Loading...
BCC Minutes 07/21/1981 R , -:---------'- --_.._--~.. Naples, Florida, July 21, 1981 LET IT 8E REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the Count:.' of Collier, and also acting as the governing boarð(s) of such special districts as have been created according to lav and having conducted business horein, met on this date at 9z00 A.M. in Regular Session in Building ·F· of the Courthouse Complex with the following members presentz CHAIRM^Nz John A. Fistor VICE-CHAIRMANr Clifford Wenzel C.R. "Russ· Wimer Mary-Frances Kruse David C. Brown ALSO PRESENT: Harold L. Hall, Chief Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Otficer, Elinor M. Skinner and Darlene Davidson (1z30 P.M.), Deputy Clerks, Donald Pickworth, County Attorney, Irving Borzon, Utilities Manager C. William Norman, County Manager Edward Smith, Assistant County Manager, Torry Virta, Community Development Administrator Danny Crew, Planning Director, Jeffory Perry, Zoning Director Clifford Barksdale, Public Works Administrator Terry Clark, Planner Grace Spaulding, Adminis- trative Aide to the Board and, William McNulty, Sherlff's Department. \ &OOK 062 PACE 245 P898 1 -,.------ -.- ---------.--------- ------ --- , . .. . . . ---------------------------------- &GOK 062 PACE 250 July 21, 1981 AGENDA - APPROVED A5 AMENDED WITH ADDITION~ AND DELETIONS Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carrieð 5/0, that the agenda be approved vith the following additions and deletionsl a. 7J, include, formation of Advisory Committeo for Marco Island beautifiction project. b. Dolete Coon Key Pass discussicn, ll-A c. Add a discussion re selection of Environmental Advisory Consultant d. Delete 14B, request by Sego Group for PUD Action for Cypress Head. e. Discussion re hiring Assistant County Attorney f. Discussion about retaining Mr. Bosselman for assistance with impact foe project. PETITION BD-8l-5C, COASTAL F.NGINEr.RING REPRESF.NTING WICGINS PASS, INC. R~ EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK TO 102' AT WIGGINS PAS~ YACHT CLUB - DENIED Legal notice having been published in tho Naples Daily News on July 5, 1981 as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider petition BD-81-5C, with Coastal Engineering representing Wiggins Pass, Inc. requesting an extension of a boat dock to 102' at Wiggins Pass Yacht Club. Community Development Director Virta explained that the petitioner requests an extension of a T-dock of l02' at Wiggins Pass Yacht Club. Ho noted that the Comprehensive Plan requires pump-out facilities, which the petitioner is locating at the end of the extension. These facilities are also required by the Corps of Engineers and DER, Mr. Virta said. Page 2 -------------------------------- - ~ - -''"-'~'-''~.'---''''''''''~' ------ ..----- ---------------------.-- July 21, 1981 Mr. John ~adðjevski, speaking for the potitioner, stated the .ituation has been reviewed very carefully and that tho T-shape viII provide for the 1ocation of the pump-out station. Rosponding to Co~issioner Wimer, Hr. ~adðjew6ki stated the boat slips would be 24', 32' and 40' long. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 5/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissionor Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor, that Petition BD-Bl-5C, Coastal Engineeering representing Wiggins Pass, Inc. re extension of a boat dock to 102' at Wigg ins Pass Yacht Cl ub be approved. Upon call for the question, the vote was 2/3, with Commissioners Kruse, Wenzel and Wimer opposed. Following the vote, Hr. Madejewski asked for clarification of why the request was denied. Commissioner Wimer said he was concerned about whether or not ~l1ggins Pass would. be dredged and how that would affect those purchasing the condominiums if it was not dredged. He said he thought it was hazardous to invite large craft to come in the area. He said he was against it in the public interest. Mr. Madejeski said 200 slips were alrcady built. Hc said it was not a commercial venture but a large private m~rina. The sU9gestion was made that the petitioner had a right to appeal the decision. Commissioner Brown asked that the record show he voted for the petition. CP-8l-1-C, ARTHUR KIRK Rt COMPREHENSIVE ~LAN LAND USE ~ENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY TO COMMF.RCIAL FOR PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 14 NORTH OF STATE ROAD 9'--A, WEST OF HARBOR PLACE, APPROXIMATELY 5 ACRES - DENIF.D Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on June 19, 19BI as evidenced by the Affidavit of Publication filed with Page :] &COK 062 PACE 251 ------------ --------------------- ..._--------------~----------------- &GOK 062 PACE 252 July 21, 1981 the Clerk, public hearing was opened re CP-81-1-C, Arthur Kirk r. Comprehensive Plan Land U.. Amendment from residential medium density to commercial for a portion of government Lot 14, North of State Road 92-A, vest of Harbor Place. Mr. Virta referred to the Executive Summary dated 6/23/81 and stated the petitIoner proposes to use the land for storage and parking of 9)rbage trucks and containers. A slide presentation folloved presented by Planner Terry Clark which showed the location of the land in question to be in the Goodland area. Mr. virta referred to a legal survey on an overhead board and stated that the CCPA held their meeting on April 9, 1981 and recom- mended that the upland area contained in the survey be approved for use. Commissioner pistor pointed out that Mr. ~irk had sold his garbage collection business. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, and carried 5/0, that the public hearing bo closed. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse, that the Board approve CP-81-1-C, for an amendment from Residential medium density to Commercial for a portion of government Lot l4, North of State Road 92-A, west of Harbor place, approximately 5 acres. Upon call for the question, the motion failed 2/3 with Commissioners Wenzel, Pistor, and Wimer opposed. Pa9· .. ....-------------------------------- .. =::J r:.::J ..--, - -------------------------------- . July 21, 1981 RESOLUTION 81-l72 RE FDPO-81-V-8, E.J. ZAMMIT, RE VARIANCE FOR FLOOD ELEVATION or lO.87' ON PART OF LOTS 13 AND l4, BLOCK 16, UNIT 2, BONITA SHORES SUDDIVYAION - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on July 5, 1981 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public heftring was opened to consider petitl~n FDPO-8l-V-8, filed by E.J. Zammit, re variance for flood elevation of 10.87' on part of Lots l3 and 14, Block 16, Unit 2 of Bonito Shores Subdivision.. Planner Tom McDaniel explained that there are houses built to 9rade on either side of this petitioner's property. In response to Chairman Pistor's question regarding new flood elevation mandates, Mr. HcDaniel said those would not apply since the Florida Coastal Setback Line alrcady meets the new elevations and that the nev maps wopld affect only the velocity zoncs. Commissioner Wimer stated he felt drainage problems could result froM these variances. Planning Director Crew stated his department uses photogr~phs of different types of construction which will not cause run-off problems. Hr. John Garnier, contractor for the petitioner, said he had looked at all the alternatives. He said thcre would be a hardship with the water flow and cost and that he felt some type of alleviation should be made. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 5/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown anð carried 5/0, that Resolution 81-172 re FDPO-81-V-8, by E. J. Zammit re variance for flood elevation of 11' on part of Lots 13 and 14, 810ck 16, Unit 2, Bonita Shores Subdivision be adopted. &COK 062 PACE 253 pag_ 5 ---------------------------------. · ----------------------------_--..:_-- eCOK 062 PACE 256 July 21, 1981 RESOLUTION 81-173 RE rDPO-R1-V-9, TONY R. TURNER RE FLOOD VARIANCE ELEVATION OF .97 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT LOT l3, BLOCK 15,' BONITA SHOREß SUBDIVISION - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naple. Daily Hews on July 5, 1981 as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition FDPO-81-V-9 by Tony R. Turner re flood variance elevation of .97 feet for property located at Lot 13, Block l5, in Bonita Shores Subdivision. Hr. McDaniel explained that in this instance the house was already started before an error was discovered. He said that on checking the procedures used to inspect these buildings it has been found that there is no mandatory inspection for the floor of the building to see if it complies early in the construction. He said that as part of the recommendation that the Board approve this variance the Planning Department is also asking that the Board have the Building Department immediately initiate a mandatory inspection of the floor level wherever it fits into the inspection process. He explained this would be an additional inspection. He said In this particular instance the applicant mistook the surveyor's elevation of his benchmark as being the required elevation of his floor and he built his floor to the benchmark and it should have been a little over a foot above it. Mr. Tony Turner, applicant, stated he had taken the surveyor's benchmark to the Building Department and five other gentlem~~ all interpreted the situation the same way he did. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Com~issioner Brown and carried 5/0, to close the public hearing. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commi.sioner Kruse and carried 5/0, that Resolution 81-l73 re FDPO-81-V-9, by Tony R. Turner Page 8 .- --------------------------------- ---"'I - - . . --------------------~~---------~- July 21, 1981 re flood variance elevatIon of .97 feet for property located at Lot 13, Block IS in Bonita Shores SubdIvisIon be adopted. CommIssIoner Wenzel moved, seconded by CommIssIoner WImer, that the Mr. Norman see that the staff look Into mandatory floor elevation Inspections and report back in two veeks. Upon call for the question the motion carried 5/0. &OOK 062 PACE 257 Page 7 ----------------------------,------- . . .-.-____________.t.-_..A-__________________ aGOf. 062 PAc£260 July 21, 1981 ~r.TITION R-81-6C, ROBERT McTAGUE, RE REZONING FROM "A" TO "PUD" FOR PRQPERTY KNOWN ~S r.DEN GARDENS LOC~TED l/2 mile vest of SR 951 ON SOUTH SIDE OF RATTLESNAKE HAM~OCK RO~D - DENIED Leqðl notice having been published in the Naples Daily Nevs on June 19, 1981 as evidenced by the Affidavit of publication filed vlth the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider petition R-81-6C, by Robert McTaque, requesting rezoning from "A" to "PUD" for property known as Eden Gardens located 1/2 mile west of SR 95l on the south side of Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Community Development Director Virta referred to the Executive SUm~ary, dated 6/22/8l, and said the CAPC recommends approval. There was a discussion regarding the sewage treatment arrangement. ~r. John Bell, representing the applicant, said the nearest treatment plant is the Lely system at 1-1/2 miles fro~ the site. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried 5/0, that tho public hearing be closed. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner pistor, that Petition R-8l-6C, by Robert McTague, requesting rezoning from "~" to "PUD" for property known as Eden Gardens located l/2 mile west of SR 95l on the south side of Rattlesnake Hammock Road be approved. Upon call for the question, the petition was denied by a vote of l/4 vith Commissioners Wenzel, Wimer, Kruse and plstor opposed. PETITION R-81-7C, MARINER PROPERTIES RE REZONING FROM "RT- TO "PUD" FOR PROPERTY KNOWN AS EAGLES NEST AND LOC^TED SOUTH AND ADJACENT TO ~ARRIOTT MARCO BEACH IIOTF.L - DENIED Leqal notice having been published in the Naples Daily Nevs on June 19, 1981, as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed vith the Page 8 . +---------------------------------- . . , ,'_. .._, -- ----------.---------------------- July 21, 1981 Clerk, public hearing vas opened to consider petition R-Bl-7C request- ing rezoning from "RT" to "PUD" for property known as Eagles Nest located south and adjacent to Harriott Marco ~each Hotel. Mr. Virta referred to the Executive Summary, dated 7/9/81, and said the petitioner proposes to develop an interval ownership property vith 97 units and related amenities. The CAPC held a public hearing on July 2, 1981 and it was pointed out that the petitioner was proposing a density of 19.4 which is less than could be placed there. The peti- tioner is proposing to reduce the height from allowable 200 feet to 125 feet, and is proposing to landscape, irrigate and curb the median in front of his property and provide a bike path, bUB stop with bench and trash receptacles and dedicate these improvements to the County. The petitioner ~greed to limit his request to wood decks only and that the project be limited to ~ne median cut. Commissioner pistor asked, since the petitioner is already allowed to place an interval ownership facility on the property In question, why the zoning chæmge is necessary? ."!r. Virta said the "PUD- allows 9reater flexibility in the design of the site. Mr. Bob Taylor, representing the petitioner, explained the back- ground ?f his firm and said they were going through the "PUD- process because tho company wanted to do an overall, coordinated plan and lay out every aspect of the project before the Commissioners. A short discussion was held regarding the co~parison between interval ownership _nd ti~e-share ownership. P-9. 9 &COIl 062 PACE 261 -----------------------------..-----.-- ----------------------------- ------- &COK 062 PACE 262 July 21, 1981 Mr. Ray Pevelka, Development Director for Mariner properties, described the projected project and stated there would be a resident manager's facility on-site. He said the property vill be developed in two phases vith the beachfront area developed first and the second phase would be a twelve story tower of 71 units. He explained the intended improvements of the road front and provision for the ~edian facilities. He said the company has spent the last six months in several workshops with the CAPC and CCPA as they reviewed the petition. After an extensive discussion, the developers agreed to a 10 foot easement and a 5 foot walkway to the beach to be dedicated to the County before the Certificate of Occupancy is received. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried 5/0, that the public hearing be closed. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse, that petition R-8l-7C, Mariner Properties re rezoning from "RT- to "PUD" for property known as the Eaglos Nest and located south of and adjacent to Marriott Marco Beach Hotel be a~proved with the stipulations that the manager's apartment be increased to 500 square feet and a maximum la' right-of-way, one turn lane and one median cut. Upon call for the question, the petition vas denied ~n a vote of 3/2 with Commissionera Wimer and Pistor oV~~~~. Chairman Pistor requested that ~r. Norman have staff formulate a means of calling a moritorium on any more interval ownership facilities until the zoning can be revised. Mr. Norman £,id that Mr. Virta has prepared a proposed ordinance to go before the next CAPC meeting and would be scheduled within about a month. Page 10 , --------------------------------- .' ~..-....... --------------------_..!...-_----'- ----.---. July 21, 1981 Mr. pickvorth explained that the Board vould have to shov there vas aomething about the interval ownership facilities that makes them different from other typos of buildings in order to impose a morltor- ium. After discussion, the recommendation was made to discuss the subject at a workshop. The petitioner was informed that the recourse for this petition would be in the Circuit Court. ORDINANCE 81-34 RE PETITION R-81-1lC, LELY F.STATES AE AMENDMENT OF BAW~IIAN VILLAGE PUD CH^NGING TOWNHOUSES TO SINGLE FAMILY VILLAS AND AMENDING THE MULTIFAMILY AREAS ^CCORDINGLY - ADOPTED Legal notice having been pUblishp.d in the Naples Dnily News on June 19, 1981 as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider petition R-8l-llC, Lely Estates, re amendment to flawal1an village PUD changing townhouses to single famly villas and amending the multi-family areas accordingly. Mr. Virta ~xpl~ined that there was no change in the number of units which the CAPC approved at their public hearing on June 18, 19~1. The major change is that in the area along the north property line, which was approved for 20 townhousos, there would be e single family villas. The multi-family building on the southwest corner of the property would be increased to three stories and 12 units added there, he said. The following persons spoke in favor of the petitionz Mr. John Connell, representing Board of Directors, Lely Village Mr. A\bert D. Prosper., representing Lely villas Condominiums Ms. Irene Stevens Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner ~ruse and carried 5/0, that the public hearing be closed. Pa9- 11 &GOK 062 PACE 263 --------------..,..------~---------_...... . . . .--------------------------------- &OOK 062 PACE264 July 21, 1981 Co~ml..loner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner ~ruse and carried 5/0, that Ordinance 81-34 re Petition R-81-1l-C, Lely EBta~.. re an amendment to Havailan Village PUD changing townhouses to single family villas and am~nding the multi~family areas accordingly be adopted. Commissioner Wimer commended the people involved who worked out an agreeable situation together. Chairman Pistor concurred with Commis- sioner Wimer's statment. ORDINMICr. A l-34 AN ORDINANCE AMP-NDING ORDINANCE 76-30, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPOnATED AREA OF TilE COASTAL ^REA PL^NNING DISTRICT BO: AMENDING THP. ZONING ATLAS MAP NUM~ER 50-26-4 OY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPP-RTY FROM PUD-PL^NNP-D UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO PUD-PLANNED UNIT DEVr.LOPMENT BY CHANGING THE TOWNHOUSE AREA TO ~INGLP. F^MILY VILLAS AND INCREASING THE HEIGHT ^ND UNITS IN THE MULTI-FAMILY AREAS ACCORDINGLY: A PORTIO~ OF BLOCK 17, UNIT 1, LF.LY TROPICAL ESTATES, AND PY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PETITION SMP-01-S-C, ROBERT W. r.EE, RE SUBDIVISION MASTER PLAN APPROVAL FOR CAPE COD ESTATES LOCATED ^T THE END OF WILLOUGHBY DRIVE IN WILLOUGHBY ACRES - CONTINUED TWO WEEKS Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on July 5, 1981 as evidenced by Affidavit of publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was oponed to consider Petition SMP-81-5-C, by Robert W. Lee, re Subdivision Master Plan approval for Cape Cod Estates located at the end of Willoughby Drive in Willoughby Acres. Commissioner Wimer asked why the system was not hooked into the Willoughby Acres sew~ge system and Utilities Manager Berzon explained he was unable to ascertain if the system could handle all the potential area of the perimeter of Willoughby Acres so he could not approve Page 12 ---------p------------------------ - ,..........- ----- - , . -----------------------~-------_..- _------------------------------ _0-· July '-I, 1981 hooking into the Willou9hby Acre. a.wage syatem. Mr. Berson explained the project i. on the immediate west side of the Willoughby Acres project and he haa tried to get the engineers to 91ve him a commitment .. to whether the capacity of the 11ft stations and the force mains in - I paqo 13 &GO~ 062 rACE 265 --------------------------------. ..._----------_._-~------------_--:_-- &CiOK 062 PACE 266 July 21, 1981 the Willoughby ~cres project are adequate to take this sort of con- nection as well as each development along the perimeter of the project. He said if it waa d~termined the facilities vere not adequate the only alternative would be for this development to use septic tanks or to create a nev sewage line going all the way to the main road. He said the Planning Commission felt strongly about insisting that the system development charges be paid regardless of whether they used septic tanks or not. Ther~ was a lengthy discussion regarding the or-ed to knov if the Willoughby Acres system could handle the developments around the perimet~r. Hr. Ed Oates of CAPC spoke regarding the petition. He said the CAPC felt impact fees should be charged on this development even though there were only 16 units. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Com~issioner Wimer and carried 5/0, that petition SMP-81-5-C, by Robert W. Lee, re Subdivision Master Plan approval for Cape Cod Estates located at the end of Willoughby Drive in willoughby Acres bo continued for two weeks. RESOLUTION 81-174 RE PETITION BD-8l-BC, COASTAL F.NGINEERING CONSULTANTS RE APPROVAL OF DOCK EXTENSION TO 75' FOR SANDCASTLE CONDOMINIUM - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on July 5, 1981 a. evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing vas oponed to consider Petition BD-81-8C, by Coastal Engineering Consultants for approval of a dock extension to 75' for the Sandcastle Condominium Hr. Virt~ explained the petition and said that it had been before the Commission before when it vas designed vith fingers jutting out into the waterway. Page 14 I 1__________----------------------- , . '_J"",,\ ---"\ -- · . ------~--------.------------------- July 2l, 19R1 Mr. Ron Hogue, representing the developor, exp~.ined that the deck ha. been re-designed and the fingers removed. Mr. Carl Gilzov spoke against the petition. ~ere vas discussion regarðlng the vidth of the lagoon which Is 460 feet. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, and carried 5/0, that tho public hearing be closed. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner pistor and carried 3/2, with commissioners Wimer and Wenzel opposed, that Resolution 81-174 re petition BD-8l-8C, Coastal Engineering Consultants re approval of dock extension to 75' for the Sandcastle Condominium be adopted. Page 15 ac~ 062 PACE 267 -.-.-,.-- --~--- w ~ _-....-..~. " &OO~ 002 PACE Z10 Ju 1 Y "l, 1 9 e1 ORDINANCE 81-35 R! C~£ATION OF M~RCO ISLAND Br.AUTIFrC~TIONMUNICIPAL SERVICE T^XING UNIT WITH ^MP:Nt'HtNTS ...~t"t ~ND WITH TflE ADVISORY RO^RD TO . CONGr~T OF R~FTnrNTS FP~~ THP: T^XrNG UMTT - ^nOPT~D - Logal notico having b~en pub 1 Is hod in the Naple. Daily Nevs on July 2, 19n1 and the Mar~o Island r.ð1le on July 9, 1901, .. evidenced by the Affidavits of Publication tiled with tho Clerk, public h.arlng wag opened to consider on ordinance to create the Marco Island Beautification Hunlclpal r,ervice Taxing Unit. Public Works ^rl~inistr~tor Barks~al. referred to the Executivo Summary, dateð 6/30/Pl, explaining th8t a referendum was held on June 1~, 19~1 with tho vote at ~a4 for and 5~O ðgainst the creation ot · hoautitication unit to be cr~ðted for M~rco Island. "0 said ð public hearing Is necessftry to create the.diotrict and ho noted that ft budqet has be~n prepareð for fiscal yoar 19A1-8' which will be submittrd and considered during tho eo~rd's budgot reviev. He said it is also proposed that a citizen's advisory council be ðppointeð, by rosolution, which will outline the duties and responsi- bilities In advising the ~oðrd ~t County Commisslonera on the opera- tional matters of the unit. lie explained that the maximlm mll1ag. as specHled In the ordinance and in the reterendum cannot exceed .25 milIa. Mr. 6arksdale reforrod to the proposed resolution with the fol- lowing recol'!mendl!td changes as a result of a letter he received froll prospective m.~ber. of the Advisory Committee I 1. Paragr~ph 1 shoul~ be amended to Includ. ft map which outline. the boundnrte.. 2. para~rðph 2, thoro should be added -aø detðrminod by the Advisory Co.,~itt('e to b. outsid.. the ob1 iClatlon of lhø County to provlðr from tnx.~ 1~vl~~ on the unincorporated ftre~ or other nppl1cabl. county fundo". Mr. ~arksdal. suqq..ted It . P..q e 16 -"--------------------.-------- ,. ...........,""""" - - ------- ---------------------------- -- July 21, 1ge1 be chnnqed to road ·oth~r public area. as determined by the Aðvisory Committee". ). 8ectl~n), to In8~rt in the snnt.nce "Whore the noar~ or County Commi5sioners øholl thereby, by rosolution, ð..iqnate an advisory committee unit with advisory authority in the buslne~s aff~irG of th~ unit", thftY have inoertp.d at thnt point "responsibility to approve all expenðituros·. Mr. Hall notod that the Soard could not dole~ðte thoRO expendi- ture. for ~pproval rosponslbillty. Mr. pickworth 8^ld th^t appropriðt~ lanquaq. could bo agreod upon. ~r. Barkødale suggested that mattor could bo includod In the rosolution rather than the ordinance. Mr. Jim Stackpoole, preøiðont of the Chamber of Co~morc., said the suqgostions which have como forth today do not pose a problem to him. I Ho sAid that it was the bunlne88 community's concern th~t the people of Marco Island continue to have a voice on how the monny is spen° and ho \ was asking th~t the ^~vIÐory co.mmitt~haVQ the authority to 3pprovo expend i turo8. There was a discussion regarding h. advlßahility of delegating \ exçendlturo approval to the Advlnory Commlttoe. ~r. ~all aaid that in tho last four years thero has heen no proble~ with ^ðvisory poards d.ter~ining how the ~oney should be spent and the 80ard following tho Advisory ~arðl8 8uggeøtlonø. Capt. Ed ~ay, President of tho ~arco Iøland Taxpayers ^8sociaton, aðld he Ðh~red th& samo concerns .. ~r. Ztnckpoole end thðt slnco tho ref.rendum ðpproveð this taxing unit by a vory n^rrOW ~arqin that so~e vay should be found to allDY tho teara of the people who vot.~ against the subject 80 that ~oney would be spent for what va. pro~18o~. Ae ..Id that what I. vantod Is protection 80 that the spendin? of the ~oney Is In the h~nðs or tho people ot Marco I.land. "r. Plckvorth said th~t the constitution of Florida places an PIU]e 17 &OO~ 062 PACE 271 --------------------------------- ..- ---.- ---- ---------- -------------- &GOK 062 PACE 272 July 21, 19111 obltq~tton on the commissioner. IS truste.. of taxpay.ra not to ð.loqat. the r.sponsibillty of approvinq ..pendltur.. to lom.on. el~.. Co~iaftloner Wenz.l moved, løconded by Co~mlalioner 8rown and carrio~ 5/0, to clol' the public h.arlnq. Mr. Norman stated for tho record that h. n.v.r ~að. a .tat.m.nt that the Advllory Com~ltto' would have control of the fund. end he t. not awar. of any meMber of ataff who made such a statement. Co~mls.ion.r wenzel ~oved, second.d Com~i88loner ~ru.e and carried 5/0, that Ordln~nce 01-35 r. creation of Marco Island Boautiflcatlon ~unlcipðl S~rvic~ Taxinq unit with ator.mentlon.d amendments with the Advisory Board to consist of r.sid.nts from the Taxinq Unit b. adopted. It was decided th~t the r.solutlon would bo brought back In two weeks. onDtNANcr NO. RI-15 AN OR~INANCE TO CRE~TE T"~ MARCO I5L~ND AEAUTIFICATION ,..tINICIP1\L SERVICE T.a.XING UNIT WITH PCìWEP TO LEVY I\.D VM,CREM TI\XES UNDER C'HI\PTr.R 125 Of THF: fLonIt'1\ ST.a.TUTER, £5T1\ALISflING TI1£ Bo~nf) OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS .1.5 ~1P. covrnNIHG AO.a.RD, PROVIr-ING FOR MI\INTF.~ANCE AND RE~UTIfIC^TION OF S^ID DISTRICT. RESOLUTION 81-175 R~ FrN1\L I\fiSrSSMrNT ROLL FOR tMPROV£HENT~ TO KAREN DRIVr. _ ^DOrTF:O WI Tn HH:t.U5IOS TH1\T PAYD~CI't nr. 3 YP.MtS ~T 1'-\ tNTr.nE'ST L.g.1 notice hðvlng be~n published in tho ~apleo Caily News on July 5 and 12, 19AI ae evidenced by the ^ffidðvlt of publication flIed with the Clerk, public h~^rinq WÞS opened to coneider tho final assessment roll for improvemonte to ~aren Drive. Mr. ~rkeda]. said .eY3r~l lett.r. vera recelvod In reepone. to , tho public h.~ring complaining about th_ drainage In the ar.ð not b.inq I P89- 111 .- ------------------------------- --- ~ - ~---------------------------------- 3u1y 1.1, 1981 I.proyed, the COlt hl9her than antlclpateð, and he .ald .yerythln9 po.llbl. hal been don. to i~prov. the area and that It I. Improv~~. Co~I.lioner Wenz.l ~oveð, seconded by Commlsltoner Brown, and carried 5/n, that the puhllc hearing bo c1oaod. Co.nl..ioner Wenz.l ~oYed, s~cond.~ by Commissioner Brown and c.rrl.d 5/0, that the final ass...ent roll ~ approv~d vlth the Inclu810n that paybAck be 3 yearl at 12\ Interelt per annum. '89' 19 &OOK 062 fACE 273 -;------:---------------:--.------- -- --- - - -- -...- -.-----------.--- ---- - -- - - - - -..... .:July 21, l()Al .nY~CUSInON "E FEDERAL nEV~NU~ ~"^RTNG FUNDS FOR FtSCAL YE^R 1981-82 - DO^RD fiotOVED THAT Tt11~ ~70r., li90 nr.VENtlP. nUAlHNG rmms DE u¡,r.n TO REDUCE t1tlL"GF. MoJO C('\NQypr.n ~Cjlolr. M' THE PUNn~ TO RF. 1If-F.f' FOR Tnr. f.LOERLY LC<Jal notice hðvlng be..n publ1shccJ In tho tlaplca Dally News on .:July 10, 1991, as evidenced hy ^ffldavlt ot publication flIed with tho Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Federal Rev.nue Sharing Funds for Plncal Year 1991-82. ~ftor a ahort discussion regarding spending tho Revenue tharlng funds, ~r. lIa11 said that prior to any determination as to how the \ funds will be spent the Board must conduct an inton~ed use hearing and hear fro~ the public, espftci~lly those groups thnt would benefit from this kind of federðl fundin9' such A9 tho elderly and handicapped, to soe If thero are any specific roquests for tho way tho money Is spont. He said In the past thoso p~rsons who spoke at tho Intended us. hearlngø wanted the money used to hold down tho t~x rate. Mr. Mike Zewnlk spokt In fovor of using the fundi to "cut down- the tax funds. Ms. Vickie Gchuylor ftskcd that consldoratlon be glvon for lome of tho rovenue aharinq funds to bo used for the new Senior Center being built In Golden Gate. She cxplðineð that the bu11dinq 1_ constructed and will he oponed ~optcmbcr 1 and opor~tln9 and oqulpment costs are need.~ for vlRual1y hnndlcappød and hearing IMpaired peroona. Co~la510nor W~n%.l ~oved, aeconded by Commissioner Brown, and c~rrl.d ~/O, that tho public haarlng he clOled. Commla.loner Wenzel ~oved, secon~ed by Co~ml.aloner Drown, and c~rrled 5/0, that based on the comment. made today that the $706,590 b. put In tho goneral fund to be used to reduce tho mlll.ge and that .taff 91ve .o~. conoid.ration to tho request from the ..nlor cltl~ona P.q. 20 ~CQ~ 062 r~CE 275 -----:-------------------------------. . -" - - --- ------ ---- ------------------"--- ßt~~ 062 PACE276 July 21, 1981 thAt poøeib1y ftome of the funds ~ay be A110cat~d to them after etudieð by the County Manaqer. COP"""I5SYONER WI~F.R CO~Mr.NTS em "t9 PELTNOtJ!rnT T.aNGTBLE TAX BILL Commissioner Wimer Nado ð brief comment on his delinquent tan91b10 tax bill which will be paid forthvlth. . . . RP.CP.S5 - TJ~E 12rOl P.~. The meetlnq reconvened with all the and Deputy Clerk ~vldBon replðcln~ . . - If30 P."'. Commisslon~rs present Deputy Clerk Skinner. . TEPMINATJON AGREEMENT WITH A.T. ~EARN£Y, INC. - AUTHORIZED FOR CII1\IR,.."N'5 5IGN.a.TURP. Commissioner Wenz~l moved, .econded by Commlsßioner Kruse and cArried un^nimously, thðt the Tormination Aqreement with A.T. ~eftrnoy, Inc., be authorized for the Chalrmanls signature, ðS prcsented by the County Manðgltr. CO~1'IT5SIONEn Y.Rl/5F. Jl.NO COUNTY MM'¡ACER NOR"""''' AUTHortI1.EO TO purtSUr. TilE POSf, Tn ILITY OF ^VAT^R DONATING LAND FOR USE BY TilE ANIMAL CONTROL Dr.PAnT~F.t~T Public r.nfcty Adr.1inistrntor ThoNaa l1afner stated that, pursuant to the Boardls direction o( 7/14/81, he has studied the matter of acquiring proporty (or US8 by th~ Anl~al Control Department. He reportod that he has di9cover~d that there m~y be other source. Dv~11able, wherrby thr l~nd ~lght be acquired at no cost to the County or nt n losser cost thnn the proporty dl.cu.~ed last week. He re(err~d to a me~orandum datod July Ij, 1981, trom Com~is8loner Kruse, vhlch Indicated that .he I. neqotlatln9 with ~v~tðr regardin9 a suitable .lte a. . donation. Page 21 ----------------- ----------- ._____-----------L-------------- aco~ 062 PACE 278 July 21, 1991 Continuing, he re1attd that he undorstands tro~ hi- conversation. ~lth Co~~l..loner ~ru,. that In attitulð. or cooperation .e.~' to be forthcoming trom the repre.entntlvel of Avatar, there tore, he b.llev.. they would prObðbly be willing to donøte a pðrcel of proparty In ftdvance ot the date on which their first obligation ari8es. He .1.0 snld that that the ßonrd should realize that Avatar could not be expected to donate proporty thnt they do not hftvft in inventory undor the De circuMstances, ðnd explained that the Commisslonors could not ðsk ^vntar to ðcqulre property In the County's hehnlf, especially it they nrp. willing to donate In advance of their first obligation date. n. rccom~endad that the Commissionars authorize someone to contact ~vatar ønrl beqin np.qotiðtlonn reqardlng which properti~s might be availablo. Commissioner Wimer ~oved, seconded by Com~isBloner Brown and carrierl 5/0, thnt Commissioner Kruse and the County ~anager b. authorized to contact ^vatnr and begin negotlntlons regarding available land for use by the Animol Control Department. Mr. Hafner reportod that he has received a letter Crom Mr. Bob Michael, representing thø Humane Gociety, which indicated that, If the County 18 no longor interested In 80 adoption program, p~rhðpa the Humðne Society could fulfill th~ nee~ for finding suitable ho~e. tor many of the \.ounty hold animols. Mr. Hð!ner .~id that the letter also .tato~ that this mðtter has been discussed with the Directors of the Humane Socloty Sheltor and that they have agreeô to vork vlth ~nl~al Control In trðn8porting animal. to the Ghelter/clinlc tor complote ~.dlcol attention and adoption. He olso covered the fact that all animals are not suitoble (Of ~rloptlon an~ that ~r. Mlcha.l has ..id that the ev~lu~tlon procedures could b. ~orked out at a later dat.. 'a9. '3 ---------------------------------- -- ------------ ---.----------------- July :n, 1981 COØllhalon., Wt.nsel I.id that he would favor such a 1I..lure IS 10n9 .1 thl County W,'I using the Rumene f:oc1ety'. Bhllter, howe·ver, once the County has itl own, he would not like to see the County held to any a9'eft~ent ~ðdo with the ~umane Society. County MAnðqer Norman stated that he Initiated the request to which tho subject l.tt~r il In response because he f..ls that it would be an unn~ce8.ary duplication for the County to &taff and provide the attention requlreð to afticlantly run en aðoption program, 10 long a8 the RU~ðno Society is doing it. n. Itated that he docs not consider the adoption of ðni~al. a bURlnes8 like proposition, from a fiscal standpoint, and he conoidere it more beneficial for the taxpayers of the County to enter into luch a contract with tho Aumane Society. i COlM\iss1onor Wimer suggested :that tho Ita ff Invest 1qate the torC\8 I of luch an Agroement and report ~oro dotalls to the Poard. COmllll.loner ~enzol concurrod. ~. off.ettlng of oxpenditures through the "cc~ptancp. of donationa was discussed, during which Commissionor KrU5a asked Fiscal Officer Harold flaIl If t~"1 County could IICCt'pt donations from p~rBons who IIIay wish to finðnciö¡ly aid an aðoption program tor anillla1.? Mr. Hall repl!~d affirmatively. Mr. ~orman said that historically, peoplo tend to don~t. to prlvðte orqanlzðtlona and not to qov.rnmont. Mr. Hafner atateð that he has been contacted by a 9roup of ladies ~ho ara In the process of for~lnq a kind of auxl11ðry and hnv. offered to help tho County If It begins an adoption proqr^m. MI. Pat Pilcher, 257 Saabr.ose Ave., reproaantinq a proposad organir.atlon to al.ist tho County In .nl~~l control, Indicated that sho and 10m. other women are trying to organiza . 9rouP of volunt.er. to P19. 24 '.' ~CO ( 062 PACE279 --.........--------...--...-..----- ----------- . ---------------------------------- ßOOK 062 rACE 280 July 21, 19A1 work with ~r. 5taudonmaler In the County ^nl.øl ^ðoptlon proqrøm. She Baid that they hop~ t~ h.como a part of . nntlonal group and aho urged the Board to rollo~ through with plana to initiate a municipal ahelter. Ms. pilcher assured tho ~o.rd that hor group will hQlp In any way they cðn, Including procurinq donations, Issuing llcensea, helpln9 In the clinic, etc. nhe requested th~t the Board look very c~~Ð!ully at the proposal that the Humðno Socioty ia making for contractual arrange~ents, aðding that tho Humane Society h~s now got a veterinarian who thoy ~UGt support. She Bald that If the County pound I. only going to serve as an "~xt.r~lnatlon chamber·, then, there t. no neod to buy l~nd and build ð building. Ghe stated that she does not se. the County'~ proposal for an ødoption ~entor aD a ·competltor- to tho Humane Gocl~ty, eopoclally in light of the qrowth of Collier. Ms. pl1cher sald that wh~n h.r pl~n8 for thft auxiliary b.come more daflnatlve, she will mð~Q a formal presontation to the RODrd and COMmissioner Wimer stðterl that he would be vory pleasorl to hoar thoee plan.. Commløsloner piator agreed, ~ddlng that the pror~Bal sounds vory good. PRELfMtN^RY ~CCF.rT^CE r.RANTED FOR TAr. RETRr.^T UNIT ON! Public Works Administrator Clifford RarkaðAle atated th~t the quoøtlon qrðntlng preliminAry accopt~nco tor The Retreat, Unlt one, VollS conslð.r~d during last ~oek8 meeting and b..c"uac the Board's vote va. tlod, the ßoðrd ðlrocto~ that It be roconslðerod todftY· The utreeta hftVO been constructed In ftccordance vith the plans and Bp~cl!lc~tlonø and ~oet the Gubdlvlslon Requlðtionø, .aid ~r. Barksdale, who reco~m.ndod tho prollmlnftry acceptønce of them for the Page 2~ -------------------------------- ------------------------------- .. July 21, 19A1 ono yoar ~~Int.nanc.. He said that the bond 10 Inclu~ed In the surety that has b.en posted !,')r t.he cOll1plotlon of all the required I~provemcnt.. Mr. ~ðrk8dale oxplalnr.d that the subject roads will not b~ ðodicnted road. roqulrlnq ~~lntenðnce hy tho ~ounty, this ¡ prollmlnory nccoptanco 10 . part of th: a9roo~ont whoraln tho do.o oper has to mftlnt~in them for one ye~r and then thft County will, ðccordlnq t~ the escrov agreemont, roloase tho 10\ malntenðnc~ suroty. He said that thlø Is th~ r.ð8on that the County Is bolng requosted to go through the formDllty of preliminary acceptanco and llnal accept^nco. He Bald that tho County will not accept th~8e roads at the end of the ono year as County roads, they will re~aln privato. Commissioner Brown Moved, seconded by Commissioner ~ruso and carried 3/2, with Commisßloner Wimer and Wenzel opposed, that f,relll'4lnary IIcceptnncft bo granted for 'Thn netreat, Un i t One. EXC^V^'TION PERMtT NO. 59.124, WrLLr^M ~. STONE, PRP-S. - rU^tLS ROO~'T, INC., ~tCT. 11, 'T~JS, n?~E - DErrnRED IN~rFTNTTELY F~R ~opr rNPORM~TrON Public Works Adminiøtrntor Clifford 8arksdale 9t^tod thnt the rft~uost for Excavation Permit No. 59.124, filed by William B. f-tone for 9uðl1n Rooat, Inc., in conjunction with., proposoc1 dt"velopmont located aouth of ~.nðte. ROðd, jUlt eðst of 951, la being roconsid.rcd today purSu3nt to Ro~rd direction taRt week. He ftlao said that, during th~ m~etlng ot 7/1~/81, he learned certain Intor~ation regftrdlng the fðct th.t the developer la now propoolnq a group housing project rather than .. ~ohll. ho~. aubdlvlson ~nd, therefore, h. Is recorn~endln9 th4t this Itoø be d.ferred Indefinitely until furthor ðetlnðt!ve Information Is forthco~lng trom the devolopor reqftrdlng specific plana for the proposod development. 6COK 062 PACE 2B1 P..qe 2(\ -- - - - - -- - - - - - - --...- ----r ---. - - - -- -- -- - --- '.. -------------------------------.--'" ßCOK 062 PACE 282 July :n, 198\ ChairDan pistor directed that consideration of the reque.t filed by William B. Stone for ~~ail ~oost, Inc., re txcavotion Permit No. 59.12. be doterred indefinitely, as recommended by Mr. Barksdale. , . FORM~L BIO PROCESS WAIVF.D REGARDINC r,MEnGlNCY R!P~IRS ON THE CO~ST GU~RO ~UXILI~nY f,TATION ^ù~inistratlv. ~s8lat~nt Netl Corrill stated that em~rgoncy ropairs were ~~~e on the Coast Guard Auxiliary Station durin~ the time that the Bo~rd W~B on vacation. In answer to Chairman piator, he laid that this item was discU80d during the 7/14/81 meeting and Commissioner Wi~er requ9ntcd furth~r information regarding the contract for the ropair work. Commi~nionor plntor askod if the Board were being asked to approve the paymont tor the rcpoirD Dince he understands that the work 1s completo. Mr. Perrill roplied negatively, fttattng that staff is requesting ðfter-tho-fact npproval for waiving of formal bid process. County M3nager Normen etðted that he takos responsibility for the rðpairs beinq completod, adding that, vhen this first came to his ðttcntlon, tho firm which had been contacted by the County's insurance cðrrier and requested to give ðn esti~ato for tho work had mistakenly thought that they were authorized to do the work ðn~ had cloaned up the . ð'ebrlS. Ilc SD ld thðt he had asked tho County purchas i ng and Build i ng Inspection P.op.utment to review thft øite and determin. what was neodod ond what tho f.irm hDd bas~d their estimate on as well 8S to assure him. that what waS boinq propolod would be conclstDnt to falr Morket cost. He snid that the problem 1. thnt It is very difficult to find anyone who is willing to do the work thDt ~rft also willing to 90 through the lengthy sa~led bid process for a project ot this Bize. ~r. Nor~an said paqe 27 ------------- ------ ".-..----- July 21, 19tH --------------------------------- - that the insuranco c~mpany vouched (or tho !ðct that thft price being chargod vas acceptehle to them. Mr. Norman 8^id that he author1zftd tho work to proceed because he did not foel this ~Dtter warranted calling ð Spocial Moetlng ~urin9 thft time that the Board was on vacation. Ae ..Iured the Coord that nothing 1rregul~r trðnøpired, adding thftt he i. reporting this t~ the Poard and ns~ing them for their approval. Co~mis.ioner Wenzel moved, soconded by Commissioner Wimer, that the normal bid process be waived on the emergency repairs for the County own~d property for the Coast Guard ~uxl1lary building. Commissioner Wi~er stated that he still has not rcc.iv~d the information that he requ~8ted. Mr. Dorril1 reported that the contractor, rlro Ðervicc, Inc., has boen in business In Ft. ~eycrø for ~a years. Hft sold thðt they also have an office in Naples, thoy have a , , category "B- State Contractor's licon~., and, thQ principle owner is Mr. William ~auto. Mr. Oorrlll said that tho insurance comp~ny has , i,sued a check Cor the repairs and the necessary repairs have been ~ðde with the exception of tho instalhtlon of ono Interior door. 110 said that when rinal Inspection has bocn made and all repairs ðpproved the . .~ I ~ I ~ County will Isøue payment for the work. Upon cnll of the question, the motion carried unani~ouøly. /.-' // , Pr.TITION V-81-11-C, 1at CAPITAL INCOMr. PROPERTIES, LTD., nrOUESTING A V"nl"NCr FROM foIINIMUM DHIENSIONS Of' PARKING SPACE' PERMIT PAln'IN" IN Tnr. FRONT SETBACK OF TIIF. I~LAND PLA'Z.... Sf!npPING CENTER ALONG O"LD EAGLE ORIVE, ~^RCO I~L^ND - ~fNI[n Zoning Director Jof!ory Perry roported that this aqenda Itnm 10 ~.gardinq potition V-81-l1-C, flleð by 1st Capital Income propertIes, Ltd., requesting a variðnce for allowing 9' wido parking spac~. and parkJn9 In tho front setback along Bald r.^ql~ Orlve Cor the parking lot . eCOK 002 PACE 283 paCJe 21' . , --------------.----------------- ...- -- - - - _...:- - --- - - -- - - - - --- -- -- - - - - - - -- t\(j~K 062 fACE 2B4 .,uly 21, 19A1 . of the Island Plazft Ghopplnq Center on Marco Ialønd. Re laid that, pursuant to 60ðrd action on 7/14/ßl, which resulted In ø tied vote, the aub'ect petition i. b~ing proaented todðY for reconsideration. Ch~irman plator, who wa. ðbaent during the 7/14/81 ~eetlng, atnted that ho woulð not go In tho parking lot bofore and would certalnly;not consider go!ng in it if the parking opl'ceft were 9' wide. He said thðt he considers 9' to be inndequate for the width of a parking space. Re laid that the condition of that parking lot ie so bad nov that ~nything: thDt would make it woree is a stop In the wrong direction. He said that approval of this roquest would be a mistake and that -two wrongs do not make it right-. ro~mI8s!oner wenzel told Chairman rlstor that during lant week's meeting tho staff brought up the f~ct that they wcre studying tho possibility of reducing the wid t.h ot pÞrking apacos to 9' in the nev Zon i n9 Ordinance and he asked who author I z&d that this be cons Iderod7 Chð!rman ristor replied thðt he ðld not know. fte sDid that cllrs are getting ~hort,r, not narrower. He Bald that he feels that. 9' spac.. woulð just compound parking prot.leIl't8, 1..., getting In and out of vehiclos, parking properly, and, getting out of parking spncaa. Re Gðld that, rogarding the subject petition, he believes that .~me other method of aolving the pðrking problems will h~VG to b. tound. County Manger Norman state~ that he authorized the Investigation and consldoratlon of 9' porÞdng øtal11. lie said that It vas a r~commendðtlon in tho ^.T. ~ellrney ~tudy pertninlng to the parking spaces around the Courthouse. He laid that hi. perspective may be different than the eo~rda, however, every other community th^t he ever worked In betore coming to Collier County has a 9' standard (or parking rage 29 -----------~-------------_._------ . ______---- _____-- _ L:... _- - --- - - - --- July 21, 1981 apac.a. Re stated th~t, v.nilo ho unðerst~nðø the perspective that rotire~.nt commun1tioø would require wider spaces Cor eð~lnr cntrønco and exiting from automobiles, he respectfully disagrees with Chairman ~ ¡../I·P¡ plator that cars are not qetting w~~r. He said that cars are, in fact, getting narrowor a8 well as shorter. He said that it h~s boan his expsricnce In p~rking at the Courthouso that th~ spaces are much wider than noe~~d to qet In and out of ð c~r. Mr. Norman øt~terl t.h3t the Ordinance will not be changed, nor will tho parking spaces ðt the Courthouse, without ~ho Roarð's approval, however, he did feel it n.cess~ry to explain the reason th^t this proposal waft being studied by the staff. n. said that if the Board disagrees with this approach then that Is tho way it will be. Hr. Perry stated that 9' wide parking spaces were ð condition of the ^dley Rozonlng ~tudy, and this is ð part of the new revløed zoning Ordinance that will b~ brought to tho Board In the comlnq months. Ho said that th'8 is only one condition that will be considered carefully by tho CAPC and will he forward~d to the B03rd, along with m~ny other conditions that the ~oard will havo to look at. Tn an_wer to ~C~ftmISSiOnor Brown, Mr. Perry stotod that he ls reco~mending approval of the auhjoct petition. Commissioner Wenzel ~oved, 8econrled by Commis8ioner ~ru.e and carried 4/1, with Com~i..ioner Brown opposod, that petition V-~l-ll-C 'bo denied. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL n! P~TITION FP-el-l1C, F.~£WILD SUBDIVISION, SECTION 25, T4~f" n"SE, c:nA~TED WITIt 5TIrUL.a.TION Co~.unity Developmont ^ðmlnSltrator Torry virta statad thftt Petition FP-81-11C, 1. requosting flnal plat ftpproval for £dgewl1ð rag. '0 ~COK 002 PACE 285 __eo....-________ . . ..__ __._ __ _---fÞ...----"--- ------~-- --.. -- ....--'- ~--------------_...- ~ÒOK 062 PACE 2B6 Ju 1 Y 21, 1981 Subdivision, which is located east of Four Saasons Subdivision. He referred to the Executive Summary dated June 29, 1981 and summarized the contents thereof, lacluding the staff recommendation that the construction drawings and plot be approved, subject to the stipulation that the plat be withheld for recording until all improvements have been completed and approved and the relative fees paid. At the request of Commissioner pistor, Public Works Administrator Clifford Barksdale outlined the location of the subject subdivision more clearly, stating that it lies along the south of rmmokalee Road, across from willoughby Acres subdivision. Commissioner Wimer inquired as to whether or not there is a turn l~ne at the entrance and Mr. Barksdale said that the developer is required to install one. County Manager Norman asked if there are sidewalks at the Rubdivision? ~essrs. virta and Barksdale stated that they did not know for sure. Mr. Virta stated that sidewalks would have been addressed during the preliminary plat stage at this stage, the developer has had the plans drawn up according to the Board approved preliminary plat and they are now re,jy to construct the subdivision. Commissioner Wimer asked if he was saying that it is too late to add additional improvements to the plans and Mr. Virta replied that during the preliminary plat approval process, the developer requests any waivers from the regulations of the Subdïvision Ordinance. He said thðt it is at that tiltle that the Bo¡Hd considers the granting or deniðl of those waivers at this point in time, tho developer has complied with everything that the Board has requested of them. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the length of the cul de saCI the possibility of continuing and/or connecting the cul de sac in Page 31 -----------~~-------------------- ,. -- ----- -~------_--...-- -- -""'---- - -- - - ---- July 21, 1981 the future, the subdivision regulations that require that cul de sacs be constructed in such a manner so as to allow for connection to the adjacent property if the need arises in the future and, the fact that the parcels located in front of the subject property are presently zoned "A" agriculture, as explained by Bruce Gr~en, of Bruce Green and ASsoc., who was representing the petitioner. In answer to Commis~ioner plstor, Mr. Green stated that he believes the same people who own the subject propcrty also own those parcels along the front. Mr. Green said that all of the engineering for the proposed project was completed prior to his client's purchasing the property, adding that nothing has beon changed because it has all been approved. In answer to Commissioner Wimer, Hr. Green said that he believes that thero is a sidewalk or a bikepath along one side of the cuI de sac. Mr. Green asked that the Board approve the provision that, should the developer prefer, after the development is constructed, the developer be allowed to post a bond sufficient to complete the project. He sðid that he would prefer to not see the possibility of having the plat recorðed before all construction and improvements h~ve been made. Mr. Barksdale explained that this is a provision of the pertinent Ordinance and would not be precluded if the Board ðcts favorably on the staff recommendations. ~fter Mr. Green stated that the water will be provided from the Four Seasons and that the proposed lots which are nearly an acre in size vill have septic tanks, Commissioner Wenzel asked the Utilities Director if the County would ever be In a position where the owners of the proposed lots would be forced to connect into the County's sewage syst.~? Hr. Berzon replied negatively, adding that the only way this Page 32 &COK 002 PACE 287 · --- - - -- ~-- -- - --- - - - -- -- ---- - - - - - - - - - --- - -.- --- ßC~ ( 062 PACE 288 July 21, 19tH would be possible is if the County's Ordinances were to supercede the State's requirements which presently allow the Health Department to approve of the use of 8~ptic tanks on lots of this size, provided the soil and water table conditions can be met. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner pistor and carried 3/2, with Commissioners Wenzel and Wimer opposed, that final plat approval for Edgcwild Subdivision be 9r~nted, subject to the aforementioned stipulation, as outlined by Mr. virta. PETITION FP-8l-l2C, US HOMES INC., REQUESTING FINAL PLAT ^PPROV^L FOR FOXFIRE UNIT ONE (FORMERLY KINGS LAKE NORTH), SECTION 6, TSOS, R26E, GRANTED, WITH STIPULATION Community Development Administrator Terry Vlrta referred to the Executive Su~mary regarding Petition FP-81-12C, filed by U S Homes Inc., requesting final plat approval for Foxfire, Unit one, formerly known as Kings Lake North, nnd summari~ed the contents thereof. He also stated that the Engineering Department has reviewed the petition "." and is recommending approval, subject to the stipulation that the plat not be recorded until the construction improvements arc completed and approved by the County or until such time as the approved construction security is provided to the County. Commissioner Brown moved for approval of Petition FP-81-12C, subject to the aforementioned stipulation. Commissioner Wenzel asked the Utilities Manager if lhere are "tap ons" available for water and sewer for this developement or would there be package plants? Mr. Derzon stated that the development will tap on to the water system the sewage plant that vas owned by Kings Lake viII be operated by U S Homes. He added that the plant Is of adequate 8ize. Pag. 33 .. _._________~r_------ -------------- July 21, 1981 ----------'------------------- ----------~. Chairman pistor seconded the motion on the floor which carried 3/2, with Commission~r Wimer and Wenzel opposed. * . RECESS - TIMEr 2r15 P.M. - 2r25 P.M. . . . . RESOLUTION 81-176 RE PETITION PU-81-9-C, REV. CHARLES FUSGELL FOR THE ASSF.MBLY OF GOD CHURCH, REQUESTING A PROVISIONAL USE (1) FOR ^ CHURCH ON THE N.R. CORNER OF 29TH AVE. S.W. AND 39TH. ST. S.W., GOLDEN GATE ESTATES _ ADOPTED, SUBJECT TO STIPULATIONS CAPC FINDING OF FACTS AND PETITIONER'S AGREEMENT TO STIPULATIONS - ACCEPTED FOR THE RECORD Community Development Administrator Terry Virta stated that Petition PU-81-9C, filed by Rev. Charles Fussell for the Assembly of God Church, Is requesting a provisional use (1) for a church on the N.E. corner of 29th Street, S.W. and 39th Avenue, s.w. in Golden Gate Estates. Referring to the Executive Summary, dated 7/7/81, he summarized the contents thereof, including the CAPC's recommendation lor approval, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Final site drainage plan shall be submitted to and approved by the County Engineer prior to the start of any construction. 2. Parking arca shall be paved with gravel, river rock, or similar material, other than limerock. 3. No access permitted on 39th. Street, S.W. 4. Final parking plan shall be approved at the time of building permit application. 5. Final approval for parking in FPL easement ~ust be approved by F PL. 6. Final offDtreet parking lan~sc8pe plan must be approved by Zoning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. All signs must be approved by the Zoning Director. Mr. virta said that, during the CAPC public hearing, there were ..veral residents who voiced an objection to the proposed church based on traffic reasons, because 39th. Street is a major collector for this . ~co~ 062 PACE 2139 Page 34 ---..-----------------..-.-------- ~-_..._-- --- . ~ ..... --------~---------------~----_.._-- BOOK 002 PACE 290 July 21, 1981 particular area of Ga1den Gate Estates. He said that it was pointed out by the CAPC that the expected traffic would occur on Sunday mornings and probably one evening a week and that this is vhen traffic was the lightost. He said the CAPC ba80d their recommendation for approval on the Finding of Fact. The proximity of the proposed church to the Rib Room, a restaurant/tavern located along 39th Street s.w. ~as discussed. In answer to Commissioner Kruse, County Attorney pickworth stated that the law provides that a church may move close to a business thnt serves alcoholic beverages, however, such a business may not move next door to a church, therefore, the law does not apply in the case of the proposed church. Mr. Charles E. Fussell, pastor of the Golden Gate Assembly of God Church, spoke in favor of the requested provisional use. He outlined the history of the subject church, his background, the intent of the church to enhance the Golden Gate Estates area, and the fact that, although the church has only 2C - 30 members at this time, it is a yo ung parish and he hopes to have approximately 100 members in the future. Mr. Fussell also stated that the church docs have members living in the Golden Gate area. Mr. Don Doca, resident on 29th Avenue, spoke In opposition to the subject Petition, citing conjested traffic and unsafe conditions in case of an emergency as his reasons. A lengthy discussion took place regarding the traffic, ingress for emergency vehicles, the narrov bridge locatod off of 951 and south of Golden Gate parkway which will have to be crossed by the members of the church in order to gain acce.. to 39th Street S.W. Also discussed in detail i. the County's plans to Pa<Je 35 ... -------------------------------- --------------------------------- _. July 21, 1981 four lane 951, install a traffic light and add a turn lane at the intersection of Golden Gate Parkway and 951 as part of the 1-75 work, which will, said Public Works Administrator Barksdale, alleviate many of the concerns of the people in the area regarding the hazardous intersection just south of there onto the aforementioned bridge. Mr. Robert Scott, resident on 29st. Street, S.W. spoke in opposition to the subject petition, citing traffic congestion and the dangerous intersection mentioned earlier as his reasons. Mr. W.R. Russell, District Representative for the Assembly of God Church, spoke in favor of the subject petition and urged the Board to consider that, although there may be a problem at the intersection of the bridge and 951, the problem did not result because of the proposed church, nor will it be worsened by the proposed church. Ho further stated that the church will benefit the entire community by administering to the sick, the elderly, and those who are in need. l1e said that the church is anticipated to have 100 members and that would only account for approximately 30 additional cars in the neighborhoo~ once a week on Sunday mornings and, perhaps, one night a week. He said that the Engineering Department has determined that the area would not be adversely affected by this number of vehicles for the amount of time that they would be on the road and that Hr. Barksdale has confirmed this. Mr. Russell concluded his statements by stating that he wished the Board to consider that S.R. 951 and 39th. Street S.W. will continue to offer limited access whether or not the church goes in, however, the neighborhood will lose a lot of services that the church can offor if it i. not granted the requested provisional use, and he urqed the Board to vote favorably on the petition. &00,. 002 PA~ 291 Page 36 ..------- - --- --------------- -----_.~-_..._-- ~--_.....~ -~-------_.._-- -" ----------------------------------- ~GO~ 062 PACE 292. July 21, 1981 Mrs. Pat Orfeld, resident on 29th ~ve. S.w. spoke in opposition to the petition, ci.:1ng increased traffic and dangerous congestion which could distrupt emergency services such as police or ambulances as her reason. She also asked the Board to consider a traffic signal on the intersection of SR 951 and Goldon Gate Parkway as soon as possible, as well ðS turn lanes off of S.R. 951. The fëAct that the church has tried repeatedly to find a sui table piece of property 1n the general area and was unsuccessful for one reason or the other was discussed, during which Commissioner Kruse stated that she travels the Rtreets of which everyone is discussing on a regular basis and believes the~ to be hazardous where the bridge crosses Golden Gate canal from 951 to 39th Street. She also said that she believes that the church will add too much additional traffic which will increase the risk of the residents in the area when crossing that bridge or using that one collector street. She said that she would not be opposed to the Church if it were being proposed for a location further north, somewhere in betwcen two bridges, where all the members of the church would not have to craBS one bridge after services. Also, she expressed concern about the traffic backing up on 951 north beyond the Parkway with no traffic light there and, even though one Is planned, she said that she is not convinced as to when it will ever be insta-lled. The discussion continued and Mr. Fussell stated that all he Is asking is for the Sðme privileges that the Board gave another church right up the street, during which it was pointed out by CommIssioner ~ruse that the other church is loc~ted In betveen two ingress/egress bridges and not on a portion of the street that deadenda on one end and P.ge 37 ....; ., ( ,,'r ,4 'J of l ~ í:.....J ----- , ~"" .. ~ .1 u 1 Y ?l, 19 ~ 1 forces tho people to us~ the hri~1e locðted just north of the Parkw~y on t.he other, liS will ,tbe µroposec1 church. Commis!:>ioner ~'Hmer said thðL he believes that if there ~re no churchcs on the e~st siòe of the brid1es, many of the same people who live on th~t. side of the hridge will have to cross the brid1e to get to churches on the wast side of ) it. He said that it seems to him that the main objections ~re due to 1: t the problems related to turn lanes and traffic si1nals alon~ 951 in the ( vi~inity of that bridle and he asked Mr. Barksdale if this could not bu , " " 4.1', " ~;... e' looked into before the r-75 work is completeò. Mr. Barksdale asked Traffic En~ineer Dunivan if the traffic studies justify this work and he said that it does. Mr. Barksdale stated that he does not feel thðt the impact from traffic associated with the proposeò church will have any adverse affect on the subject road system. Commissioner 'oJi:n(>r asked the staff to investigate the possiblity of the installation of turn lanes and a traffic si1nal ùt the intersection of SR 951 and Golden Gate Parkway nnd there was no obj~ctions from the other Commissioners. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner wimer and carried 4/1, with Commission~r Kruse oppose~, thðt nesolution q1-17~, re PAtition PU-Bl-9-C, be adopted, subject to the stipulations outlined abov~ and that the CAPC Finding of Fact and Petitioner'~ ~1rec~¿nt to stipulations be accepted for the record. Pð':)e 3~ nf\f') t')f1~ '0 " ~ '" " o CÞ ~ t: CÞ C :a ã rf ~ ~ 8 ~ Do II ~ S -i ~ ... o ... :J 04 S ... :> 04 r,,·.... t::J ~··,A , . .1uly 21, 1901 THREE ~ONTHS 8XTENSIO~ GR^NTED Fon TE~POn~RY RESIDEN~E PEn~IT nE PETlTII')1~ TR-!31-2-C, T'IEOOam~ 7.1PES, (E l/~ OF TR¡\CT (19, UNIT 3<1, GOLDBN ~~TP. EST~TES) Com~issioner wenzel m~ved, seconde~ by Commissioner Krus~ nnd carried unanimously, that õ three months extension for a temporary residence permit re petition T~-Al-2-C f.iled by Theodore 7.ipes for use of a tr~vel trailer âS a temporary residence while constructing a permaneflt residence on the East 1/2 of Tract ß9, Unit 34, Golden Gate Estate~, be 1ranted. THREE ':O~nIS EXTE~S TO"! "IIT:I .r.. PROVIS IO~ FO:1 FunT:1ER CXTE!>!S 10'1 ~rt¡\~TED FOR TE~P0R~qy n8SID8NCE rER~IT nr. PETITlaN Tn-ßI-IO-C, JE¡\N ~!IIPPLE, (E. ISO' 'JF TfF\:T 17, IJ'HT q, ":'JLnE\1 ":ì\Tf. ¡::ST'\TES) Com~issioncr ~cnzel movc~, seconded by Com~issioner ~rU5e and carri~d unanimously, that ~ three months extension with provision tor furth~r extension for a te~porñry residence permit r~ petition ~R-8\-10-C filed by Jean ~hipple, for use of i) trailer ~s a tcmpornry residance while constructing a permanent residence on the East lSD' of Tract 17, Unit 9, Golden Gate Estates, be 1ranted as recommended by the Zonin.:¡ Director. PlqC 39 ~COK 062 PACE 301 . o II > ... " U II ... C " ::: . B -4 ~ :) =' ~ lot ::a, LI lot I -4 -4 .. ::> .. J -4 I .. ) .. ~ .1 u 1 Y 21, 19 fl1 ~GOK 062 PACE 302 DR^tN~GE f.^:'E~ENT (p~nT OF LOT 23, ALK. "A", ~VnTLE COVE ~Cnr.5, U~tT NO.1) (TREF: TOPS CONnO..,tNIU,,\) - T>.CCEPTED FnO"\ 'tltLKINSO~-~EFFERT CO~STnucTtO"l CO. Public Works ^~ministrator Cliffotd Barksdale referred to the Exccutive Summary dated 7/7/81 and summarized the informt1tion therein re1~rding the En1ineering Department's recommendation that the Roard acc~pt the drainage et1sement located on part of Lot 23, ßlk. "A", Myrtle Cove Acres, Unit No. 1, which is at the southeast corner of the True Tops Condominium, from Wil~inson-"'effert Construction Co. Commissioner wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried unanimously, that the En1ineering Department's recommendation be acc~pted Jnd th~ afúre~entioned easement be ~ccepted for recordation. PlI'J e J9-A ----- -- ...-~ - ~-- .-~_.. ~ .--.-- .. . '\ __ - - ___ - - _--- - - ____--------- - - - __ __I ~co~ 062 fAGE 306 July 21, 1981 BUDC,r.T OF $4,767 F.ST^BLISHED FOR THE PUBLIC TR^NSIT r,YSTF.M FOR MONTHS OF ^UGUST AND SEPTEMOF.R, 1981. PUBLIC WOR~S ADMINIST^TOR AUTHORIZED TO HIRP. TRANSIT SYSTEM SUPERVISOR Public Works Administrator Barksdale stated he Is requesting that the Board establish a budget for the transit system for the final two months of Fiscal Year 1980-81 so that a Transit System Supervisor can be employed. He reported that the County has received the Grant from the DOT for the salary for the supervisor for those two months and up through the next fiscal year until such time 8S the Federal and State grants are received for the operation of the ~ystem. He said that he haa prepared the budget for August and September of 1981 which totals $4,7~7 and will cover just the supervisor and his administative services for those months. Mr. Barksdale referred to the Executive Summary dated 7/8/81 and stated that the paragraph therein which outlines the figures for the aforementioned 9 month budget for 81-82 is incorrect. He asked that the paragraph read as followsr "Assuming nine months of operation in Fiscal Year 1981-82, the budget requirement for the transit system will be $30P,737 of which the County's share will be $45,670." Mr. Barksdale stated that the a~ove-referenced amounts for the nine ~onth budget will be reflected in the budget that will be presented during the budget hearings next week. In answer to Chairman Plator, Mr. Barksdale stated that the budget will be figured for nine months because the proposal approved by the Board regarding the operations of a transit system is to begin in January of 1982. He said that because the fiscal year begins in October, the months of October, November, and December of 1981 will not be part of the transit operational proposol. Page 40 -.------------- --------------------- · ---------------------------------- July 21, 1981 Mr. Barksdale statod that he end the DOT jointly interviewed threo individuals interested in the position of supervisor for the transit system end he is happy to report that Mr. Lou Gordon, currently employed as the Metropolitan Transit Authority General Manager for Bay City, Michigan, with a system of over 80 buses, is ready to accept the position as public Transit Supervisor and he understands that this is to be a trial period of two years. Mr. Barksdale added that he (Mr. Gordon) could begin in mid August. Mr. Barksdale said that his recommendation is to approve the .. budget for the remainder of Fiscal Year 80-81, as submitted in the Agenda package, and authorize him to hire the Transit System Supervisor. Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse, to establish a budget for the Public Transit System for the remainðer of Fiscal ,Year 80-81 and authorize the Public Works Administrator to hire the Transit System Supervisor. The motion carried 4/l, with Comoissioner wenzel opposed. Commissioner Wimp.r asked when the Board was going to have the opportunity to review the plans for the transit system and Mr. Barksdale reported that the supervisor's first job would be to design the route system for presentation to the Board by the first week in Septembor of this year. County Manager Norman said that the Resolution adopted by the Board calls for the creation of a Citizens Advisory Committee during the plan development stage. Mr. Barksdale stated that this will be pre.ented to the Board In a few weeks. He also ðssured the Board that they viII have ðn opportunity to review the plane for routes for the \ Page 41 8C()~ 062 PACE 307 ---'- __-:--.....--.-~ _ _ __ ____ "".4__Þ-- ~-,.,.--~I ~. ---.----...---_.- -- ~- . ~.- - ------_.---~- ------- BGOK 062 ~ACE 308 July 21, 1981 øyatem cnd he told Commiaðionor Wimor that tho Boaed will have the l.lt word regarding the prQposed route.. GO D~Y EXTENSION GRANTED PINE RIDGE AGRICULTURE OWNERS, INC., TO CONCLUDE NEGOTIATIONS RE PUnCH}\SE OF RIGHT-OF-W~Y FOR THE EXTENSION OF PINE RIDGr. Ro~n TO CR 846 public Works Administrator Clifford Barksdale stAted that, when the Boarrl authorized the purchase of tho Pine Ridge Road right-ot-way up to the Irnmokalee Road, they also agreed, at that time, that they would provide 30 days for the landowners to negotiate with tho lðndowner east of the power line to Dcquire that right-of-way and trade with the County for that which is needed for the extonslon. He said that the he has received a letter from the pine Ridgo Agriculture OwnC!rs, Inc., ind icat iag that they are approaching successful negotiations and that th~y are requesting a 60 day extension of time to ~o~tinue thoir efforts towðrds successfully acquiring the right-of-way. He said that th~ Board in~lcðtcd tho t they would grant ðn extension of time to the rino Ridge Agriclulturo Ownero, Inc. if they required such an extension and that he 1s recommending that one 60 day extension be granted, however, he pointed out that time is of the essence in that the design work for the projoct is underway as is the design work for the intersection ot rrank Road and pine Ridge extonsion. He 8aid that he would not recommend that the subject orqðnlzation have any longer than this one extension ðS it vould set the tiMetable for completion of the project back ðnd subsequently delay the County's other road projects. There was a brief discuosion regarding the probloma that ~ðY be incurred it furthor delays are forthcoming, during which Mr. Barkedale pag. 42 /' ------------~---------------------- July 21, 19B1 at.ted that any additional delay. other than the requested 60 day. would be costly to th. County. Co~m1sI1on~r Wenzel moved, secondod by Comm1ssloner Brown and carried unanimously, that tho request for a 60 day extensiQn for pine Ridge Agriculture OwnÐrs, Inc., to continue negotiations for the right-of-way for tho extension of pine Ridge Road, be granted. ------------------------------ ---_. CONCE~LED PISTOL Pf.RMIT '81-9 ISSUED TO JOYCE M. CURTIS Public Safety Administrator Thomas Hafner ref6rrcd to the Executive 6ummary dated 7/10/01, and reviewed the contents thereof, regarding thcappl1cÞtion for a Concealed Pistol Permit filed by Joyce M. Curtis, a bail bond8~an. Upon h~aring that all required criteria in accordance with Ordinance No. 78-15 has been met, Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried unanimously, that Concealed Pistol Permit 181-9 be issued to Joyce M. Curtis. CONCE~LED PISTOL PERMIT _al-IO ISSUED TO THOM^S Z. CLIFTO" Public Safety Administrator Thomas Hafner referred to the Executive Summ^ry dated 7/10/01, and reviewed the contents thereof, re9arding the applicðtion for a Concealed pistol Per~it filed by Thomas Z. Clifton, a surety agent. Upon hearing that all required criteria in accordance with Ordinance No. 78-15 has been ~.t, Commissioner Brown moved, soconded by Commissionor Wenzel and carried unanimously, that Concealed Pistol Permit '81-10 be issued to Thomas Z. Clifton. Pa9f1 C 3 ~COK 062 PACE 309 ------------------ -.....----------- -_. -------------------------------- BGOK 062 PAGE 310 July 21, 1981 M.V.I. STATION OPEnATIONS TO 8E DISCONTINUED IN COLLIER COUNTY, EFFECTIVE ~UGUST 7, 19l~ Public Safety Administrator Thomas Hafner referred to the Executive Summary dated July 9, 1981, which contains a comprehensive report regarding Mr. Hafner's recommendation that Collier County continue MVI operations. Mr. H~{ner atated that he and Mr. George prexler havo attended several meetings with MVI personnel from surrounding counties and have discovered that most of them have disbanded the idoa of keeping MVI operations active in their respoctive counties. Mr. Hafner said that Collier has h^d the advantage of self sustaining MVI operations over the 1Dst few years. He referred to some of the data attached to his rocommendations, and reviewed the contents thereof, all of which supported his recommendation. At the conclusion ~f his presentation, Mr. Hafner stated that, as ð profession~l safety enginûnr, he 15 basing his rccommandation to keep MVI operations activo in Collier County on data which supports his position that areas with such a program have less accidents, both fatal and non-f~tal because of the prevention of defective equipment on the highway. Co~mlssioner Wonzel stated that, whilo he agrees wIth Mr. Haf~er regarding the position of Bafety, he feels that if the surrounding counties do not have activo MVI operations it would not be offective for Collier to support them. He referred to the many persons who are continually crossing tho bordors of the surrounding counties and said that he c~nnot sce the justification of supporting ~VI operations in Collier if it will be the only such oporation in this area of the State. However, if Lee, Charlotte, Glades and Dade County were to continue MVI operations he would favor koeping the KVI stations active .1 n Co 111. r . Page 44 ---------------------------------- ., July 21, 19£\1 ColTUft1ssoner piot';)r rtJported that he has been presented ",i th a five page petition opposod to the continuation of MVI stations in COllier County. Mr. Metlyn C. Almack, .poke in opposition to continuing the MVI operations In Collier County, indicating tho problems involved in enforcement of such a mandatory program no'" that the State has dropped the requirements for MVI stations and tho costa of such an operation ðS his reasons. He suggeste~ that the question be put on a ballot for public input. Mr. Bruce Holly, spoke in opponition to the BCC making this decision, Indicating that h. is also concerned about the problem of enforcement. Mr. Henry W. Maxant urged the Board to accept the trend being set by the President of our Country and follow through on governmental dei~gulation measureR and less taxation, therefore he is against the County supporting its own MVI program. Commissioner Wimer movod, seconded by Com~issioner Brown, that Collier County discontinue operations at the MVI stations, .ffactivo August 1, 1981, if legally pos81~le. Mr. Hafner statod that August 7, 1981 would be the end of the normal pay period and both ComMissioners Wimer and Prown agreed to amend their motion and second, respectively, to discontiue the opefations as of August 7, 1981. The amended ~otion carried unanimously. M.V.I. EMPLOYF.F.5 TO BE GIVEN PRIORITY RF.GAnCING 'ILLING VACANCIES WITHIN THE COUNTY Com~lss10nor W~~,.l referred to the pUblic's concern about MVI ...ploy... loaine¡ ti,,;~r jobS If the MVI .tations ara clo..d. He ..1d ~C01. 062 f~CE 311 P"9 e 45 ---....----------------------------- BGO~ 062 PACE '312 July 21, 1981 that he feels that theso e~ployee. can be absorbed into other positions within the County. Commissioner Wimer agreed and motioned that tho MV! employecs be given preference in filling any othor jobs available in Collier County. Co~mission.r Wenzel seconded the motion which carried unanimously. MV! BUILDING ON AIRPORT RO^O TO Bf. PUT UP FOR PUBLIC BID ~VI ßUILDING IN IMMOKALEE TO Bf-COME ^ P^RT OF COUNTY AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND f'.l\DE ^VAr LM~LE FOR LE^SE, M::, RECOMMENDED BY PUBLIC WORKS ADMIU!5TR^TOR Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that the MVI building on Airport Road, prosently situated on leased land, be put up for public bid. Public Safety Administrator Hafner remln~ed the Board that thare ~s also ðn MVI building in Immokalee and Commissioners wi~er and Br?wn amended thair motion and second, respectively to include the Immokalee building. The amended motion carried unanimously. Later In the session, Public Works ~mlni9trator Cl~tford Barksdale suggested that the Immokalee MVI building could become ð part of the County's ^lrport Development Program and bo made available for loaso. Commissioners Wimer and Brown agreed to amend their previous motion and second to accept the recommendation of Mr. Darksðale and put only the Naples MV! building up tor bid, the Immokalee building will become a part of the Airport Development Program and be made available for lease. It was the consensus of tho Board that their pre~lou. action be amonded in this manner. Pa9. 4fi ------~------------------------ ::=1 :=J :0--"'1 ~ · ------------------ ------------------ July 21, 1981 ST~f"F ,a.UTHOTHZED TO 5f.J;:1< ... rURCH1\SER FOR SURPLUS MVt EQUIPMF.NT There was a brief discussion as to what the County's plans for the MVI equipøent would be, during which Mr. Nor~an stated that certain equipment could be put into use at tho County barn ~nd other area. of County operations. It was the consensus of tho Board that the atðff should dispose of the equi~ent in tho propor manner, howover, they could use what they need elsowhere within the county. Chairman Plstor directed that the staff follow through with the procedures in the proper lIIanner. TWO WEEJŒ SEVERANCE PAY 1\UTHORIZED FOR MVI EMPLOYEES FOR WHOM OTHER COUNTY POSITIONS ARE NOT FonTHCOMING After a discusslon regarding how long it might t~ke for the County Manager to determine which county positions will be available and which MVI employees can be transferred into them, Commissioner wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried unanimously, that two weeks severance pay be authorized for any MVr employee for whom another County position cannot be found, 88 recommonded by the County Manager. MVI STAFF CO~Mf.NDED FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE OF DUTIE5 FOR COLLIER COUNTY Public Safety Administrator stated that he would like to commend all of the County's ~VI personnel who have worked under the direction of Mr. George Prexler. He s8id that this program was efficient, and one of the few such oporations throughout Florida to be selt supporting. He said that the personnel ðre dedicatod and h8V~ pride in their work. BCDK 062 PACE 313 Page 47 --------:-------------------------- . BG01. 062 f!~E314 July 21, 1981 It was the conlon. us of all the Commhsioners that they join Mr. Hafner In commending the Collier county MVI employo.s for their perfor~ðnce of duties for Collier County. Chairman plstor added that he has received numerous letters from the public who have Indicated to th~ Board that they also commønd Collier County'. MVI personnel. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO SELL SURPLUS PROPERTY (JEEP) TO NORTH NAPLES FIRE DEP^RT~r.NT _ NO ACTION T^KEN THIS DATE - ITEM H^NDLED 7/14 Rl This item was not acted upon during th1s session. It was taken up and acted upon dur1ng the 7/14/81 meet1ng. SUBSTANCE OF RECOMt"F:NDÞ.TIONS \-lITflIt:t L. r-UTH TflO~A5' 5TUDY RE WORD PROCESSING ^ND/OR INFORMATION PROCf,SSING NEEDS OF CERTAIN COLLIER COUNTY OFFICES - ^prROV~D IMMEDIATE PURCHASE OF WORD PRCCESSING EQUIPMENT FOR COUNTY MAN^GER ^ND COUNTY ATTORNEY AUTHORIZED, FISCAL OFFICER TO PRr.PARE NECr.Sr,^RY BUDGET AMENDMP.NTS A9~istant County Manager f.d Smith stated that, pursuant to the Board hiring Dr. Ruth Thomas as ð Management Information Systom Consult~nt on February 24, 1981, ehe has completed her assignment and 1s prepared to make a presentðtlon regarding her findings at this time. Dr. Thomas referred to her report entitled ~n~lYßis of Word processing and/or InforMðtion Proc~ssinq Noed~ of Selected Collier County Offices, and noted that during tho timo she conducted tho study on ~hich the aforementioned report is made, 20 departments, divisions, or offices wore reviowed and detailed logs of 15 of these clements ~Qre compiled ðnd it was found that the totðl typing production of these fifteen elements was approximately 130,500 pages per year. Referring to that portion of her study regarding the Word Processing Centor, sho said that of this total tho word processIng ~.ntdr Is r.sponsl~~é for approxlmðtely 47,500 pages. 6he said that it is concluded t".t the Word procossing Center 1s meeting its objectives, Pðge 48 ----...------------------------------- . , "'~ ~ ;--1 , . -------------------------------- July 21, 1981 It la providing automated text editing tor offices, both lorg. anð small, that could not be duplicated at tho same cost. She said that the Word processing Center is producing documonts at 41' of the national cost of similar documents produc~d by secretaries who take shorthand dictation and transcribe and reviso at electric typowriters. Dr. Thomas said that 9 elements were found to produce moderately heavy to heavy volumes of typing which would, based on volumo alone, warrant automation, however, the type of production in purchðsing and Parks and Recreation is not appropriate to word processing applications. She said that another office, the Supervisor of Zloctions, is currently being serviced by tho Data procesGing Department and sho recommended that this continue. Dr. Thomas said that the Community Development Division is a heavy user of Word processing Center and 1s ðlso acquiring capability with equipment being purchaned by the Building Inspoction Department which should meet its needs. Dr. Thomas recommonded that the offices of tho County Manager and County ^ttorncy acquire stand alone text editors with records ~anagemcnt nnd m"thematical capability as soon as it is foasible to do so. She said that the Mag Card typowriter In the County Attorney's office should be transferred to the Public Works Office to moet 80me of the needs ot that Division. Dr. Tho~a. Baid that the Sheriff'. Depart~ent, the H.alth Department, and the Public Work. Dlvi.lon are in critical need of automation in the records ~ðnðgem.nt ar.a. She recommended that syatems stud I.. 00 done in the Sheriff'. Departmont and the public Work. Dlvl.lon. She said that the problema in the H.alth Department ar. the r..ult of Stato mandated records requlre~ent. and It I. eCOK 062 fACE 315 Pa9 e .. 9 -------------------------------- ..-------------------------------- ßCQr. 062 ~;,_. 316 July 21, 19B1 recommended that t~e county work closely with the State official. to develop an avarenea. of and a .olution to the.e problema. Dr. ThoMas alao recommended that tho Office of the Bee acquire an electronic typewriter, and she stated that any typewriter purchascd in the future should be electronic as they are well on the way to replacing all othcr types of typewriters including the correcting Selectric. Sho said that, ~lthough they do not interface with other automated equipment, thoy do incorporate 80me of the automatÐd feature. of word processors and they do have a limited storage capacity. Regarding additional equipment that she i8 recommending, Dr. Thomas stated that the Word Processing Cent~r will need to purchase an additional stnnd alone processor when Its volumne increasen by 6,000 to 8,000 pages per year ðnd It Is recommended that this unit bo placed on the first floor ot Building "f", to be shnred equally by the Word Processing Center, as ð satellite station, and the Personnel Department, for records management purposes. Dr. Thomas said that the entire stand alone units with all its components and ita printer costs approximately $16,600 plus yearly mðintenancc coste of approximately $1,730. She said that the lease price is approximately $6,000 per year including the maintenance. She explalneð that the costs go down if printers are shared as is recommeded for tho offices of the County Manager ^nd County ^ttorney. Also, she sees no problem in outright purchase as and referred t~ that portion or her study report which covers the overall automation of the county, and a timetable for automation vhich she has Gstablished, and atated thftt thv growth of the County indicated that it will probably be able to sustain the paper workload vith only minor investments in automation lor five to oight years, vhen it will become nec..aary to Page 50 ~ ---------------------------------. --------------------------- -------- July 2l, 1981 invest in ,. ruain-Cran.e computer system. . She .aid that she 18 speaking about a groat deal of money when she i. talking about a main-trame co~puter. She said that although many system designers would view this interim period as one of difficulty, in that the County's current computer ~ill not give tho users all tho capðbility thnt they would like to have, she docs not feel that the County is justifiod in making the very large Investment in a main-frame Byste~ at this time. She øaid that this interim period would bo better spent if devoted to' developing an intorgrated systems design and to enhanco the internðl efficiency of components of the organization that have grown faster than their ability to keep pace. Dr. Thomas stated that she believes thðt the most co~tly mistaKes In automation occur when a system is imposed from the top on organizðtlonal el~ments whose procedures have not been upgraded and modified to gain advantage from that automation. She said that in such cases, automation will add substantially to the cost of an operation - not minimize it. Dr. Thomas outlined the timetable she has formul^ted, as indicated on pages 29 through 33 of her report, concluding with Fiscal Year 85-B~ forward, which is the anticipated year she believes the County will require the purchðae of a main-frame computer for the purpose of converting all existing data and intormntlon processing systems to this central processing unit, with the exception of tho word processing center. Sho said that at this time the County should bo in a position to auto~nte manual office systems aa are required and that communication links between the offices within the complex itaolf and fro~ the remote County Government sites as required. ~COK 062 fACE317 Pa9- 51 _________---------..--r------------ · ~ . '. .._- - - - - - - -- --- - - ------------ ---- - -- -- BGO~ 062 PACE 318 July 21, 1901 Dr. Thomas urged the Board that, during the lnterim poriod between this fiscal year and 1985, they -go" with a company which can furnish the County with interface capability equipment. She said that tho County should deal with a company that can furnish them with equipment with a wide array of configurations, from stand alone systems to the ~aln-frame unit itself. She added that, by all means, the County muat guard Against proliferation of equipment in this interim period, if the County is to moke ð relatively pðlnless transition to an intergrated main-frame system in the future. Dr. Thomas stated that interface of equipment of different makes is impossible or difficult and costly at best. She said that the County should remember that 80\ of the cost of che system ia attributllhle to personnel and procedures, which she refers to as "hiddon cost". She said ~hðt 20\ of tho system is attributable to equipment, therefore, it is easy to see the cost involved in a proliferation of equipmont. Co:,missioner pistor asked Dr. Thomas if she is saying that the County will have to buy another main-frame computer in five or six years and she replied that the County does not have a main-frame computer now. Sho referred to the computers in the dnta processing centèr as -mini-computers·, clarifying that this is a term of the industry. She said thðt the County does not havð ð mllln-Crame computer system that is cllpable oC linking everything in the County together, and 6ho .aid that shø is sorry to report that this main-frame computer 8ystem Is a very expensive undertaking- Whon 8sked it Dr. Thom~s recommended the purchase ot the $5,000 computer ðt tho Ileal th Department by Commissioner Kruse, Dr - Thomas replied negatlvo)j. The discussion continuod, during vhich Chair.an piator com~ented tha~ h. understood that thn Tax Collector and the P.ge 52 ~---------------------------------- ------~------------~-----------_. July 21, 1981 property Appraisor .re planning to purchase their own computer. Commissionor \ol1r:1cr askod Dr. Thomðs if she would be available to work tor tho County to help guide it through the flext fow y~ars regarding tho transition poriod of which sha spoke earlier. She replied that she would be available on a port time basis, and told Commissioner Wimer that she felt that this would be adequate time for tho County's noeds. She said that the "main push" will como just prior to tho County -going on- a main-frame system, adding that ahe cannot stress how vitally important it is to have someone who really knows source data information and who will go into the various offices and "clean up the procedures" before any automated cquipment la Installed. ~he said that ~he has seen these mistakes made that c~st5 millions of dollars to many governmental bodies. Commissioner Wimer stated that m~ny vendors hav~ told the County the samo things that Dr. Thomas is telling the Board, ~nd that they were looked on with a certain amount of mlstruzt because it was thought that they were just trying to sell th'o County something. lie said that ho believes that Dr. Thomas Is in ft unique position with the County at this timo, in that she is not trying to sell anything. He said that this Is not tho only advantage to h~vlng the help of Dr. ~homð9, and he expounded on her qualifications anð past work and complimented her perfor~ance. Ho said that he would like to see all of her recommendations adoptod and implemented and that tho County continue the relationship with Dr. ThoMaa. Chairman Plator stated that ho would llke to hove Dr. Thomas look into the proposed purchase of the computer by the Tax Collector and the property ^pprals.~, and stated that he was attendin9 a ~e.tln9 on Friday ~ornlng ru~~rdln9 this. Ho said that ho 10 concerned about the &CO~ 062 fACE 319 Page 53 ----------- ---- -- ------ - - -------- --. ..------------------- ---------- tJCOK 062 PACE 320 July 21, 1981 interfacing of on add1tio~al computer with the ones that are in the Data processing Department now. Clerk Roagan asked Dr. Thomas 1t, when she made a projection ot 4 to 5 years for the installation of a main-frame computer, she included the other Officers, or just the jurisdictions under the Board of County Commi~sloner8? Dr. Thomas said that the m~in-frame would have the capability to aervice the entire County. Mr. Roagðn referred to the Sheriff, the property Appraiser, the Tax Collector and the Clerk'. offices and said that these offices ore among the heaviest users of Data processing and, based on the many problems that they aro experIencing, they have calculnted a 2 to 3 year projection for the main-frame computer system. He as~eð Dr. Thomas if the workload of these offices was included in hor calculation of the 5-6 yenr " projection? Dr. Thomas stated that she does understand tho problems to which Clork Reagan Is referring and added that she did try to look into the situation as best as she could. She said that the equipment the County hað docs not have the capability to meet the needs that thoso offices now, to say nothing of tho five yoar interim period. However, said Dr. Thomas, when one considerð the investment that the County has made in that equipment, includin~ the personnel and the time that will bo required to dovelop the various procedures, she 1s mðk1ng ð conservative ostimate of fivo years. She said that in the moantlme, the offices that ðre on the present computer system are go1ng to hAve some painful Qxperiences. She _aid that, at the same time, sho must stress that ahe bellQvea that it will tðke 18 to 24 m~ntha to get all paqe 54 -. --------------------------------- ------'---- ---------------------- July 21, 19A1 the offices In thi. co~plex ready to gO on this system. Mr. Roagan .aid that he believes that 18 to 24 months 18 being conservative. Clerk Reagån stated that he has established the use of 80me .tand elone systems for Bpeci~lized sorvices throughout the Clerk's Office and that he has spont 12 to 18 months contacting and looking at different systems throughout the State. no said that he has had difficulty in finding a big main-frame system that tho County could go into. He said that he has not found any users of ouch a system in the State and that, although he believed this was the w~y to go at some time in the future, he is not convinced of that at this point in time. He explained that every County that he has found that is at that point In time, including some of tho State's larger Counties, are taking awny thoir big systems and going ~dth smallor systems. lie said that this concept Is new to him and that ho believeD tho t tho CommissionerB should consider this concept. Dr. Thomas Bc!lid that this is true, and she explained the concept which she termed "distributive d~ta processing". She said that when a ~ain-!ramo comput~r system is broken down and smaller computcr sytems are used In their place, it is generally because many of these ~ulti-~illion dollar cystoms hove not met the objectives for which they were designed. She said that most o! theso hðv~ b~en p:aced under a data proces8ing Getup that io not directly aligned with the ~anðgement of the governmontal unit. She said that whon this is done, you lose touch with mðnagement, management has no control over the computer ay.tQml and, in orðer to regaln control, thoy have gone to the d1.tributive data processing. She .aid that ln many .uch ca.e., the e.nage~ent ls tho ~~(ect result of tho governmental unit pðylng for a maln-frame system _~d many small .ystems, simply because e.nðgeeent 1. eGr)~ 062 PACE 321 Paqo 5S -------------------------- ------- -'- --------------------------------- BCOr. 062 ,.\Gt322 July 21, 1981 unable to -get a han~18· on the big system. She said that there i_ nothing wrong with the big systems in these cases, they CDn give capability that the smaller systems cannot. She said th~t Collier County vill be in the same position i' it is not done correctly. She said that there will be a need for some smaller systems as Mr. Reagan is suggesting, however, she urged the Board to go with ð vendor with a notional reputation that can offer everything from a stand alone system to a main-frame if the County ever reach.s that point. She said that, in this manner, tho County will protect itself through the capability of future intcrf~cing. Sho said that all Offices need to -go one and the sarno" direction 80 as not to w~ste the taxpayers money and to enhance the County's poGitlon. There was a brief discussion regarding Dr. Thomas' ongoing services, during which County ~an~ger Norman explained that today's report is a part of the study Dr. Tho~a8 has been conducting. Dr. Thomas reportod that she has also been conducting a program tor the Building Inspection Department. Mr. Norman eaid that Dr. Thomas' report has been of great interest and use during the preparation of the budget. One point that Dr. Thomas has made during her presentation on which Mr. Norman commented was that sho Is recommending inforoatlon processing equipment and not word processing equipment during the proposed interim poriod. He said that this 1s whnt I. beinq implemented for the Building Inspection Department. He said that this will provide modest data processing capability for each of the department areas wher_ 1s it installed and Dr. Thomas concurred. ~r. Horman added that the.e ~easure8 w111 help to bridge the gap in the County. He .aId that by following Dr. Thomas' guidance, the County can Paqe 51; -------------------,,--------------- -------:..------------------------. July 21, 1981 follow through the Qhtire transition 1n a way that giVG5 tho capabilities it needs with interface capabiliti~s in the future as well as helping to train each aroa within the departments in the uae of data processing. Ho said that he feels this Is one of the biggest stumMling blocks in data processing systems and that if tho people know hov to use it properly, it will be effective. Ho likened Dr. Thomas' recommended program to someone learning to crawl before loarning to walk. He said thnt he se~s a lot of bcnefitD in the program that she " 18 recommending. Commisaloncr Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Wenzel and carried unanimously, that tho two staff rocommendations within the ~xecutlvc summary a5 indicated below bo adopted and acceptodr 1. The Board approve tho substance of tho recommendations contained in the referenced study, and authorizo the immod1atc purchase of the reco~mended work-processing equipment needed for the County Attorney's office and the County Manðqor's office. Tho total cstimated cost Is $25,900 plus 5\ (Sl,295) for supplios, and an ~nnua1 maintenance contract to cost $1,250 for ench office. 2. The Fiscal Officer be authorized to prepare the necessary budget ~mendmQnt to ~rðnsfer needed funds fro~ the General Fund contingency to the County Attorney's offico anð to thc County Monangor's office for this purpose. . . . RECESS - TIMEr 4100 P.M. - 4r08 P.H. . . . CETA CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS RE MANDATORY REDUCTION OF FISC~L YEAR '81 YOUTH EMPLOYMEtlT TR1IINING PROGRAH (YETP) FUNDS - AUTHORIZED FOR CH.a.IRM^N'S SIGNATIJRE Cota Director Don Norton requested that the Boord approve the CETA Contract modifications regarding the mandatory reduction of Fiscal Year '81 Youth Employment Training Program Deobliqðtlon Contract Modifications. ,:. 8a1d that in anticipation of this mandatory reduction, the CETA Oifice implementod neceueary programmatic 6CO~ 002 PACE 323 pago 57 -------------------------------- .- -------------------------------- BeOK 062 PACE324 July 21, 19B1 adjustments to minimize ~he '.ffect on such a deobll9ðtlon and thor- was no need to layoff any participant.. Co~~18sloner Wenzal moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carrieð unanimously, that Mr. Norton~. recommendation be accepted and the Chairman be authorized to 819n the relevant CET~ contract modifications. Pa,,_ 58 !.--------------------------------- -------------------------------- --. . '0 ~ > ..-4 ~ U ~ ... c ~ .c: ~ ã ..-4 +' U :3 '8 ... Do II ... a ~ ..-4 "'" o ... U ..-4 a ... o ~ July 21, 19lH AOMINISTRATIVE PROCF.DlJRE RF. USE OF COUNTY VEnICLES - '\PPROVF.O As.istant County Ma~Age[ Ed Smith refer rod to the Executive Summary dated 7/14/81, which contains ft copy of the new proposod ^dmlnistfatlvc Procedure, Use of County Vehicles. He outlined the various componentÐ of tho proposed procedure and scid th~t thare cre now 46 vehicles that o[e considered to be on 24-hour Assignment. Mr. Smith said tha t , if the Board adopts the now proceóurc, only six of t.hese vehicles will be lIGsIgned on :It ~4-hour basis, with the remaining vchlclc1J to be made lSvailable when needed. Mr. Sm I ttl said that, based on an lSpproxi~ation of 378 miles per month per vehicle, it i8 calculated that the onnunl savings to the County at current costs will be approximately $43,545.GO by initiating tho proposed procedure. Mr. Smith summarized each portion of the proposed procedures, Including the three classes of vehicles that It will cBtabliGh the various procedures that will be undetaken in assignments of vehicles tho oporation and security procedures the mðintcn~nce and reporting procedures; and, tho so procedures regarding ðccidents and insurance. He pointed out that one difference re'gardinq the currrent procedure and that which is baing proposed is that, any uncomponsated cost of property damage or personal injury claims by the driver's negligence as determined by officiôl investigation and court action ~ðY, depending upon circumstances, result in ð claim for pa~nent against the driver. Referring to Chapter IV, UO~ ðnd Assiqnm~nt of County Vehicles During Othcr Than Normal Working Hours, Mr. Smith said thðt employ~es will be encouraged to use their privat~ vehicle. for job related travel after normal working hours and that they will b. reimbursed according to current mileage rates in effect at the time the vehicles wore used. Mr. Smith also soid thnt unlimited usa of County Vehicles i. not BCOK 062 fACE 331 hq. 59 --~-------------~----~---------- , . . ·_-----------~--~----------~------ . Þt't:l ~., 0> ....... (J" "IS (J ~., ..... .... "'C .., ,§i C .0 .,.... :.... u .,::s :'8 ø.~ ø. ..., ....~ s: ...S r-I c.... 0'0-0 o tIO~ Cu ........ ...s ,SJ.. J..O ø,\-4 BCOK 062 PACE 332 July 21, 1981 intended regarding any vehicles, including those used on a 24-hour basia, and that all vehicle. are to be used only tor official busines8. There was a discussion regarding omorgoncies that may require an employee to take a vehicle home with them after working hours, durin9 which Mr. Smith explained that the County Manager could approve such 24-hr. use for special equipped vehicles roquireå for immediate r~8ponse. ^lso, department heada could approve occasional use of vehicles for official business. Mr. Smith explained procedures regarding the vehiclo use request forms and the discretion of approval for same. In answer to Co~mlssloner pistor, Mr. Smith said that the figures used to calculate the antlclpnted savings under tho subject procedures is, In fact, just an approximation, based on hypothetical situations. Co~mis8ioner pistor also stated that he has 80me concorn a9 to the safety of vehiclos loft ~rked in the Immokalee area. Commissione~ Wenzel shared this concern and suggested th~t county vehicles be parked at the Sheriff's stntion in Immokalee instead of at the ^griculture Center. County Manager Norman said that these concerns could be addressed at a later date if any problems ariso. Commissioner pistor said that ho is bringing the~ up now bec~use he does not see any "looP holcs~ in the proposed procedures that would allow for future consideration of problem areas should they arise. County ~ana9·r Norman said that the procedure is written in such ð Mðnner a8 to allow tho County Manager or the Boðrd to m~ke exceptions. CO~iB.ioner Wimer Baid that, while he agrecB with the principle of the proposed procedures, he would liko to 8tate that he has never had a problem regarding County employees driving vehicles home, it 1. the U80 of County vehicles for extra-curricular Activitie. that has P.go 60 , -..-------------------------------- --------------------------------- July 21, 19£11 bothered him. He sal~ th~t this abusc has created tho problem ftnd that becau.e a lev employee. have abuscd the privilege of having a car to drivo to and from work, all of them will now be rostricted. ne said that he wishes that thero wae a better way in which to correct the problem. Also, he is conccrncd with the proposed parking of ~o extra car. at the Complex, based on the fact that 40 tmployees that drove County vehicles will now be driving their privato c~rs to work. Ho said that he bclievee that if tho cost for øddltional parking spaces is calculated, the cost savings of restricting the use of those 40 vehicles to buniness hours will rapidly dIminish. Ha saId that he Is particularly uncomfortðblc with the fact that if the Zoning Director gets a call at J1z00 P.M. about " noinc-orðinance relðted infraction that takes placc l\t 6,00 P."'. , he will hðve to send a form up to the County Manager for approval for ð County vehicle to go out aftcr 5z00 P.M. so that he can investigðte the complaint. Mr. Rmith said that in cases such as this, the Deportment could approvo such use on a caso-by-case baais. He said that depnrtmcnt heads would hl\ve three choices; an employee could take D car home overnight if he hðd ðdv~nce noticc; an employee could u~o his person"l car and charge mileage; or, if It were convenient, the employee could drive his personal car to th~ comple~ and pick up a County vehicle to use for official buslnoss. Th.re was ~ lcngthy dlscUÐGi~n on the use of County vehicl.. by certain department hoads where such use Is an Importðnt part of thelr job, including tho Zoning Director, tho Public Works Admlnlstrator, and the Civil Defense Director. Commissioner Wimer stated that he considers the proposed pollcy 80mewhðt of an "overkill" in the effort to .olve a problem of abuBe. Commis.ioner Drown .tated that he believe. that the Public Work. Ad~ini8trator need. the us. of a County &COK 062 PACE333 paq. 6l ------....--------------------------- --------------------------------- BGOK 002 fAGE 334 July 21, 1991 vehicle at all tl~es ~f the day and night, especially when hœ i. called upon to go out and check on problems regarding the county'a roads. ß. said that, while he is totally opposed to any abuse of thœ use of county vohiclco, ho wants the County Manager to be alort and koen to the fact that ho agrees with Commissioner wimer. Commissioner W~nzel statad that perhaps the answer is to give the proposed procedure a trial and, if it does not work out, it can be amended. Commissioner Brown said that he is concerned that certnin areas of county buainos8 may become non-functional through the restrlcte6 and cumbersomG procedures for the usc of county vehicles. Com~issioner Kruse sated that she has been opposed to tho non-official use of county vehicles, and that she believes that the sitúðtlon requires control over the use at county vehicles, and that she feels that if tho County Manager or the Board has thðt control, then she ca~ accopt the procedure. She said that if tho procedures include too many exceptions, then, what will happen is tho Board will be sitting in judgement ot each inõivldual CðSO, one after anothor. Commissioner Brown Baid that he is opposed to any such measuro and stated th~t he does not consider that his responsibility as ð Commissioner includcs making caso by caso judgements on the use of county vehicloa. Commissioner Kruse said that while sho agroos that thor. may be a need for some minor ð~endm.nts in the futuro, she believes that the Board has to start somewhere regarding control over tho use of county vehicles and that she will vote to adopt tho proposed procedure. Commissioner Wenzol moved tor the adoption of th~ procedure regarding the use of county vehicles, adding th~t it the Board finde that it 1. too r..trlctlvo, they can modify It. Com~i..lon.r Kru.. ..conded the motion. P"ge 62 ------------------------------------ -------------------------------- July 21, 1981 Mr. Bruce Holly spoke in favor of tho County M~nðger's recommended procedure to restrict the 2~-hour uso of County Vehicles. Civil Defense Diroctor W.C. Walker spoke In oppoøition to the procedure, specifically stating that as Civil Defense Director he responds to m~ny kinds of emergencio9 other than hurricane related. Be said that he does not Ðgree with the Idea of his taking his personal car to a forest fire or a plano crash. He said that he likens tho use of his county vehicle on a 24-hour basis to a fire truck, it may be an expensive picce of equipmont and it may sit from one day to tho next, however, when it Is needed, it is there. He also spoke in opposition to restricting the use of the helicopter vehicle, explaining that in an emergency, if tho helicopter pilot has to come to the complex first in orde~ to pick up the helicopter truck, thon go to the airport and pull the helicoptor out of tho hangar, before being able to fly off to pick up an accident victim, valuable timo has been wðsted. He said that the EMS program now uses the helicopter more often. Commissioner ~enzel said that tho procedure is flexible and that if the County Manager is consu;~3d when Mr. Walker needs to tako his vehicle home, it coulð be approved. County Manager Horman advised the Board thøt he does not feal that Hr. Walker taking a vehicle homa every night complies with the aubject policy. Ho said thðt 1f he needs his car 1n ðn emorgency, it will be at the complex and available for hi. use. Upon call for the question, the motion carried unðnimoualy. ~COK 062 fACE 335 Pðq8 6) ------------------------------.- .- --- --- ~----- ------------- -- ------- July 21, 1981 BljC~ 062 PACE 340 Ef04PLOYEES WIIO CURREN':I"LY USE COUNTY VEHICLES ON 1\ 24-HOUR BASIS ARt TO BE GIVEN TWO WEEKS NOTIt:E BEFORE TERMINATION OF THE USE OF THOSE VEHICLES AND THE INITIATION OF THE NF.WLY ADOPTED PROCEDURE rOR COUNTY VEHICLE USE B~COMEG EFFECTIVE Commissioner Kruse atated that she is aware that many County o~ploy.es thnt use County vehicles on ð 24-hour basis have no other transportation to and from work, therefore, ahe proposed that those employees be given a two-weak grace period before they are prohibited fro~ taking them home. She said that this will give them the oppor- tunity to find alternate means of transportðtion to and from work. Hearing no objections from tho Board, Chairm~n pistor so directed the County Manager. r,OUNTY ATTORNEY ANNOUNCES THAT KEN CUYLER HAS BEEN HIRED AS ASSISTANT COUNTY f\TTOnNEY County Attorney pickworth announced that he has hlred Mr. Ken Cuyler as Assistant County Attorney. He ~ðld that Mr. cuyler la currently an Assistant Stato Attorney in Naples and will be taking his new position with the County on August 17, 1981. COUNTY ATTORNEY AUTtlORIZF.D TO ENGAGE ^TTORNEY F'PED BOSSE~^U ON HOURLY 8ASIS FOR GUIDANCE RE IMPACT FF.f.S AND NAPLES CAY County Attorney pickworth requested authorIzation to .ngðge the services of Frad Bosaelman on an hourly basis for special guidance regarding Impact Fees and tho possible problems related to a pending lav suit involving the developers of Naples c~y. He sald that no studies would be conducted and that the impact fee queution would simply be addressed on tho basis of legal advic~ and/or recommendations. ^lso, there mðy be some legal advice rörthcoming fro~ this engAgement regarding what may be dono to alleviate posaibl. Page 64 ___---------7--------------------- ----------- ------------------- --. July 21, 1901 problems r.gðrding tho Naples Cay situation, wherein the County is to be the subject of ð pending suit related to this matter. Commissioner Brown asked for clarlficðtion on action taken 7/20/81, wherein his intent was to vote favorably on listening to various methods tor initiating impact fees and various alternatives for such fees in order to construct roðds. Hr. pickworth confirmed that the intent of his request 10 to gðthar altern~tlvcs and he ~greed with Commissioner ßrown that the Board has not made ðny co~mltment ðnd Is under no obligation to ^dopt any of Mr. ßosslcman's proposals. There was a brief discussion rcg~rding the School Board's proposal for an impact lee tho fact thßt Mr. Bossleman will not be hired to conduct studies1 and, the Dnticapted cost of Mr. pickworth's request, during which he stated that if the total cost were to run over $2,500.00 he would come back to thp. Board for further authorization. Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Commissioner Kruse ðnd carried unanimously, that the County Attorney bo ðuthorlzcd to engage tho legal services of Attorney Fred ~osslemðn according to the terms outlined above. BUDGET AMF.~DMENT NO. 81-1:)1 RE FURCJI!\SE OF CH^IRS FROH GOl ,)fN G¡\TE MUSICAL TIIEATRE (GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER) - ¡\DOPTED IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,163 Commissioner Wenzel moved, seconded by Co~mls510ner Kruse and carried unanimously, that Budget Amendment No. al-13l regarding the transfer of funds within tho Golden Gate Community Cantor's budget for the purchase of chairs fro~ the Golden Gate ~usical Theatre, be ~dopted In the amount of S4,163. e(.o~ 002 PACE 341 Pðge 65 ---..,.----- - -- ---- -- ---- --- - - -- - - ---.- -------------------------------- -.. July 21, 1981 BUDGET AMENDMENT NO.81-132, TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO REFLECT EXPENDITURES FOR OFFICE EOUIPMENT IN THE PUBLIC 6^FETY DIVI5ION - ,a.OOPTED IN THE AMOUNT OF S325 Co~m1ss10nor Wenzel ~oYed, soconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried unani~ously, that Budget Amend~ont No. 81-132, trannfcrrlng funds to more accurately reflect expenditures for office equipment in the Public Safety Division, be adopted in the amount of $325. , . BCOK 062 PACE 343 paq. 6fi -------------------------------.. ---------------------------------- July 21, 1981 BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 81-133, nE EXPENDITURES IN WITNESS ~SSIST^NCE PROGRAM - hDOPTF.O IN TI1£ ~MOUNT OF $2,397 Commlss1onor Wenzel moved, soconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried unanlmoúsly, that Budget Amendment No. 81-133, transferring funds to more accru^toly reflect current exponditures In tho Witness Assistance Program, be adopted in tho amount of $2,397. ßCO~ 062 fACE 345 P.q. 67 ----:------------------------------ · ' "---------------------------------- July 21, 1981 BUOOET AMENDf'lENT NO. 81-134 RE PURCnSF. OF COpy M^CHtNE FOR GOLDEN C~TE CO,.,MUNITY CENTER - ADOPTED IN TilE "MOUNT OF $3,200. Commissioner Wenzel ~oved, seconded by Commissioner Kruso and carried unanimously, that Budget ~mendment No. 81-134, trð"sferrlnq fund. to reflect the purchðse of ð copy machine for the Golden Cate Community Conter, be adopted in the amount of $3,200. ~ ~co~ 062 fl.~F347 Pa9. G8 ---~--------------~-~------------ -------------------------------- "July 21, 19A1 ROUTINE BILL~ - p~tD Pursuant to Resolution 81-150 adopted by the Board of County Co~mlaslonera on ~ay 26, 1981, the fo1lowinq checks were issued through Friday, July 17, 19[11, in p"yment of routit:e bill!'1 FUND CHECK NOS. AMOUNT County Checks 10355 - 10~lfi 25736 - 21;259 $1,471,021.07 BCC payroll $ 256,476.91:\ ADVERTISING AUTHORIZEr> FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON ^UGUST lA, 1901 RE "MEND~F.NTS TO COtlUTY "'^NÞ,GF:R OROIN^NCE NO. 1'10-77 Commissioner Wimer referred to the Executive GummÐry dated July 13, 1981 which includes a copy of tho amendments to the County Manager OrdinancG No. 80-77, which he is recommending. He said that the chlnges he is requesting be considered have been incorporated in the proposed Ordinanco prepered by the County Attorney, and that it deletes ~08t of the amendments to the County Mðn~ger Ordinance prcviously added by the Boðrd. lie s.)id thðt he is opfln to discussion regarding his recommendation. Commissioner ßrown ðsked Commissioner Wimer if his intent is to dolcg~te the authority previously given the County Mannger back to the Board of County Commissioners? He asked if thi9 is an atte~pt to amend the 50 called, ·strong County ~~nager" philosophy? Commissioner Wim~r stated that, contrary to what the media has .tated 1n the papers, he thinks the origlnðl County Manager Ordinance adoptee! in 1978 was fine. tie Baid that he believes the amendments added in 1980 were politically motivnted, with both side. of the Charter Issue ðpplying pressuro to vote for the amended ordinanco In order to insure the adoptIon of thr Charter and/or the drfeat of the Charter in Collier County. lie sðld thðt he did not consldrr either reason was a justifird reÐBon to vote for the amendment.. f10 .a Id ~co~ 06Z- fACE 349 Page 69 ---..,..- ----------- - ------ --- - --- - ---- ·--------------- . . ..-J__------------.--A.-- fl£\O ()50 July 21, 1901 BGOJl. ~ fAGE ~ that, this is a -political- issue, by virtue ot the fact that it was -polltlc.- that put the 1980 amendments In the ordinance. Ho aaid that he voted against the 1980 ðmondmonts, as well as being opposed to that provision of tho proposod charter that addressed the same issues a. the amendments, even though he did favor the overall Charter. He said that he feels that he would be dilatory in his duties ðd a Commissionor it he did not bring this before the Board for their consideration. Commissioner Wimer said that, pursuant to a request from himself, the Board's Administrative Aide conducted ð survey of other counties as to what kind of Ordinances relating to the County Manðger that oach county has. Ho said that tho survey indi,cated that thero is only ono other county in the stDte of Florida that has a county man~ger ordinance similar to Collier County's present ordinance. He further otated that in most of the other counties that have a County Manager, the manager works at the pleasure and discretion of tho the Board of County Commissioners, without the "aup~r majority provisions" ðS are In Collier's ordinance. Commissioner wimer stated that the County Attorney has propared an ordinanacQ which resembles more closely the 1978 ordinance and delineates tho differences in duties and responsibilities botween the County Manager and the Bo~rd of Commissioners and tho staff. He requcsted that it be co~sidered. Commissioner Brown statod that he voted ðgainst Ordinance ~o. 80-77 and was still opposed to it. Commissioner Kruso stated that she was not on the Board when Ordinance 80-77 was adopted. She said that she would not have voted for it had she been on the Board, slmply becau3e she dld not a.. the necesslty for it. She sald that there were other entlti.. who reported directly to the Board at that t1~a and thera were no problem. with pag a 70 -- ------------------------- -------- -- -- -------- -- ---- --- ---- --- - - ------ July 21, 19B1 ~ that. She said that shc S80S no reason that it should tako morc than 3 out of 5 votea to firc someone. She said that tho real problcm lies In the obvious dissension betweon tho Board membors regardlnq theory, practice and management of the County. She said that sho prefers to ... the Ordinance go back to tho way it was before Ordinance 80-77 was adopted. She referred to the possible problem in ado~tinq the subject proposed ordinance, specifically becausQ there seeroG to be ð split on the way the Commissioners feel about this issue. She said that she cannot understand how it takes three votes to adopt somothing and four to amend it, addinq that this provision seems to "do away with the ~ajority rule". Commisoioner Wimer stated that he questions tho legality of tho ordinance requiring a four to one vote. . ^fter discussion regarding the various counties that were contacted as part of tho survey Commissioner Wimer requested, Commissioner Brown stated that he is strongly opposed to Ordinance 80-77 and ho moved to take whatever steps arc necessary to make it -null and void". Tho motion died for lack of a second. The discussion continued as to what the proper procedure would be to adopt the proposed Ordinance which would amend Ordin~nce No. 80-77, during which Mr. Pickworth said that the Commissioners could Adopt an emergency ordinanco today, without prior advertisinq, however, that will r~quire a 4/5 vote. There was a discussion A8 to the necessity of holding a public heAring reqðrding the Adoption of the subject ordinance. It was the consensus of the Board that a public hearing should be held to consider the adoption of the proposed Ordinance which vill amend Ordinance 80-77. Upon hearing that it will require 15 day. to meet advertising requirements, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Co~~i..ion.r Brown and carried unanimously, thAt the advertising be " BCCK 062 fACE 351 Pðg. 71 ---------------------------------- ---------------------------------- BGOK 062. PACE 3æ July 21, 1981 authorizod for public hearing on ^ugust 11, 1981 to consider the adoption of Ðn Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 80-77.* . Later in the session, upon racommendation from the Clerk's office, the date of the public hoaring was changed by ord~r of the Chair, to ~ugu.t 10, 1981, in order to meet the 1eqal advertising requirements. ENVIRONMENT^L CON5ULT^NT SELWYN BEIH HIRED ON INTERIM BASIS AS RECOMMENDED 8Y COMMUNITY D~VELOPMENT ADMINrSTRATOR Chairman Fistor stated that Mr. Selwyn Bein has notified the Community Developmont Administrator that he is declining the position with the County a6 Environ~ental Consultant, however, he did offer to work during tho interim period at a rata of $130.00 per day which is equivalent to the Ðnnual rate that he had been offered by the BCC. Community Devolopmcnt Administrator Terry Virta said that Mr. Bein has indicated that he could rcport to work as early as July 22, 198J ~nd work to the middle of August. In answer to Commissioner Brown, he said that that the interim hiring of Mr. Bein would be very helpful in his division. Commissioner ~ruse moved, seconded by Commissioner Wimer and carried 4/1, with Commissioner Wenzel opposed, that Mr. Bein be hired as Environmental Consultant, on an intorim basis, a9 recommended by the Community Development ^dminlstrator. Pig- 72 .-------------------------------- ------.....=.-----------""""--------------- . July 21, 1981 MOTION TO CONSIDER TilE PROPOSED POSITION or ENVIRONMtNTAL CONSULTANT AS ~ MEMBER OF THf. GT^FF F^ILED Chairman Piator asked the Board to consider whether they wished to have the proposcd po.ition ot Environmental Consultant to be part of the staff or did they wish to consider tho position on a contractual ba.Sa? There was a discussion regarding the matter, during which Chairman Plator said that he has been given information thðt having the aforementioned posi tion as a part of tho sta f! would probably save ttoe County several thousand dollars. Ho said thðt he cannot see any advantages to having the position on a contract baaih Dnd he would prefer to hire a person as a member of the County staff. He said that the û-:>ard must find ð replacement for Dr. JlIY U"rm.1c, the tormer t:ovlro·rimental Consultðnt and, if the Board wishes to have this a contract position, he recommonded thðt a committee consisting of a member of staff and the County ~anager be formed to conduct interviews. Commissioner ~rune requested that a Commisnioner also be on the Interviewing committee. Commissioner Wenzel moved that tho position of Environmental Consultant be considered as a member of the staff. Chairman pistor .econded the motion. Commissioner Kruse stated that she bolievcs that the position of Environmental Consultant is highly political in nature due to it's influence upon development in the County. She said, -if the position w&re ð contrðct basis position, it would guarantea the person in that po.itlon i~munlty trom all five Commissioners. She added, -the person who hold. this position can 'kill' a project very easily In the form ot reco.~endation., which could away the Board'. vote one way or the other-. Chairman PIstor dls~9r.od, adding that he remembers when the ecox 062 P~CE 253 Page 73 ----.---- ------------------þ- --- -- --.... . · --. - - - - ---~----- ------ - ------- --- ----- BGOK OOZ PACE 354 July 21, 1981 Board has had rocommendations from the Environmental Consultant that were overruled on more than one occasion. He said that he do.s not consider the position as all that crucial. Paul Kruse, representing the. Golden Gate Reaid.nts and Supporters Association, spoke in opposition to having the Environmental Consultant as a member of tho stnff. fte ðskcd thðt this position be on a contract basis. Upon call for the question, the motion failed 2/3, with Commissionors Kruse, wimer and Brown voting in opposition. COMMISSIONERS KnUSE ^ND PISTon, COUNTY MANAGER AND CO~HUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ar~INISTRATon TO INTERVIEW INTERESTED PERSONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT Followinq the above-referencc~ action by the Bonrd ðnd pursuant to disr.uÐslon during the 6ðme agenda item, Commissioner Wimer moved, ~cconded by Commissioner Kruso and carried unanimously, that Comnissloners Kruse and plator, the County Manager and the Community Develor~ent Administrator form ð committee to interview prospective persons interested in tho poslt~on of County Environmentðl Counsultant on ð contract basis. CHAIRMAN AUTIIORIZED TO SIGN CEnTIFICATES OF CORRECTION TO THE TAX ROLL 1\5 pnESENTF.D BY TilE PTWPERTY APPRAISERS OFFICE Commissioner Wenzol moved, seconded by Com~issloner Kruse and carried unanimously, that the Chairman be authorized to si~n the following Certificates to the 1980 TðX Roll. T~NGIBLE PERSONAL pnOPERTY D"TES NOS. - 7/14/ - 7/20/81 1980-149 throu9h 152 Page 74 ------ _ _ __---- ____.---- ~_--Þ - -- ...--..-'-- ---------~ _.- ------"'------ July 21, 1981 LETTER or ~ESICN~TION FROM WILLI~M J. REAC~N, FROM COLLIER COUNTY HIgTORIC^L COM~I6SION - ACCEPTED Com~l.s1on.r Wenzel ~ovÐd, seconded by Commissioner Kruse and carried unanimously, that the Eoard accept the letter of resignation fro~ William J. Reagan from tho Collier County Historical Comm18~ion and that tho appropriate letter and certificate be authorized. EXTR~ G^IN TIME FOR !NM~TE NO. 35184 - ~PPROVr.D Commissioner Wen~el moved, seconded by commissioner Kruse and carried unanimously, that pursuant to Florida StatutcC 951.21, and Collier County Ordinance No. 7fi-24, fifteen d~Ys extra gain time for Inmate '35184 b~ granted, as recommended by Sheriff Aubroy Rogers. WORKSHOP RE INTERVAL OWNERSIIIP AND "ST" ORDINANCE - SCHEDULED FOR 7/n/BI ..Notlng the hour was late, Chairman ristor directed that the workshop Sossion scheduled for this date be continued to 7/28/81. HISCELLANEOU5 CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR REFERRED There being no objoction, the Chair directed the following correspondence b9 filed and/or referred to tho various dep^rtments ðS indicatedr 1. Letter dated 7/2/81, from John K. Gordy, objecting to the creation of the Ðal1ey Lane wðterline and pðv\nq district re public hearing on July 28, 1981. xC C. Barksdale; Filed. Copy of memorandum dated 7/17/81, from EMS Director to County Man^ger ro clarificðtion of equipment purch~seÐ ~nd indicðting which equipment is in the hands of American ~bulðnco nnd which is being requested to ad.quðt~ly supply existing ambulance vohicles. Filed 2. 3. Certified letter dated 7/1/Al, from Executive Dlr~ctor of Cðcoline Rotailera Associðtion Of Floridð, request1ng the acc to approve two ordin~nceB requeetinq Divorcpment and Franchise Act on beh~l[ of members of ~.G.R.^. Filed. ~COK 062 PACE 355 P4ge 75 _-...----- __-.- ------r--------------- ,. , ' . . ' ~ ' . Þ\'C ...11 fMO> 0~¥4 C.l1I ÞOaIlC.l ~fMII ....10... ........ ....c~C .01111 ....1O.c: ÐC:a .' =' ~ C 10 0 IIID¥4 .c::a~ ~ C.I II=' .. :'8 o ø.... s ø. 111011 ::E ...·410·. .c: IO~S - r-4 ...C¥4 110(,... ,!1 Ð ~ ....Cc; \-I¥4¥4 o ~ Ei ~5 ... ¥4"'O ::E ø. '"' . -----------------.--------------- ~GOf. 062 fÄ~£ ~56 July 21, 1981 ... 4. Letter dated 7/lS/Rl, trom Mr. Robert Nett, noting no objections to provisional Use petition for vanderbilt united presbytorian Church. Filod. S. DNR pèrmit '7~-P-38 (foil) (M), !o8u~d 2/19/79, for Clyde C. Quinby, Trustee, re condominium on Vanderbilt Beach. xc Building Inspection Depart~ent' Filed. G. DNR Final order re permit '79-P-409 ("), ro Mr. , Mrs. John F. Don~huÐ, for construction of elevated deck and concrete dock. xc Building Inspection Department, Filed 7. Letter dated 7/7/Bl, from DNR Chief, BureaU of Beaches and Shores, invitinq Collior County to submit application for funding request A re Erosion Control Trust Fund. xc C. Barkodale Filed. B. Copy of letter dated 7/l~/Ol to Executive Diroctor, Mental Health Center, Inc., from County Man^ger rcquesting that he Ðttcnd 7/22/Ð1 Budget He~ring to discu£s requAst for Board ~pprovðl of additional $29,514 appropriation for Baker Act servicc9 for FY 01-82. Filed. 9. Copy of letter dated 7/13/81 to HRS District Administrator, from David Lð~rence Mental Health Centor, Inc., requesting consideration of the development of District VIII, and HRS Department priority budget issue for a residential treatment center for the alcoholic in Immokalee. piled. 10. Letter dated 7/15/8l, from Thomns H. ~aloney, H.C.O. corporation, offering his proporty on 3liOO prospect Ave., tor sale to County ð5 site for Dn animal shelter. xc County Manager, public Safety ^dminißtrator Filed. 11. Copy of Letter dated 7/9/81 from DNR to Gcrllld pol. \-Iard, p.E. c/o Gee & Jenson Engineers, approving request for ono yoar extonsion for DHR Permit 79-P-J71, CorDI Rldgc-Collier propðrtio8, Inc. xc Building Director, Filed. p~tition (one paqe) suppportinq tho County and tho City govern~ents for offorts towards development of bike path system. xc County Engineer, Filed. 12. 13. Monthly Departmental Report - Library Consolidated (Jun. 1981). Filed. 14. Minutes of Golden Gate Fire control District Advisory committee _ (April 2l, 19B1) (May 12, 1981) (Juno 9, 1981). Filed. Page 76 -------------------------------- July 21, 1961 --- ----'---- - ----------'----- - - - - - - -- . ,»'0 ,., I> , .... ," () ,., ,... I Ie:: ," I.&:: ¡- e:: 10 ,.... :~ () '::5 ''8 .... ø. '11 ... S ~ .... ~ o )... () .... s ... o .\-i 15. Letter dated 7/9/81, trom HUD Area Manager, ro community Devolopment Block Crant Program, Grnnt ~ß_79-DN-12-0242, noting that Collier County's performnnco has been found satls!nctory ro program. xc S. YoteDI Filed. Letter dated 7/7/61, from Attorn~y Ronald S. Gurolnlck, notifying County that he has been retaincd by Betty F. nnd Martin Levy, in conjunction with Buit regarding accident of 12/27/80, on CR 5l ncnr cn 84~ and requesting that Rl~k Division represontative cont~ct him ro sarno I also copy of accident report and ^ffidavit signed by Trooper R.J.Albrccht. xc County Attornoy Filed. 16. 17. Memorandum dated 7/13/81 from Supervisor of ElectionB regarding cont of Charter Election of June 16, 1981. Filed Memorðndum dated 7/8/81 from Representative Mary Ellen Hawkins, regnrding tho scheduling of Collier County Leginlðtive Delegntion public hearings, having been moved up earlier than last year, to some time before November 19B1. xc County AttorneYI Filed. Copy of letter dnted 7/13/81 from HumAne Society Prcsident Robert Michael, offcrinq extension of up to six month6 for contract with County regarding care of animðls. xc County Managerl public Safety h!ministratorl Filed. 18. 19. 20. Lee County beon added July 19811 July 1981. Electric Notices regarding stroct lights that h~vc to 1 1) Marco Lighting District for the ~onth of 2) Immoka1co Lighting OistrIct for the month of Filed. . .. . . . . . * * . . . There beinq no further business for the good of the County, the ~oetin9 was adjourned by oLder of the Chair - Tlm~r 5115 P.M. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER5/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING DOA~D(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL . /ì t Æ~4~ ",' . ~-- t.;JP, 062 f~~E 357 pðqe .,., ~,--_....