The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Minutes 11/20/2003 RNovember 20, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, November 20, 2003 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 1:30 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Russell Budd Mark Strain Lindy Adelstein Paul Midney Dwight Richardson Kenneth Abemathy Brad Schiffer Robert Murray George Evans ALSO PRESENT: Joe Schmitt, Comm. Dev. & Environmental Services Ray Bellows, Planning Services Ross Gochenaur, Planning Services Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorney Kay Deselem, Planning Services Page 1 AGENDA '~CORREC~ED AGENDA) COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WIt.L MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2003, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ~G ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BU-H.f~ING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE; INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS wrt I. BE LIMITED TO 5 ~ ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLO~ I0 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOG/,WT~Y) BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA'PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SI-L~Lt. BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WHJL BE AV.AHABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIO~ IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WnJL 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. NOTE: The public should be advised that two (2) members of the Collier County Planning Commission (Dwight Richardson and Bob Murray) are also members of the Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee. In this regard, matters coming before the Collier County Planning Commission may come before the Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee from time to time. 1. PLEDGE OF,~,[.L~GIANCE 2. ROLL CAt.[. BY CLERK 3. ADDE~,TDA TO THE AGENDA A. LDC AMENDMENTS (EASTERN LANDS/RURAL FRINGE - CONTINUATION FROM 11/12 MEETING) WILL BE HEARD FIRST STARTING AT 8:30 A.M., FOLLOWED BY THE REGULAR PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS WHICH WILL BEGIN AT 1:30 P.M. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTF. S - OCTOBER 16, 2003 5. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS- OCTOBER 28, 2003 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS o Eo Do BD-2003-AR"4560, Brian Jones, representing Ben and April Jones, requesting an after-the-fact boathouse built on an existing boat dock. The property is located at 430 San Juan Avenue, Lot 686, Isles of Capri Unit No. 3, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator:. Ross Gochenanr) BD.2003-AR-4288, Jerry C. Neal, P.E., of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Sunset Cay Villas, requesting nfter-the- fact boat dock extensions for existing communal docks located at Buildings No. 1-14, Sunset Cay Villas located in Pon-of-the-Islands S~ubdivision. The docks are located in a boat besin that wns specifically built for docking of the Sunset Cay condominium unit owners boats. Dock protrusions vary from 47 feet to I05 feet as follows: Building 1 = 47 feet; Building 2 = 48 feet; Building 3 - 50 feet; Building 4 = 50 feet; Building 5 = 49 feet; Building 6 = 49 feet; Building 7 = 48 feet; Building 8 = 49 feet; Building 9 = 52 feet; Building 10 = 105 feet; Building 11 = 76 feet; Building 12 = 83 feet; Building 13 -- 52 feet; and Building 14 = 50 ft. Property is located on Newport Drive, in Section 9, Township 52 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Ross Gochenaur) PE-2003-AR-4 261, Doug Schroeder, Executive Director of Cocohatehee Natm'e Center, requesting a parking exemption to allow off-site parking via a shared parking agreement, pursuant to LDC §2.3.4.1.2.c, between the Cocohatchee Nature Center and the Pewter Mug. Access between the L~.roperties will be via a proposed pedestrian walkway under the U.S. 41 Bridge over the Cocohatchee River. The Cocohatchee Nnture Center is located at 12345 Taminmi Trail North, in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem) ' PUDA-03-AR-4008, C. Laurence Keesey, of Young, van Assenderp, Varnndoe & Anderson, P. A. representing Waterside Shops at Peliean Bay Trust and WCI Communities,/ne., requesting a rezone from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development known as the Pelican Bay PUD for the purpose of amending the PUD document to reallocate 170,343 square feet of approved, but not yet consUucted and uncommitted commercial use (consisting of 161,945 squm-e feet of office and 8,398 square feet of retail) from the North Commercial Area to the South Commercial Area. Most of the 170,343 square feet of commercial use relocated from the North Commercial Area will be converted to and utilized for additional retail use within the Waterside Shops. This relocated use will increase the approved uses by 134,343 squm'e feet of retail and 36,000 square feet of offiee space within the South Commercial Area. In addition, the Pelican Bay PUD is cttn'ently approved to contain up to 8,600 residential dwelling units. This petition will reduce the approved number by 800 units, to a new maximum of 7,800 residential dwelling units. The property to be considered for this rezone is located in the Northwest quadrant of the intersection U.S. 41 and Seagate Drive, at 5555 Tamiami Trail N., in Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, and Sections 4, 5, $, and 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East Collier County, Florida and consisting of 2,104 acres. (Coordinator: Ray Bellows) DOA-2003-AR"4777, George L. Varnadoe and C. Laurence Keesey, Esq., of Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A., representing Waterside Shops at Pelican Bay Trust, requesting an nmendment to the Pelican Bay Development of Regional Impact (DR.I) to relocate 170,343 feet of approved, but not yet consmscted nnd uncommitted commercial use from the north commercial area to the south commercial area, reduce the approved maximum nuber residential dwellings by 800 units to a new quadrant of the intersection of Tnminmi Trail (US=41) and Seagate Drive in Sections 32 and 33, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, and Sections 4,5,8 and 9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator:. Ray Bellows) PUDZ-2003-AR-366~, Vincent A. Cautero, of Constal Engineering Consultants, Inc., representing Gates McVey- Knopke, LI~, requesting n rezone fi'om the "A" Rural Agricultural zoning district to a ''PUD" Planned Unit Development district to be known as the Lemurin PUD. This project will consist of 72 residential dwelling units for a density of 2.97 dwelling units per acre. The property to be considered for this rezone is located on the east side of Goodlette-Frank Road; north of Orange Blossom Drive; South of Vanderbilt Beach Road, and adjacent to and south of the Collier County Carica Road Water Stornge and Pump Station, in Section 3,. Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 24.21± acres.(Coordinator: Fred Reischl) RESCHEDULED TO 12-04-03 OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS: 2 I 1. PUBLIC COMMF..NT ~ 12. DISCX./SSION OF ADDENDA 13. AD.IOUP-Jq ' 11/020/03 CCi~ AGENDA/RB/Io November 20, 2003 Chairman Russell Budd called the meeting to order at 1:30 PM, and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Mr. Budd read into the record Mr. Murray & Mr. Richardson are also members of the Community Character Smart Growth Advisory Committee. In regards to matters coming before the Planning Commission may also come before the Community Character Smart Growth Advisory Committee from time to time. 2. Roll Call - A quorum was established. 3. Addenda to the Agenda - Item 8F - continued until December 4th, 2003. It was suggested to move 8D & E on the Agenda first. Marjorie Student - Assistant County Attorney - stated there is an attorney that will be attending the meeting and he was aware of the 1:30 PM starting time of the meeting, but there were a couple of items to be heard first. Mr. Richardson moved to approve moving Item 8F to the December 4th meeting. Second by Mr. Strain. Carried unanimously 9-0. Approval of Minutes - October 16, 2003 Mr. Adelstein moved to approve the October 16th minutes. Second by Mr. Midney. Mr. Schiffer mentioned on page 7 - in regards to a statement he made he would like added "in regardless of the dimension" inserted after 30,000 square feet. His intention was that the dimensions of the building were not required just square footage. Mr. Adelstein amended his motion and Mr. Midney amended his second to add the above statement by Mr. Schiffer. Carried unanimously 9-0. Planning Commission Absences Mr. Abernathy will be absent for the 6-9 PM portion of the November 24th meeting. Mr. Budd will be absent for the 2-5 PM portion of the November 24th meeting. e BCC Report-Recaps-October 28, 2003 The Nicaea Academy was approved by the BCC - 5-0 - recommended 125 dwelling units instead of the original application of 250. 7. Chairman's Report- none Page 2 November 20, 2003 ge Advertised Public Hearings: a. BD-2003-AR-4560, Brian Jones, representing Ben and April Jones, requesting an after-the-fact boathouse built on an existing boat dock. The property is located at 430 Juan Ave., Lot 686, and Isles of Capri Unit No 3, in Collier County, Florida. Those testifying were sworn in by Mr. Budd. Disclosures - Mr. Budd discussed the item with Mr. Jones. PETITIONER Brian Jones - Tamiami Builders/General Contractors - representing Mr. & Mrs. Jones. A petition was circulated with the neighbors for endorsement, and a letter of support. (Handed out) They comply with 5 of the 6 criteria - the 6th will be permit of completion of which they are doing now. They wish to obtain a Certificate of Completion, pay any fees and will not have work done without being permitted. It was a bit of ignorance on the petitioner's part; because he thought he could do what the neighbors had done with hip roofs etc. This is before the Planning Commission due to a Code Enforcement action. STAFF Ross Gochenaur - Planning Services - the boathouse complies with criteria except that the roof match the roof of the house. Needs approval from Planning Commission for the boat house in order to get a building permit which is needed. In Resolution it states before the Certificate of Completion is issued, the roof has to match the house. Received no objections to the petition with one letter in support (attached). Mr. Schiffer asked about the other dock on the site - whether it was a legally permitted dock. Mr. Gochenaur could not answer the question but stated there are a lot of non- conforming docks on Isle of Capri - and is Planning Departments' policy that ifa dock can be shown on an aerial photo prior to 1990, it is considered legally non-conforming. This is very typical of the area. Mr. Schiffer is not comfortable with the fact that the other dock is not shown on the documents. He would like to know if it is non-conforming. Mr. Budd wondered since Code Enforcement is aware of the facility, that if they find further deviations or problems it will come back to the Commission again. Page 3 November 20, 2003 Staff did no research on other structures on the property that was not related to the petition, because it has no bearing. Mr. Strain moved to recommend approval of Petition BD-2003-AR-4560, subject to staff stipulations. Second by Mr. Richardson. Carried unanimously 9-0. BD-2003-AR-4288 - Jerry Neal, Hole Montes, representing Sunset Cay Villas. Requesting after the fact boat dock extensions for existing communal docks located at Buildings No. 1-14, Sunset Cay Villas located in Port-of-the-Islands Subdivision. The docks are located in a boat basin that was specifically built for docking of the Sunset Cay condominium unit owners' boats. Dock protrusions vary from 47 feet to 105 feet as follows: the protrusions were list for all 14 buildings. Property is located on Newport Drive, in Collier County, FL. Those testifying were sworn in by Mr. Budd. Disclosures -none. PETITIONER Jerry Neal - representing Sunset Cay Homeowners Assn. located in Port-of-the- Islands - a map was shown of the area. Waterway is manmade and bottoms privately owned, meaning it has never been transferred or dedicated to any governmental agency. Was created for a boat basin for Sunset Cay. The State DEP issued an exemption for the docks, meaning they do not need any more permits. Docks are located away from the neighbors and mangroves are along the shoreline, with the docks into the water and away from the mangroves. Exotic plants will be removed and agree with other staff recommendations. They will be resolved in 180 days. David Molberg - Sunset Cay Master Assn. - Docks were built ~rom 1996-2001. STAFF Ross Gochenaur - Planning Services - is trying to resolve a violation. Need approval of the extension petition by the Planning Commission, then Site Development Plan needs to be modified to show the docks as described. Then to building department for after-the- fact permits. Then spot surveys need to confirm the docks are where the drawings state. Can then resolve the code enforcement case. The violation was not committed by the property owners, but the developer. There are 140 slips - will stipulate no more than 141 slips. Joe Schmitt mentioned they were built with total disregard with a long standing Code Enforcement case (12-14 months) with a lot of legal issues and are trying to reach a solution to help the residents. Page 4 November 20, 2003 SPEAKERS David Molberg - Board of Directors Master Assn. - speaking on behalf of many of the owners at Sunset Cay. Each 140 units have a dock and single boat slip for each unit in the building. Many bought in the preconstruction and found the boat docks were completed when the buildings were being built. Legal firms read the documents and had no reason to believe the docks were not legally built, inspected and permitted. In February they all received notification from Collier County in February 2003 saying the docks were not permitted and needed to have applications or removed within 30 days. He discussed the tax and resale ramifications. Resale's have been difficult and find the homeowners are the innocent victims. Lynn Mason - agreed with Mr. Molberg. Mr. Walker - 154 Newport Dr. - President of Building 13/Villa 7 - unable to sell his real estate and gave the history of when the package was received from Code Enforcement concerning the violation. He felt the County has some responsibility and the people need to be protected. Some units are unable to close because of the violation. The Developer continues to build and make promises being the winner, the rest of them losers. Hearing is closed for motion and discussion. Mr. Adelstein moved to approve BD-2003-AR-4288 subject to staff recommendations. Second by Mr. Murray. The staff's recommendation of 141 docks maximum will be in the Resolution. Everyone agreed. Carried unanimously 9-0. Ce PE-2003-AR-4261 - Doug Schroeder, Executive Director of Cocohatchee Nature Center, requesting a parking exemption to allow off-site parking via a shared parking agreement, pursuant to LDC 2.3.4.1.2.c., between the Cocohatchee Nature Center and the Pewter Mug. Access between the properties will e via a proposed pedestrian walkway under the US 41 Bridge over the Cocohatchee River. The Cocohatchee Nature Center is located at 12345 Tamiami Trail North, in Collier County, FL. Disclosures - Mr. Richardson had a telephone conversation with the applicant. All those testifying were sworn in by Mr. Budd. Page 5 November 20, 2003 PETITIONER Mr. Doug Schroeder - Cocohatchee Nature Center - requesting a parking petition to operate a second pontoon boat for the Nature Center. There was a question on head room under the bridge. Low and mean tide - 6'8" head clearance required to meet code is there, but not at high tide. Walkway on south side will be a 30" knee wall to hold the river back to make the head clearance on each end of the bridge. Department of Transportation has 150 feet right-of-way or easement and has approved the project. It was pointed out the joint parking agreement may not be valid and might be taken to an attorney for their protection, although it is a private agreement Signage requirements were discussed and will be according to code with adequate parking and directions etc. The boardwalk and mangroves were shown on a map with no required permitting needed. STAFF Kay Deselem - Community Dev. Environmental Services Div. - the parking exemption is not affected by the Growth Management Plan. They have proposed conditions with concerns and have not received any calls in support or opposition to the request. Staff has addressed U-Tums for groups coming by bus and school buses and transportation had no problem with what is being proposed. Mr. Abemathy would like to see something concerning the lighting on the pedestrian walkway. Mr. Adelstein moved to forward PE-2003-AR-4261 to the Board of County Commissioners with recommendation of approval subject to staff recommendations which includes the lighting request. Second by Mr. Schiffer. Carried unanimously 9-0. PUDA-03-AR-4008- C. Laurence Keesey, of Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, PA, representing Waterside Shops a Pelican Bay Trust and WCI Communities, Inc., requesting a rezone from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development known as the Pelican Bay PUD for the purpose of amending the PUD document to relocate 170,343 square feet of approved but not yet constructed an uncommitted commercial use (consisting of 161,945 square feet of office and 8,398 square feet of retail) from the North Commercial Page 6 November 20, 2003 Area to the South Commercial Area. Most of the 170,343 sq. ft. of Commercial use relocated from the North Commercial Area will be converted to and utilized for additional retail use within the Waterside Shops. This relocated use will increase the approved uses by 134,343 square feet of retail ands 36,000 square feet of office space within the South Commercial Area. In addition, the Pelican Bay PUD is currently approved to contain up to 8,600 residential dewing units. This petition will reduce the approved number by 800 units to a new maximum of 7,800 residential dwelling units. The property for rezone is located in the Northwest quadrant of the intersection of US 41 and Seagate Dr., 555 Tamiami Trail N, Collier County, Florida and consists of 2,104 acres. & DOA-2003-AR-4777(Companion) - George L. Varnadoe & C. Laurence Keesey, Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, representing Waterside Shops at Pelican Bay Trust, requesting an amendment to the Pelican Bay Development of Regional Impact to relocate 170,343 feet of approved, but not yet constructed and uncommitted commercial use from the north commercial area to the south commercial area, reduce the approved maximum number residential dwellings by 800 units to a new quadrant of the intersection of Tamiami Trail (US 41) and Seagate Drive in Collier County, FL. Disclosures - Mr. Budd and Mr. Richardson spoke with petitioner & their agents. Mr. Abernathy and Mr. Adelstein received e-mails of which they did not open. Mr. Schiffer will abstain from voting due to the fact he does consulting work for WCI. Mr. Strain will abstain from voting on both issues due to the fact his employer has property within the Pelican Bay PUD and the perception of a conflict. Those testifying were sworn in by Mr. Budd. Mr. Budd was aware of a possible legal deficiency of the advertising on the issue and asked the County Attorney address the issue. Marjorie Student - Assistant County Attorney - she discussed the manner with County Attorney David Weigel. Mail notices went out properly to property owners and the advertisement was correct in the newspaper. The only thing incorrect was the sign on the subject property of the dates of the hearing and the Board of County Commissioners hearing to be held. It was their opinion if the applicant would agree to hold the County harmless to go forward (meaning they would not sue for damages because of any delay). Also they would agree to defend if any law suit was brought up from the signage issue. There have been issues with signage before due to Page 7 November 20, 2003 weather or being destroyed. The County Attorneys opinion is that the matter may proceed. Mr. Keesey stated they will not sue the County over the notice issue. He will also change the correct date/s on the sign/s. Terry Lenick - Attorney - representing property owners - stated he is the one that raised the issue of legality of the notice and sign. He also stated he raised another procedural issue, and if decided in favor of his client, they could not have the hearing today. He had 3 issues. One issue was the notice. There was a handout to the Commissioners. He discussed pictures given of 6 sign locations and spoke of Issue 2-page 233 of the Zoning Code - Ordinance of Signs. Section 2.7.2.3.1 -Notice of the Public Hearing (1) - Sign shall be posted at least 15 days prior to the date of the Public Hearing by the Planning Commission. Mandatory language - not discretionary. Was first brought before the Planning Commission on November 6th and was improperly noticed at that time. If they could not hear it then, they would not have been able to have a meeting to continue the meeting to a date certain. If a proper meeting was held on November 6th, they could have continued to a date certain and the signs could have remained the same. But that did not happen as there was a lack of notice then, and now have another "lack of notice." Marjorie Student stood by her opinion. There are other forms of notice and the sign was posted with the word "substantially the following". If other notices wouldn't have gone out, and with specific notices to property owners, there may have been a greater concern. This is jurisdictional, and if attending the hearing with objection to the notice, there is case load stating under certain circumstances, a person has waived objecting to the defect, meaning there was notice and attendance at the heating. Mr. Leniek stated they are not waiving their tight to object. He is suggesting protecting the jurisdiction of the Board and it would make sense to comply with the language. He is raising the issue on behalf of his client, and would be ready to go forward if they so desired. Marjorie Student gave examples of past cases in which they continued on hearing the issues. Mr. Lenick gave a second issue which was procedural. Zoning Code Provisions - transfer/intensity/density - page 6:9 - Definition of Applicant was read by Mr. Lenick per handout. The subject was "Right of Person to File." Taking away the intensity and density of the use of the property in question without the owners applying. He gave examples of private covenants. He stated a property owner has Page 8 November 20, 2003 never been contacted or consented. His client, Mr. Tom Conroy, an attorney, has looked at deeds and nothing showing a reservation to WCI, just a deed restriction. He asked where is the right of the property owners to the North to amend their zoning in the area. If there is no ownership of the property owners to the North, they can't transfer intensity down. Waterside will have to stand on its own. Marjorie had discussed these issues with outside counsel and their opinion is all the intensities are not absolute numbers. That is for the commercial and the residential dwelling units. Since it was not an absolute, it would not be necessary to have the owner or agent of the north property come in to apply for a rezone. Mr. Adelstein mentioned this has come up before - if people do not notify they want to make a change, and all of them sign off, then everyone could be sued. The absolute fight of an owner governs what can be done with the property he or they own. If not being done, that would be a reason to be continued. Mr. Lenick continued to discuss maximum intensity of use, WCI not owning the property, and the applicant needing to be the property owner. WCI claims they can rezone someone's property they do not own, and send the intensity use of the south, claiming the trip generation. They are not the owners, they cannot make the application, but can get the consent of the owners to do so, but have not done it. Mr. Keesey stated Mr. Lenick is correct in that WCI does not own any of the dirt on the North side. The applicant interested in the Amendment is the Waterside Shops at Pelican Bay Trust which owns the Waterside Shops. WCI obtained their development in 1977 and the developer of Pelican Bay PUD, Pelican Bay DRI. The County granted them the right within the boundaries of Pelican Bay for 1,095,000 square feet of commercial use - both office and retail. In accordance with the PUD Master Plan, the commercial areas are identified. The PUD said to WCI, they can locate or build in the north and south not exceeding particular numbers of square footage. He then discussed property and development rights. WCI has the development fights and in turn sold portions of the property. The County said WCI has the right to build 1,095,000 in all of Pelican Bay, the Master Plan identifies where commercial can be located, and the PUD & DRI says "a maximum of the 455,000 of the 1,095,000 can be in the north and a maximum of 640,000 located in the south. Discussion followed on deed restrictions, office space sold, not built, and the wording of the PUD and square footage. Mr. Keesey and Mr. Lenick discussed the contract and the deed and showed square footage on a map. Only has a private deed restriction. WCI owns the remaining development fights that aren't contracted away. Page 9 November 20, 2003 Marjorie Student stated this issue came to her only a couple of days ago and has not had time for any research. In speaking with David Weigel, his opinion is that it should be sorted out before it goes to the Board of County Commissioners. Chairman Budd stated they should continue this item so letters and files and briefs can be filed and exchanged since there are two attorneys giving different evidence and the Planning Commission needs to hear and render an opinion after all the facts are given. Needs to be carefully researched. Mr. Keesey mentioned this was scheduled to go before the Planning Commission three times for various reasons and has been continued each time. He feels they should go forward and opposes the possibility of continuance. Marjorie Student suggested a continuance to sort out the issues, and if other action needs to taken, the Commissioners will be informed. Mr. Schmitt asked to clarify ifCrayton Drive was going to be an issue. Ray Bellows said there is a recommendation from Transportation for an interconnection from Crayton Road to Seagate. There is a stiptflation of which he read. He understands the road has been platted for the extension and to reallocate square footage - this is not properly noticed. Marjorie responded this is not a zoning type public hearing and doesn't want to construe the Ordinance to indicate it as such. Mr. Kant - Transportation Operations Director - recommended several construction improvements if the project goes through. This is a piece of information the Commissioners should be aware of. Mr. Richardson stated the transportation analysis will have a bearing on whether the whole project goes forward or not. Don Scott - Transportation Planning - had sent an e-mail stating they need to look at the transportation part of the project for consideration only. Would be a public hearing in the future and will deal with some of the other issues raised at the meeting. Mr. Richardson moved PUDA-03-AR-4008 Pelican Bay PUD that was scheduled to be heard today, be continued to December 18th, 2003 as part of their regular business on that day. Second by Mr. Adelstein. Carried unanimously 9-0. Page 10 November 20, 2003 Mr. Richardson moved DOA-2003-AR-4777 - Pelican Bay DRI (Companion Item) be continued date certain to December 18th, 2003 to be heard as part of their regular business on that day. Second by Mr. Adelstein. Carried unanimously 9-0. 8. Old Business - none. New Business - Mr. Abernathy asked the County to explore the ideas of receiving emails at a Collier.gov box for storage to be read or not read. It has to be retained according by the County Attorneys office. Mr. Schmitt would look into it, but let the Commissioners know the only way to read them would be through a county computer or via the Web. Marjorie stated they could print their information. 10. Public Comment Item - None 11. Discussion of Addenda - None There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:32 PM. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Chairman Russell Budd Page 11 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY MUNICIPAL, AND OTi- ER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS ;)ATE O1~ ~____~)I~H VOTE OCCURRED NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL. COMMISSION, AUTHORITY, OR COMMri'rEE THE BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION, AUTHORrTY OR CQMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: C3 CITY [3~OUNTY E3 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: 4/' LL F.Y._ ,, MY PosmoN IS: 1:3 ELECTIVE ~ ~POINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For lhis reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143~ FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a govemment agency) by whom he or'she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or t 63.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entily engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of lhe conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY A'I-I'EMPT TO iNFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: · You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side) APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) · A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. · The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: · You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. · You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is ~ed. (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured !o the special gain or loss ol my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of whom I am ~ inured Io the special gain or loss of is the parent org.anizafion or subsidiary o! a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature o! my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST .... which Date Filed Signal NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE - CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MC~E OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT;' REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. PAGE 2 CE FORM 8B - REV. 1/98 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORI'TY~R COMMH I ~-E ' ~' THE BOARD, COUNCIL COI~tMISSlON. AUTHORITY~OR COMMll~-E ON ~.ST NAME--FIRST NAME--MIDDLE NAME 'AILING ADDRESS · ~TE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED COUNTY WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: 13 CITY ~OUNTY .~E oF ~.ou'r,c~ su~,v,s,o~: Co(Lr~,c MY POSITION IS: ! r-t ELECTIVE 13 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending 3n whether yOu hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION .112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES' A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or. · to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 o£ 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional s!ock exchange). ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this formwith the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY A'i-rEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: · You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the miautes. (Continued on other side) PAGE 1 APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) · A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. · The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: · You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, ~%~ ~ ~. ~d_~ ~, ~ ~-~P,~'~ , hereby disclose that on (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of whom I am retained; or inured to the'special gain or loss of ~ ~..~\.J~ ~c~.~l ~'),zJ , is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: , by , which Date Filed NOTICE: uNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY' ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 8B - REV. 1/98 o~: - PAGE 2 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT Commnntty Development and Environmental Services Division Planning Services Department · 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, Florida 34104 November 26, 2003 HOLE MONTES, INC. JERRY NEAL 950 ENCORE WAY NAPLES, FL 34110 REFERENCE: BD-2003-AR-4288, SUNSET CAY VILLAS Dear Mr. Neai: On Thursday, November 20, 2003, the Collier County Planning Commission heard and approved Petition No. BD-2003-AR-4288. A copy of CCPC Resolution No. 03-17 is enclosed approving this use. Please be advised that Section 2.7.2.3.2(3) of the Land Development Code requires an applicant to remove their public heating advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public heating advertising sign(s) immediately. If you have any questions, please contact me at 213-2911. Sincere~/~ /~ Ross Gochenaur, Planner Department of Zoning and Land Development Review Enclosure CC: SUNSET CAY VILLAS HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. 834 BALD EAGLE DRIVE MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145 Land Dept. Property Appraiser M. Ocheltree, Graphics Minutes & Records (BD, PSP & PDI)~'~ Customer Service Addressing (Peggy Jarrell) File C-~ o t e ,- C Phone (239) 403-2400 Fax (239) 643-6.968 www. colliergov.net CCPC RESOLUTION 03- 17 RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-2003-AR~4288 FOR AN AFTER-THE-FACT EXTENSION OF A COMMUNAL BOAT DOCKING FACILITY IN SUNSET CAY VILLAS, LOCATED IN PORT OF THE ISLANDS SUBDIVISION, 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 (LDC) (Ordinance 91-102, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which are provisions for granting extensions for boat docks; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), being duly appointed, has held a properly noticed public hearing and considered the advisability of an after-the-fact boat dock extension for existing boat docks from the 20-foot length allowed by LDC § 2.6.21. to authorize dock protrusions ranging from 47 feet to 105 feet, as shown in the petitioner's application, for a communal boat dock facility in an RMF-16 zone for the property hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by LDC Section 2.6.21 .; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has given all interested parties the opportunity to be heard, and considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Collier County Planning Commission of Collier County, Florida that: Petition Number BD-2003-AR-4288, filed on behalf of Sunset Cay Villas by Hole Montes, Incorporated, for the property hereinafter described as: (See Exhibit A) be, and the same is hereby approved for, 27-foot to 105-foot extensions for existing boat docks from the 20-foot length otherwise allowed by LDC § 2.6.21., to authorize boat docks from 47 feet to 105 feet, as shown in the petitioner's application, in the RMF-16 zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: All applicable Collier County building permits must be obtained for the existing dock facility within 180 days of the approval of this petition. All corresponding permits, or letters of exemption, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection must be provided. In order to protect manatees, at least one (1) "Manatee Area" sign must be posted in a conspicuous manner as close as possible to the furthest protrusion of each dock into the waterway. All prohibited exotic species, as such term may now or hereinafter be established in the LDC, must be removed from the subject property prior to issuance of the required Certificate of Completion and the property must be maintained free from all prohibited exotic species in perpetuity. 4. The maximum number of boat slips comprising this docking facility shall be limited to 141. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Commission and filed with the County Clerk's Office. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Donethis ,~ ~ dayof /~Ot/~_.A~r~ e~,' ,2003. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RUSSELL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: Community Development and Environmental S)/rvices Administrator ~~1 ~Legal Sufficiency: Patrick G. White Assistant County Attorney BD~2003-AR-4288/RG/sp 2 Z Zl oo (.no 577.75' S 89'4-3'20" E S 89'56'40" W 486.70' Exhibit "A" COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT Commlmity Development and Environmental Services Division Planning Services Department o 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, Florida 34104 November 26, 2003 BRIAN JONES 3500 RADIO RD. NAPLES, FL 34104 REFERENCE: BD-2003-AR-4560, JONES, BEN Dear Mr. Jones: On Thursday, November 20, 2003, the Collier County Planning Commission heard and approved Petition No. BD-2003-AR-4560. A copy of CCPC Resolution No. 03-18 is enclosed approving this use. Please be advised that Section 2.7.2.3.2(3) of the Land Development Code requires an applicant to remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. If you have any questions, please contact me at213-2911. Sincerely,~ ~ Department of Zoning and Land Development Review Enclosure CC: BEN J & APRIL TROY JONES 430 SAN JUAN AVE NAPLES, FL 34113 Land Dept. Property Appraiser M. Ocheltree, Graphics Customer Service Minutes & Records (BD, PSP & PDI) ~ Addressing ( Peggy Jarrell) File C c t. y Phone ('2'~0/4Oq-o-~.O0 r: f~'m~ c: ~" r.~,~ , .......... ~: .......... CCPC RESOLUTION 03- 18 A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-2003-AR-4560 FOR AN AFTER-THE-FACT BOATHOUSE 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 (LDC) (Ordinance 91-102, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which are provisions for granting extensions for boat docks; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), being duly appointed, has held a properly noticed public hearing and considered the advisability of an after-the-fact 12-foot by 28-foot boathouse built on an existing dock in an "RSF-3" zone for the property hereinafter described; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by LDC Section 2.6.21 .; and WHEREAS, the CCPC has given all interested parties the opportunity to be heard, and considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Collier County Zoning Commission of Collier County, Florida, that; Petition Number BD2003-AR-4560, filed on behalf of Ben J and April Troy Jones, by Brian Jones, for the property hereinafter described as: Lot 686, Isles of Capri No. 3, Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, as described in Plat Book 3, Page 66, of the public records of Collier County, Florida be, and the same is hereby approved for, an a~r-the-fact 12-foot by 28-foot boathouse built on an existing dock in the "RSF-3" zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following condition: 1. All prohibited exotic species, as such term may now or hereinafter be established in the LDC, must be removed from the subject property prior to issuance of the required Certificate of Completion and the property must be maintained free from all prohibited exotic species in perpetuity. 2. The roof of the boathouse must be modified to match the roof of the principal structure. Page 1 of 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolutio2 be recorded in the minutes of this Conm~issio~ and filed with the County Clerk's Office. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this- ,~0 ~ day of J~V~Z~'~/' , 2003. ATTEST: ~OLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER,~OUNTY, FLORIDA BY: /~//~~ RUSSELL A. BUDD, CHA/RMAN ~ed as tp lform and Legal Sufficiency: Patrick G. Whit~ Assistant County Attorney BD-2003-AR-4560/RG/Io Page 2 of 2