BCC Minutes 08/01/1989 R Nap]es, Florida, August l, 1989
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in
and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning
Appeals and as the gov~rntng board(s) of such special districts as
have been created according to law and having conducted bus~ness
herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. tn R~GULAR BZBSION tn Building
"F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
Burr L. Saunders
Max A. Hasse, Jr.
Richard S. Shanahan
Michael J. Volpe
Anne Goodntght
ALSO PRESENT: James C. Gl/es, Clerk; John Yonkosky, Finance
Director; Maureen Kenyon, Ellle Hoffman, and Annaltese Kraft, Deputy
Clerks; Neil Dorrill, County Manager; Brian MacKenzie, Assistant to
the County Manager; Tom Olltff, Assistant to the County Manager; Ken
Cuyler, County Attorney; Kevin O'Donnell, Public Services
Administrator; George Archibald, Transportation Services
Administrator; Frank Brutt, Community Development Administrator; Mike
Arnold, Utllitfes Adm~nistrator; William Lorenz, Environmental
Services Administrator: James Butch, Environmental Specialist; Dave
Weeks, Project Planner; David Pettrow, Development Services Diz. ector;
Ken Bagtnski, Planning Services Manager; Nancy Israelson,
Administrative Assistant to the Board; and Deputies Tom Storrar and
Sam Ba~, Sheriff's Office.
AUGUST 1, 1989
~ORMER COU]~rY NANAO~R HARMON TURR~R RENENBERED
Mr. Stanley Hole of Hole, Montes & Associates, Inc. requemted that
in the prayer of the day, Harmon Turner, who passed away, be remem-
bered. He noted that while in Collier County, he was the first County
Engineer, the first Public Works Director and the first County Manager
and he set a fine standard. A prayer was recited tn his honor.
A~ENDA A~D q_QON$~NT AGENDA - APPROVE~WITH C_I~.OES
Coulssioner Shmnahmn moved, seconded by Commtemioner Haeee,mnd
carried unantmouely, th&t the agenda and consent agenda be approved
with the following chmng3e:
1. Item 9A2 Added - recommendation to grant acceptance of sub-
division facilities for the Turnbury Subdlv!slon.
2. Item 6B1- Continued to August 22 1989 - Re Petition
Z0-89-13 , ,
Itenl 8A and Companion Item 10B - Continued to August 22, 1989
- re Appeal of decision relative to Impact Fees for
Can-American Naples, Ltd.
4. Item 9H3 - Continued to August 8, 1989 - re presentation of
Poly-Cycle Plastic recycling Joint venture.
5. Item 14G3 moved to Item 9Gl - re modifying a prevl,'~.,~ ~td
award for Contract B89-1386, cover and fill materi~%s '~gr the
Naples Landfill. -
Item 10D Added - re Emergency Ordinance amending Exhibit "A"
to Ord 86-40 to include additional lands that have previously
been asJessed wlth regards to the North Naples Roadway MSTU
District.
County Manager Dorrtll indicated that the following Items will be
heard prior to the 11:30 A.M. recess in order to accommodate the
public.
Item 10A re the Sunni/and Mine Issue.
Item 10C re Goodland Marina Maritime venture project.
Item 9H1 re the revised compliance agreement between the BCC and
the DCA relative to Growth Management
Item iOD re Emergency Ordinance amending Exhibit "A" to Ord. 86-40
.~E~'~LOYEE SERVIC~ AWARDS PRESENTED
The following employees were presented service awards for their
years of service with Collier County:
Pago 2
AUGUST 1, 1989
William Hudepohl, Road & Bridge - 10 years
Michael Lyon, Utilities - § years
JO AI~E BXAIRD DESIGNATED AS ~MPDOY~E OF THE M0~'IT~ FOR AUGUST
Commissioner Saunders presented a plaque and a cash award to Jo
Anne Beaird, Witness/Victim Services Coordinator, for being designated
as Employee of the Month for August.
Item #50
[989 N~TION.ah~? ASSOC~?IO~ OF COUNTIES AC~I__,,Z'~'EMEN~_ AWARDS - PRESE~TXD _
Commissioner Saunders stated that the National Association of
Counties issues awards for various categories of local government ser-
vice, adding that Collier County seems to get more than its fair share
of these awards. He indicated that there are five awards this year
and presented them to a representative from the following departments:
Growth Management Program and Process - Growth Management Dept.
Protection of Sea Turtle Program - Department of Natural Resources
It's A Magical Easter Program - Parks and Recreation Dept.
4-H Know Your County Government for Teens - Agriculture Dept.
Development Servlces One-Stop Shop - Developmental Services Dept.
Commissioner Saunders stated that it i~ significant that Collier
County continue to r~ceive national recognition for t~xe v~.rtety of
programs that the County is engaged in, adding that it is ~ tr,~ute to
the County Manager and the County Commission for the qualltl of the
staff and the quality of the programs.
County Manager Dorrlll thanked the Staff for their hard work,
adding that when they receive national recognition it makes the County
Manager and the County Commission look good and the community can be
proud of innovative department directors that have achieved national
recognition.
Item
ltr~ISlD CO~LIUCl AOU~I~ BET~EN THE D:EPART~NT OF
AFFAIRS A.WD COLLIER COUNTY - APPROVED IN CONCEPT AND STAFF TO
A STAY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEA~ING
County Manager Dorrlll stated that last Friday he had a meeting
with representatives of the Department of Community Affairs regarding
the County's desire to have the Growth Management Plan found in
Page 3
AUGUST 1, 1989
compliance. He stated that he distributed a brief memo the previous
day that outlines his recommendations theft will result in a good
effort on the part of the County to have the plan adopted and be
removed from the administrative hearing process. He stated that there
are four issues involved; the first is the Initial desire to proceed
with a process related approach to resolving inconsistent land uses
which has been replaced as a result of a negotiated date of April 1,
1990, by which the County would agree to no longer issue Development
Orders not tn conjunction with the new Comprehensive Plan and the
requirements of that. He stated that the~ second issue is the
acknowledgment on the part of the Department that during the interim
period the County would continue to reco~;nize and issue Development
Orders for those projects that are legitimate and have a legitimate
opportunity to proceed. He Indicated the, t the third issue deals with
the zoning re-evaluation proposal, specifically the fact that the
State is looking for the County to provldIe crtterta within the Compre-
hensive Plan that will spell out the deta~ils by which ~he ec,mty will
resolve specific spe::lal exceptions of an, in-fill zoning nature, but
not to perpetuate the type of densities ~nd Intensities of land use
that has been seen in the past, and to also recognize that there will
be specific instances where there are a series of strip commercial
lots. He referred to Naples Park where there is a vacant lot and then
a series of other developed strip commercial lots, adding that it is
obvious that the single-family opportunities within the strip commer-
cial neighborhood are very limited from a market standpoint~ adding
that the State wants the County to identify which of the zoning re-
evaluation areas ~hould be corrected first in a priority system and
then define the type of criteria that will be applled in order to
down-zone or re-evaluate those ~]xtsttng uses. He indicated that the
fourth issue deals with the legal aspects of not having the vested
rights ordinance and the zoning re-evaluation ordinance not consistent
with the adopted Comprehensive Plan, adding that while the County can
work on the development and the process a:~sociated with determining
P.ge 4
AUGUST l, 1989
vested rights and initiating the zoning re-evaluation process, the
County would not adopt those local regulations until the Comprehensive
Plan is amended as a result of the compliance agreement. Ht~ stated
that he feels that this agreement would be good for Collier County and
those developments that are legitimate will have an opportunity to
proceed with enough sufficient advance notice to make their plans
accordingly. He noted that the balance of the projects are going to
be subjected to the Growth Management Plan and will have to adhere to
the policies of the coming vested rights ordinance and the zoning re-
evaluation ordinance. He noted that this frame wo~k needs to be
developed in conjunction with the County Attorney's office &.;Id final
wording submitted to the Department pending the Board's dlccussion
this date.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned if the LDR procedure would co/n-
cide with the April 1, 1990, deadline, to which County Manager Dorrlll
replied affirmatively, adding that this would not affect th~ County's
ability to begin work on the two ordinances.
Commissioner Saunders stated that the action that is needed is to
approve in concept the conditions stated in the memorandum of July 31,
1989, and Staff needs to request that the DCA agree to a stay of the
administrative hearing, pending on working out language of this
settlement.
County Manager Dorrlll stated that this is in effect a settlement
of the non-compliance situation and as the County grows closer to the
administrative hearing date, attorneys representing the various
interests will begin protecting their legal rights. He stated that
the closer the County gets to the deadlines, the more difficult a
settlement will be as the County attempts to protect their rights.
Commissioner Saunders stated that it would be helpful to the
County Attorney if a continuance of the administrative hearing proce~ls
is requested.
Attorney George Varnadoe stated that half of his clients support
the outlined proposal, noting that as he understands it, the County will
Page 5
AUGUST 1, 1989
live with the existing Growth Management Plan until April 1, 1990,
which means that development permits will be issued for existing zoned
projects during that time period. He stated that the County will also
be adopting the vested rights land development regulations and the
zoning re-evaulatton regulations simultaneously with the
Management Plan amendment to effectuate this compromise on cr about
April 1, 1990. He indicated that he also understands that the County
will write in some special exception language that looks ac com-
patibility during the zoning re-evaulatton process and that April 1,
1990, ts the date where no further permits will be granted if they are
Inconsistent with the then amended Growth Management Plan. He
stated that if his understanding is correct, he has no problem. He
stated that another concern was concurrency which would be as of the
date the plan was adopted, adding that this should be cleared up In
the compliance agreement.
Mr. Edward Chlumsky indicated that If there Is dowl% zoning, he
will not be able to use his property and he has been working with DOT
and various agenctec with regards to this matter. He noted theft if he
had to utilize his property between now and April 1, 1990, it ~ould be
impossible to obtain all his approvals through the various agencies.
Commissioner Saunders Indicated that the purpose of this agenda
item is nut to address Individual pieces of property. He advised Mr.
Chlumsk¥ to have a meeting with MI'. Cuyler, who would indicate the
lmpllcat:~ons of this property, a~ssumtng that the concept of this
agreement 18 approved.
Attorney Larry Ingram indicated that the proposed agreement
adversely affect a lot of the small property owners, noting that a lot
of these people cannot afford to build until their land is paid for
and by that time, they will be under the new guidelines and it will
prcbab]y be down-zoned. He noted that more consideration should be
.jlven for people that already have zoning in place. He indicated thitt
there are a lot of people that need to know where they stand.
Mr. Lawrence Thompson stated that he owns two small pieces of pro-
Page 6
party on the south side of U.S. 4! and if they are down-zoned to resi-
dential, they will be useless because no one will want to build
residential if there is commercial on bot'h sides of it, He stated
that he does not know what should be done concerning this mat~er.
County Manage~, Dorrtll stated that no ones property is being down-
zoned and there will be criteria for special exceptions. He noted
that the County does not want to put anyone in a position where their
property is worthless and not marketable. He noted that there will be
/n-fill and a reasonable down stepping of intensity.
Mr. Alan Reynolds of Wilson, Miller, Barton, Soll& Peek, Inc.,
stated that he is in agreement with the concept that is being pre-
sented this date. He presented a letter to the Board indicating that
he has basically outlined the same four ts, sues as the County Manager
did and indicated that they also have further recommendations with
regards to the proposed vested rights process. He noted that the
solution to this dilemma is going to be accomplished in two paPts: one
by reaching an agreement with DCA and then by introducing throuuh the
vested rights process a reasonableness for dealing with propert~s
that are at various ~ages of approval which have been identified in
his letter. He stated that he hopes that these thoughts will be c¢,n-
sldered when Staff is drafting the final language, adding that he
hopes that he would be able to have input ~nto that process.
Commissioner Saunders stated that the .action to be considered is
whether the Board agrees with the four issues outlined in County
Manager Dorrill's memo and if there is agreement, then Staf~ should be
directed to negotiate a settlement agreement that contains these
issues and ask that the administrative heal~tng be continued until the
language has been worked out.
Co-~lselonar Vo1F~ aoved, seconded by (:o~tsa~oner Sh~l/l~n, that
the ~oard approve in concept the terms outlined ].n Mr. DorrA~l,a leis
of July 31, 1989, ~nd to direct Stmff to re<lu~at a stay of the
Administrative Hearing.
Commissioner Shanahan stated that he would also like to suggest
Page ?
that Staff take into consideration the Wll,3on, Miller, Barton, Soll&
Peek, Inc. recommendations as well as lnpul: from all property owners.
Upon call for the question, the motion c&rrled unmnt~Ully.
Item ~IO&
SUNI~ILA~D MZ~ H~'.~DFATHERED IN UNDER THE COLLIER OOUFI~ ~ONINH
ORDInAnCE A~D 1,O4! ACRES CONSIDERKD A LEG~ NON-CO~"FOR~INH USE IN
THE A-! ZONING DISTRICT FOR MINING OPERATIONS
County Attorney Cuyler stated that the existing Sunntland Mine is
~n the eastern part of the County off of State Road 29. Hr} noted that
there has been approximately 400 acres mined at the site, sddding that
the mine operator is attempting to get an excavation permit and as
part of the permit, certain determinations are necessary and one of
them is whether this land is in compliance w/th land use regulations
of the County. He stated that a determination has been made that this
property is not in conformance with the zoning district within which
.it is located, adding that it is not a perm.itted use in that district.
He stated that a determination has to be made whether this pro3erty
is grandfathered or is a legal non-conforming use status and 1~ has to
be determined to what extent the non-conforming use can expand beoause
of the unique nature of a mining operation. He indicated that a mine
is a diminishing asset resource and expands as it is used. He ~tated
that Mr. Goodlette, representing Sunniland Mine, needs to show the
Board that there is sufficient evidence that this property should be
grandfathered in, noting that he has presented a number of affidavits
which would indicate that this mine is a grandfathered use. He ]ndi-
cared that there is the question as to what extent the mine can
expand, adding that in other Jurisdictions he has found that it can
expand to the size of the parcel, but in this case, the parcel is
extremely large and he has not been able to determine any criteria for
such expansion. He stated that the actual size of the parcel which is
a 99 year leasehold, consists of 12,285 acres and they are requesting
1,O41 acres as part of their excavation permlt.
Attorney Dudley Goodlette of Cummings & Lockwood, representing
Florida Rock Industries, who is the operator of the quarry that has
Page 8
AUGUST 1, 1989
Just been described. He stated that the 99 year lease was entered
into November, 1955, and a quarry has been operated colltinuously. He
stated that almost 500 ~cres has been excavated to date and the
request this date is to permit the additional excavation of approxima-
tely 1,000 acres. He stated that of the additional 1,000 acres almost
400 acres has already been cleared and another 135 acres will nos be
disturbed, which means that approximately 500 acres or less will be
disturbed which comprises 4~ of the total leased property. He indi-
cated that he feels that they have passed the test of reasonableness
which should govern the Board's decision.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned how long it will take for this
additional 1,000 acres to be excavated, to which Mr. Goodlette stated
that it would take 25 to 30 years to excavate.
Mr. Goodlette stated that there is a very thorough Environmental
Impact Statement being done on this property and the material tha%~ is
being excavated is used for road construction, but the rest of the
property does not have any other use.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned if the petitioner still a~;rees to
the stipulations that were attached to the permit in 1987, to which
Mr. Goodlette replied affirmatively, with the exception of the
stipulation regarding the Planning and Zoning Director.
Mr. Goodlette stated that he is addressing Item #4, noting that
the other ones are currently being addressed. He stated that these
stipulations are an on-going process and he hopes to conclude all
these matters at an early date.
Commissioner Goodntght stated that she has been in Collier County
for 34 years and as long as she has been here, there has always been a
quarry at Sunntland and she does not see a problem with it being
grandf&thered ~n.
County Attorney Cuyler stated that the appropriate action for the
Beard to take would be to recognize that it is a legal non-conforming
use and it has been determined that it is grandfathered in to the
extent of the additional 1,041 acres.
Page 9
AUGUST 1, 1989
¢ollssloner Shanahan movE,~, s®conde~ bT' ¢olleelon~r Gocatntght,
that S~llud Mine Is considered a legal non-confo~tng use ~d
~fath~red tn to the extent of the addltto~l 1,041 acres
should ~ all~d to continue their excavation.
Commissioner Has~e questioned if all the environmental people have
looked thl~ over thoroughly, to which ~nvtronmental Services
Administrator Lorenz stated that there was a meeting a few weeks ago
with regard~ to this operation and everyone ts tn agreement with what
is being developed.
County Attorney Cuyler stated that there may be additional stipu-
lations as part of the excavation permit which will be addressed
during the process.
Upon call for the question, the notion carried unanimously.
Item ,lOC
STAFF TO ANALYZE MINOR ~ MAJOR CHANGES R~GAILDING TH~ MARITIM~
V~S GOODLAND MARINA AND TO R~PORT BACK TO THI BGC IN TWO ~L~ES__
County Attorney Cuyler stated that the Board directed him to look
Into this matter with regards to the development. He stated that with
regards to this development being allowed to continue as a marina
function and determining whether they legally cleared mangroves from
the site, he has determined that they can build a marina use of some
type and there was no problem with the c/earing of the mangroves. He
indicated that he has been In contact with DER and they have Indicated
that the developer acted in accordance with permits with regards to
the mangroves. He indicated that the permits were not obtained under
current regulations, noting that the developer felt that they had per-
mits under the Settlement Agreement of 1982. He stated that the
settlement agreement has certain provisions in It that requires notice
to various parties tn the event there ts a modification to the site
and development plans that were attached as part of the agreement. He
Indicated the developers produced certain evidence that notice was
given to the parties, adding that there is some argument regarding the
appropriateness of the notice, but he does not feel that this ts a
Page 10
valid argument as the County received the site plan and the StaZ~'
actually approved the site plan. He indicated that with regards to
transportation improvements, there are some PUD requirements that deal
with transportation improvements at the intersection of S.R. g2 and
the road to Goodland, adding that in his opinion they are claarly
required. He stated that he talked with the developer's representative
and they have indicated that they will make whatever improvements are
necessary and Transportation Services Administrator Archibald has
indicated that there may be some improvements in that area but some oi~
the improvements that have been noted on the site plan are probably
not in the County's best interest or they cannot be accomplished. He
noted that the site plan had a diagram with a loop road going through
some mangroves and the County may not want to do that, adding that
the~e may be some transportation issues th~tt may remain outstanding,
but the developer has indicated that they ~re willing to have t'~is
included as a site development plan stipul~tion. He stated that the
County, as part of the Settlement Agreement and as part of the Deltona
rezone in lg84, approved certain uses. He stated that tn his opinion
the County did not have to approve any changes to the site plan,
unlike the normal situation. He stated th~tt since the site plan was
actually the subject of an attachment to the settlement agreement and
the PUD, the County could have taken the position that they would not
allow anything other than slight changes. He indicated that the
restaurant use and the commercial use that is an accessory to the
marina are normally considered accessory u~es. He noted that the PUD
document indicates that m/nor site alterations may be permitted sub-
Ject to planning staff and administrative approval which indicates
that major site alterations may not be app~oved sub~ect to planning
staff and administrative approval. He stated that he feels that Staff
had the ability under the PUD document to ~ake minor site alterations;
to the plan, but a restaurant structure, in his opinion, is a ma~or ~lte
plan alteration and Staff would not have the ability to approve that
administratively. He stated that the Board could agree to make this
Page I1
AUGUST l, 1989
change, but Staff could not. He noted that the res/dents of Good,land
have concerns that things were not done the way they should have been
done, and the Board direction to him was to check into the ratter. He
stated that he has not mad,~ a complete analysis of all the changes and
has not determined whether they are minor or major in nature.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned if the PUD within the DRI has
expired, to which County Attorney Cuyler replied negatively, adding
that this argument has been made, but the master plans that are
attached to the PUD have never been looked at as a final Development
Order or as being expired.
Mr. James J. "Bud" Kornse stated that there have been sign/f/cant
site p/an changes and when the property was cleared, there was no
flagging or protection for any of the vegetation.
Tape e2
Mr. Clarence Smith stated that there is a two year time period in
the PUD zoning and he feels ~hat this should be adhered to.
Mr. Elhanon Combs, Vice President of the Good/and Civic
Association, stated that the Developer has deviated from the ertginal
plan. He stated that they had a two year time period on this develop-
ment and it has expired and should be enforced. He noted that there
were also more mangroves removed than what was originally intended.
Mrs. Betty Bruno ind~cated that the Board approved this marina to
be built in 1984, even with strong protest from the property owners in
the area. She stated that there has been a lot of environmental
damage and there will be problems with the roads and water.
Mr. J. W. Douglas stated that he objects to this marina because it
will be destroying the manatees ~n the harbor, excess speed of the
power boats, increasing danger during hurricanes, the removal of the
mangroves, pollutants that w~ll be put into the water, and an increase
in taxes.
County Attorney Cuyler stated that the developer has a right to
continue generally with their project, adding that there was a settle-
ment agreement with a lot of parties involved and the rezoning took
Page 12
AUGUST !, 1989
place subsequent to that. He stated that the State agencies and th~
conservation entities and the County felt at that time, the agreement
was in the best interest of the citizens.
Dr. Fran Stallings, representing the Conservancy, referred to the
settlement agreement that the Conservancy is operating under with
regards to this project. He stated that he received a letter dated
July 23, 1987, which involved five modifications to the original plan
and comments were made with regards to these modifications. He stated
that the Con~ervancy reviewed the master site plan and there were a
number of changes beyond this letter of notification. He stated that
it is difficult to determine, but the potential is there that these
changes could be defined as major. He referred to the letter dated
July 23, 1987 to Mr. Philip Edwards, DER, from Mr. Todd Turrell,
Coastal Engineering, which indicates that they felt the revised design
would accommodate a more functional marina while reducing envi,.onmen-
tal impacts. He noted that it also indicated ~hat the modification~
will be reviewed according to the settlement agreement and that any
future changes to the upland site plan that would not impact State
waters or wetlands would be subject to approval only by Collier
County. He stated that the Conservancy disagrees ~tth this above-
referenced sentence with regards to upland uses, adding that any
significant changes would be subject to all the parties involved.
Commissioner Saunders questioned if the site plan that currently
e×is~s is substantially different than what the Conservancy approved
in October, 1987, to which Dr. Stallings stated that there is not suf-
ficient detail to make that determination. He stated that he feels
that if there is more than a §~ increase in numbers then ~t would be
considered a significant chango, for example, if the number of boat
slips changed by 3 or 4 it would not be significant but if it was more
than that, it would be con~tdered significant. He stated that the
settlement requires the ap~ltcant to provide the Conservancy an oppor-
tunity to review the specific details, make the appropriate responses
and this step must take place before nhe mo4iflcations are allowed,
Page 13
AUGUST l, 1989
noting that this includes a 60 day notification period for any objec-
tions. He stated that he is asking for more detail of what is being
proposed and they would like to have one of their attorneys review
this matter.
Commissioner Saunders questioned if there is anything substan-
tially different in the current site plan than what was approved by
the Conservancy in October, 1987, to which Mr. Richard Aaron, Attorney
for the Developer of Maritime Ventures I, stated that the "current site
plan" with the modifications was sent to the Conservancy as well as the
other agencies. He stated that there were no substantial changes on
this site plan and this is the one that was approved by all parties.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Aaron stated there were modi-
fications made that were different than the 1982 plan, but it is
covered in the settlement agreement and the PUD.
Commissioner Saunders questioned if it would be appropriate for
the Board to say that prior to any construction of the future marina
commercial site, it would have to be approved by all parties and
interests as well as the Board, to which County Attorney Cuyler stated
that he assumes that the Conservancy and the Developer will clarify
what needs to be clarified, adding that The Board has the ability to
say that regardless of the settlement agreement, any building permit
that would be issued for something that Is a major change from the
conceptual site plan to the current site plan will require approval by
the Board.
Commissioner Saunders stated that the conceptual site plan versus
the current site plan show.s an increase of 20% in commercial space
which appears to be a substantial change and should be subject to
review by all parties.
County Attorney Cuyler stated that it is apparent that the
construction of a restaurant would be a major change. He stated that
there are other issues and the Board may want an analysis by Staff to
be brought back To indicate which are major changes and which are not.
Mr. Aaron stated that 'they are not making any changes, adding that
Page 14
AUGUST 1, 1989
the current site plan is the one that was approved. He stated that
this whole process was reviewed by the Board a year ago and they have
relied upon the fact that they went through the zoning process and
made changes to the site plan that were approved and notified all con-
cezned parties.
County Attorney Cuyler mtated that when this was brought before
the Board it was to do with the water issue and not the restaurant
i~sue.
Commissioner Shanahan stated that he feels that the Board owes it
to everyone to take a positive position as to whether there were minor
or major changes and if this position cannot be taken at this time,
then Staff needs to further investigate and bring back an analysis on
this matter.
*** Deputy Clerk Hoff~an rep/aced Deputy Clerk Kenyon at this l:t~e **$
Commissioner Shanahan stated that if there are minor modifica-
tions, Staff can approve them, but if there are major changes, they
need to come back before the Commission for approval.
Attorney Aaron indicated that the PUD allows a restaurant, bait
shops, and boat and motor sales. He explained that the Co~unisston
previously approved the restaurant, noting that the developer can put
in up to 32,500 square feet of accessory uses, but it will most likely
be less. He indicated that the original plan contained 100 additions3
parking spa:es, which ts another 25,000 square feet, and eliminates
green space.
Commissioner Saunders explained that the only difference he can
see is that between the current site plan and that of the conceptual
plan which .includes the restaurant, but noted that the environmental
changes are sound.
Commiss~[oner Shanahan called attention to the fact that the deve-
loper state~ that the current plan is an improvement over the concep-
tual plan, but the people of Goodland are saying that there are major
changes in the scope of the project with significant deviations; they
previously cited concerns relating to the tree removal process, but
Page 15
AUGUST ~, lg89
this has be~n unchallenged. He noted that the residents of Goodland
have additional concerns regarding the marina tapping into the water
supply. He noted that his concerns relate to transportation, since
the marina is 1/3 the size of the entirety of Goodland.
Attorney Aaron advised that the developer has acknowledge~ an
cbllgatlon tlo improve the Intersection of S.R. 92 and S.R. 92A.
Transportation Services Administrator Archibald advised that the
Settlement ;..greement contains~ a plan that Staff does not believe is in
the best interest of intersection improvements since the majority of
the traffic movements to Goodland will be coming from the west. He
explained that some of the improvements that have been made by DOT
which currently exist, are much better than trying to construct a loop
road in the middle of an intersection that %;ould not only caus~ the
east bound movement to come tn a stop, but will also involve the
wetland area. He advised that Staff is looking for other inter~ection
improvements which will do a better Job than what is outlined in the
Settlement A,]reement.
Mr. Combs stated that the point system for development plans simi-
lar to the marina project requi~es 15 points: water/sewer, highways,
fire department and ambulance service. He indicated that there is no
fire protect.ion, or water/sewer. He noted that at one time, Maritime
Ventures Ind,[cared that the marina would only employ three persons,
and there were not the same concerns that are realized today.
Commissioner Shanahan pointed out that the County approved the
site develop~ent plan on September 19, 1988, after review by all
County Departments: Zoning, NRMD, Engineering, Transportation, Marco
Island Fire Department, qutldlng Department, Health Department, and
the Utilitie~ Department.
Commissioner Saunders advised that a building permit w~ll not be
issued until the marina has water and sewer service.
Ms. Bruno raised concerns about emergency vehicle traffic and eva-
cuation. She indicated that the original plan contained the road off
of S.R. 92 which goes through the Estuary and runs all the way back to
AUGUST 1, 1989
the marina. She suggested that this route be used to get in and out
of the proJ~ct site when the construction commences, instead of coming
in and out of ~.R. 92.
County Attorney Cuyler advised that he has received a letter from
the Florida Audubon Society regarding new legislation that ~s
currently in effect relating to DRI's, and he is reviewing same to
determine whether this will have any impact on the project. He noted
with regard to the site plan, the Commission has the option to have
Staff condu.ct an analysis to separate the changes and classify them
into "minor" or "major" changes.
Co.also, toner Shmnahmn movmd, seconded by Co--missioner Hm~ee and
carried un~mt~oual¥, that Staff perform an anely~te relattvw to the
~',tnor and l~Jor changes, and the entire scope of the project, and
bring back to the Commission tn two weeks for final review.
Item #$0D
KMERGENCY ORDINANCK 89-56, AMENDING ORDINANCE 86-40 NORTH NAPLES
ROADWAY M~%~ DISTRICT - ADOPTED '
County Attorney Cuyler advised that this is an emergency ordi-
nance, and it is not an advertised public hearing. He explained that
the Commission will have to waive by 4/5 vote, the notice of intent to
conduct the normal advertised public hearing, but this is still a
public hearing, subject to public input. He indicated that the
Emergency Ordinance amends Exhibit "A" to Collier County Oz'dinance
86-40 to include additional lands lying within Sections 18 and 19,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County. He explained that
Ordinance 86-40 established the North Naples Roadway Municipal Service
Taxing and Benefit Unit, and when the District was originally formed,
the Commission subsequently, by Resolution, set forth the intent to
add these lands. He noted that the owners of the subject land have
been notified, and there have been no objections by any parties. Ne
stated that this ordinance is necessary so that the additional lands
can be included within the District.
Cosmteetonar Shanah~n moved, seconded by Co~miaelonsr ~oodntght
1989
and c~'ried unanimously, to conduct · public hearing.
Commissioner Hasse questioned the location of the properties?
County Attorney Cuyler advised that this ts the Regency Village of
Naples PUD, and it contains 200+ acres.
There were no speakers.
Comisstone~ Shanahmn moved, saconded ~ Co~tsetoner Q~tght
~ c~r~ed ~t~usly, that the ~blic hmartng ~ closed.
Co~te~ioner Sh~ m~ved, seconded ~ Co~tsstoner Vol~ ~d
carried ~t~elu, that the ordln~ce aa n~red ~d titled ~1~
~ mdopt~ ~d entered into Ordtn~ce Book No. 36:
O~IN~C~ 89-56
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING EXHIBIT "A" TO COLLIER COUNTY
ORDINANCE NO. 86-40 TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL LANDS LYING WITHIN
SECTIONS 18 AND 19, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE ~6 EAST; PROVIDING
FOR DECLARATION OF AN EMERGENCY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY:
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
· ,s ~ecess 11:35 l.M. - Reconvmned 1:00 P.N. ',*
0RDIIJL)/CE ~9-57, RE PE?I?[0:N Z0-89-18, AH~NDING 0RDI]IA]IC] 82-2,
SXCT]ON a~ SUPPL~3~x]n'ARy DIS~]tICT P~eULA?IONS - &DOt=T~p AS Xk~J~b~D
Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Dally News on
July 7, 1989, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with the
Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider an ordinance amending
Ordinance 132-2, the Zoning Ordinance of Collier County, by amendlng
Section 8, Supplementing District Regulations; by providing minimum
requirements for the use of native species tn landscape.
Chief Environmentalist Butch advised that the purpose of this
ordinance is to amend Ordinance 82-2, to incorporate native plant spe-
cies into landscape designs, as required by Objective 6.5 of the
Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management
Plan.
Mr. Butch indicated that one revision should be made to the
amendment. He referred to Page 2, Section Two (7) of the ordinance,
which should be revised as follows:
7) Prohibited Species. The following plants are specifically
prohibited from use for meeting any landscaping req%ltrement
under this Section:
Page 18
There were no speakers,
Co~imeloner Rase~e move~d, eeconded by Comalmaloner Shanahan ~d
c~rl~ m~t~sly, that the ~bltc hearing ~ close.
C~t~etoner Hesse ~, second~ ~ Co~tssloner Sh~ ~d
c~ri~ m~imly, that the ordln~ce as ~nded, ~d u n~r~
~d tltl~ ~1~ ~ adopte~l ~d entered into Ordtn~ce ~k No. 36:
O~IN~C~ 89-57
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 82-2, THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF
COLLIER COUNTY, BY AMENDING SECTION 8, SUPPLEMENTING DISTRICT
REGULATIONS; BY PROVIDING MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE USE OF
NATIVE SPECIES IN LANDSCAPE; BY PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND
SEVERABILITY; BY PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Item ~603
O~I~CE 89-58, ~ING O~INANCE 75-21, T~E ~V~ O~IN~C=,
SE~ION ~, S~SE~ION 4, P~~H D, ON, SITE I~PE~ION -
Legal notice having been pub~ished in the Naples Dail~ News on
July 6, ~989, as evidenced by Aff~davl~ of Publica~ton filed w~:~ the
Clerk, public hea~ng ~as opened ~o consider an ordinance amen,~,]ng
Ordinance 7~-2~, as amended, the Tree Removal Ordinance, by amending
Section Two; Subsection 4., Paragraph D, On-s~te Inspection.
Chief Environmen~allst Butch stated that the purpose of this ord~-
hence is ~o amend Ordinance 75-21, the Tree Removal Ordinance,
require the preserva~ion of an appropria~e amount of native habitat
wi~b~n development areas, as required by Policies 6.4.6, 6.4.7, and
6.4.8 of ~he Co~serva~loR a~d Coastal Management Element of ~he Grow%h
Management Plan. He noted that much of the lan~age ~n the proposed
amendment ~s ideDtical to t:hat of an amendment ~h~ch was reviewed
~he Co~Jssion on July 25, ~989.
There w=re no speakers.
c~=i~ ~~ly, that the ~bl~c hearing ~
C~sstoner H~ee ~d, second~ ~ Co~i.etoner S~ ~d
c~rt~ ~lmly, t~t the ordt~ce as n~r~ ~d litl~ ~1~
~ a~t~ ~d enter~ Into Ordln~cs ~k No. 36:
ORDIN~CE 89-58
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 75-21, AS AMENDED, THE TREE
REMOVAL ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING SECTION TWO: S~BSECTION 4.
Page 19
AUGUST l, 1989
PARAGf~APH D. ON-SITE INSPECTION; BY PROVIDING FOR THE
PRESEf:VATION OF AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF NATIVE HABITAT; BY
PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; BY PROVIDING FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
Item egA1
PUBLIC HHAKI]~ DATE SET FO~t OCTOBER 24, 1989, FOR DRI-~8-IC
VILLA~I OF NAPLES" - APPROVED
Co--missioner Shanah~n e~v~d, seconded t~ Coutssloner ~.~se and
carried unanimously, that October 24, 1989, be sst as m public hs~lng
date for DRI-8~-IC, 'Regen~ Village of Naples'.
Item ~&i
RESOLUTION 89-194, GRANTING PltgLININAR¥ AO¢II~AN¢I O! T~I ROADt~Y,
DItAINA~E0 ~TER A~D SEWER ~ltO%'EM~NTS FOR THE FINAL FLAT OF 'TURX~URY
SUBDIVISION' - ADOPTED SUBJECT TO MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND
Community Development Services Administrator Brutt stated that
this Item is a recommendatfon to grant preliminary acceptance o~ the
roadway, drainage, wa~er and sewer improvements for the final plat of
"Turnbury Subdivision". He noted that the developer has installed the
necessary utilities, and he has provided the necessary security. He
indicated that the Maintenance Bond has been reviewed by the County
Attorney and ~'s recommendation ts to move forward, as per the recom-
mendations of l;taff:
Accept a revised Maintenance Bond once it has been reviewed
and approved by the County Attorney's office, as security for
maintenance of the infrastructure until the Board of County
Commissioners grants final acceptance of all improvements.
Authori:~ the Chairman to execute the Maintenance Agreement
for Preliminary Acceptance and Resolution authorizing
preliminary acceptance once the Maintenance Bond has been
approved by the County Attorney's office.
Preliminary acceptance of improvements will not b~come effec-
tive until water and sewer facilities have been conveyed to
Collier County Water-Sewer District.
¢oealeeloner Ooodntght a~, seconded by Couissioner H~ ~nd
c~rt~ ~~ly, to a~pt R~olution 89-194 ~ting p~/tml~
acc~t~ of t~ rom~y, ~al~, ~tmr ~d s~r t~r~nts for
t~ f~l plat of "~m~ Su~tvtelon", ~bJmct to Staff'm mti~lm-
tt~.
Page 20
AUGUST 1, 1989
CONSULTANT SERVICI AORKEMINTS FOR RIOHT-OF-#Ay ACQUISITION A~D
AA'PRAISAL IN ~RT OF ~ NOR~ N~P~S RO~AY ~ICIP~ S~ICK
T~ING ~ B~IT ~IT - ~PRO~D~ S~.~ TO ~DIFICATIO~
Transportation Services Adminis~rator Archibald explained tha~
th~s ~tem Is a recommendation to approve ~hree contracts, all of which
relate to acquiring the right-of-way for the North Naples Roadway
MSTU. He advised that ~he North Naples project Involves Livingston
Road running north of Immokalee Road, and connecting to Bonita Beach
Road in Lee County.
Mr. Archibald indicated that the contl:acts are faXrly straight
forward, and they have been reviewed by the County Attorney's office.
He noted that the first contract Is the firm of Hanson Appraisal Co.,
and ~s for the appraisal of 26 parcels of property at a cost of
approximately $1,800 each, for the total contract amount of $46,800.
Mr. Archibald stated that the second appraisal contract is ~ith
the firm of We/ge/ Veasey Appraisers, of Middleburg, Florida, fur a
contFact involving 21 parcels at the unit price of $1,000 per parcel.
Mr. Archibald advised that the third contract deals with the need
for consulting services to acquire the right-of-way, and the Agreement
involves 9 activities on the part of the consultant dealing with the
undertaking and encumbrance stud/es, title information, making
contracts with all of the property o~ers, reviewing the appraisals
that are performed by other parties, making /nit/al and ~ood fa~h
negotiations for either donation or donation and purchase of proper-
ties, and the preparation of a suit information package, if condem-
nation should become necessary. He noted that the total amour of
this contract is $134,423, adding that the firm of Kaiser Zngineers
was chosen by the Consultant Selection Committee.
Mr. Archibald called attention to a number of revisions that need
to be made to the agreements, as recommended by the County Attorney's
office or the Risk Management Department:
1. Appraisal Contracts - Item 15, Page 3: Delete the pro-
fessional liability requirement. Mr. Archibald advised that
Staff is recommending that ~h~s be removed from the
Agreement, since none of the firms that have made submittal
provide this type of insurance, nor is there any great amount
AUGUST l, 1~89
of exposure on the part of the County for this kind of ser-
vice.
Welgel Veasey Appraisal Agreement - Items 5D and 5E - The
appraisal firm has requested that a provision be included,
that should a change occur from the time their make their ini-
tial appraisal to any updated appraisal involving additional
work, that consideration be given for any additional work
assigned to them.
Kaiser Engineers Consulting Agreement - Page 12, Article
3.06, line 5: change "warrant" to "warranty"; Page 16,
Article 3.23, lines I1 and 12: change "refuse" to "reuse";
and Page 18, Article 4.07: insert "days" between "calendar"
and "from"
Commissioner Vo]pe que,~tioned the necessity for two separate
appraisal firms? Mr. Archibald replied that it is good to have two
firms on any project, so that if two appraisals are req~/ired for one
parcel, there is a firm available, with knowledge of the project; and
the other driving force is cost.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Archibald explained that the
Selection Committee reviewed all of the submittals, and then a m'hort
list of three consultants were asked to make Presentations, and upon
hearing the presentations, the Committee chose the best of the three
firms.
Cmtsstoner Volpe ml.Nd, seconded by Cosmtsstonsr
carried unanimously, to approve the consulting contract mhd the two
appraisal contracts, for the North Naples Roadway Nunt¢tp~l
?mxtN ami ~eneftt Unit, subject to the modifications,
Page 22
AUGUST 1, 1989
It~ ~B2
R~INBUIt~tBLE CO~JTRUCTION AGREEMENT IN THE &~OUNT OF 822,374 W~TH
POVI&-~TIN~ CORFO~ATION FOR ACCESS I~PltOV~N~iTI~j
~CE ~I~I~, IN CON~ION WITH THE
I~OJEC~ - ~~D
Transportation Services Administrator Archibald stated that this
AGreement relates to a request from the Povta-Ballanttne Corporation
as developer/owner of the Naples Trace Condominium Development pro-
Ject, for the County to consider improvements for Its access needs at
the time the four lane project is designed. He indicated that the
subject development ts located south of the GreenTree shopping center,
and immediately west of Airport Road. He explained that that par-
ttcular segment of Atrpnrt Road is being Included and under design as
part of the improvements for the four-lantng of Immokalee Road between
U.S. 41 and 1-75.
Mr. Archibald advised that there will be a major change to the
intersection of Airport Road and Immokalee Road, and it will include
the frontage of this development. He Indicated that the developer ts
requesting that the County incorporate his design changes for turn
lanes and a median opening into the four-lane construction project.
He explained that this request is consistent to what the County has
done in the past, and is also conslst~nt with the needs to complete
the design and have it ready for construction without many changes.
Co~'lea~oner Shan~han ~oved, seconded b~ Co~a~aa~one~ Hu~e ~nd
carried ~tmly, to approve the Rei~rsable Co~tnctton
A~nt with P~t~-Ball~tlne Cor~r~tton, in the estt~ted
stbls ~t of ~22,3~4.
Page 23
AUGUST l, 1989
STAl~ TO .M~D LAN~3UAGK OF ORDINANCE 89-11, KSTABLISHING A ~EB FOR
B~CH ~R P~TS ~_BR~NG ~CK TO THE BCC
Public Services Administrator O'Donnell stated that Staff ts
requesting that a resolution be adopted, pursuant to Ordinance 89-~1,
specifying a fee for a beach vendor permit at $250, and to gain direc-
tion from the Commission regarding this ordinance. He advised that
when 0rd~nance 89-11 was adopted In February, 1989, there were
d~scusstons relatlng to changing the lan~age ~n the ordinance from
"access on the beach" to "access to the beach", whlch resulted in the
language being changed to "access to the beach". He ~nd~cated that
this ~s presenting Staff with operational problems.
Mr. O'Donnell referred to his memorandum dated May 2, 1989,
the County Attorney, requestlng legal clarification as to what
constitutes access to the beach. He then referred to Assistant County
Attorney WeJGel's memorandum dated May 31, 1989, advising that access
to the beach would be extremely dtfflcult for the County to enforce,
and would allow licensed vendors to move their particular operations
up and down the beach llne. He noted that Staff d~d not want to be
placed In the pos~tlon of lssulng permits to an entity, and then
asking the Commission for direction to change the ordinance and then
"~randfather in" that entlty.
Mr. O'Donnell suggested that author~zation be given to advertise
the ordinance for amendments, and then conduct a public hearing. He
~ndicated that it is necessary for the adoption of the resolution
that beach vending permits may be lssued.
Tm~ ~3
Assistant County Attorney Wetgel advised that if the direction of
the Commission is that Staff amend the operational language of the
ordinance, which effects the beach vendor permit, that the proposed
resolution be adopted, effective upon the ordinance being amended.
Commissioner Shanahan stated that the ~ntent of the Beach & Water
Safety Ordinance was to prc%ld~ a means for Staff to enforce the
Page
AUGUST 1, 1989
character and the structure of the vendor.
carried ~l~sly, that Staff ~nd th. l~ape of Ordinate 89-11,
r. litl~ to the various t~s ~d access, ~d brtn~ ~ck to
Coatsston.
Ite~ ~D1
ia~~ FOR PRO~SSION~ ENGI~ERING S~VICES NI~ WILSON, MILLER,
~N, SOLL ~ PZEK, INC. FOR AI~RT RO~ W~R ~IN - ~O~u
Utilities Administrator Arnold advised that Agenda Items 9D1, 9D2,
and 9D3, involve Agreements for Professional engineering services with
Wilson, Miller, Barton, Soil ~ Peek, Inc., for the Airport Road Water
Main and the Goodlette Road Water Main; and, with Consoer, To,send
and Associates, Inc. for the Pine Ridge Road Water Main.
Mr. Arnold advised that on May 23, 1989, the Board approved
Staff's recommendation to forego Interviews with the top three ranked
firms and proceed with contract negotiations.
Mr. Arnold explained that the total estimated compensation for
each p~oJect ts as follows:
1. Airport Road Water Main - Total estimated compensation
$58,700, o= approximately 13~ of the preliminary estimate of
thu project construction cost of $454,000.
2. Goodlette Road Water Main - Total estimated compensation Is
$65,700, or approximately 12~ of the estimate of
construction cost of $560,000.
3. Pine Ridge Road Water Main - Total estimated compensation
$1~1,500, or approximately 20~ of the preliminary estimate of
project construction cost of $636,000.
Commissioner Saunders questioned why the percentage of the Pine
Ridge project ts much higher than that of the other two pro~ects? Mr.
Arnold advised that Pine Ridge Road, betwc=n U.S. 41 and Airport Road
ts the mos~ congested area for a water main, since it ts excessively
developed, and there are many driveways.
C~osto~r ~lght ~, oecond~ ~ Co~lssi~er Hu~o
curt~ ~t~ly, to a~r~ the AgreeMnt for Profeosto~l
~t~rtng k--ica with Wilson, Ntller, hrton, ~oll t ~k, Inc.
AUGUST 1~ 1989
~9D2
A(IRXIIqKIFF r~R PROFESSIONAL KNQZNKKRINO SKRVICKS #ZTH MIL$ON, MILLER,
~~ SOLL AJ~D PK,E~f ~NC. IPOR QOODLKTTK RO~ MA~ ~IN - ~~
c~oo~oner ~ght ~oved, seconded ~ CoulsoAoner H~ooo ~d
carrl~ ~lmly, to appr~d the A~ee~ent for Professional
~l~rtng ~e~tces with ~tleon, Ntller, ~rton, ~oll i ~k, Inc.
for t~ ~llette aoad Nater Natn.
AUGUS? 2,, 1089
];tam d~gD~ 3
AGRKHMB3IT FOR PROFKSSTORAT, KNGIRKKRIHG SKRVTCKS #];TH CO)IBOKR,
ART) ASSOC!.ATES, INC. FOR PIN~ RIDGK ROAD MATER MAIN -
Commleetoner Ooodn/ght moved, eeconded by Couteetoner Homee and
carried unanlmouely, to approve the Agreement for Profeaelonal
Engineering Servicee with Coneoer, Townsend and Aeeociatea, Inc. for
the Pine R:idg~ Road Water Main.
AUGUST l, 1989
It#
RESOLUTION ~9-195, ANARDING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE ~
I[ICI~SITY TO JOlt ENTERPRISES OF NAPLES, INC. I)/B/A ROYAL ROSE SHUTTLE
Purchasing Director Carnell, representing Administrative Services,
stated that on June 29, 1989, the Public Vehicle Advisory Committee
reviewed two applications requesting Certificates of Public
Convenience and Necessity, and are recommending approval of same for:
J&R Enterprises of Naples, Inc.
D/B/A Royal Rose Shuttle
Fish 'n Fun, Inc.
D/B/A Island Airport Service
There were no speakers.
Llmou~Jlne Operator
Van Operator
Ltmoumtne Operator
Co--tssloner Shanahan moved, seconded by Co--tssloner Qoodnlght
and carried unanimously, that the public hear:lng be closed.
Commissioner Shanahan moved, seconded by Conlaetonsr Rases and
carried unanimously, that Resolution 89-195 ~s adopaad, awarding a
Certificate of Public Cgnvenience and Necssst'~y to J&R Enterprises of
Naples, Inc. D/B/A Royal Rose Shuttle.
RESOLUTION 89-196, AWARDING CERTIFICATE OF PUISLIC CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY TO FISH 'N FUN~ INC. D/B/A Isr~ND AIRPORT SZRVIC~ - ADO~-~_~D
Co~isslonsr Shanahan moved, seconded by Contastonsr H~ss and
carried unanimously, that Resolution 89-196 ~e adopted, ~warding m
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Fish ~n Fun, Inc.
D/B/A Island Airport Service.
Page 28
AUGUST 1, 1989
Itu
NODIFICITIO~ TO CONTRACT B~9-1386 NITH SZA CO~ INDUST~IZ$ FOR NAPLES
LANDFILL - AFFI~OVW~ NIH STIPULATIONS
Purchaotng Director Carnell explained that this ts a bid that was
awarded by the Commission in May, 1989, for th~ Naples and Immokalee
Landfill sites. He advised that pursuant to the specifications, the
awardees were asked to submit sample materials for testing and analy-
sts. He indicated that equal prices were offered from Sea Con
Industries and APAC-Flortda, Inc., and based on the testing of the
materials, it was determined that Sea Con had a material that was
superior, and therefore, they were selected as the firm to contract
with for the Naples site.
Mr. Carnell stated that subsequent to the award of the contract,
the Solid Waste Department had determined that a substantial portion
of the fill material requirement could be met through the use of other
materials, specifically, shredded tires, and Sea Con was presented
with a contract for an amount of 45,000 tons, ils opposed to the origi-
nal bid specifications which called for 100,000 tons. Ne advised that
upon recelvtng the contract, Sea Con objected to the reduction in
quantity on the basis that they had formulated their bid price on the
original contract as indicated in the bid specifications. He
explained that after bearing considerations from Sea Con, Staff deter-
mined to proceed with the contract as originally specified, and on
July 12, 1989, Sea Con was provided with a mod:lfted contract with the
full amount under bid specifications.
Mr. Carnell advised that pursuant to the bid specifications, all
contracts must be processed and returned to the Purchasing Department
within ten days of forma] notification by the County of the award. Me
noted that Sea Con tndtcaLted that they would return the contract the
following week, after noi:tftcatton. He stated that a letter was sent
to Mr. A1 Johnson of Sea Con Industries, on July 21, 1989, advising
that his contract needed to be returned no lat,~r than the close of
business on July 25, 1959. He indicated that as of the deadline date,
no contract had been received from Sea Con, but It was delivered to
his office on July 27, 1989, and reviewed by the County A~torney
yesterday. He noted that the contract appears to be tn order, except
for the fact that the vendor did not provide CertiFicates of
Insurance in advance, as specified in the bid documents.
Commissioner Saunders questioned iF the contractor does not per-
form now, can the material be acquired on the open market, and then
sue them for the Increase tn cost7
Mr. Carnell reported that Staff is recommending to go with the
next bidder, APAC-Florida, who bid the same price as Sea Con, of 86.30
per ton. He noted that APAC's material tested to meet the minimum
specifications.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned whether the County created
problems for Sea Con by reducing the quantity from 100,000 tons to
45,000 tons? Mr. Carnell indicated that this delayed the process,
since there was not a firm agreement on what the quantity would be,
and an agreement was not reached until July 12th. He noted that at
that time Mr. Johnson was provided the contract, and he indicated that
he would return same the following week, but that requirement was not
met.
''' D~p~t~ Clerk kraft replaced Deput~f Clerk Hoff~an at thAe
Attorney Larry In,ram representtn~ S~a Con Indus+ties, Inc.
explained that Mr. Johnson, President of Sea Con Industries, ~as on
vacation when the amended cnntract providln~ for Placemen~ and
sion of materials ~as received from the County. He reported ~h~t Sea
Con delivered a bondin~ aPPlication to the bondtnu company tn Miami
July 14, 1~8~, and ~he a~ent authorized to sl~n the bond ~as also
vacation, and consequently, the bond ~as hand delivered to Mr. Carnell
on July 27, 1~89. He pointed out that the fill has to be screened for
lmDurittes so that the seal under the sanitary landfill is not punc-
tured, and Sea Con has stockpiled 2S,O00 tons of this maker/al
required for this Particular contract. He Andlcated that Sea Con
being Punished because of the delays of the bondtn~ company.
Page 30
AUGUST 1, 1989
Commissioner Saunders questioned If Mr. Johnson ts prepared to
fulfill all obligations under the contract in terms of delivering the
material tn a timely fas, hlon7 Mr. Johnson responded that Sea Con
will meet Its obligations with the County. In response to Mr.
Carnell, Mr. Johnson stated that Certificates of Insurance will be
Issued this afternoon. A discussion followed about the lack of
Certificates of Insurance.
Commissioner Volpe expressed concern about the 100,0OO ton figure
as opposed to the 45,000 ton figure thought to be sufficient, and the
$15,000 authorized to be spent for a shredder last week.
Solid Waste Director Fahe¥ stated that Staff has been working with
the State relative to recyclinG requirements. He reported that Staff
was studying to see if a chipped rubber tire could substitute for
highly porous material normally purchased. He explained that one
foot of the required type of material supplied by the vendor would be
on the bottom and a one foot layer of chipped tires on the top. He
reported that the shredder will produce the material the size required
by the State.
Commissioner Volpe questioned staying with the 4§,000 tons? Mr.
Fahey responded that shortly, another 26 acre cell area will have to be
lined and If obliged to accept the 100,0OO tons, the County will
stockpile the balance for this use. In response to Com~atsstoner
Volpe, Mr. Fahey noted that 3 areas require this type of material and
explained that 18,O00 tons were used to create perimeter dikes; 40,000
tons are needed immediately to finish Phase I or the County will run
out of space. He explained that the other 80,000 tons go into the cell
currently beinG lined. He pointed out that his efforts to use the
alternative material would cut the 50,000 fl~re tn half by using the
one foot on the bottom and chipped tires on the top.
Commissioner Saunders questioned use of the 20,000 tons remaining?
Mr. Fah,ey indicated that the 20,000 tons would be the second one foot
lift Jn the ten acre site. In response to Com~tsstoner Shanmhan, Mr.
Fahey responded that the ~urplus would be used within two to three
Page 31
AUGUST 1, 1989
years. A discussion followed about the use of the shredder.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned Mr. Johnsca about the County not
needing the 20,000 ton surplus? He responded that he would cooperate
and give the County a break.
Co~atsetoner Shmnmhan ~ov~d, seconded by Co~mteeton~r Hesse, t~t
tton t~t ~ C~ ~ rele~ froa ~cme of the ~1~ t~.
Commissioner Saunders emphasized that his support of the motion is
based on the premise that the Certificates of Insurance will be at the
County this afternoon.
A discussion followed about the amount of tonnage. In response to
Mr. Ca,nell, Commissioner Saunders pointed out that th~ County
will purchase 80,000 tons; an additional 20,000 tons may be puFchased,
if necessary, all at a cost of $6.30 per ton, and Staff can woFk out
the portions requiring a performance bond. Co~tsstoner SaundeFs
emphasized that Mr. Johnson has agreed that ~0,000 tons does not
have to be purchased unless needed, and noted that a letter of
agreement with lan~age reflecting that, w~ll suffice.
~ call for the ~eetton, the ~tton carrt~ ~tmly.
OO~ID~TION OF ~O~IA~ A~ION ~IN~ ~ MI~TION OF ~
~ IS~ - NA~ PR~HSS ~ BE ~L~D TO ~SS ~
BE ~D ~ CLOSE NA~LLY, ST~ TO ~NITOR WA~ qu~I~,
~IA ~ ~Ian LOSS OF TIOERTAIL B~CH - ~O~D
Technical Services Supervisor Huber reported that this item Is to
consider appropriate action regaratng Sand Dollar Island. He noted
that the two primary concerns are 1) the impact resulting from lack of
percolation if the shoal connects to the mainland creating a lagoon
and 2) the possible Impact beach nourishment may create. He indicated
that 3 options are available for consideration. :ia reported that
Option #2 implementing a monitoring program to test water clualttV and
biological baseline data Is recommended by Staff for Immediate action
and Option #3, an analysis of the shoal and maintaining a channel at
either end of Sand Dollar Island to allow tidal water to flow, can be
Page 32
AUGUST 1, 1989
considered for future action.
In response to Commissioner Hesse, Mr. Huber responded thmt Sand
Dollar Island may connect to the mainland and collecting baseline data
Information will enable the County to make an appropriate decision at
that time. In response to Commissioner Shanahan, Mr. Huber noted that
Sand Dollar Island will attach Itself to the mainland with or without
the beach renourtshment project. Commissioner Shanahan questioned the
attachment influencing the flow of sand to the south end of the beach?
Mr. Huber deferred that to Mr. Kenneth Humtston of Coastal Engineering.
Commissioner Shanahan then questioned if there was any benefit that
would result from attachment of the shoal? Mr. Huber responded that
there may be, but the main concern ts a possible public health problem
if the water quality disintegrates.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned if any water testing has been
done, and Mr. Huber responded that Hideaway Beach h~s conducted some
tests. Mr. Huber reported that Staff recommends monitoring water
tests before the beach nourishment program begins. Commissioner
Shanahan questioned an annual contract for environmental monitoring at
a cost of $27,500 per year for an extended period of time? Mr. Huber
stated that it would be a one year contract.
Mr. Kenneth Humlstcn, Coastal Engineering, displayed two pho-
tographs addressing the questions and concerns. He Indicated that
aerial photos from 1979 and 1980 depict what has happened tn the past 8
or 9 years and pointed out the enlarged section in the second photo
showing the shoal. He reported that at low tide, the opening Is less
than 100 feet across, and will probably be connected before beach
renourtshment construction is started. He stated that the exact
amount of reduction of the amount of sand placed In the area will be
determined by pre-construction surveys. He outlin_~d the area where
the sand migrates to the south end of the Island, where it will
connect to the beach and become a conduit for the sand to feed on
along the coast of Marco Island, as has happened tn the past. In
response to Commissioner Hasse, he explained that the natural supply
Page
AUGUST l, 1989
of sand would reduce maintenance renourishment requirements in the
future. He also noted that monitoring of the water will keep track of
any possible health hazard to swimmers.
Commissioner Saunders questioned Environmental Services
Administrator Lorenz whether thai type of monitoring could be done
house? Mr. Lorenz replied that Staff could, but noted Staff would be
required to monitor water sampling monthly on Marco Island. He
explained that extensive environmental monitoring will be required for
benthic organism assessment to provide baseline data, in addition to
monitoring for determination of flushing rates through the system. He
pointed out that Staff could monitor the water quality. In response to
Commissioner Saunders, Mr. Lorenz reported that the flushing rate
requires a permitting procedure. Mr. Humiston elaborated that if at
some future time a problem has to be corrected, i.e. making a cut to
improve flushing, the permitting agencies would request the existing
flushing characteristics as a guideline. In response to Commissioner
Volpe, Mr. Humiston responded that it could be reconstructed through
an after-the-fact prediction.
Commissioner Shanahan questioned reduction of the maintenance cost
of the beach by the connection of Sand Dollar Island7 Mr. Humiston
replied that the movement of the sand to the south would feed sand to
the main part of Marco Island beaches. Commissioner Shanahan asked
who would own the shoal attached to the shoreline? Mr. Humiston
replied that according to State law, an emerging shoal belongs to the
State.
Mr. Frank Blanchard, Chairman of the Beach Renourlshment Advisory
Committee, advised that a permit for beach renourtshment was fi/ed
with the DER/DNR about 18 months ago and is expected on or about
September 14, 1989. He stated that potential problems concerning this
sandba~ were reported to the proper agencies for mitigation. He
explained that on the basis that no impoundment has yet occurred, none
of the agencies were willing to cooperate. He pointed out that
Hideawa~y Beach Association has been monitoring water quality samples
Page 34
for about a year~ ~e noted that aerial videotapes made ~ill provide
background data necessary to actively discuss with the DNR/DER
modification of the beach renourishment project. He emphasized that
starting the renourlshment project "as is" and making adjustments if
and when needed, is the current plan. He explained that in discussions
with The Conservancy, the Audubon Society, Fish and Wildlife
Commission last November and no one recommended any action until the
impoundment occurred. He indicated that flushing of water through that
channel is the best alternative, not filling in the space to the
shoreline. He recommended that the additional water quality data
by Staff be obtained.
In response to Commissioner Shanahan, Mr. B]anchard noted that the
State agencies would be addressed to open both ends for a flushing
action if the area closed up.
Laura B. Pearce, of a law firm in Tallahassee, ~lorida, repre-
senting Residents for Rational Renourishment, Inc., advised that Frank
Matthews and she have been retained as legal counsel for the residents
to express concern about Collier County's beach renourlshment project
on Marco Island. She explained that the members of this organization,
headquartered in Marco Island, consist of property owners and resi-
den'ts of Collier County who will be adversely affected by the beach
renourishment project as presently structured. She stated that a
legal petition for a formal Administrative Hearing has been filed to
rai~e various issues and concerns regarding the issuance of the DER
permit as now proposed.
Mr. Peter Feldmann, a Naples resident and Marco Island lot
and a memUgr of Residents for Rational Renourishment, explained that
over the last 3 years established measurements show that Marco Island
will lose Tt%;ertail Beach within the next 6 months ~hould renourish-
men~ go forward. He raised the issue of severe sociological economAc
developmental impacts by the loss of Tigertail Beach. He stated that
4 of the lO people res~dinG on Marco Island go to TiG~.~tail Beach. He
noted that with tL,., loss of Tigertatl, an additional burden will be
Pa~e 35
AUGUST 1, 1989
placed on Residents' Beach as well as the other beach properties. Ha
pointed out that Sand Dollar Island, designated a bird sanctuary, will
become State property and all the land seaward also belonginG to the
State will then allow visitors to occupy the beaches tn front of the
condominiums. He Indicated that an alternative exists by allowing the
channel to be kept open, using the sand for the beach and also main-
tains the island in its natural state for wildlife. He noted that
this island Is migrating southerly at a rate of about 70 feet a month
and is not migrating towards the shore, as noted by aerial pho-
tographs. He advised that the storm in 1968 rupturing the pass at
Coconut Island formed this shoal, as shown on the displayed photo. He
emphasized that if the Island Joins there will be no need for
renourishment in the central beach at a cost of $2,000,000. He
stated that documentation in the kit will be provided (copy not pro-
vided to Clerk to the Board) to the Board of County Commissioners.
Mr. Blanchard rebutted that the DER does not have a formal letter
presenting this problem because The Conservancy and The Audubon
Society did not want to support a compromise. He reported that review
wit~ all agencies to accommodate mutual interests was sought last
yeal~. ){e stated that he finds it obnoxious that help ks being pre-
sented in this manner, i.e. an administrative hearing. He rec~uested
that the Board of County Commissioners support the application for the
permit fo~ beach renourlshment and noted that Mr. Feldmann is a non-
resident tnvestor and that H~deaway Beach Association does not support
his views.
Commissioner Saunders pointed out that Mr. Feldmann has the right
to file for an Administrative Hearing and County Manager Dorrill con-
curred. Commissioner Saunders expressed concern about the ~mpact of
the beach r~nourishment project, not Ttgertall Beach.
Mr. Huber indicated that if beach renourishment adversely impacts
this situation, modification to the permit would be proposed. He
reported that T1gertail will not disappear unless the lagoon fills in.
Commissioner Saunders emphasized that in-house water monitoring
AUGUST 1, 1989
for the health of the public can be performed. Mr. Huber pointed out
the cost for monitoring by Coastal Engineering: $4,000 for ~%onthly
flushing, $18.000 for water quality, and $5,400 for benthic and
current turbity monitoring, based on monthly samplings. Commissioner
Saunders stated that he would not vote for a contract for water moni-
toring.
Commissioner Shanahan expressed concern about losing Tlgertall
Beach and the economic ram/f/cations. Mr. Huber did not feel that
Tigertail Beach would disappear.
Commissioner Shmnahan ~oved, seconded by Co~mismioner Hues, thmt
~ all~ to d~lop, its ~sses to close naturally, ~ if ~
~ple~t or ~mrdous condition de~lope, action to correct the
Mr. Blanchard pointed out that for the past 75 years this sand bar
has formed and disappeared, and has sometimes closea off, but he
emphasized that this is nothing new and is not a creation of 1989.
Mr. Feldmann reported that he was one of the first to support
beach renourishment. He stated that this is not a new issue and Mr.
Bianch~rd told him a year ago al/ options had been considered and when
the environmentalists raised the problem of Ttgertatl Island, it was
decided that it would be the County's problem.
Co~it,sloner Shmnmhan ~mended his motion to direct Staff to ~o~lt-
tot bmctemla, water quality and POtential loss of Tl~rtall Beach.
Commissioner Saunders emphasized that the Motion does not include
any contracting and Commissioner Shanahan concurred.
Ul)on call for the quest/on, the ~otlon passed unanimously.
Ccmmtsstoner Volpe questioned the Administrative Hearing delaying
the beach renourlshment pro3ect, and Mr. Blanchard Indicated that
Administrative Reviews take a minimum of 9 months. County Manager
Dorrlll commented that nothing can be done to prevent someone with
-standing from filing a Request of Appeal. Assistant County Attorney
Wetgel concurred.
Page 37
AUGUST l, 1989
Mr. Feldmann pointed out that he will work with the Board of
County Commissioners, and he does not want to delay the pro3ect and
noted that there are solutions at hand.
SrFTI~ OF ~AXI~U~ MILLAGZ RAT~S AND ~LIC H~ING DA~S S~ ~R ~
89/90 ~ - 4.615~ CO~ ~IDE MIL~GE ~TE, 5.4043 A~~ T~
~ - ~IC ~ING DA~ S~ ~R ~D~SDAY SE~~ 13, 1989 ~
~A~ 8~~ ~5~ 1989 AT 7:O0 P.N. - A~PRO~D
Budget Management Director Zalka reported that after today during
budget review, the tentative rates can be kept the same or lowered,
but today the Board of County Commissioners will set the m~imum
millage rate. She reported that the County-wide millage rate of
4.6157 is the same as last year, but due to ~ncreased assessments,
that corresponds to a ~2.8 percent tax increase over the rollback
rate. She explained that the unincorporated area-wide m~llage rate of
.6368 mills, also the same rate as last year, with many other
districts for a total of 49. She indicated that the comb/nation of
these rates creates an aggregate millage rate of 5.4043 representing a
15 percent tax increase to be advertised in the newspaper before the
Bo~n'd of County Commissioners, second public hearing.
Commissioner Saunders pointed out that the maximum millage rate
will be set today and tn the budget process it cannot go higher.
Ms. Zalka stated that Wednesday, September 13, 1989 and Monday,
September 25, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. are the dates selected for the
public hearing.
4.6157 ~ ~t u C~~tde millage rmte ~d 5.4043 ~ let Ii the
~t~ ~ll~ rate for the ~ 89/90 ~d~t ~d the ~t he~Ang
dmt~ ~t for ~~y, SepteH~r 13, 1989 ~d ~n~, S~t~r 25,
19~9 et T:~
Clerk G1le~ pointed out that before the final millage rate te
adopted, Ochopee will be taxed for ambulance service twice.
Coutsstoner Shanahan co~ented ~hat many letters and telephone
Page 38
AUGUST 1, 1989
calls have been received requesting consideration of lowering the
millage rates In the 1989/90 fiscal year.
~ call for the ~lsatton0 the motion passed unanimously.
Ira d~ff8
ESTABLIS~IFI* OF SOLID i(ASTS NASTKR p~ ~HOP -
~ ~ ~ A~ 22, looo AT 2:00 P.M. - ~0~D
County Manager Dorrlll reported that the Solid Waste Advisory
Committee recommends that a Solid Waste Master Plan workshop be
established with three special meetings. He noted that a series of
budget workshops, including water related issues, concurrency and
capital Improvement funding may total slx workshops. Commissioner
Saunders indicated that he did not feel it necessary to have a tele-
vised evening workshop or meet three times. He suggested setting a
time, such as 2:00 P.M. for the workshop on an advertised Board
meeting day. He Indicated that the report can be received on Au~st
8, 1989 without comment and on August 22, 1989, a public hearing can
be set for 2:00 P.M.
Co.~tsstoner Volpe questioned the urgency of the water Issue and
asked If It could walt until September? County Manager Dorrtll
replied that it needs to be handled during the month of Au~st.
C~to~r R~se ~, &econd~ ~ Co~tsston. r
c~rt~ m~lmly, t~t ~ ~'altc he~tng on the Solid
PI~ ~ a)~ct~ on Aunt ~2, 1989 at 2:00
BUDGET AMI]II~8~iT~ 89-248/251; 89-253; 89-255/288 - ADOr~iD
Co.~tleloner GoodnJght Boved, oeconded by Co.missioner Huoe and
clotted vnmnlmouoly, that Budget Amendment8 89-248/251; 89-253;
89-258/258, be adopted.
Iteu~llB
TABULATIOI OF COFFRACTS AND DOCUMKNTS - DNR AND THK CITY OF NAPLES RE:
BOATIII~ LrJ~sROV~KIJT PRO(IRAN AND FLORIDA STALK UNIVKI~ITY MEDIATIO~
SKIq'V~CK3 COFFRACTS RKSCINDKD AND RKMOVKD FROM PKNDIN~ COHTRA~ LIST -
Clerk Giles stated that under Tabulations and Contracts, Staff
requests that two contracts be removed from the report and the Board
Page 39
AUGUST l, 1989
of County Commissioners rescind the previous action. He reported that
Public Services Administrator O'Donnell received a letter from the
Florida Department of Natural Resources stating that The City of
Naples does not want to participate in the boating improvement
funding monies for Doctor's Pass dredging. In response to
Commissioner Volpe, County Manager Dorrill replied that the City of
Naples has not even opened bids and are not in any hurry. Mr. Giles
explained that the other item is a contract with Florida State
University for mediation services and requires approval from the Board
of County Commissioners to cancel the contract.
~tuto~er Sh~nahan ~ov~d, ~econded by Co~tseloner
carried unanimously, that contracts between Collier County, the
~d t~ CIW of ]spies for the ~attng t~r~nt pr~ ~d ~n
Collier C=W ud Florida State ~ntverstty for
rsscl~ ~ r~ fro~ the ~ndtn9 contract
C=~l~to~r ~at~t ~d, seconded ~ Coaisstonsr S~ders
~ ~=t~ ~tmly, t~t the foll~in~ tte~ ~dsr
· ~ ~ a~~ ~/or adoptS:
Itc ~l&~l
~ ~ ~ ~7/S8 ~ ~ 113, D~~
~ ~T - G~~N AT ~~ ~ STI~TIO~
Accept the Irrevocable Letter of Credit as security to
guarantee completion of the subdivision Improvements.
2 o
Authorize the recording of the Final Plat of Glendevon
at Wyndemere.
3. Authorize the Chairman to execute the construction
and maintenance agreement.
4°
Item ~*I 4J~3
That no Certificates of Occupancy be' Granted until the
required Improvements have received preliminary accep-
tance.
RESOI~YTION 89-197 FR~LIMINARY ACCKFTANCK OF TH~ RO~Y, DRAINAGZ, MAT~
AND ~ ~ FOR TH~ FINAL PLAT OF LONGSHORZ LAJOt Flt~[ I -
Page 40
AUGUST 1, 1989
Accept the irrevocable standby Letter of Credit as
security for maintenance of the Infrastructure until the
Board of County Commissioners grants final acceptance of
all improvements.
3 o
Itn #14&4
Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached
Maintenance Agreement for Preliminary Acceptance and
Resolution authorizing preliminary acceptance.
Preliminary acceptance of Improvements will not become
effective until water and sewer facilities have been
conveyed to Collier County Water-Sewer District.
USOL~TXO~ SO-lOS, rXHAL P~A? Or ROYA~ MA~CO ~oxwr -
1. Accept the Letter of Credit from Canadian Imperial Bank
of Commerce as security for maintenance of the
infrastructure until the Board of County Co~tsstoners
grants final acceptance of all improvements.
2. Authorize the recording of the final plat of "Royal
Marco Point" pending approval of the CDunty Attorney.
3. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Maintenance
Agreement for Preliminary Acceptance and
Resolution authorizinG preliminary acceptance.
Xte~a
~XNAL I~,I~T OF SONOMA LAKES AT T~g V!WgYARD$
1. Accept the irrevocable Letter of Credit as security to
guarantee completion of the Subdivision Improvements.
2. Authorize the recording of the final plat of "Sonoma
Lakes at the Vineyards".
It~ 014D1
Authorize the Chairman to execute the Construction
and Maintenance Agreement.
That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the
required improvements have received preliminary accep-
tance.
AND ~ r&CILITI~$ ACOEPTANCZ - TU--KNBUNya~_NILLOU~i[ByA6~S
1. The Florida Department of Environmental Regulation fur-
nishes a letter authorizing to place the sewer system
Into service and approving the water distribution system
for service.
The Fire Flow requirements of the project have been
satisfied and the Fire District furnishes a letter
accepting the fire hydrants for ownership and
maintenance.
Page 41
Bacteriological testing has met the Count¥"s require-
ment.
Recorded in O.R. Book 1460 , Pages 1325 1335
Item ,I&D2
WaTeR Mm sme~R faCILITIeS &ccra-rA~cE - ~s ~ - (~ ~)
The developers e:cplanation and correction of the discre-
pancy between th~, legal description and sketch.
Irma ,14G1
Recorded tn O.R. Book 1459
O.R. Book 1368
Pages 1834-1837 & 1841-1856
Pages 1275-1277
B~I~3rT ~ IN TH~ JU~OUNT OF 819,600.00 FOR HAFLKS PAit~ DR&IN&GK
Im~~ rmm 13o
lin ,1411
SATISFACTION OF LI~ - ADRIAAR VAR RAVESTK
See page ,/~/./_ ~Z~, /
Item #1412
$A'**r[$F&CTIOR OF LIaR - Gu~rf~R ~R
Item #1413
C~flFIC~tT~ OF COI~W~CTION TO THE TAX ROLL AS PI~S~I~ BY PROP~ItTY
1987 TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY
No. 1987-148 Dated 07/19/89
1988 TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERT~f
No. 1988-128 Da~ed 07/19/89
Item ,1432
KXTRA ~I~ TIME FOR INMATE ~OS. 31367, 60710, 23434, 60750, 25617,
49209, 47232, 59729, 6q393, 60288, AND 47164.
Item ,143
MI$C~L~r~OU$ CORR~$PO~D~RC~ - FILED ~/OR ~~D
The following miscellaneous correspondence ~as ~tled and/or
re~erred to the vartou~ department~ as indicated be/ow:
Notice ~ated ~/6/89 ~rom DCA pursuant to reneer o~ 6/9/89
Grant Number 89-C3-~5-09-21-01-033 has been extended throuQh
September 30, 1989. xc: Shertffff Don ~unter, 3oe ~arren and
Page 42
AUGUST 1, 1989
5 o
10.
Letter dated 7/14/89 from Robert K. Loflin, Environmental
Specialist, DER, enclosing short form application, File No.
111673115, involving dredge and fill activitiea, x¢:
Nell Dorrill, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Memorandum dated 7/17/89 from Don W. Berryhill, Chief, Bureau
of Local Government Wastewater Financial Assistance, DER,
advising of SRF Intended Use Plan Workshop to be held August
3 tn Tallahassee. xc: Mike Arnold and filed.
Notice dated 7/14/89 from DER'of Public Workshop on August 2,
1989, 9:30 at DER, Tallahassee, regarding Docket No. 89-63R.
xc: Neil Dorrill, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Letter dated 7/20/89 from Robert K. Lofltn, Environmental
Specialist, DER, enclosing short form application File No.
111671085, involving dredge and fill activities, xc: Nell
Dorrill, George Archibald, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Letter dated 7/10/89 from Virginia A. Vail, Environmental
Administrator, DNR, requesting applications for Artificial
Reef Development Program in fiscal year 89/90. xc: Bill
Lorenz and filed.
Letter dated 7/17/89 from Stan Bruns, General Manager,
Marrtotts Marco Island Resort, stating that the proposed
Noise Abatement Ordinance would have a negative impact on 50%
or more of their group functions, xc: }',C, Nell Dorrill,
Ken Cuyler, Frank Brutt and fi/ed.
Approval of Minutes:
A. 7/5/89 - Marco Island Beautification Advisory Committee
6/23/89 - Big Cypress Basin Board
C. 6/16/89 - Golden Gate Estates Citizens Advisory Committee
D. 4/12/89, 5/10/89, 5/24/89, 6/7/89, 6/14/89, 6/19/89,
6/21/89, 6/28/89 and 6/28/89 - City of Naples
Notice to Owner dated 7/18/89 from Suncoast Steel Corporation
advising that reinforcing steel, accessories and related
materials for the improvement of the Health Service Building
have been furnished under an order given by H. D. Rutledge &
Son, Inc. xc: Skip Camp, Tom Conrecode and filed.
Notice to Owner dated 7/17/89 from APAC-Flortda, Inc.
advising that asphalt paving and related materials for impro-
vement to the So:':h County Regional Wastewater Facilities,
Phase I, Contract I, have been furnished under an order given
by T. A. Forsberg, Inc. xc: Mike Arnold, Tom Conrecode and
filed.
Page 43
AUGUST 1, 1989
There being no further business for the Good of the Count'y, the
meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: 3:16 P.M.
BOARD OF COUNTY GOMMISSIONERS/
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
~URT L. SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JAMES C. GILES, CLERK
£hese minutes approved by the Board on ~~'~'/~/~w~'/
-
presented / or as corrected
Page 44