CCPC Minutes 03/15/2018TRANSCRIPT OF TI{E MEETING OF TI{E
COLLIER COUNry PLANNING COMMISSION
Naples, Florida, March 15,2018
March 15, 2018
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of
Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in
Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CI{AIRMAN: Mark Strain
Stan Chrzanowski
Patrick Dearborn
Diane Ebert
Edwin Fryer
Karen Homiak
Joe Schmitt
ALSO PRESENT:
Raymond V. Bellows, ZonngManager
Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attomey
Scott Stone, Assistant County Attorney
Tom Eastman, School District Representative
Page I of76
AGENDA
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M.,MARCH 15,2018, IN THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING,
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, THIRD FLOOR, 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES,
FLORIDA:
NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY
ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN
ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10
MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED
IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A
MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN
ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE
CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A
MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL
MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A
PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR
PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF
APPLICABLE.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL
NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND
THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE
PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY
3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA
4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—February 15,2018
6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Note: This item has been continued from the March 1,2018 CCPC meeting:
A. PL20170002330: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County,Florida amending Ordinance No.88-93,the City Gate Commerce Park Planned
Unit Development, to revise the legal description and correct the acreage of the MPUD;
to update the master development plan including designating a Lake/Recreational Area,
adding external access points along the eastern MPUD boundary and adding the Collier
County Sports Complex;to provide conversions to allow additional hotels and motel units
and the development of the Collier County Sports Complex,without increasing the overall
originally approved buildout traffic; to provide deviations for signage, flagpoles,parking
areas, landscape areas and buffers, architectural review standards, native vegetation and
water management;to clarify permitted uses and add development standards for the Sports
Complex, including building heights;to update building heights elsewhere in the MPUD;
Page 1 of 3
to remove outdated commitments;to add exhibits including exhibit A-3 permitted uses by
SIC codes,Exhibit A-4 cross sections-north buffer,Exhibit A-5 sign deviation exhibit,and
Exhibit A-6 required yard plan; providing for conflict and severability; and providing an
effective date. The subject property consisting of 291.55 acres is located at the northeast
quadrant of the intersection of I-75 and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 35,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Nancy
Gundlach,Principal Planner]
Note: This item has been continued from the March 1,2018 CCPC meeting:
B. PL20170002634: A Resolution amending Development Order 88-02, as amended, the
City Gate Commerce Park Development of Regional Impact, providing for Section
One: amendments restoring language from the original Development Order 88-02 and
provide traffic conversions, without increasing the overall buildout traffic; amendment to
regulations pertaining to vegetation and wildlife/wetlands to remove the 2.47 acre wetland
"preserve" requirement; amendment to remove phasing schedule and obsolete
development restrictions; amendment to master development plan; extension of
termination date;and amendment to allow for biennial reporting; Section Two: findings of
fact including revised legal description and correction of acreage; Section Three:
conclusions of law; Section Four: effect of previously issued development order,
transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and providing an effective date.
The subject property consisting of 291.55 acres is located at the northeast quadrant of
the intersection of I-75 and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 35, Township 49
South,Range 26 East,in Collier County, Florida. Coordinator:Nancy Gundlach,Principal
Planner]
C. PL20170000425: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park
Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), as amended, by adding outdoor
recreation facilities as a general permitted use; by providing that wellness centers
associated with employees and hotel guests shall not count towards square footage
maximums in the business district and industrial commercial district; by allowing a 169
room hotel on Tract 6 west of Goodlette Frank Road; by decreasing the allowable square
footage in the industrial commercial district by 6,900 square feet for a total of 709,100
square feet of floor area of industrial/commerce uses; by decreasing the allowable square
footage in the business district by 23,000 square feet to 269,000 square feet including a
reduction from 242,000 square feet to 219,000 square feet of office uses;by adding indoor
and outdoor recreational facilities as a permitted accessory use in the business district and
industrial commercial district;by adding deviations to allow any use on Tracts 3 and 6 on
the master plan to be eligible for the county's architectural deviation process and a
deviation to permit existing street trees to satisfy the buffer tree requirements for Tract 5.
The subject property is located south of Immokalee Road and both east and west of
Goodlette Frank Road in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County,Florida,consisting of 106 acres;and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator:
Nancy Gundlach,Principal Planner]
D. PUDA-PL20170001345: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 81-6, as amended,the Marco Shores Golf
Course Community Planned Unit Development (PUD), to allow group housing for
seniors on Residential Parcel Two A, and to add new development standards for
Residential Parcel Two A; and providing for an effective date, for property located near
the Marco Island Executive Airport in Section 26, Township 51 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County,Florida. [Coordinator:Eric Johnson,AICP,Principal Planner]
E. PL-20150000306: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County
Land Development Code,which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas
map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property
Page 2 of 3
from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development
(RPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the Rushton Pointe RPUD, to
allow construction of a maximum of 229 residential dwelling units on property located
on the west side of Collier Boulevard, approximately two thirds of a mile south of
Immokalee Road, in Section 27, Township 48 South,Range 26 East, consisting of 38.1±
acres. [Coordinator:Tim Finn,Principal Planner]
F. PL20160002106: A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission for an
insubstantial change to Ordinance No. 2002-51, as amended,the Lawmetka Plaza PUD,
to add a third access point on Wiggins Pass Road,to limit the eastern most access point on
Wiggins Pass Road to right in/right out,to limit the western most access point on Wiggins
Pass Road to service and delivery vehicles only, to add a developer commitment relating
to transportation, and to amend the Master Plan. The subject property is located on the
northwest corner of the U.S. 41 and Wiggins Pass Road intersection, in Section 16,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of±34 acres.
[Coordinator:Tim Finn,Principal Planner]
10. NEW BUSINESS
11. OLD BUSINESS
12. PUBLIC COMMENT
13. ADJORN
CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp
Page 3 of 3
March 15,2018
PROCEEDINGS
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Thursday, March l5th meeting
ofthe Collier County Planning Commission.
If everybody will please rise for Pledge of Allegiance, and after we do the Pledge of Allegiance, if
you could stand forjust a moment for another announcement we have to make.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: If you don't mind, the past weekend we had a long-time planner who passed
away from Collier County. He was going through some medical challenges for a while, and this weekend he
passed away. His name was Fred Reischl. So we won't be benefited by his presence anymore. He did a
great job for Collier County. I'd just like to ask a moment of silence for Fred.
(A moment of silence was observed.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Roll call by the secretary, please.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. Good moming.
Mr. Eastman?
MR. EASTMAN: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Chrzanowski?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Fryer?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mrs. Ebert's here.
Chairman Strain?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms. Homiak?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Schmitt?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Present.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: And, Mr. Dearborn?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Present.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you.
And addenda to the agenda. The first item is we're going to be continuing 9F indefinitely, the request
by the applicant. That is the LawmetkaPlazaPUD. It's on U.S. 4l and Wiggins Pass Road. I don't know
what the applicant intends to do, but they asked for an indefinite continuance. They may have to readvertise
for it to come back.
But with that in mind, is there a motion from the Planning Commission to continue 9F,
PL20l 600021 06, indefinitely?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Second.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Made by Patrick, seconded by Ned. All in favor, signifu by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
Another item for the - I just need to know if we have a quorum for the April 5th meeting. Anybody
know if they're not going to be here?
Page 2 of 76
March 15,2018
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, good. We have a quorum then.
And as we have typically done, today's meeting will have a break at around l0:30, wherever a good
break point is for the couft reporter, we'll have an hour break around noontime. Again, if -- we're as close to
that as possible, and then an aftemoon break.
We will finish today, to whatever extent we've reviewed everything,by 4 o'clock, and then we'll
resume at our next meeting, which is the April 5th meeting.
And with that, we move into the approval of minutes. We had a set of minutes distributed
electronically, the April -- I mean, February l5th minutes. Is there either changes or corrections?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Move approval of the minutes.
CHAIkIAN STRAIN: Approved by -- made by Ned. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Diane. Discussion?
(No response.)
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: All in favor, signif, by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: AyE.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Motion carries 7-0.
Ray, BCC report and recaps?
MR. BELLOWS: On March 13th the Board of County Commissioners heard two land-use petitions:
The Eagle Creek PUD amendment and the rezone for the Old U.S. 41, and they were approved on their
summary agenda.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thankyou.
That takes us to chairman's report. The only thing I'd have -- I want to stress, and I just want to make
sure the issue's been resolved, Mr. Schmitt's delivery of his packet for the Planning Commission apparently
drove past his house to Everglades City and drove past his house to get back to this building and never
delivered it last week, so -- and by, I think, Tuesday or so I found out he hadn't gotten it.
I don't know how that happene{ but I'd like to ask staffto make sure that doesn't happen again. I
mean, I know if we have people driving down there - and his house doesn't run as business hours, so on our
way back they always could stop by and drop it off.
I mean, I don't know that he doesn't run on business hours, but Im assuming he doesn't run on
business hours.
MR. BELLOWS: We can have Code Enforcement investigate.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was rather frustrating not to get it. I mean, I spent most of
Tuesday and Wednesday with a pretty significant packet.
MR. BELLOWS: Would you prefer an electronic submittal?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I get it in an electronic version, and they ffiically put it in an
envelope and just shove it in the front stick it in the door, and for some reason they didn't deliver it until I
contacted Judy and notified her, and finally Tuesday afternoon I got it.
MR. BELLOWS: Well, we'll definitely check that process.
COMMISSIOFTER SCHMITT: It's simplyjust ajump drive. That's allthey deliver. That's what I
want.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The only - with this amount of dat4 especially, we had, wha! atthe time.
Page3 of76
March 15,2018
six cases scheduled. We still have five. They're preffy intense. So hopefully whatever happened is fxed and
it won't happen again, but I just wanted to make note of it so we pay attention to it in the future. Thank you,
Ray.
Consent agend4 there are no items.
*+,<fuld that will take us directly into our first advertised public hearing. It's Item 9A'. And it's also
part of 98. It's a combination. We'll hear them together, vote on them separately. This item was continued
from our March 1st meeting.
We have a new packet that came out last Thursday, and I believe there's more information today.
But I'll announce them first, and then before the applicant speaks, I'll clariff some things with this panel.
Item 9A is PL20170002330, and Item 98 is PL20170002634.
Both are for the City Gate Commerce Park. One is for the Development of Regional Impact
documen! which is a DO, and the other is for the Planned Unit Development, which is the MPUD.
All those wishing to testif, on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly swom and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And disclosures from the Planning Commission; Iet's start with
Tom.
MR. EASTMAN: No disclosures.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: No disclosures.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: No disclosures in the last two weeks.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, I'm going to go last on this one.
Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. Joe?
MR. SCHMITT: Nothing.
Patrick?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN : Nothing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, it looks like I'm the only one that had a lot of disclosures.
I met with the applicant -- well, there's two applicants. I met with both sides of the -- both applicant
teams multiple times, had multiple conversations with them.
As you may recall, last time this came forward, the Planning Commission had asked its questions. I
normally allow - ask you-all to go first as a courtesy, and then I will wrap up with anything that's left on my
list. We only got a little bit into mine before we quit for the day.
I have met with the applicant trying to help get the items cleaned up as much as we could for today's
meeting, so that should save us some time.
But I did meet with Josh and Roger -- Josh and Roger Rice and Nick Casalanguida. I talked to the
County Attorney's Office and staffnumerous times, and I think that's about it. But we did have quite a bit of
work and time put into this, and with that we'll move right into the presentation by the applicant.
And, Josh, I know you've got a lot of new information that's not the same as we got in the packet. So
we'll have to follow along page by page as you bring it up if that's okay with the Planning Commission.
Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Forthe record, Josh Freuth with Davidson Engineering.
I'm just going to walk you through the few items, as Mark mentioned, that have changed in the last
two weeks.
One of the items that came up, I think, two weeks ago, I just wanted to clarifr for the Commission, in
the deviations, the difference between off premises and on premise for the signs. I broke it down between the
deviations and the LDC in the definition. The oFpremise signs, as it relates to this PUD, relates to Deviation
No. 8, No. 9, and No. 11.
Off-premise signs for the sports complex project will be located within the property abutting the
MPUD boundary but offthe sports complex project site. Off-premise signs for the sports complex project
and MPUD combined is only related to Deviation No. I I and the future monument sign within the City Gate
Boulevard right-of-way. It simply means offthe platted lots or offthe sports complex project site.
Page 4 of76
March 15,2018
On-premise signs, as related to this PUD, Deviations No. 3,6,7, and 12. As it relates to the sports
complex only, "on" it simply means it's on the sport complex or within the sports complex boundary. As it
relates to the MPUD, it means within the MPUD boundary or on a platted lot.
And for both combined, if the deviation affects both the PUD and the sports complex project, it
means that it's on platted right-of-way.
Going through the changes, the Commission
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's just go to the pages first. So that's page -
MR. FRUTH: PageNo. 10.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I want to make sure -- I mean, the Planning Commission, for the
most part, asked some of their questions last time. I'll make sure we don't have any other questions and I
checked mine as well so we'll get them all wrapped up.
MR. FRUTH: No problem.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Anybody have any other questions all the way to Page l0?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I did on Page 7,1.6. It's the new language entered in that says the original
PUD ordinance 88-93 was found consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in effect at that time. And I asked
for the original Comp Planning memo. And I know that you-all answered it. Maybe you can rephrase it for
the Planning Commission since it was brought up last time.
MR. FRUTH: Consistency was determined for the 1988's ADA. We were unable to gather
information that you requested.
Go ahead, Roger.
MR. RICE: Roger Rice, for the record.
That language was in the original PUD. We're just leaving it unchanged.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's underlined. Generally if it's underlined, it's new language. That's
why I was questioning it. If it was in the original, we wouldn't have an issue. That's why I don't know why
you needed to add it.
MR. RICE: Well, yeah. That language was only there -- staffasked for that language to be inserted
to clarifi the language which is unchanged, which is the next paragraph, that "development of City Gate
Commerce Park as a Planned Unit Development will comply with the planning goals and objectives of
Collier County as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan," et cetera. That was just a clarification.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, the only reason I brought it up to find out how -- originally, like
today, you get a Comprehensive Planning memo. In fac! you've got one attached here for today's request. If
one of those existed in the past, I just wanted to see if. If this is -- the purpose of it was to rephrase that
second statement or shengthen it, that's fure, too, as long as Nancy is on page with that.
MS. GUNDLACH: We're fine with it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Moving on, does anybody have anyhing else up to Page - and up to and including Page l0?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Josh, Iet's move to Page l0 then.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. I'm just going to go over the items. What you'll see here in yellow was part of
the CCPC packets. ln green are the changes I've changed that the Commission did not receive, and they were
changed and coordinated with staffover the last week or so.
ln yellow, to Item D, "Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sports complex project as defined herein
will not include the lake and recreational tract." And then at the bottom for 2.3.A, "Project development
PPLs and SDPs shall generally conform to the approved master development plan."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. This is some new language, so if any of you have a question on ig
it's a reorganization of that last sentence is all it is.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: What does "generally" mean?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: To the effort it wouldn't be a substantial deviation to the code, which is
under your insubstantial deviation section of our Land Development code.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. I was going to say everything follows the Land Development Code.
Page 5 of76
March 15,2018
COMMISSIONER FRYER: The Land Development Code uses the word "generally"?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: No, it does not.
MR. FRUTH: Not specifically.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. I would be looking for "in all material respects."
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: That's fine. The previous version had "generally" in it. That's the only
reason I think it was left in.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Noted.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 11. Under 2.4,this is related directly to the traffic discussion from two weeks
ago.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you make that larger. It's real hard to see for us up here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I cannot see.
MR. FRUTH: I'm sorry. I can't -- hang on for one second.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you see that bar on the lower right? There you go.
MR. FRUTH: I don't know if it's going to pull through on the presentation.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: It probably won't, no.
MR. FRUTH: Nope. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: I will read what it says. "The MPIID's total trips shall not exceed 5,999 netextemally
two-way p.m. peak-hour trips as calculated in the approved ADA, parenthetical, approved trips. In any
development scenario, the MPUD's total trips shall not exceed the approved trips based on the use codes in
the ITE manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP, SDPA, or subdivision plat
approval."
And 2.4.B is related to hotel and motel, and the sentence below that says, "The proposed hotel and
motel rooms in Section 2.4.A may be increased to a maximum of 950 rooms subject to the traffic cap in
Section 2.4.A.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the 5,999 comes from the original ADA approval for the
intensity of this project; is that a true statement?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. I have a slide that covers that as well, but that is a correct statement.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. My concern is - Jeff, I thought you were going to be late this
morning.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: He was.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't see you come in. We've got to take a pause here.
MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, no.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Guess whose birthday it is today. Congratulations, Jeff. Happy Birthday to
you. He thought nobody would know, but I happened to hear the scuttlebutt this morning. So he's in for a
day of surprises, I think.
Okay. Now, back on the more serious issue. Do you have your traffrc engineer here?
MR. FRUTH: He is not because of spring break, but I have a statement --
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Wait a minute; he's that young?
MR. FRUTH: He's on spring break with his children.
I have a statement from him that I prepared to put in -- a letter from him to put into the slide show
and presentation.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Is it something you can put on the overhead now or --
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. I'd like to -- but the question that I had asked the applicant to resolve
before today's meeting is if the traffrc impacts as configured in the original PUD, which is back in the'80s,
was -- the methodology was consistent with the same methodology that compares it today so we have an
apples-to-apples comparison. And if he responded to that, that's what we're looking for.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. So this slide here is what we were talking about. Table 2.A within the Traffrc
Page 6 of 76
March 15, 2018
Impact Statement is the original ADA calculations, 2.B is the approved ordinance, and2.C is the projected
buildout. I'll hit on these slides just because we're on them. But the key here is, as we talked about before,
traffic neutral, and the projected buildout, as you can see highlighted in green, is less than the original 1980
ADA, total trips and net extemal.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Question?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Go ahead, sir.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: On the 2017 AUm, how many trips are left before we hit deficiency?
MR. FRUTH: Staff?
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, I notice some other applicants in here today were smart. They
brought their, let's say, the children who are not in -- are on spring break, they brought them with them, which
is a good exercise, because they can see how government works.
And the young lady, Reagan, actually, President Reagan was named after her, so she's here today to
hear what we're doing. So Norm couldn't bring his children?
MR. FRUTH: I think he might be on a cruise boat.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Lucky him. Okay.
Is there anybody, then, that's coungr side, though, that can talk to the detail of the traffic, then, since
your expert is not here?
MR. SAWYER: Good moming. Forthe record, Mike Sawyer, transportation planning.
Bear with me. I have the20l7 AUIR numbers. I'm going to be looking at Collier County -- sorry,
Collier Boulevard basically; 75 and Davis. The capacity on that roadway system is 3,600 peak-hour and the
remaining capacity is projected to be four twenty -- yeah, 421.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Isn't this a vested project?
MR. SAWYER: It is.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Now, when that is said, does that mean that your 5,999 trips are
included in the AUIR?
MR. SAWYER: Yes. For -- when we've got projects like this where those trips were already
anticipated, those trips are automatically built into the projection of what we are projecting in the system
itself.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So the 3,600, was that the number? What's the remaining capacity?
I'm sorry.
MR. SAWYER: I believe it was 421.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Four twenty-one. So 421 would not encroach upon the 5,999 because
that's already in; is that correct?
MR. SAWYER: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'll let it go.
I could belabor that point, but it's not going to -- it doesn't -- at this point it's a vested projec! so it
doesn't matter, so I'm not going to get into the statements just made.
Okay. And then that gets us to the hoteVmotel issue, which is raising the number of hoteVmotel units
up to 950, which is above what's n2.4, because what's in2.4 is consistent with the original PUD. But you're
just raising the hotel as the only one, and that's still going to be subject to the same cap that the rest is because
you're not raising the cap, so that actually makes it neutral in regards to impacts on the system.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. We wanted to put a cap on ig and the cap still shows that we're traffic
neutral. We're actually less than the original ADA.
And then, Mark, for the original question, for the record, this is the letter from Trebilcock Consulting
from Norm Trebilcock. What this letter outlines is the consistency between the ADA, Table 2.A through
Table 2.B and2.C, the projected buildout that the calculations are done the same.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were the internal capture rates the same back in those days as it is today?
MR. FRUTH: It changed because ofthe ITE manual. The'88 ADA was done with the third manual.
We're on the tenth. But, yes, in general the internal capfure is the same. The changes are the technolory
PageT of76
March 15, 2018
changes, so the way calculations are done today versus in '88 changes some of the traffic counts.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on then. We'll be probably going back to Page 12 of the
PUD.
MR. FRUTH: Page 12, Item 2.5.8, this was simply cleanup oftext. You can see sffikethrough,
some items highlighted in green and underlined. What it now says is prior to the issuance of the building
permits for a structure or structures on any development site, Site Development Plan approval must be
obtained in accordance with the Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Question.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Go ahead, Joe.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That statement is sorl of a matter of the LDC anyway. Why is it
even in there?
MR. FRUTH: I agree.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I realize it's old language, but -
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. We were simply cleaning up. Previously it said Chapter l0 of the Collier
County ZoningOrdinance. We were cleaning it up to be consistent and update it to today's standards. But
because it follows the LDC, I understand your question.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I mean, you have to do this an).,v/ay. I don't know why it has
to be in the PUD. The entire sentence could be - the entire paragraph, essentially, could be eliminated.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. And I'll deferto staffifthey agree.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not a big deal. I just found it to be a repeat of existing
requirements.
MR. FRUTH: Agreed. It's redundant.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, new PUDs we would have that language struck. We wouldn't have it
in it. Because it was an old PUD, I think staff reviewed it. And it's up to the staffat this point.
MR. FRUTH: We were brying to simply clean up and be consistent with the original PUD. I think
that's one of the reasons why applicant and staffagree to simply clean it up.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's essentially the same as Paragraph 13, the next Paragraph C, it's
nothing more than a repeat of the requirements of the code. lrealize it's -- again, it's an existing PUD, but it's
language that is redundant.
MR. FRUTH: Agreed.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm fine with leaving it in if that's what staffwants to do. It's jus! as
Mark said, you know, we can -- if it's a new PUD, it could be cleaned up and eliminate a lot of this language.
CTIAIRMAN STRAIN: Is this an amendment or a repeal and a replacement; do you remember?
MR. BELLOWS: Amendment.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Well, it's probably cleaner -- I mean, we try not -- on an amendment
we don't make as many as if it was a repeal and a rewrite.
MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. Sometimes the language might impact other land holdings within
the PUD not subject to this amendment so we can't change it in that regard.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on, then, to the next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 13, which is part of the packet. It was a strikethrough. "Sidewalks shall be
required on at least one side of all internal project streets." The strikethrough simply is through, as shown on
the master development plan.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 14. We're into the deviations. Deviation I and2 were intentionally omitted per
the hearing two weeks ago. Those were related to sign deviations.
Deviation No. 3, the language that was added to the end of 3.A says, as shown on the attached master
development plan, Exhibit A-1, Page 2 of 5.
Page 15, Deviation No. 4, Item C, at the request from the last hearing, we clarified the number of
flagpoles, and it now reads "up to 100 flagpoles."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well - and that was something that - NicKs involved in that, not so much
you guys. This is going to go on the sports stadium, right?
Page 8 of76
March 15,2018
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. This is directly related to on site for the sport complex and the contract
purchaser.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Not all of those 100 flagpoles are the ones on top of the building. They
could be just anywhere on the site?
MR. FRUTH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And including the entries and things like that.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct yes.
Item D, under the same deviation, No. 4, the word "project" was cleaned up since your CCPC
packets, but the overall statement reads, the actual height of future structures on the sports complex project
shall be equal to the actual structure height plus the flagpole height. For example, the maximum actual
structure height of 85 feet plus the maximum flagpole height of 40 feet equals an overall maximum height of
125 feet.
Page 77, Deviation No. 8 --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Question on Deviation No. 6. The last line ofthe introductory paragraph on
No. 6, I'll read the sentence, or at least it says, oflpremise directional signs which require that directional
sigrrs be limited to 1,000 feet from the building structure or use for which the sign is displayed to, instead,
allow combined oflpremise and on-premise directional signs for the MPUD and the sports complex for the
MPUD's internal public or private right-of-way or abutting thereto but more than 200 feet from Collier
Boulevard as follows.
So you have -- this is for those, I think they're green poles or street signs you showed one of the
exhibits with street names on them or directions to the various facilities?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, conect.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So none of those will be within 200 feet of Collier Boulevard?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct as it reads.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I don't know why you chose 200 feet but that's fine. I just didn't
understand that. I wanted to make sure I understand it. Thank you.
Oh, and on number -- you went to 8, so No. 7. The deviation is to apply to on-premise directional
signs along public or private right-of-ways throughout the City Gate Commerce Park. This deviation does
not apply to directional signage on the spofts complex. See Deviation 12. And I think you probably
answered my question when we me! but just so I understand it now because I still have the note, Deviation
12 is not necessarily about directional signage, is it? It's sign exemptions located on - this is not a - this isn't
directional. It seems like it's the fence and wall signs that they attach around the inside of a stadium; is that
correct?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the reference to Deviation 12, is that still accurate in No. 7?
MR. FRUTH: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think that's the point I needed to make sure we --
MR. FRUTH: No, we'll strike through and remove that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now let's go to 8.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Number 8, again, is related to the sports complex projecL the pole-mounted
sign. The language that was changed at the end now reads, "Within the Collier Boulevard, parenthetical, g5l,
right-of-way with future Board of County Commissioners approval of the location." And the language that
was removed was "or offsite along lands outside the PUD." That was removed.
Deviation No. 9 --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, back up. So you said -- you took out the word "Board" on No. 8 as
we have it in our packet, and you replaced it with Board - and you had added "of County Commissioners" on
the end of it, and in front of it you put the word "future," right?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. "Board" remains, and we clarified what "board" meant, because it's
not a defined term in the PUD.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Approvalof the location. Okay. And then instead of "future board,"
wouldn't you mean further Board of County Commissioners approval? Because the current board could have
Page 9 of76
March 15,2078
that question come to them.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. I guess it should - if it's stated, it would be current or future Board of County
Commissioners.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Either way.
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's it in 8. Then let's move to 9.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Number 9 is related to the same item. It's the sign related to the sports
complex along the right-of-way.
E was added and clarified at the end. It now reads, "Shall be abutting to the MPUD boundary."
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: And that takes out the issue of it could go - actually, I think there was a
reference where it could have gone substantially offsite. You have D -- that was the concem there. So it's
still got to be adjacent to the site, but it could be in the right-of-way if the Board of County Commissioners
approved right-of-way signage.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now, under the third -- well, let's start out with the top line.
Deviation 9 seeks relief from the section of the LDC. "Off-premise directional signs which allows no more
than two one-sided or one double-sided off-premise directional sign to be permitted for building, structure, or
use," and then it says, "which is not visible from the roadway serving such building."
So what you're asking to do is have this on the roadway so it would be visible from the roadway, and
you're asking it to be substantially changed in size, and the basis for that has been, from what I could see in
the packet that it's typical to what other communities have for their sports parks.
MR. FRUTH: Correct. And I can pull that up. But from you two weeks ago we had a slide that
showed typical sign detail that's actually part of the PUD package and exhibit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep.
MR. FRUTH: And if needed, I can pull it up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,I'm familiarwith it.
MR. FRUTH: But that's the reason why. Okay.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question on that.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I missed part of that. I tried to -- can you show that -- was that like the
Hammond Stadium and the - so that size?
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. Those were the slides that we showed two weeks ago, that's correct. I'll pull it
up right now.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There; right above you. That's it. Good. No, that's one to the -- there you
are.
MR. FRUTH: Well, this the exhibit that's within the packet. It's Exhibit 7 or, sorry, Exhibit A-5,
Page2 of 2, and then we gave examples of Jet Blue and Hammond, as Commissioner Ebert stated.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: But this is not a commercial -- are we getting the Atlanta Braves or
somebody in there?
MR. FRUTH: No. This is essential service.
COMMISSIONEREBERT: Those are awtully big signs.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well -- and that's part of the issue we probably need to discuss a little bit.
You're asking for 350 square feet are4 and really what you meil'r, you need a 9-by-15 on each side, which is
a total of350 square feet.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: It would be better if we broke that sentence down to say, a total of 350
square feet with display area not to exceed 9-by- I 5 on either side or to whatever dimension you need to so
you get to the 350, and that would help understand the sizing of it, first of all. Second of all, you're not going
to be using any animations or other issues that the code would not allow typically on signage like this; is that
a true statement?
MR. FRUTH: Correct. The Code of Ordinances, anything prohibited, we can't change that.
Page 10 of76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Right. Okay. So it's a static sign. Basically, it's going to be whatever it is.
Does that help -
COMMISSIONER EBERT: A rolling sign.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. That helps understand it? Okay.
So let's move on. I think we have -- Page 18 is the next one.
MR. FRUTH: Page 18, Deviation No. 12. We added -- since the CCPC packets went out, we
updated the language. It simply reads now, "The projection of light from signs to the north shall be
prohibited." That's the last sentence of the deviation.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I still have questions about that. Now, let's start, first of all, with what you
mean by the "projection of light." How do you not project something that's lit? If you see ig you're
projecting something that wasn't there before. I know you're looking for Nick.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. I'm going to ask the contract purchaser to weigh in on this. But I have my
theory, but I'll go withNick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
I think, Mark, when we talked -- I don't know if we conveyed it to Josh.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It doesn't look like it did, no.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Limited to 25 feet in height to the north that's lit. Anything above 25 feet
would not be lit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you'll still have -- it won't be projected, but it will be lit. Lighted signs
can't be higher than 25 feet.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's righ! sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And above that you can still have signs, but they won't be lighted?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the other piece was -- we talked about this. You have a
statement in here which we don't normally allow in any deviations or PUDs because we always like
limitations. It says, "without limitations for type of, location, size and number," and I just -- when we talked
you had some pzrameters you wanted to make sure you got, and that's the kind of criteria I'm looking for.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. And I think the discussion we had was the signs are not higher
than the top of the building that might be seen from a far distance away.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Right.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Intemally, I need to keep that "without limitation" because you're going to
have way-finding, advertising, promotional, things that are going to be on the fields directing to different
fields. When you get above 25 feet,I think the limitation we had, or we talked about, was to the east, south,
and west we'd have a box of maybe, say, 15-by-40 that we could have a sign, because it would be lig
non-animated, not LED, but we expect to have a sponsor for one of these facilities, and they'll probably want
their name on it. They'll probably want to be seen close to from I-75, but it would not project to the north and
it will not be animated and it would be in that box. So those are the three directions we talked about.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it would face the landfill to the east.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And I-75 to the south and 951 to the west.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: And there the limitation on size would be, I think you said, 15 by --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And the only reason I say that is because we have one person that's talked
to us, and they have a symbol they like to use, and I'm not going to mention names today because it's still too
early on, that talks about one might be 12 feet high, and then go across approximately 30 to 40 feet; that they
want to maybe purchase the naming rights for the stadium.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The goal from my perspective is to make sure we have limitations, because
everybody has limitations, so these need to be limited to some extent. What you do inside normally doesn't
bother anybody from a zonngperspective. It's all intemal; you can't see it anyrvay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I know the ballpark signs that go around the fencing at the bottom row,
Page 11 of76
March 15,2018
that's typical to all kinds of high school stadiums.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think we -- I understand that. And the location and size would be limited
to the frontage as you just talked about, and the size would be limited to -- the biggest that you talked about
was the 15 by --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Fifteen-by-40 boxto work in.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Now, that language needs to get written up somehow and put in here so we
can review it on consent or review it at the next time when we go come back and make sure it's all wrapped
up in one package.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, up to three signs, limited within a l5-by-40 box that would
not -- would only face to the east, south, or to the west, or any combination thereof, and non-animated but
possibly lit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And those are your extemal limitations. lntemally, quantity, size, whatever
you want to do to block the view of people trying to watch the sport, that's up to you.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's up to us.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So somehow could you have someone get that written up so when we come
back and we have to deal with that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Josh,let's move forward.
MR. FRUTH: Page 21, Deviation No. 21.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Back up to 18. You've got one, Diane?
COMMISSIONEREBERT: No. Youwere onPage 18.
CHAIRMANSTRAN: No. HewantedtomovetoPage2l. IhaveanissueonNo. 18,Deviation
18, which is on Page 20. And it's going to occur with a couple different instances in some of the deviations.
We'll get to them all eventually, but in 18 it's the f,rst one.
You have a buffer requirement, it says, "which requires (sic) developments shall be buffered for the
protection of the property owners from land uses to instead eliminate the buffer requirements along the
eastern boundary of the spofts complex lot provided there is unified ownership in the sport complex lot and
the abutting property to the east where the development is jointly planned."
When you come in for your first SDP, one of the other changes that we talked about -- and I did talk
about it with Nick because he's the contract -- not he, but he represents the contract purchaser. There was a
water-management issue, and there was a preservation issue that deferred to the property next door owned by
the county when the county brought it into a unified plan. The problem is, if the county delays pulling it into
the unified plan, it's going to be delayed in getting -- to making sure we have those set-asides in that property
next door.
So we have talked and I think there uLs'autual understanding that the first SDP would include
enough land on the 305 property to accommodate for the off-site preserves that potentially might be there if
and, in fac! they're needed and for the water-management area that you guys have been promised to offset
some of the water-management capabilities on your property.
So this could be - should be basically tied to that first SDP, because you can -- your first SDP now is
not going to be just for this property. It will lap -- have an overlap. And I'm just suggesting we can probably
solve that deviation by the SDP process that's going to be coming up.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah, that's not a problem. Actually, Deviation 2l probably sums up the statement
you're refening to, and that could be simply added to No. 18 as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Number l9 and20,the landscape buffers there, "remove the
requirement from public or private rights-of-way with any existing and subsequent subdivision within the
City Gate Commerce Park MPUD east of the FP&L easement." So what zre you taking out that isn't in the
Page 12 of 76
March 15, 2018
yard plan?
MR. FRUTH: Okay. So this specifically relates to the MPUD, and it's a clarification because the
intemal right-of-ways at plat require us to have the landscape buffers; however, because of the required yard
plan, we're deferring it to SDP level in similar fashion to the recorded Phase 2 plat.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So this doesn't override the required yard plan?
MR. FRUTH: It does not.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. So the required yard plan will still give us the vegetation and buffers
that that plan requires?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. Basically, we're clarifoing the language that was already completed
in Phase 2.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Now we can -- I'm done. We can move to 2l if you'd like.
MR. FRUTH: Deviation 21, Page 27 , we added - at the end of this statement there's a sentence that
was added, but also added, which is key here within the statement, "shall be shown on the first Site
Development Plan, and concurrently a unified site concept plan shall designate the additional required"
yard - "required oflsite yard on the abutting patcel." "Abutting" was added. And then the last sentence that
was added, "the off-site native vegetation shall be shown on the Site Development Plan (SDP application) but
may be relocated with a Site Development Plan amendment (SDPA application) in the future."
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Good. That locks it in so it's guaranteed to be there no matter what
changes.
MR. FRUTH: And I can add that same statement to 18 as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Something to the effect we've got them covered, so...
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Deviation 22,per the hearing two weeks ago, we updated it from six to five
caretaker residences, and Deviation No. 23 is the water-management item the Chairman mentioned just a
little bit ago. We added the last sentence. It says, "Collier County will take water management to the abutting
county-owned property as a future co-permittee in the South Florida Water Management District
Environmental Resource Permit (SFWMD ERP)."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. But ifthe 305 property - first of all, it's a lot of wetlands. It doesn't
have its Corps permit. And since Joe was with the Corps, and we know while he was there he made sure
Corps permits take three or four years to get done, we're looking at a long time. Is this going to coordinate
with the needs for those properties that need that additional water management? Are we going to run into any
problems there?
MR. FRUTH: If time, as you mentioned, is a factor, Collier County - and this is why it was revised
to say "abutting county-owned property." Collier County's Resource Recovery Park and the additional acres
up there, which has an ERP, would be modified to add the necessary stormwater management.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, how is that piping done? You guys would have to do the piping?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because that's a longer distance to pipe.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. It's set up now -- as I mentioned two weeks ago, it's set up now to feed. But,
yes, there would have to be some sort of network added.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So this is going to be sort of an incremental permitting process?
MR. FRLIH: Yes. I mean, the City Gate property is obviously ahead of the 305 parcel, the
county-owned parcel, for obvious reasons. But, yes, it will be incremental.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But Mark brought up about the 404 permiq Army Corps of
Engineers' Clean Water Act 404 permits, so -- but they're still going to want a water-quality certification from
the ERP process. So itjust complicates your life by increments of permitting rather than one permitting
process.
So I -- not that it affects the zoning, but it will impact significantly your review times, especially
through the federal permit process.
MR. FRUTH: Agreed. My offrce and the environmentalist here with me today, Jeremy Sterk, we
did the permitting for Collier County for the Resource Recovery Park, so we anticipate it to be exactly what
Page 13 of76
March 15,2018
you mentioned for the 305 parcel as well, so...
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Let's move on to the next change.
MR. FRUTH: Page 25, Item 3, as related to the sports complex project and development standards,
ItemBunder3--
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: - Page 23, which you bypassed quickly. So just a statement on
impact fees, again. I find it to be unnecessary. It's already required. You have a whole paragraph about
impact fees. Again, I know it's an existing PUD. But you're going to pay the impact fees. I mean, that
statement is not necessary.
MR. FRUTH: Is that the first part you're referring to, the first paragraph?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. "City Gate commerce park shall be subjectto all impact
fees." Of course you will. I'm looking at2.9, your Paragraph 2.9 now.
MR. FRUTH: 2.9,yes,I see it. It is now Page22, sorry. That's why I was -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Page22. I'm fine with leaving it in there. It's just again, another
statement of fact.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: If this was a repeal and a replace, all that would come out.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. That's what it boils down to, how the application and what you have to do. I
mean, I'll defer to staffagain, but I think that's the main reason why.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Leave it in, but it's just taking up space.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Page25, again, we were on the development standards for sports complex
project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you -- I think that's on our Page 26.
MR. FRUTH: Yes, you're probably correct. There -- with the updates -
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yep.
MR. FRUTH: -- some ofthese items have shifted.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, that is on Page 26 in our packet yes. Okay.
MR. FRUTH: So under Item B of 3, the sports complex projecl the word "primarily" and "amateur"
have been stricken, and it now reads, "Recreational uses designated and operated to serve athletes and/or the
public."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the word "amateur" that was there before kind of provided us with
some insurance it wasn't intended to be a professional ballteam like the Braves and everything else we had to
deal with before. I'm not sure it's a good thing to strike that out because it leaves it open to everything unless
you voluntarily add some language to make a prohibition there.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, I think, Commissioner Strain, Chairman, we talked with Josh
yesterday, and I said, either strike the two out or keep it primarily amateur. And let me explain why. You're
going to have from time to time a professional athlete having a camp during the day. So, you know, for
instance, if David Beckham says, I want to run a kids camp here on a Saturday and a couple kids want to
come, there's a professional athlete there.
So I don't want to get into an argument that a professional athlete can't come and do an event there.
And that's typical at all events. They do it at high school stadiums. An athletic team will come down and
say, we're going to run a kids camp for a day. That's a professional team running a kids camp, but it's not a
professional game.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And I don't think -- at least that's not the concern I have. My concern is the
word "primarily" would mean 5l percent. So we have 365 days a years, half of those days the Braves could
come down and say -- or 49 percent of those days the Braves could come down and say this is our summer
training camp. And, like Fort Myers, it would fit because they're not there 365 days ayear. So now we still
have an amateur athletic facility that's primarily there to serve amateurs because they have one day ayear
more than the Braves. That's the scenario I'm concerned about.
I don't care about the Braves. I don't care what team it is. It was never intended to be a professional
place. And I understand -- what you're suggesting doesn't make it a professional place. Itjust makes it usable
Page 14 of76
March 15,2018
for camps and for the purpose of a park.
I don't know how to get there right now with the language, Nick, but I'm concerned that the word
"primarily" is going to open the door for more than we would anticipate, than what you're describing.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Predominantly,limited to l5 percent.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, you're getting that ambiguous language. It's a matter -- I can hear the
attomeys going back and forth describing who's right on that, you know.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not leased to a professional facility, to a professional team.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark, question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aren't professional and public athletes members of the
public?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They are.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So why are they in there separately? Just say "primarily
serve the public." And who else is there other than the public?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's why we pulled it out. Primarily amateurs is to serve athletes, I
mean, and/or the public. So, you know, if you want to put a restriction the facility shall not be leased to a
professional sports team, I'm okay with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That would work.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: That's the issue that I'm mostly concemed about.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question for you. I was not here during the last hour before,
but I'm going to ask you, is this the one where this is all tourist tax dollars? This is not -- we are not, as
residents -- this is nothing to do with parks and rec?
MR. CASALANGIIIDA: No, it's - Iike North Collier's probably 70 percent local and 30 percent
tourist tax, this is probably 70 percent tourist tax and 30 percent local.
All the people who live in Collier County will have access to this facility. So the O&M will be
covered by the General Fund, because legally, if it was 100 percent paid by tourist tax, I couldn't let the
public use it. It would be one of those where, okay, how are the justifring the use is locals?
So what we told the Board of County Commissioners was the general O&M would be done by
parks, done by the General Fund. They would maintain the facility, keep it clean, run leagues at night; that
way the children who live in Collier County would have a rational nexus to be able to use the facility. So this
would be a70130 trying to attract tournaments and weeknights open to the public for me and you or anybody
else who wanted to use the facility.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: What about the 305 tract? Isn't that park and rec?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: 305's general services to the county. A portion will be for this facility as
well, too. So about 60 acres of 305 is planned to abut this facility on the City Gate site. But tourist
development tax is doing all the vertical construction, ma'am; 100 percent of that.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: L.et me understand this then. The $70 million budget, I had thought I heard
on the Board's meeting that that is going to be out of the tourist development tax.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you're not changing that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not at all.
CFLAIRMAN STRAN: And what's this 30/70 mix you're talking about? That's for the operations,
o&M?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The use; the use of it. In other words, for instance, let's say the O&M is
$2 million ayear. When you go 10 years, okay, at $2 million, that's $20 million, a General Fund that
supports maintaining the facility. That's how we can say it's open to our residents, because we're picking up
the O&M cost. That's actually a good thing.
Page 15 of76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So 70 percent of the O&M cost is going to come out of TD funds?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. The use of the facility probably will be about 70130 split
predominantly geared towards having - attracting teams and tournaments. But you can imagine on a
Monday night, a Tuesday night, and a Wednesday night, just like North Collier, it's all league play for locals,
you know, the residents who live here. That was one of the big selling points of why the people embraced it
so much is all of our kids are going to get to play at this facility weeknights and on weekends when it's not
booked.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: But only 30 percent ofthe time.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm saying roughly the split of the facility. If you're looking at North
Collier, right now North Collier has 70 percent local and they have toumaments on the weekends, so I'd say
70130 split between league play and toumament-type attractions.
This is more geared toward tournaments, so probably 60,70 -- you know, we haven't booked
anything yet. This is predominantly attracting people to come here and attend toumaments, camps and things
like that. But a large portion of that time, weeknights when we're not booked, our kids are going to play on
all these fields.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the use will be the reverse of the North Naples one. The North Naples
one is 70 percent local, 30 percent not. This one's going to be 70 percent not local and 30 percent local.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's the intention, and those percentages aren't exact.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, I understand. I just didn't understand that aspect of it till now. We're
entering it into the AUIR as 110 acres or whatever of additional parkland.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: But it's not parkland that's driven by the budget, basically, for local people.
It's parkland that is put there as a tourist attraction.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right but used by the local. Now --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But 30 percent or whatever the low number is.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You've got to consider, Mark, like North Collier, during the weeknights,
you don't have tournaments; Monday night Tuesday night Wednesday night, Thursday night. Usually they
start around Friday, Saturday, or Sunday. And then on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday during the day those
toumaments are using most of the fields.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: JOE?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: This will be brought up by AUIR. Does this now put us in an
excess park capacity? Because I believe last year we were --
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's a good question for Amy.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We were in a deficit. This now puts us in an excess, which I have to
ask, because it was a recent issue. Then that exposes the Manatee Park as being - site as being declared
excess because you now purchased this site. Since we're now talking about AUIR.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Between Big Corkscrew Park and this facility, we've put a huge amount
of park facilities in the next two years on plan. And I don't know if, Amy, you want to cover that.
MS. PATTERSON: Good morning. Amy Patterson, for the record.
So two different types of parks, you remember. We have community parks and regional. So this
would go into the regional category and it, in fact, does put us into a surplus situation. We've been in a
surplus situation for a little while with community parks, which is where Manatee sits.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Are you looking at it for - I'll ask staff, Are you looking at
affordable housing on this site since it's now excess?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm not going to answer that question.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I know you're not. But I will put it on the record.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. That's a board policy decision. I know it's a hot one that was on
yesterday or Tuesday, yeah.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The one at Orangetree, that park -
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: -- I'm trying to find out the funding. I talked to somebody with Parks
Page 16 of76
March 15,2018
and Rec, and they said this project they have never discussed. So I thought Park and Rec would be in on this.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They are. Right now the plan is to have Parks and Rec run the O&M of
this facility. They would have program managers just like at North Collier that schedule the league play for
our kids at this facility. Three o'clock in the afternoon when kids get out of school, I expect a bunch of these
kids to be inside that field house, to be on those fields playing.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: How come they have not -- how come this has not been brought to
them?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It has. I've met with them -- ma'am, James Hanrahan, Derrick Garby are
on the team that went and toured, around Florida, these facilities. They actually, three weeks ago, gave me an
O&M budget, and I've reviewed that with them.
The cost for the Big Corkscrew Park is 100 percent park impact fees or General Fund. The cost for
this vertical consfuction is 100 percent TD tax, and the O&M is General Fund.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't know if lve got anything more for you, Nick. We'll just move
through them and see where we go.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And Ithinkwe left offon25 or26.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. PageZl,your26, we added Item E under 3. It's the hours of operation
for the sports complex project. And that reads, "Hours of operation for outdoor activities (may not exceed)
Item l, Sunday through Thursday 7 a.m. to l0 p.m. (Weekday holidays are subject to Friday and Saturday
time schedule below.)"
Number 2 is the Friday and Saturday tine,7 a.m. to 72 a.m., and No. 3 reads, "weather-related
delays will extend the hours of operation accordingly."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Underthe comment where you said "weekday holidays are subject to
Friday and Saturday"; weekday holidays recognized by Collier County Govemment?
MR. FRUTH: Yes. I mean, we can write that in there, add that to it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I mean, yes, if you don't -- there's a lot of holidays out there that we
may not --
MR. FRUTH: Fine. We're okay with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Then on the number -- it's on the next page, okay. Anybody else? If no!
let's move to the next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 26,your 27.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on Page 26.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Page26. Okay. Let's go back.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm sorry, PageZ7.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's 29. You've got to go back two pages.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No, it's Paragraph 6.
h{t. FRUTH: I'm sorry. I don't have it. I can put it on the visualizer.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. You have boat docks with recreational lake tract, and the rest
of this paragraph is strikethrough, so why do you have that sentence there? Is there something missing? I'm
looking at the one I got.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What page are you on in the one we have?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm on Page27.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Paragraph -- it's3.2, Subparagraph 6.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's underthe accessory uses.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. There it is. It says, "boat docks with recreation on lake
tract" and then the rest of it is a strikethrough, so...
MR. FRUTH: Remove the whole paragraph.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I don't know why -- you had it underlined. You added it. So
PagelT of76
March 15,2018
I was wondering was there something -- was there an intent there or --
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. The old language is strikethrough, and -- that's correct. And we're updating
the numbers, as Nancy was noting there. And "boat docks with recreation on lake tract" is acfually parl of the
new PUD document. We're adding that language. I'm sorry. I keep rotating.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It has nothing to do with the previous paragraph language. It just happened
to be the placeholder where you would add it.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. It was the location.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And while we're on that page, you made some changes to the top that you
skipped. The two greens.
MR. FRUTH: Yes. Yes, that's correct. 83.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You've got to pull it down a little bit, Josh. There you go.
MR. FRUTH: B.3, we added to the end of that. It now reads, "Signs as permitted by Collier County
zoning ordinance in effect at time of application for the sign permit and as subject to Section 2.1 inthis
document."
B.4, we also added to the end of that. It says, "2.7 of this document." It's referencing the reader back
to the location of the information that was added.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Let's move on to the next one.
MR. FRUTH: Page 29. Under the sports complex project the actual heighg it was clarified. I
already read one statement, but it now reads, "85 feet except flagpoles may be extended 40 feet above the
structure height per Deviation No. 4 within this document."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Wouldn't you mean 40 feet above the actual height of 85 feet? Because the
structure height isn't a defined -- that could be just about anything.
MR. FRUTH: Yes. I'll remove the word "structure" and replace it with "actual height," the word
"acfual."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 30, Item I, again, it's a clarification. We added a sentence that says, "subject to
Section 2.7 in this document." It's related to the parking and loading.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mark, I have a question on Page 30, at least our Page 30.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You have a statement in there under Paragraph E, "Taller buildings
may be authorized upon application following the advertised public hearing." It goes on. I mean, since
you're cleaning up the document, wouldn't you just want to make that statement pursuant to the requirements
of the LDC, you'd have to pursue an amendment to the PUD in order to make any changes? Because that's
basically what you're saying. This has to go through the Planning Commission, the Board of County
Commissioners.
MR. FRUTH: Again, that's old language. We left it in there. We didn't touch it.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah.
MR. FRUTH: There's no clarification from our end. Nancy, I don't know if you have anything to
add to that, but it's --
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You can leave it. I just - I think there would be an easier way to
say it, but that's fine. I just thought, agair,, it was --
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And, Joe, you're right. There's a lot of unnecessary language. I only left it
alone because it's an amendment; it's not a rewrite. So I think that's probably where they were coming fiom
when they did it, too.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. The only statement in that paragraph that was updated was, throughout the
documen! instead of one word, City Gate is two words. That's all we cleaned up.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Well, let's move on to the next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 30, Item I, as I read before, we added the sentence "subject to Section 2.7 in this
document."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 34,ltem I and J, Items I and J were added.
Page 18 of76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let us get -- our numbers aren't the same as yours. It takes us a minute.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah, you guys should be Page 35. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: It takes us -- a little harder to get to -- that's Page 35 in our packet.
MR. FRUTH: Correct.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: After H, Item I was added, and it reads, "The 0.82 acres of retained or recreated
native vegetation for City Gate Commerce Park, Phase 1, shall be completed by City Gate Development,
LLC, prior to the next SDP application issuance within Phase 1 for the remaining undeveloped Phase I lots."
Item J was added as well for clarification, and it reads, "Lot I of City Gate Commerce Park, Phase 2
re-plat (Plat Book 50, Page 24) also known as the South Florida Water Management District Big Cypress
Basin field station or formerly known as Lots 5 and 6, Phase 2, include 0.42 acres of retained vegetation.
This is included in the overall retained vegetation calculations shown within this document in Exhibit 4-6,
Pages 25 through 28. The Phase 2 requirement equals 5.15 acres minus 0.42 acres, which equals 4.73 acres
(remaining Phase 2 required retained vegetation)."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the reason for that is previous to the incorporation of the yard
plan into this PUD, it wasn't a document that was readily available when staffdid the reviews for the Big
Cypress Basin property. As a result they didn't adhere to the yard plan, and this will provide there are areas
that can be used for native vegetation replanting and recreation to be used and counted against the yard plan
requirements; is that accurate?
MR. FRUTH: That is accurate. The last hearing I showed an exhibit that showed the Big Cypress
Basin site. We coordinated with staff. Staffconcurs. I won't speak for them, but that is correct, Chair.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Let's roll on to the next section.
MR. FRUTH: Updates to the Master Development Plan. There's no further updates in the PUD
document the actual word text part.
Highlighted in green here, we added "Phase l, Lot 7," at the request of the last hearing. It's one of
the deviation locations. You'll see it on the next slide.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep.
MR. FRUTH: We added this note at the bottom as well. "A portion of retained vegetation may be
provided offsite pursuant to Deviation No. 21," and we clarified a calculation error. It was offby
one-hundredth. Instead of 30.57, it now reads 30.56.
Page2, Exhibit A-1, Page 2 of 5, again, Phase l,Lot7 is identified to help clarifo the location of
Deviation No. 3.
We added the note to this page, and it reads, "Note, sports complex project actual height: The actual
height of future structures on the sports complex project shall be equal to the actual structure height," which
we can adjust as we noted just now, "plus the flagpole height. For example, the maximum actual structure
height of 85 feet plus the maximum flagpole height of 40 feet equals an overall maximum height of 125 feet."
And, again, as we just mentioned in the word, in the text portion of the documen! we can revise
where it's -- and remove the word and add "actual" instead of "structure."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So no matter where you would add a flagpole to that structure, the flagpole
itself may be no higher than 40 feet?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No longerthan 40 feet.
MR. FRUTH: That is correc! and the maximum height will not be higher -
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if you have a stepped structure, the lower part of the structure is still
going to be, say, 60 feet plus 40 instead of 85 feet plus 40?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, that's --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The flagpole itself can't be greater than 40.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's what I needed to understand. Thank you.
MR. FRUTH: And green, again, it's the same carryover from Page 1 of the Exhibit A-1. We simply
updated the acreage from 30.57 to 30.56.
Page 19 of76
March I 5, 2018
Pages 3, 4, and 5 of the Master Development Plan, Exhibit A-1 are verbatim to the deviations that we
just reviewed. They're just included in this document. And the next is the updates to the required yard plan,
which is Exhibit A-6 --
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Let's go back.
MR. FRUTH: -- of your documents.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's look at our Page 54, which is permitted uses SIC code. It starts there.
I don't have issues with that page, but I do with several pages past that, which is titled "East of FP&L
Easement Sports Complex Project," and that's on Page 58 in our packet.
Now, No. 2 is your amusement and recreation services, and it says, "indoor except stadiums may be
outdoor." Well, everything's outdoor until its indoor. So what you mean here, you've got an open stadium,
right?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So, really, everything you do in the stadium is subject to rain,
weather, and it's enclosed, so you're not going to have any, necessarily, noise attenuation other than the walls
around the sports - the stadium, which leads me to a concern with Principal Use No. 2. "Bands, orchestras,
actors, and other enterlainments, entertainment groups." Now, based on the way this is written, those could
all be in the stadium, I'm assuming, and if they're all in the stadium, we're looking at jamborees -- or like
we've had up at the Vineyards Park and things like that. And I now know why you took out Deviation No. 1,
because Deviation No. I would make you come in for temporary events so that they would be somewhat
regulated so it wouldn't be 365 days a year.
This would allow you to do all those temporary events as a principal use by right, and you wouldn't
have any regulation. So I don't think the intent is to let rock bands or country western or whatever kind of
music operate out of that stadium 365 days ayear. So on that one in particular, I think it needs a cap of the
amount of times it would be there as a principal use.
MR. FRUTH: Fifty-two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know, it's like the 100 flagpoles. It's just one of those you just gtab out
of the air and say, that's a nice round number. Let's do that.
MR. FRUTH: I said it with a straight face.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I know.
How often do we have those kind of activities going on at the other fairly large park in Collier
County, which is North Naples Regional Park?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You don't have those activities that take place there.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. How about the Vineyards Park?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Probably not Vineyards. Probably the high schools have it more than
any,thing else. I mean, we've had --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How often do the high schools have it? They don't do it52 times a year
because they're not open 52 times ayear. Are they, Tom?
MR. EASTMAN: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: He's the school representative.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I didn't know that.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: He just undermined your argument, so...
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mark, you know, nothing's booked, so, you know, you want to put a
ceiling on this thing and above that would require a temporary-use permit. Does that give you some comfort?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's --yep.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So you want to put 20, and above 20 would require a temporary-use
permit?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's a lot more reasonable. Let's start there. Then when the Board deals
with it, they can look at it any way they'd like.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's not the primary, you know, intent so I don't think that's what we're
shooting for.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Page20 of76
March 15,2018
Joe, did you have something you wanted to --
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: And, Josh, we're down to the yard plan now, right, did you say?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Exhibit A-6 in your documents.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's Page - you have -- yeah. It's on Page 63 of our electronic
version.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. On this page, your Page 63, and Item No. 4, it was, again, a
calculation cleanup. It was offby one-hundredth, the same as the last exhibits. So the numbers now read
24.59, and in parenthetical itreads 26.02insteadof 26.03.
Page 63, your 64, this is a strikethrough. Under the required yard heading, the last sentence was
removed.
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: And that sentence was there primarily to address the issue with Big Cypress
which you've addressed by a separate paragraph that takes care of it. So now it doesn't have to be a general
inclusion into this yard plan.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. It primarily was moved over into -- as you'll see coming up on these
slides in coordination with staff, into a new category.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on.
MR. FRUTH: And here it is. Page 64,yow 65, the open space definition was removed. It's a full
strikethrough on that paragraph. And at the end underneath sports complex project, Item B, "with all three
sftata" was added to the end of that sentence. And Item C is brand new, and it reads "Within other areas of
the sports complex project, parcels in the PUD that are not perimeter yards may be used to meet the native
vegetation retention acreage required for the P[ID. These areas shall not be occupied by buildings,
impervious areas, streets or driveways, and will consist of 100 percent retained and/or replanted native
vegetation. These areas shall meet the minimum widths (25 feet of yards) and a minimum contiguous area of
1,250 square feet."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Good. Is thatthe language you worked outwith Summer? She's nodding
herhead. That's good. Thankyou.
MR. STONE: Mr. Chair, just a small grammatical fix.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. STONE: AT the beginning of that sentence, there should be a comma after "project" and then
delete the comma after "yards" to make it more readable.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Noted. And we will correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 65, your 66, E was added as well under this category. It relates to the passive
recreational uses, and it reads, "Passive uses are allowed within yards as long as any clearing required to
facilitate these uses does not impact the minimum required native vegetation. Passive uses are specified in
LDC section'allowable uses within the county required preserves."'
Page 67, your 68, under what must be retained in the required yards, Item 28, at the end of that
paragraph there, it now -- the addition reads, "but in no case will the total be less than 29.74 acres (Phase 2
and Phase 3)." And we added 2C,"The minimum native vegetation for Phase I is pursuant to Exhibit 4-6,
Page26 of29.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And why don't you add the amount there, too. Just make it simple so
someone hasn't got to go searching through these 100 pages to find it. It's .82 or something like that, isn't it?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct 0.82, and then the page number should be 28 instea d of 29 . I'll correct
that.
And this is why your pages are different than ours, because the required yard was updated.
Page2l of76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: The 0.82 was moved -- just for the record, was moved because it's not part of the
required yard plan. Phase 1 is not. It's noted coming up here. Actually, I think I already read it into the
record, but we can put it back in.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, it just makes it clean. If staffs reading it, they haven't got to thumb
down and find your page and your exhibits. There's an awful lot of them. They're hard to follow. So this will
just make it easier.
MR. FRUTH: That's fine.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: It doesn't negatively affect you that I could see.
MR. FRUTH: Page 68, your 69. Item -- under the replacement standards - V.C.2, added a sentence
that reads, "Native trees that were seriously damaged or destroyed in platted utility easements must be
replaced outside of the easement."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, you didn't actually add it. You unstruck it.
MR. FRUTH: Yes, that's correct.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: That's a new word, "unstruck." I don't know how else to describe it.
MR. FRUTH: I agree.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Something that was previously struck is not.
MR. FRUTH: Page 74, Exhibit ,{-6, Page 13 of 28, we changed the title, coordinating with staff,
just because of - actually, this part of the replanting and replacement plan relates to trees and shrubs. So the
title is now "Native Vegetation Replacement Plan." There's a strikethrough on shrub layer and ground cover.
And the same goes for Page 75, your Page 76; we just updated the title.
Exhibit ,{-6, Page 25 of 28, what we were just talking about the Phase I retained vegetation of 0.82
acres. It was noted on this exhibit, added.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: What page is that? Page number?
MS. GLINDLACH: It's 87.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So they're not numbered, are they?
MR. FRUTH: They are numbered. I just -- I have it clipped in this presentation.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Did you say 24 of 28?
MR. FRUTH: Eighty-six; 87 foryou.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: The next item is the traffic items. We went over this. I can go over it again, or we
can go over it --
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: I think -- unless anybody has any questions, I think we understood it.
When we get into your TIS, there is a couple of questions, but without Norm here, I'm not sure how
much -- in Table I of the TIS, and it might be the one that you've got on the righg do you see where it says
size, 350 rooms? You're really asking for 950. And I'm just making that clarification, because isn't this
where you'd want to see the new number?
MR. FRUTH: Correct. This is -- the 950 is the total of that category, and above it, if you go up, you
see the 250. So that number there, instead of 350, would read 700, but the calculations --
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Right. Yeah,250 and 350, you still are deficientthe 950 you're looking for.
MR. FRUTH: Correct. However, in this letter, what Norm's getting at here is those numbers were
pulled out of the square footage per the consistency. That table just has to be updated to the 900, but it was
done and calculated.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The quantities, because of the cap of traffic, it's kind of irrelevant, but at
least the document would be right. That's all I was tying to -
MR. FRUTH: Commissioner, thank you. And the final item I have is, because of the traffic updates,
we sent clarification text back to the Regional Planning Council, the item right in front of you, and this
clarification was worked out with staff. And this language was sent to Dan Trescott. Dan Trescott replied and
said that these revisions were acceptable.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. So that gets us through the recent information you provided. Did
you have an),thing else you wanted to add, Josh?
Page 22 of 76
March 15,2018
MR. FRUTH: All good. Thank you very much. Thank you, staff. We appreciate it. This was a
long document, and we appreciate all the help.
MR. STONE: Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
Josh, I may have missed it, but did you just introduce the new language to the resolution?
MR. RICE: Yes.
MR. FRUTH: I did, yes.
MR. STONE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I'm just checking to make sure I don't have any other issues that need
to be asked, unless anybody else has any. Now's the time to bring them up.
Did you have some, Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. I'll do it in discussion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Use your mike when you get a chance, I mean, when you talk.
And I think everything's been addressed that I had at this time, so - okay.
Nick, did you want something to add?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mr. Chairman,I'm goingto leave, but Ijust -- I can't leave without
thanking Nancy and Ray and Mike, Summer and Matt on the internal team.
Mr. Chairman, you spent quite a bit of time both with the applicant and myself and the County
Attorney's Office. I think you're going to get a beautiful project when we're done. We're going to take into
consideration the neighborhood, and our kids are going to get to use it. That's exciting. It's not professional.
It's recreational. It's amateur. It will be a great facility for Collier County.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Thank you. I appreciate your cooperation in getting some of these
numbers. I know you didn't like to do that but it was necessary, so thank you.
Go ahead, Diane.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question forNick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nick, I'll be real honest with you.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The deviation -- the amount of deviations is - it is - we just took the
whole LDC book and threw it out. That bothers me because this is the county.
And as far as signs, I understand some things, but I'm going, 22 is a lot, and you blew it past what
anybody would be allowed. And I just -- it's kind of upsetting, because we are the county.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, if you want to go through any one in particular, I'm happy to do
that. But I think, working with the applicant we tried to -- you know, that sports complex lot is going to be
exciting intemally, and we definitely want to not you know, pollute signs to the north, and we're asking for
one, really, sign on Collier Boulevard, and that's really the only big deviation in signs.
All the ones on the local streets, really, just are way-finding for the purposes of City Gate and the
sports complex. But if there's one that's got particular concem, I'm happy to spend some time with you on it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Thank you. And as soon as you leave, we'll probably undo everything you
did.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Josh, I don't think there's any more you want to add to it at this
point. And I'm going to turn to staffto see what kind of staffreport we have, and then we'll go to - we might
have public -- do we have any public speakers registered, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No one has registered. Oh, Scott has them.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Just -- in order for understanding the timing of our break for the court
reporter, is there anybody here who wishes to speak on the sports park?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Then that will - we might wrap this up before break. Well, Iet me
go through staffreport first.
Page23 of76
March 15,2018
Nancy, it's all yours.
MS. GLTNDLACH: Yes. Good morning. For the record, I'm Nancy Gundlach. I'm principal
planner with the Zoning Division.
And staffis in agreement with the proposed changes that you've made today, and we did recommend
approval of these petitions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The changes today only tighten it up, don't loosen it up, so I didn't
expect staffto have any problems with it, and I appreciate your comments. So thank you.
MS. GLTNDLACH: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions of staffbefore we go to public speakers? And we have two
public speakers, did you say, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As your name's called, please come up to the microphone, identify yourself,
and we ask our speakers to limit themselves to five minutes.
MR. BELLOWS: The first speaker is Anthony Ferraro.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Were you swom -- did you stand to be sworn in when you --
MR. FERRARO: No,I didnot.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The court repofter will have to swear you in.
(The speaker was duly swom and indicated in the affrmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Thank you.
MR. FERRARO: Good morning. My name's Anthony Ferraro, and I -- with -- I represent Indigo
Lakes Homeowners Association. I'm on the board of directors.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are you here for the project that's going in next to you called Rushton
Pointe?
MR. FERRARO: Yes,I am.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This isn't that one. This is for the sports park on I-75 and 951. So you'll
have to stay a little longer till we get to that one.
MR. FERRARO: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sorry for the confusion.
Do you have anybody else for the sports park, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Sorry forthat
With that, we will end -- that's the end of our discussion for the sports park.
Now, the changes were put on the panel in front of us today. Normally what we would do is we
would try to pass it and then -- to some extent, or deny it, and then come back for consent. We've got to
come back for consent anyway, and I don't mean to delay a vote, but your changes were so fresh, and there
were so many paragraphs, I would rather come back and finish the vote on it next time so that if there are any
questions when we look at those paragraphs closer and see how they fit into the document, we can ask them
rather than have our hands tied because we voted on it now and we closed the door to any discussion on
consent.
Is that - any objection from the applicant? Let's say, is there any reasonable objection from the
applicant? I didn't know they were going to send you up here, so...
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, I think, Mark, we've queued up a lot with closing and financing, and
we expect to go to the Board on the 27th. If Josh can make these changes and bring them back after lunch,
would that be acceptable?
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm more concerned about the time to read them all and digest them. I
mean, Josh has been sending out repeated - and rightfully so. I have no problem. He's tried real hard to get
the information to, at least to me, because I had most of the issues that we brought up today - continually.
He sent them out and sent them out and sent them out. I have -- every day I got a new email practically with
a new change. Well, that's, what, 30,40,50 changes that I have to check them all to see how it fits together.
And, Nick, we had seven cases originally, or six originally here. I could not read all that every day with
everyhing going on.
Page 24 of 76
March 15, 2018
MR. CASALANGUIDA: When's the next Planning Commission hearing?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would be the 5th of April.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We wouldn't get to the Board till the second meeting in April. That's 30
days.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What does that mean "it's 30 days"?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's 30 days before we would close. That adds to the closing dates the 30
days before we can start. We're actually ready to start working on the next phase of the project. The A&E
selection is scheduled to come to the Board, the closing, and the financing to do the closings is scheduled to
come to the Board. I think that's why we went to such extent to try and meet this deadline, because we're teed
up for the2Tth at the board meeting.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Josh, when could you have the drafu done? Electronically.
MR. FRU-[H: Close of business today.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That doesn't get us an ability to vote on them today.
Joe, did you have something?
MR. FRUTH: You guys done at 4 p.m.?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we're not going to be here.
MR. RICE: We'll have them done. When you get back from your lunch break, they'll be done.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: See, I was hoping you'd say you could have them done by the lunch break
so we could read them at lunch. I'm willing to sit here and read.
MR. RICE: We'll have them done forthe lunch break then.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Would you clearly identifo, though -- because I didn't see the
version that was presented today. The only thing I reviewed was what was on the disk that I -- or on the jump
drive that I got. I followed everything Josh presented. But the changes you're going to give us, you need to
clearly identifu in another color or whatever what you added just so we can go through it quickly. I don't
want to go -- read all of the -
MR. RICE: We'll make today's changes in orange.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Whatever, just so we can go through it quickly. I don't wantto
go -- try and go through all the green highlight again that we discussed in every detail. Is that what you
wanted to --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, I just want to make sure that our comments today - because even if
we continued it for consent, you're still stuck in the same problem.
MR. RICE: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So now you're saying we can't have that problem. We're going to do our
best to work with you but, at the same time, you've got a whole hour and a halfjust to type a few sentences
up.
MR. RICE: That's what we're going to do.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: If you could leave (sic) Josh to leave right now, we'll put a cattle prod on
him and give him an office to work on it.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Actually, he's done good in keeping up with everything, so...
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Josh, you - billable hours are three times to the county for this.
MR. FRUTH: My only question is, what color would you like these to be highlighted, to be
consistent?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You just make it any colorthat -
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: I make a motion for orange, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, orange is one you haven't used ye! so let's try that.
MR. FRUTH: Sounds good.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Then we will have that before lunch distributed in hard copies or
electronic. What do you -- can you -- some of us don't have electronic, so...
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Hard copy.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't care. Hard copies will do fine. I can compare my electronic to the
hard, and we'll be in good shape. So by the time we get back from lunch, we'll schedule you to be first up to
Page 25 of 76
March 15, 2018
finish it up if we have any issues. If not, we can vote on it and be done.
MR. FRUTH: You'll have the 89-page hard-copy document.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Eighty-nine page hard copy. Whatever it is. Just as long as it's in orange,
we'll be able to flip through it quickly.
MR. FRUTH: Sounds good. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hold on a second. Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nick, why are you saying this cannot come back? Have you already
planned this for the BCC?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. This was scheduled for the 27th knowing we went through
these couple hearings.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The 27th ofl
MR. CASALANGUIDA: March, yes, ma'am. Closing -- because of the 30-day appeal period of the
state, we're going to close 30 days later. We're going through the development of the guaranteed maximum
price for the lot clearing and a lake excavation. We've got a pretty tight schedule we're running on this
project.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, we have accommodated when we can. And if you're willing to
accommodate us so we can look at the highlights over lunch, we'll make it work.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm surprised Josh is still in the room.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I am, too. He doesn't need as much time as he's got.
MR. FRUTH: I'm packing up and leaving.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. And we'll see you back at 1 o'clock, or approximately, depending on
when we take our hour lunch.
Now, Ned, did you have something?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Chairman, thankfully you've been intimately involved in this over
the last two weeks, but I feel rather behind the eightball not having been included in the emails even on a
one-way communication basis. So I don't know if there's anything that could have been done, but I guess I'm
glad that you're on top of it, but I don't feel like I'm able to do very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's kind of hard for anybody to communicate one Planning
Commission member's issues to another. We're not supposed to do that. We're not even supposed to let them
be conduits for that purpose. So it's a little difficult to do that with the Sunshine Law.
The only thing I tried to do was last time, at the last meeting, we brought this issue up, you-all asked
your questions, and from that perspective it would have just been about done. I couldn't rest with that. I had
these two hours, plus an hour last time to try to get everything ferreted out as best we could and these
corrections made.
So that's why I tried to solve some time today so you could see it in a prepared mode like they did on
the screen. Because if I hadn't talked with them prior to today's meeting, the concerns I had wouldn't even be
on the screen today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Understood.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So that, I was hoping, would get us far enough where we could resolve it,
so...
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I was just suggesting that if you had raised an issue that the applicant
agreed to so that it was going to come before us this moming, but that agreement had been reached five or six
days ago, couldn't that have been sent to us in a one-way communication?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, no. I just met with them -- I mean, I met with Nick Monday, I met
with Josh Tuesday or Wednesday, and I've been in meetings continuously since then. So I'm not sure they
even -- I don't even know that they got what I told them they had. They sent it to me. I didn't see it till today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So, I mean, it's just been -- this meeting had six cases. There isn't a single
one of them that's going to be simple, and that's been driving the train. And the other applicants, we had to
meet with them, too. So it's been piling up this week.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And to Mark's credit, everything was very -- more restrictive. He was just
Page 26 of 16
March 15,2018
making sure we were putting the four corners on this thing with everything that was presented in the prior
meeting.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Chairman, please don't get hit by a truck, okay?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm going to get hit by him. He's bigger than a truck.
Okay. That takes us to our break. Let's come back at l0:45, and the next one up is Creekside. We'll
move right into that when we get back, so thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everybody, ifyou'd please take your seats again.
Nick, you may want to hear this real quick announcement. During the break someone came up to
Ray, a resident, and said they wanted to talk about the sports park.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And without the applicant being here, notjust you but the other side being
here, I don't think it would be fair to hear the gentleman until they got back, and everybody is coming back
after lunch, so approximately l:00. At that time if this gentleman who put the slip in late is still here, we can
hear him at that time before we vote.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So that's the fairest way I could think of handling it at this time.
And, Ray, what was the gentleman's name?
MR. BELLOWS: Steve Carmichael.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Mr. Carmichael, if you're here, that's the scenario we're going to use
to move forward. I just wanted you to be aware of it. Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mark, was he not here when we asked for speakers, or we don't
know?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's irelevant. He put a slip in, so we'll just deal with it like we can so
everybody is aware of it.
**'<Next item up is 9C. It's PL20170000425.It's a Creekside Commerce Park CPUD located south
of Immokalee Road and both east and west of Goodlette-Frank Road.
All those wishing to testiff on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly swom and indicated in the affrmative.)
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: And we'll start with disclosures with - did Tom disappear? Well, we'll
start with Stan for now.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I talked to Mr. Yovanovich.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: As have I. That's all.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Just staff.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I -- for a change, I didn't talk to Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's nottrue.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I talked to the applicant and Wayne. When did I talk to you?
MR. YOVANOVICH: On the phone.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't even know you called me. Okay. I did talk to him on the phone,
but what's nice is I have no recollection of talking to him, so -- and I have talked to staff.
Go ahead, Karen.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I spoke to Mr. Yovanovich and briefly to Mr. Arnold.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Spoke to Mr. Yovanovich, addressed several questions I had.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Patrick?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that Wayne, proceed.
MR. ARNOLD: Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor & Associates and I'm here
representing Arthrex and the PUD amendment for Creekside. Our team represents Arthrex and, of course,
Rich Yovanovich and myself and Trebilcock Consulting Solutions - unfortunately, as you leamed during the
first agenda item, Mr. Trebilcock is out of town and not able to join us, but hopefully we can address any
Page27 of76
March 15,2018
transportation questions you may have.
So the amendment that's before you was prompted largely by the need for Arthrex to develop a hotel
for their own use, and out of that grew the ability to want to put in a physical fitness facility, a wellness center
for themselves and employees, and so we have made some adjustments related to the PIID to address that.
And to address the increased intensity of the hotel, we've reduced some of the intensities in the industrial and
the business district as you see reflected in the strikethrough and underline.
We also added some general provisions for outdoor recreational facilities for the PUD in areas that
not designated either IC or B, which means that the FP&L easement and parts of the canal bank and things
like that could can be utilized for outdoor recreational facilities. Arthrex is, of course , alarge sponsor of the
Blue Zone project in Collier County, as is Collier County govemment, and they're trying to offer
opportunities for their employees to remain fit and stay on their campus.
So I'm going to introduce David Bumpous, who's with Arthrex, their operations group, and he's got a
short presentation to show you some images of the hotel and talk a little bit more about the need for the hotel,
and then we'll be huppy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Thank you.
MR. BUMPOUS: Good morning. David Bumpous, B-u-m-p-o-u-s. I'm the senior director of
operations for Arthrex. It's always a pleasure to be here presenting to the Board.
As you just heard - first of all, let me say this. I'm not going to spend any time today presenting on
Arthrex and who we are. Hopefully you know who we are, so I won't waste your time on that, but really
we're here to talk about the two key factors, one being the hotel, the other being a fitness or wellness center
for our guests and our employees.
Starting with the hotel, it's no secret Arthrex is a major contributor to medical tourism. We have
thousands of orthopedic surgeons that visit Afthrex's campus on Creekside each year for educational
purposes. And over the past few years, we've really gotten into a situation where having adequate hotel space
has become a real challenge for us.
We are governed by very strict regulations uses through the FDA and through AdvaMed, so it's very
specific in where we can put doctors. As an example, you can't put them at high-end resorts. Well, Naples is
full of high-end resorts. So that really limits our ability and options, if you will.
As an example, last year we had about 40 percent of the occupancy of the Hyatt Place at Coconut
Point for most of the year, and so what that does is it creates a burden on the guest bu! more importantly, it
also adds to traffic, because those people are being shuttled back and forth from the various hotels around
Southwest Florida.
And so by building a hotel on our camps, what that will allow us to do is have those surgeons that are
flying into RSW be brought directly to the hotel on campus and basically, from that point forward, all their
transportation will be either by golf cart or on foot.
So, again, we feel like it's a great opportunity to provide a better opportunity and educational
opportunity for those visitors and, at the same time, again, we think there's some benefit.
Next door to that facility we are hoping to build a fitness facility. This, of course, being the
Creekside PUD, the tracts that we're talking about are really this area right here.
This gives you somewhat of an overview of the overall campus. I'm not sure how to get rid of my
circle here. We're really talking about these two spaces here; the one in the forefront being the hotel, and the
smaller one being a wellness or fitness center.
As all hotels typically have some soft of a wellness or fitness opportunity, our idea was to build this
separate so that it would provide access to the employees that work on our Creekside campus. We're, again, a
very healthy company, Blue Zone company. We have an overwhelming majority of our employees that are,
every morning or every evening, driving to a fitness facility somewhere in the county and then, again,
clogging the roads coming to work at7:45 or whatever time they come in.
So we see double benefits here. One, it provides them the ability to work out during the day, during
lunch; at the same time, rather than that person driving to the gym at 5:30 or 6:00 in the moming, working
ou! showering, and then driving to Artlrex at7:45, they're not going to drive to the Arthrex campus in
nonpeak hours. They're going to work out, and then basically walk across the street to work.
Page 28 of76
March 15,2018
The same thing would be true in the evening time as well; people would finish work, go work out,
now they're on the roads at 7:00 o'clock rather than 5:15 when everybody else is on the roads.
So, again, some of the benefits that we think that we will enjoy from this, even with the hotel, one of
the key factors here is staffhas been great in working with us, and agreeing to allow us to put in less parking
than what would be required for a hotel of this size, and the point is the guests are going to be brought in by
shuttle. That's how they arrive today. That's how they'll continue to arrive in the future. They load on a
Dolphin bus, or whatever the vendor happens to be at RSW, they're brought down and, again, they're now on
our campus.
Closer view of the hotel. And, as you can see, I mean, the designs here are all to be very cohesive
with the campus with everything that's currently there. The administration building, that's been previously
approved and, actually, construction has begun.
So the idea is that everything would blend and create a nice environment. Tremendous amount of
landscaping. Again, we're creating a campus environment to continue our growth and support our
employees.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that the hotel, one of the renderings? This one here?
MR. Bt 4POUS: This would be the wellness center.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
MR. BUMPOUS: This would be the hotel.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's just interesting you said you can't put the doctors in high-end hotels. So
this is a low-end hotel?
MR. BL {POUS: It's a moderate hotel.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It looks pretty nice, so...
I can't imagine doctors staying in something that isnt nice. Usually they certainly can affiord tha!
so...
Yeah, it's a nice-looking building, okay.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question. Is this a private hotel? Is this yours only?
MR. BUMPOUS: It is a privately owned hotel; however, again, to meet AdvaMed requirements, if
we were to create an independent private hotel only catering to physicians, that would violate some
regulations. So we have to establish it as a public hotel. You will not see this on Expedia. You will not see
this on Orbitz. This will not be something that's publicized. This will be a business hotel for our visiting
surgeons and visiting employees that come in from Europe, from Californi4 from other locations that would
stay there as well.
MR. KLATZKOW: So there's no flag on it?
MR. BUMPOUS: Conect no flag.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any -- is that the end of your presentation?
MR. BLMPOUS: Yes, sir, it is.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions?
Go ahead, Ned.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: The structure that is immediately north of Tract 6, I believe that that
houses something called NCH Physicians; immediately north of Tract 6.
MR. BLA4POUS: Tract 8. Are you referring to Tract 8?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: No, 6, I believe.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tract 6 is where the hotel is, so the one north of it would be Tract 3.
MR. BUMPOUS: Yes, Tract 3. Yes, there's a building there on the comer. That's also owned by
Arthrex. It's referred to as the Polaris Center. It was originally a joint venfure between, I think, Barron Collier
as well as John R. Woods. Arthrex purchased that a few years back, and it has some medical offices in there
as well as our own medical facility and general offices for Arthrex.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Yeah. I now see where I got ttrat offof Google Earth, they
have it labeled NCH Creekside, but -- so you own the building -
MR. BLMPOUS: Yes. sir.
Page29 of76
March 15,2018
COMMISSIONER FRYER: -- and you have tenants whose leases are expiring or they're somehow
being taken care ofl
MR. BUMPOUS: We actually have a couple of tenants that are currently, if I -- in this location right
here, there are two medical buildings currently sitting in that location. Those buildings are slated to be torn
down to make way for the hotel and the wellness center.
There are two tenants that we've agreed to allow them to move into the Polaris Center, so they'll just
be simply moving across the parking lot. And one of those is NCH.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. I had a very helpful conversation with Mr. Yovanovich with
respect to an issue that is frequently of concern to me, and that is traffic. Looking at the AUIR, 2017, it looks
like there are 55 additional p.m. peak trips available which, of course, on its face, becomes a point of concern.
And I'm not asking which one of your presenters will be making the case, but there are a lot of very
helpful points that I think should be made a record of to support an argument that this will actually help
traffic. And rather than just having had that conversation one on one with Mr. Yovanovich, I hope that a full
record will be made of those points.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Forthe record, Rich Yovanovich.
I wanted to -- a couple of things that we discussed that Dave highlighted was a lot of the - you
know, the physicians that are coming now, that traffic is already on the road system, and that will now be
reduced because they'll be coming straight to the hotel and not having to travel to and from other hotels.
Also, we originally -- prior to your time on the Planning Commission, we had revised the PUD to increase
square footage for the PUD, and increasing that square footage for the PIID, we entered into a Developer
Contribution Agreement to make some roadway improvements to address the current square footage allowed
in the PUD. So we've addressed transportation impacts that way, by committing to making some
improvements to Goodlette-Frank Road mainly at the intersection past our intersection on Goodlette-Frank
Road to make it a four-lane section, increase capacity there.
Also, the way we analyzed this hotel is we analyzed it as if it were a public hotel, a real public hotel
like a Marriott or a Hilton or whatever from a transportation standpoint. We analyzed it that way, and we
actually reduced the square footages in the PUD as if this were a stand-alone hotel open to the public and,
therefore, the typical traffrc impacts of that type of a hotel. So we reduced square footage in the PUD to
offset those impacts so the PUD would be transporlation neutral.
So you're really looking at this in a worst-case scenario as if it's a public-operated open hotel for the
general public when, in reality, it will be operated as a private hotel, essentially, for Arthrex's visitors and
guests.
So between the improvements we already committed to -- we're making to the transportation system
through the DCA, through the fact that we're now going to have our doctors staying on campus versus
traveling to and from the carnpus, the analysis we did to reduce square footage, now we have the wellness
center, too, that is a benefit to our -- as Mr. Bumpous pointed out, to the employees in getting them offthe
roads during the peak and offpeak.
We think a combination of all of that is really an overall reduction to the transportation system and it,
I think, addressed the concems that have been raised in the past about, you know, what's the real-world traffic
impacts versus what's the theoretical approved in the PUD.
So those are the conversations we've had, and I wanted to put a little bit more detail on the record,
and hopefully that addresses our conversation satisfactorily.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: It does. Thank you very much.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Rich, how many square feet is this hotel going to be?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I know it's going to be 169 rooms. I don't know the actual square
footage ofthe physical structure.
Do you, David?
I don't think we've designed it to ttre final it's going to be X square feet.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: So you're telling me the 169-room hotel will not be more than 29,900
square feet?
Page 30 of 76
March 15, 2018
MR. YOVANOVICH; No, no. That's not how it works. It's the impact of 29,900 square feet of
either IC or B uses from a traffic standpoint offsets the traffic from a 169-room hotel, not -- it's not square
foot for square foot.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Anybody else?
Joe?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are you done with your presentation?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do want - I wanted to put something on the record based upon the
conversation we had that you don't remember the other day. I'm a little hurt.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: You know how many things had to happen to have this meeting today, not
just with you but the other? It's just been a whirlwind for the last three days, so...
Oh, yes. I was going to bring that up but - okay. I remember I talked to Wa1.ne about it as well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There are two sections of the PUD that address the wellness center, and we
wanted -- it's both in Section 3.2 and 4.2, and they're both the same changes, but I can put them both up if you
want.
After a conversation with Mr. Strain, Mr. Stone, Ms. Ashton and, I think, Mr. Bosi was also in the
conversation, we thought it was a better way to clariff the floor area ratio -- or the floor area comment related
to, in this case, the IC district of709,100 square feet; that it's not necessary to reference the LDC because
everything is defined as in the LDC. And then also the wellness center, we wanted to clarifo that the use was
limited to the employees and hotel guests within the PUD; shall not exceed a maximum of 40,000 square feet
and shall not be counted towards the overall square footage.
The basic intent was, is since this is a use for people who are already coming to the PUD, it really
isn't an impact from a transportation and other facility impacts for Comprehensive Plan analysis. When
you're making changes, you can't increase the intensity of the PUD, because we were deemed consistent by
policy originally for this original PUD.
So this, I think, better clarifies that this wellness center really is not impacting roads and other capital
infrastructure and, therefore, we're recognizing that there will be a 40,000-square-foot building, but it's part of
the 709,100 square feet of IC uses, and also the 269,000 square feet of B uses. So that's what those changes,
and it's both in the Section 4.2 -- I'm sorry, 3 .2, which is on the screen, and then also in Section 4 .2 to make
those clarifications. And I think I got that right.
Did I get that right, Mr. Stone, based on our conversation?
So I think that's all I wanted to add to the record, Mr. Chairman. I think that addresses all the
changes that we're making to the PUD.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: One more point of conversation we had, Rich, that deserves, I think, to
be a part of the record. Certainly, you know, some physicians will want to go out for the evening and go to
Third Street or Fifth Avenue, but they won't have to do so for restaurant needs or other typical needs of
people who are traveling that will be covered within this development correct?
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's true. Arthrex provides meals for their guests and their employees
during the week and, obviously, you could walk across the street if you wanted to within the Creekside
project. There are a few restaurants that are in the center up there.
So, yes, th"y - and I'm assuming there will be some that do actually go to either the Fifth Avenue or
Third Street or Mercato or wherever, but we make it very convenient for them to not have to leave if they
don't want to.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Wayne Arnold, forthe record.
I just wanted to make sure that we addressed the fact that we've added a notation for a deviation that
would apply to the hotel building and to the wellness center. It's the same deviation that was previously
approved for the office building that lets staffdo an altemative review to make sure that the nuance of the
LDC standards can apply to these buildings because they want them to be more of a unified theme for their
campus activities.
Page 31 of76
March 15, 2018
And then I wanted to point out that we also added a landscape buffer deviation to allow some
existing trees, due to some utility conflicts, to count as our typical landscape buffer for their primary office
building tract. I just wanted to make sure I cover those if anybody had any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Well, let's start on Page 45 - it's PUD Page 2-15, No. 9. lt
says -- you're adding "outdoor recreation facilities including, but not limited to, playfields, fitness fields, et
cetera." I have no problem with what you're trying to do when you explained it to me, but if you watched the
project in front of us today, they had a word that said "recreation" in their PUD, and now we have stadiums.
You don't mean stadiums, but someone else could take it that way. So I need that language cleaned up to go
to the limitations you're asking for, not to the unlimited standards that could be applied to it by somebody
else. Is that a problem?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Chairman, what page did you say you were on?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On the PUD Page 2-15. It's 45 page electronically, and it's No. 9.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Forty-five. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And it's the underlined section on No. 9.
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, under No. 9, you and I discussed that it curently reads outdoor
recreation facilities including, but not limited to, playfields, fitness trails, et cetera.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR. ARNOLD: And I think the clarification you wanted, because of the sports complex that you
brought up in our conversation, was to further limit that to areas that are not identified as either IC or B tracts
on the PUD master plan. So that would then limit it to various --
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: Yeah. That's a common area, which is minimum in size.
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have no problem with that.
MR. ARNOLD: So I would add language that simply said after that "et ceter4" could be on areas
not designated IC or B on the PUD master plan.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So there wouldn't be an "et cetera"?
MR. ARNOLD: Probably not. Well, I think -- we don't want to limit it, so maybe we need to --
MR. YOVANOVICH: What if we said "including but not limited" -- yeah, it does say that. We
don't need the "et cetera."
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. If we -- I mean, the next page is the paragraph that's in front of us,
and that same language appears under the business District 2, I believe. I haven't got to that page yet but I
believe it's there. So basically we're saying, the IC districts and the B dishicts you can have wellness centers.
You're not intending to do more than one, are you? Because we need to limit it to the one wellness center
you want on the south part of Tract 3 as shown on the master plan.
So I don't want someone coming back in and saying we can have all these wellness centers and say
they all don't count because they're all neutral for whatever reasons they want to conjure up. I fully believe
what you're saying. I'm convinced it's going to be neutral. I don't have a problem with this one, but I don't
want to go through this with an argument on a hotel on the other side of the stree! because it wouldn't even
be rational, a size ofthat nature.
So, anyway, would you mind limiting it to this one wellness center on this tract? And if you don't,
then that's going to open up a Pandora's box of questions.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So that's okay. I'm going to have to open up the Pandora's box because I
can't -- first of all, this wellness center is to serve for both Arthrex and the hotel. Hotels can have fifiress
facilities, and there's no limitation on a hotel and the size of the fitness facility within the hotel provided that
the development standards are met within the PUD and we don't exceed the number of rooms, et cetera.
So ifyou have a separate hotel on the east side, they have every right to have a fitness and workout
Page32 of76
March 15,2018
facility within that hotel and, frankly, I would expect for them to have their own fitness and wellness facility
for their hotel guests. That would be clearly an accessory use to the hotel.
This wellness center is not intended to serve if a second hotel is built on the second -- on the east
side. And since the people who own the east side of this PUD are not here to say, this will be the only
wellness center and it will serve my hotel as well, I can't agree to that condition.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: This is the only wellness center we're talking about today that fits the
criteria of being for Arthrex, their hotel and their facilities. You didn't tell me this is going to be for the
Barron Collier Group to add more square footage next door. That's a whole different program. A
40,000-square-foot second wellness center to support a hotel. By itself, how do you justifu that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, first of all, Mr. Strain, hotels in the PUD are recognized by rooms.
They don't count towards either the 269,000 square feet B, or the 709,000 square foot IC. It was higher
before we adjusted those numbers.
Theoretically, we wouldn't even be here discussing this wellness center if I wanted to play hide the
ball and just made this part of the hotel. I could have made it as big as I want. But the reality is, it wasn't
going to be just limited to the hotel guests. We were being open and honest in letting people know that this
wellness center on the west side of the Creekside PUD was being utilized by employees and guests of
Arthrex and the hotel guests.
If I'd have just closed my eyes and said this is a wellness center in the hotel, I wouldn't even be here
talking about this wellness center, and it wouldn't have counted against the 709,000 square feet. I wouldn't
even have had to reduce.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then you've got no problem. These sentences that are added are for the
benefit of the one that you want for Arthrex, because you're already telling us you believe the other one is use
by right. So you don't need this language to apply to it.
So I'm asking is, the two sentences that are being added to the IC and the B are for the purposes of
what Arthrex wants to accomplish for their campus. That's the whole argument.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But the way you phrased it, you made it sound like it also applied to the east
side of the street. So if you're telling me it only applies to the west side of the stree! I don't have an issue
with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It only applies to Arthrex campus. The problem is, you have this same
sentence in the IC and the B. You don't need it in both if you're going to do it just on the Arthrex campus. So
let's cross the one out you don't need. And the only one --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Which one don't I need?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: - that this sentence applies for is for the use by Arthrex.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do need it in both.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, that's what the problem is. You want -- if you don't need it on both,
because you just testified that you already have the ability to put it on the east side. So why do you need this
language to apply to the east side?
MR. YOVANOVICH: What I'm saying, Mr. Strain, it's both in the IC and the B because it straddles
6 and 3.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to fill the street in?
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's not a street. There's no street there today.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it shows on the master plan -
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's no street.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're going to take that street out and you're going to go across that
roadway with it?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Well, then --
MR. YOVANOVICH: So that's why it's in both.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Well, then, we don't have an issue with adding language to both IC
and B that says this sentence pertains to the Arthrex campus uses, do we?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. It already says employees of the PUD ard -
Page 33 of76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we'll add that language.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- guests of the hotel. It's already in there.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: What I'm saying is, your argument about the hotel somewhere else on this
property needing a wellness center is moot because you're saying you got that by right. So you don't need
this sentence to apply to it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I just wanted to make sure the way I heard you say it is this was going to be
the only wellness center in the entire PUD. That's what I --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: For purposes of this sentence.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I don't have a problem with that, but the way you phrased ig it could
have been interpreted to mean a wellness center on the east side. That's all I'm saying.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This sentence needs to be clarified for the purposes as Arthrex needs to use
it as we talked about today. So however you want to word that. And your rights to do one of these
on -- wherever else you want it, that's your issue. You can argue that point when you come in for a permit for
it.
Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just to make sure, Rich, this is not a commercial facility.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It is strictly a private facility for the employees and the hotel guests.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not Gold's Gym or California Gym or whatever else you want to
call it where you can have outside members.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Hotels have outside members.
MR. YOVANOVICH: An{ Mr. Strain, I'm fine with that. But what it says -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Hotel guests can be there, though.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. But hotel guests and hotels do allow outside members. You can go
join the one over at Tiburon or someplace like that, so...
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what I'm asking. Are you going to - is this going to be open
for non --
MR. YOVANOVICH: You can't come.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay? I can't go.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I feel slighted now.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do, too, and I drive by every day.
Now, Mr. Strain, I'm not arguing with you, but I thought that's what it said when it says "wellness
centers limited to employees and hotel guests within the PI-ID." If there's another word you want to add, tell
me what other words you want to add.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Employee -
MR. YOVANOVICH: I thought it was there.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. No, I don't believe -- because you've got it in both districts -- you're
already indicating there's two hotels, 180-room on the other side, 160-room on this side. You already
have - you believe you already have a right without having to count ig for the one next door on the east side.
And all I'm saying is this sentence, because of its rights that it's doing by not counting to the square footage, is
only for ttre benefit, as described in here, for the west side of the property.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. So tell me the words youwant, and we'll --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just told them to you. And Wayne can craft them up for consent, so...
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we coming back?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, unless you c,ur come up with the language. I'm not going to sit here
and craft your language for you. I'm telling you what my concern is. If you want to address it, you guys
come back with some language. You can do it today still, I don't care. While we're going through the rest -
Page 34 of76
March 15, 2018
MR. YOVANOVICH: Why don't we say "wellness centers limited to employees and guests within
the west side of the PUD."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That will work.
MR. YOVANOVICH: West of Goodlette-Frank Road, how about that? West of Goodlette-Frank
Road.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That will work.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Presumably, each of the two hotels would have fitness centers which,
when I think of that term, I think of maybe one or two adjacent hotel rooms that have had some rym
equipment put in there versus a wellness center, which is a lot more than that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't -- you know, it can vary. It could be as small as that. Maybe it will
have five or six ellipticals or something. You don't know what they're going to build - I don't know what
they're going to build on the east side.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Fortythousand square feet?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Strain, I'm not fighting with you. The wellness center is a separate
building.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That's the big differential here. This is a stand-alone large building.
MR.YOVANOVICH: Igotit. Igotit. Andlthoughtthelanguagewejustdidworksforthat. I
don't know, Mr. Fryer, what could happen.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I didn't mean to reopen that. I just wanted clarification.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand. I don't know what they're planning on the east side as far as
the hotel.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. From my read ofthis, the rooms are capped on each side. You've
got 169 on the west side and 1 80 on the east side; is that your reading of it, too?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Under - and this is - I've got to go back and see where this falls.
Under the -- continuing on the IC use, and it looks like it's our electronic Page 49. Under permitted
accessory uses it's PUD Page 3-5 all the way to the bottom, Cl. Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted in this district. Then you added this new language: "lncluding indoor and
outdoor recreational facilities including, but not limited to, physical fitness facilities, playfields, fitness trail,
et cetera.
What was your mindset in adding that language? What were you trying to accomplish by it? I mean,
you've got your wellness center separately stated. It's not defined as either an accessory or principal. It's
basically a use on the site, and it's not going to have it's counting because it's capture.
So, Wayne, what was your thinking here?
MR. ARNOLD: Wayne Amold.
Mr. Strain, when we discussed this briefly, I think the issue was the reference to the physical fitness
facilities because we're already taking care of them on the other sentence that's before you, I think, was the
conversation we had.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So you're saying we don't need the new underline in this particular one?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think what we wanted to be clear on as well -- and maybe the physical
fitness facility could be dropped, but I think we want to make sure that Artlrex can have other outdoor
recreational opportunities that would meander across their campus, and they would be on tracts.
For instance, the outdoor recreation that we talked about not being located on the IC or B tracts, that
could include some of their playfields and outdoor recreation space for Arthrex campus. Those same fitness
trails may meander onto their campus and be part of their fitness complex, so we wanted to make sure, as an
accessory to their use, they could also have outdoor recreational opporunities.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Could I make a suggestion?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I hate to go backwards. The different campus plans that I've seen, I
don't know that we know for an absolute fact that a playfield or a recreational space may not also overlap
Page 35 of76
March 15,2018
onto one of those firm hard lines that is an IC tract or a B tract. I think your concem is you want to prohibit
stadiums and outdoor lighted playing fields.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, and the noise and the traffic and everything else generated from an
attractive -- an issue like that that wasn't originally, I think, intended for the PUD. That's all.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So if we can -- I'd rather, when we go back and say the general permitted
uses, "exclude stadiums and lighted playing fields" -- there will be lights? Okay. There won't be your normal
stadium lighting that you would have at a county park, you know, related to that. There will be lights that,
I'm sure, will be safety-related lights so you can see but not for you to go play softball at I I o'clock in the
evening.
So I think the better way to handle it is to put the prohibitions you're concerned about because I don't
think we want to run the risk that, you know, where people are playing soccer may spill out on something
that's like Tract 5. And if I knew how to get over to what I could see on the screen.
Do you know how to switch over to the master plan? How do I switch over to the master plan?
There we go.
My concern is, if you look at Tract 5, for instance, it's right next to at areathat's common area; do
you understand what I'm saying? I'm a little concemed that the playfield, if there's a playfield here in this
area, may still spill over onto Tract 5. And if we take out this language we're talking about, accessory uses,
I'd have a code violation if I spilled over into that area, and I don't think that's your concem. Your concern
was, am I going to have a stadium or lighted field. So can we --
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- address it that way?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yes. I mean, my only concern is not to open up Pandora's box for another
possible Braves stadium this close to residential communities, and that's what I want to make sure we've not
indicated.
MR. YOVANOVICH: If we can come up with language, and hopefully you could trust us to make
sure we can get it right without having to come back for a hearing -
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We'll see. Let's see when we get through the rest of it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'd like to go back into that 2-15, No. 9 where it said outdoor rec facilities,
change Wayne's language to prohibit stadiums, prohibit, you know, typical recreation lighting versus -- we
won't prohibit lighting, but we won't have your typical ballfield lighting.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you might also put hours of operation, if you know what those are.
Something like that would help dispel it. If you don't, that's not critical. More critical, just not the stadiums
and then -
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. So we'll absolutely prohibit stadiums in 9, and then on these general
permitted uses, I mean, sorry, accessory uses, we'll make it clear, no stadiums are allowed as an accessory use
to any of the other uses that we're allowed to do in the PIID.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think that works better than trying to be firm on those lines.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: We needto -- well, you understand where we're tryingto go, so when we
get to discussion, we'll figure out how to craft some language to make sure it comes out right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm just checking the rest of the questions I had and made sure there's no
others at this point.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And we'll also deal with that on Page 4-4 inthe B district.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The changes we make under the IC district's language for the
wellness center we have to make under the -- you're going to make the same ones under the B section as well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the changes you're going to make under the IC for Cl, you
make the same ones under the Cl for the B section.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And then that gets us through it. The only thing I had asked when I met
Page 36 of76
March 15,2018
with you-all, or not you, but when I talked to the others in the meeting was to have an acknowledgment from
your traffic engineer that the way that you're going to put this wellness center in at the 40,000 square feet is,
in fact, considered traffic neutral. Were you able to get that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I was able to talk to him and have him verifo that, yes.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. As long as he verified it. And I'll ask from Mike's -- Mike Bosi,
from your perspective, I know we have talked about it. Are you comfortable with that from a Comprehensive
Planning perspective? Because it's Comprehensive Planning that's driving that issue.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
And, yes, we've had a discussion with the Chah and intemally, and we recognize that this is
primarily served as an amenity for the members that are already on campus and, therefore, a net neutral traffrc
impact would be expected; therefore, it doesn't provide for any inconsistencies with the way that we calculate
the public facilities impact analysis.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Thankyou.
Anybody else have any questions of the applicant?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Nancy, what's the situation with stafl
MS. GI-INDLACH: Good morning, Commissioners.
Staffis - as this petition is consistent with the Land Development Code and the Growth
Management Plan, staffis recommending approval and, of course, subject to today's revisions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions of stafl
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With that, are there any registered public speakers, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No speakers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on this topic?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. And that takes us to a wrap-up then, Wayne. As far as the issues,
we're going to tighten the language up on the paragraph to make sure the wellness center that's being
discussed in that paragraph is the one on the west side of the property, for the west side, as we've discussed.
Now --
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Now, I'm going to have to talk to the Planning Commission when we get
into discussion how this -- it either comes back on consent or if they want to leave it up to me to review it as
you change, and we can just go from there. I'll make sure it's the way we're talking about.
The other one -- other issue we have is clarifu the outdoor rec use limitations, which is the stadium
issue.
And then the statement of traffic neutrality. I still need to see that from your traffic engineer, but I
would suggest you need it in time - we'lljust stipulate that that ought to go to the Board of County
Commissioners as part of your package and it goes to them.
And that would take care of the issues I think we have from today. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I just have a question. You closed Creekside Boulevard. What are you
putting there? There's -- that's not where the facility is going to be? I mean --
MR. ARNOLD: The closure for Creekside was due to the fact they were trying to make sure this
one cohesive campus and not have the public roadway bisecting their campus, so this became an opportunity
to make it a pedestrian-friendly campus by rerouting the traffic to the north around the campus.
So the facilities that may go there could be some green space, could be walking paths, et ceter4 but
it's not going to be the public road. That road has been vacated.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No, I know that. Okay. I was just wondering because you've got 60
feet or whatever, and that's quite a bit extra.
MR. ARNOLD: It is, but the outdoor recreational facilities that we're talking about are really for
Page37 of76
March 15, 2018
there to be some athletic fields, trails, fitness facilities that are outdoor for the Arthrex employees. They
would like to utilize part of the FP&L easement, for instance. There may be an opportunity to put a box
culveft over part of the canal that's there to make that more of a pedestrian pathway or something that can
function as part of their overall cnmpus.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I have a motion, if it would be appropriate.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, firs! I think -- I want to know what do you-all feel about a consent
hearing?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To have consent?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: No, to obviate the need for --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, then.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I move that we repose this matter in the hands of our Chairman, and if
the Chairman is satisfied that his changes measure up to what was discussed today, that we accept that.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: So the motion is approve subject to that?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Also, if I could have you add to that motion subject to the changes
we discussed today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Motion for approval subject to the -- and we can go through the
paragraphs, but subject to the changes we discussed today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: That would be a substantive motion then, and that's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then both of you are in agreement on that.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, that's -- he seconded his. So any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: All those (sic) signiff by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: AyE.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Motion carries 7-0.
Please get the information in time before the board meeting so I have a chance to review il Wayne.
That's all I ask.
MR. ARNOLD: I'll have it for you no later than tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We'll have it by noon today.
MR. ARNOLD: That may be a challenge. I'm here for the next item, but we'll do our best.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Highlighted in what color? I don't have highlighted.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, highlighted in shades.
*+'r'Okay. The next item up, and we'll start this. We may not finish it before lunch. We'll just have
to see how it goes.
It's 9D. It's PUDA-PL20170001345. It's the Marco Shores golf course community planned unit
PUD. It's located near the Marco Island Executive Airport.
Page 38 of76
March 15,2018
All those wishing to testiff on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Disclosures? We'll start with Tom.
MR. EASTMAN: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I talked to a couple of nice people out in the hall during
break.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm sorry. I was distracted. [s this Marco Shores?
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: This is the Marco Shores, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I've not had any discussions on this.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. I spoke with Nicole Johnson, and I spoke with the airport
authority.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I have had meetings with staff, I talked to Wayne on the phone,
I think, yesterday, I also talked to the Conservancy yesterday as well. And I believe they're here somewhere
today. Yes, Alison's here.
Okay. Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: I spoke to Mr. Arnold.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I spoke to Mr. Arnold about it.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Patrick.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Correction from me. Im sorry. I spoke with Mr. Arnold.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wayne, it's all yours.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. Wayne Arnold from Grady Minor. I'm here representing the applican!
Al Moscato. The property owner's presen! as is Jim Bank, our traffic engineer that worked on the project.
Before you is an amendment to the Marco Shores Country Club to - the basic addition is to add
provisions for senior housing on what we're calling Tract2A of the PUD. On the aerial photograph I have the
subject property highlighted. It's just a little over five acres, and it's located north of the golf course ffact and
just west of the Marco Island utility tract. It's currently a residential tract and has deeded rights to 100
multifamily units on the PUD. And Mr. Moscato purchased that from WCI Communities.
And your last amendment that you heard as Planning Commission severed the airport, excuse me,
out of the property, and so it's no longer part of the PUD. But our interest was in obtaining senior
housing/group housing rights for Tract2Athat Mr. Moscato owns. There's been interest by senior housing
providers in that area.
And we carried forward the development standards for the multifamily that was previously approved,
and we've added standards for the senior housing. We've also made provisions for changing the building
heights. It was previously expressed as three stories, and we're rying to make this clear that it could be four
stories over parking. We added a zoned height of 58 feet and actual height of 72 feet.
I've spoken with the airport folks, and there doesn't seem to be any concern with those heights. We
have three towers that have been built within the same PUD that exceed 200 feet.
So those are the minor changes. I saw the Conservancy's early correspondence related to this, and I
also had the correspondence that was received yesterday or the day before, I forget. But this property and the
entire PUD was part of the overall Deltona Settlement Agreement as was parts of Isles of Capri, Fiddler's
Creek, et cetera.
So there are limitations for mangrove trimming and structures that could be built out into the bay, et
cetera. We're well aware of those and intend to respect the settlement agreement as encouraged by the
Conservancy.
I would say that with regard to the senior housing use, we're traffrc neutral. The 100 multifamily
units equated to the 240 units of senior housing. That's how we arrived at that number so our p.m. peak-hour
Page 39 of 76
March 15,2018
trip could be a neutral number.
Of course, the project is served by a traffic sigrralized intersection at Collier Boulevard and Mainsail
Drive. We think it's compatible. There are no immediate neighbors here that are residential in nature.
And that's my short presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Questions from the Planning Commission? Joe and thenNed.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question, but it's directed towards stafi and I'll wait until
staff gives its presentation, because I have an issue -- question about the one-time contribution conceming -- I
guess it was a requirement from emergency managemen! but I'll wait to discuss that with staff.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: The conversation that I initially forgot I had with Mr. Amold was, once
again, about traffic. And looking atthe 2017 AUIR, Collier Boulevard, between Walmart and Manatee, is
scheduled to go deficient n 2020 with 94 more peak p.m. trips. And, Wayne, I'll ask you to say again what
you told me when we were on the phone.
MR. ARNOLD: I'll do one better than that. I'll let Jim Banks, our traffrc engineer, address
specifically your concern. I mean, I know in his traffic analysis we are traffic neutral. But let him explain
how, from azoningperspective, we utilized the trips that are in the network.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Mr. Banks, may I begin by asking how many additional trips
will actually be generated by the project?
MR. BANKS: The project is expected to generate 60 p.m. peak hour two-way trips and 32 p.m. peak
hour -- peak direction trips. And the reason I want to distinguish is because you were mentioning 94 trips
remaining capacity. That is.one direction. So when we're looking at our one direction of our peak trips, it's
)2.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you. That pretty much answers my question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Anybody else have any questions of the applicant? Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah, just one.
The people that talked to me out in the hallway mentioned that your neighborhood information
meeting was held at the Marco Island Library one week after Hurricane Irma forced everybody to evacuate.
They thought that was kind of unfair. Was there any other meetings held?
MR. ARNOLD: No. That was our required neighborhood information meeting. And, obviously, I
couldn't control the fact we had a natural disaster the week before. But these meetings are scheduled well in
advance.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Did you have power?
MR. ARNOLD: We had power.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Really?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: One week after? You're ahead of most people.
MR. ARNOLD: I personally didn't but the library did on Marco Island.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Amazing. Especially Marco. That got hit the hardest. Anything else, Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: No, it just seemed like maybe they should have had a second
meeting.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's -- I mean, there's some residents here. Let's move through the
questions and see where it goes and see what comes out of it, so...
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I was without power over a week.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That should have been something directed by staffif they felt it did
not comply. It technically met the requirements. Staff, frankly, should have directed it.
MR. ARNOLD: Keep in mind, if I might, that there are mail notices of those meetings. There are
phone numbers attached to those. There's an email address. I mean, there's any number of ways that people
could reach out to us if they had questions or concerns, and it's not uncommon for other projects that we don't
have large attendance. I mean --
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I know that. I'm just trying to remember what I was like one
Page 40 of 76
March 15,2018
week after Irma hit, and I would not have wanted to go to a meeting.
MR. ARNOLD: But we did have two residents that happened to live in this project that did attend.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. Thank you.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: You did indicate to those two residents that the housing will not include
residents having substance-abuse issues or who are developmentally disabled. Do you mind that as a
stipulation then?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't think we have any issue adding that as a stipulation.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: You also said emergency management has met with the applicant and
expressed its concerns regarding the possibility of senior housing having to evacuate due to the high
likelihood of storm surge inundation. The developer indicated that they will build in an elevated fashion to
be more surge and flood resilient. What did you mean by that?
MR. ARNOLD: There are new standards under the county and FEMA requirements that we have to
elevate above FEMA by a foot, plus our applicant likely will develop on the site, given its size, underbuilding
parking which is going to naturally elevate it. And in our conversations with Dan Summers, that was
discussed. And his issue was more related to making sure he could accommodate any evacuees. And,
certainly, we'll make the mitigation payment, as he requested.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So by that statement, you really didn't mean you're going to do anything
more than code requires.
MR. ARNOLD: No.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But there are new rules about generators and emergency and
all that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're going to get to that. Yes, there are. An{ yes, when we get into the
PUD, we need to talk about some of the language that needs to be used to do that.
And now we're geffing -- since we are, let's move right into the PUD, and it's your Section 4,
multifamily. It's electronic version Page 16. It's Exhibit A in our document. There's page I of 4.
On the uses permitted,4.07.01-- and when I talked to you, Wayne, I think I mentioned to you I've
got to read this one -- I had to read this one last night because it was one of the -- I couldn't get to it all
because ofthe other projects.
Under uses permitted you start that paragraph out, it says, "Residential and group housing uses may
not be jointly developed." A group housing use is a residential use. And I'm just wondering if that --
MR. ARNOLD: It's our intent -- and I think staffwould tell you group housing is more of a
community facility use, not a residential use, which is how we've tried to distinguish those. And if there's a
better way to express it -- our intent was not to have conventional residential and the group housing blended
on this site. It's going to be one or the other.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Then when you get into the No. 3 where you added "goup housing
for seniors, including assisted living," and yada, yad4yad4 and then you get to not to exceed 242 total
units/beds of group housing. How big are these rooms?
MR. ARNOLD: There's no minimum size expressed, because they vary wildly.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I know there's no minimum, but what are you thinking -- what's
the - you make it -- are you going to put someone in a 4-by-4-square-foot hole?
MR. ARNOLD: No, but --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What's the minimum size you think you could practically build by
state regulations?
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, I don't think I've ever worked on a group housing project where I've
expressed a minimum size, because they vary all -
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not asking you to, Wayne. I just wanted to know what you thought the
minimum size would be. Here's why. You've got an FAR of .45. If you use the FAR available on those
sites, you come up with249 times .45. You end up with 109,000 square feet. You divide that240 units, and
each unit is going to be 454 square feet, but you've still got common areas and all the other things you're
going to have. So I'm just wondering how small these units are going to be to get the FAR you'd need for that
property.
Page 4l of 76
March 15,2018
MR. ARNOLD: I would say that depending on the type of care that ends up being provided for
memory care facilities, for instance, Mr. Strain, many times those are bedroom-size units that one person is
housed in in a bed because they don't have the same need as somebody who's living in a 55-and-over
independent facili[.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is it fairto say, since you didn't ask for a deviation from the .45
FAR, you are going to meet that .45 FAR required for the grouping - group housing on No. 3?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That will resolve it then. And I don't know -- we went - instead of
using the $oup - the .45, it's not in there. I don't know if we typically include that as a reference in the use,
Ray, or not, but I was just trying to figure out how they're going to build that many units and still hit that
FAR. But if they can, that still meets code.
MR. BELLOWS: Forthe record, Ray Bellows.
The LDC has the standard under group housing, and it is 0.45. So they would be subject to it unless
they asked for a deviation as part of the PUD amendment.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Under the principal uses, you've got the boardwalks, viewing stands,
and docks, nature trails. Now, you know about the concems with the settlement agreement and I know
you're familiar with it. You know I am. What were you intending by that principal use? I mean, was it -- do
you know? Just out of-
MR. ARNOLD: There was no specific intent with it other than to make sure we could have sort of
opportunities to enjoy the water views that are there.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Because you couldn't put a dock in past the settlement agreement line
without getting the sigrrators of that settlement agreement to sign offon it
MR. ARNOLD: There are numerous regulations and standards in that settlement agreement, and we
know we're subject to those.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can you just take the dock out?
MR. ARNOLD: I mean, I would prefer to leave it, because I believe there may be an opportunity to
have a dock on the project and still meet the settlement agreement terms.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, as long as -- yeah, there's terms. I mean, I know of - you guys
should go back to the seven or nine signatories and show them what your alternative plan is, and they either
sign off or they don't.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm very familiar with the settlement agreement as well, and it will
be a challenge. But the language can stay in. Good luck on getting it approved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under your -- go ahead, Diane.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The other thing is, when I -- when I spoke with the airport authority,
they said that the owner did not want to mention that there's an airport within a thousand feet. I feel that that
really should be on there, that people should -- I mean, I don't know whether they're coming from out of town
or what but I think they should know that there --
MR. ARNOLD: We had that conversation, but there's -- if you look at the existing P[ID, there's no
mention of it. It seems a little unfair to single out a four-and-a-half-acre parcel and tell them that they have to
notifo people but nobody else in the PUD that allows 1,580 units does. That was our thought.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That was yourthought on that?
MR. ARNOLD: Yep.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Typically, you would be required to do that if they were in the cone
of - departure cone of entry for the flight path, but this is not in the flight path.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
MR. ARNOLD: Thankyou.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Under your Part B on that same page, it says "customary permitted
accessory uses," then it says, "customary accessory uses and strucfures including parking structures." Are
you going to put a parking garage there, or is that what you're insinuating by that or -
MR. ARNOLD: No. I think that was to make sure that it was understood that we could have
Page 42 of 76
March 15,2018
underbuilding parking.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Can we just say "including underbuilding parking"?
MR. ARNOLD: Fine.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Under 4.01.03 on the following page, you have "minimum yards
multifamily/group housing." And since you're differentiating the group housing from residential structures,
what does B refer to?
MR. ARNOLD: The statement that says "setbacks from edge of pavement of public roadways"?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah. It says, "30 feet for residential structures," but I think you indicated
group housing isn't -- you're trying to differentiate that from residential. But the group housing would still
have the same 30-foot setback, right?
MR. ARNOLD: We expressed that in Item C, Mr. Strain, that says "setbacks from the right-of-way
for group housing would be 25 feet."
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And under 4.07.07 you have the off-street parking issue. I know
that used to say, I think, 1.5. Now it's 2. That's what the code requires?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So just -- why did you feel you had to state it? So --
MR. ARNOLD: The oflstreet parking section was in the prior multifamily section, so we just
carried forward all those categories, except for the group housing.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: 4.07.09, the generator, A. You talk about enough fuel supply for seven
days, but the generator -- we need language to indicate the generator must be sized to operate the
air-conditioning units and be placed above the floodplain levels as well.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That would be required by code, would it not?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not sure. I just don't know. I just wanted to make sure that we
didn't -- I hate to see the thing flooded out.
MR. ARNOLD: Maybe after the reference where the sentence ends at seven days it would say, "to
operate the air-conditioning unit for the facility and must be placed above minimum flood elevation."
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Not just the air-conditioner.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: No. Just capable of operating the air-conditioning units. Then whatever
else the state's dictated in the rules they've got, but you're going to have to do more than just that. I mean,
lighting and things like that would automatically be included.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is natural gas available down in that area? I know there is in
Fiddler's Creek. But no, not in that area?
MR. ARNOLD: I'm not aware of it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And --
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on the next sentence, and then I'll --
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- ask it now.
Tell me how you came about this developer commitmen! under what authority, who dictated it, how
did they justifz it. Because to me, it appears more of an exaction than it is a -- there's nothing that I know of
in the code that requires this. I fully understand it's in the coastal high hazard area. I fully understand the
requirements are -- that may fall upon you as far as evacuating personnel. But why 50? Why not 350? Why
not 4,550? I mean, who made the determination? Where'd it come from? Under what justification and what
authority?
MR. ARNOLD: Staffhas been including Dan Summers from emergency management --
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is he here today to talk about this?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't see him in the audience, but had several conversations with him. But in his
review he commented that, you know, we just had Hurricane Irma. This is in coastal high hazard, you know,
gee, it really would be nice if you do some otherthings like -- the emergency generator grew out of tha! and
he said, mitigation for certain things for evacuees. And we started talking about it, and he said, go take a look
at Hacienda Lakes and, on a proportionate basis, you know, they looked at this issue.
So I came up with some calculations, and it came up with a dollar amount that was a few thousand
Page 43 of 76
March 15, 2018
dollars. And our client said, there really is no statutory requirement to do this but, you know what, it's such a
minimum amount of money, I'm willing to do it because we want to be -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And where are these cots going?
MR. ARNOLD: They would be donated to the county, and the county would then utilize them at
their shelters.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Again, it's -- why don't we require that of every building permit in
the coastal high hazard area then?
(Multiple speakers speaking.)
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I know you can't answer that. I'm looking for staffto answer that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Mike's coming up.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, is this something that was just invented?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning andZonngdirector.
No, not invented. As we have said, Hacienda Lakes, which was a 2010 approval, had a similar
contribution. If you look at the CCME, Goal No. 12 is to make every reasonable effort to ensure the public
safety, health, and welfare of people and property from the effects of hurricane storm damage are protected.
That's the overarching policy. Within -- or overarching objective.
Within goals and policies of the CCME, it does talk about if warranted by the results of hurricane
evacuation, the studies that are periodically conducted by the State of Florida and federal authorities, further
restrictions of development may be proposed.
Also 12.2.1 says, the hazard mitigation section of Collier County comprehensive emergency
management plans shall continue to be received and updated every four years beginning in 2005. The
periodic update of the CMP shall include a review and update as necessary related to county evacuating and
sheltering proceedings.
There are provisions within the CCME that relates to emergency management and how we shelter,
and the overarching goal - or the overarching goals with specific policies would suggest that is not an
unreasonable exaction because it could be tied to a policy or goal within your Growth Management Plan.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mike, I fully understand. What - but why not the requirement to
create a facility on site to house in case of an evacuation? Are we now creating -
MR. BOSI: Policy 12.1.14, all new nursing homes and assisted living facilities that are licensed shall
have core area to shelter residents and staffon site. The core area will be constructed to meet public shelter
design criteria that are required for new public schools and public community colleges and universities.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Slow down a little bit.
MR. BOSI: Additionally, this area shall be capable of ventilation or air-conditioning provided by
backup generator for a period of no less thanl2 hours. So that's a specific policy that's within the CC -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That will be required as part of the construction ofthis building.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But we're still requiring them to provide 50 -- it's a small amount,
and I realize the developer's just saying, I give up. Here's your 50 cots. Thank you very much. Don't bother
me again.
But I'm still having a diffrcult time understanding why we require this person to do it and not the
person who's building the high-rise or the multifamily unit or whomever else.
MR. BOSI: I think all development that's being proposed within a PUD or PUD amendment or a
rezoning will be -- that's in the - that's in the coastal high hazards area is routed to emergency management,
and they've been consistently asking for these type of improvements when we've had these issues.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Then make it an impact fee. Then everybody pays it. I'm just
saying, this is just to me, an exaction that the developer is saying, I give up. Here's your 50 cots.
MR. BOSI: Understood. I understand the perspective.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And I think when we -- years ago we asked that emergency services take a
look at -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They review everything.
Page 44 of 76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- this review, and they never responded much before. My hope was that
they would look at and suggest ways to harden the facility or something that is attributed to that facility, not
use that opportunity to have an extraction for something just unregulated, basically. Fifty cots, they could go
up to the north end of town. They would have no - little benefit here.
I was hoping they would tie it to a benefit that would be attributed to the site itself. It doesn't seem
like that's happening with any of them I've seen so far, so...
MR. BOSI: It would suggest to me that coordination with Dan Summers and his team and maybe a
presentation or a discussion item at a future board meeting, Say, in the summertime right prior to hurricane
season might be appropriate with the Planning Commission so your perspective could be shared with the
bureau and their perspective, I think, could be articulated as well. And I'm sure that an agreement or at least
an understanding could better be established as we move forward.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: No, I think that would be a good idea.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: My concern is that we build the site; it doesn't become a burden on
Dan. The site itself sustain and can support the staffthat it has, and then if there's an evacuation, unless there's
going to be a significant threat as far as storm surge or whatever, that they could support the people that are
on site. And that is the type of payment or that's the type of requirement it should be, not just simply giving
50 cots.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I think I beat itto death.
MR. KIATZKOW: No, you didn't. You're right. You're right. You're 100 percent .ight, and I think
the Planning Commission may want to consider asking Mr. Summers to appear before it and explain the
rationale and maybe codiff it.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: As soon as we get -- yeah.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I will make that request then.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Staff-- yeah, Mike will have to put it through, and we'll get it scheduled
sometime after the Board leaves on vacation, because right now we have -- we're backed up. So let's just do
it at a time where we can really take a look at it hard, and that will be the best time. Is that okay?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yep.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm -- that's the last questions I have, Wayne.
So does anybody else have any other questions?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. Just on this emergency generator, the slab that it sits
on is going to be at or above whatever FEMA says is the flood zone for that area, or are you going to take
into account that it's kind of maybe a little nearer the coast? And I know the flood zones are based on the
surge models that were done, but they're redoing their surge model. You probably, you know -- any thought
that you might want to raise it up a foot or two above that?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think our building floor is going to be a foot above FEMA, so, I mean --
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, you have first habitable floor over parking; you should have
sufficient height. Your air-conditioners would be above BFEs.
MR. ARNOLD: I don't want to imply that we're absolutely going to have building above parking,
but I understand where Mr. Chrzanowski's coming from. I just don't know --
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: The generator itself, yeah. It does no good to have all the
air-conditioning if the generator floods out or gets hit by saltwater, so it's just a thought.
MR. FRENCH: Good moming. Jamie French, for the record.
To let you know that NFIP, the last two revisions of the Florida Building Code, the National Flood
Insurance Program was, for lack of a better term, dropped right in the middle of the Florida Building Code.
So this structure or any structure built in Collier County now, whether it be residential, commercial,
or residential use in a commercial-type building, is going to have to meet all ofthose requirements to include
BFE plus one. So there's one foot of freeboard now that's been incorporated within the Florida Building
Code with regards to habitable space, mechanical equipment.
So they -- yes, Stan, they're going to have to meet the most latest, the most stringent requirements as
Page 45 of76
March 15, 2018
set forth by the Florida Building Code.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah, but all the electrical equipment in there depends on
the functioning of the generator if you lose power. So it seems to me the generator might be a little higher
than the other stuff.
MR. KLATZKOW: Jamie, this is a Florida Building Code requirement, correct?
MR. FRENCH: That's correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: Are we entitled to ask for more?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Those are minimums, those codes are.
MR. FRENCH: Typically, with the Florida Building Code, no. You would have to -- if you wanted
to file an amendment with the Florida Building Code, if the Board did, to make it more restrictive, it would
have to be approved by the Florida Building Commission.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, wait a minute. The building codes, like the LDC, they're minimum
codes. So you're saying you can't ever -- you can't ever over-strap your house, for example? I mean --
MR. KLATZKOW: You can voluntarily do it, but we can't require them to do it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we weren't. I don't think it was going -- it was going to be a request,
and then it might impact somebody's vote on this board, but that's how it would be proposed.
MR. FRENCH: Mark, you're absolutely correct. You can --
MR. KLATZKOW: Planning Commission exaction now, huh?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not -- h"y, talk to the guy -- the engineer at the end.
MR. FRENCH: You can certainly require it. And I know there was a question as well as the wind
zones. Also, within the latest revision of the Florida Building Code, there's not much differential from East
Coast to West Coast any longer. So when we look at those coast high hazards areas, our wind load went up
from, let's say, 140 miles. This area -- and I don't have the map in front of me. I would imagine that 30
second gust on this building is probably going to have to be about 185 miles an hour.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you, sir.
Any more questions of staff before we go to -- well, I've got to talk to - what does the Planning
Commission want to do about our lunch break? You want to -- how many public speakers do we have
registered, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: Two speakers.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Well, I'd like to get through the public speakers first.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Is there a staffreport, Ray, before we go to public speakers?
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. Im filling in for Eric Johnson who's on vacation,
and the presentation made by the applicant is consistent with their request, and staff is recommending
approval.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions of stafl
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Would you call the public speakers, and whoever wants to speak,
just use one of the microphones, identiff yourself for the record. And we'll need to ask if you've been swom
in when you come up. If you haven't been, just tell us, and we'll take care of that.
MR. BELLOWS: The first speaker is Alison Wescott to be followed by Mark Andrews.
MS. WESCOTT: Okay. Can you hear me? Great.
Okay. Good aftemoon, everyone. I'm Alison Wescott for the Conservancy of Southwest Florida on
behalf of our more than 7,000 members.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were you sworn in when we --
MS. WESCOTT: Yes, I was.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Thank you.
MS. WESCOTT: Yep,I stood up.
The Conservancy, as a signatory of the Deltona Settlement Agreement, and in fulfillrnent of its
oversight authority, would like to put on the record our concerns about this project.
We acknowledge the parcel on the north side of the PUD is located within the approved development
Page 46 of 76
March 15,2018
area as identified in Exhibit B and can be developed; however, the Conservancy is concerned about the uses
permitted in Section 4.07.01of the PUD.
As it states now, as was pointed out earlier, principal uses include viewing stands or docks and nature
trails not associated with any particular multifamily development and noncommercial boat launching
facilities and multiple docking areas with a maximum extension into the waterway of 20 feet in accordance
with Section 5.03.06 ofthe Land Development Code.
The Conservancy has sought clarification from the state in light of the Deltona settlement, as has
been pointed out. ln their letter of February I 6th of this year, the state reminds us that although the property
is in an area that is approved for development, beyond the primary property boundaries are state-owned lands
and waters subject to additional protections under the settlement.
And since the Conservancy, the county, and the State of Florida are signatories to the settlement, we
should act to uphold the restrictions within the settlemen! including with regard to boardwalks or boat docks
not authorized by the settlement.
So we believe it would not be right to sell this property to a buyer who might intend to build docks or
boardwalks, as this would likely not be permitted by the state, which I believe has already been pointed out.
We'd like to put on the record that the county should consider this when it conducts its review, and I
have a copy ofthe letter from the state which I would like to leave for the record.
And I just wanted to remind everyone, and it has come up this morning, that the events of Hurricane
Irma underscore the importance of ensuring development projects such as this are built with smart growth
principles, in particular, preserving mangrove fringe for protection from storm surge and coastal erosion.
This is very important.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: There was no settlement agreement in the materials, was there?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I mean, it's about a 90 or -- I forget. I don't know how many pages.
It's a rather nice document.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Ive got a question.
MS. WESCOTT: We'd be happy to share it with you if you'd like to see it.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKJ: I have a question. The lake that this property butts up
against, is it possible to boat from that lake anywhere?
MS. WESCOTT: I don't believe that you can enter into Rookery Bay, if that's what you're asking.
And the lake is -
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: There's, like, a bridge and a weir and a few other things in
the way, right? So anybody that puts a boat into there would just be able to go back and forttr in a quarter
mile worth of lake?
MS. WESCOTT: I'm not sure aboutthat in the future.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Stan, there are control structures that control the internal
drainage to the :
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. Because we tried to get up there with a canoe one
time, and I don't remember being able to.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And I know there's one where it says Mainsail Drive there, where
the D is. Approximately in that area there's another contol structure, so it's --
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So you just have to - if they put a boat dock in, they would
just be boating back and forth in that lake?
MS. WESCOTT: I can't answer that question
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Is the settlement agreement crafted so that only uses that are expressly
permitted are permitted, or is it that uses that are prohibited are expressly stated?
MS. WESCOTT: I think the point that I was trying to make, actually, is that that land which is
water-ward of the private property line is state-owned water. And the mangroves, even though they're
emergent and may have grown up since the settlement, are actually considered to be under the control of the
state.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Does -- anything in this presentation, in this PUD, does it violate the
Page 47 of76
March 15,2018
settlement agreement?
MS. WESCOTT: Well, if they intend to build boat docks going 20 feet into the water, that would
have to go through state land, I would assume.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Well, I guess you're speculating.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, no. It would. I spent 20 years working under a settlement agreement,
and I had to go to the signators to have all the things that I was doing corrected or modified, or to the extent
they would. Some of them they wouldn't. And it's a process that's outlined in the settlement agreement and
it's from 19 - what is it -- 84? It's an old document.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Eighty-four.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. And it's got multiple pages. It's got almost more pages of exhibits
than it does text but it's got nearly a hundred pages of text so...
MS. WESCOTT: But in our discussions with the state, they indicated that they would not approve
the use ofa boat dock.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: At all?
MS. WESCOTT: No.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Even if it were, like, a small floating dock for canoes or
something like that? I mean, I can't see somebody putting a power boat in there at all, period.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: We're getting a little offtrack on this whole thing.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Well, except I'm not sure we'd want to approve a - in permitted uses of
this PUD something that is --
MR. KLATZKOW: Are not docks already approved?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're not necessarily approving it. What I would have done during
discussion is suggest that any docks or other development beyond the settlement agreement line must have
the approval through the process required by the settlement agreement.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: There is a process. You've seven to nine signatories. They can go ahead
and agree to something. Not all of them have to. You can get the majority, and you can -- something can
happen. So that's all subject to that process. It's outlined in that document. So when we get to discussion,
Ned, I was going to read that, so...
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Next speaker, Ray.
MR. BELLOWS: Mark Andrews.
MR. ANDREWS: Mr. Chairman, members ofthe Board.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were you sworn in, Mr. Andrews?
MR. ANDREWS: Yes,I have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MR. ANDREWS: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name's Mark Andrews. I reside at
1356 Mainsail Drive, Unit 1422. I'm also the president of the Marco - Fairways II, Marco Shores Condo
Association, and we are against this project mainly because of the traffic.
As everybody should know, that's a one-way street. There's one way in and one way out to Collier
Boulevard. It's a very long wait at the traffic light trying to get either into the Mainsail Drive or getting out.
And we feel that the additional traffic that's going to generate from the staff. It's a24-hour facility -- from the
residents that live there -- and we know that it's assisted living. Some people do have their own vehicles; and
then you have the families coming in visiting, and so that's a very, very big concern of ours.
The next thing is the utilities there. And it's just -- it's strange to see a facility that's going to be built
right next to a wastewater treatment plant. It's right there, right next to the property. It abuts the property
right there.
The other things with the utilities is the water supply. We do get our water from Marco Island.
That's how we get that. And sometimes the pressure and stufflike that isn't the best all the time. So that's
one of our biggest problems.
And, basically, we are not against assisted living projects whatsoever. It's just that on that site, being
Page 48 of76
March 15,2018
locked in on that one-way steet with all the traffic coming in and ou! and with the emergency vehicles
coming in at all hours, it could happen, our members feel that it's a little bit of a burden to the whole area.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Before you leave, the property right now, as it stands, could have all the
uses they're asking for basically except for the group housing, and the other uses, like multifamily, especially
two- or three-bedroom units with a family and teenagers, would generate an equivalent amount of traffic that
they're asking for.
Why do you think there's more traffic when the testimony and the analysis shows that this is an
equivalent amount of -- that's why the number was chosen. It's equivalent to the multifamily. So if you're
going to have the traffic with multifamily and you've got actually a quieter use with senior living, they
generally are more benign than kids and families.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Probably fewer drivers, too.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. Just out of curiosity -
MR. ANDREWS: Well, you know, living there and seeing the traffic going up and down the
street -- and I know, you know, the area is zoned for residential. It's just that -- I'm just conveying what we
see every day with the traffrc. And with the additional traffic coming in and with the utilities and stufflike
that, we just feel thaq you know, it's going to add quite a bit of traffic to that area. Getting in and out of
that -- I know, you know --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it won't add any more, sir. I mean, that's what the testimony is. And,
to be honest with you, we do this with a lot of projects. It's not going to add traffic. It's going to be
equivalent to the traffic or less than what's already allowed to be at that location. That's the difference.
MR. ANDREWS: Well, just, you know, by living there and trying to get out of the street and trying
to get into the street every day, you have to wait a very, very long time with just what we have now for the
traffic, you know, for the residents that live there now.
So the additional is going to be a lot more wait time trying to get in. I'm just stating the fact of us
getting in and out of that street; that's all.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I'm justtrying to understand -- I understand what you're saying,
but it really isn't additional traffic. It's already been voted on, not by this board, but by l9 - I think the
settlement agreement and the Marco Shores Unit 30 was in the 1980s it was approved. So the density and
stuffthat they're using is equivalent traffrc. So I don't know if it - I knew you didn't want more traffic, but
they have a right - they had a property right here to put more traffic there at some form over decades. That's
the piece I'm trying to understand better.
Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mark, there also would be additionaltraffic that's already -- I don't
know if it's vested or was counted because of the three towers that are there; it was originally zoned and
approved for five. So that's a significant amount of traffic that's still is yet to be added or could be added to
that PUD because it is -- there's two tracts that have yet to have been built.
MR. ANDREWS: That's correct.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Based on CTS, which is the property.ights -- we keep them
calibrated -- you have, I think, 1,580 total units available to be on that property by right based on the PUD or
the DO, and you still have 643 left to go.
Now, a lot oftimes they don't build out that many, thankfully, and that's why this is going to take the
place of 100 multifamily, so those would automatically come off. And I doubt if the two towers are going to
take as much as what's left, so you may never get built out to the maximum density and traffic that was there.
It's not going to get better for you, because that's the way this thing was approved, whal four decades ago.
MR. ANDREWS: So there's no recent traffic studies that have been done recently?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, we're going to get their traffic engineer to comment on your
comments when we finish with public speakers, so --
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: But those trips have already been counted.
MR. ANDREWS: They already have?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: They're already part of this project for years, so they're already
Page 49 of 76
March 15, 2018
counted. They're in every traffic study.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. ANDREWS: Thank you very much.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Are there any other registered public speakers, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No other speakers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any other members of the public that would like to speak? We're
going to -- ma'am, if you'd like to -- no, you have to come up to the microphone, and you have to let us know
if you've been swom in, and you have to identi! yourself for the record, then we can hear you.
MS. FINK: My name is Yvette Fink.
(The speaker was duly swom and indicated in the affrmative.)
MS. FINK: My name is Yvette Fink, and I have lived on Mainsail for 20 years.
The increase in traffic in 20 years is not comparable from the day that I moved in there. We also
have the airport there that you have to take in consideration. And the airport has been sized maybe three
times as big as it was when I was -- when I moved into Marco -- into Mainsail.
So you have the additional traffrc from the homes, the residents, plus the airport, so -- and plus, if this
is a facility over there with the airplanes flying all over the place, it's not a really quiet neighborhood, plus the
water purifring plan! which is really annoying to many people because it doesn't -- if the wind blows the
right way, you get a very beautiful scent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thankyou, ma'am.
MS. FINK: So this is what I would like you to consider. Okay. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Sir, if you'd like to come up and speak, you'll have to be swom
in if you haven't been already.
MR. HARRIS: I haven't been sworn in, sir. My name is Robert Harris.
(The speaker was duly swom and indicated in the affrmative.)
MR. HARRIS: I also have lived in Fairways II.
My consideration is just as a point of interest. Were the traffic studies done during peak season?
Because basically there's 80 units, and I think maybe l0 percent are year-round. I'm not sure -- in my
building of 12, there's two people that are year-round. All the rest of us are snowbirds, okay. We come down
for three months to get out of the New Hampshire weather and enjoy your beautiful sunshine.
The other thing is that my question would also be the duration of the building time frame. The
airport extension, we had l8-wheel dump trucks from 7 o'clock in the morning to almost 7 o'clock at night.
The speed of the dump trucks -- we had a county sheriffsit there at the end of Fairways II monitoring. I
know they get paid by the load, but you've got a full load going up the stree! speed limit's 35, and I know
most of us don't i! but it's awful to see an lS-wheeler full of dirt and rock going 40, 50 miles an hour up your
street and that.
So what would be the construction impact on the traffrc and the amount of time that it would take to
do this?
The other question is that that lake which they're trying to build docks on and recreation has a good
amount of alligators in it. We've had one gentleman be bit walking along the side of it and almost dragged in.
And we didn't buy on Mainsail because all the docks had a warning of, don't go three feet near the water
because there's alligator.
And I know it sounds silly, but my wife wanted to live on the other side because she figured the
alligators wouldn't across the street. And I said, yes, dear, and we now live in Fairways II. Luckily she's not
here so I won't get a dope slap for saying that.
Bu! you know, these are my concerns. Duration. The animal hazardto some of these elderly people.
If they go on the dock, they put their feet in the water, you've got an issue for safety.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, we're going to have the traffrc engineer comment on these
issues.
MR. HARRIS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Thank you.
Is there anybody else in the public who would like to speak who hasn't already spoken?
Page 50 of 76
March 15,2018
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And your faffic engineer is here?
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, Jim Banks is here.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: But is he doingthattoday?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, he's a traffic engineer today.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay, good.
MR. ARNOLD: If I might just address a couple of the issues that were raised before we talk about
traffic.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Go right ahead.
MR. ARNOLD: The dock issue related to the Conservancy, the language that we have in our poftion
of the PUD is exactly the language that is in the rest of this PUD except for the reference to Section 5.03 of
the LDC, which are your dock standards.
So that language was carried over. Staffasked us to update it by adding the reference to the new
Land Development Code requirements for docks.
So the rest of this PUD has the same language. And I understand the Conservancy's point, but there
is a legal process for going to the state and asking to build beyond that development line. So I would think it
would be unfair for us to not have any opportunity to approach the state to build a dock.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, who saidthat?
MR. ARNOLD: One of the residents or -- I mean, I think it was implied from somebody that maybe
we shouldn't be allowed to -
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: I read the language that I would suggest regarding that situation. Do you
have an objection to that is what you're telling me?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, you read it fast. But I think I understood what you said. It's subject to going
to the state.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Right.
MR. ARNOLD: And I think we're fine with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That just clarifies it should anybody else buy this property and look at the
uses that can be there and think they can do docks. It's interesting to understand there's probably already
docks somewhere along there. So maybe that needs to be followed up with someone who was signator to
that settlement agreement.
AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No, no, no.
MR. ARNOLD: The only other issue that I would mention, Mr. Strain, there was a comment about
the utility site. That site is being abandoned by Marco Island Utilities. I don't know what they're going to be
doing with the disposal of the property, but the site's going to be taken out.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: They're going to put docks there.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Im looking at Google, and that short of -- like Ned said,
looks like a dock, it quacks like a dock. It looks like a couple of docks along there.
MR. ARNOLD: There are docks out there.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. What are they putting in there, power boats or --
MR. ARNOLD: I don't know what other portions, but this is an isolated water body, for the most
part. It's not navigable by a boat but, you know, there's kayaking and paddle boarding and lots of other
opportunities you might want to put a small dock in, so...
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's move on to Jim Banks, because we're going into some time here we
need to break for lunch. So, Jim, you heard the issues involving the traffic. Can you explain the neutrality of
the traffic issue you have and also what happens during the construction phase of projects and issues like that.
MR. BANKS: For the record, Jim Banks. And, yeah, I'll address traffic first and then whatever you
want me to do after that.
But yeah, one ofthe questions was, are the analysis based on seasonal conditions. The traffic studies
that were prepared for this project as a whole were based on full occupancy of the units. There's not this
Page 51 of76
March 15, 2018
off-season analysis that's done. It's done for seasonal full-occupancy conditions.
The traffic study was based on complete buildout of this development for the number of units that
were approved, and the design and the access onto 951 was based on full buildout of the development.
Now, as you all correctly conveyed to the public that the request here to you today will not affect
how much traffic is going to be on Mainsail Drive or how ingress and egress is going to be in the future on
getting in and offof 951.
So you're correct, the application here today, your decision does not affect what the future traffic
conditions are on Mainsail Drive or on 951.
Now, what is occurring right now, as you heard, that they said that there's extended periods of time
getting in and out on 951. Well, that is actually a function of the signal timing. That's not -- so, today, your
traffic engineers, they go down there and they look at these intersections and they put priorities on the
side-street demand and the mainline. And right now, because this project isn't built out and there's not as
much traffrc as is going to be expected in the future, they have the timing of that signal turned down.
Now, what's going to happen in the future, as this development continues to grow and there's more
and more units in there and then the side-street demand increases, traffic ops will adjust the timing as
necessary to where there's not undue -- a substantial amount of delay for people getting in and out of this
development.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: And I was trying to figure out where the variables might have been on this
project because when the projects are approved through the PUDs and development orders, especially these
old ones, they have a vested amount of density that goes with them. You can't just take that away, and it's
supposed to have been calculated in our checkbook concurrency process, which I know it was.
But you know what the variable probably here is is the airport. If anything could generate more
traffic than was anticipated, it's probably the airport functioning and expanding like it has. And maybe that's
what they're feeling. But as far as these units and the other units and up to total maximum, the project's
always been approved for that total maximum.
So I'm not sure how to address a traffic that they have that hasn't already been acknowledged and it's
just part of the way this project was desigred.
MR. BANKS: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And we didn't design it. That was designed by the developer at the time.
He met the minimum codes, and that's what they put in there.
MR. BANKS: Right. And, again, the action today isn't going to change -- is not going to change the
traffrc conditions that are going to occur in the future.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But I think one of the things Jim brought out is, where I live
we come out and we go down to make a U-tum at the local light, and sometimes during rush hour the traffic
people have throttled that down to where only three cars czul go through and there's 10, I 5 cars in line, and it
takes you three or four times to get through.
And the right turn coming from -- or the left turn coming out of Piper's Grove, some mornings, you
know, it lets three or four or five cars through, and there's l0 cars in line.
So I know that traffic can change the timing on those signals for certain times of the day and
whatever. And a lot of this, I think, depends on them. They could probably alleviate some of the traffic
concerns if they paid real close attention, but it's all seasonal and it's all time-of-day related, and there is a lot
of traffic on 951.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah. I was there yesterday in a long line waiting to get to 41, so...
Okay. Anybody else have any questions on traffic? Oh, maybe Wayne can address phasing of the
construction, how the -- not that -- we can't stop construction vehicles, but just to at least explain the phasing
you're going to use. How were you intending to build this out?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think, given the number of units and how either a typical multifamily
development of this size on this acreage would build out, it's probably a one-phase project, most likely.
Construction project of that style probably takes less than a year to -- once you commence.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Are you going to - if you do underbuilding parking, you won't need
Page 52 of 76
March 15,2018
as much fill. Is that a fair statement?
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. Plus the site has already been filled largely. It probably doesn't
meet new FEMA, but it has been cleared and filled previously.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that - go ahead. Did you want a rebuttal?
MR. ARNOLD: No, no real rebuttal. I know that you've got issues. But Mr. Banks just found a
cellular phone on the floor. So I don't know if it fell out of any of the speakers' pockets, but we have a cell
phone I'll give to Ray and let somebody claim it.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Okay. With that, we will - no, ma'am, you can't talk from the audience. You have to come up and
be swom in and identifo yourself for the record, please.
(The speaker was duly swom and indicated in the affrrmative.)
MS. BRODAK: My name is Roma.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Could you spell your last name for us just so --
MS. BRODAK: Roma Brodak.
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you spell the last name.
MS. BRODAK: Roma, R-o-m-a; Brodak, B-r-o-d-a-k.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MS. BRODAK: I purchased the property there 20 years ago. I'm from Michigan; originally from
Poland.
I have a question to the gentleman. How many residents --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You'll have to ask us the question, and we'll get him back up here. We
don't have communication between you and the applicant.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. How many residents will be living in facility?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 1,580 times 2.47 . Here.Ill tell you what that is. You're permitted for 1,580
units, and if you multiply that times the average person per household in Collier Coungr, that's 2.47,
according to the latest census. So what you come up with is a total number of residents in the whole thing of
3,902.6. I'd round it up.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. That unit is going to be built, right?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, that's the number -- you asked for the number of residents. That's the
number of people that could live there.
MS. BRODAK: Okay.
CTIAIRMAN STRAIN: The number of residences, that could be a total of - I think the last I looked
it was 1,580, and out of that, I think there's 643leftto build.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. You are fu*y, but my question --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I'm not trying to be funny. I'm answering your question.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. Maybe I ask wrong way, but I would like to know how many residents will
be in a building or the facility the sir would like to build.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just their facility?
MS. BRODAK: Just their facility.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wayne?
MR. ARNOLD: For the senior housing we've asked for a maximum of 240 units/beds.
MS. BRODAK: So it's240 people seniors, right?
MR. ARNOLD: Potentially, yes.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. How many employees will be there working to serve the people, to deliver,
to help them, to exercise them, whatever the staffthat's needed to provide for 240 people? How many
employees will be there --
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Wayne?
MS. BRODAK: -- on everyday base?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ma'am, you're not -- you'll need to talk to us. When you finish, he'll come
Page 53 of76
March 15, 2018
up and make what's called a rebutlal, and he'll try to answer your --
MS. BRODAK: Okay. I'm a little neryous. I never take place like this.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You wantto know how many employees and how many residents, right?
MS. BRODAK: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Is there anything else?
MS. BRODAK: Well, that's going to bring the traffic, right? And how many of you went there and
see the place when they build a facility, how it's going to look in all the residential area? It's typical
residential area. I understand the plans and approval years and -- or years ago, but Ijust will really appreciate
if some of you go and look what you're trying to approve and which area.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Thank you. And we'll your answers for you from the planner (sic).
MS. BRODAK: And I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough, but I never speak publicly, plus I have an
accent.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That's okay. I just wanted to make sure we factually answered your
question. That's why when you asked about how many residents, that number can be estimated, and that's
what I was trying to do for you.
MS. BRODAK: Right. But asking, I was thinking about facility that you're trying to approve.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I understand now, yep.
MS. BRODAK: And it's any way we can protest if you approve?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: We're not -- we don't approve. We only recommend. So you can go to the
next meeting, which will occur probably in about a month, in front of the Board of County Commissioners,
and they are the ones that actually approve things. So at that level you can have the same conversation, and
they can decide what to do -
MS. BRODAK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- with ourrecommendation.
MS. BRODAK: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wayne?
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Mr. Strain. I don't have a direct rebuttal, but I know that you
mentioned a few items that we probably want to go through in the PUD document.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well - but let's answerthe lady's questions.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: She asked how many people will reside there, and basically you've got
beds. Two hundred and --
MR. ARNOLD: Forty of those.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: -- forty beds. So that means you've got at least 240 people, but they're in
beds. They may not all be drivers.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: At most.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Right, at most, because you can't fit any more residents there that can't fit
into a bed. So how many employees do you think you'll have on a single shift to run that operation?
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain,I honestly have no idea.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Does your client know, since he's in the business?
MR. ARNOLD: He's not in the senior housing business.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Oh, okay.
MR. ARNOLD: He's not a senior housing provider. We have senior housing providers who are
interested in purchasing the property, but we're not senior housing providers, so I don't have a direct answer
for how many employees that equates to. But the traffic analyses under the IT manual for senior housing
facilities factor in employees, numbers of persons that reside there, et cetera. So I think we're covered with
regard to the traffic analysis.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you don't have number of employees per shift, but you know that
the beds are going to limit the number of residents. So you've got240 people. Generally, the people in these
Page 54 of 76
March 15,2018
facilities don't all drive, so I wouldn't imagine you'd have a high percentage of drivers, compared to what it
would be if it was multifamily. That's just an assumption. So I think that's the best answer we're going to be
able to get with the information we have today.
So with that said, did you want to have rebuttal, Wayne, on anything else?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't think it's necessary. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have anyhing?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Wayne, one other thing. You know, when we have approved senior living
facilities before, staffusually adds to them the standard conditions we've approved on those, and I didn't catch
it this time.
Ray, do you know if it's in there or not?
MR. BELLOWS: The standard --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Remember the ones like we did at the Cleary PUD and the others where we
just, a long time ago, had those?
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. Those conditions were generated when there's mostly your primarily
independent living. That's not the case here, so I don't believe we've included all of them, but...
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I just wanted to understand. If you haven't included them for that reason,
that's fine. I wanted to make sure we had a reason.
MR. BELLOWS: Ray, I believe, in my discussions with Mr. Johnson, we did pass along what we
thought was applicable. But since this isn't a completely independent living, some of the others weren't
necessary.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wayne, is there anything else you want to add before we close?
MR. ARNOLD: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. I have made -- I've written five notes for the Planning Commission
to consider.
The first one is no substance abuse or developmentally disabled residents for the group housing.
Number 2, any docks or other development beyond the settlement agreement line must have
approval through the process required by the settlement agreement.
Number 3, we're going to add A/C language to the group housing generator -- so the
generator -- we're going to add language so that the generator includes enough for the air-conditioning units
in the group housing and will be installed according to the FEMA regulations that the main building is
installed to, which is one foot above FEMA.
Parking structures that was referred to under accessories was meant to be building parking under the
building, underbuilding parking.
And then the -- well, that's it. That's the four of them I have.
MR. ARNOLD: That's consistent with the notes that I made. I would - if those are going to be part
of the motion, if I could get a copy of the language just to make sure that I --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I usually send it to Ray. He can send it to you.
MR. ARNOLD: Thankyou.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Is there any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll make a motion to approve the PUDA subject to those four points.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Ned, seconded by Karen. Further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signil, by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
Page 55 of76
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
This will move on to the Board of County Commissioners probably late in April.
And with that, we're going to take a 59-minute -- or 58-minute lunch. Be back at 1:30, and we'll
resume with the -- I think it was the first one : City Gate project at that time.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Good afternoon, everyone. If you'll please retake your seats, we'll move
with the remainder of the Planning Commission's issues this afternoon.
And I'm going to tum to the Planning Commission and ask if they would consider a change to our
agenda. City Gate wasn't available to us before lunch, and it's going to -- now that they sent it to us, we're
going to need some time to read it. Some of us may have had that time.
But I would like, since we were late on lunch, I'd like to move Rushton Pointe up first and then finish
Cis, Gate up for as long as it takes this afternoon. Is everybody okay with that?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Especially since City Gate couldn't get the right color of highlighting on
this thing. We've got blue and it was supposed to be orange. And I went through it. And then based on that,
they haven't changed anything because there's no orange in the whole thing.
'k**So with that in mind, we'll move forward, and the next item up will be 9E. It's PL20150000306.
All those wishing to testifo on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And disclosures. We'll start with Tom on the - my right.
MR. EASTMAN: None.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I spoke to Mike Fernandez.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: None.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I had conversations with Mike Fernandez and Patrick White, and I just
met one of the people from Indigo Lakes in the audience.
Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I also spoke with Mike Fernandez and Patrick White.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Patrick?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'd like to amend. I did speak with Patrick White quite a
while ago about this.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And one otherthing I have to clarifr.
Trinity, I didn't (sic) notice - you brought your husband with you. Did you want to introduce him
today? I'm assuming that's your son.
MS. SCOTT: My son, yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nice to meet you, young fellow. I'm glad you're here seeing these exciting
things happen in govemment, so...
And with that, Michael, we'll turn it over to you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Good aftemoon, Commissioner. Michael Fernandez with the firm of Planning
Development representing the owners of the 38.1-acre infill parcel offof Collier Boulevard just south of
Indigo Lakes and north of Brittany Bay. Also, Indigo Lakes abuts it on the west end.
As you can see there, there's an aerial in front of you right now. The property was acfually a portion
Page 56 of 76
March 15, 2018
of the old Indigo Lakes lands under the same farming. So there's some old row crops; that areathat you can
see that was carved out of the property.
You will also notice that there's a water management feature that's at the northeast corner of the
property. It's within a 5.09-acre tract that the county acquired in 2005, and it's used in portion to satisfy the
water management requirements for Collier Boulevard.
I would tell you that there is a provision that allows the owner of the property to reconfigure that
lake, and that's exactly what we're proposing to do to enhance the ability for the site plan that we've proposed.
This is a proposed residential development. It's, as I said, an infill parcel. It abuts existing residential
development. To the north, as I said, is Indigo Lakes. Around the perimeter of the graphic you can see that
there's the Indigo Lakes entry drive in the northeast corner followed by a small section of preserve that is
isolated as part of the Indigo Lakes project then single-family along the balance of the border with the
Rushton Pointe project.
On the south side is part of Brittany Bay. You'll see that they have some multifamily residential near
the east portion. Then there's a road and recreational amenity, another recreational amenity and, finally, a
lake and open-space tract. So that's how we abut the properties.
As part of the agreement with the county when they acquired the easement, the county went ahead
and identified the exact location for the access to this parcel, and we're showing -- we're depicting it at that
location. They also are committed to providing a 250-foot turn lane for that access point and you can see in
our master plan that we have reconfigured the coun$r's drainage lake, but we have our own large centralized
feature.
The parcel itself is very rectilinear and slightly slender, and it kind of suggests the plan that we have,
what is a large linear central lake surrounded by residential fracts.
The preserve requiremen! the 25 percent of the native vegetation, is located at the western extreme
of the properly. That's the P tract, and it acts additionally as a buffer to single-family residential along the
west edge and, because it's placed there, we don't have to cut through it, so it stays in one contiguous parcel.
That location was identified in earlier documents of other development further to the south. [n the
graphic that you see there that's overlaid the aerial, this preserve arca at the western end of the parcel becomes
part of a mosaic larger area for habitat, and it's composed of preserves, open space, including lakes.
The proposed land uses could be multifamily or single-family. We looked at the analysis that staff
did, relationships to the adjacent development, and we're very comfortable with their analysis and agree with
it. We're limiting all residential development to no more than two stories, and currently there exists along the
north border with Indigo Lakes homes of one- and two-story development.
Our development standards limit the height to 30 feet. The adjacent PUDs limit their heights to 35
feet. So we're going to be a little bit shorter than they are.
Our landscape buffers meet the code requirements, and the developer has actually added, in No. 5,
their development commitments, a provision that would -- if there's only a requirement for a Type A buffer,
they would come back and enhance that with a Tlpe B hedge which would be planted at five feet grown to
six feet, and be 80 percent opaque. So there will be an enhanced buffer along the north and south buffers.
In addition to that, we have been working cooperatively with our neighbors to the north and to the
west representing - they're representing Indigo Lakes Master Association, and I believe they have a couple of
members here today that will address the results of our cooperative efforts in coming up with ways to
mitigate some of their concerns.
With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have regarding the project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Planning Commission, anybody have any questions? Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: In the NIM it was said, the proposed rezone requests only six units per
acre and does not request any bonus density or affordable housing; is that correct?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Tltat's what that document says, yes. And what we were saying there --
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Is the underlying fact correct?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. Correctly stated, we were asking for the density that is permitted by the
density band but not density for affordable housing. That would have been a correction.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. So - but then in the staffreport it said this project is eligible for
Page 57 of76
March 15, 2018
a base density of four residential dwelling units per acre and is eligible for a density bonus of three additional
dwelling units per acre for a total of seven DU per A.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So those two things don't agree with one another.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah,I agree with you. Obviously, what we were asking and what we
presented to the homeowners associations at the NIM was that we were requesting six.
And we described it at that time as four plus two out of the three that would be eligible from the
density band.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Would you mind, then, stating exactly what the density will be and of
what it will consist?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Sure. The density is a maximum of six units per acre. It can be a single-family
development multifamily development, or a combination of the two. We did make an additional
commitrnent at that NIM, and it's incorporated in the agreement that we have with Indigo Lakes and would be
added to this text and that it would prohibit a rental apartment community.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Are you asking, then, for a density bonus?
MR. FERNANDEZ: From whom?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: From the county.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We are asking for -- I'm not sure if the criteria -
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not a density bonus. You have four units by right and then you've got
the band that is allowed -- do you have a higher intensity band around activity areas.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. I'm not sure if it's called a bonus or not but it's from the density band.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: This is the language - ['m just quoting from the NIM.
MR. FERNANDEZ: I understand.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Michael, let's start with Page23.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Typically, we have asked that the accessory uses that are community wide
be allocated to a separate section of the PUD, general development or rec tracts or whatever, and I gave Ray
an example of another one we did. You have informed me during the break you thought that you could
reallocate your community-wide accessory and guardhouses and other things to paragraphs like this in your
PUD.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We can do that very easily, yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What I wanted to clarifo is that the -- you also have in here,
including recreation -- yeah, facilities for lawn care and maintenance. I didn't notice in your standards table a
category for maintenance. It says clubhouse and recreational buildings.
Now, the category's fine -- I mean, the numbers are fine, possibly, but could you add to the title,
"clubhouse recreational and/or maintenance buildings"? Because you're going to have to have a separate
situation for those, too.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That will take out a lot of my questions and concerns from the
principal uses and accessory issue.
You're going to move guardhouses and gatehouses in here, as you've seen on here. So that clears that
whole page up. I appreciate that.
When we get into your Development Standards Table -
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. Mr. Strain?
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
MR. FERNANDEZ: One moment please. Can you tell me, when you referenced thatPage23,
where were you looking?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Electronic. It's Page2 of9.
Page 58 of76
March 15,2018
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Exhibit A.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. ln our packet we delivered, there's continuous page numbering that
goes up to,like,279.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Oh. Well, it's Page 5 of your continuous page number where I just spoke
from, the paragraph I was changing. And the table I'm talking about is your Page 6.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Got it. Thankyou. Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. On that Page 6, you say maximum number of storage. And you
look at maximum building height, 30 feet. Are you doing any underbuilding parking?
MR. FERNANDEZ: No, we are not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So we can just make a note that there's no underbuilding parking. So a
story is not inclusive -- you've just got two stories, and they'll be habitable stories?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Corcect So you want that as a --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm just going to add a stipulation, no underbuilding parking.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We can add that under the footnotes, if you wish.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That's fine. Just so it gets - I didn't think you intended to. I just wanted to
make sure it was clear.
You have buffers around your facility, l0 and or 15 feet and plus you have lakes. Are you intending
to put those into separate bufler tracts or lake maintenance easement tracts?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, as required by staff.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. I wanted to make sure it was done.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So when we look at your rear setbacks, your setback for accessories is five
feet. So when you go up against Indigo Lakes, you'll really be five feet plus whatever buffer you have there.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Good. That's what I needed to find out.
And why, under your single-family detached, you have a maximum building height at 40 feet, but
then you've got maximum and zoned actual height for accessory at 40 feet. That's -- just out of curiosity,
would you build at 40 feet as an accessory?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, again, you're talking about overall height. And as an architect, I will tell
you, I would do some kind of embellishments or something that -- and I want to have that ability to do that,
for instance.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: For, like, apool cage or something?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, no. I was thinking more like a -- you know, a rec facility that may have
two levels in it that's maybe an Olde Florida style with a large roof.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, the rec facility -- yes, the rec facility there, you've got the same thing.
It's the same as principal structure, so that's what you're referring to.
I was looking at your 40 feet under your single-family detached. Because you've got 40 feet on that
one specifically --
MR. FERNANDEZ'. lf you're talking about accessory, yes, then that would be, for instance, a pool
cage that would match the -
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Height of the house?
MR. FERNANDEZ: The height ofthe house or the configuration of the roof.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Just -- then when we go into the footnotes, in your Footnote No. 1,
you talk about a 23-foot setback, and then we get into the second paragraph where it says, last line, "Shall not
conflict with the sidewalk; however, in no case shall the front setback for the side entry garage be less than 10
feet."
Then in the paragraph after that you talk about your other setbacks, including front enfiy and side
entry garage shall be set back 20 feet from the front yard property line except where the lot is -- an
intersection of two streets in which case the front yard setback herein shall only apply to the street on which
the entrance is located.
Now, let's start with the word "entrance." Do you mean entry door or garage? Because some people
Page 59 of76
March 15,2018
can put an entry door on the side ofthe house, and that's the fron! and the garage can be on the opposite side
with a driveway offthe road. You mean where your garage door fronts, right, or where your driveway
fronts?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the entrance in this case, in which the driveway is located, could
we say that instead of entrance?
MR. FERNANDEZ; Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then in the previous one I read where you wanted to be 10 feet back
and on this one, on a corner lot, you could be five feet back. Now, if we turn to your -- if you could put one
of your road cuts up there. Is utilities here? No.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. He's out -- he's sitting out in the hall.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you, Jamie.
You've got two, two cross-sections. This is C2. This would be the one you're saying you want to do
at 42 feel which I'm assuming is those -- mostly those east/west ones and then part of north/south, right?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct. The only time the other one comes into being is in those extensions
that we're asking for the deviations for a dead end of less than 100 feet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So let's start with this one. And on each side of your 42-footer,
you've got the CUE, which is a county utility easement.
MR. FERNANDEZ: If it's required. They may not be required.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But where is your l0-foot PUEs?
MR. FERNANDEZ: They would be beyond that.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Then you can't have a five-foot setback on the side.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Again, we don't know if there's going to be a CUE at all there.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Then you can't have a five-foot setback on the side because you've
got a l0-foot PUE.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We may not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FERNANDEZ: ln other words, depending on which side we load the utilities, they could go
across the steet and serve the individual lots.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not - okay. I'm not familiar with that, but if you say it can be done, I'll
take your word for it.
Then we need to add language to that footnote that - where there are either CUEs or PUEs, those
setbacks will have to be outside of those easements.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. I think that's in the code now, but we have no problem putting that in
there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I'm just concerned that someone's going to read this and not pick up
on it because --
MR. FERNANDEZ: I don't have a problem putting it in.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The other issue is -- and this is the County Attomey's Office. A
while back we had this issue concerning overhangs going into PUEs or CUEs, and I thought we weren't
allowing the overhangs in. You don't know if you're going to have overhangs or not, but if you do, I think the
language ought to be added also, any overhangs will not extend into the easements.
MR. FERNANDEZ: What I would prefer is that we come up with a standard that gives us so much
clearance above that. For instance, if I have a two-story home, I may have zm eave that comes over, you
know, two or three feet, and it's 30 feet up in the air.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the issue came up quite a while back. There was some
correspondence back and forth with the County Attorney's Office. I didn't bring it with me because I didn't
expect a - I didn't think you'd be objecting to it.
MR. FERNANDEZ: I'm just asking for a clarification. I would prefer to handle it that way.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you guys remember that Jeff? I know you were involved in ig but I
don't know if you remember. It's been a while. And you've gotten ayear older today, so...
Page 60 of76
March 15, 2018
MR. KLATZKOW: I was involved in this years ago, and it was a staffconcern because, they've got
to get equipment in.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: And staffnever wanted any overhanging in any of the utility easements because
of the equipment concerns.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's what I had thought you said back then, and we actually had - I think
the first project to come in that had this issue was Bent Creek up in the north end, and they had to be
held - they wanted to have overhangs, and they said they wouldn't be deeper than two fee! so we had them
l2 feet back.
Whatever you want to do, but I don't think -- we would need something better than just going to
build it high enough.
MR. FERNANDEZ: How about a clearance of a minimum 15 feet?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I don't know if that's the issue, rather than just -- because if we let you
get your overhangs into these, everybody's going to be able to do ig and we're going to have to start getting
into how high the eaves are going to be on every single house that could be along that frontage. What's so
critical about that two feet for the eaves or whatever you'd have? And yesterday you told me --
MR. FERNANDEZ'. I'm not --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: - you didn't even know if you were going to have an eave.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct. And I don't know. And I'm looking to retain flexibility. Im
looking to understand what is the county's need if they have equipment. If it's going to be more than l5 fee!
that's --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not worried about the county. I'm worried about the PUE. That's the
one you're up against. That's not a county easement.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Eventhen, it's --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, you've got FP&L. They don't have smallequipment. They've got big
trucks. They break up sidewalks all the time. You've got Sprint, you've got Comcas! you've got a series of
elements like - private utilities like that that are the concern. And if -- we haven't let that happen before, so
I'm not thinking this is the right way to go.
So you need to be outside either -- whatever the aggregated total of the CUEs, if they exist in PUEs
by the depth of the soffits -- or the depth of the overhangs if you have them. I mean --
MR. FERNANDEZ: lf they're encroaching, right?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. You can't encroach on them, yeah.
MR. FERNANDEZ: All right. That's good. We'll acceptthat.
MR. STONE: Mr. Chairman, just clarification. You want it to say something to the effect of the
structure, in addition to the overhang, will not encroach into a CUE or PUE.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That works great. Thank you.
MR. STONE: But in both ofthose sections.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the next exhibit, exhibit -- go ahead.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Canyou clarifo, Scott which two sections?
MR. STONE: I think it's the last two -- the second paragraph of Footnote I --
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
MR. STONE: -- where it's a l0-foot setback, and then the last sentence of Footnote I where it's a
five-foot setback.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
MR. STONE: We can say that -- we can wordsmith it bu! essentially, it will be the structure in
addition to the overhang will not encroach into PUE or CUE.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, and I noticed Eric's in the audience. Eric, could you come up and
answer a quick question about the CUEs on the typical road section that's on the overhead right now.
(The speaker was duly swom and indicated in the affirmative.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: And, Eric, the question is, on these road cuts, they're for a reduced county
standard to 42 feet. The deviations -- it's not untypical deviation. They do show the CUEs going five feet
Page 61 of76
March 15, 2018
onto the private property. Normally we see PUEs outside of those. I'm assuming you wouldn't allow a joint
effort with a PUE overriding your CUE.
MR. FEY: That is correct. We have exclusive subsurface utiligz rights within the CUE, and I think
there would need to be access rights across our CUE.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you -- on this particular project, do you know yet if there's something
you're going to be needing or not? I mean, they're called out, so you can have them if you want them. I just
didn't know if you've gone that far with the review of this site yet or not.
MR. FEY: Well, there's to be water main and force main. So, you know, they have a
seven-and-a-half-foot setback as shown, and those additional CUEs are just to provide maintenance access to
those mains within the right-of-way.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. FEY: So with the reduced width of the right-of-way, it puts us up against the right-of-way line,
and we just need some space for maintenance.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, that does help. I appreciate that. Because it looks like you're
going to need them. So we'll approach it as though they're needed. So, thank you.
MR. FEY: Thank you.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: And, Michael, you have a deviation requesting sidewalks be eliminated on
the south side of the south road because the houses are on the north side of the road, which is something
we've allowed before or recommended to be allowed before, so that part doesn't bother me.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
CTIAIRMAN STRAIN: But look at your next typical - look at your Exhibit C3. You've only got a
sidewalk on one side, and that's not on the south side of the project.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's in the turnaround area at the very end, and we may not have lots up
there or it may be -
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: But you didn't ask for a deviation for that. Unless stafftells me you don't
need a deviation for that you still do. So I don't know how far these are missing sidewalks. If it's just the arc
around the end - but then if someone's coming up one side they've got to cross the street to get to the
other -- to get to the sidewalk on the other side?
MR. FERNANDEZ: If my memory serves me correct -- I'm trying to recall -- I believe the code
gives us some flexibility when it comes to the end of a cul-de-sac; that it only needs to be on one side.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, aren't these proposed as hammerheads? I mean, where's your cut?
They're straight cuts. They're not cul-de-sacs.
MR. FERNANDEZ: They would be sfaight cuts. But effectively, what - I think what we've done
in the past, that staffhas required them only on one side. And these particular sections, both these sections
that you're seeing here, were already approved in prior PUDs.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I don't -- you know, if we made a mistake one time before, we're not going
to make it forever.
Ray, do you know the issue that -- are you familiar with the issue we're talking abou! or do you need
time to take a look at it?
MR. BELLOWS: I think we should take a look at it.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Because this will have to come back on consent, and before it comes
back, this needs to be either added to the deviation, if that's what staffthink is appropriate -
MR. BELLOWS: It probably will be a deviation.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: -- or not allowed to happen.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: That takes us back to the PUD itself. And I think I've hit the footnotes, and
if we go past that into - let me see what I've got here.
Diane, did you have something you wanted to
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ray, I'm going to ask you the question. Being most of this is on the
property because it's so narrow of a right-of-way, is this going to end up like a couple projects that we talked
about that -- the one on Livingston? Just please look at this one carefully --
Page 62 of 76
March 15,2018
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: -- because the plantings and stuff, it's horrendous.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, I understand what you're referring to in regard to cluster development and
the required tree. We'll take a look at it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Michael, if we go to your Exhibit E, which is on your Page l2,Electronic
Page32, your first deviation refers to the 42-footwidth of right-of-way internal to proposed -- as dictated on
our PUD master plan Exhibit Cl and C2. C2 is a road-cut exhibit. It's not a master plan.
MR. FERNANDEZ: You're correct. That's an error.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And on number - Deviation No. 2, it talks about the dead-end
sfeets, and those are depicted on master plan C 1 , but they're also the ones you're talking about as road
Exhibit C3, right, the road cross-section?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir. We can correctthat labeling.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. When we get into the development commitments, you -- we don't
have it in our packet, so I'd like to walk through the ones that you're proposing to add. They're strange.
They're different. We've not seen those before, but if you were volunteering to add them, I guess they can be,
so...
MR. FERNANDEZ'. Yes, sir. I don't know if you would want to wait. The master association
representative's here.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. It's -- it's your language to your PUD. I'd rather you present it. Then
they can decide ifthey like it or no! and we can listen to their concerns.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Also, just to advise you, county stafl Scott Stone, reviewed our
Ianguage, came back with proposed revisions. We have incorporated those revisions, shared them with the
master association, and they're comfortable with them as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Usually his language tightens them up and makes them a little bit more
legally sufficient so...
MR. FERNANDEZ: Herewe go.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just pull it down. There you go.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Should I go through them one by one?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. We haven't seen them. I mean, I know you showed them to me, but I
really haven't had time to study them since you sent them back. So let's go through them, each one of them,
yes.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Number 8 is one that basically proposes that should there be a
recreational amenity as part of a multifamily development and that recreational amenity requires a parking
lot, that parking lot will be improved or the pavement will be concrete and a basketball hoop and backboard
will be installed at one end, and that would only apply to the frst recreational amenity.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you've got to do concrete pavement.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Conect.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the basketball hoop and backboard. Never had this happen before, but
if you agree to it, we can add it to the PUD. It's generally not done this way, but -
MR. FERNANDEZ: We agree to it. We don't have to provide the basketball.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ['m not sure where - it's different. Let's look at No. 9 then, unless there's
any questions.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Number 9 is something that we've done quite frequently in a lot of
PUDs and, basically, it's to install a vinyl covered five-foot fence inside the hedge. So we basically build a
hedge with shrubs on either side so the hedge, then, is concealed or hidden, and it enhances the security,
basically, between developments.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Fence. Fence is concealed or hidden.
MR. FERNANDEZ: The fence, correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: When it says hidden, you mean 100 percent opacity?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Basically, this has to do with the north line - north and south property line
Page 63 of76
March 15, 2018
buffers and potentially the one along the preserve, and it references the 80 percent opacity standard as the
Type B buffer.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But this No. 9 doesn't reference the 80 percent opacrty standard.
When you say "hidden," that's an undefined term. So after "hidden," could you put in parenthetical, "80
percent opacity as required by a B buffer" since you're going to do that anyway?
MR. FERNANDEZ: We can. It does say Type B buffer. When it references to the north property
line buf,fers in the south ones --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: YEp.
MR. FERNANDEZ: - those do reference --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But those don't have a hidden fence in them. I just want to make sure --
MR. FERNANDEZ: Conect.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- nobody misreads the word "hidden."
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Now it's concealed by Scott's language.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, so he's already -- this is one of your changes?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah, this is one --
MR. STONE: Well, I just wanted clarification as to what --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I thought I was reading your language.
MR. STONE: No. Well, everything is except for that word, "hidden."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. You normally would have caught that.
MR. STONE: I didn't catch it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, okay. Then this isn't your language, okay.
MR. STONE: Just that - everything is except for that one word. I wanted to talk about that,
actually.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What did you want to talk about?
MR. STONE: Well, what we're talking about now.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh. So you disagree or agree?
MR. STONE: I think if you're relying on the Type B bufler being the obscurity, you can simply say
"placed in the shrub installation" and rely on that instead of putting "hidden." Because if it's already required
to be 80 percent opacity, then -
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That works, too. Can you take out the word "hidden" and use
"placed"?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Let's go to 10.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Number 10, the trees that are going to be planted along the north boundary,
what we're proposing is that 30 percent of those trees, which would be canopy trees, be substituted with the
county permitted three-per-one palms. This would give an initial thicker buffer, if you will. So you'll have
three palms of 10, 14, and 16 foot clear trunks, and then one such grouping will be located immediately south
of each oFsite Indigo Lakes lot. And we've done the math so we know that that works out so that there will
be one cluster, one grouping of palms substituting for one canopy tree behind each one of those lots.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And will the grouping and spacing of these clusters be consistent with the
LDC spacing requirements?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Even though they're tying to match up to the Indigo Lakes lots, they're still
consistent with the spacing required by the code?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
MR. STONE: And, Mr. Chair, one thing about that, is it going to be exactly 30 percent? I don't
want to, you know, put you in a --
MR. FERNANDEZ: It's exactly 30 percent.
MR. STONE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Number 11?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Number 11, it talks about the kind of vegetation that's going to be utilized.
Page 64 of 76
March 15, 2018
We've specified that -- our neighboring property owners have desired a specific kind of plant. We said that's
fine. They've agreed to maintain those plants. Those are nonnative plants so, basically, we've said that those
will not be placed within 50 feet of a preserve or abutting a preserve, but we've identified what those plants
are. The specification is the same as what's required in a Type B buffer.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Ard I believe you had Mark Templeton check this out, and he's
satisfied with it, too.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's my understanding. He did review ig what I've heard from our planner.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. 12?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Twelve is a -- three-tab asphalt roofing shingles are prohibited from being
utilized in this. It is a significantly less expensive product, and so they desired a more compatible one from
an architectural and value standpoinl and we agreed to eliminate that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the last one is?
MR. FERNANDF.Z: The last one, basically, goes back to the NIM as you and I discussed, that the
site will not be developed as a rental apartrnent community. Our homeowners association was a little
concerned with the change. We add "will no!" and staffhas put in there "shall not." I told them it's the same.
I just want to put it on the record that it is the same language. It would prohibit in either case.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah. "Will not" means could start out that way and not change it,
possibly. But I think "shall not" is betteq so that works fine.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. As far as -
MR. FERNANDEZ: Andthese would get incorporated right now. Our development commitments
are I through 7. These would just be 8 through 13.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the only other issue I have -- and I don't know if there's
others after I get done -- is your master plan. And let me look at what I -
MR. FERNANDEZ: Can I show you the one that we produced based on the comments we received
from you, and perhaps it will address your issues?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. Well, I know they won't, but that's okay. I've already seen
what - I've seen this, and the first thing I noticed is one of the things I didn't think you needed, but we'll get
into it.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Basically, it's a simplification of the master plan that we had. It
eliminates any confusion of line (sic) weights being associated with individual tracts. lnstead there's one
single R tract that shows a general circulation or road depending on whether it gets platted or not.
There's a note added, No. 7, that says the deviations are applicable publicly when platted. So, in other
words, if we're not platting ig then it's just basically drive through and parking lot driveway.
In the R tract description in that same table under commen! it now lists single-family, multifamily,
or combination, and it may include a community recreational facilities area except within 125 feetof Indigo
Lakes, and that is one of the other development commitments, I believe No. 5, that was already existing in
our -- in our document.
And then, finally, under the tract name where it says right-of-way, in the comments section, it's
applicable when platted; otherwise, this acreage is aggregated into Tract R.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Over on the right side, you've got that dissertation about the county
designed, permitted, and constructed turn lane. That whole paragraph needs to come out.
MR. FERNANDEZ: I'd deferto Scott Stone. He can explain.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. STONE: Actually, I'd prefer that it's not in there.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
MR. STONE: I think -- okay.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Good. Okay. We're done. Thank you, Scott.
At your table that you have at the bottom, you added a new line, and I had a question about Line 6.
Could you magni! that a little bit so we can read it.
Page 65 of76
March 15,2018
MR. FERNANDEZ: Is that good enough?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep. Deviations applicable when platted. Okay. What is - how would
they not be applicable until you plat? What was your fear there?
MR. FERNANDEZ: No. That was to clarifu because, for instance, the dead-end situation doesn't
occur in a non-plat. The sidewalk on one side of a road doesn't occur in a non-plat. The 42-foot --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's SDPs then.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. They all would not apply, and that was one of the issues I thought you
raised in our conversation. So by putting that there, it allows this to be -- it's more clear that this can be
multifami ly or single-family.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: The last line ofNote 6 --
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: -- if you strike that it doesn't change anything. So why would we have it
there? It might confuse. "This requirement is not applicable for single-family development." If it isn't
applicable, it's already not applicable by the code, then why would you need to have that last sentence there?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Staff requested it so that it doesn't get dropped for clarif,. That's something I
can take out, but that was something that staffput in there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn'tknow staff-
MR. FERNANDEZ: I think that was the environmental and landscape, yeah.
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: So it's Summer's fault?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, I think this -- I think what Summer explained to me was that this was
text that had been incorporated in other PUDs and, of course, if it's -- if it's single-family, it's not required, and
then that tract never occurs.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So that's why I just -- I mean, it's kind of a moot point. I didn't
know why we would add it as superfluous language, so...
MR. BELLOWS: I think it's probably not necessary to put in there. It's a point of clarification, and
it may be helpful to some reviewers down the line.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Well, we can leave it in, Ray. I just tried to understand why it was there. I
just couldn't --
MR. BELLOWS: It's kind of a point of clarification for future staffreviewers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, if we get that other stuff struck, I don't have any other
questions on the master plan. So that takes care of that for me.
Which takes us back to the end of the questions I have for now, depending on what the speakers may
say.
Does anybody else from the Planning Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Is there a staffreport, Tim?
Thank you, Michael.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thurk you.
MR. FINN: For the record, I'm Tim Finn, principal planner.
The project is compliant with the GMP and the zoning criteria within the LDC; therefore, staff
recommends approval.
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: With the changes you heard and the adding of the general uses section of
the PUD, do you have any change in your position on the - on this application?
MR. FINN: No, we don't;no.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions of stafl
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With that, is there any registered public speakers, Ray?
MR. FERRARO: We have one speaker, Anthony Ferraro.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir, if you could come up, identify yourself for the record, and let us know
if you've been swom in.
MR. FERRARO: My name is Anthony Ferraro, and I have not been sworn in.
Page 66 of 76
March 15,2018
(The speaker was duly swom and indicated in the affrmative.)
MR. FERRARO: I'm here today representing Indigo Lakes. I'm a member of the board of directors,
and I just want to say today that we are accepting the developer agreement with Rushton Pointe.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So all the stuffthat was read into the record you heard us just going
over, you're fine with all that from your end?
MR. FERRARO: Yes,I am.
As a matter of fact, if I could justgeta copy of the new language from, I believe, 8 to 13. Maybe
Mike could provide that for me so I can give it to our attomey and I could discuss tha! you know, with the
rest ofthe board.
But according to this, we fully accept the developer agreement.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great. Thank you very much, sir.
MR. FERRARO: Thankyou.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Mr. Chairman, quick question.
So you speak for the entire board for Indigo [,akes?
MR. FERRARO: Yes,I do.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: It was unanimous? Okay. Just curious.
MR. FERRARO: Yes, it was unalimous. We voted on it at the last meeting, and we fully accept
this developer agreement, and I speak for the entire board. It was unanimous.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Thank you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Just a point of clarification. We've been working with Patrick White and
Joshua Bialek of Porter Wright, and there is actually a copy of a signed agreement between the two parties,
and Scott Stone was given a copy.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And I just have a curiosity question.
MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir.
CIIAIRMAN STRAN: Why were you-all concemed about concrete or asphalt parking arca and a
backboard with a basketball hoop? And what was that big deal about? I just thought that was the strangest
thing to see in the language.
MR. FERRARO: No. The reason why we requested some type of a basketball facility, you know,
with their recreational area is because we have a development next to us now called Brittany Bay, and they
don't have amenities in their development. And it just seems like a lot of times, quite often, as a matter of fact,
we get lot of kids from Brittany Bay coming into our development using our basketball courts, and we've had
a lot of friction between our teens and people in our development with Brittany Bay.
So we just thought that if Rushton Pointe has a facility like that with a basketball court it just would
prevent them from coming across and using our facilities illegally.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: So the kids at Brittany Bay will use their court instead of yours. Good
move.
MR. FERRARO: You never know, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think they'd be better offpaying for a court over at Brittany Bay, and then
you both won't have to worry about it.
MR. FERRARO: That would be a good option also. But that's the reason why we decided, you
know, justto --
(Multiple speakers speaking.)
MR. FERRARO: -- alleviate some of the traffrc coming into our development illegally.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I appreciate it. That's a strange thing to add to a PUD. But if the
applicant agrees with it, it's okay.
MR. FERRARO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I just -- we never did it before that I know of, so'..
MR. KLATZKOW: And the curious thing is there's a school right there that has basketball courts,
but they close it off to the public.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, dothey?
MR. FERRARO: Yeah, they do.
Page67 of16
March 15,2018
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: That's why they call it a public school.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Tom's not here. We should bring that up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thankyou, sir.
MR. FERRARO: Thankyou very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Appreciate it.
Any other member of the public wish to speak on this item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Michael, I think we've -- we don't have any other comments. I'm
going to read several things, besides the small changes we talked about as we walked through the document --
MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: -- I made a note of about five or six things.
All buffers and lakes will be platted as separate tracts. You're going to create the general
development section which willthen -- you'll move those accessory -- community-wide accessory uses into
that area.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to have no underbuilding parking. No overhangs will extend
into the utility or - CUEs or PUEs.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Or structures.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah, structure -- well, obviously, structures or overhangs.
And then we're going to address the sidewalk issue on the 50-foot road cut section where it's missing.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir. One way orthe other.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And you're going to add the new development commitments as corrected
by Mr. Stone and you've read to this panel.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Those are the changes I'm seeing.
Now, as far as how we handle this, I'll leave it up to this board as far as what we're voting on. And
then if we need to come back as consent so we have this wrapped up as a package or you want to do it any
other way, I'm open to it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Come back. Come back for consent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does anybody want to make a motion? Let's start -- frst make the motion
on the changes, a motion - if the changes are - if it's to be approved with the changes, or whatever the
Planning Commission wishes.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll make that motion.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Subject - both of you, subject to the conditions we just read?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Let's start with that. All in favor, signif,, by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: Motion carries 7-0.
Second piece is, do you want this to come back on consent, or do you want to let staffhandle it? Do
you want me to review it before it goes to the Board with stafi or do you want to see it back here? It's up to
you guys. But that would be the first item up on the next agend4 which wouldn't be until August -- I mean
Page 68 of76
March 15,2018
April5th.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ray, can you get --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not that complicated. I just didn't know. I just didn't know what -
MR. BELLOWS: I don't believe a summary agenda's going to -- or a consent agenda's going to help
too much in this case. It's pretty straightforward. And if you, as Planning Commission, defer to Mark on the
final check, we're good with it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if you just want to do that informally, I'll check it with staffbefore it
goes back to -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm fure withthat.
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Good. There's no consent then.
Michael, thank you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: T\ankyou very much, all of you.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We have to vote.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, we did vote. No, we don't have to vote on consent. If we don't -- the
only time we vote on consent is if we want one. That's what I was trying to poll everybody for.
And that takes us -- done with our last really regularly scheduled item, and we have to go back to the
other project which is City Gate. And we got our orange highlighted copies in blue; blue and green and
yellow. Still missed the orange.
**+So let's go from that. And I'll just announce that we're returning to -- let me get the -- we're going
to return for our afternoon discussion on Advertised Item 9,A., which is PL20170002330, which is the City
Gate Commerce Park Planned Unit Development, andPL20170002634, same project City Gate Commerce
Park, for the I-75 Collier Boulevard interchange.
All those wishing to testifl again, oh - if you haven't been swom in previously, please rise to be
sworn in. Mr. Carmichael, were you here this morning early?
MR. CARMICHAEL: (Nods head.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: Okay. Then everybody -- Ruy, you already were swom in this morning,
weren't you?
MR. BELLOWS: That's right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we'lljust go forward.
Josh, let's walk us through all these changes.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Forthe record, Josh Fruth, Davidson Engineering.
As Mark mentioned, the highlights are in blue. Sorry, Mark. I didn't have my Apple computer with
me.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Microsoft should have orange, but that's okay.
MR. FRUTH: They didn't. I tried.
The first blue is on Page 10. I know that you guys do not have page numbers, so I'll walk you
through this.
It is Section 2.3. Atthe end we added "in all material respects" and removed the word "generally"
per the Commissioner's request, after "shall."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: The next page is 16. It's Deviation No. 7 where you're jumping to. Strikethrough on
Deviation "see No. 12" being removed.
Go to the next Page, 17, Deviation No. 8, we changed the word to "further Board of County
Commissioners," and Deviation No. 9, in parenthetical, "to the surface area of the sign," we added "not to
exceed 9 feet by 15 feet in display area."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, do you want to make that in each display area so that you
know -- because you're going to have one on each side ofthe sign.
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't want anybody to mistake that that's all.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. That's why you do the 350, right?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: YUP.
Page 69 of76
March 15,2018
MR. FRUTH: Will do.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MR. FRUTH: Page 18.
MR. KLATZKOW: Could we go back one second on 8?
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: You said "further Board of County Commissioner approval"?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, on Deviation No. 8.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just so we don't have an issue, are we looking at three votes or four votes?
MR. FRUTH: Do you want me to add that?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm asking, is this going to be three vote or four vote?
MR. FRUTH: Good question.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: It's not azontng issue. Well, it's in the right-of-way, but it's not a zoning
issue. Wouldn't it be a three-vote?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's going to be whatever you guys want to put into this document.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Five.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: We getto decide forthe Board whether it's three or four?
No problem;two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to open up a can of worms with this.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no. You could do it with three, or you could do it with four.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's a non-zoning change, so --
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not a -- it doesn't require supermajority. Three votes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just to avoid this issue: On majority vote, a simple majority vote.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Simple majority.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. I'll note it "with simple majority vote" or "by simple majority vote."
Page No. 18, Deviation No. 12. The bottom of that deviation we added the external projection sign
limits. Bullet Point No. 1, lighted signs are allowed facing to the east, west, and south. Bullet Point No. 2,
lighted signs facing to the north are allowed, cannot be taller than 25 feet, and cannot be animated. Bullet
Point No. 3, up to three 15-feet-by-40-fee! parenthetical, service area signs may be installed for naming
rights. Signs can be lighted but not animated.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. And the first bullet, since you were so nice to say it cannot be
animated in the other two, can you just add that to the first one?
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Then there's no question that none of them can be animated, so...
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
Okay. Jumping ahead to Page 20, which is Deviation No. 18. This language is similar to what's in
Deviation 21, as we discussed a few hours back. It reads, "In conjunction with the oflsite native vegetation
requirements (See Deviation No. 2l in this document), the buffer requirements (acreage of typically retained
native vegetation) shall be shown on the Site Development Plan application but may be relocated with the
Site Development Plan amendment application in the future."
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And both of those references that you have,27 as well, it needs to be on the
first Site Development Plan application because then everything after that's an SDPA.
MR. FRUTH: Noted. We'll add that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That also occurs in No. 21, so...
MR. FRUTH: Page 25,ltem No. 3 under the sports complex, 38, we added the sentence that says,
"The sports complex project shall not lease any property/facility to a professional sports team./franchise."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And go ahead, Joe.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just a question on that. This does not prohibit, though, if you
wanted to have, I don't know, you pick, the South Buffalo professional softball team come in and put on a
softball demo. They can't do that - or they can do that, a one-time event.
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah. We clarified.
Page 70 of 76
March 15,2018
MR. FRUTH: The goal is to allow that to happen.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what I thought we had clarified. So this doesn't prohibit a
one-time event okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: If you look at that new blue, "The sports complex shall not lease or sell."
We have a wheeler-dealer here in the county called Nick Casalanguida. If he doesn't find one way to get it
done, he might try another.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He's got to get that money for the overpass, you know. That's the
way to do it.
MR. FRUTH: Noted. We will add "or sell" after lease.
3E, we also added, after weekday holidays, it now reads, "recognizedby Collier County
Govemment."
The next page is 29; it's the height of the sports complex. Instead of "structure," it now reads "acfual
height" to match the defured term that's already in the document.
Jumping ahead to Page 58, these are the SIC codes at the top. It would be Exhibit A-3, Page 6 of 6.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. You didn't highlight the copy I've got at least, but I noticed you did it
on the one you -- the electronic version I have isn't highlighted for that addition.
MR. FRUTH: Really?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I went and checked it. That's how I happened to find it.
MR. FRUTH: It must be your Apple.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It could be, yeah.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But these pages are numbered; 58 is numbered on the ones
you gave us. The elecfonic version will be -- is numbered now. That was one of the things that we scrambled
to get done last minute. So it is now.
Under No. 2, which describes the uses, the bands, orchestras, actors and other entertainers and
entertainment groups, we added the bullet point that says limited to 20 events, one per weekend. Above 20
requires a temporary-use permit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 64,the required yard plan at the bottom, this was Scott's comments. We
removed a comm4 and we added a comma highlighted after the sports complex project and after yards, we
removed.
And Page 67, which was also the required yard, atthe bottom -- or at the end of Item 2C, we noted
the acreage, 0.82 acres, which is also shown on Exhibit A-6, Page 26 of 28, and that's actually supposed to be
25 of 28, so that will be corrected.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Andthat is it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It looks like it got cleaned up; very good. So we'll have to come back for a
final reading on April 5th and then a consent after that in the end of April, and maybe we'll get to the Board
before their summer break. Just kidding.
MR. FRUTH: You need to look out that way.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, I'm looking at Nick. I think with all the corrections and changes, that
gets us going now. Now we just -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Will thatreread be in orange, though?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It will be orange, yeah.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The correct color.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Ray, do we have any registered public speakers?
MR. BELLOWS: No speakers. Oh, wait, we do have one speaker. I'm sorry. We do have one.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. And I -- Nancy, did we ask you for a report this moming on this
issue?
MS. GUNDLACH: Yes, you did.
Page 7l of 76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Then we got that. So let's ask for public speakers. Mr. Carmichael?
MR. BELLOWS: Steve Carmichael.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Steve Carmichael, and, yes, I've been swom in, so thank you. Thank you for
having me. I apologize for the way in which this went about, but I appreciate you letting me speak.
To start offthe bat, I want to say I'm 100 percent against this sports complex, and one of the reasons I
am or the main reason I am is I'm 650 feet beyond their 85-foot wall. It's right in my backyard. I would
assume that none of you would like that if it was in your backyard either. So I'm against that.
And the other reason that I wanted to come up here and speak was I heard a couple of times today
somebody saying that the public was 100 percent behind this. Not true. Everybody that was in the
information meeting who were residents last year was 100 percent against it. So the public is not 100 percent
for it, so I wanted to point that out.
I'm now hearing for the first time that there's going to be concerts available, and I'm now hearing for
the first time that Saturday night's going to go to 12 o'clock at night. Again, I'm 650 feet beyond this thing,
and it's going to be right in my backyard. I don't want to be awake at 12 o'clock on a Saturday night, just my
personal opinion.
Traffic, that's been kind of a subject throughout the day on a number of different projects. You've
used the term called vetted plan. I'm assuming that means that the traffic has been vetted for that area.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Vested.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Vested; I'm sorry, vested.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah. This is a DRI that came about back in what, 1980s sometime, and so
all these traffic counts were approved at that time.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Okay. I would really appreciate it if all you guys could be on the comer of
that complex at 5:30 tonight and see the traffic backed up from Golden Gate Boulevard all the way back to
where you cannot get in and out of my development, that development that we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Excuse me. Where do you live?
MR. CARMICHAEL: I live right behind the canal.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: On the north side of the canal, Golden Gate Main Canal?
MR. CARMICHAEL: Yes. That's where I live, right there. Literally, from what they showed us at
that public hearing, the Planning Commission, I was literally 650 feet from their 85-foot wall.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And you're on a canal lot?
MR. CARMICHAEL: I'm on a canal lot correct.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Are you nearerthe west end orthe east end?
MR. CARMICHAEL: I'm nearer the east end. I'm about four lots from the east end of that canal.
3210 3lstAvenue Southwest, if you need an address. So it's literally right in my backyard.
Against concerts never talked about before.
Public use, I heard, you know, this is going to be great for our families and our neighbors because the
public can use this. There are two other major sports complexes on Golden Gate Boulevard and on Santa
Barbara that have all of these facilities and more. So I'm unclear as to why there's a need for this. So I don't
know if there's been a study developed for this or what
But going back to the traffic, we're now going to add not only the 100 percent residents that are there,
and now we have the seasonal residents, now you're going to be bringing 240,000 -- according to the article
in the Naples Daily News, 240,000 new people into that complex over the year. That's a lot of traffrc to be
coming through that area. So, again, just a thought.
And, finally, this isn't Field of Dreams. You know, if you build it, they will show. No, not
necessarily so. I mean, that's just you know, my opinion, and I'm just one guy. And I'm aware that chances
are my comments mean absolutely nothing, but I wanted to put them on the record an).way.
So I appreciate you having me up here. And do you have any questions for me?
CHAIRMAN STRAN: I just -- you had said there are two other facilities -- we don't have anlhing
in Collier County that I know of like this facility. Where did you -- where did you find these other --
MR. CARMICHAEL: Right behind -- next to the sheriffs station, the -- right on -- it would be
Golden Gate Boulevard right next to the Sheriffs Department. There's an entire sports complex behind
Page72 of76
March 15,2018
that -- behind the community center.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, yeah. Butthere's no stadium or --
MR. CARMICHAEL: Oh, no. There's no big stadiums, no, no, no.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. CARMICHAEL: There's no big stadiums, but there's places to play and there's parks and --
CFIAIRMAN STRAN: Yeah, ifs a community park.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Yeah, community park areas; that's what I meant by that.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Anybody else have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Thankyou, sir.
MR. CARMICFIAEL: Thankyou, all, very much. Appreciate it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mark, if I could, justto maybe help Mr. Carmichael a little bit, and put it
on the record, we'll agree to a stipulation that says the stage side will face to the south. So if any amplified
sounds, if the stadium's built and we have a stage side, we should plan to on one side, we'll point that to the
south so that at least -
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You'll putthat into the PUD?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We've talked about rt --
CFIAIRMAN STRAIN: The position I basically have on this is that I think it's going to get approved
because it was actually already reviewed by the Board, and there's a hint that they think this is a needed
facility.
On the condition that it is, the best thing we can do is put as many stipulations that are practical on it
such as that. And so with the other stuffwe did today, I don't know what else we can do to make this any
better that would stick. So does anybody else? I mean, anybody have any ideas?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would agree with you. I mean, it's sort of a - I fully understand the
issues. We've done everything we could to try and mitigate the impact and especially with signage and other
things, it's really -- you need to bring your issues to the Board of County Commissioners, because that's
where that --
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's where it comes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: - that decision will finally be made.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Let me know when the meeting is, we'd be happy to be there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Nick orthe staff-
MR. CASALANGUIDA: March 27th.
MR. CARMICHAEL: March 27th. Here?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that, Josh, do you have anything you want to wrap up with?
MR. FRUTH: Just what Nick stated. We'll add that under -- it's on Page25. We'll add Item F under
3, the sports complex project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stages and sound amplifing music --
MR. FRUTH: Will face south.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: - facilities will be facing towards - will be directed toward the south.
MR. FRUTH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, that's at least a beginning, so...
Okay. There's not really any stipulations to read into it because everything that was going to be
stipulated seemed to have gotten fixed. I'm checking right now to make sure there's nothing else. No.
Oh, at some point there was going to be Dark Skies lighting. Did that get into the -- we've read this
thing so many times, I want to make sure it's still in there.
MR. FRUTH: It was read into the record two weeks ago.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It needs to be added.
MR. FRUTH: But it was not - but I'll add that as the other -- under same page, 25.
Page73 of76
March 15,2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to stay with the Dark Skies outdoor lighting basics, which will
be much better for the lighting system, and that was volunteered by you-all, so...
And then there's staffrecommendations. Do you have any objections to staffrecommendations?
MR. FRUTH: We do not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then those need to be included as well.
And we're going to have to review this one under both cases as EAC and Planning Commission for
A and EAC and Planning Commission for B. So I want to make sure that we've got everything done.
Ray, is there anything else from staffwhere you guys --
MR. BELLOWS: No. You've got it right. You have two motions, md --
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. So I'll call as the EAC the recommendation on - this is for the PUD.
PL20170002330, and the recommendation, if for approval, should be consistent with what's been read into
the record and requested as changes that we've seen here today.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Madeby Patrick.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
COMMISSIONERFRYER: Second.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: All in favor, sigriff by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: That's the Planning Commission sitting as the EAC.
The second one we're sitting as the EAC on is Item 9B. It's PL20170002634, and it's for the -- this is
for the DRI portion of it. We discussed that the first time the original - way back when two weeks ago when
we heard it. Really, this is going to be - this is consistent with that, and to that effect that's the most the
motion needs to contain. Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
MR. STONE: Mr. Chair, there was language added at this meeting -
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR. STONE: -- to the resolution? Okay.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: The language that we discuss now to the point that it affects the DO is what
we're voting on.
MR. STONE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Okay. So we're approving the DO with any language needed to be changed
as a result of this discussion. There's been a motion. Who does the second?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: (Raises hand.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Joe did. Okay. By Patrick and Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signif, by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
Page74 of76
March 15,2018
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Motion carries 7-0.
Now, sitting as the Planning Commission, Item 9A,PL20170002330. It's for the Planned Unit
Development for City Gate subject to the conditions we heard today and the corrections passed out.
Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Patrick. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: (Raises hand.)
CHAIRMAN STRAN: JOe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signif, by sayrng aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAN: Motion carries 7-0.
Second Planning Commission vote will be on 9B, PL20110002634. It's the City Gate Commerce
Park Development of Regional Impact. Subject to those items that pertain to the DRI as read into the record
and discussed today, is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Ned, seconded by Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signi! by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CI{AIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMLAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0.
That takes us to the end of our agend4 gentlemen. So Item 10A is new business; there isn't any.
Item I I is old business. There's none listed.
Page 75 of 76
March 15,2018
Is there any other -- Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just the discussion we had about emergency management staffwill
need to come back and tell us when Dan Summers can come in and give us at least a rundown on the --
MR. BELLOWS: Definitely.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: And it would be a new business item, but please put it on an agenda or
think about it ahead of time before we have a backed-up situation.
MR. BELLOWS: We'll coordinate that on the agenda with you.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. You need to convey the concerns so he understands. If he
wants to come in and discuss some kind of a program ttrat hr'furrts to move forward with, we're open to that
as well.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. And we've had extensive discussions with him already, so he's willing to
work with us.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any public comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, is there a motion to adjourn?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Motion to adjoum.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Made by Patrick. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: Joe. All those in favor, signifr by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAN: We're out of here. Thankyou, all.
+*****,F
There being no further business for the good ofthe County, the meeting was adjourned by order of
the Chair at2:40 p.m.
COLLIER COLINTY PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on as presented / orascorrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT,INC., BY
TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 76 of 76