Loading...
CCPC Minutes 09/02/2004 R September 2, 2004 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, September 2,2004 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 8:30 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Russell Budd Robert Murray Brad Schiffer Paul Midney Lindy Adelstein Mark Strain Dwight Richardson Kenneth Abernathy Robert Vigliotti (Absent) ALSO PRESENT: Ray Bellows, Susan Murray, Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney 1 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2004, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 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 MAYBE 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. NOTE: The public should be advised that two (2) members of the Collier County Planning Commission (Dwight Richardson and Bob Murray) are also members of the Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee. In this regard, matters coming before the Collier County Planning Commission may come before the Community Character/Smart Growth Advisory Committee from time to time. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY CLERK 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROV AL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 2004, REGULAR MEETING 6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS - AUGUST 10, 2004, REGULAR MEETING 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 -_.~~_.._-,." ---".~'''-.-".' A. Petition: DOA-2004-AR-53 I 7, Airport Road Limited Partnership, represented by Richard Y ovanovich, of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P.A., requesting a Development Order Amendment to the Pine Air Lakes Development of Regional Impàct (DRI). The purpose is to extend the termination date build-out date nom October 15, 2000 to October 14; 2005 for property located on the west side of Airport-Pulling Road (C.R. 31) and approximately 'i4 mile north of Pine Ridge Road (C.R. 896), in Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Ray Bellows) B. Petition: V A-2004-AR-6067, Robert K. and Ruth P. Garee, property owners, requesting variances in the Lely County Club PUD Zoning District (Ordinance No. 84-85, PUD Document Section 3.4.4.B.) as follows: 1) a 5-foot variance nom the required IS-foot, two story side yard setback, to allow a lO-foot side yard setback adjacent to Lot 13; 2) a 6-foot 5-inch variance nom the required IS-foot, two-story side yard setback to allow an 8-foot 7-inch side yard setback adjacent to Lot 11; and 3) a I-foot I I-inch variance nom the maximum wall height of 6 feet as required by LDC Section 2.6.11.2.2., to allow a garden wall height of7 feet 11 inches adjacent to Lot 13. The property is located at 234 Palmetto Dunes Circle; further described as Lot 12, Palmetto Dunes at Lely Country Club, in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem) 9. OLD BUSINESS 10. NEW BUSINESS 11. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 12. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 13. ADJOURN _ CCPC AgendalRB/sp 2 September 2, 2004 1. Chairman Russell Budd called the meeting to order at 8:30 and Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 2. Roll Call- a quorum was established with Robert Vigliotti absent. 3. Addenda to the Agenda: IT Accounts Motion made to add a discussion on the IT Accounts made by Dwight Richardson Seconded by Lindy Adelstein All in favor 4. Planning Commission Absences: None 5. Approval of Minutes - August 15, 2005, Regular Meeting: On Page 15 it was noted that Mark Strain moves to recommend denial, yet on page 14 it was said he seconded the motion. The second was Brad Schiffer. Motion to approve by Mr. Richardson Seconded by Mr. Adelstein All in favor 6. BCC Report - Recaps - August 10, 2004, Regular Meeting Board did not meet 7. Chairman's Report: None 8. Advertised Public Hearings: A. Petition DOA-2004-AR-5317: Airport Road Limited Partnership, represented by Richard Y ovanovich, of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, P .A. requesting a Development Order Amendment to the Pine Air Lakes Development of Regional Impact. The purpose is to extend the termination date build-out from October 15,2000 to October 14,2005 for property located on the west side of Airport-Pulling Road and approximately 'i4 mile north of Pine Ridge Road, in Section 11, township 49 South Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. Disclosures: 2 '-~~" September 2, 2004 Mr. Strain talked to Mr. Y ovanovich about traffic, and representatives from a couple of County Agencies. Mr. Murray spoke with the County Attorney. All those testifying were sworn in by Mr. Budd. Richard Y ovanovich: Amendment to extend the termination date build-out from October 15,2000 to October 14,2005 for property located on the west side of Airport- Pulling Road and approximately 14 mile north of Pine Ridge Road, in Section 11, township 49 South Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. Under chapter 380 an extension of less than 5 years is considered an unsubstantial change to the DRI which would mean another analysis is not needed. The Regional Planning Counsel and the Staff has made recommendation of approval for extension. They will more that likely return within a year to address any changes or uses within the DRI if build out is not reached in a year. The area being discussed is around Lowes and Costco. Mr. Murray: Concerned about potential for accidents. Mr. Richardson: Asked if the project would be completed in a year, if not then why is the extension set just until October 14, 2005. Mr. Yovanovich: The project will more than likely not be completed within a year, but due to the DRI statute only 5 years can be requested with out a full review. The request was submitted in January of2004. Mr. Richardson: The intersection of Pine Ridge and Airport-Pulling is the worst intersection in Collier County, this area has opportunities to relieve traffic. Mr. Yovanovich: Would welcome the opportunity to speak with Mr. Richardson about the possible opportunities to relieve traffic. Mr. Murray: The Smart Growth Committee would be willing to host a meeting between the developer representative. Mr. Abernathy: The wording is "based on this information the SWFRPC concluded that the proposed changes do not create addition regional impacts or regional impact not previously reviewed". What are the other proposed change"s". Mr. Yovanovich: There are no other change"s". The only two proposed changes are to the build out date and the termination date. Mr. Strain: It was assured that some issues would be addressed. One ofthe issues being the shopping center to the right of the Cinema is in for STP. He would like a commitment form Mr. Y ovanovich that they will be back with this in order to discuss issues that have not been discussed today. 3 September 2, 2004 Mr. Yovanovich: The only way they would not be back is if the remaining acreage is built out. Some of the land is not even purchased, so it will not be built out within a year. Mr. Schiffer: Should this hearing not have occurred back in 2000. Ray Bellows: The County has issued a new DRA Monitoring process which is how it was determined that this Petition had expired. With the new process in place it is not foreseen that the limit will exceed expiration date again. Mr. Schiffer: In the resolution the owners are called Naples Association Limited Partnership; while in the application it names Airport Road Limited Partnership, why are they not named the same. Mr. Yovanovich: Airport Road Limited Partnership is the designated agent to all the owners. Naples Associates were the original owners. Staff Report: Mr. Bellows: Petition is to extend the termination date and the build out date, the project has been found consistent by the South West Florida Regional Planning counsel. They recommend approving the extension. Due to fact that the project will have to come back for an extension it was felt this would be the best time to deal with the traffic issues. Don Scott, Transportation and Phmning: Interconnection between the parcels, and the placement of a new stop light, are all being looked at. Looking at a new TIS is also being considered. Mr. Strain: With the Check Book concurrency that is in affect there is a constrained roadway with Pine Ridge Road. Mr. Scott: There are some things they are looking into doing. Mr. Strain: It was changed from a typical DRI vested for traffic to a DRI not vested for traffi c? Mr. Schiffer: What do the termination dates and build out dates mean? Mr. Ray: The build out date was made to coincide, while the termination date might have been set to pertain to the development order. Mr. Schiffer: Shouldn't this be in with a new development order, and isn't it the owners responsibility to keep the project current. Mr. Ray: Typically the region notifies, which is probably one reason it was not found earlier. 4 September 2, 2004 Mr. Yovanovich: Any change will be substantial, so it would be like a new DR!. Mr. Schiffer: What would happen if it was not passed today? Mr. White: This is only at a level of recommendation. Mr. Strain: Can it be stipulated that they would have to come back? Mr. Budd: It would not be possible to complete the project in 14 months. No Speakers: Mr. Murray: Recommendation to approve Petition DOA-2004-AR-5317 to Collier County board of Commissioners as described by amending DRI development order resolution, included in this staff report. Mr. Adelstein: Seconded motion. No Discussion: Unanimous B. Petition: V A-2004-AR-6067: Robert K. and Ruth P. Garee, property owners, requesting variances in the Lely Country Club PUD Zoning District (Ordinance No. 84-85, PUD Document Section 3.4.4.B) as follows I) a 5 foot variance from the required 15-foot, two side yard setback, to allow a 10-foot side yard setback adjacent to Lot 13; 2) a 6-foot variance from the required 15- foot, two story side yard setback to allow an 8-foot 7-inch side yard setback adjacent to Lot 11: and 3) a I-foot II-inch variance from the maximum wall height of6 feet as required by LDC Section 2.6.11.2.2., to allow a garden wall height of 7 feet 11 inches adjacent to Lot 13. The property is located at 234 Pametto Dunes Circle: further described as Lot 12, palmetto Dunes at Lely Country club, in Section 20, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. No Disclosures: Ruth Garee: Representing herself and her husband who was not able to attend today due to work. They are looking to add a second story and extend their drive. She spoke with her neighbors about the issue and had a positive response. They took the issue to the Lely Properties Home Owners Association where they agreed to the variance. They next went to the County for a pre-application meeting. The hardship for the variance is that the home needs major work and updating and they need more space. The Garees believe the home would be an asset to the area. After the meeting they were told their home was built illegally in 1982. The garden wall is taller than allowed so an after the fact variance is needed, which would cost $4,000.00. They feel they should not have to be penalized 5 ,-- September 2, 2004 for something that occurred before they owned the property, and should not have to pay for it. It was approved previously with an occupancy permit; therefore the County was aware of what existed. First they were told they could go in front ofthe County Commissioners Committee to have the fees waved, they were put on the agenda for May 25th. On May 21 5t they were called and told after further review, the after the fact variance could be done as an Administrative variance or included with the variance for the second floor. Fees were paid. The home next to theirs will only be 20 feet instead of the 25 feet, but the windows on the home next to them are opaque, and the homeowners are in support. They believe that 30% of the homes are not currently in compliance. The PUD has not been applied in the past. Susan Murray: There are various groups of set backs in this area. Staff Report: Kay Deselem: She gave an over view of the report. The original portion ofthe house was set skewed on the land, so it does not currently meet set backs. There are no land related hardships, but there are special circumstances and conditions. The interpretation under the hardship could work for the second story due to the first story not meeting set backs. Staff noted on page 6 and seven that of the 121 lots there are 2 other two story homes. They tried to piece together what originally happened; they found that the wrong subdivision was listed on the permit which probably started a chain reaction. Staffs recommendations are to not approve requests one and two dealing with the second story, with the third request being approved regarding the garden wall. Mr. Murray: If the building was not skewed would the building get the approval? Kay Deselem: This is imposable to answer. Mr. Schiffer: There is discrepancy between the survey and the application, would the survey not prevail? Kay Deselem: The survey is a boundary survey that is signed and sealed by the engineer who has sworn to its accuracy. Mr. Schiffer: There is a ground coverage requirement under the PUD for 30%, have there been any calculations? Kay Deselem: No, they could seek a variance in the future; this issue would be addressed when attaining a building permit. Mr. Richardson: The owner noted the wedding cake design is not permitted, but perhaps in this instance it would decrease the impact of the mass. If redesigned and set more to the left would this be more of an acceptable design? 6 --."..-....- '^ ·_____~·_.~_W___.·M September 2, 2004 Kay Deselem: The issue ofthe variance would still be required since it is needed for the entire building. Mr. Richardson: This situation reminds him of the Vanderbilt situation. The difference is that owners in Lely are supportive. The concern would then be that this situation would take precedence not only for the Lely area but all of Collier County. Mr. White: Every petition must be evaluated on individual facts of the application. Mr. Budd: The norms and standards and habits in the Vanderbilt area are not appropriate in Lely. Different neighborhoods can do different things. Kay Deselem: Letters were given. Public Speakers: Ted DeGrout: He lives directly across the street from subject property so he is the one that will have to deal with the construction. He is also a realtor. It is his strong recommendation to approve request. The value of his home will increase by approximately $10-20,000.00. It is generally noted that one story homes do not sell for the same amount of a two story home. The South Naples area has been depressed by the County because it has been relegated to low value single family housing and multiple housing. Mr. DeGrout: Different set backs were set for one story homes and two story homes in the code. Susan Murray: This is under a PUD not the code and there is always an opportunity for owners or developers to amend the PUD at their initiative. Ted DeGrout: What ever the set backs were at the time have resulted in a very green community unlike most of the newer communities. No More Registered Speakers: Mr. Strain: Motion to recommend PetitionV A-2004-AR-6067 with staffs recommendations. Mr. Murray: Seconded Motion Discussion: Mr. Richardson: Due to the fact that there is neighborhood support he finds no justification to support staff in this regard and offers the motion to accept all variances if the first motion fails. 7 September 2, 2004 Mr. Schiffer: Have the second story meet the set backs. Mr. Strain: The 1976 PUD code required a 7.5 foot set back for a one story and a 10 foot set back for a two story. The PUD in 1977, one year later, had wider set backs. To reverse this would be a fundamental reversal of the rules. Mr. Schiffer: The concern is that all the single family homes will be locked into not adding a second story. Mr. Strain: Does not see the hardship if purchased in the neighborhood knowing the deed restrictions and the PUD. Mr. Murray: If both owners on either side ofthe property also built two story homes the windows on the second floor would be set closely. Mr. Abernathy: Supports Mr. Strains motion. There is no precedence value if it is turned down or accepted. From previous experience on the Park Shore Board, opinions change. Mr. Adelstein: There are rules and they should be followed. Mr. Schiffer: The rules are set for the initial building. The community evolves. Mr. Abernathy: The average period of occupancy in an owned dwelling or condo is close to five years. If it turns out not to be large enough, then a move can take place. V ote taken: 5 in favor - Bob Murray, Paul Midney, Lindy Adelstein, Mark Strain, and Ken Abernathy. 3 apposed - Brad Schiffer, Dwight Richardson, and Russell Budd. The motion carried. 9. Old Business: Mr. Strain: Internet addresses have not been received yet. 10. New Business: None 11. Public Comment: None 12. Discussion of Addenda: None ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:37 AM. 8 ~---"'"--, September 2, 2004 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Chairman Mr. Russell Budd 9