BCC Minutes 01/25/2005 R
January 25,2005
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, January 25, 2005
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special district as has been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9: 00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Fred W. Coyle
Frank Halas
Tom Henning
Donna Fiala
Jim Coletta
ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Manager
David Weigel, County Attorney
Jim Mitchell, Office of the Clerk of Courts
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ii',
"'-..
.: (
_..:::~"~;:,~.,,
AGENDA
January 25, 2005
9:00 AM
Fred W. Coyle, Chairman, District 4
Frank Halas, Vice-Chairman, District 2
Donna Fiala, Commissioner, District 1
Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3
Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF
THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED REQUIRES
THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS
DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT
ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH
EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR
TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC
PETITIONS."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
Page 1
January 25, 2005
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended. (Ex
Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for summary agenda.)
3. SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS)
A. 20 Year Attendees
1) J eanine McPherson, Parks and Recreation
2) Richard Winans, Transportation Road Maintenance
3) Carol Travis, Library
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation to recognize the lmmokalee High School Football Team and
Coach Weber for becoming the Class 2A State Football Champions. To be
accepted by the football team, Coach John Weber, Principal, Armando
Page 2
January 25, 2005
Touron; and Linda Ayer.
B. Proclamation to recognize January 23-29, 2005 as Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act. To be accepted by Rick Zyvoloski,
Emergency Management Coordinator for Collier County.
C. Proclamation to recognize January 25, 2005 through January 17,2006 as A
Year of Celebration of the Life and Vision of American Statesman Benjamin
Franklin. To be accepted by Mr. Ardyn Long, President of Friends of the
Library.
D. Proclamation to congratulate the residents of Marco Island in recognition of
their 40th Anniversary Celebration. To be accepted by Terri DiSciullo,
Council Chairwoman for the City of Marco Island.
E. Proclamation to have recognized January 16th through January 22nd, 2005
as National Jaycee Recognition Week. To be accepted by Rebekah Pastor,
Naples Jaycee's 2005 President.
F. Proclamation to recognize February 4th through May 1st, 2005 as Matisse,
Picasso & Friends Season. To be accepted by Jackie Lane, Creative Director
for the Philharmonic Center for the Arts.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to recognize Ana Fuentes, Customer Service Specialist,
Administrative Services Division, as Employee of the Month for January
2005.
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
A. Public Petition request by Tom Mooney to discuss storm water management
in Naples Park.
B. Public Petition request by Donald Schummer to discuss motion of the Board
to purchase right-of-way along west side of Santa Barbara Boulevard
between Golden Gate Parkway and Pine Ridge Road.
C. Public Petition request by Nancy Lange to discuss refund of impact fees
charged in error.
Page 3
January 25, 2005
Items 7 and 8 to be heard bef!inninf! at 1:00 D.m.. unless otherwise noted.
7. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
8. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommendation to approve the 2004 Cycle Growth Management Plan
Small Scale Amendment. (Adoption cycle).
B. This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex-parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. Baldridge Real Estate,
Inc., represented by Tim Hancock of Talon Management, requesting a
rezone from the RMF -12 zoning district to the PUD zoning district to be
known as Zone PUD Planned Unit Development which will include a
maximum of 6,840 square feet of commercial use. The property is located
on the northeast comer of Golden Gate Parkway and 52nd Terrace S.W., in
Section 28, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of .83:f: acres. (Companion item to CPSS-2004-0 I)
C. This item was continued from the December 14~ 2004 BCC meetin2.
This item reauires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte
disclosure be provided bv Commission members. PUDZ-2004-AR-5220
Land Development Group, LLC, represented by Ronald Nino, AICP, of
Vanasse Daylor, LLP, requesting a rezone from Rural Agricultural (A)
zoning to Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MUPUD) for a project to
be known as the Buckley Mixed Use PUD to allow for mixed-use
commercial and residential development. The PUD is proposed for a
maximum of251 residential dwelling units, a maximum of74,230 square
feet of retail commercial, and a maximum of 97,070 square feet of office
commercial uses. The property is located at 7501 Airport-Pulling Road, in
the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Airport-Pulling Road and
Orange Blossom Drive, north of the Collier County Regional Library, in
Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 22.84:f: acres.
D. Recommendation to approve the 2004 Cycle Growth Management Plan
Amendments. (Transmittal hearing).
9. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Page 4
January 25, 2005
A. Appointment of member to the Land Acquisition Advisory Committee.
B. This item to be heard at 10:30 a.m. Discussion regarding the Pelican Bay
Annexation report. (Commissioner Henning request)
C. Request to reconsider Warm Springs PUD, PUDZ-A-2004-AR-6142 Naples
Syndications, LLC. (Commissioner Halas request)
10. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Presentation of recent analysis and recommendation of continuing with the
current design for Santa Barbara which includes widening to six lanes from
Davis Boulevard to Golden Gate Parkway and rebuilding a four lane
roadway in a six lane right-of-way from Golden Gate Parkway to Green
Boulevard with a slight revision to the Golden Gate Parkway intersection to
include three northbound lanes for a short distance to help the current and
future operations of this intersection. (Norman Feder, Administrator,
Transportation Services)
B. Recommendation to approve an alternative road impact fee calculation and
resulting rate of$9,619 Per 1,000 square feet for the proposed Germain
Riverchase BMW dealership. (Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation
Services)
C. Recommendation to close the 2005 Growth Management Plan amendment
cycle to private sector petitions, in consideration of the EAR-based
Amendments development and adoption process. (Joseph K. Schmitt,
Administrator, Community Development and Environmental Services
Division)
D. This item to be heard at 11:00 a.m. Recommendation for the approval of
the second Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direction for
staff to actively pursue projects recommended within the A Category.
(Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator, Community Development and
Environmental Services Division)
E. This item was continued from the January 11~ 2005 BCC meetin2. Staff
update and recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
in response to the Public Petition presented at the December 14, 2004, BCC
meeting by Mr. Robert France regarding an existing code violation and a
Page 5
January 25, 2005
potential solution involving a lot line adjustment and parcel exchange at
3681 4th Avenue NE. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public Utilities)
11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
A. This item to be heard at 11 :30 a.m. Recommendation that, pursuant to
Ordinance No. 2001-55 (sometimes referred to as the "Advisory Board
Ordinance"), the Board of County Commissioners adopt Resolution No.
2005-_ establishing the Caribbean Gardens Task Force Committee and
discuss any continuing role of the staff in connection with the volunteer Blue
Ribbon Committee.
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve an Interim Management Plan for the
North Golden Gate Estates (NGGE) Unit 53 property under the
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program.
2) Petition CARNY-2004-AR-7015, John Yonkosky, Treasurer, Collier
County Fair and Exposition, Inc., requesting a permit to conduct a fair
from February 4th through February 13, 2005, at the Collier County
Fair Grounds on Immokalee Road (C.R. 846) North Golden Gate
Estates.
Page 6
January 25, 2005
3) Recommendation to approve Lien Resolutions for the following Code
Enforcement Case Numbers: 2004 1 00542/Alvarez, Jennifer,
2004100530/ Cavataio, Salvatore & Antoinette, 2004110012/Caffa-
Mobley Et AI, Priscilla, 2004080055/Reece Est., Annie Earl,
2004100961/Reece Est., Annie Earl, 2004100345/Baton Rouge LLC,
2004100485/Baron, Mimon, 2004050647 /Baron, Mimon,
2004071226/ Glover, Lizzie H., 2004080595/Stonestreet, William M,
2004070376/Mac Builders Inc., - Carlos Veloz, 2004070375/Mac
Builders Inc., 2004060799/0nofre, Roberto C., Inc.,
2004070552/Seffer, Erik H. and Astrid V., 2004090471/Tsalach
Investments, Inc., 2004110013/Volcy, Evens and Marie C.,
2004030691/ Riambau, Steve and Dasilva, Gildete A.,
2004090637/0sceola, Douglas M., 2004090638/0sceola, Douglas M.,
2004061 226/Martel, Claude, 2004090639/LaRoss Tr., Elizabeth
Anton, 2004091102/ Weyrauch, James P. and Diane P.,
20040911001N0lan Jr. Tr., Leonard F., and Nolan Tr., Michael S. and
Michael N. Realty Trust, 2004050696/Morris, Thomas and
2004091116/Moriarty, Judith and Connors, Cynthia and Navarra,
Dennis.
4) Recommendation to approve two Satisfactions of Lien for Resolution
No's: 2001-213 styled Board of County Commissioners vs. Alfredo L.
and Anne C. Ramirez and 2002-349 styled Board of County
Commissioners vs. Stuart O. Kaye.
5) Recommendation to approve the application by Genapol for the Job
Creation Investment Program, the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure
Investment Program and the Fee Payment Assistance Program.
6) Recommendation to approve the application for the Job Creation
Investment Program, the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure
Investment Program and the Fee Payment Assistance Program by
Guadalupe Center, Incorporated and provide for the waiver to pay the
up front fifty-percent of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees at
Final Site Development Plan approval, but instead pay all impact fees,
in full, at issuance of the Building Permit through the Fee Payment
Assistance Deferral Agreement
7) Recommend the Board adopt a Resolution opposing proposed Senate
Bill 0620, and any similar changes to Florida Statutes, that will
Page 7
January 25, 2005
diminish authority of Florida's local governments to regulate wireless
communications facilities except to the extent actually necessary to
facilitate 911/E911 services.
8) Recommendation to approve one (I) impact fee reimbursement
requested by Mortgage Max, Incorporated, totaling $34,566.60, due to
building permit revision and corresponding reduction in square
footage.
9) Recommendation to approve a Resolution supporting Genapol as a
qualified applicant in the Qualified Target Industry (QTI) Tax Refund
Program and providing for an appropriation of$96,000 as a local
participation match, pursuant to Section 288.106, Florida Statutes.
10) Recommendation to approve a Resolution supporting Advocate
Aircraft Taxation Company as a qualified applicant in the Qualified
Target Industry (QTI) Tax Refund Program and providing for an
appropriation of $60,000 as a local participation match, pursuant to
Section 288.1 06, Florida Statutes
B. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve a Budget Amendment recognizing prior
year revenue for funds recovered from vehicle accidents where
County traffic signals and streetlights sustained damages
($78,738.98).
2) Recommendation to Approve the FY 2005 Transit Development Plan
Update.
3) Recommendation to authorize the Transportation Administrator or his
designee to execute the attached Federal Transit Administration
Section 5310 grant application and applicable documents, and to
accept, on behalf of the County, any such grant awarded
4) Recommendation to acquire Board approval to sign and execute a
Local Agency Program (LAP) Supplemental Agreement between
Collier County and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
for sidewalk construction along County Road 29 in Everglades City.
Page 8
January 25, 2005
5) Recommendation to award bid #04-3595R - annual contract for
"Clearing, Grubbing and Tree Trimming Removal Services" for the
approximate annual amount of$50,000.
6) Recommendation to award bid #05-3633 - annual contract for
"Rework of Slopes and Roadside Ditches" for the approximate annual
amount of $50,000.
7) Recommendation to approve a waiver of the formal bid process and
approve a contract agreement between Collier County and Temple,
Incorporated for services related to the implementation of a Split
Cycle Offset Optimization Technique (SCOOT) adaptive traffic
system on the Pine Ridge Road corridor between Goodlette-Frank
Road and Logan Boulevard at a cost not to exceed $671,964; Project
#601724.
8) Recommendation to approve a South Florida Water Management
District Local Governmental Grant Agreement No. OT050869 in the
amount of $170,000 for partial funding of the 2005 Australian Pine
Tree Removal Program
9) Recommendation to authorize the Transportation Administrator or his
designee to execute the attached Federal Transit Administration
Section 5311 grant application and applicable documents, and to
accept, on behalf of the County, any such grant awarded
10) Recommendation to approve a Resolution authorizing execution of a
Florida Department of Transportation Local Agency Program
Agreement for the beautification enhancements to St. Andrews
Boulevard from US 41 to Pebble Beach Boulevard and to advance the
funds from the General MSTD Fund (111).
11) A resolution required pursuant to Section 125.37, Florida Statutes, for
the exchange of real property in connection with the expansion of
lmmokalee Road from 4 lanes to 6 between US-41 and 1-75.
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES
1) Recommendation to award Bid #05-3762 to Encore Construction
Company to construct the Sodium Hypochlorite Tank and Piping
Page 9
January 25, 2005
Repairs, in the amount of $72,500, and approve the necessary budget
amendment, for the North County Water Reclamation Facility Bleach
Piping Replacement Project, Project Number 73957.
2) Recommendation to award Bid No. 04-3713, Annual Contract for
Pump and Motor Repair and Purchase for County-wide maintenance
of equipment to various companies in the estimated amount of
$300,000.00.
3) Recommendation to rescind award of Bid # 02-3382 to R & D Soil
Builders, lnc, Project 73127.
4) Approval of an lnterlocal Agreement between Collier County and The
City Of Marco Island for the County to continue providing trash
collection services in The City.
5) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, as the governing body of Collier County and as ex-
officio the governing board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District, adopt a Resolution for the exchange of 4,623 square feet of
the Pelican Bay Utility Site for 9,246 square feet of The Club Pelican
Bay, Inc., golf course property, at a total cost not to exceed $1,150.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES
1) Recommendation to approve the submittal of the attached Emergency
Prevention and Readiness Outreach grant application to Volunteer
Florida for a Responsible Pet Ownership and Disaster Preparedness
Project in the amount of $18,000.00
2) Recommendation to approve a cooperative agreement with VGC,
LLC and a TDC Category "A" Supplemental Grant Application in the
amount of$16,500 for construction of Vanderbilt Beach Access #1
3) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment recognizing
$13,166.68 in revenue from private contributions and appropriating
funds for the purchase of Access Dinghies for the Collier County
Sailing Center
4) Recommendation to enter into an agreement to provide existing
Page 10
January 25, 2005
funding of $50,000 for operational expenses associated with WeCare,
Inc.
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1) Report and ratify staff-approved change orders and changes to work
orders to Board-approved contracts.
F. COUNTY MANAGER
1) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment, Project 90536, in
the amount of $3,525.
2) Recommendation to approve two Work Order Amendments under
Contract #01-3271, Fixed Term Professional Engineering Services for
Coastal Zone Management Projects, with Humiston & Moore
Engineers for the Hideaway Beach Renourishment, Project 90502, in
the total amount of $28,500.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the City
of Marco Island & the Marco Island Area Chamber of Commerce's
40th Anniversary of Modern Marco Island dinner at the Marco Island
Marriott Resort, Golf Club & Spa; $100.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
2) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended Marco
Island Area Chamber of Commerce Aloha Luau on January 8,2005 at
Hideaway Beach Club; $55.00 to be paid from the Commissioner's
travel budget.
3) Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement for
attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Attended the
Marco Chamber of Commerce Going Away Luncheon for Greg Niles
Page 11
January 25, 2005
on January 19,2005 at the Island Country Club on Marco; $25.00 to
be paid from Commissioner Fiala's travel budget.
4) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
for attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
Henning attending the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce "Wake
Up Naples" event on January 19,2005, at the Hilton Naples &
Towers. Registration of $17.00 to be paid from Commissioner
Henning's travel budget.
5) Commissioner Coletta requests Board approval for reimbursement for
having attended a function serving a valid public purpose.
Commissioner attended the East Naples Civic Association Annual
Banquet Celebration on January 17, 2005; $35.00 to be paid from
Commissioner Coletta's travel budget.
6) Commissioner Henning requests Board approval for reimbursement
for attending a function serving a valid public purpose. Commissioner
Henning attending the Urban Land Institute of Southwest Florida 8th
Annual Winter Institute on February 3rd at the Naples Hilton &
Towers. Registration fee of$25.00 to be paid from Commissioner
Henning's travel budget.
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Items to File For Record with Action as Directed.
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve a
document for Ninth Year State Criminal Alien Assistance Program
(SCAAP) Grant Funds.
2) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners serve as the
Local Coordinating Unit of Government in the Florida Department of
Law Enforcement's Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law
Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant, approve the Sheriffs Office
Grant Application, authorize acceptance of the Grant Award, and
approve associated budget amendments.
Page 12
January 25, 2005
3) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners make a
determination that the purchases of goods and services documented in
the Detailed Report of Open Purchase Orders opened from December
25,2004 through January 7,2005 serve a valid public purpose and
authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said purchases. A
copy of the Detailed Report can be viewed at the County Manager's
Office, 2nd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, Collier County
Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve a
Stipulated Final Judgment Relative to the Acquisition of Parcel 132 in
the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. First National Bank of Naples , et
aI., Case No. 04-3587-CA (Immokalee Road Project #66042).
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Authorize
the County Attorney's Office to Make a Business Damage Offer to
Settle a Claim for Business Damages by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., d/ b/a
Sam's Club associated with the Acquisition of Parcels 135, 735A and
735B in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,
et aI., Case No. 04-3632-CA (Immokalee Road Project #66042).
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve a
Mediated Settlement Agreement and a Stipulated Final Judgment to
be Drafted Incorporating the Same Terms and Conditions as the
Mediated Settlement Agreement Relative to the Acquisition of Parcels
128 and 728 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Terry L.
Lichliter, et aI. Case No. 03-2273-CA (Golden Gate Parkway Project
No. 60027).
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners Approve a
Mediated Settlement Agreement and a Stipulated Final Judgment to
be Drafted Incorporating the Same Terms and Conditions as the
Mediated Settlement Agreement Relative to the Acquisition of Parcels
117 and 717 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Jack E. Green, et
aI. Case No. 03-2227-CA (Golden Gate Parkway Project No. 60027).
5) Recommendation to approve settlement payment of $750.00 by
Collier County in the lawsuit entitled: Brandi L. Walkowiak-King vs.
Page 13
January 25, 2005
Collier County, originally filed in the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, in
and for Collier County, Florida, case no.: 02-443 CA.
17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA:
1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2)
UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER
AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND
VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM
RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD,
PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON
WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO
INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE
ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE QUASI-JUDICIAL IN
NATURE, ALL PARTICIPANTS MUST BE SWORN IN.
A. This item reQuires that all participants be sworn in and Ex Parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to
approve Petition A VPLA T2003-AR4686 to disclaim, renounce and vacate
the County's and the Public's interest in a portion of the 20 foot wide
drainage easement located along the rear of Lot 86, according to the plat of
"Port Of The Islands (The Cays) Phase II" as recorded in Plat Book 21,
Pages I through 4, Public Records Of Collier County, Florida, located in
Section 9, Township 52 South, Range 28 East.
B. SE-04-AR-6485, an Ordinance amending Ordinance 02-53, the McIntosh
Professional Office Complex to correct a scrivener's error in the Legal
Description for property that is located on the northeast corner of Goodlette-
Frank Road (C.R. 851) and 13th Avenue North, in Section 34, Township 49
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
C. This item was continued from the January 11~ 2005 BCC meetin2.
PUDEX-2004-AR-6694 Bayview Villas, LLC, represented by Dwight
Nadeau, of RWA, Inc., requesting a two-year extension ofa Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning granted by Ordinance No. 2000-05, pursuant to
LDC Section 10.02.13.D for the North Port Bay PUD. The property,
consisting of 46.33 acres, is located north of U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail), east of
Page 14
January 25, 2005
the Fahka Union Canal, in Sections 4 & 9, Township 52 South, Range 28
East, Collier County, Florida. This petition was continued from the January
11 th, 2005 Board of County Commissioners regular meeting.
D. PUDEX-2004-AR-6630 Amy Turner, Tammy Turner Kipp and BRT Coastal
Investments, property owners, represented by Wayne Arnold, ofQ. Grady
Minor and Associates P .A., requesting a two-year extension of the
Vanderbilt Trust 1989 Planned Unit Development (PUD), pursuant to LDC
Section 10.02.13, for a 7.84+ acre tract located on Vanderbilt Beach Road,
approximately ~ mile east of Livingston Road, in Section 31, Township 48
South, Range 26 East Collier County, Florida.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 15
January 25, 2005
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have hot mics?
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, you have hot mics.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would you please stand for the
invocation, please.
MR. MUDD: Heavenly Father, we ask your blessings on these
proceedings and all who are gathered here. We ask a special blessing
on this board of county commissioners, guide them in their
deliberations, grant them the wisdom and vision to meet the trials of
this day and the days to come. .
Bless us now as we undertake the business of Collier County and
its citizens, that our actions will serve the greater good of all citizens
and be acceptable in your sight.
Your will be done, amen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. County Manager Mudd,
now will you join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Mr. Mudd, would you like to review the agenda changes?
Item #2A
REGULAR CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA - APPROVED
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. But I'm going to ask the county attorney
if he has any quick corrections, since it's not on this piece of paper.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: No. Thank you, Jim. No additional revisions to
what Mr. Mudd will make apparent. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the agenda changes -- Mr.
Chairman, Commissioners, the agenda changes for the Board of
Page 2
January 25, 2005
County Commissioners meeting, January 25th, 2005:
Item 16A5, the fiscal impact section under Broadband
Infrastructure, the fourth sentence should read: Additionally, the
participating company must pay their annual tangible (rather than
annual ad valorem property) taxes to the county, in full, prior to a
request for payment, and that change is at staffs request.
The next item is to move item 16A6 to 1 OF, and that's a
recommendation to approve the application for the Job Creation
Investment Program, the events -- the Advanced Broadband
Infrastructure Investment Program, and the Fee Payment Assistance
Program by Guadalupe Center, Inc., and provide for the waiver to pay
the up-front 50 percent of the estimated transportation impact fees as
final site development plan approval, but instead, pay all impact fees
in full at issuance of the building permit through the Fee Payment
Assistance Deferral Agreement, and that move of that item is at
Commissioner Henning's request.
Third item is to move item 16K2 to 12B, and that's a
recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners authorize
the County Attorney's Office to make a business damage offer to settle
a claim for business damages by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Sam's Club,
associated with the acquisition of parcels 135, 735A, and 735B, in the
lawsuit styled Collier County versus Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et aI, case
number 04-3632-CA. That's Immokalee -- and that has to do with the
Immokalee Road proj ect, and that move was at Commissioner
Coletta's request.
The next item is a note -- and the following items are notes:
Item 16 -- excuse me -- 17C and 17D require that all participants
be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by commission
members.
There's a series of time certain items this morning.
The first time certain item is item 9B to be heard at 10:30 a.m.,
and that's a discussion regarding the Pelican Bay annexation report,
Page 3
January 25, 2005
and that item was at Commissioner Henning's request, but I received a
memo from Commissioner Henning this morning asking that item 9B
be continued until the next meeting because there are differing legal
opinions upon effluent that he would like to study before he has a full
discussion on that particular item.
So item 9B in this particular case will not be a time certain. It
will be continued if that's the board's desire.
The next item is item 10D to be heard at 11 a.m., and that's a
recommendation for the approval of the second Conservation Collier
active acquisition list and direction for staff to actively pursue projects
recommended within the A category, and Mr. Schmitt will present on
that particular item.
The next item is item -- and the last item is item 12A to be heard
at 11 :30 a.m., and that's a recommendation that pursuant to ordinance
number 2001-55, sometimes referred to as the advisory board
ordinance, the Board of County Commissioners adopt resolution
number 2005 -- and we'll assign a number after you adopt it --
establishing the Caribbean Gardens Task Force Committee and
discuss -- and discuss any continuing role of the staff in connection
with the volunteer Blue Ribbon Committee.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Mr. Mudd, I understand we have
a speaker for one of the consent agenda items. I would like to have
that speaker come up and address 16C3 before the commissioners
begin to approve the consent agenda.
MS. FILSON: Doug Purvis.
MR. PURVIS: My name is Doug Purvis, I represent R&D Soil
Builders. I appreciate the opportunity to address, Mr. Chairman.
Looking on the Internet last night, looking through the agenda, I
noticed under public utilities item 3, 16C3, recommendation to rescind
award of bid number 02-3382 to R&D Soil Builders, Incorporated,
project 73127 appeared. It's the first time I've saw or heard anything
Page 4
January 25, 2005
about that.
And I just wanted to come and speak to you guys and let you
know that R&D Soil Builders is a company that's operating in eastern
Collier County, for about five years, running -- we're operating a
composting operation, composting horticultural, yard waste, and we're
using class AA biosolids from the City of Naples. We're employing
about seven people. There's about 10 people employed directly in
relationship to us through subcontractors.
We submitted a proposal to Collier County through the RFP
process, and on March 11th, I think in 2003, the board approved -- we
were selected out of three groups, and the board approved the staff to
go into negotiations with us for processing the biosolids generated
within Collier County.
And I just wanted to address the board and let you guys know
that since that time, R&D's feelings is there's been no fair negotiations
whatsoever to try to make that proj ect succeed.
There's -- there was items that changed since the approval on our
part due to regulations through the DEP, plus the county actually
pulled items that they had in the proposal away from us, and then they
made us resubmit a new price under the new conditions.
And basically we've heard nothing, and I just happened to cross
this on the Internet on the agenda last night, and I just wanted to
address to you guys that we felt like, that there was no fair negotiation
ever, ever took place on this issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: County Manager, can you have staff get
together with this gentleman and talk with him about this process? It
is strange that nobody informed them formally of this particular action
in advance.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, I can. If you'd like to, we can
continue this item until next meeting, then they can have that
negotiation --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Page 5
January 25, 2005
MR. MUDD: -- instead of having this --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Would that meet with the approval of the
board?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. We're just going to
have them talk to him and still pass the consent agenda?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. We're going to continue this --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Pull it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- particular item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Fine, that's great.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that okay?
All right. Do you need a formal vote on that or is that --
MR. MUDD: If that's the board's desire --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then I've just made a motion that we
pull this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we have a second from
Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And opposed --
MR. MUDD: Just for clarification, that's continuance until the
next meeting, correct?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's correct, yes.
And all opposed, like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimously.
Thank you very much. We will take a look at it.
Page 6
January 25, 2005
MR. PURVIS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
I also have another clarifying question for you, Mr. Mudd.
Under the summary agenda, we're talking about swearing in
participants. Are we going to have participants under the summary
agenda?
MR. MUDD: No, sir, not unless you -- and if you had a speaker
today that wanted to talk about that particular item, we would.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Actually I put that on there for you,
Commissioner, in case it was pulled off so you'd know.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand. All right. But it was also
on the agenda changes, but --
MS. FILSON: In case it was pulled off.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It caused some confusion.
Okay. Then we will ask for the commissioners, if they have any
additional changes to the agenda, and I would like to get any ex parte
disclosure for the summary agenda.
We'll start with Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, everybody. I have
no changes to the agendas of today, and the only item on the summary
agenda that I have disclosures to make is item 17D, and I have all the
necessary paperwork here if somebody wants to look at it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I have nothing additional
that I wish to pull from the summary -- from the consent agenda. And
on the summary agenda there, item 17D, I do -- I have had some
meetings, and the results of those meetings, the dates of it and
everything are in my file which is available to anyone who wishes to
see it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no ex parte
Page 7
January 25, 2005
communication on today's summary agenda or no further changes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I have no changes, and I do
have ex parte on 17D. I have it all in this file folder. I've had some
meetings on this particular item, and everybody can see it. It will be
filed for public viewing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I have ex parte disclosures for 17D
also. I have had meetings with the petitioner's agent, and all of the
information is contained in the ex parte folder.
I have one question or comment, Mr. Mudd, concerning 17C.
The executive summary referenced a letter of approval from the DCA,
the Department of Community Affairs.
I wanted to assure that the executive summary properly reflected
the provisions of that approval which specifically states, shoreline
alteration is no longer being pursued. I did not get that impression
from the executive summary, but if that stipulation can be made in that
particular item, then it would satisfy my concern.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And with that, I will entertain
motions to approve the regular, consent, and summary agenda as
amended.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A motion from Commissioner Fiala. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second from Commissioner Halas.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
Page 8
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Next, I believe we have service awards.
Page 9
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
Januarv 25. 2005
Item 16A5: The Fiscal Impact section, under Broadband Infrastructure, the fourth
sentence should read: "Additionally, the participating company must pay their
annual tangible (rather than annual ad valorem property) taxes to the County, in
full, prior to a request for payment." (Staff request.)
Move Item 16A6 to 10F: Recommendation to approve the application for the Job
Creation Investment Program, the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure Investment
Program and the Fee Payment Assistance Program by Guadalupe Center, Inc.,
and provide for the waiver to pay the upfront fifty-percent of the estimated
Transportation Impact Fees at Final Site Development Plan approval, but instead
pay all impact fees, in full, at issuance of the building permit through the Fee
Payment Assistance Deferral Agreement. (Commissioner Henning request.)
Move Item 16K2 to 12B: Recommendation that the Board of County
Commissioners authorize the County Attorney's Office to make a business
damage offer to settle a claim for business damages by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,
d/b/a! Sam's Club associated with the acquisition of Parcels 135, 735A and 735B in
the lawsuit styled Collier County v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et aI., Case No. 04-3632-
CA (Immokalee Road Project #66042). (Commissioner Coletta request.)
NOTE:
Items 17C and 170 requires that all participants be sworn in and Ex Parte
disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Time Certain Items:
Item 9B to be heard at 10:30 a.m.: Discussion regarding the Pelican Bay
Annexation report. (Commissioner Henning.)
Item 100 to be heard at 11:00 a.m.: Recommendation for the approval of the
second Conservation Collier Active Acquisition List and direction for staff to
actively pursue projects recommended within the A Category. (Joseph K.
Schmitt, Administrator, CD&ES)
Item 12A to be heard at 11 :30 a.m. Recommendation that, pursuant to Ordinance
No. 2001-55 (sometimes referred to as the "Advisory Board Ordinance"), the
Board of County Commissioners adopt Resolution No. 2005- _ establishing the
Caribbean Gardens Task Force Committee and discuss any continuing role of the
staff in connection with the volunteer Blue Ribbon Committee.
January 25, 2005
Item #3
SERVICE AWARDS: (EMPLOYEE AND ADVISORY BOARD
MEMBERS)
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We will come down front to do
this.
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, we have three service awards --
employee service awards to present, and they're all 20-year awards for
our employees.
The first awardee is Jeanine McPherson from Parks and
Recreation.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Can you get a picture, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Get a picture with us.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Thanks again.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: The next 20-year employee is Richard Winans
from the transportation road maintenance section.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: And the next and last, but not least, is Carol Travis
from the library.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Carol, come over here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Get a picture with us.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Thanks, Carol.
And that concludes our service award presentations.
Item #4A
Page 10
January 25, 2005
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE THE IMMOKALEE HIGH
SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM AND COACH WEBER FOR
BECOMING THE CLASS 2A STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS-
AI20TIED
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, that brings us to proclamations.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, thank you. Are you going to
announce the proclamations yourself?
MR. MUDD: Sir, I can do that if you'd like.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: The first proclamation is a proclamation to
recognize the Immokalee High School football team and Coach Weber
for becoming the Class 2A state football champions, to be accepted by
the football team --
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: -- to be accepted by the football team coach, John
Weber and principal, Armondo Touron, and Linda Ayer. If you'd
please come up to the podium, please.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Can we have them all come up --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, please--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- so we can see them.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- everyone come on up. And
I'm going to -- I'm going to ask the -- the residents of Immokalee
came. I see Fred Thomas in the crowd, and I think there's some others
ones, too. I want you to come up front, too, because we're so proud of
this team and what they've done. If I asked all the supporters of the
team to come up, there would be no audience to watch it.
MS. A YER: These are our senior members.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh. Thank you so much for
coming out today. It's an honor and a privilege to be -- to have you
here today.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I bet you guys are thrilled, huh?
Page 11
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The juniors will be here next year, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, gentlemen, gather
around.
Whereas, the Indians, Immokalee High School football team, a
District 6, Class 2A team, won their first state championship game
against Madison County; and,
Whereas, the Immokalee Indians started the season 1-2, and then
proceeded to reel off 10 straight wins to finish the year 11-2; and,
Whereas, the Immokalee Indians shut out their opponents in three
consecutive playoff games, the region 3 semifinal, the region 3
championship, and the Class 2A state semifinal; and,
Whereas, the dedicated and loyal fans of the Immokalee Indians
never lost faith, even when their team was trailing by one point late in
the fourth quarter of the state championship game; and,
Whereas, the Immokalee Indians proudly accepted the role of
underdog throughout their championship season; and,
Whereas, the Immokalee Indians ultimately defeated Madison
County 17-15 to win the school's first football championship since the
program started in 1951; and,
Whereas, the Immokalee Indians were guided to the
championship by the well-respected and inspirational head coach,
John Weber, along with the leadership provided by 13 seniors.
And, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier County
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, that January 25th, 2005, be
designated as Immokalee High Indian Day.
Done and ordered this, the 25th day of January, Fred Coyle,
Chairman.
And I make a motion, sir, with the -- to approve this.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 12
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimous.
(Applause.)
MR. THOMAS: Mr. Chairman, while they're doing that picture
-- Mr. Chairman, Fred Thomas. Anybody who saw the game or heard
this game know that in the final minutes of that game, Coach Weber
did an outstanding job of coaching, an outstanding job of coaching.
He needs to be given a hand.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coach Weber, would you like to
say a couple words, please?
Thank you, Mr. Thomas, for the comments.
MR. WEBER: Thank you. On behalf of the community, the
high school, and the Immokalee High School football team, we
sincerely appreciate your efforts for what we have done, and we hope
that we have made the county extremely proud, and we certainly
appreciate all the efforts of which you have went through.
Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You sure have made us extremely
proud.
(Applause.)
Item #4 B
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE JANUARY 23-29,2005 AS
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-
~OWACT-Amn
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next proclamation is
proclamation 4B, and that's a proclamation to recognize January 23rd
Page 13
January 25, 2005
to 29th, 2005, as Emergency Planning and Community
Right- To-Know Act to be accepted by Rick Zyvoloski, emergency
management coordinator for Collier County.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Good morning, Rick.
MR. ZYVOLOSKI: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Stand right up here, sir.
Proclamation: Whereas, the safe use of hazardous material is
essential to business, industry, and local government to maintain
economic stability and to protect the citizens of the ninth planning
district of Florida; and,
Whereas, it is essential to plan and prepare for the accidental
release of hazardous materials and to protect the well-being of all
citizens and visitors in the district; and,
Whereas, response teams such as fire, police, and emergency
medical services must know the type of hazardous materials and
chemicals that are being used and stored in the event of an incident to
respond safely; and,
Whereas, all citizens have a right to know the types of hazardous
material and chemicals in their communities and the right to know the
proper procedures to take in case of an accident or an emergency.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, recognize the importance
of community awareness of the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act enacted by the United States of America, and
hereby declared the week of January 23rd through the 29th, 2005, as
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Awareness
Week in Southwest Florida.
Done and ordered this 25th day of -- January 25th, 2005, Collier
County Board of Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Fred W.
Coyle, Chair, and I move for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
Page 14
January 25, 2005
aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimous. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
MR. MUDD: Rick, say a couple words. Go ahead, it's your
opportunity .
MR. ZYVOLOSKI: Rick Zyvoloski. Thank you very much for
this proclamation. Community right-to-know is an important aspect
prompted by the federal government because the community does
need to know what the hazards are in the area, and this is an effort to
make the community aware and let them know that they do have that
right. Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE JANUARY 25,2005
THROUGH JANUARY 17,2006 AS A YEAR OF CELEBRATION
OF THE LIFE AND VISION OF AMERICAN STATESMAN
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next proclamation is
proclamation 4C. It's a proclamation to recognize January 25th, 2005,
through January 17th, 2006, as the year of celebration of the life and
vision of American statesman Benjamin Franklin to be accepted by
Ms. -- Mr. Ardyn Long, president of the Friends of the Library. And I
think Ben is here.
Page 15
January 25, 2005
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala is always kidding
me about my advanced age. I actually knew Benjamin Franklin quite
well. And I must say he was wearing the same outfit the last time I
saw him.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: There is a similar -- the hair color
looks very close.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Whereas, January the 17th, 2005, marks
the 299th birthday of one of America's most noteworthy Founding
Fathers, author, inventor, printer, philosopher, musician, statesman,
and diplomat, Benjamin Franklin; and,
Whereas, Benjamin Franklin is credited with establishing the first
free-lending library in the United States; and,
Whereas, the public library provides a haven for the free
exchange of ideas and is the cornerstone of the American way of life;
and,
Whereas, the Friends of the Library of Collier County,
Incorporated, is committed to supporting our public library system and
our community; and,
Whereas, during the past seven years, the Friends organizations
has donated in excess of $500,000 to the Collier County Public
Library System; and,
Whereas, this money is distributed to all library locations for
many purposes, including a new circulation desk at the Immokalee
branch, patio furniture for the Marco Island library reading patio, the
underwriting of the classic foreign, documentary, and themed film
programs, and many other special programs and services offered at all
Collier County Public Library branches; and,
Whereas, the Friends organization is committed to a membership
drive that focuses on honoring Benjamin Franklin's vision by
supporting library programs and services; and,
Whereas, providing free access to works of literature, films,C
Page 16
January 25, 2005
periodicals, and more can only serve to enhance knowledge, offer
enlightenment, and thereby strengthen the community in which the
importance of public libraries is recognized; and,
Whereas, January the 17th, 2006, will mark Benjamin Franklin's
tricentennial birth date.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that extreme gratitude and
appreciation is extended to the membership of the Friends of the
Library for this successful partnership between the public and private
sectors of our community.
It is acknowledged that an investment in our public libraries is
not only an investment in the future, but in our present as well.
We, the Board of County Commissioners, reaffirm our
commitment to a high-quality public library by proclaiming January
25th, 2005, through January 17th, 2006, as a year of celebration of the
life and vision of American statesman Benjamin Franklin, and in
doing so, honor the Friends of the Library for their exceptional
commitment to the residents of Collier County, Florida.
Done and so ordered this 25th day of January, 2005, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Fred Coyle,
Chairman.
I make a motion that this proclamation be accepted.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is seconded by Commissioner Halas.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimous.
Thank you very much for your wonderful work.
Page 1 7
January 25,2005
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thanks, man. Good seeing you.
You have to stay here and get your picture.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, definitely we have to have a
picture of this one.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Want to do it with the hat on, too?
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, there you go.
(Applause.)
MR. LONG: I want to thank you on behalf of the Friends of the
Library. Ben Franklin is spearheading our drive to add 777 new
members this year. So if you're not a member of the Friends, we'd
appreciate having you.
And Ben would, at age 299, would like to share a few words with
you.
"BENJAMIN FRANKLIN": And most well-preserved am 1.
I am most pleased to join you here today, ladies and gentlemen,
commissioners, those members present who stand before the bar of
jurisprudence, and, as well, those who stand before the bar of the
tavern at the corner.
I am most pleased to announce that today we -- it is -- we are
opening our Merchant Society Library, the unto library, to public
subscription. Become subscribers this day if you have not done so.
Our energy and persistence will conquer all. Join the Friends and
mark this fine day in giving to the common and greater increase of our
brave democracy to your own library. And I thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4 D
PROCLAMATION TO CONGRATULATE THE RESIDENTS OF
MARCO ISLAND IN RECOGNITION OF THEIR 40TH
Page 18
___,.____'_."'..~H......__.,_~____"~___~___________"__,,.,.""'^"'_',".
January 25, 2005
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next item is 4D. It's a
proclamation to congratulate the residents of Marco Island in
recognition of their 40th anniversary celebration, to be accepted by
Ms. Terri DiSciullo, who's the council chairwoman for the City of
Marco Island.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And it's my pleasure to be able to
read this. Welcome, Terri.
Marco Island visionaries, the MackIe brothers, Elliot, Robert, and
Frank, Jr., are responsible for the modern development of Marco
Island; and,
Whereas, that vision included a complete range of resort and
leisure living, hotels, condominiums, and homes, all set in a tropical
paradise; a sun-drenched jewel on the Gulf of Mexico; and,
Whereas, Marco Island, Florida's 400th city, continues its
heritage with an ideal mix of restaurants, retail stores, and commercial
services to support more than 5,000 single-family residential homes,
10,000 condominium units, 2,000 hotel units, and 16,000 permanent
residents; and,
Whereas, the people of Collier County congratulate the citizens
of Marco Island for continuing the dream of the MackIe brothers for
40 years, since their grand opening on January 31st, 1965; and,
Whereas, Marco Island, with its white sandy beaches along the
bright blue Gulf of Mexico and its lush tropical setting deserves its 40
years of recognition as paradise.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, on behalf of the residents
of Collier County, hereby proclaim its special congratulations to
residents of Marco Island in recognition of their 40th anniversary
celebration.
Done and ordered this 25th day of January, Board of County
Page 19
January 25, 2005
Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Fred Coyle, Chairman.
Chairman, I motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's a second.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
Thank you very much, Terri.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I wish the other municipalities
would take your lead.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Terri, take a picture.
MS. DiSCIULLO: Thank you. Terri DiSciullo. Marco Island
truly is a paradise. It's been my home for 10 years, so I can't believe
I've been there for a quarter of the life of Marco Island already.
And on behalf of the city council, the city staff, and the residents
of Marco Island, I'd like to thank you for this proclamation and also
for the commission and your staffs cooperation with us.
As you said, we've only been a city for seven and a half years, so
we've had a lot to do there in seven and a half years, and the county
has always been cooperative in helping us in any way that you can,
and especially Commissioner Fiala who is a great representative for
us.
As a barrier island, we have some different issues and concerns
on our island. And I'd like to thank you, Commissioner Fiala, for all
your help for all these years.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's been a pleasure, believe me.
Page 20
January 25, 2005
MS. DiSCIULLO: Thank you. Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
Item #4 E
PROCLAMATION TO HAVE RECOGNIZED JANUARY 16TH
THROUGH JANUARY 22,2005 AS NATIONAL JAYCEE
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next item is 4E. It's a
proclamation to have -- recognize January 16th through January 22nd,
2005, as the National Jaycee Recognition Week, and it's to be
accepted by Ms. Rebekah Pastor, the National Jaycee's 2005 president.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Whereas, the Naples Jaycee
(sic) Chamber of Commerce has been a vital part of developing young
leaders in our community for over the past 40 years;
Whereas, the Naples Junior Chamber of Commerce serves and
continues to serve the under-privileged citizens in our community;
and,
Whereas, the Naples Junior Chamber of Commerce supports the
enhancement of professional and business advancement; and,
Whereas, the Naples Junior Chamber of Commerce promotes and
fosters the individual growth and development of young persons
across their community; and,
Whereas, the Naples (sic) Chamber of Commerce teaches an
impressive -- impresses upon individual membership a spirit of
genuine Americanism and civic interest; and,
Whereas, the Naples Chamber of -- Junior Chamber of
Commerce provides the opportunity for personal development and
achievement and a venue (sic) for participation in affairs of the
community, state, and nation; and,
Whereas, the Naples Junior Chamber of Commerce develops true
Page 21
January 25, 2005
friendship and understanding among young persons of all nations.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, that January 16th through the 22nd, 2005,
be designated as National Jaycees Recognition Week.
Done in this order, the 25th of January, 2005.
Mr. Chair, I make a motion to approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, second by Commissioner Halas (sic).
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimously approved.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if you'd like to say a few words, by
all means.
MS. PASTOR: Good morning. Rebekah Pastor. I'm the 2005
president of the Naples Jaycees chapter.
We look forward to this year. We have a lot of things that we're
planning for the community this year. We look forward to the
commissioners -- and your continued support with the chapter, and we
do thank you for recognizing us as you do. Have a good day.
(Applause.)
Item #4F
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE FEBRUARY 4 THROUGH
MAY 1, 2005 AS MATISSE, PICASSO & FRIENDS SEASON _
ADOITED
Page 22
January 25, 2005
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next proclamation is 4F, and it's
a proclamation to recognize February 4th through May 1 st, 2005, as
Matisse, Picasso & Friends season. To be accepted by Ms. Jackie
Lane, the creative director for the Philharmonic Center for the Arts.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd also like to say that we're graced
this morning by Ms. Myra Janco Daniels who is the CEO of the
Philharmonic, and I'd like also to have Myra come up here for the
presentation.
Myra, we really appreciate all the effort that you've done for this
community for the many, many years. Thank you so much.
The proclamation reads as follows:
Whereas, the Philharmonic Center of (sic) the Arts Cultural
Complex is the leading arts center in Southwest Florida, encompassing
both world-class visual, performing arts, along with the arts education;
and,
Whereas, Naples Museum of Art and the Philharmonic Center for
the Arts are dedicated to enlightening, educating, and entertaining
citizens of all ages in Collier County and the surrounding area; and,
Whereas, 2004-05 season is the fifth anniversary season at the
Naples Museum of Art; and,
Whereas, the Naples Museum of Art is one of only three
museums in the United States that will present the blockbuster
exhibition of Matisse, Picasso & Friends; Impression ( sic) to
Surrealism; and,
Whereas, the exhibition of Matisse, Picasso & Friends will
feature masterworks of painting by sculpture -- such artists as Matisse,
Picasso, Cezanne, Rodin, Gauguin, and Van Gogh;
Whereas, most of the artwork in Matisse, Picasso & Friends has
never been seen before in the State of Florida; and,
Whereas, visitors and media will come to the museum -- excuse
me -- come to the Naples Museum of Art from around the state and
Page 23
January 25, 2005
other parts of the country to experience these masterworks.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that February 4th through
May 1 st, 2005, be designated as Matisse, Picasso, Friends Season.
Done and ordered this 25th day of May -- or of January 2005,
Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Fred Coyle,
Chairman.
And Chair, I make a motion that we approve this proclamation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Halas, second by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Passes unanimously.
(Applause. )
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Boy, that is really impressive.
Myra, good to see you again.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Myra, thank you so much for all
your dedication to this community. Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Myra, can we get you for a picture with this board.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if you'd like to say a few words,
please go to the mike.
MS. DANIELS: A community -- I'm Myra Daniels, and I do
everything but sweep the floors. But I am the CEO of the complex.
A community without art is a community without soul. And for
Page 24
January 25, 2005
five years, we have been bringing in people from all over the world to
see art. This is the biggest, the biggest, show we have ever attempted.
Right now we're taking the materials out of cases. We will be
publicized throughout the country, and we have a wonderful staff that
has worked around the clock to get this ready. And we thank you for
your cooperation. I hope you'll all come.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Myra.
(Applause.)
Item #5A
RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE ANA FUENTES,
CUSTOMER SERVICE SPECIALIST, ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES DIVISION, AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR
lANllARY, 2005 - RRCOGlliZEJ)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to paragraph 5,
which is presentations. And 5A is a recommendation to recognize
Ana Fuentes, who's the customer service specialist, administrative
services division, as the employee of the month for January 2005.
And Ms. Fuentes, if you'd please come forward.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's always an honor to recognize an
outstanding employee. And let me tell you a little bit about Ana
Fuentes and why she was recommended as the employee of the month
for January 2005.
Ana is a customer service specialist assigned to the information
technology department business applications. She's a very quick study
and is always willing to go above and beyond her assigned job
functions.
This was experienced when she immediately mastered our new
accounting program called SAP, which was implemented here in
Page 25
January 25,2005
Collier County recently, and assisted the help desk in answering
customer questions during that conversion.
When we automated the agenda for this huge document that we
have for a packet that we must read prior to each meeting, she
volunteered to assist and demonstrate the use of the scanners to all of
our internal customers.
In addition, Ana also exceeds her customers' expectations on a
regular basis. She consistently completes her assignments prior to
their due dates and with complete accuracy and thoroughness. Her
customers never need to be concerned that any detail might be
overlooked.
She anticipates their need and meets and exceeds these needs
before she is asked. Ana has taken on personal development to learn
training skills and is applying these skills to help the information
technology trainers.
Ana also provides proofing and testing of training materials prior
to publication and distribution to the user community.
Ana has implemented more efficient procedures for purchasing
requests, which provides a cost savings and utilizes resources more
effectively.
Ana has been able to expand her fiscal job duties beyond the
business application section and now provides clerical fiscal support
to GIS telecommunications, security, and administration sections.
Ana is extremely diligent in carrying out tasks for her co-workers
and does so in a timely manner, and her ability and willingness to go
above and beyond the call of duty is a great asset to the information
technology department and Collier County government.
Ana, it's a real pleasure to present to you this award and check for
selection of employee of the month.
Thank you very much for your dedicated service.
MS. FUENTES: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Page 26
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're doing the wave now back
there. Look at that.
MS. FUENTES: Thank you, again.
(Applause.)
Item #6A
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY TOM MOONEY TO DISCUSS
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IN NAPLES PARK -
DISCUSSED AND DIRECTED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO
PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT REGARDING THE BCC'S
POSITION
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public petitions,
and it's paragraph 6. We'll start with 6A, and it's a public petition
request by Tom Mooney to discuss stormwater management in Naples
Park.
MR. MOONEY: Good morning, Commissioners, Tom Mooney.
I live in Naples Park, 857 107th Avenue.
Hopefully everyone's familiar or taken a look at the cul-de-sac in
the Naples Park area behind the Heidelberg Restaurant, 711, the only
lake that is in Naples Park.
I've been a resident there for about six years. Probably three
years ago I started looking into having the lake dredged, maintained to
some degree. We've hired an aquatics company over the past five
years to help maintain the lake, which has been unsuccessful.
Come dry season, the water goes down to such a level in our lake
that everything just grows up, so it's a fruitless effort on our behalf to
continue to spend the money, those of us who live on the lake that
have contributed.
There are 34 homeowners. Half of us may put in money one
year, six of us the next year. Again, it's a fruitless effort on our behalf
Page 27
January 25,2005
to try and maintain our lake. When dry season comes, everything just
grows up and it's unmanageable.
We have one lot and lot owner, Jeanette Showalter, who is
willing to allow us access into the lake to do dredging, maintenance. I
also did a title search on the property about a year and a half ago to
find out who actually owned it, when it was made, the lake.
And the homeowners own the property. We own the lake. Each
owns their 34th interest in the property. We've had EMS out there to
rescue kids that have been out in the water that have been stuck in the
mud. There is a danger there.
We are asking the Collier County Commissioners to help
maintain our lake somehow. I don't know how that can be done. I
have been at this for three years, trying to do this myself, taken my
time, met with the homeowners, met with Robert Wiley, who is
stormwater engineer for the county, had met with Stan Chrzanowski
on several occasions, have been in to see Commission Halas and
discuss the options for the lake.
I have gone out and taken prints of the lake and tried to get
excavation companies to come in and excavate our lake and take the
fill as payment for doing the work that they were going to do. That
attempt failed when the property that we were going to use was sold or
the owner didn't want to use the access to get into the lake due to the
mess that it would make.
Exotics around the lake, pepper hedge, so on, so forth. It's just a
mess. It really is. Mosquitoes during -- you know, it's not maintained
by the county in any fashion.
So, again, I am here on my own to ask the commission,
commissioners, what should we do? How should we do it? Can you
help us dredge the lake? Can it be scraped by the -- you know, the
culvert machines you have? I don't know what they're called. You
use them along Immokalee Road to dredge the large rivers that are
there on the embankments.
Page 28
January 25,2005
Being that it's a private lake, is that asking too much from the
commissioners and the county? I don't know. I mean, I've tried to do
everything I can. I've exhausted my avenues to try and get the lake
cleaned up on my own.
I'm trying to think if I'm forgetting anything. As I had
mentioned, I had spoken with Robert Wiley, who is here today, and
Stan Chrzanowski, who is the lakes engineer.
The things I've come up with are that there is a code for the depth
of a lake in Collier County. Ours certainly doesn't meet it. You'd be
happy to find five feet of water in any given pocket of water that is
remaining at this time of year right now. Wildlife leaves. I mean, you
can just see where everything -- the fish die because we do try and put
feeders and suckers in there to clean it every year. Every year they
die.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Mooney, I -- you know, the purpose
of this particular hearing is for us not to really address the solutions
for you but to determine if it -- if we should bring it back for
consideration when the staff, perhaps, has assembled some
recommendations as to how we might deal with it.
I have two commissioners who would like to ask some questions
or comment on your request. I would say to you that there are some
complications in that it is privately owned property, and once we
establish a precedent of maintaining privately owned property, it
becomes a huge, huge fiscal burden for the county throughout Collier
County .
But nevertheless, I think Commissioner Coletta was first.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are you going to yield to Commissioner
Halas?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Halas?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOONEY: If I may, before -- you just brought up a point
Page 29
January 25, 2005
that -- the lake on the graphs and charts that I've obtained from the
county from Robert Wiley and Stan Chrzanowski indicate that our
lake is of lowest elevation in the inter (sic) block, and all of the
stormwater does go into our lake inadvertently, or however it does.
So the residents who live there feel that inadvertently, whether it
is privately owned, it is still being used by the county for stormwater
management.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Okay. Thank you. Good.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'd just like to say that I
understand where you're coming from, Mr. Mooney, but our concerns
are that there was established at one time there a stormwater MSTU
for the people there in Naples Park.
And as the county started to address the stormwater issues, the
residents in Naples Park felt that the burden was too great for them, so
they, therefore, basically said that, we want to stop phase one. I
believe there was two phases to this.
And so I think phase one was near completion and they were
going to start with phase two, which was going to be quite an
undertaking. And it was my understanding that at that point in time
the residents thought that the burden was too great.
And so basically that stormwater issue has been laying there.
And I guess before we'll get involved in anything of that nature, we
have to make sure that you have the vast majority of the residents to
address this issue.
MR. MOONEY: Are you speaking of the vast majority of the
residents of Naples Park or the vast majority of the private owners on
that lake, which is 34 homeowners?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Vast majority of the residents in
Naples Park, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think that's a valid observation.
Because if, as you say, the lake is serving as a stormwater catchment
basin for a wider area, it would seem that other people would benefit
Page 30
January 25, 2005
from contributing to this solution.
Commissioner Coletta, do you still want to make a comment?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, Commissioner Halas
covered just about everything I wanted say except for one thing, and
that's the only possibility -- and I'm not familiar with the lake.
Commissioner Halas is.
If it was -- if there was a lot of land there that could be used for
public purpose, the public could use it, then that's a whole different
thing. If it was a lake that people would recreate on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A park.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be receptive to it then, you
know. If you could have fishing in the lake with maybe some other
amenities. I'm not too sure.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if you'd take a look at your--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: There's the picture -- go to your
visual there.
MR. MUDD: Look at your teleprompter.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, that wouldn't work. That's
definitely out. I can just see them driving those motorboats down
there pulling the skiers, making the sharp turns. No, just kidding, of
course, on that.
But if there was room for a passive recreation, but there's no
room. I mean, it's completely hemmed in.
MR. MOONEY: We have one available lot for access to the lake
at this tim~.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. That wouldn't be enough
to take care of the public's needs, and it would impose a burden on the
people on each side of that empty lot if we were to purchase it for the
amount of traffic going in and out of there using the lake.
MR. MOONEY: While I'm in front of the commissioners, it's
also been discussed -- because we had a meeting in the park with the
homeowners that live there -- that if we're in a position to not be able
Page 31
January 25, 2005
to do anything with the lake, the land is titled and deeded to the
homeowners -- I had mentioned this to Commissioner Halas when I
sat with him a year ago -- that our option would be to fill the lake.
And at that time, Commissioner Halas didn't think that that was a very
viable option for us homeowners.
I also shared that with Robert Wiley and Stan Chrzanowski, and
Robert Wiley didn't feel that that was a -- would be a good thing for
the Naples Park to fill the lake and take the land that is there, those of
us that own the property there. I mean, when we bought our homes,
we knew that we owned the lake.
So I'm just mentioning that, that if we cannot do something with
our lake, which is what the residents want, that our option is to fill the
lake, according to the deeded plat in the information that I have from
title search.
Whether or not the county has any bearing on that, I don't know.
But I know that we do want a lake. I've had a meeting with the
homeowners, and we've discussed this. That would be our first
option, that we would want a lake.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'm sorry, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I would think one of your options
that's open to you is to address the different homeowner associations
in Naples Park and see if you can get a buy-in by all the stakeholders
in regards to reestablishing this stormwater MSTU, and then I think
there probably could be something that could be done in regards to --
because this is basically a holding pond or a containment pond.
So I think what you need to do is find out if you're going to get
the majority of support from all of the homeowner groups or all the
particular parties of interest, the stakeholders there, to bring it forth
later on.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you very much. I don't
hear a motion to bring this back for a formal hearing, however, would
the connnissioners have any obj ection if we ask the county attorney to
Page 32
January 25, 2005
provide a written position on our involvement with private property
and what the options might be?
Can you do that, David, at some -- at some future date that's not
too far in the future?
MR. WEIGEL: I'd be very happy to. And I look forward to
meeting with Mr. Mooney in that regard.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOONEY: Thank you, Mr. Weigel.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right, Mr. Mooney. Good luck.
MR. MOONEY: One last thing is, Janet Showalter is planning to
build on the remaining lot that is on property, so it puts us under a --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand. Yeah.
MR. MOONEY: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We appreciate the problem you've got,
and we just don't have a good clear solution for you. But I think
Commissioner Halas' comes as close to anything that we can imagine.
And it's -- it certainly is possible, with the support of the majority
of the residents and homeowners, to deal with the stormwater issue if
they're willing to contribute to the funding for that purpose, and that
might solve your problem.
And -- but good luck to you, and I'm sure David Weigel will be
happy to meet with you and talk with you about the problem.
MR. MOONEY: Thank you for your time this morning.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
Item #6B
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY DONALD SCHUMMER TO
DISCUSS MOTION OF THE BOARD TO PURCHASE THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD BETWEEN GOLDEN GATE
P ARKW A Y AND PINE RIDGE ROAD - PRESENTED AND ITEM
Page 33
January 25, 2005
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the next public petition is public
petition 6B. It's a public petition request by Donald Schummer to
discuss a motion of the board to purchase right-of-way along the west
side of Santa Barbara Boulevard between Golden Gate Parkway and
Pine Ridge Road.
And I would -- I would ask Mr. Schummer if he would -- if he
would like to wait just a little bit because we are going to discuss item
IDA in the relatively near future this morning, and that's the particular
item that this petition is asking about. It's up to Mr. Schummer at this
particular juncture.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is Mr. Schummer here?
MR. SCHUMMER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Schummer, would you be willing to
wait until we get this item on the agenda? It would be --
MR. SCHUMMER: No, sir, I would not. I would like to be able
to present my 10 minutes at this time so it's not repetitive this
afternoon, or whenever that item comes in.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's going to be repetitive no matter what
we say, but okay.
MR. SCHUMMER: I'd just soon speak as it is on the agenda.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're asking us to do something that
we've already agreed to do, Mr. Schummer.
MR. SCHUMMER: Yes, sir. I'm appealing that, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You don't want us to do it?
MR. SCHUMMER: No, sir. I don't want you to go ahead with
the proposal 1130 or the Resolution.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Schummer, this is not the right time
to do that. This is a public petition to get us to take action on a
particular item to bring it to the Board of County Commissioners.
MR. SCHUMMER: That's what I want to do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you wish to talk about an item that's
Page 34
January 25, 2005
already on the agenda, we'll have to entertain those comments that are
on the agenda. And this item is on the agenda, and we'll be talking
about it in just a few moments. You'll have an ample opportunity to
talk at that point in time.
MR. SCHUMMER: I'd as soon go along with the agenda,
because that's what I'm trying to do is to get you to do something.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it's the --
MR. SCHUMMER: That's why I had to sign in 13 days ahead of
time to get on the agenda so I could do my petition.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think we have always afforded
the opportunity for people to petition their elected officials. Even
though I do agree with your comments, Commissioner Coyle, it's an
item that is on the agenda or an item within our agenda, and I think we
ought to give the public the opportunity to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm not going to deny -- I'm not going to
deny the gentleman a chance to speak, but I just want you to know
that there's nothing we can do about your petition because it's already
on the agenda, so it's not going to be taken off and it's -- there's
nothing to be put on because it's already there.
But you can speak if you like, but we just can't take any action
based upon that.
MR. SCHUMMER: I'm well aware of that, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And--
MR. SCHUMMER: That's the way all petitions are handled.
You don't take action at that time. That's what I would like to do.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, okay. It's the wrong place, but I'll
give you the chance to talk. Are you also going to speak at the time
when we're having this item up for consideration?
MS. FILSON: Yes, he's registered to speak.
MR. SCHUMMER: I don't want to be repetitive. If somebody
else is going to cover the same thing I'm going to cover, then I
wouldn't be necessary.
Page 35
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Let's go ahead with it.
MR. SCHUMMER: Thank you. My name is Donald
Schummer, and I would like to thank you for the privilege of being
able to speak to the commissioners today. I would also like to thank
Ms. Brock of the county attorney (sic), Mr. Mudd's office for being
very helpful in getting me to -- getting on here today.
I live on Santa Barbara Boulevard on the west side near
Coronado Boulevard. I purchased my home and lived there since
1982.
At that time it was a very short road, probably less than two
miles. It dead-ended at the canal of Green, and it dead-ended at the
canal north of the -- south of the parkway. The bridge was not there,
the overpass was not there. It did connect to Logan Boulevard.
It is true I belong to two associations. I belong to the Estates
association, civic association, I belong to the Santa Barbara/Logan
Association. I'm here this morning as a U.S. citizen of Collier County
to speak about how our tax dollars are spent or wasted, and I feel that
this is a waste of taxpayers' money.
I'm a much better letter writer than I am a speaker, and I hope
you'll bear with me on that.
Everyone knows that when you talked about six-lane footprint a
couple years ago, that as soon as the combination was -- order was
given, that that would go to a full six lanes, and that's exactly -- that is
exactly what happened.
I would also like to say that my information here this morning
means nothing personal about any commissioner or any department.
It's -- I'm trying to protect my land and I'm trying to save the taxpayers
money and put it where urgent roads should be put.
Led by Commissioner Coletta, who had close ties with Swifty
(phonetic) and the Collier company, you went back on your promise
that you made several years ago in going ahead with six lanes.
The resolutions that I am requesting to be repealed is number
Page 36
January 25, 2005
2004-369, and that was passed by four members of the county
commission on 11/30, and that is pertaining to the six-laning of the
Parkway -- I mean the boulevard between the Parkway and Pine Ridge
Road.
All my information this morning is going to revolve around
accountability and credibility of the information that you, as
commissioners, has received, and I'd like to say that I don't -- I believe
you made the decision, and I don't blame you for that decision. I
blame the information that you obtained to make that decision.
I liken -- I like to compare this briefly with President Bush when
he went to war with Iraq. He got very faulty intelligent information.
That's what you people got before you made this decision.
But unlike the President, he could not turn back. You will have
the opportunity to correct something that was very wrong.
The model was wrong. There's no question that the model was
wrong in regards to the traffic on Santa Barbara Boulevard.
I have some numbers. They're on the screen. They're very small.
But the prediction was, by 2005, there would be 45,600 vehicles or
trips on Santa Barbara Boulevard. In 1999 when the count started,
there were 24,918.
The traffic peaked in 2002 to 28,692. When Livingston Road
became involved with this in the third quarter of 2004, this is the
height of transportation department's figures, the trips on Santa
Barbara Boulevard were 23,429. That's about 22,000 less than what
they had predicted at 45,600.
I would like to know of any other road in the county that has seen
a decrease in traffic in the last five (sic) years.
The traffic on that road will drop considerably when the
interchange is completed at 75 yet you have people from
transportation department say the traffic will increase. If you have an
interchange at the Parkway and you have an interchange at Pine Wood
-- Pine Ridge Road, why would anybody travel Santa Barbara
Page 37
January 25, 2005
Boulevard to a residential district? It's -- I could not figure that one
out.
Again I say, you're going to get a lot of figures and a lot of
information from the transportation department as to why this should
go forward. All I'm asking you, is to look at the bottom line at those
figures. The model was wrong. There's no necessity there for six
lanes. Should be no six lane.
I think Commissioner Henning, our commissioner from our
district, can attest to you what happened within the last two weeks on
Santa Barbara Boulevard at the Parkway. They finally put in a second
right-hand turn lane to go west into the city or to various other places.
That has been tremendous for that road. It was a bottleneck because
people could not turn.
That's the main problem. There's no problem with Santa Barbara
Boulevard when it was just a small (sic) road than it is right now.
The crossroads are the problem. When they put in the widening
(sic) the roads -- and I've been there since -- seen them do Davis
Boulevard, Parkway a couple times, Pine Ridge Road, they never put
enough turn lanes in. And the turn lanes that they put in are too short
and it backs up traffic -- through traffic backs up people trying to
make a left-hand turn.
And I would just like to make a few more comments on
credibility from the transportation department. Again, I mean no
animosity .
Mr. Calvin Jones worked for the transportation department years
ago. He brokered a multi-million dollar deal with WilsonMiller. As
soon as that was taken -- that went through, he's no longer with the
county. He's with WilsonMiller.
You have a Mr. Greg Strakaluse, or however you -- maybe I'm
pronouncing his name wrong -- Mr. Feder's right-hand man. Very--
he spoke to you at very many meetings always saying that he was
right, he was correct, and the public was wrong. Where is Mr.
Page 38
January 25, 2005
Strakaluse today? He's no longer with the transportation department.
Was he prosecuted? I don't know.
You have Mr. Gordon Douglas who was with the transportation
department and land acquisition. He -- just so happened he wasn't
doing his job correctly, but it just happened to coincide when he filed
to run for commissioner. I'm not saying -- I'm not inferring anything
there, but it's coincidental that it happened at the same time.
That's -- in regards to credibility and reliability on what
information you're getting, just last -- last month federal highway
department said there was money available for 82 and 29, regularly at
55 -- the Collier would get a 57 -- 75 percent slice of that money. Last
year it was only 50 percent. That was to improve 29 and 82.
Mr. Coletta says there's no money budgeted for that purpose. I
believe that. I know that. But where was our planning commission?
What were they planning?
The terrible traffic problem in Golden Gate, especially District 5,
did not occur overnight. It's been there for years. Why wasn't that in
the planning? What a wonderful way to get people off 75 between
Naples and Fort Myers that are coming down 82 to 29, bypass the City
of Naples, get rid of the terrific acc -- or the bad accident they had on
75 a week or two ago where four or five people lost their life. That's a
great opportunity to use that right-of-way.
Again, I don't want to be against -- personal. Mr. Coletta,
Commissioner Coletta, since he made that infamous decision and
motion -- and I would like to say everybody knows it here, that Mr.
Feder made that motion, and that was not correct.
So Mr. Coletta says, that's my words exactly, and so that went
into the motion. But like I say, it was made by Mr. Feder, but he had
-- Commissioner Coletta used the terms, political correctness,
politically fueled, politically restrained, and three or four times since
that meeting. I think we all know where the politics come in in that
decision.
Page 39
January 25, 2005
On 2/16 of '04, Mr. Coletta, again, advised, the money's no
problem. It's the lack of money that's the problem. He went on to say,
you have to be up front with the public. Are we up front? I don't
know.
He also stated that the new university would have no effect on
Immokalee Road and wouldn't be any effect in the area for four or five
years. That's kind of thinking that -- why we have the bottleneck in the
Everglades in the Estates today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Schummer.
MR. SCHUMMER: I thank you very much, and I just want to
say it's time for the county departments, the county manager's office,
and some commissioners to bite the bullet, say they were wrong, and
move on from there and take a look at those figures again.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. SCHUMMER: It's no necessity. Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #6C
PUBLIC PETITION REQUEST BY NANCY LANGE TO DISCUSS
THE REFUND OF IMPACT FEES CHARGED IN ERROR-
COUNTY ATTORNEY AND IMPACT FEE DIVISION TO
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have another public petition?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, yes. That's public petition 6C, and
that's a public petition request by Nancy Lange to discuss a refund of
an impact fee that was charged in error.
MS. LANGE: Good morning, Commissioners, residents, and
visitors of Collier County. Thank you for allowing me to present our
petition today. I also speak for my husband, Carl, who felt it would be
better if I did the talking since he has a medical condition that is
Page 40
January 25, 2005
exacerbated by stress. I'll do my best to explain our case.
We feel we have suffered an injustice at the hands of Collier
County. To quote Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., injustice anywhere is a
threat to justice everywhere.
We truly believe in America's government system -- my husband
defended that right in W orld War II -- and hope that this Board of
Commissioners will rectify what has occurred.
As you have read in my statement, we purchased lot number 133
in the Imperial Wilderness Condo Association in February of 1997,
and in January of '98, we bought a park model and placed it on this lot
and were billed and paid the impact fees to Collier County.
This was to be our winter home, but health issues arose and we
became permanent residents of Naples in 2000 and had to have larger
accommodations, and sold this home in 2002.
It was not until last year, 2004, that we learned that the impact
fees paid in 1998 were in error and that the county had overcharged us
by $2,728.88. Interestingly, if we had invested this money at even a
rate of 5 percent, over $800 of interest would have accrued to this
date.
We never really learned how or why this error occurred, but to
err is human, and we were certain Collier County would correct their
error.
We visited the office of Paula Fleishman in late spring of 2004,
and she told us the amount we had overpaid. She said that, perhaps,
this $2,728.88 would go to the new owners of the home, but she would
get back to us.
Our question was, if there had been a mistake made where less
money was paid than was required, would the new owners be
responsible to pay the difference? Yet she was saying there was a
possibility that they might be eligible to receive the overcharged
amount. We felt this does not make sense and also sounded illegal.
In early August of 2004, she left a message on our answering
Page 41
January 25, 2005
machine that the county attorney -- and I was not privy to the name of
that county attorney -- said the money would go to us, the original
owners, the ones who were the victims of the error.
Although it was not done deliberately, it does not alter the fact
that we paid the money to Collier County and we were the rightful
recipients of the overpayment made by them erroneously.
I happened to record Ms. Fleishman's telephone message -- she
left it on our answering machine -- so that my husband could listen to
it and hear it verbatim. I never thought I would ever need to make a
copy to present to this board.
At some point in the fall of 2004, and I'm -- with the four
hurricanes, my vacation, and Ms. Fleishman's, I'm not exactly certain
when in the fall this occurred -- we were told that all was in order, and
Ms. Fleishman would be presenting the proposal for reimbursement to
those who had been overcharged to this board, on November 30th,
2004, which I now believe is called the consent agenda. I think that's
what she was on, but I may stand corrected with that.
We attended this meeting on November 30th, 2004, did not hear
-- did not know to look -- get on your website and pick up what that
consent agenda was, and spoke to Ms. Fleishman, and we also spoke
to the manager of Imperial Wilderness, Richard Aldacosta, and Jack
Skolai (phonetic), a member of Imperial Wilderness board of
directors, who were present at that meeting, too, and were assured that
all went as planned, and left the building.
Noone ever let us know that what was presented at this
November 30th, 2004, meeting was apparently different than what we
had been told, that the money would be returned to us who had paid it.
In fact, had I not called Ms. Fleishman's office to determine the
status of our check on January 12th, 2005, I would not have heard that
the proposal she presented on 11/30/04 had been supposedly altered.
When I began this statement, I made reference to our belief in the
honorableness of government. Also my faith teaches the Golden Rule,
Page 42
January 25, 2005
that we did unto others as we would have them do unto us.
The Collier County Mission Statement reads, and I quote, to
deliver to our residents and visitors local government and services that
exceed expectations.
We are here today, my husband and I, in anticipation that we can
rely on the integrity of the Collier County Board of Commissioners to
return the money to us, the rightful owners.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are there any comments or questions by
the commissioners?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I just had one question. Was
the money given to the people that live there now?
MS. LANGE: No. I don't believe at this point, and I will not--
I'm not going to stand on record, because I really don't know this. But
to my knowledge, the house has just turned hands again, you know.
It's just been resold, and no one even knew that that -- this is available.
I don't know how many people were overcharged in Imperial
Wilderness. I don't know how far back the error occurred. And my
feeling is, the impact fee that I paid, my husband and I paid in '98, has
absolutely nothing to do with the -- what we sold the home for. In
fact, the home has been sold for at least $15,000 more just the end --
December of 2004 because the market will bear that at this point, as
will all of our homes here.
Any other --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: As I understand the problem, Mrs.
Lange, the -- it's not a fairness issue so much as it is a legal issue. You
no longer own the property. And according to the law, the impact fee
issues go with the title of the property, but I'll let the county attorney
deal with that.
And this is not the time for us to resolve the problem. It is
merely a time to decide if we're going to bring it back.
MS. LANGE: I am aware of that.
Page 43
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think you pretty much -- I was
going to ask the county attorney, since in her letter she stated that she
was assured by the county attorney that the overcharge would be
given to the original owner who paid for it, can anybody enlighten me
on what transpired from the time that -- unless this is hearsay and not a
true fact about the county attorney saying they would return the
money.
MS. LANGE: You were presented with a tape of Ms.
Fleishman's message where she says that on my tape, on my telephone
answering machine.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I didn't have access to the tape.
MS. LANGE: I submitted the tape to the board when I petitioned
it, when I asked to be --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, maybe the county attorney
can enlighten us here.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes, Mr. Halas, I'll do my best.
It's my understanding that a question was made to the county
attorney office early on, and -- but not in -- with the degree of
formality. In fact, it came later as an absolute request for legal services
prior to the November 30th item.
Although there's a logic for the return of money to the payor, our
code, in fact, our ordinance, I should say, relating to impact fees,
specifically states what is the common law generally, and that is that
the impact fees do, in fact, run with the land so that the best I can say
right- now is, is that the informal response from the county attorney
that was relayed through Ms. Fleishman to the Lange household was
incorrect but potentially based upon less than all of the facts at that
point in time.
That's the best of my knowledge to tell you unless someone else
from development services or an assistant county attorney here can
chime in.
Page 44
January 25, 2005
One of the problems we run into here is whether there's an
overpayment or an underpayment, it's the property itself that -- that
creates the burden, therefore, the impact fee.
And to the extent that there are changes of ownership, it is very
possible, in fact, that if there had been an inappropriate payment made
and the time had not run for statute of limitations, things of that
nature, that the property itself would be the -- and the current
ownership of the property would be who would be assessed for
additions, and in like manner, is subject to a reversion of an
overpayment.
Now, once again, we know that impact fee that's paid, just as
other fees that are paid at the time of construction, development of
property, add a value to the property because it removes an obligation
that the property and property owner, at whatever point in time would
otherwise have.
So, technically, and conceivably the county attorney can assist
the Langes with the ownership that has occurred since that time to see
if, in fact, the fairness application can come into play, and
notwithstanding the legal -- what I would call a legal bar for us to
provide the refund to the Langes at the present time.
The current ownership, how many times it has changed or flipped
since the sale of the property by the Langes, are the ones that suffer
both the benefits and! or the detriments of how the property was
conveyed to them. And typically whether express or tacit, that is, not
expressly stated in a sales contract, the sales contract, you know, takes
into consideration the obligations of the property that may already be
ongoing or not, and one might expect that the purchase price that was
received at the sale of property was based upon everything being
okay. Unfortunately, it was not. I wouldn't --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas. I'm sorry.
MR. WEIGEL: I would say, I would suggest that to the extent
that we can assist the Langes with the subsequent purchasers andn
Page 45
January 25, 2005
things of that nature, that we might be able to be part of the solution
inasmuch as it was an administrative error that created the problem in
the first place.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: David, that's what I was just going
to say. I was going to ask that you and our impact fee people, and
whomever from that department, meet with Mrs. Lange, come to a fair
and equitable decision. But then I personally -- and I'm sure other
commissioners as well, would like to know the outcome, because we
want to make sure that we hear how this was dealt with, please.
MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we, of course, have to make sure it's
done in accordance with our law.
MR. WEIGEL: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is a legal issue, nothing more than a
legal issue.
And are there any other comments from the commissioners?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No comments. Thank you very much.
MS. LANGE: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's take a five-minute break. Is that
sufficient for you? Okay.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, you have a hot mike.
Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
The next item -- and just for everybody's information, if they
hadn't already read the agenda, paragraph 7 and 8, the Board of
Zoning Appeals and advertised public hearings that have to do with
land -- with zoning and -- or planned unit developments, or whatnot,
on the agenda will be heard after lunch at one o'clock, and that's what
it says on that agenda.
Item #9A
Page 46
January 25,2005
RESOLUTION 2005-81: APPOINTING ANTHONY P. PIRES, JR.
It brings us to item 9 A, which is appointment of members to the
Land Acquisition Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion that we approve
the committee's recommendation, and that is Tony Pires.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there -- is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry? I'd just like to hear a
little bit more before I second it. I don't have a problem with it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is the appointment --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. I do second it.
Forgive me. You're getting ahead of me. I didn't even -- just sat and
getting my book open.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 9A, and this is the Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee, and we're trying to fill a vacancy
there, and I nominated Tony Pires.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that motion.
MS. FILSON: It's already seconded.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion by
Commissioner Halas, a second by Commissioner --
MS. FILSON: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Commissioner Coletta --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You can give it to her.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and Commissioner Halas.
Commissioner Coletta goes first.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm actually Fiala though.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: She's Fiala.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. Oh, are you? Which one is
Coletta and which one is Fiala?
Page 47
January 25, 2005
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimous. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, item 9B was continued until 8
February .
Item #9C
REQUEST TO RECONSIDER WARM SPRINGS PUD, PUDZ-A-
AR-6142 NAPLES SYNDICATIONS, LLC - APPROVED WI
The next item is 9C, which is a request to reconsider Warm
Springs PUD, PUDZ-A-2004-AR-6142, Naples Syndication, LLC,
and this came back as a request for reconsideration from
Commissioner Halas.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And this is -- this is a consideration only
of the reconsideration motion and --
MR. MUDD: To bring this back--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- not on the merits of the issue.
MR. MUDD: -- on an agenda at a future time, and I would -- I
would probably request that it come back on the 8th of February also.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas, is there a
motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I make a motion that we
bring back the Warm Springs PUD.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
Page 48
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Motion by Commissioner Halas, second
by Commissioner Henning.
MS. FILSON: Commissioner, I have one speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we have a speaker.
MS. FILSON: Andrew Solis.
MR. SOLIS: Andrew Solis, on behalf of Naples Syndication.
Just -- I only signed up in case the commissioners have any questions
regarding the PUD that I could answer at this time, but --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're not going to debate the merits of
the issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have a question. Is your client
going to stick to what he said on the record when this item was up?
MR. SOLIS: Commissioner Henning, we are trying to address
your concerns regarding affordable housing. We would like the
opportunity to work through those issues at least until February 8th
with you and with Commissioner Halas on density issues and see if
we can't come up with something that will address all of the
commissioners' concerns.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion on the board
(sic) .
County Attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to make
sure, if the board should vote to reconsider, which is the motion before
them today, that this item, being a PUD, is an advertised item, and that
if there is a need for readvertisement and bringing it back, that we stay
consistent with that need.
Mr. Manager, it was heard on which agenda date?
MR. MUDD: The 8th --
MR. WEIGEL: Just for the record.
MR. MUDD: The 8th of February.
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I mean, it was last heard --
MR. MUDD: Oh, this item was heard at our last meeting, which
Page 49
January 25, 2005
was the 11th of January.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. The decision at that meeting did not
result in a continuation to a date certain, so by virtue of it coming back
to reconsideration today -- and if the vote is successful for .
reconsideration -- I would suggest, to avoid complications, to put it
mildly, that the matter be advertised, be readvertised so that -- for a
date certain that you determine today after your reconsideration vote,
that way it removes the ability of anyone to claim that there's a failure
of due process for notice to the public, things of that nature.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Can the motion still not include
the February 8th as a proposed date?
MR. WEIGEL: It can.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we advertise in -- that quickly and
still meet the legal requirements?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, you can't advertise that quickly, but you
don't even have to make that specific part of your resolution as you
noted. But if you vote to reconsider, then it can be considered on the
record as a directive to staff and the petitioner that the matter will be
advertised and brought back.
To the extent that you can suggest a date, that assists the public,
but it's not required by law at this point.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm confused.
MR. WEIGEL: If you had a -- it takes about four weeks to get an
advertisement out with a 1 7 -day lead time and a 10-day
advertisement. Approximately four weeks. So if you wanted to go --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I've got the solution. What we'll
do is we'll vote only on the reconsideration with the stipulation that it
meet all legal requirements for advertising, and then we'll leave the
advertising and the scheduling up to the county attorney and the staff
to make sure it gets -- it's done properly.
MR. WEIGEL: I like that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning, you
Page 50
January 25, 2005
have a question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we include in the motion
that it would be up to the -- the burden of the petitioner and the
applicant to pay for the advertisement?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MR. WEIGEL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll put that in my motion.
MR. WEIGEL: You can, yes, absolutely.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's part of my second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a modified motion by
Commissioner Halas and a second by Commissioner Henning to
continue this --
MR. WEIGEL: No, to reconsider.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to some future date --
MR. WEIGEL: This is a motion to reconsider.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Motion to reconsider only, right?
MR. WEIGEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It passes unanimously.
MR. WEIGEL: Okay. Staff and county attorney, working with
petitioner, at petitioner's expense, will take care of the readvertisement
requirements for it to be brought back at an appropriate future date.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Does that get us to the county
Page 51
January 25, 2005
manager's report?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, it does.
Item lOA. Mrs. Filson, how many speakers do we have on this
particular item? More than five?
MS. FILSON: We have five.
MR. MUDD: Okay. Commissioner, you have a time certain at
10 (sic) o'clock. I believe that--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: At 11 o'clock?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I hope it's 11 o'clock.
MR. MUDD: Excuse me, 11 o'clock, sir. Time flies when you're
having fun -- at 11 o'clock.
We could hear it at time and get as far through it as we can, then
we can go to the 11 o'clock. I don't believe that will take the entire
half an hour. And then we have an 11 :30 time certain also.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's got to lOB.
MR. MUDD: lOB?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
Item #10B
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN ALTERNATIVE ROAD
IMPACT FEE CALCULATION AND RESULTING RATE OF
$9,619 PER 1,000 SQUARE FEET FOR THE PROPOSED
MR. MUDD: Is a recommendation to approve an alternative
road impact fee calculation and resulting rate of$9,619 per 1,000
square feet for the proposed Germain Riverchase BMW dealership.
Mr. Norm Feder, administrator of transportation services --
excuse me -- Mr. Phil Tindall, from the transportation division, will
present.
MR. TINDALL: For the record, Phil Tindall from transportation
Page 52
January 25, 2005
planning. Mr. Chris Thornton, legal council for the petitioner, will be
speaking to this item to start off.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, this is going to be -- this is only an
issue of the way it was calculated. And I understand the staff agrees
with the method in which it was calculated.
Is there a need that we get involved in all this detail?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, no. I'd like to bring up some
things on this thing -- on this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. What we do not need is a
full-blown presentation about impact fee calculations, okay? The only
thing we're talking about here is whether or not the petitioner's
recommendation for a modification to that is acceptable to the staff,
and then the commissioners will have a chance to question and debate
that, okay?
Now, can we do that? Can we make sure we don't get involved
in a lot of mundane details here that don't bear on the decision-making
process? Okay. Let's go --
MR. TINDALL: We're prepared to answer any questions, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas, do you
have questions?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do.
I was looking at the data that you collected in the areas of
concern. The areas of concern for me were that you used the location
like Ft. Myers, Lakeland, and also the Tampa area. And what I'm
concerned about is that the medium (sic) household -- annual
household income here in Naples is about $63,300.
I don't think that the annual -- the median income in Ft. Myers is
that much, nor do I think it's like that in Lakeland, and I think that
probably we should have used areas such as West Palm and Fort
Page 53
January 25,2005
Lauderdale as an area because of the household medium (sic) income.
Do you -- can you give -- enlighten me on this?
MR. THORNTON: Thank you. For the record, I'm Chris
Thornton with Treiser, Collins and Vernon.
Just for the record, I would like to make sure, before we wrap it
up, that the entire study and its exhibits, as well as Mr. Tindall's
executive summary and his exhibits are included in the record.
And then Mr. Halas, to address your concerns, we did prepare --
and maybe you've received a copy of -- some demographic data, that
-- although it's not required by the consolidated impact fee ordinance
or Appendix D -- which sets out the methodology for doing an
alternative transportation impact fee calculation for road impact fees,
we have gotten some demographic data. And I don't know if all of
you have received this, but I forwarded it to staff just yesterday.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can you tell me if the median
household income in Lakeland is around $63,000? Can you tell me if
that's the same in the Tampa area and the Ft. Myers area where you
took these results?
MR. THORNTON: I don't dispute the median income data that
you're -- that you're giving me. The data that we have put together
shows that based on -- we've shown the number of affluent households
in the vicinities where these comps. were taken from, and the Naples
-- and used the Naples BMW facility, the Germain facility, with 2004
sales data and shown that the Naples BMW facility sells, on a
percentage basis, fewer cars than the BMW facilities in all the
locations where the -- where the comps. are located.
And I can provide this chart to you. It's -- we followed the
example of the Jaguar facility. They went through this same process
one year ago. I got a copy of their table. I got the same type of data
to address the same issue. And I have that table for you, if I could
pass it --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is it because the amount of cars --
Page 54
January 25, 2005
when I drive around Naples, I'll tell you, I see more BMW s and I see
more Mercedes-Benz than I do Ford and Chevrolets. And I'm not sure
if a lot of these people buy their cars elsewhere or whether it's just the
location of your dealership at the present time, which is on Radio
Road here, and that's why you want to move up to where you have
more exposure.
But I'm just concerned at the demographics in regards to what
you use to base your criteria on. And I always look at the medium
(sic) household income, because those are the people that are going to
be able to afford luxury vehicles like the ones that you're going to be
selling up in that -- in my district.
MR. THORNTON: Yes, sir. The BMW facility on Radio Road
has been there for a while. The data that we have collected, the
demographic data, the population data we got from staff, the sales
figures we obtained from the BMW facilities themselves, that data
shows that the Naples BMW facility sells fewer cars per affluent
household than the BMW facility of any of the comps. that we used in
our study.
The Lakeland comp., it's called Fields BMW in Lakeland
actually, I believe, has skewed our trip generation numbers extremely
high. That facility sold almost three times as many BMW s as the
Naples facility did, and they have only half the number of affluent
households. I think that that facility draws people from --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Orange County.
MR. THORNTON: -- other counties, and the Naples facility
doesn't draw from other counties. The Naples facility -- and Naples is
also a smaller community.
So although the percentage of affluent households might be
higher, the raw number of affluent households is not that high
compared to the other communities.
But let me just hand this out for you just so you have it. I think
Mr. Nunner can address his selection of the compo locations.
Page 55
January 25, 2005
MR. NUNNER: For the record, JeffNunner. We tried to choose
stores similar to the store that's going to be built at Riverchase. We
chose the Lakeland store, the Tampa, Reed's BMW in Tampa, and the
Ft. Myers store. We feel each of these stores is comparable and
provided a good indication of actual impact that the store -- that the
new store will have on the county roads.
MR. THORNTON: I don't want to get into a full-blown
presentation if you're not -- if you prefer not to.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I just want to try to make sure we've
answered Commissioner Halas' questions. As I understand it, what
you've done is you've based this on the number of vehicles actually
sold in these dealerships --
MR. THORNTON: In 2004.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- which is probably a more direct
measure of the amount of traffic that you generate.
MR. THORNTON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But--
MR. THORNTON: As stated in the executive summary, the
study was prepared in strict accordance with the requirements of your
consolidated impact fee ordinance in Appendix D, and the staffhas
reviewed, analyzed, and has approved the study as being in
accordance with your ordinance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we hear from staff for just a second?
What is your position on this calculation?
MR. TINDALL: Our position is that they followed the
requirements in our impact fee regulations and the specific procedures
regarding alternative fee calculations to the letter. We have no
problem with their data at all.
I've gone through the -- Mr. Nunner's report with a fine-toothed
comb with the intent of trying to find some fault with it, and
everything was just fine as far as the data. There's nothing to argue
with as far as that goes.
Page 56
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
Questions, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to wrap this up. You're
basically basing this on the sales of new vehicles. What about resale
vehicles and what about warranty and schedule maintenance as far as
generating traffic?
MR. THORNTON: These -- the table also includes data for new
-- the second line --
MR. NUNNER: Commissioner Halas, all of the stores that we
studied provided new vehicle sales, pre-owned sales, and warranty and
service. So they were all apples to apples.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any other questions?
I think there was a motion made but not seconded.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, it was seconded.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It was seconded. Motion made by
Commissioner Henning, seconded by Commissioner Fiala.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm opposed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And one opposed. Commissioner Halas
is opposed, and so it passes 4-1.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can we go to E? We have a time certain
in 10 minutes?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think E is one we've already heard
before. It should be a very brief staff presentation. No?
Page 57
January 25, 2005
MR. MUDD: No, sir. Mr. France, the petitioner, or whoever
represents him, has changed, so it could be an item that takes a little
while. I was just informed of that about 30 minutes ago.
Sir, if you go to C, I believe you can -- you can give us direction.
That's what we're looking for.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Item #IOC
MOTION TO DISAPPROVE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO
CLOSE THE 2005 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT CYCLE TO PRIVATE SECTOR PETITIONS, IN
CONSIDERATION OF THE EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS
MR. MUDD: 10C is a recommendation to close the 2005 growth
management plan amendment cycle to private sector petitions in
consideration of the EAR-based amendments developed (sic) and
adoption process, and Mr. Joe Schmitt, the administrator for
community development and environmental services division, will
present.
MR. SCHMITT: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Joe Schmitt, administrator of community development/environmental
services division.
This is a rather simple request. All it is is a request to delay the
private amendments for the growth management plan in the fact that
we're having EAR-based amendments and many activities in regards
to many issues to address through our EAR-based amendments.
The complications arise when we have to evaluate
privately-submitted amendments against both the EAR-based
amendment passing and EAR-based amendment issues being changed.
So it's the request of staff -- I certainly -- while this has been
Page 58
January 25, 2005
done in the past, the EAR -based amendments are amendments that
appear every seven years. Strictly up to the boards -- how you want to
deal with it.
The complication involves, like I said, in regards to staffing,
private amendments, and doing the evaluation both on the issues
involving the EAR-based issues and non-EAR-based issues. But as
you recall, the most significant issues we're going to be dealing with in
this series of EAR-based amendments will be the coastal high hazard
density and the density issues involving activity centers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. I'll be honest with you,
Mr. Schmitt, I can't say that I'm in agreement that this is a good idea.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that government serves
the public. And in order to serve the public, we have to work with the
smallest individual with the largest corporation out there and treat
everybody with equal respect.
If there's a problem with the funding of it, then we may not be
charging them enough to cover the cost of it. If that's not the problem,
if it's a problem with finding qualified people, we might consider
possibly farming some of the issues out to be able to free up the time.
I'm very sympathetic to staffs needs, and I know that we have
been putting an undue burden on it for some time now, and I think
that's another issue that we have to approach and make this job much
more tolerable so that they can finish it in a more friendly atmosphere
in a time frame that might be more conducive to the public benefit.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there a time frame when we
need to adopt the EAR?
MR. SCHMITT: The EAR-based amendment -- to answer your
question, yes, we'll be bringing those back this year, this -- late this
spnng.
Page 59
January 25, 2005
They'll go through the transmittal and then adoption, and we will
bring that back through this year. So all we would like to do is any --
make sure any applicant who is filing a private amendment understand
that their private amendment may be tied up in the EAR process, in
the evaluation process, and some of the decisions based on the
EAR-based amendments may adversely impact one of the private
amendments. So that--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So to answer my question --
MR. MUDD: The time frame, sir, from DCA approval of your
EAR transmittal, you have 18 months --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Eighteen months, thank you.
MR. MUDD: -- to file your LD -- to file your -- excuse me -- to
file your amendments, and they do have a six-month extension
window, but that normally gets tied up with, you submit your LDC,
then there's comments that come back, and then -- then there's a back
and forth, and that's normally what the six-month window for an
extension gets tied up in.
MR. SCHMITT: And note that in the first paragraph of the
executive summary, and there's also a twice-a-year limitation in
submitting amendments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I agree wholeheartedly with
Commissioner Coletta. We've got a job to do, and it includes serving
the public, no matter who that public is. I believe that when times get
tough, we either -- authorize the staff to hire a consultant or two to
help them with their jobs.
I understand the staff has been -- had a heavy workload, but I
think it's our job to find ways to get it done rather than postponing the
responsibility.
I don't know. Just a sense of the commissioners, I don't know
how many -- looks to me like we've got at least three nods, but we
have three -- three speakers.
Now, let me ask the three speakers --
Page 60
January 25, 2005
MS. FILSON: David Ellis--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Who are they?
MS. FILSON: -- Michael Fernandez, and Al Zichella.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you want to speak in favor or -- you
want to speak or do you want us to take a vote? You going to waive?
Okay.
Is there amotion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I make a motion that we
disapprove staff recommendations.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Coletta, second by Commissi9ner Halas.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimously.
MR. SCHMITT: No problem. We will--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We--
MR. MUDD: Commissioners, that brings us to item -- I think we
can --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You've got four minutes.
MR. MUDD: I think we could start that item, if you want.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we probably can.
Item #10D
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE SECOND
Page 61
January 25, 2005
CONSERVATION COLLIER ACTIVE ACQUISITION LIST AND
DIRECTION FOR STAFF TO ACTIVELY PURSUE PROJECTS
RECOMMENDED WITHIN THE A CATEGORY - APPROVED &
WILL RECONSIDER PARCEL AT PINE RIDGE ROAD/LOGAN
BOULEVARD
MR. MUDD: Okay. Then we're going to cover 10D. This item
to be heard at 11 a.m., and it's 10:57 right now. It's a recommendation
for the approval of the second Conservation Collier active acquisition
list and direction for staff to actively pursue projects recommended
within the A category. And Alex Sulecki will present.
MS. SULECKI: Good morning, Commissioners, Mr. Chairman,
all.
This morning I had prepared a short presentation -- oh, I'm sorry.
F or the record, I'm Alex Sulecki, coordinator of your Conservation
Collier Program, and I'm here today to seek your approval for the
second Conservation Collier active acquisition list.
Several committee members are also present and some staff from
our real estate services department.
And Mr. Chairman, I have prepared a short presentation, and I
can go through that, or I can simply answer questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I understand there are essentially four
items that are added to this acquisition list. Can you concentrate on
the ones that have been added? Because I think we've already
approved the other ones; is that not true?
MS. SULECKI: That's true, but it's a whole list. It includes a B
and C category as well.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MS. SULECKI: I can concentrate on them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. Thank you very much.
MS. SULECKI: Okay.
MR. MUDD: Hit the little screen one, right there.
Page 62
January 25, 2005
MS. SULECKI: Okay. Just to give you a general status update,
we understand from our F eb -- or January -- December workshop that
we have 75 million for land purchases, plus management, 15 percent
for management and administration, and acquisition costs.
As of today, we've acquired approximately 120 acres out of the
total 447 that were approved on our first active acquisition list. We
have developed an interim management plan for three of those
properties. One of them is before you today on the consent agenda.
And we've completed the second evaluation and ranking cycle and
today are requesting that you approve the additional purchase of 282
acres, which includes acreage in a long-term multi-parcel project.
As you'll remember we have the A, B, and C category. A
categories are those which we would like you to instruct us to go buy.
They're prioritized as high, medium, and low. All of the four in this
cycle are prioritized as high.
The B category, we are not going to pursue them at this cycle,
but we'll rerank them during the next cycle.
And the C category, we are not interested in purchasing.
Okay. So the map on the left shows you all of the qualified
projects or properties that we looked at this cycle, and on the right you
can see the four that we're recommending as A category properties.
And this shows you -- this is the map that we provided in your
executive summary, and it shows you all of the properties that, if this
new list is approved, will be on our A list.
Cycle one, you can see we had about 36 million and a half -- and
630 thousand dollars (sic), cycle two we're asking for approval for
another, approximately $8 million -- I think I said 36,000. I'm not
used to speaking in millions -- for a total, with all of these properties,
of about $44 and a half million.
And technically those properties have already been purchased,
and some of them that are on here are no longer on our active
acquisition list but they're included in the map and the figures so you
Page 63
January 25, 2005
can see the entire property cost picture and also so that you can get a
sense of where these properties are and what the size scale is.
There's also acquisition costs that come with these. In your
executive summary, we've talked about $240,000, which includes
things like title work, surveys, appraisals, recording, and that is for the
properties that we have immediately with applications.
But long-term -- we have a long-term acquisition project,
Winchester Head, that stretching over about five years, we've
estimated, will add another million dollars to those acquisition costs
because they're very small properties, and we're assuming they're
going to come in one at a time. If they don't, we will bundle and do
the best we can to reduce those costs. This is a high-cost estimate.
And you will recall that we talked about, in our workshop, the
totals figures. And cycle one, we bought $24 million worth of
properties. Properties left remaining to buyout of cycle one, I think
we gave you 8 million as that figure, but we did not include the
long-term unit -- Golden Gate Estates unit 53 costs estimated out over
five years, so we've added those in, for a total for cycle one of 36.6
million.
And then at that time we did not know what the recommended
cost would be for this cycle, and it turned out to be about eight
million, which also includes the long-term cost for Winchester Head.
So the total then is 44.6 million, which is about the same as we
told you then. I think it's a little bit less. And so we have 30.4 million
left out of the 75 million that you've authorized us to spend.
So our cycle two recommended properties, the Collier
Development Corporation, school board section 24 property,
Watkins-Jones, and Winchester Head, multi-parcel project. The
estimated value for the Collier Development Corporation parcel,
$1,121,000.
And this is it. It's along the Gordon River. It encompasses three
different parcels here. There's a lot of information about it. I've
Page 64
January 25, 2005
included that in your summaries. Do you want me to go through that
information? Okay.
The other parcel is the school board section 24, and this is about
65 acres just east of the Golden Gate Canal. You can see it's just east
of Golden Gate City. Estimated value, a little over a million dollars.
That parcel has some endangered species on it, gopher tortoise, red
cockaded woodpecker. It's right next to a noted colony.
Another parcel is the Watkins-Jones property, which is up off of
u.s. 41, just south of the Germain dealership. This buffers an
outstanding Florida water and a number of other conservation pieces,
and it will provide some protections for endangered species there. Its
value is estimated to be $1,126,000.
And then the final is the Winchester Head multi-parcel project.
We have at present five property owners who have agreed to sell their
properties, or they've agreed to at least look at our estimates, our
appraisals. And this is a project that has a total of about 114
undeveloped lots, 141 acres. We made the boundaries of it based on
aerials, wetland maps, and lidar maps that show elevations. We've not
included any developed properties.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Alex, I just want to make sure we clarify
this for the people who are seeing it. That estimated value of $4.7
million, I don't think, includes just those highlighted yellow spots on
this --
MS. SULECKI: No, it includes --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It includes that entire crossed-hatched
area.
MS. SULECKI: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So that's important --
MS. SULECKI: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- because it's a large parcel of property.
Thank you.
MS. SULECKI: Hundred and forty-one acres, 114 lots.
Page 65
January 25, 2005
For this property, we -- Big Cypress Basin has offered us
$70,000 in some assist -- funding assistance to help pay for some
administrative work to acquire the properties more quickly than we
could do just with staff. And the scope of that work would include
things like developing an acquisition strategy, personally contacting
owners, funding -- finding funding sources and grants, and preparing
documents and things like that.
In this area, we're showing the recent transfers of property.
There have been a few, about seven, but nobody's building there yet,
and DEP has denied two permits in there based on cumulative wetland
impacts.
The Army Corps has also approved use of mitigation funds to
buy properties in this area, so we do expect some partners to come
onboard with this in the future.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now, the -- those are the four
properties that you're recommending that you proceed ahead with --
MS. SULECKI: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- for acquisition. Now, there were a
number of properties that are classified as B category for the next
cycle for which you do not -- you're not seeking approval to move
ahead, but you will accept applications from property owners in that
area if they wish to proceed; is that a correct statement?
MS. SULECKI: Well, the B -- it's kind of correct. The B list
properties are those we're not going to go ahead with now, but we're
going to wait until the next cycle and we're going to put them back
into the mix and see how they stack up.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we'll get the chance to consider those
at the next cycle --
MS. SULECKI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- is that essentially --
MS. SULECKI: Automatically. If they're still available, if they
haven't been sold, if the owners are still willing.
Page 66
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And the C categories you're not planning
on pursuing at all?
MS. SULECKI: No. But the owners can resubmit those,
because in the future they may be adjacent to other parcels.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: In which case we'll have the chance to
consider it again in the future.
MS. SULECKI: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's no point in really considering
those right now?
MS. SULECKI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Unless we have an objection to
your elimination of some of these from consideration, right?
MS. SULECKI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do any of the commissioners have
questions concerning this list?
Yes, Commissioner -- who was first, Commissioner Henning or
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The properties within the rural
fringe area, does that include the density and the TDRs? I mean, will
we own those TDRs, or is that -- once it's removed?
MS. SULECKI: Once Conservation Collier buys the property,
there are no development rights. They're severed.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Are we buying those
rights?
MS. SULECKI: My understanding is we are not, that they are--
they no longer exist. I think that was one of the concerns initially with
the program, and so it was set up that way, that we would not be
buying and selling TDRs.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The -- I guess the
concern that I have is we're looking at doing some growth
management plan amendments where the ultimate would be for the
Page 67
January 25, 2005
property to go to government, and are we really spending the
taxpayers' money wisely by doing this?
The second thing I want to point out, in this area of the
Winchester Head, I would say that the average price for an acre and a
quarter is 50,000. And, in fact, I was at an auction that an acre and a
quarter went for $173,000.
So there is development pressure in this area. And I'm, you know
__ based upon comps., maybe your price on the estimates are very low
for the Winchester.
MS. SULECKI: It's true they could be, because we don't know
what's going to happen with the real estate market.
We recently asked staff to do an appraisal of this area and what
they were worth today. And how I figured that five years ahead was
to take 30,000 an acre. Now, I know that they're selling for a little bit
more than that, but they're like an acre and a quarter. But 30,000 an
acre, and then add 10 percent yearly, and that's how I figured out. It
may be low. I can't say for sure, but that seemed to be the consensus
of everybody, what would be reasonable to project.
And on the other -- the other issue, the TDRs, that is one issue
that has been evaluated by -- by the committee as they look at these
properties. And there were several that, you know, were in this area
that there could conceivably be TDRs for, and so that did come up in
discussion. It's being looked at.
And then there's also the opportunity, if we were to buy a piece
in that area, for the owner to pull the TDRs offbefore we buy it. So
there's some -- there's some time where we can evaluate all these
issues between when we decide we'd like to buy it and we buy it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think the board needs to
have that discussion --
MS. SULECKI: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- because at the end -- we're the
end responsibility of the taxpayers' money.
Page 68
January 25, 2005
MS. SULECKI: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I think there could be some
benefits and potential losses to the taxpayers on a committee making
recommendations not having the concern of the taxpayers in mind.
One other thing, Commissioners, there was a parcel on the
acquisition list. The owner put it on there wanting to sell. There's
acreage at the corner of Pine Ridge Road and Logan. And this is the
only property that we had a lot of input from residents wanting to
purchase that property. The taxpayers wanted the county to purchase
this property.
The committee, from what I'm told, is -- had a lot of concerns
because the exotics, the owner was willing to work with the county to
remove some of those exotics. There was concern about the property
being barren at that time and needed to be revegetation (sic).
When the public comes out and has a -- such as this program, a
high priority for a particular piece of parcel, which mind you, it's the
only parcel in District 3, I think that we should listen.
I talked to the owner. He's willing to put it back on the
acquisition, and I hope that we can direct the Conservation Collier to
consider this as the acquisition and put it on A.
So if that's going to be the direction, if there's going to be a
motion, I would like for that to be included into the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I don't -- can we put it on A?
Isn't it the committee that decides which -- what their
recommendations are for A, B, and C?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I think that we're the final
decision and that we should give that direction. And again, the owner
is willing to resubmit that.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I look -- these aren't my questions.
We're just talking now. I love the fact that it's local-- I mean that it's
urban, rather -- rather than rural, because that was one of the
Page 69
January 25, 2005
objectives of the program, but I don't know how much environmental
value there is.
But I'm willing to take a look at it and listen to what other people
have to say. That isn't my question. Can I ask you --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You forfeited your chance to ask
a question.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, I didn't. I'm going to just talk
anyway.
Alex, one of the things was just a light housekeeping thing. On
all of these backups that you gave us, I was wondering if, in the future,
you might be able to just put an A, B, or C on these little, like property
summaries, so I would know which one we're looking at. Thank you.
That's just housekeeping.
MS. SULECKI: Certainly, be happy to.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And the second thing I wanted to
ask was, with this Winchester Head, is that in -- it looks like it's in the
flowway, from what I can see. Is that correct?
MS. SULECKI: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Is it adjoining to or adjacent to
CREVVlands,perchance?
MS. SULECKI: No, it's not.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
MS. SULECKI: No. It's in the Estates. It's in the middle of unit
62 -- 65 and 62.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But it is in a flowway. I think that
that's very important for us to realize.
MS. SULECKI: It is in a flowway, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. There's quite a bit of
support in the area for this particular VV oodchester Hedge ( sic) to be
included in the Conservation Collier, but I'd like to weigh in on
Page 70
January 25, 2005
Commissioner Henning's concern over the transfer o(development
credits and what it means to the taxpayers.
And the man's absolutely right, there's got to be a mechanism, but
I don't think we have to go back and reinvent the wheel and say that
we're going to sever them if we end up with them. All we have to do
is bargain for our best price possible and then subtract out what the
value of the TDR would be and have the current owner sell it off and
reduce the price by that much, and then we're assured not only the
taxpayers having more funds to work with, we're assured of the fact
that there's going to be funds available for restoration if we agree on
that later today, and would be able to meet the other needs of the
public.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Weighing in on what
Commissioner Henning had to say in regards to the property located at
Logan and Pine Ridge. I think what we need to do is take care of the
issues that we have here today and give direction to the Conservation
Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee to go back and look at
that particular property that you said that that individual wanted to
probably resubmit as something that the county might want to buy.
So I think what we need to do is, if you want me to, I'll make a
motion that we approve the properties that were listed here today, and
with the -- with the -- and give direction to the Conservation Collier
land acquisition to look at this particular property that Commissioner
Henning had mentioned.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Halas, there's a second by Commissioner Fiala.
We have public speakers and we have some more questions by
commISSIoners.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. And I'll be
Page 71
January 25, 2005
brief.
I just would wonder if the motion maker and the second would
consider adding that we instruct staff and Collier 2000 to look at the
proposition as far as the transfer of development credits and using
them in a way that will benefit the county by having the owner
separate them after we agree on the price and then lowering the price
by that amount.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll correct my motion to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, I'm sorry--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- but could I raise a question here? That
is a different policy issue than the approval of this committee's
recommendations. It is a good one and one I would support, but I'm
not sure that we can bundle it with this, because in order to do that,
we've got to change an ordinance.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What we'd have to do is make two
motions here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Weigel?
MR. WEIGEL: I think that the better procedure would be to
have two motions, because ultimately Mr. Coletta's inclusion provides
a direction to staff, kind of indirectly a direction to staff to do all
things to bring it back for consideration, but this can be accomplished
in a separate motion. You can make as many motions after the initial
one as you wish to to direct --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just a clarification. The motion -- the
second motion would have the effect of bringing back the other parcel
for consideration, I think. Is that the intent?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, that was --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or is it the intent to make a modification
to the TDR program to strip the cost of the TDRs from property before
we make an offer?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's going to be -- have to be
Page 72
January 25, 2005
another motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. My concern is that there is a
procedural question that we might have to deal with that is entirely
separate from this one, okay?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But can we handle the first motion first?
Commissioner Henning has a question, then I --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I leave my motion as it stands.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. As it stood before Commissioner
Coletta's --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And then we'll get back to
Commissioner Coletta's concern and deal with --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's exactly right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that one secondly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Which was to approve the four
properties and encourage this property to go back and be reconsidered;
is that correct?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And my second is still standing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is your motion for that
reconsidering of that property to put it back on the A list?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, that's -- all that is is to have
them go back and look at it, and just look and make sure that it
qualifies, and then if it needs to -- let the Conservation of Collier (sic)
make that determination. That's what they're there for.
But we're telling them to go back and look at it because you said
that this particular individual would like to put this back on the list and
have the Conservation Collier land advisory group look at this again.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Looks like it has some viable assets
Page 73
January 25, 2005
to it --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- from what I've read, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then before I call for a vote, Alex, can
you take me back to the Winchester Head property for just a moment.
I'm going to -- will you show that up here?
I'm just going to make a statement about this, and then we'll get
on with the vote. I don't want to spend a lot of time about it -- with it.
But can you get that larger area visual?
MS. SULECKI: You want this bigger?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, real big.
The concern is that that entire area has valuable -- or is of great
environmental value, and I presume that's why you want to purchase
it.
But while we're purchasing one little parcel at a time, we are
never sure that we'll ever get it all or even a large portion of it, maybe
not even more than a third, because if property values escalate, as we
can see they are, then we will get to the point where we can't afford to
buy that entire property unless we do it very, very quickly before the
values escalate.
What my concern is is that we allocate money to buy a handful of
those properties and then suddenly, over a couple of years, the value
of that entire parcel becomes so great that we cannot possibly
complete the acquisition of that large parcel, and that leaves us
holding a few little pieces of land in that entire area, which provide us
no tangible benefits whatsoever.
I am concerned about that process, and I will probably vote no on
the motion only for that reason. But nevertheless we have one more
comment from Commissioner Halas, and we have three --
MS. FILSON: One.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: One speaker, okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I also believe that there's going to
Page 74
January 25, 2005
be a partnership here with the South Florida Water Management that
they were going to help assist. And I'm hoping that in the future that
we can look forward to South Water Management (sic) getting
involved more so in the acquisition of this land, since it is of great
importance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And let's hear the public speaker.
MS. FILSON: We have one speaker, Nicole Ryan.
MS. RYAN: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record,
Nicole Ryan, here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
And the Conservancy does support the four parcels that have been
nominated for the A list.
And I believe that you've discussed them thoroughly, so I did just
want to touch on what Commissioner Halas had said about the
Winchester Head parcels.
This is a great opportunity to partner with the Big Cypress Basin,
and I believe that with their additional assistance, the 70,000, that will
help in the acquisition costs and the administrative costs of that, that
that will be an opportunity to hopefully get those parcels purchased in
a more timely manner. There could be other potential partnerships in
the future of the soil and water conservation district.
So we feel comfortable recommending the Winchester Head
parcel for inclusion on the A list, and we support the other three
parcels as well. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Nicole.
No public -- no more public speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, that was your final speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a motion on the floor.
Is there any further discussion?
Then all in --
MS. SULECKI: May I add something before you --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
MS. SULECKI: Okay. First I want to mentioned that the TDR
Page 75
January 25, 2005
__ in the TDR program, when TDRs are on publicly owned property,
they're not -- there are no TD Rs, is that what I'm understanding?
One of our properties, the school board property, is -- well,
currently it's not in the rural fringe, but it may be switched into there,
so that's not an issue there.
And then as far as the risks of the multi-parcel project, we have
definitely considered those. But this particular area is definitely a
wetland, and we felt that we were providing some relief to property
owners who -- it would be outrageously expensive to build there.
It's in a flowway, and you can see that on the screen, as it comes
all the way down from the Okaloacoochie -- or Camp Keais Strand.
And also, DEP isn't permitting in there right now, so --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's an important point, since I'm the
only one that's raised that issue. You're telling me that it can't really be
developed in there anyway right now?
MS. SULECKI: I'm telling you that it's going to be very
difficult, and someone's going to have to fight DEP.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MS. SULECKI: And the other thing -- other point I want to
make is that property was nominated by one of our engineers, Stan
Chrzanowski, because there are severe drainage issues in the Estates.
And this was conceived as a way to help the surrounding property
owners with drainage issues.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, that certainly addresses my
concerns.
MS. SULECKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MS. SULECKI: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor -- you want to vote
on this or do you want to talk some more?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nope, I'm all set.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll call the question.
Page 76
January 25, 2005
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any opposed, by like sign?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimously.
Now let's deal with Commissioner Coletta's earlier concern.
And Commissioner Henning, you have a question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it's very important on the
agenda that everybody understands there's a potential of extra TDR
credits considered in neutral lands and sending lands, and those are
very valuable. One of the ultimate -- the bottom line is, once the
TD Rs are removed, that these lands be donated to a government
agency. So if the Talon property is already purchased, it's purchased.
If it's not --
MS. SULECKI: We're waiting on that one.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- we should -- we should wait
till the purchase, because that's going to ultimately affect the outcome
on whether it's given or will be less valuable than the estimated market
value. That is my only point, and I just hope that our staff and
advisory board proceeds with caution.
MS. SULECKI: Absolutely, we agree. And our purchase of that
property, though it was approved, is on hold until that very issue is
determined.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Oh, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. On the TDR issue, I was
wondering -- I don't see where it would be a violation of any of our
ordinances. If it takes place before the sale, before it's transferred to
Page 77
January 25, 2005
the county government where the TDRs are stripped by the present
owner and it's recognized that the value of those TDRs are such and
such, it serves two benefits.
One, it gives the taxpayer more money to be able to put into the
future of the program, and number two, it gives us an ability to be able
to restore some of those lands, and I commend Commissioner
Henning for bringing the issue up.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have -- do you want a
formal motion or do you want just guidance to staff to proceed with
this procedure?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: What do you want,
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think there's a full
understanding of the process, and I don't think the horse got out of the
gate yet, so I'm kind of happy with the way they're proceeding and --
for the benefit of all.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, let's consider this guidance for
staff to use that procedure in valuing all the properties, okay? And if
you need any administrative changes or approvals by us that are more
formal, please get them to us as quickly as possible.
MS. SULECKI: Very good.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay? Good. Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Great job, Alex.
MS. SULECKI: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Now, let's move to -
Item #12A
MOTION INSTRUCTING STAFF TO RETURN WITH
RECOMMENDATIONS OF POLICY FOR GOVERNING ALL
ADVISORY COMMITTEES IN COLLIER COUNTY AND TO
Page 78
January 25, 2005
GIVE SPECIFIC INSTRUCTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE
CARIBBEAN GARDENS TASK FORCE COMMITTEE-
.AEffiOVED
MR. MUDD: 12A, sir, and that's a time certain at 11 :30.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And that is, this item to be heard at 11 :30. It's a
recommendation that pursuant to ordinance number 2001-55,
sometimes referred to as the advisory board ordinance, the Board of
County Commissioners adopt resolution number 2005, and whatever
number that's going to be, establishing the Caribbean Gardens Task
Force Committee and discuss any continuing role of the staff in
connection with the volunteer Blue Ribbon Committee.
And Mr. Michael Pettit, the assistant county attorney, the deputy
county attorney, will present, excuse me.
MR. PETTIT: Good morning, Commissioners. Mike Pettit, the
chief assistant county attorney. I have, at board direction, brought
back before you a proposed resolution to establish a formal task--
we're going to call it a task force committee pursuant to our ordinance,
2001-55.
It -- the features of the resolution are that it will dissolve in two
years. I've made an assumption that -- two years from the date of the
first appointment. I made an assumption that this would be a single
project and a project that would come to fruition one way or another
within that two-year period.
And you can see that under section four we've assigned
functions, powers, and duties to the committee.
While I had the opportunity, if the board is of a mind to adopt
this resolution, in speaking with Ms. Filson, she gave me a good
suggestion about changing the date of the terms. She would like under
section one, the final sentence to read that the committee members
shall serve a term of two years which will commence upon the date of
Page 79
January 25, 2005
the first appointment to the committee, and similarly, under section .
five, the sunset provision, to also tie the sunsetting of the committee to
the date of the first appointment, because she points out, justly, that it's
going to take her some time to advertise to get people appointed to the
committee, if, in fact, the committee's created today.
In addition, during your discussion on December 14th, it was my
understanding that the board might consider the continuing role of
staff related to the volunteer Blue Ribbon Committee.
What I wanted to clarify today was that it's my understanding
that committee is a volunteer group of citizens. It has not been created
in a -- pursuant to formal action by the board. I have attended some of
those meetings, and I understand that staff, pursuant to your direction,
is continuing to attend and assist in those meetings.
And if you would like to discuss that, certainly you can.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any questions or comments by
commissioners? Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coletta.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- Coletta, you were first.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think that this is a better
approach than we had before, but I have some various concerns of the
fact that we don't even have a price set for this property yet, and all
we're doing is we're getting -- we're trying to come up with all sorts of
uses, we're trying to come up with purposes, we're getting the public
involved more and more.
What we're creating is a market that's going to valuate this
property as an expeded (sic) pace by putting so much attention on it.
I really don't have any problem with the group that's in place now
acting on their own and doing their own research as much as they
want. The county government, they put their blessing on something
when we haven't even reached a price on the property. It sort of
Page 80
January 25, 2005
scares me. I've got a feeling that we're going to price ourselves out of
the market by our own actions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Pettit, I received a copy of
your correspondence to the Board of Commissioners through David
Weigel on the issue of the Blue Ribbon Committee seeking donations.
MR. PETTIT: Correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Now, my question and concern
is when we provide legal -- when we provide staff to this Blue Ribbon
Committee, is that perceived that we're accepting donations or is it
not?
MR. PETTIT: Commissioner, generally what I tried to provide
you was a summary of the law on a government, local government,
accepting donations.
I believe that if you -- somebody comes forward and offers the
government, not an individual, not an individual government
employee or the elected official, but the government, the county, a
donation for a purpose -- if this board finds in an open meeting that
there's a public purpose to accept that donation, it can, and provided
there's obviously not some sort of quid pro quo being discussed.
With respect to the Blue Ribbon Committee, it's my
understanding that that's a volunteer committee of citizens, and
certainly they are free to raise money if they're able to do that. And if
they wish to come forward and do -- and offer it as a donation to the
county commissioners for a specific purpose at a regularly scheduled
meeting, I believe legally they can do that.
I would strongly caution, however, the use of our staff in
fundraising activities. And I think as a group, you made that relatively
clear that none of you are interested in having that occur. And the
reason I do that is that it's one thing for someone to come forward and
offer the government a donation to assist the government in its
functions. It's another thing to send government employees out
Page 81
January 25, 2005
individually and seek donations.
And I believe that would create a perception in the public of
potential conflicts, potential ethics ordinance issues, whether, indeed,
they were there or not.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: So I would caution you against using staff for that
purpose.
I believe that the board could find as a valid public purpose, if it
wishes, that staff involvement of some type with a volunteer
organization is okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. PETTIT: We could certainly -- you could find that they
would be free to use county facilities to have meetings and that sort of
thing. But I would caution against the use of staff to be affirmatively
involved in a volunteer organization's solicitation of money.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me ask a quick question about that.
What is the difference in the staff doing that and an officially
designated committee doing that?
MR. PETTIT: I don't think there would be one --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I don't --
MR. PETTIT: -- and that's why I'm suggest -- one of the things I
thought we -- I was -- as I went back and looked at the minutes, I
thought what the board worked hard to try to get to on the December
14 meeting was, that the task force committee, if one was formally
created, would not be a committee out seeking donations from the
whole world. It would be a committee that would review funding
sources, primarily grants.
There may be -- and I don't know this -- but there may be
nonprofit agencies who offer money to government to conserve lands.
That's a possibility also. But that was my understanding of the
board's discussion and direction from December 14, that the
committee would not be seeking private donations.
Page 82
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But the resolution, although it is
carefully worded, does mention that this committee would be
accepting recommendations and suggestions with respect to donations
and they would identify, evaluate, and make recommendations
concerning potential government and nonprofit funding sources.
I can still see cases where non-profit organizations could have a
potential conflict of interest if they are also coming to us to get
approvals for zoning or other governmental actions.
So I feel very uncomfortable with having funding issues
associated with the committee.
But Commissioner Halas has some questions.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I think originally when we
started the idea of this, we basically gave direction to this ad hoc
committee to go out and solicit donations, but it was not going to be
tied directly with Collier County government and that -- therefore
there would be no conflict of interest as long as we make sure that that
remains as such, that this committee does only nothing more than to
see if they can come up with additional funding to offset the actual
price of the land that the taxpayers are going to have to pay, which
was already approved at .15 mills for $40 million, I believe.
So that was the only direction that was really given to this
committee, and I don't think that we need to involve staff in this in any
way. As you said earlier, we just provide the location for them to
meet, but I don't believe that we need to get involved where staff
needs to be tied in with this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If I could make -- make another
comment here. It is common for us to have committees that are not
officially designated by the county commission and to provide staff
input and assistance. We have a number of them throughout Collier
County right now.
Now, I'm raising this question because it addresses a broader
policy issue. Should we, in fact, establish a policy that any
Page 83
January 25, 2005
arganizatian that is gaing to. be making recammendatians to. us and
that might ask far assistance from staff, shauld all af thase
arganizatians be designated as afficial advisary graups by the Baard
of Caunty Cammissianers and shauld their members be determined by
us? And if sa, what are the criteria far selecting them?
It apens up a very bra ad pal icy issue that I dan't think we've
thought aut. And I really think that we need to. salve that, because this
is prabably the secand ar third time this issue has came up befare us,
and we cannot deal with it, in my apinion, an a piecemeal basis, just
treat one -- ane cammittee the way we want to. treat it this week and
treat an ather cammittee a different way next week. I think we shauld
be cansistent in the way we handle the advisary cammittees we have
in Callier Caunty.
And Cammissianer Caletta brings up a very impartant issue, and
that is, if we have a committee start pulling tagether plans far what
will be dane with this and they will -- they will have to. be discussed in
public befare we get a price far this property, it cauld very well cause
the price to. inflate.
And I think his recammendatian is well cansidered that, perhaps,
what we shauld be daing is waiting until we get a price far this thing
and then start warking this aut, and that will give us time to. answer
the braader palicy issues.
Will we treat all cammittees in a consistent manner? Will we
have cansistent pracedures far all cammittees, ar will we treat them
differently based upan aur perceptian af them at any single paint in
time?
And I wauld -- I wauld quite frankly, like to. see us take the time
to laak at the braader palicy issue and then came back with a
recommendatian, and perhaps we cauld put this issue to bed once and
far all, because I guarantee you ance this ane's dane, there's gaing to.
be anather ane that paps up, and I have a cauple af naminatians for
thase right naw.
Page 84
January 25,2005
But -- sa it's an issue, I think, that has braader implicatians, and it
deserves a little time.
And Cammissianer Henning naw has a camment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Cammissianer Cayle, yau
braught up a new tapic that needs to. be discussed and given directian
by the Baard af Cammissianers.
What this -- this new ardinance and new cammittee is going to.
do is discuss -- and they can -- I knaw they can discuss abaut the price
and then later an talk abaut the different optians as far as the land use,
but all thase shauld be done under the sunshine and nat behind closed
daars.
And being that there are gaing to. be same recammendatians,
thase -- thase discussions shauld be taking place in the public. And as
far as the land uses, we can give direction nat to. discuss abaut the
specific patentialland uses an the piece afpraperty. Let's facus on
acquiring the piece af property and then go. farward with the different
uses an the praperty.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Two. issues. One is that raising the issue
af cansistency and fair treatment in gavernment is nat a new issue to.
be raised here. It is -- it underlies all afthe decisians we make here.
Secandly, perhaps yau can enlighten us as to. where these
discussions are taking place behind clased doars under the current
circumstances.
Do. you have examples af clased-daar discussians?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: When yau're under the
sunshine, it's a violatian af the law to. cammunicate an -- far members
to. cammunicate on a particular item that might be recammended. A
goad example is with planning cammissian. They are under the
sunshine. They don't talk abaut items -- two. members dan't get
together and talk. When yau're nat under the sunshine yau don't have
that impediment.
I shauldn't say it's an impediment. I think it's a goad thing. I
Page 85
January 25, 2005
know it's cumbersame, but it's a gaad thing far the public far things to.
be discussed at a public farum.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I came back to. my first questian,
do. yau have any evidence that any closed-daor discussians have been
undertaken by anybady an this cammission, ar anybady an this
cammittee we're discussing?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yau knaw, I dan't think--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Or -- is this an allegatian ar is it just --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I dan't think that's a fair
questian. The anly -- the anly statement I'm trying to. make is, when
we talk abaut public lands, it ought to. be discussed in a public meeting
and remave thase suspicians abaut things being dane with two
members aver a lunch ar a breakfast ar whatever.
If we do. things -- if the baard tries to. do. things -- tries to. bring
cammittees tagether under the sunshine, I think the public has a better
feeling about, gavernment is being run haw they wauld want it to.
under the laws af the sunshine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then yau would agree, then, with my
prapasal that we put all these cammittees under the sunshine?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, again, I think that's a
warthy discus sian abaut your cancems af ather cammittees and staff
liaisan supparting these private ones. I think it's a gaad canversatian
to have, but I dan't think it's apprapriate at this time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissianer Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Thank yau very much,
bringing this back an hame.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I think this cammittee was strictly
designed to. determine fundraising, haw to. get the funds, get ideas of
where they can go.. They weren't designed to. -- they weren't
organized to. design a park.
I think in their excitement -- and I would have been that excited,
Page 86
January 25, 2005
to.o -- I wauld have wanted to. do. that. And I completely agree with
Cammissianer Halas, that cantinues to drive the price up. If I were
the owners, I'd wait to.o to. see what all they cauld came up with. Not
anly that, but the cammunity then gets very excited abaut what they're
daing, and then the price even goes up mare. I think they shauld
strictly be limited ar facused on fundraising.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But again, I dan't knaw if I have the
right to. say that, but that's what I thaught they were arganized to do..
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I knaw that they've come up
with same ideas. I'd like to. see them cantinue to. pursue thase ideas.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm nat sure where that leaves us. The
cammittee exists right naw, and we have no. cantral aver it. We didn't
designate the cammittee, we didn't name the peaple an the cammittee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It exists, and it can do. anything that it
wants to. do. as it has been daing in a very prafessianal manner.
I wauld remind you that this is the same committee that existed at
the time when the peaple were trying to. make up their mind whether
ar nat they wauld vote far the Canservatian Collier--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, nabady's cantesting the
peaple an the cammittee.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, they are. They are cantesting it.
They've alleged that there are samehaw clased-daar discussians and
that peaple have a canflict af interest. That statement's been made
publicly. And these peaple have nat.
And it's impartant that we recagnize that if this cammittee wants
to. cantinue warking, they have every right to. do. sa no. matter what we
say here, akay?
If that is true, then let's go to. the real issue af the discussian, that
is to. determine whether or nat we want to. create anather cammittee to.
Page 87
January 25, 2005
do. something different, and I think that's what we shauld be talking
about. And if there is a mati an to. create anather cammittee --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sa moved.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- that will do. samething, then let's hear
it.
We've got a motian an the flaar by Cammissianer Henning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: To. create it to. do. what?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, to. apprave the agenda
item, and that's creatian af an advisary board, establishing the
Caribbean Gardens Task Force Cammittee.
MS. FILSON: And Mr. Chairman, I have five speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. There is no. secand, sa
the mati an dies far lack af second.
Let's go. to. the public speakers, please.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Mayar Bill Barnett. He will
be follawed by David Margan.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Three minutes, please.
MAYOR BARNETT: Thank you. Gaad marning, fellaw
commissianers. It's nice to. see all af yau. It's nice to. be here.
I believe that yau really have hit the nail an the head. I wauld --
and I am representing the City af Naples taday.
The first, and I think the faremast is, is that the cammittee, the
Blue Ribban Panel ar Cammittee that yau have naw, is daing exactly
what yau said they were daing. They are valunteers, and I think that's
what the key ward is.
And they have no. authority. They have no pawer. They are
working far the cammunity. Yau still have, and will cantinue to. have,
the final say, and I think that's what -- I think that's what the battom
line is.
I think that they have -- even thaugh they are nat required to.
work under the sunshine, I think they have, and have made a very,
very cansciaus effart to. do. sa.
Page 88
January 25, 2005
I wauld ask that yau let them be -- let them do. what they're
daing. Again, yau do. have the final say, and that's the mast important
thing.
If, per chance, anather mati an carnes up to farm a task farce as
yaur ardinance, ar yaur matian, is there, I would ask that if that is the
case, that yau do. give the City afNaples representatian and let us put
a designee an that task force.
But, again, I'm nat asking yau to. do. that. I am saying, please
leave the Blue Ribban Panel or Cammittee just as they are. As I say,
you still have the battam line. And thank yau very much.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Do. yau already have two. -- yau
have two cauncil persans an this cammittee, dan't yau?
MAYOR BARNETT: Yes, yes, we do.. Penny Taylar and Jahn
Sorey.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. We didn't get a list afwho all
is an here, but I had heard that that was the case. We dan't have
anybady an there, do. we? No.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, sure -- well, no., nat fram the
cammlSSlan.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: no..
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It was a valunteer cammissian.
Anybady fram the commissian cauld have gane --
MAYOR BARNETT: Yeah, they -- it was a valunteer, and they
still are, and as lang as they remain that way, yau're in cantrol. Thank
yau very much. I appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If I can ask a questian?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It saunds like the city is very
interested in this piece af praperty and what the uses are gaing to be.
Do. yau anticipate any manies caming farward to. the purchase af this
praperty fram the City afNaples?
MAYOR BARNETT: I'm nat here taday to. speculate an that. I
Page 89
January 25, 2005
knaw that the city is excited, as yau are, as this whale cammunity is,
and I do. knaw that that valunteer Blue Ribban Panel, as ane af the
cammissianers said, warked very hard to. get the community to vate to
accept that.
And again, the ather thing is is that we are all talking, including
the city and the caunty is -- we still dan't knaw haw much this piece
af praperty's gaing to. be. And the mare discussian we have and the
mare we talk about farming ather tasks farces, et cetera, who knaws,
there are certainly peaple that are sitting there just salivating aver,
akay, can we raise it up anather few millian.
Sa I wauld think that we would like to. get that resalved af -- get
a price and let's get it purchased, if we can, and then go. fram there.
But I can't answer yau, Cammissianer Henning, I wish I cauld,
an what the city is gaing to. do.. But we certainly are in support.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I just want to. make sure that
everybady in the audience realizes -- I believe that the max value of
maney that the caunty is gaing to. put farth in this is abaut 40 mill. Sa
anything abave that, I'm nat sure where we're gaing to. go. at that paint
in time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank yau, Mayar Barnett, for
being here.
MAYOR BARNETT: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Margan. He will be
fallowed by Vincent Mallo..
MR. MORGAN: Hi. David Morgan, and I represent myself as a
taxpayer af Callier Caunty. I have been to. every single ane af these
meetings that this cammittee has had. There has nat been ane behind
a clased daar, there has nat been ane that wasn't either in this lacatian
an the recard ar dawn at the city hall, where they had ane.
There has been nathing but -- what I perceived them to have was
the perceptian they were given the autharity to. go. farward and passn
Page 90
January 25, 2005
this ar help this referendum pass. Seventy-three percent afthe voters
wauld nat have vated far it unless there was same kind af idea ar plan
as to. what yau wauld do. with it, that's why Canservatian Callier had
such a hard time the first cauple aftimes.
I wauld respectfully disagree with the fact that we keep raising
the price, because what the current praperty awner has done is put
tagether a number af architectural renderings that they would then
walk araund to. develapers and say, haw much wauld yau pay far this.
That's what will drive this price, nat peaple saying we're turning
it into. a park far canaes and kayaks and children and seniars to. enjay.
So my persanal recammendation wauld be to. keep this
cammittee tagether, add caunty representatian as yau see fit, but nat
to. lase the mamentum that they've created and have warked sa hard
on as a taxpayer getting ready to. watch them aver the last several
months. Thank yau.
MS. FILSON: Vincent Mallo.. He will be fallawed by Clarence
Tears.
MR. MOLLO: Hi, gaad marning, Cammissianers. My name is
Vincent Mallo.. I'm a resident. I'm the people yau're talking about
when yau say the public. I'm the public, akay? And yau wark far me,
akay? And yaur best -- yaur interests shauld be to. me, akay? That's
-- and the public shauld be pratected.
We're nat discussing whether the zaa is a gaad idea ar not a gaad
idea. We are discussing the county's palicy, an apen daor.
Mr. Cayle, in a -- in your quote -- I'm quating yau, the perceptian
of wrangdaing is as bad as wrangdaing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right.
MR. MOLLO: Okay. Yau asked befare, was there meetings?
Yeah.
Ms. Fiala, ah, all it was was to. get up maney. No., it wasn't. If
yau don't knaw abaut the subject, research it befare yau try and make
a decisian. Yau -- we're awed that, akay?
Page 91
January 25, 2005
I can go. an and an and an, and I dan't have to. do. any more
research ather than go. to. the Naples Daily News and get quates from
members af that baard.
Why did the city manager fram the City af Naples resign fram
the baard? Because he was warried about sunshine law vialatians.
Why did Mr. Tanklet (sic) take--
MR. WEIGEL: Tetzlaff?
MR. MOLLO: -- Tetzlaff resign from the baard, the Blue
Ribban Panel? Because he was warried he cauldn't talk to peaple,
okay?
The perceptian af city-elected afficials aut there getting maney,
akay, it's quid pro. qua. You're absalutely right. That's what the public
sees. We dan't do. business in Callier County like that anymare. We
used to., akay? And several of yaur cammissianers went to. jail aver it,
akay?
It's time to. address the issue and put it aut in the apen. This isn't
-- this isn't racket science. This is perceptian af the public, akay?
That's all I have to. say. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I have a questian far yau.
MR. MOLLO: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Have yau been to. ane of the meetings --
MR. MOLLO: No., I haven't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Y au've never been to. a public meeting --
MR. MOLLO: No., because I didn't knaw abaut them.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I see. Okay. Thank yau.
MR. MOLLO: Okay? Where was it published?
Bringing up anather paint, if this -- they say this blue ribban
commissian is nat regulated by anything, hawever, they're going to.
apply by the sunshine law.
Well, what happens if they dan't? They're nat applied by the
sunshine law, so they can do. anything they want and say, we're daing
Page 92
January 25, 2005
it. Yeah, we did it all the time. We always did. There's no. minutes.
Haw can an email that I sent you and this cammissian cause such
a stir amangst thase elected afficials, okay, where they questianed --
which yau have no. right to. do -- my intentians? I had the right to. my
intentians and I had the right to my awn feelings an the matter. I
make an informed decisian, akay? Yau have no. right to. question why
I sent yau a letter appasing -- and yau did. Yau delivered it to. Ms.
Penny Taylar.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No., I didn't. I delivered it --
MR. MOLLO: Naw, wait a minute. Let's go. a little further.
Let's go. a little further. Naw there's three afyaus, akay? Y au're an
elected afficial, thase two. are elected officials. You discussed my
letter with thase two. afficials.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's nat --
MR. MOLLO: Was that a -- wait a minute. Was that a sunshine
violatian?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's a lie. That is a lie.
MR. MOLLO: Oh, really? Why dan't yau watch the tapes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. Y au're painting --
MR. MOLLO: Why dan't you watch the tapes?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- to. Mr. Halas as an elected afficial?
MR. MOLLO: No., no.. No, no., no.. You, yau, yau. Watch the
tapes af the city cauncil meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why dan't we tell the audience what you
really said in the letter. Would you like to. --
MR. MOLLO: Yes, I'll tell you what.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Read it to. us. Read it to us.
MR. MOLLO: Basically, the gist afthe letter was that I was
cancerned with two. members af the city cauncil, the Naples City
Council, being part af the blue ribban cammissian.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And why?
MR. MOLLO: Pardan me?
Page 93
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Why? Read it to. us.
MR. MOLLO: Get my glasses.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yau want me to. read it?
MR. MOLLO: Pardan me? I'm reading it, yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right.
MR. MOLLO: Dear sir and madam, I understand the charter --
the Blue Ribban Panel is abaut to expire and yau're about to vate to
extend their charter. I wauld request you cansider all awing the
charter to. expire and allow the caunty Park and Recreatian Advisary
Baard to. take aver this matter.
As yau knaw, two. members of the city cauncil and the CEO af
the Canservancy are members afthis Blue Ribban Panel, the same
peaple who. do. nat want input by the caunty cammissian regarding
Naples Bay.
I feel letting the charter expire wauld be in the best interest of the
taxpayers af Callier Caunty, and all awing the Park and Recreatian
Advisary Baard to. make decisians in the planning of the future af the
praperties allawed by caunty residents.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And yau --
MR. MOLLO: Anything wrang with that?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, yes. The inference really is that
yau didn't want them an there because they didn't fight aur --
MR. MOLLO: Oh, no., no.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOLLO: That's your -- yau braught it up. Let me finish.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yau read it to. me. Y aur time has
expired.
MR. MOLLO: Oh, no., let me finish.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Y aur time has expired.
MR. MOLLO: Okay. Well--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yaur time has expired.
MR. MOLLO: -- yau're gaing to. have to. get the marshal to
Page 94
January 25, 2005
thraw me aut.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, we can do. that. Sheriff?
MR. MOLLO: Okay. What abaut the statement Mr. Sarey made
in anather -- just a week ago., akay?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. MOLLO: His statement was --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're aut afsessian naw.
MR. MOLLO: I guess yau dan't want -- I guess yau want to.
walk away fram it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're--
MR. MOLLO: I guess yau want to. walk away fram it.
MS. FILSON: Then do. yau want to. hear the next speakers?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.. We'll hear them after lunch.
MS. FILSON: Oh,akay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's almast 12 a'clack.
(A lunchean recess was had.)
MR. OCHS: Yau have a hot mic, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We will cantinue with the item
that we pastpaned at the time we taak aur lunch break.
We have additianal public speakers?
MS. FILSON: We have three additianal speakers, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Will yau please call thase
speakers?
MS. FILSON: The first ane's Clarence Tears. I think he may
have left.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And just far the recard, this is item 12A,
continuing af item 12A.
MR. PETTIT: Carrect.
MS. FILSON: Kathy Prasser. She will be fallawed by Dan--
David Tetzlaff.
MS. PROSSER: Gaad afternaon, members afthe cammissian.
Page 95
January 25,2005
Kathy Prasser, president and CEO af the Canservancy af Sauthwest
Flarida and the chair af the Blue Ribban Panel.
I do. want to. make mentian, I think Clarence Tears was gaing to
try and get back after an appaintment at naan, sa hopefully he'll be
here soan.
As you recall, I was with yau last manth at yaur regular meeting
where I came to. give yau a 10-minute update an the great wark that
the Blue Ribban Panel has been daing the past seven ar eight months,
and to. my surprise, the discussian went an far, I believe, well aver an
haur, and there were lats af things said that -- I think there was a last
miscammunicatian all the way araund an this issue.
Sa if yau wauld just allaw me for a minute to. backtrack and give
yau my perception and belief af haw we've gatten to. where we are
taday an this issue. In June af last year, caunty cammissianers held a
workshap to. laak at the issue of haw we saved the zaa and the
surrounding lands to the zaa.
It was Commissianer Halas, I believe, who suggested that there
be a Blue Ribban Panel established as a result af that warkshap, and
that the peaple -- the citizens who. were at the warkshap sitting at the
table with yau, which included me, David Tetzlaff, Bab Lee fram the
caunty, J ahn Sarey -- I mean J ahn Lee fram the city, J ahn Sarey from
the city, and athers, we were invited to. participate as members of a
Blue Ribban Panel. As a result af that, we did.
Caunty staff was instructed by members af the cammissian to
pull this Blue Ribban Panel tagether and to. do. three primary things.
Number ane, to. assist in passing the referendum; number two., to.
identify additianal saurces af maney to supplement the manies from a
referendum, wauld they be needed; and number three, to. give general
ideas an haw the praperty might be used if the referendum passed and
we were able to. purchase these lands.
Caunty staff arganized that first meeting. And, in fact, caunty
staff chaired the first meeting af the Blue Ribban Panel. And
Page 96
January 25, 2005
members fram that warkshap of the public, including myself, were at
that table as members af the Blue Ribban Panel.
It wasn't taa lang after that that the county attarneys realized that
maybe the staff -- it wasn't the best rale far staff to actually serve an
the cammittee ar the panel, but that they should instead provide
service to. the panel.
As a result af that, I was elected the chair af the Blue Ribbon
Panel, and county staff then maved into. a rale af facilitating aur wark.
Since that time, the Blue Ribban Panel has aperated with thase
members who chase to. jain. We served the public and believe we
served yau. We did sa under the sunshine, even thaugh there was no.
farmal requirement to. do sa, and that meant that the meetings were
publicly naticed, that minutes were made and published fram thase
meetings. In fact, the previaus speaker mentianed -- sarry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ifyau cauld wrap it up.
MS. PROSSER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The previaus speaker taak 15 minutes.
MS. PROSSER: He did? Okay. Well, thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But I can't allow yau 15.
MS. PROSSER: Okay. I'll be fast then. Just to. cut to. it then, the
Blue Ribban Panel's been warking since last summer. And in my
view and in the panel's view, we have accamplished to. date what
we've been asked to. do..
Number ane, yau asked the referendum be passed. It passed.
Number two., yau asked that identified saurces af maney be faund.
We have identified additianal patential saurces af money. We have
also. recammended the trust far public land be used to. facilitate this,
and you have taken aur advice an that. We appreciate it. And number
three, how the praperty might be used. Three cancepts were
develaped far yau to. see.
Sa we believe to. date we have dane exactly the jab we thaught
we were daing an yaur behalf. And I will say that at aur last Blue
Page 97
January 25, 2005
Ribbon Panel meeting last week, I palled members af the cammittee
an whether ar nat they ever believed they were an the cammittee to.
raise private funds fram individuals and foundatians. And to. a persan,
every member said no., that their understanding was, we were to.
identify gavernment pats af maney, and that is what we have done.
So I think it's clear fram the Blue Ribban Panel that they feel
they neither have the expertise nor the interest in being a fundraising
arm af private funds far the caunty. Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau, Kathy. And thank yau for
the gaad wark the committee daes.
MS. PROSSER: Yau're welcome.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Next speaker.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Tetzlaff, and he will be
fallawed by -- I believe Clarence Tears has returned.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yau'll be next, Clarence.
MR. TETZLAFF: Mr. Chairman, Cammissianers, gaad
afternaan. My name's David Tetzlaff. I'm directar of Naples Zaa.
I'd just like to. make a cauple paints afyaur time taday. First of
all, I agree that there were some charrettes far the praperty, and I'm in
agreement with cammissian staff that we shauld hald aff an any
further.
But I'd like to. remind cammissian staff and the audience that the
patential uses af the praperty did help sell the referendum. I think the
public was laaking far ather uses besides a zaa, and we are in
agreement with that.
And the 73 percent passage af the referendum did accamplish
what is really a three-part gaal far the zaa itself. First af all, it was
make sure that the public would want to. help fund this facility;
secandly, we'll need full acquisitian land, which that's part af what
we're talking abaut taday; and thirdly is the nan-prafit status, which
we're very clase to. filing.
The ather thing I wanted to. ask is, what is the impetus far
Page 98
January 25, 2005
wanting to. sa-called change harses mid-stream after the referendum
has passed?
And Cammissianer Henning, I'm assuming the suggestians came
directly fram yau, sir, and it seems to. make the whale issue more
camplicit (sic) when yau have publicly said that yau're a supparter af
the zaa, yau're ane af aur members, and yaur campaign fliers, a
picture af yau and daughter in frant af one af aur signs, sa I'm
guesslng --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I dan't have a daughter, sir.
MR. TETZLAFF: Oh, I'm sarry' It laoked like a child with yau
in the picture. I apalagize.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It's a san.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's a san.
MR. TETZLAFF: It's a san. I'm sarry' I apalagize.
Sa why wauld yau want to. add ar change at this paint in time
after the referendum's already passed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that a questian far me?
MR. TETZLAFF: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let me just say it takes
mare than ane commissianer to bring samething an the agenda. It
takes mare than two. It takes a majarity.
My first cancern is, yau have the Canservancy right next daor.
Even thaugh it's stated there is no perception ar a patential canflict of
interest, I disagree with that.
I know how impartant this is to the city council afNaples. Yau
have two. members up there. I believe that's a canflict. I believe that
there shauld be a wide based -- af participatian thraugh Callier
Caunty since it is the Callier Caunty citizens that are gaing to. pay far
this property, and I think that that shauld be appainted by the baard,
and I believe that aught to. be under the sunshine law.
That's my reasaning, and I'll stand on that.
MR. TETZLAFF: Okay.
Page 99
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Halas, do. you want to.
hald yaur questian till after the public speakers? .
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank yau very much, David.
MR. TETZLAFF: Thank yau.
MS. FILSON: And your final speaker, Mr. Chairman, is
Clarence Tears.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I knaw he was here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's coming in the back daor right naw.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Trying to escape, huh?
MR. TEARS: Well, I'll keep it brief. All the time I was an this
Blue Ribban Panel, I thaught I represented yau and the public. And I
think that's mast impartant.
And I think the public spake up when they said they appraved
the $40 millian for this acquisitian. In additian, I think they felt the
panel was well-raunded at that time to. loak at all the issues. And what
we did was pravide same canceptual plans.
This praperty has a lat af appartunity to. pratect the zao, provide
same sart af central park for aur cammunity, in additian, deal with
same af the water resaurce issues that we have.
And I just -- yau knaw, I feel kind af bad being an the panel at
this time because af all the issues created, but I think we did a gaad
thing for our cammunity, and we need to. move farward and we need
to. knaw what the figure is so we can get this acquisitian campleted.
That's all I have. Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau, Clarence.
Is that all the --
MS. FILSON: He was yaur final speaker.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just wanted to. set the record
straight. When I -- when we initially convened in the warkshap, I
believe I said that what this cammittee -- that was gaing to. be a Blue
Page 100
January 25, 2005
Ribban Cammittee ar a citizens' cammittee, we -- I specifically gave
them directians to. laak far private danatians to. help affset -- I think
that's what the recard states -- private danatians to. help affset the cast
af this praperty. I just wanted to. make sure that that was clear.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Coletta, and then I want
to. have a -- make ane camment.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You want to. go. befare me?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No., no., not at all. Go. ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just -- I just wanted you to
knaw that the members af this cammittee are abave repraach. I'm
never going to. questian that, and that they have served a tremendaus
purpose.
I want them to. knaw that I'm sure that all the citizens of Callier
Caunty appreciate what they've dane; hawever, getting back to very
big basics -- and this is ane af the things we want to bring back to. the
cammissian to. try to. iran it aut in the future, it still is nat an afficial
committee af the caunty. It still is -- it's autside the sunshine, even
though sunshine laws are suppasedly being adhered to., it daesn't mean
that this cammittee is. It still falls into. that gray area.
I dan't understand what the prablem is af having this committee
set up where it's gaing to. be in the sunshine, and I can almast assure
you that -- I mean, that the peaple who. yau pick an it wauld not vary
tremendausly fram the anes that are already an it.
Y au'd see same changes maybe far a little mare
cross-representatian af the caunty, but they're gaad peaple that are an
it now, but it is nat an afficial entity of the caunty, and it could always
be the -- it cauld also. -- it cauld be misinterpreted sametime in the
future as to. what the intentians are.
And Cammissianer Henning braught up same very goad paints
about the sunshine laws and abaut the Canservancy being there. Daes
that mean that the whale thing is carrupt? No., far fram it. But still,
perceptian. Perceptian's what we're dealing with here, and that's a big
Page 101
January 25,2005
concern far me.
I dan't think there's a prablem with the directian that we've gane
so much in the past. It's just how we're gaing to. handle it at this paint.
I think that we shauld go. thraugh the farmal aspects of farming a
regular cammittee that can deal with this under the sunshine of the
caunty and be recagnized by the caunty and we can mave farward
with it. I dan't think it wauld take all that lang to do, especially if we
put it an the fast track.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I wauld like to. see if we cauldn't deal
with this an a palicy basis. If the majarity af the cammissian wants to.
have an afficially-designated advisary cammittee, I dan't have a
prablem with that.
But let's take a little bit af time, at least, to. laak at a standardized
palicy far handling this. I mean, these prablems didn't came up when
we created this cammittee. Why nat? Yau knaw, we knew that the
cammittee was being created, we knew who was an it. We get their
minutes, we attend their m~etings if we wish to.. We knew abaut this
cammittee all along.
Naw, suddenly, there is a prablem. And I wauld suggest to you
that we have ather cammittees in Collier County in exactly the same
situation. And if -- what we need to. do is to have a palicy so that we
don't get into. this contraversy in the future.
Sa I wauld like to. ask the cammissianers to. cansider instructing
the staff to. came back to us with a specific recammendatian abaut the
policy af all advisary cammittees in Callier Caunty government and
to. handle all af thase in a unifarm way and to. provide us with same
more detail abaut specifically what we're gaing to. ask this cammittee
to do..
And if we do. that, I think we can probably get unanimaus
suppart af it. But we're nat prepared taday to. really tell this
committee what it is they should be daing. Haw shauld the
representatian be selected? Shauld they be ane fram each
Page 102
January 25, 2005
cammissianer district ar shauld they be appartianed in same ather
way? We dan't knaw the answers to. thase questions.
And I wauld ask that we just direct staff to. came back with a
specific recammendation concerning a palicy gaverning all
cammittees advising the commissianers and to pravide specific
directian abaut what this particular cammittee wauld do., and at that
time we could cansider adapting it. And I'll make that a motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll secand that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a mati an an the floor,
and a secand by Cammissioner Halas.
Is there any ather discussian? Of caurse there is. There's
Cammissianer Fiala.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank yau. I just want to. go an
recard here to. say that I knaw that same peaple have perceived that
some peaple might have a canflict of interest, but when yau think af
David Tetzlaff, far instance, ar Kathy Prasser, they know their
praperties better than anybady else, and I think they knaw the pluses
and the minuses. And I think they're nat anly an impartant, but an
integral part of that committee. I'd hate to. see them go..
Yes, they have same -- they have interests because they're right
there, but they also. have the drive because they're right there, and I
think that's impartant.
One af the things that I think -- thraw in a red light was that the
city cauncil peaple were there. I didn't knaw why that was. I didn't
realize elected afficials could be on there, not that anybody didn't
allow that to. happen, but -- then I thaught, well, if city afficials are an
there, then maybe caunty afficials -- and then I thought, no., that's kind
af silly. I just -- I didn't knaw. I hope there was no. -- skip that.
I just -- I just think that cammittee's gaad, as I knaw it, but I
didn't -- we didn't get anything in the material to. tell us who. all was an
there either. Sa I can only -- I anly know af Kathy and David, and I
think they're wanderful an there. I knaw the city cauncil people, and
Page 103
January 25, 2005
that was it.
I wanted to. make a camment on yaur mati an, and that is that I
think same cammittees -- do. all cammittees have to. go. under the
county rule?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, they dan't have to., and I think
that's the prablem. This is at least the secand time in the past several
manths that we've had this kind af disagreement on the board abaut
who shauld and who. shauldn't be. And I -- what I'm asking staff to. do.
is to. came to. us with recommendatians abaut haw we make thase
determinatians, because the last thing yau want to. do. is create a
cammittee and then get into. a disagreement abaut whether ar nat you
created it praperly. Let's develap same guidelines sa that we make the
right decisions the first time.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: One thing abaut same cammittees
that dan't have to repart to. us immediately but are apen to. anybody
who. wants to. came, and publicly advertising, I think then it daesn't
stifle their creative juices. Yau knaw, they can really think and they
can -- yes, they can talk to. ane another. But, you knaw, a lat af times
I wish I cauld talk to. ane af yau guys just to. get yaur input so it helps
me, but I cannot, and it might help them. Anyway, that's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But I think the staff cauld take that into.
cansideratian and pravide us same guidance as to. how we cauld
differentiate under thase circumstances.
Cammissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think we've got a cauple afissues
here. We've gat this particular issue we're talking abaut. But right
naw, the -- we dan't even have any idea what the prapasal is for the
price af this praperty. And, af caurse, the appraiser, I believe, had
same difficulties. He had a death in his family. And maybe what we
aught to. do. is just place this an the table for a periad af time and then
bring it back later.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissianer Henning?
Page 104
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just want to. make you aware
af -- yaur mati an daesn't address the issue that's an aur agenda, and
I'm just asking if yau're gaing to. address that after the motian has been
vated an.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissianer Henning, yau made a
mati an to. apprave the item an the agenda, and yaur mati an died far
lack af a secand, sa there is no. mati an to. apprave what's an this
agenda, and there is an alternative matian an the flaar to. instruct staff
to. came back to. us with a recammendatian abaut samething that will
wark.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, there is ather alternatives
to. address the issue an the agenda, either a mati an to. deny ar mati an
to. cantinue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There is a mati an an the flaar.
And is there any further discussion?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Nat to. address this issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there any further discussian?
(No. respanse.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then I'll call the matian.
All in favor af the mati an to. instruct the staff to. came back to. us
with guidance abaut haw we make these determinations sa we can
make them in a prafessianal and infarmative manner, please signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All appased, signify by like sign.
(No. respanse.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimaus. Okay. Thank you very
much.
Page 105
January 25, 2005
Caunty Manager, where are we at this point?
MR. MUDD: Cammissioner, we are finished with the time
certain items.
There were several peaple this morning that were here far item
lOA, which had to. do. with the Santa Barbara/Lagan issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's get that dane sa these peaple dan't
have to. wait any langer.
MR. MUDD: And then we'll go. straight into. item -- agenda item
number 8, which will be the land use particular issues.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. That's fine. Thank you.
Item #10A
A PRESENTATION OF RECENT ANALYSIS AND
RECOMMENDATION OF CONTINUING WITH THE CURRENT
DESIGN FOR SANTA BARBARA WHICH INCLUDES
WIDENING TO SIX LANES FROM DAVIS BOULEVARD TO
GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AND REBUILDING A FOUR LANE
ROADWAY IN A SIX LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM GOLDEN
GA TE P ARKW A Y TO GREEN BOULEVARD WITH A SLIGHT
REVISION TO THE GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
INTERSECTION TO INCLUDE THREE NORTHBOUND LANES
FOR A SHORT DISTANCE TO HELP THE CURRENT AND
FUTURE OPERATIONS OF THIS INTERSECTION-
MR. MUDD: This is item lOA, and it's a presentatian af recent
analysis and recammendatian af cantinuing with the current design for
Santa Barbara, which includes widening to. six lanes fram David
Baulevard to. Galden Gate Parkway and building a faur-Ianed road of
-- raadway in a six-lane right-of-way from Galden Gate Parkway to
Green Baulevard with a slight revisian to the Galden Gate Parkway
Page 106
January 25, 2005
intersectian to. include three narthbaund lanes for a shart distance to.
help the current and future aperatians af this intersectian, and Mr.
Narm Feder, the transpartatian administratar, will present.
MR. FEDER: For the recard, Norman Feder, transpartatian
administratar. Cammissianers, I'll seek to. be brief an this.
Back an N avember 30th, we braught befare this baard a
candemnatian resalutian. That candemnatian resalutian was
cansistent with directian fram the baard that had been develaped aver
a number af public meetings that were held in 2002 and culminated
about 20 manths ago., abaut April af2003, when we came to. this
board and agreed that what we wauld do. is establish six lanes within a
six-lane right-af-way sauth af Galden Gate Parkway an Santa Barbara
fram Galden Gate Parkway dawn to. Davis.
With the new interchange at 1-75, the imminent need far that
impravement was quite obviaus and cancurred at that time and has
cantinued to. be an item that we present to. the baard that we needed to
proceed.
The sectian fram Galden Gate up to. Green requires
reconstructian af that raadway sectian. Specifically there are major
drainage prablems. It daes nat have bike paths, sidewalks, other
features, and the raadway basically is down to. the base in many areas,
washbaarded.
We prapased at that time and continue to. prapase that we
purchase six-lane right-af-way far that sectian fram Galden Gate to.
Green, and then construct a faur-Iane cross-sectian with all the other
features that I mentianed and to. address the drainage within that
six-lane right-af-way and with a wide median that will allow for future
expansian to. six when the need carnes, and I'll address that in a
minute, but initially allawing for side street access to. be maintained,
especially with large trailers, as we found aut that we're dealing with
in that cammunity, thraugh the public meetings.
N arth af Green Baulevard up to. Pine Ridge, this board had asked
Page 107
January 25, 2005
us nat to. pursue any right-af-way acquisitian but to. acquire same
right-af-way araund the Pine Ridge intersectian to. be able to. make
improvements at that intersectian.
We've restudied that. We concur that at this time -- we had tald
you initially it was abaut 2011, 2012, the need far six-Ianing. We've
laaked at that. As I said, it was back in April af 2003.
When we came to. the baard at that time, yau asked us to. bring
Parsans Brinckerhoff, anather consultant -- aur designer is
WilsanMiller -- Parsan Brinkerhaff anboard to. reevaluate the
numbers, to. take recent impravements, factar into. that the madel,
reassess, and as well, to. laok at nan-canventianal intersectian design
aptians.
They did all af that, they did the reanalysis af the data, they
warked with staff, they warked with WilsanMiller, and aur
cancurrence is, right naw 2014 is the date that we're laoking at af
which we'll need six lanes north af Galden Gate up to. Pine Ridge.
With that in mind, again, we're nat recommending at this time
that we pursue six lanes. Let me get that aff the table.
Weare recammending that we cantinue, as the baard direct us, to.
go six lanes sauth af Golden Gate, and a six-lane right-af-way, faur
lanes with amenities fram Golden Gate to. Green, but based an the
2014 need far six -laning, we do. not recammend buying 24 parcels, 16
of which we'd have to. go. back to. again at Pine Ridge to. do. the
ultimate intersectian canfiguratian in a faur-Iane crass-sectian.
Sa then the aptian, if we dan't want to. buy twice in that area, is
either to. buy the six-lane right-af-way far thase 24 ar to. buy six lane
far the full sectian.
The last aptian is the ane we're recammending, and that is to
make same interim impravements with carner clips at that
intersectian, cantinue to. monitor it based an the expansian af Lagan to.
the narth up to Banita Beach Raad and Santa Barbara to. the sauth and
a faur-Ianed crass-sectian from Davis dawn to Rattlesnake Hammack
Page 108
January 25, 2005
and manitar that aver time.
So we recagnize it is residential area, but we also. recagnize that
it's been part of the lang-range plan. It is ane af the limited number af
narth/ sauth arterials that exist in the caunty, and it has been
designated as such, and the madel clearly shaws that while Livingstan
Raad has pravided same relief -- that's why we're telling yau rather
than 2011, 2012, we're laaking at about 2014 -- that that need is still
there.
Basically this is getting yau to. about the midpaint af the planning
harizan af 20 years befare that need carnes farth, and we feel as lang
as we can mave an that withaut impasing upan the residential area
and cantinue to. evaluate it, we shauld do. that.
Sa in effect, aur recammendatian is to. stay exactly -- pretty clase
to. exactly where you were in yaur prior action an the resalutians and
cammitment to. the community, the anly exceptian being a minar
change as was noted there at Galden Gate to. allaw the three-lane
northbaund merge just narth af the intersectian all the way up to. 1,200
feet to. Painted Leaf, and then secandly, to. do. interim impravements at
the intersectian afPine Ridge, nat to. buy right-af-way twice.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Narm, before we begin the discussian an
this, I wauld like to. clarify the pasitian a bit mare to. make sure
everybady understands exactly where we are.
MR. FEDER: Of caurse.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We made a decisian a year ar sa ago and
we pravided directian to. staff.
MR. FEDER: Carrect.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And yau've said that what yau're
proposing taday is to. stick with that decisian we made at that paint in
time with the exceptian af certain changes.
MR. FEDER: Same minor changes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Can you give us samething visual
that will infarm the public abaut what thase changes are sa that we'll
Page 109
January 25, 2005
have an apprapriate baseline for aur angaing discussian?
MR. FEDER: Try the ather way. I will try to. do. that,
Cammissianer.
Essentially what we've agreed to., as you see an this graphic right
here, what this shaws yau is the existing number af lanes, haw many
are built taday and what right-of-way. And essentially, this is giving
yau the averall Lagan and then Santa Barbara fram the caunty line all
the way dawn, and this is what was presented to. yau, as yau
mentianed, aver a year ago., in the decisian pracess.
We're recammending basically the lane calls exactly as was
previausly appraved, and that is fram the sectian fram Galden Gate
dawn to. Davis, past Radio. and to. Davis, that we purchase six lanes af
right-af-way and do. canstruct a six-lane crass-sectian, and that need is
imminent.
That in the sectian fram Galden Gate narth up to. Green
Baulevard, that we purchase six lanes afright-af-way but anly
canstruct a recanstructed faur-Iane with all the apprapriate features
and drainage impravement.
That fram Green to. Pine Ridge, we nat undertake any praj ect
taday except -- and this is a little minar madificatian -- except far
minar intersectian impravements, basically to. take what wauld be
yaur eastbaund an Pine Ridge right and do. a carner clip to. address
that right turn a little better, and then to. extend with clasure afthe
median prabably abaut 10th, the left turn narth, putting in a dual left
turn with a langer starage to. regain that thraugh lane there at Pine
Ridge.
Sa essentially we're propasing, as I said, essentially the same.
The anly madificatian is a slight madificatian dawn within the
right-af-way that we'll have just narth af Galden Gate to. have the
merge fram three to. two. happen just narth af the intersectian to. help
that intersectian functian better, and then not to. buy right-of-way far
what would be the ultimate turn lanes but nat the ultimate thraugh
Page 110
January 25, 2005
lanes at Pine Ridge as had previausly recammended, because then
we'd have to. buy right-af-way twice, and that makes very little sense.
Does that answer yaur questian, Cammissioner?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think sa, Narm. Everything is the same
except intersection impravements at Green Baulevard?
MR. FEDER: No., at Golden Gate. We'll be merging narth af
Galden Gate rather than having the merge at the intersectian.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. FEDER: A shart distance narth of there wauld carry the
three-lane up to. abaut Painted Leaf and drap it there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Then let's divide it into. two. -- and I'm
sarry far taking the time. I need to. make sure --
MR. FEDER: That's fine. I want to. make sure it's very clear,
yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's divide it into. two. parts. Let's set
aff right-of-way acquisitian till later.
MR. FEDER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's deal with the questian afwhat are
yau gaing to. build that is different fram what we agreed to. aver a year
ago.
MR. FEDER: The anly difference fram what we agreed to. a year
ago is that at the Santa Barbara/Galden Gate intersectian, we were
gaing to. canstrain the laneage, the three lanes, narth af Galden Gate to.
two. lanes in each directian.
What we're prapasing is that an the narthbaund we add a third
lane, much like we have in the southbaund, narth af the intersectian
far about 1,200 feet, all awing the Galden Gate intersectian to. aperate
mare efficiently. Sa the merge, in effect, accurs narth af the
intersectian as appased to. at the intersection itself and we get better
operatians. Sa it's a very minor change at that intersectian.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And that's the anly change?
MR. FEDER: And then the anly other change is at the
Page III
January 25, 2005
intersectian at Pine Ridge, of Logan and Pine Ridge, where instead of
gaing in and daing the ultimate, design yaur turn lane canfiguration
within faur thraugh lanes and canstraining aur right-af-way
acquisitian, to. anly, basically, a crass-section af faur thraugh lanes,
and then having to. came back later and redo. all that when you went to.
the six-lane thraugh-Iane configuratian, we're prapasing to. do carner
clips, very little right-af-way take, and do. interim impravements there
to. meet the needs and continue to. manitar, see if we need a majar
intersectian impravement ar nat.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But no. widening?
MR. FEDER: No. widening.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Nathing at all?
MR. FEDER: No. additianallanes narth afGalden Gate.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Narth afGalden Gate?
MR. FEDER: No. additional thraugh lanes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. No. additianal thraugh lanes,
akay.
Naw let's switch to. right-of-way purchase. How has our
right-af-way purchase varied fram the guidance we affered a year
aga?
MR. FEDER: The anly difference fram actually yaur actian on
Navember 30th, at the candemnation resalutian would be we wauld
nat pursue the 24 parcel at the Lagan/Pine Ridge intersectian, rather
we'd pursue a cauple af limited parcels an carner clips to. do. an
interim improvement.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, gaod. I think I understand.
Thank yau very much.
Cammissianer Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Feder, the intersection
impravements that yau're stating at the intersectian af Pine Ridge and
Lagan, I'm sure yau feel camfartable it will help taday's traffic, but
will it help the traffic aut in the next eight years? Will it salve the
Page 112
January 25, 2005
prablem?
MR. FEDER: It will nat salve the prablem, nar wauld have
faur-Iane, even with all the turn lanes, because in 2014 we needed the
six thraugh, sa that's why we're saying that, rather than buy the
right-af-way twice, rather than start and acquire a majar partian af
six-lane taday, that we do. an interim improvement and cantinue to
manitar it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Gaod. Any ather questians? Yes,
Cammissianer Caletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Sa what we're daing is we're
being realistic in the fact that this facility isn't gaing to. be needed till
2014, sa why tie up maney that can be used ather places in the caunty
naw to. be able to. do. these impravements that will gain us very little as
far as what's needed naw, be able to. use those manies ather places, but
to. recagnize the fact that there is a paint in time that this will have to.
be a six-Ianed facility?
MR. FEDER: Precisely. While we'd lave to. get ahead afthe
curve, the $3 millian in right-af-way, appraximately abaut a millian in
additianal intersection canstruction costs, that $4 millian, we have too.
many ather needs that are taday needs, already existing needs, to. go
aut in advance of this need. Althaugh it is caming, althaugh it's abaut
halfway into. aur planning harizan, abaut 2014, it gives us the
appartunity to. take that 4 millian, as yau painted aut, Cammissianer,
and use it an ather needs that exist taday.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And also., taa, we're reserving
the aptian to. either extend the time ar shorten the time as the need
comes up sa that we can adjust far what has to. be dane?
MR. FEDER: Definitely. We will cantinue to. manitar it. Ifwe
find aut it's 2016, we wan't try to. pursue it faster. Ifwe find aut it's
2012, we'll try to. came back to. yau and make sure yau're aware af
that.
Page 113
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: But it cauld be as late as 2020,
if everything went ane directian, ar it cauld be a cauple years earlier?
MR. FEDER: Actually the sectian, prabably Green dawn to.
Galden Gate, persanally, I'll tell yau, will probably came a little bit
earlier than the 2014, but we'll cantinue to manitar. The sectian
between Green and Pine Ridge, it might be a little bit langer than
2014.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And yau'll be caming with
continuaus updates to. this cammissian in the MPO?
MR. FEDER: Exactly. And it's as we make ather system
improvements. Because just like to. day , a lat af the feel is, well,
traffic's dawn a little bit an Santa Barbara and Lagan. Of caurse it is.
We went beyand the specific need far faur lanes in mast sectians af
Livingstan Raad in initial apening and went to. six. We had added
considerable narth/south capacity, and that was goad, and didn't come
back twice, and we didn't have those costs, and we had a new
alignment.
That has helped nat anly this facility but athers, at least to. nat
experience the cantinued growth rate they're experiencing. Mast af
them didn't get a decline. This ane's gotten a little bit af a decline,
especially since it daesn't extend right naw farther nar further sauth,
but thase are caming, and impravements to. Green, sa we'll cantinue to
monitar all the netwark in this area.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Naw Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Narm, at taday's prices, as far
as acquiring land, do. yau have any idea af what we're loaking at at
2014 as far as land acquisition prices?
MR. FEDER: Staff -- abviausly this is based an an educated
estimate -- is laaking at it. One af the reasans we made this
recammendatian to. try to. use the faur millian elsewhere, the three
millian far right-af-way, is that yau've gat a develaped sectian
between, abviausly, Green and Pine Ridge. It's a very stable
Page 114
January 25, 2005
neighbarhaad, as many peaple here, I'm sure, are gaing to. be telling
yau, and a nice neighbarhaad.
While it will continue to. appreciate, it wan't appreciate maybe as
__ in a valatile nature as same af the other carridars we're dealing
with.
We're laaking at our estimate right naw, to. answer yaur questian,
is abaut 500,000, a half a millian dallars af appreciatian if I get out to.
abaut the 2012 time frame when yau laak at getting the right-af-way,
ifyau're gaing to. try to. address the 2014, 2011, 2012. Sa about
$500,000, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Per--
MR. FEDER: No., far the full acquisitian afthe -- same 40 add
parcels that are between Green and Pine Ridge, ar just narth af Pine
Ridge.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Haw many public speakers do. we have?
MS. FILSON: Six.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, ane last thing I wanted to. present
to yau. Obviausly what I tried to. do. is focus my directian an what
yau asked, and that is just evaluating the difference fram where we
were and what we had appraved.
There were a lat af issues about data prajectians. We'll be happy
to. respond to. thase. I think we're probably nat hitting apples and
apples. But nanetheless, I didn't feel that was necessary unless yau
desire that. After the public speakers we'll be happy to. respand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If same of the speakers raise that issue,
we'll ask yau to. present that infarmatian, but I'm inclined to. take the
public speakers at the present time.
I wauld ask thase af yau who. are speaking to. please take into.
cansideratian the staffs recommendatian today, that there's nat much
af a change fram the decision that was made almast a year ago. and
Page 115
January 25, 2005
that yau shauld nat assume that because this is an the agenda, that
Santa Barbara is gaing to. be six-laned all the way up. It's nat what the
staff is recammending.
Sa please take nate af the relatively minar changes that are
anticipated here and try to. address yaur cancerns to. thase.
And we'll take the first three? Okay, three peaple.
MS. FILSON: No, I'm sarry. There's six peaple. I'm asking
about the time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sarry?
MS. FILSON: The time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Five minutes.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Dan Schummer. He will be
fallawed by Shelby Jackab.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Schummer, I'd like to. remind yau af
our agreement earlier to. day . Yau spake far 15 minutes an this issue
before. Will yau please nat be repetitive?
MR. SCHUMMER: I want to get back to. my presentatian. I
noticed same resentment that I want to fallaw the agenda item, and I
naticed same metered ( sic) resentment about that. My whale purpase
in being here was to. have yau recansider the mati an that was passed
an 11/30.
And cantrary to. what Mr. Feder says, that mati an was full six
lane fram Parkway to. Pine Ridge. Naw he's saying that it's samething
different when we get -- when we talk abaut Santa Barbara Baulevard.
Yau knaw, when that first came to light many years ago., that was
suppased to. run fram U.S. 41 all the way up to. Lee Caunty line. Yau
knew that wasn't gaing to. fly thraugh Lely, and it didn't. So naw
they've cut that aff at Rattlesnake Hammack.
Everybady seems to. refer to Livingstan Raad as parallel with
Santa Barbara. There's as much difference as between day and night
between thase two. raads. Livingston Raad goes sameplace. It was
suppased to. go. to. Davis, but palitics stapped that at the Radio. Raad.
Page 116
January 25, 2005
It's gaing all the way up to. Daniels Parkway. Lee Caunty's living
with their cammitment. It's gaing all the way to Daniels Parkway by
2009.
There's no. private driveways caming aut anta Livingstan Raad,
no private driveways. It did nat go. thraugh a residential district.
There's same residential districts have built up there since then, but it
did nat go. thraugh a residential district.
The ather thing that is very impartant is the cast. Mr. Feder
refers to. the cost. You knaw, cement is gaing up, bracket is going up,
if yau can buy it, and we have to. think af ane ather thing, very
impartant, litigatian.
If yau go. with going fram ane fram like a seven-class raad to. a
three-class raad we're yau're talking abaut six lanes, yau've gat
multiple prablems that's gaing to. cause same litigatian.
And with that, like I say, yau're gaing to. have faur lanes here,
then yau're gaing to. have six lanes. When yau get to Pine Ridge, it
gaes into. two. lanes. Get to. Vanderbilt Beach Road, it's suppased to
go to. faur lanes. There isn't enaugh raam in there to. go to. faur lanes,
and, again, it's thraugh a residential. I thank yau far listening.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll have Mr. Feder come back
up at the end af these presentatians and try to. clarify that issue if
there's any misunderstanding, akay?
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Shelby Jackab. She'll be
fallawed by David Labdell.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are yau a registered vater, Shelby?
MS. JACKOB: No., I'm nat 18 yet.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's akay. You can speak anyway.
MS. JACKOB: Hello.. My name is Shelby Jackab. I'm 13 years
aId, and I live an 1301 Lagan Baulevard. I am speaking in the behalf
afthe peaple in my community, including the children.
Six lanes are nat needed. Why, yau ask? Well, my biggest
cancern is the build-up in the raads, which build-ups can lead to.
Page 11 7
January 25,2005
accidents. Also., it's especially dangeraus far me, and the children,
while I'm waiting at my bus stap and cars are just like zaaming by.
It's hard enaugh when aur bus staps to. pick up the children now.
Think af haw the traffic will be when we six -lane it.
Also., I see peaple drag-racing dawn the raad. One ward,
dangeraus. Imagine when we six-lane it.
There are ather raads that need six lanes way mare than this raad.
Trust me.
Also., think af the people that live in the raad -- live an the raad.
Do they really want it? Obviausly nat if we're prate sting against it.
Same peaple say change is good. And I've lived an Logan all my
life. And the peaple -- I've talked to. the children in my cammunity.
And if yau six-lane it, it will nat be a safe change.
So think abaut what I've said, and please occur it into. yaur mind,
and thank yau far yaur time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Shelby.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is David Labdell. He will be
follawed by Brenda DeJang.
MR. LOBDELL: Gaod afternaan. My name is Dave Labdell.
I'm the current president af the Lagan/Santa Barbara Civic
Assaciatian.
A cauple camments on what Mr. Feder said. There are same
significant changes in his plan there. As far as we're cancerned, a
six-lane right-af-way is a six-lane highway. It's just up to. yau folks
when yau pave the ather two. lanes, and that's our biggest prablem
with this plan right now.
Same af the most impartant changes are in the statistics an traffic
caunts and what's really gaing an in that neighbarhaad. And the
prajectians fram as lang as five years ago are praving to. be nearly half
of what they said they were gaing to. be.
Sa that tells us that the necessity to. ever six lane this raad really
Page 118
January 25, 2005
isn't there, particularly when yau laak at the fact that the service that's
gaing to. be available an that road narth afVanderbilt Beach is gaing
to. be minimal, and to. my knawledge there is no. plan for anything
sauth af Davis Baulevard right naw. And even if there was, with what
happened dawn araund Lely, that's gaing to. be very limited, if ever
anything.
Sa the issue to. us is credibility, credibility af this cammissian nat
anly to. the residents af Santa Barbara/Lagan, but to. residents araund
the caunty.
There are same significant changes in that plan. The six lanes
crassing aver narth af Galden Gate Parkway was nat in the plan last
year. And to. us, that's a signal that it's just going to. blaw right an up
the raad. And we dan't see the necessity to spend any maney an the
right-af-way naw because the traffic projectians just do. nat support it.
I'm sure Mr. Feder may argue that point with me, but the
numbers are there. They're the caunty's numbers. We've laaked at
them. We've been pravided with them. Mr. Schummer spake to. that
earlier abaut, the daily trips are significantly reducing every year as
ather avenues are supparted araund us, apening af Livingstan.
Yau knaw, aur neighbarhaod, there have been some comments
aver the last cauple years fram same af the WilsanMiller staff and
even same of the transpartation staff that the residents lack the
education ar credentials to. really understand why we need this
six-lane highway.
But, yau knaw, what braught us aut against this raad was the
extent af the faulty data used to. justify the raad in the first place. So
that really shaws us that, perhaps same afthe peaple that came up
with this -- these figures aren't, yau know, any mare skilled than we
might be.
But aur neighbarhaad is full af educated, talented, professianal
peaple who. have warked very hard to. present yau well-researched
reasan why this six-lane road is nat needed. All we need is a four-lanee
Page 119
January 25, 2005
raad with praperly designed intersectians.
On Navember 16th, 2002, JeffLytle shaw, Jeff asked Mr.
Henning if the six-laning af -- ifhe favored the six-Ianing af Santa
Barbara/Lagan. Mr. Henning respanded, the residents demanstrated--
and this is a quate -- the residents demanstrated to. the Baard af
Caunty Commissianers that six-Ianing is setting up a dangeraus
situatian. The design afthe six-lane is terrible, end quate.
On December 12th, 2004, Jeff asked Mr. Henning abaut the
possible change back to. six lanes after the Navember 30th meeting,
and Mr. Henning respanded, I want to hear what the peaple have to
say.
Well, we've been saying laud and clear far two. years, sa I don't
think we need to. keep telling you where we're at with this.
Like I said, traffic caunts are dawn 25 to. 30 percent af what was
projected to. be happening right naw, and it's nat happening.
And in clasing, as impartant as the fact that there is proaf beyond
a daubt that we do. nat need a six -lane highway narth af Galden Gate
Parkway thraugh aur residential neighbarhaad, there's the issue of aur
children's safety, samething Shelby tauched an.
I live an 12th Avenue Sautheast. I have two. yaung children.
The last thing we need to. do. is induce mare and higher speed traffic
into. this neighbarhaad where all aur kids wait far the schaol bus,
marning and night.
I wait with my six-year-ald daughter at 7:25 in the marning, and
I wander haw adversely a six-lane raad wauld affect this situatian
naw. It's dangeraus enaugh as it is.
And I think peaple all araund the area are waiting to. hear the
autcame afthis, and we feel very strangly that this six-lane
right-of-way will never be needed. And please stand behind the
pramises yau've made to. the gaod peaple of this neighbarhaad.
Thank yau.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Brenda DeJang. She will be
Page 120
January 25, 2005
fallawed by JeffPravenzana.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Laoks like yau're up, Jeff.
MS. FILSON: He will be fallawed by Raberta Grathause.
MR. PROVENZANO: Gaod afternaon, members of the baard,
citizens af Callier Caunty. My name is Jeff Pravenzana, far the
recard, and I do. live an Lagan Baulevard.
I'll make this short and brief. I did ask far same extra time, but I
think everybady has dane a pretty gaad jab.
And I think what's really happened here is fram the three years
ago that we started to. battle -- and I think Narm has finally admitted,
not totally what we expect him to admit, which I'm gaing to. elabarate
an here in a minute, but at least we're getting dawn that way naw to.
where it just sa happens that the madel was wrang, and that's nat to.
say that it was wrang thraughaut the caunty. Same places the model
averestimated and same it underestimated.
Sa anyway, while we're here taday -- I hate to. come back up here
next year ar the year fallawing and go. thraugh all this again, sa I'm
just gaing to. give yau the -- give yau the numbers.
Yau can see the chart up there. That chart, there's two.
highlighted traffic caunts. You've got the -- highlighted an Logan
sauth afPine Ridge Raad. That's statian 588. And yau've also. gat the
ather highlighted sectian of the traffic caunts aver the last five and a
half to. six years, yau've gat fram Galden Gate Parkway north to.
Green, which cavers that whale sectian between the Parkway and
Green.
As yau can see, ifyau take the five-year scale, thase numbers
have either remained the same ar decreased.
Naw, here's a -- I just had somebady fram the news team do a
devil's advacate, and they asked me, says, how can yau defend the fact
that with all the grawth in Callier Caunty, mare traffic will nat be
using Santa Barbara/Lagan in the future?
Well, here's what I gat to. say to. that. We've had ane hell af a
Page 121
January 25, 2005
grawth rate in the last five years. And aver the last five years, laak at
the numbers up there. They have nat increased.
This particular residential area, we've gat a unique situatian, and
especially with the new interchange caming anta Galden Gate
Parkway, we're laaking at anather 20, 25 percent decrease in the
traffic beyand the numbers that yau see right there, and it's very
simple.
Yau dan't have to. be an engineer. All's yau've gat to. do. is get in
a car and fallaw the traffic. That traffic, that cames dawn Santa
Barbara/Logan fram the sauth to. get to. the Pine Ridge interchange an
1-75. Once the interchange an the Parkway is apen, we're going to.
lase all that traffic.
Now, I want to. get to. the future because the -- there is histarical
facts in the future, and I'm just going to. try to. get this dane in five
minutes. I hape yau give me another minute. I fargat we have an
operatar naw.
What I'm shawing yau right here, these are the mast recent traffic
caunt numbers in Braward Caunty. Braward County, believe it ar
not, is very similar in a lat of ways to. Callier Caunty.
And what this shaws you is aur future, basically. What yau see
highlighted right there is 1-95. 1-95 right naw, and depending an what
segment yau're on, averages between 250,000 to. 300,000 cars a day.
Yau take the parallel raads similar to. Santa Barbara/Lagan that
run parallel with all that traffic and all the millians af mare people
there than we've gat here taday, and yau're gaing to. see the same --
average the same amount -- the same traffic caunt as we have alang
Santa Barbara/Lagan, which yau just saw earlier.
And I think histary is -- you knaw, yau can laak at -- you can
laak at these traffic caunts, and this is pretty much what's gaing to.
happen. F arget abaut all this, we'll never became a Ft. Lauderdale ar
Miami. Well, we passed that paint. We're well an aur way to tatal
pavement here.
Page 122
January 25, 2005
Sa anyway, my paint, with these charts that I just shawed to. day ,
is I hape we dan't came back here, because at the ariginal meeting an
April 16th, the warkshap meeting where everybady appraved this, if
yau look aver the films, it was -- Mr. Coletta even had the
understanding when he said, I cauld live with that, was that this was
gaing to. be braught up prabably abaut five years fram naw.
Yeah, we were gaing to. laak at yearly -- at the yearly annual
update, we were gaing to. laak at the numbers, but we weren't gaing to.
bring this back up far another five years to. see what was gaing to.
happen.
Naw, I'm haping taday that samehow we can have an agreement
that we're nat gaing to. bring this back up again after the new
interchange apens, and let's see what happens with the numbers fram
there.
That's basically it. I think I gat it pretty shart there far yau, Mr.
Cay Ie.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much. Gaodjab.
Thank yau, Jeff.
MS. FILSON: Yaur final-- I'm sorry. Were yau gaing to say
something?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No..
MS. FILSON: Yaur final speaker is Raberta Grathause.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: She had to. leave. She was gaing
to. try to. get back. She's nat here yet. I guess she didn't make it.
MS. FILSON: Okay. That's the end afyaur speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's it.
Cammissianers, do. yau have any questions? Cammissianer
Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'd just like to. -- I don't have
any questians. I'm glad to. see that Narm gave us this -- gave us this
recommendatian.
I agree with it. I think it's gaad that he'll maderate thase -- or I
Page 123
January 25, 2005
dan't know if that's the right ward ar not, far thase different
intersectians, to. improve them to., at same paint in time, 2014 ar
something when we revisit the subject -- but I'd like to. weigh in just
with yau guys and let yau knaw what my philasaphy is an raads
anyway.
We all have a challenging jab here, and that is to. plan for the
future. Right naw whatever we vate an, everybady else has to live
with in the future, and I think we never can lase sight af that, and I
dan't think any af us do., by the way. I think all af us take that charge
very seriously.
My persanal feelings an all afthis -- ah, by the way, Mr.
Schummer, I think it was, or Livingstan -- he said Livingstan Raad
staps at Radio., and I wanted to. tell yau -- and yau didn't say that in a
very kindly way.
I wanted to. tell yau why, and that is because, like an Lagan
where they really dan't want to see it six-Ianed, in that area they have
tiny little praperties, and it wauld have been right in their backyard,
and yau just can't -- yau can't do. that where you're just 10 feet fram a
backyard.
But anyway, that was just to. respand to. yau. And this was all the
way dawn that carridar. I taak a loak at it. I rade an there on a galf
cart, sa I was very cancerned with that.
But anyway, I do. believe that -- I'm a firm believer in that
six-lane highways are wanderful. They encaurage -- they encourage
greater speed, but I dan't think they belang in residential
neighborhaads.
I think that faur lanes belang in residential neighbarhaads.
Yau're gaing to. find me voting that way all the time. Whether
anybady agrees with me ar nat, that's haw I feel, because I think aur
prime mativatian is to. keep neighbarhaads safe. I dan't think any
neighborhoad shauld have a six-lane highway rather than a four-lane
raad gaing thraugh it.
Page 124
January 25, 2005
And I knaw N arm knaws that. I just wanted to. say that. And
ane af the things that I've naticed -- I've gatten same articles recently,
and I thaught this was very interesting far all to. see.
They say when the raad narraws like that, say yau're on a
six-lane, say, far instance, thraugh Galden Gate, and it narraws to. faur
lanes. When yau're an a six-lane, somehaw inside it makes yau think
af going fast just because it's an open highway. When yau narraw to
faur lanes, all af a sudden yau think yau have to. slaw dawn. It's just
ane af thase subliminal things that happens.
It's a traffic-calming device where you dan't even have to. put any
traffic calming in place. Just that haurglass appearance allaws yau, ar
encaurages yau to. slaw down. Sa I just wanted to. share my
philasophy with yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Commissianer
Fiala.
Cammissianer Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The questian, is the level af
service on the road, are we at failing, ar is it gaing to came in the near
future?
MR. FEDER: Commissianer, again, for the recard, Narman
Feder. Weare nat failing in level of service naw. That's why the
projection is 2014 narth af Golden Gate with a new interchange. We
do. have to. have the six-Ianing south afGalden Gate.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Sa the anticipatian is
2014, that it might fail in service?
MR. FEDER: That's carrect, that's why we presented to. you the
date that bath cansultants and staff have laoked at and agree is --
abaut the date that we wauld anticipate. But again, we're gaing to.
cantinue to. manitar. Livingstan has pravided same years af relief.
And when yau heard 2005, that was a prajectian done by a
cansultant that started back in 2001 an the design an this.
That was pulled aut based on an AADT and a prajectian three
Page 125
January 25, 2005
years aut in a madel, and I've never knawn anyane to. praj ect three
years by a made!. That was nat used. It was never used in reference
to. yau in recammendation.
Ifyau remember when we came through with aur
recammendatian to. yau, it was based an 2011,2012 is the date. Naw
we're laaking at 2014. And just wanted to. carrect that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- what yau're
recammending is the impravements on Pine Ridge and Lagan. I dan't
think it was anticipated at closing that median an 10th. So what that
daes if that's dane, the people who. live an the east side afLagan, they
only have ane turn movement, and that is --
MR. FEDER: Out to. a signal at Pine Ridge, yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- in ar aut -- right. Sa if they
wanted to. go. sauth an Lagan, they wauld have to., yau knaw, either go.
dawn Lagan ar turn an Pine Ridge and make a U-turn and came back.
Is there any pravisions far them to. get aut an Pine Ridge, anather
exit?
MR. FEDER: One afthe prablems, even when laoking at the
ultimate six-lanes, that wauld be clased affbecause the intersection is
taa clase, and to. get sufficient starage far the intersection taday and in
the future, yau can't keep that apen.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right. And I just wanted to. let
everybady knaw that I live an 10th but nat an that side, but I do. not
crass Logan Baulevard to. go. narth because I think it's a dangeraus
situation.
The issue -- yau knaw, having lived there and traveled it, the
raad is busy naw, and I want to cammend Cammissioner Coletta far
taking the bull by the harns and saying to. everybady, are we daing the
right thing? And I think if all af us taak a little piece af gavernment
and always questianed, are we daing the right thing, then we're gaing
to. gavern a lat better.
And I knaw he's taken a lot of heat fram it, but he cauldn't have
Page 126
January 25, 2005
brought this issue up by himself. It still takes a majarity af it.
After seeing Livingstan Raad apened up and waiting far that,
anticipating (sic) af it opening, and knawing that it was delayed far 10
years, we need -- we need to. plan far the future.
And, yau know, I think it's still a win far the residents in this
area. It's nat gaing to six lanes.
If it's -- the right-af-way wasn't acquired, Mr. Feder, what would
yau do. to. the raadway?
MR. FEDER: We wauld basically anly recammend to. yau
impravement sauth afGalden Gate Parkway. We'd go. in and try and
do. a patch averlay to. try to. keep the road tagether as lang as we could
until the need, then buy right-of-way. Yau dan't want to. buy twice.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Sa in this impravement, yau're
gaing to. get curb and gutter, drainage, and sidewalks?
MR. FEDER: Carrect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And--
MR. FEDER: Up to. Green.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So I think where we were in the
beginning is six-Ianing Galden Gate Parkway -- ar Santa Barbara, and
where we're at taday, the recammendations are to. buy right-af-way far
a six lane and keep it faur lane. I think it's a win far everybody.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a public speaker who was
autside in the hallway.
MS. FILSON: Oh, yes, Ms. DeJang.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is she -- is she --
MS. FILSON : Yes, she's right here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, okay. She has stated she wauld like
to. speak. We called her name. She didn't hear us. She was aut in the
hallway.
MS. DeJONG: Thank yau. I'm Brenda DeJang. I'm a state
certified residential cantractar and real estate braker in the State of
Flarida. And in the past few years I've been heavily invalved in the
Page 127
January 25, 2005
develapment af Galden Gate Estates.
I dan't knaw haw many ofyau go. to. what we used to call way
aut in Galden Gate, but that's where aur new-caming residents, that's
where they're caming fram mastly, the anes that are paying the
$25,000 impact fees and the new praperty taxpayers.
Sa I think we shauld maybe facus a little attentian an, perhaps,
apening up an 1-75 and Everglades Baulevard interchange, which is
ready to. apen anyway. These peaple are driving 45 minutes to. try to
get an 1-75. Sa can't samebady be praactive and pursue that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We are.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We are warking an it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We are very much.
MS. DeJONG: That's gaad to. knaw.
Also., has there been any change in the lines of the districts since
we've had such a change in aur papulatian?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
MS. DeJONG: That's gaad to. knaw, taa. Yau can see I'm not a
__ I'm nat a persan that's always in here. I'm busy warking and
supparting my family.
Sa -- but I wauld like to. say that in -- an the Lagan Boulevard, I
believe that that interchange is gaing to. make a drastic impravement.
I think if yau can get the peaple anta 1-75 aver at Everglades in the
future, yaur prajectians far 2014 may nat be necessary.
And where exactly is the development caming fram that's gaing
to. cause us to. have this traffic? Because everything's built out except
the east part af Naples.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that a questian yau want--
MS. DeJONG: Yes.
MR. FEDER: The grawth that yau're talking about is caming
through aut the caunty, but particularly east af 951, significant grawth,
1,000 new homes a year.
But yau have little things like Heritage Bay DR! at the corner af
Page 128
January 25, 2005
Immakalee and 951, faur square miles of develapment, Ave Maria,
ather issues thraugh there, but you still have all af Fiddler's Creek,
yau have Lely, east county's grawing, cantinued grawth in the
nartheast partian afthe county, sa there's develapment thraughaut the
caunty. But there is, as yau say, a lat af develapment pushing aut past
951.
MS. DeJONG: All but two afthase that yau mentianed are nat
gaing to. cause traffic an that area. Ave Maria's gaing to. bring them in
Immakalee Raad to 75, ar even ifyau came up Galden Gate -- ifyau
came up Galden Gate Baulevard and gat an at Pine Ridge Raad,
yau're still nat caming dawn that section af Lagan.
Sa -- naw the Fiddler's Creek, yau know, perhaps that might
bring a little, but I think samebady needs to. loak at the details af these
reparts you're getting. Somebady that is in real estate.
MR. FEDER: We are laoking at the details. We are loaking at
the details, yes. And we're remade ling as well.
MS. DeJONG: Thank yau.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Dan't go. anywhere yet.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Caletta has a questian.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, please. I'm always laoking
far new resaurces aut in my end af the warld. As yau knaw, the
infrastructure aut in the -- east af 951 is in great needs af all sarts af
impravement.
We're putting tagether a cammittee at the Galden Gate Estates
Civic Assaciatian to deal with such items as the interchange at 75 and
Everglades, which has been maving farward at a -- faster than it ever
has. We've been blessed by the Sauthwest Regianal Planning Cauncil
meetings, the jaint MPOs that Collier County and Lee Caunty have
endarsed.
Sa this has came a lang way. It's in frant afDOT naw, and it's
an their radar scape, but we need a citizen initiative to. keep it maving
it forward.
Page 129
January 25, 2005
The third Wednesday af March -- excuse me far the commercial
annauncement, but I can't lase this lady.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can I turn off his mike?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No., yau can't.
The third Wednesday in March, the Golden Gate Civic
Assaciatian will be dealing with this situatian in putting tagether a
cammittee, and they meet at the fire statian aff af 13th. It's at seven
o'clack. I'd lave to. have yau there and involved in the pracess. We
cauld use all the help we can get.
MS. DeJONG: I guess I can volunteer.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's a chance to. get invalved. Dan't turn
it dawn.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Cauldn't let yau get away.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Narm, in regards to the
prajectians afthe traffic, how it's dissipated aff afLagan -- and I
assume this is because af the apening af Livingstan -- what is the
prajectian af amaunt afresidents ar new structures that are gaing to be
an Livingstan, and at what time do yau consider that we're gaing to.
run into. a prablem where we're going to. be getting to. the capacity that
Livingstan was designed far? If yau can help us out an that.
MR. FEDER: I can't give yau the first figure af exactly haw
many residences, although I can get that for yau and bring it back to.
the baard in any public farum yau want.
As far as the grawth an Livingstan, as I said, yau've gat same
segments that are naw at the 30,000 and growing. The 2014 is a
reflectian af nat anly that, but Airpart, which was recently expanded
during that time frame -- yau've seen same reductian -- is cantinuing
to. graw in spite af Livingstan, althaugh the grawth is nat as fast.
Sa I guess what I'd have to. say to yau, yau're in abaut the teens,
the middle teens when Livingstan will start getting the level af traffic
that no. langer will became the attractar, and peaple will then try to.
Page 130
January 25, 2005
find the ather carridars far applicatian.
Plus, in this area, we are extending -- and it was nated that while
it will nat be as wide, and they're right, two. lanes fram Immakalee up
to. Banita Beach Raad, thraugh majar develapments -- and I didn't
mentian all af them, abviausly, but Mirasol, Parklands, and athers,
besides Heritage Bay, just mentioning that -- plus all the develapment
that's gaing dawn an the Lagan corridor at Vanderbilt and in thraugh
that area.
Plus, you're gaing to. extend the faur lanes -- two. lanes within a
faur-Iane right-of-way fram Immakalee down to. Vanderbilt Beach
Raad af Lagan that daesn't exist to. day , and that's underway as well.
And then lastly, we're in design and maving towards faur lanes
sauth af Davis dawn to. Rattlesnake Hammack that, with a jag, can
cannect to. faur lanes an a Cultural, Lely Resort.
Sa in answer to. yaur questian, I'd say abaut the mid teens. We're
gaing to. cantinue to. manitar it. But we dan't see as imminent taday
north af Galden Gate, and that's why we're recammending that those
dallars be used an athers that we knaw have the need already.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have ane last questian. On this
Santa Barbara carridar, there's a prapasal far this raad to. extend up
into Lee Caunty.
MR. FEDER: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What is yaur thoughts an haw far
up in Lee Caunty that this is gaing to praj ect to?
MR. FEDER: There's a cauple af cancepts gaing naw. One af
them wauld have Lagan -- althaugh it gaes up to Banita Beach Raad,
capitalize an its cannecting with any future 951 extensian, and
basically pulling into. that as a major way to. carry it further narth,
atherwise it's prabably generally -- and I can't speak far all afLee
County's plans -- Parklands gaes north into Lee Caunty up to Banita
Beach Raad. It will prabably terminate generally at Banita Beach
Raad, unless there's same small connectian.
Page 131
January 25, 2005
But I dan't knaw af any plans in Lee Caunty -- and we're
working with them -- far a majar expanding narth, if it's nat part af a
951 extensian.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I wauldjust like to. thank the members of
the public who. have painted aut to. us that traffic has actually
decreased an partians af Santa Barbara. Isn't that astaunding that our
road-building pragram has actually produced same pasitive results?
I am very happy to. knaw that the millions and millians and
millians af dallars that we've spent an building new raads and
widening raads and impraving intersectians is, in fact, having a
pasitive impact an traffic in Callier Caunty.
MR. FEDER: What yau have an yaur manitar is a very
interesting item. What we did is basically a streamline acrass all af
aur major narth/sauth arterials by the plan, laaked at it aver the last
few years. And as yau see an here, in 2001 we're actually behind the
curve. The red bar is capacity. The blue is volumes on thase five to
six facilities af narth/sauth.
Does this include the interstate as well, Dan? No., it excludes the
interstate. Sa when we laok at aur arterials narth and sauth, what yau
want is abviausly yaur red to. be aver the blue.
Well, as we came acrass with Airpart caming an just after 2001,
2002, as we came an the first sectians af Livingstan and naw as we've
campleted Livingstan, we're a little bit behind -- a little bit ahead af
the curve in the sense af capacity an -- overall narth/sauth is ahead af
the actual valumes.
Naw that's taday, af caurse. There's ather development caming.
But that is gaad news. And, yes, what we've dane by maving farward
is an aggressive pragram, particularly as addressed the narth/sauth
taday, and we've gat to. continue to. do. that to. meet the needs af the
future.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank yau very much for that
Page 132
January 25, 2005
summary, Narm.
Naw Cammissianer Caletta has a questian, then I'd like to. mave
into resalving this issue.
Cammissianer Caletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. Well, first affI'd like to.
apalagize far anybady I caused any distress to.. Beginning to. wander
far a while if my middle name was impeach. But that's okay.
Sametimes to. be able to. get samewhere, yau've gat to. have same fun
along the way, taa.
And it was never intended to. cause yau distress. I believe in tatal
hanesty in gavernment and everything up frant where yau can see it.
And here taday we've seen an example afwhat we faund out that we
wauldn't have knawn prabably for many manths, is the fact that this is
a needed facility, but nat now. It's needed sametime in the future.
And if same af yaur predictians prave to be right, that future
might be way aff into. the next century. It's very passible. Who.
knaws?
Who. wants to. spend money an raads that aren't needed? I mean,
that's crazy. Nat when the needs are sa great in ather parts of the
caunty. I mean, yau all said that at one time ar anather, and yau're
absolutely carrect. Believe me, I've read every ane af yaur emails,
I've seen every ane af yaur phane messages, seen all yaur letters.
Very impressed. Y au've got a great organizatian. It's daing a lat to
try to. pratect what you see as a very impartant element af yaur
standard of living, and I applaud yau far it.
I think what we've gat here in frant of us naw is an understanding
that we're laaking at a distant year, 2014. I wan't be an the
cammissian then.
Cammissianer Halas still will be here, of caurse.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hey, Halas is aver there.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's right, but I figured
I'd give yau credit taa, and Cammissianer Cayle also.. And yau
Page 133
January 25, 2005
mistaak me far Cammissianer Fiala a little while ago., sa I mean, I
can't be as bad as yau are.
But all in all, I'm laaking farward to. warking with every ane af
yau and yaur groups in the future. I think we've put this thing to bed
far same time to. came, and I make a matian for appraval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's a mati an far appraval fram
Cammissianer Caletta, secand by Cammissianer Fiala. I gat it right
this time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yau did, very gaad.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cauld I ask a questian? Wauld yau feel
camfartable putting into. yaur matian the stipulatian that this will not
be braught back far recansideration befare the 1- 7 5 averpass is
campleted and we can reevaluate this thing sa that these peaple dan't
get hit with this every year?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's anly two. years aut.
I'd be willing to. go. past that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Haw far?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Feder, prabably -- when's
the averpass suppased to. be in, another year and a half?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two. years.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two years?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Two. and a half.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be willing to. go. with three
years.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Three years.
MR. FEDER: And we'd be willing to go. with whatever directian
we get fram the baard. But I think waiting until after the interchange
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, yau need--
MR. FEDER: -- I want to. characterize as the I~ 75 interchange, is
in and is aperating, sa three years wauld be a reasonable time frame.
Page 134
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that gives us plenty aftime
to appraise the situatian then. And maybe at that paint in time, the date
would be maved farther aff into. the future, and aur grandkids will be
dealing with this.
MR. FEDER: That's a passibility.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissianer Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is the motian to. apprave staff
recammendatians?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's carrect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Why dan't yau read it just so we'll
know it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The anly cancern that I have is,
I braught up about 10th. I'm nat sure if that's gaing to. be addressed in
the cansideratian, 1 Oth Avenue, east af Lagan.
MR. FEDER: It is aur recommendatian -- abviausly this baard
can make whatever motion it choases. But aur recammendatian is --
and I dan't want to. be making a matian, sa I'll be quiet here. You've
gat it in frant af you.
Our recammendatian, it does include that shart stretch af
three-laning narth af Galden Gate simply to. make the Galden Gate
intersectian with Santa Barbara aperate mare effective by allawing the
merge fram three to. two. to. happen just narth af the intersection as
appased to. at the intersectian.
And the 10th Street issue is in there because we need to. extend --
and that was in there actually in the priar appraval with the majar
expansian af that intersectian, and it still needs to. be in there,
especially if we're gaing to. get sufficient starage far the narthbaund to.
westbound left turn.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Just a clarificatian, what
I meant was anather access far thase peaple to. access aut af theirI
Page 135
January 25, 2005
cammunity aut into. the street.
MR. FEDER: That's samething we'll wark with them an, but
unless directed by the board, I'm nat sure what we can specifically
cammit to.. But we'lllaak at that and work with them and any aptians.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Caunty attorney?
MR. WEIGEL: Thank you. In regard to. a statement abaut nat
bringing the matter back far a particular paint in time, I'd prabably be
remiss nat to. tell yau that as county governors, yau will have the
ability to. effectuate the needs af caunty gavernment for the health,
safety, and welfare at any paint in the future.
It wauld appear that the matian yau're making with the inclusian
af the time frame is a statement af policy that yau're putting in place
right naw. I didn't want the false impressian to. the public ar anyone
af interest to. think that yau are breaking a law if in the pursuit af
health, safety, and welfare af the cammunity in the future you faund it
imperative by a majarity afthe baard to bring the matter, ar a matter
related to. that, back at same paint in the future.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think that's an impartant paint far the
public. Yau can't ever depend upon anything we tell yau. I'm being
facetiaus, but what that really means is that any cammissian after this
ane can change any decisian we've made. Sa please dan't interpret aur
gaad intentians af trying to. keep this thing fram caming up sa
frequently as being lacked in concrete, because we can't legally do
that. It just -- same ather cammissioners cauld came in here and
change that palicy instantaneously. Sa just sa yau understand the
realities.
We have a mati an.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: My second wasn't an the new part
of that matian. May I just ask ane questian? Yau didn't mean we
have to bring that back in three years --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no., no., we can't.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- yau meant nat even laak at it far
Page 136
January 25, 2005
three years, but it cauld be many years dawn befare we laak at it
again, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right, exactly. We've gat to.
evaluate the averpass, see what happens at that paint in time. But we
cauld change it favarable.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Because I dan't -- yeah. I didn't
want to. set, yau knaw, like naw we're gaing to. bring it back again in
three years.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no..
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay, goad. Just sa that that -- sa I
understand and everyane else understands, that is we're nat setting it
to. bring back. It's at least three years befare we'll ever even talk abaut
it again.
Sa with that, I will -- I will add that to. my secand. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Before yau --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a mati an an the -- yau want to.
talk same mare about that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just ane little bit befare this
crawd disperses. Do. yau think I cauld have the "Impeach Caletta"
signs far my scrapbaak? Small little request.
Thank yau very much, Jeff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We--
MR. MUDD: Carinnissianer?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a matian an the baard.
Caunty Manager? I'd like to. get this aver with.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, Cammissianer, I knaw yau want to.
do. this mati an in the warst way, akay. But, yau knaw, we're going to.
have to. came back to. this baard. I mean, we did the 60 percent design
in Navember, we're gaing to. get thraugh the 100 percent design, and
Norman's gaing to. have to came back far the canstructian contract.
Sa we are gaing to. be talking abaut a canstructian cantract based
an yaur decisian taday, akay, and it's going to. be befare three years.
Page 137
January 25, 2005
It will be this year.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, but we're talking--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's different.
MR. MUDD: And I just want to. make sure that everybady aut
there understands that you are gaing to. talk abaut this particular
carridar again when yau do. a --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Not abaut six-laning the raad.
MR. MUDD: No., just what yau're appraving taday. But I just
want to. put that an the recard, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's restricted to. impraving the
intersection only, right?
MR. MUDD: No., Cammissianer. Yau're gaing to. -- yau are
going to. get a canstructian cantract to basically --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: For the whale length.
MR. MUDD: -- for the whale length that yau were shawn taday.
And when yau get that, that's gaing to. came up in frant afthis baard.
And yau knaw, you want to. make sure that everybady understands
that.
Part af this discussion is, we're not gaing to. talk abaut -- yau're
nat gaing to. talk abaut right-af-way acquisitian ar a change ar a
change in faatprint aff af what yau have right here and what yau're
basically deciding taday.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Staff recammendatians is what
we're suggesting, and we wan't deviate fram that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. And what we're trying to. do.
is get up frant af the curve here sa that if it daes came back an the
agenda, the citizens dan't need to. get excited that we're daing
samething --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A change.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- to. change it. And we just want
to. let yau knaw that when this comes farward that this is in regards to.
finishing up the engineering praj ect and letting aut the cantract bids
Page 138
January 25, 2005
and maving farward into. what was discussed here taday.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have a mati an an the table.
All in favar, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All appased, by like sign.
(No. respanse.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimausly. Thank yau very
much. Thank yau far taking the time to wait araund all day to. talk
with us.
MR. MUDD: Cammissianer, that brings us --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They need to. stay far the rest af
the meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mast afthe peaple are.
MR. MUDD: Cammissioner--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Let's -- I'm sarry, go. ahead.
MR. MUDD: Yau want to. cantinue ar -- I think it's nat time far
a break yet, I dan't believe?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Can yau hald aff a little langer? Y au're
akay? Can yau switch aff? No., yau can't. Haw much langer do. yau
think yau can go. befare a break?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two. haurs?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Halfhour?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It's been almost an haur and a
half. Why dan't we give yau a break right now, and we'll be back here
in 10 minutes, akay?
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, ifyau'd please take yaur
seats.
Page 139
January 25,2005
Mr. Chairman, yau have a hat mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank yau very much.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2005-03: THE 2004 CYCLE GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENT-
A.DOnED
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, this shauld bring us to. advertised
public hearings. And the first item is 8A, and it's a recammendatian to.
approve the 2004 cycle grawth management plan small-scale
amendment.
State yaur name far the recard.
MR. VanLENGEN: Kris VanLengen, comprehensive planning.
I wanted to. mentian very, very briefly as an intraductian that this is a
small-scale amendment, and so -- to. distinguish it fram the other
amendments yau'll be hearing a little later this afternaan.
This is, by definitian, invalving praperty less than 10 acres. It's a
map change. There is no. text change. And since it's an infrequently
heard type af petitian, I just wanted to. remind yau that it is effective
after anly ane hearing. There are no. separate transmittal and adaption
hearings, sa that it wauld be effective 31 days after adaptian, if it's
adopted, unless atherwise challenged.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Matian to. apprave.
MR. VanLENGEN: Given that, it's also. suitable for a
campanian rezane, and--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a mati an to. apprave.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Secand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And a secand by Cammissianer Caletta.
Is there any discus sian?
(No. respanse.)
Page 140
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No. discussian. I'll call the questian.
All in favar, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All apposed, like sign.
(N a respanse.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It carries unanimausly.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Pretty easy, huh?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very gaad. Gaad wark.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, the next item is -- the next item is 8
-- ladies and gentlemen, if yau'd please -- if yau'd please keep it dawn.
Item #8B
ORDINANCE 2005-04: PUDZ-2004-AR-5987: BALDR!DGE REAL
ESTATE, INC. REPRESENTED BY TIM HANCOCK OF TALON
MANAGEMENT, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM THE RMF-12
ZONING DISTR!CT TO THE PUD ZONING DISTR!CT TO BE
KNOWN AS ZONE PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
WHICH WILL INCLUDE A MAXIMUM OF 6,840 SQUARE FEET
OF COMMERCIAL USE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY AND
52ND TERRACE S.W., IN SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLOR!DA, CONSISTING
OF .83 +/- ACRES (COMPANION ITEM TO CPSS-2004-01)-
Next item is 8B. This item requires that all participants be swarn
in and ex parte disclasure be pravided by commissian members.
Page 141
January 25, 2005
Baldridge Real Estate, Inc., represented by Tim Hancack of
Talan Management, requesting a rezane fram the RMF -12 zaning
district to. the PUD zaning district to. be knawn as zane PUD, planned
unit develapment, which will include a maximum of 6,840 square feet
af commercial use.
The praperty is lacated at the nartheast corner af Galden Gate
Parkway and 52nd Terrace Sauthwest in Sectian 28, Tawnship 49
sauth, Range 26 east, Callier Caunty, Florida, cansisting af .83 plus ar
minus acres. This is also a campanian item to the first item that was
just appraved.
Mr. Hancock?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just a mament. We'll need to. swear
everyane in. Will everyane who intends to. pravide evidence for this
item please stand and be swarn in.
(The speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much.
Naw, ex parte disclasure. Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I dan't have any ex parte disclasure
an item 8B.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau. Cammissianer Caletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: 8B, I have disclasure in the fact
that I have had meetings an this particular subj ect with the petitioner
and with staff, and my file remains at this desk far anyane that wishes
to see it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have met with the petitioner's
representative cancerning this issue, and I've talked with staff abaut it.
Cammissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I've also. met with the
petitianer's representative and also. with staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissianer Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I met with Cheryle Newman, or
no. I spake to. Cheryle Newman an this petition.
Page 142
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much.
Mr. Hancack?
MR. HANCOCK: Gaad afternaon. I scratched aut marning on
my nates. And Mr. Chairman and members afthe cammissian, my
name is Tim Hancack, and I'm the agent far this applicatian
representing Baldridge Real Estate.
Since the filing af the ariginal applicatian, ane element af the
applicatian has changed that needs to. be nated far the recard, and that
is that Baldridge Real Estate was a cantract purchaser when this
applicatian was filed. They have since became the owner af the
praperty .
I have a revised applicatian far public hearing indicating that,
and we'll submit a capy far the recard this afternaan.
The applicatians befare yau today cansist af two. campanian
items. I ariginally prapased to. present them tagether, but half of my
wark has been cut aut far me, sa I will facus simply on the matter at
hand, which is the rezane to. PUD for lats one and two. an Galden Gate
Parkway and 52nd Terrace Sauthwest.
Thank yau. To. arient everybady with the praperty, it's adja -- it
cansists aftwa parcels. Lat number ane, which is .43 acres in size that
is located at the intersection af 52nd Terrace Sauthwest and Galden
Gate Parkway; lot number two., which is .4 acres in size and is
basically used right naw as a cannectian between 52nd Terrace
Sauthwest and an alley that is part af the Parkway Plaza.
There's same parking an the site that is being used apparently by
emplayees af Bank of America. In my research, I have been unable to
find an approved SDP far these impravements, but nanetheless, it has
been used apparently far aff-site parking.
The parking far Bank af America is mare than sufficient. It's not
necessary far the bank. And the bank was the awner af the praperty
and has saId the praperty, sa I think it gaes withaut saying that it's no
langer needed far the aperatian af the bank.
Page 143
January 25, 2005
Adj acent to the praperty here is the Parkway Plaza here, which is
daminated by C-4 uses. St. Elizabeth Setan Schaal is a little bit to. the
west here, as is develaped multi-family under an RMF-12 zoning
designatian.
Also. adjacent is a parking lat far the main sanctuary af St.
Elizabeth Setan Church. Again, Galden Gate Parkway to. the sauth,
and the activity center priar to. the growth management plan
amendment actually angled across and picked up a small Caribbean
faad market here, a Hess gas statian, and additional C-4 intensity type
uses.
What's being prapased in the rezane is, quite simply, a single
plan af develapment, which is to. build a stand-alane auto. parts retail
facility with no. an-site repair, and I think that's critical to. mentian.
There will nat be garages, there will nat be repair, there will nat be
tires being changed and sa farth.
It's strictly a 6,840 square faat retail facility that is pasitioned on
the back partian af the praperty, which maintains the service drive
between 52nd Terrace Sauthwest and the alley. In ather wards, we've
incarparated this into. the plan after meeting with the civic assaciatian
and really asking them whether ar not they wanted that in ar aut.
It was their apinian to. maintain it, and we have no. prablem daing
that. It also. pravides a nice service drive far any type af deliveries to
keep them fram mixing with the custamer traffic up frant.
This plan shaws that the parking is lacated between the building
and Galden Gate Parkway. Again this was a site design cansideration
that was discussed with the civic assaciation in the ane meeting I had
with them.
One alternative to. this wauld be to really flip the two. and place
the building up more claser to. Galden Gate Parkway, the parking to.
the rear.
One advantage that carries is the building would serve to, in fact,
kind af shield the parking area. That wauld be a plus. One negative is
Page 144
January 25, 2005
that the existing building line has the Bank af America site back here,
RMF -12 back here, and yau have parking lats bath an the frant here
and on the side here.
Sa what it wauld do. by flipping it is it wauld put the building aut
here kind af by itself. In laoking at those two. it is a general cansensus
that leaving the building where it is or where it's shawn here is
preferable to. placing it aut frant. But again, I dan't want to. amit that
as an aptian if it resalves same of the ather cancerns that may be
presented.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yau knaw--
MR. HANCOCK: And we eliminated a gaad piece af my
presentatian.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yau want to. make a matian.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, go. ahead.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You want to. make a mati an?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I dan't want to. make a
matian, but I think we aught to. just address any cancerns that we
have, and, yau knaw --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've gat --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. The criteria that was used to.
came up with the traffic caunt in this area, what did you use far
criteria? Was it used -- did yau use tire stares or was it the use af
other autamative stares?
MR. HANCOCK: The trip generatian repart prepared by Blair
(phanetic) Faley, the engineer, used a designation af 848, which is tire
stare. The -- after the planning commissian hearing when there was
same questian raised about whether that was used, in essence to.
artificially lawer the prapased trip generatian, I went back to. Mr.
Foley and inquired.
One af the reasans that he used tire stare was that the mast
Page 145
January 25, 2005
similar use, there is a designatian called 843 far autamabile parts
sales. Designatian 843 has a very limited sample af five stares, and it
says right an the ITE 6 generatian sheet, cautian, use carefully, small
sample size.
In that sample there are -- and I tell you what, I can put this an
the visualizer. In the sample yau will see an the battam left there,
faur Xs fairly clase together that shaw a rather linear pragressian of
traffic; hawever, there's ane sample way aut here, which is a 15,000
square faat stand-alane use. I've never seen a 15,000 faat parts stare.
But what it daes serve to. do. is create a very skewed line;
however, in discussing with Mr. Faley and with transpartatian staff,
even if these numbers were used in lieu af the tire stare, the planning
staff recammendation that there is no measurable impact to. Galden
Gate Parkway wauld not be altered. This is very similar to. any other
specialty retail use.
Sa that being the case, I do. bring this as samething we can
submit far the recard, that if it's transpartatian staffs apinion that it
should be used in place af the tire store, which was used in the trip
generatian repart, we're mare than willing to. accept that with a caveat
that the small sample size may nat be as accurate as the sample that's
presented in the trip generatian repart.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. When yau did yaur study,
what level af service did yau find Galden Gate Parkway to. be at at
this lacatian?
MR. HANCOCK: I would ask far canfirmatian with staff on
that. But the -- Galden Gate Parkway is aperating, I believe, at level
af service D. It is a canstrained facility which means that it has been
designated that it will accept a level af failure, if yau will, in lieu af
six-laning.
It also. brings in the factar that yau begin to. analyze the parallel
raadways that wauld relieve Galden Gate Parkway as a part af
laaking at impacts to. this raad.
Page 146
January 25, 2005
One thing that was, I think, missed at the planning commissian,
or maybe nat praperly understoad is that the designatian af a traffic
cangestian management area takes existing zaning and patentialland
uses and factars them into. the calculatians as if they were in place
taday.
In ather wards, these two. lats have been plugged into. that traffic
cangestian management analysis, ane as a retail campanent and ane as
a residential campanent.
So in shart, the backgraund traffic that makes up the level of
service prajectian far Galden Gate Parkway, we're already in there.
And the difference between what's being praposed in this rezane and
what was factared into. that analysis is negligible.
And again, I'll leave it to transpartatian staff to. either canfirm or
add to that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to. get the canfirmation
fram the traffic, fram aur staff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Henning?
Oh, you wanted to. do. that right naw?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ifwe cauldjust--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, gaod.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Then we'll just get that taken care
af and off the table.
MR. SCOTT: Dan Scatt, transportatian planning. It is aperating
at a level af service D. At the planning cammission we had a large
conversatian abaut the TCMAs, what that meant.
The planning commissian had a prablem with allaw -- my basic
prajectian is it has 85 remaining peak haur peak directian trips right
naw.
My basic analysis said that it's gaing to. fail later an this year.
And it cauld be this year ar next year, depending an the grawth in the
-- in the carridar.
One af the prablems, af caurse, is that we said all alang that
Page 147
January 25, 2005
based an making this a TCMA, we didn't want -- this was a
canstrained facility. We said we're gaing to. try to. widen Green
Baulevard, which is pragrammed, Davis Baulevard, which is now
finally pragrammed within the five years, same af the parallel rautes,
and leave that as a faur-laned facility and leave that alane. And that's
where we stand taday.
Obviously if they came in the way it is right naw they would be
appraved under the concurrency system.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Even thaugh it's gaing to. fail
sametime this year?
MR. SCOTT: It will fall belaw level of service standard D, yes,
but that was why, as part af the transpartation cancurrency
management area, the cammunity did nat want to. widen that roadway
beyand faur lanes. That's why the TCMA was set up.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissioner -- I'm sarry. Are yau
finished?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I'm finished.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Hancack, the -- are you
shawing intercannectivity to. the bank praperty?
MR. HANCOCK: We are shawing an intercannectivity to. an
alley that is shared by the bank property --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. HANCOCK: -- and our praject, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gaod. The -- I knaw that yau
have a drawing there on the building. That's canceptual in nature?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. HANCOCK: Yau mean the elevatian?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. That's just canceptual,
right?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. While it is canceptual in nature, wee
Page 148
January 25, 2005
have included that elevatian as a part af our PUD master plan far the
purpase af identifying the specific style of architecture that will be a
part af the develapment.
Because we knaw exactly what we want to. build an this site,
we're allawed to. pravide a little mare detail at the zaning level than
mast applicatians, and there are same additions and madificatians that
must be made to. that to. meet the new code that was adapted since we
initially submitted this, but that is the general style and character af
develapment that is prapased, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. What -- I mean, I just
dan't knaw if it fits the cade.
MR. HANCOCK: Where it --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I don't think that yau're in
the pasitian to. answer that for me. That would be staff determination.
But as lang as, yau knaw, it's conceptual.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. We've made a cammitment at the
planning cammissian also.. Because af the timing af our applicatian, it
was my understanding we'd have the aption af gaing under the
previaus cade ar the new cade. We've cammitted to. camply fully
with the new cade that's in place taday.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The last question, there's
cancerns, and valid cancerns, af changing of batteries and hoses and
tires and the like in the parking lat. We already have that prablem.
And I dan't knaw -- can yau infarm us, the cammissian, haw yau're
addressing that?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. The prablem, as stated to me by the
members af the civic assaciatian -- and I was unable to. speak to. Mrs.
Newman, but I did speak to. Ms. Tuff, and I understand they were in
cammunicatian an this particular issue.
The Discaunt Auto. Parts, and it may be called Advance Discaunt
Auto Parts an 951, apparently there was prablems with peaple daing
that, daing physical repair in the parking area, and I believe even carsn
Page 149
January 25, 2005
being left behind the store far periads af time.
One af the primary differences between this prapasal and that
stare is that stare is in straight C- 5 zaning. C- 5 zoning is yaur mast
intensive cammercial zaning category and actually allows the storage
af vehicles.
Naw, it wasn't a part aftheir SDP, and I understand thraugh a lat
af cade enfarcement effart, they've been able to. campel a level af
campliance there, but it's something they have to manitar probably
mare regularly because af the nature af that zaning, as appased to. this
praj ect.
This praject being zaned PUD, we can write into the
develapment standards same language that will address that. And let
me prapase far yau and enter into. the record samething that I've
affered, and that is, number ane, to. add under 3.4, develapment
standards in the dacument -- and I'll pravide a capy af this to. the court
reporter -- is that under item -- new item 11 -- I'm sarry, L, repair af
vehicles in the parking area is prohibited.
By stating that in the zaning dacument, yau have at least an
enfarcement step that will expedite any actian that may occur there.
And I do. have a questian for the county attorney that we might
want to. find aut regarding enfarcement in just a mament.
But I also. have anather item that I think may help deter the
practice. We have speed limit signs, but that daesn't mean peaple
always fallaw them.
What I am prapasing is that we also. add in the PUD that the
above prahibitian shall be stated an signage placed in the parking area
at a ratio. one far every five parking spaces. If apprapriate, a county
ardinance number will be listed on the signage.
In ather wards, in the parking lat, to. place signage at a rate af one
far every five parking spaces that tells peaple, repair af vehicles is
prahibited in the parking area. Again, that's samething that's not dane
at the stare an 951. Daes it mean everyane's gaing to. follaw it? No..
Page 150
January 25, 2005
But I do. believe that these two. things, cambined with the fact
that it's in a PUD, will give cade enforcement mare teeth and a more
ready platfarm to. campel campliance, shauld these rules be vialated.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I guess -- well, I appreciate that,
but my -- I view that as sign pallution, and I think yau can appreciate
that.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it can be addressed
thraugh signage, but what yau're prapasing is just taa much. And do.
yau feel camfartable all awing the SDP process to. address that?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. HANCOCK: And actually, if it's samething yau wauld like
us to take back to. the civic assaciatian and receive their input -- I
knaw yau can't mandate that, but I'll offer to. do. that --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. HANCOCK: -- ar nat.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Signage can do. it inside,
maybe some autside, but I just dan't want to. create a sign pallutian
prablem.
MR. HANCOCK: Based on that camment, I'll withdraw the
secand half af that. But I assume leave the repair af vehicles
prahibitian in the PUD dacument?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Carrect.
MR. HANCOCK: Okay. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And let aur staff review that and
address it at the SDP.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: As lang as yau feel camfartable
with that.
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir, I do.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a matian to approve
Page 151
January 25, 2005
with the stipulatians af develapment standards changing in the
dacument with the recammendatians fram the applicant.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll secand it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I can just say ane thing. I
understand the cancerns about TCMA an Galden Gate Parkway, but I
think that just about everybady in Galden Gate warks an their awn
vehicles. Sa it actually might reduce trips an certain partians an
Galden Gate Parkway.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a mati an by Cammissianer
Henning, a secand by Cammissianer Fiala, but Cammissianer Fiala
wants to. ask a questian.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Is this abaut the last piece af
property left alang that corridar?
MR. HANCOCK: No., ma'am. There are vacant parcels within
the affice parkway district. But from what I can tell, as far as pieces
that have the depth to allaw far the retail campanent in the district,
this is the last piece to. be zaned far such. The athers remain vacant
and are part afthe park east praject, which is a little further dawn the
raad. And there are, I believe, two. vacant pieces that might be sizable
enaugh far retail uses that still remain in that praj ect.
The rest are all 110 to. 120 feet deep and are limited to. the office
camponent af the district.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But then cancurrency will deal with
that?
MR. HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am. Cancurrency will deal with that.
And ane ather item, if it helps put any fears to. rest there, retail has a
different peak haur usage than daes, for example, affice ar medical
affice. Thase wauld caincide with the peak cangestian peri ads an the
Parkway.
Retail, with evening and weekend peaks, is an aff use that may --
and that's why -- ane reasan why it wan't cantribute to. cangestian on
the Parkway at peak haurs.
Page 152
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I have ane questian of Mr. Scatt.
MR. SCOTT: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm canfused abaut the camment that the
raad is actually gaing to. fail when we've gat a concurrency
management system that is suppased to. help us make sure that
additional develapment daesn't reach to. that paint. Explain this to. me
a little bit, akay?
MR. SCOTT: Okay. Originally when we went thraugh the
whale pracess af the cancurrency update, there were several segments
of raadway that were decided that they be based an either pal icy or
baard decisian previausly, that thase raadways wauld nat be widened.
When we submitted that to. DCA we had to. say, hey, we need to.
address these raadways. One af them was Vanderbilt Beach Road out
tawards the beach between 41 and Gulfshore, and then the ather ane
was Galden Gate Parkway within the city.
It's prajectian. It might not. Maybe we bring Green an in time.
Maybe we get same afthe ather impravements an time. But based on
the increase in traffic aver the last, say, five years, it's projected to fall
belaw level af service standard D. It might be E, but -- ar F, but
essentially fall belaw the level af service standard.
But it was decided at that time though that we weren't gaing to.
widen Galden Gate Parkway between Santa Barbara and 951,
essentially taking aut either all the landscaping ar taking the frant
yards ofpraperty up and dawn the carridar. That's why the TCMA
was developed to. try to. laak at nat just the raadway segment itself, but
the parallel raadways that essentially serve the same trips fram the
Estates to. here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think it's impartant that the public
understand why that sart af situation can accur and we still let a
development take place here, and I'm nat sure that we've clearly
explained that. And the point is that this praperty was zaned
Page 153
January 25, 2005
cammercial befare, right?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Residential.
MR. SCOTT: I think it was multi-family.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sarry, multi-family residential.
MR. SCOTT: Right, right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And a traffic campanent was included in
the study far that valume af traffic that would be generated.
MR. SCOTT: As is in the long-range plan, taa.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's right. Sa what Mr. Hancack has
said is that the traffic impact af this particular zaning change has
already been taken into. cansideration in the cancurrency management
system and in the traffic counts befare any actian that we take here
taday. Sa whatever impact he has is negligible with respect to. the
failure af the raad; is the a fair statement?
MR. SCOTT: That's carrect. And the interesting part af the
planning cammissian discus sian was that started aut with the site an
951 where they're parking all aver the place, they've had prablems,
well, obviausly that lends yau to. believe that there's a need far anather
facility which, as Cammissianer Henning painted aut, might sharten
the trips. I mean, yau might have a lat af peaple that walk to. this
lacatian, let alane drive, tao, sa --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If their car's broken, trust me,
they will walk.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, I just think it's impartant, because I
think this is the first time that we've said, we have a raad that is gaing
to. fail sametime in the future, but yet we're letting a develapment
occur here. And the reasan we're daing that is because it's already
been taken into. cansideratian in that traffic mix.
MR. SCOTT: And that's -- and in respanse to. it, we are laaking
at ather parallel raadways, too..
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Sa--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm certainly glad yau're putting this
Page 154
January 25, 2005
an the recard, by the way. Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. It needs to be clear. But ane final
thing. Let's presume that we had anather development that came
alang here and it had a significant impact an that raad. Do. we have
the autharity to. say na?
MR. SCOTT: If yau're talking abaut up-zaning aver what is aut
there right naw, yes, yau do..
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then aur cancurrency
management system gives us the right to. stap it if the raad is in failure
and it's gaing to. have a significant impact an the traffic; right?
MR. SCOTT: That's carrect, carrect.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sa there's nothing wrang with this
management plan that we're talking abaut?
MR. SCOTT: No..
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank yau very much.
Any ather questians by the baard?
(N a respanse.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have a mati an an the table by
Cammissianer Henning, if I remember carrectly, far approval, and
secanded by Cammissianer Fiala.
We have no. public speakers?
MS. FILSON: No., sir. Sa yau can clase the public hearing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I will clase the public hearing, and will
call the questian.
All in favar, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All appased?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. And I'd like to. put an the
record it's because even thaugh we have a TCMA, I still feel that any
Page 155
January 25,2005
road that is near failing ar near failure, I have a real cancern about
putting additianal traffic an there.
And I understand where Commissianer Henning is gaing with
this because I knaw that they need auto. repair stares there in Galden
Gate because that's basically the warkfarce peaple af Callier County,
but I have a prablem also. with the traffic situatian. That's why.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much. The mati an
carries by a vate af 4-ta-1.
Thank yau very much.
Item #8C
ORDINANCE 2005-05: PUDZ-2004-AR-5220 LAND
DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC, REPRESENTED BY RONALD
NINO, AICP, OF VANASSE DA YLOR, LLP, REQUESTING A
REZONE FROM RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING TO
MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MUPUD) FOR
A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE BUCKLEY MIXED USE
PUD TO ALLOW FOR MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL AND
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE PUD IS PROPOSED FOR
A MAXIMUM OF 251 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, A
MAXIMUM OF 74,230 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL
COMMERCIAL, AND A MAXIMUM OF 97,070 SQUARE FEET
OF OFFICE COMMERCIAL USES. THE PROPERTY IS
LOCATED AT 7501 AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD, IN THE
NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF
AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD AND ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE,
NORTH OF THE COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL LIBRARY, IN
SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 22.84::!: ACRES
Page 156
January 25, 2005
MR. MUDD: Cammissianer, that brings us to. item 8C. This
item was cantinued fram the 14th, 2004, BCC meeting. This item
requires all participants be swarn in and ex parte disclasure be
pravided by cammissian members.
It's PUDZ-2004-AR-5220, Land Develapment Graup, LLC,
represented by Ranald Nina, AICP, afVanasse, Daylar, LLP,
requesting a rezane fram rural agricultural "A" zoning to. mixed-use
planned unit development, MUPUD, far a praject to. be knawn as the
Buckley mixed-use PUD to. allaw for mixed-use cammercial and
residential develapment.
The PUD is prapased far a maximum af 251 residential dwelling
units, a maximum af 74,230 square feet af retail cammercial, and a
maximum af 97,070 square feet af affice cammercial uses.
The praperty is lacated at 7501 Airpart-Pulling Raad in the
northwest quadrant af the intersectian af Airpart- Pulling Raad and
Orange Blassam Drive, narth af the Collier Caunty Regianal Library,
in Section 2, Tawnship 49 south, Range 25 east, Collier Caunty,
Florida, cansisting af 22.84 plus ar minus acres.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much, Caunty Manager.
Cauld I ask everyane who. is going to. affer testimony an this item
to please stand to. be sworn in. That includes any public speakers.
Haw many public speakers do. we have?
MS. FILSON: We have ane.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have ane public speaker. Okay.
Thank yau very much.
MS. FILSON: Claire Gaff.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We can go. ahead and swear them in.
(The speakers were duly swarn.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much.
Naw ex parte disclasure. Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. An angaing sort af email and
meetings and carrespandence, and it's all here in my file if anybady
Page 157
January 25, 2005
wauld like to. laak at all the carrespandence that's taken place. And I
believe there's already still same additianal carrespandence that came
in this marning. I think they're included in here since lunch.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Caletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. On 8C I have meetings,
, carrespandence, emails, and phane calls. And, ance again, everything
I have is in my file far anyane that wishes to see it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much.
I have met with the petitianer and with members afthe
cammunity. I've received telephone calls and lats of emails
cancerning this. And, af caurse, this was heard by us in a priar
meeting" sa that we have gone thraugh this praj ect in some detail in
the past.
Cammissianer Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I taa have had meetings,
carrespandence, emails, calls, spoken to. staff, and as Cammissioner
Coyle painted aut, we've even addressed this in an apen meeting. And
I have everything in this file that will be on file far anybady to. view.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I met with the petitianer and
staff an this issue and received several carrespandence, email
correspandence, an this item.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank yau very much.
And if I cauld ask that -- who's going to. present first, staff? I
wauld ask that staff and the petitianer deal anly with the informatian
that is pertinent, that has changed and might address the questions the
cammissianers had asked at the last time this was heard.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Very gaad.
MS. DESELEM: Gaad afternaan. For the recard my name is
Kay Deselem, and I'm a principal planner with the develapment --
zaning and land develapment review department.
And I prepared the supplemental executive summary far this
Page 158
January 25,2005
meeting, respanding to. the baard's questians at the last meeting an
December 14th.
At that time the board had asked staff to. investigate the
affardable hausing issue relative to the adoptian af the grawth
management plan far the Buckley subdistrict and the supplemental
analysis that's pravided in that supplemental executive summary.
On page ane af faur it is explained that there was discussian at
the April 18th, 2002, Callier Caunty Planning Cammissian hearing
abaut affardable hausing, and it quotes, an affardable hausing
element, end af quate, might have been included.
But when paintedly asked, the agent at that time did decline the
apportunity to. stipulate any particular percentages af affardable
hausing that wauld be presented.
And I think it's impartant to. nate also. that the agent at that time is
no. langer the agent that's befare yau naw. Because it gaes an in that
supplemental executive summary to. state that the agent wauld be
adding that such a cammitment cauld be made at the time af zoning.
But like I said, that agent no. langer is involved in it naw that it's here
at the zaning stage.
Also. an page ane there's a synapsis afthe May 14th, 2002, Baard
af Caunty Cammissianers hearing far that subdistrict adaptian
hearing, and staff went an recard twice during that hearing to. explain
that -- and I'm quating David Weeks, comprehensive planning
manager -- I just want to. make sure it's absalutely clear there's nothing
abaut this prapasal that has any linkage whatsoever to. affardable
housing.
Sa we did investigate yaur questians, and it appears to. us that it's
clear fram the record -- and I did include far yau excerpts fram bath
thase hearings -- that there was no. affardable hausing cammitment
made as anything far the adaptian of that subdistrict.
And that's all I have far yau. Again, if yau have questians, I'd be
mast happy to. answer any questians yau might have.
Page 159
January 25,2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianers? Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a mati an that we apprave
this, althaugh I hape that Mr. Y avanavich remembers that -- I believe
that befare, in aur discussian earlier, we came up with a 50- faot height
limitatian, and I believe that yau said that there was gaing to. be abaut
206 residents in there that yau felt -- but we were gaing to. have a
maximum, instead afthe 251, it wauld -- we'd limit it to. 225.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: That's carrect. And I'm assuming yaur
mati an includes the same pravisians that was in the ariginal motian
brought by Cammissianer Coletta at the last hearing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Can we -- can yau refresh aur
memory an exactly what Cammissianer Coletta said.
Cammissianer Caletta, do. yau remember?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I've got tatal recall. What was it
I said?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: You wanted the maximum -- excuse me
-- the maximum density to. be reduced to. 225 units and yau wanted the
height af the building to be 50 feet, which was -- which was yaur
matian. And that mati an was seconded -- I cannat remember by
wham -- I think it was Cammissioner Fiala at the time. But thase
were terms we agreed to. and cantinue to. agree to..
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cauld I ask far a clarificatian? There
were several Callier Caunty Planning Cammissian recammendatians.
Wauld they be incarparated by reference --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: They wauld be incarporated within
the matian.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: With the exceptian afthe traffic light?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The stap light, the traffic light.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Carrect, that's carrect.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sa we wauld incorparate in that motion
Page 160
January 25, 2005
all af the CCPC recammendations with the exception --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Traffic light.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- afthe traffic light, akay?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So we have a mati an by Cammissianer
Halas. Is there a secand?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Secand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Secand by Cammissianer Fiala. And we
have one public speaker.
MS. FILSON: I have ane speaker, Mr. Chairman. Claire Goff.
MS. GOFF: Gaad afternaan, Cammissianers, ladies and
gentlemen. I will be very brief.
I just wanted to. clear the air in regards to. Emerald Lakes. Weare
the adjacent cammunity. And as yau knaw, I'm the president afthe
Emerald Lakes Residents' Assaciatian. And quite frankly, I just want
to. paint aut a cauple af details that have accurred since 2002.
In the fall af 2002, there was an article in the Naples Daily News
citing the fact that Emerald Lakes is affardable hausing. And,
therefare, I wauld like to. make it knawn that there is and never has
been any abjectian to. affardable hausing an that issue raised by the
peaple fram Emerald Lakes.
The issue that we raised in 2002 and the issue that we cantinue to.
raise until aur settlement in late 2003 was a matter af density. Haw
many peaple can we handle? Haw many peaple can jam the
highways, use the trash, use the water, which has been in shart supply,
and sa farth.
That has been aur issue fram the very beginning, and that is why,
you knaw, we gat -- went thraugh the whale thing with the caurts and
everybody and finally sat down with the new develaper when he came
farward with an -- in a pasitian that was lowering density, was giving
us same other cansideratians in regard to. setbacks, that we signed an
agreement with him.
Page 161
January 25,2005
And I'm simply here taday to. forward that agreement to. you and
ask yau, again, to. please apprave this recammendation, to. apprave this
develapment as it stands befare yau taday.
Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau very much.
Cammissianer Henning? And then I'll clase the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- I appreciate the
correspandence -- and, yau knaw, it wasn't my intent to. farce
affardable hausing an anybody.
We did -- I did meet with Mr. Y avanavich and we talked abaut
warkfarce hausing, and I think we've came to an agreement an
percentage af workfarce hausing?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yes, Cammissianer. Keeping in mind
that we're nat -- we dan't want to. increase the 225 units that
Cammissianer Halas ariginally wanted to. make sure we were scaled
dawn to., we dan't have an -- we dan't have an objection to. providing
that five percent af the total units we build will meet the definition af
workfarce hausing that's in yaur cade.
Sa it wauld be warkfarce hausing as defined in yaur code, and
the initial purchaser wauld qualify as -- within that incame level far
workfarce hausing, and that wauld be five percent af the units,
depending an haw many we ultimately build.,
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And that wauld pravide the
prafessianals warking within the affices and --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And other clerical peaple, right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and the retail to. affard to live
there --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yeah, correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- if they shauld chaase to. do.
sa.
Is that a part -- can yau include that in yaur matian?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll put that in my matian. Just -- I
Page 162
January 25, 2005
want to. make sure, and I think yau cleared it up very much -- very --
did a very gaad jab in clearing up the issue.
When we say warkfarce housing, this is peaple that are
professianal peaple. They'll either be -- and this is going to. be nat
rental praperty, but it will be praperty that will be saId to. them; is that
carrect?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Carrect, and that's the -- yes, the initial
purchaser.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Sa thase are basically
peaple that are coming here to. Callier Caunty and that meet the
criteria far warkforce hausing, and they're prafessionals. They cauld
also. be yaur palice afficers, they could be EMS, they cauld be nurses
in the haspital. Sa I just want to. make sure that we gat a clarificatian
an this. And that's part afmy mation.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And that will be part afmy second.
It even cauld be anybady that warks far gavernment.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Exactly. Cauld be me.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And let's see if we can't summarize this
matian, make sure we understand everything that's included. It will be
a maximum density af 225 units, five percent af which will be
affardable housing?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: W arkfarce housing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Warkforce hausing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Warkfarce hausing, warkfarce hausing,
a maximum height af 50 feet.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It will incarparate all the
recammendatians af the CCPC with the exceptian af the traffic light.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Carrect.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: What have I missed?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I dan't think yau missed anything.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, that was gaad.
Page 163
January 25,2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just ignore it. Keep gaing.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm gaing to. call the questian. Do. you
want to. --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I just want to. make ane
camment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go. ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just as an abservatian. I want to.
cangratulate Mr. Y avanavich far gaing aut there and daing the right
thing, bringing the public tagether and meeting their needs. Time and
time again yau have dane this, yau've braught the public in here with
agreement, and they've been an your side.
I've seen yau take fire storms and calm them dawn and bring
peace and tranquility to. the neighbarhaod. Gaad wark.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do. yau have an "Impeach Caletta" sign
in yaur yard?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Taking up aur time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mave alang.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. I'll call the questian. I'm going to.
clase the public hearing, and then I'll call the questian.
All in favar af the matian, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It passes unanimausly. Thank yau very
much.
Naw we're gaing to. go. an to. -
Item #8D
Page 164
January 25, 2005
RESOLUTION 2005-82: PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE 2004
CYCLE ONE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS
- APPROVED AND/OR APPROVED WITH CHANGES (CP-2004-
01, CP-2004-02, CP-2004-03, CP-2004-04, CP-2004-05, CPSP- 2004-
MR. MUDD: That brings me -- this bring us to. --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- 8D, huh?
MR. MUDD: -- to. 8D, which is a recammendatian to. apprave
the 2004 cycle grawth management plan amendments, and Mr. David
Weeks will present fram lang-range planning, cammunity
develapment's environmental services.
David, let's just let it clear far just a secand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Are we ready to. go?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Weeks?
MR. WEEKS: Far the recard, I'm David Weeks, planning
manager in the camprehensive planning department.
Cammissianers, a few brief camments befare we get into. this
item, as we always do. far yaur benefit.
First af all, to. remind yau that this is a legislative actian, not a
quasijudicial actian, sa there's no. requirement to. swear in participants
ar affer natice af ex parte communicatians.
These are grawth management plan amendments. Yau see these
typically twice a year. We have an annual cycle, we have the
transmittal, and then adaptian.
Taday is the transmittal hearing. Sa far thase petitians in this
package that yau chase to. transmit to. the Flarida Department af
Cammunity Affairs and ather state review agencies, yau will see these
again a secand and final time at the adaptian hearings later this year,
prabably in June.
Page 165
January 25, 2005
I guess the last thing to. mentian as an averview, as always, we
wauld appreciate if yau wauld leave these binders that we pravided to.
yau in yaur affices, and we will pick thase up tamarraw. We can
reuse thase by sending them to. thase state agencies. We wauld
appreciate that.
MR. MUDD: Okay. David, do. yau need separate individual
vates an each item, ar do. yau -- it says right here that yau're
recammending that all six amendments be transmitted, but do yau
want them dane individually, or do. yau need a mati an for --
MR. WEEKS: Actually, we wauld appreciate a separate mati an
an each af the petitians. And just as a matter af minar carrectian,
staff, at least, has recammended appraval af five af these. There's one
af these which we do. not recammend that yau transmit; hawever,
planning cammissian did recammend transmittal af all af these items.
Thank yau, County Manager, but a separate mati an on each
wauld be appreciated.
MR. MUDD: And that brings us to. the first petitian; is that
carrect?
MR. WEEKS: A cauple quick overviews, if I may, in the
executive summary, which is a batch farmat. There's not a separate
executive summary far each af these.
Just as an averview to. mentian that as far as the fiscal impact
gaes, in staffs apinian there is nane, mast like particularly at this time
because this is a transmittal hearing. Yau are nat taking final action
on any afthese petitians.
No. particular enviranmental issues at this time, and we'd remind
you that even ance these amendments are adapted, the site specific
anes, the next step in the pracess wauld be rezane petitians far the
individual sites, and at the time a specific review is made far
enviranmental impacts as well as campatibility, traffic impacts, et
cetera.
As I stated earlier, the planning cammissian did review these
Page 166
January 25, 2005
items and they did recammend transmittal af all six af them, though
there was a split vate an all afthase except far the caunty-initiated
amendment.
And the staffrecammendatian, as well as planning cammissian's,
is identified in yaur executive summary under each af the individual
petitians. And as is yaur typical pracedure, the staff will fallaw the
petitianer far all petitions submitted by the public.
Thank yau.
MR. MUDD: And the first petitian is CP-2004-1. It's a petitian
requesting an amendment to. the future land use element to. madify the
urban residential fringe subdistrict to. allaw the affardable hausing
density banus af 196 afthe 235 acres in the San Marina PUD, located
an the east side af Callier Baulevard, one paint -- ane and a quarter
miles sauth af Davis Baulevard in Sectian 11, Tawnship 50 south,
Range 26 east, Rayal Fakapalm planning cammunity, and the
coardinatar is Jean J aurdan.
And Mr. Rich Y avanavich, are yau the petitianer?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir.
MR. MUDD: Ga.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Again, gaad afternaan, far the recard,
Rich Y avanavich representing the petitianer. With me taday also. are
Richard Davenpart, who is the representative af one af the jaint
venture partners; Dr. Sam Durso., who. is a representative of the ather
jaint venture partner; Dwight Nadeau, with RW A, who. is the planner
an the praject; and Reed Jarvi, with Vanasse and Daylar, who. is aur
transpartatian cansultant an this praj ect.
This is a unique applicatian request. This is a jaint venture
entered into. by Waterways Develapment, who. yau've seen an many
accasians, and Habitat far Humanity, who yau've also. seen an
accaSlans.
They've entered into. a jaint a venture to. actually acquire same
praperty with the intent af jointly develaping it far bath a market rate
Page 167
January 25, 2005
praject and an affardable hausing praject that wauld serve the very
law incame categaries.
We are simply, taday, requesting that this praperty be eligible far
an existing pravisian in the camprehensive plan that would allaw far
up to. six units af density banus far an affardable hausing praj ect.
We're nat befare yau taday requesting the six units.
And I think it would be helpful to go. aver -- and we did this with
the planning cammissian. When we do. come farward with the PUD,
assuming this is transmitted and adapted, what we're requesting is that
an the 196 acres that's being added far being eligible far up to. six
banus units, we're anly asking -- we're gaing to. anly asked far faur
dwelling units.
There have been same numbers published that wauld be, yau
knaw, a worst-case scenario if we asked far the full six, but we're nat
asking far that. We're anly asking far the faur. And how that would
break aut -- that wauld be a tatal af 785 units. That wauld break out
as 549 market rate units and 236 affardable housing units serving the
very law incame categary.
The averall praject density, ifyau include the existing apartments
that are there far the entire 235 acres, wauld be 4.8 units per acres. If
we maximized the density banuses, which, again, we're nat, we cauld
ask for 7.5 units per acre. The averall praject density would be 4.8.
The pravisian that exists in the comprehensive plan actually
requires that we pravide mare affardable hausing units for the urban
residential fringe than we wauld be required if we were in the general
urban area.
By way af example, if we were in the general urban area and we
were gaing to. pravide the very law incame categary, anly 10 percent
af aur units, the banus units, wauld be required to. be affardable.
Under this pravisian, 30 percent of those units are gaing to. be
required to. be affardable, and we're gaing to. be serving the very low
categary .
Page 168
January 25,2005
Sa we're actually, by utilizing this pravisian, providing a higher
percentage af units that will be affordable in return far the density
banus units than yau would find in the urban area if yau were asking
far density banus units.
We believe that the praject serves a very impartant need in
Callier Caunty far this incame categary. We believe that this is -- you
knaw, again, I said it was a unique situatian. It's the first jaint venture
entered into., a private develaper, semi-public developer, Habitat, to. go.
farward with this praject.
Y aur staff has recammended that we -- that yau transmit to. the
Department af Cammunity Affairs. Y aur staff repart's very detailed.
I wanted to. hit the highlights af what we're requesting.
Dr. Durso. is gaing to. make a few remarks, and then we'll apen
aurselves up to. any questians -- unless yau want to. ask us questians
now -- that yau may have regarding the praj ect.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Go. ahead. Let's cantinue with the
presentatian.
DR. DURSO: Far the recard, I'm Dr. Sam Durso.. I'm president
af Habitat far Humanity af Collier Caunty.
As yau know, there's a tremendaus need far mare affardable
housing in the caunty. There's a deficit af abaut 20,000 units right
naw. The current grawth management plan calls far 500 units per
year to. be appraved ar built. We think 2,000 per year wauld be a
mare respansible number, and we still may nat salve the prablem at
2,000 per year.
Habitat far Humanity has had tremendaus suppart thraughout the
caunty and tremendaus support fram the Callier Caunty Commissian.
And we have aver 17,000 hausehalds in aur data base af falks that
have helped Habitat far Humanity in this caunty, either as volunteers
ar danars. By far mare than any other nan-prafit in the caunty. We
have tremendous support.
In the last six years, we've raised aver $20 millian in private
Page 169
January 25, 2005
danatians in Callier County. Sa Callier County residents are very
generaus and they suppart the cancept af affardable hausing.
This has helped us build 115 hames this past year, making us the
number ane habitat affiliate in the warld, right here in Callier County.
I have maps that I'm going to. give each af yau that yau can take
hame with yau that shaw where all the Habitat far Humanity housing
is in the caunty. I spent a little bit af time an that. It also. shaws where
all aur valunteers and danars came fram in the caunty and where the
maney has came fram in each district.
Right as af taday, 50 percent af aur hames are in District 1 and
50 percent are in District 5. We have abaut 350 campleted hames in
East Naples and 350 campleted hames in Immokalee.
With the land that we have under cantract, with all this land an
this map that I'm shawing yau, if everything is appraved by yau -- by
your cammissian aver the next year ar two, we will build all the land
we have in the next 15 years.
And at that time, we will have 20 percent af aur hausing in
District 1 and 80 percent in District 5, and unfartunately, nane in the
Districts 2, 3 and 4.
The caunty definitely needs mare affardable hausing closer to.
jabs. Many years ago. the fir -- I mean, I've been daing this far 12
years, and I remember the first time I met with one af the
cammissianers and they said, well, yau knaw, my canstituency wauld
rather we put all the affardable hausing in Immakalee. Well, that's nat
possible. The jabs are here in Naples. We need mare affardable
housing claser to. Naples.
And we still do. a great jab in Immokalee, and we build lats of
hauses in Immakalee and will cantinue to. do. it.
Traffic is an issue, but affordable hausing is definitely an issue.
And having affardable hausing claser to. jabs will actually decrease
the stress an the raads.
The Habitat hameawners, and we're talking 236 Habitat families
Page 170
January 25,2005
who. live at this San Marina camplex, a lat af them, even walk to.
wark, at Wal-Mart, at the new haspital, at the Publix, and definitely at
all the galf caurse communities. We have peaple warking at every
single galf caurse community up and dawn 951.
Habitat has a $2 and a half millian investment in this praperty,
and we wauld suffer tremendaus financial hardship if we can't build
there. We have a tremendaus partnership with the county . We need
yaur cantinued suppart in appraving aur subdivisians sa that tagether
we can make substandard hausing sacially, marally, and palitically
unacceptable.
Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank yau, Dr. Durso..
DR. DURSO: I'm gaing to. give yau these maps that --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Haw many units afHabitat far
Humanity were gaing to. be in this camplex?
DR. DURSO: Two. hundred thirty-six.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Two. hundred thirty-six.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I gat one, Sam.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I just wanted -- thank yau. I just wanted
to. put up there just where the praject map is in relatian to. ather
develapments.
We're narth af Immakalee -- I'm sarry, narth af Rattlesnake
Hammack Raad. We're just south of -- I fargat the name af the
project. Glen -- Farest Glen, just south af Farest Glen.
I do. want to. put up the existing master plan for the PUD, just to.
give yau an idea af what's there.
As yau can see fram -- this is the existing PUD master plan. As
yau can see -- and we're nat prapasing to. change that -- is this area
right here is preserve and will remain preserve, sa near -- the
develapment nearest Farest Glen will be a preserve, sa we believe that
campatibility wan't be an issue with our neighbars.
With that, we apen aurselves up to. any questians fram the
Page 171
January 25, 2005
cammlsslan. And, again, if there's any camments fram the public,
we'd like to. address thase that are raised.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I'm very cancerned abaut
what's prajected there far tatal units that are gaing to. be develaped in
this whale area, and I'm cancerned abaut the traffic.
And sa the first question I'm gaing to. ask is to. N arm Feder in
regards to. where we stand, again, with the raad and its capacity.
Basically what I'm talking abaut is the carridar afU.S. 41 and 951 at
that area, all the way up to. where this particular prapased praject is.
MR. FEDER: Cammissianer, far the record, Narman Feder. I
dan't believe I was swarn in. I was autside the raam. I dan't need to.
be, fine.
What I do. want to. tell yau in answer to. that questian is right naw
we have same canstraints in our capacity, but we have a praj ect to.
mave fram faur to. six lanes. It's to. be let fairly saan, sa there is not a
cancern immediately relative to. capacity in that carridar.
In the five years though, we see aurselves getting very
canstrained with what is already out there, bath vested and atherwise
appraved in PUDs current zoning, and we have a real cancern that in
spite af the fact af agreeing very strangly that affardable hausing is
needed in the caunty, that it daes help reduce trip lengths, we have a
carridar here alang 951 that we have no. viable alternate alignments, ar
very few.
And we're very cancerned that we're starting to. try and loak at
what we can do. to. the east af 951, which has a set af issues that we're
gaing to. have to. deal with, and we dan't have a lang-range answer, sa,
therefare, up-zaning, as was braught up befare -- althaugh yau may
cansider it here, and far gaad causes, cansider it -- we would, as we
brought up in the AUIR meeting and as we will bring up under yaur
cancurrency review, we have cancern abaut up-zaning particularly in
this carridar, where right naw we see some canstraints well aut past
Page 172
January 25, 2005
five years unless we bring farward some praject, which right naw are
anly in the cancept stages. They're not even in the plan and maving
tawards praductian.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: One ather questian. This is for Jae
Schmitt. Cauld yau give us a presentation af basically what is
praj ected aut there as far as grawth and haw many units right naw that
are scheduled to. be built in this general carridar?
MR. SCHMITT: Far the record, Jae Schmitt, administratar af
cammunity develapment/enviranmental services. And let me boot
this up.
I prepared this yesterday at the request af Commissianer Fiala
and then again in discussing this with Commissianer Halas. And I'm
just gaing to. run through it.
Again, we're certainly in suppart af affardable housing, but just
to show and understand what is zaned aut there. And I can run
through at least same af the vested units -- and vesting meaning they
already have the cancurrency vested -- and I can go. thraugh the area.
This is the area we're pretty much talking abaut, and if yau
fallaw in the general area, yau knaw there's the Callier Regional
Medical Center and anather ane coming in, Newtan's (sic) Square. But
ifyau take this entire carridar -- and here we are at 951 and 41, all
these units in blue are recent zanings in the last two. years, excluding,
of caurse, Lely and Fiddler's Creek and Hammack Bay have already
had zaning.
But caunting what will be built aut in that area, a little aver
16,000 units prajected to. be built. And these are all units in there. Of
caurse, Lawe's is gaing in at 951 and 41, and the Super Wal-Mart still.
N aw understand, that thaugh the zaning is appraved,
cancurrency daes nat mean that they're going to. get their building
permit ar their lacal develapment arder, excluding thaugh, the DR!s,
Fiddler's Creek, Verana Walk, and Winding Cypress are DR!s, and
Lely, sa they are -- they're already vested.
Page 173
January 25, 2005
The ather units aut there, mast af the athers will be impacted
thraugh the cancurrency amendments and will have to. be cleared
thraugh the cancurrency amendments to. deem that the roads are
adequate to. autharize the fallow-an canstructian.
I'll go. dawn further. This is, af caurse, the Super Wal-Mart,
which is certainly an area of concern, but understand that was the
Benderson Develapment and that was -- that was a vested
develapment.
And we go. up even further, when yau get up into. this area, and
certainly in the Vanderbilt Beach, gaing up -- and these are the
different PUDs all the way up thraugh, and then up into. the narth end
af 951, and thase are the units that were just appraved in the last two
years, all that develapment up at 951 and Immakalee Raad.
Sa -- and in a nutshell, Cammissianer, hapefully that answers
yaur questian. Thase are the -- at least the appraved praj ects in and
alang 951.
Naw, understand that a mile east af951 ends the urban baundary,
and then we abut up against the rural fringe mixed-use district. That's
where we're dealing with TDR's, sending and receiving lands, and
that's pretty much it. We were nat gaing to. go much further east.
This San Marina project, af course, is right at the edge af the
rural fringe. Based an the Belle Meade area, the develapment will nat
praceed any further east unless, af caurse, we deal with the TDRs, and
the receiving areas are really, in regards to. the Belle Meade area, are
dawn alang the sauth trail, east af 951.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sa right naw, what San Marina is
appraved far is 352 existing units; is that carrect?
MR. SCHMITT: Let me see the San Marina praject.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Three fifty-two., is that --
MR. SCHMITT: And I shaw at San Marina is 352 existing, 800
plus requested. I believe Mr. Y avanavich amended that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: To. 758.
Page 174
January 25, 2005
MR. SCHMITT: I guess to. seven hundred --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Eighty-five.
MR. SCHMITT: -- eighty-samething. Yeah, 780. And that's
actually affmy map. Of caurse, that's narth afNewtan's Square, New
Tawn Square. New Tawn Square was a camp. plan amendment
appraved last year far affardable hausing ar workfarce hausing in and
araund the new haspital that's already been appraved.
Sa, Cammissianer, I don't knaw if that answers yaur questian,
but that's what I'm shawing right now, abaut 800 plus, and I believe
that's been amended this marning, ar this afternaan, to. 750, plus ar
mInus.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Caletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, Mr. Schmitt, befare yau
leave the dais, wauld yau answer this far me; at taday's transmittal,
what wauld happen if we weren't able to. reach same sart af agreement
and this was to. go. farward? What wauld be the next step it wauld be
befare this pracess wauld take the next step?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, as Mr. Weeks said, it carnes back far
adaptian. And then -- then they have to. came back in again and go.
thraugh zaning and -- which I assume would be under a PUD,
amendment to. the existing PUD. And at that time they get their
zonIng.
Certainly the zaning daes nat give the green light far
develapment. They still have to. go. thraugh the site develapment plan
ar final plat and plan pracess. And ance they get their plat ar plan
appraved and the caunty approves it, deemed it based an the fact the
capacity is available an 951 to. suppart the praject, then they wauld get
their lacal develapment arder and they would be able to. praceed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: There are numeraus safeguards
MR. SCHMITT: Absalutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and checks and dauble checks
Page 175
January 25, 2005
MR. SCHMITT: Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- gaing back to. it. Naw taday,
if we were to. send this farward to. transmittal, the first part af a lang,
tediaus pracess, it would take three vates; is that carrect?
MR. SCHMITT: Three vates far transmittal, faur far adaptian.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right. And that's just -- I just
wanted to. bring all that and try to. put it in perspective.
MR. SCHMITT: And I appreciate that, Cammissianer, because
there are several safeguards. And this daes came dawn to. the issue in
regards -- and Mr. Feder can address that further as well, the issue in
regards to. cancurrency.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: One last questian, if I may, Mr.
Schmitt, and I think yau can prabably handle this quite well. Haw can
we do. affardable hausing withaut density?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, that's the real issue, and that's the
dilemma. The anly way in Callier Caunty, because afthe cast afland
and the develapment, if yau want affardable hausing and in order to.
meet the demand, the anly way we can do. it is to. pravide density to.
reduce the cast af the individual unit in regards to. -- to. create
affardable praduct.
And this really is a true example af inclusianary zaning.
Gavernment's nat invalved in this. It's a private develaper and
certainly a develaper who. meets the needs af the law, law incame,
and it's their initiative. It certainly is nateworthy in regards to. what is
being prapased.
And, again, an that issue, density is the anly way we can pravide
that praduct. And it's little -- little less ar araund faur units an acre,
which is pretty much what we built anyway in the urban area.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And inclusianary zoning is
samething I think this cammissian has been trying to. wark far in the
past with limited success.w
Page 176
January 25, 2005
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And naw we have the private
enterprise caming in and affering it to. us.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes. The anly unique difference in this thaugh
is, af caurse, Habitat will be in its awn area, but that's at the request af
Habitat, and Mr. Durso., Dr. Durso., can certainly explain that, their
reasons why they would do. that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And knawing what we know
about the 951 capacity and the future increase to the six-Ianing af951
and the develapments that are gaing in there, at what paint wauld we
reach meltdawn, ar wauldn't we, ar is that a questian yau really can't
answer?
MR. SCHMITT: I wauld definitely turn again to. my calleague,
Narm, because he can tell yau what's --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And as clase as yau can get to.
layman's explanatian af it, Narm, wauld be appreciated.
MR. FEDER: We've laoked five years aut an trend analysis. It
daesn't appear that we'd have a prablem within the five-year period,
but it does laak that ance yau get further aut, again, in layman's terms,
depending an haw fast these prajects that yau saw up there actually
build aut, I wauld tell yau appraximately 10 years. That's assuming a
fairly strang market and cantinued grawth.
But at that end af 10 years we have significant prablem in that
we wauld have six lanes and no other real viable alignments unless,
during that periad af time, we went forward with same items.
And as I said, we have same concepts. One that yau might want
to. raise with this is, is there any way that they can help to. the patential
af a narth/sauth alignment to. the east af 951 through their praperty in
same manner and athers as they came alang in this area.
We're just starting to. study that as we saw the issues that have
came aut af aur cancurrency system, and we do. praject farward. As I
said, within five we're all right. About 10, we're gaing to. have same
Page 1 77
January 25, 2005
significant canstraints in this carridar, especially with any mare
up-zaning alang this carridar, unless we have same answer and
alternatives bath in the sauth end, and yau just recently started same
issues relative to. the narth end with extensian af raadways in that
area.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, thank yau. May I ask yau a
cauple questians, Jae?
MR. SCHMITT: Certainly, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank yau. I natice here as I'm
laaking, the Super Wal-Mart has opened, and we've had quite a few
camplaints abaut the traffic that's generated fram there, actually a lat
af camplaints. The West Part Cammerce Center has nat apened at all,
right?
MR. SCHMITT: The -- it's zaned, but there's nathing in there
right naw that has actually been appraved yet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I see. But I natice them scraping
graund or samething there.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sa what is that planned for, please?
MR. SCHMITT: Well, it's the -- it's an affice cammerce center.
It's far affice, general affice space. But right naw I knaw af nathing
that is actually planned to. go. in there.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: On the sign it says medical and so
farth. I guess --
MR. SCHMITT: Medical, general affice space, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- to. carrespand with the haspital.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And then an the carner there where
it says Callier Baulevard Cammercial Center, right an the carner af
Beck and 951 and Davis there --
MR. SCHMITT: That is actually the Wal-Mart center, that
Page 178
January 25, 2005
square.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh. Well, then I understand there's
MR. SCHMITT: Well, I stand carrected. No., the Wal-Mart
center is the West Part's Cammerce Center. The -- there is an
autparcel out there that is a small cammercial center. That's where the
gas statian is right naw.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Naw, there's suppased to be a
shopping center gaing in right there also.. There's a big sign that says
. h?
sa, ng t.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, and nathing has came in far that yet.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Even though the sign is there.
MR. SCHMITT: Right.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: But again, we know that's coming.
MR. SCHMITT: Eventually, yes.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Sa naw we're beginning to. hear of
haw much is gaing to. be generated an this area. We also. knaw that --
that Collier -- that the medical center wants to. came in there.
One af my cancerns -- and I'll just say this -- with the
cancurrency, I wauld hate to see the cancurrency grab up the space
available, and then a much-needed hospital cannat get it, and I'm very
cancerned abaut that, much less the medical needs in the area.
What I'm -- I'm also. cancerned with is, I think we shauld have
learned aur lessan fram what's happened an Immakalee. As
desperately as we need warkfarce housing and affardable hausing,
and that's a much-needed cammadity, I've always been avidly for it,
but nat to. the detriment af aur raads.
I think if -- if we do. again what's happened up there an
Immakalee sa that then peaple can't even travel, then we're doing a
terrible injustice to. aur cammunity because everybody's gaing to. have
to. live with the decisians we make taday.
And we can see what's already caming an baard. We already
Page 179
January 25, 2005
knaw what's planned, and we dan't -- and there are same that we dan't
even knaw that are planned yet. And I dan't see that we have to grant
density banuses if they already have a certain amaunt an each parcel
af land.
I think we aught to. be very canservative as we laak at this entire
carridar, nat anly right here, all the way dawn. Naw that we knaw
where the baaming is -- the baaming grawth is gaing right there, we
must all be canservative in whatever we laak at to. make sure that we
dan't increase density, whether it be density banuses -- it daesn't make
any difference what it is. We have to. make sure that the peaple can
travel an the raad afterwards, ar we're gaing to. create, all by
aurselves, another Immakalee Raad.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. This is far Narm Feder. I just
want to make sure that I understaad you carrectly. And in yaur
dissertatian, I believe yau said that you dan't recammend any
up-zoning in this particular corridor because af the fact af what we've
gat caming in there; is that carrect?
MR. FEDER: Generally, yes. The part that I said was that
up-zaning in this carridar where we dan't have future answer, until we
consider and establish new alignments, is af cancern. What you're
weighing against that is the passibility af reducing trip length from
affardable hausing and/ar from emplayment centers, and that's
samething we've have to. laak at in mare detail.
But generally speaking, yes, along this carridar, we're telling yau
that we dan't have any majar new alignments. We're bringing dawn
Santa Barbara an a faur-Iane crass-sectian as well as Caunty Barn
dawn to Rattlesnake where we have limitatians there to. 41, and we
dan't have any defined carridar.
Sa back to. yaur questian, yes, we are thrawing aut restraint and
cancern abaut up-zaning alang this carridar when we laak at what we
Page 180
January 25, 2005
already have appraved aut there.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I also. think that there was anather
Super Wal-Mart sameplace up in this carridar, taa, wasn't there?
MR. FEDER: There's a Super Wal-Mart at Davis. There's one
requested just sauth af 41 an 951. That ane has not been approved.
The ane an Davis, af caurse, is develaped already.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And why is that -- why can't it be --
MR. FEDER: Because af the constraints that we have south of
that carridar given current traffic and just vested traffic. That vested
traffic, af caurse, includes same trips that mayor may not develap aut
af Lely and aut af Fiddler's Creek.
But right naw we're warking with that W al- Mart and seeing
whether ar nat they can expand the lanes an 951 sauth af 41 and make
significant intersectian impravements, whether they cauld praceed.
But as it stands right now, while they have the basic zaning, we
dan't have the capacity. And that is the first area where aur
cancurrency came farward and said, based an existing and vested
trips, we cannat allaw it to. go. unless either some af the vested trips
are removed ar additianal capacity is provided.
Sa, sa far we're warking with them an the capacity issue if they
want to praceed.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank yau.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Cammissianer Caletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Mr. Feder, befare yau go. taa
far.
MR. FEDER: Yes, Commissianer.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yau said that there's a study that
wauld have to. take place to. see what kind af trip miles wauld be
generated and also. what trip miles wauld be saved if this particular
entity was allawed to. happen; in ather words, these peaple wauld be
warking in the area, they'll have to. came into the area fram autside,
maybe fram great distances, and impact mare af the raads. Those are
Page 181
January 25, 2005
numbers that wauld came to. us at what paint in time in the pracess if
we went farward taday?
MR. FEDER: Yau go. farward taday, we wauld cantinue to. laak
at it. We're daing madeling. What yau may want to. do. is ask the
develaper themselves to try and shaw yau their camparisan of what
trips wauld be generated based an ather passible uses af the site. Staff
can try and do. that as well. And we cauld have that ready as you
might cansider this, after it gaes thraugh DCA, if that's yaur request af
staff.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank yau, Mr. Feder.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let me make a cauple af camments
abaut this situatian, and this is what makes -- Mr. Feder?
This is ane af the things that makes this pracess af cantralling
growth sa canfusing. This is nat a request to. build anything. It's
merely a request to. rezane samething, ar I'm sarry, make a
madificatian af the grawth management plan future land use.
MR. FEDER: Carrect.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And anything we do. with respect to. that
taday daes nat guarantee anyane that they will have a right to. build a
single structure.
MR. FEDER: I wauld, I wauld say --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: But the paint is that having approved it
with a cammitment to. pravide an affordable hausing density banus,
the praperty awners have every reasan to. expect that when the time
comes, that they will have a right to. build that, althaugh they really
don't have the right.
MR. FEDER: Technically they will have the right. The issue is
timing. Cancurrency daesn't remave the right far sameane to. develop
the land based an the zoning that they have, sa if land were -- and I
realize this is anly a camp. plan amendment and nat yet the rezaning.
But if this camp. plan amendment and then the subsequent
rezaning were to. accur and they had mare rights an that land, if we
Page 182
January 25, 2005
didn't have available capacity, they would not be able to move at that
time.
If that happened and others came forward and we declared a
moratorium, we would be required to then develop and provide the
solution in a reasonable frame of time to allow all of that development
to the level it has rights to develop, to develop. So when we up-zone,
we're adding to that future commitment, although concurrency will
say that we don't let it go if we can't address it at that point in time,
until we can fix it and address it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. So I think that's where I'm going
with this. If we permit the growth management plan change and then
we go through the subsequent rezoning process, then we -- if the
concurrency system will not permit the building of that density there
and we have to declare a moratorium, we are obligated by state law to
improve the capacity of the roads, and the state doesn't care where we
get the money. They just say we've got to do it.
MR. FEDER: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And it's a state statute. And that's what
makes this process so complex and confusing.
MR. FEDER: It does.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And if what you're saying is that -- that
the only way you can control this is not to approve the zoning or to
approve the growth management plan provision, what recourse does
the landowner have for use of their land?
MR. FEDER: The landowner obviously has the use of their land
as they're currently zoned. But again, if we can find some alternatives
to improvement that allow us to address those demands in the future --
as I said, we've got an unusual situation in this part of the county not
only with the growth, but with having very limited parallel facilities,
whether they be north/south or east/west for U.S. 41.
And so until such time as we see on the reasonable horizon a
viable corridor, I'm throwing up this flag of alarm. But, again, going
Page 183
January 25, 2005
back to the questions, and they're important, so I don't want to
overstate it. Right now we've got the capacity, and by our system, we
would have the capacity because we're six-Ianing the roadway.
We generally have the capacity as we project out five years, and
that's what we project out because it gets a little fuzzier after that as to
what improvements you might make and how quickly and other
issues. We have the capacity but it's getting very tight.
If we look at all this corridor as it exists today, nothing changed,
and if it develops, we can't handle it without other improvements.
Now, I don't want to presuppose we won't find other
improvements. I'm only telling you that right now in our long-range
plan, we don't have identified, at this point in time, other
improvements that could handle it. So that's the point I was trying to
make to you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So I think what you're saying to us is if
we're going to try to control the ultimate capacity problems of this
stretch of the road, you've got to do it at the point of a growth
management plan provision, a revision, or zoning.
MR. FEDER: In this particular corridor with the limitations we
have, we're raising that alarm to you, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, all right. Thank you.
Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. Commissioner Coletta stated
something about the impact on the roads if we don't build it, and we're
very fortunate we already have 362 going on down the road about -- I
don't know, about quarter ofa mile, it's called Newton's (sic) Square,
and it's 365 units, and we're very lucky also right now on Rattlesnake
Hammock we have a lot of workforce housing, as well as affordable
housing down there, and people can just walk because it's right there
at the end of their street.
So we are -- we are lucky to have all of these people right close
by. So I'm not too, too worried about that, Commissioner Coletta, but
Page 184
January 25, 2005
thank you for asking.
Also I wanted to say, on the subj ect that you were already
addressing, many times -- and I've heard it in my office -- when we
approve something like this, the beginning of the process, what we're
doing is saying, we agree with this and let's see if we 'can go forward.
We'll give you the approval to go this far, and then if you get
down the road a little way and then you yank it, then everybody is
very concerned that you've yanked the privilege of doing whatever it
is they've asked because we've given them the green light all the way
down the line.
And I truly am worried about that road, and I'm also worried
about concurrency, eliminating a hospital we desperately need.
So that's where I stand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Where I stand on this, I
guess, is that when we have this for a transmittal for a compo plan, my
problem is that if we establish a number on this, just as the Buckley
PUD was established many years ago, immediately when the person
decides that he wants to develop this, he assumes that he is entitled to
that total density of what they're asking for.
And, of course, we went through this process with the Buckley
PUD. We were able to get it down to a likable size. But when you
looked at the general area there, it really didn't fit into the overall
equation of the total density per acre, and that's what I'm concerned
about.
Then when I hear the scenario by our transportation department
and when I look at what community development/environmental
services provide with me (sic) in the possibility of all this build-out
that's going to be here in this general area, I've got some real serious
concerns.
And I don't think I can approve the -- add the density of where it
is today. Right now they're approved for 352, and they're looking for
Page 185
January 25, 2005
something in excess of 780, 750 units. And when I look at what's
down there, I have a very difficult time with this.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We've pretty much talked this
one to death. Do you have anything more you want to tell us?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yeah, I do, briefly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Wait a minute. Commissioner Henning
has a --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I didn't talk it to death yet, been
listening to everybody else.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Give it a try.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This reminds me of
self-inflicted inclusionary zoning as it comes forward, and it's quite
amazing that when it does come up, that we have a tendency to say no.
I just -- I know the fact that HMA's going to be there. I know
that Wal-Mart's across the street. I know that Marco Island doesn't
have any affordable housing. I don't think they're going to build any.
I didn't see any at Fiddler's Creek.
So I'm -- you know, I'm not sure where we're going to put it. The
people who are going to work are going to drive that road anyways,
they're just going to drive further. They might come from Immokalee
Road, from Immokalee down 951, and stretch the whole stretch to get
to Marco Island, Fiddler's Creek or Wal-Mart.
But I think it's a great proposal. It's something that we need.
And I know that, God forbid that we have affordable housing next to a
gated community, but it's an element that we need. I mean, nobody
wants beach access next to their beachfront home, do they? Huh? So
where are we going to put the beach access?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well-- well, we do have some. We
have the Assembly Center sitting right there with all of their
affordable housing, and, you know, it's a homeless shelter, and they're
also a -- you know, a resource for recovery people, and that's a
wonderful thing.
Page 186
January 25, 2005
We also have Newton's Square coming in. It's not like there isn't
any in the area. They're right there down the line from that one. And I
just think that 1,137 units versus the 350 that were originally approved
is just too much of a strain on a street. I just -- I just think that that's
not fair to the people in the area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't know if we ever looked
at a backage road when we did like FP -- we never looked at another
corridor down, parallel to 951. And, you know, maybe that's a
solution.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We need to do that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Can I -- is it premature for me to speak,
Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute, wait
a minute. We've got 25 speakers on this item?
MS. FILSON: We have 25 speakers total on this agenda item.
On this one I can count 13, however, all the speakers are -- all the slips
aren't clearly filled out. So after I call these, I'll ask if there's anyone
else.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: How many people are there who want to
address -- speak on this particular item?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let's hear from them.
MS. FILSON: I have 13 that I know, and some of them didn't
completely fill the slips out, so I'll have to ask if there are any more
after I call them.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd just like to make one statement,
and then we'll listen to the people.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, okay, okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I feel the same way that
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Henning do, that we need to
have affordable housing, there's no doubt in my mind, and I don't
think the issue here is not -- not putting it in our back yard.
Page 187
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think the issue is the density, and
I will make a motion that instead of the 785 that you proposed, that we
make -- I make a motion for 500.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion, but we
haven't heard from the public yet.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you want to -- is there a second to
that motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Guess not.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It dies for lack of second.
Let's start with the first speaker. And in the interest of getting
this done before midnight, if -- each of you has an opportunity to
speak, but I'd ask that you not be repetitive. If someone else has
already made your point, maybe you could just stand up and say, I
agree, and then we can move on, otherwise we're looking at almost
another hour of just taking public comment on this particular --
particular issue.
MS. FILSON: Three minutes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, three minutes, three minutes each.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is George Schutz, and if I could
ask --
MS. JOURDAN: May I have one moment? One minute, please?
MS. FILSON: And if I can ask the next speaker to come up and
stand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Sure, go ahead.
MS. JOURDAN: Okay. Just -- Jean Jourdan, comprehensive
planning department. I just wanted to put on the record that staff has
received no correspondence regarding this; however, I received
several telephone calls from the Naples Lake development
community. And also, I wanted to -- I had received a phone call from
someone named Deborah yesterday, and she has asked me to email
Page 188
January 25, 2005
her some information, and it kept coming back undeliverable. And
she didn't -- if she didn't receive that, I wanted to apologize.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, fine. And Deborah, if you're in
the audience, and you need that information --
MS. JOURDAN: I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- this is the lady who will get it for you.
MS. JOURDAN: I'm sorry. Did you get it?
MS. SIMPSON: No.
MS. JORDAN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, fine. We'll go with the first
speaker.
MS. FILSON: Okay. The speaker is George Schutz.
MR. SCHUTZ: Schutz.
MS. FILSON: He will be followed by Norm Bussaro.
I'm sorry, sir.
MR. SCHUTZ: Hi, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. I -- my
name is George Schutz. I live in Forest Glen. And the traffic over
there is -- is really kind of pathetic.
What you need to do is to get in a helicopter and look all the way
from the stoplight almost back to 41 from three o'clock till six, coming
off of Marco or wherever, and so the idea of just one more unit being
built in there, or PUD being built in there, to me, seems rather -- given
any approval of any type, seems somewhat ridiculous, I guess.
But for them to ask for -- going from 1.49 to 6 point -- but now I
guess it's been reduced to a 5.4 or something density, the density is, I
think, really too much for basic traffic.
We can't even pull out of our development to get onto 951 as it
is. Traffic going into San Marino's own development, their gate is so
close that people can't get out of there. They have to -- the people that
are coming out -- the gate remains open because they can't get them
all up there to get out. So the traffic that's there is probably much
worse than what you even think about since W al- Mart has opened,
Page 189
January 25, 2005
too. So I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MR. SCHUTZ: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Norm Bussaro. He will be
followed by Deb Simpson.
MR. BUSSARO: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. Like you
said, the thing has been pretty much beat to death from about every
area.
I'm a Forest Glen resident, member of their board of directors. I
think you all got an email from our vice president of the board of
directors, Laura Depamphilis, indicating our reservations about this
project going through.
Norm Federer (sic) already said that the growth that's already
been planned here, it's going to be a madhouse. My words, not his,
but that's what he inclined (sic) us to believe. Well, the madhouse is
almost here now when we try to get out of our development onto 951,
okay?
Now, what we'd like you to do -- I know it's impossible -- is to
disapprove about half of the ones that you saw up on this board, and it
might be more realistic, otherwise, you may have to find an alternate
route east of 951 a lot sooner than you think you may have to.
Commissioner Fiala, I applaud you in your comments about not
making 951 into another Immokalee Road. That's the last thing we
can do. And this is a perfect place for that to happen, since there is no
alternative north/south route near here, okay.
So what we would like you to do, respectfully, is to disapprove
this petition for transmittal. We ask you, please do not approve this
transmittal. We'd like to see it end here because it belongs to be ended
here.
And with that, I have no more to say.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Page 190
January 25, 2005
MS. FILSON: Deb Simpson. She'll be followed by Dick
Spangler.
MS. SIMPSON: Dick Spangler is not here.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Ken Sutter.
MS. SIMPSON: He's not here either. I'll be speaking for all of
them.
MS. FILSON: Jim Dishinger.
MS. SIMPSON: I'm Deb Simpson. I'm from Naples Lakes
Country Club. I live on 951.
I am making a request to you at this point to not transmit this to
the State of Florida at this time. I think after hearing the comments
from Mr. Fedler (sic) about the road capacity out there, that this needs
to be studied more.
I think we need to take a look at -- step back, take a look at
what's already been planned for this area, see what the capacity is for
the road now, five years down the road when the road is being
widened, look at what the impact of the hospital is going to have, look
at the actual developments that are going in.
I don't know -- I know we're talking about the 951 corridor, but
there's also quite a bit of development being put in on Rattlesnake
Hammock also.
There's 600 units planned there, there's a Mandalay Bay that
they're going to put 71 units. It was zoned originally for 35. We're just
increasing -- increasing, increasing the development out in this area
with no real future concept of what's going to happen, you know, to
our roads.
We've got the hospital going in. We don't have a thought on
what's going to happen if we have ambulances coming up and down
this road. They're going to be coming from Golden Gate, they're going
to be coming up from Marco Island. What's going to happen when the
road is at over-capacity?
So I just request right now that you all take a step back before
Page 191
January 25, 2005
transmitting this, and do a little bit more work to look at what is
planned for the future here. Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Jim Dishinger.
(Applause.)
MS. FILSON: He will be followed by Richard Davenport.
MR. DISHINGER: Mr. Chairman, commissioners, I'm the
secretary/treasurer of the Barrington Homeowners' Associations
Commons and the Barrington II Homeowners' Association in Forest
Glen.
Commissioner Fiala gave two speeches that I had already thought
out. Thank you very much.
I concur with the other speakers that we hope that you suppress
this here, nip it in the bud. Traffic is terrible already, and we really
don't need another Immokalee Road fiasco.
And just our community, just says, enough is enough. We need
to rethink what we're doing down here. We need more roads before
we have more building.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Richard Davenport. Did you say he's with you,
Rich?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: He's with me.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Bob Hammond. He will be followed by
Ron Schlemmer.
MR. HAMMOND: Good afternoon. My name is Bob
Hammond. I live at 3810 Groton Court, which is in the east Naples
area, Commissioner Fiala's District 1.
I am in seventh year as a volunteer for Habitat for Humanity. I'm
on the board of directors. I'm the secretary for the organization. I
volunteer at the job site, I help build homes on the job site, and I also
work in the finance department in the office. I donate -- in addition to
donating my time, I donate my -- some money to Habitat, and I am a
Page 192
January 25, 2005
spokesperson for Habitat.
Habitat will soon have 422 homes in District 1. We have 190
homes in Naples Manor. This has been an influence to give the other
residents in Naples Manor to better maintain their homes, to improve
the appearance of their homes, and it's made it a better, safer
neighborhood to live in.
We also have 110 homes in our Charlee Estates community, and
we will have 122 homes in our -- I'm sorry -- in our Victoria Falls
community, and we also have -- will have 122 homes in our Charlee
Estates community, which is about 65 percent done now.
I am one of 3,422 households in District 1 who donated
$1,233,000 plus to Habitat in 2004, and $4,511,900 to Habitat since
1998.
We strongly believe in Habitat and its goals to help provide a
single, decent -- simple, decent place for everyone in Collier County
to live in. We know that we have a good start in doing that, but there's
a long ways to go.
We will continue supporting Habitat by donating our time and
our money to do that. We hope the commissioners will see the
ongoing need to do this, and we hope that you will support us in the
future going forward to do this.
Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Ron Schlemmer. He will be followed by Douglas
Burke.
MR. SCHLEMMER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Ron Schlemmer. I live in District 2, and I'm a constituent of
Commissioner Halas.
I'm a volunteer at the east Naples construction site, and I've also
worked out at Carson Lakes in Immokalee.
Commissioner Halas, the residents of your district have been
extremely supportive of Habitat for Humanity and they've been
extremely generous to Habitat for Humanity. Last year alone they
Page 193
January 25,2005
raised over $1,400,000 to build affordable housing in this county.
My wife and I live in Collier's Reserve where over 100 of our
club members the past two years have generously donated funds to
build two Habitat houses. This year we are intent on raising funds to
at least build a house and a half for Habitat, and I'm convinced that
we'll be able to do it.
Many of my friends and neighbors, all residents of your district,
are concerned about how the disparity of income in Collier County
affects housing for the poor.
Commissioners, please do not let those that cry "not in my
backyard," keep you from voting your conscience. The mantra for
low-income housing in this community must not be "not in my
backyard" or "not as far as I can see," but instead it should be to
recognize that as Habitat for Humanity believes, that every person
deserves the decent home and a decent community.
I thank you.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a minute. May I -- may I just
comment on something?
MR. SCHLEMMER: Yes, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, I have to tell you how
strongly all of us -- you made it sound like we don't support Habitat.
The reason they're building so many is because we've supported them
all along. Nobody's ever said, "not in my backyard. " You still have
two more that you haven't even started to build in east Naples that I
know of, Greenway and Artessa Point, and so you're going -- you have
a lot there. Nobody's said, "not in my backyard," not once today.
What we said is the traffic is so bad, we can't impact that road
any more. I'm sure you feel just the same way in Collier's Reserve. If
you couldn't get out of your place, would you then want to see another
development of 1,000, 1,137 more homes coming in?
Regardless of whether it's low-income housing, high-income
Page 194
January 25, 2005
housing, you know, the best of the best, I wouldn't want to see you
come in if you had a density of that rate, Collier's Reserve.
Sir, this is not about Habitat. What this is about is the density on
the road. Please remember that.
(Applause.)
MR. SCHLEMMER: Again, Commissioner, I can only ask you
for your support. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sir--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I hope we don't challenge each
and every person that comes up here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sir, sir, sir? Excuse me. I'djust
like to have a second.
MR. SCHLEMMER: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I want to tell you that one of the
items that I helped Dr. Durso with is when the -- the zoning for
Heritage Bay came in, I helped and assisted Dr. Durso in getting about
$475,000 towards the Habitat of Humanity. So believe me, I've been
working in regards to that. Okay.
MR. SCHLEMMER: And we do all appreciate everybody's past
support --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, you made a statement that,
"not in my backyard," and that's not the issue here today, sir.
MR. SCHLEMMER: Oh, no. I did not say, you know, the
commissioners made that statement. I said I asked the commissioners
to vote their conscience, and it was my feeling that there might be
other people who had that feeling. I, at no point -- and if I did, I
certainly apologize, that I insinuated that that was, in any way, an
issue with you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I just took offense to the
presentation that you made in regards to, that we're not supportive of
Habitat of Humanity or in regards to workforce housing. It's a very
dear issue to each of us commissioners up here, and it's just the idea
Page 195
January 25,2005
that we also have to address health, safety, and welfare of citizens that
have to communicate (sic) from -- or to travel from one area to
another area in this county and how we're going to address this.
And as you heard Mr. Feder say, that we have some concern in
regards to travel in the north and south direction in this particular area.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Who's got the timer?
MR. SCHLEMMER: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speak is Douglas Burke. He will be
followed by Peter Manion.
MR. BURKE: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, good
afternoon. I, too, am a member of the board of directors of Habitat for
Humanity. I live in Vineyards and have for the last 10 years. I serve
as a member of the board of directors of Habitat, and I'm co-chairman
of the development committee.
In addition to the Vineyards, we have hundreds of nail-pounders
from Grey Oaks, W yndemere, Quail Creek, Long Shore Lakes, all
working to help build these houses in these neighborhoods.
We have also Habitat homeowners working on the golf courses
and in the maintenance of all these in the dining rooms. So Habitat for
Humanity is serving a huge need in this community, and I recognize
you have given us good support to this point.
What we have been in a difficult position over the last several
years is to accumulate land. And as you know, land has become very
-- not only very scarce, but very expensive.
We have found this opportunity with this -- with this developer to
do something creative. I beg of you to consider the creativity of this
presentation.
I've heard the other side of the density of the traffic, but I don't
think Mr. Feder's forecast is quite as grim as he has said.
And finally, I would just ask you to consider how many of those
employees or those people who would live in these Habitat homes are
currently living north of me on 1-75.
Page 196
January 25,2005
Last year almost every afternoon in season we had a parking lot
from here to the airport. Now, I suspect that a good portion of those
people are having to drive back out of Collier County to their job (sic).
So I'm not a traffic engineer, but I would hope your traffic
engineers would advise you how many of the people are already -- are
clogging up the roads in that way. Let's bring the people for Habitat
homes into the center where the jobs are.
Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Peter Manion. He will be
followed by Mary Ann Durso.
MR. MANION: Good afternoon. My name is Peter Manion. I
have been a volunteer for Habitat for the last six years. I am on their
board. And I think we've got just about the entire board here, so -- but
this is the last presentation in terms of the board, other than Mary Ann.
I live in District 4, and the chairman, obviously, is our
representati ve.
Since 1998 District 4 has supported the organization with 5,100
volunteers and contributed over $9 million to the whole effort of
Habitat.
I also act as the vice-president of operations for Habitat, and of
course, am listening very closely to the exchange that we've had
today. It's very troublesome to me.
We obviously have Grassroot support throughout our
community, and we have support on the commission, and I thank you
for that.
This, however, has been a completely unique opportunity in that
we've got a public/private partnership joining together in trying to
solve the affordable housing problem, and it certainly is unique. I
think it's never been brought before this commission before.
Obviously it's based on economics. We all know the land value.
The density bonus is really required to make the thing work. If this
doesn't work, I'm not sure what does work.
Page 197
January 25, 2005
And with that, the only thing I can say is that we really need this.
We need affordable housing. You've been supportive in the past, and
I would certainly request your consideration. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mary Ann Durso. She will be followed by Joe
Foster.
MS. DURSO: My name is Mary Ann Durso. I'm the executive
director of Habitat for Humanity of Collier County.
I represent the families of Habitat for Humanity who cannot be
here today because they all are part of the workforce. They all already
live in Naples. There's a need for 20,000 affordable housing units in
Collier County.
The following are families that were approved for a home in
Naples at our selection meeting, just a few of the families, that was
held on January 20th.
The first is a family of five. Their annual income is $18,870.
There are three children, ages eight, seven and six. They're boys. The
applicant works for Finishing by Baker. The family lives in an
overcrowded trailer.
The trailer has no insulation or heat. When the temperatures drop
at night, as it has the past few nights, the family needs to sleep in the
same bed together to stay warm.
After heavy rainfalls, the area around the trailer floods, and
alligators lurk at the doorstep.
The second is a family of four. Their annual income is $25,230.
There are two children, ages 1 7 and 15. The applicant works at the
Naples Community Hospital.
The co-applicant is handicapped and disabled. He has no legs.
He is unable to live with his family because the house is not handicap
accessible, and there is no affordable housing that he can rent.
The third and last is a family of four. Their annual income is
$19,340. There are two children, ages 14 and five.
The applicant works for Better Roads. The family lives in a
Page 198
January 25, 2005
small one-room efficiency. The children, a boy and a girl, have to
share a bed.
All of us enjoy the services these families provide. We shop at
Publix, we golf at the golf courses, we have our families in assisted
living or in day care, and our lives would change if the people that
service us weren't able to afford to live here with us.
These are just a few of the working families of Naples desperate
to find a simple, decent place to live. Please help them. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Joe Foster. And then I have one other registered
speaker, Timothy Nance, and I'm not sure--
MR. NANCE: I want to speak on the transfer of development
rights.
MS. FILSON: Okay. Thank you.
MR. FOSTER: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's Joe
Foster, and I'm the president of the Collier County Housing
Development Corporation.
I'm here in favor of the San Marino project. And as other
commissioners know, and has been pointed out by several of the
commissioners, we do have an affordable housing issue, we have a
workforce housing issue in Collier County.
A year and a half ago the workforce housing task force created
by you all was really working hard on mandatory inclusionary zoning,
and that project failed.
Here you have a situation of volunteer inclusionary zoning. You
have a developer working in concert with Habitat for Humanity, you
have a for-profit developer and a not- for-profit working together. This
truly is the model for future development of Collier County. It's a
win-win for affordable housing.
And I appreciate the traffic concerns, and I hear them, and -- I
truly do. I would just encourage the commission to find a way to deal
with the traffic concerns and allow this project to go forward, at least
Page 199
January 25, 2005
to start the process.
What is being asked of you today is not actually to improve
increased density, but rather allow Habitat for Humanity and the
developer to go forward to come back and ask for increased density in
the future.
It's a long process, as has been pointed out. The whole -- the
whole process is a long process. I would just encourage the Board of
County Commissioners to please find a way to make this new
experiment. I do believe that this is what we need in Collier County in
terms of voluntary inclusionary zoning for profits and non-profits
working together.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that the last public speaker --
MS. FILSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- on this item? Okay. Very well. I'll
close the -- you have a comment?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: If I may.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Certainly, go ahead.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And I think Mr. Durso may -- or Dr.
Durso may have one also, and Reed's got some comments regarding
the traffic issues. We won't take long.
There have been some numbers thrown around here that are not
accurate numbers. I'm not asking -- we're not asking for an additional
1,137 units.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, all total.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: We're asking for 785 additional units,
which would be a project density, if you include the 350 that are
already built, which would be 4.8 units per acre. That is basically the
density in the urban area. We are immediately adjacent to the urban
area.
We are asking for the ability to come to you and ask for a rezone.
I'm not asking for the density today. I'm not asking for an exception
Page 200
January 25, 2005
or an exemption from the concurrency management system.
We understand that all of that will be applied to us when we
come forward with a PUD. It may mean that we can't even get to the
four units per acre we're asking for. We may not make the 785.
Maybe the number's 600. We don't know that until we come forward
and deal with your staff on the specifics of this issue.
Reed will tell you that the average number of trips generated
from an affordable housing unit is much less than the number of trips
generated from a market rate unit.
Weare providing three-bedroom homes to the very low category.
That's 50 percent or less of the median income.
New Town, which everybody has assumed is approved for
purposes of calculating this -- which they haven't gone through the
zoning process yet, and I would expect would receive the same
treatment since they're going to be asking for an up-zoning -- is going
to provide services to the low, which is 80 percent or less.
I applaud them for doing that, but we're serving a totally different
category. We have taken the risk of forming a joint venture between
Habitat for Humanity and a for-profit company to do something that's
good for the community.
Traffic issues, maybe there will be a traffic issue, maybe there
won't be a traffic issue. Those are issues that are dealt with in your
concurrency management system.
For some reason we don't want to put -- we don't want to follow
the concurrency management system anymore. We've made the
decision, even before we get to zoning, that this project's not going to
work under the system.
Mr. Jarvi will point out that the system has some flaws that
you're working through right now, you're over counting some units.
So we need to be -- stay in the process because this is a worthwhile
project.
We have many more months before it comes back to DCA when
Page 201
January 25, 2005
we get to an adoption hearing. I would hate to just toss this concept
aside without giving it further study and maybe some refinement on
the numbers that we ultimately would ask for.
This is an important concept. We're the first ones to try it. I
don't think that we should just be summarily dismissed at transmittal,
especially after we have received nothing but staff recommendation of
approval. I was a little shocked at the comments today, that all of a
sudden, maybe we shouldn't get recommendation of approval.
We have a staff recommendation of approval, we've expended a
lot of time and effort. I don't think we should be summarily dismissed
at this point. I think that the issue is worth studying.
And I'll let Dr. Durso -- Reed, why don't you go quickly.
MR. JARVI: For the record, my name is Reed Jarvi. I'm a
professional engineer. I concentrate in transportation issues in Collier
County.
And just a couple of issues I want to bring up. First off, we've
had several conversations with county staff on this proj ect and how we
do the background traffic, because that's basically the problem here is
the background traffic of all the other units in the area.
And I will note that in the staff report, transport -- and I quote,
transportation staffhas determined that petition CP-2004-1 is
consistent with the transportation element, policy 5.1 of the growth
management plan. So, I mean, they have said it's consistent.
Now, I will tell you that we have had discussions on background
traffic. And as Rich said, the system we are using now, the
concurrency management system, is still relatively new. It's not yet a
year old that it's been implemented. ,
Weare looking at -- excuse me. Staff is looking at the data,
looking at how it's being -- actually developing versus what we
thought it might develop.
As an example, as you may remember when we went through the
concurrency management system, it was determined that we would
Page 202
January 25,2005
use one-seventh of the vested units as a per year basis. That was the
best guess at the time.
If you look at the Lely and the Fiddler's Creek projects that are
the major projects in the area, the large projects in this vicinity of the
county, they would go at the one-seventh rate of over 1,500 DUs a
year.
Staff has gone through the records, the building permits, and
come up with the idea that they're building about 150 DUs a year, a
tenth of the project, a tenth of the size.
So we are continuing developing the system. So we aren't there
yet. We don't have the data yet to say that this is anywhere near an
infallible system. So we're looking at that.
Also we look at, from the short-term basis, when we look at
short-term growth rates, we can't continually just add the trips.
There's a trip from an affordable housing complex that is the same trip
that's a worker using the Wal-Mart. There's a trip for shopping from
Forest Glen that goes down to the hospital.
Those trips are interactive and they're not one in one. They're
less than one in one. So on a -- on a just layering of the traffic, we
can't just do that for short-term -- it works for short-term being a year
or two, but it doesn't work for five, six, seven, eight, 10 years from the
way that we model our traffic.
The only way we've been able to successfully do that is looking
at the long -- the Florida standard model, and that's been the accepted
way that traffic engineers have done for several years in Florida,
including Collier County.
In the long-range transportation plan, the 20/20 plan, financially
feasible plan, shows this using the long-range model for the projects
that are in this area, and it will show you that Collier Boulevard is
within service -- level of service standards. That's the 20/20 model.
Yet now we're saying that in 200 -- 2005 it fails. Something's
wrong. We have to look at this on a long-range comprehensive basis,
Page 203
January 25,2005
and then we use modeling for that.
And I go back to just the last point -- or the first point I made,
that your transportation staff has said its consistent with our growth
management plan, so I would suggest that we need to do more on this
proj ect, plus others in the area, in looking at the background data and
what is the -- reasonable for us to use.
And I'll close with, now, we aren't yet, we're getting closer, we're
better than we were a year ago, we're better than we were five years
ago, but we aren't quite there yet on all the data, and we need to
continue to work on this.
Thank you.
DR. DURSO: I'll be very brief. Advocating for affordable
housing is very difficult, and I've been doing it for a long time. I hope
to continue to do it for the rest of my life.
What you got to see today was just a -- it's not -- Habitat for
Humanity is not the Dursos. There's a lot more people involved with
Habitat for Humanity . You just saw a few of them here. We can bring
1,000 people here if that's what's necessary to convince you that
affordable housing is as much of a problem as the traffic is.
And we all live here; we drive here. We know the traffic is a big
problem. The traffic problem, you've done a great job on it. And I
think, in the long term, is going to get answered.
As much as we've done on affordable housing, we have not done
a good enough job and the county has not done a good enough job.
We need more affordable housing. We need more advocacy for
affordable housing. And I think the traffic problem will get solved
eventually.
Habitat for Humanity will suffer tremendous damage if this does
not go forward. We've invested $2 and a half million because the
likelihood was that this would go forward. And we're going to lose $2
and a half million. That land is zoned for a golf course. Habitat for
, Humanity is not in the golf course business. We cannot build a golf
Page 204
January 25, 2005
course.
We need to at least go forward from this -- from this point and
give us the chance, at least transmitting, and we'll try to convince you.
I would like to see all five votes when we come up for zoning,
and I'm confident that maybe we can convince you folks of that. But
let us at least continue the process now.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you, Dr. Durso.
Okay. I'm going to close the public hearing.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Just want to make sure that
everybody in this room understands where I -- where we are in this
process.
Number one, we have -- also have the responsibility to make sure
of the safe -- health, safety, and welfare of our citizens on the road.
If our traffic people can't give us the needed information to go
and increase the density as what's stated in this GMP, then I tell you
what, I can't stick my neck out for increasing density in this area.
What I did propose, and it didn't even get a second, was that
instead of this 785 units, was the 500 units, and that was to include
housing for Habitat for Humanity.
And as you heard from Mr. Norm Feder, he recommended that
we didn't even up-zone any of these, not just because it was Habitat
for Humanity or anything else. It's the fact that we are getting ourself
in an area that we may not be able to figure out a way of addressing
additional traffic if we can't provide another north and south corridor,
even after we six-lane this road.
So I hope that you understand that we're between a rock and a
hard place. We're trying to take care of affordable housing. We also
have to take care of the other 300,000 people that live here in Collier
County.
(Applause.)
Page 205
January 25,2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I appreciate all that Habitat
has said here today, all of their speakers, but not one speaker has
addressed the issue that we've been laying on the table, and that is a
solution to the traffic that's already choking the road, much less the
congestion that would -- that would take place once this development
is built, or what would happen if, for instance, this development were
able to come in and take the road capacity from our concurrency and
get it into this development to make sure they were -- they were
locked in, and then we lost a hospital or part of a hospital because
there wasn't enough room, and then what happens?
How are we looking after the community if we allow that to
happen? And all we have to do just not approve any increased
density, or a very minor increased density.
To me, we have to think of all of that. It's a tough thing on this
job, and you hate to say no to people that are really nice people, but
it's -- you have to take a stand.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have two more commissioners who
want to speak, and ladies and gentlemen, we need to bring this to a
conclusion. We've been debating this for hours.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll make a motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta was first, but
maybe we'll get to Commissioner Henning and he'll have a motion for
us.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if I could go first--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- and I'll try not to be long.
And I know that we have a lot of people that mean very well, but
I'm going to share with you one of the earlier -- it's been -- I've been a
commissioner for over four years now, as many of you have, and
we've seen a lot of this come down the pike, and we've heard a lot of
the rationale from both sides over why it's good, why it's bad,
Page 206
January 25, 2005
whatever.
Back a couple years ago we had one come forward. It was across
from Eagles (sic) Creek, and Eagles Creek came forward and they
protested for all the same reasons we're hearing now, that they're
going to take the road space, they're going to do this, it's going to be
all sorts of problems. None of it had to do with affordable housing. It
only had to deal with the fact that it was going to be the density issue
and the crowding of the road, okay.
Well, that thing went forward. I believe it went by the wayside,
even after it was approved. But in any case, what happened is these
same people came back to see me about a year and a half, two years
later. And what they said at that time is they were very supportive of
a development that was going to take place behind them called Land's
End.
Now, I said, I'm really confused. I said, Land's End is going to
use your roads, it's going to impact you greatly in some way or
another where the project across the street on the other side of 951 was
going to have a minimal impact. Well, what's the difference?
And I got an honest answer, and I respect them so much for it.
The difference was, is that this one here is a high-end development.
This will not affect our own property values. We see this as a positive
thing for our community, where the one that would have went across
the road would have been a negative.
Okay. Here we are. I mean--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Let me interrupt just for a--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Commissioner Fiala, you can't
interrupt me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, but just for a second, just for a
second, please, and let me tell you the one across the road is now
owned by Habitat and they're building there and it's called Artessa
Point.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know, but--
Page 207
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- I'm giving you a comparison
about what happened, and it became individual housing, and it's
beautiful. And the thing is is that we know there's problems. We
know there's a lot of problems out there, but what are the solutions?
Do we say we're not going to look at the solutions, that this the
end-all ?
Now, Commissioner Halas was entirely right to bring us a
counterproposal of 500. The reason it didn't get a second is because of
the uncertainty of where everything is.
When we're looking at this thing, we don't know if 500 would
even work for them. The thing -- where that comes out, where you
make those kind of deals is when you get to the next phase of the
whole thing, and then you down-zone it. It's done all the time in here.
Very few things start out -- in fact, I wouldn't doubt that there's
some fat in here along the way that could be trimmed, but it's never
trimmed at this point, and it's not trimmed at a moment of transmittal
right here. What we've got to do is realize that his seven hundred,
what is it, eighty-five what?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Uh-huh.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Seven hundred eight-five, that's
a high number that they're asking for. Is that what they're really going
to end up with? I seriously doubt it. This thing followed itself
through the whole course.
The reason it won't happen is that right now we may -- and I can't
tell you for a fact, but I'm fairly certain, we may have three votes to be
able to transmit it, so that could be the end of it right there, because it
takes four votes to carry this all the way to some sort of conclusion,
and that's where it would die for certain if there wasn't some sort of
compromise that was made, and it would be made with somebody like
Commissioner Halas to get it down to 500.
That's where we are with this right now, and I just wanted to
Page 208
January 25, 2005
share that. And I didn't mean to offend anybody at Eagle Creek by it,
but I do appreciate it when I hear honest answers to questions that are
asked.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How about we split the baby -- I
know the concerns about traffic, the perceptions -- and forward it on
with an urban area density of four units per acre, with a ratio,
affordable housing market rates as proposed.
In other words, you know, we don't want to -- if we're doing
affordable housing and market rates, what's being proposed, whatever
density falls out, it falls out equally, affordable housing and market
rate. So it's only four units per acre instead of what they're proposing.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: They're proposing four point what,
eight; 4.8, 4.4?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, it's something like that,
but that's the same thing that's afforded in the urban area, which __
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What does that figure out in
numbers?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, they've already got their four
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm not a mathematician.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's a bunch, like 900; 900 units?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I'll make that a motion.
Let's see if it sticks.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to hear that answer, and
I'd be happy to give it a second. I'd like to know what that number is.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Okay. This is lawyer math, so there's a
disclaimer.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do you need an accountant?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Okay. There's 235 acres, plus or minus.
If you multiplied that by four, I come up with 940 units. There's
Page 209
January 25, 2005
already 350 units existing. So that's basically 590. Ifwe--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's a reduction of roughly 200 from what
you're asking.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Roughly, yes, roughly 200 from what
we're asking. Yes?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd be willing to second that. I
don't know if they can live with it or even do it. But I mean, I don't
know what else can be done at this point.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Except for further clarification
if it came back to us again.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: If that's what gets --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The -- here's the problem I've got. We
have a staff report which says that this project meets the concurrency
requirements. We've heard testimony, however, which indicates that if
this project really goes through the process, by the time it gets there
we might be failing on that road.
I am, quite frankly, confused by this. And the ultimate impact of
denying this particular proj ect is that we will not grant any more
density increases on 951, end of story, and that might be good, you
know, maybe that's what we need to do.
But if -- I merely point that out because if we, in fact, do
disapprove the proj ect, we must be prepared to handle every
succeeding project on 951 in exactly the same way. We cannot
discriminate against any petitioner. And so we would essentially have
to adopt a position where there would be no density increases
whatsoever on 951 in this traffic impact area.
But as Commissioner Coletta has correctly pointed out, it takes
three people, three votes today, to forward this to the Department of
Community Affairs in Tallahassee for a consideration, but it will take
four votes to adopt any growth management plan provision which
results from that process.
Page 210
January 25,2005
Because of the confusion that exists right now over the traffic
study and the conclusions of the county staff pertaining to that, I'm
willing to let it go forward to DCA, but if we don't have that issue
solved, I won't vote for it for adoption.
So just so you understand, this is a very serious issue. The traffic
is a problem, as we all know, and if we don't have a solution for that, I
don't think anybody would want to go ahead with this process.
So I will -- if there are no other questions by commissioners, I
will call the question.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And all those opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. It is, Commissioner Coletta,
Commissioner Coy Ie, and Commissioner Henning vote in favor of the
item for forwarding to DCA, and Commissioner Halas and
Commissioner Fiala oppose it.
MR. MUDD: And that was at four units per acre?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: At four units per acre as we specified
with Commissioner Coletta's suggestion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You know, I'd also like to suggest--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Henning, okay.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- from what you just said, I think
we all ought to take seriously the words that you've just used. I don't
thing that we should be affording anybody any extra bonus, any
density bonus increases on a road that's destined to fail anyway.
That's our obligation to this community.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I would go even a step further and
suggest that we have a workshop to set that policy, if that's what we're
Page 211
January 25, 2005
going to do. We really need to talk about it and make sure that
everybody is aware that we're willing to make that kind of
commitment, if that's what we're going to do.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You bet, you bet.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is that okay with everybody?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah, looks good.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We should workshop it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay, good. It's time for a break. Ten
minutes.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: You have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We need you for a quorum.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we're still on item--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. County Manager, are we on
petition number two, CP-2004-2?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. It's a petition requesting an amendment
to the county-wide future land use map to change 80 acres in the rural
fringe mixed-use district, RFMUD, neutral lands, to the RFMUD
sending lands, and to change 140 acres from the RFMUD neutral
lands to the RFMUD receiving lands, for property located one mile
south of Immokalee Road, and two and three quarters miles east of
Collier Boulevard in Section 31 and 32, Township 48 south, Range 27
east, Rural Estates Planning Community, and Mr. Bruce Anderson,
who represents the petitioner, will present.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. Good evening. My name is
Bruce Anderson. I am pleased to represent the Resource Conservation
Properties. They are one of the Bonita Bay Group companies.
Also with me today to answer any questions you may have are
land planners Mitch Hutchcraft of Bonita Bay and Robert Mulhere
from RWA, Inc.
Page 212
January 25, 2005
This application is to change the future land use map designation
of two rural fringe parcels that are presently designated neutral which
abut receiving lands that are also owned by Bonita Bay.
It is proposed that the 153-acre parcel and that typo -- that's a
typo about the 140. It's actually 153. The 153-acre parcel that is
proposed to be designated as receiving abuts lands that are already
designated receiving.
The second half of the proposal involves changing the
designation of an 80-acre parcel, known as the Talon parcel, from
neutral to sending.
Collectively these three parcels were the southern portion of the
original Twin Eagles project.
The county's leading environmental organizations, Florida
Wildlife Federation, Collier County Audubon Society, and the
Conservancy of Southwest Florida, all support this amendment, as did
the planning commission. The Environmental Advisory Council did
not hear this petition.
I respectfully disagree with staffs position that they had to
disregard the interest the Conservation Collier program has in the
80-acre Talon parcel in the fact that the county transportation folks
view these properties as a great opportunity to provide a direct link
between Immokalee Road and the future Vanderbilt Beach Road
extension.
The planning staff has acknowledged that you, as elected
officials, can base your decision on broader public interest
considerations, such as the Conservation Collier program and benefits
to the county's transportation network.
In that regard, both Conservation Collier Land Acquisition
Committee and this commission have ranked the Talon parcel as a
priority one property for acquisition by Conservation Collier.
Obviously if this Talon parcel designation is changed from
neutral to sending, that will lower the market value of the property.
Page 213
January 25, 2005
Now, if the property owner objected to that redesignation, that
would be an entirely different matter; however, in this case, the
property owner has requested the redesignation.
Bonita Bay's plans are to incorporate the 153-acre parcel into
becoming a part of a rural village that Bonita Bay plans to develop on
the south side of Immokalee Road. Without the redesignation of the
153 acres to receiving, a rural village would not be possible on this
property and surrounding Bonita Bay lands because it would not meet
the 300-acre minimum size requirement for a rural village.
Approval of this map amendment provides several significant
public benefits; number one, completion of the regionally significant
wildlife corridor and flowway that begins at Bonita Beach Road in
Lee County and stretches to Vanderbilt Beach extension in Collier.
The Immokalee Road wildlife underpass that is being constructed
as part of the Immokalee Road widening is part of that wildlife
corridor.
Second benefit is the ability to preserve the 80 acres that are
sought by Conservation Collier which abuts a school site, and the
school site, in turn, abuts land owned by the county and planned for a
park.
It's a unique opportunity to assemble a large contiguous parcel of
property in preservation and under public ownership.
Third benefit is the ability to provide that connector road to start
building a rural road grid between Immokalee Road and Vanderbilt
Beach Road. The Bonita Bay Group has committed on the record to
seek a rezone of the Immokalee Road south property for a rural village
of this map amendment if all the TDR and related rural village
amendments are approved.
This rezone application would be filed before your final adoption
hearing on all these amendments, which is scheduled for sometime in
June.
The proposed Bonita Bay rural village, if approved, will help
Page 214
January 25, 2005
jumpstart the rural village -- the rural fringe plan, and the, hopefully,
modified TDR program. It is a unique opportunity to have one of the
region's premier community developers to set the standard for a rural
fringe, rural village.
We respectfully request that you vote to transmit this to the
Department of Community Affairs.
We'll be happy to try to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any questions, Commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do we have any public speakers?
MS. FILSON: I have two public speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Let's call the first speaker.
MS. FILSON: Amy Taylor. She will be followed by Nancy
Payton.
MS. TAYLOR: If I could borrow a map. Thank you.
For the record, my name is Amy Taylor. I'm the long range
planner with Collier County Public Schools, and we would like to
weigh in on the broader public interest in terms of this amendment and
only in terms of the opportunity provided for that link from
Immokalee to Vanderbilt Beach Road extension.
As you can see, we have a future school site, actually two will be
on that location. It's approximately 100 acres, and it will have an
elementary school, a future elementary school, as well as a future high
school. The high school is timed so that it will open after Vanderbilt
Beach Road extension is completed up to that point.
We have estimates -- it's actually in the transportation capital
plan -- that it will start construction in 2007, if I'm not correct. The
opening of our school is estimated to be the 2010/2011 school year.
With the addition of this opportunity for this Vanderbilt -- with
this Vanderbilt Beach RoadlImmokalee connection, it will provide us
greater opportunity to relieve Gulf Coast High School, which is one of
our biggest challenges. We may not take as much school population
Page 215
January 25, 2005
from that northern area if we were to not have that opportunity.
The -- the access to the new high school for any of those
properties that are east of 951 that normally go to Gulf Coast High
School, if they were -- their attendance boundary were to change,
would have to drive two miles west to 951, I think, three to four miles
south to Vanderbilt Beach Road, and then two miles back east to the
high school. So this connection provides a wonderful opportunity.
In addition, all of those residents that would live in the rural
village would be -- if the alignment of the road were to be as it --
along -- along the school or even along the property -- the park
property, would provide an opportunity for many, if not all, of the
students within the rural village to be able to walk to the schools.
It would have to be within -- you'd have to measure it because it's
not exactly two miles. As the crow flies, it's a two-mile walking
distance that they would be eligible to walk.
This is a great opportunity and things that we do like to
encourage and try to work on very, very closely with the county.
We've also -- I wanted to commit to you that we have previously
worked with the county in terms of its transportation improvements to
Vanderbilt Beach Road. We've also worked with public utilities, with
Conservation Collier, and with parks and recreation so that we can
have a wonderful opportunity here.
And we just see this as another piece, this opportunity with this
road, and it's all -- its inherent benefits to the county as a whole and
that region as a whole, but it will also benefit the school district as
well and the students that would be attending that school.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Nancy Payton.
MS. PAYTON: Good afternoon. Nancy Payton, representing
the Florida Wildlife Federation, and I'll also be representing Collier
County Audubon Society today.
Page 216
January 25, 2005
Florida Wildlife and Collier County Audubon Society have long
worked -- have long worked with Bonita Bay on what is right for this
particular parcel. And, in fact, we recently amended our 2001 Twin
Eagles Settlement Agreement to encourage the use of TDRs on this
property and promote the concept of a rural village that would provide
service not only to the rural fringe, but to that part of the urban area as
well as the estates.
It provides an opportunity for the first rural village and to set a
standard, which we think Bonita Bay is the right person to do that.
And we can work with them very, very well, and they work with the
community extremely well.
It's a very important component, as you've heard for regional
planning for roads, schools, utilities, and parks. Also it will use over
one -- it will use hundreds of TDRs, which, of course, we like because
that helps environmentally sensitive land.
It also includes the 80 acres, which you briefly talked about this
morning, which is on Conservation Collier's A list, currently on
neutral lands, and it will connect with a linear preserve that goes all
the way up six miles to the CREW land.
And I remind you that in 2003, I believe it was, that that linear
preserve and flowway received an award from the governor's council
for Sustainable Florida because of its innovative design and its
creativity.
The wildlife preserve also includes a flowway that will rehydrate
wetlands in this part of -- south of Immokalee Road, and it also
connects with the wildlife crossing that you're currently building
under Immokalee Road. So wildlife can move very freely. That's the
only road in the six-mile preserve that is crossed by a road. It's only
Immokalee Road.
I'm going to skip through a number of the points because they've
been addressed by Ms. Taylor or other folks. I did want to comment
that we do have members who live in northern Golden Gate Estates
Page 217
January 25, 2005
just south of this proj ect on the other side of the canal, and they are
extremely supportive of this because it provides -- the 80 acres
provides an excellent buffer for them between their homes and the
rural village, and they also like the opportunity for a large natural area
that they can have easy accessibility to because there is a bridge across
13th Street Northwest so that they can come across and get to the
school site, the park, and hopefully the 80 acres, which will be under
Conservation Collier.
Nature benefits from this amendment. Eighty acres, it's part of
the six-mile linear preserve, the use ofTDRs, and no five-acre lots on
that neutral area which is currently approved.
So we urge you to vote in support of this amendment and
transmit to DCA.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That was the last of the public speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. David?
MR. WEEKS: Mr. Chairman, for the record, David Weeks of
the comprehensive planning department, pinch-hitting for Michelle
Mosca for the staff presentation, which I'll try to keep to less than two
minutes.
I'll start with a map on the visualizer, and this demonstrates in
staffs -- well, based upon the review of the environmental data
submitted by the applicant identifying different habitat types on the
property, this map, in staffs opinion, indicates the differences between
the two properties. That is their acreage. The habitats are the same.
We've reviewed amendments in light of the rural fringe
mixed-use district designations of sending, receiving, and neutral.
And as you'll recall from when those were adopted in 2002, there are
clear distinctions between those, and that's why the different
designations were created. The habitat values are different for those
three different designations, and, in fact, we want to encourage
Page 218
January 25, 2005
development on the receiving lands, and that's where there's the least
value, and then the greatest value is on the sending lands.
Conversely, that's where we sent the development away from.
That's where the TDRs are generated from. And then the neutral land
was in between. Its habitat value does not rise to the level of sending,
but it is not as low as the receiving, therefore, it's allowed to develop
as it could prior to the rural fringe amendments, and that is at one unit
per five acres.
The subject property is presently designated neutral. The habitat
value does not reach sending but it does approach it, it's close to it.
The key point I'm making here is that in our review of the property,
there's no distinction between the two properties yet one is being
proposed for receiving where development will be sent and then the
other is proposed for sending where development will be sent away
from.
I also want to comment on a couple of other things, a couple of
points that the petitioner had made. The wildlife corridor can be
developed with or without this land use change, map amendment. And
secondly, Conservation Collier is interested in this property with or
without this map amendment.
They did not endorse the property based upon this map
amendment. They simply said, based upon the value of the property,
that they would like to see it acquired by the Conservation Collier
program.
Really, Commissioners, I think this comes down to two principal
issues, and they're both a matter of policy. First of all, do you want to
change lands, the designation of properties from one designation to
another so that it can promote development of a rural village, or just in
general terms, promote development of the rural fringe mixed-use
district and the use of TDRs, help get the TDR program going. That, I
think, is the one policy issue.
The other policy issue escapes me for a moment.
Page 219
January 25, 2005
Anyway, there's concern about the precedent that might be set,
whether or not you would make a change, a map amendment change,
just to get the TDR program going.
The second policy issue is whether or not you will approve a map
amendment only. There's no text involved here. There's no
commitment other than what is verbally stated on the record, that a
rural village will be developed or that the corridor or the other types of
things will occur. The other policy issue then is, do you want to
approve a map amendment with a verbal commitment only as opposed
to something in the text that makes that commitment.
And I don't mean to offend the petitioner by any means. I mean,
that's not a role of staff to say that we don't think they're a good people
or they're a good company or they'll stand by their words. But as a
policy matter, do you want to make -- to take that action?
There's also some concern again, about the precedent for other
types of changes that might come before you if this one is approved
that would say, well, we want to make a change, too. Habitat
value-wise, we don't meet what we think is the intent of the plan, but
we want to use TDRs to let us have the same thing. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My concern is the 140 acres of
neutral lands that are going to be turned into receiving lands, is this
going to be for homesites or is this going to be for development of a
go If course?
MR. WEEKS: I'll let the petitioner answer that, sir.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: For the record, my name is Mitch
Hutchcraft. I'm regional vice-president for the Bonita Bay Group.
Our intention is to develop this property, which would include the 153
acres in addition to the receiving land to the north, as part of a rural
village.
At present time, we don't think that that property is large enough
to accommodate a golf course. We have not gotten to final site plan
Page 220
January 25, 2005
on it, but as you can see, we have done some conceptuals, and those
conceptuals at this time do not include a golf course. We are required
to do the 300-foot, or 500-foot perimeter buffer, and those will all be
incorporated in compliance with the rural fringe mixed-use plans.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. The other concern that I
have is that if we do this for one piece of property, my concern is, are
we opening the door for future properties to do the same type of thing
stating that it might be for rural villages and --
MR. WEEKS: Commissioner, that's one of staff concerns as
well. Obviously this board, collectively, makes the final decision, so
you control whether or not, in a sense, you can say whether or not a
precedent is set because you're the ones that would say yea or nay on
any future actions. But that is a staff concern.
I do want to make one other point, Commissioners. Obviously
staff is not recommending that you transmit this. The planning
commission did recommend that it be transmitted by a vote of four to
three.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I agree with Commissioner
Halas about opening the door. Conversely, I just -- I see all positives
here.
The school ground is already waiting and the parklands are
already bought, and we're going to connect a road, which just delights
me, no end, and a rural village built by Bonita Bay, I don't think you
could ask for anything better. So I just think it's a wonderful thing,
and I make a motion to approve to send.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion to approve. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only reason I'm not getting
it at this time is I just don't have all the information that I need. I
might be very receptive if questions are asked.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do you want to withdraw it and
Page 221
January 25, 2005
we'll have some more discussion here?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. I'll withdraw it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then, Commissioner Coletta, go
ahead and ask questions.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I didn't want to discourage you
from doing it, it's just that I haven't reached that level of comfort at
this time.
A couple questions, if I may, Mr. Anderson. The concerns, I
guess, are such things as the land you're going to go onto is -- really
doesn't meet the qualifications at this time of receiving land. So my
question would be, is there some -- would there be some thought
process as far as credits were allowed to restore this land to its near
pristine value? That's one of them -- a couple other question I've got.
MR. ANDERSON: You mean the sending lands?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
MR. ANDERSON: The plan would be that if this is approved
and all the TDR bonus proposals that you later will consider are
approved, that -- that would require restoration and mitigation of
anything on the 80-acre parcel.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I recognize the fact that the
land that you now own, and probably in the holding company, that
you already purchased in your normal course of business preparing for
this, gives you as many rights as the people -- anybody out there that
owns that particular land. I'm talking about land in the sending areas.
There's been quite a movement for developers to buy that land
and then later strip the TDRs when they reach that point when they
establish the value of it.
What I'd like to do is, through the amount ofTDRs that are
required and the amount that you already have and the amount that
you'll have when you get to this point if we approve this for turning it
into receiving lands, how many TDRs would you need to build this
conceptual village? Because that's a concern for many people. Even
Page 222
January 25,2005
though we hear that your intentions are to build it, what's said here,
what might interpret out another year from now could be a little
different.
But the amount of credits that you're going to be lining up, that's
the key to the whole thing. I mean, if you're going to have way over
what you need for a golf course community, then obviously you're
heading in that direction now and you're making a commitment early
on.
What right -- at this point in time, what do you own in land that
would translate to one credit per five acres or -- to reach a lot of record
that's less than five acres that was established before this whole
process started? Do you have that number?
MR. ANDERSON: I have a number of how many TDRs they
will need to buy --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that's a start. What's that--
MR. ANDERSON: -- to do a rural village.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How many?
MR. ANDERSON: And it's in the neighborhood of600.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Six hundred. Okay. Now, let's
go backwards again, and I know that you're going to try to treat this
information as confidential, and I know I got it on hand someplace. If
I take a few minutes, I can probably find it myself.
But if you could come up and tell me what you already own in
land that would equal TDRs and how close we are to that 600, that
would -- that would help to give me a little more confidence in the fact
that we're heading that way.
I don't think this is any state secret. The Tax Appraiser's Office
would have it on file.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: The answer is that we do own some
sending land, primarily that area that is north of the existing east
course. That does have some TDRs associated with it.
You'll also recognize that we own Twin Eagles, which is
Page 223
January 25, 2005
immediately next door. There's 600 acres on the north side of Twin
Eagles that we're moving forward developing through the rural fringe,
which is also going to generate a demand for TDRs.
We have been looking at the property that is on the north side of
the east course that's providing some of the TDRs for that Twin Eagles
expansion. We're going to generate more than that in demand on
Twin Eagles that more than outstrips what we already own in that
property.
So by and large, all of the density that we are going to generate a
need for on Immokalee Road south is new demand that we don't own,
that east course.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, that's fine. I mean, at this
point in time are you one-third of the way there if we grant this to you
and -- if we went with the TDR increase from one to four? Would you
be one-third of the way there, one-half of the way there?
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: I would say that for the rural village that
we're nowhere close, and I can't honestly give you the specific
percentage because I don't know the answer.
I can tell you that we have not been buying tons of TDRs in
expectation of this. We have been looking to see what's available
primarily because we've been moving forward with our Twin Eagles
proj ect. So we have acquired some to shore up that proj ect.
And I think as Bruce indicated, this creates a significant
additional demand over and above what was already anticipated for
that project.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ifwe were to transmit it at this
point in time, when it comes back to us for final consideration -- we've
got one more shot at this, is that -- at that point in time, do you think
you might be able to give us the assurance through some sort of
methodology with the TDRs that you are contracted for or have on
hold, that you're going to be able to reach that density of TDRs that
are required for a rural village?
Page 224
January 25, 2005
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Well, we definitely have to do that
because we're required to submit a planned unit development for the
property, and we don't get the approvals unless we have the ability to
achieve that density. So we are going to be required as part of the
approval of the planned unit development. So you actually have two
more takes, actually three more takes at this.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And forgive me if I sound
suspicious. I don't mean to be. I mean, you've been some of the most
ethical builders that have ever been around; however, it's the very
nature of government itself --
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Sure.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- to be suspicious of everything
that goes on around it. My other question is, is the land that we're
talking about possibly turning into sending lands, the neutral now.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there plans to use that extra
credit if it becomes available to restore this land?
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: We have anticipated that if the bonuses
become available, that we would obviously take advantage of that
credit. And I think that generates an extra -- and again, you know,
they talked about lawyer math; I'm doing planner math. It's a total of
80, but the net increase is like 64 units. It's very small.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I know it is, but there's going to
be a certain comfort level within this commission, and I think on staff,
too, if they know what they're going to end up with is not going barren
piece of land.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: No. And that's a great point, and let me
clarify. Our intention is that if the bonuses are approved and we do
the rural village as indicated there, one of the bonuses is for us to go in
and do the management on the 80 acres to make sure that it's a quality
piece of property. We'll remove exotics and we'll do the management
activities.
Page 225
January 25,2005
One of the other bonuses that are available to us is a conveyance
to public ownership, and that is one thing that we are definitely
considering, that the end result might be a donation of the land to the
county that is fully managed and has a grant, as you've been talking
about, as required by your land development code, that would be
funding in perpetuity to maintain. So those are -- those are part of our
plans going forward, yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And nothing's as simple as it
seems. If you manage to survive this particular cut and move on, do
you have any kind of impediment there as far as land values go or
anything else out there that might derail the system over and above
what the commission has control over?
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: What I can tell you from my perspective
is that without the approval of this amendment and the approval of the
bonuses, I don't think that a rural village is a viable option on this
property. So I think that the answer is, yes, that there would be an
impact. I'm not an economist and I can't tell you what that impact is,
but I can tell you that by this not being a rural village, the demand for
TDRs would go down.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So the next time you come back
to us, you're going to have a little more flesh on the bones for us to be
able to look at?
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much for your
time.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: And one other thing that I want to make
sure is clear, we made a commitment in front of the planning
commission that if this was transmitted to DCA along with the TDR
bonuses, that we were going to submit actually for our PUD rezoning
prior to the adoption hearing, so you would have a chance to see our
package.
I'm sure there would be lots of sufficiency comments that would
Page 226
January 25, 2005
come after that, but our intention is to move forward and submit a
zoning application as fast as possible, to give you that assurance.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can you show me where Gary
(sic) Island Road is?
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Yes, Sir.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: What's the name of it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Gary Island Road.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Right there. And as you can -- as you can
see, our intention, and we have made it clear to all of the property
owners out there, we intend for that to continue to provide access. It is
not intended for us to use that as a vehicular access.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, more information than I
need at this point.
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- but you -- all the land
that you're considering on sending land, you have ownership of?
MR. HUTCHCRAFT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Finished?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Uh-huh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. My question for the
gentleman is that if we don't approve this portion of the growth
management plan but approve the other portion, that wouldn't stop the
rural village concept?
MR. ANDERSON: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Why?
MR. ANDERSON: We wouldn't meet the minimum acreage size
for a rural village without this change. The minimum size is 300
acres, plus a green belt. So without this map amendment --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But even in regards to the 140
Page 227
January 25, 2005
acres, I believe, that are going to be neutral lands, you want to make
them receiving lands, you still don't have enough --
MR. ANDERSON: No. It's that -- with that we do have enough.
My point is that if this is not approved, we don't have enough acres.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Then let me reword this. If
we approve this one and don't approve the other one, can you still
have the rural village?
MR. ANDERSON: In theory, but I think as he indicated, it may
not be economically viable.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. My--
MR. ANDERSON: But it would meet the minimum size
requirements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. My concern is, as I said
earlier -- stated earlier, that once we start this process of changing
neutral lands to receiving lands, then I'm wondering if we are opening
the door that we can't stop as far as holding down density out in this
whole rural area.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. If I could, there's a density cap
for the entire rural area, so we'll never be able to go beyond that, no
matter how many of these we approve, so that will be our protection.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How are we -- how are we going to
control that density cap, Commissioner? Maybe you can enlighten me
a little bit.
MR. ANDERSON: It's in the growth management plan. There
is a density cap of one unit per acre in the rural fringe outside a rural
village. Inside a rural village the density cap is no more than three
units per acre.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. ANDERSON: And the county, in fact, requires a minimum
density for a rural village of two units per acre.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Any other questions?
Page 228
January 25, 2005
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If not, Commissioner Fiala has a motion.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes. I'd like to make a motion to
approve and send.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: A motion by Commissioner Fiala to
approve. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll give it a second because of
the fact that we're going to have time to do more scrutiny on this when
it comes back. I'm not -- I'm still nervous about certain points, but I'm
comfortable enough to transmit.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a second. Any -- we'll
close the public hearing and I'll call the question.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas is opposed.
It passes 4-1.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our third petition,
and it's petition CP-2004-3. It's a petition requesting an amendment to
the future land use element and future land use map to create a new
Vanderbilt Beach Road neighborhood commercial subdistrict to allow
for C-l through C-3 commercial uses, other comparable and/or
compatible commercial uses not found specifically in the C-l through
C-3 zoning district, mixed-use development, and indoor self-storage
on two parcels, one located at the northeast corner of Vanderbilt
Beach Road and Livingston Road, which is 9.18 acres, and one parcel
further east on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, eight acres
zoned Vanderbilt Trust PUD, in Section 31, Township 48 south,
Page 229
January 25, 2005
Range 26 east, urban estates planning community, and Mr. Richard
Y ovanovich will present.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: I guess, good evening. For the record,
Rich Y ovanovich on behalf of the petitioner. I'm not going to get into
a whole lot of details on this. I think the staff report is pretty detailed.
I do want to point out that we did have a meeting with the
residents of Wilshire Lakes last night to fill them in on what we're
proposing. I think it was a very good meeting as far as giving them
the details of what the compo plan proposal and request is and what it
is not. It's not a rezone.
So we explained all that process to the residents. They did
express some of the issues that they had with the project, and we will
meet with them again before adoption to talk about issues they may
have and also talk about the actual rezone.
Just real briefly, we're talking about two parcels. Parcel one is
the parcel on the corner of Livingston Road and Vanderbilt Beach
Road. Parcel two is just to the east of that. Parcel -- parcel one's
approximately 10 acres. Parcel two is approximately eight acres.
We're asking for C-l through C-3 type uses on both parcels and
we're also asking for the ability to have indoor self-storage on one of
the two parcels. The planning commission said, if you have it on one,
you can't have it on both. We agree with that recommendation. Your
staff report is a recommendation of approval of our proposed project.
We're available to answer any questions you may have regarding
the petition. We had a recommendation of 7 -1. The one dissenter
really was -- he wanted to get into the details of setbacks for indoor
self-storage at the compo plan stage versus at the zoning stage, and I
think that was the reason for that one negative vote out of the eight
that voted.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have three speakers. Do you
want to wait and hold your questions until after they speak or do you
want to have questions now?
Page 230
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll wait.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I was just going to make a motion
for approval.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you'd hold offuntil after we receive
the public input, I'd appreciate it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Liza McClenaghan. She'll be
followed by Kenneth Sleeth.
MS. McCLENAGHAN: And the third speaker has left.
MS. FILSON: Thank you. That's Barb Callert?
MS. McCLENAGHAN: Yes. Good evening. My name is Liza
McClenaghan, a resident of Wilshire Lakes, which Fieldstone Village,
a condominium, adjoins parcel two of the proposed Vanderbilt Beach
Road neighborhood commercial subdistrict.
I would like to thank the Collier County staff for assisting my
understanding of the issues by providing access to documents and
answering questions about the proposed CP-2004-3 amendment to the
growth management plan.
I would also like to thank the owners of the property and their
team for sharing information with our community last night.
I note that the planning commission's minutes are not yet posted
on the web site of the county clerk, so we don't have accurate
knowledge of what was discussed then.
Despite this access, I ask your forbearance this afternoon because
of my ignorance and skepticism. I'm still a student of this process, and
as you've discussed these issues this evening, or this afternoon, you've
come to the same kinds of problems that I have in looking at this
proposal.
It's how do you feel when you're looking at a document that
states specifically what the ideas are that the person wants to do, yet
it's not a rezoning question at this time. It's just a transmittal, and in
six months, an approval process.
Page 231
January 25, 2005
I have been told, along with my neighbors, that the amendment
process is not the rezoning process that will determine the final
disposition of these two parcels, yet the material before you lists
specific uses.
I feel if no comment is made at this time, at a later date, we will
be told that the Florida Department of Community Affairs and this
board have approved these uses. I believe the submitted document
should not be basic in calling for self-storage facilities in the proposed
subdistrict but mention only the commercial zoning designation of C-l
through C-3, since the actual zoning process will take place at a later
date.
When that process takes place, we'll have enough time to learn
more about the vision the owners have about self-storage and other
allowed uses in these categories, including architecture and design.
If you do keep the current wording, I support the county planning
commission recommendation that self-storage be permitted on one of
the two parcels, and the calculations for square footage.
I would further recommend self-storage not be located directly
next to the residential area of Fieldstone Village.
W e'lllook for your support in the zoning process, that due
consideration be given to the density, height, and barriers between the
commercial and residential properties.
Finally, the traffic analysis for Vanderbilt Beach Road is dated.
While there was a ground breaking for the road back in November,
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Henning were there, the
proj ect has not yet commenced. That is expected in February. The
project is 34 months for the five-mile stretch from Airport to Collier
Boulevard.
Norm Feder and his staff have met with the Wilshire Lakes
residents' neighboring communities. He explained that the project has
set deadlines for completion of intersections and that the contractor
will have access to the whole corridor during construction.
Page 232
January 25, 2005
The area between Livingston Road and Logan is most likely the
last area to be worked based on the intersection commitments creating
what he calls the center of the hourglass. Residents in Wilshire Lakes,
Village Walk, and those living off Oaks Boulevard will have less
trouble exiting their residential areas than returning.
And we've talked about traffic issues already, so I see that I'm
being asked to stop.
To that end, I note as a separate item on the agenda, 1 7D, for the
existing Vanderbilt Trust PUD parcel number two be extended for two
years to 2006. While a two-year extension is all that is allowed at this
time, it will not be adequate because of the Vanderbilt Beach Road
construction. I would support an additional renewal when the time
comes.
Thank you for your consideration of these matters.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON : Your final speaker is Kenneth Sleeth.
MR. SLEETH: Commission Chairman and the board, my name
is Ken Sleeth, and I live in Wilshire Lakes on Fabienne Court. I just
want to add to what the previous speaker spoke about, and that was
that I live in this area.
N ow that area, if you look along -- all along Vanderbilt Road
(sic), it is a residential area. So the question comes up in my mind, is
this a proper type of usage for the area?
And we had an excellent presentation last night by the owners
and their representatives out there and we got some of the answers, but
I still would, in the back of my mind, hope that even though this is in
the preliminary stage, that in turn, when it comes down to the final
thing, we would have some kind of a say in actually whether this
would be approved or not, because I don't feel that living in that area
there are -- I'm sure there are a lot of the people around me, that in
turn, we're -- we should be absorbing into buildings that all have
yellow entry doors with -- and secondary to storage sheds. I thank
Page 233
January 25,2005
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. That was our last speaker?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yeah. I do believe that all of these
issues will be addressed at the time that we go forward in zoning. All
we're doing right now is just transmitting this up to Florida DCA.
So at that, I make a motion for moving this up to transmittal.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a motion for approval. I
presume it includes the CCPC recommendations?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: They're incorporated in your motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'll make the second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta seconds it.
Commissioner Henning has a question, or comment.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is not an activity center,
correct?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: No, it's not. We're creating a subdistrict.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And what I can see is a future
activity center, because the only logical choice on the property in
between the area one and two is to go commercial.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, let me -- let me answer that
question. First of all, as -- you'll notice that on the four quadrants,
there's only one quadrant that's not already been developed.
If you look to the northeast, you'll see it's a golf course, to the
southeast you'll see residential development, and to the -- to the
southwest you'll see residential development. I meant to say
northwest on the first one. So there will be no commercial in those
quadrants.
But the two parcels in between our parcel one and parcel two
Page 234
January 25, 2005
were recently acquired for a pretty hefty sum of money, more than a
commercial developer would pay for it because they're ongoing
businesses, and I'm assuming will continue to be ongoing businesses
based upon those sales prices.
So we are not -- we don't believe that those infill parcels will
actually become commercial parcels. That would be the subj ect of a
further compo plan amendment in the future, and it mayor may not be
appropriate for those parcels to become commercial if they ever do
decide to go through that process.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What would be the logical
choice besides commercial?
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Well, right now they're ongoing
businesses.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
MR. YOV ANOVICH: And for what they paid for those
businesses, they must be -- must be worthwhile and will continue to
ongo -- continue in those endeavors.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We have a -- we will close the
public hearing. We have a motion on the table to -- for approval by
Commissioner Halas, and it was seconded by Commissioner Coletta.
All in favor, please signify by saying -- what?
MR. MOSS: Excuse me. John David Moss, comprehensive
planning. I received a correspondence from a gentleman who lives in
Wilshire Lakes, and in the legal advertisement it states that any
correspondence sent will be read into the record. Would you like me
read it or at least provide you with a summary of what the gentleman
stated?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Either that or you can give us a copy and
we can put it in the record. Where's our attorney? I'm flying solo here.
What we'll do --
MR. YOV ANOVICH: Do you want me to help you?
Page 235
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Our attorneys are right back there.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I want reliable legal advice.
MS. STUDENT: For the record, Marjorie Student, assistant
county attorney. I think it would be fine if it would just -- it says read
into the record. I think if a very brief summary is made and then
given to the board for the record that would be adequate. Again, a
brief summary.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before you start, I have a
question. I received some correspondence on this. Should it be read,
too?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: There's no ex parte disclosure here in
this process.
MS. STUDENT: Well, no, I understand. But the legal
advertisement did say it would be read into the record. I understand if
there's a voluminous amount of material, it may add substantially. I
think maybe if it could be summarized into one -- perhaps one line,
and any correspondence received by the commissioner, ifhe could just
summarize it very generally, that would--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Three words or less.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I can do it for you.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. Given this -- given this background --
and this is what the gentleman says, I was appalled to hear that our
Board of County Commissioners would ever consider a hearing to
change our district into a commercial area as outlined in CP-2004-3.
So the gentleman is not in favor of it, and I will take a copy of
this and give it to the court reporter and put it in the record, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Thank you very much.
Okay. We still have the motion on the table. All in favor, please
signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 236
January 25,2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is four, with Commissioner Henning
absent.
Now we're going to item number four, petition 200 -- CP-2004-4,
right?
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir, and that's a petition requesting an
amendment to the future land use element to change the rural fringe
mixed-use district sending lands to add three transfer of development
rights, TDR's bonus provisions, each for one TDR credit for, number
one, listed species habitat management plan and maintenance; number
two, fee simple conveyance to conservation entity or program; number
three, early entry into the TDR program and to amend rural village
development standards.
And Mr. Bruce Anderson will present.
MR. ANDERSON: Good evening, Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners. My name is Bruce Anderson. I am here representing
the Collier Building Industry Association.
With me this evening is Robert Duane, planning director of Hole
Montes and Associates, and the planner or this TDR amendment who
put together the data and analysis to support it. Also here is David
Ellis, the executive vice-president of the Collier Building Industry
Association.
I'd also like to introduce CBIA's co-applicants on this TDR
amendment. Nancy Payton of the Florida Wildlife Federation, she's
also pinch-hitting for Brad Cornell this evening on behalf of Collier
County Audubon Society, and they are here with their attorney, Tom
Reese.
These three organizations are working together to try to
successfully implement the county's growth management plan for the
rural fringe which calls for the county to direct new development to
appropriate locations called receiving lands and to protect from new
Page 237
January 25, 2005
development valuable environmental lands, called sending lands.
Sending lands also include natural resource protection areas.
One of the primary ways which the rural fringe plan seeks to
accomplish this is through an economic-based incentive program to
preserve sending lands known as the transfer of development rights, or
TDRprogram.
It was envisioned that an owner of sending lands would record a
conservation easement on his property thereby severing the TDR and
then sell that TDR to an owner of receiving lands to build a dwelling
unit on receiving lands.
But as the staff report states, quote, to date county records
indicate that zero TDRs have been severed from the approximately
21,127 acres of sending lands eligible for participation in the TDR
program, end of quote.
That means that since the rural fringe plan was adopted more
than two and a half years ago, not a single acre of sending lands has
been preserved through the recording of a county conservation
easement.
Now, there may have been a few conservation easements
recorded in connection with urban area development or mining, but
none as a result of the rural fringe plan.
Without a conservation easement, those 21,000 acres of sending
lands are vulnerable to development as country estates, scattered
throughout the 73,000 acres that make up the rural fringe.
Now, there's a name for that kind of development pattern, and it's
called urban sprawl. The TDR program is supposed to protect sending
lands and to prevent urban sprawl, but it is doing neither. It is broken
and it needs to be fixed.
And as Dr. Nicholas, your TDR consultant, stated in his report,
quote, enhancing the incentive is the only thing to do, unquote.
The proposal before you today enhances the TDR incentives
without raising the density limits that are already in place in the rural
Page 238
January 25,2005
fringe.
According to those who have unsuccessfully sought to acquire
TDRs, because of estate lots escalating in value, five-acre sending
land parcels for ranchettes and country estates in the rural fringe are
being purchased for 10,000 to 15,000 and on up per acre; however, the
same market forces that make these five-acre parcels attractive for
development of single-family homes make it non-viable economically
for a developer to pay 50- to $75,000 or more for the right to build one
dwelling unit before he even buys the land to put the dwelling unit on.
Hence, the problem with the present TDR program is that even if
TDRs could be found to be purchased, it is not economically viable to
buy and use them, but it is economically viable for someone to spend
50- to $75,000 for five acres of land to build a home on, and that's
exactly what's happening.
The solution proposed in this amendment would make it more
profitable to conserve the land and sever the TDRs than to sell it for
residential development, and that is what you say you want to have
happen in your plan.
Instead of 50- to $75,000 for title to the property for one TDR
unit, the owner can receive more and the developer can pay more than
50- to $75,000 if there are more TDR units available to be severed
from the five-acre parcel. Of course, the market will determine all of
that.
This amendment is a four-way win all the way around, for the
environment, for owners of sending lands, for owners of receiving
lands, and for the county. The EAC recognized this and unanimously
recommended approval, the planning commission recognized this and
recommended approval as well, your staff views this as such a big win
all the way around that they asked us to join in as co-applicants.
In a moment Mr. Ellis and Ms. Payton will each explain about
the TDR bonus proposals, of which there are three. Closely related to
the problems of getting the program off the ground are some changes
Page 239
January 25, 2005
that are proposed to the very specific standards that are in the growth
management plan for rural villages.
After you hear from Mr. Ellis and Ms. Payton, if there are
questions relating either to the TDR amendment or the proposed rural
village language changes, I or another member of the team will be
happy to answer your questions.
At the conclusion of the hearing we ask you to follow your
environmental and planning advisory board's recommendations and
approve this rescue of the rural fringe plan and the TDR program.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Any questions from the
commissioners?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We'll go ahead and listen to the
public speakers then.
MS. FILSON: Actually, he's a presenter, not a speaker.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh.
MR. ELLIS: Commissioners, I'm David Ellis with the Collier
Building Industry Association. It really is our pleasure to be here
tonight to talk about this program.
They've asked me to describe the early entry bonus, probably the
easiest one to understand. The idea of the bonus is, those that come
into the program in the next three years will get an additional
development right for entering the process early, or sooner.
It's designed to get early entry into the program, just like we did
in the eastern lands when we set up that program. It's modeled after
that.
The bonus will encourage people to transfer their development
rights sooner. The idea is, is that we can get those lands that need to
be preserved into preservation sooner. As Mr. Anderson noted, with
the pressure in the escalating property values, some of those lands,
people may see the economics of not doing that and not really 1!laking
this program work and, importantly, not preserving the lands that will
Page 240
January 25, 2005
need to be preserved.
I would note that when we originally came forward with this
recommendation, we said, let's make it a five-year window. Your
county consultant on TDRs suggested three years, and we do comply
with that. We've been trying to work with the county to try to make
everything work.
As many of you know, I served on the Rural Fringe Committee.
I was on that for two and a half years. We knew that the TDR
program was going to be the lynch-pin of the success of what we did.
I really believe this early entry bonus will help us move this
program towards success and to accomplish the important goals that
we have to preserve those important lands and yet move development
to appropriate places in our community.
Thank you, Commissioners.
Ms. Payton's going to come forward and explain the other two
bonuses.
MS. PAYTON: Thank you. Nancy Payton, representing the
Florida Wildlife Federation and Collier County Audubon Society,
co-petitioners with CBIA.
First I'm going to address the restoration and maintenance TDR
bonus. When we adopted the rural fringe plan back in 2002, we failed
to provide incentives to landowners who removed their -- severed their
TDCs. We had no incentives for them to enhance and maintain the
habitat in that environmentally sensitive area, hence the concept, the
idea, for the restoration and maintenance TDR.
It's a pretty simple concept, that a landowner who removes
exotics, institutes a habitat management plan and keeps it exotic free is
entitled to that bonus TDR.
Also, I might tell you that there is a stakeholders group that has
been meeting for an extended period of time looking at landowner
incentives, that is government programs, state and federal programs
that provide assistance as well as grants to landowners who want to
Page 241
January 25, 2005
improve habitat on their property. So this would be a way for
landowners in the sending area to get some type of assistance to
actually reach the goal of this restoration and maintenance TDR.
The details, or the specifics of the restoration and maintenance
plan are something that need to be worked on in the LDCs. And there
has been a proposed change in language that eliminates the reference
to 25-year annuity, and it replaces that with just the concept that
there's going to be a restoration and management plan.
And we've found as we've been working on this particular bonus
and talking with state agencies, permitting agencies, landowners, that
different types of habitat require different maintenance requirements
and, therefore, we can't have one size fits all, and those details truly do
need to be worked out in the LDC as opposed to our broad -- growth
management plan.
And I -- I think that those -- that change has been provided to
you? It has. Thank you very much.
The final TDR, the third bonus TDR is conveyance, and that is
that once you have done your restoration and maintenance plan and
you're maintaining it to standards, then you have the opportunity to
convey that land, that is free, give it, to a public agency, for instance
Conservation Collier. And we talked a little bit earlier about the 80
acres in the Bonita Beach -- or the Bonita Bay property south of
Immokalee Road, and that might be an opportunity, hopefully, to
receive that land.
Also the Big Cypress Basin has expressed support for this
project, and I believe you received a letter from Clarence Tears
outlining the various opportunities that exist, and I am going to read
that briefly, because I don't think Clarence -- I'm going to read that in
a minute because I understand Clarence isn't here.
This bonus TDR is probably most attractive to landowners who
have purchased large tracts and to those who have purchased sending
lands for TDRs and mitigation benefits.
Page 242
January 25, 2005
North Belle Meade is probably going to be the area that's going
to benefit the most from this particular program.
And I would like to read a portion of Clarence Tear's letter where
he outlines the opportunities that exist for this program to be
compatible with several of their goals. And I'll briefly read.
The North Belle Meade NRP A sending area consists of
approximately 6,000 acres. If this area can be acquired through this
amendment, we have an excellent opportunity to rehydrate an
extensively over-drained area, to improve water quality, enhance
wetland functions, and provide flood peak attenuation opportunities
for the rapidly urbanizing northern Golden Gate Estates.
The North Belle Meade rehydration will also provide aquifer
recharge and the reduction of excessive freshwater inflow to the
Naples Bay.
In addition, the initiative supports the goals and objectives of the
Southwest Florida feasibility study, which is part of the $8 billion
Everglades restoration plan. So there are significant opportunities or
cumulative impacts that are associated with these bonus TDRs.
We urge you to support this amendment and vote for transmittal
to the DCA. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: And I also, Mr. Vice-Chairman, have five
speakers on this issue.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Thank you.
MR. LITSINGER: Mr. Vice-Chairman, I am staff
comprehensive planning director, Stan Litsinger, and I'd like to say
very enthusiastically that we are the fourth petitioner in this joint
petition to modify and enhance your TDR program. And as I'm sure
all of you are aware, this has been an ongoing effort to develop these
enhancements for at least six months.
As Nancy had mentioned, to demonstrate the continuing effort to
polish and try to perfect a new set of bonuses that will jumpstart this
program and that will actually start to realize both from the TDR
Page 243
January 25, 2005
property owners' perspective in receiving some of the rewards
associated with this program and also to make TDR units available in
practical quantities in order to achieve some of the development
scenarios that we would like to see, such as the rural village that we
just heard about recently, and the receiving lands.
We, as recently as Friday, as mentioned by Nancy, have done
some modification and what we call refinement to the restoration and
maintenance bonus, which I believe you had been presented the
language.
Also with me to make some brief comments relative to his
support of the timing of this addition of additional bonuses, we have
Dr. Jim Nicholas, who's one of the prime architects of our TDR
program through the two-year process of the rural fringe mixed-use
districts, and we also have Marti Chumbler, our growth management
plan and rural fringe mixed-use district legal counsel here.
At this point, I would think -- we feel that the anecdotal evidence
that we have experienced in a little less than a year's time is correct.
And I would reflect Bruce's comments and the comments of Nancy
and David Ellis both, that we are prepared but we have not seen any
results which would indicate that we need to take the next step.
We feel confident as your staff in recommending transmittal of
these additional bonuses to DCA and their eventual adoption so that
we can realize the results that we had intended or thought we would
have seen through the TDR program.
With that, staff has no more specific presentation. Dr. Nicholas
would like to make a few comments in support of the bonuses, and if
you would permit us a few moments, I would like to have Dr.
Nicholas speak with you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, please.
DR. NICHOLAS: Thank you, Stan, Commissioners, good
afternoon. Again, I'm Jim Nicholas. I've been privileged to serve as
your consultant on TDR matters.
Page 244
January 25, 2005
When Collier County created this TDR program, there was a
great deal of caution. Perhaps the most common mistake that has been
made in the hundreds of TDR programs around the country has been
to flood the market. They come in and just dump them there with the
result that the TDR has little to no value and it has no credibility.
And that was a major concern to avoid that mistake so the
numbers were kept low. In fact, there was a lot of criticism, if you
recall at the time. In fact, there was even a legal challenge that they
were too low.
And whether that was or wasn't, we recognized, if you remember
our discussions at the time, that it might well be low, and that's where
the revisitation commitment came into play.
This started out, let's be cautious and then revisit it, because then
we'll have some experience to look at.
And in so doing, the whole concern was always to provide
maximum assurance to sending owner property owners that these
would have value to them. Of course the year has passed and now
we're revisiting.
We designed the program to net back to the sending area
properties $5,000 per acre, or the $25,000 per right. That was the
number, that was the goal we were looking at. That number or that
goal has been rejected in the marketplaces for all the reasons you've
heard.
So now we have -- we're faced with a situation of how to increase
the net back to the sending area property owners without destroying
the economic feasibility of the TDR to the users, and the only way to
do that is by increasing the ratios of TDRs.
So one way to do it is simply to come in and increase the ratio.
The other is to use it in an incentive system, which is -- of course, is
exactly what you have brought here.
From my perspective on the TDR, it doesn't make much
difference how you do it. But what, in effect, you have done is simply
Page 245
January 25, 2005
increased the ratio.
Now, in the cases of the first two bonuses, there are costs
associated with that. Restoration is not free, and the contribution for
maintenance itself is costly. The dedication mayor may not be
appropriate in all cases. The one you can really count on is the early
entry, and this is the one everybody can control. Everybody can
decide to come in now.
Again, you've heard my recommendation. Keep that period
short, three years. Come in, make it, get the system up and operating.
In my opinion, these three incentives will enhance the feasibility of
the TDR to the sending area property owners.
There's no question that there is the -- the incentive to the users.
It's to the senders that the incentive is not there. And this, in fact, will
address those, it will increase the net back to those sending area
property owners -- again, one of the major concerns -- and it will do so
in such a way that it will not diminish the economic feasibility of the
users in the receiving areas.
I'll be happy to try and answer any questions.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I just have a really basic one, if you
don't mind.
DR. NICHOLAS: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Say, for instance, I have a house on
five acres and I want to take advantage -- and I'm in the right location
and I want to take advantage of this program but I don't want to leave
my house. Can I sell the development rights to that property? I have
five acres, so one TDR.
And then if I do it rather quickly, get a second one. And if I
clean it all up and make sure that on my five acres there are no exotics
and I maintain that, there's three. I know I don't want to give it away
because I want my house on there. Can I do that?
MS. CHUMBLER: Commissioner, Marti Chumbler, outside
Page 246
January 25, 2005
legal counsel for the county. I think I need to change your example a
little bit because if you have five acres with a house on it, there's
nothing left for you to sell. You've developed that property to the
max. There's no TDR left to be severed from that property. A better
example would be the property owner with 10 acres. They've got one
house on that. So there still is a five-acre parcel on which they could
sever the one base TDR.
They would have the option of then, if they do it within the first
three years creating the early entry bonus, and if they wanted to incur
the expense of entering into a restoration and management agreement,
they could then conceivably also get the third bonus and still stay
there in their house.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. I do have quite
a bit, and what I'll do is if I go too far and you want to jump in, I'll
give it up and come back again, because it's a -- if there's anything I've
done an extensive amount of research on in my time with the
commission, it's been the TDR program. And there's a lot I learned.
There's a lot of things that are being represented to us that aren't
quite the way they appear to be, and I want to go through a couple of
them, if anything, just to get back to honesty in government, then I'm
going to tell you why the basic program is probably still a great idea.
One is that TDRs -- no TDRs have been severed, so the program
failed. Totally false. They haven't been severed correct, but there has
been numerous purchases out there. Since 2002, 471 lands have
traded hands in the -- in the sending area to potential developers, and I
have a list of them here, who the holding companies are, but that
doesn't matter.
The people that have bought these TDRs have just as much right
to them as the people that still sold them, so we've got to respect their
wishes on that. But just the amount of TDRs that are being held by
Page 247
January 25, 2005
developers at this time is a good indication that the program is
working and that we have preserved the lands out there. No one's
been able to violate what's been set up about the 40 acres, one lot --
one building per 40 acres or one building per lot of record, but there
are some things that we need to talk about just so people understand
what the mechanism is that's driving this.
One of the elements out there that we're all familiar with, and it
still boggles our mind -- and when this program was originally
contemplated and put together, whoever anticipated that our land
values would soar to the levels that they are today?
And that very fact raises a special problem for five-acre lots, or
even lots less than 10 acres, where only one TDR, in this case here,
four, are available. Those lots are worth so much money as building
lots. There's numerous ones out there that I don't think you're ever
going to get the value of a TDR up to the point that it's going to
compensate somebody for a building lot.
We heard Commissioner Henning earlier tell us about 75- foot
lots out there, Commissioner Henning? What was that number you
were telling us about for a 75- foot lot out in the Estates?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Average is 50,000. One sold for
137,000 just --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So you've got to remember as
time goes along, this market's going to probably do nothing but
escalate. And where there's little trails today, there will be roads
tomorrow. And I just want us to be totally up-front about this and
honest.
And the inholdings, we have numerous -- well, we don't have
numerous. We have would some holdings that are very large, consist
of acreage, and they're limited to one dwelling per 40 acres.
And if you stop to think about that, why would anybody in their
right mind sell the last five acres within that 40 acres? That little
inholding's got to be worth an absolute fortune for somebody that
Page 248
January 25,2005
would like to have a home in the wilderness and know that your
nearest neighbor is always going to be separated by that 40 acres that
surround you, and possibly other acreage on the other side.
And that in itself is going to raise a little bit of a problem in the
fact that wherever these inholdings are and wherever they do build
homes, there's going to be private roads, and the private roads are
going to disturb the water flow that takes place, and the people that are
there are going to have electricity and telephone lines coming to them,
and emergency services will have to go.
But in all reality, we've got to make sure that we understand what
the possibilities are of this program and also what the limitations are.
There is a couple things I would like to go into. And once again,
I'm probably going to take a record amount of time, and
Commissioner -- Commissioner Coyle, you're going to be proud of
me. Get your time watch going. Okay, turn that egg timer around.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Do you need a break soon?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I don't.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, I'm not talking --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm fine. Thank you very much
for asking.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Our court stenographer has been
laboring there for hours and hours.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Have you, dear? Are you ready
for a break? Because I'm going to talk your ear off, and I'll try not to
go too fast.
I do want to point out some of the inconsistencies. We -- earlier
today we talked about committees that are put together outside of the
government, outside of the sunshine, and these committees come
together, and they serve a purpose to a point. I mean, when other
people aren't willing to meet, they meet, and they do come up with
conclusions based upon everything that's given to them.
I do want us to note that that committee that came together for
Page 249
January 25, 2005
the stakeholders' group, out of that group, it was made up of 18
developers, the developers' interest, eight consultants or attorneys for
developers' interest, 10 members of Collier County staff, four
members of environmental groups, and one representative of the local
builders, and one newspaper reporter.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, my God.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So these people are helping to
guide a process that's going to make determinations of other people's
lands' values, and this, in itself, is a very nervous situation.
I don't think the process has gone to the point where I'm totally
comfortable with it. The only saving grace on it is that there is some
time between now and when it comes back to us to be able to say,
well, that's it, this thing isn't going to work, or get this modified to the
point that it's going to meet the true needs of everyone that's involved
in it.
Some of the things that I'd like you to think about a little bit.
Remember I was talking inholdings, the five-acre inholdings that are
going to -- they're going to be a detriment to what is trying to be
accomplished. Now, you're going to have a hard time picking up
five-acre lots unless they're isolated, or the 5.9-acre lots unless they're
isolated.
Some of the smaller lots that are less than a quarter of an acre,
and there are some out there, they might be picked up by the sure fact
that they're going to have probably four credits with them, and they'll
be able to weigh them out.
But it's such things as when we have some of these large
developers that own the land out there now, and they're going to be
turning it in for TDRs, and once again, they have every right to those
TDRs that they purchased with the land as anyone else out there.
Maybe we ought to consider a rule that if you have a holding,
that at that point in time that holding has to be given with the rest of
the land. In other words, if you have 40 acres, you can't have a
Page 250
January 25,2005
five-acre inholding, you've got to be able to do the whole acreage at
one time to avoid the inholding.
Now, I don't know how popular that's going to be or if that's
going to be another problem that we have to contend with, and I don't
know if when it comes back to us, if we could deal with it then.
Can we, Stan? Would that be something that we could talk about
between now and when this thing comes back, or would that raise a
major problem?
MR. LITSINGER: Yes, Commissioner. We can discuss the
issue of requirement that inholders where that -- in the example that
we discussed the other day was if you have a 40-acre parcel, you
could effectively identify five acres and sell seven TDRs.
Intuitively we would think of it as a disincentive to become
involved in the TDR program if there was a requirement to give up
that homestead or that rurallifesty le in order to donate the other 35
acres.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, if there's nothing built on
it, that is, of course.
MR. LITSINGER: Yes. But we had -- it's certainly something
that we can discuss then. If there is an inclination, it could be changed
prior to adoption.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's just one of those things I
think that's never come up in the discussion, but it only makes
common sense that if you are a holder of lands out there of any size of
acreage, why would you be prompted to give up that last five acres
when it's got to be worth an absolute fortune? It would be something
that you'd bank against, which is going to have a little bit of a
deterrent on the program.
The idea of the program is to come up with continuous land that
can be returned to a natural state or preserved in the natural state that
all right exists. It shouldn't -- thoughts that we've got to be working
with as we go forward with the process.
Page 251
January 25, 2005
Another concern, and I don't think this is a big concern, and I'll
tell you why, is that the early entry bonus, and especially the extra
bonuses, would turn a market around now that is a seller's market, into
a buyer's market, where there -- maybe all of a sudden people will say,
okay, we have all these TDRs out there. They'll see that -- the fact
that a lot of them have been severed from the property because the
developers out there, once they get to four, I assume that they're going
to sever them at that time. I don't know why they'd want to hold them
any longer.
At that point in time they'll start to see the market being built. It
could create a buyer's market, but only with limitations. There's
nowheres near the amount of TDRs available that is indicated by all
the numbers and figures that you see.
A lot of them already have homes on them. They're out of
consideration. A lot of them, the value of them is just way too high
for the TDR program to ever pick up, and people will sit on them and
speculate -- speculate on them, and there's some that no matter what
happens will never participate in the market. I think we estimated it
would be 40 to 60 percent; is that correct?
MR. LITSINGER: Yes. Dr. Nicholas, in his report that he
prepared for us in presentation of these amendments, estimated that 50
percent of the base TDRs would ultimately be severed, and, perhaps,
80 percent of the bonuses, in the first three years.
Afterwards we're looking at approximately possibly eventually
80 percent. It's worth noting, as Dr. Nicholas pointed out in his report,
Montgomery County, Maryland, which has been one of the more
successful programs, after 25 years, has 60 percent severance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Dr. Nicholas, if you could, for
just one moment, come up front. And what I'm going to do in a
minute is cut off and allow my fellow commissioners to carry forward,
and I'll come back later. I don't want to dominate this conversation.
Sir, the examples that you had in the past in Maryland?
Page 252
January 25, 2005
DR. NICHOLAS: Maryland and New Jersey.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In New Jersey, did you ever run
into the situation of escalating land values such as we're experiencing
today in Collier County?
DR. NICHOLAS: Not there. In Long Island we have.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And what was the outcome
there?
DR. NICHOLAS: The outcome there was many people decided
not to participate.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
DR. NICHOLAS: Excuse me, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So at what level is the program
considered successful as far as a percentage goes before we might
become liable for some Bert Harris Act? What would that be? Is
there a magic number?
DR. NICHOLAS: Not that I know of. I think the big thing is, is
to -- once the program starts where we're getting arms length sales,
what we see elsewhere is, is then it just keeps itself going. And finally
when people don't want to sell anymore, we'll see the prices starting to
rise, and -- which apparently is the case in Montgomery County now.
They've sold all they want to sell. The prices are rising, and even at
those higher pricings, no new rights are being offered up. That seems
to be the -- sort of the norm.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Did they come back and
question the validity of the program at that point because someone
wasn't selling after a certain percentage, 40 percent or so was sold?
DR. NICHOLAS: What they did do was contacted me and
several other people and said, you know, what ideas do we have on,
perhaps, renovating the program or revising it? And, of course, one of
their options is to say that hey, it's served its function.
No one ever anticipates you would ever have 100 percent
participation. You certainly wouldn't have that here. What we did see
Page 253
January 25,2005
in Montgomery, which is the closest thing you are is to Montgomery
County -- very expensive land there, too, you know, suburban
Washington.
There you had -- it started out quickly and you had purchases,
then it went along very steady for a number of years, and now it's
tailed off. What you don't have here is you haven't got the start off,
and, of course, that's the dilemma that we're trying to deal with.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I doubt seriously if you can
answer this question, but I'm going to give it a try. How can we be
assured that the rural villages will be developed and not golf course
communities? From my indication of the people that are buying the
land out there, they specialize in golf course communities, and that's a
concern.
DR. NICHOLAS: Commissioner, I have to say that that's not my
area.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I'm sorry. That's
probably Mr. Litsinger.
DR. NICHOLAS: You know, that, I think, is the regulatory area.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much, Dr.
Nicholas. I do appreciate it.
MR. LITSINGER: A comment on golf course development as
an alternative to rural village which, of course, can have a golf course.
We can have cluster development in the receiving lands of one unit
per acre in a clustered development, which amenitized with a golf
course may be a choice.
Ultimately, looking at the cost of acquiring the TDRs that are
needed to entitle the golf course and the other considerations of the
market segment that will be targeted in these receiving lands, I think it
would be very difficult to make a prediction on what market demands
will vacate that area.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let me go back, Stan. I do
appreciate --
Page 254
January 25, 2005
MR. LITSINGER: But yes, they could develop a golf course,
but not in the receiving lands.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I understand that. We did leave
that option open. I think that might have been unintentionally,
because I think every commissioner here is visualizing rural villages
to be able to meet that need for growth in the future, something that
will be all encompassing that will have places for school, work, for
people to be able to recreate and be more or less a self-contained
town.
MR. LITSINGER: Mixed-use.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A little bit on the order of Ave
Maria. I don't think we're thinking golf courses, and golf courses are
pretty easy to put in, and the indication, other than Bonita Bay -- and
they're a respectable company, and they're making a commitment up
front that they're going to do that, that's provided all the stars and the
planets line up right, of course.
How can we be assured? Is there something between now and
the time this comes back that we can put in there that the extra credits
can only be used for rural villages? Can we do that?
MR. LITSINGER: Of course, legislatively, you can make that
decision, as the Board of County Commissioners. It's a legislative
process. I am trying to anticipate a circumstance where either the
petitioners or your consultants or staff would recommend that option.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are we going to have some sort
of workshop before it comes back again so we might be able to get
into real details on this? Because unless you get directions from the
commission, you won't know which direction to go between now and
the time it's resubmitted. And if it's still the same as it is now, where
are we going to be?
MR. LITSINGER: Well, it will come back in 60 days for a
second public hearing before the planning commission and a second
public hearing, final decision-making process for the Board of County
Page 255
January 25, 2005
Commissioners to either adopt them as transmitted or to make some
changes that may be considered in the meantime.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. I have taken this mike
long enough. I do have other questions, but I'd like to give it up to
Commissioner Halas and then come back later.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Could we get public comment, please?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought we'd
been through that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nope. We've got --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've got how many public --
MS. FILSON: We have five public speakers. The first speaker is
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I apologize.
MS. FILSON: -- John Vega.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's all right.
MS. FILSON: He'll be followed by Richard Woodruff.
MR. VEGA: Thank you. Good afternoon -- or good evening,
Commissioners. My name is John Vega. I'm here on behalf of
Francis D. Hussey, Jr., and Mary Pat Hussey. They are owners of a
large section of contiguous land within the North Belle Meade area
that's designated sending, that's non-NRPA, as well as Shawn Hussey,
trustee, who owns certain ancillary parcels within the North Belle
Meade, also sending; some NRP A, some non- NRP A.
On behalf of those landowners, I object to the proposal. I may be
the fifth estate that's not in favor of it. If we quadruple the amount of
TDRs that are available, we decrease the price. Supply and demand
tends to work everywhere other than with tomatoes, is my
understanding.
So -- and in addition -- in addition to flooding the market with
four times as many TDRs, we've created increased costs in order to
obtain them. So a sending landowner would see the value of his
TDRs go down, the cost to achieve those TDRs go up. The big
Page 256
January 25, 2005
beneficiary, in my mind, are the people that own lands in receiving
lands.
They now have four times as many TDRs that they can pick up
for approximately the same cost. And let's not forget the two-for-one
bonus within rural villages. If you quadruple the amount ofTDRs that
are available for sale and you double them when they're used within
rural villages, you've octupled the amount of residential units that can
be created.
Now,.in -- at its inception, the TDR program was quite clear that
single- family development has always been permitted in the Collier
County rural area at a base gross density of one dwelling unit per five
acres.
The alternative land use scenario presented herein maintains or
reduces that gross density. Well, not anymore. Not if we octuple it.
Now, I know that there are caps. Caps are pretty high though. I
don't know that anyone's calculated them for you all. If you take the
number of receiving acres, that's one per acre, knock out the rural
villages, they can go up to three per acre. It's a huge number.
Now, if we octuple the amount of sending TDRs, we might
create an additional 30 -- maximum 35,000 TDRs. I'm with
Commissioner Coletta, I think that there are so many single-family
homes that that's unlikely. The true number's probably closer to half
that.
Staffs presentation thought that a population density would be
2.6 people per residential unit. If we do that math even at half, we're
dumping 40- to 50,000 people. We're dropping them onto Immokalee
Road, Golden Gate Boulevard, and East 41.
Now, my understanding is that these are very difficult roads as it
is, they're congested, and we're very weary of additional development.
And while I'm in favor of the environmental benefits -- and I think the
environmental TDR, perhaps, ought to be passed and make it the first
TDR. That said, to create that much additional density and to drop it
Page 257
January 25, 2005
on these congested roads, I don't think is warranted at this time.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Richard Woodruff. He'll be followed by Mary
Stamatinos.
MR. WOODRUFF: Good evening. Richard Woodruff, for the
record, WilsonMiller.
First of all, I'd like to ask you to support the amendments as
brought forward to the staff. It's quite unusual when you have the
development community, the environmental community, and the
regulatory community all in agreement on any proposal.
What has aligned these forces is the fact that the marketplace has
not worked. When we stood before you some two years ago when this
was being considered for adoption, at that time I and others told you
we thought the density was too low. We were concerned that one per
five acres would not work. The market has shown it will not work.
If you will recall, one of the premises of settling the final order
was to come up with an innovative approach that would protect the
environmental lands and would protect the premature -- almost said
the premanure -- conversion of agricultural land. So I guess there's
some truth both ways.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Don't try this at seven.
MR. WOODRUFF: Okay. The other point that I would like to
remind you of is that in -- all that we do in regulation has defined
reality in application through the market.
We represent large-scale developers. And I can tell you, we have
been on the search ever since Heritage Bay was approved by this
commission. You said in that report we were going to be required to
secure transfer of development right credits in order to develop our
golf courses.
I can tell you we have searched high and we have searched low.
We have talked to everybody that has any significant number. We've
talked to hundreds of people who only have one. N one of them will
Page 258
January 25, 2005
sell them at less than $50,000 or $40,000 per unit, per TDR. That's
what five acres is going for.
In the development community, just as in the price of tomatoes,
there comes a point where the sandwich is too expensive for the
consumer. That's what we're faced with today.
The amendments are in line with the original concept, and that
was, this commission said that as you adopted the program, you would
monitor it. DCA, as they reviewed it, they understood it would be
monitored. All of us as participants understood it would be
monitored.
Believe me, the monitoring has been done not by simply sitting
back. It's been done by going out and trying aggressively to buy
property with no success.
As recently as -- today is Tuesday. As recently as Wednesday of
last week I talked to Stan about how many TDRs are on your registry.
There were 18 on the registry. That means that people have said, I
want to sell them.
We contacted the owner of 14 of those TDRs, and their answer
was, well, they're not actually for sale right now.
You have to have reasonable numbers to divide into the purchase
price, and that reasonable number conveys to what we can then sell a
unit for in the marketplace. Today's number's too high, therefore,
please support these amendments. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Mary Stamatinos. She will be followed by
Emilio Baez.
MS. STAMATINOS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, commissioners, good
evening. My name is Mary Stamatinos and I reside at 4562 Eagle Key
Circle, Naples.
My husband, Gus, and I own five acres in North Belle Meade
area, which were designated as a -- in a sending area in 2002, which
we began purchasing and paying taxes on by agreement for deed in
1956, over 48 years ago.
Page 259
January 25, 2005
We were doing this for the purpose of moving to the rural area of
Collier County in our retirement, and we even bought fill and a trailer
to begin building. However, when the landfill -- when the county
moved the landfill out there, we decided it was too close to our land,
about five city blocks away, so we changed our mind about building
there.
But I digress, because in the whole scheme of things, our plans
and our five acres are not important. What is important is the
Constitution of the United States with regard to property rights.
So I went back and reviewed. The most important words are,
quote, property to be taken for public use -- wait a minute, pardon me.
I beg your pardon.
The fifth amendment to the United States Constitution states in
part that no person shall, quote, be deprived of life, liberty or property
without due process of law nor shall private property be taken for
public use without just compensation, end of quote.
Have you commissioners really analyzed these words in
connection with the TDR program? I am referring to the words, no
person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law nor shall private property be taken for public use
without just compensation, unquote.
The most important words are property -- property taken for
public use. This being the case, how would this be accomplished, that
is the taking of property for public use?
The taking of property for public use is accomplished through
eminent domain, which, without going into detail, primarily allows
government, that is federal, state, and municipal or whatever, to take
property for public use by going to court, giving notice to the owner,
and presenting its case, and the owner then has a chance to present his
case, which raises the question, what is quote, taking of the property?
Taking property for which just compensation must be paid does not
always mean physical possession.
Page 260
January 25, 2005
In the law of eminent domain, property is taken if it's value to the
owner is diminished. This raises the question, by the county adopting
the TDR program, which designated certain lands as being in a
sending area, wasn't the value of the land immediately diminished?
The answer is yes. That was like stigmatizing that land.
I presume that the argument could be made that the granting of
credits to the owner for selling his development rights is just
compensation, however, what about the due process of law?
In my case, as I understand it, the reason our five acres have been
designated a sending area is because, allegedly, the red-cockaded
woodpecker is using old pine trees, which are on our land, for its
habitat. My question is, how does that translate into public use?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ms.--
MS. ST AMA TINOS: I submit that this is literally a case for the
birds.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ms. Stamatinos, your time has expired.
Could you wrap it up, please? I'm --
MS. STAMATINOS: You mean I've been here five minutes?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes, ma'am.
MS. STAMATINOS: All right. Well, I just have a couple more
sentences here.
And the heck with the fifth amendment. And granting the -- that
the state, the county, the environmentalists and maybe even the
developers may mean well in trying to manage growth and protect the
environment, however, it should be done legally and in accordance
with the Constitution of the United States.
So if certain lands are needed for public use or for the good of the
public, then eminent domain should be used, and in that case each
owner would have the place -- the time and his day in court.
In closing, I would say -- I would like to say that with regard to
the change to the TDR, inasmuch as the TDR has not been working,
and any proposed changes will not make it legal, the request for the
Page 261
January 25, 2005
changes should be refused.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much, Ms. Stamatinos.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Emilio Baez, Baez. It's
B-A-E-Z.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is Emilio out in the hall, by any
chance? Would you check, please. He's been waiting all day. I hate
to have him miss the opportunity.
MR. WOODRUFF: No, sir.
MS. FILSON: And he'll be followed by Timothy Nance.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Maybe he'll still show up.
MR. NANCE: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, thank you for
letting me speak. My name is Tim Nance. I'm a member of the board
of directors and an officer of the Fran J apani (phonetic) Ag.
Community Civic Association, which is an association of small
property owners that own small farms, greenhouse businesses, tree
farms, groves, small ranches in the northern Belle Meade. We have
members in our civic association that have receiving, neutral, and
sending lands.
My concern today is with really two things with some of the
proposed amendments, but most importantly, the process. I don't
think people are aware that the trans -- the development of the transfer
of development rights process was to try to compensate people whose
land was basically down-zoned for the public good, and I think a lot of
that public good is self-evident. I don't think there's any argument.
However, I think of all the groups who had issues with a rural
fringe plan and who had goals, I think the property owners of the
sending lands are the one people who have not had their goals and
expectations met.
I think the county and the state was able to get their planning
processes done. I think the developers were able to get -- define
which areas development was going to take place in, and I think the
environmental people were unable to identify which lands were most
Page 262
January 25, 2005
important and which lands should be conserved.
However, to let these people get their monies back, I don't think
the process has been effective. I think it's been effective in all cases
except that.
And rather than rush into amendments to the plan or changes in
the plan before there's been a chance for those people to participate in
open meetings in the sunshine, since they are the largest stakeholders
that -- the benefits that we are incurring are borne on their backs, if
they cannot receive just compensation for their land, they are the ones
that bear the financial burdens and they should be able to participate.
I don't think changes should be initiated by committees that are
made up of groups dominated by developers and environmentalists,
and I don't think they should propose rule changes that benefit them
directly without having an opportunity for the commission, who is the
only advocate -- you all are the only advocate for our property owners
that bear the financial burden -- to reconsider this entire transfer of
development rights program.
If it is -- if it is identified as being broken, these people who are
the stakeholders should have the courtesy to be told that they think it's
broken and what the changes should be and why those changes should
be made and what the potential downsides are.
I don't think we need to start sticking Band-Aids on this process
by meetings for which they are really even unaware. Most of these
people are unaware this meeting is taking place, unaware that these
changes are being proposed.
I respectfully request, on behalf of my friends and neighbors, that
you seriously consider the transfer of development rights program
from the ground up if it is, indeed, broken, to figure out how these
major stakeholders can be helped.
I think the environmental community has been helped, and I
think the developers are more -- are more than benefiting. But it's
time that the focus be made on the landholders.
Page 263
January 25, 2005
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I comment. I'm sorry. I
really --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'd just like to get through these things.
We need to have a break for the court reporter.
How many more do we have?
MS. FILSON: Emilio Baez. Ifhe's gone, he's -- he would be
your last one.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's the last one?
MS. FILSON: For this item.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Just take--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All right. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll take just a moment. I'm
sorry .
Tim, you've got the same concerns I've had, and I've been trying
to drag the people from the sending lands into this. Emilio was here --
Emilio was here earlier to make some comments.
It's been very difficult, the lack of interest, but I agree with you.
I think you're right. And I'll tell you what, this thing's coming back
from the state in 60 days, and I'm going to ask this commission to
seriously consider that shortly after that, if you're doing legal
advertising and maybe writing letters to everybody in the rural fringe
that's in the sending lands, that we have an evening meeting to discuss
where we are with the program and what direction it's going, because
we can still intercept this to change it to something that's going to
meet the needs of everyone. And we'll see if we can get everybody to
do it.
MR. NANCE: Well, it may not be a legal requirement, but that's
the process that's followed.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
MR. NANCE: I mean, you all know the law and what needs to
Page 264
January 25, 2005
happen. But this is -- this whole process of basically making these
people go through the TDR program took many, many years and
many public meetings to develop.
I can't imagine that we're now going to turn around with a few
proposals from people who benefit directly, without making
absolutely certain that the goal is to get these people their value for
their land. A lot of people have all -- all the money that they own tied
up in this land.
One individual, who is a good real estate friend of mine, told me
the lowest price upland buildable lot in Golden Gate Estates in the
MLS was listed for $80,000. Now, how can we go out and say that
somebody can't afford to pay $50,000 for a development right to
somebody on five acres? That's -- to me, is bizarre. How are we ever
going to get these people their money back?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: They're not selling for $50,000.
Nobody will sell a development right for $50,000 for five acres.
They're crazy if they do.
MR. NANCE: Well, then the marketplace is working, as far as
I'm concerned. I mean, the developers are disappointed. I'm sorry for
them. But at the same time, if you look in the public records at who's
buying sending land, you'll find out it's everybody tied up through
developers. And why? That's because it's the cheapest way for them
to get TDR.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Over 20 percent of the sending
lands --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're taking a 10-minute break.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, please take your seats.
Mr. Chairman, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Do we have all of the public
comments?
Page 265
January 25, 2005
MS. FILSON: We have Tom Taylor.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Mr. Taylor, did you register after we
started hearing this item?
MR. TAYLOR: I did.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's--
MR. TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The rules are that you've got to register
before we start hearing it.
MR. TAYLOR: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay? Thank you very much.
Stan, do you have anything more?
MR. LITSINGER: Commissioner--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've got two commissioners who want
to ask some questions, so I'd like to get to them.
MR. LIT SINGER: Let's hear commissioners' questions.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. Stan, we're saying that we
have a difficult time right now for the developers to acquire these
TDRs. Can you be more explicit in why it's been difficult to acquire
these TDRs? Is it because you don't have any willing sellers, or is it
because of the price that they probably want to command for these
TDRs?
MR. LIT SINGER: There does not appear to be enough willing
sellers at the prices that the development community is willing to offer
when you look at the conversion of a TDR to dwelling units in a
development scenario in the receiving lands, which is the reason that
we are proposing through this bonus process to essentially increase the
possibility from 2,000 to 8,000 units, not a multiple of eight.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what is the willing price that
the developer is willing to pay at this point in time?
MR. LITSINGER: My crystal ball is not that good,
Commissioner. We're not involved in the marketing process here at
Page 266
January 25, 2005
the county. We act as the agent in the transactions and the severance
and the recording of easements.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, we were involved in the
process to try to determine where the support price for a TD R was
going to be about a year ago, and I believe that we picked the support
price of about $25,000.
MR. LITSINGER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And now I'm con -- now I'm
wondering where this -- the price has risen to.
MR. LITSINGER: The price that we legislated, essentially, that
you put in your land development code last year was based on the
incremental value of that transfer of development right of
approximately $23,000, and I believe Dr. Nicholas arrived at in his
analysis, and then we added transaction costs to arrive at a minimum
protective sale price of $25,000 per TDR.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand --
MR. LITSINGER: Clearly that's not enough.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I understand that. But we're -- so
are we still saying that we're only going to give $25,000 to one of
these TDRs?
MR. LITSINGER: No, sir. All we have done is identify in our
land development code that there must be a demonstration in the event
there is a sales, an arms length transaction -- when someone comes
forth to sever the TDR, that the sale price or consideration given was a
minimum of $25,000. That is not a maximum. That is a minimum.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So I assume what we're dealing
here with is that the landowner realizes that the price of land has
escalated, so, therefore, his TDR has gone up, and the problem is is
that the TDR has gone up to a point where the developer doesn't want
to buy that for that price; is that correct?
MR. LITSINGER: Not for one unit, yes, sir, I think that's a
correct analysis.
Page 267
January 25,2005
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So how are -- how's the person
going to -- the person that owns the land, how's he going to get his
money back? Because if we have a four to one stock split, I would
think that the value would go down.
MR. LIT SINGER: I would assert that if -- if we generate the
opportunity for the bonuses, then the price that would be extended to
these property owners in order to sever their rights would be more
generous on the part of the land developer in converting the number of
units to make a viable economic return on a proposed development
scenario in the receiving lands.
MR. WOODRUFF: Could I give you some data? Just asking.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Just a moment, Richard. I have
Commissioner Henning who's been waiting a long time to say
something.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this a private amendment?
And was this paid for by the private party?
MR. LITSINGER: Yes, Commissioner Henning. The $18,700
application price was paid for by the petitioner.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. I guess one of my
concerns of this is 10 staff members in meetings, but I'll address that
with the county manager later.
I've got to remind the board that every day in the urban area, that
we give density. Somebody asks for a PUD and we grant density.
They don't have to pay for it. The positive thing about this -- and I
was very skeptical up until recently -- is there's opportunities to reach
our goal, and our goal is, is to -- and this is what the governor told us
to do, is direct growth away from natural habitat.
And our first go-round it didn't work because people didn't --
didn't want to sell. The incentive is, if you have the three additional
ones, I feel that people are going to -- landowners out there are going
to get more money than they were originally offered.
And another benefit of it is, it's encouraging to create mitigation
Page 268
January 25, 2005
on these lands. So the government has an opportunity to benefit in
another way by maintaining these lands and getting mitigation credits
and keeping these lands in perpetuity.
I'm glad it was private amendment because if government was
involved in the ideas of this, I would be very objection (sic) not to
bring everybody at the table. Since it is a private amendment, I'm
very much in favor of it and I'm ready to make a motion to transmit to
DCA when the chairman is ready.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm ready.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion to transmit to
DCA, and I'll wait for Commissioner Coletta's comments of anything
that he wants to include into the motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And is there a second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Commissioner Coletta does want to make still another comment.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it's just confirming what I
believe is self-evident, is that our $25,000 floor that we established,
which at the time we thought was very generous, will now be
$100,000 if we went for four credits.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It could.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, it very well could be.
And a $100,000 for five acres still falls short. But some of the smaller
lots, it may carry some weight. It may. Who knows.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, you could buy five acres
in Golden Gate Estates and have wetlands or other issues on it for less
than that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, you might be able to, but
it would be very difficult finding a buildable lot on a road for
$100,000 for five acres. Everything I've seen so far anyways. But in
any case, I'm going to leave it at that.
Page 269
January 25, 2005
But I do want to add to the motion, or at least direction to staff,
that we have a workshop that takes place sometime after we receive
back the approval from the state, Department of Community Affairs,
and the transmittal, and that that workshop be held here or at the
Golden Gate Community Center, at some place to be able to
accommodate a large crowd, which we mayor may not get, and that
we send letters inviting everyone in the -- that holds record of land in
the -- in the sending areas, and send it out in two languages to take
care of those people that maybe speak Spanish, and at that meeting we
deal with all the different entities and we have everybody there.
We go through our minutes today to decipher some of the
concerns that I said earlier, which I don't have to repeat them all over
again, and be able to deal with them in an up-front manner with the
owners of the land.
And I don't think it's necessary to send this back to the task force.
I think this is something that we can do internally.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before I include that into my
motion -- and I think it's a good idea. What would -- the anticipated
cost of the mailing?
MR. LIT SINGER: We have about 1,600 people on there, on our
mailing list. We can draft a letter and --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So $1,600? A buck--
MR. LITSINGER: Approximately, less than that, probably.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to include that into
my motion, because I think that it would be great to inform the public
of the goal and what the benefit to the landowner is, or try to explain
it, and address any concerns that they have.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'll include that in second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And I -- I'll make one observation
before I call for a vote on this.
Is that as long as we try to discourage people from participating
Page 270
January 25, 2005
in the program, they're not going to participate in the program. As
long as there is the belief that the longer people hold out, the more we
are going to increase the price for them, nobody will participate. This
is speculation, and that's all it is. It is speculation.
And I believe that when you take TDRs and you're willing to pay
$25,000 for them and you can get $100,000 off of five acres of
property and still retain the five acres of property for your own
enjoyment, that's the best deal in the world. And I would love to have
some of that property where I could totally recover my cost of
acquisition and more and still retain the property for my enjoyment.
I think that is the most wonderful deal in the world, and we're
going to reach the point, if it doesn't work, where we're going to say,
that's it. That's the best we can do. If you don't want to sell, then don't
sell. You won't get any money, and the state will still control the land,
because that's where it started in the first place. The state told us to
stop the development in these areas, and that's what's going to happen.
So we need to start encouraging people to participate in a
reasonable program and providing enough financial incentive for them
to do so and to stop trying to speculate on what the ultimate price is
likely to be.
And with that, I'm going to call for --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I wonder if we could add one other
thing to the motion, if it's acceptable, and that is, that we do this for a
period of three years without coming back and addressing this,
increase -- in other words, going through another scenario of, people
realize that we mean business on this and that there's not going to be
another change that's going to be incremental in the advancement of
additional TDRs for -- we won't look at this for another three years.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think that has a lot of merit,
Commissioner.
Page 271
January 25, 2005
How about the motion-maker? How do you feel, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And Commissioner Fiala, your second?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yeah. I'm just thinking, what if
some kind of emergency or something, if it's not working again and
we feel that the -- what do you do in case of an emergency?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'll tell you, I think what Commissioner
Halas is saying, we make our best shot at this and we try to do the best
we can with making an attractive program. If it doesn't work, then it
doesn't work, okay? And I'm willing to let the state --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You're willing to bite the bullet.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm willing to bite the bullet and say,
we've done everything we can do for you to try to get value out of this
property. We didn't start this process. We were told to do it. And we
did what the state told us to do in a way that protects the interests of
the property owners to the best of our ability. There is nothing more
we can do --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: So I'll include it in my second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If it doesn't work, it doesn't work, and
we all go to court, and eminent domain will be exercised, I presume,
by the state, and everybody will be tied up for years and years in
court, and they won't be able to develop their property anyway.
So, you know, take your choice.
MS. CHUMBLER: And Commissioner Coyle, I was just going
to say that, you know, you are the Board of County Commissioners. I
think the policy, the statement that this is not going to be revisited
again for a period of time is a very good policy statement, but if
something totally unanticipated comes up that you consider an
emergency situation, you, as the Board of County Commissioners, can
alter that policy.
Page 272
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, we can do that. Okay. Then I'm
going to call the question. .
MR. LITSINGER: Mr. Chairman, clarification on the motion. If
we could include in the motion the inclusion of the modified language
on the maintenance and restoration bonus that has been changed since
the distribution of your notebooks that we distributed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In perpetuity is for how long?
MR. LITSINGER: In perpetuity is not language that's used. It
would identify relative to the necessary restorations and maintenance
associated with a particular property that all will be variable and
would be identified.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there a time limit?
MR. LITSINGER: A time limit would be identified in each
individual restoration and maintenance plan associated with the needs
of each property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All in favor, please signify by
saYIng aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And all opposed, by like sign.
Okay. It passes unanimously.
MR. WOODRUFF: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to our next
amendment, and that's petition number five, and it's CP-2004-5,
petition requesting an amendment to the future land use element and
future land use map to create a new Davis Boulevard/County Barn
Road mixed-use neighborhood subdistrict, to allow mixed residential
Page 273
January 25.2005 .
and commercial development similar to the residential mixed-use
neighborhood subdistrict for 22.8 acres located at the southeast COIner
of Davis Boulevard and County Barn Road in Section 8, Township 20
south, Range 26 east, South Naples Planning Con1ll1unity.
Sir, state your name for the record.
MR. MURRAY: I'm Don Murray. I'm with Coastal Engineering
Consultants. And I'd like to introduce my client, Mr. Berry
Goldmeyer, the owner of the property, and Tammy Lyday (phonetic),
our environmental consultant with -- from Earth Balance.
I'll keep this short. This is a pretty straightfof\vard request for the
Davis Boulevard/County Barn Road mixed-use subdistrict. What the
intent of this is trying to do is to incorporate mixed-use and traditional
neighborhood concepts as promoted by the county's community
character plan and also to limit the dependency upon the automobile.
There is a small commercial component in this of five acres of
the total 22.8 acres. The commercial component will be more or less
mixed residential, retail, and comn1ercial uses and offices -- office
uses within that commercial component. The project that will come
out of it will probably be through a PUD process.
The commercial component will be right here in this corner of
the property. The rest of it will mostly be the traditional neighborhood
design with grid streets, service roads. The parking will be in the rear
of the homes, probably a town home concept, maybe some
apartments.
The access to the property will be shared access to the south onto
County Barn Road and also from the north onto the Davis Boulevard.
There will be no direct access to any commercial component.
The emphasis, as I said before, will be towards pedestrian
orientation. The concept is to limit the development to a human scale.
There will be plazas, parks, lakes, community center. There will be
paths, hiking trails, hopefully, through some of the preserve areas that
are being acquired.
Page 274
January 25, 2005
There will be access to pedestrian ways that will connect the
commercial component as well as residential near the major
intersections and along County Barn. This gives access to the
adjoining developments. There are condos to the west. We have the
Glen Eagle development to the north. There's a school which wraps
around, it's Seagate school property, along the east and also to the
south.
And it's a good project, or a good, I should say subdistrict. It's
very similar to the traditional neighborhood design district that was
also amended to be now called the residential mixed-use
neighborhood subdistrict. All I can say about it is it's compatible with
the surrounding development, and we'd like your vote for it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is this mixed residential also?
MR. MURRAY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So you'll have affordable
housing and workforce housing?
MR. MURRAY: No. There's -- as far as -- there's no affordable
housing. When you said mixed, there will be apartments, town
homes, and that sort of --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's just a mixed-used
commercial --
MR. MURRAY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- residential. It's not mixed-use
residential then?
MR. MURRAY: Right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The -- I know there's concerns
from the school. Is -- as far as access from the school to this project.
Have you spoken to the school on that?
MR. MURRAY: There had been conversations with the school.
The area that there could be any access would also have to go through
the preservation area. The best parts of the property are actually along
Page 275
January 25. 2005
the perimeter, and there are some wetlands, and those will be
preserved. We have no problem with providing access, pedestrian
access or anything like that with the adjoining development as long as
it's feasible.
COlVIMISSIONER HENNING: So you really haven't had a
conversations with the school?
MR. MURRAY: Actually, there has been a number of
conversation, Mr. Goldmeyer.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is it they want to connect or
they don't want to connect? I guess that's my question.
MR. MURRAY: Did they want to?
MR. GOLDMEYER: No.
MR. MURRAY: They did not want to connect.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's a concern of mine, but
that sounds like a good proj ect, so I'm going to make a motion to
transmi t.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a second by
Commissioner Fiala.
Any questions? Comments by commissioners? Okay.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I thought we were heading
towards the direction of when we do something like this we were
going to try to have an affordable element to the whole part. I'm a
little bit lost in where we're going.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The mixed-use commercial
subdistrict doesn't have a -- doesn't require to have affordable housing
in it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, neither do PUDs, and \ve
still require that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, maybe we ought to amend
Page 276
January 25, 2005
the motion then.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm not going to vote for
it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, how many residential units
were you planning to build in here?
MR. MURRAY: We originally proposed a maximum, I believe,
of 283. That included about a -- well, it varies. They will be
distributed through the site, there will be town homes probably in this
area over here, and then in the commercial component, we were
asking for four-story type development where we could have
apartments above those units with commercial and retail below and
possibly some parking.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's 238 units on 22 acres?
MR. MURRAY: Two hundred and, I believe it's 83 is what we
originally proposed.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So you're talking about what, 12 or 14
units per acre?
MR. MURRAY: It's -- well, we had a base density of, I believe,
four units per acre, and we proposed up to, I think, 11, isn't that -- it's
been a long day.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So you're looking to go from four units
per acre to 11 units per acre?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It says here a minimum of71
residential units shall be developed in the subdistrict.
MR. MURRAY: In the -- the way staff has -- and I want to thank
them. They worked really hard to assist us in crafting this. The way
they broke down the subdistrict, they wanted it separated with
commercial component, residential component, and then the general
criteria.
Within the residential component, that would not include the
commercial component up here. There would be a minimum of 71.
And as we said, the way you calculate -- staff report, the way you
Page 277
January 25.2005
calculate the density, there would be some density that could be
calculated using the commercial as well as the residential. But I'm
going to let staff explain that. They can do it a little better.
MR. HEATH: For the record, Glenn Heath, \vith comprehensive
planning staff. First off I want to say that the -- as staff reviewed this,
we felt that the -- looking strictly at the density rating system, that the
number of units that could be derived on this project \vas somewhat
less than what the petitioner had submitted.
So we were asking as part of our modification that this be
according to the density rating system and not the numbers that are --
that the petitioner has asked for. It's -- it's less. It's actually much less
than what they're asking for, but we feel they would still get a return.
And the other thing I wanted to request or say is that we are
recommending the language as modified by staff and the planning
commission at their meeting and not the language that was originally
submitted by the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, how about summarizing for us the
total density that we're talking about.
MR. MURRAY: I want to correct myself. I may have said 283.
It's 238; 238 units.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Two thirty-eight.
MR. MURRAY: So let me correct myself. It's a long day.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's still about -- that's 11 units per
acre.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: It says here four d\velling units per
MR. MURRAY: That's the base density. The site is located
within the urban designated, urban residential subdistrict, and it's also
\vithin the density band of the activity center number six, which is at
Santa Barbara Boulevard.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, no.
MR. MURRAY: So it would qualify.
Page 278
'-
January 25,2005
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to modify my motion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We've got a couple of cOmn1ents,
but since you're the motion-maker, you said you wanted to --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I -- and I guess we need
to clarify. It's the base density of four units per acre, and then they
can ask for an additional density bonus?
MR. HEATH: They are conceivably subject to the density bonus
that comes from being close to the activity center at Santa Barbara and
Davis, and that would give them an additional three units per acre in
the residential portion of the proj ect if they were found to qualify for
that.
So they could have as mu~h as seven units per acre in the --
strictly in the residential and -- as a max, and then possibly as much as
four units for acre in the -- as part of the commercial project, because
they can have units there as well.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: But that's not a given. When
this comes back, is this a given that they can get that density?
MR. HEATH: No, no. That's up to you folks.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's the same thing as the density
band, they can ask for it, but it doesn't necessarily mean they're going
to receive it?
MR. HEATH: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. The -- I would hope that
we can get some affordable housing, workforce housing, in this. And
in fact, I'm going to make it -- incorporate it into my motion, if you're
coming back with that much density, you must have at least 10
percent affordable housing and 10 percent workforce housing,
included into -- and that would -- and that would be above -- any
density you ask above and beyond the base density for the urban area.
MR. MURRAY: For any density above the base?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Above the base, yes, that you
have 10 percent of affordable and 10 percent of workforce. And that's
Page 279
January 25,2005
really the concept of the mixed-use, is try to get the people that work
within the shops that live there.
MR. MURRAY: Yes, sir. It's providing, hopefully, enough
access to services and also to retail services and office job places that
SOllIe of the residents could work there, live there, not even leave.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Right, correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is this -- this change, is this essential for
the transmittal or is this guidance for when the petitioner comes back?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's -- I think I'm going to
incorporate it into the transmittal, anything above base density of four
units, that a requirement of 10 units (sic) of affordable and then 10
units (sic) of workforce be included in it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Ten, or 10 percent?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Ten percent.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ten percent, I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. And the seconder?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, I'm still -- I think -- you know,
a long time ago when they were talking inclusionary, which this, of
course, what you're doing here is inclusionary, we were talking 15
percent. I don't know that -- is 20 percent a fair amount?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, actually you're talking --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Ten percent of --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. But when you talk about
affordable housing, you need to get together with Cormac to
understand this.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I know. And--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The affordable housing, the
price points on workforce housing is quite high.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes, it is. And it can be
incorporated right into it. I just watched what Phil McCabe did and
there's a couple other guys on Bayshore doing the same thing, where
they take it and they start at $100,000, same building, same
Page 280
January 25, 2005
everything, same gated community, and they go up to 265, and they
just have that put in there beautifully. So everybody kind of fits in
together, so they have that all incorporated.
I was questioning the 20 percent. I wonder if 15 percent would
be good, but --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Fifteen percent of workforce
and 15 percent affordable housing?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Oh, no, no, no. I was going to say
10 and five. I'm just trying to think of what's fair.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's have an auction.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, what does Glen have to say?
MR. HEATH: I've just been advised by Ms. Student that -- or
she -- that there is a -- or she jogged my memory that if they are doing
affordable housing, then they're entitled to another density bonus, or
they can ask for another density bonus of another eight units per acre.
So we're getting back up there unless they agree to waive that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Hey, how about units per acre; is that
okay?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, that means it's got to be
48 stories high.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's all right, that's all right.
Commissioner Henning, are you finished? I think we've got your
modified motion. And how about you--
COMMISSIONER FIALA: I'm -- I'll include that in my second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm absolutely pleased. I have
nothing left to say.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You can't be nearly as pleased as I am.
How about Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Pull me off the list.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. You're off the list.
Page 281
January 25. 2005
Commissioner Henning, do you have anything else to say, or is
that it?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Do you agree to that?
MR. MURRAY: Yes, sir.
MR. GOLDMEYER: Yes, sir.
MR. MURRAY : Yes, we -- I'll restate that. They're asking for
anything, when we come back, above the four units per acre base
density to be 10 percent affordable and 10 percent workforce house.
MR. GOLDMEYER: Was it 15 percent or 20 percent?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, it was 10 and 10.
MR. GOLDMEYER: Can we address that when we come back?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: For the rezone?
MR. GOLDMEYER: I don't understand what that means.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You're going to have to get on the
microphone so we can get a record of your comments, please. And
please state your name.
MR. GOLDMEYER: I apologize. Barry Goldmeyer, 1000
Mariner Drive, Key Biscayne, Florida.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you.
MR. GOLDMEYER: And we have no objection to doing
affordable housing in general. I've met with Commissioner Coletta
and Commissioner Fiala in the past about affordable housing projects
that we've done. And, you know, we do high-end and we do
affordable.
But all I'm asking is that before the -- rather than transmitting it
up with the requirement, that we deal with that when it comes back for
approval so I have a chance to understand what I'ITI committing to
before I commit to it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And from a legal standpoint, David, can
the guidance provided by the commissioners today be enforced when
the petitioner comes back after this goes to the DCA?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, when you say enforced, that means can
Page 282
January 25,2005
you come back and say, this is what we intended at that time and we
still intend to --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes,
MR. WEIGEL: -- see to it to be realized, and I think that the
answer IS yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is that okay, Commissioner
Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, yeah, that's okay. But I
just want to tell you that above your base density, it's 143 units.
MR. GOLDMEYER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ten percent of that, or 14 units,
has to be affordable and 10 percent has to be workforce.
MR. GOLDMEYER: In general, because we also do affordable
housing, I have no objection to doing affordable housing. We do that.
You know, my question is, because we are going to be coming to you
in the future with at least one and maybe two 100 percent affordable
housing proj ects, the question would be, could I transfer that
obligation to one of my 100 percent affordable housing projects as
well ?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, that's more of the rezone
type question. The--
MR. GOLDMEYER: And we've had conversations with the
school whose -- who have requested that we provide units which are in
the price range, either rental-wise or sales-wise, that would be able to
-- enable them to hire teachers at beginning salaries. And, you know
COMMISSIONER FIALA: That's exactly the purpose of
workforce housing.
MR. GOLDMEYER: Exactly. And so our intention is there, but
I'm just reluctant to commit to something that I don't .know what I'm
committing to unless we have the chance to understand that better.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Shall I analyze it? I guess I need
Page 283
January 25~ 2005
some guidance from our legal department.
MR. WEIGEL: May I? Thank you.
Ms. Student may speak as well. But you have before you a
particular project for transmittal, and you can make your
detenninations in regard to this one, but when it turns into kind of a
contractual nature relating this one to another proj ect that hasn't come
forward yet, I have some concerns.
So I believe that you can express your desire putting the
petitioner on notice of what you'll be looking for when it comes back,
and it doesn't create a problem because the transmittal is the
transmittal and it still goes forward. But everyone knows essentially
what you're looking for when it comes back. And if there are
variations on that theme when it comes back on this proj ect, not some
other one, unnamed or yet to come down the pike, you can make those
changes if you find it appropriate to do so.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So your recommendation to us
is just to transmit as written and adopt it by the planning commission
MR. WEIGEL: No. I think --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- with a footnote
MR. WEIGEL: I think that your motion works fine --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
MR. WEIGEL: -- because it carries the freight of transmittal,
which is the main thing that this is here for, but at the same time, has
indicated an intention or a policy review specific to this -- specific to
this growth management plan amendment that will be implemented at
least to some extent when it comes back.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. All right.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I want to commend
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Fiala for bringing this
around to where we are right now. I think this is absolutely excellent.
Page 284
January 25,2005
because we really don't need any more developments. What we need
is something that's going to serve the public good.
It's got to have more justifications than just building something.
It's got to -- it's got to serve purposes, and I think this is the direction
we're going. And the element that you've got in there now, I think, is
absolutely perfect --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, let's vote on it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- I think they can afford it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. So we're going to transmit
that up with four units per acre; is that correct?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No. The motion on the floor is
to transmit --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- and must have 10 percent
affordable housing and 10 percent workforce housing above -- if
they're asking for more than four units per acre, they've got to provide
that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there a cap on what they're going
to ask for as far as density?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, Commissioner, it's just
like the issue of in the density band.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not something -- I mean, you
can have a bad day and say, well, I just don't feel like giving that to
you. I mean, it's not something --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: In other words, it's not an
entitlement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It's not an entitlement.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. All right. Just so long as we
understand it's not an entitlement.
Page 285
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I'm going to just make a little
comment.
Yeah, thank you, Commissioner Coletta, for saying that, except I
really needed your help when we were trying to approve a 1,350-unit
PUD out in your area, the Orangetree thing, and I just asked -- I
pleaded with you to please help us get some affording housing,
workforce housing in there, and I got a flat out no. So I just want to
mention that I'm glad to see you're onboard finally.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: For the record, we've got four
and a half million dollars out of concessions out of the poor man, and I
was willing to give some of that back to be able to build affordable
housing. There was just so much we could take.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We're going to vote on this item.
All in -- we'll close the public hearing.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And I think it is unanimous.
MR. GOLD MEYER: Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to the sixth petition,
which is number CPSP-2004-7. Petition requesting amendments to
the future land use element and future land use map and map series,
Golden Gate area master plan element, text and future land use map,
capital improvement element, and the potable water and sanitary
sewer subelements of the public facilities elements to include:
Number one, potable water and sanitary sewer subelement to
deleted the figure depicting the Mirasol PUD service area and all
references to it and the appropriate policies;
Number two, capital improvement element, A, correct and
Page 286
January 25,2005
modify applicable policy references to figures depicting the water and
sewer servIce areas;
Number three, Golden Gate area -- I'm doing your presentation
for you, by the way.
MR. WEEKS: I appreciate that.
MR. MUDD: Golden Gate area master plan --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is it necessary that we read all these?
MR. MUDD: No. We can just --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We've read them, we've got them in
front of us.
MR. MUDD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I think we'll just ask questions if we have
any.
Anybody have any questions?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta, ask a question.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is there anything in here that's
different than what we understood before as far as forcing people that
live in the rural areas or the Estates hook up to it? I'm talking about
existing homes that are out there.
MR. WEEKS: No, sir. There hasn't.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay.
MR. WEEKS: The changes to water and sewer --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: The only question I had. Other
than that, I thought everything was fine.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Any other questions?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We have -- we have two public speakers.
If you'd like to hold off on your motion until after we get the public
speakers, I would appreciate it.
MS. FILSON: Dick Spangler. Mr. Spangler?
Page 287
January 25,2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not here.
MS. FILSON: Ken Sutter?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Not here.
MS. FILSON: No speakers.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We'll close the public hearing.
Commission Henning has a motion.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: To approve.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: And I did the second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And a second.
Okay. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It is unanimous.
MR. WEEKS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the work on all of
these amendments. And just a reminder again, we'd appreciate it if
you leave your binders in your offices, and we'll pick them up
tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll leave mine here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Or right here.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Right here.
MR. WEEKS: We're not prepared to carry that volume. If you
could leave them in here, that's fine. We'll pick them up here.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We'd like to see you try though.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We're not prepared to carry them back to
our offices.
MR. WEEKS: We'll get them here. Thank you.
Page 288
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
Yeah. The next item is E.
Item #10E
UPDATE AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IN RESPONSE TO THE PUBLIC
PETITION PRESENTED AT THE DECEMBER 14,2004, BCC
MEETING BY MR. ROBERT FRANCE REGARDING AN
EXISTING CODE VIOLATION AND A POTENTIAL SOLUTION
INVOL VING A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AND PARCEL
TH
MR. MUDD: That should bring us to 10E. This item was
continued from the January 11 th, 2005, BCC meeting, staffupdate and
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners in response
to the public petition presented at the December 14th, 2004, BCC
meeting by Mr. Robert France regarding an existing code violation
and a potential solution involving a lot line adjustment and parcel
exchange at 3681 4th Avenue Northeast, and Tom Wides from the
Public Utilities division will present.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Now we have heard this before
and we understand what it's all about. Do we have a solution?
MR. WIDES: Yes, Commissioner, we do. I know it's been a
long day. Again, Tom Wides, for the record, Operations Director for
Public Utilities.
I know it's been a long day. I would ask for your forbearance for
a few minutes so we can get a few items on the record. We've had
kind of a marathon session over the last 24 hours trying to get this in
place, and I'd like to get it on the record. We will try. to be as brief as
possible.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, thank you, Tom.
Page 289
January 25~ 2005
MR. WIDES: Thank you. Okay. Just -- first off, this is a 200 by
200 foot property that the county owns, and there was an
encroachment by the France property, and those four Xs recognize a
barn that is partly on our county property. So what we tried to do is
work with the landowner to come up with another option to bring this
to resolution.
As you remember from his petition, he asked us to -- you've
asked us to go back and work with him, which we have done. And as
of right now, today, what we've worked out with him is we've actually
said the original lot line was running along here, which was running
right through the -- almost the middle of his barn.
We have now worked out with him at this point that he will grant
us this area here, running along this darker black line, which will, we
believe, will be satisfactory for us to take this area here, have an
easement or an access all the way up in through this area, and our well
placement locations would be still in here, which we believe will not
infringe upon our needs.
Now, we have not had a chance to verify with our water
consultants today, our water wells consultants, to make sure this
alignment would work.
We've asked Mr. France, that if, in fact, we can make this work,
that he would stipulate that we would have no further negotiations
today. Again, it is very much subject to this well alignment being a
workable alignment, and has already agreed in a previous board
meeting to, in fact, pay for the cost of the surveys, et cetera, which we
approximate at about $9,100 right now.
Now, there are also code violations outstanding that we've asked
the -- asked the code enforcement department to, in fact, take in front
of their board to see if they can be waived. That is one part that we're
trying to work with him on.
However, there's another $800 that cannot be waived. Those
were actual operating costs. He is aware of all these costs at this point
Page 290
January 25, 2005
in time.
I have asked Mr. France, and he is not here any longer, however,
his attorney is willing to stipulate that he agrees to these factors. And
if that -- if we can get that on record, that's all we want to do here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. But are you asking us for some
kind of a decision based upon facts that have not yet been verified?
MR. WIDES: All we're asking for at this point is we want to get
this on the record, and we just want your approval to continue to move
forward to a final resolution, which we will bring back to you one
more time. So it's, number one, get this on the board, get this on the
record, and then bring back final resolution to you at another board
meeting.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Can we get the attorney to get his
interpretation of this settlement on the record?
MR. ZAMPOGNA: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is
Carlos Zampogna, Woodward, Pires, Lombardo, I represent Mr.
France.
First off I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to work with
county staff to come up with a viable solution to our -- to Mr. France's
code enforcement problem and bring our property into compliance.
I apologize for the last-minute change to our proposal. But, yes,
we do understand that this is what we're going to do. This is the
county parcel here. The county will donate this area in here. We will
also grant -- Mr. France will also grant drainage and utility ingress ag
-- ingress and access to his property through this area in here, and we
will also, since Mr. France owns this area in here, we will also donate
this to the county.
We do accept the agreement as proposed today . We also would
like to also ask that if and when the county does build wells on this,
that they will comply with land development code with respect to
buffering issues, and also the recommendation to code enforcement
board that fees, which have been accruing since December 22nd,
Page 291
January 25,2005
2004, since we have been working with the county, perhaps a
recommendation could be made that they waive those fees. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Actually Commissioner Halas
beat me to the button.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He did?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll follow him.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Tom, a question I have is, I think
presently the City of Naples has a well out in this area; is that correct?
MR. WIDES: I believe there is a well out in that area, yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And why do you have concerns
that the property that's being deeded to us may not be suitable for
wells?
MR. WIDES: It's not a question of suitability. It's a -- simply a
question making sure that we have enough geographic still to get those
well in there without infringing of any other well placements. So we
don't see any problem, but we just want to make sure that we don't
walk away from this and find out that we don't have space either to
landscape around it or literally to have enough room for two well sites
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. We're not in direct
competition with the City of Naples and their source of water then, are
we, or not?
MR. WIDES: I don't believe we have any reason to believe that
we're in competition with them.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. First I want to compliment
staff for working with this for the interest of a citizen to try to bring
resolution to this.
And I'd like to make the motion that we direct staff to go forward
with this to come back with a final draft of what's going to work for
Page 292
January 25, 2005
everyone.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. There's a motion by
Commissioner Coletta for approval, second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN COYLE: All in favor, please signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's unanimous.
MR. WIDES: Commissioners, thank you for your patience.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. We go now to-
Item #10F
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION FOR
THE JOB CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM, THE
ADVANCED BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT
PROGRAM AND THE FEE PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
BY GUADALUPE CENTER, INCORPORATED AND PROVIDE
FOR THE WAIVER TO PAY THE UPFRONT FIFTY -PERCENT
OF THE ESTIMATED TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES AT
FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL, BUT
INSTEAD PAY ALL IMPACT FEES, IN FULL, AT ISSUANCE OF
THE BUILDING PERMIT THROUGH THE FEE PAYMENT
ASSISTANCE DEFERRAL AGREEMENT - APPROVED,
AND TO WORK ON PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
Page 293
January 25,2005
MR. MUDD: 10F, and that used to be 16A6 and that is a
recommendation to approve. the application for the Job Creation
Investment Program, the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure
Investment Program, and the Fee Payment Assistant Program by
Guadalupe Center, Inc., and provide for the waiver to pay the up-front
50 percent of the estimated transportation impact fees at final site
development plan approval, but instead, pay all impact fees in full at
the issuance of the building permit through the fee payment assistance
deferral agreement, and Mr. Joe Schmitt will present, but this was
brought from the consent agenda to the regular agenda at
Commissioner Henning's request.
MR. SCHMITT: Good evening, Commissioners. Again, for the
record, Joe Schmitt, administrator of community
development/environmental services division.
I won't reread what Jim just said, but this actually was heard by
the board on December 14th. It was debated at the board. It is a
non-profit organization.
You debated that extensively, but the guidance that was given to
the staffwas to come back and define the structure of the 22 jobs,
which we did in the executive summary. Average wage is $18,042.
And based on that guidance and based on what we put in the
executive summary, we completed the executive summary and
enclosed it.
I think there was -- we, as staff, probably did not get very clear
guidance in regards how to deal with these 50 -- well, the 501 C-3
organizations.
We did get instructions from Mr. Mudd to come back and
eventually amend the ordinance, the economic incentives ordinance,
to clarify that.
But in the meantime, what we did is we put this executive
summary together based on the guidance that we got from the board in
regards to clarifying simply what we received was the issue in regards
Page 294
January 25, 2005
to the average wages. .
With me is Lois Ashton from EDC, and my staff, Amy Patterson
and Denny Baker, to discuss any specifics in regards to the program,
or how you want us to deal with these.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning has a question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, the last time it was up, it
was a request for the broadband infrastructure, and it was denied 4-1.
It wasn't approved, and a lot of the discussion was, not- for-profits do
not pay property taxes.
And the whole emphasis of the program is, the taxpayers be paid
back by the property taxes, and in this case it would be the eRA also.
But again, this property doesn't pay property taxes, so there's no
increments there.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I believe that we're just
opening up a can of worms on 501 C-3s of a -- providing an incentive
basis on the basis that we thought that we were going to get paid back,
and --
MR. SCHMITT: If I could just clarify. And not to debate this,
but certainly it's the board's policy, the economic incentives when they
were brought to this board, we never even addressed, of course, the
501C-3 or the -- any of those type of programs.
The issue really is that there are 22 jobs being created. And I ask
the board not to overlook that fact that there are 22 jobs. Yes, it is a
nonprofit organization, but barring any guidance or any directive in
the current and existing ordinance, we're compelled to bring it to you,
and if you want to provide further guidance, we'll either consider that
-- we can consider that guidance, we can come back and amend our
economic incentives, with -- we're at your lead.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The job creation credit is a different
issue than what Commissioner Henning was referring to.
MR. SCHMITT: Okay.
Page 295
January 25,2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: He's talking about broadband and the fee
assistance program, fee payment assistance program that would not be
paid back out of property taxes because there gre no property taxes
being paid.
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And that's why we created the program,
so it would be self-sustaining, and that will not work in this particular
case.
I have no problem with dealing with the job credit because the
jobs are real, the salaries are real, the people are investing money in
the community as a result of the higher salaries, and they will have a
higher standard of living themselves, so that's a very, very real
contribution, and I can understand participation from the job
standpoint.
I'm not sure that I can support the broadband and the fee payment
assistance program grant, however, because that really is nothing more
than a subsidy coming straight out of the general fund.
So we have four people who are -- who have registered to speak,
correct?
MS. FILSON: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I would ask that if -- if you're -- is there
one spokesman for the group that can deal with this issue or __
MS. FILSON: I don't think they're all here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, they're not all here. Okay. Let's start
MS. FILSON: But I'll call their names. Stanley Boynton. He
was going to be followed by Tammie Nemecek, and I don't believe
she's here.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MS. FILSON: Lois Ashton. He's here?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: She is.
MS. ASHTON: I'm here.
Page 296
January 25, 2005
MS. FILSON: Oh, I'm. sorry, Lois. It's getting late. And
Melinda Riddle.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. All right. Please.
MR. BOYNTON: Thank you for the opportunity. My name is
Stan Boynton. I'm the president of the Guadalupe Center. It's a
pleasure to be here. I got here at nine o'clock in the morning to make
sure that I was here when you considered my measure. If I've learned
one thing today, it's the members of the county commission certainly
earn your salary. I congratulate you all. And I hope that I am the last
measure -- or we are the last measure on your agenda today.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: No, you're not the last one.
MR. BOYNTON: Well, you have put in your hours today, ladies
and gentlemen.
This measure that we're considering addresses the means to
strengthen the economy of eastern Collier County and an economy
that, to a large degree, is a nonprofit economy.
The Guadalupe Center oflmmokalee has an annual income of
$2.2 million this year, all of which, I might say, is privately raised.
It's not publicly funded in any degree other than a small subsidiary
that we receive in our child care center by the state. That's about 20
percent of the cost of the pre-school program. The rest of that money
we raise ourselves from individual donors.
On top of that, we are engaged in a fundraising effort for an
expansion of our program, which led us to this particular measure.
And the construction cost will be $5 million, which we are also raising
privately. And all of those funds will be invested in the community.
And as pointed out, this expansion will create specifically 22 new
jobs, but I'd like to point out to the members of the commission that in
our pre-school program, we have 107 children enrolled, we require all
the parents to be working parents or we make one exception, you can
be studying full time.
Because we can accommodate no more children and we have 100
Page 297
January 25, 2005
children's names on the waiting list, we're engaged in this expansion.
That means another 102 children will be able to attend a year from
now, which means, conceivably, that 204 more adults are working
because of the service that we're providing.
The real gain is not so much the 22 jobs that we create by
employing people, but it's the hundreds of people that are allowed to
work because of the childcare service, the pre-school services we
provide.
The proj ect meets the terms of eligibility of grant. I have told the
members of our staff -- we have 68 staff members. We have 18
trustees who come from Immokalee, Marco, Naples and Bonita
Springs and I have told the 214 -- it said stop. I'm done?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That said stop. No, you can finish up if
you'd like, just --
MR. BOYNTON: I only have a couple more points.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay.
MR. BOYNTON: -- that the county commission was supporting
us in this effort. It's an effort that we have engaged in as an
organization, and I'm wondering when I go back what do I tell them, if
this measure is denied, because this is a struggle for us. We feel we're
making a significant contribution to the community, to the economy of
Immokalee, which desperately needs it.
Last, the expansion fulfills the spirit of the law, strengthening the
economy of that region, and increasing the stability of the region,
stable jobs, both directly and indirectly, home ownership, better
students.
Commissioner Coletta will recall that you and I met last week at
a ground breaking ceremony for the Elogoral Place (phonetic) in
Immokalee. And there was a statement by a future homeowner by the
name of Barrita Jimez (phonetic), and she became very emotional in
her statement to you and the other members -- other people in
attendance, because it was the first time she was able to get a home.
Page 298
January 25, 2005
And that young lady works for the Guadalupe Center. That's
exactly what we're trying to achieve. We're trying to achieve good
employment, homeownership, a stable community, and we would like
to invite the commission to support us in that effort.
In summary, do you want to create jobs in Immokalee? I think
you do. We certainly do. Do you want to change the rules
retroactively? I don't think you do.
We applied for this grant, we were considered to be eligible for
these grants, and we have announced publicly in Immokalee that we
are receiving these grants. It will be embarrassing, to say the least,
that the county commission would decide not to support us in that
regard, so I ask for your support, ladies and gentlemen.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
MR. BOYNTON: Thank you very much.
MS. FILSON: Lois Ashton.
MS. ASHTON: Thank you. For the record, I'm Lois Ashton
with the Economic Development Council.
It's hard to follow Stan. That was pretty emotive. And I think
what he says is one of the reasons we should look very closely at how
we go forward with this particular application.
We do support their application for the incentives in the entirety
that it was presented.
There's a lot of reasons to consider their application just based on
the services that they provide. But in addition to all of those services
that they provide that wouldn't be available to the Immokalee residents
if they weren't there, in addition to that, we need to look at maybe just
the pure financial.
And if they have currently 30 jobs at an average wage of $24,000
and they're adding 22 more jobs at an additional wage, their total
economic impact is well over a million dollars just in salaries. If you
add and factor into that also the capital investment that they're making,
they are contributing financially and the county will benefit because of
Page 299
January 25, 2005
the people who are taking advantage of their services.
I found an interesting statistic today on the Internet. For every
dollar spent by a nonprofit organization, $2.89 of economic activity
statewide are generated. Now, that includes the type of services and
the type of facilities that the Guadalupe Center presents.
This was taken from Rollins College Nonprofit Philanthropic
Center. They did a complete study on the benefits of nonprofits and
what kind of contributions they make to a state or community. And
for every dollar, you get $2.89.
So I ask you to please consider that ratio.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you very much.
Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Melinda Riddle.
MS. RIDDLE: Good evening. I do have a lot of problems
following Stan, both because of his eloquence and also his height, so if
you'll bear with me here.
I'm coming to you today both as a member of the community,
having grown up in a community very similar to Immokalee, having
many, many years ago attended the schools in Immokalee, but
currently as a trustee of the board of trustees of the Guadalupe Center.
And from what I can see about this issue, there's a couple of
points. One being that the Guadalupe Center is not coming to you
asking for a donation or a contribution. We take care of our
fundraising separately; that's a separate issue.
Guadalupe Center has submitted its application based upon
guidelines that were prepared presumably with the board's policy and
direction in place. The guidelines that are in place did not disqualify
Guadalupe from the -- these incentives.
But most importantly, I think -- and I'm kind of echoing what
everybody else has said -- the economic impact, I think, you can look
at it one of two ways. You can say, if we're going to grant it to the
center, then we want this particular piece of property at some point to
Page 300
January 25, 2005
be able to show a contribution or a flow-back to the county. But that's
not the only way that money flows back to the county.
The people that are benefitting from this program spend their
money within the county, a stable community, particularly in
Immokalee, means that the residents are stable, buy homes, and they
invest their funds within the community.
The jobs that are created are not just the jobs at the center. The
actual expansion program has provided a tremendous economic
benefit to companies, contractors, and the like, in Southwest Florida.
So the economic impact and the benefit to the county is more
indirect, perhaps. And maybe you can't go back and say, well, we can
trace back where so much of this came back from property taxes, but
if you look at the base in Immokalee, you're going to find that that is
the area that probably has the least number of property owners,
individuals that are property owners, and I think that needs to change.
And I think all the economic outlooks indicate that that needs to
change in order for Immokalee to grow.
I think that based upon what you've heard here today, and my
perspective is -- certainly doesn't have the figures and the statistics,
but I think my perspective is, that if the rules were there and the
Guadalupe Center qualified, in order to say, well, they don't qualify
now means not a policy decision but actually a reversal of a decision
that this board has already made.
And if that's your choice -- and you're certainly able to do that,
then fine. But I think for the future, other applicants need to know if
the rules are going to change in the middle of the game. So thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Thank you. And I'm really sorry that
you had to wait so long to get your message to us here. We didn't do
this intentionally.
MR. BOYNTON: I'm not saying that, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And we -- and I'm sure all of us
appreciate the wonderful work you do in Immokalee.
Page 301
January 25, 2005
Now, do we have -- we have Commissioner Fiala who is next to
speak.
MR. SCHMITT: Mr. Chairman, if I could, just for a moment,
just to make sure to set the record straight, because Commissioner
Henning is, in fact, correct, there was a motion in -- at that meeting,
made a motion not to approve, and Commissioner Coyle, you
seconded that motion, and then you prefaced it by saying, is there
anything that would preclude them from coming back in a reasonable
period of time if they have additional information or new policy
guidance.
And after all the debates regarding the jobs and, of course, the
salaries for those jobs, that was our intent. But it did fail, the motion
did fail 4-1, so I just want to make sure, to clarify the record, and note
that Commissioner Henning is, in fact, correct and it did fail 4-1.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala now has
something to say.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Just a yes or no answer, please.
With these new jobs that are created, do they provide health care?
Just a yes or no. I don't want to drag it out.
MR. BOYNTON: The short answer is yes. The Guadalupe
Center has 68 employees. We provide health care. The organization
assumes the vast majority of the cost. In addition, we have a
retirement program for all our employees.
As a further benefit for our high school tutors, in addition to the
wage we pay them, we give them a $2,000 scholarship for every year
they work, and for any employee who wants to go to college, we pay
the tuition.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Thank you, that's great.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Am I correct that -- the
assumption that this is going to be a self-supporting system; in other
words, you would benefit from, over the years, of taxes?
Page 302
January 25, 2005
MR. SCHMITT: Yes, that's the way it was designed, that's
correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. So we never anticipated
an issue where a not-for-profit that doesn't pay property taxes would
apply for that?
MR. SCHMITT: The only place where they would qualify is
Immokalee. Nowhere else in the county would they qualify because--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even Immokalee --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Even Immokalee where,
understanding --
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- through the tax increments,
property taxes or whatever --
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So it's just something that wasn't
anticipated. And it's not -- the board is -- is supportive of
not- for-profits, not through tax dollars though.
MR. SCHMITT: And--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that we've said that. I
just -- I think you made a compelling argument that you do fit the
criteria and just the criteria's broken.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah. The -- and one other thing, that
the criteria does not set an entitlement.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: That's the reason that you come before
the board, for the board to make a decision. It's not an entitlement,
and we have to make those decisions based upon a number of factors.
But Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think Joe Schmitt has answered a
question. I didn't want to begin a precedence (sic) that all503Cs (sic)
were going to come in here and expect the same type of abatements,
Page 303
January 25, 2005
tax abatements, in regards to broadband communications.
And I think you clarified that what we were going to do here,
what we were trying to do is just because they are providing a
community service, and we want to make sure that this doesn't get
carried out beyond the Guadalupe Center or out of the Immokalee
area.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Second that. And I'd like to say it's
because you provide so many things to your employees, they get to
take care of themselves. It was not written in here anyplace that we
didn't accept a 5013-C, so I second that wholeheartedly.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And just so we understand, you're
approving -- you're recommending approval for the Job Creation
Investment Program credit and the Advanced Broadband
Infrastructure Investment Program and the Fee Payment Assistant
Program?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Then we have a motion on the
floor.
MS. FILSON: Who made the motion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'm sorry?
MS. FILSON: Who made the motion?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta made the motion
and Commissioner Fiala seconded the motion.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And those opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
Page 304
January 25, 2005
So it passes 3-2, with Commissioner Halas, Commissioner
Coletta, and Commissioner Fiala voting in the affirmative, and
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coyle voting against.
And I will tell you why I voted against. I would support the job
creation program without question, but anything that has to do with --
with property taxes, I think, is inappropriate. It places the burden right
squarely on the backs of the taxpayers because it is a subsidy by
taxpayers, and I do not think that's the intent of this program.
So with that, we're finished. Thank you very much.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioner Coy Ie, if I could ask, not based
on this one, but we expect another one, similar situation, I won't use
the name. If we could please get some guidance from the board on
this so we can come back and take care of this through some
appropriate amendment.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, my -- you just heard my guidance.
MR. SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: If you don't pay taxes, property taxes,
and it cannot be recouped from property tax payments, it should not be
granted --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ditto.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- because it is nothing but a public
subsidy. It is not an assistance program, it is not a deferral program.
It is a public subsidy.
So what you're asking the taxpayers to do -- in fact, what you're
doing to the taxpayers is that you're taking their money, you're giving
it to somebody without them having anything to say about it at all.
And we wouldn't do it with the Shelter for Abused Woman, we
wouldn't do it for anybody else, and -- but we've done it here, and I
think it's a big, big mistake.
MR. SCHMITT: I need to throw a wrench into the spokes here,
because we have a similar situation on the airport. We have an
organization moving in the airport that does not pay taxes. They pay --
Page 305
January 25,2005
they pay ad valorem on intangible taxes, but a program is designed to
incentivize the development of the trade port in Immokalee, and that's
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's a not-for-profit organization?
MR. BAKER: It's a for profit.
MR. SCHMITT: It's for profit.
MR. MUDD: It's for profit, but sir, it's on airport property, and
they pay -- they pay rent --
MR. SCHMITT: They pay rent.
MR. MUDD: -- but they don't pay taxes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But the rent is indirectly --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: No, we don't pay --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The rent pays for part of the taxes.
MR. BAKER: The property, because it's -- excuse me, Denny
Baker for the record. It's on airport property, sir, and the airport does
not pay property taxes, so there is no property taxes paid back to the
county on those new businesses going into the airport property.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think that's a real stretch.
That's far different from a not- for-profit.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think this is going a little too
far. We made the vote, we called it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the vote's over. They're asking for
guidance on what they do with this next one.
MR. BAKER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And so we're trying to come up with
some idea -- some way to give it to them. You want to have a separate
meeting and talk about that? I don't think we can hash those out here
tonight. In fact, I'm not inclined to.
MR. MUDD: No, sir. I think if you -- I think you gave us some
guidance the last time this came up to go in there and work on -- and
change -- and I gave Joe some guidance.
MR. SCHMITT: Yep.
Page 306
January 25,2005
MR. MUDD: -- at the last meeting, basically said, change the
ordinance and get it to the point in time that not- for-profits get taken
out. And I believe that's what I see everybody nodding on the dais
about. I believe they --
MR. SCHMITT: We will do that.
MR. MUDD: -- you approved the Guadalupe Center because it
was there and we hadn't got it changed. But we're going to change it,
and I think that will resolve the issue, and then we can talk about the
airport thing. Let's do that and have that as an agenda item during the
joint airport meeting that we have when they come with their budget--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good.
MR. MUDD: -- and we talk about that particular issue.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Maybe they should make some
payments in lieu of taxes.
MR. MUDD: Maybe they should be self-sufficient, but I won't
say anything.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yes. Okay. Good.
Let's move on to item number 12B.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: We don't have any public
comments?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: We better not have any public
comments.
MS. FILSON: He left.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Is there anybody else who wants to
makes a public comment here?
Item #12B
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO MAKE A BUSINESS DAMAGE OFFER TO SETTLE
A CLAIM FOR BUSINESS DAMAGES BY W AL-MART STORES,
Page 307
January 25, 2005
INC. D/B/A/SAM'S CLUB ASSOCIATED WITH THE
ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 135, 735A, AND 735B IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. W AL-MART
STORES, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 04-3632-CA (IMMOKALEE
ROAIl.ER..OlECT # (6042) - AEEROVED
MR. MUDD: 12B is a recommendation that the Board of
County Commissioners authorize the County Attorney's Office to
make a business damage offer to settle a claim for business damages
by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Sam's Club associated with the acquisition
of parcels 135, 735A, 735B, in a lawsuit styled Collier County versus
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et al, case number 04-3632-CA, and Heidi
Ashton will present, from the County Attorney's Office.
MS. ASHTON: Good evening, Commissioners. I don't think
I've ever said that before. It's always been good morning.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You haven't been here long enough.
MS. ASHTON: For the record, Heidi Ashton.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, if we wait a little while longer, it
will be morning.
MS. ASHTON: Okay. Well, if we're ordering pizza, that might
be okay.
This item is associated with a pending eminent domain action,
and in connection with the suit we did received a business damage
claim from Wal-Mart that's separate from the constitutional issue of
full compensation, and the amount of claim was $5.8 million.
The county has a certain time period then to respond to that offer,
and that's what our proposal is today, to offer $75,000. Ifwe don't
respond to the offer, then the attorney can potentially get hourly
attorney's fees ifhe is later successful in establishing a business
damages for his client.
What the $75,000 offer does is either they'll accept it and it will
go away, or they won't accept it, and if they're ultimately awarded
Page 308
January 25, 2005
business damages, then the attorney will receive the difference
between the $75,000 and whatever is awarded, if it exceeds that
amount.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. Thank you. I'm the one
that pulled it, and I'll tell you why. I feel trespassed against. It seems
nothing more than a big brother out there trying to beat us out of
$75,000, or whatever they can get.
We've gone out of our way to be good neighbors to Wal-Mart,
and now here we are. They're asking for something we've given no
one else. Think of all the intersection cuts or the cuts in the median
that we removed to be able to keep traffic moving, and no one came
forward for a settlement because they weren't Wal-Mart and they
didn't have the attorneys to be able to push it. I resent. I just -- I
wanted to get this in front of you for your opinion.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm also concerned about this
because of the fact that they're basically holding us up here, and I'd
like to know what their justification is.
I think you and I had a briefing in my office in regards to this,
and basically you said it was because -- that it would cause a decrease
in their fuel sales. And even though there's going to be adequate
ingress and egress from this property, I don't understand how they can
substantiate that they're going to have a loss in fuel sales. Maybe you
can enlighten me a little bit more.
MS. ASHTON: The basis of the claim, as I understand it, is
related to a median closure. Their claim is related to the access and a
circuitous route that they would have to take to access their site.
That's their position. I'm not commenting on the merit of the claim.
I can tell you at this point we found, in consultation with our
expert, no basis to support that claim. And their claim is not that
they're losing sales. Their claim is that their fuel station would have to
Page 309
January 25, 2005
shut down.
So we have not found facts at this point to support that claim;
however, the law will allow them to amend their business damage
claim to a different amount.
The way this works under the Florida statutes is that when we file
suit, we send a notice to the business owner that we're filing the suit,
and under the statute, they have 180 days to file their claim. If they
don't make a claim, then they're barred from making a business
damage claim in the future.
After that, we have a time period to respond to their claim by
way of an offer.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Do they understand why we closed
off this median? It was because -- that it's dangerous. Do they
understand that?
MS. ASHTON: I can't--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It wasn't done to deprive them of
sales. It was done because we had a safety affair (sic) there because of
the fact that there's no light there. They're too close to the
intersection. And, of course, we have continuing flow of traffic
because there's always the right-hand turn there off of Airport going
eastbound on Immokalee there, and it's advantageous that we protect
the citizens as they turn onto Immokalee Road instead of going all the
way across.
MS. ASHTON: Let me respond to your comment--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Before we get too far into this --
MS. ASHTON: Could I -- could I just make a quick comment
that might assist Commissioner Halas? Thank you.
We're expecting that they will amend their claim, and their claim
-- amended claim will be based on the fact that our cure to what
happens to their property after we construct the proj ect is to relocate
five parking spaces, and their position will be that the five parking
spaces cannot be relocated, then they will then value the five parking
Page 310
January 25, 2005
spaces. That's at a minimum of what I'm expecting them to do as far
as the business damage.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, the problem we have, then I'll go
to Commissioner Henning immediately, but we either defend our
rights or we do nothing at all. So the decision on this is relatively
simple. Either we do nothing at all or we defend our rights. You were
asking us to authorize you to defend our rights; is that correct?
MS. ASHTON: That could be one way to phrase it, yes.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
MS. ASHTON: I prefer that--
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Henning, you have a
question?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, I just didn't -- if the -- if
where we're going is further litigating this item, I would rather not say
too much on the record and just make a -- make a motion either up or
down, and let's go for it.
MS. ASHTON: If you prefer we could continue the item and I
can meet with each of you individually, but I also would prefer not to
put information on the record. This is an item that will very likely go
to jury trial.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And what you're asking us to do is just
authorize you to make a business damage offer to settle the claim --
MS. ASHTON: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: -- and prepare for any court action that
might be appropriate?
MS. ASHTON: Correct.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Is there a motion to do that? Is
anybody --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I make a motion for that.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Halas makes a
motion for approval.
Is there a second?
Page 3 11
January 25,2005
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Second by Commissioner Henning.
Any discussion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So in other words -- wait. What
we're authorizing staff to do is to go forward and offer up to $75,000?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: If they'll take it.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No questions. Just opposed to
it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Yeah, it's distasteful, but what do you
do? Okay.
I'm going to call the question.
All in favor, please signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: It's unanimous.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, it's not.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: You didn't say aye?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I did not.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Oh, you did not. I'm sorry. Then
Commissioner Coletta --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Coletta. The blonde one is
Fiala.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala--
Commissioner -- this guy --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are you getting all this down?
CHAIRMAN COYLE: This guy opposes, okay? Whatever his
name is, okay.
Do we have anything from constitutional officers? No? Airport
Authority, community development, nothing.
Page 312
January 25, 2005
Staff?
MR. MUDD: No public comments.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: And general communications.
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. What I -- I made a comment about--
when we talked about the airport just a second ago, and I want to
make sure I set that right in case it was overheard by the microphone
when I said it would be good to get the Airport Authority so they were
self-sufficient, and by getting renters, they get -- they get rent,
therefore, they have money coming in as revenue and they're not so
dependent on ad valorem taxes, and in away, that is a benefit to not
paying taxes so that we get them off of a subsidy role versus being
self-sufficient.
The only other item that I have is, we have a strategic planning
workshop scheduled for February 4th, and I've sent a memo down to
you just in case you've seen it or not. I'm just asking you to give me
your high three or your high three to five things that you would like to
get -- that are bothering you, for the future for the next five or so
years, and then I'll get all those things together, consolidated, and then
we'll talk about them during that strategic workshop and ferret out
which ones are the top ones, and we start -- we can start laying these
things on either as horizon committees or figure out how it's going to
go and play out so we can make some modifications to the strategic
plan.
Interesting to note though, and I want to make sure that you all
recognize it if you haven't gone back and looked, when you go back
and look, and you look at the horizon committees that you were on
and you look at the things about contracting that we set out to do
Page 313
January 25, 2005
almost three years ago, we pretty much have laid right on that line and
made sure that was locked in.
Look at the employees' grading sheets that they have, and they
are aligned with the strategic goals that the county has. And I would
say that we've made great strides toward that strategy, and I would just
like to make sure that we stay on that -- on that focus that you want us
to be on for the community.
Because I believe once everybody is focused on that particular --
those particular items, things get accomplished. And we stayed on
them, and we haven't played the flavor of the month, you know, the
Baskin Robbins thing where we're going to change it to vanilla, to
rocky road the next week. We've stayed -- we've stayed pretty much
constant on those particular items, and it's paid great dividends. So I
look forward to the board, and I also look forward to your input.
That's all I have, sir.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good. Thank you.
David, do you have anything?
MR. WEIGEL: I wouldn't dare, but thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Good, thank you.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Just one thing. Well,
actually two things. The question would be, did Wally Wodd on -- by
Davis Boulevard, or 951 down there, did they did open up that loop
road to relieve congestion?
And the second thing, I haven't pressed it as much on this agenda
as I have in the past, but each -- every other week there are items on
the agenda for the board to enter into agreement or contracts, except
for, those agreements or contracts are not in there.
So we're asking to enter into something we haven't read. And I
really have some condemnation (sic) about -- about those, not being
able to review items to be approved, and I just want to know if
anybody else has a problem with it, or should I take it someplace else?
Page 314
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Nope, I've got concerns like that,
too, Commissioner, especially when we talked about things a couple
years ago, and then it's not brought forth in the information of our
packages.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Anything else?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's it.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Commissioner Fiala?
COMMISSIONER FIALA: First of all, I want to remind people
that we have a town hall meeting in Golden Gate tomorrow.
Commissioner Henning's town hall meeting. It's at seven p.m. at the
Golden Gate Community Center, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Glad you reminded me.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: You'll have to be there.
And second thing is, we talked about a workshop to discuss the
no density issue, no density bonus on 951 or really on any constrained
roads, and I just wanted to remind you that we spoke of that earlier,
and I think that's something we need to address.
Lastly, Bill Barnett -- Mayor Barnett and I gave a speech the
other day on city/county relationships to the bar association, and
somebody in the audience asked, who's going to pay the bill, the bill
with regard to the overpass, and they wanted to know some -- you
know, what expenses would be involved in that.
And Bill said he -- from the podium, but he said, you know,
Donna and I've been friends a long time. I think if we just sat down
and -- we could work this out between us and save all the
entanglements from the legal profession.
And he says, I would like to try it. I said, so would 1. And so I
thought, well, you know, maybe I could just put that to you guys and
see if we couldn't, maybe just Bill and I sit down and work it out
rather than drag it through the courts and air it in the -- you know, and
corne up with a fast and--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it's a great idea.
Page 315
January 25, 2005
COMMISSIONER FIALA: -- easy solution. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: I'd buy it. I think it's a great idea.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not too particularly fond of
it because then that means that we owe them something, and I really
don't feel that we do. I mean, I guess it depends on the rest of the
commission, but that's --
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Well, it couldn't be approved without
coming back to the commission anyway.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. I'm not -- I don't think
there's any harm for you to talk to him off the record, but I can't
endorse it.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Don't forget, no matter what
happens, if we drag it out, you know, then we waste a lot of money.
It's like paying it anyway.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: You're a free agent. You don't
need our endorsement.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, no, I want your backing. I
don't want to be doing this without your backing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, I think you should proceed at
possibly -- in discussion, but I feel that the city also tried to put a stop
to the overpass, and I think that --
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Well, you know what I think, before
we even air that, I haven't even asked Mayor Barnett. You know, he
just mentioned it. I haven't gone to him at all, so I thought I'd ask you.
I'll go talk to him. And we're pretty amicable.
And the last -- oh, that is the last thing. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Okay. Good, good. Oh, and after the
town hall meeting tomorrow night, Commissioner Fiala is having a
reception at her home.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Not true.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: So everybody is invited.
COMMISSIONER FIALA: Paul, I'm not doing that.
Page 316
January 25, 2005
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, Commissioner Coletta's next.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, he got you first. Saving the
best for last.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. I've got to say that it was a
pleasure today being here in this commission meeting, and I think we
made some -- made some big progress here in Collier County for all
the citizens here, and I just want to say, it's a pleasure to work with all
you fellow commissioners and look forward to Tom Henning's town
hall meeting tomorrow night.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you, sir, and I am
looking forward to it also.
I've got to tell you something, I slipped up. I hope you can
forgive me. I was supposed to tell you around five o'clock that the
pizzas arrived. But since I'm on a low carbohydrate diet, I don't eat
pizza, so it just slipped my mind, but it's out there waiting for you.
CHAIRMAN COYLE: The last time I looked it was all gone and
they said you ate it.
I don't have anything, so I think we're adjourned. Let's go home.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Let's get out of here.
***** Commissioner Fiala moved, seconded by Commissioner Halas
and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted: *****
Item #16Al
AN INTERIM MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE NORTH
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES (NGGE) UNIT 53 PROPERTY
UNDER THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION
Page 31 7
January 25, 2005
Item #16A2
CARNIVAL PERMIT 2005-01: PETITION CARNY 2004-AR-7015;
GRANTING JOHN YONKOSKY, TREASURER, COLLIER
COUNTY FAIR AND EXPOSITION, INC., A PERMIT TO
CONDUCT A FAIR FROM FEBRUARY 4TH THROUGH
FEBRUARY 13TH, 2005 AT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FAIRGROUNDS ON IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846) NORTH
GOLDEN GATE ESTATES - WAIVING THE OCCUPATIONAL
Item #16A3
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-43 THRU 2005-68: LIEN
RESOLUTIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING CODE
ENFORCEMENT CASE NUMBERS: 2004100542/ALVAREZ,
JENNIFER, 20041 00530/ CAVATAIO, SALVATORE &
ANTOINETTE, 2004110012/CAFFA-MOBLEY ET AL,
PRISCILLA, 2004080055/REECE EST., ANNIE EARL,
2004100961/REECE EST., ANNIE EARL, 2004100345/BATON
ROUGE LLC, 2004100485/BARON, MIMON,
2004050647/BARON, MIMON, 2004071226/GLOVER, LIZZIE H.,
2004080595/STONESTREET, WILLIAM M,
2004070 10 l/WILKINSON-MEFFERT CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INC., 2004070376/MAC BUILDERS INC.,
2004070375/MAC BUILDERS INC., 2004060799/0NOFRE,
ROBERTO C., 2004070552/SEFFER, ERIK H. AND ASTRID V.,
2004090471/TSALACH INVESTMENTS, LLC.,
2004110013/VOLCY, EVENS AND MARIE C.,
2004030691/RIAMBAU, STEVE AND DASILVA, GILDETE A.,
2004090637/0SCEOLA, DOUGLAS M., 2004090638/0SCEOLA,
DOUGLAS M., 2004061226/MARTEL, CLAUDE,
Page 318
January 25,2005
2004090639/LAROSSA TR., ELIZABETH ANTON,
2004091102/WEYRAUCH, JAMES P. AND DIANE P.,
2004091100/NOLAN JR. TR., LEONARD F., AND NOLAN TR.,
MICHAEL S. AND MICHAEL N. REALTY TRUST,
2004050696/MORRIS, THOMAS AND 2004091116/MORIARTY,
Item #16A4
SATISFACTIONS OF LIEN FOR RESOLUTION NO'S: 2001-213
STYLED BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS.
ALFREDO L. AND ANNE C. RAMIREZ AND 2002-349 STYLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VS. STUART O.
KAYF
Item #16A5
THE APPLICATION BY GENAPOL FOR THE JOB CREATION
INVESTMENT PROGRAM, THE ADVANCED BROADBAND
INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROGRAM AND THE FEE
PAYMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM - AS DETAILED IN THE
Item #16A6 - Moved to Item #10F
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2005-69: OPPOSING PROPOSED SENATE BILL
0620, AND ANY SIMILAR CHANGES TO FLORIDA
STATUTES, THAT WILL DIMINISH AUTHORITY OF
FLORIDA'S LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REGULATE
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES EXCEPT TO THE
Page 319
January 25,2005
EXTENT ACTUALLY NECESSARY TO FACILITATE 911/E911
SERYICRS
Item #16A8
ONE (1) IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT REQUESTED BY
MORTGAGE MAX, INCORPORATED, TOTALING $34,566.60,
DUE TO BUILDING PERMIT REVISION AND
CORRESPONDING REDUCTION IN SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AT
Item #16A9
RESOLUTION 2005-70: SUPPORTING GENAPOL AS A
QUALIFIED APPLICANT IN THE QUALIFIED TARGET
INDUSTRY (QTI) TAX REFUND PROGRAM AND PROVIDING
FOR AN APPROPRIATION OF $96,000.00 AS A LOCAL
PARTICIPATION MATCH, PURSUANT TO SECTION 288.106,
FLORIDA STATUTES, PAID IN INCREMENTS ESTIMATED TO
BEGIN IN FY2007-FY2012- AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SllMMARY
Item #16A10
RESOLUTION 2005-71: SUPPORTING ADVOCATE AIRCRAFT
TAXATION COMPANY AS A QUALIFIED APPLICANT IN THE
QUALIFIED TARGET INDUSTRY (QTI) TAX REFUND
PROGRAM AND PROVIDING FOR AN APPROPRIATION OF
$60,000.00 AS A LOCAL PARTICIPATION MATCH,
PURSUANT TO SECTION 288.106, FLORIDA STATUTES, PAID
Page 320
January 25, 2005
IN INCREMENTS ESTIMATED TO BEGIN IN FY2006-FY2008-
Item #16B1
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING PRIOR YEAR
REVENUE FOR FUNDS RECOVERED FROM VEHICLE
ACCIDENTS WHERE COUNTY TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND
Item #16B2
THE FY 2005 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE - AS
Item # 16B3
RESOLUTION 2005-72: AUTHORIZING THE
TRANSPORTATION ADMINISTRATOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO
EXECUTE A FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
SECTION 5310 GRANT APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE
DOCUMENTS, AND TO ACCEPT, ON BEHALF OF THE
COUNTY, ANY SUCH GRANT AWARDED - AS DETAILED IN
Item #16B4
RESOLUTION 2005-73: A LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM (LAP)
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) FOR SIDEWALK
CONSTRUCTION ALONG COUNTY ROAD 29 IN
Page 321
January 25, 2005
EVERGLADES CITY- AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item #16B5
AWARD OF BID #04-3595R- THE ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
"CLEARING, GRUBBING, AND TREE TRIMMING REMOVAL
SERVICES" FOR THE APPROXIMATE ANNUAL AMOUNT OF
$50,000.00- AWARDED TO CORE SERVICES AS PRIMARY
VENDOR, AND SOUTHERN SERVICES AS SECONDARY
YENDOR
Item #16B6
AWARD OF BID #05-3633- THE ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR
"REWORK OF SLOPES AND ROADSIDE DITCHES" FOR THE
APPROXIMATE ANNUAL AMOUNT OF $50,000.00-
AWARDED TO BETTER ROADS, INC. AS PRIMARY VENDOR
AND FLORIDA STATE UNDERGROUND AS SECONDARY
YENDOR
Item #16B7
WAIVING THE FORMAL BID PROCESS AND A CONTRACT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND TEMPLE,
INCORPORATED FOR SERVICES RELATED TO THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A SPLIT CYCLE OFFSET
OPTIMIZATION TECHNIQUE (SCOOT) ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC
SYSTEM ON THE PINE RIDGE ROAD CORRIDOR BETWEEN
GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD AND LOGAN BOULEVARD AT A
COST NOT TO EXCEED $671,964.00, PROJECT #601724 - AS
Page 322
January 25, 2005
Item #16B8
A SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
LOCAL GOVERNMENT GRANT AGREEMENT NO. OT050869
IN THE AMOUNT OF $170,000.00 FOR PARTIAL FUNDING OF
THE 2005 AUSTRALIAN PINE TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM-
Item #16B9
RESOLUTION 2005-74: THE TRANSPORTATION
ADMINISTRATOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO APPLY FOR A
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION SECTION 5311
GRANT APPLICATION AND APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS,
AND TO ACCEPT, ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY, ANY SUCH
GRANT AWARDED - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SIlMMARY
Item #16B10
RESOLUTION 2005-75: A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM
AGREEMENT FOR THE BEAUTIFICATION ENHANCEMENTS
TO ST. ANDREWS BOULEVARD FROM US 41 TO PEBBLE
BEACH BOULEVARD AND TO ADVANCE THE FUNDS FROM
THE GENERAL MSTD FUND (111)- REQUESTED BY THE
LEL Y GOLF ESTATES MSTU TO BE PAID BACK UPON
REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE FDOT- AS DETAILED IN THE
Page 323
January 25, 2005
Item #16B 11
RESOLUTION 2005-76: REQUIRED PURSUANT TO SECTION
125.37, FLORIDA STATUTES, FOR THE EXCHANGE OF REAL
PROPERTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE EXPANSION OF
IMMOKALEE ROAD FROM 4 LANES TO 6 LANES BETWEEN
US-41 AND 1-75, FISCAL IMPACT NOT TO EXCEED $100.00,
PROJECT #66042 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item #16C1
AWARD BID #05-3762 TO ENCORE CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT THE SODIUM HYDROCHLORITE
TANK AND PIPING REPAIRS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $72,500.00,
AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR THE NORTH COUNTY WATER RECLAMATION
FACILITY BLEACH PIPING REPLACEMENT PROJECT,
PROJECT #73957- AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item # 16C2
AWARD BID #04-3713, ANNUAL CONTRACT FOR PUMP AND
MOTOR REPAIR AND PURCHASE FOR COUNTYWIDE
MAINTENANCE OF EQUIPMENT TO VARIOUS COMPANIES
IN THE ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $300,000.00 - AS DETAILED
Item #16C3 - Continued to the February 8, 2005 BCC Meeting-
APPROVED
Page 324
January 25, 2005
RESCIND AWARD OF BID #02-3382 TO R & D SOIL
Item #16C4
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND FOR THE
COUNTY TO CONTINUE PROVIDING TRASH COLLECTION
SERVICES IN THE CITY- AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item #16C5
RESOLUTION 2005-77: FOR THE EXCHANGE OF 4,623
SQUARE FEET OF THE PELICAN BAY UTILITY SITE FOR
9,246 SQUARE FEET OF THE CLUB PELICAN BAY, INC.,
GOLF COURSE PROPERTY, AT A TOTAL COST NOT TO
EXCEED $1,150.00 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item #16D1
SUBMITTAL OF AN EMERGENCY PREVENTION AND
READINESS OUTREACH GRANT APPLICATION TO
VOLUNTEER FLORIDA FOR A RESPONSIBLE PET
OWNERSHIP AND DISASTER PREPAREDNESS PROJECT FOR
Item #16D2
A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH VGC, LLC AND A TDC
CATEGORY "A" SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT APPLICATION IN
Page 325
January 25,2005
THE AMOUNT OF $16,500.00 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
VANDERBILT BEACH ACCESS #1, TO MAXIMIZE PUBLIC
BEACH ACCESS - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item #16D3
A BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING $13,166.68 IN
REVENUE FROM PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF ACCESS
DINGHIES FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY SAILING CENTER-
EXPANDING THE ACCESSIBLE SAILING PROGRAM AT
Item #16D4
AN AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE EXISTING FUNDING OF
$50,000.00 FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES ASSOCIATED
WITH WECARE, INC.- FOR DEVELOPING THE COLLIER
PHYSICIAN LED ACCESS NETWORK FOR THE PERIOD OF
JANUARY 25, 2005 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2005- AS
Item #16E1
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD-APPROVED
CONTRACTS FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004
THROUGH DECEMBER 23,2004 - AS DETAILED IN THE
Item #16F1
Page 326
January 25, 2005
A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,525.00 FOR
ffi.Q.IECT #90 ~::; ()
Item # 16F2
TWO WORK ORDER AMENDMENTS UNDER CONTRACT #01-
3271, FIXED TERM PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING
SERVICES FOR COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS,
WITH HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS FOR THE
HIDEAWAY BEACH RENOURISHMENT PROJECT #90502, IN
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $28,500.00 - AS DETAILED IN THE
Item #16H1
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
FIALA TO ATTEND THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND & THE
MARCO ISLAND AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S 40TH
ANNIVERSARY OF MODERN MARCO ISLAND DINNER
HELD ON JANUARY 28,2005 AT THE MARCO ISLAND
MARRIOTT RESORT, GOLF CLUB & SPA; $100.00 TO BE PAID
,
Item #16H2
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
FIALA HAVING ATTENDED THE MARCO ISLAND AREA
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S ALOHA LUAU HELD ON
JANUARY 8, 2005 AT THE HIDEAWAY BEACH CLUB; $55.00
TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER FIALA'S TRAVEL
B.llIlliET
Page 327
January 25, 2005
Item # 16H3
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
FIALA HAVING ATTENDED THE MARCO ISLAND CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE'S GOING AWAY LUNCHEON FOR GREG
NILES, HELD ON JANUARY 19,2005, AT THE ISLAND
COUNTRY CLUB ON MARCO ISLAND; $25.00 TO BE PAID
,
Item #16H4
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
HENNING HAVING ATTENDED THE GREATER NAPLES
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S "WAKE UP NAPLES" EVENT,
HELD ON JANUARY 19,2005, AT THE HILTON NAPLES &
TOWERS; THE REGISTRATION OF $17.00 TO BE PAID FROM
,
Item #16H5
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
COLETTA HAVING ATTENDED THE EAST NAPLES CIVIC
ASSOCIATION'S ANNUAL BANQUET CELEBRATION
DINNER HELD ON JANUARY 17,2005, AT NAPLES LAKES
COUNTRY CLUB; $35.00 TO BE PAID FROM COMMISSIONER
COLEIT A'S TR A VELBllD.GEJ
Item #16H6
PAYMENT FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR COMMISSIONER
HENNING TO ATTEND THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA'S 8TH ANNUAL WINTER INSTITUTE
Page 328
.,"""""__.._._""".".'".,T.....""___..___...__~'~.-
January 25,2005
ON FEBRUARY 3RD AT THE NAPLES HILTON & TOWERS;
$25.00 REGISTRATION FEE TO BE PAID FROM
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED AND/OR
REFERRED:
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 329
"_._,_..__..___~"".,,,,"..,,._",_._,,,__,___~~__~~' .,..."._....'.'T.~,....".,_,_"_"'_~".,,',,.,.,....w__,~_'~'~~._..~--
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 25, 2005
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. Clerk of Courts: Submitted for public record, pursuant to Florida Statutes,
Chapter 136.06(1), the disbursements for the Board of County Commissioners for
the period:
1. Disbursements for November 6, 2004 through November 12, 2004.
2. Disbursements for November 13,2004 through November 19,2004.
3. Disbursements for November 20,2004 through November 26, 2004.
4. Disbursements for November 27,2004 through December 3,2004.
5. Disbursements for December 4.2004 through December 10,2004.
6. Disbursements for December 1 L 2004 through December 17,2004.
7. Disbursements for December 18,2004 through December 24,2004.
8. Disbursements for December 25, 2004 through December 31, 2004.
FOR BOARD ACTION:
B. Minutes:
1. Environmental Advisory Council - Agenda for January 5, 2005; Minutes
of June 2, 1999; Minutes of December 1, 2004; January 5, 2005 - Final
Plat & Construction Plans; and Planned Unit Development PUDZ-2004-
AR-5611.
2. Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board - Minutes of September
30,2004; Minutes of October 28,2004, and November 18,2004.
3. Collier County Airport Authority - Minutes of December 15,2004.
4. Bavshore Beautification M.S.T.U. - Minutes of December 8,2004.
5. Development Services Advisory Committee - Minutes of December 1,
2004.
a) Budget & Operations Sub-Committee - Minutes of December 8,
2004.
H:DatafFormat
6. Collier County Planning Commission -Agenda for January 6,2005;
Minutes of the December 2, 2004 Meeting.
7. Collier County Citizens Corps Advisory Committee - Agenda and
Minutes for: August 25,2004; September 15,2004; October 20, 2004;
November 17,2004; and December 13,2004.
8. Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee - Agenda for
January 10,2005; Minutes of December 13,2004; Form B - Voting
Conflict for Marco Espinar ; Ellen Goetz; and Kathy Prosser.
9. Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage M.S.T.U. - Agenda for January 12,
2005; Minutes of December 8, 2004.
10. Collier County Library Advisory Board - Agenda for December 8, 2004;
Minutes of October 27, 2004.
11. Pelican Bay Services Divison - Agenda for January 5, 2005; Minutes of
December 1, 2004. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures ending
December 23,2004.
a) Budget Sub-Committee Minutes for November 23,2004
12. Productivity Committee Meeting - Minutes of November 17,2004.
H:DatafF ormat
January 25, 2005
Item #16J1
SIGNATORY APPROVAL LETTER FOR THE NINTH YEAR
STATE CRIMINAL ALIEN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (SCAAP)
GR.ANLEl.ThIDS
Item # 16J2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO SERVE AS THE
LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF GOVERNMENT IN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT'S
EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL STATE AND LOCAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE FORMULA GRANT, APPROVE
THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE GRANT APPLICATION, AUTHORIZE
ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT AWARD, AND APPROVE THE
ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS - AS DETAILED IN
Item #16J3
DETERMINATION THAT THE PURCHASES OF GOODS AND
SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE DETAILED REPORT OF
OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS OPENED FROM DECEMBER 25,
2004 THROUGH JANUARY 7, 2005 SERVE A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF
COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY SAID PURCHASES, A COpy OF
THE DETAILED REPORT IS ON DISPLAY IN THE COUNTY
MANAGER'S OFFICE, COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
CENTER, 2ND FLOOR, W. HARMON TURNER BUILDING,
NAPLES, FL .
Item #16K1
Page 330
January 25, 2005
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT RELATIVE TO THE
ACQUISITION OF PARCEL 132 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED
COLLIER COUNTY V. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF NAPLES,
ET AL., CASE NO. 04-3587-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT
Item #16K2 - Moved to Item #12B
Item # 16K3
A MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND A
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT TO BE DRAFTED
INCORPORATING THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS
THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO
THE ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 128 AND 728 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. TERRY LICHLITER,
ET AL., CASE NO. 03-2273-CA (GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
PROJECT #60027) - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARy
Item #16K4
A MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND A
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT TO BE DRAFTED
INCORPORATING THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS
THE MEDIATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO
THE ACQUISITION OF PARCELS 117 AND 717 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V. JACK E. GREEN, ET
AL., CASE NO. 03-2227-CA (GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
PROJECT #60027) - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SllMMARY
Page 331
January 25,2005
Item #16K5
SETTLEMENT PAYMENT OF $750.00 BY COLLIER COUNTY
IN THE LAWSUIT ENTITLED: BRANDI L. W ALKOWIAK-
KING VS. COLLIER COUNTY, ORIGINALLY FILED IN THE
TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR COLLIER
Item #17 A
RESOLUTION 2005-78: PETITION A VPLAT2003-AR4686 TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY'S AND
THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE 20 FOOT
WIDE DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED ALONG THE REAR
OF LOT 86, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF "PORT OF THE
ISLANDS (THE CAYS) PHASE II" AS RECORDED IN PLAT
BOOK 21, PAGES 1 THROUGH 4, PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, LOCATED IN SECTION 9,
TO~~2S0~,2RRAST
Item # 1 7B
ORDINANCE 2005-02: SE-04-AR-6485 AMENDING
ORDINANCE 2002-53, THE MCINTOSH PROFESSIONAL
OFFICE COMPLEX TO CORRECT A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN
THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR PROPERTY THAT IS
LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GOODLETTE-
FRANK ROAD (C.R. 851) AND 13TH AVENUE NORTH, IN
SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
Item #17C
Page 332
January 25,2005
RESOLUTION 2005-79: PUDEX-2004-AR-6694 BA YVIEW
VILLAS, LLC, REPRESENTED BY DWIGHT NADEAU, OF
RWA, INC., REQUESTING A TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONING GRANTED
BY ORDINANCE NO. 2000-05, PURSUANT TO LDC SECTION
10.02.13.D FOR THE NORTH PORT BAY PUD. THE PROPERTY,
CONSISTING OF 46.33 ACRES, IS LOCATED NORTH OF U.S. 41
(TAMIAMI TRAIL), EAST OF THE FAHKA UNION CANAL, IN
SECTIONS 4 & 9, TOWNSHIP 52 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST,
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2005-80: PUDEX-2004-AR-6630 AMY TURNER,
TAMMY TURNER KIPP AND BRT COASTAL INVESTMENTS,
PROPERTY OWNERS, REPRESENTED BY WAYNE ARNOLD,
OF Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES P.A., REQUESTING
A TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE VANDERBILT TRUST 1989
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), PURSUANT TO LDC
SECTION 10.02.13, FORA 7.84+ ACRE TRACT LOCATED ON
V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD, APPROXIMATELY ~ MILE
EAST OF LIVINGSTON ROAD, IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 8: 16 p.m.
Page 333
January 25, 2005
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
'1uLw~
FRED W. COYLE, C irman
A TT~/~'~~ . t~~ ~',
DWIG;f.ITE/ijROCK, CLERK
~im~t..;~+ .0.(.
~;" Ati1Mt'..:dhlthMn"S
';'4. S1~..piJJ.
/)'/. . ". .' .-, ,"'~\.:.' .,
These Iri.htutes appro~d by the Board on d.....a--J- dt:f:fS , as
presented .../ or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS.
Page 334