Loading...
BCC Minutes 12/08/1981 R Naples, Florida, December 8, 1961 LET IT Br. REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:Ø3 A.M. in Regular Session in Building -F- of the Courthouse Complex with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIRMAN: C.R. -Russ- Wimer Mary-rrances Rruse Clifford Wenzel David C. Brown (9:øa A.M.) John A. Pistor (Absent) ALSO PRESENT: William J. 'Roagðn, Clerk; Hðrold L. Hall, Chief Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Officer: Darlene Davidßon and Elinor Skinner (11:15 A.M.), Deputy Clerks: D~nald Pickworth, County Attorney; ken Cuyler, A~sistant County Attorney; Irving Berzofl, Utilities Manager; C. William Normðn, County Manager: Edward Smith, Assistant County Mðnager; Neil Dorrill, Administrative Assistant: Terry Virta, Community Development Administrator: Lee Rirchhoff, Planner: Mark Benedict, Environmentalist; Jef'ory Perry, Zoning Director: Clifford Barksdale, Public Works Administrator: Grace Spaulding, Administrative Aide to the Board; and, Raymonð Bðrnett, Doputy Chief, Sheriff's Department. Page 1 a/)~~ 056 FACt' 3M I D.~.mber 8, 1981 800K Q 66 PACt' '384 Note: " * * Commissioner pistor's absence ref.lected in votes of 4/0. . . * AGENDA - APPROVED WITH ADDITIONS Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 3/0, with Commissioner Brown absent for the vote, that the agenda be approved with the following additionsr 1. Discussion of M.P.O - added to BCC Report. 2. Amending Resolution re typographical error in Resolution 81-253 - added to County Attorney's Report. ". MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 17, 1981 - APPROVED AS PRP.SENTED Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 3/0, with Commissioner Brown absent for the vote, that the minutes of the Regular meeting of November 17, 1981, be approved as presented. RESOLUTION 81-256 RE PETITION CCCL-81-7C, GEORGE L. VARNADOE, REOUESTI~~ A VARIANCE FROM THE CCCL FOR PROPOSED CONDOMINIUM ON LOT XI, BLOCK A, U~IT NO.1, CONNER'S VANDERBILT BEACH ESTATP.S - ADOPTED, SUBJECT'TO STIPULATIONS wdgal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on November 24, 1981, ~s evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk and upon consensus of the Board and the peti'tioner that the public hearing will be opened ~fter having heard from Chief Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Officer Harold L. Hall that there was some question as to the legal notice having met the time roquirements, public hearing was opened to consider Petition CCCL-81-7C, filed by Geor~e L. Varnadoe. Page 2 ,_..~._,....-'10 ft·"'............"""., <..,~",,"'-- December 8, ]9S1 BO~~' 066 PAc¿388 The subject petition is requesting a variance from the Coastal Construction Control Line fo~ construction of a proposed condominium on Lot XI, Block A, Unit No.1, Conner'G Vanderbilt Beach Estates. * * . Commissioner Brown entered the meeting at this time: 9:ØS A.M . * * County Environmentalist Mark Benedict recapped the information outlined within the Executive Summary, dated 11/2Ø/Bl, related to petition CCCL-Sl-7C, including the recommendation for approval, subject to the stipulations outlined in the relevan~ resolution. In answer to Commissioner Wenzel, Community Development ". Administrator Terry Virta stated that the adjacent property on both sides of the subject property ~ave been granted similar variances to the CCCL. Hearing that there were no registered speakers, Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and carried 4/0, that the püblic hearing be closed. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and carried 4/0, that Resolution 81-256, granting the variance to the CCCL as requested in petition CCCL-81-7C, be adopted, suhject to the stipulations outlined therein, as racommended by staff. Page 3 ~ ·t, ~. -;, December 8, 1981 ~~TITION R-S0-3C, ItUBSCHM~N ASSOCIATES, REQUESTING REZONING FROM -RM-l- TO -PUD" FOR 48 ACRES KNOWN AS WINTERPARK, LOCATED ON SOUTH SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD, EAST OF SCOTTY'S - CONTINUED TO JANUARY 5, 1982 Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissionnr Kruse and carried 4/0, that Petition R-80-3C, Hubschman Associates, requesting rezoning from -RM-l- to -PUD" for 48 acres known as Winterpark, located. ~n the south side of Davis Boulevard, east of Scotty's, be continued to January 5, 19S2 as requested by the CAPC. PETITION R-81-26C, WORLD TENNIS CENTER ASSOCIATION, REQUESTING REZONING fROM "A" TO -PUD" FOR AN 82 ACRE PROJECT KNOWN AS WOR~D TENNIS CENTER, LOCATED ACROSS FROM PINE WOODS SUBDIVISION ON AIRPORT ROAD - DENIED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on November 6, 1981, as evidenced 'by Affidavit of publication fileù with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider pet1tion R-81-26C, World Tennis Center Association, requesting rezoning from -A- to -PUD- for an 82 acre project known as World Tennis Center, located across lrom pine Woods Subdivision on Airport Road. Planner Lee Kirchhoff outlined the general location of the proposed project and recapped the information within the Executive SummDry, dated 11/23/S1, regJrding petition R-Sl-26-C. She reported that the various advisory boards and the CAPC have recommended ... approval, subject to stipulations "A- through -J-, same outlined fully within the subject Executive Summary. Also, the County Engineer has forwarded a recomm~n~ation thac the stipu1dtion that the developer shall reimburse the County approximately $2,200 for extending the left turn lane to 150', plus a taper, be added to the aforementioned stipulations. She stated that she has been notified that the Page 4 aO~K 066 FAr.t' 389 . ¡. ;. ~ t '.'.-.....-.., December 8, 1981 M~X 066 PAc¿'390 petitionor hðs agreed to this additional stlpulðt~on. Mr. William Barton, of Wilson, Miller, Bartøn, SolI and Peeki representing the petitioner, briefly outlined the proposed project, noting that he considers this project unique in that the architectual design has become an integral part of the planning stages. Mr. Richard H~nderlong, project planner, gave a detailed description of each of the four land use tracts that will make up the proposed 82.6 acre project. Rdterring to detailed land u~e maps, Mr. Henderlong expained that there will be a preservation area, a professional tennis center, common open space areas, and a 37 acre ~ residential area made up of 32Ø one and two-story units to be constructed over a four ye~r ph~sed period. He stðted that he considers the project to be c~mpðtibl~ and complimentary to the surrounding land uses and he reported that egress/ingress points have been held to a minimum. Mr. Henderlong reported that all ~tipulation8 have been agreed upon by the project sponsor. Mr. Barton reported that the storm water and water management aspects of the project are typical and, in the interest of time, and upon hearing no objections from the Board, he opted not to expound upon same. In answer to Commissioner Wenzel, Mr. Barton stated that all of the utility lines would be deeded to the County on a time schedule. Utilities Manager Irving Berzon stated that the lines would be deeded to the County initiatlly, adding that when public facilities become available and the project connects to it, the temporary treatment plant will be retained by the developer. CommiÐsioner Wenzel asked Mr. Berzon if it was not true that the Utilities Division's policy has be.n h9. 5 ''''.- December B, 1981 that the County takes possession of these plants when no longer required? Mr. Berzon replied affirmatively, adding that, because the subject project lies within the City of Naples' Service Area, the issue has never come up for discussion. Mr. Walter Keller, project architect, referred to artist's renderings of the proposed project, noting that he considers the style . as -low-keyed- and -subtle-. In answer to Commissioner Rruse, Mr. Barton stated that the drawings make the water rctention lakcs appear larger than they actually are, adding that combined with all the storm drainage and water retention areas 1;) be heJ.d in preservation, the total land dedicated to this purpose iR less than 25\ of the project. Hearing that there were no registered speakers, Commissioner Brown m~ved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 4/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse, that petition R-8~-26-C, be approved, subject to the aforementioned 8tiplations including the stipulation regarding rcimbursement for the turn lane. The motion fðiled on ð ticd vote, with Commissioners Wenzel and Wimer opposed. ORDINANCg NO. ñ1-Pl, CREATIN~ THr. DISTRICT 1 MST UNIT - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on November 18, 1981, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of an ordinance creating the District 1 MST Unit. Page 6 a/)~~ 066 PA~é 391 ^._-,.~_..... I; BO~~ D66 PACt 392 December B, 1981 Public Works Administrator Clifford Barksdale explained that, as a result of the 19B0 Census, and, pursuant to changes in the Commis- sionor's districts, it has become necessary to change the legal description of the District 1 MST Unit. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 4/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and car ried 4/0, that the Ordinance as numbered and en t i tl ed below be adopted and entered into Ordinance Book No. 13. ORDINANCE NO. 81-81 </t.. AN OnDINANCE TO CREATE THE DISTRICT POWER~ AUTHORIZED UNDER CHAPTER 125 STATUTES; ESTABLISHING THE BOARD OF SIONERS AS THE GOVERNING BOARD. 1 MST UN!T WITH OF THE FLORIDA COUNTY C'.)~MIS- ORDINANCE NO. 81-82, CREATING THE DISTRICT 2 MST UNIT - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on November 18, 1981, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of an ordinance creating the District 2 M~T Unit.. Public Works Administrator Clifford Barksdale explained that, as a result of the 1980 Census, and, pursuant to changes in the Commis- sionerts districts, it has become necessary to change the legal description of the Dist (1ct 2 MST Unit. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissionet Kruse and carried 4/0, that the public hearing be closed. pag. 7 f''''''_.'.-'''-o .~ .~ December a, 1981 Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Y.ruse and carried 4/0, that the Ordinance, as num~red and entItled below, be adopteù and entered into Ordinance Book No. 13. ORDIH~NCE NO. 81-82 AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE THE DISTRICT 2 MST UNIT WITH POWERS AUTHORIZED UNDER CHAPTER 125 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES: ESTABLISHING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS AS TilE GOVERNING BOARD. ORDINANCE NO. 81-83, 'CREATING THE DISTRICT 3 MST UNIT - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on November 18, 1981, as evidence~ by Affidavit of publication fIled with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of an ordinance creating District 3 MST Unit. Public Works Administrator Clifford Barksdale explained that, as a rosult of the 1980 Census, and, pursuant to changes ir: the Commis- sioner's districts, it has become necessary to change the legal description of the District 3 MST Uni~. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 4/0, that the public hearing be closed. ~mmissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by CommiRsioner Kruse and carried 4/Ø, that the Ordinance, as numbered and entitled below, be adopted and entered into ~rdinance Book No. 13. ORDINANCE NO. 81-83 AN ORDIN~NCE TO CREATE THE DISTRICT 3 MST UNIT WITH POWERS AUTIIORIZED UNDER CHAPTER 125 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES; ESTABLISHING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS AS TilE GOVERNING BOARD. pag. 8 &O~~ 066 PALr: 393 ~, ,..."."-,~---,...._, ,.,..., .- December 8, 1981 ß~~K 066 PAL¿ 39·1 ORDINANCE NO. 81-84, RE~EALING ORDIN~NCE 76-73, WHICH CREATED TH~ DISTRICT 4 MST UNIT - ADOPTED ,', "', Legal notice h~ving ~een published in th. Naples Daily News on November 18, 1981, as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of an ordinance repealing Ordinance 76-73, which created the District 4 MST Unit. Public Works Administrator Clifford Bardsdale explained that, because District 4 is presently within the City of Naples' limits In its entirety and because an MST Unit is no longer neceRsary for that ,. District, it is recommended that Ordinance 76-73, which previously created District 4 MST Unit, be repealed by adoption of the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 4/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and carried 4/0, that the Ordinance, as numbered and entitled below, be adopted and entered into Ordinancv Book No. 13. C<~DINANCE NO. 81-84 AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL ORDINANCE NO. 76-73 WIIICH CREATED THE DISTRICT 4 MST UNIT WITH POWERS AUTHORIZED UNDER CH~PTER 125 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES: AND ESTABLISHED THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS THE GOVERNING BOARD ORDINANCE NO. 81-85, CREATING THE DISTRICT 5 MST UNIT - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on November 18, 1981, as evidenced by ~ffidavit of publication filed with Pa98 9 . , " ~... December 8, 1981 the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of an ordinance creating District 5 MST Unit. Public Works Administrator Clifford Barksdale explained that, as a result of the 1980 Census, and, pursuant to changes in the Commis- sioner's districts, it has become necessary to change the legal description of the District 5 MST unit. Commissioner wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carri~d 4/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 4/0, that the Ordinance as numbered and untitled below be adopted and entered into Ordinance Book No. 13. ORDINANCE NO. 81-85 AN ORDINANCE TO CREATE THE DISTRICT 5 MST UNIT WITH POh'ERS AUTHORIZED UNDER CHAPTER 125 OF THo.: FLORIDA STATUTES: ESTABLISHING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS- SIONERS AS TilE GOVERNIr;IG BOARD. ST^FF DIRECTED TO REDUCE THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT RE PROPOSED PARR TO BE KNOWN AS CAXAMBAS PARK AND TO BRING BACK AMENDED RECOMMF.NDATI0N RE SAME Assistant County Manager Edward Smith presented a recommendation to establish the name for the four acre parcel of county-owned land on .... Marco Island to be known as Ca~ambas Park. He also requested authQrization from the Board to e~ecute an agreement with a concessionaire provi~ing goods and services at the park, to establish a budget for same and to authorize ð budget amendment transferring funds for capital improvements and park operation. Page 10 aO~K 056 PA~i395 ,., ",.,_.,,-_.,.-_.- ..,,,~_.,'.," December 8, 1981 M~~r9q,~i W{¿ ª~tq ined the hi story of the subject property, incl uding the fact that it was accepted from the Deltona Corporation for use as a boat launching Ðrea providing public access to adjacent navigable waters in March of 1975. He reported that the property was dedicated as a county boat ramp park by resolution on April 8, 1975 and that, in compliance with the County Beach ^ccess Ordinance, the Hideaway Beach Corporation developed the ramp, parking lot, and landscaping in liou of providing beach access at their development on the north end of Marco Island. He said that these improvements were dedicated to the County on October 19, 1981. ~ Mr. Smith reported that, pursuant to Board action on October 27, 1981, wherein negotiation of a cùntract for operating a concession at the subject park with Marco River Mar~na Corporation was approved, the staff has formalized negotiations and is prepared to request authorization to exe~ute the contract, a copy of which is included in tho Executive Summary, dated 12/4/81. After Mr. Smith described the terms of the proposed contract, including an amendment to page two (2), line two (2) thereof, whereby the word -from- would be r~placed with the word -by-, there was a lengthy discussion regarding the proposed capital investment of $50,738. Commissioner wimer objected to spending over $50,900 on such a small park and Mr. Smith explained that although the park has been landscaped it do~s not have a sprinkler system installed and that thi. repr~sents a major expense. He also stated that there is to be an expenditure of $20,000 for restrooms and Commissioner wimer remarked that there are other parks in operation without restrooms. He .aid Pðg e 11 tf'''''--.~ ...·..~-1 DPqember 8, 1981 that he cannot vote to spend $50,000 for someone elso to make money, i.e the concassionaire. Commissioner W~nzel asked Mr. Smith how long, based on the anticipated revenue to the County each year, will it be bofore the initial investment is recouped? Mr. Smith stated that the capital investment Is amortized over approximately B years. The Idnds of landscaping that was installed, the fact t:.at the landscaping was installed after the County owned the property, and the fact that the grassy areas are already drying up were discussed, after which Commissioner Wimer stated that he did not know that there was no sprinkler system installed at that time. Commissioner Brown st4~ed that he woul¿ have to vete negatively on spending so much money on this park, after which County Manager Norman asked if it would be agreeable to the Bo~rd if the County went ahead and installed the fencing around the subject property, since that has been budgeted? Co~mlssioner Wimcr stðted that the matter should be brought back at a later date with the concerns mentioned by the Board having been addressed. After further discussion, Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Wimer and carried 3/1, with Commissioner Brown opposed, that the capital investment re proposed park to be known as Caxa~bas ,~ Park, be reduced by staff and a revised recommendation be brought back to the Board. . ill . ".M. and at 9:43 A.M. . Commissioner Rruse left the room ðt 9:39 returned during the following presentation . . Page 12 ec~~ 056 FÞGc·391 ..." .L.·_____...,....._.,.".""'.> ~O~K Q66 pÂL¿398 December 8, 1981 SITE ALTERNATIVE -F- SELECTED FOR ARCHlTECTURAÙ' PLANNING (MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT) RE PROPOSED COUNTY JU5TIC~ CENTER Mr. Robert Zimmerman of Ross/Ehrenkrant~, project architects, engineers and planners for the Collier County Government Centor Expansion (County Justice Center), refe~red to oversized maps, copies of which are oytlined within the report entitled Site 5election Report No.2, which wero dlstribut~d to each of the Commissioners, and gave a detailed report of the information regarding each of the alternate sites -A- through -F- for the proposed center as more fully defined within the aforementioned report. He addressed each alternate site with special attention having been given to parking, location of th~ justice center, economy of construction, vehicular access, building mdssing and lot coverage, drainage, environmental issues and future expansion. ',Ie also referred to a chart called Site Criteria Rank, a copy of which is included within the above-referenced report and outlined the construction premium for each site alternate which represents the dollars required over and above the project budget. Mr. Zimmerman explained that the seven alternate ~ites were evaluated against nine key criteria, with future expansion, corrections dbsig~ and operations, land availability, and minimal adverse ~nvlronmental impact considered the most critical, resulting in site "G" being evaluated highest, followed closely by site -F", however, he said that alternate "F" is the best value in terms of purchase price, averaging out to $92,000 an acre. . . . Commissioner Rruse left th~ room during the above-referenced presentation at 9:39 A.M. and returned at 9148 A.M. Pag. 13 I \. ..,."..,-".....,.., December 8, 1961 Comlnissioner Brown left the room duri-ng tho above-referenced presontation at 9:43 A.M. and returned at 9:45 A.M. Commissióner Wenzel left the room during the above-referenced presentation at 9:48 A.M. and returned at 9:5Ø A.M. . . . Commissioner Wimer asked why the report did not include any information regarding the property offered by Mr. Duvekot7 County Manager Norman explained that this property was discussed during the . workshop last Friday, December 4, however, it was the consensus of those members present that this property would not be ð viable alternate for several reasons, including the fact that it has no sewer, it is surrounded by residential lands, and, because it would require re'zoning and a compreh( )sive land use r.mendment. Mr. Zimmcrman concurred, adding that the Duvekot property would be very closely proximated to the prescnt complex and that it was expressed during the w~rkshop that that this could be considered as a duplication of efforts. Also, Mr. Zimmermð~ reminded the Board that it has not been established that the Duvekot property lies within the boundaries of - East, Naple~", . Commissioner Kruse stated that she studied cach of the alternate sites during the workshop last Friday and that she is leaning toword alternate -r", especially since it would offer room for future expan- sion. Commissioner Brown stated that he concurred. Commissioner Wenzel stated t~~t his fir~t choice w~s "A", however, "r- is his second ~hoice. Commissioner Brown stated that he also preferred -A- as a first choice in the beginning, however, he is prepared to vote for -F- "t this timo. Commissioner Wenzel stated that he still perfers Page 1. &O~~ 066 fAtè 399 December 8, 1981 BO~K 066 PA~¿ '400 consolidating all servicPos onto one sitft, however, if he has to con- sider a larger site, he would vote for -F-. Commissioner Kruse asked Mr. Norman if he requires a motion from the Board, and he replied affirmatively, explaining that in order to proceed with more detailed design information, further contact with the property owners, etc. formal action is required. He said that if the Board favors site -F-, then he will prob~bly be presenting a request for authorization for a land appraisal in the next week. The offer for property from Mr. Duvekot was discussed at length, J. during which Chairman Wimer stated that he does not consider that thrs offer has been explored as fully as it should have been. Mr. Zimmerman stated that his firm has studied this property and Chairman Wimer stated that he spoke to Mr. Duvekot yesterday and that he has ~ot been contacted by anyone from the County since he made the original offer. He said that Mr. Duvekot relayed to him that ~e was open to negotia- tions regarding the property and that he also clarified that the offer as related by Commissioner pistor was not completely accur~te. Mr. zimmerman stated that he has a preliminary appraisal on the Duvekot property of $4~8,Ø00 for 40 acres. Commissioner Wenze) stated that he feels that the main reason the Duvekot property was not acceptable to the Commissioners at the workshop is the inefficiency ,of having two courthouses 2-1/2 miles from one another. Commissioner Kruse concurred, adding that she does consider this as a duplication of services. Chairman Wimer stated that his concern is not with the negative points regarding the land, his concern is that no one followed through with the initial offer from Mr. Duvekot with a personal contact Pðge 15 ,....-.., .-.-., -"~,.,,~..>..,.,".. December 8, 1981 and researched the accuracy of the quoted price related to the Board nor of the possibilitv of that price being negotiable. Chairman Wimer stated that he considers it to be obvious that the matter was not given due consideration and that he considers that it -was set up to fail-. Chairmðn wimer asked the members of the Board if they would prefer to take formal action today, or would they prefer to wait until there is a full Board? This was discussed, during which Commissioner Kruse stated that she considers that the longer the Board waits, the more money it i8 costing the County. Chairman wimer stated that he understands her concern, however, he considers that it was the consultants that gave the Board the list of alt~rnatives with three or four -illegal- sites from which to choose and that ho considers that the delays arc not the fault of the County or the Commissioners. Upon hearing that Com~issioner pistor would return on December 22, Chairman wimer stated that he would like to schedule this matter for that date, and he asked the Commissioners if any of them had any objections to this? Hearing none, he directed that this matter be on the 12/22/81 Agenda. He dir~cted that no presentation will be necessary and that the Board will simply vote on the alternate sites at that time. County Manager Norman stated that he feels an obligation to clarify the fact that \" is -stymied- rega¡'dinq any productive work that the consultants can do over the next two weeks. Chairman wimer said that they are to do no work over the next two weeks. Mr. Norman stated that the Cou~ty's contract vith the consultant. calls for them to be -active-. He said that he sees no way to call off all their work Page 16 ~( 066 PAti401 ·,_.~......,c_""._"_..,_.. ........,., i, &O~K 066 PACt 402, December 8, 1981 for two weeks without incurring at least as much cost to the County as it would be to have them remain active and accomplish something productive. Chairman Wimer stated that, in light of what has happened regarding the consultants recommendations in the past, he would hope th~t the consultants take that into consideration and just -take the next two weeks off. He added that he did not "dream up- the illegal sites nor did any member of the Commission. Commissioner Wenzel asked If some of the buildings would not be the same, no matter which site wac chosen? Mr. Norman replied negatively, explaining that in particular, the "A" site, (present complex site) would require a more .... "compact" type of design. Commissioner Wenzel stated that he considers that he is the only Commissioner that prefcrs to remain at the present site, and that -F" seems to be the one that the majority are leaning towards, therefore, no matter which of the other sites are chosen, there must be some buildings that can be designed that will fit into all of the ren,ining alternðtives. County Manager Norman sðid that he is not sure what the cost to the County would be, however, any delay will cost the County money, ðccording to the contracts. He said th~t the County Attorney would have to l~ok over ,the con~racts and advise the Board on tho actual cost for this delay. He said that, although he undorstand3 the importance of this decision and he is not desirous that it be mðde prematurely, he has to report that this delay will cost the County money. Aftcr Chairman Wimer repeated his reasoning regarding the fact thðt it was parties other then the Commissionets who are responsible for the delðY, Mr. Norman stated that he, personally, do.s not feel that the fault for not knowing what the legal problems in Page 17 December 8, 1981 Collier County relating to where the County se~t lies, was the consultants responsibility. He said that if anyone is reaponsbile, he 18, at least as much any anyone else, however, he still does not want to see this delay cost the County additional money. Commissioner Kruse stated that she is uncomfortable with the delay because she sees the costs for consultants accumulating. She said that . each site was gone over in depth during the workshop and, although Mr. Duvekot's offer was more then generous, she would be just as comfortable with choosing another option today to keep the project prog ressi ng. After further :iscussion, Chairman Wimer stated that it would be agreeable to him if ð member of the Bo~rd chooses to maKe a motion today and not walt until December 22, 1981, and upon calling for same, Commissioner wenzel moved that the Board's first choice for the site of the expansil')n progrðm be site "F". lie requested that the record reflect that his first choice was site -A-, however, he chooses to -go along" with ~is second choice which is -F". Commissioner Kruse seconded the motion, clarifying that this second is conditional on it being for site only and not a final decision regarding the type of building or the financial structure, as was discussed during the '~ workshop. Chairman Wimer aSKed, if that is true, what would the conßultants be doing for the next few weeks. Commissioner Rruse said, -they (consultants) will be coming up with some of those an~wers.- County Manger Norman requested that Mr. Zimmerman respond to what will take place over the next few weeks if the Board votes favorably on . particular site. Mr. Zimmerman stated that they expect to go deeper Page 18 &O~ ( 056 ~ÂCi 403 n > I ~~~ 066 PACi404' December B, 1981 into the master plan and look into Bome the incremental things that werQ discussed during the workshop, including the cost of the different options. He said that their contract now calls for three master plan options and that they would be looking into those, including the cost benefits of each. Mr. Zimmerman stated that the next phase is the development of the master plan, wherein the specifics regarding what goes where and what is to be built and what is not will be decided. Commissioner Wenzel asked him if he intends to come back to the Board in the next few weeks with facts and figures? He also asked him if it is true that they will not be doing renderings, scale drawings, etc.4 Mr. Zimmerman stated that, frankly, he has to go back and look at their schedule and discuss with pol1zzi/lleery as to how much time will be requi r ed to ge t to the nex t po into lie sa id that thi s dec! sion has no't been made this morning. Commissioner Brown asked Mr. Zimmerman how much per week the County is paying for the consulting services? Mr. Zimmerman stated that he is not sure, explaining that the contract covers fees for ðdditiooal services for offsite studies and he has not compiled what that offsite study is, however, he ...ill be forwardil g to Polizzl/Heery, A statement of accounting regarding what that will be very soon. He said that Polizzi/Hoery will be receiving a -twice a month- accounting of anything over and above the regular services. Chairman Wimer asked him to make Ðn ~stimate an~ Mr. Zimmerman stated that he cannot. Administrative Assistant Neil Dorrill responded by stating that for combined professional services for the existing phase, including financial consultants, construction management consultants, archi- pag_ 19 ,.... .....~~ ." . t..·...."·'--, , December 8, 19B1 tectural and design consultants, etc., the total professional fees average approximately $4,000.Øø per day. Upon noting that there were no further questions from the members of the Board, Chairman Wimer called fo r the question on the motion on the floor. The motion carried 3/1, Commissioner wimer opposed. Commissioner Brown asked Mr. Zimmerman what he is going to do now and he replied that, as he understands it, his firm is going to be starting on the master plan options. County ~anager Norman agreed, adding that the County will also be proceeding with more accurate appraisal values. NOTE: Later in the mef':.ing, C~c1irr.iDn Wimer clarified that the intent of the Board when taking the above-referenced action is to choose a site for which architectural planning may commence: it is not to be considered as a commitment to purchase any property. . . . RECESS - TIME: 10:15 A.M.- 10:22 A.M. . . . FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF PETITION FP-Bl-22C, "THE PRESERVE OF WYNDEMERE- - CONTINUED FOR 6~ DAYS Planner Lee Kirchhoff reported that william Barton representing the petitioner re petition FP-81-22C, has requested that further consideration of this petition be continued for 60 days. .~ Commissioner Wenzel so moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and curled 4/0. SOLIC ITATION OF B IDS FOR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPII IC SERVICES FOR IDENTIFI- CATION OF WETLAND AREAS - AUTHORIZf.D Planning Director Danny Crew referred to the information within the Executive Summary, dated November 23, 1981, regarding a paqe 29 ao~.( 066 PACt: 405 , , ~o~~ 066 PAL¿ 4.06 Dtcember 8, 1981 re~ommendation that the Ðoðrd authorize the solicitation of bids fo: aerial photographic services for identification of wetland areas .. throughout the County, as a part of the approved program under the $20,000 Local Governmental Comprehensive Planning Act (LGCPA) grant awarded to the County on October 15, 1981 from the Florida Department of Veterans and Community Affairs. He explained that there would be no County funds involved, adding that additional funds for aerial photography of the Golden Gate Estates area would como from the Big Cypress Basin Board, as part of the funds given to the County for the Golden Gate Interim Action Program. He said that the BCBB has appro~ed up to $7,500 for this purpose. Commissioner wenzel asked Mr. Crew if this photography was not done two years ago? Commissioner Brown said that he has received complaints about all these photographs and Commissionp.r Rruse stated that she believes the last aerial photographs were done in 1974. Commissioner Kruse Dsked Mr. CL~W if these photographs will be infrared and he replied that they would, adding that the County has never flown infrared before. Commissioner Kruse asked if Durbin Tabb of Tropical BioIndustries Development Company did not take aeri~l infrared photos in 1974 as part of the Golden Gate Estates Study? Mr. Crew replied afflrmativp-ly, clarifying his response by stating that these photographs were done on a limited basis and that the County does not have access to them because they belong to that firm and are now being held in Miami. Commissioner Rruse asked if the County paid for them and Mr. Crew replied affirmatively, adding that he agreed that they would be useful as points of reference for any additional photographs Page 21 '''''.,',.~ December A, 1981 ~~ken and he a~reed to contact the firm regarding acquiring the~ for ~he County's use. In answer to Commissioner Brown, Mr. Crew stated that these photographs are not available through the real estate community and he explained how they will help identify areas subject to flood when prospective purchasers come to the County for that kind of information. Commissioner Kruse asked what time of the year these photographs would be taken and Mr. Crew stated that it has been recommended to him that they be flown in February. Commissioner Kruse concurred with that recommendation. Commissioner Wenzel requested that the record reflect that the funds to be used for this project are actually t.¡xpaycrs' funds havirlg been paid through taxes collected, i.e. Water Mangement funds, State Taxes paid to the County"etc. Mr. Crew concurred. Commissioner Wenzel m"Jed, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 3/1, with Commissioner Brown opposed, that the solicitation of bids for aerial photrDgraphic aervices be authorized, as recommended by sta(f. MODIFICATION TO THE STUDY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE SFWMD - AUTHORIZED TO REFLECT EXPENDITURE FOR AERIAL PHOTOGMPIIIC SERVICES RE WETL1\NbS planning Director Danny Crew requested authorization to modify the Study Agreement betwcen th~ County and the SFWMD to reflect the expenditure of funds for the aerial photographic services approvcd by the Board this session. Commissioner Wenzel so moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and carried 3/1, with Commissioner Brown opposed. Page 2~ &O~K 066 'fA~t'407 ,- I. December 8, 1981 ~C0K 056 PA~¿ '408 RESO~UTION 81-257, IN SUPPORT OF A PROPOS~L TO THE fiTATE TO ACQUIRE CLAM PASS PARK AS A PUßLIC PARK - ADOPTED; TENTATIVE APPROVA~ GIVEN TO PLACE THE BEACH ACC~SS QUESTION ON THE REFERENDUM FOR NOVEMBER 2, 19821 STAFF DIRECTED TO COME ßACR WITH DETAILED RECOMMENDATION RE WORDING AND FUNDING ~EVEL TIIEREOF Planning Director Danny Crew referred to the information detailed within the Executive Summary, dated November 30, 1981 regarding the recommendation for tentðtive approval to hold a referendum to provide matching funds under the Save O~r Coast Program and/or to provide other beach Dccess acquisitions and improvements. Mr. Crew stated that the County recently filed an application ~.r Clam Pass Park under the Conservation Land Recreation Trust Fund and he reported that a second grant program is now aVdilable through the State, under the Save ur Coðst Program. He said that he has received word from the State that the County's application through this program looks favorable if the County is willing to put up some sort of matching funds for the purchase. He said that an 80/20 split has been suggested. Mr. Crew referred to the drafted resolution, submitted as part of the Executive Summary, whirh would authorize the staff to provide these funds and the County to hold ð referendum for bonding the necessary funds for this and other beach access improvements in the County. He said that staff is currently preparing a beach master plan for the County and that one important aspect that will be forthcoming from the study is that a Trust Fund be established with public as well as private funds to be used for various purchases. Mr. Crow stðtcd that, at this timo, he is not prepared to give the Page 23 December 8, 1981 Board the exact figure that will be proposed for bonding, however, preliminary indications are that there is a need for an amount that falls in-between the $B,000,000 to $10,000,000 range. He said that to bond this amount, it will take approximately one quarter mill for a twenty year period. He said that these funds would be sufficient to assist in the purchase of the Naples Cay/Clam pass property, but, also, other properties that may come on the market or that the County deems necessary, including access easements, parking, restroom facilities, and any other beach oriented funds that might become necessary. Mr. Crew requested that, in order to meet the grant deadline, the Board grant tel,tative approval to place such an issue on a referendul". for September 7, 1982, adding that the exact details of the referendum will have to come back at ð later date for final approval. The proposed dat~ of the referendum was discussed, during which Commissioner Wenzel requested that the date be changed to November 2, 19B2, which is the date of tilt: Géneral Election. He said that he felt that many winter residents, who pay a large proportion of the taxes, would not be here to cast a vote in september and he also stated that the General Election has a better voter turnout. ~r. Crew referred to the drafted resolution and stated that the .~ third wwhereas- will have to be amended to read as follows: .Whereas, the Board of County Commissioners is interested in acquirinlj an.... develo(.l!1g property known as Clam Pass Park as a County Beach Park.w Mr. Crew also stated that the first -Now, Therefore- uhould be changed to read as follows: Page 24 ,c~~ 066 f~~¿ 4.09 December B, 1981 ßC~K 066 fA~¿ ·410 "Now, Thorefore, Bo It Resolved, by Ooard of County Commis- sioners that Collier County proposes the acquistion of said property and respectfully requests that the Save Our Coast Selection Committee nnd the Tcustees of the Intecnal Improve- ment Funds, add this proposal to the priority acquisition list.- Commissioner Wenzel requested that the date of the referendum under the fourth "Whereas- be changed to -November 2, 1982- and moved to adopt Resolution Bl-2~7 with the aforementioned changes; that tentative approval be granted for scheduling a referedum on November 2, 1982 regarding the acquisition of the afore~entioned property: and, that the staff come back with the exact wording and funding level cegarding the referendum for final approval. Upon hearing no second ~ offered, Chairman Wimer noted that the motion died. commissioner Kcuse asked for clarification from Mr. Crew regarding a stðtement he made when discussing the proposed referendum. She referred to his statcment5 wherein several items were covered as being on the referenum. She said that he mentioned "beach access-, -the acquisition of Clam Pass and its improvements" and, "other beach access improvements". She asked, if this were to go on ð referen~um, would all of these be presented as separate questions? She suggested that, in order to allow the peoplo an option, they should be ~b1e to voto if the ace willing to: one, support a bond issue for the purchase of Clam Pass and its improvements; two, support a bond issue ~or funding other improvements: or three, chuose to support a bonding issue to fund both the Clam Pass acquisition project and other improvements. Mr. Crew stated that he has no objections to wording the ballot in this matter. County Manager Norman responded by stating that the proposed resolution only covers the one item, Clam Pass, and that if fucter items are to be Page 25 ."'~,-. December a, 19R1 on the referendum, the Board will have to take additional action. Commissioner Wenzel offered the same motion once again anð Commissioner Kruse seconded it at this time. The motion carried 3/1, with Commissioner Brown opposed. .~ ~ot)i. 066 PÄ~t 411 Page 2" . " ! . . \ December 8, 1981 REVISED OPERATING HOURS FOR THE SOLID W~STE TRANSFER ST~TIONS - APPROVED Public works Administrator Clifford Barkdsale recommended that all solid wasto transfer stations be closed on all County designated holidays. Further, he recommended that the C8rnestown station operations be reduced from the pre~~nt six day week to a five day week, because reports show that the cost of operation of the station on Saturdays is nct justified by the amount of use on that day. Commmissioner W~nzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried unanimously, that all solid waste transfer stations be closed on all official Cou~ty holidays and that the Carnestown station be operated Monday through FridDY: PRELIMINARY ACCEPTANCE OF IMPERIAL GOLF ESTATES, PHASE II SUBDIVISION - GRANTED: IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 206 IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 ACCEPTED; IRREVOCABLE L~TTF.R5 OF CREDIT NO.1 AND NO.2 Rf.LEASED Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and carried 4/0, that preliminary acceptance of Imperial Golf Estates, Phase'II Subdivision, be granted: that the Irrevocable Letter of Credit No. 206 in the amount of $50,000 be accepted¡ and, that the Irrevocable Letters of Credit No. 1 and No.2 be released. .~ page 27 M~~ 066 PA~è 413 , t ~ r . December 8, 19ß1 RECOMMENDATION TO ~W~RD BID 1527 CAXAMBAS FUEL TANK WtTHOR^WN The recommendation to award Bid 15L7 was withdrawn from the agenda as requested by the County Manager by ð motion offered by commissioenr Wenzel, seconded hy Commissioenr Kruse and carried 4/0. FINAL MAINTENANCE CHARGE OF $11,881 FOR EXTRA SERVICES ASSOCIATED FOR THE EXTENSION OF PHASE I - APPROVED FOR PAYMENT TO POLIZZI/BEERY FOR CONSTRUCTION M^NAGEMENT SERVICES Administrative Assistant Neil Dorrill referred to professional services associated with the county·S expansion program. He said that on May 26, 19B1, the Board approved an extension to the schedule of critical dates which added an unanticipated 1 months to the completion of Phase I. He said that the County has, initially, coincided all three professional contPact agreements iT a phase concept for this project in reco~nition of the fact that if a financial concept is not approved the project would th~n be shut down at the epd of phase I. He said that there were a few unanticipated items which have extended this project, including the creation of th~ Citizens Ad Hoc Committee for the s~ace study and those outstanding items related to the archi- tectura1 program, i.e. number of courtrooms, cafeteria, etc. He said that the original invoice called for six payments of $23,200 per month ... for the construction manager, polizzi/Heery. He said that the completion for Ph~se I through schematic designs is now planned for some time during the end of February. He said that the County has negotiated with polizzi/Beery, in addition to their final payment, an additional $11,881 payment for their services thrQugh the end of February, thus bringing the County to the end of Phase I. He said that Page 2A ~C~( 066 fACri415 , - I; December 8, 1981 , M!)~ 066 p~~¿ '416 Pollz7.i/Heery will not be paid anything furlner through February. . Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carded ~/1, with commissioner Wenzel opposed, thðt ,the final maintenance charge of $11,881 be authorized for payment to Pol i ui/Heery. UTILITY EASEMENT DOCUMENT FOR INSTALLATION OF WATER METER RE VANDERBILT BEACH AND HARAOR CLUB - ACCEPTED FOR RECORDATION Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Rruse and carried 4/0, that the utility easement document for installation of a water meter re Vanderbilt Beach and lIarbor Club be accepted for recordation. ". Pa9. 29 II"':_'''''-Mo December A, 3981 RESOLUTION 81-258 CORRECTING A TYPOGRAPHIC~L ERROR IN RESOLUTION 81-253 - ADOPTED Assistant ~ounty Attorney Kenneth cuyler stated that Resolution 81-253, which was adopted last week, contains a typographical error and he recommended that Resolution 81-258 correcting that error be adopted. Commissioner wenzel so moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 4/0. ." page )1'1 ~M~ 066 PIM: 419 ... December 8, 1981 ROUTINE BILLS - P~ID pursuant to Resolution 81-150, the ~0110win9 checks were issued through Friday, December 4, 1981, in payment of routine bills: FUND CHECK NOS. AMOUNT - - ace payroll 30943 - 31472 $293,038.31 General Fund 6 8A,Ø0Ø.Ø0 BUDGET AMENDMENT 182-21 PROVIDING FOR MATERIAL ORDERED DURING FV 1980-81 BUT NOT RECEIVED UNTIL FY 19B1-82 (SOLID WASTE) - ADOPTED IN THE AMOUNT OF 52,775' Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 4/0, that Budget Amendment '82-21, f:oviding for material ordered during FY 1980-81 but not received until FY 1981-82 (Solid waste), be ðdopted in the ðmount of $2, 7~ 5. .~ PAge 31 &O~~ 066 f,\~¿'42f . __"'>;1__"'_"'1 --"''''''''-"''''''' .._,....._"M~.".·.'..,..,,^ ·,'II.'.··...·,.-·,..·"...~ December 8, 1981 BUDGET AMENDMENT 182-22 PROVIDING FOR COST OF CONFERENCE TABLE (PURCHÄSING) - ADOPTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $150 Commissioner Wenzel moved, secondeã by Commissioner Brown and carried 4/0, that Budget Amendment 182-22, providing for cost of conference table for purchasing, be ~dopted in the amount of $150. ." aOOK 066 PAG¿ 423 Page 32 . ~ ,~fI'lMI "R r ---.w'^ ....;...-.,,""'.._,_..~,..,"",--~._~---....-,-',......, , December 8, 1981 BUDGET AMENDMENT '82-23 PROVIDING FOR COST OF CONSTRUCTION OF SECURE .BID BOX. FOR PURCHASING - ADOPTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $127 Commissioner wenzel moved, seconded by commissioner Brown and carried 4/Ø, that Budget Amendment 182-23, providing for the cost of construction of secure -Bid Box- for purchasing, be adopted in the amount of $127. ''Po pag_ 33 ,&O~~ 066 PAti425 . .. ~ "" ..~, ..,..... ,",._",..~,,,..L".... '"""'<""'''-''_~~''''''~''_'~~^'''"_''''_'' December 8, 1981 ,;~¡ ,;,\~" ,:fìf~ ~.,,¡ BUDGET AMENDMENT '82-1.4 PROVIDING FOR TRANSFER OF UNUSED FUNDS TO CONTINGENC~ FOR USE, !F NEEDED, FOR EXPANDED OR APPROVED FUTURE PROGRAMS (OTHER.GENERAL ADMINISTR7\TION) - ADOPTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,B74 Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 4/Ø, that Budget Amendment 182-24, providing for transfer of unused funds to contigency for use, if needed, for expanded or approved future programs (Otþer General Administration), be adopted in the amount of $9,B74. .~ ~ PðCJO 34 &O~K 056 PACt 427 . '"'--''''~''"''''"'''''-'''''''''"'''''''''' _..,.."....'>..._,'-~-",._,~".,..'^ "........._~---,- December 8, 1991 RESO~UTION 81-259 DESIGNATING ßO~RD POLICY COVERING TRANSFER OF DO~~~RS TO CONTINGENCY RESERVE FROM DEPARTMP.NT BUDGETS - ~DOPTED Chief Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Officer Harold L. Hall explained that, purDuant to Bo,rd direction, the Clerkin office has prepared a , resolution covering the transfer of dollars to contingency Reserve from Department Budgets when the need for funds as anticipated in initial budgets c~ases to exist. He stated that, because some accounts for which this procedure is not completely applicable, he is requesting that the policy staté that the Fiscal Officer and the responsible Agency Head can approve the movement of money within a fund, if it does not conflict with ~ny prev~ous .policy statements approved by the Boald of County Commissioners. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Wenzel thdt Resolution 81-259, designating Board Policy as recommended by Mr. Hall, be a:Jopted. ^fter ~ brief discussion regarding the proposed policy, the cost effectiveness of such a policy in the past and the statement (rom Chairman wimer that the intent of this policy is to encourage Department heads to not spend funds simply because they Ðre in the respe~five budgets, the motion carried 4/0. Page 35 &O~~ 066 w,¿ 429 . ""'''''"''''''',",".>,,;.,~..,.._,---....,,~ "''I n Ii Decembet 8, 1981 M0~ 066 fÅ~¿'4.32 PROPOSAL FOR MEMBERSHIP OF M.P.O APPROVED WITH TWO MEMBERS BEING NOMIN^TEO O'{ TilE BCC ",NO TWO IW THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A FIFTH MEMBER BE THE COMMt55tONER RF.PRE5P.NTtNr. Dt5TRtCT 4 TO Chairman wimet referred to a memorandum, dated December 8, 1981, which he directed to the other members of the Board regarding the proposal for membership on the M.P.O that was agreed upon as the fairest and most equitable altotnative considered during the December 7th meeting he and the County Attorney attended with Mayor Anderson, City Manager Frank Jones, and city Attorney Dave Rynders. He said that he agreed to present the following proposal, having been previouslY suggested by Commissioner Wenzel, to the BOArd for their consideration ..... and that Mayor ",nderson has agreed to present the same proposal to the City Council: 1. The City council will appoint two members. 2. The County Commission will appoint two members. 3. The fifth member shall be the County Commissioner who resid~s within the City and whose district represents the City. This member, therefore, would be Commissioner Wenzel, District 4. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the anticip~ted duration of the M.P.O; the Federal rcgulations mandating the MPO; the fact that the above-referenced proposal virtually -locks in- a s~at for the Commissioner who represents District 4; and a comparison of ratio of membership by the city on the M.P.O and that of the SWFRPC, as outlined by Commissioner erown. Commissioner Kruse stated that she is opposed to the permanent seat for whoever sits as Commissioner for District 4 as did Commissioner Brown, who added that he is uncomfortable with the Page 36 "__...~_,..,...,,,,.~.".....................,,,,,...,,.~..,,",.,.,,,~.._....,,,,..",,,,_.,,,,.,,.,._..~^·.,..v·'·· December 8, 1981 apparent feeling on the part of the City of Naples that they should have equal representation on the M.P.O when it is supposed to reflect the population ratio. Commissioner Wenzel stated that he considers the subject proposal a -compromise- and he reminded the Board that whoever represents District 4 in the future will have to be fair and equitable. Commissioner Kruse stated that she still feels that giving a permanent seat to the Commissioner from District 4 totally ignores the fact that Commissioners are elected County wide and are supposed to represent and sorve the entire County. She said that, if this Commissioner 1s repr~senting only the residents of the City, then, she questions why they are elect~d ðt-large. Commissioner Wenzel asked if the Board could elect to accept this proposal for one year and County Attorney pickworth replied negatively. There was a diccussion as to the actual dutier that the mombers of the M.P.O will perform, includin~ ~itting as the policy board for urban system funds which come from the Federal DOT for roads and road improvements, mðsS transit, and the airport, as explained by ~ommunity Development Administrator Terry Vlrta. He stated that the -roads- which fall under the M.P.O is that road network which lies within the defln~ -urbanizing area- as anticipated in the year 2CØØ, which would probably include Golden Gate, The Estates, Marco Island and the entire Coastal area. C~mmissloncr Brown asked Mr. Virta if the farm roads in the Immokalee agrlcultural,areas would fall under the purview of the M.P.O and he replied that they would not, noting that the boundaries for the -urbðn area- do not extend that far to the east and the remaining Page 37 M~K 066 PAti '433 ___a··____~ December 8, 1981 M~~ 066 FA~¿'434 roads outside of the urban area would be the responsibility of the Bce with the cooperation of the FOOT. . I~ was pointed out by commissioner Kruse that, while the ratio of residents within the city of Naples as compared to those in the unincorporated urban area is approximately 20,~00 to 30,0~0 today, five years from now it will probably be closer to 20,000 to 50,000, therefore, she is uncomfortable with the proposed membership ratio because it is considered as permanent. County Attorney pickworth stated that the Statutes require that the MPO membership's representa- tion be reviewed every five ye3rs and that if, the proportionate ,. population has shifted, the membership may be altered at that time. County Manager Norman stated that there are areas that may incorporate in the future, such as Marco Island, and, if that should occur, they would be entitled to representation on the M.P.O. After further discussion, Commission~r Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Wenzel, an' carried 3/1, with Commissioner Rruse opposed, ;, that the proposal for M.P.O membership as outlined by Chairman Wimer be approved. There was some discussion regarding the statement from Commis- si'oner Brown who said that, if Commissioner Wenzel is to be seated on the M.P.O as a representative for the City, he should step down from his seat on the SWFRPC. He stated that he refuses to continue to have no recognition on the SWFRPC, especially since the area which he represents is -vitally affected- by its decisions. Commissioner Brown moved that Commissioner Wenzel resign today from the SWFRPC and be replaced by another Commissioner, The motion died for lack of a second Page 38 ·...~,ì .'~ ,,<..1 December 8, 1981 end Commissioner Wenzel stated that he would find out when his term on the SWFRPC expires, noting that he believes that it is within a few months and he added that he would be most happy to nominate Commissioner Brown to fill the vacancy at that time. There was a discussion regarding which Commission Districts will be a part of the ·study area" under the M.P.O ðnd Mr. virta explained that District 5 will have very little population involved and the remaining four districts will fall under the -study area-. Commissioner Brown moved that Commissioners wimer and Kruse be appointed to serve as the two Commissioners on the M.P.O along with Commissioner Wenzel who would be seated as the -fifth member". Chairman wimer requested that the motion be withdrawn until the intorlocal agreeli\ent is formulated. commissioner Brown agreed to withdraw his motion at the request of the Chairman. CERTIFICATES OF CORRECTION TO THE TAX ROLLS AS SUBMITTED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER - AUTHORIZED FOR EXECUTtON Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and car~ied 4/0, that the following Certificates of Correction to the Tax Rolls, as submitted by the Property Appraiser's office, be authorized ''à for execution by the Chairman: ~l_T^NGInLE PERsaNAL PROPERTY NUMBERS DATE - 12/1/81 1981-78 - 1981-73 Page 39 ~M1t 066 f,\~¿4.35 . :Î . . ~",,: ~ ~::i~ '.\~ ';!:¡1¡' :;,:aí -"1."1' , :~I: ""1 '·,,"f, - ('1'.:., A~' ; ~., ....'" i:.~· , \ -'Y'! December A, 1981 , n6.~ ·'436 LETTErÞQ'd\- "h.r;'1'G~X~lON FnOM THE WM1\B FnOM JOHN E. PRICE, EFFECTIVE 12/31/81 _ REGRETFULLY 1\CCEPTED; 1\PPROPRI1\TE LETTER OF ^PPRECIATION ^UTHORIZED; ^DVERTISEMENT OF V1\CANCY ^PPROVEO: VACANCY TO ßE FILLED· BY PERSON RESIOING IN nISTRICT 5 ~ Commssioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 4/0, that the letter of resignation from the Water Management Advisory Board from John E. Price, be regretfully accepted, effective December 31, 1981: that an appropriate letter of appreciation be authorized and the advertisement of the vacancy be approved. There was a discussion regarding Commissioner Wenzel's query as to the appropriateness of Commissioner Brown filling the vacancy as a <ft. member. Commissioner Brown stated that he has been told that he, as a Commissioner, cannot even attend advisory boðrd meetings. County Attorney Pickworth stated that he sees no reason that a commissioner cannot attend an advisory board ~eeting, however, there may be some problems with a Commissioner serving on one. He agreed to look into the matter. Commissloner Wenzel stated that, since Mr. price waS from the Immokalee area, Commissioner Brown should be authorized to nominate the next member to the WM1\B from within his district. Administrative Aide Grace Spaulding stated that Mr. price has requested that, because he is the only member on the WMAB r~presenting the agriculture community, his vacancy be filled by another member of the agriculture community. Chairman wimer asked if this is not in line with the Board's policy anywal and ,':rs. spaulding replied that it is Commh- sioner Brown's privilege to nominate someone to continue to serve out Mr. price's term. It was the consensus of the Board that Commissionor Brown is to make the nomination for the vacancy. He agreed to have a recommendation by December 31, 1981. Pa9. 411 December 8, 1981 MR. EGON HILL REAPPOINTED FOR TWO-YEAR TERM ON ARE~ ~GENCY ON ~aINa ADVISORY BOl\RD commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and arried 4/0, that Mr. Egon Hi~l be reappointed for a two-year term as Collier County's representative on the Area Agency On Aging Advisory Board. Mr. Hill thanked the Board for his appointment and noted that it will be his pleasure·to serve Collier County in this capacity. REVEREND DONALD \01. :.,.,'tJSON REAPPOINTED FOR TWO-YEAR TERM TO SOUTHWEST FLORIDA MENTAL HEl\LTII GJARD, EPFECTIVr. JI\NUl\RY 1, 1982 Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner R~use and carried 4/0, that Reverend Donald W. Lawson be reappointed for a two-year term as Collier County's representative on the Southwest Florida Mental Health Board. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATOR AUTHORIZED TO CONTACT U.S. POST OFFICE OfFICIl\LS RF. NP.W PROPOSED PO~Tl\L FACILITY IN CHOKOLOSKEP. Administrative Aide Grace Spaulding referred to a letter dated December 2, 1981 from the United States Post Office requesting the '~ Board to consider their plans to construct a new postal facility in Chokoloskee and to forward their concurrence or non-concurrence and their reasons for same. This was discussed briefly, during which aeveral Commissioners questioned the need for a 2293 square foot facility in Choko)oskee. Also discussed was the possibility of merging this facility to the one presently situated in Everglades City; the need for Board concurrence Pag. U &O~~ 056 fA~¿ 437 , 1 ',:.\' <~~! ,:~~: ~\f, .h- '.''t. ¡ . ,:) . "¿III .......~""---~,' ~"'.. ·1 ò, ," 0-.-'<>'",_,,,, December 8, 1981 on a ?i'~~ e~5ª1f(£¿·~~ if1 the f1 rst placo and .the., ,c1uestion of', whether or not the Post Office Officials are awðre of the flood elevation requirements on Chokolosk... After tho discussion, Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by CommiRsioner Wenzel and carried 4/0, that the Community Development Administrator be authorized to contact the U.S. postal Officials and discuss all the aspects of the prop~~1d project before the Board makes any further det~rminðt10n. ". LARE TRAFFORD MEMORIAL GARDENS CEMETERY DEEDS NO. 287 AND NO. 288 - ACCEPTED FOR RECORDATION pursuant to action of the Board January 10, 1978, wherein the Chairman was authorized to sign various doeds to Lake Trafford Memorial Gardens Cemetery lots as the neod arises, the following Deeds No. 287 and No. 288 were recorded and filed for the record: P-9. 42 ~ .: ..J', .,., 0-.."'.'."."'''-1"- December B, 19B1 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION OF ~PPLIC^TION FOR R~TE INCREASE FROM ^MERICAN C~BLEVISION fiERVICES, INC., - ACCEPTED ~dministrative Aide Grace Spaulding reported that a letter of notification of application for a rate increase, dated December 3, 1981, from ~erican Cablevision Services, Inc., has been received, pursuant to paragraph -g", Section "6" of the Franchise, which stipulates that they are to notify the County one month in advance of requesting the rate increase application. Mrs. spaulding explained that the application,has been referred to staff and that the matter will come before the Boar1 at the appropriate time. There were no objections from the members of the Board that the subject letter be accepted. LETTER FROM GOLDEN GATE CIVIC ASSOC. REQUESTING EXTENSION OF LIGHTING FOR GOLDEN GATE CITY - ACCP.PTED AS PETITION RE SAME Administrative Aide Grace Spaulding read a lettet, dated Docember 7, 1981, from willard Griffith, President, Golden Gate Civic Association, in its entirety. She st~ted that Mr. Griffith has asked that the letter requesting the extension of lighting for the Golden Gate City be accepted as a petition. C9mmissioner Rruse moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 4/0, that the aforementioned letter be accepted as a petition f~r the extension of lighting !or Golden Gate City. ~ISC£LL^N£OUS CORRF.SPONOF.NCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED There being no objection, the Chair directed that the following correspondence be filed and/or referred to the various departments as i nd ica ted: 'Ol)!t 066 PAt¿44f PA9. ..:s . December 8, 1981 &001. 066 fÄ~¿'44Z 1. Minutes of special meeting of City of Naples Council, November 13, 1981 and Regular moeting of November 18, 1981. Filed. 2. Letter dated 11/28/81 from L. A. MacNabb, requesting the abatemQnt of a public nuisance on Lot 9, Block C, Little Hickory Shores. xc Messrs. Norman and virta, Filed. 3. Copy of minutes of Golden Gate Community Center ~dvisory Board Ðnd copy of schedule for month of November, 1981. Filed. 4. Petition (two pages) to repair Della Drive. xc Messrs. Norman and Bðr~sdale, Filed. 5. Copy of DNR Permit No. CO-P22-81, Deltona corporation, for an elevated wooden pile supported dune walkover and temporary construction fence. Filed. ,. 6. Letter dated 12/3/81, from Roano~o Iron & Bridge works, Inc., Prison Equipment Division, offering assistance to archictect regarding proposed jail fðcility. xc Mr. Norman: Fll"d. 7. Memorandum dated 12/4/81 from Clerk Arthur H. Beckwith, Jr., Seminole County, transmitting a copy of recently adopted resolution requesting the Governor to put local government finances and State mandates on the agenda for the upcoming Special Legislation Session. Filed. 8. Copy of Resol'ltion, adopted 11/12/81 in Washington County, requesting the Florida Legislature to adddress the issue of mandðted programs and funding for came in ,the upcoming Legislative Session. Filed. . . . * Recess 11:19 A.M. to 11:15 A.M. at which time Deputy Clerk Davidson was replaced by Deputy Clerk Skinner. . . * * REPORT RE COCOH~TCHEE W^TERSHED GROUNDW~TER RESOURCES STUDY BY BtG CYPRESS B^SIN ßO^RD/SOUTH FLORID^ WATER ~ANAGEMENT DISTRICT - ACCEPTED Administrator Fred vidzes, Big Cypress Basin Board, explained he was present to make a presentation to the Board in conjunction with the eCBB's consultant, Mr. Thomas M. Missimer, of Missimer and ~ssociat.., page 44 December 8, 1981 Inc. who have prepared a study report entitled, "GROUNDWATER RESOURCES OF THE COCOHATCHEE WATERSHED, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA-. Mr. Vidzes distributed copies of th~t Report to the Commissioners, for information and future reference. He introduced Mr. Stanley Hole, Chairman of Big Cypress Basin Board, and explained that Mr. Hole is a member of the South Florida Water Management District Governing Board. Mr. vidzes listed the following main points of the report: 1. The report is timely due to the drought conditions occurring in South Fl,odda: 2. The study was sponsored by BCBß anticipating the growth and water demands in tho North Collier County area; 3. Tho study will compliment future studies in the area, wher~ a major water resource ~upply for Collier County was found. Mr. vidzes described background history which resulted in the formulation of said Report: noted one duty of SCBB is to plan for development of water resources of the area: and stated the Report successfully aj~resses that task. Mr. vidzes stressed the point that locating the water resources in growth areðs is a significant step in eventually saving Collier County money, while developing the water resources of the arJa. He explaine~ the area of the study lies north of Immokalee Road and east of 1-75. .~ He introduced Mr. Missimer to address the technical aspects of the report, as they"relate to geology and hydrology, as well as to present the recommendations of the report. CommisGioner Kruse asked Mr. vidzes if the study presented this date is the one which tho Bcee recently authorized for ~pproximately $78,0001 Mr. vidzes replied negatively and explained that several Page 4 S M0K 066 FA~¿44a ._-,..',.........,......, "-""",,,,,","., .....,-,<...,.,"'''~",'..."".».~.,,.."~_."''.. , December B, 19B1 , M"~ O~6 m¿444 studies ~re ~eing conducted simultaneously, which will culmin~te in some capit~l improvements and bo useful for future information. He explained this study is strictly the groundwater resources study, of the Cocohatchee.watershed. He noted the study to which Commissioner Y.ruse refers is the 12-square mile Golden Gate watershed study, at the edge of this study. Mr. Thomas M. Missimer, president, Missimer and ~ssociates, Inc., with the aid of charts and figures, present~d the findings of the Report his firm conducted for the BCBB and offered several recommen- dations in order to specifically protect the area under discussion a~d to develop it. Commissioner Wenzel asked why ð series of dams could not be placed as far east as the Cocohatchee Canal goes, 30 inches below nat~ral grade, every 1 foot drop in elevation on to the Gulf of Mexico? Mr. Missimer said that was what he had sU9geste~. Commissioner Wenzel commented that his suggestion would eliminate the large designed water control gates. He said this would serve the purpose of giving water- head of 30 inches, 2 or 3 foot below grade, with the surplus being allowed to run off. Mr. Missimer asked to return tv th~t point, because there is a minor flooding problem with that suggestion, since there would have to be some system of flexibility to ~elease valves and gates. Commissioner Wen~~l said that 3 foot over the top would take care of any flooding. Commissioner Kruse noted the phrase -temporary surface impound- ments-, used by Mr. Missimer. She asked that the point be made, in order not to -lose sight of it in the next 5 years-, that those P "g. 4 6 .""-,,_.,...="~--.."_."'--~...'''~". ,..._" December 8, 1981 impoundments are on somebody's surface. She said that this shQuld be done either with the property owners' pe'rmlssion, payment should be given for that permission: or flow-way easements be given. She said water should not be held on the surface of somebody's land, no matter what it is called, unless an account is provided for it. She said she did not want to lose that point. Mr. Missimer said that means of impoundment are already being implemented by water management district rules, and that this is a matter of helping some of the farmors retain more water adjacent to their property for later use. Commissioner Rruse stressed that prop- erty belongs to somebody, ðlGo, which was the pint she was mak~ng. Commissioner Wenzel noted the figure of between S3 and S6 inches of rainfall with most lost through evaporation, and he asked if the balance percolates into thn ground in that type of soi11 Mr. Missimer answered negatively and stated that, for practicðl purposes, this particular aquifer system is a temporary -storage tank", with very little water moving in and out of the basin, because of the frat terrain. He said each year the water level raises in the -tank- to land surfðce and then recedes S feet below land surface, due to evap- orati~n and surface discharge. Chairman wimer aSKed if there was any room during the rainy season for percolation, to which Mr. Missimer stated the -tank" fills during the initial rainy season until full, with additional rainfall running off. Mr. Missimer explained that there is some recharge to the lower aquifer to Tamiami Zone I or the Co~.tal Ridge ^quifor and he stressed there is no recharge in the area to the deep aquifers at all, because pag e 47 M~~ 056 FAL¿ 4.4.5 " "-".".<.-.._-."<.~.,,.,.~..-.,.,,, December 8, 1991 M~1( ass PAL¿446 the preasure surface pushes the water out and in the upward direction. Commissioner Kruse stressed her concern regarding widening and deepening what is a borrow ditch (Cocohatchee Canal) into actually a canal system. She pointed out that management requires maintenance, to which Mr. Missimer and Mr. Vidzes concurred. She noted that point sometimes is lost between Collier County and BCBB, and stated that she wanted this point emphasized because all the technical aspects of widening the Cocohatchee Canal would require maintenance for proper, efficient results with regard to BCBB design. Mr. Missimer noted that, to properly achieve desired results, ^~. coordinated effort from all water areas concerned would be required for the ultimate goal of protectin~ and maintaining the resource. Commis- sioner Kruse stressed that in the past, the maintonance point gets lost, as the heart of the system, as presented to the BCC, may become functional but the maintenance aspects not completed. Commissioner Wenzel asked if the Golden Gate system is included in the area under discussion7 Mr. vidzes explained the study boundary area as this study relates to the location on the map which Mr. Wenzel was using. A discussion followed rcqardiny saltwater intrusion during which Mr. Missimer stated that saltwater intrusion is not going to happen in the new Coral Reef Aquifer, but he stressed that a coordinated basis is needed to monitor the area, instead of the -piecemeal- basis being employed by Collier County at the present time. He referred to the data which his firm could obtain and notod that such data was received from observation points in various areas, making the compilation difficult. pag e 48 " ""." '.'""-'-"'_._'''~;''''~'.,~",'''~"- December 8, 1981 A general discussion covered percentages of water from agricul- tural use which,percolates into tho ground, and comparisons were made between ditch irrigation and drip irrigation. Mr. Missimer pointed out that drip irrigation actually gets to the plants, is utilized and that less water is lost through evaporation. Mr. Missimer referred to future studies throu~h which the BCBB plans to nlc~r~ain how much water is available in the 12 mile area unde. discussion. He stressed the importance of quantifying the water amount before development of the resources is started. He stated that punishing the environment through development cannot be done anymore if protec..:':ion of t:Ln w·ter resource supply is to be assured. commissioner Wenzel asked if it is being recommended that the area under discussion is an excellent place from which Collier County should draw its water supply? commissioner Rruse asked how the area relates to the wcllfie1d? Mr. vidzcs stated that it is important to look at the assumption that Collier County is going to be highly populated. He referred to the Golden Gate area and staterl that the purpose of the aCBS's studies is to identify areas where Collier County can obtain the water resource at a reasonable cost to the public. He noted that -the longer the pipe '''¡- line- the more cost would be involverl. He said the area is in the proximity of a cur font Collier County water plant and stressed the importance of conserving the north end area of the rliscussion site. Commissioner Rruse asked if the ACBB was going to be able to provide the Commissioners with an accurate inventory of w~ter available, combined with previously reported existing water amounts. Messrs. Missimer and vidzes replied affirmatively, for the Cocohatchee area. ~c~~ 066 m¿ 4.4.1 pð<je 49 ...,.. ._.".,-",__._~~.'·,.~"'~m'_"''''-';~_ .. ~00~ 066 fÁL¿ 448 Deccmbcr 8, 1981 commissioner Wenzel ðsked Utilities Mðneger Irving Borzon if he had any data presently of the water resources of Collier County as a result of old studies? Mr. Berzon explained he did not havo as detailed data as the Missimer and Associates, Inc. report. Responding to Commissioner Wenzel, Mr. Berzon said thðt Collier County h~s a good rcport of water resource data for the aquifer from which the City of Naples draws its water. Commissioner Brown noted that he had no questions and that this report was very thorough. Chairmðn Wimer thanked the consultants and the BCBR for bringing the report to the commission. .... . . * . * * . . * * * * There being no further business for the good of the county, the meeting ~as adjourned by order of the Chair - Time: 11:Se ^.M. BO^RO OF COUNTY CO~MtSSIONEnS EX-OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECI^L DISTRICTS UNDEn ITS CONTROL cf(, ~ ¿.~~ C. R. "RU S WIMER, HAIRMAN ,1 I Pð9. 50 , . -