BCC Minutes 01/12/1982 W
"..--........'"...,
------- - ----- -..,.--------1'---".-- ----.-.---,-----__ ---
Naples, Florida, J~nuðry ]2, 1982
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board ot County Commi881on~r8 1n
dnd for tho County of Collier, ðnd alAo ",ctlng 88 tho Governing
BOArd(n) of ouch speciAl districts 88 have been croðted according to
lAW and hAving conducted business herein, mot on this ððte at 10:45
A.M. in Workshop Session in Building -F- of the Courthouoe Complex with
the following membors prosent:
CHAIRMANI C. R. -Russ- Wimer
John A. Plator
C1i f ford Wenzel
David C. Brown
Mary-Frances Kruse
(Abllon t)
ALSO PRESENTI Harold L. Hall, Chief Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Officer,
Maureen Kenyon, Deputy Clerk Edward Smith, Administrative Services
AdmlniBtrator, Donald A. Pickworth, County Attorney, Terry Virta,
Community Ccvelopment AdminIstrator, and Neil Dorrill, Public Safoty
,
Administrator.
,.'
l,G ENDA
A. Further consideration of complex mantor plan.
B. RC':lcw of fellsibility raport on impðct f- s.
-
FU~TI1ER CONSIDERATION OF COUNTY COMPLEX MASTER PLAN (COMPLEX EXPANSION
PROGRAM) 1 STAfF AND CONSULTANTS DIRECTF.D TO PROCf:ED \-IITH PLAN "B",
APPROVAL RE FEASIBILITY OF SAID PLAN TO COME BACK BEFORE BOARD.
Mr. Bob Zimmorman of Ross/Ehrenkrantz st~ted that ho was in-
structcd to study th~ possibilitIes of working with the property owner,
Mr. Gðrgiulo, who owna s~verftl ftcres ðround the oxisting complex. Ho
reported thðt there arA four oltornativos, adding that the basic core
of the agreement of ð few weeks ago is still being us~d in order to
pago 1
M:JK 067 fAtt168
-... -- -- - - - - - - - - .--'-.- -- --- --., - ..-. ---
---- ---...---.-.----
- --------
..-- ...-- ------- --~...-._.._--- ---.------..------ -- ----------- ---- --
ßC~K 067 fACt 169
Jnnuary 12, 1982
cxpðnd the justice centor.
He roforred to various diðgr~mB, stattng
r.n~t Fr.~~~~ RAR Dhows ~n ~cqu1aition of 2J.l~ acrC9 which could bo uaod
to tho north and east for County qovernment functions, øuch as office
apnca or sp.:\ce thl'lt need not t:-o directly adjacent to tho central
complex. He 8tated that to the south, t.he County govornm&nt functions
tlH\ t relat~ more closely to tho central complex coulrl be ðccommodated
thera, adding thðt ,tho total ðcreage with the existing property would
be approximately S3 acres. Ha r~ported that it would more than meet
the neeðn of tho County In the near futuro.
Mr. Zimmermon ref.erred to Schema -B-, it acquirod, as boing an
L-shaped pieco of property to the north and to the east which is
approximately 11.83 acres. He stated that this picco of property could
also bo used for offico sp~ce thnt need not be adjacent to the central
complex and couldlalso house a service building neDI' the motor pool
~Ith attendant parking. He referred to an 0.78 acre parcel on Scheme
-8- which is pl~nned for an offien park developMent, adding that south
of that development there could be a proposed County right-of-way which
would give ~dd1tionlll access to the Complex for a lotal of three
acceSSCGI one on Airport P~ðd and two on Routo 41. He stated that one
variation on Scheme "ß" would be that the County would hðve the option
to leaso space. in the office space development, if needed in the
future.
110 reported t.h~t Scheme -CR hao it proposed riqht-of-way through
the prlvðte property ðnd tho County property to the northQrn edge of
the Gðrgiulo property. He said thðt the right-of-wðY would enllb1e the
prlvðle developer to develop ðn office park on the L-shapo which would
Pðge 2
-- - - -.. - --. - - - -- ""- - ..-.. - - -- ---- - - - -- - --- - ---- - - - -..-
r',· "~
--
'---'"'--'.---. -.,
--- -------r ,----------- -------------------,.
J~nuary 12, 1982
consist of 11.75 ~cro. and allow the County to acquir~ 5.~9 acres to
tho Bouth, adding th~t there would be ð parcel along Route 41 of
approximatoly 3 acros. He stated that in Scheme -C- there would be ð
dolay in terma of timing as it would roquire negotiations with two
proport~ ownorS1 Cargiulo and Gallman.
Mr. Zimmerman stðted that Schome -D- 18 a variation of th. ring
road scheme which io actually the same configuration as Scheme wC·,
with the exception that the County acquire land south of the existing
County site which consists of 7.69 acres. He said that in order for
this site to work, thore should still be a right-of-way developed to
the north through the Gallm~n property.
He reiterated that Scheme WC- ðnd -D- are fairly close in terms of
the pros ðnd cons. I!Q said thllt Scheme "D- ahows less expansion for
tho jail in the future, adding that Scheme "Aw should be conßidered the
-bast of all possible worlds-, but Scheme wO- being the most rOðlistic
in terms of timing.
Commissioner Wcnzal stated that h~ thought, from a-monetary
standpoint, no additional land would be acquired, ðdding that the
County should develop on the present site a8 originally planned And, if
additional land is nceded, the Gallman property should be purchased for
future expansion. He said that he ðsked for figures on renting build-
ings versus building them, but has not received the information as of
this date.
Mr. Zimmerman advised that in the report that is being submitted
thin d~te, there is a recommendation to acquire the right-of-way
through the Gnllman property for the future.
pago 3
~oaK 067 FA~t 170
- -.- -- - - - --- -- - - - --
. .., ---....----.- _ _.._---_...-..._~ -----.- ----------_. ---.
........"'..,._'~.,..""''''-_._..'_._......,
_-0 _ _ _ ___ _ __ _.. ___ _ _. __ - -.- - -- - -- - - ---- ~- --- - - ---
ðO~~ 067 FAGt 171
January 12, 1982
To Commissioner Pistor's question of whp.thor there are any price.
regarding ~ho lnnn ð~quiKic¡on, Mr. ZlMmerffi~~ ~t~tcd that ~9 a cnn~u\-
tant, It 18 not hla prcrc9at1vO to negoti~to, ðddlng that at thi8
point, tho nogotintions have not taken place.
Commissioner Wimer stated that Mr. Zlmm~rmðn Is suggosting that
the County work with the property owners to acquire the right-of-way.
Comnlisaioner Brown stated that ho was looking for tho least
expenslvo plan.
Commissioner Pistor stated that Ross/Ehrcnkrantz should be au-
thorized to proceed with consideration of Scheme WB- and find out the
actual cost of tho property and the right-of-way and report back to the
Boa rd.
Mr. Nell Corrill, Public Safety Administrator, stated that Parcel
-
"6- docs not involve any planned construction at this point, other than
the access roads. He stated that his objective was to have the ðrchi-
tcct continuo with the plan for tho justice center, the renovations and
ðdditions needed for Building "F-, and to ~'rect thu County Manager'8
office, with assistance from the construction manager, to look at cost
~l!ectivo plans rcardIn9 the land surrounding the retention pond and
its acquIsition.
Mr. Donnis Oberstar of 1753 Roso Boulevard staterl that if there
was a further need for parking, the lake could be filled in and multi-
level parking could be built, adding that thero would be more room for
oxpansion whIch would require les8 land ðcquisition.
Page ..
, - - ....-- - - - - - - - - - --- - -- -- - - - -. - - - - -- - - - -..- - - - - - - - - --
. "",,'.. ~'\
.._"'......--'~,...,....---..---....'
----------------------------------------
January 12, 19Ð2
Thore being no furthor discussion, Commissioner Pi.tor moved,
seconded by CommissionÐr WAnzal and carriod 4/0, that 6t~ff ~nd Con-
8ultant8 be directed to proceod with Plan -D· and come back to the
Board with a rcport on fo~slbility of ðcquisition.
. . . . . . * . . . .
NOTEI Workshop recessed at this time in order to reconvene in Regular
Session: 11:10 A.M. - Workshop reconvened at 11130 A.M.
. II . . . . . . . . .
CONSIDERATION OF FEASIBILITY RF..t'ORT ON IMPACT FEES - Cfl7\IRMAN WIMER
DIRECTED STAFF TO COM~ BACK TO ßOARO NITfI RECOMMENDATIONS RE FURTHER
STUDIES Sr.IUG CONDUCTf.D "IN-IIOUSF-· I.E., COSTS, n:ASTRILTTY, ETC.
Mr. Terry Vlrta, Community Development Director, stated that ~OS8
HardIes propared an overview which.basically expands the efforts of
what tho Staff accomplished jast Bummer. He st~tod that the final
recommcndlltion of Ross lIarcHes was to propare the ordinance for a sum
of $35,000 plus expenses, provided the County hires a Consultant to do
the groundwork, addIng that he does I~t)t recommend this t.o. the Board.
lIe stated that tho general consensus from ot.her finns rogðrdlng the
cost was conGiderably less. lie further stated that he needs to know in
~hat dir~ction to proceed. Ho advised that Ross Hðrdies' report gave
throe rccommendiltionsl (1) Parks & Recreation boing a viable fee to
pursue, (2) additional work neoded regarding roads, prior to an estab-
lishmont of an ordinance for this feo, ðnd (3) a recommendation against
levying a fee for govornmental services.
Pð9" 5
60~!( 067 fA~i172
- .- - -- - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - --...- - -- -- -.. - - -- - - _. - - - -- - *- -.-
~'-----""'-"""'''I
-- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - -.- _.. - ..- - ---
January 12, 1982
M~.~ 067 FACt 173
ChaIrman Wimor quostioned it the ßoðrd wonted to purauo tho impact
!~~ propo=~l for r~rkG ~nd nc~ds with ~ price t~g o! ~~5,COO, fu:t~~r
qU~Rtlonin~ whot tho 5t~ff r~commondÐ.
Mr. Virta stðted that if the impact fees are to be pursued, ð
consultant other than a legal consultant should be obtainod for tho
groundwork, such as a land use consultant or an economic consultant.
Chairman Wimer stated that Staff could work on the groundwork or
perhap~ hire lIn additional person in-house to do same.
Commissioner Wenzel questioned it methods of collection had boen
dIscussed, to which Mr. Pickworth, County Attorney, statod that the
Ordinance will provide such.
Commissioner Wenzel otated that he was not in favor of paying
$35,000 for an ordinance.
Chairman Wi;er stated that he would prefer to hire ðppropriðt~
people in-house as Staff.
Commissioner Brown stated he is opposed to paying $35,000 and i8
also opposed to impllct tel!8, ðdding t/lðt if ..t'(~ work is to be done, ho
would prefcr to see in-house Staff doing same.
Ch~lrman Wimer stated that he would like Staff to como back with
cost estimates rcgllrding funding for personnel.
Mr. Pickworth, County Attorney, stated th~t he thought tho report
should also include the pros and cons of hiring in-hous~ Stðff versus
outsido consultants.
Mr. Virta stated that it there is an impact fee cstðblished it
would be necessary to keep it current which would require additional
Start.
pago 6
~ -J_ __ _ _ _ "'"- _ _ _ _ __ ___ __ _ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _____ _ __ ___
--'''-'1
...-..........,
----
. --"".-....._,.---,....."'..-....",.,..,....-
- -. - - - - - - - - - - - - -.,.- - - - - - - - - - - -.- - - - - - - - - --
JðnU^ry 12, 1902
Mr. Druce Holly of 2160 Estey Avenue stated thðt th~ impnct f~OB
have boen in regard to strictly new construction, adding that many
newcomers are buying used homes. He stntod that ho felt that everyone
that buys should be Involved in the Impact fees based on a millage
bllsia of l/4 or 1/2 mill at tho time of closing. He concluded by
stating that, by taxing all deed transactions, therc would be a much
better chanco of impllct fees baing passcd by tho Legislature.
David Grahllm, reprnsonting Naples Areo Board of. Roaltors, stated
that tho Naplos Area BOllrd of Realtors is opposed to impact fees. He
stated that, in ordcr for Imp~ct fees to be legal at this time, they
can only be imposoct for future park constructl~n. He advised that
impact feos tend to create a bureaucracy of their own, adding that it
takes a largo portion of the feea collected to administer ond colloct
that fee, which does not leave much loft over for the impact fen to
function. lie said that the impact fee will not solvCl the problems. Hct
reported that, if the Board decides on the impact fee, District 3 would
-
like to be excluded as Ava'.:.lIr has donated ~ _00 acreS of lond for parks.
He stntcd that the County Commission haa already spent $15,000 on the
impact fee isgue and will spend another $35,000 for an ordinanco, if
approved, only to find out whether the County can have an impðct fee,
adding that this is a WðGte of taxpayoro' money. lie concluded by
stating thðt tho $35,000 could be used to purchase land for parks
instoad of cre~ting an impact feo.
PMI e 7
&o:¡~ 061 fAGi 174
. - .-. _. - -- -- -- - -- -- - ~- -. - - - --- _. - . .-- -- -- -- .-.. -- _. _. ._- --. -- - _.-
-----_..__. ----.
_'''''__'''H''~''·,,_
- - -- -.. -- -- -- ~ -- _.. --- .- _.- -' .-- ~ .. - - _..~ ._~ --. -- -. -., -- - - -- - - - - - -- - - - -- ..... -
Jðnu~ry 12, 1982
~::J~
061 fAr.¿ 175
Mr. Pickworth qucßtioned the $3~,OOO '-co that Ross Hðrdies wants
/'Inri ttln cO""t o( dl~ t~"n!lul tcon t, to wil ito';' LÍI" ¡ rrnttn ~i,"t:r tft"l;~d i:.hdl lhu
S35,000 wæs for th~ co~t of drÐftinry the Ordinðncc, ed1ing thðt the
consultnnts' fco would be in the noighborhood of $100,000.
Chairman Wimcr atnted th~t thero waS no action required by tho
Board, ndding th~t Stðff has been requested to come back with figures
regarding cost of in-houso pernonnel versus outsido consultants or ð
combinution tharcof. lie further stated that it mllY be beneficial for
Staff to report to the Board regarding what impact fees have accom-
plished or have not ~ccomplished in the water lInd sewer division.
..
It
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
Thoro being no further business for the good of th~ County, tho
meeting WðS ðdjourncd by order of the Chair lit 11148 A.M.
-
pag_ 8
---- ------ ..---.- _.- ---------------- ---..-.----...----" ------
,~~..... ',.I..,.,,,,." ~
~-'...........
..