Loading...
CCPC Minutes 02/05/2004 RFebruary 5, 2004 February 5, 2004 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, February 5, 2004 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 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION at the Board of Collier County Commissioners' meeting room, Administration Building, County Government Center, 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Russell Budd Brad Schiffer Robert Murray Lindsey Adelstein Mark Strain Dwight Richardson Ken Abemathy Paul Midney George Evans, Absent ALSO PRESENT: Joe Schmitt, Community Dev. & Environmental Services; Ray Bellows, Planning Services; Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorney; and Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2004, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN pRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR pRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 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 ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY CLERK 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 18, 2003, 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS -JANUARY 7, 2004/LDC 2:00 P.M. MEETING, AND JANUARY 13, 2004 REGULAR MEETING 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS Co BD-2003-AR-4689~ Michael D. Hawkins, of Turrell and Associates, representing Michael D. Shrigley, requesting a 16-foot boat dock extension from the maximum allowable 20 feet to construct a boat dock facility 36 feet into the waterway. Property is located at 283 3rd Street West, further described as Little Hickory Shores Unit 3 (Replat), Lot 4, Block F, in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Joyce Ernst) pUDZ-2002-AR-3542, Dwight H. Nadeau of RWA, Inc., and Richard D. Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A., representing Waterways Joint Venture IV the applicant, requesting: (1) Rezoning from an "A" Agricultural zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) district for a project to be known as the Bristol Pines PUD. This project proposes a maximum of 159 dwelling units (an overall density of 6.98 units per acre), to consist of any combination of single-family attached, zero lot line, or multi-family unit type construction; and (2) Consideration and approval of an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement authorizing the developer to utilize Affordable Housing Bonus Density units (in the amount of 68 units at 2.98 bonus density units per acre) in the development of this project or low-income residents. The 22.77+ acre subject site is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard, (C.R. 951), approximately 1 mile south of Immokalee Road, at 14750 Collier Boulevard in Section 35, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem) PUDZ-2003-AR-3831, Robert Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Robert Reed, of Reed Development Company, requesting a rezone from "PUD" to "PUD" Planned Unit Development for the purpose of changing the name from Goodland Gateway PUD to the Calusa Island Village PUD, increasing the number of dwelling units from 47 to 52, units reducing the commercial area known as the Commercial/Mixed Use area from 0.45 acres to 0.12 acres of commercial use area with a maximum of 1,300 square feet of commercial uses, and eliminate many permitted commercial uses that were no longer deemed compatible with residential uses. The subject property is located south of Goodland Drive and east of Calusa Marina, in Sections 18 & 19, Township 52 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 6.2+ acres. (Coordinator: Ray Bellows) PUDZ-2003-AR-4648~ Robert L. Duane, of Hole Montes, Inc., and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, representing Florida Conference Association of Seventh-Day Adventists, requesting a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural and "PUD" Planned Unit Development to PUD known as the Loch Ridge PUD by amending the PUD Master Plan to increase acreage from 13.44 acres to 18.05 acres, show a change in ownership, add Church, private school, and community center as permitted uses, revise the plant nurseries, florist and vegetable sales uses to be allowed only on a temporary basis for up to three years, eliminate assisted living facility as a permitted use, and add accessory uses related to church and school. Property is located on the south side of Davis Boulevard, approximately 2000 feet east of the Wendy Lane/Davis Boulevard intersection, in Section 7, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Mike Bosi) CU-2003-AR-3792, Crossroads Community Church, Inc., represented by Terrance Kepple, of Kepple Engineering Inc., requests Conditional Uses # 7 and # 11 of the Agricultural district for the construction of a church and daycare facilities. The property to be considered for the conditional use is located Northeast 'A of Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension and Livingston Road Extension, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County Florida. This property consists of 10 +acres. (Coordinator: Mike Bosi) OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS 11. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 12. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 13. ADJOURN 02/05/04/CCPC AGENDA/RB/lo February 5, 2004 I. Call to order by Mr. Budd II. Roll Call III. Agenda additions/deletions -Item 8E continued indefinitely: (Crossroads Community Church) Motion by Mr. Richardson, seconded by Mr. Strain, passed 8-0 IV. Anticipated Absences - Adelstein will be absent at the next scheduled meeting Ve Minutes Approval of Dec. 18th Changes include: p.5: "Mr. Voting" was mentioned. There is no "Mr. Voting." And, motion passed 6-1, not 7-2. Mr. Schiffer voted alone. Strike "Mr. Voting." p.3: Item 8- Advertised public hearing (Mr. Strain refrained from participation due to "perceived" conflict of interest, not necessary conflict of interest.) - p. 5: Remove numbers "22435." Motion to adopt as amended by Mr. Adelstein. Seconded by Mr. Strain Passed 8-0. VI. Chairman's Report: None VII. Advertised Public Hearings: Mr. Budd notified the public that Mr. Richardson and Mr. Murray are also members of the Community Character's Smart Growth Advisory committee. Item 1: BD-2003-AR-4689, Michael Hawkins of Turrell and Associates, representing Michael Shrigley, requesting a 16-foot boat dock extension from the maximum allowable 20 feet to construct a boat dock facility 36 feet into the waterway. Property is located at 283 3rd Street West, further described as Little Hickory Unit Shores Unit 3 (Replat), Lot 4, Block F, in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Project Coordinator: Joyce Ernst) People providing testimony sworn in. Petitioner, Michael Hawkins Mr. Shrigley is owner of the above-referenced property. Petitioner met with adjacent property owners and has an addendum to the petition (modified drawings) taking into consideration the southern adjacent property owner's concerns). Passed out copies. - Revised drawings include: access walkway moved to northern side of the boathouse. Property owners were agreeable with this. 2 February 5, 2004 Correction in dimension from the southern property line to the existing boat house. That was incorrect and has been modified and corrected. Joyce Ernst, Department of Zoning and Land Development Review - Petition meets five of the primary and five of the secondary criteria and staff recommends approval. It is within the 20 foot setback that is required. Referred to as a "non-conforming, conforn~ing structure" because it was built before codes were set in place. Tom Eastman, Attorney for adjacent owner Peter and Bridget Ebner - Neighbors had one remaining concern that amount of roofing will not increase Mr. Strain made motion that approval be made with amended documents provided. Second by Mr. Adelstein. Discussion: Mr. Abernathy requested that discussion of boat house extensions be incorporated into the next BCC workshop. Mr. Schmitt indicated that the topic of boat houses is on the agenda to discuss their elimination. Motion passed 8-0. Item 2: PUDZ-2002-AR-3542, Dwight Nadeau of RWA, Inc. and Richard Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, PA, representing Waterways Join Venture IV the applicant, requesting: 1) rezoning from an agricultural zoning district to a residential planned unit development district for a project to be known as the Bristol Pines PUD. This project proposes a maximum of 159 dwelling units (an overall density of 6.98 units per acre), to consist of any combination of single-family attached, zero lot line, or multi-family unit type construction; and 2) consideration and approval of an affordable housing density bonus agreement authorizing the developer to utilize affordable housing bonus density units (in the amount of 68 units at 2.98 bonus density units per acre) in the develo0ment of this project or low income residents. The 22.77 (approx.) acre subject site is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard in Section 35 at 14750 Collier Boulevard (approx. 1 mile south of Immokalee Road), Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (Kay Deselem, Project Coordinator) Disclosures: - Mr. Murray had conversations with Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Nadeau as well as Mr. Wellekens. Mr. Schiffer read Mr. Wellekens email Mr. Adelstein spoke with Mr. Yovanovich Mr. Budd had none 3 February 5, 2004 Mr. Strain spoke with Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Wellekens conceming design aspects of the project and received Mr. Wellekens email Mr. Abernathy received two emails but did not read either. People providing testimony sworn in. Mr. Yovanovich, representing the petitioner Presented conceptual site plan 159 residential dwelling units, under 7 units per acre. Under the county's comp. plan the base density is 4 units per acre. Requesting an affordable housing density bonus based on the fact that they are providing affordable housing to the low-income category. Would increase the amount of units by 68- of 16 will be affordable housing. Approx. 24% of the bonus units would go to affordable housing. Developer also developed Summit Place- niche market housing in the $150,000 to $200,000 range. Minimal traffic impacts- less than 3%. Consistent with the concurrency management program. - Town homes will be developed- fee simple ownership. Four units per building. - Principal structure will be set back 27 feet from the property line. - Accessory structure (lanai) will be 19 feet from the property line. - 5 foot setback from the property line plus 10 feet buffer (total of 15 foot setback from external property lines.) Minimum separation of 28 feet between structures. Unique condition- neighbor to the South- one story building will be placed adjacent to the neighbor. - Tree Farm Road: Tried to acquire property from owner for access. - Developer owns an additional 20 acres. If anything is decided to be done an additional amendment will be needed or a separate PUD application. Interconnection is already provided if development goes to the South. 27 feet is the maximum height. Discussion Mr. Midney asked about commitment regarding affordable housing. Commitment was confirmed by Mr. Yovanovich. If it was not, then density would be reduced. Mr. Murray had question about voltage and how far away electricity is. Mr. Nadeau addressed the issue of utilities. 1 O-foot utility easement. FPL will be buried underground. Mr. Murray asked about 10 percent allocated to low-income. Mr. Yovanovich confirmed that ongoing restrictions are in place to have them stay in this jurisdiction. Mr. Abernathy questioned setback for zero lot line. Setback changed from 5 to 6 feet. 4 February 5, 2004 Discussion over formula for low-income housing. No segregation of low income homes. Must be scattered within the rest of the community. Same amenities, etc. Discussion of homeowner's association dues- this is factored into the formula for low income and based on what they can afford to pay. Homeowners are responsible for maintaining landscaping, roofing, etc. 15-year deed restriction for reselling low-income homes. Height of retaining wall will vary: 10"-18" to provide adequate buffering. Length of driveways- meets the 23-foot requirement. Privately maintained roadways/Gated facility Concerns over not having access over Tree Farm Road and potential traffic impacts. Ed Kant, Transportation Operations Director - Area will be able to handle site drainage within master water management scheme. - Conflicting numbers: 10 foot lanes or 12 foot lanes? 10 foot lanes may slow traffic down- divides opinion Tree Farm Road- interested in seeing this development and Nicea Academy use this an access point. There is no legal inducement to require that this happen. Owned in fee by an individual. Discussion over eminent domain. Anxious to see this go through with Tree Farm Road. Mr. Richardson - Concerns over interconnection to right of way Mr. Yovanovich Discussion over providing interconnection in the future Has been trying to gain access to Tree Farm Road. Mr. Budd - Can this be conveyed in a manner to the public that is purchasing the property that there will be future interconnection? Mr. Yovanovich indicated that they will. Mr. Richardson Concerns over chain link fence Mr. Yovanovich asked landscape architect to elaborate February 5, 2004 Mr. Christian Andrea, Architectural Land Design Fence will be black vinyl covered with hedges planted on both side to hide the fence, as well as flowering vines - Wall will cost more than fence - Difficulty covering the wall as well. - Confident that they can cover the fence - 80% is required to be covered, but should be able to get 100% Mr. Kant Addressed issue of speed- 45 mph will be posted. No additional yellow signals at this point. Mr. Midney - Concerns over safety issues Using eminent domain to get access on Tree Farm Road. Patrick White, Asst. County Attorney Discussion over eminent domain - Obvious requirement to take property - Has to serve a public purpose - Decided by the staff and then forward to legal office Discussion over length of driveway: Total= 23 feet with 3 feet hanging over the right of way. Mr. Strain - Questions over new entrance Mr. Kant addressed Mr. Strain's questions Given the geometry of the parcel, they must have access off of 951. Northbound approaching right-turn lane will not interfere with northerly north bound right turn lanes in the future. - Ideal situation would be Tree Farm Road. Mr. Kant 951 will be going from rural section to urban section Local speed limit study will be done Mr. Strain Will the starting of 951 be jeopardized? - Mr. Kant assured that it will not be - Right in right and left in? Mr. Kant thought it was right in, right out. - Page 49 of staff report: asked about Moratorium on 951 and requested clarification. Mr. Kant indicated that this would be preferred but must meet stringent conditions. 6 February 5, 2004 Mr. Kant - Requested that a minor change be made: "Shall be public" should be changed to "Shall be private" in the PUD document on p. II-4, Section 2.7. Discussion over site plan 4 units per buildings - All are town homes - Some one stories, other two - Adjacent property owner only has concerns over wall versus chain link fence. Would prefer a chain link with vegetation and also a one-story home to face. Concerns over frost for vegetation. Homeowner's would need to have reserve for replacement of vegetation. Mr. Strain asked if Petitioner would agree to stipulation of being 15 feet from any exterior property line. Mr. Yovanovich agreed. Mr. Murray- concerns over chain link fence and reserve funds. Suggested that perhaps the builders could put aside a reserve. Mr. Yovanovich indicated that a reserve would be added to the line item reserves for the plants. Mr. Strain still had concerns over chain link versus concrete wall. Mr. Yovanovich indicated that the reserve is the better alternative from a budget standpoint. Staff presentation by Kay Deselem Handed out email from adjacent property owner dated Feb. 5. - Staff's position is to recommend that this is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan - The EAC has recommended unanimous approval for this petition Indicated that serpentine configuration of the lakes was amended and taken out of commercial architectural standards and put into landscaping requirements and is now applicable to residential in addition to commercial properties. Therefore, lake configuration (currently box-like) would need to be modified and brought into compliance. - Colorized document of parcel and buildings is not part of the submitted and reviewed master plan. Mr. Richardson had question over master plan and set backs. Confirmed that these would not change. 7 February 5, 2004 On the staff's report- page 3 of 9- had question about constraints for access. Staff' s position seemed inconsistent. Mr. Kant addressed access issues. Discussion over "R" PUD- this is a residential PUD. Codes for different PUD designations will be provided to the LDC. Mr. Richardson had concerns over amount of affordable housing not being adequate Cormac Giblin, Financial Admin. and Housing Discussion over affordable housing density Formulas and matrix work exceptionally well The county recently expressed an interest in spreading out affordable housing throughout the general population in different developments in different styles of ownership. - Showed a chart from LDC Section 2.2.7.3 - Which income level is first established- moderate, low or very low Size of efficiency Discussion over the chart and comparisons Mr. Schmitt - Requested that Mr. Giblin address inclusionary zoning and how this works Mr. Giblin Incentive to developers Will make up difference in money with the additional units. Formula works for owner occupied or rental housing Ongoing review effort that assesses the size of the bonus - Discussion over income levels and prices, and adjustments of assessments. - Fines will discourage people from reselling unit before 15 years to other than low income buyers. Mr. White Addressed issue of density bonus agreement- companion item to issue before the board. 10-Minute Break Mr. Kant More discussion over Tree Farm Road and entryways PUBLIC SPEAKERS Chuck Posch, Owner of Tree Farm Road February 5, 2004 He has received no cooperation and has not been contacted by Petitioner Met with Nicea Academy and came to an agreement Has heard misinformation Was not notified of the meeting Other person that has Tree Farm address if Dick Green and also did not receive notice of meeting Mr. Richardson asked about Nicea agreement - Mr. Posch indicated that Nicea will have access from Tree Farm Road (50% of the price- $250,000 - Mr. Posch also indicated that he would sell the remaining access to two parcels for $250,000. Mr. Kant Unaware of any of these negotiations regarding Tree Farm Road Mr. Yovanovich - Indicated that contact was made with Mr. Posch's broker to buy the access of 30 feet of compensating right of way to Tree Farm Road for $800,000 was unacceptable and that $500,000 for 30 feet of compensating right of way was unacceptable. Alternative proposed was that if we did not want to give compensating right of way was that we could pay them the value of the right away which was nowhere near $250,000 - Would agree to pay $250,000 because the bridge will cost at least that. Indicated that offer was never made. Broker indicated offers were unacceptable. Will pursue this and requests that this offer to be put in writing with no compensating right of way offered. Mr. Wellekens - Would like to confirm if granting this application gives any vested rights to the development for other 20 acres and any other acres in the area. Mr. Budd indicated that the answer is "no" and requested that this is not an information gathering session. Requested that speaker provide information to the board for the purpose of this application. Mr. Wellekens - Likes the project - Feels more profit from the additional units should be returned to the development Wall instead of fence Full-sized road - 60 feet, not 50 feet Safety issues Distribution of affordable housing should be throughout the county Discussion over rezone findings- public welfare and safety February 5, 2004 Mr. Posch commented on frost potential -temp. went down to 19 degrees. Every five years or so- very hard freeze Mr. Yovanovich Confirmed that the project is upscale in nature Discussion over 60 foot versus 50 foot right of way- width of driveway is the same under both scenarios. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Mr. Strain Recommend approval to the BCC with following stipulations: 1. Side yard setback 6 foot minimum 2. Retaining wall not to exceed max. height of 18" from outside grades 3. Provide a future interconnect to Tree Farm Road at the east end of the development to become a primary access point if it is installed and that the constraints added to the present access point- if that occurs there will be no compensating right of way from this development onto Tree Farm Road. (pursuant to Ed Kant's request) 4. Structural wall be used instead of chain link fence 5. Project retain right in, right out only at access point shown on site plan 6. Change 2.7 from a public to a private roadways 7. Setbacks in the front be 23 feet set back from the sidewalk 8. Presentation documents presented today be deemed as part of the record and as part of the approval 9. Real estate office cease after developer tums the project over to the homeowner' s association. Mr. Adelstein seconded Mr. Budd had questions about the motion: Serpentine lake configuration should that be part of the motion. Mr. Bellows indicated that the code was solid on that and it was not necessary to make as part of motion Comments and discussion - Mr. Schiffer favors the fence; mildew will appear on the wall. - Favors retaining wall in areas of 24" Mr. Budd opposes fence portion of motion Mr. White indicated that the motion should also include the density bonus agreement Motion amended to include the following revisions: - Retaining wall not to exceed 24" and the structure above not to exceed 6 feet making a total not to exceed 8 feet. 10 February 5, 2004 Motion passed 5-3: Mr. Schiffer, Mr. Midney and Mr. Budd opposed the fence portion of the motion otherwise project is acceptable. Motion carries. Lunch Break Mr. Budd did not return after lunch. Mr. Strain was assigned position of Chair. Mr. Strain called the meeting back to order. Item 3: PUDZ-2003-AR-3831: Robert Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes and Assoc. representing petitioner, Robert Reed of Reed Development Company, requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purpose of changing the name from Goodland Gateway PUD to Calusa Island Village PUD, increasing the number of dwelling units from 47 to 52, reducing the commercial area known as the Commercial/Mixed Use area from 0/45 acres to 0.12 acres of commercial use area with a maximum of 1,400 square feet of commercial uses, and eliminate many permitted commercial uses that were no longer deemed compatible with residential uses. The subject property is located south of Goodland Drive and east of Calusa Marina, in Sections 18 and 19, Township 52 South, range 27 East, Collier County Florida consisting of 6.2 acres. (Project Coord. Ray Bellows) People providing testimony sworn in. Disclosures: Mr. Strain: Discussion with Robert Duane Robert Duane, Hole Montes and Assoc. - In agreement with staff recommendation - Some opposition to the project General rezoning was approved in 2002 with 47 dwelling units which included a .45 acre commercial tract Proposing changes to the .45 acres of commercial use area: Propose to put 6 dwelling units on it, 5 of which are incurred through increased density and one unit is coming out of residential tract making the total number of units 52 and the commercial property will now be 1.2 acres or 1,300 square feet. - Showed rendering of mixed use area which shows elevation of the area- Exhibit B - Commercial uses are typical of C-4 zoning district- mostly of those uses have been eliminated- more C-1 and C-2 uses. Reduction in intensity for commercial use. Height has also been reduced from 42 feet to 35 feet within the commercial/mixed use area. The plan presented has been approved by Collier County. Project is under construction 11 February 5, 2004 - Seeking a change to the site development plan. Similar to prior site plan, Footprints have changed. Mr. Abemathy asked about prior objections which were 8-unit structures. Mr. Duane addressed the issue. Only permitted uses will be single family or duplex dwellings. There will be nothing above two units. See page 13 of PUD document. Mr. Duane continued with presentation Client received a call from the President of the Goodland Civic Assoc. indicating support of this project. One member did not support the project. - Policy 5.1 of the future land use element: this policy applies to properties that had zoning in place when 1989 GMP was adopted. Policy allows you to make changes to those types of zoning districts as long as intensity is not increased. Positive attributes to the commercial changes. David Weeks agreed with conclusion of analysis to change from one use to another. Changes being made make the property more compatible (C 1 related uses rather than C4) and better residential project. - In compliance with open space requirement of the LDC for mixed-use project. Mr. Schiffer Asked about first building (west) in the aerial photo. Mr. Duane indicated that it would be a swimming pool and not a building. Mr. Strain - Asked about time shares and commercial rentals. Mr. Duane indicated that there would be no time shares planned. Buildings are sprinkled where they eventually could be rented out on weekly basis, but no current plans to do so. Gating on common entrance road? There is none. Landscaping will be in front of the exterior wall. Wall on Angler Drive is located near the marina portion of the property. - Sec. 2.12- Item A5- is it relevant? Sales center. Clause will be omitted. - Item B 1: setbacks of 10 feet - requested clarification. Mr. Duane indicated that uncovered portions of the building and steps are not included in the setbacks. George Hermonson, Hole Montes Homes are on pilings and uncovered portions are uncovered Freedom within setbacks Ray Bellows - No problems with narrow site 12 February 5, 2004 Mr. Strain Section 2.14, C3- Language defined regarding signage. Revise language to reflect "as provided in the LDC." Mr. Duane agreed. - Page 22, strike 7361-7363 (labor pools, etc.) Mr. Duane agreed. - Page 25, clarification about proposed commercial structure being attached to residential structure. Mr. Duane indicated that it was attached. Mr. Bellows addressed the commercial structure being attached to residential. It is compatible and meets all other codes. Mr. Strain Page 27, 5.4D, sanitary collection, easements? In place and recorded in perpetuity Mr. Abernathy - Asked about setbacks - Minimum 12 feet between buildings - No lot lines for the duplexes Mr. Schiffer Discussion over walkways and elevations- approx, 13 feet elevation and grade level of between 5 and 6. Mr. David Weeks - Explained consistency of the project with the GMP - Original rezoning UR, RSF4, C4 - 5.1 of the future land use element allows for change in zoning. Decrease amount of commercial space and increase dwelling Mr. Schiffer Addressed 30% reduction in open space issue Is there minimum square footage or requirements? Mr. Bellows indicated that there was not. PUBLIC SPEAKERS Mike Barbush, 690 Palm Ave. W Immediate past president of the Goodland Civic Assoc. Supports rezone request In favor with the Goodland Civic Assoc. Concessions outweigh the objections - Has worked with Mr. Reed as irrigation contractor, but not while President of the Assoc. Jack Miller, 605 Sunset Drive -Concems over flooding issues 13 February 5, 2004 Mr. Bellows addressed cOncerns. Water by code is not meant to impact adjacent properties Mr. Hermenson also addressed concerns. Water will go into canal and collection pipe. Debby Pappy, 585 Coconut Ave. - Concerns over fencing, isolation, overzoning, and berm - Concerns over vegetation/mangrove removal - Wall concerns - Good neighbor discussion Follow rules of LDC and growth management plans Richard Pappy, 585 Coconut Ave. Goodland Preservation Coalition Historical reference to the original contract, - Concerns over original contract being broken - Density rating system/bonus system - Discussion over private property fights David Weeks Policy 5.1 discussion Agreed with Mr. Pappy's reading of the language, however, the county has already approved this and BCC has set a precedent with Boyne South PUD Hope to clear up language in 2004. Mr. White - The BCC indicated in its prior application of provision 5.1 how this should be applied. Staff is applying this as an indicator of how to apply the revision and in doing so have determined that better clarification is needed. Motion should reflect as such. Connie Fullmer, 584 Coconut Ave. President of Goodland Preservation Coalition More discussion over Policy 5.1 and original agreement Likes project overall Would like to see no more than 47 total units - No gating or walls - Limited commercial - 60% open space - Re-examine 5.1, greenspace and original PUD - Main concern is separation of project from the community. Not the original intent of the PUD. Mr. Weeks 14 February 5, 2004 - Project has been found in compliance with GMP and staff's recommendation is for approval. Mr. Duane Improvements have been made to the project Upgraded uses Discussion regarding wall removal on Goodland Drive (part of the original PUD) Wall was originally allowed on perimeter of the project. New PUD master plan is identical to the old one with the exception of the commercial use area. Mastbr plan does not have to show the wall- the site plan does Public Hearing Closed Mr. Richardson suggested motion as follows: Return to original 47 units No wall on Goodland Drive - 4,000 commercial square feet Mr. Midney seconded Discussion 4-3: Richardson's motion fails Mr. Murray made a second motion: Removal of wall Granting additional units Reduce commercial Seconded by Richardson Discussion of stipulations Mr. Strain Discussed contingencies: No timeshares No gating, amend access agreement Landscaping on exterior of walls, no wall on Angler Drive, no wall on Goodland Drive. - Single family and duplex allowed in residential area, not applied to mixed use area. - Delete section 2.12.8.5 (last sentence - Section 2.1.C3- adding language to extent provided in the LDC - Remove uses 7361 and 7363 for the commercial applications 15 February 5, 2004 - Density approved for 3 units instead of 5 in the commercial use area- same square footage. Richardson seconded Motion carries 6-1: Mr. Schiffer not in favor because of reduced commercial usage. 1 O-Minute Break Item 4: PUDZ-2003-AR-4648. Robert Duane of Hole Montes and Richard Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson representing petitioner Florida Conference Association of Seventh-Day Adventists, requesting a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural' and "PUD" Planned Unit Development to PUD known as the Loch Ridge PUD amending the PUD master plan to increase acreage from 13.44 acres to 18.05 acres, show a change in ownership, add church, private school, community center as permitted uses, revise the plant nurseries, florist and vegetable sales uses to be allowed only on a temporary basis for up to three years, eliminate assisted living facility as permitted use, and add accessory use related to church and school. Property is located on the south side of Davis Boulevard, approx. 2000 feet east of the Wendy Lane/Davis Boulevard intersection in Section 7, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (Project Coord. Ray Bellows) Mr. Strain called the meeting to order Mr. Yovanovich, representing the petitioner Amend an existing PUD and add acreage Eliminating commercial uses and replacing with church, school and community center Discussion over traffic impact analysis, and size of school. - 18 students now and maximum of 50 Marjorie Student, Asst. county attorney - Suggested that an addition be made to the final PUD requirement in regards to native vegetation Mike Boces, Zoning and Land Development Review Staff recommends approval with specific deviation Reference to Wendy Lane should actually be Kings Lane PUBLIC SPEAKERS Richard Marinelli, St. George Condominiums - Concerns over buffering In favor of proposal, overall 16 February 5, 2004 Mr. Duane responded that wall be continued on this portion of the property and will be architecturally compatible with what is currently in existence. Joe Fletcher, Crown Pointe Villas In favor of proposal Concerns over traffic Concerns over landscaping on Davis Mr. Duane responded. Ingress and egress is from Davis Boulevard. Landscaping will meet at least the minimum requirements of the LDC. Public Hearing Closed Motion made by Mr. Adelstein to recommend approval to the BCC Mr. Murray seconded Approved unanimously: 7-0 Mr. Strain asked about court reporter for meeting transcriptions. Mr. Bellows indicated that there were budgetary constraints and was not sure if this was forwarded to the BCC. He would pass along to the BCC for consideration. Mr. Abernathy asked about CCSL amendment. Ms. Student indicated that the BCC will not take final action until after this Board has reviewed. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:15 PM. Collier County Planning Commission Mark Strain 17 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT Community Development and Environmental Services Division Planning Services Department · 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples. Florida 34104 February 12, 2004 Turrell and Asspcoates Michael Hawkins 3584 Exchange AVe., # B Naples, FL 34104 REFERENCE: BD-2003-AR-4689, SHRIGLEY, MICHAEL Dear Mr. Hawkins: On Thursday, February 5, 2004, the Collier County Planning Petition No. BD-2003-AR-4689. A copy of Resolution No. 04-02 is enclosed approving this use. If you have any questions, please contact me at 403-2907. in~cerely, i .~Co / Department of Zoning and Land Development Review JE/lo Enclosure CC: MICHAEL D SHRIGLEY 6530 Exchange Avenue, Suite B Naples, Florida 34104 Land Dept. Property Appraiser Minutes & Records (BD, PSP & PDI) ~ Customer Service Addressing (Peggy Jarrell) M. Ocheltree, Graphics l~le Commission heard and approved Phone (239) 403-2400 Fax (239~ {~43-r¢)68 ., ',.~ xx..:<qli0r<_~,~x.~c! CCPC RESOLUTION 04-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-2003-AR-4689 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK 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 a 16-foot extension for a boat dock from the 20-foot length allowed by LDC § 2.6.21. to authorize a 36-foot boat dock facility in an RSF-4 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-4689, filed on behalf of Michael D. Shrigley, by Turrell and Associates, for the property hereinafter described as: Lot 4, Block F, Little Hickory Shores, Replat of Unit No. 3, in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, as described in Plat Book 6, Page 2, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, be, and the same is hereby approved for, a 16-foot extension of a boat dock from the 20-foot length otherwise allowed by LDC § 2.6.21., to authorize 36 feet into the waterway for a boat docking facility in the RSF-4 zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: 2° o Corresponding permits, or letters of exemption, from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection shall be provided to Collier County prior to the issuance of a building permit. Reflectors and house numbers of no less than four (4) inches in height must be installed at the outermost end on both sides of all docks or mooring pilings, whichever protrudes the furthest into the waterway, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. At least one (1) "Manatee Area" sign must be posted in a conspicuous manner as close as possible to the furthest protrusion of the dock into the waterway, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion. Page I of 2 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 o[ Completion and the property must be maintained free trom all prohibited exotic species in perpetuity. 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. Done this_ ~"' ~ day of ,'77~~o'~ ,2004. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY~ F!4D~IDA ' ~uS~ELL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN' ATTEST: /cOmmunity Development and Environmental ~Services Administrator ~to Form and Legal Sufficiency: 1Jatrick G.-7-,C~fliYe~- .tv" Assistant County Attorney BD-2003-A R-4689/J E/sp Page 2 of 2