Loading...
BCC Minutes 07/20/1988 S Naples, florida, July 20 , 1;':;. T.f:T IT BE REMEMBERr:D, that th~ Board of County Commissioners u.., and for the County of Collier, and also dcting as the Board of Zoni~9 Appeals and as the governing board(s) of ~uch special districts as hdve been created according to la~1 and having çonducted business herein, met on this date at 7:00 P.H. in SPECIAL SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the foll~~ing Pembers present: CHAIRMAN: Burt L. Saunders VICE-CI!AIRHAN: Anne Goodnight John A. Pistor Arnold Lee Glass ~ax A. Hasse ALSO PRESENT: Ellie Hoffman and Maureen Kenyon, Deputy Clerks; Neil ~'rrill, County Manager; Ron McLemore, Assistant County M3nager; Ken C'Iyler, County Attorney; Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorn~y; Tom Olliff, Acting Community Development Administrator; Tom Crand~\l, Utilities Administrator; George Archibald, Public Works Administrator; Kevin O'Donnell, Public Services Administrator; Jane Fitzp~trick, Growth Management Director; Diane Smith, Growth Manag~~nt Analyst; Robert Wiley, Growth Managemen~Engi~eer; Ken Pineðu. Emergency Management Director; Charles Gauthier, Long Range Planner; William Lorenz, Pollution Control Director; William Laverty, Utilities Operations Coordinator: Bob Blanchard, Planner; Nancy Isra~lson, Administrative Assistant to the Board; 3nd Sue Filson, Administrative Secretary to the Board. ~OO( 11ô~1'.¡Z49 Page 1 ...--,"' . ,-'-~'-'.' .. - JULY 20, 1988 ~gðl notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on July 12, 1988 as evidenced by Affidavi~ of Publication filed with the Clerk. public hearing was opened to co~sider recommendations for the Conser~ation, Coastal Managcment and Future Land Use Elements of the Growth Management Plan. Ch~irm~n Saunders stated that the Elements [or review on this eve- ning'~ agenda will be changed somewhat, beginning with the Future Land Use El~ment, Conservation Element, and the Coastal Managcment Elemcnt, with the remaining agenda Items, I, 2, and 3, taken in their order, as listc,-j. Future Land Use: Chief Long Range Planner Gauthier advised that work h~s been ongoing within the past few weeks to refine and modify the Element. He noted that the primary purpose of the Future :'ôIJd Use Element is to guide the location, type and intensity of land use in the County, adding that it is the geographic centerpiece of the Growth f1anagr!,"ent Plan, as it relates to natural reSO'Jrces, existing develop- ment, committed development, public facilities, housing, and urban desigr,. Referring to Page 2, Proposed Modifications To The future Land ~se Element, he noted the chðngc~. Objective 3, second paragraph on Page LU-I-26, he stated, has been modifi~d, and is suggesting that instead of a date certain of unifica- tion, ~ssessments and recommendations be made in terms of unification. Policy 3.1 (B), Page LU-I-27, he noted, has been altered somewhat, ~OO( 11B øq 251 Page 2 ~ t' j.' J 0' j -_..-. .." ....__.....m._-'-'- iOO( 11Bw.¡ 252 JULY 20, 1988 to en5~re consistency with the Coastal ~anagement and Conservation Elements. Policy 3.1 (J', Page LU-I-29, establishes a new paragraph, which refers ~o the Naples Airport and the obstruction fre~ zone, which surrovnGS the airport. He advised that when an application for deve- lopment is received, which would exceed "the imagi,ary surface", the airport will be provid~d an opportunity to review :t, and enter it into the FAA procedures. Co~issioner Saunders stated that the wor~ing is confusing, and suggested that it be changed to reflect that even if the criteria is met, the FAA should review it, since future plans may be impacted. Policy 3.1 (K), Page LU-I-39, is amended to ensure that th~re is a compat~bility test for consistency with the Plan, advised Mr. Gauthier. Policy 3.2, Page LU-I-32, noted Mr. Gauthier; is amended to assess unific~tions and make recomm~ndations, rather than a commitment by time certainty to unify the regulation. Policy 3.3, Page J.U-I-32, relates to the same issue as stated in the ab~ve Policy, therefore, is deleted. Policy 5.1, Page J.U-¡-37, stated Mr. Gauthier, is a measure which will allow flexibility. lie noted concerns of "panic development". He stated that projects which are inappropriately zoned, unvested pro- jects could change the mix in zoning, without dropping to the lower Page 3 181 - - . . -..-' ---.,- JULY 20, 1988 densi~y levels, ~na~ ~ne new Pldn WOU10 Olc~a~e. ~r. Gauthier advised that the Oen3ity ßand approach, Pagc LU-I-43, relie~ on the Act vilï Centers for commercial devel~pment, adèing that higher residential densities will be allowed in areas around the acti- vity ~~nters, noting that the increased densities d~ not apply within Coldc~ Gate Estates. ~~. Gauthier referred to Page LU-I-44, noting that it is an incen- tive, ~nd a recognition of existing patterns of higher density, adja- cent ~~ the small infill parc~ls, allowing a ~ransition, and at the same time, encourage that these areas be developed. ~r. Gauthier stated that Page LU-I-45, relates to Residential Densities within Activity Centers within the Traffic Congestion Area. He noted that it is proposed that 50\ of the Activity Centers, be allowed to be zoned and developed as commercial, with the balance coœprised of a mixed use area, i.e. institutional or public uses. fie advis~d that currently, 4 units per acre are permitted within the trafri~ congestion area, adding that a slightly higher density is pro- posed to ensure the mix use character. A discussion took place regarding the language 35 it is written. The consensus was to modify the language as follows: "Unless it is incre~sed through conversion of commercial zonlng,JSe of the provi- sion far residential infill, or for density awarded within the ;1oun- daries of an Activity Center." ~Oû~ 11B ø~'.¡ 253 Page 4 LOG, lifi '1'.~ 25~ JULY 20, 1988 Mr. Gauthier noted that another provision relating to the density a11oca~ion system. and the Traffic Congestion Area, Page LU-I-45, an att~~pt to lower future loading, noting the suggested language is chan9~, .Properties adjacent to the Traffic congestion Area shall be considered part of the Traffic congestion Area if their principal access is to a road forming the boundary of the Area." Mr. Gauthier referred to Page LU-I-50, in that, commercial zoning, within the Activity Centers be in the form or Planned Unit Develo~~nts, which allows greater flexibility in site planning, and a greater ability to coordinate access between adjacent projects. He noted ~ne suggested change: "It is preferred that all new commercial zoning-..... Mr. Gauthier stated that the Port of the Islands project, Page LU-I-&3, is a unique development, which is located within the Urban Design~ted Area, noting that a Development Agreement has been entered into wlth the State, and a vested status for 3/4 of the project has been attained. He added that an interest in changing the mix of zoning. within the project has been expressed by the Port of the IsJand::. He suggested that this project be treated uniquely, and development be regulated by the Development Agreement with the State, and that it be consistent with the Land Use Plan, as long as the overall residential density and commercial intensity not exceed that permitted, under the current zoning. Page 5 - JULY 20, 1988 Mr. Gauthier advis~rl Staff her~ma ~y~~a nf tha r~rt tn~~v thi11 there is one additionai change that is not listed. lie noted that the Orangc Tree Devel,?m~nt has a list of specific permitted uses, per the Settl~~~nt Agreement. lie stated that "earth mining" was inadvertently omitted from the Draft, and he is suggesting that it be included on Page [..!)- I-58. Attorney Donald pickworth commented on Policy 3.l (J), nJting that he fecl~ a burden is being placed on Staff, which 3hould be placed elsewhere, specifically that the Naples Airport Authority as a govern"".-cntal body is charged with responsibility for ensuring that develop~nt surrounding the airport meets the standards of the adopted Airport Master Plan, and fAA regulations. He further stated that all develop~nt applications are public rccord, and the Airport Authority has the opportunity to review those proposals. He suggested that the County submit a list of applications within 20,000 feet to the Airport Authori~y for review, adding that they can then do whatever they so desire. and thus, will take the burden off of Staff. Mr. Gauthier advised that the interest is that of an affirmatlve commit~~nt to coordinate development proposals that exceed the height threshold, adding that the intent is to provide notice to the Airport Authority of any such projects. lie stated that the langùage can be changed to indicate "notice shall be provided". Attorney pickworth referred to Page LU-[-44, and suggested that ~OO( iff) CJ~I 2.15 Page 6 "..,~, ......,.. 'cO.. '" &OO( iintl'_1,256 JULY 20, 19fj8 "as recorded at time of approval of the Plan" be deleted. He noted that he is aware of Staff's concern that some individuals may try and break up parcels of land in order to receive a density bonus, but further noted that thiS provision also includes "The following con- ditions must be met:"... ", which would prevent this from happening. Mr. Gauthier replied that Staff has no strong feeling about this change, and can accept Mr. Pickworth's suggestion. Mr. Ronald Bell, of 86S: 10th Avenue South, tlaples, Flor ida, referr~d to Policy 3.1 (J). He noted that he objeçts to the review of zoning plans by another agency (Naples Airport Authority). Co~~issioner Saunders replied that the intent is for the Naples Airport Authority to make their review and comment, but not to make any decisioDs, on a specific project, adding that it is not an unlawful delegation of authority to another body. Mr. Gauthier stated that the last sentence could be deleted in its entirety. Attorney George Varnadoe agreed that Notification of all potential developBent5 within 20,000 Sf should be given to the Airport Authority, and if they choose to review them, they have the opportunity to do 50. Co~Dissioner Pi5tor suggested the language be modified as follows: "The Naples Airport Authority will be notified of all development per- mit applications within this area". Mr. Gauthier concurred with Page 7 - - - ---,-_.,-- - .. - JULY 20 I 19ßO commi5sioner pistor, noting that he will change the language accor- dingly. Mr. ¡;'OL=L<- Û\..JIlt:: ""O"'=" ""'0" II'=' ::>ul-'!-,Vli.::> 5Ldff's modification or the provision regarding Activity Centers, Page LU-I-50. He suggeztcd the additional language as follows: "Rezoning of Activity Centers should generally be in the form of Planned Unit Developments, with the exception of minor modirications to existing zoning district boun- darie5 that result in the establishment of a more uniformed zoning boundary or contribute to improved design." Mr. Gauthier replied that he suggested "It is preferred that zoning be in the form of PUD" , noting that Mr. Duane's suggestion is narrO\ofcr. He referred to the concern of the hotel issue, noting if they ere in the form of PUD, the County may loose some of the stan- dards. Mr. Du~ne noted that he is in agreement with Mr. Gauthier, as long as it ~llows "flexibility". Mr. Duane referred to establishing hotels in Activity Centers, noting that currently the maximum density limit is 8 units per acre, adding that uses such as hotels should occur at higher densities, and suggested that language be added that better bridges the gap between the density set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and that of the "RT" Zoning District. Hr. Gauthier agreed, noting that additional language will be &OO( 116 =n 257 Page 8 -.......--,-. - aOQ( llf¡",~ 258 JULY 20, 1988 included in the Density Rating System, to read: "In the case of Recreational Vehicle TraVf!l Trailer Parks, and Hotels/Motels, the maximum density 5~ðll be determined through the Zoning Ordinance." Mr. Duane commented on the provision regarding infill development, noting that he feels it does not reflect generally accepted planning principals and practices that other communities are using with regard to infill development, i.e. performance standards, establishing general thresholds for bulk, lot coverage, open space, buffering, set- backs and allowing ð level of intensity to b~ established within that framewor~. He stated that there are a number of instances in Collier County where properties are surrounded by zoning or land uses that are much more intensely developed than 7 units per acre, adding that there should be some opportunities where flexibility is allowed to better tailor the existing conditions surrounding those properties. Commissioner Saunders suggcsted that Mr. Duane provide his com- ments, in writing to Staff. co..issioner pistor moved, seconded by commissioner Goodnight and carried unanimously, to approve the amendments to the Future Land Use Element, as modified. Mr. Gauthier indicated that an amended draft of the Element will be provided to the Board at the meeting on July 26, 1988. Attorney Linda Lawson, representing Westinghouse Communites, stated that the County's plan to re-evaluate zoning in 3 years, prompts Page 9 " Ell - - .. - - JULY 20, 1988 her firm to lcoy at their projects to determine if they are subject to down-zoning. She suggested that the County provide some degree of ccr'. tainty to active ~~velopments, and include language that will con- sider a pr~jcct to be vested if they have been in continuous development for a certain amount of time, and if a certain percentage of that project is completed. Commissioner Saunders stated that his intention of voting on the vested rights issue was that the County re-evaluate the commercial portions uf a PUD where there has been no building activity, and not a PUO that is already under construction. Commi5sioner Pistor noted that if a PUD has progressed according to the Plðn, as submi~ted, that would suffice to a a project having vested rights, but noted that there are several PUD's within the County that have been sitting around for quite some time, with no activity started, adding that he would like it understood that the vested rights "dies" after a certain period of time. Commissioner Goodnight indicated that there are PUO's around the County that have been sitting for 5 years, with no activity, noting that she f~els those are strictly for speculation. Ms. Lð~50n suggested the following language for consideration, to be included in the Element relating to the vested rights issue: "A development shall be considered to be vested, if it has been in con- tinuous development for no less than 5 years, at least 20% of its ~OO( 11f) W,I 259 Page 10 --_............,................,,'- aoo< l1B W' 260 JULY 20, 1988 residential development has been completed, and at least 15% of its commercial ~~reage or 30\ of its commercial square footage has been completed.. Mr. Lee ~Hchols, represe,nting the Naples Area Board of Realtors, said that th~y generally support the Land Use Element, but they do not support the County taking property rights, without just compensation. Mr. Waf~~ Assaad of the vineyards noted that some of the PUD's and DRI's need ~ stronger commitment from the County. lie indicated that in some in5~ances, developers proceed in good faith to comply with the Ordinances ~~d all requirements, and he feels that assurance is needed from the County, 50 that someone will not .pul1 the plug". He stated that he feets those projects should be "grandfathered". Attorncy Ccorge Varnadoe ~tated that he does not object to the 3 year re-evaJ.uation program, but indicated that when the economic return is being determined, it is based on the entire project. lie then referred to the Statutes, Section 163.3170 and 38006, and provided copy of sugryested language to the Board for consideration. County ^ttorney Cuyler advised that Staff h~d indicated that as comments or language is suggested, it would be helpful for them to evaluate sa~e for consideration. fie noted that the lar.guage provided by Mr. VarnDdoe has not been evaluated, adding that this is not the time to place it in the Comprehensive Plan, and he is recommending that it not be inserted at this time. Page II - - - JULY 20, 1988 Acting CQmmunity Development Administrator Olliff stated that there will ~ an entire vesting program, accompanicd by Ordinanccs, and if the B~ard desires to give Staff direction to include any addi- tional langu~ge as part of that program, they will do so. Commissioner Glass indicðted that without policy guidance in the Plan, assuring some type of protection, the developers will not be able to have major projects ðpprovcd for financing. COmøiSS19ner Saunders stated that there may be some planning of developments where r~sidential has already taken place, adding that there is als9 commercial property, due to the 5-2-l Rule. He indi- cated that it may be determined that the commercial within th~ PUD's is not appropriate because of the commercial activity centers or what is going on in the surrounding areas, and he would like the County to have the opportunity to review those. Commissjoner Glass noted that in the past, the Board determined that the ph~~ing concept be required for certain building permits, adding that this concept could also apply to the PUO's. He stated that he Ceei5 that tht Board should have the open door authority for review, and with due process of law, the proper hearing procedure. County Attorney Cuyler point~d out that vesting is a case-by-case situation, ~nd the analysis contemplated by the language, is to explain all the fine points and provide the Board with detailed facts as to what is appropriate for vesting. ~OO( 11B ~l'.1 261 Page 12 aoo( llB Fi'.f.7.Sl JULY 20, 1988 It was th~ consensus of the Board that Staff be directed to pro- vided flexibiJity to allow the review of zoning, whether commercial or residential, fer alteration by the Board of County Commissioners, if deemed to be appropriate. **... ReC~5S: 8:30 P.K. - Reconvened: 8:40 P.K. at which Deputy Clerk ~enyon replaced Deputy Clerk Hottman ..... URBAN ARE^ BOUnD^RY DESIGNATION Commission~r Saunders stated that the urban boundary area designa- tion will be the next issue 'discussed. Mr. W. V. lIartman stated that he urges the Board of County Commissioners to reconsider the consultant's recommendation and that of Staff to reduc~ the urban area back to 951, adding that there are areas in Collier County that are already approved for over 100,000 living units. lie noted that the SlO million drainage bill that would be needed for this area would be paid out of public funds and it would be an added burden and disservice to the ad valorem taxpayers. He noted that it will only serve to promote the interest of the spec- ulators. He noted that the State is indicating that land development must not be approved until the necessary services have been provided. He noted that the County muFt bring the infrastructure up to par before permitting any more development. He said that there are insufficient highways, sewage collection and treatment systems are behind, there is inadequate school space, and there is not sufficient means to deliv~r the needed amounts of money. He stated that it is Page l3 - - - JULY 20, 1988 time to be r~~listic and recognize the problem areas and it is üp tv the Board of County Commissioners to mak~ these tough deçision~ required to proceed, but the County ne<:!ds to proceed in a prt;dclt and deliberate ma~neI Col. John Beebe, President of Lakewood Civic Association, stðted that he is urging the ßoard of County Commissioners to reconsider the preliminary d~cision that was made at the workshop on June 6, 1988, with respect ~o Staff recommendation lo reduce the urban area east of C.R. 95l and ~long the Tamiami Trail east to Collier Seminole State Park. He noted lhtll he concurs with Mr. flarl:nan, adding that retaining the 9600 acres in the urban area will require the expen- diture of SlO million for drainage alone and that would be done on a piecemeal, c03tly, and inefficient way to handle the drainage problem of the basin affected. He noted that the proper way would be to save money and wait until the basin could be dealt with as a whole. He indicated th~t funds for drainage, roads, water and sewer resources are limited and are needed in other areas within the more compact con- tiguous urban area without going into urban spraw~ He noted that the Board of County Commissioners decisions should be based on the most prudent and cost effective utilization of funds and assets. lie stated that the County is already short ~f funds to meet higher priority needs and is considering raising the sales tax by another cent as well as higher impAct fees. He stated that the benefit would be to the &OO( 11B ~jr.: 203' Page 14 ~ ---.,,--..-......,...... .-....-.... ..~....".._...._-_...._...".... IDO( l1B ~1'.f 2G4 JULY 20, 1988 landowners, en~ineers, plannQrs, developers, and attorneys, but the burden will be on the general public that live in the urban area of Collier County who will feel the impact of this imprudent decision by higher taxes, higl ~r utility rates, lower levels of public services, crowded roads, and a lQSS attractive quality of life. He noted that the urban area line could be brought back to C.R. 951 with con- sideration Cor property owners that have vested rights and for those that have paid water assessments or impact fees. He noted that there could also be ~n exception made for low cost housing that does not require an ex~nditure of public funds for drainage, roads, or utili- ties. Mrs. Betti~ Gulacsik stated that the urban area should not be extended east of C.R 951, adding that if the Belle Meade drainage is going to cost $10 million, this is not the time to include it in the urban area. She noted that the County may make amendments twice a year to the GrQwth Management Plan, adding that in 3 or 5 years if growth justifi~s including that area, then that would be the time to put this area ~nto the plan. She stated that if this area is put into the plan, all the taxpayers are being asked in the County to pay for that Belle MeadQ drainagc to help the landowners east of C.R. 951, adding that sh~ does not feel that it is justified at this ti"e. Commission~r Pistor stated that the area cast of 951 has teen shown as urban area for quite a few years, adding that it is not being Page 15 - - - ---".""".." . -------.-.--- JULY 20, 1988 added, the Co~mission is being requested to reduce this area. Mrs. Gula~sik stated that when the urban area was first designated east of C.R. 35l, the drainage problem should have been taken care of at that time, adding that she is recommending that the urban line be brought back to C.R. 951. Mr. Tom ~ss stated that Naples has a natural beauty and the South Florida environment is unique and one of the most fragile in the Country. He noted that the County has a local and national obligation to preserve their tropical treasures. liE' noted that once an area is daMaged by development, there is no turning back. He indicated that Collier County has experienced high growth and to this date, the local officials hav~ done a good job of managing and demanding quality growth. lie no:Jted that the drainagc that is necessary should be done in such a way to protect the estuaries downstream and a multi- objective wal~r shed study should produce a plan that would provide such protection. He noted that development east of C.R. 951 should be banned. Mr. Milton Hahn of Miami indicated that he owns 55) acres of land that is south of Immokalee Road and east of C.R. 951 that he would like included in the urban area designation. He noted that this pro- perty is large enough to support a sewage treatment plan that could be ~xpanded to serve the surrounding area. lie indicated thðt this area could be developed into affordable housing for people in Collier ðOO( 11B W,f 2G5 Page 16 .., '-..,-..,..-<-,----- ._'-_.,~......._.",..,-~--,,_....",.. ,.-......,... IOO( l1ôFvÆ2G6 JULY 20, 1988 County and wou]~ give Orangetree Development some competition. He noted that all infrastructure could be provided with very little cost to the County, if any. Attorney Do~ald Pickworth stated that he would urge the Board of County Commissi~ners to retain the urban boundary line as they did at the June 6, 198B, meeting in conformance with the 1983 plan. He noted that the Board ~f County Com~issioners has debated this subject for countless hours and a lot of the [ears have been addressed concerning the infrastructvre needs and are already addressed in other areas of the Comprehensiv~ Plan through the concurrency requirements. He noted that a lot of the drainage will be provided througp the developments that will occur in this area. lie indicated that every project in this area will have ~o be approved by the Board of County Commissioners and the infrastructure needs will be a part of the consideration for every project. Mr. Lee Nichols, representing the Naples Area Board of Realtors, stated that they are in support of the CCPC's recommendation to main- tain the existing urban area boundary line one mile east of C.R. 951 and also suggest that at the County's discretion, a level of service be provided with Sources of funding from something other than the Capital Improvc~ent Funds. lie noted that this would result in a reducti~n of approximately $10 million in the projected shortfall. He stated that they support the reasonable growth man~gement and the pro- Page l7 - - - JULY 20, 1988 ~~~~;nn of thp ~r¡vate riahts of the property owner3. Dr. Neno Sp~gna stated that he lives immediately north of the sub- ject area in th~ Estates area and represents property owners that live within the one ~ile area. lie indicated that it was appropriate to include this on~ mile area when it was done originally in 1974 and again in 1979. lIe stated that the res ¡dents are in support of including this one mile strip as part of the urban area. Hr. William Barton, stated that the whole purpose of this exercise is an atte~pt t~ cause and allow growth to occur in those areas where it can be properly served by infrastructure. lie noted that the area that is one mile east of C.R. 951 is very adequately served by infrastructurer:. lie noted that these properties can be developed with on-site costs that will be borne by the developers, adding that storm water that will flow from these properties after development will be no greater than t~ose that flow before develop~ent. lie noted that the SIO million dO~5 not need to be spent in order to develop these pro- perties. Ms. S. L. Cðrey stated that the Growth Management Plan should place emphasis on Naples greatest resources, its environment. She stated that th~ proposed Future Land Usc element serves developers' interest and n~t the public's. She stated that she opposes this because it allows construction in wetlands in the Belle Meade basin and on the gulf side of U.S. 41. She read a lett~r from Chris Van 600( 116 ~1',! 207 Page 18 ---. --..-- _.. , 1 .. toO( 116 w~ 2£8 JULY 20, 1988 Hest who was unðbJ~ to attend, but indicated that that he is opposed to any construction in the Belle Meade Basin east of S.R. 951. He noted that it will cost more than $lO million for the drainage and if the affordable housing argument is used to develop this area, it would not be accurate because affordable housing could not support a $lO million draina9~ cost. Mr. Dan Wil~on read a letter indicating that he is concern~d about the rapidly and uncontrolled growth in Collier County. He noted that the west coast rye Florida is unique and is a national treasure that should be preserved. He noted that he objects to the Future Land Use element and dev~lopment to the east of C.R. 95l should not be further allowed. He noted that development in this area will have a detrimen- lÍal effect. Dr. Benedict stated that on behalf of the Conservancy he would like to support Staff's recommendation to pull back the urban boundary line to 951 and along U.S. 41. He noted that th~s would result in the construction of an urban zone that is separating and will block the undisturbed natural areas to the north from the estuarine wetlands of the south. Hr. W. K. Wilson stated that he does not recommended any develop- ment east of 9~1 as it will create problems for Rookery Bay Sanctuary. He noted that ¡f the drainage is not property handled, Rookery Bay will become a dead cay. Page 19 - - .... ------------..-... -----,--,-_.._---_.,_.........,.- .------ JULY 20, 1988 Mr. Ken Kri~r, President of Park Shore Civic Association, stated that the Associ~tion voted to support staff's original designation to shrink the area from the 1983 boundaries. He noted that there is a funding shortfaìl In capital improvements and it will be very costly for the County ~o provide the necessary infrastructures. lie noted that it would b~ more cost effective to reduce the area back to 951 than to permit growth in the outlying areas. lie noted that down- grading this arpa would not effect the vested rights of present deve- lopment. Mr. Alfred french, Architect, stated that he is opposing the line that is presently cast of 951 and would urge that the line be moved back to 95l, adding that he recognizes that the arguments in favor of the line are go~d arguments, but the arguments in favor of pulling the line back are even stronger. He noted that the County must find a way to limit urban sprawl and the cost and effect of relentless expansion are irreversible. Mrs. Ceorgi~ MCKinney stated that she would simply like to state that she is in favor of the comments made by Mr. Dan Wilson a~d Mr. Hartman. Attorney George Varnadoe stated that he is in strong support of the CCPC recommendation in leaving the line where it was put in 1983. He stated that it does not seem logical to put the line down the middle óf a four-lane road and where there is a commercial activity center at ðOO( 116 FJ',¡ 2G[} Pag".;! 20 ;~~ l1B w~ 270 JULY 20, 1988 one of the inters~ctions where this line is placed. He noted that on one side of the four-Iðne road there would be 4 units per acre and on the other side, there would only be one unit per five acres. He stated that with r -gards to th~ drainage, there ar~ two choices; the level of service could be reduced for stormw3ter in the area or the residents or dev~lopers of the area could be required to provide the necessary water ~anagemcnt to bring the area up to County standards on a development by development basis or through an MSTU. this would be grrywth paying for growth. lie noted that Mrs. Fitzpatrick stated that she received a letter from a Mr. & Mrs. Seymour PollacK that indicates their strong opposition to the inclusion of the area east or 95l within the proposed urban area as suggested in th~ Growth Management Plan. It stated that there is suf- ficíent land within the County west of 951 to provide for the antíci- pated increase in population over the foreseeable future. Commissioner Saunders stated that on June 6, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners voted to maintain the urban boundë:lry as it currently exist8, but Commissioner Hasse and himself voted against that IDOtion. Hp noted that he voted against the motion because he thought that there should be some blending of uscs between the urban area and the estates area. He stated that he feels that the Board of County Commissioners has to take the position to stop urban sprawl and the way to do it 13 with a blending cf uses. Page 2l - - .. JULY 20, 1988 Commissioner Hasse stated that h<.'! voted to SUpPort Staff the last time it was pre~onted, adding that he had several reasons [or this. He stated that he feels that there are a lot of drainage problems in the ðrea and thi3 could be reviewed again in ð few y~ars and if it is found that the land that is needed for urban development, then it could be changed at that time. Commissioner Pistor state~ that the Board of County Commissioners should consider reducing the urban sprawl and not have growth going too far east at the present time, but there is water supply available, utilities and cable is also available and he would suggest that there be a transition zone rather than an abrupt change. Commissioner Saunders stated that he feels that the Board of County Commissioners has three choices; to maintain ~he urban boundary line a& it currently exists; to adopt Staff position; or direct Staff ta Come back with a transition zone. He stated that if the Board of County Commissioners decides to apProve some type of a transition zone, he would suggest that Staff have a workshop session with the - , public to work out Some details and then br¡~g it b~~k to the Board of County Commissioners in the fall for consideration. Commissioner Glass questioned if the County has to tear the cost of the $10 million for the drainage problems, to which Planner Gauthier stated that this is would be the decision of the Board of County Commissioners. !OO, llôf1"í 271 Page 22 -----.----,.- .- aoo( 116 F1',£ 272 JULY 20, 1988 Commissioner Goodnight stated that this area is in her district, adding that there is a need to make this area urban, adding that the rest of the urban ~rea is not going to allow affordable housing to be built. She noted that the water lines are in this area and the drainage can be taken care of and this will be the area for the moderate income housing. Commissioner Saunders questioned if this area is not designated as urban, could affordable housing still be built there, to which Planner Gauthier stated that he did not have that answer. Commissioner Saunders moved, seconded by Commissioner Glass, that Start be directed to develop a blending of uses between urban and agricultural uses in the area one mile east of S.R. 951 and the area soutb of U.s. 41 on the east Trail; that Staff come back witb a recom- mendation for affordable housing in this area; that Staff conduct works bops with the public and developers in wording of the language for this type of zone; and that the County be relieved of the obliga- tion tor the cost of the drainage and that services in tbe area be provided along with the developments as they are created by the people that create them. In answer to County Manager Dorrill, Commissioner Glass stated that the cost of the drainage and services would be either developers cost or MSTU cost, adding that the people as a whole should not bear the cost of that area and this is included in the motion. Page 23 - - - - - - JULY 20, 1988 Acting Community Ðcvelopment Administrator Olliff stated ~hat basically the motion is stating that Staff will look at low-to-middle income housing as an objective, development borne capital improve- ments, and some change in density ratios in the area. County Attorney Cuyler questioned what time frame the Board of County Commissioners is contemplating, to which Commissioner Saunders stated that for purposes of submittal, the Board of County CoMmissioners is indicating that there will be a development of some transitional zone in this area that will be done over the next few months. He stated that it would not be appropriate to submit this Element with the current boundary as it is currently designated because that is not the action of the Board if the motion passes. Upon call tor the question, the motion car~ied unanimously. ***** Recess: 9:45 P.M. - Reconvened: 9:55 P.M. at which time Deputy Clerk Hoffman replaced Deputy Clerk Kenyon ****. Me. Paul E. lIoy of Kushman Stokes Armalavage, Inc. stated that he is one of the partners of the 3.69 acre tract of property that is located at Pine Ridge Road and C.R. 951. He submitted for the record, his comments, a survey, and a map of Subject property. lie noted that the intent is to develop a neighborhood retail center on this prú- perty, which is anticipated to contain approximately ]5,000-40,000 square feet of building arca. He stated that C-] Commercial District Zoning is appropriate for this purpose Hr. Hoy noted statements made by Mr. K~n Crevling of Plantec, Page 24 aoo( 116 FJ'.r 273 'OO( iiR ~1'.~ 274 JULY 20, 1988 regarding the vacancy factor of retail properties in the Naples area, but noted that his feeling is that the market will dictate the need for retail facilit.~s. He stated that developers spend thousands of dollars to research th~ need for these facilities, and if the deter- mination comes to pass that the the facility is not needed, the ven- ture will fail and the land will be put to another use. He referred to a study (Exhibit B), performed by his company of commercially zoned acres per 100 population, as of October, 1985, noting that Golden Gate has 2.3 acres per lOO, as còmpared to Marco's ~.5 per 100. He stated that the population in Golden Gate has increased 25\ since 1985, adding that there has been little or no new commercially zoned land in the populated areas of GoJden Gate since then. lie indicated that he feels t~at this is a counter-productive and dangerous competitive situation, that is already causing commercially zoned land in Golden Gate to reach unrealistic prices. He stated that commercial retail and office facilities are at, or very near, 100\ occupied at the pre- sent time, with no new facilities coming on line, adding that services have no place to settle, and thus, the residents of Golden Gate are being deprived of professional and retail services they want and need and are being forced to travel many miles to secure them which places an additional burden on the road system of the area. fie indicated that Golden Gate needs additional commercial facilities now. In answer to Commissioner Hasse, Mr. Gauthier replied that there Page 25 ;, - - - - - - JULY 20, 1988 are several proposed activity centers in close proximity to the Estates, i.e. C.R. 951 and Davis Boulevard, the Interstate and Pine Ridge Road. He stated that there is an abundance of zoned land in the very near vicinity, adding that the spacing criteria is no closer than 5 miles. Dr. Neno J. Spagna, stated that he is requesting that the activity center at Pine Ridge Road and C.R. 951 be included in the Land Use Plan as it originally was. He noted that he feels to have to wait for the preparation of the Maler Plan for Golden Gate, before this Activity Center is included, will be another 2 years down the road. He indi- cated that there is not the availability of adequate çommercially zoned l~nd in the Golden Gate area. Attorney Bruce Anderson advised that he is representing the property owners of two intersections: Airport Road and Vanderbilt Be~ch Road and Wiggins Pass Road and U.S. 4l. lie indicated that Com- mercial development projects have already been approved at both of these intersections. . , Attorney Anderson stated that the intersection of Wiggins Pass Road and U.S. 41 consists of the Germain Auto Dealership on one corner, a convenience store on another corner, and another corner consists of vacant commercially zoned property. I/~ noted that the Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport Road intersection is comprised of the Vineyards, 5.9 acre ;ommercial PUD. 600( 116 F~':r 275 Page 26 -,_.. IOO( IlB Fl'.t 276 JULY 20, 1988 Mr. Anderson indicated that the Comprehensive Plan is supposed to guide growth through 1994. lie stated that one of the arguments about designating the Airport ~oad and Vanderbilt Beach Rcad intersection as an activity center, is to wait and amend the Plan at a later date. lie noted that amendments to the Comp Plan should be limited to any antici- pated changes, and not changes that the County is already planning on. He added that the County's act of constructing Vanderbilt Beach Road leaves his client's property unsuitable for development, adding that there are no residential devel~pments clustered at the intersection of Airport Road and any other east/west road, with the exception of Airport Road and Immokalee Road, and those housing units are several hundred yards from the intersection. lie advised that the subject intersection meets the two mile spacing criteria, and residential developm~nt in excess of 6,000 dwelling units has been approved. With regard to the Wiggins Pass Road and U.S. 4l intersection, Mr. Anderson advised that commercial development has already taken place, adding that designating this ðS an activity center, would be the last intersection of a major road with U.S. 4l in Collier County, before crossing the Lee County Line, where a shopping centEr exists. He suggested keeping the tax dollars in Collier County. Mr. Anderson stated that he is requesting that the Board reinstate what was originally planned on the first Future LanG Use Map, by designating these two intersections as Activity Centers. Page 27 - - - JULY 20, 1988 Attorney Mark Woodward, .0;'..:;:;.:..:;;'.,; .: .:1~.:~:; ::'.:.-.~:-.; ;::-::;:.::-tï zoned commercial at U.S. 4l and Wiggins Pass Road, advised that he concurs with Attol ley Anderson's comments regarding this intersection. He added that the circumstances merit to designate this arca as an Activity Center. Mr. Robert Duane concurred with the two previous speakers, adding that if this area is not designated as an activity center, it is suitabl~ for an intensity of 4 units per acre, noting that he does not believe this area is suitable for relatively low density development. He further added that one of Staff's concerns is that there is an abundance of commercial zoning in the North Naples community, noting that he agrees with this, but the subject intersection is mor~ stra- tegically suited to locate commercial facilities, when the long-term policy is to try to reduce commercial zoning that is not in appropriate locations. Commissioner Pistor questioned whether it is anticipated that Vanderbilt Road will be moving ahead past Airport Road within the next 2 years? Public Works Administrator Archibald replied that the easterly se~ment is currently under construction, and the last segment, from Airport Road to U.S. 41 is to be completed by 1992. Mr. W. K. Wilson of Golden Gate stated there are several locations in the Golden Gate area for commercial development, i.e. Golden Gate ðOO( 116 ~:r,r 277 Page 28 UO( 116 w.~ 278 Parkway, and Santa Barbara Boulevard. JULY 20, 1988 II~ further stated that if the area of C.R. 951 and Pine Ridge Road is developed commercially, he will end up with a K-Mart in his backyard. Attorney George Varnadoe stated that he encourages the inclusion of the two Activity Centers, Wiggins Pass Road and U.S. 41 and Airport Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road, into the Future Land Use Plan, for reasons that have been previously stated. He noted that he is suggesting that no rezonings for commercial açtivity be considered at the Vanderbilt Beach Road/U.s. 41 intersection, until Vanderbilt Beach Road is placed from U.S. 4l to CoR. 951, thereby fulfilling the requirc- ments as set forth in thc Comp Plan regarding Activity Centers. Mr. Christopher Smith, property Owner at the Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport Road intersection, stated that the in~ent of the Comprehensive Plan is to guide the County through 1994, with a vi~ion of sounè and complete planning. lie noted tha t subject intersection is a major arterial collector, meets the same crit~ria required of all other activity centers being proposed, and is no place for residential homes. He stated that there are over 5,000 approved units within a one mile radius; the CAC and Plantec recommended that this intersec- tion be designated as an Activity Center; and, it makes no sense to place the burden on the property owners to come back and request revi- sions to the Comp Plan at a later date, therefore, he is requesting that this intersection be reinstated as an Activity Center. Page 29 - - - --'- ... -.--.----....., '----. - - - - JULY 20, 1988 Mr. Rick Barber, Bonita Shor~s resident, stated his support of the intersection of Wiggins Pass Road and U.S. 41, being designated as an Activity Center, adding that he does not want to sp~nd tax dollars in Lee County. Hr. Alfred French, Architect, stated his sentiment against adding additional Activity Centers. lie noted that he is pro the concept of these Centers, but feels they should be small in number and should be referred to as Mixed Use Centers, instead of Commercial Centers, and will be more effective when they are few in number, adding that they are not needed at every intersection. It was the consensus of the Board that Pine Ridge Road and C.R. 95l not be designated as an Activity Center, at the present time. It was further ~entioned that adoption of the Master Plan should take place before this designation is considered. Commissioner Glass stated that he feels that the Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road intersection should be considered as an Activity Center, because of the commercial that is presently taking place in that area. Commissioner Pistor indicated his concern of designating an Activity Center at Wiggins Pass Road, noting the "Y" at Old 4l and New 41 being a large commercially zoned area, being merely f mile above subject intersection. fie stated that instead of f"!wer commercial areas, there will suddenly be an over abundance of them. Page 30 &OO~ l1B PJ'.E 279 aoo( I1B Fsr.~ 280 JULY 20, 1988 Commissioner Goodnight stated that she feels b~cause of the Com- mercial already zoned in that area, this intersection should be desi- gnated as an Activity Center. Co..issioner Glass moved, seconded by Commissioner Hasse and carried unanimously, that the Wiggins Pass and U.S. 41 intersection be redesignated as an ~ctivity Center, as originally recommended in the Plantec Study. With reference to Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport Road, ' . Commissioner Pistor mentioned the fact that the commercial centers on Airport Road and Pine Hidgc Road, and the CrecnTree Shopping Center are having problems filling vacancies, adding that the completion of Vanderbilt Beach Road to U.S. 41 is still in the offing, therefore, he stated, designation of this Activity Center should be considered at a later da~e. Commissioner Goodnight ::tated that she concurs with Commissioner Pistor, adding that the Comp Plan can be amended to include this Activity Center at the appropriate time. Commissioner Hasse suggested that subject Activity Center be con- sidered at a later date, adding that there is no need to do so at the present time. Mr. Ross Longmire, representing Manatee Fruit Company, stated that he is requesting that at the very least, subject intersection be con- sidered as a future ^ctivity Center, since it will be ð major east- Page 31 - - - -"...--.----- --- _..- . -,..,-",.._----_._,---" .. west road for that property. JULY 20, 1988 Commissioner Glass noted that he [eels it is appropriate to Con- sider this intersection for the potential future, with the completion of Vanderbilt Beach Road, but nothing should be done until that time. He added that designating this a8 a future Center, will allow for planning and working purposes. Comaissioner Glass move4, seconded by Commissioner Goodnight, that the intersection at Van4erbilt Beach Roa4 an4 Airport Road be desiqnate4 as a Future Activity Center, until completion of Van4erbilt Beacb Roa4 from U.S. 41 to C.R. 951. In answer to Commissioner Saund~rs, Mr. Gauthier repli~d that this Activity Center will not be eligible for commercial zoning until it becomes operational. He noted that verbiage can be added to the text which w~'11d indicate that this is a likely site, upon road completion. , Upon call for tbe question, the motion carrie4 unanimously. Mr. Bill Barton of Wilson, Miller, Barton, SolI & Peek, Inc. referred to PUO Neighborhood Commercial Subdistricts to be included in the Comp Plan. He noted that the current: languagc states that these Centers not be located within 2 miles of each other, adding that good planning for the community would be to have small, neighborhood Commercial areas within the PUD's, thereby, excluding hundreds of trips on arterial roads, i.e., King's Lake Square alleviates extra road trips on the already overcrowded Davis Blvd. ~rom residents of &OO( 116 ~!'.: 231 Page 32 -..-.,-..-., - ---'_<0' '---- aOQ( 116 Fl-:~ 282 Fox Fire, King's Lake, and Lakewood. JULY 20, 1988 He indicated that he feels the community will be better served if these Centers are changed back to the 1 .ile spacing, noting that the market will dictate what should be constructed. Mr. Alan Reyno~ds of Wilson, Miller, Barton, SoIl & Peek, Inc. commented on the Density Rating System. He referred to the provision regarding affordable housing, noting his concern that the provision is excluded from the area known as the "Traffic Congestion Area". He added that he feels there are few:sites left in the coastal urban area, because of the land values, that can support affordable housing, noting that he believe~ an opportunity should be provided to allow affordable housing to OCcur in areas that are in proximity to the already developed employment centers. He noted the higher density, more affordable housing, that has been recently established in the Airport Road corridor, and is suggesting that the affordable housing density bonus be applied in the area of traffic congcstion. Mr. Gauthier stated that he has no objection to Mr. Reynold's suggestion, and suggested that a simple amendment could be included that would add an affordable housing density bonus to those items that are excluded from the traffic congested zone limitations. Commissioner Glass moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried unanimously, that an affordable housing density bonus be applied in the areas excluded from the traffic congested zone limita- Page 33 - - - ~!.:'~=. JULY 20, 1988 Attorney Bruce Anderson stated that his firm r~presents a gasoline corporation that is desirous of constructing a gasoline station in Golden Gate Estat~J directly across the street [rom the urban area. He noted that there is commercial in the urban area, but under the Comp Plan, his client C3nnot apply for a rezone because his property is not 5 miles away from the nearest commercially developed parcel, adding that the current Plan leaves no room for unusual circumstances. He advised that he has drafted a very narrow exception to the 5 mile spacing requirement for commercial development in the Estates, adding that it permits, but does not require the Board to exercise a limited amount of discretion to permit neighborhood commercial development in unusual circumstances, such as that stated above. He noted that all other criteria will continue to apply, including the requirement that the project is located on a major roadway, that there is adequate buf- fering, and that the project contain at least 2.5 acres. County Attorney Cuyler stated that he had not seen Mr. Anderson's draft, and advised the Board to be very careful about site specific situations, noting that this will apply to more than one situation. Commissioner Goodnight stated that she feels it would be best to walt until the Master Plan for Golden Gate is completed, before any action is taken. It was the consensus of the Board not to consider Mr. Anderson's 600( 11B Ftr.t 233 Page 34 --_. ..,~._".._- --.....---.. ---,- e --"-_e. ' aoo( 116 FA';! 284 JULY 20, 1988 recommendation until the Master Plan for Golden Gate is completed. Mr. Joseph I,on~ stðted his concerns about the availability of water, adding that it should be made a very important part of the Land Use Plan. He indicated that the assumption that all the County needs to do to get more water, is to put in additional wells, or deepen the existing wells, is sheer folly. He added that future plans for 700,000 additional people should consider where the water will be coming from. Ms. Eileen Arsenaúlt stated that she supports Mr. Long's state- ments regarding the water problem. She added that the Land Use, Coastal and Conservation Elements contain optimistic verbiage regarding the wise use and conservation of the Natural Resources, but noted that they seem to be oriented toward identification and eva- luatic.1 to the exclusion of regulation and enforcement, in that, they do not support the spirit of the Growth Management Act. She further noted that she supports Staff recommendations on the Eleffients, par- ticularly regarding the Urban Zoned Boundary, and she would like to see the Plan protect the Natural Resources. Commissioner pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Goodnight and carried unanimously, that the Future Land Use Element be approved, as amended. ..... Recess: 11:15 P.M. - Reconvened: 11:20 P.M. at which time Deputy Clerk Kenyon replaced Deputy Clerk Hoffman ..... CONSERVATION AND COA~TAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENTS Environmental Science and Pollution Control Director Lorenz stated that h~ ~:== =~:~~~~~ ~~ ~~mø h~~k with rpviscd Gap's for these two Page 35 --, JULY 20, 1988 clements, adding that the revised COP's have a short-term and a long- term strategy. H(> noted that by August, 1989, the County will meet thr: consistency requirements of 9J5 for regulating land development within the objectives established and required by the State Board of Conservation Element. lie noted thðt by August 1, 1'389, he intends to amend certain existing and propose new ordinances to meet the 9J5 objectives, adding that these steps are interim and subject to eva- luation and change by the longer-term strategy that is being proposed. He noted that the long-term strategy is to further and develop and implement the concept of naturdl resource protection areas by August I, 1994. He noted that this strategy will provide for an integrated approach that recognizes that the protection of natural resources must address the cumulative impacts of development on biological eco- systems and their component habitats. lie noted that this will also allow for proper development of various legal and technical criteria for justifying these future regulations. lie noted that at this par- ticulac point in time, staff does not feel that this information is available in order to initiate proper policies and standards within the comprehensive plan. He noted that a natural resource advisory committee will also be created to guide the development of this Natural Resource Protection area concept. lie noted that the committee will also help guide the County in terms of specified management plans. He indicated that in terms of this new revision, there is a &OO( 116 FJr.~ 285 Page 36 --" aoo( 116 FI-:~ 286 JULY 20, 1988 two time-frame strategy with the short-term ~trategf to meet con- sistency requiremer.~s and the long-term strat€9Y to develop a Co~pre- hensive integrated natural resource program that is based on th~ natural resource protection area maps that will be further developed. fie noted that over the time period, sound technical criteria will be developed. Mr. Gary Beardsley stated that he objects to the Conservation Element as it does not represent the er:vironmcnt. He noted that this element represents special int,;re~~ groups which ha3 been streamlined and weakened. He stated that he has concerns with regards to 49 items of non-consistency with State and Regional Plans. He presented a hand- out to the Board indicating the 49 items of concern. He noted that there has not been an adequate ~~ount of time for the public to look at this plan. He stated that he feels that Staff has to look at natural resources and give it an equal balance with other elements like traf- fic, hurricane evacuation, etc. He stated that he has seen losses of natural resources in the past but he does not see a concern for the environmen~ in the future, and he would ask that the ßoard revise this plan further. Mr. Lorenz stated that he has evaluated the plan for 9J5 require- ments with regdrds to consistency and for the Conservation Element, he feels that it will be consistent. He noted that the State require- ments are somewhat different than the 9J5 requirements. Page 37 .~ - - -- -..--.. JULY 20, 1988 Dr. Benedict, representing the Conservancy, stated that the natural resource features of Collier County are vital to our continuing econo- mic health, ecolo~.cal well-being and to the welfar~ of the citizens. He noted that strong locùl programs are needed to identify and prote~t these natural resource features that are critical to our area and the citizens well-being. He noted that state ðnd federal agencies cannot be relied upon to protect our natural resources as they do not have the personnel. He stated that the local Comprehensive Plan as man- dated by the Growth Management Act is the mos~ visionary and effective tool the County has to set the policies and establish the programs necessary to maintain the valuable resources of the County now and for the future. He noted that the May 6, 1988, draft of these elements repres~nted thousands of hours of detailed work by the staff and the advisory committees. He noted that it was prepared on good scientific data collected both locally and regionally utilizing state-of-the-art aerial photographic interpretation and mapping techniques not available or used by many other counties. He noted that the elements were " .-', , ~ '.. " , drafted with a specific eye to ensure compliance with the mandatory requirements' of Chapter 9J5, adding that the Conservancy generally supported the May 6 draft element. lie stated that: the revised COP's that have just been presented are watered-down and weakened with rC9ðrds to how Collier County plans to protect its critical natural resources. He noted that these COP's do not create a comprehensive &OO( 116 :1~~ 287 Page 38 '------ _'m aoo( 116 w.{ 288 JULY 20, 1988 !oca! environmental program when it is clearly needed now, but defers the commitment until 1994. lie noted thl!t a comprehensive plan is sup- pose to clearly state the strategy and guiding principles that a loca] government will fvllow in making future growth management and land use decisions. He indicated that these COP's avoid any commitment to develop specific new ordinances to implement the new comprehensive plan as required by law, adding that management plans and guidelines are referred to which are non-enforceable recommendations. Be noted thðt these COP's present interim programs that represent no advan- cement over our current envIronmental ordinances, adding that most of the ordinances were adopted prior to 1980 and in some cases prior to 1975 and there is a great need to revise these. He indicated that if these COP's are adopted as they currently stand, many vital natural areas ~nder the County's jurisdiction will get less protection than it currently gets under the existing plan. He noted that the Conservancy strongly opposes adoption of these revised COP's, as they do not meet the minimum requirements of Chapter 9J5 or the intent of the Growth Management Act. lie stated that the Conservancy recommends that the May 6, 1988, version of t~ese elements be upgradcd as appropriate. Dr. Proffitt, Florida Director for the Center of Environmental Education, stated that the COP's were rewritten at the direction of the Board to remove references to ordinances that Staff felt was needed in order to protect the n~tural resources of the County and to PAl)'" 39 - - - JULY 20, 1988 comply with the requirements of 9J5. lie noted that the skelet::>ns of ~hø nri9inal plan were salvaged by stating that managem~nt plans would be produced rather than ordinances or development standard. He stated that in his opinion, the management plans can only protect Collier County's natural resources if the plans contain some provisions for mandatory regulations on land use and certain exceptionally valuable habitats. He stated that he recommends that the Boðrd mandate that these management plans develop standards for land use, development and agricultural in certain habitats. lie stated that the County has a responsibility to develop regul~tions to protect these areas. He stated that if state and federal agencies cannot show that the natural resources are being protected, then the County should adopt regula- tions. He noted that if this does not happen, th~n he objects to these two elements. Mr. qob Krasowski stated that he feels that the County should not wait until August l, 1992 to investigate the need for more comprehen- sive local air quality monitoring p~ograms as the elements indicate. He indicated that with regards to solid waste this should be strenghtened and the collections should occur on a.monthly basis with curb side type collections. lie st.:Jted that he would like to suggest that there be an addition~l goal added to this clement that would suggest that the County will protect the environment from the effects of discarded material by-products of local activities of civilization. &OO( 116 PJ':t 229 Page 40 100< llB F1'.{ 200 JULY 20, 1988 He noted that the objective could be that the County will establish the Department of Materials, Conservation and Recycling in order to comply with State legislative requirements that counties start recycling programs. lie stated that he totally agrees with the com- ,nents made by Dr. Benedict, Dr. Proffitt, and Mr. Beardsley. Mr. William Barton stated that the environmental protections that are in effect today are worlds apart comp~red to what there was in the County 25 years ago. He noted that the environmental protections that have gone into place in the.last 3 to 5 years have been quantum leaps. He noted that a typical project in Collier County must acquire permits generally from SFWMD, DER, and Corps of Engineers. He stated that there is great protection of the environment by the state and federal agencies He noted that as the Coastal Management and Conservation Elements that have been presented are carried out, the County will take another quantum leap in protecting the environment. He noted that from the development side of the process, he is not sure if the development process will b~ able to survive the growth management system as it is being developed. He indicated that one of the worst things that could happen to the environment in Collier County is that the development process could not survive, because if it does not tre- mendous pressures will begin to build from an economic standpoint in order to allow the development process to work again. lie stated that this is another boost for the environment and it should be that way, Page 4l - - - adding that he is in favor of these two elements. Mr. Joe Fleming stated that the only thing worse than the develo- JULY 20, 1988 pers surviving would be if Co]lier County did not survive and the pur- ?Cse of this mandöLed hearing is to ensure that the developers have a recipe book and that there be coordination between the local govern- mental levels and the state government levels. regulations. to the Board which indicates that the plan is not consistent with He presen ted ma teri a] cies, adding that 9J5 requires that there be compliance. purposes of planning with State provisions as well as regional poli- He reported that Chapter 163 mandates compliance for the place. noted that there needs to be a management plan and there is not one in restrict development where it could destroy coastal resources. that in the coastal management area, the County has to plan for and He noted He want to be at odds with the County. that the Conservancy would like to work with the County as they do not lIe stated that the State objectives have not been met, adding to work on a comprehensive program. He not~d that it is not too late Mr. Arthur Lee, Director of Southwest Florida Archaeological Society, stated that he does not feel that the County should wait two years before ordinances are implemented. He stated that on Page CMI-127, the second line from the top says historic resources, adding that he would ask that it state historic and archaeological resources. He stated that this is a general principle that is being referred to ðIJO( 116 PJ~: 2Dl Page 42 ",..,'-."------- ,..--.""..,-. " '. .. .._~.., ,-,_."," " """"-""'_""'".'-'"" .. . ..... ...«.. aoo( 116 ~l~t 292 JULY 20, 1988 and it says on County-owned property, but on private property it men- tions only historic resources. Attorney Geor<;, Vnrnadoe stated that he has some written comments that he will submit, adding that he is surprised at some of the com- ments thðt have been made. He noted that when the Board directed Staff to rewrite these elements, everyone had the right to participate and give comments to the NRMD. lie stated that with rcgards to the deletion of archaeological on private property it is because under State regulations, there is:the ability to let Tallahassee supervise the excavation of the site and the state allows the development of that site if it is appropriate. fie noted that there is a specific policy with regards to this and by inserting the word "archaeological" at this time would create inconsistency. Mr. Gary Beardsley stated that there are three tests that must be made by the comprehensive local plan to determine if it complies with 9J5. He noted that it needs to be determined if it conflicts with or takes action in the direction of realizing goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Plan, and if it is con- sistent with the requirements of Florida Statutes 163 and 9J5, He stated that with regards to the involvement of the community, ~e indi- cated that he tried to be involvtd in this and was excluded as he was not part of the specific interest gro~ps. He referred to a letter from Mr. Dorrill that stated that the~e will be no changes to the Page 43 - - - - JULY 20, 1988 future plan only unless It addresses lcgal sufficiencies for con- sistency, adding th~t he takes exception to that. Ms. Linda Lawsùn, representing Westinghouse Communities of Naples, stated that she has a specific objection to Policy 2.2.6 of the Coastal Managemcnt Element. She stated that this pçlicy is clcar that this is a mandatory down zoning provision, adding that it states that by 1990 all undeveloped land in the coastal high hazard area shall be designated as environmentally s~nsitive land on the Future Land Use and shall be zoned recreational conservation. She stated that in 2.2.4 there is a definition of what coastal high hazard area is, adding that it appcars that it is something that is seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line. She stated that this line may be moved fl;-ther landward than it is now and therefore, more lands will be subject to this definition. She stated that there has not been a lot of Staff input in looking at how this mandatory down-zoning effects various properties in the County and there is also concerns with regards to vesting on some of these properties. She indicated that there should be some kind of exceptions. for lands held within a PUD or DR!. Planner Gauthier stated that this policy statement could be sof- tened so that it would say that by 1990 all undeveloped land within the coastal high hazard area shall be evaluated and recommendations made as to the appropriate land use designations. He noted that this ðOO( llÔWot29:J Page 44 aaa( 116 Fl'.' 294 JULY 20, 1988 is too abrupt and it would require mandatory down zoning in places that may not be appropriate. Ms. Lawson stated that she agrees if Staff comes back with some general reconunenda~ions regarding this policy. Commissioner Saunders stated that he is very concerned with what he has heard this evening on these two elements and he would suggest that the Board adopt the Coastal Element and the Conservation Element as presented in May and then direct Staff to meet with the Conservancy and other affected groups to modify that language in a way thnt is acceptable. co..issioner Saunders moved, seconded by Commissioner Hasse, that tbe Coastal Kanagement Element and tbe Conservation Element as pre- sented in Kay, 1988, be adopted and Staff be directed to meet with the Cons.rvcncy and other affected groups to modify that language in a way that is acceptable. Commissioner Pistor stated that if the decision making elements with regards to jurisdiction being taken away from the Board were deleted in these two elem.~nts, then the two elements could be accep- table. commissioner Saunders stated that he would modify the motion to reflect the concerns of Commissioner Pistor. commissioner Hasse ~econdeð the modification. Commissioner Goodnight stated that her concerns were that what was Page 45 .. - - JULY 20 I 1988 done in botn elemen~s in ~ay were nOl realistic, adding that the County was going to have to double the Staff to be able to implement these clements. She noted that thene May clements were stricter than the other State re~~latory agencies. Commissioner Glass stated that he does not feel that it would be ,ppropriate to go back to the May elements. He stated that he would suggest that these elements not be approved and let Staff come up with something that is acceptable to everyone. Acting Community Development Administrator Olliff stated that the Board directed Staff to rewrite these elements which was done, adding that the plan was designed to eliminate duplication of State and Federal permitting agencies. He noted that in the cases where the environr-ental staff had concerns that the State or Federal permitting agencies were not sufficient, language has been included that states that the County will pursue delegation agreements so that the local jurisdiction could take over that permitting portion. He stated that the plan is designed to address a realistic work program in the interi. period so that the County can do things between ~ow and 1989. He noted that the language is very specific and they are looking at all existing environmental ordinances and proposing new ordinances where necessary to meet 9J5 requirements by 1989. lie noted that this is a good sound environmental program and Staff is also stating that rather than do something quickly and put something together by 1989, &OO( 11B w.[ 295 Page 46 .,,-^ -,-----, --^---~,--~...- aoo( 11B FS'¿ 29B JULY 20, 1988 Staff would rather do the homework and then come back by 1992 with the NRPA program and then by 1994, the full comprehensive environmental program with deveJopment regulations attached to them. lie noted that the program is a two-ryhased approach, adding that in the short-term it addresses existing ordinance and provides ne~ ones and in the long- term it provides a very comprehensive and fully rounded environmental program that has teeth to it. Commissioner Saunders stated that he does not feel that it is inappropriate to have 'some duplication between State agencies regula- tory activities by a city or county, adding that the voters in this county approved the development of a Pollution Control Program to pro- tect the water resources. He stated that he does not feel that there is inconsistency in some duplication and there is nothing wrong with increasing the Staff to accomplish this. He stated that the purpose of his motion is to put the environment in the forefront and make modifications ~here they are needed. lIe stated that he does not feel that it is inappropriate to adopt an element with the knowledge that it will have to be re~orked. County Attorney Cuyler stated that it is appropriate to adopt something rather than nùt adopt an element at all, but ~ full prelimi- nary legal review was never made of the May 6 version. County Manager Dorrill stated that after the Board direction, the various groups were all invited to participate in revising these ele- Page 47 .. - - ---.,... ." --""-'-'- Jl'LY 20, '..988 ments. Commissioner Pistor stated that he would rather adopt the July version of the elements and then have Staff work out any problems or inconsistencies. Mr. George Varnadoe stated that he objects to the Board adopting the May version of these elements as they cannot be adopted without holding a public hearing on them first and that was not done. County Attorney Cuyler stated that the Board needs to send something to DCA within the time period in order to get comments back on it, but the May vernion of these elements were not reviewed by the Attorney's office. commis.ioner H.~se withdrew his øecond and commissioner Saunders withdrew his motion. coma'ssioner pistor moved, .econded by Commissioner Glass, that the July 7th version with the July 19th amendments of the Coastal Hanagement and Conservation Elements be adopted and that Staff get suggestions from the general public for October so that if it has to be modified at that time it can be. commissioner Glass stated that it needs to be .mphasized that there is a conference ~oordinating commit- tee that needs to work together because it will require some rewording. Commissioner Saunders stated that he would also like to see this go before the CCPC and the CAC if that is possible. Upon call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. Page 48 ~OO( 11B F!',f 207 --",,",-",-_., ----..'"' -. U"~M-'-' ~ --.---- IOOIC 116 w~ 2DB J' , 2 ( . , 'I' 8 ***** At 12:30 A.M. Deputy Clerk Hoffman replaced Deputy Clerk Xenyon ***** Mr. Lee Nichols of the Naples Area Board of Realtors noted his group supports the Commission in raising nondiscretionary funds for Capital Improvements. fie stated that an ðddi t iona 1 Ie sales tax should be relied "d ðS ð source of ðdditionðl fu-,ds. Be stated that the NABOR prefers that bonding for Capital Improvements should only be used in an emergency. Commissioner Pistor advised that the L~gislðturc put a restriction on the Ie optional sales tax, adding that the Board cannot consider that the people of Collier County vote on this issue until next year. Traffic Circulation Acting Community Development Administrator Olliff noted that amendments to this Element have been made which refer to the con- currency managcment plan in thc Traffic Elcment. MPO ryirector Perry advised that Staff suggests additional amend- ments to the Plan in 4 or 5 places which refers to the State's 5 Year Plan, noting that the intent of the language is to apply to both County and State facilities, adding that when reference is being made to the County's road program, it will also refer to the State's Road program, as well. Commissioner pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Glass and carried unanimously, that the Tr~t~ic Circulation Element be approved, as aaended. Page 49 .. .. - "--"-... ,---,-_c,- _..,cc_"~'- _c" " ""..,c"" . . --'oOC ""c,," "...._~",.._--,--_.."... JULY 20, 1988 Capital ¡mprovement Element Growth Manaqement Director Fitzpatrick noted that she handed out an addendum, at the beginning of the meeting, which should be included in the motion regarding this Element. comaissioner pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Hasse and carried unanimous.!, that the Capital Improvement Element be approved, including the addendum which reters to the city ot Naples Sewer service supplied to the unincorporated area ot the County. Growtb Management Plan Procedures Planner Blanchard noted that the monitoring procedures need to be adopted as part of the Plan, and the Plan Amendment procedure and the Plan Interpretations need formal recommendati~n by the Board. coaaissioner Pintor moved, seconded by Commissioner Hasse and carried unanimously, that the Growtb Management Plan Procedures be adopted, including the Monitoring and Evaluation, the Plan Amendments, and tb6 Plan Interpretations Elements. Mr. Blanchard stated that Staff feels very strongly that there should be one formal Plan amendment cycle, rather than the two that are recommended in the package, in order to avoid any duplication in the review cycle between January and July, and to reserve a second Plan amendment cycle to deal with those amendments that the Board feels they can act on, without going through the formal application process. &OO( 116 FA'.! 2ag Page 50 ...---,..", .......,--.-----..- . ,..,.....,-..---..... .... ....__._,_..~-,--,......--,..-,-_.."...." -""""""""""""'--.--" IOO( llô"J~.{300 ..** JULY 20, 1988 There being n~ further business for the Good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: 12:45 A.M. .. -. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS/ BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL .. ~ BURT L. SAUNDERS, on c::Z:7/~/~' /7.rÝ Page 51 ........." .,-..... -, ,_..'...........