The URL can be used to link to this page

Backup Documents 04/23/2013 Item #16I 1 161 1A BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE April 23, 2013 1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Miscellaneous Correspondence: 1) Collier Mosquito Control District: 2013 Board Meeting Schedule 1.28.13 2) Verona Walk Community Development District: FY 13 Meeting Schedule 1.3.13 3) Larry Ray Tax Collector: Notice to Dept. of Revenue 1.8.13 4) Port of the Islands Community Improvement District: Meeting agenda and minutes 10.19.12; 1.18.13 5) NDN Ad Wildwood Estates: 1.10.13 6) Commissioner Fiala Town Hall Meeting Minutes: 2.21.13; 2.27.13 7) Cedar Hammock Community Development District: Meeting agenda and minutes 9.10.12; 10.15.12; 11.12.12 16L Q lAi, ,„, ., ..„ ,..0„, l ,,, �.., Collier Mosq ' o`coritfol aim ict �---:--- 600 North Roa Naves,*3008 41 4 r n�� Administration: (239)436-1 (2111 Hangar: (239)436-1008 23 4360107(fwr) coa.r A/osgWro cono-a oama www. IiitigtosgQ .o�q�;. FEBO to i 3 v 201 3 Board Meeting Schedule 0 0. OA. ,� District Board o BY: Collier Mosquito Control s of Commissioners ell Meetings will be held at District Headquarters, 600 North Road,Naples, FL. Day o f Date Description Time Week Tuesday January 22 Regular Board Meeting 10:00 a.m. Tuesday January 22 Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting ** Tuesday February 12 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday March 19 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday April 16 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday April 16 Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting ** Tuesday May 21 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday June 18 Regular Board Meeting 10:00 a.m. Tuesday July 2 Budget Meeting 10:00 a.m. Thursday July 11 Regular Board Meeting 10:00 a.m. Thursday July 11 Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting ** Tuesday August 13 Regular Board Meeting 10:00 a.m. Tuesday September 10 Tentative-- ist Public Hearing 5:01 p.m. Tuesday September 24 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday September 24 Tentative--2nd Public Hearing 5:01 p.m. Tuesday October 22 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday October 22 Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting ** Thursday November 14 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. Tuesday December 17 Regular Board Meeting 2:3o p.m. **Immediately following the conclusion of the regularly scheduled Board Meeting Adopted Thursday,January 22, 2013 Fiala V ;% /)> C----armer, '�_Hiller Devi H.F Chair Henning -1” Coyle ✓' ,-ealertta T Created 11/15/12 EKG 1'4 cync-e_ - ` _ Board of Commissioners: Executive Director: Spray Schedule: (239)436-1010 Fjank Van Essen,Ph.D. David H.Farmer,Chair L Immokalee Substation: Jacquelyn D.Fresenlus,Secretary 165 Airpork Blvd,Bldg A-IX Robert D.Geroy,Treasurer �-+ _— Immokalee,FL 34142 Item i�:`l"� �4-. �� , (239)867-3200 Linda T.McDaniel John F.Johnson Copies to: 161 1 Al IMaRR7;311 VERONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT JAN 0 3 ERONA WALK 2012 ,/ c/o Special District t Services, Inc.In 2501 Burns Road, Suite A iY: .„........ °” 2012 DEC 20 PM 3: 09 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410 (561) 630-4922 CLERK OF COURTS Fax: (561) 630-4923 Y IV C. September 28, 2012 cr' -., ,t\ C.5 ,.-ti ;.3 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL- c.' ,--). • �� r� _ RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED ` c., -.20\ Ta Clerk of the Circuit Court Dwight E. Brock _ Collier County Courthouse 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Building L, 6th Floor Naples, Florida 34112 Re: Verona Walk Community Development District To Whom It May Concern: Pursuant to Florida law, enclosed please find the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 (October 1, 2012 - September 30, 2013) Regular Meeting Schedule for the Verona Walk Community Development District, as published in the Naples Daily News on September 24, 2012. If you have any questions and/or comments, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES,INC. 1/ Fiala l Laura J. Ar : Hiller Henning 'T T}" Coyle -- Enclosure / - Misc. Corres: Date: "i` -2»` k1e. Item#:1L \%A2. Copies to: 161 1AZ VERONA WALK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR 2012/2013 REGULAR MEETING SCHEDULE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of Supervisors of the Verona Walk Community Development District will hold Regular Meetings at 10:00 a.m. in the Town Center at Verona Walk located at 8090 Sorrento Lane, Naples, Florida 34114, on the following date: October 12,2012 November 9, 2012 December 14, 2012 January 11,2013 February 8, 2013 March 8, 2013 April 12,2013 May 10, 2013 June 14, 2013 July 12, 2013 August 9,2013 September 13, 2013 The purpose of the meetings is to conduct any business coming before the Board. Meetings are open to the public and will be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Florida law. Copies of the Agendas for any of the meetings may be obtained by contacting the District Manager at (561) 630-4922 and/or toll free at 1-877-737-4922 five (5)days prior to the date of the particular meeting. From time to time one or more Supervisors may participate by telephone; therefore, at the location of these meetings there will be a speaker telephone present so that interested persons can attend the meetings at the above location and be fully informed of the discussions taking place either in person or by telephone communication. Said meetings may be continued as found necessary to a date and time certain as stated on the record. If any person decides to appeal any decision made with respect to any matter considered at these meetings, such person will need a record of the proceedings and such person may need to insure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made at his or her own expense and which record includes the testimony and evidence on which the appeal is based. In accordance with the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special accommodations or an interpreter to participate at any of these meetings should contact the District Manager at (561) 630-4922 and/or toll free at 1-877-737-4922 at least seven (7) days prior to the date of the particular meeting. VERONA WALK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT PUBLISH: NAPLES DAILY NEWS 09/24/12 i61 1A3 jrcarumErri C 0 PY ., i Si JAN 072012jj Adairitf q, Rae, C.EC. Collier County Tax Collector C © 7 p January 8, 2013 r c' o —1 !'.. -n CD z °', ' Mrs. Cathy Galavis ,C, Budget Supervisor Property Tax Oversight Program v '� 2450 Shumard Oak Blvd., Room 2-3200 Tallahassee,Florida 32399-0126 Dear Mrs. Galavis: Pursuant to Section 145.022,Florida Statutes,this letter serves as notice to advise the Department of Revenue that the Collier County Tax Collector wishes to remain a Fee Off cier and will continue to submit our budget to the Department of Revenue. ' Fiala '()'� , Si rel Hiller ' Henning j' Coyle -- L 'ay iJA�✓ Gele#e Collier Coun Tax Collector cc: Hon. Georgia Hiller,Chairwoman,Board of County Commissioners Hon. Dwight Brock, Clerk of Courts ;Viisc.Corres: Date: t-1\ 2.3k 1'5 Item#:\Lci k S Copies to: 3291 East Tamiami Trail. Naples. Florida 34112-5758 239-252-8171 vrww.colliertax.com 161 1A Kris-WBartlett; ExecutweyAidei 3aard.of Cawvity C kOffice/ pa3n733 r7T19 2012 rJ Hi/Krist/,, 12-19-2012 BY- plea'I vtcls tide the/attached.i nfarvnatCovv,, provided.by the/Finance/ vcce/ Depav'twLent, awthe'vte/xt(cwcalab-l0 3(Yard/A eAr a'wader 1■14ceilavtecrtme Carre ancle tcex• Part of the/Island/1e C ImpravementDI/strict(CID) • • October 19th, 2012 Meellin.,AeA la'avid-Min to e Thank.yaw. A vwn. 3oard'11/44 i ' te 'Er 2ecard%Departrnent X-8406 Fiala Hiller Henning Coyle misc. Corms: Date: y\Z-3\�3 Item#:\LaZ\ "I Copies to: 161 1A'f' Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Severn Trent Services, Management Services Division 210 North University Drive, Suite 702—Coral Springs—Florida 33071 (954) 753-5841 —(954) 345-1292 Fax December 12,2012 Memorandum To: Mr. Robert Dick Severn Trent Services,Inc. 5726 Corporation Circle Fort Myers, Florida 33905 Reference: Minutes of Meeting Held October 19, 2012 and Approved November 16,2012 From: Calvin Teague District Manager Enclosed for your records is a copy of the minutes of the above-referenced meeting of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District's Board of Supervisors. Please be sure to make this document available for public access during normal business hours. If you have any questions,please contact Janice Swade at(954) 753-5841. Cc: For informational purposes only: /Ms, Crystal Kinzel Director Clerk of the Circuit Court/Finance Department 3299 Tamiami Trail East Suite 403 Naples,Florida 34112-5746 Mr. Leo Ochs, Jr. Collier County Manager 3299 Tamiami Trail East Suite 202 Naples,Florida 34112 161 . , ' 1A * Naples Daily News Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication Naples Daily News PORT OF THE ISLANDS 210 N UNIVERSITY DR #702 CORAL SPRINGS FL 33071 NO 110E OF MEET1Nt n J ND s REFERENCE: 010 9 4 8 tl AZNtTyimpaaaamaord SCWCT 59699503 NOTICE OF MEE T I NGS PO The htrm at of Soperrvts°rs of the Port of the Wench a t n Ipr bm Dt0nPweaEok d naemeem f r f or a 3F04te aG203 a a h rai,Eidsy uof°A t, of Florida mantlr asfnot fa, f Counties of Collier and Lee 'a�rl1xat ,. ��>:r 2f�1tz Before the undersigned authority, personally - -amt ,4 „1'" appeared Lynn Schneider, says that she serves a the Order Entry Data Specialist, of the Naples M4419.21°3,tp. ft3 Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naplga in Collier County, Florida: distributed in Coll 2€;1013 4., fi and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached :Tha" ao`.� for r'�i�. ;gs tirisf ° carat copy of advertising was published in said fa toroloued to =446,tkra ens 1 tiors be I"Ot record at (fleeting/ ',„:',,,'- .' '- h newspaper on dates listed. Dune maitre'uc�aas` hen Of more Snparviscrsn1f xtts�isat Affiant further says that the said Naples Dai tel rlrcaa+e dutypnronr ut 1aKtaarnrr atfna a any of men of a 4 a laty or nraI irh, nment shout Ct r� the Out News is a newspaper published at Naples, in saetrr c . 0u " I53 ;� r 4 Collier County, Florida, and that the said t��t err°ritoto �e�too e tom' °' 41"41"1"3""3 parev°fit CrfEte At Eeaat:rr#0 )41�furor 3tl a�of fwa meetings "" newspaper has heretofore been continuously fads person to derides a1 nn"taken at these"me®ting day and has been entered as second class mail advised that n d4 d l fecnrd proceedings.and a ding'. y person may need i eats v erhartdnr r icsrd of the graeeedangs e made h t us matter at the post office in Naples, in said tht+Prtim°nY'nd"r'a' �"Wnittr9r6 i' t he based Calvin ieagt�;; Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 year 1}astdctfrfanager nt4s next preceding the first publication of the "srnrerrrharars,2n12 " N attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. PUBLISHED ON: 09/28 AD SPACE: 66 LINE .. °,'`"` FILED ON: 09/28/12 1 Alf Signature of Affiant F Sworn to and Subscribed b � re rlfe�this da of ' i '�i 20 / r;�1 Personally known by me �ditia1,�' -.,�C 1" 7 t',5': CAROL PAWi..i't SKI ., : t ,*s MY COMMISSION#EE 45538 it sir EXPIRES.November 28,2014 `Ari ptf',ice,"`` Bur eon Thnr Diehard tnsr ranLe/ufanay 161 1 A4- Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Board of Supervisors Richard Ziko,Chairman Calvin Teague,District Manager Norine Dillon,Vice Chairperson Daniel Cox,District Counsel Charles Custer,Assistant Secretary Ronald Benson,District Engineer Dale Lambert,Assistant Secretary Theodore Bissell,Assistant Secretary Regular Meeting Agenda Friday,October 19,2012—10:00 a.m. 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Approval of the Minutes of the September 21,2012 Meeting 3. Public Comment Period 4. Old Business A. Review of Landscape Maintenance Performance B. Update on U.S.41 Median Flooding C. Update on Proposal for Irrigation Valve Repairs D. Discussion of Future Water Treatment Plant Open House for the Community 5. New Business A. Discussion of Fiscal Year 2013 Backflow Preventer installations 6. District Manager's Report A. Approval of the September 30,2012 Financial Statements and Check Register B. Discussion of Responses to Issues Raised by Supervisors 7. Field Manager's Report A. Discussion of September 2012 Operations Report 8. Attorney's Report A. Update on North Hotel Bankruptcy Proceedings B. Update on Lot 45 Drainage Swale Agreement C. Update on Sunset Cay Utility Dedication 9. Engineer's Report A. Update on New Water Treatment Plant B. Update on Liquidated Damages from Xlyem Water Solutions USA(ITT Technologies) 10. Supervisors'Requests 11. Public Comment Period 12. Adjournment NOTES: The next meeting is scheduled for Friday,November 16,2012,at 10:00 a.m. District Office: Meeting Location: 210 North University Drive,Suite 702 Orchid Cove Clubhouse Coral Springs,Florida 33071 25005 Peacock Lane 954-753.5841 http://poic'iid,com/ Naples,Florida 34114 239-430-0806 161 iA4 MINUTES OF MEETING PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District was held Friday, October 19, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. at the Orchid Cove Clubhouse; 25005 Peacock Lane;Naples, Florida 34114. Present and constituting a quorum were: Richard Ziko Chairman Norine Dillon Vice Chairperson Charles Custer Assistant Secretary Dale Lambert Assistant Secretary Theodore Bissell Assistant Secretary (Via Telephone) Also present were: Calvin Teague District Manager Daniel Cox District Attorney Ronald Benson District Engineer Robert Dick Severn Trent Services Robert Casey Field Manager, Severn Trent Services Robert Edge Lead Operator, Severn Trent Services Stephen Custer Custer Construction Inc. Jean Kungle POI Realty Anthony Davis Orchid Cove HOA John J. Resident Kathryn Kehlmeier Resident Randy Resch Resident The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands Community Improvement District's Board of Supervisors Meeting. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Call to Order and Roll Call Mr. Ziko called the meeting to order and Mr. Teague called the roll. Wednesday, 11/7/12 . , 161 1A4 4-- October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands CID SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the September 21,2012 Meeting Mr. Ziko stated each Board member received a copy of the Minutes of the September 21, 2012 Meeting; requesting any additions, corrections or deletions. • The Board made several changes which will be incorporated into the amended minutes. There being no further discussion, On MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Mrs. Dillon with all in favor, the Minutes of the September 21, 2012 Meeting were approved as amended. THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Comment Period • Mr. Ziko advised Ms. Kehlmeier to ensure she gets all details of signage work to be done on HOA property in writing if they use I.,ykins Signtek. • Mr. Edge acknowledged the presence of Mr. Stephen Custer of Custer Construction Inc., and complimented his work at the water plant. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS OId Business A. Review of Landscape Maintenance Performance Mrs. Dillon and Mr. Edge discussed the monthly ride-through inspection with Mr. Soto and distributed notes for the Board's information and discussion; copies of which will be entered into the official record. C. Update on Proposal for Irrigation Valve Repairs • Mr. Edge discussed additional information regarding replacement of the irrigation valves which the Board requested at the last meeting and presented the estimate from C and S Irrigation Services, Inc. in the amount of$702.37 for the Board's review and approval; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. There being no further discussion, ON MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Mrs. Dillon with all in favor, the estimate from C and S Irrigation Services, LLC in the amount of $702.37 to repair irrigation valves was approved and Mr. Edge was authorized to cover the area. Wednesday, 11/7/12 2 161 1 A 2f October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands CID A. Review of Landscape Maintenance Performance (Continued) • Mr. Teague discussed Soto's request to amend their contract with a monthly increase of $575 to accommodate additional landscaping services at the new water treatment plant. Mr. Custer MOVED to approve the request from Soto's Lawn Service, Inc. to increase their fee to $575 per month to accommodate additional landscaping services at the new water plant on a temporary basis subject to presentation of a formal addendum to their contract; and Mrs. Dillon seconded the motion. > The Board directed Mr. Cox to prepare the addendum for presentation at the next meeting. ➢ Landscaping of the retention areas should be included in the addendum. There being no further discussion, On VOICE vote with all in favor, the prior motion was approved as discussed. B. Update on U.S. 41 Median Flooding Mrs. Dillon presented an e-mail response from the state for the Board's information and discussion; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. • The state granted tentative approval to commence a drainage improvement project. • U.S. 41 will have to be re-graded. • Mr. Benson commented the state will have to design an appropriate storm water system to resolve flooding issues on the median. D. Discussion of Future Water Treatment Plant Open House for the Community Mr. Teague presented an overview of ideas for this event for discussion; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. • The Board suggested January 18, 2013 at approximately 12:30 p.m. following the CID meeting. • Severn Trent suggested a barbecue be held to commemorate the opening. • Costs will be shared by Severn Trent Services and Hole Montes. Wednesday, 11/7/12 3 161 1Af- October 19,2012 Port of the Islands CID • Mr. Benson will prepare a brochure depicting the CID's utility system. • Mrs. Dillon suggested an announcement on the water bill and on the website. • Approximately 150 people will be invited. • Ms. Kungle will prepare a flyer to be included with the November and December utility bills. • Ms. Kehlmeier will collect RSVPs. • DEP officials will be invited. • An update will be included on the next agenda. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS New Business A. Discussion of Fiscal Year 2013 Backflow Preventer Installations • Mr. Dick updated the Board on the installations done thus far, but asked the Board for direction regarding how to proceed for the new Fiscal Year. ➢ Three Hundred of approximately 500 which need to be installed have been installed. ➢ Staff will ensure all neighborhoods are taken care of. ➢ The Board directed installation of backflow preventers for Fiscal Year 2013 at Severn Trent's discretion, with staff notifying the Board in advance of start dates and locations. • Mrs. Dillon asked for the status of breakdown of labor and hours charged for backflow preventer repairs at Orchid Cove. ➢ Seven need to be repaired in the amount of$35 each. ➢ The repairs are going to cost approximately $944.50 which includes purchase of repair kits and nine hours of labor. ➢ Backflow preventers will have to be recertified once repaired. SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS District Manager's Report A. Approval of the September 30,2012 Financial Statements and Check Register B. Discussion of Responses to Issues Raised by Supervisors Mr. Teague presented the September 30, 2012 Financial Statements and Check Register for the Board's review and approval; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. • The fund balance increased. Wednesday, 11/7/12 4 161 1A + October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands CID • The water and sewer fund reflect strong net assets. • Mr. Edge confirmed the fire hydrant repair is allocated to irrigation as opposed to water. • The budget overrun for street lighting was for street light repairs in Orchid Cove which were done after the budget was adopted. • Mr. Teague assumes utility irrigation was reallocated to the wastewater treatment plant. • The Aged Trial Balance for past water bills was discussed. ➢ Mr. Bissell asked Mr. Teague to e-mail him an explanation for the fact the financials do not reflect payment made by the Gun Club last month for some overdue water bills. ➢ Mr. Ziko asked for an explanation of the outstanding bill for Mr. Brett Cihlar, • Mr. Edge and Mr. Teague will investigate. There being no further discussion, On MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Mr. Custer with all in favor, the September 30, 2012 Financial Statements and Check Register were approved. • Mr. Dick provided an explanation for Unused Residue Budget Old Contract which was addressed at the last meeting. • Refunds to residents with two accounts, one of which is outstanding, were discussed. ➢ The refund is applied to any unpaid balance once the other account is closed. • The significant amount which Severn Trent has not invoiced on the water treatment plant project was discussed. ➢ The outstanding amount of$48,000 will be billed once the work is done. ➢ Mr. Benson commented his staff made a mistake in adding up the amount and added an additional $48,000. Wednesday, 11/7/12 5 161 1A 4- October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands CID • Mr. Cox and Mr. Teague have not heard anything further from the resident who recently retained attorney services. SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Field Manager's Report A. Discussion of September 2012 Operations Report Mr. Edge presented the September 2012 Operations Report for discussion; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. • Work orders were addressed. • The well extensions will be done on Monday. • Staff is working on the signs. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report A. Update on North Hotel Bankruptcy Proceedings • Mr. Cox announced a short Executive Session will be conducted at the conclusion of this meeting to discuss the settlement offer. B. Update on Lot 45 Drainage Swale Agreement • Mr. Cox had no update on this issue. C. Update on Sunset Cay Utility Dedication • Mr. Cox is waiting for the Condominium Association to meet to consider this offer. NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer's Report A. Update on New Water Treatment Plant Mr. Benson presented the Monthly Progress Report for discussion; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. • Cardinal has been paid all but approximately$20,000. • Certain trees were not the appropriate height consistent with county standards, which has delayed distribution of the Certificate of Occupancy. B. Update on Liquidated Damages from Xlyem Water Solutions USA (ITT Technologies) • Hole Montes sent ITT a summary letter acknowledging they are going to replace the deficient membranes and skids. • $163,000 is currently being held on their contract until these issues are resolved. Miscellaneous issues were discussed. • Mr. Benson will ensure Cardinal repairs the median on Union Road. Wednesday, 1117/12 6 161 1A October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands CID • Mr. Benson distributed each Board member a cd depicting aerial and interior views of the new water plant. • Mr. Benson distributed and explained diagrams showing water reuse in the CID; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. ➢ A County Ordinance prohibits irrigation on Fridays. ➢ It is imperative to have odd/even irrigation days to spread the water use evenly; and everyone should not be watering on Wednesdays and Saturdays. ➢ Mr. Lambert asked Mr. Benson to address this issue at the Open House. ➢ County rules should be included on the CID's website. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors' Requests Hearing no requests from Supervisors,the next item followed. ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Comment Period • Ms. Kehlmeier was told the irrigation water is needed for fire protection and cannot be shut off. • Mr. Davis was told the CID will not likely need the time in the clubhouse extended for the Open House in January. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report(Continued) A. Update on North Hotel Bankruptcy Proceedings (Continued) A motion to recess this meeting in order to go into Executive Session is in order. There being no comments or questions, On MOTION by Mrs. Dillon seconded by Mr. Lambert with all in favor, the meeting was recessed at 11:50 a.m. to commence the Executive Session regarding the North Hotel Bankruptcy i Proceedings. A motion to reconvene the Open Session of the Board meeting is in order. There being no comments or questions, Wednesday, 11/7/12 7 161 1A October 19, 2012 Port of the Islands CID On MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Mr. Custer with all in favor, the Open Session of the Regular Board Meeting was reconvened at 12:30 p.m. A motion to accept or reject the offer discussed in Executive Session is in order. There being no comments or questions, On MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Mrs. Dillon with all in favor, the settlement offer presented to the Board regarding the North Hotel Bankruptcy Proceedings was rejected. TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment There being no further business, On MOTION by Mrs. Dillon seconded by Mr. Lambert with all in favor,the meeting was adjourned at 12:35 p.m. , kr Calvin Teague ';.. i .. Secretary Chairman / Wednesday, 11/7/12 8 161 1A + porAtdoi.e C and S Irrigation Services,Inc Date Estimate# C and S �� }i�f 1 a 2830 35th Ave.20 08/30/2012 ! 1227 i �1. . Naples„FL 34120 Irrigation Services, LLC �`�' Exp.Date ,_• a /��1! (239)354-1080 Isla @sotolawn.com Address Port of the Islands CID Att: Bert Underwood cdd 210 University Drive#702 Coral Springs, FL 33071. Description Quantity Rate Amount • Corner€if Cays Dr.-Stella Maris(Recommend to replace 3 valves,stock) Clock Main Entrance left side • In zone#1 by lake • In zone#2 by lake • In zone#3 side walk i I � • 2 inch Pvc Pipe 10 0.96 9.60 • 2 inch Valve 3 r 150.00 450.00 • 2 inch Tee 3 3.59 10.77 • 2 inch Male Adapter 6 3.00 18.00 • 2 inch Elbow 3 3.50 10.50 • 2 inch Coupling 3 4.50 13.50 • Labor 2 men per hour 2 95.00; 190.00 I 1 ALL ESTIMATES MUST BE SIGNED AND Total; $702.37; RETURNED PRIOR TO START OF WORK Accepted By Accepted Date: 161 lÀ Teague, Cal From: soto <sotolawn @yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,October 18, 2012 12:24 PM To: Teague, Cal;rcziko @embarqmail.com;dillonpoi @embarqmail.com;crcuster @aol.com; Edge, Robert; Casey, Bob; dalelambert@embargmail.com;tbisell @embargmail.com Subject: POI Notes October'12 Walk through on Monday,October 15 with Robert Soto, Robert Edge,and Norine Dillon. • Soto's will be fertilizing week of October 22"d • Soto's will be cutting back the hedge on the East side of 41 Bridge. That hedge has not done well since day one. We will cut back 50%and fertilize to see if hedge is salvageable. We will follow up on it and see what we determine. • We have turned on all irrigation. We will be conducting an irrigation wet check on entire property within the next few weeks. • We have had some chinch bug activity on the Common Area. We have treated and it is now under control. Due to the treatment,some of the sod was damaged. Soto's will be replacing damaged sod at no additional costs. • We would like to notify board we will be updating contract to accommodate new pricing to include the new and upgraded water plant. Our additional monthly fee will be$575.00. Services will include full package of irrigation, mowing,fertilizing due to the new shrubbery. • There are some areas on the 41 Median that we have not been able to mow yet due to the saturation from the rain. Thanks. print pout Soto'sp Lawn Service Inc. skim mireAst 2830 35th Avenue NE Naples,FL 34120 Sotolawn.com Phone: (239)354-1080 Fax: (239)354-1045 Contact us: Claire info @sotolawn.com(Office) Robert robertPsotolawn.com Scott scott @sotolawn.com Donna donna @sotolawn.com Lila lila@sotolawn.com (irrigation) 161 1A Teague, Cal From: Norine &Joe <dillonpoi @embarqmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 12:24 PM To: Teague, Cal Subject: S. 21*, Islands n Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged We need to discuss with the BOS. 1 believe we should be film about "drainage into the median swales,"which does NOT harm the landscaping. On Oct 17, 2012, at 9:51 AM, Teague, Cal wrote: Heh you got farther than I ever did©Congrats it is some progress. from: Norine &Joe fmailto:dillonpoiCa�embargmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:31 AM To:Teague, Cal Subject: U.S. 41 Port of the Islands Median Progress,I guess. Begin forwarded message: From: "Spirio, Carlton D" <Carlton.Spiriodot.state.fl.us> Date: October 16, 2012 5:07:30 PM EDT To: Norine & Joe <dillonpoi @embarclmail.com> Cc: "Tower, Debbie" <Debbie.Tower(cdot.state.fl.us> Subject: RE: U.S. 41 Port of the Islands Median Hey Norine and Joe, I checked with our roadway staff once more to ensure there are no projects planned prior to the next resurfacing job, which is scheduled for Fiscal Year 2015/2016. Based on my conversations with several FDOT Project Managers,there are no other improvements scheduled at this time. The purpose for this coordination was to determine the possibility of including this work as part of another planned project that would potentially result in a more timely solution. The real cause for the stormwater ponding is directly related to the existing pavement grades/slopes. The designated left turn lanes on U.S. 41 are both sloping toward the painted gore areas that exists between the through {travel) lanes and the left turn lanes, instead of draining into the median swales. ;During my Sit isit here were no visible obstructions within the median,including the landscapin , that appeared to e binckin roadway r noff from draining into the median. Therefore, the pavement grading needs to be regarded to force the rbadway runoff into the media and ultimately to the canal immediately west of this intersecti n. The need for these roadway: -i :,.. ...,ri a, ..,5,:ive been 1 1611A 4 ;scussed with my Director and he has given atettative approval to program a drain. =; .,"provement project,which is . entirely dependent on any funding that might become available in the coming months. I will plan to meet with the Director and our Financial personnel within the next week to see if there is any funding available for this project. I will send another update next week, or possibly sooner,to update you concerning my discussions and provide any new updates related to the improvements to this section of U.S.41. Thanks again for your patience and understanding. Carl Spirio From: Norine&Joe f mailto:dillonpoi @embargmail.coml Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 12:05 PM To: Spirio, Carlton D Cc:Tower, Debbie Subject: U.S. 41 Port of the Islands Median Another follow-up. WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THIS? From: Norine & Joe <dillonoi • embar•mail.com> Date: September 14, 2012 3:13:47 PM EDT To: Carlton Spirio D <Carlton.Spirioc dot.state.fl.us> Subject: U.S. 41 Port of the Islands Median Hi- What is the status of our request for assistance with our safety issue regarding drainage? Haven't heard from you for a while! Norine Dillon 2 161 iAt Port of the Islands Water Treatment Plant Open House January ,2013 Community Barbecue with Severn Trent(ST) and Hole Montes (HM) staff cooking. If Supervisors want to do so they can also cook. Costs will be shared by ST and HM. Menu will consist of Hot Dogs, Hamburgers and a few side dishes such as potato salad and etc. A large sheet cake commemorating the event will be provided also. Chairs and tables will be provided by HM and set up in the large storage area. ST will take responsibility to tape off sensitive areas for safety concerns. Tours will be conducted by the staff of ST and HM.All will have name tags to identify them for the community. c/1 ji r(7, 1-44: r 111,,,C--,4 (11 LC- ( 161 1A `f Teague, Cal From: Ron Benson <RonBenson @hmeng.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:11 AM To: Jean Kungle Cc: Teague,Cal Subject: RE: Port news The new water treatment plant went online in June. It is a state-of-the-art treatment facility which has been designed to remove both chemical and biological contaminants from the water prior to disinfection. The water produced in so"soft" after this high level of treatment that the treatment includes adding a small amount of pure calcium back into the water to minimize corrosion in plumbing. This project completes an overall state-of-the-art water conservation program at Port of the Islands. The water supply for Port of the Islands is a wellfield located about three miles northeast of the community in the State owned preserve. The Port of the Islands community is the only permitted user of the water in this preserve as all of the water rights are now reserved for the environment. By implementing a water conservation program, the community was able to obtain a twenty year permit,which is the longest which can be issued. One hundred percent of the water which potentially can be reclaimed at Port of the Islands is reclaimed. The well water is treated at the water treatment plant by concentrating all contaminants with the concentrate sent to the reclaimed water storage tanks, so no water is lost. The sewage from the sanitary sewers is treated at a state-of-the-art wastewater treatment plant using membranes and disinfection to remove any potentially harmful viruses and microorganisms. The treated wastewater effluent is also sent to the reclaimed water storage tanks. Each day, the reclaimed water storage tanks are topped off using untreated water from the wells and this blended water is what is used by the community for irrigation and fire protection. No water is lost in the entire process other than what is used for irrigation. All residents are encouraged to follow water conservation recommendations and regulations when operating their home irrigation systems. The program which has been implemented at Port of the Islands will assure that there is plenty of water to meet resident needs, but water conservation at Port of the Islands has a direct relationship to the environment surrounding the community. The CID must report to the South Florida Water Management District how it is doing with regard to water conservation and a good report should help assure that there is plenty of water for the community for years to come. Best wishes Ron Ronald E. Benson Jr., Ph.D., P.E. Senior Vice President/Principal Hole Montes, Inc. 950 Encore Way Naples, Florida 34110 (239) 254-2000(Voice) (239)254-2097(Fax) (239) 777-1611 (Mobile) From: Jean Kungle fmailto:jeankun4le @gmail.coml Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 8:12 AM To: Ron Benson Subject: Port news Good morning Ron, Will you be doing an update story on the plant for the newsletter? Enjoy Tuesday!! Stay safe. Jeanie Jean Kungle, Realtor Licensed Real Estate Broker i 161 1A4- Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Financial Report September 30,2012 Prepared by SEVERN ';'; SIRL'I(:L5 16. 1 1AI- Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Table of Contents FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheet-All Funds Page 1 General Fund Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Page 2-3 Trend Report Page 4-5 Enterprise Fund Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Page 6-7 Trend Report Page 8-9 SUPPORTING SCHEDULES Check Register Page 10-11 Special Assessments-Collection Schedule Page 12 Construction Schedule Page 13-14 CIPStatus Report .......................................................... Page 15-16 Cash Flow Projections Page 17-18 Cash Flow Projections-5 year Page 19 Monthly Activity Report Page 20-25 Accounts Receivable Ageing Report(90+days outstanding) Page 26-27 Repair and Maintenance Detail Reports Page 28-32 161 iAz/ Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Financial Statements (Unaudited) September 30, 2012 . . . 161 1 PORT OF THE ISLANDS CID STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS SEPTEMBER 30,2012 GENERAL WATER AND TOTAL SEWER ASSETS $ $ $ CURRENT ASSETS: CASH 104,303 75,561 179,864 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 417 2,124 2,541 DUE FROM OTHER FUNDS 233,610 233,610 INVESTMENTS: CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT-540 DAYS 151,050 151,050 MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT 706,998 6,568 713,566 SBA ACCOUNT 4,139 3,587 7,726 SBA ACCOUNT(RESTRICTED) 12,622 26,328 38,950 SBA RESERVES 1,758 - 1,758 SBA RESERVES(RESTRICTED) 1,516 - 1,516 CONSTRUCTION FUND 502,770 502,770 FMV ADJUSTMENT (1,367) (2,545) (3,912) PREPAID ITEMS 1,883 2,441 4,324 TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 1,216,929 616,834 1,833,763 NONCURRENT ASSETS: INTANGIBLE ASSETS,NET - 31,621 31,621 CAPITAL ASSETS: LAND - 288,459 288,459 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS - 1,835,968 1,835,968 IMPROVEMENTS,NET 6,777,592 6,777,592 EQUIPMENT,NET - 110,121 110,121 TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS - 9,043,761 9,043,761 TOTAL ASSETS 1,216,929 9,660,595 10,877,524 LIABILITIES CURRENT LIABILITIES: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 10,289 44,776 55,065 RETAINAGE PAYABLE 168,732 168,732 DUE TO OTHER FUNDS 233,610 233,610 ACCRUED INTEREST PAYABLE - 65,857 65,857 DEPOSITS - 32,850 32,850 BONDS AND LOANS PAYABLE CURRENT - 497.303 497,303 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 10,289 1,043,128 1,053,417 NONCURRENT LIABILITIES: BONDS AND LOANS PAYABLE,LONG-TERM - 4.005,730 4,005,730 TOTAL NONCURRENT LIABILITIES - 4,005,730 4,005,730 TOTAL LIABILITIES 10,289 5,048,858 5,059,147 NET ASSETS INVESTED IN CAPITAL ASSETS,NET OF RELATED DEBT 4,540,729 4,540,729 UNRESTRICTED - 71,010 71,010 NONSPENDABLE PREPAID ITEMS 1,883 - 1,883 ASSIGNED OPERATING RESERVE 105,018 105,018 UNASSIGNED 1,099,739 1,099,739 TOTAL NET ASSETS $ 1,206,640 $ 4,611,739 $ 5,818.379 NOTE MINOR DIFFERENCES IN STATEMENT TOTALS 1 REPORT DATE:10/5/2012 ARE A DIRECT RESULT OF ROUNDING TO WHOLE DOLLARS. , , 161 1A4 PORT OF THE ISLANDS General Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending September 30,2012 ANNUAL YTD ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE($) AS A%OF SEPTEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 2,090 $ 2,090 $ 4,064 $ 1,974 194.45% $ 2 Net Incr(Decr)In FMV-Invest - 2,811 2,811 0.00% Interest-TaxCollector - - 34 34 0.00% Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 435,400 435,400 402,231 (33,169) 92.38% - Special Assmnts-Discounts (17,416) (17,416) (11,204) 6,212 64.33% - TOTAL REVENUES 420,074 420,074 397,936 (22,138) 94.73% 2 EXPENDITURES Administrative P/R-Board of Supervisors 7,000 7,000 6,200 800 88.57% 300 FICA Taxes 536 536 474 62 88.43% 23 ProfServ-Engineering 26,000 26,000 20,662 5,338 79.47% 2,234 ProfServ-Legal Services 12,500 12,500 36,128 (23,628) 289.02% 3,151 ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 27,539 27,539 27,539 - 100.00% 2,295 ProfServ-Property Appraiser 6,530 6,530 6,531 (1) 100.02% ProfServ-Special Assessment 8,974 8,974 8,974 100.00% Auditing Services 3,750 3,750 3,500 250 93.33% Communication-Telephone 100 100 36 64 36.00% 14 Postage and Freight 1,500 1,500 1,062 438 70.80% 85 Rental-Meeting Room 300 300 325 (25) 108.33% 25 Insurance-General Liability 8,270 8,270 7,690 580 92.99% - Printing and Binding 2,000 2,000 1,239 761 61.95% 154 Legal Advertising 2,200 2,200 711 1,489 32.32% - Miscellaneous Services 400 400 890 (490) 222.50% 55 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 8,708 8,708 7,821 887 89.81% Misc-Web Hosting - 119 (119) 0.00%% Office Supplies 650 650 261 389 40.15% 23 Annual District Filing Fee 175 175 175 100.00% Total Administrative 117,132 117.132 130,337 (13,205) 111.27% 8,359 Field Contracts-Mgmt Services 103,821 103,821 98,536 5,285 94.91% 7,455 Contracts-Landscape 79,440 79,440 83,115 (3,675) 104,63% 7,820 Electricity-Streetlighting 13,000 13,000 16,615 (3,615) 127.81% 1,523 Utility-Irrigation 7,200 7,200 12,670 (5,470) 175.97% 272 R&M-Renewal and Replacement 20,000 20,000 12,170 7,830 60.85% 675 R&M-Roads&Alleyways 6,000 6,000 - 6,000 0.00% Capital Outlay 73,481 73,481 - 73,481 0.00% Total Field 302,942 302,942 223,106 79,836 73.65% 17,745 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 420.074 420,074 353,443 66,631 84.14% 26,104 Report Date:10/5/2012 Prepared by: 2 Severn Trent Management Services f 4 4 161 1A '+4 PORT OF THE ISLANDS Genera!Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending September 30,2012 ANNUAL YTD ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE(S) AS A%OF SEPTEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL Excess(deficiency)of revenues Over(under)expenditures 44,493 44,493 0.00% (26,102) Net change in fund balance $ $ - $ 44,493 $ 44,493 0.00% $ (26,102) FUND BALANCE,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2011) 1,162,147 1,162,147 1,162,147 FUND BALANCE,ENDING $ 1,162,147 $ 1,162,147 $ 1,206,640 Report Date:10/5/2012 Prepared by: 3 Severn Trent Management Services 161 1 A Lfr , LL ., ,.. cu _ o o co . - a.. ,--- <6" e-4 r--: cri sci n5 ..-: co csi ,I cd r.. ',..- .„. ..., .-- -■ 0 F- g g . ... ,,,, ,,.. . ..- ,...,. — L. 0 CO 0 0 ro o c...■ I,- CO CO e— Or 3— C. -a 1 c, co Or h 0 ,..., < 40. ...---■ Oi 4 4 4 4 ISI 8 2 A :73 83 • • • -.3- a, . • "t . ,,-, . ■ m • . CZ •E he 0 0 0 < V 0 CD 4 ii- 0 i 8 3"•;,' 2 ''' 2°' ' " - 1."--- '4 ' 83 '''' ' — 2 F-'_. • < ri :2• • ue 2 . CO S 4,4 2 • • • • ,--- . a, . • • - • g?, • 3-, OD cn .., W 2 m o .- o4 o 7 1 . o r C O f • IC) 01 ' --- " , . . s 1 , r..- , ..: ,.., ,t) < C 111 <A ts '4 o 0 . to I, • 4 . ..- .- ,t, • ,..- L. 4 0:1 03 . Lo o m ‘.4 er3 Or 0 e— -ct cv 13 (O.1 Or CO 4....■ em ei, a-,-a..,- . ei. O in C 2 t N- VI 3 < U LL 03 44.5. (i., t O N- 4 CO hi 0 0 h 5 IC) 3.11 . . . . C.1 .1 .1 . I,- VI • .rn al to v- o In m ,r, cql CD , LI, c7, CO Or eir FL7 0 al Cb , ii cv u", 7,; ro co hi . el 01 " fCL-R ai cel 0 I'''' 0 101 C CS. C < ID 01 fVI ..0 , sea o 2 ..., E N- I) ' A F," V 8 g3 2 2 83 * ' ' -"' 2 2 8 ",'"•-•3 :7 '4 2 ' 2 ' c="4 - al ▪ a. 13 1 2 .5 u-, 0 Cri VOL NS •--- al ,- lo . o c., O. O OF .- m -.--, es; ..-- m , I? iv+ I c 0. rg tl) CD CI3 6 2 .... LIC r. to = Ec. .- ,.... -. .= — c . 8 8 8 2 8' * ' — --°-' ' 23 g2 2 3,-; A " -7 7 •%-'' - 8 `" V . . 5-, 3.4. - - - - 0 E g it: ul 7ai f •§ 0-; CC .,-- ..7 c. ..-. F• .2 .t 0 E ur 1"-' cv on . r..- EC to o co co o o , , , . .. ..0 . , ' CO ., ./. • . ' 01, > as as rhl ,3 0 “7 .r.• `"' ""' 2, . cA oa cv to 0 Z .= c 12 . <NI r- ..../... cr. 2 ,- 01 In IC) ,{a ■--- C.; ca. r.,7 CI) wr CL : , ... cc . ■ . Zia; o 8 83 CO t'-'., 8 ' -g — CO IL) g IN ' -T, t; ' K' g'-. 8 , I "rs ‘,, 4 2 8 '42 In ;----- --3- 3-3 a, - ol ...- .... - c 8 .g 35 c•F r: r•T c-si cq a..; .-- r.i' 0 0 a o o .-- ,-,4 • E vs al • ••... a - s ' — i.sT Zi; g ' 2 '4 " ' 'n °' ,.3, • aa • co so • '...-- . ut o cv on 1.... so N- C* c.4 C•J LC) IN r-- IN Z 13 co r. er, c, -..r. ■ co cn .. 2 8 " 2 "c•, " " Fo. 2, * 2 ° 8 ' A " IN ft 73 .A 7 c`" -' a,, to ao ..- co 15 "E CC CI) - ..-- .4 4-4 0 0 C:1 in .E. Iii 11 a) FD CE t. ti 1E 'I.1 % 0 .■ > •X ''''' . 8 ,,,,• a) 8- a 3 'Cs '11,, u_ > In o t . -8 Fi I g E 'll .2 cl a5 ••••• g - o . = o 0.1 Wm %... 0 .• C.) > 8 3-3 ,z. si, 6 ¢ 1--- -56, T . 0_ t 0 M" 1,1 ra' -0 = $ 440 (-) t rei V., ' 2 a, - 337. ._ ,E; Z• — 1 E .S a t. t. y5 „, 2 23 . e g.•E —, -. 16 CD ,, t ,.,. vi = . 'E.. .1' a., tu -A 2 a.. cis u 73 0 . ' E al 2 a- •i,, -ci u-) C a .:t 0, ••*3 5 6 < o ...- Mi. E •E, L•4 '-', .:i'' F, E g &"'I -,L-- 8 8 8 8 5 g-.5 ‘,"5. -2'<-ffl -f. w2i '75, 1 hi 0 = a )41 o -5 -.6 -5 -5 t f■ E .'A c .2, g o 8 8 8 wt .. ill E I, 2 -K 7,-. .74 ii ,-- .,...s- ._ L-.,- & & & rt ct -, 8 ('"2 ...E E 3 "" •:" "" 5 •fr:: a t• E Si 'al A '55. a 7M 0 10 t 0 IL 0 Ce I- MI a) CC ,. , 1, 61 1A +4. ... C L.,.. U, --,-, a) — V 8 Q O r r C m C N 0 0 V ,i a ^ 1-- O cO N c. p N N V C O N ni ♦ 47 CO J 4 N F- O E � � ° te F d N I rn *01 v . get co .- w to Ca m N • • iA. .� • c4 ^ W VN) N CO h � w h ' N N In Q in en to o, too + to QQ • Q) r �- SV N N i9 N.. ' N m . < m ti ,..6 r r an e V R. en 4 SD co IB co H !p w c0 N • co o h td td .- .- w m ao ' Q CV u .Ca m svMV a „� C z °» td .= m n V Q V ' ' o N m ui ++�i to .y d N - in A tcti rn ,,, v_ uYi N 4 m o .. .- (Y d M Z .n Q . .05'' d d U o o to • 4 c el. 9 on E 41 co C m g r' _ s 6". . - R 1-15 cri q y Q T w Y a a a LL t � v vR � s ' o r' �y ~ LI IL Yl m tD V N O Q. V W m Q .n y d v 5 � '� t"'o tN., N N CD [l: r r W N o a to o 75 n m o co in C cri t-i N a "' ° a Ecu ry p y - LeJ 11 2 Yj un • w CD' VI OS Q U N H c 13 N e E 8 c.) o al 0 pj _ Zi = 2 G E p rn .�o Z 2 N 0 U Q) E c E v 't ° 'm Q"' m W N u ` in '' 'm r to .0 u cn N v� -a - as ui W p C Q �.. � O cc .�. p�j = .V( Uaa .p i.> F C U. J J 5 y' ° o. E .5.0. -1,-)s z LL LL d U Ir ,, , 161 ' 1A '+ PORT OF THE ISLANDS Water And Sewer Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenses and Changes in Net Assets For the Period Ending September 30,2012 ANNUAL YTD ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE($) AS A%OF SEPTEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL OPERATING REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 5,448 $ 5,448 $ 2,621 $ (2,827) 48.11% $ 1 Water Revenue 40,000 40,000 41,089 1,089 102.72% 2,329 Sewer Revenue 60,000 60,000 62,574 2,574 104.29% 4,330 Irrigation Fees 100,000 100,000 82,528 (17,472) 82.53% 6,383 Meter Fees - 2,500 2,500 0.00% Net Incr(Decr)In FMV-Invest - - 5,234 5,234 0.00% Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 1,135,025 1,135,025 1,048,559 (86,466) 92.38% - Special Assmnts-Discounts (45,401) (45,401) (29,206) 16,195 64.33% - Other Miscellaneous Revenues - 5,045 5,045 0.00% 210 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 1,295,072 1,295,072 1220,944 (74,128) 9428% 13,253 OPERATING EXPENSES Personnel and Administration P/R-Board of Supervisors 7,000 7,000 6.200 800 88.57% 300 FICA Taxes 536 536 474 62 88.43% 23 ProfServ•Engineering 26,000 26,000 20,662 5,338 79.47% 2,234 ProfServ-Legal Services 12,500 12,500 36,128 (23,628) 289.02% 3,151 ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 27,652 27,652 27,652 - 100.00% 2,304 ProfServ-Property Appraiser 17,024 17,024 17,025 (1) 100.01% - ProfServ-SpecialAssessment 7,655 7,655 7,655 - 100.00% - ProfServ-Utility Billing 15,821 15,821 9,053 6,768 57.22% Auditing Services 3,750 3,750 3,500 250 93.33% - Communication-Telephone 100 100 36 64 36.00% 14 Postage and Freight 1,000 1,000 690 310 69.00% 57 Rental-Meeting Room 300 300 325 (25) 108.33% 25 Insurance-General Liability 8,270 8,270 7,690 580 92.99% - Printing and Binding 1,500 1,500 930 570 62.00% 116 Legal Advertising 1,600 1,600 583 1,017 36.44% - Miscellaneous Services 1,100 1,100 2,265 (1,165) 205.91% 244 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 22,701 22,701 20,387 2,314 89.81% Office Supplies 750 750 305 445 40.67% 27 Total Personnel and Administration 155,259 155,259 161,560 (6,301) 104.06% 8,495 Water-Sewer Comb Services Contracts-MgmtServices 311,599 311,599 299,592 12,007 96.15% 23,160 Contracts-Other Services 2,000 2,000 1,750 250 87.50% - Communication-Teleph-Field 3,768 3,768 4,033 (265) 107.03% 364 Utility -General 80,000 80,000 81,516 (1,516) 101.90% 6,758 R&M-Irrigation 10,000 10,000 37,510 (27,510) 375.10% 1,720 R&M-Water Plant 10,000 10,000 26,832 (16,832) 268.32% 2,957 R&M-Waste Water Plant 25,000 25,000 72,504 (47,504) 290.02% 15,689 Misc-Bad Debt - • 2,079 (2,079) 0.00% Report Date:10/5/2012 Prepared by: 6 Severn Trent Management Services .161 1A 'f Lt, , , ,PORT OF THE ISLANDS Water And Sewer Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenses and Changes In Net Assets For the Period Ending September 30,2012 ANNUAL YTD ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE($) AS A%OF SEPTEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL Misc-Licenses&Permits 4,500 4,500 5,375 (875) 119.44% 1,000 Cap Outlay-Irrigation 10,000 10,000 11,615 (1,615) 116.15% 11,615 Cap Outlay-Water Plant 3,697,180 3,697,180 3,358,511 338,669 90.84% 272,085 Cap Outlay-Waste Water Plant 30,796 30,796 18,635 12,161 60.51% - Capital Reserve 25,000 25,000 - 25,000 0.00% - Total Water-Sewer Comb Services 4,209,843 4,209,843 3,919,952 289,891 93.11% 335,348 Debt Service Principal Debt Retirement 480,440 480,440 - 480,440 0.00% Interest Expense 174,920 174,920 174,899 21 99.99% 72,863 Total Debt Service 655,360 655,360 174,899 480,461 26.69% 72,863 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 5,020,462 5,020,462 4,256,411 764,051 84.78% 416.706 Operating income(loss) (3,725,390) (3,725,390) (3,035,467) 689,923 81.48% (403,453) Change in net assets $(3,725,390) $ (3,725,390) $ (3,035,467) $ 689,923 81.48% $ (403,453) TOTAL NET ASSETS,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2011) 7,647,204 7,647,204 7,647,204 TOTAL NET ASSETS,ENDING $ 3,921,814 $ 3,921,814 $ 4,611,737 Report Date:10/5/2012 Prepared by: 7 Severn Trent Management Services , . . . 1 6 1 1A + 13 LL co otr, cc- • 1 ,v a) . 1...• .-.; d o a a a a r.: a c4 r: r- r..: a a .-.. a .-- .... .--. EN? a° CO c -0 J Ca 0 0../ g E 0• 0 ..c.• 0 0 CO 0..0 R !CT- " ',s, ca' 2 8 42. `'' 2' 2 2 8, '2 <1 IP, '2 ,--.i ..T g c. a •-..• a a a a c., " ..: ,... . ' 8 8 c,:m ,- --, ,--, CO 0 0. CO CO ..c.-• CO .-• CC < .. = 0 < uo "a , •g c..• T •re Or c.- ..... O .. IN IN IN .- ,- < : ... PI CO a r.: a c‘i ed as a -,-.7 csi ,... , ..., < en .... OD CC ...-- CO • 0 0 01 0 0 '''' ''' ' '.° A " 8 8 — 2 8: ' 3,,.' 2 8 .7., 2 2 4.1. 7.1 '''' 2 8 fin_ ''''' 2 8 2 2 F,,,, el •,}- ,... t0 ,s, ••- ■- CV In S.• IN .1) ''' 0 U ,.. --.. 7. c..., .. ...l 1.•• [V V- 0 V 0 rn a c. CC 0 CC • Ccl Id a r.-7 a a rd. ,sir - - c. rsi 14 2 '- . ,... __ th 0, ..... •_ .4. c cic g 14..= A i 0, CO CR 0 "13 V 2 •E ,F r-: r....7 a cv 1 C4 . .. 61 0 Q. gi C 2 ta.a E., RA .,....'- E, ' . ..A•. 0 C.: :0 8 8 2 8 8 ' ' 3,9 ' * 2 8 ' z.7, gi 8 r".. 2:3 E 1m b c T. - E Lt it. u5 u. a IN a -.- 1- -a - wi .0 E , 6 ct = . In al < • S cc i2 — .— c, — ,..., cn csi . a a E". 4..., g ifs c° 'RI . 2 N. ' ' '-: 8 ,a."' f?. ' rz 2 8 Cc 0 C, YU •-• 0 0 < Or IN 0 CO' 01 0. Or .-- -c- 0 0 OD g . tr; IN E 0 is ".=. r•■ 4.. < ... . 6cI Cej ▪ — s ' - i2 g; ' g . • 00 .4 Cl 0 Lg. 0 IN 05 ■1'," en co a a . 4 ,,--3,.. F-z, .L. ...- g fft " A r.' ' " c s 1 F;i `.4 `i' ;12 ' T.; cR, •g -a t5 . rq u.-i' ‘t us uS ,..si- „„.- < IN U C... (/) ' a . 5 TI• a) 1 C E 8 14 7s RI a) ..E. 8 f, 52 P c.) Z ' g3 2 ■, 0 8 th 0 li t0 . ..- ,., '7' -52?ce '63" f, .. • — 3 ig m ,,, 0 g IC 44 ,. -• 4 c . :7-‘' -. .,, s' i lin g , — 6 .= . 8115,. a • gg .,c,. 8. 8, ,,,, :I .fics ai, ci I L. t ,,9 < 0 0 0 v2 v fa ,-- E P ,= m 73,2 O '' Z a u, c L.' e 2 2 2 2 2 rE c) 8 . g— .Y.1 a •-= 4..L14) .-.. .-- . 11 ,- 5' a OCI- = a. a. o_ a. a. a- < c.) a_ E a. ..., M oi, 0. 0 1— 0 ., , , , it 1 6 1 , a, ,.... .._ , ...... 0.; 0 c5 ci c5 sri ••ir c.5 n: 2 ,r-i- oi •.■ •••r- - 1:1 -..1 a' ,I 4. wi c•C r•.: ei' C < ow a) P X In N CD 1.0 1.0 CO 01 0 CO 0 VI 1.0 _ co co •.er "... ,cp -a 1. - - c-.; 1;3 g P ' "2 - 2 2° co ..t, •cr- ecr id r.:: ..- r r ces CI I 7; 5 .111. la 2 ' Aggrii2 ` "' 22 ,- CO..., CO CO.- r, r 0) Mt _ CO ' CO CO 10 CO ( ' g. .' 0 ,-..., ,. ..- <NI sari ..-- si- oil' .- •r- in ,- ns Z;5 f-': i IV: co R :22 § ' ' e :----- ca . ,....• ,o to CO LO g • C E3 CO r ni co ,- eR. ••,. •7C t 0 < ....... ..- If- CA • 0 C3 7110 ' F.1 cn co • 0 • • • r r 03 AO 01 ot ...„ ......,. " § g . .... , • X 8 CO .3 to cei sr5 oi A .0 ,i co '-`■ CO 1.3. 4., en 0 ■ii CO 0, ..0 OD ■Ior C.- 0 h- I,- 0 01 0 CO co CCa CO CO -.ft' '•ft. CO O) P 0 .5 01 1.15 r-- r- 1'4 CTI. 0) a t CO 177 0 CO OD A CO •CY VI 41 . 0 z .9. x k Ts NI " ' „-; ,.> r,.... CV co In o CO CO co CO 0 cca u) ..... O c, c. .c. ■- o CO 7.; ,-, CO ... C czr . e .0 r .,- • co co Ira CO o, . ■ , CO ' CO ' ' ' CO ••ct us co "tt E a▪ a CL) so- csr cssi- .-- 51= CO A &ii ..-. 41, •g a ..,c ,-., cn ,, ,, la.. 03 oa as co V e ul IX 0, .- • as cv 10 so in • • • 9, c . gl ' " a a C ow. 0 1.-.: .... CO. h: CO so cni- E ,..5 CO it It a < ,,,, CO ,g 1- ta 01 O 7 0 CD Z -71 C P 8 n is G. y, ' ' ..7. C C Ci,i , • • CO e., Cu- en cs e . cr 0 0 g = It) CL) .-- in 445 c5 ,iir ri.: • s " *.E. as ea 14i r-.." or•n, ...-= ...• en r'• e•6 eei cri E 8 t CC- i ,_ o- t trs to i„._ 43 < si- ...., ix ..- . CD 0) V' N ,-- • 'f ' 0 ' 'I •cr • in n S.,- co Ill 0 00 0 • < w• ' CL) CC) 2 "3 P. 2 8 " ' ' 8 - — -ia Cd cs., L.0 o 8 0. 0 0 '0 c.d. 01 1.0 CO •••- ..- i• r < sso -:-05 0 oil us - $ V G3 1 . c E 8 RI a) 0. ra .re CD a-. z E E f..., E k L.7 rne ‘.... 7-zi- Z cm c, 2- Cl W E a I) g , g ui 01 ..0 — 8 -Q — • a3 2 Tzi ,_ 0 alV, V, 0 C2 (1/ ei t e en uf cif •- u 4 , 8 E g Er• A' 8 5', "1".. ., u a >9. V, i ri 14i. C ai o i u o ce o. en co ▪ .2 R ••„-; -a .- E a a X ., ,,, - v e ,... .... ca . . •,,,-- 2 • 000. s .5 ea ..zi .. . 0 0 co to ,- to.. if -2 - a 8. z z 0 0 . _ i_ ,_ 161 1A Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Supporting Schedules September 30, 2012 , , , ( 1 61 1A4 immiemacr aa nC� pp o p p p p C iO Of m N p amd a N V O On). ON), m N N h mN Or O ANA IUD W O - V Ol of Qnl. N N o O O C�O7 p Op O0), o tp n N N O N to iN ' v N O . C) r• N w M.. C FA to N 64 �' (0 W ma a5... . a a ' ' w mat!'15 V� o o N a H 0 U Mr O 0 0 0 0O 0Q 0 O mp O p O O O O O 00000 .00 0 p 0 0 M _M m V 7 M v O) O) m N M M M M M CO f0 CO CO O) C) C) C) mm (D M M M M N M M M M M L0 C) M M In lA N (P) t((t�,'))(tn N N ttl N 111 I[) lf) ([) (L7 ~O ll7 Ln 4A IA LA In IA 1[7 'i i 9 Atb O N N O M (7 . RI N 2 C�) I� I; 1, t, t� N (h 6 O O w w CO S O O N O N Q p 0 0 0 0 o (O O O < M M 0 0 0 0 0 _00000000000_ C_� aOQ- 0 0 0 0_� C °V ° 00 V m m(0 S 0000000 �_} _a V. I m t[) l0 U)[7 m m 1() 1 tt') 1C1 IL m N LO W N t0 0 N 12 (7N (N� LO l0 �() M- a CV I) -6 C C rn R N to O d .c L C N = M (A « Z rn= N d m m m 5 0_ ,,- 2 ..-m .,2 E E 'w z z c & ( c m. F F a 'a. a s 2 = a a)tz u'. o m'E, H W 'd c 8 o m C� d c y c c p .- .9 o ro ro c _ .104) . .. w Li.I �q w u .p g E w m d o o s i 3 o C w c d c c g g . "4 m La (p _ t j CCO N J J (W6 w Y'O 2 % C n U.g N (�tl W W ..�.. in t 2 t t o m �7 m m t m Z = cV, E m 0 > j o)m (o > c > > 0 d �i o m is gg m w m 0,W E E O OO 0 0 t 3 S'� U E U U (ma n i;. in in c 15 N c13 ;n E E aaaazzz m E m min U 0 � oaaa°OaDDon o a 000 ci°it70 0i ¢ Q ¢ OUaoa. o.. mo ¢ M • • U o o z W r <C ON W (0 (0 - m 0 O X Lii V �ry LT 0. J n ° l O ©W W z ❑ z Z co J d = Z aL N U L ¢ Z W Z Lc,RI LL N z a f Z o a o L L i 0) T` ,, a ; m m m F' U W m CD SE0. 0 O t O < Z M ' o w w W W w CL - a t a. w O U U O D U a)m = w W my000000 v 'l r Q F < Mg 0 00 0 Vol � 3 ¢ a" o Y ~ A .0 ,. 0 >, ' w O z ❑ ❑ m aa s 0. d N N N 0. ZZ a. '11 ° 1' 11' Y ` d w U2 W{QQ w W W W W W W W w dm 7 G .. Q Y7 O Q W W _ m m m W W W W W W N N N 2 m, W O N O O N E 0 p 0 o ; wwm W , w ` ffi ¢ aw � LL � °) iomm ❑ a E � 0- L00000 o nww a a a zO � W m♦ O0 R J J J o WU7 t > } } » > E E nQaUJJJQv40oJ a. , w Z z nW W W W W W 1 °1 < V < m w W W 9 w v v Q Z W H O U C W v W 7 7 J H w + O o Z a. Vz W wvzJ -Im777000 a n n aidJJ # wm6022222L 01Z (.% Qu WNNN V zQ tmooux ¢ f y Cl U. G N CA y r N Z O V eo Cr, U o a) _0 V Or v O JJ J J m M N ^ f'. O In IC] N O O O a 0 a a Oa O -.. .-1 -: Cp')�� (((000 O O p M > O (b O m O) M N N N m Oa) Ov) O) Ql m m m N O) O O O N N N N O O N CV M M v v N N N N N O n in ul (O V m O ti to C O UY (O M N CD CO t0 OCO CQD >' Y Y t0 M (O M (o O O N N g O v 0 N N N ,- ,T- N L^D O O U N N N N N N 0. Q. a .r- N - N .- r n O O O O N N O O W W W W W W W N 0 0 0 U U U U U > > > > > > > > w w w w w w w w w 0 .. W W . W W 0 0 . Z < < < < < < ¢ ¢ ? n. v) vi I- I- i- i UE- UyZ i- z z '.. y - d C Z Z Z > Z Z Z W m W Q uj z ❑ w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00O cc N a U W m ❑ m m m m m m m w m W O a Y Y 0 z ❑ > W h z > > > > > > > U > U W d z Z J m Luz m ¢ U ¢ ZZZZZZZ , 0A T = W Mo Waa- W I--. wg w .d W J W W W W W W W WXX W W (0 r w Y O z zWzoom Ov1 z w wwwwwwwZZ m N � a O OwOo < zU h. w O O y- S W w W w w w w ❑ U U U U W WI ZV- Fmmmmmmm U m ZzJJU -) m < ❑ g ± ± 0mLL F E- - HH g ❑ ui a aL- ¢ OOppY Y W LL XX W W X OOO(CmZ(0z0" QQZd' Q Z Z Z . Z D W W p j J w K Xo0 oo1- z z0 - w (0 >>> > > > > w U m LL z > Er-, m m2z ¢ z000m � w w O < < w O w O w w w w w w w <Q O < w < O w 0 0 Z w m < w w J O p w LL W ❑ ❑ w 2 J a_ W W W W W W W 3 (01 a! U W U S w O U < O O w w w W w N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 5 , N) % Q r n n � V C c N n - ." a a r h � L d r '- N N N N N N N N Q Q N W r ,- N � r — . — - - - .,- ,- ,- * U Z aaof Ol a ) � *0m A 00) m M q a `m a 0 a o o) a a a) -al a) a) a) m O a 00000 .,. . .i , 00000 0 0 o 0000o000o000000 LL pp�� p Cp�� m Q d lid (A m 2 iA M t) (0 �mr) N (On (OO m (00 00 (On w 882 4 v v v0) ir) m u7(0i to (mn um) m !) v0) m L Z Q M M M M M M M M M M M M M C) M M M M M N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M 1 U Q/ 0) CC) o o o In k 7 IC) CL, o (0 CL) to Ct) o U) CL) :n t0 W M M M M m ul 4I W ( (C) m ( In o IC) p W W m LLz° w 8888 $ 00000000c88888 o0 0° oo 0 v ° OV OV OvOV ° o, oV oV ov ° ° ov Et • . , 161 1A - 0 Q0 0 m m N a h 0 ppff C7 0 0 N 0 0 0 C.7 a 0 • 0 f0 It) N m N N ,3R N C7� P) N n f2 m 0 4 cF FR E in 3.V. wN N.(0 (0.0� ��win 0 ca .0 0 C• p p p p O. tpj CO (00 OV 7 0 V 0 �c�O N m 0 (07 N aU In 'A u? u� U In O Crl 00 lf) IC7 u7 0 C J p to m m o W M N CO N M f- u t0 O N N 0 O 0 00000000 N 0 0 0 0 C�' 00000000_ C_7 (y yy C}Q�� { �_0 { (� (N� c a S. IOC) N tv lm iL') N N tM11 Imo ta[S 10 117 IL5 N N CL I- C) 2 d W C) • L n E" O 0 z N N t 2 8 a N N s y o ~ C r 3 ry 8 n r m @ N 0 8 g°o N g QCp o 2 2).3 C N= _ J C N C J J m 2 m d m §f ro - p - s g sg U J , N W C m .E. cr 2 v oU U 2 V 0 0 0 O E 0 (0 ° V. a . E E L C C) E O l' o 0 _ L C _ p N C E V 0a cr. OapasOO8aa0a` OciO6 a < U 0 z J a < 0 r C a N W o O H •c z_ ¢(? o s oo= oo Z gyp) Z zz -I ZZ C) mi LLNz Q ILL , > w > LL WW d >,Tm OtLLPwzx CC¢ t a E y a , d p Fx- o QV < V 0 ,j2000 cn t0 to co to 00 'fl m • y E V _E m t Z - < w m < < 3 3 3 3 <a w a x 0o a, od tW'J N wp)4o5aaaaa_ lnln ca m +' v W9chch 0 - - o .cmmmmm66 � � O d NCI' W W thW OcFicbthc� tifnp� oo a '. Za VJ 3 mJ ¢J a. LWL ZgO0NcoN00ON H cl 0. JN NCLC7c:)UCJCJN ik C) • t _ a w acwmaa02 MMa C) LL N N O 0N) O_ N = m_ C) N m r m a N 0) O U o '7 N N N N N $ g g g t. NN _ C taD pnp a) Imo O C7 tl a a N 88888 xi N m NCXi. ^ a N O) .- ^ O N 0) (0 Q) „ m Of O N CO 0 0 0 0 N N N N N 0 O 0 0 W 0 Cn N W W W W 0 W W W > > > > > > CC CC CC CC CC CC W W W W W W cnco lo0CD N Z z 0 J J J J < < < < < W 0 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z z Z z Z c z ¢ 0s¢ ¢¢ d Z Q w cn O J > > > > > > C) <0- < Z Z Z z Z Z z (J )W O m W W W W W W < < J a U Z } W W w w w w W O 0 0 W W > x O Joox Z - OO CC Q CC Q CC CC CC CC J I-- fO y OC � - uj CC J J 0 ? W W w W W O x= W W W W W W < > 2 W < < J W O w CC(?W W W W W W D O CC00 ❑ W W SJO CC In CO Cn 0 NCncnN N Yy N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 W .d. _ N t Q l N N N N C N �N N �N�1 N NI N N N N �V m O o"3 ammmrnmaialmo3o) ma0OSmm O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 aa C) U to Cr,N 0 0m) co 0 00) W 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O C (0 in 44) 10 (0 10 LO LO 0 m C0 CO 40 C0 CO m m m 02(.0 Z )m0 Imo CC) LO Imo COO Ilm) O Imo Imo m um7 Imo m I1O i10 N N 8.CU v . CC CO 000000000000000000 0 z a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a , , 161 1A ' - PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments Collier County Tax Collector-Monthly Collection Report For the Fiscal Year ending September 2012 ALLOCATION BY FUND Discount/ Gross Date Net Amount (Penalties) Collection Amount General Water/Sewer Received Received Amount Costs Received Fund Fund Assessments Levied FY 2012 S L570,427 $ 435,400 $ 1,135,027 Allocation% 100% 28% 72% 10/26/11 $ 8,861 $ 501 $ 181 $ 9,543 $ 2,646 $ 6,897 11/15/11 $ 142,077 $ 6,040 $ 2,900 $ 151,017 $ 41,869 $ 109,148 11/30/11 $ 487,695 $ 20,735 $ 9,953 $ 518,383 $ 143,721 $ 374,661 12/08/11 $ 306,388 $ 13,013 $ 6,253 $ 325,653 $ 90,287 $ 235,366 12/22/11 $ 36,014 $ 1,263 $ 735 $ 38,012 $ 10,539 $ 27,473 01/25/12 $ 57,463 $ 1,622 $ 1,173 $ 60,258 $ 16,707 $ 43,552 02/28/12 $ 31,900 $ 585 $ 651 $ 33,136 $ 9,187 $ 23,949 03/29/12 63,314 $ 79 $ 1,292 64,685 17,934 46,751 04/27/12 $ 140,164 $ (206) $ 2,860 142,818 39,596 103,222 05/21/12 $ 10,233 $ (304) $ 209 10,138 2,811 7,327 06/14/12 $ 96,092 $ (2,856) $ 1,961 $ 95,197 $ 26,393 $ 68,804 07/05/12 $ 1,967 $ (58) $ 40 $ 1,949 $ 540 $ 1,408 08/14/12 $ 4 $ (4) $ 0 $ - $ $ TOTAL $ 1,382,172 $ 40,410 $ 28,208 $ 1,450,789 $ 402,231 $ 1,048,559 %Collected 92.38% 92.38% 92.38% ITOTAL OUTSTANDING $ 119,638 I$ 33,169 I$ 86,468 Year Parcel ID Description Amount Comments FY 2010 1058920500 POI Hotel 119,627 bankruptcy FY 2011 1058920500 POI Hotel 119,627 bankruptcy FY 2012 1058920500 POI Hotel 119,638 bankruptcy Total Delinquent Parcels 358,892 Report Date:10/3/2012 12 161 1A Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Series 2010 Special Assessment Revenue Bond 1.Recap of Capital Project Fund Activity Through September 30,2012 Bond Issued(Construction Account) $5,500,000.00 Source of Funds:Interest Earned $7,977.25 Use of Funds: COI ($42,700.00) COI(costs transferred to checking account but not yet paid) ($5,000.00) Disbursements Water Treatment Plant ($4,957,506.86) ($5,005,206.86) Adjusted Balance in Construction Account September 30,2012 $502,770.39 2.Funds Available For Construction at September 30,2012 Book Balance of Construction Account at September 30,2012 $502,770.39 Construction Funds available at September 30,2012 1502,770.39 3.Investments-BB&T at September 30,2012 Estimated Tvpe Yield Principal Construction Fund: 0.12% $502,770.39 ADJ:Outstanding Amounts Due $0.00 Balance at September 30,2012 $502,770.39 13 4 4 4 161 lA 4 Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Construction Schedule AMOUNT OF CAPITAL Water Treatment REQ.# Date 1 CONTRACTOR REQUISITION OUTLAY COI Plant COt 10/20/10 Greenberg Traurig $10,000.00 $10,00000 COI 10/20/10 BB&T $2,700.00 $2,700.00 COI 10/20/10 Severn Trent Management Svcs $15,000.00 $15,000.00 COI 11/02/10 Dan Cox $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1 11/09/10 Port of the islands CID(reimb) $321,537.00 $321,537.00 $321,537.00 2 11/18/10 South Florida Excavation $26,503.75 $26,503.75 $26,503.75 3 11/24/10 Naples Daily News $151.02 $151.02 $151.02 4 01/04/11 Century Link $26,310.88 $26,310,88 $26,310.88 5 12/16/10 South Florida Excavation $18,008.90 $18,008.90 $18,008.90 6 02/01/11 Hole Mantes $2,561.25 $2,561.25 $2,561.25 7 02/01/11 Hole Montes $16,200.00 $16,200.00 $16,200.00 6 02/01/11 Hole Mantes $13,206.91 $13,206.91 $13,206.91 9 02/10/11 Benchmark EnviroAnalytical,Inc. $1,019.00 $1,019.00 $1,019.00 10 02/17/11 Hole Montes $1,982.50 $1,982.50 $1,982.50 11 03/07/11 Hole Mantes $6,250.,00 $6,250.00 $8,250.00 12 03/16/11 South Florida Excavation $12,762.00 $12,762.00 $12,762.00 13 03/29/11 Cardinal Contractors $27,000.00 $27,000.00 $27,000.00 14 04/06/11 Halo Montes $13,850.00 $13,850.00 $13,850.00 15 05/05/11 South Florida Excavation $18,587.25 $18,587.25 $18,567.25 16 05/16/11 Cardinal Contractors $95,028.60 $95,028.80 $95,028.60 17 05/19/11 Hole Montes $39,565.00 $39,565.00 $39,565,00 18 06/14/11 KW Controls $1,038.60 $1,038.60 $1,038.60 19 06/14/11 Cardinal Contractors $196,572.08 $196,572.08 $196,572.08 20 07/06/11 Hole Mantes $19,575.00 $19,576.00 $19,575.00 21 07/22/11 Cardinal Contractors $170,192.15 $170,192.15 $170,192.15 22 07/27/11 Hole Mantes $22,325.00 $22,325.00 $22,325 00 23 08/19/11 Cardinal Contractors $156,352.50 $156,352.50 $156,352.50 24 08/30/11 Hole Montes $19,700,00 $19,700.00 $19,700.00 25 09/16/11 South Florida Excavation $6,971.40 $6,971.40 $6,971.40 26 09/16/11 South Florida Excavation $4,601.85 $4,601.85 $4,601.85 27 09/16/11 Cardinal Contractors $278,892.77 $278,892.77 $278,892.77 28 09/27/11 Michael Evans Computers $3,255.00 $3,255 00 $3,255.00 29 10/17/11 Cardinal Contractors $85,416,29 $85,416.29 $85,416.29 30 11/03/11 Hole Montes $832.50 $832.50 $832.50 31 11/03/11 Hole Montes $43,975.00 $43,975.00 $43,975.00 33 11/23/11 KW Controls $24,337.00 $24,337.00 $24,337.00 € Total FY2011 $1,717,261.20 $1,674,501.20 $42,700.00 $1,674,581.201 32 11/14/11 Cardinal Contractors $266,314.14 $266,314.14 $266.314.14 34 12/15/11 South Florida Excavation $4,601.85 $4,601.85 $4,601.:85 35 12/15111 BCI Technologies $7,121.33 $7,121.33 $7,121.33 36 12115/11 ITT Water Equipment Tech $586,766.70 $566,766.70 $566,766.70 37 12/16/11 Cardinal Contractors $647,523 09 $647,523.09 $647,523 09 38 12/30/11 Hole Montes $43,672.50 $43,672.50 $43,672.50 39 01/24/12 Hole Montes 625,609.59 $25,609.59 $25,609.59 40 01/24/12 Cardinal Contractors $174,822.68 $174,822.68 $174,822.68 41 01/30/12 KW Controls $73,011.00 $73,011.00 $73,011.00 42 02/24/12 Cardinal Contractors $240,416.36 $240,416.36 $240,416.36 43 03/15/12 Cardinal Contractors $246,740.07 $246,740.07 $246,740.07 44 04,05/12 Hole Montes $48,232.19 $48,232.19 $48,232.19 45 04/23/12 Cardinal Contractors $89,577.03 $89,577.03 $89,577.03 46 05/09/12 ITT Water Equipment Tech $30,577.50 $30,577.50 $30,577.50 47 05/16/12 Cardinal Contractors $62,629.20 $62,629.20 $62,629,20 48 05/17/12 KW Controls $12,168.50 $12,166.50 $12,168.50 49 06/12/12 Hole Montes $65,278.80 $65,276.80 $65,270.80 50 06/12/12 Severn Trent Environmental Svcs $9,027.29 $9,027.29 $9,027.29 51 06/12/12 BCI Technologies $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 52 06/13/12 Cardinal Contractors $207,111.76 $207,111.76 $207,111.76 53 06/29/12 Soto's Lawn Service,Inc. $19,680.00 $19,680.00 $19,680.00 54 07/18/12 Cardinal Contractors $13,632.50 $13,632.50 $13,632.50 55 07/25/12 W.E.Johnson Equipment $33,088.00 $33,088.00 $33,088.00 56 08/03/12 Hole Mantes $49,981.80 $49,981.80 $49,981.80 57 09/04/12 Severn Trent Environmental Svcs $3,045.00 $3,045.00 $3,045.00 58 09/04/12 Cardinal Contractors $195,289.60 $195,289.60 $195,289.60 59 09/19/12 Hole Montes $21,350.41 $21,350.41 $21,350.41 60 09(19/12 BCI Technologies $33,278.67 $33,278.67 $33,278.67 61 09/19/12 Cardinal Contractors $52,400.10 $52,400.10 $52,400.10 1'ata1 FY 2012 53,282.945,66 53,282,945.66 $0,00 53 282.945.66 I • Grand Total $5,000.206,86 $4.957.506.86 542,700.00 $4 957,506 86 Interest FY 2011 Interest $5,743.88 FY 2012 Interest $2,233.37 $7,977.25 14 161 # 1A to X 6 r 0 3 E. s V ' a a a a E a s2 81 J ;' S at e r M N g N N .O >> N r T C o N ry > } Y >.. LL i LL ✓I N V LL f Mf M N v f. N N N V D N Ii• N LL N L_"" « o p.N "per 3 �£ nV < E. d 0r ` O a 0 d W LL_ E h ?'� LL� U yv ; _ lA>j va o ZQ. Mi W N. ..wrF E -- fir N E li;::, — ‘... . `--.; <-- °'''''7.; ° W ' '`' ''' i t E`- ° E `° ■.-. t 2 LL U W. & Yn LL W W uW W iIdIry iij _ a. :.Mry N:N vi�i N.WN N[n wx✓n M u C O S G S} . u .uG1 rx 0 2 Ef. E 31 1 .. a- E Q E g f r7•---' E a la z CA 2 § 1 $ o ti E [5 .g 1 : aEi 5 m a a rn- K d Q 3 a , m"i s, EL° a 2 eY: .0 u ' bag = N!5 �LL Rcs�i5 w E S •gi ar ;— m E n .(0 o ji . i .1 X 1 1 2 Z,, 5:, 0. fir',l /� D. n.. 1 6 1 1A 0 4 -14 a 1 I a i it g E as m S "2 3 . — v "2 2 i 74 8 2 g 1 to C-3■=,.,. 7r:23 t:tt ai A...g? s,5,2 E.,,,.3.-n§:,_:, 5 - C•■C`J SNI l•I .KI NI Cu E-- g i E v 5. ,,,, t. F L L .Las 1 =, s s s E =.,.5. ';' . G.-t -1'''' ''NENN11 3-5-5N • ..,3•1,4, , .33 3 .7a—E, - 'T 37,- -.- '"'.t. ' - - gt . g gg ggggggg ° &a, E u t .. . E 00 0 00 ti000(.>C)0 tau 0 (-2 a ' 13 1 K `,,, 3 z . A '6 S -. It2ce u >uj au' — - - ' -gt 2-13g 'i'. IS 2`tX 2t3 2 6+ ..... "v't"-t• .:;.; A po , 0 q V f'2 I'-'"''''1 • 0 ;7: ma 1 gl g,' &I.,:-7, -•""-'‘,4.. .`" 4—l'."."'› cn , g ° — ).-co • 0- ,,„ 22 -- 41 mt. M Et 1 ow ,., tn t3 - L . 7 a2 it 4 , r Lii A e a g g g A s 0 ? a ttt.0 "2 g 2 cki - ... P I a t ii E t ". 5 v .,:ttal 8 "1", g s I a ., .„ e, 1;3 1 a 1 11 fi a 2 2 E., i .U.t- i E 4-, r, ,g „2 2 1 E 2 1 Ts ESISn ' e . 2 t, o 0 • -2 2, . •P t-- - E ‘..' g F.:-■ . E ti .,, t-- tg .2 g E 2 E V `1. 1.21' Eg .p „ 8 § o 0 -. ° 1 5 -- E "`" ,.... td, .Z...I: 44.4.% ttg tttir,,, c• I'''t,,,..q.: 0, '28 21 0 gtg ''..-tt24'"2..- . g. Att.tAgy: g .. ' 2 .5 ,-' , -a - iVtE'V 6'41itt. g101 Aro loi,21.g , - - L .:62 :k''''">'-''—1"W ' t' tra tra:t-t:o A 42 '1*I-- - I t, 4 § 1 6 1 . 1A ,_ ..... ■.?,' ...7..re 0. " t :a rg. ..,- 0,,r,.. Im 61 1-.41 .4. .ri-4.v). ■Ft. ..., ch tr •-• & .... to 74). VS 40 01 01,.1.rn ct a, 7, fft .0, 04. .A. V*A.,0"A. 1 0 Iv 4, •-• w a 8 a- a a a 2 x 0 0 0 - 0. 0 co n to . o o o to is) o . r). o 0 0 0 .B. CO a, 2 2 P. 2 2 2 2 2.,s, .., 71.Pa.RI O.co In 0 0, CO a.0.'''' 71 ...74 pl 0 N s;sr., 0....N 0 09. co aa .0 ..;.. .4 0 to- r•-•-• <6 44 0 0 44 ars 44.4 0.94 7°''' m - - 7.4, 0.1.4 Os 10 0,194, S .., - V'. N ..:N 0 co 0 .0 •-• 03 0. n.sO pp al. .0 0.09 -• rn ay N *4- Ist 0..r.1 10 CO 01 0 0. P1 g. .... -''.. 0 14 acl. 7.1 -t,p 0 pop- 0 04 0 a^ 0 0 pa ...•.4'0 0 W.0 0.0' N .• 4,9....A-.4 in 8 =‘, V- w 4, 5,-‘'Na,0 0 0- 0 71. ss pa. ss',,., n 0 ns AP. sr*....' 6, re,,....,,r, 0,=, re, ..9. 0 'V P. =‘, "`.; 8 0 0 0 0 03 0 t. 'N 0 '0 4. N 0- 714 ,-7 . '7' ..v)a..7)§ '''''. - g In)e). o.o) - P. ••• MI ,..,*,. ,.4. CO so rn 0,sa0 7) 0 P. 7, Ft.; aa Z• ss.'s. °''''. • NN 0 491-pp ... a'. 0 tt 2 0 0 0 0. .., ,.`?;2.7;2 ....„„ . 0 4...• g on .) ..... A* Tri g' t ..c, in o o o o rs NO "' tfl 0 ria tss NI 90 0 0 1,-, co 01 0 0 N 0 tr, 7....„, 0 93 n 7.1 CV 0 0, 0 •9• .4 N. 09 0 in o .., .., ,,, 0 .E, m ,... r.. ‘r, , m a 4,■••• S 1-4 i I k i "r ;;') 0 4,' ti F■,'' Ls( I 1 4,4,0 _. .4. 0 ...0 0 ss 44 0 0.0," CO pa "s' Ast 0 „pp PP ss to'fr a a a it.,, 15 .° 0 0 sp 03 0 v* N. 7; .... 'N _1 a n, . .4- .w v--0.0 n■ . 0. 0.::: ..,,, w 44 2 2 P 2 2 2 2 X 2 i . 33 Ss' 0..3 0.0 ,0 rn 0.1 0 Ns ... N os -0' '''. ZA.. 03 ' ` . N. 01 0 7 0 Oa to 44 N N -1 .9. ,-..■ "I‘V'V...•... ;., to „tr. 9i. Ts p., 01 S.,'0 0 0 0 pp Ns 0 "r","j`Z al 0 GO N CP V- 0 0 0 CO 1.7 0 0 r-- o in a-.., o •g, Ll rsi Fa ..": fr..... - m . ,... m „.... 0 r. - „„,- at) .7,-. ,,,, ,.. ..) oi,t) --. --70.).• . 76. 11 ■ 0 2,0..,,, S 0 ,_, .0. '..7. 2 t- . a .. . . 9-1 •ii•S 't''''-,-- V w w 0.. en 0 .4 - Prl.../:,In ... ,:t ay 4, -,--• ...+. al, ..,," t 1 N a g t 1 T'- .i... 8 l 1 -0 0 , t 1 . t 2 1 ..., t r. 2 E i I 1 1 I "2 1 el " l' E'*5 2 < 2 .,..■ T. 4. ' l', - il. r _2 i 1 E 1 El ; :2, t ! i '- ''' t 3 t_ ,'. E t l'' •CE"2 § "" 1, I V, ..„ i r '.6, ,-4-;79. ,, ,,, n'f'3, ... _ 1 t .i. g. 72"Ei 7i b o ■i fn i -t53 ' "A 1. L'" i "Fri .1'vi kn 4 ,..4 ,., ‘.?, e < •: '3 1- 41 F .,* 161 ,, 1 A 00 og . . ... aaaFIE § ,4,ta00 -;aamg5,ax. ,;...ainsHau:1 a'a E. 111,4,14,..Z4 . ,%, Egaaaa 0 .9.a.Ag aa EI, t,.... . ,. ._,..„ to Waaa,11: aaav?, 6 000 " - =- 0R0g - xamr.; pmFslaam 3 .,?. R ,. .„, . N —■N , . 0 „... Ea. aaai: aaa, 6, 8 ,04 % -aaavgana5aal:i va..:3!-cHi;latil. . . 1,..,. -.. spriig:iaaaa2namlEaRx ,...,v,g,r-e, IHEaa..:4 R ; .! a. §4:z4gA.'*---a...i.za- ia • .2.1.'laa Z 6 E 171 3 0 m 17 .0 ,toot., 0! g ° R;it; sm .,L- taarammam “ Itzi ,„auiluipiaa!4, aa '4 0144 a: i f . ,.... .' t '3 I., ,:,'t3.3,;:: 2 - .4 . ... . . . . 4 WiU4aEnE4NaEW P...1'42.2i1321. 3. ".- *" ;:f ,It ... M . 4. ,... , , , 1 , 0 ...,. . -a,1-• a ;..., ‘,. - . t7, ,li,:aaa &.:,a, smtz - zamaav4anacizmA va,f7.,viiEimE aa .4-,In R .. ,7; . .:,, ,,; ..d...nit t 'm X !!! ;■1 ,3!2 ;: T! '!--,'''.:'i - .. . Fm -,N I"- ... . . —. N . . . -,-..., a ., . R ,7,,,,..,„ .4 0 . _ 13 „ ,,.. . p. x1-40.1.aLl 11. E., ,,. ,... , , . ..aa §, ,Tlaaaaaa.°:' a:'4.q . .. - F,: x -- ,-----,:.! ,.. • ,•5 „ & ... . ,.. . . - . . . . ...N N Vi.MRaaaa: - ., :lmaga,.g .-4 x::,,,r„-.; :,, ;;, ,,. §tc•?.,, a a ,4 41 . ■.' ,, .. . , 8 :11 ma4i;i7-7, $ - a . . AC eM10, 11 Z ; 'g A 1,.. g —.1..r. a p .ta F ; Ill ' n1A , . ....„ . Iss , Iii -„, .NnnE . lin 45 1 ., 1 i 4" 11 T. 1 :2 1 .,, E ba a ll " 1 2' S',g .- - E, ■ -2• 1 t , ' '' '' llzh. Illiiii-g rg,P . i 4 5 ** * h- ' ' ' '', 1 n1 jl -ggg ,W 2 ; ias2-2- :.4 SI , 16L ' lÀ PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROJECTIONS GENERAL FUND Adopted Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Operating Revenues Assessments $417,984 $417,984 $417,984 $417,984 $417,984 Interest/Miscellaneous $2,177 $12,995 $13,758 $14,422 $14,983 Total Operating Revenues $420,161 $430,979 $431,742 $432,406 $432,967 Operating Expenditures Administrative $120,826 $124,451 $128,184 $132,030 $135,991 Maintenance $223,540 $230,246 $237,154 $244,268 $251,596 Total Operating Expenditures $344,366 $354,697 $365,338 $378,298 $387,587 Capital Expenditures CIP Projects $70,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Capital Expenditures $70,894 $0 SO $0 $0 Estimated Beginning Cash Balance $1,299,493 $1,375,775 $1,442,179 $1,498,287 'Estimated Ending Cash Balance' $1,299,493 $1,375,775 $1,442,179 $1,498,287 $1,543,6671 WATER AND SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Adopted Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Operating Revenues Assessments $1,089,624 $1,089,624 $1,089,624 $1,089,624 $1,089,624 Water/Sewer/Irrigation Revenue $208,000 $208,000 $208,000 $208,000 $208,000 Interest/Miscellaneous $2,838 $2,838 $2,838 $2,838 $2,838 Total Operating Revenues $1,300,462 $1,300,462 $1,300,462 $1,300,462 $1,300,462 Operating Expenditures Administrative $141,498 $141,498 $141,498 $141,498 $141,498 Maintenance $430,411 $439,019 $447,800 $456,756 $465,891 Total Operating Expenditures $571,909 $580,517 $589,298 $598,254 $607,389 Capital Expenditures CIP Projects $50,000 $54796 $54,796 $64,796 $64,796 Total Capital Expenditures $50,000 $54,796 $54,796 $64,796 $64,796 Debt Service Principal and Interest $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655.360 Total Debt Service $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 Estimated Beginning Cash Balance $30,917 $40,706 $41,715 $23,768 !Estimated Ending Cash Balance $30,917 $40,706 $41,715 $23,768 ($3,314) 19 , , 4 161 1A , 4 1 I t I I CD N COOOU1C`CI l0 LPtO r-1 I HrHMriUi H I U)H to i 1 UT M O O D co If) 40 l0 CO U) t N O I H U) U)re tO I d O u1 O CO l0 O I 40 +.0 I a w D CD 4 i C O NU}t (N 40 U' i N N O 0 ID R h W HIO C) 1 N E. o In op co C4 c' I q'10 ri 0 1D U1 0) r ID M al ■ O VI Mt') NO N t HNU}N r4'1 40 M I NN d' w H U}UT in Cl)- in Cl)-Cl)-UT U} I -Cl)- 1 ' O ID d'M U' I 4 O 0 I FC U} UT CIT H f H H 4 U} il} I a n i ■ Q I H I I C14 I I IX 4 D)U14., as O 00000 o 0 0000000 a o o O 4 00000 0 M 0 0 x 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 Ht , • • • • I • • • • • H 4 UT UT ill.i/}(/}ill Cl)- U}U}Cl)-ill U}ilk in- ill- U}U) U} p I H I I 4 (r I U I I w 1 ■ ' S 4 I I M C1 1 I 1 I a ■ 4 1 O o 0 0 0 O I 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O a 0 a d d 0 a o 0 0 0 1 I >4 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O i 0 0 0 U U U U (/T in- U} U}U}Ur Cl)-i.}U}Cl)- ill- 1 • / ! 4 1 U I I 1 0 H 0 a I I U) p 1 I 1• Pte , 3 I 1 1 O O O • O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 O I 0 0 O t O O O O O O mo+ I 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O d 0 O i O 0 0 1 IW • • • • • • I a i U}U}U}U}Cl)-Cl)- U} U}U}if}U}U}Cl)-U} U} I U)-UT U} I ■ I H F I I I I t I I 4 (U• H I i I 4 O 4 4 a u) I 4 4 I i DI I I a i I E,U)• U) I I I tl HQ I H H 14 1 N O N 4 o d 0 0 0 0 O I a CD 0 0 0 0 0 d I C O t C ' N O O O O H CI I �jy, I a I H H I 00U100 0 Cl) 0000000 0 I dt O U' H I H w H i H I r U}U}U}U}U}U}U} U} I CO if} 03 I I N x U) i I U}U}U3'C!T i!}(/} 'G' I r I H I I U H 1-I 44 I H H I QH DI I 1 R' W 4 N C` I [1454. I I I N N 1 • >+O O H I. N CM I Cl)- UT a H 1 U} U} I HXa I I O°aao, 1 X + 1 N t I N a I U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ■ 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 O t 4 1 > 000000 0 I.. 0000000 0 I O C1 0 I H I U) I U I • U '. }U}U}U} in U- in U}U}if}U}U}U}U} U} I U}(1} in, >4 O', 4 P, i I I W I W I a • 3 I pa X GI ! I I 0 U -- t t t U 5, I 1 4 W H I . UC I I 1 4 I Y 1 a {x, N H M I 0000It1 C'^ N 060001.11 h N t O 1 mt0 V' 4 O1H MH ID at 4 0 Ill H ID I 000003 t0 U) UlM CJ CD C7 W Ifl q' 1 H 00 0 4 L) LD H 40 1/40 I I I 4.0 I.0 H CO O O CD UT CT 40 N • N N O 040 CT N d' 1 M W 0 I Z CO o in l0 ID N M cn ID H CD 40 Ill 0) N I 441 M al I W W U'M ID C• 0 Ul a H N U}N H U'tO M I rlN U1 I Q a U}U} in U} U}U}UT il} UT I .U} - ; a I H Q CD r) H I N t` I t U) 4 UT if}Cl)- H V} � 4 Iw U I P4 C7 I DI I a C I I N ; Cr) w W I w .LI 0 : KC I V7 •• 44 W 5-I .. 1 1 W 1 0 H I ••w m U co Cl) co I ■ �. I /y1 1 u) H H In 1 U][UE�) H I CV I Q I > E-4 I (UWhW W z I Zz .« I H i i H H I HFGU • I aOW Kt r .. 1 W W E-+ ■ A I g4 HC9U)CI) Q I .. U�U4 Ci3CO�) E. XX z o� 4 H.UC E. I H H H X Z 0 w 1 Cn W 12 I")- O CO >4>4 w E"1 I H H (I) I HH,44 a I H xwXp;UZ ) 44 Z Z 0 U aaa Q co co H + U((U>wwww h m as K ( I4H� E a U E12FC I 0 Kt 0CiH Z I aaa041H C F 000 z I wwxpwKC � E ��wH�W� � z �H a a i awzcorw co I NH 11 HE.H I H I QQHU)L').� 3 1 Cf) X JR'.I-7aU)`.3: a U) U) a M 1 o(HlCw a 4 Ha I (U 0 U 1-1 , 'Z,U G,aX 4 I q w o 1 ZXo a UXUXIZ0 H 4 ti U0U)U:>iU H I >4 0a Ei a . EA I I H I Q Q HU)Cr1 0 I Q 0U0 aaU)U 0 I a t o wQ 0 H',�1 U w aa 0 r l I w w w w I .� u E+ I U„ �..� _._. ._ , .„ 1611A hh0 CT,0000 H H O H0000 H+-10+-i 0000 N N CCU ' r 00 ri c-I OHO 000 +--I*4 Ob O W p N CO NN V+00 0 NN O O H OD OD 0 l0 0 H+n UI H N N 3 4 H H l71 to to HH L} �' L} fV Q _ _ tf 1 F V+d+ + 0 M ' F" O a • 0 ■ H ' a : o O1 0 + a, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 O O o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M + ,. 0 E. g4 ! U + H t 5=. f 0 41 + a 5 m O G a 3 M ' • ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 I. if; in. t? U- 4 U O H ' 0 a M U a 00000000 O O O 0 0 0 O O 00000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00000000 0000000 • a U + 0 0 '- 3 ' if) en- L'} V? en H 01 X a iF Z H am I ' We) r x i ' Q + m ' U E_'m U ! ' w + 1 HZ , .-1 '11 oH0 Mr-0-O0D 00000000 00000000 HH Olb000O H H0 H0000 H ri OlC V)m ri 0 O H 0 H w ! H [ H V•MM H H'n U) H U m + U ' U OO. U- C.O. O. 4FH + 5., 1 m NN > 0 0 r H ' 4 'F F + 0 ZOO ' O Z o C>ra ' N 1 P U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 O0 O O O O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O + H m CO- UT V? CO- 0. ' U a y + a 1 _ W a Z3 + o OU ! W o ' " Z + + 0 ' =7 W Pr-OC-MMOO Hrt OHOOOO HHOHC700O r4rACDHr-c-p0 00000000 0 oonoo ry HH H 0 0 O CVN 0 O M0 O 0 ■.+ F HH H H H tJ• H H �• {t} N N • if} F. z NN W CO 1`1 Z H 0 {.. H W F X ' S 0 + KG ' W ! a ' Z N 00 x£xx--gmur UUE£--UAU- Ze. ZU--UUU- UEZZ--UUU- XXXX--.pfaU- £XXX--0Ga O s 1 OOOO'-1- - in- OOOO'-1- - ur 000O'a- - tn- OOOO'- - - i 000O.I- - e aoo00- - o ' E. ' 51UUU0 4-l+' W W UU,-1,1 t") 51 e4 UN (l l) 5151514 ,...1 a h W w551 4 0h./ W W W W - - I'D ' ' I 1 C H n i i ' , ,...q1-400‘n ' ' ' ' 0 H q(2 ' I ' 141-Igo ' ' I ' 4 H 0 U ' ' I IgHIA N ' m✓E+m"---UF W ma Fm—U W m>FU^-'U.1 W U -4U - W FC W m 'Fw---W U m✓Fe—U es1 ' C4HOF 1-7 kHUF 0 r4HOF 0 UHUF +-7 UHUF 7 UHUH H 0 ' FFFCHW51 W.-1 Et,F4HW W W'-1 FHFCHW51 51.1 FF'4Hwt=151'-7 FFra;HW W W'a HFFC'HWf1U ' H +a + WU3 UCCUH 51 UZ 0a0H UOZ�-+0ECH WU�.+UZmm0H 51 U30mmCH UUZUUCnm H I + UI H00U05n .'EFCH..1 r"'3UU W Z+f HUUUU W X44. '"'1. UUU UI H ''�UUa1 .£KC F' UUU ' o ' W ■ FFFE.FE'E- E. FFFE- FFFE+ E-+ r+FFEHFF FFFFFE-CFF FFFHFEE- FE-+E.EHFFF a F 3 3 3 3 3. 3 3 3 3 3.. 3 3 3 3 3.3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 X 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 H •• W O p O O G1 5 00 M p 0 0 HU'-' + W 0 H H N V 0 H Qo. 1 4 ' O U U W U U H H H H , .,. . 161 lA i I , , O MMOInma OO v 1 O C h OH r1 C'Cs OOOOIntn Oln NNONIn In OIn I Nr-i HNHH C'C` , ■ I un CIHN • M I En 0 MM CI\D kD 0 I M HHM [N [II HCD N N N In In H 1D I In C1 H In 0 o ri O t . ' CO N r-1 al t .1 H H CO CV CI • , VD ID VD N N H • !. ID\D tD M M H ! 0,r. [MN ;/I- UT t t0 m H H I r-I ri N I • H II 1 0 t11 lfi ri H CO H rq fn- I O i I 0 CO W H • {1} t ! I I ■ U I ii N i- 1 rh I C3 . g g . H 1 ■ P4 I 0 a“..) Ga • Q O O O O O 0 0 0 I Q O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0© ; 0 0 0 0 M ■ 0 0 F O . , H a • • t yr 3 ! H C a in. . +ir 1 s<r ur I H I W 0 r ' , . , . ' WI in I • , 1 , , 1 ON 4 I 12 W 5 1 i i, 1 I I C) 00000000a � 00000Qbo oQOOOOOOO o000000oo1ooOb0000 $ i 0000 O • I $ O • I , 1 IL-y if} U� , {i} � ■ 3 A 1 w I I 1 U I 13 1 O H O I I-1 I I I 1 1 C t r , I t 1 t e 1 1 1 I 1 t r 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1. O O O O O O Cl 0 O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 g Q O 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 Irt' x O i O I O 1 I Er; 4 1 I-.: • t!? • Al} a +n' i1} 1 tfl- , 4 H I C e I I H E.i I 1 RC I 1 O 1 I W [n 1 Wq 1 I R 7 t H 1 m I 1 E-i1nq t I H H • H O (r 1 Y r 1 O I 1 M m O O I I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O a O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 b O O 00 I M M O N ,H 1 /- 0 H H N In In O O I r H N H f)11 I H • I O.01 Cri �. {/. i U H H t x in- 1 - . tl• +h VI- N N 1 Cr CL 1 1 i e >i00 I H .1 , H I , , H H a e , E-4 PG 0 I I 0 4 1 Z 0 0 X I 1 . t O0.1 C), 1 r 1 - I i I I I ' I N N g O I b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 QO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 I 0 0 O O O O b O O O O Q O I 0 I b H • I in- ;l} Sh t L} I U DI- I +n ,^yH I CC y Ci I G 1 t i 11 P..' E • O Q ' U 1 0 I _ Y 4 k I N H ri CI 1.0 • CD O O O O O H O O - N 01 ri O rl rl H CO a O Q O In u1 O H 111 N N O N In tL7 O ul N r-I ri N CD ri H ID I C.ID H d, : O H H H ri.n O ; r M ID rI M N C'.-1 CO N N N ut ul H . L/1*C) Q 01 H . ! 0-C`- N r-i H H H H to ul • 3 , l0 t0 l0 N N r♦ID CO H - l0 I H • {lt H H CO N r t H H N 1 0 N N co ,.i VI- i O , t 1 0 �• i . 1 C) M I I H (N? E [Jt I 4 CO 1 W I I I 1 I I i 1 r's N 1 I N 1 I , +✓ £ X£ q ■ ZX£X-,ggo- ZZ : --ggaXXXX r XXX 0 F ZZZ �] I 000011- - o- 0000.1- - a- 0000.1- - 000 4 PI0 1 000 1000 ,I own I wHWw.1.1h WWXXhi444 -1 WWWW.1.1I- Www 4ah( I Www O a I fr1f11C=I E ah� I I I I I K4Fi q ' Mg Hq 0 11 1 I *CH 0q I W I En I W 0H0vn I CnHHCn--P7KtW a)>HCI CACGCz1 CAHHC XIIIC W C!) I W OHCC1n CO 1 W I 1 PHUH i aHUH I-4 Ia;HUH ,-1 a :> HWC CC 4> HN ■ .1 EAWH Hal 0 , I HHC.CHW W W11 E.HCCHW W NI....1 HH4HW C+I W 0 Hfs)H 0 E 5)I-i I H I H CI4HCnC=1 W W W I I W UCZa)cnGnH WUZ 000COGOH W U- ZZ CncnCnH W4HCn W W W W W4Ha) H 1 I CO XHUHC7CDC7.1 I XFH0000Ca XK4 H000ttI ZrCH0000CA ZHUHCDEDC711 £HUH oa) I H4 HKCFC.4 1-1 I ElICCHryKCFCIa EiICCH I o H CxUZZCn(1)cnH E-IHHHHE-I E-H 000Fp00000 HHHH�jr.HE.E� OUZCCaF�)CnCnH 111UZn CD $ HFtH'J00000 , 33X33$ S ' ✓ 3333333 3333 33 . g4 g4 H F)00In 1 E4-+FCH r{ Q Q I 1 ■ 0 q Q o a H I I EI ••H I 0 . 0 1 1 0 Ha 0 N IH 11z� 1 [.rye-�'I o H I I ,.ya ng- 144 1 I k 3J 0 C9 ED I I 1 �7 I ■ co ■ I (Y , , 16. I 1A , , . I cr cj1 tD I Vt C!] 1 W l H 0 H l0 I a N t,H • i N 4: H t0‘.0 N O 0 I W H try M 4 ur 0 H ■ a a 0 -- M U Cs.i 1 0000 M .0 $ H ■ • i E.I 411- 4 '.7 i H I C.ra iuI 4 W I I a 1 I t , 1t 1 C� r , 0 Pi I 1 a 0000 I 'S, 0 4). i 4 , U O 1 H 0 i a tm I a I I t I t 0000 If- ., 0 E W E I H a , H : H1 x 0 a GI W ■ a t.7 ✓1 I I I H�--++ q 0 o HH I +1 i MMOO H H C I , nu o H rW E H , 0 or • U U I _ W. 1 W 1_W I N N C 4 W W r..t t 1 I E t:a H O O I H I I W a I H I H HPH , W Z o o I X I t E X 0aa1 a W N 4_1 1 N I4 000011 3 14 0 , H V) U (nr 1 I H i1 H W H s 1 I a X I 1 F E 3 I 4 O OU t 1 k. ■ I a 1 1 W , �} a , ,.� H H'd1, , a a I. 44 E H H H W I U4A I H I W H . it X H _ . to t r W I M M (N ' W O , , 1 H M I t 1 C(} M- 1 1 1 W 1 I M a4 a W H N ■ W N X P 0 4aQW I H P O I-7 H 0H04. 1 H I U H N H A F I 'J 1H WWWW a 0m 444Ia-7 Ca 0 I 0 a .. H Ca 0 WH z P KC W n a r ,. , . 161 1A i. I I I i 1 I . a t [}t M H CIDOCI L0 0 C 0 C 01 00N NN ONU1 OOm I CCHCONOg1 to I . a InHCOC 0,TM I • ul I U) c HO H H C0 H CI N N Ntn OD C) 1 MN H M In HCO t I MNH 01 to HO 1 i a a IB tD k H H • • 1 CO lC C N H • II CV) t.0 N H • t �, S Fite I OD m C01 ■ r' € N i N I H t H to C7 H I H OD t . ri CO t ■ 0 1 n N . r N t • • I . , a W t F to . r VI , Cry t a 0 V} i V} : ■ Q'i , 6 V} s I , I t I 0 I 1 H 1 t [1 9 1 f t O t 01 U - 12.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O b 0 C C 0 C 0 4 0 O O O O O O I O O O O 0 0 0 00 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 d o I 1 01 I a O 0 O F < v} i in- I u} . ca a I H i I I Ga a 0 I I a W . 4 CA ra 1 Cu I 1 O d 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t O O d 0 O 0 O 0 1 O O O O O O O o . 1 m O O 0 . C t. f I t/} V} i7} x it} - . 1 1 . t . 1 I U I O S H 1 O a a i 1 1 I I [L t t i 1 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b 0 0 CD I 10 0 CD 0 0 0 0 00 H' t O O o O. 1 MI I LZ , L't if} ih 1 , I 1 H 10 1 I I i 1 1 1 1 n4 H4 H I 1 1 1 I O H • t i 14 U] ` W a , 1 Z C7 t 7 E.a cQQn Q a r O H m.I H H 1 ',N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O d 4 O * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00000000 , H N O 4 O I O O . 4 F—U e NH a H H v} v} v} I I• WOcn Fxr4 r W ar I a 1 UlH ug pU',FH * Cl* U7 s . . . H Mt M. I 1 HUH 100 H I t 1 W W H . H Cn W I EN.., FH E4 I-1 7 I . i i MI (z] ZOO H O t I I I W W W H as 1 of 1 1 3 1 S W p 1 1 Cl] Cn CD N W a ry i a, 3 I 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I Cn H M O CD O O 1 H CO a VF V} , 1 U} I 1-141 Cli 1 U Q + Ur it i t t H CI]F �+ I W r 1 . , r F cn tat f t 0 t . ZHO O P+ r E . O . . O H O H I rata t r Ex, Fw O ■ U 1 Cz, t I 1 W v R i EQ I V t t . Q O H . 1 E I r t Qkl� r O I 1 t 1 I a I a Cl] .IM H VIN CD CI l) OOOO Lf100 N N N ON In 000 CO ul H C C-0 C'LI) l0 U)H aC NC V.In I 700 I R,' HOrI HOl HM NN NU) CO C) MNHMUI HCO . I MNHMIn Ha) . U CY1 X a H H l0 lO W H H • LC)W l0 N H I , l0 l0 ',JD N H 1 .SC W F FC CO m rn - Cr i 1 — N I DIP t Z H I11 CO I .-1 W O H H N CO • I N t HUH a Cl] Z N �- I I 3 - I I H X 4 ICI 0 c4 V� C I 1 I ' I �C W co H N IC- # I i in t I W W HI • i I I I W a Wa W E Ik U a . a it W Q F W � Z , r1 H W N Z I I i. I t I W U)E . r E M N 01 HHHE--QQC ZZ £H-- QC- ZZHH--OO i HZZ 0 i i ZZZ 0 I I HZ o 1 0000,4 - - in- 00001-i- - in- 00000- - yr t 000 own 1 000 aWQ 1 r ZWO C I H I WWWWaa}D WWWWaah WUW Waah ! WWW I )]- a} I WWW as H I I I I i Iii H Oq Q II I I F1;H qq Q , I i I I H gq Q N I I H a f]V)- , 1 . Fah]0 t 4 H E H `6 . UN E,01 W FC W CS HCn�-CI], W M KC W t O I W OH OC- W 00HO I , ,.:i g N r I ,"3 . HHUF a HHOF a HHUF a . H :? EICA .. HHN q 1 I Wtn0 HN I I 1 FHISI-IW W c.1,q HHFCHWW W a HHFCHW W MI 1-4 1 NU]H 0 I H w 1 ud I HUH CO COCOH WU ?,zcnCCH WUZ 0CU}H I WPEHu)W W W W W NEcnPW W W . C�'L�- tk H I , . x i EFCH 00000 ZC H00C0Q CO E IH0O0OCO 1 EHUFC7CD04 EHUHCDC9CD0 I i HHH I I. H.cL'H Q. K C KC I-1 E s, H . C:.IHH I O I I C H l I HHHHHHaa H H C444HHCy R. H W C 4 C i H r C D Z 0 cnH a FCUZH,7CJCH I o a I F . m0mmcnU1mcn w W Wu;Ul toC0Ul omCmomU1Ul I HI�H.h`J 0'I-)0 a H I W W W E . In I • O I H H H H 0 I ' Cl] 1 N 4 o i F I F 000 W H a H 1 • 10 I I r Z Z Z NH I W I 4 H N I H F i 0 W i W , 0 0 0 10 I I U1 I H H C# 1 CI] 0 161 1A U1 1 r-i N In lD 1 [11 N. O V' lO m I M C-• r a I-+ ; i w M V r W M I M N M N N i <i U} U} i q 4 H H H I UL .U}. U} } W U) Vy X X 0 0 v N �e+l L4 w N ° m Ci) H X 0 Ez O '- £ w W w CO 0 c' w H 4 O co W 0 W U) a H C7 'J H KC H C7 Z H w o 0 o H w 0 w w x a o 161 1A H a (s] tcl.cp O 01 r-i to U7 co N M UI O O N O V�rl 0 O o a W nits co 0 • , co oi0 VI HON N W I M lO N N N O r Ill r N ILl w M H cr N W TM H a 0 0 N H M 0 lD 0 O1 O H 0 M I11 Ol to U1 r N V N O O 0 N H O Ca on w h O O 0 en O l0 O U) U) Ill N to CJ N .r N 0) N O It a H O +D co 0 N O U} NHO CT O yn <r LO ul r Qon N •Crt O 0• 0 W 0 H ON 0 Ch O O W Ill 0 u1 N on N H U) U 0 a H l O COOUNH 11100N l3dINM 4 r H O N l00cr H CD 03 ri M Cr W Rt . • • • . • • • . . • • • 1f1 LO O i004'HON O1a M l0 Ex H cr 10 N000htn h CV Li) U In H H co co N In •r H w U O 4 H a 0 H wwwwwwHH 00000000 w U co U)U)co U)co U)Cn wwwwwwww 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 M w a H H x x x x x x x x .1HHawU)U)U)WUI U)co F U w QwoWix' 11111-1 CI H A O Ki Kt Kg E.gg d gg E.gg w z az Itxww wwwww EL. N 0 0 0 0 01 (z H HHH HO O I I I I I I r N N N N Cxl 0 000 O H H I I N 00 0)0 CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N w www ww H xl \ U O C3 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 H >4 HHHHHHHHHHHHH O U 0 a 1.(1 N lD OI OINHrNMH(TH H w I I I I 1 I I I I I I I CA cr Tr Tr d+NHHHHHHHH I I I I I I l 1 I l I i Ta MO W r-1 Or--CO OInHM Io O1 a HO CL)ONMM q <r Li)ul nr C4 H CD Ull LOO l0O l0O VD VD VD l0O l0O OD CD [t ptl I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I O a 7 cr T'd'Tr nT d'TT cr cr d V c7' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 [t] U I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I KCd,` N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 161 1A N a o N O N LM tr 14 N C7 N a 4 N 0 N r-1 al O m rn N "N H 0 < o R N E o m 6f, r in OD O 4 H P4 A w 0 kn m m co co 4 o, P N 0 M f+} O■ W r tx w Ni [n U a H o H O N N W W N N O O H U N N a. U O Q m m H IX O W W U I m m a H H E H H W W 4 a.., •• cn W O a WU U H w 8 U rl Ca U 4PI N GI Fq 0 � H HH H U a7 W a ---.. H NPU o w 0 xmxx I N3 a 000 a a a al W H a. H H H Cil CI) q U 8U 1 6 1 IA o... ›. ).-. o.... o a C as ai co C (n co co C al 5 s 5. 0 c c 3 3 2' 3 3 3 2 2 2 n n 2 2 2 2 2 -, co csc 0 5. C 2 c. 0 cp or Cr" tn 0 0 1.7 117 a o cr c o 0 o CD 0 o (5) 0 o 51- r- 8 0 CV kr) 4 9 o CL) t e l C\i C V L O u c s i n 0 o 0 0 n - o 0 o or CD CL) o co. cl . cn g ul• n Ni 4 to . O o o 2 0 6 co N. y- 1-- •r- CV 0 CV t•• 'V- if) ...- "-- .- in 0 CO in ..- r) CV ,.., C 13.. t CO" 0 N CO CD "3 0 N •d• f'•••- N 01 :ft.. N N •VO3 141.}P''' C 1,3 1•.'.1 ,c23 19.2,,,r CI 1•:. § c9 G 8 co .-- co oo co co !,.. ,c, o ts- -90. 8' 2 ..,c Ca a) ...... 17 •••-' 0 CD a '-.a E tri ....: •-• -- C.: 7 a 0 CD sg •0 C a 0 ,a, o N ,•,3 •S 2 D c0 sa 33 (7; 0 ml "if) 15 a r7; - al /.. g c fa .a• cr) ..,.._-v E ,_ u DS CO 0 ct, MI ,., .:8 co ,.•:,. o ... b- ,y, .9/ .2 14) ?? a -17 CD m 0 g .2 2 21 `›.-, .•*5 /7, ° 8 t'i; . r: 0 2 ' •0 7, li 0 ■•,^ c c • JE cl 2 iii to ••••• c 0 C c '- 0 o c, T -a.3 E cn 5 Ts 1I2 *g. cj t5co (lc E 75)8 co c 8-o .. o "c8 4:-.' 2, g 2 1•1.i.t15 .... 0 CC ?"- 0 - ro oj tri = co '5 2 ' a' ' ---. 2 .r ,- ?.:. N. ...5. 0 0-a 1:2 ° (1" - - cc ^ *-c ti) 1., 6 lo 7,37, iy, L., -g, 32 s_0 0 Ei 8 4t 5 ,1 ,,, m E 0 =,, ( o 2 e- 1:, g ,,, 6 h- ti 0) c < .- 0 -0• n c 2 - 0 5 0 cli ra- 9., ...i. v CD ... L, ., = 0 .>2. A 8 8 8 2 • 2 @, . N E ta —.. ■9 E ; u- o ° fa `` ° II z E °a co"1 n .4 0 0- IA E CL VI C 0 ° Up a •.-• 'il° .4. td ki c P_- E .: ..e 2 0 c 0 2 70 2 ..c:,53 K, g F., E 4" c 0 .::: > tl; .0:1'''-' ID LL 0 -..... 1.1 N E a--• C > g 7 ■.-••C c CV 41 g -8 8 * •'4,-;4t -2■ 2 6 15 E -, '- ° - 2 8 c`-' - CL ‘.....• 0 1" 8< a- To c- u"0 2 .0 c g -- 0 a) c • --0 - •''i-2°' p!" a- as .0 " 8 .-. 8 2 l' ...- .9_ -- 8 . . 0, . C., 0 0 a C -.0;•E - 1C3 i'''C C *•-• •'-' a; 7 ••-' CI - ra' - ('5, '4. cr) c, o 5 - ° t.,.. v) 0 0 1:::Lu 5 •-•" 9 EL • 8 2 c 15 t?- 6 a.' •• co..* ....: _z -,--; _a3 7-1, s , Fa 10 '2 0 --..9 6 ..,,,, .2 L 8 8 8 8' Of c)-c-3•.2.•lo 2, To Th. :8 "E 0-"?, ‘,..., 2- E -"n• e, .Z. - 5^ c - . m 0- C - row - 0 000 (7.5 col ,_ E „, 2 • , a ,_ _ 0 c II' -g 43,- cr° 43 -0 1-, 0 1-'.- . F:.- al tta kt- E 0`.-1:4 6 o —co o 5,,T co ..5 8 _..0 ox ,,,' 2 '.6 7.5 0-E -em .....,4t ?..r., Z E E c ..... ... - C.° '3 - PEglf . -4"\1 ',•• ° ° 4'3 c,-, 8E-° -.2 c = tn' c .o r''' ?". .,'.0 i 41 .9.. 2.,,,/ ., E - E ,_ = ,,, --,_ o co --- .- o *,,, ,,,, - ..... .2 ..c 0 a., o 5 a3 0 = - 2 9 5 - 9. '0 = a '4 g cai a g Z g rri vi 41 w E 8 0 - .... -.) 0 c al g ..... 0 o, ..- - 0 E 03(0 c0 ,... ..- ,') .0 0 -0 0 0 Ti 0 - Ta To c c " 0 0 0 •.- -to -o 6 o CUMN ..1 -0,0 •0 -0 C CC ••-• '-' ',1,"-. g '@ (3 0 2 II ::1 u)ti 6 - -. '- co •' -0 o fo .•-• a `-- o_ = a. E!-' 8 ..!" c"-) e g ts—a 2 1?) ' . 2 6--cc5 s. 'a .4:'a =, ,.. m - - - if, ,,A 6,, o o i ra c.2..) C 0 .- 2. a s o...B. o. c c tc `6. ,43 -L.' a a. '-' 8B• 8 R.---_, e, g ,90 •388-22" _2 2. 2 tc. cu-g000c c mom 2 g.. to o o g Cl cc cc . ti, cs, .0 csimmzcccncc (..) 6" a c cr ,, mcc ..tc .tc cc2 t.... _ _, cc cc cc c..) o c"a o. = , 0 ea Ii 0 ea > t,•=. E E E E E El E A E E S E t 2 f... E E C '-i.-• C C C E. '''' -.-• ;:-• ' .. ,..'- C C E ,-.3. A' A A ) A A A A >. o ,-- it ,- it ,T F 1- F- - i-- i- ,- i- i-- N )- r- r- r- r F ,,a 15.. E 5 = = = = E = = E F E. E t= E. = E E c E E E D 8 E ' 0 IL c 0 0, SC CC "CC irr .1, 's SC gr t C., g> . t t u CC a) et SC o 0 A A A A A A A A A A A ‘,3 eh A A ,s A E 3 'E t -7 8 0 S - -0 0 . = u t c a u co 4, .1 E 0 E c 5 c c c c c o c c c E. 2 5 13 8 0 2 .9 .2 Q. 0 Q 2 C 74 t'5 -6 I'l 3 3 3 3 33 3 3 3 w 3 33 0 co a 0 co co co 0 8 o o o 4"- F. E' .E.: E .E c,3 ji (af) U? (,)) (co. ,,,) o)) c% (.6 . . . . . . CV V) U) E. cm E 2 2 g 0 N CV CV CV CV CV CV CV CV CV CV N N CV N N CV CV CV N CV CV N NI C4 N E ii.•- g c"-- 4 c° '"" ° ° ' .':). ?2 g: r E"Z. .: i7.6* F;s' ■:-.: ;',:-.:- F. F. iz ■,-... ■,--.. 4 ze- — 4i ii 3 ill, i ii 45 ir, i 6 to iis . i 6 .-•15 -a id 0 o o la. c co co c. co co co co CD 0 0 0 8 o o c. 0 ca o o o o o o 0 ca 0 1 6 1 1 A 5 5 5 tit 5 5 5" 5 5 5 5 gl i V Vs VI 41 12 co 5 >" n t ri ti;7 ti 2 tti iti - • • CD at CD 01 CD 0) 01 tI) 0) 0 • 0 CD C33 .0 2 0 , a., ,,, 2 2 2 2 2, 2 2 20n00 a manna qq ,,, 3 0 2 < •,T < << < < < < < < < < < < ''''' . cr)c 0 c Ei 2 2 o a "5 8 8 tr%; i■-) & § -6 RI 5,1' trt ci 0; ct. C0 Zi., ?a - r.... ,...- .,..- DJ ,- CO CO CO CO CS1 .- 2 (,, .. E t ca cm 01 CO U ,- ,- .-: 0) It c.0 kes14 g...3 le‘l ,- 01 03 Cr) CO 0") CD if..) C r' $ r..4. (T.,3- to LO CO CO CO 'Li' * & 55 (0 ('4 V 8 0 = 45 T E 1 c 0 - 3 0 ._1 5 ii c E tj c Z' c, TA w 0 ...0- .0 • C9 LC• — 11 . cm 8 o 0 2 c c 2 6 c .5 c -- m .... c - 0 73 . o-3 a Tti El" c cc a) E a.s < w :cg 5 tu as a a) Q.,. 0 a. 0 2 9-.•(8) 9 0 2,„53- • N 2 tri -, a , - 0 > ,,, .0 O 'En CO 5` ',.- 0 t U C ;•..2& ..c S 2 13 L:1 o .-. 0 o .:k, o 2 . 8 E 8 c E ? cf) E 7 0 E 7, 0 -5 - g ... c_ 2 t ci, za 0 1- c 0 O 5 5 "t-,- 0 g 0 5- .7.2 0 - tit K 5 c --0 IX a tr -° 3 - -..- sip- 0 6 as cn o i,-- o u . a 1- ,..i, c t. ta'a, Via) .61,-re 3 g 01 a) 0 0 Z. 6 .-.5..0 cc . ,„ o 8 5 2' S cc cc co 2 t 4. • 3 - 0 . 0 .2 .- 2 $ t $2,. ts..c. cc cm._412.,6 a)..^ cle:. E •.--. 8 w = 112 o E 1 o 22 2 ca c c o -2 Y, ci ::: .8 s 2 5 5 2 6 5 o 5„. ,2 S -'. . t,, tn' E ,..,..^ -a E a 2-f; -- a .2 8 8' = = R..0 tri .- U, C..z C' a).0 '''' 9 't.'t E L2 13, to -.E --s. 2 2. 2 6 --6. '1 -,c soi' (19- g t. 8 -tfi - 0 g 1 2 'a g 2 2 - .c,' t c =__. : g 8 iii 8 c s- ;3 , , o00. tn su,.- -> cos ,t2 0 ra -15 El c C u, 01 0-0Cod CiOc ," cz 0 .1 , 0 -0 0 --,_ , 0. _ 9 tit co > A.,S .15- co . 2 0 2 0 1.-). -3 2 E 11) s 2 •-(7, , 2 o 2 0 . • - to cr) = 6 0 0 lii o 5 0- — 0 '1 9 -.. E .E.8 $3.'=. 2 - 7. < fi o ,:, a, a, •-• a a .2 0 73 c-= E 0 0 ;To • 2 c,:c c8 2 n ,c, 2' '"- a .. 0 . t„ . ..a.2•5 55 5; 0 , Li 5, 2 co ,,c a, .5 _ .,... ,...i i ,..., ,3 z o 0 1-6 ,,- ,_ c..) a 0-0 8 - 8 co >, . E -.5. ..s. -.s. 0 "• a) 2 t. .-'5 ..?_, '5 E E r, ..... . 0 - E tS -0 --„ 'tft rt mc 5_ti) t ,_CL as- - r..) •§ '§ .§1- 5 2, o- co ea „, to r) - _ a 2 0 E - ,-.. c-,—,-,J_ g a c.8. tn. .17., 1-.•-“, 2 2 in a 0— 0 a .E,.., Stl z 4:t as 2 0 5 c 2 „, .1.52a°16,,. Ai ILE 2! : 45-' .:i -3 5-z5T- In 08 12 :ca i IIC 0 "5 "°0 '5 21. Si 2 2 ..d .5. g = o en ca< CO •- ..-.. 0 (10 - - 0 , ..„,° ,..,,W 7-212. 2 co < S2 -28 ; ti •.. 5-1.' ..-W 0. (5 ..cii 2 'lit. . 2 2 E :2- `.4 -6' 8 2 ' Et e 0 IL) .c-!! Et); >' >." w ...' 2 7- "t A , T." B 0 L LQ Z a. (1 0 -_,— .-• ,_-C 5, w Ei.C C .°a '•- "it •.," g a 5 '5 01 C id to CC S.) tD ''.."'- a 0 ul c , 2. cn - 2 .i -0... 2. s 1!...4? L.t aci-.6., Et E g E 17,9.. ;), . 2. 2- sl 2 ,ci F< co......-_: g „Is . E., ,., CD 6 r, CO 8 a CCE S k) = 2 2 'g 2 o o ..';- o 9. c 2 c 2 at cc cc cc cc 0 to Lo `> < < cc m cc c5 cc(3 o. = To' 0 0 5` i 72 . ..., >1.a_-2 ?. -§ CO..- r ,13 E rs' E 1 °L3 g g 2 2 E E E E E E E E tE E E E t E u E S s i , a. ?.... c ?. E E :> E E E ., ° c-2 2, 1 U 3 , z t ., A' A 3 I t't A A 3 3 3 a c.?, .2 d .1 ' 6 8988 0 o ' 0 t c 1. LI; t U I g g I g *c% g i i g a us. 8-,8 ,..1 ru mu' 8 S-1, 1= 5 Ft P. A- P A A: A" A A A' A P A P. It, O'•-, .0 c E b 1 E ; E c F E c c E c c E c E E to 2 •:1 E 7-) 4, i tt tit t 6' 't rt, c., a, -f, , .2_ a) .--.' E t Z t o . ›.-t.) ;., (0 1,7^ EY VI t I, U, (0 I 31 AA „. A ,131AA41 .AA ,1E,5 3 A o a. o o • 0 cn O) 0 0 COO to (4) E II 15 C ri 2 0-s. E I I... , .■ .- ° " " " .t6 0) 0) 0) (0 ..., ,„. .,.., — 'CB 8 5 8 8 8 0 o 0 a; CI) a) a) 41,..3 c\I r3 CO 0 0 01 8 `al 8 8 8 8 r, Tx; 0 ca N 0 as ra L"• 75 2 tt A' di di 3 3 3 3 3 cu ... i-..3 ,i, _ ,_ - - -, i, ", 1, 1- 1,- 1,.. •-• 1". 1`. .......,...... rz ....... C 1-3 e 1.- 40. 41*- 00 (-,1- c,-) to tr) E 15•= °' c 1 Fi ;11 .!-(2 rc:i 8 8 - - s-- 0. ° ° ''" '"' V ° 0 -•:-.- 7 '- -c..1 - `,1.C2 1 V. ; r a'a. F.: N. iz a 4;(4) ,e3 Lc--1;1 LA lO m Nr. i:-.- -1:-.. N. co co co co op 8 1.8 (1-Fitz.i., CO g 8 o otua Co 0 0 0 CD C3 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 4.4 in Cl.CC tt 161 1A Severn Trent Environmental Services Port of the Islands Process Residue Disposal Applied against budget account,copies of invoices available upon request Cep$15,000.00 Inv.Date Vendor Description invoice* Invoice S Month Total Grand Total 2012-2013 3520 Sludge 30 , , . 161 1A t o � oCCCCCC222 � 20 . D > > nmmoa 4 rn rn a cn 4 0 0 N M 44.S. Q O i O O O N O n O U) F O C) CC) N q 0 CI yp D(O M N c0 In 7 I[1 cd• ti tff cll) IN m N Zr" T a T c0 07 0� O M M O in 6A in lNn CO N N N N M N 1 o)C 0 CO C) N CO CO CO st N to N N co 0) o0'g Lo 0 N. 0 0 N N VO CDD t~[) i^[7 N N 000 N 0 O N N M if C N N N N N N N N N N N N C') '.N N N N N N 0) a) U C X .X 2 pO >. 5 I _ E E C 8 a3 N R v O X O j § C7 D. I ¢ = E 2 t E E E 2 2 a E 0 0 0 aO ° m of m m °? E a) m m v v m ai :e ro _ r= :_ 1, :_ a 2 0 0 20 o 2 _o iC $ 5 o o `o _o 6 `o �- 0 0 O t .C- .0 .0 7 .0 5 U .C. U L U aioacc)E a a E a a a a. v> 8 a) �' 8 a cr 2 L T N c ) I I ad = _ I I 9 I a I al a _ = I a I g2 E 8 o E E E a E a E E °- E E E E o E E > u !a > 2 N .2 .2 .2 P. E D E E a E - v E o e cc � 0 cc cc cc cn a co ¢ cn ¢ ¢ co cn cnn 4 0) a N `ra a >, N L N A w m N O f�7 O O s. ' O C C Na _ g g g I I I I I I g m g g I t at`� > ua a o a o' a a 2 8 o o s n' d o O" n 8 8 c 0 A n C 0 d 0 E y M C 3 O y ` N tl N 6l 0) N "t 1 1t' toa ° > m a) s m a) m ca C) Li w o �i 3 m 3 (n cn o C N =•lC d a)m N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N C o E d I' o a r° cat cu o N n m Co 3,1 m of O. > 0 if) 0 0 0 Lc) 0 a 0 0 CO 0 0) 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 wa0a 5 a 161 � 1A —5 75o C �T F I ga c CO 0 c CD (040 wm N S 8 c i N d 7 g c O a 3 m iii a o N M C h O y O o a o c d c o CI N 'O G1 O d a o_ U V O M C L Q N Ot; o c 1- .cum l M>• O .12 44. N W c 1C E "-co a C m C d G V > U N N L lO HdU o 2.2. A N N M(0 o Q� Q 4 g t 0 0- '4 na.2 E o 16I 1A elk,. tie. lq° •_ of, ‘3- k i September 20,12 Field Managers Report Water Treatment Plant O'erations and Maintenance The Water Treatment Plant produced and distributed 2.220 MG for the month of August,which is an average of 0.072 MGD. Wastewater Plant Operations and Maintenance The WWTP treated approximately 1.519 MG for the month of August,which is an average of 0.049 MGD Reuse System Operations and Maintenance The reuse system delivered 5.777 MG for the month of August,which is an average of 0.186 MGD. Permit Compliance: Water Treatment Plant: All permit requirements met Wastewater Treatment Plant All permit requirements met PAINTING UPDATE;Some Before&After Photos 1 ,i0. y , TIRENI 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114 Tel 239-642-9219 Fax 239-642-9 469 wwwseverntrentservices.com ., , , 1611A ff''''''''''.k4t k 0 ,,,,,„, ,....) i. September 2012 Field Managers Report 11(;'''' ,,,,i t. _ ,,,.. . 1 .., ,. A Ep. � t3 '1 l « 1 , r3 L �y f s te°*- .. y ...- p .s.-1,:.-- —6 ' .,4*. .m l4 41/..'i* r. j 1, "1,1. * 1'":.* h6 . ,•'.r'' . .. ,t j. ' " Br Yi iS s 4 • . ....„, ' • . .$ ,., , 4s , . •x 1` ":I a 4 r w x Q1.■. s E 1 t .. ,.. P`ate, 'r 1I.,; * I < ,:''"i -tr* f't •ill' .1X.• • 2 TRENT 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642-9219*Fax 239-642-9469'vrww.severntrentservices.com •., 161 1A kit 4 qt.s September 2012 Field Managers Report 0(),,,,,, ,;� �, s IA s c �, " to � 1y r 8�t ; E tyg 1. -ate � � � B ,�w¢ 8 . d Y� all cm 3 'x'24 �� 'aPNe ° i `i ��' gf1Ai �, + REVEL' 3 Th ET*tRE e 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642' ‘'99 Fax 239-642 9469 vawwseverntrentservices.com , , , 161 1A - tz . ,,,, . 9, . ,.., ,, if ks. September 2012 Field Managers Report Water Loss Reports Potable Water Report 5 4,5 ____....:.:__:......_ 3.5 , 3.247 2.439.......2 .• 0 .... 1 _ -) 2.5 -�..l1 2.224 al: 1� 2.02._ 2... .2.1 6 t 8� .22 1:391 .. �.d�. (.9<9 1.-5 1.222 1.223 is `. --°~-°41 4 1.039a 2 0.5 _1.3% 1:3% , 13% 16% 1 Q%:_..____2.% 1 7-%—4%, % 8-%_.. Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 ,_...._....: -Water Billed -s—Water Produced --u • %Water Loss l • Irrigation Water Report 9.0 --8-2-16-81-28 _�... W W.,. 8.0 Z._452 6,991 7.0 6521 '.. ._._— 2 AL.....•,tiler--'_F/m9 5.49 ti i 60 6 416 °IIIIP" 6.334 5 0 r 5.449 5 469 5.322 4 0 NIF 4.737 To" 4.405 c 73-5/9 2.0 _.._ _. .- 1.0 c, 10"b ., 2.,,o '.a 0'a .,: a 31y J 0.0 •12 A«r-12 Mc .12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Auq-12 Snell Qct.1 t t�3,av11 IJ�'C•'11 Jan-12 Feb-12 h�+r I —ow irrigation Meter Irrigation Billed „ E_sue 4 TRENT 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642.9219•Fax 239-642-9469•www.severntrentservices.com 161 1A or0e_ September 2012 Field Managers Report CMMS Work Order Report Summary of Corrective&Preventative Work Orders Due Date Complete WO# Equipment Task 9/12/2012 9/12/2012 2400 Well 1 -Well Corrective Notes: Flow communication from meter to computer needs to be repaired. 9/13/2012 9/13/2012 2401 Well 2-Well Corrective Notes: Troubleshooting well#2,as it is not pumping the proper gpm.Checked voltage,amps and could not find any electrical problems with the motor. 9/25/2012 9/26/2012 2995 LS 8-Lift Corrective Station #8 Notes:Controls for pump#2 are not working. Special Service Deparment repaired problem and placed back in service, 9/30/2012 10/3/2012 3047 LS 4-Lift Corrective Station #4 Notes: Call-Out:Lift Station not working.9/30/12 R.Edge: Upon arrival to the station, I found the wet well full of sewage.After checking the Amps and Voltage to the station, I found that we had one phase of the 3 phase power inoperable. I immediately contacted Lee County Electric Co-Op to notify them of the problem. Their repair technicians were dispatched.While waiting on LCEC, I brought our 75 kW generator to the lift station, made the necessary connections, energized the station and began pumping it down right away. Meanwhile, LCEC arrived to troubleshoot their transformers to determine the problem. They worked on the transformers and such, in order to restore power to the station, but it was not until later thatevening. I left the generator on standby until the next day(10/1/12). 10/1/12-Rained all day,did not work on the station! 10/2/12-I removed the generator and restored station to the normal power.Later in the evening, I found that the automatic controls in the station were not working properly. I pumped the station down in manual,as those controls were fine. Due to the rainfall, I did not troubleshoot the automatic controls,just manually pumped down the station. SEVERN 5 TRENT SERVICES 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642-9219•Fax 239-642-9469•www.severntrentservices.com 161 1A * icti-14e_ September 2012 Field Managers Report 10/3/12-After further troubleshooting,I found several fuses that were blown inside the control panel, which not only operated the automatic controls, but also operated the'Alarm'controls. After replacing all the bad fuses,the station began working as it should. I also replaced the alarm bell. Summary Total#Preventative of WO's 123 Total#of Corrective WO's 4 Percentage of Completed WO's 100% Enna 6 TRENT"r: Miggal 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642-9219•Fax 239-642-9469•www.severntrentservices.com 161 1A Prepared by i'Par-t-+ 0-41-v-4.5 HOLE MONTES R.O. WATER TREATMENT PLANT ENGINEERS•PLANNERS SURVEYORS PORT OF THE ISLANDS, FLORIDA PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT October 19, 2012 A. Project Schedule —Overview • Construction Schedule: Project completion date has passed, no further schedule updates anticipated. • Primary Activities Last Month — Cardinal: Final landscape material was installed. Final building inspections were scheduled and conducted. Final site inspections were scheduled and conducted. Awaiting site re-inspection and acceptance. • Primary Activities Last Month — ITT: ITT personnel were onsite September 20th to re-clean skid #1 and install the new chemical flow-meters. One chemical flow- meter remains to be installed. The cleaning was not successful; ITT has stated that new membranes will be installed to replace the current membranes that are fouled. • Functional Completion: Substantial completion occurred on May 11, 2012. An additional time extension will be necessary due to ITT material delivery. Final completion is anticipated by the end of September. • Anticipated Facility Startup: FDEP certification was received on June 5, 2012. Water has been created and distributed to the community since June 6, 2012. • Anticipated Demolition of the "old" Water Treatment Plant: Demolition and renovation of site and building have been COMPLETED. B. Field Progress • Procurement: Materials procurement (shop drawing submission, approvals, and manufacturing lead time) is COMPLETE with 162 technical submittals received from the contractor. • Field Activities: Preliminary Acceptance punch list was submitted to Cardinal Contractors. The Items on this list have been COMPLETED. A Final Inspection of the facility is anticipated shortly as well as a final C.O. from Collier County. • ITT: Warranty list has been submitted to ITT. Awaiting schedule for warranty list completion from ITT. • Safety Record: No safety incidents to report. • Stormwater Pond: Retention area COMPLETE. C. Project Costs • Construction Contract: Nineteen payments (Total of $3,357,769.85) [99%] have been made to date on contract amount of$3,417,563. • ITT Contract: Two payments (Total of $617,344.20) have been made to date on contract amount of$780,225. H;\2011\2011003\EN\C Correspondence\C1 Client Correspondence120121019-October Monthly Progress Report BOS.doc 161 1A 'fr • Other Contracts: Eight payments (Total of $207,298.10) [78%] have been made to date on contract amounts of$266,821.70. Severn Trent Services 0.00 Evans Computers 3,255.00 BC! 60,400.00 KW Controls 110,555.10 SUBTOTAL $174,210.10 W.E. Johnson (forklift) $33,088.00 TOTAL $207,298.10 • Project Allowances —Cardinal Contractors Allowance— Owner Directed Work Contract Amount $300,000.00 Total to Date ($259,297.15) Balance $ 40,702.85 Allowance— Building Permit Contract Amount $25,000.00 Total to Date ($16,607.92) Balance $ 8,392.92 Total Balance Available $49,094.93 H:\2011\2011003\EN\C Correspondence\C1 Client Correspondencel20121019-October Monthly Progress Report BOS.doc 161 1 A4-- October 16,2012 Scott Comisrar Xylem/ITt'Technology, Inc. 10661 Newkirk Street Dallas TX 75235 RE: WARRANTY ITEMS PORT OF THE ISLANDS WATER'I' .EATMI:+:N'F PLANT HM File No, 201 1.003 Dear Scott: At this time, the following list of uncompleted and corrective ITT/Xylem work items remain open: I. Replacement membranes for RO skid ill. 2. Final adjustments to the Calcite Contactor air system: The air system for Calcite Contactor#3 has never been demonstrated. 3. Chemical Feed pump flowmeters: One flowmctcr for the NaOCI system remains to be replaced. 4. Repair report for the Transfer pump shaft repair. 5, Repair report for the High Service Pump #3 bearing repair, hole Monies Inc. and the Port of the Island Community Improvement District are considering these items as warranty issues. Please provide a written schedule by October 29, 2012 as to when these items will be completed, Sincerely, HOLE MONTES, INC. Frank .' Project Manager/Associate EIf;:dlh C: Tom Morga€r, Xyleraa/1"l"1°Teclhnology, Inc. Vince Carol lo, Xylenm/ITT Technology, Inc. id'20(r,20i=s...j' NO !.;_€.ra;;t okxEmi, i fa>€.1r=._i:=r '„rp;,..rode t. \t i 1,%;J1 Wt5`s 9:i T yi is (Jt.Scc at, 161 1A 'f ..._ a) 4, -, 2 0 cu •— as rs g a) a • U) D -t-ili5 2 0 13 c WD C ii) 0) 4t VS CD 45 I / - es / o L. ,,3) _. -0 4-, 0 i.2 'ctd E ,Ii u as ID. " 1_.. itt) ..$) a) ..., a) a) (r) as as r, 2 151 u o = 1:5 Zis" EL Qi3 CD Ce /.... O- W ca- "0 - CZ co it " . a - / E a) ,-, (.1 if) a) .— ir ..,_ It o .e), e.. -E te$ '5 'V ..,., - 0 w c .— i_ _____,,. va r.) a) —---00 0 cco co 4--, as u.• a) .4_, c 2 0 0 0 tt = a) 2 c = 2 RI CL 0 Cr) CL Ct ._ i-- A., -r.... co ...... L a. . _ E 2 -23 1.1 -00 a....4- w vs -- ,... A Is D- w = CL . ` 1 6 1 1Af , ,--- ..:...... o ) ` } } \ \ , 7 1�fib. . ; ' )o o c) ! c o to 2. al ( Ti �: e ■ ( c CD Vii. % ' \ n $ ' • ° | ■ o I .c :@ ' U) g ' D1 \ 1c O c • , ,' fi 2 ° m 0 ern! ■ ' ^ 1 C ( . 0 • ! • ( ` } ; � ( 2 I i . ■ ! � } � � : . . . ; . : . . . .. . . . . . o o 0 o o 0 o 0 N 0 CO o N wdd %O1 , . 161 1A '+ : , , i , . : IIIIIIIIIIII,„ . . ' ....,„:„....„..... ,. ......... „...., .„,..,,...„,.... . 1_ .....t • _ini_i,„.......,...........:,,.....................zzc._„:....z.c..,..:7.1:::,:,,,i,i,z;;;;;;,,,,,,,,71.a.:.z....,, cr) , ... ,fi::::::::„,,,....... . '-..........,.....,,,,,s.,.V.AX;:!..;..P,',....—,,,..,,:',,,,,„..„..;;;,,47.3,4;;;;;;;;;;,;;.,..7.... i7,:;,,,,,,,;... .:,;,,„„,,,,, ...--,;,,,„....2„......,„..,,,,A M i i j ,. MINN ' • ' Vl • I dra° • • W i k • W • I- � i i I I O I 1 , Z { i U) I I ' j to to to M to N t() ,- to 0 o d' O M 0 N O r p O 0 0 0 0 0 4JW `nnoi-J uoi;e6iJJl 161 1A4 THE LAW OFFICES OF SLATKIN �..N. REYNOLDS, PA. One East Broward Boulevard,Suite 609 Telephone:954.745.5880 Facsimile:954.745.5890 Fort Lauderdale,Florida 33301 vrwwr.slalkinreynolds.com • October 12,2012 Daniel H. Cox,Esq. Reggie D. Sanger, Esq. PO Drawer CC 208 SE 9th Street Carrabelle,FL 32322 Ft, Lauderdale,FL 33316 Re: Port of Islands Hotel&Resort Naples,LLC v.Port of Islands Community Improvement District,et al., Case No. 10-03717-RBR Dear Dan and Reggie: This letter constitutes a confidential settlement communication and cannot be used for any other purpose. I have discussed this matter both with our client and with the Barcardi Foundation and their counsel. It is my understanding that the CID has had additional discussions with the Barcardi Foundation and that there is a mutual interest in attempting to resolve this matter. Accordingly, what follows is what we would propose to include in a consensual plan of reorganization that would resolve all matters between our respective clients,as well as the claims the Barcardi Foundation has raised in the case. I have been given the Barcardi Foundation's authorization to represent that they are in agreement with the terms set forth herein/ With regards to the ad valorem taxes, the Debtor will pay the 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 amounts in full without interest. We believe that amount to be approximately $85,000.00. The reduction in interest is due to the Tax Collector's previous refusal to accept a tender of the amounts for certain years. With regards to all outstanding non ad valorem assessments that the CID has assessed, the Debtor proposes to resolve those balances as follows. First, the Debtor will transfer 44.88 ERCs to the CID. This should leave the Debtor's property with 40 ERCs. Said transfer will be in full satisfaction of all of the CID's outstanding assessments for calendar years 2007, 2008, 2009,2010, 2011 and 2012. We presume the District will be able to sell those ERCs to the south side hotel and generate cash flow. Moreover,the transfer will alleviate the chronic and perpetual problem of overassessment that will plague this property unless and until the number of ERCs is reduced. Although we understand that this sort of transfer may not be specifically contemplated in the CID's procedures, we understand that there have been other transfers outside the transfer policy, such as the transfer of the Orchid Cove common area ERCs when amounts were due on them, and that a vote of the board approving the transfer should be sufficient to authorize the transfer. 161 1A4 Daniel H.Cox,Esq. Reggie D.Sanger,Esq. October 12,2012 Page 2 With regards to the CID's ERC policy, the policy would be amended to reduce the ERC for a hotel room to .3, while leaving a resort hotel as .6, and would be amended to include a designation for a hotel restaurant that only served breakfast,or some similar designation. The .3 and .6 designations are consistent with the Florida Administrative Code's designations for hotel rooms and resort hotel rooms. As for the service of continental breakfast, we suggest a .0167 ERC designation per seat, which we calculate based on one ERC being 300 gallons/day and each seat using five gallons of water. At the current time, the Debtor's intention is to either convert the property to an ACLF, but if that is not successful, the Debtor will continue to operate as a hotel, but will close the restaurant with the exception of serving a continental-type breakfast, with no lunch or dinner. The Debtor would also reduce the number of seats so that it would not need a large number of ERCs for such an operation. Next, the CID agrees, at the next opportunity to do so,to propose to raise the utility rates going forward. In return for raising these rates, the CID will propose to lower the amount charged per ERC for the Maintenance Special Assessment accordingly. Raising the usage rates will accomplish a much more equal distribution of the costs of utilization of the water system, since those who use more will pay a larger share. In exchange for these concessions, the Debtor and Bacardi will agree to the dismissal of their respective adversary proceedings with prejudice. All parties will bear their own fees and costs. The Debtor proposes to put these terms into a plan of reorganization. The Court's approval of the plan will bind all parties thereto. Moreover, there may be a way to force the certificate holders to accept the plan, depending on how it is proposed. If the above terms are workable for the Tax Collector and the CID, we can explore further the issue of cramming any plan down over the certificate holder's objections. Given the significant legal fees and costs that the parties are about to incur if we do not resolve the matter, and the downside to the CID if the property escheats to the county, those issues alone justify attempting to reach a resolution, and we believe what has been proposed herein is both fair and can be accomplished fairly quickly. Please let me know if this general framework is acceptable to you. We look forward to resolving this matter quickly and efficiently. Sincerely, SL,ATHIN&REYNOLDS,P.A. Robert F. Reynolds RFR/ipm cc: Port of Islands Hotel&Resort Naples,LLC Craig Pugatch,Esq. 161 1A Li- p ign7W3 MAR 04LU13 KrC t&Bart- ett txecut"we'ALde/ Board/of Co-wnty C kOf five/ BY: }f v Kri.,W, 3-1-2013 Please the/attached/Cv farvn t',ofw, pray Cdec'by theme F(44.cmcei yepartwient, o-wthe'vtext(avaaalrle/) Board Age 'tda/wvider M Corre pandence, Port of the/IsiAmtd*Coinwuknity I vwproVeme/nt Datrict • January 18, 2013 Meet✓wu'Agendcv Ja,vuccu y 18, 2013 Meet'u MLnutes- Fiala pi/ Heiler sr Henning Coyle .,,C' �_ rha�a�yo�w. AA") A vwv 3oiardiMLnutes,fr 2ecord4(Depavtment X-8406 Misc.Corres: Date: `� I 2_31 Item#:1 Lam C°r 161 1A 'f Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Severn Trent Services, Management Services Division 210 North University Drive, Suite 702—Coral Springs—Florida 33071 (954) 753-5841 —(954) 345-1292 Fax February 25,2013 Memorandum To: Mr. Robert Dick Severn Trent Services,Inc. 5911 Country Lakes Road Fort Myers, Florida 33905 Reference: Minutes of Meeting Held January 18,2013 and Approved February 15, 2013 From: Calvin Teague District Manager Enclosed for your records is a copy of the minutes of the above-referenced meeting of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District's Board of Supervisors. Please be sure to make this document available for public access during normal business hours. If you have any questions, please contact Janice Swade at(954) 753-5841. Cc: For informational purposes only: vkIs. Crystal Kinzel Director Clerk of the Circuit Court/Finance Department 3299 Tamiami Trail East Suite 403 Naples,Florida 34112-5746 Mr. Leo Ochs,Jr. Collier County Manager 3299 Tamiami Trail East Suite 202 Naples,Florida 34112 161 1A4 4 d Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Board of Supervisors Calvin Teague,District Manager Theme Theodor Dillon, V ire Chairman Daniel Cox,Distriet Counsel Richard ,A Vioo Cha rman Ronald Benson,District Engineer Richard Ziko,Assistant Secretary Dale Lambert,Assistant Secretary Regular Meeting Agenda Friday,January 18,2013—10:00 a.m. 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Organizational Matters A. Appointment of Supervisor to Fill Unexpired Term B. Oath of Office for Newly Appointed Supervisor C. Designation of Officers—Resolution 2013-2 3. Approval of Minutes A. December 7,2012 Special Meeting B. December 21,2012 Regular Meeting 4. Public Comment Period 5. Old Business A. Review of Landscape Maintenance Performance B. Update on U.S.41 Median Flooding C. Update on Well Repairs 6. New Business 7. District Manager's Report A. Approval of the December 31,2012 Financial Statements and Check Register 8. Field Manager's Report A. Discussion of December 2012 Operations Report 9. Attorney's Report A. Update on North Hotel Bankruptcy Proceedings B. Update on Lot 45 Drainage Swale Agreement • C. Update on Sunset Cay Utility Dedication 10. Engineer's Report A. Discussion of Remaining Issues Regarding the New Water Treatment Plant B. Update on Liquidated Damages from Xlyem Water Solutions USA(ITT Technologies) 11. Supervisors'Requests 12. Public Comment Period 13. Adjournment NOTES: The next meeting is scheduled for Friday,February 15,2013,at 10:00 a.m. Meeting Location: District Trent Office: Orchid Gave Clubhouse Severn Country Sakes Road 25005 Peacock Lane For 5911 Myers,Florida kas 33905 Naples,Florida 34114 Fort Myers,Fo 33905 239-245-7118 hflp:ilpoicid.cornl 239.430-0806 161 1A4- MINUTES OF MEETING PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District was held Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. at the Orchid Cove Clubhouse; 25005 Peacock Lane;Naples, Florida 34114. Present and constituting a quorum were: Norine Dillon Chairperson Theodore Bissell Vice Chairman Anthony Davis Assistant Secretary Dale Lambert Assistant Secretary Richard Ziko Assistant Secretary Also present were: Calvin Teague District Manager Daniel Cox District Counsel Ronald Benson District Engineer Robert Dick Severn Trent Services Operations Robert Casey Field Manager, Severn Trent Operations Robert Edge Lead Operator, Severn Trent Operations Rita Varona Severn Trent Services Operations Rose Hodza Severn Trent Management Services Diane Manza Severn Trent Management Services Stephanie Rehe Severn Trent Management Services Janice Swade Severn Trent Management Services Ron Gilbert Ochopee Fire Control &Rescue District Alan McLaughlin Ochopee Fire Control &Rescue District Jean Kungle POI Realty Sheryl Gibert Resident Kathryn Kehlmeier Resident George Kramer Resident Sam Marchand Resident Randy Resch Resident Audrey Sanders Resident Monday,2/4/2013 161 January 18, 2013 Port of the Islands CID The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the January 18, 2013 Port of the Islands Community Improvement District's Board of Supervisors Meeting. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Call to Order and Roll Call Mrs. Dillon called the meeting to order and Mr. Teague called the roll. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Organizational Matters A. Appointment of Supervisor to Fill Unexpired Term • Mr. Anthony Davis and Mr. Randy Resch introduced themselves and presented details of their background; copies of which will be entered into the official record. • Mr. Teague discussed options to appoint one of the two candidates. Mr. Lambert NOMINATED Mr. Joel Anthony (Tony) Davis to fill the unexpired term of office vacated by Mr. Charles Custer in Seat 2; and Mr. Ziko seconded the nomination. There being no further nominations with all in favor, Mr. Joel Anthony (Tony) Davis was appointed to fill the unexpired term of office in Seat 2 as a Supervisor of the District. B. Oath of Office for Newly Appointed Supervisor Mr. Teague, being a Notary Public of the State of Florida, administered the Oath of Office to Mr. Davis; a copy of the signed Oath is attached hereto and made part of the public record. • Mr. Teague distributed the appropriate forms for Mr. Davis to fill out. • Mrs. Dillon thanked Mr. Resch for running for the position. C. Designation of Officers—Resolution 2013-2 Mr. Teague presented Resolution 2013-2 for adoption; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. There being no comments or questions, Monday,2/4/2013 2 161 1A ' January 18, 2013 Port of the Islands CID On MOTION by Mr. Lambert seconded by Mr. Ziko with all in favor, Resolution 2013-2 designating Officers of the District with Mrs. Norine Dillon to remain as Chairperson; Mr. Theodore Bissell to remain as Vice Chairman; Mr. Calvin Teague to remain as Secretary and District Manager; Mr. Robert Komar to continue as Treasurer; Mr. Stephen Bloom to continue as Assistant Treasurer; Mr. Dale Lambert and Mr. Richard Ziko to remain as Assistant Secretaries; and Mr. Joel Anthony (Tony) Davis to serve as Assistant Secretary was adopted. THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of Minutes A. December 7,2012 Special Meeting Mrs. Dillon stated each Board member received a copy of the Minutes of the December 7, 2012 Special Meeting; requesting any additions,corrections or deletions. There not being any, On MOTION by Mr. Ziko seconded by Mr. Lambert with all in favor, the Minutes of the December 7, 2012 Special Meeting were approved. B. December 21,2012 Regular Meeting Mrs. Dillon stated each Board member received a copy of the Minutes of the December 21, 2012 Regular Meeting; requesting any additions, corrections or deletions. • The Board made minor changes which will be reflected in the amended minutes. There being no further discussion, On MOTION by Mr. Ziko seconded by Mr. Lambert with all in favor the Minutes of the December 21, 2012 Regular Meeting were approved as amended. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Comment Period Chief Alan McLaughlin updated the Board and audience on recent events. • The BCC moved forward with the fire station project for POI, which Chief McLaughlin explained in detail. ➢ Permitting will go into effect next week; at which time bidding may commence. Monday,2/4/2013 3 161 y1A January 18,2013 Port of the Islands CID ➢ The remaining balance of the project in the approximate amount of $210,000 will go to ad valorem increases. ➢ The project is expected to commence in mid to late May and projected to be complete in November or December. ➢ Final numbers will be available by June. ➢ Chief McLaughlin commented residents can expect a $20 increase to ad valorem taxes for three years. • Mr. Ron Gilbert addressed issues concerning merging of local fire departments. • Building of a fire station at Mile Marker 63 on 1-75 was approved and is scheduled to commence in May. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Old Business A. Review of Landscape Maintenance Performance Mrs. Dillon and Mr. Edge discussed the monthly ride-through inspection with Mr. Soto and distributed notes for the Board's information and discussion; copies of which will be entered into the official record. • There is no irrigation on the east side of the bridge at the U.S. 41 median. • Mr. Bissell and Mr. Davis are to be included on the e-mail distribution from Soto. • The ant mounds will be treated. B. Update on U.S. 41 Median Flooding • Mrs. Dillon has not received any further updates. C. Update on Well Repairs • The well pump was replaced and the extension was completed. • Mr. Edge is awaiting proposals for vibration testing of all 20 above ground pumps. • Mr. Edge is also looking to purchase a vibration meter which costs approximately $2,000 in order to do this testing in house. • Mr. Edge will prepare a cost benefit analysis to present at the next meeting during his Operations Report. SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS New Business There being no new business to report,the next item followed. Monday,2/4/2013 4 161 1A 'f; January 18,2013 Port of the Islands CID SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS District Manager's Report A. Approval of the December 31,2012 Financial Statements and Check Register Mr. Teague presented the December 31, 2012 Financial Statements and Check Register for the Board's review and approval; copies of which will be entered into the official record. • The Board was in favor of using the bond construction funds for all capital items. • The charge from FDEP is an annual fee associated with the wastewater. • A contract amendment will be done to put the CID on a fiscal year timeframe. There being no further discussion, On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Davis with all in favor, the December 31, 2012 Financial Statements and Check Register were approved. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Field Manager's Report A. Discussion of December 2012 Operations Report Mr. Edge presented the December 2012 Operations Report for discussion; a copy of which will be entered into the official record. • Staff will monitor the trees which are not looking healthy. • Staff has been making last minute preparations for today's event. • A sampling of the water which contained a trace of pesticide will be sent on Monday to SFWMD. ➢ The amount of pesticide in the water was extremely small and does not present any health hazards. ➢ Staff will report back next month. NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report A. Update on North Hotel Bankruptcy Proceedings • Mr. Cox is waiting for a proposal for the written agreement, as it is possible they are still working out details with tax certificate holders. • Another Executive Session may be scheduled once Mr. Cox receives the agreement. • There is currently a verbal agreement in place. B. Update on Lot 45 Drainage Swale Agreement • The Agreement has not yet been returned,but Mr. Cox will follow up. Monday,2/4/2013 5 161 1A1+ January 18,2013 Port of the Islands CID • The owner did all of the work appropriately. C. Update on Sunset Cay Utility Dedication • This is still going through all of the Associations, but it should be available for the Board next month. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer's Report B. Update on Liquidated Damages from Xlyem Water Solutions USA (ITT Technologies) • The letter regarding liquidated damages which came back as Undeliverable was re-sent to the appropriate address. A. Discussion of Remaining Issues Regarding the New Water Treatment Plant There being no issues to discuss,the next item followed. ELEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors' Requests • Mr. Bissell commented Cardinal is responsible for repairs to the damaged median. • Over 200 people are attending today's ceremony. • The Orchid Cove HOA President will comment on their meeting with the state at the next CID meeting. TWELFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Public Comment Period • Mrs. Dillon provided Ms. Marchand an explanation of the U.S. 41 median flooding issue. • Mr. Edge commented a sprinkler head probably would not make a difference on the median with the dead grass. • A Resident questioned Mr. Edge regarding the water testing and other related issues. • A Resident related issues with his sprinkler heads clogging in Orchid Cove. ➢ Mr. Edge will flush out the hydrants in this area. • A Resident asked the Board to consider having the CID take over Orchid Cove's fire suppression system. A The property owner is responsible for maintaining the hydrant on the property. ➢ Mr. Teague and Mr. Benson will have a conference call on this subject and report back at the next meeting. Monday,2/4/2013 6 . . , . 161 1A 1. January 18, 2013 Port of the Islands CID • Mr. Gilbert requested staff look at his neighbor's unit which had a significant loss of water pressure when the backflow preventers were installed. THIRTEENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment Upon adjournment, The Open House for the new Water Treatment Plant will be held. There being no further business, On MOTION by Mr. Bissell seconded by Mr. Ziko with all in favor,the meeting was adjourned at 11:43 a.m. --, - n , y ) , ,,,,,, —_ ,_ Calvin Teague orine Dillon Secretary °� Chairperson Monday,2/4/2013 7 161 1A + Naples Daily News Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication Naples Daily News PORT OF THE ISLANDS 210 N UNIVERSITY DR #702 CORAL SPRINGS FL 33071 NOTICE OF MEETINGS PORT OF THE ISLANDS REFERENCE: 010948 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT 59699503 NOTICE OF MEETINGSPO Tstr�wIIll thre a 121rh +Year2013at�tseOr i , 225 Reacacie Lane t#aptes. brida 34113 at 11100 a in or'he thild Friday n1 e• month as follows: State of Florida L}ctwbee19,'2012 Counties of Collier and Lee November 16,2012 December 21,2012 • Before the undersigned authority, personally 3 13 ,- appeared Lynn Schneider, says that she serves a1W the Order Entry Data Specialist, of the Naples 1t3 zrm� t�a>�t� Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Napl 1usg x13 #titt%t fi«20i3 in Collier County, Florida: distributed in Coll 1}72 13 and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached the rla aria for Coumrrtrur Imp,be at accordance t copy of advertising was published in said bec n nued.to a date,time and location to be specdied the record at newspaper on dates listed. There may be 11s'Aber}f3f16 or more Suporritors Will participate.. Affiant further says that the said Naples Dal0000 1 'a 0, d , l I p.,ha.00;h,�a pmuts#00 News is a newspaper published at Naples, in s a i 11:277,1:1„ y . x. Collier County, Florida, and that the said contra t rlriaRelaySctka.t1 965°a'`I°to*a'd� t0tItatRr0 '$' Paffaa'eat9,act two t2)days po rt.the4ateatthecreel,e+r newspaper has heretofore been continuously Each person who derides to appeal any acthenlakels da these-meetfneg day and has been entered as second class mail advised that person..sll a moult of the P wyt arut.eroardingiy, Ferran may need to ensure a verbatim frtrird of the proceedings is made inc or matter at the post office in Naples, in said the tettiEnwa ynevi daneepwho,thaae'sta ba '` virtaywe �e Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 year p;cal mTanager 14 next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. PUBLISHED ON: 09/28 AD SPACE: 66 LINE " - FILED ON: 09/28/12 Signature of Affiant v f .," It Sworn to and Subscribed before e\this day of t`= " 20 /r, Personally known by me L-- ra't J . , � r ` ? *art CAROL PAWLINSKI 47 ,r MY COMMISSION#EE 45538 EXPIRES:November 28,2014 ▪ Bonded Thal Pickard Insurance Agency 161 1A 'f Candidate Information Sheet Joel Anthony (Tony) Davis P.O. Box 7488 Naples, FL 34101-7488 Anthony @1 adavis.corn (239)430-0806 Education • B.S. Finance and Marketing—Auburn University • M.A. Economics—Clemson University • Numerous courses over the years in management,finance, insurance and investments Personal Background • Originally from Atlanta, Georgia area • Former Senior Cost Accountant with Monsanto Company • Lived in Naples since 1991 (year-round resident of Orchid Cove) • Self-employed in financial services and insurance for the last 30+years servicing corporate and individual clients nationwide (now mainly in Florida) • Former Board Member and President-Kiwanis and Sertoma International • Former Board Member and Secretary-Everglades Area Chamber of Commerce • Board of Directors-Smallwood Store Museum in Chokoloskee, Florida • Former Board Member &President- Orchid Cove Condo Association • Board of Directors- Ochopee Fire Control District • Board of Directors &President—Friends of Collier-Seminole State Park 5.Antony Davis 161 1A1 Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Severn Trent Services, Management Services Division 210 North University Drive Suite 702 .Coral Springs,Florida 33071 Telephone: (954)753-5841 •Fax: (954) 345-1292 January 22, 2013 Department of State Division of Elections Room 316, R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee,Florida 32399-0250 To Whom It May Concern: Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District at their meeting held on January 18, 2013 appointed Mr. Joel Anthony (Tony) Davis to fill the unexpired Seat vacated by Mr. Charles Custer. A copy of the Oath of Office subscribed to by Mr. Davis is enclosed for your records. Following is Mr. Davis's contact information: Joel Anthony(Tony)Davis Phone 239-430-0806 25053 Peacock Lane #202 Naples,Florida 34114-9696 Appointed: 1/18/2013 Term Expires: 11/2014 Seat 2 Anthony(aiadavis.com Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, WV-6 fTWirld Calvin Teague/js j District Manager Enclosure Cc: Ms. Jennifer J. Edwards Collier County Supervisor of Elections . 161 1A ik. Port of the Islands CID Date:0112212013 Check No 53751 Payable To: FLORIDA DEPT OF STATE Invoice Date Amount Invoice No. Description 012113 PAYROLL DED-JOEL ANTHONY DAVIS 01/21/13 10.00 Total 1000 -. ., . ri<LiIVI^:YL?* 11 Fs 1ar as I:`i X-f.. 1z3;° 7L Tr :i[."iast^8a.ts, ;, . WELLS FARGO MAIN Check No.53751 Port of the Islands CID 210 NORTH UNIVERSITY DRIVE SUITE 702 CORAL SPRINGS, FL 33071 Date Amount 01/22/2013 **********410:00 ****TEN AND 0/100 DOLLARS Pay FLORIDA DEPT OF STATE i" I ! /41-tta.,,, To the DIV OF ELECTIONS i Order of: 500 SOUTH BRONOUGH ST RM 316 TALLAHASSEE; FL 32399-0250 Authorized Signature • , . . 161 1A4 OATH OF OFFICE (Art.II.§5(b),Fla.Const.) STATE OF FLORIDA County of �Q t I I .e'er I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State,and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of (Title of Office) % on which I am now about to enter, so help me God. [NOTE: If you affirm,you may omit the words"so help me God." See§92.52,Fla. Stat.] Si di... , /nature Swor .ands r tbseibed before me this IF clay ofter,' ' * ." - ti ,,' CALVIN TEAGUE NOTARY PUBLIC Signature of Admirt sterin atir or of Notary Public +STATE OF FLORIDA 4,'� :. Comm,*EE019496 40E109' Expires 11/19/2014 Print, Type,or Stamp Commissioned Name of Notary Public Personally K►rowrt O R Produced Identification ❑ Type of Identificauon Produced ACCEPTANCE I accept the office listed in the above Oath of Office. Mailing Address: Irk Home ❑Office P2 a,70 71,V _:‹ 44,cb- Street or Post Office Box Print name as you desir0 eofff. fission issued / J ' J /0/ City,State,Zip Code Signatu e DS-DE 56(Rev.02/10) 161 1 A 1± CHECK REQUEST FORM Date: 01/21/13 From: Janice Swade District Name: Port of the Islands CD Please cut check from Acct. #: Please issue a check to: Florida Department of State Florida Department of State Division of Elections Vendor Name: 500 South Bronough St, Room # 316 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Check amount: $10.00 Please code to: 001-217000-2000 Check Description/Reason: Payroll deduction for Joel Anthony (Tony) Davis Mailing instructions: Please return check to Janice Swade Manager's Approval: (0-at 4)(2-3-16 Date: 21-Jan-13 Prepared By: Report Date: 1/21/2013 Severn Trent Manangement Services 16 I 1A 'f Authorization for One Time Payroll Deduction: The Division of Elections is now requiring the following two items in order to become a Commissioned Officer of the State of Florida: 1) Official Oath of Office form issued by the Division of Elections 2)$10.00 fee Listed below are the Statutes allowing for the fee: FS 113.01 Fee for commissions issued by Governor. A fee of $10 is prescribed for the issuance of each commission issued by the Governor of the state and attested by the Secretary of State for an elected officer or a notary public. FS 113.02 Fee to be paid before commissions Issued. No commission shall be issued by the Governor or attested by the Secretary of State or shall bear the seal of the state until the fee fixed and required by s. 113.01, if any,shall first be paid as therein provided. FS 113.06 Record of commission, oath, and acceptance. Every commission issued by the Governor shall be recorded in the Office of the Secretary of State in a book of commissions and an index made thereof, and the oath of office of the person named in said commission shall be endorsed on said commission, and accompanying the commission there shall be transmitted to each officer a printed acceptance of said commission,and his or her oath of office,which shall be subscribed and taken by such officer, and returned to the Office of the Secretary of State and filed therein,and a note thereof made on the record of said commission by the Secretary of State. In order to facilitate the oath of office process for incoming Board of Supervisors, Severn Trent would like to offer this authorization form for a one time payroll deduction from the initial Board of Supervisor Payroll check. By signing below you hereby authorize Severn Trent to deduct $10 from your next Board of Supervisor Compensation check. A$10 check will be made payable to the Florida Department of State for the filing of your Oath of Office. O/--1P- /3 Date • Print Name Sig attire Supervisor, Community 4t4r31 District Witness Enc. State of Florida Oath of office form 1 i61 1 A ' NEW SUPERVISOR INFORMATION SHEET PLEASE RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO RECORDING SECRETARY: Severn Trent Services 210 North University Drive Suite 702 Coral Springs, Florida 33071 CDD: ea NAME: d 4-7 /41`5 ADDRESS: 4 � r, 7 25053 Peacock Lane Naples, Florida 34144-9696 COUNTY OF RESIDENCE: 6(4,4 PHONE: Z3�7 1 /50- 0e06 FAX: a ( - 0,z6 - 79`3 CELL: S A-CM E- 4--r .a-Rav_e EMAIL ADDRESS: . U is O ,„41- 161ageit ' Swade, Janice _..... From: Anthony Davis[Anthony@jadavis.comj Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 10:35 AM To: Swade, Janice Subject: RE: ADDRESS Anthony Davis 25053 Peacock Lane#202 Naples, FL 34114-9696 A &vty (239)430-0806 www,jadavis.com From: Swade, Janice [mailto:jswade @severntrentms,com] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 10:26 AM To: Anthony Davis Cc:Teague, Cal Subject: ADDRESS Congratulations and welcome to the POI Board! Can you please send me a physical address. Your Agenda Package is sent via FedEx and cannot be sent to a PO Box. Thank you ! Janice Swade Note to Board Members-As all Supervisors are included on this e-mail, please do not answer this e-mail via the"reply to all" button, in order to avoid an unintentional violation of the Sunshine Law. Janice Swade District Recording Secretary Severn Trent Services, Inc. 210 North University Drive Suite 702 Coral Springs, FL 33071 (954) 753-5841 Ext. 3058 (Telephone) (954)345-1292 (Fax) 1/21/2013 1X61 1A4 Page 1 of 1 Colao, Barbara From: Teague, Cal Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 1:52 PM To: Colao, Barbara Subject: FW: Letter of Consideration Please print From: audrey sanders [mailto:audsanders @gmail.com] Sent:Thursday,January 10, 2013 4:27 PM To:Teague, Cal Subject: Letter of Consideration Dear CID Board of Supervisors, I,Randy Resch,am submitting my candidacy for consideration for appointment to the Board of Supervisors. My previous experience as owner of a New York/New Jersey based mechanical/electrical contracting/engineering company for forty (40)years will assist the board technically in construction, maintenance and operations associated with the operation of your water/sewerage treatment and ancillary facilities. I would appreciate the opportunity to personally interview for the upcoming position. Very truly yours, Randolph Resch 25069 Peacock Lane Unit#201 Naples,Fl 34114 cell 732-673-2077 Fax and home 239-642-3888 email audsanders_@gmail.com 1/11/2013 s s 161 1A4- r January 16,2013 Dear CID Board of Supervisors: The Board of Directors of Orchid Cove supports the appointment of Randy Resch to the Board of Supervisors of the Community Improvement District. His technical abilities and tireless volunteerism has greatly benefited our community. His knowledge and skills afforded Orchid Cove the ability to make vast improvements and corrections in our irrigation system, security system,pool equipment, and lighting throughout the community. He has helped save Orchid Cove thousands of dollars in expenses. As the chairperson of the Architectural Committee, member of the Security Committee, and assistant to the Environmental and Landscaping Committee,he has used his technical forte to our advantage. We,the Board of Orchid Cove, are certain that Mr.Resch's experience and knowledge would be an asset to the Community Improvement District.. We appreciate your consideration. With Sincere Regards, Board of Directors Orchid Cove Condominium Association Cc: Board Members of Orchid Cove: Jean Hunt John favor Kevin McPeak Audrey Sanders *161 1 . . , . . Ai RESOLUTION 2013-2 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING OFFICERS OF THE PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of the Port of the Islands Community Improvement District at a regular business meeting desires to appoint the below recited persons to the offices specified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT: 1. The following persons were appointed to the offices shown, to wit: Norine Dillon Chairman Theodore Bissell. Vice Chairman Calvin Teague Secretary Robert Koncar Treasurer Stephen Bloom Assistant Treasurer .J.oe..1_, 1.xtt:hony (Tony=)._.Cta i s _ Assistant Secretary Dale Lambert Assistant Secretary Richard Ziko Assistant Secretary c PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS, 18TH DAY OF UAL Y 74)13. Norine Dillon Chairperson Calvin Teague '` Secretary , . 161 1A if Teague, Cal From: soto <sotolawn @yahoo.com> Sent Thursday,January 17,2013 3:38 PM To: Teague,Cal; rcziko @embarqmail.com; 'Dillon Norine';crcuster @aol.com;Edge, Robert; Casey, Bob;dalelambert @embarqmail.com Subject: POI CID Notes Jan'13 Good Afternoon. P01 CID walk through was with Robert Soto, Robert Edge,and Norine Dillon. • Soto's Lawn will be proceeding with mulching common areas next week. • We will be adding a second application on turf in common areas. • We will re adjust sprinklers that are over spraying onto road at pump station. • There will be a fertilization application added to build turf, resulting in greener grass. • We will be applying a special treatment in areas with ant mounds. --) • Soto's Lawn is recommending replanting plants on East side of bridge at 41 median. We have treated area ~'° before, but results have not proven better. We recommend installation of sixty Fakahatchee(3 gallon)at$12 totaling$720. Also,eight Firebush(3 gallon)at$12,totaling$960. • Our tree service crew will e removing any overhanging limbs on roadway on common areas. Thank you, SOtO S 04 .: -3 \ A4i Lawn Servic , inc. (' . 2830 35th Avenue NE Naples,FL 34120 Sotolawn.com Phone:(239)354-1080 Fax:(239)354-1045 Contact us: Claire info@sotolawn.com (Office) Robert robert@sotolawn.com Scott scott@sotolawn.com Donna donna @sotolawn.com Lila lila@sotolawn.com (irrigation) 1 161 1A Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Financial Report December 31,2012 Prepared by SEVERN TRENT SLRVTC 161 1A '+ PORT OF THE ISLANDS Community Improvement District Table of Contents FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheet-All Funds Page 1 General Fund Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance............... Page 2-3 Trend Report Page 4-5 Enterprise Fund Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance ............... Page 6-7 Trend Report Page 8-9 SUPPORTING SCHEDULES Check Register Page 10-11 Special Assessments-Collection Schedule .......................................................... Page 12 Construction Schedule Page 13-14 CIP Status Report Page 15-16 Cash Flow Projections Page 17-18 Cash Fldw Projections-5 year .......:................................ Page 19 Monthly Activity Report .......................................................... Page 20-25 Accounts Receivable Ageing Report (90+days outstanding).......................................... Page 26-27 Repair and Maintenance Detail Reports Page 28-34 16, 1 1AL Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Financial Statements (Unaudited) December 31, 2012 0 $ 161 1 A 4 PORT OF THE ISLANDS CID STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS DECEMBER 31,2012 GENERAL WATER AND TOTAL SEWER ASSETS $ $ $ CURRENT ASSETS: CASH 608,609 48,752 657,361 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 834 907 1,741 DUE FROM OTHER FUNDS 16,961 16,961 INTEREST/DIVIDENDS RECEIVABLE 665 - 665 INVESTMENTS: CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT-540 DAYS 151,050 - 151,050 MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT 567,736 6,576 574,312 SBA ACCOUNT 4,893 5,158 10,051 SBA ACCOUNT(RESTRICTED) 11,871 24,760 36,631 SBA RESERVES 1,850 - 1,850 SBA RESERVES(RESTRICTED) 1,425 - 1,425 CONSTRUCTION FUND - 286,497 286,497 FMV ADJUSTMENT (350) (652) (1,002) TOTAL CURRENT ASSETS 1,348,583 388,959 1,737,542 NONCURRENT ASSETS: INTANGIBLE ASSETS,NET - 31,621 31,621 CAPITAL ASSETS: LAND - 293,061 293,061 CONSTRUCTION IN PROGRESS 5,196,390 5,196,390 IMPROVEMENTS,NET - 6,491,391 6,491,391 EQUIPMENT,NET 144,459 144„459 TOTAL NONCURRENT ASSETS 12,156,922 12,156,922 TOTAL ASSETS 1,348,583 12,545,881 13,894,464 LIABILITIES CURRENT LIABILITIES: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 100 100 ACCRUED EXPENSES 2,364 2,374 4,738 RETAINAGE PAYABLE 16,873 16,873 DUE TO OTHER FUNDS 16,961 16,961 DEPOSITS - 33,100 33,100 BONDS AND LOANS PAYABLE CURRENT - 497,303 497,303 TOTAL CURRENT LIABILITIES 19,425 549,650 569,075 NONCURRENT LIABILITIES: BONDS AND LOANS PAYABLE,LONG-TERM 4,005,730 4,005,730 TOTAL NONCURRENT LIABILITIES 4,005,730 4,005,730 - TOTAL LIABILITIES 19,425 4,555,380 4,574,805 NET ASSETS INVESTED IN CAPITAL ASSETS,NET OF RELATED DEBT - 7,653,889 7,653,889 UNRESTRICTED 336,612 336,612 - ASSIGNED OPERATING RESERVE 103,815 - 103,815 UNASSIGNED 1,225,343 - 1,225,343 TOTAL NET ASSETS $ 1,329,158 $ 7,990,501 $ 9,319,659 NOTE:MINOR DIFFERENCES IN STATEMENT TOTALS REPORT DATE:114/2013 ARE A DIRECT RESULT OF ROUNDING TO WHOLE DOLLARS. 1 4 4 4 161 lA '- PORT OF THE ISLANDS General Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending December 31,2012 ANNUAL YTD ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE($) AS A%OF DECEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 2,177 $ 544 $ 455 $ (89) 20.90% $ 1 Net Incr(Decr)in FMV-Invest - - 371 371 0.00% - Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 435,400 145,133 213,799 68,666 49.10% 126,151 Special Assmnts-Discounts (17,416) (5,805) (8,267) (2,462) 47.47% (4,721) Other Miscellaneous Revenues - 315 315 0.00% TOTAL REVENUES 420,161 139,872 206,673 66,801 49.19% 121,431 EXPENDITURES Administrative P/R-Board of Supervisors 7,000 1,500 2,000 (500) 28.57% 1000 FICA Taxes 536 115 153 (38) 28,54% 77 ProfServ-Engineering 26,000 6,500 - 6,500 0.00% - ProfServ-Legal Services 12,500 3,125 6,047 (2,922) 48.38% 3,490 ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 28,365 7,091 7,091 - 25.00% 2,364 ProfServ-Property Appraiser 6,531 6,531 6,531 - 100.00% 6,531 ProfServ-Special Assessment 9,243 9,243 9,243 0.00% Auditing Services 3,750 1,875 - 1,875 0.00% • Communication-Telephone 100 25 9 16 9.00% - Postage and Freight 1,500 375 349 26 23,27% 57 Rental-Meeting Room 350 75 75 - 21.43% 25 Insurance-General Liability 8,844 2,211 3,830 (1,619) 43.31% 1,883 Printing and Binding 2,000 500 118 382 5.90% - Legal Advertising 2,200 550 135 415 6,14% 135 Miscellaneous Services 1,375 344 241 103 17.53% 85 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 8,708 2,903 4,111 (1,208) 47,21% 2,429 Misc-Web Hosting 1,000 250 - 250 0.00% - Office Supplies 650 162 • 162 0.00% Annual District Filing Fee 175 175 175 - 100,00% - Total Administrative 120,827 43,550 30,865 12.685 25.54% 18,076 Field Contracts-MgmtServices 100,000 25,000 25,000 - 25.00% 8,333 Contracts-Landscape 79,440 19,860 19,860 25.00% 6,620 Electricity-Streetlighling 16,50C 4,125 4,744 (619) 28.75% 1,693 Utility-Irrigation 12,600 3,150 1,645 1,505 13,06% 1,350 R&M-Renewal and Replacement 10,000 2,500 1,757 743 17.57% 478 R&M-Roads&Alleyways 4,000 1,000 - 1,000 0.00% - R&M-Signage 1,000 250 - 250 0.00% - Capital Outlay 70,894 17,723 17,723 0.00% - Total Field 294,434 73,608 53,006 20,602 18.00% 18,474 Report Date:1/6/2013 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services 2 0 , . 161 1k I-- PORT OF THE ISLANDS General Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending December 31,2012 ANNUAL YTD ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE($) AS A%OF DECEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL TOTAL EXPENDITURES 415,281 117058 83,871 33287 2020% 38,550 Excess(deficiency)of revenues Over(under)expenditures 4,900 22,714 122,802 100,088 2506.16% 84,881 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES(USES) Contribution to(Use of)Fund Balance 4,900 - - - 0.00% . TOTAL FINANCING SOURCES(USES) 4,900 - - 0,009E Net change In fund balance $ 4,900 $ 22,714 $ 122,802 $ 100,088 2506.16% $ 84,881 FUND BALANCE,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2012) 1,208,358 1,208,358 1,208,358 FUND BALANCE,ENDING $ 1,211,258 $ 1,229,070 5 1,329,158 Report Date:1/6/2013 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services 3 i 161 1A . V z .„ ... .4. ct, ... N._ Op 2 �S J p7 2n O 2 fit 8 C O... r O O i! N N. {' Z O p 1+ 1D CO CD m rc of of m c3 cv r ui R m N a 6 w 0 Z 7.. N O to , 6 O 2 , . .T1 V R 2 t.') fV 7 ' r - co gS a M1. th . O �- [�I W co L: (ry m O C4 cc n t0 M V' b7 4,1 N N G m 6 LO To a us d _ e a tn t • iVI CA c $ a E • A d 13f m o 0 z h as d A 43 0 CD a a� = $ a. 4. k a w fr to E .• LP. a' H a ^ y d w rte- .s 0 C•i c0 p6p� C .R ,. C�, - N .- CV ai E o a .„, fA > ,� c4 r' vi m CO m. 8 ` •,. N c., , m N N •, • VII 3 qQ 12 �/ -IS N w x CO § CO • • • t ■ ,+V. N . + 1n «(J , • , i;LJ CO y Q M V L .... 0 O N Q • C J (I) tC I Q O = V B a, 2 p 4 a m fh F- E V y > 8 � 8 c 0c3 _ .- g m �7i c v' 'u. N O m c H E x, j 8 8 Y 0 d n 5 a e- P. M a w .2 u Vi ml < ,,,, sa n ,12 v c E rev 'S p, o —m 3 8 0 o V Og E w '-° m a ., a � arkka ¢ 821 2 Ems' -- gES. ~ fl ? '8 Q CC . . . 1 6 1 IA 4,1 ,Z t.L In CO ‘... .— 43 (1) ] I ....- u. .- CD _. u 1 . a - F- 0 1-• 2 .,_,`, § § +4+ g 'Z' gi 7. •••• CY .— g a gl r; ,_ ... --. g .0 xo, A I 1 I . ■ 1 ■ 0 . ca To sc 4„ I , ■ • ■ fl ■ s 1 ■ Til "2 •E < cs .‘U) G 4 ces U, 7a VI in t.g 4! G 2 U < ..... . t tui + + + + + . + + • . . 0 U) — 0 o o 7a t6• .: < 11 C < .., 511 1U .•C ■ V. O 41 A i a • , -13 V al c r i -6 = 2 03 10 +0 2 t RI C 6. 0 2 -6- c -6 . 4 • . , . 7, a. t R. •g < F. 1.14 ta 4.9 E .■ '1' a) a) , , , ■ , • • . , al Z , To 41,1 --.1 t9 a Ul U) ... Ct 1 o Cr) (0 40 C'l ,f <II us co 05 to a, a e U) ..) it - - ...„ -4, ,-... . , , - 0, 6.,.. e... co Z •O .--- eu < v 7a N- CI :., 0 U) 4—, V. 12 .22 Z a 4X g ...I ,„— CV cn E ta g — 2. IMO '5 73 Z 0 z O■ CI Cl 2, _ 46 . Z Z C., E c) IL. >, 8 4-6 0 .E a fn V, Z. E r.... a: = ' ° 2' -4'3 'I — iEt21-.. 5 -55n g Il l r n 5 ai '3 Es_ I." g CC E c.) w g g g x o o 0 z z 0 0 u. Lj e cc , . .. 161 1A ii 4 PORT OF THE ISLANDS Water And Sewer Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenses and Changes in Net Assets For the Period Ending December 31,2012 ANNUAL YID ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE($) AS A%OF DECEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL OPERATING REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 2,838 $ 710 $ 119 $ (591) 4.19% $ 33 Water Revenue 43,000 10,750 8,552 (2,198) 19.89% 3,758 Sewer Revenue 65,000 16,251 13,657 (2,594) 21.01% 5,879 irrigation Fees 100,000 25,000 18,938 (6,062) 18.94% 8,827 Net!nor(Decr)In FMV-Invest - 692 692 0.00% Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 1,135,025 378,342 557,344 179,002 49.10% 328,859 Special Assmnts-Discounts (45,401) (15,134) (21,552) (6,418) 47.47% (12,306) Other Miscellaneous Revenues - 1,585 1,585 0.00% 585 TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 1,300,462 415,919 579,335 183,416 44.55% 335,635 OPERATING EXPENSES Personnel and Administration FIR-Board of Supervisors 7,000 1,500 2,000 (500) 28.57% 1,000 FICA Taxes 536 115 153 (38) 28,54% 77 ProfServ-Engineering 26,000 6,500 - 6,500 0.00% - ProfServ-Legal Services 12,500 3,125 6,047 (2,922) 48.38% 3,490 ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sory 28,482 7,121 7,121 - 25.00% 2,374 ProfServ-Property Appraiser 17,025 17,025 17,025 - 100.00% 17,025 ProfServ-Special Assessment 7,885 7,885 - 7,885 0.00% Auditing Services 3,750 1,875 - 1,875 0.00% Communication-Telephone 100 25 9 16 9.00% - Postage and Freight 1,000 250 233 17 23,30% 38 Rental-Meeting Room 350 75 75 21.43% 25 Insurance-General Liability 8,270 2,068 3,704 (1,636) 44.79% 1,883 Printing and Binding 1,500 375 88 287 5.87% - Legal Advertising 1,600 400 98 302 6.13% 98 Miscellaneous Services 2,050 512 611 (99) 29.80% 236 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 22,701 7,567 10,716 (3,149) 47.20% 6,331 Office Supplies 750 188 - 188 0.00% - Total Personnel and Administration 141,499 56,606 47,880 8,726 33.84% 32,577 Water-Sewer Comb Services Contracts-Mgmt Services 309,533 77,383 77,383 25.00% 25,794 Contracts-Other Services 2,000 - - 0.00% Communication-Teleph-Field 4,512 1,128 1,331 (203) 29.50% 296 Utility -General 80,000 20,000 18,675 1,325 23.34% 6,580 R&M-Irrigation 10,000 2,500 1,355 1,145 13.55% 1,025 R&M-Water Plant 10,000 2,500 76 2,424 0.76% (1,631) R&M-Waste Water Plant 9,866 2,467 20,871 (18,404) 211.54% (322) Misc-Licenses&Permits 4,500 4,500 3,375 1,125 75.00% 3,375 Cap Outlay-Water Plant 50,000 12,500 58,767 (46,267) 117.53% 48,585 Total Water-Sewer Comb Services 480,411 122,978 181,833 (58,855) 37.85% 83,702 Report Date:1/6/2013 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services 6 v , , 161 IA PORT OF THE ISLANDS Water And Sewer Fund Community Improvement District Statement of Revenues,Expenses and Changes In Net Assets For the Period Ending December 31,2012 ANNUAL YID ACTUAL ADOPTED YEAR TO DATE YEAR TO DATE VARIANCE(5) AS A%OF DECEMBER-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ADOPTED BUD ACTUAL Debt Service Principal Debt Retirement 497,303 - - - 0.00% Interest Expense 158,056 79,028 13,171 65857 8.33% - Total Debt Service 655,359 79,028 13,171 65,857 2.01% - TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 1,277,289 258.612 242.884 15,728 19.02% 116,279 Operating Income(loss) 23,193 157,307 336,451 179,144 1450.66% 219,356 Change In net assets $ 23,193 5 157,307 $ 336,451 $ 179,144 1450.66% $ 219,356 TOTAL NET ASSETS,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2012) 7,654,048 7,854,048 7,654,048 TOTAL NET ASSETS.ENDING S 7,877,241 S 7.811,355 $ 7,990,499 Report Date:1/6/2013 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services 7 k 161 1A 4 .t, ,, „L. op .... 3 -0 ts 8 ° ° ° ' ° , N w o 0 o oa; o io 28821 /9- § 82c732 v . a o r oo CD n n v 7 fV � im O ti N N ~ 7 r W r �-- N N ? D O V' 4 0 2 w m m m m m m CU 0 oO ^ o °' N n g m tip co t c2 T. V ti ni ..0 r` co- o to < ua g'74 5 a C L> en e ea i a Q m r1 2 < vs U EU ai n a a in � E d o, , . , , , . . , , . m 12 42 r � � o1 A a, N O R C ddb ac ., a �+ km • $ Tel d e W 6--. W W < o F , a , . , E a < W m m rn ti 05 ■n ,n o 1 ' 27...' &) • • , gi r , m cn o 8 8 m C L r5 "' C %. 00 [D C, ,n ,n o v. cn o m �' n c`a'n in 0 8 0 Mi v m of ni ui Y to ni ,.: C p Q PI co: m m a fn g.2 m o m CD <.7 OD w e r a ' m vn N , • cn N , -al ip M W V' m .- N _Z _ t(l N o st_ a gi ✓ m m o CD _N c 0 m m . . , . v -��, m y PA chi 'Cn t . TO m 7 .h W N '- Lri a vto Cn u- • N Z o v y N 8 E r/W O h _ co�qq )1; E `o i Q O S-' c a� y A d m m = �0- a8 �i a c7 F u c Z N -6 8 C c y C v „1 d D N S u) C.7 'E' u �' ',D u, v as Ji U C 4 N N c c 0 C ili 9 !1III g$ aiu' a aLa ¢ 8ocre = L Or ~ r c ' Vi C Z n n O z 4 CC U O f- O 1611ALf Z 3 o o m L0 o v 01 o .. N CO I a Qi c.' -4 g r 6. of .a o `tea n i tg {� ci y ., e7i �t .r . N C F 4 3 1▪ E N M 1(1 Ot ~ N Et "' a a' NY To 4 a . c s -, Q N m X0 r3. Q 2 < d Z ua v N C r • < w r a E 0 A A 9 ai O o u a e b a$' ti, y ro C a d . , , , , , , . , , Ge ¢ - a fu q a. e W P. d• d E i• z Al y a+ VJ cx G , v Ci E 0 N ni Y - of 0 R A • . O "CS, tV - M - T 4. • Q o C p N C • i ' . N 03 n m .0 to U Z ° ' C C U CO m W O u w v u_ £ _ z ZQ _ o c t7 F c O 1 Z 2 m E E lit 2 u v+ a t7 O m C E h - ui , t o- t '°y Z N Wm W N 4' _ E E rn d E P c ? m ,- # a E. ? ru Ci a Cii 05 O € 2 3 - f t U o lL C .. '= . a ua 3 m9 u1 6 m rn w tfoo v Ct 4 0 '� o O t c 3 C m• 4 C. U ▪ O O CL Y 4 1 6 I 1 A Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Supporting Schedules December 31, 2012 t e 3 ) 1 b11 1 V N r N m w M 8 3 2 O O S N 4' 3 3 2 8 O O O O Q O O O O p 0 O V rO CS in 8 • O m 0 m m O m m D m M N P w 1R E M M ^ w W Mg w 4 N N m4 a 2 O N Ni � w N( .- w w w w en w w w O N w w w w w d X in w O„_.. i } pp 8 pp p p p M O ? pp R c9 88822 pp pp N o p op N a 0 0 0 0 ,.- N N 2 O N M 7- 31 O t 2 6 08N E o O O 0000 0 0 0 o 0 o 00 1_ _ _ 323 333 33 O h N N 3 3 2 2 Q 3 LL I♦ I 'Mi N h m (n m 2 J T S aE 2 2 c° m E E N N •- Z c m 1 cc y2 ��p a .ry�i -� j W N N i (3 U i 1 3 J N F- s 'E N (b W A A 1. N a i y' c EE E t� (7' A y .. f8 a `u° m O O r% $5 8 7-6$ k c b oro - 5 �5k S t5 rNa g 8 u m° m°o = a a a U U K M ma. U < _J W O U O. U U a a a` O N N OY W rn N CO to � 5 _ W a (o C ~ C O Z V ¢ N N I1>N }�Gj C C' C' C p�{$C" C'{�G�j {t�j' Qo (� In N e W }- z > o o a a N z 3 a 1- J �¢ d } a V w g z Z z n o o N 5 g 5 3 w > > > > a .c a > > > > > 5ao ❑ woor` , - J E222 aaEE az0000 gm g E - 00000 , 0 z0j 0 U U a a ° < ^f. .N. - Ni N-i -p-i .i ❑ Z Z z z . _,• .�O Or "8 W LL LL W LL X 0 , .- Z W ❑ , O O W •- Z N N N N N N N N N N U O 3 y y a a. y O fA 1- N U N (n (n O O W > j ❑ I❑WL ❑ a O. r ❑ ao Ci ,}m� as m N N QS N N ?' Y Ifl (h >(� (?f ~ U N O W y W W W F" U LL .4- j J J 6 U` V` F a N S1 S S' < W W W W E va.a. d Z LL LL LL LL Z Q U = ¢ Z Z Q N E E E E p N W W LL p I- F - F- F- p� O F 1- F. .1' U J J Z p y; MM F- 1- h h 'L" m 2 2 2 2 2 K ¢ W O M Z a a W - m O a S 770000 .� o a a J m m a 's ?r m m m `o K C w z ca�R (D m 0 m CJ � O) 6f CO!A CO O) N N me}} "J Q ¢ J J J J J JJ J....1 J J CO M p N N m N N N N C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ n O) O T G d N N N N N M 6 N N ^ N tY (,r = w ee a' m K Ce CL m a N N g S S as g g o S 2 0, v R R - m " o r r r r > r > > a- > 2 8 3 3 3 8 N O O N - -- Q N tm N N O ^ ^ a a a a < a < < < O O) O O R N N N (N�n {V Z N .- - N N a a a a a a a a a 0. N N N N N N N W CO W W W 01 CI, cn W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 0 K U 0 U U U U w t w N CC i U w LU U lot W u W R w W J W W W in f n (n CO CO F (n (n C/7 !n 0) 0) 0) 0)_, -.I Q Q Q 4 < 4 % W E W W W W W 0 0 w w w w W tL Z Z Z Z Z J a F z U g g g (p Z 2 Z Z Z J W W W N Z 'Z Y Z z z 2 4 c. K K (Y ¢ U O (Wj < < U (n K Z Ca 0 R_0 , 00 ° 0 a" Z Z > > > N a _i N S U Z Z 5 a (n W ry7 (IuJl z 0) 0) Z Z Z ill W W Z Z Z W LL LL 5 W p, (/} 1- 0) Z m F- F- Z f. W iz W W W W F- F W W W z0 W O O Z JWJ N f- 0 m 6 W Y '� ❑ W O O 0 F- 1- F- 1- F- F- Z Z Z z Z F- ❑ U O z Q 0.~. > W W Z z K (,) m ti J a: U m N _ Nt Z < Z Z Z Z W W W W ill < W W W W W W ¢ a ¢ a ^ csavo 000Z � 3 ui • c35LU (0) o o' LU 000) 0 X Z Z Z Z Z 0 W J J LUX 0 ❑ ❑ W O O , O ❑ J i F W ❑ J 4 K W Z Z Z Z Z Z Z W 11 W W W W to J W W W O E R J U 1- W W E. O K W < Z O W < Z W F- W W W W I' w 1 G>i L>i 1 -I o ¢ 0) ❑w o 0) o 0) 'di LL o x 1 0 , z Ix- 1 o z 1 o (>il 1 OLL to a, (n N N 0 U ❑ ❑ u_ a, W W Z J rg (A LL (n to (n N W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N al 1 s 8 , a c3 ? " ' " ` ` -- Si Si c ` A(O m m m m m` is as ` ` m W v_ 'n g(� ii n5 0 0 0 _. N N N M +l 5.a' N N N W 0 0 0 0 N U s ; a a a a a a a a a a a aaa aaaaa a s aaa a a a a a 0 a a a a a a wr yll W - - - - - ^ - w - - .1. (V 0. tp tp m g O O O O O (O O W N O O O O a N ^ ^ N N I P h 7. h , , N- N M M M M M M M M M M M M M U) M M 013 M M M M M M M M C) M M W M CO M M �/ 10 4) tel III III (n In ll1 N N :A vI V) 7 N N N N V3 N to N ill M (I) 1() Y! N t W w a LL 2 88888888888888888888 °o $ o° °o °o °o nb u4 o n ? v v n. v °e C. X ID ) ) , f 161 1A 4, E m ° rn ry o a, (tmp v 1°pt r <�*, qm �Npi uNi, ±i (°np as, rn .Ni °' �qmy trop �p' p°o rn ry iiEE Wi UI " U) . w y p Yf UN M W W W 69 N M M eVe��A V U3 cS 4. {/f O4 M Y4 +}p h K N LA W NW U W OtY; N N g r N 0 N N N N 47 N N VI t� N N N N N N 1fM N N f1 m - o tO CO - Q d § m o ° 88 " ' § g118 . _ , p - o O g i 1 Z 1 N 2 aS I N p V N N N N S S VS N S ?rVN < M V csl _ IL ky $ s a 2 U LL N w Z '8 N N N p, E W m t p 1 G LL � q a $ ' R a B F- ∎m �? c Z C U , J F ,b a a J G a..!54 C m L c c m 2 J J 0 a iE T C e c .,§ w c c ` 2 3 & a i rn a a - U C .fq a m t t y t Y Tr m ; m 7 m m m g g 8 3 $ m q U c U U - Uc t U � E m m y T U U g g E E . Fi 3 § U7g N i +G L 0 N 2 - (§L Ei W P . i 5 i p > y L QU a s x aO U 2 O O J U U a U cc a U R a a . 0 0 0 e 4 0 N 0. N x 0 N W m f!) .N. w Li, 0 M y W x J K C 7 O O Z x Z J W ❑ ❑ ❑ Q > N W N ❑ ❑ W pNp Z Yx J IY ❑ ❑ w > > ❑ w ❑ N N ❑ ❑ W W W W 7 ❑ - 1 • N V N F¢- W Q ZQ C7 LL LL LL Y O zU •a • t�i ❑ ❑ ❑ f- W W a E • L rn !- Z > W J CL a ce za W F y O th ch (13 Z cc K m ID a A U▪ a M o z w U m a v U h U 4'- .- o d - >- 000 ,-.1216- ti ul : a LL la- .- a U ❑ 5 Z a a > U U a U C N a 5' ePe[ FQ- .1'. ^ j U U 'a N a 0 N W U ,% 0 N a Z a a a ' LL N Q }j a a g a a a 1 ill W 111 0 iC .. y _ x N U O- _N Q J d ° a N 8 !- c? O Z o Cr 0- a N m 6 x a c V s - p~p m > CC (7) 0Z-4 CO ch h �MV' z $ w Ow O O O O N - o .A ~°o - la 0 v W U d O W O r o O' O 4 N m 0 a U7 men J J J a Z g. . d.• GGG7777 t� O g U LL - m o 4 M fO Y "' r u. c7 LL U x x x N .L o d �q+ a z ¢ d g dd ° I° x z r d N g E'0.m U y 'z 0 ~ g > z N g g U y tcp _ ¢ O O O 3 C. , �' .L+ W a �O W O M O a N a N N W 3e 'N' ❑ g N cc w 1. v 0 u. m it W it it J it a 'n m U 2 M M a u u x 0 u. p Z pp y p N C 0 N Q N M O y r 0 O g G mm N a m 2 {n t:, ^ R S N N N N ^ r m N N N N N N N N m 1` N N _ M A d N - y O ppp 8yh m N N P. a O N N E N N N N Ni N OO N N N mm a N Cl* CO N N *0 W W W W W K 0 0 0 0 0 ui IT: 0 N O N 0) N 15, ! Q h I- a Fa- Fa- la- fa- la- V f Z Z 7z Z Z z z W W Z () W W W WW CO 6 4 C ? Z Z L Z z a a 5 O 5 O ix U tt ec x ec ce F. Claz Z N 2 d tJdi Q4Q o N R z .W�tt W W L- W W LU W 9,-, Z Z Z X X j $ U Y 1- a Y a �y F- F- F- F- F- - W ti Z Z Moo o $ W Z a W J M Z 'S W W W W W ❑ yQ K LC��7[ (7 U o U X a' a' J y ❑ Z ? ❑ y W .-J I- I- I- I- ate' m W a a a Z -I W w W W O j LY >- 1 O Z Z N W W W W W Z ❑ O O _ i _ K Z a o a 7d °w m w a s °d x w a ❑ W l>u I>i Z ww _ W Q a -di 'J) fn U ❑ ❑ LL co W a U LL 2 M Z F- U U' x J N N N to N LL LL c.9 r2 N r ~ ~ .N- M r . . . . N N .N .N- N N_ N N_ N .N- eN- .N- z z z z N z 8 0 P C V F 'C :�' C V A f3 A A N h N GGGJJ N N cV N N <^! lVN M M M M M aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa a N N gt t9 3 3 S O O O 8cp h m m O .- h m O: N N N N N 'R 3 0 N N "" 6) m m Oi O O O d N N N N N N N r- M M t0 N N m m m h h h h h h h !+ I` h in h h A h h h h h h h h ❑ U N �tO N N . N N N ;II N M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M k'1 N N � N N N N N N N N N N N N N N lf1 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V or , . , 0 , 161 1AL PORT OF THE ISLANDS Community Improvement District Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments Collier County Tax Collector-Monthly Collection Report For the Fiscal Year ending September 2013 ALLOCATION BY FUND Discount/ Gross Date Net Amount (Penalties) Collection Amount General Water/Sewer Received Received Amount Costs Received Fund Fund Assessments Levied FY 2013 $ 1,570,427 $ 435,400 $ 1,135,027 28%Allocation% 100% 28/° 72% 10/30/12 $ 10,430 $ 597 $ 213 $ 11,239 $ 3,116 $ 8,123 11/14/12 $ 82,051 $ 3,488 $ 1,675 $ 87,214 $ 24,180 $ 63,034 11/29/12 $ 204,794 $ 8,707 $ 4,179 $ 217,680 $ 60,352 $ 157,328 12/13/12 $ 402,445 $ 17,027 $ 8,213 $ 427,685 $ 118,576 $ 309,110 12/27/12 $ 26,778 * $ 547 $ 27,325 $ 7,576 $ 19,749 TOTAL $ 726,497 $ 29,819 $ 14,826 $ 771,143 $ 213,799 $ 557,344 %Collected 49.10% 49.10% 49.10% ITOTAL OUTSTANDING $ 799,284 $ 221,601 ] $ 577,683 *Discount taken in the 12/27/12 distribution was not available as of the date of this report. Once this information is received,an adjustment will be made and reflected in the next set of financial statements. Year Parcel ID Description Amount Comments FY 2010 1058920500 POI Hotel 119,627 bankruptcy FY 2011 1058920500 POI Hotel 119,627 bankruptcy FY 2012 1058920500 POI Hotel 119,638 bankruptcy Total Delinquent Parcels 358,892 Report Date:1/4/2013 12 161 1A '+ Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Series 2010 Special Assessment Revenue Bond 1.Recap of Capital Project Fund Activity Through December 31,2012 Bond Issued(Construction Account) $ 5,500,000 Source of Funds:Interest Earned $ 8,146 Use of Funds: COI $ (42,700) COI(costs transferred to checking account but not yet paid) $ (5,000) Disbursements Water Treatment Plant $ (5,173,949) $ (5,221,649) Adjusted Balance In Construction Account December 31,2012 $ 286,497 2.Funds Available For Construction at December 31,2012 Book Balance of Construction Account at December 31,2012 $ 286,497 Construction Funds available at December 31,2012 $ 286,497 3.Investments-BB&T at December 31,2012 Estimated Tyoe Yield Principal Construction Fund: 0.12% $ 286,497 ADJ:Outstanding Amounts Due $ Balance at December 31,2012 $ 286,497 13 . . 161 A Port of the Islands Community Improvement District Construction Schedule AMOUNT OF( CAPITAL Water Treatment REQ.# Date CONTRACTOR REQUISITION; OUTLAY COI ( Plant COI 10/20/10 Greenberg Traurig $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 COI 10/20/10 BUT $ 2,700.00 $ 2,700,00 COI 10/20/10 Severn Trent Management Svcs $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000,00 COI 11/02/10 Dan Cox $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000,00 1 11/09/10 Port of the Islands CID(reirnb) $ 321,537.00 $ 321,537.00 $ 321,537.00 2 11/18/10 South Florida Excavation $ 26,503.75 $ 26,503.75 $ 26,503.75 3 11/24/10 Naples Daily News $ 151.02 $ 151.02 5 151.02 4 01/04/11 Century Link $ 26,310.89 $ 26,310.88 5 26,310.88 5 12/16/10 South Florida Excavation $ 18,008.90 $ 18,008.90 9 18,008.90 6 02/01/11 Hole Monies $ 2,561.25 $ 2,561,25 $ 2,561.25 7 02/01/11 Hole Mantes $ 16,200.00 $ 16,200.00 $ 16,200.00 8 02/01/11 Hole Monies $ 13,20891 $ 13,206.91 $ 13,206.91 9 02/10/11 Benchmark EnviroMalytical,Inc. $ 1,019.00 $ 1,019.00 $ 1,019.00 10 02/17/11 Hole Monies $ 1,982.50 $ 1,982.50 $ 1,982,50 11 03/07/11 Hole Mantes $ 6,250.00 $ 6,250.00 5 6,250.00 12 03/16/11 South Florida Excavation $ 12,762.00 $ 12,762.00 $ 12,762 00 13 03/29/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 27,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 27,000.00 14 04/06/11 Hole Monies $ 13,850.00 $ 13,850.00 $ 13,850.00 15 05/05/11 South Florida Excavation $ 18,587.25 $ 18,587.25 $ 18,58725 16 05/16/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 95,028.60 $ 95,028.60 $ 85,028.60 17 05/19/11 Hole Monies $ 39,565.00 $ 39,565.00 $ 39,565.00 18 06/14/11 KW Controls $ 1,038.60 $ 1,036.60 $ 1,038.60 19 06/14/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 196,572.08 $ 196,572.08 $ 196,572.08 20 07/06/11 Hoie Montes $ 19,575.00 $ 19,575.00 $ 19,575.00 21 07/22/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 170,192.15 $ 170,192.15 $ 170,192.15 22 07/27/11 Hole Montes $ 22,325.00 $ 22,325.00 $ 22,325.00 23 08/19/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 156,352.50 $ 156,352.50 $ 156,352.50 24 08/30/11 Hole Monies $ 19,700.00 $ 19,700.00 $ 19,700.00 25 09/16/11 South Florida Excavation $ 6,971 40 $ 6,971.40 $ 6,971.40 26 09/16/11 South Florida Excavation $ 4,601,85 $ 4,601.85 $ 4,601,85 27 09/16/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 278,892.77 $ 278,892.77 $ 278,892.77 28 09/27/11 Michael Evans Computers $ 3,255.00 $ 3,255.00 $ 3,255.00 29 10/17/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 65,41829 $ 85,416.29 5 85,416.29 30 11/03/11 Hole Monies $ 832.50 $ 832.50 $ 832.50 31 11/03/11 Mole Monies $ 43,975.00 $ 43,975 00 $ 43,975.00 33 11/23/11 KW Controls $ 24,337.00 5 24,337.00 $ 24,337.00 J. iota[FYgri11 3 1.717,291 20 $ 1,874,561.20 $ 42,7011:00 $ 1674,561 20 J 32 11/14/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 266,314.14 $ 266,314,14 $ 266,314.14 34 12/15/11 South Florida Excavation $ 4,601.85 $ 4,601.85 $ 4,601 85 35 12/15/11 BC'Technologies $ 7,121,33 $ 7,121.33 $ 7,121.33 36 12/15/11 ITT Water Equipment Tech $ 586,766.70 $ 586,766.70 $ 586,766.70 37 12/16/11 Cardinal Contractors $ 647,523.09 $ 647,523.09 $ 647,523.09 38 12/30/11 Hole Montes $ 43,672.50 $ 43,67250 $ 43,67250 39 01/24/12 I-tole Montes $ 2550959 $ 25,609.59 $ 25,609.59 40 01/24/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 174,822,68 $ 174,822.66 $ 174,822,68 41 01/30/12 KW Controls $ 73,011 00 $ 73,011..00 $ 73.011,00 42 02/24/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 240,416.36 $ 240,416.36 $ 240,416,36 43 03115/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 246,740.07 $ 246,740..07 $ 246,74007 44 04/05/12 Hole Mantes $ 48,232.19 $ 48,232.19 $ 46,232.19 45 04/23/12 Cardinal Contractors § 89,577.03 $ 89,577.03 $ 89,577.03 46 05/09/12 ITT Water Equipment Tech $ 30,577.50 $ 30577.50 $ 30,577.50 47 05;16/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 62,629.20 $ 62,62920 $ 62,62920 48 05/17/12 KW Controls $ 12,168.50 $ 12,169.50 $ 12,16950 49 06/12/12 Hole Montes $ 65,2'76:60 $ 65,279.80 $ 65,276.80 50 06/12/12 Severn Trani Environmental Svcs $ 9,027.29 $ 9,027.29 $ 9,027.20 51 06/12;12 SCI Technologies $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,00000 52 06/13/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 207,111.76 $ 207,111.76 $ 207,111.76 53 06/29/12 Soto's Lawn Service,Inc. $ 19,680.00 $ 19,680,00 $ 19,680.00 54 07/18/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 13,632.50 $ 13,632.50 $ 13,63250 55 07/25/12 W.E.Johnson Equipment $ 33,086.00 $ 33,088.00 $ 33,088.00 56 06/03/12 Hole Monies $ 49,981.80 $ 49,981.80 $ 49,981 80 57 09/04/12 Severn Trent Environmental Svcs $ 3,045.00 $ 3,045.00 $ 3,045.00 58 09/04/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 195,289.60 $ 195,289.60 $ 195,289.60 59 09/19/12 Hole Montes $ 21,350.41 $ 21,350.41 $ 21,35041 60 09/19/12 BCI Technologies $ 33,278.67 $ 33,278.67 $ 33,278.67 61 09/19/12 Cardinal Contractors 5 52,400.10 $ 52,400.10 $ 52,400.10 1 Tvtal FY 2012 3,262,945.69... ...,_ ... $ 3,282,94Tz-96 $ $.. ...' $ 3282,045.66.J 62 10/16/12 PMA Geological Consultants $ 5,989.71 $ 5,989.71 $ 5,989.71 63 10/16/12 Cardinal Contractors $ 151,858.93 $ 151,858.93 5 151,85993 64 11/01/12 Hole Monies $ 10,027.10 $ 10,027.10 $ 10,027.10 65 12/11/12 Severn Trent $ 48,566.70 $ 48,566.70 $ 48,566.70 I. Iola/FY 2013 $ ....2.16,442,44 $ 216,442.44 $ "`"""2-167°'"'°"" ....._ _.....�.,.. $ 218.442.441 I Grand Total $ 5,216,649.30 $ 5173.949.317 $ 42,700.00 'G 5,1 73,9497-91 311) Interest ,. FY 2011 Interest $ 5,743.88 FY 2012 Interest $ 2,291.47 FY 2013 Interest $ 110.93 $ 8,14628 14 . 161 1A4 IT a 7,> I-F- 3* x!star s n x / ,.. i o N H w w w w A w + off.. +� yHNw ■41(01!... t w s v< —-1g i II LL LL H V. rywy., ww u 3u nw o , nn Y <v Mg N O a r.M CC ANN o c ,-m r r:: a.2 E c-7 . .1 a It g.2' F'a ° r ' S2 n b ww'w d I za a 0Em "-Q LL z 2D m ; a (1)"— -n ,mmm �.,c aq E La ,-.3 N ;A ai ry,°n o E • o* 2 a5 , Y1a F E E. W NW - . W '1,, a .iy<n O N O } :"�' o i a 1i Y L N v B1 GNF W -M ._..-.. �-�-4- 3 o ,�x w g x ' h> i c Q 2 1 E :,5 n. Q E € °' r Ir E N E v 5-�2 o O C z = 50 8 ww r cc w w - n c + a 11 1 at a o t E6 1 ro� a E z E # n s g' — ¢g 3 2 s g t ag W 0 0 .hs v t 1 6 1 1 A i . , -. li 6 2 .,' 2 0 2 2- E E. 2 . :r2 .2 R a `4' g 2 . '2 •-• -G. es-* .-P ',=.'F, Eg §I_F4. • Rx.Y4 E o- g j3 .. "2 S M g g ; i t 5 , - 8 (.) gggg o oouoou . * v 11 1 111111111 C) .. (7C) ,• :iA 8,§1,§' ,§6,.1. K °E § E 1 rs „000000 1, "- g 00 ,0 u • . -g I a 00.1, 1 2 0 , , .-i— , ,..., -- g . g 3 ,!"-, c egg N g v A 1 1s0v4 ,;.... .0.0 - .. „:4...,77., .,-a. - _'- _. _--, lic a , , ,z,_-_, "") -- "-;,,,:, -,T,...7. A53.,:,.. q=^ >,2 ,..._ ,. ;,,,;;g- „_ m M'q .7-0O3t:,14. -C95 t MQ'' i- --,z,-,R U) ._ 1 ' V — E F I .. ...,,, sl ,,,, ,,......-4.---. 1' -.„---,,, .. -- 2 2 w -21 „.0.„. - - Dm ,.., G '-:, ■6, --Z-' 2Z 0 - 04' ..... ., '- uE mt z I a me W. V4 e., . zo. • 6 .- g E 0 ‹ E - 25 roJi to-5— Tt4 = 2.. ,., t'tSE - -,S ..—o F- II tt3"gg t E 0 m 2 t 6 2 , g a Q'tili2 t ,1 Ig I 62 Rili. 1i g ii 6 A- 2 Y.2 2 it 5 wioglg il 7Clo 2 0 ' fif'37,q r g g f-t g s ,. . . § z5 -.2 ql - Et.1: 2 4 -1 .. .g t,1 :2 '- il■ u 31 1 =73.g..- 0-e. e ti g . ,21-g g i 1 ai 2D, R Q ri Lu -,7,. z a it g. -2 ' E .2 s-RIEZS gi2 r=, 0 2 P 2 $ CC o . .- ,:, w 6 . — . PI--- „, . -sgEat ; ivl-g4 -5.,.i t ' g f Z - ... .,1 '', ey_ s' -41 ,25. z 513.A xi t › - .777 , EvvF„ - . ' P A g al t a-614 - E i=4Rig12 .mmA _,....., 1 - e Ili z 101 EF. E.Y° ?-'2,-?<4‘ 22 ,, 2.;,1 Qg ,„ ,. S = E2 2 (?) - < §il E*rEE &U 4''-- ) . .Vg 0 . g310 2 h`,.. ..q. m r 01 - k -2—' 2 g Y. 0 NM gl ' 11POR'&fr ,*4 .igig ? . 6 1--- T. r1 g s LL,-.125 ,,,N 'A',t.',44.-.,-,, ,-*-. - 4,i AgA,51.t" c 2 -'.- 6 '4 ° gi"-T741-; ttt61111 , 111"14.Aiz ' iFf'-E2 ,, - ,241 - og,Ave,Rn .., L .s. mw A ” 15 IT' . . . 161 lA '? . Port of the Islands Improvement District Cash Flow Projections Fenerv/fund 31-Jon 28-Feb 32-Mar 30-Apr 31-May 30-Jun 31-Jul 31-Aug 30-Sep 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Cash Beginning Balance $1,183,088 $1,190,789 $1,315,210 $1,316,542 $1,340,805 $1,315,608 $1,266,980 $1,239,771 $1213,974 Cash Inflow $53,365 $152,824 Cash Outflow $53,365 $53,365 $181 $181 $€81 $18; $E81 ($26328) ($29,402) ($52034) ($29,102) ($25,378) 348,820) ($27,389) ($25,978) ($00,i73) CD Investment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $151,050 Add:Prepaid Items $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Add: Due to W5 Fund ($16,873) $0 $0 $0 Less:Current Liabilities(as of 12232/12) l$t:45':ii $17 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Estimated Cash Balance $1,190,769 $1,316,210 $1,316,542 $1 340,805 $1,315 608 1,266,988 50 $ .x1,239,771 $1,213,974 $2,315,032 Cash Receipts Special Assessments-Levy $55,400 $55,400 $55,400 $55400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Assessments-Delinquent(prier yr) 0 $99,459 $0 $U $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Assessments-Discount ($2,226) ($2,216) ($2,216) ($2,216) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Interest $181 $181 Total Cosh Inflow ,365 $181 181 $181 $181 $181 §182 .. $53.365 $192.824 $53,365 $53,365 $181 $181 $181 -�-.----.- f 183. $381 Operating Expenditures Administrative P/R-Board of Supervisors $500 $500 $500 $1,000 FICA Taxes $38 $38 $38 $$38 $500 $500 $500 $1,000 ProfServ-Engineering $2,167 $2,167 $77 $ $38 $38 $38 $38 $77 §2,167 $2,167 $2,167 $2,167 $2,167 $2,167 $2,167 ProfSery-Legal Services $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 ProfSery-Mgmt Consulting Sery $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 ProfSery-Property Appraiser $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SO ProfSery-Special Assessment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Annual Audit $0 $1,875 $1,875 $0 $0 Telephone $8 §8 $8 $0 $0 $0 $0 Postage and Freight $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $8 $150 Recital-Meeting Room $25 $25 $25 $50 $25 $25 $25 $25 $50 Insurance-General Liability $0 $0 $0 $2,211 $0 $0 $2,211 $0 $0 Printing&Binding $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 $167 Legal Advertising $'$ $167 $100 $0 $200 $200 $0 $200 $0 $0 $eoR $800 Miscellaneous Services $115 $115 $115 $115 $115 $115 $115 $115 $115 Misc.-Assessmnt Collection Cost $1,149 $1,149 $1,149 $1,149 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Office Supplies Total Administrative $7,699 $9,774 $9,774 $0 $0 $0 $O $0 $0 $10,473 $6,750 $6,550 $8,761 $7,350 $7,9123 Maintenance Contracts-Mgmt Services $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 $8,333 Contracts-Landscape $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 $6,620 Electricity-Streetlighting $1,375 $1,375 $1,375 $1,375 $1,375 Utility-Irrigation $1,375 $1,375 $1,375 $)350 $1,050 $1,050 §1,050 $1,050 $1,050 $1,050 $1,050 $1,050 $1,050 RAM-Renewal$Replacement $833 $833 $833 $833 RAM-Roads $333 $333 $833 $333 $833 $833 $833 $333 $333 $333 $333 $333 $333 $333 RAM-Signagc $83 $83 $ $83 $83 §83 $83 $63 CIPc $0 $0 $23,631 $0 $0 $23,631 $0 $83 $0 $23,631 _,....._,,,,..,... Total Maintenance $18,628 $18,628 $42,260 $18,625 $18,628 $42,260 $18,628 $18,628 $42,260 Total Cash Outflow $26,328 $28,402 $29,102 $25,378 $25,978" _,,, $52,034 $29,302 $26,378 $48,810 $27,389 $25,978 $50,173 `NOTES: _v Estimated COP costs for the anticipated projects are shown quarterly Delinquent assessments from hotel parcel are reflected as received in February 2013 Actual receipt date Olio or.n. 17 , , y 161 . IA 1-f Port of the Islands Improvement District Cosh Flow Projections Water and Serer£n0etv7iae Ass/ 31-Jan 28-Feb 31-Mar 30-Apr 31-May 30-Jun 31-Jul 31-Aug 30-5ap 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 Cash Beginning Balance $346,983 $451,197 $815,109 $825,497 $937,217 $326387 $207939 $181,369 $156,432 Cash Inflow $15;414 $410,046 $151,414 $151,414 $17,5'70 $17,570 $$17,570 517,570 §!7,570 Cash Outflow-Expenses ($44 914) 1546,934) ($141,026) 7c"+634) ($618401) ($136017) ($44,140) ($42107) ($137,162) Add:Prepaid Items $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 f0 Less:Due from general Fund $16,961 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Less:Current Liabilities(as of 12/31/12) ($14,7171 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Estimated Cash Balance y'-- 1_�_,""m""""""•" '-',497 "-$9 $0 ------ 07 $0 ••-$1- $0 $451,197 $#15,209 E825,497 $927,217 E326;387 $207,939 E1B1;369 EI56,432 $36,#39 Cash Receipts Spacial Assessments-Levy $139,421 $139,421 $139,421 $139,421 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Assessments-Delinquent(tear yr.) 0 $259432 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Assessments-Discount ($5 577) ($5,577) ($5,577) ($5,577) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Water/Sewer/Irrigation Revenue $17,333 $17333 $17,333 $17.333 $17,333 $17,333 $17,333 $17,333 $17,333 Interest/Miscellaneous $237 $237 $237 $237 ..................._......".�. $237 $737 $237 Total Lash Inflow #151,414 $410,046 $151 414 $15{�14 $237 $237 ,„- ,,. "..�..-."..".537 674 f67,57O E11670 §17.570 $17570 Oserotita Expen4llvees Administrative P/R-Board of Supervisors $500 $500 FICA Taxes $38 $$8 $$38 $1,000 $$8 $500 IIS 8 $38 $1,000 $77 ProfSerwEngineeriry $2,167 $2,167 $2,167 $2,I67 §2:67 $2,167 $2,167 $7,167 $2,167 PrafSery-Legal Services $1,042 $1,047 $1,042 $1,042 $1,043 $1,042 $1,042 $1,042 $1042 ProfSery-Mgmt Consulting Sera $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 $2,364 ProfServ-Property Appraiser $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PrafSerwSpeclal Assusments $0 Annual Audit $0 $1,875 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,875 Telephone $8 $8 $8 $0 $0 $0 $8 $0 Postage and Freight $83 $83 $83 Ee $86 3 06 $8 $8 $50 $83 $283 3 525 $83 $50 Recital-Meeting Roam $25 $25 §23 S50 $25 E25 $25 §25 $50 Insurance-general Liability $0 $0 $0 $2,211 $0 $0 $2,211 Printing 4 Binding $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 §$125 $125 25 Legal Advertising $0 $144 $144 $0 $176 Miscellaneous Services $171 $171 $171 $171 $144 $0 $0 $576 $576 $171 $171 $171 $176 $171 Misc:Azzessmnt Collection Cost $2,996 $2,996 $2,996 $2,996 $0 Office Supplies $66 $67 $65 $69 7 $0 70 70 74 .12,36................,..,. $70 $6,593 §72 $73 Total Administrative $9785. 5I1,604 §11605 §12,352 $6,736 $74 $6.593 $6,805 57,171 {7,736 Maintenance Contracts-Mgmt Services $23,794 $25,794 $25.794 $25,794 $25,794 $25,794 $25,794 $25,794 $25.794 Contracts-other Services $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Communication-Teleph-Field $379 $380 $381 $382 $383 $384 $85 $386 $367 Utility-general $6,667 $6,667 $6,667 $6,667 $6,667 RAM-Irrigation $833 $833 $833 $6,667 $6,667 $6,667 $6,667 $0 3 $633 $833 $833 $833 $833 RdM-Water Plant $833 §833 $833 $833 $533 $833 E633 $833 §833 $833 RdM-Waste Water Plant $022 $822 $822 $622 $822 $822 $622 Misc.-Licenses d Permits $0 $0 $0 fo $822 $522 Eo $0 §6 6 CIF.. $0 $0 $94,090 $0 $0 $94,090 $0 $0 $94:90 $124 Total Maintenance ^----°._-.......__.._...__...........___ E35,329 $35,330 ._129_.. --W°•°°-,^^-, § ,421 $37,332 $35,333 $129,424 $35,335 $35,336 $129427 Debt Service Principal and Interut $0 $0 $0 $0 $576,331 $o $o $o $o Total Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $576,331 $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Cash Outflow m__ - '""'""""•••"•""•""---" _ $44,914 $46,934 $141,026 $49,694 $618,401 $136,017 $44,140 $42,507 $137,162 "NOTES: Eatimutad GIP cost:far The tnc:mtnd psjncta are dawn q,nrterly 6alinv,rnt:rsesrments tram hotel parcel ewe reflected,u rs<anaa m Fehn:c+y 60:3 Actual receipt date,nb,ewn 18 . . 161 it A. Li...„ PORT OF THE ISLANDS COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PROJECTIONS GENERAL FUND Adopted Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Operating Revenues Assessments $417,984 $417,984 $417,984 $417,984 $417,984 Interest/Miscellaneous $2,177 $13,150 $13,915 $14,580 $15,143 Total Operating Revenues $420,161 $431,134 $431,899 $432,564 $433,127 Operating Expenditures Administrative $120,826 $124,451 $128,184 $132,030 $135,991 Maintenance $223,540 $230,246 $237,154 $244,268 $251,596 Total Operating Expenditures $344,366 $354,697 $365,338 $376,298 $387,587 Capital Expenditures CIP Projects $70,894 Total Capital Expenditures $70,894 $0 $0 $0 $0 Estimated Beginning Cash Balance $1,315;032 $1,391,470 $1,458,030 $1,514,297 !Estimated Ending Cash Balance' $1,315,032 $1,391,470 $1,458,030 $1,514,297 $1,559,837 I WATER AND SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Adopted Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 Operating Revenues Assessments $1,089,624 $1,089,624 $1,089,624 $1,089,624 $1,089,624 Water/Sewer/Irrigation Revenue $208,000 $208,000 $208,000 $208,000 $208,000 Interest/Miscellaneous $2,838 $2,838 $2,838 $2,838 $2,838 Total Operating Revenues $1,300,462 $1,300,462 $1,300,462 $1,300,462 $1,300,462 Operating Expenditures Administrative $141,498 $141,498 $141,498 $141,498 $141,498 Maintenance $430,411 $439,019 $447,800 $456,756 $465,891 Total Operating Expenditures $571,909 $580,517 $589,298 $598,254 $607,389 Capital Expenditures CIP Projects $50,000 $54,796 $54,796 $64,796 $64,796 Total Capital Expenditures $50,000 $54,796 $54,796 $64,796 $64,796 Debt Service Principal and Interest $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 Total Debt Service $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 $655,360 Estimated Beginning Cash Balance $38.839 $46,628 $47,637 $29,690 Estimated Ending Cash Balance $36,839 $46,628 $47,637 $29,690 $2,608 1 19 , 16I 1A 'f Lt., - 1 tf10ln ! 0000 VI W N I 4100 100001 40 W Ol N I 0 M B a1 H U1 10HN I 00 Ln O a1111 0 1 H NOC.O mO N VI N ry O t N N r Hi 10 10 t • • • • • • • • • 10 k.0 I 4 1 0 CO i1TN CO O I 10 III 0HU)Vt 00 O 0 E. I 00\0 H 03 N • Zh0 H41N m 00 al M H N• iN00 61N 41 • 0 t?414-.1 UTHVT N N Vt 10 } CO E r uT vT ur 41T _411. W0 CO 111 Ih 00 1 l0 10 t I x UT UT(!N H 1 I H H I i VT U} A I 1 I H 1 1 GL ! I ri r 0 1 0 U e W 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O I 0 0 0 0 (n1 8 " e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I H I 8.4 I I • • • • • • 1 o IQ; I 1 i1}VT t1}VT UT VT t1?ill-i1T U}t1?VT i1}UT VT i1)VT VT N I 1 W k0 I w f a tom 'e I 0 O e4 a.W r 4 ! • 0 O C 0 0 0 C O O O 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 t x 0 0 0 0 0 0 O $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 8 � ! i/T i.4-U}V}U}U} V} I L}to UT VT UT i1T i T i4- VT 211-UT UT 14 r U I 0 H 0 a a 1 a r• 0 0 0 1 O O p 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O O O C a O O O Q a• t 0 0 0 0 0 0 O - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C I w ?.7 i/T VT U VT V U V U U U}VT U U}0•i1} U} 8 V}U} U} $ I H 1 Cg I 1 ! 4 E 1 0 1 P4 0 4 I W 0 I 1 a � I I > U1 I 8 ECA0 •e I I H H �+ N O N I 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 0 0 O ry 0 0 Cl H W H H H 1 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O i O O C J H H E U)CO U) I VT 0 N UT f?i1} Cl VT 0 i1}0 0 VT is{IT 0 E H 1 H 01 H 4-81 h H H I W W 1 E ?I 0 O H 1.7 E 1 iii- iceT inn- U�)- I Z 0 U 0 r OC1W { ! I U. • N N rt1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O Q O O O O O o 0 C b O O O 8 0 0 0 0 El 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 1 H 01 . . . . . e t >81 0 M VT VT V}VT 08 h I 00 V}V U U ill-ill- V t U0 V 8 0. gt 3X03 a 1 I s W U • W } • O 0 cn O 1 U a 0 ■ e a t W e 1 E.., 4 U) 1 I I I I I I a I W M O 1') I 000041 CO N 4100 H000001 10 03 01 N OD 010 N N 0 �Hto I 0 001001 U) O HN+OI�O 0 0 N dl LAN 0 L11 ID I E Cn I COVOUTN0 0) \OU10HU14100 0 w w y H 0 i H co U I 0O CO U1 H CO ih01 H N H N H 0 81 U) 01 !` Ht 4 0 u}u}•1 0 H ill O 1 a) 41 N I A a I UT V} U} VT .V} I I-1 C) 1 In Lt)0 L) H N I U) 0: 1 vT VT U} H H rf I W 44 I VT f i/ I i~ 0 1/3. {!T W 1 [Y. I I I 8 t Ul m I t F4 e U) •• 8 0 W 0 I r 0 e • E I ••w U) I q I • d I 41 . I U)co W to 0 U) 1 I 8 p 1 W H ( 0 • �i ):i 1 I 41 41 r M i t y rh C!)u7 I I HN I CO HU0 I W 2 UCH i C 2.CIZO J 0 W E •• I H 1 1 £ Er.4U + I PS 0w1� g •• ■ .. ,�'I�""'OP:RC0KC 14 1.1 W El ` H I I i UZO I a' I HC7CnU) Q ULAUH,4e�4) U) E EX 1 W a ON I 4HI� t E 1 EEEp00 14 I u) W E00Z0 U) >-I W E 1 H tq r I H 1 O i q' I H H '1; a 1 E x w 21 4 0 0 £31 a I H P4 Pi El H I o •• 1 U 4Kg I p 0 QOHUW W H t W "a0HF7 1 14 0 1 41 1 P W H 1 L Z 4014 H 1 A I 4 000 ! t9 I wa-,Ma43 E A I £ RCEtxE 3 E (N ( + 1 00 0 • CO H 1 1 000 • Z • al WC4'OW Kg E •• .` wr, K WWa' I Z I rtH W I p' t7'.4 W EEE+ I H I )CHCaU) a U) CO U44HaCOF, a I W I•]C/) 1.7 t m w E Ix 1 1 •�1� I a , o w a 1 Q Ql r E e X X'X $ a 1 »Q.u W N , t U rg W 0 u 0 o 0 I 0 w [�-I F 4a-� Z a Rai E. I WIWWW r wrAA�Uo14 0 I000Ha[nEV O i IWW O H atx 0 r E I a1 1 (NC) E I w E I • , . , , 161 1A A.,.., ['C`0010101 ri0 Hri O H LA 17100 HH Ori 0000 N N OC'NNOO H H0 -10000 H H OLD VI W O N r M f NN CN OO OIIA LAO 0 O HOM 0 In O HMM to I. HH 111HH • HH HMM HNN g - - 0 In L} C fl- H In L11 ON CO T r N O 1 N M rn W . H 1 il} CO - CD In 0 H a, 0.i O Q■U I W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 O O O H 4 H 1 Irt in- if} t7 @ i!} D H [xi I U W a, m CD O ai ai • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r'Srr 0 0 O O O E.y U O H o a w a y i I 1 s , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t (Y. 1 W O O O O 0 W IH HI0 1 £ f I H 1 H I 0 t Z 0 O H aiCO W cl 1 Ix I 0 >-,,-.1m I Q H H'Z..� I >i a i COONN NH O 00000000 00000000 H H 0100000 H HO H 0000 H H0ID C'dr0 > I- h7 I HH MNNC O 0 0 H 0 10 O HMM H W a HH 'I cILn In • H HNC-. H rx M cA 1 • • C 1/} t/} ir• U} UHH NN In rj f=I M ? In i 0 O H N xH a 4 in H Zoo ZRA 0aa, £ N W N 4 tD , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H W U D I W. if} U} It} ih >t LX Z co Al I £ D £ t O O 0 a, Uv £ I 1 . 0 1 I a I W N N O N N N O O H H O H In N 0 0 H H O H 0 0 0 0 H H O H N N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 O 0 O I It ! I H H H W CO In LC)N O 0 It)LA O O I H H H H H LO 41 • H H • MM • I H rt H Ln V} 0 VS- 1Z N N M CO W * C.') Z N U} ih H 0 di Cr) H U} W H aIw Z Z In 0 U ££££--ffqu} ££ ££--f fin ££i:F---fitly} ££££—f fv} ££££—fflt/} ££££--f f m O O O O I a - - 0- 00004- - CI} 00001=:- - il} 00001•=]- - y r 00004- 44. 0000i-1- - o H WWWWI-l.ah WW WW El r a t] WWW W ,ate WWWWlafah 41 41 41 414El0 WWWW1.a�r,ah H z III I r II H q Q III I H q fa III 1 Q',H$040 III I I1 H Q 1 1 I 1 4 H PO I I I 1 111 H R Z rn>Hco—CAFCW to> Hcn--A W u]> E.41-0.111 W CO,> H0)'-flA, W v E-.Cn--- W 441 U)F.E.CA—cor•C M 0 {>rHUH a c4 H 0 H r1 ZHUH 4 C HUEI 4 124HUE+ a a:HUH HN HHF4 1-+W W 43,_3 HHrtHW W pi,_.1 HHICHW W WIa HHrtHW W W a Ft HItI-AW W 41,4 HHFCHWW41 I H I.'J WUZ m MACH W U rZi CACACnH WUZ CnCACAH W U'Z ACnCJH W UZ CAACAH W U,ZZACAA H I £rtH1:DDDDCA £4I- 000m £d1i0D0041 £4 Ei0000 111 .4rtHi-Ira0.7W £ u'.HilDI')D ON C I H W E.HHHHHHH HHHHHHHH HHHHHHHEi HHEiEiHHEIH HHHHHHHH E.F.,HHEIE-+E. o w 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 IV 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 q I £ In O o 0 0 0 W O ,N s a o In o 0 0 H 41 i W O H H N CH 0 O f1a I 1 3 I a H Z E Z Ei S , v 161 . 1A 4, i ! 1 1 1 1 € I t l f I I O I m m O 111 O O r i O I X 0 0 0 0 0 0<4.•O 0 0 0 0 .O t 0 O CO N N O N 0 0 0 0 I N N O N V)1.0 *CO £ i i LC1 N O N in i U) I O l mm Vt NN01N k MN rim Cl V' N NN NO CO in O 1 NVIHNNN Ln I I cONH01 ca I • f Hri CO MM I IO:O 1 inN ' i i UP UP 1O l0 . F 3 3 N(■ VI 4 in i IX7 i x O {!} 1 m t 4 N H N lO t0 0 1 k H H CO m O A H H N 's H N 0 I V• P m l 1 N N I N I Ei I ry} 1 • � I �, I N ± ■ C./ I in in - m r , l ; I 0 I H f I t I 1 1 1 I a , k , a e I ' 0 ; 01 U I 44 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 o 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 O O O O in I L i 0 0 1 O 0 0 i 0 1 H I a ■ • E. t 4 I U} i � 0 0- V} 1 i/} I W I U I I 3 I N 1 1 I C194 £ I 9 m1 1 4 I i 1 i 0 1 ■ I £ r i O I I 1 I a I I I ■ I I a 1 1 1. 1 1 I I I 4 • 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 t 'a'. i 0 1 O 1 0 0 0 I 0 1 i EA I • 1 • 1 • I I I i1} t. ill- 9 N- i? i1} I V} + u 1 I I I 1 4 H i 1 O 1.i I 1 t DI 1 Da 1 1 I t I 1 9 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 ai I o 1 O 0 0 0 0 I N • I • i F-� I if} I Cl) .V} � • I : I I int I f-i i i f 4 N I I H H 3 9 IX 1 ■ I 4 I 1 0 1 1 I a U) I - I N a I I I I I 9 I Htna I I E H H`Zy - ',aI O m rn o N H H ri a _ 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I m m 0 N (C. Kg a O rl rl N in in 01 O 0 O O 1 O 9 I H H N H W F) H NNN • I • N V} U} 9 UHH 4 N MM H +} Cl) t I G.E.,., I S 1 m 1 I I }I O 0 H M I I I : I Exact 1 I I ao i I , , o a QI 9 I I X I N I I 11 1 I N to 1 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 1 I 1 0 0 0 0 H 1 0 0 I O O O H I 0 I I 9 5'+ 1-. I (? N I L? in- in. (? 9 I I 1 I 4 1 1 1 L I I t P-1 0 a N 1 1 O U 7 1 I U 4I7I I i I 1 i 1-1 O 000007 0100 I O OOOOO V'0 0000b L00 CO N NO 01 0000 NN ON IO IO cP m i 1 I NN O N 4 0 . NN NCO CO N mNrIM VI V1 N NN NCO0 M 0 N VIHN CV Cs) N I I I NVOHN II-1 • 1 HH H00 i00 lO N N • V)W t0 iO 0 • 1 1 I NN N Ezy ' 0 1 t0 W O U} m I I 1 M M N H H CO O H H CO i I N 1 I in N N N I -0 i H in I I U) i1} M 4 1NI I N I a I F 1 I V• 1 N 9 1 4f K 0 9 N k•k X aav NNN£- aai1 NNNN--00 ii Z N N U I I f c X CO V} 000 I-N0 I 0000x - - U} 00001-1 - - i1} 0000-1- • U} 000 aNa 000 0 N N N H 4 i I N N N N .1 h N N N N h N N N N a h N N N I 1 a I h .1 .1 .1 ID -alq W OIk W co I N O H Uq<n- 1 0) HEU)-04SN m>Ht4•- N 4 u)✓Hcn 1C rn I N HUC) cn I N M ■ a a ›. H W FC 7 ix H U H 1-7 NH U H la N H U H a a > H CID Ir4 Z HN r I I./ E-INH a H Hr.4HNN/CI ) HHI4HNNNI-1 HH4HNr7N1-a HNH W I H H N(HU)NNNN NUZZzU)CJU)H NUZZUUU)H NUZz EIU)U)H (I HUNNNN I >HU) c)IN 0 NHry'HUU0.4 £ FyH00000 NIr4HI.:)UUUo N<H000000 EFA0E.0 CDcD .4 I XInC)EH I H I H tx U Z Z m co co H I H E.E+ E.E.H H H EA H Ei H H E.E. H H H H H EA E-I H CD U Z N O C)Ca H 1-1 U Z ', Ho N i H4FArp D 00 I `NNNN I N NN XN N N S S 1'3 ',01 NN ' c44Hi�'U000 I KtKtH0 0 ' 9 N O 0 0 + H 1 N I 0 0 0 1 0 ■ 0 H a E I 0 H I H I q 4 0 I I I (i/ I N a s I I I 0 1 Ur CD CD II I a I cn � £ 1:4 [x a w u) i 1 0 , , . , 161 1A 4 I l0 10 Li"CO d , CO 1 1`h Ol 0 Iasi F 0\01 • •. h N i H , r`t, in O F 10 , CO H I • i O I N 4 1 H I a ■ yr , o H I i I Ott , O , a,0 , W 0000 1 In , a ■ I� • H `C "t 1 H G. 1 0 1W a U a Z a 0000 • o (f} i 1 U / I O H I 4 i 0 4 , 1 , I 1 al I S I 0 0 0 0 1 > O i 1 W • • ■ a U} 1 1 H I t RC i P4 , 1 H I H 1 Z I I O I 1 .1,C)) , W I a. I I E-,C,(]q i I t I Q HH 1 )-I HHIH0 + I H H W + H N N a 1 P U W U H CO , rn rn ,Ni Cn G., rn >400 H In W 4 H VT E-I H4a Z zoo X 2aa ■ 1 , i H N I 1 4 N a s 0000 , Q 0 1 I H 1 CJ U I !/)• 1 I H Wi , I H P., Xi II X 0 UU I a U C.I i CI , W I I a I I 1 a I a In In cj,m 1 ,4 45 HHI 0 I U i H N N >4 ■ H In 1 I W Ws!' C m , W ■ . I , f:4 H I 01 1 I Qi 1 rn I 1 I 1 W 1 I s CO o a I I ai I W I I I 1 H dl ■ 1 W N I X n , O , IaW(q 1 W o r HahMt t , H , OHqqur I I H rn I H03 4 t i U H N 1 I 0 1 0 I H 1 i W W W>4I 0 1 4444 t O N 1-1 0 I H CO CO CO H 1 H "J00 W 1 .. O W H W OH 1 I s>4 Htx I I FC W I I Qa I i 1 1 } 161 1A .2_,t, , . • .1 1 , 1 I I .. I e 11 T V O T V[r O T V N O O O O W O O N N NON 0 0 0 0 t 10 10 O 10 0 0•g I d I I W 10 O 10 0 0 d 1 C 1 in Cl) ' HOHH%o c0 NN NCO H 0 1 01 NHMLC) CI I I MNHMN 0) I .1 I 1D 1D 10 U) • I l0 10 kr.In I , 10 10 TO IL) • 1 CO V} f N I N N Nt EH-1 t H co N H H I H H 0 , In m i 0) I 1 on I V} i I I - W H CD 1 Cl)- , V} 1 i {I} W• •• • I I Q I t I-1 o 1 t a t N 1 0 m U 1 0) O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O o O 0 0 0 0 O I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m S ---- O O 0 1 O i 0 1 H • 4 V} in- i!}• z V} I V1-H t U I 1 k7 I 1 C., ■ ■ I f f O I O . 1 a 1 I t CV s 1 O O O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s s O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O • . 0 0 0 , o i o t VT U} in- -C/ • 1 • 1 I An- ! t I I 1 • U ' 3 O H O .a I 1 1 y i ■ t 0 I I 1 I 1 i 1 I 1 i 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 0 0 0 0 O r CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 I x O O 0 1 0 I O I F N H + E+ I • I • i IW E Ia Z Cl)- V} Cl)- I V)- I V} • H 0 t t 1 D £ H 1 H 0 1 1 N I EL'I H a Cn I t t I CO Q , s -• a Q I 13 Z I 1 z o t , O H H H Q�y Y H I W ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 1 1 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 ' H V H W N I H I H ' 0 0 I O 1 I O U Z W H N rn I Cl 4n- V} (1} 1 in' I U} W 0 to UHHI I (OHN U) I 4 N txl44 i I N I I • NU W HOO H , • HW H �r I W N 4 , W E E. N s wa X I I x I I wwZ I I I 4 :3 X W N W I I t I , Cl) to N { F1 0 I 00000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 # 00000000 cn N o 0 1 Wm p C Y O i t H CO 1 • • I I I U1 Z H U 0 1 Int CO. in int ' in H W N tx I I 1 N CO H ii I P3 ; t Et N 0 1 I I X H O N ' 0 a tI I °NHw o I U a U I 0) E • 4r I ( I I Q Q I I , W 040 I 1 0 I 1 1 I P4 I) 1 1 I I I I I I to 1 .a ■ N c o TV O[r U)Ocr N 00 00100004 N N 004 0000 1O10 O0D 0C cr U) 11D TO CD VD OO Vl TT I I .aQ U HOHHID CO NN 0403 H O MNHMIn O) 1 MNHMII) 0) 1 I U W X H H 10 10 1D VI • I 1O ID 10 1n • '.. 10 w ID LO t 54 N W H I ■ `y N s 1 W H CO N {ft H H I H H 1 I '-1 W Z Cl) tin m 0) rn I 1 W UN iJ- 1 , I i 44 Xi aC H• 0 V) in i Li) I I 4 W I CO H V} V} I Aft 1 U1WN 1 W H N I C4 U I NNW KC I 1 WRCH H W I N cn N •• U N Z Z N--Q Q v} Z ZZ Z'Z--O 0 ci} Z NZ Z Z--Q Q VL- I N N Z Q , Z N N Q I W O co 0000.-1 - - cn- 0000,-1- - in- 00004 - - C/} 1 000 4 W0 1 000 0WQ I WHO CD H W W W W,11-1h C.1 41 W Waah MNNIxl4ah l www Ida - in- 1 40414 Na- in- t I ZWH H I I 1 I H W Q III I N H O Q III 1 H N Q 1 I I H a h in' 1 I 1 H 0 I7 V} I H N H mHHm--alI�W toH HCn--oa W CnHHc7--a1III 04 1 to 141 OHpto t 1 1 co ! GI G, OHHaC 1 aW C(7 M NHOH .1 NHUH r-1 NHUH I-1 1 N > HN� H 4 EH41-iFri W Wt•a H H N H 04 C n 1 04.4 E-IE-IFCHW W WI-1 1 HWH Q , 1 , HWH Ll I WU1F-1 I H Ik WUZI..IcnCnu)H W UZ u)Cnu)H 0400z U (1)unH I W>Hu1W W W tx1 I I W HHN W W W W apx r-1 1 ZNH0pppal X HP)COR1 NNHpp )0 al t NH0E.CCDCD CD.4 1 1 ZH,UHC0C0C71-1 1 riwp4 M H N H 4 RC N I 1 H N H 4 N KC a II• H s ,;.sl 1xNNNNNNN NNNNNNNN NNNNNNZN 1 0UZ COU)0H 1 .4 UZZCn U)CnH Ho I H mtnm0cococo co cntnuatntntoalu) tnmcnmtntr.coCO 1 c>r4r+0N0CDN 1 4KC Hp4 O0N I r4 I O I HEHH q I In 0 o I O I r o o , 000 ..p I I H I H qo , Q E zzz H H H 1 04 • 0 H N H ■ N t 1 3 1 I F N+? , I q w I W 1 C9 CD CD I I I to 1 N N N + tn , C7 1 6 1 1 A n0 CV 7.0 a) as Lfl C7- CV 0 0 77/7 (N N C) t-- 0) r H .47 077 CV 7cti CO 747-17 H Co 7,0 r-1 7-7-1 (.07 7C0- 7 (17; 0 0 E 0 0 X 4-7 F., CV H 7:4 7 7 c,1 rn cn C' X 0 0-1 Z Z E Crl C.L1 H 0 E HI 774 >7, H E-, 4 PI 04 0 CD [4 0 P-1 X 2 2 1 ,FA Z 0 00 CD 0 01.1Qalul 161 1A H a V' V O)H 111 CO N VD U NM ri.-i NO c11 H CD OD H 01.11 101D LOoO N cr D M O L N O r-h Itl In N Ut H C'N Lf) d1 ri O fn W 4 Q O N H M 0 0 c, O 0 CO O U) C1) N 111 N 0 4 0 Q N F 0 0 4 Cx• • O s.O O O H 0 O Cn U1 LO Lf1 U) 0 N N N N a 0 O 0 0 U1 O 0 U) U) 111 111 4 V N N O cl O O E H O O z W o Ui In N N h r H U) U w7 H a C,co VI D1 H UI CO N CO VINM µ' ONHNO W rHOU)HNcM W LHNHN0 NLfl 0 NLD rl CD F E HH07NOhU) O NUl U N •'H w 0 E N O a 4C 0 wwwwwwr' 1 W 0 00000000 U 1UU wwwwwwww ZZZXXXXE a aI-1 00000000 '04 HH E x x X.ii X X x x P48.6f1MNHNN c4 a 0aW°ti.1 � F W HIN HHFFE EFE Q ,�) waa 4�C4444 4 W Z 4 C7'" KC W W W W W W W W O FxI J Cx]rx 1:4 g g c.L'a' R: aC co0Un40C7000000 N O O O O 01 EL. I H H H H O 11 1 I 11 r N N N N [.4 0000 OH E I I I i y' NU)cD ca fAM Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 M W EL,E..5.. H a U 000000000000 H 9+ ri r1 H H rl ri H H H H H H o U H a' 01 M111 D1NHrNMHQ1 r-1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W Md+mod Hr-IH JHHHH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M NOr-i hO0111 HMU1 1 H CO r1 OMM41 W 11)U)1/1r C4 O O M r i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E OOH to LOtDW LOUT L01010 [L I I I I I I I i I 1 I I O V w.4,v,.4, v1wv v crd v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W U I I I I i 1 I I 1 1 I E-I U NNNNNNNNNNNN a' A' NNNNNNNNNNNN Q 161 .1A 'f N 44 IX) N O O C7 cn a N O N M (n O '-4 O a O cn 'V4 H P4 a 0 0 Rf a) O M o N m U H r-i r-I W H• H tn U n to • U O 4 N N CY. ° KC N N • W 4 w cn cnW w• C31 E-4 IH H N 0 ° a Z aaZ o X N 0 OHO g 4 B ul Q U , . , 161 1A /° W W W W m. W W W W W f.2 Z Z NN C .E 2 o N "p p o O O O N n O O O O sN O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 1` _ O 0 0 0 CO Lo 0 O M f) ft7 M o tV C11 c' d O O d N O C7 6 O O 6 4 OE 6 O O 6 O h C') N CO CO M Cl) CO 0 CO N Ca V CO O CO N ID T r r C tOP pVp�� I; tO t{'pry �c�pi (fl O �Op N N d cb t¢T Al c0 t0 (V O c+5 tc' N7 O N N s# <f 7,3 73 t c00 CD cn W CO O CO O g N t_D ,- ,O a- ,- W N h Amt a) 47 W v yy ' m ( to N O O c T O N 0 0 tr Of OGt W Y N_C4 a) O '-� m O N C C C m i m °m 2 is a is — co $ c a. N 63 2 2 0 'E m W �, c C N N L `) ttl .0 D .0 y D C N Y ° CO i C 1U CC L5O N N N W 0 C la 0 1 C O O t0 0 0 $ C ''.'° A .0 to 0. C >� 333° in N d ry N co J Y a 0 D O W N try ',.d O .'C-.^ c0 Y t E .-• 0 N O C m 4 a a3i E 2 '° 0 ,r, 0 a m v a ° N O b :0 Z O . Cn U r 3t m ¢1 U) N'y '..of.,„, d W a. co Q) ° 12 m 0, 0 A ° pz Ooh • ?• r w ,8 m N z W fAl2 c ro o r m .x', a 2 c3 0 2 c� o , Cl)' c a # c m c) C C a) d N d L7 d Ci ° co Q7 N = Q • N E a) 0 u L: ✓_ c tom E iv > 0 ,� 3 �pj po N ) N «O t. .W. W 7 W aL 0 O 0 Q O' o 2 """ (� °a Y ° ° o W c a `- C o c m u. c ° ° W O N a-cc N 5:, • N N Q L 0 J E CC > v w ° o) .z' in o .0 ' t m at Z E a '- c ° W a c c O v ' a a ` m 2 G o > t•ti — 2 a°) -2 an m G) 0 a m 1 c. , p u ar c n m H r .n X U c .. o c j ° c m c ' ° ay co i w ° L a O E ' — ry W O M m p. m CC - m > O c z s, 6, 5 C 3 g o Y 7 iii} a n 2 oo2°y -2 Z K ` m a y a d ° L W i E m o r: ra ° ik( 30 47 p Ecti Cl) A r Z 1 1 .o ° W E °• w - Q v - C O Cc T a C y0 0 C co O C Q 3 0 C eC0 N ` t9 h M N ` - C a 0 N U C H $ C.) Al Q N Q 7 N ° m 0 E 0 N 0 O 4 E Ci6 0 ) 0E CC N iti N P) ro c .e o W ri u Xk y h cp z. °2 � a, 8m .x m o o E C # E IP 13 W E � C C C . C a N m c3 C N°) J c °m _We O Lca 0 N C m E CC � C W N �tf4 TE c 2 m 3 m 2 c c1 m co 0 co m ° W c ' wo2m0t;at . N 0 3 mma a' (175 o y i w .d. -o d . alo 3 v 2 T E a � ' N a CO � 8 o v ? — %. o o a c1 8 2-m N ai a r # d � N 2m m m W n > 2c0 C z ° c a m °E °= c x tN o ° o Z L C• a s c E a i 1 *° E a.21 -c1 a a- ca Oc c a 2 ° O c L. LL E O cc a a cr cc 2 cf 2 cc 2 F 2 0. 7 C) )p a 0 0 CC IA N N CC V) co CC N CC N V). co CO CC co co V) to _co co 0 co co 'a• ` C) N 0 Cl C) C) 0 a) CO C) 0 C) a) C) a) a) a) N C) a) C) a) a) a) a) 0 > Ct a ° .C) U U a CC C) O ° C) U .5 O ° ° 0 ° , ° C) 0 ° ° a W e 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Z 2 2 2 > 2 2 2 2 Cy)O C) C) C) C) C) C) C! C) N C) C) C) O Q) a) 0 N Cl) CO co C) C)) Cn (n to to O C/) N v) tIl to to Cl) to [n ;n (di Cl) v) 1). m m cn to C O O N N C C C G C 0 C C C C C C C C C C C C C C l -. N N C 4 2 Q m W a) C) O 0 C 2 ° C) 2 ` C C 2 .c in C-• H I- H H H H t- H H H H F- ft H F- L- I- L- F- H L- I- H H I- 13 :06 E, c c E C E C C C E E E E E. E E E E E E E C E C E E C E. d a`) Ci a) a) 41 a) a) m C) w ) a, `a) `C) C) `m `a) C`) n) a`, a`) m m H a c > > > > > > > �>� > ry> > > > > > > > > > > > t>� > > > > C' a▪ O > .0 7) U) Cn to ti to Co CC) U) to U) (n to in) (0 (0) 0) U) t!C)) 0) (o Cl) to (n (n U) V U )) OI C CS a 0 "P ‘28° 4) W W E °m c C In C to y c c c C c C c c c c c c c C .h. 0«�7 tl 0 0 C) 0 C 0 C) 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 M C C C 16 N t� W l,S N 5 ie cE tC N itl O 'io N ) {�1 qq11 Q¢77 vv 'U O W W••C N co co 0) of CC o) 0) Ci 0) a) CC 0) CC 03 CC 0) co C) S 'i 3 3 3 3 N C NN N C N •� y _. _ _ `- y !n U) U) to cn Cn Cn V) fn co I-r CW W „4) N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Cu N N N N N N ` W r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ` r ` r r r r r r C, Q L� V 00 O O O 8 M 8 Zf 8 8 8 8 8 N r N c'''''' r O O O _ _� W in T al 00 O > C B a > :,--i n n n n n n r rn m m rn r o o O W O_ co o CD o O O o O O O O O O r V 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 aJ)ycc a — C 0 , , . 161 ' 1A 'f I-) .c 5 d] J] li '5 a Q A c A O N N 2° = '5 t 0O) N 212 . 2 �• c 7 -7 Q G R1 ' U U Q 8 8 O O 8 8 Z l �* {/) O Z Z Z O�.0,N C .% 2 o 0 0 vt n 0 O 0 O CO 0 it) N N 0 0 Ct) 0 'O ..t O O N w) ,n O co c') O 0 O i) 0 O 07 co c+]O O n O N Ct) 0) co. O O ° O. () oa"2 cC) )n - 1') cNj aNU LLi , .- g- '.- n CD � , C ° N- n o m Q ° °° > v n c o 0 v (0 a N i0 a cp 0) .V CO ,17 ••ct CC 10 y C7) n ,1') O et )NC) c0 rn_ n '�i o o : v N O 1)A m v c2 8' v i ° Mm "•) n ao 2- 00 N u�) 5 a0 `� o° v v v y r v (V U- v `a r v`4- CO n r "� CO CO CO CO •ci FO. o o Gr r ° ° o m n 3 ti • 0 6 r D 1° m _ _ ° E c.) c m m ca 'N of w u 0 $ F r t E; = Q ° N LA al al _ 0 O Ta ° N N C ai E O 2 N a Cr U F-• C 5 -O 8 V)) n 8 g 0 03 co co ta°' C c o d-aJ Crj E r w 02 a 8r o a c 2H - ��n X € I • _ CNn b 5 w 1)) O 0 r C c N Fl °m cN ° a ;C .X U- -= u u o E ec0) LL tr a 0 ° m .a a r ? c • or m z z w° . '- a § ALL o N ay0 2 E 0 a f) F-5 c a � E 3 °0 , `-a)6a U >ca o ,- z w a W E N O O caQ -O N • (n 0 n ° 0- =a) a E c m .� G ° C : o at o ooc a = E c e aCC r _. C N •e. • _ U m u at a O- N N d C 4D a 6 r t O N -1''2 C N 43 W QN O N a Y a C '- C 4 D 0. =-• a 4 G 44 e C r ID � ° N U � O DA' i !)E c QQ Q a a/ a° o C N a E ro A O C a C U C a a v - ` o M O m U o C c m o oY Ci ° c ° c > G x) ° E 8 e1 a $ E o c o E � $' L _ ` m 8 a° a ai o m - q c -..). co $ m m P._ n m 1 o c a a N 0 s 'Cl/ . E 0- ' a :-5 m F r O a G - a e c y 9 co a O O N ... .0 O c a o a N N .o O 3 N N 0 0 0 a °a cN C y. C6 a) N _ C a) U a E E a 'Ed. 4 c) ._ a as E a rn ° N o a c 13. o ii E s E a- N ` a - m > a - II f U C 2 7 U L ' D o, 1C _ o° 2 -e -5 o C O o a „+,' vnn 7 -w LL r2.t a a- o m m a c O '-3 c N O 0 C _ E O n= 8 0 Y N N ° ° j j =q o al t o o ,a m - m ° id a o o a 13) -o a F m 2 e E= o o r a 2 E U $0 t 6 n a � i` y - 62)' o tl o o iri(LIZ a m a 8 tL 5° aJ ..4. a N � a O m m (U � a Y O 0 a G O. 2 o � 5 Q s C * N S ir '3 C E a) C a = N C 00 a a i t Ri O iF- tto E M '¢t m o o qCO Cr) *0 O n 2 0 n O O _ 12 C 07 m ° a -1 CC CC CO U U U Q U CO CC i< cc CJ O M n u_ • 1- LL 0 m Q ¢ a a a P ea T ea 9 W N N N N N N a W a N a or tll U) N 4) cc)Q a a N N N N N N a a a a a a to"O" 2 L> Q Z GEaC E 2 O Z 4'' e. 2 2 2 2 2 E 2 c' 2 t O dO Cn (n >. Cn CO V) CO a tb a) ) r� a a )) a a a a U V a Cl) :to N CO U) t7d' Cn CO CO Cn in CO CO >. Y ° G C U C C C G G C' C C C C C C C C C a •>C G a '8 a 2 2 O a a a a e a a a a a e a a `) a a c ui F- F- E Co F- F- F- h cn C- O I-I`- N F- C- F- F- F- F- I 'F- H (I) S `o in 0 c E 'o o E E E E o E N E E c E o E E E E E E E `o -m Ti CD a) (q a a) a a3 a a ¢d 6- a. o a`) Cl) ca c a ) a) a) a) a) a N a7 1¢ a a LL a a N a Cl) y',— Ia a) a) a a) a a' a) a C) ) fn F- C 'a t7 > V) CO I I- Cl) CI) (n (n F- Cl) ..) CO(n Cl) Cl) J) c7 (n CI) CO CO CO fn 0 I II- (C N g N w (ca m m a) m at) t t5 t t tt $ t 3 t , t t > 3 t t t t t l tS t a pJ a a a a a1 a s a a a o Ca a) @ a a a) a a C f/1 1.m rn Cl) CO CO (� (!) (n Cn Cl) Cl) (n V)(n u) Cl) to co V} co U) co co u) CE) Cn Cl) Cn N F 0.0 c (tea r N N N N N N N N 01 01 0.1 N_N N N N N N N N 01 _N N N N N N N r cj A _� .-- r r r r r vu r .- r .- v- e- r C g a p pO Q) M C� 4 -` C� CO CO n 4+16 a to O o O .-. 1� c+7 4 ul ,[) l� CZ N Y- N 4l1 N . r O r N N r- CV CT) t') c v- r r N N r r r- a " �o. > (� (8 m o a nn n w 803 a) m an O` o 0 0 0 0 0 o c ° o O.a¢ O o o O. O o O o O 0 Q O o .,- in .161 1A + . , '_ 2- 2 T >� y, a y T T T N N N 8 N N N N N N 9t 2 2 2- E E E E t > c > c a > > > > o = > > > > > E E E E 8 C) m a m C an an 0 0) 0) )) m U m m c 0 0 Q Q Q Q d. Q Q Q Q Q d N a@ 07 CO Z U) CO U) CO U) 2.(T)c a 4°. ID O CO 0 O CS O O s M O O O O O O O O N N O O }0D O P- N O O O O tD 10 h O U] U7 O O IC) !17 O O +- O O 07 C') O 14(y Q O 1{7 O C? O h IA In N !) h h N N to P. O It) U o N N to h (D F4') h O ~mm (h��7 N 2 hV O in o Cn tD CU CO V' co y A, N f'- N CO CO 70 L') N r- )D 2. C N N c n a 2 co o 3 N U U m D h D i0 O> - O th D W a0 h N V ? CB O CD 4 a LO Ln N N 3 S' q r q q ; :t v v v a `a v 54 v q v "r a v 5 a q Q vii zC.70 _ i 0 m m E ; € Q c N c a7 c a9i y Z. TO 03 o c c c c co E 5)N n o "o V i a L �o m `� c U c m ' a) " O a>. e c L O c O 2. E E a 0 - a: 0 f m o a E E m o O v C8 0 a i O m .- O ›. m N N .0 ' CC c a -0 O L ca O 0 a: a7 p a 0 0 o 0- c~ co 00 ` V p' 8 N C O yg7 3. 3 2 2 c 7 a tn. ,a. N o C a7 U W c 0 m N a 0 C aP C) d Co a. N a1 'D 0 o N 0 -2 H 4S 41 ? 'C. °�` D co C C ..0:-0 y). O # a t) c c © m a m e 'V F .. ro chi c .� .a 'ro co c. y § a .a a a J a a) a)CJ to c' as 0 E y� o, ` .c m o a) c) ? > 5 m a) ai . R .a c .. C C U} c c a c U N G. a) a7. oo c a U YA —Si N ) 'p3. > ii C a N C 03 y O C a 0 c N 07 .?. 8 m 0 > O a) N N 10 C > 'p 0 tv c N to .g m .r o L O_ 6O c O y L c Q}- O R C tT N � t > N W C ?E.? V 'y c 0 0 aa' a a, 5 K aai of ..a)V .8 a c °' m A CJ °) D c E u o .5 rn U a? ). C 'E A, a) 0 Q G oO U) C O) 2 v O C 0 COj� U) 3 c O O C O -c7 .1 O..�a0" N LO O GI 0.7 O_ Q qj C O C 'f., 2~ 0 ` CC 3 �O t1 N ~ '.. ai Cy ¢ N N 9) 8 itl 7 N y 4}. 0 w c >. o o a>i �' N m m .� `° Z c o m x N•a) o o I I r) ¢ 'U a c E A _`m - m c 3 m N in a) a) .'L... - P. a .• c E .4`i D 0 a) + fl) U �: 0 al cc to .c C �' t, a . )0 ; '; F- 0 )U Ei. pop m m E is 2. m p E ,E m m m y o iv a ac)° m a m ti c7 g ro 3 O e m c c E a' ro 2 5 p) a a s a E m _U a .N 1 777 0'E C ,0 _,e ,e 2 ° m 3. > > 0 0 2 a0) F}2 .0 m N 19 a) B j 3. }G a) 0 N �>. X , . H I- C 0 a µJ 0 p 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 a) al 2 a) N g e L p N r, O- C 0 O a D CC ac _ O CC aj O O O C L L.+ � Np c c 00 E. 3 LH 7 O E 0 A7 5 ' 2 t2 c .: ; ; ;. 0¢ 6 T ea : ; a : U) N g w. U Si 3.1 V V U U u U us cm n a cn d o m rn CI) .VO- O Q : -+ C C C C C C C C ~'• C C C C C C C C C to W N 4J a} a) N a1 N P. N N N `) C) a} a7 a) a) ai N a) N d c 6.. p m H O H H H F- 1- H H H H H H N H H H H H H H H •O o t4 a: C ? C C C E C c C C C C 5 .c SU a m a) d a d 0 a) N m a} N U C) a) ■51;1 N y ¢Ni 0 a) 0 a y a C U > O' ? > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > a. a. > >a a d a U > LL. < U)11 U) Cl) W U) C)) U) U) U) Cl) U) U) U) U) U) CO U) U) CO J -I U) U) a o 03 a) C iii �a a) OL m d d ? C) I C) at yy m a) w a� �`w a) v d cu `m a`) a� m o C a G r Z 3 3 „a, m N m d 8 N N N N w m'- d to m m m n) m is i6 is m m as is ea ro CO za CO CO m C.O. is 2'a r$ �i cn 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 cv N � 09rn C R « N N N N N N N N CO N N N N N N N N N N O J N N N N N N E a._ D c3 Lh. v n v m a, a7 1 W iri ici a9 m m c� c ` N O 3.7 .- _Ot O ,C.: r- Or N 0 O ..--• CO N N .- a r a a P, oa 4 In }n n co u9 >n n r•- 1� n h 6 m m c3 w 6 ca m m m m Naga 5 -- O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 a O 0 0 0 0 0 0 , , . 161 1A +LI- ,,c, - k_ ._ •_ .._ .,_ ,... _ 3 C as ma O d N d Al A 07 N. 007 y 0 0/ CI o) C y p� 8 O o .Q 6 o N 8 0 0 Y Q 4 ¢ 4 ¢ R ce- Ul f/J Z Z Z 2 2 w w cM S 22c7 0) A S p O oo 6 W r r O 2 M m N O 'E 2 a O c�rD t O CV u7 C et 00 O N Obi N C m N • N , iD CD • N t 2 P. as co U U S (mom r pppp Ch CD fA CO N 01 CMD tnfi 9 N N O 2 N > 07 O V, . O) N CD N CO ID VI t� to E v `4 a UU v `V (V U U °n u-) h. n v Z a z I !:d g H a a w C c' 0) f.) p C 07 o o 'O. a) Ca a N U ¢ 3 z w T8 T c 2 CO C c 0 +`a c W y ° 0 w co o Cr) a Q c a .0 •6 Cl C N X -o .0 O C c o w sr r c (Oj -• 9.1 OCj 51 g Q f.7 P. y y `O yd 7 Q O y W a 2 El. A 0 C V U 0 N F- >, co 0 8. N O C ED Z a o O (0 o E o e c a �» 8¢ E N c O7, m d C of . N N v O p U N N t m c E c w .c y E iiiu).a) C 0 ° C m 2 0 .a Z C 0. a ,.. 3 r a W 5 O o ' Al L W (a X a o. -8 o a V 0 $W a� -2 cn na W x c. N csr ii mO w0 m W ¢ a a coi ., >, E m c w N�? a u X cc E ii) m m 'o 8 O 0 .9.iaU at� o c� o0.° C .' c o as 3 •d w Z ',o z a� o- o w - m ¢ 2 0 en .• E ro 2Z 12X 5 ,t cc Eup O E •CO A d w aw E o a �i m as (`sa c d o cr .F 6'z �if, 0 U °' o `m 0 ° X O a m c m E .5m uo ¢ >�¢ E¢ 2'8 E0 5N °' o o O c p.~r ro a N >o„O �V 4°_�.« �N in;W _a j O CL o O.. c - NZ (o Z, N 0..0) ' O CX O 5 E 0) N ca -co .N C A 7. 0 C O Z O O w W o GGG N T`�.. i]W 5 C C 5 8 > 4 o O ti 7 O 6O7 O O 4F ( O W c 0. O G0: 69 eU d c c 8 ii U is gU U C7 al 2 C N C O C N CT C ¢ C w .D 0. Ill 2.Z Ti _ _ a. N C g C a c O % O_T O <22 Lh U a O Q 0) W fit d c0 S O exH cn O �» C. U ¢ $z ¢ o•h- ZK 13 m C7 0C(� 7 O O d A 0 a A 4 O N > _ c'9 U_ U_ Cl) CD U U v 9 p q • C cN m a E a) >4 Z z Z Z Z O O g a — a a, u S U) (� cA VS V1 0) N N >. �y .5 .E ui QE Cl) O _2 o N N CD CD N N 1 0. h 8 m = N c,°0 H I- H 1- H H H H .- !n Cl)o g° c 0 H ^� o f E E E E Ea �!n E E E `o `o, m �' E .o 01 a 0) O7 O) ) N a) 01 O - �} Y - A 0) da c > > > > > > > 3 > > > m n 03 cc 8 E > 0 W m 0 0) 0) O) 07 O O 0) 0) I) pp O y S.U 7. Cn Cl) CI) Cl) fn Cl) J J Cl) CO Ch h-- M 0 0 0 0 C/) • 8 } 41 ill i E. m U d d E ° I o cn CO CO CD N C 3 V7 cO (� co r A O C C C .t .6o. N G1 d m ti 8 :[t 8 8 N N W A a m (c is m in (s is 8 is m 8 3 , H2 r 3 3 3 3 3 3 's 3 o E 2 m `d„ N N N N N N_ N_ N N N N N N 'N N N N N N F c r r r C ...'E G• > 01 4 m 8 C 8 a 8 h O O o 'mm v- 1- r N N 8 N') r N Cl N N N N M *- N? r O.7 al C O O 8 Co 033 C) C _ O Cl (- 1z h j W 1 O 0 .- 0 0 0 p0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 O N 2 . 161 1A .4— . L � ^ N d 0 d 03 N C) N m N IO �: o@ N N N N N N N v7 N F h d a > > > o > > > > E E E c c c c c c c c c c c al mmin 3 4 4 4 2 0 C W Q Q Q Q . Q 6 . Q t5 o mN , � 4 Um N M 0 0 0 O 0 CJ O O to O UT 0 CO CD O If) O In O N O O µN O O to O O t[) O N O ^^ N 0 1Il O It) P O N O A o t` CD t0 tri n 0) n It) II) m to '.x9' IP) m N co CS) V' to O 14) N tL) m co u) co v co m co R m o- co o) m o m m N. m m 'p Co m N [f r In u9 CO m I� N CO IA •-0 a N C NN V;LC; 0) 0 CO 0) N- m CO CO ar r. In t- n CO 0) o c01 m CO c 0 o o 1 � INn in Fri ' v`t) m 2) 2n I. m ' 0) 0)) CD S N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N N N CD V a O O S = v E a_ 0d 0 CD 'a d d 0 C Q o u 0 0 Cl -Cl i� U 0 T I 0 T _ a a io E E 2 x E E E a 0) U 2 2 d CO ' (0 o E t V E N Cl d) Q) °a tU C/7 m S 12 Cl N U) N 9 `o 0 0 `o a 9 `o ro `o o o `o `o `y o `o 9 L L E U .0 U U 0 U '3 U U Cl 7 V E sa en 0 _ Cl) 0 8 8 cn 8 a o R < a n.. a E E 0C E k E 9 E T O -D I I an I I z I DI J. = N 2 = 1 I . I a I S Q n' m E E U E E E E E o E 8 g E E E gd E 8 E E ` yv 'pp a_ mp y p> p> n =_ E pm E ' E p> p>_ pg- E _2 E 'p. a c O . In Ul U cn US t22 ,V Vi ¢ cn < d US N US < . CO US c m d m A .t. N Cl— F O o O c c c F "6 LOL W C Eg 9 pc 9 9 6 Cl 9 c cc v c E qc c a. Cl Q Qc o c j j E e t e g e E E ? g t E E g k t g t a� a > o o ea a o ci 5 0' o ty o 3E.)' co o' o a o' a a a a 8 Cl)) c a To' 8 ti U as 0 E n, a al o -o 8 M y O C C V a .E. 45 8 Cl) 4) N N 3 N N P. > Y . .- N W @ 9 C Cl Cl n) 3 Cl CO Cl 3 Cl 3 N � ��l a•a � 3 3 3 U) 3 3 in 3 in 3 in 3 u) rn .. C m tT N t• a d N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N y « E o O O N N o a N N O O O M ° m M N N O zt C a D > d G • 1(I u) N t�C to us L� (Cl CA SD CC) CO n ti Ir n N m m W C�. a) as 0 a..c�t. > o co 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o CD 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 , . . 16 I 1 A 4 i � o g . . ! -g r m ..a E E E E 9 A _ _ 8 8 8 ° ° ° z z zz o 2 "a , c7 r a z Ri qq77 p M "' NA V N o t. rnm ul N “Ni N O ■ N U7 O) N 2 O co 3 r. N f7 In!) M n N N LLY 2 n > n m � N N m N � S. cD n n eo N N CO O G) M 2 N 2 V' CO CO ' CO M C) -a-C N N N CO CO CO CO •O , m o xo 3. I 2 I E E a 0 W ;Si d9 Q) N N 9 0 �0. m o a o 0 0 4 c g g a g a 2 g I I I I I I I I 2 2 E > > 2 w as• - a T m W N yyW'^ U 8 a O O C p N 0 0, a d g € g s g g d aU > c'� +3 2 d o o d o .y • 8 U c 0 m 0 c m E v o V m 8 c• m a pFy1 a) a 0 P. 'i m 3 N ZS C N 7 W N C!) V) 8 cc") N 0 F"Y m a) N CO 122 0 N N N N N N N N C O•E•- O N .4- O 0 N N O O y> oz a o 0 0 0 0 IA lg.0Q c A 1. 61 1A4 7, 3 Ts O 9 2 0 0 5 cr gN M N N N N • rn m g 0 4O 40 c (o (c"to 1 v(0 > o > in c U, 0) o 3 g C 0 a 7 m as o m 'm > o y C O o .2 o n, o o•C r e a i > o 0 Q d o o• '5.o • `m d o 0 >, O ^' c ` c — o• ` o U `.4 d 8 °0 0 c rnW 9 E• m 13 0 a . NO O` N O1 7 O o 0 m S-.ii V ay 15 Y W t• C0 , N lag o _� N o 0.c.c C) > U N 4 ar0 N ▪ 7 ._ R m0 > r H •Q ° if 61 O O 0. > co V)0.2 Q C , , , 161 * 1A4 xec k 0 • :qv. ircl i December 2012 Field Managers Report Water Treatment Plant Operations and Maintenance The Water Treatment Plant produced and distributed 2.160 MG for the month of November, which is an average of 0.072 MGD. Wastewater Plant Operations and Maintenance The WWTP treated approximately 1.562 MG for the month of November, which is an average of 0.052 MGD Reuse System Operations and Maintenance The reuse system delivered 7.009 MG for the month of November, which is an average of 0.234 MGD, Permit Compliance: Water Treatment Plant: All permit requirements met Wastewater Treatment Plant All permit requirements met In The Community • Performed some more minor repairs on a few backflow preventers in community. • Replaced a few light fixtures at the ends of Newport Drive and Cays Drive. 1 TRENT SERVICES 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642.9219*Fax.239-642-9469•www.severntrentservices.com # 161 1A4 ais„...k- c. lc'0 / J90.t4c----k, ,,,,,s 3c i' December 2012 Field 'rii Report Severn Trent Special Services Installing New 8ackflow Preventers—You may notice that the new backflow preventers are a less lengthy than the ones we previously have been installing.This newer style should be quite a bit better as we progress into some of the more space limited areas of P01. •C. — - ). Illift.- s a# 44 a �+ kJ �� ,1 pp:'y $ a • At The Reverse Osmosis & Water Reclamation Facility:, You may have noticed some of the trees that look sickly around the new pond (south of the WWTP). These are Cypress trees and I have been told that they are semi-deciduous. About this time of year(Dry Season) they will lose their leaves like what we are seeing. We will see them start to green up again a little bit before the start of the rainy season. ,� -.,. � e w'F tic = '`5+s,;*a �`r '�°'` t ,t ,a-n a z = -, t gf ° ♦ '41'.:7;':`,.., . .€ r� ', • `�..a ins a + ; F Re ,y t 4;L.9 ' jtiiC R r 'Y. r+px �" ti"3'�r a b t e �t ��ew a- �" r < t F , .4,1,-‘2:--:.gf, SEVERN 2 TRENT"' 12600 Union Road Naples, Florida 34114•Tel 239-642.9219•Fax 239-642-9469•wawseverntrentservices.com 1611A4 4 0 4ck . / _12 6,'''.'"• 11\3 • December 2012 Field Managers Report east side of our facility! L Old fence removed an, d new fence installed on the �� f ' F ` ear e"4 oq*3 ,g a , PI ! dr i .. ` Well#2- Installation after replacement of pump and 3'extension. 4 S .b k4‘`• $ RY' yj a k Y iy E 4M n 3 �.Y, r �" app° .�' �p ply "�9 ,- s 3 TRENT eFFVICEF 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114 Tel 239.642.9219 Fax-239 642-9469 wwwseverntrentservices.com • •161 1A4 „2,45- fifre December 2012 Field Managers Report CMMS Work Order Report 12/12/2012 WO#3516 Corrective RO System#2 Notes: Performed a low pH cleaning on this membrane.Original interstage differential pressures were 31 psi.After cleaning,differential pressures went down to 14 psi. 12/3/2012 WO#3517 Corrective MBR Skid#2 Notes: Transmembrane pressures were getting high,and Permeability was getting low.Performed an enhanced cleaning on skid in order to recover optimal operating pressures. 12/26/2012 WO#3604 Corrective Rote mesh unit Notes: Chain broke,Replaced chain and placed rotomesh back in operation. Ordering a stainless steel chain for replacement in the future as the Hydrogen Sulfide is deteriorating the chain over a short period of time. 12/31/2012 WO#3659 Corrective MBR Skid#2 Backwash Valve inoperable. The pneumatic actuator for the backwash valve failed. Notes: Installed new actuator and place skid back into service.No charge for labor hours as this was completed during normal business hours.t will order a new actuator to have a spare on the shel€. Summary Total#of WO's 203 Total Completed 203 Total Corrective 4 Total Hours 35.90 4 TRENT 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239.542-9219•Fax 239-642-9469•www.severntrentservices.com 161 1A4 kgc., .r elk^ December 2012 Field Managers Report Water Loss Reports Potable Water Report 5 4.5 4 _ 3 5 -241 8 3 2 5 8 `-085 2 2 509 2.5 2 2 1..as 2002 1.5 1-822--1-023- — °-° 64 , �4 1.496 1.6-04 - rr - _ ► 1 622 1 234 1 187 1 4.®........-_ ` 1.039 05 .;, . 11%,. 5na si% 1.0 a 4Its, Eat& Po .. . �# 0 . Dee-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 --e—Water Produced —*--WaterBdle'J %WM&r Loss] Irrigation Water Report 9.0 -- 2tt28 8.0 +-""""-. _ _ 7 4 2 6991 7 009 7.0 1, " . .• 6009 6.0 - 7,019 0 953 5 879 y .. 6 334 4 79 4 259 50 �,t4 4121 5322 b€Sld ra c74.0 • —— c 0 3.0 2.0 1.8 , 1W 9% 5% 10% 6% 9% 9% 3% 9% 3% 1% 3% 0 0 r— * . r , t w sDec-11 Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 1 Meier •••...9rr}uu r 9941arl 1 ��i�► 5 TRENT SERVICES 12600 Union Road Naples,Florida 34114•Tel 239-642-9219•Fax 239-642-9469•www.severntrentservices.com + 161 1A . .1 . , .FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF (,c r 1:R' :F: c ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION t)\\IN.ta( ;att.o1 t. 1FLOR SOUTH DISTRICT @ P.Q.BOX 2549 " FORT MYERS,FL 33902-2549 1It.1?4("1f�S1,1'.41 \kI)il=` Si';Ris1.11? December 6,2012 Mr. Dale Lambert,Chairperson Port of the Islands CID 298 Stella Maris Dr S Naples FL 34114 Re: Collier County- PW Port of the Islands PWS I.D.Number: 5110230 Lead and Copper Sampling Plan Approval Dear Mr.Lambert: The Department received the revised Lead and Copper Sampling Plan for the system on 12/06/2012. The Department has reviewed the plan and has found the plan to meet the requirements of the Lead and Copper Rule. Sincerely, Ryan Snyder Environmental Specialist II cc: Robert Edge, redge @stes.com 161 ? 1A4 T t+' COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT DEDICATION OF THE NEW WATER TREATMENT PLANT JANUARY 18, 2013 Welcome—Calvin Teague, P.O.I. District Manager Greetings from the Board of Supervisors, Norine Dillon, Chairperson Introduction of State and Local guests Special Recognition of Dale Lambert, Board of Supervisors Project Representative/Liaison Comments and recognition of key staff by District Engineer, Ron Benson, Hole Montes Severn Trent Operations, Bob Dick Presentation of Recognition Gifts and Dedication Remembrances Port of the Islands CID Board of Supervisors Norine Dillon Dale Lambert Ted Bissell Charles Custer Richard Ziko Dan Cox Florida Department of Environmental Protection Cardinal Contractors Acknowledge Staff in attendance District Engineer: Hole Montes Operation of the POI Utility System:Severn Trent—Operations District Management Services: Severn Trent-Management Services Plant Construction Contractor:Cardinal Contractors There will be Guided Plant Tours approximately every 15 minutes. Since this is an operational Plant and we want to keep everyone safe, please do not enter Plant area unaccompanied. We have bottles of the finest water for you to take home as souvenirs—your very own Port of the Island water in custom bottles. Please only take one bottle each as you leave. Due to the overwhelming response of to- day's event, we may run short but will give"RAIN CHECKS"for the second bottling! `FERN C HOLE IVIONTES SERVICES E ., 4 , , 1 6 1 1A igivt--06.- te • ir i/3 Community Improvement District #1- 1 , DEDICATION OF THE NEW WATER TREATMENT PLANT JANUARY 18, 2013 Right: 2012 aerial photo of the POI Utilities site with relo- ,N. cater] Union Road and additional 1 acre property to the south of the wastewater treatment plant Redeveloped property includes new water treatment plant, modernized ..,' itiBl?ivastc water treatment plant, reuse storage and irriga- tion pump stailem. ,,,',3.ek'7„ :: 1/47'* „,... ,- • " k 1- i° -' *At.,''''' ''';' ''''. '''''. `, .• 2 ‘' :- \ 1 i ,•.,, ,r,„IP% , „" 14 2,• . , V j, •;'' ' ':;: I , ' \':,, 2.141111, . 7iF fC:,--Ci. -,1' ''. ', `,x' :g; Left: 1993 aerial photo qf the POI Utilities site following 4 .4•'q''''A,n`. I I ,,i, , x , ' ,,;ittirte*e,, construction of the advanced wastewater treatment plant isly , _ . " s- t'''''„' rkse,P.,i4-.-11',„ and ittstallation of the used water treatment plant which . . I . , Creek in i - ll- :°'"i'' ' '•A' '''61 'A,..-:...„t4z.4„, , ,,, , ,,,,,,‘,„,,,,,1„ - ...,,,,p‘,,,.s,,,;s4, ,, 4v pt emus y served Quart(t eek in non tern Co ter Couno7, The Port of the Islands Community essentially owns their property in the future. This was a win-win proposi- their own potable water, irrigation water, and sanitary tion for both public and private parties. sewer utility company. The Community Improvement At the time redevelopment of the CID utilities site was District (CID) has invested nearly $10 million over the in the planning stages, rezoning and site development ap- past twenty plus years to provide the residents of Port of provals had to be obtained from Collier County. The ap- the Islands the highest quality utility system. The above proved plan for development of the site includes room for photos illustrate the same property from December 1993 a future building and parking lot in the area south of the following the initial development of the water and waste- wastewater treatment plant which is currently being used water treatment plants as planned for build-out needs of fir storinwater management. While such a project is not the romtramity as well as the newly revamped utilities in current planning or budgeting stages, a multi-purpose complex at Port of the Islands. Most of this property was building to serve the POI community now has a potential acquired twenty years ago during the early years of the site at this location. In the event such a project were un- CID with ultimate needs of the community in mind, al- dertaken, a portion of the site north of the new water treat- though an additional acre of land(south of the wastewater meat plant(where the old water treatment plant used to be treatment plant) was acquired from BRH Enterprises in located)would he converted to stt)nnwater management at 2010 at which time an agreement was reached to relocate that time to replace the areas filled in for construction of Union Road to the west side of the utilities complex (it new facilities. used to run thru the middle) as well as potential future re- In order to be good stewards of the environment, the alignment of Union Road as it passes through the BRH CID utilities site has been graded to divert all rainfall run- property at the time BRI-I may develop the property. This off into on-site retention areas for treatment as well as allowed improved access to the Gun Club, provided a groundWater recharge. In the event of a very large tropical much more usable site for future development by the CID, storm or hurricane, the excess runoff can overflow to a as well as allows BRH more flexibility in development of pipeline which discharges the water to the Faka Union Canal near the entrance to the Gun Club. . 161 1A ' ..- - -,;;;;--._-_*---,,,,-,7,-,,f.::„. ,,.„-,..1,,,,,,.:,,,,-,, ,,,:-..„, -;,7-----1- ‘ -‘,- ‘ ...... i ,, .,, ..N., ,, ,,,,,-, , ,. .,,„ . ,„,,,,,.. .., „,„,,,,,,,, , , ..,.,... ....., -. .„, - 1., ,,,, f t'''''"7"etc _ ,,..per s �,° i .g z� 4 3L T H T � 2g'�i» i f-S£-• kN �"Y-- :11: 1,„,. x �„ i g . � �'-r'7j b.:K T J{sue';ff 1 � R °*Tx b e ; ? ..f. j v$ 31 '-`w" r3 5 w•s * Yr F yy .' w dA y Ga..ri m h§" ,' ,�y, .sic _r�,r/�i = rz.:,,r;, 4 '" `? k ;,'' �, ,. a .. _ �' ,.....,. rdµ,:, �". �..«�� : 5�� a.,. --� "� br .e. Raw water booster pumps and strainers prepare water from the Two parallel Reverse Osmosis water treatment skids. Each skid wells for reverse osmosis treatment. can produce 200,000 gallons/day if operated 24 hours per day. Water Treatment Process at Port of the Islands The first step in the treatment of the water at Port of � � ' " `" the Islands is that it is passed through automatically s ,'Vtett cleaned strainers in order to remove any sand or particu- - ` � r , � , late matter. The second step is the filtration of the water la �'��` �� t �9 , using cartridge filters to remove even smaller sediment ,a before the water is treated by pumping it through reverse � � s r °' ' ' osmosis membranes. Treatment using reverse osmosis , F „ , i dry i ' i ��; membranes provides such a high level of removal that . °;; F even dissolved minerals are removed such as calcium g rim ` hardness, sodium chloride and other salts. The mem- �� r ; "`' brans use a two-stage process where the concentrated j water from the first stage is concentrated a second time to ,d ' reduce the volume of concentrated water while increasing -'. ' the quantity of finished product water. ; Following reverse osmosis treatment, the water is very pure. High purity water is actually low in pH and very Calcite Contactors treat the water following reverse osmosis to corrosive and aggressive on metal plumbing, so the next add some calcium and alkalinity back into the pure water to process is to add some pure calcium carbonate back into make it less aggressive when in contact with metal plumbing. the water to make the water less corrosive and more pleas- . °" ing to taste. This is done essentially by trickling the water -- -a.P,', s over high purity limestone pebbles. The pH of the fin- mP - ished water is adjusted and chlorine is added for disinfec- 4,' u «'" tion. After allowing sufficient contact time for the chlo- K , - ry rine with the water,a trace amount of ammonia is added in " .,, ..#, .. .. .., „. I order to convert the chlorine into chloramines which do P ' - ` ,. t not have the same chlorine odor and taste you may notice '4 v in some public water supplies, as well as to form a longer *. " lasting disinfectant prior to the water being stored on-site 4 and then travelling in the distribution system to the cus- ' tomer's homes. $� y : All of the minerals contained in the well water are re- i moved, as the drinking water is being produced, and con- i '; centrated in the portion of the water which is then able to Sodium hydroxide is added in order to raise the pH of the be used for irrigation. All process wastewater is sent to treated water, sodium hypochlorite (bleach) is added for disin- the wastewater treatment plant where it is treated and re- fection, and a trace amount of ammonia is added to form a claimed for irrigation water. longer acting disinfectant in the distribution system. , , . 161 1A1 100% Water Reuse at Port of the Islands The Port of the Islands community is located in an extremely unique loca- Water Potable Potable Water Potable returned Y q --••••••••--•-- � Treatment Water -- Pumped to °-°°° not returned tion, in the middle of a large natural Plant Storage Tank Residents down drains ecosystem protected by the State and 1 Federal governments. Other than the Water concentrate ___•-_— Water used, water use permitted for the POI corn- pumped from produced during ProcasS returned Wellfield treatment wastewater down drains munity, one hundred percent of the wa- .._ ter resource is reserved for the natural b, environment. For that reason, in order -- Irrigation and Fire Reclaimed Wastewater to obtain a twenty year extension to the ti– Protection + — water – Treatment water use permit, the CID proposed to Storage Tanks produced Plant implement a program in which 100%of the water which can be reused would be Irrigation water Irrigation water reused. In addition, this program was pumped to used by developed in a manner to also provide Residents Residents the residents with the highest quality potable water and irrigation water possible. Previously, the primary source for irrigation water used other 2 gallons. The 8 gallons of thinking water goes into to be the Faka Union Canal and as long-time residents of the potable water storage tank and pumped to the custom- POI will recall, this water would become salty during part ers. The 2 gallons of well water which contains the con- of the year. The current program provides irrigation water centrated minerals and natural organic matter which was from a combination of well water,blended with reclaimed removed from the other 8 gallons is discharged into the wastewater effluent along with concentrated well water irrigation water storage tanks. The wastewater collected at from the potable water treatment plant. POI is treated through a combination of an advanced bio- The diagram above, illustrates water reuse at Port of logical treatment process followed by a membrane treat- the Islands. The production of potable water consists of ment process which produces a very high quality re- converting 10 gallons of well water into 8 gallons of claimed water which is also sent to the irrigation storage drinking water by removing the minerals and natural or- tanks. Each day, sufficient well water is added to the irri- ganic matter in the well water and concentrating it in the gation storage tanks to keep them full. Advanced Wastewater Treatment at Port of the Islands The Port of the Islands community has had an ad- from four years ago, illustrate the approach which has vanced wastewater treatment facility since 1993. This been taken at POI in planning the expenditures for the treatment plant was initially designed using the same treat- community's utility system—construct the structures to ment process used by the City of Naples, City of Fort last a lifetime(using materials such as reinforced concrete) Myers, and City of Cape Coral which meets the highest while allowing the ability to upgrade to newer types of treatment standards required in Florida for nutrient re- treatment at the time when the mechanical equipment moval. reaches the end of its useful life, which is much shorter The treated wastewater effluent is of better quality than than the length of time the concrete structures will last. the irrigation water which was previously coming from the Also the citizen-elected Board of Supervisors, who are Faka Union canal, and the Florida Department of Environ- residents of the community have made the decision to pro- mental Protection has permitted POI to use the reclaimed vide their neighbors with the highest level of service prac- water from the wastewater treatment plant for irrigation. tical. These goals have taken a number of years to imple- In order to provide the highest level of protection to the ment, but with the completion of the new water treatment public, the wastewater effluent receives the highest levels plant,the major work to accomplish these goals have been of treatment. achieved. About four years ago, much of the mechanical equip- When you tour the wastewater treatment plant at POI, ment at the POI wastewater treatment facility was up- you will note the integrity of the reinforced concrete struc- graded to add membranes which filter the effluent to a tures at the facility which were constructed twenty years much higher degree than the previous sand filters. This ago and see that the investment in these facilities was provides the highest quality water for irrigation possible in made for the long-term, just as the new water treatment order to minimize concerns with viral and bacterial con- plant has also been constructed to last a lifetime. tamination from occurring. These equipment upgrades 1 6 1 1A4 ... , . 4.4....i. . _ .. ,.., , . . ....., . . .. it tt -: ��. f• i ff ��y te ... - { V,� y k �r£.S#� e Mme, ,`'Y�N"�.+,„ �Z95. b yack 1 S ( ! r. ., 1 t ..% ■ gl,,..".4,1. r u */ ...,„., IP. = 0 .. . * ....e 0-.....= -i ,, . -Ark v.,,,,, i .' ;,L,.,. ,;...i,, kl .1.,,,, , 1;,;" ,.., ,„.„,;.t, ,....,, 4" g-,,,',..T.-t-t,./4... ,...r..- .4 44., , , 0!,.,,,;,,,, : ....A.'e, ' ,° '....„'_-24,4 %It!...' li ..,,,,444`.'47''''.''',,, '-, 4„„,„:1 i„' .,.t.,,i,1 ',. ak �j J 4 bey..... ,..t,:...,.-', . r ,.1 .1 r. r Ii . �; Y '' 3 SEVERN District Management Services Construction of the Plant by by Severn Trent TRENT `= Management Services Cardinal Contractors, Inc. SERVICES Fort Myers, Florida Sarasota,Florida iiiin Engineering Design and SEVERN Operation of the Inspection provided by T R ENT POI Utility System by Hole ontes,Inc. Severn Trent HOLE MANTES Naples,Florida SERVICES Environmental Services ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVCYO"5 161 1A � Martha S. Vergara -P R O N II V7 3 From: BosiMichael <MichaelBosi @colliergov.net> JAN 2 4 2013 Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 1:55 PM To: Minutes and Records $ Cc: 'MorganTrish'; Neet, Virginia; Rodriguez, Wanda; Brock, Maryla Subject: NDN ad to run 1-10-13 Attachments: NDN ad wildwood estates.docx Please charge to: Department:Planning&Zoning,Zoning Review Section; Fund&Cost Center: 131-138326-649100-00000;Purchase Order Number: 4500096189;Account Number:068779 Should you have questions, please contact me. Mike Bosi,AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager and Interim Planning and Zoning Director 239-252-6819 -Office 239-204-0739-Cell 239-252-2806- Fax s 7 .� 3..t .Ia� .,. :Gi.,. ,,r., .< <3 e .= �.. , tas{,T. F i'C_p,.. ,s,to a Luh i{.<a_t rds EE..r.+0st.do act send Fiala Hiller Henning Coyle isc. Corres: Date: \2113 Item*:\Low \tot S Copies to: 1 161 1A For a copy of the actual interpretation letter, please contact the Collier County Land Development Services Department at 252-6818 by phone, or by mail at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104, attention Mike Bosi. Within 30 days of publication of the public notice, any affected property owner or aggrieved or adversely affected party may appeal the interpretation to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). An affected property owner is defined as an owner of property within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpretation is effective. An aggrieved or adversely affected party is defined as any person or group of persons which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code. A request for appeal must be filed in writing and must state the basis for the appeal and include any pertinent information, exhibits, or other back-up information in support of the appeal. The appeal must be accompanied by a $1,000.00 application and processing fee. (If payment is in the form of a check, it should be made out to the Collier County Board of Commissioners.) An appeal can be hand delivered or mailed to my attention at the address provided. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further questions on this matter. The interpretation file and other pertinent information related to this interpretation are kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation building at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104. Please contact the staff member below at (239) 252-6819 to set up an appointment if you wish to review the file. Mike Bosi, AICP, Interim Director, Planning and Zoning Department Revised: 12/13/12 161 1 A 5 Notice of Official Interpretation of Collier County Land Development Code Ordinance Pursuant to Division 10.02.02.F.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), 04-41, as amended, public notice is hereby given of an official interpretation. RE: INTP-2012-PL-2598, OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION REQUESTING A USE DETERMINATIONS FOR THE WILDWOOD ESTATES PUD, SECTION 3.2.A (18), ANY OTHER CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL USE WHICH IS COMPARABLE IN NATURE WITH THE FOREGOING USES, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR. In regards to the above referenced Land Development Code (LDC) provision, it has been asked of the Department of Planning and Zoning Services Interim Director to render an official interpretation regarding the determination of comparable allowed uses, as provided for within the Wildwood Estates Planned Unit Development, Section 3.2, permitted commercial uses. Specifically, use eighteen is, any other convenience commercial use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Director determines to be compatible in the District. Essential to your question is the recognition of the official uses specifically permitted by the PUD. Fourteen of the seventeen specific uses in the PUD are permitted uses within the C-2 zoning district, with the noted distinction that the C-2 uses within the LDC contain square footage limitations, an intensity limitation not present in the PUD. This is relevant to the request in that there is no intensity (square footage limitation) within the PUD and therefore the allowed C-2 uses have the potential for a greater intensity or demand upon public facilities, than those within the LDC C-2 uses. The three other specific uses listed within the PUD are permitted in the C-3 zoning district. The uses your application seeks a compatibility determination upon are Health Care Uses (SIC codes 8011, 8021, 8031, 8041, 8042, 8043, 8049). From review of the uses requested within this determination, use codes 8011-8049 (Health Services, offices and clinics) are permitted uses in the C- 1 zoning district and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Additionally, the request seeks compatibility for various Professional Office Uses (SIC codes 7311-advertising, 7322-23-consumer credit reporting, 7331-direct mail advertising, 7338-court reporting services, 7371-76, 7379-computer programming, data processing, 8111-legal services, 8322-individual and family service, 8351-child day care services, 8711-engineering, architectural and surveying, 8721—accounting, auditing and bookkeeping and 8741- 43—management and public relation). From review of the uses requested within this determination, the above grouping of use codes are permitted uses in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Based upon these facts it is determined the identified above uses could be sought at the Del Mar retail Center within the Wildwood Estates PUD. Revised: 12/13/12 161 1A 5 Notice of Official Interpretation of Collier County Land Development Code Ordinance Pursuant to Division 10.02.02.F.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), 04-41, as amended, public notice is hereby given of an official interpretation. RE: INTP-2012-PL-2598, OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION REQUESTING A USE DETERMINATIONS FOR THE WILDWOOD ESTATES PUD, SECTION 3.2.A (18), ANY OTHER CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL USE WHICH IS COMPARABLE IN NATURE WITH THE FOREGOING USES, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR. In regards to the above referenced Land Development Code (LDC) provision, it has been asked of the Department of Planning and Zoning Services Interim Director to render an official interpretation regarding the determination of comparable allowed uses, as provided for within the Wildwood Estates Planned Unit Development, Section 3.2, permitted commercial uses. Specifically, use eighteen is, any other convenience commercial use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Director determines to be compatible in the District. Essential to your question is the recognition of the official uses specifically permitted by the PUD. Fourteen of the seventeen specific uses in the PUD are permitted uses within the C-2 zoning district, with the noted distinction that the C-2 uses within the LDC contain square footage limitations, an intensity limitation not present in the PUD. This is relevant to the request in that there is no intensity (square footage limitation) within the PUD and therefore the allowed C-2 uses have the potential for a greater intensity or demand upon public facilities, than those within the LDC C-2 uses. The three other specific uses listed within the PUD are permitted in the C-3 zoning district. The uses your application seeks a compatibility determination upon are Health Care Uses (SIC codes 8011, 8021, 8031, 8041, 8042, 8043, 8049). From review of the uses requested within this determination, use codes 8011-8049 (Health Services, offices and clinics) are permitted uses in the C- 1 zoning district and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Additionally, the request seeks compatibility for various Professional Office Uses (SIC codes 7311-advertising, 7322-23-consumer credit reporting, 7331-direct mail advertising, 7338-court reporting services, 7371-76, 7379-computer programming, data processing, 8111-legal services, 8322-individual and family service, 8351-child day care services, 8711-engineering, architectural and surveying, 8721—accounting, auditing and bookkeeping and 8741- 43—management and public relation). From review of the uses requested within this determination, the above grouping of use codes are permitted uses in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Based upon these facts it is determined the identified above uses could be sought at the Del Mar retail Center within the Wildwood Estates PUD. 161 1A 5 For a copy of the actual interpretation letter, please contact the Collier County Land Development Services Department at 252-6818 by phone, or by mail at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104, attention Mike Bosi. Within 30 days of publication of the public notice, any affected property owner or aggrieved or adversely affected party may appeal the interpretation to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). An affected property owner is defined as an owner of property within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpretation is effective. An aggrieved or adversely affected party is defined as any person or group of persons which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code. A request for appeal must be filed in writing and must state the basis for the appeal and include any pertinent information, exhibits, or other back-up information in support of the appeal. The appeal must be accompanied by a $1,000.00 application and processing fee. (If payment is in the form of a check, it should be made out to the Collier County Board of Commissioners.) An appeal can be hand delivered or mailed to my attention at the address provided. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further questions on this matter. The interpretation file and other pertinent information related to this interpretation are kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation building at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104. Please contact the staff member below at (239) 252-6819 to set up an appointment if you wish to review the file. Mike Bosi, AICP, Interim Director, Planning and Zoning Department 161 1A5 Acct. #068779 December 26, 2012 Attn: Legals Naples News Media 1100 Immokalee Rd. Naples, Florida 34110 Re: Notice of Official Interpretation Dear Legals: Please advertise the above referenced notice on Monday, January 10, 2013, and kindly send the Affidavit of Publication, in duplicate, together with charges involved, to this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk P.O. #4500096189 Foreign Account Number . 068779 1 6 I 1 A 5 Ad # 1972869 Ad Net Cost $341.94 Name •(Primary) BCC/ZONING DEPARTMENT Company (Primary) - Street 1 (Primary) 2800 N HORSESHOE DR City (Primary) NAPLES State (Primary) FL ZIP (Primary) 34104 Phone (Primary) : (239) 252-2476 Class Code 0114 - Notice Start Date 1/10/2013 Stop Date 1/10/2013 Prepayment Amount $0.00 Ad Sales Rep. 400 - Robin Calabrese Width 2 Depth 59 al k Notice of Official kdntrpre[ation of Collier County Land Development Code Ordinance • -Pursuant to Division t0.02.02.F.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC),04-41,as amended,pubic notice is hereby given of an official interpretation. RE: INTP-2012-PL-2598,OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION REQUESTING A USE DETERMI- NATIONS FOR THE WILDWOOD ESTATES PUD,SECTION 3.2.A(18),ANY OTHER CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL USE WHICH IS COMPARABLE IN NATURE WITH THE FOREGOING USES,AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR In regards to the above referenced Land Development Code(LOC)provision,It has been asked of the Department of Planning and Zoning Services Interim Director to render an official interpretation reganfing the determination of comparable allow- ed uses,as provided for within the Wildwood Estates Planned Unit Development, Section 12,permitted commercial uses.Specifically,use eighteen is.any other con- venience commercial use which is conpareble in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Director determines to be compatible in the District Essential to your question is the recognition of the official uses specifically permit- ted by the PUD. Fourteen of the seventeen specific uses in the PUD are permitted uses within the C-2 zoning district,with the noted distinction that the C-2 uses within the WC contain square footage limitations,an intensity limitation not pres- ent in the PUD. This is relevant to the request in that there is no intensity(square footage limitation)within the PUD and therefore the allowed C-2 uses have the potential for a greater intensity or demand upon public facilities,than those within the LDC C-2 uses. The three other specific uses listed within the PUD are permitted in the C-3 zoning district. The uses your application seeks a compatibility determination upon are Health Care Uses(SIC codes 8011,8021,8031,8041,8042 8043,8049). From review of the uses requested within this determination,use codes 8011-8049(Health Services,of- fices and dinics)are permitted uses in the C-1 zoning district and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation.Additionally,the request seeks compatibility for various Professional Office Uses (SIC codes 7311 -advertising,7322-23-consumer credit reporting,7331-direct mail advertising,7338-court reporting services,7371- 76,7379-computer programming,data processing,8111-legal services,8322-indtvi- dual and family service,8351-child day care services,8711-engineering,architectural and surveying,8721-accounting,auditing and bookkeeping and 8741-43-manage- ment and public relation). From review of the was requested within this determi- nation.the above grouping of use codes are permitted uses in the C-1 and C-2 zon- ing districts and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Based upon these facts it is determined the identified above uses could be sought at the Del Mar retail Center within the Wlldwood Estates PUD. For a copy of the actual Interpretation letter,please contact the Collier County Land Development Services Department at 252-6818 by phone,or by mail at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL 34104,attention Mike Bosi- Within 30 days of publication of the public notke,any affected owner or aggrieved or adversely affected party may appeal the interpretation to the Board of Zoning Appeals(8 ). An affected property owner is ed fined as an owner of property within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpreta- tion is effective.An aggrieved or adversely affected party is defined as any person or group of persons which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan or'Land Development Code.A request for appeal must be filed in writing and must state the basis for the appeal and include any pertinent information,exhibits,or other back-up informa- tion in support of the appeal. The appeal must be accompanied by a$1,000.00 ap- 16 I /// ''' plication and processing fee.(If payment is in the form of a check,It should be 1 �' made out to the Collier County Board of Commissioners.) An appeal can be hand delivered or mailed to my attention at the address provided. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further questions on this matter. The interpretation file and other pertinent information related to this interprets. lion are kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation building at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL 34104. Please contact the staff member below at(239)252-6819 to set up an appointment if you wish to review the file. Mike Bosi,AICP.Interim Director. Planning and Zoning Department January 10,2013 1972869 • • • 161 1A5 Martha S. Vergara From: BosiMichael <MichaelBosi @colliergov.net> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 12:51 PM To: Martha S. Vergara Subject: RE: PROOF FW: [Image File] R Calabrese,DisplayWest, #694 Martha, The Wildwood Ad is good to go. Thank you and have a great weekend, mike Original Message From: Martha S.Vergara [mailto:Martha.Vergara @collierclerk.com] Sent:Thursday, December 27, 2012 8:18 AM To: BosiMichael Subject: RE: PROOF FW: [Image File] R Calabrese,DisplayWest, #694 Awesome,you do the same Mike. May the new year bring us shorter BCC Meetings. LOL Martha Original Message From: BosiMichael [mailto:MichaelBosi@colliergov.net] Sent:Thursday, December 27, 2012 8:15 AM To: Martha S.Vergara Subject: RE: PROOF FW: [Image File] R Calabrese,DisplayWest, #694 Good Morning Martha, Yes, the ad satisfied our procedural requirement. I hope you have a great day and rest of the year! Mike :) Original Message From: Martha S. Vergara [mailto:Martha.Vergara @collierclerk.com] Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 8:13 AM To: BosiMichael Subject: RE: PROOF FW: [Image File] R Calabrese,DisplayWest, #694 Morning Mike, No it had to do with NDN and the size they sent the ad proof, I sent it to them in word but they send the ad proofs in a pdf format. Does that mean that it was good to go for you? Original Message From: BosiMichael [mailto:MichaelBosi @colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 8:06 AM To: Martha S. Vergara; Neet, Virginia Subject: RE: PROOF FW: [Image File] R Calabrese,DisplayWest,#694 1 161 1A5 . Thank you Martha. I can send the word document if that helps? Thanks again, mike Original Message From: Martha S.Vergara [mailto:Martha.Vergara @collierclerk.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 4:44 PM To: NeetVirginia; BosiMichael Subject: FW: PROOF FW: [Image File] R Calabrese,DisplayWest, #694 Attached is the proof and it different than what you are used to seeing. I had to send back the adobe file because I couldn't even read it... Let me know of any changes ASAP.. Thanks, Martha Please visit us on the web at www.collierclerk.com This electronic communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient,you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Clerk's Office by emailing helpdesk @collierclerk.com quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents.The Collier County Clerk's Office accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the CollierClerk.com domain. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 161 1A5 . Martha S. Vergara From: Naples Daily News <naplesnews @clicknbuy.com> Sent: Wednesday,January 09, 2013 11:10 PM To: Martha S. Vergara Subject: Thank you for placing your classified advertisement. Ad# 1972869 Thank you for placing your classified advertisement. The following represents the current text of your advertisement: Notice of Official Interpretation of Collier County Land Development Code Ordinance Pursuant to Division 10.02.02.F.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), 04-41, as amended, public notice is hereby given of an official interpretation. RE: INTP-2012-PL-2598, OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION REQUESTING A USE DETERMINATIONS FOR THE WILDWOOD ESTATES PUD, SECTION 3.2.A(18), ANY OTHER CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL USE WHICH IS COMPARABLE IN NATURE WITH THE FOREGOING USES, AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR. In regards to the above referenced Land Development Code (LDC) provision, it has been asked of the Department of Planning and Zoning Services Interim Director to render an official interpretation regarding the determination of comparable allowed uses, as provided for within the Wildwood Estates Planned Unit Development, Section 3.2, permitted commercial uses. Specifically, use eighteen is, any other convenience commercial use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Director determines to be compatible in the District. Essential to your question is the recognition of the official uses specifically permitted by the PUD. Fourteen of the seventeen specific uses in the PUD are permitted uses within the C-2 zoning district, with the noted distinction that the C-2 uses within the LDC contain square footage limitations, an intensity limitation not present in the PUD. This is relevant to the request in that there is no intensity (square footage limitation)within the PUD and therefore the allowed C-2 uses have the potential for a greater intensity or demand upon public facilities,than those within the LDC C-2 uses. The three other specific uses listed within the PUD are permitted in the C-3 zoning district. The uses your application seeks a compatibility determination upon are Health Care Uses (SIC codes 8011, 8021, 8031, 8041, 8042, 8043, 8049). From review of the uses requested within this determination, use codes 8011-8049 (Health Services, offices and clinics) are permitted uses in the C-1 zoning district and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Additionally,the request seeks compatibility for various Professional Office Uses (SIC codes 7311-advertising, 7322-23-consumer credit reporting, 7331-direct mail advertising, 7338-court reporting services, 737176, 7379- computer programming, data processing, 8111-legal services, 8322-individual and family service, 8351-child day care services, 8711-engineering, architectural and surveying, 8721-accounting, auditing and bookkeeping and 8741-43-management and public relation). From review of the uses requested within this determination, the above grouping of use codes are permitted uses in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation. Based upon these facts it is determined the identified above uses could be sought at the Del Mar retail Center within the Wildwood Estates PUD. For a copy of the actual interpretation letter, please contact the Collier County Land Development Services Department at 252-6818 by phone, or by mail at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples, FL 34104, attention Mike Bosi. Within 30 days of publication of the public notice, any affected property owner or aggrieved or adversely affected party may appeal the interpretation to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). An affected property owner is defined as an owner of property within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpretation is effective. An aggrieved or adversely affected party is defined as 1 161 1A . . any person or group of persons which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code. A request for appeal must be filed in writing and must state the basis for the appeal and include any pertinent information, exhibits, or other back-up information in support of the appeal. The appeal must be accompanied by a $1,000.00 application and processing fee. (If payment is in the form of a check, it should be made out to the Collier County Board of Commissioners.) An appeal can be hand delivered or mailed to my attention at the address provided. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further questions on this matter. The interpretation file and other pertinent information related to this interpretation are kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation building at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples, FL 34104. Please contact the staff member below at(239) 252-6819 to set up an appointment if you wish to review the file. Mike Bosi, AICP, Interim Director, Planning and Zoning Department January 10, 2013 1972869 You also have the exciting option to enhance your online advertisement with extended text, photos and even multimedia! Enhancing your classified advertisement will give you increased exposure to thousands of online shoppers that visit our classified section every day. You can also choose to add shipping and delivery options for the buyer. Enhancing your advertisement is easy;just follow the online AdWizard to add an expanded description, photos and even video/audio of your item. To log in to the New Ad Wizard use your email address and existing password. Go to: http://secure.adpay.com/adwizard login.aspx?1=23061559 , if this link is inactive, cut and paste it into your browser address window. If you need any assistance with your advertisement, please contact our classifieds department. 239-263-4700 Thank you for using naplesnews.com Online Classifieds. 2 t . 161 1 A 5 RECEIVED Naples Daily News JAN 2 2 713 Naples, FL 34110 (o Affidavit of Publication FINANCE Naples Daily News + BCC/ZONING DEPARTMENT FINANCE DEPARTMENT • Notice of Official Interpretation of 3299 TAM IAM I TRL E #700 Collier County Land Development Code Ordinance Pursuant to Division 10.02.02.F.3 of the Collier County Land Development NAPLES FL 3 4112 (LDC),04-41,as amended,public notice is hereby given of an official interpretation. RE: INTP-2012-PL-2598, OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION REQUESTING A USE DETE NATIONS FOR THE WILDWOOD ESTATES PUD, SECTION 3.2.A (18), ANY 0 CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL USE WHICH IS COMPARABLE IN NATURE WITH REFERENCE: 068779 4 5 0 0 0 9 618 9 FOREGOING USES,AS DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR. In regards to the above referenced Land Development Code(LDC) provision, i 59707137 NOTICE OF OFFICIAL I been asked of the Department of Planning and Zoning Services Interim Direct render an official interpretation regarding the determination of comparable a ed uses, as provided for within the Wildwood Estates Planned Unit Develops State of Florida Section 3.2,permitted commercial uses.Specifically, use eighteen is, any other venience commercial use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing Counties of Collier and Lee and which the Director determines to be compatible in the District. Essential to your question is the recognition of the official uses specifically pi Before the undersigned authority, personally ted by the PUD. Fourteen of the seventeen specific uses in the PUD are pern uses within the C-2 zoning district, with the noted distinction that the C-2 appeared Amy Davidson, says that she serves as the within the LDC contain square footage limitations, an intensity limitation not ent in the PUD. This is relevant to the request in that there is no intensity(si Inside Sales Supervisor, of the Naples Daily News, footage limitation) within the PUD and therefore the allowed C-2 uses hay, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier the LDC for a uses. The intensity of er specific upon public facilities,than those pern n the LDC C-2 uses. The three other specific uses listed within the PUD are pern County, Florida: distributed in Collier n the C-3 zoning district. and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached The uses your des application 011, seeks a compatibility 80ity 8043,8049). upon m.r are c Care Uses(SIC codes 8011,8021,8031,8041,8042,8043,8049). From.review c uses requested within this determination, use codes 8011-8049(Health Service copy of advertising was published in said fices and clinics)are permitted uses in the C-1 zoning district and hence deem be compatible and permitted within the PUD based upon the criteria estab newspaper on dates listed. within this Official Interpretation. Additionally, the request seeks compatibilil various Professional Office Uses (SIC codes 7311-advertising, 7322-23-com Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily credit reporting, 7331-direct mail advertising, 7338-court reporting services, Y P Y 76, 7379-computer programming, data processing, 8111-legal services, 8322-i News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said dual and family service,8351-child day care services,8711-engineering,archite and surveying, 8721-accounting, auditing and bookkeeping and 8741-43-ma Collier County, Florida, and that the said ment and public relation). From review of the uses requested within this de' nation,the above grouping of use codes are permitted uses in the C-1 and C-: newspaper has heretofore been continuously ing districts and hence deemed to be compatible and permitted within the Y based upon the criteria established within this Official Interpretation.• day and has been entered as second class mail Based upon these facts it is determined the identified above uses could be s matter at the post office in Naples, in said at the Del Mar retail Center within the Wildwood Estates PUD. Collier County, Florida, for period of 1 year For a copy of the actual interpretation letter, please contact the Collier C Y i i p er Y Land Development Services Department at 252-6818 by phone, or by mail at next preceding the first publication of the North Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL 34104,attention Mike Bosi. attached copy of advertisement; and of f iant Within 30 days of publication of the public notice,any affected property owi py r aggrieved or adversely affected party may appeal the interpretation to the further says that he has neither paid nor of Zoning Appeals (BZA). An affected property owner is defined as an owl y p property within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the inter tion is effective.An aggrieved or adversely affected party is defined as any,1 promised any person, firm or corporation any or group of persons which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest-protec discount, rebate, commission or refund for the furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan or Land Develo Code.A request for appeal must be filed in writing and must state the basis 1J appeal and include any pertinent information, exhibits, or other back-up in1 purpose of securing this advertisement for support pp appeal accompanied by tion in su ort of the appeal. The a pal must a accom anied b a E1,000.1 plication and processing fee. (If payment is in the form of a check, it shot publication in the said newspaper. made out to the Collier County Board of Commissioners.) An appeal can be delivered or mailed to my attention at the address provided. Please do not h, to contact me should you have any further questions on this matter. PUBLISHED ON: 01/10 The interpretation file and other pertinent information related to this inter tion are kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth Management Di Planning and Regulation building at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples,FL Please contact the staff member below at(239)252-6819 to set up an appoir if you wish to review the file. Mike Bosi,AICP,Interim Director, Planning and Zoning Department January 10 7013 1977 AD SPACE: 118 LINE FILED ON: 01/10/13 t Signature of Affiant A/Mei Ai A , , he Ili Vrillri III Sworn to and Subscribed ore me s� day o i 2L Personally known by me I 1 ■i';. APB'. Imo_ "a 41,,•• CAROL POLIDORA ,:,' MY COMMISSION#EE 851758 It,rai-.1,1 EXPIRES:November 28,2014 Bonded Tin Wcherd Insurance Agency 161 1 A (,0 COMMISSIONER FIALA MARCO TOWN HALL MEETING February 21, 2013 Rose Hall Auditorium, 180 South Heathwood Dr Meeting begins 6:37 In attendance: Commissioner Donna Fiala, Congressman Trey Radel, Leo Ochs, Nick Casalanguida, Barry Williams,Gary McAlpin, Len Golden Price, Dan Rodriguez,Alexandra Scardino COMMISSIONER FIALA OPENING REMARKS Congressman Trey Radel • Budget Breakdown • Where money is and where it is going($3.4 trillion) • Budget reality • Mandatory funding and borrowed money • CBO projections • Tax money and where it is going • Medicare benefits • No budget, people don't get paid • Closing remarks—need to come together to resolve economic issues. He is in DC to find solutions and represent FL. County Manager Leo Ochs • Coming out of the recession • Economy dependent on outside influences—hit us hard • Kept essential services and tried to not increase taxes • Didn't raise taxes in the past four years • Maintained excellent customer service and have increased our general funds reserve • Lowered debt • Since FY 2008 we've seen a slight increase in value • Visitation is up in Collier county • Median home prices are stabilizing • Permit activity increase for single family homes • BCC approved Economic Development—this could bring more opportunities in businesses and jobs—stimulate the local economy • Doing best to maintain great service, infrastructure and amenities and come back from this recession 161 1A@ Parks&Rec Director Barry Williams • 3 Regional Parks in Marco • Tigertail Beach improvements—rebuilding boardwalks, and a new bathroom. • South Marco Beach—one of the busiest locations in the county,trying to work out the parking issues with the City of Marco. The county owns the access. Working on getting another bathroom. • Caxambas Park—very busy boat ramp. They have out-sourced operations and management at this facility and received positive feedback. Coastal Zone Manager Gary McAlpin • Maintain beaches—this supports the city,community and tourist • Number of projects coming BUT this is a highly regulated industry. The permit process is very lengthy. • If approved by BCC on the 26th,they will issue the notice to proceed to re-nourish beach in Marco beginning of March • In order to maintain beaches they need to rebuild the erosion control structures • Will begin to re-grade the beach in North end of Marco • Working with the state to improve our beaches Growth Management Administrator Nick Casalanguida • Major increase in permit activity in the past three years in residential • Starting to see increase in permit activity in commercial • More development in Hacienda Lakes, Fiddlers Creek, Naples Reserve, Sabal Bay and Lely • Shifting to electronic planning&submittal • Customer service is very important and priority • 951/41 intersection is the primary traffic spot to Marco • This is a 24 month long project-funded by state grants and impact fees and will begin in 6 months • 951/175 project is running 6 months early and under budget—should be completed by the end of fall Q&A • No plans for a new Home Depot • 951/41 project will have delays in traffic but they will maintain access to the businesses • County will contact City of Marco regarding maintenance on culverts COMMISSIONER FIALA CLOSING REMARKS Meeting Ended 7:35 PM fr 161 lAo 3(m:cum COMMISSIONER FIALA TOWN HALL MEETING MAR 0 20 1 13 February 27, 2013 South Regional Library, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy Meeting begins 6:30 In attendance: Commissioner Donna Fiala, Leo Ochs, Nick Casalanguida, Steve Carnell, Barry Williams, Jamie French, Dan Rodriguez, Len Golden Price,Joe Bellone,Alexandra Scardino COMMISSIONER FIALA OPENING REMARKS Fiala County Manager Leo Ochs Hiller Henning 1 • This recession hit Collier County hard–tough for past 5 years. Coyle v^ Colette • 2008-2012 lost about 30%taxable value. �— • Collier County kept essential services. 1.4°`�'� • Maintained excellent customer service. • Lowered debt. • Growing reserve funds so we can respond to emergencies. • Since FY 2008 we've seen a slight increase in taxable value. • Permit&construction increased activity-especially for single family homes. • Median home prices are stabilizing. • BCC approved the Office of Business and Economic Development-this could bring more opportunities in businesses and jobs–stimulate the local economy. Working with the Chamber, FGCU and Lee County. • Local government has a big influence on the local economy. • Striving for competitive taxing and fee structure • Looking into the permitting process and regulations to ensure it is business friendly, but still protects the community. • Local government invests in Collier County thru roads, safety,education, amenities. • Maintaining public amenities (i.e. beaches, museums, parks), helps maintain quality of life which gives Collier County a competitive edge. Parks&Rec Director Barry Williams • 60 parks in Collier County, East Naples has some of the best. • Bayview park—.Best access to Gulf-Is in the final phase of construction, should be completed by May. • Sugden Park–Great events including Jazz in the Park. • East Naples Community Park–Hosted Pickle Ball tournament the included 300 participants. • Isles of Capri Paddle Craft Park is great for kayakers. Misc.Corres: Date: `-V2 1 Item#: `LA.= ° s to. 161 1A 6 • Eagle Lakes Community Park—Park developed with bare amenities, but sees tremendous need for more. The design plan is 60%completed—community center will include fitness center, classrooms,VPK space. Try to start construction in fall and finish by next summer. Solid Waste Director Dan Rodriguez • Collier County water#4 best tasting in North America. • Numerous Awards and recognitions for facilities, customer service and water. • Naples Manor and Doral Circle will get a water/sewer line replacement this year. • Davis&County Barn Rd station will be getting new pump and technology upgrades. • Ability to pay utility bill online. • Collier County Landfill one of the most efficient and effective in the state. • Collier County Landfill will be opening Household Hazardous Waste collection in 3 months. • The department is working with FL Fish &Wildlife to inform/educate residents on trash & bears issue. • Gas—to-Energy plant a great success for Collier County—produces power for 2000+ homes. Growth Management Administrator Nick Casalanguida • Needed to get public trust and improve customer service—department is achieving this goal. • Paid a lot of debt off. • 951/175 project is running 6 months early and under budget—should be completed by the end of fall. • 951/41 intersection is the primary traffic spot to Marco -24-30 month long project-funded by state grants and impact fees. Scheduled to begin in 6 months and it will cause traffic delays. • East Trail project scheduled to begin fall—36 month long project. Operations Director Jamie French • Fresh Market coming to 951/41 • Outback Steakhouse & Buffalo Wild Wings also coming • Buffalo Wild Wings had some delays-difficult to take retail store and turn it in to a restaurant • Trying to reach out to business owners/potential businesses to inform and assist them (Re: permitting). • Major increase in permit activity—(i.e. Hacienda Lakes,Treviso Bay, Sabal Bay, Fiddlers Creek). • Building code comes from state—adopted state policy for legal sufficiency and updates. • More efficient permitting process and better customer service. • They are revisiting Land Development Code. Q&A • Looking at other options for parking at South Beach in Marco. COMMISSIONER FIALA CLOSING REMARKS Meeting ends 7:45 PM 161 1A ? D -IP(73 R 7 V.7 3 il FEB 0 5 Zu13 KrC tvBartle t, £X.ecalw /Aide 'Board/of County Co s'Office, fit............. . t vKri4ty, 1-29-2013 Plecu e'Cirtdutie.the.attached. v f orvna ti o-w, p ravCded.by theme FAAance. Depavtvne nt, a v the.vte ct(available') 3acrd Agenda/wvtder MI4c,eilaneowse Correspondence. Cedar liattunociv Cawavuknity DevelopmeatDi.strict(CDD) • Septevnber 10, 2012 Meetw M(,note' • Septeler 10, 2012 Meetin*flgenda. Fiala ✓ . Hiller Hen nintl a__._ • OctaUer 15, 2012 Meet xiCvt te' Coyle. v' ____._,�.__.. • October 15, 2012 Meet'n Agenda. ttc' ._u."7',,'. - NGYILG • November 12, 2012 Meet Mlvwste ' • Navemlrnr 12, 2012 Meetw Ag-ender. Thank,yaw. Aww 3ou.raLMivu,Lte.'Er 11ecords'Depavtvnent X-8406 Misc.Corns: Date: `i t 23l 1,S item#: IL.a.-- \ 1A-i• Copies to: 1. 61 1A7 CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AGENDA Monday Cedar Hammock Clubhouse September 10,2012 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard 9:00 a.m. Naples,Florida 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of the Minutes of the June 25,2012 Meeting 3. Old Business A. Discussion of Water Use Permit and Maintenance of Water Levels in the Irrigation Lake B. Review of Revised Structural Analysis of Bulkheads C. Review of Storm Water System Maintenance Efforts 4. New Business A. Review of Road Maintenance Proposals 5. Manager's Report A. Discussion of FY 2014 Budget Public Hearing Date B. Financial Report for July,2012 6. Attorney's Report 7. Engineer's Report 8. Supervisors Request 9. Audience Comments 10. Adjournment THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 8,2012 at 9:00 A.M. . 16I 1A ---1 ..,, ,,..-. : ,,.,,,,,,„- . ,„..„,„...,_.,7.-x.:'*.i.Z....'''.." 4.10.-k,.*-r„: • „.1." .; . ""-- ''. fit lir .4*.a I - ik .... : -`',1 PS ',:,..,.,, '-`,.- •,-, •.. ..'-'s.` ”.-.....,- -. Tit .''''..- --- • ..d-1'.m,3, ki ...4iikit,Sii.; •*i• ".1'tt*-,.`i:t;-, kiNt i' 40414.0: „:,41,...70.,_'k•" �.,;.c ,,%3 ...., ..i...,..„.„ .,„....,:..,:.:,,,,i.:. ti,........,1 ,.. ....4 ..... . ,, . miittio . , . .........1„*......:„...„ ,4.2.-4 zs °� : ' �` Ci Yom§ f* e.e app.. 4 '� ! c.'.�k '� 'a4 J4 �/' f ew ...''' '''''f'":611'7,;-1*:''-,1- '''''''''.7:'.1.N ' "''''''''''':5 tj: $ . ylr 4 , a,„fix` d.... `.`ip,. . j 9 . `.� * " .' r y � � ?,..7,,,:,—� l''' .4 ''' ' *4'''sfP; • i_ . .* I. ( £ n.r xs. irt7.`; ix,. ,m�' 4 �`r 79:„ 1..,,,,:' '''-',V.,4i:., Airti , -r ' *o r a ou ;-:,,,t.„-,..:.-..14:,-4.,:,. .... -,, . •,116:::,: _•:,.:-.-,.:::.,,!..•„:::••.,9?-i•4 .., .„ .,,, , sq Yom` ',"k';'� r '.r;t ,. 1 6 1 I. A 7 11, wr • lw . ----,4%.,c, 4.;::::,....„..... -......„..--...;0„ --„,„„,..., ,,, ......., t., I. P a:1..tto,,Ti ,,,,,,,,,.....-7,...„,,,,,, _ ,,,,..00,- ,i.7 b,. ), (,,..g' F lj # i A."'"01 . R•a=1TIir.0.% r=•-.. r:,•..,...0 -4.,,,,,, 1 i 1::.' :-';P i-'",.... 11 '.1 .• i 4 f , ,., ic.,. 4 ,.- ' ' i ? c:teut .,,,,, i it 4 1.; 1 t,„.,,,,..il --- ,;, i i i ,. ,,,,,,,„4,7,z1...ii.,,...,.....„ ,i: I t :• e e ' it ,',.! #.4t-,.,z4.0' .: $ .. -- C 1 e A ....!;,‘ ",",......), "''T,,,,,„,., i? -I 41 ft:..i..-..ffl- - -, ,. f ., '-‘,‘ t• 4 t- — ,., • if Wj7 . -i` ' 1 '1 ,.. /-,A ,:, ••- :'' - ' ' V ,4 •!, .4-5 '. i . ' _.„....=.17.,v.;44g,e`.." 0 r 4. I j e. '; Pi • 1 t'''' if 1 It t- tA 1 v. 9. .' . • b. I . , :, , 4,,,,,,,,,,..." -,' c , . : • .4.,• 1 ...' 4,,,„ g,:co--"-- •f,:,:, . , , . ,,, ,,,,A' 0,,,,,,.,,,k, t ,,... .-,e,,,e'''' f .. ,... :„ . . ., .. .,,,,,...„,„,,,,,...„...,...v., ,,,,, iiiA 1 '''a , :,„,,,,A f ..0-'•1*. il, 4, 4' tp ' A ir.- „ , , 1. d- . t7 .,..-----A:c W 4 , t'o.)4> ..1 4'74- 1 a ‘. , , . • ,_ .. , t IN, . • f t '• r...A • ti ‘, ‘ i., ,, II t. ''... "•,,s. ‘. ‘ 1 \ 71.J:a .k. ,L.,,,,,,:_tv ‘c, vik v,o,,,,,v,A, II: i, ,0011.4613,,,r0.--';'"*''''Yy ‘ '' ‘h' A 6= ,04=•- •'" .-4,4,0 I .?P'-'1'1 '& (4,„$,Arrld'r.,4,••''''''44' 44,"-'4,0'."747‘. 4 . k t i—v...,,,..„-i•eu '404,,,v , ,:i ..,,,.... .-.4.2 . l'it.4,.00.' — `', '1: '• '' ' \ , 1 er5:47%;iv,.-.A''''''''''?' :,:,-*!'" 4 • ,.. . , , ',. . , 1 ,, \ . ---- - .4/-- t. , ,, ,, ,..i -sr. i, , , , \ ., - '.'i 1 ',_- ", IS/ \ V; 4v`A" ,,,,....,====f• „..,.=^01'.','4.!''.77`t • '''. '.*, ' ''''' ., 4='1, . ,,,!.4"'-;,.:=.:'',,..,•••:'n•:.:., •.:••'.'. ;'•!:'' .,; • .. '' ' 4\-4,.. . i 1:411 ;194 '3"1L'''t ,,,„„,,,r' -.- ::: ,;;.;,;;:,.;, -..,,,,.',,,:,..2„`.,.,.,...,, . :c.. :,:, ••,.., :--,,,,,„ \ ,'.,. T....„„,,,,, k.4N, Li\ Al a! , ,,e''': .. ,:' ' ''::'-'::''-:;::-':::..:'.'..'n,',:..::':'::::'':::--:::: :. .:,"::: 'H.'.:':.:,'..-•:), f<tv't,, \t\\::: '''.`'.,-7.,'"h, 7:kth.„ 0 itk:.:'1' -.:„..,:',.:. : ..:''-,,,,„ 0:- ,., k•-• ,-,, 41 ' • . :.',.--;.,:',',..:.);,:!s!:,-,:::.•,2'.;.:,,..::::;.:',,,,::::;:'-!;-i: ::.,2,,,,'!:...::::•;,;:.-.'::':IL ,,,„ ,.:,. q,,, -..ti:‘:, :-.-....;..:-..,-.„, 3 /dir. it''''',., •* :. '::::.'',, ''.`:';',,:::°,,`., ..'.-:;4;1;,:`;::.';'%,';', ',::;„''.;,::4,),,:.', ',,,i;',...2,-.2•,:;::'..,;;::.'..-;., \ ',.: .4 )i.;;;':.;; Y-....:,',•:::;•.';'. ‘,.r=,. r7 ( 0Y ',.',.=;''.. -...; '.4.":..-:-:',1. ' . — ,, ' ,::""":''':1';'''.:(;:':';‘?0,,;::', '.-,•-,..::-.'i'';!...:'''.:;';':'.'„,',,,":.%::::,I.''',A, 's \, ' . ''... ',;..;;.'.'; ;'':::'...'• -;:.'..::',,„ 4' 'f ',:'. ::':;:::'','/...,'"::^::.,....•...:',:12..''.,:-'- . - :* !;':','H - .'.:.'':'p'71::,':,..:',.:,-'1:::`,.•.'.:..!:::.,''..:.,f....':,'",:"..:‘',.: ',::::::,;';,;:' `.., ”i, ‘..A.,..;!..",`,,..:`;,:::::',,.;:..;•''.';''.'-::.;-,:`::".: ::::,'1.-::::''s:4 1 '..':'''''''''.:,:'''''s::!,l'';'::: :::;•::'''''::::::: :',"''''''',.' -.' .- : ' ..'''''.::'z::,::,:;;;;;r.i.:',‘," -:::''''''''':'.—,'''':; : ,;•:'''...'::` ,:::::.2:::::"1:':::;:''',)::::::;:1-,: ".4''..1,,".:1%,;'N'',::"‘'et.!.:!..;,:;:','-‘,'1,,'„::.';',„ '.: '. ',,:, .,,:', ',,,..,',..':' ::`'.;.',:i;1.1',,..ii::;,:.,:,,,,,;'''..:',:':'''.::::''.,'../-.; -''.'-:-',. :',. ..;,'.1:,::,,.: ' ‹,—...[.•'::.; ' '',....';'''1'.'.':-';',..,;.` ,.,'•!. ..'!'..,1-;:.','..t. '::;/,'.'';`;' '4..:, 1.:;,,'-' ,:, ::'',' .....::',:‘ — ,..",-':'. - . .. .: -,,,:,'::'t::::- ":', ...A., ' : ' ': ' ,' ''', ' ,, : . '' ' —,' ' ....,, ,,:,,-:,!::::::,- -:::::,': , '..'• ...,f," '`': :. ",::',„ ',A, 'A,.: .' ' '' : :.- :::— ' • , ‘: A''''.:'''./I'''', ,,',V.:.'';. -1 . ' ;.;,', :— ..., ; . . ,:;:,:, :,. . ..: i''''.'2'.',.A. -: :.. '„ ', ' ,. ' ' ,',' ;'. :', ',;:,:'!,, '41A -':1:.:::'. ,..., - ., • :, A%.' : — : '' '''''''';'''''':' '''::::',..;::::',L:2:1 ...s....';.,'',.':.."',..,T,,;:.: "'-''"' :::':"','..'''' ''':'.;:•.,..... A -::',''....2.,:'• '','..:',;;,':..:.,:.:' .......:,_:,. -:'1.-.,' ..',,,,,,j:I: :-.A.:2.;',-,::'.'.,.,,:..'',:'.:- : , , . 161 1A7 • . , . . . . . • :• :,• . ,,,,: •.,4 . . :... . ,._ •-;,11 , • . .. .:., ..•,..... . •.-...,..:. . . . .. •• •. ..:•,..:.........,... . :„.,..,.., . . , . . .. . .,......, ...,•• :.•,.-..:.,-,.::........,..........-....,,:y.,.„:;‘,7,-iiii- ,,,,, . - . , - : .. . ,. ...:, ..4-... '1400,1 A�. { yl l•.c.:...:--.1•,:'..:.'..-. ♦r J % , '::),..',-.'.;,',1-':::.. +S -i F t n p u 1rY# ' i. ! E tit y " v «m, s• '"'''k , . t. - t t / r >rt a. t 1 S ti s / ttt t 11 to t •.> t i c a t' t/ ) 7 4. t ); � l• � t i sa.x.,�waaMwr sa.>ra ''' li t "1 f t ' ,..,�t•�eaa�ac4r•�✓.tw i s�A t ■ 1 t i 3 1 ' , «-:: tsate..eeww�+a... • r /� i • z p 4 yA t YiV II�4 . ;• ro,a` RTht,,y8 'Y r t. d , 9 a _ . . • . 1 6 1 1 A 7 4 , I'll A viip:, r. A --.I .' '11 N ' ' — , ., . , 4,tit,,,L , %Mr/ 1.v o -44:, , ,, ° • dera vovz„.04„,,,,, g4' d ° ,A0 f, . . ):, ..:,.', :0,„,,,,,,,A,„,.. ,,,,,,,4 0,,,,,wr.T.1:,.:2,10■,,,y,;4,0^441`,7 Vz,'.41'1'61".'",x1,,,, , r ...07- t 4""ri, 1 1' , t$333333$:$4"11" ,341§3434,33t.133W3.$3.33.3313$3333W-3.33$414'_, "'" , 1 1 1 N ...43,,,,,,,,,,,,,M,..0..4,1.,..171..........*AKIM.17.7'M i 4" 04,......17..... t ,i ; i t e; 4 0 t 1 okerai i 1 1 -i t ,... 41 11 p 1 1 , , , 4 1. 1 A 6,1 i 1 4 6.k. lii 6 . G 1 P; 66 . .i. 14 q '.., I 1 4 tr ; ....,, , *AU ;':'.,k .:'• . U wtszAve.0,1t4A-.:4" . ,.....- ,„,a...q.,,,, 4 ! atvws-,,,w,,A4f..,,,,,..*-^,,,N.., '''''' .1 )) ,t, if, i , 4,,,,.,, 0-f.:1 1 ta,,,,:k 44*kfili,,,,,..,,,,,,.^.„.w.,,,,,, ::::,,,,, '" 4,6,t, G'01 WI Iltrrtta..7-4^4,4 .4"*.- A. ';` A. 1 t t ft ii V:-;',,2, `,.5' i 4 1 ,i. ',. I %i il r; , 1 ''.! if ., $ 11 i i a ., 1 ft . .; I A )t 4 li 11 i yi i`r, 1 i $ ,I. i ...144/N 4..1........L."......,...4'","...W.. ...LH....# ......V,,,,,,,,I.,, ,.61•,,,*.........,•••1.,,,,n,'"'".."'""'''"" it.,1"4'-``Xaa.WAVINVANSAfMarefilla.C4#0?VargraPet74147;SAW9,-. 4.1A.V440,4=41V4,. .3".,,,,, i P444■1: ,•;• . : .. .-..'7, .■ .:...‘-'.V: ' . ' --'",...., ...- •...• • , • . .■'3l.•,..<4.V.6-.A,,.1.•7+4A'..A:'`' ''''''''' ..4'••• .•— 1 ‘.•',.....,''',C,.1.:-.:. . : ' ' •' • . ''''t.:Z.:,,,,k.,;4::41;,:c*N./...1 t, 1 . .,,,.,.,, , — „ % . ' ' '• '• , • 01, :‘. , 1.+2,14 3 ;344 1 $ ' ,3` 1 t-, K.' 41' r 5 ., ,r4r44, 4,,,..., ,..,,,,,,,,,,,, ..4‘14'W4*,';:014/44,14,134.3■84a.4001%.n‘4,4sing,c,..00-4.14.4,-'..',':`''''' '' ,„?„,,,,,, i I 1.....'.1 it V i $ I I i p 4 si 1 1 1 ..., t I i I i i J 11 ' 1 i 1 1 1 1 I I i 1 1 ; I 1 1 ij 161 1 Al James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING MARINE STRUCTURES August 17, 2012 Mr. Calvin Teague District Manager Severn Trent Services Via Email: cteague @severntrentms. com RE: Structural Inspection of Various Timber Bulkheads found at Cedar Hammock Dear Mr. Teague: On April 20, 2012, accompanied by Mr. Miles Jordan of this office, I made a limited visual structural inspection of the various bulkheads at Cedar Hammock Golf Course. Six sections of timber bulkhead were identified from a map provided. Bulkhead lines A and B are located adjacent to the Davis Boulevard entrance and bulkheads C, D, E and F are located adjacent the CR951 entranceway. A couple of bulkhead location deviations were noted. Bulkhead line C was indicated to be on the west side only of an island. However, it was found completely surrounding the island. A similar condition was noted at bulkhead D where the bulkhead to be inspected was indicated at its western alignment only. It was found with an eastern alignment as well. Both of these bulkhead alignments were added to those inspected. The only deviations from this occurred at portions of bulkhead lines D and E where, due to landscaped entry security features, several smaller sections of bulkhead were inaccessible. In addition, we noted that there was another similar bulkhead at the driving range which had not been identified for inspection. Bulkhead Detailing In general, all of the bulkheads were typically constructed. They consist of ten inch (10") butt measured piles spaced on about five foot (5' ) centers with two horizontal lines of support consisting of 3x8 timbers mounted in the weak direction. At the top there is a 3x8 horizontal cap piece and typically located 3' -10" from the top is a 3x8 wale line. Continuously placed 2x8 vertical sheet planks are supported by the cap piece, the wale piece and 2x8 vertical sheet planking penetration into the bottom several 309 Airport Road North Phone (239) 261-4567 Naples, Florida 34104 Fax (239) 263-0541 161 1AI inches. At the top of the wall is another 2x8 horizontally mounted cap piece with a layer of filter cloth anchored immediately beneath and draped down behind the 2x8 vertical sheet planks. Condition of Materials The general condition of the timbers was found to be good. None were found with any serious systematic deterioration from weather or insect attack. All of these timbers had originally been treated with CCA (Chromate Copper Arsenate Type C) . Most of this green treatment has leached out of the elements above the bottom of the bulkheads. However it is clear that up to this time this treatment has been very effective. Structural Element Condition In general the condition of all the various timber elements of the bulkhead appeared to be good. There were a few minor failures found scattered around but none of these could be considered systematic or serious. Examples include occasionally found broken or split 3x8 wales or broken vertical 2x8 sheet planks immediately above their penetration into the bottom. In general the seawalls were found straight and vertical with very few locations of minor rotation encountered. nfortunately none of the detailing of the dead man and tieback system was accessible and their condition is unknown. However, there was no visual evidence of any tieback system failure. Inspection Description The bulkheads were inspected in each case in a map clockwise direction. ocations were identified by the pile number from the beginning. At the pile locations indicated, measurements were taken of the adjacent pile spacing and retained earth height. Bulkhead Analysis No original construction drawings were available. The pile lengths are unknown. If drawings had been available, this analysis would have simply been a reoccupation of the original design calculations. However, without the pile lengths we have attempted to analyze the bulkhead for a prediction of the typical pile lengths. Other assumed parameters of analysis include soil properties which are based upon commonly encountered local soils and practice. Page 2 of 9 161 1A1 The passive width of the timber piles has been assumed at 12". The user defined pressures are applied for the width of the active earth pressures between each pile. If the as-found pile lengths are on the order of 14' we can say that this analysis closely reflects the as-built condition of the typical bulkhead. Subse uent to this inspection, the uestion was posed as to an estimate of remaining useful life for this system as inspected. As I mention above, the only current sign of systematic deterioration is the bleaching out of the exposed timbers. e would estimate approximately ten years plus before this system will express conditions which would prompt the consideration of complete replacement. Page of 9 161 1A1 B HEAD A Pile Number Pile Spacing Retained Height 3 4'-9" 4'-3" 7 4'-9" 6' -0" 11 5' -0" 6' -6" 15 5' -0" 6' -6" 19 5' -2" 6' -8" 24 4' -10" 6'-4" 27 5' -0" 6'-10" 31 5' -0" 6'-11" 34 BRO EN A E 5' -0" 6' -10" 38 4'-9" 6' -11" 43 5'-0" 6' -6" 48 5' -0" 6'-7" 53 5' -0" 6' -7" 57 5' -2" 7' -0" 59 BRO EN A E INACCESSIB E 62 4'-10" 7' -1" 65 5' -6" 7' -0" 69 5' -0" 7' -0" 72 5' -0" 7' -0" 75 5' -0" 6' -2" Page of 9 161 1 Al B HEAD B PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 2 4' -6" 4' -0" 4 4' -9" 6' -0" 6 4' -6" 6' -6" 9 5' -0" 6' -9" 12 5'-0" 7' -0" 15 5'-0" 7' -0" 19 5'-0" 7' -0" 23 5' -0" 7' -0" 27 S IGHT ROTATION 5' -0" 7' -0" 30 5' -0" 7' -0" 34 5' -0" 6' -9" 38 5' -0" 6'-6" 42 5' -0" 6' -9" 46 5' -0" 6' -8" 50 5' -0" 6' -10" 54 4' -6" 6' -8" 57 4' -9" 6' -4" Page of 9 • 161 1 A 1 B HEAD C PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 ADJACENT BRIDGE 4' -10" 6' -3" 4 5' -0" 6' -10" 8 5' -0" 6' -6" 12 5'-0" 6' -8" 16 5' -0" 6' -10" 20 5' -0" 6' -10" 25 5'-0" 6'-11" 30 5'-0" 6' -10" 35 5' -0" 6' -10" 40 5' -4" 6' -10" 45 5' -0" 6' -10" 50 5' -0" 7' -0" 55 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -1" 60 5' -0" 6' -9" 65 5'-0" 6' -8" 70 5,-0" 6' -8" 75 5'-2" 6' -7" 80 5' -0" 6' -6" 85 5' -0" 6' -8" 90 5' -0" 6' -10" 95 5' -0" 6' -4" 100 5'-0" 6' -8" 105 5' -0" 7' -1" 110 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 6' -8" Page of 9 • 161 IA1 1 B HEAD D PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 5' -0" 4' -6" 5 4' -6" 6' -0" 10 5' -0" 6' -2" 15 5' -0" 6' -8" 20 IC FAI RE 5'-0" 7' -0" 39 5' -0" 7' -0" 42 4' -6" 7' -4" 46 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -2" 47 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -l0" 50 5' -0" 7' -10" 55 5' -0" 7'-3" 60 5' -0" 6' -6" 65 5' -0" 7' -5" 70 5' -0" 6' -6" 75 5' -0" 6'-0" 80 5' -4" 5' -10" Page of 9 161 1AI • B HEAD E PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 5' -0" 2' -6" 5 5' -0" 5' -10" 10 5' -0" 6' -8" 15 5' -4" 6' -8" 20 5' -6" 5' -11" A REMAINING PI ES ARE INACCESSIB E Page of 9 161 1A1 B HEAD F PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 ADJACENT BRIDGE 4' -6" 7' -2" 5 5' -0" 6' -9" 10 5'-0" 7' -0" 15 5' -0" 7' -0" 20 5' -0" 7' -4" 25 5' -0" 7' -6" 30 4' -6" 8' -0" 35 5' -0" 6' -11" 40 5' -0" 6' -8" 45 5' -0" 6' -8" 50 5'-4" 6' -10" 55 5' -0" 6' -11" 60 4' -6" 6' -8" 65 5' -4" 6'-10" 70 5' -0" 6' -11" 75 5' -0" 7' -0" 80 5' -0" 6' -6" 85 5' -0" 6' -6" 90 5' -0" 6' -9" 95 5' -0" 6' -10" 100 5' -0" 7' -4" 105 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -10" 110 5'-0" 7' -2" Page 9 of 9 161 1A J) Cardno ENTRIX Shaping the Future MEMORANDUM To: Calvin Teague Cedar Hammock Community Development District From: Gary Susdorf Cardno ENTRIX Re: Cedar Hammock Water Use Permit 11-01711-W Date: September 7, 2012 Provided below are summaries of the status of the water use permitting, wetland monitoring, and water quality(SALT) monitoring for Cedar Hammock. Water Use Permit The modification application has been submitted and is currently undergoing review by South Florida Water Management District staff. The application is requesting a modification to reduce the number of withdrawal facilities from the currently permit seven wells to four wells and to add an allocation from the surface water system. It should be noted that there is no increase requested in the irrigated acreage or currently permitted allocations. The modification application requests that the allocation from the Lower Tamiami Aquifer be reduced and redistributed through a revised irrigation well network. The allocation requested from the surface water system is equal to the reduction in groundwater withdrawals. As has been previously noted, the eastern portion of the site is not the most appropriate location for additional wells due to the brackish water quality. The water quality in the western portion of the project makes that area of the site a better choice for water supply. Therefore, the water use permit modification requests that the four wells permitted in the western portion of the project (existing and operational wells 1 and 2, existing well 4, and proposed well 6) be retained and that the three permitted wells located in the eastern half of the project(existing wells 3 and 5, and proposed well 7) be eliminated from the permit. It should also be noted that well 6 will be repositioned from its currently proposed location on the north side of Lake 6 to the south side of the lake for better access to electrical supply. . 161 1 Al Wetland Monitoring The second wet season monitoring event was conducted yesterday, September 6, 2012.The wetland ecologists report that the wetlands all appear to be doing well. Three of the four transects were very wet, water levels seem to be fluctuating normally, and minimal nuisance/exotic species were observed. The second annual report will be prepared and submitted to the SFWMD next month. SALT Monitoring Water quality data is collected from the four SALT monitoring wells, from the two operational production wells, and from the irrigation supply lake. The chloride concentrations measured in the SALT monitor wells in the eastern portion of the site show that Lower Tamiami Aquifer groundwater quality is mildly brackish.The chloride concentrations fluctuate throughout the year and range from approximately 240 mg/I up to approximately 380 mg/I in both the upper and lower monitoring zones (drinking water quality standards classify water with chloride concentrations less than 250 mg/I as potable). The water quality in the western monitor wells, in the production wells, and in the irrigation supply lake are all fresh (chloride concentration less than 250 mg/I).Water quality in the western monitor wells has remained relatively stable with chloride concentrations generally less than 100 mg/I. The production well water quality fluctuates seasonally with chloride concentrations less than 200 mg/I. Lake water quality also fluctuates seasonally and varies dependant on the amount of recharge. Chloride concentrations in the lake are generally less than 100 mg/I during the wet season and increase to around 150 mg/I during the dry season. No noticeable water quality degradation has been noted during the SALT monitoring period of record. • • 161 1A7 Robert J Nocera Memo To: Cal Teague From:Bob Nocera Date:8/2/2012 Re: A Crack Report Cal, I have re-inspected the cracked areas previously reported and have attached enlarged versions of the map provided, showing four (4) areas requiring attention, The specific areas are shown with red line and/or yellow highlights on the attached maps.They include: • Building 3830 Sawgrass Way: The road pavement abutting the covered concrete parking area is cracked or broken along its entire length, approximately 190 lineal feet. • Buttonwood Way. The cracking on this road is located at or near the cul-de- sac. At the front there is one area about 12' in length and one area about 18' in length. In the circle there is a12' long crack and three areas of shorter cracks,2'to 4' in length. • Wax Myrtle Run: All of the cracks on this road are located continuously from the rear of the circle to an area approximately 40' in front of the circle, totaling approximately 179 lineal feet. • Cordgrass Way: There are two areas of cracking on this road. First, the right side from about 45' in front up to the right rear of the circle has continuous cracking over about 142 lineal feet. Then the left portion of the circle from the front to the left rear has cracking over about 81 lineal feet. Please refer the drawing and if you need further explanation,feel free to contact me. 1 . . . , . . . , - . 1A1 161 k/ f13_3 ,e , E k\ . k RR! \7 77 77 \§ d$ ® 2 .0 g# f�kf AL {) /- ��k\ 77 ; w / 2�)� k/ \} \} Kdk\ \ / \ / \ \ \f \ f J / \ ? a § 03 [ \ / \ 01 j j / al \ t2k k ° ° � I k - s % g 2 § to \ \ \ to k ( k ( 2 CC 2 a s & a to S 8 a & & 0) & 0 ft o t E E m k e k \ 0 ° § 1 E k 7 \ / } { ) 8 ) - 2 $ E m E o r ] / - e E - { -8 ) ] j k \ 2 tu , o ! \ } / ` 'a 1 g § 2 } 7 0 ) 8 ƒ 3 2 \ k I m f a. / § U ) a # . _ 0 j _ ( { - V \ k a - a $ E. k 'Cr) E k { , \ % . 0 ] a k / a k \ } } . . 161 1A1 SEVERN TRENT SERVICES Severn Trent Services 5911 Country Lakes Drive Fort Myers, FL 33905 United States September 5,2012 T +1 239 245-7118 F: +1 239 245-7120 www.severntrentms.com The Cedar Hammock CDD is seeking a contractor to repair 683 LF of road cracks throughout the Community,a removal and replacement of street area approximately 200 sq.feet all cracks are identified on the maps provided. If your firm is interested in bidding on the project the scope of services are described below: Clean out and repair the cracks in the road throughout the Cedar Hammock Community The quote should include the following: • Price per LF • Price per Sq Ft You may inspect the property at your convenience. The cracks are located at the following addresses: • 383o Sawgrass Way approximately 190 LF • Button Way near the cul-de-sac approximately 46 LF • Wax Myrtle Run from the rear of the circle to the front of the circle approximately 179 LF • Cordgrass Way right rear of circle approximately 187 LF • Cordgrass Way left portion of the circle approximately 81 LF All bids should include proof of insurance,references and be delivered to Severn Trent no later than September 7, 2012. Bids can be emailed,mailed or dropped off to: bcolaonseverntrentservices.Cora and cteague{8)s everntrentm s.com Severn Trent Management Service Attn:Barbara Colao 5911 Country Lakes Drive Fort Myers,FL 33905 T: +239-245-7118 ext 300 If you have any questions please feel free to ask. Thank you, Barbara Colao Page 1 of 1 Correspondence should be addressed to: Severn Trent Environmental Services,Inc. • 161 1A Cedar Hammock Community Development District Financial Report July 31,2012 Prepared by SEVERN TRENT SERVICES . - . - 161 1A1 Cedar Hammock Community Development District Table of Contents FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheet Page 1 Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances General Fund Page 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULES Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments Page 3 Cash and Investment Report Page 4 Suntrust Bank Reconciliation Page 5 Check Register&Invoice Copies Page 6-15 - 161 1A--7 Cedar Hammock Community Development District Financial Statements (Unaudited) July 31,2012 1 61 1 A Cedar Hammock Governmental Fund Community Development District Balance Sheet July 31,2012 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND ASSETS Cash In Bank $ 65,091 Investments: Certificates of Deposit-450 Days 25,000 Money Market Account 288,557 TOTAL ASSETS $ 378,648 Accounts Payable $ 12,151 TOTAL LIABILITIES 12,151 FUND BALANCES Assigned to: Reserved-Operating Reserves 19,073 Reserved- Roadways 121,375 Reserved- Bulkheads 40,000 Reserved- Bridges 9,477 Reserved - Lakes 14,627 Unassigned: 161,945 TOTAL FUND BALANCES $ 366,497 TOTAL LIABILITIES& FUND BALANCES $ 378,648 Prepared by: Report Date:8/27/2012 Severn Trent Management Services Page 1 . • . . . . - 16 .1 . _ 1A 1 CEDAR HAMMOCK General Funds-All Community Development District Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending July 31, 2012 ANNUAL ADOPTED YTD YTD VARIANCE($) JULY-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ACTUAL REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 3,000 $ 2,500 $ 908 $ (1,592) $ 90 6 ICJ- Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 279,653 279,653' 279,650 ,r (3) 700 1 d: Special Assmnts-Discounts (11,186) (11,186) (10,223) 963 21 TOTAL REVENUES 271,467 270,967 270,335 (632) 811 EXPENDITURES Administrative ProfServ-Engineering 2,000 1,667 11,684 (10,017) 925 ProfSery-Legal Services 2,000 1,667 295 1,372 - ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 31,533 26,279 26,278 1 2,628 ProfSery-Property Appraiser 4,195 4,195 2,097 2,098 - ProfSery-Special Assessment 2,718 2,718 2,718 - - Auditing Services 6,250 6,250 5,250 1,000 - Communication-Telephone 50 40 9 31 1 Postage and Freight 750 625 468 157 143 Insurance-General Liability 4,700 4,700 5,500 (800) - Printing and Binding 750 625 970 (345) 200 Legal Advertising 2,000 1,668 1,145 523 - Misc-Bank Charges 1,000 832 479 353 41 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 5,593 5,593 5,389 204 14 Office Supplies 250 210 298 (88) 44 Annual District Filing Fee 175 175 175 - - Total Administrative 63,964 57,244 62,755 (5,511) 3,996 Field �Z> ProfServ-Field Management - - 500 (500) - el iv Mgmt Services 3,000 2,500 410,500 (8,000) 1,200 Contracts-Water Quality 7,200 6,000 9,201`. (3,201) - R&M-Bridge 3,000 2,500 2,500 - R&M-Lake 3,000 2,500 7,750 (5,250) 7,750 R&M-Plant Replacement 5,000 4,167 - 4,167 - Misc-Contingency 3,303 2,753 10,523 (7,7/0) - Reserve-Bridges 47,000 47,000 18,197 28,803 5,978 Reserve-Bulkheads 47,000 47,000 - 47,000 - Reserve-Lakes 42,000 42,000 - 42,000 - Reserve-Roadways 47,000 47,000 23,625 23,375 - Total Field 207,503 203,420 80,296 123,124 14,928 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 271,467 260,664 143,051 117,613 18,924 Net change in fund balance $ - $ 10,303 $ 127,284 $ 116,981 $ (18,113) FUND BAL,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2011) 239,213 239,213 239,213 FUND BALANCE,ENDING $ 239,213 $ 249,516 $ 366,497 Report Date:8/27/2012 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services Page 2 16 ] 1A � Cedar Hammock Community Development District Supporting Schedules July 31,2012 . _ _ . _ 161 i A --4 Cedar Hammock Community Development District Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments (Collier County Tax Collector-Monthly Collection Distributions) For the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2012 Discount/ Gross Date Net Amount (Penalties) County Exp Amount Received Received Amount Amount Received Assessments Levied $279,650 Allocation % 100% 10/31/11 $ 1,137.53 $ 64.26 $ 23.21 $ 1,225.00 11/15/11 43,722.21 1,848.00 892.29 46,462.50 11/30/11 84,624.96 3,598.00 1,727.04 89,950.00 12/08/11 92,201.83 3,916.50 1,881.67 98,000.00 12/22/11 6,796.54 239.76 138.70 7,175.00 01/25/12 15,263.48 437.52 311.50 16,012.50 02/27/12 10,115.07 178.50 206.43 10,500.00 03/29/12 5,817.28 14.00 118.72 5,950.00 05/03/12 2,239.79 (10.50) 45.71 2,275.00 05/25/12 353.29 (10.50) 7.21 350.00 06/21/12 1,059.87 (31.50) 21.63 1,050.00 07/05/12 706.58 (21.00) 14.42 700.00 TOTAL $ 264,038.43 $ 10,223.04 $ 5,388.53 $ 279,650.00 %COLLECTED 100.00% TOTAL OUTSTANDING $ - Report Date:8/22/2012 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services Page 3 161. -1A Cedar Hammocks All Funds Community Development District Cash and Investment Report July 31,2012 General Fund Account Name Bank Name Investment Type Maturity Yield Balance Checking Account-Operating SunTrust Bank n/a n/a 0.10% $ 65,091 Certificate of Deposit 1st So Bank 18 month CD 8/6/13 0.75% 25,000 Money Market Account Florida Shores Public Funds MMA n/a 0.50% 288,557 Total $378,648 Report Date:8/27/2012 Prepared By: Severn Trent Management Services Page 4 • • - . . _ 161 1A � Cedar Hammock CDD Bank Reconciliation Bank Account No. 9995 Statement No. 07-12 Statement Date 07/31/12 G/L Balance($) 65391.35 Statement Balance 66391.35 G/L Balance 65,091.35 Outstanding Deposits 0.00 Positive Adjustments 0.00 ------------ Subtotal 06,091.35 Subtotal 65,09135 Outstanding Checks 1300.00 Negative Adjustments 0.00 Total Differences 0.00 Ending G/L Balance 65,091.35 Ending Balance 65,091.35 Difference 0.00 Posting Cleared Date Document Type Document No. Description Amount Amoun Difference Checks 06/26/12 Payment 1427 HOME DEPOT 12,219.94 12,219.94 0.00 06/26/12 Payment 1428 SEVERN TRENT ENVIRONMENTAL 2,717.10 2,717.10 0.00 07/10/12 Payment 1430 FEDEX 140.08 140.08 0.00 07/18/12 Payment 1431 CEDAR HAMMOCK GOLF&COUNTRY C 5,977.50 5,977.50 0.00 07/24/12 Payment 1432 CARDNO ENTRIX 600.00 600.00 0.00 Total Checks 21,654.62 21,654.62 0.00 Deposits 07/05/12 ACH CREDIT COLLIER CTY TAX COLL:ASSMNTS RCVD thru 6/28/1 706.58 706.58 0.00 07/20/12 ACH DEBIT SUNTRUST ANALYSIS FEE-JUNE 2012 -40.65 -40.65 0.00 07/31/12 ACH CREDIT SUNTRUST INTEREST INC-JULY 2012 6.04 6.04 0.00 Total Deposits 671.97 671.97 0.00 Outstanding Checks 06/26/12 Payment 1429 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT 1,000.00 0.00 1,000.00 Total Outstanding Checks 1,000.00 Page 5 _ 161 1A1 i _ Y C 0 0 0 O 41 I o 3 c6 N O N O N • O ta w on CD N O E Sr) (e" a d, v) # v E; M o o A E a "' 0 co) U) o ti n in N o o0 0 ° N 0 0 0 N o 0 J U r 0 LOU) to N F N U > a) co E 0) O) N N E Z .V..' .8n 0) It LL 2 G -o -0 on (0 N al cc) a Q cd N w J N N cu U (7 a. a. ¢ 12 G 0 0 W N N O O) (O N T' `1 4-1 m 0 N M n N N Cr CC CC O BM Q N D ... c FF 0 ¢ o CO I ▪ is n h o U) N W H ,Z Q O LLNZ 00 0 Cf, N LL lL a 0 a y Q, r n a w w w 2 ? E E 0 t° ti v UU O w N a > > U ,a oU 0 v es C I.• 4) cc a a / / o ill iv 7 CO 0 ° r to U1 G > a N m d o o 0o J Q F C! .t U ON i- F ¢ D o _ • r E 7 a a ? c=) 0 o o E E LL z C' O CO U) in O o co 4 N 0 > Cc) a ZO o c m m N o N N o 0 co J 0 Y IX I- 2 2 0 a1 0 T 0 A Y a U X_ F- Q W c = 0 co N ■ W w < O _ z WW 0 0 a 0 U. N N N N Co o a) r y 0 0 0 00 N V a1 ,C p (•1 .- .- co '- co N v 4 ; 00 ,- 0 '' 0 0 al W a It ' t Y Y Y o n Z W W °° oo w oo w Oo a) IL U' 0 0 0 CC Page 6 161 1A MINUTES OF MEETING CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock Community Development District was held on Monday, September 10, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. at Cedar Hammock Clubhouse, 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard,Naples,Florida. Present and constituting a quorum were: Frank Vaselewski Chairman(via phone) Thomas Cook Vice Chairman(via phone) Gary McClellan Assistant Secretary Ron Rellinger Assistant Secretary Bob Nocera Assistant Secretary Also present were: Cal Teague District Manager Sam Marshall District Engineer Paul Molhberg Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club Tony Santariga Master Association Liaison The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the September 10, 2012 Cedar Hammock Board of Supervisors Meeting. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call Mr. Teague called the meeting to order and called the roll. On MOTION by Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Nocera to allow Mr. Vaselewski and Mr. Cook to participate via phone was approved. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the June 25, 2012 Meeting • Page 9 - should state Golf Committee expects the golf project will fund any new bridges. 161 . 1A . - September 10,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD On MOTION by Mr. Nocera seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in favor, the minutes of the June 25, 2012 meeting were approved as amended. It was noted Mr. Rellinger needs to leave the meeting at 10:00 a.m. and the agenda items requiring Board action are being taken at this time. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS New Business A. Review of Road Maintenance Proposals • 683 LF of road cracks to be filled. o Two bids received for$1,650 and$2,360. • 200 SF alligator cracking. o Two bids received - one for cleaning, putting a tack coat down with an asphalt overlay at$1,000 and one for removal and replacement at$2,975. • Discussion followed on the road maintenance proposals. On MOTION by Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Nocera with all in favor, the road maintenance was approved at a cost not to exceed$4,650. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager's Report A. Discussion of FY 2014 Budget Public Hearing Date • Mr. Teague addressed the FY 2014 budget public hearing date. • Mr. McClellan noted the difficulty in obtaining a quorum for summer month meetings. On MOTION by Mr. Nocera seconded by Mr. Vaselewski with all in favor, setting the FY 2014 Budget Public Hearing for July 29, 2013 was approved. B. Financial Report for July,2012 • Assessments are 100%collected. 2 • • 16 .1 . 1A I September 10,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD • Mr. Teague noted they are over budget on a couple of items due to the water use study and Entrix. On MOTION by Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Nocera with all in favor,the July,2012 financials were accepted. THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Old Business A. Discussion of Water Use Permit and Maintenance of Water Levels in the Irrigation Lake • Mr. Marshall reviewed the letter provided by Mr. Susdorf of Entrix. o The application for the Water Use Permit was submitted to SFWMD and is under review. The permit should take about three months to be issued. o Discussion followed on the Water Use Permit. B. Review of Revised Structural Analysis of Bulkheads • Mr. Teague addressed the James E. Hirst structural analysis for the bulkheads and bridges. They have included the requested lifespan in the last paragraph on page three noting it is approximately ten years. • Discussion followed on the structural analysis report with it being noted there are minor repairs recommended. • The golf course reconstruction and what bulkheads and bridges will be affected by the heavy equipment was discussed. o Mr. Cook and Mr.Nocera will share the report with the Golf Committee. o The consensus of the Board is they are only willing to consider repairs at this point. C. Review of Storm Water System Maintenance Efforts • Mr. Teague reported the golf course personnel will address the issues of clearing and restoring rip rap as soon as the water levels recede. o The concern is for the repair of the outfall structures. 3 • . 161. 1Ai . September 10,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD o Mr. McClellan requested a more detailed map showing the individual points. Mr. Teague noted there is a detailed map; it is too large to include in the report. • Discussion followed on storm water system maintenance. o The HOA maintains it through the April 2008 maintenance agreement but if not maintained properly it is legally the responsibility of the CDD. • Mr. Molhberg addressed the maintenance his staff will he doing noting he will track the hours and submit an invoice. • Mr. Teague addressed a broken driveway approach which is typically the responsibility of the homeowner to repair but it appears it was undermined possibly by the storm water system. o A contractor will be inspecting the damaged area to determine the cause and how to repair. o Discussion followed on CDD responsibility if caused by storm water. SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report There being none,the next item followed. SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer's Report There being no further report,the next item followed. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors Request • Mr. Nocera requested the October 8 meeting be rescheduled and discussion followed. On MOTION by Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Nocera with all in favor, the October 8, 2012 meeting was rescheduled to October 15,2012 at 9:00 a.m. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment There being no further business, 4 161 1A September 10, 2012 Cedar Hammock CDD On MOTION by Mr. Rellinger seconded by Mr. Nocera with all in favor,the meeting was adjourned. NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Audience Comments • Mr. Santariga reported on the Master Association's efforts for traffic control and parking. o The Master Association has contracted to have 26 parking spaces installed between the driving range and tennis courts. o The Safety Committee is not recommending speed humps for speed control but will be requesting speed detection signs to help slow traffic. o Discussion followed on speeding and the possibility of a penalty/fine for speeders. Calvin eag e 'rank Vaselewski Secretary Chairman 5 161 1A —1 CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AGENDA Monday Cedar Hammock Clubhouse October 15,2012 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard 9:00 a.m. Naples,Florida 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of the Minutes of the September 10,2012 Meeting 3. Old Business A. Discussion of Water Use Permit and Maintenance of Water Levels in the Irrigation Lake B. Review of Revised Structural Analysis of Bulkheads C. Review of Storm Water System Maintenance Efforts D. Update on Road Maintenance Work 4. New Business A. Discussion of Bulkhead and Bridge Work Related to the Golf Course Renovation 5. Manager's Report A. Financial Report for August, 2012 6. Attorney's Report 7. Engineer's Report 8. Supervisors Request 9. Audience Comments 10. Adjournment THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 12,2012 at 9:00 A.M. 161 1A Naples Daily News Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication • Naples Daily News CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 210 N UNIVERSITY DR #702 CORAL SPRINGS FL 33071 REFERENCE: 056685 59699530 NOTICE OF MEETINGCED State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned authority, personall- appeared Lynn Schneider, says that she serves NOTICE OF FOEETING the Order Entry Data Specialist, of the Naple. : CEDABHAOPMENT STRIA• aEVEIAPMENi Ui giu Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Na Thgg'regular mA�tliigg•ofsYhe'Board of Sdpervnors of dhe:Cedar Hammock r Community DevelopmenttDIstnct will'•he held on Monday October 15„2012.at 9:00• in Collier County, Florida• distributed in Co a.m.atifil Cedar Hammock;Clubhouse,8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard,Naples; and Lee counties of Florida; that the attache. Flofda39112.; � �.The-:rsSeel;ing,Is•bpers�,to;tl(epbblle and will be,cgpdisged In accordapce with •the p[ovisions.of"F(orida:W'w•:f r,Community Devei'opment.Olstriitz �The�meetmg' copy of advertising was published in said ba.wntlnued td p'date,tike and ilea.to be"specified on the record at the rneetind.•A.copy of-the-the this meeting may be obtained fiom;eyern newspaper on dates listed. .T,ht.sravices,2lotv.I•Jnlvenity Drive,Suite 702,'Coral Springs,Florida 33071: C C "Thgfb.may,be-occasions when sone or mgte•SUpe nsefs will.;participate,by Affiant further says that the said Naples D. `'te r phohe.r Y P Ip;Accg dance With the.provisionq of the Amerkam,with.Disalinities Act;.ony News is a newspaper published at Naples, in s; :,p<it rlitragn;ti tbntactthea DistrdrAtiwgtmeMeCogsya, 5evem Collier County, Florida, nd that the said TrentServices.:at(954).7.53-5841. If you are hearing orapgech impaired;please r r -contact the•Florida Relay Semite at(800)955-8770 for aid:in'Contacting th'e:District newspaper has heretofore been continuously •' Offke at lea5t•0No2)days prloito the date of thehearing and meeting Each person who dadaTi to appeal any de0von made by the Board vh ire pect to day and has been entered as second class mail any inattey conndered�t the pseefing rs advjseb that person will:need a retor8of matter at the post office in Naples, in said the proceeding;and that seco7dinBly, the Personn.may needto.yeVciesfhat P P r verbatirli temrd pf:.the p[ocdeEings•Is made,mduding`t a testimon and ev dence Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 ye< '4p°nwhxh,uehsappeal stobebased Calvin Teague'' next preceding the first publication of the fe-pis inct Manager Not 0272q attached copy of advertisement; and affiant nhe7Oh2 further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. PUBLISHED ON: 10/08 AD SPACE: 48 LINE FILED ON: 10/08/12 � 40 Signature of Affiant JAI ` /;�%. � A r I Sworn to and Subscribed befd e me t ' . O day/Of S e-ti e 204 Personally known by me ` I / �A L �y o CAROL PAWU SKI , ? MY COMMISSION#EE 45538 ,•��i q EXPIRES:November28,2014 Bf tad BondadThru Pishard Insurance Agency Page 21 _ 161 1 ALtVc SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT `cos ,.,_,ti,. Regulation Division September 27,2012 Mr. Gary Susdorf Cardno ENTRIX 13700 Ben C. Pratt/Six Mile Cypress Pkwy. Suite 1 Fort Myers, FL 33912 Subject: Cedar Hammock Golf and Country Club Water Use Permit Application No. 120907-8, Permit No. 11-01711-W Collier County Dear Mr. Susdorf: District staff has reviewed the above-referenced application and has determined that additional information will be required to complete the application. In accordance with Rule 40E-1.603, Florida Administrative Code (FAC), the District is requesting the following information to complete the application and provide reasonable assurances for permit issuance: 1. The above application submitted on September 7, 2012 is incomplete. The cover letter that accompanied the application form, submitted for a modification to this project, indicated that supplemental materials would be submitted via ePermitting. Based on phone conversations conducted between the District and Mr. Gary Susdorf on 9/17/2012 and 9/26/2012, the District understands that this information is forthcoming. Please include all materials required for a complete permit application in accordance with 40E-20.101 F.A.C. (Content of General Water Use Permit Applications), and the Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications within the South Florida Water Management District(BOR) in this supplemental material. 2. Please confirm that the recharge wells, required under the existing permit, were installed and provide an updated Table A as required. 3. Upon submission and review of the documentation requested in Comment No. 1, District staff will request a site inspection to observe the condition of the wetland systems due to a historic lack of groundwater recharge. In addition, Staff will assess the viability of any proposed increase in surface water withdrawals with respect to future wetland impacts. Included with your response, please submit historic hydrologic data collected at the site, and data collected as part of the current Wetland Monitoring Program for the project. Please provide analysis of this data and any conclusions that DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS: 3301 Gun Club Road,West Palm Beach,Florida 33406 • (561)6868800 • (800)432-2045 Mailing Address: PO BOX 24680 West Palm Beach FL,33416-4680 LOWER WEST COAST SERVICE CENTER:2301 McGregor Boulevard,Fort Myers,FL 33901 •(239)338-2929• (800)248-1201 OKEECHOBEE SERVICE CENTER: 205 North Parrott Aveoue,Suite 201,Okeechobee,FL 34972 a(863)4625260 • (800)250.4200 ORLANDO SERVICE CENTER: 1707 Orlando Central Parkway,Suite 200,Orlando FL 32809 •(407)858.6100 • (800)250.4250 161 1A -7 Mr. Gary Susdorf Cedar Hammock Golf and Country Club,Application No. 120907-8 September 27, 2012 Page 2 can be drawn as well as appropriate assurances(i.e. modeling)that the proposed withdrawals and any subsequent hydrologic alterations will not cause harm to wetlands (Section 3.3 BOR). Based on the results of the requested modeling and site inspection a reduction or elimination of wetland impacts from water table drawdown may be necessary and/or additional mitigation/monitoring may be required. Please contact Karyn Allman,the environmental reviewer, at(239)338-2929 ext. 7626 to arrange a field inspection and to discuss the Project. Depending on the results of the site inspection and review of the submitted documentation, additional information may be necessary in accordance with Sections 3 and 4 of the BOR. Please submit responses to this letter electronically on the District's ePermitting website (www.sfwmd.ciov/epermitting) to expedite administrative processing of the application and to save paper. Please note that an electronic response may be submitted even if the original application was submitted via hard copy. Information regarding the District's comprehensive ePermitting program is enclosed. Alternatively, please provide one (1) original and one (1) copy of the requested information, clearly labeled with the application number, to the Lower West Coast Regional Service Center. In accordance with Rule 40E-1.603(1)(b) FAC, if the requested information is not received within 90 days of the date of this letter, this application may be processed for denial, if not withdrawn by the applicant. If additional time is needed, please contact one of the District staff members below with a request for an extension before the 90 day period ends. The District recommends scheduling a meeting with the assigned staff members to resolve the above questions and concerns prior to submitting a response. Please contact either Michael Taylor PG, at (239) 338-2929 ext. 7745, or via email at mtaylor @sfwmd.gov; or Karyn Allman at (239) 338-2929 ext. 7626, or via email at kallman @sfwmd.gov to assist with questions. Si, - y, . .._. . • Y J. Hurst, P.E. Supervisor South Florida Water Management District DH/mt Enclosure cc: Cedar Hammock Community Development District . . 161 1A1 James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING MARINE STRUCTURES August 17, 2012 Mr. Calvin Teague District Manager Severn Trent Services Via Email: cteague @severntrentms.com RE: Structural Inspection of Various Timber Bulkheads found at Cedar Hammock Dear Mr. Teague: On April 20, 2012, accompanied by Mr. Miles Jordan of this office, I made a limited visual structural inspection of the various bulkheads at Cedar Hammock Golf Course. Six sections of timber bulkhead were identified from a map provided. Bulkhead lines A and B are located adjacent to the Davis Boulevard entrance and bulkheads C, D, E and F are located adjacent the CR951 entranceway. A couple of bulkhead location deviations were noted. Bulkhead line C was indicated to be on the west side only of an island. However, it was found completely surrounding the island. A similar condition was noted at bulkhead D where the bulkhead to be inspected was indicated at its western alignment only. It was found with an eastern alignment as well. Both of these bulkhead alignments were added to those inspected. The only deviations from this occurred at portions of bulkhead lines D and E where, due to landscaped entry security features, several smaller sections of bulkhead were inaccessible. In addition, we noted that there was another similar bulkhead at the driving range which had not been identified for inspection. Bulkhead Detailing . In general, all of the bulkheads were typically constructed. They consist of ten inch (10") butt measured piles spaced on about five foot (5' ) centers with two horizontal lines of support consisting of 3x8 timbers mounted in the weak direction. At the top there is a 3x8 horizontal cap piece and typically located 3' -10" from the top is a 3x8 wale line. Continuously placed 2x8 vertical sheet planks are supported by the cap piece, the wale piece and 2x8 vertical sheet planking penetration into the bottom several 309 Airport Road North Phone (239) 261-4567 Naples, Florida 34104 Fax (239) 263-0541 161 1A1 inches. At the top of the wall is another 2x8 horizontally mounted cap piece with a layer of filter cloth anchored immediately beneath and draped down behind the 2x8 vertical sheet planks. Condition of Materials The general condition of the timbers was found to be good. None were found with any serious systematic deterioration from weather or insect attack. All of these timbers had originally been treated with CCA (Chromate Copper Arsenate Type C) . Most of this green treatment has leached out of the elements above the bottom of the bulkheads. However it is clear that up to this time this treatment has been very effective. Structural Element Condition In general the condition of all the various timber elements of the bulkhead appeared to be good. There were a few minor failures found scattered around but none of these could be considered systematic or serious. Examples include occasionally found broken or split 3x8 wales or broken vertical 2x8 sheet planks immediately above their penetration into the bottom. In general the seawalls were found straight and vertical with very few locations of minor rotation encountered. nfortunately none of the detailing of the dead man and tieback system was accessible and their condition is unknown. However, there was no visual evidence of any tieback system failure. Inspection Description The bulkheads were inspected in each case in a map clockwise direction. ocations were identified by the pile number from the beginning. At the pile locations indicated, measurements were taken of the adjacent pile spacing and retained earth height. Bulkhead Analysis No original construction drawings were available. The pile lengths are unknown. If drawings had been available, this analysis would have simply been a reoccupation of the original design calculations. However, without the pile lengths we have attempted to analyze the bulkhead for a prediction of the typical pile lengths. Other assumed parameters of analysis include soil properties which are based upon commonly encountered local soils and practice. Page 2 of 9 161 1AI The passive width of the timber piles has been assumed at 12". The user defined pressures are applied for the width of the active earth pressures between each pile. If the as-found pile lengths are on the order of 14' we can say that this analysis closely reflects the as-built condition of the typical bulkhead. Subse uent to this inspection, the uestion was posed as to an estimate of remaining useful life for this system as inspected. As I mention above, the only current sign of systematic deterioration is the bleaching out of the exposed timbers. e would estimate approximately ten years plus before this system will express conditions which would prompt the consideration of complete replacement. Page of 9 161 1A 1' B HEAD A Pile Number Pile Spacing Retained Height 3 4'-9" 4'-3" 7 4'-9" 6' -0" 11 5' -0" 6' -6" 15 5' -0" 6' -6" 19 5' -2" 6' -8" 24 4' -10" 6' -4" 27 5' -0" 6' -10" 31 5' -0" 6'-11" 34 BRO EN A E 5' -0" 6' -10" 38 4' -9" 6' -11" 43 5' -0" 6' -6" 48 5' -0" 53 5' -0" 6' -7" • 57 5' -2" 7' -0" 59 BRO EN A E INACCESSIB E 62 4' -10" 7' -1" . 65 5' 0" 7' -0" 69 5' -0" 7' -0" 72 5' -0" 7' -0" 75 5' -0" 6' -2" Page of 9 1 -6 _ I 1A B HEAD B PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 2 4' -6" 4' -0" 4 4' -9" 6' -0" 6 4' -6" 6' -6" 9 5' -0" 6' -9" 12 5' -0" 7' -0" 15 5' -0" 7' -0" 19 5' -0" 7' -0" 23 5' -0" 7'-0" 27 S IGHT ROTATION 5' -0" 7' -0" 30 5' -0" 7' -0" 34 5' -0" 6' -9" 38 5' -0" 6' -6" 42 5' -0" 6' -9" 46 5' -0" 6' -8" 50 5' -0" 6' -10" 54 4' -6" 6' -8" 57 4' -9" 6' -4" Page of 9 . _ . . _ . . _ 1. 61 1A --A- B HEAD C PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 ADJACENT BRIDGE 4' -10" 6' -3" 4 5' -0" 6' -10" 8 5' -0" 6' -6" 12 5' -0" 6' -8" 16 5' -0" 6' -10" 20 5' -0" 6' -10" 25 5' -0" 6' -11" 30 5' -0" 6' -10" 35 ' 5' -0" 6' -10" 40 5' -4" 6' -10" 45 5' -0" 6' -10" 50 5' -0" 7' -0" 55 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -1" 60 5' -0" 6' -9" 65 5' -0" 6' -8" 70 5' -0" 6' -8" 75 5' -2" 6' -7" 80 5' -0" 6' -6" 85 5' -0" 6' -8" 90 5' -0" 6' -10" 95 5' -0" 6' -4" 100 5' -0" 6' -8" 105 5' -0" 7' -1" 110 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 6'-8" • Page of 9 1 .61 1A 1 . . B HEAD D PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 5'-0" 4' -6" 5 4' -6" 6' -0" 10 5' -0" 6'-2" 15 5' -0" 6' -8" 20 IC FAI RE 5' -0" 7' -0" 39 5' -0" 7' -0" 42 4' -6" 7' -4" 46 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -2" 47 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -10" 50 5' -0" 7' -10" 55 5' -0" 7' -3" 60 5' -0" 6' -6" 65 5' -0" 7' -5" 70 5' -0" 6' -6" 75 5'-0" 6' -0" 80 5' -4" 5' -10" Page of 9 16 .1 1A B HEAD E PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 5' -0" 2' -6" 5 5' -0" 5' -l0" 10 5' -0" 6' -8" 15 5' -4" 6' -8" 20 5' -6" 5' -11" A REMAINING PI ES ARE INACCESSIB E Page of 9 _ 161 1A �. B HEAD F PI E N MBER PI E SPACING RETAINED HEIGHT 1 ADJACENT BRIDGE 4' -6" 7' -2" 5 5' -0" 6' -9" 10 5' -0" 7' -0" 15 5' -0" 7' -0" 20 5' -0" 7' -4" 25 5' -0" 7' -6" 30 4' -6" 8' -0" 35 5' -0" 6' -11" 40 5' -0" 6' -8„ 45 5' -0" 6' -8" 50 5' -4" 6' -10" 55 5' -0" 6/ -11" 60 4' -6" 6' -8" 65 5' -4" 6' -10" 70 5' -0" 6' -11" 75 5' -0" 7' -0" 80 5' -0" 6' -6" 85 5' -0" 6' -6" 90 5' -0" 6' -9" 95 5' -0" 6' -10" 100 5' -0" 7' -4" 105 ADJACENT BRIDGE 5' -0" 7' -10" 110 5' -0" 7' -2" Page 9 of 9 • 161 1A .� . . _1. A-1 Professional Asphalt, LLC in frith trod All Things Art.Paxcsihlc Asphalt Paving & Sealing • Lic. # 25637 P.O.Box 368295 Bonita Springs,FL 34136 (239)682-8687 al proasphaltt yahoo.com Bid Proposal/Contract Date: 09/10/2012 Submitted to: Barbara Colao 245-7118 ext.300 Email: bcolao at?.severntrentservices.com Project: Cedar Hammock Road Cracks Address: See below,Naples Clean out and repair the cracks in the road throughout the Cedar Hammock Community at the below addresses using Polymer Rubberized Asphalt Emulsion Crack Filler and Prime&Compacted Asphalt where needed. • 3830 Sawgrass Way 190 LF • Button Way near the cul-de-sac approximately 46 LF • Wax Myrtle Run from the rear of the circle to the front of the circle approximately 179 LF • Cordgrass Way right rear of circle approximately 187 LF • Cordgrass Way left portion of the circle approximately 81 LF $1.67 per linear foot for a total of$1,140.61 Saw cut and replace additional 10'x 20'area or 200 sq.ft.Total$875. Grand Total: $2,015.61 Payment Terms: Due upon completion. This contractor makes no claim the handicap stalls will meet all local,state and federal ADA requirements. Areas being sealed will be inaccessible for 24 hours.Barricades will be provided to close off areas being seal coated. This contractor will not be responsible for persons entering the area and tracking sealer or paint,for damage to property or injury to persons entering the area. Permit fees,procurement fees and any additional work required by the permit will be an extra cost to the customer. Contractor is not liable for any damage to underground pipe that may be caused by compaction. Contractor is not responsible for tire scuffing or marking of the fresh asphalt within the first twelve months after placement due to the curing process. Due to existing grades and conditions,we will not be responsible for 100%drainage of surface water following resurfacing. Contractor is not responsible for grass growing through new asphalt,overlays,or asphalts applied on existing lime rock. Contractor is not responsible for existing cracks in old asphalt or concrete that may transfer through new overlay. All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workman like manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders,and will become an extra charge over and fees incurred because of the collection process will be paid by"Client"including but not limited to court costs and all reasonable attorneys'fees. This contract includes an asphalt price escalation clause in the case where asphalt raw material costs increase prior to contract completion. Contractor reserves the right to increase this contract price accordingly. UPON ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL THIS BECOMES A BINDING CONTRACT The above price,specifications,and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified.Payment will be made as outlined above. Signature ', /! Date %" ��7 (Ac =• c- may be sent via email to alproasphalt@yahoo.com) Page 1 of 1 161 1A Cedar Hammock Community Development District Financial Report August 31,2012 Prepared by SEVERN TRENT 161 1A � Cedar Hammock Community Development District Table of Contents FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ' Balance Sheet Page 1 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances General Fund Page 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULES Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments Page 3 Cash and Investment Report Page 4 Suntrust Bank Reconciliation Page 5 Check Register&Invoice Copies Page 6-13 161 1A "1- • Cedar Hammock Community Development District Financial Statements (Unaudited) August 31,2012 161 1A - Cedar Hammock Governmental Fund Community Development District Balance Sheet August 31,2012 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND ASSETS Cash In Bank $ 45,304 Investments: Certificates of Deposit-450 Days 25,000 Money Market Account 288,806 TOTAL ASSETS $ 359,110 Accounts Payable $ - ITOTAL LIABILITIES - 1 FUND BALANCES Assigned to: Reserved -Operating Reserves 19,073 Reserved- Roadways 121,375 Reserved- Bulkheads 36,445 Reserved - Bridges 9,477 Reserved - Lakes 14,627 Unassigned: 158,113 (TOTAL FUND BALANCES $ 359,110 TOTAL LIABILITIES& FUND BALANCES $ 359,110 Prepared by: Report Date:9/26/2012 Severn Trent Management Services Page 1 161 . iA 1 Cedar Hammock General Fund Community Development District Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending August 31, 2012 ANNUAL ADOPTED YTD YTD VARIANCE($) AUG-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ACTUAL REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 3,000 $ 2,750 $ 1,164 $ (1,586) $ 254 Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 279,653 279,653 279,650 (3) - Special Assmnts-Discounts (11,186) (11,186) (10,223) 963 - TOTAL REVENUES 271,467 271,217 270,591 (626) 254 EXPENDITURES Administrative ProfServ-Engineering 2,000 1,834 11,684 (9,850) - ProfServ-Legal Services 2,000 1,834 295 1,539 - ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 31,533 28,906 28,905 1 2,628 ProfServ-Property Appraiser 4,195 4,195 2,097 2,098 - ProfSery-Special Assessment 2,718 2,718 2,718 - - Auditing Services 6,250 6,250 5,250 1,000 - Communication-Telephone 50 45 10 35 1 Postage and Freight 750 687 472 215 4 Insurance-General Liability 4,700 4,700 5,500 (800) - Printing and Binding 750 687 1,111 (424) 140 Legal Advertising 2,000 1,834 1,145 689 - Misc-Bank Charges 1,000 916 519 397 40 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 5,593 5,593 5,389 204 - Office Supplies 250 230 298 (68) - Annual District Filing Fee 175 175 175 - - Total Administrative 63,964 60,604 65,568 (4,964) 2,813 Field ProfSery-Field Management - - 500 (500) - Contracts-W ater Mgmt Services 3,000 2,750 11,775 (9,025) 1,275 Contracts-Water Quality 7,200 6,600 9,201 (2,601) - R&M-Bridge 3,000 2,750 - 2,750 - R&M-Lake 3,000 2,750 7,750 (5,000) - R&M-Plant Replacement 5,000 4,584 - 4,584 - Misc-Contingency 3,303 3,028 10,523 (7,495) - Reserve-Bridges 47,000 47,000 18,197 28,803 - Reserve-Bulkheads 47,000 47,000 3,555 43,445 3,555 Reserve-Lakes 42,000 42,000 - 42,000 - Reserve-Roadways 47,000 47,000 23,625 23,375 - Total Field 207,503 205,462 85,126 120,336 4,830 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 271,467 266,066 150,694 115,372 7,643 Net change in fund balance $ - $ 5,151 $ 119,897 $ 114,746 $ (7,389) FUND BAL,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2011) 239,213 239,213 239,213 FUND BALANCE,ENDING $ 239,213 $ 244,364 $ 359,110 Prepared by: • • • . Page 2• Report Date:9/26/2012 • Severn Trent Management Services 161 1AI Cedar Hammock Community Development District Supporting Schedules August 31,2012 _ 161 1A 1 Cedar Hammock Community Development District Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments (Collier County Tax Collector-Monthly Collection Distributions) For the Fiscal Year Ending September 30,2012 Discount/ Gross Date Net Amount (Penalties) County Exp Amount Received Received Amount Amount Received Assessments Levied $279,650 Allocation% 100% 10/31/11 $ 1,137.53 $ 64.26 $ 23.21 $ 1,225.00 11/15/11 43,722.21 1,848.00 892.29 46,462.50 11/30/11 84,624.96 3,598.00 1,727.04 89,950.00 12/08/11 92,201.83 3,916.50 1,881.67 98,000.00 12/22/11 6,796.54 239.76 138.70 7,175.00 01/25/12 15,263.48 437.52 311.50 16,012.50 02/27/12 10,115.07 178.50 206.43 10,500.00 03/29/12 5,817.28 14.00 118.72 5,950.00 . 05/03/12 2,239.79 (10.50) 45.71 2,275.00 05/25/12 353.29 (10.50) 7.21 350.00 06/21/12 1,059.87 (31.50) 21.63 1,050.00 07/05/12 706.58 (21.00) 14.42 700.00 TOTAL $ 264,038.43 $ 10,223.04 $ 5,388.53 $ 279,650.00 %COLLECTED 100.00% TOTAL OUTSTANDING $ - Report Date: 8/22/2012 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services Page 3 161 1A Cedar Hammocks All Funds Community Development District Cash and Investment Report August 31,2012 !General Fund Account Name Bank Name Investment Type Maturity Yield Balance Checking Account-Operating SunTrust Bank n/a n/a 0.10% $ 45,304 Certificate of Deposit 1st So Bank 18 month CD 8/6/13 0.75% 25,000 Money Market Account Florida Shores Public Funds MMA n/a 0.50% 288,806 Total $359,110 Report Date:9/26/2012 Prepared By: Severn Trent Management Services Page 4 161 1i- Cedar Hammock CDD Bank Reconciliation Bank Account No. 9995 Statement No. 08-12 Statement Date 08/31/12 G/L Balance($) 45,303.69 Statement Balance 53,906.49 G/L Balance 45,303.69 Outstanding Deposits 0.00 Positive Adjustments 0.00 Subtotal 53,906.49 Subtotal 45,303.69 Outstanding Checks 8,602.80 Negative Adjustments . 0.00 Total Differences 0.00 , Ending G/L Balance 45,303.69 Ending Balance 45,303.69 Difference 0.00 posting Cleared Date Document Type Document No. Description Amount Amount Difference Checks 08/03/12 Payment 1433 SEVERN TRENT ENVIRONMENTAL 2,875.57 2,875.57 0.00 08/20/12 Payment 1434 BZ CONSULTING LLC 7,750.00 7,750.00 0.00 08/23/12 Payment 1435 BANKS ENGINEERING INC 925.00 925.00 0.00 08/23/12 Payment 1436 CARDNO ENTRIX 600.00 600.00 0.00 Total Checks 12,150.57 12,150.57 0.00 Deposits 08/20/12 ACH DEBIT SUNTRUST ANALYSIS FEE-JULY 2012 -39.57 -39.57 0.00 08/31/12 ACH CREDIT SUNTRUST INTEREST INC-AUG 2012 5.28 5.28 0.00 Total Deposits -34.29 -34.29 0.00 Outstanding Checks 06/26/12 Payment 1429 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT 1,000.00 0.00 1,000.00 08/24/12 Payment 1437 JAMES E.HIRST&ASSOCIATES,INC 3,555.00 0.00 3,555.00 08/29/12 Payment 1438 CARDNO ENTRIX 1,275.00 0.00 1,275.00 08/29/12 Payment 1439 SEVERN TRENT ENVIRONMENTAL 2,772.80 0.00 2,772.80 Total Outstanding Checks 8,602.80 Page 5 161 1A * n h V O CO D• lh O O O O O n O V COD 00 eC Y t n N-C 0 y. O I(j O t� O Ni NA r V (] O pj M V = N co O K vi N n IL) N O N r N 49 7 CA N- I!) O CD N Ci 03 n A a 6 ID U) N CV rz cc 69 D n r 49 fill 49 N NY N O V 4 w 000000 co O O O O 0 pp O p O 9 8C N M M M M M CD LA CA Nn O M M M R ii � C� { Nn N �7 I(C�77 N It�)) I•. IL, u) L. IL) u) IL) IA ID F� 0. N 0 0 0 0 VN' .M- .5. iS rV N CO O O y a 08n oo 0 o_ moo, 0 _000 CD IM � N 10 U) Ill NMA N1) NA M Im g I N 6 O H C C U w a) CO C p) O O)t E « t 6 CO -� m.5 d tT 9 m E m m m a°)) E • E m °) c u -0 I- 'a N Ala) a) pC� C W m IT -4 8 C - C g C J G U C C C O Ca O Cn O W y W Y as m O H EmomE1 «s 2 z m E °)id (p O U Q 2 .0 c c CC d 3 5 •C c7 00- CL _ � 2 5 c Zao E E y m a ro E CA 8 - S a cc ZO UJ V ¢ z 'C o 3 y,I W z cc N In C.1 2 � V JJ M A E. G 0 j N aN OD F U Q LL N Z Z K CC w E Q, aZ v "' w �- • N a �. ` a•3 0 N ` `cs a) t a) 0 C m W n m 2 y 0 a. O y C)) y cn m W 3 J m W O. g)4-- c wwwwww {o Z ¢ = wwww a I. d C d LL Li. W W LL LL W H I- LI W LL W ~~ F d !0 v •� ZZZZZZ a O o v Z 5 5ZZ = O0. N wwwwww 1- a mmmm CO = 222222 on 0 CC d V y " wwwwww 2 W W W W W V = r ¢ ac7 ¢ a ¢ Q o ? __CO ? c7Q) CJ () 0 ¢ Z F < 2 CO E u. ¢ a ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ U n S n. 0 < < a W Y v 2 2 2 2 N• N N N N N E _ O N N_ N N_ 0 n h Ir r r r Z CD U 0. .• ct Z m F. '5 NN- t•-• N- N- N r r N.- P- 2 p ' p p m r N co N co CD CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N 0 p NN N N N N CO CO CO MCI) CO U N N CA y M f/) C W W W W W W N m m m co W W W W F- F- I- F F F O N 0 M O F F N- I-- 0) N CA CA O) ( O r O CD Cq V) C)) Z• ~Z ~Z 5 rZ rz CO Z Z Z Z W W W W W W F W W W W z z z z z z z z z Z U z a wwwwwwI J a a WZ 'U >Zz - '•I O- < W W W W Z z W z Z Z 2 2 91 I- 2 Z W W W W N 11.1 LU ((�� W W p� ¢ ¢ CC CC CC CC CC CC J 2 FF F- N N N N N N p Z 2 2 2 2 Z Z W 0 W 0 Z Z Z ZZ N XCCQaCCCCC CO Z CO Z CCG: aa DC X W W W W W W 8 Y O W 0 W W W W N » » » 2 CC M CC » » W W W W W W N < < < Q W W W W ca in U) Ca C/) CA CI) CO Ca U -J 0 CO CA CO CO CV „ A C6 Y C�NJ CN �N N C+N N N N N N N N N N N N (] U 0 O Q O O O m v O)' N N N N 0 0 a0 0 0 0 0 0 O co co co 0 0 0 co a) GC U z CO U co N. a0 0) .- r . Page 6 161 1A MINUTES OF MEETING CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock Community Development District was held on Monday, October 15, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. at Cedar Hammock Clubhouse, 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard,Naples,Florida. Present and constituting a quorum were: Frank Vaselewski Chairman Thomas Cook Vice Chairman Gary McClellan Assistant Secretary Ron Rellinger Assistant Secretary Bob Nocera Assistant Secretary Also present were: Cal Teague District Manager Tony Santariga Master Association Liaison The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the October 15, 2012 Cedar Hammock Board of Supervisors Meeting. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call Mr.Teague called the meeting to order and called the roll. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the September 10,2012 Meeting There being no comments, On MOTION by Mr. Nocera seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in favor, the minutes of the September 10, 2012 meeting were approved. THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Old Business A. Discussion of Water Use Permit and Maintenance of Water Levels in the Irrigation Lake • Mr. Teague addressed the letter received from SFWMD requesting additional information noting this is typical. Mr. Susdorf is preparing the response letter. 161 1A1- October 15,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD o Discussion followed on the SFWMD letter regarding the Water Use Permit. B. Review of Revised Structural Analysis of Bulkheads • Mr.Nocera addressed the bulkhead analysis. o With regard to the golf course renovations, Mr. Read said it will most likely be done every ten years which will coincide with the projected bulkhead repairs/replacements. o For the repairs on the bulkheads Mr. Read suggested they might want to communicate with the golf course contractor and if possible use the same contractor to do any bulkhead renovations. • Mr. Cook reported he spoke with Mr. Buddy White, who provided the original estimate for the Golf Committee. He told him about the engineering report and asked if they were missing anything and Mr. White confirmed they are not. o Mr. Cook noted the HOA capital budget for golf course renovations is being built based on the ten year renovation period. • Mr. Cook noted with the Board's agreement they will go to the October 30 Golf Committee meeting to address the CDD's findings and reiterate if the Master Association wants to add or delete a bridge it is strictly within their budget and would not come back to the CDD. • Discussion followed on future golf course renovations and planning by the CDD for the bulkheads. o Mr. Rellinger inquired which bulkheads are directly affected by the golf course. o Mr. Cook responded the two biggest are the islands - Green#4 and the #5 Tee and discussion followed. • Discussion ensued regarding using the golf course contractor for bulkhead repairs with it being noted the cost falls well below bid thresholds. o The Board requested a detailed list of repairs needed for the bulkhead. Mr. Teague will get quotes for the inspection. 2 161 1A 'I- October 15,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD C. Review of Storm Water System Maintenance Efforts • Mr. Teague noted Mr. Read will complete the repairs to the drainage structures as soon as the water recedes; after this is completed, if funds remain, the interconnects will be cleaned. D. Update on Road Maintenance Work • Mr. Teague reported the work will cost $2,015.61 and will begin on Wednesday, October 17th • Discussion followed on the repairs and residents accessing their homes. Mr. Cook will prepare a message to those residents affected by the road repair work. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS New Business A. Discussion of Bulkhead and Bridge Work Related to the Golf Course This item previously addressed. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager's Report A. Financial Report for August,2012 There being no comments or questions, On MOTION by Mr. Vaselewski seconded by Mr.Nocera with all in favor,the August,2012 financials were accepted. • Mr. Teague addressed the General Election noting the next meeting is November 12t" and the new supervisors will not take their seats until the second Tuesday following the election which is November 20th. • Mr. Teague addressed public records requests and discussion followed. • Mr. Teague outlined the invoices. • Mr. Cook addressed the road striping with it being noted the CDD did not pay for this. • Mr. Teague noted the Maintenance Agreement with the IIOA comes up for renewal in April and if there are to be any changes a 90-day notice is required. o Discussion followed on the Maintenance Agreement and the $2,500 expenditure threshold. The Board did not express a need for any changes. 3 161 1A October 15,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD • Discussion followed on a driveway repair with it being noted there was no drainage issue involved. • The responsibility for driveways was addressed with it being noted the associations differ on whether it is the homeowner or HOA responsibility. SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report There being no report,the next item followed. SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer's Report There being no report,the next item followed. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors Request • Mr.Nocera asked Mr. Santariga about the recommended traffic control options to manage speeding. o Mr. Santariga noted the Safety Committee is recommending solar speed monitoring signs. o Discussion followed on the speeding issue on Cedar Hammock Boulevard and safety issues on Sawgrass. • Mr. Santariga addressed issues they are having with permitting from Collier County for the parking lot/spaces at the Club and discussion followed with regard to the safety issue with the parking on both sides of Cedar Hammock Boulevard by the Club. NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Audience Comments There being none,the next item followed. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment There being no further business, On MOTION by Mr. Vaselewski seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in favor,the meeting was adjourned. Ca'vin Teagu ° rank Vaselewski Secretary Chairman 4 161 1A \ CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AGENDA Monday Cedar Hammock Clubhouse November 12,2012 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard 9:00 a.m. Naples,Florida 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of the Minutes of the October 15,2012 Meeting 3. Old Business A. Discussion of Water Use Permit and Maintenance of Water Levels in the Irrigation Lake B. Review of Revised Structural Analysis of Bulkheads C. Review of Storm Water System Maintenance Efforts D. Update on Road Maintenance Work 4. New Business 5. Manager's Report A. Financial Report for September,2012 6. Attorney's Report 7. Engineer's Report 8. Supervisors Request 9. Audience Comments 10. Adjournment THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 10,2012 at 9:00 A.M. 161 1A Cardno ENTRIX Shaping the Future MEMORANDUM To Calvin Teague Cedar Hammock Community Development District From Gary Susdorf Cardno ENTRIX Re: Cedar Hammock Water Use Permit 11-01711-W Date: November 6, 2012 Provided below are summaries of the status of the water use permitting, wetland monitoring, and water quality (SALT) monitoring for Cedar Hammock. Water Use Permit The South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD) has issued a request for additional information (RAI) regarding the submitted modification application.We are preparing the response and will be submitting the required data to SFWMD shortly. One item requested by the SFWMD's RAI is that a confirmation be submitted of the installation of the recharge wells required under the existing permit. It should be noted that the specific purpose of the modification request is to reduce the total number of irrigation wells. A thorough discussion will be provided in our RAI response outlining the rationale (including the submission of technical data)for our request to reduce the number of irrigation supply wells. Another item requested by SFWMD is that a site inspection be conducted by their staff to observe the condition of the wetlands. Additionally,wetland monitoring data was also requested. The wetland data has been submitted as part of the on-going wetland monitoring program and the inspection was conducted by District staff. Refer to the following wetland monitoring section for further discussion. The impact assessment of proposed withdrawals from the revised irrigation well system on the surface water and shallow groundwater,relative to wetlands, will be addressed in the RAI response. 161 1A 1 Wetland Monitoring The report of the second wet season monitoring event, conducted in September, has been submitted to the SFWMD. The SFWMD has issued a Notice of Inspection, Environmental letter dated October 31, 2012(attached) based on their review of the submitted wetland monitoring data and a site inspection conducted by District staff.The inspection letter noted that the project is currently in compliance with the environmental special conditions of the permit.The letter also noted that the exotic maintenance program is successful and recognizes the efforts of Cedar Hammock. SALT Monitoring Water quality data collected from the two western monitoring wells located near the production wells,from the two operational production wells, and from the irrigation supply lake are exhibiting stable water quality trends. The previous chloride concentrations measured in the two eastern monitor wells have shown that Lower Tamiami Aquifer groundwater quality is mildly brackish (chloride concentrations greater than 250 mg/I). However, the chloride concentrations in the two eastern wells measured during the October sampling event had chloride concentrations less than 250 mg/I.The freshening in these wells may be a function of end of the wet-season conditions and may also represent effects of either on-site or off-site Lower Tamiami Aquifer water usage.We will continue to review and assess water quality trends in the aquifer. It should be noted that no apparent water quality degradation has been identified within the surface water or groundwater throughout the SALT monitoring period of record. X61 1AI James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING MARINE STRUCTURES November 9, 2012 Cedar Hammock CDD c/o Mr. Calvin Teague, District Manager Severn Trent Services Via Email: cteague @severntrentms.com RE: Follow-up. Engineering Services in Application to the Six Bulkhead Sections at Cedar Hammock Dear Mr. Teague: Mr. Sam Marshal at Banks Engineering suggested we provide you with a proposal for certain follow-up services in regards to the general condition of the six timber bulkhead sections at Cedar Hammock. These previously identified conditions are not systematic, substantially individual and in general are of a lesser nature. Nevertheless, it is correcting the worst conditions encountered and as a result, raising the general continued life expectations of the six bulkhead sections. Because each of these conditions is individual, we would propose the following method. Once a repair contractor has been selected, we would propose a joint survey in which we review and identify with the repair contractor these isolated conditions of distress with the thought of approaching them on a fix what you find basis. We propose that the particular locations be agreed upon after survey and initially handled on a simple replacement basis. If during our surveys it becomes clear that there are conditions which require more attention to detailing then we would agree to provide these at that time. The general condition of the six bulkhead sections system is outlined in our final condition report. If new-conditions or unanticipated condition interactions are encountered we would propose to consult with Banks Engineering as well as District representatives in order to determine what approach is best. Again, it would appear that this process might entail as many as three general re-inspections of the bulkhead system as well as Cedar Hammock Bulkhead Proposal 309 Airport Road North • Mercantile Plaza .NovemberPiKne261-4567 Naples,Florida 34104 Fax(239)263-0541 161 1 A intermediate and final reports. Based upon this general scope of work we estimate the following costs: Three Inspections $3, 900.00 Final Condition Status Report With Any Required Supporting Analysis $ 700.00 This estimate is based upon the following hourly rates : JAMES E. HIRST & ASSOCIATES, INC. HOURLY RATES Principal/Structural Engineer $180.00 Inspector/Technician/Cad Operator Clerical $ '60':~00 GENERAL CONDITIONS In the event payment for an invoice is not made within 60 days, James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. reserves the right to notify the Client of our intention to stop work on the project. Additionally, we reserve the right to charge interest at the rate of 18% per annum for unpaid invoices after 60 days. In the event the Client requests termination of the work prior to completion, we reserve the right to complete such analysis and records as are necessary to place our files in order and, where deemed necessary by us to protect our professional responsibilities, to complete a report on the work performed to date. A termination charge to cover the cost thereof in an amount not to exceed 30% of all charges incurred. up to the date of the stoppage of work may, at the discretion of James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. , be applicable. In the even the Client makes a claim against James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. , at law or otherwise, for any alleged error, omission or other act arising out of the performance of our professional services, and the Client fails to prove such claim, then the Client shall pay all costs, including attorney=s fees, incurred by James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. in defending itself against the claim. The only warranty or guarantee made by James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. , in connection with the services performed hereunder is that we will use that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by 'reputable members of our profession practicing in the same or similar • Cedar Hammock Bulkhead Proposal November 9, 2012 161 1A 1- . . • . ,. . ::: . locality. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made or intended by our Proposal for Consulting Services, by our furnishing oraj or'=written reports, or by furnishing drawings • and specifications. The outlined Scope of Services will be accomplished in a timely, workmanlike and professional manner by employees of James E. Hirst & Associates, Inc. at the hourly rates outlined. If, during the execution of the work, we are required to stop operation as a result of changes in the Scope of Work, such as requests by the Client, the Owner or the requirements of third parties, additional charges will be applicable. James E.. Hirst & Associates, Inc maintaina;;OolgWvCompensation and Employers= Liability Insurance in conforms ' e` wi'th state statute. In addition, we maintain Comprehensive General Liability Insurance with limits of $1,000, 000.00. Certificates of Insurance can be provided evidencing such coverage. Cost of the above coverage is included in our quoted fees. Additional insurance or increased limits of liability are available upon written request for an additional: charge. Again we are pleased to provide this proposal. If there are any clarifications I can make or further questions I can answer, please do not hesitate to call me. Very T 1\ Yo.r •, a ,- E. Hirst, '. . , SECB • JEH/jm Accepted by Date For Owner Cedar Hammock. Bulkhead Proposal November 9, 2012 161 1A Cedar Hammock Community Development District Financial Report September 30,2012 Prepared by SEVERN TRENT ,..,; SERVICES _ 1611A 7 . _Cedar Hammock Community Development District Table of Contents FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheet Page 1 Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances General Fund Page 2 SUPPORTING SCHEDULES Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments Page 3 Cash and Investment Report Page 4 Suntrust Bank Reconciliation Page 5 Check Register&Invoice Copies(NONE) 161 1 1 A Cedar Hammock Governmental Fund Community Development District Balance Sheet September 30,2012 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND ASSETS Cash In Bank $ 45,269 Investments: Certificates of Deposit-450 Days 25,125 Money Market Account 288,917 TOTAL ASSETS $ 359,311 LIABILITIES Accounts Payable $ 5,435 Accrued Expenses 3,543 'TOTAL LIABILITIES 8,978 I FUND BALANCES Assigned to: Reserved-Operating Reserves 19,073 .t/ Reserved - Roadways 168,375 Reserved - Bulkheads 78,245 Reserved- Bridges 33,180 Reserved - Lakes 51,460 Unassigned: 'TOTAL FUND BALANCES $ 350,333 TOTAL LIABILITIES& FUND BALANCES $ 359,311 Prepared by: Report Date:11/1/2012 Severn Trent Management Services Page 1 161 1A 1 Cedar Hammock Community Development District Financial Statements (Unaudited) September 30,2012 161 1A Cedar Hammock Governmental Fund Community Development District Balance Sheet September 30,2012 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND ASSETS Cash In Bank $ 45,269 Investments: Certificates of Deposit-450 Days 25,125 Money Market Account 288,917 TOTAL ASSETS $ 359,311 LIABILITIES Accounts Payable $ 5,435 Accrued Expenses 3,543 TOTAL LIABILITIES 8,978 FUND BALANCES Assigned to: Reserved-Operating Reserves 19,073 Reserved- Roadways 168,375 Reserved - Bulkheads 78,245 Reserved - Bridges 33,180 Reserved - Lakes 51,460 Unassigned: - TOTAL FUND BALANCES $ 350,333 I TOTAL LIABILITIES& FUND BALANCES $ 359,311 Prepared by Report Date:11/1/2012 Severn Trent Management Services Page 1 ---1- 161 1A CEDAR HAMMOCK General Fund Community Development District Statement of Revenues,Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances For the Period Ending September 30,2012 ANNUAL ADOPTED YTD YTD VARIANCE($) SEPT-12 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL FAV(UNFAV) ACTUAL REVENUES Interest-Investments $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 1,403 $ (1,597) $ 240 Special Assmnts-Tax Collector 279,653 279,653 279,650 (3) - Special Assmnts-Discounts (11,186) (11,186) (10,223) 963 - TOTAL REVENUES 271,467 271,467 270,830 (637) 240 EXPENDITURES Administrative ProfServ-Engineering 2,000 2,000 13,719 (11,719) 2,035 ProfServ-Legal Services 2,000 2,000 295 1,705 - ProfServ-Mgmt Consulting Sery 31,533 31,533 31,533 - 2,628 ProfServ-Property Appraiser 4,195 4,195 2,097 2,098 - ProfServ-Special Assessment 2,718 2,718 2,718 - - Auditing Services 6,250 6,250 5,250 1,000 - Communication-Telephone 50 50 11 39 2 Postage and Freight 750 750 530 220 58 Insurance-General Liability 4,700 4,700 5,500 (B00) - Printing and Binding 750 750 1,180 (430) 69 Legal Advertising 2,000 2,000 1,145 855 - Misc-Bank Charges 1,000 1,000 595 405 77 Misc-Assessmnt Collection Cost 5,593 5,593 5,389 204 - Office Supplies 250 250 342 (92) 44 Annual District Filing Fee 175 175 175 - - Total Administrative 63,964 63,964 70,479 (6,515) 4,913 Field ProfServ-Field Management - - 500 (500) - Contracts-Water Mgml Services 3,000 3,000 11,100 (8,100) 600 Contracts-Water Quality 7,200 7,200 13,981 (6,781) 3,505 R&M-Bridge 3,000 3,000 - 3,000 - R&M-Lake 3,000 3,000 7,750 (4,750) - R&M-Plant Replacement 5,000 5,000 - 5,000 - Misc-Contingency 3,303 3,303 10,523 (7,220) - Reserve-Bridges 47,000 47,000 18,197 28,803 - Reserve-Bulkheads 47,000 47,000 3,555 43,445 - Reserve-Lakes 42,000 42,000 - 42,000 - Reserve-Roadways 47,000 47,000 23,625 23,375 - Total Field 207,503 207,503 89,231 118,272 4,105 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 271,467 271,467 159,710 111,757 9,018 Net change in fund balance $ - $ - $ 111,120 $ 111,120 $ (8,778) FUND BAL,BEGINNING(OCT 1,2011) 239,213 239,213 239,213 FUND BALANCE,ENDING $ 239,213 $ 239,213 $ 350,333 Report Date:11/1/2012 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services Page 2 161 1A Cedar Hammock Community Development District Supporting Schedules September 30,2012 161 1A -1- Cedar Hammock Community Development District Non-Ad Valorem Special Assessments (Collier County Tax Collector-Monthly Collection Distributions) For the Fiscal Year Ending September 30,2012 Discount/ Gross Date Net Amount (Penalties) County Exp Amount Received Received Amount Amount Received Assessments Levied $279,650 Allocation % 100% 10/31/11 $ 1,137.53 $ 64.26 $ 23.21 $ 1,225.00 11/15/11 43,722.21 1,848.00 892.29 46,462.50 11/30/11 84,624.96 3,598.00 1,727.04 89,950.00 12/08/11 92,201.83 3,916.50 1,881.67 98,000.00 12/22/11 6,796.54 239.76 138.70 7,175.00 01/25/12 15,263.48 437.52 311.50 16,012.50 02/27/12 10,115.07 178.50 206.43 10,500.00 03/29/12 5,817.28 14.00 118.72 5,950.00 05/03/12 2,239.79 (10.50) 45.71 2,275.00 05/25/12 353.29 (10.50) 7.21 350.00 06/21/12 1,059.87 (31.50) 21.63 1,050.00 07/05/12 706.58 (21.00) 14.42 700.00 TOTAL $ 264,038.43 $ 10,223.04 $ 5,388.53 $ 279,650.00 COLLECTED 100.00% TOTAL OUTSTANDING $ - I Report Date: 10/30/2012 Prepared by: Severn Trent Management Services Page 3 161 1A Cedar Hammock All Funds Community Development District Cash and Investment Report September 30,2012 !General Fund Account Name Bank Name Investment Type Maturity Yield Balance Checking Account-Operating SunTrust Bank n/a n/a 0.10% $ 45,269 Certificate of Deposit 1st So Bank 18 month CD 8/6/13 0.75% 25,125 Money Market Account Florida Shores Public Funds MMA n/a 0.50% 288,917 Total $359,311 Report Date: 10/30/2012 Prepared By: Severn Trent Management Services Page 4 161 1A1 Cedar Hammock CDD Bank Reconciliation Bank Account No. 9995 Statement No. 09-12 Statement Date 09/30/12 G/L Balance($) 45,269.29 Statement Balance 45,269.29 G/L Balance 45,269.29 Outstanding Deposits 0.00 Positive Adjustments 0.00 —` ---- Subtotal 45,269.29 Subtotal 45,269.29 Outstanding Checks 0.00 Negative Adjustments 0.00 Total Differences 0.00 Ending G/L Balance 45,269.29 Ending Balance 45,269.29 Difference 0.00 Posting Cleared Date Document Type Document No. Description Amount Amount Difference Checks 06/26/12 Payment 1429 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 08/24/12 Payment 1437 JAMES E.HIRST&ASSOCIATES,INC 3,555.00 3,555.00 0.00 08/29/12 Payment 1438 CARDNO ENTRIX 1,275.00 1,275.00 0.00 08/29/12 Payment 1439 SEVERN TRENT ENVIRONMENTAL 2,772.80 2,772.80 0.00 Total Checks 8,602.80 8,602.80 0.00 Deposits 09/21/12 ACH DEBIT SUNTRUST ANALYSIS FEE-AUG 2012 -38.28 -38.28 0.00 09/30/12 ACH CREDIT SUNTRUST INTEREST INC-SEPT 2012 3.88 3.88 0.00 Total Deposits -34.40 -34.40 0.00 Page 5 161 1A FACILITIES OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND CEDAR HAMMOCK GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC., THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this - day of �, J.; ,2008, by and between the CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, an independent special district established pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, hereinafter referred to as"District", and the CEDAR HAMMOCK GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, hereinafter referred to as the"Association". WHEREAS,the District has the authority to exercise powers to finance, fund, plan, establish, acquire, construct or reconstruct enlarge or extend, equip, operate, and maintain systems and facilities for roads, water management, water supply, sewer, street lights, security and parks and recreational facilities, among other powers, including all powers necessary, convenient, incidental or proper in connection with any of the powers, duties, or purposes authorized by Chapter 190?Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, for ease of administration, potential cost savings, and the benefits of full time on site operation and maintenance purposes,the District desires to contract with the Association to operate and maintain certain of the District's systems and facilities; and WHEREAS,the Association desires to operate and maintain the District's systems and facilities; (Intentionally left blank) 161 1A1 NOW, THEREFORE,the District and the Association agree as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated by reference herein. 2. The District will retain full responsibility for major capita! renewal and replacement for: A. Lakes. B. Preserves. C. Roads, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters, including asphalted streets and parking areas in the Terrace and Veranda areas, but excluding the Clubhouse parking area and maintenance building parking area. D. Bridges and Bulkheads. E. Storm water drainage systems, F. Street signage. G. Collier Blvd&Davis Blvd entrances. H. Irrigation pump house,(excluding pumps, motors) and irrigation distribution system from the pump house to the point of metering on each individual property. I. Tracts F4 & F5 sanitary sewer and potable water lines until determination is made regarding acceptance by Collier County. (Intentionally left blank) • 161 1A7 3. The Association shall operate and maintain the following systems and facilities of the District at a minimum compliance with all applicable statutes, ordinances, administrative rules and regulations, and permit requirements: A. Lakes. B. Preserves. C. Sidewalks,curbs and gutters. D. Bridges and Bulkheads. E. Street signage. F. Collier Blvd&Davis Blvd entrances. G. Irrigation pump house and wells. 4. All other operation and maintenance responsibilities for the District's systems and facilities not otherwise addressed in this Agreement shall remain the sole responsibility of the District including roads and parking areas(excluding Clubhouse parking). 5. District shall pay the Association the sum of ten ($10.00) Dollars per year for the performance of the operation and maintenance responsibilities set forth in this Agreement. 6. The term of this Agreement is for a period of five years commencing on April 22, 2008 and shall be automatically renewed for additional one year periods after April 22, 2013, unless either party provides the other party at least 90 days written notice of its intent not to renew. District may cancel this Agreement at any time for any reason in its sole discretion upon providing at least 90 days written notice to the Association of its intent to cancel this Agreement. • 161 1A 7.Association shall be solely responsible for the staffing,budgeting,financing,billing and collection of fees, assessments,service charges,etc.necessary to perform the operation and maintenance responsibilities set forth in this Agreement. However,any capital expenditure by the Association of $2500 or more in carrying out the responsibilities of this Agreement will require approval of the District and reimbursement of the Association by the District. 8.Association shall procure at its expense and at all times include the District as an additional named insured on comprehensive liability insurance policies to cover the operation and maintenance responsibilities set forth in this Agreement. Comprehensive liability insurance shall be in amounts determined by District Manager.Association,in consideration of Ten($10.00)Dollars,the receipt and sufficiency of which is accepted,through the signing of this document,shall hold harmless,defend and indemnify District,its agents and employees,from all claims,suites and actions(whether for negligence or otherwise),including daims for attorneys fees and all costs of litigation,and judgments of any name and description,including administrative fines and costs imposed by regulatory agencies,arising out of or incidental to the performance of this Agreement or work performed there under.This Section does not pertain to any incident arising from the sole negligence of District (Intentionaly left blank) • _�� 1 6 1 1 A 9. This Agreement may only be amended in wr ing executed by both parties. 10. This Agreement shall become effective on April 22, 2008. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this document the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CEDAR UN|TY DEygLOPq,RT DISTRICT Calvin Teague -- ~ p�rank Vooe(ews� Secretary Chairman ATTEST: CEDAR HAMMOCK GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB, INC - !'' _,, ^ � , � c ( k^,/ , ?` � ~ /-� / Tom Read Edward Carter General President 161 1A1 MINUTES OF MEETING CEDAR HAMMOCK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Cedar Hammock Community Development District was held on Monday,November 12,2012 at 9:00 a.m. at Cedar Hammock Clubhouse, 8660 Cedar Hammock Boulevard,Naples, Florida. Present and constituting a quorum were: Frank Vaselewski Chairman Thomas Cook Vice Chairman Gary McClellan Assistant Secretary Ron Rellinger Assistant Secretary Bob Nocera Assistant Secretary Also present were: Cal Teague District Manager Sam Marshall District Engineer Tom Read Cedar Hammock Golf&Country Club Tony Santariga Master Association Liaison Larry Minamyer Supervisor Elect The following is a summary of the discussions and actions taken at the November 12, 2012 Cedar Hammock Board of Supervisors Meeting. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS Roll Call Mr. Teague called the meeting to order and called the roll. SECOND ORDER OF BUSINESS Approval of the Minutes of the October 15,2012 Meeting There being no comments, On MOTION by Mr. McClellan seconded by Mr. Cook with all in favor,the minutes of the October 15,2012 meeting were approved. • Mr. Cook acknowledged today as Mr. Rellinger's last meeting after serving eight years on the CDD Board. THIRD ORDER OF BUSINESS Old Business 161 1AI November 12,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD A. Discussion of Water Use Permit and Maintenance of Water Levels in the Irrigation Lake • Mr. Teague addressed the Water Use Permit (WUP) and the summary provided by Mr. Susdorf. o Entrix will be submitting the RIA to SFWMD. • Mr. Marshall noted the field inspection requested by SFWMD is routine. • Discussion followed on the WUP. B. Review of Revised Structural Analysis of Bulkheads • Mr. Marshall reported on his conversation with Mr. Jim Hirst, Structural Engineer,regarding the repairs to the bulkheads. o There are no systematic failures;the repairs needed are individual areas. o It is proposed Mr. Hirst be the Structural Engineer for the Board. He will conduct field inspections along with the contractor and provide input whcn repairs are proposed. He will also conduct inspections when repairs are done. • Mr. Cook noted the Board believes there are bulkhead repairs which need to be addressed immediately and some which can be done when there is a golf course shutdown. o Mr. Marshall will ask Mr. Hirst to provide a detailed list of work to include when he recommends the repair be done with an estimated cost. • Mr. Nocera addressed coordination with the Golf Course Committee and if nothing is done by 2014, the golf course contractor should be considered as the party who will do any repair work on the bulkheads for the District. o Discussion followed on bulkhead repairs. o Mr. Read noted he will be happy to extend the golf course shutdown to help get repairs done if any immediate repairs require more than the typical eight days. • Mr. Rellinger suggested Mr. Hirst provide photos along with the list of repairs. C. Review of Storm Water System Maintenance Efforts 2 161 1AI . . - November 12,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD • Mr. Teague reported the Club will be doing the maintenance when the water levels recede. D. Update on Road Maintenance Work • Mr. Teague noted he does not see much road work being done. • Mr. McClellan noted the specific spots on the circle have been done. • Mr.Nocera met with the contractor at the various sites. • The Board expressed concern if the contractor understood the work to be performed. Discussion followed on the road maintenance. • Mr. Read will arrange for Mr. Nocera to meet with the parking lot contractor/superintendent for an opinion on the areas identified for repairs and a proposal for doing the repairs correctly. o Mr. Marshall addressed if Board will tell the current contractor the repairs were not done properly and that he will have a chance to fix his work. The Board needs to consider how they will closeout with the current contractor. o Mr. Teague will speak with the contractor today. FOURTH ORDER OF BUSINESS New Business • Mr. Teague reported on a discussion regarding the preserve acreage and what is committed; what is not committed; and permit requirements. o Mr. Teague and Mr. Marshall reviewed the permit and provided copies along with the mitigation plan and CH. o There are three conservation areas - C3 is 3.62 acres; C2 is 91.32 acres; and Cl is 40.86 acres. The requirement through the permit for preserve area is 94.77 acres which includes an upland wetlands area. o Mr. Marshall addressed permitting for preserves. • Discussion followed on whether there is District property available for improvement opportunities. o Mr. Cook noted the Golf Course Committee is discussing a variety of actions-increase lakes,fill in lakes,move golf cart paths. 3 . 161 1A1 November 12,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD o Mr. Teague stated if it is minor deviations and you work with SFWMD you might have a chance. • Discussion followed on possible golf course changes and SFWMD permit modifications. The information from staff will be given to the Golf Course Engineer but there will be no CDD expenditures going forward. o Mr. Marshall noted any changes to lakes require an application to SFWMD. o Mr. Teague explained the lakes are a stormwater retention system. o Mr. Read reported he and Mr. Mohlberg were named the golf course project managers by the Master Association. When Kip Schultz was hired they checked to make sure he had significant experience in South Florida with county government and SFWMD permitting. FIFTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Manager's Report A. Financial Report for September,2012 • Mr.Teague outlined the financial report. On MOTION by Mr. Cook seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in favor,the September,2012 financials were accepted. • Mr. Teague addressed reserves noting Fund Balance is$350,000. • Discussion followed on reserves, allocations and the Capital Planning spreadsheet. • A review of the Capital Plan will be placed on the agenda for the December meeting. SIXTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Attorney's Report There being no report,the next item followed. SEVENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Engineer's Report There being no additional report,the next item followed. EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Supervisors Request There being none,the next item followed. 4 . 1r61 1AI November 12,2012 Cedar Hammock CDD NINTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Audience Comments • Mr. Santariga, HOA Liaison, reported the parking space paving will begin tomorrow. The Master Association agreed to install the sign mounted speed monitoring signs. • Discussion followed on the spaces to be paved. • Mr. Nocera noted the Building and Grounds Committee will be suggesting they consider other locations for employee parking, to include the maintenance building area. Discussion followed. • Mr. Santariga addressed the Maintenance Agreement with the HOA. o Mr. Teague noted when they discussed it last meeting no changes were suggested. o Discussion followed on the expense limits. TENTH ORDER OF BUSINESS Adjournment There being no further business, On MOTION by Mr. Vaselewski seconded by Mr. McClellan with all in favor,the meeting was adjourned. Calvin Teague 'rank Vasele ski Secretary Chairman 5 161 2A BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES April 23, 2013 2. ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Minutes: 1) Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee: Minutes of 12.13.12 2) Collier County Code Enforcement Board: Minutes of 3.22.12; 4.26.12; 5.24.12; 6.28.12; 7.26.12; 8.23.12; 9.27.12; 12.7.12 (Special Magistrate); 1.4.13 (Special Magistrate) 3) Collier County Planning Commission: Agenda of 12.6.12 Minutes of 12.6.12 4) Contractors Licensing Board: Minutes of 12.19.12; 1.16.13 5) Development Services Advisory Committee: Minutes of 12.5.12; 12.14.12 (Land Development Review Subcommittee). 6) Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Committee: Minutes of 11.5.12 7) Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board: Minutes of 10.25.12 8) Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board: Minutes of 10.17.12 9) Immokalee Beautification Advisory Committee: Agenda of 1.23.13 Minutes of 11.14.12 10) Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee: Minutes of 1.17.13 • 161 2A 11) Land Acquisition Advisory Committee: Minutes of 11.16.12; 1.14.13 12) Library Advisory Board: Minutes of 10.17.12; 12.6.12 13) Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Committee: Minutes of 12.10.12; 1.14.13 14) Pelican Bay Services Division Board: Agenda of 12.27.12 (Clam Bay Subcommittee); 1.2.13; 1.15.13 (Landscape Water Management Subcommittee); 1.15.13 (Clam Bay Subcommittee); 1.21.13 (Special Session); 1.22.13 (Ad Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathways and Trees); 1.22.13 (Budget Subcommittee); 2.13.13 Minutes of 12.5.12; 12.10.12 (Clam Bay Subcommittee); 12.10.12 (Landscape Water Management Subcommittee); 12.27.12 (Clam Bay Subcommittee); 1.2.13; 1.15.13 (Clam Bay Subcommittee); 1.21.13 (Special Session); 1.22.13 (Ad Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathways and Trees) 15) Public Safety Authority: Minutes of 11.14.12 CAC Febru 16011 2A VI-1 Approval of CAC Minutes 1 of 7 December 13, 2012 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, December 13, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 1:00 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at Administrative Building "F", 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex Naples, Florida with the following members present: -' -p ✓ Cam.y;, ✓' NGY�c.G CHAIRMAN: John Sorey, III VICE CHAIRMAN: Jim Burke Anthony Pires Linda Penniman Robert Raymond Joseph A. Moreland Victor Rios ALSO PRESENT: Gary McAlpin, Director, Coastal Zone Management Colleen Greene, Assistant County Attorney Gail Hambright, Accountant Dr. Michael Bauer, City of Naples Misc.Corns: Date: 1 Item#: Copies to: CAC Ferry,2 3 2 ■ VI-1 Approval of CA Minutes 2of7 December 13, 2012 Any persons in need of the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the video recording from the Collier County Communications and Customer Relations Department or view online. I. Call to Order Chairman Sorey called the meeting to order at 1:02PM II. Pledge of Allegiance The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. III. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Chairman Sorey reported that Mr. Moity has resigned from the Coastal Advisory Committee and recognized his service to Collier County and its citizens. Changes and Approval of Agenda Mr. Pires moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Burke. Carried unanimously 7—0. IV. Public Comments Bob Krasowski addressed the Committee expressing concern on the format of the minutes as they do not outline speaker's comments. V. Approval of CAC Minutes 1. November 8,2012 Mr.Rios moved to approve the minutes of the November 8, 2012 meeting as presented. Second by Mr. Burke. Carried unanimously 7—0. VII. Staff Reports 1. Expanded Revenue Report—Gary McAlpin The Committee reviewed the"Collier County Tourist Tax Revenue FY 13 TDC Revenue Report"dated through November 30, 2012. 2. New Artificial Dunes Gary McAlpin provided a December 4, 2012 NY Times article "Resisted for Blocking the View, Dunes Prove They Blunt Storms"for information purposes. VIII. New Business 1. Post-Tropical Storm Isaac Analysis-Atkins North American,Inc. * Proposal Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary"Recommendation to approve and authorize the expenditure of Tourist Development Category "A" Tax funds for Post- Tropical Storm Isaac Analysis of Collier County Beaches by Atkins North American, Inc. under contract No. 09-5262-CZ for a not-to-exceed time and material amount$77,327" dated December 13, 2012. He reported that the Tourist Development Council reviewed the item and recommended it be approved subject to review by the Coastal Advisory Committee. Subsequent to this,the proposed contract amount has been revised to $77,327. 2 CAC Feluar4,213 VI-1 Ap va C Minute 3of7 December 13, 2012 The Committee recommended the wording in the Executive Summary and any other necessary documents reflect the contract is a "lump sum amount." Mr. Rios moved to recommend the Board of County Commissioners approve expenditure of Tourist Development Category "A"Tax funds for Post-Tropical Storm Isaac Analysis of Collier County Beaches by Atkins North American,Inc. under contract No. 09-5262-CZ for a lump sum amount of$77,327." Second by Mr. Burke. Mr. Fires voted"no." Mr.Pires expressed concern the documents identified the expenditure as "time and material"versus "lump sum amount"and on the methodology utilized to determine the costs involved with the proposed scope of work. 2. Marco South -Verbal Update * Schedule for Renourishment and Erosion Control Structures * Bid for Erosion Control Structure * Bids for Renourishment * FEMA Tropical Storm Debbie * Renourishment Quantities Gary McAlpin reported in relation to the project the bids are due back to the County on December 19, 2012 with the Board of County Commissioners expected to hear the item on February 12, 2013. He noted: • The project is based on a"6 year design"providing for approximately 77CY of sand. • The work is anticipated to begin at the beginning of April and be completed by the beginning of May at the latest. • Four bids were received for the construction of the proposed erosion control structures. • The source of the rock required to fabricate the structures is yet to be identified. • Staff will be submitting formal items to the Committee in January for their review. 3. Major Renourishment-Verbal Update * Recent BCC Direction * Peer Review Renourishment Quantities * Bidding Schedule * Permit Update Gary McAlpin reported that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)approved the proposed "Peer Review" on December 12, 2012. The Board directed Staff to ascertain bids for the scope of work as both a dredge and truck haul project with the item scheduled for BCC in March or April of 2013. He also noted the Emergency Renourishment project is ongoing with completion expected by December 14— 19,2012. 3 CAC FELar 4,113 2A VI-1 Approval of CAC Minutes 4of7 December 13, 2012 The Committee discussed the status of the City of Naples outfall pipes. 4. Update on December 11,2012 BCC Meeting The following was noted during a verbal update from Mr. McAlpin * 10M- Grant Application from the City of Marco Island/Hideaway Beach District Gary McAlpin provided a memorandum from Commissioner Tom Henning to County Manager Leo Ochs—Re: Reconsideration Hideaway dated November 14, 2012. The BCC voted to reconsider the item. * lOR- Tourist Development Tax Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Direct the County Attorney to seek a Florida Attorney General Opinion regarding authorized uses of tourist development tax" dated December 13, 2012 for information purposes. The BCC directed County Staff to obtain an Attorney General Opinion regarding authorized uses of sand used in dredging events. * l0X- Clam Pass/Pelican Bay Services Division Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary"Recommendation that effective immediately, Clam Pass be considered part of the ongoing management responsibilities of the Pelican Bays Services Division ("PBSD") including but not limited to all monitoring components such as biological, tidal and hydrographic data collection, and inlet dredge permitting/construction; that PBSD, exclusively, shall make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners as to when the inlet should be dredged, and make such other recommendations related to managing the unified Clam Bay System as it deems necessary; further, that Clam Pass, being an integral part of the Clam Bay System, is managed as such" for information purposes. The BCC approved the request for the Pelican Bay Services Division to assume the management of the Clam Bay System. The Committee requested Staff to review the Ordinance which outlines the powers and duties of the Coastal Advisory Committee to determine if any changes are necessary given this decision. * 10Y- Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Request for authorization to advertise an ordinance for future consideration which would amend Ordinance No. 2002-27, as amended, relating to the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit" for information purposes. * 10Z-RFP/General Beach Renourishment Construction Project Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners direct staff to prepare RFPs for the Collier County General Beach Re-nourishment construction project to include pricing for sand in 50,000CY 4 CAC Fe1ar4 2113 A VI-1 Approval CA Minutes 5of7 December 13, 2012 increments over 200,000CY up to 500,000CY,, to include pricing for both truck hauls and dredging, to include pricing for such re-nourishment activities outside of and within turtle nesting season, and to include that the offered prices will be fixed for a period of time at the expiration of which if construction has not commenced that the contract will lapse and be put back out to bid in the future; that staff further prepare an RFP for Fixed Term Coastal Engineering services to expand the number of firms available to provide such services to the county; that these RFPs shall be prepared and publicly advertised during the months of December and January, respectively" for information purposes. * 10AA-FEMA Beach Renourishment Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Recommendation that the County Attorney be directed to handle all aspects of the FEMA beach re-nourishment reimbursement dental and de-obligation appeals on behalf of Collier County; to direct that staff provide the County Attorney with all requested information, and to assist his office in any manner he deems necessary; further, that the County Attorney assess what civil and/or criminal liability the county may face if the final determination on appeal is that the county materially misrepresented to the federal government(by way of overstatement) what the storm related beach re-nourishment expenses were, and report back to the Board of County Commissioners"for information purposes. The BCC directed any work in relation to the issue be directed through the County Attorney's Office. * 10AC -Turrell Hall & Associates/Clam Bay System Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Recommendation to direct Turrell, Hall&Associates, Inc. to prepare a work order under Contract #10-5571 to update the existing Clam Bay Management Plan to ensure the preservation of the Clam Bay system and compliance with this preserve's Natural Resource Preservation Area ("NRPA') designation; and, to establish criteria as indicators for evaluation of dredging needs for the purpose of maintaining flushing for the environmental benefit of the Clam Bay system; to present such work order to the PBSD, the TDC, and the BCC at the first January, 2013 meeting of each of these respective boards" for information purposes. * 11E - Peer Review with Atkins North American Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary"Recommendation to approve and authorize the expenditure of Tourist Development Category "A"tax funds for a Peer Review of the Collier County Beaches volume design by Atkins North American, Inc under Contract No. 09-5262-CZ for a lump sum amount of$33,365" for information purposes. The BCC approved the Contract. * 16A35 -FEMA Law Associates 5 CAC Fluaai 4,1013 2 A VI-1 Approval of CAC Minutes 6 of 7 December 13, 2012 Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a Retention Agreement for legal services with FEMA Law Associates, PLLC pertaining to an appeal concerning the de-obligation of FEMA funds related to Hurricanes Katrina and Wilma with a request to open a Purchase Order in an amount not to exceed$20,000" for information purposes. The BCC approved the request. Speaker Marcia Cravens 5. Wiggins Pass-Update Gary McAlpin reported that the Subcommittee met on December 3, 2012 at the Pelican Isle Yacht Club for the purposes of providing an update to Stakeholders. It is anticipated the BCC will hear an item requesting contract approval in February of 2013. 6. FEMA De-Obligation -Update Gary McAlpin reported that the process necessary to file an appeal with the Florida Department of Protection and subsequently FEMA for the de-obligation of funds in relation to Hurricane Wilma is ongoing. 7. Funding Formula for Beach Renourishment * 11C -Reallocation of Current TDC Funding Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary"Recommendation to provide direction relative to reallocation of existing Tourist Development Tax distributions to increase destination marketing efforts and the annual accumulation of reserves for major beach renourishment" for information purposes. The BCC postponed consideration of the item. * 11D-FY 12 Carry Forward up to$450,000 Gary McAlpin presented the Executive Summary "Recommendation to approve recognition of additional, uncommitted FY12 Carry Forward up to$450,000 and all necessary budget amendments for additional destination marketing efforts and Tourism Department Staff"for information purposes. IX. Old Business None X. Announcements 2013 CAC Meeting Schedule Gary McAlpin provided a memorandum from Gail Hambright, Accountant dated December 1, 2012-Subject: 2013 CAC Scheduled meetings for information purposes. Mr.Moity-Resignation Letter 6 161 2 A CAC February 14,2013 I VI-1 Approval of CAC Minutes 7 of 7 December 13, 2012 Gary McAlpin provided a letter from Randy Moity directed to Councilman Joe Battie which announced Mr. Moity's resignation from the CAC. 11/15/12 Laplava Letter from Ron Vuv,Vice-President Gary McAlpin provided a copy of a letter from to Commissioner Georgia Hiller dated November 15,2012—Re: Director Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management. CAC Marco Island - BCC Approval for Coastal Advisory Committee membership The BCC postponed a decision on the item. Speaker Marcia Cravens expressed concern the members of the Committee lack a technical background in Coastal Planning and Engineering or related environmental fields. XI. Committee Member Discussion Committee members noted, in order for a Committee or Board member to make informed decisions on items such as Staff or consultant recommendations,policy directives, budgetary expenditures, etc., it is not inherently necessary to hold an educational degree or have professionally worked in the specific field of expertise related to the item under consideration. The Committee expressed concern on the format of the minutes and authorized Chairman Sorey to contact the County Manager's Office regarding the issue. Speaker Marcia Cravens expressed concern the internet link to the Agenda was"down"the day before the meeting. Staff reported the link was "down"due to technical difficulties and was"up"at approximately 8:00 am the morning of the meeting. XII. Next Meeting Date/Location January 10,2013—Government Center,Administration Bldg. F,3rd Floor There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at 2:38 P.M. Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee , Ly,""\-- < Aohn Sorey,III,Chairman These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on 2/1 y /.� as presented or as amended - 7 161 2 A ippgaigiM31 Kri/st'y curtiett, Ex,ecu- ove/Aide MAR 0 4 2U13 Bcox&of Co ,vity C s,Of ice' 1 Kri t'v, 3 -1 -2013 Piecuse, ' the attached/im forwtatLaw, provided/by the CoderEvlrfo-rce vt-evit 1Depavtwlevit, awthe net (&wc 1a,&ei) Bocwd/Age/,dcv uiv4er M' Carmsp 2012 Cade Evtfor /3 Gard/ Meet M//mute*fro-ill/the.dates Fiala Hiller i a c22 Mv , 2012 Henning • Coyly • Apra26, 2012 • May 24, 2012 • Ju4 Lei 28, 2012 Misc. Corres: • Ji4y 26, 2012 Date: • Auut23, 2012 Item#: • Septesnbe.r 27, 2012 Copies to: 1 hcun./yaw. A vv Board/M iwwcte Er Record's-Department X-8406 161 2A . March 22, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, March 22, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Kenneth Kelly Robert Kaufman Tony Marino Gerald Lefebvre Larry Mieszcak Lionel L'Esperance James Lavinski Ron Doino (Alternate) Chris Hudson (Alternate) ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Specialist Colleen Crawley, Code Enforcement Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Page 1 161 2A March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. Welcome to another edition of the Collier County Code Enforcement Board for March 22, 2012. Just a quick notice before we get started. The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chair. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. May I have roll call, please. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Ken Kelly? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Robert Kaufman? MR. KAUFMAN: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Chris Hudson? MR. HUDSON: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Larry Mieszcak? MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. James Lavinski? Page 2 161 2A 2 - March 22, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Ronald Doino? MR. DOINO: Here. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Because of our full board today, we have two alternates. Mr. Doino and Mr. Hudson will be able to participate in all of our discussions but will not have voting privileges today. Moving on to the approval of the agenda. May I have the approval of the agenda and/or any changes? MS. CRAWLEY: Number 4, public hearings, motions, A, motions, motion for continuance: Number 1, Paul and Kathleen Burcky, CESD20110011764, motion for extension of time; No. 6, Federal and National Mortgage Association, CESD20110009549; No. 7, Carlos Rivers, CESD20110009946; No. 8, Rene Zafra and Marie Zafra, CESD20090008252; No. 9, Janet Sneeden, CESD20110009351; Mr. 99 Cents, Incorporated, 2007050898. Under B; Stipulations, No. 1 is No. 6 under hearings, Anthony Dinorcia, Senior, LLC, 2007100236; No. 2 is No. 7 under hearings, Anthony Dinorcia, Senior, LLC, CELU200100022151; No. 3 is No. 16 from hearings, Eagles Bond Investments, Incorporated, CESD20110005082; No. 4 is No. 9 (sic) from hearings, Carlisle Wilson Plaza, LLC, CESD20110001653; No. 5 is under No. 11 of hearings, Nian Financing Corporation, CESD20110006404; No. 6 is No. 10 from hearings, Serafin Riveron, Junior, and Carida Menendez, CESD20110012707; No. 7 is No. 1 from hearings, Efrain and Marie Arce, CEN20120003503; No. 8 is No. 3 from hearings, Steven J. Sokol, CESD20110001100. Under C, hearings, No. 2, CESD20110006746, Jose Queveto, has been withdrawn. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can you slow down, please? MS. CRAWLEY: Sorry. MR. KAUFMAN: And could you start again? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yeah, start over. Page 3 161 2 A ;-- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'll help keep everybody going. MS. CRAWLEY: Number 13, CESD20110014170, Clara Tarrago has been withdrawn; No. 14, CESD20 -- oh, I'm sorry. I already did that one. Under 5; old business, A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 4, CESD20110001287, has been withdrawn; No. 5, CEPM20110001296, Sergio and Sara Garita, has been withdrawn; No. 6, CESD20090000972, Maria Ramirez, has been withdrawn; No. 7, CEROW20090000973, has been withdrawn; No. 12, CELU20100019844, San -- Juan Sanchez Olivera and Pamela Jean Sanchez, has been withdrawn. And under 6; new business, A, Code Enforcement Board workshop, has been rescheduled to next month, and in addition, B, elections; and that's all. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Did you -- what was that about elections? MS. CRAWLEY: An addition under 6. CHAIRMAN KELLY: An addition. So we are doing them this month? MS. CRAWLEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any other changes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: With that I'll entertain a motion to accept. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 4 161 2A March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Moving on to the approval of the minutes from the February 23, 2012 Meeting. Any changes? MS. BAKER: No. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion to accept the approval of the minutes. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the minutes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. All in -- any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: (Abstained.) MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: (Abstained.) MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And one abstention due to an absence. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll be abstaining also. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I'm sorry, Gerald abstains as well. Page 5 161 2 A 2— March 22, 2012 Moving on to public hearings, motions, letter A, motions. Motion for a continuance. Number 1 is going to be Burcky, and that is Case No. 14 in your packet. Is the respondent here? Would you like to come on up? We'll swear you in. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. L'ESPERANCE: I don't think the PA system is on. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sir, could you tap your mic for us. Yeah, that one's not on. K.D., can you check this one again for us, please? MS. ARNOLD: Check, check. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very good, thank you. Sorry about that, okay. Okay. Since this is a motion for continuance, sir, for the record, could you state your name. MR. BURCKY: Paul Burcky. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And also, since you're requesting the motion for continuance, could you tell the board what the circumstances are behind it. We'll see if we can't work something out. MR. BURCKY: I applied for the building permit, and it's in review right now, and I haven't heard back from them as of yet. As soon as it gets approved, then I'll be able to go forward. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any objections from the county? MR. ASARO: No, no objections at all. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: How much of an extension are you looking for? MR. BURCKY: I believe it was 60 days. MR. KAUFMAN: Do you think that's enough time to hear back from permitting? MR. BURCKY: I hope so, sir. Page 6 161 2Aa- March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I make a motion that we extend this for 60 days. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Real quick, do you understand that 60 days gives you enough time -- does 60 days give you enough time to not only pull the permit but then do any type of work necessary to comply with that permit? MR. BURCKY: I believe so, I believe so. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, good. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Thank you very much, sir. Good luck. MR. BURCKY: Thank you, Board. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're welcome. That concludes our motions for continuance. Now moving to motion for extension of time. Case No. 1, Charles and Laurie Flaum. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. MS. FLAUM: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, can you state your name. Page 7 161 2A - March 22, 2012 MS. FLAUM: Laurie Flaum. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And we have a letter here explaining the situation, but just in your own words, for the record, do you want to kind of recap? MS. FLAUM: Well, yeah. We had several violations at our home, and we corrected eight of the nine violations already. And I guess since this is our first time ever dealing with this, we didn't realize how much time and money it would take, so we just need more time. We've already applied for the permit to convert the garage to a storage room. And we understand there's going to be a lot of inspections required, engineering inspections. We haven't even started the actual work. So the -- I think the time necessary is to buy us enough time to come up with the money and also to get these inspections handled. We've had the septic inspected, paid for that, paid for surveys. We've spent thousands already just on what we've done. And we just -- I would like to request as much time as possible, because I don't know -- like the gentleman before me, I don't know how these inspections, how long they're going to take, because I know there'll probably be five or six different -- and rumor has it that -- there's -- rumor has it that they fail a lot of people, so you have to go through these inspections more than once. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. In your original letter you requested 120 days. Is that still sufficient? MS. FLAUM: Would it be possible to even have more? I mean, just so we don't have to come back to another hearing, just -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: We'd be happy to entertain whatever you feel is a necessary time. I think the board likes to see progress, and if you are making all the attempts that you can and it's really more or less an issue with the Collier County Building Department that's causing some of the delays, we understand and appreciate that. At the Page 8 161 2A ? March 22, 2012 same time, we just want to see diligence. We don't want to hang this out for a year. But if you need, you know, more time, now's the time to ask. MS. FLAUM: If I could get six months, that would be nice. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Does the county have any objection with a six-month extension? INVESTIGATOR McGONAGLE: For the record, Investigator Michelle McGonagle. Sorry; how's that? No, we have no objections. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Any questions by the board? MR. MIESZCAK: I have a question. Is -- the garage that was converted to living, is it occupied? MS. FLAUM: No. MR. MIESZCAK: It's not occupied? MS. FLAUM: The -- it's attached to the main house and we're trying to get it converted to a storage unit. It's got a bunch of furniture in it now, just stored in it. MR. MIESZCAK: I was just concerned it's not lived in. So nobody's living in the garage you just said. Thank you. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question. The -- in the second paragraph you said that you have a problem with a shed that needs to be moved because it's encroaching by five feet. And my question is, are you going to move it or -- MS. FLAUM: We handled that since I wrote that letter. It's gone. MR. KAUFMAN: That's taken care of, okay. You're looking for 180 days. MS. FLAUM: Yeah. Everything, I think, is done except for this last application to convert the garage. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other questions? MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll make a motion that we extend this 180 days. Page 9 161 2A .9-) March 22, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And you have 180 days from today. MS. FLAUM: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great, thank you. Good luck. MS. BAKER: Board members, can I just make a suggestion? When you guys are talking, can you make sure that your microphones are real close to you, because we're not picking up all the sound from the board members. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It does seem as though the master volume is lower than normal. MS. BAKER: They're picking it up on the recording. So it's working fine, but we just need to make sure we're talking in the mics. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. It's actually hard for us to hear. MR. DOINO: It's hard for us to hear. MS. BAKER: It's hard for me to hear, too. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Moving on before we get out of control. James and Julia Askey. Are the respondents here? We do have a Page 10 161 2 A 9- March 22, 2012 handwritten letter in our packet. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, code enforcement supervisor Cristina Perez. I just wanted to give the board a brief update before reviewing the letter. Investigator Eric Short did conduct a site visit yesterday to determine the status of the violation. He was unable to make contact with the occupants or the respondents, but the mobile home in itself has been removed. Some of the debris remains on the property, and the demolition permit remains to be obtained, inspected, and CO'ed since there was utilities connected to the mobile home. So that part of the order still has to be completed. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Just so I'm clear, you said that a demo permit still needs to be obtained? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So they removed a mobile home with utilities without having the actual permit? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any questions? MR. KAUFMAN: Was the $80.29 paid? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: No, it has not been paid, which that -- I know there was contact made with the respondent's daughter who had the authority to act on her behalf with this code case, and that was explained that it needed to be paid prior to the hearing or the day of the hearing. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion we deny this based on the fees not being paid and a demo permit not being issued. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? Page 11 161 Zit 9- March 22, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. It was denied. Next, moving on to Eric Rodriguez. Is Mr. Rodriguez here? Good morning. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. MR. KAUFMAN: Before we go on, does that mean this case is going to be heard today since the motion -- MS. BAKER: I don't believe it's on the -- I don't believe it's on the agenda otherwise. It will be brought back at a later date. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, can you state your name, please. MR. RODRIGUEZ: My name is Eric Triguero Rodriguez. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And we have a letter from you, but just, if you would, recap it for us. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Let us know what's going on. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah. I have an addition in my house. And I went to all the prints, you know. I work with my engineer and my -- the architect. I did all the prints. I did everything. And I'm finished Page 12 161 2 A D- March 22, 2012 with the code -- no. I'm finished with the building department. But the date, the last time I was here I just noticed that I was dealing with the health department, too, because this -- that date that I was here I received a letter from the health department that I have to, like, do an extension to my drain field. I didn't know that. So this is the reason I'm here, because I'm finished with the building department. Everything is closed there. But the health department needs some work from me. I'm asking for more time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very good. Thank you. Investigator, just for the record, would you state your name. INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: For the record, Jonathan Musse, code enforcement. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Was the health department violation part of this case? INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: It wasn't as part of the permitting process where they've got to inspect the septic. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So we still don't have a CO? INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: No CO. Actually, the permit's ready for issuance. It's a permit by affidavit, and it's ready for issuance. He just has to complete the health department's portion of it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And you're asking for three months? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. I come up with the money, because the contractor that is going to do the job is -- I come up with that money. I've been paying a lot before. I assume that in three months -- you know, the guy is going to start working today at my house. I assume that, you know, I can -- but I got a question. Because I got the money to do this extension, to pay the guy, you know, but after that, for the impact fees, I got to come up with the -- at least $5,000 to complete, you know, to pay in the building department in the growth management. So my question is, do I -- can I pay, you know, in parts, like, do a Page 13 161 2A 0-- March 22, 2012 loan or something with you guys, pay with money? Because, otherwise, you know, probably in the next two, three weeks, I'm going to finish everything. And I come up with the money for the guy, you know, that is going to do the extension for the health department, you know, to finish with the health department. But once my permit's ready to issue, I have to pay, like, $5,000, and I don't know if-- you know, if I can pay portions or -- I don't want to come here, you know, just because I didn't pay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I understand. So you've increased the size of your home, there's a requirement to increase the drain-field because of the number of occupants now, potential occupants, and now, because of that, there's an additional impact fee that's due. If I'm not mistaken, impact fees are part of the CO, correct? INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Unfortunately, they would have to be paid before the permit was finaled and CO'ed, and we need a final or a CO on the permit in order for this case to close. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So as far as I understand, it would all have to be paid. Now, I don't know if the county has any payment plan on impact fees. Does anyone know? MR. KAUFMAN: Nope. We've got -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: No. Unfortunately, I don't think that they do. MR. RODRIGUEZ: I thought that, you know, three months would be good because it's just -- you know, I got the money to finish the job. That's it. But now, you know, I'm seeing that -- and I don't want to come back in three months and -- because I don't have the money to finish, you know. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Make sure you're also extending your permit so it doesn't expire, because they'll naturally expire every six months. So ask for that extension so that you don't have to pay for a Page 14 161 2 A ?-- March 22, 2012 new permit, too. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah. After here I'm going to go to -- talk to my agent, my inspector, to see. MR. KAUFMAN: A couple of quick questions. The $81.43, has that been paid? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: That's been paid. This hearing is for an extension of time. We're not hearing the case? CHAIRMAN KELLY: No. MR. KAUFMAN: So we can decide to extend this -- MR. MIESZCAK: Ninety days. MR. KAUFMAN: -- 90 days. You're looking for three more months, and then we'll see what happens then. And in the meantime, I guess you could check with the county to see if you can pay them piecemeal. MR. RODRIGUEZ: So I can get 90 more days? MR. KAUFMAN: That's what you're requesting from your letter. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah. MR. KAUFMAN: If the board approves it, you'll have 90 days to work everything out. MR. RODRIGUEZ: No. I -- first before I asked for 90 days, but now that I know that I have to come up with the money to -- you know, for the CO to be closed, I don't know if I can get the money in three months. It's over -- for the -- MR. MARINO: I have a question. MR. RODRIGUEZ: It's over $80,000 (sic) -- MR. MARINO: How long do you think you need? MR. RODRIGUEZ: I don't know. Probably -- a little more time if you guys can give me. MR. MARINO: How much time? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Because I'm finished with everything. Page 15 161 2A a- March 22, 2012 MR. MARINO: How much time? How much time? MR. RODRIGUEZ: Probably, I don't know, three more months. MR. LEFEBVRE: How about if we extend for 150 days. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, that will be -- MR. LEFEBVRE: And at that point everything would be CO'ed. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Yeah. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to extend this, instead of 90 days, 150 days. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and second. Any discussion? My discussion would be if he was going for extension of the permit, which would give him six months, to make things easy and to relieve pressure because of his due diligence in working with us so far, I suggest we match the six-month permit extension on the time allowed for the case. Instead of the 150 days, I suggest 180 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: When's the permit expired? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Well, almost irrelevant. If he goes for the extension, it will at least give him six months from today. MR. RODRIGUEZ: It's going to be expired in these days, too, so I have to -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very soon. MR. RODRIGUEZ: So I have to go for -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I amend my motion to 180 days. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Motion and a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 16 161 2 A d-- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You now have six months. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good luck. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Thanks. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Now next case, Case No. 4, Carlos and Cynthia Gonzalez. Are the respondents here? INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: No. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Mr. -- Carlos couldn't come today. He had to work, but he was asking for the extension of time because the permit that he applied and the permit was issued to wasn't CO'ed. It is now, as of yesterday, CO'ed, so he was asking for the extension of time so he wouldn't be fined on a daily basis. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion to extend it 30 days. MR. MARINO: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Pick one. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 17 161 2A ? March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries. Great, thank you. And thank Mr. Gonzalez for us, too. Next is Leszek and Henryka Klim. I apologize if I did not pronounce your name correctly. MR. BANSKY: You were close. This is my uncle, Leszek Klim. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Now if you would, feel free to introduce yourself for the record. MR. BANSKY: Yes. My name is Peter Bansky. This is my uncle, Leszek Klim. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Peter Bansky. MR. BANSKY: I'm here to help him. MR. LEFEBVRE: He's going to have to be sworn in as a translator. (Peter Bansky, the interpreter herein, was sworn to truly and correctly translate English into Polish and Polish into English.) (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Kitchell, do you want to, just for the record -- SUPERVISOR SNOW: Oh. I'm sorry, for the record, Kitchell Snow, code enforcement. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Because this is a request from you to extend the time, would you like to just give us a kind of brief idea of what's going on so that we can consider it? Page 18 161 2A - March 22, 2012 MR. BANSKY: Yes. We were here, I believe it was last May. I was here with my uncle as well. And with the previous investigator, we were asked to apply for a permit, pay the fine, and make his roof shorter by 4 feet, which will be from 14 feet to 10 feet, which was actually going to fix the problem. When my uncle went to the building department to apply for the permit, all he had, you know, pretty much problems to do it. They didn't allow it. They did not allow it. So something else was said here, and he heard something else from the building department, permitting. So what he tried to do with all the paperwork, he also made the new surveys most recently to try to pretty much fix the problem. And it's been sitting at somebody's desk over there for a while. When he received the letter here, notice of hearing extension of time, he went back to the county, and what they told him that -- what he has to do is go to a variance. So petition for variance, which was granted, and we already have a date on April 12th this year. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. Supervisor Snow, any objections from the county or any further testimony? SUPERVISOR SNOW: No. They have paid operational costs. And I don't see any reason why the county would object to any extension of time the board would allow. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great, thank you. Any questions from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Just, I guess, clarification. If-- so if the variance isn't granted, what's the next step? SUPERVISOR SNOW: Well, normally, if a variance isn't granted, then he's going to have to either remove or permit what he's got. Now, I would assume this is a variance that talks about an extension on encroachment. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Page 19 1 I 2 A 9-- arch 22, 2012 SUPERVISOR SNOW: That's what we're talking about. So if they wish the time to do that, I think they should be allowed to have that time. They can always come back and ask you for more time if it's granted or denied, if we get to that point. MR. LEFEBVRE: Why were they turned away if they were willing to remove the four-foot section? SUPERVISOR SNOW: I can't answer that question. I don't work in the building department, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, all right. MR. KAUFMAN: I was wondering why -- six months seems like a long time considering this goes back to August of last year. So from August of last year, what was done time-wise between then and, say, January 1st? MR. BANSKY: Well, on my uncle's part, pretty much anything that he could. I mean, he's been numerous times to the building department trying to push them, and I believe it went from -- it went from one desk to another for somebody to -- you know, they wouldn't make a decision. They could not come up with a decision for his problem. So pretty much whatever was said here at a previous meeting, they told him that doesn't really matter what is said here. What's more important is what they say. But at the same time they couldn't really come up with a solution, which was, you know, kind of unusual. I mean, the easiest thing for them is to tell my uncle, okay, remove what you have. But it's not -- it's not the easiest solution. I mean, there has to be a solution to everything. MR. KAUFMAN: The building department is the department that is responsible for issuing permits -- MR. BANSKY: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: -- checking right-of-ways or whatever has to be done. We only rule on whether something is in violation or not. Page 20 161 2A2- March 22, 2012 So anything that we say other than "it's in violation and fix it within a certain amount of time," that all belongs to the building department. It's their purview. So it just seems that six months from now, since this started in August of 2011, seems to be quite a long time. MR. BANSKY: It's a long time, it's a long time. I would think by now it should be resolved. MR. KAUFMAN: And having a variance hearing in April certainly will -- hopefully the variance is granted. It's probably -- is it an administrative variance or a regular variance? SUPERVISOR SNOW: It would be a regular variance. If I can offer a little clarity. Remember when -- your board order is either going to permit or demolition. Now, when they go talk to the building department and discuss something down in growth management, if you really don't know the questions you ask, and it sounds like that's the case in this question (sic), then they don't know what to answer you. So I think this process has led them through a journey, and now they finally decide, yes, this is the process we want to use. We want to keep what we have. We want a variance. And this is not uncommon. Unfortunately, if they don't know the right questions to ask, it gets to that point. And I think this is where we're at now, that they want to keep what they have, so they have the variance. They want to require -- or they're asking to get a variance, and it wouldn't be administrative. It would be just a regular variance. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. No more questions. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other questions? MR. MIESZCAK: I'd just say one thing. I don't have any problem with the six month. I mean, you know, I think there's due diligence here, and the county recommends. So I'd make a motion -- I'd make a motion that we do a six-month extension. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll second it. Page 21 161 2A March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: The motion carries unanimously. SUPERVISOR SNOW: Thank the board. MR. BANSKY: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. MR. MIESZCAK: Good luck. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Next case. It's going to be Federal National Mortgage, which was a new addition to our packet this morning. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning, sir. MR. SIEVERS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, could you state your name, please. MR. SIEVERS: Bob Sievers. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And, also, I assume that you're representing the mortgage association. MR. SIEVERS: Yes, and we received a notarized document from them, and we gave it to Colleen yesterday. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great, thank you. That's why I was asking. Page 22 lôt e - March 22, 2012 Since you're requesting the extension of time, would you like to just explain to us what's going on. MR. SIEVERS: They just -- Federal National Mortgage just acquired this property through the foreclosure property -- or process. We find there's a couple of open permits and an unpermitted shed. We're still waiting for the CT to be filed, so we'll have contractors that need to go out there, find out what's involved. We don't know if we have to -- what to do to the -- to get the permit. So we're just asking for an extension since a compliance date was March 21st. Just trying to avoid fines. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. I can appreciate that. Good morning. For the record, do you just want to state your name. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Does the county have any objection to the extension? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: No objection, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. When was the house -- when was the final judgment on the house? MR. SIEVERS: They just acquired it about two weeks ago. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. So it's going to take another couple weeks for the certificate of title probably. MR. SIEVERS: It takes two to four weeks to get those files. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, right. So that's even -- that's 14 days -- let's say two weeks, 14 days. It's going be about a hundred days to complete the work. That -- and being a, I guess, quasi government entity, it might take longer than 120 days to actually get this permitted. MR. SIEVERS: A couple years maybe. MR. LEFEBVRE: And you don't know what kind of issues you Page 23 161 2 A March 22, 2012 have at the site? MR. SIEVERS: We don't know what's -- we've got contractors getting ready to go out to look at it and, obviously, we'll have to have the permitting department come out and make sure that we're doing what they need. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MR. SIEVERS: And they go overboard to make sure that they comply. MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think it would be out of the question to give a six-month extension. MR. MARINO: Is that your motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Would the county object to that? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: No, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Make a motion to extend for six months, 180 days from today. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. MR. SIEVERS: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Page 24 161 2A - March 22, 2012 MR. SIEVERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We heard a case just a little bit ago, James and Julia Askey, and the respondent was not here at the time. It was a motion for an extension of time. And I believe we ruled against the extension; however, Ms. Askey is here and is requesting that we rehear the case. And I'm in support of rehearing it, but it's up to the board to set aside our original motion and order and rehear it. MR. MIESZCAK: I'd like to make a motion to rehear. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Can we do that, Jean? MS. RAWSON: Yes, you certainly can. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Let's go back then. And this is going to be, again, James and Julia Askey. Dig up my paperwork. MR. KAUFMAN: Which case number is it? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. KAUFMAN: Is this a new one? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Just give us one second. We've got to -- you know, we kind of clear out our books as we go. Just give us a minute. Page 25 161 2 A .9- March 22, 2012 MS. PASKANIK: That's no problem. MS. BAKER: It was No. 2 from extension of time. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. For the record, could you state your name. MS. PASKANIK: Tisha Paskanik. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And your relation to the Askeys. MS. PASKANIK: It's my mother and stepfather. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And, for the record, could you just state that you have their -- you have authority to speak -- MS. PASKANIK: I do have authority for anything that goes on on the property there. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a letter that you had written, but since you're here, could you explain to us the situation? MS. PASKANIK: Actually -- well, the letter is a little not important at this point. I have removed, you know, 95 percent. The structure is off. I mean, I have a dumpster there. I have a trailer with wood that I'm going to try to salvage in a separate trailer. I was told that the most critical thing would be to pay the operational costs and, because of my budget, I either did one or the other, so I paid the operational costs. I'm trying now -- I'm going to go back to Horseshoe when I leave here, find out exactly what the permit fee was. I was informed that they need to come back out and just inspect that the electric was disconnected which, when I was here originally, I was told to disconnect it. It was disconnected at the box. So I guess I just have to have the building people come out and verify. I will need, like, a week and a half, maybe two weeks till I'm going to have the money to get that. She thinks it's roughly $80. So, I mean, that's pretty much, you know, where we stand. She said I needed to either get the building permitted -- and after doing my research, I don't think it would have passed the Wind Zone 3 requirement even for a storage building. It has to meet certain Page 26 161 a A � March 22, 2012 requirements, and I didn't have the money to invest to find out if it was going to pass to find out that it wouldn't. I mean, it required architectural fees, which I had an architect that was supposed to help me who totally backed out on me, and then the additional permitting costs. I mean, you're talking, you know, a couple thousand dollars that I absolutely don't have. So I figured I would remove the structure and make this problem try to go away. I'm -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Real quick, let me ask the county. Is there any way that the county will be able -- not the county as in the Code Enforcement Department, but community development would be able to waive the triple damages since it's an after-the-fact and go back to just the original demo permit amount? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: I'm not entirely sure that there are after-the-fact fees on a demolition permit, but we could, you know, check with them on that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, okay. Excellent. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yeah. And then earlier when we had first come up, I had checked the operational costs, if they had been paid, and they had not. But in the process of her arriving, you know, they had been paid, so it was probably just -- you know, while we were here, she's over there paying them. And she does have her receipt. I did verify that they were paid. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So recap, operational costs have been paid, 95 percent of the work has been completed. All you really need is a demo permit and a final inspection. MS. PASKANIK: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: How much time do you think you need to have everything all done? MS. PASKANIK: Well, I mean, technically that's pushing it is, like, two weeks as far as for me to get the money together. I'm, like, Page 27 161 2 A �-- March 22, 2012 basically a single mom with a baby right now. But I was advised by her that that's the time frame that it would need to be in so that by the time I came in front of the board again. I mean, if I could get a 30-day, would be great, because then I know I could come up with the money. But I was going with the idea of trying to get all this done in case it wasn't reheard by the next hearing, you know, by next month. MR. KAUFMAN: How about two months? MS. PASKANIK: That would be wonderful. MR. MIESZCAK: I'd like to make a motion we do 60 days. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Just one comment. The demo permit should have been pulled before any demolition was done on the property. MS. PASKANIK: I do understand. It was a money thing. I mean, everything comes down to pennies and dimes with me. I mean, I am on an extremely tight budget, so I do understand that. I was in the construction business for a long time, so I am kind of familiar with, you know, demolition and the process of said -- MR. LEFEBVRE: It might cost you more, could cost you, possibly, triple the amount. So in the long run it might cost you more. MS. PASKANIK: Well, that would be quite unfortunate for me, but I really -- I had no choice. I had people that were willing to help me at the time. I took advantage of the help that was offered. MR. LEFEBVRE: That's just my comment. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 28 161 2A - March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any it carries unanimously. Thanks for making it here today. MS. PASKANIK: Yeah, I was -- sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: No, that's okay. We're happy that we were able to rehear it. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Moving on to the next case, which is Carlos Rivers. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Could you pull the mic down to you. Thank you. And, for the record, can you state your name. MR. RIVERS: My name is Carlos Rivers. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And we have a letter here requesting a 90-day extension. MR. RIVERS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Could you explain to the board in your own words just what's going on. MR. RIVERS: Yes. From the time I put in my permits for -- legalize my lanai, I no receive no answer. I come in. They say they sent a letter, but I still no receive it. And, you know, I -- if I no letter, you know, it's so hard, you know. I tried to correct it, already, you know. I wait now for the correction of the -- for the plan, the C plan (sic). CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Good morning. Page 29 161 2A 2— March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, Joe. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. He had to submit some corrections, and I think he might have been unaware of-- I guess that's what I'm kind of getting from it is he was unaware that he needed to submit these corrections. And he was down to permitting this week and is working with them on the corrections. So I think he's on the right path to where he needs to be. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Does the county have any objections to an extension of 90 days? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Has the $79.72 been paid? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion to extend. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And that -- we have a motion and a second. And that was for -- MR. MIESZCAK: Ninety days? MR. LEFEBVRE: Ninety days. MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 30 161 2 A .0- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Great. Good luck, sir. And Case No. 8 is Zafra. It's an extension for time. And it was Case No. 8 under our imposition of fines. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. MR. ZAFRA: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, could you state your name, please. MR. ZAFRA: Rene Zafra. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. And we have email requesting -- MR. ZAFRA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: -- requesting an extension. Since you're here, could you just describe what's going on? MR. ZAFRA: I've been dealing with this for a while now, and it's been all, you know, because of money. I mean, it's costing me a fortune to do this. But I have been working on it. I finally -- I got my health department permit done. I had to enlarge my septic, which I didn't know. Got it all done, everything's cleared, permit's finished with that. I'm going through building. I turned in my plans for the third time, I think, came back with another rejection. I called Mr. Walsh -- he was the building inspector of my plans -- and we went through everything. I was needing a certification for my windows that I had installed. The ones that I sent, unfortunately, were outdated. I called the manufacturer. They sent me the new one. I sent it to Mr. Walsh. During this process of talking to Mr. Walsh, he says to me, this works -- seems like it's been done already. It hasn't yet. It's been done for over 14 years. And he says, well, this permit that you're applying for is no good. He says, I got to reject it because what you need is a Page 31 161 2A - March 22, 2012 permit by affidavit to do this. So, basically, I go back to my engineer and my architect, and he says -- he told me he pretty much wasn't going to sign off on permit of affidavit. So I had to go find another architect, another engineer. Right now I'm in the process of that. I hired Reliable Permitting, a professional, to help me do this, because it's just -- to me I thought I could do it. It's just too much for me. I don't understand it, so I hired someone to do it. She's going to resubmit -- Reliable's going to resubmit everything either Tuesday or Wednesday with a permit of affidavit with an architect/engineer. That's why I'm asking for at least 30 to 60 days, and I should be finished with everything. I've already gotten my price for my impact fees, because I do have to do that, and they came out to, like, $2,700. I'm fine with it. I'm going to pay it when my permit comes up. So basically what I'm doing now is just waiting for Reliable to submit my plans by Tuesday or Wednesday and have everything taken care of by then. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Cristina, for the record, sorry. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Cristina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement. We did receive the information from the health department, as he stated, that that permit was issued and the work was completed in order -- you know, for part of this permit to even be issued. And then there was a rejection done at the beginning of the month by Mr. Walsh, as he stated, you know. So speaking with Mr. Zafra, you know, he had that communication. When he first hired his architect, from what he tells me, the architect wouldn't do the permit by affidavit, but said, let's go this route. So they went ahead and they submitted the plans. And once it was mentioned to him again, we won't do it unless it's a permit by affidavit, otherwise they have to tear out, you know, sections of the walls and then, of course, it will be his responsibility to fix them. Page 32 ... ... . . .. . . . .. . . ... 16 ...1. . 2A - March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sorry you had to go through all that. MR. ZAFRA: That's all right. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any objection from the county for a two-month extension? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Up to the board's discretion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll make a motion that we extend the time two months. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously, two months from today. MR. ZAFRA: Thank you, Board, very much. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Thank you. Good luck, man. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you. MR. KAUFMAN: We remove this now from the -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: We can remove it from our imposition of fines. The next one is Sneeden. Are the respondents here? Janet Sneeden? Page 33 161 2A .-- March 22, 2012 (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We have a letter from Erik Hester and Janet Sneeden asking for at least six months. Any -- want to state your name for the record, please. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Cristina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Just to refresh your mind, this is a case that came before you last month. What the board's direction was, was to get together with the building department because we did not know the conditions of the interior of the structure. There were two additions that were made to the mobile home that were unpermitted, and they were asking for an six-month extension at the last hearing. So you guys granted a 30-day extension with direction to the county to do an inspection, which I did go out there with our interim building official and conducted an inspection. And he did provide us with a letter declaring the structure a dangerous building. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Do you have a recommendation on this, by the way? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: As far as their extension, or -- I mean, they had to obtain the permits to, you know, keep the additions or a demolition permit to remove them. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, if it's a dangerous building, that's for us, generally, a big red flag -- SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Right. MR. KAUFMAN: -- that says we don't go forward with this at all. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Correct. MR. KAUFMAN: That's my comment. MR. LEFEBVRE: Couple concerns I have. One major concern is that it states the property is for sale. It sounds like they have an Page 34 161 2 Ate---- March 22, 2012 interested party to buy it. Would not want this property to transfer without the new party knowing that there's a problem. I'm not in favor of extending -- to make the extension, because I -- not sure if it's going to be -- these issues are going to be fixed prior to the new owner -- SUPERVISOR PEREZ: And I haven't had any communication with, you know, an outside party to make them aware that if they are interested on this property that these are the violations. I mean, there is an order recorded but, you know, if it's a cash transaction and they don't do a title search, they wouldn't, you know, find -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny. MR. KAUFMAN: Second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: The motion's been denied. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. And I believe this is the last motion for an extension of time. This is Mr. 99 Cents, Incorporated. Is Mr. Hassam here? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the board, this is Case No. 11 under imposition of fines, and you also have an addition that was added to Page 35 161 2A . March 22, 2012 your packet this morning. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good morning. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Mr. Hassam wasn't able to come today, but he's asking for a three-month extension. This is his fifth extension. And he has been working really hard to try to permit this addition that was built prior to him owning the building. He has a building permit at this time being reviewed right now to leave the addition. He had a demolition before, and he decided to leave the addition. Now he has gotten a building permit; it's under review. So he's hoping within the next three months that he can have it CO'ed. Operational costs have been paid. There is no electricity running through that section of the building because they did turn it off, so -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: You know our hot buttons. That's good. Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: How much time are they looking for? MR. MIESZCAK: Ninety days. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Three months, 90 days. MR. KAUFMAN: Ninety. I'll make a motion we grant 90 days. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 36 161 2A 0' March 22, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. And we can remove it from our imposition of the fines. Thank you. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Now we're moving to Letter B, stipulations. First stipulation is Dinorcia. Hope I pronounced it right. MR. KAUFMAN: Which case number is that? CHAIRMAN KELLY: That would be Case No. 6 under your standard cases. There's a second case right behind it, same respondent. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Investigator, would you like to state your name for the record and read the stipulated agreement into the record. INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes. My name is Investigator Hines Box. I'm with code enforcement, Collier County. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$81 .15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Hines, real quick. Are you able to hear the investigator? INVESTIGATOR BOX: Can you hear me? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah, okay. INVESTIGATOR BOX: Abate all violations by obtaining any and all Collier County permits, inspections through to the certificate of occupancy through or certificate of completion for all unpermitted structures or, alternatively, obtain any and all demolition permits within 120 days or pay a fine in the amount of$200 -- I'm sorry -- or a fine in the amount of$200 will be imposed until the violation is Page 37 16I 2A -- March 22, 2012 abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement within 24 hours of the abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that the respondent -- that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Sir, do you agree with everything that was just read? MR. SHANNON: Yes, sir, we do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. And for the record, could you state your name, I'm sorry. MR. SHANNON: My name is Jim Shannon. I'm the contractor that's been hired to try to correct this. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And, for the record, could you state that you have the authority to speak on the owner's behalf. MR. SHANNON: I do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 38 161 2A - March22, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. Going on to the next case, we'll have to re-swear everybody in since it's a different case. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) INVESTIGATOR BOX: For the record, Investigator Hines Box, code enforcement, Collier County. This is regarding Case No. CELU2010002251. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier building permits for all unpermitted improvements or obtain a Collier County demolition permit to restore the property, including the swale, to its originally permitted condition within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine in the amount of$200 a day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must notify the code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation to request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violations, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and costs of the abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sir, again, could you state your name for the record. MR. SHANNON: My name is Jim Shannon. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And then also, since it's a new case, also state that you have the authority to -- MR. SHANNON: I have the authority to respond for the owner. Page 39 161 2 A G-- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great, thank you. And you agree to everything that was just read? MR. SHANNON: Correct. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Entertain a motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by -- who was that, Tony? MR. MARINO: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. Thank you, sir. MR. SHANNON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case is going to be Eagle Bond. That's Case No. 16 under normal case hearings. MR. BOND: Good morning. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Investigator? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. Page 40 161 2 A a-- March 22, 2012 Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall; one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permit or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Good morning, sir. MR. BOND: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, could you state your name, please. MR. BOND: Roy Bond. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Mr. Bond, I assume you're the owner of Eagle Bond Investments? MR. BOND: I'm the CEO of Eagle Bonds, yes, sir. That's the family corporation. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Excellent. Do you understand and agree to everything that was just read? MR. BOND: I do. I would like to state, this is the third building permit. Originally we were informed that we could not do this work ourselves and we were forced to hire a contractor to do this. We hired three. And as soon as they got all our money, they absconded after doing some work. So, some of the work has been done. There is not much left to Page 41 16 ! 2 A 9-" March 22, 2012 do. However, I hope that the board would be lenient in the event that we will be pushing the 60 days, if we were to ask for an extension, with the understanding we were going to work diligently at it. But I've got a health problem right now, and that's kind of-- I don't know what -- how that's going to turn out. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I appreciate your concerns. I can tell you that in the past the board has been sympathetic to people who have diligently worked hard to try to resolve situations and had holdups outside of something that they could control, for instance, delays at the county or, you know, issues as far as petitions or something along those lines. I can't tell you how the board would vote at that time. MR. BOND: I understand. CHAIRMAN KELLY: However, if you come to us before your time expires and request an extension, given the circumstances, as long as you've been working hard, we're usually pretty good about it. MR. BOND: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're welcome. Any other questions? MR. KAUFMAN: I have one. Do you think you'll be close to that time frame? Would one extra month help, or just don't know? It's up in the air? MR. BOND: I just don't know, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I believe why Mr. Kaufman is asking is because we have the -- we have the opportunity right now to put 90 days instead of 60. MR. BOND: I understand. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And that might save another appearance. MR. BOND: That would -- probably would be appropriate. That might save another appearance. And in the event that I was to get done, perhaps I could ask code enforcement to put me on the agenda for the earlier month. Page 42 161 2A 0- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: If you were to come into compliance, it would not be any more appearances. MR. BOND: Oh, that's right. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So you would be okay. Investigator Baldwin, any issues or -- INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: The 2006 permit basically just needed the final electric, septic, and mechanical. Just about everything else was taken care of. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So it's going to be -- it should be pretty easy. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: It should be pretty easy, yes. MR. BOND: Well, there's a half mile of electric line that's got to be brought in. That's the only thing. I don't know how FP&L -- what their time frame is. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I can appreciate that. What's the will of the board? If somebody wants to make -- or have any questions or make a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess the question is, is this mobile home being lived -- is it currently occupied? MR. BOND: Pardon me? MR. LEFEBVRE: Is it currently occupied? MR. BOND: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we accept the stipulated agreement, as stated, 60 days. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. Page 43 1 faith 226A 9— 112 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. So we did accept it just as it is for 60 days. If you're running into a time crunch, FPL's not able to get out there fast enough, try to get back to us before it expires; we'll see if we can't get you an extension. MR. BOND: Very fine. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. Thank you, sir. Next case is Wilson Plaza. That would be Case No. 4, not case No. 9, as Colleen read during the original amendments. MS. CRAWLEY: Sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: That's okay. But it is Case No. 4 from your original packets. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall; one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by submitting the following documents: Two completed copies of the annual monitoring report; one of three traffic county options; and one executed affidavit for the years of 2010 and 2011 within 60 days of this hearing, or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into Page 44 16 ! 2A - March 22, 2012 compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And the motion carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thanks, Patrick. Next is going to be Nian Financing Corporation. That would be Case No. 10 -- I'm sorry -- Case No. 11 from your packet. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Is it Nine or Nian? MR. BROWN: Nian. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I apologize. MR. BROWN: That's fine. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, could you state your name. MR. BROWN: Antonio Brown. Page 45 161 2A & March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Investigator, would you like to -- INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Sure. For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Go ahead. MR. KAUFMAN: A quick question. On No. 2 under the Statement of Violation, it says that the permit for the home on the property was stalled. Does that mean expired? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: The -- it was expired at the beginning of the case. When Mr. Brown took over, he reapp'ed that permit, okay; however, the -- what I meant by stalled, the inspections were not called in immediately. There was quite a bit of time there. MR. KAUFMAN: The reason I ask, I've never seen that in one of these. So thank you. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I used the verbiage there. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Mr. Brown, what is your relationship to Page 46 161 2Adt- March 22, 2012 the corporation? MR. BROWN: The owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, great. Do you agree to and understand everything that was just read? MR. BROWN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do you have any questions? MR. LEFEBVRE: How far along is this house? MR. BROWN: Excuse me? MR. LEFEBVRE: How far along is this house? MR. BROWN: Oh, I think we're 60 days away from finishing the house and all the last inspections. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. I mean, is sheetrock in? What is it? MR. BROWN: Right now we went to rough plumbing, rough framing, we're almost done with the floor, rough A/C. So hopefully in the next two weeks we're going to call for another inspection also. MR. LEFEBVRE: Are you a builder yourself? MR. BROWN: No, I have a contractor. MR. LEFEBVRE: Contractor. So you feel that -- you feel that in 60 days you should be finished with this? MR. BROWN: Well, I think four months would be great, if I have it, but I'm trying to go for 60 days. That's my goal. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, right now you have a stipulation in front of us for four months. MR. BROWN: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: A hundred twenty days. MR. BROWN: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we approve the stipulated agreement. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? Page 47 161 2A2- March 22, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it passes unanimously. Thank you, sir. MR. BROWN: Thank you. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next is going to be Serafin -- I can't even read my own handwriting -- and Menendez. That would be Case No. 10 from your packet. That is Serafin Riveron. I apologize. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, code enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until violation's abated. Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of the abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the Page 48 161 2 A ,- March 22, 2012 provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. My apologies. It's actually 80.86. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So it's less than what's on there? INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We're just going to -- if you want to white it out, and we'll make a change, initial. And then, sir, if you agree to everything still -- it's a little less money on the operational costs. So if you could just initial it when we're done. MR. RIVERON: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For the record, could you state your name again. MR. RIVERON: Serafin. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And do you agree to and understand everything that was just read? MR. RIVERON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Entertain a motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? Page 49 161 2A2- March 22, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Great. INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Thank you. MR. RIVERON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Good luck, sir. We're just going to have you initial that real quick. MR. RIVERON: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next one is going to be Arce, which is Case No. 1 from your packet. Are the respondents here? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: They're not here. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Good morning. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and abate all violations by immediately ceasing to allow amplified sound except during the time specified on the Sol de Mexico's amplified sound permit and pay a first-time violation fine of$100 in accordance with the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances Article IV, Section 54-90(A); Three, the respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I've got a question. How -- it states in No. 3, the respondent must notify code enforcement. What is there to look at? Is there removal of sound equipment or -- Page 50 161 2A2- March22, 2 12 MR. LEFEBVRE: At this point, no, not that -- just our standard 3 and 4 on all of our stipulations; I just didn't remove that. But they are in compliance right now unless they allow their amplified sound during times other than is on the amplified sound permit. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: But in the future we could -- there is a part of the ordinance that states that we could, with the Sheriffs Department, confiscate the equipment if they continue doing what they're doing at this point. CHAIRMAN KELLY: This is concerts at the fairgrounds or something? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: No. This is the -- you know where the chickee hut is on 951, where the Sol de Mexico, right there. They have amplified sound permit, and they just were playing music after their 12 a.m. deadline on the permit. MR. KAUFMAN: This sounds very familiar. Was this before us recently, or was it a case similar to this? MR. LEFEBVRE: There was something similar, I believe. This is the first time I actually brought these particular owners in, the restaurant, to the board. MR. KAUFMAN: Yeah. Tony said it was a different restaurant, I guess. Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Entertain a motion from the board to accept or deny. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 51 161 2 A a-= March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: Just for the record as well, the operational costs and the hundred dollars have been paid. They paid it this morning, so they paid the $180 that was due. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, great. They're already in compliance with most of it then. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. The last one under stipulations is Sokol, Steven Sokol, and that would have been Case No. 3 in your packet. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Are you Mr. Sokol? MR. HAGAN: No, I'm not. I'm his engineer, Chris Hagan. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Investigator, if you'd like to state your name and read it in. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Good morning. For the record, Andrew Kelly, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall; one, pay the operational costs of$82 even incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County permits for excavation and final approval or restoration to original condition within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of$100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, alternatively restore the area to original condition; Page 52 161 2A - March 22, 2012 Four, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request an investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Five, that the respondent shall -- that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Again, if you would, just state that you have the authority to speak on the behalf of the owners. MR. HAGAN: My name is Chris Hagan, and the owner has authorized me to represent him on this issue. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Great. And do you understand and agree to everything that was just read? MR. HAGAN: We do. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: What has to be done? Is there still a hole there or something? MR. HAGAN: There was a minor excavation of earth on the site, and it's been in violation. So the owner has authorized me to proceed and get an excavation permit to dig a proper pond to the county code and, utilizing that material, backfill the over-excavated areas. MR. KAUFMAN: Thank you for your explanation. Make a motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 53 161 2AQ- March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. MR. HAGAN: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you very much. Before we get into hearings, it's 10:17. We'll take a break until 10:30 and be back. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: So now we're going to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. It's like in stereo up here. Okay. Now it's almost too loud. No, it's good, it's good. Okay. I'd like to propose an amendment to the agenda, if I could get a motion for this. We have two respondents in the audience, and I'd like just to be as fair as possible and pull them up. And thank you, Gerald, for the recommendation. If we could get amendment to the agenda, I'd like to pull case number -- and we're moving now into C, hearings. And we'll pull Case No. 15, Sean King Trust, move that up to next on our agenda, and then immediately following that, under old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines, Case No. 2, Gulf Way Condominiums. We'll put that next, and then we'll go back to our agenda. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to change the agenda. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 54 161 2Ac - March 22, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, it carries. So we're going to move right to hearings, Letter C, hearings, Case No. 15, Sean King Trust. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: This is violation of ordinance: Vegetation removal, protection, and preservation; vegetation removal/landfill required; Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.01(B). Description of violation: Property was partially cleared of vegetation without a Collier County permit. Location/address where violation exists: 4441 5th Avenue Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34119; Folio 36663400008. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Sean King Trust, 720 Goodlette Road North, Suite 304, Naples, Florida, 34102. Date violation first observed: March 10, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: June 1, 2011. Date on by/which violation to be corrected: July 1, 2011. Date of reinspection: August 31, 2011. Results of reinspection, non-compliant. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Good morning, for the record -- can you hear me? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. Page 55 161 2Aa- March 22, 2012 INVESTIGATOR KELLY: For the record, Andrew Kelly, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like now to present case evidence in the following exhibits of two photos. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion by Mr. Lavinski. MR. MIESZCAK: Did he see them? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah, that's a good idea. Have you seen the photos, sir? MR. GARCIA: I have. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And you're okay with them being shown to us? MR. GARCIA: I am, I am. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Seconded by Tony. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Okay. I'd like to -- I observed the violation on March 10, 2011. The property was partially cleared, approximately .0 -- I'm sorry -- 0.8 acres. There were no building Page 56 161 2A9 March 22, 2012 permits issued or a vegetation removal permit issued per the county records. I spoke with a gentleman named Steve from Jazz Development on the same day of 3/10/11 who stated that he was working on behalf of the owner at the time, and I advised him of the violation. He did cease all activities on the property. I posted the notice of violation on this property on June 1, 2011. Steve, with Jazz Development, indicated that they were in the process of getting a building permit. On August 31 of 2011 I checked our records to see if any permits were applied for. None had been applied for at the time through the county. On February 16, 2012, I met with Mr. and Mrs. Garcia. Mrs. Garcia identified herself as the sole beneficiary of the trust. I met them on site. While on site, I discussed the violation. I presented them with all my case information. And they understood the violation. On this past Monday, on March 19, 2012, I spoke with Mr. Garcia and their current architect who advised that they are in the process of completely redesigning the house that they want to put on this piece of property. They also acquired a piece of land contiguous to this property, so they wanted to make some additional changes. The property -- the architect advised that they would probably need about nine months to complete the plans. Also, once the building permit is issued, then the violation would be immediately abated by the issuance of that permit, and that is under Land Development Code 3.05.02(F)(1), which states a building permit has been issued for permitted principal structure. The building permit serves as the clearing permit. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. How large is the property in its current state? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: The property currently is 2.5 acres. It is an unimproved vacant property. Page 57 161 2A March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So they're allowed to clear up to an acre, but they have to have a building permit which acts as the vegetation removal permit then? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Any questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN COYLE: Anything further from the county? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Mr. King? MR. GARCIA: Good morning. No, I'm -- he's our attorney. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay, I'm sorry. MR. GARCIA: I'm the husband. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Could you just state your name. MR. GARCIA: Dan Garcia. It was our understanding through the excavator that if it was under one acre of clearing, a simple -- is it a vegetation permit -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes. MR. GARCIA: -- would be required. The difference, and I guess ultimately what -- in the code, once you introduce mechanical excavation -- we could have went out there and did exactly what we did here now if we did not have mechanical equipment on site. Regardless, as the owners, we're responsible. I don't know if a licensed excavator knew the difference between mechanical or not. What I later learned is that, you know, it's quite an effort time-wise to get the approval for that. So I'm not saying anything. It was excavated. We moved forward with it not knowing we needed the permit. When we then went to see what kind of permit we needed after Andrew had contacted us, that's when we discovered that it's a pretty big permit. It's not a permit just to go in and get the land cleared, that we needed a full building permit. What has happened since then is we've been in talks with two of the owners around the two-and-a-half acres to acquire their property Page 58 161 2Ac - March 22, 2012 as well, and that kind of scratches -- you know, we've got to go back to the drawing board in terms of our home design, where on the property it's going to be. We've got title of unity issues, and I think we're kind of back -- where we were 70, 80 percent of the way with our permit drawings that would have abated this violation, we're not even closing on the other adjacent properties for another 30 to 60 days. So we do need quite a bit of time if possible, and that's why our architect and us got on the phone to see if there was any way that we could do something maybe a little further out than six -- 180 days, six months. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So just for clarification, you do intend to build on this property? MR. GARCIA: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And you're going to actively pursue a building permit to an eventual structure? MR. GARCIA: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Questions? MR. KAUFMAN: So you now -- with the explanation of what needs to be done, you realize that you were in violation or you are in violation? MR. GARCIA: Oh, absolutely, yeah. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Then I make a motion that we find you in violation, and then we'll talk about what you need. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Second by Mr. Lavinski. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 59 161 2A - March 22, 012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. Now, if you'll bear with us, we're going to get a recommendation from the county, and we can talk about outcomes. MR. GARCIA: Sure. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Recommendation: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the -- excuse me. The Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days, and abate all violations by; one, must cease all land clearing, excavation, and/or landfill operation and must obtain any and all applicable permits, to include vegetation removal or vegetation removal and landfill permits pursuant to 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) or, two, must submit a restoration plan pursuant to the Collier County Land Development Code, Chapters 10.02.06(E)(2) for the -- excuse me -- for the approval by Collier County and restore the property; Three, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated and ordered to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the -- bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have several questions. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Go ahead. Page 60 161 2 IV' March 22, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: First of all, how much land are you acquiring on either side of your property? MR. GARCIA: Two-and-a-half acres to the east and one-and-a-half acres to the north. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. So you currently have two-and-a-half acres? MR. GARCIA: Yeah. It would be six-and-a-half acres when all is said and done. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. Can you put the -- because, really, this -- this recommendation is going to need quite a bit of tweaking, because, number two, you wouldn't have a mitigation plan if you're going to be building a house there. MS. BAKER: It's either/or from what the recommendation says. It's one -- MR. GARCIA: And one thing we didn't want to do is we didn't want to go ahead and mitigate and plant things that we knew we would be removing. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MR. GARCIA: So that's kind of left us in the predicament of building permit. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. The reason I ask how many total acreage you have -- because, hypothetically, when you purchase this it will be a total of six-and-a-half acres. If you only removed one acre, you could then now remove another percentage, whatever -- what's the percentage of-- INVESTIGATOR KELLY: No, you're only under a building permit, and you're only allowed to clear up to one acre -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: -- with a valid building permit. If they build an accessory structure that may need additional clearing, then they can get a vegetation removal permit for that additional structure. Page 61 161 2 A )- March 22, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: But if this is considered three separate parcels, could they get -- I guess would it depend on which property they build a house on, or is it all, collectively, one parcel now, and they can only get one acre? MR. GARCIA: It will be one parcel where -- just for tax purposes, we're going to do a title unity. CHAIRMAN KELLY: For land clearing, one building permit gives you one acre. So if they built three houses, they could clear three acres. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: But they would have to be on separate parcels of land. MR. GARCIA: And we'd have three separate building permits. MR. KAUFMAN: And you're not closing on those properties real soon? MR. GARCIA: Thirty to sixty days. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: When do you think you'll be pulling a building permit? MR. GARCIA: We're at -- our architect had said, realistically, it would be nine months; six to nine months. MR. LEFEBVRE: Before you pull a permit? MR. GARCIA: Yeah, before we pull a -- before we pull a permit. You know, could it go a little quicker than that? What I don't want to do is I don't want to -- disingenuous, want to stand there and say, hey, we'll have it done in four months and then have to stand before you again and say, yeah, we're still -- we have a problem with this lot or we have to expand the house. We've gone through three months redesign on the house anyway, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: So you may have to incorporate a mitigation plan anyway, because if you have one acre cleared already and you decide to build a house in a different location, you are going to have to mitigate the current -- Page 62 161 2A � March 22, 2012 MR. GARCIA: Fortunately we're keeping the house -- you're right. Yeah, if we decided once we put these together that we wanted to move the house a half an acre over, yeah, but we're going to keep the house in the same exact location. MR. LEFEBVRE: So -- but a building permit wouldn't then necessarily negate this order? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. The building permit, by the issuance of a building permit, automatically allows them to clear up to one acre of land. The code does not require them to have a CO or any other -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Right, but if it's built in a different location, then they still would have to mitigate. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Correct. If they opt to go beyond the one acre of allowance the building permit gives them, then anything beyond that would either have to be authorized or they would have to restore the area. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. So you're telling me it could take up to nine months to get -- I just don't understand why it would take that long. MR. GARCIA: First of all, we're 50 percent in town and not -- we've taken three to four months with the first building or the first home. We went from a two-story to a one-story. A lot of it is husband and wife's kind of putting together. One wants one type of house, the other one looks at the numbers and says, maybe value engineering. So what we've got to really do is we've got to sit down and start right at scratch and look to see what we're doing. It may sound like a long time, but I think the fact that I'm going out of town now and coming back next week, and then I'm going to be gone for three months gives me a little less time to deal with the architect. And what we've done with the property now -- and I want to emphasize -- yes, it's a violation. It's something that inevitably we'd be Page 63 161 2Ad-- March 22, 2012 in the exact same position. We just weren't, as owners, fully informed that to get where we are today was more than a vegetation removal permit, that it was the full-blown house plans. I mean, we have issues with the land, where exactly we're putting the house. We've got to combine these, and I think it's going to take, realistically, six months. Our architect thinks more like nine. That's why I'm asking for a year. MR. LEFEBVRE: I just don't understand why the location of the house is going to dictate the plans of the house. I just don't -- I mean, I don't get it. I mean, with six-and-a-half acres, I don't see you increasing the house size that it's going to encroach on the two-and-a-half acres. So I'm -- I can't agree to the nine months. That just seems like an exorbitant amount of time. I don't know what size house you're building, but -- MR. GARCIA: Well -- and, you know, in all honesty, I'm telling you we're keeping it right there. Once we sit down with the architect, you know, we may very well move it an acre and a half I don't think we're going to, and I think we've kind of agreed to that, but I can't tell you for sure we haven't. That opens the can of worms of we've applied for the building permit, but what do we do with what we've just cleared? And you're right, we're going to have to go back and mitigate, and we're going to have to go in and probably replant. In order to do that, then we're going to have to hire, I believe, an environmental consultant if we do. So what I don't want to do is I don't want to 100 percent agree that we're going to go lock in on that one area that we cleared just to satisfy a violation when we're building our home. It may be a number of different issues that open up over the next three to four to six months, and I just -- I'm asking for this because I don't want to be standing here in six months and nine months and say, oh, we didn't Page 64 161 2 March 22, 2012 quite get where we were. MR. LEFEBVRE: The other issue we have, if we do give you nine months -- which, again, I don't think I can agree to -- we're going to be back in the dry season and on the cusp of being on the dry season. And I would take it you probably don't want to irrigate the land that you're mitigating, so you want to give it the best chance of survival, and that's going to be difficult, too. So we have some time constraints ourselves, too. MR. GARCIA: But I think it's unrealistic -- and, again, we're in this position -- for us to -- you know, I could stand here -- if we were granted 90 days, I just don't realistically see how we could do it because of the mass of the work that we're doing, the amount of work we're doing, and the fact that this is a considerable investment. It's a house, and it's a -- not a small house, and we just -- we need the time. We need the time. MR. MIESZCAK: You know, it seems to me there's so many "if this," "if that," "if that." You're buying property here, you're buying property there. You don't know where you're going. You already moved away with the vegetation without a permit, and I think the board -- I think we should consider what we're here for; property was partially cleared of vegetation without a Collier County permit, and that's what we should be deciding on. I don't want to get into all this other stuff, because I have no clue where he's going to go with this. And if pulling a building permit solves the problem, then maybe that's what should be done. MR. GARCIA: But I -- and we talked about that, and the one thing our architect doesn't want to do -- and I think it's not fair to us, the county, anybody -- is go in with a disingenuous building permit for the sake of trying to satisfy a code violation. We don't want to do that. We're not going to do that. Our architect is -- just, ethically, we're not going to do that. We could go in next week with a building permit and make this Page 65 16I 2 March 22, 12 go away, but 100 percent chance we're not going to build that house, and I don't know if that's really the best and fairest way to go. MR. MIESZCAK: What's the problem with pulling a permit? MR. GARCIA: We haven't decided on exactly the house design. MR. MIESZCAK: I'm talking about this partial cleared vegetation without a permit. MR. GARCIA: Well, because we can't pull a permit. The permit is actually the residential building permit to build the structure, the whole house. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Mr. Kaufman? MR. MIESZCAK: No. MR. KAUFMAN: Yeah, I kind of agree with both of the board members. If nothing is done but giving nine months to resolve this, there is no penalty for somebody else to go out and do exactly what you did and then come before the board and say, let's wait until I get all my plans done and it's going to take a year. There's no penalty, and yet we have found you in violation. MR. GARCIA: Sure. MR. KAUFMAN: And, typically, when we find you in violation, we give a reasonable -- we care more about compliance than anything. It's not fines. But compliance on this requires some amount of time that's reasonable to have the property come -- or the violation come into the plans. So it's a reasonable amount of time. I agree with Mr. Lefevbre, 90 days seems to be on the outset. If I'm not mistaken, you start out when you get a building permit with a notice of commencement that's posted on the property; is that correct? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: I honestly don't know. I'm not in building. MR. GARCIA: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: So if you put forward plans that need to be modified in the future, you're building it in the same place, what's to prevent you from getting a building permit in a much shorter time Page 66 161 2A - March 22, 2012 frame? You're not asking for property to be CO'ed. Just the -- start with a notice of commencement, and then I believe you have to do inspections, at the minimum, one every six months until the project is complete. MR. GARCIA: Well, I guess the reason we're not doing that is because we would knowingly be going and applying for a building permit based upon a design that's going to change. And we could go through six revisions over the next four years, and we wouldn't be any further along. The integrity of the process -- you know, if we do get extended a little time, we're going to go in one time with the design we want, the design we agree to. And what's been done out there is technically -- and, fully agree, it's a violation, and we bear the responsibility as the owner, but it's not something we need to go in and fix in terms of what we did out there was wrong. We did it in the wrong order, and it's going to stay exactly the way it is down the road. The problem is we're just creating a lot of paperwork and administrative and time of the county by going through revision after revision after revision if we do only have 60 to 90 days. MR. KAUFMAN: I think most houses that are built have revisions. It's the rule rather than the exception. Somebody builds a house, and then they change it a little bit. They could even be changing the footprint. MR. GARCIA: Sure. MR. KAUFMAN: So to say that we're not going to do it until everything is absolutely completed, I don't think is fair to being incompliant -- in compliance. MR. GARCIA: Sure, sure. And, again, I just think that we're going to be spending a lot of time at the building department over the course of the next year and a half or so. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can I see the recommendation, please, once again. Does the board have any more comments? I would like to make a motion. Page 67 1 61 2 A c7.1_ March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: I just think that we're probably going to end up settling on around six months, and it's just going to force you to kind of get your architect and you and your wife together to decide on a plan and get an architect who will draw it, submit them to the county in order to pull a permit within six months. It's just going to probably accelerate your process a little bit. MR. GARCIA: And there's a big difference between 90 days and six months. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yep, agreed. MR. GARCIA: You know, so -- and if we do that knowing we've got to make a revision, you know, we could be fine with that. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Can I make a clarification real quick? On the recommendation it talks about a vegetation removal permit or a vegetation removal site fill permit. When I went through and cited code of 3.05 paren -- I'm sorry, 3.05.02(F)(1), the building permit acts as the vegetation clearing permit. I just want to make sure that, you know, there's a clarification that you-all understood that. Also it's -- maybe should have put it more explicit in the recommendations. But the vegetation removal permit acts -- I'm sorry. The building permit acts as that vegetation removal permit. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thanks for your explanation. But if you're citing the right section of the code, your explanation here on the record is probably fine enough. Thank you. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Does anyone want to take a stab at it? MR. LEFEBVRE: I mean, I guess the question I have is, if they decide to build on a different location than the land that's currently cleared, will they have to mitigation the other land before they can clear the land where the house site is going to be? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: If they pull a building permit and they wind up relocating the building, when they go for their COs or Page 68 161 2A i- March 22, 2012 their inspections and they see they've cleared beyond the acre allowance, they will not be able to get their CO until they're in compliance within the full project site. So they would be required to go back and restore any areas beyond the one acre of allowed clearance. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Very good. So -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: Can I have a follow-up? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, sure. CHAIRMAN KELLY: However, during the process of submitting for their building permit, if the plans were drawn to use more than one acre and there was justification for it, for instance, a larger home footprint, taking into consideration the adjoining properties as one, there's a chance that the county would allow them to clear more than one acre, correct? INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Yes, sir. There's lots of variables that would allow one acre beyond clearance. MR. KAUFMAN: One quickie. Property itself, is it 660 feet deep? MR. GARCIA: Yeah, 660 by 155, I think. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's two and a half? MR. KAUFMAN: Two and a half. CHAIRMAN KELLY: One eighty. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, 180 makes it 2.72 acres, but who's counting? MR. GARCIA: I think 150 to 170. MR. KAUFMAN: Right. So in all likelihood, you can't really move it very far. You have setbacks on either side. If it was a 1.14-acre lot, you'd only have -- you have a much smaller setback. But with a two-and-a-half acre lot, your setbacks on either side are wider. And based on what I saw in the pictures, I don't think you can move it, unless you move it farther back or farther forward on the 660 feet. Page 69 161 2A .c71_, March 22, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: But they're going to acquire -- MR. GARCIA: And we're -- yeah. What we're doing is we're going behind us and to the side, so we can put the house -- and this is where we're still confused and haven't figured out. We can put the house wherever we want. You're right, we've locked in on this one two-and-a-half acre area, but now we can move it 80 feet one way, 300 feet the other way, and we just don't -- we just don't know. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think we've beat this horse many times over. MR. GARCIA: I agree. MR. KAUFMAN: And you can have horses on your property, too. But let's -- 180 days from today or $150 will be imposed for each day the violation remains, or the respondent must prepare a mitigation plan which meets the criteria stated in the case. I'm not sure if I want to stick with that 180 days. I'll stay with 180 days or $150 a day will be imposed. MR. MIESZCAK: Mitigation. MR. LEFEBVRE: What's that? CHAIRMAN KELLY: The actual planting of the vegetation. MR. LEFEBVRE: How about within 270 days or $150 a day. Again, we're going to be in dry season. That's the only thing that I have that's going to be a problem. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? MR. GARCIA: No, thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 70 161 2 A c9--- March 22, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. And it carries. So we've accepted the county's recommendation. You have 30 days to pay the operational costs of$81 .15, 180 days to get a permit pulled, a building permit pulled or, if you decide not to pull a building permit, mitigation would require -- actual mitigation report filed within 180 days, and then all the vegetation completely planted within 270 days from today. MR. GARCIA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. INVESTIGATOR KELLY: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So now we're moving to, under imposition of fine. It's going to be Gulf Way Condominiums. MR. LEFEBVRE: Don't you wish your case was before that one? MR. CAHILL: It's been very interesting. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. This is an imposition of fine, but we're just going to read it real quick into the record, and then we'll decide what we're going to do. MR. CAHILL: Okay, fine. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay. Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in regards to CEB Case No. CESD20100006498, Board of County Commissioners versus Gulf Way Condominiums. Original violation is of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06 (B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Violation location is at 211 First Street, Naples, Florida; Folio Page 71 161 2 A a-- March 22, 2012 No. 48270040001. Violation description is a garage that was converted into a living space without obtaining proper Collier County permits. Past order: On September 22, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4728, Page 885, for more information. A motion to continue was granted on June 23, 2011. See the attached order of the board, OR4698, Page 1338 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 22, 2012. Fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between January 22, 2012, and January 26, 2012, totaling six days, for a total of$1,200. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Total amount to date, $1,200. The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and operational costs are paid. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to abate. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 72 161 2 A 0— March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it's been completely abated. Thank you, Mr. Cahill, for your time. MR. CAHILL: Thank you very much, Board. Good morning. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you, sir. MR. CAHILL: See you, Lionel. MR. LEFEBVRE: Mr. Chairman, can we take -- I know a lot of members have to leave early. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I've got to leave at noon. MR. LEFEBVRE: We have quite a bit still, I think, if I'm not mistaken. Should we move up the vote for chair? CHAIRMAN KELLY: If you'd like. Yeah, if you want to make a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: But, I mean, if some members leave and we have a full board -- it's up to you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any issues with that? MS. BAKER: No issues, just with the understanding that the new chair will not start as chair until the next meeting. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Fine with me. You okay, Jean? MS. RAWSON: I'm fine with that. We just can't switch horses in midstream here. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I understand. MR. LEFEBVRE: I just know that quite a few people -- are we going to have a quorum after, like, 12 o'clock? CHAIRMAN KELLY: We'll still have a quorum. I think the two alternates will then be voting. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, no. One of the alternates is leaving. MR. MARINO: I'm leaving at 11 :30. MR. L'ESPERANCE: And actually I'm leaving at 12. Page 73 161 2 A 0-- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're leaving at 12, okay. MR. HUDSON: It would be both alternates. I'm out at 12:30. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We might as well do it now. I've got a full board. Let's go ahead and make a motion to amend. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to amend the agenda and move up the elections, but whatever number it is on the agenda. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Tony. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Now moving on to elections. Do we have a nomination for the position of chairman? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I have a nomination as Mr. Kaufman as chairman. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Do we have a -- any other nominations for chairman? (No response.) Page 74 161 2A0- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seeing none, we'll all make the motion -- we have the motion and a second. All in favor of Mr. Kaufman as chairman, signify by saying aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Now for the position of vice chair, do we have a nomination? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I have a nomination for Mr. Dean as vice chair. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Mr. Dean, do you accept? MR. MIESZCAK: I decline. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yeah. Really? MR. MIESZCAK: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Do we have any other nominations? Glad I asked. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Really? I've got to pay you back for that dinner you bought me, huh? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any other nomination for vice chairman? MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to nominate -- MR. MIESZCAK: I'd like to nominate, Lefebvre. The new guy on the block. MR. KAUFMAN: That was who I was going to nominate. MR. MIESZCAK: The new guy on the block. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. Page 75 161 2Aa March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: So it's seconded. Any other nomination for vice chair? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and vote. MR. MARINO: Did he accept? MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess I -- CHAIRMAN KELLY: You're accepting, right? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You don't have a choice. You have to accept this one. MR. MIESZCAK: You're looking at him? CHAIRMAN KELLY: No, he's -- oh, you're accepting. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sorry. MR. MIESZCAK: That's Lefebvre over there. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Lefebvre, I apologize. L'Esperance -- MR. MIESZCAK: You got a fever. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You accept, right? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. We'll go ahead and call for a vote. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) Page 76 161 2A - March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. There, our new board, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Vice chairman starting next month. Congratulations, guys. MR. KAUFMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Excellent. MR. MIESZCAK: What are you going to do? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, I'm going to be participating again. This is stressful. All right. So now, if I'm not mistaken, going back to normal cases, under standard hearings, Case No. 5 is next, is that correct, and that would be MDG Capital, Lake Trafford, LLC. The respondents are not here. Do we have the investigator to present? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.13(F). Description of violation: Failed to submit PUD monitoring report for 2011. Location/address where violation exists: Arrowhead PUD, Folio No. 22430003105. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: William L. Klohn, registered agent for MDG, Lake Trafford, LLC, MDG Capital Corporation, 2180 Immokalee Road, Suite 309, Naples, Florida, 34110. Date violation first observed: October 22nd -- I'm sorry. August 22, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: August 24, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 22, 2011. Date of reinspection: February 22, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. Page 77 161 2A � March 22, 2012 MR. RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence, and these are the copy of the letters that they sent for the annual monitoring reports; one dated March 28th, the other one dated May 31st -- I'm sorry, June 15th. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: On August 22, 2011, I received a complaint: Monitor failed to receive the PUD monitoring report for 2011. I researched the tracking system, and no PUD monitoring reports were ever received. I attempted to contact the registered agent but was unable to. On August 24, 2011, I posted the property and courthouse and I mailed the notice of violation certified. I have been checking and tracking the system, and all forms have been returned. As of today the violation remains. Page 78 161 2A 2 . March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Was there a second page? Is it required to have any type of service for these type of letters? MR. RODRIGUEZ: There is. CHAIRMAN KELLY: And you can certify that there was good service? INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any questions from the board? MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we find him in violation. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. Do you have a recommendation? MR. RODRIGUEZ: That the board order to pay operational costs in the amount of$82.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing, abate all violations by submitting the following documents: Two completed copies of the annual monitoring report, one of three traffic county options, and one executive affidavit within X amount of days of this hearing, or a fine of X per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigators perform a site Page 79 16i • A March 22, 2012 inspection to confirm compliance, but if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any methods to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Would someone like to accept the county's suggestion? MR. KAUFMAN: I have one question for Mr. Lavinski, who is our resident expert on PUD monitoring. How long do you think this should take to resolve? MR. LAVINSKI: I guess I'm concerned. Has anything been done on this, anything submitted on the PUD report, or are they just ignoring it completely? MS. BEARD: Laurie Beard, for the record. Sorry. CHAIRMAN KELLY: (Indicating.) MS. BEARD: I did. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Yeah, good. Thank you. MS. BEARD: For the record, Laurie Beard, PUD monitoring. They have not filled in anything this year at all. I've gotten it from the other owners in the property, but nothing from MDG. MR. LAVINSKI: Okay. So do we know if it's completed, it's built out, and there are no -- MS. BEARD: No, sir. MR. LAVINSKI: -- missing portions? MS. BEARD: They have -- according to the 2010 report, there were 117 single-family homes out of 436 built, and 332 multifamily homes out of 809, and there are zero square footage of commercial built out of 130,000. So there's quite a bit left to build there. MR. LAVINSKI: Well, that -- they should still be able to pull that together, I would say, in 60 to 90 days. It's -- they know -- and especially where Laurie says she has previous years, that's a good base Page 80 161 2Ac March 22, 2012 for this -- new folks to work from. And where they just haven't responded, I think that probably 90 days -- it sounds like a big project, so I would think 90 days would be a good start. CHAIRMAN KELLY: It's the same owner year to year, correct? MDG's owned it the whole time. MS. BEARD: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: They have? MS. BEARD: Yes. It currently owns all of the single-family, which -- the single-family and the commercial, and that's the only two parcels -- the portions left that have not turned in the monitoring report. CHAIRMAN KELLY: So it's essentially just copying last years, to an effect? MS. BEARD: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: This is a local developer that has developed here for years. MS. BEARD: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: He should know the process. So I think 90 days is -- MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I think 90's too much. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- too much, right. MR. LAVINSKI: Right. I change my opinion on that, yeah. MR. LEFEBVRE: I would have to go -- make a motion with 60 days and a fine of$100 a day. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 81 161 2 A March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Sixty days and $100 a day accepting county's additions. MR. MIESZCAK: Operational costs 82.86? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, included. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Thank you. I have the next case as Irma Arrendondo. Okay. Respondent's not here. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(2). Description of violation: Dwelling being occupied without water. Location/address violation exists: 1948 45th Terrace Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116; Folio No. 35749440006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Irma Arrendondo, 1948 45th Terrace Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: January 30, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: February 13, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: Immediately. Date of reinspection: March 1, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. I have two items I'd like to present for case evidence. The first Page 82 161 2 A March 22, 2012 item's going to be a notice of lien on the property from Florida Governmental Utility Authority, which is the operator of the water and wastewater utility system for the Golden Gate City area that this property's located at, and I also have a photograph taken by myself yesterday that kind of proves that the property is occupied. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: This case initiated on January 30th of this year as an anonymous complaint. Complaint was in regards, actually, at the time to the individuals living at the house were constantly running a generator. So I believe it was more -- the complaint was probably initially about the noise, because they were running a generator at all times of the day. I made a site visit to the property, met with an occupant of the house, and he had stated that they were in the process of moving in, and they were working on establishing an account with Florida Power and Light. On February 7th of this year, our customer service staff received a phone call that the water had also been shut off to the property, and Page 83 161 2A 9- March 22, 2012 at that time I verified with Florida Governmental Utility Authority that the meter had been removed due to an outstanding bill, so that's why I wanted to show the lien. So on February 8th, I made a site visit to the property and met with the occupant. At that time they did have power, and he stated that they were going to go down to FGUA and work out a payment plan so that they could get the water turned back on. So I was -- seemed like they were trying to do the right thing, so I wanted to work with them a little bit. And he also said at that time that they were kind of just staying there during the day, and at night they were staying with relatives. So I just was trying to work with them a little bit. February 24th, I made a site visit to the property, and water was still not turned on. The guy, again, said he was still working on it, so I would give him another week. March 1st, checked with FGUA, and the water still was shut off, and no one had contacted them about setting up a new account or making a payment plan. So at that point I just wanted to bring the case to a hearing. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Mucha, I have a question. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is there an irrigation well on this property? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: An irrigation well, I don't believe so. MR. L'ESPERANCE: It appears to me that there's a good possibility that there might be because of the age of the home. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: And I just raise a question of the possibility that the irrigation well has been diverted into domestic use, possibly. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Possibly. Page 84 161 2 A .9-- March 22, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I don't know. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: There's a good chance of that. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion that a violation exists. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. Do you have a recommendation? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. My recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and to abate the violation by providing water to the dwelling with an active valid account with Florida Governmental Utility Authority or vacating the premises until such time that water is provided within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank for each day the violation continues. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated and ordered to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Page 85 161 2 March 22, 2012 Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. KAUFMAN: Are there any children living there? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: You know, I did see some children on one of my visits. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion, fill in the blanks. Pay the operational costs as listed, $500 a day fine, three days. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Three days? Three business days or three days? MR. KAUFMAN: Three days. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Three days. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's going to be hard for noticing them. CHAIRMAN KELLY: I won't have them signed in time for three days. MS. RAWSON: It is -- they won't even get the order in three days. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, what's the soonest we can do it? Because this is certainly a safety and health. And when there's children involved, it's even worse. MS. BAKER: If Jean could get us a copy of the order that's not signed, we can go post it on the property. Once you guys issue a verbal order, it takes effect whether we have a signed copy or not, so MS. RAWSON: Not a problem. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So you're comfortable with three days? MS. RAWSON: Yes, because I'll have it to Colleen tomorrow. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: All right. Do we have any further discussion? (No response.) Page 86 161 March 2 , 2 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Very good, it carries. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you, Joe. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just a clarification for the reason that I seconded the motion, is you've had multiple contacts with the tenant. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: And maybe this will get the owner's attention. So that's just my reason behind it. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Well, one thing I'm a little curious about is that the tenants have refused to give me any contact information for the owners, so they may be squatters. So that's another reason why I was kind of not sure, you know, what's going on. So I have no way of getting ahold of the owner. I haven't been able to find them, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Very good. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Thank you. MR. MARINO: I'm leaving. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case is Lonny Moore Trust, Morrison Living Trust. MR. KAUFMAN: Tony's got to leave. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Oh, yeah. Tony's got to leave. And, Ron, are you -- Page 87 161 21% 9-- March 22, 2012 MR. DOINO: I've got a few minutes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. A couple more cases. All right. That means for a few minutes, while you are still here, you have voting authority because you're our senior alternate. MR. KAUFMAN: Which case are we up to? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.08(C). Description of violation: Presence of Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation including, but not limited to, Brazilian pepper. Location/address where violation exists: 120 7th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 37161440006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Lonny Moore Trust Estate, Morrison Living Trust, 391 9th Street Southwest, Naple, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: December 5, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 24, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 24, 2012. Date of reinspection: February 28, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Good afternoon. For the record, David Jones, investigator, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present some case evidence regarding this in the form of a picture. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion by Mr. Lavinski. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 88 161 2A 2-- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Thank you. In the picture you can see there are Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation mainly consisting of Brazilian pepper located on the property. Part of the Land Development Code requires these exotics to be removed in perpetuity. As you can see, that's not being done here. I did make a site visit yesterday. The violation remains. As previously stated, service was given on January 24th, and the violation remains. MR. KAUFMAN: Could I ask a question, or three? The amount of garbage cans sitting there tells me something, number one; number two, I see a driveway going up to a window. That kind of gives me an indication of something else. Has this property been looked at other than the exotics that are right in the front? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Actually, yes. There's another investigator. I believe it's Chris Ambach. He may have had a previous case on this property. As a matter of fact, I know he did. I don't know the details of that case or what it consisted of. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I make a motion we find it in violation. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) Page 89 161 2 A March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries. Do you have a recommendation? INVESTIGATOR JONES: I do. That the code enforcement board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, must obtain any necessary permits, inspections, and certificate of completion for the removal of all Collier County prohibited exotics vegetation within blank days of this hearing or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated; Two, the prohibited exotic vegetation base stump must be treated with a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide, and a visual tracer dye shall be applied when the prohibited exotic vegetation is removed, but the base of the vegetation remains within blank days or a fine of blank per day will be imposed; And, finally, No. 3, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated and ordered to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the new property owner. Page 90 161 2L a March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with the owner of the property? INVESTIGATOR JONES: I have not. All -- I just served the property, you know, posted at the property, as well as the courthouse, and mailed it. That's the extent of my contact. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to try to fill in the blanks: 80.57 paid within 30 days. Cristina, do you want to -- INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah. If I could just add something. The owner is deceased but there's a trust, Morrison Living Trust that the notice was sent to, so that may be another party that, you know -- it's his sister. MR. KAUFMAN: Do you know who's living in the property? Is it the sister or -- INVESTIGATOR JONES: Right now I don't know who's living at the property, no. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. 80.57 to be paid within 30 days, the problem to be abated within 30 days, and $100-a-day fine thereafter. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries, 30 days, $100 a day. Page 91 I, 161 2A 9-- March 22, 2012 INVESTIGATOR JONES: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. Next case is Tommy Pickren, that would have been Case No. 12. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(A). Description of violation: An unpermitted shed with utilities in the rear yard. Location/address where violation exists: 1072 North Alhambra Circle, Naples, Florida, 34103; Folio No. 63401440002. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Tommy Pickren, 1072 North Alhambra Circle, Naples, Florida, 34103. Date violation first observed: October 26, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: October 26, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: November 25, 2011. Date of reinspection: February 6, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: Good morning. For the record, Joseph Giannone, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present Case CESD20110014953. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Three photos dated March 19th. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to accept. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Mr. Lavinski. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 92 161 2 A c2 March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: On October 26, 2011, I received a complaint of an unpermitted shed in the rear yard with the utilities located at 1072 North Alhambra Circle. That same day I visited the site and saw the shed with a locked front door with the hose bib on the exterior west side wall, along with a type of venting cap also on the west side wall. At the time of my visit, I found the home to be vacant and the shed to be vacant. On October 26, 2011, I posted a notice of violation at the home and the Collier County Courthouse. I checked the site weekly and this morning and found there to be no change in the violation. MR. KAUFMAN: Could you explain that photo? Looks like a vent? INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: Yeah. It appears to be some type of a vent that's on the side of the shed. MR. KAUFMAN: Like a dryer vent or something? INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: Yeah. It kind of leads me to believe there may be an electric hookup, but I didn't see any conduit or any type of evidence of wires. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have, I guess, a question for our attorney. MS. RAWSON: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'm in real estate, and yesterday I showed a property in the area, and my customer showed me this property. I did some research on it and found some information about it. The owner has transferred. It's now a bank foreclosure. It's bank owned. Took Page 93 161 2 A 9--- March 22, 2012 final judgment on the 8th of this month. I don't know if my customer's going to make an offer on this property, but I have more knowledge than the board has. But ownership has changed as of-- MS. RAWSON: Well, that's helpful information for the board to know; however, because, you know, all of you are really prohibited from going out and doing your own investigation -- although yours was quite incidental -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. RAWSON: -- to the board meeting, I would -- how many people -- yeah, I would suggest that you recuse yourself from the vote. But the knowledge about the ownership being transferred, you know, is probably public record. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. That's how I found it out. MS. RAWSON: So I think you should probably recuse yourself from the voting. And I'll give you a piece of paper to fill out. MR. LEFEBVRE: I would do that. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Stay with us and continue to participate in the discussion, however, though, right? MS. RAWSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question on the pipe that you showed with the shutoff. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Hose bib. MR. MIESZCAK: It's in the "on" position. MR. KAUFMAN: Yeah. Did you try turning it on? Is there water there, or is it just a piece of PVC? MR. MIESZCAK: It's in the "on" position. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me clarify also. Well, I don't know if it's public records. But on MLS, from a previous listing, it did state that this had a guest -- or not a guest, but a separate apartment on the property. Page 94 161 2A g_ March 22, 2012 MR. KAUFMAN: Could you show some of the other pictures again? MS. RAWSON: If there's a separate structure on the land, I'm sure that probably the investigator, Code Enforcement Board people, probably know that. MR. MIESZCAK: There's another one. MS. RAWSON: Whoop. They're showing you a picture of it right now. MR. LEFEBVRE: That is the -- yeah. INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: That's the shed. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, the tank that's on the left-hand side that's blue, that's water treatment. INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: That is basically loose. I grabbed that thinking that there may be some type of an attachment. I moved that -- I didn't want to disturb it anymore -- and it was not attached to anything that I saw, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: So it's not like a rocket engine or anything. MS. BAKER: Can I just make a point of clarification with the final judgment certificate of title issue just so we're all on the same page. The final judgment was done in March, and they set a sale date for April 2, 2012. So at this time there is not a new owner. They just have a sale date. So just so we're clear that the owner that we are here for today still does own the property as of now because there is no certificate of title issued. MR. KAUFMAN: Make the motion we find him in violation. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded by Mr. Lavinski. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? Page 95 lot aA- - a-- March 22, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: (Abstained.) MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Motion carries. Do you have a recommendation? INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: Yes, sir. Code enforcement board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of occupancy, completion within X amount of days of this hearing or a fine of X amount of dollars per day will be imposed until this violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation by using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Department -- Collier County's Sheriffs Office to enforce provisions of this order, and costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KELLY: What were the fees again? MR. MIESZCAK: 81.43, is that right? INVESTIGATOR GIANNONE: 81.43, yes, sir. MR. KAUFMAN: Let me try filling in the blanks: $81.43 paid Page 96 161 2 A 0-- March 22, 2012 within 30 days, violation abated within 30 days, $200 a day fine thereafter. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. LEFEBVRE: (Abstained.) MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Well done, thank you. I think that concludes all of our new cases. Now moving on to old business, No. 5, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines, Subset 1, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company. MR. DOINO: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN KELLY: You ready to go? MR. DOINO: I'm ready to go. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chair, also. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. So we have two more board members going. We still have a quorum. Chris, you'll be voting on everything. And thanks, guys. See you next month. (Mr. Doino and Mr. L'Esperance left the boardroom.) Page 97 161 2A �-- March 22, 2012 (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Are we ready? CHAIRMAN KELLY: Yes. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay. Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in regard to CEB Case No. CESD20110013221, Board of County Commissioners versus Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Company. Original violation is of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Violation location is 4540 7th Avenue Northwest, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 36661360001. Violation description is a 26-foot by 30-foot two-story addition on the side of the residence and an 18-foot by 56-foot screen porch on the rear of the residence. Both additions were constructed without Collier County permits. Past order: On January 19, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 630, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 22, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between February 19, 2012, and March 22, 2012, totaling 33 days, for the total amount of$6,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. Total amount to date $6,681.15. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) Page 98 161 2 A c- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. Thank you. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Next case is Delzotto. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, Cristina Perez, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to CEB Case No. CEAU20110007440. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), and Florida Building Code 2007 Edition Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1 . Location: 2921 2nd Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida; Folio No. 40927600006. Description: Metal shed, garage conversion, and fence all built without Collier County building permits. Past orders: On November 18, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 558, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 22, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as following: Order Page 99 161 2 A a-- March 22, 2012 Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between December 19, 2011, and March 22, 2012, 95 days, for a total of$14,250. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.43 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $14,331.43. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Cristina. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you, Board. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next case is Virginia Villarreal -- Villarrealy? Close? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) SUPERVISOR SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. CEB Case No. CESD20110002682, Board of County Commissioners versus Virginia Villarreal. The violation is Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The location address is 1314 Tangerine Street, Immokalee, Page 100 161 2 R 9- March 22, 2012 Florida. Folio is 3073280001 . The description is two sheds erected in the rear of the property without first obtaining Collier County building permit. Past orders: On October 12, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4734 and Page 2813 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 22, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Items No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between January 26, 2012, and March 22, 2012, 57 days, for a total of$11,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order No. 5, operational costs of$80 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $11,480. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Seconded. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. Okay. And the next one is going to be Juan Cervantez and Page 101 161 2 A �--- March 22, 2012 Marion Hernandez. SUPERVISOR SNOW: That was good. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. SUPERVISOR SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is concerning CEB Case No. CESD20110002352, Board of County Commissioners versus Juan Cervantez and Marion Hernandez. The violation is Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The location is 2615 Dimar Lane, Immokalee, Florida. The folio is 60380320000. The description: An addition and carport attached to the mobile home, also a roof over the mobile home all erected without first obtaining Collier County building permit. Past orders: On October 27, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, a conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4734, Page 2801, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 22, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Item No. 1 and No. 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period of between January 26, 2012 and March 22, 2012, 57 days, for a total of $11,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order No. 5, operational costs of$80.29 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $11,480.29. MR. KAUFMAN: Motion to impose. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? Page 102 161 2 A a__ March 22, 2012 MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: It carries unanimously. And our last case under imposition of fines, AMG Properties. SUPERVISOR SNOW: Before I read the order, just to refresh the board's memory, this was a case that was in the industrial park. They had done additions to the property, massive additions. I would say they added 2,500 square feet to the building. They needed an SIP. They came back before the board and requested more time. The board denied that; however, they requested that they continue working for the SIP, and they continued to do that. The SIP was recently approved as of October of last year, and they have done nothing since then. Now they need to get building permits. So that's why the length of time that when -- when I read this amount -- I just wanted to give you an explanation before I did that. Board of County Commissioners -- THE COURT REPORTER: Hold on. SUPERVISOR SNOW: I'm sorry. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) SUPERVISOR SNOW: I do so swear what I gave and what I will give is accurate. Board of County Commissioners versus AMG Properties, Incorporated. It's CEB Case No. 2007090454. Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Page 103 161 2 A 9--- March 22, 2012 The location is 3 831 Arnold Avenue, Naples, Florida. The folio number is 00278360006. Description is construction/additions/remodeling done without proper permits. Past orders: On June 26, 2008, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4 -- excuse me -- 4376, Pages 0285, for more information. An extension of time was denied to October 2nd -- October 20, 2008, for the attached order of the board; OR4410, Page 3229, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board as of March 22, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Item No. 1 and No. 4, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between October 25, 2008, and March 22, 2012, 1,242 days, for a total of $248,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order No. 7, operational costs in the amount of$502.49 have been paid. Total fines to date are $248,400. MR. KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with these folks lately? SUPERVISOR SNOW: I did until recently. They would always tell me they're working forward. They're progressing. It took them a very long time to do an SIP. And you all know how the process works. Once you do an SIP, they get rejections. They had approximately six months to do the -- to respond. And they would wait until the ninth hour before they would respond, then they'd get another six months. So if-- that's why it took the SIP to go -- to progress so long. And it was just -- it was in October it was -- it was finalized. Now they have to do their -- they have to do a construction meeting with Page 104 161 2 A a-- March 22, 2012 the county to get their permits, and I haven't heard a word from them since then. MR. KAUFMAN: Big fine. But they're not in compliance, so I make a motion we impose. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it carries unanimously. SUPERVISOR SNOW: Thank you, Board. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Thank you. That concludes all of our cases today except we have one more, motion to amend a previously issued order for McKinney. MS. BAKER: Yes, sir. This case was brought to you, I believe it was last month, and we found the board imposed only the operational costs and abated all the fines. The operational costs had been paid prior to the hearing. So we would just ask that the order be amended that the operational costs are not imposed as a lien and that all fines were abated. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Okay. Would someone like to make a motion for Case CES20110001989, McKinney? MR. MIESZCAK: So moved as read. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. Page 105 161 2A a-- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And it's taken care of for you. Now, any -- the new business has been moved to next month. Any old business? I'm sorry, consent agenda has already been forwarded. Awful lot of cases going to the county's attorney's office this week, but we haven't had any in months, so I assume that's why. Any reports? MS. BAKER: Just to give you an update on the foreclosure numbers, for the week ending March 18, 2012, the abatement costs paid by lenders was $2,746,669. The total violations abated by lenders is $2,221 . The current number of open foreclosure cases we have is 73. And that week's total savings to Collier County was $7,462, and nine violations were abated by lenders. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Beautiful. Excellent. Any other reports? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: Comments? I want to say congratulations to our chairman, Mr. Kaufman, and our vice chairman, Mr. Lefebvre. MR. MIESZCAK: I was going to say the same thing to our new board member, Mr. Lefebvre, vice chair, and it was very nice, and Mr. Kaufman. Page 106 161 2 A g- March 22, 2012 CHAIRMAN KELLY: He moves up the ranks quickly. MR. MIESZCAK: Congratulations. MR. KAUFMAN: I have a request before next month, and that is the latest version for our workshop on the articles, I don't know that I have the latest version. I don't know if anybody has the latest version. CHAIRMAN KELLY: You emailed it in the last minute approval. MS. BAKER: We emailed it. That's the latest version is what we emailed you. CHAIRMAN KELLY: There were two attachments. MR. KAUFMAN: Oh, I didn't see the second one. Okay. That was one. CHAIRMAN KELLY: He needs it resent. MR. KAUFMAN: No, if it's there, it's there, and I don't delete them. The other thing is, it seems that one of the suggestions that I'm going to have at the next workshop is that we do something so it's easier for us to find the different cases as we go through it instead of fumbling back and forth on a book. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Tablet. MR. KAUFMAN: Yeah, that was going to be nice. MR. MIESZCAK: I think that was -- we were going to bring that up at the workshop. MR. KAUFMAN: Yeah. But one of the things I would request, if it's possible, the next time we send out the cases, I wonder if we can get the separators, you know, with the little tabs on them with numbers so that we all have the same thing. MS. BAKER: You want us to put binders together; is that what you're asking? MR. KAUFMAN: No, no, no, no, no, no, just the separators. I know the county can't afford the binders or an iPad, but maybe the Page 107 161 2Aa-- March 22, 2012 dividers so that if I picked up Gerald's book or Ken's book, we're all -- have the same sort of plan for seeing what comes next. MR. MIESZCAK: Can we talk about this at the workshop next meeting? I think -- because I've got some suggestions I'd like to bring up, but I don't want to do it now. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Are we going to have the workshop before the meeting or after the meeting? MS. BAKER: At the end of the meeting. MR. MIESZCAK: Are we going to have lunch and all that? Bring your own lunch, folks. MR. LEFEBVRE: Motion to adjourn. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Next meeting's April 26th. We have a motion and a second, however you want to work it. All in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KELLY: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KELLY: And we're out of here. Thank you. Page 108 161 2A ? March 22, 2012 ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :50 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD KEN LY, Chairman These mutes approved by the Board on Lo �' 6,_ .�� , as presented V or as corrected Page 109 161 2A a-- April 26, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, April 26, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Robert Kaufman Kenneth Kelly Larry Mieszcak Ron Doino Chris Hudson (Alternate) James Lavinski Gerald Lefebvre Lionel L'Esperance Tony Marino (Absent) ALSO PRESENT: Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jen Baker, Code Enforcement Specialist Page 1 161 2A April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. And I notice this morning that somebody left a gavel here for me this morning. I have never seen one here in the last four, five years. Notice: That the respondents may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation, unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal the decision of the Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony, evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing that record. Which brings us to roll call. MS. BAKER: Mr. Howard Kaufman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre. MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ken Kelly. MR. KELLY: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Tony Marino is absent. Mr. Chris Hudson. MR. HUDSON: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Larry Mieszcak. MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. Page 2 161 2A o- April 26, 2012 MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski. MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ronald Doino, Jr. MR. DOINO: Here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This morning, since we have one member who is not here, Ron will be a voting member of the proceedings today. Okay, we're moving on to the agenda. Do we have any changes? MS. BAKER: We do. Under number 4, public hearings, motions, letter A, motions, motion for continuance, we have one addition. This will be Dominick Cammuso, CENA2012000965. This was number 15 previously -- previously number 15 under hearings. Under motion for extension of time, we have four additions. The first will be John C. Boyer and Betty Jane Savard-Boyer, Case CESD2011-0002585. The next will be John and Denise T. C. Brimmer, Case 2007090878. Next will be Kirsten Martucci, Case CELU20110006574. And the last will be Kirsten Martucci, Case CESD20110008406. Under stipulations, we have two stipulations. The first stipulation is Judy S. and Silas Pacheco, Case CESD20110007349. This was number five under hearings. And the second is Barry W. Barnett, Jr. and Michelle A. Barnett, Case CESD20110014881. And this was number 13 from hearings. Under letter C, hearings, number two, case CELU20110011262, Gracelyn Mostaccio Rue has been withdrawn. Number 6, Case CESD20100007042, Kirk Sanders has been withdrawn. Number 9, Case CESD20110014134, Maria Ortiz Garcia has been withdrawn. Number 14, case CEROW20120000960, Dominick Cammuso has been withdrawn. Page 3 161 2Ac April 26, 2012 And under number five, old business, letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, number two, Case CES20110006426, Carlisle/Wilson Plaza, LLC has been withdrawn. Number 9, Case CESD20100009135, Opera Naples, Inc. has been withdrawn. And number 10, Case CEPM20110003139, Nicholas and Catherine Gonzalez has been withdrawn. That's all the changes I have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to approve. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Okay, now we have the minutes. We need a motion to approve the minutes, unless there are any discussions, changes, abstentions. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? Page 4 161 2A April 26, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries. Okay, that brings us down to motions for continuance. And I'll leave that up to you to call. MS. BAKER: The first will be Dominick Cammuso, Case CENA20120000965. (Speakers duly sworn). INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is the respondent here today? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: We have been in contact with the lawyer. He's not here today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Jen, what tab is this under for me? MR. LEFEBVRE: There's a letter from the attorney dated the 16th of April. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: None of us will find it. MR. LAVINSKI: It's number 14. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I have it. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: It's 14 and 15. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question on this one, and that was how the notice was performed. Was this a registered letter Page 5 161 aA April 26, 2012 that was sent out or -- MS. BAKER: Yeah, certified mail was sent out on April 16th and the property and courthouse were both posted as well. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It appears that -- why don't you present and we'll go from there. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: You want me to just read the letter or go off-- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, the letter is asking for a -- it says that he's disabled, unable to attend. That's this one. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: I know they have a new lawyer. He had a lawyer before and he switched over to a new lawyer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: McDonald? Okay, why don't you read the letter and go from there. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: It says: Please allow this letter to serve as my request to continue the hearing currently scheduled for April 26th, 2012 in the above stated cases beginning at 8:30 for the investigator's meeting and 9:00 for the hearings. I have a conflict with my calendar for April 26th and respectfully request my scheduling assistant contact your scheduling department to reset it. In addition, with regard to the SIP, Site Improvement Plan, Mr. Cammuso has been advised by the fire department that he should be able to get the building permit so he can bury the concrete. MS. BAKER: We just got confirmation that we have a signed stipulation for this case. We just have to get it. It's been e-mailed to us. So we need to get copies of it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You want to hold this off till -- MS. BAKER: So can we just, yeah, move this. Hopefully we should have that stuff by the time we get to the stipulation section. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that there's less confusion, for me anyhow, this was under Tab 17. Is that the number that's still there? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: The case was under 15. Page 6 16 ' 2A ? 14pril 12 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, I understand that. I'm trying out a new system so we don't have to go through all the different pages. That would be on the first page of-- MS. BAKER: It was under number 17, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Those are the numbers that I'm going to be looking for so I don't have to hunt around for them. Okay, so we'll save that to stipulations. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Next case? MS. BAKER: The next will be under motion for extension of time, Thomas P. Smith, Case CESD20110003049. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's under my tab one. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SMITH: Yeah, I just need to see if I can get an extension on this. I have the permit for the fence. I obtained that earlier this week. I have a partial permit for the structure in the back, a Ted's shed. I can get an engineered drawing from the gentleman. The business has been changed to Amazon.sheds.com up in Bonita. He requires a $50 fee for a copy of the engineering permit, you know, so I can give it to the county. I think that's a little extreme but I can't argue with the man, it's his business. He has all the blueprints for all the Ted's sheds that were ever built in this area. And I can't get it from the county. Then I have a -- from Reggie Smith, I have a certificate here where the permit was reissued for the C.O., the final C.O. on the 18-year-old modification to my garage into a playroom. And all that paperwork has been re-filed and they're trying to get all that in order. The gentleman that did the construction is out of town for a few days. As soon as he gets back in, he'll be following up with this. So of the three violations there I am working on trying to get these. I'm also in a short sale on the property. If the short sale goes Page 7 161 2Aa April 26, 2012 through, I still will be able to stay there. But that's up in the air right now. We did move back into the property per Diane Flagg's recommendation. We were working with the bank on it. That was in December. I spent quite a bit of money getting back into the house, couple thousand dollars to get the well system back up and a hot water heater replaced. And we just need some more time to get the rest of these things in order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time do you need? MR. SMITH: I'm asking for a six-month extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Does the county have any comments on it? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Just let me add that he's been very cooperative and he's working with contractor licensing, and they found the actual original contractor that was for the garage conversion. There was a permit pulled back in '96, '97. And they found that contractor and they're actually working with the contractor trying to get that garage conversion permitted. So I think -- we have no objection to an extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to extend. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to extend six months. Do we have a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those -- any discussion on it? MR. KELLY: Just a quick question. Now that we have an order, if someone was to buy the home, would they know about this order? Would it be disclosed? MS. FLAGG: The order is in Clerk of Courts record, because it's recorded. And if they do a lien search they'll definitely know about it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Page 8 161 2Ad-- April 26, 2012 Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries. MS. BAKER: Next case will be you Urbano Hernandez and Manuel Hernandez. Case CESD20110001255. (All speakers sworn.) SUPERVISOR SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. I suppose it would adequate if I spoke for the respondent. He is working today. He felt that he couldn't take off. He's trying to get all his finances in order so he can finish doing what he was doing. If you remember, this had to do with a carport and a large steel structure that was added to the mobile home. He's demolitioned part of the -- he got a demolition permit. He's removed part of the carport. He's in the process of getting engineered drawing so he can keep part of the carport and the steel structure. He does have one -- he does have a permit that he is applying for that hasn't been issued yet. I think he's made progress. I know he's requesting 60 days and I know you already granted an extension for 60 days, but he is trying to come into compliance and he is diligent in doing what he needs to do. Page 9 161 2A �- April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you think -- knowing your ways in and out of our building area, do you think 90 days would be sufficient? SUPERVISOR SNOW: I was thinking maybe more of 120. He has been diligent and he has requested extensions from you all before, so we're keeping in active contact with him. I would say he calls Maria Rodriguez, who is the investigator of the case, at least once a week to let her know what's going on. So it's not like he hasn't -- he's not trying. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion for 120 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. KELLY: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 120 days. SUPERVISOR SNOW: I thank the Board. MS. BAKER: Next case is Joyce Holland, Case CELU20080009976. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. HOLLAND: Good morning. Page 10 161 2 A 0 . April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see that you're requesting 30 days. MS. HOLLAND: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you give us a little -- MS. HOLLAND: I originally had requested 60 days back in January for my SIP to be completed. It was completed in time by March 20th, but for some reason or another, the fire department couldn't decide who was going to be taking care of our business and so fire had not signed off. And I understand fire has signed off now by April 6th. So I requested 30 more days extension to take care of the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question. Has the $79.72 been paid? MS. BAKER: (Nods head affirmatively.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So you think 30 days will be sufficient? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Well, she's in compliance now. It's abated. So -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, well, if we grant the 30 days, this just doesn't come back. Okay. So motion? MR. KELLY: So moved. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. We have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 11 161 2A . -- April 26, 2012 MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) MS. HOLLAND: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is Janet Sneeden, Case CESD20110009351 . (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. SNEEDEN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have your letter. Maybe you can tell us a little bit about the situation. MS. SNEEDEN: Huh? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you understand what I'm saying? MS. SNEEDEN: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you tell us how long of an extension that you need and the reason for the extension? MS. SNEEDEN: Six months? Six months. Erik? (Mr. Hester was duly sworn.) MR. HESTER: All right, here's the deal. We're tearing down the house. We're tearing it down slowly. We started on the back porch. It had enough stuff to put a U-haul in to strain of tools and screws and stuff And it had to go somewhere. Can't take the roof down, because if I take the roof off the porch, then that means the living room is ruined. So eventually I'll get to it. And I'm working on it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I believe this case was heard in November, if I'm not mistaken? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yeah, that is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And at that time -- I'm trying to see how much time was granted at that time. This was due to be 90 days, Page 12 161 2A - April 26, 2012 at which we are probably at that point right now, or past that. Why don't you give us an update from the county's perspective. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Well, since the last hearing they have made some efforts in tearing down the back portion of the structure. I have a picture here I'd like to put in as evidence. MR. MIESZCAK: Have they seen the picture? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have they seen the picture? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yes. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the picture. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion. Second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MS. BAKER: Jean? Just a legal question. Can we present evidence for an extension of time hearing? MS. RAWSON: Not really, because this is not anything other than their request for you to extend the time. And so it's really their burden to convince you that the time should be extended. If the county opposes it, of course they can say that you oppose it. But we don't usually have like a full-blown hearing. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And this is written up as an imposition of fines. MS. RAWSON: It is, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I find it -- I don't know how you put the imposition of fines in the request for an extension or a Page 13 161 2A - April 26, 2012 continuance. MS. BAKER: Well, it was originally scheduled for imposition of fines. After we had scheduled it they had asked for an extension. If it's denied, we're still going to go ahead with the imposition of fines. MS. RAWSON: Correct. At which time then you would get that evidence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we'll hold off on that until we see what we're doing with the extension of time. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Okay. It was just more to show that they are making an effort. MR. LEFEBVRE: Have they pulled a demo permit? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: There has not been -- no permits have been pulled. MR. HESTER: I was told I didn't need it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: By whom? MR. HESTER: They told me I didn't need a permit. I asked. Well back up. Thirteen years ago when I bought the place, it was like it is. And there was -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think you need to save that if we're going to hear the case during the imposition of fines. Right now we have to decide whether we can grant additional time for your case or not. Based on that, it either goes to the imposition of fines at that point. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to deny. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to deny. MR. KELLY: Hang on. Mr. Chair, you already had a motion and a second that was never voted on. I think that needs to be withdrawn before Gerald's motion can be made. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, that was for the documentation. You want to withdraw that? MR. LEFEBVRE: I didn't make the motion. MR. KELLY: Someone else made the motion. Page 14 161 2 a-- A April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: That was the one that was seconded by Mr. Lavinski? MR. KELLY: I think it might be. THE COURT REPORTER: Mr. Mieszcak. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll withdraw. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll withdraw the second. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to deny, based on the fact that he hasn't applied for a permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. KELLY: I'll second it. MR. HESTER: Excuse me, what's going on? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Hold on, wait. We have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, all those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have turned down your motion for an extension of time. This case will come back later in the agenda under imposition of fines and we can discuss the work you've done, pictures showing work you've done, et cetera, at that time. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chair, if we could just do that now, amend the agenda and take that case now, please? Page 15 161 2 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, fine. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to amend the agenda, take that case now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Which brings us back to a motion to accept the picture that you have. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make that motion to accept the photo. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 16 161 2A , __ April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That carries. MS. BAKER: We'll go ahead and read the recommendation first, and then we'll put the picture up. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: This is dealing with violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location is 540 Plat Road, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 00111280007. Modifications to the main structure without first obtaining Collier County building permits. On November 18th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4744, Page 1134 for more information. An extension of time was granted on February 23rd, 2012. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4772, Page 1299 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board's orders as of April 26th, 2012. The fines and cost to date are described as the following: Order items number one and two, fines at a rate of$200 per day for the period between March 25th, 2012 through April 26th, 2012, 33 days, for the total of$6,600 -- MR. HESTER: They're stealing our property. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Page 17 161 2A .9- April 26, 2012 Total amount to date $6,600. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, can you describe in the picture that we have on the visualizer the work that's been done? MR. HESTER: That's the back of the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. HESTER: There was a wall there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The wall was up in the front? MR. HESTER: No, this is the rear of the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a microphone? MR. HESTER: There was a wall here, okay. It's not there anymore. And this board, and this board and this board, is the only thing holding that roof from coming down. This section here is the trailer, okay? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. HESTER: And this is the back porch. The man that I bought the house from built it. So I would appreciate if you all keep that in mind. I bought the house as it is. And I did a title search. I paid big money for this company to do this and now they're denying doing it. So here's a door. That's the air conditioner. This door's going to replace that door because that door is aluminum. I had to put the hot water heater inside the house somehow. But like I said, when I take this roof here off, because of the way the guy did it, he drove nails and stuff through the roof of the trailer. You just can't take the one roof off and expect everything to be okay. I'm on medication, understand that one? I don't walk without it. I try not to take any. I look at the neighborhood around me everybody's on my medication and they're acting crazy and stealing from people. So I'm really, really careful in what I do with my meds. In fact, I'm working my way out of not taking any of them, which is going to leave me to where I'm back to a wheelchair or something. So I take pills to work on the house and I take them so I can Page 18 161 2A April 26, 2012 come here and deal with you guys. Other than that, I don't like to take them. I got a nice thing on my brain here, I got another one on my liver, and that's from taking these pills. And the doctor gave me two months. So if I get upset, the cancer grows real fast. And I'm trying to do this. We don't have no money. My neighbor next door has caused all these problems. He helped the guy build this. There was permits pulled. I don't know what happened. But my neighbor has a way with someone named Tony. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now -- MR. HESTER: And now I come home to find that I got to get rid of my house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How long do you think it's going to take before you would become into compliance? MR. HESTER: Compliance as it being torn down? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Whatever the original order was. MR. HESTER: Well, they wanted me to get another home, and the cheapest junkiest one I can get is 20 grand. Because it has to be a '96 or newer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So are you saying that -- MR. HESTER: There's no way we can do that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you saying that no matter what you do you can't bring this into compliance? MR. HESTER: Oh, I can fix this. But it's not like I'm 25 years old and I have lots of energy. I'm more like you. And you don't want to go and do this stuff every day either, right? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think I'm capable of it, but -- MR. HESTER: This here work took me every day a couple hours, you know, and it's seriously put together. Because after I bought it, I modified the structure to where it wouldn't come apart in a hurricane. So for what a normal house would have a strap, I've got four. And when I rebuilt the trusses when the tree came down on the house, Page 19 161 2A - April 26, 2012 I found it insufficient to my standards. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But my question to you is -- MR. HESTER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- can you fix this so that it comes into compliance? MR. HESTER: Yes, I can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And if you can, how long do you think it would take? Because that's what the board is going to weigh if this is a possibility or not. MR. HESTER: I'd say the least it would take is six months. I have a lot of materials. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. MR. MIESZCAK: I have a question, if I may ask. Can you put that picture back, where he pointed to two posts that's holding up the roof Those two end posts down there are holding up the roof, right? You said that those -- MR. HESTER: There's one, two, three, four. MR. MIESZCAK: You said the two there in the middle were holding up the roof But all four of them are holding up that roof? MR. HESTER: Yeah, there's four of them there. And then this here -- this right here is the closet. MR. MIESZCAK: No, but I'm asking, you think that's safe right there? I think it's a safety issue. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Looks like a two-by-four. MR. HESTER: There's a beam that runs this whole thing all across -- MR. MIESZCAK: Right, but look what's holding it up. It looks like a two-by-four, is what I'm saying. There's not much support for a big roof MR. HESTER: Well, there's a reason it looks like that. I'm tearing it down. Page 20 161 2A April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: So if you pull out the posts does the roof come down too? MR. HESTER: I can't pull the posts out until I peel the roof off. Because, if I pull the posts out it causes more damage. Now, it's got hurricane straps running through them. So if a wind came, it ain't lifting it off. But the plywood, the windows and the doors that were there are gone. So basically all this held up that anyways. The plywood's kind of like cosmetics. But in a couple of weeks from now I could have that roof down. MR. L'ESPERANCE: May I ask a question? How many people live in this home? MR. HESTER: Janet and I. We have shared it with many other people. There has been several families that have lived there. They needed a place. MR. LEFEBVRE: Question I have. In November when you came in front of us, you had an opportunity to do one of two things: You had an opportunity to either get the addition permitted or do a demo. And before -- don't cut me off. You would either had to apply for permits and get all the inspections and go that route to get it permitted and get a certificate of occupancy. MR. HESTER: I tried all that. MR. LEFEBVRE: The other option would be to demo. To demo you need a permit. And you haven't received a permit. So I guess that's one of the issues I have, is right now you're not following the proper procedure so that the county knows that it's been demoed correctly, because there's been no inspections or anything. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: May I? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Supervisor Cristina Perez. There was a previous last month when this had come to hearing, and we had presented a letter from the building official declaring the Page 21 161 2A d-, April 26, 2012 building a dangerous building because of some of these supporting factors of these additions. We do have that letter, if you wish to review it again. MR. LEFEBVRE: You have to be sworn in. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: I was sworn in when we initiated. So we do have that letter from the building official and he does point out four sections of the dangerous building code that he found to be in dangerous violation at this location. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it's the county's recommendation that this be denied and the county will, I guess, dispose of that if you can't. MR. LEFEBVRE: The problem I have is hurricane season's coming, and if anything it's more compromised without the wall than it is -- it's more compromised in the state it is now than it was before when there was a wall up, which would have supported this roof much better. And as we know, winds will just lift that roof right off and now you have airborne debris and everything. So going six months will basically take us through the hurricane season. And I just don't see that that will be the route that I would want to take. MR. HESTER: I think you misunderstand. It's not going to take me six months to tear that part of the roof off. MR. LEFEBVRE: You're asking for a six-month extension. So literally, if we give you a six-month extension it could take six months. You could come in to us on the 179th day and say I finished and we would be well into the hurricane season. MR. HESTER: Well, this back roof is not -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop this a second. The extension of time was denied. Was denied. This is for the imposition of fines. So either we impose the fines or we don't. And based on what the county has provided and your testimony, does anybody want to make a motion? 161 2 A April 26, 2012 building a dangerous building because of some of these supporting factors of these additions. We do have that letter, if you wish to review it again. MR. LEFEBVRE: You have to be sworn in. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: I was sworn in when we initiated. So we do have that letter from the building official and he does point out four sections of the dangerous building code that he found to be in dangerous violation at this location. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it's the county's recommendation that this be denied and the county will, I guess, dispose of that if you can't. MR. LEFEBVRE: The problem I have is hurricane season's coming, and if anything it's more compromised without the wall than it is -- it's more compromised in the state it is now than it was before when there was a wall up, which would have supported this roof much better. And as we know, winds will just lift that roof right off and now you have airborne debris and everything. So going six months will basically take us through the hurricane season. And I just don't see that that will be the route that I would want to take. MR. HESTER: I think you misunderstand. It's not going to take me six months to tear that part of the roof off. MR. LEFEBVRE: You're asking for a six-month extension. So literally, if we give you a six-month extension it could take six months. You could come in to us on the 179th day and say I finished and we would be well into the hurricane season. MR. HESTER: Well, this back roof is not -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop this a second. The extension of time was denied. Was denied. This is for the imposition of fines. So either we impose the fines or we don't. And based on what the county has provided and your testimony, does anybody want to make a motion? Page 22 161 2A c2 April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to impose, do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? MR. MIESZCAK: My main reason is I'm worried about the safety of that property right there. That could fall down on somebody. MR. HESTER: Sir. MR. MIESZCAK: Excuse me. And they've had other people in there staying with them. So if you bring another 10 people in there I can see it could be a real problem. And there it sits and here we've been six months after the fact and it's still there. So that's why I made that motion. MR. HESTER: The reason it's -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on, we have a motion on the floor. Any other discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, so the fines will be imposed and -- Page 23 161 2A d2- April 26, 2012 MR. HESTER: This is not working with me. This is me losing my house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is the imposition of the fines. You can appeal that -- MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. FLAGG: If I may offer, once anyone comes into compliance after the fines are imposed, what then happens is we go to the BCC on their behalf, as long as they have worked diligently towards compliance, and we recommend to the BCC that the fines are waived. So this is not the end of the road, this is one step. The next step in the priority is to seek compliance. Once compliance is achieved, if they've been diligent in pursuing it then we ask the board on their behalf to waive the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, do you understand what Ms. Flagg has said? This is not the end. If you continue working on it and you bring it into compliance, the code enforcement division will go on your behalf to the County Commissioners to resolve the situation. Okay? MR. L'ESPERANCE: And to take away the fines if you come into compliance. Understand that? MR. HESTER: Kind of. MR. L'ESPERANCE: They will take away the fines if you come into compliance. MR. HESTER: When? MR. L'ESPERANCE: If you come into compliance. MR. HESTER: Are you saying at the end of the day? I want to know exactly what you're saying. If I have to go home to set a match to my house today to stop the fines, is that what you're saying? Do I have to burn my house down? MR. MIESZCAK: Speak into the microphone so I can hear. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Speak into the microphone, please. Page 24 161 2A P-- April 26, 2012 MR. HESTER: Are you giving me the option of the end of the day or what? Explain more detail, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's not the end of the day. MR. HESTER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It takes a while, I'll tell you, to do anything. MR. HESTER: Okay. It took me a while to tear that part off. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand that. But it takes -- thank you. Ms. Sneeden, we have ruled that the imposition of the fines will occur. Ms. Flagg has described to you the process that needs to take place for that to be changed. So this case is concluded. MS. SNEEDEN: What's conclude mean? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay? Thank you. MS. SNEEDEN: Thank you. MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, the supervisor will go out with Ms. Sneeden and review everything that we've discussed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Great. MS. BAKER: The next case, we're back to motion for extension of time, will be John C. Boyer and Betty Jane Savard-Boyer, Case CESD20110002585. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see you are requesting, it appears a 90-day extension -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Yes, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to complete the work? Do you want to give us a little -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Background? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: When we were here in November, I Page 25 161 2A April 26, 2012 thought you were very generous in giving us six months to do what had to be done. The renter that was in the building at the time moved out like within a week. So it's been vacant. In the last six months we've had some health problems in the family. My sister-in-law was in hospice and has since died. Anyhow, we didn't get together with Ralph until March 14th, I believe it was, and tried to see what had to be done to retain this as a rental unit. We found out that we can't afford to continue it as a rental unit because it came into impact fees and all sorts of problems. And we discussed this with a few of the people at planning and whatever. The best thing we can do right now is try and use it as storage. We have furniture from family members. And instead of paying storage fees of 100 plus, we have allowed them to put their furniture in this building. However, we still need a convenience permit to do the AC and plumbing or something. We were told we had to remove everything out of the kitchen, the refrigerator, the stove, whatever. Fortunately they're leaving the bathroom there. We just have a big family and we have a lot of things on our plate and we just couldn't get it done. We hope to get it done by May 15th, but if we don't, you know, God knows we don't need a $100 a day fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you think 90 days would be sufficient time to -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: At least, sure. I mean, at the maximum. I'm hoping to have it done, with Ralph helping us, within the next, you know, 30 days. But I don't want -- you never know today who's going to be at work and who isn't going to be at work. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. Ralph, do you have any comments? INVESTIGATOR BOSA: No. She's been in contact with me. She's been diligent in regards to that. I've been trying to get ahold of her contractor. She does have a contractor. I have his number. I have Page 26 16Aril2? 12 his name. So we've been working together on getting this done. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you would support the 90-day extension? INVESTIGATOR BOSA: Yes, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do you feel 90 days is sufficient? INVESTIGATOR BOSA: I think so. I think it's at least sufficient. I'm helping her also, so we'll get this moved along -- MR. MIESZCAK: Also, permits were pulled, correct? You have permits, right? INVESTIGATOR BOSA: No, she doesn't yet. It has to be pulled by a contractor because it's a rental unit. She can't do it by herself, so a contractor has to come in. I think that's where she's having a little problem, trying to get -- MR. MIESZCAK: That's part of my question. If you give an extension and you don't have a permit even applied for, what are we extending? MS. SAVARD-BOYER: But it isn't a rental anymore, it's like a garage, it's like a storage building. And it will not go back to being a rental because we cannot afford a four or $5,000 impact fee to do everything that they're asking us to do. MR. MIESZCAK: One concern as long as I've been on this board is the safety issue. You have a garage or whatever and it's converted, you have plumbing, you have no permits, somebody's living there, you have electrical, it's not safe -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Nobody's living there, sir. MR. MIESZCAK: Okay. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: And we don't know if permits were pulled back in the Eighties or not. The man that lived there that we bought the house from, the duplex from, was a builder. Now he's in California and he's not cooperating with me at all. So perhaps he got permits, maybe he didn't get permits. But he owned four lots there and he converted a lot of stuff. Page 27 161 2A P- April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask: If you're not going to use it as a rental unit, can you pull the permits by owner-builder? I'll ask our resident -- MR. KELLY: If it's a duplex, then I'm not sure. If it was a single-family home, then yes, they can pull a permit as an owner and have an engineer even do the permit by affidavit. But since it's a duplex -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: It's a building behind the duplex. MR. KELLY: But since the original property is a duplex, I don't think that constitutes sole ownership. I believe you do have to have a contractor actually pull the permits for you. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Well, that's what we're trying to do, isn't it? MR. KELLY: I was answering the question. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: Oh, I'm sorry. MR. KELLY: No, that's okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can pull your own building permit if you're the owner of the property. And the point is, that if it was a rental unit then you would need a contractor to do it. If it is not a rental, not a duplex, you probably need a contractor to -- MS. SAVARD-BOYER: That's fine. MR. KELLY: Mr. Chair, I can see how they went down one path and it took a lot of time doing discovery, and now they've switched gears and they're going down a different path which is a better option for them. I don't think the board should impede that. I make a motion for the 90-day extension. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm going to ask, do you see any safety problems in that site? Page 28 161 2- ApriL26, 2012 INVESTIGATOR BOSA: No, not at all. Because the renters that she has in there right now, they don't have access to that location now. She's using it as a storage unit. We confirmed that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to extend it 90 days. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, you have 90 days. And hopefully if you don't get it done within 90 days, come back to us and we'll take it on at that time. MS. SAVARD-BOYER: It will be done for sure. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is John and Denise T.C. Brimmer, Case 2007090878. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. MS. BRIMMER: Good morning. This is not the place I expected to be. As from when we met in January, you suggested that we hire professionals. So we added another professional to manage the project. As of the middle of May we fired that team because they didn't return phone calls and they didn't do anything. So we hired a new team, Mr. Garcia and Mr. McCleary as our surveyor, and they have submitted the information. It was denied. Page 29 161 2A 2- April 26, 2012 We found out the gravest mistake. They said the trusses of the roof that was on the garage, which is a detached, were built in 2008. The garage was put up in the late Eighties or Nineties before we purchased the property. We have the engineer signed off on the stability of it, and my husband's there submitting everything that they found wrong right now, including the beginning of April, the 9th, we found out we needed to do an elevation for the garage. So that is all done and being submitted as we speak. But because it's not finished, we're going to need an extension, and I'm going to leave that up to you to make sure we're completely in compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. Good morning. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have any comments on the case? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: She submitted, you know, a few times. Both times there was quite a bit of time in between. The submissions were made towards the end of the time that was given. So this would be the third, I believe the third extension. So the county doesn't necessarily object. We're hoping that we're almost at completion right now. She seems pretty confident. She explained to me this morning that someone is down at the county as we speak to resubmit for the third time, hopefully all the corrections this time are taken care of The county just requests that if you do give an extension of time that -- MS. BRIMMER: Make it short. I mean -- INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Yeah, I think she's right there. Close. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What would you recommend? The request here is 90 days. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: I think that's fair. I think 90 days is fair. Page 30 161 t a A pril 40122— MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion for 90 days, but consider this to be the last one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. We have a second? MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Ninety days. And you heard what Mr. Lefebvre said. MS. BRIMMER: Yeah. Prayer hopefully -- the only thing I think might be the hold-up is the person that originally the first two times actually was lying that the truss was built in 2008. So I'm hoping the engineer signing off on the stability of the building fixes that. But that would be the only thing that I can see. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Great. Well, good luck to you, and I hope we don't see you soon. MS. BRIMMER: Me as well. Maybe over cocktails, but not here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Thank you. Page 31 161 2A 9- April 26, 2012 MS. BAKER: The next case is Kirsten Martucci, Case CELU201110006574. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. MARTUCCI: Good morning, how are you? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You have the ability to speak for the owner of the property? MR. MARTUCCI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I say that so it's on the record and we can go from there. MR. MARTUCCI: I have a notarized letter to speak for him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Perfect. Okay, why don't you give us a little background. MR. MARTUCCI: Okay. We have a concrete pumping business and we had it at the house, and we did have a complaint to move it. We got till I think the end of May to move. We have -- it took a while but we have purchased a piece of property over here off of Market Avenue and we have the closing papers. We closed 3/26. But we had to put a substantial down payment. So in order to -- it's a vacant piece of property. We have asked to go to the end of the year because we need money to clear the land and to develop it. We'd like to move the equipment over to the industrial section. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What type of equipment? Are you talking about a pump or -- MR. MARTUCCI: I have three big boom pumps and three trailer pumps, yes, sir. Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All right. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. I spoke with the property owner yesterday. They have gone through a lot, at this point have done quite a bit. They purchased Page 32 161 April , 012 property off of Market Street; very much want to come to compliance. Their request for an extension is 365 days. I think that is realistic because of any county requirements as far as pulling permits for land clearing, any SIP, site improvement plans or site development plans that may be needed. I think a realistic number is that 365 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So not the January that's in the letter? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Oh, the end of the year, I'm sorry. I was -- MR. MARTUCCI: Yes, it's just the end of the year. I'm hoping it will be by summer to work on it and get it done but -- INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Well, that's better. I apologize. MR. MARTUCCI: No problem, no problem. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the county has no objection to granting an extension? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: No objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What say the Board? MR. KELLY: I just have a question. Does the new property that was just purchased, does it have to be improved in order to park the vehicles there? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: It does. MR. KELLY: I have no problem with the extension. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess I don't want to rehear the case, but are these vehicles -- can neighbors see these vehicles? I mean, I'm trying to figure out, wrap my head around what is the reason why the complaint came about. And if I was a neighbor and I had equipment, which I assume that probably goes out early and everything, driving by my house and then finding out that this case originated here actually in June, to find out that it's going to be a year and a half before the equipment's moved, I would look at government and say wow, they're moving real slow. That was your option to buy a piece of property and go through Page 33 161 2 AiApril26, 12 all the process. There probably was a shorter option maybe to rent space for a short term to put your equipment. So maybe if you can just help me with that. MR. MARTUCCI: Yes, sir. With the business we have, it's not that easy to rent a piece, because we do have to wash the machines, we have to maintenance the machines and we have to be set up. Because every day they come in the machines get washed because it is concrete. And a lot of places we went to rent from, you have to have certain equipment, pads, and there is stuff that we have to be containment with as far as when we change oils and do stuff like that, which we did have at the house because we did set it up for that originally. And I don't have any immediate neighbors beside me. And the neighbors across the canal, I put -- I built a big 20-foot berm and spent a lot of money putting oak trees up so they can't see me. But as far as just driving down the road, I went and talked to that neighbor that complained because I knew who it was, and I had asked him, do we wake you up, were my guys disrespectful, do we drive fast? He said, no, you guys are -- you don't wake me up, I don't hear you. I do not -- you guys drive very respectful, slow, they wave, it's just I don't want it here, you're depreciating my home value. But he can't see my home from his house. But the only reason why, sir, is it took a while to find a piece because nowadays you have to put such a big down-payment down on a piece of property. You know, we had to put like 30 grand down. And it drained us a little bit with payroll and fuel being so high. So we just -- I'm hoping this summer we can be gone. But I'd like to ask the end of the year because we do have to put a fence, we do have to put fill to come into compliance, and I'm even going to have to put water and all that stuff out there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did this come about because there was no -- what's the license you're required -- the occupancy license, Page 34 161 2A 2- April 26, 2012 did you ever pull that for that particular type business? MR. MARTUCCI: We are in the process. We are going to get that done, sir. Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, any other questions from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions from the Board? MR. KELLY: Make a motion we extend it till January of 2013. And just for sake of argument should we do it today's date in January? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, I would think that would be the way to go. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do we have a date for our meeting in January? MS. BAKER: No. MR. KELLY: No, not yet? Okay, well, let's do it today's date then. What's today, the 26th? Do the 26th of January, 2013. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, do we have a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second from Lionel. All those -- any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) Page 35 161 2A Ed- April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, hopefully you'll be out of there this summer. MR. MARTUCCI: That's what I wanted. Thank you gentlemen very much. MS. BAKER: The next case is also for Kirsten Martucci, Case CESD20110008406. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MR. MARTUCCI: I think this is on the shed. We have not followed up with that because we're going to take it with us. It's going to be moved to the future location. It's sitting about 25, 30 feet off the canal. And I think that was -- was that the problem, it was too close? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: It was the original permitting on that shed. MR. MARTUCCI: The original permitting. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Yes. So when it's moved it would obviously need to be re-permitted where it's going. But that's the reason, you know, the extension of time came up on this case, is clearly he needs to move to the other property so he can bring that with him for storage. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there anything that needs to be done to the other property in order for you to move the shed? MR. MARTUCCI: That's -- we have to put the -- yes, sir, yes, sir, we have to put the fill in and put the fence up, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you still need the January date for that or can that be done sooner? MR. MARTUCCI: Probably. Because -- if I can get it done by summer, I'll move it. But I don't want to move it until I put a fence up because it keeps all my tools, you know, and all my parts in it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other discussion from the -- MR. KELLY: Is there a demo permit required to take it from one property and put it on another, where it needs a permit to place it? INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Electric? Page 36 1 6 Al 12 MR. MARTUCCI: No, sir, there's no electric. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: There's no electric, no plumbing, no. Just pick up, move. But permitted when it gets to its final destination, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motion from the Board? MR. KELLY: I'll make the same motion I made on the last case, until January 26th, 2013. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second from Mr. L'Esperance. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Hopefully we won't see you for a while. MR. MARTUCCI: Hopefully not. Thank you, guys. Have a good one. MS. BAKER: Okay, we have two additional stipulations so we will need to amend the agenda again. Number three under stipulations will be case Page 37 161 2A a" April 26, 2012 CESD20100016684, Joseph R. and Betty J. Faircloth, which was number one under hearings. And the fourth one will be Case CENA20120000965, Dominick Cammuso, which was number 15 under hearings. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't we start out by -- oh, yeah, motion to amend the agenda. MR. KELLY: So moved. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second to modify the agenda. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. (Mr. Pacheco and Investigator Baldwin were duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall: One, pay operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Two: Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permit or demolition permits, inspection and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Three: The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 Page 38 161 April2 , 12 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator to perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Four: That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation, using any method to bring the violation into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Department to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you understand the stipulation? MR. PACHECO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you agree to it? MR. PACHECO: I do agree. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, do we have any motions or discussions from the board? MR. KELLY: Motion to accept the stipulated agreement as written. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. PACHECO: Thank you very much. Page 39 161 2 April 26, 012 MS. BAKER: Next case is Case CESD20110014881, Barry W. Barnett, Jr. and Michelle A. Barnett. MR. MIESZCAK: What number? MR. L'ESPERANCE: 13. MR. MIESZCAK: Thank you. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay all operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Three: Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site visit, a site inspection to confirm compliance. Four: That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Ms. Barnett, have you -- you understand all the provisions of the stipulation? MS. BARNETT: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you agree to all of that? MS. BARNETT: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any discussion from the board? (No response.) Page 40 161 2A April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you very much. MS. BARNETT: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is CESD20100016684, Joseph R. and Betty J. Faircloth. (Mr. Faircloth and Investigator Short were duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Morning again. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one: Pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Two: Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and Page 41 161 2 d April 26, 012 certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of$150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Three: Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Four: That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Faircloth, do you understand the stipulation that you agreed to? MR. FAIRCLOTH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other comments? MR. FAIRCLOTH: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 42 161 2 April 26, 012 Opposed. (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. FAIRCLOTH: Thank you, have a good day. MS. BAKER: Next case is CENA20120000965, Dominick Cammuso. (Investigator Condomina was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one: Pay operational costs in the amount of$81.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing. Two: Abate all violations by removing any unauthorized accumulation of topsoil and litter consisting of but not limited to vegetation, material, concrete, et cetera, from the property to a site intended for final disposal or an area on the property authorized for such storage, and/or obtain approval for proper disposal in conformance with federal, state and local laws and regulations within 180 days of this hearing or a fine of$250 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. Four: Respondent must notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of this -- of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Five: That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you had been in contact with them obviously? Page 43 161 2 A . -- April 26, 012 INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments from the Board? MR. KELLY: Yeah, question. This is just a driveway that was put in filling up a drainage swale? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: No, this one is for -- they actually abated that, the install of the driveway. This one is for prior land -- this is a new owner that took over some -- took ownership over land that was basically used as a yard trash site without authorization from the county. New owner got it, he's working into compliance, got a, you know, business tax receipt, got a Site Improvement Plan. He's just working to get everything into compliance. MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the stipulated agreement as written. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You okay, Cherie' or do you want a Page 44 161 2 A April 26, 2012 break? How about another -- till a quarter after or so? MS. BAKER: Okay, that brings us to hearings. The next case will be case CEVR20120001904, Stephen J. Lockwood and Company, LLC. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Ordinance 87-41. Description of violation: Presence of Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation including but not limited to Brazilian Pepper. Location/address where violation exists: 9051 Tamiami Trail North, Naples, Florida, 34103. Folio 176681007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Stephen J. Lockwood and Company, LLC, care of Cameron Real Estate Services, Inc., 2390 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 100, Naples, Florida, 34103. Date violation first observed: February 8th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: March 13th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: March 28th, 2012. Date of re-inspection: March 29th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Good morning. For the record, David Jones, Collier County Code Enforcement. As stated, I did visit -- it's an unimproved tract of land, okay, at 9051 Tamiami Trail North, okay. It's full of prohibited exotic vegetation in this unimproved parcel. Further research show that the parcel of property is accounted for in a PUD called Pavilion Lake. And the ordinance on the PUD is 87-41. And within that ordinance it requires exotic removal and maintenance, okay. So that's what Stephen Lockwood was cited for is violation of Collier County Ordinance 87-41 . Page 45 161 2A 2- April 26, 2012 And I do have some photos here if you'd like to see them to kind of show you what the shape of it is, and then what it shows in the PUD, just to solidify that if you need it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Actually, no, he has not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you show the photos. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And after you see them, I'll accept a motion to accept them, if the respondent has no objection. MR. KELLY: I make a motion to accept the exhibit into the record. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. An eye test. INVESTIGATOR JONES: I was hoping you'd be able to see it a little bit more clearly. But you can see that the highlighted tract of land there. Okay, you see the shape of it. Now I'd like to follow that with just the PUD master plan out of the Pavilion Lakes PUD so you Page 46 161 2A 9- April 26, 2012 can see where it's accounted for. And if you look where it says wetland buffer cypress on the northern end of that preserve, for all intent and purposes, you can see where that's the tract of land as it's recorded in that PUD. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. INVESTIGATOR JONES: So basically that's the case. You know, those are the basic facts. If there's any other questions you have, we have plenty of information, as well as Mr. Minor does as well. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. MR. MINOR: Good morning, Mr. Kaufman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did you have a question before we MR. KELLY: Just real quick. Do you have any pictures of the Brazilian Pepper? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes I do, actually. This is a photo that was taken yesterday as part of the pre-hearing inspections. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this part of the photos that you showed the respondent? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Actually, no, it's -- I think he's okay with it, it's just -- MR. MINOR: I'm okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion to accept this as a -- MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. MR. KELLY: Second. - CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 47 161 2 A 2- April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: It's huge. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. MINOR: Good morning. My name is Bruce Minor. I'm here on behalf of Stephen J. Lockwood Company. And I'm here hopefully to redirect this violation to the Pavilion Lakes PUD and condominium complex based on information that I have here. And I've got packages here for each member to review, with photos and actually have the restated condominium docs, the areas in which I feel are pertinent to the case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to accept -- have you seen these packages? INVESTIGATOR JONES: I haven't seen every page but I have no issue with that if we can just get it resolved, if it helps. MR. KELLY: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 48 161 2A -- April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. MINOR: If you will, there's actually two separate paperclip exhibits. If you take off the left paperclip it will give you the two separate parcels. The one that's titled Pavilion Lakes, Pavilion Club and Pavilion Terraces chain of title is more or less exhibits that include photos of the property that might be a little easier to see than what was shown on the overhead. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I understand this properly, you represent -- MR. MINOR: Stephen J. Lockwood and Company at his request. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, now, this is part of a PUD? MR. MINOR: That parcel is, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the homeowner's association is where you think this violation belongs, is that what I'm -- MR. MINOR: That's correct, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: What you're trying to argue is that within the PUD for Pavilion Lakes PUD it states that it's their responsibility to maintain this property. MR. MINOR: That's correct. And what I'm going to utilize is the other packet, which is the recently -- and I say recently, 2008, completely restated condominium documents of the Pavilion Lake tract. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with the homeowner's association at Pavilion Lakes? MR. MINOR: We have in the past. Not pursuant to this case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you suspect that they would not have a problem resolving this situation, or -- Page 49 16I 2A �-- April 26, 2012 MR. MINOR: It's my belief that they're the ones that reported it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, the plot thickens. INVESTIGATOR JONES: If I may let you know, actually a property manager of Pavilion Lake is here today. So if he would like to come up here and provide any further information that he may have to help anybody out, just so you know. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would think this would be the time to bring him up, swear him in and have all the testimony at one time. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question. MR. MINOR: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Who is paying the taxes on this particular parcel? MR. MINOR: Stephen J. Lockwood and Company. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So he is the owner of that property. MR. MINOR: He is the owner through kind of a convoluted receipt of the property. And it's outlined in the chain of title. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, why don't you continue. Sorry to interrupt you. MR. MINOR: Okay. In the restated documents for the Pavilion Club, which is in charge of the Pavilion Lake PUD, if you look at the first -- but what I've tried to do here is highlight the pertinent paragraphs that we're dealing with. And on the front page of the packet I'm just showing that this is a completely restated PUD document, including articles of incorporation and the bylaws of the PUD. I've just highlighted that just for the purpose of indicating. And then it says on the second page, which is actually Page 1 of the declaration, the description of condominium property, it says the land submitted to the condominium form of ownership by the original declaration. The land, in quotes, is legally described in Exhibit A of the original declaration, which is hereby incorporated by reference. And if you'll just follow on, on the next page, I tried to put this in Page 50 161 2A April 26, 2012 some kind of order. In the re-declaration of the documents, they show the definitions as association property, meaning all property real and personal owned or leased by the association for the use and benefit of the unit owners. I put in the column over there conflict with 718.103, paragraph three. That would just follow to the next one. A survey and plot plan attached to the original declaration, Exhibit A, Pages 7 through 23, and incorporated by reference herein are a survey of the land, legal description and plot plans which graphically describe the improvements in which units are located and which show all the units, including their identification numbers, locations and approximate dimensions and the common elements and limited common elements. Together with this declaration, the exhibit identifies the common elements and limited elements and the relative locations and dimensions. A new boundary survey is attached as Exhibit C, which shows the corrected legal description of the condominium. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, it appears to me that possibly we may need a read from the County Attorney on this particular issue. What do you think? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I agree. Why don't we continue and then we will ask the attorney. MR. MINOR: On Page 8 of the declaration of condo, 9.1, the top paragraph, which is highlighted, association maintenance, association's responsible for the protection, maintenance and repair and replacement of all common elements and association property other than the limited common elements that are required elsewhere herein to be maintained by the unit owners. The cost is a common expense. The association is responsible, including without limitation, and then it goes on to identify the limited common elements. INVESTIGATOR JONES: If I could just add something very briefly. I did speak with the County Attorney regarding this matter and he did feel comfortable with it going forward before you. As far Page 51 161 2A 2 April 26, 2012 as code enforcement's concerned, I just followed Florida Statute 162 by citing the property owner as identified in the tax records. So based on that, we both felt comfortable bringing it forth before you. But of course we can, you know -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand, that's why I asked who's paying the taxes on it. MR. MINOR: On Page 36 of the declaration, the highlighted paragraph 22.3 conflicts. And this is where I had an issue with the previous page that said that their definition of the property, association property. The Florida Statute 718 -- well, it says the conflicts, if there is a conflict between any provision of the Declaration of Condominium Act, the Condominium Act shall control. If there is a conflict between the Declaration of Association Articles Incorporated or Bylaws, the Declaration shall control. Now, if you go to the next page, which is from Florida Statute 718.103, paragraph three, as highlighted, association property means the property real and personal which is owned or leased by or is dedicated by a recorded plat to the association for the use and benefit of its members. The next page shows the restated site plan for the -- not the PUD but for the condominium Pavilion Club that does not include the subject property that we're discussing here. So this is a restate of the Pavilion Club association property that they legally own now. Originally this property was deeded to both parties. It was deeded to -- in part of the PUD it was deeded to Pavilion Lakes Development Company, and it was also deeded to the C-4 owner. And the C-4 owner, which was prior to Mr. Lockwood or S.J. Lockwood and Company. They recorded first, thereby acquiring the property. Speaking to the tax issue, from day one the entire parcel, which includes the subject property, has been taxed by the county as a C-4 Page 52 161 2 A .9- April 26, 2012 zoned property and it was all in one parcel number at that time. Now, Mr. Lockwood came in and purchased the property in 2000. He purchased the property. And the deed that was recorded did not include the preserve, if you will, the subject property, by legal description. A year later -- or coming into collecting taxes in November, the original owner received a tax bill on that property. The county had -- I don't know how this came about, but they ended up subdividing and gave it its own property identification number and continued to -- and the tax for that particular parcel, which is the preserve, for the first year was about $4,000 because they called it C-4 zone. The property value increased to the point of the last five years until we went to the county and spoke with them. The taxes on the property were six and 7,000. The property was assessed--- it's .63 acres on U.S. 41, and it was assessed as a C-4 zoned property, improperly. So S.J. Lockwood and Company had been, I don't know, prejudiced if you will by -- I mean, he has paid $50,000 in real estate taxes to the county that shouldn't have been charged. I went down to the county in 2003 originally to question the whole issue because it was becoming evident that this parcel had something to do with the PUD. Now, I was told at that time that hey, it's C-4 zoned property, even though it's a preserve. You could go down and probably get it approved to do something with it. So consequently Mr. Lockwood felt, you know if I got C property on 41 and it's worth $535,000, I'm not going to reject the offer for the previous owner to add that on. So it was re-filed again with the original legal description, which included both parcels and one legal description. But it was still getting two separate tax bills because it had been separated out. In 2008 I started looking into the possibility of putting some parking there, because the property to the north of it, the C-4 zone where the Pavilion Terraces is, is lacking for parking, desperately Page 53 161 2A April 26, 2012 lacking for parking. And it used to be occupied by the La-Z-Boy Furniture by which the parking requirement was very skinny back then for a furniture store, and it still is. So it really limited our ability to do anything as far as putting tenants in. I mean, it's had vacancies ever since then because of parking. We've turned away several people that were interested, especially now where its location is right across from Mercato, and we've had to turn away due to the parking issue. I'm getting a little dry. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I have a question for Jean. MS. RAWSON: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Your off-the-cuff comment or read on this, please? MS. RAWSON: Well, I guess it depends on who is the violator, you know. And what the county is telling you, the code officials are telling you, is that they cited the person who's on the title, that they've spoken to the County Attorney and that is the proper way to proceed. But the issue is, you know, who is the violator, and therefore who can you lien, if that's the case. MR. L'ESPERANCE: If the issue is who is the violator, is that our purview to decide that? MS. RAWSON: Well, it would be nice if you had an opinion from the County Attorney, but apparently they've been told that you cite the person who is on the title, and that's what they've done. MR. L'ESPERANCE: And Mr. Minor is doing his best at this particular moment to deflect that, correct? MS. RAWSON: Yes, he is. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess I have a question which would maybe clear it up. Hypothetically, if you were to sell this property, who would get the proceeds? Page 54 161 2 A a-- April 26, 2012 MR. MINOR: They would go to Mr. Lockwood. But if I could continue just a little bit more now that I've kind of gathered my thoughts here? On the last page of the first document, this parcel that we're talking about here, the subject parcel which is the cypress, is included in the Phase 14 legal description as part of that parcel. So Phase 14, which is -- consists of two buildings, a couple of covered parking and this parcel including all the rest of the cypress is -- it's imperative -- they didn't change the legal description on Page 14, because if they were to change that legal description and something happened to any buildings in there, they wouldn't be able to rebuild. The property was put up at 10 units per acre, it's got 156 units and it's got 156.7 acres. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So this parcel was required for them, for the county to grant their ability to do the PUD. MR. MINOR: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And without this parcel, this is after the fact, obviously, if they were to go today to do this, they would need that six acres as wetlands, as part of the requirement. MR. MINOR: It's six-tenths of an acre and that represents six units. So because it's part -- you know, because it's part of the PUD, we're maintaining that because of a stipulation, if you go to the other packet that I had with the pictures and photos and such, it shows the title. I've got the overhead photo of the Pavilion Lakes, as well as this parcel that we're referring to. And I've also got the county's -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, let me cut you off here. Sounds like Mr. Lockwood wants all the benefits of the association to take care of his property but still have the right to sell it and do whatever he wants with it. But a lot of the comments, one of the last comments that you just made was that this parcel was included in the original PUD to make up -- or to make 10 units per acre, 156 units. So if that's the case then the rights of this property have been Page 55 161 2A April 26, 2012 used. You cannot now come in and say well, I want to put a, let's hypothetically say, a 4,000 square foot commercial building on this property. So this property really should be deeded back to the association as preserve. MR. ZARELLI: We've been trying that. We've been trying that. MR. LEFEBVRE: And basically work out some agreement that it comes under the ownership of the association. Now, if they've been working on that and they haven't been successful or whatever the case is, that tells me that Mr. Lockwood is trying to reap the benefits of a sale or owning the property without paying for maintenance of the property. He owns the property. I feel comfortable that we move forward on this case. There is an argument of who owns the property. He's been paying taxes for it. If there was a question about who owns the property or -- he's been getting the benefit of the property. Also, in the highlighted sections here you state that it's for the benefit -- one of it says the benefit -- Page 2 in the legal size paper, it says association property means all property, real estate owned or leased by the association for the use and benefit for the unit owners. They don't have the use and benefit of this property. They don't have -- right now the use and benefit would be if there was walking paths. The only benefit they're getting is under the original PUD this property was used for density issues to get 10 units per acre. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Are you making a motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, I guess I make a motion that there's a violation to be found. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do you make a motion that we proceed and hear this and accept the County Attorney's opinion that they are the owner of record and we proceed and hear the case? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think there's a case -- we know who owns the property. There's no argument there. The property is owned by the respondent and it goes back to -- let me give Page 56 A6J 2A2 April 26, 2012 you my comments on what you said. I disagree to some extent and I disagree because this is a piece of property that probably way back when should have been part -- it should have been owned by the PUD, and for whatever reason it wasn't. I'm kind of surprised by the county accepting a PUD when they don't own the property. But that's not for us to decide, that would be the County Attorney. And I have a feeling that they're passing that on to us. MR. ZARELLI: Can I give you a little background on how that happened? In July of 1986 Pavilion Lakes Development went to the county with this promise of building this condominium association, okay, which is Pavilion Club. Well, they were denied because it was -- they were going to build 156 units, at that time was 10 units per acre. They were shy .67 of an acre. In May of 1987 they came back and resubmitted a new document saying that they own all of the preserve, including this piece that he's talking about, which is now called lot 194, okay. We got it. The county gave them the approval. We were within 15.67 acres. 157 units were built, tada, tada, goes on and on. Well, December, 1987 all of a sudden we don't know about this, we as homeowner's and part of the association, it's now a piece that is owned by the prior owner he talked about, that's a Maurice Connel (Phonetic). Maurice Connel sold Lockwood this piece of property, that's called lot 201, which is where the La-Z-Boy thing was, it's a commercial piece of property. And along with that, lot 194. We go on and on. And in 2001 the county comes to us and says we are in violation of this exotics issue, okay, for the preserve, which is running on 41. Our board and our manager responded. We spent $30,000 that year and have gone on and cleaned that property. Well, some of the homeowner's were a little upset about this thing so we started doing Page 57 161 2A a- April 26, 2012 some investigation. And that's when we found out we didn't even own that piece of property and we were cleaning it for all these years, okay. Things went on and on. We've got all the information, all the lawyers involved and all that kind of stuff. So we don't own that piece, but it does belong to the PUD, as Bruce said. True, fine. A year ago I met with Bruce and Scott Cameron and we discussed perhaps, and we found that they cannot build on this piece of property, all right. Parking lots, their parking lot on 201 is more than sufficient for the businesses that are now. If there was some more office space or office buildings where they are more people, perhaps the code needed more parking. A year ago they said okay, we'll give you this piece, 194, all right. We'll talk to Mr. Lockwood and we'll assure you that we'll give you this piece if you give us an REA, a restricted easement agreement, to build a parking lot, okay, in case they needed it. Well, time goes by, a lot of us are north and south and east and west, and it wasn't until this past June, I'm sorry, June of 2011, that our lawyer Tony Pires finally got something from the county, a zoning thing that said Section 9.03.03.B.5 and all this other stuff, I'm sorry. But in it, it states the county forbids you to build any commercial thing on a PUD property. Even though it's not our property, it's their property. So they can't build on it, as long as it's part of our PUD. And we have this zoning verification notice from the county here signed and sealed and et cetera. And as far as it stands now, if we continue with this, we don't feel we're -- we've done our part of cleaning that. But gentlemen, this is contiguous property. There's no line in between it. The wind blows, we clean our exotics. It blows from their end, which they have exotics, as David says, it comes down to our property and we continue, we continue to clean it. There's no stopping these seeds blowing down. These guys didn't have to clean it until Page 58 ' 161 2A O- April 26, 2012 2008, because that property was deemed commercial property. And your laws say that there's no need to clean exotics until such time that there's going to be development on that. Well, these guys paid 50, $60,000, of which they should not have paid. But that's their problem. Lockwood's got deep pockets. We don't. In 2008 it became preserve. Still part of our PUD. And as long as it's part of our PUD you gentlemen and the county states that we cannot do anything with that property. They could sell it, but it will still be PUD, our PUD. And they can't build on it. We went back to them in January and said look, here's a zoning verification says you can't do this, all right, are you still willing to give us or deed us the property. We'll give you a dollar. There's nothing you can do on it. We can't build on it, we don't want to build on it. And they said no, it was kind of a joke. No, forget about it. We don't want to do any business with you. That's where we stand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think that we understand. It seems to me strange that you can do a PUD in the county and then sell off part of the wetlands to somebody else. MR. ZARELLI: We never sold it -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I didn't say you did -- MR. ZARELLI: -- the developer did. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Regardless of who sold it, but either you need the wetlands and it's part of the PUD or you don't. I don't understand that. That would be up to the county I guess to describe what really happened. MR. ZARELLI: It's in here. MR. KELLY: Sir? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: Just from one person's opinion, I think if we look at it from the 30,000 foot view, I think we can surmise that the venue Page 59 161 2A 0— April 26, 2012 here today is probably not appropriate for what sounds like great arguments on both sides. I think that as a board we only can vote on what we've been put in front of us, and it's very clear that our requirement is to decide whether or not there's a violation. If there is a violation, we therefore go forward with trying to figure out a time frame or resolution to solve that violation. And if the violation's not solved within the time frame, a fine goes against the owner of the property, unfortunately. At that time maybe you can take it to another venue. We're quasi-judicial, barely at that. And then maybe take it to another venue and then maybe a civil route at that point. But I think everything that you've said so far is very interesting, and I'd love to be involved in that -- MR. ZARELLI: Ten years I was involved with it. MR. KELLY: But this isn't -- unfortunately I don't think this is the right venue. MR. ZARELLI: Well, I kind of agree and disagree, but -- and it's not my venue to do. But they're the owners, it cites they're responsible. All we want them to do is clean. That's .67 of our three acres. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion on the table, by the way. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Can that motion be repeated, please? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. That was your motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion that a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we have a motion that it exists. Do we have a second on the motion? MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Now, should this pass -- this is discussion on the motion -- this will go against the owners of the property, that's the only thing we're able to do. And I'm sure that the owners of the property will have a Page 60 161 2 - April 26, 2012 next step and a next step as was discussed here. So any discussion on the -- any further discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, all those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Unfortunately you may say that we're passing the buck, but that's all we can do is to rule that it's either a violation or it's not a violation. Who really owns the property, is going to be something--you're going to wind up probably in a court. MR. MINOR: There's never any question of who owns the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. MR. KELLY: Who's responsible to take care of it? MR. MINOR: Because they had a maintenance agreement that said they would take care of it, which I hadn't gotten to yet. MR. KELLY: It wouldn't have mattered, actually. Because anything we do goes against the owner anyways. So -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Jean, do you have any problem with our -- MS. RAWSON: No, I don't. And I think you're right, this is a very interesting case. But it's probably past your pay grade. And, you know, you can only decide if there's a violation and if so, tell them to fix it within so many days and it goes against the owner of record. Page 61 161 2 A .9 - April 26, 2012 They're going to fight this out in some other court. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now, we've decided the violation exists. And now do you have a recommendation? INVESTIGATOR JONES: I do. The recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days, and abate all violations by, one: Must remove all Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation by hand removal methods and obtain any necessary permits, inspections and certificate of completion for the removal of all Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation within blank days of this hearing or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated. Two: The prohibited exotic vegetation base/stump must be treated with an U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide, and visual tracer dye shall be applied when the prohibited exotic vegetation is removed but the base of the vegetation remains within blank days or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed. And three: The respondent must notify the Code Enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. I think this is going to wind up going forward, so we should, just to keep it from coming back to us, provide enough time for this to be resolved where it probably will be in the courts. Anybody like to take on the -- MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation with a term of 365 days and $100 per day for both two and three. Page 62 16 )pril12 MR. LEFEBVRE: I second that motion. The reason I do is if there's some litigation, that may allow time for the litigation to wind its way through or possibly for the two parties to come to agreement to selling the property to the association. MR. MIESZCAK: Right. Makes sense. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any discussion -- further discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. We're going to take a 10 minute break. We'll be back here at -- we'll make it an extended break, 11 :00. (A recess was taken.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to bring the code enforcement meeting back to order. And that brings us to -- MS. BAKER: The next case is number four, Case CESD20090010573, Edgar Perez. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is violation the Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41 as amended, Section 10.01.06.B.1.A and Florida Building Code 2007 edition, Section 105.1. Description of violation: No Collier County building permits Page 63 161 2 A April 26, 2012 were obtained for electrical and plumbing modifications to the main structure and fence, invalid building permit for horse barn without issuance of a Certificate of Completion. Location/address where violation exists: 3445 56th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 38664320004. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Edgar Perez, 3445 56th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34102. Date violation first observed: June 10th, 2009. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: September 26th, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: October 10th, 2011. Date of re-inspection: March 21st, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. Just a correction on number 4 for the statement of violation, the zip code should be 34120. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Four photos taken by Investigator Scavone June 10th, 2009, stored and retrieved from a data base which I have legal access to, as well as three additional photos taken by Investigator Scavone July 13th, 2010, stored and retrieved from a data base that I have legal access to. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Get a motion to accept them? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 64 161 2A t .- April 26, 2012 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: On June 10th, 2009, Investigator Scavone made a site visit with the Collier County Sheriffs Office and observed electrical and plumbing modifications in relation to a marijuana grow house as well as an unpermitted structure and fence in the rear of the property. Several attempts to gain compliance from the lender were made, but the lender has not done so and to date the violations remain. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was observed first in 2009? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: That is correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Certainly has a green thumb. That last photo, that's a picture of what? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: That's the unpermitted fence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any discussion from the Board? MR. KELLY: Make a motion that a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion on the floor. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it's seconded. All those in favor -- hold on, we have a motion and a second -- MR. DOINO: I did. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, he did. Okay, Ron. He used to be a ventriloquist, and that's a problem. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 65 161 2A 2-- April 26, 2012 MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Do you have a suggestion for this case? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: I do. Recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violation by, one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank days will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to tackle this one? MR. KELLY: Anybody have a problem with 30 days? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No. MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation, time frame of 30 days and a fine of$250 per day. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. Page 66 1 61 2 A �- April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before you do that -- MR. MIESZCAK: He has a motion. Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On the grow houses, we typically have gone with a fine of$500 a day, if you would like to reconsider. Just my comment. MR. MIESZCAK: I don't think it will make any difference at this point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Who owns the property? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: There was a lis pendens filed on June 30th, 2011, but as of now, Edgar Perez is the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the bank involved in this is -- probably Bank of America. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: I'm not sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion, we have a second for 30 days, $250 a day fine, and $80.57 as the cost. Any other discussions on it? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you, Eric. MS. BAKER: Next case is number seven, Case CESD20110014115, Oslay Fernandez. Page 67 161 �-- April 26, 2012 (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41 as amended, Section 10.02.06.B.1.A. Description of violation: A screen enclosure with canceled Permit number 2005-033480. Also a pool decking and shed type structures on the property without Collier County permits. Location/address where violation exists: 4120 68th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 38902360001. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Oslay Fernandez, 3020 Southeast 103rd Avenue, Miami, Florida, 33165. Date violation first observed: October 10th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: October 13th, 2011 . Date on/by which violation to be corrected: November 11th, 2011. Date of re-inspection: March 14th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Eric, you're on. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two aerial photos of the subject property printed from Collier County Property Appraiser's Office website January 10th, 2012, and a photo taken by myself January 10th, 2012 from a neighboring property. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. Second? MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 68 . 61 ; a- April 26, LZO12 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) INVESTIGATOR SHORT: On October 7th, 2011, an anonymous complaint came in regarding expired permits. Investigator Asaro made a site visit on October 10th, 2011 and found the property was not accessible, as there is a locked gate. Utilizing the Collier County Property Appraiser's GIS mapping, Investigator Asaro discovered a screen enclosure with expired permit number 2005-033480, decking, a pool, shed type structures on the property without Collier County permits. On October 17th, 2011, the code enforcement foreclosure team began requesting compliance from the lender. The case was transferred to myself on November 17th, 2011 . I performed a site visit November 30th, 2011 and found the violation remained. On January 10th, 2012 I made a site visit and took a photo visible from a neighboring -- of the violations visible from a neighboring property. To date the violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is the property occupied? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: It is not. MR. KELLY: Do you have anything covering the pool? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is the pool green also? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Due to the locked gate, I cannot confirm. MR. L'ESPERANCE: The entire property is fenced in? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: That is correct. Page 69 161 2A a April 26, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: The fence, does it have total integrity, any holes in it that you could know, see or tell? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Not that I can see. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Do you have a proposal? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yes. My recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must notify the Code Enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the Page 70 161 24 9 April 26, - 012 county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. LEFEBVRE: Before a motion is made, you stated prior that they tried to get in touch with the bank to get this violation corrected. So it's not been foreclosed upon, correct? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: No. There was a lis pendens filed July 6th, 2010. MR. LEFEBVRE: July 6th, 2010. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Banks like to hold off on that so they don't start accruing any faults. Anybody like to take this on? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, I will. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll make a motion. Sixty days and a $200 fine per day. MR. KELLY: I second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. The costs are 80.29 as well? All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thanks, Eric. MS. BAKER: Next case is number eight, Case Page 71 161 2A O.-- April 26, 2012 CESD20110015948, Michael Zager and Paula J. Rhoads. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04-41 as amended, Sections 10.02.06.B.1.A, building and land alteration permits, and Section 10.02.06.B.1 .E, improvement of property prior to issuance of building permits. Description of violation: Remodeling alterations to inside and outside of the house without first obtaining the proper Collier County permits and inspections. Location/address where violation exists: 557 Cypress Way East, Naples, Florida, 34110. Folio 65322840006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Michael Zager and Paula J. Rhoads, 557 Cypress Way East, Naples, Florida, 34110. Date violation first observed: November 17th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: November 21st, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: December 21st, 2011. Date of re-inspection: February 10th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: John, you're on. INVESTIGATOR CONNETTA: Good morning. For the record, John Connetta, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Exhibit A is two photos taken by me November 17th, 2011 showing a new partition wall that was installed as you walk in the front doorway. Exhibit B, two photos taken by me November 17th showing the new shower stall and a new toilet that was installed. And Exhibit C, two photos taken by me November 17th, 2011 showing a new water line and an electrical outlet that was installed on the lanai. Page 72 161 2A April 26, 2012 On November 17th, 2011 -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on. We have a motion to accept the exhibits? MR. MIESZCAK: A, B, C, I make that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion -- MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. You have to be faster. MR. KELLY: Yeah, I'm working on it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, John, you're on. INVESTIGATOR CONNETTA: On November 17th, 2011 I responded and spoke to one of the tenants at the house, Nick Cosmo, who stated that the person in charge of the house, a Curt Owens, had hired to some guys to do alterations to the inside and outside of the house. Cosmo agreed and signed an entry consent form allowing code enforcement investigator to enter the house and take several photographs of the changes being made. Once inside, I observed the partition wall that was installed separating the living room from the front doorway and the bathroom to the right, with a new toilet, new tub and new shower stall. Also I observed an electrical outlet and a water line that was Page 73 161 2A g- April 26, 2012 installed on the outside wall of the lanai. Several attempts to locate the contact, Curt Owens, and the property owners, Michael Zager and Paula Rhoads have met with negative results. Haven't been able to contact either one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. They must have had a falling out between the tenant and the landlord, it seems. MR. CONNETTA: I guess what it was, is Curt Owens leased it from the property owners and then what he was doing is subleasing it to three other individuals that were living in the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: I'll make a motion that a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. And you have a recommendation for us? INVESTIGATOR CONNETTA: Recommendation that the Code Enforcement Board order the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demo permits, inspections, certificate of completion/occupancy within X number of days of this Page 74 161 2A 9-- April 26, 2012 hearing or a fine of X number of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use assistance of Collier County's Sheriffs Office to enforce provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to try that? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine of$81.15, 60 days at $150 a day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second from Mr. Lavinski All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is number 10, Case CESD20120000335 Arnoldo and Daisy de la Cruz. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is a violation of Collier County Land Page 75 161 2 A 49- April 26, 2012 Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06.B.1 .A. Description of violation: A garage enclosure, shed, elevated deck and fence without valid Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 3770 47th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 39784640003. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Arnoldo and Daisy de la Cruz, 3770 47th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: January 17th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 23rd, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 22nd, 2012. Date of re-inspection: March 12th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Eric, you're on again. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Eight photos taken by myself on January 17th, 2012 and two aerial photos from the Collier County Property Appraiser's website, one being from 2006 showing that the deck does not exist and the other, the most recent showing is that it does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do I have a motion to accept the -- MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 76 161 2Aa- April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: On January 17th 2012, I met with the property owner Daisy de la Cruz and obtained entry consent. I took photos of the garage enclosure, shed and decking. A notice of violation was given January 23rd, 2012 with a compliance date of February 22nd, 2012. I made contact with Daisy on February 28th, 2012. Daisy stated she is not going to abate as she is losing the home. I advised the case will be prepped for hearing. To date violations remain. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, any comments from the board? MR. KELLY: I make a motion that a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion that the violation exists. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Lavinski, you're late, Gerald beat you. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Done. Page 77 161 2A9 April 26, 2012 You have a recommendation, Eric? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yes. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. KELLY: Investigator, did you say that it was occupied? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yes, she is currently renting the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I saw the electrical work in the panel there that seemed -- MR. MIESZCAK: The yellow cord? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, the yellow cord that was plugged in there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to take this on? MR. KELLY: I'm in favor of keeping a simple order and doing a smaller time frame but the electric does make me nervous, especially with people living in there. My initial was to do 30 days, but I'm thinking more like 14 now. What's the suggestions of the board members? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I don't think it matters a whole bunch because they're not going to abate it either way. MR. KELLY: Just in case. I'll make a motion that we accept the Page 78 161 2A �9- April 26, 2012 county's recommendation, fill in the blanks, 30 days with a fine of $250 per day. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's $80 is the cost. And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is number 11, Case CESD20110006351, David H. Schaare, Jr. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Description of violation: Barn type structure and shed built on property without Collier County building permits. Location/Address where violation exists: 520 2nd Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 37283440007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: David H, Schaare, Jr., 520 2nd Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: April 29th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: October Page 79 161 2A8 April 26, 2012 20th, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: November 18th, 2011. Date of re-inspection: April 10th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Patrick. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Good morning. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photos taken April 9th, 2011 by Investigator Janice Potter; two photographs taken yesterday, April 25th, 2012. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: I'd like to present the details of the case. While on a vacant and foreclosure meet and greet, Investigator Potter observed two unpermitted structures on the back of the estates zoned property, one a barn type structure and the other one a shed. I issued the notice of violation on November 18th, 2011 via posting and regular and certified mail. Page 80 161 2A � April 26, 2012 I have not had any contact with the owner; all attempts have been unsuccessful. There was a final judgment recorded on August -- recorded in August of 2010 but no certificate of title has been issued as of yet and the violation remains to this date. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Doesn't the certificate of title follow maybe five, six days after the final judgment? MS. BAKER: The final judgment sets a sale date. So if they never had that sale there wouldn't have been a certificate of title. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you know if the owners filed for bankruptcy? Because that would probably stay -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That would hold it. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: No, we do not. MR. LEFEBVRE: That might be why. Maybe they filed for bankruptcy between -- MS. BAKER: Yeah. We'll double-check that. As of right now we are not aware that there's a bankruptcy. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was part of the foreclosure team? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Yes, it was. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, any discussion from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to find them in violation? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion that there's a violation exists. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. Page 81 161 2A April 26, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. You have a suggestion for us? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Yes. That Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm the abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to fill in the blanks? MR. LAVINSKI: I'll take a shot at it. Make a motion the respondent pay the $80.86, that they have 30 days and a fine of$100 per day. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? Page 82 161 2A - April 26, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Patrick. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, as I discussed with you, I have an appointment I have to move on to now, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And during this time, Chris, you will be a full voting member right now with the departure of Mr. L'Esperance. (At which time, Mr. L'Esperance exited the boardroom.) MS. BAKER: Next case is number 12, Case CENA20120000290, Westok International Corp. (Speaker was duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of ordinance Collier County Code of Ordinances Section 54-185, subsection D. Description of violation: Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation located upon an unimproved property within a 200-foot radius of improved property. Location/address where violation exists: The drainage easement located between Huntington Lakes and Quail Creek. Folio 68640001003. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Westok International Corporation, 5551 Ridgewood Drive, Suite 501, Naples, Florida, 34108. Page 83 161 e A --- April 26, 2012 Date violation first observed: January 12th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 18th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 13th, 2012. Date of re-inspection: March 29th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hi, David, have some exhibits for us? INVESTIGATOR JONES: I do. But first I'd like to make a note for the record, there was a scriveners error on the notice of hearing that was provided to Westok, and the details of that error was that David Gevanas (phonetic) of 4886 Pond Apple Drive South, Naples, Florida, had been listed as registered agent. That was incorrect. The correct registered agent for Westok is David G. Budd of 5551 Ridgewood Drive, Suite 501, Naples, Florida. And with that, I do have some case evidence in the form of a photograph of the prohibited exotics. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was the agent notified? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes, he was provided certified and regular mail. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 84 161 2A - April 26, 2012 MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR JONES: And you can see here the Brazilian pepper poking through the fence there. And as stated earlier, this is an unimproved parcel that borders Huntington Lakes and Quail Creek, so -- the owner of it, Westok, according to tax records, and to date the violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you had any contact with the INVESTIGATOR JONES: Well, I have had contact with the registered agent, David Budd, and he expressed that Westok is a dissolved corporation. And David Budd is the only registered agent that is associated with them that's still able to, you know, speak about them or -- and everything else. So that's where we're at on that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the property is owned by -- INVESTIGATOR JONES: Westok. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. INVESTIGATOR JONES: And they've been -- you know, proper service has been given. Of course I didn't hear any response back. It may be because the corporation, according to David Budd, the registered agent, was dissolved. But we just followed procedures all the way through and then the violation still remains so we bring it to hearing. MR. HUDSON: How much land are we talking about? INVESTIGATOR JONES: How much land? Well, it's actually quite a bit. This parcel, it goes east and west and then it goes north and south. I don't know the exact acreage but the ordinance that it violates is the ordinance of exotics within 200 feet of an improved property. So there's sections of it that aren't within 200 feet and there's Page 85 161 . 2A April 26, 2012 sections that are. And if I spoke with somebody that was going to abate it I would specify what section should be abated according to that ordinance -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's like a narrow strip, 15 feet -- INVESTIGATOR JONES: It is. Yeah, it is. Actually, I think it's like 30 feet wide. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the exotics exist on the entire length of it? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any other pictures? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah, actually I have a picture of the parcel, if you'd like to see it. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR JONES: It's highlighted in blue. You can see where it goes east and west and then runs north and south. And beyond that picture it runs further east and west and then it picks up again. But again, I just focused on the area which I assume the complaint came from. Actually, I think I know that, they left their Page 86 161 2A2 April 26, 2012 contact information. So that's the area which would be targeted, of course. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And any notification of what we find here will be transmitted to? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Will be transmitted to Westok, of course. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That seems to be a problem if they're dissolved. INVESTIGATOR JONES: It will be transmitted to Westok's registered agent as well, David Budd, who still represents them, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Were they the original developers of either one of these parcels? I'm just trying to figure out why they own a, like a 30-foot piece of land. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yeah, it's another one of these cases. This easement, in quotes, is represented in Quail Creek's PUD, but Westok owns it. And Westok, yeah, similar to the previous case. The reason behind why Westok bought it, I'm sure it was early on in the development stages. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: These are properties that are all sold when they sell them for lack of payment of taxes that wind up being sold by the tax collector that people like to stay away from because -- INVESTIGATOR JONES: Yes, you're right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, so we have a motion from the board? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion a fine exists -- I mean, a violation exists. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion that it exists and we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 87 161 2A 3- April 26, 2012 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They're in violation. All unanimously. INVESTIGATOR JONES: You're ready for my recommendation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I am. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Okay. Recommendation is as follows: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Must obtain any necessary permits, inspections and certificate of completion for the removal of all Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation within blank days of this hearing or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated. Two: The prohibited exotic vegetation base/stump must be treated with a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved herbicide and a visual tracer dye shall be applied when the prohibited exotic vegetation is removed but the base of the vegetation remains within blank days or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed. Three: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, Page 88 161 ZAP April 26, 2012 and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to fill in the blanks? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, give it a shot. Make a motion that the respondent pay the $80.29 in costs and that item one and two be abated in 60 days or a fine of$100 a day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is number 16, Case CESD20110013644, Giselle and Alejandro Melendi. (Speaker was duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to Collier County Land Development Code 04-41 as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Description of violation: Attached garage enclosed and turned into living space. Detached garage and swimming pool with enclosure built without Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 3680 4th Avenue Page 89 161 2A April 26, 2012 Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio 40865680007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Giselle and Alejandro Melendi, 18361 Southwest 82nd Avenue, Palmetto Way, Florida 33157. Date violation first observed: September 29th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: November 4th, 2011 . Date on/by which violation to be corrected: December 2nd, 2011. Date of re-inspection: April 9th, 2012. Results of the re-inspection: The violation remains. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Good morning still. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One aerial photo taken from the Property Appraiser -- Collier County Property Appraiser. Two photographs taken September 29th, 2011 . One photograph taken October 26th, 2011, and two photographs taken yesterday, April 25, 2012, from a neighboring property. MR. KELLY: Motion to accept. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept and we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? Page 90 161 2A 2- April 26, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: I would like to present details of the case. While on a vacant and foreclosed home meet and greet I observed that the home had three expired permits: One for a detached garage, two, a swimming pool, and three, a screen enclosure for the swimming pool. I also observed the garage on the principal structure was turned into living space. I'm sorry, I have not had any contact with the owner and there was a lis pendens that was filed by Countrywide and Bank of America on August 9th, 2010. But in doing research yesterday there was a final judgment that was just recorded on March 9th, 2012. All attempts at contacting the owner have been unsuccessful by the foreclosure team and by myself. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It looks like the -- has this had any other violations besides these? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: It did. It had a weed and litter violation that has been abated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: By the county, I'm sure. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Actually by the bank. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay, good. All right, anybody like to make a motion or discuss this? MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion that a violation exists. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 91 161 2A2 April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. And you have a suggestion for us? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: I do. That Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.51 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the Code Enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What did you say the operational costs were? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: $80.51 . MS. BAKER: Fifty-seven cents. MR. MIESZCAK: Um-hum, six cents. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to fill in the blanks? MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation as read, with the blanks filled in, 60 days and $200 per day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? Page 92 161 2A - April 26, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: The next case we're moving to is Number 5, Old Business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, will be Number 3, Case CESD20110001287, Sergio and Sara Garita. (Speaker was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41 as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida. Folio number 3701 1920003. Description of violation: Expired Collier County permits without receiving required inspections, any certificate completion/occupancy for the pool. In addition of a game room and lanai. Also, no Collier County permits obtained for the shed built in the rear yard. Past orders: On October 27th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. Respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4734, Page 2807 for more information. Page 93 161 24. 2— April 26, 2012 The property is not in compliance with Code Enforcement Board orders as of April 26th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as following: Order item number one and two, fines at a rate of$200 per day for the period between November 27th, 2011 and April 26th, 2012, 152 days, for the total amount of$30,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$81.15 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $30,481.15. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions, motion to impose -- MR. MIESZCAK: Make a motion to impose a fine. MR. LAVINSKI: Give it to my father. I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. MIESZCAK: Hope your mother was cute. MS. BAKER: The next case is number 4 under imposition, CEPM20110001296, Sergio and Sara Garita. (Speaker was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Violation of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article 6, Section 22-231, subsection 15. Page 94 161 2A2 April 26, 2012 Location: 420 15th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida. Folio number 37011920003. Description: A green and stagnant pool not protected from the elements. Past orders: On October 27th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4734, Page 2809 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 11th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number two and four, fines at a rate of$250 per day for the period between November 11th, 2011, January 11, 2012, 62 days, for a total amount of$15,500. Order item number six: Abatement costs of$1,335.90 have not been paid. Order item number seven: Operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $16,916.76. MR. KELLY: Make a motion that we impose the fines. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? Page 95 161 2A 9-- April 26, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is under imposition, number 5, Case CESD20090000972, Maria L. Ramirez. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Eric, you're on. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violations of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article 2, Section 22-26.B, 104.5.1 .4.4. Location: 3440 35th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 39956600004. Description: Expired fence permit 2007-052601 without a certificate of completion. Fence construction started on property. Past orders: On November 18th, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4629, Page 250 for more information. An extension of time was granted on April 28th, 2011 . See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4681, Page 2033 for more information. An additional extension of time was granted on August 25th, 2011 . See the attached Order of the Board OR 4718, Page 1659 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of April 26th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item one and two: Fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period between January 23rd 2012 through April 26th, 2012, 95 days, for the total of$14,250. Fines continue to accrue. Page 96 161 2A April 26, 2012 Order item number five: Operational costs of$79.72 have been paid. Total amount to date: $14,250. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's hard to believe that an expired fence permit could run up a fine of this amount. I do remember this case. Have you had any contact with Ms. Ramirez at all? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: I attempted contact yesterday and did not receive any. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I remember her being here. I think the operational costs have been paid on this. And that's really unfortunate. Our hands are tied on a case like this. But it seems quite a lot of money for an expired fence permit. Okay, anybody like to take this one on? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose the fines. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, just a comment on that. That again, once they come into compliance our department on the respondent's behalf would go to the board and ask for the fines to be waived. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think this might be one of those times. Page 97 161 2 A April 26, 2012 Do you have a suggestion for us, Eric? Oh, this is imposed, yeah, next -- MS. BAKER: Next case is number 6, Case CEROW20090000973, Maria L. Ramirez. (Speaker was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violations of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 110, Article 2, Division 1, generally, Section 110-31 .A. Location: 3440 35th Avenue, Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 39956600004. Description: Expired right-of-way permit 07-0945-E. Construction debris still on the property. Driveway not complete. Past orders: On November 18th, 2010 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4629, Page 244 for more information. An extension of time was granted on April 28th, 2011. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4681, Page 2035 for more information. An additional extension of time was granted August 25th, 2011. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4718, Page 1661 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of April 26th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two: Fines at a rate of$200 per day for the period between January 23rd, 2012 through April 26th, 2012, 95 days, for the total of$19,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five: Operational costs of$80 have been paid. Total amount to date: $19,000. Page 98 161 2A April 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: Mr. Chairman, in relation to the fact that this respondent signed a stipulation agreement on 11/18 of'10, 18 months ago, I'd like to make a motion we impose the fine as stated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Thanks, Eric. MS. BAKER: Next case is number 7, Case CESD20090005007, Roxana Sorokoty Trust and Walter G. Sorokoty, Jr. Estate. (Speaker was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR SNOW: This concerns violations of Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinance, Chapter 22 -- oh, for the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. Article 2, Section 22-26.B-104.1 .35, Florida Building Code, 2004 edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1 and 111 . 1 and Ordinances 04-41 as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code as amended, Sections 10.02(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e) and that is a six and 10.02.06(B)(1 )(a). The location is 2435 Tamiami Trail East, Unit 9, Naples, Florida. Page 99 1. 61 2A April 26, 2012 Folio number is 387040000. Description is a mezzanine and stairs in bays nine and 10 erected and electrical work done in the bays. Bay eight without first obtaining Collier County approval, required inspections and certificate of completion. Past orders: On January 7th, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4651, Page 570 for more information. A motion for extension of time was denied on June 23rd, 2011 . See the attached Order of the Board OR 4698, Page 1333 for more information. An additional motion for extension of time was granted August 25, 2011. See attached Order of the Board OR 4718, Page 1665 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 27th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order number one and two: Fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between October 25th, 2011 and March 27th, 2012, 155 days, for a total of$31,000. Item number five: Operational costs of$82.86 have been paid. Total amount to date is $31,000. The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and operational costs have been paid. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 100 161 2A 2 April 26, 2012 MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: The next case is number 8, CESD20090011861, Steven A. and Kelly A. Johnson. (Speaker was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Violations Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permit Section 105.1 . Location: 111 4th Street Southeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 37224080002. Description: Permit number 900005651 expired without a C.O. Past orders: On November 18th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4744, Page 1106 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of April 6th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order items number one and two: Fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between January 18th, 2012 and April 6th, 2012, 80 days, for the total of$12,000. Order Item number five: Operational costs of$81 .43 cents have been paid. Total amount to date: $12,000. The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and operational costs have been paid. Page 101 161 2A a- April 26, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to abate. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Is that the last case? MS. BAKER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. That brings us to -- MR. MIESZCAK: I missed the opera. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we'll sing for you later. MR. MIESZCAK: The last one was opera. Number nine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, reports. Do we have any reports? MS. FLAGG: Do you want to do your workshop? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We want to do the workshop after everything or -- MS. FLAGG: Well, your agenda, the next one is workshop. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. FLAGG: Do you want to amend the agenda and we'll put that -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let's amend the agenda. MR. MIESZCAK: And finish it, right. I'd like to amend the Page 102 161 2A 0- April 26, 2012 agenda and save the workshop for the end. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. So we'll get you out of here sooner rather than later. MS. FLAGG: Let me just give you the report for last week, the week of April 12th, ending April 18th. As of November, 2008, the banks have expended $2.7 million to abate 2,246 code violations. And just as a reminder, the banks can abate. For instance, the case that you had, they can abate the weed violation. But if it requires a permit, they have to have a certificate of title before they can abate the internal permitting issues. And that's a building code requirement. For the week, 130 additional cases were opened. There were 149 lien searches done in that week. And of those 149, eight code cases and code violations were identified. The cases today show how important it is to do this lien search program and property inspection program. And the realty -- the realtors are doing a great job in letting their potential buyers know the importance of doing that, by evidence by the number of lien searches that were done just that week. Page 103 161 2A April 26, 2012 The Code Enforcement Department also administers all citations that are issued by various county departments, whether it's Domestic Animal Services, Parks and Rec, Sheriffs office, et cetera. And so just in that week there were 127 citations that were also processed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, that brings us then to next meeting date's going to be May 24th. And we can probably -- MR. KELLY: Motion -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to adjourn and then we'll have the workshop after. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to adjourn. MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. Page 104 161 2A April 26, 2012 ****** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:03 p.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD •r ' OBE ' • UFMAN, CHAIRMAN These mi tes approved by the Board on as presented or as corrected Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Court Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 105 161 2A 4 -- ' May 24, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, May 24, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Robert Kaufman Kenneth Kelly Tony Marino Gerald Lefebvre Lionel L'Esperance James Lavinski Ronald Doino Larry Miesczak (Excused) Chris Hudson (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Page 1 1b1 2A - May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: The respondents may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. Could we have the roll call. MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ronald Doino, Jr.? MR. DOINO: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ken Kelly? MR. KELLY: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Larry Miesczak and Mr. Chris Hudson both have excused absences for today. Page 2 16I 2 May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And would you put down Ken Kelly for being two minutes late, please. Do we have any changes to the agenda? MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. Under No. 4, public hearings, motions, Letter A, motions, we have two additions. The first will be Case No. 9 from the agenda, Robert and Colleen Rossomando, Case CEOCC20120002338. The second will be Case No. 3 from hearings, Gracelyn Mostaccio Rue, Case CELU20110011262. Under motion for extension of time, we have one addition. It will be Matthew Arsenault and Christina Arsenault, Case CESD20110000448. Under Letter B, stipulations, the first stipulation will be No. 7 from hearings, Case CESD20120000069, Henry Rouzier and Jessica E. Lopez. The second stipulation will be No. 1 from hearings, Case CESD20110005108, Carlos Ramos. Under Letter C, hearings, No. 2, Case CESD20100007042, Kirk Sanders, has been withdrawn. Number 6, Case CEPM20120001592, Thu-Nhut Nguyen, has been withdrawn. Under No. 5, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 1, Case CESD20110000038, Olga Canova and Rebecca M. Rios, has been withdrawn. Number 3, Case CES20110006426, Carlisle/Wilson Plaza, LLC, has been withdrawn. Number 5, Case CESD20110014953, Tommy Pickren, has been withdrawn. And that is all the changes I have to the agenda. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If we could get a motion to accept the agenda as modified. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. Page 3 161 2A. May 24, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Approval of the minutes. If we can get a motion to approve the minutes. Are there any changes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments on the minutes? MR. L'ESPERANCE: So move. MS. GERALD: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That carries. Page 4 lot2A May 24, 2012 Which brings us to motions. MS. BAKER: The first motion for continuance will be No. 9 from hearings, Robert and Colleen Rossomando, Case CEOCC20120002338. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. LEFEBVRE: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Do they have -- MS. BAKER: There's a letter in your packet requesting the motion for continuance. It is under the hearing packet, and it states that the respondent will be out of state on a previously scheduled trip. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does the county have any objection to granting a continuance? MR. LETOURNEAU: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And what time frame are we looking at for the continuance? MS. BAKER: The letter states a request for three weeks, so we could schedule for the June hearing. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is that sufficient time enough for the recuperation period? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You'll have to check with the doctor. Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, that's what they're asking for, so I make a motion that we continue to the June meeting. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second by -- okay. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 5 161 2A ?- May 24, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 3 from hearings, Gracelyn Mostaccio Rue, Case CELU20110011262. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. It looks like you brought quite a crew with you today. MR. FREEMAN: Good morning. For the record, Yale Freeman appearing on behalf of the respondent, Gracie Rue, and, as co-council, Ari Good is also present before this board. We have, in fact, filed a motion for a continuance and an amendment to the request for continuance. We've met with staff and discussed it, and it would appear as if their recommendation would be that a 30-day continuance be granted. We just came onboard just a little over a week and a half ago. It looks like a matter that has been attempted to be resolved with a commitment from both sides up until this point, and we just need a little bit more time to go through this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does the county have any problem with the movement to the next meeting? MS. PEREZ: No objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any motions from the board? MR. KELLY: Make a motion to grant the continuance to the next meeting. MR. DOINO: Second. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. Page 6 161 2A May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. MR. DOINO: Second over here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Thank you. MR. FREEMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Or not. MS. BAKER: The next case will be under motion for extension of time, Matthew Arsenault and Christine Arsenault, Case CESD20110000448. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And show the respondent is not present. MR. BALDWIN: No, I don't see her, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: The permit is in ready -- ready for issuance. She just needed a little more time. The shed was a small shed. It should be down this weekend. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any problem with extending this time? MR. BALDWIN: I don't have any objections, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And how much time was Page 7 161 2A May 24, 2012 requested; one month? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: The letter actually says 45 days. MR. BALDWIN: Oh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: Sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That would be two months. So go to 60 days. Do we have a motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How many days, Mr. Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Forty-five is stated in their memo. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, which would move it to our second meeting coming up. MR. LAVINSKI: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second from Mr. Doino. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Page 8 161 2A Ma y 24, 2012 MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 7 from the agenda under stipulations, Case CESD20120000069, Henry Rouzier and Jessica E. Lopez. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we continue, I neglected to say that since we are short members, that Mr. Doino will be a voting member for this meeting. MS. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; abate all violations by: Must apply for and obtain a Collier County building permit or a demolition permit and request inspections to be performed and passed through a certificate of completion/occupancy within 180 days of this hearing or a fine of 250 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. Respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using the methods -- using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provision of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. MS. LOPEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your name for the record is? MS. LOPEZ: Jessica Lopez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you understand the stipulation and agree to the terms of that stipulation? MS. LOPEZ: Yes. Page 9 161 2A a' May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And 180 days should be sufficient time for you to get everything done? MS. LOPEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion from the board. Any discussion? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 1 from the agenda, Case CESD20110005108, Carlos Ramos. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. CONDOMINA: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. It is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County Page 10 161 2 A May 24, 2012 permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Ramos, could you give your name for the record. MR. RAMOS: My name is Carlo Ramos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And do you understand the stipulation that you've agreed to? MR. RAMOS: Yes, sir, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you have no problem with the time frame? MR. RAMOS: No problem. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. Do we have -- MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 11 161 2A 2' May 24, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Mr. Ramos. MR. CONDOMINA: Thank you. MR. RAMOS: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be under Letter C, hearings, No. 4, Case CEPM20120003266, Integrity First CR Services. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231, Subsections 9, 11, 12i, 12p, and 20. Description of violation: Exposed wires, no smoke detectors, hole in ceiling and walls, and broken windows. Location/address where violation exists: 2221 Golden Gate Boulevard West, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 36912040009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Integrity First CR Services, care of registered agent, Leandro Feliz, 4100 Corporal Square, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: March 2, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: March 2, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 1, 2012. Date of reinspection: April 11, 2012. Results of the reinspection: The violation remains. MR. AMBACH: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. AMBACH: For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Page 12 161 2A _ May 24, 2012 I'd now like to present case evidence of the following exhibits: Seven photographs taken July 28, 2010, and one photograph taken May 23, 2012. All photographs taken by myself. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a motion to accept the photos? MR. KELLY: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. This case initiated after the observation of what appeared to be a vacant home with a front door unsecured. While at the front entrance of the home, I smelled what appeared to be a strong odor of marijuana. I contacted the Collier County Sheriffs Department, who met me at the property and confirmed the home was a marijuana grow house. While on site, I observed crude electrical alterations, holes in the ceiling and walls, missing smoke detectors throughout the home, and broken windows. A notice of violation was sent to the property owner. And due to Page 13 161 21\ ?- May 24, 2012 pre-foreclosure, this case was sent to our foreclosure specialist as well. A few weeks later I did observe the broken front window had been secured with a board; however, I was unable at the time to determine if any other issues were addressed on the inside. After no response from the bank or the bank -- from the owner or the bank, excuse me, I rechecked the clerk's website and observed the home had been sold in a short sale. I served a new notice of violation to the current owner, and after no response to the notice and failed attempts to locate the owner, this case was prepared for today's hearing. As of today, the violations continue to exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any questions from the board? MR. KELLY: I have a question. So is the Integrity First CR Services, in fact, the owner then or the -- MR. AMBACH: They are -- MR. KELLY: -- agent for the owner? MR. AMBACH: They are the owner. Now, I served -- they were local. I went to the office. I posted a courtesy copy at the office. I always do my postings on the property of the courthouse, as we're supposed to, but I always try, if they're local, to go over and knock on the door. I did speak with a woman that said that she hasn't seen him in that office for quite some time. Tried to find him through the web. Failed attempts, so -- MR. LEFEBVRE: When was this first observed, this violation? MR. AMBACH: It was back in 2010. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was this a police case at the time? MR. AMBACH: It was a patrol by myself. I stumbled across it, and then I contacted the Sheriffs Department. They came out and confirmed that it was, in fact, a grow house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Page 14 161 2 A a- May 24, 2012 MR. KELLY: I make a motion that a violation exists. MS. GERALD: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is one of two cases, as I see. MR. AMBACH: It is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. AMBACH: Would you like to hear the recommendation on this? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. AMBACH: The county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81 .43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining a Collier County boarding certificate within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Number 2, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of Page 15 161 2A �-- May 24, 2012 completion/occupancy for the unpermitted alterations and repairs of unsecured openings within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Number 3, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to fill in the blanks on the board? Hearing none, I will attempt to fill in the blanks. The 81.43 to be paid within 30 days, 60 days to take care of all the violations, to bring it into compliance, and $500-a-day fine thereafter. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion; we have a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Now we go to the second case. MS. RAWSON: Can I ask you one question about your order, Page 16 161 2A 9 May 24, 2012 sir? Is that 60 days for each of the things he recommended or 60 days for everything? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sixty days for everything. MS. RAWSON: Thank you. MR. KELLY: I have a question about procedures, Jean. In small board situations, the chairman usually is allowed to make motions. On larger-board situations, they are not. Is there anything in our rules that prevents Mr. Kaufman from doing that? MS. RAWSON: There's nothing in the rules. We're going to talk about the rules today. You can bring that up, but there's nothing in it now. MR. KELLY: I have no problem with it; I just want to make sure that there's no issues down the road -- MS. RAWSON: I understand. MR. KELLY: -- loophole that a respondent could use against us. MS. RAWSON: Very good item for discussion at our workshop. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I actually have looked that up in Robert's Rules, and it does provide it, unless you go against Robert's Rules. MR. KELLY: No pun intended, Mr. Robert Kaufman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Trouble maker. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to Case CESD20120003258, violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 2007 Florida Building Code Chapter V, Section 424.2.17. Description of violation: Expired pool permit and no protective barrier around the pool. Location/address where violation exists: 2221 Golden Gate Boulevard West, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 369120400009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Integrity First CR Service, care of Leandro Feliz, 4100 Page 17 ioLaA May 24, 2012 Corporal Square, No. 135, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: September 22, 2010. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: March 2, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 1, 2011. Date of reinspection: April 11, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. AMBACH: For the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One photograph taken July 28, 2010, and a second photograph taken yesterday, the 23rd of May 2012. All photographs were taken by myself. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there a motion to accept it? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. AMBACH: Again, this case initiated as a patrol for an unsecured structure. It was determined by the Sheriffs Department to be a marijuana grow house. Page 18 16 Lay 12 And after the site visit, I determined that the pool on site was not permitted, and it does not have the safety barrier around it. Now, you'll notice from the photos that at some point in the pool's life, it popped up out of the ground. This is an in-ground pool. That's concrete that you're looking at there. But because the construction was never finished, it was never filled, it's been compromised, and it's popped itself back up, out. Again, the notice of violation was sent to the property owner, and due to pre-foreclosure, it was sent to the foreclosure specialist. No response from the bank or the owner, and then the property was sold to the current owner. A new notice of violation was issued to the current owner and no response as of today. The violation remains. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I have a couple questions. This pool does not have water in it? MR. AMBACH: I can't determine if it has water or not at this point. I don't have the right to walk around the back of the house. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Can we tell if it's completely covered on the top? MR. AMBACH: Even an aerial photograph would not show a complete coverage, because the new aerial photographs haven't come out yet. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So we don't know if it's covered? MR. AMBACH: It is covered, but I don't know if it's compromised at this point. It has a visqueen plastic covering, and that's metal -- that they normally do for, you know, the HUD standards. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this far from another residence? MR. AMBACH: I have one residence to the left of that house. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is this yard fenced in? MR. AMBACH: It's not fenced in, no. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Page 19 161 2A d" May 24, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: This has been going on -- the question I have is, this has been going on for nearly two years, correct? MR. AMBACH: It has. MR. LEFEBVRE: The previous statement of violation actually had, I think, the wrong date when it was first observed. It said May 12, I think, 2012. But this, for two years to go on unprotected, it seems like a long time. We've dealt with cases before where there's been -- the structure of the pool has been compromised, that it's been an open barrier, and we give a very short time frame usually, and usually those cases come to us pretty quickly, due to the fact that a kid can fall into the pool and so forth. So I think that there is, in fact, a violation. So I make a motion that there's a violation, and we should have a very short time frame to have this corrected. MR. KELLY: Second the violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, and we have a second that a violation exists. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. You have a recommendation? MR. AMBACH: I do. The Code Enforcement Department asks the Code Enforcement Board -- orders the respondent to pay all Page 20 1 61 2 A 9' May 24, 2012 operational costs in the amount of$81 .15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do we have your recommendation we could see on the screen? Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, Mr. Lefebvre, you said you wanted to put a short time on this. Do you have a recommendation? MR. LEFEBVRE: I sure do. $81.15 within 30 days, and let's stick with $500 per day and 15 days to correct, to abate. MR. KELLY: I'll second that one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. MR. MARINO: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 21 161 2A g-- ' May 24, 2012 MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Chris. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be Number 8, Case CESD20100007624, Juan H. and Ana Perez Huapilla. And we do have an interpreter for this case. (The interpreter was duly sworn to translate from English to Spanish and Spanish to English to the best of his ability.) (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to Case CESD20100007624, violation of ordinance, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: House that has an addition attached. Location/address where violation exists: 804 Jefferson Avenue West, Immokalee, Florida, 34142; Folio 63854400000. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Mr. Juan H. Huapilla and Ana Perez Huapilla, 804 Jefferson Avenue West, Immokalee, Florida, 34142. Date violation first observed: August 27, 2010. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: April 15, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: May 8, 2011. Date of reinspection: January 18, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. WALKER: Good morning. For the record, Weldon J. Walker, Jr., Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present as exhibit of evidence four photos and a property ID card. Page 22 161 2k 9- May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen those photos? MR. WALKER: No, he hasn't. I could show him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If you could show him the photos. We'd like you to look at the photos and see if you have any objection to them being presented as evidence. MR. HUAPILLA: Yes. This is my house here. I agree to everything he's telling me. The problem now is that I am not working. I have no money. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll get to that. Let the county -- the county will present, and then we'll come back. Okay. Do we have a motion to accept the photos in evidence? MR. KELLY: So moved. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept and a second? MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. WALKER: This case was initiated as a complaint in 6 -- 06 -- June 2, 2010. The complaint referenced multiple additions on property, including an illegal shed. Page 23 U 16 , 2 1 2 Y � On June 7, 2010, I observed a house that appeared to have an addition attached and a porch-over attached to the house. I requested the property card and determined upon further research of the old handwritten permit books, the first computer system program, Whips, and the computer programming system, CD Plus, that two permits were recorded for the property. One was an '83 permit for a slab which received a CO, and the other was a 1991 re-roof permit which received its CO. There is no permits for the addition or roofover, and it is recorded -- and is recorded on the property card as being picked up in 1985. I have met with the property owner and his son on several occasions in our office to discuss the violation and abatement. Now, the property owner took steps to abate by acquiring a demo permit, which was issued on June 10, 2011, but expired June 12 -- I mean, December 12 -- excuse me -- December 13, 2011. Property owner is an agricultural worker and travels to work. As of today, the addition, as well as the porch-over, remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you tell me if that's occupied at this time? MR. WALKER: Yes. He actually lives in the residence. The attached addition is used as storage. It has electric in it and plumbing, because they have washers and dryers there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: No interior photographs? MR. WALKER: No, no. I was never allowed in and -- or when I did go there, there was no one present. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Have we seen all the photos? Okay. Similar. Okay. Any questions of the respondent? MR. KELLY: I had a question actually for Collier County. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. Page 24 161 Z A �- May 24, 2012 MR. KELLY: Investigator Walker? MR. WALKER: Yes, sir. MR. KELLY: You said that in 1985 something was picked up? MR. WALKER: What happened, on the property appraiser's website -- or on the property ID card, if you look at it, it shows that there was an addition that was recorded in 1985. The actual permit that existed was for a 1983 slab. That slab was CO'ed. From the time that slab was CO'ed until 1985, that slab ceased from being a slab to the addition that we have there now. MR. KELLY: And those permits and comments about a slab are all referring to addition work, not the original home, correct? MR. WALKER: Exactly. MR. KELLY: Okay, thank you. I'd just -- the reason why I'm asking is because the original NOV cited a house with additions without permits, including the house. So I'm just clarifying. So it's not the original house. It's just the additions that's a violation? MR. WALKER: That's correct. MR. KELLY: Okay, great. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. MR. HUAPILLA: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you state your name for the record. MR. HUAPILLA: Juan Huapilla. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you've heard what the county has to say? MR. HUAPILLA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And could you tell us your situation? MR. HUAPILLA: This is my house. When I bought the house, it was like this. I did not add anything. When he showed up to let me know what was going on, I spoke to the owner, and I explained to him what was going on, and he didn't Page 25 161 2 9- May 24, 2012 want to fix it. I'm here today to know -- I mean, I would like you to tell me what does he want me to do. When he sent me the warning first, he wanted me to take this off, all this, all this. He said -- he said he didn't get in the house. Indeed, he never got in the house, but somebody else from there got into the house. Do they have permit to get in the house? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm sure the answer to that is no, not without his permission. MR. HUAPILLA: But they got in the house -- they got in the house. Okay. I want them to tell me what do I need to take down. This is -- this is the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It looks like that's the -- from the property appraiser, that's the diagram of the structure. MR. HUAPILLA: Yeah, this is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to -- do you want to enter that as evidence? MR. HUAPILLA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. HUAPILLA: Yes, I would -- because I would like him to tell me what needs to be taken down. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: I make a motion we accept it. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to accept that diagram as evidence. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 26 1 61 2A �- May 24, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. HUAPILLA: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now, you won't get that piece of paper back, but that's available, I know, on the website to be printed at any time. MR. MARINO: Who is he -- excuse me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. HUAPILLA: I would like to know. MR. LEFEBVRE: Excuse me. Who is he referring to when he says they entered the house? Is he talking about the county? Who's he talking about? MR. HUAPILLA: Yes, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know who in the county entered the house? MR. HUAPILLA: The one who gives the permits. I asked him to go and he didn't go. He didn't want to. The other person was the one who got in. That's why the other person showed up. The house is 40 years old, and they're going to realize that it has that addition. I, myself, did not do anything. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When did you purchase the house? MR. HUAPILLA: Ten years ago. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So around 2002? MR. HUAPILLA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. HUAPILLA: Yes, 2002. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the county has the numbers that go back to 1985. Okay. This is -- is this the diagram from the property appraiser's website? Page 27 161 2A9' May 24, 2012 MR. HUAPILLA: Yes, that's it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Investigator, can you tell me the section that was the slab originally and now has the addition? MR. WALKER: Yes. Where it says SP40/300, that red or pink highlighted section there that's 20 by 15, that's the actual slab section. MR. HUAPILLA: Yes, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the other section that is in pink or red in the front of the house? MR. HUAPILLA: That particular section is not the one cited. It's the side on the white section that says 16/5. That front section, and the -- the front section actually appeared, as we could tell, as my discussion with the permit tech, that was there with the house. The front -- the front -- or that rear slab and that side section roofover, which could be discerned by the photos and the property appraiser's card, appeared in 1985. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I think for the board we have to find out if a violation exists. If it does exist, then we can work on the remedy. MR. LEFEBVRE: So just to be clear, the only part that we're talking about is the 16-by-5 white section; is that correct? MR. WALKER: Actually, it's the 16-by-5 white section, and the 16-by-5 -- the 20-by-15 section. That's the actual addition. The slab was the foundation that was CO'ed. On top of the slab they created the addition, which was cited as a shed when I investigated it. Once I investigated, it was that addition on the rear. MR. LEFEBVRE: So the 20-by-15 and the 16-by-5 -- MR. WALKER: Exactly. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- section, are two sections -- MR. WALKER: The 16-by-5 section is the roofover, which is attached to the addition in the rear and the side of the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The slab exists in both sections? MR. WALKER: Yes. Page 28 161 May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Yes? MR. KELLY: So if those two sections are what's listed on the notice of violation and they had a permit at one time with a slab that received a CO, and the gentleman stated that it is used as a cover-over and just a storage area, is it possible that he could render those acceptable to 1985 standards, since that's when they were built, as storage, not necessarily necessitating demo permit or demolition of them? MR. WALKER: I mean, that could be quite possible. That would be something that I would rather defer to the people who handle permitting that can determine that -- MR. KELLY: Of course. MR. WALKER: -- or ascertain that. MR. KELLY: Of course. It's just the respondent is asking, what do I need to tear down, and he did receive a demo permit which has since expired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think we need to find either it's a violation or it's not first, then we can go into that discussion. MR. KELLY: Sure. That's true, that's true. Yeah, we'll hold that. MR. MARINO: I have a question. The SP40/300, the 20-by-15 building, what is that used for? MR. WALKER: There is -- from what I understand, it's a laundry room. There's washers and dryers in there, which means that there's also electric and plumbing. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Now, "washers, dryers," more than one washer; more than one dryer? MR. WALKER: That's what I was told. Again, I didn't actually physically go in the structure because I wasn't allowed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, we have the respondent here who could answer that question. Can you tell us what you have in that 20-by-15 structure? What's inside? Page 29 161 2 A .9' May 24, 2012 MR. HUAPILLA: My washer, the dryer, and that's it, and my stuff. My -- I mean, things from my wife. I mean, the table -- that are located on the table, and that's it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion a violation does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. MARINO: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second; take your choice. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. We've gotten past -- it is a violation. Now what can be done, which is the question you asked earlier, to resolve the situation? Mr. Kelly, did you want to make a comment now? MR. KELLY: Just to finish. My only point is, if the respondent is asking what he needs to demo and there is an option to possibly keep this as a storage shed, maybe we let him know at this point that that is an option; just needs further investigation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would ask the question, if the electrical and the plumbing was inspected, either by affidavit or whatever, is it possible that that could remain, and then pull a permit Page 30 161 2A - May 24, 2012 on the entire unit? MR. L'ESPERANCE: I think that is a possibility. It has to be brought up with the proper department in the county, however. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I think that's a possibility. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent been working with you to try to resolve this, or -- MR. WALKER: Actually, at times it's been rather difficult to maintain contact with him. Again, he works agricultural work. I have worked -- I have had phone conversations with his son, who actually kind of translates for his father. Again, we did sit down with him and the permitting tech and discussed with him his options. And it was his choice at that time to select the option that he chose based on his feeling of financial requirements. So I don't -- I'm not -- I don't see where he wasn't informed, but he, of course, has the opportunity to do whatever we recommend if that's what he wants to do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you aware of anybody entering the building without his permission? MR. WALKER: No, the only -- I never entered in the facility. I think when he had talked to the permit tech, she at that point went there and kind of tried to see what she could do to assist him because, again, I didn't get access. But I don't know what transpired from there, because she began to work with him with regards to what his options would be. And at that point it was between him and her to determine what he needed to do, and he chose the course that he chose to demo it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And have you had any contact with that permitting person to find out what would be possible to do? MR. WALKER: I would rather defer to her. Again, I know that she recommended, of course, to demo it or attempt to permit it. I Page 31 161 2A May 24, 2012 think what she said to me was the concern of his was the cost, would it cost to actually permit it any other way other than just to remove it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you remember somebody coming out from the building department trying to work with you to see what needed to be done to bring the addition into compliance? MR. HUAPILLA: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And do you have the contact information from that person? MR. HUAPILLA: No, no, because he explained to me that things were to be arranged with him because he was the one who executed the inspection. Okay. MR. KELLY: Recommendation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a recommendation? MR. WALKER: Yes, I do, sir. Code Enforcement Board orders that the respondent pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits and inspections and certificate of completions within days to be determined of this hearing and a fine set, to be determined, will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to take a stab at that? Page 32 161 2A - May 24, 2012 MR. KELLY: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: Do you mind if I poll the respondent even though we've closed it just to see what -- a time frame in his mind may be? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. KELLY: Sir, you may have the option to keep that addition and use it like it is, but it may cost a little money to get a permit and a licensed contractor or engineer to approve it. We're going to set a time frame to allow you to do that work. My question is, how long do you think it would take to get up the money to comply? MR. HUAPILLA: I would like to have a year in order to fix the problem, tear it down, and according to what I'm told, to be -- if I can finish that before, if I get the money before, I'll do it. MR. KELLY: It's important to understand that whatever time frame we set today, if it's not met, fines will go against the property and could cost much more. MR. HUAPILLA: I'm going to tear it down. I'm going to tear it down. MR. KELLY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you need -- you're saying that you need a year to tear it down? MR. HUAPILLA: Yes. In that period of time, I will tear down. MR. KELLY: I know this has been there for a long time, but I'm not comfortable with a year. It's just too long, you know, and in a year he could come for an extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: On top of that, from board discussion, there's electrical and plumbing in there that hasn't been looked at by anyone -- MR. KELLY: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to see if it's safe or not. How many people live in that structure? Page 33 161 2A May 24, 2012 MR. HUAPILLA: Five; my wife and my children. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: How many bedrooms in the home? MR. HUAPILLA: Two. MR. KELLY: Normally we would do maybe three months here in these type of situations, maybe less. I'd be okay with six months, to compromise. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to take a stab at the MR. KELLY: Well, I'd like to poll the board first. I don't know how everyone feels. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I was at 270 days, so nine months. That's what I have written down. MR. KELLY: Okay, good. Nine months would probably be better then. Go ahead, Gerald. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that $80.29 be paid within 30 days; 270 days, so nine months, roughly, to correct the problem, or a fine of$150 a day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The $150 is after the 270 days should you not be in compliance at that time. MR. KELLY: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, and we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 34 161 2A May 24, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. We are not saying that you have to take it down. We're saying that it has to come into compliance. So if you can work with the building department to get into compliance, that is one of your options. If you can't or if that costs too much money, then you'd have to pull it down. And you have nine months to get that work done. MR. HUAPILLA: Okay. I'm going to try to fix it. I'm going to look for the means in order to -- I will try to keep it there, but if not, then I'll take it down. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, very good. MR. LEFEBVRE: Please try to work with the investigator and have open communication with him. If you could, keep him up to date on what you're doing, because if you do not -- if you do not finish it in 270 days and you come back in front of us and you ask for more time, if you show good faith in trying to fix the problem, we might be inclined to give you an extension. Entiendo? MR. HUAPILLA: That's fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: Muchas gracias. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Thank you, Inspector Walters. MS. BAKER: The next case will be under No. 5 (sic), old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines, liens. And it's number -- excuse me -- No. 2, Case CESD20110006100, Harry E. Montz. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. SCAVONE: Good morning. For the record, Michelle Scavone, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. Page 35 161 2A � May 24, 2012 This case is in reference to violations, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1). Location: 2547 Barrett Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34112; Folio No. 81730640005. Description of the past orders: Extension of roof over the carport and front door area. On August 25, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of facts, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4718, Page 1677, for more information. An extension of time was granted on January 19, 2012. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 554, for more information. The property -- the property is now in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 23rd. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$200 per day for a period between March 21, 2012, and May 23, 2012, 64 days, for a total of$12,800. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.29 have been paid. The total amount to date is $12,800. During the prehearing inspection, it showed that the violation is now abated, and the county recommends full abatement of fines, as case is in compliance and operational costs have been paid. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 36 161 2A 4p May 24, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. SCAVONE: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 4 under imposition of fines, Case CESD20100003214, Marvin and Donna Schroeder. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. CONDOMINA: Violations: Florida Building Code, 2007 edition -- oh, for the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violations: Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1 and Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Location: 3801 21st Avenue Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 38050720001. Description: No Collier County permits for construction of two structures appearing to be a garage and a barn. Past orders: On February 24, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4656, Page 2345, for more information. And an extension of time was granted on November 18, 2011. See the attached order of the board, OR4744, Page 1091, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period Page 37 161 2A .- May 24, 2012 between April 16, 2012, and May -- through May 24 2012, 39 days, for the total of$5,850. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.29 have been paid. Total amount to date 5,800 -- $5,850. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. KELLY: Make a motion to impose. MR. L'ESPERANCE: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you, Danny. MR. CONDOMINA: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case will be No. 6 under imposition, Case CEPM20100018316, Michael Bonelli. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to violation of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, building and building regulations, Article VI, Section 22-231, Subsection 15. Violation location is 935 Fountain Run, Naples, Florida, 34119; Page 38 161 2A 0- May 24, 2012 Folio No. 33160001123. Violation description is a swimming pool that was not being maintained. Past order on November 18, 2010, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4692, Page 294, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of January 4, 2011. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 3, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between December 19, 2010, to January 4, 2011, totaling 17 days for the total fine amount of$2,550. Order Item No. 7, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $2,630.57. The county recommends abatement of$2,550 and daily fines, as the case is in compliance, and operational costs of$80.57 will be imposed as a lien. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was this brought into compliance by the county or by the respondent? MR. LETOURNEAU: I believe -- this property is in foreclosure. It was brought into compliance by the bank. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Wow. Okay. MR. KELLY: It shows our task force is working. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: Make a motion that we impose the lien amount of $80.57. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 39 161 2A ?- May 24, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 7 under imposition of fines, Case CESD20100009135, Opera Naples, Inc. MR. MARINO: I'm going to have to excuse myself from this one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Marino has a previous appointment. MS. BAKER: Conflict. MR. LEFEBVRE: Conflict. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Conflict. He has a previous conflict. MR. L'ESPERANCE: An existing conflict. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's existing. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. SCAVONE: For the record again, Michelle Scavone, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. This case is in reference to violations, Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article II, Section 22-26(b)(104.5.1 .4.4), Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1, and Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 2408 Linwood Avenue, Naples, Florida; Folio 61631160002. Page 40 161 2 A a--- May 24, 2012 Description: Alterations of building consisting of but not limited to electrical, adding and removing the interior walls, adding and widening of door jams without first obtaining Collier County building permits. Past orders: On August 25, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of facts, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4718, Page 2022, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$200 per day for the periods between February 22nd and May -- I'm going to back up there -- for the periods between February 22, 2012, and May 24, 2012, 93 days, for a total of$18,600. Fines continue to accrue. The Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid to -- total amount to date, $18,600. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir, if you can state your name for the record. MR. KNAFO: For the record, my name is James Knafo. I am the principal architect at James Knafo, Incorporated, located at 649 5th Avenue South in downtown Naples. I was retained by Opera Naples on May 9th to lend a professional voice to this discussion and to facilitate the correction of the stated violations to further guide them in their efforts to alter their facility at 2408 Linwood Avenue into a code-compliant state. Can you please share those with the board? MS. RAWSON: He has brought some exhibits which he'd like for you to look at. So that would be up to you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're not here to rehear the case, so Page 41 161 2A 9 May 24, 2012 MR. KNAFO: This is in terms of moving forward and resolution of the stated violations that I would like to share. MR. KELLY: Could I make a suggestion? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. KELLY: Maybe as you advise your clients, maybe we could advise you on our procedure. MR. KNAFO: Sure. MR. KELLY: We usually do requests for continuances, motions for extension of time and so forth, at the beginning of our meetings. At this particular point we're being presented by the county with a fact, and we have to either say yes or no. It's one of those up/down vote times. We can't go back and rehear or change anything. However, if the county wishes to withdraw this this month and next month you were to appear in front of with us an extension of time, we could hear that. And we might -- in fact, now that there's professional representation, we might, in fact, entertain that. MS. BAKER: You do have the authority to grant the extension of time today. You can hear his side of it, and if you -- the board chooses to do that, you may do that today instead of bringing it back next month. We have done that many times. MR. KELLY: Excellent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I don't know that it's necessary to read all that. My questions of you would be, what is it going to take to bring this into compliance? That's what we're all about. MR. KNAFO: Ninety days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It would take ninety days to bring it into compliance. MR. KELLY: Make a motion to extend for 90 days from today. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? Page 42 161 2 A a-- May 24, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, I do have some discussion. They had up until -- they actually knew this back in August of last year, that they had six months to come into compliance. Now we have the architect coming to us saying that he was retained May 9th, nearly two months after -- nearly two-and-a-half months or so after the February 22nd date. I really -- it's imperative, if we do grant this extension, that they have it done in 90 days, because coming back to me, and wait -- for them to wait this long. We grant an extension, and ifs from the time of this hearing, not from the time of when they should have been in compliance. So, actually, they'll have nearly six months more time. They should have retained you much sooner. And it -- if an extension is granted, 90 days, I will not be one to grant another extension. It better be done in 90 days, or I'm -- I just really feel that waiting this -- almost two-and-a-half months later to retain somebody isn't the way that it should have been done. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Call the question, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I just wanted to hear your comment on Mr. Lefebvre's. MR. KNAFO: Code enforcement has been extremely patient and understanding with Opera Naples. The only way to explain why they have not been able to move forward to this point has been that their efforts at fundraising have been extremely unsuccessful. What's changed is that the severity and the seriousness of where they are now has been recognized by members of the community, and they've agreed to step forward and help. That's why I can stand in front of you and say that we will resolve this in 90 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: That's fine, but that should have been conveyed to code enforcement so that could have been conveyed to us. And I know that's not under -- I mean, I know you can't speak for them in that regard, but just -- if an extension is granted, I would not Page 43 161 2A a" May 24, 2012 be one to grant an extension above -- anything past 90 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you been in touch with -- MR. KNAFO: Ms. Scavone? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. KNAFO: Yes, I have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any problem with us granting an extension? MS. SCAVONE: The county does not have any problems. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We'll call the question. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: (Abstained.) MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. LAVINSKI: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously (sic). MR. KNAFO: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Shows that Mr. Marino is -- MS. BAKER: I believe Mr. Lavinski voted no. MR. LAVINSKI: Yes. I voted no on that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear. Okay. Okay. Hopefully at 90 days it will all be resolved. MR. KNAFO: You won't see me again. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 8 under imposition, Case CESD20090007697, Timothy Beebe. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to take a break now before we hear this one? THE COURT REPORTER: I'm okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're okay? Are you okay? Page 44 161 2A May 24, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: We have one more case then? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One more case, then we'll take a break. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. BAKER: If we are going to take a break, can we take a different case, because we do have the interpreter here, and we would like to let him leave, if possible. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you'd like to modify the agenda? MS. BAKER: Yes, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a motion to modify the agenda? MR. KELLY: Which case? MS. BAKER: It would be No. 11 under imposition of fines. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second to modify the agenda. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 11, Case CESD20110007333, Erineldo Mosquera and Eddy Lunar. (The interpreter was duly sworn to translate from English to Page 45 161 2,A May 24, 012 Spanish and Spanish to English to the best of his ability.) (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Quick question for the interpreter. Are we going too fast or about the right speed? THE INTERPRETER: You were fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. THE INTERPRETER: It was just before then, the last part of the previous case that -- when he read the final, it was really, like, very fast. But that was -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: I'll try to pace myself also. For the record, once again, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in violation of Ordinance 04-41, the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and the Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1. The violation location is 4191 18th Place Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116; Folio No. 35766920004. Violation description: Permits 2004080292 for a fence, 2004112551 for a shed, 2006023718 for a garage conversion, and 2006023732 for an enclosed porch that all have expired permits without completing all inspections and receiving certificate of completion or occupancy. Past order: On September 22, 2011, Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4728, Page 875, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Item No. 2 and 4, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between Page 46 161 2A a-- May 24, 2012 March 22 (sic), 2012, and May 24, 2012, totaling 65 days, for the total amount of$13,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 7, operational costs of$80 have been paid. Total amount to date, $13,000. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a question. MR. MARINO: Is that March 21st or March 22nd? MR. LETOURNEAU: I've got -- for the -- March 21, 2012, to May 24, 2012. MR. MARINO: I thought he said 22nd. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. For the record, could each person identify themselves. MR. MOSQUERA: I was here in court, and I told you that the property was in foreclosure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you. Just your name, and your name. MR. MOSQUERA: Okay. Erineldo Mosquera. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. LUNAR: Eddy Lunar. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you, gracias. Yes, I do remember that you were here. And what -- the house, you said, is in foreclosure? Is there anything else that you want to tell the board? MR. MOSQUERA: I'm still in foreclosure. I am -- I'm working with a couple attorneys. The attorneys are telling me that everything's going on very well. They are negotiating with the bank. And I expect to have good news, to fix everything concerning the house, I mean, all the -- the problems concerning the permits. We are a little low in money, short. I requested attention (sic) here, because I was expecting that the foreclosure issue was going to be taken care of, but the banks have some issues. And I don't know why. But if we -- if the problem -- if the issue -- I'm sorry. If the issue with the foreclosure is resolved and if we keep our house, we will agree in resolving all the problems to avoid coming back here Page 47 161 2A 0- May 24, 2012 again. We are elder person. We don't like to come to court for things that can be resolved. And if these things can be resolved, we will do so. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any discussion from the board? MR. KELLY: If I have to be the bad guy in this situation, unfortunately, we're presented with what we're presented. There's no extension that was asked for. But in this case, maybe the bank seeing a lien against the property may help expedite the foreclosure proceedings in their favor, and they get to either modify or maybe reduce or something. So I hate to say it, but that might be the best course of action here. And then down the road, if they do, in fact, retain possession of the property, we can talk about maybe an extension, or they can work directly with the County Attorney's Office to get it rectified. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Does the -- has the county been working this issue with the foreclosure team? MR. LETOURNEAU: No. Our foreclosure team normally doesn't really get involved with occupied properties. So they haven't been involved in this case at all. MR. LEFEBVRE: Once we impose the fines, then it's out of our hands, correct? It would have to go to the commission. MS. BAKER: Yes. MS. FLAGG: The way it would work is, if you -- I think Mr. Kelly's making the point that the bank is -- gets really interested to help when there's a lien. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. FLAGG: At the point that, let's say, the bank does resolve it with the property owner, then at that point we would go to the Board of County Commissioners on their behalf and ask that the fines be waived. Page 48 161 2 A May 24, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. With that being said, I make a motion to impose the fines. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. We believe that what we have done will help your position with the bank. When the bank sees these numbers, they will probably be more likely to come to some resolution with you. If they do, the county will go to the next level up on your behalf to try to abate the fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: Once the fine is -- once the violation's abated, they will go to the County Commissioners on your behalf. But you would have to abate the problem before, okay. Does that -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yep. Thank you very much. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you. MR. MOSQUERA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Bye, now. Okay. We're going to take a 10-minute break. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Code Enforcement Board is back in session, and we're up to the next case. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 8 under imposition, Case CESD20090007697, Timothy Beebe. Page 49 161 2A May 24, 2012 (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: Again, for the record, Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), and Florida Building Code, 2004 edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1, and Collier County Code of Laws Chapter 22, Article II, Section 22-26(B) (104.1.3.5). Location: 245 22nd Avenue Northeast, Naples Florida, 34120; Folio No. 37743840008. Description: Open sides with metal-roofed type structure and attached deck/dock pilings all built without Collier County permits. Past orders: On October 27, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See attached order of the board, OR4734, Page 2823, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period between April 26, 2012, and May 24, 2012, 29 days, for the total of $4,350. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81 .72 have been paid. Total amount to date, $4,350. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Any discussion? Page 50 161 2A .P-- May 24, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 9, Case CESD20110012249, Kenneth T. Jenkins and Aundrea Jenkins. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. AMBACH: This is in reference to the violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 260 Weber Boulevard South, Naples Florida, 34117; Folio No. 36760921008. Description: Pool permit expired without receiving a certificate of completion/occupancy, and no permits on file for the screen -- the pool screen enclosure, excuse me. Past orders: On January 19, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 63 -- 632 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period Page 51 161 2 A May 24, 2012 between March 21, 2012, and May 24, 2012, 65 days, for the total of $9,750. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $9,830.57. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Quick question. Have you been in contact with these folks at all? MR. AMBACH: There's been no contact with these people at all. This was a -- it was not a foreclosure. I was trying to -- when it started, there was a real estate agent that was working to help, and I was speaking to the wife. The two don't talk to each other, and I guess what he told me was she wasn't going to do it, he wasn't going to do it, so nobody was going to do it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thanks, Chris. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 10, Case CEVR20110016570, Lonny Moore Trust Estate and Morrison Living Trust. Page 52 161 2 A May 24, 2012 (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This was a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 3.05.08(C). Violation location was 120 7th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 37161440006. The violation description is presence of Collier County prohibited exotic vegetation including, but not limited to, Brazilian pepper. Past order: On March 22, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4784, Page 1839, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of $100 per day for the period between April 22, 2012, and May 24, 2012, totaling 33 days, for the total fine amount of$3,300. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total fine amount to date: $3,380.57. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Do we have a motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 53 161 2A2 May 24, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously, thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 12, Case CESD20110009942, Aura Rodulfo. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. This was a violation of Ordinance 04-41, the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location of the violation: 2390 Markley Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 337440003. Violation description: A horse stable/barn with unpermitted electric and plumbing. Past order: January 19, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 565, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 29, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between March 21, 2012, and March 29, 2012, totaling nine days, for a total of$900. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Page 54 161 2A 9 May 24, 2012 Total amount to date, $900. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as case is in compliance and operational costs have been paid. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So moved. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. MARINO: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're welcome. MR. MARINO: That's what I said. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 13, Case CESD20110014484, James A. and Barbara A. White. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. PEREZ: For the record, Code Enforcement Supervisor Cristina Perez. This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Location is 3150 36th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 41718160000. Description: Addition made to the front of the principal structure Page 55 161 2A 49- May 24, 2012 without Collier County building permits. Past orders: On February 23, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4772, Page 1325, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between April 24, 2012, through May 24, 2012, 31 days, for a total of $4,650. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $4,730.86. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. PEREZ: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 14, Case Page 56 161 a A 9- May 24, 2012 CEPM20120001359, Irma Arrendondo. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, once again, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Original violation: Collier County laws of-- excuse me -- Collier County laws and ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(2). Violation location: 1948 45th Terrace Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116; Folio No. 35749440006. Violation description is dwelling being occupied without water. Past order: On March 22, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4786, Page 3373, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 24, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$500 per day for the period between March 26, 2012, and May 24, 2012, totaling 60 days, for the total of$30,000. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $30,080. MR. KELLY: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. One quick question I have on this. Is this unoccupied? MR. LETOURNEAU: It is occupied. I believe possible squatters at this point. It's in foreclosure, and -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: What options do we have? Page 57 161 2A 9- May 24, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I thought we did that, when this was imposed, that we would use the Sheriffs Office to clear it out. MR. LETOURNEAU: I'm not sure why we haven't done that yet. I guess we can. We've never really evicted people as of yet, but I guess that's an option we can look into. MS. FLAGG: The challenge is you have to get the property owner's permission to enter unless you get a court order, but we can review that. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I would like to pursue that possibility if they are squatters, if they don't have the owner's permission to be there, if they're not paying rent. This is a health and welfare issue, in my mind. So if we could pursue that possibility, that would be something the board would -- MR. LETOURNEAU: We will. Finding the owner is going to be the hard part. I'm not sure if we've ever spoken to her or where she's located at this time. MR. LEFEBVRE: I concur. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. MR. MARINO: If you can't find the owner, can you still get a court order? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. MR. MARINO: How long does it take for a court order? MR. LETOURNEAU: Yeah, it depends on what court we -- you know -- MR. MARINO: Okay. MR. LETOURNEAU: -- we've never done this before, so I can't really say. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'd like to have this expedited if possible. MR. KELLY: Can the health department step in and do that? MS. FLAGG: (Shakes head.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. I'm completely mystified by squatters. If somebody moves into your house when you're on Page 58 16 ! 2A a" May 24, 2012 vacation, they have a right to be there, and you have to go to the court to get them thrown out? MS. FLAGG: Again, the property owner of record is the one who owns the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All righty. Well, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that the last case? Oh, boy. Next meeting is -- before we get to the -- so I don't forget, the next meeting is June 28th. Reports? Do we -- I guess we have nothing to forward to the County Attorney's Office? MS. FLAGG: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a report? MS. FLAGG: We do. For the week ending May 16th, the banks have expended $2,783,000 to abate 2,262 code violations. For that week alone, we had 157 new cases opened. And as we've talked before, a new case is opened if we receive a complaint and/or if it's a vacant property. In that week there were 517 property inspections; 59 cases were Page 59 1 b1 2A 2- May 24, 2012 closed due to compliance; 48 cases have had bankruptcy filed. Our bankruptcy filings have significantly increased in Collier County. There were, in that week, 144 lien searches completed, and of those 144, five of those did identify for the potential buyer that there were code issues on the property. So, as you know, those lien searches are invaluable to a potential buyer because they know exactly what they're dealing with before they go into the property. Also, wanted to let you know that June 1st, the code district supervisors will be rotating to go a new district. And so during the month of May, they've been doing transitions. So the current district supervisor has been taking the new district supervisor to their -- all their meetings through this month, their homeowners' association meetings, civic association, task force meetings. They've been introducing them. They've been becoming familiar with the issues in that district, and then effective June 1st, they will all rotate one district. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. As a realtor, the -- it's good to hear that you picked up five cases that we probably won't be hearing here. Because I know I see them all the time, and I'm sure my fellow realtors and brokers also are seeing the same thing. It really helps. It's the best $25 you can spend; better than termites. Termites will only eat your house. If you get finished with the fines, they could take your house. Okay. Well, I guess that brings us up to -- are we going to adjourn the meeting and then start the workshop? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 60 161 2A May 24, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The meeting is adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:56 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD ors I ■ RP ERT KA / "AN, CHAIRMAN These inutes approved by the Board ono, A) �,, as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER. Page 61 161 2 A d' June 28, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, June 28, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION at Growth Management Division Conference Room 609/610, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Robert Kaufman Gerald Lefebvre Larry Mieszcak Kenneth Kelly (Excused) James Lavinski Lionel L'Esperance Tony Marino (Excused) ALTERNATES: Ron Doino Chris Hudson ALSO PRESENT: Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jen Baker, Code Enforcement Specialist Page 1 161 2A 0-- June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. The Code Enforcement Board is now in session. Notice: That the respondents may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the Board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Roberts Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence which the appeal is to be based on. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. And we'll start with the roll call. MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Present. MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chris Hudson? MR. HUDSON: Present. MS. BAKER: Mr. Larry Mieszcak? MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. BAKER: And Mr. Ronald Doino, Jr.? MR. DOINO: Here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And today since we are missing two members, the alternates will be voting members today. Page 2 161 2A June 28, 2012 MS. BAKER: Yes. And Mr. Kelly and Mr. Marino both have excused absences. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So Chris and Ron, you both will be voting members. Okay. Do we have any agenda changes? MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. The first will be under letter A, motions. Under motion for extension of time, we have two additions. Number two under extension of time will be number 10 from imposition of fines, Eagles Bond Investments, Case CESD20110005082. Number three under motion for extension of time will be number three, moved from imposition of fines, James and Julia Askey, Case No CESD20100008859. Under letter C, hearings, number two, Case CESD20110006729, Jason Nardella, has been withdrawn. Number five, Case CESD20100007042, Kirk Sanders, has been withdrawn. Number seven, Case CESD20110017156, Ronnie G. and Beverly J. Bishop, has been withdrawn. Number 10, Case CESD20110003387, Prime Homes at Portofino Falls, has been withdrawn. And that's all the changes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. Which brings us to approval of the minutes from the May 24th Meeting. Do we have any additional changes or motion to accept? MR. LEFEBVRE: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 3 161 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay, now we go into motions. And the first one is Paul and Cathleen Burcky. MR. RICHARDS: Richards. That would be me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: Paul and Cathleen Burcky is the first case. MR. RICHARDS: Excuse me? MS. BAKER: Paul and Cathleen Burcky is the motion for continuance. MR. RICHARDS: I thought you said Paul and Jacqueline. MS. BAKER: No, Paul and Cathleen Burcky. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, sorry. (Investigator Asaro was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. INVESTIGATOR ASARO: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a request here, I read the letter, for a 60-day extension on this case. This is the second extension that's been requested for 60 days. Do you have any comments or suggestions on this? INVESTIGATOR ASARO: For the record, Tony Asaro, Collier County Code Enforcement Department. This morning I spoke with Mr. Burcky, and he is -- he is in the last step of the process. He needs to submit an inspection card and he needs to obtain that from his architect. And unfortunately his architect Page 4 161 2A June 28, 2012 is out of town for the next few weeks or so on family emergency. But I've been working with Mr. Burcky. He has been trying to abate the violation, and he's been pretty good to work with. So I don't have a problem with the extension of time. Unfortunately a couple -- an issue came up with his home, he had to spend some additional money re-roofing his house, so that kind of put him behind a little bit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you have no problem with granting an extension of time? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: No, not at all. No, he's been great to work with. MR. MIESZCAK: I make a motion of an extension of 60 days. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion is granted. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The next case is Jose Casarez. (Investigator Rodriguez and Jose Casarez were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you let us know what your thoughts on this particular case are. And you can give us your request why you need an extension. Page 5 161 2A June 28, 2012 MR. CASAREZ: First of all, I just started work again in June. I have been laid off since January. And I have not been financially able to come up with some material to do some of the stuff I'm doing. But we've got the trailer down that was behind it, it's completely down, it's only just the floor now. And I showed it to her, she came by to see it. And other than being financially not able to finish, I need an extension so I can get the materials I need to finish. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I have a couple of questions. My first question would be for the county. Has the $80.29 been paid? INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Yes, it has. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I did notice that this goes back a ways. There was a 90-day extension of time back in February, and the past order was due on 5/23. You requested the extension on 5/25. So let me hear from the county what their suggestion is or what their feeling is on this. INVESTIGATOR RODRIGUEZ: We have no objection. He has both permits that have been applied. The demolition for the removal of one of the mobile homes, which he pretty much has gotten rid of and the second mobile home, which is the double-wide, the permit is ready to be issued. We're just ready for the C.O. because they won't give one without the other. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you think that you can complete everything in what period of time? MR. CASAREZ: Right now because of my financial status, situation, I probably need till June so I can take everything out of there and get the other one ready. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Being that this is June, you're saying a year? MR. CASAREZ: No, six months, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments from the Board? Page 6 I 2 A �---' June 28, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: I mean, first of all, you requested 120 days, now you're talking about six months? MR. CASAREZ: Yes, sir. MR. MIESZCAK: So you're changing what you -- MR. CASAREZ: Right. Because after talking and trying to figure out everything that I need, I'm going to need more time, because I'm the only one working and I just started working here in June. MR. MIESZCAK: Okay, thank you. I'll make a motion, 180 days extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. HUDSON: Second. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'd like to interject a question here. You say 180 days and he's requesting six months. That's going to be what date? Do we need to be specific about the date or not? MR. LEFEBVRE: You could do 180 days from today. MR. CASAREZ: Yes, that's fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that your motion? MR. MIESZCAK: That should have been my motion to be exact. No time though, just the days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion and we have a second. Any other questions on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. Page 7 1 6I 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. MR. CASAREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The next case will be Eagles Bond Investments, Incorporated. Case 22 in our tab. (Mr. Roy Bond and Investigator Baldwin were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Bond? MR. BOND: Yes, good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Please let us know what the situation is. MR. BOND: My problem is only just getting the permit basically. And we're in the process of getting that. As a mobile home we have been -- we can't do anything ourselves, we must acquire a mobile home installer to do it to get the license, which we have done three times. But they never followed through and give us the C.O. and that's what -- we have the same goal that the county does, the code -- Mr. Baldwin and I have. It's just a matter of the timing involved and getting -- now that we have to start from scratch. We've had it extended twice before, the permit, but it was renewed each time. And this time our planner tells us that we have to start from scratch. And that's what we've done. It's currently before the Planning Commission now; part of it is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Baldwin? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. He appears to be willing to take care of this. It's been going on for quite some time, but -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We were given quite a lengthy explanation this morning. I don't know that anybody on the Board has even had time to read it all. But how much time are you requesting? MR. BOND: Well, initially as soon as we have the permits we Page 8 161 2 A June 28, 2012 will immediately, assuming the inspectors are willing, to have one of the inspectors come in and inspect it so we know where we're at then for certain. I want this finished, we want this finished and we want it done properly. I want to be there at each step and see what the contractors -- what they've doing. But I want to know what they have to do. Because I don't want to go through this again. But once we know then what the inspectors tell us, I think it's completed. But I don't know. I've been told it's completed. Some of it I can see where it probably has some work that has to be done to it. But I'm no expert, and I rely upon the inspectors to tell us what we need. But then I can tell you a time. It won't be very long. But normally a new contract from scratch has six months. And we've had to get new engineering reports; everything starts from scratch instead of just renewing it. And that's any holdup we've had. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, it's a little difficult for the Board to say okay, we'll give you what you're asking for when you're not sure what you're asking for right now. MR. BOND: I agree with you. But I'm honest, I don't, I mean, you know, six months' a normal contract for a new building permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Baldwin, would six months be acceptable to the county? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: County has no objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any questions from the Board, or motions? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, I guess -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: I make a motion -- excuse me, go ahead. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a question. Is this a removal of a mobile home, is that what it is? MR. BOND: No, sir, it's an installation. MR. LEFEBVRE: And the mobile home's already there correct? MR. BOND: Pardon me? MR. LEFEBVRE: The mobile home's already there? Page 9 161 21k June 28, 2012 MR. BOND: Yeah, it's already there. It's almost -- I mean, it needs the C.O. on it. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think six months is a long time. Is it currently being lived in? MR. BOND: It's -- currently we have 30 acres there. And we right there -- not -- we have people on guard there all the time. MR. LEFEBVRE: The question is, is it occupied? MR. BOND: It is occupied, yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Six months I think is excessive. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other questions from the Board, or motions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The reason that I tend to agree with Mr. Lefebvre, if it hasn't been inspected how do we know it's safe from an electrical perspective or from a plumbing perspective? MR. BOND: There has been inspections on it. A lot of the inspections are already on it, if we look at some of the material that was submitted there. There has been -- the septic's complete, the well's complete. I mean, it's all basically there. There never has been -- the certificate that -- I have learned mobile home installers are supposed to put on it on the back. And since they pulled the permit, they're the ones that get the Certificate of Occupancy. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we grant an extension for 90 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to extend it 90 days. Naturally, after 90 days or prior to the 90 days, should this motion pass, you have the opportunity to come back and give us a progress report or request additional time, et cetera. I just want to make that clear. All those in favor of the motion -- you have a question? MR. MIESZCAK: Yeah comment and I'd like to ask a question. Page 10 161 2 A June 28, 2012 So in other words, we're giving a 90-day extension on something that's not C.O.'d, correct? MR. BOND: Understand. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. MIESZCAK: Well, I'm certainly against that. Thank you. I mean, somebody's living in a property that's unsafe. How do we know what it looks like? And yeah, I see all these permits here, but who did the inspections? So I'm not in favor of this, just to let you know. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess a follow-up question: What permits are still outstanding, and what's holding you up from getting that? Or what inspections are still outstanding and what's holding you up from MR. BOND: Well, they haven't been finalized. That's the thing. MR. LEFEBVRE: I understand. But what -- MR. BOND: All of them basically -- not all of them, but they -- INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: The final electric, the final AC, the final mechanical and the final building and the final septic have not been finalized on the permit. MR. LEFEBVRE: So there's like five, four or five. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Correct. MR. L'ESPERANCE: In your opinion, is 90 days sufficient to do this? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: In your opinion, do you see any roadblocks to that happening? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: There are always roadblocks. You know, things always come up. I don't know, I can't give you an honest answer on that, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: No red flags that are obvious in your mind right now? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: No. Page 11 161 e � June 28, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I call the question, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, all in favor of the 90-day extension, say aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) MR. DOINO: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Bond, you have 90 days to -- (phone interruption) -- answer your phone and to get the C.O. MR. BOND: Good time for that. Everything else is falling apart. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You understand the Board has granted you 90 days to get it done, and should you have a problem getting it done in 90 days, prior to the 90 days I would expect that you would come back to the Board and request. And at that time I would suggest that you have some sense of what has been done, you know, four of the permits have been completed, I'm waiting for one, or maybe they're all done, in which case we won't see you. Okay? MR. BOND: Okay, I sincerely appreciate the Board's assistance, help. I'm surprised we're even here. But we're going to get this straight. I don't think it's even going to take 90 days, if we can just get a permit. But that's in the third-party's hands, I don't know that time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. MR. BOND: Thank you, and thank the Board. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Thank you. Page 12 161 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This brings us to James Askey and Julia Askey. Are they here? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: They're not. (Investigator Short was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we received this this morning, and I just want to briefly go through it. This was originally scheduled for imposition of fines because the property was not in compliance. Why don't you give us your take on this case. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. The trailer has been demolished and removed from the property. However, no demolition permit was obtained. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. In all likelihood this will probably be in compliance now, should they have a permit. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Right. To this time -- I mean at this time no permits have been applied for, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. To get a permit of this type probably could be done in a couple of days. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Has all the debris been removed? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: It has. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Have you been at the site to verify this? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: I have. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: This case has been going on since August, 2011, so I think that's quite an excessive time. I make a motion that we deny the extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. MR. DOINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second by Mr. Doino. I have one comment. This thing -- again, what Mr. Lefebvre said, I went back to 60-day extension, 180-day extension. We've been Page 13 161 2 A �-- June 28, 2012 here too long on this one. And I'm sure that over the past year they have known that they had to obtain a building permit. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: It was addressed on the order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have a motion to deny this request and we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) MR. HUDSON: Opposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And one opposed, Chris. Okay. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: So we'll hear this, the imposition of fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Under imposition of fines. We're in the hearings now. Jen, I'll wait for you to let us know where we're going to start. MS. BAKER: The first case will be number one, Case CEOCC20120002338, Robert E. and Colleen Rossomando. (Mr. and Mrs. Robert Rossomando and Supervisor Jeff Letourneau were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Description of violation: Operating an inn-type lodging business in an Estates zoned district. Location/address where violation exists: 4641 Fifth Avenue Page 14 161 2A June 28, 2012 Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34119. Folio 36661320009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Robert E. and Colleen Rossomando, 4641 Fifth Avenue Northwest, Naples Florida, 34119. Date violation first observed: February 15th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: March 9th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 9th, 2012. Date of re-inspection: April 30th, 2012. Results of re-inspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Letourneau? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Good morning. For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to start out by handing in some case evidence in the following exhibits: Four printed pages of websites, four pages of Land Development Code and definitions, and three pages of an email I received from County Attorney Jeff Klatzkow. I did show this to Mr. Perlow this morning. I think he might have some objection on a part of it. MR. PERLOW: Yes, I have to strongly object to the email. That's not what's called competent substantial evidence, that's an opinion from the attorney and that's conversations going back and forth between the attorney and Mr. Letourneau. It's just not evidence. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Actually, it was a request for legal services from Mr. Klatzkow that I asked him in an email to make a determine on if this was a -- this particular activity was a violation. And I got his answer back on that email right there. MR. PERLOW: It is still not factual evidence presented at a hearing. He's offering an opinion as an attorney for Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He's offering an opinion as the county's attorney. Page 15 161 2A June 28, 2012 Jean, do you have any problem with what Klatzkow has written? MS. RAWSON: We've allowed evidence like that in before from the County Attorney's opinions, you know, on more than one occasion. Not only the County Attorney, a couple of times from other people in code enforcement you've allowed evidence in about people's opinion. MR. LEFEBVRE: The building department specifically. MS. RAWSON: Yes. And I know that Mr. Klatzkow is not here; however, credible hearsay is permissible. MR. PERLOW: Well, I think that violates Mr. Rossomando's fundamental due process. I can't cross-examine that opinion. I can't question him at all. He mentions in here this is a possible prohibited use. There are statements in here. I can't question him on this document if he is not here. And that does violate Mr. Rossomando's due process rights. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can you bring the mic closer to you, please. MR. PERLOW: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Jeff, do you have comments on this? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: This is common practice. We have determinations from various parts of the county at all times on code cases. Zoning, building department, county attorney, we request their legal advice on violations all the time and we go forward with cases on his opinion a lot of times. I don't agree, I think that his opinion does matter. He is the County Attorney, and part of his job is to make decisions on whether something is a violation or not. MR. PERLOW: But the bottom line is he's offering testimony that I can't cross-examine. And it's being accepted on the face of the letter. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, this is based on the past precedent. I would tend to accept the email, and should you disagree you have the means to file an appeal based on our interpretation. Page 16 161 2A 4?-- June 28, 2012 MR. PERLOW: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Now, I have a question. You have seen this whole package? MR. PERLOW: I did. I saw it this morning for the first time, yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we accept this package in its entirety. MR. PERLOW: And I would object to that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Unfortunately you're not on the Board, so we have a motion to accept the package as written. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) MR. HUDSON: Opposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One opposed. Okay, so the package is accepted. And obviously I haven't seen this package yet either. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay, I'd like to start out by the actual website that you can go on. The first one is bedandbreakfast.com, as you can see. If you go down to the bottom one you see, A Dream Come True Home. I believe that is the advertisement for this particular property. And then you have the view website. And when you click on that you Page 17 161 2A June 28, 2012 come to the second page, which has the home page, A Dream Come True. It basically tells you, you know, what a nice facility this is, everything else. Then if you click on rooms, you know, view rooms, you come to that third page which shows three bedrooms, I believe, that are being rented out. You have mom's room, grandma's room and Lady Di's room. As you can see there's rates available on this website. And the third page shows you the services; it's a typical bed and breakfast, it looks like. You stay for the night, you come down and get your bed and breakfast -- you get your breakfast at the kitchen table. So that's -- I'm just trying to establish that there is this activity going on on this property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: The next part of the packet would be the ordinances I took out of the Land Development Code. The first ordinance would be 2.02.03, prohibited uses. I just want to really stress that that's the ordinance that I am claiming there is a violation of. And I'm going to read it here: Any use or structure not specifically identified in the zoning district as a permitted use, conditional use or accessory use shall be prohibited in such zoning districts. That's what I'm here today for you guys to make a decision on, that and that alone. As you go down the page I also put a definition of motel/hotel, which states: A building or group of buildings offering transient lodging accommodations normally on a daily rate to the general public with or without accessory uses such as restaurants, meeting rooms or recreational facilities. I want to just say daily rate is what I'm trying to get at right there, which I believe that they're charging at this facility. I couldn't find a transient definition in the Land Development Code, so I put the next one in there, which was destination Page 18 161 2 A �--- June 28, 2012 resort/hotel, and I believe I highlighted the first sentence right there which says: A transient lodging facility, i.e. less than six months occupancy. That's what I could find in the LDC as far as transient lodging. The next section I put in was just for reference was residential tourist district. Now, if you scroll down to permitted uses, you'll see the first one is hotels and motels. That is a permitted use in that zoning district, allowable as a permitted use. The next one I put in was the whole Estates district. I put in the permitted, the accessory and the conditional uses. And as you can see if you overlook the whole thing, hotels and motels are not part of the Estates zoned district as far as any kind of use out there. All right, any questions so far? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: None from me. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Good. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay. I'd like to move on to Mr. Klatzkow's email. This email was something I sent to him because I just wanted to confirm with the County Attorney that what I was saying in my Notice of Violation was an actual violation. So I wrote him a long -- it's called a Request for Legal Services, which I wanted his opinion on this violation. I highlighted -- if you go down to the middle of that first page, my first question was: I am requesting the County Attorney Office to determine if this type of transient lodging or hotel use is allowed in this -- that I referenced, residential single-family and Estates districts. If you scroll down a little further, the first thing he says is: In answer to your question -- he restates the prohibited use, which I cited on the Notice of Violation. Which it's not a permitted accessory or conditional use in this zoning district. Now, if you move on to the -- then he also quotes the residential zoning district in between there which also states that there's no hotel Page 19 1 6 I 2 June 28, 2012 or motel as a use in that type of zoning district. After you get done with that, he has a little spiel on the third page stating: Renting one's home in the manner described in your request for legal service is a transient rental use. This use is not authorized in residential zoning districts or the Estates. Other districts such as certain commercial districts, the residential tourist district and many PUD's specifically authorize this use. That does not mean one cannot rent out one's home for a single-family resident use. Typically such rentals are in excess of six months. Accordingly, in answer to your questions -- and my first question was: I'm requesting the County Attorney's Office to determine if this type of transient lodging or hotel use is allowed in these types of neighborhoods. Not authorized. Pretty clear right there. I also went on, I just wanted to know if it was authorized, if he did say that, if they needed a home occupational license, but it was pretty moot at that point that they just can't do it, so there's no sense even getting into that. Okay, the original case was opened on February 14th. I did get a complaint through the zoning department. I'm not really sure how it came in, but somebody from the zoning department sent me an email saying they had a complaint about this particular property. I'm not sure who -- you know, if it was a neighbor, competitor, or what it was. So after extensive research, we did serve Mr. Rossomando a Notice of Violation. Because it was -- in the beginning it was a little vague about, you know, the period of time that you can rent one's house out. Because obviously there are people that rent rooms out in residential districts. And from what I can gather with transient and Mr. Klatzkow's opinion, it looks like six months is pretty much the least amount of time that you can rent out a piece of property without it becoming a transient use and we're getting into the hotel/motel use at that point. Page 20 161 2A 2 June 28, 2012 That's pretty much it, if you don't have any questions. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question. I know on certain rentals certain tax has to be paid to the county. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have any taxes on this particular property been paid to the county? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I do believe that they were paying a tourist tax. MR. ROSSOMANDO: Yes, we were. We have a tax I.D. number and we've been paying the tax on a monthly basis, both to the county and the state. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, that's my question. Any other questions from the Board of the county? (No response.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Before I hand it over, I just want to just reiterate, we're just here to make a determination -- or ask you guys to make a determination whether this is a use that's allowed in the Estates zoned district. That's it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, good morning. MR. PERLOW: May I inquire? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. Why don't you give us your testimony first and then you can go back and forth with questions. Correct, Jean? MR. PERLOW: I would like to cross-examine -- MS. RAWSON: No, I think he cross-examines him first. MR. PERLOW: -- based upon what was testified to. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. MS. RAWSON: Right. MR. PERLOW: Mr. Letourneau, where in 2.03.02 does it state you can rent in excess of six months? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It doesn't state it in the prohibitive ordinance. Page 21 161 2A 2-- June 28, 2012 MR. PERLOW: Well, then it's a prohibitive use, isn't it, to rent at all? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It would be pretty much impossible to label every activity in the Land Development Code. It could say breathing is allowed in the Estates, it could say, you know, whatever. I mean, it's going to be hard to go over everything that's allowed, so they pinpoint exactly what's allowed in a certain zoning district. MR. PERLOW: This opinion states that six months would be okay, correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It does. MR. PERLOW: But it doesn't say in 2.03.02 that six months is okay; isn't that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: That is correct. MR. PERLOW: And it also doesn't say in that section that three nights or four nights or five nights is prohibited; isn't that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: That is correct. MR. PERLOW: So you're randomly, correct me if I'm wrong, establishing six-month cut-off; isn't that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: That is not correct. MR. PERLOW: Well, it doesn't say in the code that it's six months. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It says in a certain definition I gave that transient i.e. is six months or less. MR. PERLOW: But you're basing it strictly on 2.03.02; isn't that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: No, that's what I cited the gentleman with. I'm not basing it solely on that ordinance. MR. PERLOW: When was the property first inspected? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: The property -- I've only been onto the property twice. I've never inspected to see if there was anybody coming in and out of there. I do believe that I had Mr. Page 22 161 2Aa- ' June 28, 2012 Rossomando state that they were doing what they had advertised on the website. MR. PERLOW: Well, it says, does it not, that on February 15th, 2012 the violation was first observed? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It was first observed on the website. MR. PERLOW: It wasn't observed on premises? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: No, it was not. MR. PERLOW: Have the premises ever been gone to by you or someone from your office? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I've been to the premises. MR. PERLOW: And have you seen rentals taking place? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I have not. MR. PERLOW: When was the reinspection done? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: The reinspection was done on the website, once again. I went to the website and it was still up, advertising for daily rentals. MR. PERLOW: So everything was based upon the website and that's it? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes. And Mr. Rossomando I believe at one point told me that they were doing it. MR. PERLOW: If Mr. Rossomando were to rent to somebody for 30 days, would that be a violation of 2.03.02? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes. MR. PERLOW: How about 60 days, would that be a violation? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I'm just basing it off the transient lodging which is -- and the County Attorney's opinion. I believe anything less than six months would probably be a violation at this point. MR. PERLOW: So anybody renting to anyone in Naples for under six months is in violation? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Depending on what zoning Page 23 1 61 2Ad' June 28, 2012 district they're in. There's a lot of variables, obviously. MR. PERLOW: Well, if you're in an Estates zone, anybody under six months, you'd be in violation; isn't that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: According to this County Attorney's opinion, yes, I think at that point you could say it's transient lodging. MR. PERLOW: And looking at this letter from the County Attorney where he states 2.03.02 residential zoning districts, in A he's referencing RS-1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Do any of those districts apply in this case? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Are you talking about 2.0 -- you're talking about residential zoning districts on this email right here, is that what you're -- MR. PERLOW: Yes. Yes, please. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: No, the Estates is not included in that particular grouping of zoning. MR. PERLOW: So anything in those zoning districts would also be a violation if they were under six months; is that your opinion? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Yes. MR. PERLOW: Also in this email it states, or you testified rather, that this might be a transient lodging or hotel; is that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Correct. MR. PERLOW: Are you aware of the statutory definition in the State of Florida for a hotel? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: No, I'm not. MR. PERLOW: You're not aware of Section 5.09.242 that defines a hotel as 25 or more guests? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay. MR. PERLOW: You're not aware of that? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I am not. MR. PERLOW: So would you agree that Mr. Rossomando is not operating a transient type hotel, assuming what I just told you is Page 24 161 2A ?-- June 28, 2012 correct about the Florida statutory definition? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I would probably agree that the hotel reference prob -- he doesn't have a hotel; he's got transient lodging though. MR. PERLOW: But he doesn't have a hotel? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I guess if that's the state definition, I would agree that he doesn't have a hotel. MR. PERLOW: But you would also testify that anything under six months, five months is transient lodging? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: In Estates and residential zoning. MR. PERLOW: Even though that's not in Section 2.03.02 or in the Collier County Enforcement Code; is that correct? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It's not in the prohibited use. MR. PERLOW: I have nothing further. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you finished asking? MR. PERLOW: I'm finished with that examination, yes, please. May I question Mr. Rossomando? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. PERLOW: Mr. Rossomando, how long have you lived on these premises? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Since 2003. MR. PERLOW: And did you build the home? MR. ROSSOMANDO: We built the home. MR. PERLOW: And at some point did you go to zoning and make an inquiry regarding whether or not you could rent rooms in your home? MR. ROSSOMANDO: I did. MR. PERLOW: And where did you go? MR. ROSSOMANDO: I went to zoning. I asked them whether I can rent rooms short-term and they said yes. MR. PERLOW: And when was that? Page 25 I 1 1 b June 28, 2012 MR. ROSSOMANDO: That was -- I'm not sure, 2004, 2005 when we started thinking about doing this. MR. PERLOW: And after receiving that reply, did you at some point start renting rooms? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Yes. MR. PERLOW: And when was that? MR. ROSSOMANDO: 2007. MR. PERLOW: And did you go to someone at some point and ask about taxes and paying taxes? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Yes. We weren't aware at first that we needed to pay taxes and were contacted by the tax people in 2009. We paid the current taxes and all back taxes and have been paying currently. MR. PERLOW: Prior to being issued this citation, had you had prior contacts with the code enforcement? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Yes. MR. PERLOW: And when were those contacts? MR. ROSSOMANDO: The last two years. MR. PERLOW: Would you explain what those contacts entailed? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Well, in the past people have -- code enforcement has come to the house, talked to me, talked to my guests. At one time there was confusion that I was renting my guesthouse. I have a guesthouse on the property, my mother-in-law lives there. Another time they talked to my guests and went back and said that renting my bedrooms was a permitted use and I can continue. MR. PERLOW: Were you ever given a citation before this? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Not a citation. In this case no one came to the house to talk to us. Code Enforcement came to the house to deliver a cease and desist order. MR. PERLOW: So you're not aware of any inspection actually taking place on premises? Page 26 161 2 June 28, 2012 MR. ROSSOMANDO: No. My mother-in-law did say she saw a car parked in my driveway and look at her house through binoculars. MR. PERLOW: Do you consider what you're operating to be a hotel? MR. ROSSOMANDO: No. MR. PERLOW: What's the difference between your residence and your rentals and a hotel? MR. ROSSOMANDO: There are a number of differences. One, the number of rooms as stated, we only have three rooms. We don't perform a number of services that a hotel performs. We don't have a 24-hour front desk. We don't have concierge service. We don't accept credit cards. We -- the place closes when we go on vacation. We don't have any employees, it's just my wife and I that run it. MR. PERLOW: Did you at some point look at the code to determine what the prohibited uses were in the Estate district area? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Yes, I did. MR. PERLOW: What did you do find? MR. ROSSOMANDO: I found that paragraph D of the Estates code is a prohibited use paragraph. And it states that the permitted uses are as follows, and it only lists the training and bating of fighting animals. MR. PERLOW: And you didn't see anything in there about rentals or rental of rooms? MR. ROSSOMANDO: The code is silent on renting of rooms. As Mr. Perlow said, it doesn't say we can rent rooms. Code is silent on renting, period. Doesn't say we can rent the whole house, part of the house, for long-term, short-term, anything. And renting is one of the incomes in this county where people buy residences just to rent. So I don't think it was the intention of the code to eliminate renting. MR. PERLOW: How long have you been paying taxes on your rentals? Page 27 June 162 A 2- t 28, 2012 MR. ROSSOMANDO: Since 2009. MR. PERLOW: And this was after speaking to the representatives that you were supposed to be paying the taxes? MR. ROSSOMANDO: That's correct. MR. PERLOW: And you state you have four rooms? MR. ROSSOMANDO: We have -- the house is a four-bedroom house. We live in one of the bedrooms; we rent out the three other bedrooms. MR. PERLOW: Explain to the board why you became involved in doing this and why you're presently doing it. MR. ROSSOMANDO: Whenever we traveled we loved staying in these types of houses. There's a friendship, there's a knowledge the owners have and we just enjoy doing this. MR. PERLOW: I have nothing further -- MR. ROSSOMANDO: No, I wanted to go on. MR. PERLOW: Go ahead, what else did you want? Excuse me for one moment, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. PERLOW: We want to address the issue of home occupation. Would you please explain to the Board what you want to talk about and how you're living in the house and how you're renting out the rooms and how that affects your view of what a home occupation is? MR. ROSSOMANDO: Section 5.02.01 talks about home occupations. And it says it's allowable on any zone which permits residential dwellings must be conducted by the owner. Can't have signs, no excess traffic, no excess delivery of goods. And I believe the renting of my spare bedrooms in my house meets this requirement. MR. PERLOW: Do you have any signs in front of your house? MR. ROSSOMANDO: There are no signs. MR. PERLOW: There's no sign for a bed and breakfast in front Page 28 161 2 A ?- June 28, 2012 of your house? MR. ROSSOMANDO: No. MR. PERLOW: How many are the most amount of cars you have parked in your yard at one time? MR. ROSSOMANDO: A maximum of three cars. MR. PERLOW: Do you consider yourself occupying or renting a rooming house? MR. ROSSOMANDO: It can be considered a rooming house. According to the definition paragraph, Section 22.257 defines a rooming house as a residential dwelling which rents space to non-family members. MR. PERLOW: And in renting this rooming house, this is one of the reasons you realized you had to pay taxes; isn't that correct? MR. ROSSOMANDO: That's correct. The Tourist Tax Code defines -- lists a rooming house as one of the types of dwellings that need to pay their transient tax. So it seems that it was intended for a rooming house type property to be a permitted use. MR. PERLOW: Is there anything else you want to address with the Board today as far as why you're renting these rooms and why you believed initially you were able to do so? MR. ROSSOMANDO: I think it's a win/win for everyone involved. Colleen and I enjoy doing this. Our guests enjoy our home, enjoy Collier County activities. Collier County gets increased tourist taxes. Collier County businesses get increased business. Most of our guests don't like staying in hotels. They prefer this type of lodging. Therefore, they will go -- if it's not allowed in Collier County, they will go to Lee County which offers these types of lodging. Real estate sales could increase, because a lot of our guests are looking to buy. If they stay here, they'll buy here. For these reasons I believe we are in compliance with the current ordinances and we should be allowed to continue to operate. Page 29 161 2A ? June 28, 2012 MR. PERLOW: Nothing further of Mr. Rossomando. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any other witnesses? MR. PERLOW: No. But I would like to briefly address the Board in closing, if permitted. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. PERLOW: Estates District E does not list renting rooms as a prohibited use. If you look closely at the code, it's not prohibited. Under the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 5.02.03, under home occupations, what the Rossomandos are doing is not a prohibited use. According to the testimony that's been offered here today, and we're focusing on 2.03.02, if it doesn't say in there you can rent, then you can't rent. Except you can rent, according to the testimony, if it's six months or more. If you're going to rely strictly on the statute, I don't -- or this code, I don't know how you can cut off the time period at six months. That's being done randomly here. So again, according to the testimony offered here today, anybody in the City of Naples that rents their condo or their house for under six months is in violation. That would result in thousands and thousands of violations. Why is that? Because today we're trying to establish the cut-off at six months. That's not what the code says. The code is silent on it. If the code intended there not to be any rentals, there would be language in there to that effect. Otherwise what we're saying here is we're going to interject in this code section a six-month limit where you have to rent for at least six months or you can't rent to anyone. That's what's being offered here today. I have nothing further. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any questions of the respondent? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: I do. Mr. Rossomando, do you have any inspections done by any Page 30 161 2A9--- June 28, 2012 government entity for this type of establishment? MR. ROSSOMANDO: No, I don't. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: So nobody comes in to make sure everything's safe? MR. ROSSOMANDO: No. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Would you consider this a business venture? MR. ROSSOMANDO: No. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: But you did quote the home occupation ordinance; is that correct? MR. ROSSOMANDO: That's correct. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: They quoted some of the home occupation ordinance, but they didn't quote Section C, which states: The use shall not generate more traffic than would be associated with the allowable residential use. To that end, traveling to and from, as well as meeting or parking at the residence by either employees of the business operated therefrom who are not residing at the subject address or by customers or clients of the home occupation is prohibited. That statement right there says you can't have people coming over for any kind of business activities. You're making money on these people. To me that's a business. Do you have a home occupational license? MR. ROSSOMANDO: No, I don't. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay. I want to go right back to the Estates district one more time here. The beginning statement, it gives you the whole purpose of the Estates, which is basically: The purpose and intent of the Estates district is to provide lands for low density residential development in a semi-rural to rural environment with limited agricultural activities. That's it. Doesn't say anything about, you know, tourists or -- you can call it what you want, it might not be a hotel, but it's definitely Page 31 16 run A � e , 2012 a hotel type use because you're having daily rates going on. They specifically put hotel/motels, that type of transient lodging in certain zoning districts and purposely left that out of the Estates and residential districts, because they do not want that allowed in those type of districts. It could be changed down the road if somebody petitioned the commissioners and they agree to it. But at this point I don't think it's -- I don't think just because it's not in there doesn't mean it's allowed. Because they purposely put it into other zoning districts. That's all I have. MR. PERLOW: My only response to that is to argue that this is a hotel/motel type lodging is ridiculous. It's not a hotel, it's not a motel. It's a couple, a family that are renting a few rooms here and there. It's not a hotel. It doesn't even meet the statutory definition of a hotel. And I think it's -- again, it's ludicrous to argue that this is a hotel or a motel. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: And they are running this business, allowing people into their house, no inspections done by state, county, federal; no safety precautions whatsoever have been determined by any government agency for this type of use. MR. PERLOW: And if I may address that, anyone who rents their condo for a month at a time, because the condo laws and bylaws approve of that kind of action, they're not having it inspected either. So there aren't inspectors running around Naples inspecting all the time for a month or two-month occupancies. MR. LEFEBVRE: But here's the difference: He's serving food. He's doing more than someone as an owner would be renting a unit. An owner renting a unit is not physically on premise renting a unit operating a business, per se. That's the distinct difference. Now, I'm not sure if this is the proper violation. I think the violation that might be more appropriate would be lack of having a home occupancy license. That would be my feeling. And I think it would be very difficult to get that home occupancy license. Page 32 161 2 A 9-- June 28, 2012 MR. PERLOW: Home occupation? MR. LEFEBVRE: Home occupational license, thank you. But I think that's the distinct difference here is someone that owns a condo renting it out for three months, for season or whatever, is not physically there making them -- making food and so forth. MR. PERLOW: Well, if that's the case, if the Rossomandos stop severing a light breakfast, which is all they do, would that bring them in compliance? Because I'm sure they'd be willing to do that. Then we're back to the same question -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, the other difference -- MR. PERLOW: -- about the time, the six months, one month, one week, two weeks. MR. LEFEBVRE: The other difference too is you're not having multiple -- typically you're not having multiple unrelated parties coming into that particular home. And also the owners are not on-site -- are not sharing the same residence when you're renting it out for three months. So there's a lot of distinct differences between what they're doing and what someone as an individual if I owned a condo renting it out for three months. There's huge differences between what they're doing. MR. PERLOW: But there are people that rent out rooms in their condos. They own the condo, they rent out a second room to somebody. They've living there with them. So that does occur. MR. LEFEBVRE: But that's usually for a longer term and usually they're not there every morning making breakfast, making -- MR. PERLOW: The problem is -- MR. LEFEBVRE: And they're not advertising it as a bed and breakfast. They're -- MR. PERLOW: The difficulty is and the problem is when we start talking about longer terms, shorter terms, we're subjectively saying what that term is. We're saying that six months is okay but three months isn't. It's not in here. Page 33 161 2k9- June 28, 2012 So if you're citing 2.03.02, and that's what we're here for today, there's no time constraint within that code provision. So what you're saying, okay, if it was six months we wouldn't even be here today because he would be in compliance with 2.03.02; is that what we're saying? MR. LEFEBVRE: We're saying also, the home occupancy says that you're not supposed to increase traffic. Well, you're obviously increasing traffic because it was -- hold on, I'm not finished. If it's just he and his wife, that would be two cars. Now you're bringing in three other bedrooms with three other cars. If you're a family and have two or three kids, a lot of times you'll be traveling with your kids, so there will be less trips. It says not to increase trips. There's a lot of things. I'm thinking that this might be the wrong -- you might be quoting the wrong violation where it might be a home occupancy. MR. PERLOW: And I'll just -- and I don't want to belabor the point but on the cars, Mr. and Mrs. Rossomando keep their cars in the garage when the guests are there. So at all times there's no more than three cars, you know, in the driveway. MR. LEFEBVRE: It doesn't say three cars in the driveway, it says more trips. And obviously if you're bringing people in -- he stated that they're going out to businesses within the county, they're going to restaurants, they're going here, they're going there. That's increasing the trips versus if it's just he and his wife. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to close the public hearing. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. MR. HUDSON: I'd still like to -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, we can still talk. MR. MIESZCAK: After your -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, all those in favor of closing Page 34 161 2A .9-' June 28, 2012 the public hearing, say aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, the public hearing is closed. Chris? MR. HUDSON: One, I would just like to say I think I agree with Mr. Lefebvre, I think this is probably a home occupancy license issue. Second, I don't think this is the venue, I think we're heading in dangerous water if we're going to talk about a precedent. THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me, you're talking very fast. MR. HUDSON: Sorry. Again, I agree with Mr. Lefebvre, I think that this is a home occupancy issue. I think that in general this is going to head into dangerous waters, talking about a precedent. I really wish the County Attorney was here. That's why I objected to having the evidence admitted. I think that we are talking about things -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Slow down, Chris. MR. HUDSON: Sorry. I think that we are talking about things in general terms. We have one definition over here, we have a definition over here. I think that there's two really good cases here. I wish that the County Attorney was here to sort of answer what he said in his email. I'd also like to say in general, I am that person who travels around the state because of what I do for a profession. And I might stay in a Page 35 1 6 I 2 A �-- June 28, 2012 home for one night, three days, four days, a month, two months. And I can tell you that if it's not in this code, it should be. We should label out the actual number. And I think that this side has a case there, because I can tell you I've stayed in tons of counties all over this state where I show up, I pay cash, I stay and I'm out the door, because I don't like to stay in a hotel, I don't like to stay in a motel, I like to stay in a home. It's a disappointment that I think that Mr. Letourneau is right about the zoning, particularly here in this case. And that's why I wish the County Attorney was here. So that's where I wanted to state my opinion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one I had scribbled down here. If you're a real estate person, a one-man show, if you will, and you're a broker and you want to have an office in your house, you don't have a bunch of agents coming to your house, you have to apply for an occupation license. And I agree with Chris and with Mr. Lefebvre regarding that, that's required. It's unfortunate, I think, that taxes have been paid. So you would have thought that this would have come up before. But it hasn't. So that confuses the issue to Mr. Hudson's point. They're paying taxes, which is the government almost sanctioning what's going on. I also agree that this may be above our pay grade to decide. We're not here to write the LDC, we're only here to interpret those portions that come before us, whether they're in violation or not. I agree, it is not a hotel, based on what has been presented here. However, it is a bed and breakfast, as anybody would attest to. So those are my two cents, for whatever they're worth. Jean, do you have any comments regarding the legality of that particular statute of the LDC that's stated? Page 36 1 61 2pt9-, June 28, 2012 MS. RAWSON: Your job is to decide whether or not a code violation exists. The code that has been cited is the Land Development Code, Section 2.02.03. So you're going to have to decide if that particular provision of the code has been violated and if so, what to do about it. You can't make new law. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that there is not a violation, based on the case presented and the statute. MR. HUDSON: Seconded. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? MR. MIESZCAK: I'd like to discuss something. You know, it states right here, 2.02.03, and it's in writing that conditional use shall be prohibited in such zoning district. That's what we're on. I like the bed and breakfast, probably a great thing. But in here, if I lived next door, maybe I wouldn't like it. So I think we're not doing what we should be doing and we're saying -- I think there's a violation that does exist. And I'm quoting what our code enforcement officer said. So -- I'm in denial of that motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Mr. Chairman, I agree. And if I look at the County Attorney's, and we go to a County Attorney to get an opinion, and that continue opinion, there's no doubt in my mind it says it's not authorized and it calls it transient lodging. And I just don't think it should be allowed in this situation, or we shouldn't have wasted our time talking to the County Attorney. MR. HUDSON: Mr. Chairman, again, I would just like to note that's why I opposed this being admitted into this case. I think that this attorney should have had the opportunity to cross-examine the County Attorney. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the Board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion that a Page 37 161 zA � une 28, 2012 violation does not exist and we have a second. All those in favor of that motion, signify by saying aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And those opposed? MR. LAVINSKI: Nay. MR. MIESZCAK: (Indicating.) MR. L'ESPERANCE: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's three. So a violation does not appear to exist on a vote of 4-3. That's it. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MR. PERLOW: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chair, can we take a 10-minute break, please? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The Board is going to take a 10-minute break at this time. We'll reconvene at a quarter after. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to active session. MS. BAKER: The next -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Our next case? MS. BAKER: -- case is number three, Case CELU20110011262, Gracelyn Mostaccio Rue. MR. HUDSON: Mr. Chairman, I have to recuse myself from this case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I think that we'll have paperwork too for you to sign. MS. RAWSON: He's already signed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: He's ahead of the game. Okay. (Jonathan Slaby and Supervisor Perez were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in vio -- Page 38 16 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One second. Could we swear everybody in that's going to testify today? MS. SLABY: For the record, I am not Gracelyn Mostaccio Rue, and in fact her name has been changed to Gracelyn Slaby. I am her husband, Jonathan Slaby. I do have that whole box of mess over there, a quitclaim deed that says that is so, and it has been filed with the county several years ago. THE COURT REPORTER: Would you spell your last name. MR. SLABY: S-L-A-B-Y. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we continue -- MS. RAWSON: At this time, I think you can do obviously the code enforcement officials, as well as the respondents, but I don't know how many other people are testifying, so I think it would probably be better if you had them sworn in as they testify. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, you were saying something that was off the microphone? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I was asking whether everybody that's going to testify this morning should be sworn in now, and Jean has responded that they'll swear each person that's going to testify in as they testify. MS. RAWSON: I only have one speaker slip, but there probably are more. MS. BAKER: I don't have any. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could I have hands of everybody here who intends to speak? Okay. MS. BAKER: Just on this case. MS. RAWSON: You know, I think my speaker slip is not even for this case. Oh, yes, it is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're going to have to stay after Page 39 16 2A2 ) June 28, 2012 school, Jean. MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(A). Description of Violation: Kowiachobee Animal Preserve, Estates zoned property, advertising and allowing scheduled trips and tours for the public to view animals on an Estates zoned property. Location/address where violation exists: 2861 Fourth Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio 40926160000. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Gracelyn Mostaccio Rue, a/k/a Gracelyn Slaby, 261 -- 2861 Fourth Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: August 30th, 2011 . Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: September 26th, 2011 . Date on/by which violation to be corrected: October 26th, 2011. Date of reinspection: April 1 lth, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good morning. For the record, Code Enforcement Supervisor Cristina Perez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits, which Ms. Baker will distribute. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have the exhibits been seen by the respondent? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: We did provide them a copy this morning, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. DOINO: Second. Page 40 161 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: In the exhibit package, the first package is labeled Land Development Code Sections, and it consists of three land development codes that might be discussed: The 104.1 general land use, Section A. Section 2.03.01 is the Estates zoning district. And Section 5.02.03 is the home occupation that is mentioned in the Determination of Violation form. There's also three photos taken on August 18, 2011 by Investigator Patrick Baldwin. There are three photos that were obtained from Naples Daily News in an article dated May 12th, 2012. There's the zoning manager's Determination of Violation form. And there's the original brochure and website that we first reviewed when this case came before us. This case was initiated approximately a year ago as a complaint received on August 12th, 2011. Investigator Patrick Baldwin met with the property owner Grace Rue, also known as Gracelyn Slaby, and her husband Jonathan Slaby, and informed them of the complaint our office had received. Further research of the website and the brochure revealed that upon calling the number, scheduling an appointment, the public was able to visit the property, schedule field trips and tours. Page 41 lotak �- June 28, 2012 On August 19th, 2011, Collier County Zoning Manager Ray Bellows, Investigator Patrick Baldwin and myself met with Mr. Slaby to further discuss the findings. Mr. Slaby stated the preserve did provide tours to local groups such as the Boy Scouts, schools, tourists from the local hotels and others to view the exotic pets on the property. Collier County staff provided Land Development Code zoning information to support the findings of the land use violation, allowing the public access to the property to view the animal preserve in the residential neighborhood. Estates Zoning District Section 2.03.01.B does not provide such land use as an allowable accessory to the conditional -- or a conditional use; therefore, applying the Illegal Land Use Section 1.04.01 .A, and see the page in the exhibit that's titled Land Development Code Sections. In paraphrase, that section says the provisions of this Land Development Code shall apply to all land, property and development in the total unincorporated area of Collier County. No development shall be undertaken without private authorization pursuant to this Land Development Code. Specifically no land shall hereby be developed or occupied, altered, accept in conformancy with the regulations set forth herein and for the zoning districts in which it is located. The zoning district for the Estates defines the purpose and intent of the Estates zoning district as a low density residential development in a semi rural to rural environment with limited agricultural activities. A Notice of Violation was issued upon completion of the Determination of Violation form used by county staff that was completed by the zoning manager. The Estates zoning district does not permit a zoo, preserve, schedule events, field trips from the local schools, advertising to the public to call and arrange site visit or tour of the exotic animals on this subject property. Even as a non-profit organization, all such activities are prohibited on this residential property. Page 42 161 a A 9- June 28, 2012 The keeping of the exotic animals on the Estates zoned property is not a violation; the property owner is allowed to keep his exotic animals on-site as personal pets and otherwise as noted in the Determination of Violation form. In conclusion, the issue before you today is the zoning regulation of illegal land use of the residential property in the Estates zoning district. The animal preserve and allowing the public to access the property within the residential neighborhood to view the exotic animals, whether it's by way of tours, school bus field trips, scheduled or not scheduled events, it is not allowed in such a zoning district by the Collier County Land Development Code. I'd also just like to mention that I did receive an email June 24th from a supporter of the preserve who is not in the country, and specified that they would not be able to be here for the hearing but would like to say a couple of words. So I don't know when you'd like to, you know, receive a copy. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Might as well read it right now. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Okay. Want me to just go ahead and read it? This is from Morgan Skipper, she says: Hello, my name is Morgan Skipper, I am a friend of Grace and John Slaby. I heard about their problems and asked what I could do to help. I am currently in Afghanistan so unfortunately I cannot make the hearing, but I would like to put in a word. I absolutely believe that they are a great service to the community. Teaching the community about wildlife is really important and where you can have the opportunity to learn and see in person at the same time. These people take great care of their animals and teach a great deal of people about them. Churches, schools and many other groups have been to the preserve to see and learn. I believe the (sic) more communities should have more people like Grace and John around. They care so much for the community Page 43 161 2P0-- June 28, 2012 and these animals. It would be so terribly unfortunate for anything to happen to them. I hope and pray that you can help them. Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is the county done? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. SLABY: Morning. Do I need to restate my name? Jonathan Slaby, owner of the property. Also director of operations for the Kowiachobee Animal Preserve. We have boxes and boxes of material that support what we do for the community, the types of activities we're involved with. However, I do realize that has nothing to do with this case. At this time I would ask the case be dismissed altogether. I do not find it as a violation of the land use code, being that it is not in reference to any commercial type activity. We agree and concede with the county's definition that certain activities on a business level are not allowed in Golden Gate Estates. For example, the sale of anything from store front, Kowiachobee Animal Preserve does not sell anything, T-shirts, wrist bands or any type of products on property, as well as we do not charge admission. In reference to tours, field trips, they are under -- and even in the county's own memorandum, that these things are not allowed, but it's under a reference to commercial activity in the Golden Gate Estates area. Being that we don't charge admission and we do not sell anything the word commerce is not fitting in the activities of the Kowiachobee Animal Preserve. As well as we do not open our gates to the general public. Yeah, we have advertised in the past. The county has pointed out specific wording in our website and our brochures that we have conceded and have changed, in reference to calling for specific tours or the intent to visit the property. It has been changed to calling information about the Kowiachobee Animal Preserve. You simply call the number. At that point, is whether Page 44 161 2 Pts - June 28, 2012 we choose to invite or not invite someone to our property. My contention is because there is no commercial activity going on on the property and there is no problem with me actually having the animals that I have on my property, it basically boils down to a civil liberties issue, my personal right as a homeowner to invite or not invite anybody onto my property. You cannot enter my property. The gate is locked on a normal basis by a padlock or a gate opener. You are not allowed to come on my property unless I invite you onto my property. Which is the simple right of anybody to be able to do so. Anybody coming onto the property from the general public without an invitation would be in violation of trespassing. So my contention is that this really is not a land use violation and any type of cited violation would actually be a violation of my civil liberties or my personal property rights. I would contend that anybody for any reason inviting somebody on their property, no matter what it is, has the right to do so. Somebody that was a coin collector that possibly attended a coin collecting convention ran into somebody that was also a coin collector and had a coin collecting club and found out about a certain collection that you kept at your residence should be allowed to invite said coin collecting club to his property to view those coins. As long as he was not charging them to do so, as long as he was not advertising that you can come, or as long as he -- there was no commerce involved. So I would contend that the land use issue is not so much a debate of whether or not I've invited somebody to my property but whether it's in reference to actual commercial activity. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have anybody else that is going to speak in your behalf? MR. SLABY: I believe so. There was somebody here but -- MS. RAWSON: I have one -- MR. SLABY: -- it might be a little more specific about it. MS. RAWSON: I have one speaker slip. Dwaine Parker. Page 45 161 June 28, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I have one question for the respondent. Sir? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Mr. Slaby, he has a question. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Sir, I have one question for you. Have any monetary donations been received in the past? MR. SLABY: Yeah, but they're not required or solicited. But I will make reference to the fact that even off-site, when it comes to educational ventures, excluding maybe an exhibit with a hotel or somebody that's not related to what our mission statement is, those charges would come into play. And I do have a county exhibition permit to do so. When it comes to donations, it's completely up to them whether they want to leave it or not. We don't even accept money into our hand. There's a jar that says donations. Not a requirement. Whether somebody gives or not is completely up to them. And I will not open my mouth in protest if somebody leaves without leaving a dime. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: And just if I can clarify, when he said he has an exhibition permit, he has the -- because he says he has a county exhibition, it's the county occupational license, home occupational license. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SLABY: Which requires a land use permit. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: And he did obtain that in 2005. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, just to narrow this down a little bit, he is permitted to have the animals that are out there. And I guess the county -- the county's concern is that there's a commercial venture going on out there; is that the county's contention? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Well, in my testimony the word commercial was not mentioned. It's the continuous traveling of the community members, the public, you know, the field trips. In your evidence packet there are photographs from Naples Daily News which Page 46 1 6 1 2 June 28, 2012 are school children on a field trip to the preserve. And that's where, you know, we're saying that the preserve itself in allowing, you know, the public to visit the property, whether it be by scheduled appointments, you know, organizations, local groups and schools are not allowed. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you have employees? MR. SLABY: No, sir. Kowiachobee Animal Preserve has no paid employees; everybody is completely 100 percent volunteer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you have your speaker come forward and then we can ask our questions after. (Mr. Parker was duly sworn.) MR. PARKER: Good morning. My name is Dwaine, D-W-A-I-N-E, Parker, P-A-R-K-E-R. I'm here today because I'm a concerned citizen. I do not know John other than this morning. Today was the very first day I met him. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Can you speak a little closer to the microphone, please? MR. PARKER: I have not been to his property, although I intend to go to his property because I have children and I wanted my children to see the animals. I became aware of this case through a newspaper article through the Naples Daily News. And when talking about it, I learned that a friend of mine happens to volunteer out there, so I asked her about the specifics of the case. She provided me with the documents. I read through the documents. And after reading the documents, I became very concerned about the case and Collier County Code Enforcement's position in this case. John is a homeowner, just like I am. Everything he does on that property is lawful. He has the permits to have the animals, he pays his taxes. When you look at the tax code for his property on the tax website, it's zoned agriculture. He's in the Tax E district, that's correct. And when I looked up the code use for Tax E, county code's Page 47 161 2A9 June 28, 2012 correct, everything that's mentioned in there, states under commercial purpose. So I went to the State of Florida website and I looked up the definition for commercial. And basically it's not anything that we would think to be arbitrary of what a common person would think would be commercial. Because you can't sell anything, you can't receive money. Anything commercial, it has to do with making a profit or exchanging of money for the purpose of having a business. And his wildlife sanctuary is not there to make a profit, it's there to serve the community for educational purposes. My concern is this: When he was issued this notice, he was given a cease and desist order from the county. So it's private property. Any person that comes to that residence to see those animals has to be invited by him. So the county has basically told him that he's no longer allowed to invite anyone to his property. In fear that if he does invite someone over there and county code goes by there and takes pictures of the cars, county code can't even determine whether that car is there for a dinner party at his house because it's his aunt or if it's there because someone who he invited him legally -- or he invited them legally there to go look at some of the animals. You can't determine the difference. It's private property. He's invited that guest. It's no difference than if I invite somebody at my house. In the complaint that it says, well, there's school buses going up and down the road, well there's school buses going up and down that road every day when school's in session. So the amount of traffic isn't increased due to the school buses. And then the children coming over. Well, the question might be, well, he doesn't know those children on the bus. He doesn't need to know those persons on the bus. If he goes out and he meets a group of people at Seminole Casino and he tells them about his animal cages that he has there with the animals in it, he doesn't know those persons but he has every right as a U.S. citizen and a Florida State citizen to invite them to his house to Page 48 lot June 28, 2012 see what he has. He's not asking for any money, he's not asking for anything in return. He's sharing information with somebody and he's showing them something that he's proud of. That's his right as a citizen. And for the county to come in and say you're not allowed to invite somebody on private property to your house is very dangerous. Very dangerous. So basically you're telling this person for the last 10 months that he's not allowed to invite anybody to his house. Although his house is run legally, he's allowed to have the animals there, there's nothing by code that's mentioned in the complaint that has stated that he's in violation of except for the amount of who's coming to his house. And personally I don't think it's any of the county's business who he's inviting to his house. As long as they're acting legally and morally and as long as they arrive legally, what difference does it make what mode of transportation that his guests come to his house? If they decide to come there on a bus, he can do it. If I want to go down to Stevie Tomatoes and invite everybody who's there that night to my house to come over and look at my cat and they get on a bus and they drive there, I have every right to do that. That's my right as a homeowner in who I invite to my house as a guest. Every person that comes to his house is a guest. This -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you begin to wrap up. MR. PARKER: Yes, sir, I am. This sanctuary has been in business for 10 years. There's been several complaints on it that I found through the county. And every time there was a complaint on it, the county code enforcement person, up until this last one, stated that he is a sanctuary, the complaint's not valid. If you look back through the complaints, every time there was a complaint made, it was found not a complaint. It was not a valid complaint because he's met every code, he's done everything right. Everything. And now all of a sudden the county says you're not Page 49 1 1 2A d-- June 28, 2012 allowed to have people at your house or the amount of people at their house and the mode of transportation in which they're coming by is not right. I think that's very dangerous. In this last case at least the inspector tried to contact the County Attorney to have an opinion rendered on it. But on this case I see no such opinion except for a supervisor's opinion. My suggestion to you all is when you start having cases like this, before you serve somebody with a notice, my recommendation would be please seek the County Attorney's advice on the code violation whether it is or not. Because right now he has not been able to invite anybody to his house in fear of being violated again -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I -- MR. PARKER: -- as a homeowner. Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you for your testimony. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: If I may, I have some comments that I would -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: -- like to add in reference to that. It was stated that the Notice of Violation says to cease and desist the invitation, inviting people over. The Notice of Violation says that in order to comply, that corrective actions must be taken, must comply with all land standards of the Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended. An animal preserve cannot be operated on an Estates zoning parcel. Number two: Must cease and desist all advertisement of field trips and tours to the Kowiachobee Preserve. And then number three: Owner cannot have field trips/tours from the public to the Estates property for exotic view. It does not specify anything about inviting anyone to come to the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you go back to the first item that you mentioned? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: The item number one under the Page 50 1 6 1 2 A �-- June 28, 2012 corrective actions was must comply with all land use standards of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended. An animal preserve cannot be operated on an Estates zoned parcel. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just stop right there. So an animal preserve cannot be operated there; is that correct? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there a difference of opinion here whether that is an animal preserve or not? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: That's the name of the location. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, I understand that. From -- Jonathan? MR. SLABY: Obviously the word preserve is used and animal preserve is used in the reference to what our thing is. Again, I would refer (sic), does the county have the right to outlaw a word or a term? Even as simple as tour field trip. Is it the word or the intent that the word is used? What I was just looking for was a memorandum that has actually been sent to me from the county before in reference to that amendment that they're talking about for land use. At the very beginning of it, it does cite for commercial use. We are aware of everything it says. But under the heading of commercial use, say for example a dog kennel or an animal rescue, which is allowed, and we do rescue animals, it's one of the things that we do. It's not the only thing we do. Our stated goal is to educate. But there are rescues, adoptions, adoptions in, adoption out. We participate in a lot of different areas when it comes to wildlife preservation. But commercial use is not one of the functions at the preserve. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I'm not asking about commercial use. Do you consider it to be an animal preserve? MR. SLABY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And if it is an animal preserve, is it the county's position that that is not permitted? Page 51 161 2A June 28, 2012 SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'd like to inquire -- MR. SLABY: Under what context, though, is my question. Under what context is an animal preserve not permitted? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Well, the other comment in reference to us not seeking -- myself not seeking the assistance of the County Attorney's Office -- the other thing was -- the other comment I wanted to make was in reference to not seeking the assistance of the County Attorney's Office. We went through the Determination of Violation form, which was in your evidence package, and I did seek the assistance of the zoning manager, who is also present here today. In that Determination of Violation it does also state that the preserve is not allowed on the Estates zoning district. MR. L'ESPERANCE: May I inquire as to the purview of the occupational license, what that has to do, if we might expand on that just a moment here? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: The occupational -- there's a section in that Determination of Violation where it also says that the homeowner could obtain an occupational license. And I'll go back to that form so I can cite it correctly. MR. MIESZCAK: While we're looking, can I ask -- SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Under -- MR. MIESZCAK: Go ahead. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: I'm sorry. This is the second page to the page that's titled Code Case Violation Determination Checklist Attachment B. On the second page under the Violation Determination, third column, list compliance options. On the second paragraph, it says: In addition, the property owner may have a home occupational (sic) subject to the requirements of the Land Development Code to have a mobile display of exotic animals at school sites, parties and the like. Page 52 Ilôt 2A a- June 28, 2012 So in reference to that, I attached in the first packet what the definitions would be of the home occupational license. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do they have an occupational license? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: They do have an occupational license and they also have their state certifications for exhibition of the animals. And as stated in the determination is for mobile display. So it's not for the home. And in that home occupational section under letter C it does talk about there shall be -- it says: To that end, traveling to and from, as well as meeting or parking at the residence by either employees of the business operated therefrom who are not residing at subject address or by customers or clients of the home occupation is prohibited. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Cristine, you mentioned that the zoning manager has looked at this? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Does that individual want to testify as to what is considered the proper use of that zone? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes, he is -- Mr. Bellows is here. If you have specific questions that you would like to ask him, I'm sure he would be glad to answer that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would. (Mr. Bellows was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BELLOWS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I was looking at the package that we received where it says Ordinance No. 04-41. I read through that and it seems very, very general to me. Can you be more specific on the allowable use based on the zoning in that particular area? MR. BELLOWS: I'd be happy to. Collier County has many types of zoning districts. And these zoning districts specifically list uses that are deemed permitted by Page 53 16 I 2P1 a June 28, 2012 right by the property owner and those uses that may be allowed with a conditional use subject to Board of County Commissioner approval. The reason we have separate zoning districts is to group those like uses so they would be compatible and not represent a hardship to adjacent property owners. Collier County has an agricultural zoning district where preserve type uses are allowed. We have had several cases within the last six months to a year where almost exact same business, they were directed to the agricultural zoning district and they had to get the conditional use. One was Ngala and the one that's currently under review is for a single-family home in the ag. district to operate an aquarium. That required a conditional use also. The Estates, if you look at the purpose and intent -- and Cristine did specify that it's a single-family primarily. And preserves, whether it's profit or not profit is not allowed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So as far as it being commercial or not commercial, that's not part of this. It's whether the preserve, if it is a preserve, is legally allowed in that particular -- at that particular site. MR. BELLOWS: I think that's part of it. And the other part is as a homeowner you are allowed to have animals. And in this case some exotic animals that require state permits are allowed. He can have a home occupation subject to the home occupation criteria, which was previously specified that no customers to the house, no additional traffic above the normal single-family. He could have like a show where he goes off-site to show the animals in display. What the concern is from a zoning standpoint is if you're a property owner adjacent to this site and there are scheduled events with schools and -- or other groups constantly coming in and out, is that the intent when they bought -- is that a single-family use? So it really boils down to what is a single-family use and what is accessory to single-family. If you're calling yourself a preserve, Page 54 161 2A June 28, 2012 there's a zoning district for that use. If you're calling yourself single-family, what are the accessory uses allowed in a single-family. Certainly we're not saying he can't have parties and show his animals at a party. And then it boils down to my mind's eye, is a not-for-profit business. What is that? Basically you're encouraging the donation to fund the operation to continue to take care of the animals. That's basically what -- preserves do that. Animal preserves, that's another agricultural use in my opinion. MR. SLABY: Can I question them? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. SLABY: My question to you, is there a county ordinance that prohibits me having a school bus on my property? MR. BELLOWS: I'm not sure I understand the question. MR. SLABY: Just plain and simple. As a homeowner of a single-family residence, is it illegal -- MR. BELLOWS: Tour? MR. PERLOW: -- for me to have -- no, no tour -- a school bus on my property? MR. BELLOWS: Well, there's a commercial vehicle ordinance. In the Estates you would be allowed, but not in other residential districts. MR. SLABY: Is it illegal for me to invite anybody over to my property as a homeowner? Forget everything else. MR. BELLOWS: No, I already said that. MR. SLABY: Is it illegal for me to invite an individual, anybody, or any amount of people? MR. BELLOWS: I said you can invite -- have parties at your house. MR. SLABY: Okay. So again, I state that this is the issue. Page 55 161 2A June 28, 2012 What is the violation? Is the violation the preserve? Put the preserve aside, do I have the right as a homeowner to invite somebody onto my property? MR. BELLOWS: You have that right. MR. SLABY: Okay, that's what's going on. So what exactly is the violation is my problem. What justifies, you know, the violation of what I am doing? What makes that a violation? What makes it go from I have the right to invite whoever I want on my property, although the school bus is not illegal on my property. What makes it go from one to another? Is the violation just the fact that somebody is allowed to use or leave a donation? If I, for example, as a homeowner said do not leave a donation, donate somewhere else or mail it to me, would that passify this violation? Would that be the end of it? Mind you, since May 11th, I haven't had a school field trip. I've canceled all tours. Right now I'm in compliance, but I object to this whole thing. I view it as a violation of my civil liberties and my private property rights. I am trying to follow this, and you have been in agreement, it's documented in your reports that I -- because I was not charging anybody, invitation was required for somebody to enter my property, the code enforcement office has acknowledged that in the past. So if there is a violation, my question is after 10 years why is a violation all of a sudden happening now? Why is your mind changed? And if the violation is just the fact that somebody can leave a donation, if I refuse donations or any form of income, would that satisfy the violation and I can continue doing -- inviting people as I will? MR. BELLOWS: I believe the intent is how the property's being operated. I see advertisements calling this an animal preserve. That's not allowed in the Estates. I see you have people coming to the site to take care of the animals. That's kind of an employee-based -- Page 56 161 A g June 8, 012 MR. SLABY: With a conditional use. I understand the conditional use, but the conditional use, again, yeah, what do you get a conditional use permit for? You get it for a commercial business or some type of activity that requires that you need some sort of business license or something. You know, I'm simply stating that all I am doing is inviting individuals on my property. MR. BELLOWS: And I said you can do that. MR. SLABY: Okay. So what makes it a violation? The fact that I collected donations or somebody would like to leave it? MR. BELLOWS: The fact that you are advertising a business called an animal preserve. MR. SLABY: Okay, the wording that you told me was in violation was inviting people to come out on tours. I eliminated that. All that's in my advertising now is what it is, what we do, what our mission is, and to call for information. Okay, advertising. Do I advertise on TV? No, I do not. Do I advertise in a newspaper through a paid ad? No. Do you know how people find out about the Kowiachobee Animal Preserve? I meet them. I go out into the public. I take an animal out, I go to community events, I go to parks, I go to schools, I meet individuals and I hand them the brochure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think it's time to -- we're going over the same thing over and over again. I'm looking at the photo that says animal preserve. MS. RAWSON: We have -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You say an animal preserve is not a use there? MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. MS. RAWSON: We have another speaker. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, let's hear the other speaker and then we'll close -- Page 57 161 2A 3-- June 28, 2012 MR. SLABY: I would like to note that that animal preserve sign that they have a picture of is attached to a mobile trailer that is used for off-site activities. MS. RAWSON: Dr. Lori Loper. (Dr. Loper was duly sworn.) DR. LOPER: Good morning. Good morning. I had not intended to speak, and I hope I don't cry. But I am a former superintendent of a large school district outside the Space Center in Houston. And I have worked with children as a therapist for many years prior to my many years as a school administrator. I retired when my husband died, came here, and I am currently the president of the Lions Club, Lions Club of Naples, and active of course in my church. I don't know how I came to find John, but it was a blessing. And I probably will cry, because there's a lot of emotion when people look at animals and the care that's given to them in his family. Let's take away the name preserve. Can't we call it family? Can we call it animal collection? What would you suggest? If that's in a preserve, it becomes a legal entity within itself I don't think that exists. The first time I went out, my first vision was that of an ostrich who sleeps with a tiny donkey at night. They cuddle. Children love to see the two turtles interact. I like the chickens and the big horse. I guess those aren't allowed anywhere in Collier County either? Is that a preserve? No. They do have some cats. And my son had returned from employment in England, and as he was looking for a position as an engineer, he found solis in going out there and saying, you know, John, I can do stuff. May I build some new cages, some really nice ones? Perhaps you can make a larger cage? But then he spent several days shoveling you know what, cleaning up wherever he could. And there have been many people who have gone out as well. Yes, John, you know, you've seen me there giving you a check. Page 58 161 2A 2- June 28, 2012 It was not solicited. There's no place out there that you can really be charged anything. You just go out with the love of your heart for seeing some beautiful animals being cared for. Well, that check says this is for food, you know, a lion, a tiger, a cougar, those animals eat a lot. So I go out occasionally and just give money for food. It's not a donation, it's not to pay his salary or anything like that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Doctor, I think your time has expired. DR. LOPER: Yes, thank you. And I have one more comment. When I worked with the Lions Club, we serve 1,000 children, you know, in our area every year, vision and hearing. And we go to the county collection of all the agencies that come together and do things for needy children. John brings one or two of his animals just on display so that those children who can't afford to go to a zoo might see an animal. And I think that's notable. Thank you for your time and I certainly hope you look deep in your heart. Thank you. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you, Doctor. With that, I'd like to close the public hearing. If I get a -- MR. SLABY: I would -- can I state one more thing? I mean, the original violation is land use. You know, whether or not I'm a preserve, you know, the fact that I call my preserve is not the stated violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one more question for the county. Did this come about because of neighbors, problems with the traffic in the area? Is that what instigated this -- SUPERVISOR PEREZ: The complaint that came in through us came in through the zoning department. There was a complaint in regards to the activity on the property, which we received the website Page 59 1 6 I Jun 2012 information and the brochure. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Was it from an adjacent resident? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: That I don't know. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: We have received additional complaints, you know, with regards to activities still happening on the property from anonymous complainants. MR. SLABY: And again, one of the things that I did state to code enforcement is the problem with anonymous phone calls, especially in somebody that deals with wildlife that so many people have so many different passionate opinions on, there's no telling whether that phone call was actually from a neighbor or from somebody that might maliciously want to do harm. Recent phone calls I've actually identified as individuals who live nowhere near us. We also have had complaints that were sent down our way from as far as Tampa from Big Cat Rescue who had sent letters to all my neighbors, which my neighbors brought to my attention that they were basically trying to say that we were doing bad things and that the neighbors should be aware of what they're doing there. Fortunately I've introduced myself to the majority of my neighbors. Rather than keep them out I always invite them in so they don't have to be in the dark about what's there or be concerned. I always find out that what you don't know or what you don't understand is always going to be your worst nightmare. So they are invited in to view the place and understand what we do. Also, the concern with an anonymous phone call is, does that person realize that we're not running a business. Is that the complaint, that we're running a business or doing commercial activity? A lot of people call out of jealousy in reference to how come they're allowed to do something that I was not allowed to do, without even really understanding what the person is actually doing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Page 60 161 2A 2 June 28, 2012 With that, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to close the public hearing. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. (At which time Ms. Flagg enters the boardroom.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The public hearing has ended. Any comments from the board? MR. MIESZCAK: I just had one. I got this picture here, but is that a volunteer or spectator? MR. SLABY: That's a volunteer. We do not allow contact with any of the big cats by visiting individuals. That's actually illegal by FWC and USDA standards. MR. MIESZCAK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, as we've said before, I'll make one comment, we don't write the LDC, we are only here to interpret what it says. And from what I understand from the county, there is a restriction on having a preserve. Whether it's on your sign that says preserve, I don't know what the definition of a preserve is other than animals are there. I don't think it talks to whether or not there's a charge for the service or the demonstrations or not. I don't think that's part of the problem that we have. It's not a commerce type thing. Page 61 161 2 9— June 28, 2012 I understand your concern and I'm sure your neighbors there, there are probably some neighbors who have no problem with it and others have a problem with the traffic maybe, I don't know. But I'm looking to the Board to come up with a suggestion one way or the other. MR. DOINO: If it's a name issue, why don't you just change the name or delete it? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would almost ask the county, could Jonathan go before the BCC and request a special use of the property that would take care of the zoning issue? MR. BELLOWS: There are conditional uses for similar uses, as I previously mentioned, but those are conditional uses allowed in the agriculture zoning district. We did meet with the property owners' attorney, was it a month ago or so, and we did offer--we rendered an opinion that a conditional use could be applied for in regards to operating in conjunction as part of a private type school operation where you could have these educational facilities as part of a tie-in with the school. I don't know if anything's come of that, but that was something we felt was eligible. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other comments from the Board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me just make a statement. There's no question you do provide a benefit to the community. But there are certain areas of the county that do allow this with a conditional use and there's certain areas of the county that do not allow this. And unfortunately I think you're in an area that does not allow this and even with a conditional use. So I make a motion that there is a violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. Page 62 16 June , 2012 Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor, say aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) Opposed? MR. DOINO: Opposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed. MR. L'ESPERANCE: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Three to three. You don't get to vote. So I think we're three to three right now. We can try it again. My concern is preserve. It's either a preserve or it's not a preserve. If it's a preserve and it's not permitted, it's not permitted. MR. DOINO: He's been there 10 years though. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand, it's been there 10 years, and that's why I voted the way I did. MR. MIESZCAK: But you have to remember too, a lot of things that come before this board, nobody's known about it. It could have been that way for 20 years. And then sometimes once somebody says something, then you have to respond. And that's why you have to go with the rules we have. So -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ms. Flagg? MS. FLAGG: Just as clarification, the issue is use, not whether it's a preserve. Whether they can have the public visiting in a neighborhood community, buses and cars. So irrespective of what it's called, it's the use of buses and cars coming through a neighborhood to visit the facility. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is not a -- it's not unlike visiting some of the locations in the county at Christmastime with the lights Page 63 161 2A9 June 28, 2012 where everybody is -- but they're welcomed by the community. And in this particular case, I don't know what the community in that particular area is like, I don't know if the school buses are blocking the road, I just don't know. MS. FLAGG: It's not that they're blocking the road. My understanding is that they've been -- you know, that the -- we haven't gotten any complaints that the buses are blocking the road. The issue is that it's a use issue because of the zoning district that this facility is located within. The zoning district is a neighborhood district, and therefore the zoning laws prohibit visitation by buses and cars in the public to this facility. As the Zoning Manager indicated, if they relocated the facility to an agricultural zoned facility, not a residential facility, if they relocated it to an agricultural zoning district and they obtained a conditional use by the Board of County Commissioners, they could have all the visitors that they wanted. This is simply a zoning issue. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is RS-1, I believe? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: No, Estates. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's Estates. Can't you have RS-1 in the Estates? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: The permitted use is single-family dwellings. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are we going to try this again or -- MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I think as the evidence stands today, it appears as the county presented their case that there's a violation of the existing conditions. There obviously are other avenues to go get that changed if the respondent wants to keep on with this activity and that type of process. I don't see how we can not find that there's not a violation of the existing codes and ordinance as they stand today. MR. LEFEBVRE: Can we make another motion? Page 64 16 I 2A 2-- June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure, try it again. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion that a violation does exist. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion and a second. MR. DOINO: Opposed. MR. MIESZCAK: Any discussion? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll get the vote before you get -- okay, based on your description, I can't disagree with you, so I am going to change my vote and vote with the amendment. So all those in favor, say aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) MR. L'ESPERANCE: Opposed. MR. DOINO: Opposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have two opposed? Okay, this is not the end of the road, obviously. I'm sure you can appeal this and take it to the Board of County Commissioners and go from there. MR. SLABY: I would like clarification. Am I or am I not allowed to invite anybody on my property? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think that's been discussed and -- MR. SLABY: I mean anybody. Am I allowed not even to invite my friend, an acquaintance? What is the definition? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I believe that they said you can invite anybody you want on your property. MR. SLABY: Okay. Page 65 161 2Ac June 28, 2012 MS. BAKER: Would you like our recommendation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, I would like your recommendation. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: County recommends that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$79.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by one: Cease and desist all field trips/tours from the general public and animal preserve located on the Estates zoned property within blank amount of days of this hearing or a fine of blank amount of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Number two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of the order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have somebody who would like to fill in the blanks? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll give it a shot. My motion would be that the respondent pay operational costs of -- how much? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: $79.43. MR. LAVINSKI: I'm a little torn as to whether this is a prohibited animal type of thing regarding a seven-day, but I'd like to make a motion that the violation be cleared in 60 days or a fine of $100 a day be imposed. MR. SLABY: I've already stated the violation has been cleared. We haven't been accepting anything since May 11th. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, does a violation still exist there right now? Page 66 161 2A8- June 28, 2012 SUPERVISOR PEREZ: When this case was prepared for the hearing in the month of May, there was still a violation, you know, as included in your packet with the -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As you understand things, does a violation exist now? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yes. MR. SLABY: How? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: And also from other complaints that we've continued to receive, you know, the activity. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, let's continue on with this and then we'll talk about that. So we have a motion to the $79.43 operational costs; come into compliance within 60 days or $100 a day fine; is that correct? MR. LAVINSKI: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, James. And we have a second on that? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second from Mr. Lefebvre. Any discussion on that? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) MR. DOINO: (Indicating.) MR. L'ESPERANCE: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Two. Okay, now, where do we go from here? It's either in compliance Page 67 161 June?3/1012 ---- , 012 now or it's not. The respondent should know what needs to be done to come in compliance if he currently thinks that it's in compliance now. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Well, we could also get together with the zoning manager, the zoning department, in reference to the animal preserve and what needs to be done in order for that to be completely abated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Terrific. Okay. MR. SLABY: I can't. Everybody's asking me what do you do now? I have no idea. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think the next thing you should do is to meet with Cristine -- MR. SLABY: All I know is I feel violated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- and see what can be worked out so that everybody is in compliance. Give a couple of minutes for everybody to settle down. MS. BAKER: Do you want to take a five-minute break? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah five minutes. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. I was reminded after two and a half hours, we're still on case number four. We'll be here till 3:00 in the morning. No, whatever it takes. Jen, who's next? MS. BAKER: Next case is number four, Case CESD20120000189, Jorge G. Rodriguez. (Sucet Rodriguez and Investigator Short were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Garage and CBS guest house with no valid Collier County building permits. Page 68 161 2A 2 June 28, 2012 Location/address where violation exists: 1165 Everglades Boulevard North, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 40579120002. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Jorge G. Rodriguez, 1165 Everglades Boulevard North, Naples Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: January 6, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: January 13th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 13th, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 10th, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: High Eric, good morning. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One aerial photo obtained and printed from Collier County Property Appraiser's GIS mapping, and two photos taken by myself on June 27th, 2012. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the -- INVESTIGATOR SHORT: They have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- photos? Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion -- MR. DOING: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- do we have a second? Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 69 161 2A9- June 28, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: This case originated on January 6th, 2012 for an unpermitted concrete block garage and guesthouse. And an unpermitted chain link fence with a gate. The property owners have since permitted the chain link fence and are working with Mr. Bob Lockhart, a local engineer, to bring the garage and guesthouse into compliance. To date no permits have been applied for. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is how it's been sitting for quite a while? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: I'm not sure of the specific time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was a building permit pulled on it originally and it's expired? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yes. And actually in 2004 a permit was pulled for a four-car garage, and in 2006 for the CBS guesthouse. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Hi, how are you? To begin with, we just bought the house in December of 2012 (sic). So from, you know, what happened before, we don't know. On January 16th we signed the contract with Bob Lockhart, a civil engineer, to, you know, make the plans and submit the permits. So he did that. And then on May 16th we came to submit the permits, but we were missing the codes on the windows and doors. So we gave them that within two weeks, and we haven't heard from him. We call him, he doesn't answer. We paid him what he has to be paid. We don't Page 70 161 2A 9- June 28, 2012 want to go to his house because probably it will be considered harassment or who knows what. He doesn't answer our phone calls. We don't know what to do. That's basically it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So if I understand, you went to somebody and -- you bought it in December? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did you have an inspection done by code enforcement to see if there were any outstanding permits or whatever? MS. RODRIGUEZ: When -- we did come to the county and we got all the papers. I mean, we got up to date with everything that had been done in the past that wasn't done, everything that was C.O.'d that wasn't. So that's why, you know, we decided to get Bob that would help us with all of this. MS. BAKER: Ms. Rodriguez, can you state on the record what your relationship to Mr. Rodriguez is? MS. RODRIGUEZ: He's my dad. MS. BAKER: And your authority to speak on his behalf? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. MS. BAKER: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And so in January you contacted the contractor? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the contractor was going to, I guess apply for new building permits since the -- MS. RODRIGUEZ: Right, right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- old ones were expired. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Um-hum. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you paid him? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you can't get ahold of him anymore; is that -- Page 71 16 I, ZA une 012 9-- MS. RODRIGUEZ: Exactly. We have the plans, we have everything. Everything is set. He just -- we came May 15th to -- or May 16th to submit the plans, but we were missing the codes on the doors and windows. We gave him that information and, you know, we haven't heard from him since. You know, we told him that the county was back in our house; he said I will contact them. I think Eric did tell me that he sent him an email but then he tried calling him and he didn't answer. You know, we call him all the time. I mean, there's nothing we can do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is he a licensed contractor? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, he is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: In Collier County? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you ever heard of a place called the Contractor's Licensing Board? MS. RODRIGUEZ: I have not. This is the first time, you know, we are involved in this. MS. FLAGG: The supervisor just told me he's going to walk her over to contractor licensing after the hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They may be able to help you there. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Okay. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: And just to correct the statement, on April 30th I did speak to Bob Lockhart. And he claimed to be working on permitting the structures. I requested a written statement, you know, showing that he is making compliance efforts and did not receive anything. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I believe the Contractor's Licensing Board will be able to help you. But right now we have this case to dispose of Anything from the board? Any questions? MR. HUDSON: I really think that, Mr. Chairman, we probably shouldn't have gotten here, it should have been like a motion for time Page 72 161 2A d- June 28, 2012 extension, continuance, et cetera. I mean, they should have either contacted an attorney or gone to the licensing contracting board. And since it seems like it's their first time here and they just bought the home, I really wish we would have had the ability to give them more time. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that a violation does exist -- or before I say that, a violation does exist, but would it be better to maybe withdraw this case and see -- MS. FLAGG: That's what we'd like to do. What we're going to do is withdraw the case and go work with contr -- have her work with contractor licensing and see if they can assist with her contractor. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I believe that they will return their telephone calls. MR. LAVINSKI: Diane, is this one that possibly fell through the cracks where they bought it from Fanny Mae -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Time out. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, we have a lot of people talking. MR. LAVINSKI: Is this one of those situations -- I know she's trying to ensure that people don't inherit problems that aren't theirs. She bought this problem in December, or Jorge did, from Fannie Mae. MS. FLAGG: There's no prohibition in purchasing a property that has code violations. What we ask folks to do is to know what they're buying before they buy it. So they know what they're buying before they buy it by having a lien search done and a code property inspection done. MR. LAVINSKI: But Fannie Mae does not owe them any allegiance or anything? MS. FLAGG: No, Fannie Mae, if they agreed to buy, those are typically as-is contracts. So if the buyer negotiated down the price to buy the property as-is, Fannie's releasing their responsibility and the Page 73 161 2A d June 28, 2012 new buyer is buying it as-is. MR. LAVINSKI: Okay, thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think I had made a motion. I withdraw that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you, Eric. MS. BAKER: Okay, next case is number six, Case CESD20120003854, Wilkert and Fidelene Eugene. (Wilkert Eugene and Supervisor Joe Mucha were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Permit for addition that has not completed all inspections and received certificate of completion/occupy, and the permit is now expired. Location/address where violation exists: 4478 18th Avenue Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio 35757800007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Wilkert Eugene and Fidelene Eugene, 447818th Avenue Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: March 13th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: March 14th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 13th, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 1st, 2012. Results of the reinspection: The violation remains. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Mucha, Supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement. This case initiated on March 13th of 2012. I received a complaint in regards to a house that had an addition started several years ago and was not complete. I researched the property and found that the most recent permit from 2010 for the addition had expired and that there was a previous Page 74 161 2A i June 28, 2012 permit from 2007 that had also expired. March 14th of this year I made a site visit to the property to meet with the owner. He was not at home at that time so I posted the Notice of Violation at the property and the courthouse and also sent it certified and regular mail. On April 14th I researched and found that the owners had applied for a new permit on March 19th of this year and it had been rejected on March 23rd. I spoke to the owner via phone and advised him to contact our project coordinator, Renald Paul, to help him with corrections for the permit application. On April 30th I researched and found that the corrections had still not been submitted for the permit. On May 15th I checked again and the corrections had still not been submitted. At that time I elected to prepare the case for hearing. The permit has been issued now as of June 15th. I'd like to submit evidence of one photograph taken on March 14th. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the picture? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Yes, he has. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept it? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. Page 75 161 2A a-. June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: This picture is just depicting the addition from what it would look like from the street side. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What's this, a second floor addition with a garage underneath? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: It's not a second floor addition, it's just CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that the front door? What am I looking at here? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: That's the front of the property. The garage is off to the left side. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sir? MR. EUGENE: Yes. Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What can you tell us? MR. EUGENE: Yes, and I start that project since '07 when I had -- when I start that project, I had the constru -- I have a truck in business. So when the market drop, everything drop so I couldn't continue. In 2010 I came back, I renew the payment. I paid about $1,500. But still I had one inspection, but still I didn't have enough money to put in there with the project, so the payment was expired in between six month. So that's why I got that violation. So I went back to the county so take care of everything last week. So I call for the plumbing inspection. It already pass. So now I just need a little bit more time in order for me to finish the job. I want one year to deal with my finances now. So I need at least one year to finish the project. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're asking for one year to finish the project; is that correct? MR. EUGENE: Yes, sir. Page 76 161 2A 9-- June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, any comments from the board, or questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anything from the country relative to the time frame requested? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: The only thing is, like I said, this project started in 2007, so it's been five years. So it seems to me like one more year, I don't know if he's going to able to get it done if finances are the issue. MR. LEFEBVRE: How big of an area are we talking? What's the square footage of the addition, roughly? MR. EUGENE: About 600. It's one room plus a remodel on the front. So I already have the plumbing, so I just waiting for electrical and AC. So when I talk about my budget, within a one-year period I should be able to get it done. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, we're not talking about time frames right now, we're talking about finding if there's a violation exists or not, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could I get a motion from -- MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that a violation does exist. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 77 161 2A - June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, it passes unanimously. So obviously we show that this is in violation. Now, to remedy it, do you have a suggestion? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and to abate all violations by one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections and certificates of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct the final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order. And all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you think you've pulled all the permits that need to be pulled? MR. EUGENE: Yes, sir, I did. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So I see the $80.29. Permits, it appears that they've all been pulled. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: The permit was just issued on June 15th, correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you said you had a final on the plumbing? MR. EUGENE: The rough plumbing -- THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me, say that again? MR. LEFEBVRE: Rough plumbing. MR. EUGENE: -- was having passed last week. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Somebody like to take this on, fill in the blanks? Page 78 161 2A a- li June 28, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have a question. Permit, you can get one permit for six months and then extend it one time; is that correct? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: I think as long as they -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Or is it just as long as they're working on it -- SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Right, every time you complete an inspection it gives it another six months of life. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that the respondent pays $80.29 in operational costs within 30 days. And within 180 days to get the final C.O. or demolition, whatever the case may be, or a fine of $150 a day. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. You understand the motion that Mr. Lefebvre made? MR. EUGENE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You are going to pay $80.29 within 30 days. The time frame on completing your work is six months, 180 days. And if you can't complete it within that time, before that time elapses I would suggest that you come back to the Board and ask for an extension of time, if you can't make that date. Should you not, the fine would be $150 a day for every day past that 180 days. Page 79 161 2 A ft' June 28, 2012 MR. EUGENE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You understand that? MR. EUGENE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, very good. Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be number eight, Case CELU20120000522, Sherry Lictman. My name Kim Todd. I'm standing in for Sherry Lictman today. And I have a notarized statement that I just gave to Ms. Baker earlier today. (Ms. Kim Todd and Supervisor Joe Mucha were duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Description of violation: Accessory structure remains on the property after primary structure was demolished due to fire. Location/address where violation exists: 371 19th Street Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 36914600007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Sherry Lictman, 214 Avenue A, Bayonne, New Jersey, 07002. Date violation first observed: January 13, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: January 28th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 23rd, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 22nd, 2012. Results of the reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Joe? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Good morning. Again for the record, Joe Mucha, Supervisor, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present one picture into evidence taken by myself from a previous case that will depict the guest house in question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Respondent has seen the picture? Page 80 161 2A June 28, 2012 SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the picture. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: And the respondent also has a packet that she would like to present as evidence, so we'd like to give that to you at the same time. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Essentially what's going on here -- MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion we accept the packet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's given by the respondent. MR. MIESZCAK: Right, given by the -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 81 161 2A 9 June 28, 2012 MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Essentially what's going on here is the principal structure of the property burned down several years ago. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know when the fire was? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: I want to say approximately 2002, 2003. MS. TODD: No, actually, the fire was in the late Eighties or early Nineties. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Oh, it was -- MS. TODD: It's been that long ago. For the principal structure. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: So the guesthouse, for it to be a permitted use there has to be a primary structure on the property. And since the primary structure is no longer there, that means the guesthouse is in violation. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is the guesthouse occupied? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: No, it's not. And I've been working with the owner for a long time. And the problem is the owner has an ongoing lawsuit with an insurance company due to damages that were done to the guesthouse at some point years ago. And that's kind of what's holding her up from -- she wants to demolish the structure, but this lawsuit has to settle before she can move forward with that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One quick question. Is it possible that the guesthouse could be a primary structure? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: I think based on the size of it, because I think it's only -- is it about 600 square foot? MS. TODD: It's less than the 1,000 square feet that's required for a primary structure for Golden Gate Estates area. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Page 82 161 2A .0- June 28, 2012 SUPERVISOR MUCHA: And I've been working with the contractor here, Kim Todd, for a long time. She's pulled a permit, she's ready to go, she's just waiting for the okay from the owner. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is there a possibility that the county might want to consider withdrawing this, or do you recommend that we continue? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: This case has been going on since January. This lawsuit's been going on since before that. So there's no telling when this lawsuit's going to settle. As far as I know -- how long has this lawsuit been going on? For a couple years now? MS. TODD: Almost two years now. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: So, I don't -- the house itself is secure, it's boarded, so health and safety is not an issue. It's just the fact of it just being there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the dispute is with the insurance company on damage that was done to the accessory structure; is that correct? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe you can enlighten us a little bit more. MS. TODD: For the record, my name is Kim Todd and I'm a licensed building contractor here in Collier County. Ms. Lictman has acquired my services to help her do whatever needs to be done to make everything right. She had originally purchased this as an investment property and she was renting the guesthouse out. And there was -- the renter wasn't paying rent and so he ended up saying that he would do some work on the place to help pay for the rent, like put tile and paint and stuff like that. Well, she said that he shouldn't be living there until he could pay the rent and get all this done. So he was still going there but he wasn't living there. And so because he wasn't there every night there were Page 83 161 2A June 28, 2012 some children in the neighborhood that vandalized the home. And so it ended up -- they vandalized it pretty bad. And so anyway, she -- that's when she got me involved. And then I was talking to Joe about it, because I said I don't know if this thing needs to be condemned or not, because it was pretty bad. And so she contacted the insurance company and they said they weren't going to pay it because it was vacant. Well, come to find out legally it was considered vacant because there -- I mean not vacant because there was work being done on it. So anyway, she went, hired a lawyer, and so it's been going on. There's like several people involved with it now. And it's been going on approximately two years, since 2010, as far as the lawsuit has been going on. Maybe even 2009. But -- so then we got the boarding certificate and everything. And we were trying to renew the boarding certificate and then that's when Joe brought it to my attention that well, you know, we have to get rid of this house because there's no primary structure here. So it was like there was just a domino effect of everything. And so when we were trying to renew the boarding certificate, that's when he found out about the guesthouse needing to come off or put a primary structure there. Well, Ms. Lictman doesn't want to demolish the house until she gets the settlement, because that settlement's going to help pay for all the lawyer fees and everything that's been involved, plus pay for the demolition of the house. And she's afraid that if we demolish the house before we get the settlement, or before they get the settlement, that it's going to be detrimental to the case and then all these people are going to be unpaid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are there any problems as far as safety and health on the -- SUPERVISOR MUCHA: No, sir. Like I said, it's been boarded. It's out in the Estates, it's set way back on the property, so it's not an issue. Page 84 161 2A2 June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that if we came up with a -- well, let's see if we find a violation exists first. MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess I have a question. In your package you submitted, you submitted a -- the last page says a permit. Demo permit. Back in February of this year, correct? MS. TODD: Correct. That was trying to keep -- within the violation that was submitted, we were trying to, you know, do what we're supposed to do. MR. LEFEBVRE: But that's contrary to what you just said just now in your statements that you don't want to -- she doesn't want to demo it because that might be detrimental to her case. So why would a demo permit be pulled? MS. TODD: Well, we knew we had six months to do -- you know, once you pull a permit you've got six months to do that. And she was hoping that the case would be resolved by then. Because they're close to getting a settlement. We're just not sure when the settlement -- they just did some more depositions last week, and so honestly, I don't know, and Ms. Lictman doesn't know when the settlement will come. But the -- we were supposed to comply to the violation, I think it was by the end of February, I think is when it was. And so we had applied for the demolition permit to try to be within compliance of that violation. And then we were supposed to have it demolished within six months, I believe the permit is good for. But your violation is good till May 23rd or something like that. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 85 161 2A � June 28, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay, it is in violation. I'm guessing now that if we gave sufficient time, maybe the courts would -- and the insurance company would get off their bums and resolve this and then everything goes away. MS. TODD: Exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So anybody -- what's your recommendation, Joe? SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Yes, sir, my recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by one: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections and certificates of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Anybody like to take this on? I don't know what the amount of Page 86 161 2A .9- ' June 28, 2012 time it would take to have this case resolved. Nobody does. So I would suggest that we give it sufficient time, whoever does it. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that the respondent pays $80.29 in operational costs within 30 days. And I'm not sure if a building permit is really what you're looking for at this point. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Well, technically if they wanted to build a principal structure, that would cure the violation as well. MR. LEFEBVRE: Or make this 1,000 square feet. SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Or add onto it, correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So let's say get this property into compliance within 270 days, so whatever way they get it into compliance, or a fine of$150 a day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion, do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. So 270 days hopefully the insurance company and the respondent will be able to work out their differences, and we probably won't see you until the next case you volunteer to be the general contractor on. MS. TODD: Well thank you very much. Appreciate it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Page 87 16I 2A June 28, 2012 SUPERVISOR MUCHA: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is number nine, Case CEPM20100019476, Eric Dorestil and Elvita Pierre. (Investigator Danny Condomina was duly sworn.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of 2010 Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article 6, Section 22-231, subsection 15. Description of violation: No protective barrier securing swimming pool. Swimming pool permit expired without obtaining a certificate of completion. Location/address where violation exists: 3661 12th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio 40527040008. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Eric Dorestil and Elvita Pierre, 3661 12th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: October 1st, 2010. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: April 30th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 25th, 2012. Date of reinspection: April 26th, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: For the record, Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One photograph taken by me on April 26th, 2012. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept it? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? Page 88 1b i A �- June 2 , 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Violation first observed on October 1st, 2010. Pool permit expired in 2007 without completing several inspections. There is no fence or enclosure around pool. This property is vacant and has a notice of lis pendens recorded. Our foreclosure team has been in contact with the bank, but bank is unable to abate the violation at this time. As of today violation the remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you believe this is a safety and health issue? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would somebody like to take a shot at finding them in violation or not? MR. MIESZCAK: What do they recommend? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We got to find them in violation first. MR. MIESZCAK: Oh, I'll make a motion -- MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: -- to find them in violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to find them in violation. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 89 161 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. They are in violation. And do you have a recommendation? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Yes, I do, sir. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81 .72 incurred in this prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to try to fill in the blanks? MR. LAVINSKI: I'll take this one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, James. MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion that the fees of 81.72 be paid, that the violation be corrected in seven days or a fine of$250 a day be assessed. Page 90 161 2A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the $81.72 will be paid in 30 days. MR. LAVINSKI: Right, 30 days, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case we're moving into number five, old business, letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens. Case number one, Case CESD20110006971, Henry and Jan E. Holzkamper. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, at this time I'm going to have to leave the hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Let the record show that Mr. L'Esperance had to leave at noon. (Mr. Holzkamper and Supervisor Snow were duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. This concerns violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(c). Page 91 161 2A a June 28, 2012 The location is 3230 Thompson Drive, Naples, Florida. The folio is 5260044005. Description is: The drywall has been removed and replaced in the east building's bottom east unit A, and the stairs in the front of the east building have been required to include but not limited to handrails, steps and supports without first obtaining all Collier County required building permits. Past orders: On August 25th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. Respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violations. See the attached Order of the Board OR4732 and Page 491 for more information. An extension of time was granted on February 23rd, 2012. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4472, Pages 1327 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the code enforcement orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and cost to date are described as the following: Order number one and two, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between May 24th, 2012 and June 28, 2012, 36 days, for a total of $3,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order number five, operational cost of$81.15 have been paid. Total amount to date is $3,600. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Do you have anything, pictures or -- SUPERVISOR SNOW: No, sir, this is an imposition of fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, imposition. I'm sorry. SUPERVISOR SNOW: I believe Mr. Holzkamper -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sir, you're on. MR. HOLZKAMPER: From the last time I saw you, we have been diligent. We hired a drywall contractor three months ago. And as of last week we thought everything was done, and then one final Page 92 2A 161 � June 28, 2012 inspector said -- raised the question were the kitchen cabinets moved? This is a small kitchen and drywall was put up on two walls. And I've got all the stuff here, everything was done. And so we thought we were done a week ago, but then they said were the kitchen cabinets moved? Well, they weren't moved. You know, there's this wall and this wall that were repaired and these walls weren't done. The total amount of work to replace the drywall probably took two men two days. Getting these retroactive permits has taken months. Anyway, we've done the best we could and it should be done very soon. It's not like we haven't been doing anything. And I have the documentation here for the engineer and the dates and everything else. I mean, it's -- SUPERVISOR SNOW: If I may, the -- MR. HOLZKAMPER: Excuse me, I petition that the fines be dropped. We have been operating diligently as fast as we can. In getting one inspector, then the next inspector, then the fire inspector and then somebody raises a question and you have to do redo the drawings. I mean, it's insane. Insane. SUPERVISOR SNOW: If I may, the latest rejection was on 6-25 and they needed some clarity the permit. Remember, this was a permit by affidavit. Your order expired and that's why we're here. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, we can't just erase the fines, because the violation has not been abated yet. We can't abate the fines. MR. HOLZKAMPER: One moment. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can I make a recommendation to the county to bring this back next month? Maybe everything will be done by then. I remember this case in the past with the stairs and whatnot. SUPERVISOR SNOW: We wouldn't object to anything the Board wanted to do. MS. FLAGG: If the goal -- the Board has set an order and the time has already expired. What we could do is bring it back next Page 93 161 2A June 28, 2012 month and hopefully they're in compliance and then they would be eligible maybe for a fine waiver. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just -- can you hear me now? MR. HOLZKAMPER: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just for clarification of what I was trying to say before, you asked for reduction of fines. We cannot reduce fines as a Board until we have abatement of the issue at hand. So until we have that, we cannot abate the fines. But what Diane was stating was that we can pull this case -- or she can pull this case till next month and hopefully by then you will have all the permits and everything and you can come back in front of us and ask for abatement of fines at that time. MR. HOLZKAMPER: We're all becoming friends. Next month, see you. Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is that what you're going to do? MS. FLAGG: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we need a motion for that, or -- MR. LEFEBVRE: You're withdrawing it, correct? MS. FLAGG: (Nods head affirmatively.) SUPERVISOR SNOW: Thank the board. MS. BAKER: The next case is number two under imposition, Case CESD20110003492, Robin M. Cantara. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Lavinski has to step out right now. (Ms. Cantara and Investigator Condomina were duly sworn.) THE COURT REPORTER: Did he leave for the day? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, he's -- I think he's recusing himself from this case. Is that right, Jean? MS. RAWSON: I don't know that. MR. KAUFMAN: He'll be right back. He had to go see a man about a horse. MS. RAWSON: No, he didn't recuse himself. Page 94 161 2 A 2' June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, he'll be back. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Once again, for the record Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violation is of the Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Violation location: 2169 Vardin Place, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 7869520424. The violation description: Expired permit No. 2010070368 for pool/spa and concrete deck, and expired permit 2010070898 for adding a lanai and summer kitchen, and an expired permit 2010081074 for tank installation with piping and to hook up a pool heater and grill. On June 23rd, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. (At which time, Mr. Lavinski returns to the boardroom.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: See the attached order of the Board, OR 4698, Page 1361 for more information. An extension of time was granted on September 22nd, 2011. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4728, Page 855 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of May 8th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and four, fines at the rate of$150 for the period between December 22nd, 2011 and May 8th, 2012, 139 days, for a total of$20,850. Order item number seven, operational costs of$81.15 have been paid. Total amount to date: $20,850. The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and the operational costs are paid. Page 95 1b1 ZA 3-- June 28, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to abate. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is number three under imposition, Case CESD20100008859, James A. and Julia M. Askey. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violation is of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The violation location is 670 20th Street Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 39329240004. Description of the violation is an expired canceled building permit 970019848 for a CBS single-family residence. On November 18th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4744, Page 1112 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are Page 96 iôi 2 A a- June 28, 2012 described as the following: Order items number one and two, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between May 16th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 44 days, for the total fine amount of$6,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Total amount to date: $6,600. THE COURT REPORTER: Which case was this? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: This was Askey, 2010000889 -- 859. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you go over the -- I have different numbers on my -- SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Am I on the wrong case here? My apologies. Let me start over. I'm sorry. Same violation, the Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended. Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). This case number is CESD2010000 -- am I on Askey or the Ni -- MS. BAKER: Askey. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Askey. So it's CESD20100008859? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Correct. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay. The Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Violation location: 7920 Friendship Lane, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 101040008. Violation description: Mobile home on property without Collier County permits. The past order: On February 24th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board Page 97 161 2 i 0- June 28, 2012 OR 4656, Page 2321 for more information. An extension of time was granted on August 25th, 2011. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4718, Page 1667 for more information. An additional extension of time was granted on March 22nd, 2012. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4784, Page 1815 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order items number one and two, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between May 22nd, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 38 days, for the total amount of$7,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$80.29 have been paid. Total amount due to date: $7,600. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. This one, as I looked at it, this came up earlier requesting an extension of time. This has been going on -- a 60-day extension was granted, a 180-day extension was granted. Maybe we're at the end of our rope here. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. Page 98 1 6 1une ,k12 MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Thank you, Jeff. MS. BAKER: Next case is number four under imposition, Case CESD2010003911, Elias Nicot. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Okay, back to the one I already read. The violation is of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The violation location is 670 20th Street Northeast, Naples Florida. Folio number 39329240004. A violation description is: Expired canceled building permit 970019849 for a CBS single-family residence. On November 18th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4744 Page 1112 for more information. The property was not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order items number one and two, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between May 16th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 44 days, for the total fine amount of$6,600. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$89.86 have been paid. Total amount to date: $6,600. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody -- this is not in compliance. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. Page 99 161 2A a June 28, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: This next case I will be recusing myself. MS. BAKER: Next case is number five under imposition. Case CESD20110004532, Judson G. White. (Judson White and Investigator Ambach were duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR AMBACH: This is with regard to violation of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location: 3330 31st Avenue Southwest, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 38055840009. Description: The original pool permit was canceled and a new permit was obtained for the pool. However, the new permit has stalled without completing all required inspections and obtaining a certificate of completion/occupancy. Past orders of the Board: On February 23rd, 2012 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See attached Order of the Board OR 4772, Page 1307, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Page 100 1 61 2 A June 28, 2012 Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period between May 24th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 36 days, for the total amount of$5,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$91.15 have been paid. Total amount to date, $5,400. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Mr. White? MR. WHITE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your turn to let us know what's going on. MR. WHITE: Well, we had the original -- when I purchased the house, the person that built the pool, or the contractor that built the pool, he never closed the permit, never did any inspections, and I guess he never got his final payment from the original owner of the house. And then in order for him to release that permit, he wanted me to pay $950 to him for completing the pool before. But the pool has been damaged and is shot, so it needs to be redone. I said I'd gladly pay that if he finished the pool again. But he wouldn't do it. So it took us that time just to get him to release the permit so that I could put the pool contractor that I'm going to be using to do it so that he could put in the permit so that he'd be doing the job. So what I'm here to request I guess is I'd like to have about six more months, because we've also been told that it's going to be a very lengthy process because no inspections ever being called in on it and just you know, not having a permit ever closed and C.O. for the pool. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're trying to do this by affidavit; is that correct? The pool's been built? MR. WHITE: Right. But it needs to be redone. So we're actually having a pool company come in, redo the whole thing and Page 101 161 2A ,- June 28, 2012 bring everything up to code. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When you say redone, resurfaced, pool equipment? MR. WHITE: Pool equipment was stolen. The -- it needs to be resurfaced. The decking around it needs to be replaced. These are all things I'm getting done but we haven't even been able to do anything because the old contractor on file wouldn't release the permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What we're here for today though is to impose the fine, not to rehear the case, unfortunately. MR. WHITE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So that's the predicament that we're in right now. It is not in compliance, unless somebody has a suggestion on this. MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, what we can do is if you impose today, at the point that it comes into compliance then we can go to the board on his behalf and ask the fines be waived. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think that's more than fair. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Do you understand what Ms. Flagg said? You come into Page 102 ZA 16I 9- June 28, 2012 compliance. At that date the county will assist you in going before the BCC, the Board of County Commissioners, to abate your problem. MR. WHITE: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay? MR. WHITE: All right, thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is number six under imposition. CESD20090010573, Edgar Perez. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The violation was of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and the Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, Permits, Section 105.1. The violation location was 3445 56th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 38664320004. The violation description: No Collier County building permits were obtained for electrical and plumbing modification to the main structure and fence, and invalid building permit for a horse barn without issuance of a certificate of completion. The past order: On April 26th, 2012 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4795, Page 110 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board order as of June 28th, 2012. The fine and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between May 27th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 33 days, for a total amount of$8,250. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item five, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $8,330.57. Page 103 • 161 2A " June 28, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: Next case, number seven under imposition of fines, CEAU20110013571, Jeff J. and Joan R. Reeder. (Jeff Reeder and Supervisor Perez were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Cristine. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Good afternoon. For the record, before I read the documentation of imposition of fines, I would like to state that we did receive a request for extension about -- MR. REEDER: April 20th. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Yeah, in April from Mr. Reeder requesting the extension. And we didn't present this to you at the initial hearing, so we'd like to provide that for you, you know, initially requesting an extension of time. MR. REEDER: Before? MR. LAVINSKI: And where has this been since April? SUPERVISOR PEREZ: We just did not print it up when the initial hearing started. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have something to say, Jen? Page 104 161 ZA 9- June 28, 2012 MS. BAKER: Well, I believe that the respondent is requesting an extension of time. So you may want -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Even though it's dated April? MS. BAKER: You may want to hear from him before we -- if you decide not to grant that, then we can go ahead with the imposition. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Reeder? MR. REEDER: Okay. When I sent this in, this was -- I called Mr. Coletta's office and they told me what to do about getting an extension because of the cost of an engineer and everything like that for plans for two sheds. Well, since then I've gotten the plans. I went in for a permit. They reviewed them. And I needed a revision, I think it's called, for some hydrostatic drain, seeing how my property, as of March, is now in a flood zone. And right now I'm waiting on that revision. And once that's done -- everything's been done, permit by affidavit and completion. And once I get those, then I'll be able to turn them in. But until then, that's what I'm waiting for now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm a little confused because it says structure and a fence. The fence is -- MR. REEDER: Yeah. Now, I talked to the county inspector. He said what I could do was once I have the plans approved for the sheds, which also has the survey on there, I can put my fence in and turn that in and get a permit and a completion and they'll come out and check it all at the same time. That's what I was told. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Can I speak, sir? For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County -- THE COURT REPORTER: Let me swear you in. (Investigator Baldwin was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. He has two relatively small Ted Shed type structures on the back and a fence that's surrounding it. It's -- he's been doing all the work up Page 105 16 % 2A a-� une 28, 2012 until this point. He did request an extension. The county would have no objection. MR. LEFEBVRE: In April you asked for a six-month extension. MR. REEDER: That's correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So would that mean now that you're looking for four months? MR. REEDER: I'll take the six if you give it to me. I mean, I would rather be safe than sorry, you know. I'm not going to lie to you or anything, I mean, it's expensive, you know, I can only pay what I can pay. MR. LEFEBVRE: From the time you wrote this letter -- MR. REEDER: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- till now, how much has been done to correct the problem? MR. REEDER: Right now I'm waiting on the revision on the plans. So the plans were drawn up, the plans were submitted. They said that I needed a revision, and I'm waiting on the engineer right now to supply my revision. MR. LEFEBVRE: Any idea when you're going to get that? MR. REEDER: Hopefully within the next two weeks or so. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. I make a motion to grant extension of time of four months. So 120 days from today. MR. REEDER: I'll see if-- I don't see a problem with that. Like I said, I'll take the -- MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 106 1 6 tune g,k,112 MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, you have till April. If you can't meet it by then, come back to the board ahead of time. MR. REEDER: Yes, sir. That's why I sent this ahead of time before the -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It got lost in a time warp, I guess. MR. REEDER: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have one question, administrative. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Jen, is this considered an exhibit? MS. BAKER: That's fine. We never admitted it into evidence or anything, but that's fine. MR. LEFEBVRE: I'll put it in the pile. MS. BAKER: Okay, the next case is number eight, Case CESD201200003 3 5, Arnoldo and Daisy De La Cruz. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Once again, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violation is the Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Violation location: 3770 47th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 39784640003. Description of violation: A garage enclosure, shed, elevated deck and fence without valid Collier County building permits. Past order: On April 26th, 2012 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4795, Page 316 for more information. Page 107 1 6 une 012 9— The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board order as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between May 27th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 33 days, for the total amount of$8,250. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$80 have not been paid. Total fine to date: $8,330. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: Next case is number nine under imposition, Case CESD20110005690, Luis Arteaga and Ruby Ossorio. (Investigator Baldwin was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. Violation: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Location: 775 Sixth Street Southeast, Naples, Florida. Folio Page 108 bt 2A d- June 28 28, 2012 number 37227400003. Description: Observed a shed on the south side of the property, a carport shed-like structure in the center of the property and shed-type structure housing chickens on the north side of the property, all built without Collier County building permits. Past orders: On February 23rd, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4772, Page 1320 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 27th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between May 24th, 2012 and June 27th, 2012, 35 days, for a total of$5,250. Order number five, operational costs of$80.29 have been paid. Total amount to date, $5,250. The county recommends full abatement of fines as the violation is abated and operational costs have been paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a motion from the Board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to abate. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. Page 109 161 a k June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is number 11 under imposition of fines, Case CESD20110006351, David Schaare, Jr. (Supervisor Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Once again for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The original violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Violation location: 520 Second Street Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio No. 37283440007. Description of violation: Barn type structure and shed built on the property without Collier County building permits. On April 26th, 2012 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4795, Pages 318 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between May 27th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 33 days, for a total amount of$3,300. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number five, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $3,380.86. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose a fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. And a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? Page 110 161 2 A �-- June 28, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: Next case is number 12 under imposition, Case CEV20100018622, Krista L. Marcial Irizarry and John Irizarry. (Investigator Baldwin was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement Board Investigator. Violation: The Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 2.01.00(A), now found in the Code of Laws and Ordinances, Article 3, Chapter 130-95. Location: 105 16th Street Southeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 39210380002. Description: Many unlicensed and inoperable vehicles and trailers on the Estates zoned property. Two Volkswagen Beetles, vans, commercial trailers and more. Past orders: On May 26th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4690, Page 273 for more information. An extension of time was granted on November 18th, 2011. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4744, Page 1097 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. Page 111 1 (tie 28 F2 Fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between May 16th, 2012 and June 28th, 2012, 44 days, for a total of$4,400. Fines continue to accrue. Order number five: Operational costs of$80 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $4,480. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. I have a question. Sir, you've been sitting here since the beginning of time. We haven't called your case yet? MR. LEFEBVRE: This is the last one. MS. BAKER: It's the next one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Boy, my timing is terrible, isn't it? We generally -- if somebody is here, we generally push you up the agenda. So I apologize for not spotting you sitting behind Cherie' and I couldn't see you. MS. BAKER: Next case is under 13 under imposition, Case CESD20100020099, Paul and Jacqueline Richards. (Mr. Richards, Supervisor Letourneau and Supervisor Perez were Page 112 161 2 A a- - June 28, 2012 duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violations are of Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 2007 Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17. The location of the violation: 580 24th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida. Folio number 37784320002. Violation description: Permit No. 2010040206 expired on October 2nd, 2010. No certificate of completion was attained. The temporary safety barrier has fallen down and is not secure. Past order: On November 18th, 2011 the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact/conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4760, Page 560 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 28th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and three, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between December 19th, 2011 and June 28th, 2012, 193 days, for the total amount of$48,250. Fines continue to accrue. Order item number two and four, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between November 25th, 2011 and March 8th, 2012, 105 days, for the total amount of$26,250. Order item number six: Abatement costs of$1,495 have not been paid. Order item number seven: Operational costs of$82.29 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $76,077.29. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, sorry for the long wait, but -- MR. RICHARDS: It is what it is. Page 113 1. U J1ne 2 , 412 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's it. Can you tell us why you are in front of us today to I assume talk about your case? MR. RICHARDS: Well, I decided to build myself a pool. Much to my chagrin, when I got finished with that pool they told me I needed a fence. I don't want a fence. I don't want to be caged in. So I tried to find an alternate way. And it just isn't -- I could have got a pool cover that you could park a Harley Davidson on, but because it didn't meet some ridiculous code that I could get someone to verify, I couldn't do it. They're worried about somebody falling into my pool. To the west end of my property I have 660 feet of fence. To the east end of my property I have 660 feet of impenetrable woods. To the south end of my property I have 180 feet of impenetrable woods. Who's going to fall in my pool? I don't feel I need a pool (sic). The pool is elevated three feet off the ground. Putting that aside, I realized I had to get a fence done. So I inquired to a couple of different contractors who told me they wanted 55 to $6,000, which is ridiculous. There was no way I was going to be able to afford that. So I came here and tried to work with people. Between not getting any calls back, which none of them do -- well, unless 10 minutes is sufficient -- I got nowhere. They recommended me fencing in my entire property. I don't want to be caged. I'm not an animal. You know, I just don't want to be caged. I don't want to sit in my pool and look at a fence. That's not what I came here for. But nonetheless, we couldn't meet an agreement. I came here to renew the permit initially. They told me, you know, get your pool -- get your fence permit, update your -- whatever the last final was. I had all my inspections done, they're all cleared. Everything was perfect except for the fence. You know, get your pool finaled and then you can at your leisure get the fence done. That's what they tell me here. Page 114 16June 282O12 But when the inspector come out, he had a whole different variation of what he wanted done. He wasn't going to give me anything until the fence was done. Well, I can't do the fence right now. I just can't. I wasn't financially capable of doing it. So getting no assistance from the three or four different people that had my case throughout the two or three years it's been, I reached out to a family member to someone I can call. And I'm not going to mention his name because I'm not quite positive that the person I called was the person that called me back. But the person that called me back basically ridiculed me, laughed in my face and made me feel like a piece of garbage, stating that it's my own fault for not getting a fence done to begin with. That's one of these code enforcement professionals which basically sent me over the edge. If that's the way that these people are going to treat me, I'm going to give it right back to them. And I did, and then some, I will admit that. So the newest person comes in and she says, you know, I had some hearing down there on Airport Road, and when I got there she basically told me I don't need to be there. These fines are going to follow the property, they have nothing to do with you. Because the house is in limbo. I don't want to say it's in foreclosure. You know, I don't know what's going on. I know Bank of America tried to issue me documents stating that they're my lienholder, but yet they can't prove they're my lienholder. So they tried to foreclose on me. They found the documents that they used as my lienholder were fraudulent, so that never happened. They gave me a loan modification, they backed out of the loan modification. I paid them $10,000. I mean, I've just been blowing through money, you know. In the interim of all this, I lost my father, my wife lost her father. And at the end of the day we get this company called Carter Fence that shows up at my door. Well, let me put it this way: Page 115 161 P June 2 12 When someone came and knocked on my door, my wife answered it, the man said, "I'm code enforcement and I need to look at your pool." And this was in the evening. Code enforcement wasn't even open. So I went to the front door to greet this gentleman and he wasn't there. So I went to my back door and I find this guy measuring my pool. So I asked him if I could be of assistance. And he says, "Oh, I'm from Carter Fence." "Oh, you are? Well, I thought I just overheard you tell my wife you were from code enforcement." "Oh, no, I'm here for code enforcement." But that's not what he told her. So I immediately escorted him off my property. If you're going to lie to my wife to gain access to my property, that's unacceptable to me. So Carter Fence apparently sent another gentleman out who was much more courteous. I spoke to him. I allowed him on my property to do his estimate. This is what the estimate was supposed to be that I agreed to. Now like I said, when I was getting my estimates they were $5,500. This guy, I think his name was Al, gave me an estimate of $1,540 which I found really reasonable. Who can argue with that right? He was going to do exactly what I wanted him to do. Fine, let's do it. Let's get it done. So I called whatever inspector was -- person was handling my case at the time again and told him, you know, I'll just have him do it right now, get it over with. "Well, I don't know, I've got to talk to my supervisor." Never got a call back. Next thing I know, I've got people all over my front yard, parking their trucks in the middle of my front yard looking to put a fence up. I have no idea what they're doing. I mean, I know what they're there for, but I don't know what they're doing. So I objected to it, almost to the point of leaving in handcuffs. Page 116 161 June 2 Al2 0-- And, you know, I got everything right here. Fence to be -- to go on elevated deck, core drill concrete. Well, that's not what they did. They put this ridiculous ugly fence around my pool. It's pathetic. And not only did they do that, they put the fence post right where the switch is to turn on my pool light, right directly in front of it. Now, if you look at that and follow the line down into the ground, you can see that my electrical wire is going to be there. I mean, anybody can see that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me interrupt you. This is, I'm assuming, not done by code enforcement. MR. RICHARDS: Yes, it was. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: It was done by a hired contractor to abate the safety violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RICHARDS: So I don't know if it was Ms. Perez. Are you Ms. Perez? You are. You're the one that promised to call me, right. So she's the last one to get the brunt of all of this. And that's really unfortunate. But the fact of the matter is, she didn't do much better. Promised me she was going to get everybody together and we were going to figure this out, and she must have organized three, four, five different people, five different organizations to come to my house. And 10 minutes before they're supposed to get there, she calls me, oh, by the way, see you in 10 minutes. That was April 13th. That was my daughter's birthday. And I had just far too many things to do. So I sent them packing. If you're not going to give me any respect, I'm not going to give you any. So now I'm stuck with this ridiculous fence that not only was installed incorrectly, it's blocking the switch for my pool. Which if she would have called me back would have been done two weeks prior to them doing it. But I guess her supervisor didn't get back to me so of course no one -- supervisor didn't get back to her so of course nobody got back to me. And here we have this -- Page 117 161 2 A 0- June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: -- ridiculous fence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm looking at the order here for the imposition of fines and it goes back quite a while, back to December of 2011 -- back to November of 2011. And it's a hefty amount, obviously. Are you aware of that? MR. RICHARDS: Well, when I was supposed to be at the last hearing which I stated earlier, on Airport Road, the code enforcement officer told me that I shouldn't be concerned with these fines, they're going to follow the property, not me. In other words, if Bank of America foreclosed, they would have to deal with this, not me. Because I still wasn't financially capable of doing anything. After Bush left office, the world stopped for three months. I didn't have any business for three months. It took a long time to come back from that. Not to mention the two deaths, traveling back and forth to New York between my wife, my kids, myself. You know, I've only just completed my father's will, last week, actually. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, let me bring it to the Board for discussion, see if anybody wants to make a motion. MR. RICHARDS: In fact, the only thing that I was actually aware that I was set to pay was the $1,500 bill that they sent me for the fence, which is what I was here to refuse to pay, because the fence wasn't installed correctly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the Board? MR. LEFEBVRE: I just have a couple of comments. One comment is the operational cost of$82.29. Typically in our order we ask that they be paid within 30 days. That hasn't even been paid. So -- MR. RICHARDS: I wasn't aware of it, sir, I'm sorry. But nonetheless, go ahead. MR. LEFEBVRE: I've been on this board for 10 plus years and Page 118 161 2A a- June 28, 2012 it's very clear when we make our order, and you've sat in front of-- you're the very last one. And every single time we mention the operational cost be paid within 30 days. So we make that very clear to the respondents. It hasn't been paid. The county even had to go in and abate the fine -- or abate the issue. It just seems -- MR. RICHARDS: Well, you know, I look at it this way: If the county's not going to work with me, why should I work with them? I mean, if they're not going to return my phone calls when I need to know different things of what's happening, because I have no clue. I really don't. But if I can't get them to call me back, how can you expect me to abide by anything they want me to do? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask the county: Is this in -- since it was abated by the county, is this in compliance now? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Well, we hired a contractor to put a fence in to abate any kind of safety issue at this point. I can't say -- it was permitted and C.O.'d as a fence. However, I cannot say if the fence is good enough to obtain the pool permit at this time. I'm not sure. We just went with the lowest bidder just to, you know, make sure there wasn't any kind of safety violation. MS. FLAGG: What he's saying is no, it's not in compliance. The pool doesn't have a permit yet. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Right. The fence -- MR. RICHARDS: The pool doesn't have a CO yet. I have all documents for everything else. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I believe that you're correct in what you said or you were told, that fines go with the property. If you're unable to satisfy your bank that's holding the mortgage on the property and the property goes to somebody else, the fine stays with the property, which would stay with Bank of America or whoever it is. So as far as that is concerned, I agree with what you said and what the county said. Having said that, is there a motion that we have from the Board Page 119 1 6 I 2 A June 28, 2012 relative to closing this case out? MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think we have a choice but to impose the fine, as this has not been abated. He has not received a certificate of completion for the pool. And I think we should impose the fines and hopefully he can go down and get a final certificate of completion. MR. HUDSON: So if I understand it, the county was just abating the public safety issue, right, of the pool not having a fence, right? SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Correct. There was a temporary barrier up there at one point. I believe it fell down. And we just abated the safety issue. The pool still remains un -- MR. RICHARDS: The temporary barrier was virtually impossible to keep in place. I mean, I did everything I could. Living out in the Estates, especially where I am, there's just about a thunderstorm every single evening. I mean, I was on the thing every day at least twice a week, replacing the whole thing. It just got tedious and expensive. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. HUDSON: Opposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One opposed. It carries with 5-1 opposed. You can work with the county to see how you can get this resolved now. I don't think code enforcement is going to bother you. Page 120 161 2A d' June 28, 2012 Just to let you know that the fines continue to accrue. Try working with the county to see what you can do to resolve the situation. That's the only thing I can -- MR. RICHARDS: The only thing that's going to resolve the situation is if they remove this fence and put it back properly or put it in properly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, that's a discussion that you're going to have to have with them going forward. We've done the only thing we can do. So I'm sorry you had to wait so long. MR. RICHARDS: It pretty much got me nowhere. It left me with an agency that I couldn't get to cooperate with me for all these years and now you expect me to -- that they're going to do it now? I just -- I don't get it. All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now back to the agenda. All right, do we have any new business? We're up to reports. MS. FLAGG: Good afternoon. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good afternoon. MS. FLAGG: Just to give you -- what we did this time is I asked them to give me the last five months, January through May, of the stats, just to give you an idea of how it's going. So for the past five months there's been 3,677 code cases open. There's been 11,856 property inspections completed. 1,787 cases closed with voluntary compliance, meaning that -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There were 11 -- MS. FLAGG: -- 856 property inspections in five months. Of the cases closed with voluntary compliance, meaning that the individual worked with the investigator and brought the property into compliance before it needed to go to a hearing, there were 295 Code Enforcement Board and special magistrate orders issued. There were 462 liens filed. There were 101 liens released. So as -- even though they're filed, then we go to the Board on the community member's behalf and ask that -- once they come into compliance -- and ask that Page 121 16t 2 A 0' June 28, 2012 the BCC waive the fines pursuant to resolution and release the lien. There were 225 bankruptcy documents received during these five months. And what we are seeing is due to the economy and the foreclosures that are continuing, we're seeing more and more bankruptcy -- we're receiving more and more bankruptcy documents. And just as a clarification, there was a recent article about a home that had been abandoned, the neighbors didn't know that there was actually someone who had broken into the home that was living there, even though they were living right next door. Because as soon as that is brought to our attention, we work with law enforcement to address that situation. However that home, we did have an open case on that home. But at the point that that bankruptcy document is filed, by law we have to stop and we can't do anything with that case until that case is released by court. We can -- if it's a health and safety issue we can petition the court to give us a right to address it, even though it's in bankruptcy. In that particular case it was on our radar, it was on our community caretaking list, but bankruptcy documents had been filed so we were waiting for the court to release that house so we could go ahead and take care of the nuisance abatement violations that existed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is that in Pine Ridge? MS. FLAGG: It is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm familiar with it. MS. FLAGG: The homes, as we've talked before, are all over the county. They're not restricted to one area of our community. They're -- you know, they're all over: North Naples, East Naples, the Estates, Immokalee. They're everywhere. In that five-month period we also completed 3,160 lien searches. And as you know, lien searches, people ask for a lien search through the partnership agreement with Naples Area Board of Realtors to see if there are any code violations on property. During that five-month period 135 lien searches were found to have code violations. Page 122 lot 2A line 28, 2012 So you, through this partnership, prevented 135 people from buying a home that had a code violation and not knowing about it. And then the average time from complaint to completion of the initial inspection is averaging three days. Which in light of the number of cases that each of the investigators are carrying is pretty significant. But that's one of the things that we focus on, because if there is a health and safety, we reprioritize and seek to address those. Also, I will tell you that one of our supervisors, Supervisor Patti Petrulli, retired. And following her retirement Mr. Joe Mucha was promoted to supervisor, who you saw him today. And then just as a reminder, any time that you do impose fines that we do, once the property does come into compliance, we go to the Board of County Commissioners on their behalf. The Board has passed a resolution that determines how the fines are waived. And the Board has waived over $8 million in fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Excellent. The Board would like to thank you for sending us the dividers that we now have. MS. FLAGG: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We did have one complaint from a person who is color blind and can't see the numbers. Right, Jim? MR. LAVINSKI: Other than that, they work fine. I just can't see them. MS. FLAGG: You can thank Jen and her folks, they took care of it for you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Very good. We appreciate it. MR. DOINO: Thanks, Jen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments from anybody? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The next meeting is July 26th. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to adjourn. Page 123 b l 2 A June 28, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to adjourn. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Seconded. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 1 :00 p.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD ' 4132,R-wig N, CHAIRMAN These minutes7roved by the Board on ju,k as p resented or as corrected 1 Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 124 161 2A July 26, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, July 26, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Robert Kaufman Lionel L'Esperance Tony Marino James Lavinski Kenneth Kelly (Excused) Gerald Lefebvre (Excused) Larry Miesczak (Excused) Ronald Doino (Excused) Chris Hudson (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Colleen Crawley, Code Enforcement Jean Rawson, CEB Attorney Page 1 161 2 A a-- July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless time is adjusted by the chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision by the board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. Roll call. MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ken Kelly, Mr. Larry Miesczak, Mr. Gerald Lefebvre, Mr. Ronald Doino, Jr., and Mr. Chris Hudson all have excused absences for today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We feel lonesome, but we'll carry on. We do have a quorum. Do we have any changes in the agenda? MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. Under No. 4, public hearings, motions, Letter A, motions, motion for extension of time. We have Page 2 161 2A - July 26, 2012 one addition. It will be No. 2 from imposition of fines, Michael and Amy Facundo, Case CESD20100006940. Under Letter B, stipulations, we have three stipulations. The first will be No. 7 from hearings, Steven J. Martarano, Case CENA20120003516; the second will be Case No. 8 from hearings, which was an addition to this agenda, and it is Roger and Tammy Macauley, Case CESD20120002439; the third will be No. 4 from hearings, Miriam H. Montes De Oca, Case CESD20110011822. Under Letter C, hearings, No. 5, Case CESD20110006729, Jason Nardella, has been withdrawn. Number 6, Case CESD20110017156, Ronnie G. and Beverly J. Bishop, has been withdrawn. And then we did have the addition of No. 8 to the agenda, which was Case CESD20120002439, Roger and Tammy Macauley, which has been moved to stipulations. Under No. 5, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 9, Case CESD20120003258, Integrity First CR Services, has been withdrawn. And that's all the changes I have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to accept the changes? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept the changes. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Page 3 161 2A7 July 26, 2012 Okay. Approval of the minutes? Can we get a motion to approve the minutes, or any changes in the minutes? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries. The minutes are approved. Which brings us to motions for extension of time. You're on, Jen. MS. BAKER: The first one will be Serafin Riveron, Jr., and Carida O. Menendez, Case CESD20110012707. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. MUSSE: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. RIVERON: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're asking for an extension of time. Can you give us some background? MR. RIVERON: Yes, sir. My name is Serafin, and I have a schedule of events that we have done since October. I don't know if you guys have it. They have it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We do. MR. RIVERON: Okay. So, I mean, it's basically in the county's hands, and I'm trying to get more time so we could finish this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. There was 120 days that was Page 4 161 2 July 26, 2 12 granted in April. MR. RIVERON: Yes, sir. I thought that was plenty and sufficient, but it's been going back and forth, and my contractor -- you know, he gave me this, and we're just going back and forth with the county right now to get the permits, still. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And from the county? MR. MUSSE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse. We have no objections to the extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And how much time do you think you would need to get everything done? MR. RIVERON: I would have thought that we had the 120 days, and now I don't know how long we still need. I mean, I wish I could do this tomorrow, but -- I wish I could get the most so I don't have to be coming here. MR. L'ESPERANCE: What does your contractor suggest? Has he made a suggestion? MR. RIVERON: He said 60 days. MR. L'ESPERANCE: What does the county suggest? MR. MUSSE: Sixty days is fine. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I move that we grant the citizen 90 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Exactly what I was going to say. I'll second that. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You have 90 days. MR. RIVERON: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So do the same thing. After 90 days, Page 5 161 2A2- July 26, 2012 it's not done, come back before the end of the 90 days so that we can address the issue. MR. RIVERON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. MR. MUSSE: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next two cases kind of go hand in hand, so I'll call them both together. Anthony DiNorcia, Sr., LLC, Case 2007100236, and Anthony DiNorcia, Sr., LLC, Case CELU20100022151. MR. DiNORCIA: Good morning, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. DiNORCIA: Gentlemen, I'd like to bring you up to what we have done so far, if I can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. DiNORCIA: The first thing, we obtained the CO for the main building that was -- seemed like the sticking point to the building requirements. But that's been permitted and a CO is obtained. We got plans as built from Mario Lamendola the other day done for the additional areas that need to be permitted. We retained the engineer for the new site plan because some of the changes need to be done from the original site plan that were supposedly not necessary. So that's being done. We retained the engineer. We retained a landscape architect, Mr. Wayne Hook to work on the new -- changing some of the landscaping requirements. We had to get an up-to-date survey, and we found out that the neighbor's fence is really on our property. And we're having that removed so that Mr. Hook can re -- use those trees and stuff as our landscaping. We removed all the exotics on our property. So we've done all of that, but we still need about another 120 days mainly because of the SDP requirement. So I'd like to ask for another 120 days. Page 6 161 2A2" July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the county says? MR. BOX: No objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No objection? MR. BOX: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could we get a motion from the board, or any questions? MR. MARINO: Is 120 days enough? MR. DiNORCIA: I think so, according to the engineer. We got all the plans done. I would -- I hope so. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if it's not enough you'll come back, as you've done today, and we'll discuss it at that time. MR. DiNORCIA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there a motion to grant 120 days? MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion we grant 120 days. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. DiNORCIA: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Now, do we have to vote on each one separately? MS. RAWSON: Yeah. Just for the record, this is 120 days for each, so there's two different orders. So, yeah, please. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So that one was the case number ending in 236, okay. And we need the motion and a vote on the motion for the case ending 151. Page 7 161 2A2- July 26, 2012 MR. MARINO: Do you want a vote on that? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll make the second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: The next case will be Michael and Amy Facundo. Case CESD20100006940. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was a -- was this on the imposition that's been moved? MS. BAKER: Yes. It was No. 2 on imposition. MR. FACUNDO: Hi, good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Why don't you give us -- MR. FACUNDO: Michael Facundo. This has been a long journey for me. This process had started a while back, and this is my second time coming and asking for an extension approximately six months or -- what would that be, 180 days or so. And I don't know if you guys remember my original letter, if it's part of the enclosure, when my contractor basically bailed on me, couldn't finish the job because he had built the house within the 3-foot setback. I rectified that and fixed it out of my own pocket. And -- well, I had a drafter, and he was drawing it, and on March the 14th the codes changed, and so he, since then, says look -- he Page 8 1 6 I A July 26, 2012 didn't really want to put a lot of time into it and get it done, so I had to let him go, and I got a new guy that's making this work with a structural guy to get it all wrapped up. And so we're making progress in getting it done. We're probably in -- revising to the new building codes. That's really -- it's a combination of a few things that's sort of prolonged this. And so once that's completed, we're ready to go ahead and submit. I met with him last Friday, talked to him, and he's probably about 80 percent completed with the revisions. And so, hopefully, that's -- once that gets reviewed and the structure guy looks at it, signs and seals it, get everything, we'll be able to submit and hopefully begin the process. I've got, obviously, the bank knocking on my door, and I've got, you know, obviously, the county, you know, wanting me to finish this, which -- it's my personal home and my investment that my wife and I have put into this, and so I've got to finish it. And so that's where we're at. And just -- and given the economic times and people get pressured to do things and, you know -- and that's where we're at right now. So I'm asking for an extension is what I'm asking for. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you're asking for 180 days extension. MR. FACUNDO: Yes, sir, because what's happening is I have a slab and some walls up, so it's not like it's an addition. This is a whole complete house that I'm trying to finish where my family will be living in. So that's why I'm asking for that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The original order on this was November of 2010. MR. FACUNDO: Yes. That's -- if that's what it says there, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, long time ago. And at that time 180 days was granted -- MR. FACUNDO: Right. Page 9 16 �-- uly2 012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- as an extension, which came up on May 13, 2011. So it's been a long time. Let's see what the county has to say. MR. WALKER: We would rather defer to you, sir, in reference to how you would proceed. We won't object to anything you decide. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Go. MR. MARINO: You said there was a slab and some walls up? MR. FACUNDO: Yeah. It's just some block walls. They started, you know, when the contractor started. Again, he built it -- that setback. It's been -- you know, I fixed that, my own expense. I got that rectified. So it's not a lot of walls. Well, yeah, there's the exterior walls, but part of it is not developed, obviously, or erected because, obviously, I've got to pull a permit. MR. MARINO: So there's no roof on the building? MR. FACUNDO: No, sir. There's no roof on the building. MR. MARINO: How big is the house? MR. FACUNDO: Top end, it's probably going to be about 2,600 square feet. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a building permit on it now? MR. FACUNDO: No. My original contractor should have pulled one. So right now there's not one there, I don't think, or it's expired. I don't know. Give you a true answer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So if we go back to November of 2010 -- MR. FACUNDO: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- the original case, this was a structure that was being built without a building permit; is that correct? MR. FACUNDO: No, no, no, no, no. I had a contractor. I Page 10 1 b � 2A � July 26, 2012 pulled a permit to fix all that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not a contractor. MR. FACUNDO: No, no, no. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Building permit. MR. FACUNDO: Yeah, we should have had a building permit, absolutely. We even got a building permit to fix what the -- within the setback. I have that -- I don't have it with me, but I have, you know, where we pulled a permit to fix the setback, absolutely. MR. WALKER: Yeah. The actual original building permit had expired, and that was one of the reasons why the case came before me as an investigator when I went by and seen the structure that had been there for quite a long time. And when I went to investigate whether or not the permits were still active, they had at that time expired. When we brought this case before the board for a hearing, what was necessary was that he again reactivate or initiate the permits again in order to complete the work that needed to be done to the house, because it was at a dead standstill, and the permits had actually expired for the construction of the home. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No building permit exists today? MR. WALKER: Today -- the actual permit expires. He had a permit, and the permit expired as of, I think it is, November -- not November -- of June, it expired, which was a permit that was originally -- there was actually a permit to correct the actual setbacks, which he was initially given 180 days to do, which he did, and he got that completed. After the completion of that, there was an additional 180 days after that -- during that first order which he had to complete things, which he didn't do. That permit has expired, or that time frame has expired under that permit. So currently there is no active permit due to the fact that the permit is expired. MR. MARINO: You said it expired in June. Is that June of this Page 11 161 2A2'- July 26, 2012 year? MR. WALKER: Yes. The extended permit expired, yes. Let me check just to make sure. Yes, that's correct. The actual permit that was there existing now is now expired. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What I see here is a case that came before us for an extension of time -- excuse me -- an extension of time but originally was coming before the board for the imposition of the fines. We're not here to rehear the case, which was heard in the past. MR. WALKER: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It seems to me that from 2010 -- I understand there was an encroachment on the property; that encroachment was resolved by what? You contacted the people next -- they had to move a fence; is that it? MR. FACUNDO: No, no, no, sir; it's much more than that. I had to remove the whole footing wall that the contractor built three feet within the setback. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So your contractor put the footprint into an area within the boundary? MR. FACUNDO: Within -- 3 feet within the setback. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. FACUNDO: And we had to knock -- I had to knock that down. I no longer have him. I found another new contractor that's going to do this, and I fixed that on my own. I mean, I hired a contractor to do it, but it came out of-- I paid out of my pocket to do that. And so we're right there to get started and move on with this. Again, it's just things that are beyond my control when people are not following what they're supposed to do in regards to getting stuff done regarding the plans. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Unfortunately, that is -- that's -- MR. FACUNDO: Yeah, I know. That's my headache. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's your headache, right. Page 12 161 2A � July 26, 2012 MR. FACUNDO: And I'm here, actually, to ask for an extension because I need to finish this. I don't know what else to do it is what I'm saying. MR. L'ESPERANCE: There is no swimming pool correct, sir? MR. FACUNDO: No, there's no swimming pool. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How much time -- I mean, if you were to purchase a brand new piece of property, apply for a building permit, and build a house, that's probably the position that you're in today. MR. FACUNDO: In a nutshell. I mean, that's not actual, but I guess, hypothetically, I would say yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The slab that's there, is that going to be able to be reused for -- MR. FACUNDO: Oh, yes, sir, absolutely. That's what's going to save me money. If it wasn't -- if it wasn't -- trust me, I would have -- you know, I -- it's going to be reused is what I'm saying. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. If the county has no objection, I guess it becomes a -- for the board to decide either to grant some time or to deny. So I'm looking for direction from the board. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I put forth a motion to grant the individual 180 days as requested. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 13 161 2 A 2' July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries. You have 180 days. MR. FACUNDO: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And hopefully we won't see you back here. MR. FACUNDO: Oh, trust me, that's what I'm shooting for, Robert. So I appreciate that. Thank you for understanding. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. FACUNDO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. WALKER: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be under stipulations. It was No. 7 from hearings. Steven J. Martarano, Case CENA20120003516. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. Therefore, it's agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by removing all litter to a site intended for final disposal or store desired items within a completely enclosed structure within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Page 14 161 2A2-- July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What's the nature of the debris that's there? MR. BALDWIN: Construction debris, mostly large rocks and construction debris. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And it will take 60 days to get it moved? MR. BALDWIN: He's working on it right now; that's why he's not here, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could we get a motion to approve the stipulation as written? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. And a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second by Mr. L'Esperance. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 8 from hearings, Roger and Tammy Macauley, Case CESD20120002439. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. McGONAGLE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Michele McGonagle. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$81 .72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Page 15 16t 2A2 July 26, 2012 Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of $250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abasement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. MACAULEY: Good morning, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. Do you have any comments on the stipulation? MR. MACAULEY: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You think 180 days is sufficient time to -- MR. MACAULEY: For now, sir. My wife and I are both currently laid off. We're scheduled to go back to work in October, November. We should be able to -- we'll give it our best to do it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was a garage conversion? MR. MACAULEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did you do the conversion, or was it something that you bought? MR. MACAULEY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. McGONAGLE: Sir, if I may? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MS. McGONAGLE: There's a number of other things that are there also. There is a three-car garage, a single reroof, and the garage Page 16 161 2A2" July 26, 2012 conversion; all three had permits, but they were never CO'ed. There is also an 8-by-38 addition to the home, a wooden fence, and three accessory structures were added to the property without obtaining any permits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sounds like you've been busy. MR. MACAULEY: That was a long time ago that all this was done. Financially, I couldn't afford to put a nail in the fence today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MACAULEY: I'm asking for time to correct all of this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can we get a motion from the board to accept the stipulation as written? MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'm concerned about 180 days. Do you think that's sufficient? MR. MACAULEY: I don't know, but I'm going to give it the best I can. As speaking with the building inspectors, as long as I show progress -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, if it's not sufficient, Mr. Macauley, you can come back to the board and ask for an extension at that time showing some -- MR. MACAULEY: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- activity towards getting it completed. MR. MARINO: You say you're going back when, you think? MR. MACAULEY: We're hopefully going back by October. My wife works at Cypress Woods Country Club, and they're remodeling right now, so she got laid off. MR. MARINO: I know that for a fact. MR. MACAULEY: And it's tough. Mr. Marino, I've worked for you in the past part time. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we accept the stipulation as written. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a Page 17 161 2A 9- July 26, 2012 second? MR. MARINO: Second. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MACAULEY: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you don't get it done within 180 days, don't wait till -- MR. MACAULEY: I won't. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- Day 179 to come back. Come back to prior to that. MR. MACAULEY: I won't. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. McGONAGLE: Thank you. MS. RAWSON: Mr. Marino, I'm hoping you're telling me that you don't have a conflict? MR. MARINO: I just mentioned that to Lionel, that I didn't recognize him until he just said that he worked for me. I don't have a conflict with that if you don't have a conflict with it. I did not recognize him. It must have been -- MR. MACAULEY: That was a long time ago. MR. MARINO: Yeah. It must have been years ago. MS. RAWSON: Well, because -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: What's your recommendation? MS. RAWSON: Well, here's the problem. We only have four of Page 18 161 2 ,T, July 26, 2012 you, and that's the quorum. We didn't have a hearing, we didn't enter any evidence, really. It's a stipulated agreement. I didn't hear any comments coming from you, Mr. Marino. You didn't recognize him, and you don't remember him, and in your mind if there's no conflict because, you know, we don't want to have to put this off till next month, if-- I guess we should probably ask the respondent if he thinks there's a conflict. MR. MACAULEY: I don't think there's a conflict. It's been, like, six years, and I worked for him two days. MR. MARINO: Yeah. Like I say, I don't even recognize him, and I have a lot of people that have been in and out, so -- MS. RAWSON: Okay. MR. MARINO: -- I don't feel -- MS. RAWSON: Well, as long as the record reflects that neither one of you believes that there's a conflict of interest and there was a stipulated agreement entered into by the respondent and the county, then we'll go with it. MR. MACAULEY: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Okay. The next case under stipulations was No. 4 from hearings, Miriam H. Montes De Oca, Case CESD20110011822. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. DE OCA: Good morning. MR. CONDOMINA: For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing or a fine of $250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours Page 19 lbt 2A ?- July 26, 2012 of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Do you have any comments? MR. DE OCA: No, I don't. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you agree to the stipulation? MR. DE OCA: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the timing, you should be able to complete everything that's required in the time allocated? MR. DE OCA: Yes, I'll give it my best. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a stipulation (sic) from the board to accept the stipulation as written? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. DE OCA: Thank you. MR. CONDOMINA: Thank you. MR. DE OCA: Good day. MS. BAKER: The next case will be from Letter C, hearings, No. Page 20 161 2A2 July 26, 2012 1, Case CESD20100007042, Kirk Sanders. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance Florida Building Code 2007 Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(A), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i), and 2.02.03. Description of violation: Approximately 12 mobile homes were installed with several additions added to the mobile homes consisting of carports, screen porches, roof-overs, and living space below flood level with electrical and plumbing without first obtaining all required building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 2280 Pineland Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34112; Folio Numbers 56150200005 and 56150520002. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Kirk N. Sanders, P.O. Box 2481, Naples, Florida, 34106. Date violation first observed: June 8, 2010. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: September 1, 2010. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: September 29, 2010. Date of reinspection: May 11, 2011 . Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. SCAVONE: Good morning. Michelle Scavone, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. This case was heard before the Code Enforcement Board on July 28, 2011 . The respondent requested a rehearing from a higher court, and it was granted; thus we are here today for a rehearing. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits. This is going to -- MS. BAKER: There are a lot of exhibits, so I'm not sure you want us to name them all right now; if you just want to accept the Page 21 161 2A2- July 26, 2012 county's exhibit as a whole. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen those? MS. SCAVONE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We need a motion to accept those exhibits. MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion we accept the exhibits. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. A site visit was made on June 8, 2010. It was observed that several mobile homes had additions and alterations such as the sheds, fences, carports, porches, roof-overs. Extensive research was conducted. No permits were found for any of the additions or alterations. Notice of Violation was mailed certified receipt on September 29, 2010. Several meetings and phone conversations have been conducted with the property owner, Mr. Sanders, explaining what the violations were and how to correct them. In conclusion, the permit is basically a permitting case, and per Collier County Ordinance 2010-04, Article IV, Section 9, notice shall be given to the property owner as listed on the tax collector's. County policy, basically, is building permits cannot be issued to anyone other than the property owner or general contractors hired by the property owner. And at this time the violation does remain. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Page 22 161 2A - July 26, 2012 MR. BOATMAN: Thank you, good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BOATMAN: I'm sorry. MS. SCAVONE: That's okay. May I present some of the evidence that was shown before? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. One is the state definitions, Florida Statute, Title 33, regulations of trade, Section 513.04, definitions, just explaining what an operator is and that they are -- of a mobile home, lodging, or recreational park. Permittee means a person who applies for and is granted permits under the chapter and who is ultimately responsible for the operation of the mobile home, lodging, or recreational vehicle park. The next one, B, what a recreational vehicle is; temporary living quarters for recreational camping, traveling. Under county definitions, the Land Development Code, 1.08.02. Again, just pointing out just what some of the definitions of recreational vehicle, temporary living accommodations, again. The next page. MR. BOATMAN: Pardon me. May I make an inquiry, please? In terms of the introduction of evidence, am Ito object contemporaneously when she presents specific evidence? Because there was an entire package of materials that was handed to you that was ostensibly made a record in a prior hearing, and the representation was that we are on rehearing. And if we were, I could not object to that which the board has already considered; however, we are not here on a rehearing. There was an appeal filed, and there was a stipulation to withdraw the prior order, and so we're -- if we are here at a new hearing, then I want to specifically object to the information coming in as it's offered. And so I just wanted to have clarification on that, because that took me -- Page 23 161 2A2- July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you identify yourself first. MR. BOATMAN: Yes, sir. My name is Jim Boatman. I'm an attorney here locally, and I represent Mr. Sanders. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: So I wanted to get some clarification on that. And I really hated to interrupt her presentation, but -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's okay. MR. BOATMAN: -- this is my first time before the board, and I'm going to stumble over some protocols, and I apologize. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Not a problem. Jean, is this coming back to us as a brand new case now? MS. RAWSON: You know, I didn't see the Circuit Court order. Mr. Boatman has told you that there was a stipulation to withdraw the original order and that it's a new hearing, not a rehearing. So, you know, let's see what the county says about that. Is it a new hearing, or is it a rehearing? Since we aren't at the Circuit Court. MR. BOATMAN: See -- if I may just give some context. What occurred was that my client had requested a continuance. He did -- then did not come and appear at the hearing. You decided to proceed in absentia. The argument on the appeal was that it was a deprivation of his due process. And as we discussed the merits of the appeal -- and I was not the appellate attorney, and I have come after that resolution -- the determination was made by the county that they didn't want to fight the fight in the Circuit Court and they would basically hit the reset button and come back here and have the hearing. So it's not a rehearing. The last hearing there was a deprivation of due process, so we should be starting at ground zero. That was my understanding with regard to what today is. And that shouldn't change a whole lot, but it's going to change my response to certain evidence that either was already in, because this is a rehearing, or has not yet come in because the prior hearing has basically been nullified. Page 24 161 2A - July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Kitchell. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SNOW: I do so swear. And not to my knowledge, I -- I won't contest what counsel's saying. It's a hearing. To my knowledge, most of this evidence has not been submitted before. A lot of this is new evidence, which could be construed as a new hearing. It's a new hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SNOW: It's a new hearing. That's from Jeff Wright, so there's no issue there. MS. RAWSON: Well, then back to Mr. Boatman's original request. He wants to have the right to object to certain pieces of evidence. And so, in light of that, I think that probably it would be easier, since Ms. Baker told us there's a lot of evidence, that the county present the evidence one at a time so Mr. Boatman has a right to object to it. MR. BOATMAN: Thank you. I would appreciate that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Do you want to start back from the beginning? MR. BOATMAN: Yes, sir. That would be very helpful. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. These are definitions that the county is providing right now? MS. SCAVONE: Correct. MR. BOATMAN: So with regard to the packet of materials that you initially tendered, that is not in evidence then? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're starting at square one. MR. BOATMAN: Square one? MS. SCAVONE: Correct. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. Thank you. MS. SCAVONE: Florida Statute, Title 23, Section 320.01, definitions. Page 25 161 a A 9- July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a problem with that one? MR. BOATMAN: I do not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Next? MS. SCAVONE: Okay. Title -- Florida Statute, Title 33, Section 513.01, definitions, operator. MR. BOATMAN: For the record, I have no objection to any statute or rule being tendered as evidence. So I have no objection to that. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. We're going to go to the county definitions then. Did you want me to -- MR. BOATMAN: I have no objection to those -- MS. SCAVONE: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: -- being submitted. MS. SCAVONE: I've just got a little shuffle for a minute. Okay. Florida Building -- Florida Code of Ordinance Section 2.2004, general definitions of what a violator is. That basically is the property owner. MR. BOATMAN: No objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Code of Ordinance Chapter 62. MR. BOATMAN: No objection. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. Do you want me to read these? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to just throw them up for -- MR. BOATMAN: If there's any ordinances or code recitations, I have no objection to their presentation to the county. I think they're a matter of public record. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. So -- MR. BOATMAN: I'm going to be objecting primarily to photographic-type evidence. MS. SCAVONE: State Statutes -- Page 26 1bl a A July 26, 2012 MR. BOATMAN: No objection. MS. SCAVONE: -- 513.05, 513.065, 513.10, 513.112, 513.117, and 513.118. MR. BOATMAN: No objection. MS. SCAVONE: All right. The 513.05 is basically explaining the owner's responsibility for adopting rules pertaining to the park. 513.065 basically explains that citations must be issued to the permittee. MR. BOATMAN: Yeah. I'm not objecting to the submission of these. I may not agree with the interpretation of them. But no objection. MS. BAKER: Right. We just need to go through them so the board knows. MS. SCAVONE: 513.10, any person -- anyone who operates a mobile home park has first responsibility to obtain the permit before opening the park. 513.112 basically discusses the duty of the operation of the park, having to maintain and keep registers at all times of who's in the park. 513.117 establishes rules that are reasonable by the operator. 513.118, the operator may refuse accommodations to whom he does not want there. Okay. Mobile home manufacturing information booklet prepared by the Manufacturing Housing Section and Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Page 18. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's your first picture. No problem? MR. BOATMAN: Oh, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I was -- can we go back to that? Oh, oh. I have no objection. That's a part of that manual? MS. SCAVONE: Correct. MR. BOATMAN: No, no objection. MS. SCAVONE: And under Page 18, explaining about mobile Page 27 ibi ePtg' July 26, 2012 and manufactured home repairs and remodeling, additions, including, but not limited to, add a -- rooms, roof-overs, porches, shall be freestanding and self-supporting with only the flash attaching to the main unit unless the added unit has been designed to be marriage (sic) to the existing unit. All additions shall be constructed in compliance with state and locally adopted building codes, what I would like to point out. At Page -- also with Rule 15C-2.0081 under Florida Statute 1A, it says the same thing, additions shall be constructed in compliance with state and locally adopted building codes. Again, this is just showing about -- our local codes have the authority. Property appraiser's aerials from 1975, '85, '89, '94, and 2012. MR. BOATMAN: No objection. MS. SCAVONE: Aerial from 1975 shows the park on, basically, a diagonal spacing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are my eyes going bad, or is that fuzzy? MR. L'ESPERANCE: It's just you. The rest of us have no problem. MR. MARINO: Yeah, I don't have a problem with it. MS. SCAVONE: This was the first map that I was able to find. I wasn't able to find aerial sooner than that. 1985, still on a diagonal, and this is also showing that there were some alterations and additions made. 1989, 13 units. Now they are on a more permanent parking configuration. 1994, again, permanent parking configuration with additions and alterations showing. And 2012 is our current, showing that their parking is on a more permanent configuration with many additions and alterations. The Collier County zoning map. It's the current zoning of-- MR. BOATMAN: No objection. Page 28 161 2A � July 26, 2012 MS. SCAVONE: -- C4. There's 37 photos of the structure on the property. Do you want me to go through each one of them? MR. BOATMAN: Yes. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. You can just show each one of them. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What are we seeing, a picture of each unit now? MS. SCAVONE: You're going to see a picture of each unit with some porches, fences, sheds, add-ons, roof-overs. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me ask a question. Are you saying that these are not in the park? Is that what you're saying? MR. BOATMAN: I'm objecting -- first of all, I would like to ask the witness to describe who took that photograph. MS. SCAVONE: I took that photograph. MR. BOATMAN: And is that photograph Unit 1, two twenty-eight eighty (sic) Pineland Avenue, Naples, Florida? MS. SCAVONE: Some of the units did not have the addresses on them, which is another -- MR. BOATMAN: The notice of hearing suggests the location of the violation is 2280 Pineland Avenue, Unit 1 . To your personal knowledge, do you know whether that's Unit 1 or not? MS. SCAVONE: I do not know. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: The notice of violation had the folio numbers listed on there as well, which is -- encompasses the entire property. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What I'm interested in is are these units in the park or not? MR. BOATMAN: That unit is within the East Naples Park, mobile home park. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Within the folio numbers listed on the notice Page 29 161 2A July 26, 2012 of violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: That's right. And so I object to the submission of this photograph for the purpose of a determination of whether or not the use at the property is in conformance or not. The -- this notice of violation -- and this goes to my argument, but that is not relevant to Mr. Sanders. Mr. Sanders does not own that. The violator, if there is a violation, is the person who owns that unit. That's pursuant to Chapter 723. We don't hold the man accountable who's got just the pad there and the pedestal for building code violations of that unit. That's the main issue here. I'm not here to necessarily talk about each unit and whether there's violations. At the outside layer of this onion, we have some substantial due process issues. So the entire regime that's utilized by the State of Florida creates a situation where the Department of Health permits this piece of property that has pads and pedestals. They basically inspect them twice a year to make sure that his pads and pedestals are in place. And he gets violations, and he cleans them up. And he's been -- basically, this place has been operating like this since 1956, okay. It's only contracted. It's never expanded. And so if you're pointing out a mobile home that's sitting on a pad that he owns, he doesn't -- that's not his property. So why should he be here answering for that piece of property? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think you're arguing your case yet. We're trying to get into the display of the units that are there, whether they're in that park or not. MR. BOATMAN: Okay, sir. And so to the extent -- and so I won't belabor this objection next time, I'll have a standing objection to any photographic evidence that is of property not owned by my client. He owns that dirt that's sitting around there, but he doesn't own the thing which I think the county's primarily concerned about. And if Page 30 2A2 July 26, 2012 you're concerned about that thing, work with your Department of Health, and so -- code enforcement and Department of Health can get together, because the Department of Health can go violate that mobile home. So for that purpose, I would object, but I don't want to -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're not objecting to the fact that those units or these units we're about to see are all located in that mobile park? MR. BOATMAN: Within -- correct, I am not. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So why don't you go through the pictures real quickly, and they'll be admitted as evidence. MR. BOATMAN: The only thing I would like to ask, sir, is I just want to get clarification as to what Unit 1 is, because there's been only one unit that was posted with this violation, and it was Unit 1. And so I want to make sure, even if we're going to disagree as to the implication of that, that we see a photograph of Unit 1 and we know which one it is when it comes -- that will be the question. So I would only ask the officer whether that is a picture of Unit 1, to your knowledge. MS. SCAVONE: Well, as I stated before, the folio numbers are listed on the notice of violation as that's the location of violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And all the folio numbers are unique to the individual units? MS. SCAVONE: No. It's -- there's two folio numbers; there's two properties that were joined by that -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the folio number -- MS. SCAVONE: -- property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- includes all of those units that are built on it? MS. SCAVONE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: Could we go back to the first picture, first Page 31 1 u 26 0l exhibit? Can you do that? MS. BAKER: Which one? MR. MARINO: The first one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before that. Is that a 2 on the corner there? MR. MARINO: That's a 2 on the corner; is it not? MS. SCAVONE: That appears to be a 2. MR. MARINO: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let's go back one more, and maybe we'll find No. 1 . MS. BAKER: That is the first. MR. MARINO: That's the first one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That is the first one. MR. MARINO: That's the first one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There was actually a picture. MS. SCAVONE: After I submit the photographs, I can further explain that there have been changes in the park that -- from 1956, that some of the structures were not there as they are now. And, again, as I said, many of them do not have a number listed on the unit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: Is this the second or the third photograph? MS. SCAVONE: This would be the -- MS. BAKER: This is the fourth page. MS. SCAVONE: Fourth page. MR. BOATMAN: Well, I was asking the second page of photographs, after unit -- or after the photograph that depicted the two, I had asked you a question that I think was pending, and that was, do you have personal knowledge whether that unit right there is Unit 1? MS. SCAVONE: No, I do not. MR. BOATMAN: Okay, thank you. I would object on the same basis I previously stated. MS. SCAVONE: Now, this is, you know, again, just showing Page 32 161 2A 7 July 26, 2012 the roof-overs and additions, porches. MR. BOATMAN: Could -- are you -- like, what number -- these don't go in the order that you -- could you show me now again the pictures that have been submitted into evidence? Because it seemed like things were flashing, going. How many pages -- MS. BAKER: Five -- this is the fifth page. MR. BOATMAN: Yeah. I want to ask a question for each page, if that's okay. So right now I've asked two questions, so there's two that I've had objections for. So if we could go to the third page of pictures. That one we took care of. MS. BAKER: That's the third page. MR. BOATMAN: Yes, ma'am. So the next page. Okay. Before this is submitted, I would just like to ask you -- because I don't think you testified to anything about it previously. Do you have personal knowledge as to whether that's Unit 1? MS. SCAVONE: No. MR. BOATMAN: Okay, thank you. That's it. I have objection based on the articulation previously. Okay. Same question. MR. SNOW: If we may, can we stipulate that we don't have any knowledge of what's Unit 1, specifically, so we can move this forward? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. SNOW: Is that -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. So I have a standing objection to the pictures on the basis that they don't demonstrate Unit 1 . CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. SNOW: If I may clarify. We're not stating it doesn't represent Unit 1; that Unit 1 may not be identified strictly by the photographs. It may not have a number on it. That doesn't mean Unit 1 does not exist. We're just stating for these photographic evidence, Page 33 161 2Aa- July 26, 2012 these are just examples of the additions that have been made in the park and the construction -- that illegal construction's been made without permits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Correct. MR. SNOW: That's all -- that's all we're doing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My concern is, as far as objections are concerned at this point, these units are either in the park or they're not. That's what I would like to know. If you object to them being shown as evidence because they're not in the park, that's an objection I would like to hear. MR. BOATMAN: No. To my knowledge, and based upon the package that I've received, all of these units are, in fact, in the park; however, their owners aren't here. So that's the gist of my problem with the pictures. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. MR. SNOW: Sir, for clarification, the owner of the park is here and the representative of the property that is responsible for the park is here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I assume, Mr. Snow, that that is the individual standing over here? MR. SNOW: That looks to be Mr. Sanders, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: Can I ask a question? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. MARINO: So he owns the park. He owns the slabs. He does not own the individual units. And you're saying that he's not responsible for those units; is that what you're trying to say? Is that what we're trying to get to? MR. BOATMAN: Yes, sir. MR. MARINO: But he does own the park and manages the park and is responsible for the park? Page 34 161 2Ad.- July 26, 2012 MR. BOATMAN: There is a Florida Statute that sort of steers that analysis, but that's right. Our contention is, he does own one of the units in the park, but not all of the units in the park. MR. MARINO: But he owns the park, the property, the slabs -- MR. BOATMAN: The slabs. MR. MARINO: -- and doesn't own -- but he's responsible for the entire property and what goes on in the entire property. He's, like, the manager/owner, is that what it is? MR. BOATMAN: That's right, that's right. MR. MARINO: I need that clarification. So he it responsible for it, okay. MR. BOATMAN: Yeah. He operates under a state permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Are we finished with the units or what? MS. SCAVONE: No. Can you bring the one -- the last one back. This is a bus that would not be under the definitions of a mobile home trailer that you would live in. Again, these are carports and porches without permits. Carports and permit -- without permits. Porches, no permits. Fence without a permit. Porches, carports, no permits. Fence. Again, same picture. There's porches without permits. Attachment to the back. That's one of the wider views of the park. And sheds without permits. That's, again, a wider view of the park road. Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's the extent of the photos that you have? MS. SCAVONE: For the photos, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Also, into evidence, Collier County zoning ordinance from 1965. Basically, it's just to establish in history that permits were required on Page 28. Number 7 stating that a permit shall be required for installation of a mobile home or trailer and the construction of any structure, appendix thereto. It's just, again, like I Page 35 161 2A � July 26, 2012 said, for history reasons that we've always required permits. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Who is responsible for obtaining that permit? MS. SCAVONE: The property owner. The next exhibit is the State of Florida health records. And, again, this is just for historical reasons, that it was the original permit for the application to operate a tourist trailer camp located at the East Naples Trailer Park, October 1965 -- I'm sorry, '56. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's hard to read that. MS. SCAVONE: Next exhibit is case law opinion of the Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, the second to last page. And just basically, again, it is explaining her opinion of serving the property owner notice on parks such as this. Do you want me to read it? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just read No. 11 . I can -- MS. SCAVONE: Thus, it would appear that local code provisions defining a violator to include the owner of the property owner which code violations exist would not be preempted or conflict with the terms of Part 1, Chapter 162, Florida Statute. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Case evidence, Land Development Code, Chapter 9, just explaining, basically, how to get permits on nonconforming properties and that they are required. And lastly is our code violation determination from our building official and chief structural inspector, and this is basically just being used as collateral evidence of our opinion that there is a violation that exists on the property. If-- and also that if the owner wants to keep structures in place, all necessary permits shall be applied for from the Department of Health and the building department, or the applicant wants to remove any work which was done without a permit, a demolition would be required. Page 36 161 2A � July 26, 2012 MR. BOATMAN: May I ask a question, briefly, regarding that, before I make an objection? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. BOATMAN: Was there an inspection done by the gentleman that signed that paper of the subject property? MS. SCAVONE: They do their investigations. I don't know what they do on their end. This is our determination, which I would assume that he's done his due diligence. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. I would object to that opinion being brought in without my opportunity to cross-examine the person regarding their opinion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SNOW: If I may. This is just corroborating our opinion. This is not hearsay evidence. We're allowed to submit this. It's just corroborating what we have suggested, what we presented. It's not hearsay. Other testimony probably is not needed in this venue because it's just corroborating. We can submit that. That's all this is. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: I stand by my objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. And I'd just like to ask the property owner some questions, Mr. Sanders. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MS. SCAVONE: Mr. Sanders, you are the property owner? MR. SANDERS: Yes, I am. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. MR. BOATMAN: I object. What property are you asking about? MS. SCAVONE: You are the property owner of Folio No. 5615020005 and 56150520002; location: 2280 Pineland Ave., Naples, Florida? Page 37 1 2 uy26, 20 MR. BOATMAN: Just the real property, not the personal property? MS. SCAVONE: That -- as the property owner of those folio numbers. MR. SANDERS: Yes, I am. MS. SCAVONE: Do you receive income from any of the tenants to that property? MR. SANDERS: Yes, I do. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. And do they pay on a weekly or monthly rent cycle? MR. BOATMAN: I would object to the relevance of this line of questioning. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. I'm just trying to determine that he has control over the property and what he subjects to what's going on, on the property. Do they have your permission to be at the property, the renters in the trailers? MR. BOATMAN: I would object, but you can go ahead and answer. MR. SANDERS: If we object, we object. MS. SCAVONE: Do the tenants that are on -- that are living in the mobile homes on the property, do they have your permission to be on that property? MR. SANDERS: Yes, yes. MS. SCAVONE: Yes. Okay. So you -- if there were any benefits -- you would be able to control what's going on in that property as the property owner, correct? MR. BOATMAN: I would object. That calls for a legal conclusion. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. Again, I'm just trying to determine that he does have control over what's going on, on the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any other questions? Page 38 161 2Ac - July 26, 2012 MS. SCAVONE: I don't have any questions at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have a question? MR. MARINO: Do these people have leases with you? MR. SANDERS: Yes. MR. MARINO: Monthly, PLE? MR. SANDERS: I think we just objected to that. They're actually annual leases. MS. SCAVONE: So. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: County's -- MS. SCAVONE: At this time the violation does remain. Did you want to hear the recommendation? No, okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Try to keep this as simple as possible. MR. BOATMAN: Trust me, you don't know how much time I've spent trying to keep it simple. But, really, from a real property and from a governance standpoint, it's really an interesting and fascinating issue. And whenever you hear an attorney say that, it's bad news for whosever got to listen or who's got to pay, for that matter. But in the simplest terms, here's what we're dealing with. Mr. Sanders has been brought before this board as an owner of a piece of real property that's permitted through the state. There are things that are situated on the property. It's the things that are situated on the property that the county is unhappy about. And there's a disconnect between the ownership and regulation of this versus this. In a nutshell, that's the issue. So even if Mr. Marino or somebody else -- really, they've looked at the pictures, they kind of-- they've just got a feel in their bones that there's something wrong here; even if this is the right thing to do, it's not being done right. That's kind of the gist of where I am. So before I can even get to the stage of peeling the layers of the onion on the relative codes and whether this is an RV, they're just Page 39 161 2A2- July 26, 2012 calling it a mobile home. They're RVs. If you look at the state permit, it's all permitted RVs. The state looked at it six months ago, and they're all RVs. Case law suggested if you take an RV and you start attaching stuff to it, I don't care if it sits there for eight years and sinks like this into the ground, you don't change it into a mobile home. You'll see that case in our materials, and it's Sunshine Key Association versus Monroe, and I think it's an important place to start. In that case, which is a Third DCA case, the Court is reasoning. And it says the following thing: As conceded by the park, some owners had affixed sheds, porches, and other attachments to their vehicles inhibiting their road-ready capabilities. I think we've seen that that's occurred at the park. This explains why at on-site inspection the trial judge observed vehicles which she concluded were not readily movable. However, as the park points out, if classified as RVs, these additions would be code violation by the individual owners and, thus, should not be determinative of the classification of these vehicles when not so encumbered. So it goes back to let's get the right party before this board; that way we don't have to go through an appeal and all the other stuff. Let's just back off, figure out who the unit owners are, and then it also improves the process, because there are several of these situated. One of them might have a relatively modest bit of renovation or modification to be done for it to be compliant. Another may have to just go altogether. But it does no good to paint with these broad brush strokes, as has been done over here. And I understand. They -- they're dealing with this big onion, as I am, and they're doing the best they can, and they've been very professional in the undertaking in terms of my interaction with them. But I think we need to step back and do it the right way so that Page 40 161 2 A d- July 26, 2012 we don't get into a situation where you're trying to correct things, but we've started out on such a wrong foot that, from a legal standpoint, it's not enforceable. That doesn't do anybody any good. The state already kind of saw this coming, because where all this drives from is a public policy. Public policy was that we want people with RVs to come into the state and be able to drive from county to county and not have to deal with this localized sort of, well, that's not how we do it in Lee County. You can't do that. So once you have your permit with the state and your pad and your -- these guys are inspected every six months. I mean, I don't know many businesses -- well, there's several businesses that are inspected -- but property owners are inspected every six months. As part of your package, you will see -- the package that I've given you -- MS. BAKER: Mr. Boatman, we have to admit that into evidence. It hasn't been given to the board. MR. BOATMAN: Oh. It's been distributed, but not -- oh, okay. MS. BAKER: It hasn't been distributed to them. MR. BOATMAN: My bad. So let me lead you through some of that so you can see that there's a state observer in this situation, and they are vested by the legislature with the responsibility of making sure his pads and his part of the fee simple is compliant, okay. On top of that, they have specific preemption language in Chapter 513 that says, if there's any issues vis-a-vis the landlord and the tenant in a RV or mobile home situation, counties, you can't get involved at all. State preempts that. That gets into the very issue where she was inquiring, couldn't you hold these people enforceable -- accountable? It's not for him to do that, and the state has made a specific regime for that not to occur, because if that occurs, all of a sudden -- the county violates him, and now he's got to be the county code enforcement person in kicking the people out. That's not how it's supposed to be. It's supposed to be the Department of Health, through Page 41 161 2A ?- July 26, 2012 assistance with code, if code is relative, and they're supposed to violate the specific -- either it's -- most of these are motor vehicles. They have DMV tags on them. They're not real property. And you can't change them into being real property just by adding stuff onto them. That's what the case law says. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are you saying that these vehicles are registered? MR. BOATMAN: I'm saying the county has not put on any evidence to suggest they are or they aren't. It is my understanding that -- we can testify that at least certain of them are registered. Is that accurate? MR. SANDERS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And what I hear you saying is that the owner of the park is responsible for the slab, but what -- but not what's on it. MR. BOATMAN: Right. The person drives up, and they plug into electricity. They have a plug that they plug in; they plug into sewage. It's just like a campground. That's all -- this is -- these are just glorified campers that have been sitting there so long that they've sort of molded into their environment, but that was -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: When was the last time one of them was moved out of the park? MR. SANDERS: 2010. MR. BOATMAN: 2010. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So they've been there since that time? I have a question regarding taxes on this. Obviously, square footage has been added to these units. I'm not getting into who's responsible for it, but I'm assuming that if square footage has been added, there should be a taxable amount that comes with that. Jean, would you say that the county looks at that, they don't look at that? MS. RAWSON: I don't know whether the county looks at it or Page 42 16L 2A � July 26, 2012 not but, you know, you can ask the respondent about the taxes on the property. MR. BOATMAN: Mr. Kaufman, if I may -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. BOATMAN: -- assist your analysis. Okay. I would like to go ahead and submit my first exhibit, which is the top page in the materials you've been provided. MS. BAKER: They haven't been provided yet. MR. BOATMAN: That they haven't seen yet. I apologize. I'm slow. MS. BAKER: But they've got to -- do you want to submit the whole packet as a whole? They can accept the whole packet as evidence. MR. BOATMAN: That would be good, unless these guys are going to give me a hard time like I gave them. MS. BAKER: The county's already seen it, and they have no objection. MR. BOATMAN: Oh. MS. SCAVONE: No objection. MR. BOATMAN: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So I'll make a motion to accept the packet. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept the packet. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 43 161 2 A 0— July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: Would you like me just to put them up on the screen? MR. BOATMAN: That would be very helpful, Jen. I appreciate it. MS. BAKER: Which -- the first page. MR. BOATMAN: Yes, ma'am. MS. BAKER: The property appraiser? MR. BOATMAN: Yes. Okay. This document is, obviously, a public record. Everybody probably recognizes what that is. It defines the tax situation, the property-tax situation on the lot. And as you will see, there's a land value of forty-nine, five. The improved value is zero. There's no improvements on this land. It's the same with the other folio. We thought we had both folios. But it's a matter of public record. There is zero improvements. To further support that position, if you will go to the email from Ernie Kerskie, which is just a couple pages away, which I would like to submit as my second. Relatively early on in this undertaking when my client was really trying to figure out why have I been -- why has this park been here since '56 and all of a sudden -- he was trying to orient himself to the viability of the code enforcement action, and he was looking for assistance by Ernie Kerskie. The property appraiser response, after listing the folio numbers -- and this is in the third full paragraph -- the properties are both assessed as vacant and the improvements, parenthetical, mobile homes, are considered motor vehicle. So this gets back to this. We're here really talking about this. As soon as we start talking about this, we need to talk to somebody else. These -- his property is vacant land as far as the county's concerned, and they know what's there, as far as the taxing authority's concerned. And I just wanted to address that, because I thought that was what you were asking about. Page 44 161 2 A 9- July 26, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: Does your client only own one of the units? MR. BOATMAN: To my knowledge. MR. SANDERS: Yes, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: You do not own any of the other units? MR. SANDERS: No. MR. L'ESPERANCE: They're all individually owned by different people? MR. SANDERS: They're all individually owned, yes, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do you have common restrooms or laundry facilities, a permanent fracture? MR. SANDERS: No, sir, because it's under the 25 units; it's not required. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are there any children living there in the park? MR. SANDERS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do they attend school? MR. SANDERS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do they pay school taxes? MR. SANDERS: I don't know what they pay, other than under property taxes. I just pay the real property taxes. I'm responsible for the real property from what I understand, and each individual property owner is individually assessed their own taxes on their license plate or the decal sticker. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So there's a community there that has men, women, and children living there that pay no taxes; no school taxes, no real estate taxes, but they are provided all the services that Collier County offers; am I correct in that? MR. BOATMAN: I would suggest not, sir. The State of Florida recovers taxes on these RV parks. And it's my understanding that the county does receive funding from the State of Florida. And in this -- Page 45 x. 61 2A9- July 26, 2012 the trajectory of this analysis is a public policy analysis and if-- that's not one that's going to yield a good outcome, I would suggest. Because if that were the case, you would have local governments squeezing out the mobile home units in parks, and that gets into a real difficult situation with regard to Chapter 513 and Chapter 723. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, I'm not trying to do any analysis. I'm just asking questions. MR. MARINO: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Question. MR. MARINO: The people that are living in those particular units, do they own those units or they lease them from somebody else? MR. SANDERS: That I'm really not positive of. MR. MARINO: Well, I think he should know. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What are the rules that govern -- MR. SNOW: Gentlemen, let's focus on the issue at hand, okay. We have a property. Any property, whether it's multiple units or single units -- and let me make a clarification here where counsel's trying to lead you. All the state does is regulate operations of that park. That has to do with electric, that has to do with -- make sure the trash is picked up, that has to make sure -- that's making sure that the electric is the way it should be. They have nothing to do with our local codes. If it was a singular property or there's one or two units on a property or it's multifamily, it still requires building permits. That's the issue. It doesn't matter who owns it. He owns the property where those mobile homes sit. That's the issue. We don't know who's in those mobile homes. We don't know if the owners of those mobile homes rent them to somebody else. They're on his property. State statutes dictate he's responsible. Pam Bondi, who's the attorney general for the State of Florida, says that we can serve him. These folios are owned by him. I don't understand what the contention is. Page 46 1b1 z9- July 26, 2012 Every -- even if you rent a home, you rent a home to somebody, you have a tenant there, you're still responsible. The only person that can pull a permit for a property is with the authorization of that property owner or a contractor that's been authorized by that. That's it. That's it. He's on the rolls of the tax -- from the tax collector as the responsible party for paying taxes. Thank you. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Sanders, your leases that you have for these individual units, are they with the individuals, the tenants living in the units or the owners of the RVs? MR. SANDERS: It would be the individual tenants. MR. MARINO: Who's the tenant? What's the definition of a tenant? Is it the person -- the tenant that owns -- the person that owns the -- I need this for my own clarification. The person that owns that mobile unit, is he the tenant, or is the person living in the unit the tenant? MR. SANDERS: I would believe the person living in the unit would be the tenant. MR. BOATMAN: So just to understand, is your tenant the owner of the thing that's -- is the owner of this your -- the person you do business with? MR. SANDERS: You know, I believe it could be, but it doesn't necessarily mean it is, because if you borrowed a vehicle and moved it in, that -- and I rented you a space -- MR. BOATMAN: So you're just -- MR. SANDERS: -- I don't really know who owns the unit. MR. BOATMAN: Okay. So he's just renting out the pad, and so he doesn't necessarily know who owns the motor vehicle sitting on the pad. MR. MARINO: Don't you think that he should know? MR. BOATMAN: Well, there's no -- MR. MARINO: The violations and everything else, don't you Page 47 161 2A 2- July 26, 2012 think he should know? MS. SCAVONE: According to the state statutes, the rolls, that he's supposed to know who's registered in that park. MR. BOATMAN: Well, he knows who's registered in the park. It's the person who's renting the unit from him. MS. SCAVONE: Again, I'd just like to bring back the attention that we're talking about additions and alterations; not that specific mobile home, but the additions and alterations that were attached to those mobile homes that are on the ground; where, as I stated before in 15C-2.0081, that, you know, any additions and alterations, they have to be freestanding, and they are locally -- have to be in compliance with state and local codes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me just -- this is not the first mobile park that we've heard. As a matter of fact, one -- I remember a case that's no more than a mile away from here. And our major concern with that was electrical. If a violation, a safety hazard exists, you're saying that he has no responsibility for it? MR. BOATMAN: He may. If the -- for instance, if in one of his pedestals where there's a plug-in that's state defined in terms of how this pedestal's presented, if he -- if the state walks through there the next time, which will probably be in two months, and they don't like the way the pedestal's configured or there's an issue, they tell him to clean it up. One thing that I would like to add at this juncture to my evidence is -- the top of it says the State of Florida Department of Health, county health department, and it's a stapled number of pages together. We just picked some random samples of some Department of Health inspections of the property. See, there is somebody -- one of the things that it would appear that you're concerned with is this notion that if we don't do something and something terrible happens, it's going to be back on our plate. The something terrible happens vis-a-vis this gentleman is the Page 48 1. b1 2A2- July 26, 2012 pads and the pedestals. And the state -- the Department of Health even looks at issues beyond that. If you look at the front page of it, for instance, comments and instruction: Remove sink and refrigerator from carport, remove plywood and propane tanks. And they go through and they do a physical inspection. And it also includes a review of the electrical components of the pedestal. Now, if the people that drive up there and plug something in and do something with their unit that's not lawful, pursuant to Florida Statute 723.023, which is entitled "mobile home owner's general obligations" -- we're not conceding that these are even mobile homes, but if they are, then let's look at that statute. That statute specifically says that mobile homeowners shall comply with all obligations imposed on mobile home owners by applicable provisions of building, housing, and health codes. The buck is supposed to stop with the people that own it. He is not -- it's not supposed to become a mini fiefdom. You can imagine why that is the case, because you could have a heavy handed -- see, we're kind of looking -- these policy decisions are made from these global perspectives, and you have all of these interests coming in, and you find this balance. If it was, in fact, his obligation to take the baton from you and beat these people into submission, you can see how that could be abused. You would be empowering him, in fact, to suggest to people you have to do X, Y, and Z. You have to pay me, you have to do -- that's what they didn't want to have happen. And so they gave the obligation directly to the owner to take responsibility for that vehicle, and if they don't, guess what, the state comes and tows it out of there or they lose their right to have it. And so 723.024 goes on to suggest that if a unit of local government finds that a violation of local code or ordinance has occurred, the unit of local government shall cite the responsible party for the violation. A lien, penalty, fine, or administrative or civil Page 49 161 2Ag' July 26, 2012 proceeding may not be brought against a mobile park owner for violations by the -- of the duties of the mobile home owner. I mean, that's Chapter 723.024. They've already thought about this very conundrum that we're facing. MR. L'ESPERANCE: May I pause you there for a moment? MR. BOATMAN: Yes, sir. MR. SNOW: Gentlemen, hold on -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: At the bottom of this page, it says "mail to owner." Who is the owner? MR. BOATMAN: Of what page? MR. L'ESPERANCE: The page that's on the screen. Who's the owner that they mailed that to? MR. SANDERS: That would be me. MR. L'ESPERANCE: They mailed these findings to you? MR. BOATMAN: That's right. MR. L'ESPERANCE: For an individual unit? MR. SANDERS: This was for the trailer park, East Naples Trailer Park. It's a health inspection, and on the -- MR. SNOW: Gentlemen, all that is, is an operational inspection. It has nothing to do with any health and safety issues that are prevalent with unpermitted additions. Any rental property in unincorporated Collier County, the property owner is responsible, but this is no different. This is no different than any other mobile home park we've been through. The property owner is responsible. He's on the tax rolls as paying the taxes for this property. Whatever happens on that property, he's responsible for. The statute dictates that. Statutes -- there's precedence all over that said that the property owner's responsible, and that's what we're talking about here. We're talking about illegal additions, period. MR. L'ESPERANCE: My next question is for Jean. MS. RAWSON: Yes. Page 50 16 % 2A9- July 26, 2012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I think you want to perhaps -- you look like you've got some recommendations that you might want to give us. MS. RAWSON: Well, this is a very interesting case, and -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes. MS. RAWSON: -- I can't tell you guys how to rule. MR. L'ESPERANCE: True. MS. RAWSON: You're going to have to decide whether he, as the owner of the -- as Mr. Boatman called it -- the dirt is responsible for the persons who own -- which is probably personal property, because they're RVs -- if he's responsible for their violations as the owner of the dirt. I mean, that's really what it comes down to. The county is telling you, yes, he is. This is no different from any of the other mobile home cases that you've heard. So you can wrestle with that decision. There are good arguments on both sides, but I can't tell you how to rule. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Understand. Is this the correct venue for that consideration? MS. RAWSON: You have to decide -- your duty as Code Enforcement Board is to decide whether or not there has been a violation of this ordinance as cited and -- it's more than one. The -- he's being charged with having approximately 12 mobile homes installed with several additions added to the mobile homes consisting of carports, screen porches, roofs-over, and living space below flood level with electrical and plumbing without first obtaining all required building permits. That's the Statement of Violation. So you have to determine whether or not Mr. Sanders, as the owner of these -- this property that's in these two folios, is the violator. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. MS. SCAVONE: May I ask a question? I just wanted -- the evidence as presented up at the board right now, that you are inferring that, Mr. Sanders, you were the property owner that received this Page 51 161 2A July 26, 2012 report from the health department? MR. SANDERS: Yes. I'm regulated under the department of health. MS. SCAVONE: And you would regulate the item numbers at the bottom for each individual unit, that they would come into compliance with the state? MR. BOATMAN: I would object to the question, because the question presumes that these are associated with individual unit items. I object to the premise. MS. SCAVONE: I'm trying to determine who the -- it says mailed to the owner, and at top it says owner, Kirk Sanders. Is that inferring -- MR. MARINO: Well, I have a question on that, but to the bottom of the page. We've got violations here with things being built and everything else. You've got Item 20, replace missing skirting on -- I guess that's Unit 9, 13 and 7. If you replace the floorboard or a piece of wood, you need a permit for that. Who is responsible for replacing that missing skirting on those mobile units, and who does it? MR. SNOW: It wouldn't require a permit. MS. SCAVONE: The mobile units are per HUD standards built, and we don't regulate what's going on. We're talking about what's on the real property is what -- the things that -- needing permits, and additions. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Keep on going. I see where you're going. MR. MARINO: You know where I'm going? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, make a motion. MR. MARINO: Who takes care of all these -- who takes care of all these violations that you've got, the -- you as the owner of the property or the person that is renting that pad or leasing that pad? You've got "remove sink and refrigerator from carport." That's just a removal. You can remove plywood, but you've got things here that need to be replaced, which needs a permit to do that. If you're Page 52 161 ► ' July 26, 2012 replacing a poster on a banister or a railing, you need a permit. MR. SNOW: No, it's below a certain amount of money, Mr. Marino. No, you wouldn't have to do that. What we're trying to do is -- is from this report -- this report suggests that there's individual properties that have been -- that he's been cited for. We're trying to suggest that he is responsible for correcting those violations which -- from the state. The state doesn't regulate anything but operations. Again, this is a rental property. It doesn't matter how many units are on it. It's a rental property. The property owner's responsible. Now, there's a contention by council that these are all recreational vehicles. I would suggest they're not all recreational vehicles. I think there's some, but there's mobile homes on there, and there's manufactured homes on there. So I think that contention is not fully accurate either. MR. LAVINSKI: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we close the public hearing on this. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. I think we've talked this to death right now, and -- MR. LAVINSKI: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion, based on all the facts that I've seen and the statutes, that there is, in Page 53 161 aA , - July 26, 2012 fact, a violation on this property as stated. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I would second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. You know you're -- we find you in violation, and you know what the next steps are better than we do. MR. BOATMAN: Thank you, sir. May I ask at this juncture to just proffer my last pieces of evidence into the file? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MS. SCAVONE: May the county make a recommendation? MS. BAKER: Hold on. Jean, can he enter evidence after the public hearing is closed? MS. RAWSON: They'd have to re-open the public hearing in order for him to do that. He wants to make a proffer, but you have to re-open the public hearing because you've closed it and you already made the -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is this a verbal proffer or a simple documentation offering? MR. BOATMAN: I was just going to submit the documents that I had. And I didn't know we were wrapping up, so -- just -- I felt like the door just shut, and I want to make sure I slip in -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: So there'll be no argument with the proffer of the documents? MS. RAWSON: Well, I could be mistaken. The court reporter Page 54 161 ZAP July 26, 2012 will tell me if I am. But I believe he introduced the whole packet and you accepted it, so it's all -- MS. BAKER: Yes. MR. BOATMAN: Thank you, Jean, for that clarification. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you very much. MR. BOATMAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: Would you like the recommendation, Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, we would. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. The Code Enforcement Board orders that the respondent pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining any and all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within X amount of days of this hearing or a fine of X amount a day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody want to -- the costs are 41 -- 81.43? MS. BAKER: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we're looking for a time and fine. MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I'd like to make a motion that the administrative costs of 81.43 be paid within 30 days, that the compliance occur within 120 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 a day be imposed for the violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we Page 55 161 2A2- July 26, 2012 have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. MR. BOATMAN: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you. MS. SCAVONE: Thank you. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Short break, sir? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. We're going to take a 10-minute break. Be back at 45. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Code enforcement is back in session. MS. BAKER: Okay. Mr. Chairman, we have -- the next cases are No. 2 and No. 3 on the agenda, and the cases go hand in hand, and we had thought that we'd present these cases together; however, we have one respondent from one case and no respondent for the other case. So it's the same testimony for both cases. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: He just will be speaking on one of the property owner's behalf. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And then we'll vote separately on the individual cases. MS. BAKER: Yes. Okay. So I'll call the cases. The first is No. 2, Case CESD20120000114, Olympia Park RTL Building Page 56 161 2Aa- July 26, 2012 Development, LLC, and No. 3, Case CESD20120000116, VP Office Holdings, LLC. And we will read each Statement of Violation as well for both cases. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 6.06.03(A). Description of violation: Failure to install streetlight at north entry/exit at Vanderbilt Beach Road. Location/address where violation exists: 2400 Vanderbilt Beach Road, Naples, Florida, 34109; Folio No. 64630000021 . Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Olympia Park RTL Building Development, LLC, P.O. Box 25965, Shawnee Mission, Kansas, 66225, care of registered agent, R&P Property Management, 265 Airport Road South, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: January 4, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 19, 2012. Date on by/which violation to be corrected: February 13, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 24, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you give me the last three digits case number on the first one. MR. MARINO: 114. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 114? MR. MARINO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Did I hear you say 21, or I'm listening to a different number? MS. BAKER: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And the other 116. MS. CRAWLEY: VP Office Holdings, LLC, CESD20120000116. Page 57 161 2A July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Got it, okay. MS. CRAWLEY: Violation of ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 6.06.03(A). Description of violation: Failure to install streetlight at north entry/exit at Vanderbilt Beach Road. Location/address where violation exists: 2244 Venetian Court, Naples, Florida, 34109; Folio No. 237600008. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: VP Office Holdings LLC, 4600 Enterprise Avenue, Suite A, Naples, Florida, 34104. Care of registered agent: Richard L. Armalavage, 2240 Venetian Court, Naples, Florida, 34109. Date violation first observed: January 4, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 17, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 13, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 24, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: David? MR. JONES: Good afternoon. MS. BAKER: Good morning. MR. JONES: As I explained -- good -- thank you. As I explain further, you'll see how these two cases coincide. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: There's two separate lights, by the way? MR. JONES: No. It's just one light. So at the southwest corner of Airport Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road there's a PUD known as Olympia Park PUD, Walgreens PUD, and there was another one. Anyway, there's an entrance/exit at this PUD, and the entrance/exit butts up to Vanderbilt Beach Road. And according to the Collier County LDC, a streetlight needs to be installed at all street entrance intersects. Page 58 161 2A 4?- July 26, 2012 This Olympia Park Boulevard happens to be a shared access agreement between Olympia Park, which the gentleman here is representing, and Venetia PUD. So that's why they're together. If one doesn't do it, they're both at fault for not having the streetlight there because it's a shared access agreement between the two of them, and that's the gist of the case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's like a marriage. MR. JONES: Yes, yes, very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We'll try the husband first, and then we'll go to the wife. MR. CARROLL: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. CARROLL: On behalf of Olympia Park, we want to thank you and let you know that the board -- the board was put into place in the spring of this year. As such, they were handed two lawsuits internally at the same time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Let me stop you for one second. Could you just give your name for the record. MR. CARROLL: Oh, sorry. Glenn Carroll, R&P Property Management, property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Great, thank you. MR. CARROLL: What the board is requesting is some time. We have been working with David trying to contact the other party. Our revenue was cut in half due to one of the lawsuits for the distribution of maintenance fees. In addition, we also had a delinquency and are now served with an additional lawsuit that we're defending. So, financially, we don't have the resources to put or even attempt to put a streetlight up, but what the board wants to do is to see if we can find the "wife" and work together to come together with some kind of financial means with which we can do this. We have tried on a number of occasions, even going to the Page 59 161 2 A V-- July 26, 2012 address, as you have just heard, to see if we could find somebody to at least deal with us face to face. We have been unsuccessful in that, as I believe the county has as well in getting a response. We're just asking for some time to get our finances in line and to get our lawsuit settled, and then we can go forward. MR. L'ESPERANCE: What is your estimate as to the cost of the installation of this light? MR. CARROLL: We had gotten three bids. The cheapest one we've gotten so far is $4,500. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. First we need to find if the respondent is in violation or not. MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion that a violation does exist. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. A violation exists. Now, how much time do you think you'd need to -- MR. CARROLL: We were asking for six months because we think the lawsuit should be settled by then. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Is it a safety, David, item? MR. JONES: In my personal opinion, I would not consider it a viable safety issue at this point. It's -- you know, there hasn't been any incidents at this entry/exit point. There is a clear sight -- line of traffic right now, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would you have any problem with six months? Page 60 161 2A - July 26, 2012 MR. JONES: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'm looking for a motion from the board. MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion, six months, 180 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MS. BAKER: You need the fine amount. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, fine per day after that? MS. BAKER: Did we read the recommendation? Let's read the recommendation first. MR. JONES: I'll read the recommendation, then you fill in the blanks, and we'll just go from there. And I didn't state my name for the record either. David Jones, Collier County Code Enforcement. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll make you stay after. MR. JONES: Okay. The recommendations are as follows: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Install all required arterial lighting and obtain any necessary permits, inspections, and certificate of completion for the installation of arterial lighting within blank days of this hearing or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated, and also the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, that county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So if I understand your Page 61 161 2Aa July 26, 2012 suggestion -- MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion that he pays the amount of $80.86 within 30 days, extension of 180 days or a fine of$100 a day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. LAVINSKI: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It carries 3-1 . MS. BAKER: Okay. So -- MR. LAVINSKI: I voted no. I think the time is too long, but the amount of money is not that great, and those operations for PUDs certainly have special assessment powers, and I think it could be done a lot quicker than six months. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: Okay. So that was for the first case, for CESD20120000114, Olympia Park. So now we need to do Case CESD20120000116, VP Office Holdings, LLC. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. JONES: And the case is -- mirrors, you know, what we just discussed. So if you'd like, I could just read the recommendations as well. There's a difference in cost in the operational costs for this other entity, so I'll just read this again and then you can provide the -- MS. BAKER: Don't read it. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Jean, that would be proper to proceed in Page 62 161 2A9- July 26, 2012 that fashion? MS. RAWSON: Yes, because you have to have two different orders. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. MR. JONES: Are you ready? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. JONES: And this is in regards to owner, which is VP Office Holdings, LLC, that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: Install all required arterial lighting and obtain any necessary permits, inspections, and certificate of completion for the installation of arterial lighting within blank days of this hearing or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated. Also, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. So you just want to do the same -- okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. Motion from the board? MR. MARINO: I'm not taking it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll take it. The fine is $80? MR. JONES: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Within 30 days, the days are 180, and the fine is $100 a day. I have a comment to make. In cases like this where -- for whatever reason the respondent, in this case, this particular respondent, has been unavailable. You've been unable to reach him? MR. JONES: I have. I've tried numerous attempts, and I've not Page 63 x. 61 2A � July 26, 2012 been able to reach (sic) contact with him. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Because I'm certainly of the mindset to make them an offer where it probably will -- if this case comes back in six months and they're still unavailable, I think we can probably adjust the penalty accordingly. MR. JONES: I agree, at that time, yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second your motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hold on a second. You have a question? MR. MARINO: Could there have been two different penalties and two different times? MS. BAKER: Well, they're cases that go hand in hand. They have to work together to install the streetlight. So the time frame should be the same as you did for the other case. If you want to put a different fine amount, that's up to you, but to be consistent -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: I suggest that we mirror them. MR. MARINO: Well, the only reason I'm saying that is that you're having trouble reaching the second party, but the first party you haven't had any trouble reaching or communicating with them? MR. JONES: No, I haven't. And, hopefully, they'll be the ones that install the streetlight and we can just get this -- MR. MARINO: I'm saying maybe if you do it the other way with the other people, we could push them into -- that's just a suggestion. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second your motion, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 64 161 2Ar July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. LAVINSKI: Opposed? No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One opposed. MR. LAVINSKI: Based on the time allocation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You may -- you have been unable to reach these folks -- let them know of our displeasure with them not working together with the other organization. MR. JONES: Okay, I will. Thanks. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Okay. Next case we move to old business, No. 5, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens. Number 1, Case CES20110006426, Carlisle Wilson Plaza, LLC. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. LETOURNEAU: Good morning. For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The original violation is of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 5.06.11(A)(1) and 5.06.07(A). Violation location is 50 Wilson Boulevard, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 37221120305. Violation description: Pole sign, Wilson Plaza altered without required permit. Wall sign, The Farmer Jack Supermarket altered without required permit. Past order: On January 19, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 546, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of July 26, 2012. The fines and costs are -- to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period Page 65 161 2A July 26, 2012 between February 19, 2012, and July 26, 2012, totaling 159 days, for a total amount of$15,900. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $15,980.57. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with them at all? MR. LETOURNEAU: I have been in contact, actually. I talked to the -- I believe the property manager last month and told him that they need to come -- you know, do -- at least get a demo permit or get the -- whatever the sign is up there at this time to be permitted, and they haven't made a move since then. So I don't really know what their issue is at this point. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thanks, Jeff. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case is No. 3, Case CESD20100021657, Fifth Third Mortgage Company. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow. This concerns CEB Case No. CESD20100021657, Board of Collier Commission (sic), Page 66 161 2A 9' July 26, 2012 County Commissioners versus Fifth Third Mortgage Company. The violation is Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article II of the Florida Building Code, adoption (sic) and amended of the Florida Building Code, Sections 22-26(b)(104.5.1 .4.4) Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 1, permits, Section 105.1, and Ordinance 04-41, the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(A). The location is 3420 Caloosa Street, Naples, Florida, 34112; folio number is 74412600008. And the description is Permit 2009100320, expired and has been canceled, leaving additions, alterations on residence unpermitted and incomplete. Past orders: On May 26, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, a conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4690, Page 258, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 22, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate -- at the rate of$200 per day for a period between September 24, 2011, and June 22, 2012, 273 days, for a total of$54,600. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of 84.01 have been paid. Total fine amount to date is $54,600. The county recommends abatement of the fines, as the violation is abated and operational costs paid. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to abate. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 67 161 2A2-- July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. SNOW: Thank the board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It was worth the wait. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 4, Case CESD20110009946, Carlos Rego Rivers. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. I was actually going to let Mr. Rivers go first because I think he has a request that he wants to ask of you guys. MR. RIVERS: Okay. My name is Carlos Rivers. I have to legalize the lanai. And the only reason I'm denied -- I'm 95 percent done. I have the picture right here -- it's a budget problem. My hand get hurt last week, and no can finish at this time. So I ask, you know, like 45 days to -- get complete. I already have here inspection for footing final. The footing already has a letter from my engineer; I already have here. I finish some part of the job. It's a letter for the engineer. Now I have to go for the final inspection for, you know, the okay. That's all. MR. L'ESPERANCE: You're requesting 45 days extension, sir? MR. RIVERS: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Give us a shout. MR. MUCHA: I was going to say, I think, you know, what he was trying to get at, he's real close to coming into compliance, so he was just wanting some additional time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Since this is an imposition of fines, what's the best way to accomplish granting some additional time? Page 68 161 2A 9' July 26, 2012 MS. BAKER: You can go ahead and grant them the extension of time. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant this individual 90 days extension of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have 90 days. I hope your hand is better by then and you can finish it all up by then. MR. RIVERS: All right. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Thank you for your patience today. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 5, CEAU20110000498, Matthew Arsenault and Christina Arsenault. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The original violation is of the Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, permits, Section 105.1 . Violation location is 105 6th Street Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 37226440006. Violation description was a white fence surrounding the property and a brown wooden fence next to the principal structure. Past orders: On January 19, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent Page 69 161 2 Ar July 26, 2012 was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4760, Page 660, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 28, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$100 per day for the period between March 21, 2012, to March 28, 2012, 8 days, for the total amount of$800. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.29 have been paid. Total amount to date, $800. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated and operational costs are paid. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you, Jeff. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 6, Case CESD20110003169, Kimberly M. Fry. And on this case you also have received a letter from Ms. Fry, so if you need a chance to review that. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. McGONAGLE: Ready? Page 70 161 2Ag- July 26, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yep, shoot. MS. McGONAGLE: For the record, Investigator Michele McGonagle, Collier County Code Enforcement. Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.0206(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06 (B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Location: 6025 English Oaks Lane, Naples, Florida, 34119; Folio No. 41883680004. Description: Converted the downstairs utility room into living space and added a room on the upstairs deck, both without first obtaining proper Collier County permits. Past orders: On June 23, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4698, Page 1356, for more information. An extension of time was granted on February 23, 2012. See the attached order of the board, OR4772, Page 1293, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of July 26, 2012. Fines and costs to date are described as follows: Order Items No. 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$200 per day for the period between June 23, 2012, July 26, 2012, 34 days, for the total of$6,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order No. 5, operation costs of$80.57 have been paid. Total amount to date: $6,800. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you been in contact with the respondent? MS. McGONAGLE: I have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there any reason why the respondent is not here today? Page 71 16I aik9 July 26, 2012 MS. McGONAGLE: That I'm not sure. I had talked to her roommate, and he wasn't sure if she was going to be able to make it. I know she does have some health challenges. She had sent the letter but, there again, she didn't ask for another extension or anything. The last I spoke to her, she basically just is throwing her hands up and doesn't have the money to do it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And I see that 120 days was granted in February. And according to this, the -- I guess the bank is -- looks like the bank is going after her as well. I don't know if granting any -- anything other than imposing the fine would help. MR. LAVINSKI: It doesn't appear there's -- in my reading the letter or anything else, that there's any hope that this is going to be corrected. So as of today the violation sits there and exists. I make a motion to impose the fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) MS. McGONAGLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. BAKER: Next case is Case No. 7, Case CESD20100008561, Jose L. Perez and Isabel Perez. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: Once again, for the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The original violation is of the Collier County Land Page 72 16I 2A - July 26, 2012 Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Location of violation: 110 Wilson Boulevard South, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 37221090008. Violation description: No Collier County permits obtained or inspections and certificate of completion for the pool and pool screen enclosure. Past order: On February 23, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4772, Page 1289, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of July 26, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between June 23, 2012, and July 26, 2012, totaling 34 days for the total amount of$5,100. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $5,180.86. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 8, Case CESD20110010712, Page 73 16t 2A9- July 26, 2012 Manuel Olvera. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. The original violation is of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Violation location is 1823 43rd Street Southwest, Naples, 34116; Folio No. is 35765240002. Violation description is a permit for reroof that was canceled without completing all inspections and a conversion of a garage to living space without permits. Past orders: On February 23, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4772, Page 1310, for more information. As of today, the property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of July 26, 2012. Fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item 1 and 2, fines at a rate of$250 per day for the period between June 23, 2012, and July 26, 2012, 34 days, for a total of$8,500. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.29 have not been paid. Total amount to date is 8,580.29. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to impose. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 74 161 2A?' July 26, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Let's go. MS. BAKER: And the last case is No. 10, Case CEPM20110003139, CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. LETOURNEAU: For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. The original violation is of the Florida Building Code, 2007 edition, Chapter 4, Section 424.2.17. Violation location: 561 2nd Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 37281720004. The violation description: No protective barrier surrounding the swimming pool. Past order: On October 27, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinance and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4734, Page 2797, for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of March 8, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between November 27, 2011, and March 8, 2012, 103 days, for a total amount of$20,600. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$80.86 have been paid. Total amount to the date: $20,680.86. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated, and operational costs are paid. Page 75 161 2 Po- July 26, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to abate. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you, Jeff. Which now brings us to reports. Do we have any reports today? MS. BAKER: Not today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have no reports today. Not many people to hear the reports that we don't have, so it's okay. Next meeting is August 23, 2012. Anybody have anything else to discuss? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes. Mr. Chairman, I will not be able to attend the August 23rd meeting, and no need to deliver the packet. MS. BAKER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's a good idea. You're saving county money. Very nice. MS. RAWSON: I hope some of our other members will be able to attend in August. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They'll be here. We'll make them an offer they can't refuse. MR. MARINO: And I suggest that we use a timer from now on, on some of these things. Page 76 Y 1 �Ju 26?--.. A3" 012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll be the timer. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The chairman is the timer. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Except not in August. MR. MARINO: You get an iPhone, you get your seconds. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Make a motion that we adjourn. MR. MARINO: Are you sure? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. If you want to vote against it, that's possible. MR. MARINO: I'll third it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We are adjourned. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :20 a.m. CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD 411/1■ 0,:iiddirmiriti P • BERT i= 'AN, CHAIRMAN These rites approved by the Board on 4 ; A .,. s presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER. Page 77 August 23, 2012 161 ear TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida August 23, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Robert Kaufman Larry Mieszcak Kenneth Kelly (Absent) James Lavinski Gerald Lefebvre Lionel L'Esperance (Excused) Tony Marino Ron Doino (Alternate) Chris Hudson (Alternate-late) ALSO PRESENT: Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Board. Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Colleen Crawley, Code Enforcement Associate Page 1 August 23, 2012 161 2Ac-- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, everybody. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation, unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak on any item will receive up to five unless the time is adjusted by the Chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Roberts Rules of Order, speak one at a time so that,the court reporter can record the statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record indicates (sic) the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. And can we have the roll call? MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Present. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Ronald Doino, Jr.? MR. DOINO: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Larry Mieszcak? MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance has an excused absence, and Mr. Chris Hudson and Mr. Ken Kelly are absent. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And that means that Ron will Page 2 August 23, 2012 161 2A9- be a voting member of the board. MR. MIESZCAK: You got that? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You got that? MR. DOINO: Got that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any agenda ‘x changes? MS. CRAWLEY: Under four, public hearings/motions,,,-A, motions, motion for continuance, there are two additions: Iumber one is number five from hearings, Iris Labrie, Case CESD201 X0016035. The second addition under motion for continuance is number two from hearings: Steve and Alice Poseley, CESD20120001351. Under motion for extension of time, we also have two additions. The first one is Martha Menendez Cruz, Case CESD20110014160. The second is number nine from imposition of fines: Oslay Fernandez, Case CESD20110014115. Under C, hearings, number three, Case CESD20110016681, KRG 951 and 41 LLC has been withdrawn. Number six, Case CESD20110012040, Westbury Quail Gardens, LLC has been withdrawn. Number nine, Case CESD20110015021, Kluver Trust, Dawn Commercial Trust Real Trust, has been withdrawn. Number 11, the owner for Case CESD20110006530, should be Park East Development, Ltd. We have one addition, which is number 12. Case CEP1VI20120012335, Robert P. Hendricks and Amanda E. Hendricks. Under five, old business, A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, number seven, Case CESD20110007803, Larry W. Fox, has been withdrawn. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Get a motion to approve the amended agenda? (At which time, Mr. Hudson enters the boardroom.) Page 3 August 23, 2012 161 2 A MR. MARINO: Motion to approve. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. µ. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. I'd just like to notice that Chris Hudson has joined us this morning. You'll have to stay after school for being late, but he will be a full voting member because we have two people who are excused or absent. Okay, I guess that brings us to the first -- MS. CRAWLEY: Motion for rehearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. CRAWLEY: Robert E. and Colleen Rossomando, Case CEOCC20120002338. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we do that, I just wanted to get a motion to approve the minutes. MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 4 August 23, 2012 1 61 2 A MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. kfri MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Than k you Okay, good morning. .. MR. WRIGHT: Good morning, members of the board. My name's Jeff Wright, for the record. I'm an Assistant County Attorney. This is our motion that's before you today. And my counterpart here is Mr. Jeff-- MR. PERLOW: I'm Jeffrey Perlow for the Rossomandos. Good morning. THE COURT REPORTER: Last name? MR. PERLOW: Perlow, P-E-R-L-O-W. MR. WRIGHT: First of all, I trust that you all received a copy of our motion and the attachments to the motion. It should be in your agenda packet. And we lay out our arguments in that motion. And I'm going to go through some of them, if you'll allow me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. WRIGHT: First of all, we rarely request a rehearing. We defer to your rulings and we normally treat them as sacrosanct and we don't request rehearings on what you've already decided. This case was a rare one We find it troubling that the result of the ruling in our view was to allow a commercial use where commercial uses aren't allowed. And if I may, on June 28th -- the history of this case real quick -- this was presented before you and there was a 4-3 vote. There was a lot of back and forth. It was over at the Horseshoe building. And there was a few requests for additional Page 5 August 23, 2012 161 2A0. people to be present. For example, there's a County Attorney memo that was submitted to the board as evidence objected to, and there was some comments from the board, geez, I wish he was here to answer some of these questions. So when I reviewed the record, I feel like -- first of all, we feel like we've met the standard for a rehearing. And under your rules, a rehearing -- I'm just going to go over , some of the fundamentals of a rehearing request. There were two grounds on which you can grant a rehearing request. First, that the decision in the first hearing was contrary to the evidence Second, that the hearing involved an error on a ruling of law. And either one of those can be present as a basis for granting a rehearing motion. We think that both of those grounds are present, as I outlined in my motion. First off, the first of those two prongs, the standard that the code enforcement's decision was contrary to the evidence, we had a plain admission from the respondent at the hearing that he operates an Inn. He's listed on the website as an Innkeeper. And when you look at the zoning district, it's Estates Zoning, and you look at the uses that are allowed in that zoning district; Inns, Hotels, Transient Lodging Facilities don't pop up. And if I may take a step back on zoning ordinances, generally the way they work is when you're in a particular zoning district, you're wondering what you can do on your property. For example, if you wanted to open a bar at your house, you look to that zoning district, residential, and see if you're allowed to do that. It doesn't say what you're not allowed to do, it lists those things that you are allowed to do, the permitted uses, conditional uses which can be separately applied for and accessory uses. When you look at the permitted conditional accessory uses allowed in this district, there's nothing of a commercial nature. In addition, our Growth Management Plan does not contemplate Page 6 August 23, 2012 161 2A � commercial activity in this zoning district. So I'm back to my argument on the evidence. We believe with the plain admission from somebody saying they operate an inn in this zoning district, to find that that's okay, that that commercial activity is okay, despite it not being anywhere in that , zoning district's list of uses, we believe it's contrary to the evidence: You have a plain admission; it doesn't match the zoning district. We believe it's contrary to the evidence. So that's the first prong, we believe there's a basis there for granting our rehearing xequest. The second prong is kind of related. It's really hard to separate these completely, but that the order involved an error„on a ruling of law which was fundamental to the board's decision. r Again, we believe that the Code Enforcement Board's decision had the effect of changing the zoning district to allow transient lodging, which is not currently allowed, it's a commercial use We also -- well, there's two specific rulings of law that I believe that there were errors on First the ruling was inconsistent with the language and intent of the Land Development Code, particularly with respect to unauthorized commercial uses within the Estates zoning district. You can't have commercial uses out there. Number two, the decision was inconsistent with the county's Growth Management Plan, Golden Gate Master Plan, which does not contemplate this type of commercial use within the zoning district. Finally, there are some arguments back and forth about we don't operate a hotel. There's a statute that defines hotel. Well, that statute also requires you to register your hotel, get a license, go through inspections. So it seems to me that they want to have their cake and eat it. They don't want to be subject to that statute, but they do want to point to the definition within there to point out that they're not a hotel. We don't care about that statute; we don't believe it applies here. We have an LDC that spells out what you can and can't do, and the use Page 7 August 23, 2012 161 2A that they are currently enjoying on that property, advertising on that property, is not in the list of authorized uses in the zoning district. So we believe that therefore there was an error on a ruling of law that was fundamental to the decision. Finally, that hotel statute, it was suggested that there might be,a conflict between the statute and our ordinance, and I would just point out that under your rules, literally the rules say that you are without jurisdiction to hear any argument that our ordinance is in,colict with the state statute. Now, that's not where we're hanging our hat on this one We really think that there was -- the decision was contrary to the evidence and involved an error on a ruling of law and we've met the standard. Really we're not out to tip the apple cart, we just re-reviewed the proceedings, saw that was a 4-3 vote, saw that there was a couple requests for additional people to be present, and we want to get it right. And we respectfully request that you grant a rehearing. And if so, there is a lingering matter here. It's the occupational license. And that matter was never brought to you It's never been adjudicated. And what we propose to do to make this complete and get it right is to bring this back at a future hearing, probably in September, and address both of those pending violations -- well, one has already been decided, but the occupational license in tandem with this use question that you've already decided on. So with that, I request a rehearing. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. PERLOW: Respectfully, the plaintiff is asking for a rehearing because the plaintiff disagrees with a very close decision. That's not a reason to ask for a rehearing. In its memorandum, the plaintiff states, and I'm quoting, this very close vote followed considerable deliberation and debate. This wasn't a hasty decision. There was a lot of testimony taken. Page 8 Au ust 012 16 It was deliberated by the board. And because it was a close decision, a 4-3 decision, they're asking for a rehearing. That's not -- again, that's not a basis for a rehearing. It's also not a basis for a rehearing that you should have brought in testimony that you didn't bring in, that you didn't like how the testimony went, that you introduced a letter from an attorney that said six months is okay, but renting your propert ,out once in a while is not okay. The Rossomando's live on this property. Their mother-in-law lives on this property. Once in a while they rent out rooms. So we didn't try to change any zoning ordinances, as is alleged by the plaintiff in its memorandum. That's not what the board did. There was no error on a rule of law that was fundamental to the decision. There was not one statute pointed out, there was not one case law pointed out It was the opinion of the plaintiff in its memorandum that your decision changed the zoning. Is that what your board thinks you did? I don't think so. I think the board considered all the facts, all the circumstances, and decided that there was not a violation. That's not enough to say we want to get it right, we want to try again, we want to bring in another testimony. That's not why you get a rehearing. You get a rehearing because it's against the weight of the evidence or there was a mistake in the interpretation of the evidence. Again, that wasn't done here. The board heard all the evidence. Everything was considered that was brought before the board, and the board ruled that there was not a violation in this case. And again, there was no error of a rule of law that was pointed out in the memorandum or pointed out here today that was fundamental to this decision. There's no case law, there's nothing that's been pointed out that would justify a rehearing on this matter. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments? Page 9 August 23, 2012 161 2 Ar MR. WRIGHT: Well, just in reply to that, I would point out that I did spell out why the decision was contrary to the evidence, and I did spell out the two specific errors on rulings of law, and I specified that as a matter of policy we want to get it right. That's the frosting. The cake is already there. We've met the standard. And the suggestion that we are just -- and I even said we're not hanging our hat on that We're not We're not hanging our hat on the idea that we need to get it right. But I think that it's an important policy point to make you aware of That's all I have. , s MR. PERLOW: And again, a very close decision 4 I'n happy with a close decision. That's not enough to ask for a rehearing. It can't be a best out of three here. The board heard the matter in its entirety. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the board'? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions from the board'? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any discussion from the board? Go ahead. MR. MARINO: No, I wasn't going to say anything. I was going to throw it to you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Of course. It was --'I remember the case distinctly and I remember the first comment that was made by Mr. Hudson who said that he would have expected that the County Attorney would have been here at the time. And I remember the vote and I reread the case, that because the County Attorney was not here the respondent had nobody to cross-examine as far as the evidence was concerned. Any comments from you, Chris, on that? MR. HUDSON: I mean, I'm glad to see that you guys are here now, and I certainly understand the arguments you've laid out. But I Page 10 August 23, 2012 161 2A � also understand Mr. Perlow's argument, that this isn't the best of three situations here. County Attorney's Office should have been there with a contentious case like this, or at least have had some input so that we weren't just standing there listening to Mr. Perlow back and forthwith the code enforcement investigator, which I think he probably could. have used some support. And the code enforcement investigator's argument was sound as well at the time But looking at it from a legal perspective, there wasn't anybody for Mr. Perlow to engage and so I still stand with my original decision that you guys should have been there the first time.;:Although looking at your memorandum here certainly makes sense. MR. WRIGHT: Mr. Chairman, if I could just address that I want to point out, it wasn't a matter of not being there when we need to be there. We like to be there whenever there is a contentious issue. That was kind of a perfect storm of facts that resulted in our not attending that hearing. It was at the off site, and I believe it was the same day as the board's budget hearing. So we did have -- we had to decide how to allocate our limited resources. And we did provide input, a written input. Not intended to be evidence, but intended to support our position. So I just wanted to explain that to you why we weren't there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: As I recall from that hearing, there were a couple of items that were brought up that we could probably hash around a little bit now. Number one, the item of occupational license was brought up. That was number one. Number two, there was an item that was brought up regarding the code that says what you can do or can't do. There were no prohibitive words to running a bed and breakfast, if you will. Any comments on the items that I'm bringing up? MR. MARINO: I agree with you on those. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Also, the fact that the respondent was Page 11 August 23, 2012 161 2A ' paying taxes and the county was receiving taxes that were earmarked I guess for the tourist development tax that was also brought up at the hearing. Do you have any comments on that? MR. WRIGHT: Well, I would say that paying taxes on a pr ety A is not necessarily a defense to a zoning infraction. We work a separate constitutional office from the Tax Collector. I know from appearances sake, well, they're paying the county money, they must be-authorizing it But they're paying a different Constitutional Office.money and we don't get involved in any of that We have a code we have to enforce. That's the only thing. I realize outwardly it may not look right, but the fact that they're paying taxes is not dispositive of the question whether or not it's allowed. MR. PERLOW: If I may, the Rossomandos were paying taxes, but they also spoke to numerous officials in the city regarding what they were doing on the way to paying those taxes. So they approached several people regarding what they were doing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, I believe Mr. Bellows testified when he was before us that that was a use that is not part of the zoning. MR. WRIGHT: Mr. Chairman, if I may add to your comment on the prohibited thing, it's not -- inns aren't listed in this zoning as prohibited. Well, it's very rare to find a list of prohibited uses. Back to my point about operating a bar out of your house, you're not going to find in residential that bars are prohibited, but they are. And they are prohibited because they're not in the list of authorized uses. So I just wanted to clarify that point. MR. PERLOW: If I may, and I don't want to prolong this, they testified -- testimony was brought in last time that if you were renting for six months, that was okay. That's also not listed in the ordinance. So the plaintiff came in and said six months was okay, but what you're Page 12 August 23 2012 161 2 A 9 doing is not okay. But six months isn't listed either. So technically according to their argument that's a prohibited use. But they said that was okay. So it was very confusing. Again, the board considered all of this in making a decision.This Y was fully heard the first time All of the testimony was heard. So now to just pick out things isn't fair to the Rossomandos. k r MR. HUDSON: Mr. Chairman? ` CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. HUDSON: I have a question for the County A.Attorney Actually, could you comment on that? That was one of my big questions that day was the two time frames: One, we had a time frame where the Rossomandos were paying their taxes and this sort of comes up. I believe they were running this entity for quite some time with no one stopping them until this point. My other question was, what is that number, if you will? What is the number of days that makes it a rental or doesn't make it a rental? You know, I think that's important. MR. WRIGHT: Well, sure, sure. I realize there could be better clarity in our code, I will submit that. When I look at the definitions in our code, there is a definition where: Transient lodging facility (i.e., less than six months occupancy.) So there is a reference in the code. It's not perfectly drafted, but there is a reference in the code that says a transient lodging facility is less than six months occupancy. Now, the way I see it, no matter how you slice it, we're talking about a daily rental. So in my view it's hypothetical to think, well, could I do six months there, could I do three months, could I do seven months, could I do 12 months? What can I do? That's something that we can sit down with them and tell them. You know, I think our position is six months is okay. Six months or more is fine. But the reference in the 'ADC definition to a transient lodging facility being Page 13 August 23, 2012 161 2A '' less than six months in my view establishes that's what a transient lodging facility is, anything less than six months. In his case, his client's case, they're doing it daily, so they're not even close to that bar. MS. FLAGG: Mr. Chair, if I could remind the board, this isnot,,. to rehear the case today, it's simply -- and there's clearly a lot of questions. It is simply a request to come back to you at a later date and hear the facts that are being discussed right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. PERLOW: Again, those facts were brought into evidence last time And the plaintiff is correct, there could be better clarity in the ordinance, and that was one of the reasons that the board found there was no violation. So everything was considered the first time And I think it's again unfair to bring in additional facts now, or ask the board to reconsider other matters that weren't before it the first time Everything you've heard today was before the board the first time when you voted. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question. Based on what the ruling was at the time, are you saying that that means that the Code Enforcement Board is, by their decision, a 4-3 decision, that anybody could open up a bed and breakfast out in Golden Gate Estates? MR. WRIGHT: That's the precedent that we don't want to set. And that's why we want to have a rehearing, to get it right. There's traffic concerns, there's planning concerns, and it literally violates our Growth Management Plan, which creates a big problem for residents and county. MR. HUDSON: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. HUDSON: For the County Attorney, wouldn't this just go before the Board of County Commissioners? I mean, wouldn't this be Page 14 August 23, 2012 161 2A 2' something that you would just take before the board if this issue was unresolved here? MR. WRIGHT: Well, typically you are a standalone forum and you are a tribunal that makes decisions on these code issues. The normal path for a dispute in a code enforcement case is not through the Board of County Commissioners. You know there's been wx. exceptions, because they want to serve the citizens if there', an issue that's appropriate for their consideration. But generally if you 3ii,oul dispute a decision that the Code Enforcement Board has entered, you can request a rehearing or you can hear it after that and you move for an appeal in circuit court. So that's the normal path Nothing's to prevent the Rossomandos from getting up to the podium and making their plea to the Board of County Commissioners. MR. PERLOW: And again, respectfully, if you rent for something under six months, according to what the plaintiff is saying, if we come back and if it's established that you can rent for six months but you can't rent for under six months, is the board then establishing a precedent that five months is in violation of the ordinance, five and a half months is in violation, four months is in violation? And so they're asking you to set a precedent. I think the board was concerned about setting a precedent in this case regarding the time period. And that's why it was determined that the Rossomandos were not in violation of the ordinance. MR. WRIGHT: Mr. Chairman, if I may, the suggestion geez, I don't know if it's six months, five months, four months, would three months be -- we're not dealing with any of those. We're dealing with nightly rentals. And there's no way to view a nightly rental as anything but transient, in my view. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any -- MR. PERLOW: Again, that was heard last time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. Page 15 Augus 2 , 2012 161 Any comments from the board? MR. MIESZCAK: One comment. This is residential zoning, right? It's R what -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: RSF-1, I believe. MR. WRIGHT: It's actually Estates zoning. And within the Estates zoning it's very similar to residential for our purposes.;$. MR. MIESZCAK: So Section 2.02.03 does apply, and that's why I voted against it last time and I'm still against it Thank you CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to make a motion to bring it back? MR. MIESZCAK: Yeah, I'd love to make, a motion for the county to bring it back. I think it would be better understanding for all of us, and all fair play for everybody concerned.' MR. LAVINSKI: I second it CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion'? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO:'Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? MR. LEFEI3VRE: Nay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, passes 6-1 -- one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, 6-1. Okay, so it will be coming back. MR. WRIGHT: Thank you. MR. PERLOW: Thank you. Page 16 August 23, 2012 161 2A2- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Colleen, who's up? MS. CRAWLEY: We're now on to motion for continuance. Number one, Iris Labrie. Case CESD20110016035. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was a motion originally. (Investigator Pulse was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR PULSE: For the record, Dee Pulse. . CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you -- the respondent is not here. Give us your comments on the case INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Okay. For the record,-Dee Pulse, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is a request for the continuance, not the actual case. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: For the record -- (Investigator Joe Mucha was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. We have no issue with continuing this case to next month's hearing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to continue. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to continue this case till the next meeting. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. I)OINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 17 August 23, 2012 101 2A7 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you, it will be heard at the next hearing. MS. CRAWLEY: Second motion for continuance is number two from hearings, Steve and Alice Poseley, Case CESD20120001351#t (Investigator Dee Pulse was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR PULSE: For the record, Dee Pulse, Collier dyt County Code Enforcement Investigator. And the county has no problem with issuing a continuance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You see progress beg met? INVESTIGATOR PULSE: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to extend it till next month. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Till next month. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. CRAWLEY: We're now on to motion for extension of time Number one, Martha Menendez Cruz, Case CESD20110014160. (Veronica Cruz Fernandez and Investigator Eric Short were duly sworn.) Page 18 August 23, 2012 161 2A7 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was added at the last minute to our package, so we have a little juggling around. Give us a minute to review it. MR. MARINO: What number is that? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Put at the end. MR. MIESZCAK: One of these. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The one with all the capital MR. MARINO: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. How are you? MS. FERNANDEZ: Fine. I'm here because we were granted until yesterday to complete this home. I came back to the states to finish it for my parents because they're older, but when we got back, we noticed that we had other costs involved due to two special items that we weren't aware of Someone rode over our septic tank; it cost us $4,500 to fix it and be able to pass that inspection. Also we had a site drainage because we are on a 75-foot lot, and that fence we had to put up was another 2,000 something dollars. And we only have really one main inspection to go, which is our right-of-way, and that's going to be $2,600. And my parents don't have all the funds yet. So really I'm here to ask for an extension to give us just a little bit more time That's the only thing we have left on the property to complete. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time do you think you'll need? MS. FERNANDEZ: I'm really looking at about three months, if you can give me at least that, or a little bit more so that -- I just want to get the funds together to finish up that project. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. County, do you have any problem with an extension on this? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Page 19 August 23, 2012 161 2A9' Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. As Ms. Fernandez said, she's real close to completing this, you know, and finalizing the permits, so the county has no objection. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we extend the time .fry period for 150 days. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: 150 days. If you don't get it done before the 150, come back as you've done this time and we'll talk at that time. MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you very much. Have a great day. MS. CRAWLEY: Second motion for extension of time is number nine under motion for imposition of fines/liens, Oslay Fernandez, Case CESD20110014115. (Investigator Eric Short was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This was originally an imposition of fines on our original agenda? MS. CRAWLEY: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll give everybody a minute to look at it. Page 20 August 23„2012 MR. MARINO: I have it under number 19. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Eric? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: At this point the county has no objection, as Ms. Hole requested. You know, it looks like 30 days is what she's asking for and the property's not bank owned, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have one question, and that's have the operational costs been paid? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: They have not CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Ordinarily if this was to come before us just on the imposition of fines, if we find that the occupational costs have not been paid and neither has the property come into compliance, we would impose the fine. So I'm hard pressed to grant an extension. They're not here. I'm relying personally on your testimony in this case. Any comments from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, couple comments. First of all, it states that -- I assume that the bank is waiting to physically take possession of this property; is that correct? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: That is correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: And it says the foreclosure is not yet scheduled. So the foreclosure has to be scheduled, there actually has to be a sale, the bank has to take the certificate of title. So that's going to be way more than 30 days. So we're going to be right back here in 30 days. I'm in agreement with Mr. Kaufman, I don't think that we should grant an extension due to the fact that first of all the fee's not been paid, and this is just going to linger for an unknown amount of time So I think that we should impose the fines. Because otherwise if we don't impose the fines, if we don't impose the fines then the fine of $11,800 plus the operational costs would -- $11,800 would go away. So I think we should impose the fines. I make a motion to impose the fines. Page 21 August 3, 012 MR. MARINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. ' MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you MS. CRAWLEY: I just want to clarify on that that we denied the motion for extension of time -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MS. CRAWLEY: And then we can -- would you like to bring it back under motion for imposition of fines? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. CRAWLEY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This will come up in the imposition, unless we want to modify the agenda and hear that right now MR. LEFEBVRE: Since it's in front of us -- MS. RAWSON: It's not on the agenda for today, is it? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. MS. CRAWLEY: It's number nine. MR. MARINO: Or 19, according to the schedule. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. We have the same. MR. MARINO: Right. Page 22 August 23 2012 161 2A � CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'm glad to see you struggling to find it, Jean. That makes me feel better. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's at the very bottom. MS. RAWSON: I thought number nine was Fernandez. MS. CRAWLEY: That is correct. Oslay Fernandez. That's t hearing. MS. RAWSON: Okay. Are we talking about Menendez Cruz? MS. CRAWLEY: She was heard -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Last. MS. CRAWLEY: -- the last one MS. RAWSON: Okay, I got it MR. MARINO: Number 19 on our new listings.' CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'll accept a motion to modify the agenda so that we can hear this particular case under imposition now MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to modify. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second, CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No 'response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to impose a fine. MR. MARINO: I'll second it. Page 23 August 23, 2012 161 2A - CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed'? No response. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That carries unanimously. Yes, Colleen'? MS. CRAWLEY: If we may, we're just going to read the executive summary into the record. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with violations of the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(8)(1)(a). Location: 4120 Eighth Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio No. 38902360001. This is a screened enclosure with cancel Permit No 2005033480. Also a pool, decking and shed type structures on the property without Collier County permits. On April 26th, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4795, Page 312 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board's order as of August 23rd, 2012. Page 24 August 23 2012 161 2A - The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at a rate of$200 per day for the period between June 26th, 2012 through August 23rd, 2012, 59 days, for the total of$11,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational cost of$80.29 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $11,880.29. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Now we can move on the next case then. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks, Eric. MS. CRAWLEY: We are now under C, hearings. And if we may, number 12, Case CEPM20120012335, Robert P. Hendricks and Amanda E. Hendricks. If we can move that up to the front? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to amend the agenda. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we're moving it up. (Investigator Eric Short was duly sworn.) MS. CRAWLEY: Case CEPM20120012335, Robert P. Hendricks and Amanda E. Hendricks. Violation of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Page 25 August 23, 2012 Maintenance Code Section 22-231 .11 and 22-231 .2. 161 2 Description of violation: An occupied dwelling with no electrical power or hot and cold water supply. Location/address where violation exists: 2531 Eighth Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio No 38972600005. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Robert P. Hendricks and Amanda E. Hendricks. Date violation first observed: August 15th, 2012. k . r Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: August 16th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: Immediately. Date of reinspection: August 16th, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: An entry consent form signed by a tenant, Justin Perez, on August 15th, 2012, at 1 :40 p.m. one photograph taken by myself on August 15th, 2012 showing the electrical meter, and one photo taken by myself on August 22nd, 2012, showing the electric meter has not moved since August 15th, 2012. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a motion to accept the exhibits? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 26 August 23, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. 161 2Ad MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: This case originated on Auguste 5th, 2012 as an annonymous complaint, stating the power has been#shut off and they are running a small generator that does not power Jee entire home. I called Lee County Electric Cooperative and spoke to Claudia, who confirmed that service had been interrupted since August 13th, 2012. I attempted to contact Scott Morell, the son of Amanda E. Hendricks via telephone, as I've dealt with this property in the past, but was unsuccessful. A site visit was made with Corporal Villa from the Collier County Sheriffs Office. We came in contact with Justin Perez who advised that Scott left Monday, the 13th, when the power was turned off Justin stated that he and others at the residence pay rent to Scott. I explained to Justin that as a tenant he has certain rights, and I explained the property maintenance code. Justin willingly consented entry. I observed the dwelling to have no electricity, which leads to no water in the dwelling, since the house is on a well system. On August 1'6th, 2012 I received a missed call and voice mail from Scott Morall, and I attempted to return. I left the voice mail requesting a return phone call. I made an additional site visit to the property to make contact with Scott and serve legal notice. I further attempted to contact the property owner or her son by making a site visit to 3 825 56th Avenue Northeast where the parents of Amanda E. Hendricks reside. I made contact with Jennifer Morell who claimed that she has not been in contact with her daughter in over a year. Page 27 August 23, 2012 161 ' A2 Jennifer also claimed that her grandson Scott is not staying with them. And the last she heard he was staying with friends since the power had been shut off Monday, the 13th. On August 22nd I made a site visit with Corporal Villa and Corporal Lucere with Collier County Sheriffs Office and observed{ he electrical meter has not moved since my initial site visit on the 0th, 2012. Violation remains. ,..., CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, ordinarily on these type of violations, we've heard them in the past, it's a safety and health issue, so I guess the first -- any questions from the board to begin with? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We need to see if we find them in violation or not Any motions? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion a violation does exist. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) s CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. So they are in violation. And do you have a suggestion, Eric? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: The county recommends that the Page 28 August 23, 2012 161 2Aa- Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the am of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Restoring the electricity to the dwelling with an active account with Lee County Electric Cooperative, or vacating the dwelling until such a time -r util such time that the electricity is restored with an active account,with} Lee County Electric Cooperative within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars and blank cents per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues. . Two Provide an adequate hot and cold water supply to all plumbing fixtures in the dwelling or vacating the dwelling until such time that an adequate hot and cold water supply can be provided to all plumbing fixtures within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars and blank cents per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues. Three: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. LEFEBVRE: Couple questions. The Lee County -- or Lee Cooperative, I think you said it was? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: What's the outstanding bill'? Is there a water bill outstanding at all? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They have a well. MR. LEFEBVRE: Or electric. MR. DOINO: Electric. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Any information -- any further Page 29 August 23, 2012 1 6 1 2 A P- information other than her -- Claudia with Lee County Electric Cooperative, she would not give any further information other than service had been interrupted. MR. LEFEBVRE: Are they in foreclosure? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: The property is in lis pendens.: fi�'� g.. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion that we give them three days from the date of this hearing or a fine of$500. And that would-,:be also for number two MR. LAVINSKI: I'll second it CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion'? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I guess three days would probably be the minimum amount of time to enable them to put up a deposit of whatever is required for the electric company to turn the service back on I have one question, though. You've mentioned hot and cold water to each Is hot water required, or is it just water'? MR. MIESZCAK: It's water. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: It is required. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hot and cold, okay. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor'? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thanks, Eric. Page 30 August 23, 2012 161 2A .2- INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Thank you. MS. CRAWLEY: We are now back at number one. Case CESD20120004317, Pacifica Laurel Ridge LLC, Pacifica Companies, LLC. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I had one question while we're 73'41r young lady back here with the two people, little people who want to testify, is it possible to move that case up so that -- I know bow ; difficult that can be. ' MS. CRAWLEY: We can move that next. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks. (Investigator Jonathan Musse was duly sworn.) MS. CRAWLEY: Case CESD20120004317, Pacifica Laurel Ridge, LLC. Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a).' Description of violation: AC handler installed without valid Collier County permits. Location/address where violation exists: 5543 Laurel Ridge Lane, Unit 107, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio No 3618008008. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Pacifica Laurel Ridge. LLC, Pacifica Companies, LLC, care of Danny Bennett, 236 East Sixth Avenue, Tallahassee, Florida, 32303. Date violation first observed: March 15th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: March 26th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 21st, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 25th, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, Collier County Code Enforcement. Page 31 August 23, 2012 161 2A7 I would now like to present the case in the following exhibits: One photo taken by myself on March 15th, 2012, and Permit No. PRHV2012081717401. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept -- f MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. , MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CI-IAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Conducted an initial inspection on March 15th, 2012. As the tenant was showing me some property maintenance issues she informed me that Laurel Ridge Apartments recently installed an AC handler. I was able to get in contact with the property manager, Hilda, informed her of the violation. She stated that she did not realize that a permit was needed and will hire a contractor as soon as possible. Conducted numerous inspections, kept in contact with the property manager, no permit was ever issued. At that time I prepared the case to appear before the Code Enforcement Board. On August 16th, 2012, Permit No. PRHV20120817174 was issued for the AC equipment. Permit is currently active and is pending a final inspection, which is scheduled today. Page 32 August 23, 2012 16I 2A � CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The original complaint was no air conditioning in the unit or -- INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: They had some issues with oneof the inner tubes of the AC that runs through the unit. That wsktheir issue. And the tenant at that time just said that -- oh, by the may, they recently installed this in here, so that's why I checked it out, that's all, and saw they needed a permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Well, considering the permit has been pulled, anybody like to make a motion? Does a violation exist? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll make a motion that a violation does in fact exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion, do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second it CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN Seconded. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Do you have a suggestion? MR. LAVINSKI: Yes. I think that the respondent should pay the Page 33 August 23, 2012 161 2A ?" $81.43 in costs and that they be given 30 days to correct this or a fine of$100 a day be imposed. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we saved you all this reacling time We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Thank you MR. LEFEBVRE: Does he have to read it in? MS. CRAWLEY: If we could. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, it should be read. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN I thought we saved you INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: The county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board order the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspection and certificate of completion within 30 days of this hearing or a fine of $100 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into Page 34 August 23, 2012 161 2 A compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you. INVESTIGATOR MUSSE: Thank you k, MS. CRAWLEY: If we could amend the agenda. Under five,old business, A, motion for imposition of fines/liens. Number four,'Case CESD2011000679, Maderline and Edileydis Gonzalez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to modify the agenda? MR. MIESZCAK: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. Good morning. MS. MADERLINE GONZALEZ: Hi, how are you? (Maderline Gonzalez, Edileydis Gonzalez and Investigator Tony Asaro were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, good morning. INVESTIGATOR ASARO: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have the -- he wants to testify. I see that the operational costs have been paid; is that correct? INVESTIGATOR ASARO: Yes, they have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the property is not in Page 35 August 23, 2012 161 2A ?- compliance. INVESTIGATOR ASARO: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you tell us a little bit about what's going on? MS. EDILEYDIS GONZALEZ: The whole construction is already done. The only thing that we have that we didn't know that we were in violation of was some trees that -- . MS. MADERLINE GONZALEZ: The pepper trees MS. EDILEYDIS GONZALEZ: Pepper trees that we were supposed to take it out, we didn't know. And our budget, it's already done, we already did three trucks of pepper tree. And we don't have -- we need a little bit of extension of the time because we don't have the money to take all the trees out There's a lot of trees on the property, there's almost three acres of that And, you know, like the whole construction's already done. You know, we don't have any more to take out the trees and stuff, so we need a little bit more time That's why -- we try to do the best, and -- that's about it CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And what say the county? INVESTIGATOR ASARO: Repeat that, please'? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Your comments. INVESTIGATOR ASARO: Actually, I spoke to Miguel Gonzalez on several occasions and he's making every attempt to clear the exotics from the property. It's just that his financial situation doesn't allow him to proceed. So he does need some more time, in my opinion: But he is trying. MS. CRAWLEY: Mr. Chair'? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. CRAWLEY: We'd like to -- the county would like to withdraw this case right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, fine. MS. CRAWLEY: Thank you. Page 36 August 23, 2012 161 2 A 9-- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. MADERLINE GONZALEZ: Thank you. MS. CRAWLEY: Number four under hearings, Case CELU20120007339, Timothy Todd Lainhart, Lori Renee Lainhart, th Anthony Ira Lainhart and Deana Renee Lainhart (Anthony Ira Lainhart, Todd Lainhart and Investigator Erie Short were duly sworn.) MS. CRAWLEY: Case CELU20120007339, Timothy Todd Lainhart, Lori Renee Lainhart, Anthony Ira Lainhart andDean a Renee Lainhart. Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 1.04.01(A), 2.02.03, and 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: A permitted accessory structure with unpermitted alterations with no principal structure on the same parcel. Location/arrest dress where violation exists: No site address. Folio No 37692280007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Timothy Todd Lainhart, Lori Renee Lainhart, Anthony Ira Lainhart and Dean a Renee Lainhart, 2531 Second Street Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: May 14th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: May 15th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 15th, 2012. Date of reinspection: July 25th, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning again, Eric. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One copy of the most recent aerial obtained from the Collier County Page 37 August 23, 2012 161 2 property appraiser's website, and one photo taken by myself, August 22nd, 2012, showing the structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photographs and the evidence? INVESTIGATOR SHORT: Actually, they have not CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, why don't you show it to# hem and then I'll entertain a motion to accept the evidence. You might want to pull the mic up a little bit so we can x hear you And do you have any problem with the items being entered into evidence? MR. ANTHONY LAINHART: No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion to accept the -- MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR SHORT: This case originated from a lien search on May 10th, 2012. The initial site visit was made on May 14th, 2012 where the steel structure with an attached lanai, an AC unit and utilities were observed. It was also observed that no primary structure existed on the structure. After extensive research, I discovered the property had been split in 1992, leaving the accessory structure on parcel number Page 38 August 23, 2012 161 2 A 37692280007 and the primary structure on parcel number 37692340002. I also discovered the steel structure had originally been permitted under Permit No. 860756 as an access building with no utilities. I have made several attempts to contact the Lainhart residence , and had been unsuccessful until August 21st, where I was contacted by Anthony Ira Lainhart. Anthony claims he would like to resolve this issue. I-HoWver, the violation rcinains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Good morning. MR. ANTHONY LAINHART: Good morning. Yeah, just in reference to this property, we've only owned it -- I don't remember the exact date, but it was like 2003 or so. But the building was built prior to us buying the property. And any violations that might be existing now were all done before we bought the property. But needless to say, if it's -- you know, if it's not within the permitted process or whatever, we'd like to do whatever it takes to correct that But now as it exists, the building has no electricity turned on and there's nobody occupying it It's sitting there simply as a structure. I mean, there's nobody using it And we i.x-yere just hoping the fact that it's not being used that -- I mean, if yoi do require us to tear it down that, you know, maybe there's some way that we could do away with the violated part of it, and maybe vze could keep the part that was permitted some way, somehow io it doesn't devalue the property that much more Being as it's probably, you know, worth 20 percent of what we originally hr)ught it for I mean, we stand to lose money on it So whatever -- what we're -- we're willing to do whatever to satisfy any violations. We want to cooperate, we're just -- we just -- you know. We'll do v itever it takes to try to keep everybody happy. CIA IP:MAN KAUFMAN: Well, the first thing, we have to find out wheth nr a violation exists or not. Page 39 August 23, 2012 161 2A d' Any motions from the board? MR. L JFEBVRE: Well, just it sounds like they're not sure what to do in this particular case. Obviously they're able to get -- prior to you ownir g it, the people that built it in '92 were able to get a pe nit because it v as all one parcel. Now that it's been split, that building's not a prim'al building so you need one of two things, it sounds like: p Y g Y g � 1� . Either yol. ; ave to tear it down or build a primary structure on the property. I- ich would make that a -- not a violation. MR. A NTHONY LAINHART: Correct. MR ' FEBVRE: So there's one of two things that you can do. Obviously :; it stands now you have -- there is a violation on the property. you have an option, either building a primary structure so that is ntw flowed, or tearing it down. CIA ' _MAN KAUFMAN: Let's -- I'll accept a motion to find them in vi Ilion, if you want. ;FEBVRE: I make a motion that there is a violation. CI IA I '_MAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MP . \VINSKI: Second. CI I A MAN KAUFMAN: We have a second from Mr. Lavinsk All tl 'e in favor? MI . rJDSON Aye. MI LINO: Aye. CI-TA . MAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MI . ;FEBVRE: Aye. 1VII�. IESZCAK: Aye. MI . ARINO: Aye. C A MAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (N ) t ponse.) Cl- A MAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Page 40 August 23, 2012 161 2A9 Di, _ ) -- prior to this hearing, did you discuss with the code enforces ie officer -- MI 4TTHONY LAINHART: Yes. CI!A MAN KAUFMAN: -- some of the possible solutions, to the probe Vie, ti MI ' THONY LAINHART: Yes, I did. Yes, I did person,l ly. CI?. A MAN KAUFMAN: And were any of them viable'? MI . 'TTHONY LAINHART: Yeah, yeah, they're Vial le. It's just the .a( hat, you know, that the building is probably,'you know, it's prob ib -- to build it, if you built it at today's cost is probably 30 or $40,( r)( mean, if we just have to -- if we just have to demolish that bui'di in order to make this okay, I mean, we might as well -- I mean, I 3 we'll have to take that hit. But, I mean, if that's what you require as do, I mean, I guess that's what we'll have to do. I mean, I'd like to )id, you know, taking that much more of a loss on the property tJ what we've already incurred. But if that's what is requires', i know, I guess we'll have to do it MI '. ;FEBVRE: Again, the other option would be to build a primary st 1 -tune on there, meaning a house. That would be the other option. MR. ITHONY LAINHART: Right. I guess we just have to weigh the st involved on which way to go in order to satisfy the violations nd, you know, we want to do whatever it takes to make things r gl CIS`. MAN KAUFMAN: Is it a case of when rather than how much? In 1 er words, if sufficient time was granted for you to do whatever equired, would that help'? MR. ITIIONY LAINHART: Sure, that would help, if you can give us tiro time. You know, I don't know -- I guess you talk to Eric and take b: suggestions. But yeah, if we had a little time to get this resolve( . would def-- I mean, if it meant tearing it down or Page 41 August 23, 2012 161 2 A r demoing it, yeah, that's what we would do. MI . L FEBVRE: What I'm trying to get at is there would be one time pei 'or if your decision was to tear it down, which I'm sure was discuss d. And then obviously for you to build a primary structure th c e would be another time frame, which would be a longtier time fra io I'm just trying to find out what your -- I know there's four pai 'wics isie -- I assume probably husband and wife. Ml ` �Tr1'LIONY LAINHART: Correct, yes. Ml . T ;FI;BVRE: So I'm just trying to figure out what your ultimata 20 I is with this property. Do you plan on building a house and hay ins 'zis as an accessory structure or do you just plan on having it sit there? Ml . l° 'fl TONY LAINHART: Right. You know, we haven't really p tr. I :d the thought of building a primary structure on it But, you knc .7/ gu?ss we should probably consider that option more, I mean, a as rather than demoing it and losing that much more money (,1 t wilding. You know, it's a steel building and, you know, it does 1 a-.rc a certain amount of value to it So yeah, we should probabl T (si isic'er building a primary structure and doing whatever it takes to at save that I would say that's probably something we need to ) more thoroughly. M1 F BVRE: As you saw in previous cases, we've had people c :1 , iit front of us for continuances. And whatever we do, if you do ; 'e~i 'e to -- let's say if we give you a time frame and you can't meet th s'➢ mo frames but you decide to build a house, you can come back in - : c F us. But the thing I want to stress is that it is very imports - r:s to see that there's progress being made to correct the situatio 1 -rc c t the violation. Ml ' " \Ill TONY LAINHART: I understand. Ml '' ;FFBVRE: Okay. M1 '. : \T 1 IONY LAINHART: In reference to the building, I Page 42 August 23, 2012 161 2A9- know E , as said a certain portion of it was permitted, and that was before ( a, mc, naturally. And maybe there's violations with the building , t is. If we could maybe take care of some of the violations that invF.)1 -- I mean, that would be a progressive step to maybe,what you guy: int, I mean -- CI r% ` :MAN KAUFMAN: Well, the main violation is that the buildin` Zeiccy -- MI \ 1-TONY LAINHART: Right. CI / M AN KAUFMAN: -- and there's no primary structure. M1 TTIIONY LAINHART: Right. C !. . ' 'MAN KAUFMAN: So I don't think that the problem is with th? ire that's on the property. W is ai five-acre parcel that was split in half or -- do you know, I IN 7 TI GATOR SHORT: Give me a moment, please. CI M AN KAUFMAN: How big was the -- M I . Afl 1 TONY LAINHART: I'm thinking it was five origins R 1 TI GATOR SHORT: Five or more M N i 1-TONY LAINHART: I think it was five or more original y lase as it exists now it's over three. The parcel we own is three -- itt le over three acres, so I assume that the parcel that the house zL originally is probably a couple or so. I don't know for sure. C' 1V`AN KAUFMAN: Were you looking to sell this piece of proper of 1 point? M V"1TONY LAINHART: It was -- originally that was the plan. it as an investment, yes. Cl I. N AN KAUFMAN: Okay. And at this time it's off the market`? N`R LAINHART: It's off the market for various Page 43 August 23, 2012 161 2 9' reason::, . . C i I1 .V AN KAUFMAN: Okay. V R JF E BVRE: The violation was created once the property was sp I it w� s n't a violation up until it was -- V R MIONY LAINHART: Exactly, correct. That's the situatic n rc in, yes. V' R -:F ;BVRE: Right. So, I mean, as Mr. Kaufman didjsay, correc n vi -- there's nothing inherently wrong with the building becau:; i )C ;i permitted and everything, it's with what the previous owner Ii, l luting it R ' -TONY LAINHART: Right. And I understand the -- I under ii '-1(. :ituation, it needing a primary residence. We under.- It's just our investment didn't sell quickly and we've got it I )1 .r ' it's devalued, naturally, from the original price of what we pa? ! 1 t. '°:'Mich is the norm, you know. We know that we're not the on' hat situation, so -- l\ R. ;T I ',BVRE: Maybe we can see what the recommendation, count cc .i -1 - ndation is.. P 4 T ilATOR SHORT: We recommend that the Code Enforc n T )ard orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the ° a it $80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 dad ; to all violations by, one: Obtaining all required Collier Count: t i permits or demolition permit, inspections and certifi' it npletion/occupancy to build a principal structure and return ory structure to its original permanent state, or demo]` ,? sting accessory structure within blank days of this hearin ; c of blank dollars and blank cents per day will be impos{ d ? ? e violation is abated. T v, espondent must notify the code enforcement invest' °n the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate Page 44 August 23 2012 1 b1 2Ac the vie la • : county may abate the violation, using any method to bring 1 Icy ? on into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collie C !_ sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and al' :abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. R ! BVRE: Is this property in foreclosure at all? R TONY LAINHART: No, sir. C r I: N KAUFMAN: Reminds me of-- is it Solomon or King I = 're you put the baby back together again? Maybe you could ' l: use that's next door. That would resolve the problem. And tl r / the -- l0 ' )THY LAINHART: Better yet, maybe we cancel it to the ne' ? ( r ‘N KAUFMAN: That also You may be able to make them l\ ' ' . BVRE: What I would suggest or be inclined to do is give ti _ n od of time, let's say 90 days, to demolish the property or get a ‘e to of completion, which we know won't happen. But I'd like fig) ,m come back in front of us and say either it's been demol s' e 7e decided to pull a permit and get this property -- build : l- , 1 like to see -- give them 90 days and see where they are, or I'd be inclined to extend that if they did pull a permit to bui' i l And if they didn't pull permit, then they would need to have he ling demolished. o r 1 ' motion that we give them 120 days from the date of this he a 'n 3 150 a fine per day. And that way it will give them time t( That they want to do. And again, if they apply to build a hour viously we would extend it And if they didn't, then it would ' - ,.ling would have to be demoed. ( I A .N KAUFMAN: The court fees of$80.86 to be paid within 3 ) art of-- 1' . BVRE: Yes. Page 45 August 23 2012 1 6 1 2A C f A \.1\1 KAUFMAN: -- your motion? MI . BVRE: Yes. (I A N KAUFMAN: Okay. Ml . 'NO: I'll second it. ( 1- \A KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. sion on the motion? ( s se.) C A R N KAUFMAN: Okay, seeing none, I'll call the questi t 1 )se in favor? " . I ;ON: Aye. )( '0: Aye. ( KAUFMAN: Aye. 1 BVRE: Aye. . 1 ZCAK: Aye. . I ENO: Aye. ( A c' ,N KAUFMAN: Opposed? ( T se.) ( N KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. ( c a time to -- 120 days to figure out what you're doing. IONY LAINHART: Okay. ( A KAUFMAN: It would be best if you would need more ne back to us before the 120 days expires and we'll go from ee what we need to do. IONY LAINHART: Okay, who would I contact? Do I come meeting or the -- C A KAUFMAN: Work it through Eric. IONY LAINHART: Okay, through Eric? Okay, great. ( kN KAUFMAN: Okay, thank you IONY LAINHART: Thank you. I ATOR SHORT: Thank you. 1' I MEY: Number seven, Case CENA20120006825, Page 46 August 23, 2012 161 2V- Gwendolyn Green. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Cherie', do you need a break? THE COURT REPORTER: Maybe after this? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We'll hear one more case and then we'll take a break. Okay, which case is this, Colleen? I'm sorry. MS. CRAWLEY: Number seven. MR. MARINO: Number seven in your book. (Investigator Patrick Baldwin was duly sworn.) MS. CRAWLEY: Case CENA20120006825, Gwendolyn Green. Violation of Ordinance Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54-181 . Description of violation: Litter consisting of but not limited to refuse, clothes, boxes, assorted metals, plastics and wood tires, et cetera. Location/address where violation exists: 3675 10th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No 410446400003. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Gwendolyn Green, 3675 10th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: May 7th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: May 9th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 1st, 2012. Date of renspection: July 16th, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Patrick. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like now to present case evidence in the following Page 47 August 23, 2012 6 2 A9 exhibits: Two photographs taken May 7th, 2012. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, anything else? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: No, that's it. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: May 7th, 2012 I responded to an anonymous complaint. I observed litter consisting of tires, clothes, refuse, boxes, et cetera. I posted the property on May 9th, 2012, and the courthouse. I have left several notices and door hangers on the property but I have not had a response. Today the violation still remains. This is actually a recurring violation at this property. It appears that they have garage sales on the weekends and then they leave the stuff out there for a period of time The other times they abated the violation, but this time still today, I mean, we're going back to May, the stuff is still out there on the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The house is not in lis pendens? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: There is a lis pendens that's been filed on May 5th, 2012. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I accept a motion. Page 48 August 23, 2012 161 2A a� MR. MIESZCAK: I make a motion a violation exists. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Do you have a suggestion? INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one Removing all litter to a site intended for final disposal or stored desired items within a completely enclosed structure within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two The respondent must notify code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. I'll tell you, I -- I wouldn't give them much time to fix this. This is nothing more than going out there and picking up the stuff and Page 49 August 23, 2012 161 2A2- putting it in the garbage can. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion. MR. DOINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have to do the days. MR. LEFEBVRE: To pay all operational costs in the amount of $80.29 incurred in the prosecution in this case within 30 days CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I was thinking more on the line of three -- MR. LEFEBVRE: No, no, no, that's to pay the 80.29. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, I'm sorry. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you want to do the motion? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: No, no, go ahead. • MR. LEFEBVRE: And within seven days of this hearing, or a fine of$500 per day. MR. MARINO: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BALDWIN: Thank you CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we're going to take a break. We'll be back here at 10:30. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Call the Code Enforcement Board Page 50 August 23, 2012 161 ZA2 ' back to meeting. And that brings us to the next case, Colleen? MS. CRAWLEY: Number eight, Case CESD20110005345, Grand Cypress Communities, Inc. (Mr. Rolan Richard and Investigator Danny Condomina were duly sworn.) MS. CRAWLEY: Case CESD20110005345, Grand Cypress Communities, Inc. Violation of Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Description of violation: Remodel, including the removal of a firewall between commercial units 604 and 605.prior to issuance of a Collier County building permit. Location/address where violation exists: 3887 Mannix Drive, Unit 605, Naples, Florida, 34114. Folio No 76885100984. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Grand Cypress Communities, Inc., 3887 Mannix Drive, Suite 612, Naples, Florida, 34114. Date violation first observed: May 11th, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: December 2nd, 2011. Day on/by which violation to be corrected: December 31st, 2011 . Date of reinspection: June 1st, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Danny, you're on INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Hello. For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs taken by me on November 30th, 2011, and one floor plan from permit 2005082207. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the Page 51 August 23, 2012 161 2A � photographs? MR. RICHARD: Yes. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Yes. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photographs. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second: All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed?' (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: For the case details, the original complaint came from the fire department inspector. I observed unit 604 and 605 altered and combined through the removal of a fire barrier wall prior to issuance of permit. Business owner applied for permits and went through several issues trying to get that permit accepted. He ran into also financial issues regarding that permit. I have spoken with Larry Goad, who also -- he's the registered agent and property manager of these commercial units through phone calls and email to inform him of the issues of this unit -- of these units. Two new permits have been issued to replace the missing section of the walls for these two units. No certificate of completion. Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Could you identify yourself and your relationship to the business? MR. RICHARD: I'm -- I own Cafe Portafino and Portafino Bay Page 52 Au ust 2412 12 ibi and Company who leased the building off of Larry. So essentially I took the wall down, he didn't. But I'm encompassed by fire walls all the way around, and it wasn't a structural wall so I figured it was okay. You know, my bad now that I know. So it is going up this Friday, it's going back up, because we received our permit. We're just putting it back to the way it was He's actually taking Unit 604 back and he's going to lease it out because I don't need that much space anymore because we've got another retail location. And that's about -- we're just going to get everything back to the way it was And the permit's been issued for that That starts this Friday. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How long do you think it will take to get it done? MR. RICHARD: Probably take them three, four months, get everything done, back in order. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I guess our first order of business is to find if a violation exists or not Any motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion a violation exists. MR. MARINO: I'll second it CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Page 53 August 23, 2012 161 ZAP Okay, now, Danny, you have a suggestion? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: I sure do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$82.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation, using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to take a stab at this? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah, I'll do it I make a motion that the respondent pay the $82.86 within 30 days, and that he be given 120 days to correct the violation or a fine of $200 per day be imposed. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second it Okay, all those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. Page 54 August 23, 2012 161 2A7 MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Thank you CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, so you have 120 days. If they can get it done in 90 you're out of the game. MR. RICHARD: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you can't, come back and see us and we'll do whatever we need to do. MR. RICHARD: It will get done. Thank you You guys take care. MS. CRAWLEY: Number 10, Case CESD20120004188, Doreen Bigica. (Investigator Condomina was duly sworn.) MS. CRAWLEY: Case CESD20120004188, Doreen Bigica. Violation of Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Description of violation: No Collier County building permits for garage door converted to double glass doors. Location/address where violation exists: 2391 19th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No 45965880003. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Doreen Bigica, 2391 19th Street Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: March 21st, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: March 29th, 2012. Day on/by which violation to be corrected: April 28th, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 22nd, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. Page 55 August 23, 2012 161 2A .)-- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Danny. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Hello. For the record, Investigator Danny Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would now like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One photograph taken by me on March 21st, 2012, and one floor plan from permit 91-9103, showing garage door. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion -- MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. F, CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Case details. We received an anonymous complaint regarding several permit concerns on this property. After doing research I found the garage door was altered to double glass doors without permits. Property is vacant at this time I found no active foreclosure information. As of today, no permits have been obtained for this alteration. Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You need a real little car to get through that door, don't you? Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: Danny, have you been inside that unit? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: I have not. There's a fence, I Page 56 August 23, 2012 161 2A - can't -- MR. LAVINSKI: Okay. I was just wondering if-- it's obvious it's converted to a living space, so it probably has air conditioning and on and on. INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: There may I just -- there's a fence, so I was unable to access. MR. LAVINSKI: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion that a violation does exist. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Do you have a suggestion? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: I sure do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81 .43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one Obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated. Two: The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate Page 57 August 23, 2012 161 2Ao- the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance, and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provision of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a quick question. Is this property on the market that you know of? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: I saw -- there is a realty sign, and I did inform the realtor of the violations, and they said they're -- I mean, they didn't tell me anymore information. I talked to them at least twice about this CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It would be interesting to see if it's for sale how many bedrooms or what they say about that particular room. And anybody who would buy that without doing an inspection would be foolish. I'm sorry, Gerald? MR. LEFEBVRE: Is there any way that part of our motion -- or our order, I should say, that we could require access to the structure to see if in fact that was converted to a room? MS. RAWSON: I doubt it MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. MARINO: I mean, if somebody puts French doors up, you'd almost think that -- I would say 99.9 I agree, it's a room. MR. LEFEBVRE: Correct. And that's why I was saying that -- MR. MARINO: So there's electrical. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah, so you can go in there and actually see what was done to the structure. The other thing is chances are if this is listed, there might be some pictures on line, like realtor.com or something. You know, that might be another way to see -- INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: We can also look into that too. Page 58 August 23, 2012 161 2A2 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have any -- Diane, do you have access to MLS through one means or another? MS. FLAGG: They have access, but in addition they can get an entry consent form if they can get the property owner to agree. And/or there's also an option to go to the court to get access. But they'll start with looking at the listing. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to tackle the motion? MR. LEFEBVRE: I guess since I had the questions -- so many questions, the respondent is to pay $81 .43 within 30 days and abate all violations by -- let's say -- it's vacant you said, correct? INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Within 60 days or a fine of$250 per day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, we have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: I'll second it CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thank you INVESTIGATOR CONDOMINA: Thank you. MS. CRAWLEY: Number 11, Case CESD20120006530, Park East Development, LTD. (Investigator Jones was duly sworn.) Page 59 u ust 2 , 2012 A / MS. CRAWLEY: Case CESD20120006530, Park East Development, LTD. Violation of Ordinance Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.13(F). Description of violation: Failure to submit annual PUD monitoring reports. Location/address where violation exists: 5100 27th Place Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio No 36453120006. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Park East Development, LTD, 5258 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34116, care of James G. O'Gara, 5258 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: April 30th, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: May 18th, 2012. Date on/by which violation to,be corrected: June 18th, 2012. Date of reinspection: June 19th, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. INVESTIGATOR JONES Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, David. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Pretty simple here. If you'd like, I could just read you the recommendations from this point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Fine with me. We have to find them in violation first, so -- INVESTIGATOR JONES: Okay, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Just give us a quick summary. INVESTIGATOR JONES: I will Actually, I do have some additional info. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any exhibits? INVESTIGATOR JONES: I don't. I just have some email correspondence. It's another department that kind of handles this. And Page 60 August 23, 2012 161 2 A when they don't submit these PUD monitoring reports, it's pushed over to code enforcement to go to that level. There was a request sent to the respondent 1/5 of 2012, a second request was sent on 3/15 of 2012. Nothing was heard from them. So that's where we're at today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: What kind of PUD is this? INVESTIGATOR JONES: This is a -- let's take a look here. It's called Founders Plaza PUD. And according to this email correspondence, all parcels are complete with PUD monitoring submittals except for one parcel. They didn't submit the monitoring report for one parcel, so they're in violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: I'll make a motion a violation does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. DOING: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. ,k MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Passes unanimously. Mr. Lavinski is our general expert on PUD's, but let Dave go first to give us his recommendation. INVESTIGATOR JONES: Sure. Recommendation is that the Page 61 August 23, 2012 161 2 A Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one: Respondent must submit two complete copies of the planned unit development annual monitoring report form, one of three traffic county options, and one executed affidavit within blank days of this hearing or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated. Two The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any suggestions, Mr. Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Yes. I make a motion that the respondent pay the $80.86 within 30 days.. And where this is a PUD update, it's not that big a deal. So I'd like to say that they have 30 days to get that submitted or a fine of$100 per day. MR. MIESZCAK: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 62 August 23, 2012 161 2 A 9' CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Thanks, Dave? INVESTIGATOR JONES: Thank you. MR. MARINO: Mr. Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. MARINO: I see there's nobody else here except Mr. Holzkamper. Can we bring him up? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. LEFEBVRE: He's right after the next case. MR. MARINO: Is he? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. MS. CRAWLEY: We are now on to number five, old business, A, motion for imposition of fines. Number one, Case 2007050898, Mr. 99 Cents, Inc. (Supervisor Perez was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR PEREZ: For the record, Code Enforcement Supervisor Cristina Perez. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Cristina. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: This is in reference to Case No CEB2009050898. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Location: 113 Lake Trafford Road, Immokalee, Florida, 34142. Folio No 000745600000. Description: A 50-foot by 12-foot room addition without first obtaining prior Collier County permits. Past orders: On September 24, 2009, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4499, Page 2139 for more information. Page 63 August 23, 2012 161 2A7 The last extension of time was be granted on March 22nd, 2012. See the attached order of the board OR 4784, page 1797 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of June 25th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number two, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between June 21st, 2012 to June 25th, 2012, five days, for the total of $1,000. Order item number one, operational costs of$86.71 have been paid. Total amount to date, $1,000. The county recommends full abatement of fines, as the violation is abated and operational costs paid. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to,abate. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. SUPERVISOR PEREZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks Cristina. MS. CRAWLEY: Number two, Case CESD20110006971, Henry and Jan E. Holzkamper. Page 64 August 23, 2012 161 2A MR. HOLZKAMPER: We're getting to be old friends. (Mr. Holzkamper and Supervisor Snow were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All right. SUPERVISOR SNOW: Kitchell Snow, Collier County Code Enforcement. This concerns violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). The location is 3230 Thommason Drive, Naples, Florida, 34112. Folio No is 526004-4005. And the description of the violation is drywall has been removed and replaced in the east buildings bottom east unit. And the stairs in the front of the east building have been repaired to include but not limited to Handrails, steps, and supports without first obtaining all required Collier County building permits. On August 25th, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, a conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4732, Page 491 for more information. An extension of time was granted on February 23rd, 2012. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4772, and Page 1327 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board's orders as of August 7th, 2012. The fines and cost to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between May 24th, 2012 and August 7th, 2012, 76 days, for a total of$15,200. Order Item number five, operational cost of$81 .15 have been paid. Total amount to date is $15,200. The county recommends full abatement of all fines, as the Page 65 August 23, 2012 161 2 A 7 violation is abated and operational costs paid. MR. MARINO: I'll make a motion we abate all fines. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a motion and a second to abate all fines. This might be the last time we see you in a long time All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries. SUPERVISOR SNOW: We thank the board. MR. HOLZKAMPER: I'm a happy Henry, thank you MR. MIESZCAK: All about the staircase. MS. CRAWLEY: Number three, Case CESD20110015948, Michael Zager and Paula J. Rhoads. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with violation of Collier County -- THE COURT REPORTER: Joe, let me swear you in, please. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Oh, sorry. (Investigator Joe Mucha was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with violations of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(e). Page 66 August 23, 2012 1tI 2A2r Violation location: 557 Cypress Way East, Naples, 4110. olio No. 65322840006. Violation description is remodeling alterations to the inside and outside of house without first obtaining the proper Collier County permits and inspections. Past orders: On April 26th, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, Book 4795, Page 314 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of today, August 23rd, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at a rate of$150 per day for the period between June 26th, 2012 and August 23rd, 2012, 59 days, for the total of 8,850. And fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of $81 .15 have not been paid. Total amount to date is $8,931 .15. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fines. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 67 August 23, 2012 161 2A (°--" CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries. The fines are imposed. MS. CRAWLEY: Number five, Case CESD20110014201253, Tommy Pickren. (Investigator Joe Mucha was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is dealing with violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). The violation location is 1072 north Alhambra Circle, Naples, 34103. The Folio No. is 63401440002. TM Violation description is an unpermitted shed with utilities in the rear yard. Past orders: On March 22nd, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, Book 4784, Page 1837 for more information. The property is in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of July 26th, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at a rate of $200 per day for the period between April 22nd, 2012 and July 26th, 2012, or 96 days, for the total of$19,200. Order number Item five, operational costs of$81.43 have been paid. Total amount to date is $19,200. And the county is recommending abatement of$19,200 in daily fines due to the case being in compliance and the operational costs having been paid. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a question regarding this property. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Yes, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: This property went to foreclosure, bank took it bank in April, I think, correct? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Yes. Page 68 August 23, 2012 161 2A ?-- MR. LEFEBVRE: How come it's not reflected on here, the bank's name? INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: I don't -- I think -- I think Tommy Pickren is still technically the owner. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. I mean, I know on public records it's showing as a bank foreclosure in April. I know this case was withdrawn. The imposition of fines I think was withdrawn a month or two ago, or the case was withdrawn. It probably doesn't matter much, because there's not going to be any fines on the property, I'm just -- INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: I'm not sure. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, very good. I make a motion that we abate the fines. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye.' MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR MUCHA: Thank you MS'. CRAWLEY: Number six, Case CELU20110009421, Terry Hernandez and Brian K. Fults. (Investigator Box was duly sworn.) INVESTIGATOR BOX: For the record, my name is Investigator Heinz Box, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is regarding violations of the Collier County Land Page 69 August 23, 2012 161 2A9 Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Section 2.02.03. Location of violation is 2700 47th Terrace Southwest, Naples, Florida, 34116. Folio number 35988400001. Description of violation is a pool built on the property with no primary structure. And a pool water green with algae. Past orders: On October 27th, 2011, the Code Enforcement Board issued a findings of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board, OR 4734, Page 2795 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of August 23rd, 20112. The fines and costs to date are described as following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$150 a day for the period between,December 12th, 2011 and August 23rd, 2012, 256 days, for a total of$38,400. And fines continue to accrue. Order item number four, abatement costs in the amount of 6,530 have not been paid. Order Item number five, operational costs of$80.86 have not been paid. The total amount is $45,010.86. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a couple questions. Why has it taken so long for it to come back in front of us? And the fines continue to accrue; is that correct? INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes, uh-huh. MR. LEFEBVRE: But it says abatement costs of 6,530. I mean, that's contradictory. INVESTIGATOR BOX: Okay. On reviewing this case -- I got this case just recently, okay. And on reviewing it, it seemed like there were two parts to this case. The first one was the fact that the pool was not permitted, and the second part of it was because the county had to go and put some type of netting material over the top of the pool. I Page 70 August 23, 2012 161 2A9- believe that $6,500 is what the cost was to have that pool secured. MR. LEFEBVRE: Secured similar to what a bank would do -- INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- when they foreclose on the property -- INVESTIGATOR BOX: That's correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- with a pool? Okay. But the pool is still there? INVESTIGATOR BOX: Yes, the pool is still there and it's unpermitted. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion -- well, before I make a motion, is it in fact in foreclosure right now? INVESTIGATOR BOX: To the best of my knowledge, no, it's not in foreclosure. It's still owned. MR. LEFEBVRE: And there's no primary structure, no house -- INVESTIGATOR BOX: No, there's no home there at all MR. LEFEBVRE: Was there ever a house there? INVESTIGATOR BOX: Honestly, I don't know. I just got the case and I didn't look that deep into it MR. LEFEBVRE: No problem. I make a motion to impose a fine. MR. DOING: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 71 t123, 201 2 t- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. INVESTIGATOR BOX: Thank you. MS. CRAWLEY: Number eight, Case CESD20110013644, Giselle and Alejandro Melendi. (Supervisor Jeff Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Just in reference to that last case, there was a house there at one point that got destroyed by Wilma. They demolished it For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Original violation is of the Collier County Land Development . .......... . ........: Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). The violation location is at 3680 Forth Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Folio No 40865680007. Violation description is attached garage enclosed and turned into living space, detached garage and swimming pool with enclosure built without Collier County building permits. On April 26th, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact and conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4795, Page 333, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board order as of July -- excuse me, August 23rd, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$200 per day for the period between June 26th, 2012 and August 23rd, 2012, totaling 59 days, for the total amount of$11,800. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$80.57 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $11,880.57. Page 72 August 23, 2012 161 2AD " CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any motion from the board? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose a fine. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) • CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carnes unanimously. MS. CRAWLEY: Number 10, Case CEPM20100019476, Erick Dorestil and Elvita Pierre. (Supervisor Jeff Letourneau was duly sworn.) SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Original violation, 2010 Florida Building Code, Chapter 4, Section 424.2317, and Ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), and the Collier County codes of laws and ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231, Subsection 15. The violation location: 3661 12th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Folio No. 40527040008. Violation description: No protective barrier securing the swimming pool. Swimming pool permit expired without obtaining a certificate of completion. Past order: On June 28th, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached Order of the Board OR 4816, Page 73 August 23, 2012 161 2A2 Page 1512 for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of August 23rd, 2012. The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order item number one and two, fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between July 6th, 2012 and August 23rd, 2012, totaling 49 days, for the total of$12,250. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item number five, operational costs of$81 .72 have not been paid. Total amount to date, $12,331.72. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fine. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOING: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye._ MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. LEFEBVRE: I have a question. When would the county go in -- since it says no protective barrier, I mean, it's been two months now since we've ruled. SUPERVISOR LETOURNEAU: Actually, right now the property's in lis pendens with Indy Mac, and we're negotiating with the bank trying to get them to take care of it. If they don't, we would have to go in. Hopefully the bank will take care of it though. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, great. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Colleen, where does that leave Page 74 August 23, 2012 161 2A9— us? MS. CRAWLEY: We are under reports. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any reports? MS. FLAGG: Yes, Mr. Chair, we do. As of August 15th, the banks have spent more than $2.8 million to abate 2,339 violations in Collier County. And just as a reminder, the banks can only abate if the house is unoccupied. So for those homes that have occupancy, they do come before you and then the county can abate by virtue of your order. So that's -- either the banks abate or we abate, depending upon the occupancy of the home. In regard to how much the banks have spent, just the first 10 months of this fiscal year they've spent $444,000 and abated 281 code cases. For the week ending August 15th, there were 168 code cases opened, just in that one week. And again, cases are opened based upon complaints by community members and/or if there's a vacant home the sheriffs office and the code enforcement officers do sweeps through neighborhoods, and their focus is on addressing vacant homes or foreclosed homes. As of again the 10 months, there's been 7,265 code cases opened. There's been 24,306 property inspections. There's been 3,901 cases closed with voluntary compliance, meaning those are cases that they worked with the property owner and the property owner made a decision to go ahead and abate the violation before it had to come to a hearing. There have been 100 -- just this year, the 10 months of this year there's been 122 meet and greet events. That's where the investigators join up with the other members of the community task force members, go out, talk to community members, talk to them about their neighborhood, followed by 19 cleanup events. And that's where the Page 75 August 23, 2012 161 a A 9- investigators through their community task force teams go out in neighborhoods and instead of citing them for violations provide dumpsters and help them get rid of the litter and the debris and the items in their neighborhood. So they've had 19 of those events. They've also done 20 vacant home sweeps in the first 10 months of this year The amount of fines waived by both yourselves, the special magistrate and the BCC just in the first 10 months of this year is more than $1 .4 million in fines that have been waived. As I talked to you at the last meeting, bankruptcy, we're seeing more and more bankruptcies occur. And we've received 81 new bankruptcy notifications, and the number of cases affected by bankruptcy right now are averaging 50. The number of documents we've received in the first -- bankruptcy documents we've received in the first 10 months of this year is 528 bankruptcy documents. The program that was initiated several years ago with the lien search program where owners that are thinking about buying a property, they contact our office,we let them know whether there's an open code case, whether there's an existing order or lien on the property, there's been 6,469 lien searches requested in the first 10 months of this year And of those, more than 6,310 identified that there was an issue on the property. So that gave the potential purchaser advance warning that there was an issue on the property so that they didn't buy the property not knowing that there was an issue on the property. And with that, I don't know if you have any questions. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you could, could you email me the report? I want to present that to one of the other committees I'm on in NAB OR. MS. FLAGG: I'd be happy to. MR. MARINO: I'd like to make a comment, Diane, on your little Page 76 1 fAgist e 22412 group of people. I'll call them a little group of people. They are doing a great job for -- keeping an eye on the fire industry. MS. FLAGG: Thank you. MR. MARINO: I've been getting my reports and they're doing a good job with that also MS. FLAGG: Thank you CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I hope we're all safe and we all can get that storm to go a little bit further out in the Gulf of Mexico. MR. MIESZCAK: I make a motion to adjourn so we can go home and put up our shutters. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. HUDSON: Aye. MR. DOINO: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. MIESZCAK: Aye. MR. MARINO: Aye. . CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN Okay, we're adjourned. Page 77 1 ôigusta ? There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :31 a.m. C• I ENFORCEMENT BOARD Re ERT •rA U 'a Z , Chairman These minutes approved by the Board on presented q. Q01 c� as resented �/ or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM. Page 78 161 2A September 27, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Naples, Florida, September 27, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Code Enforcement Board, in and for the County of Collier, 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: Robert Kaufman Kenneth Kelly Gerald Lefebvre James Lavinski Larry Mieszcak Lionel L'Esperance (Arrived Late) Tony Marino Ron Doino (Absent) Chris Hudson (Alternate) ALSO PRESENT: Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Jean Rawson, Attorney to the board Page 1 161 2A � September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board to order. Notice: The respondent may be limited to 20 minutes for case presentation unless additional time is granted by the board. Persons wishing to speak on any agenda item will receive up to five minutes unless the time is adjusted by the chairman. All parties participating in the public hearing are asked to observe Robert's Rules of Order and speak one at a time so that the court reporter can record all statements being made. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Code Enforcement Board shall be responsible for providing this record. Roll call, please. MS. BAKER: Mr. Robert Kaufman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? MR. LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Ken Kelly? MR. KELLY: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Tony Marino? MR. MARINO: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Larry Mieszcak? MR. MIESZCAK: Here. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chris Hudson? MR. HUDSON: Here. MS. BAKER: And Mr. Lionel L'Esperance is absent, and Mr. Ron Doino, Jr., is also absent today. Page 2 161 2A �' September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So, Chris, you will be a voting member today to fill the -- Lionel's seat. Okay. Do we have any changes, maybe, in the agenda? MS. BAKER: Yes, we do. Under No. 4, public hearings, motions, Letter A, motions, motion for continuance, we have two additions. Number 2 will be No. 2 from hearings, Steve and Alice Poseley, Case CESD20120001351. Number 3 will be No. 20 from hearings, Thu-Nhut Nguyen, Case CEPM20120001592. Under motion for extension of time, we have three additions. Number 4 will be No. 1 from imposition of fines, Maderline and Edileydis Gonzalez, Case CESD20110000679. Number 5 will be No. 2 from imposition of fines, Bruce Blocker, Case CESD20100005205. Number 6 will be No. 6 from imposition of fines, Silver Lakes Property Owners Association of Collier County, Case CELU20100004523. Under stipulations, we have five stipulations. The first will be No. 3 from hearings, Teymur Akhundov, Case CESD20110008224. The second will be No. 8 from hearings, Jenna Holbrook, Case CESD20120002199. Number 3 will be No. 17 from hearings, Peter Salazar Lopez and Monica O. Coariti DeSalazar, Case CESD20120007390. (Mr. Lionel L'Esperance entered the hearing room.) MS. BAKER: Number 4 will be No. 18 from hearings, Peter Salazar Lopez and Monica O. Coariti DeSalazar, Case CESD20120007391 . Number 5 will be No. 19 from hearings, Peter Salazar Lopez and Monica O. Coariti DeSalazar, Case CESD20120007393. Under Letter C, hearings, No. 5, Case CEOCC20120002338, Page 3 16 I 2 A V September 27, 2012 Robert E. and Colleen Rossomando, has been withdrawn. Number 6, Case CESD20110010944, Dan R. and Susie L. Rickard, has been withdrawn. Number 12, Case CESD20120003835, Noham Kilinsky, has been withdrawn. Number 16, Case CESD20120000028, Esteban Santiago Ramirez and Nassario Eligio Santiago, has been withdrawn. Under No. 5, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens, No. 3, Case CEPM20120003266, Integrity First CR Services, has been withdrawn. And No. 5, Case CESD20100016684, Joseph R. and Betty J. Faircloth, has been withdrawn. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Before we accept a motion to accept the changes to the agenda, let me just -- since Lionel has just arrived, he will be the regular voting member, and Chris will be the alternate. Okay. I'll accept a motion to accept the changes. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the changes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Second by Mr. Lefebvre. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 4 i ' ' Spember 1 hplmbei"272012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. Approval of minutes. Do we have any changes on the minutes from any of the board? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to approve the minutes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to approve it. Do we -- MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second by Tony. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: (Abstaining.) MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. KELLY: One abstention. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One abstention. Yeah, Mr. Kelly was not at the last meeting. Okay. Which brings us to motions. MS. BAKER: The first motion for continuance will be Paul and Cathleen Burcky, Case CESD20110011764. You'll find their request under No. 1 from hearings. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. ASARO: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we even begin, I have one question. Have the fees been paid on this one? MS. BAKER: They haven't been to a hearing yet. Page 5 161 2 A 9- September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. Just asking for the continuance. You've been in touch with the respondent; can you give us a quickie background on the case? MR. ASARO: Yes. As a matter of fact, I spoke to Mr. Burcky. I was hoping he was going to be here today. Unfortunately, he's been having some financial difficulties. He's recently lost his job, and he's trying -- presently trying to save his house with his lender. So, basically, everything's been on hold for now. One of the permits isn't ready for issuance status for the pole barn, but everything's just been on hold. Yeah, he -- that's basically what he related to me. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: I guess I don't understand why he's not here, and we're just talking about a permit; is that correct? MR. ASARO: It's actually -- it's actually a permit for the pole barn and a permit to demo the two-story structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We're talking, to begin with, $400. That's what it says on the letter. MR. ASARO: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: To -- MR. KELLY: Can I make a suggestion to the board? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. KELLY: If we were to deny the request for continuance, go to the regular hearing, and then struck the -- construct the resolution to give him the time that he's asking for, perhaps that would be a way to save an agenda spot in the future, give the respondent what they are asking for, at the same time, make it more official. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yeah. And this has been going on since August of last year. So I would agree with Mr. Kelly and have this go to a hearing and structure a -- exactly the way Mr. Kelly said. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So first things first; we need to deny Page 6 161 2Aa" September 27, 2012 the -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- request. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to deny the request. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. Okay. So we will hear that when it comes up today. MR. ASARO: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Next case is? MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 2, which was No. 2 from hearings, Steve and Alice Poseley, Case CESD20120001351. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. MUCHA: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you give us a little background on this? MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. I've been in touch with the property owners. They are out-of-state owners, and they're not coming back till October. They have two inspections left on their permit. It's an unoccupied structure. They Page 7 161 2Aa' September 27, 2012 need their final electrical and final building, and it will be a wrap. So they just basically needed more time because they're out of state. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So they'll be back in October? MR. MUCHA: Yes, sir, yes, sir. And, actually, we had continued this case last month, and I didn't mean for it to come on this agenda. I wanted to push it to the November agenda, if needed. But I feel pretty confident that they're going to take care of this issue, and the case will be closed. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Kelly, would you like to give us your MR. KELLY: Ditto from the last case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's what I thought. Okay. So what we're basically asking for is to deny the continuance request, and when we hear the case, we will be able to act accordingly, okay? MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to deny. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to deny. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thanks. Page 8 161 2 9 September 27, 12 MS. BAKER: The next will be No. 3, which was No. 20 from hearings, Thu-Nhut Nguyen, Case CEPM20120001592. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Boy, you're fast. He got there before I got my tab. Okay. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BALDWIN: I spoke with the owners on Monday of this week. They are -- as Joe stated in the previous case, they are out of town as well, out of state. And they did board up the property. And the case was -- they just didn't get a boarding certificate before. But some vagrants or scoundrels in the neighborhood broke into the property again, and it is unsecured. They have a flight booked. They're coming down October 13th, and they're going to replace all of the windows in the structure. They're not going to get a boarding certificate. They're going to get permits and replace everything. They bought the home as a retirement home and, unfortunately, some people in the neighborhood keep breaking into it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Sounds similar? MR. KELLY: I would say it sounds very similar. Just keep in mind that when we do get to the hearings, just giving the respondents ample time to take care of these issues. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I need a motion to deny the -- MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion to deny. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. And do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second by Mr. Lavinski. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 9 161 2Ar September 27, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MS. BAKER: The next, moving to motion for extension of time. The first case will be Steven J. Sokol, Case CESD20110001100. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. SOKOL: Good morning. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're asking an extension of time? Why don't you let us know the story. MR. SOKOL: Yes, sir, thank you. We originally purchased this property, and it has been excavated. Some of the soil had been sold. We were given a period of six months to complete. This is a large excavation that had previously taken place by the old owner. We had put in approximately 50 dump truckloads full of soil, 20 tons of soil each, an additional 60 dump truckloads of soil, and we continue to work. One of the problems that we've had has been the rain where it's very difficult to get on the property without sliding, essentially, for the dump trucks. We're having ruts. But we have continued to do so, and we're hoping for the additional 120 days during what will be a drier period of time so that we can complete the refurbishment of the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. A question I had. Originally this was not your case; this was somebody else's case? MR. SOKOL: That's correct. Page 10 161 2A - September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And they were given 180 days originally? MR. SOKOL: Oh, no. This was my case for the 180 days, but I believe that there was some type of code enforcement before I purchased the property, but I'm not positive of that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is what we try to keep from happening, that somebody purchases a piece of property or a house where there's a violation on it, and then the property is sold, which is the case here. MR. SOKOL: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And -- yes? MR. ANDREW KELLY: May I speak? For the record, Andrew Kelly, code enforcement. On this particular case, there was a notice of violation given on the property on the original owner, and it went through two other ownerships prior to Mr. Sokol purchasing the property, but Mr. Sokol did understand when he purchased this property that there was already a violation on it. MR. SOKOL: Oh, yes, yes. I did understand that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I understand. Okay. And you think that you can have this all done by when? MR. SOKOL: Yeah. We're asking for an extension of 120 days, sir. We're now working on a more rapid cycle of getting material -- clean fill material put in there, and we have the entire back portion of the property completed. And we've been trying to update code enforcement as possible. Originally an engineer -- we'd gone to an engineer, and he suggested actually to make a lake there, which was a period of time, and get a permit, after-the-fact permit, for a small lake to be excavated, and using that dirt. Unfortunately, it was -- we did test holes in that area. There was some bedrock, so we don't have a choice but to actually do the fill. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any comments from the board? Yes. Page 11 161 a' September , 012 MR. L'ESPERANCE: I move that we grant the individual's request for 120 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion to extend the case 120 days. Do we have -- MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SOKOL: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You have 120 days. I hope we don't see you. MR. SOKOL: I hope not, too. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next will be No. 2, Urbano Hernandez and Manuel Hernandez, Case CESD20110001255. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a little story to go with this one? MS. RODRIGUEZ: For the record, Maria Rodriguez, Collier County Code Enforcement. Mr. Urbano has finished his permits. He finalized it yesterday. So he needs an extension just so that he won't get fined for the few Page 12 eptember , 12 days that -- 30-something days that he went over. But the permit is finaled, and he has abated the violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would it be appropriate for the county to withdraw this then? MS. BAKER: There -- he's already past his compliance date. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion to grant the extension of time. Thirty days. MS. RODRIGUEZ: Thirty-three days. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thirty-three days. MS. BAKER: Until today. He's in compliance, right? MS. RODRIGUEZ: Yes. MS. BAKER: So we could grant the extension until today. MR. L'ESPERANCE: But it doesn't have to be retroactive, or does it automatically be retroactive? MS. BAKER: If you grant the extension until today's date, we'll be good. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How about if we grant the extension until next month's meeting, and at that time it will probably be withdrawn. MS. BAKER: He's already in compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Make a motion to grant an extension to today. MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 13 161 2A September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 3, Carlos Ramos, Case CESD20110005108. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. RAMOS: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can you give us a little background on this case? I did read your note. MR. RAMOS: I'm almost done with my house, and I'd like to get at least 120-day extension, if I could. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If I'm reading the letter that you wrote correctly, you're asking for six months. MR. RAMOS: Well, if I can get the six months, it would be better. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's not Let's Make a Deal. MR. RAMOS: I know. Yeah, that would be good for six months, if I could. I've got a few things I need to get done and, financially, I'm kind of hurting. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Was the $80.86 paid on this? MR. RAMOS: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. As I read the documentation, there was no CO on the house; is that correct? MR. CONDOMINA: Yes. For the record, Investigator Dan Condomina, Collier County Code Enforcement. He has all the inspections done for the home. The shed permit has to be completed before they'll allow him to get a certificate of completion on everything, so -- it's a shed and a home. All the Page 14 1 61 2 A g' September 27, 2012 inspections have been done on the house. All that's waiting for is the shed to be completed and, therefore, they'll give him the certificate of completion for both. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the shed been built? MR. CONDOMINA: The shed is -- it's an older shed, so he had to -- that was installed on the property and, therefore, it needs to meet all of today's requirements, and that's what's taking him a little bit, too. MR. RAMOS: Excuse me. It's a Ted's Shed. And it was given to me, and it's been there for about 20 years. But my neighbor got mad, so he called the code enforcement on me, so that's why I'm dealing with you guys. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. What needs to be done to the shed? MR. RAMOS: I need to approve (sic) some -- the deck and what kind of materials that's on the deck. And, well, I already applied for the permits, and I'm hoping to get it done soon. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: Are we talking about a slab that has to be poured so he could put it on it? MR. RAMOS, JR: No. It's just -- excuse me. It's just what needs to be done to the shed is two-and-a-half inches on the railing, and that's it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you think that's going to take three months? MR. RAMOS: No. I'm hoping it takes less. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RAMOS: But another thing, I need to clear some stuff around there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. CONDOMINA: Excuse me. Can I speak for a second? He's had rejections on his plans. He's been pretty much doing it all himself, and there's just been some confusions on some of the Page 15 i6i 2 a-- September 27, 2012 rejections. So he hasn't -- he's still in the application status of the shed, so it's better that he doesn't sit here and do all that stuff until he gets the actual, you know, application approved. So he's been working on that. But he stopped working on the shed because he wanted to get all the stuff done on the house first and, you know, all his financial, you know, means went to the house. So now he's going to work on the shed. He has it activated again. The permit is active, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you have no problem in granting the extension? MR. CONDOMINA: No, no objection. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions from the board? MR. LEFEBVRE: Considering it's been there for 20 years, I make a motion that we grant an extension of time of 180 days from today. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion, and we have a second by Mr. L'Esperance. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. You have Page 16 161 2 A 2- September 27, 2012 180 days, six months. MR. RAMOS: Thank you. Thank you, sir. MR. RAMOS, JR: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 4, which was No. 1 from imposition, Maderline and Edileydis Gonzalez, Case CESD20110000679. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's under the imposition, Tab 24. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. You look very familiar. MR. ASARO: I do, don't I? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MS. GONZALEZ: Good morning. MR. GONZALEZ: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You're requesting an extension of time on this? MS. GONZALEZ: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Can you give us some background? MS. GONZALEZ: Well, we already finish, you know, the property. We add in the bedroom and bathroom, and we already, you know, finished the permits for that one. The other thing we need are pepper tree, and it's -- the plans. So we need to take off all of this one for the property. And we -- right now we don't have any money for finish that one, so that's why I'm asking for getting more time, to finish that one. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SNOW: Yes, ma'am, I do so swear. For the record, Kitchell Snow, Code Enforcement. I spoke to the respondents this morning. They've done everything they need to do as far as their permit's concerned, but they have a lot of exotics on the property. They have all the inspections completed Page 17 161 2A � September 27, 2012 other than getting the exotics off, and that's what they're requesting time to do. They've been working very diligently toward compliance. They just need time to remove the exotics. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. L'ESPERANCE: What's your recommendation for the time period, Mr. Snow? MR. SNOW: I believe whatever they requested. Do you -- how long, sir? MR. GONZALEZ: I try -- MS. GONZALEZ: I request one year, but the best you can do, you know. MR. SNOW: If we give them six months, then we can bring them back at that time if they need more time before you, but it is an extensive project. There are a lot of exotics on the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This originally was granted six months; is that correct? MR. SNOW: Yes, sir, and they did everything during that six months. They got everything done but the exotics. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: We also granted a motion of extension of time on January 19, 2012. So I don't know when the case was opened, but it has been a substantial amount of time that has been granted at this point. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant the individuals' request for 180 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Six months. MR. MARINO: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and we have a second, Tony. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? Page 18 161 2A - September 27, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. You have six months. MS. GONZALEZ: Thank you. Okay. Thank you so much. MR. GONZALEZ: We appreciate it. MS. BAKER: Next will be No. 5, which was No. 2 from imposition, Bruce Blocker, Case CESD20100005205. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Blocker? MR. JOHNS: No, sir. I'm here to represent Mr. Blocker. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And your name is? MR. JOHNS: Randy Johns. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, Randy. Can you give us a little background? MR. JOHNS: Yes, sir. We're just asking for six months to the -- they're rewriting some of the LDC language now. And we applied to get an SIP plan done for this, and when the comments came back, they came back as an SDP. So we're trying to come up with -- trying to come to an agreement with the planners on the requirements they want for this project. We haven't got a direct answer yet. MR. LEFEBVRE: Are you talking about the Immokalee Master Plan? MR. JOHNS: Master plan and the LDC that they're writing for Page 19 161 2A - September 27, 2012 it. We've made requests, and we don't know if we're going to get it. It's really complicated at this time. Any mobile homes and structures that were in place before 1991 when the LDC was amended, we're trying to get that where those people are going to be legal. So we're just kind of waiting to see where the planners are going with this. MR. LEFEBVRE: Does the Immokalee Master Plan have to be in place and voted on and agreed upon by the commissioners before they can work on the LDC? MR. JOHNS: No, sir. MR. LEFEBVRE: It's going to be in tandem; both of them are going to be heard hand in hand? MR. JOHNS: Immokalee has a master plan, so they can amend the LDC at any time. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. PEREZ: Yes, they are -- they're two separate. For the record, Cristina Perez, code enforcement. Two separate issues. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. PEREZ: And the county has no objection with the request of the six-month extension. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any other discussion from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Can we get a motion from the board? MR. KELLY: Motion to grant the extension as requested for six months. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion, and we have a second. All those in favor? Page 20 161 2A0-- September 27, 2012 MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously. Six months. MR. JOHNS: Thank you. MS. PEREZ: Thank you, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good luck. MS. BAKER: Next will be No. 6, which was No. 6 from impositions, Silver Lakes Property Owners Association of Collier County, Case CELU20100004523. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Before we go on with this, I see that they're in compliance, if I'm correct. MR. SNOW: No, they're not in compliance. They have paid. Not in compliance. They have their SIP in process, SDP in process. It's just taking them longer to do it than they anticipated. There was some delays on the county side, and they've been getting their permits. They've been diligent in what they're doing; it's just taking longer for them to come into compliance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I guess he said it all. MR. BENNETT: He has. My name's Conway Bennett, for the record. I'm the park manager. But, yeah, we've been trying to get everything done. We didn't get the SDP actually approved till, like, June. We took down the old fence, got the fencing permit, the fence is up, and we're in the process of getting the fire hydrant and the roadway. It's just taken three weeks Page 21 161 2A9- September 27, 2012 or more to get a permit, and then to get people to sign off on it, so we're just chugging along trying to get it done. I want it done before everybody gets back, but it's not going to happen. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How much time do you need to, you think, iron everything out? MR. BENNETT: If everything goes smoothly, I'd say six months. MR. SNOW: It's not a health and safety issue. It's outside storage, paving. Just to give you a little bit of history on this, the builder did use it for outside storage. It never was permitted, it never was on the original Site Development Plan. That's the reason -- somebody complained. That's the reason this happened. So they have been diligent in trying to do what they're going to do, and they have used it for a long time. There's no health and safety issue there. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll make a motion for extension, six months. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It also carries unanimously. Page 22 161 2A9- September 27, 2012 MR. BENNETT: Thank you. MR. SNOW: Thank the board. MS. BAKER: Okay. Moving onto Letter B, stipulations, the first stipulation will be No. 3 from hearings, Teymur Akhundov, Case CESD20110008224. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning, again. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see this was a problem with the expired -- two expired permits. MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And do you want to go through your stipulation? MR. BALDWIN: Sure. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within 180 days of this hearing, or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the board? Yes? MR. KELLY: One question. There's three permits. Page 23 161 2A September 27, 2012 MR. BALDWIN: Correct. MR. KELLY: Are they the same permit that's been reapplied for multiple times, or are they different areas? MR. BALDWIN: They're three separate. There's one for a guesthouse, one for an attached garage, and one for another garage. The previous owners -- this owner bought the property, I believe, in June of this year. He has reapplied for the new permits, and he's in the process of it. They were -- two of the permits -- one permit was rejected, one permit was canceled, and the other permit he applied for a demo permit to remove the garage. He has actually applied for two other permits. MR. KELLY: To help with timing, how long do you think it would take someone to get this taken care of? MR. BALDWIN: He says in six months everything should be done. He's working pretty diligently to handle this, and he has paid the operational costs already. MR. KELLY: Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other comments from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any motions from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept the stipulation as written. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. Any other comments from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 24 161 2A9 September 27, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next stipulation agreement is No. 8 from hearings, Jenna Holbrook, Case CESD20120002199. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. I see this was a garage conversion. MR. AMBACH: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And why don't you read us the stipulation that's been agreed to. MR. AMBACH: Very good. For the record, Investigator Chris Ambach, Collier County Code Enforcement. Therefore, it is agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Abate all violations by obtaining Collier County building permits or a demolition permit, inspections, and a certificate of completion/occupancy within 120 days of this hearing or a fine of $150 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Unpermitted living space must be unoccupied and utilities turned off within 24 hours of this hearing until the building permit or demolition permit has received a certificate of completion/occupancy, or a fine of$250 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may Page 25 161 2A9 September A 27, 2012 abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You've heard the stipulation and you've signed it. MS. HOLBROOK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you think you can make all the dates that were required in here, the 24 hours and the 120 days? MS. HOLBROOK: Yes, sir. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the stipulation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept it. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second, Mr. Lavinski. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you very much. MS. HOLBROOK: Thank you. MR. AMBACH: Thank you. MS. BAKER: The next stipulation will be No. 17 from hearings, Peter Salazar Lopez and Monica O. Coariti DeSalizar, Case CESD20120007390. Page 26 161 2p September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see we have three of them there. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Joe, you want to read the stipulation? MR. MUCHA: Okay. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement, and this is the stipulation for Case CESD20120007390. I met with Mr. Antonio Brown this morning that provided documentation that he is acting as power of attorney for the respondents. It was agreed between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificates of completion/occupancy within 90 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; That the respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Good morning. MR. BROWN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could you give us your name for the record. MR. BROWN: Antonio Brown. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you have the authority to -- Page 27 161 2A2 . September 27, 2012 MR. BROWN: Yes, I'm here in behalf of Peter Salazar and Monica Coariti. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you know the stipulation; you agree to it? MR. BROWN: Yes. Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anything from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a motion from the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to accept the stipulation as written. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BROWN: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Don't go away. That's the first case. MR. BROWN: Oh, sorry. MS. BAKER: The next case will be No. 19, Case CESD20120007393 -- nope, I'm sorry. Number 18, Case CESD20120007391, Peter Salazar Lopez and Monica O. Coariti DeSalizar. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Joe? Page 28 1 61 2A 9— September 27, 2012 MR. MUCHA: Okay. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. I met with Mr. Antonio Brown this morning, who provided documentation that he is acting as power of attorney for the respondents. There was an agreement made between the parties that the respondent shall pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; And to abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificates of completion/occupancy within 90 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; The respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; That if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Same questions as before. MR. BROWN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have permission to agree to this? MR. BROWN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And you do agree to the stipulation as written? MR. BROWN: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How say the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. Page 29 2 A )-- ep ember 27, n12 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. Last one. MS. BAKER: Next is No. 19, CESD20120007393, Peter Salazar Lopez and Monica O. Coariti DeSalizar. MR. MUCHA: Okay. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. I met with Mr. Antonio Brown this morning, who provided documentation that he has the authority to act as power of attorney for the respondent. An agreement was made between the parties that the respondents shall, one, pay operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing; Two, to abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections and certificates of completion/occupancy within 90 days of this hearing, or a fine of$200 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, the respondent must notify code enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance; Four, that if the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into Page 30 161 2 A 2- September 27, 2012 compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. And same questions again. MR. BROWN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have the authority to act on behalf of the respondent? MR. BROWN: Yes, I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you accept the stipulation as written? MR. BROWN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How say the board? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. MR. BROWN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Moving on to Letter C, hearings, No. 1, Case Page 31 161 2 A 9-- September 27, 2012 CESD20110011764, Paul and Cathleen Burcky. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Two-story concrete and wood structure located in the rear property area without first obtaining Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 4425 North Road, Naples, Florida, 34104; Folio No. 26480720007. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Paul A. and Cathleen T. Burcky, 4425 North Road, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: August 30, 2011 . Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: December 16, 2011. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: January 16, 2012. Date of reinspection: January 27, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. This is the one we heard earlier today that requires how much time to bring them into compliance? Sixty days? MR. KELLY: That's what they're requesting. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Right. MR. KELLY: I make a motion that a violation does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion that a violation exists. Do we have a second? MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. Page 32 161 2 A2-- September 27, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. And your suggestion? MR. ASARO: I'm going to read the -- MS. BAKER: Recommendation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. ASARO: Yeah, my recommendation. MR. SNOW: Didn't you already make a recommendation for that? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. KELLY: And let me clarify. The reason we jumped ahead so quickly is because in the respondent's own letter, he admits to a violation. MR. ASARO: The code enforcement -- for the record, Tony Asaro, Collier County Code Enforcement Department. The Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days, and abate all violations by obtaining all Collier County building permits or a Collier County demolition permit, request all required inspections, and obtain a certificate of completion within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement. If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Page 33 161 2AQ September 27, 2012 Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any suggestions from the board? MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation and, to fill in the blanks, 60 days, as requested by the respondent, or a fine of$150 per day. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Comments on the motion? He specified in the letter that he needed the $400. So just as a follow-up to the respondent, should this motion pass, the one $150 a day adds up to more than the 400 quite quickly, so he should be aware of that, and that if he needs more time or something -- MR. ASARO: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to come back to us before the date is reached. Okay. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. ASARO: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next is No. 2, Case CESD20120001351, Steve and Alice Poseley. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Page 34 bbl 2A 2— September 27, 2012 Code of Laws and Ordinances, building and land alteration permits, Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and (e). Description of violation: Interior demo work being done with no permit obtained. Location/address where violation exists: 706 West Valley Drive, Bonita Springs, Florida, 34134 -- 34134; Folio 24537040001. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Steve and Alice Poseley, 24741 Northeast Ce Dah Drive, Elkhart, Indiana, 46516. Date violation first observed: January 27, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: February 4, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 29, 2012. Date of reinspection: July 2, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Joe, do you want to give us your recommendation -- oh, first, do we find the respondent in violation? MR. KELLY: I make a motion to the effect. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion that the respondent is in violation. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 35 161 2A - September 27, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Now, your recommendation. MR. MUCHA: Okay. For the record, Joe Mucha, Collier County Code Enforcement. Recommendation: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days; And to abate all violations by obtaining all inspections and certificates of completion/certificates of occupancy for Permit PRBD20120203404 within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct the final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Any comments from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: My first question is, how much time do we really think is required to have this done? MR. MUCHA: They were asking for the end of October, so maybe 90 days, just to be safe. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any motion from the board? MR. KELLY: Make a motion we accept the county's recommendation with 90 days, and a fine of$150 per day. MR. LEFEBVRE: Second that motion. Page 36 161 2A - September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. MUCHA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 4, Case CEVR20110014958, Tiburon Golf Ventures Limited Partnership. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 4.06.05(K)(2). Description of violation: A portion of the required buffer vegetation is missing and not maintained. Location/address where violation exists: 3195 Vanderbilt Beach Road, Naples, Florida, 34109. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Lou Conzulmann, Director of Golf Course Maintenance, Tiburon Gold Ventures Limited Partnership; 24301 Walden Center Drive, Suite 300; Bonita Springs, Florida, 34134. Also care of registered agent, Corporation Service Company, 1201 Hayes Street, Tallahassee, Florida, 32301. Date violation first observed: November 23, 2011. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: December 15, 2011. Page 37 161 2Ag- September 27, 2012 Date on/by which violation to be corrected: January 15, 2012. Date of reinspection: August 14, 2012. Results of reinspection: Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Kelly, you want to present the county's case? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Thank you. Good morning. For the record, Andrew Kelly, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like now to present case evidence into the following exhibits: Four photographs dated 9/26/2012, and a copy of the Collier County approved Landscape Plan SDP 97-166. MR. KELLY: Make a motion that we accept the exhibits. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen these pictures first? MR. RAINVILLE: We have. We also have some pictures and other information, but we have seen those. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And you have no objection to them? MR. RAINVILLE: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion to accept the photos. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) Page 38 161 2A - September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Thank you. At this time I'd like to present the code's case. Code enforcement received a complaint about the required landscaping at the Tiburon golf course maintenance facility. On November 23, 2011, I conducted a site visit of the facility and determined that there were missing required landscape trees and shrubs were too small. This is a violation of the LDC for the required B buffer. The B buffer is described in the Land Development Code, 4.06.02(C)(2). At this time would you-all want me to explain the B buffer, or do you want to wait? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure, why don't you. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Okay. What's highlighted in 2 is from the Land Development Code. Can you hear me? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Fifteen-wide, 80 percent opaque with the one landscape buffer six feet in height, which may include a wall fence, hedge, berm, or a combination thereof, including trees spaced no more than 25 feet on center. In the planting of a hedge, it shall be a minimum of 10-gallon plants, five feet in height, three feet in spread, and spaced a maximum of four feet on center. I'll go to the diagram. The area that's circled in green is a typical B-type buffer. Okay. And we'll go to the chart. Per the Land Development Code -- this is Table 2.4, also in the same section -- when you have a golf course maintenance building, No. 12, and it abuts a vehicle right-of-way, which is No. 11, it is a required B buffer, and this is also shown in the evidence with the Site Development Plan showing the landscaping plans. I'll continue on. On December 15, 2011, I met with -- excuse me Page 39 161 2A49- September 27, 2012 -- met with Mr. Lou Conzelmann, director of golf course maintenance for Tiburon. I advised Mr. Conzelmann of the complaint and what was needed to bring the landscape into compliance. After discussing this, I personally served Mr. Conzelmann with the notice of violation along with a copy of the Site Development Plan showing the B buffer. On January 24th, I met with representatives of Tiburon. We discussed the case and what needed -- bringing the landscaping into compliance. Tiburon agreed to install the missing trees, and code enforcement agreed to allow the existing shrubs to grow for six months through the rainy season, then recheck for compliance. A reinspection was for August 16, 2012. On August 14, 2012, I, again, met with Mr. Conzelmann on site. The required trees were installed, but the shrubs did not attain the 6-foot height and 80 percent opacity. I advised Mr. Conzelmann that I will take this to the code enforcement unless compliance is achieved before then. On September 17, 2012, I met with Mr. Conzelmann on site, personally served the notice of hearing. So we have given them nine months to come into compliance since the original notice of violation. It should also be noted that there was a previous case on this in which the investigator advised them to plant some vegetation which is -- which currently is still there, but that vegetation was planted incorrectly in size because the order from the previous investigator was not correct, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to show us the photos that you have? MR. ANDREW KELLY: The picture shown right now -- just to let you know that the facility is on the corner of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Livingston. It's on the northwest corner. What you're looking at is the shrubbery on the outside of the fence as you look from the Livingston Road side. Page 40 161 2A9- September 27, 2012 This is a -- closer up of that same location. Just to let you know that the shrubbery is ranging between three feet to five feet on -- through most of the area. This is the most extreme case of what the worst part of the vegetation looks like. This is the vegetation. It is -- all the vegetation, the shrubs that you're seeing are cocoplum. This is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road. And this is another photograph showing that the -- approximately three feet in height in the vegetation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So you're saying -- if you go back to that previous picture, Jen, those bushes should be about as high as the crossbeam on the fence or close to that or -- MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes. That fence is running -- no, it's, I think, supposed to be a 6-foot fence. But according to the measurement, that fence is about 5 feet, 7 inches tall. So the vegetation should be as tall as the top of the fence. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So it should be five feet high? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Six feet high. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Six feet high, and the plants are planted so many feet on center. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Correct. MR. MIESZCAK: Miracle Grow. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have any other information you'd like to provide? MR. ANDREW KELLY: No, sir, not at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have any questions of the officer? MR. RAINVILLE: I don't have questions of the officer. I just want -- and agree with what he has said. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RAINVILLE: But we do have a couple of other things we would like to add. Page 41 161 2A � September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Your turn. MR. RAINVILLE: Sir, as -- Richard Rainville, and I'm the general manager of the Tiburon Golf Club, and Lou Conzelmann, our director of golf course operations superintendent. As Mr. Kelly referred to just minutes ago, that there was actually a case that started well back into 2010. In November of 2010, there was a violation given to the club, and a supervisor -- excuse me, Investigator Susan O'Farrell is -- was the investigator on the case. At that time she did meet with Lou Conzelmann, and they discussed what we would need to plant in this area to comply with the codes. At that time we did. We complied with what was given to us, the directions. And we do have some handouts that have the original complaint and the directions, the instructions to correct, specifically, which we followed to the letter, and -- or were in February of 2011, this case was closed and signed by the inspector. So she came back out, inspected it, said, "you are in compliance," and the case was closed. A year later, we -- there was another complaint on the same area, which is when Mr. Kelly got involved and came out and met with the club and Mr. Conzelmann. At that time he said that -- to us that -- we understand that you were given instructions previously; however, they were incorrect. They were not the right instructions. Well, we had already spent $7,500 to get in compliance for this area. And also at that time we agreed, okay, we're going to do all we can to get this to the proper height. It was not a question about whether the plantings were the incorrect plantings or they were planted improperly. It was a matter of the height. And we said, well, in time these are going to grow to the proper height. We were following what we were told to do. We spent the money to do that, and we added additional trees. Mr. Kelly agreed that -- at that time to grant us more time. We put an aggressive fertilization program in place. The area Page 42 161 2A September 27, 2012 itself is really -- there's a -- there is a canal, essentially, in front of it, so it's pretty low, and in the wet season it really doesn't grow as much as we had expected because it floods. And so we believe at this point that we have done what we were asked to do. Now code enforcement came back to us and said, we were wrong, sorry, and we want you to rip this out and replant it, and we just thought that that was unreasonable, considering the fact that this is just -- this will get -- we will comply, we will meet the code requirements once these plants reach that proper height. And we believe that that will happen. You know, realistically, it's still going to take more time. We were granted six months. That was certainly not enough time. We have seen a progression. And we do have some photos that do show from 2011 when the original planting was done after the first violation and the height of those at that point and then a six-month-later progression into today. And, granted, there were a couple of areas there that are weak. They -- as Mr. Kelly indicated, the most dramatic of the areas, most of them are within a couple of feet. And in those weak areas, we certainly would go back in and we would -- we would -- at this point we have no problem with trying to aggressively get those to grow to the proper height. Perhaps even add additional plantings in those areas to progress the process, get it along as fast as possible, and we're just asking for more time on that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How long is that buffer? How many linear feet? MR. RAINVILLE: There is a diagram here that says. MS. BAKER: Mr. Chair, if you'd like to accept their packet into evidence, we can give that to you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have a motion to accept their package? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the packet. Page 43 lbt 2Atc) September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. KELLY: Second. MR. MIESZCAK: If they're submitting it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the second. Do you want to submit that package to the board so that we can see it? MR. RAINVILLE: Yes, we would like to submit the package to the board. Thank you. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the package. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept the package. MR. KELLY: (Raises hand.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. RAINVILLE: To get back to your question, we believe it's 460 lineal feet on the Vanderbilt side, which is the south side, and 550 lineal feet on the Livingston side. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Are any parts of that in compliance? MR. RAINVILLE: That's a very good question. I would say that they're close, but I'm not going to -- MR. KELLY: No, sir, they're not in compliance. MR. RAINVILLE: -- be the expert on that one. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Page 44 161 2 A'-) September 27, 2012 MR. RAINVILLE: If we look at what the original inspector told us, they were in compliance. But today, no, that's not the case. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you seen this package? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes, sir, I have. MR. RAINVILLE: And the photos are very similar with the exception of the earlier photos in February 2011 that show that there was virtually nothing there. We planted the materials that we were required to at that time. And then in October of 2011 you can see significant growth, and that is in a period of, roughly, six months. And then here we are September 2012. And it depends on what angle you take these photos from. And it's important also to note that, visually, from Livingston Road, it's three feet higher than this area is. So, of course, there's going to be a perception that it -- that you're going to see part of the buildings. And that will always be the case, whether this is six feet or seven feet. And Livingston Road was not there when they originally built the club. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The trees portion of the buffer -- MR. RAINVILLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- that were required and that were planted -- MR. RAINVILLE: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- there's no problem with that? MR. RAINVILLE: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's part of the $7,500 that you spent? MR. RAINVILLE: That's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RAINVILLE: And the 75- does include all the irrigation that we had to put in in additional irrigation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So basically it's the height of the plants, and there are some empty spaces that need to be filled in as Page 45 l6L Z e)-- September 27, 2012 well. MR. RAINVILLE: There are some areas that have struggled to grow, and it's basically based on where they are. So, yes, that's accurate. There are some weak areas. MR. MARINO: Did you say that that portion has irrigation on it? MR. RAINVILLE: It all has -- the whole thing has irrigation on it. And we have -- six, seven months ago really began an aggressive fertilization program. And so we've seen some progress; granted not enough, according to the code enforcement at this stage. And we're simply saying, we believe that we will get there, and we'll work to do that. We're not arguing -- at this stage we were told the wrong information, okay. We get that. We did have a significant investment at that period of time to do that. We've done everything we believe that was asked of us to do. Now we're saying that the code that was given to us was wrong. Okay. We need more time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The process that we have is, find you in violation or not find you in violation, and if you are found in violation, then to work out the remedy after that. So I go to the board. Yes, Mr. Kelly? MR. KELLY: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. KELLY: Actually, I have two. One is to the respondent. Could you just quickly clarify the difference between what was originally told and what was told just six months ago? MR. RAINVILLE: I can tell you -- and I will state that I was not at the club at this period of time. I'm just going off of the record here. The original -- no, that's not the original one. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Excuse me. If you -- if you don't mind, I'll go ahead and answer that question, because I will -- I have Page 46 iot I 2 k September 27, 2012 the notice of violation from back from December 17, 2010, that was written by the previous investigator. The corrective action that she described -- I'll read the whole corrective action. It says, where a fence or a wall fronts an arterial or collector road as described by the Transportation Circulation Element of the Growth Management Plan and continues. And here's the issues: 3-gallon single-row hedge a minimum of 24 inches in height spaced 3 feet on center shall be planted along the right-of-way of the fence. The required trees shall be located on the side of the fence facing the right-of-way. Every effort shall be made to undulate the wall and landscaping design, incorporating trees, shrubs, and ground cover into the design. It is not the intent of this requirement to obscure from view decorative elements such as emblems, tile, molding, and wrought iron, and that comes from the Land Development Code. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So, basically, the difference was 24 inches to 60 inches? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes, sir. MR. RAINVILLE: Three gallon to 10 gallon, I think. Is that what the -- MR. ANDREW KELLY: I'll have to go back and look at the exact -- MR. KELLY: I'm just curious, why did Susan cite that then? MR. ANDREW KELLY: I can't answer that. The standards that she cited were for a fence standard. But other than that, I do not -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is it for a different size buffer? MR. ANDREW KELLY: No, I -- I don't understand what happened. You know, there is a site development plan shown clearly, a B buffer. The citation was incorrect. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: One more quick question; it might tail into this. Andrew, when you were going through your presentation, you had Page 47 161 aAi (k September 27, 2012 said that the average mean height needed to be six feet; is that correct? MR. ANDREW KELLY: That is to come into compliance with the Land Development Code. MR. KELLY: Okay. Because under the diagram, the B buffer says 60 inches, which is five feet; is that at planting or -- MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes, sir, that's at time of planting. MR. KELLY: Okay. So it should be 72 inches? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes, sir. MR. KELLY: Sorry. Diane? MS. FLAGG: Just simply, the investigator made an error. We went through all the paperwork when the second complaint came in. So we went through the investigator's paperwork, and Ms. O'Farrell simply made an error, a mistake. MR. KELLY: So there is a site development plan that's already been approved and agreed upon that supersedes any of that anyways? MS. FLAGG: As well as the Land Development Code. And I will tell you that Investigator Kelly gave these folks more time than is normally given because of the mistakes made by the prior investigator. MR. KELLY: Okay. So just to kind of sum it all up. They originally thought it had to be three-gallon, 24 inches. The real code says 10-gallon, 60 inches at planting, growing to 72. If they were found to be in violation, would they then have to go and replant all of this over again to the 10-gallon, 60-inch height? MR. ANDREW KELLY: I think in the reality, if that -- when we came through it, that I would require them to put in 60 inches -- I'm sorry, the 72-inches, since we go back to the 1997 Site Development Plan, that this shrubbery should have always been at that particular location. We would probably have given them additional time, another six months, say, if it was at five feet, to come to that six feet to -- you know, to meet that 80 percent opacity. MR. MARINO: I have a question. I might be a little bit Page 48 161 2A (2 ' September 27, 2012 confused. When the original plans were drawn up, the landscape plans were drawn up, what was required at that time? MR. ANDREW KELLY: The same standards that are -- that we presented today. A B buffer has not changed as far as the requirements. MR. MARINO: The 60 inches? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Correct. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I have a question also, maybe to dovetail with the previous question. Will these plants that are currently in the ground reach the 60- or 72-inch height? If so, how long will that take? MR. ANDREW KELLY: They will definitely eventually reach that height. The smallest one on there is going to take, you know, probably several years. But I do not see that more than -- you know, two years, is probably being, you know, pretty generous that they will reach their 60 -- I'm sorry -- the 72-inch height requirement. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So it's a matter of age of the plant as being the required time to wait for it to gain the particular height we need -- MR. ANDREW KELLY: Correct. MR. L'ESPERANCE: -- for the existing plants? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Probably should have found Jack and the beans, but that's another story. Mr. Kelly? MR. KELLY: So last point of clarification. Originally, when this property was developed, there had to have been some sort of approval for them to develop it and to continue to develop it and to get COs for buildings and so forth. So originally the county did approve the site as to plant, and now they've come back, and Susan found an issue, cited it wrong, now we found another issue, and we're getting it corrected. Page 49 161 2V/ September 27, 2012 I feel as though the county may have made two errors; one, the original approval and now, of course, with Susan's error. And now I'm -- to the board, I'm in favor of allowing the plants to stay, maybe replacing the few that are just, you know, little guys that aren't going to make it there in the next three or four years. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have to find if they're in violation first, Mr. Kelly. MR. KELLY: I'm just throwing it out there for the board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I have a question on the pictures that you provided. MR. RAINVILLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I see two pictures, one on top of the other. MR. RAINVILLE: That's correct. Just a different angle. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: One looks like -- that it's almost in compliance, the top picture. And I don't know, did somebody trim the other ones? MR. RAINVILLE: Two different locations. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Different locations? MR. RAINVILLE: Yes, it is, that's correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So my question to Mr. Kelly is, are both of these in violation or just one? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Are you looking at the September 2012 photo? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, I am. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Okay. The -- no, they're all out of compliance; they have not reached -- achieved their 80 percent opacity. There's no reason for them to -- the area that you're looking at in the top photo is on the west side of the entrance to the golf course maintenance facility. They're very close to being in compliance. They are, you know, just a little over five foot in average height at that Page 50 161 am, September 27, 2012 location, where the other trees -- excuse me -- scrubs on the bottom photo, which is showing the east side of the entrance, those are averaging between three and four feet. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me ask you another question. When this was -- this PUD was originally approved, Livingston Road was not built. MR. RAINVILLE: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So a B buffer was not required because it was not on a main road. MR. RAINVILLE: I'd make the assumption that that's correct, yes. MR. LEFEBVRE: Right. So at some point when Livingston was built, a B buffer was then required. What I -- the problem I have is there was misinformation given, they spent $7,500 to plant bushes and so forth, cocoa palms (sic), and now coming back saying, no, you know, this is what it should have been, how it should have been planted. I feel that if we do find a violation, that they should have ample time to let what is there grow, and if there are pockets that there are no bushes or holes or gaps, that we should require at that point what -- I guess, a five-foot bush. So I make a motion that a violation does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 51 16 ' eptem er 27, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So we find you in violation. MR. KELLY: I have opposition, and I'll explain the opposition. If the citation is for both zones and there was no road on one, which required it to be a different buffer zone and now there is a road, how are they in violation? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It should have been grandfather. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Just let -- what was cited in the previous -- by the previous investigator talking about the arterial portions of it, and, you know, in the site development plan, it was very clear that on all sides of the facility had to have B buffer. The side to the north and to the west, immediate west of the facility, was not required to have a buffer because the area in question is part of the preserve, so that preserve automatically acted as the buffer, exceeded the standards of the buffer. So what we're looking at here are strictly the two sides, what's currently on the east side and the south side of the facility. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, the county knew that they were building Livingston Road for the last 50 years. I mean, that road took a long time to get built. So they probably -- and I don't know this for sure unless I were to look at the SDP -- SDP, whether they required a B buffer or not. They probably did knowing the road was going in there. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Okay. The drawing you're seeing is from the approved Site Development Plan showing the B buffer. In order for them to have received their certifications as far as -- they would have had to come into compliance at that point in time. You know, as far as we know, at the time of completion, they were in compliance with the county regulations at that time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. The motion to find in violation passes with Mr. Kelly dissenting. So now how do we put the baby back together? And I -- my Page 52 161 2 A e), September 27, 2012 comments are on what Mr. Lefebvre said; it looks like one of the buffers is almost there. And based on everything that's happened, that's a good thing that it's almost there, and I guess that it's possible we can wait for it to grow a little bit longer. The other side, where you may have missing plants, it's up to you, but I would think that that probably could be worked out with the county to replace the plants that are missing in those areas that have nothing and put some additions in there to bring it up to a higher level. MR. RAINVILLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So those are my two-cents worth on where we are. MR. MARINO: What's the amount of time we're looking for? MR. RAINVILLE: We would like two years. We think that that gives us ample amount of time to get everything to the 72 inches, granted there will be areas that will be in compliance well before that. And we will look at those very weak areas and plant the 10 gallons and come up with a new landscape plan to get it to where we need to be. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Would it be possible to have you go -- I was going to say, come up with some sort of a stipulation agreement on that, work out the details? MR. KELLY: I'm in favor of the two years as well. When you look at the comparison pictures between 2011, 2012, after a year and a half, we see substantial growth. So I think given the two years and, you know, give them the time to grow it, I think we'll be all right. MR. LEFEBVRE: Again, I think if we can strike something where, if there are holes, they're required to plant the five gallons -- or 10 gallons -- 10 gallons, 60 inches in height, so follow the current -- follow the code, and then for the plants -- for the bushes that are not quite there, give them two years. So if we can structure an agreement in that regard, I think we would be in good shape. MR. RAINVILLE: We can put together a landscape plan and Page 53 161 2A2 ' September 27, 2012 then ask Mr. Kelly to come in and review that. Just do it. MR. LEFEBVRE: But if we can maybe -- do you want us to strike? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, no. I'd rather they agree -- the county and the respondent agree to the plan that they're going to enact, and we should give them sufficient time to do that. And if a meeting of the minds can't be made, then bring it back before the board. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you want them to go and do that now, and then before we're done -- MS. BAKER: Mr. Chair, I think we can provide you with a recommendation that may be helpful for you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to do that right now? MS. BAKER: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes? MR. KELLY: Take five? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We should take 10. MR. KELLY: Take 10 minutes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. Why don't we take 10 minutes while you're working that out, and I can go in the back and take care of the facilities. MR. RAINVILLE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Ten minutes. Be back here at 10:30. (A brief recess was had.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. Let's see where we left off. You had a recommendation for us. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes, sir. Our county recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$84.58 incurred in the prosecution Page 54 161 2A9---- September 27, 2012 of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one, replace shrubs four feet or less on the outer side of the existing chain-link fence. At the time of planting, the shrubs should be a minimum of 10 gallon, 60 inches spaced four feet on center -- four feet center. The installation of the shrubs shall be complete within X amount days of this hearing, or a fine of X dollars per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. Two, the remaining shrubs over four feet shall be allowed to grow to 72 inches, as required by the B buffer, within X days or a fine of X dollars per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. RAINVILLE: With all due respect, we object to the recommendation based on the four-foot number. We're back to where we were. We're asking for more time. And we believe that there's only a few areas that are really struggling, and that may only require a minimal amount of planting versus the potential of 4- to 500 foot of planting at 10 foot. I mean, that will get very expensive, 10 gallons. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: What they provided is a recommendation. MR. RAINVILLE: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Then the board has the ability to add days, take away days, and do what is necessary. And I'd like to see what the board has to say. MR. RAINVILLE: Understood. Thank you. MR. MARINO: I have a question for Mr. Kelly. Not you. How many plants do you think are less than four feet? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Excuse me. MR. MARINO: How many plants do you think are less than four feet? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Less than four feet? MR. MARINO: Yeah. Page 55 161 2A2 September 27, 2012 MR. ANDREW KELLY: I would -- and this is -- approximately, you know, 40 to 50 percent of the vegetation out there's probably less than four feet. MR. MARINO: And these plants were all planted at the same time? MR. ANDREW KELLY: Yes, sir. MR. RAINVILLE: Correct. MR. MARINO: So is it possible irrigation, bad plants, not enough fertilizer? MR. ANDREW KELLY: There's many reasons for shrubs not to take, but I'll let Mr. Conzelmann talk. MR. CONZELMANN: On the south side they're doing well. I think the better soil. And the irrigation is operational in all the areas. On the Livingston Road side, that area gets flooded in summer when it rains. That's in an FP&L easement there, so they have -- they struggle there mostly because of too much water, actually, in the summer. That's why there's some of the weak areas. We've been fertilizing them on a 30-day schedule, I mean, you know, lightly fertilizing, so we've been really trying to push them. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any other questions from the board or any suggestion from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Kelly? MR. KELLY: I have a comment. I share, you know, Mr. Marino's sentiment that I think that having to replace 40 percent of the vegetation, given the stride that they've made in just a year and a half, I think would be a little excessive. You know, what I was thinking that the recommendation would look more like would be to replace the bushes or fill the bushes that had voids. That's what I thought we would see on the recommendation. And, you know, I think the four foot is just a little excessive. Page 56 161 2 , ` September 27, 2012 If they want to go the four-foot route, well, then maybe two foot, you know, would be a little more palatable, if you will. But in any case, that's just my thoughts. MR. LEFEBVRE: I think -- I agree with Mr. Kelly, and a couple comments I have. Maybe if there's a way we can structure it that if there's a hole larger than a certain width you would have to plant a 10-gallon plant, 10 gallons. Also, we're going into the dry season. So unlike most times, where the section's flooded, more than likely that will grow a lot better. And maybe what we should do is have a review. Give them two years, have a review on a six-month period, and that way six months from now we'll see that the rainy season will be just starting a new rainy season, and if, in fact, these are starting to take and grow a little bit better. But I would agree with Mr. Kelly that maybe if there's any plantings that are less than two feet, then they would have to replace those with a 10-gallon or 60 inches in height. MR. MARINO: I have another question. Hopefully these plants will grow real quick. Now, when it gets to -- this is my own knowledge. When it gets to that six-foot mark, do they continue to grow, or do they get trimmed down to the top of the fence? I'm asking whoever can answer that question. MR. CONZELMANN: I'd prefer for them to continue to grow, because cocoplums don't grow really tall, maybe 15 feet or so at maximum height. But even when they get to the top of the fence, when you're driving on Livingston, you're kind of still looking down into the building. And so I would -- one of the reasons we chose cocoplums is we thought we could get a nice plant up taller than actually the fence in the long term. MR. MARINO: They're not going to have a problem with that Page 57 161 2A9-- eptember 27, 2012 that they're too tall and whatever? You never know. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, it is a big building, and isn't the most attractive building. So the higher that these grow, the better. But code says that they have to be six feet, 72 inches. MR. MARINO: Minimum six feet. MR. LEFEBVRE: So anything higher is fine. Do you actually have the order? Can you place the order -- do you have it at all, or is it -- it's kind of just jotted down? MR. ANDREW KELLY: It's going to be -- no, I can't put it up there. It will look awful. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. Maybe with a little help of the board I can strike a recommendation, or an order, I should say. Respondent pays operational costs in the amount of$84.58, is that correct, within 30 days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Uh-huh. MR. LEFEBVRE: Time frame would be two years from today. MR. RAINVILLE: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: With review of six months periods, so -- MR. RAINVILLE: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- come back and tell us the progress. And if there are some areas that are not -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Performing. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- thank you -- growing like they should, then we could possibly modify it. MR. RAINVILLE: Understood. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. And if after two years they are not in compliance, the fine per day will be $200 per day. Now, that was the easy part. The hard part is coming up with -- let's say, first of all, if there are any plantings that are less than two feet, they will have to be replaced with whatever code states, I think, it's 10-gallon -- MR. MIESZCAK: Ten gallons. Page 58 16I a It (iv September 27, 2012 MR. LEFEBVRE: -- container, no less than 60 inches -- MR. KELLY: Sixty inches. MR. LEFEBVRE: -- 60 inches. MR. RAINVILLE: Understood. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. And if there's any gaps in the bushes more than -- MR. KELLY: Four foot is what buffer B requires. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Anything more than four feet, then you would have to replace -- or you would have to plant 60 inches in height, 10-gallon containers. Now, also, if anything dies and there are new gaps more than four feet, those would have to also be replaced with a 60-inch height plant, coco palm (sic) plant. MR. RAINVILLE: Understood. MR. LEFEBVRE: With -- and 10 gallons. MR. MARINO: Question. MR. LEFEBVRE: Did I miss anything? MR. MARINO: Question. Full of questions today. MR. LEFEBVRE: No, no problem. MR. MARINO: Are there any -- how tall were these plants when they were first planted? MR. RAINVILLE: Three gallon. I don't know how tall that is. MR. CONZELMANN: They're 24 inches; three gallon, 24 inches. MR. MARINO: So there should not be anything 24 inches. MR. RAINVILLE: If there is, we would replace it. MR. MARINO: That's bad, and you'll have to replace them anyways. MR. RAINVILLE: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So that's saying that -- that's what they were told to do originally. So if those plants are underperforming and they're less than 24 inches now, then they're probably never going to Page 59 1 (' I 2i- eptemr 7, 2012 be 72. MR. MARINO: That was my point. And they should be replaced with the 10-gallon cans. MR. LEFEBVRE: So I'm trying to correct an error that was made by the county. MR. MARINO: Sounds good. MR. LEFEBVRE: Basically, if those plants that were planted per what was told by (sic) you prior are not performing, you're going to have to replace them. MR. KELLY: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion; we have a second. Do we have any more comments on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. RAINVILLE: Thank you. MR. ANDREW KELLY: Thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Jean, did you -- MS. RAWSON: I hope so. I'm not sure. MR. LEFEBVRE: Do you want to repeat it? MS. RAWSON: Pay the operational costs in the amount of $84.58 within 30 days. Page 60 6 A eptem er 2 , 201 2 2 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Correct. MS. RAWSON: Everything has to happen within two years. Review in six months. If it doesn't -- you're not in compliance in two years, it's $200 a day. Then you are replacing the plants that are two feet or less with a 10-gallon container, no less than 16 inches in height? MR. LEFEBVRE: Sixty, six zero. MS. RAWSON: That would have been a big one. If there's gaps in any of the bushes more than four feet, you must plant the, you know, 10-gallon container 60 inches in height. And also if any of them die, you have to plant the same -- MR. LEFEBVRE: Anything under 24 inches would also have to be replaced with a 60-inch, 10-gallon plant. MR. MARINO: Do they understand that they have to do that now and not two years? MS. BAKER: We need to clarify that, because the -- you required anything within two feet, but within what time fame? MR. MARINO: That work should be done now. MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes, exactly. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Stop the elevator. MR. LEFEBVRE: Let me amend. MS. RAWSON: Right, because the way you wrote it or said it, they've got two years to do it. MS. BAKER: Right. MR. MARINO: Right, that's why I brought it up. MR. LEFEBVRE: That must be done now. MR. KELLY: So 60 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay, 60 days. MR. KELLY: So if you're amending your motion, I'll second that amendment. MS. BAKER: Sixty days or what -- what is the fine amount as well? Page 61 161 2A2- September 27, 2012 MR. KELLY: Two hundred a day, I think. MR. MARINO: Two hundred dollars. MS. BAKER: Two hundred dollars a day? Because it was 250, I believe, for the first section. MR. KELLY: Everything was 200. MS. BAKER: Two hundred. MR. KELLY: That's what you had said, right? MR. LEFEBVRE: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we have an amended motion, which we'll cover in a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. The amendment was -- the proposal was the work that needs to be done now needs to be done within 60 days. MR. LEFEBVRE: Correct. MR. RAINVILLE: Understood. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay? MR. RAINVILLE: Perfect, thank you. MR. LEFEBVRE: Thank you very much. MR. KELLY: Good catch. MR. LEFEBVRE: Sony for the confusion, but that's why I wanted some help on this one. MR. MARINO: I'm sitting here going, well, they could wait the Page 62 tsI eptember , 012 two years. MS. BAKER: Okay. Next case is No. 7, Case CESD20120000189, Jorge G. Rodriguez. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Garage and CBS guesthouse with no valid Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 1165 Everglades Boulevard North, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 40579120002. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Jorge G. Rodriguez, 1165 Everglades Boulevard North, Naples, Florida, 32120. Date violation first observed: January 6, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: January 13, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: February 13, 2012. Date of reinspection: August 1, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Eric? MR. SHORT: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You want to provide us with the county's case on this? MR. SHORT: For the record, Investigator Eric Short, Collier County Code Enforcement. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: One aerial photo obtained and printed from the Collier County property appraiser's GIS mapping on June 26, 2012, and two photos taken by myself June 27, 2012. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen those? MR. SHORT: They have. Page 63 161 2A - September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Motion to accept? MR. KELLY: Make a motion. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion to accept and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. SHORT: That's just the aerial photo showing the two structures in the rear of the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Which is the main house? The one up front? MR. SHORT: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. A house, and what other structures behind it? MR. SHORT: Here and here. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Were you ever back there to see what they were? MR. SHORT: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. SHORT: If you look at the following pictures, it shows more detail. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Very good. MR. SHORT: This case originated on January 6, 2012, for an Page 64 161 2A (2. September 27, 2012 unpermitted garage, CBS guesthouse, and an unpermitted chain-link fence with a gate. The property owners have since permitted the chain-link fence and are working with Mr. Bob Lockhart, a local engineer, to bring the garage and CBS guesthouse into compliance. This case was withdrawn from the June hearing, as the respondents had not been in contact with Mr. Lockhart, and it was suggested that the respondents contact the board of professional engineers. Over the past few months the respondents claim Mr. Lockhart has been in contact with them but has yet to prove compliance efforts. To date, the permits have been applied for. That is the garage. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Two -- that's about a 20-by-40 garage? This looks like a similar picture to it; two garage doors in the front, or windows or whatever. MR. MARINO: Are those double-door garage doors? They're double doors. They're not a single door, right, from here? MR. SHORT: Right. It's double door. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The block work there, does that look strange to you or just to me? The course on the bottom or the two courses on the bottom. MR. MARINO: There's three course. MR. SHORT: It does appear to be not normal. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It appears to have been put in by me. MR. KELLY: Question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: None of these structures were approved in the original permit application for the home, correct? MR. SHORT: They were never COed. MR. KELLY: Oh, so it is all part of the original -- MR. SHORT: Right. Page 65 161 2A (2-- September 27, 2012 MR. KELLY: -- but they don't have CO. Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They were never permitted. MR. SHORT: The permits were applied for; however, they did expire. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: They expired. No inspections? MR. SHORT: A lot of inspections were missing, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you know when they expired? MR. SHORT: The original permit was in 2006 for the guesthouse and 2004 for the four-car garage. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MARINO: Eric, are you saying that that blockwork was all approved? MR. SHORT: A lot of the inspections weren't done, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It doesn't matter. The building permits expired, so it never exists right now. Okay. Any more pictures? MR. SHORT: That is all. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any more case evidence? MR. SHORT: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Mr. Rodriguez? MR. SELENEZ: Good morning. I'm not Mr. Rodriguez. This is Mr. Rodriguez. He's the owner of the house, of the property. And I'm -- my name is Lanyard Selenez. He is my father-in-law. He doesn't speak English. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. And do you have his permission -- MR. SELENEZ: I do. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- to testify on his behalf? MR. SELENEZ: Yes. MR. MARINO: He should be up there. MR. KELLY: Did you swear him in as a translator? Page 66 v 1Se§teLber?772012 THE COURT REPORTER: No. Are you going to translate? MR. SELENEZ: I don't know if he's (sic) translating or speaking on his behalf. He's not even up here. MR. MARINO: Well, shouldn't he be up there with him? MR. KELLY: The reason why I'm asking is because if you had to ask him any questions throughout this and he answered you -- MR. SELENEZ: I understand. MR. KELLY: -- she would need to swear you both in. (The interpreter was duly sworn to translate from English to Spanish and Spanish to English to the best of his ability.) MR. MARINO: Your father-in-law needs to be up there also. MS. BAKER: Can he also be sworn in? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SELENEZ: And he understands, but he just doesn't speak it that much. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Why don't you provide us your information on -- MR. SELENEZ: We were in front of you guys back in June 2012, and the reason was because we started -- they purchased the house on December of 2011, and the house was already like this. And we tried to finish the guesthouse and the garage. And then I started working with an engineer, Bob Lockhart, and he disappeared for, like, a month, then we got cited over here. And they gave us a couple of months, some time period for me to find the guy. He actually said he was on vacation without telling me. So from there on we kept on talking. So he forgot that we needed the energy counts, calculations. And then I spoke with this guy, A/C mechanical, and he provided me the energy calculations from 24th of September, which I have them here with me. And that was the only thing holding me back from submitting the plans, according to Bob Lockhart. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you submitted the plans? Page 67 161 2A September 27, 2012 MR. SELENEZ: I haven't. And he said -- I spoke with him Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, trying not come over here, and he said that he was going to probably do it tomorrow, and I don't believe that he's going to do it tomorrow. I'm going to say a month from now, to be sure, and not give a specific time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Any comments or questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Does a violation exist? MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion a violation does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion that a violation exists. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Okay. So the property is in violation. Now, what is the -- what plans do you have going forward from here? MR. SELENEZ: I have to give him this. He already has it. These are the energy calculations, and he already has them. He has to Page 68 161 2A � September 27, 2012 put everything together, sit down with me, make sure that whatever we agree, like the plans of the house are ready, according to me, and then submit them. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But energy calculations have to do with air-conditioning -- MR. SELENEZ: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- and cubic feet, et cetera, et cetera. MR. SELENEZ: Right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But what is standing in the way of getting the building permit? Ordinarily you get the building permit, and then you provide that information during the course of building. MR. SELENEZ: He said that he needs this in order for him to go forward with the permits, to submit the permits. MR. SHORT: They're doing a permit by affidavit, so that kind of changes the process a little bit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: How could you do a building (sic) by affidavit when the building's not built and the permits have expired? They don't exist anymore. MR. SHORT: Well, actually, they -- to correct what I said, they haven't applied. So we don't really know what their direction is. That's what Mr. Lockhart has stated. They are doing a permit by affidavit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes? MS. FLAGG: Just to clarify. A permit by affidavit is that they can hire an engineer to review the structure or portions of the structure that have already been built, and the engineer has to qualify that it was built according to code, then sign and seal it and submit to get a permit and not have to reinspect what has already been done. So what this engineer is doing is seeking to get, presumably, an inspection for the block work, the roof, but he has to provide calculations to the permitting department before they will issue a permit. Page 69 161 2Ao September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Now, I've seen many, many permits by affidavit, generally on completed structures, on structures -- I mean, this is, I think, a one oh -- I forgot, Mr. Kelly, the roof number, and the early inspection is 1 .05 and 1.04, whatever, but this is so far from being built. So he can do an affidavit on this without any inspections ever being done? MS. FLAGG: Ultimately, the building official will make the final determination if they want to charge for additional inspections. So the engineer, once he gets this, he can submit it. He's signing and sealing that it was built according to code. When it comes in and they issue a permit, the building official may choose to do inspections himself, and then any inspections that the county doesn't actually do would be refunded back to the applicant. So you still have a check and balance there. MR. LEFEBVRE: Now, would he be getting a permit by -- or affidavit for just the work completed or for the complete building? MS. FLAGG: Work completed. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just work completed. And then going forward he would have to get all the county inspections? MS. FLAGG: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And that's for both buildings? MS. FLAGG: I don't know if they're doing a permit by affidavit for both. I presume so. Yes? MR. SELENEZ: I think so, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you know, Eric, whether it's for both buildings? MR. SHORT: I do not know. There has been no application process. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You say it's for both buildings? MR. SELENEZ: I think so, yeah. MR. LEFEBVRE: All right. I think we're past that stage Page 70 161 2 A 2- September 27, 2012 actually, because we found a violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: But what is your time frame to complete this? MS. BAKER: Mr. Chair, would you like us to read a recommendation for you? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah, but before you do that, let me ask a question. When you finally go for your permit, it's going to be a few dollars, to say the least. Are you in a position to come up with that money for the permit? MR. SELENEZ: Yes. And what's a few dollars? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Well, I say few, but that's with a little smile. It will be more than a few. MR. LEFEBVRE: You've got to finish the structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And the permit -- just to apply for the permit. MR. SELENEZ: I understand that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So we're going to see what the county recommends on this, okay? MR. SHORT: That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy, within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of Page 71 X61 2 September 27, 2012 abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. My only question is, we're talking about getting the permits, not completing the structure. In other words, operational costs of$80.29, and then so many days to get all the required permits, not to complete the construction. That's not that time there. MR. SHORT: In the county's recommendation it does say obtain certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Oh, okay. So then the whole structure would need to be completed. MS. BAKER: Inspections and CO included. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, after they pull permits, then they have six months to get all their inspections. Per the permit, correct? MR. SHORT: Correct. MR. LEFEBVRE: So maybe what we can do is have a time frame for them to get their permits, and then six months from when they get their permits to complete so we're in line with the permit. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I believe that you can get more than six months. MR. LEFEBVRE: You can. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You can get six months, and then if you do something, you get another six months, and then another six months. So it would have to be some sort of-- let me ask the respondent. How long do you think you will need -- let's say that everything works out and you get your okay from the engineer and you get your permits to complete the construction. Are these both going to be garages or they're going to be living space? MR. SELENEZ: I think one of them is going to be living space and the other one is going to be a garage. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. How long do you think it Page 72 161 2A 2 September 27, 2012 would take to complete everything? MR. SELENEZ: To complete, I would say, fair, year and a half. MR. LEFEBVRE: The other building is complete, right? MR. SELENEZ: Is complete, yeah. MR. LEFEBVRE: So maybe we can break it down to getting the permits and CO for that other building in a shorter period of time and then this building would be a longer period of time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Structure A and Structure B. MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. Or define what structures are which. This structure is at the very back of the property, correct, this picture? MR. SHORT: No, that's not correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is the garage? MR. LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. SELENEZ: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is going to be the living space. MR. SELENEZ: That's the guesthouse. MR. RODRIGUEZ: Guesthouse. MR. MARINO: Guesthouse. MR. MIESZCAK: So that building behind is a guesthouse, or is that a garage? MR. SELENEZ: It's a garage. MR. MIESZCAK: That building back there, the other picture? MR. KELLY: If we can go back to the aerial. MR. MIESZCAK: Yeah. If you can go back to the picture, it looked like a guesthouse. That's a garage? MR. L'ESPERANCE: That's the lanai you're looking at. MR. SHORT: The previous picture you just looked at is the structure in the rear of the property here. MR. MIESZCAK: Okay. MR. SHORT: And the guesthouse is the structure towards the middle of the property. MR. KELLY: Can I go ahead and make a recommendation that Page 73 161 2A f) September 27, 2012 we accept the county's recommendation with the time frame of one year and a fine of$250 per day. We just keep it clean and simple, you let them have the one year to do whatever's necessary both to get the permits and to complete construction. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll second that recommendation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Hearing none, call for vote. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries. MR. KELLY: And to explain to the board, in the past when we used to separate permits and construction, we got into almost, like, a double jeopardy situation if they didn't pull the permit and they also didn't complete the construction where you had both fines running concurrently. So that's why we kind of started going towards just picking an end date. MR. MIESZCAK: Simple makes sense. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. BAKER: Can you just clarify for us what the fine amount was per day? MR. KELLY: Two fifty. Page 74 161 2A 2 September 27, 2012 MS. BAKER: Okay, thank you. MR. KELLY: One year. MR. SELENEZ: So from now I'll have a year to get the permits and finish both the garage and the guesthouse? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. SELENEZ: And what do I do if in a year I'm not done? What am I supposed to do? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You need to come back to the board MR. SELENEZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: -- prior to the year. MR. SELENEZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Maybe 10 months or so, and come back and make your case, show the progress that you've made, you pulled permits, you have two out of seven inspections done, whatever it is. MR. SELENEZ: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And then at that time the board has the ability to extend the time or not. MR. SELENEZ: Sounds good. MR. LEFEBVRE: Just another -- I would recommend that the other building, which is substantially complete, work on getting that -- MR. SELENEZ: That one just needs the electrical; that's it. MR. LEFEBVRE: So get that COed. That will show progress. MR. SELENEZ: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: We strongly look at, if you come back to us -- as you probably heard, we had, I think, four or five cases where people asked for an extension of time, and we look at what progress you've made. So we definitely want to see progress. If we don't see progress, then, obviously, that -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is not good. MR. LEFEBVRE: That's not good. Page 75 161 2A )-- September 27, 2012 MR. SELENEZ: No problem. Thank you. MR. SHORT: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 9, Case CESD20120006821, Robert D. Campbell, Jr., and Nina M. Campbell. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Description of violation: Garage enclosed and turned into living space with a bathroom and a mobile home without Collier County building permits. Location/address where violation exists: 2331 8th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio No. 39393640009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Robert D. Campbell, Jr., and Nina M. Campbell, 2331 8th Avenue Southeast, Naples, Florida, 34117. Date violation first observed: May 7, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: May 10, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 6, 2012. Date of reinspection: August 15, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs taken May 7, 2012; one aerial photograph from the Collier County Property Appraiser's website; and one violation determination completed by the building official, Thomas DeGram and Myron Jacobs, the chief structural inspector. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Could I have a motion to accept the Page 76 161 2A * September 27, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photos. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. KELLY: (Raises hand.) MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It passes unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: This case originated as a anonymous complaint about a converted garage into an efficiency without permits, and he's renting it out. On May 7, 2012, I met with the owner, Mr. Robert Campbell, and he admitted that the garage is a separate unit/apartment with a bathroom. He stated that the house is exactly the same from now as when he bought the house in 2002. At that time he also admitted that the mobile home for the storage -- I'm sorry. The mobile home for storage was not permitted as well. I informed the owner that I would do the research on the property and get back to him with my findings. May 10, 2012, I made a site visit to the property to inform the owners of my findings. At that time I spoke to a man at the property who confirmed that he was living inside the garage. I informed -- I'm sorry. Research indicates that the home did have a garage and not an apartment with a bathroom, and the mobile Page 77 161 2Ao September 27, 2012 home does not have a Collier County building permit. I posted the notice of violation on the property and the courthouse and sent the owner a notice of violation in regular and certified mail. To this date I have not had any contact with the owners, despite several site visits. On August 20, I received confirmation from the building official in the form of the violation determination letter that I submitted in my evidence packet. To this date, still, no permits have been applied for, and the violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This sounds awful familiar to me. Did we have them or somebody here on this case? MR. BALDWIN: I have two current cases as well that have been before the board. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. You want to show us those photos? Looks like a Chevrolet. MR. BALDWIN: The garage -- I apologize for not having great photos. I didn't feel comfortable, and I was not permitted to go any closer on the property at that time. Some of the indicators we look at for violations of converted garages you can see on this, with the indentation around -- around the garage where a wall has been put up. And normally one of the indicators that tells us is the concrete in front of the garage as well. If you look on the -- this side of the photo that is the mobile home. It is a mobile home or the type of trailer that you would see at a commercial -- a commercial construction site, commercial trailer. I don't know if it's specifically a mobile home, but it's definitely a commercial-type structure, like an office, and the owner stated that it's filled with storage at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: And then the aerial photo, it has -- it shows the structure in the back in the aerial photo. It's in the center of the Page 78 2A - SepTeriTher i 27, picture. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have any comments from the board, or do we find them in violation? MR. MIESZCAK: Motion that a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion that a violation exists. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Do you have a recommendation? MR. BALDWIN: I do. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $80.57 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing -- I'm sorry, yes -- and abate all violations by, one, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing, or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a Page 79 161 2A2 September 27, 2012 final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to try to fill in the blanks on this? Mr. Kelly? MR. KELLY: I just have a concern about the gentleman who's renting out the converted garage and the safety of that person. So if we accept the county's recommendation, I suggest -- or I would be in favor of a shorter time frame, then everything gets taken care of and permitted correctly, or that we add a provision that that particular section is vacated and the utilities turned off. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I believe that section should be vacated immediately. That's what we've done in the past on cases like this. MR. L'ESPERANCE: How do we enforce that, Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We use the -- code enforcement can check to see if there's anybody there, and the sheriff would be the vehicle to use to have them removed. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Is that a viable option? MS. FLAGG: The challenge there is in an eviction process, the property owner has to do the eviction. The property owner has not responded to any contact by the investigator. We could confer with the County Attorney's Office what the options are in this case, because this is a little bit unusual. Normally, you have the property owner here and they agree to have the person leave. That's -- this case is unusual in that the property owner is just refusing to even make contact. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Has the property owner been spotted Page 80 161 2A2 September 27, 2012 in his residence on the property, or he just doesn't return calls? MR. BALDWIN: I actually saw him yesterday on the property. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You saw him? MR. BALDWIN: Yes. Typically, before all of our cases we go out the day before and we check the violation. I would say the relationship between us is very uncomfortable at this point, so I didn't feel comfortable speaking to him at that point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: On the other hand, it has been like that since 2002, the respondent says. MR. BALDWIN: Yes. MR. KELLY: So, you know, maybe 60 days or something along that time frame would be acceptable. It's a decent balance. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I think whatever we come up with, we need to have some means of getting the homeowner's or the respondent's attention so that he starts to -- a dialogue between the county and himself. MR. LEFEBVRE: Well, one way would be have a pretty large fine attached to it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LEFEBVRE: If we're looking at having the tenant move out in a short period of time, we can structure maybe 30 days for the property to be vacated. We can't force him to vacate. But one way of prodding the owner would be maybe having a $500 fine. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Do we also have an option to have the Sheriffs Department accompany one of our personnel, if necessary, so he feels more comfortable with the dialogue? MS. FLAGG: That's always the option, you know, that the investigator can take the Sheriffs Office with him, but it requires participation with the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have access to, pardon the expression, rental unit? Can you knock on the door and speak to the Page 81 161 2Ai . September 27, 2012 person who's living there? MR. BALDWIN: No. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You're not permitted? MR. BALDWIN: I wasn't granted access the first visit that I had with the property owner, but he did confirm that there was a separate unit -- apartment unit inside the garage. MR. LEFEBVRE: Would you need the owner's permission, or if the tenant was there, could you knock on the door and get -- MR. BALDWIN: The owner lives at the unit as well. The owner -- the owner, his wife, and other -- I -- he stated that he's renting out other rooms in his house as well. They're all living there. Part of the complaint was the efficiency. I couldn't confirm there was an efficiency. But based on the owner's statements to me, I could surmise that it's probably -- he's running an efficiency there. MR. LEFEBVRE: There's multiple structures on this property. So the owner lives in the structure that -- MR. BALDWIN: Correct. The mobile home in the back or commercial trailer, what it is -- he's stated that he's using it strictly for storage. He has no -- I also had another case on the property, or other complaints on the property, about illegal outside storage. And as you can see in the photo, there's a bunch of outside things that are being stored, such as a lawnmower, maybe garage (sic) cans, some gas cans, so you can typically see that those are other indicators that the garage is, you know, not used for storage. MR. LEFEBVRE: Being used for something other than what it should be intended. MR. BALDWIN: No one is living in the mobile home in the back. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Have you tagged the property at all, the contact, besides -- MR. BALDWIN: Yes, I have. I've posted the notice of violation, I posted the notice of hearing, and I've spoken to the owner Page 82 161 2A '2 - September 27, 2012 at the location. I've spoken to the guy who said he's renting out the garage at that point. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You want to take a shot at the -- MR. MIESZCAK: Well, I'll make a motion that -- 60 days and $200-a-day fine and operational costs, $80.57, within 30 days. MR. MARINO: I don't think that's strong enough. MR. LEFEBVRE: Neither do I. MR. MIESZCAK: Well, don't forget, I'm looking at it this way. There's a tenant there. Innocent person, part of the thing. He's been there a while. So we jump up with seven days or a week, I mean -- MR. LEFEBVRE: No, no, I'm not looking -- I don't think we're looking at time frame. We're looking at dollar amounts. MR. MARINO: Dollars. MR. LEFEBVRE: I don't think it's big enough to stick. MR. MIESZCAK: Well, I made the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: You can amend the motion. MR. KELLY: I concur. I think because there's a potential health and safety issue, that the fine should be higher. So, Larry, I'd be willing to support it if you had something -- MR. MIESZCAK: I'll withdraw. I like the motion. That's okay. No problem. I like it. MR. KELLY: Make -- all right. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Make a motion. MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation with a time frame of 60 days and a fine of$500 per day. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: With the operational -- $80.57 be paid within 30 days? MR. KELLY: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion, and we Page 83 161 2A - September 27, 2012 have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I thought you were going to oppose it. Okay. MR. BALDWIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 10, Case CESD20110017156, Ronnie G. and Beverly J. Bishop. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Turned permitted garage into a guesthouse. Location/address where violation exists: 1329 St. Claire Shores Road, Naples, Florida, 34104; Folio 294600009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Ronnie G. and Beverly J. Bishop, 1329 St. Claire Shores Road, Naples, Florida, 34104. Date violation first observed: February 28, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: February 28, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: March 29, 2012. Date of reinspection: May 14, 2012. Page 84 161 2A - September 27, 2012 Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning. MR. BOSA: Good morning. For the record, Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to present case evidence in the following exhibits, two photographs taken December 13, 2011, of the structure in violation. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits? MR. LAVINSKI: Motion to accept. MR. MARINO: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion; we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BOSA: This case originated from a complaint in regards to someone living in a structure that was not permitted for that specific use. On December 14, 2011, Investigator Gomez made a site visit and spoke with the owner of the property, Mrs. Bishop, who confirmed at that time that her and her husband were living in the structure, a structure originally permitted as a garage. Research conducted by the investigator, myself, and the chief building official showed that the structure was permitted originally as a nonliving-space garage and was not to be used as living space. Page 85 16I 2Ai- September 27, 2012 Investigator Gomez and myself have had numerous correspondence with Mrs. Bishop about the violation and spoke about plans to abate the violation. My last meeting with Ms. Bishop stated that she cannot move forward with taking care of the violation and will just walk away from the property. And as of this date, no permits have been applied for. The structure still remains vacant, and I haven't heard from Mrs. Bishop. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The structure is vacant, you said? MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BOSA: That would be the structure to the left. You see they have a door and window dressings and chairs in front and stuff. That's that structure there. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is there another structure on the property? MR. BOSA: Yes, there is a structure on the property. All the structures are permitted. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is anybody living in the other structure? MR. BOSA: No, nobody. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So there's nobody living on this parcel at all? MR. BOSA: No. She just walked away from the property. I think she moved up to Gainesville because of her husband being ill, things like that, so -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does a violation exist? MR. LEFEBVRE: I make a motion a violation exists. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. Page 86 161 2Az September 27, 2012 MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A violation exists, unanimously. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you have a recommendation? MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$79.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within X amount of days of this hearing, or a fine of X amount per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Number 2, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. MR. KELLY: I have a question, real quick. MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. MR. KELLY: Just clarification. In your presentation you had stated that all structures had already permitted and approved. MR. BOSA: Correct. MR. KELLY: The recommendation seems to lean towards a structure that hasn't been permitted yet, and I can see how you would Page 87 161 2A /, September 27, 2012 need to, then, get it re-permitted and then change of use if they were going to remain (sic) the use as a guesthouse. MR. BOSA: Correct. MR. KELLY: But if they were going to use it strictly as storage, there wouldn't be any permits necessary, correct? MR. BOSA: To demo. They would have to pull a demolition permit to bring it back to its original state and would have to be inspected. MR. KELLY: Okay. So there was plumbing and electrical added that were not part of the original. MR. BOSA: Yes, exactly. MR. KELLY: I understand now. Thank you. I'll take a stab at it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: I suggest -- I'll make an amendment (sic) that we accept the county's recommendation with a time frame of 60 days and a $250-per-day fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. With the $79.72 paid within 30 days? MR. KELLY: Yeah, whatever -- yes, yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second it. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? Page 88 161 2A ?. September 27, 2012 (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. LEFEBVRE: Is this in lis pendens? MR. BOSA: No, it's not. I did check yesterday. There's not a lis pendens or foreclosure process. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this an elderly woman? MR. BOSA: No, it's not. I would say mid '50s. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A youngster. Okay. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 11, Case CESD20110017435, Rookery Bay Business Park, LLC. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: This is a violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.13F. Description of violation: Failure to submit annual PUD monitoring report. Location/address where violation exists -- Folio No. 732800002. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation: Rookery Bay Business Park, LLC, 1083 North Collier Boulevard, Unit 113, Marco Island, Florida, 34145; Care of Sean M. Coutts, 1172 South Dixie Highway, No. 453, Coral Gables, Florida, 34146. Date violation first observed: May 16, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: May 18, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 18, 2012. Date of reinspection: June 19, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, David. MR. JONES: Good morning. For the record, David Jones, Collier County Code Enforcement. I'd like to just present to you the case details right now. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. JONES: And those are, on December 16, 2011, code Page 89 161 2k September 27, 2012 enforcement received a request from the planned unit development coordinator to issue a notice of violation to Rookery Bay Business Park, LLC, citing failure to submit annual PUD monitoring reports. On May 18, 2012, a notice of violation was issued to Rookery Bay Business Park, LLC. In that time, I've had no correspondence with the owners of the property. A reinspection was done on September 26, 2012. And to date, Rookery Bay's annual PUD monitoring report has not been submitted. Violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. L'ESPERANCE: How many times has it been requested for by the county? MS. BEARD: Laurie Beard, for the record, PUD monitoring. They get an original notice two months prior to it being due, then another one goes out two weeks after it was due. So they get two, but in this case I've probably sent six out to different addresses for them. MR. L'ESPERANCE: They're verified, appropriate addresses? MS. BEARD: I took them off of Sunbiz, and I actually went into the -- Mr. Coutts lives in Miami, and I actually went through their property appraiser and sent them to the different homes, even, that he owns there. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Thank you so much. MS. BEARD: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we -- MR. LAVINSKI: I have a question. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes, Mr. Lavinski, who is our PUD expert. MR. LAVINSKI: Is this a single parcel PUD? So they're the only -- so it is the Rookery Bay Business Park themselves? MS. BEARD: Yes. It's just one large parcel. MR. LAVINSKI: Okay. And is this the annual update or the original? Page 90 161 2Az September 27, 2012 MS. BEARD: It's the annual update. MR. LAVINSKI: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we have a motion to find them in violation? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I make a motion that they're -- a violation does exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. LEFEBVRE: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Do you have a recommendation for us? MR. JONES: I do, and the recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by: One, respondent must submit two complete copies of the planned unit development annual monitoring report form, one of three traffic count options, and one executed affidavit within blank days of this hearing, or pay a fine of blank dollars a day until abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a Page 91 161 2A2 September 27, 2012 final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would any -- yes, Mr. Kelly? MR. KELLY: Just a quick question. Since this is an annual submittal, do you feel as though 14 days is adequate time to submit? Like, would they be able to use last year's and just modify it slightly, or are they relying on outside entities that they'd have to hire and perform any services? MS. BEARD: They actually never turned in last year's report either. The last one I received was 2005. Because the property is vacant, they could, honestly, fill it out in about five minutes. MR. KELLY: Okay. Well -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Mr. Lavinski, generally, who has filled these out, is our resident expert on this. Would you like to tackle it, Mr. Lavinski? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. In this case I'd like to make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation for the 80.86 to be paid in 30 days and that they be given 15 days to comply or a fine of$100 per day. MR. KELLY: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 92 161 2A September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. JONES: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case is No. 13, Case CESD20120004794, Hernandez Equity Invest, Inc. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: Violation of Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). Description of violation: Expired Permit No. 2006063986. Location/address where violation exists: 1261 DeSoto Boulevard South, Naples, Florida, 34117; Folio 41105240009. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Luis Hernandez, 346 Northeast 27th Street, Miami, Florida, 33137. Date violation first observed: May 27, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: March 29, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be correct: April 28, 2012. Date of reinspection: June 20, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Patrick. MR. BALDWIN: Good morning, again. For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. I would like to present case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photographs taken yesterday, September 26, 2012, and one aerial photo taken from the Collier County Property Appraiser's website. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion to accept the exhibits. Page 93 161 2V7 September 27, 2012 MR. KELLY: So moved. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Move and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: This case originated from a vacant and foreclosed home sweep in the Golden Gate Estates area of Collier County. I observed that the structure had an expired permit, No. 2006063986, and the last inspection was on May 19, 2008. On May 2, 2012, I spoke with the owner, Luis Hernandez, and he stated that he is in current litigation with the bank for the money to finish the structure. Still at this time no permits have been applied for, and the violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Do you want to show us the photos? MR. BALDWIN: Sure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Looks like a big house. MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's camouflage. MR. BALDWIN: As you can see -- actually, you really can't even see the structure from the property because of the vegetation, and then you go onto the property and you can barely see the structure because of the weeds and other vegetation that has grown up since Page 94 161 2Ai - September 27, 2012 2008. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the building -- the original building permits were 2006? MR. BALDWIN: Correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And did they have any inspections at that time? MR. BALDWIN: Oh, yes. It's had quite a bit of inspections. It's basically just the outer shell -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. BALDWIN: -- of the structure remains to this day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Were you able to get to the house itself and -- MR. BALDWIN: Oh, I can get right up next to the house, but there are other debris -- I can probably get, probably, 20 yards from the house. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: So the inside's done also? MR. BALDWIN: Oh, no. It's looks like -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's a shell? MR. BALDWIN: It appears just to be the shell of the structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does a violation exist? Would anybody like to take a stab at that? MR. KELLY: I'd make a motion a violation exist. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion that a violation exists. Do we have a second? MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 95 161 2Ai September 27, 2012 MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Do you have a recommendation for us, Patrick? MR. BALDWIN: Sure. That the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by, one, obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Two, the respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Is this in foreclosure? MR. BALDWIN: No. He's -- the current owner, he's suing the bank, and I believe maybe a contractor ran out on him or took his money. So I'm not quite sure. He was kind of vague about what's going on. He stated that he did intend to finish it, but -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody like to take a stab at this one? MR. KELLY: I make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation with 90-day term and $200-per-day fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay, 81.15 being the occupational costs that -- within 30 days? Page 96 161 2V), September 27, 2012 MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you, Patrick. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 14, Case CESD20120006219, Craig Morris. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: It's a violation of Collier County Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(B)(1)(a), 10.02.06(B)(1)(e), and Florida Building Code 110.1. Description of violation: Carport or detached garage that was constructed between 2002 and 2003 with no valid Collier County permit issued. Location/address where violation exists: 5845 Painted Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida 34116; Folio 38167240005. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Craig M. Morris, 5845 Painted Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: April 23, 2012. Page 97 161 2Ai- September 27, 2012 Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: May 25, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: June 8, 2012. Date of reinspection: August 16, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Good morning, Jonathan. MR. MUSSE: Good morning. How you doing? For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, code enforcement. I would now like to present the case evidence in the following exhibits: A 2002 and a 2003 aerial-view photo of the property in question and a final determination letter from Myron Jacobs, chief structural inspector, and Thomas DeGram, building official. MR. KELLY: I make a motion we accept the exhibits. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second to accept the exhibits. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Carries unanimously. MR. MUSSE: On April 23, 2012, while researching the property for another case, I observed the detached garage located in the rear yard. After looking at the aerial photos on the Collier appraiser site, it shows that the structure was built between 2002 and 2003. Page 98 161 2A2 September 27, 2012 I do have a photo of the aerial. MR. MIESZCAK: Looks like your house. MR. MUSSE: Research was conducted by myself, Mr. DeGram, and Mr. Jacobs, and came to the conclusion that the structure was in violation. Property owner would need to apply for a permit by affidavit and obtain a demolition permit to have the structure removed. Was able to get in contact with Mr. Morris and informed him of the violation. At this time I prepared the case -- or conducted multiple inspections with no change in violations. No permits have been attained. At that time I prepared the case for hearing. A prehearing inspection was conducted today. Violation remains. No permits have been issued. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: You've been in contact with the respondent? MR. MUSSE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And what does he say about it? MR. MUSSE: Well, at first he said it was built before he even bought the property. But when I explained the photos, he goes, okay, I built it. And -- CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: "You caught me." MR. MUSSE: Basically, he has no intentions of permitting it at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does a violation exist here? MR. MIESZCAK: Yes, I do (sic). Make a motion a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 99 161 2likSeptember 2 , 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. I'm a little confused as to -- he admitted that he built it without any permits, and he is not going to do anything about it. MR. MUSSE: Well, I guess the next case will kind of clear up why. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Bring it all together? MR. MUSSE: Yeah. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do you have a recommendation? MR. MUSSE: Oh. The county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days, and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permits, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within X amount of days of this hearing, or a fine of X amount of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct the final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any methods to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provision of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Page 100 161 2A September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Anybody have any comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Anybody like to take a stab at filling in the blanks? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I make a motion we accept the county's recommendation. And here again, a 90-day time frame or a $200-a-day fine. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. With 80.86 paid within 30 days? MR. LAVINSKI: Yes, within 30 days, correct. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Which brings us to the second case, same respondent. MR. MIESZCAK: Next case, No. 15, Case CEPM20120004563, Craig Morris. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: Violation of Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Article VI, property maintenance code, Sections 22-231(12)(c), 12(i), 12(b), and 12(q). Page 101 161 2Ai September 27, 2012 Description of violation: Dwelling with missing roof, windows, and doors, damaged interior and exterior walls. Location/address where violation exists: 5845 Painted Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116; Folio 38167240005. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Craig M. Morris, 5845 Painted Leaf Lane, Naples, Florida, 34116. Date violation first observed: March 27, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: April 26, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: May 26, 2012. Date of reinspection: August 16, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. MR. MUSSE: For the record, Investigator Jonathan Musse, Code Enforcement. I would now like to present the case evidence in the following exhibits: Two photos taken by myself on March 27, 2012. MR. KELLY: Make a motion to accept. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Page 102 161 2Aci-. September 27, 2012 MR. MUSSE: I conducted an initial inspection on March 27, 2012. The gate was locked; however, I was able to view the violation from the neighboring property. There I observed an unsecured structure with missing doors, windows, and roof CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: This is the main structure? MR. MUSSE: This is the main structure. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: If you'll pardon the expression, this is the main structure. Okay. Did they have a fire or -- MR. MUSSE: Yeah, yeah. I contacted Mr. Morris, and he informed me that there was a fire about a couple years ago, and he's basically -- he stated that he's working with the insurance company on his claim. But there's been no movement, no -- not looking towards a resolution at this time. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: The fire was when? MR. MUSSE: A couple years ago. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. So nobody lives on this property? MR. MUSSE: No, sir. No, sir. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Does a violation exist? MR. KELLY: I think it does, and I'd like to make a motion to the effect. MR. MARINO: Appears to be. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion that a violation exists. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. Page 103 161 2A - September 27, 2012 MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Do you have a recommendation for us? MR. MUSSE: Yes, sir. The county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$80.86 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County building permits or demolition permit, inspections, and certificate of completion/occupancy within X amount of days of this hearing, to repair all damages noted in the property maintenance inspection report or a fine of X amount of dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to abate the violation, the county may abate the violation using any methods to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Would anybody like to take a stab at filling in the blanks on this one? MR. LAVINSKI: Yeah. I'll do this one, too. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion we accept the county's recommendation that the $80.86 operational costs be paid in 30 days and, again, 90 days or a fine of$200 a day. MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. Page 104 161 21kek September 27, 2012 All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thanks, Jonathan. MR. MUSSE: Thank you. MS. BAKER: Next case, No. 20, Case CEPM20120001592, Thu-Nhut Nguyen. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. BAKER: It's a violation of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231(12)(i) and 22-242. Description of violation: Unsecured home on Estates-zoned property. Location/address where violation exists: 480 8th Street Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio 39260480004. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Thu-Nhut Nguyen, 13342 Lucille Street, Garden Grove, California, 92844. Date violation first observed: February 2, 2012. Date owner/person in charge given notice of violation: February 8, 2012. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: March 5, 2012. Date of reinspection: July 20, 2012. Results of reinspection: The violation remains. Page 105 161 2A /7 September 27, 2012 CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Patrick? MR. BALDWIN: Hello, again. Last time you'll see me today. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Promise? MR. BALDWIN: For the record, Patrick Baldwin, Collier County Code Enforcement investigator. I would like to present case evidence in the follow exhibits: Four photographs taken February 2, 2012; 3 photographs taken May 25, 2012. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to accept the photographs. MR. LAVINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: A motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: On February 2, 2012, I responded to an anonymous complaint regarding a house in disrepair. I observed that most of the windows and the doors on the structure were removed or broken. On February 8, 2012, I posted the property and sent the notice of violation regular and certified mail. In late May of this year, the owners boarded up the windows and the doors but, unfortunately, within a week, the home was broken into again. This past Monday I spoke with the owners, Ms. -- the owner, Ms. Nguyen, and she stated that she would be down here in mid October to Page 106 161 2A , September 27, 2012 abate the violation. She stated that she would also get permits for windows, and she would like to be moving in here into the property within a year. To this day, the violation still remains. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. KELLY: Was this the one that we had a -- MR. BALDWIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yes. MR. KELLY: Okay. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Do we find this in violation? MR. LAVINSKI: Make a motion a violation exists. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. We have a motion. Do we have a second? MR. MIESZCAK: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. BALDWIN: Would you like the recommendation, sir? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Yeah. I was wondering if-- have the Sheriffs Office been notified to keep an eye on this place or -- MR. BALDWIN: The structure is on our community -- Golden Gate Community Caretaking list, so, yes, they have. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: But they haven't caught anybody? Page 107 161 2Av September 27, 2012 MR. BALDWIN: No, unfortunately. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Even the people who were squatting the place? MR. BALDWIN: Well, we could never determine if anyone was squatting inside the place. Typically, a lot of these homes, it might be teenagers or people in the neighborhood. You never know. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. Your recommendation, Patrick? MR. BALDWIN: That the code enforcement board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of$81.43 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and to abate all violations by, one, applying for and obtaining a Collier County boarding certificate, providing a detailed plan for rehabilitation or demolition, and completing the boarding within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; and, Two, obtaining all required Collier County building permits to repair all unsecured openings or demolition permit, inspections and certificate of completion/occupancy within blank days of this hearing or a fine of blank dollars per day will be imposed until the violation is abated; Three, respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final inspection to confirm abatement; If the respondent fails to notify and abate the violation, the county may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this order, and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. It appears -- we should be as benevolent as possible on this. This is really not the fault of the respondent; more, it's vandalism that's caused these problems. My two-cents worth. Page 108 161 2 September 27, 2012 Would anybody like to take a stab at this? MR. KELLY: All right. Make a motion that we accept the county's recommendation with time frame of 120 days or a fine of $150 per day. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. MR. MIESZCAK: And operational costs of$81.43. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Forty-three. MR. MIESZCAK: And I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN KELLY: We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Jen? MS. BAKER: Just for clarification, do you want that for section -- there's two parts of this recommendation; part one, which is just requiring get a permit or a demo permit, and then the second part is obtaining a boarding certificate within X amount of days and then completing the work. MR. KELLY: My intention was to definitely give her plenty of time to come down through the end of October. I know that we don't have a December meeting, so it basically pushes it through the rest of the year; that was my intention. Even for boarding, because it sounded like in her request that she wanted to be here to not just board it but to actually put in windows. Page 109 161 2A ' September 27, 2012 MS. BAKER: Okay. So you want to give her 120 days to board the structure as well? MR. KELLY: Yeah. That was part of her request, so I'm really just, kind of, bowing to what the respondent wanted. MS. BAKER: Okay. But there's another section on Section 2. MR. KELLY: Right. MS. BAKER: If you give her 120 days, and then how many days from the boarding certificate would you like to give her to fix things, if that's the option she decides to take? MR. KELLY: Oh, I'm sorry. I see what you're saying. In that case, can I restructure 2 and just have 120 days or a fine of$150 a day to board and have it completed, if that's what she elects to do? MS. BAKER: Uh-huh. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I would give her more time, because she said she wants to replace the windows and doors and whatever, and she'll have to pull permits on that, et cetera. And, again, this was strictly vandalism that caused this violation. MR. KELLY: I can amend it to six months if that's more amenable to the board. MR. MARINO: One hundred eighty days. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It's okay with me. MR. KELLY: Hundred and eighty? MR. MARINO: Hundred and eighty. MR. KELLY: I'll amend to 180 days. MR. MARINO: I'll second the motion. MR. MIESZCAK: Second 180 days. THE COURT REPORTER: Who seconded? MR. KELLY: Larry. He had the original second, so he amended his second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Okay. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 110 161 2A - September 27, 2012 MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. MIESZCAK: Break for lunch? CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: County's buying. MS. BAKER: Next case we're moving to No. 5, old business, Letter A, motion for imposition of fines/liens. Number 4, Case CESD20110007349, Judy S. and Silas Pacheco. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Patrick, you've changed. MR. LETOURNEAU: I have. For the record, Jeff Letourneau, Collier County Code Enforcement. Original violation of the Collier County Land Development Code, 04-41, as amended, Sections 10.02.06(B)(1)(a) and 10.02.06(B)(1)(e)(i). Violation location is 1330 Golden Gate Boulevard East, Naples, Florida, 34120; Folio No. 39206920007. Violation description: A chickee hut and swimming pool constructed without Collier County building permits. Past order: On April 26, 2012, the Code Enforcement Board issued a finding of fact, conclusion of law and order. The respondent was found in violation of the referenced ordinances and ordered to correct the violation. See the attached order of the board, OR4795, Page 309, for more information. The property is not in compliance with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of September 27, 2012. Page 111 161 2A ' September 27, 2012 The fines and costs to date are described as the following: Order Item No. 1 and 2, fines at the rate of$150 per day for the period between August 25, 2012, and September 27, 2012, a total of 34 days, for the total amount of$5,100. Fines continue to accrue. Order Item No. 5, operational costs of$81.43 have not been paid. Total amount to date: $5,181.43. MR. MIESZCAK: Motion to impose the fines. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: We have a motion. Do we have -- MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a second. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: It carries unanimously. MR. LETOURNEAU: Thank you. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Thank you. Okay. Which brings us back to the agenda. And do we have any -- we are now to reports. Sorry it took me so long to get there. The pages are heavy. MR. MIESZCAK: We understand. MS. FLAGG: No worries. MR. MIESZCAK: It's the double tabs you use. MS. FLAGG: Just very quickly. Since November 2008 to date, the banks have expended $2.961 Page 112 161 2A2,, . September 27, 2012 million to abate code violations, and these are properties that they haven't taken title to yet, which resulted in the abatement of 2,602 cases. Since July of'09, the BCC and yourselves have waived $6.9 million in fines due to compliance by property owners. For the time frame of September 6th through the 19th, we've received 292 complaints. Year to date, we've opened, as a result of those complaints, 8,075 cases. The investigators during this time frame of September 6th through 19th completed 1,026 inspections of property. Year to date they've completed 26,833 property inspections. Year to date the district teams, in conjunction with the community task force teams that were formed to address blight prevention, they've sponsored 122 meet-and-greet events; they've provided 20 cleanup events for community members, which means they have -- make arrangements to have dumpsters come out and clean up properties at no cost to the property owner; and they've conducted 23 vacant-home sweeps. Also during the time frame of September 6th through 19th, there were 290 lien-search requests completed. Year to date there's been 7,230 lien searches completed. Lien searches with open cases during the time frame of the 6th through the 19th there were 10 properties that were requested lien searches where they found open code violations on. Year to date they've identified 340 properties that had code violations on them when the lien search was requested. So the process of creating a mechanism to assure that people don't buy properties without knowing that there was a code case on it, as you saw through some of the cases today, they -- people are choosing to purchase properties with code violations on it, which is no issue, but we make sure that they get notified that there is a violation on it, and that's done through that lien-search program. Page 113 161 2A - September 27, 2012 And I do need to share some sad news with you. Investigator Gomez recently passed away from -- he was an investigator with our department. MR. MIESZCAK: Sorry to hear that. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: I wanted to let you know that the information that you provided, the summary information, I shared with our neighbor brothers and sisters on the government committee, the ones who were -- I guess, co-negotiated the rules, and they were very impressed with it. They're sending it out to all the members. MS. FLAGG: Great. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: With that said, next meeting is October 25, 2012. MR. MIESZCAK: I make the motion to adjourn. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: And we have a motion to adjourn. All those in favor? MR. MARINO: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MR. LEFEBVRE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. MIESCZAK: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. CHAIRMAN KAUFMAN: Opposed? We are adjourned? ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11 :57 a.m. Page 114 161 2A /), September 27, 2012 CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD awl■ , A 0" moire`./ t ERT • AT , CHAIRMAN These ny4utes approved by the Board on Jas presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, NOTARY PUBLIC/COURT REPORTER. Page 115 161 2A December 7, 2012 MINUTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE p11-1) Naples, Florida, December 7, 2012 a 3 JAN 08 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED the Collier County Special Magistrate, havmg'coridize! d`business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following persons present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable Brenda Garretson Fiala 1 '/ Hiller Henning ) Coyle V uici4a Misc. ,arres: Date: Item#: (P 12.A-2. Copies to: ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Supervisor Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary 161 2 A � December 7, 2012 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Special Magistrate will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Special Magistrate shall be responsible for providing this record. CALL TO ORDER—Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson presiding The Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson called the Hearing to order at 9:08 A.M. All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. A. Hearing rules and regulations Special Magistrate Garretson outlined the Rules and Regulations for the Hearing. Prior to conducting the Hearing, Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officers for a Resolution by Stipulation. The goal is to obtain compliance without being punitive. Recessed: 9:17 a.m. Reconvened: 9:40 a.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Supervisor, noted the following changes (listed below as Agenda Item Numbers): Under Item IV.0—Motion for Extension of Time, the following case was withdrawn • #1 - CASE NO: CEPM20100003914-SIEGFRIED AND IRENE FASCHER R/F TRUST UTD 9/24/93 Under Item V.B —Hearings, the following case was moved to IV.B—Motion for Continuance: • #11 - CASE NO: CEPM20120013875 -LINDA C.DAIGLE Under Item V.B —Hearings, the following cases were moved to V.A—Stipulations: • #3 -CASE NO: PU4535-CEEX20120008981 -GL HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES II LTD • #4-CASE NO: PU4831-CEEX20120009279 -MARBELLA LAKES OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC • #12-CASE NO: CELU20120014916-MARIAN J.BAKER AND THOMAS BAKER Under Item V.B—Hearings, the following cases were withdrawn: • #1 -CASE NO: PR048689-CEEX20120012404-SIXT RENT A CAR LLC • #5 -CASE NO: DAS12826-CEEX20120016981 -MARIE POLLARA • #6-CASE NO: DAS12827-CEEX20120016989-MARIE POLLARA • #8-CASE NO: CEPM20120012660-AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC • #9-CASE NO: CEPM20120013134-ROSE MCLAUGHLIN • #10-CASE NO: CEAU20120009040-GREGORY T.HAGEN • #17-CASE NO: CEA20120013025 -ROBIN L. BRUSCINI • #19-CASE NO: CEPM20120013895-SFR 2012-1, FLORIDA LLC • #21 -CASE NO: CEEX20120017427-ANN MARIE CRUZ • #22-CASE NO: CEEX20120017428-ANN MARIE CRUZ Under Item VI.A—Motion for Imposition of Fines, the following case was withdrawn: • #1 -CASE NO: CEPM20120009061 -HSBC BANK USA NA TR,ACE SECURITIES CORPORATION • #2-CASE NO: CEAU20120011090-SILVIA DERRICK 2 16L 2A2-- ecember 7, 2012 • #6-CASE NO: CEPM20120006379-DENNIS WOLFE AND ROBERTA WOLFE Under Item VII.B —Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Order, the following cases were added: • #1 - CEPM20120009061 HSBC Bank • #2 - CEPM20110000743 HSBC Bank The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as modified. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—November 2, 2012 The minutes of the November 2, 2012 Special Magistrate Hearing were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as submitted. IV. MOTIONS A. Motion for Reduction/Abatement of Fines None B. Motion for Continuance 11. CASE NO: CEPM20120013875 OWNER: LINDA C.DAIGLE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES DAVIS VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, ARTICLE VI,CHAPTER 22, SECTION 22-231(12)(c),(i),AND(p). RESIDENCE IS VACANT AND UNSECURED, WINDOWS BROKEN,DOORS ARE REMOVED, INTERIOR WALLS ARE INFESTED WITH MOLD,ROOF IS IN NEED OF REPAIR. FOLIO NO: 37598720001 VIOLATION ADDRESS:2045 WILSON BLVD N,NAPLES Linda Daigle submitted the request in writing. Investigator Davis represented the County stating he had no objection to the request. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the Motion for Continuance and continued the case to a future date. C. Motion for Extension of Time None V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Stipulations 1. CASE NO: PU4535-CEEX20120008981 OWNER: GL HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES II LTD OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ALBERTO SANCHEZ VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD.2001-73, SECTION 1.4 N UNLAWFUL CONNECTION TO WATER OWNED BY DISTRICT WITHOUT CONSENT. FOLIO NO: 72640033407 VIOLATION ADDRESS:3994 BERING COURT,NAPLES Investigator Sanchez requested the hearing. The Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent's representative Heather C. Keith, ESQ. on December 6, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 3 161 2Ai December 7, 2012 1. To prepare and distribute a memo to all of its direct employees and direct contractors working in the RiverStone at Naples residential community which memo shall stress the importance of complying with the Collier County Utility Code and warning that violations of the Utility Code, including the unauthorized use of water, will not be tolerated. Respondent agrees to distribute said memo to its employees and contractors by January 12, 2013 and notify the County on compliance of said directive. 2. To pay a civil penalty in the amount of$350.00 for Citation No. PU 4535, Operational Costs in the amount of$50.00 and an Administrative Fee of$5.00 for a total amount due of$405.00. Payment shall be made to Collier County by January 12, 2013. Amount Due: $405.00 2. CASE NO: PU4831-CEEX20120009279 OWNER: MARBELLA LAKES OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RAY ADDISON VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD.2001-73, SECTION 1.4b SUBSECTION 1 CROSSING PROPERTY LINE WITH WATER HOSE FOR CONSTRUCTION AT DIFFERENT FOLIO NUMBER/ADDRESS. FOLIO NO: 56610000208 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 6395 LAGUNA CIRCLE,NAPLES Investigator Addison requested the hearing. The Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent's representative Heather C. Keith, ESQ. on December 6, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. To prepare and distribute a memo to all of its direct employees and direct contractors working in the RiverStone at Naples residential community which memo shall stress the importance of complying with the Collier County Utility Code and warning that violations of the Utility Code, including the unauthorized use of water, will not be tolerated. Respondent agrees to distribute said memo to its employees and contractors by January 12, 2013 and notify the County on compliance of said directive. 2. To pay Operational Costs in the amount of$50.00 and an Administrative Fee of$5.00 for a total amount due of$55.00. Payment shall be made to Collier County by January 12, 2013. Total Amount Due: $55.00 3. CASE NO: CELU20120014916 OWNER: MARIAN J.BAKER AND THOMAS BAKER OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR STEPHEN ATHEY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTIONS 1.04.01(A)AND 2.02.03. VEHICLES FOR SALE ON PROPERTY,ALSO NO VISIBLE LICENSE PLATES ON VEHICLES. FOLIO NO: 67281240004 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 326 RIDGE DRIVE,NAPLES Investigator Athey requested the hearing. 4 161 2A - December 7, 2012 The Stipulation was entered into by Thomas Baker on December 7, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.47 incurred in the prosecution of the case by February 7, 2013. 2. Abate all violations by obtaining and affixing a current valid license plate to each vehicle, or storing vehicles within a completely enclosed structure, or removing offending vehicles from the property by January 7, 2013 or a fine of$50.00 for each day the violation continues thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.47 B. Hearings 15. CASE NO: CEAU20120009405 OWNER: FOREST PARK MASTER PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: 2010 BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER 1 SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATION,PART 1 SCOPE AND APPLICATION, SECTION 105 PERMITS, 105.1 REQUIRED.PERMIT#2001061594 FOR A"6 FT PRE-CAST FENCE"PERMIT EXPIRED ON DECEMBER 25,2001, CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION WAS NOT ISSUED. FOLIO NO: 33140000364 VIOLATION ADDRESS:NO SITE ADDRESS Investigator Musse represented the County. Michael Towns, Property Manager and Kenneth Teebagy, Homeowner represented the Respondent. County Evidence Entered: Exhibit A— 1 photo dated 6/29/12 Exhibit B—Permit#200161594 Investigator Musse testified: • Upon investigation into an inquiry by a landowner on whose responsibility it was to maintain the fence, it was determined a permit was issued to install the fence in 2001. • The permit was issued to the Developer, however no Certificate of Completion is on file. • The permit was deemed "cancelled" by the County on April 20, 2004. • Based on a these facts, the notice of violation was issued. Mr. Towns testified: • The fence abuts County owned property, the Golden Gate Community Center. 5 161 2A � December 7, 2012 • It was in need of repair, and there was a question on who is responsible for the repairs as the fence is located on private property (homeowner lands), not common lands controlled by the Association. • The fence has been repaired by the Association. Respondent Evidence Entered: Composite Exhibit A: 2 photos dated 12/5/12. Mr. Teebagy testified: • The original builder and developer have been contacted and they stated the fence was inspected by the County after the original construction was completed. • They do not have a record of the inspection report. • In 2008, the developer ascertained a Certificate of Completion for the entire project, which should have included the fence in question. • The fence was constructed in conformance with the building code requirements at the time it was installed. • He provided photos of the fence showing it is in good repair. Upon hearing the evidence, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent NOT GUILTY, as there is insufficient evidence to support existence of a violation. Break: 10:47 a.m. Reconvened: 10:54 a.m. 2. CASE NO: PR049169-CEEX20120015848 OWNER: EAN HOLDINGS LLC OFFICER: PARK RANGER RICHARD MAUNZ VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD., SEC. 130-66 FAILURE TO DISPLAY PAID PARKING RECEIPT VIOLATION ADDRESS:VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/19/12 Delivered: 11/26/12 Ranger Maunz presented the case. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay a Fine of$30.00, Operational Costs in the amount of$50.00 and an Administrative Fee in the amount of$5.00 for a total amount due of$85.00 by January 7, 2013. Total Amount Due: $85.00 7. CASE NO: CENA20120015717 OWNER: JUAN HERNANDEZ AND ADRIANNA GARCIA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR CHRISTOPHER AMBACH VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 54 ENVIRONMENT, ARTICLE VI WEEDS,LITTER,AND EXOTICS, SECTION 54-186(a)AND UNAUTHORIZED ACCUMULATION OF LITTER, SECTION 54-181.LITTER AND DEBRIS CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO: OLD CLOTHING,BROKEN TELEVISION,OLD FURNITURE,METAL, PLASTIC,AND HOUSEHOLD TRASH. FOLIO NO: 37060160005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1521 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W.,NAPLES 6 161 2A - December 7, 2012 Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/19/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/26/12 Investigator Ambach presented the case. Evidence entered: Exhibit A: 1 photo dated 10/15/12 Exhibit B: 1 photo dated 12/6/12 The violation remains as of December 7, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.38 incurred in the prosecution of the case by January 7, 2013. 2. Abate the violation by removing all unauthorized accumulation of litter from the property to an appropriate waste disposal facility and remove any and all abandoned or derelict property from the location in question to a site intended for final disposal by December 10, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday,Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.38 The Special Magistrate stated the case was a repeat violation with fines to be imposed at a higher rate should there be another occurrence. 13. CASE NO: CEPM20120012329 OWNER: TAYLOR,BEAN AND WHITAKER MORTGAGE CORP. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ART FORD VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231,SUBSECTIONS 12k, 12n,AND 15. SCREEN PANELS MISSING/TORN FOR POOL ENCLOSURE,FRONT DOOR MISSING HARDWARE,AND UNMAINTAINED SWIMMING POOL. FOLIO NO: 56570005408 VIOLATION ADDRESS:717 CROSSFIELD CIRCLE,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/19/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/26/12 Investigator Ford presented the case. The Respondents were not present. Evidence entered: Composite Exhibit A: 2 photos dated 8/16/12 Composite Exhibit B: 3 photos dated 10/27/12 7 161 2A - December 7, 2012 The violation remains as of December 7, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTYof the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay the Operational Costs of$112.56 incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case on or before January 7, 2013. 2. Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi-weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water and filtration system on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter or; 3. Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water pursuant to HUD standards on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 4. Make all necessary repairs of the pool cage structure on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 5. Repar the front door to a permitted condition or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 6. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 7. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.56 14. CASE NO: CEPM20120014330 OWNER: THOMAS A.LORINO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES DAVIS VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(15). UNMAINTAINED POOL. FOLIO NO: 68986773189 VIOLATION ADDRESS:9137 QUARTZ LANE,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/19/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/20/12 Investigator Davis presented the case. The Respondent was not present. Evidence entered: Exhibit A: 1 photo dated 10/4/12 The violation remains as of December 7, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTYof the alleged violation and ordered to: 8 1 61 2 A 9, December 7, 2012 1. Pay the Operational Costs of$112.38 incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case on or before January 7, 2013. 2. Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi-weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water and filtration system on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter or; 3. Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water pursuant to HUD standards on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 4. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday,Sunday or legal holiday. 5. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.38 16. CASE NO: CESD20120015121 OWNER: OPTION ONE MTG LOAN TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND(e). SHED IN REAR YARD AND NO PERMIT OBTAINED. FOLIO NO: 62411160108 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 819 108TH AVENUE N,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/19/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/19/12 Investigator Pulse presented the case. The Respondents were not present. Evidence entered: Exhibit A: Aerial photos of property dated 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005 Exhibit B: photo dated 3/20/12 Exhibit C: photo dated 6/7/12 Exhibit C: photo dated 11/7/12 The violation remains as of December 7, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.29 incurred in the prosecution of the case by January 7, 2013. 2. Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County Building Permit(s), or Collier County Demolition Permit(s) and required inspections and Certificate of Occupancy/Completion by January 7, 2013 or a fine of$100.00 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by 9 161 2A2- December 7, 2012 phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.29 18. CASE NO: CEPM20120017192 OWNER: JUDITH HARBRECHT HILL TR AND WILLIAM P.HILL TR OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(15). UNMAINTAINED POOL-REPEAT VIOLATION. FOLIO NO: 55402400004 VIOLATION ADDRESS:451 TORREY PINES POINT,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/19/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/19/12 Investigator Kincaid presented the case. The Respondent was not present. Evidence entered: Composite Exhibit A: 2 photos dated 11/7/12 Exhibit B: 1 photo dated 12/6/12 The violation remains as of December 7, 2012.. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTYof the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay the Operational Costs of$112.56 incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case on or before January 7, 2013. 2. Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi-weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water and filtration system on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$500.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter or; 3. Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water pursuant to HUD standards on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of $500.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 4. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 5. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.56 10 161 2A - December 7, 2012 20. CASE NO: CEPM20120013543 OWNER: JEAN E.POLCHE AND BRULIA BRUNY OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHELLE SCAVONE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231 (15)AND THE 2010 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER 4, SECTION 424,424.2,AND 424.2.17. POOL WATER AND POOL ENCLOSURE NOT BEING MAINTAINED. FOLIO NO: 49481480006 VIOLATION ADDRESS:4123 CINDY AVENUE,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/20/12 Personal Service: 11/21/12 Investigator Snow presented the case. The Respondents were not present. Evidence entered: Composite Exhibit A: 2 photos dated 9/24/12 The violation remains as of December 7, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay the Operational Costs of 112.38 incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case on or before January 7, 2013. 2. Chemically treat the pool water to kill the algae and provide bi-weekly treatments to maintain clean pool water and filtration system on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter or; 3. Chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool to prevent the intrusion of rain water pursuant to HUD standards on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 4. Make all necessary repairs of the pool cage structure on or before December 14, 2012 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 5. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 6. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.38 C. Emergency Cases: None VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: 3. CASE NO: CEPM20120005148 OWNER: MARK L. SZUREK 11 161 2A - December 7, 2012 OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONY ASARO VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231(15). A POOL WITH ALGAE GROWTH. FOLIO NO: 53000160007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 2305 KINGS LAKE BLVD,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/20/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/20/12 The Respondent was not present. Investigator Snow presented the case noting the violation has been abated by the County. Abatement Date: 10/2/12 Special Magistrate Order: 8/3/12 Fine Amount: $250.00/day Duration: (53 days) Total Fine Amount: $13,250.00 Unpaid Abatement Costs: $1,094.90 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.56 Total to Date: $14,457.46 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$14,457.46. Said amount to become a lien on the property. 4. CASE NO: CENA20120008602 OWNER: ALEJANDRA LYNCH OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JIM KINCAID VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 54,ARTICLE VI SECTIONS 54-179 AND 181. LITTER ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 62260040000 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5330 BROWARD STREET,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/20/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/19/12 The Respondent was not present. Investigator Snow presented the case noting the violation has been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate DENIED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines. 5. CASE NO: CEPM20120006351 OWNER: ABRAHAM&SWEENEY PA TR,GRANT FAMILY LAND TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOHN CONNETTA VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(15). POOL WATER IS DARK GREEN IN COLOR, STAGNANT,AND NOT BEING PROPERLY MAINTAINED. FOLIO NO: 59960012749 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 15134 BROLIO LANE,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/20/12 12 161 2A2' December 7, 2012 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/16/12 The Respondents were not present. Supervisor Bosa presented the case noting the violation has been abated by the County. Special Magistrate Order: 9/7/12 Fine Amount: $250.00/day Duration: (45 days) Total Fine Amount: $11,250.00 Unpaid Abatement Costs: $3,672.76 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.73 Total to Date: $15,035.43 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$15,035.43. Said amount to become a lien on the property. 7. CASE NO: CEPM20120008040 OWNER: DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST CO ATF THE HOLDERS OF GSAMP TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOE GIANNONE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES CHAPTER 22,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231(15). AN UNMAINTAINED POOL CREATING AN UNHEALTHY AND HAZARDOUS CONDITION. FOLIO NO: 68094280001 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 3539 SANTIAGO WAY, NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/20/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/20/12 The Respondents were not present. Supervisor Mucha presented the case noting the violation has been abated. Special Magistrate Order: 9/7/12 Fine Amount: $250/00/day Duration (21 days) Total Fine Amount: $5,250.00 Unpaid Abatement Costs: $1,153.50 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.29 Total to Date: $6,515.79 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$6,515.79. Said amount to become a lien on the property. 8. CASE NO: CEPM20120001710 OWNER: JENNIFER BONACKI OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MICHELE MCGONAGLE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(12)(p)AND 19. MOLD GROWING ON THE INTERIOR WALLS AND BASEBOARDS OF A VACANT CONDO. FOLIO NO: 51080001984 VIOLATION ADDRESS:2456 MILLCREEK LANE, UNIT 103,NAPLES 13 161 2A - December 7, 2012 Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 11/20/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 11/20/12 The Respondent was not present. Supervisor Bosa presented the case noting the violation has not been abated. Special Magistrate Order: 6/1/12 Fine Amount: $250.00/day Duration: (181 days) Total Fine Amount: $45.250.00 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.56 Total to Date: $45,362.56 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$45,362.56. Said amount to become a lien on the property with fines continuing to accrue. VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Motion to Amend Previously Issued Order: None B. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Order: 1. CEPM 20120009061 HSBC Bank Ms. Baker requested the Order be Rescinded (OR 4837 PG 1940)as the Bank is not the owner of the property. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion to Rescind the Previously Issued Order. 2. CEPM20110000743 HSBC Bank Ms. Baker requested the Orders be Rescinded (OR 4681 PG 2199 and OR 4737 PG 97) as the Bank is not the owner of the property. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion to Rescind the Previously Issued Orders. VIII. CONSENT AGENDA A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. B. Request for Special Magistrate to Impose Nuisance Abatement Liens on Cases Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. IX. REPORTS None 14 161 2A � December 7, 2012 X. NEXT MEETING DATE: January 4, 2013 at 9:00 A.M. located at the Collier County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail, Building F,3rd Floor, Naples, Florida There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by Order of the Special Magistrate at 11:35 A.M. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING ahlik I►k..i' B- nda Garret o , Special Magistrate The Minutes we approved by the Special Magistrate on o1'Y�U g°13 , as presented , or as amended 15 161 2A2 January 4, 2013 MINUTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE Naples, Florida, January 4, 2013 FEB © 6 2013 v LET IT BE REMEMBERED the Collier County Special Magistrate, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the Fiala ,/ following persons present: Hiller Henning 1 Coyle ✓' SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable Brenda Garretson Misc.Cares: Dace: Item* 1(o 12.i 2-- Copies to: ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Supervisor Kerry Adams, Code Enforcement Administrative Secretary 161 2A � January 4, 2013 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Special Magistrate will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Neither Collier County nor the Special Magistrate shall be responsible for providing this record. I. CALL TO ORDER—Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson presiding A. Hearing rules and regulations The Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson called the Hearing to order at 9:03 A.M. All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. Special Magistrate Garretson outlined the Rules and Regulations for the Hearing. Prior to conducting the Hearing,Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officers for a Resolution by Stipulation. The goal is to obtain compliance without being punitive. Recessed: 9:15 A.M. Reconvened: 9:45 A.M. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Jennifer Baker, Code Enforcement Supervisor, noted the following changes (listed below as Agenda item numbers): Under Item V. B —Hearings, the following case was moved to V.0 —Motion for Continuance: • #15-CASE NO: CESD20120003786-JANIE M.OSBRON • #27-CASE NO: CEPM20120014225-VINCENT RUSSELL • #26-CASE NO: CEPM20120014819-FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT MASTER ASSOCIATION INC. Under Item V. B —Hearings, the following cases were moved to V.A—Stipulations: • #18-CASE NO: CEV20120012775-ISMAEL RODRIGUEZ • #7-CASE NO: PU4540-CEEX20120017418-LENNAR HOMES LLC • #8-CASE NO: PU4539-CEEX20120017419- LENNAR HOMES LLC • #9-CASE NO: PU4538-CEEX20120017420-LENNAR HOMES LLC Under Item V. B —Hearings, the following cases were withdrawn: • #2-CASE NO: SO148892-CEEX20120017775-MARTIN DOMAN • #4-CASE NO: PR049242-CEEX20120018252-DAVID AND PATRICIA BOESCHE • #5 -CASE NO: PR049333-CEEX20120018119 -ROBERT LALLIER • #6- CASE NO: PR049334-CEEX20120018260-OWNER: ROBERT LALLIER • #12-CASE NO: CEA20120013025-ROBIN L.BRUSCINI • #14-CASE NO: CEPM20120012638-IRMA ARRENDONDO • #16-CASE NO: CEAU20120015039-CHAPLIN DIXON AND PASCALE DIXON • #17-CASE NO: CELU20120012431 -JULIAN H.CAMACHO • #19-CASE NO: CENA20120017776-URMAS A.KASK AND ROBERT SCHULTZ • #20-CASE NO: CEPM20120014777-ANA DANNIC 2 161 2A � January 4, 2013 • #22-CASE NO: CEV20120010115-JOSEPH C.MIRABILIO AND SHEILAGH MIRABILIO • #25-CASE NO: CEROW20120001296-MARTHA M.RODRIGUEZ-MENDOZA Under Item VI. A—Motion for Imposition of Fines, the following case was withdrawn: • #5- CASE NO: CEPM20120001143-SARAH JANE HORNER • #6- CASE NO: CEPM20120001144-SARAH JANE HORNER The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as modified. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—December 7, 2012 The minutes of the December 7, 2012 Special Magistrate Hearing were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as submitted. IV. MOTIONS A. Motion for Reduction/Abatement of Fines None B. Motion for Continuance 1. CASE NO: CESD20120003786 OWNER: JANIE M.OSBRON OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR VICKI GIGUERE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a)AND 2010 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER 1 SCOPE AND ADMINISTRATION,PART 1 SCOPE AND APPLICATION, SECTION 105 PERMITS, 105.1 REQUIRED. FENCE AROUND PROPERTY,CARPORT/SCREEN ENCLOSURE TYPE STRUCTURE,AND SHED IN REAR OF PROPERTY ALL WITHOUT COLLIER COUNTY PERMITS. FOLIO NO: 26630680007 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1011 GUAVA DRIVE,NAPLES Janie Osbron was not present but submitted a written request for a continuance. Investigator Giguere representing the County had no objection to the request. Special Magistrate Garretson GRANTED the Motion for Continuance. 2. CASE NO: CEPM20120014225 OWNER: VINCENT RUSSELL OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOE GIANNONE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-236. VACANT STRUCTURE WITH FIRE DAMAGE DECLARED TO BE DANGEROUS BY THE COLLIER COUNTY CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL. FOLIO NO: 77411840002 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1258 TRAIL TERRACE DRIVE,NAPLES Mr. Russell was present and submitted a written request for a continuance. Jeffery Grant, Mr. Russell's attorney stated Mr. Russell is in the process of pursuing an insurance claim. Investigator Giannone representing the County had no objection to the request as it is not a health, safety and welfare issue. 3 161 2A2 January 4, 2013 Special Magistrate Garretson GRANTED the Motion for Continuance until the Investigating Officer advises the County to move forward with any action. 3. CASE NO: CEPM20120014819 OWNER: FALLING WATERS BEACH RESORT MASTER ASSOCIATION INC. OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES SEABASTY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,ARTICLE VI, CHAPTER 22, SECTION 22-231 (12)(n)AND SECTION 22-228(1).HANDRAILING TO THE BRIDGES OVER THE SWIMMING POOL ALL ARE IN NEED OF REPAIR TO THE ROPES COVERING THE TOP RAILS(FRAYED,LOOSE,MILDEWED,BROKEN AND SEPARATED IN SPOTS)AND THE BALUSTERS LOOSE ON THE CEMENT STEPS. FOLIO NO: 726722507 VIOLATION ADDRESS:6784 BEACH RESORT DRIVE,NAPLES Thomas Powers, Treasurer of the Falling Waters Beach Resort Master Association, Inc.,was present and requested a continuance. Supervisor Letourneau representing the County stated that he had no objection to the request. Mr. Powers stated that the repairs to the bridge are underway and requested a 60 day continuance. Special Magistrate Garretson GRANTED the Motion for Continuance for the case until May 4, 2013. C. Motion for Extension of Time 1. CASE NO: CESD20120002950 OWNER: MERCEDES ORTIZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR RALPH BOSA VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION 10.02.06(B)(1)(a). SEVERAL UNPERMITTED IMPROVEMENTS/ADDITIONS TO INCLUDE CABANAS, STORAGE BUILDING,LANAI,AND ROOF ADDITION WITHOUT PERMITS. FOLIO NO: 35743720007 VIOLATION ADDRESS:2184 46TH TERRACE SW,NAPLES The Respondent was not present. Supervisor Bosa representing the County reported that the violation has been abated. Special Magistrate Garretson GRANTED the Motion for an Extension of Time until January 4, 2013. 2. CASE NO: CEPM20120001264 OWNER: ISRAEL DOMINGO OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR MARIA RODRIGUEZ VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22, BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231 (11),(12)(d),(12)(b),(12)(i),(12)(p),AND(19). STRUCTURE IN A VERY POOR STATE OF REPAIR WITH MULTIPLE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE VIOLATIONS. STRUCTURE IS BEING USED AS A DRUG AND PROSTITUTION HOUSE. FOLIO NO: 00082963903 VIOLATION ADDRESS:3036 IMMOKALEE DRIVE, IMMOKALEE 4 161 2A January 4, 2013 Mr. Domingo was present and stated that the repairs necessary to abate the violation are ongoing. Investigator Rodriguez representing the County and reported that she had no objection to the request. Special Magistrate Garretson GRANTED the Motion for an Extension of Time until July 4, 2013. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Stipulations 1. CASE NO: CEV20120012775 OWNER: ISMAEL RODRIGUEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,ARTICLE II, CHAPTER 130, SECTION 130-97(4).COMMERCIAL VEHICLES PARKED ON RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONED PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 36374840009 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5416 25TH AVENUE SW,NAPLES Investigator Musse represented the County. The Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent Ismael Rodriguez on January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.12 incurred in the prosecution of the case by March 4, 2013. 2. Abate all violations by storing all commercial vehicles in rear yard and conceal them from view within a completely enclosed,permitted structure or remove offending vehicles from residentially zoned property by March 4, 2013 or a fine of$100.00 per day will be imposed until the violation is abated, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation using any method to bring the violation into compliance and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.12 2. CASE NO: PU4540-CEEX20120017418 OWNER: LENNAR HOMES LLC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ALBERTO SANCHEZ VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD.2001-73, SECTION 134-174(A)(N)UNLAWFUL CONNECTION TO COUNTY WATER LINE BY HOOKING WATER HOSE TO TEST PORT. 5 161 2A � January 4, 2013 VIOLATION ADDRESS:3437 RUNAWAY LANE,NAPLES Investigator Sanchez represented the County. The Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent's representative Jack Turner on January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$55.00 and a fine of$250.00 for a total amount due of $305.00 by February 4, 2013. Total Amount Due: $305.00 3. CASE NO: PU4539-CEEX20120017419 OWNER: LENNAR HOMES LLC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ALBERTO SANCHEZ VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD.2001-73, SECTION 134, 126(A)(6)ALTERING BACKFLOW DEVICE WITHOUT COUNTY APPROVAL. VIOLATION ADDRESS:3420 RUNAWAY LANE,NAPLES Investigator Sanchez represented the County. The Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent's representative Jack Turner on January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$55.00 and a fine of$250.00 for a total amount due of $305.00 by February 4, 2013. Total Amount Due: $305.00 4. CASE NO: PU4538-CEEX20120017420 OWNER: LENNAR HOMES LLC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ALBERTO SANCHEZ VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD.2001-73, SECTION 134, 126(A)(6)ALTERING BACKFLOW DEVICE WITHOUT COUNTY APPROVAL. VIOLATION ADDRESS:3429 RUNAWAY LANE,NAPLES Investigator Sanchez represented the County. The Stipulation was entered into by the Respondent's representative Jack Turner on January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$55.00 and a fine of$250.00 for a total amount due of$305.00 by February 4, 2013. Total Amount Due: $305.00 Break: 10:32 A.M. 6 161 2 A 4, 013 Reconvened: 10:40 A.M. B. Hearings 1. CASE NO: S0156992-CEEX20120018012 OWNER: JAMES V.GRANDE OFFICER: DEPUTY BARRY ARDREY VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD., SEC. 130-66 UNLAWFUL AREA VIOLATION ADDRESS:FLAMINGO AND CARDINAL,NAPLES Deputy Ardrey was not present. Mr. Grande was present and requested dismissal of the case. Special Magistrate GRANTED Mr. Grande's request and DISMISSED the case. 11. CASE NO: PU4794-CEEX20120018546 OWNER: LLOYD L.BOWEIN OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR TONYA PHILLIPS VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD. 118-62/134-174, SECTION B (3)SEWER CLEAN OUT CAP WAS REMOVED,ALLOWING RAW SEWAGE FROM BUILDING TO DRAIN OUT ON GROUND. CONTACT WITH SOIL WAS MADE,PUDDLES OF SEWAGE IN PARKING LOT. SEWER LINES TO COUNTY CONNECTION BLOCKED. FOLIO NO: 71781320009 VIOLATION ADDRESS:3385 BAYSHORE DRIVE,NAPLES Investigator Addison represented the County. Mr. Bowein was present. Mr. Bowein testified: • The property in question is an apartment building. • He was out of town when it was reported the sewer line backed up due to inappropriate waste being flushed down the toilet. • A licensed plumber addressed the problem as soon as possible. • It has been an ongoing issue and the vendor who now addressed the problem believes he identified and remedied the problem permanently (long term grease build up clogging the line). • In his opinion, he acted in a timely manner to address the problem and the fine amount is excessive given the violation. Investigator Addison testified: There was raw sewage on the ground which constituted a violation and the investigating officer only assessed a penalty of$100.00, when the maximum allowed is $500.00. Mr. Bowein stated: He was unaware the maximum fine amount was $500.00, and had he known this at the time, he would have agreed to pay the fine. 7 161 A`k January , 2013 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay a $100.00 fine, Operational Costs in the amount of$50.00 and a $5.00 Administrative Fee for a total amount due of$155.00 by February 4, 2013. Total Amount Due: $155.00 3. CASE NO: S0178025-CEEX20120017624 OWNER: LORRIE GOLD OFFICER: DEPUTY L.KELLER VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD., SEC. 130-67 HANDICAPPED SPACE VIOLATION ADDRESS:HOLLYWOOD,NAPLES Deputy Keller was not present. Lorrie Gold was not present. Special Magistrate Garretson CONTINUED the case. 10. CASE NO: PU5006-CEEX20120017422 OWNER: ACN HOLDINGS LLC OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR NATALIE SMITH VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAW&ORD. 118-66, SECTION A UNCONTAINERIZED LITTER CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO PAPER TOWELS,WATER BOTTLES,PAPER,TORN BAGS OF TRASH,ETC. LITTER IS BEING WIND DRIVEN THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY. FOLIO NO: 38103120008 VIOLATION ADDRESS:6800 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/17/12 Investigator Addison represented the County. The Respondent was not present. Evidence entered: Exhibit A: 1 photos dated 12/5/12 Exhbiti B: 1 photo dated 11/26/12 Exhibit C: 1 photo dated 11/14/12 Investigator Addison reported: The violation was first observed on October 12, 2012 with a violation issued on October 26, 2012 and was not corrected until December 12, 2012. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$50.0, an Administrative Fee in the amount of$5.00 and a fine of$500.00 for a total amount due of$555.00 by February 4, 2013. Total Amount Due: $555.00 8 161 2 It 12- anuary 4, 2013 13. CASE NO: CEPM20120017683 OWNER: ELAINE DELORES CHOICE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR HEINZ BOX VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231 (12)(c),22-231 (12)(b),22-241 (1). BLUE TARP ON ROOF DUE TO DAMAGED ROOF,WINDOWS ARE BOARDED UP AND NO BOARDING CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR. FOLIO NO: 35980440001 VIOLATION ADDRESS:4500 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/17/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/17/12 Investigator Box presented the case and reported the structure has been boarded, however no permit was issued for the work. The Respondent was not present. Evidence entered: Composite Exhibit A: 2 photos dated 12/17/12 Exhibit B: 1 photo dated 1/2/13 The violation remains as of January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTYof the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay the Operational Costs of$112.64 incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of the case on or before February 4, 2013. 2. Obtain all required Collier County Building Permits, inspections and a Certificate of Completion to repair the roof by January 11, 2013 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Restore the windows to a permitted condition on or before January 11, 2103 or a fine of $250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate or; obtain a Collier County Boarding Certificate on or before by January 11, 2013 and obtain all required Collier County Building Permits inspections and Certificates of Completion/Occupancy to restore the windows to permitted condition by July 4, 2013 or a fine of$250.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 4. Notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. 5. If the Respondents have not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the terms of the Stipulation. Total Amount Due: $112.64 9 16 k 2 anuary , 2013 21. CASE NO: CEV20120015869 OWNER: BANK OF AMERICA NA OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE VIOLATIONS: CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 130,ARTICLE III, SECTION 130-95 AND COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE 04-41,AS AMENDED,SECTION 4.05.03(A). VEHICLE WITH NO CURRENT LICENSE PLATE ATTACHED PARKED IN THE GRASS. FOLIO NO: 24476240001 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 55 3RD STREET,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/19/12 Supevisor Mucha presented the case. Evidence entered: Composite Exhibit A: 2 photos dated 1/3/13 The violation remains as of January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.38 incurred in the prosecution of this case by February 4, 2013. 2. Abate all violations by obtaining and affixing a current valid license plate to the vehicle and moving to a stabilized surface, or store the vehicles in a completely enclosed structure, or remove the offending vehicles from the property by January 7, 2013 or a fine of$50.00 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.38 23. CASE NO: CEV20120016482 OWNER: PETER A.HELFF OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JAMES SEABASTY VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 130, ARTICLE III, SECITON 130-95. TRAVEL TRAILER IS BEING STORED,IS INOPERABLE AND BEING REPAIRED,AND IS NOT CURRENTLY TAGGED WITH A VALID TAG. FOLIO NO: 45965080007 VIOLATION ADDRESS:2080 21ST STREET SW,NAPLES 10 161 2 A20`' January 13 Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/19/12 Supevisor Letourneau presented the case. Evidence entered: Exhibit A: 1 photo dated 11/15/12 Exhibit B: 1 photo dated 12/7/12 The violation remains as of January 4, 2013. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.03 incurred in the prosecution of this case by February 4, 2013. 2. Abate all violations by obtaining and affixing a current valid license plate to the vehicle and repair the vehicle to an operable condition, or store the vehicles in a completely enclosed structure, or remove the offending vehicles from the property by January 7, 2013 or a fine of $50.00 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday,Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriffs Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.03 24. CASE NO: CEAU20120013152 OWNER: MARK N.BRODHEAD OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE VIOLATIONS: THE 2010 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE,CHAPTER 1, SECTION 105.1.WOODEN FENCE IN BACKYARD AND NO COLLIER COUNTY PERMIT OBTAINED. FOLIO NO: 62843720006 VIOLATION ADDRESS:534 106TH AVENUE N,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/19/12 Supervisor Mucha presented the case. Evidence entered: Exhibit A: 1 photo dated 11/1/12 The violation remains as of January 4, 2013. 11 161 2AV January 4, 2013 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate found the Respondent GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to: 1. Pay Operational Costs in the amount of$112.12 incurred in the prosecution of this case by February 4, 2013. 2. Abate all violations by obtaining all required Collier County Building Permit(s), and required inspections and Certificate of Occupancy/Completion to permit the fence or remove the fence by February 4, 2013 or a fine of$100.00 per day will be imposed until the violation has been abated thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 3. Notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance 24 hours. Notice shall be by phone and made during the work week. If the violation is abated 24 hours prior to a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, then the notification must be made on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. 4. If the Respondent fails to abate the violation the County may abate the violation and may use the assistance of the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of this agreement and all costs of abatement shall be assessed to the property owner. Total Amount Due: $112.12 C. Emergency Cases: None VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: 1. CASE NO: CENA20120010303 OWNER: BENNETT JOHNSTON OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS, CHAPTER 54,ARTICLE VI, SECTION 54- 179.LITTER CONSISTING OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LADDERS,WOOD,GROCERY CART, TIRES,BUCKETS,CINDER BLOCK,ETC. FOLIO NO: 36238240004 VIOLATION ADDRESS:5203 HUNTER BLVD,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/13/12 The Respondent was not present. Staff reported the the violation has been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate DENIED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines. 2. CASE NO: CEAU20120011090 OWNER: TIMOTHY S.CASEY,TRUSTEE OF THE 616 92ND AVE N.TRUST OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ART FORD VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,ORDINANCE 04-41,AS AMENDED, SECTION 5.03.02(F)(3). SECTIONS OF STOCKADE FENCE FALLING DOWN ON THE PROPERTY. 12 161 2Az January 4, 2013 FOLIO NO: 62704240007 VIOLATION ADDRESS:616 92ND AVENUE N,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/13/12 The Respondent was not present. Staff reported the the violation has been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate DENIED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines. 3. CASE NO: CEROW20120004592 OWNER: DANIEL J.BARRY OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR DEE PULSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 110 ROADS AND BRIDGES, SECTION 110-46 AND SECTION 110-31(a). CULVERT PIPE IN THE ENCLOSED SWALE RUSTED THROUGH AND IN NEED OF REPAIR/REPLACEMENT. FOLIO NO: 62580280003 VIOLATION ADDRESS:635 104TH AVENUE N,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/19/12 The Respondent was not present. Staff reported the the violation has been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate DENIED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines. 4. CASE NO: CEPM20120003671 OWNER: NORMAN C.PARTINGTON OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22 BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(12)(i). UNSECURED PROPERTY WITH BROKEN WINDOWS AND DAMAGED EXTERIOR DOORS. FOLIO NO: 38168160003 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 5761 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/13/12 The Respondents was not present. Investigator Musse presented the case noting the violation has not been abated. Special Magistrate Order: 6/1/12 Fine Amount: $250.00/day 13 1 61 2 A January 4, 2013 Duration: 7/2/12— 1/4/13 (187 days) Total Fine Amount: $46,750.00 Total to Date: $46,750.00 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$46,750.00. Said amount to become a lien on the property with fines continuing to accrue. 7. CASE NO: CEPM20120007449 OWNER: MATTHEW D.WILLIAMS OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JOE GIANNONE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22, ARTICLE VI, SECTION 22-231(12)(i). BROKEN WINDOWS THROUGHOUT THE DUPLEX. FOLIO NO: 29782320005 VIOLATION ADDRESS: 1378 HIGHLANDS DRIVE,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/17/12 The Respondents were not present. Investigator Giannone presented the case noting the violation has been abated by the County. Special Magistrate Order: 10/5/12 Fine Amount: $250.00/day Duration: 84 days Total Fine Amount: $21,000.00 Unpaid Abatement Costs: $1,630.00 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.29 Total to Date: $22,742.29 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$22,742.29. Said amount to become a lien on the property. 8. CASE NO: CEPM20110013543 OWNER: EMILIO HERNANDEZ AND EMMA HERNANDEZ OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR ED MORAD VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22, BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231 (12)(b),(12)(d)(12)(i),(12)(p),AND(19). MOBILE HOME IN A POOR STATE OF REPAIR WITH INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR OF THE HOME BADLY DAMAGED BY FIRE. WINDOWS AND DOORS ARE BROKEN OUT WITH THE INTERIOR OF THE STRUCTURE OPEN TO THE ELEMENTS. FOLIO NO: 66221040003 VIOLATION ADDRESS:406 12TH STREET SE,IMMOKALEE Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/14/12 14 161 z A eir, January 4, 2013 The Respondents were not present. Investigator Morad presented the case noting the violation has been abated. Fine Amount: $250.00/day Duration: 265 days Total Fine Amount: $66,250.00 Unpaid Abatement Costs: $950.00 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.56 Total to Date: $67,312.56 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$67,312.56. Said amount to become a lien on the property. 9. CASE NO: CEPM20120006379 OWNER: DENNIS WOLFE AND ROBERTA WOLFE OFFICER: INVESTIGATOR JONATHAN MUSSE VIOLATIONS: COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,CHAPTER 22,BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS,ARTICLE VI,PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODE, SECTION 22-231(15). GREEN POOL. FOLIO NO: 36380720003 VIOLATION ADDRESS:2500 55TH STREET SW,NAPLES Date of Hearing Notice by Certified Mail: 12/18/12 Date of Hearing Notice Property/Courthouse Posting: 12/13/12 The Respondents were not present. Investigator Musse presented the case noting the violation has been abated. Fine Amount: $250.00/day Duration: 9/15/12— 10/9/12 Total Fine Amount: $6,250.00 Unpaid Abatement Costs: $1,069.30 Unpaid Operational Costs: $112.20 Total to Date: $7,431.50 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines for a total amount due of$7,431.50. Said amount to become a lien on the property. VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Motion to Amend Previously Issued Order: None B. Motion to Rescind Previously Issued Order: 15 161 2A2 January 4, 2013 None VIII. CONSENT AGENDA A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. B. Request for Special Magistrate to Impose Nuisance Abatement Liens on Cases Referenced in Submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's Request. IX. REPORTS None X. NEXT MEETING DATE: February 1, 2013 at 9:00 A.M. located at the Collier County Government Center,3299 East Tamiami Trail, Building F,3rd Floor,Naples,Florida There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by Order of the Special Magistrate at 11:45 A.M. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING / * t!�i�•� .rfr Br• da Ga F °Mr Special Magistrate The Minutes we approved by the Special Magistrate on g / /3 as presented /, or as amended 16 AGENDA 161 2 � 2 JAN 1 2013 �+ COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2012, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION fLD.ING,.,COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER,THIRD FLOOR,3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST,NAPLES,FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE,WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1./Fiala 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Hiller Henning_ _ 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY Ca (e 'ettetta 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA GY K-4 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 4, 2012, October 30, 2012 "Special EAR Based GMP Amendment Adoption meeting,November 1,2012 6. BCC REPORT-RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT c))16.44:art t. 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. BDE-PL20120001428: Wahl Boat Dock Extension - A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BDE-PL20120001428 for a 21.5-foot extension over the maximum 20-foot limit provided in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code to allow a total protrusion of 41.5 feet for a boat lift on the east side of a boat dock facility in an RSF-4 zone on property hereinafter described in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator:Michael Sawyer,Project Manager] i;. VOlR:S. Date: Item* ICIZA-3 1 161 2A � B. PUDA-PL20120001105: Buttonwood Preserve RPUD- An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County,Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Residential Planned Unit Development zoning district(RPUD)to a RPUD zoning district, for a project known as the Buttonwood Preserve RPUD to allow up to 220 residential dwelling units on property located southeast of the Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) intersection on Tree Farm Road approximately.7 miles east of Collier Boulevard in Section 35,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County, Florida, consisting of 53.8± acres; providing for the repeal of Ordinance Number 2007-42, the former Buttonwood Preserve RPUD;and by providing an effective date. [Coordinator:Michael Sawyer,Project Manager] 10. OLD BUSINESS NOTE: This item was continued at the Planning Commission hearing on September 6, 2012 to the October 4, 2012 hearing date. On the October 4, 2012 agenda, this item was continued to the November 1, 2012 Planning Commission hearing date. On the November 1, 2012 agenda, this item was continued to the December 6, 2012 hearing date. This item has been further continued to the January 3,2013 Planning Commission hearing date. A. LDC Amendments 2012 Cycle 1 [Coordinator: Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner] B. To have the Collier County Planning Commission(CCPC)to review past staff clarifications of the Land Development Code and to forward a recommendation to accept the selected Staff Clarifications to the Board of County Commissioners(BCC). [Coordinator:Ray Bellows,Zoning Manager] 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows/jmp 2 ,k 161 2 A n December 6, 2012 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples,Florida December 6,2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building"F"of the Government Complex,East Naples,Florida,with the following members present: Melissa Keene,Chairwoman Phillip Brougham Diane Ebert Karen Homiak Paul Midney Brad Schiffer Bill Vonier ALSO PRESENT: Heidi Ashton-Cicko,Assistant County Attorney Nick Casalanguida,Growth Management Division/Planning&Regulation Ray Bellows,Zoning Manager Mike Bosi,Interim Director Planning and Zoning Department Page 1 of 30 161 2A3 December 6, 2012 CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Good morning,everyone.And welcome to the December 6th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. If everyone would rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Roll call,please. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Okay,Mr.Eastman is absent. Mr.Rankin? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Present. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Midney? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Present. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Vonier? COMMISSIONER VONIER: Present. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms.Keene? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Ms.Homiak is here. Ms.Ebert? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Mr.Klein? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Here. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And Mr.Brougham? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Present. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Addenda to the agenda.Ray,do you have anything? MR. BELLOWS: I have no changes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: And Planning Commission absences. Ray,how do we look for our next meeting? MR.BELLOWS: Well,the next meeting would be December 20th,and at the present time there are no land use items scheduled, so I would ask if the board would consider canceling that meeting. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Do we have a motion to-- COMMISSIONER VONIER: So moved. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Second. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Second. That was difficult--that would be difficult,four days before Christmas. MR.BELLOWS: On January 3rd we have the consideration of the proposed settlement agreement for Hussey. And then on the 17th is going to be--January 17th is going to be the heavy agenda with about six items. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: And it looks like the LDC amendments has been continued to January 3rd as well. MR.BELLOWS: Yes. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Ray,how soon will we get the Hussey case? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Materials. MR.BELLOWS: I'll have to check on that and get back to you. Maybe Mr.Bosi can shed some more light on that. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Some nice holiday reading. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Some of us may or may not be gone between Christmas and New Year's. MR.BOSI: Good morning,Planning Commission. Mike Bosi, Interim Director,Planning and Zoning Department. We just contacted the agent for the Husseys and we have yet to receive the full package of information. So as soon as we receive it we will provide it to the Planning Commission. But it's been--it's been anticipated,it just hasn't arrived yet. As soon as we get it,we will get it to the Planning Commission. And while--there could be some modifications to the arrangement from our original understanding, Page 2 of 30 115 1 2A � December 6, 2012 but as soon as that information comes in,as soon as it gets in,we'll make sure we get it to the Planning Commission as soon as possible. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Is there a way to put a deadline on that? You know,as far as--I don't want everyone receiving it,you know,four days prior. MR.BOSI: Well, if the material comes in four days prior to the scheduled meeting,the meeting's going to be pushed back. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. MR.BOSI: We're not going to provide it to you two days before a meeting or four days before a meeting,a voluminous set of information documents and ask you and expect you to turn around--so if it continues to delay,all that's going to do will delay the time before the item is scheduled for your agenda. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Phil? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Two clarifications: Who set the date of January 3rd for the hearing? MR.BOSI: The date was-- it was anticipated that we were going to be able to receive that material and have that to you in adequate time,that's why the date was set. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: As I recall from our last meeting that the way we left it is we did not fix a date because that would be dependent upon when the petitioner could get the proper material to us. And once that material be committed to a certain date then we'd set the date. That's the way I recall the direction. MR.BOSI: Well,maybe it was--it was anticipated--like I said,it was anticipated that it was going to be received as of this date. That's why we set it for after the holidays. It's looking more and more like that January 3rd date probably might not be the date. And unfortunately that second meeting in is January is already populated,so it's going to remain a question as to when that-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Maybe we can move some of the-- COMMISSIONER RANKIN: The other thing we might want to discuss,because there is a deadline on that at some point,do we want to discuss an alternative meeting in January,just in case? MR.BOSI: If that is the circumstance,that will be something that will be brought up at that first meeting in January. If it looks like we're going to have to have--because of an overload from that second meeting in January,we'll discuss with the Planning Commission and see what their desire is. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I want to have a second--you mentioned something just now about modifications in the arrangements. What's that mean? MR.BOSI: There's some original discussion that the applicant was willing to with go or forego the conditional use as part of the settlement and require that the mining application still go through the traditional conditional use public hearing process so all those issues can be addressed because of the compatibility, transportation impacts. Those things I think started to become a little bit realizing that they were probably too much to be able to handle within the period of time associated with the settlement and the time frames associated with trying to get something back to the Board of County Commissioners. There's not a certainty on that. But if that does,it changes their purview of the Planning Commission's review and really focuses-- takes your feet out of the zoning world and puts it squarely within the Growth Management Plan. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: That's-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: That's really a lot of contradictions in my opinion to what we discussed and agreed and directed in our motions at the last meeting. Number one,because of the arbitrary imposition of a date.Number two,falling back on a deadline of some sort that we have to resolve this by X, Y and Z. And number three,that we were asking the petitioner to bring forward all the materials ordinarily associated with the conditional use and the GMP. And now it looks like there's all kinds of modifications to that motion. MR.BOSI: Well, if you think about it,it makes your job a little bit more-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: We're not looking for that. In my opinion,we're not looking to make our job easier. We were charged by the BCC to evaluate a conditional use and two Growth Management Plan amendments. Page 3 of 30 161 2A � December 6, 2012 MR.BOSI: You were asked to review a settlement agreement. The settlement agreement was going to be--if it's modified, it's modified. That's a decision that we don't have any control over. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. But we-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: No,you have it correctly. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: The minutes we received from the BCC citing Mr. Henning,and he reiterated the direction,was that he expected the Planning Commission to review a conditional use and GMP amendments. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: And not to weigh in on the settlement offer,per say. That's-- COMMISSIONER VONIER: That's true. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: That's what I remember,and that's what I read. MR.BOSI: And I believe that is the case.And if there is a modification to that settlement agreement,they're going to ask you to review what the modified settlement agreement is. It's really--the direction for the Planning Commission,to be able to dictate what is coming--this settlement process is such a unique animal because it's between two parties,the Board of County Commissioners and the Husseys and their legal team. Whatever modifications comes from that settlement or what is being proposed is what the Planning Commission's going to be asked to review. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I'll defer to you,Melissa. That's definitely not my understanding of our charter. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Well, I think part of the issue and maybe how you should view this is any petition that comes before us that we make or require multiple changes,and it has to go back,redone and then it's represented to us and we review it as if it's a new,you know,a new package. There's nothing we can do to,you know,to prevent changes. And it sounds like what I'm hearing from that meeting and the direction that the Planning Commission was going,the petitioner decided that it may be easier to take out some of the portions of the settlement agreement and approach it a different way. Is that-- MR.BOSI: That's exactly the case. It's a dynamic process. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE:Right. MR.BOSI: I mean,meaning it's not static. It's not locked into what the discussion-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Right. MR.BOSI--was in November that settlement--it looks like there's some moving parts to it. And I know that it's maybe unsettling to some of the Planning Commission members,but we're only going to be asked to review what's the latest of this settlement-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Right. MR.BOSI--proposal is. And if there's modifications based upon some further discussions between the two parties,then that will affect what's being asked for the other planning commission's review. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Heidi,what is the status of the final date this needs to be completed? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Initially we were driving for a December or January tentative date so that it would avoid the necessity of filing an opinion in the appeal case. And so we're going to have to file the opinion. So there's not really--we're not really limited by a date anymore. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: As far as some of the comments on the settlement,remember it was an offer by the owner to try to settle it. It primarily had two components to it: One being it would resolve a GMP issue,which would be equal to or similar to a GMP amendment. And then the second component they were requesting was that it would resolve a conditional use issue. And we have gotten an indication from the applicant that their intent to withdraw the conditional use resolution through the settlement agreement and if they wanted to go forward with the conditional use,they would go through the full process before the CCPC. So it just eliminates one component. So you'd only be looking at the GMP issue-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Right. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: --at this time. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Go ahead. Page 4 of 30 161 2A3 December 6, 2012 COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: That's fine. I'm hearing all kinds of new input this morning. But I would feel more comfortable having,number one,listened to the Board of County Commissioners'hearing and viewed it on videotape and then being presented with a copy of the minutes where Mr. Henning specifically repeated his charter to this commission. I would feel much more comfortable if we got a refreshed set of directions from the BCC then so we don't stumble down a road that they're expecting one thing and we're expecting another. I'm hearing that based upon the last Planning Commission hearing on this, on the Hussey settlement,the applicant decided to change a few things in the settlement offer.Well,okay,but I'm not certain in my own mind that that changed our charter,our direction from the BCC. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: I would tend to disagree,because we are reviewing whatever is presented to us. Now, if they're pulling out the conditional use--I mean,the settlement was basically for them to bypass the conditional use process. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Correct,that was-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: So by pulling that out,now we're not looking at it from a conditional use perspective,just a GMP and then at a future date they'll have to come back in for a conditional use and then everything is reviewed at that point. I don't know that,you know,as the settlement changes that going back to the commission for them to acknowledge we're not reviewing everything initial-- I mean,that's part of the process in the settlement is they're going to go back and forth. So I don't know what the benefit in going back to the BCC-- COMMISSIONER RANKIN: I wouldn't suggest that,Madam Chairman. I look at this as--I do these kind of settlements all the time in litigation,and sometimes I hire a consultant to review parts of the settlement to advise my client as to whether or not it's something they should do. And that's the way I see our place in this is. We have no control over the terms of this settlement. We never have and we never will. We just need to provide the input to the BCC,as would a consultant. And while this doesn't fit exactly in the round peg hole of what we normally do,that's just part of life. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: I agree. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Well,one final shot. We were specific-- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Give it up,Phil. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: We were specifically instructed not to review the settlement offer. COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's correct. COMMISSIONER VONIER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: That's all I've got to say. MR.BOSI: Thank you,Chair. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Thank you. Okay,approval of minutes. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I have one correction. On the minutes of November 1,Page 3, under the approval of the minutes of 9/20,and Mr. Schiffer's vote was cited. Mr. Schiffer was not on the commission at that point. So I don't know-- COMMISSIONER EBERT:9/20? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: One of the minutes was reviewing--approving the minutes of September 20th--on the minutes of November 1st,2012,okay it's-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: He was here on the 20th. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Excuse me. On September 20th? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay,he was here.But on November 1,he was not here. And the vote to approve the minutes-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Of that meeting. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: --of September 20th was taken on November 1st,citing Mr. Schiffer's voting. Mr. Schiffer was not here. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Cherie',did you get that? Thank you. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Okay. Well then, if you're on the November 1st minutes, on Page 58 Page 5 of 30 161 a 3 December 6, 2012 and 68 it references Chairman Strain,where it should be Chairwoman Keene. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Thank you,I didn't even catch that. That's a lot of minutes.Okay. Okay, so do we have a motion to approve October 4th minutes? COMMISSIONER VONIER: So moved. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Second. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. CHARWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: I abstain,because I wasn't here yet. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: So motion approved,7-0. And October 30th. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: So moved. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHARWOMAN KEENE: All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. CHARWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Same thing. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Motion approved 7-0. And then the November 1,with the two corrections. COMMISSIONER VONIER: So moved. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Second. CHARWOMAN KEENE: All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Aye. CHARWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. CHARWOMAN KEENE: Any opposed? (No response.) CHARWOMAN KEENE: So motion approved 8-0. Ray,BCC? MR.BELLOWS: Yes,on November 13th,the Board of County Commissioners heard the SRA Amendment and the Development Order Amendment for Ave Maria. That was approved by the board 5-0, subject to the Planning Commission recommendations. Plus they had an additional condition,and that was alternate movements including median openings shall be determined by Collier County in accordance with its access management policy at the time of right-of-way permit approval. And then other one was Collier County retains the right at all times in its sole discretion to open or close or modify median openings. CHARWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Page 6 of 30 161 2A3 December 6, 2012 MR.BELLOWS: The board also approved the PUD amendment for Mirasol on the summary agenda,and the Mac Business Center conditional use was continued to the December 11th meeting.That's all I have. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. There's no chairman's report. And consent agenda items,we don't have anything shown,but I understand that Buttonwood would like to come back at the end on consent if we-- MR.BELLOWS: That's correct, if there are changes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Yeah. We can do that. Okay,on to advertised public hearings.First hearing is BDE-PL20120001428,Wahl Boat Dock Extension. If--everyone wishing to participate on this item,please stand up to be sworn. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Petitioner? MR.MAXWELL: Good morning. Today we're here to ask for your approval for the additional boat --Josh Maxwell,from Turrell Hall and Associates. Sorry. This morning we're here to ask for your approval for the second boat lift at the Wahl's Boat Dock. Previously this year we received approval for the footprint of the dock and the total protrusion,and we later received approval from the BCC for the variance for the side setback. And so we're back in front of you today to ask for the additional boat lift so that they can moor their second vessel more safely than they can now. Nice, short and sweet. So if you have any questions,we'd be happy to answer them. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Can you go over any changes that have been made since the last time you were here? MR.MAXWELL: The only changes is we came back on the consent agenda without the side boat lift on,and you guys approved it. And now we're back asking for that side lift. So new configuration. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. COMMISSIONER VONIER: You mentioned boat safety. MR.MAXWELL: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Explain that. MR.MAXWELL: Well,presently they can only side tie to the new dock. And with the waters in the Big Marker River reaching,you know,a couple knots during a flood tide,you don't necessarily want to just moor your boat on the side of a dock,you'd like to be able to pull it away either with mooring piles or in an optimal situation on a boat lift. It also allows you to keep the boat moored out of the water,which in essence can help improve water quality,because you don't have bottom paint in the water all the time. And also just improves safety of the boat. COMMISSIONER VONIER: So it was my understanding that at the BCC meeting safety was bandied about,and it was considered to be safety of people getting in and out of the boat. And I didn't see that as being an issue. However,having said what you just said,there are a lot of people that moor boats alongside of piers safely. You can go any place in Naples and see that. So that isn't an absolute impossibility. MR.MAXWELL: There's not many places in Collier County where the water velocity reaches what it does in the Big Marker River. And also a lot of those docks also have either mooring piles or boat lifts,you know,to tie the boat up to keep them off the dock. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Is it difficult to moor a boat because of the current? MR.MAXWELL: It can be. It can be very difficult to pull in and out of your slip,especially in that area. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Do you have any aerials that show the surrounding boat docks? Nothing--we received this in our package. MR.MAXWELL: Right. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: You don't have anything of a larger scale? MR.MAXWELL: No,not today. Page 7 of 30 161 2A 5 December 6, 2012 COMMISSIONER VONIER: What's the length of the boat you would propose to put on that lift? MR.MAXWELL: Right now they don't have a boat in mind because they can't have a lift. But I think the thought is something in the 30 to 35-foot range. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Well,having said that,in looking at the ability of the county to be fair to everybody,based on the LDC,we have reduced the setback to 9.3 feet. Now,the adjacent property in the future,let's just make an assumption,let's say the owner decides to sell to someone who wants to build a mega house and put in his own boat dock. MR.MAXWELL: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Now,if he was doing proper due diligence,he would find--he'd say I want to put a 30 or 35-foot boat in there.And he would find that he doesn't have to,he thinks, stick with a 15-foot setback because his neighbor got a waiver. So let's make an assumption that he puts in a boat dock and he asks for a waiver and we give him the same waiver. That leaves 18 feet between two rigid structures. And we're talking about landing 30-foot boats with 18 feet of clearance in a strong current. I don't think it makes sense. I think there's a reason why the LDC was written the way it is,and that was to clear up some of the chaos in boat docks. Case in point,the property to the west of the applicant. That's grandfathered,and it severely impinged upon the Wahl's ability to put in a boat dock. The LDC was meant to correct that. What we appear to be doing is perpetrating the chaos by allowing this. If we allow it here,we should allow it next door if they want to do the same thing.And we had heard at the last meeting when this was presented the first time from yet the other neighbor beyond that,one property beyond the property to the east,who said the same thing.They haven't done their boat dock yet either. So what it appears to me is we're compounding a felony by approving a rigid structure in the form of a boat lift. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: As far as the--I'm sorry. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Phil? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Several questions. In the application,and this could just be a technicality or semantics,the addition of a second boat slip,define slip versus lift. MR.MAXWELL: Well,currently we can moor a boat there. So we can moor a boat in the location of the lift. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay that-- MR. MAXWELL: So the lift is just to be able to lift it out of the water when it's not in use. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: So you're not requesting a slip,because you have the ability and you could moor a 30-foot boat on the side of that dock any place you wanted to,you're actually requesting a lift? MR.MAXWELL: Right. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. Do you know or not know how many neighbors along that stretch--I think maybe that's why we could have used a larger aerial--that moor their dock--moor their boat parallel to the current? MR.MAXWELL: Parallel or perpendicular? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Perpendicular.Excuse me,it's going this way. MR.MAXWELL: There's numerous ones along the way. As you get further to the east there's a lot of parallel to the current mooring,but those are on wider lots so they can fit,you know,a larger boat. And they can also fit a boat on the back side of their terminal platform. Unfortunately,due to the configuration of the neighbor to the west,there's no safe way to get a boat on the back side of this terminal platform. So that's why we're left,you know,the two locations we'd like to put the lifts now. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: But going back to the current issue,it's not unprecedented if people will moor alongside of their dock-- MR.MAXWELL: No, it's not. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM--given the current and so forth. Page 8 of 30 161 2A3 December 6, 2012 MR.MAXWELL: Right. It's not truly optimal,but-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: But it's not--we're not setting a precedent here,whatever. Secondly,if we presume--I mean,you mentioned a 30-foot boat is potentially the boat that's going to be moored there,today and also in the prior hearing,yet 30 foot in length,what's the, if there is such a thing,average height of a 30-foot boat from top to bottom? MR.MAXWELL: It's completely dependent on the style of boat. If you were talking about just a center console without any kind of a second station on top of the T top,you're probably looking at seven to eight feet.Anything we put in here,as far as on a lift,unless it was some sort of a small yacht,which would be very difficult to fit into this narrow area in a small slip,would be smaller--would be lower in a height than the neighboring boathouse. So as far as a visual impact of any of the neighbors,I don't see that being any worse than it currently is. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: If such a boat was put on a--elevated on a lift,what's the height then? MR.MAXWELL: Like a center console? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I don't know,mine I accept 30 foot in length. MR.MAXWELL: Most boats,you can figure about at maximum seven or eight feet above the waterline. So if you lifted it to the highest you could, say for a hurricane situation,you're probably talking about the top of that boat maybe being-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Thirteen feet, 14 feet? MR.MAXWELL: From the water. So I would say probably about five to six feet above the-- maybe seven feet above the seawall. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Not a boat with a fishing tower,however. MR.MAXWELL: Right. If you had a tuna tower on anything, it can definitely get up there. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Phil,do you have anything else? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: No,except in the resolution,which is right after the staff report. The date needs corrected,if this goes forward,to March 15th is the date we heard this,the original,not the first. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: We'll address it on the staff report. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. Other than that,I think I'm done. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay,actually-- COMMISSIONER RANKIN: With all this technology,do we have access to the property appraiser's website and get the GIS system up and see any part of Collier County you want to? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: I don't think we have that,Doug. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Well,they've got a computer sitting up there in the expansion as part of the system. MR.BELLOWS: At the podium computer we have this. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: I don't think it has Internet. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: It doesn't? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: I don't believe so. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: They have Wifi here. This whole building and the courthouse is full of free Wifi. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: And while he's getting that ready for you,yes,the March 1st date was the date of the regular agenda item,and that's the date we go with for the approval,even though the consent agenda would have been on the 15th. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: It's difficult to see how the boats are moored. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: No,that's not great. That's why I was suggesting the property appraiser's,you can zoom in and out as you see fit,and pan. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: We'll see what we can come up with. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Because I figured this is going to be something we're going to make use of in the future,that GIS system paid for with tax dollars. There we are. And if you just hit to the--open the GIS link. Oh yeah,you got it. There you go. I use this is all the time. Page 9 of 30 • 161 2 A3 December 6, 2012 COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I just looked at these this morning. MR.MAXWELL: So currently the arrow's over our subject property. And then as you can see here, six docks down the way there's a boat moored,you know, shore perpendicular. So perpendicular to the current flow. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: As well as to the left? MR.MAXWELL: Yeah,directly to the west of the boathouse it's perpendicular to the current. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Doug,did you have other questions? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: No,I just wanted to see this,and everybody else to have access. Because I imagine not only for this petition,this is going to be a useful tool in the future. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Diane? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. I have several questions. I won't go into all of them because--I went back and looked at this. And I'll be very honest with you,I was--I wanted to see where we went wrong,where all of us thought the same thing. We have a state rule and we have county rules. This is done by the state where they--when this gentleman moved in. They had to take off that T. He did not put it there.Everything is grandfathered in. And at this point he can moor two boats there very easily. A lift,right, is not a safety. A lift is for convenience. And there are tons of boats out there that are not on lifts. If this property had no dock out there,they would have to put up a marginal wharf; is that correct? MR.MAXWELL: Yes,it is. COMMISSIONER EBERT: So they only have one way of going to their property. When you put the marginal,you can tie up against the-- MR.MAXWELL: Yeah,you'd only be able to tie up against the dock there. But we would,as we've done in other parts of Isles of Capri,try to permit them a boat lift or at least some mooring piles for the same reason,to try and keep the boat off the dock to prevent damage to the rubbering-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's true. But you also have bumpers for a boat. You also have fenders as we call them. MR.MAXWELL: Yes. Yes,you do have those but it's not optimal to rely on those solely. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Well, I guess in reading this I was more angry at some of the stuff when you go back and you actually picked up the minutes,the minutes of what we had to say here originally. And then when it went to the BZA,the staff report in the executive summary was lacking a lot of things. Here's what they said in the executive summary: The CCPC heard the petition--and I won't read the whole thing--with a recommendation for denial. The CCPC denied the variance petition because the property owner did not demonstrate there was a hardship to allow the construction of a second boat lift located within the side yard setback. It should be noted that the CCPC approved the companion boat dock extension subject to the elimination of the boat dock lift on the east side. That's really all they said. And when you go back and read our minutes,like Mr.Vonier said,this is more of a convenience. In having two boats,just because you can,does not mean you have to. You tell all the people that come out of Wiggins Pass down in that area they can have two boats? I mean,there's no way. They're lucky they can have one boat. And so I guess it's the way that the--there's more than one reason why we did not do this. The pre-existing conditions that are there now,they can park boats. Nobody's denying that. And we did give them an extension to put the lift out on the--what would you say,the southern end of it. So he can put a huge boat in there. And if he was just going to have the smaller boat,which I believe was going to be 22 feet, he had some 30 some feet between there. And yes,I understand there's strong currents. Our boat was on the Mississippi and the same--we had very strong currents too. So I do understand river currents. I'm sure he knows how to operate a boat. I think most people that have one in this area should. But we're not going to be going back over this whole thing today. Excuse me.Because when you re-did the criteria,or when they re-did the criteria,there's some things they did not meet. Waterfront length. He only has 75 feet.He wants to go over what he's really allowed in our Land Page 10 of 30 161 2A3 • December 6, 2012 Development Code at this point. He should only have half of the 75 feet,and he wants to moor 60 feet of boat. So that's going over the code. That was never brought up. There isn't a problem with water depth.We deal with so many docks that have to go out over the sea grasses,over the mangroves,where just even to get there is long. They have the water depth. He has everything available to him right now. And I don't know,I guess the other thing was I was not that pleased with what I saw in the executive report or in the staff report going to the BCC. It was confusing. And when it came back,there were several reasons--if you read the minutes,there were several reasons why it was not approved,Josh. It wasn't just a hardship. But he can't even prove that. I mean,that's one of the things you're supposed to do is prove the hardship. I want to have a boat. I want to be able to get to the boat. He didn't have that hardship. And Mr. Brougham even mentioned that his commissioner didn't quite understand,because she was getting stuff and she couldn't understand why we were holding it back.Everybody probably has one boat. We already gave him that lift. So it was very confusing to the way it was presented. And Commissioner Henning in here asked,where's the hardship? Where is all this stuff that he has a problem with? I have so much information on this,I could probably spend an hour reading to you. I'll let other people ask questions,but tons of questions on this. There is--there's just too many in reading this that just does not bode well for this. MR.MAXWELL: Okay. Just in quick response,in the Wiggins Pass area we have permitted many, many slips. Many,many docks with two boat lifts for the property owners,because it's the optimal way to store your boat. And I'd also like you just to look in the areas of Collier County,especially around the Isles of Capri, what the percentage of boats that are on boat lifts. One is for environmental reasons,and two is for the safety of the boat. And also in instances on fast moving water it's easier and safer to load on and off your boat when it's on a lift and then put in the water. I've not boated very many areas outside of Collier County. I've lived here all my life and I can tell you the waters in that area can be very,very swift. And so it's not--you may not look at it as a hardship but I look at it as a safety factor that if it was my dock I would definitely want the lift because it's much easier to access your boat. COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's true. And we gave him a lift. We did give him a lift. And I also have a GPS on mine. I looked at this.There are several places that don't even have a dock,and there are several with marginal wharfs out here because of the depth of the water. MR.MAXWELL: Uh-huh. That's because of the state criteria. COMMISSIONER EBERT: It's because of the state criteria,you are correct. So there's nothing-- he has a non-conforming dock. MR.MAXWELL: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER EBERT: And he can only put this dock back just the way it was before. He cannot change one or add extra boards. So I do not see us adding another boat lift to a non-conforming structure. And there are several there that are not up on lifts. MR.MAXWELL: Several,but-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes there are. MR.MAXWELL: I would say more than 50 percent are. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have not been through every one,I just went with the GPS and went all around the thing,and you'd be surprised. Thank you. MR.MAXWELL: Uh-huh. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Does anyone else have any questions? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: I have one question.Could you put mooring pilings out without coming back to us? MR.MAXWELL: No,I could not. I would need a variance--I would need your approval to put the pilings in for the lift or mooring piles. COMMISSIONER EBERT: They already have mooring pilings. MR.MAXWELL: Not for the side lift. Page 11 of 30 1 61 2A3 December 6, 2012 COMMISSIONER EBERT: Not for the side,but they already have mooring pilings there. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Staff report? Thank you. MR. SAWYER: Good morning,Commissioners.For the record,Mike Sawyer, Project Manager for the petition. I do have one slight clarification. In the purpose description on Page 1 of the staff report,the petition was continued to the 15th. So if there's any confusion on that,please let me know. But I did check that. Again,what we're looking at is with the approved variance,in essence what we're looking at is the addition of the second vessel and the lift associated with that. And they are able,because it is an existing dock,to moor the vessel. So it's kind of a question at this point,quite honestly,whether they can have the lift added in. The initial boat dock that you've already approved is for the one at the end. This will be,if you do approve it,a second boat dock extension for the second lift. And I'll answer whatever questions you might have. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Just for the record,and we exchanged some emails on this, Mike,I asked Mike the question of this request is for a BDE,extending 21 and a half feet to a total of 41 and a half feet. Whereas,we had previously approved a BDE to 54.6 feet. My questions was,does a new BDE supersede a previous BDE? And I'll let Mike answer. MR. SAWYER: Yeah, in conversations with the County Attorney's Office,we were really looking at the first petition for the BDE as being the one that you've already approved-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Correct. MR. SAWYER: --at that distance. That's the first BDE. This is the second separate BDE,if you will,for just this second vessel and the associated lift. So it would--the second would not affect or alter the first. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I just wanted to-- MR. SAWYER: Correct. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: --bring it forward. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Am I--you said vessel and lift. Actually,the vessel is not in question. They are allowed to moor a vessel. The only thing in question is the boat lift. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: That's right. MR. SAWYER: Correct. The reason that I--and I don't want to confuse anybody. The reason I keep saying,you know,vessel and associated lift is that the criteria in the Land Development Code requires us to--when we're looking at the actual boat dock extension length to include both. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: May I,Madam Chairwoman? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Sure. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: My philosophy is we can't go back and change the past. What's here is what's here. And like you said the man can put a boat here any time he wants. The question is,is which are the neighbors going to be more concerned about,a boat lift being added or a boat maybe cutting loose on the pass that's almost open to the Gulf,or at least a pretty good sized pass. That could cut loose in a quick storm and damage some things or damage the boat at least. And so that's really the question. And I wish that we all wished probably that we could go back and change the past and put things the way they'd like to be,but the dock's already there,they can already put the boat there. The question is are we going to leave it tied up to the dock or hang it up. Now,can we put a restriction on how high the boat and the lift can be? Because,I think that would probably be the thing neighbors are most concerned about. MR.BELLOWS: For the record,Ray Bellows. The Collier County Planning Commission has the ability to condition a boat dock extension.And if that was an issue, I believe that could be a condition. However,I'm not sure how we would derive at the appropriate height that still makes it-- COMMISSIONER RANKIN: We'd have to ask the expert-- MR.BELLOWS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: --because I don't know how high boat lifts have to be to function. Page 12 of 30 � 161 2 A 3 . December 6, 2012 MR.BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: These kind anyway. But that was just my thoughts on it. MR.BELLOWS: It can be conditioned. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Generally a concern,the height of the boat. And I've been at the site and there's not a line of sight problem from the neighbor. So-- COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Well,I've seen some boat lifts,you know,that can be massive structures. And I've seen others that are relatively unobtrusive. And that's the only thing I would wonder about. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Mike,just to get it on the record,even though this extension is only going to 41.5,it's--the other one is to 54,so that still remains. So it's still going to be less than the original extension. MR. SAWYER: Correct. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Just so everyone understands. Are there any other questions? COMMISSIONER VONIER: Mike,on criteria five,whether the proposed location in that facility is such that it would interfere with the neighbors,there's been conversation by this board this morning which would appear to lean in that direction,that there might be interference. Which in fact if that criteria were not met would mean that there were two criteria not met which would be enough to disapprove this. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: What interference are you talking about,the one you suggested might happen? COMMISSIONER VONIER: With a future boat dock. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: But that dock on the east has to stay in the same footprint. If anything's ever done to it,it has to stay in the same-- COMMISSIONER VONIER: The dock has to say,but a boat dock does not have to. That does not define where a boat dock can be,it only outlines where the pier should be if the pier stays in the same position. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Right. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Okay? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Right. COMMISSIONER VONIER: But that does not necessarily mean that's where they put a boat dock --or a boat lift,excuse me,I'm using an incorrect term. The point is that they have a right to do something in the future and we potentially could be taking that right away from them. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Sure. COMMISSIONER EBERT: You're correct,Bill.I had this also circled. The proposed location of the design of the dock facility would not interfere with the site. If you put a boat lift there and you bring this boat up,it will interfere with the site.You will not have that 45. That was one of the reasons that out at the end it would mainly be the owner's, it would be his site, not the neighbors. There are--there are so many things in here that I marked up. He can do--because he is grandfathered with the state and he can moor his boats there,he would be going over his footage that he is allowed. And if you look in this photo--thank you,Doug,for bringing this up,you look across the--look at the long,long docks up to the--I'm going to say the northeast. Those--look how long they have to come out and what little area they have to put their boats in. So as far as currents and every--the other people do it. They do. And if you take--when I took this and went around with the GPS,if you just kind of go through the islands here,if you go up one,you have a huge boat,which is probably 45,50 feet that's sticking out there. And they only have--it looks like a boat dock like this and it's just backed up to it. So I think we have done what we should do,and he can have his two boats,but not two boat lifts. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'm just going to say,I don't see the problem with having another boat lift. The boat's going to be there,and it's a lot safer,it's better out of the water. If there's a storm or a Page 13 of 30 3 1 4e)ember hurricane that should come up and you don't have time--I've seen new boat lifts go through Charley with the boat still there and the boat lift still there and everybody's else's boat's down wherever,everything's torn apart. It's a lot safer when they're new. So I have no problem with it. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Are there additional criteria that we're supposed to look at for lifts more than what we have to do for docks?I mean,is there a basis for us to deny this? MR. SAWYER: Again,Mike Sawyer with Planning and Zoning. No,there is not. With the boat dock extension it includes the boat dock surface itself,any applicable lifts and the vessels.The criteria remains the same. As far as from what the LDC says,as far as using those criteria. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: So if you have permission to put a dock,you automatically have permission to put a lift? What basis then do we have for denying it? COMMISSIONER EBERT: It's more than 20 feet. MR. SAWYER: Well,with the boat dock extensions,your application needs to include all of those factors in it. And we looked, again,at the same criteria. And that's what the LDC says. I'm just--I'm trying to call a distinction between what the Land Development Code says and it's been opined before the score card, if you will. And that's what staff puts together with our staff reports. It's the same criteria. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: If we were to move to deny this,what basis could we use? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: Well,you've got your criteria that's in your package that you're looking at, and you've already heard some of the commissioners cite criteria that they don't believe is met. So you would have to identify those that aren't met and move to disapprove. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: But in each case the primary and secondary,there's only one criteria that's not met,doesn't there have to be more than one in either one? MS.ASHTON-CICKO: That's been an ongoing debate. But in order to approve it,they have to meet the minimum. Okay,you can still disprove it,but I think that we've heard some members at least believe that there's sufficient evidence to support some of the other criteria hasn't been met. So you can probably even fall below those thresholds. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Phil? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Just to comment on that. I mean,the staff report cites certain criteria met or not met in their opinion. We don't necessarily have to agree with the staff opinion. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Correct. Mike,looking at the layout at the dimension given where the boat dock would be 12.5 feet. So obviously they'll have to get a boat that stays within that--you know,to get on the lifts. MR. SAWYER: Correct. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: If they don't have a lift,is there any restriction on the width of a boat they could just moor there? MR. SAWYER: In this case,no,because it's an existing, if you will,non-conforming dock. So correct,they could put whatever vessel-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: They could have a 15-foot wide boat and intrude more. MR. SAWYER: Correct. Look at it as a vehicle,it's not permanent. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Right. So,I just wanted to make that-- COMMISSIONER EBERT: I do have another question. Mike, I believe when Tim Hall was here,and I can find it in my notes if I need to,he did come up and say can we add two feet to this boat dock extension out front if that's--if we don't get the variance and stuff for the second boat lift? Because he said we'll take whatever we can get. They can put that big boat out at the end.And I believe we did give them that extra two feet. Because it is already--because of the pilings and stuff,I'd have to go back to the notes,but he could actually take his big boat and put out at the end of the--he doesn't have to put the tiny boat in there. That boat lift does not have to be tiny. MR. SAWYER: Commissioner,I'd have to look at that. We would have to actually go back to what is included in the resolution.Most of the time when we've got these resolutions,we include the layout that Page 14 of 30 161 2A3 December 6,2 they propose. And that was for the smaller boat at that time,I believe. But we would have to look at that. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Josh,were both boat lifts the same as far as they were both 12 feet or 12 feet one way and 12 and a half feet the other? MR.MAXWELL: The standard size for most of your smaller boat lifts is 12 and a half feet in width. And until you start getting over--you know,unless you get to a very beaming 30-foot boat,they don't start getting wider to 15 until you probably get closer to 40. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: While you're here,how high are these? MR.MAXWELL: Depends on the style of boat. One thing,if I could just present one exhibit? Just to clear it up for a few people.There has been discussion of what happens if the neighbor to the east wants to put in a lift. They're approximately 35 feet from the riparian line,so that gives them,you know,over 44 feet till the neighboring structure,if this is approved,which is more than adequate. And for the record,they cannot move that dock further to the west. It has to remain in the same location and configuration. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Josh,could they put a parallel to the shore boat lift in? Is it possible? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Which property? MR.MAXWELL: Are you're talking about the property to the east? COMMISSIONER VONIER: Yeah. MR.MAXWELL: It would have to be a minimum of 15 foot off of the riparian line,which would give them approximately 15 feet to put in. So if they wanted to for say a jet ski,they could. It's not optimal. If I was their consultant,I would recommend numerous other locations for them to put it. COMMISSIONER VONIER: But to my earlier point,though,we could grant them a variance so they could get into the 15-foot setback. MR.MAXWELL: They would not need a variance to drive the boat through the setback area. They'd only need the variance for any permanent structure in the-- COMMISSIONER VONIER --correct. MR.MAXWELL: --in that setback area. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Any other questions? COMMISSIONER EBERT: One other thing. The boat to the west,I believe is a boathouse?And it is only one boat there; is that correct?Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: For the record,Josh's response was yes. Okay,does anyone have any other questions before we go to public speakers? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Ray? MR.BELLOWS: The first speaker is Arthur Spiegel,to be followed by John Rogers. MR. SPIEGEL: Good morning,everyone. My name is Art Spiegel. I own a home at 4 West Pelican Street which is east of-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Can you bring the mic down,please,Mr. Spiegel? MR. SPIEGEL: Sure. Is that fine? Which is east of the Wahl residence. You know,when I bought my property a couple of years ago,and when the adjacent property owners,one of whom couldn't be here today because she's actually been sick to her stomach for three days, but she did write a letter. She asked me to make sure that you have it as part of the record,that's from Joan Evans. And the other neighbor,being Tony Rinaldi,had to be in Pennsylvania. But when we bought our property,I a couple of years ago,and they,not aging them,but many, many,many years ago,we felt that we paid for and bought certain rights that now we seem to be losing simply because someone has asked for a variance. We knew what the rules were. We lived by the rules. We knew what would happen if someone built on the property next door. But built in conformity with the laws and the regulations and the codes that were established by you and people before you. But we didn't think that we would end up losing rights because now people are given variances. Page 15 of 30 1 6 2 A. 3 December 6, 2012 And I'm going to speak strictly for myself when I say I sit in my front yard,which is my little piece of paradise and I look west and I had a commanding view of the Gulf,the sunsets,the river going into the Gulf. There was no way without variances that anyone could ever stop my view. Now there's going to be a boat.And this fellow is a boat builder. I find it a little difficult to understand how a boat builder doesn't know what kind of boat he's putting in at the end of a dock when in fact he's going to have a small boat in one spot. Well,he's not going to have two small boats,matching his and hers. I leave that to you. We go to the next point of my other neighbors looking to the west. They have beautiful commanding views of the bridge.Gorgeous. They're totally blocked now. I will look out at a boat. And I have to tell you,the Wahls built a gorgeous home. It's beautiful. It's an asset to the community. It took every inch of building space on their property. They are trying to put 50 pounds of potatoes in a 10-pound sack. And I don't think it is up to any of us to give variances that will take away rights of other people. And I truly ask that you decline in giving this or not allow giving a variance,as been requested. Just want to look at my notes here. Oh,it's my understanding that any boat docks that are to be built today,not non-conforming ones of the past,are to be built parallel to a seawall. Well,in fact,we have a seawall,a brand new seawall where rip-rap was taken out to build a brand new seawall and then rip-rap was put back. Well,that's creating your own problem,in my opinion. Why in fact couldn't a dock been built right along the property? Oh,I know, because the property is only 75 feet wide,and we wanted more dock than that. This isn't right to the taxpayers of the area who have relied on the codes as they were printed and don't feel that we should lose rights because of a variance. Thank you for your time. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Just for point of clarification,the BZA already approved the variance,so we don't--we're not in a position to change that. We're looking at the extension. MR. SPIEGEL: But I have the right to complain. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Sure, sure. I just wanted to make sure that you understood that had already been approved. MR. SPIEGEL: Yes. But I understand that.But now you're looking for basically another variance. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: An extension. MR. SPIEGEL: An extension,right,and we are against that. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Thank you. MR. SPIEGEL: Thank you. MR.BELLOWS: John Rogers. MR.ROGERS: Good morning,Commissioners.John Rogers. I live at 138 Tahiti Circle. I'm really down here to speak about consistency on how we're applying this on the Isles of Capri. Three times I've been in this exact situation with a legal non-conforming boat dock: 200 Tahiti Circle, 134 Tahiti Circle and on Capris Boulevard. Three times it's been an absolute rule that you may not change one iota. And Commissioner Ebert,you were right on it. You may not change the existing non-conformity and then do anything to increase it. And when,Commissioner Ebert,you were referring to earlier we've really got a state issue here and a county issue here,and if you read the record,this is really screwy. You're exactly right. If you read the entire record,which I've done,there's been a whole lot of smoke and mirrors. And if I may quote the former commissioner,he called it,I think you've given me a lot of crap. He's exactly right.What occurred here is they went to the state and said we're going to be good guys and we're going to remove this T and make it an L. But they didn't say and then we're doing that so that we can pull in and get another extension and have a boat dock to the side. I'm in favor of boat docks,I'm in favor of boat lifts. I'm just in favor of doing it right. And this has not been done right. I respectfully disagree that he can put a vessel there outside of the 20 feet without the BDE that he's currently requesting. Otherwise he wouldn't be here. So when you gentlemen say that he can put a 34 or a 44-foot boat there right now,no,he can't. That is not under your code. The BDE includes a vessel. And the gentleman over here that's--I'm telling you, code enforcement is on Isles of Capri ticketing people whose boats overhang their 20-foot or 25-foot dock if Page 16 of 30 161 2A3 December 6,2012 the boat is sticking out. And they're making my neighbor apply for a BDE for his boat,not for his lift, because it's a 31-foot boat in a 21-foot slip. So I don't agree. If this man could put his boat there,he wouldn't have to ask you for an extension. Because vessel in your code it's all defined together,vessel,lift,dock,mooring facility. So we're getting a few more smoke and mirrors with regard to that,in my opinion. You know, I have my boat dock. Actually,Turrell and Associates did it for me. It was a long four-year expensive process. I think this man's entitled to his. But I just think he hasn't properly come forward and told you his plan from the beginning,what he wanted to do. I want to say when I owned the house at 134 Tahiti Circle,I had three pilings that were out. One that I had a boat dock extension--I'm sorry,it was a legal non-conforming dock. I wanted to move one of the piles six inches so that a boat could get in and out more easily. And the state said absolutely positively not. Any--you can remove it but you can't move it anywhere else. If you look at the end of what you've already approved,and I know we're not reopening that can of worms,but that's exactly what we did at the end of this dock,we allowed him to move the non-conformity. So as Commissioner Vonier,I believe it's pronounced,stated at the beginning of this,we're not fixing it at all, we're perpetuating the problem. And I really hope that you'll stop it here,send it back,maybe he can reconfigure it and come up with his two lifts some other way if he can. But I think this BDE absolutely needs to be denied,thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Thank you. MR.BELLOWS: No other speakers have registered. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Ray,can you comment on the statement that he cannot moor a boat there and clarify for the record? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: A 30-foot. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah,for the record,Ray Bellows. I think he's referring to as Mike Sawyer had previously indicated today,that the measurement for an extension going into the waterway includes the boat. And that's what they're requesting with this boat dock extension,the lift plus the boat overhang. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. So without the-- MR.BELLOWS: Without the boat lift they can still moor the boat there. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Hold on. Phil? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I think the real question,Mike,is going to Mr.Roger's comment,if he were to moor without a lift,pull in a 30-foot boat which exceeds a 20-foot limit, is that permitted under our code?Without a BDE to allow that. MR.BELLOWS: Yes. My understanding is the boat is not a structure,therefore it's not subject to the setback requirements that a structure would be,such as the boat lift. So in measuring the depth of the boat dock,it's the dock and the extension of the boat into the waterway. And if there's--if the boat is moored to the side of the dock-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: That's the question. MR.BELLOWS: --then it's not extending out past what was approved. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Thanks. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Phil,did that help? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Doug? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: My question then,I'm a little confused here,because we have one branch of government saying that the boat cannot extend past the end of the dock and the other branch of government saying that the boat doesn't count. My question is,because I can't see in the items I've got,how long can a boat be attached to this dock? Because I don't see dimensions on what I've got here that can tell me that.And before we get into the code enforcement issue that he raised,or is he wrong about that code enforcement issue? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Josh,can you? MR.MAXWELL: Oh,yeah. We previously received approval for a 54.6-foot boat dock extension. Page 17 of 30 A 161 3 ?ce1A.er 6, 2012 And as it's been applied in other areas of the county,your dock and boat cannot extend past that 20 feet without that BDE. Now,we have a boat dock extension for 54.6 feet. So I can't put in a 55-foot vessel.That's how it's been applied to many of our projects in the past. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Doug,does that help? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Yeah,but I assume that there is some--you said there's rip-rap up against the seawall. So I assume the whole 40 feet is not useable. MR.MAXWELL: I would say--I mean,the bow of your boat typically draws the least.And that rip-rap is mainly for scour protection,that was brought up earlier. You guys have--at the end of this dock the waters exceed 20 feet. And I would venture to say there's very few seawall panels on Isles of Capri that extend past maybe 15 feet. So scour protection is not a necessity,but it's highly recommended to ensure the security of that seawall. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: And the other question is how high--how short could we live with here in a height? MR.MAXWELL: Oh,as far as a height,I think it would be very difficult for us to get a boat higher than the neighboring boathouse,higher than the peak of that. And if that is to be a stipulation,that is something that I think the Wahls may be able to live with. But that would be,I would say,a reasonable-- that way we're not asking for anything more than what the neighbors have. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: What I was listening to is this gentleman saying he's not going to lose this beautiful view and now look at a boat. MR.MAXWELL: Right now he's got a boathouse to look at. So,I mean,he's not losing any view of the Gulf of Mexico. MR.ROGERS: Not true. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I've got a question.In the criteria,Josh,and staff,in the criteria the waterfront length,he does not--he is not meeting,okay? Because it's only supposed to be half of the 75 feet. He wants to put 60 feet of boat in there. That's number one. The criteria number two,the water depth.That is not met. He has to bring the dock out so far because of the--there is so much water here. And this is mainly why we do these boat dock extensions is there is not enough water. So he has not met the criteria to this at all. And because of the grandfathering of the state where you can't put an extra board or anything on,but they can still put in boats there,that's where I'm going. Because he can still bring a boat on that long side. And if that's grandfathered in,as far as the dock being grandfathered in,you can put a boat there but you need to come to the county for the boat lift. So that's what we're going against. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Mike? MR. SAWYER: Yeah,just to clarify. As the staff report indicates,you are correct,they do not meet one of the primary criterion.In other words,as far as water depth. And as far as second criteria,they do not meet criteria number three,and that is the vessel length. And then criteria six actually is not applicable in this case. So they don't meet one of the primary and one of the secondary. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Okay. MR. SAWYER: Just to be clear. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you. MR. SAWYER: I do have a copy of the resolution for the first boat dock. If you want,I can put that on the visualizer. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Please. MR. SAWYER: I always do this upside down, so I apologize. It does show one vessel at the end. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. And as previously stated,I understand the lift will be the same size,regardless of the side that it's located on. So I don't think changing anything around will change that. So--okay,are there any other questions before we close the public hearing? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Does anyone have a motion? Page 18 of 30 161 2A3 December 6, 2012 COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I do. I'll make a motion that we deny the boat dock extension on the basis of not meeting criteria number two and five of primary and criteria number three and four of secondary,and that obviously reflects some disagreement I have personally with staffs recommendation. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Second. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. So we have a motion to deny the petition and a second. All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: All opposed? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. THE COURT REPORTER: Could I see a show of hands? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Opposed? Okay, so one,two,three,four,five; 5-3. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Raise your hands if there's any--let's do it over again. If there's any-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: It's 5-3. So the petition is denied 5-3. MR. SAWYER: Sony,Commissioners,just for the record, if I could get the denial criteria numbers? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: On the basis of not meeting criteria two. On primary of criteria two and five was my motion. And on secondary,not meeting criteria three and four. MR. SAWYER: Thank you,Commissioners. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Since we're almost at break time,why don't we go ahead and take a break and then we will pick up with Buttonwood. It's 10:13 so let's return at 10:30. Thank you. (Recess.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Welcome back from break. Our next advertised public hearing is PUDA-PL20120001105,Buttonwood Preserve. And if everybody wishing to testify,please rise and be sworn in. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: And do we have any disclosure from Planning Commissioners? Start with you Phil. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: No,nothing. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes,I did speak with Mr.Anderson. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Anyone else? COMMISSIONER VONIER: No. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. MR.NEAL: Good morning,Madam Chairman. I'm Pat Neal,Neal Communities, 8210 Lakewood Ranch Boulevard,Bradenton,Florida. I have been sworn. I would like to do three minutes of introduction of our firm and our team. I've been building in Bradenton since 1968 and currently build in eight jurisdictions,but I've never built before in Collier County,and I hope to have a--I hope that you have a happy future with me over the next few years. Our company has built about 8,700 homes.Mostly we build all-American communities,that is multi-aged communities that has families,people with middle age and income and also active adults. We have a very strong financial team with professionals who have been in the business for a long time. I've done about 90 approvals in Manatee County. We primarily build in Manatee and Sarasota County. Page 19 of 30 161 2A 3 December 6, 2012 Oh, I was America's best builder,chosen by the National Association of Homebuilders in 2012. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: It's a commercial. MR.NEAL: Unlike the other local builders,we prospered through the bust. We actually changed our product. We built a product as small as home sites on 27 by 116 foot lots. In Manatee County we built homes or built homes during the deepest part of the recession from$106,000. We thought it was a good thing that we could build good housing for America's cottages in Neoclassical style. We currently build homes for about$140,000 in Sarasota County. We do not plan to build houses in that price range in Collier County. We do think this is the center of what will be a development universe because of the desirable economic and environmental and physiological characteristics of Collier County. We like it here because it's a good place. And I think that you will find us,after the five approvals that we hope to bring to this year and five years from now,I hope you'll find that we're responsible stewards of your economy and your community,because we're here because Collier County is a desirable place. We're old. I counted these people. They have 360 years among them in the building business. I have employees of more than 40 years myself. We are skilled in what we do.We're quite active in our business and we're doing well in the communities that we've built. Again,my most important point is I have two sons in the business,a nephew and my spouse of 35 years. We have a long-term commitment to the communities in which we build. We expect to have a long-term commitment here in Collier County. I have with me,Michael Greenberg,who is the Vice President who will run our division.He's formally vice president in a very responsible position,more than a billion dollars a year for WCI,and previous to that Toll Brothers and Avatar. Alexis Crespo is our planner from whom you know,and Jeremy Arnold,from Waldrop. And Alexis Dixon is here to answer questions about the environment. I'll close by saying it's fun to be here,I plan to be here a lot. And I hope to have a good time with you and you with me. And we hope to bring things to you that you'll find desirable for Collier County. Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and Andress will start off. MR.ANDERSON: Good morning,Commissioners. For the record,my name is Bruce Anderson. And I wanted to read to you some additional language and then post it that we had worked out with your transportation staff earlier this week in response to some concerns.And it has to do with an additional development commitment to build a stormwater system to convey drainage from Tree Farm Road and from this project to the Collier Boulevard canal. And I'll post here the new language. And Mr.Casalanguida and Ms.Ashton-Cicko have both reviewed and approved this language and had input on it. In the new Section 4.5,it's just to deal with the separate item that's pending about a right-of-way vacation. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Excuse me,Bruce,where is that language? MR.ANDERSON: Oh,it would be under the Development Commitments in the PUD. Towards the end. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: The last page,Page 10 of 10. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I have it.Exhibit F? MR.BELLOWS: Correct. MR.ANDERSON: And unless there are questions right now on those. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Fifteen seconds. As far as the maintenance of the conveyance system to be shared with the developer, its successor and/or assigns on a pro rata basis using the percentage of stormwater that is private compared to public,as determined by whom? MR.ANDERSON: Oh,always the county. But we do reserve the right to discuss it if there are differences of opinion. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Do we need to be that specific or is that just a given? MR.ANDERSON: That's just a given.That's part of the give and take. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Thank you. Page 20 of 30 2A 4 161 5 December 6,2012 MR.ANDERSON: Thank you. And with that,I'll ask Ms. Crespo to come up and go into some more detail about the master plan with you. Thank you very much. MS.CRESPO: Good morning. For the record,Alexis Crespo with Waldrop Engineering. I just have a few power point slides to show you. The request before you this morning is very limited in nature. We're simply seeking to amend the Buttonwood Preserve Residential Planned Unit Development,which was approved in 2007,to allow it to implement the Neal Communities Development Program. This aerial location map before you shows the subject property,which is approximately 55 acres in size. It is large-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: We don't have anything. MS.CRESPO: Is that not showing up on your screen? COMMISSIONER RANKIN: That screen shows this. MS.CRESPO: Thank you,Mr.Bellows. You can see the property has been disturbed over the years. It is formerly known as Miss Kitty's Horse Ranch and contained a number of residential structures and barns,as well as some agricultural uses. To the south we have the Vanderbilt Country Club,which is developed at about 2.5 units per acre. The abutting uses are multi-family residential uses as well as some of their preserve areas and golf course, and that also abuts to the south and east. To the east of the property are agriculturally zoned lands,which are developed with the cell phone tower. To the north of Tree Farm Road,we have the Warm Springs PUD,which was approved at approximately four units per acre and remains undeveloped. Lastly,to the west we have the Bristol Pines Community,which is partially developed,as you can see on your slide. It's developed with a townhome product type. And they did achieve bonus density through their PUD to allow for approximately seven units per acre. This next slide depicts the approved master plan,which was a part of that 2007 original RPUD zoning. This plan allowed for the development of 220 residential units,ranging from multi-family to single-family,as well as two-family detached product types.This is at four units per acre,which is consistent with your urban residential subdistrict future land use category. We are looking to do very minimal changes to what was previously approved. This next slide is our proposed master plan. The amendment before you is limited to the following items: Number one,we're reducing the on-site native vegetation from 13.45 acres,which was indicated in the previous PUD document and master plan,and reducing that down to 11.6 acres. To be clear,that is meeting your minimum requirement in your Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan,and that does represent the minimum 25 percent on-site native vegetation required. So we're still very much consistent with that requirement. The applicant is also seeking an additional five deviations for flexibility in terms of model homes, temporary signage,internal signage to the community. We are seeking the continuation of the approved deviation for a 50-foot wide internal right-of-way. And through the redesign,we were able to improve inter-connectivity and we were able to remove the previously approved deviation for cul-de-sacs. Mr.Anderson has touched on the transportation commitment changes based upon our meeting with staff earlier today. In terms of compatibility,we are not proposing any changes to the approved buffers per the 2007 ordinance. The optional recreation facilities shown on the master plan have been limited to those locations,so they cannot be located any closer to the adjacent existing and planned residential areas. As noted in your staff report, staff has recommended approval of the request,as well as all six proposed deviations. The applicant is in agreement with the findings of fact,as well as the recommendation. And we would respectfully request your recommendation of approval today. Of course with the inclusion of the transportation commitments proffered by the applicant and staff. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Does anyone have any questions? Phil? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Yes,Ma'am. Page 21 of 30 • •z � bbl 2 , 3 December 6, 2012 Six or eight. Looking at the master plan and acknowledging that this was a previously approved master plan and now there's some minor changes to it, I guess I have some questions. On the master plan with respect to the buffers,and I guess this would be on the southwest border there with that development to the side,it notes an optional six to eight-foot fence/wall miming--well,you can see where it's pointing to. Why--talk to me about optional. Which way are you going to go?Optional to me means you can put it up or you can't put it up or you won't put it up. Or I can put up a fence or I can put up a fence and a wall. What are your plans there? MS.CRESPO: Correct. There's no buffer required in that specific location,because it abuts preserve on the Vanderbilt Country Club Property. So there would be no buffer required. However, if Neal Communities would like to do a perimeter masonry wall of some sort as an enhancement to their community we'd like to reserve the right to be able to install that certainly on the applicant's property. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: The one I'm referring to here is abutting,what is it,Bristol Pines? In this square down at the southwest right in here. MS.CRESPO: Can you see my mouse? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Yes. That-- MS CRESPO: In that area? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: If you go north and a little bit to the west. Those are the first questions on optional. And that's abutting that development, is it not? MS.CRESPO: Correct. And again,we are proffering the code required buffer for those townhome units that would be eventually developed in Bristol Pines,and that again would be an enhancement that Neal Communities may elect to do with buffering their--I believe single-family uses are limited in that southwest corner,so they may elect to do a wall there if-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Or they may elect-- MS.CRESPO: To just simply install-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM--to do nothing. MS.CRESPO: No, in that location they would be required to do the 10 to 15-foot wide buffer, depending upon the product type. Am I pointing in the correct location? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Yeah,okay,I see the 10-foot buffer. And that's per the LDC. And then optionally what you're saying is you could--you might or you may-- MS.CRESPO: Correct. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: --put a fence or a wall-- MS.CRESPO: The walls not required by the LDC would be an enhancement at the pleasure of the developer applicant. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: And we really don't have,and you don't have to address it,we really don't have any idea what Bristol Pines plans for that adjacent area,do we? Or do we not? I mean,to a certain extent. MS.CRESPO: We do. This property is platted for more townhomes,more of the same of what is in Phase I. So it is platted. Mr.Neal may want to add some to that. But we do have an approved product type for that area. MR.NEAL: I'll try to give a more specific response as to my thinking,Phil. Commissioner,Bristol Pines has recently been sold to the DR Horton Company for townhomes. For the most part those townhomes would have young families with children. This is adjacent to our amenity facility,including pool. So the probability would be that in order to maintain the continuity of both communities that we would put a well-landscaped barrier,either a fence or wall. That really is what we believe will occur. As we can't determine whether DR Horton will go forward and we don't know their product,I'd prefer not to make an explicit commitment to that. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: What I hear you saying is it would be a landscape buffer, inclusive of either a fence or a wall. MR.NEAL: Yes. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. That's more specific than what's shown on your master plan,and I would recommend that we add that as we go forward. Page 22 of 30 16I 2A3 December 6, 2012 MR.NEAL: I think perhaps I've given away something,but the answer is still yes. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: All right. MS.CRESPO: As proposed looking for the certainly provision of the code required buffer on that location and depending upon the ultimate build-out of that project,be able to do a wall if it is warranted, based upon what occurs in Bristol Pines. But we certainly want to meet your code for buffers. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: A wall or a fence optional. MS.CRESPO: Optionally,which is above and beyond the code requirement. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I know. I'm going to Mr.Neal. There you are. Thank you,that's that question. Okay,now,let's go over to the southern boundary that abuts Vanderbilt Country Club.And I understand there's no buffer required because there's a golf course there,et cetera,et cetera. And you say no buffer required,but a six to eight-foot wall partially to the east.But if you go along that same boundary to the west you have a 15-foot type B buffer,400 lineal feet of six to eight-foot wall and then you stop,and then no buffer required with a six to eight-foot wall fence. Why the distinction there? MS.CRESPO: Well,a portion of this is based upon commitment five,which is 10 of 10 of your PUD document,which is carried over from the 2007 ordinance,which does prescribe the construction of a six-foot high masonry wall east and south--east of the southwest property line for a distance of approximately 400 linear feet. So that is why that is being shown there. And the 15-foot type B buffer is where our proposed single-family or villa uses would abut their existing multi-family uses. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. MS.CRESPO: As you carry eastward,our project then begins to abut their golf course and preserve where no formal buffer is required. But we are showing that fence to comply with the previous condition of the 2007 ordinance. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. Have you--I'm sure you've had conversations with Vanderbilt Country Club? MS.CRESPO: Yes, sir,they did attend our neighborhood information meeting and provided feedback and were very comfortable that we're carrying forward those commitments from the original ordinance. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay,stay with me. And I have most of my questions on the staff report,but I'm not questioning staff,I'm really questioning you. On--in terms of Growth Management Plan consistency on Page 6 of 20 in the staff report,Policy 7.2 comments,the RPUD Master Plan does not depict a loop road within the project. However, interconnections to adjacent and multiple ingress/egress points are proposed. My question is where is that shown on this master plan? MS.CRESPO: That is not shown.Mr. Sawyer and I did discuss once the staff report was released that based upon the surrounding development patterns around the project an interconnection is not appropriate for this project,it was not appropriate in 2007 when it was originally approved. And I believe this is a carryover or more of a scrivener's error type item in terms of an interconnection. Mr. Sawyer,would you like to-- MR. SAWYER: The problem with trying to do an interconnection is that you don't have a related connection possible-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I understand that. MR. SAWYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: No,I understand that. Maybe it's just a problem with the language that that needs to be taken out,because it's very definitely it's proposed. Well, it's not proposed. I think there's agreement--I think I'm hearing there's agreement but it doesn't make sense to have interconnections,given the adjacent properties. MR. SAWYER: I apologize,that's an error in the staff report. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Thank you. Page 23 of 30 • 16t 2 A 3 December 6, 2012 Your recreational facilities are shown as optional. And on the same Page 6 on the staff report it says the RPUD is proposed to include blah,blab,blah various housing types and so forth and recreational facilities. However the master plan says optional. I'd just like to tie that down. I mean,is that your plan or you may or may not? MS.CRESPO: We are showing that as an optional recreation facility. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: So it's not a definite that you're not committing-- MS.CRESPO: Correct. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay,in the plan. MS.CRESPO: We are committing to not locating it anywhere else within the project. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: All right. If you build it,it will be built where you-- MS.CRESPO: Correct,just based on the eventual unit count. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: With respect to one of the proposed deviations,and that's with respect to the sign,the signage,the temporary signs up to--requested deviation allow a temporary sign or banner up to a maximum of 32 square feet blah,blah,blah,blah. The temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 60 days per calendar year. Typically either you or staff. Who directs that? I mean,you put a limitation in there of 60. I have no problem with 60,it's just a-- MR. SAWYER: Yeah,again,for the record,Mike Sawyer,Project Manager. Those are done with temporary use permits,and most of the time those are limited to less than the 60 days that they're actually asking for. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: All right,cool. I'm done for now,Melissa,thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Anyone else have any questions? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes,I do. Alexis,good morning. MS.CRESPO: Morning. COMMISSIONER EBERT: One of my questions for you is on the NIM meeting,the Neighborhood Informational Meeting. On question five,it says the previous PUD document noted that the property was in Zone X. Has that changed? And your response was: It has changed. The property is now located within zones A and H.The property is not located in a flood plain. Well,that is put--that is now flood,AH and AE. I just checked with Robert Wiley. And I just want to know,because I want it on the record, is this developer going to put the base of all of his homes above the flood--I just really--it's best for you and everyone involved,and so I guess--so what you will be doing is telling the people that move there don't worry because we are above the 100-year flood and we are in now a Zone X. Because the Estates,there is problems there. So you will take care of that, it will be a flood-- MS.CRESPO: Yes. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay,thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay,any other questions? (No response.) Okay,thank you. MS.CRESPO: Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Mike? MR. SAWYER: Again for the record,Mike Sawyer,Project Manager for the petition. I've got a couple of corrections. On Page 4,purpose and description,I noted that they were keeping three of the previously approved deviations,they're actually keeping one,so I apologize for that. And also,we've already talked in the--on Page 6,the growth management consistency. We talked about 7.2. 7.1 actually notes that project entrance is provided on Immokalee.Clearly that's not the case. It's 951 through Tree Farm. So I apologize for that as well. I'm here to answer questions. We are finding that the petition as it was previously consistent with the Growth Management Plan,and are recommending approval of the deviations that they're proposing. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Phil? Do you have a question? I thought you said you had more staff questions. Page 24 of 30 6 1 , December 6, 2012 COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: No,thank you. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I do. Deviation two,which has to do with the models,I believe with most of our recent PUDs that we have been allowing 15. That is not a problem at all. My problem with this is they want to leave the models up for 10 years. Did we not have to get conditional use--I think when I first moved down here your homes like on 951 --well,anywhere where they put up models,they had to get a conditional use like if it was under three,or how long was it? Ray,do you remember? It was a very short time. They always had to get a conditional use. If they wanted to keep it opened two,three years,they needed an extension or something? MR. SAWYER: Yeah,Commissioner, I believe--and this is from memory. I believe what it is is that they're able to do that with temporary use permits,I believe for three years,and then are able to request an additional,I believe it's a year. And then they need to go through the conditional use process. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. MR SAWYER: Because this is internal to the development itself. And I think the original intention was for the ones that you're citing,the model home centers that were on major thoroughfares that remained in place for a number of years without it coming back for public hearings. Staffs opinion in this case was it's internal,we've been doing additional models. I have honestly been seeing a lot of developers over the years,especially recently,chafing,because we've had different business climate right now as far as home sales. And being able to keep model home centers open longer and with a wider product range kind of seems like it makes sense to help them,you know,at least with the conditions that we have currently. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. This is where I called Mr.Anderson. And with what is going up,I see what they do is pretty much change their models so that you don't have the same model. This one they said up to 10 years. I don't want to move into a model that's 10 years old and nobody's lived there,to be very honest. Would you mind cutting it down to like six? And I mean,they do change the models as you go along. Ten years for one particular building,that-- MR.NEAL: Madam Commissioner,if we had models for 10 years or six years,it would be a very long time. Six years would be perfectly agreeable to us. It should be much,much faster than this. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. All right. So you wouldn't even mind changing that down to six years from 10? MR.NEAL: Yes,Ma'am. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Melissa? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Sure. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Clarification on that,Mr.Neal,or someone. This says model homes. And when spotting model home and picking up on Commissioner Ebert's point,you build a model with this kind of a floor plan and then next door to it you might have a different kind of floor plan and so forth.There can be a subtlety between this particular model home and model homes in toto. MR.NEAL: Yes. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: You understand what I'm saying? So you might have this model over here for floor plan A in place for two years,then you sell it,then you build another model home down the way. So,I mean,we're talking about the total number of the aggregate number of model homes,aren't we? MR.NEAL: Precisely. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. MR.NEAL: Traditionally we'd start with two. If they weren't working we'd close them and do another two. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay. MR.NEAL: Our models are brand fresh,Mrs.Ebert,and if they go more than two years,we don't like it. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: They're not selling. MR.NEAL: I should say that our professional model merchandiser for 36 years is is my wife, Page 25 of 30 16 1 2, A3 December 6, 2012 Charlene. She's doing 21 models between now and March 31st and she likes building models. So we always have fresh models. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Thank you. MR.NEAL: It's model homes and they could be in different locations. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Okay,thanks. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay. And back to the--being this is the staff report. And I don't mean to be on you,Mike,it must be my cold,I've got to tell you. But you had a staff analysis and recommendation,which I did not think was a good rationale. Fifteen model homes,we've pretty much been doing that the whole time on all the PUDs coming out. But you are relating a 53, 54-acre parcel with Hacienda Lakes,which has over 1,700 acres and you're saying they have 60 models. What they're going to do at Hacienda,which by the way is an old Toll Brothers,they're going to just take sections of that and sell it off. That's how they're going to work on--this is just one developer. So 15 models? But you're comparison to 60 models. I'm going,you can't take 53 acres and compare it to something over 1,700. I just didn't think that was a good rationale. MR. SAWYER: Your point's taken,Commissioner. Quite honestly I could have probably picked a different development. Hacienda also does honestly have a large amount of preserve area,probably comparative-wise,percentage-wise than this one. Basically my intent just with that was that we have in fact in other PUDs approved a much larger number of total models. Not so much a comparison of 60 here,because of the size of the development itself, just that we have approved a much larger number of model home centers per development--I'm sorry,per PUD itself. It was just up for illustration,and your point's taken. COMMISSIONER EBERT: It's just that we've been doing--Ray,have we not been doing pretty much 15? I mean,that's been common lately in our Land Development Code. Maybe that should be changed where we have not as many,but-- MR.BELLOWS: You raise a great point where we see constantly requested deviations.Maybe that should be looked at if we have the round number as a base and that should be analyzed. And historically there have been approximately 15 requested. And I think Mike has already pointed out maybe the better example would have been something similar in size. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. Well,I was just thinking what came to us recently,Mirasol, GL. I mean,they're all going 15,I mean. So you're right,maybe that portion of the Land Development Code we should bring up to date. MR.BELLOWS: Yeah,I really appreciate the comments from the Planning Commission with regard to old code provisions where we see--and when applicants keep asking for the same type of deviation maybe it's time to reevaluate some of those standards and criteria. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Ray,didn't we ultimately do something with the conditional use for model homes? MR.BELLOWS: Definitely as applied to 951. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Right. MR.BELLOWS: There was a change as a result of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan,which required that, so that had to be fixed before the LDC provision. But yeah-- CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: I mean,we went on hold for a couple of years,I think just from code enforcement action while-- MR.BELLOWS: Definitely,that was an issue. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Great. Paul? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: On deviation three,what's the difference between a model versus a speculative home? MR. SAWYER: Commissioner,quite honestly we do not have one. When people--when developers come in for building permits,you are either--you either have an ultimate owner of that home and you do a standard residential building permit or you're doing a model home. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Why don't we call them all model homes? Page 26 of 30 161 2A3 3 December 6,2012 MR. SAWYER: Correct. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: And then on deviation four,you talk about protecting view sheds from Tree Farm Road. What is a view shed? MR. SAWYER: That--Commissioner,I actually pulled that off of the application from the applicant themselves. Basically a view shed is a term that is generally used as far as what you can see if you're looking in a particular direction. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Like a watershed? MR. SAWYER: Yeah,exactly. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Okay. Good,good-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Not a Ted's shed. MR. SAWYER: Not a Ted's shed,thank you. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: And then my final question was on deviation six,you say that reduced right-of-way widths act as a traffic calming feature and assist in maintaining public health,safety and welfare. I also think that you could interpret it as if your road is narrower, it could be less safe because there's less room to pass. To me it doesn't necessarily imply that it's safer. In fact,the whole reason that we put in road widths,I thought was,a matter to improve safety,that they're not too narrow. MR. SAWYER: Yeah,I think the roadway width themselves remain the same. So our standards for the road width itself remain the same. What we're talking about here is the required right-of-way area is reduced. So the actual road width itself isn't being reduced. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: How is reducing that as a traffic calming feature? MR. SAWYER: Basically what you're doing is you're reducing--I'm going to have to go back to the view shed again. When you've got a wider open area for a particular road,you tend to have people going faster in that area. If your view area starts coming down from that because you've got more stuff in there,you're going to have additional people potentially on sidewalks,you're going to have potentially additional landscaping. A lot of times even the homes start coming up because the setbacks are coming back in towards you. In those conditions people, if you will,psychologically drive slower,generally speaking. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: It almost seems as though they would drive slower because they feel it's not as safe to drive fast. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Either way, it works. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Whatever works. MR. SAWYER: Traffic has a large psychological component to it. As a bicyclist,believe me,it's all psychological. MR.BELLOWS: I would also like to point out,this is also one of those deviations that's constantly requested. And then maybe this is time that we evaluate that particular deviation also. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Absolutely. Any other questions? COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'd like to comment on that. You're right,they have been going to this. But living in a community that has this is not good. I would prefer the wider road.And I understand it's private, it's not a problem. But you cannot--because you always have either a pool person doing something or somebody who has just parked--you cannot barely get two cars there. I mean, so I understand the reason the developers do it is because the property is expensive, they want to use as much as they can so,they narrow the street. And I think the--although we've got the cul-de-sacs taken care of a lot better because of the fire,and I see that's in here that they have to do everything. The cul-de-sacs in our community,you can't even get a fire truck. If you have a big moving company truck,one of those--they can't turn around in the cul-de-sac. They have to back in to where they're going and back out. They cannot turn around. That to me is a safety--fire. I mean,just fire and safety hazard.But you're right,all the developers are going to the 50 foot. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Any other questions? (No response.) Ray,do we have any public speakers? Page 27 of 30 16L 2A3 December 6, 2012 MR.BELLOWS: No one has registered. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay, is there anyone here that would like to speak on this? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay,we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion. And also, whomever makes a motion,it would be with the additional language to 4.4 and 4.5.Anyone? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I'll move to approve the Petition PUDA-PL20120001105, inclusive of the stipulations of the additional language for 4.4 and 4.5 referencing transportation,the stipulation that there will be either a fence or a wall in addition to the required buffers on the southwest and southern borders,if I've got that correct. And that the model homes will be limited to an aggregate of six. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second that. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Second that. Okay.All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Anyone opposed? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Motion is approved 8-0.Thank you. MR.ANDERSON: Excuse me,Madam Chairwoman? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Sony. MR.ANDERSON: Could we go ahead and have the consent hearing,or are you--the minor nature of these changes? CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Is that okay,Ray? MR.BELLOWS: Yeah,we can do that now or after the staff clarifications. But if Bruce's team is ready now then-- COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Have you made the annotations on the master plan,et cetera? Then I don't see any reason why we couldn't. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Right. Not a problem. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: It's this ordinance that we're approving right here,though,right? MR.ANDERSON: Yes,with those changes in Mr. Brougham's motion. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: You're going to take Richard Yovanovich's name off and put yours there? MR.ANDERSON: Yes,yes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay,do we have a motion on consent to approve? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'll make a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: With all of the stipulations? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: With all the stipulations,yes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. Page 28 of 30 r , 161 2A3 December 6, 2012 CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Motion approved 8-0. Thank you. MR.NEAL: Thank you,Madam Chairwoman. Thank you,Commissioners. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Thank you. Okay,moving on to old business. As we discussed earlier,the LDC amendments has been continued to January 3rd. And last on our agenda under old business is to review the past staff clarifications of the LDC and forward a recommendation to accept the selected staff clarifications to the BCC. Ray? MR.BELLOWS: Yes,this is the second round of staff clarifications. I believe you approved five others on November--was it the 3rd? These are an additional five others or six others,and if you have questions, I'll be glad to answer them. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Okay. Do you guys want to go through each one and ask any questions?Does anyone have any questions? COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: I have none. I mean,to be--I read through these,and I think consistent with our comments with the last round,this is really formalizing a blessing of previous staff clarifications for the benefit of the BCC. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Agreed. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: So I would move to approve them all as submitted here. COMMISSIONER KLEIN: I'll second. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: So we have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: All in favor? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: Aye. COMMISSIONER RANKIN: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Aye. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. CHAIRWOMAN KEEN: Motion approved, 8-0. Okay. Anyone have any new business? COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Do share. COMMISSIONER EBERT: I want to share with you that I talked with Mr. Schiffer,and Governor Scott has asked Mr. Schiffer to become the architect on the Florida Building Commission. So now Mr. Schiffer is on the State Board of Building Commission. Which I think is great. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Brad, if you're listening,congratulations. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: Brad's probably written us off. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Moved on to bigger and better. Okay. Any other new business? (No response.) CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: Any public comments?Since there's no one in the audience. Do we have a motion to adjourn? COMMISSIONER KLEIN: So moved. COMMISSIONER BROUGHAM: So moved. CHAIRWOMAN KEENE: We are adjourned.Thank you. ****************** Page 29 of 30 161 2 December , 2012 There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:16 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION „. M At.* P srx-MU e Lw,►`�✓► � These minutes approved by the board on (-11-13 as presented or as corrected Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service,Inc., by Cherie'R.Nottingham. Page 30 of 30 161 2A +Li- December 19, 2012 Q INCPTRIM37 L, JAN 1 'a 2013 v MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUttlyTY. CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD Naples, Florida, December 19, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Richard Joslin VICE CHAIRMAN: Patrick White Terry Jerulle Kyle Lantz Thomas Lykos Fiala _ Y 'l Robert Meister (Excused) Hiller Jon Walker Henning —j' 4 Michael Boyd(Excused) Coyle ✓ Colctta 410> Ronald Doino, Jr. >H anc.e i iisc, Correa: Date: Item#: I LP( 2-A 4 ALSO PRESENT: Michael Ossorio, Supervisor, Contractors' Licensing Jeff Williams, Assistant County Attorney John F. Morey, Attorney for the Contractors' Licensing Board Ian Jackson, License Compliance Officer Ken Kovensky, Financial and Operations Support Manager Jamie French, Operations Director, GMD P&R 1 lot December 19, 2012 NOTE: Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings and 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. I. ROLL CALL Vice Chairman Joslin called the meeting to order at 9:02AM. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. The Board welcomed Ronald Doino, Jr. as a new member. II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS None III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Lantz moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. White. Carried unanimously 6—0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATE: October 17,2012 Mr. White moved to approve the minutes of the October 17, 2012 meeting. Second by Mr. Lantz. Carried unanimously 6—0. V. DISCUSSION A. Election of Chair and Vice Chair Mr. Lantz moved to nominate Richard Joslin as Chairman of the Collier County Contractors'Licensing Board. Second by Mr. White. Carried unanimously 6—0. Mr. Lantz moved to nominate Patrick White as Vice Chairman of the Collier County Contractors'Licensing Board. Second by Mr. Jerulle. Carried unanimously 6—0. Mr. Joslin assumed the Chair Mr. Lykos arrived at 9:10am The Board determined to hear item VIII (A)first. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 2012-12 W. Christian Busk, d/b/a Buck& Associates All those testing were sworn in. Mr. Joslin read the rules of procedure into the record. Mr. Busk was present. Brian Osborn,Attorney for Mr. Busk was present. Mr. Mitchell submitted Administrative Complaint Case Number 2012-12, License Number 11713 —W. Christian Busk—D/B/A—Busk& Associates, Inc. for consideration. 2 161 2A December 19, 2012 Mr. Lantz moved to enter the complaint into evidence. Second by Mr. White. Carried unanimously 7—0. Mr. Lantz moved to enter the Proposed Stipulation into evidence. Second by Mr. White. Carried unanimously 7—0. Stipulation Agreement 1. Respondent admits the allegations in the Administrative Complaint for the purpose of this Stipulated Settlement Agreement and Agreed Order. 2. Respondent and Board agree that Respondent shall be placed on probation for a period of one (1)year. During his probationary period, Respondent shall have no duties to report or to undertake any other activities other than to comply with the laws and ordinances governing contractor both within the State of Florida and Collier County. In the event of any violation, investigated and validated by Collier County Contractors'Licensing Supervisor during this probationary period, there shall be an immediate suspension of Respondent's permit pulling privileges under License No. C11713 pending a full hearing before the Contractors"Licensing Board 3. Respondent shall be responsible for paying investigative and operational costs for the Case No. in the amount of$500.00. These costs shall be paid within thirty (30) days form the date of this Stipulated Settlement Agreement and Agreed Order. 4. Respondent shall also be fined$4,000.00 for the two violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint, which have been admitted for the purpose of this Stipulated Settlement Agreement and Agreed Order and this sum shall be paid within (30)days form the date of this Stipulated Agreement and Agreed Order. 5. Respondent enters into this Stipulated Settlement and Agreed Order with the understanding that the Stipulated Settlement and Agreed Order will be presented to the Board on December 19, 2012 and if rejected, Respondent shall be permitted to present his defense at the February 2013 meeting of the Board. Mr. Ossorio stated the County had no objection to the proposed Stipulation. Mr. Morey,Attorney for the Board read the into the record Section 4.3.5.1 of the Ordinance which outlined the enforcement penalties available to the Board including, but not limited to probationary periods of no more than 2 years in length and a$5,000 fine per event. It was noted the Respondent entered into contracts for installation of driveway pavers and construction of a swimming pool. He subcontracted the work to licensed vendors, however this activity is not permitted under his license issued by the County. Board discussion occurred on the following conditions of the proposed Stipulation: Condition#2 -whether the language is "strong enough"to meet the purpose of ensuring the Respondent will not undertake this activity in the future. 3 161 2A . December 19, 2012 Condition#2 - if the length of the probationary period is adequate given the nature of the violation. Condition#4 - if the fine amount is an adequate penalty given the monetary gain the Respondent may have achieved while undertaking the activity. Mr. Morey reported the Board could amend the stipulation during the hearing as the party's involved are present. Mr. Busk reported the fee received for his services from the property owner exceeded $4,000 It included additional work permitted under his license. He is in the process of obtaining his General Contractor's License which would permit him to undertake this activity in the future. Mr. Ossorio noted if a Stipulation not agreed upon today, the case will be scheduled for a full hearing in February 2013. Staff did take into account historic cases when determining the proposed fine amount. Mr. Jerulle voiced concern the proposed fine amount may not be adequate. The Board and Staff discussed possible revised language for the proposed Stipulation. Mr. White moved to approve the Stipulation subject to the following changes: 1. Condition #2 to read "Respondent and Board agree that Respondent shall be placed on probation for a period of two (2)years. During his probationary period, Respondent shall have a duty to report all contracts entered into under this license to the County Licensing Supervisor. In the event of any violation resulting in charges being filed during this probationary period, there shall be an immediate suspension of Respondent's permit pulling privileges under License No. C11713 pending a full hearing before the Contractors Licensing Board" Second by Mr. Lantz. County Staff and the Respondent reported they had no objection to the proposed changes to the stipulation. Motion carried 6 `yes"—1 "no." Mr. Jerulle voted "no." VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Victor Treissa—Review of Credit Report All persons testifying were sworn in. Victor Treissa was present for a review of his personal credit report. The Board expressed concern the report was in a format that was difficult to comprehend the status of the accounts listed and discussed whether it should be resubmitted in an alternate format. 4 161 2A * December 19, 2012 Staff reported current policy dictates which Agencies may be utilized by the applicant when obtaining the report, but not the exact format required. The report was obtained from a qualified Agency(Expedian). Board discussion occurred noting a license may be issued for a probationary period and require a new credit report be submitted which utilizes an alternate format. Mr. Joslin moved to approve a the application for licensure for a 6 month probationary period subject to Mr. Treissa submitting another credit report for review by County Staff within 30 days. Should Staff have any concerns after reviewing said report, a hearing will be scheduled with the Board at which time they may determine whether any changes in license status are necessary. Second by Mr. Lantz. Mr. Lykos outlined the report which contained many deficiencies. He noted, absent of a more detailed report, the license should not be granted. A review of a credit report is required for issuance of a license due to the fact, not only must an applicant possess the necessary technical skills to conduct a proposed business, but be proficient in the financial operation of a business. Issuing a license to an applicant with credit deficiencies may provide the opportunity for misdirection of funds during the course of business (obtain deposits from clients and appropriating the funds to a personal/business emergency, thereby not having funds available to complete the scope of work in a satisfactory time and/or manner). Others noted the license would be for a short probationary period with another review available within 30—60 days. Motion carried 5 "yes"—2 "no." Mr. Lykos and Mr. Jerulle. voted "no." Break: 10:40am Reconvened: 10:55am B. Tad Kring—Qualify Second Entity All persons testifying were sworn in. Mr. Kring reported he wishes to qualify www.allegrogroup.com, LLC as a second entity. Mr. Ossorio reported the County had no objection to the application. The Board reviewed the credit report provided with the application. Mr. Lantz moved to approve the application to qualms a second entity. Second by Mr. White. Motion carried 6 `yes"—1 "no." Mr. Jerulle voted "no." C. Viorel Toader—Qualify Second Entity All persons testifying were sworn in. 5 161 2 A December 19, 2012 Mr. Lykos reported he has conducted business with the applicant in the past, however he is not a "regular vendor"for his business activities. The previous relationship would not have an affect on his ability to be impartial. Mr. Toader wishes to qualify Affordable Flooring & Kitchens as a second entity. Mr. Ossorio reported the County had no objection to the application and recommends approval. It was noted only the commercial credit report is applicable to the application as the party has been in business longer than 1 year. The Board reviewed the credit report. Mr. White moved to approve the application to qualify a second entity. Second by Mr. Doino. Motion carried 6 `yes"—1 "no." Mr. Jerulle voted "no." VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Orders of the Board Mr. Lantz moved to approve the Orders of the Board. Second by Mr. Lykos. Carried unanimously 7—0. B. 2011-10 James G. Schuck, MMC of Marco Island, LLC., d/b/a Marco Marine Construction Suspension Hearing All persons testifying were sworn in. Mr. Schuck was not present. Ian Mitchell presented Administrative Complaint Case Number 2011-10(8), License Number 36545- James G. Schuck, DBA MMC of Marco Island LLC/Marco Marine Construction for consideration. Mr. Schuck has been engaging in business activity absent of the proper insurance coverage. Mr. Lantz moved to enter the complaint into evidence. Second by Mr. White. Carried unanimously 7- 0. Mr. Mitchell stated Mr. Schuck was notified of the hearing and was aware it is occurring today. Mr. Schuck had submitted a letter dated December 17,2012 acknowledging the violation and not contesting the proposed suspension of his license. Board discussion occurred on the nature of the penalty to be doled out; suspension of the license, whereby there may be a possibility the applicant may apply to re-instate the current license, or revocation of the license whereby the applicant would be required to apply for any new license to conduct business. 6 161 2A December 19, 2012 Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney stated the hearing notice identified the item to be considered a"Suspension Hearing." Further, Mr. Schuck's letter acknowledges his license will be "suspended." Other Board members noted Mr. Schuck violated a previous Stipulation Agreement(dated July 20, 2011)wherein the penalty that may be enforced for failing to comply with the Stipulation would be"revocation" of the license, thereby possibly granting the Board the authority to revoke the license today It was noted the Board's intent would be to "revoke"the license. Board discussion occurred on the legal ramifications of each possible enforcement action available (suspension vs. revocation) including how to ensure the applicant's "due process" has not been violated. Mr. White moved to suspend license number 36545 indefinitely and order the Respondent to pay Administrative Costs in the amount of$500.00. Said costs to be paid within 30 days. Second by Mr. Jerulle. Carried unanimously 7—0. IX. PUBLIC COMMENTS Toni Jessen Ms. Jessen expressed concern a fine was not imposed in the case involving Mr. Schuck.. The Board reported the case was for violating a stipulation whereas the penalty considered was altering the status of the license. X. NEXT MEETING DATE -Wednesday January 16,2012 Board of County Commissioners, 3rd Floor-Administrative Building"F", Government Complex, 3301,E. T 3rd Floor, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail,Naples FL, 34112 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 11:45 AM. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD ,l Richard Joslin, hairma These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on as presented , or as amended 7 161 2A L- .15.) 1EgrCWIE Janu 16, 2013 FEB 2 0 2013 BY: .... .................. MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD MEETING Fiala Hiller January 16, 2013 Henning "7- 14 Naples, Florida Coyle ✓ 1-4o ence, LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Contractors' Licensing Board, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: Chairman: Richard Joslin Vice Chair: Patrick White Members: Michael Boyd Ronald Donino Terry Jerulle Kyle Lantz Misc Robert Meister Jon Walker Datie: Stem ,, ' Excused: Thomas Lykos �:�.� Copies to; ALSO PRESENT: Michael Ossorio — Supervisor, Contractors' Licensing Office Jeff Wright, Esq. —Assistant County Attorney James F. Morey, Esq. —Attorney for the Contractors' Licensing Board Karen Clements—Licensing Compliance Officer 1 1 aA � January 16,2013 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings and 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. I. ROLL CALL: Chairman Richard Joslin called the meeting to order at 9:01 AM and read the procedures to be followed to appeal a decision. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. Eight voting members were present. Michael Ossorio, Supervisor—Contractors' Licensing Office, noted Board Member Thomas Lykos had been excused. II. AGENDA—ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS: Deletion: • Under Item VI, "New Business:" (A) Jerome J. Jeker—Contesting Citation (The request to withdraw was made by Mr. Jeker.) Continuation: • Under Item VIII, "Public Hearings:" (A) Case #2013-01: BCC vs. Brenton L. Mongan, d/b/a"Naples Property Pros"was continued to the February meeting. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Vice Chairman Patrick White moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Second by Robert Meister. Carried unanimously, 8—0. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—December 19,2012: Kyle Lantz moved to approve the Minutes as presented. Second by Jon Walker. Carried unanimously, 6—0. (Note: Michael Boyd and Robert Meister could not vote to approve the Minutes because they did not attend the December meeting.) V. DISCUSSION: (None) VI. NEW BUSINESS: (Note: Regarding cases heard under Section VI, the individuals who testified were first sworn in by the Attorney for the Board.) 2 2A 161 January 16,2013 B. Dagoberto Barcelo—Credit Report Review Applicant: Dagoberto Barcelo d/b/a"Barcelo's Custom Cabinets and Millwork, Inc." Mr. Barcelo explained the reasons for his personal credit problems: • Due to the economic downturn, he had been laid off as a cabinet maker by his former employer • He was unable to find employment and lost his house due to foreclosure • He resorted to using his credit cards to meet his expenses (food, rent, etc.) • He decided to open his own company as a custom cabinet maker in order to improve his situation Chairman Joslin noted Mr. Barcelo is a woodworker who made cabinets and has applied for a license to install his work product. He commended Mr. Barcelo on his test results; the score for the Business Procedures exam was 90%. Michael Ossorio confirmed Mr. Barcelo had taken the examination at GITS, LLC, which is a Board-approved testing facility in Ocala. Chairman Joslin stated Mr. Barcelo presented serious credit issues. The Applicant stated his priorities were to make money since he cares for his 73- year old mother. Mr. Barcelo further stated he had been advised to open his own business since he has the skill and experience in the trade. He guaranteed that if his license application is approved, he will pay all of his obligations and noted he is attempting to establish a payment plan. Vice Chairman White noted the Applicant had received a citation for installing cabinets without a license and requested an explanation. Mr. Barcelo stated he had been working for a General Contractor on Marco Island who was to have included his name on the payroll. The General Contractor failed to do so. When the citation was issued, the Applicant immediately paid the fine. Mr. White stated if the Applicant became a Contractor, it would eliminate this type of problem. He asked the Applicant if he would make every effort to pay off his debts if a license was granted. Mr. Barcelo stated every penny of profit would be put back into the company to allow it to grow. He explained his biggest problem was with the Bank of America and he was obtaining information concerning a new government program that may apply to his situation and arranging a payment schedule for his credit card bills. Chairman Joslin requested recommendations from Staff. Michael Ossorio suggested approving the application for a license while imposing a one-year probationary period. The Applicant will be required to return to present his business and personal credit reports for the Board to review. Jon Walker asked if the Applicant if he understood he would be required to prove to the Board that he had made some progress paying down his debts. Mr. Barcelo responded, "Yes." 3 161 2AIt- January 16, 2013 Jon Walker moved to approve granting a license to the Applicant with a one-year probationary period. Vice Chairman White offered a second and added the requirement that the Applicant was to return at the end of the one-year probationary period to provide updated personal and business credit reports. Mr. Walker amended his original Motion to include the suggested addition. Second by Vice Chairman White. Carried unanimously, 8—0. Chairman Joslin instructed Mr. Barcelo to contact Contractors' Licensing Office Supervisor Michael Ossorio to complete the required paperwork. VII. OLD BUSINESS: A. Orders of the Board Vice Chairman Patrick White moved to approve authorizing the Chairman to sign the Orders of the Board. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 8—0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Case#2013-02: BCC vs. Robert E. Elwell,Jr. Respondent, Robert E. Elwell, Jr., was not present or represented by Counsel. Chairman Joslin outlined the manner in which the Public Hearing will be conducted: • Hearings will be conducted pursuant to the procedures contained in Collier County Ordinance#90-105, as amended, and Florida Statutes, Title XXXII, "Regulation of Professions and Occupations, " Chapter 489. • The Hearings are quasi-judicial in nature. • Formal "Rules of Evidence" shall not apply. • Fundamental fairness and due process shall be observed and govern the proceedings. • Irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative evidence shall be excluded. • All other evidence of the type commonly relied upon by reasonably prudent persons shall be admissible, whether or not such evidence would be admissible in a trial in the Courts of the State of Florida. • Hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose of supplementing or explaining any evidence but shall not be deemed sufficient by itself to support a Finding, unless such hearsay would be admissible over objection in a civil action in Court. • The "Rules of Privilege" shall be effective to the same extent that such Rules are now, or hereafter may be,recognized in civil actions. • Any member of the Contractors' Licensing Board may question any witness before the Board. 4 2161 16,2013 • Each party to the proceedings shall have the right to call and examine witnesses,to introduce Exhibits, to cross-examine witnesses,to impeach any witness regardless of which party called the witness to testify, and to rebut any evidence presented against the party. • The Chairperson or, in his/her absence,the Vice Chair, shall have all powers necessary to conduct the proceedings at the Hearing in a full, fair, and impartial manner, and to preserve order and decorum. • The general process of the Hearing is for the County to present an Opening Statement to set forth the charges and, in general terms,how the County intends to prove the charges. • The Respondent will present his/her Opening Statement setting forth, in general terms, defenses to the charges. • The County will present its Case in Chief by calling witnesses and presenting evidence. • The Respondent may cross-examine the witnesses. • After the County has closed its Case in Chief the Respondent may present his/her defense as described previously, i.e., to call and examine witnesses, to introduce Exhibits, to cross-examine witnesses, to impeach any witness regardless of which party called the witness to testify, and to rebut any evidence presented against the party. • After the Respondent has presented his/her case, the County will present a rebuttal to the Respondent's presentation. • When the Rebuttal is concluded, each party is permitted to present a Closing Statement. • The County is allowed a second opportunity to rebut the Respondent's Closing Statement. • The Board will close the Public Hearing and begin deliberations. • Prior to beginning deliberations, the Board's Attorney will give a"charge"to the Board, similar to the charge given to a jury, setting out the parameters on which the decision will be based. • During deliberations, the Board can request additional information and clarification from the parties. • The Board will decide two different issues: o Whether the Respondent is guilty of the offenpe as charged in the Administrative Complaint. A vote will be taken on the matter. o If the Respondent is found guilty, the Board must decide the sanctions to be imposed. • The Board's Attorney will advise the Board concerning the sanctions and the factors to be considered. • The Board will discuss the sanctions and vote. • After the matters are decided,the Chair/Vice Chair will read a Summary of the Order to be issued by the Board. The Summary is a basic outline of the Order and may not reflect the same language contained in the Final Order. • The Final Order will include complete details as required under State laws and procedures. 5 1 6 2A4 January 16, 2013 Vice Chairman White moved to approve entering Case No. 2013-02, Collier County Board of County Commissioners vs. Robert E. Elwell, Jr., d/b/a "Service Star Cooling&Heating,Inc.," consisting of the Administrative Complaint and Exhibits into evidence. Second by Kyle Lantz. Carried unanimously, 8—0. Chairman Joslin entered the information packet into evidence as County's Exhibit "A." Karen Clements, Licensing Compliance Officer, presented the County's Opening Statement: • The Respondent is Robert E. Elwell, Jr., d/b/a"Service Star Cooling & Heating, Inc." • The Respondent is licensed by the State of Florida as a Certified Class A Air-Conditioning Contractor, License No. CAC-0568252 • May 1, 2012: Received a complaint from Kobie Kooling concerning discovery of the installation of an a/c unit at 6216 Bellerive Avenue, Bldg. 17, Apt. # 1702, for which a permit had not been pulled. • May 3, 2012: A site inspection was conducted. The homeowner, Mrs. Martens, stated she had been solicited by Service Star to install a new a/c unit since they were in the area and could give her a"good price"to do the job. • May 14, 2012: A Permit was issued • May 17, 2.012: Called the Respondent; reminded him the Permit was to be picked up and an inspection scheduled upon completion. • May 23, 2012: Inspection was schedule for May 25th • May 25, 2012: Inspection failed—installation did not comply with Code requirements. • September 20, 2012: Contacted"Michael"at Service Star. A second inspection was to be scheduled. • September 24, 2012: Calls were placed to Service Star and to Robert Elwell. Messages were left. • September 26, 2012: Received call from Robert Elwell who stated inspection would be called in on September 27, 2012. • October 1, 2012: Final inspection was scheduled. • October 2, 2012: Contractor's license with State had not been renewed—he must re-register with Collier County; Inspection results will be entered into Collier's system at that point • October 10, 2012: Mr. Elwell stated he would no longer qualify Service Star Cooling and Heating after Permit has been completed • October 12, 2012: Robert Elwell called-- Service Star had retained a new qualifier. • October 23, 2012: Spoke with"David" at Service Star"Enterprises"—new company name—who stated the company will not stand behind previous work. Contacted Mr. Elwell who stated he was retaining an attorney. Ms. Clements advised Mr. Elwell to hire a company to finish the work. 6 161 2A if- January 16,2013 • October 26, 2012: Left several messages for Mr. Elwell. Did not receive a response. • October 29, 2012: Received a phone message from Peter Mackey, counsel for Robert Elwell. • November 1, 2013: Spoke with Mr. Mackey who stated the owner of Service Star had been arrested several times for involvement in"Ponzi" schemes (investment swindles). He further stated options were under consideration to rectify the situation with the homeowner, Mr. Martens. • November 27, 2012: A Non-compliance Letter was sent and the hearing was scheduled for January 16, 2013. Ms. Clements noted the County received a fax dated January 15, 2013 (at 5:34 PM) from the Mackey Law Group, P.A. She read the contents of the letter into the record: "As you know from our previous letter of December 19, 2012, we represent Robert E. Elwell, Jr. We are cognizant of the January 16, 2013, 9:00 a.m. Contractors'Licensing Board hearing. Mr. Elwell is not able to be at the hearing due to health reasons. As we previously referenced, he has heart problems. It is our understanding that the decision to be made tomorrow is whether to revoke Mr. Elwell's permitting privileges with Collier County. Based on our letter of December 19, 2012, Mr. Elwell's health and Mr. Elwell's finances, we are informing you that he has not objection to the revocation of his permitting privileges for Collier County. Mr. Elwell appreciates any consideration that you can provide to him as a result of his unfortunate association with Salvatore Tavoclacci. Please call me if you need any assistance whatsoever and/or if you would like to speak with Mr. Elwell. Sincerely, MACKEY LAW GROUP, P.A. (signed) Peter J Mackey" (Note: A copy of the letter was distributed to the Board members.) Ms. Clement stated she requested direction from Thomas L. DeGram, Collier County Chief Building Official, who stated he considered the situation to be a "willful Code violation." Ms. Clements verified that Mr. Elwell had been properly notified of the Hearing via certified letter delivered to his attorney, Peter Mackey, on December 8, 2012. 7 • 161 2A4- January 16,2013 Chairman Richard Joslin moved to enter the letter from Peter Mackey,Esq., dated January 15, 2013 into evidence as County's Exhibit `B." Second by Vice Chairman Patrick White. Carried unanimously, 8—0. Terry Jerulle asked if Mr. Mackey's letter of December 19, 2012 had been included in the information packet previously presented to the Board members. Vice Chairman White noted Attorney Mackey's letter of January 15, 2013 referenced the Respondent's Collier County Certificate of Competency(Number 201100001915) while the Administrative Complaint referenced the State License (CAC-058252.) He asked for clarification that the Board would decide whether or not to revoke the Respondent's permit pulling privileges in Collier County under the State License. Michael Ossorio confirmed. Mr. White asked how the Respondent's Collier County Certificate of Competency would be effected. Mr. Ossorio responded the CAC would become inactive. Mr. White clarified the permit pulling privileges would be revoked and the Certificate of Competency would be inactive. Karen Clements produced a copy of Attorney Mackey's December 19th letter. (Note: Vice Chairman White reviewed the letter.) Chairman Joslin asked if the job had ever been completed. Ms. Clements replied it had not passed inspection and a Certificate of Completion has not been issued. Michael Ossorio referred the Members to Exhibit E-13, "Inspection History." Vice Chairman White referred to Mr. Mackey's letter and stated, "in essence," the situation appeared to be a pattern of practice throughout the state with respect to Salvatore Tavolacci,the owner of Service Star. He noted there may be other victims throughout the State. He further stated the letter noted Mr. Elwell was not in a position to do anything to correct the situation due to his health issues and finances. Michael Ossorio stated the charge was "willful Building Code violation." • The Chief Building Official reviewed the Building Permit. • The Respondent chose to qualify a company even though he had no ownership in it. • The Respondent chose to pull and sign for Building Permits in Collier County. • A deposit was taken from a Collier County homeowner. • The installation was inspected twice and failed twice. • The Respondent is responsible to rectify the situation—to complete the job, have the work inspected and pass inspection for the consumer. 8 161 2A '+ January 16,2013 Mr. Ossorio stated the company and the qualifier are responsible to make amends to the homeowner. He further stated the local Licensing Board is the first line of defense for consumers. He continued that if the Board finds there has been a violation, a letter will be sent to the State's Construction Industry Licensing Board. All consumers who have been harmed by this contractor would be notified and sent a State complaint form. Chairman Joslin asked if Service Star had been re-qualified in Collier County under a new qualifier. Mr. Ossorio stated the new company name is Service Star Enterprise with the same business address and telephone number. He reminded the Board that Mr. Elwell had previously been before the Board for prior willful Code violations. The previous order of the Board required Mr. Elwell to personally pull building permits and could not rely on the company to do so. Michael Ossorio stated County would rest its case under Count I which charged a violation of Ordinance 90-105, as amended, Section 22-201.1(2), "Willfully violating the applicable building codes of law of the State, City or Collier. " Vice Chairman White asked if the new company was operating in Collier County. Mr. Ossorio confirmed that Service Star Enterprises (formerly Service Star Cooling and Heating, Inc.) was currently conducting business in Collier County under a different qualifier. Vice Chairman White moved to approve closing the Public Hearing. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 8—0. Attorney Morey outlined the Charge to the Board: • The Board shall ascertain in its deliberations that fundamental fairness and due process were accorded to the Respondent • Pursuant to Section 22-203(g) (5) of the Codified Ordinance,the formal Rules of Evidence set out in Florida Statutes shall not apply. • The Board shall consider solely the evidence presented at the Hearing in its deliberation of this matter. • The Board shall exclude from its deliberations irrelevant, immaterial and cumulative testimony. • The Board shall admit and consider all other evidence of a type commonly relied upon by reasonably prudent persons in the conduct of their affairs, whether or not the evidence so admitted would be admissible in a Court of Law or Equity. • Hearsay evidence may be used to explain or supplement any other evidence but hearsay by itself is not be sufficient to support a Finding, unless such hearsay would be admissible over objection in a civil action in Court. • The Standard of Proof in actions where a Respondent may lose his privileges to practice his profession is that the evidence presented by the Complainant must prove the Complainant's case in a clear and convincing manner. 9 2A 161 + January 16,2013 • The Burden of Proof on the Complainant is a larger burden than the "Preponderance of Evidence" Standard set in civil cases. • The Standard of Evidence is to be weighed solely as to the charges set out in the Complaint. • The only charges the Board may decide upon are the only ones to which the Respondent has had an opportunity to prepare a defense. • The damages awarded by the Board must be directly related to the charges. • The decision made by the Board shall be stated orally at the Hearing and is effective upon being read, unless the Board orders otherwise. • The Respondent, if found guilty, has certain appeal rights to the Contractors' Licensing Board,the Courts, and the State Construction Industry Licensing Board ("CILB"),pursuant to Florida Statutes and the Florida Administrative Code. • The Board shall vote upon the evidence presented in all areas and if the Respondent is found in violation, shall adopt the Administrative Complaint. • The Board shall also make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in support of the charges set out in the Complaint. Chairman Joslin asked if it was possible to track the State's actions regarding the Contractor. Michael Ossorio responded the State will notify Collier County of the progress of its independent investigation. e noted the investigation process may take months ar years before it is conclude ; Vice Chairman White askecfhe Board could make a recommendation to the State's Construction Industry Licensing Board ("CILB") for further action in addition to the requested penalty. He asked the County for its recommendation. Recommendations: • Indefinite suspension or revocation of the Qualifier's Building Permit pulling privileges under State License#CAC-058252 for the City of Naples, Marco Island, and unincorporated Collier County; • Payment of$1,000 to Collier County for investigative costs incurred; • The State conduct a full investigation into the matter, and • Revocation of the Qualifier's State license Attorney Morey reminded the Board that if a decision was made that a violation occurred,there is to be a finding of guilty of willful violation Vice Chairman White moved to approve finding the Respondent,Robert E. Elwell, Jr.,guilty of the violation as charged and that the evidence presented demonstrated that he willfully violated the Building Codes. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 8—0. Attorney Morey advised the Board that that when imposing disciplinary sanctions on a State-certified Contractor who has been found to be guilty of misconduct,the Contractors' Licensing Board shall consider the following: 10 161 2A January 16,2013 (1) The evidence presented at the Hearing; (2) The gravity of the violation; (3) The impact of the violation on public Health/Safety or Welfare; (4) Any actions taken by the Respondent to correct the violation; (5) Any previous violations committed by the Respondent, and (6) Any other evidence presented at the Hearing by the parties relevant as to the sanction which is appropriate for the case given the nature of the violation or the violator. Mr. Morey verified the Board is allowed to recover administrative costs but cannot impose a fine on a State-certified Contractor. Terry Jerulle asked if a public notice (reprimand) could be published. Michael Ossorio confirmed the Board could only recommend to the State that the State publically reprimand the Respondent; the County did not have the authority to publish a press release. Vice Chairman White moved to accept Staff's recommendations and to approve imposing the following Sanctions: • Denial of all further Building Permit privileges for the Respondent in Collier County, the City of Naples,Marco Island, and Everglades City; • Requesting that the CILB order the Respondent to pay $1,000 to Collier County for administrative/investigative costs incurred; • Recommending to the CILB to revoke the Respondent's state license; • Recommending to the CILB to order a public reprimand of Mr. Elwell Second by Terry Jerulle. Kyle Lantz suggested adding a recommendation to the State to impose a fine of $5,000 in addition to the other Sanctions. Vice Chairman White amended the Motion to include recommending that the CILB impose a fine of$5,000 on the Respondent. Second by Terry Jerulle. Carried unanimously, 8—0. Chairman Joslin stated: • This cause came on for public hearing before the Contractors' Licensing Board on January 16,2013 for consideration of the Administrative Complaint filed against Robert E. Elwell, Jr., d/b/a"Service Star Cooling & Heating, Inc.,"the holder of record of State License#CAC-058252. • Service of the Complaint was made in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended. • The Respondent was not present, and was not represented by Counsel. • The Board, at this Hearing, having heard testimony under oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters,therefore issues its Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law as follows. 11 161 2AL k- January 16,2013 Findinj's of Fact: • Robert E. Elwell, Jr., d/b/a"Service Star Cooling & Heating, Inc.," is the holder of record of State License#CAC-058252. • The Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Contractors' Licensing Board is the Petitioner(Complainant) in this matter. • The Board has jurisdiction of the person of the Respondent. • Respondent, Robert E. Elwell, Jr., was not present and was not represented by Counsel at the Public Hearing held on January 16, 2013. • All notices required by Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, have been properly issued and were personally delivered via certified mail. • The Respondent acted in a manner that is in violation of Collier County Ordinance and is the one who committed the act. • The allegations set forth in Administrative Complaint as Count I, under Section 22-201.1(2), "Willfully violating the applicable Building Codes or laws of the State, City, or Collier County, " have been found to be supported by the evidence presented at the Hearing. Conclusions of Law: • The Conclusions of Law alleged and set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I have been approved, adopted and incorporated herein,to wit: o The Respondent violated Section 22-201.1(2) of Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County by acting in violation of the Section set out in the Administrative Complaint with particularity. Order of the Board: • Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489,Florida Statutes, and in Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, by a vote of 8 in favor, none in opposition, a majority vote of the Board members present,the Respondent has been found in violation as set out above. • Further, it is hereby ordered by a vote of 8 in favor, none in opposition, a majority vote of the Board members present, that the following Disciplinary Sanctions and related Order are hereby imposed upon the holder of State License#CAC-058252: o Robert E. Elwell, Jr., d/b/a"Service Star Heating and Cooling,Inc." is required to $1,000 to Collier County for administrative costs incurred; o Deny all further building permit pulling privileges indefinitely in Collier County, the City of Naples, Marco Island; o Request that the State Construction Industry Licensing Board revoke his License; o Request that the State of Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board impose a maximum fine $5,000in penalties, and o Request that the CILB issue a public reprimand. 12 161 2 16,2013 Chairman Joslin noted the case was closed. IX. REPORTS: • Michael Ossorio stated a Resolution was passed by the State Legislature which authorized the Department of Business and Professional Regulations to allow "grandfathering"of any State-registered Contractors who wished to apply for State certification. He explained the process and noted it could be done administratively —an appearance before the State Licensing Board was no longer required. X. MEMBER COMMENTS: (None) XI. NEXT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 Board of County Commissioners' Chambers, 3n1 Floor—Administrative Building "F," Government Complex, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail,Naples, FL 34112 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Vice Chairman at 10:15 AM. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD fs awn, Chairman NO 4 CV The Minutes were a roved by the Board/Chairman on M %!-`,'( Y Olf6 , 2013, "as submitted" OR "as amended" F 1. 13 161 2 As ' II�� December 5, 2012 th JAN 3 1. 2013 Li!, MINUTES OF THE MEETING Ofiy[HE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, December 5, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Division Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chairman: William J. Varian Vice Chairman: David Dunnavant He, : .,„ James E. Boughton Coy;-- Clay Brooker cokAtia Dalas Disney Marco Espinar Blair Foley Chris Mitchell Robert Mulhere M sc.Corres: George H. Hermanson Date: Stan Chrzanowski item*: t 1 1 Excused: Laura Spurgeon DeJohn copies to: Ron Waldrop Norm Gentry Absent: Mario Valle ALSO PRESENT: Nick Casalanguida, Administrator, Growth Management Division Jamie French, Director, Operations & Regulatory Management Judy Puig, Operations Analyst, Staff Liaison Jay Ahmad, Director, Transportation Engineering Ed Riley, Fire Code Official Reed Jarvi, Manager, Transportation Planning Nathan Beals, Project Manager, Public Utilities Caroline Cilek, M.S., Senior Planner, LDC Coordinator Jack McKenna, County Engineer Mike Ossorio, License Compliance Supervisor Tonia Spangler, Operations Analyst Bill Lorenz, Natural Resources Dept. Director 1 161 2A 5 December 5, 2012 I. Call to Order- Chairman Chairman Varian called the meeting to order at 3:00pm II. Approval of Agenda Mr. Foley moved to approve the Agenda subject to the following addition: • Item VI.0 - Stormwater Management Systems Second by Mr. Mitchell. Carried unanimously 10- 0. III. Approval of Minutes from November 7,2012 Meeting Mr. Disney moved to approve the minutes of the November 7, 2012 meeting as presented. Second by Mr. Chrzanowski. Carried unanimously 10- 0. IV. Public Speakers None V. Staff Announcements/Updates A. Public Utilities Division Update— [Nathan Beals or Tom Chmelik] Nathan Beals reported: • 47 water meters were installed in November. • The RFP for the Public Utility Master Plan was disseminated on November 21, 2012. • The study on the requirements for the sizing of water meters is ongoing. Discussion occurred on the rationale for Staff determining the size of water meters required for potential applicants. Mr. Beals noted the requirement is for only 2" or smaller services. Chairman Varian requested Staff provided the water flows distributed over a 24 hour period for unincorporated Collier County for the dates of February 15, 2012, July 6, 2012 and October 16, 2012. B. Fire Review Update— [Ed Riley] Ed Riley, Fire Code Official submitted the documents "Office of the Fire Code Official— Summary of Plan Review Activity— October - 12" and "Fire Plan Review— Time Frame Summary- October 12" for information purposes. Mr. Hermanson arrived at 3:17pm C. Growth Management Division/Transportation Engineering— [Jay Ahmad or Reed Jarvi] Jay Ahmad and Reed Jarvi were present and reported: • White St. bridge project -- underway with a temporary bridge being constructed at 23r1 St. with an anticipated completion ahead of schedule which is currently July 5, 2013. • Golden Gate Boulevard bridge project - under construction (Golden Gate Main Canal followed by Miller Canal in the fall) with temporary bridge being constructed. • Davis Boulevard/Collier Boulevard Improvement Project- continuing ahead of schedule with an estimated completion date of late summer 2013. 2 • E f 161 2 A 6 December 5, 2012 • Proposed I-75 interchange - Everglades Boulevard area- Staff to seek direction from the Board of County Commissioners. • Long Range Transportation Plan—meeting with Metropolitan Planning Organization for consideration of final approval of the plan scheduled for December. D. Growth Management Division/Planning & Regulation Update— [Jamie French] Nick Casalanguida presented the Executive Summary "Recommendation to review the County's progress coordinating permitting and inspection activities with the building industry and the independent fire districts (Districts) and staff's request for direction on future actions regarding the same" for information purposes. He noted the item will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners. Staff is recommending the meetings to seek avenues to improve coordination of permitting and inspections continue along with consideration being given to amending the inter-local agreement as necessary. Any proposed amendment may include a revised fee collection structure. Jamie French submitted the "November 2012 Monthly Statistics"which outlined the building plan review activities. He noted the Board of County Commissioners will be authorizing overtime payroll to existing employees to assist in alleviating the workload for reviews and inspections. VI. New Business A. GMD Fee Schedule changes [Jamie French/Ken Kovensky] Jamie French provided the "Collier County Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Fee Schedule— Underline &Strikethrough—BCC Approved Version, January 08, 2013, " last revised 11/15/12 for consideration. He requested a recommendation from the Committee on the language included in various sections of the document stating"All inspection fees will be due at the pre-construction meeting. If there is no pre-construction meeting required, all inspection fees shall be due at the time of application. " The Committee discussed the ramifications of the wording, including possible revisions. Mr. Hermanson moved to recommend the document referenced above contain the following language in any applicable sections regarding Plan Review and Inspection Fees, "All inspection fees will be due at the pre-construction meeting. If there is no pre-construction meeting required, all inspection fees shall be due prior to permit approval." Second by Mr. Mulhere. Carried unanimously 11 —0. Changes to City View portal Mr. French reported the vendor changes to the portal are underway and should be available for testing purposes by January 1, 2013. Responsibilities of DSAC 3 M ..4 161 2A5 December 5, 2012 Chairman Varian requested Staff to review the powers and duties of the Committee to determine if they are applicable to any areas under the auspices of the Code Enforcement Office. SIRE Technologies. Inc. Mr. French reported he will be providing an update to the Board of County Commissioners on the implementation of SIRE Technologies, Inc.'s electronic plan review system. The County intends to employ a staff person to provide "technical support" for the application when the system becomes functional. B. Contractor Licensing update [Mike Ossorio] Mr. Ossorio provided a document "Top Violation Types"which outlined the percentage of violations encountered by the Contractor Licensing Department. C. Stormwater Management Systems Mr. Disney expressed concern Section 6.05.02(F) of the Land Development Code (LDC) (Stormwater Retention/Detention Design for Single-Family Dwelling Units, Two-Family Dwelling Units and Duplexes) is overly burdensome to some landowners who wish to develop their property. He recommended the requirements for the section be reviewed for a possible amendment. Staff members agreed on Mr. Disney's concern in regards to certain land use applications and supported the request for the Committee to review the language via the LDC Subcommittee. Caroline Cilek reported the most recent LDC Amendment Cycle terminated in September, with no Cycle active at this time. If the Committee would like to pursue the concept of proposing an Amendment, she recommended they present a request to the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Brooker moved for the Development Services Advisory Committee to submit a formal request to the Board of County Commissioners for authorization of an Out of Cycle Land Development Code Amendment in order for the Committee to develop a proposed revision to Section 6.05.02(F) of the Code- (Stormwater Retention/Detention Design for Single-Family Dwelling Units, Two-Family Dwelling Units and Duplexes). Second by Mr. Disney. Carried unanimously 11 —0. VII. Old Business None VIII. Committee Member Comments Chairman Varian reported Mr. Hermanson is stepping down from the Committee and recognized his service to the County and citizens of Collier County. IX. Adjourn Next Meeting Dates January 9,2013 GMD Conference Room 610—3:00 pm February 6,2013 GMD Conference Room 610—3:00 pm 4 1 §, 1 2A5 e m r ce be 5, 2012 March 6,2013 GMD Conference Room 610—3:00 pm There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 4:45 PM. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chairman,William Varian These Minutes wer pproved by the Board/Chairman on as presented , or as amended 5 161 2 A s December 14, 2012 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE LOW-gglinq Naples, Florida, December 14, 2012 At JAN 1 6 2013 R. BY: LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee —Land Development Review Subcommittee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 1:30 PM in REGULAR SESSION at the Growth Management Division Building, Room 609/610 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL with the following persons present: Robert Mulhere Fiala 12 David Dunnavant Hiller Henning —f' �. Stan Chrzanowski Coyle Dalas Disney Dor - Chris Mitchell ALSO PRESENT: Alison Bradford, Assistant County Engineer Bill Lorenz, Director, Natural Resources Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner Christian Andrea, ALD Jeremy Frantz, Conservancy of S.W. Florida ; em 4:_1( 2. 1 to 161 2A5 December 14, 2012 1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order 1:41 P.M. and a quorum established. 2. LDC Materials and DSAC Ordinance Caroline Cilek provided a handout, which was also projected on an overhead screen, containing the portion of the Land Development Code (LDC) concerning 6.05.00 Water Management Systems and Drainage Improvements Standards She also provided a copy of a portion of the Code of Laws and Ordinances which pertained to the creation, powers and duties of the Development Services Advisory Committee. The topic of discussion was a proposed revision and interim implementation regarding LDC section 6.05.01 F Stormwater Retention/Detention Design for Single Family Dwelling Units, Two Family Dwelling Units and Duplexes. David Dunnavant moved to have Stan Chrzanowski chair the discussion. Second by Dalas Disney. Carried unanimously. Stan accepted, noting he would have to leave early. To provide background information on the purpose for the Subcommittee, a draft letter from the Chairman of DSAC, Bill Varian, to the BCC explained the cited LDC Section which was creating an adverse hardship on certain property owners. It requested an Out of Cycle Amendment to address the issue; and, to allow the Committee to develop a proposed revision to Section 6.05.01 F. Recommend an interim standard rather than an out of cycle LDC Amendment. Realizing the urgency of addressing the problem, the suggestion was for a 2-part process covering the next 2 months. a) Propose to the Board, an interim measure/ pilot project to see how it works, while addressing any problems. b) Work on it further during the LDC Cycle refining it as it goes through the full LDC process. The Subcommittee was agreeable to the proposed process. 3. Discussion of LDC section 6.05.01 F — Stormwater Retention/Detention Design for Single-Family Dwelling Units, Two-Family Dwelling Units, and Duplexes Stan Chrzanowski commented on the Table 6.05.01, stating the numbers in the table should be raised and also that the 25%, implemented across the board, for water quantity would be fair. He proposed less stringent measures to allow for building on more than 2% or 3% of the property. He noted the Lot Coverage and Impervious Surface Table were meant to be a water quantity solution to a problem not water quality. Justification for the 2,750 square feet and 4,850 square feet was arrived at by looking at different areas of County, identifying approximate lot coverage, and 2 • 1 6 1 ? As December 14, 2012 finding out 75 to 90% were under the lot coverage and impervious surface requirement. He agreed the numbers now appear to be too low. Dave Dunnavant suggested eliminating the fixed numbers in favor of a straight percentage, citing the fixed number in the Table was creating the problem. He stated most of impervious surfaces were driveways. Stan Chrzanowski left at 1:50 p.m. Caroline Cilek mentioned a stay of enforcement for Golden Gate Estates could be an interim measure. Concern was the percentage suggested would allow for too much impervious surface in the Estates. Robert Mulhere noted there was no regulation in Golden Gate Estates for the amount of impervious surface and very few districts have such a regulation. Also, noted was newer homes were not so much a problem. Older, existing or remodeled homes were the problem when the smaller lots build additions or bigger houses. Without a Master Stormwater Management System, assurance was needed at the permitting level as to how the water shed would be handled so as not to impact neighbors. He agreed an interim standard would allow the DSAC LDR to prepare language to put into the regular LDC Cycle as an amendment. Dalas Disney stated the numbers in the Table could be doubled and still be less percentage under the 11,000 square feet. He suggested an increase in the base square feet or an increase in the excess area. Principal structure and impervious area coverage could be done in combination. Or, leave the square foot allowables and increase the percentage, adding a condition if on a body of water, no storage system would be required and no runoff to neighbors would be allowed. Chris Mitchell agreed, stating the Table, as shown, penalizes larger lot owners. He suggested a reversal of the numbers. He favored removing the base of 2,750 square feet and go with a straight percentage application to the size of the lot, taking into consideration the width and setbacks. He noted the high cost of conforming to retention/detention issues under the new FEMA determinations, especially with the smaller lots. Christian Andrea passed around several site plans of projects in the City of Naples and County to show the impact of landscape and offered several points on how the City of Naples handles stormwater runoff. He spoke of the many conditions involved with stormwater management runoff and ways not to encumber neighbors. A lengthy discussion followed. 3 . . 161 2A5 December 14, 2012 In summary, the points to be addressed were: • The Table 6.05.01 —Figures should be addressed for smaller and larger lots. • 25% lot coverage across the board should be considered. • Older home additions, expansions, and rebuilding would demand the most attention to drainage and stormwater retention/runoff vegetation, etc. which may require engineer's report as determined in the permitting process. • Assurances that neighbors would not be impacted by stormwater runoff. • Impervious area in excess of a (to be determined) percent will require an engineer's report identifying that neighbors would not be impacted. • Adjustments could be considered where water can shed to a body of water. • Write language to cover most situations and include some sort of exclusionary or other designed"check list," as approved by the county engineer. • Make criteria to manage stormwater. • Separate item G. from item F. to clarify G. does not apply to F. • Interim measure to enforce and control only what impacts neighbors. Then return with a maximum outfall managed by berms, swales, curbs, and gutters etc. Dalas Disney left at 2:30 p.m. 4. LDC Amendment The decision was made to have Alison, Caroline and Jack McKenna review all comments, suggestions and proposals by the Subcommittee; work up a preliminary interim standard which will improve and clarify the items put forth by the DSAC LDR Subcommittee; and present it for review at the next Subcommittee meeting. Chris Mitchell left at 2:40 p.m. 5. Next meeting date/time The next meeting was tentatively scheduled f•r January 7 I taff will notify all participants upon confirmation. There being no her business for the good of the County, the Meeting was adjourned 2:50 P.M. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISO •MMITTEE. LAND DEV OPMENT REV. l:CO' EE /`/ /_..auilliMilliolliv.A./111611111111•11111111111111..-a. :tan Chrzanowski, Chip an These minutes were approved by the Board/Committee on 0,171 A)20( s presented, or as amended 4 161 2AQ November 5,2012 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD RNamnviirri Naples, Florida, November 5, 2012 11:0 0 1 2013 ,J BY: LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:00 PM in a REGULAR SESSION in Conference Rooms "C" of the Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway,Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Kaydee Tuff VICE CHAIR: James Klug III Bill Arthur Darrin Brooks Peggy Harris Comet Fiala Misc.Co Hiller per; Henning - I Coyle � Item#: .Coleta erVa t Copies to: ALSO PRESENT: Annie Alvarez, Regional Manager III Vickie Wilson, Community Center Supervisor 1 161 2A tp November 5, 2012 Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Chair Kaydee Tuff. II. Attendance—Establish a Quorum Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Bill Arthur moved to approve the November 5, 2012 Agenda as submitted. Second by Darrin Brooks. Motion carried unanimously, 4-0. IV. Approval of October 1,2012 Minutes Bill Arthur moved to approve the October 1, 2012 Minutes as submitted. Second by James Klug. Motion carried unanimously, 4-0. V. Public Comments (None) Peggy Harris arrived at 6:03 PM VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights Vickie Wilson reported the Collier County Community Garden Initiative (CCCGI)was not awarded a Grant. The CCCGI planted a butterfly garden. Brooke Hollander will be pursued a community garden project in April,2013. Kaydee Tuff stated the Civic Association planned a"Garden Party" in which Brooke Hollander will give a community garden awareness presentation on November 12,2012 at 6:30 pm. Staff reported the following upcoming events: • Outdoor Movie Night- "Avengers" -November 9 from 7:00-9:00 pm. • Ziggy's BBQ Cook Off- January 4-6,2013. • Senior Expo -February • Frontier Days -March • Renaissance Festival—April She reported the Renaissance Festival has 45-vendors scheduled. The contract will be presented to BCC for approval. Darrin Brooks will research becoming a co-sponsorship with the Chapter his group is affiliated with. Staff indicated the Cool Cruisers may also be interested in becoming a co-sponsor. B. Playground Update Staff reported the receipt 2-quotes for the playground project for 120' and 58' design, ranging from $33,000—$46,000. 2 1 6I 2Aø November 5, 2012 Vickie Wilson will request quote from both vendors on identical criteria to compare costs. VII. New Business A. Month to Date Budget/Year to Date Staff distributed the following reports: (See attached) ➢ Monthly Budget to Actual Comparison BCS Drilldown Report dated October 23,2012 ➢ 130 Monthly Report dated November 5, 2012. Vickie Wilson reported receiving training on creating graphs and will provide class comparison information at future Advisory Board meetings on: ➢ FY 2010-2011 ➢ #of visitors to the Center ➢ Current Classes versus Classes held the prior year. Annie Alvarez reported the need for someone to supervise teenagers between the hours of 4:30—8:00 pm at the Community Center. Several complaints have been received regarding teenagers using profanity, smoking and laying on tables. She suggested the Center use Job Bankers to walk around the grounds and direct them to the Youth Area. VIII. Member Comments Kaydee Tuff reported the submittal of her application for reconsideration for the position on the Advisory Board. James Klug reported not receiving notification of upcoming term expiration date from the County. Staff will research the expiration date of James Klug and Kaydee Tuff. It was suggested CCCGI research obtaining a Grant through the Community Foundation and Harry Chapin Foundation. Peggy Harris suggested CCCGI write an article about the Community Garden to create awareness and interest for possible donations. Kaydee Tuff extended an invitation to the Golden Gate Civic Association Banquet honoring the"Citizen of the Year" at the Vanderbilt County Club on November 13, 2012. Tickets for the event are $35.00. Darrin Brooks moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:30 pm. Second by Kaydee Tuff Motion carried unanimously 5-0. There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:30 PM. 3 161 2k.0 November 5, 2012 e .4" Kayd e T ff, Chairman These Minutes were approved by the Committee/Board on / / �... , as presented ,k or as amended 4 161 2Aá0 COLLIER COUNTY DIVISON OF PUBLIC SERVICES Parks and Recreation Department 15000 Livingston Road — Naples, Florida 34109— Phone (239)252-4000— Fax(239) 514-8657 Website: colliergov.net GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA December 3, 2012 I. Call to Order II. Attendance — Establish a Quorum III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes — November 5, 2012 V. Public Comments VI. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights —Vickie Wilson B. Playground Update—Vickie Wilson VII. New Business A. Month to Date Budget/Year to Date—Annie Alvarez VIII. Member Comments IX. Adjournment The next meeting January 7, 2013 at 6:00 PM Collier County Golden Gate Community Center 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Conference Room "C" Naples, Florida 161 2A ° PARK HAPPENINGS OUTDOOR MOVIE: "AVENGERS" NOV. 9T", 85 in attendance ELECTIONS: NOV. 6 GGCC Precinct reported the most voters in Collier County FARMERS MARKET: FRIDAYS 3-7 P.M. & SAT. 10A.M.-2P.M. BREAKFAST W/ SANTA: DEC. 1', 300 in attendance, GG Kiwanis provided breakfast and Key Club to serve Ziggy's BBQ January 4th & 5th ,, ,....„---------------„,,, ., Ly ,, 7/k. '1 hS' THE BABY IS OUR REASON FOR THE SEASON 161 2Ac Program Registrations FY13 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Afterschool 1 10 Aquatic 5 Arts/Music 18 Athletic Teams Camps 56 Dance 9 29 Educational 3 12 Extreme Sports 1 Fitness 22 17 Homeschool 3 Leagues Preschool 8 7 Social Special Events 4 142 _ Special Needs Sports 97 423 Water Sports 30 TOTAL 144 753 0 0 0 0 0 Q1 897 Q2 0 Q3 0 Q4 0 Year Total 897 Registration Summary Report-Total Registrations per Brochure Section 161 2ACa Program Revenue FY13 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr Afterschool $217.76 $160.64 Aquatic $856.00 Arts/Music $1,036.00 Athletic Teams Camps $1,004.40 Dance $348.75 $1,538.37 Educational $40.00 $220.00 Extreme Sports $35.00 Fitness $960.00 $760.00 Homeschool $150.00 Leagues Preschool $240.00 $779.80 Social Special Events $84.90 $2,401.03 Special Needs Sports $4,349.22 $18,991.19 Water Sports $2,520.00 TOTAL $6,240.63 $30,452.43 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Q1 $36,693.06 Q2 $0.00 Q3 $0.00 Q4 $0.00 Year Total $36,693.06 Registration Summary Report-Total Registrations per Brochure Section Team Roster Report-Total number of registrations 16I Z A { - { -< � I-, r r r r r-• CO NJ r W NJ r ■ Q1 A CO 0 r A CD N CD r 0 O NJ G1 t ''-' V a a. V N W V NJ iR W NJ O N W .> CO O1 Z v r 2 N In CO C W lD < A W N W W in- I-. in iA N ,P) o N— A O O Co A O Qp O n D1 (/1 V O VI. to A A W VT In N in Ol O go l0 3 ° O A r 7 CO?� CO O V A to i- N N A O • N Q N O O Al NI O D- 03 00 W r VI in U7 In • tNJ O 3 0 W N 3 ° .' O A ,cu O O N U1 to Mf r W VF W N 0 N r y p w 'O O N tip O A to to r NJ V i/T i/1 'O W to -' o v `)° a a 0 l N V 0 dQ 0 C d NJ 01 A W 3 3 xi m m co C'a" N _ K G 0 t C O V W o N r ; r V C d ON r. fD 1 0 tn. Ci N 0•O O V C o VI tn c •C U i/N 1/T ( N g• A N O A C O O9 r A A W N tn.' O O W W VI O tD a 0 r 0 N CO 2 V '• 01 m v+ in iA W NJ A al O O tD NJ N A t0 03 NJ 0.1 CO Ci A W V r V 0 00 O N in D1 V to M tn. In A i/N W Ni CD .0 in p 0 rn o O N 00 N Ol N to iD NJ 0 iN iA I-. r 0 A V3 A r p� A° P6°+ A O N N A0 A A iD Ni 00 iA iR A CO U) W LD O m r p o o N A iv w co A . 2A � Program Registrations-Afterschool Program Registrations-Arts&Music 30 _ 20 18 25 - 16 20 14 -a..41.11 12 -a..41.11 ..FM 15 - -FY12 10 -a-Fy12 10 Fria 6 FY13 5 4 I ; • 2 5 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Program Registrations-Athletic Teams Program Registrations-Camps 4 - - _ _ __ 250 . . --- 3 _ _.- 200 3 - ---- 2 a r - FY11 150 - •FYll 2 FY12 . -y-FY12 FY13 100 ' FY13 1 •--ie 50 S_� Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Program Registrations-Dance Program Registrations- Educational 35 14 - - -- 1 30 12 25 _. 10 i20 ....-FY31 g y�FY11 15 FY12 6 -0.-FY12 l FY13 10 -: FY13 4 -- 5 2 ■ 0 --- -- 0 — Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Program Registrations-Fitness Program Registrations- Preschool 50 --_ 30 45 40 25 - 35 20 30 - .-FY11 -FYll 25 .rt-FY12 15 FY32 20 -- FY13 g' �, �i 10 FY13 10 "ti's. -+.r+v + 5 5 0 ' • 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep _5 I Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Program Registrations Special Events Program Registrations-Sports 160 , - 450 140 ! 400 - 120 i --. - 350 100 - 300 80 -� - -+�FY11 250 • -+-_FY11 n--FY12 60 1—. 200 FY12 40 I- FY33 15o FY13 1 100 20 a--- -- 0 ( -° o Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep G:\GGCC\GGCC Monthly Activity Reps\Program registrations for GGCC 1_6 I 2_4 Program Registrations 800 N -- 7 600 500 _ FY11 400 FY12 P1'13 300 200 100 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Program Revenue $70,000.00 $60,000.00 ----_ $50,000.00 $40,000.00 • FY11 FY12 $30,000.00 - h= FY13 Ar$20,000.00 - /L4\ $10,000.00 $0.00 — —� Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep G:\GGCC\GGCC Monthly Activity Reps\Program registrations for GGCC 161 2A40 ....., '� � T <T GI 70 W N M w n~, N i v GI o Gl ."z• n c 0 N N N" W ■+ F. O O V 003 O F. to A O 030 01 V N 2 — A V 2 Lf,m (n o D 0 N N N <_' .4/ tn 7-.-. poppp Z h. 4� Ni V O c N <n al M 0± 0 0 0 in r N N T .-, W N d n .w 0 00 fp taVi m 0 O V in co n n = x O 0 ro 3^ N N Err N N y U A W E1' (, N O 3 W V 7 0 CT 00 G1 Cu n ,-, 1.,.•N n O W N 3 O V C' O in O O N N N N 00 3 N N rn d in 0 0 in N N J. W D D tn U1 V v , - W■ to O 0 0 N N N N T v~i t• -il 3 ff O CO 0° 01 n 88 N N W N 70 73 In co C 0 lD D1 7 = In N 3 K Cl to FP O to 0u cu O O A Ul CO IA.SA N < 0 Q to O• el: C in C 7C' go b H 0 OV n m N N N ■• • D co in D pO N W T O .9 O O N N W N In N fD N W in v • v O in 0 0 N N N V v 01 V N .• Ail A N 0 V p O1 N lD La 0 8 N N CO V oA D 00 OCOA f„ 0 o • $ N N N o m 0 v C A 0 m W JD O V A V N W•in Ln 0 0 N N N•ND Cl.' goo A 0 w Nt Is,2 A 88 N N N V W N to W 1 �N lD CO to »W ln o fT o W y N 8^ N O 2A 161 (‘) , • Facility Bookings - Monthly 140 120 100 _ ��+�►_ 80 _ FY11 FY12 60 �i FY13 40 20 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Facility Bookings - Quarterly 300 250 200 +o--- �"""' FY11 FY12 150 FY13 100 50 0 G:\GGCC\GGCC Monthly Activity Reps\Facility Rentals for GGCC 161 2A " S Facility Booking Revenue - Monthly $4,500.00 $4,000.00 - -- $3,500.00 _ $3,000.00 $2,500.00 — — FYll FY12 $2,000.00 FY13 $1,500.00 $1,000.00 $500.00 $0.00 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Facility Booking Revenue - Quarterly $12,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 ,...► .► $6,000.00 so' FY12 FY13 II' $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 t 1 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 G:\GGCC\GGCC Monthly Activity Reps\Facility Rentals for GGCC 161 2ACo _. n CC › —) "U 0 0 'V 00 cn n 2) io Fd v > 0z � O ? -) , m ZO mr a C v v --1Z r �, ,z-�, .o o 0 n m m r m c n • 73 cc o o U) a CC -4 N G- _ o 0 m rr0 C7 -{ < ° 5 K (D -+, O c, Imf'iC rn m ON Z2 z o (-) -, ca n x o N c z Z 3D CD z S S. i y w m co n c G 73• O D Cat z n r (0 m O Cn g .69 N s m 0 a 9' C 1\) 0-� 0 CD CD �- m s Cp `G CO G 7- F N (7 Z 0 O al CD N Q :— N Q O O o v .p 5 N N� '� # o Ca (D — a' O a) co D � a wtD 3 a a CO °= w N v oo a m °' o ZZ � N � X y p a Cr oo D D o • Nl o 2 N co cD 0 N G N N d .r, O a) Sv } r O j n 0 o ONO = m (n rt m o z t4 C NN 93 'a = EcDD 0 ID N C) 5. C.D O Cn © CD w 1y w -, N 1'1 Q. tD 1 6 I 2Aø LT, v, -0 0 ,..... =- 0 , C2— v) CD CD v) D (I) G) (I) CUrD) e—+ CD Atte • 0 "T3 = 0) tr) .< a) ao , lk r-f- —% S Ul 0 I C = .........h CD V) —.1 = CD = 0.) .-. e-+ CD CI ..., 0 0 < < CD CD -,-, is—5 .,, C1) = .... -0 (IQ —0 1•••••■ (I) = ..< 0 CD C r+ CD CI) ID = A.. X' A ,.•rs' M n 1 a to $ MEW = (1) =4 C)) I/11 r—t- --7 .. . i 61 2A60 * m. W 4- 'F'F I 0 1>f 0 0 rs We n }* !R D(t .��O €Cn p,m fi 0 a.!-, td Q }}. 0M 0 roX, WM--1p I" 0 ((+0 0 H mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmrotntntntntntntn(nu,cnv,WMrowwwwWWWWwwwwWWWM<-.1p. '* iq H 14. O ai,A.o.0. .4t.a PiP�PiPiPwWwwwwmNNNNNNt-3F-+F+h+HH 7c imm�PJadaiA��Pi:.�PF-+1�<mH 1i H •PtC.WWWF-11-11- 000WINIA11.11. WWNNHWINWNNNinZI-1.. JJJJJJJ.-1H �I-�trJ'ZOH :C. & �`p molo.w 't9lOv0-iNt.wNtfl�Ut94Jtora �H1-`t-`mr..-1- 9461HOCS]G7tifmtD�D�tDtD .toNN,WvHZ0 O 5 fv o NOOOOCnU700WHOOmko-11-1+0,30mtn 000000 0002[+]NtDipF-+F-+000010JW0.00m 1t 0o000HOOo0o000W0F-+0,iH000o00000000U 000WHCOU CO0000a 00U 00$ 1 H( ,,," Z t-i to Cl) N 1 r EHC+ihi10 nH XrOHHOH OZrxx� (n 00ytri tnt7'HHtlwmH to P)oto 4tjn I b'Oy1+9 'fi * *tnI-'1-' N r Pim root+immo HOHZHMHMOH t- MOWCH>C7JNW ZZMitd$+ ONVMHt+7t=lt+1CO HO 09 CQ1U o �Z tzlmwrir H rnxt7 1n x rHnrntiixbd 001-3 tantz1n Xgdt+inxgWt4 roH[r1. R rooH cnHC+7tnnHHtrlr[=J0� 7vt=lHaJHn tJ [�1 OHHtz1'�iC+irAC.'COLi7HHnH Hnn �+,ZO MO n W tz OZHM* V0VO WWWHn t11 C�7 HyZ WHO to Hc1MiWt-IHr�WWp Wn H M I-0',y0H {t- IOZZO WZF�ZOhi�HOHHM0:0M WANK W MMIV� [Tll tHH1HCr14 O HOXOCCCf�H X � C� ----------- --- --- - ------ - F-' W V W (@ (D .P 1-' N U7 lD 1--' .... (D F-' 61 Ito F-' .P 0 NNF-' U1 mIU1 WW I--HN N 0UWNN 15. Wa01mm 0 N WH tO•.WCO W61 61 0JN I' NtO'm I--'to 01F-'N61 .30 F-'.P.0..P.p . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W 0 U1NOU'1mU1 m-JoNoo01-'wmJJW- F-'N0 -..7 00010) r]N Om000 tm oNN01O 0 000000 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m JF-'to O O W O O O O 0000000 00000 000000 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 o w.o moo O O J 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 �Q C) 00000C) o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 000 0 0000 0 0 0000000 00000 d- S� 0 000000 0000000000000000 000 0 0000 00 0000000 000001 H I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I i ZOOM H1' O O O Wt 1-'- CrtyAl MD IF 0 tilt.,,,.O a 0 t; Z ,0 0 .P F-' N U'o F-' „c,,,,,,...0. a U W >>0 F t) F-' 01 .P tO H 01 O NNF-' N CDI-'J COW I-'N N CWWWW WmU'01m U' N WI-' tO.0.wm 6161 O1 OJN 1-' I-'toot F-' I-'tO U'I-'N01-.7.0.01 1-��4,-4�1 C'.m U))h' 01< U'.00000 P m■10NO00'F�Wm•1�1W-.1■IF-' 1--'N01 -.I 0001m -]N 00000-3m ommwm 14 t'• OOH 000000 000000000000(nomm '.1F-'to 0 owo(n o0 0000000 000Utn p. X OO;i tIFli 000000 0000000oo000010a.0. mtoto 0 0-J00 o0 0000000 000mM 'O XP_- OF-' 000000 0000000000000000 000 0 0000 00 0000000 00000 lct c t) O 000000 0000000000000000 000 0 0000 00 0000000 00000 1 t o ZO0 W'• 1 1 m i l l i I I I 1 0 H z rf H rt. En I 1-3‹ I-'0 �C) P. o Hz OH @ 61 W 01 01 0101 WW (0D F-' tO.0.0 w w to to tO to 1 .P J 01 m U7 O 01 01 Mali r'F'rt f 0 CO J m m w CO .P •P .1''P I 00 0 F{ 01 .t.--ND N I' co to to lip 1 ft rt J HN61 M H 0 0 001 0 W WNW W N W W WW !.. t-1 I t)] I z i b tli H F-' 1--'.P m F' W0'. • N N0(1mm NF'F' 0J N NNW NH tOtOH HI-' NH N ONNWW ;.O 0 .P W.P 61 J t0 F-' J W U1 m N.0.W tO I-'m N ui .P d>W N J 01 m 0-I W W.0. i II-' to NNo U0W F-'0 H 4.0101 01N..JNF=N 001NJNNNJ MW 0- -4, . ! OHO 0 0J01 I-'W01 m0 .. t110t0 W-4010tF'V.OWOOF-'-IOOI0 01--'0'ONJ 1 n HP-0 Z P-00. N mm01 .n t00 m0 W NOU1 0'mN O tOO.0.0000N 00010 NI--'HN0-1JJJ '-3 O M M -4 HOW JN.. m0 to tDUF01 omtoOWI-'OF'mo00moW0 00moN0000 @ I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 (} I-'F' W(11N 0.. 0I-.0 --3w N F-' N.P 01 I-' N....F-'N QF 0 -JO .. I-' H 0 I-'NF-' W . .U'J t-'W N N O1mCOmW J. 0 1-' I-'aN W H N WF-' 01-4Wm W6\ (31I-'--1WN lot-' l0(510 O-3 NWF-'lO(31 4.0.0.■ 0HI-'mm H r N U C!'Nm.0.610 U'610N00mJ�1lOJW01W01NNwlOt-'WW .P 61 ..W..JNOOtO .PmmtP(JI trJ 1-'Ot0t0WF-'010000000000momm.P (PJWOmm HU'NJ--Jto--JN000 HNNO W F-+ COOtU'61OHWW000o000000NOW.P0-1tOtWN00-.1WHO6100HNOWoOWW00.1NNWW 0 00000)0.0.W W00000000001 000NW.P00 1I'NOOtO010t000NtO0.0.00-ItF-'Nt W W NN 000maOJo00000000000a000tO0 OtNWO-1CO-IHNOOU'NOJ000OWOW00 JAI ! H 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I ! U)) dP C) 0 F' tt 1 Q U moo J mo U FF N - -W H W I - 1-' OO Cl OWU' WU' wo W N.. .. JWFH 6 .0. N..1m( N. Jt0 O0101 � C) H d .•4(1:014t. t.01--. UO F' -.3M 0 OmUO NO UN00 WW WmmtOtO {O Ift ma)rnmmmahrnrnrnrnmmmaimm01rnohm mmOh01 M a 01 m a o a malchal CN DI MON C4 01 01 M o,a .P.P.P NNNNNNNNNNNNNNHHl0WWtDODO(1,lmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmUiWLYI WNH(Ot 00 0(0(OJUIit.WNHHHIOHOWOOHHHWW.4W44:. 0,1PWWWWWWWHNNH mF-'I-`(0(0(0(0.PHNH(OHH.PWHHH(OWWH JmH JHH H W.P.PW H NHHHH H HW m 00 000(0 NH 000000000000000(7100000000N(710000(0a)J0 (7H0000 or7tdymmo x mroonm000 r or0000mrommm Xmx mw toH y o>f4f4y HV10 t ot1rrHhiyno. H�yro9yro t4t"t4tyc VI yrocl cl xi z nom0Ht21tlJxxf t70 7d 0$i 00:4 hi 0 WF4 HkiCI t+it4t=JH Nei-+0Ck1HHOtn t.1(n7Cz( 0t9C201-(tnt+Ht7tnyyOHCri041LI) t=]ztiyt- 011.4 Ditli tzlO r)r)tl 4+Flt'0'd Pi uiyHH7j 11 PiCitL1 �bOx00Pi0 i1•4ii3i,Z 6dyxi ( H4Yyy 3Cntn xHyEli t7 ti n flG)CH2nro C)t4 Pi[1C' (4)(G)hiVIHC)ZCOZIIQQiooLZl C0.'o)0 "t40V]4iNFCCl NI-- CO I-, NNI.10Y W(7NW NWW1-1W 1-10, 61W 1--N W NUI.C.NNOII-(n .PCn . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 5 .• 5 . . . . . . . . . . JM/rs.00 0NOJN00061(PODMOWHUIN(PNNUOOD(P00HW I- 00000NOOF- OM 000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O Nfi N H (0 NF-,06\ W(71NW NWWHW HM CAW 1-1N W NO.1=.NJ0\I-10 .A(.t( . • • • • . . . . . . . . . . 55 NS N5 . . . . . . . . . 55 J614,000NOJN00001(J(0.1000WHONONN00M0 0HW H0000(ONOOF-'NCO 0 0 0 0(O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000\000000 O O O O N O O O O O O o 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o 00000.r.000000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M (T N W Ca 61 .A CAN H H 0 0W (0 N N U( N 0 (O(O JW N 0 0J UI N 0 0 H 0 CAW 00 NJ .A O(0 (0 W 0 0 .1=. 0 a..0 00 0 (' 00 61 -3 0 O .A 0 00 00 0 W ON O (0 O O J 0 00 N F--1I-' (O 0JW (061 N 61 •1=• ON J C000 .1=•NJ MN .tom J W W HO 0 NO0 JW .AO 0 0 (7( 0 00 0 000 M(0 O(0 W N U( 0 00 0 U'•1=.0 (DJ NM N 1-, W 0 I' N 1-- N N W(0 01 N.P N W W I-'W I-s W I-N W NO N N W H O 4=/.0 . • • . No • • • • • • . . . ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ . . • . . . . • .A.1=.42.(((3106INWNOWOO11C NJ0 I10N0 N 0aDN001--iU).P1-+00 00NJ001--+0C NU100001-+4 .00JOW0000 0000 0 0000000W000 00000000 .A 00000N(OU'ON610(P0000 0000 O 00000000000 oou'00000 00000010(D00Fj00(00000 0000 0 00000000000 00000000 OOOOOON61001-,WOCD000o 0000 O 00000000000 00000000 I 1 I I--, F-' 1-4 f-' F-+ 1-1 F-'N J W W(-` 1-sN 0 0 0 0 61 0 J.A MO W 0..10 HN 00 J O 0 0 0 0 .AM, NO (0 MOW M0 JO 1-' 0 0 0 0 0 WW III p r 3 Cm I ss w O N N. �i N N . W N � v a � a . Y M � C1 O N 0 O J Y Y m b 5 V J E F. N p 2 C p IU . o ° S A g o _ b1 � oagc ✓wq y o uM C■ Yg� !Cn W% /1,21. 1. .11.101. 1 .1 ; IIIIII ! ! !...., ! `:! .111 .11111� N i1 � � �y+ A (��pbfff H A � • J O r R 1 1 f.1 1 1 w 1 11!9011 ! ! y i K o�Ry777 `� Ili ��ymll q �a F � e W � � H � W - F. i i K $ "_ N W b a b m OI m m O J p- If. ✓ ';'1, U ✓ N b U N m N J a U Im a ` y W W I I 0 o O m U O O O O W m J O W W ✓ m b m O O O O m EE O O O O O o 0 0 EN E I 8 8 r• Y r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 Q O O 0 O O O O o 0O ! < n R M 2 a J m m m u i 6 A H 0 ✓ b a o W o u b✓ w w C � Z i li..m a m . N a b y y - - a b e ' y 4 8 g y W e N e 3 N W W W W 20 .< m N I I I I 1 » 9 O mN w g r I J a N 3. U O J U a 1 J o U a 8 1 1 1 l p I 5 UIU p E A m +U y ✓ ✓ PI N o * 0 : : : uI a N b o O a 0 a N H 1 2 s r n EN N N N ✓ Y b N O W m m m O C N m O a P 1 A E I O 4 I t y! 1 I n 3 fig 3 1 I 1 I 3 5 A 3 1 1 1 7 3 1 3 ¢3 I I 1 1 T' 11/141 i11 g q A q A.a q �q p r e n � : : ir'gi O O O P O O p c+ G fi G gy Q p g / 1 1 1 1 a 11118i1111/11 i !E 6 i i i i yy. by ii yW N„ O R pb m Cy r. N N a N a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O G O o 0 0 0 6 E ' 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O O - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 00 O 0 0 O O O C O 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N m N N O N u e. b O b W p O O n N O O N 88 O u 82 m V O O J O 88 O W O O a O O m N N N q O q a : It N O O O �+ q r O q a Q I 161 2A1iJ . i 1 i ti15f r n I K 5 . a a a a a a a a n a c A A i Y ". a N N• tN µ r w w w w µ w ;^ ' w a a a W v a v a l W W W W a r µ 0< A, g• 6 O . 0 K W r r r a 0 N b m o ✓ N 0 0 ? 0 O N r m0 0 b@ a W mJ N Y z a O O o r b m J OJ W b N w D rg Q 0 p M O O . 0 c, E O t E0 0 2 E H F r H r o H H O .T gr. 2 y 9 0 a H 2 O w A 2 m e. 0 R n 5 « b q b q R y b 3 m m y R 2 O n i E i A + � @•Y ,+O O. H r r r r o .5 O S m m Q w y m o v R r yy A y x m a O w o r x H m 5 M y Q ' m m M n P O H S P O r P V O o [ „ I J N ii S rS R Or O50 Q M A y m mO 1 w 2 % R P 4 µ i y O j rO ' < i w 0 H { K p � O Z b C 1p H m Q < < 9 3' 3 Q y r 7 P r ^I O S 2 - r R 3b C0 A 0 0 0 y N Z 3O 5 5 pP3 2 n < Z S S K C O G1 m0 O N ; 0 y < 0 < c P A A c 0Q0 )$ 0 0 A 0 N m 2n 55 r4p S 7 T z C >•} gt 0 N N O N N m m b d u N N O w mQ @ r O 000030014 O m m J J m R 0 88' 8288888888 0 0 0 0 0 J O J p o O g O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 a m J m p $ °o °o o °o b b a m 8 8 as r 0 0 0 0o a o 0 0 0 0 r o 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 o c m m l ® G o y s 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 r_ 0 0 0 00 0 o O 0o m o 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 c. a tr , Z 2 2 K Z�]] p b b a O r r a 222 • Q O O K O o Y o g} '8 "oS 4 ' u • Y 0 G 41 ..". ,,, I p e O O O R m K y Ft m m i H Y W _ O w N J N • N py r.. 6 6 J. mo 0 0 Yo 0 0 + 0 + 0 e m m N s r J m a m r J 3 U 14 N 14 w ° 0 0 0 o o m a o I 00 II I 0 144 1 1 is u • 8 a 0 'Z'I m r a b N u i r N 7.u • N 0 @ a @ a D r o N N M 5 Y u N M 66 66 1.0 0 0 03 w a 0 O J O • O 888E2282 w e n H i 1 g i a W O 0 w m CO 1 1 1 1 1 1 , , i 1 1 s v t w r _ n o w w O Y r .G W W b O O ° u .e m r P I r W O o o ° oa kg o w n O O O 8t 48t b W r, :-.'1 ,.. * 1 to o CO. O CA 66 O w w 0 O C O O C O r a J O a 0 J m b y O O O O O O LI O N N 1 1 1 1 le : 71 , 17 11 . irr pZ SC: 7 a n w ` r w » o a e 0 0 66 14 ,- 88882 8 a ' a N m 8 3 z o N ▪ f N o m H e s m ° .1 a o 0 0 N .. ° a o• a o w .- ° o a t 1 i i w -o " v l '' n 0 °w w N m r W ' a ` or a0 0 a 0 VD 9 b t Y o m o oa m r' 1 p O w b 0 m o o N to mW W I •. b a s O a O O a J J m Y 0 W t J N O a O 41 m@ O O 0 a Y O • i 1 ' w ! jy/ W a r r r r m m 0 w m @O J �r J O 0 W > U °� a o a a oYO' a N J a m O N W . O . i0 `' J w mm r • b r m .on o m in to r 5.1 m J o r o 0 m oa w o r n 0 0 0 8O ° @ a 1 �. w _ r W O 0 ` r N N m tw Y 0 p a o m W `1 b m V C N O a x 0 0 0 0 J W D W O.D O N N m O W a O O U 2 O T o nat.') O c@ m ' W N N 41 r a s Ei O O Ya Ol . O O O W a s O O 0 1 . 1 . 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 7' w l J J m a �, m N a O m m 0 w I 4 v v 3 CC 0 c 10 • w ° .re a r a o w a,m o u N o o Zr, a w W O 0 N 03. 0 0 0 W b 0 a j O 0 W a N ?. 14 0 0 0 0 0 l I i 1 a 1 1 . ■ I 4 C m q ',O I ■W r w r o r r 66 0 r w r r to` a to `" D n o P m ® v °n o a M °v ° ` g r b 0 J o w W O O O m O m D w w O b u o o CO a 4 IJ b 0 0 O O O 3 0 0 0 J 0 O O W 0 O 0 a a m o aJ a o @w a o o 11 '. „ i ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 a N r @Y .+ r N W r N O O w lY.• k• q W a N N r 0 41 u 0 n w a m m N w m a J N 0 a D W O T W O J W J W W O r O u w eb 0 J O ' r w o I V. O O a 3 a O m w a 0 r m r 0 r O CO O :Si r 0 0 N O O N 2 g i 8 R• 0 b N I i l 1 , 1 I t I i , i 1 a r N t w w N r a to w r .+ 1 a J J s N a >N m a l J 9 J C O O oO• W O Y 9 b w 0 O w Y W iO O O .l a O r 11a r O O a w a J m . 0 . 0 ,- .m .f a a m 1 1 1 , m . 1 1 1 . O 1 1 r " w l 161 m N a J g A 2P T A � e a n Y _ N n 2Tmwma2A2TTTaN am u T T a a a a a a a s a 0 0,0 w N N 13 v . v 0 2 u u N 0 N b O m W w U 8 0 0 0 O p 0 0 0% N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O W O O D O O d '8 O O N O 0 0 0 m J T m w 0 0 0 0 8 O 0 0 O 0 0 O O } gy .: O O m W W O I O M X S ^1 0: 0 0 » „ 0 0 0 0 4 [' y 4 0 0 0 �Tg �4+ q 4 pH t. M 3 b W Q c 4 E y A R H M b 19 Y 0 F, m A 000910 3 0 *4 o " H O 0 0 O O K 0 1X9 O 0 m m 10 09 x b 4 S 8 m T 0 m n n bx M r, 1* 0 0 0 10 t10 m A 0 H !g1� b m mg0 -1 P w P1 w P Y N P 7 X 9 x w H A A 2 109 A H m 0 P H A 4 y yH ny 5 x y y F Z H O y y l9 w A X H 10 20 [OI g . .i m O - g m .C. A v - t r. P 41 > e, O m .X. ,1 1 m o O o D m v � 9 3 r bb Y Y 8 t• yy yy�� W .3 „ Y O m O 1 •C n c a , `o x .0. p m 9 A y q 2 O fl � -fM1„ o Se a Y w m O O z � O � � A � n w i m 0 o K H m x t' A 19 0 � � w r cl H 7 M t1 b yy o y m ;> x gg 3 N A iii ;A w 3 C O O m 9 3 S � � O A A .C•- .mi x m " Ef ZZ ss yy 'q O P 3 q y 9y w y O H W H w c iQ i9. x N Oy ; P, k n S m p v P « y v P m y O m .H+ 3 0 K t• Z n g 4 c Z iP9 n M 2 4 F a 0 x P P •0 9 Z m p 9 �l i P y w b FFF a s ,+ .. N N v p O w a a.+ N a .- -. -- w �• O a .� r-. N N w a l+ T N W .n I- tf. t,^ N v N W 41 F m J T ° ° N O O O 822 ;!, 88282` ` 2 m 2 8 8 . . . .� '.•.:4 m m 0 D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 P P P P F P F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° o n o 0 0 0 0 0 o c o 0 J o 00 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0° o o °o o O c O D0 °o °O o °m o °o ° °o ° 00 ° o o° °o °O ° o° o° ° a° o 8 o o a a o 0 0 0 o N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o c� o o° a o g °o ° °o o c o° 0 F °o 0 e. G O o ° o w o o N 8 a p O 4 e a r v m u ' m O O T-, a a O n [n O W T . . O m J J m N 22 '3Z 5 W O O O 2 N O + '+ a N O a 0 a C O O O m o • w C °(� U O w O m O O O „ a Q m O T O N m J 0 °o o f m N a e y ? V u N 8 N m a a 8 ,. o 2 °O r N o .. «- , i w a o 0 ° 2 t a m o w q m O N O Y O m m . 0 a m a C O O •°o .2 0 0 0 3 - a 0 FP m m m m m J N J 22 10 0 .r w o 0 00 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 o m o o 'Y m m oo .`; '.3F,; ',2 O O O O a m J O 0 0 V. 0 " O N W 0 W O O CO J CO W m O .0 O T N CO O Y _m b O O a m ip W N O o 0 " 0°O 0 0 2 O O O P !' W W O J •U J W w o. 0 O 0 m O w 0 Y O w 822 ,'.122 ° 1 °D G W O . O T o C m U J N 0 0 .a,, o J m 0 •°o w n ..x t P m N O Y a N U a a N . w •,• e m a s 80 O O O O J CO w W m + : • . : t•6 I 2A (p 9 n n rt, �2Ap ! j K . d p g K iS Xi N N w m 0 O h Y 9 f 1 n a a m 2 R W W u W 8 v - N N u N N w O O m d M w m O A m � n a n a w n r+ V J 6 a „ y K E b O N 9O O u b O M to? j N El = O O o Oo O r :4 W N O O v 5 b W b Y J 5 5 5 J N N N Y N M q $ O N p ? 9 -".. g O o o o 0 o e o tO O n R ? •' H n H3 Hx o 2 H O H y O o M S Y Y u0A 2 0 H H A 1w P yAOr " ' " v Y � ,' 0 0 ' C 2 9 M - e r ! S� 1' m A m N 3 -°' y t R„ y - H A R +w S S W 0 G 3 ! S � 1 k b 6” 1 AH m „, H H H� .> il� i y En mS 'A: P [ y y R O \ a 3 O N q2 0 P = 0 2 rY l m .r X gm H M V ( O G H 2 11 Z O Y < Y 1 O M W O p m Z n p C C H w O S O y n 7 0 P N b P r �H > O � : O 2 � E O S T K N O P �7 5 r, Es. A 9 3 m O Z YYYO R M < 3 Z O g H A S p I m S w H < A < C A H O 2 y 6 2 2 C K C u R K 9 m OX 7 [' A � Z O N P H A K N I e a c a J o m N a Y a ' , ✓ A N M V,Y +J w `Y Y m w W r .? .? e. m W Y b N O N w a UT + j a Y uc a N 0 O 8" E N 7.1. O J m O W b+ b D O a a w v. 't:. Y u W U •Y O w O " 0 a Y Y Y J Yo Y LLL . J W 0 • w O Y b b m b m m m I : 88 f r J m O Y N r.', x 0 0 0 0 m w 0 0 0 m t: :','. J W w T O O u m J W O O g :,,' O m O b W W a W O J a W N 0 Y Q : M e G Q D J Y a W N w Y W a Y a r m r m a m w r Y m W 2 Z V 4c ' a i°H g v n w n .i : Y Y N Y N w m a a o N b m W w Y w Y N w m W a i . o Y Y w 'N N N W m 8' N J CO N 0 0 W a 0 0 0 a m W Y O a N b .. a 0 a Y N 0 0 0 0 M ✓ N W yP a ? • Q : PP W P O R W' F 7 O R 7 a J d 7 J C J ? w O O P e O O: ti m 0 0 0 U U 1 r . Z n i 7. w N o O m m O w J O w u O • I w 1 O w t.,' `,11 N O Y O N O W I. I m w ! I m 0 b V A dl m O H P �O w ! ! ! ! N O O a m J m Y I P a. J 0 o 0 0 O m 0 o 0 0 u m a 0m m N N •! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !: J O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 4,0 -mi m a o m m I b m Y m a w w D R D o ;., o o D J N a 000, 0 Y 0 0, b- * • - - - -J Y N m c R o g• 3 N H O H ! 3 A O O 5 .?,.. 8 J 0 H V 0 0 H n 4 I (p , � � y , _ . . _ gma . amaammamam 2a2Amm 161 2A 2 I 2 2 _ a a a N N 00 N 0 N 0 N tNw a 0 N 0 N rN+ r 1' m b b a b m G a p a a a a s t a i i o s Y P a W W W b O N Op N N 0 b b M t /J N b r ‘.:3 N r o OO Om Y 00 m o b O N IN t 0 N tW0 W U 0 u p r N m m r 0 0 0 o 0 o N o 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m m .,1 � m .� o 0 0° o 0 o a g °o o .- a M O ' H p❑Oj 0 t•1 O e4i i S 9t t 9 O O w „ 0 0 0 O 4 0 m O rll p O O 3 m +1 II [[++ H 8 Y g W E b t 0 S 02 w mm p O �❑ O h C O ^I H }+ ❑ Y H M H Y b ly+ [' y a ❑ 11 H H H P 0 b y 01 P S 00 : R m S P S Z O ❑m y 0 P OH Y O O M v to 1„0 40] or 2 to S m b 0 i K w o w n M Z .P. y Ym 4 y m mY n m Y Oq P .` m b mZi wOi W O O C 0 ro 5 < ^ P Y P N P SL a P Y w 2 O 2 S P P Z ' P H N m of y P „ P p W H H m Y H t Z H O 61 m P 2 a 2 P Ol pp Z b Z t� O f6 W O C yy W V yy Z O O O M � yy � y, � y y e0f � „ O m W Y Oy o „ P V Z� a 9 2 w C W O Y » n 0 Y y m Ss LZ] n O o t0f W O O O ” O n °a tra Q9� � � C 3 O o � m rsr m h C'' C pp yy C C : Y F S Y S 4 O p ! Y 7 r. pm ' o v Z 2 g ay A p S m O �y a (n� ?b Y y W O y 9 N C O H +L1 tb6 cv O iyp Pj C W O o % Y O 9 zF O • yH H O 3 n 0 3 p g W4 y Ey K K Gz] % a W a umi C x g n m Y P w y m S O y t Z t0] O 0 m E W 0 W 3 O F 9 O Z P • P 9 i p E 0 4 N A H 0 P H 4 y p pl W a r w re !, N ul 0 O N a OW Om m m O u p t r ~ • o m .i m A 0 0 0 O 10+ O m m 0 U m tlwf T r• to O O , 0 0 r J O m 00 O m O m 1 2 8 E 2 2 8 8 2 ;1 22 2 8 2 E v 2 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 O . 0 m 0 0 0 N 8 8 8 8 • r r a P re. ve N r N r N a .?, r r N r O m N U W W O O W r r m w J r a O W o J m m N m r m a0 m Q c a r o 0 0 N J Y O N O O W N O O O W N b Y m 0 a■ N t O m m a W T O o N 0 m im 0 N m m O O b O mO N m O m 0 w u O t O c Q O m J o a 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 O N a .Y 0 .f.; a o W m N 8 ; 2282 ,2E22 228282888228822 ,-: 222 N m U r a Wp M Y Y C O a N a W r0 O O O m a 00 W v U O O to O a 0 1+ m N p 01 U 0 C. ~ • • z y r H r� m N u w rn m w oa o 0 0 0 0 0 °0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0 0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 00 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 222222222 0 0 0 ❑ o 0 N O Y W a W rO r u10 m M W N G O O tf0t V O o m a 8 W w O o m n m N .n p v N a a m rto o N r N c, s ti > � N a U W � �o W ' m o 0 o U t>• m � p m &tLr25i ' 7 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD Naples, Florida, October 25, 2012 AI JAN 0 8 2013 v BY: LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Hispanic Affairs Advisory Board, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 6:00 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F," 3rd floor, of the Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: Fiala V✓ Chairman: Manuel Gonzalez Hiller Henning , Ileana Ramos Coyle Valaree D. Maxwell Albert Batista Zetty Y. Rivera (absent) c. dorres: Late: Item#: l ID ! 2—ft1 ALSO PRESENT: Marlene Serrano, Staff Liaison Copies to: 1 161 2A7 October 25, 2012 I. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Manny Gonzalez at 6:01 pm and a quorum was established. II. Approve the Meeting Agenda: Ileana moved to approve the Agenda, second by Albert. Carried unanimously, 4-0. III. Approval of Minutes from the Meeting of September 27, 2012: Ileana motioned to approve the minutes, Valaree seconded. Carried unanimously, 4-0. A suggestion was made to allow the guest speakers to make their presentations before other business was conducted. IV. Guest Speaker: A. Karyn Cavero- Legal Aid Services: Ms. Cavero presented a power point that explained the different services provided by Legal Aid Services which includes providing free civil legal services to low income residents in Collier County. Legal Aid Service is a private, non- profit law firm that was formed as part of a statewide reorganization in 2004. Their mission is to provide high quality, free civil legal services to the residents of Collier County, based on need so as to encourage self sufficiency and improve the lifestyle and living conditions of the entire community. Legal aid Services has three locations in the county and operates from Monday- Friday 9am-5pm. Legal Aid Services has several guidelines: • Client must be a resident of Collier County • Civil cases only • Eligibility is tied to Federal Poverty Guidelines Ms. Cavero stated that Legal Aid has different units of services as Public benefits, Immigration, Housing law, Family Law Unit, Children Advocacy Services, Probono and Low Income Taxpayer Clinic. Manny asked in regards to Immigration and the U-Visa. Ms. Cavero stated that the U- Visa is for victims of domestic violence. Manny also asked if Legal Aid Services 2 161 2A7 October 25, 2012 works with the Department of Children and Family Services, and Ms. Cavero stated that they work with them and refer cases to them but the DCF has their own attorneys. B. Ismael Hernandez- Freedom and Virtue Institute: This institute was formed because of the need to serve the poor and teach principles in different areas. The Institute has different programs, there is one program that is called the "Self Reliance Club" that helps minority kids to work and earn money to purchase schools supplies in the next year. The work is related to the school, they work in school gardens, entrepreneurship roles, and it teaches the kids not to be at the end of the receiving hand, and they learn how to be self sufficient. The program is now in five schools in Lee County and hopefully will be here in Collier County soon. The institute also trains members of the community in the "Effective Compassion Training", which are involved as volunteers in 7 principles. The training is often provided to members of the church, ministers, etc. Their work is expanding to Chicago, Ohio and Puerto Rico. Albert asked which company started the program. Mr. Hernandez stated that it was a group of volunteers that got together and formed the group. Valaree asked what type of work the kids were doing. Mr. Hernandez stated that they are doing urban farming. They visit the schools and go over what the school is already doing. They are working with Tyce Elementary that is doing a garden; Three Oaks Elementary is farming for flowers. Farming goes with the idea of entrepreneurship and wealth creation. Ileana asked if they offer tutoring to the children. Mr. Hernandez stated that they haven't offered tutoring but they are working with volunteers. Mr. Hernandez stated that they are meeting with Collier County Superintendent to seek other opportunities. C. Veronica Vidaurri- South wind Village Mobile Home Park: Ms. Vidaurri stated that she came to this meeting to advise the Board problems at her community: • Water bills range from $300-$400 per month per mobile home • Drainage problems in all street, they have to carry the kids • Trailer Park owners are obligated to cut all the trees in the community 3 16I 2A7 7 October 25, 2012 • Streets are not painted to divide the flow of traffic, there are no street signs, speed limit signs, cars are constantly speeding and drivers use San Marco Blvd. to come across to the next community. • Trailer park manager contracted with a towing company to tow all vehicles that exceed the amount of vehicles that are parked on the driveways and they do not leave any notices to the owners. • There are no street lights. Iliana asked where the Mobile Home Park was located. Ms. Vidaurri stated that it's on San Marco Blvd and Radio Road. Manny advised Ms. Vidaurri that Marlene Serrano, HAAB Staff Liaison, works in Code Enforcement and may be able to assist. Manny also asked Ms. Cavero if she could help the mobile home owners in regards to any owner tenant violations. Albert stated that he visited the park and offered help, but the majority of the residents are illegal and they are afraid to come forward and provide documentation in regards to the water bills. Albert stated that he asked for documentation to be able to go to the State attorney's Office, but he has unable to get anything from the residents. In regards to the water drainage and the street lights, signs, the County should be able to help. The tow trucks are regulated by the Collier County Sheriff's Office. Ms. Serrano gave her business card and offer assistance. Ms. Serrano also advised about the Task Force meetings that take place monthly and the public is invited to attend. Lt. Gonzalez stated that the Sheriffs Office can help and they don't check if the person is illegal. The police department only checks the immigration status when there is criminal activity taking place. Ms. Vidaurri stated that she will email the information to Lt. Gonzalez, Albert and Ms. Serrano. 4 6.1ber 25, 2012 r7 V. Old Business: None VI. New Business: VII. Member and Staff Comments: A. Marijuana and Drugs- Valaree spoke about a recent BCC meeting that she attended where it was discussed the sale and use of synthetic drugs. Ms. Maxwell went over the different type of synthetic drugs offered for sale at gas stations and the danger of the drugs. B. CCSO Hostage Negotiation Seminar- Manny spoke about a recent seminar that he attended with Ileana. Ileana stated that it was a very interesting meeting. She learned how the team works, the strategy and the terminology that they use. C. Records Search Clerks of Courts Seminar- Manny spoke about how to search on property records, evictions, civil, criminal court records, etc. D. Guadalupe Center- Manny asked the Board members to volunteer during Thanksgiving to serve the needy at the Guadalupe Center. VIII. Adjourn Manny motioned to adjourn, Ileana seconded. Carried unanimously, 4-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 pm. Next Meeting: November 15, 2012. Chairman Date 5 161 2A7 COLLIER COUNTY HISPANIC AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD Sign-In/Attendance Sheet For 11/15/12 Meeting Albert Batista j iffi/►i Manuel Gonzalez c3\ 1Z Valaree D. Maxwell Zetty Y. Rivera Ar0-r 2-y�Q` Marlene Serrano - PUBLIC AND GUESTS (Please Print) 1. e Xs CCSc7 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 161 2As/ October 17, 2012 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF COLLIER COUNTY HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD Naples, Florida, October 17, 2012 JAN 08ZU13 P BY: .....................„ LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Historical/Archaeological Preservation Board in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:15 AM in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Division —Planning and Regulation, Conference Room 610, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Craig Woodward Fiala VJ Matthew Betz Hiller William Dempsey Henning e f ng Coy Patricia Huff(absent) C /is,,/ Sharon Kenny Elizabeth Perdichizzi Rich Taylor Misc.Corres: Date: Item*: ((Q L 2.Ar F. Copies to: ALSO PRESENT: Ray Bellows, Manager—Zoning Services Fred Reischl, Staff Liaison—Zoning Services 1 161 2A ?' October 17, 2012 Roll Call/Attendance Chairman Craig Woodward called the meeting to order at 9:19 A.M. Attendance was taken and a quorum established. II. Addenda to the Agenda Add: Under Old Business - D. Old Marco Inn Update, Craig Woodward Under New Business - C. Mar-Good - discussion Under New Business—D. Pottery,Will Dempsey III. Approval of Agenda Elizabeth Perdichizzi moved to approve the Agenda, as amended to include the three Addenda items. Second by Sharon Kenny. Carried unanimously, 6-0. IV. Approval of Minutes—September 19, 2012 Correction: Page 4. VIII 2nd line "...and shell tools that had been found" Page S. 1st line—remove. Replace with "Matthew Betz suggested"... etc. Sharon Kenny moved to approve the minutes of September 19, 2012, as amended. Second by Rich Taylor. Carried unanimously, 6-0. V. Old Business. A. Revisions to the Historic Guide Ray Bellows had provided copies of the updated map locations and a final review with the HAPB for accuracy, item by item,took place. Craig Woodward noted a few changes. He commented the Brochure had evolved into a much improved Guide. The rest of the Board members agreed. Ray Bellows will make the changes and forward final corrections to Patty Huff. B. Interlocal Agreement with the City of Marco Island (Craig Woodward) Craig Woodward reported the status had not changed since the last meeting. Meetings with City officials had to be scheduled. He will keep working on it. Item D. was taken up prior to Item C. as it tied in with the urgency to finalize the interlocal agreement. D. Old Marco Inn Update(Craig Woodward) Craig Woodward recapped his meeting with the architect,who had previously planned to tear out, reconfigure and totally change the look and character of the Old Marco Inn. As was noted in the minutes of September 19, 2012,the research by Ray Bellows produced the documents designating the Old Marco Inn historic. Any renovations were required to be in keeping with the historic nature of the building. In addition, Ray found an ordinance (1998) whereby the City of Marco described the Old Marco Inn as being"subject to the historic archaeological preservation regulations of the Collier County Land Development Code."Also, the PUD zoning district gave an affirmative obligation to renovate and restore the building. Any renovation plans would have to come before the HAPB. Craig had e-mailed the architect all the information he would need along with 2 161 2A � October 17, 2012 many pictures of the way the Inn originally looked. The architect indicated he would comply and would re-work his plans. When Craig met with him again, he was told he needed to bring the plans and ideas to the HAPB. Craig noted the new plans showed all the old structure of the Old Marco Inn being preserved, the room with the piano and the Audubon room. The floor would be shored up and the staircase would be left in place. Upstairs would have more modern hotel suites. The chandelier room was taken out and the kitchen redone and moved to a different location. A parking garage was to be located below and rooms added on the third floor. The area by pool was all redone except for the historic bar. A parking garage was to be located below and rooms added on the third floor. Upon re-revision, the architect will bring the plans to HAPB. Craig determined there was more density than allowed and there maybe zoning issues. He encouraged the architect to visit the Collier Inn on Useppa Island to see an example of a well done restoration. Craig said the restaurant was open and operating. Presumably, they may not do any renovations during the season. A future phase was to remove the Shops of Marco buildings, which the Inn owners had purchased. C. Pepper Ranch Update (Fred Reischl) Fred Reischl and Ray Bellows spoke about looking into the site at Pepper Ranch,part of the Conservation Collier purchase of sensitive lands, for park use. Ray said it was in an area of high probability; and, by Code, requiring a cultural assessment survey. Copies of that assessment report were distributed. The Project Parcel in question, 15.4 acres, was in the southeast area of the larger 2,512 acre Pepper Ranch property. Conservation Collier were addressing issues in the report so as not to impact sensitive areas. Fred Reischl added the park would be used for Ecotourism. He explained the existing pathway into the camp would be converted to a lime-rock/shell road. There would be no structures; only markers to indicate the nine primitive campsites, with a pathway to Lake Trafford for a fishing destination. There would be no hook-ups for water or electricity. An existing ranch building would be available for rest room facilities. A Park Ranger would be on site. Ray Bellows explained the process. When a site development plan comes in and the area is within an area of historic or archaeological probability, the owner(in this case, the County) is required to contract a certified archaeologist to do a cultural survey and assessment. It was then sent to the HAPB to concur or add their comments, which become a part of the Site Development Plan. Any future plans for development would need a separate site plan& survey and assessment for any ground or vegetation disturbances. The site plan that staff reviewed determined the campsites will not impact anything. The HAPB asked for time to review the Cultural Resource Survey and to see the Site Development Plan (SDP) before giving their recommendations. 3 161 2AS October 17, 2012 Ray Bellows stated the HAPB may choose to begin the designation process for other areas of Pepper Ranch, such as the structures, based on the determinations in the Cultural Assessment and SDP. Matthew Betz moved to bring back the issue; and, the Site Development Plans to be reviewed by the HAPB at the next meeting. Second by Elizabeth Perdichizzi. Carried unanimously, 6-0. VI. New Business A. Election of Officers Sharon Kenny moved to appoint Will Dempsey as Chairman. Second by Rich Taylor. Carried unanimously, 6-0. Sharon Kenny moved to appoint Matthew Betz for Vice Chairman. Second by Craig Woodward. Carried unanimously, 6-0. Will Dempsey took over the meeting as the new Chairman. He announced he had a pending appointment and turned over the meeting to the Vice Chairman, Matthew Betz. Will Dempsey left at 9:50AM. B. Revision to HAPB Application Forms Ray Bellows had been contacted to review the forms. He asked the HAPB to look over the forms and make suggestions for corrections and/or revisions and bring them back for discussion at the next meeting. Matthew Betz asked how often the probability maps were updated. Ray Bellows responded for several years there had been no funding. However, he will look into funding for updating and coordinating data with the Florida master site file. The County was required to put out for bid, the services of a professional consultant. Ray Bellows stated there were many levels of updating and some data bases had periodically been updated in house. Matthew Betz noted all new surveys may not be incorporated. Also, Probability Maps were not in the Florida master site file. Therefore a Certified Archeologist was required. He mentioned 1/4 more sites (900) needed to be included since the last Probability Map updates. Several area companies could provide the service. C. Mar-Good Sharon Kenny cited a letter to the editor in the newspaper criticizing the changes made by the County and what had been done to the Mar-Good property. Craig Woodward commented the former owners were extremely upset with the renovations. He spoke of the site tour the HAPB had taken with the staff liaison and a representative from the Parks and Recreation department. Certain cottages were to remain and there were many artifacts inside the building. HAPB was assured they would be apprised of any changes progress; but nothing had come 4 161 October 17, 2012 back to HAPB. Everything was torn down and a new structure put up without coming before the HAPB. The building and site were in the Historic Guide. Elizabeth Perdichizzi stated she was at the opening and the inside was bare. Nothing of interest was in there. She questioned the whereabouts of the items that were observed on the tour. She was told time and money was the issue. Craig Woodward reported he had met with Commissioner Donna Fiala and learned of a group in Goodland, the Goodland Village Arts, who were interested in displaying art in the main building. They would eventually form a non profit corporation, leasing and renovating the four remaining cottages and creating an Art Colony. The HAPB agreed it would be a positive outcome for Goodland. Craig Woodward expressed concerns of the Board that, like Pepper Ranch, the HAPB was to provide input before changes were made. They questioned HAPB's purpose if projects were executed without the required step to submit items to them. Ray Bellows responded he will research to look into what transpired with the Mar-Good project. He was not a part of the department concerned at the time decisions were made. He recalled it had been put on hold and will find out why. Discussion of Pepper Ranch and Mar-Good will be revisited at the next meeting. D. Pottery (Will Dempsey) Will Dempsey,prior to leaving, shared some of the Calusa pottery shards and artifacts he and his son had discovered in the Rock Creek area. Several pieces were large enough to determine their use. Updates will be forthcoming. Matthew Betz, a certified archaeologist identified the pieces as authentic. VII. Public Comments -None VIII. Board Member Announcements -None There will be no November meeting due to the Thanksgiving Holiday. The next scheduled meeting will be December 19,2012, at 9:15 A.M. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:22 A.M. HistoricaUArc P aeo u .. 'reservation Board - ,;___ Chairman 411. 6■-4-; (esv,,,HY:D2AA13-Set These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on (2/ 1?4? as presented 47 or as amended . 5 161 2A9 Immokalee Lighting and Beautification MSTU FEB 0 7 2013 v BY lee Certification of Minutes Approval Form Pre• ed by: Approved by: Jt 1 I be. /J Jl�. fit .l- .Ls Penny/ i Exe vi 'f e Director Cherryle TAT' as, Chairman y, pp Imm alee Lighting and Beautification MSTU Liaison These Minutes for the November 14, 2012, MSTU Advisory Committee Meeting were approved by the MSTU Advisory Committee on January 23,2013 as presented. *The next MSTU Advisory Committee meeting will be held February 27, 2013 at 10:00A.M. at the Immokalee CRA office located at 1320 156 Street,Immokalee,FL.,34142. All meetings will be publicly noticed in the W. Harmon Turner Building (Building F), posted at the Immokalee Public Library and provided to the County Public Information Department for distribution. Please call Christie Betancourt,Immokalee CRA, at 239-867-4121 for additional information. In accordance with the American with Disabilities Act, persons needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact Christie Betancourt, Administrative Assistant, at least 48 hours before the meeting. The public should be advised that members of the MSTU Lighting and Beautification Advisory Committee may also be members of other Boards and Committees. In this regard,matters coming before the Advisory Committee may come before one or more of the referenced Board and Committees from time to time. Fiala Y '� Hiller Henning 7 Coyle ✓ .Gelett • Misc.Corres: Date: Item#:I 1_2 to: Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency 16 1 2A 9 Enclosure 1 IMMOKALEE CRA i The Place to Call Home jj0) MINUTES Joint Meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency Advisory Committee, Immokalee Enterprise Zone Agency,and the Immokalee Lighting and Beautification MSTU "°°' z.`'`°"'"" November 14,2012 A. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Mike Facundo/Cherryle Thomas, Chairpersons at 8:40 a.m. B. Roll Call and Announcement of a Quorum. Advisory Committee/EZDA Members Present: Mike Facundo, Floyd Crews, Eva Deyo, Jeffery Randall, Carrie Williams, Cristina Perez, Ski Olesky and Dan Rosario. Advisory Committee/EZDA Members Absent/Excused: Julio Estremera,James Wall and Robert Halman. MSTU Advisory Committee Members Present: Cherryle Thomas, Lucy Ortiz, William Deyo and Norma Garcia. MSTU Advisory Committee Members Absent/Excused. Andrea Halman Action: A quorum was announced as being present for both the CRA/EZDA and the MSTU Committees. Others Present: Steve Hart,David Corban and Fred Thomas.. Staff: Penny Phillippi, Brad Muckel,Marie Capita, Christie Betancourt, and Jeffrey Nagle. C. Introductions. All present introduced themselves. D. Announcements. a. Ms. Phillippi announced the Agenda items that had been heard the previous day by the BCC. E. Adoption of Agenda. Action: Ski Olesky made a motion to approve the CRA/EZDA Agenda, Eva Deyo seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. Norma Garcia made a motion to approve the Agenda for the MSTU, Lucy Ortiz seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. F. Communications. a. The Communications Folder containing the meeting notices was passed around for review. G. Consent Agenda. a. Approval of CRA/EZDA Minutes for the October 17,2012. Action: Ski Olesky made the motion to approve the CRA/EZDA Consent Agenda, the motion was seconded by Eva Deyo and the Consent Agenda was approved by unanimous vote. b. Approval of the MSTU Minutes for October 24, 2012. I Action: Norma Garcia —made the motion to approve the MSTU Consent Agenda, the motion was seconded by Lucy Ortiz and the Consent Agenda was approved by unanimous vote. H. New Business. a. First Street Plaza — David Corban, Architect. Ms. Phillippi introduced Mr. Corban and asked that the Committees provide him with input on things they would like to see at the First Street Plaza. Suggestions included a town clock, trees, landscaping, pavers, decorative items such as trash cans and bike racks, and benches.; It was announced that another meeting will be held this evening for public input. b. Big Cypress Basin—Mr. Flood did not attend this meeting. 1 161 2A Enclosure 1 4 c. Renewable Energy—Mr. Dumphy did not attend this meeting. Old Business. a. Project Manager's Reports CRA Project Manager 1. Stormwater Master Plan—Mr. Muckel reported that the punch list for the Phase I Stormwater Project will soon be issued and the General Contractor has been paid approximately 95% of the $2.7 million contract. The Phase II Stormwater Project on Immokalee Drive RFQ for an engineering firm should be released later this month 2. Crosswalk Improvement Project— Mr. Muckel informed the Committee that he and the Executive Director talked with AIM and that he was able to re- negotiate the price to $73,070, half the original price. He proposed a partnership with the MSTU Advisory Committee, asking them to pay for the study and design and the CRA would apply for a grant for the construction. Action: Mr. William Deyo made a motion that the MSTU would pay for the cost of the study and design, Cherryle Thomas seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. 3. EZDA Annual Report — Mr. Muckel reviewed the Annual Report with the Committees noting the number of new businesses, new jobs created and the specific incentive program applications processed by staff during FY2012. Ms. Phillippi requested that he seek more information on state and federal grants for Collier County to include in the report. Action: Mr. Olesky made a motion to approve the transmittal of the EZDA Annual Report, Ms. Deyo seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. ii. IBDC Manager Ms. Capita reported that she is currently conducting the quarterly reviews for the businesses enrolled in the IBDC program. She reviewed the items presented to and approved by the BCC on the previous day. iii. MSTU Reports 1. Budget Report Mr. Nagle reviewed the MSTU Budget status, the Purchase Orders and the payments made on behalf of the MSTU during October, 2012. 2. Project Manager's Report a. Main Street Improvements — Mr. Nagle reported that FDOT had provided their review comments which are currently in review with the design professional for preparing responses. b. Street Lighting Report i. Holiday Decorations — Mr. Nagle announced that the brackets for the angel displays have arrived and have been painted by the contractor to match the blue poles and will be left up permanently. He stated that he angels should arrive on or about November 26th and will be install the following week. 3. Contractor Report. a. Mr. Nagle called the Committees' attention to the report submitted by CLM discussing plantings, hedging, trimming and mowing throughout the jurisdiction. b. Landscape Architects Report i. Mr. Nagle requested approval for the Work Order to retain the services of Greenworks Studio, Inc. in the amount of $9,990.00 for a period of 180 days. 2 161 2A Enclosure 1 Action: Norma Garcia made a motion to approve the Work Order for Greenworks Studio, Inc. in the amount of$9,990.00 for period of 180 days. William Deyo seconded the motion and it passed by unanimous vote. ii. Mr. Nagle showed the MSTU Committee the choices he found that might meet the need to fill the median at First Street. By consensus,the Committee selected a combination of Blueberry Flax Lily and Blue eyed grass. b. Code Enforcement Ms. Perez reported that there will be a Meet and Greet with the Sheriff's Department held on November 26th. She also stated that Code Enforcement will hold a Community Clean- up held on December 1st in and around the Lake Trafford Marina from 8:00 a.m. until noon. Lastly, she announced that the Community Task Force will meet at the Health Department on November 27th at 10:00 a.m. J. Citizen Comments. -None K. Next Meeting Date. The next regular CRA Meeting will be December 20,2012 at 8:30 A.M. The next regular meeting of the Immokalee MSTU will be held on January 23, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. L. Adjournment. This meeting adjourned at 10:08 a.m. 3 161 2A9 AGENDA MSTU Board Immokalee Lighting and Beautification MSTU Commissioner 1320 North 15t Street Chair Immokalee,FL 34142 Georgia Hiller January 23,2013 - 10:00 A.M. Commissioner l m moka lee Fred W.Coyle A. Call to Order. Fonda in the 21st century Commissioner B. Roll Call and Announcement of a Quorum. Tom Henning C. Introductions. James Sainvilus Commissioner D. Announcements. Timothy Nance E. Adoption of Agenda. Commissioner F. Communications. Donna Fiala G. Approval of Minutes for November 14, 2012. a. November 14,2012 Minutes(Enclosure 1) MSTU Advisory H. Old Business. Committee a. Budget Report(Enclosure 2) i. PO Report(Enclosure 3) Che Clhaihomas ii. Expenditures(Enclosure 4a&4b) b. Code Enforcement Report Lucy Ortiz c. Project Manager Report William Deyo i. Carson Road Sidewalk Report ii. Main Street Improvements(Enclosure 5) Andrea Halman iii. Street Lighting Report Norma Ramirez iv. Holiday Decoration Update d. Contractor Reports CRA Staff i. Maintenance Report—CLM(Enclosure 6) ii. Landscape Architect Report— GWS Penny Phillippi e. Community Redevelopment Agency Report Executive Director i. Stormwater Project Update Bradley Muckel ii. Crosswalk Project Update Project Manager 1st Street Plaza Update Christie Betancourt I. New Business. Administrative Assistant a. Colorado Avenue Design Proposal(Enclosure 7) IBDC Staff J. Citizen Comments. K. Next Meeting Date: February 27,2013 at 10:00 A.M. Marie Capita L. Adjournment. IBDC Manager MSTU Staff *The next MSTU Advisory Committee meeting will be held February 27,2013 at 10:00 A.M.at the Immokalee Community Redevelopment Agency office located at 1320 North 15th Street in Immokalee. All meetings will be publicly noticed in the W. Harmon Tumer Building James Sainvilus (Building F), posted at the Immokalee Public Library and provided to the County Public Information Department for distribution. Please Project Manger contact Christie Betancourt, at 239.867.4121 for additional information. In accordance with the American with Disabilities Act, persons needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact Jeffrey Nagle at least 48 hours before the meeting. The public should be advised that members of the MSTU Lighting and Beautification Advisory Committee may also members of other Boards and Committees. In this regard, matters coming before the Advisory Committee may come before one or more of the referenced Board and Committees from time to time. • Immokalee Lighting and Beautification MSTU 1320 North 15th Street Immokalee,FL 34142 161 2A 'o pgarquntl Atl FEB 252013 BY: ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE/RESCUE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 17, 2013 ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE STATION ATTENDEES: Jim Hughes, Vice Chairman Raymond Kane, Advisory Committee Member Dan Sansevieri, Advisory Committee Member Alan McLaughlin, Fire Chief Fiala Barbara Shea, Minutes Preparer Hiller Henning `71 Coyle v. Gaietta I. CALL TO ORDER t`socNce. A. Jim Hughes opened the meeting at 3:00 p.m. B. Motion to approve the Jan. 17, 2013 Agenda by Dan Sansevieri. 1. Motion seconded by Ray Kane. 2. Motion carried unanimously. IL REPORTS A. Minutes of prior regular advisory committee meetings. 1. Minutes of September 21, 2012 meeting were not produced. 2. Minutes of October 19, 2012 meeting were not produced. 3. Minutes of November 16, 2012 meeting were not produced. 4. Motion to approve December 27, 2012 minutes by Jim Hughes. a. Motion seconded by Ray Kane. b. Motion carried unanimously. c. Minutes were transcribed by Barbara Shea. c. Minutes signed off by Vice Chairman Jim Hughes. 5. Jim Hughes will contact Mr. Langkawel for missing meeting minutes. B. Awards and Recognition Misc.Comes: 1. Recognition of the service of four retiring advisory committee members. a. Ted Decker was recognized for 5 years of service. Date: b. Joe Langkawel, Kevin Walsh and Jim Gault could not attend. Item it . Recognition of 10 years of service by Betty Moenkhaus. Copies to: C. Chiefs Report 1. Image Trend December incident type report has been provided. 2. ICFD had a total of 35 calls in December. 161 2A10 3. Budget for the first quarter of FY13 is on track with projections. 4. Collier County Finance Dept. has reallocated personnel salary expenses. a. 48% of Chief McLaughlin's salary expense is now charged to ICFD. b. Capt. Purcell's salary expense is now evenly split to ICFD & OFD. 5. U.S. Line of Duty Deaths. a. 83 year to date. b. 11 during December, 2012. D. Administrative Report from Jim Hughes 1. Roberts Rules of Order will be followed at advisory committee meetings. a. Each meeting will have a sign-up sheet for public speakers. b. Interruptions from the public will not be tolerated. 2. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the ICFD Advisory committee. a. The application period for our two vacancies is open until 01/25/13. b. Approval by BCC of two new members will not be until Feb. 12. c. Five members should be in place by the regular Feb. meeting. d. Motion to delay the election until Feb. 12 by Dan Sansevieri. 1. Motion seconded by Ray Kane. 2. Motion carried unanimously. HI. OLD BUSINESS A. ICFD By-laws produced by Jim Gault at a previous meeting. 1. These by-laws were never submitted to or adopted by the BCC. 2. These by-laws were never recorded. 3. The responsibilities and/or powers of the advisory committee may change. 4. This issue was tabled and should be revisited in a few months. 5. John Rogers volunteered to update the new members on ICFD issues. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Application process for two vacancies on the ICFD advisory committee. 1. Current application period ends 01/25/13. 2. Qualified applications will be provided to Chief Mclaughlin on 01/28/13. 3. Adv. Committee recommendations must be received by 01/30/13 in order for the item to be included on the BCC 02/12/13 agenda. 4. ICFD Adv. Committee will meet at 8 a.m. on 01/30 to hold a vote. B. Future meeting dates and times. 1. The next ICFD adv. committee meeting will be at 3 p.m. on Feb. 20. 2. A permanent schedule of regular monthly meetings will be set in future. C. Future ICFD planning workshops will be held Jan. 28, Feb. 15 &Mar. 1. V. PUBLIC COMMENT 161 2 A 1° A. Resident Jeri Neuhaus requests the meeting Agenda be published in advance. 1. A published Agenda would inform residents of discussion points. 2. Jim Hughes agreed to emailing his Agenda a few days in advance. 3. Ann Hall will distribute the Agenda on the coconut telegraph. 4. Phil Brougham will distribute the information to other district areas. B. Resident Jeri Neuhaus requests constant flow of ICFD information to residents. 1. She requests that Chief McLaughlin provide information as it arises. 2. Len Price will look into Sunshine Law compliance of one-way communication to advisory committee members and residents. 3. Major ICFD events or unexpected expenses could be communicated. VI. ADJOURNMENT A. Motion to adjourn the meeting by Ray Kane at 3:35 p.m. 1. Motion seconded by Dan Sansevieri. 2. Motion carried unanimously. r Approved: Date: 2 — I S 1 � 16I 2AR VIR O IR II W M 7 January 14, 2013 J, FEB 1 2 2013 J MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, January 14, 2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at North Collier Regional Park Administration Building, Conference Room A Naples, Florida with the following Fiala T'✓ members present: Hiller Henning Coyle f v-40. 4/i4/ CHAIRMAN: Bill Poteet VICE CHAIRMAN: Clarence Tears Misc.Comes. Tony Pires Jeffrey Curl Date: Jeremy Sterk Lauren Gibson Item Tracy Dewrell Copies to: Todd Allen (Absent) John Burton, II ALSO PRESENT: Alexandra Sulecki, Conservation Collier Coordinator, Program Manager Christal Segura, Environmental Specialist, Conservation Collier Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney Cindy Erb, Real Property Management Melissa Hennig, Sr. Environmental Specialist, Conservation Collier Tony Ruberto, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation Dept. Barry Williams, Director, Parks and Recreation 1 161 2A \ January 14, 2013 I. Roll Call Chairman Poteet called the meeting to order at 9:00AM. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. II. Approval of Agenda Mr. Curl moved to approve the Agenda subject to Item VC being heard before V.B. Second by Mrs. Gibson. Carried unanimously 7—0. Mr. Pires arrived at 9:02am III. Election of New Chair and Vice Chair Mr. Curl moved to appoint Bill Poteet as Chairman and Tony Fires as Vice Chairman of the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee. Second by Mr.Sterk. Carried unanimously 8—0. IV. Approval of November 16,2012 Special Meeting minutes Mr. Curl moved to approve the minutes of the November 16, 2012 Special Meeting. Second by Mr. Fires. Carried unanimously 8—0. V. Old Business A. Real Property Management Update—Kania Donation Cindy Erb, Real Property Management reported: • The 10 acre parcel is being donated to the County per a January 24,2012 agreement with the Board of County Commissioners (BCC). • The County agreed to pay probate costs up to $2000,which now anticipated to be approximately$1,300. • The owner paid a portion of the 2012 taxes with a remaining balance of$100 - $200. • An item has been placed on the February 12, 2013 BCC Agenda for the final approval for conveyance of the property. • The end result will be, should the County pay the remaining balance of the FY12 property taxes, the County will have expended less funds in acquiring the property than originally approved by the BCC. She sought a recommendation from the Committee on the County paying the remaining balance on the 2012 taxes. Mr. Pires moved to recommend the Board of County Commissioners agree to pay the balance due for FY12 Collier County property taxes for the above referenced parcel. Second by Mr. Curl. Carried unanimously 8—0. C. Draft Fee Policy Alex Sulecki presented a Resolution to Re-establish the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department Facilities and Outdoor License Fee Policy and Establish a Collier County Preserve Lands License and Fee Policy for consideration. The Committee reviewed the Resolution and discussed possible revisions. 2 161 2A ■ A January 14, 2013 Break: 10:05am Reconvened: 10:12am Mr. Curl moved to recommend the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Resolution subject to the following changes: 1. Overall- Where necessary, revise the text identifying "Preserve Lands"to "Conservation Collier Preserve Lands." 2. Page 20—Section I.B—User Categories -paragraph 1, line 2 -3 to read- "Note: All Preserve Lands, unless reserved,shall remain open to the public during normal Preserve Land hours." 3. Page 22— Section ILA—Add rate for 100'x 100'open space rental at an hourly fee of$10.00 and require a $25.00 deposit. 4. Page 22—Section II.A—Revise Deposit schedule to provide for a $300.00 deposit for any uses associated with Pepper Ranch Lodge. All others uses to be$100.00, with the exception of rentals of open space as prescribed in #3 above. 5. Page 22—Section II.A/B, #1 - to read"Rental fees do not include setup and break down of facility or area. These services must be provided by the user." 6. Page 22—Section LA/B,#2 -to be relocated as Section V.F. and to read"If the facility and/or grounds are not returned in the condition they were found,the security deposit will be retained up to the cost required to return the facilities to its original condition. 7. Page 23—Section II.0 —delete existing language in table under Additional Fee Per Hour with the exception of wording- "Per hour fee determined by Department based on cost." 8. Page 23—Section II.D - Donor Recognition Plaques to read- "Recognition Plaques—Bench $2000.00." 9. Page 23 - Add Section ILE-"Hunt Fees-Hunt fees to be established by the Board of County Commissioners." 10. Page 23 —Add Section 11.F—"Camping Fees— To be determined upon establishment of the facilities." Second by Mr. Sterk. Carried unanimously 8—0. B. Gordon River Greenway Project Update Tony Ruberto, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation Department presented the document "Gordon River Greenway Project Update as of 1/2/13" for information purposes. He noted: 3 i 4 161 2 January 14, 2 1 • The Purchasing Department recommended the Board of County Commissioners reject all bids received for the project due to the fact 3 of the 7 low bidders did not provide unit prices and other abnormalities within the bid package. • The BCC approved the recommendations and new bids are due back by January 30, 2013. • Following receipt of the new bids, the CCLAAC will meet again with Stakeholders to review the bids. • It is anticipated the BCC will review the new bid package at the February 26, 2013 meeting. VI. New Business A. February special CLAAC meeting The Committee determined to hold a Special Meeting on February 11, 2013. B. Eagle Scout Recognition—discussion Ms. Sulecki reported there will be an item on the Board of County Commissioners February 12, 2012 Agenda for recognition of Eagle Scout projects completed for the Program. Staff will present the item and publicly notice the meeting for any Committee members who may wish to attend. VII. Coordinator Communications Ms. Sulecki reported: • Members should review the Resolution for"off site preserves" as developers have contacted Staff showing interest in the concept and may be bringing proposals forward. • Any members terms who are expiring in 2013 are required to submit an application for re- appointment, (should they so desire), by January 25, 2013. • Improvements to the Pepper Ranch caretaker's lodge have been completed. • The Paganes parcel on Rivers Road is being put up for auction by the owner. • Caracara Preserve had a"soft opening"in June of 2012 with an official opening slated for March 15 or May 10 of 2013, depending on District Commissioner availability. • A youth hunt was held at Pepper Ranch on the first weekend in January of 2013 with 2 hogs taken. • Staff plans to present the following items to the BCC in the near future: • A "Carry Forward Budget" amendment to the BCC for re-appropriation of funds set aside for Gordon River Greenway and Pepper Ranch Capital Improvements to the capital improvements fund. • A request the Interim Land Management PIans for Unit 53, Winchester Head, Mcllvane Marsh and Kamp Keais Strand be extended. The request is based on the unique characteristics of multi parcel projects (access, project's parcels unconsolidated at this point, etc.). VIII. Sub-Committee Meeting Reports A. Outreach—Tony Pires, Chair There will be a joint Outreach- Ordinance, Policy& Rules meeting held on February 7,2013 at 8:00am. B. Lands Evaluation and Management—Jeremy Sterk, Chair 4 161 2q \\ January 14, 2013 None C. Ordinance Policy and Procedures—Bill Poteet, Chair None IX. Chair Committee Member Comments None X. Public General Comments None XI. Staff Comments None There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at 11:10A.M. Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee Bill Poteet, Chairn> These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on ! '3 as presented or as amended • 5 . , .—,c . . , 161 2 A '1:: IwiuTsril JAN 1 0 2013 v November 16,2012 ' BY: MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida,November 16, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in SPECIAL SESSION at North Collier Regional Park Administration Building, Conference Room A Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Bill Poteet VICE CHAIRMAN: Clarence Tears (Excused) ./ Tony Pires (Excused) iala Jeffrey Curl Hiller �— Jeremy Sterk(Excused) Henning 1 — Coyle f Lauren Gibson ..1; ____ __ Tracy Dewrell tv�,v��,e, Todd Allen(Excused) John Burton, II ALSO PRESENT: Alexandra Sulecki, Conservation Collier Coordinator, Program Manager Melissa Hennig, Sr. Environmental Spec., Barry Williams,Director, Parks and Recreation Tony Ruberto,Project Manager,Parks and Recreation Rhonda Cummings, Collier County Purchasing Steve Carvell,Director, Collier County Public Services 1 irate: Item#:I iO 12k I( Copies to: 3 s 2A \` . , November 16,2012 I. Roil Call Chairman Poteet called the meeting to order at 9:00AM. Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. The following Gordon River Greenway Stakeholders were present: Terry Cook, Bears Paw; Kerry Keith,Naples Airport; Mike Delate, O. Grady Minor and Assoc.; Matt McLean,Naples Zoo; Nicole Johnson, Conservancy of Southwest Florida; Bill Barton, Southwest Florida Land Preservation Trust; Sue Falkner, Metropolitan Planning Organization. IL Approval of Agenda Mr. Curl moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mrs. Gibson. Carried unanimously 5—0. III. Approval of October 12,2012 Minutes Mr. Curl moved to approve the minutes of the October 12,2012 meeting as submitted. Second by Mr.Burton. Carried unanimously 5—0. IV. Old Business A. Gordon River Greenway Project Bids Review Alex Sulecki provided the following documents for information purposes: • "Bid Schedule for Gordon River Greenway Park"dated November 16,2012—(CLAAC Agenda Item IV.A). • "Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost For Gordon River Greenway Park"dated November 16,2012—(CLAAC Agenda Item IV.A). • "Item Description:Grand Total—Gordon River Greenway Park"dated November 16, 2012—(CLAAC Agenda Item IV.A). • Spreadsheet outlining a cost share analysis between Conservation Collier, Parks and Recreation and the Naples Zoo and the bid estimates by the top 3 qualified vendors, Manhattan Construction,J.L.Wallace, Inc. and Gates, Inc. Tony Ruberto and Barry Williams provided an overview of the bids received for construction of the Gordon River Greenway with the following noted: • Boardwalk"alternates"have been identified within the project. • As additional funds become available,the parties may choose to complete any or all of the "alternates"as the permits issued to construct the project are valid for 8 years including extensions. • The uncompleted options will not affect the main transportation nodes proposed for the project. During Committee discussion,the following recommendations were approved: Solar Lighting Discussion occurred on the ramifications of installing solar light fixtures within the project. Staff reported the"payback period" for the solar lighting option is approximately 10 years,and regardless if this option is chosen,the project will be"hard wired" to ensure adequate infrastructure is available to provide exterior lighting to the project. 2 it t' 161 2A November 16,2012 Mr. Curl moved to recommend to not pursue installation of solar lighting fixtures within the project area. Second by Mr.Burton. Carried unanimously 5—0. Mulching of site clearance vegetation Discussion occurred on the rationale for extra charges/credits proposed by the bidders for stockpiling the mulched material on site. Staff noted the key is to determine the most overall cost efficient estimate for the project,and subtract or add any options to identify the most optimal proposal. Some vendors may have reductions in one area and up charges in another. An individual vendor's rationale for up charges/credits for different functions of the construction process may differ from another vendor based on the logistics of their particular operation. Mr.Burton moved to recommend that any mulching associated with the project due to clearing activities remain on site. Second by Mrs. Gibson. Carried unanimously 5—D. Boardwalk and bridge decking Mr. Curl moved to recommend that IPE materials be utilized for the boardwalks and bridge surface throughout the entire project as specified by Q. Grady Minor,Inc. in the bid package. Second by Mrs. Gibson. Carried unanimously 5-0. Pathway in southeast corner of Conservation Collier property Discussion occurred on a section of the pathway between the proposed boardwalk and the southerly end of the pedestrian bridge on the Conservation Collier property. Staff noted although the characteristics of the area allow for pavement, it may be difficult to place the pavement as the location is between wetland areas. It was noted this portion of the pathway may need to be constructed as"boardwalk." Mr. Curl moved to recommend a boardwalk utilizing an IPE surface be constructed in the area in question,providing said change provides for a nominal increase or a decrease in construction cost in relation to the paving costs. Discussion occurred on defining"nominal." Without a second,the motion was not considered. Mr.Dewrell moved to recommend a boardwalk be constructed utilizing an IPE surface in the area in question if the costs are equal to or less than that of the currently proposed asphalt surface. Second by Mrs. Gibson. Carried unanimously 5—0. Cost share analysis Tony Ruberto and Barry Williams provided an overview of the cost share requirements for the parties with the total cost of the project estimated at$8,976,943 with Conservation Collier portion being$2,042,482. 3 `1` 161 2A November 16,2012 Under Committee discussion it was noted: • The estimates allow for standardized benches which may be upgraded as necessary through donation programs, etc. • Staff needs to clarify if additional charges are due to FPL by the parties,however this will not affect the Conservation Collier portion of funds required to construct the project. V. New Business None VI. Coordinator Communications None VII. Sub-Commit-tee Meeting Reports A. Outreach—Tony Pires,Chair Mr. Curl provided the report noting a meeting was held where the Program's brochure was discussed. B. Lands Evaluation and Management—Jeremy Sterk,Chair Mrs.Gibson stated no meetings had occurred. C. Ordinance Policy and Procedures—Bill Poteet,Chair None VIII. Chair Committee Member Comments None VIII. Public General Comments None IX. Staff Comments None There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at 10:45A.M. Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee Bill Poteet,Chairma 4 } 161 2A November 16,2012 '---) 3 These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on u /� �/ as presented or as amended /Jj ' • 5 161 2A i2 DJAN 1 � �Jl� � Naples, Florida, October 17, 2012 BY LET IT BE KNOWN that the LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD met on this date in regular session at 10:00 a.m. in the Headquarters Branch Library with the following members present: CHAIR: Doris J. Lewis— District-4 VICE-CHAIR: Loretta Murray—District-1 Fiala Connie Bettinger-Hennink- District- 3 Hiller Carla Grieve- District- 2 Henning T) Rochelle Lieb- District-5 Coyle Cetta ALSO PRESENT: Roberta Riess, Literacy Program cAr■`R Marilyn Matthes, Library Director Joy White, Public Service Librarian Lisseth Weschler, Administrative Assistant APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mrs. Lewis asked for additions or corrections to the minutes of September 19, 2012. A few minor corrections were noted. Ms. Bettinger-Hennink moved to approve the minutes, Mrs. Lieb seconded and the motion was carried unanimously that the minutes be approved as corrected. LITERACY PROGRAM REPORT—Mrs. Riess stated: 1. The September class had eight participants, with six graduating. 2. The basic computer class will be recruiting students from our Collier Connects participants. 3. The computer classes will start in January and will run until April. 4. School on Wheels has a new director, Lindsay Spinazzola. REPORT OF OFFICERS- None COMMUNICATIONS Carla Grieve mentioned Collier Citizen "Looking at the Library" did not get printed on the first Friday of the month, but the article did appear on Friday, October 12th Unfinished Business 1. Social media update- Mrs. Joy White discussed how to use: • Facebook • Twitter • Pinterest Misc.Corres: Date: 2. Requirements to get a library card r ^( I n Item#:i` L 1 Copies to: 161 2A "tz • Mrs. Matthes will be sending the document to the County Attorney. 3. Collier Connects Grant Activities • Starts in November. 4. Employee of the Month—October • Mrs. Grieve nominated Karen Kocses for the October employee of the month. Ms.Bettinger-Hennink seconded the nomination and the motion passed. 5. Meeting Room Policies—Status • Mrs. Matthes stated that all the meeting room policies and fee charges have been approved. Mrs. Matthes will bring a copy to the December meeting. NEW BUSINESS 1) A patron requested a fee waiver for use of one of the small conference rooms at the Golden Gate Branch. Mrs. Matthes requested to deny the waiver fee and the board confirmend the decision. 2) Three positions for the Library Advisory Board will expire on December 31, 2012. There are two applicants who have applied they are Doris J. Lewis for District 4 and Carla Grieve for District 2. The third position for District 5 is still open. It is being advertised. Mrs. Murray moved to accept the applications of Doris J. Lewis and Mrs. Carla Grieve to serve on the board. Mrs. Bettinger-Hennink seconded and the motion was carried unanimously. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS • Ms. Bettinger-Henning mentioned that there are free solutions to picking up trash around the library and will check with a Scout Troop. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mrs. Matthes reported the following: 1. Current Statistics • The annual circulation exceeded last year's circulation by fourteen thousand items. 2. Staffing update-None 3. Comparison of book costs • The library is charged a higher cost for audio and e-books that are downloaded than publishers charge individual purchasers. Some publishers do not sell to e-books to Libraries, and some limit the number of times an e-book can be checked out from a Library. 2 Dui 2A 4. State Library visit November 16th • Sandy Newell, a consultant for the State Library,will be visiting Southwest Florida. She will meet with the Friends of Marco Island Library and the Friends at the Naples Regional Library. The meetings are open to the public and anyone who wants to participate can attend either meeting. 5. Organizational chart • Mrs. Matthes distributed the organizational chart and stated that there are several vacancies for Mangers, as well as other positions. Currently the Library has eighty-four point five (84.5) positions authorized. Three of these are vacant at this time. Originally, at its height the Library was authorized to have 121 full-time equivalent positions. REPORT OF THE FRIENDS Mrs. Grieve reported: • The Friends Newsletter was published and mailed out. • Amy Kolis is no longer working with the Friends of Library. • The Red, White & Roulette fund raiser will be on November 2, 2012, at the Waldorf Astoria. • The next Friends of the Library board meeting will be Friday November the 19`". ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Library Advisory Board. Ms. Bettinger- Hennink moved to adjourn, Mrs. Murray seconded and the motion was carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m. Approved by: 40,1„ 4„,c Doris J. Lewis Chair, Library Advisory Board 3 161 2A 17 5$) iumning � FEB 2 o 2013 13 ,v Naples, Florida, December 6, 2012 LET IT BE KNOWN that the LIBRARY ADVISORY BOARD met on this date in regular session at 10:00 a.m. in the Headquarters Branch Library with the following members present: CHAIR: Doris J. Lewis—District-4 VICE-CHAIR: Loretta Murray—District-1 Fiala Y Connie Bettinger-Hennink—District-3 Hider Henning Carla Grieve— District-2 Coyle v. Rochelle Lieb—District-5 G �oanct ALSO PRESENT: Roberta Riess, Literacy Program Marilyn Matthes, Library Director Lisseth Weschler, Administrative Assistant APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mrs. Lewis asked for additions or corrections to the minutes of October 17, 2012. A few minor corrections were noted. Mrs. Lieb moved to approve the minutes, Mrs. Murray seconded and the motion was carried unanimously that the minutes be approved as corrected. LITERACY PROGRAM REPORT—Mrs. Riess reported: • Handed out a brochure referencing the computer classes the library is offering through the Collier Connects Grant. • The Conversation Club is a success. We have two separate sessions every Tuesday at 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. • Starting In January, I will be partnering with the Collier Connects computer classes in East Naples. I will be offering even more basic computer classes to patrons who have difficulties in Collier Connects classes. • Mrs. Reiss has been invited to a Literacy conference on Captive in May to give a presentation on the Conversation Club program. Misc. Comes: Report of Officers - None Date: Communications-None Item a -Written b - Personal Copies to: Unfinished Business 1) Employee of the Month—November • Mrs. Grieve nominated Joy White for the November employee of the month. Ms. Bettinger-Hennink seconded the nomination and the motion passed. 1 R..: `-1 2 A 0,, Employee of the Month—December • Mrs. Lewis nominated Lynn Gesdorf for the December employee of the month. Mrs. Murray seconded the nomination and the motion passed. Mrs. Matthes stated: 2 Library card policy—The paper work is still at the County Attorney's office. 3. LAB member application-The County will be advertising District 5, Mrs. Liebs' position, again because no one has applied. 4. Zinio—Mrs. Matthes handed out paperwork that illustrated procedures on how to log into Zinio. 5. Cameras at HQ—Cameras in headquarters have been installed throughout the library. 6. Bench in courtyard —This was purchased with funds donated by Mrs. Jane Parks, in memory of her husband. Mrs. Matthes is also going to the County to request that the courtyard be named after Ben Parks. New Business: Mrs. Matthes stated: 1) System Upgrade • The library automation system has been upgraded to Sierra. The new system is also owned by the same automation company we have used since 2006. a. Possible on-line registration for library cards • Patrons will be able to fill out their own registration on line but they will have to physically come in to the library to receive their Library cards. 2) Staffing • Karen Tibbetts will be starting on January 2, 2013. She will be the new full-time Administrative Assistant. • Christopher Serio will be starting as a Librarian starting at • Headquarters. • - Ginjer Fassold will be starting in Immokalee as a Library Program Specialist. • There are positions still open at Marco Island and at Naples Regional. • Gywn Goodman is retiring. Her last day will be Friday, December 7t'. She has worked at Headquarters Reference and at Marco Island as a Branch Manager. 2 161 2A/2' • Michael Brauer from our IT dept will be leaving. He has agreed to work for us part-time until we find a replacement. 3) Connect2Compete—State Program, starting in March • This is a program that enables children who receive free or reduced lunches at public schools the ability to receive a low cost computer and a low cost internet connection. The library will be providing free digital literacy training on-line and in person. We will be getting more information about this program in the Spring. 4) Marco Island Rose Hall completion and funds • The project for noise reduction has been completed and there is money unspent from this project. The remaining three hundred and fifty thousand dollars will be divided between the Friends of Marco and the Library. Mrs. Matthes will take the request to the Board of County Commissioners in January. General Considerations Ms. Bettinger-Henning mentioned that she is very pleased with the staff of Golden Gate Library. Mrs. Matthes stated that the Senior Resource Center still wants to rent the old Golden Gate Library on a semi-permanent basis. There is a lease agreement that has to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners that will take place at the January meeting. We had a request from the Experience Works program for office space. This program is funded by the state and provides seniors the opportunity to work part-time. This program has been authorized to hire up to thirty more seniors in Collier County. The Senior Resources Center and Experience Works are exploring a joint partnership. Experience Works would provide a clerical person to help the Senior Resources Center at the old Golden Gate library. Director's Report Mrs. Matthes reported the following: 1. Current Statistics • Circulation for the month of October is down slightly and November went down significantly. The month of November decreased twelve percent in comparison from last year. The library has less money to spend on books, and it is starting to affect circulation. The staff also believes crowds during "early voting" kept some library users away. • There is a program that Overdrive offers called Test Drive—which provides technical information on lending e-readers. The Library Advisory Board members expressed concern that it would be difficult for staff to manage and that security would be difficult. The Library Advisory Board did not support this program. 3 161 2 A C2 2. Staffing update—(see new business above) REPORT OF THE FRIENDS Mrs. Grieve reported: • Ken Assal, Linda Leatherbury and Dick Jordan are new Board members. • The entire board is going to be attending a presentation by the Community Foundation on Board Roles and Responsibilities. • Pat Sherry and Marlene Kern are new employees working in the office. • Bill Pappalardo and Amy Schiffer are no longer with the Friends of the Library. • There will be no Executive Director for the Friends of the Library only staff for the office. • The member appreciation event in January has been cancelled. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Library Advisory Board. Mrs. Grieve moved to adjourn, Ms. Bettinger- Hennink seconded and the motion was carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 a.m. Approved by: Q'�Itia V-12-AM1 - Doris J. Lewis Chair, Library Advisory Board 4 2A 13 JAN 152113 0 OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING HELD BY: DECEMBER 10, 2012 The following were in attendance: Caleb Morris, Captain, Ochopee Fire Control District Ronald Gilbert, Chairman, Port of the Islands,Advisory Board Member Tony Davis, Port of the Islands Advisory,Advisory Board Member Frank Hawkins, Port of the Islands,Advisory Board Member ROLL CALL OF ATTENDEES: The meeting came to order and then roll call of attendees. ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS TO AGENDA: Fiala Hiller Henning -rig- No additions or deletions to the Agenda. Coyle; Coittfe- 7;4.4( APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Nc+►r44. The Agenda was approved as written. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF 11-13-12: The minutes were approved with corrections. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS: There aren't any this month. REPORTS: Chief's Report: Captain Morris—The Chief is now including the Firefighter in the line of duty deaths throughout the US. As of 12-10-12 there has been 76 Firefighter line of duty deaths nationwide. Tony Davis — He felt there should be a comment stating that the line of duty deaths are nationwide. Misc. Cones: Page 1 Date: Item#: UP 1 I Copies to: 161 2A `3 Ron Gilbert—Suggested adding US in front of Firefighter LODD. Operations Report: Captain Morris—We have had 39 calls for the month of November, 2012. We had three calls out of District to Marco Island Fire District and East Naples Fire District. We had one boat call. Ron Gilbert—Is that a boat fire? Captain Morris—Yes,fire, rescue, anything to do with the use of Rescue Boat 60. We have had minor inspections and no fire investigations. The total Personnel training hours for the month of November 2012 was 483.5. Ron Gilbert—Is that normal? Captain Morris—Yes and it is ongoing a couple of hours every day. OLD BUSINESS: Grant Updates: Captain Morris—Neither the FEMA Grant nor the SAFER Grant have been announced yet. Even though we have not been awarded the grants yet we have not been cut out of the process we are still in the running. The DOF Grant was awarded the foam was purchased and delivered. Vacant Position on the Advisory Board (Has to be a resident of the District) Ron Gilbert—Linda sent something out regarding the fact that the Advisory Board Member has to be a resident of the District. Tony Davis —This is regarding the verification from the Chief whether Bob Miller could be on the board a while back. He said Bob Miller Jr. is living in Everglades City but he needs to find out if it is a permanent residence. Ron Gilbert— He has someone from Port of the Islands but he would rather see someone from Everglades City get the position. Page 2 161 2 A f3 1-75 Station 63 Update: Captain Morris—The Chief and Dan Summers are at a meeting today in Ft. Myers regarding the Station on 1-75. They are going over the plans of the station with FDOT who is continuing to move forward with rebuilding the rest area. FDOT has no problem with building the Fire Station they have a problem with the operations costs. Ron Gilbert—That was clearly stated in the beginning. Captain Morris—FDOT said they definitely want to go forward with the station. Port of the Islands Update: Ron Gilbert—I guess that is the Fire Station. Captain Morris-Yes that is moving forward every day. There had to be some minor updating to the plans because some of the codes had changed. The go head has been given to move forward on refurbishing the building at Port of the Islands. Tony Davis—The issue with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Water Management District with regards to revamping the weir will affect the emergency water irrigation system. Have you looked into how it may affect the station in regards to emergency water? Captain Morris—I haven't really heard much about this. Ron Gilbert — Their plan is to move the weir 2000 feet just north of Orchid Cove this is supposedly to allow the manatee to come into the bay. The residents are not for it they feel it is too expensive and not necessary. Captain Morris—Are they going to move all of the pickups for the water plant? Tony Davis—The emergency pumps will have to be relocated if they move the weir. Captain Morris— It sounds like they are just moving things back and that they are going to put everything back as it was. If that is the case they it won't affect the Fire Department. We can draft salt water if necessary. The only problem would be if the water is going to be cut off. Tony Davis— The water probably won't be cut off until they are ready to hook up to the new pumps. Captain Morris—If we can't get water out of the hydrants then we will draft the salt water. I don't see that it is going to be an issue but I will definitely look into it. Page 3 161 2 A I,. NEW BUSINESS: The attached Memo has to be signed by Ron Gilbert after a motion is passed by the Advisory Board recommending the re-appointment of Joel A.Davis and Ronald Gilmerg Gilbert to the board. Frank Hawkins—He made a motion recommending the re-appointment of Joel A. Davis and Ronald GilmerfGilbert to the Ochopee Advisory Board. The motion was passed unanimously. afil be eV Ron Gilbert-The memo has to be changed because his name is Ronald Gilmerie Gilbert not Ronald Gilmore Gilbert. He requested the change and then to e-mail the memo to him for signature. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made to adjourn the meeting it was passed and the meeting ended. . j vt� Ronald Gilbert, Chairman Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board Page 4 161 2A '3 OCHOPEE FIRE CONTROL DISTRICT U! V ADVISORY BOARD MEETING HELD FEB 1 5 1013 JANUARY 14, 2013 The following were in attendance: BY: Alan McLaughlin, Fire Chief, Ochopee Fire Control District Caleb Morris, Captain, Ochopee Fire Control District Ronald Gilbert, Chairman, Port of the Islands,Advisory Board Member Tony Davis, Port of the Islands,Advisory Board Member Frank Hawkins, Port of the Islands,Advisory Board Member ROLL CALL OF ATTENDEES: Fiala i Hiller Henning The meeting came to order. Coyle 6efetta ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS TO AGENDA: 1-4c.rce. Frank Hawkins--He added inspections under new business. APPROVAL OF AGDENDA: The agenda was approved with the addition of inspections under new business. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF 12/10/12: The minutes were approved with one correction on page four of Ronald Gilberts middle name from Gilmere to the correct spelling of Gilmer. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS: Chief McLaughlin--He mentioned that attached to the agenda was a letter of recognition from the Collier County Sheriff's Office involving one of our Firefighters. The letter is in reference to a rescue call involving a female being eaten by an alligator. The deputy got a hold of her he slipped and fell. So Firefighter Lee Kidder went in grabbed the female and handed her over to the Sheriff's Department. The recognition is for this incident and per the letter it will be presented on Monday February 4, 2013 at 9:30AM at the Professional Development Center, 615 3rd Ave South, Naples, Fl. Page 1 lvlisc. Corres: Date: Item#: Copies to: A 161 2 A 73 REPORTS: Chiefs Report: Chief McLaughlin—The budget is on track through our first quarter and we are on track with our budget projections in fact we are actually a little ahead. There are some Capital items he wishes to purchase but he is holding off on those items to see how the budget is going to hold up with regular expenses. He is in the process of obtaining bids on ventilation fans, one has been out of service and the second one just quit working. We have not had any unforeseen equipment breakage. The Job Banker and Overtime budget line items are on track. The US Firefighter line of duty deaths for 2012 was 83 and 8 for the month of December 2012. Ron Gilbert—He wanted to know if the Department had made any changes in response policy. He cited the incident in Massachusetts when someone set some houses on fire then shot at the firemen when they came to put out the fire. Chief McLaughlin-No. Ron Gilbert—Do you ever think about that? Chief McLaughlin—We hope that would be a very rare occurrence and there is no way of knowing that is going to happen. it is not the first time it has happened and there are departments in other states where the fireman wear bullet proof vest. In Gary Indiana it is mandatory to wear a bullet proof vest while on duty so there are some areas where they have taken precautions. But he doesn't foresee it as being necessary in a rural area such as the Ochopee Fire District. Frank Hawkins—Would that be considered a line of duty death or a crime? Chief McLaughlin—That would be a line of duty death because you were responding to a fire but it is also a crime so it would be both. Operations Report: Chief McLaughlin—58 calls for the month of December 2012, one call out of the District on Marco Island, one emergency medical boat call. We had two fire inspections and no fire investigations. We had 513 hours of training for the month of December. Page 2 ., 161 2A 73 OLD BUSINESS: Grant Up Dates Chief McLaughlin—We are still waiting for our FEMA Grant to purchase equipment. FEMA contacted us for routing and banking information which is a good sign it usually means you are going to get the grant. We sent that information to them right after Christmas and there was an award on the 4th of January but we were not on it but he assumes our paperwork had not made it through the system. He is hoping that within the next 30 days we will hear something the award would be$81,000 to purchase equipment. 1-75 Station Chief McLaughlin—We are still on track. They are supposed to meet with the construction company regarding the building. He has not seen the original documents that were sent to FDOT regarding the building. Even though it is their money we do have some necessary requirements for the building. The construction company is supposed to break ground in May 2013 and the project is to close June 2014. Port of the Islands Station Chief McLaughlin—He met last Friday with the budget office trying to get some answers because he has a meeting this Friday with the CID Board. $750,000 has been allocated out of the Pilt funds for Ochopee Fire Control District. $430,000 out of the$750,000 has already been taken out and is in the Ochopee Fire Control District budget to offset operating cost. The remaining balance which would be approximately$325,000 has been added to the project of remodeling the station of which the estimated cost is$600,000. In order to cover the total construction costs additional funds will have to come from raising the millage rate. At this time we don't know exactly how much more has to be added to cover the$600,000 until we get a construction bid and we probably won't see any construction bids until mid April because the bids are going out right now. We should have some solid numbers by mid April. Our early projections show it is going to cost$230,000 to the District you take that over 4100 tax payers break it out over three years it comes to about$22.00 per property owner. Ron Gilbert—This will not take a vote of the property owners in the District the commissioners can do this? Chief McLaughlin—The BCC through their enactment can raise the millage rate to get this project done without going to a vote. They have enough letters and support to do this. The budget office wanted the payment to go two years. The BCC suggested three years in order to lower the dollar amount therefore lessening the impact. It would take the millage rate increase from 4.18maybe even less 4.07. 4 Page 3 ()\ (Lt‘A 3 161 2A / Chief McLaughlin—We are on track with the Port of the Islands Station re-model and they are looking to break ground in either May or June 2013. The construction should be completed by November or December of 2013. He was informed that it could take 90 to 180 days depending on who received the bid. Hank Jones who is the project manager for the County thinks whoever takes the bid will complete it as soon as possible they won't drag it out. Frank Hawkins—Asked if they were going to do any modifications to the parking lot. Chief McLaughlin—He said they are going to re-do the parking lot the dumpster is going to be moved and enclosed. A hedge is also going to be put in. The water and electric meter are going to be split. He wants the water and electrical usage to be separated. We will have an emergency generator. He said the department of parks and recreation did not want to be included in hooking to the generator. Frank Hawkins—He said there are plans already for an enclosed dumpster. Chief McLaughlin—They should know about that because it is in the STP so if they are going to do something over there it is just temporary. Vacant Position on the Advisory Board Chief McLaughlin—There is still a vacant position on the Advisory Board. The issue with Bob Miller is that you have to be a resident of the District. It has been re-posted. Frank Hawkins—You don't have to be a property owner you just have to live in the District. Chief McLaughlin—Yes,you could be a renter,you just have to live in the District. NEW BUSINESS: Response to Board of County Commissioners Statement Chief McLaughlin—It was brought up at the last Board of County Commissioners Meeting during the Isles of Capri Fire District issue of separating from Collier County. Fred Coyle said the County Commissioners cannot give up their duties, responsibilities or authorities to anybody they would have to be annexed by East Naples Fire District. Commissioner Hiller gave direction to the group in attendance and East Naples Fire District to include Ochopee Fire Control District in the annexation. She did this without any input or consultation from the Ochopee Advisory Board. He said the Ochopee Advisory Board needs to send a response to her request. This information has also been submitted to the Mayor. This is something that has been pushed on the District without any previous knowledge. We have done financial studies in the past regarding consolidation with East Naples before and there is no way that is going to happen. Page 4 161 2 A /3 Ron Gilbert—She can't do that can she? Chief McLaughlin—We've done two studies for Commissioner Hiller. To lower Ochopee Fire Control District to 1.5 mills they would lose$800,000 and East Naples is already$1,000,000 in the hole.They would have to lay off two thirds of the Department or shut all the facilities down or they would have to raise their millage to 2.4 which isn't going to happen. East Naples Fire District asked for a millage rate increase and was voted down. But they are going to ask again for an increase because they cannot continue to operate under their current funding. There is no way East Naples Fire District could take us over it would be too much of a loss for them and for their tax payers. He informed the Ochopee Advisory Board of this information so that they could formulate a response. He suggested that they formulate a letter between board members via e-mail and then bring it to the meeting. Everglades City Agreement for Service Expires December 2013 Chief McLaughlin—We have a service agreement with Everglades City that expires December 2013 and no one can find a copy of it. He found a copy in an old file;they can't even find a copy at Everglades City Hall. We started the process of sending the copies to the County Attorney and to the Clerk at Everglades City Hall. The City of Everglades has to have an ordinance stating that the County can provide the service and what those services are.Then the County Commissioners will adopt it which will renew the service agreement for an indefinite time period or for 20 years it will be up to them. Inspections Frank Hawkins—What is the legal definition of how much path of egress or ingress do we have to legally maintain? Chief McLaughlin—There are two answers to that question. The first one depends on how the building was built and what path of egress was determined when the building was built. You would have to go back to the architectural plans to determine that. Usually on any exit way or pathway on a floor landing it's the entire pathway or the minimum width of the path way. It isn't just a black and white issue. Based on the situation at Sunset Cay that minimum width would have been the distance of the center pylon to the wall anything in that breeze other than an extinguisher box is intruding. The code says "no exit or egress passage way shall be blocked with anything". The AHJ (Chief McLaughlin) has some authority regarding this situation. If you take legal action it will affect everyone in the building you have to treat everyone the same. He finds it is much better to sit down with everyone concerned and find out what the issue is and come to a workable solution that the AHJ (Chief McLaughlin) can live with understanding the full situation. Page 5 161 2A /3 Chief McLaughlin - No more than two people are going to be walking down that exit way at any time in the middle of the night because of the occupancy of the building. If there were a hundred people on that floor and that was the only way out of the building it would be a different story. So we came to an equitable solution of some folding tables a smaller size which will be a smaller impact to the passage way we can live with that. He feels that is well within what the code intended for the occupancy of that building. Ron Gilbert—Just as long as it is a small enough table that it does not block the passage way or if it is a plant that is over to the side. Chief McLaughlin—Technically there cannot be a plant in front of the fire extinguisher. Nothing can be within three feet or blocking the access to the fire extinguisher. You can't have a plant so close to your front door that it hits it when you open it. In a multifamily occupancy you cannot block you means of egress. So basically nothing can be out there but on the ground floor it is a little different because if you can walk out the front door and step on the grass it doesn't make any difference. We have two options here we enforce the code to the letter which means nothing goes in the egress area walk way or we come back and say this is what we can allow are table and chairs that are foldable or movable and of small size that they will not impact the breeze way. Frank Hawkins--It gets a little more complicated than that because the building association actually has the responsibility to enforce the condominium laws which says their owners cannot modify their commons areas in any way without board approval. He said you can't have a plant or table without asking the board. Chief McLaughlin—That is a condo association rule they are breaking not mine. Frank Hawkins—But who is going to give notice? The condo association should give notice to the homeowner that they are in violation and that they have to remove the table. Chief McLaughlin—I agree with you but if it were a fire violation we would give notice to the condo association who would give notice to the owner. The president of the condo association involved John Carr because this is a situation that they had dealt with before. He told the condo association what he could accept but he left it up to them regarding the issue. He can't over ride the condo association. Ron Gilbert—Is this written down? Chief McLaughlin—No not yet he has not heard back from the Condo Association when he does he will put it in writing. Page 6 161 2A L3 Frank Hawkins—We would have to take a look at the original drawings for that building to find out the approved amount of pathway egress. Chief McLaughlin The minimum is 38 inches. Frank Hawkins—That would be in the building permit? Chief McLaughlin—It would be in the plans. Here is another problem your building was built in 1984 under the 1982 code and those are long gone. So what was approved might be out of date. You have to look at what was the intention of the code 38" has been the standard for many years for a multi family dwelling and can be up to 42" depending on occupancy load. It is either knowing what the code is asking for and what he can allow as AHJ or we just go to the letter of the law which is nothing can be in there. That hasn't changed anything in an egress pathway. In this situation it is two people. Most of the people go the other way no one is walking past their table. Frank Hawkins—He said there is a lot of stuff going on there. He suggested that they inspect the building. Chief McLaughlin—Technically we are supposed to inspect all buildings once a year but the problem is man power. We just can't get to it we don't have the people to do it and anything that we find that didn't comply with the fire code would have to go. Condo association has their rules as to what they allow but the fire code trumps everything. Frank Hawkins—He doesn't think there are any condo association laws regarding those things other than property owners can't modify the common area without board approval. Chief McLaughlin—He came up with a solution to the problem if the condo association President is alright with it if not he needs to enforce his condominium rule. He brought up the fact that you can't have anything on a staircase there is no getting around that. Frank Hawkins--Well there are. A lot of people have plants on the landings between the actual stairs. Chief McLaughlin-You can't have anything on a staircase that is specific in the code there can be no obstructions. Frank Hawkins—If we put together some fairly generic rules the first thing that is going to be asked is where is this coming from. Is there something you could put together as a kind of general rule of thumb as to what you would be looking for during an inspecting of these buildings such as nothing on the staircases etc...? Page 7 161 2 A Chief McLaughlin—We are currently under the 2010 Florida Statutes Fire Prevention and Building Codes so we would just go to the statutes. Unless a County or City adopts the code they can add to it because it is a minimum. It is assumed you are under the code if you don't adopt it. Frank Hawkins—He would like some sort of documented guidelines. Chief McLaughlin--He could put together an inspection cut sheet. It would basically have listed the things the Fire Department would look for during an inspection. He told Frank he needed a month to put this information together. It would be just Capt Morris and himself collecting this information so he needed sometime. Public Comment None The meeting adjourned at 5:06PM AV Ronald Gilbert, Chairman Ochopee Fire Control District Advisory Board Page 8 , . 161 J, 2 I [4 JFI) RI;m7 g JAN 0 4 2 012 BY:......................o PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING THURSDAY, DECEMBER 27, 2012 THE CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET THURSDAY, DECEMBER 27 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34108. 2%4 4441 F101141/ AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll call 2. Approval of December 10 Clam Bay Subcommittee minutes 3. Clam Bay transition 4. Clam Bay dredging permit Fiala 5. Updated Clam Bay management plan Hiller 6. Audience comments Henning L---- 7. Adjourn Coyle ,/ ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT(239)597-1749. VISIT US AT HTTP://PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. Misc.Corres: Date: Item#: 12/20/2012 8:49:10 AM Copies to: l �: 1 6 I 2A CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES MONDAY,DECEMBER 10,2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Monday, December 10, 2012 at 3:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Clam Bay Subcommittee Susan O'Brien,Chairman Tom Cravens Mike Levy Mary Anne Womble Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary • Also Present: Susan Boland Tim Hall Jim Hoppensteadt Kathy Worley AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Draft Clam Bay mangrove maintenance annual report 3. Draft Clam Bay tidal analysis annual report 4. FDEP Data for copper levels in Clam Bay 5. Proposed BCC Ordinance amendment discussion 6. Date and tops for next Subcommittee meeting 7. Audience Comments 8. Adjourn ROLL CALL All members were present. DRAFT CLAM BAY ANNUAL REPORTS Chairman O'Brien explained the draft Clam Bay mangrove maintenance and tidal analysis annual ,;<; • were included to review briefly;Mr.Tim Hall and Mr.Ken Humiston would present the full reports at . re Boar. meeting. Mr.Hall commented that historically when Clam Pass has closed,the water furthest from t .ecomes stagnant and increasing contaminants and algae growth.As oxygen levels decrease,fish a l.j14.!1-t ife m unaffected locations. The longer the flow is constricted,the greater the chance for mang $ ° °° 7, ly during the rainy season.Areas identified as stressed continue to be monitored on_,,,,;„south n° Clam Bay (Plots 3&4)and north of Clam Pass(Plot 7). An unintended consequence of • $ ®redgt, „ s an increase in the tidal range creating a lower,low tide,and exposed seagrasses.Becaus° a er level,seagrasses are growing in other areas.Mr.Hall and Ms.Kathy Worley agreed it w.,- be`+ an ostly to propagate seagrasses. 12 , ... , 16I 211 Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes December 10, 2012 FDEP DATA FOR COPPER LEVELS IN CLAM BAY The Subcommittee briefly discussed Clam Bay copper data. PROPOSED BCC ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DISCUSSION The Subcommittee briefly discussed the proposed amendments to the Pelican Bay Services Division's Ordinance and a budget currently deficient of funds to carry out the additional Clam Bay responsibilities. CONSTRUCTING AN OSPREY NEST BOX Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to make a recommendation to the Board that in a cooperative effort with the Foundation, investigate constructing an osprey nest site adjacent to the South beach restaurant facility with a webcam. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms.Marcia Cravens distributed correspondence regarding the Clam Bay dredging permit. ADJOURNMENT Mr.Cravens made a motion,second by Ms. Womble to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,passing the motion,and the meeting adjourned at 3:53 p.m. Susan O'Brien,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 12/19/2012 4:53:04 PM Ail ,to 4.c.-.=% -112,2 :"sue e a 13 161 Dec.27,2012 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board 3. Clam Bay transition comments by Dave Trecker Page 1 of 1 December 15, 2012 One-way communication with PBSD directors: Since I will be up north and unable to attend the December 27 meeting of the Clam Bay Subcommittee,I want to pass on the following thoughts. It is essential the PBSD move quickly to assume its assigned responsibility for managing all facets of the Pelican Bay Conservation Area,including Clam Bay.It is a responsibility assigned by the Board of County Commissioners.It is not an option.And at least some of us feel it is an important opportunity for the PBSD. I have been assured that county staff and the Pelican Bay Foundation will assist in the transfer of those responsibilities to the PBSD.Everyone appears to be on board. There are,by my count,four areas of management.Action will be needed,I believe,in three of the four areas. (1) Clam Pass dredging-how to handle the permitting and how to manage the dredging. Regarding permitting,there are two obvious possibilities:Withdraw and replace the active application or revise the active application.Changes to be considered are the permittee,which now should be the PBSD; width of cut at the mouth,which probably should be changed to"no more than 80 feet;"and triggers for dredging,which could be specified based on input from Tim Hall and Ken Humiston or left qualitative.Timely issuance of a permit to deal with the current shoaling is obviously important. Our agents could be Turrell Hall Associates and Humiston&Moore,the advantage being they know Clam Pass and are local,or Adkins,the advantage being it prepared the existing dredging permit application. (2) Water purity-transfer of data and ongoing sampling and monitoring. Things to be monitored include nutrient levels (dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus),dissolved oxygen, bacteria and copper. Transfer of all data from the county and the Foundation should be straightforward,as should assignments of future sampling by the PBSD. Adkins could be retained,reporting to the PBSD,for data analysis,or this could be assigned to Tim Hall and the local folks. (3) Hydrolytic measurements-tidal flow and bathymetry. Ken Humiston already does analysis of flow measurements for the PBSD.We should probably have him do bathymetry as well;he used to do that some years ago.I believe sampling for bathymetric data would have to be transferred from the county. (4) Mangrove maintenance Tim Hall already does a terrific job for the PBSD. The Seagate lawsuit is another matter,which should be addressed separately. I personally feel we should involve the Foundation in a constructive partnership,not only during this transition period but later in proactive management of the conservation area. I hope these comments are helpful.I have great confidence in Neil Dorrill and in Susan O'Brien and her committee. Good luck! Dave Trecker 161 2A D (I) ecember 27,2012 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board 4. Clam Bay dredging permit USACE correspondence of 12/17/2012 Page 1 of 2 Original Message From: Neil Dorrill [mailto:Neil a,dmgfl.com] Sent: Tuesday,December 18,2012 11:24 AM To: ResnickLisa Subject: FW: SAJ-1996-02789 Clam Pass project - application and management items - status note (UNCLASSIFIED) Original Message From: McAlpinGary [mailto:GaryMcAlpin@a colliergov.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:30 AM To: OchsLeo; CasalanguidaNick; LorenzWilliam; Neil Dorrill; Neil Dorrill Subject: FW: SAJ-1996-02789 Clam Pass project - application and management items - status note (UNCLASSIFIED) FYI -Received this last night from Linda Elligot-USACE. Original Message From: Elligott, Linda A SAJ [mailto:Linda.A.Elligott(a�usace.army.mil] Sent: Monday, December 17,2012 5:41 PM To: McAlpinGary Subject: SAJ-1996-02789 Clam Pass project - application and management items - status note (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Gary, I received an email from Georgia Hiller (as below) which indicated that this project will be revised. The email was also sent to USFWS/Howe and NMFS/Sramek. As a result, USFWS has informed the Corps that the ESA consultation has been suspended and the draft Biological Opinion that you have reviewed/provided comments for in concert with the ongoing Corps permit review will not be completed in the previously-stated timeframe. Due to pending project revisions, the need for revised plan sheets and uncertainty with respect to Collier County management for a long-term permit of this nature, the Corps intends to withdraw this project. A formal letter will be sent to you as the on-record point of contact for Collier County; a copy will be forwarded to Atkins/Tabar as the consultant of record. The file may be re-activated with provision of an updated application and a complete submittal. Note that the project, when re-activated, would be subject to review by NMFS-PRD for potential impacts to swimming sea turtles and the smalltooth sawfish; this type of consultation may take 10-12 months from the date of consultation package "completion",based on current turnaround times. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks, Linda December 27,2012 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelil Ba SerIices Division Board 1� 4. Clam Bay dredging permit USACE correspondence of 12/17/2012 Page 2 of 2 <START COPY> Please be advised that the Collier Board of County Commissioners voted this week to transfer management of the Clam Bay System back to the County's Pelican Bay Services Division - Neil Dorrill, Administrator. The Board of County Commissioners took further action to direct a revision of the Clam Bay Management for dredging activities within Clam Pass, and that dredging permits be amended accordingly. Specific details of changes to this project will be provided to the Corps as soon as they are available. The dredging plan will be consistent with updates that will be made to the existing Clam Bay Management Plan. We believe the changes will remain within the scope of the current application. As such, please continue the ongoing coordination with the resource agencies. With thanks- Commissioner Georgia Hiller, Esq. Chair,Board of County Commissioners <END COPY> Linda A. Elligott Project Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office 1520 Royal Palm Square Blvd., Suite 310 Fort Myers, FL 33919 Telephone: 239-334-1975 x 22 email: linda.a.elligottAusace.army.mil Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE December 27,2012 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Plnn S,rvices Di2nArd 1 1 5. Updated Clam Bay management plan comments by Kathy Worley Page 1 of 2 December 12, 2012 Re: Clam Bay Management Plan Dear Pelican Bay MSTBU Board Members: I am writing in response to the responsibility given to you by the County Commission and the December 11th Commissioner's meeting to develop and implement a management and monitoring plan for Clam Bay. The idea to manage Clam Pass and the Bays as a whole is something that I have advocated for since the early 90's, There is a need for a comprehensive plan to protect the estuary, which consists of environmental resources that are found in the Pass, Bays, Tributaries and the landward habitats including the mangrove forests, scrub and dunes. Given that the Pass is only — 50% functional I think it would behoove you to first concentrate on getting a dredging permit before the wet season gets here and then take some time to develop a management and monitoring plan that addresses the concerns of the entire estuary. I believe you does not have to start from scratch regarding the dredging permit as the one currently in the hands of FDEP could be tweeked (i.e. the width of the dredge cut and footprint, etc. if you so desire) to accomplish in the short- term resolving flow and phase lag issues in the back bays that were illustrated in the current Humiston and Moore report. By separating out the dredging permit for the moment and keeping it under the auspices of the Mangrove Restoration Plan you could get the Pass operating on all cylinders again and take the time necessary to develop and true management and monitoring plan for the estuary that would include the dredging permit as a part of the tools needed to alleviate future pass closures or inefficient estuarine function. I urge you to establish a working group that includes all of the stakeholders that have worked to preserve this system and have the scientific expertise necessary to assist in Plan development. In particular those groups that were a part of the original "working group" in the 90's that dealt with the mangrove die-off problem (the Conservancy, Audubon, MAG, and Collier County Natural Resource Department, etc.) not only have a vested interest, but have the expertise along with Turrell, Hall and Associates, and should have direct input into a new Management Plan for the area. "The fundamental objective of mangrove management is to promote conservation, restoration or rehabilitation and sustainable use of mangrove ecosystems and their associated habitats, supported where necessary by ecological restoration and rehabilitation" (World Bank et al., 2004). The original Clam Bay Management Plan was developed to restore the mangrove forests and was very successful. Moving forward we need to not only focus on the health and viability of the mangrove forest (though they are near and dear to my heart!), but the entire ecosystem and its recreational uses. The plan should have the objective of sustaining the entire estuary, which would include the mangrove forest, benthic habitats and invertebrates (seagrasses and other organisms that December 27,2012 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the PSTfcan ay Jervices D ard ("') 5. Updated Clam Bay management plan comments by Kathy Worley Page 2 of 2 Kathy B. Worley Re: Clam Bay Management Plan December 12, 2012 Page 2 makeup the bottom of the food chain), fish, birds, the dune and waterway systems, water quality, hydrology, etc. since all of these components are interconnected and vital in order for the estuary to be "healthy". It is generally recognized by ecologists, ichthyologists, managers and policy makers that mangroves are tightly linked by adjacent ecosystems and that managing them in isolation is unsustainable (Ellison, 2008). Taking the time to fully vet a management plan is the prudent approach that will lessen the chance of making snap decisions that may be inappropriate in pushing forward a plan quickly. Thus concentrating first on getting the dredging permit and then taking time later to develop a management plan seems the most logical route forward. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Kathy B. Worley Director of Science, Conservancy of Southwest Florida 239-403-4223 kathywAconservancy.org 161 AV AGNOLI BARBER & BRUNDAGE, INC 7-100 i K:FSf�i3. �,�J� 4�s,:�3`1f�r _lay,... _�� I� l '� ti � �;(',t_ 3 �i ;2;9) .3?7...3&.li f tkF e'39, December 20, 2012 Mr. Kyle Lukasz Pelican bay Services Re: Clam Pass Annual Monitoring, Collier County, Florida ABB PN 12-1000-GPA/106 Dear Kyle: We are pleased to submit the following proposal for Professional Surveying Services on the above referenced project. Clam Pass Annual Monitoring: 1) We shall perform bathymetric monitoring of Cut 4 at Clam Pass from profile station 0+00 thru 18+00 forty two (42) cross sections. 2) We shall perform bathymetric monitoring of Cut 4 at Clam Pass from profile station 18+27 thru 36+00 twenty (20) cross sections. 3)We will survey beach profiles extending from 100 feet landward of the vegetation line seaward to wading depth at the four(4)DNR monuments north of the inlet and three (3) monuments south of the inlet, plus one (1) intermediate beach profile. This would include DNR reference monuments R-38 through R-44 a total of eight (8) profiles. The profiles will be taken along the same azimuth as the State DEP profiles. 4)We shall obtain profile elevations at 10'intervals±,along Stations 0+00 through 3+64.5, from the vegetation line, south through the Staging area.This will include profile elevations at Station 3+30. (See attached drawing.) 5)We shall obtain profile elevations seaward from Sta 0+00, on 50'stations, at 10' intervals, to a depth of -5.0' NAVD. (See attached drawing.) Our final deliverable will be an ASCII file containing raw x, y, and z profile data points to Humiston and Moore. Elevations will be based on NGVD29 Vertical Datum. 161 2A c Our final deliverable will be an ASCII file containing raw x, y, and z profile data points. Coordinates will be based on Florida State Plane 83/90 East Zone Datum. Elevations will be based on NAVD88 Datum. Our fee for providing the above services shall be a lump sum in the amount of $18,400.00. All services will be performed under the terms and conditions specified in the "County- Wide Engineering" Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida and Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc., Contract #09-5262-S. Sincerely, AGNOLI, BARBER & BRUNDAGE, INC. cc,Guy P. Adams, P.S.M. Vice President of Surveying ' 161 1 2 A (9, WORK ORDER Agreement for "County Wide Engineering Services" Contract #09-5262-SSM BCC App 3/9/2010 10.0 This Work Order is for professional engineering services for work known as Clam Pass Annual Survey The work is specified in the proposal dated December 20, 2012, 2012 which is attached hereto and made a part of this Work Order. In accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement referenced above this Work Order is assigned to Agnoli Barber and Brundage,Inc. Scope of Work: Task I 1. Perform bathmetric monitoring of Cut #4 at Clam Pass at profile stations 0+00 thru 18+00, forty two cross sections. 2. Perform bathmetric monitoring of Cut #4 at Clam Pass at profile stations 18+27 thru 36+00, twenty cross sections. 3. Survey beach profiles extending from 100 feet landward of the vegetation line seaward to wading depth at the four (4) DNR monuments north of the inlet and three (3) monuments south of the inlet, plus one (1) intermediate beach profile. This would include DNR reference monuments R-38 through R-44 a total of eight (8) profiles. 4. Obtain profile elevation at 10' intervals ,i-, along Stations 0+00 through 3!64.5, from the vegetation line , south through the staging area. This shall include profile elevations at Station 3+30. 5. Obtain profile elevations seaward from Station 0-00, on 50' stations, at 10" intervals, to a depth of-5.0'NAVD. Schedule of Work: Complete work within 90 days from date of the Notice to Proceed authorizing start of work. Compensation: In accordance with Article Five of the Agreement, the County will compensate the Firm in accordance with the negotiated lump sum or time and material amount provided in the schedule below (if a task is time and material, so indicate and use the established hourly rate(s) as enumerated in Schedule "A" of the Agreement). (List all Tasks) Task I $ 18.400.00 (Lump Sum) TOTAL FEE $ 18,400.00 Any change within monetary authority of this Work Order made subsequent to final department approval will a considered an additional service and charged according to Schedule "A" of a Agreement. Air AUTHORIZED BY: %A 0' if k. ,,', //..,. /./..". yle Lukasz, Operati•is Manager Date ACCEPTED BY: Agnoli Barber and Brundage, Inc. . �. O /VQ,C.7riter 2d4cl2 Author' ed Company Officer GG Date C r _hlocf/1 fit. Ty Print Name and Title 161 2 A 4 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 0 MONII Ji Municipal Service Taxing & Benefit Unit JAN 0 4 2012 D BY: . NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 2 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108. cx 'i' r 3 FI/ L A The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll call 3. Agenda approval 4. Elect new Chairman 5. Recent Board of County Commissioners' decisions involving Pelican Bay Services Division 6. Approval of December 5 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 7. Monthly financial report 8. Cobblestones at San Marino crossing * (John Chandler) Fiala 9. Committee reports Hiller a. Clam Bay Subcommittee Henning i. Clam Bay transition plan Coyle ✓ ii. Clam Bay dredging permit---- b. Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee£ 10. Setting Priorities (Keith J. Dallas) 11. Changes to Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27 (Keith J. Dallas) 12. Old Business a. Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes£ (John Chandler) 13. Audience Comments 14. Miscellaneous Correspondence 15. Adjournment Board vote is anticipated £ Chairman recommended item is deferred ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE,WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239)597-1749 OR VISIT PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. Misc. Corres: Date: Item#: 12/18/2012 11:33:37 AM Copies to: 161 2A December 17, 2012 Pelican Bay Services Division Board, I have decided to resign as Chair of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board effective the January 2, 2013 meeting. It is obvious from recent actions and her total lack of communication with me that Commissioner Hiller is dissatisfied with my leadership of the PBSD Board. I have concluded that immediately choosing the new Chair of the PBSD Board may improve the ability of the PBSD to perform your important functions. I will continue to serve the remainder of my term as a Board member. i<0 & L- Keith J. Dall s 161 2A4- PELICAN_ _ BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY,DECEMBER 5,2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday, December 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Michael Levy Keith J.Dallas,Chairman Susan O'Brien Tom Cravens,Vice Chairman Dave Trecker John P.Chandler Mary Anne Womble Geoffrey S.Gibson absent John Baron absent John Iaizzo Hunter H.Hansen absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Kevin Carter,Field Manager,Dorrill Management Group Lauren Gibson,Biologist,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President&CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation REVISED AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Rules for audience participation* 5. Approval of November 7 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 6. Committee Reports a. Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee Report i. Approval of recommended approach* ii. Selection of arborist* iii. Bicycle lane survey discussion 7. Old Business a. Cobblestones at San Marino crossing discussion(John Chandler) 8. Report from Commissioner Hiller(Add-on by Dave Trecker) 9. Administrator's Report a. North Tram pedestrian crossing signal b. Landscape intersection improvements c. South berm restoration d. Pelican Bay Boulevard pathways safety concerns&status of County's repairs e. Monthly financial report 10. Additional Committee Reports b. Clam Bay Subcommittee ti i. STORET water quality data recommendation* c. Landscape Water Management Subcommittee i. Status of data collection and cost of monitoring inland waterways(Dave Trecker) ii. Alternatives to copper sulfate* iii. Community outreach d. Strategic Planning Committee news(Mary Anne Womble) 11. Chairman's Report a Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandle b. PBSD Board terms c. Announcements eta 12. New Business 13. Audience Comments 14. Miscellaneous Correspondence 15. Adjournment =++ ' ticipated 8577 , 4 161 1 2,,,,iq 4 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 ROLL CALL With the exception of Messrs.Baron,Gibson,and Hansen,all members were present. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr.Chandler made a motion,second by Dr. Trecker,to approve the agenda as amended: Following"Approval of minutes',the Board would proceed with"Pathways"then "Cobblestones"then Dr. Trecker's addition, "Commissioner Hiller Report'; The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. RULES FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Vice Chairman Cravens,to amend the"Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD meetings"by striking"politely"and replacing with"strictly". The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to amend the `Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD meetings"by inserting after item 3, but before item 4, the sentence, "After public comments are heard, the Board will proceed to discuss the agenda item and take appropriate action without interruption." The Board voted unanimously in favor and the_ motion was passed. Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Levy, to approve the"Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD meetings"as amended. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 7 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to approve the Nov. 7 Regular Session minutes as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. PATHWAYS AD-HOC COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDED APPROACH* Dr. Trecker made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Cravens, to amend PBSD Path Project Draft 6.4, Step 2 to read, "Conduct a census of trees along the length of Pelic, : Boulevard to estimate the health of the trees and determine the likely impact of dists om'' the sidewalk and the street to the trees in question."The Board voted unanimously"- i� or and the motion passed. I IN 1: Mr.Chandler made a motion,second by Vice Chairman Cravens,to amend,,0'..‘„)s Path Po i Project Draft 6.4,Step 3 to read, "Have staff revisit County and State pr s , e :!es a pathways and bicycle usage. The Board voted unanimously in favor and a ®; -s. SELECTION OF ARBORIST* :. Mr.Ian Orlikoff,ISA Certified Arborist gave a presentation rega * '* e of evaluating existing conditions to develop a plan for the pathways improvem a1j role -s"fig an approach that promotes tree health,structural integrity,and mitigates potential prop• _. veto aye*injury and liability. er,8578 $ 161 2 A ti Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Dr. Trecker,to select ISA Certified Arborist Ian Orlikoff as the Pelican Bay Services Division's arborist The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. The Board directed staff to schedule a Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee meeting in mid-January to review Mr.Orlikoffs initial evaluation of trees along Pelican Bay Boulevard. BICYCLE LANE SURVEY DISCUSSION The Board discussed developing a community survey and directed staff to assist and to obtain the County's roadway paving schedule. OLD BUSINESS COBBLESTONES AT SAN MARINO DISCUSSION Based on past complaints about noise when vehicles drive over the cobblestones at the San Marino crossing,the Board discussed:Decibel readings done at several crosswalk locations(results for crosswalks without cobblestones showed an insignificant reduction in decibel levels);safety issues;aesthetics;and cost estimates to replace cobblestones with other materials.Both the Pelican Bay Foundation(PBF)and Pelican Bay Property Owners Association's(PBPOA)were opposed to removal.Further discussion deferred to January 2. REPORT FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER(DAVE TRECKERI Dr.Trecker conveyed information he received from Commissioner Hiller regarding proposed amendments to the Pelican Bay Services Division's ordinance under consideration by the Board of County Commissioners on December 11 and included 1)adding a non-voting member of the Pelican Bay Foundation Board to this Board; 2)establishing Chairman and Vice Chairman one-year term limits;and 3)reaffirming the Pelican Bay Services Division's responsibility for managing Clam Bay in its entirety. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT NORTH TRAM PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL Mr.Dorrill reported that the signal components were delivered and work starts next week. LANDSCAPE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Mr.Dorrill reported that some residents would like to add more color at several intersections annuals. Finding the balance between landscaping best management practices and maintenance i • ve plantings was deferred to the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee. SOUTH BERM RESTORATION Mr.Dorrill reported that the south berm restoration was done within budget .mple P LI A BAY B S LEVARD PATHW.Y E T •F • Mr.Dorrill reported the recent Pelican Bay Boulevard pathways overt., . esulti ra neven areas and safety concerns. The County is in the process of grading to a lev: r rn an y •irs are 75% complete. 8579 , 161 2A t4' . , . Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Cravens, to accept the November financial report into the record. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE STORET WATER QUALITY DATA RECOMMENDATION* Ms.O'Brien made a motion,second by Mr.laizzo,to authorize up to$10,000 to have Turrell- Hall enter Clam Bay water quality data into STORET pending verification that the Clam Bay WBID is separate from the Naples WBID. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE The Board discussed locations to monitor nutrients and copper and deferred to the Subcommittee. Mr.Hoppensteadt presented Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)water quality data and map indicating Clam Bay was impaired due to high levels of copper sulfate.Mr.Hall's ongoing nutrient study and flow map would help locate the source,but a resolution still is complicated and costly. The Board discussed staff's suggestions for alternatives to copper sulfate to control algae including aeration,bacteria,and aquatic plantings;and plan to test effectiveness in Basin 3. Dr. Trecker made a motion second by Mr.Levy,to approve the pilot testing of aeration,bacteria products,and aquatic plantings using solar power in Basin III. The Board voted 6 to 2 in favor, two opposed(Mr.Chandler and Ms.O'Brien)and the motion passed. STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE Ms.Womble reported that the Strategic Planning Committee met November 8 and discussed the status of several projects including media infrastructure and community competitiveness. The Committee's next meetings are December 11 and January 8. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT SCHEDULING MEETING TO DISCUSS BOARD POLICY FOR RECONSIDERATION(JOHN CHANDLER) The Board discussed briefly whether to schedule a separate meeting to discuss the Board poli 4_,(9F reconsideration of votes. Consensus was to defer to January 2 and the Board directed staff to redi e previous material. BOARD TERMS The Board discussed the four terms expiring at once in March and ways to st.•. = ms to , i ,*e for Board continuity and easy recruitment. Ms. 0 Brien made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler,to direct t • , finis , , o discuss with Commissioner Hiller the possibility of changing the length o,' , , ±ur -3,,,,44,.r terms in the upcoming election whereas the two applicants who rece" , _ , s ffi, e appointed for four years, and applicants placing third and fourth are r, ,r •, , : ,years. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. 8580 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 1 6 1 2 A [ ( December 5, 2012 1.- ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Dallas announced upcoming meetings: Landscape Water Management Subcommittee meets December 10 at 1 p.m.and the Clam Bay Subcommittee follows at 3 p.m.;the next Board Regular Session is January 2 then February 13;and the Budget Subcommittee meets January 22 at 3 p.m.The Coastal Advisory Committee meets December 13 and Pelican Bay Foundation meets December 14. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mr.Jerry Moffatt received correspondence regarding rebuilding the pathways away from driveways; a nearby community established a special taxing unit for landscaping;the sod installed by the County as part of the pathways overlay is dead;and audience participation does not increase the length of meetings. ADIOURNMENT Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Dr. Trecker,to adjourn. The Board voted unanimously in favor,passing the motion,and the meeting was adjourned at 4:04 p.m. Keith J.Dallas,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 12/20/2012 12:32:47 PM IMP . 8581 ray.}4. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Divisio Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing 6 1 2 A Page 1of16 s Crosswalk Decibel Readings Decibel readings were taken from several different types of crosswalks to determine what extent the cobble bands installed at the mid-block crosswalks impacted the amount of sound generated. These readings were taken from the Beach Walkway and the North Tram Station crosswalks that both have the cobbles/brick pavers installed. Readings were also collected from the crosswalk at Pelican Bay Blvd.and Gulf Park Dr. which only has brick pavers installed. Readings were also collected at the painted Crayton Rd. crosswalk for comparison purposes. Readings listed were collected from 15', 50' and 75' feet from the edge of road.The 50' and 75' distances are more representative of the distances that some condo buildings are located from the roadway. When comparing between cobble/brick paver crosswalks and brick paver only crosswalks at the two distances most representative of the buildings located adjacent to the roadway there was a 1-6 decibel higher reading at a cobble/brick paver crosswalk vs.a brick paver only crosswalk at 50'.At 75'there was a 4-5 decibel higher reading at a cobble/brick paver crosswalk vs. brick paver only crosswalk. These readings can be impacted by differences in vegetation, wind velocity /direction and exterior noises, which when detected as noticeable readings were discarded. When this latest set of readings was collected the wind was approximately 10-14MPH from the SW. The reading collection point for the Beach Walkway was on the east side of the road and for the North Tram was from the west side of the road. This may have contributed to higher readings at the Beach Walkway, but because of structural walls they had to be collected from those sides to reach the distances of 50'and 75'. Attached is some information related to traffic noise, in the second paragraph it states the "A 10-dBA change in noise levels is judged by most people as a doubling of sound level. The smallest change in noise level that the human ear can perceive is about 3-dBA. Increases of 5-dBA or more are clearly noticeable." Decibel readings from the various locations and distances are listed below. Distance from Roadway Locations 15' 50' 75' Beach Walkway 76 63 57 North Tram Station 73 58 58 Pelican Bay Blvd.&Gulf Park Drive 68 57 53 Pelican Bay Blvd.&Crayton Road 63 55 53 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 2of16 2 A • Traffic Noise Background Information Introduction to Noise Human response to noise is subjective and can vary greatly from person to person. Factors that can influence individual response include the loudness,frequency,and time pattern;the amount of background noise present before an intruding noise;and the nature of the activity(e.g.,sleeping)that the noise affects. The sensitivity of the human ear to sounds of different frequencies is measured by the A-weighted decibel scale(dBA). A l0-dBA change in noise levels is judged by most people as a doubling of sound level. The smallest change in noise level that a human car can perceive is about 3-dBA. Increases of 5-dBA or more are clearly noticeable. Nonnal conversation ranges between 44 and 65 dBA when the people speaking arc 3 to 6 feet apart. Table I shows sound levels for some common noise sources and compares Their relative loudness to that of an 80-dBA source such as a garbage disposal or food blender.Noisy levels in a quiet rural area at night are typically between 32 and 35 dBA. Quiet urban nighttime noise levels range from 40 to 50 dBA. Noise levels during the day in a noisy urban area are frequently as high as 70 to 80 dBA. Noise levels above 110 dBA become intolerable and then painful;levels higher than 80 dBA over continuous periods can result in hearing loss. Constant noises tend to be less noticeable than irregular or periodic noises. Table 1 Sound Levels and Relative Loudness of Typical Noise Sources Sound Subjective Relative Loudness Noise Source or Activity Level Impression (human judgment of (dBA) different sound levels) Jet aircraft takeoff from carrier(50 ft) 140 Threshold of pain 64 times as loud 50-hp siren(100 ft) 130 32 times as loud Loud rock concert near stage,Jet takeoff 120 Uncomfortably loud 16 times as loud (200 ft) Float plane takeoff(100 ft) 110 8 times as loud Jet takeoff(2,000 ft) 100 Very loud 4 times as loud Heavy truck or motorcycle(25 ft) 90 2 times as loud Garbage disposal,food blender(2 ft), 80 Moderately loud Reference loudness Pneumatic drill(50 ft) Vacuum cleaner(10 ft),Passenger car at 65 70 1/2 as loud mph(25 ft) Large store air-conditioning unit(20 ft) 60 1/4 as loud Light auto traffic(100 ft) 50 Quiet 1/8 as loud Bedroom or quiet living room,Bird calls 40 1/16 as loud Quiet library,soft whisper(15 ft) 30 Very quiet High quality recording studio 20 Acoustic Test Chamber 10 Just audible 0 Threshold of hearing Sources: Beranek(1988)and EPA(1971) PDXFTRAFFIC NOISE HANDOUT.DOC January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 3 of 16 1 6 1 2 Al TRAFFIC NOISE BACKGROUND INFORMATION Traffic Noise Sources and Propagation Noise sources associated with transportation projects can include passenger vehicles,medium trucks, heavy trucks and buses.Each of these vehicles produces noise:however,the source and magnitude of the noise can vary greatly depending on vehicle type.For example,while the noise from passenger vehicles occurs mainly from the tire-roadway interface and is therefore located at ground level,noise from heavy trucks is produced by a combination of noise from tires,engine,and exhaust,resulting in a noise source that is approximately 8 feet above the ground.The following list provides information on the types of transportation noise sources that will be part of a roadway project,and describes the type of noise each produces. • Passenger Vehicles(cars):Noise emitted from 0 to 2 feet above roadway,primarily from tire-roadway interface.This category includes normal passenger vehicles,small and regular pickup trucks,small to mid-size sport utility vehicles,mini-and full-size passenger vans. Typical noise levels for passenger vehicles are 72 to 74 dBA at 55 itiph at a distance of 50 feet. • • Medium Trucks(MT):Noise emitted from 2 to 5 feet above roadi'au combined noise from tire-roadway interface and engine exhaust noise.This category includes delivery vans,such as UPS and Federal Express trucks,large sport utility vehicles with knobby tires,large diesel engine trucks,some tow-trucks,city transit and school buses with under vehicle exhaust, moving vans(U-haul-type trucks),small to medium recreational motor homes and other larger trucks with the exhaust located under the vehicle.Typical noise levels for medium trucks are 80 to 82 dBA at 55 mph at 50 feet. • • Heavy Trucks(HT):Noise emitted from 6 to 8 feet above the roadway surface,combined noise sources includes tire-roadway interface,engine noise,and exhaust stack noise.This category includes all log-haul tractor-trailers(semi-trucks),large tows trucks,dump trucks, cement mixers,large transit buses,motor homes with exhaust located at top of vehicle,and other vehicles with the exhaust located above the vehicle(typical exhaust height of 12 to 15 feet).Typical noise levels for heavy trucks are 84 to 86 dBA at 55 mph at 50 feet'. • Several factors determine how sound levels decrease over distance.Under ideal conditions,a line noise source(such as constant flowing traffic on a busy highway)decreases at a rate of approximately 3 dB each time the distance doubles.Under real-life conditions,however,interactions of the sound waves with the ground often results in attenuation that is slightly greater than the ideal reduction factors given above.Other factors that affect the attenuation of sound with distance include existing structures,topography,foliage,ground cover,and atmospheric conditions such as wind,temperature, and relative humidity.The following list provides some general information on the potential affects each of these factors may have on sound propagation. • Existing Structures.Existing structures can have a substantial effect on noise levels in any given area.Structures can reduce noise by physically blocking the sound transmission.(Under special circumstances,structures may cause an increase in noise levels if the sound is reflected off the structure and transmitted to a nearby receiver location.)Measurements have shown that a single- story house has the potential,through shielding,to reduce noise levels by'as much as 10 dB or greater.The actual noise reduction will depend greatly on the geometry of the noise source, receiver,and Iocation of the structure.Increases in noise caused by reflection are normally 3 dB or less,which is the minimum change in noise levels that can be noticed by the human ear. • Topography.Topography includes existing hills,berms,and other surface features between the noise source and receiver location.As with structures,topography has the potential to reduce or increase sound depending on the geometry of the area.Hills and berms,When placed between the noise source and receiver,can have a significant effect on noise levels.In many situations,berms are used as noise mitigation by physically blocking the noise source from the receiver location.In PDXI(RAFFIC NOISE HANDOUT DOC 2 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 4 of 16 2 161 A TRAFFIC NOISE BACKGROUND INFORMATION some locations,however,the topography can result in an overall increase in sound levels by either reflecting or channeling the noise towards a sensitive receiver location. • Foliage.Foliage,if dense,can provide slight reductions in noise levels,FIT WA provides for up to a 5 dBA reduction in traffic noise for locations with at least a 30 feet depth of dense evergreen foliage. • Ground Cover.The ground cover between the receiver and the noise source can have a significant effect on noise transmission.For example,sound will travel very well across reflective surfaces such as water and pavement,but can be attenuated when the ground cover is field grass, lawns,or even loose soil. Traffic Noise Mitigation In theory,there are a number of options that can be used to reduce or mitigate traffic noise.These include traffic management,highway design,and noise barriers including earthen berms. In reality, noise mitigation is often infeasible due to space requirements,aesthetic issues and financial costs,or because the costs outweigh the benefits. Any specific mitigation measure recommended as part of a project must be feasible and have a reasonable cost in relation to the benefit.Potential mitigation measures are described below. • Traffic Management:Traffic management measures include modification of speed limits and restricting or prohibiting truck traffic.Restricting truck use on a given roadway would reduce noise levels at nearby receivers since trucks are louder than cars. Flowdver,displacing truck traffic front one roadway to another would only shift noise impacts front one area to another and may conflict with the planned function of the roadway(e.g.,an arterial generally carries truck traffic).The level of truck traffic on Sunnyside Road is too low for truck restrictions to result in a significant reduction in overall noise in the area.While reducing speeds may reduce noise,a reduction of at least 10 mph is needed for a noticeable difference in noise to result.Also,because roadways are planned and designed to support speeds consistent with their functional classification(e.g.,35-45 mph on an arterial),changing speeds for the purpose of noise mitigation is not common. • Roadway Design:Roadway design measures include altering the roadway alignment and depressing roadway cut sections. Alteration of roadway alignment could decrease noise levels by moving the traffic farther away from the affected receivers. Because there are noise sensitive receivers along both sides of Sunnyside Road,changing the alignment May benefit one side of Sunnyside Road,but would increase noise levels on the other. • Noise Barriers:Construction of noise bathers between the roadways and the affected receivers would reduce noise levels by physically blocking the transmission of traffic-generated noise. Barriers can be constructed as walls or earthen berms.Earthen berms require more right-of-way than walls and are usually constructed with a 3-to-1 slope.Using this requirement,a benu 8 feet tall would slope 24 feet in each direction,for a total width of 48 feet. For the Sunnyside Road project,berms are not feasible because of the right-of-way requirement.\loise walls should be high enough to break the line-of-sight between the noise source and the receiver. They must also be long enough to prevent significant flanking of noise around the ends of the walls.Openings in the wall,such as for driveways and walkways,can significantly reduce the barrier effectiveness. Because of the frequent driveways and walkways on.Sunnyside Road,noise walls would not be effective in most locations. PDYJTRAFFIC NOISE HANDOUT.Doe 3 „ . 161 2A ' )/ C O_ d) H 0)0) Co 7 O) 0) Co 0 m C O .> 0 O) C U O U u) 0 N.~' CO N C c U '0 CA 0 2S 2 aft 1/1 in 10 'S.0 ti M 3” fu1 CM ^L Y3 kY- 4 0.1. N O Q NFU) N. N Li.)• O N ul c U � aoa 3 ^ rn N Q ul L LA ^ Uri iUn all in N 00' ^ U) d cri N U1 U) Q t0 N 00 b in P. 3 a w u`r'i IIf) .-+ 0 00 Lo Lo in lt1 LA IA m 00 N Q N N to > A 3 N 01 in N N ^ tD lA To,, t RI M M M us 07 EL a 0 0 0 0 U N o -- _ C .17 10 c ho N a.-1 ,, ob a o0 3 a+ 'a G s % ` —'ten X `^ X O O) S O �0 i N > 0 N N > aW N U CC au �� Co. v a � ; 0s Cl) P c u 9 X c m 45 u -a X c r�o a u v c m a c GU co` 3NU° i 3 co SINUS cfl UXS a c 0 0 3 vi9 d a E O Co 5 CL G 3 F 0 c t 0Z (Cl u % C m 0 m i _, m z a u January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Ii Page 6 of 16 161 2 A STREET AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION lEAv SITE PREPARATION CHANGE ORDER REQUEST Date:June 4,2012 To:Collier County BOCC Attention: Kyle Lukasz Phone:438-5239 e-mail: kvieiukasz 1)coiliergov.net Project: Remove/Replace curb in median at North Tram ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION GENERAL Remove and replace curb,including traffic control and bond LS 1.0 $6,940.00 $6,940.00 TOTAL $6,940.00 Leo-M. Bateman, LEO M.BATEMAN 3260 Cargo St WBE CERTIFIED ph(239)482-4826 Ft.Myers,FL 33916 Lic.CGC 1506291 tx(239)482-8177 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session I 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing / - Page I. 2 STREET AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION SITE PREPARATION CHANGE ORDER REQUEST Date:June 4,2012 To: Collier County BOCC Attention: Kyle Lukasz Phone: 438-5239 e-mail: kylelukaszacolliergov.net Project: Replace Cobblers with brick pavers at 4 intersections ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST QTY UNIT PRICE EXTENSION GENERAL Hammock Oak LS 1.0 $12,900.00 $12,900.00 North Tram Station LS 1.0 $12,250.00 $12,250.00 Beachwalk LS 1.0 $11,600.00 $11,600.00 Glenview LS 1.0 $9,650.00 $9,650.00 TOTAL_ _ $46,400.00 Price includes removal of cobblers,replace with pavers(pavers furnished by Pelican Bay),maintenance of traffic and bond Leo-b &Et mam LEO M. BATEMAN 3260 Cargo St WBE CERTIFIED ph(239)482-4826 Ft.Myers,FL 33916 Lic.CGC 1506291 fx(239)482-8177 161 2Ai' ' 0 0 N 4) a) u) 7 O) N 'tx F } (/ q l a f ,,,,t. II, r4 j , tt ' cc �* � im s to N `° j . �'' \ '1.4' \ .S5 ti t'. t . � ) cc au co 2 ca • o o co a p ,iF N 7 3` l es' ,fie./'ro' t d � {J \ 9 \ \� ; V!p„a" rte` ,, ,i.-: ', ' * ; .1 ' ' 1\ 1 ''' '''' 1 ' . '„e k'v � fr A ; :- i 4 •. i w. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 9 of 16 1 6 1 2A ti '":, PELICAN BAY PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, N. ' INC. 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 600, •Naples,FL 34108 (239)566-9707• FAX(239)598-9485 • E-Mail PBPOA(a�pbpropertyowners.org October 16, 2012 Keith J. Dallas, President PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 801 Laurel Oak Blvd. Suite 605 Naples FL 34108 Dear President Dallas, The Board of the PBPOA wishes to register its strong objection to the PBSD's decision to research the possibility of removing the cobblestones at key crosswalks along Pelican Bay Boulevard, and to not complete the remaining new crosswalk as recommended by the Joint Strategic Planning Committee and the PBSD. This joint group worked with traffic and safety engineers to develop design and material recommendations consistent with both FDOT requirements and the need to improve pedestrian safety. The crosswalk design recommendations, including materials, were reviewed multiple times in community forums. Additionally , at the September meeting, it was noticed that new decibel readings were again insignificant. We believe it would be fiscally irresponsible for the PBSD to rework any of the paving that has been installed, and would be contrary to public safety and to the overall continuity of the community upgrades to not complete all of the crosswalks as originally planned. Sincerely, r As--'IN NC &NIAMEY Susan M. Boland President cc: Jim Hoppensteadt Ronnie Bellone January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing 161 I Page 10 of 16 2 A May 2,2012 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5ai.Administrator's Report.Crosswalks.Uniform Traffic Standards(Additional Correspondence)No.2 Page 1 of 1 ResnickLisa From: Kate[kfweath @gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 6:52 PM To: office@pelicanbayservicesdivision.net Subject: Crosswalks I am a resident of San Marino and as such, I cross the nearby crosswalk several times daily when in residence at San Marino. It is becoming more and more hazardous because the traffic generally does not stop for pedestrians. Something needs to be added to the signage—lights,closer signage, a warning—something. The signs at that crosswalk are small and very far from the crosswalk. Someone is going to be hurt or killed at the crosswalks due to pedestrians thinking they are safe to cross and traffic not stopping. I have had cars actually honk at me when I have been crossing in the middle of a lane and they whiz by. More go by than stop. One suggestion is to put LARGE signs—maybe even temporary-at each entrance to Pelican Bay announcing that it is Florida Law to stop at crosswalks. And,we definitely need flashing lights to note the crosswalk. They are not visible until you are in them. Kate Weathersby San Marino January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session /' 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing `( Page 11 of 16 161 2 A , May 2,2012 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5ai. Administrator's Report.Crosswalks.Additional Correspondence No.3 Page 1 of 1 ResnickLisa Subject: 5ai.Administrator's Report. Crosswalks.Additional Correspondence No. 3 From: Cliff Landers fmailto:clifflanders 2000©yahoo.coml Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 5:29 PM To: office©pelicanbayservicesdivision.net Subject: Crosswalk at San Marino Pelican Bay Services Division To whoever may be reluctant to reverse the unstudied project of the crosswalk near San Marino, I would say: Put aside ego,acknowledge the mistake, remove the cobblestones, and fill in and cement over the holes. Done. The danger and annoyance level of the crosswalk has already been discussed and proven, so let's put an end to this long and fruitless dialogue. Sincerely, Clifford E. Landers San Marino#305 From: Brendan P. Culligan [mailto:pebblepost(agmail.coml Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 4:46 PM To: 21 Lisa Resnick Subject: STOP FOR PEOPLE video link Lisa, Please click www.vimeo.com/41366160 to view my three minute STOP FOR PEOPLE video. Please test it so you can access it for presentation at the PBSD meeting on Wednesday at 1 PM. If you have any technical problems, please call me at 239-597-7957 in the morning so I can resolve them before the meeting. Thanks for you help. Brendan Culligan Pebble Creek at Pelican Bay 17-201 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 12 of 16 161 2 A \`k.1 May 2,2012 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5ai. Administrator's Report.Crosswalks.Additional correspondence no.4 Page 1 of 1 ResnickLisa From: Ktm140[ktm140 @aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 12:37 PM To: office @pelicanbayservicesdivision.net Subject: RE:The crosswalk located at San Marino RE: The crosswalk located at San Marino. In my opinion,there are two issues with the crosswalk at San Marino. Unfortunately,I have a last minute work conflict so I am not able to make the meeting this afternoon. The issues are—Noise&Safety. The noise issue-As a resident of San Marino, I walk my dog at least twice a day on Pelican Bay Blvd.&I am very much aware of the thump-thump as cars cross the cobblestones. When I mentioned this at a Pelican Bay Foundation meeting,the comment back was that they had a noise gun&it wasn't too loud. It's not so much the loudness but it's the fact that the noise has become a constant presence.The designers of the crosswalks have created a source of noise pollution&have taken one of the prettiest areas in Naples and made it sound like an urban center. I understand that the concept is that the cobblestones would act as a warning&a speed deterrent to drivers when,in reality,neither of these things occurs. I grew up in Mid-town Manhattan,certainly one of the busiest areas of NYC,&if there was a loose manhole cover which is a very similar sound to the cars driving over the cobblestone,one could call the NYC DOT and they would come out to fix it because it was considered a noise nuisance. It would be great if that were possible in this situation. Again,it's not the loudness it's the fact that it is a noise that was not part of our community prior to the installation of the crosswalk. The 2nd issue is even more crucial—Safety.Again,spending as much time on the Blvd as I do both in the morning and the afternoons I have had the opportunity of seeing many"near misses". I have seen drivers ignore pedestrians;drivers stop on 1 side but not the other;cars in the right lane stopping but not in the left lane& even cars speeding up so they don't have to stop. It has actually created an unsafe situation—pedestrians don't know whether the cars are going to stop or not. The crosswalk definitely needs further signage to make it safe. I have heard remarks that the only people complaining are the San Marino residents. It only takes a bit of common sense to realize that the residents of San Marino and Calais are most directly affected since the crosswalk is closest to those communities&most pedestrian's traffic originates from them. I think it would be a rare occasion for some one from St Raphael to cross over to the east side of the street. It is my recommendation that the cobblestones be removed&the crosswalk has better signage. When a decision is made by the Pelican Bay Services Division is any consideration give to the impact of that decision to the residents of the Pelican Bay&the communities most affected? It seems like there is very little regard as to how the design has impacted the area&our concerns seem to be ignored. Kathy Mahoney Kathy Mahoney Coldwell Banker Residential Real Estate 8200 Health Center Blvd.#101 Bonita Springs,34135 800-547-3019 239-992-0059(0) 239-404-0677(C) 239-992-0231 (Fax) MailTo:kathy.mahonevAfloridamoves.com http:///kathy-mahoney.com January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 13 of 16 16 I 2 A f May 2,2012 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5ai. Administrator's Report.Crosswalks.Additional correspondence. Page 1 of 1 ResnickLisa Subject: 5ai. CROSSWALK IN FRONT OF SAN MARINO AND BEACH ACCESS! From: Dolores E.Stillings Jmailto:westlakecog@comcast.netl Sent: Monday,April 30,2012 9:27 AM To:office(apelicanbayservicesdivision.net Subject:CROSSWALK IN FRONT OF SAN MARINO AND BEACH ACCESS! LADIES/GENTLEMEN: I AM UNABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING ON WEDNESDAY MAY 2ND. THEREFORE, WOULD LIKE YOU TO KNOW THAT I OWN AND RESIDE IN A FIRST FLOOR CONDO WITHIN SAN MARINO. THE BACK OF MY CONDO (BEDROOMS AND LANAI) FACE PELICAN BAY BLVD. SINCE THE INSTALLATION OF THE COBBLESTONE CROSSWALK I CAN'T OPEN A WINDOW OR MY LANAI. IN THE MASTER-BATHROOM, THE VIBRATION IS AWFUL. THIS IS SO VERY DISTRUBING!f!I I H H I HAVE MY UNIT FOR SALE AND HAVE BEEN TOLD BY MANY LOOKERS THAT THEY FEAR THE NOISE LEVEL WOULD REALLY BE A CONSTANT DISTURBANCE TO THEM!!! I HAVE HEARD THAT THE PBSD TESTED THE NOISE LEVEL AND FIND IT ACCEPTABLE THEY SHOULD COME LIVE IN MY HOME FOR A WEEK. THE NOISE LEVEL MIGHT HAVE BEEN TESTED DURING OUR OFF SEASON! DURING THIS PAST BUSY SEASON, I HAVE SUFFERED GREATLY. THIS SITUATION IS NOT ONLY AFFECTING MY PEACEFULNESS, BUT IT HAS IMPACTED MY RE-SALE VALUE! I HAVE PAID $520K FOR THIS CONDO AND COMPLETELY RENOVATED AT A COST OF $80K. PLEASE, AT LEAST, CONSIDER THE REMOVAL OF THE COBBLESTONE FROM EACH SIDE OF THE SMOOTH PAVERS. IT WAS A REALLY AN IDEA THAT HAD NO CONSIDERATION FOR THOSE OF US THAT LIVE RIGHT ON PB BLVD. THERE ARE A FEW CROSSWALKS THAT DO NOT HAVE THE COBBLESTONE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE PAVERS, AND IT DOES MAKE IT MORE ACCEPTABLE. I WOULD LIKE YOUR RESPONSE TO THIS E-MAIL AFTER YOUR MEETING. THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE FOR ME AND MOST OF THE SAN MARINO RESIDENTS FACING PB BLVD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND CONSIDERATION TO MY REQUEST. DOLORES E. STILLINGS 6855 SAN MARINO DRIVE #202 239-513-1410 732-310-2359 CELL January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing Page 14 of 16 1 ^ ' Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 6 I 2 A \ck May 2, 2012 i - APPROVAL OF APRIL 11,2012 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Levy to approve the April 11 Regular Session minutes as amended:1)Page 8546:identify San Marino and North Tram station crossings;and 2) Page 8549: "...berm... erosion observed along east and west sides..." The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion was passed. APPROVAL OF APRIL 16,2012 BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to approve the April 16 Budget Subcommittee meeting minutes as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion was assed REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2013 BUDGET(LEVY) Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to approve the Budget Subcommittee's recommendation to approve the Proposed Fiscal Year 2013 Budget as presented by Budget Subcommittee Chairman Levy. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion was passed ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT CROSSWALKS BATEMAN CONTRACT UPDATE Mr. Dorrill reported the County Attorney initially opined that the Bateman contract would need Board of County Commissioners authorization before moving forward with the two additional crosswalk projects planned for this summer on Pelican Bay Boulevard at the intersections of North Pointe Drive and Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard. • t Upon realization that the original Bateman contract approved by the Board of County Commissioners in 2011 included these additional locations,the County Attorney determined that no further authorization was necessary UNIFORM TRAFFIC STANDARDS Mr.Dorrill introduced two engineers invited to speak about uniform traffic standards and address residents' concerns about safety and noise that resonated from vehicles driving over cobblestones at the San Marino and North Tram station mid-block crossings. Mr. James Carr, P.E. explained the crosswalks constructed along Pelican Bay Boulevard were designed by Wilson Miller. All mid-block crossings have three feet wide cobblestone bands on each side that was intended to create a "rumble" sound and have a tactile feel effect. After the initial installation, following complaints that the cobblestones were uneven and created a tripping hazard, the edges were adjusted to form a more level surface and it had the added effect of reducing noise. Traffic engineering expert, Mr. Bill Oliver, P.E. explained at pedestrian crossings, key issues for safety are speed and advance warning and methods currently in use to alert drivers did not appear to be working.If the intention of the cobblestones was to cause vehicles to slow down, it was clear the cobblestones were installed too close to the crossing. If the sound and tactile feel of driving over cobblestones was intended to change drivers' behavior, by the time the rumble is heard, it is too late to stop.The mid-block crossings include standard signs and pavement markings required by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices(MUTCD). The question was whether the methods being 8551 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing li .k; Page 15 of 16 17 A Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes i 6 i L May 2,2012 1 used to get drivers' attention were producing the intended effect.The answer was no.The solution would be one that reaches out and grabs drivers' attention. Mr. Oliver recommended progressing to a higher level of driver awareness that could be achieved by installing a pedestrian-activated flashing beacon light timed to continue flashing until the pedestrian crossed the intersection. Mr. Oliver explained the County uses MUTCD standards to determine signage, signals, and pavement markings;and agreed that installing additional signage that is considered "supplemental"to MUTCD standards could cause.confusion.Regarding the flashing yellow lights in the roadway on Ridgewood that outline a crossing to the Phil, Mr.Oliver reasoned the design was likely"emerging technology"that was later determined to be ineffectual. Mr. Brendan Culligan (Pebble Creek) presented a video he made showing problems faced by pedestrians attempting to cross at the North Tram station mid-block crossing and at other locations within Pelican Bay. BOARD DISCUSSION Mr. Iaizzo suggested removing the cobblestones at the San Marino crossing. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Ms. O'Brien to recommend to the Foundation Board to remove cobblestones at the San Marino crossing. Mr. Gibson said he supported removing the cobblestones, but the motion should include replacing cobblestones with fire-red clay brick pavers. Ms.Womble stressed the importance of uniformity and consistency as a theme established by the Community Improvement Plan. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mr. Steve Seidel (San Marino), Ms. Kathy Mahoney (San Marino), Dr. Ted Raia (St. Raphael), Mr. Dave Cook(Crescent),Mr.Brendan Culligan(Pebble Creek)and another Pebble Creek resident supported increased traffic enforcement to control speeders,and supported removing cobblestones at the San Marino crossing or at all mid-block crossings; and agreed that resolving safety issues should not require consulting with the Foundation first and also be t completed promptly. Ms. Marcia Cravens (Dorchester) suggested installing speed bumps, but Mr. Dorrill explained that speed bumps were not appropriate for Pelican Bay Boulevard,an arterial roadway. Mr.Jerry Moffatt(L'Ambiance) said the Foundation paid for the construction, but the road is owned by the County, and Mr. Dorrill added the Services Division permitted the project and is therefore responsible for maintenance. Mr.John Domenie (Breakwater)did not agree with Mr. Gibson's idea to replace cobblestones with fire-red clay brick pavers; and Ms. Mary McLean Johnson (St. Marissa)suggested amending the motion to include replacing cobblestones with appropriate alternatives that increase visibility and consistency. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Ms. O'Brien to make a recommendation to the Foundation Board that they remove the cobblestones at the San Marino crossing. The Board voted 9 in favor (Chandler, Iaizzo, O'Brien, Levy, Womble, Cravens, Trecker, Baron, and Gibson) and I opposed (Dallas)and the motion was passed. Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker to make a recommendation to the Foundation Board that they remove the cobblestones from all mid-block crosswalk locations. The Board voted 9 in favor (Chandler, Iaizzo, O'Brien, Levy, Womble, Cravens, Trecker, Baron, and Gibson)and 1 opposed(Dallas)and the motion was passed 8552 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session i U 8.Cobblestones at San Marino crossing . Page 16 of 16 2 A Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes May 2,2012 Ms. O'Brien made a motion, second by Mr. Chandler to not install cobblestones at the North Pointe Drive crossing that is planned to be done this summer. The Board voted 9 in favor(Chandler, laizzo, O'Brien,Levy, Womble, Cravens, Trecker,Baron,and Gibson)and 1 opposed(Dallas)and the motion was passed. Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. laizzo to install pedestrian-activated flashing lights that is identical to the crossing on Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard, at the North Tram station and San Marino mid- block crossings. The total estimated cost to install a pedestrian-activated light at one location including solar power and bollards with sensors is$26,000. Mr.Chandler suggested obtaining pedestrian count data. Dr.Trecker suggested installing the pedestrian-activated light at the North Tram station crossing first to test efficacy. Mr. Tim Corcoran (Pebble Creek)agreed the North Tram station crossing would be the best location to test how effective a pedestrian-activated light is. Mr. Steve Seidel (San Marino), Mr. Brendan Culligan (Pebble Creek), and Ms.Mary Jane Culligan(Pebble Creek)supported installation at both the North Tram and San Marino locations. Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. laizzo to install pedestrian-activated flashing lights at both the North Tram station and San Marino mid-block crossings similar to the crossing on Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard. The Board voted 5 in favor (Dallas, Gibson, Cravens, Baron, and Womble) and 5 opposed(Trecker,Levy, O'Brien, Chandler, and laizzo) and resulted in a tie, and the motion was not passed. Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker to install a pedestrian-activated flashing light at the North Tram station mid-block crossing similar to the crossing on Myra Janco Daniels Boulevard. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion was assed. Mr.Carr and Mr.Oliver said the bollards with the sensors would be installed as specified by the MUTCP., A short recess was taken then the Board reconvened. NORTH POINTE DRIVE CROSSING(CHANDLER) Mr.Chandler suggested reconfiguring the North Pointe Drive crossing to improve pedestrian safety. Mr.Carr explained there most likely is a reason the existing crosswalk is located to the west of North Pointe and recommended prior to making any changes to the design that a traffic-count study is performed and subsequent changes would require a new permit. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Cravens that when installing the new brick crosswalk at North Pointe Drive across Pelican Bay Boulevard that the crossing be located to align with the eastern sidewalk of North Pointe Drive. The Board voted 3 in favor(Cravens, Trecker, and Chandler)and 6 opposed(Gibson,Dallas, Womble(Levy,O'Brien,and laizzo)and the motion failed. PATHWAYS II 1 Mr.Dorrill said at the April 11 meeting,the Board affirmed constructing 8-feet wide pathways and directed staff to obtain a second opinion from an independent certified arborist to determine the impact to existing trees. Certified arborist,Mr. Ralph B. Jimison visited the site to evaluate the route of the proposed pathways project. Mr. Jimison concluded it was necessary to remove approximately 5 trees and outlined his recommendations to accomplish root pruning without causing damage. However Mr. Jimison's findings appeared to contradict with Signature Tree 8553 January 2,2013 Pelican Baylrvi6Di1sion Boaae�i r Session 9ai. Clam Bay transition comments by Dave Trecker Page 1 of 1 December 15,2012 One-way communication with PBSD directors: Since I will be up north and unable to attend the December 27 meeting of the Clam Bay Subcommittee,I want to pass on the following thoughts. It is essential the PBSD move quickly to assume its assigned responsibility for managing all facets of the Pelican Bay Conservation Area,including Clam Bay.It is a responsibility assigned by the Board of County Commissioners.It is not an option.And at least some of us feel it is an important opportunity for the PBSD. I have been assured that county staff and the Pelican Bay Foundation will assist in the transfer of those responsibilities to the PBSD.Everyone appears to be on board. There are,by my count,four areas of management.Action will be needed,I believe,in three of the four areas. (1) Clam Pass dredging-how to handle the permitting and how to manage the dredging. Regarding permitting,there are two obvious possibilities:Withdraw and replace the active application or revise the active application.Changes to be considered are the permittee,which now should be the PBSD; width of cut at the mouth,which probably should be changed to"no more than 80 feet;"and triggers for dredging,which could be specified based on input from Tim Hall and Ken Humiston or left qualitative.Timely issuance of a permit to deal with the current shoaling is obviously important. Our agents could be Turrell Hall Associates and Humiston&Moore,the advantage being they know Clam Pass and are local,or Adkins,the advantage being it prepared the existing dredging permit application. (2) Water purity-transfer of data and ongoing sampling and monitoring. Things to be monitored include nutrient levels (dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus),dissolved oxygen, bacteria and copper. Transfer of all data from the county and the Foundation should be straightforward,as should assignments of future sampling by the PBSD. Adkins could be retained,reporting to the PBSD,for data analysis,or this could be assigned to Tim Hall and the local folks. (3) Hydrolytic measurements-tidal flow and bathymetry. Ken Humiston already does analysis of flow measurements for the PBSD.We should probably have him do bathymetry as well; he used to do that some years ago.I believe sampling for bathymetric data would have to be transferred from the county. (4) Mangrove maintenance Tim Hall already does a terrific job for the PBSD. The Seagate lawsuit is another matter,which should be addressed separately. I personally feel we should involve the Foundation in a constructive partnership,not only during this transition period but later in proactive management of the conservation area. I hope these comments are helpful.I have great confidence in Neil Dorrill and in Susan O'Brien and her committee. Good luck! Dave Trecker lbl � H January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sessiot 9ai. Clam Bay transition comments by Kathy Worley Page 1 of 2 December 12,2012 Re: Clam Bay Management Plan Dear Pelican Bay MSTBU Board Members: I am writing in response to the responsibility given to you by the County Commission and the December 11th Commissioner's meeting to develop and implement a management and monitoring plan for Clam Bay. The idea to manage Clam Pass and the Bays as a whole is something that I have advocated for since the early 90's,There is a need for a comprehensive plan to protect the estuary, which consists of environmental resources that are found in the Pass, Bays, Tributaries and the landward habitats including the mangrove forests, scrub and dunes. Given that the Pass is only — 50% functional I think it would behoove you to first concentrate on getting a dredging permit before the wet season gets here and then take some time to develop a management and monitoring plan that addresses the concerns of the entire estuary. I believe you does not have to start from scratch regarding the dredging permit as the one currently in the hands of FDEP could be tweeked (i.e. the width of the dredge cut and footprint, etc. if you so desire) to accomplish in the short- term resolving flow and phase lag issues in the back bays that were illustrated in the current Humiston and Moore report. By separating out the dredging permit for the moment and keeping it under the auspices of the Mangrove Restoration Plan you could get the Pass operating on all cylinders again and take the time necessary to develop and true management and monitoring plan for the estuary that would include the dredging permit as a part of the tools needed to alleviate future pass closures or inefficient estuarine function. I urge you to establish a working group that includes all of the stakeholders that have worked to preserve this system and have the scientific expertise necessary to assist in Plan development. In particular those groups that were a part of the original "working group" in the 90's that dealt with the mangrove die-off problem (the Conservancy, Audubon, MAG, and Collier County Natural Resource Department, etc.)not only have a vested interest, but have the expertise along with Turrell, Hall and Associates, and should have direct input into a new Management Plan for the area. "The fundamental objective of mangrove management is to promote conservation, restoration or rehabilitation and sustainable use of mangrove ecosystems and their associated habitats, supported where necessary by ecological restoration and rehabilitation" (World Bank et al., 2004). The original Clam Bay Management Plan was developed to restore the mangrove forests and was very successful. Moving forward we need to not only focus on the health and viability of the mangrove forest(though they are near and dear to my heart!), but the entire ecosystem and its recreational uses. The plan should have the objective of sustaining the entire estuary, which would include the mangrove forest, benthic habitats and invertebrates (seagrasses and other organisms that I aAjJanuary 2,2013 Pelican Bay Sees 6vision Board Regular Sessio 9ai. Clam Bay transition comments by Kathy Worley .' Page 2 of 2 Kathy B. Worley - Re: Clam Bay Management Plan December 12,2012 - Page 2 makeup the bottom of the food chain), fish, birds, the dune and waterway systems, water quality, hydrology, etc. since all of these components are interconnected and vital in order for the estuary to be "healthy". It is generally recognized by ecologists, ichthyologists, managers and policy makers that mangroves are tightly linked by adjacent ecosystems and that managing them in isolation is unsustainable(Ellison, 2008). Taking the time to fully vet a management plan is the prudent approach that will lessen I the chance of making snap decisions that may be inappropriate in pushing forward a plan quickly. Thus concentrating first on getting the dredging permit and then taking time later to develop a management plan seems the most logical route forward. Thank you for your time and consideration. 1 ISincerely, 1 Kathy B. Worley 1 Director of Science, Conservancy of Southwest Florida 239-403-4223 kathyw(a)conservancy.ora i 1 i i i i i January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1, 4 9aii. 12/18/12 correspondence from Linda Elligott,USAGE to Gary McAlpin,Coastal Zone Management re:per p tio SAJ-19 -Clam Pass Page 1 of 2 ■ Original Message From:Neil Dorrill [mailto:Neil @dmgfl.com] Sent:Tuesday,December 18,2012 11:24 AM To:ResnickLisa Subject: FW: SAJ-1996-02789 Clam Pass project - application and management items - status note (UNCLASSIFIED) Original Message From:McAlpinGary [mailto:GaryMcAlpin @colliergov.net] Sent:Tuesday,December 18,2012 9:30 AM To: OchsLeo;CasalanguidaNick; LorenzWilliam;Neil Dorrill;Neil Dorrill Subject: FW: SAJ-1996-02789 Clam Pass project - application and management items - status note (UNCLASSIFIED) FYI-Received this last night from Linda Elligot-USACE. Original Message From:Elligott,Linda A SAJ [mailto:Linda.A.Elligottausace.army.mil] Sent:Monday,December 17,2012 5:41 PM To: McAlpinGary Subject: SAJ-1996-02789 Clam Pass project - application and management items - status note (UNCLASSIFIED) Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats:NONE Gary, I received an email from Georgia Hiller (as below) which indicated that this project will be revised. The email was also sent to USFWS/Howe and NMFS/Sramek. As a result, USFWS has informed the Corps that the ESA consultation has been suspended and the draft Biological Opinion that you have reviewed/provided comments for in concert with the ongoing Corps permit review will not be completed in the previously-stated timeframe. Due to pending project revisions, the need for revised plan sheets and uncertainty with respect to Collier County management for a long-term permit of this nature, the Corps intends to withdraw this project. A formal letter will be sent to you as the on-record point of contact for Collier County; a copy will be forwarded to Atkins/Tabar as the consultant of record. The file may be re-activated with provision of an updated application and a complete submittal. Note that the project, when re-activated,would be subject to review by NMFS-PRD for potential impacts to swimming sea turtles and the smalltooth sawfish;this type of consultation may take 10-12 months from the date of consultation package "completion",based on current turnaround times. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks,Linda 1 6 1 2A January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 9aii. 12/18/12 correspondence from Linda Elligott,USACE to Gary McAlpin,Coastal Zone Management re:permit application SAJ-1996-02789-Clam ass Page 2 of 2 <START COPY> _ - I Please be advised that the Collier Board of County Commissioners voted this week to transfer management of the Clam Bay System back to the County's Pelican Bay Services Divi ion -Neil Dorrill, Administrator. The Board of County Commissioners took further action to direct a revision of the Clam Bay Management for dredging activities within Clam Pass, and that dredging permits be amended accordingly. Specific details of changes to this project will be provided to the Corps as soon as they are available. The dredging plan will be consistent with updates that will be made to the existing Clam Bay Management Plan. We believe the changes will remain within the scope of the current application. As such, please continue the ongoing coordination with the resource agencies. With thanks- Commissioner Georgia Hiller,Esq. Chair,Board of County Commissioners <END COPY> Linda A.Elligott Project Manager U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office 1520 Royal Palm Square Blvd., Suite 310 Fort Myers,FL 33919 Telephone:239-334-1975 x 22 email: linda.a.elligott(a,usace.army.mil Classification:UNCLASSIFIED Caveats:NONE 2 A 1, , , . .,,..... ,. .. I i i 7 -*) iv !,, ,: i fi / ,.,::„Aft:0;:,,,::•..,,:::`,-,3,', ,,„.„„,•r ,: ,..._,.....,„,.•..: l'„„6 1 .,., ,.. ,.. .. . , i ' ' 1 / / . . . . . ..,, .......„. a , 4 . l,, ..„:„. , .. . . , L. . . . i , „ 0 , . ./,.,.;21:1°,-.:*: 1 1 ," '.: , r 1.1.1. .. .., , -4-J ., # 0 i 0.5 , l'•• A..A. , . A., : '4' 'A" U Z (ID , ' ■ft':.V =■ ,, Z (I) cu W W 1,■■■I Z . •.... C3) 4, ... 1.." n .,.., jcp,, (-NI ...... a) (1.) -"/:/ 4. w ' 0 •• N , (9 (+if) A• < le.•• (I) 1 .,-,.. J Q W = C■1 , ..., :: ,-,.-''f:.:.''''.,,..,''.,e.■.,;.t..IC.;:;tV.N.rgft..,z: 4.,..I.R',';:,OZIC,'rf'i'',ZN'g°.'1°4;F..3.;',±'ai;'',,.;;.;!: 161 2A f v 1N314103S �, e 1N3WJ3S 0 1N3WJ3S a, o O O U o N N N A Olg to 03 00 W 0 N N N n N N N Z o 40 0 O -N _o H W o 0 0 o =a a N N N d v v v ,^ �� 00 -00 f1 °o VI N N N W rn M Ct o N N _0 N 0 to e -J II N 0 - N N p/I �I -8 7 -8 1 _O �I `� N �� N N Z )) O 4) o I) _a N N N U ,, ,, W � -a o 0 tV�J ct N N V I EJ (n C. ai ai en ce W U _; co cry m 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O to tl V M N O o .-<p 1.0 M N O aN 0 N O tp V M O Cxx ell (.3) V32WV N01133S SSOJD (01-i) V38d NOI133S SSOJD (4 ) V3aV N01133S SSOa3 -- 0) 0E Z —I 0 jit 1 161 2A, \'\ .. ,, ,... .....:„..,„:„ , ,,r ,..,...„.,,,,,..., . ., . , ,. .. ,• _ . .,.. . ., , ... „..,,-.„--i.7.-:,',- - • ,..-..,.,,':,„*-41"--::-.S--''''-';', r'''''''''-' ' ' fe''''',,' • .4,7,4,f:.*:- • - F14 t E vx S a ' i , . - ,,,,,IF L*"-- / .4.:','''..,,,,,,.,..,441j otil C# 5 E° <sq aS " ty w'u to ar L cb u U i w Q.&�s*y �z #� 0 z e ,w yi im, a:c z T" f „t $a •U w • $its 31F�? 1-ms es ,,ieet-• ..ys u r " t` 4-,,,,,..,,,,,A....U 161 2A Y -3;\4E S m 0 N O -O N N O N _ N ...,. . .. ... , .... ..., ... .,..,., _.., , .. .. . ,. .. ,..., , tc ,,. „.........,. ... .., ,,,‘,:-„,, � .. "o N Y� �t s o. - o N M -77-1-:- o N ,,, I/ „A I\ N 0 4) N U)V w w J O O O O O Cr ID LA '1' M N O 0 i U (1u) d3dY N01103S SS0N0 ' -----.;):,"i:,,:„:ikfilq4.1-.°4:1.-11.144.14A.,.,:r7-41,7;q4ms734: - 1 _,,„,,.,,,,„,_.,,,t,..„.,:o,,,:t,a,k,,,,t„,,,,,„,,a,,t,,trm.il.„.L.,..„....,..,;e,...p.:,,,,r,,,,„,:iv,.:L.,,,,,,,,,,,;,.,..„......„,,,:,„., ., .„,, 161 2A iLt i ._ E" ."41',',;;;4:, ,„,.:,.:.:,.;,.1...A...4;,,.1ii.°;:,, C(I)c I o j li o :::„.:.::,4,..!;.:,;..;'"2,"".„4'.. '-.' : ;. 1 - I La W U W cl i z CD J 6 0 a d CO —CV i I 0 o .2 C) - L-+ `„ z�7 W N / L-71 0 U Q Q _�f I I CC (.9 N i � W W W C7 C7 E? C7 MCI 0 0 —h+'1 W W W 0 !Y Ll' LY O 0 0 I I I _ CI � v► cn W d O O 0 i Ln IX o o� o IC-Z-2.; 0 .n I C A o �//�� o a o s W I f l I ' I ' I I I I ° 0 n� cc ' N o C I (a CO o N I I It 1 I a (cIA9N) 6133.di I I o 2 lit T 0 Igo€� „ s .......« sa4.L.`k 43 ix n 8;€: e?a eesxl. 161 2Ai 1 1 .1, .4,..,...,4...4.,„,7.„.., .7,;..,4.e.„.iti.i...,,,,,?....44,......,..v.4.:,.....,„4:„..„.„, ,,:,:x„,,..,,o,„.,;,,.,,eitt.,,,,t);!,,,,c41.4.....1.,11,.,.,.,iki,,,,,t. 0 , yK Y 2 4� � a o Ln bit"iq,.1 ,. T * �f 4r %rr I o .4 eJ >. I— W __. ___ 0 W 1.9 L.L u.,. —' `. Li / z ,� 0 z mom.. /� .: O m P• N U O N z _ er ca L. -ct Eli in ° a U -CV Z 4 F- In tn V - a Z w w w �. o a a a 1 V W W W 0 H H I- V) (n {n w 0_ 0_ 0_ Z rn o o CD Cs4 CV o 0 0 + ~ _ w 7� Q O M< i 1 l I l I F ' I l I I I l I l I ' -T m co '.t N 0 NI V) -r w I a'S 1 I I (OAON) `133 NOI±YA373 1 m 1_ 1 J U , . :„,..., ...:..,,,,,s.,,,,,.:7„.11,:insilzvai,,zra3rsoloa,,,,,;:01..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.18,„:,. .,s!,,-,01.i.-*'''''''''':6 . 161 2A '-( , , # f t i i fi''i I : , c / 4 t tj1 `,s J I., )1): t 1 Ft CCC or I: TII E ii t r 1 ( Wi,,, . , ,,,, 1' 1.,,,., ... I 'i,.''''''''''''.3:' , ..'''' - "J::..'11:',.,;:':-.: V t F � ra � b(3 i ,"S - i' Imo... Vy t A CI) i W,I V _'�' „� U '.-,- z w M z� U , p ki � v UNA 161 2A i,----- i .,_.) i Q.,, W eu 0 O 0) E 161 al O 0 # N,.: , O (n O_A: O _____ ,, ...._ ..__ .. ., . ,,.. , „,..„,,,,,,..,..,......, : „,....„ .,„,et ' -/-?:t.,:::' i. ' ,' W -�f*.=--! vi - 0) 4 + -O Q I 4. N - 0 0 -tr) z ,M I 4 °> cn Z x - moo a 0 I OW W W 0 0 -0 0 W W W u 0 0 0 Z - w IA O CI d Q d ` � n- o) r"4 N = W ^ z m oo oo ± - Vl W 3 00 �/� 0 g z W 0 0 0 00 ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I I I I I I I I N w 0 00 (D 't N 0 N '4- tD DO 0 1(i' I I I I I ,`i (aAON) `133 NOIIVA313 0 1 6 1 2A l'F 8 1N3V103S m l 2cc 0 . ... , . .... :..... , , - .., .. .. ,L u.., , . 0 0 CV -,f-1°'''-,-''' •<''':',: , - in L 0 .. 4 QP,_ 1)■4„, o -o ■P cs, •t" Sio:‘ *. 11,040, N.) ctit ,... to —(.18 _ ,.. (9 I — iii....• ' 0 — cs, CI f) . E.12 o Z Ct 0.4: : ,.. „„,..,,,...- __ -'---, ,,.., c4 •..... tr) (i) C cr, EP- (I) cn et< 06 Lim . - e- ...... 0 2 • I • I ' I • I • I • cyj 0 o o o o 0 ..... ....., Z < CD 4 V' PO C•4 1- 0 z ....I (..L.1) V321Y N01.1.03S SS083 . . 0 161 2A t '.. 0 1N3WJ3S A o .i p N co 0 0 N -x•x p N.O''' x s ?re m... `' Xaidr 0 0 CO 0 J O o 4 N J` 0 S' \itir‘ , N 111? 3:,°,.", El M O x < N , O 0 ICI " ,".• 11 O O 0 3' C CD )'' 0 N W A V J o ,^ C O ' n QOf O 2 Oni Z o J 0 0 0 M N o p U (zLI) b3 ad NouO3s SSO80 a ' January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 1 2 A C 9aii.Clam Bay dredging permit-Turrell Hall WO Clam Pass dredging permitting&management plan update Page 3 of 3 WORK ORDER/PURCHASE ORDER# CONTRACT# 10-5571 CLAM PASS JOINT COASTAL PERMIT AND INLET&BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE January 2,2013 Turrell, Hall &Associates, Inc. (THA) is pleased to provide this scope of work to Collier County via the Pelican Bays Services Division (PBSD). The purpose of this scope is to outline professional environmental permitting services to the PBSD for the dredging of Clam Pass. The work proposed will be conducted under Contract Number 10-5571 by THA and our subcontractor, Humiston and Moore Engineers. Based on recent telephone conversations with the federal permitting agencies (USACE and FWS), our understanding is that a new permit application will need to be submitted to the USACE with updated project conditions and further permit coordination may be required with FWS to complete the Biological Opinion for the project. Scope of Work TASK I: PERMITTING a) Permit Drawings: H&M and THA will prepare updated design and permit drawings at the direction of the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) for the dredging of Clam Pass. The plans will be based on updated hydrographic and beach profile data to be collected in January 2013 and on the most recent benthic resources surveys conducted in August 2012. b) DEP Permitting: H&M will coordinate with the staff of the DEP to update the existing DEP JCP permit (no. 0296087-001-JC) as needed for the updated plans. This will include filing new plans on behalf of Collier County and meeting with the DEP staff. c) DEP Mixing Zone Variance: H&M will prepare and submit a mixing zone variance request to DEP for the proposed dredging activity. d) USACE Permitting: THA and H&M will coordinate with the staff of the USACE to complete their review of the project (No. 0296087-001-JC) as needed based on the updated plans. This will include filing a new permit application on behalf of Collier County, meetings with the USACE staff, and responses to commenting parties as a result of the new application. e) USFWS and NMFS Coordination: THA will provide information to and coordinate with these agencies relative to their species and habitat guidelines.We will provide a technical review of the draft Biological Opinion from the FWS including an engineering evaluation by H&M of the project design. Attendance at two meetings with these agencies is included in the scope. Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. 1 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session i 6 1 2 A 9aii.Clam Bay dredging permit-Turrell Hall WO Clam Pass dredging permitting&management plan update Page 1 of 3 The scope does not include provisions for production of detailed environmental documents such as mitigation plans,Environmental Impact Statements, or Biological Assessments that could be requested by the reviewing agencies based on the updated application. We do not anticipate these documents being requested now since they were not requested as part of the previous applications but will still need to verify this once the revised application has been submitted. TASK II: INLET AND BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE Inlet and Bay Management Plan Update: THA and H&M will prepare the framework for an updated management plan for the Clam Pass and Bay system. • H&M will prepare exhibits and supporting documentation relative to the design configuration of Clam Pass dredging for inclusion into the Plan. • THA will coordinate stakeholder input into the plan through three efforts. An initial call for written input from stakeholders and interested parties will be used to determine goals and objectives for the Plan. A workshop will be held once the framework for the plan has been completed to collect written and oral comments. A final workshop will be held once the Plan has been drafted and prior to being finalized. • THA will prepare documentation necessary for stakeholder input including initial invitation letter to participate,Plan outline,and Plan Draft. • THA will coordinate with the State and Federal permitting and review agencies as needed during the formulation of the Plan. Baseline information already available will be incorporated into Plan elements however; additional field data collection(such as fish and bird surveys) is not included in this scope. This scope does not include services for responding to legal objections,preparing for expert testimony,or preparing for litigation associated with the project. If necessary,these services will be provided under a separate agreement with the County. Schedule The above scope is based on a 75 day schedule. Creation of the permit exhibits and submittal of the updated application to the DEP and USACE will take place within 10 days of approval to proceed. Subsequent coordination with the permitting agencies will be done as quickly as possible based on the agency's review times and comment periods. Coordination of the Management Plan will be done concurrently with the permitting. The initial invitation to participate will be sent out within 7 days of the notice to proceed. Management Plan outline and preliminary exhibits will be available for the first stakeholder workshop within 35 days of the invitation. Draft Plan will be available for the second stakeholder meeting within 35 days of the first stakeholder meeting. Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. I r _ January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sessions 6 I 2 a� 1 9aii.Clam Bay dredging permit-Turrell Hall WO Clam Pass dredging permitting&management plan update Page 2 of 3 Budget Compensation for the above scope of work will be based on charges as described in Exhibit"A"and will not exceed the amount listed without approval from PBSD. .34,000.00 Accepted By: Timothy C.Hall,Vice President Date Turrell,Hall &Associates,Inc. Approved By: Neil Dorrill,Administrator Date Pelican Bay Services Division Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. � 6 .� January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Se es isi Board ZiAssion 10. Setting Priorities(Keith J.Dallas) Page 1 of 2 Setting PBSD Priorities By Keith J. Dallas As I end my term as your Board Chair, I have started to take inventory of the issues that I feel are outstanding, in order to avoid items being inadvertently forgotten. That process has highlighted the number of important projects in which the PBSD is currently involved, and the need to prioritize them so that the most important ones are accomplished as needed. The following are my thoughts. They are given to encourage the Board to think about priorities and develop your own priorities. 1. Clam Bay Dredging- This has to be the number one priority, and needs immediate attention. The PBSD has to have a seamless transition from the CZM/Foundation, and do the permitting/dredging project on as fast a track as possible. Anything else is unsatisfactory. 2. Solving the Copper Sulfate Problem - Although there is some time to fully solve this problem, it still has to have very high priority. The solution(s) are probably very complex, and will involve trying various ideas and then monitoring results. It also involves community communications and working closely with major abutting landowners. All that will take a huge effort from staff and the PBSD Board, and will not occur quickly. There is only 5 years to solve this problem. 3. Taking Over Various CZM/Foundation Functions - The intent is that PBSD step into roles that have recently been done by either CZM or the Foundation. Staff and the Board should spend time to make sure nothing slips through the cracks and consider if there are other additional functions that are needed. This will take time and effort over the next few months. 4. Tree Canopy/Pathway/Bike Lane Study - I think the timing of this project is most debatable. Its urgency has been diminished with the repaving of the Pelican Bay pathways. Although the study would be useful, it's immediate importance pales in comparison with the items above. Given it will take a lot of resources and staff/Board time, should you consider delaying most of this for a year or two? The pathways probably won't need work for a couple of years or more, and the County has now delayed the repaving schedule for the Boulevard to 2019 (and therefore the need to decide on possible bike paths). Maybe you should merely hire the arborist to provide status on the current health of the tree canopy and the best ways to maintain (and possibly enhance) the health of the trees, assuming no immediate pathway changes. The rest of the project can wait. jL� January Bay c1i �Iln gi2Se Janua 2,2013 Pelican Ba Servic roi Bard Re s n 1 (c 10. Setting Priorities(KeithlJ.Dallas) Page 2 of 2 Setting PBSD Priorities By Keith J. Dallas Page 2 5. Ongoing Landscape Improvements - This almost falls into the normal maintenance mode. Each year staff will upgrade further sections of our landscape, as time and money allows. 6. Crosswalks - Hopefully a decision will be made at the January 2nd meeting regarding any modifications at the San Marino crosswalk. Hopefully that will also provide the direction for future crosswalks. Once that is decided, minimal effort will be needed deciding on when and where future crosswalks are built. 7. Repaving Pelican Bay Boulevard - The County has now said the Boulevard will not be repaved until Fiscal 2019. The Board will have to decide if that is acceptable, and if not what can practically be done.Although I agree the current road condition is cosmetically very poor, I personally would defer discussions of this until other items have been solved and you are sure of the PBSD's financial status. 8. Replacing Street Lighting- At some point the PBSD needs to hire an expert to advise you of the current state of the art of LED lighting, and update the cost estimates provided by Wilson Miller. The original study said the fixtures should be replaced in 4 to 7 years from now. However given the time needed to update the study, decide on a specific technology and look, and communicate to the community, a couple of years lead time is needed. Once staff and Board get beyond the current high priority issues, thought should be given to start the process and maybe do a demonstration project. It is my hope that the Board will start to discuss priorities at the January 2nd meeting.Anything that can be lowered in priority will give everyone more time to work on immediate issues. Keith 161 2At ORDINANCE NO. 2013 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27, AS AMENDED, WHICH CREATED THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT, BY AMENDING SECTION FOUR, PURPOSE; POWERS; SECTION SEVEN, CREATION OF THE PELICAN BAY MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING AND BENEFIT UNIT ADVISORY COMMITTEE KNOWN AS THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD; SECTION EIGHT, COMPOSITION, NOMINATION AND APPOINTMENT; AND SECTION ELEVEN, OFFICERS; QUORUM; RULES OF PROCEDURE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on May 28, 2002, the Board of County Commissioners (Board), adopted Ordinance No. 2002-27, which superseded, repealed, and consolidated prior ordinances relating to the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit("Unit"); and WHEREAS, the Board subsequently amended Ordinance No. 2002-27 by adopting Ordinance No. 2006-05 and Ordinance No. 2009-05; and WHEREAS, the Board desires to further amend Ordinance No. 2002-27, as amended, in order to clarify that the Unit will be solely responsible for advising the County on dredging and maintaining Clam Pass for the purpose of enhancing the health of the affected mangrove forest and will manage such activities for the County; to add a non-voting member recommended by the Pelican Bay Foundation; and to create a system of rotating officers for the Unit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENT TO SECTION FOUR OF ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27, AS AMENDED. Section Four is hereby amended as follows: SECTION FOUR: Purpose; powers. The Unit is formed for the purpose of providing street lighting, water management, ambient noise management, extraordinary law enforcement service and beautification, including but not limited to beautification of recreation facilities, sidewalk, street and median areas, identification markers, the maintenance of conservation or preserve areas including the restoration of the mangrove forest preserve and to finance the landscaping beautification of only Words Underlined are added;Words Struck Through are deleted. Page 1 of 4 161 2A 1L that portion of U.S. 41 from Pine Ridge Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road in the above-described taxing and benefit unit and to that end shall possess all the powers to do all things reasonably necessary to provide such services. The Unit will be solely responsible for advising the County on dredging and maintaining Clam Pass for the purpose of enhancing the health of the affected mangrove forest, and will manage such activities for the County. SECTION TWO: AMENDMENT TO SECTION SEVEN OF ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27,AS AMENDED. Section Seven is hereby amended as follows: SECTION SEVEN: Creation of the Pelican Bay Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit Advisory Committee Known as the Pelican Bay Services Division Board. Concurrent with the passage of the Ordinance, an 11 member advisory committee to be known as the Pelican Bay Services Division Board (PBSD Board) is hereby created. Those individuals who are members of the PBSD Board pursuant to Collier County Ordinance No. 90- 111, as amended, as of the moment prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, shall continue on as members of the PBSD Board until March 31st of the year in which their term would have expired as set forth in the prior ordinances, and shall continue to hold over and serve in that capacity until their position is filled as provided for in this Ordinance. In addition, there shall be 1 non-voting member nominated by the Pelican Bay Foundation in the manner set forth below. This non-voting member shall not be subject to the voting requirements set forth below. SECTION THREE: AMENDMENT TO SECTION EIGHT OF ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27,AS AMENDED. Section Eight is hereby amended as follows: SECTION EIGHT: Composition, nomination and appointment. A) The PBSD Board shall be representative of the residential, business and commercial interests and landowners in Pelican Bay. To that end, nine of the PBSD Board members shall be representative of the residential interests within the Unit and two of the PBSD Board members shall be representative of the commercial and business interests within the Unit. The non-voting member shall be recommended for appointment by the Pelican Bay Foundation. The non-voting member should be an individual who is not related to and who is independent of the other Board members and County employees, with no apparent conflict of interest or appearance of impropriety. Members of the PBSD Board shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Board of County Commissioners pursuant to the procedure outlined herein. The nine (9) PBSD Board members representative of the residential interests within the Unit, and the non-voting member recommended for appointment by the Pelican Bay Foundation, shall be residents of and qualified Words Underlined are added;Words Struck Through are deleted. Page 2 of 4 161' 2A (--1- electors within the Unit. The two PBSD Board members representative of the commercial/business/other interests shall be residents of and qualified electors in Collier County. ********** SECTION FOUR: AMENDMENT TO SECTION ELEVEN OF ORDINANCE NO. 2002-27,AS AMENDED. Section Eleven is hereby amended as follows: SECTION ELEVEN: Officers; quorum; rules of procedure. A) At its earliest opportunity, the membership of the PBSD Board shall elect a chairman and vice chairs from among the members. Officers'terms shall be for one year, with no eligibility for re-election. Officer's terms are to be on a rotating basis, with no member allowed a second term for the same office unless all members have previously served in that position. This provision shall be retroactive for one year prior to the adoption of this ordinance, and shall apply to all current officers and members. ********** SECTION FIVE: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY. In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION SIX: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word. SECTION SEVEN: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Department of State. Words Underlined are added;Words; sl—Thfeegh are deleted. Page 3 of 4 161 2A iF PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by a vote of a majority plus one of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of , 2013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: By: , Deputy Clerk , CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Jeffrey A. Klatzkow County Attorney Words Underlined are added;Words Stfuek-Thretigh are deleted. Page 4 of 4 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Bdulall Session 2 A • 11. Changes to Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27(Keith J.Dallas) Page 1 of 1 Comments on Proposed PBSD Ordinance _ By Keith J. Dallas The Board of County Commissioner has proposed a new County Ordinance that redefines the responsibilities and operations of the PBSD. Commissioner Hiller has requested that Y individuals who have ideas about how the Ordinance could be improved contact the County with ideas before the Ordinance is considered in January. The following are areas on which the PBSD Board may want to consider making comments: • The proposed ordinance limits Chairman and Vice Chairman terms to one year, and says, "...with no member allowed a second term for the same office unless all members have previously served in that position". Given the difficulty the PBSD has had in filling Board openings, a literal reading of this section could further discourage individuals to run for the Board. A better approach might be to say, "... unless all members have been given the opportunity to serve in that position". Thus individuals not interested in becoming Chair could decline. • Another way to encourage rotation of the Chair would be to limit a person to one term as Chair during their 4-year term as member of the Board. In a second term they could serve another term as Chair. • I can personally attest to the challenge of serving as Chair, particularly in the first year. If the BCC is amendable, could the term as Chair be limited to 2 year? This would give the position more continuity. • Ideally the terms should coincide with the election of the new Board, i.e. first meeting in April. Some thought should be given at some point to extend one time a Chair's term to more than 12 months to put the terms on an April to March time frame. • Currently the residential member terms are staggered to have 4 open one year, 3 another, 2 another, none the last year. The County could consider staggering this year's election appointments so that the pattern will be 2 members in 3 of the years, with 3 members the 4th year. Details of this approach have been discussed in prior PBSD meetings. I would like to have the Board discuss these and other ideas they feel appropriate at our January 2nd meeting, with the consensus of the Board forwarded to the County for possible incorporation in the proposed Ordinance. Keith J. Dallas 1b A January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session I 2 • ' 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler 9 9 P Y � Chandler) Page 1 of 18 Possible Rules for PBSD Meetings The question has been raised about the appropriateness of the current methods the PBSD is using to conduct meetings, and to what extent Robert's Rules apply. The purpose of the following is to discuss our current practices, where I see them not working, and possible ways they could be changed. My intent is to encourage Board members to begin thinking about possible approaches so that at a future meeting we jointly can decide which approaches are most desirable. Community Input Currently we allow 3-minute comments on each individual subject, as well general comments at the end of the meeting. Individuals are supposed to speak only once on each subject (although I have not done a good job policing that rule). The problem is that especially on controversial matters, comments can take a huge amount of time, often with the same thoughts being said again and again. Recent meetings have been long, with topics at the end of the agenda having to be carried to the next meeting. Looking at what other area Boards do: • The Foundation allows 3 minutes at the beginning of the meeting for general member comments, plus an additional minute before any specific Board action is taken. • The BCC allows 3 minutes on any subject, including general topics at the beginning of a meeting. However individuals must sign up to speak BEFORE the subject begins to be discussed. Individuals may also cede time to others. • County committees often function like the BCC. The issue is how we can speed up our meetings without instituting procedures the public will feel unduly limits their input?At a minimum I intend to more strictly enforce our current rules. However I would encourage a Board discussion of any other ideas. Amending a Previously Adopted Motion The situations where Board members want to revisit prior Board votes are probably the most controversial. Our recent multiple votes on the width of our pathways are a classic example. How do we allow revisiting prior decisions without creating chaos and encouraging gamesmanship? January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 16 1 2 A 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 2 of 18 Some possibilities are: • Currently we allegedly use Robert's Rules. It allows motions during the . same meeting to be revisited ("reconsideration") only if a Board member who voted with the prevailing side of the prior vote makes the motion to reconsider. The losing members can't bring the motion up again that day. Motions voted in prior meetings can be brought up by anyone. If they have been "properly noticed"before the meeting, a simple majority can "amend something previously adopted". If not properly noticed, a 2/3rd majority vote is required to change the vote (more on this later). • We could require, like the BCC, that any motion to reconsider, even in subsequent meetings, can only be raised by a Board member who voted with the prevailing side of the prior vote. • Alternatively we could allow any Board member to make a motion to amend something previously adopted,with proper notice, but require a more substantial vote for passage (for example, a super majority or 2/3rd majority). The real question is how comfortable the Board is with making it more difficult to revote previously decided matters, and what are the kind of rules are we should use? Prior Notice of Motions To Be Considered The above discussion highlights an area that has concerned me, to what extent should the community and other Board members have notice that a particular motion will be considered at a particular meeting? Some of our more contentious votes have happened when some member wanted a vote on an item that caught people by surprise. Not only had other Board members not had a chance to think about a subject in depth, people in the community who felt one way or another on the subject often did not even come to the meeting. Some possibilities: • Roberts Rules has no requirement for noticing most motions, other than the above-mentioned motion to amend something previously adopted. • The Foundation includes any motions to be voted in their agenda. Some specific items must actually be discussed at 2 consecutive meetings and then require a super majority vote. (The PBSD only requires a majority vote, but the Budget must have at least 7 Board members present for the vote). • The BCC also includes all motions to be considered in their agenda, and requires super majority votes on some items. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 I 2 A 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 3 of 18 I would like a Board discussion regarding your desires for requiring or not prior notice of motions to be considered at upcoming PBSD meetings. Other Procedures? Are there other situations where we want Robert's Rules to be modified? If so, please think about them and contact Lisa so your thoughts can be distributed in advance of the meeting where we discuss these matters. KJD January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsider n o ote (John C I ) Page 4 of 18 LJi 7 _ , By ORDINANCE NO. 2012- 15 .:J 9 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.75-1b1 AS AMENDED, IN ORDER TO REVISE PROCEDURES r.FOR : RECONSIDERATION OF LAND USE MATTERS; PROVIDING FOR --' CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION.-:IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOYt AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on April 22, 1975, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) adopted Ordinance No. 75-16 which established the time,place and conduct of its meetings;and WHEREAS, subsequent amendments to Ordinance No. 75-16 reflect the evolving practices and procedures relating to the meetings of the Board of County Commissioners;and WHEREAS,the Board desires to amend Ordinance No. 75-16,as amended,as it relates to a request for reconsideration by a petitioner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENT TO SECTION ONE OF ORDINANCE NO. 75-16, AS AMENDED. Section One is hereby amended as follows: 7. Reconsideration of land use matters a. Applicability. Any matter in which the Board of County Commissioners or Board of Zoning Appeals,as the case may be,has denied a request to change the land use designation of a parcel of land, a request for site specific rezone initiated by a petitioner or his or her agent, variance,conditional use,license,permit or other land use-related request. b Request for Reconsideration by Petitioner. A request for reconsideration may be made only by the petitioner. The petitioner may request reconsideration of a petition in writing to the County Manager no later than 15 days from the date of the Board's action denying the original petition. Except as provided below, Tthis request shall be jurisdictional, and no motion for reconsideration may be made by any member of the Board where such a request was untimely. If State or Federal submission and/or approval schedules pertaining to the petition are extended within 6 months following the denial of the original petition,upon Public Petition initiated by the petitioner,the Board may extend petitioner's request for reconsideration by majority vote,and on a second motion made by any Commissioner,place the issue of reconsideration for a date certain on which the action or petition will be reconsidered, but in no event shall such reconsideration take place less than 14 days nor more than 45 days from the date the motion to reconsider is adopted. Underlined text is added;Struck through text is deleted Page 1 of 3 U Janus 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session U I �Y Y 9 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 5 of 18 t c. Motion for reconsideration by a Board member who voted in the majority. Any member of the Board who voted with the majority(or in the case of a rezoning or change in land use designation,voted against)on the original action or petition may move for a reconsideration of the action or petition at any regular meeting of the Board within 15 days of the date of the request for reconsideration. If no regular meeting of the Board occurs within 15 days of the request for reconsideration, the Board member may move for a reconsideration of the action or petition no later than the first meeting of the Board that follows the County Manager's receipt of the request for consideration. This motion shall be made during that portion of the Board's agenda entitled "Board of County Commissioners." If no motion for reconsideration is made during this time period,the request shall be deemed denied. The motion may specify a date certain on which the action or petition will be reconsidered, but in no event shall such reconsideration take place less than 14 days nor more than 45 days from the date the motion to reconsider is adopted. * * * * * SECTION TWO: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY. In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law,the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction,such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such,and the word"ordinance"may be changed to"section,""article,"or any other appropriate word. SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Department of State,and shall apply to all land use petitions that were denied after December 1,2011. Underlined text is added;St eagh text is deleted Page 2 of 3 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration v ( hn Chan) Page 6 of 18 • PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,Florida,this 2,- lay of �a„��,, ,2012. ATTEST:` •r^.�-, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGIft E131ZOCK,CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA "?'9 W■kt-tcC I'LAA. lerk FRED W.COYLE, CHAI N Att4 as..to..Cn i1gns t of$' ' Ap. ov • =s to form and a .. .-ncy: Jeffr.i . Klatzkow Coun ttorney This ordinance filed with the Secretory of tate' Office the ■day of Pa Z and acknowledgement of that filin rec ived this 5'et day of Zo/ Dewy CS* Underlined text is added;&tfiek through text is deleted Page 3 of 3 _ f January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 ("\), 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsiderat of es John Cha er Page 7 of 18 STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of: ORDINANCE 2012-15 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 27th day of March, 2012, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 29th day of March, 2012 . DWIGHT E. BROCK Clerk of Courts and-COYk, Ex-officio to Boar "bf-„"I .:?. w County Commissoirs 1116 ' :y. Teresa Polaski, Deputy Clerk l AJanuary 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 b I e ( (.) meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) 12a.Old Business Scheduling g p Y Page 8 of 18 Sec.2-36.-General provisions. Sec.2-37.-Addressing the Commission. Sec.2-38.-Sergeant-at-arms. Sec.2-39.-Action to be taken by resolution,ordinance or motion. Sec.2-40.-Adlournment. Sec.2-41.-Reconsideration of matters generally. Sec.2-42.-Reconsideration of land use matters. Sec.2-43-2-65.-Reserved. Sec. 2-36. -General provisions. (a) Regular meetings. The Board of County Commissioners shall normally hold its regular meeting at 9:00 a.m. each second and fourth Tuesday, except on a day designated as a holiday, interim recess, or as otherwise directed by an affirmative vote of the majority of all Board members present. Meetings may be postponed or cancelled by an affirmative vote of the majority of all Board members present. Meetings shall normally be held at the Collier County Government Center and shall be open to the news media and the public. Meetings may be held in other locations within the County. (b) Special meetings. When the Chairman or a majority of the Board calls a special meeting, the County Manager or his designee shall notify the Clerk, the County Attorney, and issue press releases advising of the place, date and hour of the meeting and the purpose for which the meeting is called. (c) Agenda. There shall be an official agenda for each meeting of the Board, which shall determine the order of business conducted at the meeting. (1) The Board shall not take action upon any matter, proposal, report or item of business not listed upon the official agenda, unless a majority of the Board present consents. (2) The County Manager shall prepare each agenda in appropriate form approved by the Board. Matters may be placed on the agenda by the County Manager, any County Commissioner, the Clerk, the County Attorney, and the constitutional officers. The agenda shall be prepared and distributed not later than four days preceding the regular meeting. (3) Prior to the publishing of the agenda, matters placed on the agenda should include as much supporting documents, information, and materials as is needed to aid the Board in its preparation and deliberation of the agenda item. Documents, information and materials will not be accepted by the Board following publication of the agenda. Should additional documents, information and materials be presented to the Board following publication, the Board may, by a majority vote of those present, elect to either continue the agenda item to a future Board meeting, or waive this requirement and hear the matter if it determines that the agenda item is of significant public importance and should not be postponed. (4) All requests for a continuance of an agenda item, including matters advertised for a public hearing, require Board of County Commission approval. No person shall be entitled to rely for any reason upon any assurances that an agenda item or public hearing will be continued. A continuance shall only be granted by an affirmative vote of the majority of the Board Members present. (d) Presiding officer, election, duties. The presiding Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be elected by a majority of the members of the Board of County Commissioners and said election shall occur at the first regularly scheduled Board meeting in January of each year. In the event that the Chairman and/or the Vice-Chairman are not reelected as Commissioners in any given year, unless a Special Meeting is called, the Board of County Commissioners shall elect a January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session11 A 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideratio v (J hn Chan Page 9 of 18 Chairman and/or Vice-Chairman, as applicable, at the first regularly scheduled Board meeting on or after the second Tuesday after the election to temporarily serve until the first regularly scheduled Board meeting in January at which time the scheduled election shall take place. However, the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman shall serve at the pleasure of the Board. The Vice-Chairman shall preside in the absence of the Chairman. With respect to all matters outside of meetings (see subsection (e) below), in the absence of both the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman, the immediate past Chairman shall act as temporary Chairman, and if there is no immediate past Chairman, then the longest tenured Commissioner shall so act. The Chairman shall become the presiding officer immediately after his or her election. The Chairman shall preserve order and decorum at all meetings. He shall state every question and announce the decision of the commission on each item of business. The majority vote of the members present shall determine all questions of order not otherwise covered. The Chairman may vote on any question, his or her name being called last. The Chairman shall sign all ordinances, resolutions and legally binding documents adopted by the Commission during his or her presence. In his or her absence, such ordinances, resolutions and legally binding documents shall be signed by the presiding officer. (e) Call to Order. At the hour appointed for the meeting, the Chairman shall immediately call the Commission to order. In the physical absence of the Chairman, and the Vice-Chairman, the Board members present shall elect a temporary Chairman and a temporary Vice-Chairman by majority vote, and the Chairman so elected shall then call the meeting to order and shall serve until arrival of the Chairman or Vice-Chairman. (f) Quorum. A majority of the Board shall constitute a quorum. No resolution, legally binding document or motion shall be adopted by the Board without the affirmative vote of the majority of all members present. Should no quorum attend within 30 minutes after the hour appointed for the meeting, the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, or in their absence, the Clerk or his designee, may adjourn the meeting. (g) Super-Majority Exception. Whenever provided by general law, special law, ordinance, or as specified by resolution adopted by a majority of the full membership of the Board, and notwithstanding subsection (f), a motion, ordinance, legally binding document or resolution may be required to be adopted by an affirmative vote of four-fifths (4/5) of the full membership of the Board. (h) Rules of debate. The following rules of debate shall be observed by the Board. Except as herein provided questions of order and the conduct of business shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order. (1) Motion under consideration. When a motion is presented and seconded, it is under consideration and no other motion shall be received thereafter, except to adjourn, to lay on the table, to postpone, or to amend until the question is decided. These countermotions shall have preference in the order in which they are mentioned, and the first two shall be decided without debate. Final action upon a pending motion may be deferred until the next meeting by majority of the members present. (2) Chairman participation. The presiding Chairman may move, second and debate from the chair, and shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Commissioner by reason of being the presiding Chairman. (3) Form of address. Each member shall address only the presiding officer for recognition, shall confine himself to the question under debate, and shall avoid personalities and indecorous language. (4) Interruption. A member, once recognized, shall not be interrupted except by a call to Regular January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board R eg Session 1 i 6 1 1 2 A 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 10 of 18 order or as herein otherwise provided. If a member is called to order, he shall stop speaking until the question is determined by the presiding officer. Any member may appeal the decision of the Chairman to the Board for decision by majority vote. (5) Privilege of closing debate. The Commissioner moving for the adoption of an ordinance, resolution or other act shall have the privilege of closing debate unless otherwise directed by the Chair. (6) The question. Upon the closing of debate any member may require a roll call vote. Any member may give a brief statement or file a written explanation of his or her vote. (i) Minutes. The minutes of prior meetings approved by a majority of the members present shall become the official minutes. Each resolution, ordinance and legally binding document shall be signed by the presiding officer at the meeting and by the Clerk and entered in the minutes. (Ord. No. 75-16, § 1(1); Ord. No. 85-20, § 1; Ord. No. 87-14, § 1; Ord. No. 89-04, § 1; Ord. No. 90-27, § 1; Ord. No. 2007-02, §§ 1-3; Ord. No. 07-50, § 1; Ord. No. 2009-52, § 1; Ord. No. 2011-01, § 1; Ord. No. 2011-17, § 1) Sec. 2-37. -Addressing the Commission. (a) If a subject is not on the agenda for a meeting of the Board of County Commissioners it may be added by motion and an affirmative vote of a majority of all Board members present that the subject should not be delayed until the next meeting. (b) Any person appearing to provide the Board factual information or expert opinion to consider prior to taking official action shall be governed by the following procedure: (1) Prior to addressing the Board the speaker shall approach any podium or any other place otherwise designated by the Board of County Commissioners for this purpose and clearly state his or her full name, home address,the name of the person or entity that he or she represents and the subject of his or her address. (2) Before providing factual information or expert opinion the speaker may ask, and any Commissioner may require the speaker to be placed under the following oath with right hand upraised: "I willfully swear under oath the facts and testimony I furnish this Board to be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and not inconsistent or contradictory with other statements made by me under oath." No person shall be required to take this oath more than once in any given day, but shall be reminded he is under oath before again addressing the Board. Each commissioner, shall take the oath one time and be considered under oath during the term of his office. Those asking questions or desiring to comment on a matter before the Board shall not be required to take the oath. Any Commissioner may at any time request such a speaker to take the above oath. (3) Each person shall limit his address to three minutes unless granted additional time by the Chairman or by an affirmative vote of the majority of the Board members present. All remarks shall be to the Board as a body and not to any individual member. No person other than a Commissioner shall discuss directly or through a Commissioner, without authorization of the presiding officer. (4) Any person making impertinent or slanderous remarks or who becomes boisterous A January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 61 2 12a.Old Business Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 11 of 18 shall be instructed to remain silent by the presiding officer, until permission to continue is granted. (Ord. No. 75-16, § 1(2); Ord. No. 07-50, § 1) Sec. 2-38.-Sergeant-at-arms. The County Sheriff, or his deputy, shall be the sergeant-at-arms at meetings of the Board of County Commissioners and shall carry out all orders of the Chairman to maintain order and decorum. (Ord. No. 75-16, § 1(3); Ord. No. 07-50, § 1) Sec. 2-39. -Action to be taken by resolution,ordinance or motion. Each action of the Board of County Commissioners shall be taken by resolution, ordinance or legally binding document approved as to form by the County Attorney, except approval of administrative matters may be by motion adopted and recorded in the minutes. (Ord. No. 75-16, § 1(4); Ord. No. 07-50, § 1) Sec. 2-40. -Adjournment. A motion to adjourn shall always be in order and decided without debate. (Ord. No. 75-16, § 1(5); Ord. No. 07-50, § 1) Sec. 2-41. -Reconsideration of matters generally. (a) Any matter which has been voted upon by the Board of County Commissioners may be reconsidered as follows: (1) By a motion to reconsider made by a member who voted with the majority if such motion is made prior to the adjournment of the meeting at which the matter was voted upon. If there were no public speakers on the item, or if all of the public speakers for the item are still present in the boardroom following a successful motion to reconsider, the Board may elect to rehear the matter during that meeting, or direct the County Manager to place the item on the agenda for a future meeting as set forth in subsection (2). If there were public speakers for the item, and not all of the public speakers are still present in the boardroom following a successful motion to reconsider, the County Manager will place the item on the agenda for a future meeting as set forth in subsection (2). (2) By a motion to reconsider made by a member who voted with the majority if such motion is made at a regular meeting following the meeting at which the matter was voted upon, but only in accordance with the following: a. Where a member who voted with the majority wishes the Board to reconsider a matter after the adjournment of the meeting at which it was voted on, the member shall deliver to the County Manager a written memorandum stating that the member intends to introduce a motion to reconsider. The memorandum shall state the date of the regular meeting at which the member intends to introduce such motion, and shall be delivered to the County Manager at least six days prior to such meeting. The purpose of this requirement is to allow the staff to advise the Board of the legal or other ramifications of reconsideration. b. No motion to reconsider shall be made any later than the second regular Board meeting following the Board's vote on the matter sought to be reconsidered. a January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 161 2 A 11) 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 12 of 18 c. Upon adoption of a motion to reconsider, the County Manager shall place the item on an agenda not later than the second regular Commission meeting following the meeting at which the motion for reconsideration was adopted. d. All parties who participated by speaking, submitting registration forms or written materials at the first hearing, shall be notified by the County Manager of the date of reconsideration. (b) This section shall apply to any matters which may lawfully be reconsidered except those matters which are covered by Paragraph 7 below. (Ord. No. 81-54, § 1; Ord. No. 07-50, §2; Ord. No. 2009-52, § 1) Sec. 2-42. - Reconsideration of land use matters. (a) Applicability. Any matter in which the Board of County Commissioners or Board of Zoning Appeals, as the case may be, has denied a request to change the land use designation of a parcel of land, a request for site specific rezone initiated by a petitioner or his or her agent, variance, conditional use, license, permit or other land use-related request. (b) Request for Reconsideration by Petitioner. A request for reconsideration may be made only by the petitioner. The petitioner may request reconsideration of a petition in writing to the County Manager no later than 15 days from the date of the Board's action denying the original petition. Except as provided below, this request shall be jurisdictional, and no motion for reconsideration may be made by any member of the Board where such a request was untimely. If State or Federal submission and/or approval schedules pertaining to the petition are extended within 6 months following the denial of the original petition, upon Public Petition initiated by the petitioner, the Board may extend petitioner's request for reconsideration by majority vote, and on a second motion made by any Commissioner, place the issue of reconsideration for a date certain on which the action or petition will be reconsidered, but in no event shall such reconsideration take place less than 14 days nor more than 45 days from the date the motion to reconsider is adopted. (c) Motion for reconsideration by a Board member who voted in the majority. Any member of the Board who voted with the majority (or in the case of a rezoning or change in land use designation, voted against) on the original action or petition may move for a reconsideration of the action or petition at any regular meeting of the Board within 15 days of the date of the request for reconsideration. If no regular meeting of the Board occurs within 15 days of the request for reconsideration, the Board member may move for a reconsideration of the action or petition no later than the first meeting of the Board that follows the County Manager's receipt of the request for consideration. This motion shall be made during that portion of the Board's agenda entitled "Board of County Commissioners." If no motion for reconsideration is made during this time period, the request shall be deemed denied. The motion may specify a date certain on which the action or petition will be reconsidered, but in no event shall such reconsideration take place less than 14 days nor more than 45 days from the date the motion to reconsider is adopted. (d) Action on motion for reconsideration. The Board shall either act on the motion for reconsideration at the meeting at which such motion is made or may table the motion for no longer than the next regular meeting of the Board. If the motion is not finally acted upon by the adjournment of the next regular meeting of the Board after the motion has been made, it shall be deemed to have been denied. (e) Scheduling of petition for reconsideration. If the motion for reconsideration is granted, the January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 1 2 A Ikti 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting meetin to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 13 of 18 County Manager shall schedule the petition on the agenda for the regular Board meeting which was specified in the motion for reconsideration, or if no date is specified then on the second regular Board meeting following the meeting at which the motion is granted. (f) No hearing or debate on motion for reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration shall not require public hearing, and neither the petitioner nor any other person shall have the right to address the Board considering the merits of such a motion. However, the Board may request information of the petitioner, the staff or any other person in order to better inform itself prior to acting upon the motion. The purpose of this provision is to prevent either the petitioner or any other person from debating the merits of the petition prior to its full consideration at a regularly scheduled Board meeting where the petition is reconsidered. (g) [Procedures outlined.]The procedures outlined herein shall not constitute an administrative remedy, and the defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies shall not be raised if a petitioner declines to utilize these procedures and instead elects to pursue judicial remedies following the denial of the petition. The time period for seeking judicial relief following denial of those matters contemplated by subsection (a)(2) of this section shall run from the time the Board votes on such matter, and a motion hereunder shall not alter such time period. (h) [Initial vote.] Where the initial vote was made after an advertised public hearing, any reconsideration of such vote shall comply with all advertisement and notice provisions that were legally required for the initial public hearing. (Ord. No. 81-54, §2; Ord. No. 88-41, § 1; Ord. No. 07-50, § 2; Ord. No. 2012-15, 1) Land Development Code reference—Zoning amendments,§2.7.2. State law reference— Adoption of rezoning ordinances, F.S.§125.66(5). Sec. 2-43-2-65. -Reserved. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 1 e 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 14 of 18 COLLIER COUNTY CLAM BAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE PROCEDURES FOR CLAM BAY ADVISORY COMMITTEE September 24,2009 A. General: 1. Meetings: Regular meetings of the advisory board shall be held on such day, time and place as may be determined by the advisory board, and at a minimum of once a month,except for one month in the summer. • 2. Quorum and Voting: At all regular or special meetings of the advisory board, a majority of the membership of the advisory board shall constitute a quorum. Voting shall be by voice unless a member of the advisory board requests a roll call. The roll shall be in alphabetical order with the first name called rotating with each motion upon which the vote is called. The Chairman shall always vote last. A record of the roll call shall be kept as part of the minutes. 3. Special Meetings: Special meetings may be called by the Chairman at any time provided adequate notice is given pursuant to Paragraph 4 below. The chairman may also call a special meeting when requested to do so in writing by a majority of the members of the advisory board or by a County staff member. The notice of such a meeting shall specify the purpose of such a meeting and no other business may be considered except by unanimous consent of the advisory board. All members of the advisory board shall be notified in advance of such special meetings by the staff liaison. 4. Notice and Publication: The staff liaison shall give notice and keep record of such notice of its meetings and the meeting of the subcommittees including the date, time, and location of each regular and special meeting. Notice shall be posted in the county administration building and other appropriate locations as recommended by the advisory board and to the County Public Information Department for future distribution. 5. Open Meetings: All meetings of the advisory board or its subcommittees shall be open to the public and governed by the provisions of Florida's Government in the Sunshine Law. 1 I _ January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideratio v (J n Chan `lf Page 15 of 18 6. Minutes: The minutes of all meetings shall be promptly recorded, and such records shall be open to public inspection, in accordance with applicable law. 7. Location: Meetings of the advisory board, or any of its subcommittees, shall be held in a location accessible to the public. 8. Meeting Agenda: There shall be an agenda for each meeting of the advisory board which shall determine the order of business conducted. The board shall not take action on any matter, proposal, report or item of business not listed upon the official agenda unless a majority of the Board present consents. Any advisory board member, in the case of an advisory board or a subcommittee member in the case of a subcommittee, may place an item on the agenda by submitting it to the Chairman for forwarding to the staff liaison prior to the deadline for publishing the notice of such meeting. The Chairman shall determine whether the item submitted by the board member is relevant to the purposes of the advisory committee. Upon his/her finding that the item is relevant, it shall be included in the agenda. Staff-initiated agenda items are not subject to prior review by the Chairman. 9. Order of Business: The order of business at regular meetings shall be as follows: (a) Call to Order (b) Pledge of Allegiance (c) Roll Call (d) Changes and Approval of Agenda (e) Public Comment (f) Approval of Minutes (g) Chairman's Comments (h) Staff Reports (i) New Business (j) Old Business (k) Announcements (1) Committee Member Discussion (m)Next Meeting Time,Date and Location (n) Adjournment B. Agenda Items Requiring Action(Old Business and New Business): 1. General: All members of the public who address the Board shall utilize the speaker's podium to allow their comments to be recorded, and shall identify themselves by name and local addresses, if applicable. Further, any speaker speaking on behalf of an organization or group of individuals • 1 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 2 A 161 2 Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) 1 aOd u g g p y ( Page 16 of 18 (exceeding five) shall indicate such and shall cite the source of such authority whether by request,petition,vote,or otherwise. 2. Speaker Registration: Persons, other than staff wishing to speak on an agenda item shall, prior to the item being heard, register with the staff liaison on the forms provided. Five (5) or more persons deemed by the Board to be associated together or otherwise represent a common point of view,as proponents or opponents on any item may be requested to select a spokesperson. All persons may speak for a maximum of three(3)minutes each unless otherwise approve by the Chairman. 3. Restrictions on Comments Deemed not Germane to the Item: Notwithstanding any provisions herein, any board member may interrupt and/or stop any presentation that discusses matters that need not be considered in deciding the matter then before the Board for consideration. At any Board proceeding, the Chairman, unless overruled by majority of the Board members present, may restrict or terminate presentations which in the Chairman's judgment are frivolous, unduly repetitive or out of order. C. Order and Subject of Appearance: To the extent possible, the following shall be the order of the proceeding: 1. Preliminary Statement: The Chairman shall read the title of the Agenda item. 2. Initial Presentation by Staff: County staff shall make the initial presentation to the Board regarding any item under consideration. After completion of the staff presentation,the Board may make inquiries of staff at this time. 3. Initial Presentation by Petitioner or Proposer: Petitioner or Proposer shall make the initial presentation to the Board regarding any item under consideration. After completion of the presentation by the Petitioner or Proposer, the Board may make inquiries of the Petitioner or Proposer at this time. 4. Speakers: After Board inquiry, speakers shall be allowed to speak based on the time limitation guidelines outlined in the preceding subsection B above. During and after a speaker's presentation, the Board shall have an opportunity to comment or ask questions of or seek clarification from such speaker. The Board may also allow staff to comment, ask questions of or seek clarification from speakers. 5. Restrictions on Testimony or Presentation of Evidence: Notwithstanding any provisions herein, any board member may interrupt any presentation I � 1 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 1 2 A 1(11 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) • 9 9 P Y Page 17 of 18 that contains matters which need not be considered in deciding the matter then before the Board for consideration. At any Board proceeding, the Chairman, unless overruled by majority of the Board members present, may restrict or terminate presentations which in the Chairman's judgment are frivolous,unduly repetitive or out of order. D. Rules of Debate: The following rules of debate shall be observed by the Board. Except as herein provided questions of order and the conduct of business shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order. 1. Motion under consideration: When a motion is presented and seconded,it is under consideration and no other motion shall be received thereafter, except to adjourn, to lay on the table, to postpone, or to amend until the question is decided. These countermotions shall have preference in the order in which they are mentioned, and the first two shall be decided without debate. Final action upon a pending motion may be deferred until the next meeting by majority of the members present. 2. Chairman participation: The presiding chairman may move, second and debate from the chair, and shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a committee member by reason of being the presiding chairman. 3. Form of address: Each member shall address only the presiding officer for recognition, shall confine himself to the question under debate, and shall avoid personalities and indecorous language. 4. Interruption: A member, once recognized, shall not be interrupted except by the Chairman if the Chairman determines that the member's participation is irrelevant, frivolous or out of order. Any member may appeal the decision of the Chairman to the committee for decision by majority vote. 5. The question: Upon the closing of debate, any member may require a roll call vote. Any member may give a brief statement or file a written explanation of his vote. E. Public Comment on General Topics: Members of the public may register to speak on general topics under the Public Comment portion of the CBAC agenda. The number of speakers permitted to register under public comment on any given agenda shall be limited to a maximum of five, unless the Chairman recognizes additional speakers. 1. Speaker Registration: Individuals wishing to speak to the CBAC under public comment at any regularly scheduled meeting of the CBAC shall January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 161 2 A If 12a.Old Business-Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) Page 18 of 18 register to speak in writing on the form provided by the County prior to the public comment portion of the agenda being called by the Chairman. F. Conflicts of Interest: Any Member having a potential voting conflict shall publicly state the nature of the conflict at the Clam Bay Advisory Committee meeting and complete Form 8B (Memorandum of Voting Conflict for County, Municipal and Other Local Public Officers) within 15 days of the scheduled meeting. 41 1 gide/ • �i hn Arceri hairman January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-Landscaping Best M nagement Practices Draft 1.0 Page 1 of 2 L I LANDSCAPING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DRAFT 1.0 1 Pelican Bay is facing a severe problem. Its waterways — inland lakes and Clam Bay— are being polluted by high levels of fertilizer runoff. Nutrients from the runoff— dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus — cause algae bloom, a threat to aquatic plants and wildlife. To deal with algae buildup, a copper fungicide has been applied over an extended period of time. Through accumulation, copper— itself a pollutant—has reached alarmingly high levels in our freshwater lakes. The maximal acceptable level for dissolved copper is 3.7 milligrams per liter. A higher reading signifies the water body is impaired. Current levels in our 42 lakes range from 12 to 3870 milligrams per liter, with an average of close to 350. We are badly out of compliance. Several approaches are being taken to deal with the problem. (1) The Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) is exploring alternatives to copper sulfate as a means of controlling algae. The use of selective bacteria in combination with aeration and littoral plantings will be tested in Basin 3, the central section of the freshwater lakes. If this pilot program is successful, it will be expanded to other basins. (2) To deal with fertilizer misuse, the heart of the problem, the PBSD is undertaking a community awareness program— a follow-on to a recent county ordinance (11-24) which mandates that Best Management Practices (BMP) be followed throughout Collier County. Dealing with this problem is everyone's responsibility. If we are to have clean groundwater and healthy waterways in Pelican Bay, it is essential that fertilizers be used in accordance with BMP. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-Landscaping Best Management Practices Draft 1.0 Page 2 of 2 16 I 2 A i(t Landscaping Best Management Practices Draft 1.0 Page 2 Here is a specific list of things every condominium association, homeowner association and individual homeowner can and should do. • Use only landscape maintenance companies whose technicians are trained and licensed in BMP. During the course of fertilizer application, be sure there is appropriate on-site supervision. • Use fertilizer application rates recommended by the Florida-Friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries. Those can be accessed at http:/fyn.ifas.ufl.edu/professionals/GI-BMP_publications.htm. • Limit nitrogen usage to 4-6 lbs./1000 sq. ft./yr. • Whenever possible, use slow-release fertilizer. • Do not fertilize during the rainy season (June 1 - September 30) or prior to forecasted storms • Be sure no fertilizer is used within 10 feet of groundwater, including lakes, except to establish new landscape and then for no more than 30 days after planting. • When installing new landscape, use drought-resistant plants that require minimal fertilization. • Be mindful that reclaimed water used for irrigation already contains most of the nitrogen and phosphorus needed for grass fertilization. Little or no additional fertilizer may be needed. The Pelican Bay Services Division, working in concert with the Pelican Bay Foundation, urges all residents of Pelican Bay to follow these guidelines. The health of our lakes and our estuary depends upon it. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Revised paving schedule Page 1 of 1 Original Message 1 b 1 2 A From: John Chandler[mailto:johnchandler2l9 @gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 19,2012 1:31 PM To: ResnickLisa Cc: Neil Dorrill Subject: Fwd: RM 3948 Hiller/FW: PB Blvd. asphalt rating Pelican Bay Good news from the County. Please advise all Board members. John Chandler From: VlietJohn Date: December 19,2012 10:59:24 AM EST To: HillerGeorgia Cc: CasalanguidaNick,OchsLeo, ChesneyBarbara, MarcellaJeanne,GossardTravis,BlancoAlexander Subject: FW: RM 3948 Hiller/FW: PB Blvd. asphalt rating Pelican Bay Commissioner Hiller: John Vliet,GMD Road Maintenance, has advised that staff has revisited the paving schedule and determined that Pelican Bay Boulevard will be paved in FY 2014/15 as previously scheduled. This determination was based upon utilizing the planning methods in place in FY 2010/11. At present, staff has been working with the Cartegraph(Asset Management System) Pavement View module, which projected paving Pelican Bay Boulevard in FY 2018/19. This information was provided to Pelican Bay Services prematurely. As we are still in the early stages of entering data and making adjustments to the asset management system program, it is too early to use the Pavement View modual at this time for scheduling purposes. On behalf of John Vliet GMD Road Maintenance Barbara Original Message From: OchsLeo Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 8:56 AM To: CasalanguidaNick Subject: FW: \PB Blvd. asphalt rating/paving schedule Status please Original Message From: HillerGeorgia Sent: Friday, December 07,2012 2:12 PM To:Josie's 1Pad; OchsLeo; CasalanguidaNick Subject: Re: \PB Blvd. asphalt rating/paving schedule Leo/Nick: Why was the schedule pushed back? Please provide the updated schedule and the evidence that has precipitated the change. With thanks— Commissioner Georgia Hiller January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous correspondence-Pelican Bay Boulevard rating&paving schedule r Original Message----- Page 1 of 1 From:BlancoAlexander Thursday,December 06,2012 3:23 PM • T 161 ak o:ResnickLisa Cc:GossardTravis;Kevin Carter(kevin @dmefl.com)• Subject:RE:PB Blvd.asphalt rating Lisa, Yes we do.The estimated time for rehabilitation on Pelican Bay Blvd is 4/13/2019,about 7 rears from now.Please remember this is only an estimate.It can change. Thanks Alexander Bianco Inspector Road&Bridge Maintenance Dept. Growth Management Division Tel.239-252-8924 Fax 239-774-6406 AlexanderBlanco colIiergov.net Original Message---- From:ResnickLisa Sent:Thursday,December 06,2012 3:07 PM To:BlancoAlexander Cc:GossardTravis:Kevin Carter(kevint<i)dm, tg l.com):ResnickLisa Subject:RE:PB Blvd.asphalt rating lii Alex, As the rating is below 70%,do you have an estimate as to when Pelican Bay Boulevard will be on the schedule for milling and paving? Thanks again,Lisa Original Message From:BlancoAlexander Sent:Thursday,December 06,2012 12:50 PM To:ResnickLisa Cc:Kevin Carter(kevin .clmgfl.com);GossardTravis Subject:RE:PB Blvd.-Asphalt Rating? Lisa, Per our records Pelican Bay Blvd was rated on 8-15-12 and the rating is 66.5%. Thanks Alexander Blanco Original Message From:GossardTravis Sent:Tuesday,November 13,2012 9:41 AM To:ResnickLisa;BlancoAlexander Cc:Frank J.Laney(flaney(tpelicanbay.org) Subject:RE:Current asphalt rating threshold? Hi Lisa,Currently we are looking at numbers below 70,that being said we are currently paving roads in the mid to high 50's. Regards, Travis D.Gossard Sr. Road&Bridge Superintendent Growth Mgmt.Division Collier County Government PH#239-252-8924 Fax#239-774-6406 Travisgossard( colliergov.net January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Laurel Oak and Ridgewood Pathways a /iLt Page 1 of 3 1 6 1 2 ! Original Message From: ChesneyBarbara Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 9:58 AM To: ResnickLisa Cc: CasalanguidaNick; OchsLeo; VlietJohn; GossardTravis; WrightTodd; VorthermsJonathan; SheffieldMichael; LukaszKyle; MarcellaJeanne Subject: FW: RM 3917 Resnick/FW: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak&Ridgewood) Lisa: Todd Wright,Area Supervisor of GMD Road Maintenance,has just advised that his crews have finished work on the areas that were found to be deficient on 12/14/12. Todd also had them repair a couple of additional areas that he had deemed necessary, so that they would not become deficient within a month or so because of minor root damage that has occurred now. All of the work will be completed by COB today 12/20/12. Please let us know if you have any questions. I am closing this issue out. Happy holidays! On behalf of Todd Wright Sr. Field Supervisor GMD Road and Bridge Maintenance Department Phone#239-252-8924 Barbara Original Message From: ResnickLisa Sent: Wednesday,November 28, 2012 11:01 AM To: GossardTravis Cc: VlietJohn; CasalanguidaNick; ChesneyBarbara; WrightTodd; SheffieldMichael; OchsLeo; VorthermsJonathan; Neil Dorrill; LukaszKyle Subject: RE: RM 3917 Resnick/FW: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak& Ridgewood) Hi Travis, I called her back. She's happy. This issue can be closed out! Thanks again, Lisa Original Message From: GossardTravis Sent: Wednesday,November 28, 2012 10:52 AM To: ResnickLisa Cc: VlietJohn; CasalanguidaNick; ChesneyBarbara; WrightTodd; SheffieldMichael; OchsLeo; VorthermsJonathan; Neil Dorrill; LukaszKyle Subject: RE: RM 3917 Resnick/FW: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak& Ridgewood) Hi Lisa, That area was marked also and will be addressed within thirty days. Regards, Travis D. Gossard Sr. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Laurel Oak and Ridgewood Pathwa s i Page2of3 161 A Y`Ir' Original Message From: ResnickLisa Sent: Wednesday,November 28, 2012 10:06 AM To: GossardTravis Cc: VlietJohn; CasalanguidaNick; ChesneyBarbara; WrightTodd; SheffieldMichael; OchsLeo; VorthermsJonathan; Neil Dorrill; LukaszKyle Subject: RE: RM 3917 Resnick/FW:Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak&Ridgewood) Hi Travis, I spoke with Mrs. Pratt. She noticed the orange markings along the Ridgewood pathways yesterday and she's extremely pleased that RM is going to address the really bad parts. She asked whether one section on Ridgewood- on the Phil side -starting from the intersection of PBB to the first parking lot entrance-would also be addressed? She said that area was also difficult to walk on. Let me know and I'll get back to her. Thanks very much, Lisa Original Message From: GossardTravis Sent: Tuesday,November 27,2012 3:13 PM To: ResnickLisa; LukaszKyle Cc: VlietJohn; CasalanguidaNick; ChesneyBarbara; WrightTodd; SheffieldMichael; OchsLeo; VorthermsJonathan; Neil Dorrill Subject: FW: RM 3917 Resnick/FW: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak&Ridgewood) Lisa/Mr. Lukasz: The area supervisor made a site visit, 11/27/12,and reported that the sidewalk had some root damage that has made portions of the walkway wavy. These areas have been marked and RM will complete the repairs within a 30 day period. The walkway is not in that bad of shape that we would need a complete overlay in these areas. Best Regards, Travis D. Gossard Sr. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session , (1 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Laurel Oak and Ri gew 6 d P thways Page3of3 j Original Message From: GossardTravis Sent: Wednesday,November 21, 2012 3:15 PM To: ChesneyBarbara Cc: VlietJohn; LynchDiane; BlancoAlexander; ResnickLisa; WrightTodd;BlancoAlexander Subject: RE: RM 3917 Resnick/FW: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak&Ridgewood) Sidewalks were inspected on Laurel Oaks and Ridgewood April of 2012 and are scheduled to be re-inspected April 2013. Currently they are not scheduled for overlay. I will have the Area Supervisor go by next week and look at them to see if there are any immediate issues. We will respond with our findings next week. Thank you, Travis D. Gossard Sr. Road& Bridge Superintendent Growth Mgmt. Division Collier County Government PH#239-252-8924 Fax#239-774-6406 Travisgossard@colliergov.net From: ChesneyBarbara Sent: Wednesday,November 21, 2012 2:43 PM To: GossardTravis Cc: VlietJohn; LynchDiane; BlancoAlexander; CasalanguidaNick;ResnickLisa Subject: RM 3917 Resnick/FW: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak& Ridgewood) Importance: High RM 3917 w/response due COB 11/27/12. Please provide response to forward to Lisa. Thanks! Barbie Original Message From: ResnickLisa Sent: Wednesday,November 21, 2012 1:37 PM To: GossardTravis; BlancoAlexander Cc: ChesneyBarbara; LukaszKyle Subject: Pathways behind SunTrust(Laurel Oak&Ridgewood) Hi Travis and Alex, I received a call today from a Pelican Bay resident(Di Pratt 239-254-1616) stating that the pathways on Laurel Oak Drive(to Ridgewood)and Ridgewood Drive(to Pelican Bay Boulevard) were extremely difficult to walk on- cracked, uneven,etc.. She asked whether these pathways were evaluated recently and/or tentatively scheduled for an overlay like the ones on Myra Janco Daniels? These paths are located next to Waterside shops and adjacent to the Philharmonic. Please let me know. I told her we might not have an answer until Mon. or Tues, so she's not expecting to hear back today. Thanks and happy Thanksgiving. Lisa January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-Landscape intersection improvement II Page 1 of 1 1 6 Original Message From: Keith Dallas [mailto:keithjdallas @ gmail.com] Sent: Friday, December 14,2012 2:25 PM To: ResnickLisa Subject: Fwd: Median Landscaping. Lisa, Please include this email for the Board's information in the January agenda package. Keith Begin forwarded message: From:judesterz @aol.com Subject: Re: Median Landscaping. Date: December 11,2012 1:02:57 PM EST To: keithjdallas @gmail.com Hi Keith, Thank you so much for your explanation. Still would LOVE to see some color with annuals, but at least you took the time to let us know the rationale. Look forward to the survey. Phil and Judy Gutermuth Original Message From: Keith Dallas<keithjdallas(a,gmail.com> To:judesterz<iudesterz @aol.com> Cc: Lisa Resnick<LResnick(aicotliergov.net> Sent: Sat, Dec 8,2012 3:24 pm Subject: Median Landscaping. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gutermuth, Just a note to bring you up to date about the discussions at wednesday's PBSD meeting regarding your question about adding more color at the noses of the medians at certain Pelican Bay Blvd intersections. After some discussion the Board decided to wait for more input from the community before taking any actions. This season we will be distributing a resident survey to all residents which will include questions about the new landscaping. Depending on those responses,we would then revisit the question. The issue of our landscaping and its impact on the environment is complex.The rationale of the re- landscaping approach,besides up dating and freshening our landscape look, was to use materials and design that would reduce the need for water,fertilizers,and especially as it relates to sod,manpower. Pelican Bay has an ongoing problem that as a community we use too much water and fertilizers that then flow into our 42 fresh water ponds and ultimately flow into Clam Bay. The fertilizers then create algae blooms, which historically we have treated with copper sulfate,the most effective tool,but also a toxic material. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP) recently informed us that we do have a copper sulfate problem that we must solve in the next 5 years. We are now just starting to explore other, probably less effective and more expensive ways we can solve this problem. Part of that solution will involve finding more ways to reduce fertilizer and water usage throughout our community. As you can see,we have a balancing act to have landscaping we all enjoy and does our community service, while at the same time not taking any actions that will make our environmental problem bigger. Please stay interested in our landscaping and continue to give us your input. Keith January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-SFWMD Page 1 of 6 1 6 2, ER SOUTH FLORIDA WATERMANAGEMENT DISTRICT District Headquarters:3301 Gun Club Road,West Palm Beach,Florida 33406(561)686-8800 www.shvmd.gov December 13, 2012 Neil Dorrill, District Manager 1;-,7v; :1 Pelican Bay Services Division } Lely Community Development District �� ;; '< ` ?(i Pelican Marsh Community Development District 5672 Strand Court Suite 1 Naples, FL 34110 Subject: Permit Conversion and Transfer to the Operating Entity Pelican Bay, Permit No. 11-00065-S Lely Resort, Permit No 11-00429-S Pelican Marsh, Permit No. 11-01121-S Pelican Marsh East, Permit No. 11-01568-P Dear Mr. Dorrill, Thank you for discussing the above referenced projects with us on December 10, 2012. A general summary of our conversation and a plan of action leading up to a meeting in January follows: • Your office will provide a list of the recorded Plats, including Book and Page numbers, to SFWMD staff for each project. Actual copies of the plats are not necessary if they are available for download from the Collier County Clerk of the Circuit Court's website. • Upon additional review of each file, we noted that staff has copies of each ordinance and boundary map for each CDD, with the exception of Lely CDD. Please provide a boundary map for Lely CDD. • Although we did not discuss provision of a list of associations within the respective CDD boundaries, we request that you or your staff provide a list of associations within each project area to assist SFWMD staffs research. • SFWMD staff will provide a list of certified applications within each CDD boundary that must be converted to operation and transferred to the respective operating entity(ies) at this time (please see enclosures). Additional information for each application is located on SFWMD's ePermitting website. Okeechobee Service Center:3800 N.W. 16th Blvd.,Suite A,Okeechobee,FL 34972(863)462-5385 Lower West Coast Service Center:2301 McGregor Boulevard,,Fort Myers,FL 33901(239)338-2929 Orlando Service Center: 1707 Orlando Central Parkway,Suite 200,Orlando,FL 32809(407)858-6100 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-SFWMD Page2of6 1 6 1 2 API) Pelican Bay, Permit No. 11-00065-S Pelican Marsh, Permit No. 11-01121-S Pelican Marsh East, Permit No. 11-01568-P Lely Resort, Permit No. 11-00429-S December 13, 2012 Page 2 of 2 As you requested, we scheduled three back-to-back meetings for January 23, 2012 at the SFWMD Lower West Coast Service Center, located in Ft. Myers. Attendees will include you, the respective engineering consultants for each project, and appropriate SFWMD staff. The purpose for each meeting is to review all certified applications for each permit to determine the entity(ies) responsible for the operation and maintenance of the surface water management system. This may be the respective CDD, an association, or both a CDD and association as co-permittees/co-operating entities. Please provide contact information for the engineering groups that will meet with staff and the CDD they are associated with, along with specific times for the three meetings, to assist us in scheduling each group. We greatly appreciate your willingness to work with us in resolving these matters. Please provide the above documentation on or before January 2, 2013 to allow staff time to review it prior to the scheduled meetings. Should you have questions or comments, please contact me at sgonzale @sfwmd.gov or 561-682-6786. Sincerely, 0 San•/a Gonzalez, egulat ry Speci list 1 Regulatory Support Bureau Regulation Division sg/or Enclosures: Pelican Bay Attachment "A" Lely Resort Attachment"A" Pelican Marsh Attachment"A" Pelican Marsh East Attachment"A" January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division 1 Board 6 Regular 1 Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-SFWMD A 1 T • Pelica�n3 ay 2 Environmental Resource Permit History _ Pelican Bay Permit Number: 11-00065-S S Certification j Acceptance App. No. Project Name Permit Issue Date Date 950511-3 The Biltmore at Bay Colony 27-Jun-95 18-Jun-10 950511-7 Mansion La Palma at Pelican Bay 29-Jun-95 18-Jun-10 950518-3 The Villa La Palma at Pelican Bay 10-Jul-95 18-Jun-10 950313-2 Breakwater 12-Jul-95 28-Jul-10 X000000559 Pelican Bay Improvement District 19-Oct-78 20-Mar-07 940412-6 The Remington 27-May-94 28-Feb-11 940411-2 Neighborhood Park A Portion of Drainage System V 20-Jun-94 24-Mar-11 960116-1 The Windsor at Bay Colony 10-Apr-96 3-May-11 961125-3 The Marbella at Pelican Bay 6-Jan-97 31-Oct-06 970613-8 Toscana at Bay Colony 30-Jul-97 28-Jul-10 961125-5 The Coronado at Pelican Bay 6-Jan-97 31-Oct-06 970924-6 Marbella/Coronado Project 16-Oct-97 14-May-10 980313-11 Salerno at Bay Colony 10-Apr-98 29-Jul-10 970818-15 Toscana at Bay Colony 12-Sep-97 28-Jul-10 981027-10 Pelican Bay/U.S.41 17-Nov-99 14-May-10 990301-4 Montenero at Pelican Bay 19-Apr-99 23-Mar-11 000518-13 The Trieste 28-Jun-00 29-Jul-10 030908-19 Crown Colony at Pelican Bay 17-Sep-03 23-Apr-07 891229-15 Crown Colony at Pelican Bay 4-Jan-90 26-Sep-06 921202-3 Coco Bay at Pelican Bay 28-May-93 18-Jan-11 930329-1 North Bay Plaza 28-Jul-93 23-Aug-10 930609-3 Drainage 1 -Neighborhood Park Pelican Bay 17-Aug-93 24-Mar-11 930402-10 Pelican Bay Improvement District 12-May-93 21-Nov-11 940420-9 L'Ambiance of Pelican Bay 30-Jun-94 21-Nov-11 951115-6 St. Raphael 14-May-96 15-Jul-10 930702-1 The Marquesa at Bay Colony-Pelican Bay System V 9-Sep-93 7-May-12 Attachment "A" January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-SFWMD • Lely eSOrt 1 6 1 2 A ( tt Environmental Resource Permit History Lely Resort ! Permit Number: 11-00429-S Certification Acceptance App. No. Project Name Permit Issue Date Date 911112-7 Lely Wildflower Way and Lely High School Road 5-Dec-91 11-Jun-96 930520-3 Freedom Square at Lely 17-Jun-93 11-Jun-96 920821-11 Freedom Square at Lely 15-Sep-92 11-Jun-96 920320-8 The Verandas at Lely Flamingo Island Club 2-Apr-92 1-Apr-97 931022-8 The Verandas/Tiger Island Phase I and II 3-Nov-93 1-Apr-97 911216-5 Freedom Square at Lely 14-Jan-93 8-Sep-09 921029-5 Lely Basin B 12-Aug-93 7-Jun-96 940622-7 McDonalds Restaurant/Freedom Square 28-Jun-94 14-Dec-05 940418-11 Palomino Village 13-May-94 11-Jun-96 930428-3 Mustang Plantation Golf Course 10-Feb-94 16-Aug-99 940812-6 Chase Preserve of Lely Resort-Phase I 9-Sep-94 18-Aug-99 900801-20 Lely Resort Community Ph. II 17-Jan-91 7-Jun-96 890210-15 Lely Resort Community- Lake Add 10-May-89 26-May-09 890808-6 Lely Resort Lakes 5, 18, 2, 17 3-Oct-89 26-May-09 890808-7 South Elementary School"C" 9-Nov-89 1-Apr-94 890607-3 Lely Resort Phase I 15-Feb-90 11-Jun-96 960827-3 Mustang Plantation Golf Course 23-Sep-96 17-Aug-99 960513-3 Lely Tract 33(Indian Wells Golf Villas) 3-Jul-96 18-Aug-99 960725-15 The Verandas at Lely, Building#16 13-Aug-96 1-Apr-97 011114-7 Masters Reserve 6-Dec-01 13-Oct-06 020128-8 The Champions 22-Feb-02 28-Jul-04 021028-7 The Majors Phase One 22-Nov-02 21-Oct-04 020917-14 Lely Resort Slaes and Information Center 8-Nov-02 9-Oct-09 030306-4 Lely Resort-Tract 49 7-Apr-03 25-Oct-06 030207-7 Lely Resort-Tract 35 13-Mar-03 8-Nov-05 030625-9 Chase Preserve of Lely Resort 24-Jul-03 14-Nov-07 030818-3 The Majors Phase 2 and 3 23-Sep-03 13-Jul-05 040929-15 Hawthorne at Lely Resort- Phase 1 20-Dec-04 29-Mar-07 050204-18 Legacy 8-Jun-05 28-Sep-06 051103-7 Ashton Place FKA Lely Resort Tract 27 17-Mar-06 14-Jul-08 910802-5 Lely Tracts 31&32 Infrastructure 30-Aug-91 1-Apr-94 921002-6 Lely Resort DrilMustang Villas 28-Oct-92 1-Apr-94 921218-3 Classics Clubhouse Phase 1 26-Jan-93 1-Apr-94 041006-15 Amsouth and Carrabas at Lely Freedom Square 12-Apr-05 28-Sep-06 060801-3 Canwick Cove 3-Nov-06 15-Mar-10 100223-15 Mitchell Meadows at Lely Resort Tract 58 31-Mar-10 24-Mar-11 081120-18 Cordoba at Lely Resort 9-Dec-08 6-Mar-09 080321-8 Cordoba at Lely Resort 22-Jul-08 6-Mar-09 081223-25 Cordoba at Lely Resort Front Entrance Improvements 23-Jan-09 6-Mar-09 Attachment A January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-SFWMD PeIicSf@ �-sh 1 6 I A I Environmental Resource Permit History Pelican Marsh Permit Number: 11-01121-S Certification Acceptance App. No. Project Name Permit issue Date Date 950404-6 Pelican Marsh Unit Eight 2-May-95 21-May-97 950613-7 Additional Nine Hole Golf Course-Pelican Marsh 9-Nov-95 21-May-97 950505-4 Pelican Marsh Bay Colony-Additional 9 Holes Golf Course 14-Sep-95 9-Jun-98 940317-1 Pelican Marsh Unit Four 14-Sep-94 21-May-97 950228-4 Clermont at Pelican Marsh Tracts C/D, Unit 6 31-Mar-95 26-Aug-02 940701-4 Pelican Marsh Unit Six 5-Aug-94 21-May-97 940613-5 Pelican Marsh -Egret's Walk 28-Jul-94 21-May-97 931207-13 Pelican Marsh-Culvert Crossing 6-Jan-94 16-Jun-94 960311-4 Ravenna at Pelican Marsh 5-Apr-96 17-Jun-02 951010-3 Bay Colony Additional Nine Golf Course Holes 9-Jan-96 9-Jun-98 960124-2 Pelican Marsh Unit 9 Parcel B 14-Feb-96 21-May-97 941209-4 Unit Nine Pelican Marsh 5-Jan-95 21-May-97 960730-2 Pelican Marsh Unit 8 23-Aug-96 21-May-97 961007-12 Pelican Marsh Unit 10 Phase Two 7-Nov-96 21-May-97 970204-1 Ivy Pointe 6-Mar-97 23-Jul-99 970613-9 Augusta at Pelican Marsh 15-Jul-97 17-Jun-02 980311-9 Troon Lakes 9-Apr-98 23-Jul-99 980910-2 Pelican Marsh Phase Four Eckerd at Vanderbilt Galleria 24-Dec-98 28-Jan-02 980623-18 Pelican Marsh Cocohatchee Strand 20-Jul-98 19-May-00 980702-17 Bay Laurel Estates-Pelican Marsh Unit 21 23-Jul-98 23-Jul-99 991006-7 Terranova at Pelican Marsh 29-Oct-99 5-Sep-08 Attachment A January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division B d tlarr ession • 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-SFWMD Pelican WO East Environmental Resource Permit History Pelican Marsh East Permit Number: 11-01568-P Certification Acceptance App.No. Project Name Permit Issue Date Date 980306-4 Tiburon Golf Club(Pelican Marsh Resort Golf Club ClubhousE 9-Apr-98 22-Feb-11 981016-20 Tiburon The Norman Estates at Pelican Marsh Unit 23 18-Mar-99 7-Jan-02 981211-13 Tiburon Golf Course 15-Apr-99 11-Apr-01 990917-5 Tiburon Entrance Feature and Sales Center 20-Oct-99 22-Feb-11 991227-6 Escada at Tiburon 26-Jan-00 8-May-01 001004-11 Touchstone Parcel Addition to Tiburon 12-Jul-01 3-Jun-04 000815-5 Escada at Tiburon 16-Oct-00 8-May-01 050602-11 Touchstone Golf Course 29-Jun-05 22-Feb-11 050729-2 Marsala at Tiburon 19-Dec-05 23-Jul-07 060214-17 Marquesa Royale at Tiburon 15-Mar-06 6-Aug-08 Attachment A 161 2 A 11 AGNOLI BARBER & BRUNDAGE, nvc t 1490 rair11,an% i r 11 lit Lam!i..r '.'C!I°..:., t i Ph (239) ` c-I/ 3 1 .. 5562203 December 20, 2012 Mr. Kyle Lukasz Pelican bay Services Re: Clam Pass Annual Monitoring, Collier County, Florida ABB PN 12-1000-GPA/106 Dear Kyle: We are pleased to submit the following proposal for Professional Surveying Services on the above referenced project. Clam Pass Annual Monitoring: 1) We shall perform bathymetric monitoring of Cut 4 at Clam Pass from profile station 0+00 thru 18+00 forty two (42) cross sections. 2) We shall perform bathymetric monitoring of Cut 4 at Clam Pass from profile station 18+27 thru 36+00 twenty (20) cross sections. 3)We will survey beach profiles extending from 100 feet landward of the vegetation line seaward to wading depth at the four(4) DNR monuments north of the inlet and three (3) monuments south of the inlet, plus one (1) intermediate beach profile. This would include DNR reference monuments R-38 through R-44 a total of eight (8) profiles. The profiles will be taken along the same azimuth as the State DEP profiles. 4)We shall obtain profile elevations at 10'intervals±,along Stations 0+00 through 3+64.5, from the vegetation line, south through the Staging area.This will include profile elevations at Station 3+30. (See attached drawing.) 5)We shall obtain profile elevations seaward from Sta 0+00, on 50'stations, at 10' intervals, to a depth of -5.0' NAVD. (See attached drawing.) Our final deliverable will be an ASCII file containing raw x, y, and z profile data points to Humiston and Moore. Elevations will be based on NGVD29 Vertical Datum. 161 2A iv Our final deliverable will be an ASCII file containing raw x, y, and z profile data points. Coordinates will be based on Florida State Plane 83/90 East Zone Datum. Elevations will be based on NAVD88 Datum. Our fee for providing the above services shall be a lump sum in the amount of $18,400.00. All services will be performed under the terms and conditions specified in the "County- Wide Engineering" Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida and Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc., Contract #09-5262-S. Sincerely, AGNOU, BARBER & BRUNDAGE, INC. coil uy P. Adams, P.S.M. Vice President of Surveying u WORK ORDER 161 2 A G Agreement for "County Wide Engineering Services" Contract #09-5262-SSM BCC App 3/9/2010 10.0 This Work Order is for professional engineering services for work known as Clam Pass Annual Survey The work is specified in the proposal dated December 20,2012, 2012 which is attached hereto and made a part of this Work Order. In accordance with the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement referenced above this Work Order is assigned to Agnoli Barber and Brundage,Inc. Scope of Work: Task I 1. Perform bathmetric monitoring of Cut #4 at Clam Pass at profile stations 0+00 thru 18+00, forty two cross sections. 2. Perform bathmetric monitoring of Cut #4 at Clam Pass at profile stations 18+27 thru 36+00, twenty cross sections. 3. Survey beach profiles extending from 100 feet landward of the vegetation line seaward to wading depth at the four (4) DNR monuments north of the inlet and three (3) monuments south of the inlet, plus one (1) intermediate beach profile. This would include DNR reference monuments R-38 through R-44 a total of eight (8) profiles. 4. Obtain profile elevation at 10' intervals -/-, along Stations 0+00 through 3 1 64.5, from the vegetation line , south through the staging area. This shall include profile elevations at Station 3+30. 5. Obtain profile elevations seaward from Station 0-00, on 50' stations, at 10" intervals, to a depth of-5.0'NAVD. Schedule of Work: Complete work within 90 days from date of the Notice to Proceed authorizing start of work. Compensation: In accordance with Article Five of the Agreement, the County will compensate the Firm in accordance with the negotiated lump sum or time and material amount provided in the schedule below (if a task is time and material, so indicate and use the established hourly rate(s) as enumerated in Schedule "A" of the Agreement). (List all Tasks) Task I $ 18,400.00 (Lump Sum) TOTAL FEE $ 18,400.00 Any change within monetary authority of this Work Order made subsequent to final department approval will a considered an additional service and charged according to Schedule "A" of a Agreement. Ae AUTHORIZED BY: t I Ty�asz, Operati•ys Manager Date ACCEPTED BY: Agnoli Barber and Brundal;e Inc_ Authored Company Officer G Date TypE'or Print Name and Title I January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6 I 2 4' 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Rules for Audience Participation,Pelican Bay Services Division Board amended 12/5/2012 P p Y Page 1 of 1 Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD Meetings The rules for audience participation at PBSD meetings are intended to improve productivity and to manage time efficiently without instituting procedures that unduly limit community input. Any person may participate by commenting on individual agenda items, as well as make general comments at the end of the meeting. The Chairman will strictly enforce the following rules: 1. Comments are limited to 3-minutes 2. An individual may speak only once per agenda item 3. Time from one speaker cannot be ceded to another speaker After public comments are heard, the Board will proceed to discuss the agenda item and take appropriate action without interruption. 4. Individuals invited to speak on a subject by the Chairman will be recognized and afforded adequate time to present information and answer questions Amended 12/5/2012 by Pelican Bay Services Division Board by three separate motions,seconds,and unanimous votes as recorded on page 8578 of the 12/5/2012 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session draft meeting minutes—LRJ 12/26/2012 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 1 2A IA 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley Page 1 of 9 Development of a Management Plan We need to take the time to develop an ecosystem wide management plan that protects the estuary as best we can given limited resources. This will involve looking at other estuary management plans and find out what worked and more importantly what didn't so we don't repeat the mistakes that others have learned. It is also important to understand that once we have a management plan it is not set in stone. It is an adaptive plan that should be re-evaluated periodically and adjusted to reflect new science and how the estuary responds to management. Management plans should be adjusted in accordance with new data- it is a fluid working document and is not set in stone. Estuaries are a focal point for a wide range of human activities of increasing social and economic importance. Strategic management and planning within estuaries often is aimed at identifying a framework to attain estuarine sustainability by accounting for long-term change; physical, chemical and biological interactions and system response (including socio-economic interactions). Given the highly non-linear and complex adaptive nature of estuary systems, managing them is tricky and is often a process of trial and error. Estuaries are ruled by a complex interplay of physical, chemical and biological processes, all of which are influenced by the marine environment and the surrounding freshwater inputs. Estuarine processes are inextricably linked with often no obvious dependent and independent variables, or clear cause—effect hierarchies. For example, although the size and shape of an estuary channel is a response to tidal processes, the tidal discharge is itself dependent on the morphology of the channel, since this determines the tidal prism. This interdependence means that changes in one part of the system can cause responses elsewhere in the estuary. Consequently, the central question for management is whether imposed changes will alter particular estuary features, that we value, in a way that we consider unacceptable? Another thing to consider is what are you managing for? It follows that a strategic approach to estuary management must consider the estuary as a whole, managed within the spatial context of not just the estuary, but all its inputs and outputs as well. The usual goal of current environmental management plans is to preserve or return areas to a good ecological status. To accomplish this goal the area should be assessed at the ecosystem level, using several biological elements, together with physical, chemical and pollution elements present in the system. This type of holistic approach aims to be more effective in the assessment of the ecological status of the estuary than just managing water quality or for a specific species. Therefore, there is a major challenge to develop simple, but scientifically sound methodologies capable of assessing the ecological status of estuarine ecosystems, which is relevant to managers and policy makers and understandable by the public. Indicators of changes and response to those changes can be used to give an early warning so that measures can be taken to alleviate problems at an early stage. There have been recent substantial scientific advances in the development of indices to measure the condition of biological ecosystem elements in coastal and estuarine waters. However, the actual challenge is not only to integrate indicators for single ecosystem elements like water quality, but also to include measures of biological structure, function and process. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 16 I 2 A t 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Ma n ag ement Plan submitted by Kathy Worley Page 2 of 9 Examples of Questions that should be asked and other things to consider prior to developing management plans and objectives: A. What are the known factors that affect this estuary? 1) Climate 2) Salinity 3) Hydrology 4)Turbidity 5) Substrate 6)Available Nutrients 7) ETC. B Basic Path taken when developing objectives: 1) Historical Review of Studies to see what biological work has been done to date and what insights these historic documents can reveal. 2) Identify external and anthropogenic drivers of the natural system. 3) Have biological and physical characterizations been conducted? If so what do they tell us? 4) Develop Performance Measures C. What do you hope to discover(examples): 1) Identify key areas of scientific uncertainty and plan and conduct actions to test uncertainties 2) Recommend improvements based on the results of field experiments to guide management strategies. 3) Establish adequate long-term key biological and water benchmarks to ensure a healthy environment. 4) Employ science-based management strategies to conserve natural biodiversity along with recreational goals. D. Identify Areas of Importance or Concerns: (Examples) 1) Mangroves 2) Seagrass 3) Benthic Communities 4) Avifauna 5) Fish 6) Water Quality 7) Tidal Flow 8) Sedimentation 9) Catastrophic Events (Hurricanes, Harmful Algal Blooms, Sea Level Rise, Climate Change) E. Questions and/or Directives: (Examples) 1) ID freshwater inputs, quality and timing for long-term conservation of the natural biodiversity January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 I 2A ii 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley Page 3 of 9 2) Identify the minimum tidal flow necessary to ensure a healthy environment, develop mechanisms to alert us of hydrologic problems and responses to problems. 3) Invasive Exotic species management— Survey areas for exotics, plan to eradicate the exotics, etc. 4) Continue Mangrove and Seagrass Monitoring and establish benchmarks? 5) Identify essential habitats and assess condition of listed species and associated habitats by establishing monitoring programs. Implement plans if necessary to address deficiencies if they exist. 6) Identify natural resource and human use conflicts and test effectiveness of potential management actions, and encourage adaptive management. 7) Identify potential threats to the resource and develop and implement plans to negate impacts Once you have established management goals and answered all of the background questions you need to design a monitoring program that will allow you to attain your management goals. This is another exercise that requires a lot of thought prior to commencement rather than charging ahead and making mistakes, since in this case it will require merging of several current monitoring programs and discern how they can be integrated to obtain your management objectives. Here is where the monitoring plan fits in. MONITORING PROGRAMS: Without reliable information on changes within the estuary and the causes of those changes, management can not make sound decisions to deal with potential problems. Designing a monitoring program is not simple, since estuaries are not simple but complex systems. To design a sound management plan this complexity has to be made manageable. One method of doing this is to subdivide the entire design-process into separate components, thereby making it easier to tackle one problem at a time, and to apply the appropriate considerations to each component. In other words, to design a sound monitoring program, a general and systematic framework is needed. There are essentially two types of monitoring designs: 1) early warning system: detects changes in the environment which might need remedial action, and identify (possible or likely) causes of those changes to indicate the kind of remedial action needed. 2) early control: checks whether remedial action is successful or not, and to evaluate the predicted or expected consequences of specific measures or activities. This type of monitoring program often tests hypotheses regarding ecological effects of human impacts. Decisions need to be made detailing monitoring objectives, variables to be tested or monitored, sampling strategy and design, data collection, data handling, maintenance and organization. This type of framework will help design an effective monitoring system since it enables the authors to avoid overlooking important components, clarifies the relation between the different components, maximizes the exploitation of existing monitoring efforts and identifies shortcomings. Clarifying monitoring program priorities ahead of time tends to result in monitoring programs that are more effective at the onset. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session i 6 1 2 a ( 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley Page 4 of 9 Functions of Ecological Monitoring Many monitoring systems lack clear purpose. A mere `knowing-what-is-going-on' argument often seems to motivate the effort. However, this approach can not be used to derive clear objectives and outcomes. A monitoring design must be able to both detect a change in the environment and be able to identify the cause(s)of a detected change. interventions Input ___.. _w._. Output )► Ecosystem FunctIons ' (3 l0 {) y v T • y Monitoring program Y Environmental policy •,,ll( Standards &nature management V Instruments & actions .[ Decision making Figure 1. The role of an ecological monitoring program as part of a regulatory system. Meelis and Ter Keurs (2000). Figure 1 depicts a monitoring program that provides information on the relevant ecosystem output which has aims or standards, which are set in relation to the desired functions of the system involved. Where these standards are not met, either new standards can be set, or remedial action can be undertaken. Subsequently, the information from the monitoring program can be used to control the effectiveness of the measures taken, i.e., whether aims are reached. The Framework 1. Purpose: the design of any monitoring program should start with the identification of the purposes of the program. 2. Monitoring Objectives: To establish meaningful objectives (goals) one must first review all known information about the estuary including past plans, studies, etc. This review will enable monitoring designs that are geared at achievable outcomes, help to 1 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 I 2 A C 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley Page 5 of 9 identify areas of concern, gaps in monitoring, etc.. Then, objectives can be set geared at establishing a holistic effort to develop the best management plan possible for the health of the estuary. Objectives should be quantifiable so that the monitoring program can be evaluated in terms of effectiveness: the degree to which a program meets the objectives. 2. Select Variables: Variables describe quantitative aspects of concern such as density which estimates population size. Indicators are `surrogates' for `target' variables such as species richness in one taxon as surrogate for total species richness. Output or valued endpoints, like population size, is described with the term `final variables' such as numbers and densities per species in the figure below describing different types of variables. Uncontrolled variables Such as weather e.) NIlif Permanent features such as soil type Dependent effect or o Anthropogenic such as Pass size Condition variables response Controlled variables Intermediate variables Final variables )0' >- r-- A 1 44 V Y I V y Indicator variables Adapted from Meelis and Ter Keurs(2000). Variable selection is extremely important as variables chosen will determine analysis and ultimately decisions made to manage the estuary. There are physical variables like salinity, soils, hydrology, water quality etc. There are biological variables based on ecological importance such as forest structure,benthic, fish and bird components, etc. Biological indicators are used to reflect the state of the environment in response to human induced stresses and includes plants and animals found in the ecosystem and changes in their presence/absence, condition, behavior and numbers, which can provide information about the health of a the ecosystem. Discerning biological patterns that occur in response to stress and investigations into the source(s) of that stress, can lead to management of those problems for the estuaries future stability. 1b � 2 A if January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley . Page 6 of 9 Biological assessment of a community depends on the ability to define, measure, and compare the relative biological integrity or the condition of a community over time. Measures such as community structure and function, including species richness, species abundance and indicator species are often used to provide early warning of pollution or degradation of an ecosystem, alerting managers to halt or mitigate the impact before critical resources are lost. Unlike physical measures, which may only be useful during an impact, biological responses are cumulative and observable after the event that caused them. Thus episodic impacts become apparent through their lasting effects on the biota. Similarly, low intensity, chronic impacts (e.g. low-level pollution) may be undetectable by physical or chemical measures but the cumulative biological effects may be easily detectable. Examples of Bioindicators: 1. Phytoplankton biomass 2. Seagrass productivity and algal epiphyte loads on seagrasses 4. Benthic invertebrates. 5. Fisheries or fish survey data. 6. Composition and structure of sessile communities on mangrove roots. 6. Various organisms, such as amphipods, birds, etc. 3. Sampling strategy: Once the objectives have been set, and the variables have been selected, a general sampling strategy has to be set. This is the methods section: How are you going to collect the variables, select sites for monitoring, select time intervals for monitoring variables, etc. These methodologies are often dependant on what you want your analysis of the variables to show and statistical tests needed to accomplish this. As an example, one type of monitoring data collection strategy is described in Table 4 below by Townend, 2002. Table 4 Levels of monitoring r-.csel Measurement Frequency tI Extreme events(e.g., hood levels, Ad hoc defence failures) Bathymetry/topography Annual Water levels at one or more locations Continuous (ideally with one near mouth) 2 Freshwater flows near tidal limits of Daily tributaries Velocity measurements Occasional Sediment properties Occasional Suspended sediment load, salinity, Daily/ temperature seasonal 3 Water quality parameters,henthie Seasonal samples, bird counts, vegetation surveys Boreholcs,development records, user Occasional surveys,economic.valuations January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley Page 7 of 9 � f 2A 4. Data collection: What is the amount of sampling effort needed per target area, i.e., field methods including sample area or plot size, sampling frequency (maybe on various time scales), the number of sampling sites (maybe on various spatial scales), and the number of replications on each sampling occasion and site. How can you fit current monitoring programs by different organizations to work for you and how do you keep costs down? These and other questions need to be answered to determine data collection protocols. Such optimization is often based on the intended statistical analysis, using statistical power as an important measure of effectiveness. Finally, for ecological monitoring systems meant to be operational for a long period, or even permanently, a regular measurement of the quantities and spatial distribution of the distinguished landscape units is necessary. For the long run, this would lead to a monitoring system which uses remote sensing techniques to monitor quantities of landscape units, and field work to monitor their ecological qualities. 5. Data handling: includes data storage, (statistical) analysis of the data, and interpretation and presentation of the results. The methods for statistical analyses must be determined in advance to check for compatibility with earlier choices concerning variables, sampling strategy, and data collection. For the early-warning system, analysis aims at detecting ecological change and formulation of hypotheses concerning the possible causes of that change. Need to know how you are going to use of the information; not only ecological change needs to be described, but also the possible causes, and perhaps even the different management alternatives for remedial action. 6. Maintenance: Sampling strategy and design, data collection and data handling represent the body of the monitoring program. A regular evaluation of protocols and quality control of the monitoring program is necessary to maintain the quality of the program. During the design and planning of a monitoring program, it should be established how quality control will take place. The diagram below depicts the framework for the design and evaluation of monitoring programs (Meelis and Ter Keurs, 2000). January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worley A, Page 8 of 9 161 2A if Purposes External constraints o, 1 1 1 ;lilijil 1 1 . Monitoring objectives y 2. Objects and variables 3. Sampling strategy o. 4. Data collection 5. Data handling E ti 6. Maintenance it oo 7. Organization , ., � t 1 Actual use of monitoring a results in decision making :i , {P i Available '' 7)' Cost/ - Benefits means a benefit r V '' if Expected analysis Costs benefits "'� ' � January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence-Development of a Management Plan submitted by Kathy Worle Page9of9 1 6 Nv LITERATURE USED WHEN COMPILING THIS DOCUMENT INCLUDED: Linton, D.M. and Warnerm G.F. 2003. Biological indicators in the Caribbean coastal zone and their role in integrated coastal management. Ocean & Coastal Management 46: 261-276. Meelis,P.V.E. and Ter Kuers, W.J. 2000. A Framework for the Design of Ecological Monitoring Programs as a Tool for Environmental and Nature Management.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 61: 317-344. Ramos, S., Amorim, E., Elliot, M., Cabral, H., and Bordalo,A. A. 2012. Early life stages of fishes as indicators of estuarine ecosystem health. Ecological Indicators 19:172-183. Townend, I. 2002. Marine science for strategic planning and management: the requirement for estuaries. Marine Policy 26: 209-219. January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8. Cobblestones at San Marino Crossing(John Cndle� Page 1 of 2 6 cm: fir! ovifiroin 2 k Condominium Association, Southwest Property Management Corp.,1044 Castello Dr.,Suite#206,Naples,FL 34103 (239)261-3440•Fax:(239)261-2013 March 19, 2012 Mr. Jim Hoppensteadt President,Pelican Bay Foundation 6251 Pelican Bay Boulevard Naples,FL 34108 Dear President Hoppensteadt: The San Marino Association Board of Directors is herein bringing two issues to the attention of the Foundation and offering a proposed solution concerning the newly installed pedestrian crosswalk across Pelican Bay Boulevard adjacent to San Marino. The two issues are the need for increased safety for crossing pedestrians and noise pollution caused by automobiles driving over the cobblestones within the crosswalk. We understand that the intent of the redesigned crosswalk installed several months ago was to cause automobile traffic to slow down when approaching the crossing thereby resulting in a safer crossing for pedestrians. At each of the last several monthly meetings of the Association Board.since the new installation,owners have related their personal experiences in making risky crossings at the crosswalk or have observed danger to other crossing pedestrians. Their observations are that often drivers do not yield to pedestrians at the curb,or are distracted or unaware of pedestrians who want to cross,or do not yield to pedestrians already in the crosswalk. It has been observed on several occasions that because of the two-lane traffic configuration of the Boulevard, a car slowing or stopped at the crosswalk in the outer lane blocks the view of a trailing car in the inner lane of pedestrians stepping off the curb. It also has been observed by residents of San Marino that the cobblestones have not caused drivers to slow down as they approach the crossing. At this point several months after revamping the crosswalk,it is apparent that the original intent of installing cobblestones to cause automobile traffic to slow down when approaching the crossing has generally not resulted in the intended outcome. The noise emanating from the cobblestones which resonates into San Marino has also detracted from the quality of life for owners who live within at least 100 yards of the Boulevard. - 9 - January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 8. Cobblestones at San Marino Crossing(John Chandler) Page 2 of 2 To give a visible warning to drivers that pedestrians want to cross the street or are already in the crosswalk,the San Marino Board of Directors proposes that a different crosswalk design be installed on the Boulevard adjacent to San Marino.We suggest a design like the crossing on Myra Daniels Parkway between Waterside Shops and Bridge-Way Villas. A flashing yellow light is activated when a pedestrian walks between two bollards containing sensors. The flashing light warns drivers several yards from the crossing that pedestrians want to cross or are in the crosswalk. The caution light stops flashing within a reasonable time after activation and therefore is not a continuing false signal to drivers.Further it is proposed that the cobblestones be removed and replaced by a quieter surface such as that installed at the intersection of Pelican Bay Boulevard and Gulf Park. For improved pedestrian safety and restoration to the quality of life previously experienced by residents of San Marino,the Board of Directors urges that this proposal be implemented by the Foundation, On behalf of the Board of Directors, Ted Darrow,President • San Marino Condominium Association tdarrew@embarqmail.com 239-594-0520 - 10 - January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11. Changes to Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27(Keith J.Dallas)Commissioner Georgia Hiller's comments r r Page 1 of 1 16I 2A Original Message From: HillerGeorgia[mailto:GeorgiaHiller @colliergov.net] Sent: Wednesday,January 02,2013 8:46 AM To: naplespatriots @comcast.net Cc: office @pelicanbayservicesdivision.net; keithdallas @comcast.net;jlytle @naplesnews.com; nfn16799 @naples.net;jbaro@watersideshops.com;johnchandler219 @gmail.com;josiegeoff @aol.com; iaizzo @comcast.net; mikelevy435 @gmail.com; naplessusan @comcast.net;djtrecker @yahoo.com; teedupl @aol.com;hunter hansen;johnsusanboland @ aol.com; OchsLeo; Neil Dorrill; Dwight E. Brock; Crystal K. Kinzel Subject: Re: PBSD--01/02/2013--Agenda Item 11--Changes to County Ordinance--Audience Comment To all: There will not be an additional cost to the MSTU. With thanks- Commissioner Georgia Hiller On Dec 31, 2012, at 4:03 PM, "naplespatriots(aicomcast.net<mailto:naplespatriots@comcast.net>" <naplespatriots@comcast.net<mailto:naplespatriots@comcast.net>>wrote: We are concerned with the wording in section 1: The Unit will be solely responsible for advising the County on dredging and maintaining Clam Pass for the purpose of enhancing the health of the affected mangrove forest, and will manage such activities for the County." This management activity will be an additional cost to the residents of Pelican Bay. Does BCC plan to reimburse the PBSD for the time spent by the contracted administrator as well as the assigned staff for their activities related to managing Clam Pass? It appears that the transfer of the responsibility for managing Clam Pass was transferred from the Coastal Advisory Council to PBSD without consideration of the impact on the PBSD budget. Joseph Doyle Sandy Doyle Laurel Oaks/Pelican Bay January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11. Changes to Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27(Keith J.Dallas)Audience comments b1seanandy D A Page 1 of 1 Original Message From: naplespatriots @comcast.net [mailto:naplespatriots @ comcast.net] Sent: Monday,December 31, 2012 4:03 PM To: office @pelicanbayservicesdivision.net; keithdallas @comcast.net Cc:jlytle @naplesnews.com; nfn16799 @naples.net;jbaron @watersideshops.com; johnchandler219 @gmail.com;josiegeoff @aol.com; iaizzo @comcast.net; mikelevy435 @gmail.com; naplessusan @comcast.net; djtrecker @yahoo.com;teedupl @aol.com; hunter hansen; HillerGeorgia; johnsusanboland @aol.com Subject: PBSD--01/02/2013--Agenda Item 11--Changes to County Ordinance--Audience Comment We are concerned with the wording in section 1: "The Unit will be solely responsible for advising the County on dredging and maintaining Clam Pass for the purpose of enhancing the health of the affected mangrove forest, and will manage such activities for the County." This management activity will be an additional cost to the residents of Pelican Bay. Does BCC plan to reimburse the PBSD for the time spent by the contracted administrator as well as the assigned staff for their activities related to managing Clam Pass? It appears that the transfer of the responsibility for managing Clam Pass was transferred from the Coastal Advisory Council to PBSD without consideration of the impact on the PBSD budget. Joseph Doyle Sandy Doyle Laurel Oaks/Pelican Bay 161 2 Office of the County Manager • Leo E. Ochs, Jr. fit N-N 3299 Tamiami Trai East,Suite 202•Naples Florida 34112-5746•(239)252-8383•FAX(239)252-4010 December 21,2012 Mr.Tunis W.McElwain Chief Fort Myers Section Jacksonville District Corps of Engineers 1520 Royal Palm Square Boulevard,Suite 310 Ft.Myers,Florida 33919 Re: South Permits Branch/FL Myers Section SAJ-1996-02789 Dear Mr.McElwain: This letter is in response to the letter Collier County received from Tunis W.McElwain regarding Collier County's Permit Application for dredging Clam Pass(SAJ-1996-02789). In this letter you indicated that"due to the extent of the issues and pending project changes,the Corps is withdrawing this application." Please be advised that the recent action taken by the County is simply a ministerial,administrative item that is no more than a minor reorganization. The recommendation approved by the County Commission was as follows: "Effective immediately,that Clam Pass be considered part of the ongoing management responsibilities of the Pelican Bay Services Division("PBSD)including but not limited to all monitoring components such as biological,tidal,and hydrographic data collection,and inlet dredge permitting/construction;that PBSD, exclusively,shall make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners as to when the inlet should be dredged and make such other recommendations related to managing the unified Clam Bay system as it deems necessary;further,that Clam Pass,being an integral part of the Clam Bay system,is managed as such" Instead of having Collier County's Coastal Zone Management section overseeing Clam Pass and the permit process, the County's Pelican Bay Services Division will now handle these matters now and in the future. Both of these County departments operate under the supervision of my Office. The permit applicant has not changed;it is still Collier County. All that has changed is that one County department has been substituted for another County department in administering this process and will be the point of contact for all permitting issues. This action does not materially affect the County's current application. Accordingly,there is no justification for the Corps to withdraw the subject application and Collier County should be able to proceed with obtaining the Corps permit within the existing process. I,therefore,respectfully request that Application SAJ-1996-02789 remain active and ultimately be approved by the Corps in a timely fashion. Sincerely, Leo E.Ochs,Jr. County Manager CC: Collier County Board of County Commissioners Jeff Klatzkow,County Attorney Neil Dorrill,Administrator,Pelican Bay Services Division Nick Casalanguida,Administrator,Growth Management Division Linda A.Ellicot,USACOE(lirida.d.eliigott[usace.arrny,mA II i . 161 2A t •y�z 4 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY %s` \ JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS• a� z1 1620 ROYAL PALM SQUARE BOULEVARD,SUITE 310 c FORT MYERS,FLORIDA 33919• r -,;� December 19, 2012 ��_«_ REPLY TO ATTENTION OF - - . South Permits Branch/Fort Myers Section SAJ-1996-02789 Collier County Coastal Zone Management W. Harmon Turner Bldg, Suite 103 . 3301 East Tamiami Trail . Naples, FL 34112 . (via email) . Attention Collier County Coastal Zone Management/Gary McAlpin: • Reference is made to Department of the Army permit application number SAJ-1996-02789 . The project is located at Clam Bay/Clam • Pass and the coastal shoreline, in Sections 8/9, Township 49S, Range 25E, Naples, Collier County, Florida. Due to the extent of issues and pending project changes, the Corps ,is withdrawing this application. When the file is re-- activated and the application (with revised consultant and applicant contact) is deemed complete, the Corps will request . initiation of ESA consultation for listed species with' USFWS and NMFS. Please provide a signed/dated application and complete . details with .respect to the revised proposal, including updated plan sheets. Please note that this action will not prejudice future permit requests. . You are cautioned that commencement of the proposed work prior to Department of the Army authorization would constitute a violation of Federal laws and subject you to possible enforcement • action. Receipt of a permit from Florida Department of • Environmental Protection or a Water Management District does not obviate the requirement for obtaining a Department of the Army permit prior to commencing the proposed work. If you have any questions,, please contact the Corps project . manager, Linda A. Elligott at the letterhead address, phone 239- 334-1975, or email: Linda.a.elligott @usace.army.mil. Thank you • for cooperating with the Corps Regulatory program. • • ' Sincerely, . . . • Ytmf\e511-A-Lkst • Tunis W. McElwain Chief, Fort Myers Section . CC: RD-PE agent: Atkins/Tabar January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 1 of 12 if/ Bay Services " " 1 Pelican Ba 16t 2 Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-December 27,2012 Operating Fund 109-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments 2,539,841.12 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles& Equipment 1,085,189.35 Due from Property Appraiser - Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 3,625,030.47 Total Assets $ 3,625,030.47 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ 18,612.15 Accrued Wages Payable - Goods Received/Inventory Recv'd 21,645.54 Total Liabilities $ 40,257.69 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 900,302.49 Excess Revenues(Expenditures) 2,684,470.29 Total Fund Balance 3,584,772.78 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 3,625,030.47 I 1 ' January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 2 of 12 1 fir/ 1 2A 1(f Pelican Bay Services . Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-December 27,2012 Operating Fund 109-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carryforward $ 951,600.00 $ 951,600.00 $ 951,600.00 $ - Special Assessment-Water Management Admin 695,000.00 556,000.00 565,584.26 9,584.26 Special Assessment-Right of Way Beautification 1,878,800.00 1,503,040.00 1,528,706.13 25,666.13 Charges for Services 1,500.00 - - - Insurance Company Refunds - - 1,549.74 1,549.74 Surplus Property Sales - - Revenue Reserve (128,700.00) - Interest 15,800.00 3,950.00 1,018.18 (2,931.82) Total Operating Revenues $ 3,414,000.00 $ 3,014,590.00 $ 3,048,458.31 $ 33,868.31 Operating Expenditures: Water Management Administration Payroll Expense $ 42,000.00 $ 9,700.00 $ 6,870.40 $ 2,829.60 Emergency Maintenace and Repairs 8,800.00 - - - IT Direct Capital 200.00 - - - IT Office Automation/Billing Hr. 4,600.00 460.00 400.00 60.00 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 85,100.00 42,600.00 42,550.00 50.00 Inter Payment/Mnt.Site Ins. Assessment 13,400.00 - 3,350.00 (3,350.00) Other Contractural Services 29,700.00 7,400.00 6,275.00 1,125.00 Telephone 3,900.00 1,000.00 805.90 194.10 Postage and Freight 2,200.00 600.00 - 600.00 Rent Buildings and Equipment 11,000.00 3,700.00 3,509.95 190.05 Insurance-General 1,000.00 - - - Printing,Binding and Copying 1,800.00 200.00 10.47 189.53 Clerk's Recording Fees 1,500.00 - - Advertising 1,500.00 - - - Other Office and Operating Supplies 2,000.00 500.00 71.15 428.85 Training and Education 1,100.00 200.00 - 200.00 Total Water Management Admin Operating $ 209,800.00 $ 66,360.00 $ 63,842.87 $ 2,517.13 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense $ 135,800.00 $ 31,300.00 $ 23,331.35 $ 7,968.65 Engineering Fees 10,000.00 2,500.00 - 2,500.00 Flood Control Berm and Swale Mntc. 18,000.00 4,500.00 7.30 4,492.70 Landscape Materials/Replanting Program 8,500.00 500.00 - 500.00 Interdepartmental Payment(Water Quality Lab) 30,100.00 7,500.00 2,382.50 5,117.50 Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - - Other Contractural Services 1,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Temporary Labor 44,900.00 23,500.00 25,059.50 (1,559.50) Telephone 500.00 100.00 72.08 27.92 Trash and Garbage 5,700.00 1,400.00 2,497.00 (1,097.00) Motor Pool Rental Charge 100.00 100.00 122.50 (22.50) Insurance-General 2,400.00 - - - Insurance-Auto 900.00 - - - Building Repairs&Mntc. 1,700.00 - - - Fleet Maintenance and Parts 2,400.00 2,400.00 3,387.76 (987.76) Fuel and Lubricants 3,300.00 800.00 634.50 165.50 Tree Triming 36,000.00 9,000.00 4,992.00 4,008.00 Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 400.00 433.00 (33.00) Page 1 of 3 I ■ January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report / Page3of12 /v"� (J+ Ali() Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 500.00 767.12 (267.12) Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 19,700.00 18,507.55 1,192.45 Other Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 1,100.00 2,274.10 (1,174.10) Other Operating Supplies and Equipment 2,500.00 600.00 479.58 120.42 Total Water Management Field Operating $ 406,800.00 $ 106,200.00 $ 84,947.84 $ 21,252.16 Right of Way Beautification-Operating Payroll Expense $ 43,300.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 7,078.79 $ 2,921.21 Emergency Repairs and Maintenance 7,400.00 - - - IT Direct Capital 200.00 - - - Office Automation 9,500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 37,100.00 9,300.00 6,830.00 2,470.00 Telephone 3,900.00 1,000.00 806.90 193.10 Postage 2,200.00 600.00 - 600.00 Rent Buildings/Equipment/Storage 12,200.00 4,100.00 3,794.95 305.05 Insurance-General 500.00 - - - Printing,Binding and Copying 2,600.00 400.00 - 400.00 Clerk's Recording 2,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Legal Advertising 2,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Office Supplies General 2,500.00 400.00 71.15 328.85 Training and Education 1,500.00 600.00 593.22 6.78 Total Right of Way Beautification Operating $ 126,900.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 19,175.01 $ 7,824.99 Right of Way Beautification-Field Payroll Expense $ 797,000.00 $ 183,900.00 $ 127,843.89 $ 56,056.11 Emergency Maintenance and Repairs 3,300.00 800.00 809.68 (9.68) Flood Control(Water Use&Swale/Berm Mntc.) 89,900.00 23,200.00 23,937.08 (737.08) Pest Control 6,000.00 1,800.00 1,925.00 (125.00) Landscape Incidentals 2,500.00 600.00 582.82 17.18 Other Contractural Services 29,500.00 13,200.00 12,541.00 659.00 Temporary Labor 201,400.00 77,500.00 69,362.58 8,137.42 Telephone 3,200.00 800.00 440.98 359.02 Electricity*$2,620 J/E pending to SL Fund 778 3,400.00 900.00 3,009.38 ' (2,109.38) Trash and Garbage 17,000.00 4,300.00 3,865.32 434.68 Rent Equipment 2,500.00 2,100.00 2,598.99 (498.99) Motor Pool Rental Charge 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 Insurance-General 9,300.00 - - - Insurance-Auto 10,000.00 - - - Building Repairs and Maintenance 1,700.00 300.00 300.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 17,600.00 4,400.00 4,077.22 322.78 Fuel and Lubricants 64,600.00 14,700.00 6,580.01 8,119.99 Licenses,Permits,Training 800.00 200.00 - 200.00 Tree Triming 64,500.00 3,200.00 - 3,200.00 Clothing and Uniforms 9,400.00 1,600.00 1,318.70 281.30 Personal Safety Equipment 3,000.00 800.00 796.97 3.03 Fertilizer and Herbicides 62,000.00 27,600.00 27,358.79 241.21 Landscape Maintenance 46,000.00 28,800.00 28,756.35 43.65 Mulch/Landscape Materials 52,000.00 39,000.00 25,602.50 13,397.50 Pathway Repairs 6,000.00 1,500.00 - 1,500.00 Sprinkler Maintenance 30,000.00 10,000.00 10,359.80 (359.80) Painting Supplies 800.00 200.00 43.88 156.12 Traffic Signs 3,000.00 800.00 - 800.00 Minor Operating Equipment 3,700.00 900.00 599.75 300.25 Other Operating Supplies 9,000.00 2,300.00 1,822.88 477.12 Total Right of Way Beautification-Field Operating $ 1,549,600.00 $ 445,500.00 $ 354,233.57 $ 91,266.43 Total Operating Expenditures $ 2,293,100.00 $ 645,060.00 $ 522,199.29 $ 122,860.71 Page 2 of 3 I January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 4 of 12 At 161 c(--- • Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations Other Machinery and Equipment $ 1,000.00 $ - $ - $ - General Improvements - - - - Total Water Management Field Operations Capital $ 1,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Right of Way Beautification-Field Autos and Trucks $ 35,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Other Machinery and Equipmeny 1,000.00 - - Total Right of Way Beautification-Field Capital $ 36,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Total Capital Expenditures $ 37,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Total Operating Expenditures $ 2,330,100.00 $ 645,060.00 $ 522,199.29 $ 122,860.71 Non-Operating Expenditures: Transfer to Fund 322 $ 241,700.00 $ 241,700.00 $ 241,700.00 $ - Tax Collector Fees 79,300.00 27,755.00 22,522.58 5,232.42 Property Appraiser Fees 72,900.00 40,095.00 39,607.92 487.08 Reserves(2 1/2 months for Operations) 533,400.00 550,400.00 550,400.00 - Reserve for Operating Fund Capital Improvement 65,000.00 Reserves for Equipment 107,800.00 107,800.00 107,800.00 - Reserved for Attrition (16,200.00) (16,200.00) (16,200.00) - Revenue Reserve - - - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures $ 1,083,900.00 $ 951,550.00 $ 945,830.50 $ 5,719.50 Total Expenditures $ 3,414,000.00 $ 1,596,610.00 $ 1,468,029.79 $ 128,580.21 Net Profit/(Loss) $ - $ 1,417,980.00 $ 1,580,428.52 $ 162,448.52 Page 3 of 3 ill111111111111111111111111111111111111111.11111111111111111111111111111111111111.11111111=1111.' January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report 1 6 1 /* Page 5 of 12 iLy■ Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-December 27,2012 Street Lighting Fund 778-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 570,417.22 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles&Equipment 54,386.52 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 624,803.74 Total Assets $ 624,803.74 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ 799.82 Goods Received/Inventory Recv'd 2,166.06 Accrued Wages Payable - Total Liabilities $ 2,965.88 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 401,763.99 Excess Revenue(Expenditures) 220,073.87 Total Fund Balance 621,837.86 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 624,803.74 1 • ' January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 6of12 161 2 A `I if Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit income Statement w/Budget-December 27,2012 Street Lighting Fund 778-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carryforward $ 376,200.00 $ 376,200.00 $ 376,200.00 $ - Curent Ad Valorem Tax 440,700.00 193,908.00 197,096.71 $ 3,188.71 Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax $ - Insurance Claim 1,286.80 $ 1,286.80 Revenue Reserve ?';:: , Interest 6,700.00 670.00 314.95 $ (355.05) Total Operating Revenues 801,300.00 570,778.00 574,898.46 4,120.46 Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration • Payroll Expense $ 42,200.00 $ 9,700.00 $ 6,870.41 $ 2,829.59 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 8,700.00 $ 4,350.00 4,350.00 $ - Other Contractural Services 26,900.00 $ 6,725.00 6,275.00 $ 450.00 Telephone 3,600.00 $ 900.00 657.54 $ 242.46 Postage and Freight 2,000.00 $ 500.00 - $ 500.00 Rent Buildings/Equipment/Storage 11,800.00 $ 3,900.00 3,651.01 $ 248.99 Insurance-General 300.00 $ - - $ - Office Supplies General 800.00 $ 100.00 42.00 $ 58.00 Other Office and Operating Supplies 1,000.00 $ 200.00 - $ 200.00 Total Street Lighting Admin Operating 97,300.00 26,375.00 21,845.96 4,529.04 Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense 63,900.00 14,700.00 11,240.12 3,459.88 Emergency Maintenance&Repairs 9,600.00 - - - Other Contractual Services 800.00 100.00 - 100.00 Telephone 500.00 100.00 72.08 27.92 Electricity 44,200.00 11,100.00 5,426.75 5,673.25 Insurance-General 900.00 - - _ Insurance-Auto 900.00 - - _ Building Maintenace&Repairs 1,700.00 - - _ Fleet Maintenance and Parts 1,500.00 400.00 60.00 340.00 Fuel and Lubricants 900.00 200.00 111.59 88.41 Other Equipment Repairs/Supplies 200.00 100.00 - 100.00 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 100.00 - 100.00 Electrical Contractors 7,300.00 1,800.00 - 1,800.00 Page 1 of 2 I 7. Monthly l 2013 Pelican Report Bay Services Divisior�Boar�l Re ular Sess 7. Monthly Financial Report 16 1 Page 7 of 12 if Light Bulb Ballast 13,100.00 3,900.00 3,790.10 109.90 Total Street Lighting Field Operating 146,000.00 32,500.00 20,700.64 11,799.36 Total Field Expenditures 243,300.00 58,875.00 42,546.60 16,328.40 Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations Other Machinery/Equipment 1,000.00 200.00 - 200.00 General Improvements - - - - Total Capital Expenditures 1,000.00 200.00 - 200.00 Total Operating Expenditures 244,300.00 59,075.00 42,546.60 16,528.40 Non-Operating Expenditures: Tax Collector Fees 13,700.00 4,110.00 3,984.78 125.22 Property Appraiser Fees 9,000.00 900.00 - 900.00 Reserve for Future Construction 444,200.00 444,200.00 444,200.00 - Reserves(2 1/2 mos.for Operations) 57,600.00 57,600.00 57,600.00 - Reserves for Equipment 32,500.00 32,500.00 32,500.00 - Revenue Reserve - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures 557,000.00 539,310.00 538,284.78 1,025.22 Total Expenditures 801,300.00 598,385.00 580,831.38 17,553.62 Net Profit/(Loss) - (27,607.00) (5,932.92) 21,674.08 Page 2 of 2 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 8 of 12 1 2 6 L I J A I � Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-December 27,2012 Clam Bay Fund 320-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 106,323.37 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles&Equipment 287,297.40 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets 393,620.77 Total Assets $ 393,620.77 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ - Goods Received/Inventory Recv'd 1,144.00 Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities 1,144.00 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 200,198.08 Excess Revenues(Expenditures) 192,278.69 Total Fund Balance 392,476.77 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 393,620.77 • I January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 9of12 ( `•{"161 2 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-December 27,2012 Clam Bay Fund 320-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward $ 354,768.43 $ 22,400.00 $ 22,400.00 $ - Special Assessment 134,400.00 57,792.00 58,673.85 881.85 Miscellaneous Income - - Fund 111 32,300.00 - - - Revenue Reserve , ..,,.:' - - Interest 800.00 200.00 236.48 36.48 Total Operating Revenues $ 515,468.43 $ 80,392.00 $ 81,310.33 $ 918.33 Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees $ 164,478.75 $ 6,416.67 $ 4,080.00 $ 2,336.67 Other Contractural Services 10,464.65 6,802.02 6,551.58 250.44 Tree Trimming 67,000.00 5,600.00 4,992.00 608.00 Other Equipment Repairs 577.77 - - Aerial Photography 15,000.00 7,500.00 5,449.80 2,050.20 Minor Operating 2,988.01 - - - Other Operating Supplies 1,500.00 - - - Total Clam Bay Restoration $ 262,009.18 $ 26,318.69 $ 21,073.38 $ 5,245.31 Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees $ - $ - $ 9,189.75 $ (9,189.75) Licenses and Permits - - - - Other Contractual Services 212,859.25 191,573.33 189,123.80 2,449.53 Total Clam Bay Ecosystem $ 212,859.25 $ 191,573.33 $ 198,313.55 $ (6,740.22) Total Capital Expenditures $ 11,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures $ 485,868.43 $ 217,892.01 $ 219,386.93 $ (1,494.92) Non-Operating Expenditures: Tax Collector Fees $ 4,200.00 $ 1,260.00 $ 1,161.44 $ 98.56 Property Appraiser Fees 2,700.00 2,160.00 2,015.21 144.79 Reserves for Operations 22,700.00 - - _ Total Non-Operating Expenditures $ 29,600.00 $ 3,420.00 $ 3,176.65 $ 243.35 Page 1 of 2 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 10 of 12 1 6 I 2 A ICJ Total Expenditures $ 515,468.43 $ 221,312.01 $ 222,563.58 $ (1,251.57) Net Profit/(Loss) $ - $ (140,920.01) $ (141,253.25) $ (333.24) Page 2 of 2 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report 16 I a A Page 11 of 12 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-December 27,2012 Capital Projects Fund 322-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 2,607,620.65 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles&Equipment 1,213,800.81 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets 3,821,421.46 Total Assets $ 3,821,421.46 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ - Goods Received Inv. Received 38,163.28 Total Liabilities 38,163.28 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 2,501,578.47 Excess Revenues(Expenditures) 1,281,679.71 Total Fund Balance 3,783,258.18 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 3,821,421.46 i January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7. Monthly Financial Report Page 12of12 1 6 I (1' Pelican Bay Services i Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-December 27,2012 Capital Projects Fund 322-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward $ 2,618,011.49 $ 2,553,384.04 $ 2,553,384.04 $ - Transfer from Fund 109 General 241,700.00 241,700.00 241,700.00 - Foundation Payment for Crosswalks - - - - Special Assessment 324,400.00 139,492.00 141,717.89 2,225.89 Transfer from Tax Collector - - - - Interest 25,700.00 4,283.33 1,898.16 (2,385.17) Total Operating Revenues $ 3,209,811.49 $ 2,938,859.37 $2,938,700.09 $ (159.28) Operating Expenditures: Irrigation&Landscaping Hardscape Project(50066) Engineering Fees $ 125,332.12 $ 20,888.69 $ 5,978.65 $ 14,910.04 Other Contractural Services 2,714,133.64 135,706.68 96,933.73 38,772.95 Sprinkler System Repairs - - - - Landscape material 64,550.01 24,529.00 23,522.25 1,006.75 Permits - - - - Electrical - - 2,285.67 (2,285.67) Other Operating Supplies(Pavers) - - - - Other Road Materials - - - - Traffic Sign Restoration Project(50103) Traffic Signs 78,920.00 - - - Lake Bank Project(51026) Swale&Slope Maintenance 192,775.72 77,110.29 75,807.28 1,303.01 Engineering Fees 500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 22,275.72 - - - Total Irrigation&Landscaping Expenditures $ 3,198,487.21 $ 258,234.66 $ 204,527.58 $ 53,707.08 Non-Operating Expenditures: Tax Collector Fees $ 10,000.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 2,805.30 $ 694.70 Property Appraiser Fees 6,600.00 4,950.00 4,867.45 82.55 Reserve for Contingencies - - - . Revenue Reserve 17,500.00 - - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures: $ 34,100.00 $ 8,450.00 $ 7,672.75 $ 777.25 Total Expenditures $ 3,232,587.21 $ 266,684.66 $ 212,200.33 $ 54,484.33 Net Profit/(Loss) $ - $ 2,672,174.71 $2,726,499.76 $ 54,325.05 Page 1 of 1 161 2A FACT SHEET NATIONWIDE PERMIT 3 MAINTENANCE. (a)The repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable, structure, or fill, or of any currently serviceable structure or fill authorized by 33 CFR 330.3,provided that the structure or fill is not to be put to uses differing from those uses specified or contemplated for it in the original permit or the most recently authorized modification.Minor deviations in the structure's configuration or filled area, including those due to changes in materials, construction techniques,or current construction codes or safety standards that are necessary to make the repair,rehabilitation, or replacement are authorized.This NWP authorizes the repair, rehabilitation,or replacement of those structures or fills destroyed or damaged by storms, floods, fire or other discrete events,provided the repair,rehabilitation,or replacement is commenced,or is under contract to commence, within two years of the date of their destruction or damage. In cases of catastrophic events,such as hurricanes or tornadoes, this two-year limit may be waived by the district engineer,provided the permittee can demonstrate funding, contract, or other similar delays. (b)This NWP also authorizes the removal of accumulated sediments and debris in the vicinity of and within existing structures(e.g., bridges, culverted road crossings, water intake structures, etc.) and the placement of new or additional riprap to protect the structure.The removal of sediment is limited to the minimum necessary to restore the waterway in the immediate vicinity of the structure to the approximate dimensions that existed when the structure was built, but cannot extend further than 200 feet in any direction from the structure. This 200 foot limit does not apply to maintenance dredging to remove accumulated sediments blocking or restricting outfall and intake structures or to maintenance dredging to remove accumulated sediments from canals associated with outfall and intake structures. All dredged or excavated materials must be deposited and retained in an upland area unless otherwise specifically approved by the district engineer under separate authorization.The placement of riprap must be the minimum necessary to protect the structure or to ensure the safety of the structure. Any bank stabilization measures not directly associated with the structure will require a separate authorization from the district engineer. (c)This NWP also authorizes temporary structures, fills, and work necessary to conduct the maintenance activity. Appropriate measures must be taken to maintain normal downstream flows and minimize flooding to the maximum extent practicable, when temporary structures, work, and discharges, including cofferdams, are necessary for construction activities, access fills, or dewatering of construction sites. Temporary fills must consist of materials, and be placed in a manner,that will not be eroded by expected high flows. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations. The areas affected by temporary fills must be revegetated,as appropriate. (d)This NWP does not authorize maintenance dredging for the primary purpose of navigation or beach restoration. This NWP does not authorize new stream channelization or stream relocation projects. 161 2 A I(/) Notification: For activities authorized by paragraph (b)of this NWP,the permittee must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer prior to commencing the activity. Where maintenance dredging is proposed,the pre-construction notification must include information regarding the original design capacities and configurations of the outfalls, intakes, small impoundments, and canals. (Sections 10 and 404) Note: This NWP authorizes the repair,rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized structure or fill that does not qualify for the Clean Water Act Section 404(f)exemption for maintenance. General Conditions: To qualify for NWP authorization,the prospective permittee must comply with the following general conditions,as appropriate, in addition to any regional or case-specific conditions imposed by the division engineer or district engineer. 1.Navigation.(a)No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. (b)Any safety lights and signals prescribed by the U.S. Coast Guard,through regulations or otherwise, must be installed and maintained at the permittee's expense on authorized facilities in navigable waters of the United States. (c)The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States require the removal, relocation,or other alteration, of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of the navigable waters,the permittee will be required,upon due notice from the Corps of Engineers,to remove, relocate, or alter the structural work or obstructions caused thereby,without expense to the United States.No claim shall be made against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration. 2. Aquatic Life Movements.No activity may substantially disrupt the necessary life cycle movements of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species that normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. Culverts placed in streams must be installed to maintain low flow conditions. 3. Spawning Areas.Activities in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that result in the physical destruction (e.g.,through excavation, fill,or downstream smothering by substantial turbidity)of an important spawning area are not authorized. 4. Migratory Bird Breeding Areas. Activities in waters of the United States that serve as breeding areas for migratory birds must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 5. Shellfish Beds.No activity may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish populations, unless the activity is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWPs 4 and 48. 161 2A l 6. Suitable Material.No activity may use unsuitable material (e.g.,trash, debris, car bodies, asphalt, etc.). Material used for construction or discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see Section 307 of the Clean Water Act). 7. Water Supply Intakes.No activity may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake, except where the activity is for the repair or improvement of public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. 8.Adverse Effects From Impoundments. If the activity creates an impoundment of water, adverse effects to the aquatic system due to accelerating the passage of water, and/or restricting its flow must be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. 9. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum extent practicable,the pre- construction course,condition, capacity, and location of open waters must be maintained for each activity, including stream channelization and storm water management activities, except as provided below. The activity must be constructed to withstand expected high flows. The activity must not restrict or impede the passage of normal or high flows, unless the primary purpose of the activity is to impound water or manage high flows. The activity may alter the pre-construction course,condition, capacity, and location of open waters if it benefits the aquatic environment(e.g., stream restoration or relocation activities). 10.Fills Within 100-Year Floodplains. The activity must comply with applicable FEMA-approved state or local floodplain management requirements. 11.Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands or mudflats must be placed on mats, or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 12. Soil Erosion and Sediment Controls.Appropriate soil erosion and sediment controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills, as well as any work below the ordinary high water mark or high tide line, must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. Permittees are encouraged to perform work within waters of the United States during periods of low-flow or no-flow. 13. Removal of Temporary Fills. Temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to pre-construction elevations. The affected areas must be revegetated, as appropriate. 14. Proper Maintenance.Any authorized structure or fill shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 15. Wild and Scenic Rivers.No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System, or in a river officially designated by Congress as a"study river"for possible inclusion in the system while the river is in an official study status, unless the appropriate Federal agency with direct management responsibility for 161 2AI(f such river,has determined in writing that the proposed activity will not adversely affect the Wild and Scenic River designation or study status. Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the appropriate Federal land management agency in the area(e.g.,National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service,Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 16.Tribal Rights.No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited to,reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights. 17. Endangered Species. (a)No activity is authorized under any NWP which is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species or a species proposed for such designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered Species Act(ESA),or which will destroy or adversely modify the critical habitat of such species.No activity is authorized under any NWP which"may affect"a listed species or critical habitat, unless Section 7 consultation addressing the effects of the proposed activity has been completed. (b)Federal agencies should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of the ESA. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. (c)Non-federal permittees shall notify the district engineer if any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the project is located in designated critical habitat, and shall not begin work on the activity until notified by the district engineer that the requirements of the ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized. For activities that might affect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species or designated critical habitat,the pre-construction notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or threatened species that may be affected by the proposed work or that utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work.The district engineer will determine whether the proposed activity"may affect" or will have "no effect"to listed species and designated critical habitat and will notify the non-Federal applicant of the Corps' determination within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification. In cases where the non- Federal applicant has identified listed species or critical habitat that might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, and has so notified the Corps,the applicant shall not begin work until the Corps has provided notification the proposed activities will have"no effect" on listed species or critical habitat, or until Section 7 consultation has been completed. (d) As a result of formal or informal consultation with the FWS or NMFS the district engineer may add species-specific regional endangered species conditions to the NWPs. (e)Authorization of an activity by a NWP does not authorize the"take"of a threatened or endangered species as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate authorization(e.g., an ESA Section 10 Permit, a Biological Opinion with"incidental take"provisions, etc.) from the U.S. FWS or the NMFS, both lethal and non-lethal "takes" of protected species are in violation of the ESA. Information on the location of threatened and endangered species and their critical habitat can be obtained directly from 161 2A � TI the offices of the U.S. FWS and NMFS or their world wide Web pages at http://www.fws.gov/and http://www.noaa.gov/fisheries.html respectively. 18. Historic Properties. (a)In cases where the district engineer determines that the activity may affect properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places,the activity is not authorized, until the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)have been satisfied. (b)Federal permittees should follow their own procedures for complying with the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Federal permittees must provide the district engineer with the appropriate documentation to demonstrate compliance with those requirements. (c)Non-federal permittees must submit a pre-construction notification to the district engineer if the authorized activity may have the potential to cause effects to any historic properties listed, determined to be eligible for listing on,or potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, including previously unidentified properties. For such activities,the pre-construction notification must state which historic properties may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic properties or the potential for the presence of historic properties. Assistance regarding information on the location of or potential for the presence of historic resources can be sought from the State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, as appropriate, and the National Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.4(g)).The district engineer shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts,which may include background research, consultation, oral history interviews, sample field investigation, and field survey. Based on the information submitted and these efforts,the district engineer shall determine whether the proposed activity has the potential to cause an effect on the historic properties. Where the non-Federal applicant has identified historic properties which the activity may have the potential to cause effects and so notified the Corps,the non-Federal applicant shall not begin the activity until notified by the district engineer either that the activity has no potential to cause effects or that consultation under Section 106 of the NHPA has been completed. (d) The district engineer will notify the prospective permittee within 45 days of receipt of a complete pre-construction notification whether NHPA Section 106 consultation is required. Section 106 consultation is not required when the Corps determines that the activity does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties (see 36 CFR §800.3(a)). If NHPA section 106 consultation is required and will occur,the district engineer will notify the non-Federal applicant that he or she cannot begin work until Section 106 consultation is completed. (e) Prospective permittees should be aware that section 110k of the NHPA (16 U.S.C. 470h-2(k))prevents the Corps from granting a permit or other assistance to an applicant who, with intent to avoid the requirements of Section 106 of the NHPA,has intentionally significantly adversely affected a historic property to which the permit would relate, or having legal power to prevent it,allowed such significant adverse effect to occur, unless the Corps, after consultation with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), determines that circumstances justify granting such assistance despite the adverse effect created or permitted by the applicant. If circumstances justify 161 granting the assistance,the Corps is required to notify the ACHP and provide documentation specifying the circumstances, explaining the degree of damage to the integrity of any historic properties affected, and proposed mitigation. This documentation must include any views obtained from the applicant, SHPO/THPO, appropriate Indian tribes if the undertaking occurs on or affects historic properties on tribal lands or affects properties of interest to those tribes,and other parties known to have a legitimate interest in the impacts to the permitted activity on historic properties. 19.Designated Critical Resource Waters. Critical resource waters include, NOAA-designated marine sanctuaries,National Estuarine Research Reserves, state natural heritage sites, and outstanding national resource waters or other waters officially designated by a state as having particular environmental or ecological significance and identified by the district engineer after notice and opportunity for public comment. The district engineer may also designate additional critical resource waters after notice and opportunity for comment. (a)Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States are not authorized by NWPs 7, 12, 14, 16, 17,21, 29, 31, 35, 39, 40, 42, 43,44,49,and 50 for any activity within,or directly affecting, critical resource waters, including wetlands adjacent to such waters. (b)For NWPs 3, 8, 10, 13, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23,25,27, 28, 30, 33, 34, 36,37, and 38,notification is required in accordance with general condition 27,for any activity proposed in the designated critical resource waters including wetlands adjacent to those waters. The district engineer may authorize activities under these NWPs only after it is determined that the impacts to the critical resource waters will be no more than minimal. 20. Mitigation. The district engineer will consider the following factors when determining appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary to ensure that adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal: (a)The activity must be designed and constructed to avoid and minimize adverse effects, both temporary and permanent,to waters of the United States to the maximum extent practicable at the project site(i.e.,on site). (b)Mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing,rectifying,reducing, or compensating)will be required to the extent necessary to ensure that the adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. (c) Compensatory mitigation at a minimum one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetland losses that exceed 1/10 acre and require pre-construction notification, unless the district engineer determines in writing that some other form of mitigation would be more environmentally appropriate and provides a project-specific waiver of this requirement. For wetland losses of 1/10 acre or less that require pre-construction notification,the district engineer may determine on a case-by-case basis that compensatory mitigation is required to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Since the likelihood of success is greater and the impacts to potentially valuable uplands are reduced,wetland restoration should be the first compensatory mitigation option considered. (d)For losses of streams or other open waters that require pre-construction notification,the district engineer may require compensatory mitigation, such as stream 16i2A1 tf restoration,to ensure that the activity results in minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. (e) Compensatory mitigation will not be used to increase the acreage losses allowed by the acreage limits of the NWPs. For example, if an NWP has an acreage limit of 1/2 acre, it cannot be used to authorize any project resulting in the loss of greater than 1/2 acre of waters of the United States, even if compensatory mitigation is provided that replaces or restores some of the lost waters. However, compensatory mitigation can and should be used, as necessary,to ensure that a project already meeting the established acreage limits also satisfies the minimal impact requirement associated with the NWPs. (1) Compensatory mitigation plans for projects in or near streams or other open waters will normally include a requirement for the establishment, maintenance, and legal protection (e.g., conservation easements) of riparian areas next to open waters. In some cases, riparian areas may be the only compensatory mitigation required.Riparian areas should consist of native species.The width of the required riparian area will address documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns.Normally,the riparian area will be 25 to 50 feet wide on each side of the stream, but the district engineer may require slightly wider riparian areas to address documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. Where both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site,the district engineer will determine the appropriate compensatory mitigation (e.g.,riparian areas and/or wetlands compensation) based on what is best for the aquatic environment on a watershed basis. In cases where riparian areas are determined to be the most appropriate form of compensatory mitigation, the district engineer may waive or reduce the requirement to provide wetland compensatory mitigation for wetland losses. (g) Permittees may propose the use of mitigation banks, in-lieu fee arrangements or separate activity-specific compensatory mitigation. In all cases, the mitigation provisions will specify the party responsible for accomplishing and/or complying with the mitigation plan. (h) Where certain functions and services of waters of the United States are permanently adversely affected, such as the conversion of a forested or scrub-shrub wetland to a herbaceous wetland in a permanently maintained utility line right-of-way, mitigation may be required to reduce the adverse effects of the project to the minimal level. 21. Water Quality. Where States and authorized Tribes, or EPA where applicable, have not previously certified compliance of an NWP with CWA Section 401, individual 401 Water Quality Certification must be obtained or waived(see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). The district engineer or State or Tribe may require additional water quality management measures to ensure that the authorized activity does not result in more than minimal degradation of water quality. 22. Coastal Zone Management.Not Applicable. 23. Regional and Case-By-Case Conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions that may have been added by the Division Engineer(see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and with any case specific conditions added by the Corps or by the state, Indian x61 2 A (i Tribe, or U.S.EPA in its section 401 Water Quality Certification, or by the state in its Coastal Zone Management Act consistency determination. 24.Use of Multiple Nationwide Permits.The use of more than one NWP for a single and complete project is prohibited, except when the acreage loss of waters of the United States authorized by the NWPs does not exceed the acreage limit of the NWP with the highest specified acreage limit. For example, if a road crossing over tidal waters is constructed under NWP 14,with associated bank stabilization authorized by NWP 13, the maximum acreage loss of waters of the United States for the total project cannot exceed 1/3-acre. 25.Transfer of Nationwide Permit Verifications. If the permittee sells the property associated with a nationwide permit verification,the permittee may transfer the nationwide permit verification to the new owner by submitting a letter to the appropriate Corps district office to validate the transfer. A copy of the nationwide permit verification must be attached to the letter, and the letter must contain the following statement and signature: "When the structures or work authorized by this nationwide permit are still in existence at the time the property is transferred,the terms and conditions of this nationwide permit, including any special conditions,will continue to be binding on the new owners)of the property. To validate the transfer of this nationwide permit and the associated liabilities associated with compliance with its terms and conditions, have the transferee sign and date below." (Transferee) (Date) 26. Compliance Certification. Each permittee who received an NWP verification from the Corps must submit a signed certification regarding the completed work and any required mitigation. The certification form must be forwarded by the Corps with the NWP verification letter and will include: (a)A statement that the authorized work was done in accordance with the NWP authorization, including any general or specific conditions; (b)A statement that any required mitigation was completed in accordance with the permit conditions; and (c)The signature of the permittee certifying the completion of the work and mitigation. 27. Pre-Construction Notification.Not Applicable. 161 2A I (( 28. Single and Complete Project.The activity must be a single and complete project. The same NWP cannot be used more than once for the same single and complete project. Further Information 1.District Engineers have authority to determine if an activity complies with the terms and conditions of an NWP. 2.NWPs do not obviate the need to obtain other federal, state, or local permits, approvals, or authorizations required by law. 3.NWPs do not grant any property rights or exclusive privileges. 4.NWPs do not authorize any injury to the property or rights of others. 5. NWPs do not authorize interference with any existing or proposed Federal project. 161 2 A 14 -0,^01'',,s:_ DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ar c= 2t CORPS OF ENGINEERS,NORTHWESTERN DIVISION Po BOX 2870 PORTLAND OR 97208-2870 -o% REPLY TO - arert u∎ ' ATTENTION OF CENWD-PDS 29 March 2006. MEMORANDUM FOR Commander,Kansas City District Commander,Omaha District Commander,Portland District Commander,Seattle District Commander,Walla Walla District SUBJECT: Department of the Army Section 404 Authorization for Replacement of Uplands; Northwestern Division Regulatory Program 1. Nationwide Permit(NWP)3(iii)contains the following language,which is causing confusion for the general public,as well as Northwestern Division Regulatory employees: "Uplands lost as a result of a storm, flood,or other discrete event can be replaced without a Section 404 permit provided the uplands are restored to their original pre-event location.This NWP is for the activities in waters of the United States associated with the replacement of the uplands." 2. To help alleviate confusion,the following clarification is provided regarding when a Department of the Army(DA)authorization may be necessary to replace upland areas lost as the result of a discrete event, such as a flood or hurricane. Development of this clarifying guidance was coordinated with HQUSACE: a. If the post-event(new)Ordinary High Water Mark(OHWM)or High Tide Line(HTL)remains at the same location as the pre-event(old)OHWM/HTL,no DA authorization is required for work to occur above(landward)the OHWM/HTL. If work is proposed to occur below(riverward/seaward)the OIWM/HTL,a DA authorization will likely be required for the work in this area. b. If the new OHWM/HTL establishes below the old OHWM/HTL,no DA authorization is required for work to occur above(landward)the new OHWM/HTL. If work is proposed to occur below (riverward/seaward)the new OHWM/HTL,a DA authorization will likely be required for work in this area. c. If the new 0I-IWM/HTL establishes above(landward)the old OHWM/HTL,no DA authorization is required for work to occur above the new OHWM/HTL. If work is proposed to occur below (riverward/seaward)the new OHWMJHTL,a DA authorization will likely be required for work in this area. 3. For the cases referenced above,a discrete event has likely caused a permanent change in the OHWM/HTL. Therefore, in accordance with 33 CFR Part 328.5, permanent changes in the OHWM/HTL should he examined and verified by the District Engineer.along with any changes in the lateral extent of jurisdiction. Panted on Recycled Paper 161 2A III' CENWD-PDS SUBJECT: Department of the Army Section 404 Authorization for Replacement of Uplands; Northwestern Division Regulatory Program 4. The following diagram graphically illustrates case 2.c.above: • No DA authorization required to replace uplands lost between C and D • DA authorization required to replace uplands lost between B and C, as the area is now a water of the US • •c ONWM S D A A—Pre-event OHWM/HTL B— Pre-event bank C—Post-event OHWM/HTL D—Post-event bank 5. All Northwestern Division Districts shall post this clarifying guidance on their websites. My point of contact for this action is Mr. Timothy Carey at(303)979-4120 or Mr. Peter Gibson at(505)808-3880. KAREN L. DURHAM-AGUILERA,P.E. Director,Programs 2 161 2 At ,( General Condition 27. Pre-Construction Notification. (a)Timing. Where required by the terms of the NWP, the prospective permittee must notify the district engineer by submitting a pre-construction notification(PCN) as early as possible. The district engineer must determine if the PCN is complete within 30 calendar days of the date of receipt and, as a general rule,will request additional information necessary to make the PCN complete only once. However, if the prospective permittee does not provide all of the requested information, then the district engineer will notify the prospective permittee that the PCN is still incomplete and the PCN review process will not commence until all of the requested information has been received by the district engineer.The prospective permittee shall not begin the activity: (1)Until notified in writing by the district engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWP with any special conditions imposed by the district or division engineer; or (2) If 45 calendar days have passed from the district engineer's receipt of the complete PCN and the prospective permittee has not received written notice from the district or division engineer. However, if the permittee was required to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 17 that listed species or critical habitat might be affected or in the vicinity of the project, or to notify the Corps pursuant to general condition 18 that the activity may have the potential to cause effects to historic properties,the permittee cannot begin the activity until receiving written notification from the Corps that is"no effect" on listed species or"no potential to cause effects"on historic properties, or that any consultation required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act(see 33 CFR 330.4(f)) and/or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation(see 33 CFR 330.4(g)) is completed. Also, work cannot begin under NWPs 21,49, or 50 until the permittee has received written approval from the Corps.If the proposed activity requires a written waiver to exceed specified limits of an NWP, the permittee cannot begin the activity until the district engineer issues the waiver. If the district or division engineer notifies the permittee in writing that an individual permit is required within 45 calendar days of receipt of a complete PCN, the permittee cannot begin the activity until an individual permit has been obtained. Subsequently,the permittee's right to proceed under the NWP may be modified, suspended, or revoked only in accordance with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2). (b) Contents of Pre-Construction Notification: The PCN must be in writing and include the following information: (1)Name, address and telephone numbers of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the proposed project; (3)A description of the proposed project; the project's purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permit(s)used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity. The description should be sufficiently detailed to allow the district engineer to determine that the adverse effects of the project will be minimal and to determine the need for compensatory mitigation. Sketches should be provided when necessary to show that the activity complies with the 161 a A terms of the NWP. (Sketches usually clarify the project and when provided result in a quicker decision.); (4)The PCN must include a delineation of special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States on the project site. Wetland delineations must be prepared in accordance with the current method required by the Corps.The permittee may ask the Corps to delineate the special aquatic sites and other waters of the United States,but there may be a delay if the Corps does the delineation, especially if the project site is large or contains many waters of the United States.Furthermore,the 45 day period will not start until the delineation has been submitted to or completed by the Corps,where appropriate; (5) If the proposed activity will result in the loss of greater than 1/10 acre of wetlands and a PCN is required,the prospective permittee must submit a statement describing how the mitigation requirement will be satisfied. As an alternative, the prospective permittee may submit a conceptual or deta}Jo„mitigation plan. (6) If any listed species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is in the vicinity of the project, or if the project is located in designated critical habitat, for non- Federal applicants the PCN must include the name(s)of those endangered or threatened species that might be affected by the proposed work or utilize the designated critical habitat that may be affected by the proposed work. Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with the Endangered Species Act; and (7) For an activity that may affect a historic property listed on, determined to be eligible for listing on,or potentially eligible for listing on,the National Register of Historic.Places, for non-Federal applicants the PCN must state which historic property may be affected by the proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the historic property. Federal applicants must provide documentation demonstrating compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. (c) Form of Pre-Construction Notification: The standard individual permit application form(Form ENG 4345) may be used, but the completed application form must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and must include all of the information required in paragraphs (b)(1)through (7)of this general condition. A letter containing the required information may also be used. (d)Agency Coordination: (1)The district engineer will consider any comments from Federal and state agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of the NWPs and the need for mitigation to reduce the project's adverse environmental effects to a minimal level: (2) For all NWP 48 activities requiring pre-construction notification and for other NWP activities requiring pre-construction notification to the district engineer that result in the loss of greater than 1/2-acre of waters of the United States, the district engineer will immediately provide (e.g.,via facsimile transmission, overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a copy of the PCN to the appropriate Federal or state offices (U.S. FWS, state natural resource or water quality agency,EPA, State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Office(THPO), and, if appropriate, the NMFS). With the exception of NWP 37,these agencies will then have 10 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to telephone or fax the district engineer notice that they intend to provide substantive, site-specific comments. If so contacted by an 161 2A IL-1 agency, the district engineer will wait an additional 15 calendar days before making a decision on the pre-construction notification. The district engineer will fully consider agency comments received within the specified time frame, but will provide no response to the resource agency, except as provided below. The district engineer will indicate in the administrative record associated with each pre-construction notification that the resource agencies' concerns were considered. For NWP 37,the emergency watershed protection and rehabilitation activity may proceed immediately in cases where there is an unacceptable hazard to life or a significant loss of property or economic hardship will occur.The district engineer will consider any comments received to decide whether the NWP 37 authorization should be modified, suspended, or revoked in accordance with the procedures at 33 CFR 330.5. (3) In cases where the prospective permittee is not a Federal agency,the district engineer will provide a response to NMFS within 30 calendar days of receipt of any Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, as required by Section 305(b)(4)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. (4)Applicants are encouraged to provide the Corps multiple copies of pre- construction notifications to expedite agency coordination. (5)For NWP 48 activities that require reporting, the district engineer will provide a copy of each report within 10 calendar days of receipt to the appropriate regional office of the NMFS. (e) District Engineer's Decision: In reviewing the PCN for the proposed activity, the district engineer will determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or may be contrary to the public interest. If the proposed activity requires a PCN and will result in a loss of greater than 1/10 acre of wetlands,the prospective permittee should submit a mitigation proposal with the PCN. Applicants may also propose compensatory mitigation for projects with smaller impacts. The district engineer will consider any proposed compensatory mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the proposed work are minimal. The compensatory mitigation proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If the district engineer determines that the activity complies with the telius and conditions of the NWP and that the adverse effects on the aquatic environment are minimal, after considering mitigation,the district engineer will notify the permittee and include any conditions the district engineer deems necessary. The district engineer must approve any compensatory mitigation proposal before the permittee commences work. If the prospective permittee elects to submit a compensatory mitigation plan with the PCN, the district engineer will expeditiously review the proposed compensatory mitigation plan.The district engineer must review the plan within 45 calendar days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether the proposed mitigation would ensure no more than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. If the net adverse effects of the project on the aquatic environment(after consideration of the compensatory mitigation proposal) are determined by the district engineer to be minimal,the district engineer will provide a timely written response to the applicant. The response will state that the project can proceed under the terms and conditions of the NWP. 161 2AF litt If the district engineer determines that the adverse effects of the proposed work are more than minimal,then the district engineer will notify the applicant either: (1)That the project does not qualify for authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant on the procedures to seek authorization under an individual permit; (2)that the project is authorized under the NWP subject to the applicant's submission of a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal level; or (3) that the project is authorized under the NWP with specific modifications or conditions. Where the district engineer determines that mitigation is required to ensure no more than minimal adverse effects occur to the aquatic environment,the activity will be authorized within the 45-day PCN period. The authorization will include the necessary conceptual or specific mitigation or a requirement that the applicant submit a mitigation plan that would reduce the adverse effects on the aquatic environment to the minimal level. When mitigation is required,no work in waters of the United States may occur until the district engineer has approved a specific mitigation plan. • , January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence submitted by Marcia Cravens Page 1 of 2 6 t L^ A "Elligott, Linda A SAJ"<Linda.A.Elligott@usace.army.mil> 12-28-12 Clam Pass project -- notes re: your messages (UNCLASSIFIED) December 28, 2012 6:10 PM Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE Marcia, Sorry that I could not get back to you by phone today --- here are some general notes: The Corps process must be followed in order to re-activate the file for this project. With respect to your messages related to some possible project alternatives, the Corps project managers are not allowed to coach or help to devise a work proposal; our scope is to review proposed work as it is presented by an applicant and/or agent "of record" as per the official signed/dated application. You may coordinate with the consultant to discuss some options, but until the Corps receives an updated application that authorizes Turrell, Hall & Associates to act on behalf of Collier County, we cannot entertain discussions. Note: I am on scheduled leave part of next week and out of the office until Friday 4 January. My phone message notes my schedule. If you wish to speak with our Section Chief, please contact Tunis McElwain at extension 30; I believe he is scheduled to return to the office on Weds. 2 January, but I do not know his full schedule. Thanks, Linda Linda A. Elligott Project Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office 1520 Royal Palm Square Blvd,, Suite 310 Fort Myers, FL 33919 Telephone: 239-334-1975 x 22 email: linda.a.elligott @usace.army.mil Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Caveats: NONE 4 161 2 A i/Q O , N N N D) a � J as 2 5U cn a) @ I d' U a@ 2 Ico m � din CC N• - 0 5 3 ,,T., °(.1 :, 4 co 0_ it. n 4' 1:.f a r t.) i '1 CO cf, m 7 -,:l. ;,VI- 5 ' U g ' /Jts —LEI i O C .. }j 'ryT R i N CO N f .f r ('. HI^ B f t. l• . 3 i yt 5 * - , t•�, r F,I. k. z i + ter' .�v.- ��, j f�, •, _ f• r . if ,'-' " , ' U r r f 0) Q O r ii *4%- 6 �t[t ) t p i .0.t t v t-} 1 . VP' \ t i � fa 1 �js g r` a .-43 t' '4 *f i ti s :� f /�',,.r to z s� f- '+ t , a/ o, 9 r z: f r ,4Mr- ; - 3 At rs a . .-Y » „' '▪ g is n f ► xxx `s !% I. th`aissit 8 3 •y..y, X13 rxx 3 r' uc n• -Catt -- 161 2A if `{' Ilik. ti f` l F.: F 4 , AI c o ml i2 I kt :;'.', X 44 — 4 mss,. a • L �fil •G . 4 rsr s lik i W a i 161 aA 13„aL3 2 0 2013 0 LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY,JANUARY 15,2013" "..... LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met Tuesday,January 15 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present Landscape Water Management(LWM)Subcommittee Dave Trecker,Chairman Keith J.Dallas John P.Chandler Geoffrey S.Gibson Tom Cravens Pelican Bay Services Division Staff Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Fiala 5 in the audience Hiller Henning anning Coyle ✓' 1. Roll Call -greiette , 2. Approval of December 10 LWM Subcommittee meeting minutes '''4.C4'F' 3. Update on copper monitoring and status of trial programs on algae control 4. Pelican Bay community outreach regarding the importance of BMP a. Landscaping color at"end-caps"discussion(Chandler add-on) 5. Audience Comments 6. Adjournment ROLL CALL All Subcommittee members were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas to approve the agenda as amended, adding Mr. Chandler's item 4a, Landscaping color at"end-caps"discussion. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 10 LWM SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas to approve the December 10 LWM Subcommittee meeting minutes as presented. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. UPDATE ON COPPER MONITORING AND STATUS OF TRIAL PROGRAMS ON ALGAE CONTROL Mr.Lukasz reported that this month,staff plans to implement the copper monitoring and trial program using alternatives to copper sulfate to control algae at sites located within Basin 3. Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas to make a recommendation to the PBSD Board to direct the Administrator to investigate subcontracting mechanical removal of algae in lake systems. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Misc.Corns: 16 Date: Item#: Copies to: £ 61 2A 1/tp Landscape Water Management Subcommittee Meeting Minutes January 15, 2013 Chairman Trecker was concerned about rumors he heard that PBSD was not incompliance with the SFWMD Master Surface Water Management permit. Mr.Dorrill acknowledged that he planned to meet with SFWMD officials January 23 to resolve permit modifications conveyance-related issues,but was not aware of any non-compliance issues regarding the Master permit. PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY OUTREACH REGARDING THE IMPORTANCE OF BMP Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Chairman Trecker to make a recommendation to the PBSD Board to proceed with production and distribution of"Landscape BMP Draft 1.0" The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. LANDSCAPING COLOR AT"END-CAPS"(CHANDLER ADD-ON) Mr.Chandler was concerned about resident complaints regarding the lack of color in landscaping at median"end-caps". Mr.Dallas said planting maintenance-intensive Annuals would defeat the purpose of attempting to employ BMP. Staff would contact Landscape Architect,Ms.Ellin Goetz to make a presentation at the next LWM meeting of her recommendations for colorful and drought-resistant alternatives to Annuals. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms.Diane Lustig explained`BMP Draft 1.0"was informative but lackluster. Mr.Dave Cook suggested PBSD hold a workshop that focuses on littoral plantings. Mr.John Domenie was concerned that employee training did not change behavior. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion,second by Chairman Trecker to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor, the motion passed,and meeting adjourned at 2:12 p.m. 41) IA...1.4..4 2.e....e.A 2...._..._....._ F�ee r •r,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 1/29/2013 3:37:34 PM 17 161 2A FEB 2 2013 D PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BY: ...... .. . .,Oe Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 15, 2013 THE LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETS TUESDAY, JANUARY 15 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108. Fiala ✓ Hiller Henning -------- Coyle Gelett AGENDA r The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll call 2. Approval of December 10 LWM Subcommittee meeting minutes 3. Update on copper monitoring and status of trial programs on algae control 4. Pelican Bay community outreach regarding the importance of BMP 5. Audience Comments 6. Adjournment ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT(239) 597-1749. Misc.Corres: Date: Item#: 1/14/2013 8:54:20 AM Copies to: . , 161 2A i . LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES MONDAY,DECEMBER 10,2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Monday, December 10, 2012 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Landscape Water Management Subcommittee Dave Trecker,Chairman Keith J.Dallas John P.Chandler absent Geoffrey S.Gibson absent Tom Cravens Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary AGENDA • 1. Roll Call 2. Pelican Bay community outreach regarding the importance of BMP 3. Audience Comments 4. Adjournment ROLL CALL With the exception of Mr.Chandler and Mr.Gibson,the Subcommittee members were present. PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY OUTREACH REGARDING THE IMPORTANCE OF BMP The Subcommittee discussed ways to communicate effectively(Pelican Bay Post articles,e-blasts,etc.)with the Pelican Bay community(homeowners,associations,property managers,contractors,golf course,etc.)to create awareness and encourage the use of landscaping best management practices(BMP). Consensus was to develop a brochure that explains how fertilizer misuse and nutrient runoff contaminates adjacent waterways and guidelines to incorporate landscaping BMP. The Subcommittee agreed that the Pelican Bay Services Division's role is to provide information only. Dr.Trecker volunteered to draft a two-page summary. Ms.Diane Lustig(Hyde Park)suggested that Division staff work with the Hyde Park association and e Kohn,Property Manager to develop a BMP plan. , Mr.Dorrill recommended gaining support for this campaign from entities within the comm AO•y identifyin $: the stakeholders (Club Pelican Bay,entities adjacent to the Club,and nearby)to schedule an initia 144,,,,-,..r-,4°=°fing in mid-late January. The Subcommittee concurred. ADJOURN IMr. Dallas made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to adjourn. The scorn •_'' unanimously in favor,passing the motion,and the meeting adjour, r-,,,!-:32 ,. Tom Cravens,Chairman a , - , 1!1h4. 1/10/2013 11:31:34 AM Su�,,,,s 15 3 %January L,LV 1J rcul.aII oay ocivIUca LJIVIJIUII ovalu ncyuiai OCDbIVII 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-Landscaping Best Management Practices Draft 1.0 Page 1 of 2 161 2 A 11, LANDSCAPING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DRAFT 1.0 Pelican Bay is facing a severe problem. Its waterways — inland lakes and Clam Bay — are being polluted by high levels of fertilizer runoff. Nutrients from the runoff— dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus — cause algae bloom, a threat to aquatic plants and wildlife. To deal with algae buildup, a copper fungicide has been applied over an extended period of time. Through accumulation, copper— itself a pollutant—has reached alarmingly high levels in our freshwater lakes. The maximal acceptable level for dissolved copper is 3.7 milligrams per liter. A higher reading signifies the water body is impaired. Current levels in our 42 lakes range from 12 to 3870 milligrams per liter, with an average of close to 350. We are badly out of compliance. Several approaches are being taken to deal with the problem. (1) The Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) is exploring alternatives to copper sulfate as a means of controlling algae. The use of selective bacteria in combination with aeration and littoral plantings will be tested in Basin 3, the central section of the freshwater lakes. If this pilot program is successful, it will be expanded to other basins. (2) To deal with fertilizer misuse, the heart of the problem, the PBSD is undertaking a community awareness program — a follow-on to a recent county ordinance (11-24) which mandates that Best Management Practices (BMP) be followed throughout Collier County. Dealing with this problem is everyone's responsibility. If we are to have clean groundwater and healthy waterways in Pelican Bay, it is essential that fertilizers be used in accordance with BMP. Janualy c,GV IJ rcnL,aiI oay ocIVIL.VJ vIVIJIVn ovaIU ncyuiai .JcaivII 13.Miscellaneous Correspondence-Landscaping Best Management Practices Draft 1.0 Page 2 of 2 II lcf Landscaping Best Management Practices Draft 1.0 Page 2 Here is a specific list of things every condominium association, homeowner association and individual homeowner can and should do. • Use only landscape maintenance companies whose technicians are trained and licensed in BMP. During the course of fertilizer application, be sure there is appropriate on-site supervision. • Use fertilizer application rates recommended by the Florida-Friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries. Those can be accessed at http:/fyn.ifas.ufl.edu/professionals/GI-BMP_publications.htm. • Limit nitrogen usage to 4-6 lbs./1000 sq. ft./yr. • Whenever possible, use slow-release fertilizer. • Do not fertilize during the rainy season (June 1 - September 30) or prior to forecasted storms • Be sure no fertilizer is used within 10 feet of groundwater, including lakes, except to establish new landscape and then for no more than 30 days after planting. • When installing new landscape, use drought-resistant plants that require minimal fertilization. • Be mindful that reclaimed water used for irrigation already contains most of the nitrogen and phosphorus needed for grass fertilization. Little or no additional fertilizer may be needed. The Pelican Bay Services Division, working in concert with the Pelican Bay Foundation, urges all residents of Pelican Bay to follow these guidelines. The health of our lakes and our estuary depends upon it. i , , 161 2At* PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD SPECIAL SESSION MINUTES MONDAY,JANUARY 21,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Special Session on Monday,January 21 at 9:00 AM at The Club Pelican Bay,707 Gulf Park Drive,Naples,Florida. The following members were present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board o m ?yet y��g ,J��7 2 7 Tom Cravens,Chairman John Iaizzo departed early FEB �� 3 v Dave Trecker,Vice Chairman Michael Levy John P.Chandler Susan O'Brien Keith J.Dallas Mary Anne Womble BY: Geoffrey S.Gibson departed early Hunter H.Hansen absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst absent Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager absent Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Fiala I/ Kevin Carter,Field Manager,Dorrill Management Group Hiller Tim Hall,Turrell,Hall&Associates Henning Jim Hoppensteadt,President&CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Coyle �. eritita- Ken Humiston,RE.,Humiston&Moore Engineers (, f Brett Moore, P.E.,Humiston&Moore Engineers Kathy Worley,Conservancy of Southwest Florida NG'r►GG 40 in audience AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Draft Clam Pass construction plans presentation by Ken Humiston,P.E.,and Brett D.Moore,P.E.,Humiston&Moore Engineers 3. Board Discussion Misc.Cones: 4. Audience Comments 5. *Approval of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board recommendation Date: to the Board of County Commissioners 6. Adjourn Item#: ROLL CALL Copies to: With the exception of Mr.Hansen,nine members were present. Mr.Iaizzo and Mr.Gibson departed the meeting early. AGENDA APPROVAL Ms. Womble made a motion,second by Mr.Dallas to approve the agenda as presented. The I Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. DRAFT CLAM PASS CONSTRUCTION PLANS PRESENTATION Mr. Ken Humiston presented the draft Clam Pass construction plans and recommendation for the width of the dredge cut at the mouth of the Pass. The "natural width" or equilibrium cross-sectional area determines the volume of water that flows through the inlet and potentially scours sand out when waves push sand in. The actual size of the cut depends upon the tidal range in the Gulf. Past monitoring data shows 8587 161 2A1+ Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session Minutes Monday,January 21, 2013 the equilibrium cross-sectional area is 200-300 square feet.The area is determined by multiplying the width by depth by slope. Humiston&Moore Engineers recommended a narrower dredge cut width of 45',depth of -4.5',and not as steep slope to limit the cross-sectional area toward the lower-range of 2002 feet;versus the prior recommendation to dredge a wider 60' cut,to a depth of-5'having a steeper slope that increased the cross-sectional area toward the higher-range of 3002 feet. To stabilize the Pass and prevent material from falling into the inlet during the post-dredge adjustment period,the beach adjacent to the inlet will be graded to an elevation above the Mean High Water line(MHW)at high tide. Mr. Humiston explained the type of permit determines what dredging equipment is used. Dredging work maybe done mechanically as it was in 1997 reaching Segments A and B only, not C, whereas a a hydraulic dredge as as used in 1999 could reach all Segments A,B,and C and would be more effective. Mr. Tim Hall clarified PBSD is submitting an application to USACE for Nationwide Permit 27 (NWP- 27) to open Clam Pass as soon as possible. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit-in-place will be modified accordingly for consistency. Mr. Dorrill concurred PBSD is submitting an application to USACE NWP-27 as recommended by USACE as the most appropriate and expeditious permit to have Clam Pass re-opened as soon as possible; versus NWP-3 that requires dredged material taken off-site. Removal of the dredged material from the site violates FDEP rules regarding placement of "beach-compatible sand" adjacent to the inlet. There are construction means and methods that can determine the type of equipment used and are dependent upon site conditions and the contractor's judgment. As stated in the Executive Summary of the proposed January 22 Board of County Commissioners' (BCC) add-on item, the recommendation is to approve the expedited bid solicitation process and direct the County Manager to issue work orders to the County's five pre-approved excavation-type contractors. Staff intends to discuss types of equipment recommended with these potential contractors and obtain base bids to dredge Segments A&B only(approximately 20,000 cubic yards of sand); then obtain ad-alternate bids to dredge Segment C only(approximately 7,000 cubic yards of sand). Mr.Humiston explained what an over-allowance is. As it is difficult to grade the bottom under water, the contractor must achieve a required depth,and given an over-allowance depth,that is"no more than"one- half foot deeper than required depth. Mr. Humiston explained dredging Segment A is critical because it is the most dynamic area where wave action along the beach pushes sand into the inlet and the place to where strong currents scour that sand out. According to monitoring data, tide range (decreasing) and phase lag (increasing) indicated shoaling of Segments B and C. In order to generate the strong currents, Segments B and C require cleaning and the reason why dredge cuts are wider(than a prior recommendation)in Segments B and C. Some Board members were still concerned about wider dredge cuts in Segments B and C and wanted assurance that the NWP-27 would not set precedent for future dredging events. Mr. Dorrill explained the NWP-27 permit is designed specifically for a one-time, project-specific, single event and he had expressed clearly to USACE that PBSD preferred to spend the next three years, 8588 X61 2A * Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session Minutes Monday,January 21, 2013 (subject to funding and PBSD Board approval)to develop a comprehensive long-term Clam Bay Management Plan. Mr.Brett Moore reported he informed FDEP of the scope of changes to the FDEP Clam Pass dredging permit-in-place and urgent nature of the project,and FDEP is expediting the approval process. Mr.Dorrill added the FDEP permit-in-place is a 10-year Clam Pass dredging permit that must be modified for consistency with the NWP-27 prior to issuance of a Notice-To-Proceed(NTP)with construction. Mr.Hall estimated the NWP-27 permit application would be prepared and ready for submittal on January 23,but the construction plans Mr.Humiston is recommending and presenting are a required component. As far as timeline,he believed it was extremely optimistic for work to begin in March,but regardless,the construction must be complete by May 1,the start of Turtle Nesting Season. Mr. Dorrill is exploring possibilities for the contractors to work additional shifts or "around the clock"to meet the May 1 deadline. Ms.Kathy Worley explained possible environmental impacts of dredging Segment C wider or"wall- to-wall"including turbidity and exposed seagrasses,and was concerned this dredging project would set precedent for future dredging. Mr.Hall commented that with the Pass closed,problems are in process or already happening.It was apparent that water clarity is decreasing,which prevents light from penetrating to deeper depths which impacts fish and seagrass.Mangroves were not yet a concern until the rainy season when the possibility for submersion exists. He supported Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. Mr.Iaizzo departed the meeting. Before departing,Mr.Gibson stated he supported Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms.Diane Lustig,Mr.Ken Dawson,Mr.Rick Dykman,Ms.Mary Johnson emphasized the urgency of obtaining a permit to open Clam Pass as soon as possible and supported Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. Ms.Linda Roth,Ms.Marcia Cravens did not support Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. Mr.Bill Klauber was concerned about the proposed 24/7 construction and potential noise. BOARD DISCUSSION The Board agreed it was imperative for PBSD to proceed on an emergency basis with submitting the NWP-27 application as USACE recommended was the most appropriate permit to have Clam Pass re-opened as soon as possible.Some members were concerned about the wider cut proposed for Segment C and considered amending the construction plans and the suggestion troubled some Board members who agreed the Board should listen to the experts. Subsequently,Chairman Cravens called for a motion,second and vote. 8589 i . . 161 2A 1 (, Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session Minutes Monday,January 21, 2013 APPROVAL OF PBSD RECOMMENDATION TO BCC Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas that the PBSD approve of a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners that the Clam Pass Construction plans as drawn on January 17,2013 by Humiston&Moore Engineers be utilized for an application of one-time permitting, specifically for emergency dredging to re-open Clam Pass. The Board voted 6-1 in favor and the motion passed.(O'Brien opposed) APPROVAL TO EXTEND MR.DORRILL'S CONTRACT Mr. Dorrill informed the Board on February 12 the BCC plans to discuss his management services contract that is set to expire in June 2013. Given the Clam Pass emergency conditions that exist and additional work required, the available options are to either: 1) begin the bid solicitation process anew for district administrative services; or 2) extend his management services contract by one-year and allow for an additional four-and-one-half hours compensatory time calculated on a weekly basis. Mr. Dallas made a motion, second by Ms. O'Brien that PBSD make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to extend Mr. Dorrill's management services contract by one- year and include an additional four-and-one-half hours (4.5 hours) of compensatory time calculated on a weekly basis. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ADJOURN Vice Chairman Trecker made a motion, second by Chairman Cravens to adjourn. The Board voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed and meeting adjourned at 10:38 a.m. ....e_,_y_____:....----"I0Olr- Tom Craven,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 2/6/2013 10:52:25 AM 8590 161 2A1+3RD AD-HOC COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP AN APPROACH FOR STUDYING PATHWAYS& EES OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD i FEB 2 0 2013 MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY,JANUARY 22,2013 ' ....e„+cQa.e•...,•-Q^ LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Ad-Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathway s and Trees of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met Tuesday,January 22,2013 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida. The following members were present: Ad-Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathways&Trees Keith J.Dallas,Chairman Dave Trecker Tom Cravens Mary Anne Womble absent Pelican Bay Services Division Board John Iaizzo Susan O'Brien Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations An st/ Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Riffding Secretary Also Present Hiller Ian Orlikoff,ISA Certified Arborist Henning 14 in the audience Coyle ✓” Gelettet AGENDA 1yG`nc¢ 1. Roll Call 2. Tree Health along Pelican Bay Boulevard presentation by Ian Orlikoff,Certified Arborist 3. Audience Comments 4. Adjourn ROLL CALL With the exception of Ms.Mary Anne Womble,all Ad-Hoc Committee members were present. INTRODUCTION Chairman Dallas explained that in light of increased Clam Bay responsibilities given to the Pelican Bay Services Division,and the recent Pelican Bay Boulevard pathways repaving done by the County,he mentioned lowering the priority of the pathways project,with the exception of Mr.Ian Orlikoff Certified Arborist's initial evaluation of the tree canopy. TREE HEALTH ALONG PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PRESENTATION BY IAN ORLIKOFF,ISA CERTIFIED ARBORIST Mr.Ian Orlikoff,Certified Arborist,presented an initial analysis of the tree canopy along the west side of Pelican Bay Boulevard(from The Commons to North Tram)for the ultimate goal of developing a tree canopy management plan that is flexible,and can be implemented in phases,and offers alternative designs and materials.He stressed the importance of investing in sustained results, which will reduce costs over time,infrastructure damage,and potential liability. Mr.Orlikoff evaluated specific trees and recommended mitigation for many to either curve pathways around trees,or construct pathways using flexible permeable pave�mmeent.He did advise removing several trees due to lack of structural integrity caused by cutting s: removing accommodate Date: 4 Item#: Copies to: I . . 161 2A1., Ad-Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathways and Trees Meeting Minutes Tuesday,January 22,2013 previous pathways installations.He did not recommend using root barriers that can predispose trees to fail. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Comments made to encourage involving homeowners associations adjacent to the evaluation areas prior to taking recommended actions;and to expand the evaluation area,include the impact to the tree canopy,and incorporate cost of an expanded evaluation into next year's budget. Mr.Lukasz clarified that the Pelican Bay Services Division or County was responsible for the area between the pathway and the street;and the association was responsible for the area between the pathway and private property. Mr.Orlikoff estimated the cost to prepare today's initial evaluation of the section of Pelican Bay Boulevard(from The Commons to the North Tram)was approximately$500. Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Mr.Cravens to make a recommendation to the Pelican Bay Services Division Board to have Mr.Ian Orlikoff, Certified Arborist evaluate the trees along the entire length of Pelican Bay Boulevard. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Cravens made made a motion, second by Chairman Dallas to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed,and meeting adjourned at 2;35 p.m. Keit .Dallas,Cha an Minutes by Lisa Resnick 2/11/2013 9:42:02 AM 5 - 161 2A germ PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION FEB 2 0 1013 Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit .. .. NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY,JANUARY 22, 2013 THE AD-HOC COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP AN APPROACH FOR STUDYING PATHWAYS & TREES OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION, TUESDAY, JANUARY 22 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, LOCATED AT 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108 AGENDA Fiala Hiller Henning The agenda includes, but is not limited: Coyle ,%." Culella• -- -,—____ 1. Roll Call 2. Tree Health along Pelican Bay Boulevard Presentation by Ian Orlikoff, ISA Certified Arborist 3. Audience Comments 4. Adjourn ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597-1749 OR VISIT PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. Misc.Corres: Date: Item#: Copies to: 1/16/2013 3:33:42 PM 161 2A (6 Signature Tree Care,ac 000 481 10th Avenue N.E. • Naples, Florida 34120 Office: (239) 348-1330 • Fax: (239) 348-3133 Email: info @signaturetreecare.com IAN ORLIKOFF ISA Certified Arborist#FL-1037A Florida Certified Horticulture Professional #H605655 January 17,2013 Attention: Mr. Keith Dallas Re: Arborist Consultation for Pelican Bay Services Division, Pelican Bay Blvd. Pathway Project from Westside-Commons to North Tram Station I conducted a driving patrol street survey of the trees along the West side of Pelican Bay Boulevard for the proposed pathway project from the West Commons to the North Tram Station. This is not a hazard evaluation. However,certain obvious hazards were noted and recommended as candidates for removal rather than employ pathway mitigation to solve conflicts. No below ground investigation was performed at this time to determine what, if any, roots were impacted from previous pathway installation. Options to Root Cutting: 1. Curve pathway: curve far enough away from trunk for a stable root zone to remain intact.This may require cooperation with individual or multiple properties if they are open to preserving the present tree canopy.This is the highest standard for community involvement. 2. Flexible permeable pavement: allows roots to remain in place while providing a quality soft impact, permeable surface for pedestrians and bicyclists.There are a few products on the market that are similar in comparison. 3. Bridging: a structure that is built over roots for pedestrian and bike access.This option is not recommended in this particular section of the proposed project. 4. Removal of tree: due to poor structure,defects, lean, and/or pathway conflict. Arborist Consultation for Pelican Bay Services Division,Pelican Bay Blvd. Pathway Project from Westside-Commons to North Tram Station Jan. 17,2013 Page 1 161 2A � Signature Tree Care,ac 481 10th Avenue N.E. • Naples, Florida 34120 Office: (239) 348-1330 • Fax: (239) 348-3133 Email: info @signaturetreecare.com IAN ORLIKOFF ISA Certified Arborist #FL-1037A Florida Certified Horticulture Professional #H605655 Root barriers were omitted in my recommendations because existing trees in these stages of development and maturity are not appropriate candidates for root barriers in such close proximity. Root barriers will in most cases protect the pathway, but will create a host of problems and liabilities. Large tree roots would need to be cut to install the systems and developing root systems would be impeded from providing stability. Future plantings may receive root barriers if sufficient soil volume is provided for development of a stable root system for mature tree size. The situation being dealt with at this time was shaped by a lack of understanding regarding the impacts of tree roots and structural conflicts in the past. It is my professional recommendation that the existing plan be further developed to incorporate sufficient spaces for future tree plantings in areas where this flexibility exists.This will ensure that as trees fail,decline or need to be installed,transplanted or replaced, that there be sufficient area to do so without the limitations that exist today. History should not repeat itself.The scope of a newly developed plan would be decided upon and based on long term goals. Site prep specifications should be provided by an experienced and qualified ISA Certified Arborist so as not to encourage root/structural conflicts or potential for tree failure. The installation contractor should understand the reasoning behind the specifications,site selection, and have knowledge of proper installation methodology. Contractor should be held accountable for any deviation from specifications without approval from controlling authority or agent. All too often specifications are not followed during a project which creates future complications. Monitoring of all work should be completed by the controlling authority ensuring that the installation contractor is employing the detailed specifications. Please advise if there are any queries on topics which I have distinguished in this consultation report. Best Regards, Ian Orlikof Arborist Consultation for Pelican Bay Services Division,Pelican Bay Blvd.Pathway Project from Westside-Commons to North Tram Station Jan. 17, 2013 Page 2 161 2A1 14 Ti 1 i •I OBEs ss �<�"� ; / B 'i 4 0 i • ; 9 4 `� kS O g> � til I) il o d < ^ 'o ,1_b a a o8r 4 2> a =° � g b g g o 5 ,, GEP .Z$ a ; g a £ xi9 r :fo a '" P t i m o rl ril • J H r) ril O AC ^ c4 Fp'-3i• z i C O•" G 0. 44 �• \\� ; y „ IM. b C n �.r§ar, \p� � ` y,, C z5� &0... to �N � ry�°yy O '�' A ° Sc� yw R A yS Rlti�#1i �i`r.�r�Ti r ii 9 � iii b`� �C, En H W col F' '411,1, q �t s lit t r ',.:3,.:.-'1,:' , �' A I 3. ,1 ' it 5,.w . µ y 4 LJt_ * TL 1, ill!! H w__., _ ___-/ \\, .../ Pi 5 , 1,b>.. H' "515 ,t; r, F ,4g` ''( ', 4 k Q, "ue " ' 4 b R� t Ytl i4C G + W G C ` e r a a u a u a 6 � g,i ,,.,,, .° t qy _ t � � ,' q $° O J , i R R M R R ImflHHH N R M ► M i "t—, : 4t) O , A r N ~ '' lt b b b ti ti ti ro ro w •u A 11 w a !',,,„; ,rt,o,, . '.. ''''.';/4` 'It\..„■ l'i;.'47,L.".., lict p,/,...,.k.4,, 6 6 T ti',, »,i sst .r.'R'r.F•� 'k3. 4, f. „ „ ga.,p'�s�"'j., F z y 9 3�9 '�.�.mot.. ''ir' A.�•. 2 d_ e' t i:.:5,1- > - LPF'»v + \ / G" -1_ 161 2 A 1 \) � • 'v'.' 3 :`�4aT� 3 ,t zS+IFP''� s e 1 _"e ` T ��r.t.. 4„ .1.,,,,,„? > °� , txtri te" y4,Ay `- i J, ,ar . 1 yi9Y"�P 4 ' it 4 Y t � J Kil 1dr' r AS A' `i ' � F+ti' C1X f 6`p is, 4 ¢��p P f; % o a 4414, + 4 r • �!1� dal fi ''..404. t N �. EJ y,_,,,,. . ' i @ E @ia 11911111111 x R....° K% Ra, •\7;1 r i` £ ,j. '&k., rT , '6 1 :-. iihl li "6� P 5E$.- BE 6 Oh �1 4 O 1� ;�� 1E c IaY a@ " �i 1 � >'� �, �� r��"�i'� s i'71 4r ��{� a` 1gg e 4 Z 1 15' id 1;11111 g 1a/1•x 9 �F ,'rtL,r 1 } ” z r ^ r`Ya f+ 'r. 9 5 as I1 IA, 11 gi E @E@ ilg5�9��31/ eu abut IP s � 1� -"5, ` t-'.,-A`h r - 'fokt v;3 ,°�, f 5 , .�,, i -.•T 'r'�q"' s +'�' i1'' i 11 i1 iZ 9 F E3 E B a1 2 1 Ji 1. {-I +` g' d wF1rr >':-,1L i 44,,,„4,&t �' 4 Y° + "e C E a $ i a 1 ' ; { !g .j'it ' ,t .. *� ' '' 41+!4"x ,, r t�,{ia�{��y�# T *,,.• 4g'.t"r` a a Wit":t1,' ,, t S i d Y k p a s a , axe `j''a ^y�Y}V^^4F��,a:414.L ,, r k ,e li �, 4', 4 jV i a 9a ►"i a i 3a R @'NI; ._ -4 1-r,4,X14 �� s�ff F' +( Y p EE'4A ;111{ s1 1 i @1 1 , , sY > P' a. ','': + ii1�� i i ia5q A '" 1 e 'rii� tf q r 9.i is 91 19 5 gi as x ,g a g a 9! z@ 1�°' ;1114..4 i �1 i� i i �� '. i w'� r J� i s Mfr Q'�' fi�8ggg ai•£8p; Eg[ E;d er X1 1 .A 1 t, �t'�;-x".° V.ati,,,�. N. tti{ f�°a f '' a' i� a1 a e$ i ei @ 41:1 y t e� yS c. '14,1: �"'' * .�� I. i � s r' 1 a r r 9 i9� ei IN Ili Y x 111 ;1111 9 II...§ i i i 1 tit '.,,f YfL� ✓ - _/£ ,,, * :t, �.�x yr:fs, ,+ ',. e 91 EExaalg !II 1EEEEzIE a $i a5 s @E FE u I.° r+ xf 3 +N� ma t ii 9i/@/ !iI 1i 113 li$�,i`5 Ii !E/ 11$ 3 ei p it ,--- 9-,°!+ �. c,' - £ _ �"�j L':,‘,54-4,,g ` @ �5 t. 1 : :1 1 1 s1�a Eta z^ 1 �a9 x1 a i < e "��F i t�� 8 x ai AI E1:1S' iE 1l ,^1 K1 In 1'8 1 11 C $x ` 'Y `x . ..rz f . ) ; 1.04 ab �R 12 �1 9 a �,, ;,c�*%�v~ +It *„ �. t r K �� Blty 1 t ' t,I i 1 i 0,-„i,iii.,. t rr �l�`'+4.'‘,---,>,1.,,.-" o�' � I �1il}l�k'1 w Cam,• A ' ' + r Y 1 ,, �, ay�iS V4: 54 y yL 4 �y' . a°•4, iy,,. t %yyyl '1 ,. , +t" r -^�s.� i f .—}'��.1:. #" ,e,n 3 ,,'o'>tq r c - , .... .fa �?-.' .t; �6 b%,' � 11 Ita 1ti 7`a,.',&. t LB�p _�:1; :p iii 1s a 1@ i i E a ii{a'ab i k rf s 't A f, +t :..mod' x { �,''S. ,3 8183593 �� i1 1 8g a5g �R a �d 1 t iv.... 6 '1> f t ''y� s `"k +7 t e F �iti qa t G s K i EPa is ak@ 9.1. i i"g i t; p 11 ip p l r 1 21' YF� 4-, 41.�- �pp,� y ,p y X : 1 it 54€i, 1 i ii@ a@:z a d-la 1 9 8 0101 aiav< t i �ta ,1"" ,y� $ g_ . 1 ,44' � �''',."14"", tE I1 t1 a€p 1 s 1. i , e8 3 1'Till lla r' 1 r a : l 9 `�pi p�9"I 111ap 1jji��$�7y a1 91 {®1� a'�{ 881 �Y` 7 � +r, `Y..r�['.44 � "'� .�4r , .. 'w '�`� 1� t� 1 i9 be , 1°% 9E i' 9°i1 5 7 a 1 a Iii;i �yl 1 t'"+ S s i Z , 1 ,rr ',*i` {1 Cn .i,,, s.b r hg.. .1,.• i11 9 4 g i.0 , , `,1 101 " u ps,kr , . . tii,,,,,,R,I.iii,.- r-° 1t ,, '"i , is 19 a1 ■ i!a 1i 1 @° KA 1 E lgAN EY Xt .1 „ 8 'f`'�_ 10.f ,a,;4 /�+• m ° %t"7 C t % j i, g R xiit � "5 -',A3 '4 ;10- e t .1 5 r rss!...:S 't.. 11 E1 E @ai 9,E 11 s d m r a4 'E A. s a 1 E@€1 11 1 1 t11Eg�F 31 $ 5 a i i )C;PI i �� pia ' ,;` ,'„ `:r ' {' „ 'III a�� 1g1 aE�1 1 EI 1 1"a 9 ,� a. � �i r v� t d �z. , fit �`v G4 @1xl iv 1a 11 1 1a 5 a§1 1 1d@e k'• ` 111 ', P" 3 ,& " ' �t bsm� . 't n • R 1 a 9 a 4.i• irf�� .>Nit{ <T, r ti 6' . �,.� #> gg ay 9 a1 9 1p 1 E1 IL i9 1 1 11,11 @• `?N 5. s ' �,t.s+,-.. l `y,� 1 1 i9 L� °1 f @i ,4,^ 1 a a9 I bid 'tt , 1 a�'4 r� , M r �", . , �';'s,'",,; " : 3-i'' ° @a z + f 14 `�, T w ti r-ar 3 't,,,,„1)rKts v yy4 tVs� r�, j' �' �k x�f l a�°b.'+4 .{{.,, f 0. ,-,, } ^�tL gi 1x a x 't 111 1 i I el a9 : 1 13 � 4e_ x 1 low,�6 id d 1111 13�" 11 a ii "1 , t , �•zr1 r ive` ,.x- #` 4 r t �. a e.,.,../0�. a1�a 3 i;"id1ae11 11I ;Vie:91 1E' 1 w . x.'ti �# i ,K ` ,, ;0 j a p e 13 IK 11( R i•1 iia11E iii 1 4 r a „� yy��"r ''y�fy� r{I a i 9 II B 1 �1 "i �ya�,9 i; 1t d� _ " " �,- a,�' 'e✓' '''+..3 "+tZ.gs z z i ez 1 1 @'p1 a 1 E1 1 d "1 S I,� .1,$,,+'i,,�q;y ';1, �. . £1 ba a9 ,ig1 9`1 �5' t t J.1,.h,1r t° It p +��,$ I. IA" �si1� ��pE9 € 1 .:.�� E i Se�;,� ��`.�.., �.`� �>' '‘k4.14.;?'� ,.; +rk� o;1 i @aS y R a deli MY 9 a 9 l �"a S qek t t h. . �'y� y ®E � lagg 1 51 i �9 ;Dili i 3r-; � C Y � J � /' W x ' as ai � �8 v 1 1 51 iii; 1a f � .b, r„i k, iK�' r.(; .�xd' `" a Ats ;. `�i x h 991 s ge 'ix 5 a D. ,4,,,r,74' r '` '� 1* `t y Iii, E i.,1= §i 1.1 aii'1l a`iA! ' y l'" t .".t, `i. ' ,' ',u s YYv- yays� w : f , 99 9 9 1 91 "v � + 1 Z° } ,°'^' '1�,,�.,�r . '..,yr .,c. 4'°'S 1 9° 451k4,14% $:* '' �" 1.'I I j *4'. ~ W KI ,T �`a•;+ # ''v r,y. f ^-.- #.,"':.,.4'_ ''''.44,01..„..„..:va'' ru e, ..gu,s `v'a , r s"4t a: i c i....a� S.t ...^'L.',.. ",..,wv7`" ,.,6 ..a"'a<.'.li,iE:i2ati.,_ ry 'd: -:P�.a!a :•> s a PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY i1{il;1o1 E o o $ e g wa9T8IDS-COtrmiONSm PELICAN BAY ��,i i,°t w g NORTHTRMfSTATION SERVICES DIVISION :'I ;i A NNE :.:4s I G MASTER SQ LAt PLAN 801 LAT O DERIVE,SUITE 605 ; ii ii ons —1 34108 �J I 161 2A i 4 8 x I , , . ; 1 • j 'I I SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET • I ° •__[ail 1...s�._.�� is 11 1 i 11. i • I I I '= \ I I Ss i r 1 �. \ I in I 1 : 1i . ; s I • I I ; 11 CO i , I } r aI 4 <•� .mil • l 1 CI��. �ti I I w Iyj I III 1'R1= I < 11 o I 1 I; I I ., I1 = j 1 .1, D s 1 IC.! 'r l''" I C .4 . t 1 t , 1 : l'.' Li ) °I., , , ,,- . .I J11:I I ID S, .S '� .‘,.:;.V.!,',;44' •WW1 ass' I I ' 1 I 0B `4N._ L •...`\>:.-4-,. 4'L 09,4-4ii-a-- ' --1' * .' • q� I I ' ) :f 4 ' C. ], ,, ,,m6 \\4/0�. !'L I I I 1 .1 `'' elm Lk-1— I�iE -{> D, 03 II is I '- c ° I: 13 ` ° 11 1 I 8g: �'' Ii_4 ohs 1 I II. I £° 4 '\ ' ;1'4!i �m (SNt71(�W4a) • f f� r " *t 7 J Ao I V 3h1LS0 31VhRid 1 �i ' 9 SCI I i I VHO :i I CI a 1 :06 !9:44 72. n,i ;f 41 m F z z z .,> _ 1 I I is = g4 o �=I� �•. © `'�Lal �� ) 1 i Eo �gw_ I 1011 c-r rov (1 BH o 11 il. : 1 z `^8 !: ,t 'a ,, n€ 1 1 S �H" --- iy 1 0 . I a„ $ 0 I� u I , 1 a I �g I • 1 ,l,,,` l\'\'$." ' (.:6;i1.. a'_s 1 I : '2' a8 //o 0 0 0,w\\ I i t � 1 m:O^11 I°�b^P""HP J fr 35'1• ' '° 1 «: ''.=' O 1 ng 1� ,, 1 c .� k,5,a 3 n° I . %I 1 8 1 1 e i a i s s ' n ''''i 1 I . 184 1 C I b<, ,5,....V 1 ° it 11JJ, y / I- LLIQ(' 1 d.3 g = 1 I I V'�Vi� 18 -r r,.I�b :5 1 mmsa If: 25g e 1 hi 1y .. ',o I Rm 1 ` ...f" t, €;n1 , I 1 i f " 1 �a 11 m , � �=e8 ; , m wp-1 1 ^T I aoPi> . I''"P- 1 ' P S +�l ' � ' __ SHEET 4 . :•dS 1.4...5.. . !1 o .. ..1..... SE SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET . 1 4 1 1 Ili 1 1 01! PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY �NM ii{iI ii' :a W o� , " 1 1''•"'• R •"men•Amor a a WBSTSma-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY 11 d'b"1:::u' I r b- A 1 g NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION .t i P w i $W g - i k E i --- 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 f � `� SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 I I ° , t.#3 GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(1) : 8 v W 161 2A . . f SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 3 } pa .II I 11 . 1 l s ' r + a I 1 I . 4,° I' ` 4._. S a 1 'I t e 4 �,, I y . M P I..._....._.......... ......._.- J II # I "°' I11 " 1 1 #I 1 s IQ' s G Jy T 9 I{ ♦ T ; . j l� �, 11 5. II I. , 1 IO i . �� a<I ` 1 i I I I --., le.,\. r •`a + I „ w a gag € H <; 'w °•s ., °, �,, .. del „� -- o ® as« o i I i g<< 11. $ c I \ 11 i.. .f oo I I' �I g I f ....I I I i m 8I II 1 m *� I# ,,,, 1 E is . �- I ; a i ml 1 "ry r t 1W awl. 111I '� 1\ I > I 1 :I o W4 I I♦ ♦ # <� .a', trrl�n 1 is) Ii I 1 ,v ;j °+ ♦ �ARIa 31tlA131d 1. I o Ij \Ii i a, 11#' It I I ' € 111 ``♦� '1 II I' ' 4 4, n "' ��t 11111 r.i I ,eI9� Ij ( rm£ ""ii.': m8 1' � • II $ o NbF g nn.• II I ? . m�gm ° oat . • I I I 1_. !/ \i ,'1,F ''''!:5'4 gN f .' T,';�a ! Y„,.''',4;.'4i. 5� I Ify 1 . ; .p _ i �- � i ��e -N ( .7.7)14.... 1111.11111111101111111111111111.11,° _1 p� 'N...,/0”# 2 1 drb,, 1'- STOP STOP + g" o a 1 y * I 1 $1 I k ' �` 1> s Di I I I 1 J I I hiq I I M le I II i do 00 _ i I.' • I II0 l/ I • y 11 „e} T ., I 11 1 1 , P 0 Ago ,' \I' o b u a I ctLa i I " SEE SHEET 5 SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET [[ E �••n •,e••� g' A/ PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY �•� r�{if iii �y ! 0 g b I R R ` ,*rgr�T ID�� 10 ,a 1 4 �.� n WBSTSIDE-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY hill;,i'E€':. - S g NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION E I c W' i 6 i 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 S it I . a ,,,, SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 I r U GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(2) I D . . 161 2A \(.. SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 4 r I ; r;r i ' I + Q II t I ° I l 4. °., a4 t I I. I II �. to 1 II i I II 1_. I3 • ! II I' I I i I ' i s�Y I I I #I m,, 11 I ; j I I'm Ii I (1 r# ".4 9 I9 ., o PY .�9+ I I i i 1 • 1 $n°am m !1:21: I 4 11-;,,�V �-a�$a'9 a'. 3 o I �•'1 m a ira,�,_ f �l §t:'-� �A I�_� ate' 3 e L!';'.' 0,'F'';P I i i ..j j:"'� r _� I II I ' 1 a € ° F I i y 1 4` \r„„';', 1 n 1 ! 1 1 I I ;I ••wa i m� I ip Icl) g. 1 Ie I ` H x„ ©Ik i'`, , Ir fir,;, `-��• kl 1 ' R• f', ��', I II - a o o r\\ I 4 4,1,,,..i.....,y .P,a�, mi I 1 � R G1 _ i I I "v4 e 4 ri _ ? I I :4 1 11 CI s II i I ' 'I 1' I ;mQ I 1 Pf I I t <a I II ,I Egg I I t�. ... o I I I II 1 1 ;� . . 1' 1 x 1 I = an 1 ' ,I` 1, I 113 Li iti I II I 1 1BIt J I ICI tl I �s I I !j p r ,i� 1 11 'MI • I II a ^_ ` 1 / r I ' • aL m 1 1 ,, I {// i,` ao li ; pn pq1 1x/1 Wn ill j (? w 9.\11 C d t I V L/ ,/,. • II 1 `, II 1: ' I" !e a� 6-44 vn3 I,I i #1; si 8I Imo. S' '.I.d 5f tip.r j '"`" i II 'L; 1 �I 1 II - I } I I i .. I I ey I '41 III P..I iay o 1yp i ' I `I I ; 1 a<?' I I e- ` s111 ti. .k II 1 i �........._.. cCRV4. '1...4■ o I I I ' SEE SHEET 6 SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET I 4 1 I::::::.'=%,---------""-- 141 1 1 PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY °'°'."'°" j'�1 if;pip!!•• 0 3 g 4 '•'•"�""'a°•m••"m•m• i B N P B WESTSDE-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY 1lEIt1,= i 9 . 1 : s .. 1 NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION 'X `l¢ Y 1 w A ='8 I' 8 E '° "° 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 ! 7 ., " SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 I 1 g A. to N GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(3) 1 I ..----. . . 161 2A idt) SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 5„ ,,,,, 1 I I I N. a rq -� I i5i a ,. ib a mv° mb;IT F I �. ` L�� .., P 1{=-;\:.,:. 55 =SNOH .11£ a ,,. n / o3 i is =g : 4 ;li CO nI '�, ,11 ,� '. .�{' I go G m°a 1 . , v n 4 I I p 4,a,a 8 8 I6fr°s_a. si �” aJ a r 8 fl I I o\ II I —i .JyC II 3OII T, it a l y 7. ..._ , .ql r-44 hm 06 ,4% .a .` ih. -I -',1.\\ 111 :.!gym 1,: A �� .K � 1 .1 i#i �; ,- ®I go l 1 II 9 F I •III VII d�°' ,1A I sl ® =o aQ c,it 11 11y d�11'. I/ I 1 I.* Y 1 `-. ,iJ -4 t.i i i s c rzgi g l lI �+ 1 :: / I III-S.� �1 I - ' OVA €bop o- 1 A 1 I I .. t 1 I 1 � '$ 1 I xl ` k' S=, 8, gg 1 m 1 r li 4"6+ s ,t 11,., 122 F~ ;-fig} N 1 t i ' I { \\%� da. ii ° \,,,,f;?„ 1 , I ,,- g i$ $a 3AIHC c, . .4:-1,� 11' \1me P4 s -# 31VAINd E \ i ,4, l�l "q, 5;2 • b o G3 e„` 3'jS ` I ` J b / 7_- „• 1 \j,, 1• IY•9 p o 1 4, 11 1 I r .t 1 I`. I 4 1 # I} b y' I I. V '\ _ :' 11 i 11 ma s3 �,i �..;r� i II 11Li'd ' !l' 'Ni it a I r`•'r 1. '4'\--' .rqT i1� 8 1 k _ x '�� I �? Ni I III M I# 4-E bgt ., "} I I' 11 I 1.° I I I t I I I 11 1 '!f '} 61f. 'I I.# -,, 1 1 1 1:, 1 � $ + II I 1, s1 8'� II I I i i? =IPA 1 III I I'� ,C 1 ---• b m , 1 b 1\ I 8 x 1 Z A°S 1 I I, t , !.s, III 't '.. :I # x I' rq} e I �q I :. r 1 1 A 1 1 rya H / i.� I,I I 11 a; '!II 1 . I I °' 31 �q II I I rq ..11 1 i SEE SHEET7 . L , SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET ( ' 1 ° I L am`•: p „,,,, ti'�� iiilim;• 1 ;14 s PELICAN HAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY °� PELICAN BAY f a ' 0 :::. 1R8 g 7 2- a ° s �.� �NOOR RT STATIOND SERVICES DIVLSION �_'{��f{ W �+ :-i i SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 r f r J A U a GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(4) NAPLES,FL 34108 W 161 2A . . 1 ,, SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 8 4 i4' z £ I a � "A r s la 5 I nm 5 8 qo I I S ' id ! j I ^ m L ' ^a ° I 6 mp jp v Hi ,, . om 1 $ I� � J I $ ; iV \ I I s L ii 4''' - gal I I 1/ I E . ff -I I lu, ol �x�o 3N .` F I I I : o .4_7 ...c }a m' I e a I !off' m e I I 'it' IP;S ii tt t.i o+..• I t I i m mia ,.'"'''P' I . LmQ I x af: I I 1 s (4 .E. ¢, (3at�-id j 7 1 • N2l7d2131VM) I 3AI2I0 31VARid I I j a °� _� �o Mg s 1 �i�aE�u did"� g leak 023 If 1 I i m A a I .a. I b; th 01 I I. - I 11 :?f,1:--,-.',. f'> � H,U �.... X �` 1 Ti, •� al �. x 9s9 1 t I y , minsf I S ' I I 1 ; 3 LNOa P.P og° , �9r, - 1 1 p�- Pi fe gn vy')� II 1 jy., f f¢ m In I I I j11 C ,--�•,,a — m 1• 1 i '$ ' �I1 �,, i T Q a z s I r: t F ° Y d t ep CI II ;A � 7 I I ��e� II\` m I m 1 j 'a 9� 11 1 \ a 1 ��J; f 4" 11 a l '4 8 b t 3!g• I I ! s 8 ® _. a t< .1i' I I I f 1 Z 1 I q N m F a I `�b. —j' .p f r° I 1 k ', `L , g -' I x I r•I� �� 11 '' ,.°_ I I\ II Ilf,.' rot: ae '.1i r,,, J ��- A q H II P I' ° 1 1 `• ,S`: SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEETS a .1.-..-1, ..,n..•,.�,, "° ii 0 a PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY PELICAN BAY 11:11117 I�{{ ! i LS e a a a WESTSIDE-COMMONS TO a� �e 14, G NORTH TEAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION Y °� ;-i1 E` ��STlE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 r `� p r+ NAPLES,FL 34108 4 f Vs GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(5) I 9 1 ` W 161 2A i < . . SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 7 4 i °rte I hj 1';•, I Ie\ 4 3 I .-. 1° 4.4, P e■/ =m t r I I s So ,. 1538liNV•o dto) I III 11 A}.4 Ala 31V79d I l l . I � Ii d I I v IE 1 9.r 4 I 111°l ffi �''I Ify affi j 3 �O \ v. Il, 10° ' f ' m I I/. '10 'TA B a ; I I © � 5 I I , isi I i i � JF 4AiI } ; I 'Fs{ IIf f tw ,. ld• g y I 1 I I1 I 44 I a 41. " I 1 TPQ '0' 1 bry°M.,, // \\ I �n i I ® uF of II 1 I e>gs ii,I I R C°g 46 4S I I owl F Ap,. _ s a 9 I I i I a9N; a I Ig8 € c I I I I 4g I I I I F■ �ka1.0 l• ')1e= ao q". G�;» a6B;F 1 41.r. 's t. •.i Y °g `3 � I h" • i'i 'm gam< a �I I »o ,,€.o aTm 5$ $ I m 2o I I I 4 IaE i' T ■ I i l 6 F o g m I W I 1 1 1 " -I ¢ Ti w! ■ w` ° I II I¢a a p- "i a $ $ f( I :11 arsi coat gp _1 1, .a :B an� 11'', ks I j I 3A 'a� 1 J I. I V H }4 y`+Iy i 99 1-gL P a�4~P$ . I y I I `h 4 1m I I ti }Q'8 s. m ns n if 1 I \ . iF50I FI I i ne� I , � 1 I %111 m I ,a I � °€a I kl�;. I 1 19 > 4If4' 1 II= "� L. F 4 3� i t a ay, I I d,! 'x I . aka-' . I i1� � i a {p,.; 1 €I III x I s I ,, I FF 3n� I 1 ) i b 661t...., I t7/q I 1t I I ' 5/i,1 I ee ! I I + I a�, I °11 �Y ,,I #1,,,,,� • I $ Y. 1 �,b III I I� I I J 1. »« '/ .1141 ~ j �J 0 : i (pt.'',ro°7 SEEISMEET 9 . SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET IT7 - x�k'-.° C a,,,-°� ,,,,,,,m„„�m,m, a PELICANW ISIama-COMMONS PATHWAY PELICAN BAY :.rifilqiiffirsil "' q A b_ g 1 g ` ` NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION �'{� E 4 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE SUITE 605 E I T., ° SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, t~i: GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(6) NAPLES,FL 34108 I T ) J , • 16I 2A iLk, SEE SHEET SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET 1 E.I#T yyII I C' ��' cc,i pS�"f`<^'_"°-- +_ i.y {^4 can+},� ....I,: t ` . 1 m p's tp, I F 'Rro ti 1 k� E° "t. I 4 1 ©ICI c°� S.v,' 1# YZ t I I 05 1\�\ _,----"n4 o qti;��p /, ,,,� v--1-1 1/ lv.:P I.. ap P$a<` \ y� C °!s� n , $ d:' 4_,m`,' `k� sNm- tea s �nil i P'�. ` /Kn ET�l 0l.I" < y u pF" l gc i • FI a I1 P �c, I a,a tome a31QVN3ao) 1.> y� 'j l mI d-0l +P 1:.,g i,/P 1 3AING 71Vitald I{ ... I * I S _ I`Y.gem f� as," (-�wvlldva.1s) _6 '. k ° ' a 3AISO 3J.VA121d '�" 1 < � i 1 mg a° I_ 1 otn+\„o f I Gm N P 8, r,Ar1,r.m I r—1 l "' ,n , .k.IFS. !w. F I m I.I Vt i0 .am. EMU w. .-'" II i!e"I ° SLG ''/V 1 N1V cti m /day t1S x�mg: �Ca 2 3S U Itam: 2' �v- V.g:I o 4 l"C It� �Il. I i EMI 4 , , gp BB B +. I I s !a' 6. m arms-\ - i Y� $tll, 4 \ , —124' BI ,l�• ! m>smI gmeaN 2 "�y 9 /j I /QZ�JI i ! mly Ng-q -^ I °'° ` ,.!....1_1al-!:?' 11�Y I 4a .. s �w�" I m n I (� 1,p 9�Inauol LVCL' flI}1e, d Y �v da �m� I €fia 9f T x I m I 3b°' 11.E ,vi 4 \ 'bz J I 1 ?� I -i e` II 1 ..J 11 7 �- 11�y-�- I•I f A v v a ° g 5 Otero ,,..,70.41„�+. C t1 co I 1:,�;� i a E 12 '�., I� a. 11 ° _ Y, I II Ern k I n"=8 .1x"8 g ° a=, �i o° C' a� m i o 0 0 ,�_ ,. :max . m ��" £ B� ® my n I Ii am I r I Ifs ET A aF] Va a RS .4-- I 3V1 a $ 11 II ey Sg , xi 1,e I 11 SoS 'OS z I 1 7, aa I I ! II'ii fan ,iq EI i; c a :_ "b 8 11 i 11 °'!J COI I w l I FF P <TI 9 v I II a"k a N`rG L 4 7..AI 1? ° ri 1 •i 511 9 I .� ' I m`� . SEE SHEET 10 SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET m 4 " 5 1'®°,..,,a,",a" —"W';"„° N 9 3 ® PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY "'m tE It 5'° '.. 11E m 1 i WESTSIDE-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY (leCg �'" — g NORTH TRAM STATION r �. j„ � `;5 E E SERVICES DIVISION =r E��¢ 2 g o 1 I.+ 5 °°°°"° 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 f 1 .0a F". a SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 I ° t!i D GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(7) 1, ! W 1 6 1 2 A i, SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 9 1 . 1 f 777,-77— 1 1-r-------=Il- i II k I 1 3 C ;L , ;,'4'''h''i 1 I j \ C 0 ''' e , i'4P:4 I •I :If:: 11 : 'I * I „!:1. 1 .-1 I i ! 'I/ we] el t' i il I W 17:J 0Pg I - I ,1 I 1 -'',1:',1 1 f* '6('-',, ■0! 41 4, „. ,., J, ,,. 2 -. % • L 11 ' I ;.* — ul 'ii 5 1 1 1 . . ----' ' ' I II 1 . i I q Ohl! I qia 1 .t. **4 I IVC7V7 in !le P t j Sipl I .. ,,,,, 1 1 ! a' " .4 E i IA 'PE IN 1 i j 1010 I 1 II" f - :i0 (13‘/Hd1121%LS/ °I 14. h !'" i h .":3AING 3.1.VAIIM 0 0 irr\-) 14 HO ... ' li 1 1 g t as, Te, i'' - 4‘k I II L... ._..... ...... • c-Jr''Cs - nvi / Ri ig#II .1 ill i R i' ,.. 4 , 1 ,_/1 ipl , l 4:° -71E1 0 1 1 -,,C.,..crig FRH. • --' i ' feo-T-. . 8g .121,, r ! . 41 : . —. MI :.,-..•Z'g1.01g .,,,,m 1 111:r;] siogOr:,-,k!, i .!!.0'. '6"--••14 110, 114.,\:::t*--0" ‘,--'"••' HA1( WIli I h 4.' ''$ °.,..! "-...,4•A "----/ t'%. r.-1 1141 1 11 ' 4,,, :.'f---7-i 103. 4EF.,. i ;' il ph 1 1 . ,,, .d .,, „.,,,r, h 2„ 16,------; ! 14 ' W16 higg -1 IM 7■W ^g42I' fr;;\ *.9-9 I ! "1 r'il 11 ei II S I °'.!1. WI iiieg 1 (0(IVN02.103 SillIA) qt (--14--- iii . A 1 ii, I 3AING 3.1VAINd 'l - 1 - \_. . 11 ..„. ; —-; I I( ) i:- ;t1 x 0(r.,—,i 7,1 LL Hi 411 1(1. ) L ■1 v' 111111P I... ;LtEl 1",•,,y,' o'i-A , mg.1 ' 'I; I nrIp i IT. !ii 4 i i .. 1 h;', : 8 .J :0 1 =, , .. „ WI -4 , 0' gPi $1 . b 2A05 I ' r'1' -, ■ ':i.:1 Ph OW ti il P*i - , 1 i: I P Pig ■ ! g r i !!'z't,.41E1 w.lig 'MI IL "' hPgs" I % t,C;;,?, '01;1 4'l 1 1 AEW Ogle, ‘g'1 ' I 1 arRa. ...19 A 2. .. 4. „ ,..:,i _ -al • - ` ,, , •••-,,V.t. . v . gi. \ ; 1•Kr- 1 'il '/1,13 1,9 ' 2.T. 0. INg 0/112ONVIN IV 3A03 al4.0 \ it q' hi M i'171 3A1710 aLVAINd \ MI 11 ; ,,; i , ,, ,-, • p_ . >. 1 • ----K4 1 , INME...,-...„.172,,:rn , .■ A ,i • t t: ::t s J s-J •■4-- !i...... g SEE SHEET 11 SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET '"""' 111111IpEtyaN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY ! Pt N ,k,! 6'7" ; WESTSIDS-COMMONS TO TH TRAM STATION PELICAN BAY NOR SERVICES DIVISION gal:,II I'll 2 --- LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUTTI3 re, *, 1-.. 801 605,5 q SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 I r H ---- tit 0 GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(8) . .,,) 161 2A (. . SEE SHEET 10 SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEEP �; ©'< '�+ Q I ` ;` Iii I I#°g I I rai Ii , . ! I u>h H a I 11 I I I} ' I 1. 11`3' gym <1 E r,q }} 3, ii mNY I I I !(I ;app.. 3a ,,,,,,,,7,s-,?.go$ Iii: ;"^° i _ I ::k. ,ncmj ,i=o mo ° :r E I Cy= 1 Ij {?1 ‘i,7,43;! i I °, I i s I:1B I ; ; c, °'4 ' H.-g, IIv-. nx 1 j;� A;-.5i°>° I II 4.:, 1I lip, §pi.oC IP ' g. 'i I�mx 9 19 , 5}• I I I, Egm j g.8 zA I ' I '..r &j I 7r� o ? 1 Ig .° ron f j q I : �roi 1 ek +j om1Q<y - I < n 18116 nPdO I g I- � I 36 i m�2' n9lr P 1 ;, I P; 1 ;1 1 n ',, I I4 1 I 334 , Ills 21;3 G 1 (3'Ja1?1v IO) ` . 1" 44 m . ,o !Hi 3Aka31VARld I \ e _ I f a� oaim Iw I p.it,, a,n I kg i 1 © :y mf 4es S I''I 4 I .Iii 4 °' Ali I rn s t..( R-.. i~~.a_; mmoP �r 14 I": �, '1 alfgm } gB 11` ■ alas 9nnl ,a,''I. (304,',g � 44' 1 ,_,,,,• I. X x°9 e j ''f: I,..- °. $t i''';'' !> v 1 T y , `la ; \Pit 6n > p '3 .� \ ' 1,,i,!1 ! ( I 1\ w m EN-'...4 ��,> i S t"v �moa I 8 aw "" €i r4.: w9 .`"° (1i113EiVtN) i I 8 = '-'�3F .f fig§ '1 1 ..1_..4' �aARIaaivAnid mom I r; a°4'^ © R;�B gg i O `) I RI I I 0 0 `t0 0 0 S 'e 5 s ShIF66, > , I 11 I o OE g 1 a:1: G/:..:,li a �� i �K. _ ;� ; mn 1Pg C,�. (/�,I—{�J .,,.+ ppn ® 11 o L" Li i .. 1. I I 2'.m o I ' p4,;I Ga8 z& 2,g' II fARa e n8 I m. w C n grlig I ' 'I g ' C B 9n�° a d J ( 1 a N ° zm :4 I F � .., /I' V i ; y= I ' f ZR iiT `', 1 fi 1 _ n9 n ° � � 9 I ss N v I s Bb. I � _ V I 7 1 I I � ,..1 S h4 - o I I , SEE SHEET 12 °.,y .1 l.' n SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET 1 4 1 1�l """< •""".' N 41 1 1 PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY 1It1f i(` o 1 1"~"<"°''<"•m'•`'''m°'' a WESTSIDH-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY 2�.1�;,:�'°� F. NORTH TRAM STATION ° ■5 �' c - - ° �,� SERVICES DIVISION =Y d { o -41 - I B I I °< 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 J 1 D q SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 S I C p s GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(9) 1 1 I —te, N.;') 161 2Aj ""------------- ---SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEESHEETII • t" ! ■ 1 6 I, I 1 1 I r I �' I J '1 I 1 ID-.,, I cr ! 1 1 Di"obi�' .N 'F'.. Z RD. vv •C/T1/ • 1 3 I `°TOE { I 1 , /..D 1 II °- I 1.D ,, I s; ,r}t 9:" , I i= I if # Yi viL I I e € f« < — :I rz, .: . ,,, oil 1 , 1 i ' %,, ..mT i mina } 4 < e*7 'a l 1 3AINO 3.LVAP T € = 0. _i ' I :D .€ P ,,.1 ' 'T, i ahl 1 1 "vi 8E I 1 a© .IN j {fr I4 .' 4 Ion _1 "* { a 30 } _. ,t. Aaw iSs 1'Vel °t i'y.. fad V i I � . t_.. #•,, 1 s• as ' 1 I I Inn a , D7 'I • m } CO", HI'[ j a t KDII,4 ..�p. ! I .a• I ;gin. ran gm4lF Fig $ { 4 I moon A t;o 1 , • I u 1% c I of=- _ = a + : > •{- . d� I ;mom.. xbz 5 „�� r---, S I .�.. _ 1 __ j ill§> ; I i IsD ?i-r----- �a; l I 1 rA;\ mmoa 1 I''''' ro j A <i.-.J Ds'` _z P ¢ r 3 k:1 4. I v s s a . .. ' I = g 1 j 1 p . , § z E€g \ar lip 4 1lyi a I wig .464 I ' �∎ I ! 1 • 1 9fi as ^a I` a w-.r j 0 p ° I a $a 30 1t4 Sl 8 1 n` Y KI ( ® !`1 • • I j I 1 9. 1 I c .• -- -� Via._ w... TOM -j.�+... SEE SHEET 7 - SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SH=i ; c 6 ” 1.18 AIWIT NIT I) e 9 PELICANBAwes s o�NSTPOATHWAY PELICA?TBAY rfi�iEE ,-c I, .� 1+ a NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION I 1 'E 8 Y 1 t _"1 E E I °""° 801 LAUREL OAR DRIVE,SUITE 605 f 1 a ,,, 1-, N e SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,?L 34108 E r } UI N GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(10) f 1 J w . 161 2A1 it SEE TOP VIEW THIS SHEET SEE SHEET 12 T � T ; 1 I II a Is I ■d4 I I 1 I„ ' 1 iW s : ,11.. ' F .. F 4-- ° e .iP_ 1 ii- . b Cis r I I 8 stt� 41 t 1�■' s 9 3 1VV*A1 E€ y 1 ,' ' r 4- I I n II a ,,r(i" I IY zo \ i I 1 1 r r k i--,I o II �l I R< I I 1;_ I m ni i , Ie ' l d _r If 8 4' 1 r t,\ f 't \ Z I v 1 ; I o \ CO I I • 1 I#WH I i °g /'/ I �' • 'G I I I. :r Fn; (O'd3NaiNow) 11 1 I n Da 1 II /I !F1 MIND31VAINd 11 i.m I , 4 �\ �.' i 11 0 11 f t 144 i i1 ;J 8 m r - I 1 11 I i f 1__._._1 g y9 11 I I I 0 . ay. i �� 0g C33 o s, jJa� i 1 1�c. 1..__ 1 1-•., r iY 14,1 2:,;'-•1 .. 11 t o a ±a l n 1 1 k I• �N. IV 111 I11 1 <; 11 it f ° ° 1 1... i I+I I I' 1� 3� G��> oo°r\ 11 � f � I I �I I £mo 3b= I I� i � U; 4"�° 11 I miss _ moo =_ ' .. 1 , -a 1 1_ 1 ; s £; 1 1 8m • 1 I • /•I , / °;� T".;,G"L3 \1 tag m <el 1'4 I si$ 1 6z�8 q-'" . it ,4o f0 Icy.if °m E b $c 1 r 1 ., ..iq' Ii II .11 , 1 r` I11 '"1 _ �' ! ' , , f_ li F ;f // • 1 1 y> 7; I ;I z0jrl i ❑" I1 I i 1 I • , s I % a g 1 r 1 1 1 "yi '.l IIf ; £p ; RII 11 a 1 '.P9 w*1'i S'�'''l /, n. I r T ] 1 r J' 1. •4 j 4\ 'o /d1 SS I I 4 ,7;a \y il �I // tal a T.. s a" i s 4/1 1 1 h© l k 5� / ,_ / O 17 O \\ 1 1 I $lip \-V�/ ��lf tl zia 0 4 �g I I 1�4.. d„9 \.. gt 5 w6 St m - -A 1 ! >V P ��„, X11 .. at mf i§' 0 1 III I.' j . Pg.. $ I I I I....\t, .•' ''',„r,t, • / t 3 o m Q R I S' 1 , 6 gh,,,i• ' e., < e{/t.!!!-� <...�� 1: o m `.g CD'", 4."13 II i ) �v,, -�io -I 1 TT I 1 u.1 `�7 / / -��I I .1 SEE BOTTOM VIEW THIS SHEET Ss..L. I m 4 1 1 Tier- •'+• •""+*W L"' 111 1 1 1 PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY i(fillii° -• • o �'•"""°"°'°"`"°°m" 9 a �.�— wasTSma-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY 11011:. 1:ee�l . — "1 g € a g g NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION .1 i { e e i, i ,., g I R I i 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITS 605 I 1 / • -^. °� SITE,SIGN&STRIPING,PAVING, NAPLES,FL 34108 11 I 1 ,• .1.• VU w t' GRADING&DRAINAGE PLAN(11) I _ W w 161 2A1 , . :: . . 4. A 11 ,11 0 „ L,: r w �'' �]a9 '' $ g II, III• $ a 1 lea{ � �� ~ ^ §� '( L y CRS i II RE 1 s ili it ili I e" I _121_ p ti E \ z R ji 9 ......0 ;f- ,-----8 :,-;'1 t. ti-• z. 8:i ' _:1÷11 000000 oil © 3 IT 000000 0!II © �`ri�`ri`O�`o�`o�< y , s a , C (4 R a ° 1 Oe\J94 - ., E o € 1 1 i.a C1- rn i §a ; I I s i' �, N �£ s � ;„{ z I t '+ I`i 4igI ! z i ii§ 1 I n it % OU a I " n I I I PPE ' ifo 1/ia `•/ „ a 7 / I I Imo' g + s I I I--- D 1 Ali © — T IN © — 3 z , 13E oo 1 g z 0 0 3- g� i fl iv II .� £E;Eggs i T. m: — 11,1 If Ill l j��yyt�f, 644[ 8 f g§ SS I�, �q/ �SFy R fl Fig R I A —5:! RR 0 �, :• 4 8\ h I I a$ a Ip� _ t6 va�Zl. 3 ' gyyeg a3p4ee 8 tE.I � 1 li I i7 ,,iv m O+n R i RjFa'° I e P �' _—_— _ I 'ii u. I O 4gM a _______._ 1 r' b >_ • I4aP �'3e pl ,v__: 105 i i antrf-: iqt — --- R•y tri 's �f,? � 1 ” \1111/ 111 a isle: I al.,,,,. I , .I�'elb, mi. I \•. , k o y �\ 3Ey 1211 ''1 Aq �?,- I 0 a ��-8 /� 5 �• ` i�� '•'� egg I';� �6"? i p. �p f �e!�7: 9 S I F �rt 4 ;g ;;`-°*III ;i I E 1 i 1' '"--...n-., — 1 0111 a 1 PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY am.. Iifi�lli1••• @ o o i 1 ? WESTSIDE-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY II°Ij4. '� a ? ? ' ? NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION I,'d R� i n. o „,' gA .�V.I N E i °"°' 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 I 1 !I 4 g. -` A ? p CONSTRUCTION DETAILS NAPLES,FL 34108 i I II VI 1 I 2 A v .... , • 1 .k.s„..„, ,., ,,,. ) .i,,,/ 1. 1 _••• ti / II", ••• • \ \ 0 / ,,,• ,„, ;, 11 io \ \ \ . , ,--, 2 Iv . ir \ -.......-• / it i i AA _,.. " „ 1 ,\ ' ht / \ ;;, , \ \ 1 i \ \ \ \ f,:I ,, ‘, \ \ I \ 'k •; \ , .., I /I /1 / / 1 i [ \ % \ 1, ._ . . , It.7 7/1 I / i._...._ , I t - 1 4. / ----- 1 1 (//4-- If , i 1 ,, lk, \ \N 'I \ i 'A \ i g \ ; , 1 I, " I t , il 1 I , i , i \ ■ ■ 1 . \ if i \ I■ \-1 1 \ \,, ‘ 11 i■ II 1-. 11 1 1 t I 1\ K1 ■:-_, I ■ ■ ,, \ \ ,t1 .:\ \ W \ if 1,, • il : • • m 11. \ --, , i 1 \ , , ,. . ., 1 ill'1: 1 ? 11 i r 1E ., •, 1. g „In .,, 1 Nil,1 i 46 . ,.1.______ ii 1 — „.-- , ,, , 3 ----,,, '4 1 1 1 • , „ I , , 1 , ... , 1: •F, _ A. 1 ‘ 1 i ,, _, [ ,, t : i ell ip ,-., 11(..: d% I il I 1'i 1 I j I I;4 11. :'IX 1 _, i 1 ', •::-7: !il -LI •,..,n t.74; 1 1§ Ii C 1 ., • 1 ''''' 111,7 I, I IL 'i ' ! 1 111 I I II I( I 1 4 ,1: I , i i , , / i 11 i 1 1 h , I ' 12 i 1 — I - i 11 lir '.:1 it ' il I 1 I ; ,, 1 I if I i I 1 I 'iL 1 , i \ A:'. I 1 ; 1 1 j IX ." 1 i . ''t I; ■1 Ig. ' i 1 i( 111'%9 it i \ $1 ■ ',.11, , \ 4 ' 1 I , ', . 1 g I 1 li I 11 1 I 1 j 1 l' i I L 1 ii :I ■1. 11 ' 1 il I /A 1 1 :I , ,. c‘ , , i I I i I 4 i : n-1, ■ . i I IE • I t N \ 'I, i i i • - i I .i :I I i i ■ J i! 1 1 i, II 'l' 01, i W I ne. .. I 1 —' if.Si t; I—' il.' 1 g I 1:g . in 1,1'-' 0 i i fl / 53 i i I. '48 , , rT, ■ W ' I I II .0/ 1 1 : 1 I, 1 33 , ■ • ,,, , ,, .•.... . ,... ; „ • - ' „ 1 t 1 - ; p. 1 ID P III i 11 I I li k ' , II ;I I e I . II I I I 1 U . 1 514 14 I i 'N il 1 li 1 1 01 1 , 1 , 4 . , „ Al 1 II I,' I q I ,f § , i41111!1 ig4 1 'ttc'i- P il ii 1 fi ' ii 1 liN ;! 411 i u IP1 1 ii113 I I . • 1 \ Il I 1 1 II 1 IIT . lc aal 1 1 4. t t 1 , II 1 1 1( • • • IN ! hil i 1 1, .• ■ It 11 11 1 i..,i.,-.....•..,,,,,,.... N 1 lIl I. PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAY ''''' iffif Ira iir : , ! 0 1 a i r.: 1 8 i R g N g VillSTSIDI3-COMMONS TO PELICAN BAY hill IN NORTH TRAM STATION SERVICES DIVISION C kt 1 E ----- 1 - K -V:I 8 I 1 •••••*•• 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE,SUITE 605 , • - SOIL EROSION& NAPLES,FL 34108 , tii un SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS 1 I . ■..1-3 161 2A 1 lc) Number of bicyclists,walkers,&joggers using pathways Pelican Bay Boulevard(PBB)near Sandpiper parking lot December 2012 (Submitted by Susan O'Brien) Location Dec 26 Dec 27 Dec 28 Dec 29 Dec 30 Dec 31 (Direction) 11a-12p 10-11 a 1:30-2:30 p 9 -10 a 3p-4p 8a-9a Totals PBB(east) 21 22 10 19 11 51 134 Bicyclists PBB(west) 40 34 16 25 23 12 150 Pathway (east) 5 5 3 0 1 0 14 Pathway(west) 22 6 20 10 5 1 64 Walkers Pathway(east) 8 6 5 9 5 8 41 Pathway(west) 22 24 17 25 13 15 116 Joggers Pathway(east) 6 12 0 7 4 6 35 Pathway(west) 9 14 0 9 8 8 48 Notes: 12/26 - 4 walkers passed 1 jogger without incident - 4 bicyclists passed 1 jogger without incident - 5 walkers passed 1 walker without incident 12/27 - 1 walker passed a bicyclist without incident 12/28 - 1 bicyclists passed 4 walkers without incident 12/29 - 1 walker passed 2 bicyclists without incident - 1 bicyclists passed 1 walker without incident - 2 walkers passed 1 jogger without incident 12/30 - 1 bicyclist passed 1 walker without incident - 2 bicyclists passed 1 walker without incident - 2 walkers passed 1 walker without incident - 2 bicyclists passed 2 joggers without incident 12/31 - 1 walker passed 1 walker without incident Observations: 78%of bicyclists used PBB;22%used the pathway 49%of pathway users were walkers;26%were joggers;25%were bicyclists 72%of pathway users used pathway on west side of PBB;28%used pathway on east side of PBB Submitted by Ms.Susan O'Brien 161 2Ai n 0 m- N O N LA) I. v C - 78_ ■ _, 2) (D (1) )1111° C7 CO Cr Mil a7 = O N Do _. N C,co m CD Q Iiii, ,..z-%''-';,, I< C --4 .2.1':::-;.... , IMIL — --.--:.:....._.,— -__ ----=::: :: MC C :1) it Mil =::.7.-f:7:'''':„:.*, L O.4 Co 4 / _Ilf -11 • el * mCi m SU Ih< IN '✓•0_ '• y T ,.^ V i (C2 MO = A > '. CD Q a CD `■ CC cD CD CD -0 a CD n n M D SD !■M v D c CD a- M o' o o 3 n ° t- n 161 2A (\/ • • • • • • • p cn T, > = cn cn C "0 c ag rp "0 0M CD = CD 0) Fi-) 2 v, -S n n n n rt m �' 5' r--f• CO cp n C cp!/.) O 0� rD-r CD �, 0 M _. o/a —I SD r+ Qo CD m r D rn p- ca C O CO co 0 C = o' CO � EI rI o- O N C 3 -0 0 C 3 D• ID 0• 161 2Ai* V V --I a) cu -0 -0 m..- O (D 0 CU 3 r) —h �' N c (D O - L = CD < 0m C v) * v' n CD (D r.+ 0 5 71: c 3 3 a) = m- 0. o = 0- < t-+. 3 (131 cm 5. CD -O cu 0M < v, %< 0 �' = 0- -0 • O -s r-r CD r 1 O D E 0- _ . O C O n a) N 0 ", 0 -h v' r F cD D c 3 0, n v)FIT O= ,:u rt CD D . O ,..., 6• (D cr' O- 0_--1 c) (D = O O < 0_ -(.13 cr) _ CD O rt -0 v' E O = 7-, rt = ri• Cr, N 71:0' fD i61 2A1 V rPr) CD -, s � -. 1 EF0 C a I (13 ! J i'''1 ,..:1.. 4. ° ,t,,,,k,.%11'-'1 ,rt Wit A - ' - ' ''' '' ''' ' 7`, ' . 0 0— ta)r Cilialla . (n € - d• r . .: F ,,u r & r ''fit x 0 o (D• • o �, 0 a- E3g _ (D (D _ *_• ED -0 Co Z CAD Olin rD O M 3 r+ 0 CD C CD 161 11-\ „_, , ......„.,,.....,.,...„,.. ,.. , .-, ..... ..„..„,,, . 4 _ .„.. - — T Th.,,,..,.., . -. ,.. ., ........ gyp' a ,_ R i4 kl g s rt a ' "'11 X �. I .1, 1 • lk. a. ....... 1. I 20 r0 } cp r ell (1) S... 1 1 ,. 0 tr•,, ....„ tit) .. ; 'Illia,,.... 6 161 Zit \,, 2J .. :.,..,•,... 5 +: ' _. ..: - - i 1� ` 0 A�`■ pjyl//) � }■i 3 i A', fp ,#:, ii TS 0 O �( D 0 CU jmlo e CD CU (D 161 2A ■ i • • • • z o D� � 0 CD rD CD 1111 ':',L*t.I.1.1"."1.11.1v -5 0 CD r-1- N Oi: IO CD 3 r+ (1) O 6. te` 22 v) O N r+ CD <• 3 a) D- 2 ; 1 3 O -. N prq� O N V) 3 co r+ a) * * i i 5 v) (1 Di CD .. p -3 CD - i 0. CD 8 5 0- -. a) g -I, CiD -1 0- 0 CAD CD �- ' C•7 0- r-i- Z 0 -%t-1- = 0 cn (D• 0 0 01:) n 0 0� O O CD D CD 161 2A 1,(\ . ....... . ..._. , . , ....„ .. , * - ‘I, ';4; 1: ''' .:.. .6., 4'. .;40"T._„ *. , . tip *, V ` ''''' 0,1.I11:... '' ..:1:",.ri...1_ ': A ir‘.......1 '': te 4. , , 44. agiltV r. rt fD - alml (D je, -h ` O , . ,. , 4f, o ..... .... ...,.. ... ..... ., . ., , ... ..,-., "0,- 4, :11 D 3 / it< . X61 Z A • R P € w !(- 161 2k #:::....„.4- ,:iii ' . • . '' ' Ewa fff . 24'x§::-.1., ". F- : }} ¢ , c ,t+ a a t. '¢; "' L �y� y � t � Yg fi Y < 161 2A kt- . ./„.1 / .„ ,., , ,,, i.4, ‘,/,,, .,,,:.i. ft ,...:, , ii. , , ,, r.,. ,.. .. ,, .......„.. 4 v i ,�# y Si t 'X43 s w1 # a E r �' n ,.may � . yy t fh A ^1. fig: � { 7''� 1! �� is try` p } r� r}s. +",.,,..;1 1 a e € .+fit " . q .a °'Sk +., ' 1,F� i dj y� .;' -0 tyf� fi y:'`';',i;� ' " +' "*..* n ,F , ap. K a L i ft4e, t 161 2A $-k , . . ..„, , ... .. __,.._ . . . . , , „.,. ,..„... . . . . , . ,,,,,,_ . , _..:.... ,... _. , rx ' 4 < 1l. . d C '•'sr 4/ " If • r. a i � nt �' O i r _ I b sI , 8 f w t. s Ly r:4 . 4 ' ..1- .• t ' -. ion:;,,.. ' ' » "" j ;., i , , - i A'''* ' ''' ''''' kd• , ; , .• tr , _ ,. ..,:.... „„, ter : : ; l !t. - '44",. Alt- . )*.., ,, , . ,.. , + - 1 k. .. . i.v,k ''' 1 .h y1 i 1 !6 x 1g ~ y li.. irt4 „ s z r • � n k -, 161 2 A \k...$ 7v• ,,.._ ,..,,kk, ,,,,+,,,,,• Yes fF ' O„ ,,:), e) CAI P•NO •.4_, ''A • , '' 3 7+h . 3 '-‘' .. i T„lt, ;, . ,fc O -,' ” . may ° 1., ' s r • 3 CD O 161 2 A \(k , . „, 3: -. BC,) o. tt..... . . _• . 3 CD ......„ O .. , , _ ' 1 1 , 9- ..., , ., ,.. „, . c (-1- 3 How-- _, : f t„ilt, ,' ''' __,A ..- • :- Y ,ate Fr t: CD ti _. r .cat: y" t ((( - ' -• * ' ' �a (D V s s �B, �1, �'3's;"' Y�.. Mfr, ,., cp Q) c i , ii a _. } ,, 5 14.:..r. 0 �--r •4 < rn (1) BCD ^ �t $te,y t. � t RY y ,, yn I, F .. r/ ■• y , 2'''''-;:':::,,".."'i mt c • - 1 1. 61 2A \* \* rt 0 o < rt , .q = rt rI (-) . M rr+ r-F ` , r+ CC 3 ,< r-h o C n _..s r-F rD N a) CD n N 161 A I(". ' � C b 4. 4 0 _ -S. i' )� } '/ Y r,, °1117 `� ' b u Iry O � � m ?}�,u�� t f��, .Z.-...olk- . . . .._j,f::::-.. ...,,,,,,,,, - 114/4„„ .- .:: ..,. 1. ; 16I 2A kt\ --, .. , Ti . i .ii 4 . ,.... ,.,.,,, 1 5 CD I Sri i \ ' ■ • . • '�,.. ! a 4 -...,r„. ,r,.c.r=. rill, llibtd :•. . 1, ., ‘ ,.........11=00.0 0MF'. >— O'er . ftt Z � \ C'�'- a Ill p `. , �1 - rrrs- r ..rr,,.. '�� 1. .-F- wi 9. I �-: ' — 9 '7f . A_°' • -�- e SR& L r' It .. , X16 i , t r y, yyy$ .,,,.4.. 'y, it.. ,£ P a i R;.b,� ..1 3 i is, ARd et, � - , P ++v i„. ° I N 1 --_ ' }- , 0 , 'Gov 12'; - t '� d ° t �ii *r- , t.- p ,r. , r d Utt...,,v, , r l 161 2A • • C � SD n 3 3 F. -' CD r-r n - -0 Co CD CD (--1- 0 _ r--r n 3 CD E. CD 2 O CD CD Co v) o -0 Cu r- CD n • rt N CD O n < CD V) - r-r CD O' CD o Co D- • • N' O D O CD CD = r ( (/) • N n — . Q r O D o CD C �, v) M r, (DD * (3)) CD = = SD O r+ CD O CD r-r cn ' 161 2AA • • • • ,. _ m.- = r— 1— cD CD o 0 Cr CD c CD n r+ 5' = 0 rD _h CD B ''S-t, - — a) cn O a r-r = O < CD CAD � .< CD r-r � � CD —r+. 0 r-+ n CD r ca. o 0 3 O SD = C. CfQ o 3 3 3 -1 CD a CM CD cri" rD CD 7v Ci CD 2 0 = c O -a N .< 3 c (=T. -a re. 0 161 2A itii‘ RNIOTRICW/M1 Ail FEB 2 0 2013 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Services Taxing and Benefit Unit ( r: ..... NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2013 THE BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2013 AT 3:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BI YIaLOCAT .,y` 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108. Hiller Henning —r7).-- AGENDA Coyle Colette 1. Roil Call r`14'ten°¢ 2. Agenda approval. 3. FY '12 Fund Balances actual vs. the estimates used to prepare the FY '13 Budget. Quantify affected areas. 4. Review schedule for preparation of the FY '14 Budget — including availability of County guidelines for salaries, wages, benefits and other items. 5. Clam Bay reassignment to PBSD. FY '13 additional tasks, associated costs and source of funds. 6. Review Capital Projects: a) Non CIP i. Financial Status of projects currently approved; and ii. Estimates for expected projects going forward. b) CIP Activities i. Financial status of projects currently apprpyed0d ii. Estimates for expected projects going forward. 7. Audience Comments Date: 8. Adjourn Item#: Copies to: ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597-1749 OR VISIT PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. 2/7/2012 3:53:25 PM 161 2A FY 2014 BUDGET PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE Feb. 26, 2013 Budget Policy set and approved by BCC (2/26/13). Feb. 26, 2013 Tuesday— meeting at 3 p.m. Mid March Final Budget Policy Documents with guidelines regarding salaries, benefits, tax rates, etc. and CM budget review schedule. March 21, 2013 Tuesday— meeting at 3 p.m. April 16, 2013 Tuesday— meeting at 3 p.m. Committee should approve proposed FY 2014 budget to recommend approval by the full board at their May 1st meeting. May 14, 2013 Tuesday— meeting at 3 p.m. Final review for submission to CM office. Late May Review Session with CM, our budget due one week prior. Late June BCC Budget Workshop & Wrap-up Late July BCC release of tentative budget and set proposed millage rates Early September Public Hearing 5:05 p.m. 161 2A l4 FY 2012 Forecasted vs. (Unaudited)Actual Expenditures Variance Forecasted Budget Forecasted Actual VS. Actual Water Management Reveune $ 666,300.00 $ 639,600.00 $ 642,444.00 $ 2,844.00 Operating Exp. $ 604,300.00 $ 575,200.00 $ 581,458.00 $ (6,258.00) Other Fees & Chrgs. $ 46,000.00 $ 29,000.00 $ 26,670.00 $ 2,330.00 $ (1,084.00) Community Beautification Reveune $ 1,907,800.00 $ 1,831,500.00 $ 1,838,752.00 $ 7,252.00 Operating Exp. $ 1,788,900.00 $ 1,695,300.00 $ 1,630,889.00 $ 64,411.00 Other Fees & Chrgs. $ 106,900.00 $ 67,700.00 $ 62,235.00 $ 5,465.00 $ 77,128.00 Street Lighting Reveune $ 436,800.00 $ 419,400.00 $ 421,000.00 $ 1,600.00 Operating Exp. $ 241,500.00 $ 206,500.00 $ 185,828.00 $ 20,672.00 Other Fees & Chrgs. $ 22,400.00 $ 9,500.00 $ 8,461.00 $ 1,039.00 $ 23,311.00 Rolled Capital Project Balances - Forecasted Vs. Actual Forecasted Actual Variance Clam Bay - Fund 320 $86,770 $262,920 $176,150 Capital - Fund 322 $2,086,509 $2,623,420 $536,911 161 2A l ([ • . . . o 0 -1 6) CA C D CA CD C) CA CA c, 6) CA 0) 3 C D O) 6) ® 0 6) CD CD 6) CD 6) 6) CD cn cn .A 4 41. . CO CO C .P W W ® W W CO N C 01 01 01 4 4 CO Co CA co NN -4 -40) 0) 41. -1C' CO .4. -& 3 . - W WNN6) CA .A _ T QD C4 N -b. CO CO CO 41. C) O OD .A () CO NJ 1 r -4 J CO CO CO W CO .A O Cfl - - - v CO O r- -� up O r Co 01 O > - CO m N -, Cfl O = O OOOOOCOCOO > OCOO ):, Co -A O 01\300 - COO > OK -0 -00 -I0mE r0m Ommm m Hnm or- f0 m o -1 - mx -I2) -IZW 0 -IZ W -I ' Zm xl � -1 , THz (n� -1 z -< >T, mO Hmmmz < mz mOzz n mimcJzmzOoO mm -O00m omm nmoom z 0 _ nrnr rp � z -4 p zzY co mmO z > zzz z 0Fm Zz z m > "" m -1 � 0 OD > n D0m7JG � m mmC Om (J) C) ) > -n 0zzcn � m � -- nm � 1- m � z _1m _ m Omm m m ) OZ > � nO cnE c � n xl7lECw znmG y z D D * > nD > r r r D r D 0. 0 m. CD N N Q. W N Co CO Cn N N 01 co N 00 O W O O Cn O Cn .66--N -01 Cn O O 6) O -co O -o-co c 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O 0. m OOOO OOOOO O O O OO co 6666 O O O O O O O O 66 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O . N O D '' w n = D N 0. 13 -.. - N N _ --A _I. CD -1 3 ' 6) - 6) W -� - N ^4 0) --• N 0. N m �1 O .P W N N NO 00 m co r- O ill O O 6 -c) -4=. -.4=.6 -co 0o N O Cn CO 6 -..-w 0 0 00 0 -1 O 6) J O C)1 Cn -1 O O N Cn W W C 'fl O O CO O -1 O P O CO CO CO Cn O O O O W N lQ ; 6666 -1 O6) 4 N N :A6. 6 O O CD -L O O -A O -40 n 01 OD Cn Cn N CD CD O - .J' N rt 0 m O cn D cD -I 0. C rf CO - -� CN000 � NN CN11 .A N � 6) V 6) 0 0o -00010--4 -01 -% - - 00-N) O Cn .P -, C4 W -1 0 co NJ �1 Cn co co O CA 0) CO y O 01 O O .A -A. CO O A N ^4 N CO Cn _P Cfl CO -A Cn O O O O J C D CO CA -1 rt Cn CJ ^I C7 0 C7 W CO CO CD -1 C7 C7 C7 O :A ^1 CA CO CO CD 0) Cn ∎l O O O Cb N N (1) -%. o O O O Cn N m — N C) m. Cn ---40) 41. W COO Cfl 0) 01i N co -1 O) C .A .la -1 O -1 __. __.. 0, 00 N In lo----.1 -p COMM -4 N CO CO O CO N W OD O 00 -x O CO W CO 3 'J Cn N O -P. 0) O Cn O W Co "1 ^1 N 6) N 66 O O OD O 0) O 01 4 CO 'J 01 -A 01 In - I31 -. N N Cn N - N NJ 6) CO W 41. -y -� N CO -A CO CO CO C) CO -A 4 -A CO CO - N N v 41. CO N tU O 6) CO Cn co Cn Cn O Cb N -1 W N Cat -, v -co -6-6 -,-, 00 -P Cr O 6) 00CnNO6) N -1. -1 CO CnCO Cb --1O --1 CD CO P -1- CD 41. CD O Cn C O O N O O CO W A Cn C O .p 41. -4 O O D 4 -- 0) 0) 0 1 6 0 .403001OO W (0103 Cn �1CO 0) O- O O CD b) I I I I I I I I I lot 2A (� PBSD BUDGET SUB COMMITTEE Proposed Schedule for FY 2014 Budget Preparation January Budget Sub Committee Meeting Jan. 17,2013 • Review this schedule and update Based on expected availability of county budget guidelines: (i) BCC sets policy 2/26/2013 (ii) Detailed county policy available mid March. • Initial review of Capital Projects going forward: o Non CIP o CIP • County vs. PBSD responsibility February Budget Sub Committee Tuesday, Feb.26,2013 • Review by staff of any proposed changes: o To staffing levels o Operations and resulting cost impact. • Discuss budget objectives without CIP with regard to: o Per unit assessment and millage rate. • Establish budget sub committee initial position regarding capital needs for FY 2014 and forward: o Non CIP o CIP March Budget Sub Committee Meeting Thursday,March 21,2013 • Review staff's initial presentation of the FY 2104 Budget • Finalize capital needs. April Budget Sub Committee Meeting Tuesday,April 16,2013 • Review and approve FY 2104 Budget for presentation to full PBSD Board at 5/1/13 meeting. Ask the PBSD Board for approval. May Budget Sub Committee Tuesday, May 14,2103 • This meeting would be to incorporate any changes resulting from the PBSD Board. • The PBSD Budget is due at the County Manager's Office in late May. 16 I 2AF PBSD BUDGET SUB COMMITTEE—CAPTIAL PROJECTS GOING FORWARD CIP Estimated Cost • Medians and other Landscaping • Crosswalks o North Pointe $ 53,000.00 o Crayton $ 52,000.00 • Pathways—Condition and Responsibility o Gulf Park 63% $150,000.00/per side o Oakmont Lake $ 80,000.00 o North Pointe *75%, Hammock Oak 25%,Crayton 60% $230,000.00 o Single Family Neighborhoods, Ridgewood 22%, Oakmont 55%,Greentree 55% $350,000.00 Glenview 37% (*percentages indicated the condition) Non CIP • Traffic Signs • Lake Bank Enhancements • North Berm • Other 161 2A Icir PBSD BUDGET SUB COMMITTEE Proposed Schedule for FY 2014 Budget Preparation January Budget Sub Committee Meeting Jan. 17,2013 • Review this schedule and update Based on expected availability of county budget guidelines: (i) BCC sets policy 2/26/2013 (ii) Detailed county policy available mid March. • Initial review of Capital Projects going forward: o Non CIP o CIP • County vs. PBSD responsibility February Budget Sub Committee Tuesday, Feb.26,2013 • Review by staff of any proposed changes: o To staffing levels o Operations and resulting cost impact. • Discuss budget objectives without OP with regard to: o Per unit assessment and millage rate. • Establish budget sub committee initial position regarding capital needs for FY 2014 and forward: o Non CIP o CIP March Budget Sub Committee Meeting Thursday, March 21,2013 • Review staff's initial presentation of the FY 2104 Budget • Finalize capital needs. April Budget Sub Committee Meeting Tuesday,April 16,2013 • Review and approve FY 2104 Budget for presentation to full PBSD Board at 5/1/13 meeting. Ask the PBSD Board for approval. May Budget Sub Committee Tuesday, May 14,2103 • This meeting would be to incorporate any changes resulting from the PBSD Board. • The PBSD Budget is due at the County Manager's Office in late May. • 161 2A PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 8, FEB 2 0 20 i 3 O Municipal Service Taxing & Benefit Unit BY: ..,.. .• ..... NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13,2013 THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN REGULAR SESSION ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13 AT 11:00 AM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108. AGENDA The agenda includes,but is not limited: 1. Pledge of Allegiance Fiala 2. Roll call Hiller 3. Agenda approval Henning 4. Approval of Meeting Minutes COyie a. January 2 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session •COlettct b. January 15 Landscape Water Management Subcommittee —�`�----- c. January 15 Clam Bay Subcommitteeorrtce' d. January 21 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session e. January 22 Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee 5. Administrator's Report a. Speeding on Pelican Bay Boulevard,enforcement activity to date and planned enforcement activity presented by Corporal Carmine Marceno,Collier County Sheriff (John Chandler) b. Clam Pass permit update c. Crosswalk Standards (John Chandler) d. Monthly Financial Report 6. Chairman's Report a. Announcements 7. Committee Reports a. Budget Subcommittee (Michael Levy) b. Clam Bay Subcommittee i. Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass (Susan O'Brien) ii. Mangrove monitoring report (Tom Cravens) iii. Status of osprey nesting box (Tom Cravens) c. Landscape Water Management Subcommittee (Dave Trecker) i. Water collection basins post-construction agency monitoring and reporting requirements ii. Algae control recommendation iii. Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation iv. Transition of Coastal Zone Management Water Quality Monitoring program to PBSD d. Pathways/Tree Canopy Committee (Keith Dallas) i. January 22 meeting update M�� rr ii. *Review of expanded proposal from tan Orlikoff,ISA Certified A' s morii Orres. iii. Discussion of next steps e. Strategic Planning Committee update Date: 10. Old Business 11. New Business Item#: a. Establish priorities,and identify upcoming meetings b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Copies t0: 12. Audience Comments 13. Miscellaneous Correspondence 14. Adjourn *Board vote is anticipated ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE(3)MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD.THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE(3)MINUTES.THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE,WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE.PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT(239) 597-1749 OR VISIT PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. 2/11/2013 11:03:32 AM 161 (Lk PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY,JANUARY 2,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday,January 2,2013 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board John Iaizzo Tom Cravens,Chairman Michael Levy Dave Trecker,Vice Chairman Susan O'Brien John P.Chandler Mary Anne Womble Keith J.Dallas John Baron absent Geoffrey S.Gibson Hunter H.Hansen absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator(participated by phone) Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Kevin Carter,Field Manager,Dorrill Management Group Joe Foster,Humiston&Moore Tim Hall,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President&CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Ken Humiston Brett Moore,President,Humiston&Moore 65 in audience FINAL AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll call 3. Agenda approval 4. Elect new Chairman 5. Recent Board of County Commissioners'(BCC)decisions involving Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) presented by Commissioner Georgia Hiller 6. Audience Comments 7. Approval of December 5 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 8. Committee reports a.Clam Bay Subcommittee i.Clam Bay transition plan ii.Clam Bay dredging permit 9. Monthly financial report(deferred to February 13) 10. Cobblestones at San Marino crossing*(John Chandler) 11. Setting Priorities(Keith J.Dallas) 12. Changes to Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27(Keith J.Dallas) I' L 13. Old Business a.Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of (John Chandler) 14. Miscellaneous Correspondence 15. Adjournment 8582 161 2Ai(t , Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2, 2013 ROLL CALL Nine members were present(Chandler,Cravens,Dallas,Gibson,Iaizzo,Levy,O'Brien,Trecker, Womble)and two members were absent(Baron,Hanson). AGENDA APPROVAL Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to approve the agenda as amended: Following item 4, `Elect new Chairman', the Board would proceed with item 5, • "Recent decisions..."presentation by Commissioner Georgia Hiller;then item 13, "Audience Comments";then item 9, "Clam Bay dredging permit"presentation by Ken Humiston. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ELECT NEW CHAIRMAN Effective immediately,Chairman Dallas resigned as Chairman of the PBSD Board. Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Ms. O'Brien, to nominate Vice Chairman Cravens as Chairman of the PBSD Board. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler to nominate Dr. Trecker as Vice Chairman of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board for the interim period from now until "we have a new Board and elect a new set of Chairman and Vice Chairman". The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Dr. Trecker made a motion, second by Ms. O'Brien that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board acknowledges Mr. Keith J. Dallas for his outstanding stewardship as Board Chairman with a plaque at the next Board meeting. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. . RECENT DECISIONS MADE BY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS(BCC)INVOLVING PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION(PBSD)PRESENTATION BY COMMISSIONER GEORGIA HILLER Commissioner Georgia Hiller commented on recent decisions made by the Board of County Commissioners(BCC)involving Pelican Bay Services Division(PBSD). The BCC reaffirmed that the PBSD is responsible for managing all aspects of Clam Bay/Pass and January 8,the BCC plans to vote on several re recommendations:1)To transfer sufficient funds to PBSD already set aside for Clam Bay projects;2 - - re the closure of Clam Pass an emergency situation requiring dredging(strictly and solely to allow t t es .to flushing and to preserve the health of the mangroves,and science will determine the size of th• , 'i )as quickly as possible once permit issues are resolved; 3)to direct staff to override the pur,. asing p t ier. avoid the delay of the bidding process;obtain bids from two prospective dredging co t na . en - to an agreement with the lowest bidder;and 4)at the time that the Clam Bay Manageme ° ✓-,,-,4,--6,all stakeholders will have the opportunity to participate. '440_..„' =t%,,, AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Marcia Cravens was concerned about the U.S.Army Corps 4,1'.1,.4.0„a °'CE) permit application and PBSD ordinance; Ms.Pat Bush and Dr.Ted Rai. ° t ce-, ,°t tout the"Seagate lawsuit"; 8583 . , 161 2Aj Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2, 2013 Ms. Annice Gregerson was concerned PBSD would lose responsibility for Clam Bay; and Mr. Scott Streckenbein and Ms. Diane Lustig were concerned about the inlet closing and impacts to the environment and public health. Mr.Hall explained the longer Clam Pass stays closed and water cannot disperse the greater chance of negative impact to the mangroves by submersion. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 5 BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler to approve the December.5 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session minutes as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY DREDGING PERMIT PRESENTATION BY MR.KEN HUMISTON&MR.BRETT MOORE Mr.Ken Humiston and Mr.Brett Moore,Humiston and Moore Engineers(HM)made a presentation about dredging Clam Pass. Based on current conditions,and to increase time between dredging events,HM recommended the optimal width of the cut at the mouth of the Pass(Cut A)is sixty feet. HM expect to have the construction plans and specifications complete by January 15 to present to the Clam Bay Subcommittee. The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers'(USACE)suspended the County's Coastal Zone Management(CZM)Clam Pass dredging permit application. Ms.Marcia Cravens and Dr.Ted Raia were concerned about HM's optimal width recommendation. Mr.Charles Bodo suggested HM consider using methods and structures used to stabilize inlets. Ms.Kathy Worley suggested HM apply for an interim or one-time only permit to open the pass. APPROVAL OF TURRELL-HALL WORK ORDER Mr.Tim Hall distributed Turrell-Hall's(TH)work order of the tasks needed to obtain permits quickly from several agencies to reopen Clam Pass. Mr.Hall would discuss with USACE officials soon the methods USACE recommends that PBSD take to obtain the Clam Pass dredging permit quickly. Mr.Dorrill and Ms. O'Brien plan to attend.Mr.Hall estimates that if PBSD applies for a USACE Nationwide permit the turnaround for USACE determination to issue the permit is minimum 30-45 days. A major task of the Turrell-Hall work order is to update the 1998 Clam Bay Management Plan w ' would reference having"permits in place"to dredge when needed.Mr.Hall distributed a draft invitat;a participate to"stakeholders",including but not limited to neighborhood associations,conservati a , environmental organizations,user groups,and government agencies. Ms.Kathy Worley requested Mr.Hall consider suggestions she submitted on developing. .�� management plan. A resident presented recent aerial photographs of Clam Pass. Mr.Chandler made a motion,second by Mr.Levy to approve the T all 's'+rder as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the mot , s .1 8584 161 iq-, Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2,2013 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Report deferred until February 13. COBBLESTONES AT SAN MARINO CROSSING*(JOHN CHANDLER) Due to continued complaints from residents of San Marino that the noise made by vehicles driving over cobblestones were a nuisance,the Board considered removing cobblestones at the San Marino crossing. Mr.Ted Darrow,Mr.Steve Seidel,Mr.Pat Downing(San Marino);and Dr.Ted Raia expressed concerns about noise,safety,speeding,and were in support of removing cobblestones at San Marino crossing. Mr.Jim Hoppensteadt made an indication that as the PBSD Board is responsible for noise abatement in Pelican Bay,the decision made today would set precedent. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Mr. laizzo, that the PBSD remove the cobblestones at the San Marino crossing and replace with fire-red clay brick pavers. The Board took a roll call vote: 5 voted in favor of the motion (Chandler, Cravens, Gibson,Iaizzo, Trecker) and 4 opposed(Dallas,Levy, O'Brien, Womble)and the motion passed. PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION ORDINANCE(KEITH J.DALLAS) The Board discussed suggested changes to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27. Ms.Cravens was concerned about alleged erroneous language in the proposed ordinance. Mr. Dallas made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Trecker to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to amend the proposed PBSD Ordinance:1)regarding limiting Chairman and Vice Chairman to one-year terms,strike, "... unless all members have previously served..." to read, ':..unless all members have been given the opportunity to serve..."; and 2) consider staggering this year's appointments, so that the two applicants receiving the most votes are appointed for four years, and applicants placing third and fourth are appointed for three years. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Ms. O'Brien made a motion,second by Mr.Dallas to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to amend the proposed PBSD Ordinance [to manage the current "interim" Chairman situation until a new Board is appointed] to allow the current Chairman to serve a fifteen-month term; then revert to the twelve-month term. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN OF LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOM . Chairman Cravens appointed Vice Chairman Trecker as Chairman of the Lands +• Water' Management Subcommittee. APPROVAL TO OBTAIN PERMITTING TO CONSTRUCT AN OSPREY NESTING PLAT qi0u Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler toe ukas' proceed with contacting Mr. Tim Hall to get permitting for ' s tip Osprey nesting platform near the South Beach facility. The Board vo °r ; ` pr in favor and the motion passed. � � . 1 8585 161 2A , Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2, 2013 (ADJOURN Ms.O Brien made a motion,second by . handler jo . oted unanimously in favor,the motion passedMr,and C meeting to adadjournurned The at B 4:05 ard p.vo m. r Tom Cravens,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick \ 2/4/2013 8:43:05 AM •• 410 ' 8586 161 2A1 fq LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES - TUESDAY,JANUARY 15,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay r Services Division Board met Tuesday,January 15 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present Landscape Water Management(LWM)Subcommittee Dave Trecker,Chairman Keith J.Dallas John P.Chandler Geoffrey S.Gibson Tom Cravens Pelican Bay Services Division Staff Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager 5 in the audience AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of December 10 LWM Subcommittee meeting minutes 3. Update on copper monitoring and status of trial programs on algae control 4. Pelican Bay community outreach regarding the importance of BMP a. Landscaping color at"end-caps"discussion(Chandler add-on) 5. Audience Comments 6. Adjournment ROLL CALL All Subcommittee members were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas to approve the agenda as amended, adding Mr. Chandler's item 4a, Landscaping color at"end-caps"discussion. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 10 LWM SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas to approve the December U M Subcommittee meeting minutes as presented. The Subcommittee voted unanimo t favor and the motion passed. UPDATE ON COPPER MONITORING AND STATUS OF TRIAL PROGRAMS ON ALGAE _ONTRO], Mr.Lukasz reported that this month,staff plans to implement the copper m• m " ria program using alternatives to copper sulfate to control algae at sites located within Ba Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas to make d„ men r ,n to the PBSD Board to direct the Administrator to investigate subcontr• • ic• ° oval of algae-1'1'4 p, in lake systems. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in a ° ,"- �'' passed. 16 161 2Afr Landscape Water Management Subcommittee Meeting Minutes January 15, 2013 Chairman Trecker was concerned about rumors he heard that PBSD was not incompliance with the SFWMD Master Surface Water Management permit. Mr.Dorrill acknowledged that he planned to meet with SFWMD officials January 23 to resolve permit modifications conveyance-related issues,but was not aware of any non-compliance issues regarding the Master permit. r PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY OUTREACH REGARDING THE IMPORTANCE OF BMP Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Chairman Trecker to make a recommendation to the PBSD Board to proceed with production and distribution of"Landscape BMP Draft 1.0" The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. LANDSCAPING COLOR AT"END-CAPS"(CHANDLER ADD-ON' Mr.Chandler was concerned about resident complaints regarding the lack of color in landscaping at median"end-caps". Mr.Dallas said planting maintenance-intensive Annuals would defeat the purpose of attempting to employ BMP. Staff would contact Landscape Architect,Ms.Ellin Goetz to make a presentation at the next LWM meeting of her recommendations for colorful and drought-resistant alternatives to Annuals. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms.Diane Lustig explained"BMP Draft 1.0"was informative but lackluster. Mr.Dave Cook suggested PBSD hold a workshop that focuses on littoral plantings. Mr.John Domenie was concerned that employee training did not change behavior. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion,second by Chairman Trecker to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted I unanimously in favor, the motion passed,and meeting adjourned at 2:12 p.m. Dave Trecker,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 1/29/2013 3:37:34 PM 4 w 17 161 2A lit- CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY,JANUARY 15,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Tuesday,January 15 at 3:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive, r Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Clam Bay Subcommittee Susan O'Brien,Chairman Mike Levy Tom Cravens Mary Anne Womble Pelican Bay Services Division Board Also Present John Chandler Keith J.Dallas Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Tim Hall,Senior Ecologist&Principal,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President and CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Kathy Worley,Director of Environmental Science,Conservancy of Southwest Florida 30 in the audience AGENDA 1. Roll call 2. Approval of December 27 Clam Bay Subcommittee meeting minutes 3. Clam Bay transition update 4. Clam Bay dredging permit update 5. Meetings needed by Clam Bay Subcommittee and/or PBSD Board to continue to expedite the Clam Pass dredging permit 6. Audience Comments 7. Adjourn ROLL CALL All Subcommittee members were present. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to approve the agenda as presente' Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. in APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 27 CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to approve the De , a°-r 27. a :ay Subcommittee meeting minutes as presented. The Subcommittee vot- > _. r 9 s vor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY DREDGING PERMIT UPDATE Chairman O'Brien reported at this time,the Pelican Bay Servi , Y+uld only pursue a Nationwide 27(NWS 27)permit from the Army Corps of Engineer US eo t Clam Pass as soon as ilo17 161 2A r4 Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes January 15, 2013 possible.Once Clam Pass is open,then PBSD will seek the ten-year permit and update the Clam Bay Management Plan. Mr. Dorrill reported as the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) declared Clam Pass closing an emergency requiring dredging as soon as possible,Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD),is pursuing permits on an emergency basis. The Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stated this project was not eligible for a "Letter of Emergency" permit. However, USACE recommended PBSD apply for the most appropriate, one- . time, project-specific Nationwide 27 permit (NWP-27) intended for "environmental benefit and enhancement" versus a NWP-3 permit, a regular maintenance-type dredging permit. NWP-3 requires the dredged material taken off-site which is not only logistic and cost-prohibitive,but this USACE criteria violates Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) rules regarding placement of "beach-compatible sand"adjacent to the inlet to prevent erosion. Mr.Dorrill explained the Clam Pass construction plans are one of the required components to submit with the USACE NWP-27 permit application. The construction plans are also necessary to provide to pre- qualified, prospective dredging contractors to submit bids/proposals. In anticipation of receiving the plans by January 18, the PBSD Board decided to schedule a Special Session, Monday, January 21 at 9 a.m. at Club Pelican Bay to review the plans and approve a recommendation to the BCC for consideration January 22. Mr. Dorrill clarified the BCC determined this project is eligible for Tourist Development Council (TDC)Fund 195,or tourist tax dollars because the area adjacent to the inlet is public beach. Collier County has a permit to operate a beach "rake" that could be used to maintain the surface of the beach. However, Mr. Dorrill stressed there was a fine line between raking and grading. No work would be authorized that would put the FDEP permit-in-place at-risk. Mr.Hall clarified the FDEP permit-in-place is compatible with the proposed work in the USACE NWP- 27 application because it is less extensive. However,the same construction plans submitted to USACE NWP- 27 must also be submitted to FDEP to modify the FDEP permit-in-place for consistency before FDEP will issue the Notice to Proceed (NTP) to the contractor to begin the actual construction. Concurrently, Mr.Hall is also performing a biological monitoring(BO) study of migratory and nesting sea birds as required by U.S.Fish a Wildlife Service(USFWS)prior to the anticipated NTP with construction. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Marcia Cravens mentioned other NWP permits not under consideration, and on ed about an engineer's itinerary and the pending construction plans. Ms. Annice Gregerson s rued about stench and water quality. Dr. Ted Raia agreed the NWP-27 was project-ap• 'ate, b till concerned. Ms. Diane Lustig commended Mr. Dorrill for progress made and enco . • ' : • co inue moving forward; Mr.Scott Streckenbein agreed and commented on the "dig" and con r . o est from many diverse communities. Ms.Kathy Worley was concerned about the d*_;_.. oft ® , dge cut setting precedent for the long-term management plan. Ms. Cravens and Ms. 9.,4410 + erned about new permits'compatibility with the 1998 permit. 18 . , 161 2 A i4 • . . Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes January 15, 2013 CONCLUSION Staff would notify the Board when the construction plans are available by Friday, January 18 and confirm the Monday,January 21 at 9 a.m.Board Special Session at Club Pelican Bay. Mr.Hall distributed a sample invitation to participate in the development of an updated Clam Bay Management Plan he is sending to Clam Bay stakeholders. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble, to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed,and the meeting was adjourned at 4:18 p.m. Susan O'Brien,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 2/4/2013 10:03:28 AM 4 . ' -.'--4' 19 161 2Acfr PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD SPECIAL SESSION MINUTES MONDAY,JANUARY 21,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Special Session on Monday,January 21 at 9:00 AM at The Club Pelican Bay,707 Gulf Park Drive,Naples,Florida. r The following members were present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Tom Cravens,Chairman John laizzo departed early _ Dave Trecker,Vice Chairman Michael Levy John P.Chandler Susan O'Brien Keith J.Dallas Mary Anne Womble Geoffrey S.Gibson departed early Hunter H.Hansen absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst absent Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager absent Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Kevin Carter,Field Manager,Dorrill Management Group Tim Hall,Turrell,Hall&Associates Jim Hoppensteadt,President&CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Ken Humiston,P.E.,Humiston&Moore Engineers Brett Moore, P.E.,Humiston&Moore Engineers Kathy Worley,Conservancy of Southwest Florida 40 in audience AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Draft Clam Pass construction plans presentation by Ken Humiston,P.E.,and Brett D.Moore,P.E.,Humiston&Moore Engineers 3. Board Discussion 4. Audience Comments 5. *Approval of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners 6. Adjourn ROLL CALL With the exception of Mr.Hansen,nine members were present. Mr.Iaizzo and Mr.Gibson depa the meeting early. AGENDA APPROVAL Ms. Womble made a motion,second by Mr.Dallas to approve the agenda as present--,'Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. nom. DRAFT CLAM PASS CONSTRUCTION PLANS PRESENTATION Mr. Ken Humiston presented the draft Clam Pass construction . .* + reds-1414.7-ndation for the width of the dredge cut at the mouth of the Pass. The "natural wid • f c• s-sectional area determines the volume of water that flows through the inlet and pote,a: c. - . nd out when waves push sand in The actual size of the cut depends upon the tida a e i .. ';•st monitoring data shows 8587 161 2A �� Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session Minutes Monday,January 21, 2013 the equilibrium cross-sectional area is 200-300 square feet.The area is determined by multiplying the width by depth by slope. Humiston&Moore Engineers recommended a narrower dredge cut width of 45',depth of -4.5',and not as steep slope to limit the cross-sectional area toward the lower-range of 2002 feet; versus the prior recommendation to dredge a wider 60' cut, to a depth of-5'having a steeper slope that increased the cross-sectional area toward the higher-range of 3002 feet. To stabilize the Pass and prevent material from falling into the inlet during the post-dredge adjustment period,the beach adjacent to the inlet will be graded to an elevation above the Mean High Water line(MHW)at high tide. Mr. Humiston explained the type of permit determines what dredging equipment is used. Dredging work maybe done mechanically as it was in 1997 reaching Segments A and B only, not C, whereas a a hydraulic dredge as as used in 1999 could reach all Segments A,B,and C and would be more effective. Mr. Tim Hall clarified PBSD is submitting an application to USACE for Nationwide Permit 27 (NWP- 27) to open Clam Pass as soon as possible. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permit-in-place will be modified accordingly for consistency. Mr. Dorrill concurred PBSD is submitting an application to USACE NWP-27 as recommended by USACE as the most appropriate and expeditious permit to have Clam Pass re-opened as soon as possible; versus NWP-3 that requires dredged material taken off-site. Removal of the dredged material from the site violates FDEP rules regarding placement of "beach-compatible sand" adjacent to the inlet. There are construction means and methods that can determine the type of equipment used and are dependent upon site conditions and the contractor's judgment. As stated in the Executive Summary of the proposed January 22 Board of County Commissioners' (BCC) add-on item, the recommendation is to approve the expedited bid solicitation process and direct the County Manager to issue work orders to the County's five pre-approved excavation-type contractors. Staff intends to discuss types of equipment recommended with these potential contractors and obtain base bids to dredge Segments A&B only(approximately 20,000 cubic yards of sand); then obtain ad-alternate bids to dredge Segment C only(approximately 7,000 cubic yards of sand). Mr.Humiston explained what an over-allowance is. As it is difficult to grade the bottom under water, the contractor must achieve a required depth,and given an over-allowance depth,that is"no more than"o half foot deeper than required depth. Mr. Humiston explained dredging Segment A is critical because it is the most dynamic g,A:‘:-=where wave action along the beach pushes sand into the inlet and the place to where strong current t• ..nd out. According to monitoring data, tide range (decreasing) and phase lag (increasing) indicat ing of Segments B and C. In order to generate the strong currents, Segments B and C r•°• •anin•,. he reason why dredge cuts are wider(than a prior recommendation)in Segments B and )114 Some Board members were still concerned about wider dredge Se- ; and C and wanted assurance that the NWP-27 would not set precedent for future dr• ts. Mr. Dorrill explained the NWP-27 permit is designed specs' : a . r. `e, project-specific, single event and he had expressed clearly to USACE that PBS' • •rr .end the next three years, 8588 161 2Ai4'14-i Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session Minutes Monday,January 21, 2013 (subject to funding and PBSD Board approval)to develop a comprehensive long-term Clam Bay Management Plan. Mr.Brett Moore reported he informed FDEP of the scope of changes to the FDEP Clam Pass dredging permit-in-place and urgent nature of the project,and FDEP is expediting the approval process. Mr.Dorrill added the FDEP permit-in-place is a 10-year Clam Pass dredging permit that must be modified for consistency with the NWP-27 prior to issuance of a Notice-To-Proceed(NTP)with construction. Mr.Hall estimated the NWP-27 permit application would be prepared and ready for submittal on January 23,but the construction plans Mr.Humiston is recommending and presenting are a required component. As far as timeline,he believed it was extremely optimistic for work to begin in March,but regardless,the construction must be complete by May 1,the start of Turtle Nesting Season. Mr. Dorrill is exploring possibilities for the contractors to work additional shifts or "around the clock"to meet the May 1 deadline. Ms.Kathy Worley explained possible environmental impacts of dredging Segment C wider or"wall- to-wall"including turbidity and exposed seagrasses,and was concerned this dredging project would set precedent for future dredging. Mr.Hall commented that with the Pass closed,problems are in process or already happening.It was apparent that water clarity is decreasing,which prevents light from penetrating to deeper depths which impacts fish and seagrass.Mangroves were not yet a concern until the rainy season when the possibility for submersion exists. He supported Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. Mr.Iaizzo departed the meeting. Before departing,Mr.Gibson stated he supported Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms.Diane Lustig,Mr.Ken Dawson,Mr.Rick Dykman,Ms.Mary Johnson emphasized the urgency of obtaining a permit to open Clam Pass as soon as possible and supported Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendation. Ms.Linda Roth,Ms.Marcia Cravens did not support Humiston&Moore Engineers recommendati Mr.Bill Klauber was concerned about the proposed 24/7 construction and potential noise. BOARD DISCUSSION The Board agreed it was imperative for PBSD to proceed on an emergency basis with ' tt. w `e NWP-27 application as USACE recommended was the most appropriate permit to have Clam Pas, � ned as soon as possible.Some members were concerned about the wider cut proposed fo Can: considered amending the construction plans and the suggestion troubled some Board : ;•reed the Board should listen to the experts. Subsequently,Chairman Cravens call , a mo ,: on. and vote. 410 - 8589 , 161 2Q vli Pelican Bay Services Division Board Special Session Minutes Monday,January 21, 2013 APPROVAL OF PBSD RECOMMENDATION TO BCC Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Mr. Dallas that the PBSD approve of a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners that the Clam Pass Construction plans as drawn on January 17,2013 by Humiston&Moore Engineers be utilized for an application of one-time permitting, specifically for emergency dredging to re-open Clam Pass. The Board voted 6-1 in favor and the motion passed.(O'Brien opposed) APPROVAL TO EXTEND MR.DORRILL'S CONTRACT Mr. Dorrill informed the Board on February 12 the BCC plans to discuss his management services contract that is set to expire in June 2013. Given the Clam Pass emergency conditions that exist and additional work required, the available options are to either: 1) begin the bid solicitation process anew for district administrative services; or 2) extend his management services contract by one-year and allow for an additional four-and-one-half hours compensatory time calculated on a weekly basis. Mr. Dallas made a motion, second by Ms. O'Brien that PBSD make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners to extend Mr. Dorrill's management services contract by one- year and include an additional four-and-one-half hours (4.5 hours) of compensatory time calculated on a weekly basis. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ADJOURN IVice Chairman Trecker made a motion, second by Chairman Cravens to adjourn. The Board I voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed and meeting adjourned at 10:38 a.m. Tom Cravens,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 2/6/2013 10:52:25 AM - ,_4, * - 8590 - 161 2A4' AD-HOC COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP AN APPROACH FOR STUDYING PATHWAYS&TREES OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD - MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY,JANUARY 22,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Ad-Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathways and Trees of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met Tuesday,January 22,2013 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida. The following members were present: Ad-Hoc Committee to Develop an Approach for Studying Pathways&Trees Keith J.Dallas,Chairman Dave Trecker Tom Cravens Mary Anne Womble absent Pelican Bay Services Division Board John Iaizzo Susan O'Brien Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Ian Orlikoff,ISA Certified Arborist 14 in the audience AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Tree Health along Pelican Bay Boulevard presentation by Ian Orlikoff,Certified Arborist 3. Audience Comments 4. Adjourn ROLL CALL With the exception of Ms.Mary Anne Womble,all Ad-Hoc Committee members were present. INTRODUCTION Chairman Dallas explained that in light of increased Clam Bay responsibilities given to the Pelican Bay Services Division,and the recent Pelican Bay Boulevard pathways repaving done by the County,he mentioned lowering the priority of the pathways project,with the exception of Mr.Ian Orlikoff Certified Arborist's initial evaluation of the tree canopy. TREE HEALTH ALONG PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PRESENTATION BY IAN ORLIKOFF.ISA CERTIFIED ARBORIST Mr.Ian Orlikoff,Certified Arborist,presented an initial analysis of the tree canoe ,. e west side of Pelican Bay Boulevard(from The Commons to North Tram)for the ulti ate goal developing a tree canopy management plan that is flexible,and can be implemen an ' offers alternative designs and materials.He stressed the importance of investing i -4 ° ts, which will reduce costs over time,infrastructure damage,and potential.3.'-ii Mr.Orlikoff evaluated specific trees and recommended miti.= $ 4-7.1'0.17444,!_is ° er curve-yv pathways around trees,or construct pathways using flexible perme.'i' _ k i . •did advise removing several trees due to lack of structural integrity c. � ® ` utti s�GS to accommodate .. r.. 4 . 161 ikt Ad-Hoc Committee to Develop a n A pp roach for Studying Pathways and Trees Meeting Minutes Tuesday,January 22,2013 previous pathways installations.He did not recommend using root barriers that can predispose trees . to fail. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Comments made to encourage involving homeowners associations adjacent to the evaluation areas prior to taking recommended actions;and to expand the evaluation area,include the impact to the tree canopy,and incorporate cost of an expanded evaluation into next year's budget. Mr.Lukasz clarified that the Pelican Bay Services Division or County was responsible for the area between the pathway and the street;and the association was responsible for the area between the pathway and private property. Mr.Orlikoff estimated the cost to prepare today's initial evaluation of the section of Pelican Bay Boulevard(from The Commons to the North Tram)was approximately$500. Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Mr.Cravens to make a recommendation to the Pelican Bay Services Division Board to have Mr. Ian Orlikoff, Certified Arborist evaluate the trees along the entire length of Pelican Bay Boulevard. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Cravens made made a motion, second by Chairman Dallas to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed,and meeting adjourned at 2:35 p.m. Keith J.Dallas,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 2/11/2013 9:42:02 AM 4 %';''‘:-:',:n,:- ,,tztr —: Wtv 5 161 2. A February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Re ular Session 5b.Administrator's Report-Clam Pass Permit Update Page 1 of 6 TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARINE&ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B •Naples,Florida 34104-3732 • (239)643-0166 •Fax(239)643-6632 January 25,2013 Tunis W.McElwain Chief,Fort Myers Section U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office 1520 Royal Palm Square Boulevard, Suite 310 Fort Myers,Florida 33919 RE: Corps Application No.: SAJ-1996-02789 Project: Clam Pass Dredging County: Collier Tunis, The enclosed application is a request for a Nationwide 27 permit authorization to conduct a single event excavation and dredging activity at Clam Pass. As you are aware,the Pass closed in late December 2012, and as a result of the closure,tidal exchange to the estuary system has been cut off. The Pelican Bay Community has put a lot of effort and expense into the restoration and enhancement of the mangrove system, and this effort is dependant on tidal exchange being maintained. Nationwide Permit 27 was established to allow for restoration and enhancement projects such as this and based on our previous conversations with your office;we believe that it is the best option available to restore tidal flow as quickly as possible. The intent under the Nationwide 27 is to address the immediate problem as expeditiously as possible,to give the County time to develop a more long term solution that will be intended to avoid problems like this in the future. The Project Purpose is to restore tidal flushing to the Clam Bay Estuary system and maintain restoration and enhancement achievements previously realized within the system. The Project Description is as follows. The proposed project will remove sand from the pass and associated flood shoal areas to restore tidal flow to the estuary. Dredging and excavation will be done by backhoe, hydraulic dredge,or a combination of both. Beach compatible sand will be deposited on the adjacent beaches as required by Chapter 161,Florida Statutes. Excavation and dredging work is divided into three zones as depicted on the enclosed project plans. Channel width will be a maximum of 45 feet bottom width through Section A and a design depth of-4.5 feet NGVD(-5.8 feet NAVD). A 0.5 foot over-dredge allowance will be allowed which would result in a maximum excavation/dredge depth of-5.0 feet NGVD. Widths through Sections B and C will vary according to the enclosed project plans which are based on a recent survey completed earlier this month. A minimum of a 5 foot offset buffer will be maintained between Page 1 of 3 • 6 I 2. A ► February 13,201elican Bay Services Division Boar Regular Session �Y Y 5b.Administrator's Report-Clam Pass Permit Update Page 2 of 6 the excavation and dredging and any mangrove prop roots growing adjacent to the dredge template. It is anticipated that approximately 21,000 cubic yards of sand will be removed from the Pass and flood shoal area. Approximately 4,300 cubic yards will be placed to the north of the Pass in the old channel meander (approximately 0.6 acre of which is below MHW). The remaining 17,000 cubic yards will be placed to the south of the Pass, starting at the north end of the depicted footprint and continuing south until the sand is expended(approximately 3 to 4 acres of this beach disposal area lies below MHW). Material excavated with a backhoe will be loaded into haul trucks and dumped in the proper locations on the beach with a lateral berm extending ahead of the discharge parallel to the shoreline to reduce turbidity and mixing in the nearshore. Material that is dredged hydraulically will be pumped to the appropriate location on the beach. Once placed,material will be spread and contoured with loaders,bulldozers,or other suitable beach grading equipment. Although not anticipated,any non-beach compatible material will be stockpiled within the staging area and hauled away to an appropriate upland disposal site landward of the CCCL. Equipment access to the beach will occur from beach access locations previously used in this area approximately 2.4 miles north and 2 miles south of the Pass or may be delivered directly to the site by barge at the discretion of the contractor. Work areas and travel corridors will be roped off to warn visitors to the beach of the construction operations and to keep them out of the work areas. The work is expected to take between 30 and 60 days.to complete. In order to expedite the work and complete operations before the sea turtle nesting season,the County would like to explore the possibility of working 16 or 24 hour days. This would allow the County to excavate and stockpile material during daylight hours,and spread the material on the beach disposal areas during evening hours. Listed Species: The applicant is willing and able to abide by the protection measures outlined in the SPBO for nesting sea turtles,nests and eggs as well as for manatees. It is the intent of the County to complete all activities prior to the May 1 start of sea turtle nesting season. No impacts to these species are anticipated. The closure of the pass prevents smalltooth sawfish from entering or leaving the bay system. Opening it up again will re-establish the access into the Bay system and allow for smalltooth sawfish utilization that is not currently available. Excavation and dredging of the pass is not expected to adversely affect the smalltooth sawfish and should in fact increase habitat availability and utilization within the Clam Bay system for this species. The project is outside of the identified Critical Habitat Units for the Piping Plover. It is approximately 20 miles north of Map Unit 27 on Marco Island and approximately 14 miles south of Map Unit 26 on Estero Island. However,Primary Constituent Elements(PCEs)for piping plover wintering habitat,those habitat components that support foraging,roosting,and sheltering,and the physical features necessary for maintaining the natural processes that support these habitat components,are present in the project area. PCEs of wintering piping plover critical habitat include sand or mud flats with no or sparse emergent vegetation. Adjacent unvegetated or sparsely vegetated sand,mud,or algal flats above high tide are also important. Important components of the beach/dune ecosystem include surf-cast algae,sparsely vegetated back beach and salterns,spits,and washover areas. Washover areas are broad,unvegetated zones,with little or no topographic relief,that are formed and maintained by the action of hurricanes,storm surge,or other extreme wave action. The project area contains beach and dune areas as well as tidal flats within the Bay system. No washover areas are present. The closure of the pass has resulted in a lack of tidal exchange within the Bays so the tidal flats are not currently subject to the rise and fall of the tide and therefore are not as available to foraging and roosting piping plovers as they would be with the opening of the Pass. The enclosed exhibits depict the closest defined critical habitat units and the tidal areas Page 2 of 3 Febria 13 2 JLPe ican ay Services Diivision Boa; Regular Session rY Y 9 5b.Administrator's Report-Clam Pass Permit Update Page3of6 lost and gained as a result of the proposed project. Further coordination of potential impacts to piping plovers resulting from this project will be undertaken with the USFWS. As discussed during our conversations with you and your staff during our meeting at your office,and depicted in this submittal,the project proposed will enhance and restore habitat that is in the process of being degraded by the Pass closure. Maintaining tidal flow into the estuary has been shown to be a vital component to the health and stability of the system. The proposed project will result in benefits to listed species,water quality,mangroves, and seagrasses,as well as to the myriad of other vertebrate and invertebrate species that call this estuary home. As such,we believe that the proposed project meets the qualifications for the Nationwide 27 permit and would appreciate your concurrence on this. It is also important to realize that this application for a single dredging activity is not intended to set a precedent for future dredging events. Future events,as may be needed,will be based on conditions at the time of the dredging proposal and may or may not require the same template to achieve/maintain the enhancement goals of the project. Coordination.with USFWS will continue to alleviate the potential Piping Plover concerns related to the placement of the sand on the adjacent beach areas. As you are aware,the project is of high importance to the community. The County has declared this a state of environmental emergency and the Board of County Commissioners has waived the normal contractor bidding procedures to expedite the selection of a contractor to commence with the project immediately upon authorization by your agency and the DEP. We would appreciate all efforts that can be made to expedite the review and permitting of this project. A copy of this information will be forwarded to the USFWS along with a request to review the proposed project changes in relation to the existing Draft Biological Opinion. We believe that the proposed changes result in no additional impacts to listed species. We will be asking F W S to review the submittal and offer their comments on the proposed changes. A modification to the FDEP permit which had previously been issued with a wider dredge template in Section A than what is currently proposed herein will be submitted shortly for the proposed changes to the template. We will keep the Corps informed as to the status of that application and the subsequent FDEP review. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any additional questions or comments regarding this submittal. Sincerely, //#04.714_, Timothy Hall Page 3 of 3 16 (r 13 2013 Pelican ay Services D on Bo rd Regular Session Feb uary y 9 5b.Administrator's Report-Clam Pass Permit Update Page 4 of 6 HUMISTON &MOORE s 4 i' ENGINEERS r 5679 STRAND COURT COASTAL NAPLES,FLORIDA 34110 ENGINEERING DESIGN FAX 239 594 2025 AND PERMITTING PHONE:239 594 2021 January 31, 2013 Sent via FedEx Elizabeth Young, Permit Manager DEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems 4708 Capital Circle N.W. Tallahassee, FL 32303 Re: Updated Plans and Applicant Information DEP Permit 0296087-001-JC HM File No. HM13-078, Clam Pass Dear Liz, This is a follow up to our meeting on January 11, 2013 regarding the status of Clam Pass being closed and the need for quick action to reopen the inlet. I advised that a survey was being completed to document current conditions, which was used to prepare corresponding updated plans. At that time I also advised that there was a change in management of the permit from the County. A letter from the county clarifying the new applicant and agents will be sent separately from the County Manager's office. Enclosed are two sets of signed and sealed construction plans for the dredging of Clam Pass. These plans have been prepared for current condition and are intended for this specific dredging event. The purpose of this dredging is to open the inlet for the environmental benefit and restoration of tidal flushing of the bay system. The County has declared this as an environmental emergency and has approved a change in the normal procedures of the purchasing Department to allow for an expedited selection of a contractor. A Pre-Bid meeting was held this past Tuesday, January 29, 2013 and bids are due next Friday. Once selected we would like to schedule our pre- construction conference with the Department as soon as possible and allow for mobilization of the contractor with construction commencing immediately upon approval of the pending Corps of Engineers' permit. We anticipate that all of Sections A and B will be dredged. Section C has been included as an alternative bid item depending on the capabilities of the contractors submitting bids. While it would be desirable to dredge Section C, we do not consider it necessary to meet the immediate emergency of reopening the inlet, and if C is not dredged at this time, it is intended that through completion of this immediate necessary dredging operation the inlet will remain open a sufficient time to allow for evaluation of a long term dredging program for this system. Given this extreme condition and need for immediate action, we appreciate everything the Department can do to expedite approval of this plan. As you can see from the timeline above, it is our intent to complete this work as soon as possible to potentially avoid the sea turtle nesting season. . 2 1 'February 2 3 Pelican Bay Servie Division Bo Regular Session rY 9 5b.Administrator's Report-Clam Pass Permit Update • Page 5 of 6 Once you review this request, please give me a call to discuss the sufficiency of the plans and if you need anything else to approve this specific project. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely yours, HUMISTON : MOO- , ENGINEERS Brett D. Moore, P.E. Enclosure Copy to: Neil Dorrill, Administrator, Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Tim Hall, Turrell Hall and Associates, Inc. 161 2Ai ,�Iyt/ Bay Services Division Board RA gular Session February 13,2013 Pelican y g 5b.Administrator's Report-Clam Pass Permit Update Page 6 of 6 =ASr Office of the County Manager rt Leo E. Ochs, Jr. " 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 202•Naples Florida 34112-5746•(239)252-8383•FAX:(239)252-4010 February 1,2013 Ms. Elizabeth Young, Permit Manager FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems 4708 Capital Circle, N.W. Tallahassee, FL 32303 RE: Collier County Clam Pass Permit No.0296087-001-JC Dear Ms.Young: As a result of recent action by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners concerning the above permit,please note the following: Permittee: Collier County c/o W. Neil Dorrill,Administrator Pelican Bay Services Division 801 Laurel Oak Drive,Suite 605 Naples, FL 34108 Authorized Agents: Humiston and Moore Engineers c/o Brett D.Moore,P.E. 5679 Strand Court Naples, FL 34110 Turrell Hall and Associates c/o Tim Hall 3584 Exchange Avenue,Suite B Naples, FL 34104 If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Leo .Ochs,Jr. County Manager!' CC: Collier �• my Board of County Commissioners W. Neil Dorrill,Administrator, Pelican Bay Services Division Brett Moore, P.E., Humiston and Moore Engineers Tim Hall,Turrell Hall and Associates February 13,201 elicaa Ba ServiceseisAoard Re ular Session ry � 9 5c. Administrator's Report-Crosswalk Standards(John Chandler) Page 1 of 4 Original Message From: Jim Carr [mailto:carr @abbinc.com] Sent: Wednesday,February 06, 2013 10:32 AM To: ResnickLisa Subject: RE: Crosswalk Standards Lisa, Regarding Question#2,there is not a local or state standard for minimum pedestrian volumes in warranting a crosswalk. The MUTCD and Florida Green Book standards suggest and/or require how the crosswalks are to be marked(width,location, signage and marking, etc.). A crosswalk is defined by MUTCD 2009 Edition as: "(a)that part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway,and in the absence of a sidewalk on one side of the roadway,the part of a roadway included within the extension of the lateral lines of the sidewalk at right angles to the center line;(b)any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated as a pedestrian crossing by pavement marking lines on the surface, which might be supplemented by contrasting pavement texture, style,or color." So, according to(a), crosswalks are the portions of roadway that connect sidewalks at intersections, whether the area is marked or not. Crosswalks at intersections should be marked to provide guidance where pedestrians are expected to cross, regardless of pedestrian volumes. Older existing intersections may or may not be marked at all legs of the intersection. New construction would implement current marking and signage standards. Pedestrian volume is only a consideration,among many other things, when determining a midblock crossing location between intersections. The question was specific to crossings across Pelican Bay Boulevard such as North Pointe and Crayton where there is no stop condition on PBB (the stop is only at the side street). These crosswalks are currently marked with sign and striping. Eliminating them would not be justified and would not be permitted by Collier County Traffic Operations. Adding new striping, contrasting pavement texture and color, and advance warning signage is not required at the existing crosswalks, but would provide additional measures to alert pedestrians and road users of the pedestrian use as a crossing location. The two crosswalks on Gulf Park Drive are similar to the two on PBB, however the Gulf Park Drive crosswalks are not currently marked with sign and striping. Although the County wouldn't require new markings at this time,these should be signed and marked per current standards for the same reasons, regardless of pedestrian volume. Attached is the Pedestrian Crossing section(two pages)from the Florida Greenbook for reference. Jim Carr, P.E. Agnoli, Barber& Brundage, Inc. 7400 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34108 239.597.3111 ext. 215 239.566.2203 fax February,13,20131.lic63ajServices 2sio $ eguiar Session 5c. Administrator's Report-Crosswalk Standards(John Chandler) Page 2 of 4 Original Message From: ResnickLisa[mailto:LResnick@colliergov.net<mailto:LResnick @colliergov.net>] Sent: Thursday,January 24,2013 4:18 PM To: Jim Carr Mr. Chandler is requesting the County and State crosswalk standards for crosswalks, specifically: Original Message From: John Chandler [mailto:johnchandler219Agmail.com<mailto:johnchandler219(&,,gmail.com>] Sent: Wednesday,January 23,2013 1:20 PM To: ResnickLisa Subject: Re: Feb 13 Agenda Requests -County and State standards for minimum volume of pedestrians required to warrant a crosswalk(other than at a Stop sign). This should be presented by Staff and relates to whether or not the existing walks crossing PBB at North Pointe and Crayton should be bricked or eliminated. This information is also relevant to potentially adding crosswalks across Gulf Park Drive. Let me know if you have questions. Thanks, Lisa February 13 2013 iicaó3y lervices 2oAar\igular Session 5c. Administrator's Report-Crosswalk Standards(John Chandler) Page 3 of 4 I Topic#625-000-015 May-2011 Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways F PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS The design of pedestrian crossings and parallel pathways within the right of way shall be considered an integral part of the overall design of a street or highway. The development of protection at any remaining crossings or conflict points must be adequate to achieve a total pedestrian transportation mode that is reasonably safe. F.1 Crosswalks Crosswalks serve as the pedestrian right-of-way across streets. A crosswalk is: (a) that part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway, measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway; (b) any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface. The design of pedestrian crosswalks should be based on the following requirements: • Crosswalks should be placed at locations with ample sight distances • At crossings, the roadway should be free from changes in alignment or cross section • The entire length of crosswalk shall be visible to drivers at a sufficient distance to allow a stopping maneuver • Stop bars or yield markings, in conjunction with the appropriate signing,shall be provided at all marked crosswalks • All crosswalks shall be easily identified and clearly delineated, in accordance with Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) (Rule 14-15.010) F.1.a Marked Crosswalks Marked crosswalks are one tool to allow pedestrians to cross the roadway safely. They are often used in combination with other treatments (signs, flashing beacons, curb extensions, pedestrian signals, raised median or refuge islands, and enhanced overhead lighting). Marked crosswalks serve two purposes: 1) to inform motorists of the location of a pedestrian crossing so that they have time to lawfully yield to a crossing pedestrian; and 2) to Pedestrian Facilities 8-8 February 13,201 lic�Ba ServicesivisibnBo r ry gular Session 5c. Administrator's Report-Crosswalk Standards(John Chandler) Page 4 of 4 Topic#625-000-015 May-2011 Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways assure the pedestrian that a legal crosswalk exists at a particular location. Marked crosswalks shall not be installed in an uncontrolled environment (without signals, stop signs, or yield signs) when the posted speeds are greater than 40 mph, or on multilane roads where traffic volumes exceed 12,000 vpd (without raised median) or 15,000 vpd (with raised median). Marked crosswalks can also be used to create midblock crossings. F.1.b Midblock Crosswalks Midblock crossings help meet crossing needs within an area. At specific locations where intersections are spaced relatively far apart or substantial pedestrian generators are located between intersections, midblock crossing may be used; however, since midblock crossings are not generally expected by motorists, they should be well signed and marked. Midblock crossings are located according to a number of factors including pedestrian volume, traffic volume, roadway width, traffic speed and type, desired paths for pedestrians, land use, and to accommodate transit connectivity. Midblock crossings should not be installed where sight distance or sight lines are limited for either the motorist or pedestrian. Midblock crossings should be illuminated, marked, and outfitted with advanced warning signs or warning flasher in accordance with the MUTCD. F.1.c Crossing Distance Considerations At mid block locations where roadway crossings exceed sixty feet, or where there are a limited number of gaps in traffic, a median or crossing island should be considered and be accessible. When a midblock crossing is provided along a multilane arterial, a median or crossing island is desirable, and consideration should be given to providing supplementary traffic control devices (signs, beacons, signals, etc.). F.2 Curb Ramps Curb ramps provide access between the sidewalk and the street for people who use mobility aids such as wheelchairs and scooters, people pushing strollers and pulling suitcases, children on bicycles, and delivery services. Curb ramps, with detectable warnings, meeting the requirements of ADA Standards for Accessible Pedestrian Facilities 8-9 161 2A � February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session rY Y 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 1 of 12 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-January 31,2013 Operating Fund 109-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments 2,383,956.59 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles& Equipment 1,085,189.35 Due from Property Appraiser - Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 3,469,145.94 Total Assets $ 3,469,145.94 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ 53,739.30 Accrued Wages Payable - Goods Received/Inventory Recv'd 17,261.44 Total Liabilities $ 71,000.74 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 900,302.49 Excess Revenues(Expenditures) 2,497,842.71 Total Fund Balance 3,398,145.20 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 3,469,145.94 161 2A \ 2 13 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session February 13, 0 y 9 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 2 of 12 Pelican Bay Services r Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-January 31,2013 Operating Fund 109-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carryforward $ 951,600.00 $ 951,600.00 $ 951,600.00 $ - Special Assessment-Water Management Admin 695,000.00 576,850.00 579,047.26 2,197.26 Special Assessment-Right of Way Beautification 1,878,800.00 1,559,404.00 1,565,095.00 5,691.00 Charges for Services 1,500.00 - - - Insurance Company Refunds - - 1,549.74 1,549.74 Surplus Property Sales - - - Revenue Reserve (128,700.00) - Interest 15,800.00 5,266.67 2,064.89 (3,201.78) Total Operating Revenues $ 3,414,000.00 $ 3,093,120.67 $ 3,099,356.89 $ 6,236.22 Operating Expenditures: Water Management Administration Payroll Expense $ 42,000.00 $ 12,900.00 $ 9,337.33 $ 3,562.67 Emergency Maintenace and Repairs 8,800.00 - - - IT Direct Capital 200.00 - - - IT Office Automation/Billing Hr. 4,600.00 460.00 400.00 60.00 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 85,100.00 42,600.00 42,550.00 50.00 Inter Payment/Mnt.Site Ins. Assessment 13,400.00 6,700.00 6,700.00 - Other Contractural Services 29,700.00 9,900.00 8,275.00 1,625.00 Telephone 3,900.00 1,300.00 1,073.40 226.60 Postage and Freight 2,200.00 700.00 3.97 696.03 Rent Buildings and Equipment 11,000.00 4,600.00 4,492.23 107.77 Insurance-General 1,000.00 - - - Printing,Binding and Copying 1,800.00 200.00 10.47 189.53 Clerk's Recording Fees 1,500.00 - - - Advertising 1,500.00 - - - Other Office and Operating Supplies 2,000.00 700.00 71.15 628.85 Training and Education 1,100.00 400.00 352.95 47.05 Total Water Management Admin Operating $ 209,800.00 $ 80,460.00 $ 73,266.50 $ 7,193.50 Water Management Field Operations Payroll Expense $ 135,800.00 $ 41,800.00 $ 31,725.04 $ 10,074.96 Engineering Fees 10,000.00 3,300.00 1,728.90 1,571.10 Flood Control Berm and Swale Mntc. 18,000.00 6,000.00 1,468.33 4,531.67 Landscape Materials/Replanting Program 8,500.00 700.00 - 700.00 Interdepartmental Payment(Water Quality Lab) 30,100.00 10,000.00 2,382.50 7,617.50 Plan Review Fees 1,500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 1,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Temporary Labor 44,900.00 26,800.00 30,984.00 (4,184.00) Telephone 500.00 200.00 148.11 51.89 Trash and Garbage 5,700.00 1,500.00 2,787.00 (1,287.00) Motor Pool Rental Charge 100.00 100.00 122.50 (22.50) Insurance-General 2,400.00 - - - Insurance-Auto 900.00 - - - Building Repairs&Mntc. 1,700.00 - - - Fleet Maintenance and Parts 2,400.00 2,400.00 3,596.25 (1,196.25) Fuel and Lubricants 3,300.00 1,100.00 780.62 319.38 Tree Triming 36,000.00 12,000.00 7,488.00 4,512.00 Clothing and Uniforms 1,100.00 500.00 579.75 (79.75) Page 1of3 161 2A1 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Se sion 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 3 of 12 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 500.00 767.12 (267.12) Fertilizer and Herbicides 98,400.00 25,100.00 21,347.67 3,752.33 Other Repairs and Maintenance 1,500.00 1,100.00 2,274.10 (1,174.10) Other Operating Supplies and Equipment 2,500.00 800.00 1,164.78 (364.78) Total Water Management Field Operating $ 406,800.00 $ 134,200.00 $ 109,344.67 $ 24,855.33 Right of Way Beautification-Operating Payroll Expense $ 43,300.00 $ 13,300.00 $ 9,620.68 $ 3,679.32 Emergency Repairs and Maintenance 7,400.00 - - - IT Direct Capital 200.00 - - - Office Automation 9,500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 37,100.00 12,400.00 9,110.00 3,290.00 Telephone 3,900.00 1,300.00 1,072.40 227.60 Postage 2,200.00 700.00 3.97 696.03 Rent Buildings/Equipment/Storage 12,200.00 5,100.00 4,891.93 208.07 Insurance-General 500.00 - - - Printing,Binding and Copying 2,600.00 400.00 - 400.00 Clerk's Recording 2,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Legal Advertising 2,000.00 300.00 - 300.00 Office Supplies General 2,500.00 600.00 71.15 528.85 Training and Education 1,500.00 500.00 453.30 46.70 Total Right of Way Beautification Operating $ 126,900.00 $ 34,900.00 $ 25,223.43 $ 9,676.57 Right of Way Beautification-Field Payroll Expense $ 797,000.00 $ 245,200.00 $ 174,357.06 $ 70,842.94 Emergency Maintenance and Repairs 3,300.00 1,100.00 809.68 290.32 Flood Control(Water Use&Swale/Berm Mntc.) 89,900.00 30,800.00 30,840.06 (40.06) Pest Control 6,000.00 3,200.00 3,625.00 (425.00) Landscape Incidentals 2,500.00 800.00 582.82 217.18 Other Contractural Services 29,500.00 15,000.00 13,841.00 1,159.00 Temporary Labor 201,400.00 87,300.00 86,253.44 1,046.56 Telephone 3,200.00 1,100.00 656.17 443.83 Electricity*$2,620 J/E pending to SL Fund 778 3,400.00 1,100.00 3,283.01 ' (2,183.01) Trash and Garbage 17,000.00 4,500.00 4,519.90 (19.90) Rent Equipment 2,500.00 2,100.00 2,598.99 (498.99) Motor Pool Rental Charge 500.00 200.00 - 200.00 Insurance-General 9,300.00 - - - Insurance-Auto 10,000.00 - - - Building Repairs and Maintenance 1,700.00 600.00 600.00 Fleet Maintenance and Parts 17,600.00 5,900.00 7,413.25 (1,513.25) Fuel and Lubricants 64,600.00 19,500.00 10,024.38 9,475.62 Licenses,Permits,Training 800.00 300.00 - 300.00 Tree Triming 64,500.00 9,700.00 - 9,700.00 Clothing and Uniforms 9,400.00 2,000.00 1,907.98 92.02 Personal Safety Equipment 3,000.00 1,000.00 796.97 203.03 Fertilizer and Herbicides 62,000.00 32,500.00 33,508.17 (1,008.17) Landscape Maintenance 46,000.00 30,700.00 36,146.25 (5,446.25) Mulch/Landscape Materials 52,000.00 44,200.00 33,092.50 11,107.50 Pathway Repairs 6,000.00 2,000.00 - 2,000.00 Sprinkler Maintenance 30,000.00 11,800.00 11,125.70 674.30 Painting Supplies 800.00 300.00 43.88 256.12 Traffic Signs 3,000.00 1,000.00 - 1,000.00 Minor Operating Equipment 3,700.00 1,200.00 857.65 342.35 Other Operating Supplies 9,000.00 3,000.00 2,327.57 672.43 Total Right of Way Beautification-Field Operating $ 1,549,600.00 $ 558,100.00 $ 458,611.43 $ 99,488.57 Total Operating Expenditures $ 2,293,100.00 $ 807,660.00 $ 666,446.03 $ 141,213.97 Page 2 of 3 February 13,2013 Pelican SdTCiceJDivision 6t�rd�F✓!t gular Se sion 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 4 of 12 Capital Expenditures: Water Management Field Operations - Other Machinery and Equipment $ 1,000.00 $ - $ - $ - General Improvements - - - - Total Water Management Field Operations Capital $ 1,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Right of Way Beautification-Field Autos and Trucks $ 35,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 31,907.38 $ 3,092.62 Other Machinery and Equipmeny 1,000.00 - - - Total Right of Way Beautification-Field Capital $ 36,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 31,907.38 $ 3,092.62 Total Capital Expenditures $ 37,000.00 $ 35,000.00 $ 31,907.38 $ 3,092.62 Total Operating Expenditures $ 2,330,100.00 $ 842,660.00 $ 698,353.41 $ 144,306.59 Non-Operating Expenditures: Transfer to Fund 322 $ 241,700.00 $ 241,700.00 $ 241,700.00 $ - Tax Collector Fees 79,300.00 47,580.00 42,923.24 4,656.76 Property Appraiser Fees 72,900.00 43,740.00 39,607.92 4,132.08 Reserves(2 1/2 months for Operations) 533,400.00 550,400.00 550,400.00 - Reserve for Operating Fund Capital Improvement 65,000.00 - - - Reserves for Equipment 107,800.00 107,800.00 107,800.00 - Reserved for Attrition (16,200.00) (16,200.00) (16,200.00) - Revenue Reserve - - - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures $ 1,083,900.00 $ 975,020.00 $ 966,231.16 $ 8,788.84 Total Expenditures $ 3,414,000.00 $ 1,817,680.00 $ 1,664,584.57 $ 153,095.43 Net Profit/(Loss) $ - $ 1,275,440.67 $ 1,434,772.32 $ 159,331.65 Page 3 of 3 161 2 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board egular S ssion ry Y 9 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 5 of 12 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-January 31,2013 Street Lighting Fund 778-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 710,448.04 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles&Equipment 54,386.52 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets $ 764,834.56 Total Assets $ 764,834.56 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ - Goods Received/Inventory Recv'd 42.00 Accrued Wages Payable - Total Liabilities $ 42.00 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 401,763.99 Excess Revenue(Expenditures) 363,028.57 Total Fund Balance 764,792.56 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 764,834.56 ....... . ... 22 11t February 13,2013 Pelican Bay BoardKeg I Sess on ry Y 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 6 of 12 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-January 31,2013 Street Lighting Fund 778-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carryforward $ 376,200.00 $ 376,200.00 $ 376,200.00 $ - Curent Ad Valorem Tax 440,700.00 352,560.00 359,162.44 $ 6,602.44 Delinquent Ad Valorem Tax $ - Insurance Claim 1,286.80 $ 1,286.80 Revenue Reserve $ (22,300.00) Interest 6,700.00 670.00 631.24 $ (38.76) Total Operating Revenues 801,300.00 729,430.00 737,280.48 7,850.48 Operating Expenditures: Street Lighting Administration Payroll Expense $ 42,200.00 $ 13,000.00 $ 10,570.89 $ 2,429.11 Indirect Cost Reimbursement 8,700.00 $ 4,350.00 4,350.00 $ - Other Contractural Services 26,900.00 $ 8,966.67 8,275.00 $ 691.67 Telephone 3,600.00 $ 1,200.00 853.10 $ 346.90 Postage and Freight 2,000.00 $ 500.00 3.97 $ 496.03 Rent Buildings/Equipment/Storage 11,800.00 $ 4,900.00 4,727.14 $ 172.86 Insurance-General 300.00 $ - - $ - Office Supplies General 800.00 $ 300.00 42.00 $ 258.00 Other Office and Operating Supplies 1,000.00 $ 300.00 - $ 300.00 Total Street Lighting Admin Operating 97,300.00 33,516.67 28,822.10 4,694.57 Street Lighting Field Operations Payroll Expense 63,900.00 19,700.00 17,136.33 2,563.67 Emergency Maintenance& Repairs 9,600.00 - - - Other Contractual Services 800.00 300.00 - 300.00 Telephone 500.00 200.00 108.12 91.88 Electricity 44,200.00 14,700.00 8,084.91 6,615.09 Insurance-General 900.00 - - - Insurance-Auto 900.00 - - - Building Maintenace& Repairs 1,700.00 - - - Fleet Maintenance and Parts 1,500.00 500.00 90.00 410.00 Fuel and Lubricants 900.00 300.00 219.29 80.71 Other Equipment Repairs/Supplies 200.00 100.00 - 100.00 Personal Safety Equipment 500.00 200.00 - 200.00 Electrical Contractors 7,300.00 2,400.00 - 2,400.00 Page 1 of 2 161 2 A 1� February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sessio Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 7 of 12 Light Bulb Ballast 13,100.00 4,300.00 4,271.96 28.04 Total Street Lighting Field Operating 146,000.00 42,700.00 29,910.61 12,789.39 Total Field Expenditures 243,300.00 76,216.67 58,732.71 17,483.96 Capital Expenditures: Street Lighting Field Operations Other Machinery/Equipment 1,000.00 - - - General Improvements - - - - Total Capital Expenditures 1,000.00 - - - Total Operating Expenditures 244,300.00 76,216.67 58,732.71 17,483.96 Non-Operating Expenditures: Tax Collector Fees 13,700.00 8,220.00 7,225.99 994.01 Property Appraiser Fees 9,000.00 900.00 - 900.00 Reserve for Future Construction 444,200.00 444,200.00 444,200.00 - Reserves(2 1/2 mos.for Operations) 57,600.00 57,600.00 57,600.00 - Reserves for Equipment 32,500.00 32,500.00 32,500.00 - Revenue Reserve - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures 557,000.00 543,420.00 541,525.99 1,894.01 Total Expenditures 801,300.00 619,636.67 600,258.70 19,377.97 Net Profit/(Loss) - 109,793.33 137,021.78 27,228.45 Page 2 of 2 February 13,2013 Pelican is s ision Boa Rr Ass n 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 8 of 12 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-January 31,2013 Clam Bay Fund 320-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 154,857.49 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles&Equipment 287,297.40 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets 442,154.89 Total Assets $ 442,154.89 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ - Goods Received/Inventory Recv'd 71.50 Accrued Wages Payable Total Liabilities 71.50 Fund Balance Fund Balance- unreserved 200,198.08 Excess Revenues(Expenditures) 241,885.31 Total Fund Balance 442,083.39 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 442,154.89 1 161 2Ai qi Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-January 31,2013 Clam Bay Fund 320-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward $ 354,800.00 $ 354,800.00 $ 354,800.00 $ - Special Assessment 134,400.00 111,552.00 111,918.81 366.81 Miscellaneous Income - - Fund 111 32,300.00 - - - Revenue Reserve (6,800.00) - - Interest 800.00 300.00 440.55 140.55 Total Operating Revenues $ 515,500.00 $ 466,652.00 $ 467,159.36 $ 507.36 Operating Expenditures: Clam Bay Restoration Engineering Fees $ 164,478.75 $ 6,416.67 $ 4,080.00 $ 2,336.67 Other Contractural Services 10,464.65 6,802.02 6,761.58 40.44 Tree Trimming 67,000.00 11,200.00 7,488.00 3,712.00 Other Equipment Repairs 577.77 - - - Aerial Photography 15,000.00 7,500.00 5,449.80 2,050.20 Minor Operating 2,988.01 - - - Other Operating Supplies 1,500.00 - - - Total Clam Bay Restoration $ 262,009.18 $ 31,918.69 $ 23,779.38 $ 8,139.31 Clam Bay Ecosystem Engineering Fees $ - $ - $ 9,261.25 $ (9,261.25) Licenses and Permits - - - - Other Contractual Services 212,859.25 202,216.29 189,123.80 13,092.49 Total Clam Bay Ecosystem $ 212,859.25 $ 202,216.29 $ 198,385.05 $ 3,831.24 Total Capital Expenditures $ 11,000.00 $ - $ - $ - Total Clam Bay Operating Expenditures $ 485,868.43 $ 234,134.98 $ 222,164.43 $ 11,970.55 Non-Operating Expenditures: Tax Collector Fees $ 4,200.00 $ 3,360.00 $ 2,226.35 $ 1,133.65 Property Appraiser Fees 2,700.00 2,160.00 2,015.21 144.79 Reserves for Operations 22,700.00 - - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures $ 29,600.00 $ 5,520.00 $ 4,241.56 $ 1,278.44 Page 1 of 2 161 2A + Total Expenditures $ 515,468.43 $ 239,654.98 $ 226,405.99 $ 13,248.99 Net Profit/(Loss) $ - $ 226,997.02 $ 240,753.37 $ 13,756.35 Page 2 of 2 161 A February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 5d.Administrator's Report-Monthly Financial Report,January 2013 Page 11 of 12 Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Balance Sheet-January 31,2013 Capital Projects Fund 322-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Assets Current Assets Cash and Investments $ 2,730,265.76 Interest Receivable - Improvements,Vehicles& Equipment 1,213,800.81 Due from Tax Collector - Total Current Assets 3,944,066.57 Total Assets $ 3,944,066.57 Liabilities and Fund Balance Current Liabilities Accounts/Trade Payable $ 18,826.00 Goods Received Inv. Received 8,689.71 Total Liabilities 27,515.71 Fund Balance Fund Balance-unreserved 2,501,578.47 Excess Revenues(Expenditures) 1,414,972.39 Total Fund Balance 3,916,550.86 Total Liabilities and Fund Balance $ 3,944,066.57 161 2At Pelican Bay Services Municipal Services Taxing Unit Income Statement w/Budget-January 31, 2013 Capital Projects Fund 322-FY 2013 (Unaudited) Annual YTD YTD Budget Budget Actual Variance Operating Revenues: Carry Forward $ 2,618,011.49 $ 2,618,011.49 $ 2,618,011.49 $ - Transfer from Fund 109 General 241,700.00 241,700.00 241,700.00 - Foundation Payment for Crosswalks - - - - Special Assessment 324,400.00 269,252.00 270,323.10 1,071.10 Transfer from Tax Collector - - - - Interest 25,700.00 6,425.00 3,780.62 (2,644.38) Total Operating Revenues $ 3,209,811.49 $ 3,135,388.49 $3,133,815.21 $ (1,573.28) Operating Expenditures: Irrigation& Landscaping Hardscape Project(50066) Engineering Fees $ 125,332.12 $ 20,888.69 $ 6,784.55 $ 14,104.14 Other Contractural Services 2,714,133.64 135,706.68 117,930.01 17,776.67 Sprinkler System Repairs - - - - Landscape material 64,550.01 24,529.00 23,522.25 1,006.75 Permits - - - - Electrical - - 2,285.67 (2,285.67) Other Operating Supplies(Pavers) - - - - Other Road Materials - - 2,500.00 (2,500.00) Traffic Sign Restoration Project(50103) Traffic Signs 78,920.00 11,838.00 5,730.00 6,108.00 Lake Bank Project(51026) Swale &Slope Maintenance 192,775.72 115,665.43 100,822.99 14,842.44 Engineering Fees 500.00 - - - Other Contractural Services 22,275.72 - - - Total Irrigation & Landscaping Expenditures $ 3,198,487.21 $ 308,627.80 $ 259,575.47 $ 49,052.33 Non-Operating Expenditures: Tax Collector Fees $ 10,000.00 $ 7,500.00 $ 5,377.40 $ 2,122.60 Property Appraiser Fees 6,600.00 4,950.00 4,867.45 82.55 Reserve for Contingencies - - - - Revenue Reserve 17,500.00 - - - Total Non-Operating Expenditures: $ 34,100.00 $ 12,450.00 $ 10,244.85 $ 2,205.15 Total Expenditures $ 3,232,587.21 $ 321,077.80 $ 269,820.32 $ 51,257.48 Net Profit/(Loss) $ - $ 2,814,310.69 $2,863,994.89 $ 49,684.20 Page 1 of 1 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 1 2 A 1 County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien)7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by Co y p ( Page 1 of 17 COLLIER COUNTY BID SCHEDULE SUMMARY COLLIER COUNTY CLAM PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING-2013 January 25, 2013 BID SCHEDULE . HUMISTON AND MOORE ENGINEERS FILE NO. 13-078 Estimated Unit Total Item Quantity Unit Cost Cost 1. Mobilization and demobilization 1 Job L.S. $ 2. Survey control and progress surveys 1 Job L.S. $ 3. Dredging of Sections A and B, 12,200 cy $ $ beach fill placement and grading 4. Turbidity monitoring 1 Job L.S. $ 5. Removal and reinstallation 3 each $ $ of informational signage(if necessary) 6. Removal of non-beach compatible material resulting from Sections A&B1 20 cy $ $ 7. Final grading&tilling 1 Job L.S. $ 8. Restoration of construction access and staging area 1 Job L.S $ 9. Payment and 1 Job L.S. $ Performance Bond Total Base Bid $ Bid Alternate 10. Mobilization and demobilization 1 Job L.S. $ 11. Dredging of Section C, Beach 8,100 cy $ $ fill placement and grading 12. Removal and reinstallation 1 each $ $ of informational signage(if necessary) 13. Survey control and progress surveys 1 Job L.S. $ 14. Removal of non-beach compatible material resulting from Section C2 20 cy $ $ 15. Final grading&tilling 1 Job L.S. $ Total Bid Alternate $ Total Base Bid Plus Alternate $ 1.2 From within the allowable dredge cut February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 16 1 IT. 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 2 of 17 COLLIER COUNTY Technical Specifications COLLIER COUNTY CLAM PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING-2013 January 25, 2013 BID SCHEDULE HUMISTON AND MOORE ENGINEERS FILE NO. 13-078 TS-1.0 Scope of WORK TS-2.0 Pre-construction Meeting and Submittals TS-3.0 Order of WORK TS-4.0 Layout of the WORK TS-5.0 Record Drawings TS-6.0 Site Conditions TS-7.0 Dredging TS-8.0 Beach Fill TS-9.0 Payment TS-10.0 General TS-11.0 Environmental Protection Technical Specification Page 1 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 J BA 17 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen am ass(Susa ) Page 3 of 17 TS-1.0 Scope of WORK TS-1.1 The WORK consists of furnishing all labor, materials, and equipment, and performing all tasks necessary for the maintenance dredging of approximately 20,000 cubic yards of sand from Clam Pass, and placement of sand fill along the shoreline to both the north and south of Clam Pass inlet as described herein. For the purpose of these technical specifications, OWNER shall mean Collier County, and ENGINEER shall mean Humiston and Moore Engineers or Turrell Hall and Associates, Inc. The material to be dredged is distributed among three areas as designated as Sections A, B, and C, on the plans. It is the intent of the County to, at a minimum, complete the dredging as specified for Sections A and B, because these are contiguous to the beach and are the shallowest areas and the easiest to access with mechanical excavation equipment, and past experience has shown that logistically Sections A and B can be excavated mechanically. Section C presents logistical difficulty to mechanical excavation that is somewhat different from the conditions in Sections A and B. Section C has greater water depths and distribution of the material to be dredged over a wider area. In the past Section C has always been dredged with a hydraulic dredge, with the material being pumped directly to the beach. This has been done during maintenance operations when all three sections, A, B, and C, were dredged hydraulically. For this reason, and because the most immediate need is to remove the material from Sections A and B, Section C has been added to the bid schedule as a bid alternate. This has been done to provide contractors, who may have the means of completing all three Sections, with an opportunity to provide the County with a price for completing all three Sections as part of this project. The amount of material to be dredged is summarized in the following Table TS-1 and shown in detail in the Construction Plans: Table TS-1 Clam Pass Dredge Quantities Dredge Channel Width Estimated Design Cut Estimated Design Cut Location at Design Volume in cubic yards Volume (cy)with a Depth (ft) (cy) 6-inch Overdepth Section A 45' 5,800 cy to-5.8 ft NAVD 6,200 cy to-6.3 ft NAVD Stations 0+00 (-4.5 NGVD) (-5.0 NGVD) thru 3+64.5 Section B Varies 5,400 cy to-5.3 ft NAVD 6,000 cy to-5.8 ft NAVD Stations 4+10 (-4.0 NGVD) (-4.5 NGVD) to 6+60 Section C Varies 6,600 cy to-4.8 ft NAVD 8,100 cy to-5.3 ft NAVD Stations 7+10 (-3.5 NGVD) (-4.0 NGVD) to 17+50 Note: OWNER has the right to reduce design elevations of the dredging during construction based on the material, which may affect the total dredge quantity. TS-1.2 This WORK must be completed according to the plans and these specifications within the time specified in the contract and within compliance with the conditions of the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Corps of Engineers, and all local permits including permits from Collier County. Technical Specification Page 2 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 1 6 I 2 A (4, 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 4 of 17 TS-1.3 The CONTRACTOR is solely responsible for all construction means, methods, techniques, and procedures including construction layout and staking, and the sequence of the WORK, except as provided for in section TS-3.0, Order of WORK. TS-2.0 Pre-Construction Meeting and Submittals TS-2.1 Prior to commencement of construction, CONTRACTOR shall meet with ENGINEER and OWNER. CONTRACTOR's designated superintendent, as required under the General Terms and Conditions shall be present at the pre-construction meeting. TS-2.2 A minimum of three days prior to the pre-construction meeting, the CONTRACTOR shall submit to ENGINEER, for the OWNER's approval, an Operations Plan which shall describe in detail, as a minimum, the CONTRACTOR's proposed: 1. Order of WORK, 2. Anticipated schedule, including estimated start and completion dates, and anticipated daily production (i.e. cubic yards per day) 3. Vessels and heavy equipment to be used, 4. Water transportation for OWNER and ENGINEER if barge or other floating equipment is to be used, 5. Construction access to be used for equipment mobilization and demobilization, 6. Specific method of dredging and disposal of dredged material from the pass. Details will include staging of any equipment, procedures for removing the material from the approved dredge cut, method of material transport to the disposal area. 7. Number and qualifications of personnel to be used, 8. Specific methods to be used in establishing horizontal and vertical control and for staking out the WORK, 9. Subcontractors, including the registered PSM who will conduct progress and payment surveys, and the anticipated frequency of surveys. 10. A form to be used for reporting daily operations. This form shall include a place to record the number of personnel and equipment at the site, quantities of material dredged and placed on the beach disposal area during the reporting period, a description of the character of the material dredged, the locations dredged during the reporting period, number of truckloads of material hauled, the beach stations where material was placed during the reporting period, weather and sea conditions, the extent of and reason for any delays, visits from regulatory agencies, and any instructions received from the County or any County representative. If a hydraulic dredge is used for any part of the WORK, the daily reports of operation shall include the start and stop stations of both the dredge and the end of the discharge pipe. Turbidity measurements as required by the regulatory permits may be included on the daily reports of operation or may be submitted on a separate form. Reporting forms shall be provided to OWNER or ENGINEER by noon on the day following the day covered by the daily Report of Operations. 11. If a hydraulic dredge is to be used for any part of the WORK, in addition to the information listed under item 10 above, CONTRACTOR shall provide information on the size of the dredge, including horsepower on the main engine and the size of the intake and discharge pipelines, draft required by the dredge barge, minimum depth to which the dredge is capable of excavating, and the estimated daily production rates. Technical Specification Page 3 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 5 of 17 l 1 6 1 2 A Acceptance of the plan by the OWNER indicates an acknowledgement of receipt and a general understanding of the CONTRACTOR's proposed approach to the WORK; acceptance is not an endorsement of the CONTRACTOR's means and methods. TS-2.2 CONTRACTOR shall designate a competent superintendent to be on site who will be responsible for seeing that the WORK is in compliance with the contract documents. The superintendent shall supply the CONTRACTOR's contact information (i.e. mobile number and email) at which the CONTRACTOR may be reached at any time of day, and attend the • preconstruction meeting. Once designated by the CONTRACTOR and accepted by the OWNER, the superintendent shall not be replaced on the job without prior notification to the OWNER and ENGINEER. TS-3.0 Order of WORK TS-3.1 The order of WORK shall generally be: excavation where called for in Sections A and B on the Construction Drawings. Section C representing a bid alternative shall be discussed separately as an ad-on, and if the CONTRACTOR chooses to provide a bid for Section C, the order of WORK for C will be discussed separately out of consideration for the logistics of completing Section C along with Sections A and B. For Sections A and B only, the order of WORK shall be placement and grading of approximately 4,000 cubic yards of sand in the old natural channel meander, then placement of the remainder of the material, estimated to be approximately 8,000 cubic yards of sand in the designated area on the beach south of the inlet. OWNER reserves the right to change the amounts of material placed to the south and to the north of the inlet. TS-3.2 The means and methods of excavation shall be determined by the CONTRACTOR. If dredging is to be done mechanically, this may require using some of the material to be graded for the purpose of constructing a temporary access sand road between stations approximately 2+00 and 6+10. Upon completion of the access road, CONTRACTOR shall begin at the eastern end excavating the material to be dredged down to grade, or as near to grade as possible so as to minimize removal of non-beach compatible material which may be encountered at lower elevations. The excavation shall proceed from east to west, with removal of the plug to connect the channel to the Gulf of Mexico being the last order of WORK, so that during the majority of the excavation, tidal currents will not interfere with the WORK or carry turbidity into interior portions of the bay or out the inlet. TS-4.0 Layout of the WORK TS-4.1 The CONTRACTOR shall complete layout (initial stake out) of WORK per the construction plans. The stake out shall include laying out the project by placing vertical stakes at every station as depicted on the construction plans, in alignment with the dredge footprint in order to present an outline of the bottom width of the dredge cut. The CONTRACTOR may elect to only stake out a portion of the job initially to reduce potential displacement or loss of stakes. The CONTRACTOR shall furnish such stakes, equipment, tools and qualified personnel as may be necessary for maintaining such staking for completion of the WORK. CONTRACTOR will be responsible for documenting the placement of all stakes placed on the beach through a graduated numbering of the stakes, and to use that list to ensure all stakes are removed and accounted for upon completion of the project. Technical Specification Page 4 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 6 of 17 161 2A 14 TS-5.0 Record Drawings TS-5.1 During the course of construction, the CONTRACTOR shall record all information required to complete a set of Record As-Built Drawings. Information to be included on the Record Drawings shall be recorded on one working set of construction drawings during the course of the WORK, and shall include actual dredged channel dimensions and elevations, and beach fill dimensions and elevations. TS-5.2 The information recorded on the working set of construction drawings shall include a surveyed cross section for each station in the dredge cut. These cross sections shall be surveyed by a PSM registered in the State of Florida, in the presence of the ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR shall notify ENGINEER 24 hours in advance of conducting progress surveys. The information recorded on the working set of construction drawings shall also include a profile for each completed station on the beach fill which is shown on the plans. CONTRACTOR shall also provide ENGINEER with survey data in x, y, z format, and a copy of all survey notes. TS-5.3 If field changes are made to modify the WORK in any way, such field changes shall be documented on the Record Drawings by dimension, detail, and date and also noted on the daily report form by the CONTRACTOR. The working set of construction drawings shall be kept at the site and be available for review by OWNER and ENGINEER at all times during the progress of the WORK. Prior to Substantial Completion of the WORK, the CONTRACTOR shall transfer the information to a final Project Record set of reproducible drawings, and submit the working construction and Project Record drawings to the OWNER through the ENGINEER, along with a certification as to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. Prior to final payment, the Record Drawings shall be revised by the CONTRACTOR to reflect any changes which have occurred since the submittal for Substantial Completion. TS-6.0 Site Conditions TS-6.1 The construction site is in the entrance to Clam Pass, and in the immediate interior waterway to approximately 1800 feet inside the eastern end of the pass, when including the bid alternate for Section C. For Sections A and B alone, the eastern limit of the WORK is approximately 700 feet from the entrance to the inlet at the Gulf of Mexico. The entrance to the pass is in the nearshore environment of the Gulf of Mexico. The site is therefore exposed to weather conditions which at times may include storms and rough sea conditions necessitating temporary suspension of marine construction operations. Additionally, Clam Pass is a tidal inlet, and is subject to strong tidal currents. The CONTRACTOR is responsible for being familiar with these conditions and to take them under consideration in the cost of the WORK. TS-6.2 The CONTRACTOR is responsible to take appropriate precautions to insure that partially completed WORK is not subject to displacement or damage due to natural site and storm conditions. Should any such damage or displacement of partially completed WORK occur, the CONTRACTOR is responsible for repairing any such damage or displacement of partially completed WORK at no additional cost to the OWNER. The CONTRACTOR is encouraged to perform progress surveys to document completed WORK, and the survey must be completed by a professional surveyor as described in TS-5.2. Should there be any changed site conditions due to storm effects, the CONTRACTOR's progress surveys along with any data collected by the ENGINEER, including photographs, will be the basis for documenting the nature and magnitude of any such changes. Technical Specification Page 5 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 7 of 17 161 2A TS-6.3 Information and data furnished or referred to herein are for the CONTRACTOR's information, however it is expressly understood that the OWNER and ENGINEER shall not be responsible for any interpretation or conclusion drawn therefrom by the CONTRACTOR. It is the CONTRACTOR's responsibility to be familiar with local conditions that may in any manner affect performance of the WORK. TS-7.0 Dredging TS-7.1 The WORK covered by this section consists of furnishing all labor, materials, and equipment and performing all tasks necessary for the excavation and transport of the excavated material from the designated area to be dredged to the designated beach fill area. TS-7.2 The maximum depth of dredging is -5.8 feet NAVD in Area A at the entrance channel and -5.3 feet NAVD in Area B and -4.8 NAVD in Area C. Due to inaccuracies inherent in dredging and underwater excavation, overdepth of one half foot shall be used in determining pay quantities and acceptance of the WORK. No payment shall be made for any material excavated from below the overdepth elevation. Any over dredging beyond what is shown in the plans or these specifications that results in a permit violation will be the CONTRACTOR's responsibility to correct at no expense to the OWNER. CONTRACTOR shall be required to excavate down to within one half foot of the depth specified on the plans, except as provided for under section TS-7.3 below, and material excavated from below the overdepth specified on the plans shall not be included in the pay quantity. Additionally, CONTRACTOR is encourage to not excavate below the maximum depth designated as the overdepth as shown herein and on the Construction Drawings, due to regulatory constraints as well as to minimize potential for excavating non-beach compatible material. TS-7.3 If material other than beach quality sand is encountered above the specified depths, CONTRACTOR shall immediately notify the OWNER and the ENGINEER and reduce the dredging depth and positioning, in the immediate vicinity where unsuitable material was encountered, to avoid dredging material that is unsuitable for beach disposal. Should any material unsuitable for beach disposal be excavated, CONTRACTOR shall separate such material from the beach compatible material to the maximum extent practical and dispose of the non-compatible material as directed by the OWNER. TS-7.4 The CONTRACTOR shall erect such barricades, fences and signs around the construction area as necessary to prevent public access to the construction area. CONTRACTOR shall also be responsible to post appropriate warnings within and around the construction area to prevent pedestrians, boaters, and swimmers from entering the area affected by the construction project. It is the CONTRACTOR's responsibility to insure that the construction project area is sufficiently posted and monitored to prevent swimmers, boaters and pedestrians from injury from the construction. TS-7.5 The CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for all informational signage markers in the waterway that may be removed, destroyed or otherwise displaced during the project as a result of construction. The informational signage markers shall be restored by the CONTRACTOR at locations approved by the OWNER or ENGINEER. TS-8.0 Beach Disposal TS-8.1 The WORK covered by this section consists of furnishing all labor, materials, and equipment and performing all tasks necessary for the placement of sand on the beach fill area within the lines and grades shown on the Construction Plans. Technical Specification Page 6 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 8 of 17 161 2 A ti TS-8.2 Beach disposal may be conducted at night as necessary to avoid interference with the use of park facilities by park visitors during park normal operation hours as described in Section TS-3.0, Order of WORK. TS-8.3 The CONTRACTOR shall establish lines and grades for the beach fill phase of the WORK. The tolerances in the beach fill grade are plus or minus one half foot on all grades above 0 NGVD. CONTRACTOR will be responsible for the removal of all stakes prior to completion of the project. Upon completion of all filling operations, the fill shall be graded and dressed so as to eliminate any undrained pockets and abrupt humps and depressions. TS-8.4 After the beach has been graded to project specifications, the CONTRACTOR shall perform the following WORK if sand compaction measurements are incompatible with turtle nesting behavior determined by an authorized representative of the ENGINEER immediately upon completion of the required WORK. The CONTRACTOR shall till the WORK area with equipment operated so as to penetrate and loosen beach sand (a) to a depth of 36 inches and (b) laterally without leaving unloosened compact sand between the adjacent paths of tines or penetrating part of the equipment. Upon completion of any tilling, the beach shall be dragged to smooth the surface and remove any ruts created by the tilling process. TS-8.5 Placement of beach fill material shall not encroach beyond the continuous vegetation line where such a line exists. TS-9.0 Payment TS-9.1 Payment will be based upon quantities of material dredged out of the design channel lines and grades as specified on the construction plans, including overdepth, as documented by the CONTRACTOR's progress surveys, conducted by a PSM registered in the State of Florida. TS-9.2 Notwithstanding required production rates, the CONTRACTOR will need to achieve completion of the WORK within the specified time, and with an understanding that full production may not be achieved at the outset of construction, CONTRACTOR shall be eligible for 60% payment of mobilization/demobilization upon demonstrating the capability of excavating a minimum of 100 cubic yards of sand and placement of that sand in the designated fill area within a 24 hour period. Payment for the remaining 40% of the mobilization/demobilization shall be eligible upon determination of final completion and acceptance of the completed WORK by OWNER. TS-9.3 Pay quantities will be computed based upon comparison of the January 2013 survey shown on the construction plans, and progress surveys to be conducted by CONTRATOR's surveyor in accordance with paragraph TS-5.2, provided that ENGINEER determines that the CONTRACTOR's surveys are adequate for determining pay quantities. If the ENGINEER determines that additional surveys are needed to determine or verify pay quantities, additional surveys may be conducted by the CONTRACTOR with ENGINEER present, or independent surveys may be conducted at the discretion of the OWNER. TS-9.4 The CONTRACTOR shall perform and provide his own volume calculations for determination of material dredged, as required for payment purposes, at the time of each pay request, if applicable. The volumes shall be determined through comparison of surveys. The CONTRACTOR shall be paid on the unit price basis and the cubic yards excavated based on progress surveys. TS-9.5 Material which is not deemed beach compatible which was dredged and separated from the beach compatible material and stockpiled for disposal off of the beach will be measured by the surveyor before removing from the beach. That CONTRACTOR will provide the ENGINEER Technical Specification Page 7 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 9 of 17 161 2A ‘k and OWNER with an estimated quantity of the non-beach compatible material based on the survey data also to be provided to the ENGIEER and OWNER. OWNER reserves the right to have ENGINEER make an independent estimate of such quantities. TS-10.0 General TS-10.1 Location of Storage Facilities The WORK is to be completed on the beach and in the nearshore area around Clam Pass including the staging area designated on plans. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for restoring these areas to their pre-project condition, including native vegetation, before the project will be considered to be substantially complete. If additional storage is required for construction equipment and materials, arrangements for such storage facilities shall be the responsibility of the CONTRACTOR. If the beach area in the immediate vicinity of the inlet that is disturbed by normal construction activities proves to be sufficient for all of the CONTRACTOR's staging and stockpiling needs, without unnecessarily disturbing vegetation in the staging area as designated on the plans, the CONTRACTOR may use the beach area in the immediate vicinity of the inlet to fulfill staging and stockpiling needs, at the approval of the OWNER, and provided that this does not violate any conditions of the regulatory permits, and provided the beach staging area so designated is thoroughly marked by the CONTRACTOR with warning tape, staking, and signage to keep pedestrian traffic out of the staging, stockpiling, and storage area. Any area used for staging will need to be graded and dressed so as to eliminate any undrained pockets and abrupt humps and depressions. TS-10.2 Spillage Special measures shall be taken to prevent bilge pumpage or effluent, chemicals, fuels, oils, greases, and bituminous materials from entering the water. TS-10.3 Disposal Disposal of any materials, wastes, effluent, trash, garbage, oil, grease, chemicals, etc., in and adjacent to the project site shall not be permitted. If any waste materials are dumped in unauthorized areas, the CONTRACTOR shall remove the material and restore the area to the original condition that existed before the area was disturbed. If necessary, contaminated ground shall be excavated, disposed of as directed by the OWNER through the ENGINEER, and replaced with suitable fill material. Any restoration measures required under this section of the Specifications will be the responsibility of the CONTRACTOR, and shall not result in any additional expense to the OWNER. TS-11.0 Environmental Protection TS-11.1 CONTRACTOR shall exercise due caution so as not to damage existing native vegetation along the shoreline within and around the project sites, access ways, and staging areas. Any native vegetation damaged by CONTRACTOR during the course of the WORK shall be restored by CONTRACTOR at CONTRACTOR's expense. TS-11.2 CONTRACTOR shall perform all WORK in accordance with all county, state and federal permits issued for this WORK. Technical Specification Page 8 of 8 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 10 of 17 1 6 2 [V) CONSTRUCTION BID BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Emergency Dredging of Clam Pass BID NO. 13-6054 Full Name of Bidder Main Business Address Place of Business Telephone No. Fax No. State Contractor's License # State of Florida Certificate of Authority Document Number Federal Tax Identification Number DUNS # CCR# Cage Code To: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter called the Owner) The undersigned, as Bidder declares that the only person or parties interested in this Bid as principals are those named herein, that this Bid is submitted without collusion with any other person, firm or corporation; that it has carefully examined the location of the proposed Work, the proposed form of Agreement and all other Contract Documents and Bonds, and the Contract Drawings and Specifications. Bidder proposes, and agrees if this Bid is accepted, Bidder will execute the Agreement included in the Bidding Documents, to provide all necessary machinery, tools, apparatus and other means of construction, including utility and transportation services necessary to do all the Work, and furnish all the materials and equipment specified or referred to in the Contract Documents in the manner and time herein prescribed and according to the requirements of the Owner as therein set forth, furnish the Contractor's Bonds and Insurance specified in the General Conditions of the Contract, and to do all other things required of the Contractor by the Contract Documents, and that it will take full payment the sums set forth in the following Bid Schedule: Unit prices shall be provided in no more than two decimal points, and in the case where further decimal points are inadvertently provided, rounding to two decimal points will be conducted by Purchasing staff. NOTE: If you choose to bid, please submit an ORIGINAL and ONE COPY of your bid pages. February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 11 of 17 r 1 6 1 2A MODIFICATIONS PER PRE-BID • BIDS ARE DUE FEB 8, 2013 @ 2:30PM • See attached Bid Schedule • Surveying Firms Agnoli Barber& Brundage, Inc. 7400 Tamiami Trail N #200, Naples, FL 34108 Phone:(239) 597-3111 Dagostino &Wood Address: 610 18th Ave NE, Naples, FL 34120 Phone:(239) 352-6085 Marco Island Surveyors 950 NORTH COLLIER BLVD.SUITE 412 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145 239-389-0026 • Parking: The successful contractor will need to coordinate parking and access with the Parks & Recreation Department Attn: Jake Sullivan 239.252-4000. The Parks Department will provide some onsite parking to the successful contractor. • Humiston & Moore will perform Turbidity Monitoring per their existing contract February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 12 of 17 161 I LIST OF MAJOR SUBCONTRACTORS THIS LIST MUST BE COMPLETED OR BID MAY BE DEEMED NON-RESPONSIVE The undersigned states that the following is a list of the proposed subcontractors for the major categories outlined in the requirements of the Bid specifications. The undersigned acknowledges its responsibility for ensuring that the Subcontractors for the major categories listed herein are "qualified" (as defined in Ordinance 87-25 and Section 15 of Instructions to Bidders) and meet all legal requirements applicable to and necessitated by the Contract Documents, including, but not limited to proper licenses, certifications, registrations and insurance coverage. The Owner reserves the right to disqualify any Bidder who includes non-compliant or non-qualified Subcontractors in its bid offer. Further, the Owner may direct the Successful Bidder to remove/replace any Subcontractor, at no additional cost to Owner, which is found to be non-compliant with this requirement either before or after the issuance of the Award of Contract by Owner. (Attach additional sheets as needed). Further, the undersigned acknowledges and agrees that promptly after the Award of Contract, and in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents, the Successful Bidder shall identify all Subcontractors it intends to use on the Project. The undersigned further agrees that all Subcontractors subsequently identified for any portion of work on this Project must be qualified as noted above. Major Category of Work Subcontractor and Address 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Company: Signature: Date: February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 13 of 17 1 6 I 2 A 1(.(1 STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The Bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude completed within the last five years is a judge of its experience, skill and business standing and of its ability to conduct the work as completely and as rapidly as required under the terms of the Agreement. Project and Location Reference 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Company: Signature: Date: February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to re Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 14 of 17 1 2 A J(f' TRENCH SAFETY ACT Bidder acknowledges that included in the various items of the bid and in the Total Bid Price are costs for complying with the Florida Trench Safety Act (90-96, Laws of Florida) effective October 1, 1990. The Bidder further identifies the cost to be summarized below: Trench Safety Units of Unit Unit Extended Measure Measure (Quantity) Cost Cost (Description) (LF,SY) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. TOTAL $ Failure to complete the above may result in the Bid being declared non-responsive. Company: Signature: Date: 161 2A till' a) m 0 c a) cn y u) co - a E c ,UI c a o_ 0 ED. o N a) N fO. fa C fl a c c 0 u) O O a) a) a) U Q Q 0 a Z P m c > o.a.) N 0 w a) a) To (n u) U_ C a) a CO N C C 05 _c In O Q 0 Lt ti co M 3 C N O o co C a) 0 m U a) - m 7 CO 0 E (0 .N 3 o a U >_ a) C '— >^ C > a) N a) 2 O u) (�j -a a) c O U a a) T a1"- C 2 V 7 < -5 (I) (n N C C� � C 0 O ' T O_' '15 -a o �a m 4'-- a) a) m N c (p m O w (� c . C7 U' a m 0 E U) °6 as E 2 m E E a 0 a c ° (a) a _o N a) fh 0 E E .C ._ U EL P- o n UN O O O n. =N >.r- O C E•'m w : O Q LL C m o C -. E o o m a o E ) = a)m m U t m ' .1) 7 V N N a 06 06 m 0 C 2 m U C HE Q Q c o = w . ai a) U 1- Ei c o c a)— co 0 ' c c Q O O O O a) O U v v -D Z 0) 0 . C C c c U) m e `.- c c w 'a O O c _O 0 0 0 a) 0 3 Liz Q N C_) o O 6 (26 (6 a) @ C N a) a) a) O >O _- 0 0) > ' 0 la 2 E E a) 0) E a) c O 2 U) O O CC Et LL X O Et F— 0 0 U 0 } >- 0 L ›- >- W W U V U L U U W CO clD i. O O N °O N 1- O O M 3 3 N N N a) o AD N co V u1 O r CO Q) a Z C o . ,, , .3 161 2A 1 ' c (0lo � E o p U O O O O 0 O o O C • 0 0 a a ( } } } } }m o v C o 0 N . co_ 0 Y }o CC 0 c_ co N co 20. co c) z O a t 3 O h (h N - p cal m Q 69 69 A 69 to .D.4., 1N d o O c Z C (D „.9 ..,9 O 0 0 8000 0 U C O O O m 0 O O O 8 O O w N N N a) N N N a Y 0 0 0 0 Q o O 0 n o o } } } } } } } cfl v Z _- _- In m A �T z,0,9- 0 fA Efl O M �V O V� h r oa Z 69 fA � <?:fA K N O N N `','T, Q 'n O O O O O O O O: 0 O C9 O O D O 0 0 0 O m o y O O O m 0 O " O N: O O 64,1 N rn N 2 N N N 1 u 0 0 0 O O 0 U co O O a) a) a) a7 al a) a) oN v o rn o v ,n CO w L6 VI r) } } } } } } } m Iri ei CO 2 O NN- Z EA 69 69 6) (11 s-69 69 ur (,...5 U N 3 >m o z2 0 O 8. °a N— � D6 'o ° 000 #, 0 0 2 . a3 W O 0 m h: o O In m m m,r.: „ „ a, „ N N li 0 C 2- o V O O N M r M. ° "9 } } } } } } } a°i -C.� 0 , Z °D It z° Z o y ":0 ai tO 669 u4 N mm 2 ir3 - u3 c 2103E o u) N z,.w o o o a 0 0 ° o vni February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7bi.Clam Bay Subcommittee Report-Review of construction bids received by County to reopen Clam Pass(Susan O'Brien) Page 17 of 17 161 2A Original Message From: Neil Dorrill [mailto:Neil @dmgfl.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12,2013 3:40 PM To: ResnickLisa Subject: FW: Clam Pass Emergency Dredging... Bid Tabulation Results? Original Message From: Ken Humiston [mailto:kh @,humistonandmoore.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 2:53 PM To:Neil Dorrill Subject: RE: Clam Pass Emergency Dredging... Bid Tabulation Results? Neil Upon review of the bid summary for Clam Pass,the lowest responsive bidders for Clam Pass appear to be Kyle Construction, Inc for Sections A and B, and Crowder Gulf for Section C. However, it is not clear if Crowder's bid for items I and 2,the Mobilization/Demobilization,and surveying,which are included in the first part of the bid,would apply, perhaps on a prorated basis, for Section C. If that is the case, it would seem to make sense to award A and B to Kyle,and C to Crowder. Ken February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ci. Landscape Water Management Subcommittee-Water collection basins post-construction monitoring requirements(Dave Trecker) Page 1 of 1 16 2A Original Message From: Jim Carr[mailto:carr @abbinc.com] Sent: Tuesday,February 05,2013 9:38 AM To: ResnickLisa Subject: RE: On behalf of Mr.Neil Dorrill,Two Requests Lisa, Regarding Question# 1,yes Dr. Trecker's comments are accurate. The South Florida Water Management District Permits typically include conditions that reserve the right to require additional water quality treatment if necessary, but there is no standard for long term monitoring of the man-made lakes. Water Quality is typically monitored at the point source where the project(man-made lakes)discharges into the receiving waters. Jim Carr,P.E. Agnoli, Barber&Brundage, Inc. 7400 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 200 Naples,FL 34108 239.597.3111 ext. 215 239.566.2203 fax Original Message From: david trecker[mailto:djtreckerAyahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday,January 23, 2013 11:22 AM To: ResnickLisa Subject: Water Management Lisa- Please pass this on to the PBSD directors,Neil and Kyle as a one-way communication. I just spoke with Jennifer Hecker of the Conservancy. Jennifer is an expert on regulations and standards. She said man-made lakes, water-collection basins used to control run-off, are not regulated. They have no standards for nutrients,copper,bacteria,etc. She said the Water Management District signs off on man-made lakes once construction is completed,but there are no monitoring or reporting requirements subsequently. Of course, pollution problems from man-made lakes can affect downstream waters that are regulated,e.g.,Clam Bay. So the pollution should be addressed at its source,as we're proposing to do. Dave February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page 1 of 8 • 161 \q) TO: PBSD Directors, Neil Dorrill and Kyle Lukasz FROM: Dave Trecker for the Landscape & Water Management Subcommittee SUBJECT: Community Awareness Program on Fertilizer Usage DATE: February 7, 2013 The PBSD has begun to address community-wide fertilizer usage, leading to copper fungicide treatment of the freshwater lakes and, in turn, some copper buildup in Clam Bay and very significant copper buildup in the lakes. A community awareness program on the problems, stressing best-management practices on fertilizer use, was proposed. To that end, the attached drafts for a simple brochure and for a Powerpoint presentation are offered for review and revisions. The intent of the awareness program is to drive home the problems to residents via articles in the PB Post and presentations to community organizations and condo associations. This would be the first step in what would likely be a long-range program to deal with both fertilizer misuse and copper buildup. The staged approaches might entail the following. I. Misuse of fertilizers Stage 1 — Community awareness (now) Stage 2 - Foundation enforcement based on new policy or amended covenants (longer term) II. Copper buildup Stage 1 - Pilot programs on non-copper fungicide treatments (Kyle Lukasz proposal for Basin 3 lakes) Stage 2 - If successful, expansion to other lakes. Stage 3 - Removal of accumulated copper (long-term possibility) Please review the attached drafts and pass on any suggested revisions to Lisa. I would like to hammer out final drafts at the Feb. 26 sub-committee meeting. February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page2of8 161 2 A't\i BROCHURE DRAFT Pelican Bay is facing a severe problem. Its waterways — inland lakes and Clam Bay— are being polluted by high levels of fertilizer runoff. Nutrients from the runoff— dissolved nitrogen and phosphorus — cause algae bloom, a threat to aquatic plants and wildlife. To deal with algae buildup, a copper fungicide has been applied over an extended period of time. Through accumulation, copper— itself a pollutant— has reached alarmingly high levels in our freshwater lakes. Those lakes are not subject to federal or state regulation. But pollution— leading to unsightly sludge, odor and dead wildlife— affects quality of life and property values of people who live nearby. And Clam Bay, downstream of the lakes, is highly regulated and has strict limits on pollution. The maximal acceptable level for dissolved copper is 3.7 micrograms per liter. Current levels in Inner and Outer Clam Bay are 7.7 and 9.0, respectively, marginally out of compliance. But dissolved copper in the 44 lakes that feed Clam Bay ranges from 12 to 3870 micrograms per liter, with an average close to 350. Continuing copper buildup will lead to further migration to Clam Bay and eventually a major pollution problem. Several approaches are being taken to deal with this problem. (1) The Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) is exploring alternatives to copper sulfate as a means of controlling algae. The use of selective bacteria in combination with aeration and littoral plantings will be tested in Basin 3, the central section of the freshwater lakes. If this pilot program is successful, it will be expanded to other basins. (2) To deal with fertilizer misuse, the heart of the problem, the PBSD is undertaking a community awareness program— a follow-on to a recent county ordinance (11-24) which mandates that Best Management Practices (BMP) be followed throughout Collier County. February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page3of8 161 2Aft Dealing with this problem is everyone's responsibility. If we are to have clean groundwater and healthy waterways in Pelican Bay, it is essential that fertilizers be used in accordance with BMP. Here is a specific list of things every condominium association, homeowner association and individual homeowner can and should do. • Use only landscape maintenance companies whose technicians are trained and licensed in BMP. During the course of fertilizer application, be sure there is appropriate on-site supervision. • Use fertilizer application rates recommended by the Florida-Friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries. Those can be accessed at http:/fyn.ifas.ufl.edu/professionals/GI-BMP publications.htm. • Limit nitrogen usage to 4-6 lbs./1000 sq. ft./yr. • Whenever possible, use slow-release fertilizer. • Do not fertilize during the rainy season (June 1 - September 30) or prior to forecasted storms • Be sure no fertilizer is used within 10 feet of groundwater, including lakes, except to establish new landscape and then for no more than 30 days after planting. • When installing new landscape, use drought-resistant plants that require minimal fertilization. • Be mindful that reclaimed water used for irrigation already contains most of the nitrogen and phosphorus needed for grass fertilization. Little or no additional fertilizer may be needed. The Pelican Bay Services Division, working in concert with the Pelican Bay Foundation, urges all residents of Pelican Bay to follow these guidelines. The health of our lakes and our estuary depends upon it. February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page4of8 . � POWERFOINT DRAFT 161 2 A `ki Slide 1 ... against a backdrop photo of a neighborhood lake POLLUTION IN PELICAN BAY Slide 2 WATERWAY SYSTEM Part of the South Florida Water Management District • 44 freshwater lakes —retention ponds to control runoff • Troughs to canal along berm, with culverts leading to Clam Bay • Clam Bay —Outer,Inner and Upper Clam Bay and connecting channels Slide 3 Map of Pelican Bay showing waterways Slide 4 Photo of neighborhood lake Slide 5 Photo of berm canal Slide 6 Photo of Clam Bay February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page 5 of 8 161 2At+ Slide 7 Lakes Canal along berm. Clam Bay Slide 8 WATER QUALITY MONITORING - Dissolved oxygen -Total dissolved solids - Dissolved nitrogen - Dissolved phosphorus - Chlorophyll A - Dissolved copper (fungicide) Slide 9 STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS • Man-made Lakes SFWMD approval after construction No regulation thereafter • Clam Bay U.S. EPA standards Florida DEP standards February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page 6 of 8 1 6 1 2A t( Slide 10 CLAM BAY WATER QUALITY Standard Actual Dissolved oxygen 5 mg/L 5.1 ** Nitrogen 0.81 mg/L* 0.07 ** Phosphorus 0.06 mg/L* 0.065 ** Copper 3.71Ug /L 7.7 Inner Clam Bay 9.0 Outer Clam Bay * Midpoint of allowed range ** Average in 1-2Q/12 Slide 11 SERIOUS FUTURE PROBLEMS High fertilizer usage (nitrogen and phosphorus) 1 Nutrient runoff to lakes and Clam Bay 1 Algae bloom from excess nutrients - Reduced dissolved oxygen - Odor and sludge build-up - Fish and bird kill I. Copper fungicide build-up from algae treatment February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page7of8 161 2A ' Slide 12 Fertilizer Runoff f Lake and Bay Pollution - I Algae Bloom Lake and Bay Pollution Copper Fungicide Slide 13 CURRENT WATER QUALITY* Lakes Clam Bay Dissolved oxygen 4.9 mg/L 5.1 Nitrogen (nitrites/nitrates) 0.11 mg/L 0.07 Phosphorus (phosphates) 0.11 mg/L 0.07 Copper 350, g/L 6 *Average of test data in 1-2Q/12 Slide 14 HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM? Dual-Path Approach (1) Replace copper fungicide - Bacteria+ aeration + littoral plantings piloted in Basin 3 (2) Reduce fertilizer usage - Community awareness of problem - Best Management Practices as mandated by county ordinance February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7ciii.Landscape Water Management Report-Community Outreach regarding importance of BMP recommendation(Dave Trecker) Page 8 of 8 161 2A 1* Slide 15 WHAT CAN YOU DO? (1) Use BMP-licensed landscape maintenance companies (2) Use fertilizer rates recommended by "Florida-Friendly BMP for Protection of Water Resources" (3) Limit nitrogen application to 4-6 lbs. per 1000 sq. ft. per year Slide 16 WHAT CAN YOU DO? (4) Do not fertilize between June 1 and September 30 or prior to forecasted storms (5) Apply no fertilizer within 10 feet of groundwater, including lakes (6) Use drought-resistant plants that require minimal fertilization Slide 17 HERE'S A TIP Reclaimed water used for irrigation already contains most of the nitrogen and phosphorus needed for grass fertilization! Slide 18 SOLUTION TO POLLUTION? Proper use of fertilizer! It's everyone's responsibility! February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7d.Pathways/Tree Canopy Subcommittee Report- Ian Orlikoff,Certified Arborist,Initial Analysis of Pelican Bay Boulevard(from Commons to North Tram) Page 1 of 17 1 6 1 Signature Tree Care, 2A4 ac 4 481 10th Avenue N.E. • Naples, Florida 34120 Office: (239) 348-1330 • Fax: (239) 348-3133 Email: info@signaturetreecare.com IAN ORLIKOFF ISA Certified Arborist #F1.-1037A Florida Certified Horticulture Professional #11605655 January 17,2013 Attention:Mr.Keith Dallas Re:Arborist Consultation for Pelican Bay Services Division,Pelican Bay Blvd. Pathway Project from Westside-Commons to North Tram Station I conducted a driving patrol street survey of the trees along the West side of Pelican Bay Boulevard for the proposed pathway project from the West Commons to the North Tram Station. This is not a hazard evaluation. However,certain obvious hazards were noted and recommended as candidates for removal rather than employ pathway mitigation to solve conflicts. No below ground investigation was performed at this time to determine what, if any,roots were impacted from previous pathway installation. Options to Root Cutting: 1.Curve pathway:curve far enough away from trunk for a stable root zone to remain intact.This may require cooperation with individual or multiple properties if they are open to preserving the present tree canopy.This is the highest standard for community involvement. 2. Flexible permeable pavement:allows roots to remain in place while providing a quality soft impact, permeable surface for pedestrians and bicyclists.There are a few products on the market that are similar in comparison. 3. Bridging:a structure that is built over roots for pedestrian and bike access.This option is not recommended in this particular section of the proposed project. 4. Removal of tree:due to poor structure,defects,lean,and/or pathway conflict. Arborist Consultation for Pelican Bay Services Division,Pelican Bay Blvd.Pathway Project from Westside-Commons to North Tram Station Jan. 17,2013 Page 1 • February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 7d.Pathways/Tree Canopy Subcommittee Report- Ian Orlikoff,Certified Arborist,Initial Analysis of Pelican Bay Boulevard(from Commons to North Tram) Page 2of17 1 61 2 A tT 4, Signature Tree Care,ac 481 10th Avenue N.E. • Naples, Florida 34120 4 ilk Office: (239) 348-1330 • Fax: (219) 348-3133 Email: info@signaturetreecare.com IAN ORLIKOFF • ISA Certified Arborist till-1037A Florida Certified Horticulture Professional#kH605655 Root barriers were omitted in my recommendations because existing trees in these stages of development and maturity are not appropriate candidates for root barriers in such close proximity. Root barriers will in most cases protect the pathway,but will create a host of problems and liabilities.Large tree roots would need to be cut to install the systems and developing root systems would be impeded from providing stability. Future plantings may receive root barriers if sufficient soil volume is provided for development of a stable root system for mature tree size. The situation being dealt with at this time was shaped by a lack of understanding regarding the impacts of tree roots and structural conflicts in the past. It is my professional recommendation that the existing plan be further developed to incorporate sufficient spaces for future tree plantings in areas where this flexibility exists.This will ensure that as trees fail,decline or need to be installed,transplanted or replaced,that there be sufficient area to do so without the limitations that exist today. History should not repeat itself.The scope of a newly developed plan would be decided upon and based on long term goals. Site prep specifications should be provided by an experienced and qualified ISA Certified Arborist so as not to encourage root/structural conflicts or potential for tree failure. The installation contractor should understand the reasoning behind the specifications,site selection,and have knowledge of proper installation methodology.Contractor should be held accountable for any deviation from specifications without approval from controlling authority or agent. All too often specifications are not followed during a project which creates future complications. Monitoring of all work should be completed by the controlling authority ensuring that the installation contractor is employing the detailed specifications. Please advise if there are any queries on topics which I have distinguished in this consultation report. Best Regards, Ian Orliko . Arborist Consultation for Pelican Bay Services Division,Pelican Bay Blvd.Pathway Project from Westside-Commons to North Tram Station Jan. 17,2013 Page 2 r aIC7Yw1!�� 1�iyFid�N � 14, �, 2A p a/ s , sx d - i 1 r xh�. o xSC SC 7SR� I C : 3 ! $` cE$ECr6EEEa Ly � a Y�i E E a R g o $ $ $ $vuvu j (�tr.y]� 4.- : , '� < t m W . ,. 4 4 0. 4 4 L M 6 0. 4 1 ✓Zi "Y "y'[ t.p`� t'.' w}''' Iiiiiiiiihiq e3 ',' .:;.:411,1.,.4 4,.. ,7 ,i,..-;,,,t co 0 U.'y �llinil i 4 '`d .-1 NegHlgig$49 ' W'r-Av .. ''.f*Alf4-1 el ca Q lr } s rs TO E p t i 45;',4."11,:. E ,per t.x` !V- Q H W i ._.. `�L t2» h. s7 �...* ...,.,fib..-t' i±i VI c 73 n____ 0 .. , . _ u) 0 P—i p, r r--- If pi W 0�0 ,4S bi1i r5 v' 9 � -o c P 2 a 0 8 1 ... I � wi1 �`•6''--,;,;Y:4;, °p .0 I l' l I 9'd R >> 1' ,4,.1r'i` ,Z FF�r-y{ q ,a. 1-4140"1" m �"' W Q� IIJ A '' .1_afit t — ! '4i o . p ► + A O F= 4 :y is a s r ,s )�. > � >F-+ `r1� k a y sofa IIJ a 1 j� y .Y $3iI �� s U ° O p O ' ihili JjiUii O zc„ t'_[ ��rq\ s, `' ,; as m err co co 0 Umoo :..,. ! o m — --a � WqU t u_ , PQD 1 = g y <z .y �LLz gxF_ s s t S p x ct uJ (( +� F y 3 p z - �'1=c 2o=t Psi I.s k 5 �S C .�j a F s r S $ F. a W @e �E W E IS �,`.k a E t �E s` L g } < ! 8 F (�Ni, I Fp `:Ec3 E s`➢F''K g a 4 E G r Y E g s "s ° F � ,. la J 0 g' h i' ? eta t r .. Q z r r 04 , .gg ;., .in. 1 r / 1 11 / a ®J:14111d " I5 "1 2 A. 19 I— (~— 1 r 11 sOIPH'S IWN v MOWN/MOD sv l `' ~I L� { ! I s09 aIIns'Emma xvo�1 nv-I I OS mvc L, 1 , i 1 P 0............... • t ; 1'}. NIOISIAIU S33IA�IIS xouv[s MILL siaox s E s 'r Z •----- I at srroi�}oo a�s}saa AVIINVDIrlad o :. 3' lib '-'°° xv�1uva axvnaIrtoa ava oiraa 111 ��i 1 1 _.,1 N E • ....'t,-,..,..-: r„,„,...... .... ,. ... ... .....„. ,„,t4,,,,,,,,...,,,,- ..,:„.„..,, task, C Y .aa° 7,,,,..e., '6 +G y n z „i 3` S SA �,. ,r >. -O }_{� `' 3r *,. aMISA�f 'x �'!�; diY '- _.. —.w�pl > • � , + S � oe -�.. ++,.p► - al rJt. } lit j �� + m `' Tr' ��t. .r P s;OA . j i 1�1ill Ng gl I Y 1 !! R t`> ` '- i ' i T : P .13 18 111311 t 1 `-4. \ k y ./- -t' '" ' .r., .1 i, pt I�� }III �1:_111 i t4 .1, ,= it�' o '-, ' '+,iii . � 'f> j*!.. 44t,'ip ty "' 9 11 1! •M- ii ° }1 it � ix 1i �� I 'P ter ' i Y y i j `o ,rs s r 0'Ail .+� a � :3 c` ayt�i2� 4'} tt1 J E�c tlii�i tf t¢ # +,�,r � a ra ¢ 1 i.X IL Xti't 9 iI° 1.g g t" a� }1 Il.a J, ,, V:\ s, +' *i , at i t ,s YSt 1.4 I9 t.i!• Y aE 39 to tt 1d + f �2 '' r 2 i To ; +3R Yj a �e f,,,,.....„4„. Ly z}:a1 1pe�,i i 111 i �� i i 1/ �{ 6 ' it 6 e I g p i ° i 4s Yn, Y+t Pa 1 „� R� r :1 + iBr ii� 581ia` c!!� 11 �6p° �� E r {I g� !S! �e N 1 1/3Oxeit '�`j �. a� p k q �s Q;�y !` 6 S- ; fy !4 iY t.. + �' I„�pit•° 1 + 't`. ' A c„, , 11Y t °1 i } }ti id: 111b i ii i1a 0 - 1 -Ai- s3, '� t ,,, . ; i� 1 3 i 1 111,1'{ iti tf, 1 is 1 , ti Cp ii•C _O -, i ak , �..." a.!..44- '4't . µ****re PI W}S} 3 gt IPq 3° if p� i}ti °' w ,� + �� ? m -' � �»� i ` , 1Iy t) 3 i i �1 i 141E i!i'.�all et 1S�i g�5r N ci) �; ,r all e , 4 i'. Y- I t ,1) t t t e 1 114 1'.„1,t :1 i't ie aet Y 1t 7 z v } �I 3 .t E ,,%I, / H , .a �ii;i a. i I ti II i 1 1 1e Ii`.} i i'�i 3-' ieha�SY!1 Y Y , It 1.1 1 it'31�I 11�at 131 Y 3 a� . if t a p cc O �t �y� ; 1. .,!.` ., ; '*, r =i r I e a aA 1 -g ill I!;i 1,a 1°4'�' f pp Y 1 a ,.,, _ 1° .> ,E^ � 4, r. 'j � , c ,,. , 1,1 ,... ,� ,, .' 1! Co ji `�` , rn* S•'>,� " jai ',.? ; i gi Y`F 1QQ '11131°4 1.1 tt 4'4i i jft k 1 �( 1 Y le P p� ..!°f i°3 f3,i 171 O r A.l h` ze�� tG p i�I�e iG �1� ;i Its;_��j 11e t°9,• a) ,, y� r . i 1 k iE:i;.tai 1r U ';k x-,s y�KL '`"i'" "R Y� { 1e IAA°!1 9 6=1= 11 �r > I 1 }1 i}I.t ;1r�,1. !I'J S) t 1 1 t: 6• @ �7 a I8 t Z ii�1#v d 13 Y co c, '' r i Y 1 }:ii pa F gY 19 1 t}a1 is 1� 3 -,,� iF'f'' i f i iy, '. 7 {Y * ,} a 7 1 13 i t 1 i1 i! a a.M �. ,'4, ' t 4 , Yt, . t'',Aa 't 1111;i1;11 I11 I it 1p111 1i a a.° ; `°� as"Yf x , l �, fit' It €1�,a } 1'1} 111p i- i i, .awry 4 , , i.ii1 b tit i �i;i . Y 11 t ii 1 1 1 i ktz f` •cI ° ✓ n, K '; . I11 }; 1 i `�1 11 f,l iI ti q ihi o ?' i tc1 t_3YpS[136[ a� ,11�,it n§6. 6�� toil�p c Y(( 6 i.. t� t(a h*C �Q��' ` , ' 114 l0,}i; !mid.=,i�i ii b t33:`i i I! E 4 Yiht3GM1 it 1 n a `'{ z , a e.Aiit 3 titl}it t; ++II 141 t i 1 _r I _ . l sit i 1t111�� gq ;le! 111€�' 1!!� 1 a) -0 \ 141,Y9.�r 54 s.S ?" ` Y.4 tct Y It all xi a9.dig aYa vii ii YI< .4i*-...- :,-,..- '.... ' ., ... t, ,0.: , , o x r� l a i'P 1 # . °x` y - c ,-"- ! i s � 44, N : � a • + fi '' t N ` ! < „, ' it .,++ ''t'' t � + ; 4 is ti.a �. a %'.` 3 w. i . • 2 A if 2 rsrk . i I iz (1)mind aDvarHa 4,onnavlo 1- 4r1 O --__ 2 J i 801VE'LI'S'a TdVM ttenva'Drums 4,mom'ans a ,--, f ---- • id I 509 suns'HAM xvo-la-umn los ...— lavia- , `Z t-- 1[100 NOISIAKI SgOI&IIHS ..____________ NOLLYIS WM,ELLTION O ---- ir"1 AVE NVOTT3,1 04 SNOKKO3-110:03160AS. ,1 ?- 1 :41.10- iti ■i::ii i Awexi.va amfmant-xt Ava Nvonaa 1 1 1 1 II'a _—__ 'id, 1,, —• — —,,3,11,A i..F,,7,1:1 ,1 1 1 u) 1331•13 31311/431A 113011.012 333 - 0 r E , • , 4 1 " '1 5 k g 1 "" • " t! O : I P iii (- 1 i 6 . !Ili ..-t. I ' 'i ° 2 ; . 1 ,•J W I i ■ +k 0 I ■ • I ,,,,,gi -2 ' ••,.' 1 I ■r g r,,,•i 1st,Wg' e! a) !C) ;( , r 111 ' .- • , 1 iii '''' i N'N.q ;:'" -1..+_,--) i -, co -------. iLf , Ili a (-. — 3 i 03 / 41 0 a li ,E - !is O 4 1 gl. -1 il ill E t 4.. ' • *I 1 I I . 15, .- : , ii i t -1- I • .. ge.•.4 ; \..._,„ . _____1 if i ' ' /I 4 5 . 11 •.. 4■4 I '4 g ‘7, 1 w.,.. \,„,,,,./1 /•,, >, • :1,..:, 1 N.' 1 --- •1 i I 1 i S. : '',•'''g-----j I 1 0 . ■ 4 ,s,„I -, i t t II / 211-1 I '4 g ; I 1 I I • S ..... 14:Pl. §11_,I :.%.,`,--,.—e ' il i , 1 I ,...1 I /1 .4 Pi ,..-.. i ti, _____ ! 1 "4' 0 4) 1 .3) 0) 4 . , Lf.,.1 •ijiti`t .5 • ' I i i ; i 1 U)0 i t ti k• it ,4;!,. , ' lit! ,k li via as."1 e iil nits.n F,t,i '' I I gle t v . - , 0 ti •LIti gsaw 1 ,... ,..___,, ,... ,.. ii,,,, ...,..,1,,,,,,L. .0;„.+ ii! !,,, ._ a 0- f 8 '"--- I 4,) I- •ei r CI :I■-• i;5,!W!t t;/i 4 !1 8 1 i, w g Ct 0 44;71 .A • 1 i■! ' I. . €0 111 gi 1151 ill:' 1 , ■ , ...... 12 c s, : •-, _I. ,.' o I -c c 0 p 0. PRIJA1E VRIVE, r•--I i • ' 1 N ,'4i>.1\ b• a) r1,,r 11 ill I“ 1 l'is 7 frf. U w = i- 22 I 8.L. f ■ 1 i ' 1 I 1 E E ,. r , • ' 1 I i , i .., 1!! I 4.) o 0 ---•\:.) =- - g. i °3 Ili 1 mw(1) tilli 1 t•W‘ -f g , 0,, f ' - 1- ,t■ 03 c, .0 c fl'ilt. 1 ., g II 1 x o ! I I Z I Z M \_t_.); '- I 0_0 ',,,`‘.1 4 1 41 t 1..4 0 S. ; I I ' IT c,) &.) ,.... •,..,<;11'_ - 1 - ,•,,.-----t.X\ 4, ak.„,...,-- 4 , , l 1 . .'7. ,.4-1 cr".■t -'---- ,-----------1 _ ...97.0.1-143firan'. 7,___ 1::',1"--7,-; C.S,‘.--; f t Y i'l. ,..;• >..„-- L. .1 I ! "ii — -7 [4 lirli 1 ;;.' N',441100:***4"14 IL.c - ' ; 1.. Al*,_ti,,44_,A,41p,„*, i ! 11 co -iv. .i .4— ,Ili:4.v-,.:._-..ry,,..--A4,-14-4,---, --; 1 1 $ ..-_.-..-tf.:".±.1.-,_-_,....-. I,.."'t,ut -,-, 1 it-,t' I i 2 I I ; 1 < I ‘.1. L_L..,' ,,, tffi ' I si .- 1 1 1:4. , ' , t „ 1 ) ,, 1 1,, , , L. , ..., qv, 1 1 ,, 1 -, f ' 03 si 11 sItT , 0. I le .'s; t..! 4 . 'fr 1 i 'ki 1 i I i '.'. el i , s• H • t , 1 In I 1 E IA ' . I ' --..-I I II 2 ti P.1.111. 11 1 ' I if --1,-—s. ? i I I ■ 1 t) \LI 1 1 I 1 L------,' -1 i i j I 111 \ I I i i I I • ,I I C 1 i I I I I , I i ‘VEr 4- fr 1 . i 1 I 1 i I I 1 I I I i I I 1 1 I 1 1 . 1 1 r I I -- 11,-, 133k3 SW PAM d01333 i" ' I i I I 1 I I I I I I ..4112.411 It■••4.01.40%oil.....11 ...6..../ 2 A • (z)xvaa annerva w oNiavlio v 41,..., v F- -- i 1 ns VAni i SOIVE 13 bli RIVNI Venva'maxis 'Kois'ails - • i i 1 SO9 auc Taupr uxvo i los cS C---- ill; 1! , mamma sammos oitiouvisittFauxox. i•,i k 11;----- IEL1 !Vi z -- 1 r I 11111 ANTI ISVDITdd AVASHIVit CDIVAH111013 AVI1 KVDTMI ....,az.. -- I II 1 rir c O 1.33/.12 211.11M31A 120.1109 an sluts 33S E i 9- r I •, . 1 . ,i _ . ; E . ica . . I:2 . 9 i, i > \Ian 4 I I 4 1 CD r 4,i .,: f I I o . • . .0,11:11 I. co 11 l' CO . I "... I,... i_ I i 11 i .- .40 I I . RI ., 11 g / I 0 St ,d; . I I 771; ill ; . • •if it it 1 1 r I i 1,71 cl V 0- L........„.. ,,''' I i I I i "5 I -,----- -- ---, , I : - i I I i Fn To EAT' I -1 I 1 r I I i I I c : 7 , 1 1. I 1 j I < c___ 4 i i ? i ; i i I TZ I ', 'n't• ....4. le i 1.1 ! ii 1 ) 1 I i III 1.,.. em., 1 ..... 1 „ Ittil I, i 'al . c. r ,r, I 1-I I„y -- , I . 1.1-1, . r 1V-7;•-.1‘. - I irzi , , >ctx , ,... lk ---- . ,,i pf 4„,f._,,t(1, _.— ,F,I! ( _0 0 1 1 ..:C- bil p , I f 4 ,1 1 I '-'" F-:---7:—;"----; 4-5 $%. . 1, i, I i C -0 di ,--(74-.. r r s'',Ve-0$4,4k; • .,...,4-,, i ,,,Ais,;1004,444:1-'se4S,4%f ii 11..1 I a% i . . . , ._ ,. . , Iii ,i.,.., ., .4 ile.411Ae.....#1.14%..,:_±;;.■ .■:.... .... ,,....,. r 1 i 1 I . - 1 I :.t.,,.;',1,14. -77'7————- --— •4* 7 .r ''l 'I'• ' . ‘ 1, : u)(.3 i -.0? . „,„. ;,/ •t41 fi k9$ 1 ("71 ... : i' 74 1 • "1 0* ' 1 9.!15 ‘II I s I i 'i I i qii . I L'ii -• i <1.)= i iP*4§4 11 ill 0 IgR ' L'4" I i I .1. 4; II 1 . -2 g I 1 isr`05:5. 11.P li ii ; i . 1 , ti! 1: . 17. It ii , c 8 1 1 is.ks': , I C---...4 I o c, \ I**1 i 1 i 1 , ›- %,I CI I 1 I 1 •:( I Ct ; Xa*1 I I 1 > I I; CO i IVATE DRIVE 'vet.,21 i.t.t: —I R . II I 2 I a) :-- I PR(ST.LUCIA) ,t, rirlI&I 1 2 g I u) 0 i til , , . u . i ...4,1 .+As.,1-1■ 73 ' ''' e 4 I c 0_ § CO 0 4 W I I .. i.P I7.01 1 I - a' i! Cl■ c 0- C) W ii I 1 11 I li i I l I.A.z ,jo, , . CV --w- i \4‘44.-1 i Eg 1 I 1 I I I 111 " s..W4t.■1-,1_ ,:?! >,-.Z , i 1 .- r t -t" -4. 1 1§. Y 1 . li ,..m,-....,„ s,44114,4;14,. ... .., ....., ,..t. ,Ii/ii ; 1 C13 'IT,' CO I i i IV"' , F...i.. t,... i ' I I I i i i ,,.., \ A 1... i ' o 1 r.--- 4 r I , I I I a) -6 op 1 ; •,t..„,.• v.1 ..‹.,--;-‘,„>7 <, LL r-- 0_ I I I I 111 “.1.•.. yyt W... , 4., ..., ,%I.4. I g H---,1 ,.._....-,-. • ' I 1 1 0 .....1 6 1 1 §. I 1 151 .. 14,. s4 ' r .14., c6 4(),1•., ,e f f i fs III; 1 %, ,, . I 4 1 1 \ 1 \ . . i' (1 ' 1 1 1111 \ ' 1 I I ,.r.9' 1 1 1.9 11 ' ';?4‘ , a .a. \ 1 , .,.... \ , i :.,..., ,—„,. ,,,,, , . 5 r• v • i • ' 1 ' 1 \". ... I 1 "_\ .,. \•," 1 i ".4. fi. 1 1, I il 1 ' I , , II , II I. i t . . „;. , , L. -J.'. „ 1 21321.22 232 1.2.1HS SININMA1.1101228 —--— -- ........,.,,,p,. .8.=01. vti 2A It" 9433,49 33S 0 1aafis 59.1 M3141.401.1.011935 - E t \-ti ' I I --, 1 r....' 1 C \ i , A '.-, \,. \\ ' 1\ LC4-4----,J. . - 1 k 1 t • \\;\ stk_.... 4 ..f,."" ,..,.. Li 1 ell ,,,,-... 0 v 1 1 i 1.Ili " IR ill 1 44 ,I7vi a) := \ ...'..A. .4; I iiii0 igE:tt 11___f!) I i ! CO Illill t ' tki°1 , . R. ,r ;Ci, 3 ; s i„. ,;,, I ;I 's i '',■,. 4, s i • a_ 0 \ ••• 'I, I ,t,,/'' L•.,..i ! --------fri \ if \II iI , „.. .4 is 1:415 IOU M313 40153S tiaapls 335 • ^ __' 0 .....6 ...mat t 119111- 1*1 i 2A Eq-, 2. ----- 1 g (t')NYLIEDVRIVN(14'DNB:MO H 80 14£1A`S')rldV.14 Dtztva'mous w Nos`aus I -C -.1-7-7 • III I 509 MILS'HAIM WO latinin ios _._ •••— 1)11:1z-i, 1 ,-. 1 T 6..-i, O 1 il IA NOISIATU SaDIMIRS KOLINIS WILL MDR —rg - ......., OISSIOADVOD-RaNIMA ZO Illii in AVE{NV3ITHET AN 7' • -ii*Iiir - 1.4 1:4" lial i ,..,.,..,,, Avnilliva cnrvna-Inos Ave tivonaa I 1 11 0 I .!iliii II • 1 1 c 1-45INS SIM.NGIA V101103 ggS O , T r1.1-- Li MN E . ss, III s E 1 1 t i 1 k 8 ;.: \11, i_ ,,,_ ',1 1 1 1 . , I I ; l'S/ 7: - 1 E \-0 '1 L. 1111 i 1 it‘ 2 Y 1-1, ' 'I r 1 11 ,„:2._.,,,-` t...„,.. 2 ......(k/ — \ ' liE II 1, t k -2 1: • VI i 1 .1_ .. . .i • ? ,V \''' II ' 1 at t > .'-'s! 1 3%. .41 t ..._,, ..,1, ,, , ,,..,-,_ . iti i 1 I I R 1/ 1 0 ■ 0 1 * i I ' 1 t I CI, d: 1 s, / t 0 1 • i \''''' I11/1 I 1 1 1 1 i I li .: *i ■ * . ,, . CO 1 1,, ...I I' , , 1 , 11 ,, r ‘, 1 .. I i g g i I I k (7.).- /\ 1 k +I ■I ....., ..4. i ii t 1 $I • .‘.3--••••'". ..,..4._ 11*1 .4,, 4E) \\ A 2c 111 1 .....-- .u2 ., 1 ' ' \ 11 th gi 1 , • ` 0 >, co c < i Mi9 r 1 l' 22/g ... 4 41.'. ■ § \ --Ithi°I, ■ I m 'F• 1 '', ; 1 1 k''' + — d• I `,. -- . ; II IS \ .,= O , 1 1 it 1 \ • 1 s.,4 !,4.• '',• r;4E,, . \ 0 -0 •E. ', ZJ o o 1 1 1 1 . .. W ........1 . H t • W \.. I i (i) 0 1 ,11 V- 6 2 11 11 . 0: ‘ . . 1 1 i r.2 PRIVATE zo IC _DRIVE -5 ,c,'' 5 . If 'i ''. g'I I\ , g i I I b 111\4) P cs i III V ,., .... 1 pliaErl 1--f Nr Ifi 1 . co. ..,_, ,.. lc/19 1 : 1 $ -... , 1 •• ..,g' 1 ovt-i -J-------,... ..,,, \(7) a) 1' 2 t 1 ----------\,, ' . V11,... .,,,...........,....II I 1 1 i 2 '5 X I' \ 11 4 I kil I II'' 71"—". .. "'""1 7 I , -a- a) 0:11ti ', ■ ,: g L1, ;14 115 i 1 ' li %. 0) 'I) -:. \ t h 1111 flg II!, ' 09/8 I I Gy, .[K. ,,L: / , . , 1 1., ,1 , , (3 E 1 i' ; V„ 'lit I 1: 1: 0/i : t N)2,,rw, / E I II,II; ' .4..' ti r k. 4,.: 1 ,lu 0 , i\, , . . . . i -i 1 ,- \ ., ,. . 0 MAIII LI -..._. _ ... , -•;,• , • ■, ••,.."- •,...4.v, I ... cci u) \„„. '‘IIIII - 14 '...,!.'I.• ''•■•,*.v*..4440,;y4,„,,,,V,, op ft-'---- ---Th I`" I '''I ''',' "°s• $ • 'tk•••0•:$: •$ ! 'I ' -.• i CO 0 1. I I 1 k... i 5 , 1 , kr' VC 7.CCEIccrEn_fa rm,,,,,._krr,_ t a' • r , 'i C i . 3 :I , ,....0 A / .• ,4 IA 2,1 I I 1 , -,. 8 II, g I ',. cv .....th 11 l °31 4.,„_., 1, , Lj I gre 1M / 1 1 1 -. : .it il '1 \ (j 11 \ ti 1:'•i'-11; 1 01 7, CO li• 1 g A" , r"■• 2 ri a) cp I I . ‘ / I a)mi co ..*,......A , u_ r- CL ", - . ',, , ' ..---1 I I ., -.• 2 4., . rc, i ..,, .,„, ... . ,. „,,..._ . li Or- ., i I , . : . ,••/, , tiol 11 f 2 S A h N 1 > .14aid k .#• ....1 03 11, ..,..\ '411111111111101 k i I 4 , 010 gigY . / , 2 2 2 ' .4 2 03 •. ;Aligin 140 ". ' Z ' '0 Mil WN ) • -1 rs, C., I 'i "i3 Wi g 5 W i il-4q pH "I 2 ) *z• T .7, ••,, Ili 1,111§ :in 4, .11 1 ...3' ' N. r i 11 i -I ' ..... 1 .1 `21,..igi 3 1 ".7 41 1 II 133/01331 lillOS cammaggaca its , — • , i 1 _— . ..... ......*aa AN.........r61 rt■ ----• ____ 2 A E r- , _ I i i i I SOIVE IA Va7r1Vti (5)NV-Id aDvmvaa w Exicavlio .-. , ------ ONIAY4'ONEJLELS 78 NOIS'ans „ 8 — ' iti, 1 SO9 suns'annia xvo Tairwl los NOISIAICI saphsalas NOILVIS NVILL 111:11QK - g, Itti4 '01 4' ' Z Pli Al Ca SNONENCX)-acasisafri 1 m"!il i --- AYH NVDI1Thd i - 1 = ° 0 ... •..1 i 470411.-, Aweatva awvitaanoti AYR 1+TV31-11id I i 1 11 11 0 --'''"'-`-t'-'''''''''""-....'-.4°,1-14 1 ; '. i ; a r=mt......mici-sobeymr_.,...,,ara,..2 i (A C ? 123146 SIHJ./ANN HOLUM an 11133NS 335 ,, ., I I E ' 17,,l+' .14 1 4 A ' r - o .•"" ., - ! •- ; ' 1 •i ■ r 1 , (..) . - t:1 , ... ,, 1 (.3 .".1' -1 i ii i i , 1 , ., . c. 2 ...,-• g • a 1 % ...4r A 0 — „, ,• A E't; . . \*. - CO ■ I > 1 li i r4./ P • a) •,, 1 , t, ! i .c..t„ 4 ., r, co Pt I II i 11 /41 N f.- - ,/ ..-_.„ ., ! cr5 . I i 11 H !III! #1 , , go L) i till 11 ii -1 li 1 t I , ci.. 1 \,......,.....■,-, 0 D 6 svi •f I 11 0 'kJ t i ' I' t. I .* --f Ai rr) rl ( 11 4.-- ;1 ! If I 11 1 : 4, 4 LII kge I 121 ill ; 11 • 0 i it '''4' IQ Iv., ' P " t a 0 0_. 0 ...■I , I E . I .- . ... • Vst i - E 1-Ar 0 4 , .1 f .-7. iAf f!; o 4 ii; i i I .o .-S- r- - 11!2 . _. II . -0 , 1 ,1 I 1 t 1 I ,,, , • f i WI .1 i 1 i 1 ,'11-L-6 - • % s,/ ; 1/ .F.N —1 1- a) a) ES c'•/. 401 : 3A T, ;el s4lef, Et.,v sl, i 1 s i 1 I ' - I , .L.-' , 1 , , , 1 ; 1,--, s st ,,,,I. u I .%,...zo Q........ - • r , : %I r 1 i r 14., co_ 1 1 I I I I C 8 r• ''''' ( ) I cti. i 76 Fic i I '5 cc i I ii a) !! ''.91:if;c:C;:Ifflrie.:'1•1 ill!li ii 4.--> 4a! ,0 I '1 lz-t I u) (I) ,7•, . ,...--". • ' t 1 a 1 if1 I. a) 7.- .15,• • 1 I I I .0 Er PRIVATE DRIVE -T, I 3 I t I I 1 .- E (WATERPARK al -le* 4 1 I 1 I ar o 1 PLACE) 1: #a) 1 i ■ I I U) c-> 4,*1 ,.7.,I - 1 co \i"..".. Ci3 0 I ■1Z W . i CO CD III it: 1 qiit• tIti, i 1 i O ,L- ill e I: 1 • =Vii c-a-- Ili i 7 1 111! . C■I ,-- CA 1 .• . §P 1 2 o_ a) •• , • -:"`""t .0 0) - I iss,_ /4— $ ,g. , .p• • . c..\,,, f.,,, fit il - I ifil I i g- 1 fig 1 ,! t '$ a iig i g I 111' 1 i•i 1 F 1 ri ,,,, I 1 1 1 s ' t , Jr43-' I 111 \ 4 4 0 4 4 r,,, • I ... ili :f., 1 '44 k , .i.-- I 1 1 1 'I 1 _,-..... ,4 1 4\ '1 C.-' •-..? I 1 . . ..r 91. I ‘, ......1:: ' IJ I •1.3311,3134 1.121I4S 811104-IIA 1 33$ ...“.....•w Iv.41.713.1.11.=at 1.1. tots 1 2 A 1 ti- se, I i 8014C'11'821)1VN (SO mria arwmvKa 4'DNICIVIID 'otonva'ON:13MB V NDIS'ans _ t A I a, ca o ' ?111/11 4'1 li o 091 5 £1.11f1S'HADICI 311/0 TallflY1 108 ___ _ NOISIAICI SgOIAIGS iioiriiiifiiminiori — :-'1; 11111 A.Vil NVDITatl 01 83301/31.300-3321111.67153. 0 EMI U3 .WM1LLVd CDPVATIDOEI XVII NVOCIad C 0 ,,,,,,,,, \.,•6'. 6 1321.1S 3S - E s.,-' 1.,, .1.-13/4 S11.11.M..11M11401100 33S 661 E .4,0 ,..,., ,ipit ,. .0,., , . 0 , ;„ ,, , ._, ,,-,,, 0 ' ' ''''r r ,,,v 0„. ... E 0 . i , 1 .„.„..,411 ni, , , - 2 / ' , 1 1 I 1 i'' I I I I, — -2 , i co , II I r r 1 / 1 3 > I 3 1 i N 1 I ! „,,r!1 o I i 1 si I I I I i .. I 11 , i 1 >, 0: / ,,,,..c.... . , , I, 1 1 ,1 's.0•/, 4. ' .,,S, i 4. I 1 C i 1 I CO ;:: 4 1,,,, -, ,,,, ' 1 , i 1 1 I ., f I i 1 i 1 t 1 i (7) I i 1 . ,-.4 ■ 1 .., 1 , I .5 1, ■ 1 . I ..,...Q Ili • • A. 6.1 ' I k§ , I 111 \ t I (1.1 Cl.) 1 k' 1 co (..) , ; t, i " riE 1 . ! i C', II hi/i 1 I 6 5 6,0 1 fr 1 . '.. / 7 ° Y i $ a.) 7= il i:1 I 1(11 I I . ...., I 1 I 0 1 cal ' i m /ct, _ to. li 1 i.,* . ''' !. /.0 1.^ • co ' c 6 ii . .I'-,..A' al 1. 9 , . ..:44- :r ‘i . , t ' t i I : =.0 ° I ,. ------14 .: iii. : \ u) 0 I 1 1. g i >,= 4,1 as co . - § .., -1 DO , 1 I en i F1.11; 8 11 I 4 11 il !...,.4 = 0 1 t I ., iiitt .!,5 , I , ■ 11 '..? ,, ,I. _ (-) s' t1/4 l . 1 lir oil il! ii . I $ 4 *.'c' k '''' .,,. 6„, .i , __ _____, .., . , 1 1 1 , CA . 1 I Ci 1 i It i 1 too i 1 I ti li _c o l I It 1 ,:!:1 / 0 1 - 3 7 — OV 1 '1 , :I lit I 1 _8 a-i & I I I • a) -t: co Iiii lilt\ IA_ ,••••- 0_ l I „oPt ." 41. ... 4, +. a . ,i ' ." 1 el .,- i , I I i : ! ! i 1 I i?,..ftt) • t i ---,./ . i 1 1 •g— = .t ...--\. t.41 ` .) )t. x■ .k.;),'I ;ti I 11 i \tm.._ , -...../ ,• . .....„....; sj ca 1 i lu I t 1--1 1 1 , 1 1 . 1 I I\ I FINNIC.'DRIVE 1 I t 1 1 t I ( P Cr ANTIBES) 1 Iiii I 1 / 1 1 rili / I i / / ....#•! --N.' 1 •+-''-"--:.-----____14,41',... i I • s. . 1/DPW EIS liamS NU NUN am 3.4. .......... .............v.. - 1 2„-- rrl j 1 2 I I (V!ma aDvievva v DNIQVIID v1 H r` I I SoIY£1.1 VE 7dvN teenva'DNid[N.s V NDIS'aus •- ti °` I fo9 ELMS AMU VO'IHYIlv'I io „� 13 I I _ a 'gg Z ,._.. • V, 1 NOISIA a mums NOLIV,IS MILL ROOST .ti E _ f II q . o i#. AVHldV�IIHd 010105 (M-wormm it I @ p a I . ail:PA I ,, ®, AVMEII.Vd c YAH7ROH AYH Nv3rraa I a I I N#1 "s. I 1 ) y I cn c 0 133HSSIRLM3N/11011.08 338 - _ O111�3HS 33S E ‘,..0,. 1,°1 f I '; 'r' ; •eli 6 + N+ ! E _ dhi • > I g T 41 1' co II; ls I `� 111.,:, I co If 1I I € II t f; 11:1 h }}'' 1 I I z S it o. §i 3 f, ;. d c w � p '"a!► m1E .: it S. ®a l ■1 9 I I C y. k wC. t_ f3' ill$ 1 N ; 4 �' Nr++sd �' 0 ❑ O0 .. gI ; Ii .ems..� f� 2 « i j .NY a... { IIt: ' p or i f 3 ` 1 I F ti, „ x I It ,, ,� 3 4 d �* ' a € € € mil Q ; I 'A i 'o � I I fi! ( I $ ' i l Il I ( ai I q 't 1. '''r v m I i I I m 4 t r .4,s I Y D_O 4 f `� iI w%j'y _z 3 .,,� e wm n,i1 1* .. %`. �q,�.S �`V'i ,-L.' Ira. e BEACH I , /eY f''�r. � ItkY I E WALK '�;.{„/ •I Y23 2 I € 0i .) o $,."s ' 1 Ili -• t .4 U U .n•l m U , 1 c n 1 F 3 I I I ; E Y iMC m ,t3 ## .� ;I PRIVATE DRIVE \`• I h 0_ U , I 4 (ST.RAPNAEL) r M Kt; p �ts� y .u. M T`- PRIVATE DRIVE •i..,I •t ° e I F't `- 3 o (GRENADIER BLVD.) "9 I ;..I .. zw•� i I . I co a I-r. `+ I ��',4 i J I I5. LLaa y I. g I a '1 - i p r 5 �L. s I 5I \ m, ` ,p 9 I' 1 t I s1 I �,w 1 t ♦4 . f +^ t. F. !! ,� - ---- A..:1:•,a + ELMS 334 "' 133HSSW1M3Ndb133S =ay.,=at11 4tltilVyNOIS1 61 2A 1 q- ,...........__ H i X83 NV'Id HDVMVII I v.DMQVaO O tel v. ,C 1,, 1 SO10E'L 'SdHHVN 'DHIAVd'DNId[KLS 3'r ois'Hns °'~- -C !! J c09 aUOS'SAIIM WO'IME 1V1 108 ........ I k 8 :..ii_ o _ i Ill; NOISIAJQ S 1DIA217S NOLLVLS MILL HLI ON 6 c E i __ 1_ ^ p' i z `III. Ave NVD IId QL SNDH'iQOJ-HOISL88M - 5 ., ° 1`x[•[[ Av/AILLVd QI[VA ICIOEI Ava NvOPTdd I i 1i II i P a y i1 I v' 1 C 0 AS*x11LL Maui 1011061 335 -i 1t 133H5335 7 6. . ri, tai 1 o • `2 I4.:I II Rke4 , £ e. 15 .! ° tPYM ` i 1 2,13 , J o A % 4 '1 � t PRIVATE DRIVE R .. e, 1 IIE CPVE AT MARa LLA) ... CO ([ g I i I I I I 4i S1 Xt 4,4: 4),,t, \.w , CCI op ?3Figgge t !`.:. ! ,,, II / • a j am..©I, ? M ia3 d ta. I 0- ill @@ o I t par s D I - .ift : I o Q _ i ill a, ♦t S gII ,g {t, i + x I i 1 ;8 t m �( '` '' ..s. ' �i t N /it ` lit:tt E. +: i I i'-', --`)'J j4 .a,. k @ 3 11 el'''f# ii 'I Ir . a` 1 � m Im �- a= r p l H I D CI in D 1 C v Q� , 1 la N• N D U ♦ I ' .7n' ,F ©;tea y'I "i t e ;-- 1 I !ai a g 1 Mrn ♦ 1614 II 5H `" Y Y s '2 c c = I C I m_ 1 + r} N iii o PRIVATE DRIVE Se I CO (VILLA CORONADO) � f .'. I' a o• a t ; \p, ( 11! iii x111§ tti LIfi 1 1 E .,;. .° t`" .;£ i. 888§ 111 a; -1,-- /� I � � ....3 y.1 %- 'I' 11 -.II �1 N o ©J ii I t'll ei g �a � Y S Cad 1ty I, j er• I 1 1111 99 i i 8 -: ,, � r m a „,.. Fa Irl 4, s ,I eiii =fIi L I CU m jig $1,,,--s6,1 ``til zI r I i CV y n t11111;`xIY + �' I t I .; 6i�t s„ # ;t' 1 m B 6 >.� S /g I Ili. T g IE i I+ �S g a^L CV sip 'ra B # __ C cc, K C ii ', •p d p� PRIVATE DRIVE yI R`t II 1 n}+ S�S4 V' I.,I i N a m (ST.RAPHAEI) i °(- �.I gYaf I I I I I /11 111 L.L. f�0_ i "Pi o Igt :8a �,,. i Al 1'3 © I i' i g i E i : ' I R g „: Q I'.._ L I m i I {.,, ,I1 t - x 59 4°_;"f! it ,a ti..,Y I 'I' it, 1 ( !ill J~1 I ® j I I i '(' ! i I I{!' ; ;;I ' ; `'s .1' ■I I s II, ` , Inn ,1 §=i i I I' 1 I l 1 I I ♦i t+ a3 !I I ^C ,hi ' •r5i I --7 x 1 r It^ I o s i 4i Al I I i ' I 1 1111 .7I ' 1 y4y 11' I I 18 'G' I II I � ' i I I , I �4>c . > C. i 1112131411311 U 4 MM3IA .1 w ....,9Yi QIIti ILL VIfZ 1 2A i I i (6)NV'Ia H9VN[VIIa'3NIQVII3 _-- -. t ■ 1 i i 80IrE73'SH7dVN 'ONIAVa'3NId[1LLS2t NoIS'alas `- ------------- J.^' c r {{ f SO9 EIdf1S'IAIHQ MVO'1aNfiVT 108 �- t 3 I S'.Z- _ a ° .A..-- d, } I t;i NOISIAIQ SHOIAIIHS — mawsvevlualsox I 4, _, z j1Ipli AVHNVJI'IHd 0161•101411110D-amsasan °t°I41Ir-_— ,r+ -- @ i @ ° a :3II jl�j1 e, W 1 AVASILLW Q1IVAff noai AVII!wor d 1 i 1 l ig a rte. _- -ri c.i..,I ! i ,./) x an ays� _._ C 133145 Slat M3Lt 0 WOl1OS 335 0 , - ll`t * C1.133119 , :., -rt."-4 ro I.. al >�ryR>*3 , i i,11 s 4 J °b• ) ,+ L'. 1 i its° '•1 o m 4s gib /I ',-s•\-i-' I ¢ s 33 w- ; ig a T Y `� 8 S E'S MsCa : I I S C' ,� C s CO RI k;$.1 I�1 .a k g I @€ �- g� IMF 1., , I I .t. ) H ,, , f "y f 1 t ,1 1IA 1 ' '� ,! , 7 (0 r - lS 4 ,C. ,1 9 c wrr I Q( ) 6 8 a o' I - _ ---- 1 3 a N oseL-liet, ' .".• ! it�3 Q` PRIVATE DRIVE - lit 'Is!I s. d * t4 I `r g ° {MAABELLA) ', { " 1 3 f4g_i I d 1 ` 1 a`a) a`) 1 '; '�` Ili! 1" �4£i`xle! §6ix 1 fa I Z f-J 0) U 4j '©^, , $I YR;R3 1oW „ 2c 0 �_ '� - r `99"��. , Iii .:s ; ', . , ,_' "6 C � 3el1 pa3 �\ \R , - I lgy o o a) ;jj 4.I i.- CD 0 •¢ { PRIVATE DRIVE -, I ,1 (CLARIDGE) s r, 2 m )i I ?Ili c' � +" 3 : N ifs . g i C .. r q 1 0_ -) h 5 8E {'1�5. I i3s o�� .die�.� .igg O Et I 11, ,. I s c F € a , m ' c;r.'. ft‘es . �... 111.1 i i .��I 1 3 ° I i , m A 'i G I � o gds m�f; •lm i!' -- .f - gioi iii i.4, ': !1 , I' �'`� .F/f '+ i I Svc 0 !II � �a € Wks '.Ifi• % E ' c ''\ lilt L'�:a .• ,- F gr4 } ,I'� i 9 I '`I. I • /1- . 1g ' f:, , R b,f I 'i4t 1 1125 .4. 133HS SIH1Mla ..1334 - 0:13355 555 • G1 v.J a.'�G7.L 301 Ii V 1 tt 01)mvsagovNivim 79DNIQVIID I N h -.E.7-7-z--- 1 1 i SOWE 14'Sfl1dVN 'DPIIAVd'DHIdDLLS w NOIS'fl'US `- - " ~ ~ ,... 509 aims'flAIII{I�Ivo is inv7 lob 1 i o_ z a• tti ls3/1 MOISIAIQ SHOIA�IHS I Nouvtsfr a m.ioN P� r 3 t -�__ -- — ' i�H!I AVHNVOIIHd otsctosuvoo acn�s�a l( wa.r. ,mow d 1 @ ° € ° )i� .m AVAILLVd advAfl nou AVH NVOIT3d I 1 8 i so i 1 � . 133H.ZHLL Af31A 140/109 33s - E ¢' 1 i 9d 1 II -.. a s-s- 4„, ••■ g I ( 1\ ,, , trb: . I''''I 1•• o r v o r-Ti -) i i i 1 m I TYr` E,, 01 11, o I 4_1r 1 4 I�i0 ® 1 I 1s € 1::::: N R ! 1 c 1 q: r i i ) �I f. i 1 1 1 4 t r{ i i I C 1 d i I 1 11 1 al' J 1iik i r R { -0 till I.- „3! #, �..JO �; w.c. , . roll Q B �'1i � I • E 1 I g ja<>: gist I t` l I I I 1 � �g 4 6fil , 1 O I t ,. I I.31 g GY gwii, 11 ' I e . `° L., ° ` -1-� I 1 ° I o ° I 1 j= ' .� 1 o a) 11 k g 1 b I .� E Li 1 is `,, 9'•f{ I �4 a) 0 `1� {' 1 t 6+ t 1}} ' h-1, 4'1 ( .I i: 1 1 1 l'" gad i If�..�,. Do 4. CA N N. I <4 =.S 41 [ 11`1. I". al, I I H.- , ' g - PRIVATE DRIVE " i iii 9 a a j 1 tG (MONTENERO) I I i :, 1r 1 1115- r!i I• ,I i* 1 1 I } s S I I I -m a,.\ i f t I! I tilli • 3 j .1 Si i I �!r a„l I 1 I Y �, ,....1 -: I k� ■ mle� a I i ^�I,I -•ai I I lI 11133145 335 'A.!133)15 6411 M314 all336 :a,;J,►..+»ai.Ott!Il'd �IQ' I 2 A I 1 --- ' (t0NVZaHOVNIV2Ia1b'oteavwo = I m -I r- 1 3 1 8014E 73`S37dVN 'ONIAVd'ONMDtLS 3'ND's tin y,^' ~ o {{ I 509 ELMS'HARICI VOZ32SRVZ108 ",,,,,,,,,® 1113,Eta -_ _^ ° a- I 1 1 NOISIAIQ S�IAZI3S Nouv.LS NIVEL HILTON c . --- 4 w Z ' o 'i 1' AVH AIV�ITdd cu sNOrnvoa tsaa I �.r t it�� y o 1 itlMliLtld auwi a-u1oa xva Nvorrdd f- .a m:•� �F - ! ^ E 'r •i _.IJ "_ ...� �� L O ,r 13:114S l Si_HL M31A W01109335 �r , ; tr J E . 1._� 1 1 i _c----1- /.� 9 V' J•�f t 1 1 I I r i u U �% i it I I p� > W 1 i r L -N o �q ��1 J I a t C" `,,._,/ ., 11 111i i ° ` 1i ii. I: 0111 �l1''.1--- 4-.,,,,, � //. ffi � ' TIT b 1. a 1 ill o n o , { l La o 9 i�1 5 *41 4 4•t I I F/ t� q ti ;i 1 t T_ 9° °,a Q }cf; i� i 3 1e ;1` v.,/ _ 1 iI m 1� ! ? a '1 t#11 }. �k o I`AC�"�°g i 4' ,I I ,, m I t -- 1 `o r.> WE s7`EE t' t rq I Z 1 e -- f / i / I I Ii a :i=. I I I Q 1 N @ C. I r t I I Q H. y4 g a i t I 9 j t j 'z@ ri� � 1' .'� II I j C - t �`�" yk' i I 1 I 71 t 1 3c�.1 �3 r} o ' Cp i ° ..R1 41 p0 W ' 1 t �a-R B ' tJ ' N N ' '} t 1'1 I,' o ( i I j'JJd I1 a. 1 .1111; Fl :c I/ : , /1 ( . m� m 1 a � i O �._� I €i ■ ' It m ' (i ; I • I.' /4.4 II ...11 NO 4 I I ', �,* 11 E II o fAs 1I' �:\ / �� r I II o I1 II m PRIVATE DRIVE 1 11t i i /t !+ `�1 I I a) I t ,� n (MONTENERO) ��e ‘i'/! t i I I >' ....1� 03 o ( II rn N t>.. r Ne: toil.T s u :1' ..t 1 W `� I I di p TX EEI co a : f i b I I - :,1, .15 11 1 I �asia * lr i 1 r d. (iii ' A 4 10 11.-t 0 : 45,1, I I 4 rw I t t,�.- 11 Erg ll N a , t ice .. d .0..110 ir y t a 1 I ut' / IOk1l ik,�nr, c Iy f" AI,'...; I 11 : le l.!......._...,......I _..—. .. i ��« .i.s+.aL33NS SCHL M3I 431 II �I El:13314S 330. s�+ 1 80I4£13`S31dVN S'IIVL3 NOb1.01aa.I.SNOO --- — o •-. { 509$LIRS`r1A1liQ]IVO'IItIRV1 I08 ,. ,.„ !!!!N- o Z-...::__ _ III;if% xOISIAIQ sa;Jlnxas o'ouv s WILL a11.1110K a p E Y e B �.:l:'•'•1��!lhI'l, avaxw�riaa �� Avnsxrvamlvnalno€AVaNvariaa 1 iE —! !_N ; N C o • j ••, . . t ill fzill i I • i'l it'i,:?I'-',:: 11 g r_.... ..,7 i E 11 i CO co '....t...1,''- 1 . 7,,,- ! .01 .- I i-i �p 'i� I al ,'� r� li le Ay Q -. __-- __ i s f0 I y a , li. }pi. v 1 , tiA 141. , E my is;% ',y.,, r3 , 1 t" #I N �" W L 1 0 iY – 03 o :I7'4 I � /I I4?Ki o o g ;_ s1 o o i I r s. ! ° III g e= _ ° III 1.1 .I > � I rl O N .`z'1 I I ; : iP III p �'�`I i I F e i e:. 5116 w ' <j{ g 1t 1+I I I a ; ai yg a !lilt I I rr a 3 a' m Z E ?11` litli4�1 / 1 II I PI [i EzIll I I I i i i lls a t~i � 0 .:�''o ' I I I gg gg H� 4J € I i I g g U,WI rip ti�'o'i�'c ,•�, — 6! 9 — O ; Mil. 03 T I,,�l:,*:ii: e o O®®OHO O 000000 0 III tO fa 4a U eV I d U - € 6 �b` i M N _ - r L r�0 I a-, I .J': CO 17.3.0 C I . 'as tins 01 gi k n S ttl au / Y ! yIl �' E .. I 1 In y 1 ..-''.4'' ey i u ; v+ h g,- •=II=1=11 e �� ` f a I.'� QI Ije y 4iE '=17(:11 !& , �., hg , !� . " ` 1 d1I1�I "• z 1 #1 1 1�$ ► > 11=Ii firth y ° " / —6 R! hP a - .:•.`a a.a •r-:11_1 q h-r-I -r=II . ah6 w ., ,_ . ..\ . 1 6 1 2 A Ili ir---- ii.A ; 8014E 1.3'MAN STIVLFICI'IMMO INSPEIORS ....4._ oii0 i II 11. 509 Runs'annul NVO 7311f1Y1 108 .......... 116611§1 i .11i I, 1 ; 1 P , „ 1 - "A ' I ill 'nil 11E1,hl , .. 1 ! i p ; I!! 1 I li II 1 ! ' 1 IPA i! I il o ' ' ,l ) --,1,0. 1 I \. 1,li011 1110 NI 1 i. ithi 111 >, - li 1 I il ,i , . h i ,1 ? k 11 dig —h§1 co , i --\ ,,, - " ia / , , , 111‘1111'1:.'11'1111t.i..11,):,i''''''''''.:i, 1111\\It''''' / ') 1 f '' 1 ; 1 ' 1 _ \ . . .. _.../I 1 \\''\i \ 1 . , , , i I ., x ,, // 1 . -,\ 1 r , / *- 'if 1 0 I I 1 1$ ,' .1".., u, / 1 0 : \n\ ? . ,,.„.. \ \ \ ,, • .3z '. 1,, . ' , jp%/ \\ \ \ \ t I ,) , I 1111 1 (4/ Original Message From: LukaszKyle Sent: Monday,February 11, 2013 3:37 PM To: Ian Orlikoff(info @signaturetreecare.com) Cc: ResnickLisa Subject: Pelican Bay Blvd. Tree Analysis The area that Ian did was approximately 6200 Lin. Ft.That leaves approximately 26,800 Lin. Ft. of sidewalk area remaining on Pelican Bay Blvd. and the length of the median is about 16,000 feet long. Maybe that helps him estimate the time required. Thanks, Kyle February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 6 t (1/ n proposal from Ian Orlikoff, ISA Certi ie 4barist 7dii. Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee Report-Review of expanded r d p p Page 1 of 1 signaturetreecare.co PROPOSAL Page 1 ecologiclandcare. Signature Tree Care,LLC Proposal#: 5170 481 10th Avenue N.E. • Naples, Florida 34120 Office: (239) 348-1330 • Fax: (239) 348-3133F G L A n � <. annEO` Email: info -. ARBORtST ' IAN ORLIKOFF ISA Certified Arborist#FL-1037A Florida Certified Horticulture Professional#11605655 Pelican Bay c/o Dorrill Mgt. Proposal Date: 02/12/2013 5672 Strand Court Customer#: 2164 Suite 1 SalesRep: Ian Naples, FL 34110 • Item# Quantity Description of Services Units UnitPrice Tax Item Amount 1 56 Trees per hour 125.00 No 7,000.00 Client requested a rough estimate of time that would be required for the arborist to review trees, mark map with options and consult report as previously completed for another section.This is only an estimate of time,which may have to be adjusted if more or less time is required to complete the project requested. As per Pelican Bay Services:The total amount left of roadway on both sides of the road as well as the median estimated at 69,600 feet.The area that was already done was approximately 6,200 Ft. That leaves approximately 26,800 Lin. Ft.of sidewalk area remaining on Pelican Bay Blvd.and the length of the median is about 16,000 feet long. Arborist Consultation.A"From the ground"basic inspection, inventory and consultation with client on options for pathway project. Provide options for care regarding pathway project as needed and mapping with options noted. Consultations(price listed is cost per hour)include meeting time, property review,emails, phone calls and tree mapping, report writing. Informational literature will be provided as indicated. All methods accomplished thru ANSI Z133.1 Specs. in compliance with Collier County code and industry standards. , Not responsible for underground sprinkler lines. • Terms:payment is due upon completion unless other arrangements have been made. Proposal SubTotal: 7,000.00 Should you have any questions, or if you wish to make any changes to this Proposal, Required Deposit: 0.00 please do not hesitate to call us. Please sign and return as soon as possible. State Taxes: 0.00 • Proposal Total: $7,000.00 Signed: Date: Estimate is Valid for 15 Days. I February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sesi;ion 1 6 1 2 At 7d. Pathways/Tree Canopy Subcommittee Report-December 2012 Observations submitted by Susan O'Brien Page 1 of 1 Number of bicyclists,walkers,&joggers using pathways Pelican Bay Boulevard(PBB)near Sandpiper parking lot December 2012(Submitted by Susan O'Brien) Location Dec 26 Dec 27 Dec 28 Dec 29 Dec 30 Dec 31 Totals (Direction) 11 a-12 p 10-11 a 1:30-2:30 p 9 -10 a 3p-4p 8a-9a PBB(east) 21 22 10 19 11 51 134 PBB(west) 40 34 16 25 23 12 150 Bicyclists Pathway (east) 5 5 3 0 1 0 14 Pathway(west) 22 6 20 10 5 1 64 Walkers Pathway(east) 8 6 5 9 5 8 41 Pathway(west) 22 24 17 25 13 15 116 Joggers Pathway(east) 6 12 0 7 4 6 35 Pathway(west) 9 14 0 9 8 8 48 Notes: 12/26 - 4 walkers passed 1 jogger without incident - 4 bicyclists passed 1 jogger without incident - 5 walkers passed 1 walker without incident 12/27 - 1 walker passed a bicyclist without incident 12/28 - 1 bicyclists passed 4 walkers without incident 12/29 - 1 walker passed 2 bicyclists without incident - 1 bicyclists passed 1 walker without incident - 2 walkers passed 1 jogger without incident 12/30 - 1 bicyclist passed 1 walker without incident - 2 bicyclists passed 1 walker without incident - 2 walkers passed 1 walker without incident - 2 bicyclists passed 2 joggers without incident 12/31 - 1 walker passed 1 walker without incident Observations: 78%of bicyclists used PBB;22%used the pathway 49%of pathway users were walkers;26%were joggers;25%were bicyclists 72%of pathway users used pathway on west side of PBB;28%used pathway on east side of PBB Submitted by Ms.Susan O'Brien February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services n Bird Regul�'Se3s�En ry Y 11a.New Business-Establish priorities and identify upcoming meetings Page 1 of 2 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 10. Setting Priorities(Keith J.Dallas) Page 1 of 2 Setting PBSD Priorities By Keith J. Dallas As I end my term as your Board Chair, I have started to take inventory of the - issues that I feel are outstanding, in order to avoid items being inadvertently forgotten. That process has highlighted the number of important projects in which the PBSD is currently involved, and the need to prioritize them so that the most important ones are accomplished as needed. The following are my thoughts. They are given to encourage the Board to think about priorities and develop your own priorities. 1. Clam Bay Dredging- This has to be the number one priority, and needs immediate attention. The PBSD has to have a seamless transition from the CZM/Foundation, and do the permitting/dredging project on as fast a track as possible.Anything else is unsatisfactory. 2. Solving the Copper Sulfate Problem - Although there is some time to fully solve this problem, it still has to have very high priority.The solution(s) are probably very complex, and will involve trying various ideas and then monitoring results. It also involves community communications and working closely with major abutting landowners.All that will take a huge effort from staff and the PBSD Board, and will not occur quickly. There is only 5 years to solve this problem. 3. Taking Over Various CZM/Foundation Functions - The intent is that PBSD step into roles that have recently been done by either CZM or the Foundation. Staff and the Board should spend time to make sure nothing slips through the cracks and consider if there are other additional functions that are needed. This will take time and effort over the next few months. 4. Tree Canopy/Pathway/Bike Lane Study- I think the timing of this project is most debatable. Its urgency has been diminished with the repaving of the Pelican Bay pathways.Although the study would be useful, it's immediate importance pales in comparison with the items above. Given it will take a lot of resources and staff/Board time, should you consider delaying most of this for a year or two?The pathways probably won't need work for a couple of years or more, and the County has now delayed the repaving schedule for the Boulevard to 2019 (and therefore the need to decide on possible bike paths). Maybe you should merely hire the arborist to provide status on the current health of the tree canopy and the best ways to maintain (and possibly enhance) the health of the trees, assuming no immediate pathway changes. The rest of the project can wait. 161 2A1 1 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11a.New Business-Establish priorities and identify upcoming meetings Page 2 of 2 January 2,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 10. Setting Priorities(Keith J.Dallas) Page 2 of 2 Setting PBSD Priorities By Keith J. Dallas - Page 2 5. Ongoing Landscape Improvements - This almost falls into the normal maintenance mode. Each year staff will upgrade further sections of our landscape, as time and money allows. 6. Crosswalks - Hopefully a decision will be made at the January 2nd meeting regarding any modifications at the San Marino crosswalk. Hopefully that will also provide the direction for future crosswalks. Once that is decided, minimal effort will be needed deciding on when and where future crosswalks are built. 7. Repaving Pelican Bay Boulevard - The County has now said the Boulevard will not be repaved until Fiscal 2019. The Board will have to decide if that is acceptable, and if not what can practically be done. Although I agree the current road condition is cosmetically very poor, I personally would defer discussions of this until other items have been solved and you are sure of the PBSD's financial status. 8. Replacing Street Lighting -At some point the PBSD needs to hire an expert to advise you of the current state of the art of LED lighting, and update the cost estimates provided by Wilson Miller. The original study said the fixtures should be replaced in 4 to 7 years from now. However given the time needed to update the study, decide on a specific technology and look, and communicate to the community, a couple of years lead time is needed. Once staff and Board get beyond the current high priority issues, thought should be given to start the process and maybe do a demonstration project. It is my hope that the Board will start to discuss priorities at the January 2nd meeting. Anything that can be lowered in priority will give everyone more time to work on immediate issues. Keith i'' -- I - i 1 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Sess on 11 b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 1 of 11 k BAY COLONY COMM(NiTY ASST CI ATi(C (.jeneral Manager, CEO Nhicrrurl A.Nclson,cx'M.,.:.AM Board of( overnors January 11,2013 Pn.si,icni _ ,p 1,41n N.'.11 t ii Pelican Bay Services Division ,,,,-,t.t,tr,, c/o Neil Dorrill „t,�t„hIn 5672 Strand Court, Suite 1 r;.;:,,,;-:, Naples, FL 34110 St,‘, tw,«. \l,n;,,,i.�,t'<,?m,r. Re: Beach Renourishment Roam Ann SF,tr1 loN..atua Dear Neil. 0"4'` ",, i am writing this letter to you on behalf of the Bay Colony Community Association, Inc. (:har1 ra,h:,...Ms). ("BCCA"). BCCA was recently made aware of Collier County's plans to renourish the R.,.C:al..r; Shot_.; various Collier County beaches and is of the understanding that those plans do not include the iv`"""'Mr- -I beaches adjacent to Pelican Bay(including Bay Colony). rs<<13�!nn�„�• t.ii`n `;, It was BCCA's understanding that Pelican Bay Services Division ("PBSD”) historically paid At R..,11, for beach renourishment to the beaches from the Contessa condominium to a location fifteen rl,c,,,t-.,t,. hundred feet south of the Sandpiper Beach facilities. Further TDC Funds paid for beach t, t r renourishment from the Ritz to the Contessa. The last renourishment of these beaches t 1.,,.:',.:, occurred in 2006. BCCA was inthrmed that Collier County is relying on a study which it.r,i,,1,,,. ., showed that beaches adjacent to Pelican Bay have only lost a fraction of shoreline in i 1,t..,e, comparison to the various other beaches to be re-nourished. Notwithstanding the suggested Pint St (O<rnrun results of this study, the erosion that has occurred is not insignificant and because the County ncc,ti1.,r,l,tt,t is on a six-year cycle to re-nourish the beaches, the failure to renourish the Pelican Bay P.tt,Ni.1411 beaches at this time in connection with the County program could create a substantial hardship `h..i"'"'"'`'t'°` for Pelican Bay if that area is made to wait until the next cycle in 2019 -- 2020. As TDC .,,.,Ii k Ns:,.,at, Funds are apparently not available, we would urge the Pelican Bay Services Division to act promptly to take such action as necessary in order to join the county process for the re- Kx,rracon I.,l,Cti nourishment of the Pelican Bay beaches. rh. st„t,,:t I)nuv,,1),,ntnrtit We work! appreciate your prompt rronongo*n this 4 nm!'ri!eatkn .' we are advised that time ist.sr, appreciate 1 r' r is of the essence. 1'rir.:rrl,i:::, ,Ala!_a Palm( / Sincerely, . r .!��-+� ' Kim Rosenberg de Mi et-A. No son, CCM,CAM President Chief Executive Officer cc James lioppensteadt, President.Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. 8700 BAY COLONI DRIVE•NAPLES,FLORIDA 34108. 239-591.2202 • FAX 239-591-1685 • www.bay-colony'.org I - -1 :t 2 it-tt t 45 a ,.N 01 N c a) 7 a N �4/ co N N N N o i i 1 .f y Y Cl mr‘ E Fat C .- a) L d ..._,V M .0 K7 oN r a1 N to Z'o° g CO j 0 N a.. u m CU Uia- a W ze fk I 1 a R B 88888 8 T. o.FT V g g 3 N T.,' a r 6 Off 2 g_ O le F M 4-1 t'] f Cr Q o ^ M P 2 8 O C) W R - — Of N 1D N l") ...I C/ tt R •-f LL E � C1 y g E 1tl § E W 4 O 4 4t_l V N L ` M N N UU XS) t u'1 tel i .11 i February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Servt l6orLoard Rea ASion 11 b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 3 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Division Board October 7,2005 Mrs.Johnson-Fogg stated,"I don't think anyone will disagree with that". I am only brining this up because it has been a couple of years and nothing has happened. It is not going to go A away and somebody is going to have to deal with it. el 4 Mr. Carroll stated, "We will get a letter off to the Foundation to find out their position on the issue". Mr. Sutphin stated, "I would suggest that you strongly demand a response by our next meeting". Mr.Charlie Manning-Grosvenor-"At the next meeting are you going to decide whether to add more money or stay with the$800,000 for beach renourishment"? Mr. Carroll replied,"No,that is a separate issue and I was about to bring that subject up". I think we ought to consider approving$160,000 to increase the amount of money to be spent on the beach renourishment. Mr.Domenie asked,'Where would we get the additional funds"? Mr. Sutphin replied, "Spend $350,000 on Oakmont Lake". That is a phony number to begin with. IMr. Carroll moved seconded by Mr. Sutphin and approved on a vote of 7/1 to increase the amount to be spend on beach renourishment by$160,000. Mr.laisso cast the dissenting vote. Mr.laizzo asked,'We have$840,000 budgeted don't we"? Mr.Carroll replied,"Yes, now we have$1,000,000". Now we will be getting 36,000 cubic yards instead of 30,000 cubic yards of sand. Mr.laizzo stated,"Yes,but I don't know that it is necessary. Mr.Sutphin replied,"I don't know that any of It Is necessary". SYSTEM Iii&IV RETENTION AREA IMPROVEMENTS-TEST AREA Mr.Lukasz stated,"There is nothing new to report on this project". Mr.Domenie asked,"There are still some flags in the area,are you still planting"? Mr.Lukasz replied,"We still have some fern and Cord Grass to plant in that area". r r 6238 , r. C, -2 I February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Se es>T'vision Board Regular Session 11b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 4 of 11 Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2006 Capital Projects Fund Clam Bay Restoration Program Appropriation Analysis: Clam Bay Operations&Maintenance Clam Bay Improvement Program(183805) Engineering(320-183805-631400-511051) $80,000 Restoration Consultant Services $80,000 The Clam Bay monitoring program includes biological, water quality and hydrographic analysis which is performed on an annual basis. Findings of these analyses are developed into an Annual Management Report used to identify any potential improvements in the restoration of the Clam Bay System.The fees being requested are for the consultant services necessary for these improvements. Also,included is 520 hours for biologist time to assist staff in the Clam Bay Restoration Program. Pelican Bay Beach Renourishment SO This funding will allow PBSD to participate in the permitting process with Collier County which will give the Pelican Bay community a cost effective option for beach renourishment. Other Contractual Services(320-1838055.634999-511051) $870,000 Pelican Bay Beach Renourishment $840,000 These fees are the renourishment of Pelican Bay Beaches from the Contessa south to approximately 1,500 feet south of the Sandpiper Beach Facility.TDC will fund the beach renourishment from the Contessa north to the Ritz Carlton. Interior Tidal Channels $5,000 Fees are being budgeted for the contractual services necessary for the construction of the Interior Tidal Channels. Cattail Enhancements&Plantings 825,000 These fees are for cattail replanting within the Clam Bay System. 64 6 2013 Pelican Bay ServiiDiJlSfon board Reg Session February 13, y 9 11b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 5 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Division Board September 7,2005 Mr.McAlpin replied,"It could be from the Ebb Tide Shoal,the Flood Tide Shoal or it could be truck hauled". That has to be worked out with the State. Mr.Mathias asked,'What happens from R-37 to Clam Pass at R-42"? Mr. McAlphin replied. 'When that was surveyed it was determined that portion of beach did not critically erode and did not require renourishment". Mr.Mathias stated,"There was an original bid of 63,000 cubic yards of sand from R-30 to R-37 according to this document,which may not be right". Mr. McAlphin replied, "Recognize that the area between R-30 and R-31, I am going to take care of". That is 30,000 cubic yards that I am going to pay for. The other 36,000 cubic yards you are going to pay for. Mr. Sutphin stated, "We have a habit of over-complicating simple issues". To me, this is very simple. The County has a plan, there are aspects of it that we don't like, but we don't have the ability to change the plan. We either play in the game for$840,000 or we wait eight years for the chance to play again. I have heard speeches, including one from Mr. laizzo, of how we don't listen to the residents. I guarantee you that an overwhelming percentage of Pelican Bay residents would shoot us if we would watch the beach erode. Mr. Charlie Manning - Grosvenor-'Why was it that the south beach was never in the original proposal and have you noticed that the south beach has eroded"? Mr. Domenie stated,"It will come back". Mr.Carroll stated,it moves back and forth". Mr. Sutphin moved seconded by Mr.Spanier and approved by a vote of&*, that the Board approve the expenditure of the$840,000 that is in the budget for beach renourishment. Mr. Roellig and Mr. Boland cast the dissenting votes. CLAM PASS INLET POLICY Mr. Burke stated, "A lot of time has been spent on Clam Pass Inlet". For the sake of the rest of the Board and the owners,the Pelican Bay Services Division has been responsible for the permits for the maintenance dredging of Clam Pass. We have done it in a manner to benefit the s 6187 PI CJ r- C) February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Re lar ssion 11b. County's 2013 Beach Renouri e rog m Discus Page 6 of 11 Pelican Bay Services Division Board August 3,2005 postponed for one year. We have no idea whether or not the County is willing to spend the extra money that is indicated in the bids. Mr.Burke stated,"There are a lot of"ifs",but we feel that is our best position". Mr.Ward stated,"The question is,what you are going to do about the$172,000". Mr. Burke stated, "The feeling is that we could move funds around in the budget to accommodate the$172,000". Mr. Sutphin moved seconded by Mr. Roellig and approved unanimously that the Services Division express It's desire to continue to participate in the Beach Renourishment Project, subject to a final review when the County answers the as-yet unanswered questions. CLAM PASS INLET MANAGEMENT POLICY Mr. Burke stated, "I was encouraged by some of the things that I heard from Mr. Humiston and others". Essentially, we are not in favor of dredging the ebb shoal. From what I gather from the discussions, if the County Inlet Sub-committee came up with a policy regarding Clam Pass that would dredge that shoal,they would have to go to the State to get an exception or modification to our permits. Our present permits govern that process. Mr. Sutphin stated, "Mr. Burke, I believe Mr. Humiston indicated they would need a new permit,which he very much doubted they would ever get from the State". Mr. Burke stated,"We are still going to move forward with the Inlet Resolution that we are going to provide to the County Commissioners". That has not been presented yet,has it? Mr.Ward replied,"No". Mr. Burke stated, "In effect, we are telling them that we are happy with the way we do it now and the bigger picture is Clam Bay". I felt good about what we discussed and what we heard. Mr. Carroll stated, "Mr. Lukasz mentioned that there are some changes to the Resolution". Mr.Ward replied,"Yes". 0 , cl 0 O 6151 N tV N February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11 b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishm nt Program Discussion Page 7 of 11 6 I 2 A Pelican Bay Services Division Board October 6,2004 Mr.Ward replied, I don't think you are ever closing the door". I think it is a good idea to put it on the table that is what we want to pay for and we will see how far up the flagpole that will fly. Mr. Burke moved, seconded by Mr. Werner and approved unanimously that we limit our participation In beach renourls tun ent to $700,000 and that the scope of participation be limited to placing sand on the beach, not m on or monitor! . SYSTEM 111 AND IV BERM AND RETENTION ARE IMPROVEMENTS Mr. Burke stated, "The plan, as developed by Mr. Lukasz and Mr. Lieber and presented to us,allows the Pelican Bay Services Division to move forward with the System ill&IV berm and retention work". Mr. Ward, I understand that you and the Foundation are working in getting the associations involved to do their part. The Clam Bay Sub-committee wanted to recommend that the full Board proceed with the plan as presented to us. Mr. Domenie asked,Is that the$75,000"? Mr.Carroll replied,$200,000". Mr. Domenie stated, "The $200,000 covers re-strengthening of the berm on the west side". From what I can see,this part is$75,000. Mr.Ward replied, "No, I believe it is a$150,000 figure". It is $200.000 for this program, exclusive of our berm restoration work. Mr. Werner asked, "Do you still have the sheet from last month showing the break down"? Mr.Ward replied,"Not with me". Mr.Werner stated,"Mr.Domenie,I have the same memory as you". Mr. Ward replied, "Mr. Lukasz has indicated that It is $203,000 and includes the berm work". Mr.Burke moved,seconded by Mr. Roeltig and approved on a vote of 9/1 to move forward with the System Ill and IV berm and retention area improvements as presented. Mr. a' laizzo cast the dissenting vote. 5874 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11 b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 8 of 11 1 b I 2A Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2005 Capital Projects Fund Clam Bay Restoration Program Appropriation Analysis: Clam Bay Operations&Maintenance Clam Bay Improvement Program(183805) Engiaeering(320-183805-631400-511051) $80,000 Restoration Consultant Services $80,000 The Clam Bay monitoring program includes biological, water quality and hydrographic analysis which is performed on an annual basis. Findings of these analyses are developed into an Annual Management Report used to identify any potential improvements in the restoration of the Clam Bay System.The fees being requested are for the consultant services necessary for these improvements. Also,included is 520 hours for biologist time to assist staff in the Clam Bay Restoration Program. Pelican Bay Beach Renourishment $0 This funding will allow PBSD to participate in the permitting process with Collier County which will give the Pelican Bay community a cost effective option for beach renourishment. Other Contractual Services(320-183805-634999-511051) $196,900 Pelican Bay Beach Renourishment $46,600 These fees are the renourishrnent of Pelican Bay Beaches from the Contessa south to approximately 1,500 feet south of the Sandpiper Beach Facility.TDC will fund the beach renourishment from the Contessa north to the Ritz Carlton, Interior Tidal Channels $150,000 Fees are being budgeted for the contractual services necessary for the construction of the Interior Tidal Channels. Clam Bay Plantings $300 These fees are for Mangrove replanting within the Clam Bay System. 64 February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Dis si Page 9 of 11 16 I PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING June 2,2004 Mr. Sutphin moved seconded by Mr. Werner and approved unanimously to adjust the budget by reducing the flushing cuts to $150,000, removing the beach renourishment contingency in the amount of $140,000 and reduce the Operating Fund Balance to 3.5 months. Mr. Ward stated, "Because your Ordinance requires an affirmative vote on this Budget, I think your motion was to remove line items". I need you to approve the budget. Mr. Werner moved seconded by Mr. Domenie and approved unanimously by a vote of 1010 to approve the Fiscal Year 2005 Bud•at subject to removal of the line items above". ADMINISTRATOR'S OVERVIEW Mr. Carroll asked,"Mr.Ward,have we agreed to resurfacing the tram berm"? Mr. Ward replied, "That is an approximate $40,000 expenditure to do that, which would be completely wasted money if we move forward with the removal of the cattails". Mr. Carroll stated, "That is a good point". Mr. Kinney we have money in the budget to spend$1,900,000 to scoop out all of the cattails to get rid of them. If the County buys that and it goes through they have to come up with the money,then we will be proceeding with that work. If we were to resurface the berm prior to the cattail removal it would be a waste of money. Would it be all right that we don't repave the berm for that reason until we resolve the other issue? Mr. Kinney asked, 'Would you know before the season began whether or not it was a go"? Mr.Ward replied,"Yes,we will probably know within sixty days". Mr. Burke asked, "At which County Commission meeting do the County Commissioner's approve our budget"? Mr. Ward replied, "We have to go before the Board of County Commissioners and ask them to set a Pubic Hearing date,which will probably be the second week of September". Ms. Sue Belanger - "At the intersection on Greentree Drive where you turn on to Gulf ItY Park Drive heading towards U.S 41, you can't find the street at night". The streetlight is 100'feet trA down the road and the palms have grown so tall that they really don't shed any light. Is there 5784 r February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11 b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 10 of 11 1 6 1 2 1` 000405 Collier County Beach Renourishment Bid No. 05-3854 Schedule of Bid Items Bid Item No. Units Unit Price Subtotal BASE BID—Construct Beach Fill Hydraulically 1. Mobilization/Demobilization 1 L.S. $2,329,057.00 $2,329,057.00 3. Payment and Performance Bond 1 L.S. $133,418.00 $133,418.00 Beach Fill 4. Dredge Sand from Borrow Area, Place and Grade at Vanderbilt Beach (R22.5- 95,337 C.Y. $24.09 $2,296,668.33 R31) 5. Dredge Sand from Borrow Area, Place and Grade at 59,812 C.Y. $27.14 $1,623,297.68 Pelican Bay(R31-R37) 6. Dredge Sand from Borrow Area, Place and Grade at 25,705 C.Y. $27.42 $704,831.10 North Park Shore (R43.5-R48) 7. Dredge Sand from Borrow Area, Place and Grade at 132,491 C.Y. $22.56 $2,988,996.96 Park Shore(R48-R54.5) 8. Dredge Sand from Borrow Area, Place and Grade at 312,049 C.Y. $26.06 $8,131,996.94 Naples Beach (R58A-R79) 9. Beach Tilling--Deleted Deleted Deleted Beach Fill Subtotal $ 15,745,791 Al Environmental Monitoring 10. Set Buoys for Pipeline Corridor P1, L.S $8,243.00 $8,243.00 Pumpout& Booster Locations 11. Set Buoys for Pipeline Corridor P2, 1 L.S $8,243.00 $8,243.00 Pumpout& Booster Locations 12. Set Buoys for Pipeline Corridor P3, 1 L.S $8,243.40 $8,243.00 Pumpout& Booster Locations 13. Set Buoys for Pipeline Corridor P4. 1 L.S $0,00 $0.00 Pumpout& Booster Locations 14. Turbidity Monitoring 1 L.S. $170,058.00 $170,058.00 Environmental Monitoring Subtotal $194,787.00 Offshore Sea Turtle Monitoring(Hopper Dredge only) 15. Mobilization/Demobilization Turtle 1 Event $3,642.00 $3,642.00 Trawler 16. Relocation Trawling 5 Day $3,500.00 $17,500.00 17. Endangered Species Observer 1 _ L.S $52,117.00 $52,117.00 Sea Turtle Trawling Subtotal $73,259.00 1 l BASE BID—TOTAL $ 18,476,312.01 X71, February 13,2013 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session 11 b. County's 2013 Beach Renourishment Program Discussion Page 11 of 11 1 6 1 2 A Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Operating Budget Fiscal Year 2004 Capital Projects Fund Clam Bay Restoration Program Appropriation Analysis: Clam Bay Improvement Program Pelican Bay Beach Renourishmern $10,000 This funding will allow PBSD to participate in the permitting process with Collier County which will give the Pelican Bay community a cost effective option for beach rcnourishmcnt. Interior Tidal Channels 510.000 Consultant fees necessary for the surveying,design and services during construction of interior tidal channels.These interior tidal channels are constructed to drain stormwater from low lying areas within Clam Bay where this condition is causing stress to the mangroves. Other Contractual Services(320-183805-634999-0) 5182.000 Hydrographic Improvements $152.000 These fees arc the construction of the improvements identified in the Clam Bay Hydrographic Study. interior Tidal Channels $20,000 Fees are being budgeted for the contractual services necessary for the construction of the Interior Tidal Channels. Clam Bay Plantings $10,000 These fees are for Mangrove replanting within the Clam Bay System. Other Fees and Charges: Tax Collector(133-959050-930700) $1,200 Fccs arc based on Fiscal Year 2004 assessments to be collected. The Tax Collector charges three(3)percent of the assessments collected. Property Appraiser (133-959050-930600) $800 Fees are based on Fiscal Year 2004 assessments levied The Property Appraiser charges two percent(2%)of the amount levied. Revenue Reserve(133-919010-489900) $2.000 The Board of County Commissioners policy and State l..aw requires the Division to appropriate 95%of estimated revenues,which will cover discounts and non-payment of assessments, Total Other Fees&Charges: $4,000 Total Appropriations: $461,100 • ri • 64 aefA, Srkettoil S ,04LI• • Z. s‘: : , , Pi- VJ ittri. T .2 r sir N. • " l� 5 } \ ��. -Ser L d • v. c9 , - .A. fa—lo.. „ti-'-- - ■ t p wiml b iiiiera, �o � �� ` G�� i�� easfa, • Goo es..e e a r t h meters 200 00 A f t 4i:till1111.1„--, _,_ ,,,,,,Allik-\ - ( '1' .. e "It m \ ice' t'ire...... . . ,, 4.. , j/ ' r /1 1.000\\ .. . . ' . 'ft,. :' . ..' 111111-.-– —INIP. .___- t t =om-^ _ -- it �s � ' *` ' � • t x, ti - #, a �G ^� x�� • # «b y ; g 5 .�: '7,..`1.* : 11 A '.ni*W x„ _ �V ��`r o- a €2012Google IM .S fD A. (Q XD 9 ra. °. 4 • ' - ..44„,..,,. ::` 0.1 v:".'::.:': ' �+ Z `� 4 CI °, moo z 1 rl .„ 1, < Q m ID` * to - it N O (D n: n C . fl) At • i" s li <O- ' -l'.''',,,,, . O Q r+ Ol w rD C O .., '} ` ' V. -0 Q S , I,' -,' '.' . ' '- ''t .°° , ', --, °:'' -..,,-;;;AiL.�+ p a (D . P 1 '+ ate ,# rt O gyp `" . r _ 't � N - .'• fie;* - Nr - '9 ?_< —• I .. t 7 "'"J, ,,,f,...,%-;' n '' *-11i-W..: , . ,, .- ..: .4 '-*: .. 41 1 4.,:,o n Cr L-A-• * bi*, 1 sA7te;t1 , p a 4° ', ''3 -to , (D mil, dr.< W �k >, 3{bd a vokv g:: a •,,,,... kat2414( 05-C: Improve the height of the berm at the south end of the Ridgewood Drive park beyond the water management lake. Proposed Improvement: Install a wooden retaining wall on the park/lake side and place up to 54" of new planting fill on the US-41 side— install the new concrete panel wall noted above atop this new berm area and re-landscape and irrigate additional berm area. Opinion of Probable Cost: $ 1,983,500 Alternative solution: Place limited height soil berm of a maximum of 30" in the same area of the US 41/Ridgewood Park parcel line: place the new wall atop this berm and re-landscape the additional berm area. Opinion of Probable Cost: $ 1,877,500 2 Phasing: This project is limited in scope and length and can be installed at one time. Sequencing: This improvement will need to be done in conjunction with other ro improvements recommended in this section. 4sA, D5-D: Add a perimeter/barrier along the Serendipity and Naples Grande common property line along with acoustic treatments on the Naples Grande side of the wall to eliminate bounce noise to the pool 713 area or re-transmitted to the Serendipity(reference Serendipity Perimeter Wall Study graphic). Proposed Improvement: Add a twelve foot precast concrete panel wall and columns/caps system as a continuous perimeter/barrier wall across from the service dock wall of the Naples Grande. Opinion of Probable Cost: $ 62,700 Alternative solution: Add a ten foot precast concrete panel wall and columns/caps system as a continuous perimeter/barrier wall across from the service dock wall of the Naples Grande. Opinion of Probable Cost: $ 52,400 Phasing: This project is to be implemented at a single time and include the landscape screening of the wall as required by the Pelican Bay Covenants. Sequencing: This improvement will need to be done in conjunction with operations and management understanding/agreement of the Naples aizz, ait a - 05/18/2010 • . '`°" . • • "`` s• te . r v. 1f4'44--„-' '„, n C Z + ° #,i y :mow tI � r .. . .,. . . . . ... • -1/4N,.. t : . ., M 1. . „....... ,. „,...,. .. ,. . ......„ . !4 k b x li V')..I't"'r�, . .. .„,„ ,,,,, .. .„. . . . . _•, . , .. , . , . 1,.,„„,,,.16„.. �� i r . "49 „,-, ,,,, :, _D�k ` a � +. � M �ta�' i'" '''' '' r -1/4,.,`"' ' . 11%' - t4-, .'1/4A4, 0. ' dillit ", 1 4:r.,:"..:: . . Mr .. -,3,. ., P �a. ye at W • a sa 1 i . i• °'•• a r a�p 'f . ''-'''''''' ' • "*:*:irit aa - a . '..11,;:-.*,,, M°,`. -,,, _ , fi r 1• A .. .,,, . 4- .. .... . ! 4 � , . -„,. .:.::. . ..%A . �. �� 'r`, , . Ac N.' "014..r..X. '.21%,r.:1;1"41tr#,.'. # .F • x t ka 'C • • * . . _ - ,, 4.4:3,,... „, . ,, „i,. • it }y .:•,., ,„ . „„ .,,,.. . • . .,,,,, ,..„"R y )1/4,,,01., .a, +. .' s IOWA - * , r. 14. 161 2A Dr Gerry Sparkes From: "Mark Brice)"<mark_bricel@bricel.ca> Date: May-29-08 2:26 PM To: "'Dr Gerry Sparkes"'<shampers@nbnet.nb.ca>; <glsparkes @ntezero.net> Cc: <gillupton @aol.com>; <jquinn4l @comcast.net>; <RMasi @luxuryresorts.com> Subject: RE:NAPLES GRANDE/PELICAN BAY NEIGHBORS COMMITTEE MEETING.doc Hello Gerry, Referring to your e-mail of May 10th. as the owner of the Unit 603 Serendipity Dr. for over 16 years I want to give you full support in your efforts to make the management of Naples Grande Hotel realize the problems of the exorbitant noise caused by their refrigeration units,delivery trucks, back dock loading areas unloading and loading all kinds of materials incl. bottles, cans,glass,garbage etc. The Collier County Noise Control Ordinance for a residential area,sets the limits for noise level during the night and day hours. It is quite obvious that Naples Grande Hotel is responsible for any infringement of the rules and regulations. Due to the fact that we as Residents of The Pelican Bay,paying the yearly fees and Collier County Taxes have all the rights to enjoy our properties under normal and tolerable circumstances. In the event that this is not the case (our example), it is responsibility of Collier County, Pelican Bay Foundation and The Serendipity Condo Association to take all necessary actions to enforce the rules and regulations. In my opinion the management of the Previous Registry Hotel and now Naples Grande Hotel haven't done anything to minimize the unbearable noise and to abide by the rules of Collier County. Our main concern is frequent terrible banging of the very huge containers of garbage and other material when dropped or loaded onto a truck and of course steady noise of the refrigeration units standing between the Hotel and our 4 units building. A diplomatic approach is recommendable, however,we have to see a progress in the right direction. I believe that a time limit should be set,as otherwise the present unacceptable situation will continue to no end in sight. Moreover,the market value of our units has been seriously affected,consequently we have actually suffered damages in six digits figures. Let's hope that the management of the Naples Grande Hotel will acknowledge the above mentioned facts and that this matter can be solved on an amicable basis. With best regartis, Mark From Dr Gerry Sparkes [mailtoshampers @nbnet.nb.ca] Sent Saturday, May 10, 2008 3:51 PM To: Mark&Lilo Brice) Subject Fw NAPLES GRANDE/ PELICAN BAY NEIGHBORS COMMITTEE MEETING.doc Hi Marko As you can see from these 2 e-mails,the president of Pelican Bay Foundation has this Mr.John Quinn chairing this committee who wishes input. I think we must make this group aware that we are constantly affected by this service entrance noise both day&night which has been ongoing for many, many years without any definitive attempts at solution. 19/11/2009 Page l of 6 161 2A I if Margie & Gerry Sparkes 9 rY P From: "Hunter Hansen"<Hunter.Hansen @waldorfastoria.com> Date: December-27-12 5:11 PM To: "Margie&Gerry Sparkes"<glsparkes @embargmail.com> Cc: "James Hoppensteadt"<jimh @pelicanbay.org> Subject: RE:Naples Grand(Waldorf Astoria)/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Mr. Sparkes, Thank you for your note and I certainly understand your concern. It was my understanding that this noise issue was resolved with the changed times of deliveries to the Hotel. Jim Hoppensteadt and I have worked together on a number of issues and I will make a point to liaise with him next week to discuss the best solution for all of us. We'll be back to you with our thoughts. Kind regards, Hunter Hunter H. Hansen Managing Director Waldorf Astoria Hotels and Resorts 1 WALDORF EDGEWATER ASTOR(A' e =: . 0 0� NAPLLS A WALCCR1 ASTORIA 1,01EL 475 Seagate Drive Naples, FL 34103 T: (239)594 6001 M: (239)300 8800 F:(239)597 3128 hunter.hansen @waldorfastoria.com for . . WALDORF EXTRAORDINARY PLACES. ASTOR ESCar HOTELS E RESC�� A SINGULAR EXPERIENCE. From: Margie&Gerry Sparkes [mailto:glsparkes @embargmail.com] Sent:Thursday, December 27, 2012 12:15 PM To: Hunter Hansen Cc:Armstrong Mr Harry(Monk); Hulme at 541 Serendipity Geoff&Glenys; Luscherc Christina; Martino Al &Jan; Hoppensteadt Jim Subject: Fw: Naples Grand (Waldorf Astoria)/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Dear Mr Hansen (with apologies for the previous e-mail sent in error this AM), This significant noise issue affecting Serendipity residents continues without any significant change except for the 10/02/2013 Page 2 of 6 161 2 A �q controls on hours of operation.As per the previously forwarded documentation, the Wilson Miller master plan for Pelican Bay looked at this issue, thanks to the initiative of Mr Jim Hoppensteadt and recommended a 12 foot sound absorbing wall on the edge of the parking, truck turning area on hotel property. This plan, we believe is the only definitive plan on a go forward basis to address this issue. We continue to hope that you and your Company will address this issue to benefit your residential neighbours. Gerry Sparkes From: Margie&Gerry Sparkes Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 3:02 PM To: Donna Cox Cc: Hansen Hunter ; Armstrong Mr Harry(Monk) ; Hulme at 541 Serendipity Geoff&Glenys ; Luscherc Christina ; Martino Al &Jan ; Hoppensteadt Jim Subject: Re: Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Just a note to say we appreciate your very positive response. Finding a definitive solution "to eliminate the noise as much as possible"is all that we ask. Having your new engineer address the issue and find a long term solution is music to our ears!! Thank you, thank you, keep us posted. Gerry Sparkes From: Donna Cox Sent:Thursday,April 19, 2012 8:15 AM To: glsparkesOembargmail.com Subject: RE: Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Dear Mr. Sparkes, Thank you for taking the time to write to Mr. Hansen regarding some concern with some noise resonating from our properties loading dock, and the concerns you along some residents have. Mr. Hansen is on vacation as I type this note to you but he did receive your email and asked that I respond on his behalf. We do have a new Engineer on property Jacob Attallah, and Mr. Hansen along with Jacob, our Security and Other Teams, will do all we can to eliminate the noise as much as we can and provide a quieter environment for you and your residents. Donna V. Cox Executive Assistant Waldorf Astoria,Naples \\X WALDORF ASTORIA 475 Seagate Drive Naples, FL 34103 Telephone (239) 594-6002 Fax(239) 597-7168 Donna.Cox @waldorfastoria.com 10/02/2013 Page 3 of 6 AA? = EXTRAORDINARY PLACES. r42, A SINGULAR. CE. WALDORF A STO 7 IA' THE ANSWER IS "YES"WHAT'S THE QUESTION... From: "Margie& Gerry Sparkes" <glsparkes@embargmail.com> To: "Hunter Hansen" <Hunter.Hansen @waldorfastoria.com> Cc: "Hoppensteadt Jim" <jimh @,pelicanbay.org>, "Armstrong Mr Harry (Monk)" <harryarmstrong 181(nimnail.com>, "Hulme at 541 Serendipity Geoff& Glenys" <geoffreyhulme@yahoo.co.uk>, "Luscherc Christina" <shoesinc @aol.com>, "Martino Al & Jan" <jandmar@comcast.net> Subject: Fw: Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Mr. Hunter Hansen Serendipity Condominium Association members continue to be troubled re the noise issue from the commercial dock at the back of the Hotel. We appreciate your previous efforts to place controls on the timing of when trucks are off loading but for a number of Serendipity owners,the frequent burst of noise when metal frames are dropped,the beeping of vehicles when in reverse and the amphitheatre like design of the service bay continues to be of great annoyance to Serendipity residents. Mr. Jim Hoppenstaedt has been on site personally and very kindly arranged to have an assessment done as part of the master plan work for Pelican bay by Wilson Miller consultants (the above attachements are included). You may have been copied as part of the original distribution of this document. As a member of the Serendipity Condominium Association Board, & because of my previous involvement in this issue, I have been asked to write you and seek your help. We have not placed any requests with you and the Naples Grand over the last couple of years realizing the down turn of tourism/market etc. but now with the gradual improvement in the tourism market and with the new affiliation with the Waldorf Astoria we are asking that you consider giving this issue due attention. Your"neighbourly" consideration of facilitating a solution to this long standing issue would be most appreciated. Thank You in advance Gerry Sparkes Secretary, Serendipity Condominium Association,Representative to Pelican Bay Presidents Council 10/02/2013 Page 4 of 6 From:James Hoppensteadt<mailto:jimh @peh 1 canbay.org> 6 1 2 a ( (f Sent: Friday, January 08,2010 5:22 PM To: Margie & Gerry Sparkes<mailto:glsparkes(a embargmail.com> Cc: Cinadr Donna<mailto:donna537 @embargmail.com> ; Gill Lee<mailto:GillUpton@aol.com> ; Smith Joanne<mailto:joanne525 @comcast.net> ; Lisa Warren<mailto:lwarren@pelicanbay.org> ; Kevin V Mangan<mailto:KevinMangan @wilsonmiller.com> ; Hunter Hansen<mailto:Hunter.Hansen@hilton.com> Subject: RE:Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Dr. Sparkes, Attached is a picture of the property line between the Naples Grande and Serendipity. I do not have a problem with the Foundation continuing to explore this with Wilson Miller for a general wall solution—placement& estimated cost. At least we'll all know more about what we're dealing with. Sincerely, Jim Hoppensteadt President Pelican Bay Foundation 6251 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples,FL 34108 239-596-6180 ext. 223 239-597-6927 fax From:Margie & Gerry Sparkes (mailto:glsparkes @embargmail.coml Sent: Friday, January 08,2010 9:10 AM To: James Hoppensteadt Cc: Cinadr Donna; Gill Lee; Smith Joanne; Lisa Warren; Kevin Mangan Subject:Re:Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Dear Mr. Hoppenstaedt, Thank you for your very rapid response and your initiative to ask Wilson Miller to look at the problem. This request for costing of such a project will give us a basis for discussion on how to accomplish this task. Like you,we at Serendipity would have a number of questions on 1: exactly where the wall should be located, (my knee jerk response would be right at the edge of the hotel's pavement which I think would place it on the hotel's property as the current land elevations would give the maximum benefit the closer it is to the hotel). 2: What steps could be taken to preserve the tree line along our road to initially minimize the visual impact of the wall until new tree plantings along our side of the wall were in place for camouflage,this would be key to having association support from an aesthetic perspective. 3: The financial issue is one that, I think,will need a round table discussion with The Foundation, The Naples Grand and Serendipity Association. Serendipity is the victim in this design"error" when Pelican Bay was designed. The Hotel also when designed probably didn't see the the use of commercial dumpsters needing to be parked at the edge of our property or freezer trailers parked for weeks with compressors running for food storage. So to answer your last question, I think Serendipity can develop a position once we are given the proposed plan and costing by Wilson Miller. Again many thanks for anticipating our needs and asking for the consultants to have a look at our problem,much appreciated. Gerry Sparkes 10/02/2013 Page 5 of 6 From: James Ho pP ensteadt<mailto:J imh P elicanbay.org> 1 6 1 2 A (I Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:57 PM To: Margie& Gerry Sparkes<mailto:glsparkes(n�embargmail.com> Cc: Cinadr Donna<mailto:donna537@embargmail.com> ; Gill Lee<mailto:GillUpton @aol.com> ; Smith Joanne<mailto:joanne525 @comcast.net> ;Lisa Warren<mailtoawarren @pelicanbay.org> ; Kevin Mangan mailto:KevinMangan @wilsonmiller.com> • Subject: RE:Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Dr. Sparkes, Thank you for your email,and Happy New Year. I think the wall and technology you reference would probably be a good solution to your noise issues. In fact,I had asked the planners from Wilson Miller to go over and take a look at the area. They indicated they also think the wall would be the best noise attenuation solution. There are a couple of challenges 1)the existing landscaping between the two properties would be completely(or mostly all) removed during the excavation of that area for the wall footers, and 2)this is private property (it looks to be Serendipity's). So the questions we would have to grapple with are 1) is this something the overall association would support - aesthetically?, and 2) who would pay for the wall (financial support)? By copy of this, I will ask Wilson Miller for an order of magnitude on the cost. Once you have that, can you determine Serendipity's position on these two items,and we can see if we can find some way forward? Sincerely, Jim Hoppensteadt President Pelican Bay Foundation 6251 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples,FL 34108 239-596-6180 ext. 223 239-597-6927 fax From: Margie & Gerry Sparkes 1mailto:glsparkes(a,embargmail.coml Sent: Thursday,January 07,2010 4:28 PM To: James Hoppensteadt Cc: Cinadr Donna; Gill Lee; Smith Joanne Subject:Naples Grand/Serendipity Commercial Residential Interface Dear Mr. Hoppensteadt First of all, a sincere thank you for being willing to have the Foundation participate in finding a solution to our longstanding noise issue.I read with keen interest under the Community Improvement Plan, the Dec 9 2009 Wilson Miller Pelican Bay 100%Base Data phase 1 Report detailed information re noise control for residents who live along the 41. On page 23 Sec 1:21,re sound attenuation the consultants provide data re noise control using a product called LITE-FORM. This is an insulating concrete form with both sound reflective and sound absorbing properties.No doubt you have had detailed briefings on such products. I think I speak for a significant number of Serendipity residents when I suggest that any consideration of planning for such a structural barrier between us and the Naples Grand as part of the Pelican Bay Master plan would be most appreciated. Thank you again for being willing to listen to us. 10/02/2013 Page 6 of 6 Dr Gerry Sparkes 1 6 I 2 a 605 Serendipity Drive Naples,Fl 34108 239 594 5623 This transmission is not a digital or electronic signature and cannot be used to form,document,or authenticate a contract.Hilton and its affiliates accept no liability arising in connection with this transmission.Copyright 2012 Hilton Worldwide Proprietary and Confidential 10/02/2013 I • Lig OWN 1‘1211 3 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD J I° "I1/42 CANDIDATE: JOHN M. VISOSKY 6 1 2 A vk RESIDENCE: ST. TROPEZ CONDOMINIUM, HERON POINT DRIVE OFFICE HELD: PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR 9 YEARS NAPLES RESIDENT: 43 YEARS FAMILY: WIFE SALLY AND FIVE CHILDREN EDUCATION: BA, MA, AND Ph.D DEGREES, ALL FROM UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN EMPLOYMENT: ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS RESPONSIBILITIES: RECRUTING AND HIRING INSTRUCTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL AT UNIVERSITIES THROUGHOUT THE U.S. PARTICIPATED IN THE BUILDING OF MULTIPLE SCHOOLS TO ACCOMMODATE 38,000 STUDENTS. SUBMITTED COMPETITIVE GRANTS TO FLORIDA STATE GOVERNMENT AND U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN WASHINGTON, D.C. OBTAINING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF SUPPLEMENTAL DOLLARS OVER AND ABOVE STATE FUNDING. ALL FUNDING HIGHLY AUDITED AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL. AT THE REQUEST OF THE FLORIDA STATE DEPARTMENT, I TESTIFIED BEFORE A U.S. SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE ON THE MERITS OF TITLE ONE,A MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR FEDERAL PROGRAM. REASON FOR CANDIDACY: KNOWING THE PBSD MUST WORK WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, BOTH NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, AS WELL AS THE PELICAN BAY FOUNDATION BOARD, IT MUST BE FIRM AND DILIGENT IN ITS RECOMMENDATIONS. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CONCERNS THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED BUT IT MUST BE DONE WHILE CONSIDERING THE MOOD AND WILL OF PELICAN BAY RESIDENTS, AND MUST BE PRATICAL AND FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE. I LOVE THIS BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY OF PELICAN BAY AND AM CONFIDENT I CAN CONTRIBUTE TO ITS FURTHER IMPROVEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT. i Final corrected 2-8-13 Sierra Club Calusa Group Concerns on NWP 27&Section 404/10 Clam Pass Permits ‘14,1.Oh ` el 2/13/13 10:53 AM 161 2A't2l ' I'3 2-08-13 Sierra Club Calusa Group Concerns on NWP 27&Section 404/10 Clam Pass Permits Sierra Club Calusa Group(Sierra Calusa)advocates holistic management of the Clam Pass-Clam tAits4. Bay Natural Resources Protection Area(NRPA)Preserve to retain the natural contours and conditions of Clam Pass and its intertidal brackish creeks and lagoons to the greatest extent possible as these COPMAS characteristics are fundamental to sustaining habitats for indigenous and migrating listed and unlisted species and passive recreation enjoyed by thousands of visitors annually. We appreciate the Board of ■ County Commissioners recent affirmation to manage the Clam Pass-Clam Bay NRPA to preserve and protect its natural resources(mixed mangroves-seagrass-tidal flats-shallows-beach-dune-scrub-marsh)as an integrated whole. This special coastal aquatic area/wetlands preserve is a rare complete coastal barrier system of fish spawning/nursery,marine mammal foraging,sea turtle nesting,gopher tortoise,multi- species bird foraging/resting/roosting,and small mammals habitats. Sierra Calusa supports use of NWP 27 for a onetime project to restore Clam Pass and its adjacent shoreline from severe weather damage of October-December of 2012 that resulted in its closure over a short period of time. We agree with the Corps staff that NWP 27 would be appropriate to expedite authorization to restore Clam Pass and its immediately adjacent shoreline by mechanical excavation to remove sand which washed and migrated into the pass and then dispose of that sand by using it to repair its shoreline that was damaged from the same weather conditions that caused pass closure.However, Sierra Calusa is very concerned that the onetime project to reopen Clam Pass has been unnecessarily complicated by a construction plan that far exceeds simply restoring Clam Pass. We are concerned that the submitted materials do not conform to criteria for a NWP 27 due to the applicant including a complete new maintenance dredging plan to enlarge dredging Clam Pass to Outer Clam Bay and removal of 20,000+cu. yards of sand for a nonadjacent beach area. We respectfully object to the applicant's attempt to use a NWP 27 to gain a Corps authorization for either a completely new Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Plan or revised 2009-2010 Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Plan which is already a high profile proposed project that warrants a higher not lesser level of review by the Corps. Since the 2009-10 proposed maintenance dredging plan has unresolved conflicts evidenced by 100+letters and emails,nearly 3,000 petition signatures, forums/meetings with USACE and N'DEP staff,and correspondence from an attorney representing local environmental conservation interests-we urge the Corps to acknowledge the high degree of public concern that recently prompted the county to transfer responsibility for permitting and assure the public that Clam Pass will not be dredged to mine sand from it for beach projects,will not be dredged for navigation purposes,and will only be dredged for the health of the mangroves ecosystem We pray the Corps concurs with us that the Conservation NGOs participation will benefit Clam Pass permitting. * Sierra Calusa respectfully requests the Corps approve a NWP 27 for a onetime project to restore Clam Pass Segments A and B(stations 0+00 to 6.60)in a manner that doesn't exceed the last Corps permit SAJ 199602789(IP-CC)widths and depths and exclude from NWP 27 items 1-4 listed below and to require a Public Notice of these items for Sec.404/10 Individual Permit as a new Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Plan or as substantial added modifications to the already high profile 2009-2010 Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging Plan: 1) Clam Pass channel depicted to extend 400 feet westward into the Gulf of Mexico in/near known offshore productive high relief hard bottom with sponges,soft corals and other important aquatic habitat. 2) 1/2 foot over-dredge added to maximize sand taken for beaches renourishment contrary to stated intent. 3) Excavation of Clam Pass Segment B substantially wider as nearly shoreline to shoreline dredging plan that reduces existing benthos,jeopardizes mangrove root stability and conflicts with restoration intent. 4)Excavation of Clam Pass Segment C to greater widths in/near seagrasses areas that is counterproductive to desirable reestablishment of seagrasses between Clam Pass and Outer Clam Bay ecosystem restoration. Thank you for your public service and response to public interest for improved Clam Pass permit outcomes Bobbie Lee Gruninger,Sierra Club Calusa Group Chairwoman *Follow up for Sierra Club Calusa Group will be done by Co-Conservation Chairwoman Marcia Cravens 161 2A 1,1 Rammill3r\I JAN p 4 2012 v PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY,DECEMBER 5,2012 BY: LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday, December 5, 2012 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board Michael Levy Keith J.Dallas,Chairman Susan O'Brien Tom Cravens,Vice Chairman Dave Trecker John P.Chandler Mary Anne Womble Geoffrey S.Gibson absent John Baron absent John Iaizzo Hunter H.Hansen absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association / Kevin Carter,Field Manager,Dorrill Management Group ✓ Lauren Gibson,Biologist,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Fiala Jim Hoppensteadt,President&CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Hiller Henning -r-77¢-- REVISED AGENDA Coyle ✓ Pledge of Allegiance cpj , 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Rules for audience participation* 5. Approval of November 7 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 6. Committee Reports a. Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee Report i. Approval of recommended approach* ii. Selection of arborist* iii. Bicycle lane survey discussion 7. Old Business a. Cobblestones at San Marino crossing discussion(John Chandler) 8. Report from Commissioner Hiller(Add-on by Dave Trecker) 9. Administrator's Report a. North Tram pedestrian crossing signal b. Landscape intersection improvements c. South berm restoration d. Pelican Bay Boulevard pathways safety concerns&status of County's repairs e. Monthly financial report 10. Additional Committee Reports b. Clam Bay Subcommittee i. STORET water quality data recommendation* c. Landscape Water Management Subcommittee i. Status of data collection and cost of monitoring inland waterways(Dave Trecker) ii. Alternatives to copper sulfate* iii. Community outreach d. Strategic Planning Committee news(Mary Anne Womble) 11. Chairman's Report a. Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes(John Chandler) b. PBSD Board terms c. Announcements 12. New Business 13. Audience Comments 14. Miscellaneous Correspondence 15. Adjournment * Board vote is anticipated Misc.Corres: Date: / 8577 Item* IL) I I Copies to: 1 • 161 it( Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 ROLL CALL With the exception of Messrs.Baron,Gibson,and Hansen,all members were present. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr.Chandler made a motion,second by Dr. Trecker,to approve the agenda as amended: Following"Approval of minutes',the Board would proceed with"Pathways"then "Cobblestones"then Dr. Trecker's addition, "Commissioner Hiller Report': The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. RULES FOR AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Vice Chairman Cravens,to amend the`Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD meetings"by striking"politely"and replacing with"strictly': The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to amend the "Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD meetings" by inserting after item 3, but before item 4, the sentence, "After public comments are heard, the Board will proceed to discuss the agenda item and take appropriate action without interruption." The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion was passed. Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Levy, to approve the"Rules for Audience Participation at PBSD meetings"as amended. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 7 REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to approve the Nov. 7 Regular Session minutes as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. PATHWAYS AD-HOC COMMITTEE REPORT APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDED APPROACH* Dr. Trecker made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Cravens, to amend PBSD Pathways Project Draft 6.4, Step 2 to read, "Conduct a census of trees along the length of Pelican Bay Boulevard to estimate the health of the trees and determine the likely impact of distance from the sidewalk and the street to the trees in question."The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Mr.Chandler made a motion,second by Vice Chairman Cravens,to amend PBSD Pathways Project Draft 6.4,Step 3 to read, `Have staff revisit County and State practice and codes for pathways and bicycle usage. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. SELECTION OF ARBORIST* Mr.Ian Orlikoff,ISA Certified Arborist gave a presentation regarding the importance of evaluating existing conditions to develop a plan for the pathways improvement project using an approach that promotes tree health,structural integrity,and mitigates potential property damage to avoid injury and liability. 8578 1 . . 161 2 A l Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Dr. Trecker,to select ISA Certified Arborist Ian Orlikoff as the Pelican Bay Services Division's arborist The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. The Board directed staff to schedule a Pathways Ad-Hoc Committee meeting in mid-January to review Mr.Orlikoffs initial evaluation of trees along Pelican Bay Boulevard. BICYCLE LANE SURVEY DISCUSSION The Board discussed developing a community survey and directed staff to assist and to obtain the County's roadway paving schedule. OLD BUSINESS COBBLESTONES AT SAN MARINO DISCUSSION Based on past complaints about noise when vehicles drive over the cobblestones at the San Marino crossing,the Board discussed:Decibel readings done at several crosswalk locations(results for crosswalks without cobblestones showed an insignificant reduction in decibel levels);safety issues;aesthetics;and cost estimates to replace cobblestones with other materials.Both the Pelican Bay Foundation(PBF)and Pelican Bay Property Owners Association's(PBPOA)were opposed to removal.Further discussion deferred to January 2. REPORT FROM COMMISSIONER HILLER(DAVE TRECKER) Dr.Trecker conveyed information he received from Commissioner Hiller regarding proposed amendments to the Pelican Bay Services Division's ordinance under consideration by the Board of County Commissioners on December 11 and included 1)adding a non-voting member of the Pelican Bay Foundation Board to this Board;2)establishing Chairman and Vice Chairman one-year term limits;and 3)reaffirming the Pelican Bay Services Division's responsibility for managing Clam Bay in its entirety. ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT NORTH TRAM PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL Mr.Dorrill reported that the signal components were delivered and work starts next week. LANDSCAPE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS Mr.Dorrill reported that some residents would like to add more color at several intersections using annuals. Finding the balance between landscaping best management practices and maintenance intensive plantings was deferred to the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee. SOUTH BERM RESTORATION Mr.Dorrill reported that the south berm restoration was done within budget and is complete. PELICAN BAY BOULEVARD PATHWAYS CONCERNS&STATUS OF COUNTY'S REPAIRS Mr.Dorrill reported the recent Pelican Bay Boulevard pathways overlay resulted in several uneven areas and safety concerns. The County is in the process of grading to a level elevation and repairs are 75% complete. 8579 I 161 2 A ', Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Cravens, to accept the November financial report into the record. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE STORET WATER QUALITY DATA RECOMMENDATION* Ms.O'Brien made a motion,second by Mr.laizzo,to authorize up to$10,000 to have Turrell- Hall enter Clam Bay water quality data into STORET pending verification that the Clam Bay WBID is separate from the Naples WBID. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE The Board discussed locations to monitor nutrients and copper and deferred to the Subcommittee. Mr.Hoppensteadt presented Florida Department of Environmental Protection(FDEP)water quality data and map indicating Clam Bay was impaired due to high levels of copper sulfate.Mr.Hall's ongoing nutrient study and flow map would help locate the source,but a resolution still is complicated and costly. The Board discussed staff's suggestions for alternatives to copper sulfate to control algae including aeration,bacteria,and aquatic plantings;and plan to test effectiveness in Basin 3. Dr. Trecker made a motion second by Mr.Levy,to approve the pilot testing of aeration,bacteria products,and aquatic plantings using solar power in Basin HI. The Board voted 6 to 2 in favor, two opposed(Mr.Chandler and Ms.O'Brien)and the motion passed. STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE Ms.Womble reported that the Strategic Planning Committee met November 8 and discussed the status of several projects including media infrastructure and community competitiveness. The Committee's next meetings are December 11 and January 8. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT SCHEDULING MEETING TO DISCUSS BOARD POLICY FOR RECONSIDERATION(JOHN CHANDLER) The Board discussed briefly whether to schedule a separate meeting to discuss the Board policy for reconsideration of votes. Consensus was to defer to January 2 and the Board directed staff to redistribute previous material. BOARD TERMS The Board discussed the four terms expiring at once in March and ways to stagger terms to provide for Board continuity and easy recruitment. Ms.O'Brien made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler, to direct the Administrator to discuss with Commissioner Hiller the possibility of changing the length of two of four member terms in the upcoming election whereas the two applicants who receive the most votes are appointed for four years, and applicants placing third and fourth are appointed for two years. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. 8580 161 2A '+ Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes December 5, 2012 ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Dallas announced upcoming meetings: Landscape Water Management Subcommittee meets December 10 at 1 p.m.and the Clam Bay Subcommittee follows at 3 p.m.;the next Board Regular Session is January 2 then February 13;and the Budget Subcommittee meets January 22 at 3 p.m.The Coastal Advisory Committee meets December 13 and Pelican Bay Foundation meets December 14. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mr.Jerry Moffatt received correspondence regarding rebuilding the pathways away from driveways; a nearby community established a special taxing unit for landscaping;the sod installed by the County as part of the pathways overlay is dead;and audience participation does not increase the length of meetings. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Dr. Trecker,to adjourn. The Board voted unanimously in favor,passing the motion,and the meeting was adjourned at 4:04 p.m. • 4 Keith' .Dallas, 001irman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 12/20/2012 12:32:47 PM 8581 p 31, A IT Ati JAN04 2012 CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOAR E MONDAY,DECEMBER 10,2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Monday,December 10,2012 at 3:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Clam Bay Subcommittee Susan O'Brien,Chairman Mike Levy Tom Cravens Mary Anne Womble Pelican Bay Services Division Board Also Present Keith J.Dallas Dave Trecker Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present: Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Tim Hall,Senior Ecologist&Principal,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President and CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Kathy Worley,Director of Environmental Science,Conservancy of Southwest Florida AGENDA 1. Roll Call 2. Draft Clam Bay mangrove maintenance annual report 3. Draft Clam Bay tidal analysis annual report 4. FDEP Data for copper levels in Clam Bay 5. Proposed BCC Ordinance amendment discussion en,./ 6. Date and tops for next Subcommittee meeting Fiala 7. Audience Comments Hiller 8. Adjourn Henning ROLL CALL Coyle celette All members were present. DRAFT CLAM BAY ANNUAL REPORTS Chairman O'Brien explained the draft Clam Bay mangrove maintenance and tidal analysis annual reports were included to review briefly;Mr.Tim Hall and Mr.Ken Humiston would present the full reports at a future Board meeting. Mr.Hall commented that historically when Clam Pass has closed,the water furthest from the Pass becomes stagnant and increasing contaminants and algae growth.As oxygen levels decrease,fish and wildlife move to unaffected locations.The longer the flow is constricted,the greater the chance for mangrove die-off, especially during the rainy season.Areas identified as stressed continue to be monitored on the south side of Inner Clam Bay(Plots 3&4)and north of Clam Pass(Plot 7).An unintended consequence of the 1998 dredging was an increase in the tidal range creating a lower,low tide,and exposed seagrasses.Because of changes in the water level,seagrasses are growing in other areas.Mr.Hall and Ms.Kathy Worley agreed it would be difficult and costly SC.Lorres: to propagate seagrasses. Date: 12 Item#: Copies to: I cf, . . Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes 161 2A December 10, 2012 FDEP DATA FOR COPPER LEVELS IN CLAM BAY The Subcommittee briefly discussed Clam Bay copper data. PROPOSED BCC ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DISCUSSION The Subcommittee briefly discussed the proposed amendments to the Pelican Bay Services Division's Ordinance and a budget currently deficient of funds to carry out the additional Clam Bay responsibilities. CONSTRUCTING AN OSPREY NEST BOX Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to make a recommendation to the Board that in a cooperative effort with the Foundation, investigate constructing an osprey nest site adjacent to the South beach restaurant facility with a webcam. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms.Marcia Cravens distributed correspondence regarding the Clam Bay dredging permit. ADJOURNMENT Mr.Cravens made a motion,second by Ms. Womble to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,passing the motion,and the meeting adjourned at 3:53 p.m. Susan O'Brien,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 12/19/2012 4:53:04 PM 13 i 161 2 A I41- 3(01E1/W7E1 LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE FEB 2 OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUT 0 2013 MONDAY,DECEMBER 10,2012 BY: LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Monday, December 10, 2012 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay, 8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Landscape Water Management Subcommittee Dave Trecker,Chairman Keith J.Dallas John P.Chandler absent Geoffrey S.Gibson absent Tom Cravens Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary AGENDA -✓ 1. Roll Call Hiller 2. Pelican Bay community outreach regarding the importance of BMP Henning 3. Audience Comments Coyle ✓ 4. Adjournment Colette ROLL CALL With the exception of Mr.Chandler and Mr.Gibson,the Subcommittee members were present. PELICAN BAY COMMUNITY OUTREACH REGARDING THE IMPORTANCE OF BMP The Subcommittee discussed ways to communicate effectively(Pelican Bay Post articles,e-blasts,etc.)with the Pelican Bay community(homeowners,associations,property managers,contractors,golf course,etc.)to create awareness and encourage the use of landscaping best management practices(BMP). Consensus was to develop a brochure that explains how fertilizer misuse and nutrient runoff contaminates adjacent waterways and guidelines to incorporate landscaping BMP. The Subcommittee agreed that the Pelican Bay Services Division's role is to provide information only. Dr.Trecker volunteered to draft a two-page summary. Ms.Diane Lustig(Hyde Park) suggested that Division staff work with the Hyde Park association and Mr.Steve Kohn,Property Manager to develop a BMP plan. Mr.Dorrill recommended gaining support for this campaign from entities within the community by identifying the stakeholders (Club Pelican Bay,entities adjacent to the Club,and nearby)to schedule an initial private briefing in mid-late January. The Subcommittee concurred. ADJOURN Mr. Dallas made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,passing the motion,and the meeting adjourned at 2:32 p.m. ) misc.cones: ,/ $4 Date: Tom Cravens,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 1/10/2013 11:31:34 AM Item#: Copies to: 15 I 161 2A \ CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY,DECEMBER 27,2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Thursday,December 27,2012 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Clam Bay Subcommittee g `�.1��p 3 1 Susan O'Brien,Chairman Mike Levy absent FEB 2 ZU 3 Lf Tom Cravens Mar Anne Womble Pelican Bay Services Division Board Also Present BY' John Chandler Keith J.Dallas Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager absent Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present: Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Tim Hall,Senior Ecologist&Principal,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President and CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Kathy Worley,Director of Environmental Science,Conservancy of Southwest Florida AGENDA LI 1. Roll call Fiala 2. Approval of December 10 Clam Bay Subcommittee minutes Hiller 3. Clam Bay transition Henning -f 4. Clam Bay dredging permit Coyle , ✓ 5. Updated Clam Bay management plan Goth _.. __ 6. Audience comments 1-4 oance 7. Adjourn ROLL CALL With the exception of Mr.Levy,Subcommittee members were present. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 10 CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble to approve the December 10 Clam Bay Subcommittee meeting minutes as amended, adding Mr.Dallas and Dr. Trecker as Board members also present. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY TRANSITION Chairman O'Brien reported that on December 18,she and Mr. Dorrill discussed Clam Bay transition issues with Mr.Gary McAlpin,Mr.Bill Lorenz,Mr.Tim Hall,Mr.Ken Humiston,and Mr.Steve Foge. CLAM BAY DREDGING PERMIT The Subcommittee discussed at length Clam Pass'immediate needs and agreed Clam Pass needs dredging as soon as possible. Mr. Hall is preparing the Clam Pass dredging permit application on tittiParra414Wcy basis,but the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) would make that determination. He explailii.USACE does not have a special Item kff, I 14 Copies to: Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes 6 1 I December 27,2012 procedure to issue an"emergency"permit,but the agency does look at conditions surrounding an application and if it is determined"critical",USACE can expedite the permit application's review. Mr.Dorrill reported that due to misunderstanding over who is the managing entity of Clam Bay,the USACE withdrew the Clam Pass dredging permit application. County Manager Ochs responded to USACE to reaffirm the Board of County Commissioners'intent and to request that the agency reinstate the application. Additionally,Mr.Dorrill initiated three items,so that when permit issues are resolved,staff will be prepared: 1) $18,400 work order to have Agnoli,Barber,&Brundage,conduct a Clam Pass survey;2) Have Humiston&Moore to prepare preliminary dredging design specifications and construction plans;and 3) staff is performing a cost analysis of upcoming Clam Bay expenses and budget amendments. Mr.Dorrill advised there are two dredging contractors that recently completed work nearby that have not yet relocated the extensive dredging equipment. If the Board of County Commissioners were to declare a dredging emergency and authorization to bypass the sealed bidding process and use one of these dredging contractors then the work could start as soon as the permit issues are resolved. The Subcommittee discussed how to determine the size of the dredge cut and the best way to move forward to obtain the permit. There was agreement to move forward in a non-controversial manner,and Ms.Mary Johnson suggested possibly separate the dredging application from the long-term management plan.Audience consensus(Ms.Marcia Cravens,Mr.Keith Dallas,Mr.James Pettegrove,Ms.Linda Roth,and Ms.Kathy Worley)was that the Pass needs dredging as soon as possible,but disagreed on what the size of the cut should be and who should determine it. Ms.Diane Lustig was concerned about water quality and health hazards. Mr.Dorrill recommended that the experts determine the size of the cut and plans to discuss with USACE authorities,recommendations for securing a permit to dredge Clam Pass as soon as possible. Mr.Hall agreed and reported that he did not yet have the engineers'recommendation for the size of the cut. Further,the dredge cut is limited to the parameters authorized by the permit and authorizing a larger than actual cut,allows the contractor to deal with unanticipated on-site construction issues. The size of the cut cannot be arbitrary;if the agency questions it,it will slow down the application process. Mr.Cravens made a motion,second by Chairman O'Brien to recommend to the full Board that the on the construction plans, the engineers'are instructed to limit the dredge cut at the entrance for the emergency dredge to 40 feet. The Subcommittee voted 2-1 in favor, Ms. Womble opposed, and the motion passed. UPDATED CLAM BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN Mr.Hall introduced suggestions to develop an updated and more comprehensive Clam Bay Management Plan that addresses all habitats,stakeholders and user groups,and navigation. The intent is to develop a framework or basis outline of a plan,hold a workshop to discuss,write the draft plan,then ask stakeholders to submit comments. Ms.Worley suggested first step is to determine what the goals of the management plan are. Stakeholders should include scientists and recreational users. The Subcommittee discussed defining stakeholders,but did not make a determination. 15 1 Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes t 16 I 2A 'ik- December 27,2012 Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble, to recommend to the full Board that the PBSD facilitate roundtable discussions with the opportunity for stakeholders and user groups to be defined later, to participate with their recommendations for the updates to the Clam Bay Management Plan and that the PBSD considers the material provided by Ms. Kathy Worley as a basic how-to-develop a management plan. The Subcommittee voted 2-0 in favor, Ms. Womble abstained,and the motion passed. Mr.Dorrill reiterated that this proposed work is not a funded project yet and fiscal impact be considered. Ms.Cravens said the BCC approved$35,000 to update the management plan and recommended training Ms.Resnick to apply for grants. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Chairman O'Brien to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed,and the meeting adjourned at 3 p.m. t S-7/4--no---)-- 031-4_ ' Susan O'Brien,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 12/31/2012 4:49:44 PM 16 i 161 it\i FEB F B 2 0 2013 v PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES WEDNESDAY,JANUARY 2,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met in Regular Session on Wednesday,January 2,2013 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive,Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Pelican Bay Services Division Board John Iaizzo Tom Cravens,Chairman Michael Levy Dave Trecker,Vice Chairman Susan O'Brien John P.Chandler Mary Anne Womble Keith J.Dallas John Baron absent Geoffrey S.Gibson Hunter H.Hansen absent Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator(participated by phone) Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary / Also Present '! t Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Fiala 1` Kevin Carter,Field Manager,Dorrill Management Group Hiller Joe Foster,Humiston&Moore Henning Y # Tim Hall,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Coyle ,/ Jim Hoppensteadt,President&CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Gelette Ken Humiston 1-4o Ice. Brett Moore,President,Humiston&Moore 65 in audience FINAL AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll call 3. Agenda approval 4. Elect new Chairman 5. Recent Board of County Commissioners'(BCC)decisions involving Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) presented by Commissioner Georgia Hiller 6. Audience Comments 7. Approval of December 5 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes 8. Committee reports a.Clam Bay Subcommittee i.Clam Bay transition plan ii.Clam Bay dredging permit 9. Monthly financial report(deferred to February 13) 10. Cobblestones at San Marino crossing*(John Chandler) 11. Setting Priorities(Keith J.Dallas) 12. Changes to Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27(Keith"Dallas) 13. Old Business a.Scheduling meeting to discuss Board policy for reconsideration of votes£ (John Chandler) 14. Miscellaneous Correspondence 15. Adjournment Misc.Cones: Date: Item#: 8582 Copies to: ._ x. 61 2 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes ' January 2,2013 ROLL CALL Nine members were present(Chandler,Cravens,Dallas,Gibson,Iaizzo,Levy,O'Brien,Trecker, Womble)and two members were absent(Baron,Hanson). AGENDA APPROVAL Vice Chairman Cravens made a motion, second by Dr. Trecker, to approve the agenda as amended; Following item 4, `Elect new Chairman", the Board would proceed with item 5, "Recent decisions..."presentation by Commissioner Georgia Hiller;then item 13, "Audience Comments"; then item 9, "Clam Bay dredging permit"presentation by Ken Humiston. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ELECT NEW CHAIRMAN Effective immediately,Chairman Dallas resigned as Chairman of the PBSD Board. Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Ms. O'Brien, to nominate Vice Chairman Cravens as Chairman of the PBSD Board. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler to nominate Dr. Trecker as Vice Chairman of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board for the interim period from now until "we have a new Board and elect a new set of Chairman and Vice Chairman": The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Dr. Trecker made a motion, second by Ms. O'Brien that the Pelican Bay Services Division Board acknowledges Mr. Keith J. Dallas for his outstanding stewardship as Board Chairman with a plaque at the next Board meeting. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. RECENT DECISIONS MADE BY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS(BCC)INVOLVING PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION(PBSD)PRESENTATION BY COMMISSIONER GEORGIA HILLER Commissioner Georgia Hiller commented on recent decisions made by the Board of County Commissioners(BCC)involving Pelican Bay Services Division(PBSD). The BCC reaffirmed that the PBSD is responsible for managing all aspects of Clam Bay/Pass and January 8,the BCC plans to vote on several related recommendations:1)To transfer sufficient funds to PBSD already set aside for Clam Bay projects;2)Declare the closure of Clam Pass an emergency situation requiring dredging(strictly and solely to allow for adequate flushing and to preserve the health of the mangroves,and science will determine the size of the dredge cut)as quickly as possible once permit issues are resolved; 3)to direct staff to override the purchasing policy to avoid the delay of the bidding process;obtain bids from two prospective dredging contractors;and enter into an agreement with the lowest bidder;and 4)at the time that the Clam Bay Management Plan is revised,all stakeholders will have the opportunity to participate. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Marcia Cravens was concerned about the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit application and PBSD ordinance; Ms.Pat Bush and Dr.Ted Raia were concerned about the"Seagate lawsuit"; 8583 .. 2A1*1 b 1 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2, 2013 Ms. Annice Gregerson was concerned PBSD would lose responsibility for Clam Bay; and Mr. Scott Streckenbein and Ms. Diane Lustig were concerned about the inlet closing and impacts to the environment and public health. Mr.Hall explained the longer Clam Pass stays closed and water cannot disperse the greater chance of negative impact to the mangroves by submersion. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 5 BOARD REGULAR SESSION MINUTES Dr. Trecker made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler to approve the December 5 Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session minutes as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY DREDGING PERMIT PRESENTATION BY MR.KEN HUMISTON&MR.BRETT MOORE Mr.Ken Humiston and Mr.Brett Moore,Humiston and Moore Engineers(HM)made a presentation about dredging Clam Pass. Based on current conditions,and to increase time between dredging events,HM recommended the optimal width of the cut at the mouth of the Pass(Cut A)is sixty feet. HM expect to have the construction plans and specifications complete by January 15 to present to the Clam Bay Subcommittee. The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers'(USACE)suspended the County's Coastal Zone Management(CZM)Clam Pass dredging permit application. Ms.Marcia Cravens and Dr.Ted Raia were concerned about HM's optimal width recommendation. Mr.Charles Bodo suggested HM consider using methods and structures used to stabilize inlets. Ms.Kathy Worley suggested HM apply for an interim or one-time only permit to open the pass. APPROVAL OF TURRELL-HALL WORK ORDER Mr.Tim Hall distributed Turrell-Hall's(TH)work order of the tasks needed to obtain permits quickly from several agencies to reopen Clam Pass. Mr.Hall would discuss with USACE officials soon the methods USACE recommends that PBSD take to obtain the Clam Pass dredging permit quickly. Mr.Dorrill and Ms. O'Brien plan to attend.Mr.Hall estimates that if PBSD applies for a USACE Nationwide permit the turnaround for USACE determination to issue the permit is minimum 30-45 days. A major task of the Turrell-Hall work order is to update the 1998 Clam Bay Management Plan which would reference having"permits in place"to dredge when needed.Mr.Hall distributed a draft invitation to participate to"stakeholders",including but not limited to neighborhood associations,conservation and environmental organizations,user groups,and government agencies. Ms.Kathy Worley requested Mr.Hall consider suggestions she submitted on developing a management plan. A resident presented recent aerial photographs of Clam Pass. Mr.Chandler made a motion,second by Mr.Levy to approve the Turrell-Hall work order as presented. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. 8584 161 2 Al Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2,2013 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT Report deferred until February 13. COBBLESTONES AT SAN MARINO CROSSING*(JOHN CHANDLER) Due to continued complaints from residents of San Marino that the noise made by vehicles driving over cobblestones were a nuisance,the Board considered removing cobblestones at the San Marino crossing. Mr.Ted Darrow,Mr.Steve Seidel,Mr.Pat Downing(San Marino);and Dr.Ted Raia expressed concerns about noise,safety,speeding,and were in support of removing cobblestones at San Marino crossing. Mr.Jim Hoppensteadt made an indication that as the PBSD Board is responsible for noise abatement in Pelican Bay,the decision made today would set precedent. Mr. Chandler made a motion, second by Mr. laizzo, that the PBSD remove the cobblestones at the San Marino crossing and replace with fire-red clay brick pavers. The Board took a roll call vote: 5 voted in favor of the motion (Chandler, Cravens, Gibson,laizzo, Trecker) and 4 opposed(Dallas,Levy, O'Brien, Womble)and the motion passed. PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION ORDINANCE(KEITH J.DALLAS) The Board discussed suggested changes to recommend to the Board of County-Commissioners regarding the Pelican Bay Services Division Ordinance 2002-27. Ms.Cravens was concerned about alleged erroneous language in the proposed ordinance. Mr. Dallas made a motion, second by Vice Chairman Trecker to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to amend the proposed PBSD Ordinance:1)regarding limiting Chairman and Vice Chairman to one-year terms,strike, "... unless all members have previously served..." to read, ':..unless all members have been given the opportunity to serve..."; and 2) consider staggering this year's appointments, so that the two applicants receiving the most votes are appointed for four years, and applicants placing third and fourth are appointed for three years. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. Ms. O'Brien made a motion,second by Mr.Dallas to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to amend the proposed PBSD Ordinance [to manage the current "interim" Chairman situation until a new Board is appointed] to allow the current Chairman to serve a fifteen-month term; then revert to the twelve-month term. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN OF LANDSCAPE WATER MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE Chairman Cravens appointed Vice Chairman Trecker as Chairman of the Landscape Water Management Subcommittee. APPROVAL TO OBTAIN PERMITTING TO CONSTRUCT AN OSPREY NESTING PLATFORM Chairman Cravens made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler to direct Mr.Lukasz to proceed with contacting Mr. Tim Hall to get permitting for the construction of an Osprey nesting platform near the South Beach facility. The Board voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. 8585 . _ 161 2A Pelican Bay Services Division Board Regular Session Minutes January 2, 2013 ADJOURN M .O'Brien made a motion,second by Mr.Chandler to adourn. The Board voted I u:anmouslyinfavorthemotionpassedandmeetingalournedat4.05pn j . Tom Cravens,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick\ 2/4/2013 8:43:05 AM 8586 X61 2A 14 NIT Wi FEB 2 3 2013 PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY, JANUARY 15, 2013 THE CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET TUESDAY, JANUARY 15 AT 3:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34108. Fiala T2✓ Hiller AGENDA Henning GENDA (o1Ie _. The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll call 2. Approval of December 27 Clam Bay Subcommittee minutes 3. Clam Bay transition update 4. Clam Bay dredging permit update 5. Meetings needed by Clam Bay Subcommittee and/or PBSD Board to continue to expedite Clam Pass dredging permit 6. Audience comments 7. Adjourn Misc.Corres: Date: Item#: ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (e)A LUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON S AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT(239)597-1749. VISIT US AT HTTP://PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. 1/10/2013 11:59:41 AM ,, .,... y, , 161 2 A t+ „.., ,. .• , CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES THURSDAY,DECEMBER 27,2012 ft LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Thursday,December 27,2012 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples,Florida.The following members were present: Clam Bay Subcommittee Susan O'Brien,Chairman Mike Levy absent Tom Cravens Mary Anne Womble Pelican Bay Services Division Board Also Present John Chandler Keith J.Dallas Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager absent Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present: Susan Boland,President,Pelican Bay Property Owners Association Tim Hall,Senior Ecologist&Principal,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President and CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Kathy Worley,Director of Environmental Science,Conservancy of Southwest Florida AGENDA 1. Roll call 2. Approval of December 10 Clam Bay Subcommittee minutes 3. Clam Bay transition 4. Clam Bay dredging permit 5. Updated Clam Bay management plan 6. Audience comments 7. Adjourn ROLL CALL, With the exception of Mr.Levy,Subcommittee members were present. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 10 CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE MINUTES ti Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble to approve the December 10 C f, vi ay Subcommittee meeting minutes as amended, adding Mr. Dallas and Dr. Trecker as Boar r also present. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. ' ,r' CLAM BAY TRANSITION Chairman O'Brien reported that on December 18,she and Mr. Dorrill discussed Clam :: tion issues with Mr.Gary McAlpin,Mr.Bill Lorenz,Mr.Tim Hall,Mr. Ken Humiston,and Mr.Steve I: CLAM BAY DREDGING PERMIT The Subcommittee discussed at length Clam Pass'immediate needs a .+ .gree s '.s eeds dredging as soon as possible. Mr. Hall is preparing the Clam Pass dredging permit applicati ® ` '8 asis,but the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) would make that determination. -xp 4' SA does not have a special 14 161 2 A A Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes 1 December 27,2012 procedure to issue an"emergency"permit,but the agency does look at conditions surrounding an application and if it is determined"critical",USACE can expedite the permit application's review. Mr.Dorrill reported that due to misunderstanding over who is the managing entity of Clam Bay,the USACE withdrew the Clam Pass dredging permit application. County Manager Ochs responded to USACE to reaffirm the Board of County Commissioners'intent and to request that the agency reinstate the application. Additionally,Mr.Dorrill initiated three items,so that when permit issues are resolved,staff will be prepared: 1) $18,400 work order to have Agnoli,Barber,&Brundage,conduct a Clam Pass survey; 2) Have Humiston&Moore to prepare preliminary dredging design specifications and construction plans;and 3) staff is performing a cost analysis of upcoming Clam Bay expenses and budget amendments. Mr.Dorrill advised there are two dredging contractors that recently completed work nearby that have not yet relocated the extensive dredging equipment. If the Board of County Commissioners were to declare a dredging emergency and authorization to bypass the sealed bidding process and use one of these dredging contractors then the work could start as soon as the permit issues are resolved. The Subcommittee discussed how to determine the size of the dredge cut and the best way to move forward to obtain the permit. There was agreement to move forward in a non-controversial manner,and Ms.Mary Johnson suggested possibly separate the dredging application from the long-term management plan.Audience consensus(Ms.Marcia Cravens,Mr.Keith Dallas,Mr.James Pettegrove,Ms.Linda Roth,and Ms.Kathy Worley)was that the Pass needs dredging as soon as possible,but disagreed on what the size of the cut should be and who should determine it. Ms. Diane Lustig was concerned about water quality and health hazards. Mr.Dorrill recommended that the experts determine the size of the cut and plans to discuss with USACE authorities,recommendations for securing a permit to dredge Clam Pass as soon as possible. Mr.Hall agreed and reported that he did not yet have the engineers'recommendation for the size of the cut. Further,the dredge cut is limited to the parameters authorized by the permit and authorizing a larger than actual cut,allows the contractor to deal with unanticipated on-site construction issues. The size of the cut cannot be arbitrary;if the agency questions it,it will slow down the application process. Mr. Cravens made a motion,second by Chairman O'Brien to recommend to the full Board a a the construction plans, the engineers'are instructed to limit the dredge cut at the en - fo emergency dredge to 40 feet. The Subcommittee voted 2-1 in favor, Ms. Womble o 1 s,d, and t " motion passed. UPDATED CLAM BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN Mr.Hall introduced suggestions to develop an updated and more comprehe .ay e•ment Plan that addresses all habitats,stakeholders and user groups,and navigation. The in`- tt o - f,i a framework or basis outline of a plan,hold a workshop to discuss,write the d tan th takeholders to submit comments. �� mM b Ms.Worley suggested first step is to determine what the goals #ft a,e tit plan are Stakeholders should include scientists and recreational users. The Subcommittee discussed defining stakeholders �id fM lake a 4 tIetermination. 15 1 1612A14 Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes December 27,2012 Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble, to recommend to the full Board that the PBSD facilitate roundtable discussions with the opportunity for stakeholders and user groups to be defined later, to participate with their recommendations for the updates to the Clam Bay Management Plan and that the PBSD considers the material provided by Ms. Kathy Worley as a basic how-to-develop a management plan. The Subcommittee voted 2-0 in favor, Ms. Womble abstained,and the motion passed. Mr.Dorrill reiterated that this proposed work is not a funded project yet and fiscal impact be considered. Ms.Cravens said the BCC approved$35,000 to update the management plan and recommended training Ms.Resnick to apply for grants. ADJOURN IMr. Cravens made a motion, second by Chairman O'Brien to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed,and the meeting adjourned at 3 p.m. Susan O'Brien,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 12/31/2012 4:49:44 PM ,frkipt~ 144 16 ---'-i7.4,,,,;1 e 161 2Aq Clam Bay-related Work Project Description Vendor Cost Funding Source PBSD Board Approval Date Environmental Permitting services Turrell-Hall $28,000 TDC Fund 195 Jan.2,2013 PBSD for Clam Pass Joint Coastal Permit pending recommendation to and Inlet Management Plan update determination BCC;Jan.8,2013 to Federal&State agencies USACE, project serves to BCC approval USFWC,FDEP promote tourism Perform annual survey of Clam Pass Agnoli,Barber,& $18,400 TDC Fund 195 Work authorized Brundage pending by Mr.Dorrill, determination Administrator;and project serves to Jan.8,2013 BCC promote tourism approval Prepare preliminary dredging Humiston& $76,360 TDC Fund 195 Work authorized design specifications&construction Moore pending by Mr. Dorrill, plans determination Administrator;and project serves to Jan.8,2013 BCC promote tourism approval Dredging Clam Pass TBD TBD TDC Fund 195 Jan.8,2013 BCC to have agreement in place when pending approval permitting issues are resolved determination project serves to promote tourism • Jan ual y IU,LL,IJ'.,II II[Day Ouut,uI111111tcc VI LI lc rcllt.all lJay QUI VIL.C.7 VIVIJIUI I DUCHU Raia/Humiston Jan.8,2013 correspondence Page 1 of 2 6 1 0, 2 A +' From:Neil Dorrill<Neil@dmgfl.com> Date:January 8,2013 2:09:48 PM EST To:"Naplessusan@comcast.net"<Naplessusan @comcast.net> Subject:FW:Received from Ted Raia to my email FYI From:Ken Humiston [mailto:kh @humistonandmoore.com] Sent:Tuesday,January 08,2013 1:35 PM To:tedraia @gmail.com Cc:Celia Fellows; Brett Moore;Neil Dorrill Subject: RE: Received from Ted Raia to my email Ted, We too appreciate that you took the time to come to our office to discuss this very important issue,and I believe that the meeting was productive.I do,however,feel it necessary to clarify a couple of points,in part because of the misconception that has been circulating that H&M had endorsed a 30 width as the"equilibrium"width to which the inlet should always be dredged.The first part of this misconception is that there is not an"equilibrium width". Each inlet has what we refer to as an equilibrium cross section of flow,which is related to width but is n fact dictated by the size of the bay and the tide range.In concept it is quite simple,for a fixed volume,an oversized inlet will generate slow velocities that will not scour sand out of the inlet and it will get smaller.Squeezing the same amount of water through a small entrance will generate high velocities and cause scour which will make the inlet larger. The real situation is much more complicated than this simple explanation for a variety of reasons,which is why we have said that the"equilibrium condition"should be considered dynamic,because it will change at different times during the month as the tide range varies,and it will also regularly respond to storm tides.It is our responsibility to analyze all the available data,and provide our professional opinion to those who will ultimately make the decisions. What we discussed yesterday is that our recommendation to optimize management of the inlet,in terms of dredging it so it will work efficiently for the purpose of flushing the bay system to preserve that natural environmental balance,is to dredge the entrance channel to a width of 60 feet at a nominal depth of-5.0 feet NGVD.This will create a cross section that will be at the upper end of what the data shows to be a range of equilibrium conditions that have been documented with ten years of data.Part of the reason for this recommendation is that the inlet is now closed,and the readjustment may be significant.Furthermore,as the dredge cut readjusts to a natural configuration,which it always will,it will do so most likely through minor shoaling if the tides and currents dictate that the inlet wants to close down to a slightly smaller section than that to which it was dredged.This will occur simply through trapping relatively small quantities of sand from the littoral system. If,on the other hand,the inlet is dredged to a cross section that is at the low end of the demonstrated"equilibrium range",current velocities will be high enough to scour sand out of the channel.That scour action is going to deposit some sand on shoals in the interior parts of Cut#4,specifically sections B and C,from which it will eventually have to be dredged.Our recommendation of the 60'width at-5.0 feet depth is therefore intended to optimize the long term maintenance of the inlet,to reduce the need for future maintenance dredging for cost savings as well as possibly resulting in less frequent dredging. If for political reasons the wider cut is unacceptable to the Mangrove Action Committee or any other stake holders, what we talked about yesterday is that H&M can support a smaller cut as long as it is within the range that the data shows to be in the range of stability that has been documented over the ten years of monitoring.As you indicated in your email,those dimensions are a 45'wide cut at a depth of-4.5 feet NGVD,with one half foot of overdepth to account for inaccuracies in the dredging operation.While this is at the low end of the demonstrated range of stability,and a condition that occurs when the inlet is in need of dredging,we believe that after dredging B and C, the 45'width at a depth of 4.5 feet will enlarge through scour,at the expense of accumulating sand in B and C. Additionally,under this plan,we would excavate the channel slopes above MHW to reduce the amount of readjustment that will occur after dredging.I just want to make it clear,that H&M is not endorsing a 45'width as Jell lUal y IU,LV IJ 1/4,1611117<V, UUI.VII UnIllcc VI Ulc rcl0..al I oay OW VIVA Ll1VWNl1 OVaIU Raia/Humiston Jan.8,2013 correspondence Page2of2 1 6 ' 2 A I_ ( the"equilibrium section"for future maintenance,yet we do believe that we have data that can be used to justify this dredging plan to the regulatory agencies.Even though we have reason to believe that it may not necessarily be the optimum way to manage the inlet.However,if this enables us to move forward with unified support,it maybe the best way to get the inlet reopened which is certainly in everyone's best interest.The issue of the optimum dredge template can then be evaluated more closely while updating the Restoration and Management Plan. On a number of occasions you indicated that your incentive to minimize the amount of dredging is for environmental preservation,and not just mangroves but also benthic communities within the bay.However,you also indicated that you had not seen any data or reports that document any impacts from dredging operations to date.We would appreciate it if you run across any environmental reports or data which document that there have been environmental impacts from the maintenance dredging operations,that you please forward them to us.The whole purpose of this inlet maintenance is enhancement of the environment within the 550 acre mangrove preserve,and we are interested in all information which documents the effects on the envoronment of maintaining the inlet. We appreciate your input and the time you have put forth on this project. Kenneth K.Humiston,P.E.and Brett Moore,P.E. Humiston&Moore Engineers 5679 Strand Court Naples FL 34110 239-594-2021 Email khPhumistonandmoore.com Web Site http://www.humistonandmoore.com From:Celia Fellows Sent:Tuesday,January 08,2013 7:17 AM To:Brett Moore; Ken Humiston Subject:Received from Ted Raia to my email From:Ted Raia[mailto:tedraiaftgmail.com] Sent:Monday,January 07,2013 9:00 PM To:Celia Fellows Subject:agreement Dear Ken and Brett, I want to thank you for the time you took out of your busy schedule to resolve our difference. I hope the following encapsulates our discussion and agreement. Today's meeting and discussion went on for almost 2 hours covering the details for an agreement. You expressed concern that because of the height of the sand berm that developed over time a dredge through there should be 60 feet because the sand would cave into the cut negating a 30 foot cut. I suggested that a bulldozer should restore the height of the sand to normal before dredging and you agreed noting that you were also planning to address the slope.However there was still concern and you said you would be more comfortable with a 45 foot dredge. I said I could not agree to 45 feet. Georgia interjected and suggested a forty-five foot dredge but limited to a 4.5 foot depth. You accepted it and I followed with the caveat that the triggers would be changed as well the QA/QC and the permit remains under the control of the PBSD. You also agreed that after using the 45 foot dredge if the data suggests that the 30 foot is better that you would use the 30 foot in the future. You assured me that your interest was solely in preserving the conservation area. In closing I said the last step is for the MAG Board to agree and I would recommend we support it. Thanks again for your time and interest. Ted Jal lual y 10,Lu 10 l,Ia111 oay OW-Kalil I II I!MCC VI UIt rClll.all oay OCI VII.eJ IIIVIJIUI I[DUO!u Tom Cravens/Humiston Jan.4,2013 correspondence Page 1 of 2 161 2 A From: ResnickLisa 11/4r Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 3:00 PM To: Tom Cravens (nfn16799 @naples.net) Cc: Jim Powers (jim @dmgfl.com); McCaughtryMary; LukaszKyle; Karen McIntyre (karen @dmgfl.com); ResnickLisa Subject: FW: Request for information Mr. Cravens, The information that you requested re: Humiston and Moore's Clam Pass dredge cut recommendation is below. Thanks, Lisa From: LukaszKyle Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 1:44 PM To: ResnickLisa Subject: FW: Request for information Lisa—Here is the information Mr. Cravens requested regarding data for Clam Pass that H & M is using to base their recommendation for a 60' wide cut in Cut 4, Section A. Kyle From: Ken Humiston [mailto:kh @humistonandmoore.com] Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 1:34 PM To: LukaszKyle Cc: Georgia Hiller; Brett Moore; Joe Foster; Tim Hall; Neil @dmgfl.com Subject: RE: Request for information Kyle, In response to your request, on behalf of Tom Cravens, for the data in support of the recommendation for a 60'wide cut in Section A, below is the Section A portion of exhibit from Figure 4 from the 2008 monitoring report.This summarizes the data and is the exhibit that was used in the presentation on January 3.The data is also provided for each station in appendix D of the report, in the form of channel cross sections. CUT 4, SECTION A �' A k sop aft JCL! y IU,GV IJ V1dI11 octy J U{Jl.Vlllll llllcc VI LI IC rciK.diI oG !VI V J IVII DO ■ Tom Cravens/Humiston Jan.4,2013 correspondence r 1 Page 2 of 2 `Jt' The 10 years of data show that keeping B and C clear of shoaling generates strong enough tidal currents to maintain self- scouring action in section A.The data show that A tends toward a flow cross section in the range of 200 to 300 square feet, and with a nominal depth of-5.0 feet these areas translate into widths of approximately 40'to 60'.The reason we are recommending a width of 60 feet at the upper end of this range is because if the cut is dredged to a smaller size, scour will occur in section A during adjustment after dredging and that scour will have a greater potential for transporting sand into B and C. With the inlet currently being closed,we anticipate that the readjustment may be more significant than it has been following the previous maintenance dredging events. Once that sand scoured from A reaches B and C it will be deposited there. It will then eventually have to be removed during the next maintenance dredging. We believe dredging to a width of 60 feet now will reduce the rate of shoaling in B and C during the readjustment period after dredging, and will help to optimize maintenance of the inlet from the standpoint of reducing maintenance dredging requirements.This may ultimately reduce long term maintenance dredging costs. I would also like to point out that section A was not dredged in 2002.The entrance was not dredged in 2002 because the dredging of B, C, D, and Cuts#1,#2, and#3 in 1999 had resulted in currents strong enough to keep A scoured to a flow cross section of 200 to 300 square feet.At the time of the 2002 dredging,Section A had an average cross sectional area of approximately 300 square feet. It did not need to be dredged at all. Once the inlet is reopened and functioning as intended under the Restoration and Management Plan,we may reevaluate the dredging width of cut A with the additional data that is collected, including the ongoing tidal data collection program as well as reestablishment of the regular schedule of conducting hydrographic surveys which have apparently not been conducted for the last several years. If the inlet is once again maintained through maintenance dredging on a regular basis, dredging of Section A may not be necessary,as was the case in 2002. If you or Mr. Cravens have any additional questions, please give me a call. Thanks, Ken Kenneth K. Humiston, P.E. Humiston & Moore Engineers 5679 Strand Court Naples FL 34110 239-594-2021 Email kh @humistonandmoore.com Web Site http://www.humistonandmoore.com Jan Ual y I:J,Lk./IJ l.ld I11 Oay JuvwI1111 IILLCC VI IIIG rulll.cut!Day. IVIIT.D VIVIJIVII UUdIu Turrell-Hall&Associates work order for environmental permitting services Page 1 of 4 1 6 1 LJ^ A I WORK ORDER/PURCHASE ORDER# CONTRACT#10-5571 CLAM PASS JOINT COASTAL PERMIT AND INLET&BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE January 3,2013 Turrell,Hall &Associates,Inc. (THA)is pleased to provide this scope of work to Collier County via the Pelican Bays Services Division (PBSD). The purpose of this scope is to outline professional environmental permitting services to the PBSD for the dredging of Clam Pass. The work proposed will be conducted under Contract Number 10-5571 by THA and our subcontractor,Humiston and Moore Engineers. Based on recent telephone conversations with the federal permitting agencies (USACE and FWS), our understanding is that a new permit application will need to be submitted to the USACE with updated project conditions and further permit coordination may be required with FWS to complete the Biological Opinion for the project. Scope of Work TASK I: PERMITTING a) Permit Drawings: THA will coordinate updated permit drawings at the direction of the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) for the dredging of Clam Pass. The permit exhibits will be based on updated hydrographic and beach profile data to be collected in January 2013 and on the most recent benthic resources surveys conducted in August 2012. b) DEP Permitting: H&M will coordinate with the staff of the DEP to update the existing DFP JCP permit(no. 0296087-001-JC)as needed with the updated exhibits. This will include filing of permit modification on behalf of Collier County and meeting with the DEP staff. c) DEP Mixing Zone Variance:H&M will prepare and submit a mixing zone variance request to DEP for the proposed dredging activity. d) USACE Permitting: THA and H&M will coordinate with the staff of the USACE to complete their review of the project(No. 0296087-001-JC) as needed based on the updated exhibits. This will include filing a new permit application on behalf of Collier County, meetings with the USACE staff and responses to commenting parties as a result of the new application. e) USFWS and NMFS Coordination: THA will provide information to and coordinate with these agencies relative to their species and habitat guidelines.We will provide a technical review of the draft Biological Opinion from the FWS including an engineering evaluation by H&M (under a separate scope) of the project design. Attendance at two meetings with these agencies is included in the scope. Turrell, Hall &Associates,Inc. Turrell-liall&Associates work order for environmental permitting services Page 2 of 4 161 The scope does not include provisions for production of detailed environmental documents such as mitigation plans,Environmental Impact Statements, or Biological Assessments that could be requested by the reviewing agencies based on the updated application. We do not anticipate these documents being requested now since they were not requested as part of the previous applications but will still need to verify this once the revised application has been submitted. TASK II: INLET AND BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE Inlet and Bay Management Plan Update: THA and H&M will prepare the framework for an updated management plan for the Clam Pass and Bay system. • H&M will prepare exhibits and supporting documentation relative to the design configuration of Clam Pass dredging for inclusion into the Plan. • THA will coordinate stakeholder input into the plan through three efforts. An initial call for written input from stakeholders and interested parties will be used to determine goals and objectives for the Plan. A workshop will be held once the framework for the plan has been completed to collect written and oral comments. A final workshop will be held once the Plan has been drafted and prior to being finalized. • THA will prepare documentation necessary for stakeholder input including initial invitation letter to participate,Plan outline,and Plan Draft • THA will coordinate with the State and Federal permitting and review agencies as needed during the formulation of the Plan. Baseline information already available will be incorporated into Plan elements however; additional field data collection(such as fish and bird surveys) is not included in this scope. This scope does not include services for responding to legal objections,preparing for expert testimony,or preparing for litigation associated with the project If necessary,these services will be provided-under a separate agreement with the County. Schedule The above scope is based on a 75 day schedule. Creation of the permit exhibits and submittal of the updated application to the DEP and USACE will take place within 10 days of approval to proceed. Subsequent coordination with the permitting agencies will be done as quickly as possible based on the agency's review times and comment periods. Coordination of the Management Plan will be done concurrently with the permitting. The initial invitation to participate will be sent out within 7 days of the notice to proceed. Management Plan outline and preliminary exhibits will be available for the first stakeholder workshop within 35 days of the invitation. Draft Plan will be available for the second stakeholder meeting within 35 days of the first stakeholder meeting. Turrell,Hall&Associates, Inc. 1 Ja1!VW y IJ,CU I 1,lalll oay 0U1.l.V1I II I!MCC VI LI IC rC lll.all Day Qv!VR.CJ VIVIJIVII 17Val4 o Turrell-Hall&Associates work order for environmental permitting services Page 3 of 4 161 2 'A1 1 q) Budget Compensation for the above scope of work will be based on charges as described in Exhibit"A"and will not exceed the amount listed without approval from PBSD. $28,000.00 Accepted By: r 17,g-- u6,-, ©J ciU/.Timohy C.Hall,Vice President Date Turrell,Hall&Associates, Inc. Approve zr, Kyle Lukasz, Operations 0 s :!er Date Pelican Bay Services Division Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. JdI IUaly IJ,GUI."1/4,101111712y..UUl.V 11111011CC UI Ulc rcl0..al1 oay. I VII.CJ VIVIJIVII�VdIU • Turrell-Hall&Associates work order for environmental permitting services Page 4 of 4 161 2A l (f WORK ORDER/PURCHASE ORDER# CONTRACT# 10-5571 CLAM PASS JOINT COASTAL PERMIT AND INLET&BAY MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE January 3, 2013 Exhibit "A" Scope of Services: PERMITTING Task I a. —Permit Drawings .$2,350.00 Task I b. —DEP Permitting $2,500.00 Task I c. —DEP Mixing Zone Variance ...$1,300.00 Task I d. —USACE Permitting $6,000.00 Task I e. —USFWS and NMFS Coordination .$3,850.00 MANAGEMENT PLAN Task II—Inlet and Bay Management Plan Update $12,000.00 Total Services ..$28,000.00 Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. January 15,2013 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Humiston&Moore proposal for professional services Page 1 of 4 1 b ! HUMISTON &MOORE 5679 Strand Court Maples,FL 34110 ENGINEERS 239-594-2021—Voice COASTAL 239-594-2025-Fax t „ ENGINEERING DESIGN AND PERMITTING WORK ORDER/PURCHASE ORDER# January 3,2013 Humiston&Moore Engineers (H&M) is pleased to provide this scope of work to Collier County via the Pelican Bays Services Division (PBSD). The purpose of this scope is to outline professional services to be provided to the PBSD for dredging of Clam Pass (Project). The work proposed will be conducted consistent with the terms and rates of Contract Number 08-5124 by H&M. Services include the design, preparation of permit drawings, construction plans,technical specifications and construction phase services. Scone of Work TASK 1: DESIGN, PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS a) Permit Drawings: H&M will prepare updated design and permit drawings at the direction of the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) for the dredging of Clam Pass. The plans will be based on updated hydrographic and beach profile data to be collected in January 2013 and on the most recent benthic resources surveys conducted in August 2012. b) Construction Plans: Based on direction from the PBSD and the ongoing permitting, H&M will prepare details construction plans for the purpose of obtaining bids and construction the Project. c) Technical Specifications: Based on the final design, regulatory permits and construction plans, H&M will prepare technical specifications for the Project which will be used in conjunction with the Construction Plans in obtaining bids for the Project. These documents will be used by PBSD along with Collier County Contract Documents as part of the contract with the selected Contractor for the Project. Task 2: CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES H&M will provide the necessary support to PBSD based on a time and materials basis as needed throughout the selection of a contractor, negotiating a price for the Project, conducting a pre-construction meeting, conducting construction observation services, on- site permitting compliance monitoring for turbidity and sand QA/QC placement, review of Humiston & Moore Engineers January 15,2013 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Humiston&Moore proposal for professional services Page 2 of 4 161 V t regulatory agencies; conducting construction observation services, on-site permitting compliance monitoring for turbidity and sand QA/QC placement, review of pay requests from the Contractor, post construction certifications and prepare the required post construction report to the regulatory agencies. The costs assume a declaration of emergency order to limit bid qualification and price negotiating with one contractor Schedule The above scope is based on a 50-day construction schedule. Creation of the permit drawings is based on completion of the survey by PBSD,which is underway at this time. Permit drawings for use in coordination with Collier County, the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, along with the associated state and federal resource agencies such as Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), will be prepared within 10 days of receipt of the survey. Construction Plans and Technical Specifications will be completed within 30 days of confirmation of the acceptability of the design from the PBSD, DEP, and USACE. Any subsequent plan changes as deemed necessary will be completed as quickly as possible to avoid any delays in selecting a contractor and negotiating a construction price. Budget Compensation for the above scope of work will be based on charges as described in Exhibit"A"and will not exceed the amount listed without approval from PBSD. $76,360.00 Accepted By: 1/3/13 Brett D.Moore,P.E.President Date Humiston & Moore Engineers Approved By: le Lukasz, Operations ger Date Collier County Pelican Bay Services Division Humiston & Moore Engineers January 15,2013 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board Humiston&Moore proposal for professional services]. 6 I Page 3 of 4 y' WORK ORDER/PURCHASE ORDER# January 3,2013 Exhibit "A" Scope of Services: Task I: Design, Plans, Specifications (Lump Sum Costs) Task Ia.—Permit Drawings .$5,940.00 Task Ib.—Construction Plans ...$10,090.00 Task Ic.—Technical Specifications ...$7,620.00 Subtotal for Task I (Lump Sum) $23,650.00 Task II: Construction Phase Services (Time and Materials) Based on 50 Construction Work Days Task IIa.—Bid Review, Pre-constr. Meeting, etc $3,880.00 Task IIb. —Construction Observation,Pay Review .$39,850.00 Task IIIc.—Post Construction Report and Certification $8,980.00 Subtotal for Task II (Time and Materials) $52,710.00 Total Budget Tasks I and II: $76,360.00 Humiston&Moore Engineers January 15,2013 Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Ba Services Division Board Humiston&Moore proposal for professional services n Page 4 of 4 A I WORK ORDER FEE BREAKDOWN Humiston&Moore Engineers • TASK 2:Construction Observation • Rate Hours Amount Budget Principle Engineer $175.00 78.00 $13,650.00 Engineer III $105.00 36.00 $3,780.00 Engineer I $90.00 36.00 $3,240.00 $52,710.00 Junior Tech(Field) $75.00 400.00 $30,000.00 Senior Tech(AC2) $85.00 24.00 $2,040.00 • 161 I 'k EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners declares the recent closure of Clam Pass to constitute an emergency situation, requiring dredging the pass as soon as practicable; that in furtherance of this, the Board directs the County Manager to obtain pricing information for this project from at least two prospective vendors, including any potential vendors with dredges already operating off the west coast of Florida, and that the County Manager negotiate and enter into an Agreement with the apparent low bidder, subject to ratification by the Board, preferably at the next Board meeting. OBJECTIVE: To have an Agreement in place to immediately dredge Clam Pass once all final permits have been issued. CONSIDERATIONS: The following is taken from a January 2, 2013 e-mail sent to me by Brett D. Moore, P.E., President, Humiston& Moore Engineers: "Understanding that Clam Pass remains as the primary source of flushing for Clam Bay, the present condition of the inlet does not allow for a sufficient exchange of tidal water to the system which should be considered an environmental emergency. Once the inlet closed, the nearshore ebb shoal has begun to collapse onshore widening the beach at the location of the inlet, making the opportunity for the inlet to re-open unlikely. The only practical manner to restore the tidal flow at this point is through dredging the inlet as soon as possible. Sufficient removal of sand from not only the beach area but also the flood shoal area within the inlet system is necessary in order for the results of the dredging to remain sustainable. Part of the reason for considering this an emergency is that in the past when the inlet closed, cutting off tidal circulation resulted in degradation of water quality resulting in fish kills, and many believe that was a factor in the die-off of 50 acres of mangroves near the north end of the preserve." Mr. Moore's further went on to state that "Having an agreement in place is needed now so there won't be a delay on Purchasing's part when the Corps permit is issued. I believe the state permit has already been issued." FISCAL IMPACT: Presently unknown. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item was reviewed by the County Attorney, is consistent with Article XXI (Emergency Purchases) of the County's Purchasing policy, and is legally sufficient for Board action. Any proposed Agreement would be conditioned upon the County obtaining all necessary permits. A simple majority vote is required for approval. - JAK RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners declares the recent closure of Clam Pass to constitute an emergency situation, requiring dredging the pass as soon as practicable; that in furtherance of this the Board directs the County Manager to obtain pricing information for this project from at least two prospective vendors, including any potential vendors with dredges already operating off the west coast of Florida, and that the County Manager negotiate and enter into an Agreement with the apparent low bidder, subject to ratification by the Board, preferably at the next Board meeting. SUBMITTED BY: Commissioner Georgia Hiller, District 2 161 c I1 Vill January 10, 2013 1 CLAM PASS PERMIT MEETING SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: As a result of the recent,withdrawal of the ACOE permit application for Clam Pass a meeting was requested with Army Corp of Engineers and key staff to review the status and options available to the county MEETING ATTENDEES: ACOE: Tunis McElwayne, Bill Defrance, Linda Elligott (by phone) FDEP: Lani Edwards (by phone) Collier County: Neil Dorrill and Susan O'Brien Consultants: Tim Hall, Ken Humiston and Brett Moore (by phone) KEY OPTIONS: • 10 year permit application-The Federal 10 year permit application remains withdrawn at this time. While Ms. Elligott participated by phone, she did not offer any new information. Discussions with the ACOE to resolve this issue will continue in earnest after the immediate actions to open the pass outlined below are completed. • Emergency Letter Approval - While there have been numerous references to "Emergency Permits" we are not eligible for this option according to Mr. McElwayne. In his time as Fort Myers Section Chief, this option was used on a single "life safety" basis to provide emergency dredging for the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter to alleviate groundings at their Fort Myers Beach facility. • Nationwide Permits The Corp has developed a series of nationwide short form and project specific permits to address dredge and fill activities. This process was utilized recently by the Pelican Bay Services Division to reconstruct the water management berm along the western mangrove conservation area. Two nationwide options were identified. • Nationwide 3 This would allow mechanical track hoe equipment to remove sand within areas A, B and possibly C consistent with the 1998 permit. The nationwide 3 is maintenance oriented and would require the removal and stockpiling of 1 6 1 2 A sand and not spread on the beach. This option would be in conflict with the FDEP permit which requires beach compatible material to remain on the beach. • Nationwide 27 This permit appears to be the most acceptable option, as it again would allow areas A, B and possibly C to be mechanically opened for habitat protection and environmental enhancement. Beach compatible sand could be placed on the beach and inlet to restore those areas impacted by the recent migration of the pass, subject to a determination that they enhance foraging habitat for Plovers. SUMMARY: In order to improve and complete the permit file, surveys will be delivered this weekend. Direction has been given to develop construction plans and specifications to present to the PBSD Advisory Board and County Commission as early as the week of January 20, 2013. Finally, staff will identify local site contractors capable of performing the work utilizing long reach track hoes and earth moving equipment under the Board of County Commissioners emergency declaration. Prepared by: W. Neil Dorrill, PBSD Administrator Approved By: Leo Ochs, County Manager 2AtP Original Message From: Lustig! [mailto:Lustigl @embargmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 8:46 PM To: office @pelicanbayservicesdivision.net Cc: Streckenbein,Jane& Scott Subject: Status of Clam Pass closure Lisa: Would you please forward my email to all the members of the PBSD, and--most especially--Neil Dorrill. Thanks. Diane Lustig In preparation for PBSD's Clam Bay sub-committee's meeting on Tuesday, I wanted to share with you the avalanche of comments that we are receiving on a daily basis at the Clam Pass "Dig." I personally have been down at the dig, daily, since it was initiated by a family on Saturday 29 December. As a result of press coverage,there has been a steady flow of Collier residents and tourists. All express horror when they look at the magnitude of the devastation along the Pass and beach. All express absolute disgust and dismay over the bureaucratic delays and the "in-fighting" between neighborhoods that they are reading about in the paper. One comment we hear from every person coming past the dig: Why can't we immediately bring some form of earth mover(front loader, back-hoe, etc) to push the sands aside, making it infinitely easier for the diggers to make headway. So far, we have not heard any definitive reason/law that would rule out such a provisional measure. We have assured the hundreds of visitors that we would relay their suggestions and requests--ours as well--to the PBSD. I know that if there is anyone in Collier County that could find some way to bring in now some "small" machinery, it would be Mr. Dorrill, and that the many avid advocates of Clam Pass that sit on the PBSD would whole-heartedly support his proposed solutions. I've included as a "cc," Jane and Scott Streckenbein, residents of Valencia, who have put more hours into the "dig" effort than anyone. I'm sure that they could provide you with pages of similar comments. We are looking forward to the Tuesday subcommittee meeting with great anticipation. Sincerely, Diane Lustig(239-593-6448) 161 A1� TURRELL HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC. MARINE & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B •Naples, Florida 34104-3732 • ( 9) 643-0166 • Fax (239) 643-6632 January 15, 2013 James Hoppensteadt Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. °45141" 6251 Pelican Bay Blvd. Naples, FL 34108 Re: Invitation to Participate in Clam Pass Management Plan Update Dear Mr. Hoppensteadt: As you may or may not be aware,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc.was recently asked to start working on updating the Clam Pass Management Plan. As one of the identified stakeholders whose members commonly use the Pass and Bay system,we would like to invite your participation in the formulation of the updates. The immediate goal is to establish the uses(i.e.bird watching,swimming,fishing,boating,etc.)of the system by the many user groups and to establish the purpose, scope, and goals of the Management Plan. We would request a written submittal by your organization outlining the uses of,and aspirations for, the system by your constituents. Once we have collected this preliminary information from the interested user groups,Turrell,Hall& Associates will be creating an outline and framework for the updated Management Plan which you will be able to comment on again prior to the formulation of the draft updated Plan. Once the Management Plan has been drafted,a public workshop will be held and additional comments will be collected prior to the finalization of the Plan. We hope you will take this opportunity to participate in this process. Your written comments should be submitted before February 4th by USPS or electronically to: The Pelican Bay Services Division c/o Mrs. Lisa Resnick 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 605 Naples, FL 34108 Iresnick@colliergov.net Thanks you for your interest in the Clam Bay Natural resource Protection Area. We look forward to working with you in this endeavor. Sincerely, ,/. .A71/L Timothy Hall 161 2 Lf CLAM PASS NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE USER GROUP QUESTIONNAIRE (This sheet is being provided to help solicit comments on the upcoming Clam Pass Management Plan Update. Feel free to use this sheet or provide your own written comments) Group/Individual Name: Uses of the system (i.e. bird watching, fishing, boating, kayaking, sunbathing,etc.): Concerns for the system: Goals for the Management Plan: Other comments: Thank you for your interest in the Clam Bay Natural Resource Protection Area(NRPA). We hope you will take this opportunity to participate in this process. Your written comments should be submitted before February 4th by USPS or electronically to: The Pelican Bay Services Division do Mrs. Lisa Resnick 801 Laurel Oak Drive,Ste 605 Naples,FL 34108 lresnick @colliergov.net f 161 2Ai + CLAM PASS MANAGEMENT PLAN STAKEHOLDERS GROUPS and REVIEW AGENCIES Pelican Bay Foundation Pelican Bay Homeowner's Association Seagate Homeowner's Association Naples Cay Homeowner's Association Mangrove Action Group Conservancy of Southwest Florida Sierra Club Collier County Audubon Paradise Coast Paddlers Southwest Florida Paddling Club Tall Tales Bait and Tackle Collier County Environmental Services (Bill Lorenz) Collier County Parks and Recreation(Maura Kraus, Barry Williams) Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Florida Department of Environmental Protection US Army Corps of Engineers US Fish and Wildlife Service 161 2A1 1(1/ 1/15/13 Dear Member of PBSD Clam Bay Subcommittee, I have prepared some materials that I believe you will find useful for reviewing the updated dredge designs, specifications, and permit drawings. These materials contain brief but pertinent information on the conditions of Clam Pass in the past 12 years as documented by Mr. Humiston in the Humiston & Moore Bathymetric Monitoring Reports, and Tidal Analysis Reports. They are not as technical as they appear. I would appreciate it very much if you could take half an hour of your time to read them, as I have spent days re-reading and analyzing Mr. Humiston's reports, and field data. I have excerpted Mr. Humiston's conclusions and findings of Clam Pass' responses to the dredging events, and presented the data sheets in an understandable manner for those who have not been following Clam Pass dredging closely. After reading the materials, I am certain that you will have a good sense of how Clam Pass responds to dredging. Consequently, you will be able to make informed decisions on the dredge designs, specifications, and permit drawings that will be presented to the Board by PBSD's consultants, Humiston & Moore, and Turrell, Hall & Associates. Thank you for your kind attention. Respectfully, Linda Roth Montenero 239-254-8889 P.S. Could Lisa make copies of my materials and distribute them to all members of PBSD, and Neil Dorrill? Thank you. 161 2A1 * Clam Pass Dredging & Equilibrium Condition In 1999, the Mouth of Clam Pass (Segment A) was dredged 30 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep. In 2002, the Mouth was not dredged. In the 2007, the Mouth was over- dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep at the request of Coastal Zone Management, violating the permit. An equilibrium condition: "...the inlet cross sectional area is near an equilibrium condition where tidal currents are able to scour sand from the channel at approximately the same rate that wave action deposited sand in the channel." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p.11) This self-scouring condition is the optimal condition for an inlet because sand is not accumulating in the channel rapidly. The equilibrium condition of Clam Pass can last up to 5 or 6 years under normal environmental condition. Excerpts from Humiston & Moore Monitoring Reports Regarding Equilibrium Condition of Clam Pass Excerpt #1: "Figure 2 also shows the inlet width was approximately 40' wide in the pre- dredging condition of 1998 and 2007, which along with the cross sections in Appendix D indicate that a larger dredge cut is not sustainable as an equilibrium condition due to the limited volume of tidal prism flowing through this inlet." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p.6) Excerpt #2: "This wider cut was not dredged in 1999 or in 2002 because it has been determined that 80 ft. is significantly wider than the equilibrium channel width supported by tidal flow, and is therefore not necessary to achieve the improved flushing of Clam Bay. Furthermore, the wider cut quickly shoaled in with sand from the beaches immediately adjacent to the inlet." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 7, p.22) Excerpt #3: "This maintenance dredging included a modification by request of the county, to increase the width of the dredge cut from stations 0+00 to 2+37.5. It is anticipated that the increase of the dredge cut at the entrance will have little if any improvement to the tidal flushing of the Clam Pass tidal system, because the wider cut results in a cross section that is larger than the equilibrium section area, and it is therefore expected to fill in quickly." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p.14) 161 2A ILF _ Excerpt #4: "The rapid reduction of the cross sectional area within segments A & B can be attributed to the inlet readjusting to its natural equilibrium cross sectional area." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p.14) Excerpt #5: "Monitoring of Clam Pass indicates that adjacent beaches, both north and south of the inlet, have been impacted by previous dredging. This has in the past been addressed by reducing the scope of the dredging to minimize disruption of littoral transport and natural inlet sand bypass, and by placing dredged material in the eroded areas. Due to the potential of adverse impacts, more extensive dredging at Clam Pass is not recommended without more thorough evaluation of the severity of potential impacts." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 8, p.19) Excerpt #6: "Table 1 also shows that the shoaling rates were higher after the 1999 and 2007 dredging events than they were after the 2002 dredging. This may be attributed to the dredging of a wider entrance channel cut template in 1999 and 2007, whereas a narrower cut closer to equilibrium dimensions was dredged in 2002. The purpose of the narrower cut in 2002 was to avoid post dredging readjustment that has a tendency to erode adjacent beaches. (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p.6) Note: the Mouth of Pass was not dredged in 2002. Excerpt #7: "Note that the cross sectional area for A & B fluctuates about the 200 sq. ft. level, indicating that this is close to the equilibrium cross sectional area." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p.8) 200 sq. ft. divided by 5 ft. deep = 40 ft. wide. Excerpt #8: "As occurred after previous dredging events, the significant increase of cross section area of flow from dredging sections A and B is followed by a rapid reduction of cross sectional area as the channel dimensions adjust back toward an equilibrium condition." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p. 11) Excerpt #9: "The fact that erosion occurred adjacent to the inlet, and accretion occurred further from the inlet, is an indication that readjustment of the dredge channel back to the equilibrium cross sectional area was the result of trapping sand from adjacent beaches. This is the reason the inlet entrance channel was dredged to a narrower template in 2002 than it was in 1999, so that the dredge channel would be closer to an equilibrium section and less readjustment would occur." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p. 20) 161 2A Excerpt #10: "The success of previous dredging without impact to adjacent shorelines, as well as the apparent equilibrium cross section from previous monitoring between dredging events, are the best way to evaluate an appropriate width of cut." ... "It is probably appropriate to continue dredging the cut to the same width that has been dredged in the past, as long as monitoring shows it does not impact adjacent beaches. Dredging the cut too wide will result in slow tidal currents because they are limited by the size of the bay. Slow tidal currents promote shoaling, and the shoaling will occur by trapping of sand from the beach, potentially causing beach erosion. Slower currents can also result in collapse of the ebb shoal onshore creating more restriction to flow, yet also potentially increasing sand supply to adjacent beaches." (H&M Tidal Analysis Element Report # 13, November 2012, p.16) Summary Conclusions The excerpts above are found throughout 12 years of Humiston and Moore (H&M)'s bathymetric and tidal monitoring reports. Mr. Humiston has been conducting maintenance dredging of Clam Pass since 1999, and is the author of these reports. His statements regarding the conditions of Clam Pass and its adjacent beaches are based on 12 years of field data, as well as widely accepted inlet dredging principles and concepts. The importance of dredging an inlet according to its equilibrium cross sectional area cannot be over-emphasized, because all inlets will eventually establish an equilibrium condition -- a natural flow condition, no matter how wide or deep the inlet is dredged. That is the reason inlets over-dredged for navigation have to be dredged frequently to maintain their unnatural width and depth, not to mention the fact that the in-filling of inlets to establish an equilibrium area causes erosion on the adjacent beaches, and significant disturbance to the natural sand by-passing process off- shore. "... it is well established that there are impacts associated with dredging, and increasing the scope of dredging has the potential for increasing the scope of impacts." (H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p. 26) 12 years of empirical data show that the equilibrium cross sectional area of Clam Pass is approximately 40 ft. wide X 5 ft. deep (approximately 200 sq. ft.). Areas larger are unsustainable. Statements to the contrary are unscientific. 16 I 2 ick The purpose of the proposed 10-year Clam Pass dredging permit is to allow for tidal flushing to conserve and enhance the health of the overall Clam Bay system when found to be warranted. The proposed dredging permit is not for navigation or sand- mining to renourish Clam Pass Park Beach. Clam Pass/Clam Bay is a preserve; it is the first and only coastal Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) in Collier County. The dredging of Clam Pass must be designed to allow tidal flushing in conjunction with the Pass' natural equilibrium condition (self scouring condition). It should not be over-dredged as it is done for navigation in all other Collier County inlets. There is no scientific evidence that dredging the Mouth of Clam Pass 80 ft. wide, or a width wider than its equilibrium cross section enhances the health of the Clam Bay mangrove ecosystem. On the contrary, it increases erosion on the adjacent beaches; causes damage to the red mangrove roots; needlessly destroys habitats of benthic organisms which are vital food items in the estuarine food chain. By Linda Roth, Mangrove Action Group Board 161 2A i(F Analysis of Table 1, Table 2, and Figure 4 in H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9 November 2008 The purpose of the data analysis below is to show that the width of Segment A (Mouth) becomes much wider than the dredge cut within a month after each dredge event. But a year after dredging, the Mouth returns to its natural flow (equilibrium) condition, and the width decreases to approximately 30 ft. to 40 ft. Therefore, a cut wider than 40 ft. is unsustainable and unnecessary. Table 1 Stations 0+00 to 3+00 is Segment A (Mouth). Let's look at the Post dredging data for 1999, 2002, and 2007, and then the data one year later. The average cross- sectional area (sq. ft) of Segment A was calculated by adding all the cross sectional areas of Stations 0+00 to 3+00, then divided by 11 (# of stations). NOTE: the "Post Dredge" time frame is usually a month after the dredge event. The data one year after dredging more accurately represent the condition of the Pass. The following are the results: In 1999, Segment A was dredged 30 ft. wide X 5.5 ft deep. The average Post Dredging Cross Sectional Area was 417 sq. ft. To derive the width, divide the cross sectional area by the depth of 5.5 ft., the width is 76 ft. (Post dredge width was much wider than the dredge cut width) One year later, the average Cross Sectional Area was 180 sq. ft. When divided by a depth of 5.5 ft., the width is 33 ft. (Segment A filled in quickly, returning to its natural flow condition, to a width of approximately 33 ft. In 2002, Segment A was not dredged. The average Post Dredging Cross Sectional Area is 277 sq. ft. (In Table 2, 296 sq. ft. was listed instead; perhaps the result of an earlier survey). When divided by a depth of 5.5 ft., the width was 50 ft. (Post dredge width was wider than the dredge cut width. In this case, the Mouth was not dredged) One year later, the average Cross Sectional Area was 177 sq. ft. When divided by a depth of 5.5 ft., the width is 32 ft. (Segment A returned to a width of approximately 32 ft., to its equilibrium condition) x61 2Aiq' In 2007, Segment A was over-dredged to 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft deep The average Post Dredging Cross Sectional Area was 580 sq. ft. When divided by a depth of 5.5 ft., the width is 105 ft. (Post dredge width was much wider than the dredge cut width) One year later, the average Cross Sectional Area was 213 sq. ft. When divided by a depth of 5.5 ft., the width is 39 ft. (Segment A filled in quickly returning to a near equilibrium condition) Table 2 In Oct. 1998, the average Pre-dredge Cross Sectional Area was 93 sq. ft., and in April 1999, the Post Dredge Cross sectional Area was 417 sq. ft. (Segment A was dredged 30' wide X 5.5 ft. deep, in 1999). In Dec. 2001, the average Pre-dredge Cross Sectional Area was 301 sq. ft. and in Feb. 2002, the Post dredge Cross Sectional area was 296 sq. ft. (Segment A was not dredged) In July 2006, the average Pre-dredge Cross Sectional Area was 345 sq. ft., and in April 2007, the Post dredge Cross Sectional area was 580 sq. ft. (Segment A was dredged 80' wide X 5.5 ft. deep, in 2007). Discounting the tropical storm and post dredge data (outliers), Table 2 shows that the Average Cross Sectional Area in Segment A remained at approximately 187 sq. ft. an indication of the Pass' natural flow (equilibrium) condition, not withstanding the fact that Segment A is the most unstable area (The first three or four stations nearly completely filled in). Figure 4 Segment A (Mouth) is the first graph. Draw a horizontal line across from the 200 sq. ft. Cross Section Area (sq. ft) to 2009. You will see that from 2000 to 2009, the approximately 200 sq. ft. cross section remained stable, indicating the Pass was at an equilibrium condition. The abnormal surges were right after the 1999 dredge, and the 2007 dredge. The slight up-ticks to 300 sq. ft., in the mid section, were due to two storm events, and the small 2002 dredge. Outliers cannot be used to calculate the equilibrium cross section. 161 2Ai+ - Interestingly, the second graph for Segment B (Throat) is similar to the one for - Segment A, indicating the Cross Sectional Area of approximately 200 sq. ft. is the _ equilibrium cross section for both Segments A & B. Again, Figure 4 indicates that when the Pass is at an equilibrium condition, the cross sectional area in Segment A is approximately 200 sq. ft. that is between 30 ft. to 40 ft. wide depending on the depth. The upper end is 40 ft., not 60 ft. as Mr. Humiston recently proposed. Summary Conclusions 10 years of bathymetric data collected by H&M indicate that the width of Segment A is approximately 30 ft. to 40 ft. in its natural flow condition. Therefore, the data collected in the recent survey after storm events and Pass closure are outliers which cannot be considered appropriate or sufficient data to justify the recently proposed 60 ft. width for Segment A, for the long term purpose of maintenance dredging for the health of the Clam Bay ecosystem. By Linda Roth, Mangrove Action Group Board 1 • 161 2A11 ®� u.,._ a,O .-® 7 7 D °apU) CO C3 v m CO 0br wmmvN W CO mar 0 W W m °' -- 00,0 M W W OD.. N Mc0 W W m M10mat Orb w M W 6 W prm W 0 W Cc90 Nm m BOO T/c7,4,-i?e-e-ov T7.7-Q 1 ..a- ��N . N NN�Y T u:N N 0 ,}C ono= / a N M / N ,_ NT C w al N r O W C 3 m s m w n M W .-O m n M r 1 Q O w b W N w M m at m W m W O O W W w O m O n W O M > - d U) N W W N W+tN bNa-mnbv W O Y W N W Nv m W m W V W wmw NmO W bNN W M m m aa. a. N M,-,-N N N N MM a.w W b Mw a-atM.-.- N W N NM M N N Q f —1,' N C4 2 < td J� . . 1., _.: as .s_ >, c w m o1 C .C. - 2 0 O< 41 O 0 .'... ww 0 Ww CO U MOM 04 rW .- 0 M W m W r n w 0 M n U)0) ._ Mm m w WMMm0 armormvcon n -UMW W NOr wnw w aiw 0) O m m nn r nnmw MMMCMMn W W MNMNMatUW r W W w ata!W wvov MN c a cQ O n p U C N cO ' L C T W a. . O 2 C 2e! . co W a p U) o f m a r {M W � O OM W CO w M N M 7 C M O N 0.W m N 1 N N T ' n M • rV W e-M Q W n n W G • • a O � m M oo . o_.) • c c Pacol ., • o G) U U o C J N d t 0 7 C � 0 9' j — rC m N 3 M n s-W O w O w N W N O r of n W W W O O N 10 W O W W w w W N 7 < 0 _ T• 01 cq tom 0 O 1D 0 0 0—M O M m W • w n • M m W N M n O N N m W n M M n V W m_ M 1a m M M N N N�m�N .-�- NNN Vw W nm W m mm W w w atw wN 6 -1' 1-''''O 0 Q A v: = c N U 10. sn J c• C "t W S 1p .a; U 0• H A E. m0 mMM 10 N W NN W mwM n 0ww N N w b W M On Ow b aT 0 CO of m co 0'0 a N W OOmatMr 00 W atMOM V'W ng 10 atCm W W O W OOrO W rn0 0_0 O m 2 '4 U N MMN N N N N N 1-U U M N NNN M a f b n r m n n W n W W W W w a r CO O«o N p Q o U Ca. O W N . W W W C W."- c T Cd 1p O 0 o .,- 4 7 e-�- r, L V m � W� a nm nr m rO �47 c, 17 M W n m vA is uiA w t N mN W O N nW�A . . W rm . . . . mo n ?m 9 � - .--1- 3 w C mO IT M e2Tos Nq M,-. 1 a- � r e- L" L.L.• 0=W v U CO Q a C°- -, la m c m O 3 n n W C0 M N 0 w w W n M O W 0)< N O m M N M w V w W b N N c® VU) m N 0 CO CO n b n CO m m CO at r CO N CO co Co N 1 N m r' m r . < Y N w O r M M • • • m m N r w 1.- co O O 4- N or LO W N U C . O U w c m O 1 c .2 O N . N Ol W w w M w C1 W M m V V:n W W W mmNb W atom W mmwN M ...3_ 0 ww M Omnmm V'mM V nwO 10 W 0mN W nnMp NO W Nr OmM <f- . O bw b watRMMNNMN7 WtrN�Ow M m WO OM 1n mN co ccn 0• M .-r e-N aT w w b b b b w sr sr co co..- a 2 -, I,r, c,,f C 0 -& 0 -5- g- I c o w o b O b o 10 0 b o b'00000000000 O O W O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0)0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �- 0 ON w n O N w n o r 0 W W W b 0 10 O w 0 b o b O b O w 0 w O b o b 0 ..j NOO 0 0.-rrr N NMNRatww W W nnmmW mOOO NNMMaf ttww W W rnm 0.7 • s `;'D� t - a 7 t. - d - 4. ../°• 1 01.- Li, 161 2A ' In this analysis, the channel width is measured at 0.0 ft. NGVD, and the cross sectional area is calculated from the area bound by the bottom profile and 0.0 NGVD elevation. The 0.0 NGVD contour is used as a common datum for shoreline positioning. For reference purposes, mean high water(MHVV) for this area is+1.5 feet above NGVD, mean tide level is+0.5 feet above NGVD, and mean low water(MLW) is—0.5 feet below NGVD1. Table 2J Average Cross Sectional Areas within Active Portion of Cut#4 Clam Pass Monitoring 1998 to 2008 Date of Description of Survey Avg.Area(ft2) Avg.Area(ft`) Avg.Area(ft`) Survey Segment A Segment B Segment C 10/1998 Pre-dredge 9 74 92 04/1999 Post dredge ';417,; 359 402 05/2000 13-month monitoring 180 198 360 02/2001 22-month monitoring 185 205 no data 09/2001 Post Tropical Storm Gabrielle 298 243 312 12/2001 Pre-maintenance dredge 301' 240 342 02/2002 Post maintenance dredge 399 no data 04/2002 36-month monitoring 276 317 558 06/2003 50-month monitoring 177 186 537 11/2003 Post storm 270 212 510 05/2004 61-month monitoring 210 260 443 06/2005 74-month monitoring 1 215 331 07/2006 87-month monitoring '345 165 345 042007 96-month post dredge 485 483 08/2008 112-month monitoring 213 226 396 Note:Description of survey interval is in reference to completion of the April 1999 dredging. Post dredging surveys are underlined. All three segments were dredged in 1999. Only segments B and C were dredged during the January 2002 maintenance dredging. Following the maintenance dredging in 2002, Segment A experienced shoaling in response to high wave energy.The shoaling took the form of a sand spit that grew across the inlet entrance from the south causing the inlet entrance to migrate north approximately 400 feet. In October 2002 scour from tidal currents during an elevated storm tide reopened Segment A along the dredged channel alignment. This is an example of how the increased tidal prism and stronger tidal flow resulting from the 1999 dredging has been effective in maintaining the average channel cross section above the pre-dredge condition which existed in 1998. The most recent monitoring data collected in April 2008 shows the average cross sectional area in each of the three segments has decreased since the last monitoring data set was collected in April 2007. As stated previously, the decrease in cross sectional area of flow is the result of in-filling from the inlet returning to an equilibrium cross section area. 'The elevations of Mean High Water(MHW)and Mean Low Water(MLW)are based on DEP Special Report No.87-2,Predicted Open Tidal Datums for the Florida Lower Guff Coast, Balsillie, 1987,and discussions with the DEP Bureau of Survey and Mapping. in • , 161 2Ai > OEM 11 i 9 r.-- -----�. 2 oel. 600 E 50o I I i I a 400 1— z 300 _ W tn 100 � I � __ I � I I JV) tot Ow W 200 -_ —_.._ _ _ C U 0 , l , , , 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 600 E 500 - Q I I m 400 1-La 300 I I 2 wid 200 - La III C U 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 600 I c 500 - I ` .. U 400 - 1% 0 1-- I 300 _ W oz N W 200 - I I i N W N c too - to r U 0 , l , , , , , , , i 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 ( IGURE 4 AVERAGE CROSS SECTION AREA OF FLOW IN CUT #4 SEGMENTS A, B, and C 17 161 2A + Analysis of Appendix D, H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9 November 2008 Below is an analysis of the cross section drawings of Segment A (Stations 0+00 to 3+00), and Segment B (Stations 3+ 64.5 to 6+10). Segment A is the "Mouth" area and Segment B is the "Throat" area. In 1999, Segment A (Mouth) was dredged 30 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep. In 2007, Segment A (Mouth) was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep. In 1999 and 2007, Segment B (Throat) was dredged the same variable dimensions that is between 30 ft. to 140 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep, with the exception of Station 3+64.5 which was dredged 5.5 ft. deep. The Thin Black line is the 1999 Post Dredge cross section The Red line is the 2007 Post Dredge cross section The Dark Black line is the 2008 cross section, approximately a year later. NOTE: Since the "Post Dredge" time frame is only a month after the dredge event, it is expected that the 1999 and 2007 Post-dredge cross section drawings show that the dimensions as well as the locations of the stations remained approximately the same as the dredge cuts. Therefore, the data a year after dredging are more representational of the Pass condition and should be the focus of attention. 1) Stations 0+00 to 0+50 (Segment A) These 3 stations were dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, these stations nearly completely filled in. 2) Station 0+75 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 30 ft. wide X 2.5 ft. deep appeared 160 ft. north of the dredge location. 3) Station 1+00 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 20 ft. wide X 3 ft. deep appeared 130 ft. north of the dredge location. 161 2A I * 4) Station 1+25 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 20 ft. wide X 3.8 ft. deep appeared 125 ft. north of the dredge location. 5) Station 1+50 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 20 ft. wide X 4 ft. deep appeared 110 ft. north of the dredge location. 6) Station 1+75 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 20 ft. wide X 3.8 ft. deep appeared 85 ft. north of the dredge location. 7) Station 2+00 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 25 ft. wide X 3 ft. deep appeared 65 ft. north of the dredge location. 8) Station 2+37.5 (Segment A) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after the 80 ft. dredge, a cross section of approximately 40 ft. wide X 1. 25 ft. deep appeared 25 ft. north of the dredge location. 9) Station 3+00 (Segment A) This station was dredged 60 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, a cross section of approximately 60 ft. wide X 3 ft. deep appeared 20 ft. north of the dredge location. 161 2A' r `{. 10) Station 3+64.5 (Segment B) This station was dredged 30 ft. wide X 5.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, a cross section of approximately 50 ft. wide X 4 ft. deep appeared at the dredge location. 11) Station 4+10 (Segment B) This station was dredged 140 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, the width and location remained approximately the same, but the depth fluctuated between 0.5 ft and 4.5 ft. 12) Station 4+60 (Segment B) This station was dredged 135 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, the width and location remained approximately the same, but the depth fluctuated between 0.5 ft and 2.25 ft. 13) Station 5+10 (Segment B) This station was dredged 80 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, a cross section of approximately 20 ft. wide X 4 ft. deep appeared 30 ft. south of the dredge location. 14) Station 5+60 (Segment B) This station was dredged 40 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, a cross section of approximately 25 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep appeared 30 ft. south of the dredge location. 15) Station 6+10 (Segment B) This station was dredged 30 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, a cross section of approximately 35 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep appeared 25 ft. south of the dredge location. 16) Station 6+60 (Segment C) This station was dredged 25 ft. wide X 4.5 ft. deep In 2008, approximately a year after dredging, a cross section of approximately 35 ft. wide X 5 ft. deep appeared at the dredge location. Summary Conclusions 161 2A The conditions of Clam Pass in 2008, a year after the 80 ft. wide dredge at the Mouth, were as follows: Segment A (Stations 0+00 to 3+00) 1 . Stations 0+00 to 0+50 nearly completely filled in. The data of these three stations should not be used to calculate the equilibrium cross section. 2. The width of the remaining stations in Segment A decreased from 80 ft. to between 20 ft. to 40 ft. indicating that a dredge width wider than 40 ft. is unsustainable as Mr. Humiston stated on p. 6 in H&M Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9. 3. The depth of the remaining stations in Segment A decreased from 5.5 ft to between 1.25 ft. to 4 ft. 4. Segment A migrated 160 ft. north of the dredge location. Segment B (Stations 3+64.5 to 6+10) The dredge widths of Segment B vary from 30 ft. to 140 ft. The cross section drawings show that where the dredge cuts were small (between 30 to 40 ft. wide), the widths became slightly wider, and the depths of 4.5 ft. were maintained; where the dredge cuts were large (between 80 ft. to 140 ft), the depths and widths decreased significantly. By Linda Roth, Mangrove Action Group Board 161 2A ' * a • STA 0+0D 0 c 0 ' a. 6- i. S 4- i- G a -1 m s+' N —2- 1 t — 0, ear" 'r ;I ` `___y____._ji:oir j _10- - NORTH -'-ma Asa ' -lap ' -$a ' ADD ' -ha ' -1ia0 ' -aD ' 0 DISTANCE FROM SASEUNE (FEET) a s -t" 0•- STA 0+25 .; 2. Ti A 0 I F +�— � A yeonr I 4E/ i - nem cur(-d8'MNG) t -a-- -10- NOM IWO -12-400 450 ' -boa -dao doa ' -4o ' -46 ' -le ' 4 DISTANCE FROM BASEUNE (FEET) 0 0- STA 0+30 _ ' Z 2- we WADI -o- �.t-a+r f -....- ,... A y e o-r !ca' .P -10- NORTH MIDI -'ADO -ISO • -boa -dsa -1'0a -1.5o -16 ' -io • 6 DISTANCE FROM mEUNE (FEET) LEGEND •04/1999 POST-DREDGE 04/2007 POST-DREDGE 96-MONTH MONT. 08/2006 105-MONTH MONIT. = NUMISTON CLAM PASS ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT #9< 5679 STRAND COURT CUT-4 CROSS SECTIONS ' MOORE FOR'P.B.S.Q. NAPLES, FL 34110 r1""- ENGINEERS FAX: (239) 594-2025 tt consru DATE:09/08/08 ILE:CUT4 X—SEC SCALE:AS SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594-2021 i Via PERMITTING www.humistonandmoore.eom - ------ ,--- ;w.ae�Rnurrwe _J08:9-068 �ATUM:NGVQ FIGURE: D-6 1007 Dreat g 161 2A ■ 1.) a — STA 0+75 0 P 44 ° - & ■ie,.r Ifti-, ( Q s- - MINN CUT C-6.1"MY --- -10- NORTH BOURN -12400 -i50 • -100 • A50 • -100 • -1130 • -1100 • -'80 ' O s DISTANCE FROM BASEUNE (FEET) a r 8- STA 1+00 tt ` s 2- wul _- - 4 O-4^ i - MINI CPT(-as'N7ve) —-B- .-10-- SOUTH- NORM SOUTH -12 . -400 -i80 • -ioo • -i50 ' -loo • -1150 • -1'00 • --o • o DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) a !l- STA 1+25 ; 0 Awe- M QF—4-: •IC . MIN cur(-6.6'I40D) __J -a- -10- NORTH SoU1H -1-400 -350 • -ioo • -also • -ioo • -1`so • -too • -to • o DtsTANCE FROM BAS Mee (FEET) LEGEID .04/1999 POST-DREDGE 04/2007 POST-DREDGE 96-MONTH MONT. 08/2008 105-MONTH MONIT. 4I4UMISTON CLAM PASS ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT #9 5679 STRAND COURT All I MOIRE CUT-4 CROSS SECTIONS NAPLES, FL 34110 ENGINEERS FOR:P.B.S.D. FAX: (239) 594-2025 �' COASTAL DATE:09/08/08 ILE:CUT4 X-SEC SCALE:AS SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594-2021 N.4 PERMITTING"" JOB:9-068 _OATUM:NGVD FIGURE: D-7 www.hum(slonondmoore.aom 2007 161 a e; STA 1+50 F .n V2- (., ' a c2- 1 ' r _—T— .▪ -a- -to- NORM BOUM -12 400 -5o ' -Joo ' -5a ' -2oo ' 450 ' -too ' -bo ' o DISTANCE FROM BASELH4E (FEET) 8- STA 1+73 u r ti 0 c' i riq z PI O 4- -0- -to- N13:1H SD= -t-400 5o ' -ice ' -25a ' -Am ' -1150 ' -100 ' -6o ' b DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) a- 1.- STA 2+00 ' (:` 6 47 a 2- Mll1(+ilQf . ....Hal 9:-A. 4117 -3- • - DEMON an(-as mono —1111111_——-J -a-- W - -a- -ta- NORTH SOWN -1?400 -A0 -/00 ' 430 ' -100 450 ' ->'ao ' -6 ' o LEGEND DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) •04/1999 POST-DREDGE 04/2007 POST-DREDGE 96-MONTH MONT. 08/2008 105-MONTH MONIT. 'fill HUMISTON CLAM PASS ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT #9 5679 STRAND COURT �,MARE CUT-4 CROSS SECTIONS EI�IGINEER FOR:CLAM NAPLES, FL 94 O _ }� FAX: (239) 594-2025 COASTAL DATE:09/08/08 ILE:CUT4 X—SEC SCALE:AS SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594-2021 --_�_-- !ouvOtEERARrrwG JOB:9-068 TUM:NGVD FIGURE: p—$ w•humtstanandmoo re.com 16 , 2 o 6 '7 Tr,) r p4.4,3 ,e, 2A pi-- 1 a STA 2+37.5 E 0 = t •w coin Na_ 0} Z 1 i� ', 1/ 0 . MIN WI(-611 IMOD ___- -5- . NORTH SOUTH --400 -he ' -ice -Ao ' -do° ' -1150 • -1100 • --o ' o DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) 8 STA 3+00 = 2- NNr(N.R9 - Mt(-64111 I i 11=11 as(-v mmo l A W-8- -10- • NORTH SOUTH -1?4400 ' -AO ' -ioo ' -Ise ' -doo ' -1'so ' 40 ' -ho ' 0 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) 0 IILIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIII g_* imar ..-I-- Imp, .1 —1• NORTH SOUTH —1 - 0D - . -100 , 50 1.0 1 • LEGEND DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) •04/1999 POST-DREDGE 04/2007 POST-DREDGE 96-MONTH MONT. 08/2008 105-MONTH MONIT. �� !3UMISTON CLAM PASS ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT #9 CUT-4 CROSS SECTIONS 5679 STRAND COURT L'P MOORE NAPLES, FL 34110 V ENGINEERS FOR:P.B.S.D. FAX (239) 594-2025 ! COATUI DATE:09/09/08 rILE:CUT4 X—SEC�SCALE:AS SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594-2021 i Arat tray Da cI+ www.humtstonandmoore.com �_— -- �NOrcRraNrwe JO6:9-068 TUM:NGYD FIGURE: D-8 i 2- 6a7ItecLa 161 2 !� . r-.7,. ,,, _ .„ - 4 STA 4+10 . , fi t7 4- _ 2- Nunn v ., :j I '4-4- WM art(-4.5.NW* W-5- -Q- -10- NORTH SOUTH i i i _ 9 —1-200 —1550 . —40 . —SO ' 6 do 1ii0 ' 15e ' 100 F DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) i 8 6- STA 4+80 „ ' - n Er 2--B- W -10- - NORTH 1 SOUTH -12200 -750 . -1100 ' -JO ' 6 k tap ' 1&0 ' 200 DISTANCE FROM IMMUNE (FEET) a a. STA 5+10 r' 2 2- wr(*4. ') � —0� ow[-sw9 I—4— Ef71OM cur[-as'N L 5'4 j-B- c -10- NORTH i SOUTH -12 . -1150 ' -1 30 00 ' - ' 6 AI ' Ido 130 ' 200 =ENO DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) •04/1999 POST-DREDGE 04/2007 POST-DREDGE 96-MONTH MONT. 08/2008 105-MONTH MONIT. — HUMISTON CLAM PASS ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT #9 5679 STRAND COURT MOORE CUT-4 CROSS SECTIONS NAPLES. FL 34110 ENGINEERS,FOR:P.B.S.D. FAX: (239) 594-2025 %zit DATE:09/08/08 ILE:CUT4 X-SEC :AS SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594-2021 { ;i[r,G�mmor0E5 W+ www.humIsfonandmoora.com -.-- ----- -3�u+o�cEeanwe JOB:9-068 �ATUM:NGVD LIRE: D-9 • 1 6 I 2 A (.----' A N1 a 6- STA S+60 u ' a 1 2--' ow(+ erg R I`-2- m 4 1-4- t 9-Q p -- —10- NORTH > BOMB c 1 6 0 -12n -1160 • -1100 ' -00 ' • Jo • 1lo ' 130 • ROO 1 mum FROM BASELINE (FEET) k e I. STA 6+10 :>: ' E ii .. 4- 14 I 2- mg Wain v J 4 t' o r!(-Ian -h mww aR(-u' 1 -l- -1 - NORTH -12200 -?50 ' -100 ' -40 ' 6 43 • 16D ' 1kD • 240 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) 10 MA 1+80 , 6 a 4- d 2- mom man 0 At' zo __, w( 7 -4,7 R7w ON(-4S Me -6- -i-- - NORTH SIMMER -10 450 ' -100 ' -!1110 ' 6 • J0 tbo Tae ' SO LEGEND DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET, •04/1999 POST-DREDGE 04/2007 POST-DREDGE 96-MONTH MONT. 06/2008 105-MONTH MONTT. 1HUMISTON CLAM PASS ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT #9 CUT-4 CROSS SECTIONS 5679 STRAND COURT MOORE NAPLES, FL 34110 i' , ,}, ENGINEERS FOR:P.B.S.D. FAX: (239) 594-2025 coasrac DATE:09/08/08 ILE:CUT4 X—SEC SCALE:AS SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594-2021 (- " ."cc U TNG"'� JOB:9-068 ATUM:NGYD [FIGURE: D-10 _ www.humlalanandmoora.com i 1 61 2 A iq-- CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY,JANUARY 15,2013 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Clam Bay Subcommittee of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board met on Tuesday,January 15 at 3:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay,8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples,Florida.The following members were present: �f7 IEIRClam Bay Subcommittee I R `J Susan O'Brien,Chairman Mike Levy Ia� F Eg 2 r /013 gi Tom Cravens Mary Anne Womble t�tt Pelican Bay Services Division Board Also Present John Chandler Keith J.Dallas Pelican Bay Services Division Staff W.Neil Dorrill,Administrator Mary McCaughtry,Operations Analyst Kyle Lukasz,Operations Manager Lisa Resnick,Recording Secretary Also Present Tim Hall,Senior Ecologist&Principal,Turrell,Hall&Associates,Inc. Jim Hoppensteadt,President and CEO,Pelican Bay Foundation Kathy Worley,Director of Environmental Science,Conservancy of Southwest Florid iala ____21/________ 30 in the audience Hiller AGENDA Henning 1. Roll call Coyle .�' 2. Approval of December 27 Clam Bay Subcommittee meeting minutes _ _� 3. Clam Bay transition update .acQ—" P ------- 4. Clam Bay dredging permit update 5. Meetings needed by Clam Bay Subcommittee and/or PBSD Board to continue to expedite the Clam Pass dredging permit 6. Audience Comments 7. Adjourn ROLL CALL All Subcommittee members were present. AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to approve the agenda as presented. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 27 CLAM BAY SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Mr. Levy to approve the December 27 Clam Bay Subcommittee meeting minutes as presented. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor and the motion passed. CLAM BAY DREDGING PERMIT UPDATE Chairman O'Brien reported at this time,the Pelican Bay Services Division(PBSD)would only pursue a Nationwide 27(NWS 27)permit from the Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)to ciPM Pass as soon as Date: 17 Item* Copies to: X61 2A1* Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes January 15, 2013 possible.Once Clam Pass is open,then PBSD will seek the ten-year permit and update the Clam Bay Management Plan. Mr. Dorrill reported as the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) declared Clam Pass closing an emergency requiring dredging as soon as possible,Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD),is pursuing permits on an emergency basis. The Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stated this project was not eligible for a "Letter of Emergency" permit. However, USAGE recommended PBSD apply for the most appropriate, one- time, project-specific Nationwide 27 permit (NWP-27) intended for "environmental benefit and enhancement" versus a NWP-3 permit, a regular maintenance-type dredging permit. NWP-3 requires the dredged material taken off-site which is not only logistic and cost-prohibitive,but this USACE criteria violates Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) rules regarding placement of "beach-compatible sand"adjacent to the inlet to prevent erosion. Mr.Dorrill explained the Clam Pass construction plans are one of the required components to submit with the USACE NWP-27 permit application. The construction plans are also necessary to provide to pre- qualified, prospective dredging contractors to submit bids/proposals. In anticipation of receiving the plans by January 18, the PBSD Board decided to schedule a Special Session, Monday, January 21 at 9 a.m. at Club Pelican Bay to review the plans and approve a recommendation to the BCC for consideration January 22. Mr. Dorrill clarified the BCC determined this project is eligible for Tourist Development Council (TDC)Fund 195,or tourist tax dollars because the area adjacent to the inlet is public beach. Collier County has a permit to operate a beach "rake" that could be used to maintain the surface of the beach. However, Mr. Dorrill stressed there was a fine line between raking and grading. No work would be authorized that would put the FDEP permit-in-place at-risk. Mr.Hall clarified the FDEP permit-in-place is compatible with the proposed work in the USAGE NWP- 27 application because it is less extensive. However,the same construction plans submitted to USACE NWP- 27 must also be submitted to FDEP to modify the FDEP permit-in-place for consistency before FDEP will issue the Notice to Proceed (NTP)to the contractor to begin the actual construction. Concurrently,Mr.Hall is also performing a biological monitoring(BO)study of migratory and nesting sea birds as required by U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS)prior to the anticipated NTP with construction. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Marcia Cravens mentioned other NWP permits not under consideration, and was concerned about an engineer's itinerary and the pending construction plans. Ms. Annice Gregerson was concerned about stench and water quality. Dr. Ted Raia agreed the NWP-27 was project-appropriate, but was still concerned. Ms. Diane Lustig commended Mr. Dorrill for progress made and encouraged PBSD to continue moving forward; Mr.Scott Streckenbein agreed and commented on the "dig" and considerable interest from many diverse communities. Ms.Kathy Worley was concerned about the dimensions of the dredge cut setting precedent for the long-term management plan. Ms. Cravens and Ms. Linda Roth were concerned about new permits'compatibility with the 1998 permit. 18 i . . 161 2A * Clam Bay Subcommittee Meeting Minutes January 15, 2013 CONCLUSION Staff would notify the Board when the construction plans are available by Friday, January 18 and confirm the Monday,January 21 at 9 a.m.Board Special Session at Club Pelican Bay. Mr.Hall distributed a sample invitation to participate in the development of an updated Clam Bay Management Plan he is sending to Clam Bay stakeholders. ADJOURN Mr. Cravens made a motion, second by Ms. Womble, to adjourn. The Subcommittee voted unanimously in favor,the motion passed,and the meeting was adjourned at 4:18 p.m. S:1A0 OVI 0731.‘4.2 ._ Susan O'Brien,Chairman Minutes by Lisa Resnick 2/4/2013 10:03:28 AM 19 I 1 6 1 a ii. PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing & Benefit Unit g W1 I I 0 FEB 2 n 1013 ig BY: .... ... .............. NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING MONDAY, JANUARY 21, 2013 THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION BOARD WILL MEET IN SPECIAL SESSION MONDAY, JANUARY 21 AT 9:00 AM AT THE CLUB PELICAN BAY, 707 GULF PARK DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34108 ti Fiala I Hiller AGENDA Henning 1—)4 Coyle v•• . Golotta The agenda includes, but is not limited: �,yQ�C ` "" 1. Roll call 2. Draft Clam Pass Construction Plans Presentation by Ken Humiston, P.E., and Brett D. Moore, P.E., Humiston & Moore Engineers 3. Board Discussion 4. Audience Comments 5. *Approval of the Pelican Bay Services Division Board recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners 6. Adjourn * Board vote is anticipated ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597-1749 OR VISIT PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. Misc.Cures: Date: Item#: 1/18/2013 12:41:16 PM Copies t0: • ',. 'ti If .- 1 f 't 3 it ,, rw a " ,r . $tl'i , i,,,11 ti te ' f "'• - 0 ff �4 CD 1 ,A w 5 E (D O • E cc CD , U C Ii 4, , /�/^�� IIF, „ . m y o , { N c y-)' a.) 0 oa vJ T B V 9 AL, 41 .71:: ¢fig. 70. �w iL LF ' q Ce oT y `*,='1 •six i_=`Z r „� " 1 a YYY e a yyy ,�,/ . Ci) d S' , A M,1141 . ,$. . ...:'',"..:;'.5-,..'•%:'''':-.5°55:575', L., . ,,,,,,t',.;.4... igt,.--•••• 1§.s "" tea T 5wi } 3 ¢4`n4 E . y E • K F ')f 03 sw, . n < . E2 N t Z O . ,, �.,. 0.. r , W*ow tb U L N 0 0 W Z o c o es ' ,N" '�r y ,mil`e 3 e, y _ z Ott*`4r�'s � �.�. ""' ^+,� r t � s'r , 1 VW ' tis' a - V 1N30103S o, aR ' _ a - N - 1.0. (NJ N W cc D LL S$" �F#<^:.a 4. "t N 4. N -N k■ i J ▪o ■ °pd .' ▪O CV q ' e , --,.-.7:1 / O N v. an;> "y r iiiiiiiitinC:7"' '-'. . '' - i► -8 Cs% a I t .. 1"11 r Ii O _. r� - 0 _°' O 01 O en _ O crl to O O O O O O w 0 M N O O ,T U (&Li) Y3JV NOI103S SSOaI rt 1., 161 2 A 1+ ... .. , . \''''''''' .. , .. ... .. F . 8 _0 H 4,,t.''....0:4,:;.,,•::',",7-:—'; '7 ,::-: ,,,. / .. A, 1 �. ..a "� '� J -° O .... . N Z ° i _ I o W s.u - a `` S. Lil CI it d C r� W V —r*� {I Lai w w Moll W W W ,4 . - 0 0 0 11 0 i_' 0 0 O r 2 0 I W CL '- Q� N N .=n 0' 0 0 A Cr) 1:3 0 In -53 _..1 O O O O - ! - I r ) P_ ul El E 2 3 2 0 CI I I I I e ' ' 'lrg ii NQLIV 313 0 11( = -I U r: t C:1ProleZ-Clam-PasslDWg-201101-01 Print Jan 17.2011 16 I 2 A 11\/, cLi A N Z H m m .3. z,,,-,,,. DOmm 0,',7,0,, - A x z m -I 0 A O D Z y m y A 5 D°x =0..,._m To M m Z x JC ZmSO mK N N NNQ o h ti fill,m=m m =A m I00 # m O D O q hW.' V t N O Z -D tim i S y � Z t`Am `.4 CD 4k W D A Nm w �/d co 4 O oO,Z O Z m Nm m�wN �W N m m N D N m Z 1 7 1.11.11/W.6 o,. 4 oo°z m,zA ` 1 S O =< Z F N Ox O< Z A mmSAD J f A< D Amm as O A O °Z D O<z O V 'Tl , O m O m A D 0 Z D o c O V_ O 3 m m Z°W 00 - rI 1 m mr C D r mW�A /� ..__, . . , NDmc I �1 < Z - Jl�J7 m a m ^ w z \ ` 1--1 1 r c X C 1l t. D • A a o i- i tml 1-3 < 5 m� D - - -t n J ,Ir1Y 2 7 m 3 2 ILA-r/ll `1 ;_ �� - -�` 2p ,' i, r -� ( ;1 } Wv�i^�. 1 µ Yy9L Rj�� (6 \ zt i. ci) (hyter.- _,L „ O` . ^ u ! � E A):-:.4i,-.1,!-- --77-1N%- {V D RJ� ..- ,to A w ",. „st. F z= C>m m � -p�OI V O N A W N �m N ro Z D O '1 O00O OOO<iNVNO D Z rm D O o 0 0 0 0 0 a m m m< H< 0 N NNNWND m N O Ill I/I/1 N Ill/1 p-p m DA N W _m D Y i-+r _ 0 00 z rD D to NN 8°O m=1 Amy 00000000,-zzzx m D z CA D- 00 �CD - Z--1-Oi-Oiytiy--Im I I �m -m lm DO C--I ~ZZZZZZZ~po=D N In mm nODpm= '-' O O(/1NVI UI VI U1 U1°mm x ( J = O c=Z-° �0] W� 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 N4°"100 m ( ) 0 y3m=m mwoo OOOpV1mmN0 Z ~ G.�K0* ODmmOOM,1„, -AD 0 0 KO OD ,mtmm00m0 -!1M00 x D]Z m tnrn W D N01~e1D mr� Z ZD o-o ZU VmO*A< 1 1 I Dv F 2 D D 01 N m m" O r O FOxme I AK K K Z Z < r A m '.-71-,,I.,'3,21 r N N o r D m r r < < 2• 0 o N CO -000,c. r ° O c 3.Nv�D .co* m m m POeWO P.' '.--,*Oz ro rc �" N Oa ivA j0 vw m0 -D-I tD co 3mI o 7 m 0 o.NOCA /� A ON /�/ F,„:,1`" 3 C:1Prl clZ-G!a'�.-Pg5510V,q.2011-Oi-051 b 2.'l1O q PI'Irl_JAf 1].2011 .,;:e4ei..-,,;,:7r-,''''-tir.',...-.IT'1''...!. ICS:4-'7:1;k-.:1°:--":7:.: +�'`_,,may [ S' --. . f . k : -.„•,,„6,....t z. z .,,.... .... . , ,,,.. mc. :._... ...„,....,__ ..,._ . „, T......1 m i .'I F N ..-• oz Z.'.t \ ik., . . . X O j ..� n 1 ° yam /► , . . ,N v i[r. J'. o '�Ili: I I „j -.O dV F`T�!'Cfti'I ;` ,, rd n / A VI,O /�± ? te 'Y `'ti D A A 1n * . 0.rnn - c) 5� ' ry As �En =zDm y I ' r' t., z N O'z a N1173• �t'D an a -ice`6�ais/+`%� O 1.' • Z D D p m r., _ t ...'&14.\)t.7141. {fir �c��.3y�. '.t' M O t [ Y OF• - O < m i f ,. .ova��!S ,`i - o I yya! •` In m , D Y z o ice , =` , _ i a� --. rye _-;_ a li is m e G w A. n S r a� mzm ,c fit,f- /- >A i. ,..,-..:.- 8 ..,„: _ , _ . .._:,.. . .,.... ,.. 7:,r: -2<"3";°- -' 4 411* i_.:..,4- _ - .-. p '';'3'..i'f'.1----;':'-'1.:::1::::'.1''':''-w '• -•:•-: 1:n3 �z OZm N-i ?� 7p rg RI 0 ' t. 'L'''''''''';',::::1'. ::::::::f1-4.74,' -, - � :t d ~ 1 t,,:?..,:...,je,_,;.. il.ii.iii.._ ...1 ` - k' W i _ • ZZ Z -i=mo Ii.1":, ('7. Z m n. • rn im n 4 D M r y �_a vn ." : 3.. _ r }y� y C'\Frolec:'2-Clam-PasslDw�-2013-Ot-011PIan Vlew.tlwp Pnnt Jan 1].2013 • l zn. ' - - 1 ' t.', '17. . Ad\17;.4.7';', ::.'.:.:...1.: ,:,,.r . :::;:..ii.:...::.::::',......:':.::,.'...S.:,:r... ',1'.:::....... ''::::::, ,.:'. :, ' , .: r- D A-,It'F K o- - D.p m •z O U I Z•-. r0 M _. ?,.m ZO - •_- �` m '�:- - - r N .•-< -r -m '—� M "-i r - - - - -•m o-0 =_i -H <.mr y - - z_ .,• - o n n O m m K .� O ti Z -a O -I m Z m -p ~O -I -i -n+- r")- S O r.r m D m > W� ��-- - - O O Z m x 0 m O v ZO .::,-:1- .. _ - m Z Z m Z:-0 - y0 V t�ll V N N . . 11" • '''..;1-.,H - - - -- r-- /.;944 ....--- ----- •-•:--.-. -. :-. - . .-- • ; ,_- 1liii , • 1Illlllii::!`ti " ij IIiiiIUiIIfl• _ , „ r • f` d .; ' - _ \ :j.: - m UI-A'W _N - Z c� - N ` q, MI m c - . mr N�Dfp 00� cZN -mom.n ,��N N�o gn" N - Z t • F n 0 m . ''.,./14 Q A T q'r • .. y gi sr,7 . �D 02z mom ^m m I''1 . m o O :,-G b' , <sN _• 'm' VI -I- LA m VI_ Z C m m A C_, O- O - - OO N "D Z o O W r N'0 -I.N.p 0 . O Z F A mN - _...---mm. 'm y Z' D m D 1=C ZZ --r, ,.Z __rri .o. "" - fir z1 '^,• c•• -< I m :5, g"ST3 6 --'‘ • •• :• • T.:-L" - ' '''If'--77-:'—*-1''''''''I'"::' '':-. ;._ :' '''''' oZ - -c. m- =_.z - N • C° Zo ZI -a? .n . r_0 2 .. _ N O o b➢. - -➢3 O t• m W z Z m', _ m _ Zl O -_I m 3 m — • ° -Oi ' OC p : - N -A C O O h~: r Z :O D - < -A y Z O +I n m p •C . o _. r . p - nom.,co .m -, -1 ' F ' Z- - j Fr,' 0 6--.- c-). 0 OVr M -r ,r-'- _ f2DDm D V D. 4*I OX�,o O ��p N m l`i TnZ Z m -i A • -• _ HN�"nj C:\Pro ecl1Z-Clam-Pass\D a-2013-01-01\Plan Vle.v.clwG PMtJan 11,2.^3 A 0 W- ,O 7.,_:. rmOryW yy N{x*CC- �++ADvO Zr T -x0T mon W a v4m !.‘.1S' _ O 00+4- .. Z m 3 v a �<E: mm W W W W W W W W W W W W m W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W m a OS+£- °-c \mmmmWmmmmm Wm°' wmm°imoE.IRWWmmmrommWWm-,0 W W W W AA ACA N NNOI �+1 W W�JJN AANAA W NN OVOmyo aN c!TTOA W NN {D+ opf E•gg N V po R3 W 3 W A(TNN Ol♦zZ N A W N Z OooaaA W 01DWw, -Jsowoo-0TNt0J W 61 Wawoao W-1 O _--.72 f0<O(D.�AITNA AlJ W A JAO W O W SINN W ANNLJA W OAfO O Zn-nm^o-nD m q.o __ r rm> N + �OZ� D°ooh •. z.zf1 m0-�DmAmD mmg'mmammam @g mRmmmmmmm @mwmgSmwmw^A2 mCm-V•—Af"' - �� pQ??NN NN NOI mNm WmWN NNmp�NNNNOaAIWAWA Nn,„-1 ..K.,,-,„ RE o W EE E ��Nm W—2,�F SL N+EEET-OO-mi=D .N-.Z D-C O S+Z— +1 N WA N N y o tT OoM+CAW WNK AN(T W N+W N W W W W V 0)0 00 my my0 0 AIJ�tJJIJ<00+1(n�O�lO V N<T fT�1 fOJ(T lau W 4)+T<D W O 47p D D m N (4- 0 ! iH!! OO+Z- - Z m Z X om-Z mm,,, vZG]� ' Z c j m 2 m f 0 m T•i m y m P4=16> moo D Z �. 'r—r ��_ �m to r I:i1- -- - o i I —u, .,m m = N 00+0 a - '� '� ii10. Z y O l' L-------° 4>isilig=" =Ism mw-r„„,...i■■'"'""'" Z ��= f•1 m III R..—In > OS+1 a � ��0 c N ,f/ Z m,D m o o moo+z AR» ,* . }�' ` I A • , __ �- ' OS+Z �� r r r m b ��pp Drr „1 rA T °ti � m zZm O m D _ y• q rx-r XI m Z rat Air ,j1'"'1,7. * V , ' s.0:9++:.i � -a zz 20 n i 0 < e it a '111, t: re, :,,,4, NI _ z u, ��#F s ' 00 p UOo p< pmp o�0 Sq P7 n 1#'- F4mm Er'ma ■ � i z� ,,,,,-,R, c.. r vm ono r4tr1r10 c- O�tSb - I. zoo +o °o 0 0 a m �fZ ; m x0\ci tS n 7,,.� - --17v--1,11111111111k- : . 7:''. .. — cc. - ‘°'-'\\ ,.,. ---___T: n :iiil?'.-. o N -S- -= -- wlr O �tW + � 3 ; 1 ,I . • o N' ■ i � zi ,..\ 11 0 „, o z y �:\� /j 711 ,----: !...- .—.0 It An 41 1 o \._, � DN & x -'s1 Sr ,• " 2,--.' t ,..0,1`-",-,: x o0 C m^\n ' �� i So N W ,. ,;, h." 0 3.Nv�D ,.. ci �6 o... . 0 „..,,,....r...,..N i . . 'n N N f L )"' '1F �-� o / o nJ t .. I c:wro ectl2-Clam-Pav\Owo-201101-O t\Cross Sections Ore0ge5U0ons.dw0 Pont Jan 19,2013 1 6 ' 2 A I WN Z aom m a VI m N o>n OZ-i . V1OO -1 mZ a to C O x z z NZ - C Z n • a <m m mt j-miz 0 o T m z m -1 0 c -< ) D m 0 o n O j co o •V r D z o y N p o m D Z7 fn D ° O o m x Z m co rt if C A Z-5 -1 m � O n c z - 0 TI Z < N O m N v O n Z z Z I- 2 O m O• 3 II`n A co w y w o w rn w V o f 1 O I Ul `/ • • r07 3 3 m m r 3 D r x x w ma c)L ^hCx a a I m Z �4 DD _=s o 0° z O m w W G o0 3 0.1 CO F -i-D Z Z m fn4[ap 4i? M>, o < n Z but zco o x n o� o zz Am 1 c ma 00 =ln p - O ovo D 000 113 00 Xo < < ri ovo��ry (n6 0o o ° < V to 0 0 o D Zw <z c m m W O fr�13 a I m N o T1 C-1> v 'O c. am -' I7 pD •v 01 x m m z n oz D 0 D. z Nm �1 a fm-1 O -i-1 to m x x om D m- zo z z 1n In WO O -O m z ()x m m O In m m o-0 as M Li N O� r O mm Z -o F F- 3- -1 m £innm f°x�e Z m jV to N 3-Uv a °bswo 3 Q 4)°° ", o l y 3 , ' C:\Prole012-Clam-Pass\DWG-2013-01-011Cross Sections Dredge SGtlons.tlwp Pdne Jan 17,2013 � � I 2 ■ ��/ I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) I 1 ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) A W N� p NIII.1•l•lIII pNlll ° IAI. vpm VI ° i i ° x i i m, C1ZD x i m 0 it -.. �. .: U 1 .. .. 6 A N N C 0 S N 1 S Z o O O Z Z - - CZD y N j u A rn - <mm m m n a j~Z 7 O I n 0 I Q m Z I y L I y z m O Y o ° o m Sn ° -I• co m i m m D m So - 50 o m 0 D z ..° ?o ( ...° E1 G7 = o m ° ° Z A 0 --- A - O O 2 A D . K m Tb4 A °- °- C CO D A Z " C Z V 0 m o °c o c° > -i 0 --I x x In n D Z r o o I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET.(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET.(NAVIN D I I I I 1 I I I - m m a I ti A C PN1llll IAII iNII,11ITIAII jN N - N A m Or o 3 O z i ° s c 3 0 A F £ x i F £m D u x 1 x u D o o t .. `. o .� .. ..j -. _ _Z I I I D-I O O 0 0 W N N D N N N w v O D D D 10 D O w I_ + Z I- ,�, I +O O O O D O °_ - E 50 50 n o o o ig F1_ I I O O I 1111 N- I oF 0 = r• namp ° z 2 x = p T m-1 D A C I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) 1 I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) m I I 1 N I I I N I ) I I - a D AN•I•I,T.i.i• l•I.A1 .1• wN•I.I•I•I• •I•I•I•I. pN O N A m m 0 0 3 ° a: z ° 3 i o c s V 1-- z F F F F c. m D 13 V A OM 7- x -' AN I I S i _F -Co -V . . .W o OK o o m C IV> D-Z Z _ - c 7 !mm I 2,f„_ O O Z D OZ D Z z - - In m v°i °n ID I C a I, a N r; m Z oos a A r O. r O. ~ r ° a VI IA m0 S C] OZ a0 1 AO I m D .0 I o Z I + m r m - i m v °° n °° °o a °o ° IV O - - 5 E - m - Cl z 0 m = Z y h 50 v - p v - ER v I �+)Z<n O O 4 C f x r b Z m ,,m-,,-,12.., .''''4 z 3 s r C:\Prolectl2-Clam-PassWwg-201191-011Cross Sections Dredge Pia Lions d,Print Jan 17.2013 16 2Ai , , ELEVATION FEET,(NATO) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NATO) , ELE�ATION FEE(,(NAVD I I m1 1 p I I I I W N•' ZO IN lll 4'.. li 11. INll .1.. ti., 1. lli 1. IN,I.11.1 1��,111, -i ° z®®® O a® ® f ° A®®® •F- PO "0 0M m N m V Oy DD I- _ �_ ''9 N N - aaa - a a a - a a a n z Co I 1 I ▪ _ _ _ g O - I Zn > f- Oi F m Y - z 4 o t- o A ▪' r. -` z I- 4 z n n z z s . _ z z N p O a S I S O• -n _ FA Li' > s O ° CO co -I D I VE 0 m Ti,d um 4m m0 0 0 f.f ° II o m ° 1 1 ° 1% ° 1z m A I ��1 I ' I IF m K A m fA A °" °- °- co O z A n _ c Z F f Z C G ° D A o = o = o = G) -I . En e > z •• 0 , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) I , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) - I I , N 1 1 1 1 • + 1 p1� 4 4, c C tr,?.T.T.7. °,II,I.T oN,.T,T.I.N. '.N,I.Ti 1",,, ,I , I . , ,J ,II,I,T, 1I I 4 £°- y ® ®®® ° ®®® _n N m m N,0 , , o ,. c U . a v . O x a a' I - a - a Z 1 . < m I O ° i - " - - o O Co - g - z N w > H ~ f Y N N Fiff ~ i 2 , m a°_ ~ i m \ O z _ c z j A s c N i s N I a I 4 D O N D O o D N n -,, - =s C _ .7-1 _ P1 z..`" . .°..2. 2 2, i i /44k , I , !/ ■ .- °- o- °-- '"''' ; 3: 20cn V ` ono m m A nr , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) _- I I I I .. I I I I -• I I I I C W O O 3 tr,I,T,T,I.l,l,lil.T. j N,°I .T,T,I.I.I•I..T, >N,I,1,1,1.1, 1 1,1, ,1 W\m D °- p®®® Z F °- p®®® f a ° a®®® V A ow 0 O - _ c 0 CND ° `�\\ ° < < u ° 0 0 ' Crri jtim - as a - 0 a\ - Yi. - •, O ° = O D ZZ Z N 0 10 N- y N y U ~ m m N N m Cl N " { AO N N m0 - D T - I V •r _ 1 I =O OZ S I S I ±w Z I-InD o - e oc,PI a s °-I m a s ° � a ° N p1 I +o Z y w ° u m O u m ^ - u b EE as as • 1 iI� ■ v I_ �I, �� I_ �I. Z x V ° i \ ° 1��` o- 1/�\ =-'.-'-' 1.20 N - \ O ,\ ° '\ atol-° 7 0 0- 3A°°y � _ ; : °O NO N N m N £ £ O O ° o' ° o c 3 s C.IProlectlZ-Clam-PassaNg-201301-011Cross Sections Oredoe Stations.dwy PMC Jan 1],2013 ■-/w/j / I 1 ELEVATION FEET,(NATO) I i ELEVATION FEET,(N E2N A(NAVD'/ I N O 1 I I N 1 I I I I • • N• Z INilil l 1. IA.I, IN 1111, 1111, I,III. 1111 O °m m £ £ £ F T.U N m ° ®® ° p®®® ° A®®® A® I - ODD wx - _ _ u_ E.'p N m n ID n - - a a 0, a - a a C O y ==N i _ _ _ _ _ - Z o 0 Z D n N_ N ~ ; o n O- ~ o A <,+ 1 o iZ t N O it + O 1 f n O I a A So +O m 01 N I4- p N ti > o O . 0. C 2 C _ C _ O m —I > W. PI N u 1 u m ( 0 o V v v 1 1 z � �.l l D O "g- i or __ - Z , ,O m A \0 A D m I. P, 0_ O- O- m D - C y '8' IA Z < p o' 0 0 D -1 x x x G' 0 m > 0 c .I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) .II I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NATO) . > - I I I I -. 1 mI I I -- I II I I .� IN I I I I.I. il. lil. 1N.1.1 1 ,1, ,II I,I1, IN I,1 1 1. ,1, 1 1, 3 Om ° A®®® 4 4 °- E DIK ° A®®® F F w uD v .. u 3._7 L. n N 0 V v C 0 n n n m ° n n n D a n n A a a a - a a a a a W Z O - ° _ _ - °_ _ ~ =1 - °- _ _ CZ Ilk > I £ > ° f N > o O 'i 1 - 1 + 3 1 I y 1 F z + i t y N y p p ° , C 1- C . i + V v oo I-O „ '\\I I- I rn `i I- I o lrn ' i !II rp= e�. � - z p 0- p a� 0 = hmp x zx m-I A •• m IOI-- • O O c- ---/c -> I I ELEVATION FEET.(NAVD) I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) Co-Ft D _ I° I I I I I I I - I I I 1 \.ZI AN NN O A 0 N A C, W NN I.I.I.I.1, .I,1,1. I N•1, .1,1,1,1,11.1 1 , 00 o A®® V o- A®® F°f ° A®® f i W O NK 00 t n D D m z Z s v EI API 'v ^ - m >' - r+ v -O -In O < n O i n v .. O n n . ., z zz a as as C z 1 m Ao ° o p o ° ° LA l m 0 n D= OZ LJI A 73 / - - - 9 - 9 - F Ze N H / j�Ao I I o m� o .k o -;; ry,A c s _ O t! - C h 4 3oO C 1. N Z a° ££ O mN N O 1-' N x O 3 i C:IP4O500Z-Clam-Pass\Dwq-2013-01-O1ICross Sections Dredge SDIions.tlxp Print Jan 17,2013 1 6 I 2 A /(- W N Z --1 i I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) 1 1 ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) z v m I I 1 1 T Os N 1 1 1 1 -r !n I (^m T ,i.L i ,T, w�' i 1 ,T, .° T, r;�' i T i i i T 0y< o s °. c a: o z ;; D yn0 z®® { n®® F A®® Z F y Z I A to . . 7 a .. o . o . o .O - ' a s - Z Z 1 N Z Z D o 0 • 7. <T mom N In N j m n l n i .y Z 1 I o n � a n _ Y _ %z m A ` a p _ w O y O ; p o 0 o- m N �/ O o- o u, n ‘. a O O ' /m II D Z T II -ki o m r Ei .DV _, o' E o' v y o- m .... € A K a § a" o m I. A C C m 5 N x x A D C Z N O Z < O O O m D A G1 -I m (1 D Z r o 0 • D � 1 -1 A C o K 3 0 1 1 ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I 1 ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) m - - I I I 1 -. -• I I I I - 1 1 1 1 D _ N N.I.T,T,I.T,I.I,I,T. N N.I,T,T,l,T. .1,l,T• N N, ,T•T, ,T,OL ,Tf.1•T.O D N o m®® F f o y®® i Z o y®® 4 f m j Z I o W 8- as as o= as W I 0 (., > 1 2 > 1 r > I y m o > _ > - F i >IIP m - II I II s� IF TT e r5 k 1N ; s ZX; o •- o- € mxv' o a 0 c z `o vD o m y A m..o ro o O O O 3 1 I m\m D I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) V A oN I I I 1 - I 1 I 1 I I I I \ AN NN,T,T.T.I,T,I,T,I,T, NN•I.1.1.1,1.1.1•I.I, NN.I,T,T,I•T,I, T.I,T, o> o s s s i O o V D - 1 B® a rI e® a' y 8® D Z -1 m y N, .. an v -ID �3 a o '` o n o ■ n D r 2 o - 7 - - y'i z Vm< I v 1v - - Wo O o vm v zs m Doz 1 9 O a n Z..- y m m o N rs z ° _ 5,5 -0 ; Oo A +i a o \ N mn O o o o n o- y a - H O- H Z z m II N�� o- I o II O 3�:°Pn do - - eF N z y� N O � ypz 't!=, av0 - Y: ��FAO 0 0 3000A y 4 5.. ANN 'i ti CE L9 N E E Q ..,' NO 3 0 o a i C:Wroiett\Z-Clam-PassZm-2013.01-011 Cross Sections Dredge SlauonsAwq Print Jan 17.2013 1 6 1 2 A 14; w N Z - O v o m ti-o I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) j I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) mNro V l I N I I I I I N I I I N I N -- I I I I A en Oil o n< ,i.T,i,4, ,i,i.4,i, N ,1, 1 ,1,4,1, , 1 .4,i, .i,. ,. ,.i,i,1, 1 , 1 , oz p ._ I p .: ; p Z --t,Z n n I O -1 O= 0 -s K 0 < < O t D zZ* - as - as - as m rn N-Z i. I n E 7 n CZD - - - A CC - - i mmm _ o- _ o- i $ 3£ o- D <m- 9 .oil cc N 111 y 1- -. a 1 -r 11 n 1 2 n < Z m I D m w m v. A - a - A K o m � 3p a ; p_ r Or n ° I� o m o o. LI - c7,r' - 2 - Ii.re:10 r.n m p r II PE L Z m D L II - z ,,,P, ,r, O m o p T p FA ."O m C D _ _ :S C Z y Z < 0 0 0 o m £1 I y Cl n-1 -1 m O C Z D NZ r 7 O K D C T --I -1 A C = 0 K to K p ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) i N o m m A N 0 N A I II 11 - I I I I Do. m m NN.Y,1, 1 ,4.I,I.r1,4,1, NN,l,l,1,4,L,Y,7,4,1, Z p Z 3 A o a '^S a s - a s N o 31 0 0 Cl _ O , y p ° O _ E2g Cc 0 0 o n \ a O 1,. : a y o / v •� II / I 4 O p - o I 1 p gD iR =s f�; mx a o p z _m _ ZT 1.o p_ o z °o mm. woo OJ 1-v I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) I I ELEVATION FEET.(NAVD) C > I m II I -. I I I 1 1 I N J."D A VI I N N N O N A a INC 1.1..e•.1 1,4,1, INC A O N - m m W O 0K 4 o O F F p O 4 f O C InD n r Z Z =m K <C `1m V OID o r . O ._ . Z D OZ 7 D Z < nm I 0 1 O I C0 C p 0 m oo VI po 0 Zl _ - O VI 1n mo In .n 2 O OZ D I a I P,'. I mr mo m ° m v a a y ao CO 0 a A a Z _ 0 - 23?, f - �y v v ..£I V O O N L7,:.w-` n ..I-z Qry^ O �3 N N O N p A C = o N 0 = 0 3 . . C:1Prolect1Z- 2013-Pass1OW0-2019-01-011Cross Sections OredOe Slations.2,. Print Jan 17.2015 1 (.) 1 2 A (4' w iv f , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE]) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NANO) -00m m - I I I I P ,8 - I I I N IN _ I I I I A .'I1N m N N"�, 1 , I , 1 ,1 1,1,1, 1 ,1. ,1.1.1, 1 .I,1, 1 ,1,1. ,I 1,I,I, I ,I,1, 1 .1. m a: o a: o a: s °na ° E®® " y®E s _ x i za i vZimo , -li:-I N Z 0o= °- s °- a °- D Z Z 0 _ = KmA z I `I< Z I 1.... I Ia O a v _ -, a _ e P. < z m - \ y O O - g O O O o- m m D H y ° O IN *I C - C - C - D O O 0 r O j O - / r - m o m v o r z o '� O o °o T m p _. A A A °a3 O m O m ° ::i m D N A Z O o 0 c -, Z < o m O Z rt 0 y r I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVD) , , ELEVATION FEET,(NANO) N Z - I 1 I I -• 1. I 1 N 8 I I I. I O O 3 D N"�,I,I,I 1 1 1,1.1, NN,I, ,I ,11,1,1, HN,I.T,11 1, , 1 ,1 . 1 , 0 c ° a: L O a: z O L i•o n O - m c w - - as - as n a A _ W g I- - I-I N r " i ° °771 g- ' 1-! 0 0 0 I f f if=D�g o o °o, , I ELEVATION rFEET,(NAND) _ Imo ° A®®®® c � z 4 c0 100• O I I ELEVATION FEET,(NAND) I , ELEVATION FEET,(NAVE) - .1 a a a �'o 1' I I I I I I I I' (N O 0 3 aN,I, ,T,I,I ,I,I,T pN,°,1,T,1,1,1 I,I a_ — 14 r-0 ° p®®®® °£ ° °®®®® �,t o 0 10 tg m OD ..< --4 A�N -°i '.1 z � N dI!1 a a a Ir m: 1 I - Nz w F I w- - `, - 'g I o Z Z � . < m : : y i c r c„ xpo 0 m as �Z s / RP v o , °°I III �i ; -I_ �' °_ ° °_ I �Fzx�� ' i (f)i s° AA '.2 °- °_ 8 ,,,,o. 0 °N U ?-9 F 4 - s 1 - C tn En O p O S I C2Prolen12-Clam-Pass107,2013-01-0,Cross Section R Monumental],Print Jan 1],201] 16 I ELEV., FT. NAVD I ° WNW Z I I I I O I rn m O m N Orr, .. D,,0 O O p O N O Z l n - O D° Z D-i D Z Z nmL, 0 x m o N n 0 m 0 m 2 W 2 y O N OO j Zm D z,r D z Z N D o'- A A Ati A ,DA„n Ao - A y> I p - m x_ 1 Zm< O mx _` mm mN Co m- zw Z 0 3 ro O m D m m-�z O z Z -r Imp Z O'1 C 00 -I C 3 m y 3 Z Z m n oo ro < N m m z N Z Z -I 2 O rn° ti O— —< m O `G m 0 0.{ M m Z Z O D v v■ -I Z O 2 Z m=0 Z m O z m D=rAmi I I ELEV., FT. NAVD I 1 ELEV., FT. NAVD m D P - co o I I I I I o ( o A m R. _ (l A_ D 0— z D C O G Z Z N O ro O D y O— -Ni m- -1 y 0 Z D N 5 C m m N Z x D3 Z to *O m �O pD'n D Zm m mF m amp A A r A D A D W 3 O _ - Z _ Z A 1 y Omm mm m N O m= CD D m- tr,NC 3 AN m mN co-I D O m 3 ZIA CO N A Z n-I O m y • < C Z Z 3 !'tm C 0 D m W m 0 0 3 z o^-1 -1N rZ ZN -< W z O O— -< M O— • W m v N O_ W - J I 1 ELEV., FT. NAVD I 1 ELEV., FT. NAVD 1 v W p 3.' A V a I/! N W cn • -i . `2 m m O— o m m z°— D z I r^ G m O a VEGETATION LINE m < m N mA °- EP DMZ D 7 F7 z C A p _ A A A g.a �� 0 _ o I p m - VEGETATION LINE = I 4,-O z 02 Om W A m /,••• m••O y /N m W Z Z N O 0— I a W m o '/ 1 A W p-• 3 r.0m G G O m Z O v 2OQ D D / u m AD W v O o o * Z Z N ._. Z D D W O N3 z G O v 0 m c ND 0 D 1-Z mz O-r •Ix zn I 1 ELEV., FT. NAVD I 1 ELEV., FT. NAVD < O Nr^ o .. .� ° o � 0 m mA n,j p i Vl n _z O— m 0— mD O D r im � z D z -i r O A N A P _ O < N O r^ v nl So m D VEGETATION LINE , I m EXISTING STRUCTURE A z , , A V N o II I o �mzW FSxDV p O ..� O •• '1' fz..�ro z O w V c z Q o N 3.-.�n� 3 0 .• o A C 0 Ul z z \ ,• W J Z -, h Nv�A '�1 �vb W 0 O ~O— -I / m Z -i Q— -1 C WAAn / m0 Z D < r.0 O A Ol 3AOOC / v DG p O v S• _ f ONN ;, m N N Z m r- o o O 3y *„ I f C:\Purled m .Cla -Pass\Dwq-2013-01-01\Cross Settlers Dredqe Stations.dwg Pdnt Jan 17,2013 1b I 2 A I hihik kA6hhhiwth QQd.mm®reaer'o6aea.aee....Nme®m Eeeo.e tlA 7S g r. • iii €iiii ii i lliii iiii ii€i iiiiiH iiiiiiiiiiH itnii6t iiiii i3 4 04e to .sla naa « ssx5sastis $444 s assitsm ttem nn2 d 1+ n...l..6616 r O..,...L.:.H} ,...L. bHb00u,,:� ,wk,t.04. $....................................................q w 411 11a, ! b!NW!!!N!!!!!!!!p WIa:II + MEsOIN I 1 yyyy,�t.fy 1 1 CNNNNN N fe ie fpe CCii LA N CC Or in......N N O W W W W W W in UN mmrn mm in mummm uchm W.m.. _ SIC Nummoia1 01 N }}N N NAM}}N Utn}}W N NNNNNNN NNNN W U ammoemi Cd ig POPPPPP POPP71Pio PPAPMPOPPpNNI.P.P1f.Pl n is ipc^F^-doPPPPPPth 000000W oomm Wdn O00f bO+O+++omomoo0+WN00000ea00000000 M b M A Sg W.14 MrpYgatig 10 V T W!N M 111 C612 bbLbHLb:.:.�tN tr bbi 6=U li C r bb A W tWww W NNN�bNpNNN eNs eNe eNSN W egiP b1 =4 M ESffib�1+S obai0Cd� Ili!!! ppg Z HHHHHHbtn=+H HHHHIe 7�{ .'i' y ;Qj Om � y/y e0r1 e�y [11 1p /y y�y y y L1 ry.!J�.r y W �nyyyyyy/ a O n YYNbitma g NV£$4�N (JNfIIVNLIN"}t1J'b11L°Sft L"1,1fditastJNN[n01 + 0 Q1'CGI2 ±Yl�{h j 09^WO in '.d v iArLM.P.-i l*N-1 Y Cd4 Cii iAP 4 1PAN r�j N+.143 pe+.1 ... go oo 1+N+Aomm10 V 01 NN++NN N}N}01400 V V 01++ S4g0 m 111 � o x 1 0 0000-“..4..+00-,00 i =C fil Ob+bk.L.J.bHHi>,a:+:1b1 I° 11 3. d 12.4 • O i.i.l. lbbl+bbi01b1b�blb 3 .i J �0 �' 3i.r r _N V bgQ V ++ N N+V.. p f.r 41 W W W N N NNNNNN NNNN W �yC y1 p1�.f PPyf1 WPp 9^e P1WPp��..IIW{ F"-1W-.a�tJJ=p.1gpp]e44ep 1e P'v.1v-1p r H b H1001b O01 M N 001 n::N yt/1001+►Net 10 di 0 L+11th H/JO L ilete.l g bi W WJ.1V n dt W}++a V iW++NiOL1 b1L1W}W W W}}NiC W WCd4. ii 0 ro��fi Idl 01 005knJinp11rM-&CiER-COC CC-*€�-'aini .�i.0....wen N 100101N}O 01N Y01Np+ON+O01N 01}b Np+p O+}ab 44 CUTCSUBTOTAL +CUT65U 610TAL. CUT A SUBTOTAL ?O S 8.448E —nri B.1_.Im; 6.730 m.zx i N..O �I y� gg=P,p Ng een MN e' V, 9 z III §Il 11111i 1 m�m� tePb amm m mml , o°O-3 SpwWWs SWStau88 m .F1 m�A ZN rr ppr�1�rl+ p� y rn_ C7O br tni.s'pihcipass w .ozK\ ,tn DAp 13 3-6.13,-.1.,J Cm_,Or, yy@@�� !11 on <<00 C.Jd=a<P0000 b z > Az 008000ppp0""°°0 7 g Om U N IN x oZ mo N M M mai m I Aqr e,}�s} 1 W u}W 0.11�-1 xn r c1t SN m n .1-pSn , }_N (N� m� �1`©O 1 �'$i7r-,il 1 IRa 1 1 9 10 }.y.l A . �7 1ri D— !PH zit'. i 1 -�rco !PH I W 1. 1 W N z b61� N6n rn m P . 4pA OQ ,oNo , rrW . r+N N 1;. „. 1 c mm .00a o � r gN °2 i/", o a oo r—O 3 161 2A 'f Add On Item 11H January 22,2013 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve the expedited solicitation process for the construction dredging of Clam Pass and direct the County Manager to issue work order(s) under current Board approved contract(s) to the firm(s) who submit the lowest responsive price for the Clam Pass project and approve necessary budget amendments. OBJECTIVE: To provide for an expedited bidding process to obtain the construction work order(s) to proceed with expedited dredging and clearing of Clam Pass and approve necessary budget amendments. CONSIDERATIONS: On December 11, 2012, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) clarified and reaffirmed that the Pelican Bay Services Division has the responsibility for advising the County on dredging and maintaining Clam Pass and for managing such activities for the County. On January 8, 2013 (Item 10R) the Board of County Commissioners declared that the recent closure of Clam Pass constituted a valid public emergency requiring dredging of the Pass as soon as practicable. Services related to the permitting, surveying, engineering and construction phase engineering services were authorized and include: Task Firm Cost Project Surveying Agnoli, Barber and Brundage (ABB) $20,900 • Original Amount: 18,400 • Change Order#1 Pending: 2,500 Permits and Management Turrell, Hall and Associates 28,000 Plan Design, Plans and Humiston and Moore 23,650 Specification Development Construction Services Humiston and Moore 52,710 Construction drawings were delivered to the County Manager's Office on Friday, January 18, 2013, by Humiston and Moore. Approximately 20,000 cubic yards of sand will be removed from Clam Pass and used for inlet restoration and beach renourishment; services are to be performed with mechanical equipment. The Pelican Bay Advisory Board is scheduled to review the plans and make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners following a special meeting on Monday, January 21, 2013. Purchasing staff have identified options to obtain construction prices for the project and have been in contact with a number of firms on two Board approved contracts, including: • The five (5) firms on contract 08-5011 Underground Utility Contract are licensed to perform this type of work and may submit a"total unit-price" for the project; and • The three (3) firms on contract 11-5673 Disaster Debris Removal & Disposal Services have indicated that they are capable of coordinating and directing the activity through subcontractors and may submit a"cost-plus"price proposal for the project. 161 2. A ) Add On Item 11H January 22,2013 Staff recommends that these contracted firms be invited to attend a project "pre-bid meeting" as soon as practicable; the meeting will be coordinated by the Purchasing Department in conjunction with Humiston and Moore. Once prices are received (5 – 7 days after the "pre-bid" meeting), Purchasing staff and Humiston and Moore would review, recommend and request approval from the County Manager to approve the issuance of work order(s) under the Board approved contract terms and conditions. FISCAL IMPACT: At its January 8, 2013 meeting the Board authorized funding for design, permitting and construction phase services. The budget for those services is included in TDC Beach Renourishment/Pass Maintenance Fund (195) under project 88032. The final cost of the construction phase will be known when the construction work order(s) are approved by the County Manager. A budget amendment appropriating reserve funds from TDC Beach Renourishment/Pass Maintenance Fund (195) for the construction phase of the Clam Pass dredging project will be necessary. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office, is legally sufficient for Board action and only requires a majority vote for approval—SRT. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is Growth Management impact associated with this item. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approves the expedited solicitation process for the construction dredging of Clam Pass and directs the County Manager to issue contract work order(s) to the firm(s) who submits the lowest responsive price(s) for the Clam Pass project and approve necessary budget amendments. Prepared by: Neil Dorrill, PBSD Administrator Reviewed by: Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager riot -Ci& Grn/4.s il� 113 161 2 AST/ a � 're el-i January 21, 2013 PA-6C a To: PBSD Board Members From: Sierra Club Calusa Group Subject: Draft Construction/Excavation Plans proposed for Clam Pass The Sierra Club Calusa Group Board (Calusa Group) continues to support the management of Clam Pass in concert with holistic management of the Clam Pass- Clam Bay Natural Resources Protection Area, for the restoration, preservation, and protection of its natural conditions and characteristics to the greatest extent possible. Such management requires prudent caution when addressing excavation of stream bed or tidal channels, as these areas are contiguous with and support wetlands habitats and wildlife that utilize both the aquatic area and its wetlands. The Calusa Group appreciates that the engineering firm put effort into the draft construction/excavation plans and these plans should be discussed fully as a potential alternative for long term management. Calusa Group will not object to the draft for entrance cuts 0+00 to 3+64.5 from the Mean High Water Line to the submerged bottom - which is roughly 202 sq. ft in those cross sections, but do object to the new element of the designed channel to now include extension into the Gulf of 400 ft west of station 0+00 We do suggest that the excess unconsolidated sand which has moved ashore from the ebb shoal should be moved out of the path of the area to be excavated in advance of such excavation and should not be included in the dredge cut design. Further, the 1/2 foot over dredge is a new element that should be removed as there is no ecological justification to add another half foot to allowed dredged depth Calusa Group objects to the new element of this draft for a dredged channel to excavate Clam Pass middle area from shoreline to shoreline which eliminates tidal flat wetlands and increases the loss of benthic habitat. Calusa Group objects to the new element of enlarged widths in Segment C. 161 2 A Recommendations from Sierra Calusa Group on the Draft Plans of 1/17/13 1) Eliminate the Westward expansion of the design which extends 400 ft into the Gulf from station 0+00. 2) Eliminate the 1/2 foot over dredge from all stations. 3) Do not exceed the widths in Segment B that were authorized in the prior ten year permits. Rather than enlarging widths in this area, Calusa Group recommends that these widths be reduced wherever possible. 4) Do not exceed the widths in Segment C that were authorized in the prior ten year permits. Rather than enlarging widths in this area, Calusa Group recommends that these widths be reduced wherever possible. 5) For the immediate need to reopen Clam Pass - whether by mechanical excavation or barge operated dredging - Calusa Group recommends that only Segments A and the part of Segment B which are choked by sand would be excavated at this time and overall maintenance dredging limits require further discussion from affected stakeholders and user groups before proceeding with plans for those segments. Please consider these recommendations in good faith for the health and sustainability of the Clam Pass - Clam Bay NRPA. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in your discussions. Marcia Cravens Sierra Club Co-Conseervation Chair Florida Master Naturalist for Coastal Systems 161 2 ., i (fr Segment B Station 4+10: H&M Plan is 140 ft, PBSJ Plan is 127 ft. Dredged 130 ft in 2007. Station 5+10: H&M Plan is 135 ft, PBSJ Plan is 83 ft. Dredged 80 ft in 2007. Station 5+60: H&M Plan is 110 ft, PBSJ Plan is 54 ft. Dredged 50 ft in 2007. Station 6+10: H&M Plan is 80 ft, PBSJ Plan is 48 ft. Dredged 25 ft in 2007. Station 6+60: H&M Plan is 60 ft, PBSJ Plan is 25 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Segment C Station 7+10: H&M Plan is 45 ft, PBSJ Plan is 30 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 7+50: H&M Plan is 35 ft, PBSJ plan is 20 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 8+00: H&M Plan is 80 ft. PBSJ Plan is 47 ft. Dredged 30 ft in 2007. Station 8+50: H&M Plan is 125 ft. PBSJ Plan is 56 ft. Dredged 60 ft in 2007. Station 9+00: H&M Plan is 145 ft. PBSJ Plan is 60 ft. Dredged 70 ft in 2007. Station 9+50: H&M Plan is 162 ft. PBSJ Plan is 124 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. Station 9+00: H&M Plan is 145 ft. PBSJ Plan is 60 ft. Dredged 70 ft in 2007. Station 10+00: H&M Plan is 167 ft. equals PBSJ Plan. Dredged 140 ft in 2007. Station 10+19: H&M Plan is 198 ft. equals PBSD Plan. Dredged 145 ft in 2007. Station 10+50: H&M Plan is 150 ft. PBSJ Plan is 117 ft. Dredged 120 ft in 2007. Station 12+00: H&M Plan is 235 ft. PBSJ Plan is 232 ft. Dredged 160 ft in 2007. Station 12+50: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 255 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 15+00: H&M Plan is 225 ft. PBSJ Plan is 191 ft. Dredged 220 ft in 2007. Station 15+50: H&M Plan is 260 ft. PBSJ Plan is 122 ft. Dredged 190 ft in 2007. Station 16+00: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 104 ft. Dredged 104 ft in 2007. Station 16+50: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 111 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. Station 17+00: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 95 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. 161 214 B Station 4+10: H&M Plan is 140 ft, PBSJ Plan is 127 ft. Dredged 130 ft in 2007. Station 5+10: H&M Plan is 135 ft, PBSJ Plan is 83 ft. Dredged 80 ft in 2007. Station 5+60: H&M Plan is 110 ft, PBSJ Plan is 54 ft. Dredged 50 ft in 2007. Station 6+10: H&M Plan is 80 ft, PBSJ Plan is 48 ft. Dredged 25 ft in 2007. Station 6+60: H&M Plan is 60 ft, PBSJ Plan is 25 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Segment C Station 7+10: H&M Plan is 45 ft, PBSJ Plan is 30 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 7+50: H&M Plan is 35 ft, PBSJ plan is 20 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 8+00: H&M Plan is 80 ft. PBSJ Plan is 47 ft. Dredged 30 ft in 2007. Station 8+50: H&M Plan is 125 ft. PBSJ Plan is 56 ft. Dredged 60 ft in 2007. Station 9+00: H&M Plan is 145 ft. PBSJ Plan is 60 ft. Dredged 70 ft in 2007. Station 9+50: H&M Plan is 162 ft. PBSJ Plan is 124 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. Station 9+00: H&M Plan is 145 ft. PBSJ Plan is 60 ft. Dredged 70 ft in 2007. Station 10+00: H&M Plan is 167 ft. equals PBSJ Plan. Dredged 140 ft in 2007. Station 10+19: H&M Plan is 198 ft. equals PBSD Plan. Dredged 145 ft in 2007. Station 10+50: H&M Plan is 150 ft. PBSJ Plan is 117 ft. Dredged 120 ft in 2007. Station 12+00: H&M Plan is 235 ft. PBSJ Plan is 232 ft. Dredged 160 ft in • a/- The following are questions and comments arising fronikiVadalysiscif#A&M Draft Construction Plans for Clam Pass Maintenance Dredging, submitted to PBSD for review on Friday, January 18, 2013. Mr. Humiston should clarify the issues discussed below. 1 . On pages 2 & 3: What is the unlabeled segment to the left of Segment A? When and why would this segment be utilized? 2. What does "Over Depth Allowance" mean? It cannot mean a "margin of error of 0.5 ft deep" because according to the "Dredge Station Control and Volumetric Information" Table on the last page, the estimated volume of approximately 21,000 cubic yard of sand can only be obtained by including the "Over Depth Allowance". Consequently, the actual dredge depth for Segment A is (— 6.3 ft. NAVD88 or - 5.0 ft. NGVD). For segment B, the actual dredge depth is (- 5.8 ft. NAVD88 or - 4.5 ft. NGVD). For Segment C, the actual dredge depth is (- 5.3 ft. NAVD88 or — 4.0 ft. NGVD). These are the same depths as in the prior authorized 1998 Dredging Permit, and the Coastal Zone Management (CZM) PBSJ permit application, with the exception of the depth in Segment A which is 0.5 ft less in the Draft H&M Construction Plans. 3. The proposed dredge width in Segment A is 45 ft (15 ft wider than the authorized 1998 dredge permit), as agreed upon by Ken Humiston & MAG President Ted Raia, in the presence of Commissioner Hiller. However, the dredge widths of a number of stations in Segments B & C (listed below) have been enlarged; this was not discussed or agreed to. They are even wider than the illicit 2007 (80 ft. wide) dredge design, as well as the CZM PBSJ permit application. What is the purpose of enlarging these stations? Kathy Worley, Senior Scientist at the Conservancy has consistently objected to dredging too close to the mangrove roots as this practice will damage the mangroves during and after excavation. Furthermore, this practice will unnecessarily reduce benthic habitats needed by aquatic fauna and flora to survive and flourish in Clam Bay. The dredge widths of the following stations have been enlarged from the CZM PBSJ permit application, and the prior authorized 1998 Dredge Permit. Segment B Station 4+10: H&M Plan is 140 ft, PBSJ Plan is 127 ft. Dredged 130 ft in 2007. Station 5+10: H&M Plan is 135 ft, PBSJ Plan is 83 ft. Dredged 80 ft in 2007. Station 5+60: H&M Plan is 110 ft, PBSJ Plan is 54 ft. Dredged 50 ft in 2007. Station 6+10: H&M Plan is 80 ft, PBSJ Plan is 48 ft. Dredged 25 ft in 2007. Station 6+60: H&M Plan is 60 ft, PBSJ Plan is 25 ft. Not dredged in 2007. 161 2Aiq Segment C Station 7+10: H&M Plan is 45 ft, PBSJ Plan is 30 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 7+50: H&M Plan is 35 ft, PBSJ plan is 20 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 8+00: H&M Plan is 80 ft. PBSJ Plan is 47 ft. Dredged 30 ft in 2007. Station 8+50: H&M Plan is 125 ft. PBSJ Plan is 56 ft. Dredged 60 ft in 2007. Station 9+00: H&M Plan is 145 ft. PBSJ Plan is 60 ft. Dredged 70 ft in 2007. Station 9+50: H&M Plan is 162 ft. PBSJ Plan is 124 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. Station 9+00: H&M Plan is 145 ft. PBSJ Plan is 60 ft. Dredged 70 ft in 2007. Station 10+00: H&M Plan is 167 ft. equals PBSJ Plan. Dredged 140 ft in 2007. Station 10+19: H&M Plan is 198 ft. equals PBSD Plan. Dredged 145 ft in 2007. Station 10+50: H&M Plan is 150 ft. PBSJ Plan is 117 ft. Dredged 120 ft in 2007. Station 12+00: H&M Plan is 235 ft. PBSJ Plan is 232 ft. Dredged 160 ft in 2007. Station 12+50: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 255 ft. Not dredged in 2007. Station 15+00: H&M Plan is 225 ft. PBSJ Plan is 191 ft. Dredged 220 ft in 2007. Station 15+50: H&M Plan is 260 ft. PBSJ Plan is 122 ft. Dredged 190 ft in 2007. Station 16+00: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 104 ft. Dredged 104 ft in 2007. Station 16+50: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 111 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. Station 17+00: Not in H&M Plan. PBSJ Plan is 95 ft. Dredged 110 ft in 2007. Summary Conclusions It appears that the Draft H&M Plan, as stated in the Executive Summary of the Add On Item 11H for the 1/22/13 BCC Meeting, is designed to meet the objective of obtaining approximately 20,000 cubic yards of sand for inlet restoration and beach renourishment. According to the "Fill Template Information" Table on the last page of the Draft Plans, 5280 cu. yd. of sand can be placed.on locations R- 40, and R- 40+725 north of the Pass; 24,000 cu. yd. of sand can be placed on locations R- 42 and R- 44 south of the Pass. This plan talks a lot about sand volumes and renourishment, but nothing about dredging to maintain health of the eco-system. If this draft plan is to be used; clear statements must be included in the PBSD dredge permit application that this design will only be used to address the critical condition presently existed in Clam Pass, and not be used for future maintenance dredging. This H&M Plan has expanded the scope of the prior authorized 1998 dredge permit instead of reducing it. It is uncertain that the regulatory agencies would approve this plan quickly. The Nation-wide Permit 27 states that applications should not differ from a prior permit (the 1998 permit) used as a basis. This plan does deviate significantly, and environmental and conservation groups may object to it. 44'In4 Pair_ 3v-c NOTE: 161 2Aft The recent survey conducted by Agnoli, Barber, & Brundage from January 3 to 11 , 2013, shows that in Segments B & C, the channel depths and widths remain quite constant at approximately — 4 ft NGVD, and 25 to 40 ft wide, indicating the Pass is at its equilibrium condition. Segment A is completely filled in with an addition of 2 ft of sand. Undoubtedly, Segment A does need to be dredged to allow for tidal flushing for the health of Clam Bay, as well as for fish to enter and exit the estuary, but let's not over-dredge Segments B & C for the purpose of accumulating or mining sand. As stated in Humiston & Moore Bathymetric Monitoring Report # 9, p. 11, November 2008; "It should be understood that Segment C is dredged to a much larger channel flow cross section than the entrance channel, so that a substantial amount of sand can accumulate in Segment C before it begins to adversely affect inlet hydraulics. This area is designed to act as a deposition basin for sand carried into the inlet and becomes a source of sand for beach renourishment when inlet dredging becomes necessary." Accumulating sand and dredging for renourishment of adjacent beaches should no longer be a consideration of Clam Pass maintenance dredging. Linda Roth Montenero 254-8889 0 16I Ra R � 2A15 JAN 1 b Z013 November 14, 2012 BY: MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY AUTHORITY Naples, Florida, November 14, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Public Safety Authority in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 10:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Professional Development Center located at 615 3rd Avenue South, Nap es, Florida Fiala Hiller with the following members present: Henning J Coyle v _V eaten 1 — Dr. Robert B. Tober, Collier County Medical Director Dr. Jeffrey A. Panozzo, Medical Director- COPCN Holder Dr. John Zelahy, Active ER Physician Dr. Todd Bethel, Active ER Physician (Excused) Chief James S. Bloom, Collier County Sheriffs Office Captain Robert Montagano, Naples Police Department Chief Michael D. Murphy, Collier County Fire Chiefs Association Chief Walter Kopka, Collier County EMS Chief Mr. Jose Santana, EMT, Outside Collier County EMS Mr. David Mennini, EMT, Collier County EMS Mr. Justin Gibson, Paramedic, Outside Collier County EMS Mr. Bobby Allen, Paramedic. Collier County EMS (Excused) Mr. Phillip C. Dutcher, Hospital Administrator Mr. Robert T. Lupton, Hospital Administrator Mr. Reg Buxton, Citizen Representative Mr. Edward Morton, Citizen Representative Ms. Janet Vasey, Citizen Representative ALSO PRESENT: Dan Bowman, Division Chief, EMS Dan Summers, Director, Bureau of Emergency Services Misc,Correa: Wayne Watson, Division Chief, EMS Maria Franco, Administrative Assistant, EMS date: Tabatha Butcher, EMS Battalion Chief 1 161 2As November 14,2012 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mr. Kopka called the meeting to order at 10:00 AM. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. The members of the Authority introduced themselves. 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES—Address after 3. a. 3. NEW BUSINESS a. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman Mr.Murphy moved to nominate Mr. Bloom to serve as Chairman. Second by Mr. Kopka. Motion carried unanimously, Mr.Kopka moved to nominate Ms. Vasey to serve as Vice-Chairman. Second by Mr.Dutcher. Motion carried unanitnously, 15-0. 2. AGENDA AND MINUTES a. Approval of Today's Agenda Add: 3. g. Subcommittees Mr.Dutcher moved to approve the Agenda as amended. Second by Mr.Buxton. Motion carried unanimously, 15-0. • b. Approval of Minutes from the October 14th PSA Meeting Mr.Montagano moved to approve the minutes from October 14,2012 as presented. Second by Mr. Gibson. Motion carried unanimously, 15-0. 3. NEW BUSINESS a. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman—Addressed previously b. Establishment of a schedule for 2013 meetings Staff provided a Proposed Meeting Schedule for the PSA. (See attached) It was suggested Workshops be held on alternate months and placed tentatively on schedule. By consensus it was decided meetings would be scheduled for 10:00 am. Mr.Kopko moved to approve the proposed PSA Schedule of Meetings for 2013 and in January Staff would come back with alternate month Workshops. Second by Mr. Buxton. Motion carried unanimously, 15-0. It was suggested the Medical Director Subcommittee meet directly after PSA meetings. c. Administrative Budget i. Cost Center Staff provided a Proposed Budget for PSA Committee and Sub-Committee Meetings. (See attached) 2 AF 161 2A 15 November 14, 2012 Ms.Vasey volunteered to do research on agency representation and legal clarification and make budget recommendations to include Public Awareness Program for PSA consideration. Mr.Dutcher will join Ms. Vasey on the Budget Committee. ii. Establish Administrative Budget–Addressed previously iii. Administration and Record Keeping Administrative and Record Keeping is included in budget. The Job Bank is available if required. Recommendations will be covered from the Budget Committee. iv. Collection Method -None v. Approval for Expenses-None vi. Reporting-None d. PSA Ordinance Revisions Draft Changes submitted by Kopka on Ordinance No. 2012-—was distributed. (See attached) Staff will bring back voting procedures to the next meeting. Mr.Murphy moved to approve draft changes to Ordinance No. 2012- as presented(to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners(BCC)) Second by Mr.Dutcher. Motion carried unanimously, 15-0. e. Bylaws Staff distributed the Draft Public Safety Authority Bylaws for review. A suggestion was made to add letter"j. To advise the BCC on Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity"(COPCN)to Article One–Creation,Purpose,and Objectives. Mr.Murphy moved to add `j"to the Bylaws and the PSA will make recommendations concerning the Certification of Public Convenience and Necessity to the BCC. Second by Mr. Gibson. Dr.Panozzo moved to add an amendment to the motion `pending results of vote;the PSA communicate with BCC for specific language." Discussion was ensued on if the Ordinance and Bylaws should both be revised. Motion withdrawn. Mr.Murphy moved to recommend the BCC approve revising Ordinance No. 2012- Section One; Creation,Purpose,Powers and Duties of the Collier County Safety Authority by adding number 13-PSA be the Reviewing Agency of the COPCN to make recommendation for approval to the BCC. Second by Mr. Buxton. Motion carried unanimously,15-0. 3 r. s 161 2A15 November 14, 2012 Mr. Murphy moved to recommend all other changes remain in the Bylaws. Second by Mr. Dutcher. Motion carried unanimously, 15-0. Sheriff Rambosk recommended the Sheriff's Office discuss a"New Cad System"and"How we process Emergency Medical Dispatch"at a future meeting. f. Technical Work Groups Jeff Page,Fire Commissioner, George Danz and Reg Buxton volunteered to serve on the Emergency Medical Dispatch Subcommittee. g. Subcommittees -Medical Director Subcommittee' -Dr.Robert B. Tober -Dr. Jeffrey A. Panozzo -Dr. John Zelahy -Dr.Todd Bethel 4. STAFF REPORTS Mr. Bloom reiterated the Authority's Staff liaison is Maria Franco. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS Sneakers Dan Summers,Bureau of Emergency Services Director suggested Staff/Public Comments is added to the Agenda. George Danz suggested PSA ask Collier County to fund PSA. Jaime Cunningham,Assistant Fire Chief-North Naples asked to make a future presentation to the PSA. 6. BOARD MEMBER DISCUSSION Mr. Morton recommended the budget include tools needed and the distribution of the Blue Ribbon Report. Staff will distribute the Blue Ribbon Report to PSA members. Ms. Vasey stated any suggestions should be email directly to Maria Franco. Mr.Murphy will serve on the Budget Committee. 7. ESTABLISH NEXT MEETING DATE The next scheduled meeting will meet at Physicians Regional Hospital, 6101 Pine Ridge Road on January 16,2013 at 10:00 am. Staff will coordinate the Medical Director Meetings. Mr.Buxton moved to adjourn at 11:25 AM. Second by Mr. Murphy. Motion carried unanimously, 15-0. 4 161 2 A 16 November 14, 2012 There being no further business for the good of the County,the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at 11:25A.M. Collier County Public Safety Authority Chief Ja es S. Bloom, Chairman These minutes approved by the Board/Committee on 1'- ILO "13 as presented or as amended V 5