The URL can be used to link to this page

BCC Minutes 01/03/1989 R --, Naplcs, Fler \;'" January 3. 1 ~'39 LE':' IT BE REMEM8ERED, that the Board of Cc:~~~y Commissioners in and tor the County at Collier, and also acting'J the Board ot Zoning Appeals and a3 the governing bo.:1rd(s) ot such ar.p"~lal dlstrictG as have been created according to law and ha'"ing c'.;,'~ucted business herein, met on this date at ~:oo A,M. in REGULAR SESSlO. in Building "P" at the Government Comple~, East Naples, Plor:da, with the following me.bers present: CHAIRMAN: 8,; ~ t L. Saunders VICE GHAIRI".AH: M,'j;': A. HaaG'!, Jr, P:' hard S. Shanahan M;--:hael :1. Volpe A:.:¡.~ Goodnight ALSO PRESENT: Jame3'" Giles, Clerk; Johr. ":Jnkosky, Finance Director; Maureen Kenyon, Ellie Hott~an, and Dc ;a Mendez, Deputy Clerks; Neil Dorrill, County Manager; Ron McLc~ -n Assistant County Manager; Tom Olliff, Acting Cemmunity Dcvclopmc:,- Administrator; Ken Cuyler, County Attorney; TOQ Crandall, Utl1itlc'j Administrator; George Archibald, Public WorKs Admir.istrator; Kcvin O' :'.~.n('ll, Public Services Administrator; Jay Rcardon, Emergency ',"r'"ices Administrator; Barbara Cacchione. Project Planner; Leo Ochs, A'~~;ni9trative Services Administrator; Haney I~~acl30n, Administrative ~';3i3tant to the Board; and Sergeant David Johnson, Sheriff's Departmcn' / Page 1 ,-.,.,', ',....."" t, JANUARY 3, 1~B9 Tape.1 I~- n AGD'D& - APp.Jtuv~ WITH CHAJfGE Co8ai.aioner Shanahan aoved, .econded by Co..l..ioner Baa.. and carried unani80U8ly, that the agenda be approved with It.. 681 being beard at 10:0C A.M. It.a .SA IXPLO~.u:; SERVICZ AMJ.RI)S -= PRESEnED Coaaiasioncr Saunder3 prc3ented employe~ 3er','ir:e3 awards to the following e=ployee~ and thanked them tor thcir 3r>r""ice to Collier County: ThOl8a3 011 Ht, Acting Co~Qunity Development Admin. - 5 years .John Short, Utilitie:> Di'J1:>ion .. 5 year:> It.. .sa PDJrT DDLUtTU RECOG1rIZED AS -~I&~~ THE M°JrJH FOR :1AXtJARY. 1989 CoRZ133ioner Saunder:> rc;:,d a letter and prc3cnted a plaque and a S50.00 cash award to Penny DiMartin for being recognized as the Elllployee of the Month tor January, 198'3. It- .6C nocr..t.x.\TIO. APPLAUDIJlO AJfD APPROVl.O THE PROJECT OF TIm PBlLHARMo.IC CI:.IIT£a FOR TIm ARTS IJI PELlCAJI BAY - ADOPTED Ca=i::>:>ionf'!r ':cJ:iJ ~ c:;.rJ ar;c p:-c:>cntcd i) p:-ocla:n;:¡tion to Mr3, Myra Daniels representing the Philharmonic Cr:r.tcr far the Arts tor their diligent work in maKing the project ot the Philharmonic Center for the Arts 1n Pelican Bay become a reality, ;7 Co8a1..ioner Shanahan aoved, .econded by Co..l..loner Baa.. and carr led unan18OU8l y, that the proclaaatlon applaudlng and approving the project at the Phllharaonic Center for the Arts In Pellcan Bay and the ~1haraonic'. per.1stence and careful planning to aake thl. dre.. a reali~ be adopted, Mrs. Daniels indicated that ahe i3 proud to rp.ceivc the proclama- Pag.æ 2 -,,-_.'-,-- ,.- ,..-"., ""_"'" JANUARY 3, I~B9 tion but noted that there are ~.OOO ether people that have worked hard on this caU3P.. She 3t<1ted ~hat thi:; .1:; the begi~1nin1 ot a cultural revolution in thi3 ce=unity and thanked the Boa:-d tor their 9upport, j7 ' Page 3 '..__e___-- ---. --.........,..." JANUARY 3, In9 It... "At COIInACT TO BE EXE~D FOR THE ACCEPTUCE 0., GRANT MOBlES FROM THE DO FOR THE Ar.UICIAL, Rg'~~oa~~ COLLIER COUJITY - AfPROVED Acting Co~*unity 'Jr~'/c 1 opl:1cn t Administr;¡tor OllHt stated that thi3 i3 a reco=cnèation req'~~3tlr.:;¡ that the Chairman be authorized to exe- cute a CoIìtrao::t tor grar.t :non~<:3 from 'JlIR tor the artiticial reef building program in Collier County, Hc 3 t.:¡t; cd that Collier County ha3 been worKing on a reet program tOt' three years, using clean materials to create the3e reets, He noted that the grant was ilpplJ ed tor through DIfR, and rccel""cd, and this is simpl/ a request to allow the County to receive theae ¡::on1ca. ec-.t-i0D8r Baa.. aoved, ..conded by COJIai881oner Sban"""an and. carr i ed unan 18OU8 1 y, that the contract for the acceptance of grant 8OJ1i- in the iI8Ount of $20,000 f roa the DO for the art1ficlal reef prograa of Collier County be executed by the Chalraan. Page 4 ,-_......, ..---.,,--- ..'." --.-.......",.", <- JANUARY 3, 19B9 I~- ftA2 CA.DIv AL PEJOa T #8 9 - 1 RE PETITIO. C-ð8-ð, COLLIER COtnn'Y AGRICt7Lruur, WAlK 6 EZPoS ITI OW , IlfC. TO COðDUCT A PAIR FROM 1/14-21/89 O. THE EAST SIDE OW C.R, 846 llf ORABGETRZE PUD - APPROVED. S t1RE TY Be 1fD, CARJrIVAL nZ'-~~~TI9~~ ~qçg~~_I(~J~D H_" ~- '~---~ A::;t~ng (;G¡¡::;:u..~tÏ C)c'¡e lop;:¡c'r.t Ad;:,.~nio;tr;:,to. r 11 Ht 3tated that th13 i:; .. req-':I?:;t for ;1 per:::i t to ccnd'Jct the ':10.,:..1,:': ~ollier County Fair and to wa~"'e the :;ur~tÏ br,nr'.., the carni'Jal t cr... dnd the Occupational license. He noted th.)t thi3 h':l3 been done for . hc pa:H two 'feara and the feea have also been wai~ed, Co8aiaaioner Baaae aoved, aeconded by Co_1ssloner Shanahan and carr led una.niaoual y, that Carnival Perait #89-1 re Petltlon C-88-ð, Collier County Agricultural Palr & Expoaltlon, Inc. requeatlng a per- ait to conduct. falr be approved and that the surety bond, the earn .1 va 1 tee, and the OCcupatIonal llcenae be waIved, /(/ Page 5 -,~~" , -'---.--..--.- ~'- --.--.....",..",.",.. .. :1AJroARY 3, 1985¡ n- .,.1 CO.~Io-n.o DGDrEEJU.a SERVICES AGREEMD'r WITH SMALLY, WEI3OJU) . IlALVD, DIe. roJ( 'I'D PRXPAR.ATIOJr or COnTRtJC'1'IOJr PLAJrS .DD SPECIna'fiOJrS, RIGHT-OF-WAY MAPS AXD PERMIT APPLICA'1'IOJrS peR WES'l'CLOX .DD CAJISOIf ROI,DS EXTDSIOJrS I. IMMOULEE - APPROVED Public Works Admlniatrator Arch1bald stated that thls item involves a design contract for two road improvements in the Imaokalee area: Weatclox Road extenslon fro. Carson Road to State Road 29 and Carson Road extenslon fro. Lake Trafford Road to Imaokalee Drive. He indicated that this project was envisioned a number of years ago and, it is now in the design phase, He stated that on September 27, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners approved the waivlng of the COIII- petitive selection proce3s, declared an emergency, and directed statt to negotiate a consulting services contract w1th Smally, Helford & Jralven, Inc. for the preparation of constructlon plan. and specitica- tions, right-of-way maps, and per.it appllcatlona for both roads. He indicated that Smally, Welford & Nalven, Inc. are familiar with this area and also familiar wlth uti11ties that are in the area. He noted that a contract h~; been negotlated and there is a ceiling of $73,200 in the contract wlth a cost Incentlve proviølon, He stat~d that it upon completion of the project services, charges have not reached the agreed $60,400 contract target cost, the difference between the contract target cost and the contract actual cost will be split bet- ween the County and the consultant on a 60/40 percent baals respec- tlvely as an incentive to perfor. the project under target cost. He indicated that the County shall also pay tho consultant the actual coat plus 10' of all reimbursable expenses incurred in connection with the basic and additional servlces as set forth in the agreement. He noted that the total contract amount is about 8' of the construction aaount and he Is recommendlng that this item be approved. Colll8issioner Shanahan questloned if thls type of a contract has Page e ..' .,' . , --, ....,.., '...,...._"......"'.',,,...', """""""""'-"'---'---- -"--"""" .,.,.-.- .. .1 AJft1 ART 3, 1989 been approved previously, to which Public Harks Administrator Archibald stated that this is the second contract of this nature, adding that the fir3t one was for the extension of Lely Barefoot Bc~ch Road, which is not complete at this time, but it appears that it wIll work in the County's favor, Co..issioner Volpe questloned when the actual construction wl11 be done on these roads, to which Publ1c Harks Administrator Archibald .tated that the first road 1s Westclox Road extension and once the design is coaplete, construction will begin, adding that the coaple- tion 4&~e for the construction is 1991. ~f..1ouer Shan..),~ 8OV8d, ..c0n4e4 by Co8aJ...iouer Goodnight 8D4 carr 1e4 ~ f 8nU81 y, that ~ Consulting ..rv1ce. engi.aeeriDg 8gr& lit .i~ S8811y, Welford" .a1V811, Inc. for ~ de8igz¡ ot the II881:claz 8D4 Car8oD Roada extenal008 in IlI8Okalee be ~i'¡ov.d. , Page 7 c "~,-,--",,~,,~,,~""",., -..-..-,".- ,-.. ""'-"---'- _._,-,,-~ . - .,.""."""""",... ¡. Jþ':fl1ARY 3, 1989 '" Xu. nB2 .L81\.1..&nOJUL P.&enGZ .um QO'ES'fiODA.IU TO BE SDT TO ALL PROPD'I'Y o,.,.5'CI D' TO DPLU PARX ARZA DRAt-AGE STODY AREA Public Works Adminlatrator Archlbald stated that Naples Park area bas serious drainage problema due to developmcnt that dates back to the early 1~60's, adding that there is no real conveyance system or water aanageaent retention or detention. He noted that i8provementø to the primary r¡stem are estlaated to cost $3.3 million and 18prove- aenta to the secondary system are estimated to coat $2.3 ailllon. He stated ~hat Staff has aet wlth the Naples Park Area Associatlon on different occasions to deteralne the next steps to follow. He reported that the best way to obtain input tram the property owners i8 ~hrough an informational package and questionnaire. He noted ~ha~ the property owners will end up absorbing the cost which will probably be through an &Sse83aent project due to the large dollars involved and Staff needs to be sure that SO~ plus one property owner is in favor of such an assessment project. He stated that there are over 4,000 pro- perty owners in Naples Park area and they need to be able to choose whether they are In favor of thls assessment project and if so, whether they are in favor of the primary system or the priaary and secondary system. He stated that he is asking for approval to send t~ inforaatlonal package and questionnaire to tha property owners, adding that the package gives information on the financing and also explains that the questionnaire must be returned within 30 to 45 days. Be no~ed that at that tlme, the results of the questionnaire will be deteralned and will be brought back to the Board and also will be pre- sented to the Naples Park Area Association at thelr annual meeting In February. He stated that it will cost about $3,500 to sand out the questionnalre, whlch ls aval1able in the Naples Park Area Drainage MSTU Fund 139. Page 8 '"'.'-'-' --,-------,--, ,", t ¡ ,11.JroARY 3, 1989 Coaaissioner Saunders stated that his only request is that there ¡- be good flnanclng informatlon available to the property owners and [ that there be a good readlng of the que~tionnaires to be sure at the results. i' Public Works Adminlotrator Archibald stated that the inforaation )'¿: Incl~8 the financing and it is estiaated that the average a8Se8888nt ~~ to each property owner will be about $7S0.00 per lot. f c-t..i~r Sh8I~a"'.n 8OV84, .ec0nd8d by Co8ai..ioner Baa.., that the 1DtOr'8aUonal package and quesUonnairs be aent to all prope~ o.m.r. in the .apls. Park Area Drainage Study area. Mr. Richard Wood, Chalraan of the Waples Park Area Assocla~ion Civic Coaaittee, stated that the co..ittee agrees to the mailing at ~be que.tionnaire but does not agree to the $750.00 per lot and each person paying equally. He noted that he feels that the Beachwalk, Pavilion Club, Pavilion Shopping Centor, Pavilion Lakes, and 67 acres across U.S. 41 which drains Into ~he system should be included in ~his project. He noted that the newer developers are putting in retention lake. which, in a 3-day stora, would hold water in their lakes, bat would then be released Into Waples Park system which would cause pro- ble_. He stated that he feels that all property owners in the MSTD area should be assessed equally wlthout any tavoritlsm. Public Works Administrator Archibald stated that the analysis of the properties will equate to a benefit assesoment and the best analy- ?" ,.;. .1. will be to deter.ine the run-ott and that is how the asse...ent will be computed. Co8aissioner Saunders stated that the assessaent method will be deterained by the Co..lssion when all information has been pre.ented. Co..issioner Shanahan questloned it the areas at concorn are Included in the study, to which Public Works Administrator Archibald replied attiraatlvely, adding that the only area that i. excluded ls Page 9 '1 1 ---- ",-_. -. '-' - . . ,.. -'.'- ~.., ... -..."",",-.." "'.."- "-----""""""""'--"""" JANUARY 3, 1~B9 the Vanderbilt Be;:¡ch .-,red which 1::; lac;:¡ted wc,;! of Vanderbilt Beach Dri'"e as there will be r,o bC~H' fit to that arei}, HI', Wood indicate1 th<:.t the C:ounty :¡hou:d help pay a3 there will be a largc 5;:¡'.'i:-,ç~ '" ~ ~.r! "r;',.n"f in :;..lintn~¡;lr,(,r> ":'-'1'cn::I<'. plu3 the Count'¡ OWT',3 o3b(J'~~ 25% '~ f ~ ~,¡;> ':03:,'1 in thc N'11'lc3 Park Area, In answer to Co~mi~3ir;ncr V~lpc. f'ut¡J i c W(JrY~ Adminiatrator Archibald stated that olJtt.:¡ll:¡ '...ill be provided th;:¡t will a3;,,;ure all propertic!) the re~a'...a 1 of run off, He 3tated thiJt when this is accolllpl isher'.. , the ro;:¡ds;d!:' sw'lle:J will h;:¡'Je to be cleaned out and pipe3 w il: r,a'",c to be "nl;:¡rg!:'r".. in 3(;::;" ;:¡ r C;¡" ;J:; 30mi'. people put in pipes in their road::; 1 dlc 'JW':' Ie'} t h.l t were ei'hcr not large enough or were not :;ct at the right ¿¡rog] (' ,¡ or cl("...,:,t1'~n3, Opoo c& 11 for the qt1eatlon, the action carried unaniaoualy. It.. ftB3 CO.SULTAn SELECTIOII PROCEDURE WAIVED OK Alf !MEROncy BASIS AJfD STAn .t.rr1'IIORIZED TO nOOTIATE Alf AGREEJŒJfT WITH ODELL ASSOCIATES TO PROVIDE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES DURIRG CONSTRUCTION OF THE HEALTH AND PUBLIC ~ERyIC'~, JWILDIlIg, - APPROVED -- - _h ,-, ---,---- Public Wary:; Ad;r.,;.:-.l:,;tr,)"~r Ar:.:r,; ba 1o.i ::¡ t;¡1 cd ',;¡ i1 t there i::; a contract that has ber'r¡ ;Jwardr'~ to CarI30n C"rporation to c.Jnstruct the Health and Pub lic Service::; building which wa::; dc3igned by Design Arts ",ho h<1s g.:me into rerr' :""'Jr3h Ip and 13 in thC! proces::; ot liquidating its resourcea and will not be able to undertake the dcaign services that were to be pro"'idcd b'l them during the con::;truction phase. He noted that he haa been looking at thrc.e other fIrms that will provlde ?/ such servIce; one i:; ;:',;¡d r, I;P c, t the principles cf De3ign Arts that have atarted a firm en HIe i r own; another ene 1', Ode 11 and A330ciate:J; and the othcr is Carl"on and A::;::;ociate::;, He Indicat(!d that of the three tirm3, Staft ,~ recer;.:nc:-.d;ng a contrar.t w j"h Ode 11 and .... Associate3 to pertorm the remainder of the <1rr.hj"'ctural !)ervices of the Health and Pub Ii c Services Building, 'Ie lnd:cated that one of the Page 10 j '--,---- , ..". ...'-'-""--"".."-"-'_._-" - r,:/UARY 3, 1'J8'J rea::Jon::J tor this deci::;lon i3 that thr.ir main pra~'cct manager was with Design Art::; '",hl?n ~':""ï p,I?par"d the tinal plan::; ;:¡~, '; ::;pecificationg, He indicated t 1".'1 ~ ,)d,,11 a;,,~ A33c;ciatl?:;¡ 13 i),1::;0 ab1" pro,...ide thc required liabil~ty in::;¡,¡rancr1 a;-:.d contract in::;ura:,'~e relating tu errO:::"3 and 0:i3:;icn::., He 3~,')tl?d t~..:1 t hc ha3 b",=n aol" " J nl?gotiate a rough cO:Jt for the ::;er....icl?::; to b'~ .,rr')'/ idee! b'i Odell :~n. A::;~¡oc lates '..,hich i9 very clo:;¡e to servlcJ1::> th;:¡,t would ha'",c beer. pro'..,';ed by Design Arts. He stated that i., 13 "pp:-oximatel'f ~72,8~2,OO wL; h would be the lIIa.xl' IIUIII .:uIIount cf ::;crVlce::; pro"" idee'., Hc r.ot 'c,j t r,cj t Jè::"e 3er'"icC3 provide str\Jctural ir,3pectlor.::;, re, 'lewing all '3ublllittal,. tQr a 1 1 the materials to aS3urc co;plianc" "" 1 t h the ::;pl?cifJC.:JtJ(.n3 an': :;cric:J of other actl...itie::; that are c r : t I r: ,-.1 'n ¡¡::;:¡ure tr.a t the ; l¡.j I ng in put up properly and t h.'1t t hI? County j-¡ "Iecur....d ,«¡It!',/. '0 the de:3ign and the completion of the projr'ct, Hr' noted n¡at t t,r'y w:;] '1130 pro'"ide staff to 9upplelH'nt t. he County':; 3in~le project eng i r.' for that job, He 3tated that he if) rcqucC",t . ~¡') th"t hf' be au'hurl: ,! to negotiate and prepare a fin...! contr'Jc' wi th Ocr:>11 .:md A:;¡::;or: ia' ':', and upon that contract being rc'"iewed and complctf'd by th{' C(';o,'y Attorney':; office and out9l~e coun3el of C,:¡rltcn, Pield:>, Ward, E:r.;T,...¡nuc 1, Smith á Cutler, the Chairlllùn be a'lthorlzl!ù to ezccut', ," ,1 contract, In an::;wcr to Cc=l::;::¡ior-.er H<l:J3e. Pub! lc ;.Iar>' > Administrator Arct-.1bald ::;tatcd t h;l t the CrJl.:nty Attorney will '~, 'f'.rmine it it is pru- dent to terminate the contract or to ;:¡llow tor to be reassigned, ?¿:. Commissioner Saunderr; indir.ated that the co:,' fact may be an asset during the bankruptcy, Coamis::¡ioner Volpe qu....::;tioned if thc County ~.a3 the drawings, to which Mr. Archibald replied attirmatlvely, ColUlli:>sioncr Vclp" q;¡C'::;t lor,cd it the 1n~¡¡rar,r{; premium will be pa33ed on to the Coun t '£, t 'J which Mr, A"rhibald indicated that the total cost of the contract wi 11 bc $72,852 and will include the , Page 11 i ! I ---..-"",.. '..' , "'__"'0_0"'-_.' --, ; MWARY 3, 198~ in3urance" County Attorney Cuyler 3tated that thi3 it<,-::: ,:; an emergency becau3e :Jf the time f"ctr¡r ¡r..."cl...-ed, Co8a.1.. 1 ODe r S han.ahan aov ed, -conded by Co_issloner Goodnight and carr i.d an81'\ illOU8 I y, that the consultant selectlon procedure be waived on an ...rgency ba.~. and .tatt be authorized to negotIate an agr...-nt wIth Odell and Å8aoclates to provlde archltectural .ervice. dur1nç conatruction at the Health and Public Services Buildlng and the Ch.alr-..n be authorized to execute .888 atter review by the out. ide ccranael and the County Attorney. DOCUMENT NOT RECEIVED AS OF JANUARY 13, 1.989. !,..fJ p¡.ge 12 i I I I i J --"""""""-"""'."'- ,,- """..."""""..""..,,- ; ~.~IUARY 3, 1989 I t- 884 BID .88-1340 AERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPlla - AWARDED TO rDCERA SOUTH, IIC. IW THE ~ OF $103,674,40 Lcça: :'.()~ice h;)'¡ing b,!('" F..¡bl i'3hed in ~ h,! H..Jí '"" D;:¡ilï new::; on Dece~ber '. 1')8<:. ;)3 evidenced b'z' Affi¿;)'"it .? f p' :,;ication filed wlth the Clerlo:, bid::; were rccc i'led far Bid .88 1340 f r,:- aerial topographic aappinç within ar, ;:¡r/õ.:1 known a3 Water M;:¡n;:¡gc~cnt ::i::;trict No, 7, un t 11 2:30 P,M" ;)ecezbcr 21, ~,)?.8, ~~bl1c Work::; Admlni3trator Archibald ::¡tatcd . :,at thl::¡ itelll ia part of the water aar..')gcJ:en t budget tor the c...rrent 1"-1r, noting that this aappir.ç will dcvclop one foot contour3 tor not o:,lï the ba3e area which c;(tcr.d3 prlmarilï fro::: Goodlc.,te Po;:¡d tc ",;, C;J3t to almo3t C,R, ,)~l but 01130 an "r/Õ'-J that "¡ i 11 c:<tcr.d to ~,R, c':' Hf'! noted that the urban area ia the area th;:¡t has been 3ubject to 'r.e bld prop03al3 that ha'..e been rece i'"cd, He noted that two bid::; w<ërr :-cce i'"cd and staff is recoaacndir.ç¡ award of the 10..... bid which i3 in t:" amount of $103,67(,40, adding that the furlding 13 ¿¡'¡ail;:¡b: ... the w;:¡ter manage' aent acco;,¡nt and al::iG iôc111dc::¡ ;¡ gr;:¡nt froc the ,;uth Florida Water Managc:IIerlt Oi::¡trict i r. thp ;¡:nO,ln t of appro;(i;::¿¡t,:'l $100.000. He Indl.. cated that a l:w:;t a1: Qf tr.i::; worK will be :Jut3. il;:ed by the grant, He indicated that th<ër" '...c'r,! three other alterr.,,"! areaG that were to be coo3i,1e red, but d..e tc the ;:},.."ilable tunds. :.:] f f is recommending 7¡!' that th03e area3 not be con3idcred at thi::> t imr., 'lnlcGs he can find Gome t un,:\i rig, He notcd t :,.') t the bil:ilc area i:¡c:;de3 a litt le more than 25 sq-yarc mile::. and ~hi:; i:::; what Statt i3 ~.'::ommending be awarded to Y.ucera South, Inc, :n the ¿¡mount of ~lO3,f..74 ~o, Co8ai_ioner B&8- aoved, aeconded by Co..ias1oner Volpe and carr i ed unan iJlOU8l y, that Bld .88-1340 be awarded to ~ucera South, Inc. in the II8OUl1 tot $103,674.40 as being the lowest bidder. I~_.-,c1 neJPOSAL BY nDETH R. UHJ( TO DEVELOP A REDS ASSESSMEJI'T AJID PLADI.a PROCESS LEADI.a TO THE rORMATIOK or A CULTURAL AFYAIRS COOXCIL FOa Page 13 I j I I J ¡ "'-""""""---"'- """-""'" ...-, ..".. - .. ,... _."._~"",.._._-,-,_._" ;i\.WUARY 3, 1S18S1 ODATD JU.PLU TO 8E I'UnED OW A SO/60 BASIS WITH THE CITY ow WA.PLES AlII) "~~~~'!-1JL~ .M"Q!!JfT_9r_J~,~00_~() B~PREPI.UD - APPROVED P;;.hl ic S~r',¡ ice:; A~m;;:;Jtrat:Jr :)'DonnclJ :;t;'}~ ., that thi3 i tern Is to co-"er a r.ontractur<J¡ (:rr.;- ';'t'::I(:;: t with the r: ~ t ':' ',f t/afilc3 on a 50/50 ba3 i s tor a propo::;al bï Y.~r.ncth p, Y.ahn to devel 't' ;J, needs assessment and pla~~inç ~rocess leadlnç to the torJ:l;:¡t ion of :) Cultural Attairs Council fer '::reater HapI,,:; ba3ed or. the P/UCAT r "r,om:nendat ion, He noted that the sub gro\.;p rd the Commun i t'" Inst 1 ~ " lonG TasK Porce has puraued thi:; rndea',¡..-...r ;:¡,:¡d r.a3 recommenced Mr, Y.r :,:,eth Y.ahn. He noted that the scope at Mr. Y. .:!t >n' -; w , r I( woulr'. o:o'"...r " ;;1 I arts/cratts orga' ni:;:ation3, ¿¡rti3~3 fx ;;.)]Jerie>, pc'rtorr:1in~ :~ r t:, ,c,rj ,3rti:;ts; hi3torical, "rC3('r',¡at ion ;:¡:¡ ,; ~:: icnce grCJ'Jp3; bn" :.('33 ¡;¡nd tourism interest:> and 3er'.rice ¡;¡nd c i'" i c oq¡anlz¡;¡t lor,::;, "" noted that the Ç5,500 would COlli" trom t ~.l.: General F:md Rr>3c'r'¡c' ,:¡r'. the nece3sary budget a=end::acnt woulè. h;J,'.r~ to b~ prepared, (;0:=is3loncr Volpe r¡üP3t i:;ncd ; f thf' C j t." G: ~¡"'pJf'S is going to participate in thi3 prnjco:t, to whJch City of H:',:,; e3 Mayor Putze11 replied atfirmati-¡elï. adding th;:¡t th~ City ta3 ,: re;:¡dy <3uthorlzed the $5,500 for the contract. Co~is3ioner Saunder3 stated that according the prc~")aed thle- table, it appears that the majority ot the work ',as been completed. Public Service:; AdQini3trator O'Donnell :; t a ~ '.i that the 3chedulc ~ needs to be reworked, :1oti:'1g that the prapo:':ll ~" or ig inall\ sub- .itted in Septemhcr and the outline 3haw~, U;a t " wo rk wC"ll d be completed by the end of Januar'¡, but due te the .rmal process of being approved by the C it'" of Maple:; and thp Co';:,~y, the schedule wl1l have to be updated and he will pre'3ent :1 rev 1 '3c'; :opy to the Co-laglon. Comaisaloner Volpe quc:;tioned it any of t h i c> ,",ark ha:; been done at this time, to which Mr:;, Myra Daniel:>, member cf 'he '3ub group of the Page 14 "--"--""""""""'" """ --. ""'" '.""""""._-""'---""- J~tlUARY 3, 1~B9 Col:J8Un~";,Y ir-.:;titution:; T.:>.31c Porc~, rep1ied r-,'~g.)~ :':',ly. She indicated tha";, ~r-. ~~h~ i3 hoping ~o begin ~hi3 work by t~ pnd at thi3 month. ec-.1_1oner Shan&h.an aoved, seconded by Co_isaloner Goodnight and carried unaniaaualy, that the proposal by ~enneth R. Eahn to develop a needa &8aea88en~ and plannlng process leading to the foraatlon of . CUl~al Affair. Councll for Greater Naples be approved and funded on a 50/50 baai. with the Clty of .aplea and that a budget aaendaent in the 88OaDt of $5.500 be prepared and a new revlsed work .chedul. be prepared , ..... Reoea.: 10:00 A.M. - Reconvened: 10:10 A.M. ..... It- "81 PETITI08 DOA-88-1C, GEORGE VARIADOE REPRESEKTING WESTI.GROUSE co.-u.~TIU or JlAPLES. IXC. R.! AX A.MEJrDIa)IT TO THE DEVELOPMEJIT ORDER roJL~~~AX_BA.! - DE~D J5þ'Ç~,.r.0_~T~ AJfD THE CCPC ~------- Legal notice ~a~in; bcc~ p~b¡i:;~cd In thc N. ,c:; D~ily New3 on tfO\;c'z::ber 27, 1188, a:, "vidcnu:r! by Aftlda'Ji~ ,,~ .!::Jlication tiled with the Clerk, public hc<:l:-ing W,):; cor,tinu'~d from Dc:. ,",ber 13, 1'J88, to conaidcr Peti";,ion DOA 88 IC, [1lcd by George Va~',~doe representing Westlnghou3c Co_unitie3 of ~lap¡e3, Inc, reque:;' .:-.g an alll{,"Idment to the Dcvclop:ucnt Order for P("}ican Ba', by rcquc3' .C1Ç1 an addition<:ll 600,000 :;quarC? teet Gt Gfficc and ret.:lil commcrc;,::d space lc..cated west ot U,S, 41, 30uth of V~ndcrbi:t 8each Road, and ',~rth ot Scaçatc Drive in Section3 32 ~nè 33, Town:;hip 48 South, R<1ngc ;H, E;:¡st <lnc'. ~.~ctions ?~ 4, 5, 8, .;¡nd 'I, Town:;r,ip 4'1 So;~th, Range 25 1'.a:,' containiõ1\,i 2,104 acres. Project Plan:Jcr Cacchionc 3tated that thi3 ;:-ojcct i3 located west ot U,$, 41. south at Vanderbilt Beach Road,nd north ot Se<lgate Drive, She indicated that there arc thrcc comn:c': ial parcels that are in question; the northern parc~l which i:; 28,7 '... "123, the middle par- cel which Is 21,1 acre3 and the 30uthern parcc'l '.lh ich ia !)!), 2 acres. She stated that zonir,;¡ to the north i3 RMF 6 whj ~ i3 the Beachwalk, Page 15 I ,----,._.,"..~, '---- ""'.".."""""'---' :J A1fU ART 3, 1989 ,;~ ,.180 to the north is the Pavilion PUD and Pavilion Lakes which is residen~ial as well a8 C-4; to tho east is RMF-16 and RSF-1¡ to the ~1, "f. South i. C-4, Seagate Subdlvision, Naples Cay, and RSP-4 zoning. She t'j indicated that the petitioner would l1ke to IncrcaGe the allowable square footage of commercial, but is not requesting any change to the peraitted uses or the development standards as provided for in the PUn ðocaaen t. She noted that the aain area of concern i. with the iapact of the ad41tional development on tho transportation network, adding that the MPO has had concerns wlth the orlglnal submittal in regard to the ~otal trafflc and assignments on the road network, the external ~rips asslgned to the network, and the number of trips generated. She stated that there is also some concerns about the proposed mitigationa such as 8-laning 0.5, 41 which i. not an approprlate suggestion. She stated that Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes indicates that the project has been determlned to be a substantial deviation, adding that the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council reviewed the subs tan- tial deviation on November 17, 1988, and aade thelr official report and recoaaendation for approval with the mitigation measur~g outlined in the atatf report. She noted that Planning staff is recoaaending approval subject to the stlpulatlona outllned by the Regional Planning Cðunc 11. She indlcated that the CCPC held their public hearing on this petition on December 1, 1988, and recommended tha~ the Board deny thi. petitlon by a vote of 6/3. She stated that one person spoke for the petition, cltlng tho need for commercial to 3crve tho Pelican Bay residents and 8 people spoke in opposition citing negative traffic iapacts both inside Pellcan Bay and tho external road network, changes in the character of the communlty, possible Increase in crime, over- taxing of the utilities, and incremental amendments to the projec~. She stated that one person stated that he was not notified of the pro- posed change and two letters in opposition were received with concerns Page lIS "-""""'--'" ,-,...",..., "-,~"",,,"',"' ,,",'..,...,...........-- JAJrOARY 3, 1989 over increased traffic, parking requireaents, and environaental illpacts. She stated that the stipulation options provided for in this 8Uba~an~ial deviation request are con.istent with the proposed growth aanage.ent pIa". She Indlcated that due to this projects DRI status it is allowed a "pipelinlng" option or the ability to ai~igate through an upfron~ fair share contribution payment, adding that the impact of the total developaent cannot be deterained until such ~i8Ð as a deter- aination is aade regardlng the vesting 8tatus of the project. She indicated that the Staff reco88endation i. the same as the CCPC recoa- _ndation, which is for denial. Mrs. Cacchione stated that the original request was for 1,260,000 square feet of coaaercial area and the proposed reque8~ i. for a cap of gros8 building area of 1,150,000 square feet. She stated that this would be broken down into 520,000 square feet of retail and 630,000 aquare teet of office space. She noted that the original PUD has 660,000 net leasable area and the petitioner is requesting a gross building area, but those two ite- are no~ coaparable. She stated that the petitioner has estiaated that tho origlnal request wa8 ac~ually 820,000 square feet in gross building area and tho!r reque8t i8 to bring thlø up to 1,150,000 square feet which ls an increase of 368,000 square feet. She noted that the Petitioner has a180 reque8ted a reduction froB 9,600 dwelling unit8 to 9,000 dwelling units and they have also agreed ~o allow hotels in the co..ercial area. and Bay Colony only. Coaaisøioner Saunders questioned it Staft agreoo with ~he square foo~age with regards to what is being proposed by the Peti~ioner, to which Mrs. Cacchione stated that the original PUD did refer to net le...able 8quare footage and there 18 a difference be~en net le...able, gross leaseable and grOg. building area. She 8tated that the percentages were glven to ber by the Petitioner and were based on Page 11 ._"~."'-""."-" ""--- -, ""'..--'...----,----.-..,-".. -",.---..".----., .,.- " AJrtJ ART 3, 1989 I' source. such as OLI and others which are probably accurate. ~.' Mrs. Cacchione referred to an overhead aap indicating two parcels and .ta~ed ~hat the final suggestion Is to aove the approxiaately 15 acre northern coamerclal tract further to the north and at a later point in tiae rezone the other parcel to Group I or Group II housing. She noted that the petltloner has a180 agreed to choose tho op~ion of .pipelining", whlch is a payment upfront of the fees to .itigrte the i.pact and that is an option that they are por.itted to choose because it i. a DRI project. Coaaisaioner Saunders questioned what is .oant by .pipoliningW and what are the iap_cts, to which Mrs. Cacchione øta~ed that the i8p8c~s of the substantial deviation project aa it tranalatea into a dollar figure in teraa of the cost at .itigating that particular iapact can be paid up-front. She stated that once this dollar aaount is paid, the project can continue. Co-.issioner Volpe questioned if the original staff proposali. being considered at this tiae. to which Mrs. Cacchione indica~ed ~ha~ a 8Odification at the original proposal is being considered and the inforaa~ion concerning the aodification ia not in the agend3 packet. Co-.issioner Volpe stated that he is uncertain at this point a. to whether the orlg1nal proposal is being requested or the aoditicatlons ~o tho orlg1nal proposal, but questioned if ataff has had the oppar- tuni~ to adequately revlew and assess the aodlfications? Mrs. Cacchione stated that since the Planning Commission ~eting, there bas been discussions with the Petitioner and with Pelican Bay Property OWners Associations and the aodlflcations to the original proposal are based on aany of those discussions, such as the 8OV88eDt of ~he coamercial parcel to the north, t~ reduction in the overall 8qU8re footage, the exclusion of the hotels except tor coaaercial are.. and Bay Colony. She noted tha~ the iapacts are Ie.. than the Page 18 of , -.-..--.......--."...."., ...._, -,." .' ....., ",.......' ,...,,-.......,..... ,......,.-....-..,.,....-..----- JAJroARY 3, 1989 original subaittal and Start has reco88Ønded ar~roval at the original aubalttal and would find this to be less at an iapact than the origl- nal reque.t. Coaaisaioner Volpe questioned what ls the request tor the addi- tlonal square ~ootage, to which Mrs. Cacchione stated that In the ori- glnal Development Order there was 660,000 net leaseable square footage which co.pares to B¿O,OOO square teet gross bulldlng area and they are requesting 1,150,000 square feet whlch Is an increase of 368,000 square feet gross buildlng area, She noted that the additional square footage Is being allocated between 520,000 square feet retail space and 630,000 square feet office space. She stated that there will be .12,000 square teet in the northern parcel; B5,000 square feet in the aiddle parce 1; and 653,000 square feet in the southern parcel. Coaaiøsloner Shanahan questioned what portlon of the dollar figure stays with the County and what portion goes back to the developer with regards to ftplpelinlng", to which Acting Community Development Adainistrator Olliff stated that he had dlscussion with the Petitioner on the original request and on the revised request and Staff Is coa- tortable in that the Petltloner wlth the altigatlon has aWreed to pay all iapact fees for the project as It coaes through the &ystea and has also agreed to pay $750,000 on top of i.pact fees whIch clearly aiti- J'o oates whatever traffic impacts there wll1 be for this additlonal reque.t. Comaissloner Shanahan questloned If the 81tlgatlon is acceptable for both the State and County roads, to whlch Acting Comaunity Development Administrator Olllff replied affirmatively, addlng that he feels that the aaount is actually above what the Impact wlll be on both State and County roads, Co..issioner Shanahan questloned If there 10 8ufflcient and satis- factory aonltoring agreements as well as necessary stop actlon provi- Page 19 -....-..---...-- .....-..-...".. " --.. ... --.....,. '.,- JANUARY 3, 1989 .ions if levels of 3ervice are not met and held, to which Acting Coaaunity ~~elopment Administrator Olllff stated that the Executive Suaaary indlca~es that no determlnatlon has been made yet about the vested status of a DRI project. He Indlcated that thls determlnation has not been aade at this polnt, but they have mltlgated and provided funds and the roadways will be monitored. Co-.issloner Shanahan questioned If there arc concerns regarding 80l1d waste, wastewater management and water supply, to which Mrs. Caccbione stated that she recelved a letter from the Pelican Bay Improvement Distrlct noting that they had written a letter for the application that wa3 orlginally submitted to the Regional Planning Counc il and In that letter, thay stated that they had the adequate capacity to serve the sub3tantial deviation project, but in a letter that was recelved Deceaber 15, 19BB, It states that on December 30, 1987, the Dlstrict Manager of Pelican Bay Improvement Dlstrlct advised that Pellcan Bay Improvement District could meet the wastewater and irrigation water 3ervice req~lrement3 of the addltlonal commercial developaents requested by Westinghouse in its petltion, but due to '-nexpectcd operational problem3 with the wastewater treatment plant, it i8 now the opinion of tha Distrlct that it does not have the faci- lities at present to serve the additional commerclal square footage. J?/ She stated that they have the intention to have the facll1tles In place in accordance with its legal obligation in the ordinary course of the d._ovelopment of Pelican B.ay, but because of the unresolved prable.. wlth the wastewater treatment plant, the Dlstrict ca.mot advise what the current maximum capacity is or when the necessary facilities wlll be completed, Co..issioner Volpe questioned it the proposed amendment ls con- .i.tent wlth the new comprehensive plan, to whlch Acting Coaaunity Developaent Admlnistrator Olllft stated that it is in compliance wi~h Page 20 -..,-..""....."-.,'..".., ,. .,-.."..-......."".,,---.- JARUARY 3, 1989 the new coaprehensive plan with the exception of the five acre parcel that is outslde the activity center. He stated that staff has always taken the poaitlon that a plan 8U~t be in compliance based on the existing comprehensive plan, adding that the recommendatlon is based on the existlng co=prehen31ve plan and not on a proposed comprehen.ive plan. Mrs. Cacchione stated that it this development ls not deterained to be vested, it wll1 have to be made conslstent wlth the new coapre- henalve plan. Cosaissloner Saunder3 stated that it the Board does not teel that the five acre coamercial area 18 appropriate, Statt can be dlrec~ed to take appropriate proceedings to move that commercial to another area to make it consistent wlth the comprehensive plan or to eliminate it entirely, Mrs. Cacchlone stated that she recelved? letters tram various property owners (not filed wlth the Clerk) as Indlcated below that are in opposition to the project; Pelican Bay Property Owners Aosoclatlon Eugene and Florence Bates Moorlngs Property OWners As30clatlon Crayton Road Association I Mr. Charle3 Roth : ' Strattord Condomlolum of PelIcan Bay "'z.;,' . Mr. Cheater Sinkowitt ".< Edith and Bll1 McCutcheon t,",' Mrs. Angus Brun ' ~ape n ~; ,~ Attorney George Varnadoe, representing Pellcan Bay and Its <!eve- "4 'J loper, W~stinghouse Communities ot Naples, 3tated that thls pÞtition ,t ,¡' will fulfill the requirements of Chapter 380 of the Florida 5tatutes, 't ,r, . which is the DRI law, adding that th13 will place the limit on the " aaount of square footage that wIll be allowed In Pellcan Bay and to deter.ine the necessary mitlgation of the regional Impacts at that aquare footage, He stated that because the DRI law forces developers Page 21 -,----- ---'-""',-""" ~"-'--"'" "'-"""--'- .1ARUARY 3, 1989 to pay their lapacts, a maxi8UA aJ8Ount of square footage of comaercial that wlll be allowed has to be specified and the conditlons of a Deve- lopaent Order have to be determined in order to mftlgate thelr regional iapacts resulting from that square footage, He indlcated that because of the size of Pelican Bay, it is a project of reglonal impact and 1s and was requlr-,d to go through the DR! process in addition to the local zonlnq process that Collier County has, addin'J that in 1977 after the development of the regional impact review and local zoning revlew by all advisory committees and review by the Board, POD zoning was granted .ad a Development Order under the DRI law wao ",dopted, Mr. Varnadoe noted that a DRI 1~ a development of regional impact which aeans that certain size projects and certain types of develop- aents are requlred by State Law to undergo a review by the Rpwlonal Planninç Council because they are presumed to have reglonal impacts. Be stated that a Develop.e~t Order establishes the 8itlgation tor the regional lapacts and the Regional Planning Council and the Departaent of Coa.unity Affairs have the right to review the Development Order and 1 f they feel that the mitiga~ions are not sufficlent, they have appeal rlghts, but it they do not appeal, then that means that the tf..P mitigation was sufficient. He indlcated that in 1977, the Board approved a Development Order for Pellcan Bay which altigated their reglonal impacts and in 1')77, POD zoning was also granted which established the land UGe3, the criteria and the standards for develop- aent, He indicated that this land use established '),600 resldential ðwellinç unlts as the maximum number of dwelllng units and it also establlshed hotels as permitted uses In the project as well as 10~ acre. of coamerclal dl".veloplllent. He stated that at thls polnt in tiae. the POD also specified a limitation on net leasoable square footage in the project which limited the offlce to 350.000 net Ieaøeable square feet and limited the retail to 310,000 net leaseable Page 22 -.".......--..., .."".. ,- ---..- """""'.""",....-..,--.."'- JANUARY 3, 1989 aquare feet. He noted that the ll.ltatlon on square footage along wlth an acreage limitat ion is very unusual in Colller County, adding that in 1981, Westinghouse realized that the aquare footage 11mi tat 10n was overly restrictive and Staff reallzed that the square footage li81tatlon was dlfflcult to administer; therefore, Westinghouse Co-.unitles of Naples filed an application to amend their planned unit docuaent and to delete the square footage 11mitatlon In the commercial areas. He Indicated that Staff telt that the other controls in the POD were sufflcient and thls li.itatlon was unanimously approved and deleted. He presented a copy of the application for the record as well as a copy of the mlnutea and the ordlnance that waD approved in 1981 which are aarked a3 Exhibit "A". He stated that the effect of thl. POD aaendaent would put Pelican Bay on the same basis aa other POD'. In the County as tar as square footage 11mltatlons are con- cerned wlth the control being with the other factors that are In the Zoning Ordlnance. He noted that the effect from a legal stanupoint was that the local land U3e decialon as to the areas and uses per- aitted was aade in 1977 and a local land use was aade in 1981 as ~o the intenslty of thoBe u~e3 and to treat Pelican Bay like every other Eft!' faD in the county. He indicated that because Pellcan Bay is a DRI. the Development Order has to be amended to Bet a 11mlt on the .quare footage so that the impacts can be measured and the Petltloner can have the privilege of paying tor those impacts up-tront. He stated that In March, l'JBB, a substantial deviation request was flIed which is'a shortened appllcatlon for development approval, addlng tha~ in May. 1988, it was reallzed that 90mo additional square tootag~ may be needed prior to the development order bel~g amended; therefore, he requested the Department ot Communlty Aftaira to enter into a preUai- nary develop.eot agreement which would authorize more square footage under the State Statutes. He noted that the Board wrote a letter to Page 23 ,.... ,.."""...."...",..,..,.....,.....,..- "-"""""""""""'.""""" :1A1fUARY 3, 1989 the State in May saylng that they had no objectlon to an additional 64,000 groGs bullding area of offlc~ develop.ent and a subsequent pre- liainary development agreement was entered into between the State and Pelican Bay which was entered into the record and marked as Exhibi~ -8-. Be stated that the Reglonal Planning Council has revlewed the regional impacts and ha3 recommended approyal subject to certain con- ditions and 81tlgations whlch are In thelr recommendatlons, adding that Staff has conaidered thiG petitlon and made the Game recomaen- dations. Mr. Charles Turner, Director of Planning and Deslgn for Westinghouse Coamunlties of Kaples, the developers of Pelican Bay, stated that Pellcan Bay is an exemplary comaunlty. He stated tha~ the plan for Pelican Bay i3 in the pun docUllcnt and includeG all the restrictions, the generallzed locatlon of the uses involved, the .treet system and the three coaaercial areas. He noted that this docuaent also Includeo the basic controls of the areas, the .",tbacka, the height restrlctions, the traffic requirements, and the water aana- geaent requlrements. He stated that the PUD document io ;:¡nly the starting polnt that they use in establishing the quality of develop- ~nt and the desl9O review for the co..unity, He stated that there are overall covenants for the coaaunlty that 3ets forth the design review, the requirements for the varioua developers, as well as neigh- borhood covenants. He stated that there are al~o revlew and approvals in the sales contractø, adding that these requlrements are very 8Uch enforced on the various developers and they are more restrlctive than what is in the County's zonlng ordinance. He noted that the change ~hat was made in 19B 1 which was the elimination of the square tootage cap was relied upon and more deflnitive planning with these coaaercial are.. proceeded 83 well as fractionalizatlon plans, He stated tha~ in doing these plans a lot is involved and the yields of the square Page 24 ..OoO""_"M_.",..o". ,...." - ° 'O""",-" """._-"- JAJrnARY 3, 1989 footage that is achieved in these various commercial areas are the prcducts of the proce3s that is used. He referred to a graphlc wi~h regards to the substantial deviatlon request, noting that the numbers on the graphic reter to gross building area which includes the footprlnt of the building. He referred to the three columns on the graphic, noting that the tirst column ahows the 1~77 Development Order and PUD and list the three commercial areas from south to north with certaln nuMbers assigned to tho3e areas. He noted that the second colWL"1 Indlcatea the 1981 PUD and it give3 a llst of numbers and a swuaar¡ 0 f the estlmated square footage based on Industry standards. Be stated that the third column says HBB PDA which is the preliminary developaent agreement and development order which factors in the nua- bera that have to do with an additlon of square footage. He noted that there were a number of meetings with the residents of Pelican Bay regarding the issues that have been ralsed. He stated that t::e resl- dents were concerned with the total number of square footage and there was a substantlal reduction in those numbers, addlng that the resi- denta were also concerned with the middle commerclal area and he indi- cated that the retail area could be relocated to the northeast corner ' '~ ".. nf the development. He atated that the residents woro concerned with {¡.' J" addltlonal hotels being developed in Pellcan Bay and his response i8 ~, p, ';:' that there are major areas in the Group 3 and 4 residentlal areas that they would comml t to having no additional hotels. He Indicated that the overall dwelling unit ca~ of 9,600 In Pellcan Bay would also be reduced to 9,000 dwelling units. He indicated that the other item that is an Issue i3 the mitigation involved and there are requlreaents that have to be met. He referred to the graphic and indicated what is actually beln~ requested this date, noting that the request Is for 1.0150,000 !Jquare feet. He stated that the three parcel!J that are involved consist ot 45-1/2 acres in the southeast area which consist Page 25 -""""'-'--""'" ... JANUARY 3, 1989 of 270,000 aquare feet of retall gross building area and 383,000 aquare feet of office groøs bullding area; the middle commercial area consists of 5 acres in size and wlll contain 85,000 square feet of offlce gross buildlng area; and the northeast ar~tl contains 51-1/2 acres which wlll be 250,000 square feet of retail gross building area and lS2,000 square teet wll1 be office groan building area. Co..issloner Haase questloned how aany more accesaes will there be to U.S. 41, to which Mr. Turner Indlcated that there will be no addi- tional accesses beyond those that are already approved and part of the PUD doCUJ8ent. Co..issloner Volpe stated that there Is a right-ln, rlght-ou~ turn on Gulf Park Drive and questioned if that turn will still be there if the c088ercial area in that location is relocated, to which "1", Turner indlcated that this Is not so.ething that has been addressed at this point. Co..lssloner Volpe questioned what the approximate nuaber of equare teet tor both retal1 and coamercial is in Pellcan Bay at thi. tlae, to whlc'" Mr. Varnadoe atated that he believcs that there is 313,000 square feet of office space currently on the ground and there 1.- been fractlonalization plana flIed and approved by the County for the waterslde shops whlch will consist of 270,000 square teet of retail and 30,000 square feet of office and immediately adjacent to J'7 that there wlll be an office building that Is 40,000 square feet. Mr. Harry Adley of Adley A3soclates Land Planners, stated that he has known this site since the late 1960's and hù3 always thought of this area as a new communlty. He indlcated that since these agreeaents were prepared about 13 years ago, a lot has changed. Re stated that the gross building area ia tho area measured fro. the outer sides of the building and everythlng in it is the gross building area; the groas leaseable area is the space mea3ured to exclude ~he Page 25 ---,---.".."-..".,, --.".-....----.- JANUARY 3, 198!) thing. that are common facilltles like hallways, etc.: and the net leaaeable area ia the sp~ce measured from the in:;ide facing of the wall to the center line of partltions excluding heating elements, etc, He referred to a chart which 1ndlcated the comparison of gross building area, grolJs leaseable area, and net lea:;eable area, He stated that in planning, the 1nterestlng part 13 to determine how 8Uch building can be put on an area In a quality fashion. He noted that when they plan, they uae the restrictive criteria in preparing their plans. He noted that the Petltloner is asklng for 1,1S0,OOO square feet and under the aost severe criteria and applïing all the constraints there could still be 1,2S0,OOO aquar~ feet, whlch means that thr¡ are still beneath the threshold of critcrla set by restric- tive cO88Unities. Mr. Lou Hoegsted. Vice Chairman of Operation:; of Kestlnghouae Coaaunitles of Naples, stated that based on information provided by Westinghouse as to future commercial intensity, the latest Pelican Bay laproveaent District rate study Incorporated a converslon factor tor coaaercial acreage usage, for potable water, lrrigatlon water and san- itary sewer services, which anticipated the remaining undvveloped com- aercial acreage to be developed similar to that which exlsts today. Ee stated that the design of the aystem and the ratc3 that were ~ adopted were established incorporatlng this anticipated Increaae in coll8erclal square tootage. He indicated that in connection wlth the widening of Seagate Drive to four-lanes which extended to West Blvd. and was premature with regards to development of that area ,but the additlonal square footage to be built wa~ anticipated. He stated that since 1981, there have been five different commercial property sale8 totallng approxlmately ~7 acres wi th an estlmatc'~ average use of 10,8S0 square feet of gross buildin~ area per acre, He stated that a aubsequent commerclal property owner decided to add additional square Page 27 --..-".-....-.-, .,.. . "-'----'" "- JAffUARY 3, 1989 footage to their slte and made appllcatlon to the County and wa. per- mltted an addltional 75,000 square feet of office space wlthout Westlnghouae'a opposition, He stated that declsiona on these iseue8 were aade based on the tact that the 1981 PUD amer.d/llent would provide We.tinghouse with the reasonable intensity of uae of its co_ercial acreage as determined by bullding setbacks, parking requlreaent8, heiçht limitations, and other establiohed County and Pellcan Bay POD regulatlons. He noted that at a meeting held on December 12, 1988, addressing the water and sewer issues, the District englneer advised that the master utility plan for Pelican Bay would accommodate the additional square footage belng requested, He r~Eerred to the minutes of the Pelican Bay Improvement Distrlct meeting notlng that the District wlll have the capacity in their plant to supply the water and sewer as the needs arioe. Co-.issloner Volpe stated that the letter Erom the Pelican Bay Iaproveaent District on December 15, 19BB, indic'1tes that the capacity is not available. Mr. Hoegated stated that it 13 the obllgatlon at the Dlstrlct to provide this servlce as developm~nt proçresses, Mr. Varnadoe stated that the master plan has the capacity tor ~his .ite, but it ls not in place at thls tlme, adding that it wl11 be phased in when development occurs. Mr. Varnadoe stated that in the absence of Mr, Barr, the Transportation Planner, he will make Ð few COMmpnts on the matter. He noted that Mr. Barr's study showed the patterns ot trlps and ana- lized thea, adding that one of the things the study showed ls tha~ the residents of Pelican Bay will be able to satistï a lot of thelr com- aercial trips on.site rather than having to go oft-site. He stated that the mitlgation was compared to the S~ate minimum requirements tor mitigation and his comment was that the fair share amount tar exceeds tbe minimum requirements of the State. Hp. further noted that the Page 28 "'_""'0_""'." ._-". ...", ...."......"...",.........,....- :JANUARY 3, 1989 reductlon of unlts and Intenslty of U$e has a lesser impact than ~he original proposal by a greater amount. He indicated that Mr, Barr indicated that .plpellning" should be utlllzed whenever it is proposed because it glves the County the opportunlty to spend those dollars in advance of the development and make Improvementn up-tront. He sta~.d that Mr. Barr's analysis shows that the Internal system will reaain at Level at Service "A" for all road3 through the bul1d-o'lt ot the deve- lopaent. Mr. Varnadoe stated that what in being requested thls date is less ot an iapact, addlng that he is requeatlng that a limltatlon of 1,150,000 square feet of gross bullding area be placed In the Develop- aent Order. He stated that thla amounts to an Increase at 34~,000 aquare teet of gross buildlng area. He stated that he agrees to .pipelin~. the Impact on transportatlon facllitles, adding that the speclflc proposal is to plpeline through thc payment of $1,130,000 which consists of the prevlously mentloned $75C 000 and an additional 8380,000 which is eatlmated to be the Impact fees for the area and is the only amount that they would recelve credlt for agalnst impact tees. Be stated that they agree to amend the Development Order to reduce the aaxlmum number of dweillng units that can be built 1n Felican Bay from 9,600 to 9,000 dwelling unlts which will have a bene- tit on the traffic also. He stated that they aloo agree to modify the POD to aove the commercial acreage located in the mlddle dlstrict on the north side of Gulf Park Drive. 15 acres, to the north commercial dl.trict where it will be in an actlvlty center on the proposed co.prehenslve plan. He noted that he also agrees to have the Developaent Order amended to specity that no hotels outside the pri- vate coaaunity of Bay Colony or the commercial areas would be allowed in the future. Mr. Varnadoe entered into the record a two-page letter fro. Mr. Barr whlch summarizes the transportatlon impacts of the Page 29 ,,-- "'-'--""""""'--"""-- "-..,,---""....-. JANUARY 3, 1989 8Odified plan, whlch was not recelved by the Clerk of the Board. Co..løøioner Volpe questloned the vested rlghts lsøue with regards to any action taken by the Board of County Commissloners thls date, to which Mr. Varnadoe stated that vested rights i3 a~ issue that will co.. up under the new coaprehen31ve plan, adding that Secretary Pelhaa of the DCA recently issued two statements that are blnding on the State and gets forth their p03itlons on vested rightø at developaen~ of regional 1.pact and h13 statement says that DRI's are vested for the developaent that is approved by the development order without any other detrlaental reliance because of the way Chapter 380.06 reads. Be indicated that it also states that local government3 in modifying the comprehensive plan, are to take the development orders th4t have been issued for DRI's Into account so that the growth can be accoa- 8Odated for in those DRI'o. In answer to Commlssloner Shanahan, Mr. Varnadoe stated that the Staft has recommended the "plpellnlng" option and that It be paid up- front so that an improvement can be made on the tacil1ty that Is iapacted at the present tlme. whether It ls a County transportation facility or a State transportation facillty. He stated that they have agreed to the monltoring that was set forth previously, 9/ ..... Jtecea.: l1:tSð A.M. - Reconvened: 12:0tS P.M. a~ ~ch ~188 Deputy Clerk Boffaan replaced Deputy Clerk Kenyon ..... Mr. Frederlclc Hardt, Pelican Bay Property Owners Assoclatlon President, provlded a copy of a letter, dated December 23, 1988, to Westinghouse Comaunlties, statlng the position ot the Association regarding the proposed amendment to the Development Order for Pelican Bay to increase comaercial development by 600,000 square feet, (Exhibit "C" on tlle with Clerk of the Board). Mr, Bernon Young, Vice Presldent of the Pellcan Bay Property Owner. Assoclatlon, stated concerns that the petitlon has been aodified, Page 30 '-"".. ---.., ,....-.-..,- '.----..,..-....,... JA1fUARY 3, 1989 and questloned whether today's consideration is based on the petition as advertised, or on the amendments? Co..lss10ner Saunders stated that the petitlon, as modifle1 ls being considered. He noted that aany of the objections to the origi- nal petitlon have been ellminated, and Indicated that all objections should be addrossed to the new petltion. Mr. Young noted that the procesalng of aubatantlal devlatlon took over one year, but the people of Westinghouse nor the Planning off i- cials did not attempt to Involve the people to be affected by the 8Jlend8en t. He Indicated that the Assoclation was advised by the Planning Staff that an additional 600,000 square feet of commerclal buildings "111 nearly double tho initial azount allowed by Pelican Bay's Appllcatlon for DevelopMent Approval. He noted that their petition could have serious Impact on the level of ~n':enslty, both inside and outslde of Pelican Bay. He advised that the objections raised by the Property Owners Assoclation are as follows: 1. The Florida DOT is reluctant to concur wlth the Westinghouse as3UJllption that there will be 60' internal capture rate, 2. The Naples Metro Plannlng Organlzatlon Staff belleves that approval of thls proposal at thls tlme is inappropriate. 3. Local issues were concerned that the planned Intenslty at the corner of U.S. 41 and Pine Rldge Road treated the new Phllharaonic Center as though it does not exlst, 9¿ ." 4. Water and Sewer system is not adequate. 5. Reglonal løsues conflrmed with the MPO that approval of this substantlal deviatlon at thls tlme ls inappropriate, 6. Southwest Florida Reglonal Plannlng CouDcll feels that if adequate commltments to provide the needed publlc facilities to accommodate the proposed development are not met, the pro- ject should be denied. 7. Collier County Planning Staff belleves that the applicant's model underestimates the total tra~tic demand slmulation, and concerned about the valldlty of the assignments that produce the DRI trips on the adjacent hlghway nQtwork. Staff does not belleve that the impacts of this proposal have been ade- quately identified and accepted solutlon3 for the deflclen- cles have not been Identlfied, upon which mltigation could be based. Page 31 -.,-----,..--..,---. ..., .-..---- ,_.' . .. ---.......... .........,..-" ..">"."0.. """,-,,_.. -'.'- :J AJro ARY 3, 1989 In response to Mr. Young, Mrs. Cacchione stated that the subs tan- tial deviation project which la before the Board of County Coaaissloner3 for the reduced square footage and all the other co.- ponents, Is a reduction of intensIty. She noted that Staff did recoa- aend approval of the original substantlal devlation, and they are recoaaendlng approval of the reducad request. Mr. Young indicated that It Is the feeling of the Assoclatlon ~hat another profe3sional office bulldlng is not needed at the Perfor.in; Arts slte, untl1 a deter.lnatlon can be made as to whether or not the additional trafflc can be acco8modated. He noted that there are two co...rcial out lots where those that have already made co..itaents could be aoved to. Mr. Young stated that additlonal coaaerclal could be given to Me.tinghouse to solve an laaedJate proble., If they would be willing to reduce the unlts In Pelican Bay. He noted that this will relieve congestion at the Gulf Park Drlve entrance. Mr. Young indlcated that 200,000 square feet at the north end is adequate for offlce and retail space. He stated that the Associa~ion cannot accept the 1,150,000 square feet; th~ offlce building behind the Philharaoic 13 a .istake; and they are opposed to the 86,000 square feet of office at the entrance to Gulf Park Drlve Mr. Hardt referred to the Coaaerclal Land Use Schedule, attached to bis letter of Dace.bar 23, 1988 to Wastlnghouso. He noted that ?'.P tbese figures were originally used by the Petitioner, bet they are now asking tor a 67' increase in co8mercial intcnslty, He noted that pre- sently existing is: Naples Federal, 199,000 square feet gross; Sun Bank, 70,000; HMA Bulldlng 44,000, for a total of 313,000 square feet. Øe indicated that there is also 90,000 square feet of the Phllharaonlc. Mr. Hardt Indlcated that the south corner conslsts of 68 acres, Page 32 .~---,-,--- -., ,_..",---_. ",-,_.,-,.",....,_.. JANUARY 3, 1989 noting that the Philharmonlc contalna 6-1/2 acres, and ls zoned coa- -rcial. He noted that regardless of what the gross square footages are that are being presented: 383,000 for office and 270,000 for retail, the Philharmonic has to be included in these flgures. He noted that presently exlsting ls 4~3,000 square feet. The proposed square footage in the 58 acres is 743,000, addlng that it is too intense. Mr. Hardt stated that the Assoclatlon feels that the petltion should be denled, but noted that if the Board of County Commissioners ls looking for an alternative. a reasonable compromise would be to allow the Speclalty Center, conslstlng of 270,000 square feet, and the existing authorized office space of 350,000 square feet, for a total of 620,000 square feet, Mr. Hardt noted that because Weøtinghousc rejected the Association's proposal, they are prepared to object to their petition, .. aodlfied for the followlng reasons: Therc have been no reasons presented as to why this petltion should be granted; unclear understandlng of why the County approved the 1981 PUD, eli8inating all the square footage limitations; no vested rlghts created by the 1981 PUD; the land is not under-utillzed, as the Petltioner claims It is; there ls not a shortage at land or avallable space; there ls not a l~ck of otflce space or retal1 space in Colller County; there will be no public benefit by the increase in traffic and congestion; ~ inadequate capaclty relating to sewer. He requested that the petition be denied. Mr. Robert Nunes, B06 Pineside Lane, Pelican Bay, stated that he aoved to Pellcan Bay because it was advertlsed by Westinghouse as a low density premium development, He indicated that he belleveB there should be adequate time for the homeowners and Staff to revlew the new proposal, Ho notod that physical impacts on the resldents of Pelican Bay needs to be addressed; the denalty in commerclal development needs Page 33 -"--"'--'" _... .---- ,- J'...«UARY 3, 1989 to be looked at in more detail; Mr, Davld Bennett, Director of the Park Shore Association, cited opposition to the petitlon for the followlng reasons: existlng traffic probleas on Seagate Drlve, West Boulevard, Crayton Road and U.S. '1; no factor ha3 been Included for the addition of the Philharaonlc Performing Arts Center, He indlcated that approval of thi8 petition will set an undesirable precedent tor other developers, l.e. after-the-tact amendments. 'Depg~ Clerk Mendez replaced DeJQ~ Clerk Bottaan at this ~i... Mr. Harr! Hoffmeister, President of the Crayton Road Association, advlaed that subsequent to notlficatlon of the proposed amendment, the Assoclatlon met to discuss all the pertinent issues involved, and it was the general conaenSU3 that the proposal was beyond what was anticipated for the area, He noted that In the early part ot 1988, under the auspices of the Clty Manager and the City Engineer, the Crayton Road Aasociation, Park Shore Assoclation, Seagate Association, Coquina Sands and the property ownera were Invlted to discuss the iapact of growth on the Seagate and Crayton Road areas, He stated that the Pellcan Bay Westinghouse development wocld be a serious detriaent and Impact to the quallty of llte in the communlty. Mr. George Keller, Preaident of the Colller County Clvlc RI- Federation, stated that land la expected to become more expenslve, and each developer that applles for development wl11 be requesting acre and acre as time goes by. He stated that development should be baaed on what is beneflclal to the community and not how much acney a developer can get on a piece of land. He noted that the Plannlng eo..is.lon denled the petition, and the revised amendment does not eubstantially change the development. He stated that if the changes are eubstantlal, the developer should go back to the Plannlng Page 34. . ""-. ,-- _0__,..._- _"__0.,.",,_....-- ", JANUARY 3, 1989 C088Is.Ion tor further review or the petitlon should be denied by the Board. Be stated that due to the compromises inltiated, Staff has changed its positlon in the matter. He indlcated that plans should be made speclflc ~)d exceptions should not be made, Mr. Ron Pennlngton, representlng the Moorings Property Owners As80clation, stated that approval of the development wIll affect the Moorings area as well as surroundlng coacunitles by increasing the traffic flow of the areas. He noted that presently the Ccunty has a water problea which will be further aggravated by the development, and the quality of llfe In the area will be degradated, M3. Pat Pilcher, of the Vanderbllt Beach Property Owners A880ciation. stated that the d~~elopaent will be detrimental to the area as It will further burden the a,s. 41. Vanderbilt Beach Road traffic. ~he noted that the left-turn lane at Vanderbilt Beach Road is inadequate, and expressed strong oppositlon to the petition. Mr. Alan Koreot, of 350 Bowline Bend. referred to hls letter dated Deceaber 3, 1988, whlch delineates his opposition to the proposed development. He noted that Westlnghouse Communitles of Naples. Inc. presently bas 802,000 ot gross bullding. plus 90,000 at t~~ performing arts center which totals 892,000 square teet already permitted. Be nnted that presently there are 2.000 acres of commercial zoned landa within existing POD's. He suggested that the development be reviewed 9&: in ita total perspectlve. He requested denlal of the proposed aaend- _nt. Ms. Myra Danlel, Pelican Bay resident, noted that If reduction, relocation and compromise are implemented it wll1 satlsfy and benefit all of those concerned. She stated that she has not seen any cor- paretion durlng the past two years that has given in dollars as 8Uch .. Meatlnghouse has to make the community a better place In which to live. Page 35 ,,----.-, "'.' .-.--,---.,-...,. ,. "~-"-"'--""'--' ,- JANUARY 3, 1989 Mre. Charlotte Westman, representing the League of Woaen's Vo~er. of Collier County, stated that the League stand3 for good governaantal practices and planning procedures that permit reasonable growth wlth 8Ufficient infrastructure, paid for in an equltable aanner, She stated that a telephone survey was conducted and many Individuals had expressed concerns about the quallty ot life and the sustalnlng at 8aae, Reaponding to Mrs. Westaan, Mr. Olllft advlsed that the Depart88nt at Environaental Regulatlon's "pipeline" option, is an option provided to developaents of reglonal impact by State statutes, He noted that the State's and the County's Transportation Planners have determined the iapact of Westlnghouse's orlginal, as well as the revlsed request tor additional coaaerclal, and have agreed on a dollar figure that will 8itigate the impacts on County and State roads. Ms. Westaan rebutted that Staff doe3 not as yet know what impacts will resul~ tro. developaent. Referring to Page 2 at the MPO report, she concurred that 8-laning 0,5, 41 i3 not approprlate. In answer to Mrs. Westman, Mr, Varnadoe advlaed that the reduction of the 600 dwelling units will come trom Group 4 ot the the con- doainiua section. Pointing to the map, he indlcated that Group 4 is basically along the west slde of Pellcan Bay Boulevard, Mrs, Westman indicated that there is not sufticlent capaclty in the ~ water aanagement system for development. She suggested that the deve- loper should go back to the drawlng board, and the League cannot approve the petltlon as presented. Referring to hls letter to Coaalssloner Volpe, Mr. Carl H. Bowen, President of the Dorchester Condomlnium A3aociatlon, stated ~hat the proposal is a violation of an agreement which property owners relied upon when they purchased homes In Pelican Bay. He stated that Westinghouse's plan should be revlewed It any changes are to be iaple- Page 36 -...-..--.---, , '-..-.-,...,..-,-... .. JANUARY 3, 1989 aented to the original plan, He requested that the Board consider Pelican Bay'. Indi~ldual homeowners, and not the developer, Mr. Henaan E. Moll, stated ~hat In the twenty-years that he has been a resIden~ of Naples, only posItive Improve.ents have occurred 1n the Pelican Bay area. He requested that the proposal be carefully reviewed and that the Board take a posltlve actlon in the matter. Mr. John O. Findeisen, Jr. of 607S Pelican Bay Boulevard, con- curred wlth Mr, Bowen's statement. He noted that the promises made have been broken, and therefore, he is totally agalnst the proposal as presented, Mr. Bertrua Silver, Pelican Bay resident, stated that if the aaendaent ls approved the value and price of his property will be reduced. He expressed concerns about the adverse effect the amendaent will have on people and living standards. Mr. Varnadoe noted that the Development Order amendment was pursued to approve the Philharmonlc Hall as a new use in Pelican Bay and not a commerclal une, under the DRI approved In 1987. He indj- cated ~hat the Executlve Summary clearly states that the square footage does not count as commercIal footage. He provlde~ the Board with a traffic report whlch indicates that traffic impacts are aeaøured at peak hour times. Mr. Varnadoe stated that Mr, Adley's reaarks pertalnlng to the square footage are based on gross leasable 9/ area, and Pelican Bay's leasable area Is 6,000 square feet per acre. Øe pointed out that Pelican Bay has always been sold aa a balanced self-contained community with commerclal development, He indicated that the Naples Federal bullding was the first building buIlt in the area. Be confIrmed that "pipelining" has been recommended, and noted ~hat if all projecto "plpel1ne" their Impacts in advance, all the road systeas will be in excellent condition, He stated that the Pelican Bay Property Owners Assoclatlon compromise Is not a co.promlse, as it Page '3'7 ~ , -..'" "'--.- ~~ -"..."......",..,...--.""..,.-,., -"-,.,..,..','..,,,,-,-- ..,,----.,"'. JANUARY 3, 1989 i8 1.88 than what Westinghouse i9 presently authorized. Be indica~ed that the square footage changes will be located on the low end of what 18 expected and restrictive quality developaont. He confirmed that Westinghouse will contlnue to do an excellent job in the Pelican Bay area. Be guaaarized by stating that the amendment is a reasonable land use for the property, the intensity of use in the coaaercial is not a reasonable land use, and the north and south parcels planned for c0.88rcial are in the coJamUnl ty act i',l ty aodes under the new Coaprehenalve Plan. In re3pOnse to Co..lssloner Volpe, Mr, Varnadoe advised that the proposal is not to eliainate any acreage, but to aove the IS acres to the north coaaercial parcel and keep tho saao intensity of land use. Be reiterated that the proposal i9 for 10~ acres of coaaercial with 1,150,000 square feet. Mr. Bardt noted that the proposal to reduce the residentlal units froa 9,600 units to 9,000 ls illusory. He stated that the "pipelining" process is a bad policy, and is not proper procedure to undertake. Be noted that the AS90clatlon's proposal is for 820,000 square feet, and the property owners have trled to negotiate a reasonable coaproaise. Be stated that the coaaenta during the public hearing have all been in the interest of the developer, not the publlc's interest, and reque.ted denlal of the proposal, ('-i-1oaar Shan.h.." 8W8d. ..cODded by Co88i..iOlUlr 1Ia88e. ~t 9? ~ pllbl1c bear1.ng be Cl088d. Mr. ~eller pointed out that according to the Executive Suaaary. Staff baa recoaaended denial of the petition subject to the CCpe'. reco...ndation, Mrs. Cacchione noted that Staft had recommended appro- val of the petitlon, and the reco..endatlon on the Executive Suamary 1s that of the Planning Coamission. 0p0D çal1 for the que.tion. the 8O~ion carried unan.18Oaaly. Page 38 ""'-"'-'--- "'--"" ~.,.. .."..,...._---"..,~.-.-.,,"'-,. .,'.' ' " "".".., ,..,-"..__.......",,--, JANUARY 3, 1989 Coaaissloner Saunders entered Mr. Kenneth D. Krler's letter of 3anuary 2, l'i8!). of the Park Shore Aøsoclation, Inc, into the record. (Exhibit "D~ on flle with Clerk of the Board). He noted that the A8sociation oppo8e8 the Westinghouse petitlon. In re.ponse to Commissioner Goodnight, Mr. Olllff advised that the only dIfference between the 1917 plan and the preaent proposal is that Westinghouse is requesting additional square footage. Co_issloner Saunders clarifled that the difference between the money paid In 1977 and presently 18 that the County now has a Road Impact Fee that requires Iapact fees for roads, and the developer is agreeing to pay an additional $750,000 for addltlonal improvement to U.S. U and other arteries that aay be impacted. Mr. Turner confirmed for Commissioner Goodnight that there were co..it8ent8 with the 1917 plan which were initiated upon approval, however, with the pre3ent plan the developer 13 paylng the money upfront. Commlssioner Goodnlght stated that wlth the "pipellnlng~ process the developer ls merely paying up-front to take care of the mitigation of roads that Staff anticIpates wlll take place, and there i. no real dlfference between the 1911 and 1989 plan. Mr. Olliff explained for Commissioner Volpe how Staff determin.s the trip. per day to be generated from a project. He conflraed for Co..18s10ner Hasse that Impact fees are levied on properties that are being developed, and if the development 13 denied the County wlll not /00 get the additional mitigation monles. He verlfled for Commissioner Volpe that portions of U.S. 41 are currently worklng under Level at Service "E" wlth no conatructlon Improvements commltted withln the next five years, and the Growth Management Plan wll1 adopt State stan- darda of Level of Servlce "D", Comaissloner Volpe asked if the Activity Centers at U.S. 41 at Immokalee Road, D,S. U at Vanderbilt Beach Road, and 0,5. 41 at fine Rldge Road have been taken into con- Page 39 ~--'-"""" .."",-",.._-.' ,-,--_...., . .. -~""" '.""'.-'-- '_-_."."'--""""'.' . """"'" """'.-----' JANUARY 3, 1989 8ideration? Mr. Olliff stated that the issue ~~ nand is very coapli- cat.d, and the plan will balance zoning that is on the ground with infraatructure, and the abillty to provide same. He stated that the Gr~h Management Plan does not contemplate rezone as the point in which auch decJ9ion9 wlll be based, He noted that the Plan cites bulldlng peralts as the point of impact, and the current ayste. has the ability to rezone properties. He indlcated that rezones have no iapact on the roadway, however, the building and permlt associated with.... has a definlte lapact on the roadway. He noted that the project 18 proposing commercial in actlvity centers areas, where Staff has deterained they should be, He stated that aa part at zonlng re-evaluatlon program, Staff will have to look at zonlng that is not located in activity centers, and case back to the Board with recoaaen- dationa. Coaai88ioner Goodnight coamented that it U.S. '1 Level of Service tall. below the requlreaent, building permlta will not be issued to the developer, County Attorney Cuyler advised that the petitioner's position would be that they are "vested", and the County has to allow the. to continue to pull bulldlng permits, however, if a devlopment is not considered to be a DRI, they would be subject to concurrency, and they can be stopped. ,.hI'" Co..insloner Saunders stated that he was not comfortable with approving or denying the petltlon, and there ls an area of co.proais. that needs to be evaluated. He noted that Westlnghouse should not be penalized because of the Philharmonic Hall, and noted that Westinghouse has done a great servlce to the communlty by providlng the land for the hall. He suggested that the flve acres, south aec- tion, be aoved to the north actlvity center, He suggested that Statt evaluate the movement of all the collllllerclal from the middle to the northern sectlon, Includlng the property n~t owned by Pelican Bay, And Page 40 ."-."--.'--'" , ,".._-----", . . '-,'" ,,--, _..._~-"",..."."_.""..."-,-"",..,,,, """"."""."",., --, JAJfUARY 3, 1989 that the new square fuotage be evaluated by the Planning CO..i88ion, and that Staff request Westinghouse to continue negotiations with Mr. Fred Hardt. He volunteered to be present at the negotlatlons. eo..lssioner Hasse stated that he has not heard any justification why the petltlon should be granted. He noted that he did not see any reason to contlnue, and that Westinghou3e should go back to the drawing board 83 suggested by Mrs. Westman. C-1 ..iooer Ba8.. 1IOV8d, to deny P.~ition DOA-88-1C. Coaalssioner Shanahan concurred with Commissioner Saunders' state- I18nt, that there has been e~ough area tor con3ideratlon ot reduction, relocatlon and compromlae. He noted that Mr. Hardt had Indlcated that initlally there was a compromise that was not accepted. Be stated that there are sufficlent reasons for both parties to go back and co.. back wlth a reductlon, relocation and compromise, and to take into consideration the residential development in the middle area. Co..lssioner Saunders indicated that the Board was dealing with a project that has a 23 year bulld-out, and the developer nor the County would be prejudlced to further investigate, He stated that he did not like putting off declslons, however, he dld not want to make a deci- 8ion that would be unrea30nable or unfalr. eo..issloner Volpe stated that a number of questions have not been adequately answered. He expressed concerns about the Increase in COm- /b¿!. aercilization that is presently takIng place, He noted that in the last tour years the City of Naples has approved and permitted over a aillion square feet at leasable, retaIl and office apace. He Indi- cated that the Pelican Bay Property Owners' Association concerns and other associations are well founded, He stated that he was .'ltistied with the transportation network, which Staff has identlfied to be a ..rioua consideration In the matter, He noted that the aforementioned i. 8 very import~~t Issue as far as the community is concerned. Be Page 41 '-"'-"""""". "... -,," ,-,.,."",....",,- J AJ(tJ ART 3, 1989 .tated that Staff has not adequately identified t~e iapact on the tranaportation network, He concurred with CommiBsioner Saunders' recosaendat 101U. Mr. Varnadoe referred to Mr. Hoegsted's statement, and noted that the &aSter plan is baaed on uses for the property in question, and the original aaater plan and the revised master plan took all the uses in Pelican Bay and turned the. into re8identlal unit equlvalent. He recalled that the dwelling unit equi~alent for the area was 6,5 units per acre, which is in the master plan, He stated that the Engineer had indicated that 6.5 units per acres would more than handle the six ail11on square feet of co.aercial that 1s proposed. He stated that the proposal contains a phasing schedule whlch shows the normal absorption for the property. In response to Co..lssloner Hasse, Mr. Varnadoe stated that he has been in the process for over a year, and the appllcation has been reviewed by the Regional Planning Council and Staff, who have made their reco..endatlons. He stated that the developer Is belng pena- lized for trying to change the proposal to try to accommodate 80me of tbe concerns expressed, by reducing the intenslty, COll81s31oner Saunders rebuked that the developer is not being penallzed, but has been given another opportunity to work out the lsøues. Co..18sloner Ooodnight co_ented that the petItion was brought to /~.? the Board because it 1s a substantlal deviatlon trom the original petition. She concurred wlth Co..issioner Saundero that Staff be instructed to re-evaluate the proposal, In answer to Commisoioncr Hasse, Mrs. Cacchione advlsed that the petitioner estlmates 348,000 gross building area plus the added 802,000 square feet, which total a 1,150,000 gross bulldlng area. She veritied that it is a 3ubstantlal deviation, and that is the reason why it W83 brought to the Board. Page 42 .' '"""-"'-'-"'_. .._._~_........,- r . ,..",,--_. .~..~.... ., -,---"-,--..---...,,.. ..""_....",,,--- .MJftJ ARY 3, 1989 ""'-4..ioDa' .....'. 8O~ion to &my ~be petition fal1e4 fen.' lack of. ~. ~1..1.oD8r Ooodnigb~ 1IOV8d. ..cOD4ed by Co8a1..1cmer 88UDder8. ~~ "~1U,cm DC)A-88-1C. be deferred back ~o ~h8 Plazm!Dg Co8a1_1cm fen.' ~4 0&1-. Co..i.sioner Saunders explained that the intersection where the Pavilion Shopping Center is located, is an area where there should be so&e coaacrcial activity center, however, the questlon ot how much has to be negotlated aaong Westlnghouse and the homeowners. Cozaissloner Volpe stated that as the electlve representative from the Di8trict. he would 11ke to particlpate in the negotiations. Co8als8ioner Saunders deferred to Commissloner Volpe to handle the nego~i.tions. Co8aissloner Hasse stated that he boslcally concurs wlth the IIOtion, however, Westinghouse should review the proposal with the pro- perty owners to come up with a new plan that would be agreeable wl~h ~he area's residents. eo..i.sioner Saunders stated that a second motlon is needed con- cerning the coaaercial area in the alddle of the property, so that the coaaercial portion ls transferred to the activity center to the north. Co..lssioner Goodnight stat~d that ahe dld not have a problea with ~ adding the aforementioned to her motion, and requested that Westinghouse's attorney inquire about acqulrlng the flve acres that i. owned by a private owner. Commlssioner Saunders noted that the pr1- v.te owner will be put on notlce effective immcdlately, and the de.ire of the Co..is.ion ls to re-evaluate the zonlng for the coaaercial uae on ~be property. County Attorney Cuyler advlsed that there 1s no problea w~th including the commercial portion In the sa~e motion with the undarstanding that it would be part at the negotlations. He noted that Page.&3 .-""',,.--,-- ....-....-.. - """,__0.' --'---'"_..""", ",-",-""".""" ..,., .1AJroARY 3, 1989 a separate hearing will have to be conducted when the zoning co... about. Coaa18s1oner Volpe aakcd if the owner of the five acres will have ~o be aade part of the proceedlngs7 Co..issioner Saunders reiterated that the property owner will be on notice as of today, and there is going to be a re-evaluation of co..ercial In the center, He sta~ed that Staff can re-evaluate the property w1thout the property owner agr_ing to 1 t. County Attorney cuyler clarified that the latter does not instruct Staff to start a zoning petitlon, but merely indlcates that the owner be put on notlce that the property in queation has been discussed by the Board for four houra, anð that the Board would like to see 8Q88thing that ls In compllance with the new Comprehensive Plan. eo..issioner Saunders stated that It would be easier to do two separate actions. ~ 8OUon carried 4/1. eo-.1..icmer Ba8- oppoae4. C-i..lcmer s.nftAal'1l 8DVed, ..cODA1ed. by eo-.1..icmer 5h.ft_~ di~1Dg Staff ~o ."aluate Mhether the cOll88rcial ~rac~ in the C8Dur of Ü88 P81.iC8D Bay D8'V8lo¡88l1~ would be ItUbject to a zon!Dg pe1:iUon in t:b8 future, 8D4 cSe.igDed ~o ~r8D8fer it ~o the nor'th8rn area, t8ber8 t:b8 8Ct:lvlq center 1. loca~e4¡ 8D4 the properq owner ~o be put DOtlce. ~ County Attor~ey Cuyler clarified that the aforementioned gives , Staff the ability to inform the Board that the transfer of the acreage to the northern location is appropriate. If He noted that Staff 18 not '," being directed to initiate a zoning petition, Co..issioner Saunders reiterated that he wants the property owner to be on notice, until Staft determines If the co..erclal acreage can be move~ to the north portion whlch would be consistent wlth the new Comprehensive Plan. He confiraed for Co..issioner Volpe that the evaluation is for the five Page 4. "'M"'__'"--'- "--",.. ",.. .. ... """ '------" ,.," , ----,.,,"_., ",.- JAlmARY 3, 1989 acre ~ract as well aa the entire coaaercial area, County Manager Dorrill stated that Staff's role is to be one of review and he is uncomfortable with Staff trying to determine aarket or corporate strategy Interests. He expressed concerns in tr¡ing to determlne the amount of tlme necessary before the Board want. the petition to reappear before the Planning CommlsGion. Vpca c:a.ll for t:ha question, t:ha 8Otion carried 4/1. CO8ai _1 oner ..... ~=..4. Responding to Mr. Dorrlll's concerns, Commissioner Saunders adviaed that Staff's role is merely as a facilitator and Commissioner Volpe would be avallable for both parties. He advised Westingbouae and the boseowners that the Board feelo there should be so.. coaaer- cial square footage in the area of the Pavilion Shopping Center. In regard to the advertislng concerns, he advlaed that whatever time trase i. c08fortable for Staff to submit the amended petition to the Planning Coaalsslon would be acceptable. 1t8c88a: 2:2& P.M. - Reccmven.e4: 2:40 P.M. at which t18e Deputy Clerk hDyon replaced Deputy Clerk MeDdez It- nJ'l RZSOLUTXcø: 89-1 CRUTI.G THE POSITIOn AXD SALARY RUGU J'OJl All &avl.-.'-......¡;AL SDVICU ADMI.ISTRATOR AJrD A PROJECT M.IJL\GDDDI'1' DIDCTOJl - ADOr];&U. COOB'TY MAJIAOER' S REORGAJlIZATIO. CO.CEP1' PLAJI - Arr,ftOvlW County Manager Dorrill atated that as a result of an Increase for potential development problems and trylng to antlcipate what the coa- /#¿ aunity wanta the government to be, an oplnion survey was done last apring and as a result of this three areas were Identified that the cO88Unity i8 mo8t concerned wlth, namely, the aanageaent of growth with an emphasis on the prudent use of taxpayers money; transportation and the ability to move up and down roads; and protectlon of the environaental sensitivity of the coaaun1ty, He indicated tha~ as a reault of this and trying to incorporate Gome management goal. and pagu 45 .. .. ", " --.""""""""""""--- .... -,' -" -----"",.., ",.,..., ---, JANUARY 3, 1989 objectlvea of hls agency for the coming year, there were two areas that he needs approval for whlch ia two posltlons reclassified. Be Inc11cated that this will develop and strengthen two areas of govern- aent reporting to hlm which ls an Envlromental Servlces Adalnlstra- tor's poaitlon and a Project Management Director's position, addlng that these are not new poaitions. He noted that these positions wIll have rcsponsibilitiea for exlating departments, addlng that the envlronaental position will have responsibilitiea for the Solid Waste Departaent, Water Management Department, Environmental Sclence and Pollution Control Department, and Natural Resources Department. Be noted that for the project management posit ion, there will be a reclassificatlon of an exiating project manager or project englneers po3itiona as well aD the budget authority for theae. He noted that he wlll have to come back to the Board of County Commissloners with a budget aaendaent, but he i3 a3king that the concept be acknowledged for the reorganization and approval for the two reclassificatlona. In an3Wer to Commiasioner Hasse, County Manager Dorrll1 stated that the salary scales are ccnslatent with slml1ar posltlons 1n the organlzation. In answer to Commissioner Shanahan, County Manager Dorrl11 stated that these positiona, if approved, will report: directly to the County Manager's office becauae of the importance of theae posltlons. ~~ Mr. George Keller, President of Collier County Civic Federation, .tated that he .:1greelJ with thia matter, addlng there ill a blg dif- ference between low and high salaries, County Manager Dorril1 stated that theoe ranges which are mlnlmum and aaximum comply with the pay plan ot the Peraonnel Department. ec-.1-1oner Ba8- I8Oved. ..cocded by Coaai.sioner Shanah.n aDd carr led. 1IZUU1Ú1OU8l y. that the County ~.r. reorganiza~iou CODC8p~ plaD be appr0ve4 and that Reaolutiou 89-1 creatIng tbe po8i~10D8 aDd Pag8 6. ~"""---~""""-'" .,. ' """-.,,,.- .. .._---- J'AJlUAKY 3, li89 8&lary nmgea tor an Jtnvironaental Servic- Adaini.tra~or and a Project ~t Director be a40pted. /ø,r Page .&7 --,.....,......,-,- ...,_. .._."._,....."",." JANUARY 3, 1989 Iu. .nn 1IDOLUTXC8 89-2 &Ax_gIRO 860 MILLIOR OJ' THE 888 MILLIOJr RDOUltCE ~..x 8OXD ISSUE UITIL 8/1/8i AT A COST or $10,000 - ADOPTED. SOLID USTJ: KUrAGUI£JIl" MASTER PLAJI REORGUlZATIOK PLAJ( - APPROVED. COOKT1' UJIAGD TO ADVERTISE rOR RJ'P' S rOR A CO.SULTAn UD A SELZCTIOJr COMMI~__1()_ZV~J!A~- ~Q.P9~~I~~LMœ_~ SAID CO.SULTAJITS Com.=issioner Saundcr3 ::;tated th<1t with rcg.:¡rd::; to the cxten::;ion of the bond issue, he will abntain trom voting on thi3 particular issue but w':'ll vote or. the other matters with regards to the reorganlzation plan. Assistant County Manager McLemore stated that thls item ls to try and develop a Solid Waste master plan In an etficlent and effective way. He 8tated that in this approach he i3 asking that the concept and reorganization plan be approved which provides for a number of changes¡ which is to cstabli3h a new management ta3k torce comprlsed at a nuaber of people that are affected by these decisions and the aana- geaent of this new tank force will COllie directly froll the County Manager's office. He stated that the Gcope or the goal of the task torce i8 being revised to require th~t the plan be economically teasible and that it alao be environmentally compatible wlth the com- .unl ty. He stated that a management termination date will be set tor .June 30, 1989, with the actual resolution extending the bond3 for August 1, 1989. He noted that the advi30ry committee scope would be reviewing the actual lIa3ter plan product with the staff which will be developed by an indepcndc.ont wa3te management con3ultant, addlng that .ÞD he i. asking for authority to solicit RFP's tor ~ waste management consultant who will work with the advisory committee and staff to come up with thia final product. He noted that a aelcction comalttee will review the RFP's and rank the top three firms and come back to the Board with their recommendat':'on, In answer to Commlaaloner Hasse, County Manager Dorrill stated that there is an advisory committee in place that has been struggling Page 48 .,....,-.-......,... JAlrUARY 3, 1989 In teras ot what they were technically capable of doing as well as hav Ing some internal political problems that has resulted in resigna- tions. Be 3tatr>.d that he has con3ented to work with whoever 13 on the co_ittee, but in terms of the zakeup of the colllmittee, it Is the discretion of the Board. Aaslstant County Manager McLemore stated that the consultant would be responsible for wrlting the master plan if hi3 reorganizatlon plan is approved, County Manager Dorrill 3tated that this is to be a comprehensive County-wlde solld waste management plan that zay include recycllng both at the curb as well as a processing facil1ty, colllpostlng, land- f 11 l1ng , adding that he is hopeful that a master plan will Include all these processes and others that may be available. Co..iasJoner Shanahan questioned if this i3 approved, would It replace the existlng Solid Waste Advisory Board with a new task torce instead of an advisory committee, to which A3sistant County Manager McLe80re replied affIrmatively. Mr. Bob Y.rasowak I, representing Work on Waste CoRllllttee, stated that thls itelll was not advertised in the newspaper, addln9 that what was advertlsed only addressed the extension ot the bonds and not the reorganlzatlon of the committee, He stated th<:lt it would be appropriate to continue this Ratter until such time aa It has been properly advertised. Mrs. Charlotte Westman, representing the League of Woaen Voters, /// que8tioned it this recoRlllcndation is tor <:I new solid waste task toree, to whlch County M<:Inager Dorrill 3tated that there arc sollie vacancies and it the Commis3ion wants to change the makeup of that co-ittee, it is up to the Board. Mrs. Weotman otated that there should be a new commlttee as this group ls not being effect~ve in thls area, as they do not work . Page '9 ...,....-,...."...-... ,.. "..,-",..,.....,-- JAKUARY 3, 1989 toçether well. She stated that this matter has been discussed over two years now and noted that the League of Women Voters supports a comprehensive master plan as well as the recycling conce~t. She stated that the League is also supporting the reco=mendation of Staff. Mr. Bob Krasowski c:¡ucationed the advertising requirements, to whlch County Attorney Cuyler stated th;:¡t this matter ha~ been in front of the Board twice and the County Manager's offlce was charged with coming back to the Board with somethlng comprehensive whlch Is what 1s front of the Board at this tlme. Mr. Kra8OWski stated that the only reason that the exlstlng Com- alttee 1:1 to be reworKed is to elialnate the crltics of resource reco- very or Inclneratlon of solid waste. He stated that the Executive Susaary refer3 to the existing solid waste advisory commlttee, but the atateaents that have been made are inaccurate and untrue. He referred to a status report that was given to the Board regarding the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and indicated that he would like to be able to express his opinion with regarda to thdt report and would request that this item be placed on the agenda 30 that the people that are mentioned in the report can have a chance to defend themselves. He stated that the commit~ee presented an outline ot a master plan and also presented an RFP document to aoliclt input from interested par- ties. He stated that there are people that arc promotlng resource recovery for varlous reasons and trylng to discredit the committee. //¿ Be stated that he would suggest that the Board not go forward with tho recoaaendatlon of Staff, He stated that after 3-1/2 years of looking into the solid waste i33ue, there should not be anymore money spent by County Government to extend this bond lssue, 'fIIp8" Mr. George Keller, President of Collier County Civic Federation, .t.tad that the process should be an open mind and to find out what 1s Page ðO ---- -'~'..."'- ,,«-._- .- ,.....-""",.--- JAIfUARY 3, 1989 the aost beneficial way of getting rid of solid waste in Collier County. He noted that set ting up the task torce 9hould have been done a long tiae ago and rccycling 3hould be in9titutcd il1medlately. He noted that the County nccd3 to move torward on thi3 matter. AlGa, he feels that the County nhould be operating this plant and not someone from the private Gcctor. He quc:3tioned if bond coun::¡el knows for sure that the investment credits will be extended? Mr. Daniel George, Tax Partner of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby, & MacRae in Row York Clty, stated that when the Tax Retorm Act of 1986 was passed, there were certain broad grandfathering provisions applied to certain Golld waste facilities, adding that it i39uers or governmental planning facilitics took certain stepa prior to the year end 1985, the law sald that when they did a plant it would have certain tax advantages that were eliminated and would be entitled to a step-down investment tax credit. He stated that the tax advantages at this tilDe would probably result in a net present value benefit to the bullder, and therefore, to the ultimate recipient of the gervlce, it would be between 8 and 10\. He 3tatcd that Collicr County expended a slgnlfl- cant aaount of money prior to year-end and there waG also a signed aervlce contract with a vendor, but there are grey areas where an equlty tax consultant would have to be hired to give a tax oplnion. Be stated that some of t."Ie grey area3 involve the aervlco contract that was signed and has now been resclnded and the expendlture of the //~ project that was made prior to year-end, but with a questlon of what the project is, adding that there will have to ultimately be some guidance from IRS by the law firm that gives the tax oplnion. He indlcated that IRS i:; giving favorable rulings it the project Is sll11i- lar to the project that was contemplated in the beginnlng, that Is, if Colller County decides to do a resource recovery facility that involves some sort of combustion that 13 similar to the orig~nally Page ell ._-,"-, .----".---....".-- .. ,....-. . ..-".---.------,..--,.,-."" ,,-----,- JANUARY 3, 1989 cO8pleted ~roject. He stated that he cannot guarantee that the tax benefIts would be there, but there io a high probabllity. In anøwer to Commissioner H.:1S3e, Bruce Pulver ot PaineWebber stated that the $10,000 is the coot to August 1, 1989, which covers the trustee, the tender agent, and the rating agencies. He stated that hls flra gets nothing out of it, He noted that baslcally $5,000 will be for the tender agent for certlflcates that are passed between old buyers and new buyers; $1,100 is for the trustee for malntaining the account3 for Collier County; and $3,000 i3 for the rating agencies whlch gi~e a rating to the bond issue. Clerk Gile3 questioned it the County should get a rullng on this issue and indicate what 3cenarios are likely tor the County, to which Mr. George stated that it a vendor is chosen, he would ask for repre- sentatIon from the County indicating that the County spent $200,000 prior to December 31, 1~85, He stated that the vendor will then take the risk to make sure that he gets the tax advantagcs, He stated that It would not be prude~t at thi3 time to get a pr i...ate letter rullng fr~m the IRS because there is not a speclfic project at this time. Co..issloner Saunders stated that the County io in the exact same place they were in Dccembc r, adding that there i3 an Issue of whether the banda should be extended tor 6 months on the posslblllty that /~ there may be oome tax benefits that would be bcnetlcial to the rate- payer:» of the solid wB3te oystcm. He stated that this 10 not known at this time because it Is not Known what type of systcm wl11 be bullt. He stated that by extending the bonds, it Is simply keeping thls issue allve for another 6 months, adding that during that time period, it could be determined that there will not be a resource recovery taci- I1ty and then $10,000 would be spent tor nothing, He noted that if it 1. deteralned that a resource recovery facility is wanted withln the County and the County i3 eligible for the tax benefits, then the Page &2 -""-,,,."""."'-"'- ...-...-,--...-.,..-"., ,.....,. JANUARY 3, 1989 $10,000 cost wlll have saved the ratepayers mlllions of dollars over the I1fe of the project. CO..18sioner Volpe questiQned how long the bonds will remain outstanding, t.:. which Mr. Pulver stated that they remain outstanding until Collier County decides on a project. Mr. To. Giblln of Nabors, Giblin, Steffan, and Hickerson, stated that prlor to August, he will look at what has been done and if the County 13 going to proceed with some type of solid waste plan that involves resource recovery or energy, the bonds will be extended out further, but if the County decides not to go with such a project, then he wl11 let the bonds "drop dead" as of August 1. 1989. Mr. Irvlng Berzon, lIICaber of the Solid Waste Advlsory Commlttee, stated t~t he feels that this bond Issue should be renewed and he would go along with the recommendation at staff, He stated that he would strongly urge the Commission to dlaband the existing Solld Waste Advisory Committee as they serve no useful function in its present for.. Be stated that a committee needs to work honestly and objec- tively with Staff. He stated that he was against the $88 alllion pro- ject and if the County was proposing an $88 million incln~rator this date, he would stll1 oppose it, but there has to be some form of energy recovery project done, He stated that he feels that the $10,000 cost to extend these bonds is worth the chance In order for the County to prepare a master plan. //S- ~4..1oDer Baa.. aoved, ..condad by Co8ai..ioner Volpe and carried 410, (Co8a1..ioner Saunders aba~ained), that Resolution 89-2 ~~t"G 060 ~llion of the $88 aillion Reeource Recovery BoD4 i8eue until 111 Iii at a cost of $10,000 be adopted. ec-.s...icmer Shanahan 8OVed, ..condad by Co-i.sioner OoodDigh~ aDd carried n~_nS8nU8ly, that the SoUd NiUlte Manag...nt Maeter Plan 8eorv-n4'ation Plan providing a new Solid Naete Manage88D~ Task Worce P8ge ea --- -------."',,..-..... . "> -, _._'..0.'.""'.. JAJrOAKY 3. un CO8pr18ed at a Taak Force Director and Manager. Prote.eienal CO88dt- ~-. aDd Ci tizena Adv i8Ory Co8ai ttee be approved; that a r."i88d pro- jec:~ goal 1Jta~~t requiring the aaater plan to be enviroD88D~ally aDd .c~~calJy t...ible be approved; that ~he revi88d projec~ echa- dule ~ era1na ~ 1Dg on J una 3 O. 1989. be approved; that the revi88d 8dvi- eory CO88d~t- r8eponaibilitie. liaiting ~he co..itt- to review aDd c~ "1: OlD the ...~er plan d.ocuaent. developed by tbe prote..ional CO881~t- be approved; that an appointaent at a cOD8Ultan~ ..løc1:ion ~~~- be apploved: that an appoinu.ent ot . qualltied 8Olid ....~e ---s. IAt COD.8Ultant be approved; that tbe County Manager be aut:hor1.zed ~o adv8rti.. tor R.eqa.eet tor Propo_18 tor a qualified Solid "'U &D.g1neering con8Ultant to aa.iet tbe taak torce; and ~~ th8 Solid ...te &D.gineering Con8uI~ant Selection Co8aitt_. aade up at th8 Coan tv Manager. the A8. i. t an t Coun ty Manage r. the Finanee DÚ'8CtOr. the County Attorney and the EDviroD8ental Servic- LA.fnt.~rator be authorized to evaluate coD8Ultan~ propo_le and re<> ~ to the Board the top three coneultant. in order of pre- f 8r8DC8. //¿, Page 54 ....----,.. . .--..--."."'-- -..' .. JANUARY 3, 1989 I~ n1.A1A2 ~~ '---'~.S 8~-&8¡ 8~-63¡ 8~-8&/86¡ 8~-68/12¡ 8~-76/7&¡ "'77/'78: UD ....0/82 - ADOl'TlW c-i..1oner Goodnight 8OVed. ..ccmðed by Co88.1..ioner ..... and carr~ ~'~ly. that Budge~ Aaen48enta 89-&8¡ 8~-13¡ 8i-Ia/II. 89-68/72: 8i-76/7a: 89-77/78: and 89-80/82 be a40pted. It- .11Ü DUUU&X M&aWlA'lX RESOLOTIOJI 89-1 - ADOPTED C-i..ioner Goodnight 8OVed. ..conded by Coaai..ioner Baa88 and carried anan18oualy. that Budget ~~ ReeoluUon 8i-8 be a40pted. Page && ,-...., .. ...-....,---..-.... '-"'----""'-'- ... JANUARY 3, 1989 Iw. .12£ RICB.I.8Ð .:ruD8Q. ItOJIALD PRITCBARD. UD WILLIAM PSCBlGODA APPOIII'RD '1'0 TO ISLa o~ CAPIlI ~IRE COJrrROt, DISTItIC'1' ADVISORY COtOII'1"1'D ('~t-i0D8r Sþ.ana~n 8OVed. _condeð by C~i..ioner Goodnigh~ aD4 carr led ......., i ~ 1 y, that Ricahrd 3an4ro. Ronald Pritchard. and .ill~ P8chJgoda be appointed to ~ lele. of Capri ~ir. Control D 1sU 1ct A4Y 18ory Co8a.1 t t e. . I t.ea n 2JI PAD.ICZ a.u.&. DAVZD ADDlSOJr. UD '1'000 'J.'tJ'RRELL APPOIII'RD '1'0 'l'D ...y I ~.AL ADVISORY COOJrCIL Adainiatratlve Asaiatant to tho Board Israclaon stated that there are three posltions available on the flve member committee and Mr, Cardillo has asked to be reappointed. She stated that 9 resumes were received and the EAC reviewed the resumeD and recoaaended that Mr, Cardillo be reappointed; that Mr. David Addlaon be appolnted to one position and that either Mr. Neale, Mr. Dlffenderfer or Mr. Turrell be appoInted to the third vacancy. eo..i8sioner Shanahan stated that he would like to see Mr. David AddIson appointed and for the other two poaltions he woulG llke to recoaaend Mr. Patrick Heale and Mr. Todd Turrell. He stated that he W?Uld like to recommended Mr. Turrell instead of Mr. Cardlllo as he feels that there should be a change and Mr. Turrell would also be a /,ið balance for the committee. ~_icmer ~n..h..n 1IOV8d., ..condeð by Co8ai..ioner ~tgh~. u. appoint Mr. Patrick ..ale, Mr. David Addi.ion and Mr. TocSd Turrell u. the bvirOD88ntal Adviaory Co8aitt_. Coaaiasioner Saunder3 stated that he doea not have a problem wlth recOllllendlng Mr. John Cardillo again if he would 11ke to be reap- pointed. eoaaiaaIoner Volpe stated that Mr, Cardillo aoked to be reap- pointed tor the purpose of havlng some contlnuity on the committee. Page 56 """"....."""""~..,..,,,. ."""""".--,--..",. ,-.." JAJWARY 3, 19S9 Adaini8trative Assistant to the Board Israe130n stated that the two other people that are on the comalttee are falrly new members and becauae of thla, Mr. Cardillo felt that he would 11ke to serve another ter1ll. eo..lss10ner Volpe asKed 1t there 13 80me question as to whether Mr. Cardillo could continue to serve on the committee because at having served two teras already? Ma. Israelson stated that Ordlnance 86-41 states that only two 8Ucceasive teras can be served, but there 1s a pro7islon where the Board at County Comci3s10ners can waive thls requlrement If It i8 dee8ed necessary. C082iasioner Saunders stated that he only served a portion at one tara and then a whole term, adding that he 13 eligible for reappolnt- 8ent without a waiver. VpoD call tor the question, the 8O~ion carried 3/2. ( ~ ~ ..10D18Z'8 ..... 8Dd --.-...1:'8 oppoaed). ..... Coa:Dty A~~orney Cuyler .tated that on It.. .14M ~bere i. suppoee t:o be 8D exhibl~ -A- which list. the Avatar Pha8e III deed that i. t:o be ---.. t ed. Be noted that thi. i~a. could be continued or it could be approved eeparately troa the regular Consent Agenda. Be DO~ect t:ha~ he doe. have tbe docuaen~ in hand. I~- .14N /N ~0Jf 89-3 CAJlCELLUO DELUQt1D1' AJm CtTRR.EJIT TAnS CPO. L.UDS DC8.t.%I:D BY AVATÜ PROPERTIES, I.C. PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED O. WDRtJAKY g, 1 gaa. BY 'I'D 8CC - ADOPnD c-~..loner Oooc1niiiht aoved, ..conðed by CO8IIi..ioner Sh.n.~. t:hat: It:- .UN be reaoved troa the Con8ent Agenda an4 tha~ Re80lu~Jon ..-3 C8DC8liDg delinquent an4 current taxa. upon land.8 donated by Avatar Proper~ie., Inc. previously accepted on February g, a&8, by the Board ot County eo_i..ioner. be adoptlfd. Page 57 .."..-"....-...- . ~_'_""_._" ".' "-,-,,,- JANUARY 3, 1989 ..... c-i..ioD8r Baa.. lIOVed, ..conc1ec1 by Co8a1..ioner Gooc1n.1ght an4 carr Ja4 Øft8ft i 8nU81 y, that the r...1nlng Con8ent Agenda 1~... be 6du..t84 8Dd./or approved - inc1icat.d below: I~- nUl CHAT"'" ACTJIOaIZED TO EDCtJTE AGJUtDmJrT WITH BRS CO.CERJrI.O MATCBI.O roJID .uPO.SIBILITIES J'OR I'RIIJIDSBIP BOUSE PROJ'ECT I. IMMOULEE See !';:¡ges ,,~- I. I - I. 7i' It- .1~81 LAD TJtA.J'J'O1U) KDIORIAL OARDDS CÐûìluu' LOT DEED .OS. 662. 664. .. ee& See Pagc3 ~- It- .1482 DCOJrDDIO OJ' AGHEDŒJrr OJ' DEED TO RIOB'1' OJ' I.T~l' raR PRURRAJrOZD 8OR..I.AL LOTS AT YD T'RAJ'J'ORD KDIOKIAL GA.RDDS C~TIUtY - DEED 1fO. Gee SN: P'lgc ~.L-:.8, / It- .1~83 un cø QOALUIED APPRAISERS AJID APPR.USAL J'IRMS TO BE tJ'l'ILIZED 011 U AS -.....u&U 8&S I S $ce Paç;c3 ~ Itea .1~" beard prior to Con8ent Agenda approval Itea .1485 ~ PLAT OJ' WIJIDSO.O - St1BJ'EC'1' TO STIPtTLATIO.S__- 1. That the final plat not be recorded until the requlred Imprc- ß7 veaents have been conatructed and accepted or untll approved securlty ls received. 2. That the utllity maintenance bondlng security required pur- suant to Ordlnance 88-16 be walved (the maintenance security required for thls work wl1l be provided by the developer pur- suant to Ordinance 16-6). It- n4.. rnu.r. PLAT OJ' LELY 8A.R.D'OO'l SUCH, OJrIT '!'NO - ACCEP'l' 'l'RtJn DEED AS S8CUaXTY, AtJ'l'BOJUZ); UCORDI.O AJID AtJ'l'BORIZJ: JCŒCtrnO. OJ' CO.SfauC'l'IO. AJID 1LUJlTDAJrCJ; AOR,EEMDT See Page!> k1:J-J}. / - 1J~- Itea .1487 rnu.r. PLAT OJ' TOLL GAn COtOŒJtCIAL C&8TIUt, PlLLSE on - SUB.:1ZC'r 'l'O ß' U'V t..a TI on Page 158 - -.'<"-~-""-"-"--- , -.. - "",,-, -----..-,- .]1,.NUARY 3, 1989 1. That the final plat not be recorded until the requlred impro- veaent3 have been conatructed and accepted or until approved security is received and that no certificate of occupancy be is1Jued until the plan for street lights ha3 been approved by the En~ineering Department, 2. That the UtilitleG Performance Bond required pursuant to Ordl~.ce 88-76 be waived (this work wlll be covered by aain- tenance security to be provided by the Developer pursuant to Ordlnance 76-6). It- ß6" rDIU. Pr.&T ~AL OJ' TRADE CUTER OJ', Jl.l.PLES - StJB..1ECT TO 8'1'tJIVI.&TI OIlS 1. Accept the security for the 3ubdivlaion improvements and authorlze the Chairman to execute the attached securlty docu- 8Cnts. 2. That the Utilities Performance Bond required pursuant to Or~lnance 88-76 be waived (this work will be covered by the construction a~d maintenance security to be provided by the developer pursuant to Ordinance 76-6). Sce Pagc3 {¡,~ I - £, 6 Itea .16B9 rDIAL PLAT OJ' nAC1' .0.. AtTDOBO1I COu.Ut! CLUB. t11IIT on - S1J'BJECT TO 8nPVLAfiOllS 1. That the Board ot County Comalasionera approve the attached Construction and Maintenance Agreement of Subdlvislon Improvements and authorize the Chalrman to execute the same. 2, That the Utilities Performance Bond required pursuant to Ordinance 88-76 be waived (th18 work will be cover~d by construction and maintenance securlty to be provided by the Developer pursuant to Ordinance 76-6), 3. That the plat not be recorded until a new letter of credit is /.$2:, received referencing "Tract G", substituting the exlsting letter of credit for Audubon Country Club, Unit One. It:- .16Dl ...... FAÇIt.ITIU .&tmt~T FOR WOODSIDE L.AJI'ES TO BE RECORDED See Page:; OR Book 1406 Pages 1590 -~593 It:- .1401 aaor.unOJl U-' AUTBORIZUO TO JCœCO'fIOJI UD ACCEP'l'AJrCZ OJ' .I.OJtEDœJrr -I...... TO STAn OJ' FLORIDA, DEPAJtTJouuIT OJ' COMMUJrITY Al'J'AIRS, AJID COI.I..XD Ouu..n IlEOARDI.O CERTAIN DŒRODCY ~AOEMEJIT RZLAnD ~¿Y~TXU -------.,--- '-. -- See Pages ~:l- r. / - &.d. 0 I~- .1402 Page 69 .----.-... ."- --...,"-.,...--. ..,.--. -'-- JANUARY 3, 1~89 ~0Jr 89-6 APPROVI.O '1'1DC COLLIER COtJJrTY PEACETIME D(DQDCT PL.Uf See Page -6.~...,lJ. , Iu. nc.G3 D%R& DI8 mrrr J'Oa 'I'D COUJI'1'Y WAIK, .:JAJroARY 10& - 21, 19 8 9 AT JIO CIIAJaJE ro TD COLLID \,iUU.n WAIR BOARD Iu. ndl '--au.. .LCA%D OJ' COJtRECrIOJr TO '1'1DC TAX ROLLS AS PlŒSDTED BY 'fD ~ . J: APPItAIID' S ORICZ 1988 TANGIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY 1988-61/64 12/14/88 - 12/22/88 %~ nØ2 D%8& a&IJr TIXI r;)Jt IIDIA'fB .OS. 49202, 1581570, 38441, 158101, 315184, 04728. ~13, U888, 68046, 68880, 211502. AJrD 69868 It- .1"0 SA1'%SFACTImr OF LID rOR SERVICES or '1'1DC Pt7BLIC DD'DDER See Pages ~ -II, I - H. /.!L I~- .1". III-"~a~ COUZSPO.DùCZ - I'ILED AJr])/OR REWERUD There being no objection, the Chair directed that the following 8iscellaneous correapondencc be tiled and/or referred to the various departlM!nt::a as indicated below: 1. Letter dated 12/9/88 to BCC Chalraan trom William K, Clark, Executive Director, Area Agency on Aglng, re Seml-Annual CCI a Title III-B Monitoring Visit. xc: Kevin O'Donnell; Filed. 2, Memo dated 12/'/88 to All Local Governments, Eliglble /.17 Entitieø, Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkcr Organizatlonø and Other Interested Partie::a from Bud Parmer, Director, Divlsion of Housing and Communlty Development, DCA, re Notlce of Fund Availability " Community Services Block Grant, xc: Nell Dorrll1; To. 0 llit f; and Filed. 3. Letter dated 12/15/88 to B. L. Saunders from Thomas B. Yeatman, Community Program Adminlstrator, DCA, re FY 1988 Coaaunlty Development Block Cr.:1nt Program on 12/29/88 at 9:00 A.M. xc: Neil Dorrill; Tom 011 itf; and Filed. 4. Letter dated 12/20/88 to Colleague from Thomas G, Pelham, Chairman State Emergency Response Commis3ion tor Hazardous Materials, DCA, re new federal and state law known as Tltle III, Emergency Planning and Communlty Right-To--Know. xc: Neil Dorrill; Tom Olliff; :Jay Reardon; and FlIed, Page 60 ,..." "..-..-- . ,.."",."-,.".-...,.",, JAJrnARY 3, 1989 5. Letter dated 11/17/88 to BCC Chairman froll Robert K, Loflin, Environmental Specialist, DER, re Mr. Otto Rosenaeir, File No, 441571855. xc: Neil Dorrill; George Archlbald; Bil 1 Lorenz; and Filed. 6. Letter dated 12/14/88 to BCC Chalraan from Robert Loflin, Environmental Specialist, DER, re Collier County - WRR, File 1(0. 111582175. xc: Neil Dorrill; George Archibald; Bl11 Lorenz, and Filed. 7. Letter dated 12/16/88 to BCC Chairman from Patrick Kenney, Environmental Specialist, DER, re Collier County - WRR, File No. 111565195, Foster and Bellairs, xc, Neil Dorrill; George Archibald; and Filed" 8. Memo dated 12/20/88 to Local Governments Eligible for Grants Onder the Solid Waste Management Act and Other Interested Parties trom Rick Wilkina, Director Division of Waote Managellent, DER. re A Profile and Directory ot the Recycllng Industry in Florida, 1~88. xc: lfc il Do r r ill; Bob Fahey; and Filed. 9. Letter dated 12/16/88 addreosed to Dear Sir or Madam, froa Randall L. Armstrong, Director, Dlvision of Water Management, DER, re their participation of a program of recom- aended federal approprlatlons tor the a,s. Army Corps of Engineers' water resource otudieo and projects in Florida. xc: Neil Dorrill; George Archibald; and Filed. 10. Letter dated 12/09/88 to BCC Chalrman froll Robert Loflin, Environmental Specialist, DER, re Collier County - WRR, File No. 111581285. xc: Neil Dorrl11; George Archibald; Bl11 Lorenz; and Filed. 11. Letter dat~d 12/16/88 to BCC Chairman from Robert Loflin, Environmental Specialist, DER, re Collier County- WRR, File No. 111583375, Fernstrom, Carl M. xc: Neil Dorrill; George Archlbald; Bill Lorenz; and Filed. 12. Letter dated 12/12/88 to BCC Chalrman from Gary J. Clarice, Assistant Secr~tary for Medicaid, fiRS, rc Health Care Responsibility Act, xc: Neil Dorrill; Kevin O'Donnell; and /s-¡r F~led. 13. Meao dated 12/05/88 to BCC Chairaan frail Hey Landrum, Dlrector, Division of Recreation and Parka, DNR, re nolllina- tions for Beach Acceos Initiatlve (Extended Deadline). xc: Neil Dorrill; George Archibald; Tom Olliff; and filed. 14. Letter dated 12/09/88 to BCC Chairman from Gerald G. Lott, P.E., Dlstrlct Traffic Operation3 Engineer, DOT, re notlfica- tion of changes in Traffic regulations, xc: Nell Dorrlll; and Piled. 15. Letter dated 12/22/88 to Chairman BCC from Gerald Q, Lott, P,E., Dlstrlct Traffic Operatlons Englneer, DOT, re nc.titica- tlon of changc9 in Traffic regulations. xc: Neil Dorrl11; George Archibald; and Filed, 16. Mlnutea of Collier County Ad Hoc Holleleao Committee tor 12/7/88 and agenda for 1/4/89 meeting. xc: Filed, Page tH -'"..", """ ,~,_.._.._., '" -- _............"...._,--, "....,--,_. n .",-, .1 !.JroARY 3, 1989 17. .otice to Owner dated 12/8/88 to Gulf Constructors Int'l. and Collier County BCC tro. Naples Lumber & Supply Co" Inc. re South Collier County Waste Water Plant. xc: Nell Dorrlll; Toa Cranda11; and Piled. 18. Motice to Owner dated 12/8/88 to Collier County acc for the improvement of the real property identified as Tamiami/Col11er Co. Aniaal Control Addition by Tamiami Bul1ders, Inc. by Allen Concrete & Ma30nry, Inc. xc: Nei' Dorrill; Kevln O'Donnell; and Piled. 19. Notice to Owner dated 12/8/88 to Collier County BCC tor the Improveaent of the real prop~rty idcntlfled as Street Improvements (S. Colller Blvd.) by H. W. Beaudoln & Sana by Hertz Equipment Rental. xc: Heil Dorrill; George Archibald; and Filed. 20. Notice to Owner dated 12/20/88 to Collier County acc for fire alarm equlpment and/or labor at Collier County Courthouse under an order given by Leitner Electric Company. F~oa Si.plex Time Recorder Company, xc: ~cil Dorrlll; Skip Camp: and Piled. 21. Peralt for Construction, Permit Number A CO-l~l. Permlttee: Crescent Beach Developers, Inc, c/o Coastal Englneering Consultants, Inc. xc: Nell Dorrill; Bll1 Lorenz; Tom Olliff; and Piled. *** There belng no further business for the Good of the County, the aeeting was adjourned by Order of the Chalr - Time: 4:30 P,M. BOARD OF COU1f'l'Y COMMISSIOJŒRSI BOARD OF ZO.llla APPEAL!'/EX OFFICIO GOVERXIIIO BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL ~ . , .,. ~ß'.'1~.o1" , CRT L, '."""EIIS, CHAllUWI ~ ~s .r",'c;.' """ ,7ùœ!s... ç. G~', ~CLERT. ~ ~4....;.i ~ - / ~~ - ~ " ,', ---C ~ ~~~j~~tes approved b; the Board on -- -< ~ /11 P,7' as presented ~ or a3 corrected /- . Page 152 -" ."'--..--.. ,..,-.--.. .."."'"