Loading...
BCC Minutes 03/28/1989 R Haples, Florida, March 28, 1989 LET IT BE REMEMBERED. that the Board ot County Co..issioners in and tor the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board ot Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) ot such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, .et on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REOVLAa SKSSI08 in Building -," of the Governaent Co.plex, East "aples, Florida, with the following ...bers present: CHAIRMA!f: Burt L. Saunders VICE-CHAIRMAlf: Max A. Hasse, Jr. Richard S. Shanahan Michael J. Volpe Anne Goodnight ALSO PRltSE!fT: Jaaes C. Giles, Clerk; Maureen Kenyon and Itllie Hotfaan. Deputy Clerks; Neil Dorrill. County Manager; Ron McLemore, A8sistant County Manager; Toa Olliff, Assistant to the County Manager; Ken Cuyler, County Attorney; David Weigel, Assistant County Attorney; Ken Baginski, Planning Services Manager; Leo Ochs, Adainistrative Services Adainistrator; Jeft Perry, MPO Director; Dr. Jane Polkow8ki, Health Director; Frank Brutt, Co..unity Develop.ent Adainistrator; Barbara Cacchione, Ron !fino, Philip Scheff. and Bob Lord, Project Planners; Kevin O'Donnell. Public Services Ad.inistrator; George Archibald, Public Works Adaini8trator; !fancy Israelson, Adainistrat1ve Assistant to the Board; and Deputy Toa Storrar, Sheriff's Office. Page 1 \ -" ""'-'- .- .....-..""""" ........- March 28, 1989 '!çe n I~- n AGØ1)A J.81) CO..""T AGDDA - UPkOVLU WIn ClLUlGU Co8aI_I00er Sþ.--_haft aoved, eeconded by eo.aIs.iooer ...- and carried unaniaoualy, that the Aqend.a and Conaent Aq1mda be approved with the following change8: 1. Item 9H1 Added re approval of Development Services Building change Order. 2. Itea 12A continued to April 4, 1989 re productivity analysis. 3. Itea 6C4. Pet. AV-89-001, Longshore Lakes Joint Venture, con- t inued to Apr il 11. 1989. It- 4JU JaJrOTØ or Q.CJOt.A.R KD'TUO or MAJtC1I 7. un - UPftOv~ AS ""'...¡.cJ) ec-.1_I00er GoodnIght aoved. ..conded by eo.aI..100er ~han ao4 carrIed unan iaoual y. that the ainute. of March 7. un. be appr'Óved .. ~ted. It- nA DCPLOTU SØVI ~ AIUJlDS - P'QSD'nD Co..issioner Saunders presented the tollowlng eaployee service ."ards: Bruce 'oster, Utilities 15 years Mary Esch, Aniaal Control 10 years Diane Brubaker, Adainistrative Services 10 years Warren Keys, Utilities !> years Phillip Cr_er. Utilities 5 years It- ft- P'!tOCI..UQ'!I08 DUIGJIA'l'I.O 'l'1!JI: TU.K or un AS "'l'1!JI: PUBLIC DAL'f1I ~"':¡"'.LAL" - ADOPTKt> Co8a1..1 ooe r Ooodn i gh t aoved. ..conded by C088I..iOD8r 8b.'m.~ ao4 carr i ed unan Iaoual y, tba~ ~he procl...t1on de81gn.aUng ~ year of 1..... "'!be Public Health Centennial", be adop~ed. Dr. Polkow8ki thanked everyone working in the public health systea as well as the private and the public sector for recognizing the i.portance or public health in the County a8 well ae the State. Page 2 t ---...... ...,---.-- ----..-- ---- . -_..-.......~.,._..,,-,.,......,_...._,......, .---.-.. ..- March 28. 1989 1~- ..51 1tZSOLQTI0II .-.-77A U OOA-88-1C, CBO1tCn VADADOK, JtZP1tUDTIn .._'X"~& co.MDJrI'l'IU or JIAPLU, I.C. U AJI ....... UI'I&JI T '!O 'l'1!JI: ørn¡,o ~ ;r 0ItDD l'OJ( PEL I C AJI 8A T - ADO PTKD WIn C1I.AJfGP Legal not lee having been published in the !Caples Daily News on March 12, 1989, as evidenced by Affidavit or Publication tiled with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition DOA-88-1C, tiled by George Varnadoe, representing Westinghouse Comaunities ot Naples, Inc. requesting an aaendaent to the Development Order for Pelican Bay requesting a total of 1,150,000 square teet or gross building area or otrlce and retail co..ercial. Planner Cacchione reterred to an overhead sap noting the subject ot discu8sion i8 the three co..ercial parcels, noting that property to the north is zoned RMP-6 and PUD which is the Beachwalk Development and the Pavilion Shopping Center; property to the east is zoned C-4 and RSF-1 which is the Pine Ridge Subdivision; property to the south is zoned RSP-4. C-4. RMP-12 and RSP-3 which i8 Haples Cay and Seagate Subdivision; and property to the west is the Gult or Mexico. She indicated that the proposed amendaent to the development order to pro- vide ror an increase in co_ercial square footage allocation has been reviewed and has been deterained to be consistent with the Growth Manageaent Plan. adding that any subsequent rezoning or relocation ot co_ercial land use or intensity or use will be reviewed and a deter- aination aade on consistency with the Growth Management Plan at that tiae. She stated that no determination has been made on the r.tatu8 ot vested rights tor the Pelican Bay DRI. She indicated that she received changed inror_tion in regards to this petition the previous day, noting that 80llle of the tigures have been changed. She indicated that she would go over the request as it exists this date, noting that Itea "a" in the Executive Summary should now read 1.096,000 square teet insteac1 of 1,150.000 square teet, which is broken down between the southern parcel and the northern parcel. She stated that the southern parcel will consist of 640.400 square feet and the northern parcel will consist ot 454.600 square feet, it approved. She indl- Page 3 q _. '..'.."'. .. . ,.'.""..--"""".""'.' March 28, 1989 cated that the total breakdown for otfice versus retail 18 660,000 equare reet ot oftice and 435.000 square feet of retail. She stated that Itea "b" of the Executive Suaaary is a reduction in units which will go rroa 9,600 dwelling units to 8,600 dwelling units. She noted that Itea "c" i8 a restriction on where hotels will be located which 18 identified on Exhibit "B" of the Resolution. She noted that Item "d" is with regards to height, indicating that there will be a maxi.ua height or 100 teet on both coamercial parcels. the north and the south. She indicated that with regards to Item "e", the petitioner has agreed to reaove the Biddle coamercial acreage which comprises 21 acres to the north. addlng that what is currently peraitted in the POD docuaent is 26 acres at the north and by saving this middle coamercial tract to the north. there would be a total ot 47 acres or co..ercial on the northern tract. She indicated that since the Executive Summary wa. written, the Petitioner has also agreed to reduce the number of hotel uni ts from l,~OO to 1.336 units. She stated that the Petitioner has also agreed to three other changes which are not part of the de\'elopaent order but are part ot the agreement with the Pelican Bay Property Owners Association. She stated that one ot those changes is to have the commercial parcels go through a site plan approval process which is outlined in Section 2.0~ or the PUD docu- Bent, another change is to have restrictions on access to the Waterside Shops, and the last change is a height llmitation ot tive stories on the east si'\e ot Pelican Bay Boulevard. She indicated that tho.e three changes have not been included in the develop.ent order. Co..issioner Volpe questioned ir moving the parcels would have to be done by a rezone. to which Mrs. Cacchione replied aftiraatively, adding that the changing or the land use in the siddle tract to resi- dential Group II and adding the additional commercial on the north tract would be done by a subsequent rezone and would have to c~me back to the SOard. Co..issioner Saunders questioned how aany square teet of retal1 space there is in the south and the north parcel and how aany square Page" 119 ,,-~""---_.__., ' "-'."---"-"'--""------"._'.'-"- March 28, 1989 teet ot office space there is in the south and north parcel, to which Mrs. Cacchione indicated that there is 28~,OOO square teet ot retail in the southern tract and 355,400 square teet of orfice space. She stated that ror the northern tract, it is 1~0.000 square teet of retail .pace and 304,600 square feet of oftice space. Co..i.sioner Saunders questioned the square footage of the Pavilion Shopping Center. to which Mrs. Cacchione replied under 200,000 square feet. Planner Cacchione stated that Staff prepared a conversion chart that would change the gross leasable area to gross building area .0 that there would not be any confusion with regards to square tootage. She noted that in reviewing this project as well as others in th18 area. the overall concern is long-range transportation impacts. She noted that through the process or developing the Growth Management Plan. it becaae apparent that there was a need to prepare long-range transportation plans in conjunction with build-out of the future land use "p, adding that until Start has determined the road pl~, n.cessary to support the existing land use patterns and possible u.e. under the Growth Management Plan. the interia approach is that each rezone or substantial deviation needs to identity their iapacts and pro~ide aitigation. She noted that Staff has tound that all the al~l- gatio~ aeasure8 outlined in the Development Order would aitigate the iapact of the substantial deviation. She indicated that the Petitioner has modified the proposal soaewhat and has proposed an approach that would include both "pipelining" and "phase-in" which Ja a four step approach wlth an iaproveaent being made to the road net- work berore the next phase could continue. She stated that the phased approach is outlined on Page 8 of the Development Order that was sub- Bitted by Attorney Varnadoe, noting that Phase I allows commercial equare footage in the amount of 478,400 square feet and then the next phase would begin once runding has been provided ror the road iaprove- aent troa Laurel Oak Drive to Gulf Park Drive. She noted that when the contract is awarded for that improvement. then the next increaent Page IS \~ ----_. March 28, 1989 at .quare toot::.ge is peraitted and Phase IV co_itaent is to wait on the coaaercial square footage until the six-laning is done tor the entire length of U.S. 41 f rom au It Park Drive to Vanderbilt Beach Drive. She noted that she received this document late the previous day and her opportunity has been limited with regards to revi~ing saa.. She noted that there are several issues that will necessitate turther legal revi~; one i8 the pipelining review and the other is the issue of the subsequent rezone which will occur atter the approval of the developaent order. She noted that the CCPC held their second public hearing on March 16, 1989, and they torwarded the petition with a reco...ndation or approval, 4/3. She noted that 8 people spolee in opposition at the public hearing and 14 letters were rece1ved in oppo- sition. noting that the concerns raised were traffic consideration, quality ot life, intensity levels of co-ercial, infrastructure needs, and the need ror additional recreational facilities. She noted that the reco...ndation to the Board is the CCPC's recommendation which 1. tor approval, adding that they did not aake a finding on which ot the four aiti~ations should be chosen that were permitted in the original developaent order as they felt that this decision was best tor the Board to aake. Co..issioner Shanahan questioned if Mrs. Cacchione is comfortable with the aitigation that has been proposed with regards to the trattic iapacts, to which she replied atfirmatively. Mr.. Cacchione stated that the Pelican Bay Property Owners Association are aware or the new changes and there was an article in the Sunday newspaper indlcating the majority ot the changes. Co..is.ioner Volpe stated a long-range transportation p1an is needed in connection with the future land use aap and questioned when this plan will be available? Mr. Jett Perry, MPO Director, stated that the advanceaent toward a long-range transportation proposal will take two steps; one i. to push the . :-,',;,~?or~a: ..J:1 p.a:¡r.~ng out as tar as possible to aatch the zoning on the ground and the second step is the zoning re-evaluation Page 6 \'11 ----,--,-, "'--.--. .-.-., . ,_.._- March 28, 1989 phase ot the Growth Hanageaent Plan which will bring the long-range growth to aid halt-way, adding that he hopes to have a coaputer aodel by the end or July. Co..issioner Volpe questioned what the current level ot service is at the intersection of Pine Ridge Road, Seagate Drive and U.S. 41. to which Mr. Perry stated that just north ot the intersection, the Level of Service is presently at "F" and the standard that has been adopted is "D". He stated that this portion is also planned tor construct10n which should start this aonth. adding that this portion is troll Solana Road to Laurel Oak Drive. He noted that the portion from Laurel Oak Drive to Gult Park Drive is presently at Level of Service "D" or "E" and further north ot there to Vanderbilt Beach Drive is at Level of Serv1ce "D", Co..issioner Volpe questioned what the level ot service will be on U.S. 41 froa Solana Road to Laurel Oak Drive once it has been s1x- laned. to which Mr. Perry stated that it would be at least at the Level or Service "C" or better. Co..issioner Saunders questioned it Mr. Perry has reviewed the tratfic intoraation concerning this petition, to which he replied atfiraatively, addi111 that the pipelining and the placeaent ot the construction on the ground ror that segment or U.S. 41 between Laurel Oak Drive and Gulf Parle Drive Kill make a substantial improvement, He stated that north ot that area, the concurrency provisions that have been written into the development order w111 help aitigate anr future iapact of the northern section until the County or State decides to tix that portion. He stated that this developaent order is better than the last development order that siaply had a pipelining opt10n. Attorney George Varnadoe. representing Westinghouse Comaunities of .aples. Inc., stated that th1B is one ot the rinest developaents in Southwest Florida, He stated that this is a continuation ot the public hearing, adding that on January 3, 1989, the Board asked that the Petit10ner go back to the CCPC tor an evaluat10n of the aaended proposal, that the Petitioner continue negotiations with Pelican Bay Page 7 I~ ---.. March 28. 1989 Property Owner. Association, and that an evaluation of . rezone be done on the 8iddle coaaercial tract regarding transferring those uses and acreage to the north end tract. He stated that he went back to the CCPe with the &aended proposal and they voted in tavor of it, but they st ill continued to negotiate with the Pelican Bay Property Owners Association (PBPOA). He indicated the negotiations resulted in the agree-nt that i. to be pre.ented this date. He stated that with regards to the re-evaluation or the rezoning of the Biddle commercial property to the north, Westinghouse has consented to the aovement of that siddle coaaercial and the rezone or that siddle coamercial to Group 2 residential and he has received the written consent and joiner of the owner. of both parcels in the Biddle commercial district. He stated that all three tasks that the Board asked ror have been accoaplished. He referred to the agreement with the PBPOA, noting that there is currently between 760.000 and 786,000 square teet of gross building area and Start has indicated that there is 757,000 square teet that is presently approved. He stated that he is asking for an increase to 1,095,000 square feet or gross building area which is an increase or 337,966 8quare feet based on Staff's conversion. He stated that out of the 7~7,OOO square teet that is approved, a PUD aaendaent was approved in 1981 that reaoved any restriction on where the square footage could be placed subject to setbacks. height restriction., etc. He indicated that he originally asked ror 1,260,000 on January 3, 1989, which is a reduction in the request tor 165,000 square feet. He reported that there is 644,400 squ~re feet 1n the south CO..ercial district of which. a aaxillull or 285,000 square teet will be retail, and in the north, there is 404,600 square feet. of which a aaxiaull of 150,000 square feet will be retail. He stated that a. a result of negotiations with PBPOA. the mix has signI- ticantly changed trom retail to office. He noted that the original request was a 52' retail and 48' ofrice split and now it is 40' retail and 60' o~fic.. He stated that the Petitioner agreed to reduce the aaxiaua nu.ber of residential units by 1,000 dwelling units, adding Page 8 "_--'-'_..C,",.. March 28, 1989 that thh will have a positive i.pact on transportation issues, He indicated that with regards to the .iddle co..ercial, the Pet1t10ner has consented to the deletion or any co..ercial in the present district and in a subsequent rezone, thi8 would be transferred to the north co_ercial district and rezoned for community co..ercial. He stated that what is now the .iddle commercial district would be rezoned to Group 2 residential which will be more in coapliance and consistent with the Co.prehen8ive Plan by putting the co_ercial in the activity centers. He indicated that the Petitioner agreed with the property owners to reduce hotel room. by 164 hotel rooaa, troa 1.500 to 1,336 which would have a positive iapact on transportation tacilities. He reported that the co_ercial will be developed in tour phases; Phase I i8 what can be built now, which is less than what ls currently authorized under the Development Order; Phase II is the 8qlUre footage that the Petitioner can develop once WCH has funded the .ix-Ianing ot U.S. U tro. Laurel Oak Drive to and including the intersection or Gulr Park Drive; Pha.e III is the square footage that can be built once the contract has been awarded to construct this road iaprove..nt; and Phase IV is the square rootage that can be built when adequate co-itaents pursuant to the concurrency management syste. are aade to six-lane U.S. U froB GuIt Park Drive to Vanderbilt Beach Road. Be stated that WCH will not be eligible for iapact tee credits on the funding of the six-laning ot U.S. 41 between Laurel Oak Drive and Gulf Park Drive, therefore. it would not have a negative on the County's collection of impact tees on the use or County roads. He stated that Phase I square rootage will be a total co-ercial square footage or 478.400 with a aaxiaum or 123,000 square teet ot retail tor the southern portion and 227,000 square teet ot otrice space in the north. He noted that Phase II would allow 45,000 square feet in the south parcel with a aaximum of 40.000 square feet being retail co...r- cial. He noted that Phase III would be 132,000 square teet ot co...r- cial on the southern parcel with a aaxiaum of 122,000 of that being retail. He indicated that the overall maxiau. on the southern parcel ! Page g '" 1~ -----,_.._- March 28. 1989 is 640,400 8qU8re feet of which a aaxi.ua ot 285,000 could be retail. Coaaissioner Hasse questioned when this project would be built- out, to which Attorney Varnadoe stated that tor the total square footage being discussed, the build-out would be 8 to 12 years. Mr. Varnadoe stated that Phase IV square tootage could only be built when the runding tor the six-laning ot the northern segment in tront at Pelican Bay is co..itted and that square tootage 18 77, 600 tor otfice and 150,000 square feet tor retail. Hr. Varnadoe indicated that the Petitioner has agreed to restrict the areas in Pelican Bay where hotels can be located and the height of residential structures have been restricted in Groups 3 and 4 on the east side or Pelican Bay Boulevard to tive tloors above parking, with one exception. He noted that there has been an agreeaent with regards to the access points at the Waterside Shops and they have agreed to co..itaents regarding landscaping and the buffer surrounding residen- tial developments. as well as to signage that would direct people back to the aain roads outside the development. He reported that the Petitioner has agreed to restrict the height or new structures in the co_rcial area to 100 reet or less and they have agreed that all coa- aercial development in Pelican Bay will be subject to the site plan approval process as set rorth in the Pelican Bay PUD. adding that the intent is tor the PBPOA to have a chance tor input with regards to any site plan that is being subaitted tor approval. He indicated that the Petitioner has agreed to aake this agreement part or the record which MOuld be included ln an amended PUD. Coaaissioner Volpe questioned it hotels are allowed in co-erc1al areas and one is built at the intersection ot Vanderbilt Beach Drive and U.S. 41, how would this compute into the 454,600 square teet ot coaaercial, to which Mr. Varnadoe stated that it would not. adding that in Pelican Bay, hotels are counted against residential units at a ratio ot one to three. which is 3 hotel rooms to every resident1al unit. He stated that by building another hotel, the amount ot resi- dential units are reduced that could be built in Pelican Bay. He Page 10 )£1 "'-' -"_._--" -.,."...,,--.,-,----.--...-. -. March 28. 1989 noted that a hotel could not be built in the southeast corner, add1ng that it is not prohibited by the PUD, but that property has been sold. Mr. Byron !Coste. representing Pelican Bay, stated that if either of the property owners in the southeast co...ercial area were \0 case to the County with a revised plan and it JIIade sense to the County, a hotel could be built there because it is an allowable use, but it this happens acreage is taken away fro. whatever else they want to do because they would have to go through the trade-otto Attorney Varnadoe stated that the Petitioner has agreed to pursue a POD aaendaent that would prohibit the connection or Crayton Road 1n Pelican Bay to Seagate Drive. He noted that all these changes have been aade through negotiations with the PBPOA to iaprove the develop- aent and stated that he is requesting approval. He noted that this plan is consistent with the new Growth Manageaent Plan, adding that the Growth Manageaent Plan shows activity centers at the north and south ends or Pelican Bay at the intersections with U.S. U. He noted that the activity center conception and the location ot the. were adopted atter two years ot study as a result of Plantec's study and aany hearings. He stated that Start is recoamending approval and the CCPC reco..ended approval as well as the Regional Planning Council. He noted that Sherwood Smith rrOJII Adley & Associates would otter his professional opinion that the aaount ot square rootage requested 18 reasonable and appropriate ror a project the size of Pelican Bay and that the square tootage per acreage is also reasonable tor a quality restricted co..unity. He reported that Jack Barr or Barr, Dunlop & Associates would indicate that the revised co...erc1al square tootage request, when coabined with reduction or residential units ~nd hotel units, would cause external traftic iapacts to be less than those that Pelican Bay has approved currently; that the payment proposed to six- lane U.S. U between Laurel Oak Drive and Gult Park Drive would Bore than cover the proportionate share of cost of JIIitigation or trattic iap&cts ot the added coaaercial develúpaent on the regional roadway.. Page 11 \1 --."'.. '"""'" '-""-""---.""'. .--- March 28, 1989 I n 8nSW1t r to Coaaissioner Volpe. Mr. Varnadoe stated that the square toot age per acre is 11,061 square teet, which is weighted 60-40 in tavor or ottice space. Co..issioner Shanahan stated that Seagate Elementary School eub- aitted a letter expressing a concern with regard to children walking to school because of the parking lot entrances and exits on the east side ot West Boulevard. Mr. Varnadoe stated that there 18 a sidewalk on the _at side of West Blvd. in Pelican Bay that would acco..odate the children and the only access in the vicinity of the school would be the Bridgeway residential development and a side entrance to the Cathol1c Church. Mr. Charles Turner. Director of Planning tor Westinghouse Co-.unities or Haples. Inc., rererred to a aap ot Pelican Bay indi- cating the surrounding properties and the structures within Pelican Bay as well as the co-ercial areas, the areas with height restric- tions. and the location of the park area. He noted that with the changes. he is coatortable with all the plan which will .eet all the zoning require.ents, He reterred to the Waterside shopping area, indicating that access to this area would be with one 88in entrance along U.S. 41 and a right-in only access to the area. He stated that along Seagate Drive there is one tull intersection opposite a aedian breaJt in the roadway and one in right-in right-out access. He indi- cated that along West Blvd. there is one tull intersection opposite. aedian break and one right-in access and another right-in right-out access. Co..issioner Volpe stated that the two outparcels are 1ð,OOO aquare teet each and he was under the iapression that one ot these outparcels was going to be aoved to the interior portion and questioned if this is accurate, to which Mr. Varnadoe stated that the original co..itment ror the Waterside Shops parcel was that it be developed tor a aaxiaum ot 300,000 square teet. He indicated that the co..i taent that the owner has agreed to i8 that it will be reduced to 285.000 aquare teet, but there has been no co..itaent as to where 1t Page 12 l~ --... .....---...-..... --...-. - - . ---. --,,_......_--, _. March 28, 1989 will be located. Mr. Turner stated that the location of the pedestrian walkway along West Blvd. is along the western side at the property, adding that this sidewalk i. in place and there are only two access points along that section. He referred to the location of the school. not1ng that there is a direct crosøwalk and an existing traffic 11ght at that location. He noted that it has been his privilege over a nuaber of years to be able to handle these things for Pelican Bay. add1ng that he teels that Pelican Bay has done a great job tor the County and the resident. with regards to quality ot lite and he intends to continue with this type ot quality review as this development is constructed. ..... aeo._: 10130 A.M. - JtecODV8Do84: 10:.0 A.M. at wh1ch t18e Depaty Clerk Bott8IID replaced Depaty Clerk E8Dyon ..... '!çe 4J2 Mr. 8ernon Young, Vice President, Pelican Bay Property Owners Association. stated that his Board has been working with Westinghouse over the past tour aonths to arrive at a position regarding its planning. He presented a petition with 1.121 signature. troa the Pelican Bay residents/unit owners opposing the amended petition of Westinghouse to expand the co..ercial space in Pelican Bay to 1,160,000 square reet. He advised that so.e compromise. have been reached since the signing or the petition, and they are only known to the nine Board members. noting that he is hopeful that the 1,000 plus property owners will continue to back the decision ot the Boa':d. He indicated that the negotiations with Westinghouse have been sign1t1- cant, in that the retail square footage, which was one of the Property Owner. aain objectives rrom the beginning, has been reduced fro. 15150,000 square teet to 420,000 square teet. Mr. Young stated that with regard to the six-lan1ng of U.S. 41, to Laurel Oak Drive, his Board believes that this should be extended to Gult Park Drive, noting that when the project is completed at the north end, the six-Ianing will also be completed at the north end, ~o _at the definition or concurrency. Page 13 \'\ ...--"'......,.".- March 28, 1989 Mr. Youn~ indicated that the 8Oveaent ot the "lIiddle section" to the north of the project will be beneticial to everyone in Naples. He noted that ~estinghouse has agreed to re.ove 1.000 living unit.. which is a genuine coaproaise, as i. the reaoval of 164 aotel roo_. He stated that he is happy with the height li.it or 100 reet, .ince the east side ot Pelican Bay has been a thorn in everyone's slde. He noted concern. regarding neighbors to the south. and suggested that Crayton Road be closed. Mr. Young stated that there are three essential tools to growth aanageaent which the County is not using: 1. Square footage is iaportant. 2. Concurrency in not only identifying the problea, but showing how to resolve the problell, 3. Input - the people that are Boat affected have the right to give input at the planning process, so it will ainiaize the need at the hearing process. He stated that it the County will use the above tools, Staff wIll be such 8Ore effective. Coaaissioner Volpe co..ended Hr. Young's group in working with Kestinghouse to reach a consensus, and questioned whether there 18 anything within the proposed DCA which limits the height restrictions on the east side of Pelicar. Bay Boulevard? Mr. Young stated that th18 is contained in the Agreement and not in the DCA. In an_er to Co..issioner Volpe, Mr. Young replied that the Pelican Bay Iaprovement District has taken the position that they wl11 continue the process or concurrency, noting that the raciliti~s will have to be available before they can be constructed. Mr. Fred Hardt, President, Pelican Bay Property OWners Association, .tated that the first page of the Agreeaent, Paragraph 2, Ite- 1, 2 and 3, 8peC ity how the items that were agreed upon will be covered either through the Development Order. or through a POD ...endaen t. He noted that at the Annual Meeting ot the Property OWners on March 13, 1989. the Board was given authority to continue negotiations with Westinghouse, and h. believes that the authority given by the a.a- Page 14 'YO , - March 28, 1989 bership has given the Board the authority to enter into this Agree_n t. He indicated that he believes the negotiations have resulted in satistactory comproaises which address mo.t ot the Board's concerns, and he is requesting that the Board ot County Commissioners approve the proposed Development Order. With regard to concurrency, Mr. Hardt indicated that hi. Board felt that the best protection tor everyone concerned, was to provide specifically what Westinghouse was required to do. Coaai.sioner Volpe questioned whether Pelican Bay's traftic con- sul tant revi_ed the issue of concurrency, other than as it relates to U.S. 41, and whether it was stated that this issue has been satisfac- torily addressed, or that the iapact has been 8itigated? Mr. Hardt stated the traftic consultant reels that there are other areas that will have to be addressed with respect to concurrency. Hr. Henry Maxant. Presldent. Pine Ridge Civlc Association, stated that a General Membership Meeting was held on March 22, 1989, and the .e.bers unaniaously expressed their objection to any change in the presently per.itted co..ercial development in Pelican Bay, noting that this will present a problem ror the adjacent roadways and the adjacent coaaunities. He stated that the requested 45~ increase in coamercial will result in an unbearable and unnecessary burden. He indicated that the present petition is referred to as a compromise. He indi- cated that he has submitted a copy of a letter trom Mr. To. Russell, Vice Pre.ident of Pine Ridge Civic Association, tor the Co_lssion's review. Mr. Ron Pennington, representing the Board of Governor's of the Moorings Property Owners Association, stated that after the n-. release in Sunday's paper. the Board ot Governor's was poll~d, since there was not sufficient time to approach the 1.800 members ot the A.sociation, noting that the Board unanimously opposes the subject -.ndaent ror the rollowing reasons: trafric concerns which will 1.pact the Moorings; the 285,000 SF ot retail to the south end 18 actually 15,000 SF .ore than what was addressed during the January 3, Page lð 1- \. ._.,.,..~_..... -"" 'v ~ " . ....,-----..-, March 28, 1989 1989 _eting. Co..lssioner Volpe questioned what the current Level of Service 18 tor Crayton Road? Mr. John of. Barr. President, Barr Dunlop & Associates, stated that the present Level of Service tor Crayton Road during peak season i8 "B", noting that the projected future Level of Service at build-out ot this project will result in operation at Level of Service "C"o Co..issioner Saunders asked Mr. Pennington ir what his group is oPpo8ing to i8 the co..ercial develop.ent on the south end ot Pelican Bay? Mr. Pennington replied aftiraatively. Mr. Alan Korest representing the Greater Naples Civic Association, stated that arter aeeting with the Westinghouse people last Wednesday, he pre.ented the aatter to his Board and it was teIt that there is still substantial i.pact on the Park Shore Association. and those parts ot Maples which are abutting the Pelican Bay project. He indi- cated that in order to give his Board sutticient ti.e to review the new _terial, a two week continuance is requested so that the entire aeabership could be polled. He further stated that a second vote was taken which asked what the current position ot the Board aeaber. is, it a continuance cannot be granted? He advised that the Board oppo.e. the petition as presented. He indicated that a great deal of progress has been Bade today. but Staff has not had the opportunity to review the new aaterial, the Developaent Order has not been aade available to the public. and the retail has a 4:1 tratfic i.pact as coapared to oft ice, and it has been increased by l~,OOO square teet. He aoted that there are serious concerns about the ~utparcels on Seagate Drive, noting that they should not be considered tor retail. In answer to Comaissioner Volpe, Mr. Korest stated that his Board was opposing the 270,00 SF tor retail, and it is now being increased to 28~,OOO SF in the southern end. He voiced concerns relating to the Level of Service on Crayton Road, noting that the City ot Haples did a study in 1988 which indicates Level "C", and is tast approaching Level "D". Page lIS 1-'Ÿ -----....,-,-, ,- - ,... ,......-,--., March 28, 1989 The following persons spoke in favor at this petition: Mrs. Sylvia Moll Mr. Charles Co~el..n Mrs. Myra Peniels Mr. .Jack Bloodgood Those persons speaking in favor of this Petition, stated the following: Pelican Bay needs the aix ot co..ercial, residential and retail; Petition co.plies with Future Coap Plan; in favor. but landscaping and irrigation should be incorporated into the planning tor the aedian strips on U.S. 41; interests of both sides have been brought to a successful coaproaise The following persons spoke in opposition to this petition: Mr. Oeroge Buonocore Mr. Oeroge Keller Mr. Ken Krier Mr. Mike Bethine Reasona of opposition were cited as follows: traffic iapacts on an already jaaaed U.S. 41; the 45' increase in co..ercial Is a treaen- deus -aunt; Petition will affect the entire County; anyagree.ent aade between Pelican Bay and Westinghouse cannot be enforced by the County; the originally planned retail space ot 158.000 SF is adequate; six-laning of u.s. U will not be adequate to handle the additional trattic iapact; three exits on the east side or the developlllent are too aany. and will be dangerous to the children walking to school. Mr. Varnadoe indicated that the speakers opposing this petition have torgotten the reduction ot 1,000 dwelling units, the reduction ot 164 hotel roo_. and the runding of construction for the six-laning ot the one aile stretch of U.s. U. He noted that th'tse people are ignoring the Comprehensive Plan which say" that the intersection ot D.S. 41 and Seagate/Pine Ridge is an Activity Center where co..ercial activIty is approprIate, noting that the intent is merely to i.pleaent the Coap Plan. He advised that the Park Shore residents were invited to a March 14, 1989 .eeting which Mr. Bennett attended, but after that, they did not involve the.selves in the process. He stated that the changes that are proposed today will lessen the trattic impacts on the external roads and the trattic which will be generated by the Page 11 ~~ --_.._-"- '" ...'" March 28. 1989 project, .. approved today, and there i. not a developer that will be six-laning a State road. In answer to Co..issioner Saunders, Mr. Varnadoe indlcated that atter the PUD ..endment. it was th~ developer's opinion that there was no aaxiaua cap on commercial square rootage because the purpose was to put Pelican Bay on the s..e level as other co..ercially zoned property in the County, noting that other constraints, 1.e. parking, setbacks. etc. controlled the square rootage. Co..issioner Saunders questioned when Pelican Bay discovered that they could not build the anticipated co..ercial square tootage on their co_ercial acreage? Mr. Varnadoe stated that was in 1987. In anwwer to Co..issioner Saunders, Mr. Varnadoe stated that the site plan tor the shopping center at the south end ot Pelican Bay has been approved. He noted that the developer was asked to reduce the square footage of that shopping center, which he agreed to reduce by 16.000 square teet, but wanted the r lexibi 11 ty of the reduction to coae tro. either ottice or retail. Coaaissioner Saunders stated that there is going to be co..ercial equare tootage in the Activity Center, and he would rather see W.stinghouse building it, than S08eone that is not known. '!çe n Co..issioner Volpe indicated that he concurs with the 10glc. but he has reservations regarding the issue ot concurrency, and what the iapact or the additional square tootage. it authorized, will have on the transportation network in this comaunity. Mr. Varnadoe noted that Pelican Bay is a DRI with a valid Develop- .ent Order with 757,000 square teet or commercial approved today, 9,100 dwelling units, and l,!>OO hotel roo... He indicated that under the interpretation or the Growth Manageaent Act given by DCA. they have the right to proceed no .atter what happens to the roads around the project, or its impact on those roads. He stated that the propo- sal today will not increase the impact on those roads, a coaalt.ent baa been aade to six-lane a ditticult segment ot the road now. and Page 18 1-q .._~,_._,-- - . -.---,,--.... '..._,..,,~. .-' March 28, 1919 agreeing to phase the project until another segaent of that s-e road i. also six-laned. Co..issioner Saunders asked County Attorney Cuyler it this peti- tion is approved, is it possible to arrange tor the funding ot the one aile section, so that the County can Bake payment for the road and .eek reiaburseaent froB the State? County Attorney Cuyler indicated that this is possible rroa the County'. end. There were no other speakers either tor or against this petition. ec-.1_10D8r Sha....~ aoved, eeconded by Co8al..1oner ...- end carr 1 ed 1m8n 1aDu8 1 y. tha~ the public bearIng be cloeed. Co..is.ioner Hasse coapliaented all parties involved tor their efforts to aediate a very difticult situation. He indicated that he would like to see all the Civic Associations, and the Associations repre.enting Seagate. Park Shore. Pine Ridge, etc, represented turther. He noted that he is not satistied with the representatlon of the average cltizen or Collier County. He rurther noted that many roads wi II be iapacted by this development. Co..issioner Goodnight stated that when this DRI was approved, the State approved it along with the road mitigation, noting that she teels that the State is obligated to help Collier County in this instance. Co..issioner Volpe stated that his concerns are what will be done in the interia. He indicated it concurrency is required, and the funds are down the line. +he ettect ot what will occur ls that other Developaent Orders will not be granted this year. County Attorney Cuyler advised that Page 12. Section "A" ot the Developaent Order talks about Start initiating a subsequent rezone to aove the acreage rrom the middle area to the northern area. He noted that Section "8" talks about development ot Phase 4, contingent on the adoption ot the rezone. He stated that Sectinn "C" talks about the reduction ot 164 hotel rooms. contingent on the rezone, and Section "D" repeats the ettective date. He stated that it this Development Order i. passed. it allows the developer the ability to construct Page 19 / 'f¡~ -'" .-.._", -.,..."........... March 28, 1989 Phases 1, 2, and 3, ~S outlined on Page 8. and the con.truction of Phase 4 is contingent on the rezone and the Developer's obligation to reduce his hotel roo. units. He noted that there are dratts in his office where all or the square footage and all of the developaent is contingent on the rezone taking place. noting that the Board needs to aake a conscious decision as to how intricate this rezone is to the entire process, and how .uch of the develop.ent rights are to be tied to that subsequent rezone. Co..issioner Saunders stated that there i8 an Agree.ent troa the two proper~ owners that they are willing to forego any development rights that they have on the 8iddle section. as long as it i. trana- ferred to the northern section. Mr. Varnadoe indicated that the two property owners and Westinghouse have agreed to the above, noting that they have signed joint consents which he will forward tor the record. Mrs. Cacchione stated that the acreages as contained in the Developaent Or~.r are not correct. She referred to Page 2, noting that there have been discussions relating to the aaount ot acreage for the northern parcel, She indicated that Staff's opinion is that it should be 47 acres, excluding the lake that exists, and the Petitioner is stating 50 acres. Mrs. Cacchione referred to Page B of the Developaent Order, notlng that the phasing schedule refers to the timing and Certificates of Occupancy. which allows the Petitioner to con8truct the building and the road iaprove.ent will take place in the future. She advised that a &Ore appropriate fora is to use the Building Perait, instead of the Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Varnadoe stated that what he drafted in the Develop.ent Order w- a alniaal or 47 acres, and a aaxiaua ot 50.2 acres. giving the Board or County Co..1ssioners the r1ght to say what it should be within that range. Mrs. Cacchione indicated that it is sugge8ted that a tiae traae be established ror the rezone to occur, noting that 120 days would be Page 20 1-U ,.«~..,....- ..,,-.---- ...- -.,.-- ~ -'.."".'-'..-"'--"""""'.."'" . '-"-"--' March 28, 1989 approprIate. County Attorney Cuyler advised that Page 11, Subaection 12, there Is a provision that states that the substantial devlatlon is exeapt fro. down-zoning for a period ot 5 years. He noted that the tille per 10d is at the discretIon ot the Board. County Attorney Cuyler stated that it this petltlon is approved. he will draw up the Developaent Order in final tor., and it there are any probleas, he will present thee to the Board tor a resolution. Co..issioner Shanahan indicated that he supported Co..issloner Saunders' position on January 3. 1989 to have both parties COli. back with negotiated satisfactory conclusions. He noted that he coamends both sldes. the pro and the con. ~i..1CDn' Sbanetwn 8OV84 ~o approve Pe~ltlon DOA 88-1C, b888d on ~ cepe re<~ 1nd.a~lona, the Start rec~tlone, subject ~o all of ~ 418CU881ona. raa1flcatlona, and C one 1 de r a ~ 1 one tba t have been 88ð8 , and that a..o I u t1 on 89- 77 A be 8dop ~ ed. Seconded by Co8a1_100er --.-. i gilt. Co..ls.ioner Volpe stated that he is troubled by the is8Ue of con- currency, and would be sore coatortable it instead of the phasing requ i reaen t. there would be solie .odificatlon as developed by the Region which has to do with a co..it.ent toward en8Uring that con- currency exists on U.S. 41 and all ot the other roadways that will be lapacted by the increase. Co..issioner Saunders suggested that the phasing ot all tl:'.e deve- lopaen t be subject to concurrency as derinpd in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Varnadoe stated that it concurrency is to be illposed on the additional substantial deviation square tootage, the phasing schedule is reaoved, the improvements to U.S. U are removed, and the reduction in units is reaoved. He noted that he does not reel that develcpment rights which the Developer has today can be subjected to concurrency. He noted that the 8iddle co..ercial property owners are being asked to aove and give up soae rights, adding that they are not subjected to Page 21 1-1 ----,..' , ..., -, March 28, 1989 concurrency now, and yet they are being asked to be subjected to con- currency at a ðitferent location. Co..iaaioner Goodnight inðicated that for the pa.t tour aonths letters have been eubaitted to DCA. and their eain Counsel has advised that there is nothing that the County or Region can do about a Developaent Order which is already there, and the only thing that there cen be eny type of aitigation on, is the substantial deviation. co..issioner Saunders indicated that his concern was the school and the traffic on West Avenue. which has been addressed. He noted that aoving the coaaercial to the center is a benetl~; reduclng the percentage of retail apace and increasing ottice space, reducing the nuaber ot dwelling units, and hotel units provides a such better deve- lop_nt plan than what was presented earlier. In an_er to Co..issioner Hasse. Mr. Perry indIcated that the issue regarding concurrency is a choice as to whether concurrency 1. to be provided to a half a dozen roadways, or consider the Beall per- centage or iapact that they have on U.S. 41. He stated that this substantial deviation request represents a s&all percentage ot the iapacta on U.S. U and Pine Ridge Road, West Blvd., etc. He noted that the County is in a position to tix the other County roads whIch aay be iapacted, but neither the City nor the County have the revenue streaa to rix U,S. 41. He indicated that the Levels of Service will decre..e whether or not the substantial deviation is approved. Opaa 1"0 11 c.11, the 8CI~ion carrIed .. followa: ~ t -100er 8haftA haft Aye C-t-1oaer CIood.nlght Aye ~t..100er Volpe .ay ~ t ..1c:mer ..... )lay C t -.1oaer """""'r. Aye P8ge 22 A C; ......",..._-",- ..'-,-".~.._'...'_...., .'.....,.. . March 28. 1188 I tea ....,. D8'ßI.C .-1 POX SDYICU IRnLDIJRI C'JI&JICD 01U)DS 1'0 CIIC DnKLOftIKJI'l' COItP. 111 '!D NIOUIIT or . 1 7 e . 3. 3 . 00 - APP'1tO'VK1) Assistant County Manager McLeaore stated that approval is requested tor Change Order '1 in the amount of $147.333. and Change Order '2 in the aaount of $28,010, tor the Development Services Building in order for closing to take place at 3 P.M. today. He advised that the Board ot County Co..issioner8 authorlzed $3.S 811110n for construction or this project, and at closing, the County will be at 98.3' of budget, and three aonths ahead of schedule. ec-.1_1 ODIn' Vol p8 aove4, 88Conded. by Co8ai_1oaer .haftelwn aDd carried ---..-..ly. to approve Cb.angw Order. .1 aDd 2 ~o CIIC 0.".14. t Corp. Page 23 till ,--_. March 28, 1989 ..... JI¡eçe_: 12:00 P.M. - Jtecouvened: 1:015 P.M. a~ wh.tch U,.. Depaty Clerk ~ replaced Deputy Clerk Boffa8n ..... It- nB2 PS'!I'!I08 PD-I'-28C, DIAD L. U1) AJrTBOn 3. GOALARIO, UQt1U'!UO P1tOVI8IO8AL 0S'l "E" or 'l'1!JI: UTA'l"KS zon.o DISTRIC'l roJt U ADOL'! ~U'i..ft LIVIJIQ J'ACILI'l'T 08 'l'1!JI: .01frB SIDE or an AVDUK SOO'!1Df&S'!, OOLDal ClAft U'!A'l"KS - DDIKD Co..issioner Volpe indicated that Mr. Gualario's accounting firm acts a. his personal accountant and questloned it this would be a cant l1ct of interest. to which County Attorney Cuyler stated that ita Co..issioner is uncoafortable because of such. situation. he ha. the right not to vote. Co..issioner Saunders stated that unless there is an econollic conflict of interest. he teels that Co..issioner Volpe should vote on this -tter. Atter a general discussion. it was Co..issioner Volpe's decision to vote on the i8sue at hand as long as everyone knows the extent of the relationship between hi. and Mr. Oualario. Planner Scheff stated that this petition is a request for Provi- sional Dse "e" of the Estates zoning district for an adult con~pegate living facility for property located on the north side ot 6th Avenue Southwest approxillately 840 teet east of Livingston Road, consisting of 2.21 acre.. He indicated that thi8 petition is consistent with the Gr~h Manage..nt Plan. noting that lands to the north. east. south, and west are zoned Estates and contain large lots, single f_ily ho_s, and undeveloped woodlands. He stated that the Petitioner is proposing to construct a 24 bed congregate living racility on 2.21 acres Which will generate .inill4l traffic because the residents will not drive. He stated that there would be ~ aaxillUlI of 6 eaployees on a shirt. which would create a small amount at trattic, adding that there would also be people that would be involved in aaintenance and lawn care. visits froll taaily .eabers, and staff trips tor 8upplies. He stated that the Petitioner is proposing to construct a home of approxi_tely 1.000 square reet that ..ill have the appearance of a 8ingle teaily residence, adding that the facility will be built around Page 2" <l\ -_..'«.._<.."". ..-...., .<0<..,..'."".. <..-...-......., '..'-"' -.. March 28, 1989 a pa~io with the fence surrounding the rear yard. He indicated that with the recoaaended 8itigation 8easures Start has no objection to the request and recoaaended approval to the CCPC. He stated that based upon the Finding or Pacts or the CCPC, they recommended denial by a vote or 8/0 as they felt the proposed use is not compatible with the general area and it would have negative eftects upon surrounding pro- perties. He .tated that two people spoke in tavor of the petition 8 people spoke against it, 26 letters were received in support, 18 let- ter. of objection Mere received. and one petition (Exhibit "A") with 151 signaOUre. opposing the petition were received. He stated that it is reco..ended that the Board deny this petition per the CCPC's recollJleDdation. In an8Wer to Coaaissioner Volpe, Mr. Scheff indicated that one unit per 2.25 acres is allowed in this district. C088iesioner Shanahan questioned it there would be any problea with potable water and sewer. to which Mr. Scheff stated that all regulatory agencies have reviewed this petition and have no proble.. with it. He noted that the start report indicates that the well will have to have approval from DER and the lot shall accept a aaxiaua flow ot 3,000 gallons per day and plans tor the septic syste. shall be approved by the Collier County Health Department. Mrs. Diana Gualario, Petitioner. stated that there i. a need in Collier County for quality housing in a residential setting tor older people who are not able to live independently but who should not be In a nursing hoa.. She noted that this petition would mitigate that need and enable a s_ll n\1.8ber ot the older citizens to live in safety, coatort and dignity. She stated that this petition should be judged on its aerite and compliance with the ordinance ror provisional use. She noted tha t the objections have been trafric and placing a bualnea. in a residential area. She subaitted a petition (Exhibit "B" that wa. signed by over 1.000 concerned citizens of Collier County that have placed their support behind this home. She stated that the CCPC aade a recoaaendation of denial because of the support against this Page 215 ~z., -- , '. '. ..,... ..,......,."..,. ",-....-,--.- ..,~- . March 28, 1989 type ot facility troa the residents in the i_ediate area, adding that this is docuaented in the ainutes ot their meeting. She stated that the tacility will generate ainimua tratfic because the people that will live in this hose will not drive. She indicated that with reqards to access in case of fire, the tacility is close to Pine Ridge Road and the rire departaent located on that .treet. She stated that she has been asked to put in a large tank that would be buried and MOuld bold 8.000 gallons of water to be used if there is a tire, She noted that there will be landscape butters in the area, adding that this residence will be compatible with the surrounding properties. She reported that there were concerns regarding placing a buaines. In a re.idential area. adding that there are a lot or people in this area that have businesses rroa their hoaes. She stated that with regards to water and s~er requirements, there will be a well and septic 8Ystea. but the requireaents will not exceed the l1aitations imposed by the Utilities Departaent. She noted that the demands ot this ho- will be no different than it there was a home with a guest hoae and teenage children at home. She noted that the elderly do not shower as often as the teenage children and the laundry is not that much. She ':'ndicated that the xericscape technique will be used to ainiaize the groundwater that is used. She indicated that this home will not decrea.e the property values, adding that her investment will be approxi_tely one-haIr Billion dollars. She presented picture. (Exhibit .C" of the neighborhood showing the various debris that i. in the y~rds. adding that this area is or mixed character and her home will not depreciate the property values. '!ape.. In answer to Coaaissioner Hasse. Mrs. Gualario stated that the plan is for 12 bedroom. with two people sharing a room with the aaxi- 8U8 liait of 24 people for the residence, as this is the liait that HRS will allow. She noted that Bose people may want a private room and therefore, there would only be one person in that bedroom. She indicated that each bedroom will have a bathrooa. She stated that Page 28 <)13 ..--..,-....",'..-..-. . . ""-"."--"'---- .. ,.--..- ,,~ .-,--..- '~'. . -.-.,...,.-....-..,.....,............,," , ."..", .. March 28, 1989 there will be no food delivery as she will purchase the food fro. the grocery store. She indicated that the house is 6.500 square teet, a single-story with a 3-car garage. Co..issioner Volpe questioned it the facility would be sprinkled. to which Mr.. Oualario replied negatively, as it is not a requireaent. Co..issioner Volpe questioned if there would be recreational actl- v1tie8, to which Hr.. Oualario stated that there would be a craft roo. and places for the residents to exercise. Mrs. Gualario stated that there are certain requir..ents that have to be aet with regards to square footage per resident and she will -et all those requireaents. She stated that there MOuld be two washers and two dryers to Beet the needs for the laundry. In anawer to Co..issioner Shanahan, Hrs. Gualario stated that the typical resident i. 80 or older, frail, unable to take care at thelr own daily living, not able to drive, do laundry, prepare aeals, and usually has difficulty reading. She noted that typically these people have to have aedication at a certain ti.e and lose track ot tiae and there tore , cannot function properly in the comaunity by theaselves. She stated that there are only two other facilities of this type in Collier County; one in !Corth !Caples and one in East Maples. adding that they are both licensed for 12 people. Co..issioner Volpe questioned it a du.pster would be placed on site, to which Mrs. Oualario stated that there would be no duapsters on site as the trash could be contained in trash barrels and plcked up twice a _ek by Yahl Brothers. Mrs. Gualario stated that there would not be a physiclan on site .. this facility is not set up to take care of the ill, no~ing that when people reach that point, they will be transferred to a skilled care facility, The tollowing people spoke in opposition to this petltion citing ~be increase in traffic. the affect on property values, conceIns regarding wastewater flows on proposed septic system, and the attect on the character of the neighborhood: Pag.27 ~4 ._---,,-----, . -. -,_. -.---.---'--'-- ---- March 28, 1989 Mr. Lee .ichols Michelle Lord-McCauley Lyle McCandle.s john Gulotta Cbri.tlne Ebersbach Ken Connor George hller Art Krieger Shelly Dixon 30hn !hraan Prank Zencuch John Mana1ka Pa~ Miller Phil Denh.. 3ett BUyeau Willi.. I':leln 3i. Si880n8 Stephen Caah10r Rlcki Caahior Marilyn 1Cn0blauch Rich Forbis David Stuart Mr. Lionel Landry stated that he feels that there is a need for congregate living tacilities and the best place for the. is in a resi- dential area. He suggested that the Board give conslderation to approving this petition. Mr. Fred PezeshJcan. Vice President of Kraft Construction. stated that it this petition is approved, his fir. has been selected to build thie bo_, which will be a rine addition to the neighborhood. Mr. Ji. Jones, Chief or Korth Naples Fire District, stated that the requireaents that have been aentloned are the ainlaua requlre..nts tor the site. He noted that the staff that will be on sIte is not adequate staff for these people in the event that there 1s a tire. He noted that response tiae to this area with regards to an e.ergency call is li.ited because or the diøtance. He stated that with regard. to a sprinkler &yete. in the home. there is not enough pressure to install a systea, adding that he feels that this area ls too remote tor these people. Mrs. Gualario stated that her plans were reviewed by all agencle. and there were no proble.s with thea, adding that all the req~ire..nts have been aet. She noted that there is a ~eed for such a facility and it is needed in a resldential area and she would request that this petition be approved. Coaaissioner Goodnight indicated that she feels that there is need tor this type ot facility also, but she has concerns with regards to water and sewer as well as fire and emergency assistance. Coaalssioner Saunders indicated that he agrees with Co..issloner Goodnight, adding that he teels that it would be proper ln a residen- tlal area but this location is too reacte for the elderly wlth regard. Page 28 ?,S ....' "-,""..""",, ,........,....,-......-.... -~-""""'." , March 28, 1989 to aabulance and tire services. Co..issioner Shanahan indicated that he would like to have the Board deteraine where these type or facilities should be placed in the Coun ty . C.- i ..10D8r ..... ~, eeconðed by Co8a1..ioner Volpe and carr 1ed. ........ i 8nU81 y, that Petltlon PO-II-2IC, be denIed. ..... ~.: 3:3ð P.M. - Il8conv8ned: 3:ðO P.M. .~ whIch ~18e Depaq Clerk Bott1l8D rçlaced Deputy Clerk Eeuyon ..... It- nB1 8UOLD'rZGW 1tÞ-7IA, PKTITI~ PO-II-27C, IIDBD'I' SA V A(ß: DnKSDT:IJrO I'LOIUM ~ 1 as AJß) DKVKLOPMD'f, I:we., UQUU'fIJIG PIIO'nSIO1I.U. ~ "I" J'O8 .. I«:J"l'KI. LOCATED O. 'I'D SOO'!II SIDE 01' FIRST AVDVI:, Jt&.S'l' 0 r KAJtCO LAD DRIVE, MARCO 18I.AJrD - ADOrTLU WI'f1I S'!IPULA'!IOIIS Planner Scheff stated that this petition is a request tor Provisional Use "I" at the C-4 Zoning District for a aotel located on the south side of First Avenue, East of Marco Lake Drive, turther de.cribed as Lots 2 and 3. Block '1, Marco Highlands. He noted that this petition is consistent with the Growth Management Plan. Mr. Scheff indicated that lands to the north, across First Avenue, are zoned RMF-6; lands to the east are zoned C-4; lands to the south are zoned RSP-4; and lands to the west are zoned C-4. He advised that the Petitioner proposes to construct a 12 unit motel and associated accessory uses on approxiaately 0.76 acres, noting that the aotel 1. part ot a project that includes a restaurant. He noted that the area is characterized by a .ixture of development: multi-taaily residen- tial structures are predoainant to the north, across First Avenue; single-taaily residential hoaes are doainant to the east, on both side. of Yellowbird Street; a large pond with an abundance ot vegeta- tion (foraerly an old borrow pit) is located south ot subject pro- perty. Be stated that a diversitied mixture ot coamercial uses (including restaurants, services, and a aedical clinic) are located to the Mest across Marco Lake Drive. He noted that the ~roposed aotel and re.taurant would represent "intill" coamercial between an ..ight unit etticiency motel and an eighteen unit apartment building. Mr. Scheff stated that due to its and size and location, the aotel Page 29 ~(, "-'-"-"""- ......"......... -..",..--....",....-... March 28, 1989 portIon of the project would be Bore siailar to 8Ulti-f..ily residen- tial units than to a transient lodging tacility, therefore, the pro- posed facility is expected to generate aini..l trarfic. He noted tha~ Staff baa no objection to this petition. and recommends approval. Mr. Scheff advised that the Collier County Planning Co..ission held their public hearing on March 2, 1989. and they are forwarding this petition to the Board ot Co~ty Co..issionera with a recoaaen- dation ot approval, subject to Staff's stipulations, and the additlon ot Stipulation "a" as follows: .. Insure Illuaination on parking lot does not create glare. Bulbs shall be shIelded and pointed down. Mr. Scheff stated that no one spoke concerning this petitlon at the publIc hearing, however, one letter ot oppositIon has been received, citing the rollowing: increased traffic on 'Irst Street, noise would be detri.ental to year-round residents, and affects on proper~ values to the surrounding area. Mr. Scheff noted that the site plan regarding this petition BUst be revised to include a third handicapped parking space and a loading zone. ~t..1aaer 8"""'h~ 8OY8d., eeconded. by Co8a1..10D8r -..tgh~ 8Dd C8Z'Z'leeS 1ID8Di8cnaa I y, ~o ~rov. P8~lt1on PO-88-21C, 8Ub j ec:1: to .~f'. .tJpa1.~10D8, ~ aðdJ~ion of S~lpu1.~lon ".", 8Dd ~ 1'8'91- 8100 of the 81 ~e plan ~o 1nclud8 a ~lrd bandJcapped parking 8p8C8 8Dd a 1-- t "9 ZOD8, thereby ado¡rting btIoluUon 8~78"'. Page 30 ~1 -_....w- _mN"""'.-""'-"...".". ........... March 28, 1989 I~- ..82 n1'I'!Iœ ZO-""1. COMMDII'l'Y DKVKLOPMZX'! DIVISIO., IlI.rK&<:J &8'T DIG 'I'D 8OAJtD or ~. u CC8MISSICD'DS UQUU'!IJrG AJr AAuI"....T 1'0 8ZC1'IOJr '.11, LOCATIœ ~u.Duul.dì roa USES IJrvOLVX.O Irr'OnCA'!I.O 8rIDAGU - DDY 1m Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily Hews on February 25, 1989, as evidenced by Atfidavit of Publication tiled with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition ZO-89-1, Coaaunity Developaent Division representing the Board of County Co_issioners, requestinQ' an aaendment to Section 8.11, location r~ireaents for uses involving intoxicating beverages, to set torth the procedure and criteria for waiver ot part or all of the .iniaua distance requireaent between an establishment engaging in the sale of alcoholic beverages for consuaption on pre.ises and an established church, school, public park or playground and amending Appendix "A". schedule ot fees. by addlng a tee. Planner Scherr stated that this petition is requested as a result that certain distance requireaents between establishments providing on-slte sale and consuaption ot alcoholic beverages and churches, schools, public parks and playgrounds aay be too stringent as required by the Collier County Zoning Ordinance where certain aan-aade and natural boundaries, structures and other features exist which may off- set and reduce the .ini.u. spacing r~ire.ents. Mr. Scherr noted that the CCPC held a public workshop on February 2 1989, and a public hearing on March 2, 1989, and they are recoa- &ending approval of this petition. He indicated that there was no public co_ent. either ror or against this petition at the public bearIng, and no correspondence has been received. He advised that Start is reco..ending approval. subject to the CCPC's reco..endation. There were no speakers either for or against this petition. Co8a1_1oner ..... 8:JV8d, eeconded by Co8aJ..ioner Good:DJgh~ 8Dd carr 1 ed ...,....., 1 8ftU81 y, ~hat the public hearIng be cloaed. Co8aJ_i oner ..... aoved, eeconded by C0881881oner S~h..n, ~o ~VYW "~ition ZO-I9-1, subject to tb8 CCPC'. Taco nld.~lon. ." Page 31 q4 -..,,--... .-.c.-".-",.-..c_...".......-......" March 28, 1989 C088issloner Saunders stated that he has concerns that the Board ot County Co..issioners will be evaluating requests for persission to sell alcohol, and he can see proble.. down the road with waivers belng r.quested. Planning Services Manager Baginski stated that there has been at least one situation where there is a shopping plaza, with a restaurant, and because they are approxiaately 400' away tro. a school, they are prohibited fro. applying for an alcoholic beverage license. HI'". noted that the intent of the waiver procedure is to iden- tify those particular instances, and natural buffers. spacing or barriers, 1.e. 6 or a lane intersections or boulevards that would allow the Board to waive those .ini.ua require.ents. C088issioner Saunders referred to Section "C", Page 3 of the Ordinance. which sets the rinding that the Board of Zoning Appeals aust aake before an application can be evaluated: " ...... is separated fro. an established school, church, public park or playground by natural or aan-aade boundaries. structures or other teatures which otfset or H8it the necessity tor such .ini.ua dlstance requireaent." He stated that everything will be separated by aan-aade or natural boundaries. noting that there is no detinition of "boundary". He indicated that every conceivable scenario can come before the Board and he feels that it this is to be opened up, the Board aay as well eliminate the separation altogether, becau.e It i. a fiction. Co..issioner Hasse stated that there js a distance that was pre- viously addressed as the Maya person .ight normally walk. Mr. Baginski stated that tro. Staft's point or view, a waiver request fro. an accepted standard would be reviewed and the appllcant would be required to justify to the Board's satistaction that there are reasons to grant the waiver. Co..issioner Volpe questioned why the variance procedure would not accomplish the saae results? County At~orney Cuyler stated that this i. not an ita. tha~ a Page 32 ,. t\!Þ .--,.---.,.. - March 28, 1989 variance can be applied ror. He indicated that he feels that the crl- teria can not be such better than it is, noting that one thing that would be considered is if the pri8ary use of the facility i. for the sale of alcoholic beverages, or it it is a secondary use. He noted that froa tiae to ti.e, there are situations where a Long John Silvers is selling beer, and there is a lake next to that racil1ty, with a church on the other side, and the arguaent is that no one froB the establi.haent will be stumbling over to the church. eo..issioner Volpe stated that the criteria to be reviewed by the Board which causes hia the Boat difficulty is the deteraination as to "whether the owner. le.see, invitee or user will be aaterially injured as a result or a waiver of a part or allot the distance requlreaent". He suggested that this con8ideration be eliainated. noting that such conditions a. hours ot operation, noise, light, etc. are a little easier for the Board to approach. In an.-.r to Co..issioner Saunders, Mr. Baginski .tated that the language contained in this ordinance is si8ilar to that of the area he just left. noting that a separation requireaent of 1,000 feet was establi.hed in that coaaunity. Opaa call for ~ qae.t1on. ~ 8Ot1on ... d8nied 3/2 ("""-t.-1C1D8r8 ~.r8 aDd Volpe o~). I tea Ma3 œD.....a~ 1'-11, Pn I T I OW zo- I .. 3, caea:nr I 'l'T DKVKLO PMIDI"1' D IVI 8 I 08 a........-u"" TIm 8OAJU) or \;\Nan COMMISSIOJIDS UQO'U'!IJIG AIr MUU_..:¡- 1'0 TIm COLLI" \;\N. ¡:r ZO.IJIO OIWI:LUrCE. SKC'fIOJr 10.15, 8In DJrlJa.OPI8JrT PL.I..8 - ADOPTED St1B.1ECT TO cepe I S UC~uATI0. AJfI) O"-BALr ADDITI08AL PLA8I180 POSITIO.S ~~VED -- -- Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily N~s on March 9, 1989, as evidenced by Aftidavit o! Publication tiled with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petitlon ZO-89-3, Coaaunity Development Division representing the Board ot County Co_is.ioners, requesting an aaendaent to the Colller County ZonIng Ordinance 82-2, Section 10.5. Site Development Plan. P 1 anIII: r lie:sc.~. 5~ated that the requested amendment deals with Section 10.5 of the Zoning Ordinance which sets forth provislons tor Page 33 q(, --,.",.- March 28, 1989 Site Developaent Plans (SDP). He indicated that this aaendaent i. in re.ponse to the findings and reco..endations identified in a report to the Board of County Co_issioners re quality growth and development throughout the County. He noted that one ot the recomaendations fro. this report which was accepted by the Board in October. 1987, was to retine or revise the current SOP procedure to make the. .ore effec- tive, and to provide greater accountability for quality growth throughout the County. Mr. Jfelson indicated that in order to i.pleaent this reco..en- dation, Staff is proposing .everal changes to the current SDP provi- sions. noting that the aost obvious proposed change i8 to reorganize and expand the provisions to clearly derine what an SDP is. and wha~ it i. intended to serve. Mr. Kelson advised that Staff is proposing that the SDP procedure be divided into a two phase sequence: Phase I will consi8t of a pre- liainery SDP which will concentrate on zoning, planning. and sIte d~sign considerations; and Phase II will consist of the tinal SOP which will concentrate on detailed inroraation necessary to show how the project will be constructed. Mr. Jfelson stated that the Boat 8igniticant change that is being proposed is when is a SDP required. and when is it not? He noted that under current provisions, a church. hospital or ottice building require. a SDP in the C-1 District, but these same uses do not require a SDP in the C-3 District. He indicated that another exaaple is a fast toad restaurant: it a drive-thru window is proposed in conjunc- tion with that restaurant. a SDP is required. but it there 1. not to be a drive-thru window, it would not require a SDP. and could go directly to the building permit stage. He noted that in order to eli- ainete these inconsistencies and to ensure quality developaent throughout the County, Staff is proposing that all developaent propo- sels be subject to both the preli8inary and final SDP, adding that the only exception would be for a single lot or parcel that i8 propo8ing a single-taally detached or duplex unit. Page 34 ...." . . """...........-...,,...-..,-..-. "--.""'.--" March 28, 1989 Mr. I.leon indicated that the final change that Start is propo.ing has to do with aoditications or aaendment. to a previously approved SDP. He stated that Statt is proposing criteria that would ditteren- tiate between a substantial and a lee. than substantial lIIodification, adding that it the proposed aoditication was deemed to be substantial, it MOuld be required to go through the entire SDP procedure. However, he noted, it the aodification was deeaed to be less than substantial. it would be handled adainistratively, without going through the SDP proce... Mr. Kelson advised that the CCPC held their public hearing on March 16, 1989, to revi~ the aaendaent. and unanimously reco..ended that the Board at County Coaaissioners approve the proposed provi- .ions. He noted that the CCPC did propose three minor retineaents to the -.endJlent to improve its clarity. adding that these _endments have been incorporated into the aaendaent as presented in the IJtecutlve Su-.ry. Mr. Kelson indicated that Statf conducted a workshop with the Development Services Steering Co..ittee, and they too have recoaaended .everal refineaents to the aaendment, which are highlighted in the ordinance. Be noted that the &Ost significant change proposed by the Coaaittee has to do with a better definition ot what type of develop- Bent would require a SDP, and relocating the landscape requirements for identitication during the final SDP process. He advised that Statf believes that the refineaent. as proposed by the Steering Co..ittee adds rurther guidance, coordination, and çlariticatlon to the propo.ed revIsions. and recommend that they be incorporated into the aaendaent, Mr. Kelson stated that the tiscal iapact of the proposed provi- sion.. if approved. will generate approxiaately 2-3 tiaes the number of SDP applications that the County currently receives. He indicated that in order to support and impleaent these provisions, as well as accoaaodate the increased volume in SDP applications in a tiaely and efficIent aanner, Statf is reco..ending that the Board authorlze the Page 3ð '\~ -"""",,-""""""""-""'.""-"""- .--.-- .. . March 28, 1989 hiring ot one a~ one half additional position. to the current Staff. Co..issioner Volpe questioned whether this subject will be incor- pora ted into the Land Developaent Regulations? Mr. Hel.on responded affiraatlvely. Project Revlew Services Manager Madajewskl stated that thls issue is soaetbing that was identified through the initial process ot creating Developaent Services a. one of the aanagement area. that needed to be looked at on a streaalining basis to obtain better effi- ciency in the entire process of approving building plan.. He noted that Staff is looking to Beet the Develop.ent Services co..itaent by creating a process that can be used enjoined into the Icard. Merrl11 contract C088i.sioner Hasse questioned who would aake the deteraination.. to whether a aodification was substantial or less than substantial? Mr. Jfelson replied that the County Manager or his designee would aake that deteraination. Mr. Baginski advised that the changes within the ordlnance are procedural in nature, and they are not that ditterent froB what is currently contained in Section 10,5. He noted th.t the intent is to divide the process into two steps, which is to separate the conceptual or planning review fro. the hard engineering so that any problem. can be identitied berore any hard engineering is done. Co..issioner Volpe que Jtioned who will receive the other half of the po.ition? County Manager Dorrill stated that typically a part-tiae indivi- duel will be hired. and the paying sources will be split with the nuaber of work hours shared between an existing full-tlme position. Developaent Services Acainistrator Pettrow advised that thf".re wa. a half-ti.. Planning Technician position. but the person lett that po.ition, leaving a half-tiae vacancy. There were no speakers either for or against this petition. C'.-tlK'lC11D6r IIh.anal:aen 8O98d, 88Gcmd0.4 by Co8aJ..loner ..... 8Dd carr led 1ID8D.18oaa 1..,. ~~ ~he public Marlng be cloee4. P8ge.e ""'~ ""....~,,~,,~,_.._._.. ".-. ..... "-"'.-"" March 21. 1... C 1 -1--- m.-n.. han 8O98d. 8e(;cmðe4 by Co8a.1..1oaer Øoodnlgb.~ ~o ~&_,- ~l~lOD ZG-e--3, 8dopt 1ng Or4in8Dc:. "-18. aDd ~Iovlng ODe ao4 --balt 8ddltlonal plazmlng poaitlona wlthln the Co8aœ11t:y DwveLopa8Dt Dl.1.100 Budget for riacal Year 1988-89. Co..issioner Volpe questioned the creation of the new positions, with regard to ti.ing, noting that bas~d upon gueøøtiaates of Staff resulting in the i.ple.entation or 100 Site Plan reviews to 200. and wondered if the hiring of the additional peopl~ should wait until everyone is settled in the n~ Developaent Services Building? Hr. Baginski advised that he intends to promote internally tor the Planner position. He indicated that there will be an e.inent work load with the adoption of the proposed ordinance. He noted that durlng the first year. there "ill be 250 plan increase. UpOD call for the qwttrt i 00, ~be 8)~lon carried UD8Di8:7u.81y tha~ tbe "'1- - Da8ber8d ao4 titled below be adopted aDd 8D~ered 1D~o ()rtit t ........ IIoak 80. 36: oaDIJLUfCZ '~le AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 82-2 THE COMPReHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUHTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 10.5. DEVELOPMeNT PLAN APPROVAL, BY CHAMGIHG THE TITLE AKD BY ADDIHG PARAGRAPHS OF INTENT, APPLICABILITY. DEFINITIOHS, PROCEDURES, STANDARDS, AMEHDMEHTS, AND VIOLATIO!CS; BY REPEALING PREVIOUS SUBSECTION 10.5, DEVELOPMENT PLAJf APPROVAL; BY PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND BY PROVIDI!CG AN EPPECTIVE DAT!. I~_"'" ORDDK&8C8 8~1', PS'!ITI08 a-8'-2&O, UIIIAJU) L. 'l'JIOKPICID, aKPItUD'TIJIQ '!D euu.,uu: CLOJI or IIAPLU, I.C. UQOU'fIG A uzon nat UP-I, 'fO GC GOLF COOb. DIS1'IlIC"l' rea PItOPDTT LOCA'!'ED A'l' TO .0R'l'HLUT QU.I.DItUI'f or 'l'1!JI: .L8¡&IUI~IOIf or BURJrI.O ~ DRIVE UD SOLA.lrA ROAD: 2.242 AC1tU - ADOPTED StJB.TKC"l' TO CCPC STIPS UD LZTTD nOM ATTO_~ PICDIOftTB Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily Ha"s on February 25, 1989, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed wIth the Clerk. public hearing was opened to consider Petitlon R-88-26C, Edwar d J. Thoapkins, representing The Country Club of Naples, Inc., requesting a rezone tro. RSP'-3, Residential Single-Paaily District to OC Golf Course District tor property located at the northe..t quadrant of the 1ntersection or Burning Tree Drive and Solana Road 1n Section Page 37 ,0° ----,..",",..-.-....,--....."".,...---..- ,......_,.._-,,~ March 28, 1989 1~. Township 49 South, Range 2~ East; 2.242 acres. Planner C.~chione indicated that surrounding zoning i. RSP-3 to the _st. ST and RO to the south, and ac to the east. She noted that this request is to rezone 2.242 acres, adding that the proposed rezone i. coapatible with surrounding land use. She indicated that the -in area of concern is that of accessory structures which aay be peraitted withln the Golf Course District. She stated that this area Is in close proxiaity to the City of !Caples wells. and there are specific prov1sions contained in the Petitioner's Ayreeaent Sheet, Ite- "i" through "q" which addresses any cont..ination that lIIayoccur fro. a aaintenance racility being located on site. Mr.. Cacchione stated that the CCPC held their public hearing on March 16. 1989, and reco..end approval, subject to changes in the Petitioner'. Agreeaent: Itea "g" relates to a drainage easeaent located along the southern property boundary, and there is a propo.al aubaitted by Attorney Pickworth regarding how the drainage ease.ent will be provided and the size; Ite. "i" per.its a septic tank, per with Collier County Public Health Unit and DER approval; Itea "j" .hould be aaended to read: "Any facility containing hazardous or toxic wa.t.. shall be located on the east end of the site. " Attorney Donald Pickworth stated that a 3,000 square foot facUity is proposed for the site. He indicated that there is presently a drainage ditch running along the southern boundary of the property, and a 30' right-of-way below it. He advised that he has had discus.ion with Public Works Adainistrator Archibald as to a solution, noting that an agree.ent has be~n arranged, whereby for the first 1/2 of the length of the property (3U'). the Petitioner will prepare an excavation into which drainage pipe. can b~ placed by the County. Be IndIcated that tor the reaaining 344'. the Petitioner will rebuild the drainage ditch, and tie into it, He noted that this construction will extend 8'-10' to the Petitioner's property, and upon coapletlon, an eaaeaent will be given to the County. Public Work. Adainistrator Archibald advised that the drainage Page 38 /0 l .. ,-"'....."......""'... -".....,.",.-.--.-..- March 28, 1989 ...e..ut in que.tion is a result of trying to coaplete the Goodlette- Prank Road outfall. He indicated that he is requesting authorizatIon to work with the applicant to obtain an eas..ent fro. hi. which will serve his needø and the needs for Twin Lakes. He noted that based upon the stipulations as outlined by Attorney Pickworth, Staft con- curs, but the Board of County CO..i8sioners should recognlze that a purchase order in the approxiaate aaount of $25.000 will be forth- co.ing to purchase the pipe at this location. He stated that there are three aajor outralls along Goodlette-Frank Road fro. Pine Ridg. Road south to Golden Gate Parkway. He noted that of those three out- falls, this i. the only one that is partially opened, and a. ~i.. goe. on, the County will want to install the stora drain -vstea for this outfall. and to obtain ea.e..nts turther south. Attorney Pickworth stated that he has set forth the ite.. as discussed in a letter addressed to Mr. Archibald, and suggested that if agreeable, Stipulation "g" should read: "Easement sufficient to provide the reaoval or runofr as currently directed fro. the we.t, In accordance with the Letter or 3-21-89 to be attached to this agree_nt." There were no speakers either for or against this Petition. ~ i -1 oaer tJhan..8 han aoved. aecond8d by CO881_1oaer ..... and carrIed Dn8ftt8ftg8I~, that the public hearing be clo88d. c-t_iooer Shan...h4n aoved. eeconded by C0881seiooer ..... ao4 carr ieeS 1m8D iaau.81 y. to approve Petition ft-88-2&C. subject ~o the CCPC '. 1'.... nndatlon, including the le~ter froa AttorD8T Plc~~h, htlt.s.-r'. AvlJ.. ..~, and that ~ ord1D8nc:e - ~~~ 8Dð t1 t1ed belCM be 8døp~ed ao4 8D~.red 1n~0 Ord1DaDce Book 80. 30: OJU)I~ 8--11 AM ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDIHANCE 82-2 THE COMPREHEHSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UHINCORPORATED AREA OP COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA, BY AMEHDING THE OFFICIAL ZOHING ATLAS MAP HUMBER 49-2~-~ BY CHAlfGIHG THE ZOHING CLASSIPICATION PROM "RSF-3" RESIDENTIAL 5IKGLE-FAMILY TO "GC" GOLP COURSE ON THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OP THE INTERSECTION OF BrmNI!CG TRItE DRIVE AND SOLANA ROAD: SECTION 1~. TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST, COHTAIHIHG 2.242 ACRES, MORE OR LESS; AND BY PROVIDIKG FOR Alf EFFECTIVE DATE. Page 39 /°1, ,-,--,-- ,........-----.,.",-..--.-....---- March 28, 1989 I~_. 8CI ~.nn08 8.-71&. PKTI'rIO8 AV-81-OO2. COU'!.&L JDIOIJtDIU)JQ ~. x-=., AØDTS J'O1t URIIuœ DQOUT1:JIG VACA'!I08 cø 'fJm 00' ItOAD ..AIk-px C8 'fJm DU or LO'!S 27 1'1DW 38, COLLID \Nuau: ~.I.08 PA.I:IC, PIU.S& 18 - ADOPTÐ> WI'I'II COJIDITIO. THA'! INIDDC& O~ 8O8D - ~~rTLU Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily H.ws on March 12, and 19, 1989, as evidenced by Atfidavit of Publication flIed witb the Clerk. public hearing was opened to consider Petition AV-89-002. Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. as Agents tor Owners. requesting vacation or the 50' road easeaent on the rear of Lots 21 through 38, Collier County Production Park, Phase 1 B, so that Petitioner aay better utilize the property. Public Works Adainistrator Archibald stated that this itea is, in .slHtnce, to vacate road easeaents that were part of the Production Park Plat, Phase lB. He noted that the location of this plat is on the north side or Radio Road, i..ediately east or Co..ercial Boulevard. He indicated that part of the plat sets forth a 50' drainage eaaeaent along the easterly boundary of this project. He advised that as part or the verbiage in the plat, there is an indica- tion that the ~O' easeaent is tor road purposes. noting that there Is a need to clarltiy this. He stated that the applicant has subaitted a petition to clarify that by vacating the intent of the &0' drainage ease.ent tor road purposes, but indicating that it can be used for road drainage. He stated that this easeaent serves the internal streets ot the develop.ent, and it borders Livingston Road which will be extending froB Radio Road north. He noted that Staft is r~co.- aending that this vacation be approved. There were no speakers either for or against thls Petition. '"-t..l00er Shan-haft aoved, 88CODded by Co8a1ss1oner ~tgh~ 8Dd carr 184 1ID8D 18OWIl y, ~ha~ th8 public hearIng be clo88ð. Mr. Archibald stated that there is a concern regarding the prell- Binary approval and final acceptance of the streets and the 1nfrastructure in the plat. He noted that Staff 1s reque.ting tha~ the resolution not be recorded until all 1ssues are resolved regardlng Page 40 lIP ",-~....__..,_.. - .'-"-'--.."-' ..-.......---,-... March 28, 1989 .ecurlty to ..sure coapletion ot ~he cona~ruction work and the 84in- tenanc.. Øe .~i8ed that there Is a bond which is being renewed. Be noted that upon renewal or the bon", the resolution could be recorded. Mr. Gary P1ckel. ot Aerial Investaents, Managing Partner at the Production Park, stated that he was required to aaintain a Maintenance Bond. He noted that this bond was due to expire at the end of May, but hI. accountant was not aware ot the tact that there were further requir.-ents on the property, and he requested that the bond be can- celled. H. indicated that the request to cancel the bond has been wi thdrawn, and he will provide evidence of the bond to Mr. Archibald. "'-i..~ Khaft.8h8ft 8CI'9'8d, 84t<;onðe4 by Co8al..100er GoodD.1ght aDd C8Z'r 1ed ....... i 8ftOQ.81 y, that Petition AV-8tt-OO2, be 8f1'1'",....Ir~, 81Ib j eet 'to U. caad1t:1oa. that evldeDc8 of ~ bcmd be 8UbII1t~8d ~o Mr. ~t"'l"', 8Dd that: beoluUon 89-7IA be 8ðopted. Page U , , I -_. -- -....--- ..". ".".,"""..'."..""'...""'..-"-'- March 28, 198i I t:- 4MC2 C8:D---- ..-20 Ø'r.&JIt,ISJIDIIIiJ 'fD COLLID cuU.n 8lAra POLLO"rXOII ~~~ ~.,.. 81' ItEPULIJIO J.81) l:turlUal~IJIØ OIWIJLUfC'K 1'-81 - ADOhlW Legal notice having been published in the !Caples Daily K~8 on March 9, 1989, as evidenced by Aftidavit of Publication tiled with the Clerk. public hearing was opened to consider an ordinance establishing the Collier County Water Pollution Control proqraa by repeallng and superseding Ordinance 85-31. Environaental Services Adainistrator Lorenz stated that this i.. h~lteepiDA¡ He.. noting that in Kove.her. 1984 a referendua was passed that created the Water Pollution Control Prograa. but li.Hed its scope to aonitoring studies and abating the errects ot sewer dispo.al in the County's water resources. He advised that a reteren- dua was held in March ot 1988, which expanded the scope ot the prograa to protect ground water, fresh water, surface water and other non- ~idal water resources fro. all sources ot pollution, without increasIng the 8illage ot one-tenth of a .1ll. He indicated that the proposed ordinance is to retlect the wording ot that referendua into an ordinance that creates the Water Pollution Control again with this particular scope of activities. C t-1c8er ~lgh~ 8O'ftrd, 88<:0D4e4 by Co8a1_1C1D8r ~hCI 8Dd carried --t~ly, tba~ the pabl1c bearing be cloeeð. r.-t-.1C1D8r Qoodnlgh~ 8O'ftrd, 8eCODde4 by Co881-J0D8r Volpe and carr ... T t-.ly, tba ~ ~ ord1naDce - øuabered ao4 ~ J t: led. be low be 8dopt:8d ao4 8D~ered in Ord1D1'mC8 Book .0. 3&: OKDIJIAJrCK '.-20 AN ORDIKANCE ESTABLISHIHG THE COLLIER COUHTY WATER POLL~TIO!C CO8TROL PROGRAM AHD PROVIDING FOR ITS PURPOSES AND IMPLEMEKTATIOH: PROVIDIKG SHORT TITLE; PROVIDING paR APPLICABILITY; PROVIDIKG FOR I'tÆI)UG A!CD LEVY OF TAXES; PROVIDIHG FOR CREATIOH OF A WA'l'ER POLLUTIO" CONTROL ADVISORY BOARD; REPEALIHG AND SUPERSEDI!CG COLLIER COUHTY ORDINANCE NO. 85-31; PROVIDIHG FOR COHFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. I 1:88 . 8Ca C8:D_a- ..-21, AaJlDIJIO OItDlJUJICK 72-1 COUlD COtnrrT SDD"I' U..u.L88 DI8ftJ:C'1.', BY ADDIJIO CarrA.x. DIS'l'IJIO S'fJt&U LIG11'l'D1U DI8D1C'n AIm ~IJIO '!1IOSK OIWIJLUICU U"l'ABL1SBI.a 'l'JIOSK DIsnICTS AS ~u--x UR'f IIOIfICIPAL SDVICU '!AXI.O UJlITS - ADOP'!'KD, DCWDIJIØ MIIICO ULMD Page 42 I' tf ~ ~..<.~<.-._._, ,0<., <. <.....O<'O<'---_.«""""--".~.' March 28, 1989 Legal noti=e having been published in the !Caples Daily H~s on March 9, 1989. as evidenced by Affidavit at Publication flIed with the Clerk. public hearing was opened to consider an ordinance aaending Ordinance .0. 72-1, Collier County Street Lighting District. by adding certain existing Street Lighting Districts and repealing tho.e ordinances establishing those districts as Street Lighting Municlpel Servlce Taxing Units. Public Works Adainistrator Archibald noted that each year at this ti-. the budgets are analyzed ror the upcoaing Lighting Dlstrict8. Be indicated that if the 8illages tar those saaller Districts are within 1/4 8ill ot the County-wide Street Lighting District 8illag., they are recoaaended to be asse8bled Into the County-wide DIstrict. B. stated that Staff is recoaaending that the following indivldual Districts be consolidated into the Collier County Lighting Distrlct: Collier County Production Park Edgewlld Subdivision roxtlre CUlt. 1 6 3 Ben4eraon Creek Park 18p8rial Golf Estates .4 ~lnga Lake Unit Two ~~ Lake Unit Three Mar co Is I and .apl.. Park Rallb8ad Induatrial Park VIctoria Park II WIlloughby Place Cape Cod Estates Crescent Lake Estates World 'l'ennis Center Mr. Archibald advised that there is one exception to the above- na.aed Districts. He noted that dollar-wise. Marco Island is fairly large. and it aay be desired to keep this District 8.eparate. H. indi- cated that the Board aay wish to delete incorporating the Marco Island District into the Collier County Lighting District. C088issioner Shanahan stated that he has been asked to petition the Board to specifically reaove Marco Island trom the proposed ordI- nance. ~t-1GD8T Gooc2D~gb.t 1IO98d, 8eCODde4 by Co8al_1GD8T """"h8.n 8DII 08rr 1- 1ID8I11-..1 y, that ~be public beariDg be cloeecl. In answer to CO..i88ioner Volpe, Mr. Archibald advised that the Page 43 lit -...--..,,- . 0"" ....-........,-....--,..,.....,...,-, March 28, 1989 purpoae of incorporatinq the individual Dlstricts into ~he County-wide District is to eli8inate several separate funds, which al.o eli8inate. overhead costs and tinancing costs, and it i. a way to streaaline all of the Coun~ District.. Coun~ Manaqer Dorrill indicated that historically. a District could not be included in the Collier County District until that sub- dlvision had constructed it. own facilities, and once that was accOllpl i.hed , that subdivision could be included in the Collier County Lighting Di.trict. ~t..laaer Øooðnlgh~ aoved, 88CODded by CO881_1aaer ~.h8ft ao4 C8IT 1 ect ananJ.80a.81 y, that ~ abov8-l1s~ed str_~ l1gh~lng 418ttlcta be 8IISð8d to the Collier Coun~ 8tree~ Ligh~1.ng DI81:rlc~, ezcl111111J.Dg 8I8rco Island, and tha~ ~be Ord1ft--C8 .. u....t:-red and ~l~lect below be 8dop1:8d and entered into Ordln.ence Book .0. 3ð: ORDIJIAJICE 89-21 Alf ORDINANCE AMEHDIHG ORDINA!CCE NO, 72-1. BY ADDING CERTAIN EXISTING STREET LIGHTIHG MUHICIPAL SERVICE TAXI!CO U~ITS AND DISTRICTS IDE!CTIFIED AS COLLIER COUBTY PRODUCTIO~ PARK STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UBIT, EDGEWILD SUBDIVISION STREET LIGHTI!CG MUHICIPAL SERVICE TAXI!CG UNIT, FOXFIRE U~ITS 16 3 STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXIHG UNIT. HE~DERSON CREEK ROAD STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXIHG UNIT, IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES 4 STREET LIGHTING MUHICIPAL SERVICE TAXIHG UNIT, ~INGS LAKE UNIT TWO STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE 'l'AXING DISTRICT, KINGS LAKE UNIT 3 STREET LIGHTIHO MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING DISTRICT. NAPLES PARK LIGHTING MUKICIPAL SERVICE TAXI!fG DISTRICT, RAILHEAD I!CDUSTRIAL PARK STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT, VICTORIA PARK II LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXIJIG UKIT, WILLOUGHY PLACE STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXIKG DISTRICT. CAPE COD ESTATES STREET LIGHTING MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT, CRESCENT LAKE ESTATES STREET LIGHTIHG MUXICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UHIT, AND WORLD TENNIS CE!CTER STREET LIGHTIKG MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXIHG UNIT TO THE COLLIER CO~ATY LIGHTIKG DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE HOS. 81-79, 81-78, 86-43, 82-112, 86-44, 80-!>2, 81-33, 78-41. 80-2ð, 81-77, 79-43, 80-11ð. 82-101, 82-66, AND 82-100; PROVIDING COHFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDIHG AH EFFECTIVE DATE, I tea HCa ~ "'8OA, n'!I'l'IO. aMP-II-I, Q. 0JtA.DT MI.oa .um ASSOC., P.". ----¡;~ 8A%U MII.I.S Dnm:.oPlCDl"l' CO., UQOU'!I.O StJ1IZ)IVI8I08 III.8'!D f'LA8 AJIPIIOV&L roa 0A'1'U JaI.I.S I. 'I'D WILLOUOJIBY ACIœS mP1I'WWJ.t, ADA OI88Iftx.8 o. 'I'D WKS1'WAaD 1U.....:ltIO. or WICELlrR DIUft - ADOI"t'KD IIn1I JJ -'.D 8TIPVLArIOIIS Legal notice having been published in the Haples DaIly News on March 12. 1989, as evidenced by Atfidavit ot Publication flIed with Page 44 tic, -",.._---" . ., """"""""","'"""""'..'-'-" March 28, 1989 the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition SMP-88-8, filed by Gates Mills Developaent Co., represented by Q. Grady Minor & Assoc., requesting Subdivision Master Plan approval for Gates Mill. located in the south halt or the north half of the southwest quarter ot the southwest quarter of Section 24, Township 48 South, Range 2& East, consisting ot 28 lots, all of which tront on Wickliffe Drlve Extended; Wicklifte Drive is further located north of Iaaokalee Road in Willoughby Acres area. Project Planner !Cino indicated that this petition is a reque.~ for Subdivi.ion Master Plan application consisting of 28 lots on 10 acre. ot land in the Willoughby Acres area. He indicated that the appllca- tion has been reviewed by all applicable County 8gencies, and they have no objection to approval of this Plan. subject to the Stipulations as contained in the Petitioner's Agreeaent. Mr. øino advised that since this petition was presented to the Collier County Planning Co..i.sion, Start had the opportunity to revi- sit the site. and have round that amendaents are desirable to the plans to facilitate the proposed extension of Airport-Pulling Road øorth. 8e noted that approval of the CCPC neglected to include any considerations tor the Airport Road extension. He noted that in addi- tion. Staff indicated the need to Master Plan this area so they could have a &Ore objective basis to decide which roads should be cul-de- s.cs and which roads should be interfaced with Airport Road and Livingston Road. He advised that Statf is reco..ending that Wickliffe Drive be extended to the Airport-Pulling Road Extension, He indicated that if this action is deeaed appropriate by the Board of County Co-i..ioners, Stipulation "G" will allow a 1,600 rt. cul-de-sac to be waived in favor of the condition a. included the Executive Suaaary. hpe" Mr. !Cino stated that the amended stipulation as contained In the Executive Suaaary hedges a bit in the .ense that ir Airport-Pulling Road is not extended, the County should have the right to preserve the land ot the developaent to be interfaced with the land to the Page 4& 111 ._,~--, '-.----- ... ".. ,.. . _ .- ~. -.--. ,-.........-."'...---,,---- March 28. 1989 north. Øe noted that in view of the need to have a flexible stipulation. Statt has worded the new stipulation such, that it account. for this happening, and it does not Occur, Staff he. provlded tor taking out Lot 13 and extending the road north to provide inter- facing with land further north. Mr. Wino indicated that Public Works Adainistrator Archibald haa expressed a desire to acquire the entirety ot Lots 14 and 1& whlch are the laat ~ lots on the Subdivision Plan. He noted it that action ls taken, the intent at the new stipulation will have been achieved. He advised that the applicants have indicated that they are acre coator- table with an additional stateBent in that stipulation suggesting: Should the County acquire proposed Lots 14 and 15 In thelr entirety then all or the objectives ot this stipulation shall have been aet and proposed Lot 13 is released froB any reservation requlreaent and aay be disposed of by the developer as a building site. Mr. "ino advised that the stipulation as worded, without the applicants' suggested language. indicates that Lots 13, 14. and 1& will be withheld tor a period up to five years. He noted that the applicants do not teel that this is appropriate since they are wIlling to convey Lots 14 and 15 to the County, and they would like 88surance that upon doing so. they will be able to retain Lot 13 for a buildIng site. Mr. .lno indicated that Stat! is reco..ending approval of this petltion, subject to the stipulations as contained in the Petitioner'. Agree..nt, with the inclusion of --ended Stipulation "G". Mr. Mark Minor, representing the Peti~ioners, advised that he 1. not in agreeaent with the aaended Stipulation. He advlsed that he would like to delete the reservation of Lot 13, and enter into an agree..nt with the County to convey Lots 14 and 15. Mr. Archibald stated that Stat! foresees extending Alrport Road. and aa a result. a nuaber o! platted lots will be encuabered. He indIcated that it an agreeaent can be arranged to purch... those lot. at an appropriate price, both parties will wl11 achieve what i. desired in t~ Subdivision Master Planning process. He advls.d ~hat Page 45 t L ~ ",-,.""",.""""""'.""-.'- '."" ...--..,.." March 28, 1989 Lot. 14 and 16 are 250' in Ifmgth. and the County needs 160' tor road purpo.es, notir~ that the re.ainder i. what wl11 have to be nego- Uated. In terw. of price. Mr. MInor 8tated that he i. willIng to dedicate the we.t 100' teet of the project and then enter into a purcha.e agreement with the Coun~ tor the reaainder of those two lots at a fair aarket prIce. Coaai..ioner Volpe noted that he feel. that the suggestlon is an excellent one, adding that In thIs Instance, there 1. not the physlcal barrIer whIch existed with so.. other .treets In another petltlon. Mr. Archibald indicated that one advantage of the stlpulatlon aa it ls written. 1. that it gives the County leverage in negotlating an acceptable agree..nt tor the purchase ot Lots 14 and 16. Be noted that If an acceptable agreeaent is not reached for these two lots, the County has the opportunity to encuaber Lot 13. He notttd that 1t an agr....nt can be reached for Lots 14 and 15. thIs wl11 release Lot 13 coapletely. Mr. Phll1p Pugh. Petitioner. advised that hIs concern 1. that It a road needs to be extended north, it can be done with Lot 14, but not Lot 13. He indicated that Lots 14 and 16 will serve every need that the County bas. He referred to the revised Stlpulatlon "0", the flr.t tour paragraphs, noting that the tlr.t optlon can be achleved Wlth Lot 14, bat not Lot 13. Mr. .11. Vano., Petitioner. .tated that he and hI. partner bought the 8eCond five acres with the hopeful intention of developing It, and pre.erving the cypress. He indicated that It Airport Road ls extended, they will be loosing the Cypress, and the ~o lots whlch were buIldable. wIll beco.e Northless. He indicated that Lots 14 and 16 eocoapaas 2 of the 6 acres. C0881s.ioner Volpe stated that he realizes what the Petltloner 1. aey1ng. but he 1s asking tor a variance to exceed the standard cul-de- .ac length. Mr. Vano. IndIcated that It 100' of Lots 14 and 16 are dttdlcated to the CQ1¡nty, and the reaalnder ha. to be purchased for reaaons to Page 47 , let .'.'.""-'-----""- -'--' .........-.... March 28. 1985Þ relocate the cypre.s head. the road will extend to Airport Road, and 1t w111 not be a cul-de-sac. There were no other speakers either tor or against th18 pe~ition. ~..icDer Sh->-~ 8O'98d, 88COnded by Cc-..1.aiODn' ..... 8Dd carried ---i~l,., tha~ ~ public bearlDg be cloeed. C- i - icDer Shan- ~ 1IO'V8d. 88Conded by C0881a.loswr Ba88e, to 8C;OrItiJl tb8 r8< -1etlana ot Start, ap~l'Óylng P8~I~ion SMP-I'-., sub- j 8C1: to t:he 8 t1 pal.a U ana, and t:he inclusion ot ~ 8U~a1:1OD "S., t:MJ..l>f, 8dap'tlDg 1l88o1uUon 8s.-IOA. C0881ssioner Volpe noted that the reservation of Lot 13 is tor up to 5 years. and questIoned what will take place to aake thi8 less than 5 years? Planner .1no Indicated that whenever satlstactory arrangeaent. are &&de w1th respect to the acquis1tion ot Lots 14 and 15. He noted that the t1ae tr... 1s within the control ot the applicants. Dpaa call tor t:he q1I88 t Ion . t:he 801: 1 OD e&rr 1 ed Dft8ft t 8Oa81,.. Page 48 ,11 March 28, 1989 Iu.~ œI1"".- .'-22, CUA'!IJIICJ 'l'1!JI: A.DVISOKY C<8{['!TD o. 'fJDI: 1IfWWT .'S - ~"'- Legal notice having been published in the !Caples Daily "ews on March 9. 1989, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flIed with the Clerk. public hearing was opened to consider an ordinance creating ~he Advisory Coaaittee on the Hoaeless. County Attorney Cuyler advised that this is a standard tore ordi- nance for creating an Advisory Co..ittee for the Hoa.less. C088i..ioner Volpe indicated that he obtained the report tha~ we. prepared by the Ad Hoc Co..ittee tor the Roaeless, notlng that he was looking at the tunctions, powers and duties of the co..ittee, and questioned whether the assistance plan aspect has so.. financial responsibility? As.istant County Manager HcLeaore advised that the co..ittee worked with Start to develop a plan which i. required for grant appli- cation. eo..is.ioner Saunders asked Mr. McLeaore it, in his opinlon, the County will be required to co..it any funds of any kind? Mr. McLe1lore stated that this will not require a coaaitaent or County tunde. t" i..1oDer ~h.an 8W8d, 88Conðed. by eo.a.t881oner Goodnlgh~ 8Dd carr 1ed 1InMID t80Q81 y. that the public beariD9 be clO88CS. C t-l~ 901pe 8W8d, 88Conðed. by Co8aJ..ioner ..... IID4 C8rrl.. -t-..ly, ~ha~ ~ ord1nance - nuabered IID4 1:1 ~lttd below be 868ptecI aDd 8D~ered 1n~o Ord"?8nCe Book 110. 315: ORDIJIAJICZ -.-22 AØ ORDINANCE CREATIHG THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE HOMELESS; PROVIDING FOR APPOIHTMENT AND COMPOSITION: SETTIHG FORTH THE TERMS OF OFFICE; PROVIDING FOR REMOVAL FROM OFFICE. FAILURE TO ATTEND MEETIHGS; PROVIDING FOR OFFICERS, QUORUM, RULES OF PROCEDURE; PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES; SETTING FORTH THE Ft1JfCTIONS. POWERS AHD DUTIES OF THE COMMITTEE; SETTIHG FORTH THE DUTIES OF THE PUBLIC SERVICES ADHIHISTRATOR OR HIS DESIGNEE; PROVIDING FOR REVIEW PROCESS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Iu. nu Jll)u.aI --,+Ia.X" "'147 ADOP'!KD c t-'-r 8oodnlgh~ 8W8d, sec;on4o.4 by Cc8ai_loner 1nuofta'Mln 8IId C8rr 1aot -- t ---œsl y, tha~ 8udge~ a~~ -.-141 be 8Idosñttd. page.9 \.Jt .-_..""-.... _......,-,._-_..,._~.._..,..__..,,~_... ,..- ..---.-- .... March 28, 1989 ~ 011 Dt8CQ'!l8IC8 1'0 n PT.AC8D 01( rvTUKa AGDD.LS C088i..ioner Volpe stated that with regard to the ACLF petition which ~ heard earlier, there see.. to be a deficiency that is not addressed regarding density requirements in the rural area of the Estate.. He indicated that this is an i.sue that needs to be explored. C0881s.ioner Volpe noted that a nuaber of people within the past couple of weeks have co...nted on the fact that they had not receIved any notice that there was a petition pending for a Provisional Use. or a Rezone. Be indicated that the current requirement i. to notify those within 300' of the affected property. He stated that he feels that. proce.s should be considered to provide better notice to people who aay be aftected. Co..l.sioner Saunders stated that an article appeared In the"ew York '!1... entltled "Rede.ign 'l'oilets As W.apon In The Mar Agalnat Drought". He indicated that the article talks about reducing the aaount of water tor toilets by 80~. He noted that perhaps thIs item could be placed on a future agenda for discussion. ... ""'-t-.10D8r Volpe 1IO'9WC1, eec;0Dðe4 by eo.d_l00er ----tght 8Dd carr 18d -- t ..... I." that ~ following 1~... UDder ~ Con88Dt .'1Th4e be ~lv.-d and/or adop~ed: I~ nUl PDIAL PLA'! or ~aIU T u'w1J OJrI'! 1 II - WIn S'!IPULA'!IO8 1. That the final plat not be recorded until the required iapro- veaent. have been constructed and accepted or until approved security is received tor the incoapleted improvement. and that construction shall be coapleted within 36 aonths of the date of this approval. It8a n..u NnØ8CTIG8 O. LID U .1O1Df 1ID1U'JI1/:lJu:niJlxD MOJIIU ... 'AU See Page ~5-A.1 " I~ ~"1 118818 -. .42, ..3, &71, &72, &73, J.81) &14 A'! LAD ~ -Tal', ..- ~~-I See Pages ~..5. B. I - B." I~ ~4Cl hg8 &0 1~1 " "<.,,, . <----<..,."..<...... .-. -.- March 28. 1989 . BID "--1377, I'OJ( ISALLrIELD ruCI.O AT SJI.ADOINL.AM1f SCHOOL, '!O SMIn rDC8 I1J 'l'1!JI: MiOVJrr 0' Ii. U 7 . 2 0 Legal notice having been published in the Haples Daily Hews on February 27, 1989, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed wlth the Clerk. bids were received until 2:30 P.M. on March 15, 1989, to consider Bid 689-1377 for ballfield fencing at Shadowlawn School. 1~- .1~2 1tESOLOTI08 1--81.&. COJrT1tACTUAL AGUmaJn' WIn STAn or rLOlUDA DBP ARn.... ,¡- or CC»8«II'I .L 'l'T Arr A IRS, O. BDALP or '1'BK HE.AL'!1I OJfI'!, 'fa OB'fADr caAJr'f rtnrDI.O U '1'BK AMOt1JIT or 87.090 FOR. BULn SDVICES See Pages --5ff-ð . I - e,l / It- .1~3 APPOl."""",UJ or orrICDS TO COLLID COUJrTY AGRICULTURAL rAIR. AJr]) IXPOS ITI 011, nrc. BOAJIlD or DlllECTOKS Appointaent of the 1989-90 Officers for the Collier County Agricultural Fair & Exposition, Inc. Board of Directors as follow.: w. J. "Bill" Hill President Robert R. S.ith Vice-President Jo Selvia Secretary Jaaes C. Giles Treasurer Rolly Chernoft Collier County Bar Association Joanne Loukonen Co88unity Civic Association Bonnie Fauls Collier County Agriculture Department Dr. Thuraan Hux Collier County School System It- .1.Dl usourn08 1--I2/CWSI9-6, AJrI) RUOLDTIO. 19-13/CWS89-7. AO"fBOR.IZIJrO ACQO'I8ITIOir or PDPrroAL .O.-EXCLUSIVE tn'ILI'l'T DSDIEJrrS WInI. DlsnICT8 1 . 4. "US'! .\B1) SOOTH 8APLES SAJrI'!ARY SEWD SYð'f.us" PRO.7EC'I' See Page. .5 5- D. I - 1). J.9 It- .14D2 5ID "--U73. FOR. AJrJroAL AJrALT'fICAL SDVICZS '1'0 DVIR.OLAII, I.C. I. TIU AMCru8T or 8'.300 Legal notice having been published in the Haples Daily Hews on February 14, 1989. as evidenced by Affidavit or Publication filed with the Clerk, bids were received until 2:00 P.M. on February 23, 1989, to consider Bid 689-1373, ror Annual Analytical Services. Page 61 rtt ., ..--..--_,____h.'- -,---- March 28, n8St 1 t88 ft 4Da ~ OW .an IIAPLa IJI1N6n.u.", pAJat SDfD J'ICIt.Ina See OR Book 1428. Pages 199-214 It- ft~ AC:Ca'D8a or M'lD rACILI'!IÞ - C1IUDOJDI&!' AT '!Jm VDrnAaD8 See OR Book 1428. Pages 229-24~ I tea ft 4M AiCCD"'rA8CZ at1 _'!at PACII.Inu - ~.....n COVE. A CO.~n~ See OR Book 1428, Page. 21~-228 It88 #1~ ~ . ~ or .... PACILInU - JUVD Jt.UCJI. PIIA.n II See OR Book 1430, Pages 1076-1087 1t88 "81 PV8L%C - a -nIIr MD 8ft J'OIt &PIUI. 4, 1 .., , '!O AMaD carrzn CArD OJ' PØ8UO { ..._~ AJID ImCUaIT'!' '!O '!JtOLJ'..n $:r.T_, DIe., AJID .nJ.&8 A. ~ 818/& '!.D..J. '!UX I t88 ft 481 ItIN'>l ....n08 '!O ICaCCt7TK .a.......,au I"¡..u.;uu..I:r .&.G"....... ~ ðfW.f. TIlt &11ft r... exMI.-r ~U q R'IGGIJrS PASS &aTInCu.r. ItKD See PaQes ..E S - £, I - £. Y Itea #1"2 8m -"-ln4, PItO..JKCT A (&aTIncu.r. ItKD (';()hlaUCTIO8 A'! PAVZLIO8 DY Aanncx.u. au SIR) '!O o.u: JUDO KQVIPICD"l CO., IJfC. Dr '!D AIIOOII'r OW 8H,UO, A.IID l\&M;(rrIOJr or 'lDD-P&aT I~ UTtr&IUI COLLI" ÇOCh" :r (. 'I'D Clft or IYPGLADa AlII) au IU EOOIPICD"l co. Legal notice havinQ been pUblished in the Naples Daily !C~s on February 1 ~, 1989, as evidenced by Attldavit ot Publlcatlon tiled Mith the Clerk, blds were received until 2:30 P.M. on March 1, 1989, ~o consider Bid 689-1374, Project A (Artitlcial Reef Constructlon at Pavl11on Eay Artiflcial Reet Slte). See pages...5"' G - F, I -F /3 . I t88 .. 68a 8m -"-1aGe, 8UOY 8'10%- J'OIt AJrI'Incu.r. 1tZU'S, A8IAJU) Jt88Cnmtm '!O UY8{ "'-~.l08 8DVICD, DIe., AJID "'1II&Jmm) '!O MR. ~. W. .... ~ - Dr 2'D AMOOJr'l' or . 5 . 7 5 a Itea #1411 D8OI.Uno8 .".., APPOInx&a-r or DOItCAS r. IIOIIAJU) '!O '!D D8IOK.AJ.D LI..-rUlllil AIm 8&At7rrPICATIO. ADVISORY CO88IIrrn See Page ./)"5- Af.¡ Page 52 \1-tt """",,"""""--"--"-----' .._---~' March 28, 198t Xu. ftUI ~C8 """', CAJlCELUU 'fJI8 ACC1mAL 01' '!ADS O. A POIt'n08 01' LOTS U . 20 , A8D 21. CAST II.\PLU U ~ T KIAL P AJtX See Page ..5' .G - Nfl . I~- .1".12 ~08 ....a, DKSIGIL\1'IJIG 'fKJDIS 01' OFFICI: lOR COLLID eou.n COD8 ...-rI -~ . lIfT lOAD .....,~ See Page o-Gg-- .J. I I~- n«1 CÞu"l.C&T'P 01' ÇOU:&C'fIO8 PRabTLU BY PItOPD'rT APPftAIsø. - TAlfGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY 1988 No. 1988-85 Dated 03/16/89 .0. 1988-86 Dated 03/20/89 Xu. ftC2 8ZD& 8A.DI 1'D8 FOR 18&1'K JIO8. a3.62, ""75, a5807, aeo8', "7Ial, "'28. "'.7. .'13,. ~40",'0 Xu. ft4& 8I~..-.ovw C(>Af¡..~& "LED ~/0Jt ÂAI&KKÆD The following correspondence was filed and/or reterred as indi- cated below: 1. Meaorandua dated 02/10/89 to All Recipients of the Florida Retire8ent Syste. Rules, fro. Virginia W. Bryant, Retire8en~ Research Supervisor Research, Education & PolIcy, Dept. of Adainistration. re Florida Retire.ent Syste. Rule Aaend8ent. - Rule Package 1988-I, eftective February 7, 1989. Reterred to Huaan Resources and filed. 2. Letter dated 03/17/89 fro. Margaret M. Stanek, Lt, Col, USAF. advising that Tactical Air Coaaand has recently approved funding for an Environaental Impact Statement (EIS) assesslng the establishment of the Cypress ~ilitary Operations Area (MOA) in south central Florida. F11ed 3. Letter dated 03/17/89 and accident report fro. Jacob E. Colgrove Law Offices, advising that he has been retained by Elizabeth Duggar re Elizabeth Duggar v. Collier County, \ Florida. Referred to Neil Dorrill. Ken Cuyler, Leo Ochs, George Archibald and filed. 4. Petition DCA Docket Ho. 88-NOI-ll01-(H) re: Collier County Growth Manageaent Plan adopted by Ordinance Ho. 89-06 on 01/10/89. Reterred to BCC, Reil Dorril1. Frank Brutt, Stan Litsinger, Ken Cuyler, and fUed. 6. He.orandua dated 03/07/89 tram Lewis O. Burnside. .]r., Director, Division of Houslng and Coaaunity Development, DCA, re Pr~curement ot Minority and Women Owned BU81ne..e.. Rðferred to Neil Dorrill, Frank Brutt, Ru.sell Shreeve, and t 11ed. Page 53 ,I)() ..-...... March 28, 1989 6. Meaorandua dated 03/1t.1/89 tro. Lewis 0, Burnside, Jr., Director, Division ot Housing and Coa.unity Develop.ant. DCA. re Fair Rousin9 Month. Reterred to Prank Brutt. Russell Shr..,,-e. and riled. 7. Letter dated 03/13/89 fro. Patrick Kenney, Environ.ental Specialist, DER, enclosing short tore application, Pile 1(0. 11161823ð, which involves dredge and till activities. Reterred to Heil Dorrill (letter), BUl Lorenz. and tiled. 8. 03/16/89 copy or letter to Clyde C. Quinby, tro. Tony D. McKeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coa.tal Engineering and Regulation, D!fR, advising that Perait !fo. CO-181 has been approved. Referred to Neil Dorrill, Bill Lorenz and tiled. 9. 03/10/89 .e.orandua fro. Larry SchneIder, Health Servlces and Facilities Consultant, E.ergency Medical Services, HRS, a~;ising that EMS grant workshops will be conducted in March and Apr il. Reterred to Heil Dorrill, James Reardon, George Barton, and filed. 10. Minutes: A. 01/26/89 - Library Advisory Board B. 02/21/89 - Iaaokalee Lighting & Beautitication Advisory Coaaittee and 03/21/89 Agenda C. 03/02/89 - Fire Consolidation Study Group and 03/16/89 Agenda D. 03/1ð/89 - Golden Gate Master Plan Steerin9 Co..ittee and 03/29/89 Agenda 11. .otice of Clai. dated 03/1ð/89 tro. Monaco. Cardillo & Kelth, P. A., re Audrey Kay Hurley. re 06/03/88 accldent at Colller County Jail Co.plex. Referred to Ken Cuyler, Leo Ochs. .e11 Dorrill, and f l1ed. 12. "otice To Owner dated 03/09/89 fro. David E. Weston, Vice President, Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., advlslng that they have furnished engineering services re notice to proceed per addendum dated Septe.ber 16, 1986, under an order given by Harry Huber. Referred to Skip Camp. Harry Huber. and filed. 13. Letter dated 03/20/89 tro. Paul K. Hottaan, President, Co..ittee to Restore the Constitution, enclosing Petltion fro. residents ot Collier County petltioning the Board of County Coaaissioners to authorize the inclusion of "The Spotlight" newspaper in the Collier County Public Libraries. Referred to Board ot County Co..issioners, Neil Dorrill, Kevin O'Donnell, and f l1ed. U. 3/10/89 Notice of Coaaission Hearing re Docket Ho. 880828-'1'I, Application of Teleco. Xpress. Inc. for authorlty to provlde interexchange telecoaaunication service on Friday, April 14, 1989 in Tallahassee. Filed 1ð. Letter dated 03/21/89 fro. A. W. Addison, Deputy Tax Collector, re annual selection ot newspaper tor 1989 adver- tis.aent ot delinquent taxes. Piled 16. Letter dated 03/10/89 fro. W. R. Tretz, P.E., District One Secretary, Dept. ot Transportation, re the transfer ot the jurisdictional responsibilities of SR-84 to 1-7ð fro. Colller County to the State ot Florida. Referred to George Archibald. Walt Carter, and t Ued. 17. Letter dated 03/13/89 troa Robert W. Genzaan, Unlted State. Attorney, U.S. Departaent of Justice. re request for reviww Page 64 il ----- ,,-- - ..---- March 28, 1989 of aaterlal subaltted by the Golden Gat~ Area Taxpayer. Aaeoclat1on, Collier Coun~. FlorIda. Referred to BCC, !fell Dorrlll. ~en Cuyler. and filed. ... There being no further bu.ine.. for the Good of the County. the aeeting was adjourned by Order at the Chair - Ti~~ 5:30 P.M. BOARD or CO{]JfTY COMMISSIOJrDSI BOARD or ZONna APPULs/IX OFFICIO OOVER!fI!fO BOARD(S) or SPECIAL DISTRIC'!S OWDER ITS COIfTROL /V¿L¡ BURT L. SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAJf .' ~ '. ,".. ~ ATTKST; 'V .1 A.M:is . C . G I t. ItS . C'L.!RJC , ~.. " . ... : :;.: -: , ~. the Board on ~/ /Á. /~{7 as pre88Dted /---- or a. corrected Page !ss ,'3,Ÿ -~..._-_..,..