The URL can be used to link to this page

Backup Documents 03/09/2010 Item #16I 1 161 1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE March 9, 2010 I. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: A. Districts: I) Collier Mosquito Control District: 2010 Meeting Schedule; Final Annual Certified Budget for 2010. B. Minutes: I) Bavshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee: Minutes of May 13,2009; July 8, 2009; August 4,2009; September 1,2009; October 6,2009; November 3, 2009; December I, 2009; January 5, 2010. 2) Bavshore/Gatewav Triangle Local Redevelopment Advisory Board: Minutes of March 3, 2009; July 7, 2009; August 4,2009; September 1,2009; October 6,2009; November 3,2009. 3) Collier County Code Enforcement Board: Minutes of November 19, 2009. 4) Collier County Planning Commission: Minutes of January 7, 2010. 5) Contractors Licensing Board: Minutes of December 16,2009. 6) Development Services Advisory Committee: Minutes of January 6, 2010. 7) Environmental Advisorv Council: Minutes of December 2,2009; January 6, 20 I O. 8) Floodplain Management Planning Committee: Minutes of September 28,2009; October 5, 2009. 9) Golden Gate Community Center Advisorv Committee: Minutes of January 4, 2010. 10) Historical! Archaeological Preservation Board: Agenda of February 17,20]0. " 161 1 II) Isles of Capri Fire Control District Advisory Committee: Minutes of January 7, 20 I O. 12) Land Acquisition Advisory Committee: Minutes of January 11,2010. ]3) Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee: Agenda of January 7, 2010; February 4, 2010. Minutes of December 3,2009; January 7, 2010; supplements to file with November 5, 2009 minutes. C. Other: I) Special Magistrate Code Enforcement: Minutes of January 15,2010. 2) Special Magistrate Intersection Safety Program: Minutes ofJanuary 8, 2010. ~~ Collier MOSqUito~~trL DiS!::' 600 North Rood, Nap/es, FL 34104-3464 Administration: (239) 436-1000/ (239) 436-1005 (fax) Hangar: (239) 436-1008/ (239) 436-1007 (fox) www.colller-mosQuito.ora r", ~.,." r~;: L r ?lJlO January 21,2010 ',-,-.,"'",-.,. "';"-"" ivIr. Dwight E. oi'ock Clerk ofthe Circuit Court P.O. Box 413044 Naples, Florida 34101-3044 Dear Mr. Brock: Enclosed please find the 2010 meeting schedule for the Collier Mosquito Control District. The Board of Commissioners unanimously approved this schedule on November 17, 2009. I am also enclosing a copy of the Final Annual Certified Budget for 2010. If you require any further information, please feel free to contact me at (239) 434-4647. Stac J. elch Director, Administration Coliier Mosquito Control District siwelch(ci)cmcd.org Enclosures(2) Item.: COf);es to: Board of Commissioners: Executive Director: Fronk Van Essen, Ph.D. Spray Schedule: (239) 436-1010 John F. Johnson, Choir Jeanne E. Brooker, Secretary Robert D. Geroy, Treasurer Jacquelyn D. Fresenius Immokolee Substation: 165 Airpark Blvd, Bldg A-1M Immokolee, FL 34142 (239/867-3200 . :SIAIt: Uf FLORIIJA Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Division of Agricultural Environmental Service (850) 922-7011/SunCom 292-7011. Fax (850) 413.7044 Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control vl....!(...A.~A.- < I..- u 1203 Governor's Square Blvd GS46 Suite 300 Tallahassee, Florida 32301 CHARLES H. BRONSON RECEIPTS Acct# Description TOTAL LOCAL STATE 311 Ad Valorem (Current/Delinquent 4,826,698 4,828,698 334.1 State Grant 35,000 .. < 35,000 362 EClulDment Rentals - 337 Grants and Donations - 381 Interest Earnings 200,800 200,000 800 364 EauiDment andlor Other Sales - 389 MlscIRefunds (Drior yr expenditures) - 380 Other Sources 389 Loans TOTAL RECEIPTS 5,062,498 5,026,898 35,800 Beginning Fund Balance 4,601,000 4,600,000 1,000 Total Bud etary Receipts & Balances 9,663,498 9,626,698 36,800 EXPENDITURES Acct# Uniform Accounting System Transaction TOTAL LOCAL STATE 10 Personal Services 1,799,390 1,799,390 20 Per Serv Benefits 1,432,160 1,432,160 30 OperatinaExpense 322,620 322,620 40 Travel & Per Diem 36,885 36,885 - 41 Communication Serv 32,800 32,800 - 42 Freight Services 21,400 21,400 43 Utility Service 49,150 49,150 44 Rentals & Leases 80,136 80,136 45 Insurance 263,616 263,616 46 Repairs & Maint 952,880 952,880 - 47 Printing and BindinQ 7,450 7,450 - 48 Promotional Activities 17,500 17,500 49 Other CharQ" 5,000 5,000 51 Office Supplies 64,500 64,SOO 52.1 Gasoline/OillLube 225,500 225,500 52.2 Chemicals 1,238,699 1,202,399 36,300 52.3 Protective Clothing 3,750 3,750 - 52.4 Misc. SUDplies 44,400 44,400 52.5 Tools & ImDlements 4,500 4,500 54 Publications & Dues 17,571 11,571 55 Tralnina 14,600 14,600 60 CaDital Outlav 61,200 61,200 71 Principal - - 72 Interest - 89 ContInGency (Current Year) 666,440 665,940 500 99 Payment of Prior Year Accounts 250 250 TOTAL BUDGET ANO CHANGES 7,362,397 7,325,597 36,800 0.001 Reserves. Future Capital Outlay 239,816 239,616 - 0.002 Reserves - Self-Insurance 744,000 744,000 - 0.003 Reserves - Cash Balance to be Carried Forward 1,000,000 1,000,000 0.004 Reserves - Sick and Annual Leave Trans Out 317,485 317,485 TOTAL RESERVES ENDING BALANCE 2,301,101 2,301,101 - TOTAL BUDGETARY EXPENDITURES AND BALANCES 9,663,498 9,626,698 36,800 ANNUAL CERTIFIED BUDGET FOR MOSQUITO CONTROL 16 , COUNTY I DISTRICT Collier FISCAL YEAR OCTOBER 1, 2009 - SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 1~\ AUTHORITY: Chll~r 388.341 F.S. CERTIFleo BUDGET OACS FORM 13611, Rev 9103 I certify that the budget shown was adopted on this 22nd day of September 2009. DATE: September 22.2009 iiJ! DATE C}/30/ 2009 SIGNED: SIGNED: State of Florida: County of Collier: 1, Stacy J. Welch, a Notary Public, certify the signature of t and the document is a true, correct, complete and unalte -~, -'" ~ STACYJOYWELCH MY COMMISSION # DDS94464 ~... "'4 EXPIRE5:_ll,20IO 'VltCll:.P" f\. NotuyD*xIuDI AsIIJl;. en. .-'" November 13,2010 ~~ Collier Mo5li~ c~ntrofD~ict 600 North Road, Naples, FL 34104-3464 Administration: (239) 436-1000/ (239) 436-1005 (fax) Hangar: (239) 436-1008/ (239) 436-1007 (fax) www.collier-mosQuito.ora Calendar Year 2010 - Board Meeting Schedule Dav Date Time Description Tuesday January 19 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday January 19 .. CMCD IRC Section 1SS Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting Tuesday February 16 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday March 16 9:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday April 20 9:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday April 20 .. CMCD IRC Section 1SS Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting Tuesday May 18 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday June IS 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Thursday July 8 10:00 a.m. Budget Meeting Tuesday July 13 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday July 13 .. CMCD IRC Section 1SS Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting Tuesday August 17 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday September 7 5:01 p.m. · 1" Public Hearing Tuesday September 21 3:00 p.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday September 21 5:01 p.m. . 20d Public Hearing Thursday October 14 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Thursday October 14 .. CMCD IRC Section 155 Retiree Benefit Trust Meeting Tuesday November 9 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting Tuesday December 14 10:00 a.m. Regular Board Meeting . Tentative Date .. Immediately following the regularly scheduled Board Meeting Board of Commissioners: Executive Director: Frank Van Essen, Ph.D. Spray Schedule: (239) 436-1010 John F. Johnson, Choir Jeanne E. Brooker, Secretory Robert D. Geroy, Treasurer Jacquelyn D. Fresenius lmmokalee Substation: 165 Airpork Blvd, Bldg A-1M Immoka/ee, FL 34142 (239) 867-3200 RECEIVED FES 0 5 2010 ~~~. 161~ iroL/ DPI . _"" f . P ,.J ~.I \...._ Hoard of County CommisSioner''' Fiala Halas Henning Coyle Coletta bill....:". Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE MAY 13, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Mr. Bill Neal at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Bill Neal, Maurice Gutierrez, Tom Finn, Dwight Oakley, Victor Brittain, and Victoria Nicklos. Absent: Conrad Willkomm.. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator, and Sue Trone Operations Analyst. 2. Adoption of Aoenda: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the April 8, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Finn. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 6-0. 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Jackson presented numerous invoices for Ground Zero landscape maintenance and miscellaneous supplies for Advisory Committee approval. Mr. Neal made a motion to pay all the bills. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 6-0. Mr. Jackson asked the Advisory Committee for advance approval for staff to pay all invoices for landscape maintenance and repairs as they are received. By consensus, the Advisory Committee agreed. Mr. Neal asked that if there are any irregularities noticed that staff brings them to the attention of the Committee. Mr. Jackson agreed. Mr. Aaron Gross, Ground Zero, gave a report on the work his company had performed in the last 30 days. There were no questions from the Committee. b. South Bavshore Proiect. Ms. Jourdan handed out the final report delivered by the consultant team, Agnoli, Barber & Brundage. She explained that the final report shows in detail what the Advisory Committee approved and the report includes cost estimates to perform the next steps to achieve street, landscape, lighting and sidewalk improvements. c. Side Street Uohtino. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Advisory Committee on the work completed to date by the FPL representative. FPL's pr~Ii?P~as to complete the field survey and installation design by the June MSTU meeIin90 I 0 Date 0 May 13,2009 Minutes item #ltQ_L'l 1\ "'OS to: ~~~. 161 1 ~\ IJ In 'i ". Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 5. Old Business: a. Reauest for Payment. Mr. Jackson presented invoices from consultants that are providing services under Work Orders and Purchase Orders that were not a part of the annual landscape contract: Ground Zero; Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Custom Bricks, and FPL electricity usage. He asked for approval to make payment for services rendered. Motion to approve Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6- O. b. MSTU Sianaae Discussion. Mr. Jackson discussed the various options that staff had drafted of for building signage and vehicle signage. The Committee reviewed the options and made the selections. Motion for staff to get quotes and install signage: Mr. Finn. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 6-0. c. Liaht Pole Repaintina Proposal. Mr. Jackson explained that the proposals presented were requested by Alternative transportation Modes staff and that they were not comparative. He requested that the Committee reject the quotes and task staff to develop a new scope of work for new quotes. Mr. Neal asked why this was before the Committee as the light poles did not need repainting. The rest of the Committee concurred. Motion to reject the quotes and not re-quote the work: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6-0. 6. New Business: a. MSTU Committee Goal Workshop - Goals Approval. Ms. Trone presented the goals in a grouped content form with color coding for easy identification. After review, the Committee, by consensus, agreed to review the goals and discuss them at future meetings. b. MSTU Boundary Expansion - Discussion. The Committee reviewed an analysis of expansion options with associated tax rates and what each new area would generate in revenue. Discussion centered on how the funds from the new areas would be separated from the old area and what type of process would there be if money was to be used across old and new boundaries. By consensus, the Committee agreed to continue the discussion. c. Brick Paver Repair - Quote Custom Bricks. Mr. Jackson presented a single quote to make MSTU sidewalk paver repairs. Motion to approve: Mr. Finn. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6-0. d. Bayshore drive Landscape Plan - Next Steps. Mr. Jackson stated that he and Mr. Neal met with Ellin Goetz at the Botanical Gardens. Mr. Jackson stated that Ms Goetz visited the offices and said she would have a proposal by the May meeting. May 13,2009 Minutes 161 l~\ ~04> IJRI"\I"<' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. The Committee agreed to continue to have meetings throughout the summer months. They also agreed to attend the Naples Botanical Garden tour on July 1st and have the staff advertise the tour to meet sunshine requirements. 9. Adiournment: Motion to adjourn: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Finn. The regular meeting was adjourned at 5:35 pm. Approved ana forwarded by III Neal, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. June 10,2009 Minutes RECEIVED FES 0 5 2010 ~~~. I)RJ"\)~' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 16 I 1 t0l I Fiala .{X::-15;i Halas ~ Henning Coyle .. Coletta J c.'1 Hoarrj :If COUPl\I ,:omrniss;o/u.!f1!, BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE JULY 08, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Mr. Neal at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Bill Neal, Maurice Gutierrez, Conrad Willkomm, Dwight Oakley, and Victoria Nicklos. Excused: Tom Finn and Victor Brittain. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, and Sue Trone Operations Analyst 2. Adoption of Aqenda: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Willkomm. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the June 11, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. There were no questions from the Committee. b. Relocation of Bus Benches. Mr. Jackson informed the Committee that the new competitive quote received to move the last bench was $1,700. c. South Bavshore Drive Proiect Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the Chairman's request, Mr. Ted Tryka, ABB Inc., was present to explain the proposed time line to complete the project's construction documents. Mr. Tryka stated that the timeline did have some built-in cushion to allow for the normally slow responses from permitting agencies. Mr. Neal asked him to please stay on top of the process and complete the construction documents in minimum time d. FPL Liqhtinq On Side Streets. Ms. Jourdan updated the Committee on the FPL contract and stated that the BCC would approve the contract at their July 2ath meeting. FPL would be given notice to proceed and there w/Mltf<weesa existing poles retrofitted with new lights. Date:__..._ July 8, 2009 Minutes Item # '.".';:-">:3 tc ~~~. () R I"~' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 161 1 ~ \ 5. Old Business: a. Bavshore Drive Landscape Maintenance & Repairs. Mr. Jackson presented updates on various MSTU projects, maintenance and contracts. Motion by Mr. Gutierrez to allow Ground Zero to maintain the two green areas on Lunar Street and bill the MSTU. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 5-0. b. Bavshore Drive Streetscape & Desiqn Discussion. Mr. Jackson advised the Committee that at a previous meeting they group had discussed improving or upgrading the 12-year old landscape design on Bayshore Drive. On July 1S\ they took a group tour of the entire area to view the existing plantings. He asked for the group to discuss the possible options to achieve their goal. He also asked for the Committee to consider scheduling a series of informative and educational sessions over the summer with area professionals to help the Committee understand how their work in the public space impacts people. A 45 minute roundtable discussion ensued with many topics about sidewalks, plantings, buildings and their relationship to the street, lighting and the use of public space by walking and bicycling residents. The item concluded with a motion by Mr. Oakley to conduct a one-day presentation by an urban design professional and/or landscape architect with specific focus on Bayshore Drive. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. In discussion Ms. Nicklos asked if there would be more sessions and Mr. Oakley replied that follow-on session would be discussed after the first presentation because the Committee would then have a better grasp on the topic. 6. New Business: a. Request for Pavment of Services. Mr. Jackson briefed the Committee on miscellaneous invoices for payment of services rendered for the last month: Ground Zero - south Bayshore Drive mowing; replacement of effluent irrigation pump; and Custom Brick pavers - sidewalk paver repairs. Motion to approve payment: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. 7. Public Comments. Mr. Neal asked if there were any comments from the audience. There was none. 8. Advisorv Committee General Communications. The Committee agreed to continue to discuss options for improvement of the entire area. They also discussed possible changes to their ordinance. 9. Adiournment: Motion to adjourn: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. The regular meeting was a 'ourned at 6: 15 pm. Approved and orwarded by Bil July 8, 2009 Minutes ~~~. OR 1''; '(, Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 161 1 t;\ She had not responded to date. Mr. Jackson recommended the Committee approve staff moving forward with getting landscape architect quotes and proposals and return with them for Committee review. Motion to approve: Mr. Finn. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 6-0. e. Decorative SiQnaoe Poles for Bavshore Drive South. Mr. Jackson presented a single quote to install decorative poles on all signage south of Thomasson Drive. He stated that this quote was also generated by Alternative Transportation Modes staff. Mr. Jackson recommended that the Committee reject the quote and wait until the improvements to south Bayshore Drive are completed because new poles might get damaged or relocated while the road is under construction. Motion to reject and bid the project after or as part of the sough Bayshore Drive improvement project: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Finn. Approved 6-0. f. Bavshore Drive South Improvements. Ms Jourdan asked the Committee to consider proceeding with quotes for construction documents that will be used to bid the project. Motion to approve staff to get quotes and return for Committee approval: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Finn. Approved 6-0. g. East Naples Fire Department Sions. Mr. Jackson showed a photo of the type of poles holding the Fire Stations' entry and exit signs. He recommended the Committee consider installing decorative poles for the signs to match the rest of the street. Motion to task staff to see if the Fire Department would buy their own poles and if not to return to the Committee for discussion: Mr. Neal. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 6-0. 7. Public Comments. Mr. Neal asked if there were any comments from the audience. Hearing none he asked for a motion to adjourn. 8. Adiournment: Motion to adjourn: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Finn. The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:20 pm. May 13,2009 Minutes Fk'..-'<nJ ')7 ;-:CWliV .:::orlil'piSS'cme,', ~o~ Fiala 1 ~F , 1 ~ I Halas Henning Coyle__ I - i) Coletta ,I C It. ./ RECEIVED FEB 0 5 2010 biB"\(' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 4, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Mr. Neal at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Bill Neal, Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, Tom Finn and Victor Brittain. Absent: Conrad Willkomm. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Sue Trone Project Manager, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Approval of Aqenda: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Mr. Finn. Approved 6-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the July 8, 2009 regular meeting minutes. Mr. Brittain asked for a typographical error to be corrected. : Motion to approve with correction: Mr. Finn. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6-0. 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. Committee discussion ensued about the lack of effluent water and that staff should make contact with the county and discuss the issue. b. Bavshore Bridqe LAP Project. Mr. Jackson stated that that Pam Lulich, Transportation Modes Project Manager informed the MSTU that she is waiting for final FOOT inspections. c. Relocation of Bus Benches. Mr. Jackson informed the Committee that the quote to move the last bench was $1,700, and that the county had required new engineering drawings and miscellaneous other data. Ms. Garcia had been working with the contractor to cut through the red tape. d. South Bavshore Drive Proiect. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB and its two sub-contract?)',s,. OiVindh~m Studios - Landscape, and TR Transportation Consultants - Llghtlng~~: With staff and discussed the project. ABB agreed to provide monthly writbMereports to the MSTU August 4 2009 Minutes :em# '(. ~o~ 16/ 1 aJ\ I.JRJ'i~' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 and all conceptual designs would come to the Committee for review and approval prior to moving forward. e. FPL Liohtina On Side Streets. Ms. Jourdan updated the Committee on the FPL contract and stated that the BCC approved the contract at their July 28th meeting. FPL was given notice to proceed and there would be 68 existing poles retrofitted with new lights. The FPL timeline was discussed and Ms. Jourdan explained that the timeline is a guideline and that FPL usually takes longer to complete the work. f. Median #1 Uporade. Mr. Jackson gave a short presentation that had been coordinated with Ground Zero to upgrade Bayshore Drive Median #1. Ground Zero gave three quotes to: 1) replace the two broken palms: $4,326; 2) replace existing palms with Foxtail Palms: $9,776; and 3) replace existing palms with New single stalk Solitaire Palms: $15,012. Mr. Jackson asked that the Committee consider the replacement with new, sturdier and fuller palms. After a short roundtable discussion, Ms. Nicklos made the motion for staff to work with Ground Zero to look at the number and spacing of Foxtail Palms, investigate and price including bull nose flowering plants and possibility of Bougainvillea, and return with information. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6-0. g. Ms. Garcia presented a quote from Signcraft to prime and paint the four silver Fire Department warning light poles in the amount of $512.00. Mr. Finn asked if the poles would be taken down for painting. Ms. Garcia stated they would be 'painted in place' because the Fire Department needed them to be continuously operational. Motion to approve: Mr. Finn. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 6-0. 5. Old Business: a. Bavshore Drive Streetscape & Desian - Discussion. Mr. Jackson presented a flow chart of a 6-month education and training session for the Committee, if they chose to go through the process to learn about streetscape planning. The other choice would be to do a 5-6 hour workshop on a Saturday with staff and one or more professional consultants that work in this field. Ms. Trone presented a compilation of the MSTU Committee's 2009 - 2010 Goals that referred to 'public realm' improvements to public amenities and evolving the area landscape plan with a 'green' concept in mind. In a roundtable discussion the Committee agreed that the education and training session was critical to the positive improvement to the area, and that a Saturday session was the best choice. Staff was tasked to bring back a suggested date, agenda and recommended consultants. August 4 2009 Minutes ~~~. 161 1 to I IJRI~~' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 6. New Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Mr. Jackson briefed the Committee on miscellaneous invoices for payment of services rendered for the last month: Ground Zero - south Bayshore Drive mowing and Lunar Street mowing. Motion to approve payment: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6-0. 7. Public Comments. Mr. Neal asked if there were any comments from the audience. There was none. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. a. Victor Brittain: Presented photos of pole banners from his trip to Virginia. He recommended the Committee approve using local artists' art and screening them on to banners on the bridge. He asked staff to assist in making the project work. The Committee agreed to proceed and return with styles, copy and prices. Mr. Neal asked for staff recommended plan for all banners. b. Dwight Oakley: Suggested that the Committee working with staff do everything possible to make improvements prior to the Naples Botanical Garden's November opening. Items to get completed were Median #1 upgrade, the banners and landscape repairs and replacement. The Committee agreed. c. Tom Finn: Asked when Ground Zero's contract was up for renewal. Staff explained that the contract will be re-bid, and it is not known if he would win the contract. As such the staff is working hard to get all improvements made under the current cost- structu re. d. Victoria Nicklos: Stated that one of the Lunar Street triangle areas was to be mowed by a resident. Mr. Jackson asked for the resident's name and address so he could contact him. e. Bill Neal: I. Asked for a status on the MSTU signage. Ms. Trone presented the sign permit and site plan for a monument sign instead of a wall sign. Discussion was about whether the Haldeman Creek MSTU would pay for half the sign. Staff said that until the administrative duties are turned over to the CRA in October, they would not have an answer. ii. Complimented the expenses graph that they see under Projects Report. He asked for staff to develop a similar graphic for the annual budget. 9. Adiournment: Motion to adjourn: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. The regular meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm. '';(? Ap oved and forward d by Bill Neal, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. August 4 2009 Minutes Fiala ~~{l 1 ~l Halas ~ Henning~ g~~:a ./ CJ ; ~~i . I RE.CEIVED FEB 0 5 2010 ~~~. ~()<lrd (!: <,:O(];;\\' (;orprmS$lon2r:.; () R I ,,'(, Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 1, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Vice-Chairman Mr. Gutierrez at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Conrad Willkomm, Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, and Victor Brittain. Excused Absence: Bill Neal, Tom Finn, and Victoria Nicklos. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Sue Trone Project Manager, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Approval of Aoenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Willkomm. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 4-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the August 4, 2009 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 4-0. 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. Committee discussed right-of- way signage and contractor precautions when working in and around traffic. Mr. Gross advised the Committee of the landscape plant material that was replaced this month, as approved by the Committee as part of ongoing and routine maintenance. b. Bavshore Bridoe LAP Proiect. Mr. Jackson stated that that Pam Lulich, Transportation Modes Project Manager informed the MSTU that she is still waiting for final FOOT inspections. The last inspection was cancelled due the FOOT representative having a family emergency. c. Relocation of Bus Benches. Mr. Jackson informed the Committee that the quote to move the last bench was $1,700, and that the county had required new engineering drawings and miscellaneous other data. Ms. Garcia had been working with the contractor to cut through the red tape. ~orre.: September I 2009 Minutes ~ J. ~o~ ()RI'i" Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 161 lib l d. South Bavshore Drive Proiect. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB has its request for South Florida Water Management District review completed, now awaiting the results of their review. e. MSTU Crosswalk Siqnaqe. The MSTU contractor, Signcraft, has installed the designer sign poles at the two MSTU lighted crosswalks and combined miscellaneous signage on to single poles to reduce visual pollution. f. MSTU Monument Siqn. Mr. Jackson directed the Committee's attention to the newly erected monument sign on Bayshore Drive. g. Bavshore Drive Streetscape & Desiqn. Ms. Trone gave the Committee an update on her progress at acquiring a consultant to conduct a streetscape design session with the Committee. It appears she will have definitive information in October. 5. Old Business: a. MSTU Streetscape Banners. Mr. Jackson presented three types of banner material and estimated prices to create banners for the material. By consensus, the Committee selected "Mainstreet" material. i. Motion to approve up to $3,000 for "Welcome to Bayshore" banners with the MSTU logo: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 4-0. ii. Motion to approve up to $3,000 for a selection of floral/plant banners that are representative of southern Florida and complement the Botanical Garden scheme: Mr. Willkomm. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 4-0. iii. Motion to task staff to send out letters of interest to local artists to submit pieces of art to be juried and selected to be displayed on MSTU banners on Bayshore Drive: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 4-0. b. Median #1 Replacement. Mr. Jackson reminded the Committee that at the last meeting they tasked staff to determine the cost to upgrade the median with Foxtail Palms, investigate spacing and include larger bull nose areas for flowering plants. Mr. Jackson and Mr. Gross presented a cost estimate for ten (10) Foxtail Palms and Crown of Thorns at the bull nose areas for a total cost of $9,856.00. Motion to approve the upgrade as quoted for $9,856.00: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 4-0. The Committee asked staff and Mr. Gross to investigate every opportunity to salvage the existing median palms and replant them in the Lunar Street area. Mr. Gross stated that the County has a contract "flat fee" of $250.00 per plan to transplant. The Committee approved up to $1,500 to cover the cost of moving the palms. Motion Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 4-0. September I 2009 Minutes 161 101 ~~~. ()R 1'\ <(, Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 6. New Business: a. Request for Payment of Services. Mr. Jackson briefed the Committee on miscellaneous invoices for payment of services rendered for the last month: Ground Zero - south Bayshore Drive mowing - $703.00 (two times), irrigation line repairs - $147.50, contractual monthly maintenance $4,676.65, landscape replacement and repairs $2,220.00, and Lunar Street mowing - $380.00 (two times). Motion to approve payment: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 4-0. 7. Public Comments. Mr. Gutierrez asked if there were any comments from the audience. There was none. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. a. Mr. Willkomm asked how the Committee could get their next projects started. Mr. Jackson stated that the Committee completed its visioning with a mission statement and associated Goals & Objectives. The projects are there, the Committee just needs to make the commitment to select them, prioritize them, task staff to implement the planning and then budget the projects. b. Mr. Willkomm: Motion for the MSTU staff to move forward with investigation into expanding the MSTU boundary towards US41 along Thomasson Drive and return to the Committee with information. Second: Mr. Oakley. In discussion, Mr. Gutierrez expressed his concern on separating the collected revenues. Mr. Jackson stated that there could be a separate and distinct MSTU to the east - but that would mean intra-MSTU coordination with conflicting groups; or just work the accounting by separate budget line items - which would allow for loans from one to another for projects that cross boundary lines. Mr. Oakley stated that if the capture of the residential area north of Thomasson was not possible, the MSTU should consider 'annexing just the east end of Thomasson right-of-way' to the improved section, eliminating the private property owner. Then the MSTU could pay for improvements. Approved 4-0. c. Mr. Willkomm: Motion for MSTU staff to explore improvement options for Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue and return to the Committee with information. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 4-0. d. Dwight Oakley: Suggested that the MSTU staff put on the October agenda the topic of right-of-way clearing on the Hallendale subdivision streets: Pine Tree, Woodside, and Andrews. 9. Adiournment: Motion to adjourn: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Willkomm. The regular meeting was djourned at 5:05 pm. , Approved d forwarded by Bil September 1 2009 Minutes Rt:CEiVt:iJ FEB 0 5 2il1O ~~~. 16/ F. I orl~ la a Tfri/v1<:.. Halas. ~ / Hennmg v', Coyle j ,""\! ,- ...> (>Jletta <,) "-._~ ,~- ./ 1&( ~c'drd (,{ (;CUlltj' C{Jmrnissi(;rvJrto IJ R I"~' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 6, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairman Mr. Neal at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Dnve. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Bill Neal, Conrad Willkomm, Mauricde Gutierrez (arrived at 4:30), Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, and Victor Brittain. Excuse Absence: Tom Finn. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Sue Trone Project Manager, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Approval of Aaenda: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 4-0 (Mr. Oakley & Mr. Gutierrez absent). 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Neal asked for a motion to approve the September 1, 2009 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 4-0 (Mr. Oakley & Mr. Gutierrez absent). 4. Proiects Report: Mr. Jackson handed out copies of the MSTU's FY2007 through FY 2010 budget expenses, a historic view of MSTU property values and respective revenues for those years. He also delivered a map displaying the County's effluent water structure. a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. Committee discussed median #1 upgrade and transplanting of palms on Lunar Street. Mr. Gross advised the Committee of the landscape plant material that was replaced this month, as approved by the Committee as part of ongoing and routine maintenance. b. Bavshore Bridae LAP Proiect. Mr. Jackson stated that that Pam Lulich, Transportation Modes Project Manager informed the MSTU that she was meeting the FDOT representative today for a final walk-through. October 6 2009 Minutes c. Relocation of Bus Benches. Mr. Jackson informed the Committee the last bench was moved and the designer sign pole installed. d. South Bavshore Drive Proiect. Ms. Jourdan briefed theM~6R,~ee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB has met with South tilIwida Water Management District in a pre-application review with 60% construction documents. She also Item#: '''lies to: '--'~'"<._'----- ~~1 161 1 ~ \ bRJ'i>(' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, Fl34112 delivered a set of proposed plant material for the landscape plan. Mr. Neal stated that the handouts were for Committee members to review and that the Committee would meet on another date to discuss landscape and lighting. He asked that the consultants be at the meeting. Mr. Jackson suggested a workshop type of setting. Mr. Neal asked staff to set up the workshop. e. MSTU Streetscape Banners. Mr. Jackson displayed the new "Welcome to Bayshore Drive" banners that were hung at the north and south approach ends of Bayshore Drive. 5. Old Business: a. Bavshore Beautification MSTU Ordinance Modification. Mr. Jackson presented proposed changes to fhe existing ordinance for the Committee to discuss. Ms. Nicklos asked for words describing public art and playground or recreation equipment. Mr. Neal asked for inclusion of a 'more all inclusive' set of wording just to cover the bases. Ms. Jourdan recommended ".. .enhancements as deemed appropriate..." as that was similar language used in other County documents. Mr. Neal asked for staff to return with a smooth copy in November. b. MSTU Boundary Expansion. Mr. Jackson reminded the Committee that the graphic in the Committee packages was review by them several months ago. Now with the discussion about modifying the ordinance, the Committee might consider adding MSTU boundary expansion in it and achieve two objectives at once. A roundtable discussion ensued that covered what parcel-sets of land should be included or excluded. The group also discussed how the revenues collected would be accounted for and distributed towards projects, to include the possibility of loaning the expansion area funds and being reimbursed for projects. There were suggestions that the expansion should include areas such as Sugden Regional Park, East Naples Community Park and Avalon Elementary School. The Committee assigned Mr. Neal and Mr. Jackson to visit County staff and Commissioners to discuss the merits of the expansion to get a feel of the political will to support the expansion. c. Bavshore Drive Landscape Plan - Update. Ms. Trone briefed the extent of her work completed to date. She summarized three options for the Committee to consider: 1) Graduate Student Studio, 2) Program Resource Efficient Communities (PREC), and 3) Landscape Architect. She has issued a request for quotes and is waiting for a response to bring to the Committee. 6. New Business: October 6 2009 Minutes -" '--"~'-----.,,~----,.- 161 1 fJ l ~~~. IJRI"\'i. Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 a. Request for Payment of Services. Mr. Jackson briefed the Committee on miscellaneous invoices for payment of services rendered for the last month: Ground Zero contractual monthly maintenance, Signcraft for light pole painting and street poles, BO Concrete for relocation of the bus bench, Banner Works of Florida for street banners, and Agnoli, Barber & Brundage for south Bayshore construction documents. Motion to approve payment: Mr. Gutierrez. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 6-0. b. Thomas Drive & Hamilton Avenue Improvements. Mr. Jackson detailed two years worth of discussions with Collier Enterprises about improving the two subject roads. He delivered road cross sections and cost estimates that had been provided by Collier Enterprises representatives. Mr. Oakley spoke of the informal discussion he and staff had with Collier enterprises last month. He related that they did not have the financial strength or interest at this time to contribute to any improvements or collaboratively participate in a near future project. Ms. Valerie Pike of Collier Enterprises was present and confirmed Mr. Oakley's summation. The Committee agreed that further discussion should be had after the Committee determines if a boundary expansion could be accomplished so additional funding could be acquired to support the improvements outside the current MSTU boundary. c. RiQht of Way ClearinQ in Hallendale Subdivision. Mr. Jackson stated that this item was placed on the agenda at Mr. Oakley's request. Mr. Oakley stated that three years ago the right of way was cleared on the three Hallendale streets to allow dirt road paving. He felt that vegetation had grown in and is heavily encroaching on the right of way. He felt that it did not present a 'favorable' appearance to prospective buyers because of the unkempt appearance. Mr. Neal asked Mr. Jackson to investigate the procedure and cost to the MSTU if the right of way was cleared of vegetation. 7. Public Comments. Mr. Neal asked if there were any comments from the audience. There was none. 8. Advisorv Committee General Communications. Mr. Neal commented on the favorable comments he has received about the first MSTU newsletter that was mailed to the residents. He comments were echoed by Mr. Brittain. 9. Adiournment: Motion to adjourn: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Willkomm. The regular meeting f ,was adj at 5:45 pm. ~----.. pproved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Vice Chairman. October 6 2009 Minutes RECEIVED FEB 0 5 2010 ~e~ 161 10l/ Fiala Dj/I ~ Halas ~ Henning Coyle;_" ... \' C':nletta -, C. l :~Cdr(,' 1\: Co:Jni! CJlr~rr't'::':\')7';:::;: IJRI'i'i, Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 3, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Vice Chairman Mr. Gutierrez at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Conrad Willkomm, Maurice Gutierrez and Dwight Oakley. Excused Absence: Tom Finn, Victoria Nicklos, and Victor Brittain. Mr. Gutierrez announced that the Committee did not have a quorum; however, those present would discuss MSTU business, but could not vote on any topic. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, and Jean Jourdan, Project Manager. 2. Approval of Aqenda: None. No quorum. 3. Adoption of Minutes: None. No quorum. 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. Committee discussed median #1 upgrade and repairs made to the irrigation system. Mr. Gross advised the Committee that landscape mulch was being applied to all areas. b. South Bavshore Drive Proiect. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB had delivered to South Florida Water Management District permit application with 60% construction documents. 5. Old Business: a. MSTU Boundary Expansion. Mr. Jackson reminded the Committee that at the last meeting, the Committee approved Mr. Neal and staff to visit the Commissioners to discuss modifying the ordinance and a possible MSTU boundary expansion. A roundtable discussion ensued that covered what parcel-sets of land should be included or excluded and whether they should just annex in the Thomasson drive rights of way only. Mr. Gutierrez agreed to attend the Commissioner meetings in place of Mr. Neal. Mr. Oakley would attend if Mr. Gutierrez's schedule would not allow his attendance. MIsc. Corres: ]te November 3 2009 Minutes -1ft ~o~ 161 IPJl IJR 1 '\' ", Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 b. Bavshore Drive Landscape Plan. Mr. Oakley asked if the training and review session could be handled by staff using some of the presentation material from Dan Burden. Mr. Jackson said it could, and that the Committee should discuss and approve that process at their December meeting. 6. New Business: No discussion. 7. Public Comments. None. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. Mr. advised that Ms. Nicklos had requested that the Committee discuss relocating the northern Bayshore Drive gateway entry feature (pagoda) and possibly erecting a gateway feature at the southern end. Mr. Gutierrez and Mr. Willkomm thought the idea had merit and will be discussed in Decernber. 9. nt: The regular meeting was adjourned at 5:30 pm. a~ / /~ Approved and forwar ed by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Vice Chairman. November 3 2009 Minutes 16 i 1 tb( V Fiala OC{ ~ Halas -E..I::t h-f,-, Henning --r tr ~ Coyle V _ Coletta \r (~': (04-) R.ECEIVED FES 0 5 2010 ~o~ ':""2\[(1 of C;ou:lt')' G()mn)lssion2r~ [JRI"'" Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BA YSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 1, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Mr. Victor Brittain at 4:07 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Conrad Willkomm, Maurice Gutierrez (arrived at 4:27), Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, and Victor Brittain. Mr. Brittain announced that he would serve as acting Chairman until Vice Chairman Gutierrez arrived. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Approval of Aqenda: Mr. Brittain asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Oakley. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 4-0 (Mr. Gutierrez absent). 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Brittain asked for a motion to approve the October 6, 2009 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 4-0 (Mr. Gutierrez absent). Mr. Brittain asked for a motion to approve the November 3, 2009 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Mr. Willkomm. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 4-0 (Mr. Gutierrez absent). 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. b. FPL Side Street Liqhtinq Proiect. Ms. Jourdan asked Mr. Brittain to consider hearing two members from the public that were in attendance to discuss new FPL street lights installed on their street. i. Ms. Kathy Holder, of Weeks Avenue, stated that she did not request the light on the pole beside her house, and that she desired the MSTU either: turn it off, remove it, lower the wattage, or have it come on later in the night. ii. Mr. Ray Peterson, of Weeks Avenue, stated that he does not want a light on his street as the lighting of the strip mall across the street has enough lighting to keep the area and street safely lit. Mr. Brittain gave a short explanation of the timeline taken to get the lights approved. Mr. Jackson stated that after all the lights are installed, staff willl~. aOrm;lucing the bulb Date: December I 2009 Minutes !ti~m #" ~~~ 161 1 ~[ /~ R I \j'i, Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 wattage or placing shields on the cobra heads to further deflect the lighting spot at problematic areas. III. Mr. John Palis, of Bayview Drive, stated that he has one of the new lights in front of his house, and that he totally approved of the light as it really gave a sense of security and safety at the end of his street. c. South Bayshore Drive Proiect. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB had delivered to South Florida Water Management District permit application with 60% construction documents. d. Bayshore Beautification MSTU Boundary Expansion. Mr. Gutierrez detailed his meetings with Commissioners Coyle and Fiala about the expansion of the MSTU boundaries. They both agreed that the Advisory Committee and staff should make a great effort to engage the people in the area that may be included and see where they stand on the issues. Mr. Gutierrez also detailed the Commissioner's remarks concerning officially naming, by County Proclamation, the future pathway to Sugden regional Park after former Chairman Bill Neal. e. Riqht of Way Clearinq in Hallendale Subdivision. Ms. Jourdan stated that staff was still awaiting quotes to bring to the Advisory Committee. Mr. Oakley expressed his displeasure in waiting another 30 days to review quotes and getting started. f. Bayshore Drive Streetscape & Desiqn Sessions. Mr. Jackson advised the Committee that at the November meeting Mr. Oakley asked, "If the training and review session could be handled by staff using some of the presentation material from Dan Burden." Mr. Jackson stated at that meeting that it could, and since there was no quorum that the Committee should discuss and approve that process at their December meeting. Mr. Oakley expressed his sincere concern that again a project for important Committee Member training was inordinately delayed, and that it should be conducted as soon as possible. Motion to approve a 'staff level' training session in January: Mr. Oakley. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. In discussion, the Committee selected January 9, 2010 from 8:30AM to 12:00PM to conduct the session. 5. Old Business: a. Bayshore Beautification MSTU Ordinance Modification. Mr. Jourdan directed the Committee's attention to the drafted changes to current MSTU Ordinance. After discussion the Committee decided to hold off submitting the changes until they find out if a boundary expansion would occur. December I 2009 Minutes 161 1 ~t ~~~. l.J'H"~' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 b. Bayshore Banners. Mr. Gutierrez informed the Committee that he met with Brian Holley, Executive Director and Ms. Jill Barry of the Naples Botanical Garden concerning using the Garden's themes on future banners. Mr. Holley agreed to pay for new designs and authorize the MSTU to use their material, but could not pay for the MSTU's banners. Mr. Gutierrez asked if the Committee agreed that the new banners should include the Garden's patterns. All agreed. Mr. Oakley stated that he was concerned that the Committee had previously approved using artists' work on certain banners and that project had not been completed yet. He felt that the bridge would be a good place for them. 6. New Business: a. Request for Pavment of Services. Motion to approve October and November 2009 bills and invoices: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. b. Election of MSTU Chairman and Vice Chairman. I. Nomination for Mr. Gutierrez to be the new MSTU Chairman: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. ii. Nomination for Mr. Willkomm to be new Vice Chairman: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 5-0. 7. Public Comments. None. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. Ms. Nicklos requested that the Committee discuss relocating the northern Bayshore Drive gateway entry feature (pagoda) and replacing it with some sort of art. In discussion the Committee thought the idea had merit, but Mr. Oakley thought that due to the construction and footers of the pagoda, it might just have to be demolished because it might not be able to be moved. Ms. Nicklos discussed the possibility of erecting a gateway feature at the southern end. The Committee thought the idea had merit and that both of these suggestions should be discussed at the January training session. 9. Ad'ourn nt: 1J;le regular meeting was adjourned at 5:40 pm. ,I/J,.... _>' ).~ ~<~. (y Approved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. December 1 2009 Minutes 161 Ol-;;l~ Fiala - n-l /-11<- Halas :-=f'ff Henning J' V / Coyle ' .- ,:; coletta(\:~ ' r v :f; I v RECE\VEO FEB 0 5 2010 ~~~. f-)Od.ld u~ ~,;OI.,nW COlN\1\S'S\On3r" 'J1H"'i, Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF THE JANAURY 5, 2010 MEETING The meeting of the Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee was called to order by Mr. Gutierrez at 4:00 p.m. at the MSTU Office 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Committee Members: Conrad Willkomm, Maurice Gutierrez, Dwight Oakley, Victoria Nicklos, and Victor Brittain. MSTU Staff Present: David Jackson, MSTU Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Approval of Aqenda: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 4-0 (Mr. Willkomm absent). 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Gutierrez asked for a motion to approve the December, 2009 regular meeting minutes. Motion to approve: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Brittain. Approved 4- o (Mr. Willkomm absent). 4. Proiects Report: a. Landscape Maintenance. Mr. Gross, Ground Zero Landscape, gave a report on the work Ground Zero had performed in the last 30 days. Ms. Jourdan asked the Committee to consider approving their landscape contractor's quote of $1,016.00 to mow and treat for ants the CRA's event location. Motion to approve: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 5-0. b. South Bavshore Drive Proiect. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Committee on progress to date and stated that at the ABB had received South Florida Water Management District permit and forwarded the 60% construction documents to the Collier Transportation Division for review. c. FPL Side Street Liqhtinq Proiect. Ms. Jourdan Updated the Committee on the FPL lighting progress. d. Botanical Themed Banners. Mr. Jackson informed the Committee that 50 Botanical Garden designed banners had been ordered and were due to be delivered in January. Misc. Corres: Date: January 5 2010 Minutes Ilem# ~~~ 161 1 ~I IJRI\i'(' Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 e. Bayshore Drive Streetscape & Desi~n Session. Mr. Jackson reminded the Committee of their Saturday January 9 h Workshop. Mr. Willkomm stated that he would not be able to attend. 5. Old Business: a. Quote - Riqht of Way Clearinq in Hallendale Subdivision. Mr. Jackson stated that five (5) companies were asked to quote on the project and only one quote was received from Ground Zero in the amount of $1 ,265.00. Motion to approve the quote Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. b. Thomasson Drive Improvements - Fundinq Application. Mr. Jackson asked the Committee to consider applying for a bond under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) to fund the entire Thomasson Drive, Hamilton Avenue and south Bayshore Drive construction project. If approved, the lump sum loan would allow the projects to be built as one, in a short period of time. Otherwise with a limited annual funding stream, the projects might have to be completed partially over time, thus possibly costing more. Mr. Willkomm asked staff to also investigate a bank loan and the cost of each. Mr. Jackson stated that he would bring that information back to the Committee in February. Motion to pursue a loan or bond to complete all road projects: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Willkomm. Approved 5-0. 6. New Business: a. MSTU Committee Applicant Interviews. Mr. Jackson introduced Ms. Carolyn Cochrane and Mr. Gerry Buck as the two applicants that had applied for the two vacant seats on the committee. The Committee members asked questions and discussed the applicant's credentials listed on their applications. Motion to recommend to the BCC that Ms. Cochrane and Mr. Buck fill the two vacant seats: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. b. Request for Payment of Services. Motion to approve Ground Zero's landscape maintenance December 2009 bills and an invoice from Southern Signal and Lighting to repair street light in the amount of $1,515.00: Mr. Brittain. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 5-0. c. RFP for Road Desiqn Consultant Services - Thomasson & Hamilton. Mr. Jackson advised the Committee that if they desired to improve these two streets sooner than later, they should begin the process by advertising a RFP for a design consultant, similar to the process they completed for south Bayshore Drive design. He advised that it has been almost a year in that process and approximately $80,000 in design January 5 2010 Minutes ~~~ 161 1 I?I IJRr,\!\i. Bayshore Beautification MSTU 4069 Bayshore Drive, Naples, FL 34112 costs. Mr. Oakley stated that he felt that the Committee needed to proceed with the process. Mr. Willkomm asked if the Committee was agreeing to an unknown amount. Mr. Jackson stated that the RFP would come back with a proposal and cost for them to approve, and to expect a complete package to be $100,000 or more. Motion to approve staff to advertise an RFP for a transportation design consultant for Thomasson Drive and Hamilton Avenue: Mr. Oakley. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. d. Approval of Quotes for Streetscape Conceptual Desiqns. Mr. Jackson advised the Committee that five (5) landscape design companies were asked for quotes to develop a conceptual streetscape design for the two streets. The designs would help the Committee discuss MSTU boundary expansion and potential streetscape designs with the public. The lowest quote meeting specifications was from the joint team of JRL Design and PK Studios in the amount of $$8,620.00. The design team would complete the work in 30 days and return in February to present their design. Motion to approve: Mr. Brittain. Second: Ms. Nicklos. Approved 5-0. e. Hirinq of Dedicated (Full Time) MSTU Staff. Mr. Jackson stated that this agenda item came out of Committee member's discussions with staff about moving forward with projects at a higher tempo. He advised the Committee that the MSTU compensates the CRA for staff time in the amount of $22,000 per year, which not a full time focus. If the MSTU wanted to add more projects and complete projects faster, then more staff time was needed. The difficulty in paying for more CRA staff time is that project managers are taken away from their primary focus, the CRA mission. He suggested the Committee consider hiring a full-time staff or contracting for consulting services either part-time of full-time. After a round table discussion the Committee agreed that they desired a full-time staff of one person, that was stationed in the MSTU building under the management of the CRA Executive Director. Motion to proceed with acquiring a full-time staff person: Ms. Nicklos. Second: Mr. Oakley. Approved 5-0. 7. Public Comments. None. 8. Advisory Committee General Communications. None. $~O~gUlar meeting was adjourned at 5:43 pm. Approved and forwarded by Maurice Gutierrez, MSTU Advisory Committee Chairman. January 5 2010 Minutes 16 \ ~~ J)pl Halas THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT ~nnlm{ COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENQ:l~e EC:E\\ E..D" 4069 BAYSHORE DRIVE, NAPLES, FI. 34112 PHONE 239.643.JI15 FAX 239.775.44f...oletta R ," . FEB 0 ~A'l~ORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES OF THE MARCH 3, 2009 MEETING I 'J-C~10P ROil'{\O', C-Ol\lrnlSSlone(~' "ounN e" . The meeting of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redeveiopment Advisory Board was called to order by Vice-Chair Ms, Jill Barry at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive 1, Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Chuck Gunther, Jill Barry, Steve Main, Bill Neal, Ron Fowle, and Maurice Gutierrez. Excused absence: Lindsey Thomas. Unexcused: Bruce Preble CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director and Sue Trone Operations Analyst: Countv Staff Present: Marjorie Student-Stirling, Assistant County Attorney, Michelle Arnold, Alternative Transportation Modes, 2. Adoption of Aqenda: Ms Barry asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda, Mr Jackson asked for two items in the Executive Director's Report be deleted: Item 4a,i. Inaugural CRA Event, and Item 4a,ii. Bank Loan RFP; and he requested to add two items to New Business: Item 6c, CRA RFP for Bank Loan and Item 6d. Authorization to negotiate Assumption of a Bank Loan. She asked for a motion to approve the agenda with changes: Motion: Mr Neal. Second: Ms. Beatty, Approved 7-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Ms, Barry asked for a motion to approve the February 3, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr Neal. Second: Mr Main, Approved 7-0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. . Master Developer RFP. Mr. Jackson informed the Board that one response was received from the Pizzuti Company and that the Selection Committee will review the package and conduct and interview with the respondent: . Redevelopment Plan Update. Mr Jackson informed the Board that the Purchasing Department had called for the RFP Selection Committee to reconvene as there had been an error in the scoring sheets, The result was that the ranking of the respondents on the short-list had changed and that the CRA had to negotiate an agreement with correct top-ranked firm, . Land Offered to CRA Mr Jackson briefly reviewed with the Board that the commercial and residential parcels that were offered last month are still on the table as well as the properties in the mini-triangle. The additional parcel that had been offered to the CRA was the building that the CRA offices are in. The owners offered to sell the building to the CRA at $599,000 which is approximately half the price they were asking a year ago. 5, Old Business: a. Request for Pavment: Mr Jackson presented four invoices from consultants to the CRA that are providing services under Work Orders: Johnson Engineering, Inc.; Q. Grady Minor & Associates PA; RWA, and Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, He asked for approval to make payment for services rendered in accordance with the approved Work Order Motion to approve Mr Gunther, Second: Mr, Neal. Approved 7-0. March 3 2009 CRA.AB Minutes 6. New Business: a. CRA Grant Approvals, Ms Trone presented: . A Shoreline Stabilization Grant application, SSG 03-09, f<l9liM:~d Corban who owns 2832 Arbutus Street: The grant application was for $'(4llo.00 and that it met the scope and intent of the program, Motion to '!llReove: Ms, fleattYI ,-,..., Second: Mr, Main. Approved 7-0. ' 0 '-0; ~J (TtJ lrem~~, t l;IC0~ 16 1 lRY- . A Commercial Building Grant application, C-BIG 01-09, for Mark and Natalie Anguilano dba Eagle Packaging Products at 3161 Van Buren Avenue. The grant application was for $1,450.00 and that it met the scope and intent of the program. Motion to approve: Mr. Fowle. Second: Mr Gutierrez. Approved 7-0. b. Schedule Public Workshop - CRA Desian Concepts March 18.2009. Mr Jackson asked the Board to agree to hold a public workshop on March 18, 2009 to formally hear a presentation by the CRA's consultant, RWA, on the proposed Design Concepts for the CRA's 18 acre parcel on Bayshore Drive and the 14 acre mini-triangle. Motion to hold the workshop on March 18, 2009 at 6PM: Ms. Beatty. Second: Mr. Fowle. In discussion the question was asked if there was going to be extensive input into the design. Mr Jackson explained that instead of taking one hour of CRA-AB regular meeting time, a workshop would allow the Board to extensively discuss the proposals and hear comments from the public. Approved 7-0. c. CRA RFP for Bank Loan. Mr. Jackson briefed the CRA-AB that only one bank response was received from 5'" 3,d Bank. He stated that the response was creative in nature however not very attractive due to the controls placed on the CRA Also the total amount offered in new money was $4M, which was $3.5M short of what the CRA has hoped for as a minimum amount Because the response did not offer enough debt for the CRA to acquire the number one targeted property in the mini-triangle for $7.5M, the CRA-AB should consider recommending to the RFP Selection Committee a rejection of the RFP response. Also the CRA-AB should recommend the staff investigate: . A new type of lending called Commercial Paper, which is a government generated lending source, and . Assumption of the seller's mortgage from the existing bank, Royal Palm Bank. In discussion, Mr Gunther asked if the Board could discuss this item and the following item 6d. at the same time since they are related. By consensus the Board agreed. c. & d. Discussion: Mr. Main wanted to know more about Commercial paper and how it worked. He also felt that the CRA-AB should keep its options open until the Commercial Paper matter and discussions with Royal Palm Bank occurs. He felt that maybe the CRA could combine one or more of the instruments to get enough money to buy the land. Mr Gunther felt that the CRA-AB should wait 2-3 months to see if the banking market got better and maybe there would be better rates and more money available. Mr Jackson answered that Commercial Paper is government based lending through a bank and that it may not be available to CRAs, and that the three parcels the CRA Board has prioritized may not be on the market in 2-3 months. Especially the mini-triangle parcel has had two offers to purchase on separate parcels. If they are sold, the possibility of assemblage will disappear. Ms. Barry asked if the CRA-AB could table the discussion until the March 18th workshop and discuss it then when staff brings back more information. Mr. Jackson stated that a motion to table was allowable; however the workshop would have to become a special meeting in order to make motions. Motion to table until March 18 at a special meeting of the CRA-AB: Mr Gunter Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7-0. 7. Citizen Comments. Ms. Barry asked if there were any comments from the audience. Mr Mark Anguilano expressed his sincerest appreciation for the hard work and personal service rendered by Sue Trone during his application for the grant he was awarded. Mr. David Corban echoed the same thoughts and stated that he felt the CRA-AB was providing an essential service to the community. 8. Adiournment: The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:40 pm. rded by Lindsey Thomas, CRA-AB Chairman. March 3 2009 eRA-AB Minutes 2 16 \ FiaJ. YOF Halas THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMEN"+tennih?t,c RECE\\JEOC4?9~A~H~R~}R~E~NA~~ ~ ~,~ ~';O?E ~3~~~: FA~3?~~~ FEB 0 ')Bl~HORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD '-ount~ can,miss,oners MINUTES OF THE JULY 7,2009 MEETING p'V<l111 'It -,' ./ r:> The meeting of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Jill Barry, Steve Main, Chuck Gunther, Maurice Gutierrez, Larry Ingram, Bruce Preble, Lindsey Thomas, Bill Neal and Karen Beatty. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator, and Sue Trone Operations Analyst 2. Adoption of Aqenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Neal Second: Mr. Main. Approved 9-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the June 2, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Neal. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 9-0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. i. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that in their Board packages there was a project update memo. As a further update, he stated that the mini-triangle site complicated by an environmental issue on Davis Blvd will be purchased separately from the other 6 parcels. ii. Ms. Trone discussed the Shadowlawn Drive residential area drainage study and the next course of action to get County Stormwater Department and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) approval as an area master plan. 5. Old Business: a. Natural Disaster Grant Proposal. Ms. Trone updated the Board that the County Attorney's Office advised that the CRA could not advance the program as designed because any CRA monies would have to be issued to vendors that won a competitive bid through home-owner solicited quotes. b. CRA Overlav RFP. Ms. Jourdan advised the Board that the CRA would be advertising only the CRA Overlay update RFP due to limited funding and that the CRA Plan was still valid in all respects. c. CRA Event Mr. Jackson reminded the Board of his position on the CRA sponsored event in January 2010. He stated that he was concerned about the event, the timing in the current economic market and the impact on the CRA FY2010 budget He also stated that he recommended the Advisory Board members that support the event should approach the CRA Board at the July 28, 2009 meeting and receive approval to budget up to $25,000 of the CRA TIF for the event Mr. Neal stated that the CRA had approved $5,000 for a one-time sponsorship for the Haldeman Creek Art Festival; however the event resulted in some negative feedback from the public. Mr. Gunther agreed with Mr. Neal's observation and he stated that the problem was the closing of the street and parking. Ms. Beatty stated she felt that 'the time was right for it' and that the CRA should pursue the funding and to ask staff to conduct the event Mr. ThomlilllScl~iI. the CRA holds the event next year and it is unsuccessful, will that kill the event from ever happening again? Mr. Main stated that in the newspaper, the Napl<llllt&!!.0~.<<ers might -'-~-_._._- July 7 2009 eRA-AS Minutes Item # ".j 161 Ibr be looking for a new home and the CRA should reach out to them and get them into this event. By consensus, the Advisory Board asked the staff to write the executive summary and get it scheduled to be heard by the CRA Board at their July 28th meeting. Ms. Beatty and Mr. Main said they would attend and speak. d. Request for Pavment. ABB - South Bavshore Drive Desion. Ms. Jourdan advised the Board that the final invoice had arrived from Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc. for the design services for south Bayshore Drive. The Bayshore Beautification MSTU had paid all the invoices and now it was time for the CRA to reimburse the MSTU 50% of the total cost or $27,485.00. Motion to pay ABB by reimbursing the MSTU: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr Preble Approved 9-0. e. CRA Area Incubator Prooram. Mr. Jackson updated on the staff's work to date in investigating the creation of an art incubator on Bayshore Drive. The staff had contact with the bank-owned real estate agent and the bank was interested in receiving an offer to purchase the two vacant commercial units (1750sqft each). Also there had been discussion with Ms. Litchfeld-Neff about the use of her mixed-use building as the art incubator; however, she wasn't sure she was interested yet. Staff discussed the incubator idea with a potential consultant who offered to develop the business plan for a fee and then run the operation as an employee. Staff would work on the business plan in-house and then decide the best next-steps. f. CRA & Haldeman Creek Dredoino MSTU. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that the Board of Commissioners had authorized the transfer of administrative duties for the area's two MSTUs to the CRA staff: Bayshore Beautification and Haldeman Creek Dredging MSTUs. Mr. Neal and Mr. Gutierrez applauded the transfer and stated that working with the CRA staff was a pleasure 6. New Business: a. CRA FRA Conference Travel. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that travel for staff to attend the annual FRA conference in October in Orlando had been approved; however funding for the Advisory Board to attend was not approved. 7. Citizen Comments. Mr Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience. Ms Mabel Dunn, an architect from Columbia, stated that she was pleased to be offered the opportunity to volunteer her services to the CRA. She would be researching the possibility to create a multi- modal path that would connect all three county parks and the CRA's 17 acre project. Mr. Thomas thanked her for her volunteerism. 8. Advisorv Board oeneral Communications. Ms. Beatty asked for the Board to support the installation of signs on all the CRA properties. The Board members stated that they thought it was a good idea. Mr. Ingram asked if the County was going to dredge the east side of the Haldeman Creek Bridge. Mr. Main stated that it had been 2 years ago. Mr Ingram stated that it didn't appear that the job removed very much sediment. 9. Adiournment: The regular meeting was adjourned at 7:00pm. / J A y Lindsey Thomas, CRA-AB Chairman. July7 2009 eRA-AS Minutes 2 161 ,/ ,;Iala THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT kUllelillc RE.CE\\IEO COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGEN~~~ng J~O fEa \) ~ 10\0 4069 BAVSHORE DRIVE, NAPLES, FL 34112 PHONE 239.643.1115 FAX 239.775.44S,1j',l~tt8 COI1\~ORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD il03,QO\CQU"rJ MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 4,2009 MEETING The meeting of the BayshorelGateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Steve Main, Chuck Gunther, Maurice Gutierrez, Bruce Preble, Lindsey Thomas, Bill Neal and Karen Beatty. Excused: Larry Ingram and Jill Barry. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator, and Sue Trone Operations Analyst 2. Adoption of Aoenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Preble. Second: Mr. Neal. Approved 7-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the July 7, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Neal. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7-0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. i. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that in their Board packages there was a project update memo. As a further update, he handed out the first Monthly Report by the CRA's development consultant, Pizzuti solutions, LLC and well as copies of pages from the BCC's 2010 Budget Booklet that pertained to the CRA and area MSTUs. He also advised the Board that on July 28, 2009, the CRA Board and BCC Board approved the CRA's $13.5M bank loan with 5-3 Bank. The entire loan amount will be drawn on September 1 ,t Mr. Thomas asked if the Wachovia Line of Credit would be paid off then, and Mr. Jackson replied it would, along with accrued interest, and the remainder would be deposited for future disbursement when the mini-triangle properties closed. ii. Trianole Land Purchase. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Board on the status of the two land purchase contracts in the mini-triangle which were approved on July 28,2009 by the CRA Board. Six parcels will close on September 16\h and the environmentally impacted parcel is scheduled to close on September 30lh provided the seller receives a 'clean' certificate from the FDEP. iii. CRA Crime Statistics Update. Ms. Garcia discussed the latest quarterly crime statistics received from the Sheriff's Office. The first two quarters of this year reflected similar numbers as last calendar year. iv. CRA Event Update. Ms. Jourdan and Ms. Garcia briefed the CRA-AB on the sponsorship funds received to date, and stated that there was interest by local artist to possibly become vendors at the event 5. Old Business: a. CRA Area Incubator Prooram. Mr. Jackson reviewed progress to date on the potential incubator program. During the Pizzuti Solution cultural interviews, one property owner discussed the use of her 15,000sqft commercial building as a possible location for the incubator. Also the business plan was in draft and soon letters of interest will be solicited from area art business ownersloperators as well as Naples Art Association, Marco Art League and United Arts Council to see if any of them would l*IoollolNBed in running the operation for the CRA. Also the staff had not made an offer on the two foreclosed commercial units in the Bayshore Lofts project because thtElOOfl had not secured an AugusI4 2009 eRA-AS MinuIes Item # 161 l~ end user yet. Ms. Beatty stated that she had a potential client that desired to start a yoga studio and that site may be a good location. 6. New Business: a. C-BIG Grant Approval. Ms. Trone briefed the Board on a Commercial Building Grant (C- BIG) application received from Frank Lacava for his newly acquired commercial building on Commercial Drive. The project's total estimate was in the vicinity or $36,000 and the CRA would match up to 50% of the project, not to exceed $30,000 match. Motion to approve the C-BIG 03-2009 pending completion of the application and subject to County Attorney finding of legal sufficiency: Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7-0. b. Land Lease to Collier Countv Sheriff Deputv. Motion by Mr. Neal to approve leasing CRA-owned vacant land to the Sheriff Deputy vacating the Sugden regional Park property at no cost to the CRA, pending lease approval by the CRA Board and for CRA staff to coordinate favorable lease terms with the County Attorney's Office. Second: Mr. Thomas. Approved 7-0. 7. Citizen Comments. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience. There was none. 8. Advisorv Board General Communications. a. Mr. Ron Fowle and Mr. Thomas discussed a marketing opportunity for the CRA to support for the local CRA businesses. The project is for the CRA to pay for the production of a coupon book to be handed out by the Naples Botanical Garden to its paying customers. A promoter who does this work as a business would contact the participating business and include them in the coupon book provided they offer 'significant' incentive deals and offers to customers. The promoter would design and print the booklet for the CRA and the total cost would be borne by the CRA. By consensus the CRA-AB authorized the staff to work with Mr. Fowle and return with specifics at the September meeting. Their desire was to have coupon booklet completed in time for the Botanical Garden's November opening. b. Mr. Thomas asked for the CRA-AB to consider a marketing approach to assist in 'branding' the area. He said that the CRA could put a company or individual on retainers to help with a 'branding' campaign. Mr. Main asked how much was budgeted in FY2010 for Marketing and Promotions. Mr. Jackson stated $30,000 however the CRA Event would most likely consume $25,000 of it. He said that if the CRA-AB wanted to increase the Marketing budget line, that they would have to take it from another line item. Motion by Ms. Beatty to task the staff to explore the idea and return in September with concepts, proposals or findings for the Board to review. Second: Mr. Neal. Approved 7- O. 9. Adiournment: The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:45pm. /--~"'~~/ <:.. ~- ded by Lindsey Thomas, CRA-AB Chairman. August 4 2009 eRA-AB Minutes 2 16 1 1_1P1:Y'./ Fiala D~ ~ . E\V~~~Y~:;~E~;;~ER~~R~~N:~~;:;;:;~oA~~TNAM~~~~ 1:;- REC 4069 BA"HUH D"YE, NHL"" FL 34112 PHUNE 239.643.1115 FAX 239.775.44$OY ~ r FEB 0 5B YSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISORY BOARD aoard 01 Coun\1 commisslon",s MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 1, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the BayshorelGateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 pm. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Jill Barry, Maurice Gutierrez, Bruce Preble, Lindsey Thomas, and Karen Beatty. Excused: Chuck Gunther and Bill Neal. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Adoption of AQenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Preble. Second: Ms. Barry. Approved 7-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the July 7, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Main. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 7-0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. i. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that in their Board packages there was a project update memo. As a further update, he handed out the August Monthly Report by the CRA's development consultant, Pizzuti solutions, LLC and copies of the proposed FY2010 CRA Budget He also delivered a $49,700 quote by HAS Engineers and Consultants to remove the buried fuel tanks on 4315 Bayshore Drive (the old welding shop), remove any contaminated soil from the site and backfill with clean soil. A monitoring well will be installed to assess the condition of the ground water. The cost of the remediation will be paid from the $100,000 clean-up escrow account that was set aside at the sale of the property. Motion to approve: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 7-0. CRA Business Coupon Book. Ms. Jourdan updated the Board on the CRA-AB approved business coupon book that is being funded by the CRA and will be distributed at the Naples Botanical Garden. The book's cost will be under $3,000 for 10,000 copies. TrianQle Land Purchase. Ms. Jourdan briefed the Board on the status of the two land purchase contracts in the mini-triangle which were approved on July 28,2009 by the CRA Board. Six parcels will close on September 16th and the environmentally impacted parcel is scheduled to close when the seller receives a 'clean' certificate from the FDEP. Fifth Third Bank $13.5M Loan to CRA Mr. Jackson stated that the 513 Bank loan was executed on September 1 st and that the entire Wachovia loan of $5.901 M was paid was paid by 513 Bank and absorbed into this loan instrument The balance was deposited into the CRA's Capital Improvements budget awaiting the closing on the mini-triangle properties. Land Lease to Collier Countv Sheriff Deputv. Mr. Jackson informed the Board that the County Housing Department will buy the Deputy's prefab house and move it to a new location. CRA Event Update. Ms Jourdan and Ms. Garcia briElVil.cJ. t)le CRA-AB on the sponsorship funds received to date, and stated thm"'lh1!'RV~as continued interest by local artists and local vendors. September 1 2009 eRA-AS Minutes ii. iii. iv. v. vi. Date: Item # '_ '_'__'~~v_.._ _.'_~___.~~ "-ski 5. Old Business: a. 4069 Bavshore Drive BuildinQ Options. Mr. Jackson informed the Board that the building is going into foreclosure and as a result, the CRA will be named a defendant in the suit because the CRA is a tenant. During a commercial sale, a lease transfers to the new owners, however during a foreclosure it doesn't. Mr. Jackson stated that he had talked with the Bank President and was assured that the Bank desired the CRA to remain a tenant and that the suit was just a formality. The CRA currently has the building being appraised by the County Land Acquisitions office as a comparative to the Bank's appraisal at $725,000. In discussion, the CRA-AB suggested that the staff obtain a cost estimate to make any and all required improvements or repairs to the building and site. The quote could be used to negotiate with the Bank or have the Bank make the repairs. 6. New Business: a. Cultural District Plan - Discussion. Mr. Jackson stated that the staff had discussed options to complete the Cultural District plan, and that a quote had been requested from AMS Planning & Research just to get an idea of a scope of work and approximate costs. The scope of work received did not have a price affixed and the proposed work did not appear to satisfy the CRA's needs. Mr. Jackson presented a separate quote for services to complete a "Customer Data File Analysis" that would be beneficial to development of the Cultural District Plan. The Analysis would be valuable to the District and to any of the art/cultural organizations that contributed to the data base. The quote estimate was for $10,000 and would require the staff to obtain two other comparative quotes in order to proceed. In discussion, the CRA-AB shared their professional experience with a collection of this type of data. Ms. Barry said the Garden has already done this analysis but would be willing to contribute their information to be used in the aggregate results. Motion by Mr. Preble for staff to survey the local art/cultural groups to determine the number of groups that would contribute information, assess if the number of participants would warrant the expenditure of this amount of CRA funds, and return with a sample report and three comparative quotes for CRA-AB review. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 6-1 (Mr. Ingram opposed). b. C-BIG Grant - Bavshore Drive CITGO Station. Ms. Trone briefed the Board on a Commercial Building Grant (C-BIG) application received from Monsur Ahmad for his gas station at the corner of Bayshore Drive and Lakeview Drive. The project entails removal of underground gasoline tanks and associated above-ground equipment, replacement of parking lot and concrete areas, landscaping and new signage. The project's total estimate was $54,455.58 with a CRA 50% match of $27,227.94. Ms Trone stated that the County Attorney's opinion was that the grant should not be used to pay for the underground tank removal, however the other portions of the grant application were allowable by the grant's approved projects list. Mr. Ingram stated that he did not approve of this grant and that business owners must survive on their own or go out of business and made a motion to deny the grant. Mr. Thomas asked for a second to the motion, and hearing none, he stated the motion dies for lack of a second. Mr. Thomas asked if there was any discussion from the Board. Mr. Main, Ms. Barry and Mr. Preble expressed that this type of project is exactly what the grant was meant to be used for. Mr. Ahmad was asked if he did not receive the grant would he be able to complete the work. Mr. Ahmad stated that by law he had to remove the tanks, he had enough money to pull the tanks but not complete all the work. He has an insurance policy about to expire; therefore he had to complete the work before November. He added that if he did not receive the grant, he would re-assess his financial situation and reapply later. A short roundtable discussion ensued with all the Board members resulting in a motion by Ms. Barry to have staff revisit the grant application with the County Attorney and approve the C-BIG 04-2009 contingent upon the County Attorney agreeing to allow the grant application. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 6-1 (Mr. Ingram opposed). c. Request for Sponsorship. Mr. Jackson advised the Board of an e-mail request from Ms. Doepke, Cultural and Performing Arts (CAPA), for CRA monetary sponsorship for the group's inaugural fund raiser on November 1 ,t He stated that he had asked for September 1 2009 eRA-AS Minutes 2 161 !IOY additional information from CAPA and received their event budget and a request for $5,000. Mr. Jackson recommended denial of the request based on the economic situation of the County and CRA, the informal budget direction he received from the CRA Soard, that the event was outside the CRA area, and that the CAPA budget did not clearly indicate to him that it would 'be in the black'. He also added that if the CRA-AS sponsored one art/cultural organization's fund raising event, the other groups beginning to locate in the CRA would be asking for the same consideration. Mr. Thomas recognized members in the audience from CAPA and asked if they wished to speak. Mr. Dwight Richardson, CAPA, asked the CRA-AS 'what is the CRA's reiationship with CAPA?' Mr. Thomas replied that the CRA and CRA-AS supports CAPA but that the CRA must also support other art/cultural organizations. Mr. Richardson followed with a statement that the CAPA group was formed with a more direct relationship with the CRA in mind. Ms. Chellie Doepke, CAPA, stated that she and her executive board were in absolute 'shock' that the CRA Executive Director would recommend denial, and especially without consulting with CAPA first. She asked that there be better lines of communication between CAPA and the CRA. Mr. Jackson stated that CAPA is an independent non-profit organization that is not under the operation or control of the CRA; therefore any and all activities by the CRA and staff must be transparent and legally defensible. The CRA and CRA staff has been supportive of the Sayshore Arts and CAPA organizations by providing staff time and general office support as with any group or person. From its inception, CAPA has been, and will continue to be supported as a potential group to locate within the CRA boundary. The CRA-AS just passed a motion to investigate supporting all art/cultural groups with a "Customer Data File Analysis" that could have a monetary value to the groups of $10,000 or more. That clearly meets the mission of the CRA, and equally supports them all. If the CRA-AS provided a monetary support of $5,000 for a fund raiser without a clear 'benefit' to the CRA, it could be challenged or questioned. Mr. Jackson recommended denial. Motion by Mr. Main to deny the CAPA sponsorship. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 7-0. d. Request for Pavment of Services - Pizzuti Solutions. Mr. Jackson delivered an invoice from Pizzuti Solutions for services rendered under the Master Developer Phase I contract with the CRA in the amount of $12,520.01. Motion to approve payment: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7-0. 7. Citizen Comments. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience. Mr. Ron Fowle asked what kind of notification was there going to be to the neighborhood about the CRA event in January. He is concerned about the impact of traffic and roadside parking like there was when the Haldeman Creek Bridge was partially closed. Ms. Garcia stated that there will be parking at Gulf Gate Shopping Plaza and trolleys to transport the people to and from the event. There will be no road closures. Mr. Fowle asked if the CAPA group would be a part of the event, and Ms. Jourdan stated that they would. 8. Advisorv Soard General Communications. None. 9. Adiournment: The regular 7g was adjourned at 7:10m. --------/ -- arded by Lindsey Thomas, CRA-AS Chairman. September 1 2009 CRAMAB Minutes 3 161 lRJr THE BA YS H 0 RE / GA T EW A Y T RI AN GL ERE DE V E LO PM E NT A~~~sCY~~ RtCE\\IEO C4?9~~'~R~D:~E~NA~E~ ~ ~I~ Ep~O?E ~3~~~} FA~3? ~5~4~~~ng:iL f fES 1.\ ':ll~\YSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISO~~I~taARD ,; '-.:... . cO'Ol1"SSIOOO<5 MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 6, 2009 MEETING "oiCOIJOl'l ' Boar..... / = I.l The meeting of the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Jill Barry, Maurice Gutierrez, Bruce Preble, Lindsey Thomas, Karen Beatty, Chuck Gunther and Bill Neal. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan and Sue Trone, Project Managers, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Adoption of Aqenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Hearing none, Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda: Motion: Mr. Preble. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 8-0 (Ms. Beatty absent). 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the July 7, 2009 regular meeting minutes: Motion: Mr. Preble. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 8-0 (Ms. Beatty Absent). 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. i. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that in their Board packages there was a project update memo. As a further update, he reminded the Board that a large file was sent via e-mail containing Task #1 Report by the CRA's development consultant, Pizzuti solutions, LLC. He also informed the Board that a recent e- mail from County Transportation staff indicated that the entire triangle stormwater pond project would be bid this year. ii. Trianqle Land Purchase. Ms. Jourdan informed the Board that on September 16th the CRA successfully closed on the land purchase contract in the mini- triangle which was approved on July 28, 2009 by the CRA Board The environmentally impacted parcel is scheduled to close when the seller receives a 'clean' certificate from the FDEP. iii. Overlav RFP Results. Ms. Jourdan informed the Board that the CRA's RFP for a consultant to provide professional services to update the CRA's two overlays had four responses. The Selection Committee will meet and bring a recommendation back to the CRA-AB for approval. iv. 4069 Bavshore Drive. Mr. Jackson updated the Board on real estate and bank activity on the building the CRA rents as an office and meeting space. The building and land has been offered to the CRA for a Bank-appraised value of $725,000. The CRA's appraisal was $700,000. Mr. Jay Crandall, Real Estate Broker representing The Bank of Naples and building owners, introduced himself and handed out a marketing package for the site. Board members felt the appraisals were not accurate considering the commercial market and that property values continue to slide lower. Mr. Thomas pointed out that one Bayshore Drive foreclosed building containing commercial and residential was on the market for $60psf. Mr. Ingram stated that $75psf was what he thought was a good working number. Mr. Preble felt that $75-100psf for the building is a good number to use which would value the site at $450,000 to $500,000. Mr. Jackson asked the Board to consider two questions: 1) do you really want this building, and 2) do you really need this building. A hearty roundtable discussion ensued about the building's condition, parking~~rl!~ndition of the parking lot, and whether the building sufficiently meets the 'C"'RA staffs needs Mr Jackson replied that all the issues have beet])~~d wit~~ Item # -' 'U Bank and building's owners. The building does sufficiently meet the staff's needs and except for limited parking at peak hours (meetings) and a parking lot in need of repair, the building is in good condition. Mr. Thomas felt the building was a perfect lease building but not one to purchase. He felt that the CRA could build its own office building on the old welding shop site for less cost per square foot that what the building was on the market. Mr. Neal asked if the Board would agree to keep staff engaged with the owners, Bank of Naples and real estate agent to see if there was a compromise position. The Board agreed. 5. Old Business: a. Cultural District Plan - Discussion. Mr. Jackson updated the Board on the past activity concerning establishing a cultural district within the CRA. He offered two options for the Board to consider: 1) hire a consultant to perform the work, which may be at a high cost and the CRA would not be sure what product would be delivered, or 2) ask the CRA Board to commission a study group made of experienced and credentialed people from the area and county. Motion for the staff to proceed with a request to the CRA Board to create a study group to create a cultural district plan that could be implemented, with goals, objectives and strategies Mr. Neal. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 9-0. 6. New Business: a. Grants. Ms. Trone briefed the Board on three matching grant applications: I. C-BIG 02-2010 Lichetefeld. Commercial grant for 3248 Bayshore Drive for parking lot repairs, replacement of all windows with hurricane-impact resistance glass in the amount of $69,665.00 of which the CRA would provide a 50% match of not to exceed $30,000. Motion by Mr. Neal to approve. Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved 8-1 (Mr. Ingram opposed). il. C-BIG 01-2010 Adrenaline Motor Sports of Naples Inc. Commercial grant for 1695 Commercial Drive for a business sign in the amount of $712.48 of which the CRA would provide a 50% match of $356.24. Motion to approve: Mr. Neal. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 9-0. iii. L1G 01-2010 DeSavigny. Residential landscaping grant for 2957 Orange Street for general Florida-friendly landscape improvements to a single-family home in the amount of $3,843.25 of which the CRA would provide a 50% match of $1,921.62. Motion to approve: Mr. Neal. Second: Mr. Preble. In discussion Mr. Ingram expressed his concern that grants of this sort does not have a provision for the grant recipient to maintain the improvements for a specific amount of time, and if not maintained they would have to reimburse the CRA. Ms. Barry said that despite his concerns this grant application meets the criteria. Mr. Thomas replied that he felt the application meets the intent of the grant to assist and incentivize homeowners to upgrade their property, and that the CRA should not put themselves into a 'policing situation'. He also stated that if the CRA made the grant application and criterion very onerous, the residents would not see it as an incentive. Approved 8-1 (Mr. Ingram opposed). b. CRA Event Update & request to Approve Beer Sales. Mr. Jackson asked the Board to consider a request from the event committee to allow the East Naples Kiwanis Club (a 501 c3) to sell beer at the CRA event in January and a percentage of the sales would be donated to the event's expenses. He added that a 501 c3 is allowed to apply for and receive three temporary alcohol sales permits per year, and if approved by the Advisory Board, their recommendation would have to go to the CRA Board for approval. Mr. Main asked if the permit could include wine sales and Ms Garcia answered yes. Motion by Ms. Barry to recommend approval to the CRA Board to allow beer/wine sales by the East Naples Kiwanis Club at the CRA's January 2010 event. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 9-0. 2 161 lb~ c. Recover Zone Desiqnation. Mr. Jackson advised the Board that in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 allocated to Collier County $14M in Recovery Zone Economic Development Bonds and $21 M in Recovery Zone Facility Bonds. To be eligible for the bonds, an area must be designated a "Recovery Zone" by the Collier Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and that he felt that the CRA should request designation, thus making CRA infrastructure projects and private-public redevelopment project eligible for the funds. Motion to recommend to the CRA Board and BCC to designate the Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA area as a Recovery Zone Mr. Gunther. Second: Mr. Neal. Approved 9-0. d. Auto Pride Collision Centers. LLC Lease Renewal. The Advisory Board reviewed the negotiated terms to renew Auto Pride Collision Center's lease terms for 1911 Tamiami Trail East, the old Bob Taylor Chevrolet site. The lease would be for three years with a 2-year renewal option where the CRA could terminate the 2-year portion after execution if there was a developer assigned to build on the site. The rents would be fixed at $150,000 or 5% of gross annual sales as determined from the previous year. Motion to approve: Ms. Barry. Second: Ms. Beatty. Approved 9-0. e. Request for Pavment of Services - Pizzuti Solutions. Mr. Jackson delivered an invoice from Pizzuti Solutions for services rendered under the Master Developer Phase I contract with the CRA in the amount of $168,600. Motion to approve payment: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 9-0. f. Brownfields Area & Brownfields Committee Desiqnation. Mr. Jackson asked the Board to approve staff's recommendation to create a Brownfields Area on the CRA's 17 acre site and the Hubert's Welding Shop site. The BCC would be the governmental agency designating the Area. Along with the designation comes the requirement for a local group to serve as the "Brownfields Advisory Committee' and Mr. Jackson recommended the CRA-AB serve as that group. Motion by Mr. Neal to designate the 17 acres and Welding Shop as a Brownfields Area and for the CRA Advisory Board to serve as the Brownfields Area Advisory Committee. Second: Mr. Gutierrez. Approved 9-0. 7. Citizen Comments. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience. Ms. Doepke asked about the status of last month's motion to get three quotes to hire a consultant to perform a cultural survey. Mr. Jackson stated that he had not made any progress on the topic of getting quotes; however he did get permission from three large organizations to volunteer their customer and donator data bases for the survey. He said he had three more groups to contact before he would ask for the quotes. Mr. Noll addressed the Board and stated that he supported the Board's work. 8. Advisorv Board General Communications. Mr. Thomas provided his thoughts about trying to market the area as South Naples and do it through a process of creating a sense of history about the area. He explained that with a little research he had discovered aerial photos and some public historical books that included the Bayshore and Triangle area from as early as the 1940s. He felt that if the Board thought it was of merit, he would work with the staff to generate a historical awareness of the area as marketing tool. Mr. Neal advised the Board on his 12 year effort to coin the area as South Naples. Mr. Thomas asked the Board what they thought about transferring a potion of the CRA's 17 acres to the MSTU provided they funded and established the pedestrian access to Sugden Park? The Board agreed that the idea had merit and asked staff to work with the MSTU to see if there was a solution to the idea. 9. Adiournment: The regular ~,.s adjourned at 7:05m. Ap y Lindsey Thomas, CRA-AB Chairman. 3 . ..,16 bFI~l~ THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT 'A1~I~Nl.~;; Halas . RECE\\/;~4?9~A~'~R~DIR~E\A~E: ~ ~1~ Ep~O?E ~3~~;::: FA:\3?~5~~ng ,,,. fEB 0 5 2 :~'~ " ~,I ~ ..' BAYS!!~GATEWAY TRIANGLE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LOCAL ADVISO UAKU quad ni CouP" con''''' MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 3, 2009 MEETING The meeting of the BayshorelGateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Advisory Board was called to order by Chairman Mr. Lindsey Thomas at 6:00 p.m. at the CRA Office Meeting Room 4069 Bayshore Drive. 1. Roll Call: Present: Advisory Board Members: Larry Ingram, Steve Main, Jill Barry, Maurice Gutierrez, Bruce Preble, Lindsey Thomas, Karen Beatty, and Chuck Gunther. Mr. Thomas announced to the Board and general public in attendance, that Bill Neal had passed away two weeks ago and that he was a friend asset to the community. Ms Barry said Bill Neal was a true friend to all and he was often affectionately called the "Mayor of Bayshore." Mr. Gunther echoed those comments and added that the reason the area has improved so much was all due to Bill's work. CRA Staff Present: David Jackson, Executive Director, Jean Jourdan, Project Manager, and Shirley Garcia, Operations Coordinator. 2. Adoption of Aqenda: Mr. Thomas asked if there were any additions or corrections to the published agenda. Mr. Jackson asked that three items be added to the advertised agenda: Project Updates - Southern Motorsports Lease; Old Business - Work Order Change for HSA Scientist & Engineers; and Advisory Board General Communications - Bill Neal Honorary Status. Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the agenda with changes: Motion: Mr. Main. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 8-0. 3. Adoption of Minutes: Mr. Thomas asked for a motion to approve the October 6, 2009 meeting minutes: Motion: Ms. Barry. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 8-0. 4. Executive Director's Report: a. Proiect Updates. i Mr. Jackson advised that in the Board packages there was a projects update memo. As a further update, he reminded the Board that a file was sent via e- mail containing the October Report by the CRA's development consultant, Pizzuti solutions, LLC. ii. Mr. Jackson introduced Ms. Jourdan who advised the Board that one of the CRA's tenants in the mini-triangle was having difficulty making monthly rent payments and the issue has been forwarded to the Attorney's office to send a letter demanding payment: 5. Old Business: a. Overlav RFP Results and Contract Approval. Mr. Jackson informed the Board that Ms. Jourdan headed the RFP selection Team along with Ms. Trone as a Team member. There were four RFP responses and RWA, Inc. was selected. Initial negotiations with RWA began with a $115,000 proposal. Certain tasks were modified and a final price was agreed at $105,000. Schedules and rates are being delivered to Purchasing Department: Motion to recommend approval to the CRA Board at $105,000: Mr. Main. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 7-1 (Mr. Ingram opposed). After the vote Mr. Ingram expressed his firm opinion that land codes and zoning laws should be fixed and not amended as it creates a financial burden on land owners. b. Proqress Report & Request for Payment of Services. Mr. Jackson reminded the Board of the Pizzuti Monthly Report delivered bye-mail, and stated that they received an invoice for $5,300 from Pizzuti, and he requested a motion to pay. Motion to pay Pizzuti Solutions $5,300: Ms> Barry Second: Mr. Gunther. Approved 8-0. c. Work Order Chanqe - HSA Enqineers & Scientists. Mr. Jackson explained that in the process of removing contaminated soil for the former welding sholillllll6;MD:e soil was O.le: ilerD # 16 J 1 ~~ removed than provided in the original job estimate. The contractor had to continue . excavation until no contamination was discovered. The added soil disposal increased the expense to the contractor and an additional amount of soil will be required to fill. Mr. Preble asked if the original contract was open ended or lump sum. Mr. Jackson responded that the contract was lump sum with the provision that if additional soil removal/replacement was above the estimate, then a reimbursement could be authorized. Motion to authorize the Work Change Order and pay the invoice when received: Ms. Barry. Seconded: Mr Gutierrez. Approved 8-0. 6. New Business: a. Brownfields Site Rehabilitation Aareement (BSRA). Mr. Jackson informed the Advisory Board that last month the CRA-AB authorized staff to request a Brownfields Area designation from the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) and that Resolution was on the November 10th agenda Following the designation there would be a BSRA going to the BCC on December 1st to enter into a formal clean-up agreement with the Department of Environmental Protection. This is a voluntary program that would give the CRA protections and tax and job credits that may be sold on the open market or used as an incentive to the future site develo~er. Mr Jackson stated that a public notice was in the newspaper for the November 10' meeting and that the local neighbors were sent a letter informing them of tonight's meeting. In the audience were several people from Jeepers Drive and Lunar Street. Mr Steve Ramsey of Jeepers Drive asked to speak. He was concerned about contamination seeping outside the welding shop property and the impact to his property values. Mr Jackson stated that the hole in the ground they saw was the extent of the contaminated soil (and was verified by lab tests) and that ground water was being tested. Initial soil samples showed that the contaminated soil had been removed. All attendees were given an informative brochure and newsletter on Brownfields. b. Grants. Mr Jackson briefed the Board on two matching grant applications: i. C-BIG 03-2010 Weissenborn. A commercial grant for the Greyhound Bus Station on Davis Blvd for new paint in accordance with County Codes in the amount of $3,000 of which the CRA would provide a 50% match of not to exceed $1,500. Motion by Mr. Gunther to approve, pending County Attorney approval. Second: Mr. Preble. Approved 8-0. ii. SIG 01-2010 William Abbott. A residential grant for 2445 Thomasson Drive for a new roof on a duplex in the amount of $7,726.88 of which the CRA would provide a 33% match of $2,549.87. Motion to approve, pending County Attorney approval: Mr. Preble. Second: Mr. Main. Approved 7-1. (Mr Ingram opposed). 7. Citizen Comments. Mr. Thomas asked if there were any comments from the audience. None. 8. Advisorv Board General Communications. a. Historic Documentation of CRA Area - Ms. Beatty provided her thoughts about trying to market the area through a process of creating a sense of history about the area. She recommended a CRA-AB workshop with some people with that may have a historical context of the area. Mr. Thomas thought it was a good idea and stated that he would ask Mr. Jose Lombillo, and Ms. Beatty would ask Paul Arsenault. Mr Ingram would ask Mr Morgan a local boat builder. The Board agreed to have a short December meeting and move into a workshop. b. Bill Neal Honorary Status - Mr Gunther handed out a point paper on Roberts Rules of Order and stating that a person could be designated to hold an honorary position on the Board but not be a voting members; alive or deceased. He asked the Board to consider that for Bill Neal. Mr. Thomas questioned whether that is the best way to memorialize 2 161 l~ Mr. Neal. He thought a formal proclamation by the BCC or CRA Boards officially naming the 'to be built' Bill Neal Pathway to Sugden regional Park would be a greater recognition. The Board agreed to add Mr. Neal's name to the staff letterhead, pursue the proclamation from the BCC and query the County Attorney if a change of the CRA By- Laws would be supported. C. Mr. Preble expressed concern over the 2010 National Census. He asked the Board if there could be some way staff could help get the word out to residents to answer the Census Survey and provide accurate data. Suggestions were to send e-mail info-grams, add information pages to the CRA web site, and for staff to contact the appropriate County Department that would be a part of the process and see if there were suggestions that the CRA staff could use to get an accurate census. 9. Adiournment The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:54pm. ,/ /) /:7':/_/ ;;..-<~/~,- 3 RECEIVED FIB 1 (J 2010 161 1 ~y November 19,2009 -:'", qf ,.>:,'J"i'y (,ljillmISsicl')8rg TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEM&~T B~ Naples, Florida November, 19, 2~hl~ ~ Henning Coyle ~ Coletta ;('~ r;;.:P 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 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Gerald Lefebvre Robert Kaufman Edward Larsen Kenneth Kelly Larry Dean Lionel L'Esperance James Lavinski Herminio Ortega (Alternate) ALSO PRESENT: Diane Flagg, Code Enforcement Director Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Specialist Jean Rawson, Attorney for the Code Enforcement Board Misc. Corres: / Date 03 0 Page 1 Item # T l C('ryiesto: 16 I 1 6~ November 19,2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board meeting to order for November 19, 2009. 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 proceeding pertaining thereto and, therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding 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. WALDRON: Mr. Gerald Lefebvre? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Ken Kelly? MR. KELLY: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Ed Larsen? MR. LARSEN: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Robert Kaufman? MR. KAUFMAN: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Herminio Ortega? MR. ORTEGA: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Larry Dean? MR. DEAN: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Lionel L'Esperance? MR. L'ESPERANCE: Here. MS. WALDRON: Mr. James Lavinski? MR. LA VINSKI: Here. Page 2 Novtm~e} 19, ~09 ~ CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: There are some changes to the agenda? MS. WALDRON: We do have one stipulation agreement, which will be Item 7 under hearings, case CESD200800 14486, Clyde and Susan Bryan; and under item number C, hearings, number four, case number CESD20090009638, John Horton, has been withdrawn. And that is all the changes I have. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion for approval? MR. DEAN: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. And before the approval of minutes, there's one change. MS. WALDRON: We do. Mr. Lionel L'Esperance was stated that he had an unexcused absence at the October 22nd meeting, and this wasn't an excused (sic) absence. MR. KELLY: I make a motion we accept the minutes from October 22nd with the change. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. DEAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? Page 3 1 6 I 1 {??>_ November 19,2009 (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. We're going to move on to public hearings, motions, and the first one is Gambino Medina, Jr., CESD20080016167. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If you can state your names for the record. MR. MEDINA: Yes. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Gambino Medina, Jr. And I'd like to -- I'm requesting an extension on the demolition -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Could you pull the mike up a little bit, please. MR. MEDINA: Sure. I'm requesting an extension on a demolition for an illegal addition in Immokalee, Florida. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And can you just explain briefly why you're looking for an extension? We already gave a six-month extension, correct? MR. MEDINA: I had a four-month extension, I believe. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Four months, okay. MR. MEDINA: I'm requesting a six-month extension now, and that's due to a lot of reasons. There was two open cases on this property. One has been closed in that section of the Code Page 4 16 I 1 fJ~ November 19,2009 Enforcement Board -- department, and I just need some more time. I don't have the funds right now to proceed with the second phase. But I do have some documents I'd like to bring into evidence, which is a letter from a contractor regarding the demolition permit that he's going to be handling for me. As soon as I can come up with some money, he's going to pull it and we're going to proceed accordingly. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would you like to accept those? Do I hear a motion? MR. DEAN: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KELLY: Second. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? MR. SNOW: For the record, Kitchell Snow. I have seen those. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye_ MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. MEDINA: Thank you very much, gentlemen. MR. KELLY: Investigator Snow? MR. SNOW: Sir? MR. KELLY: Do you have any issues with the extension of six months? MR. SNOW: We agree with whatever the board will decide. MR. DEAN: And that one case ending in 161, it was closed? I Page 5 16 I 1 V~ November 19,2009 mean, that was fine? There's two cases here. MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. MR. DEAN: One is done and we're just working on the other? MR. SNOW: Yes, sir. We're just working on this one, and due to the financial issues -- he's been diligent. That states he's got a contractor. He's actually trying to work with it again, but economic reasons, he's -- he's progressing. MR. DEAN: Okay. Thank you. MR. KAUFMAN: Is there any safety, health issues? MR. SNOW: Not that we're aware of, sir. The structure that we're talking about is not occupied at this time, so we believe that it's -- possibly could be permitted, and I guess his contractor's working on that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion, questions? MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion to extend it six months. MR. DEAN: I'll second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR_ SNOW: Thank the board. MR. MEDINA: Thank you, gentlemen. Have you-all a good Page 6 161 1 November 19, 200r day. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next case will be Scott Lamp, case number 20071 10819. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If you can state your names for the record, please. MR. LAMP: Scott A. Lamp. MS. SORRELS: Azure Sorrels, Collier County code enforcement investigator. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. And the reason you're looking for an extension of time, please, Sir. MR. LAMP: I tried to comply. I -- excuse me. I bought this property with these existing conditions, and I was led to believe that the building was able to be permitted by the people who sold it to me. And I've gone ahead and gone through, had drawings done, met with the architects, the engineers, I've had permits by affidavit. I've submitted everything. They were rejected. I took them back, got them resubmitted. And I pretty much have done everything that has been asked to do, and now I've got to the point where it's a FEMA issue. The building is too low and it's not going to be able to be permitted. I have hired an attorney to go -- to go after this, and now he said he had -- he would like to leave everything as it is for the moment until he figures out what he's going to do with it. So I don't -- it looks like we're probably going to level the building and just rebuild the whole thing in accordance with the codes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have you looked to see ifhe has, in fact, submitted for approval? MS. SORRELS: Yes, he has_ And he has been very good about communicating with me, and him and I have both been up at the front asking several questions and trying to provide all the options Page 7 16l 1 ePJ November 19,2009 available. At the time we were underneath the understanding -- we went to impact fees and made sure that all those things were something that was going to be feasible for him to do. We never thought about thinking about the FEMA zoning for flood level. And so we proceed -- or he proceeded to do what was asked of him and, unfortunately, it's too low. They won't permit certain things underneath the FEMA level. So he did submit the permits, and they were reviewed and they were rejected. And you know, he did communicate with me that he did have a lawyer trying to look into this and that most likely what would happen would be eventually they would level it and build a new structure after they got the permits and things like that. MR. KAUFMAN: Mr. Lamp, how much time do you think you need to have this all resolved? MR. LAMP: With the possibility that it may take longer, I think that we should have some reasonable answers within six months and, you know, I really -- I've expected this to be much farther along than it is now, so I don't have anything to base it on. MR. KAUFMAN: Is the facility occupied? MR. LAMP: It's unoccupied. It's uninhabitable. They had a makeshift sewer system there. I have dis- -- everything is out of the building now that would make it inhabitable. MR. LARSEN: I'm inclined to grant a six-month extension. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll second that. MR. LARSEN : Yeah. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So we have a motion and second. Any further discussion? MR. ORTEGA: Just for clarity purposes, we're talking about a structure. But is this a home? We're talking about a home? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It's a barn. MR. ORTEGA: Barn. Page 8 16 I 1 ~9;-. November 19,2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: If you look in where the case is, the description. Maybe you can explain, Investigator? MS. SORRELS: Yes. The original structure was permitted, I believe it was in '85, as a pool barn. And the prior owners at some point in time had enclosed the structure completely, turning it into more or less a guesthouse that they were renting. And then they were actually -- this case was open when they were still the property owners. They sold the property to Mr. Lamp. They did make him aware of the violations, so -- but that's originally what it was was a pool barn. MR. ORTEGA: And when you speak of demolishing, you're talking about leveling the entire structure or just bringing it back to a barn? MR_ LAMP: The general contractor that I consulted with for my attorney has suggested that we level the whole thing and don't try -- you know, don't try to retain any of it. So that's what he's recommending is going to be the most cost-effective way to do this. MR. ORTEGA: No further questions. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We have a motion, and we have a second. Any further discussions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? Page 9 1611 b?Y/ November 19,2009 (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MS. SORRELS: Thank you, gentlemen. MR. LARSEN: Thank you. MS. WALDRON: ***We have an additional stipulation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. WALDRON: It will be item number six from the agenda under hearings, case CESD200900 15436, Anne Jules Delva. MR. KELLY: I'd make a motion we amend the agenda. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. The next stipulation will be Clyde and Susan Bryan, and I'm looking for the case number. Case number CESD20080014486. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. KEEGAN: Good morning. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Good morning. MR. KEEGAN: For the record, Thomas Keegan, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. Case number CESD200800 14486, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, versus Clyde and Susan Page 10 1 6 I 1 fJ} November 19,2009 Bryan. The respondent, Susan Bryan, has reached an agreement with Collier County on November 17,2009. She agreed that the violations noted in the reference Notice of Violation are accurate, and she stipulates to their existence, an unpermitted enclosure to carport to include decking and screening located at 54 Moorhead Manor, Naples, Florida, 34112. She's also agreed to pay the operational costs in the amount of $80.29 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days. She's also agreed to abate all violations by obtaining all valid permits, inspections, and Certificate of Completion to bring property into compliance within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 a day will be imposed until the violation is abated, or obtain a Collier County Demolition Permit and remove all unpermitted improvements and materials, request all inspections through to Certificate of Completion within 60 days ofthis hearing, or a fine of $200 a day will be imposed until the violation is abated. MR. KAUFMAN: Is Ms. Bryan here? MR. KEEGAN: No, I received a -- Mr. Bryan's deceased. Mrs. Bryan could not make it. I received a letter this morning from Shirley Garcia of the Bayshore CRA from Mrs. Bryan. Shirley delivered it this morning. I have no problems if you guys -- if the board would like to read it. MR. KELLY: I'm inclined to make a motion to accept the stipulated agreement. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. Page 11 16 I 1 b9; November trJ, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. KEEGAN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The next stipulation will be Anne Jules Delva, CESD20090015436. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. KEEGAN: For the record, Thomas Keegan, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. In regards to case number CESD20090015436, Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, versus Anne Jules Delva. Mrs. Delva agreed that the violations noted in the reference Notice of Violation are accurate, and she stipulates to their existence. Permit number 2008051265 expired on May 4, 2009, without completing the work at 3404 Seminole Avenue, Naples, Florida, 34112, folio number 74411360006. Ms. Delva has agreed to pay operational costs in the amount of $81.15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days of this hearing and to abate all violations by obtaining a valid permit and request inspections through to Certificate of Completion within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of$200 a day will be imposed until the Certificate of Completion is issued, or remove structure by a valid demolition permit to bring property into compliance and request all inspections through to Certificate of Completion within 60 days of this hearing or a fine of $200 a day will be imposed until violation is abated. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you state your name for the record, please. Can you please state your name for the record. Page 12 16 I 1 e;?; November 19,2009 MS. DELVA: Yep. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What is your name? MS. DEL V A: Anne Delva. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. MR. KEEGAN: This was translated by a -- by some -- the whole stipulation was translated. MR. KAUFMAN: By a translator? MR. KEEGAN : Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. KELLY: Investigator, what exactly was the permit for? MR. KEEGAN: Complete remodel, complete roof, walls, everything. MR. KELLY: And is the work completed and -- MR. KEEGAN: No. MR. KELLY: So is 60 days a fair amount of time? MR. KEEGAN: She -- from speaking with her and the translator, she's inclined to demo the structure. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And we don't -- we do not have a translator here now? MR. KEEGAN: No. Well, no. It was the department person that speaks Creole that translated out in the hallway. MR. LARSEN: Okay. This is a residential structure? MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir. MR_ LARSEN: She had a permit pulled for a complete remodel? MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: It wasn't done within the time frame of the permit, then it expired? MR. KEEGAN : Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: Now you've worked out an agreement through the translator, and they agreed that basically 60 days is sufficient to either remodel or the demolition? MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir. Page 13 161 1 PJ3 November] 9,2009 MR. LARSEN: And they understand it's $200 per day? MR. KEEGAN: Yes, sir, and they also understood that if the county -- if they do not do it within the 60 days, the county will hire a contractor to abate the violations, and that cost will be assessed against the property. MR. LARSEN: Okay. And I assume this property is not being occupied? MR. KEEGAN: Correct. MR. LARSEN: Is there any utilities that are active to the site? MR. KEEGAN: I do not believe so. It's been vacant for quite some time. MR LARSEN: Thank you. MR. KELLY: I have two concerns. One is the time frame even to do a demo, and two, some kind of translation so that she completely understands. And I apologize for speaking in the third person when you're standing here. That ifthere was a problem with whatever time frame, she would able to come back to us preferably prior to that time frame expiring and ask for a continuance. MS. WALDRON: We do have the option to try and get a translator here, but it will be moved to the end of the agenda. MR. LARSEN: Well, perhaps, Ms. Rawson, maybe you can -- if we just place on the record a caveat that in light of the fact that Ms. Delva is here and there might be a language barrier, that Ms. Delva would have the opportunity to come back should there be a problem that arose in her not getting permits, and the board would entertain at that time an extension of time for her; would that suffice? MS. RAWSON: That would suffice, and then I would also suggest that maybe the staff member who translated earlier maybe tell her that in the hallway immediately following this hearing. MR. LARSEN: All right. And we can put that into the form directive to the code enforcement? MR. KEEGAN: She speaks English. I've spoken to her on the Page ]4 16 j 1 t)? November 19,2009 phone, and I've also spoken to her out there, English, before the Creole speaking -- she -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Ma'am, do you understand what we're saying right now? MS. DELVA: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, thank you. MR. KELLY: Okay. MR. LARSEN: Solves that issue. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you understand that the stipulation states -- I'm over here. Right up front. The stipulation states that you have 60 days to either get all the permits for the property or 60 days to remove any work that's been done on the property already? MS.DELVA: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any further questions? MR. ORTEGA: I have one question. If this is a single-family residence that is in the process of remodel and the finances are not there to be able to complete it and you're talking about demolition, you're talking about demolition of the whole house? MR. KEEGAN: I can show photos. The whole house would need to be gutted. The roofs bad, the walls are shot. There's no floors. It's concrete. It was a complete remodel. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What are your intentions? Are they to finish the remodel or demo the property? MS. DEL VA: I don't know now. I don't know now, because I was going to rehab to get help there, but they don't give me the real instant (sic) now, but I don't know -- but if they want to remove the house for me, no problem, because I don't know what they have to do for me. If! say no and then later they tell me they cannot help me, I have to come back again here to talk to that, so I say yes now. MR. KELLY: Ifit pleases the board, I'm familiar with the rehab Page 15 16 I 1 fl) November 19,2009 program in my other hat, and if the application process hasn't been started, it can be somewhat lengthy to get the approvals for the DR! or whatever funding stream they're going to get it from. So, again, I would say that maybe 60 days is not sufficient for her to explore those options. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What would you suggest? MR. KELLY: At least twice that. Maybe six months would be more realistic, if the county doesn't have any objections to that. MR. KEEGAN: May I submit photos so you can see what shape the house is in? MR. KELLY: Is it habited now? MR. KEEGAN: No. MR. KELLY: Okay. I would -- I wouldn't mind seeing them, but we get into now case presentation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. I mean, that's what I'm worried about. We're getting into case presentation now. MR. KEEGAN : Yeah, that's fine. MR. LARSEN: No, I agree with Mr. Kelly. I don't have a problem with extending the time to 120 days, I mean, basically if it's not inhabited, you know. She's actively working on either the demolition or the rehab; I think 120 days is fair. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that in the motion? MR. LARSEN: I'll make that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 16 16 I 1 ~3 November 19,2009 MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. What we just did -- ma'am, right up front. MS. DELVA: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We just -- you can just stand right there, and if you can just listen for a minute. We just changed, instead of 60 days, you have 120 days_ MS. DEL V A: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right? But what I'd like the investigator to do is get with you and just cross out the 60 days and put in 120, and I'd like you to initial it, too, please. MS. DEL VA: All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Before you leave, please meet with the investigator. MS. DEL V A: All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Next will be the hearings, and the first one will be Tricia Jenks, CESD2009000 1470, and there's one speaker for this case. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Code of Laws and -- Chapter 22, Buildings and Building Regulations, Article II, Florida Building Code, Section 22-26(b)(104.1.3.5). Florida Building Code 2004 Edition, Chapter 1, Section 105.1 and Ordinance 04-41, as amended, Collier County Land Development Code, 1O.02.06(B)(1 )(a) and 1O.02.06(B)(1)( e )(i). Description of violation: Garage built on property without Collier County permits. Location/address where violation exists: 830 3rd Street Page 17 ~. 6 I 1 ffl;J November 19,2009 Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34120; folio number 37115960008. Name and owner (sic) of person in charge of violation location: Trisha Jenks, 830 3rd Street Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: February 19,2009. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: March 16,2009. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: April 15,2009. Date ofre-inspection: August 27,2009. Results ofre-inspection: The violation remains. I would like to now present Investigator Michelle Scavone. MS. SCAVONE: Good morning. For the record, Michelle Scavone, Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator. This case is in reference to case number CESD20090001470 dealing with the violations of the garage built on property without Collier County permits, located at 830 3rd Street Northwest, Naples, Florida, 34120, folio number 371 15960008. Notice of Violation was given on March 16,2009, by posting of the property and of the courthouse. I would like to present into evidence the -- I have four photos of the garage. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, first of all, she's asking for a continuance, correct? MS. SCAVONE: Did you want to do that or -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, we do that before presentation of the case. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. MS. JENKS: Well, to be honest with you, this property is already in foreclosure, so 1 have less than 90 days to vacate the property . CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I don't think a foreclosure would -- MS. FLAGG: I believe she's withdrawing her request for continuance. Page 18 NoJe~bL 19,~OO~? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that what you're stating? MS. JENKS: Right, because there's no point in it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Go ahead and proceed. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. MR. KELLY: I make a motion we accept the photos and whatever evidence you have as packet A. MR. KAUFMAN: I second it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? MR. LARSEN: Has the respondent seen it? MS. SCAVONE: Yes, she has. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, is this a situation where stipulation would be appropriate? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, we don't have a stipulation, so -- and it doesn't sound like it's going to get corrected. So I don't think a stipulation would be worth completing; is that correct? You're not going to correct it or go and get permits necessary? It's in -- MS. SCAVONE: May -- we discussed the stipulation. She wanted to go forth with the hearing. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. WALDRON: Can I just ask the board to make sure that you Page 19 16 1 1 fuj November 19,2009 guys speak in your microphones when you are talking. Thank you. MS. SCAVONE: The photos are just -- they're four photos of the garage that was built. And 1 don't believe -- I don't know if it's finished or -- completely finished or not, ifthere's something more that's going to be added or not, but that's what the photos are, and they remain the same as -- since yesterday. February 11,2009, an anonymous complaint came in that a garage had been constructed without the permits. On February 18, 2009, I made a site visit, observed the new garage was constructed_ No one was home. I left a note for contact trying to get contact of the property owner. Research was later conducted, and it was found that there was no permit on file. On February 26, 2009, I spoke with a man named Steve on behalf of the property owner. He stated that he was working with a builder and that he would go himself to go and get the permits. Time was given to get that taken care of, and the permits still were not pulled. On February -- on March 16, 2009, research again was provided that there was no permits on file. At that time, the Notice of Violation was issued. And as of this date, there are still no permits on file. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: There's been no -- no submittals or anything? MS. SCAVONE: Not at this time, no. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that correct? MS. JENKS: To be honest with you, I have had a paperwork drawn up in order to try and rectify this situation. There's been a lot of confusion in this case. I will tell you it's not as cut-and-dry as it appears. I have taken the time to have drawings done and all kinds of things for the architect to go out and do his thing and to do an affidavit and so on and so forth. We're being put in foreclosure. This will cost me a lot of money to have done, and I don't think it can be taken care of before the 90 Page 20 Nove1b~r ! 9, 20{P p days. MR. LARSEN: Okay. Well, it's a very nice garage. Unfortunately, there are requirements for a permit for the construction. I can understand why, as a homeowner, you may have -- not have been familiar with all the rules and regulations, and sometimes it's really the obligation of the professionals. And I'm sorry to hear that you're in foreclosure. That is, you know, a travesty in this county as well as many other communities nationwide. You say that basically you've already been before the magistrate and he's given a sale date? MS. JENKS: Yes. MR. LARSEN: When is that sale date, ma'am? MS. JENKS: Well, I went on October 14th, and he ordered 90 days. MR. LARSEN: Okay, all right. So you have less than 90 days, and you're concerned that whatever we order here cannot be completed within 90 days; is that it? MS. JENKS: Right. MR. LARSEN: And that -- you're worried that a fine will be imposed upon you after the 90-day period of time? MS. JENKS: (Nods head.) MR. LARSEN: Okay. MR. KELLY: For formalities I make a motion that a violation exists_ MR. LA VINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 21 16 I 1 b~ November 19,2009 MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. MS. RAWSON: Before we do that, there is one speaker, and I'm not sure whether she's on the respondent's case or the county's case, but we should let the speaker speak. And before you vote on a -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. RAWSON: -- motion, we should be sure we close the public hearing. MR. KELLY: Withdraw my motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Second withdrawn? MR. LAVINSKI: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. And the speaker, please? MS. RAWSON: Steve-- MR. STRESSENRY: Stressenry (phonetic). Do I have to be sworn in? (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. STRESSENRY: Yes. I was just here to -- I'm involved with the Jenks case. We did some work out on her property, and I just wanted to see -- basically I was here to see if she -- we -- they sent me before the licensing board. I'm a concrete contractor. We did the work out there and never got paid. Her fiance is a general contractor, so when you said the professionals should let them know, I just wanted to state that a professional was involved. So I didn't get paid, and that's where -- they sent me before the licensing board and said I was supposed to pull the permits. So I just -- that was only -- I just wanted to see if she brought that up. She didn't, so I have nothing further. MS. JENKS: Can I just clarify that? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes. Page 22 16 1 1 ~'J November 19,2009 MS. JENKS: I didn't send anybody before the licensing board. I didn't even know that there were steps to be taken to send somebody before the licensing board. I got a phone call from the licensing board saying, can you please come in and talk to us about the situation that's happened out there. So I didn't send anybody to the licensing board nor did I even know that was an option. MR. STRESSENRY: Okay_ Well, Michael and Rob Gagliano, I spent two days in their office. MR. LARSEN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move to terminate the public comment at this time as not being relative to the proceedings before this board. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'd like to close the public hearing at this point. MR. KELLY: I'll reinstate my motion that a violation exists. MR. LA VINSKI: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. LARSEN: Now, Ms. Jenks, what that means is basically the board found there was a technical violation, that you should have had a permit before the garage was constructed, and that's -- that's what was decided on just now, okay? Page 23 16 I 1 ~; November 19,2009 MS. FLAGG: If it please the board, just to kind of let you know how the foreclosures work, anything that you-all decide on will become the responsibility of the bank, and we will work with the bank. The bank will pay the fines owed, the bank will bring the property into compliance. MR. LARSEN: You understand what the director of code enforcement just explained, Mrs. Jenks? That the levy of the board is against the property, not against you individually; you understand that? MS. JENKS: I do understand that. MR. LARSEN: Okay. MS. JENKS: Thank you very much. MR. LARSEN: So, you know -- and there's also -- you know, the problem is that basically we can't forego that portion of our duties, which is to impose, you know, a penalty for not having a permit. MS. JENKS: I understand. MR. LARSEN: Okay. All right. MS. JENKS: Thank you. MS. SCAVONE: Would you -- MR. LARSEN: Thank you, Ms. Flagg, for that explanation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're not done yet. MS. JENKS: Oh, okay. MS. SCAVONE: The recommendations? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Recommendations, please. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to ask a quickie question. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead. MR. KAUFMAN: Should the board decide that no fines accrue until such time that the bank takes over the property and that code enforcement is given the opportunity to work with the bank, is that proper? MS. FLAGG: Certainly that's the purview of the board. I will Page 24 161 1 fJ!J November 19, 2009 tell you that we -- the banks are paying the fines accrued on the property. We work out arrangements with the bank. Our primary goal, obviously, is to bring the property into compliance before they pass it on to somebody else. MR. KELLY: I think that it's a great idea, and if we construct whatever our settlement is, perhaps just grant extra time so that they don't get to that point where fines would start accruing. MR. KAUFMAN: I agree with that. MR. LARSEN: I'm not sure I agree with that theory, because then what you're doing is you're saying that whomever takes the property, whether it's at public sale, if it's the bank or a third party, what we're saying is that basically the fines are not going to start to accrue until that third party takes ownership; and I think that basically what we should be doing is we should be assessing the penalties against the property owners, not against a party that is not before this board. MR. KAUFMAN: My comment on that would be that if Ms. Jenks had come before the board and said, I'm going to try to take care of this situation, would you give me 90 days, I'm sure that the board, based on our past history, would do that. So the only thing I'm saying is, that if we would do that now, title would probably transfer to the bank, and then the bank would be the responsible party at that time, and they could work directly with code enforcement and work out an agreement to have everything resolved. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right now it's 60 days, because it was from the October date. MR_ KAUFMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But I mean, if that gets prolonged and dragged out, then our fines would be prolonged and dragged out also. MR. LARSEN: Well, also there are situations which are occurring in the realm of foreclosures where many banks are Page 25 Novl~e}19, 2~O~? canceling the sales and not taking possession of the properties. So we'd have a situation, if we predicated it upon the transfer before fines started to accrue, we'd have -- we'd have, you know, impositions of levies or liens in limbo. So I think -- I'm fine with whatever date the board agrees on, whether it's 60 or 90 days, but I just wouldn't predicate it on the transfer of ownership. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is the board ready to hear the recommendation? Okay. MS. SCAVONE: Okay. The recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $83 .15 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by applying for and obtaining a Collier County building permit or demolition permit for all unpermitted construction/improvements to the garage, all related inspections through a Certificate of Completion within a certain amount of days of the date 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 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 LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. KELLY: I'll make a motion that we accept the stipulated agreement with the blanks filled in for 180 days and $200 per day. MR. LARSEN: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? Page 26 16 I 1~? November 19,2009 MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? Nay. Motion passes. Do you understand what we just decided? MS. JENKS: No_ I'd appreciate it if you could explain it, please. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Basically, the recommendation is that the operational costs of $83.15 be paid within 30 days, and then you or the bank will have 180 days to correct the problem, either finish it or remove it or there will be a fine of $200 a day thereafter. All right? MS. JENKS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: You're welcome. Have a good day. MS. JENKS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Next case will be Dale and Keri Ann Ochs and Jeaneen Norton, case number CEVR20090000974. MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of ordinance 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code Section 3.05.0 I B, vegetation removal, protection, and preservation. Description of violation: Clearing of native vegetation without a permit. Location/address where violation exists: Big Cypress National Park, folio number 01138800003. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Dale and Keri Ann Ochs, Richard and Jeaneen Norton, 4050 Southwest 102nd Avenue, Davie, Florida, 33328. Date violation first observed: January 29, 2009. Page 27 16 I 1 f;~ November] 9,2009 Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: February 24, 2009. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: March 30, 2009. Date ofre-inspection: August 18,2009. Results ofre-inspection: The violation remains. I would now like to present Environmental Specialist Susan O'Farrell. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Have you been sworn in? MS. O'FARRELL: Nope, not yet. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. O'FARRELL: And it would appear that our respondents aren't here this morning, so we'll proceed without them. MR. LARSEN: Ms. O'Farrell, where is this property? MS. O'FARRELL: This property -- shall I -- do you want me to go through the whole, like, good morning and how are you stuff? MR. LARSEN: I was just wondering, it said Big Cypress National Park. MS. O'FARRELL: The Big Cypress National Park is out 41 in the Everglades. MR. LARSEN: I know where it is, but where is the house? MS. O'FARRELL: Well, there is no house actually. There are privately owned parcels within the park. MR. LARSEN: Okay. MS. O'FARRELL: So -- and the park has really strict rules on those parcels and what they can and cannot do. This is an unimproved parcel within the park that is privately owned by the Ochs and the Nortons. It's folio number 01138800003. And they are in violation of clearing of native vegetation without a permit. The service was given on February 24th of2009, and I would now like to present Exhibits B, which are photographs of the property as I saw it, and we have Exhibit C, which is a GPS map that was done Page 28 16/1 PJ? November 19,2009 by one of the National Park Service rangers showing the clearing. MR. KELLY: Make a motion to accept all the exhibits. MR. LARSEN: I second that. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. KAUFMAN: How big a piece of property is it? MS. O'FARRELL: I think the property is about five acres. The whole thing wasn't cleared. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has there been any contact with the respondents? Susan, has there been any contact with the respondents? MS_ O'FARRELL: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. O'FARRELL: There has been numerous contacts with the respondents. It took me a while to find them actually and to find the correct address to send them the Notice of Violation, but they were ultimately served. We've had emails and negotiations going back and forth. I've had an environmentalist, Paul Lewis -- is that you? MR. TOSTO: No. MS. O'FARRELL: Okay -- who called asking questions about how to bring the property into compliance_ And the last email I got Page 29 16 I 1 tJ~ November 19, 2009 from them was to go ahead and take it to the Code Enforcement Board because they didn't have the resources to come into compliance. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is it 2.5 acres; is that what it is? On the Notice of Violation it looks like it might be -- MS. O'FARRELL: Yeah. This folio number is 2.5 acres. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Go ahead. MS. O'FARRELL: It's kind of -- it's basically a big square out in the middle of nowhere. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. O'FARRELL: If you'd look at Exhibit E, I can show the property appraiser's picture. MR. KAUFMAN: If! look at Exhibit C, there's a red circle in the back off the -- way off the road. That's the cleared area? MS. O'FARRELL: Exhibit C. We would be talking about the GPS map? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. O'F ARRELL: Yes. The red circle is what was cleared. The blue line was the designated trail which they also widened. The yellow center line is a secondary trail that was not permitted. National Park Service will give them permission to get to their property, so they gave them permission to create a trail, but then they widened the trail and put fill into the trail as well. And then you can see from the purple line the amount of the property itself. And the little yellow dots are where we found stakes and trees that had been taped off like they were going to remove them and place a building on the property. MR. KAUFMAN: So this is basically a landlocked piece of property with a right-of-way to get to it? That's the blue trail? MS. O'FARRELL: Well, it's not actually a right-of-way. It's a permission granted by National Park Service for them to be able to access their camp. It would be more -- it would be called more of a camp than a habitable place. It's all under water right now. I was out Page 30 16 1 1 fJ? November 19,2009 there about a week ago. MR. DEAN: People buy these lots like -- MS. O'FARRELL: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: So you could put a houseboat, but regular boat, probably not. MR. DEAN: Wow. MS. O'FARRELL: According to the National Park -- excuse me -- restrictions, they're not allowed to put anything out there. MR. KAUFMAN: Nothing. MS. O'FARRELL: Once the park took over that section of land, each parcel had to remain exactly the same as it was when the park took over. So they were warned repeatedly by the National Park Service that they couldn't clear, they couldn't put a trailer on there, they couldn't put the docking that you can see to keep themselves above the water. All of that stuff is illegal according to the National Park Service, and all of it was done without a permit according to the Collier County regulations. MR. KAUFMAN: How did you become aware of this violation? MS. O'FARRELL: The violation was reported to me by Christine Clark, who's the lands acquisition manager of National Park Service. They have rangers that patrol the area on a regular basis, and her ranger, Garnet Tritt, who did the GPS mapping, reported it to her, and she reported it to me. MR. ORTEGA: Is there any indication that someone's living there, a trailer? MS. O'FARRELL: No, they wouldn't be able to live out there. It's -- it's a beautiful place to be, but you'd be dead of blood loss from the mosquitoes after about two days. On 1/29/2009, I visited the site and found that there had been removal of native wetland species including, but not limited to, Pop Ash and Cypress as well as Slash Pines and Sabal Palms. Christine Clark, Garnet Tritt, and I all took a -- a section, we Page 31 16 I 1 ~?;; November 19,2009 gridded the section off and counted stumps as we walked through each of our sections kind of going from left to right, and came up with a total of 584 mature and juvenile trees that had been removed. They were thinning out the property rather than clearing it straight away. That was where we found the burn pile; however, the burn pile seems kind of small for that amount of trees to be removed, so I'm not really sure what they did with the trees that they did remove. MR. KAUFMAN: I do see on one of the photographs the back of a pickup truck that's there, so there must be something to get that in there? MS. O'FARRELL: Yeah. They were able to drive machinery back in there. There were tire ruts and tracks. And they've hauled a trailer back there. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion that a violation exists. MR. DEAN: I'll second the motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR_ L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. And now your recommendation? MS. O'FARRELL: The county's recommendation is that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational Page 32 16 lIb? November 19, 2009 costs in the amount of $79.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by preparing a mitigation plan which meets the criteria pursuant to 04-41, as amended, Section 10.02.06(E)(3), and obtain approval of the required plan, and the mitigation plan shall be prepared by a person who meets or exceeds the credentials specified in 04-41, as amended, Section 1 0.02.02(A)(3), within a number of days that you see fit, or a daily fine of a certain amount shall be assessed until the mitigation plan is submitted. The mitigation plan must be implemented within a certain number of days of approval of the plan by county staff or a daily fine of a certain amount will be assessed as long as the violation persists. The respondent must notify the code enforcement investigator when the violation has been abated in order to conduct a final investigation 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. MR. KELLY: Susan, could you read the -- I guess it's the third paragraph, again, for me? It's the one after the mitigation plan. It's about the actual work. MS. O'FARRELL: The implementation? MR. KELLY: Yes. MS. O'FARRELL: The mitigation plan must be implemented within a certain number of days as you see fit of approval of the plan by the county or a daily fine of a certain amount of money will be assessed as long as a violation persists. MR. LARSEN: Let me ask you a question, Ms. O'Farrell. A first generation Cypress, how long does it take to grow to maturity? MS. O'FARRELL: Do you want a history of the area? MR. LARSEN: No, just -- you know, you have a photograph Page 33 161 1 fj? November 19,2009 here and it says, a first generation Cypress. MS. O'FARRELL: All right. I'll have to give you a little history then. The Fakahatchee Strand in that area of the Big Cypress that was completely logged during the 1940's. They used the Cypress for boardwalks, cigar boxes, benches, various and sundry, really important things that we needed. These Cypress Trees are the ones that have recruited after that logging. So first generation would be after the original, so we're talking about 40 to 60 years to get to be that height. MR. LARSEN: Okay. All right. And you said that there were over 500 trees of different maturities that seemed to have -- MS. O'FARRELL: Yes. MR_ LARSEN: -- been taken out? MS. O'FARRELL: We found -- well, they had the stumps. MR. LARSEN: They had the stumps. MS. O'FARRELL: The one -- the reason that I took the picture of the stump that -- I don't even know if anyone -- I tested the people in my prehearing. It's a large round thing that you can't really tell what it is. That's a fresh stump with sap oozing out of it. The Ochs and the Nortons insisted that they hadn't done any clearing for months, but sap doesn't ooze for months after clearing so -- and that was a large stump. MR. KAUFMAN: So in your discussions with the owners of the property, they said that they did not do this? Did they have any idea how it got done or -- MS. O'FARRELL: They had -- they had some statements to make about how they had called the county and that I had told them which trees they were allowed to remove, which native trees they were allowed to remove. And I think everybody in this building pretty much knows that I wouldn't tell anybody to cut any tree down. So they had a lot of reasons for why things were done, but none of them really made any sense for that many trees to be cut down in Page 34 16 I 1 63 November 19, 2009 that space. MR. LARSEN: So your recommendation is basically to put together a mitigation plan and that failure to do so -- MS. O'FARRELL: That's the recommendation that I'm required to give according to the Land Development Code. I don't see that happening. What I see happening is that the National Park Service will acquire the land because they're now out of compliance and aren't going to be able to come into compliance. So I would suggest 90 days for them to come into compliance and that way the National Park Service can start its acquisition process before the fines start to accrue. That's -- because they've said they're not going to be able to do the mitigation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Question. Is there any action that National Park Service can take to bring them into compliance, or is this the venue? MS. O'FARRELL: This is the venue. The National Park Service requires all parcel owners to be in compliance with all of the codes. So if the -- ifthere had been wetlands involved, you know, serious wetland devastation, we would have had the DEP involved. The county was involved because they did the clearing without the permits. The federal government, for some reason, doesn't have specific, do this or else, in their booklet. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to see if! can fill in the blanks for you. MR. KELLY: I have, just real quick, two questions, if you will. MR. KAUFMAN: Sure. MR. KELLY: One, is there any type of permit, or was there anyone that said they could or couldn't do anything to this property? MS. O'FARRELL: No. MR. KELLY: And number two, if we find a violation exists and we put these type of restrictions on it, let's say, for instance, 90 days, Page 35 16 1 1 b?J November 19,2009 as per your suggestion, if the National Park Service takes ownership of this property, they would then have to still make this property come into compliance under those same restrictions and hence be fined X number of dollars per day after that? MS. O'FARRELL: Yeah. That's where it gets kind of tricky, because we don't generally have cases against the federal government. MR. LARSEN: And correct me ifI'm wrong, Ms. Rawson, do we have the authority to bind the federal government to any kind of a directive emanating from this board? MS. RAWSON: Well, we're not binding the federal government today. We're binding the owners of this property. But in answer to your question, probably not. But the federal government at the moment is not the title owner of the property. MR. LARSEN: Right. But my point is basically, if they become the owner of the property, then they wouldn't necessarily have to file a mitigation plan. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: How's this different than a house that goes into foreclosure and is owned by -- MS. RAWSON: I think they still have to come into compliance. Now, whether or not they're going to pay the fines to Collier County is another story. MR. LARSEN : Yeah. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. O'FARRELL: Yeah. The cases with the federal government get pretty tricky because of all the different levels you have to go through and the interior of the department and all of that. MR. LARSEN: Well, you know, it all boils down to whether or not we should give 90 days or we should give an extended period of time. Ifwe give the 90 days, is that a triggering mechanism for the, you know, the government to move at that point? MS. O'FARRELL: Well, the federal government's already been triggered because they're out of compliance. Page 36 16 1 1 PJ:? November 19, 2009 MR. LARSEN: Okay. MS. O'FARRELL: And they were on a condemnation list anyways. That part -- because it was an undeveloped parcel, they would have been -- they would have gone through the condemnation process, which is where they take over the property within ten years. By clearing the property, they just moved themselves up about nine and a half years. So if we give them 120 days or if we give them six months, the Ochs and the Nortons don't apparently seem inclined to do the mitigation plan. So at some point it's going to go to the federal government. MR. LARSEN: All right. MS. O'FARRELL: What -- basically what they did by clearing was triggering that condemnation process to start a whole lot earlier. MR. KELLY: And you, or Collier County Code Enforcement, would ensure that regardless of whoever takes ownership of this property will make sure that that mitigation gets done and we finally go through to whatever is necessary, regardless of who owns it. MS. O'FARRELL: I'll do my best. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: 1 think we're ready for a recommendation. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. I'll try to fill in the blanks. MS. O'FARRELL: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Pay the operational costs of $79.72 within 30 days. The first blank I'd like to fill in is to develop the mitigation program in 60 days and complete the work within 90 days or a $IOO-a-day fine imposed. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Ninety days from when, from today? MR. KAUFMAN: From today, 90 days from-- MS. O'FARRELL: Wait a minute. I got confused. From the approval? Page 37 : 6 J 1 02 November 19, 2009 MR. KAUFMAN: Ninety days after the 60 days; 60 days to have the plan, and then 90 days from then to -- MS. O'FARRELL: Having the plan approved? MR. KAUFMAN: Right. MS. O'FARRELL: And then, do you want to give me a fine for the 60 days to submit the mitigation plan? MR. KAUFMAN: Same $100 a day. MS. O'FARRELL: Hundred dollars. MR. LARSEN: 1 would respectfully disagree with my colleague in regard to the fine amounts. I would suggest a $500-a-day fine. MR. LA VINSKI: Yeah, I agree that $100 is not appropriate in this case. MR. KAUFMAN: $500, I will amend my motion. MR. KELLY: I -- 1 don't agree with that at all. I think. $500 is when we have second offender public health and safety issues. I mean, I think that's absolutely excessive. I can't support a motion at that amount. MR. LA VINSKI: This is a blatant continuing violation. I don't see how we can hold that it's not significant, especially in a national -- MR. KAUFMAN: It appears to me that no matter what number we come up with it won't be paid by the offenders that we have already found to be in violation. So whether it's $100 a day or $500 a day is a moot point. But if you'd like to split the baby and make it $250 a day, I'd be amenable to that as well. MR. LARSEN: Well, my concern always is basically, you know, that people who engage in activities designed to undermine the laws, you know, receive a penalty commensurate with the damage that they have wrought. And here, this is the Big Cypress and it's protected habitat, and clearly the damage is very, very extensive, as showed by photographs. And I understand Mr. Kelly's position quite well and I agree. Typically we don't impose a fine of that magnitude unless it's Page 38 161 1 PJ'? November 19,2009 extremely serious. But I do believe, as Mr. Lavinski believes, that basically under these circumstances, a fine of such magnitude is warranted. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? MS. O'FARRELL: I have an opinion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What's that? MS. O'FARRELL: If you're still open for opinions. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, we're really -- it's discussion of the board at this point, so -- okay. I have a motion. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, let's get to the amount. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: I have modified my motion to show $500. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Correct. And then you said I'd be agree- -- I agree with 250, so what is your motion? MR. KAUFMAN: I'm going to stay with the $500. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. I have a motion and, ifl'm not mistaken, a second by Mr. Larsen; is that correct? MR. LARSEN: Yes, I second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? MR. KELLY: Nay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Nay. Motion passes. MS. O'FARRELL: Is that $500 for both sections; one and two? Page 39 16 I 1 0; November 19, 2009 MR. KAUFMAN: The first date is the 60 days on the developing the plan. MS. O'FARRELL: Right. MR. KAUFMAN: I would stay with the $100 a day on that one. MS. O'FARRELL: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: Unless I hear any-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is that how it was understood for the second? MR. KAUFMAN: Yes. MS. O'FARRELL: And then the second one with the mitigation implementation would be $500 per day. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We want to make sure that-- MR. KAUFMAN: That's correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- the board is clear that it's 500 and 100, that that's what we were voting on. MR. DEAN: One hundred on the 60 and 500 on the remaining? MR. KAUFMAN: That's correct. MR. LARSEN: Yes, I'll support that. MS. WALDRON: Just for clarification on the record, they're submitting the mitigation plan within 60 days or a $1 OO-per-day fine and installing the vegetation within 90 days of acceptance of mitigation plan or $500 a day? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. DEAN: Correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Correct, yes. MS. O'FARRELL: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to compliment the person who took these pictures. They're excellent. MS. O'FARRELL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. The next one will be Alba R. -- Page 40 16 I 1 6? November 19, 2009 MR. DEAN: Licci. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- Licci. I'm not sure if I'm saying that correctly or not. MR. DEAN: Close enough. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But case number CESD20090007768. And then we'll probably take a break after this. MS. RAWSON: And Mr. Chair, there is a speaker on this case as well. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'll try to remember that there's a speaker. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of ordinance 04-41, as amended, Collier County Land Development Code, Section 1O.02.06(B)(1)( e). Description of violation: A garage converted into living space without permits. Location/address where violation exists: 2395 39th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120, folio number 39890600005. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Alba R. Licci, 2395 39th Avenue Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120. Date violation first observed: June 8, 2009. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: August 20,2009. Date on/by violation to be corrected: September 8, 2009. And date ofre-inspection: September 21,2009. Results of the re-inspection is that the violation remains. At this time I would like to present Investigator Ralph Bosa. MR. BOSA: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Ralph Bosa, Collier County Code Enforcement. This is in reference to Case Number CESD20090007768. It's dealing with a violation of a garage converted into a living space Page 41 16 I 1 ~3 November 19,2009 without permits. It is located at 2395 39th Ave. Northeast, Naples, Florida, 34120, folio number of 39890600005. Service was given on August 20th, and I received proof of service that it was received -- from the post office that it was received on that date. I'd like to present the case evidence in the following exhibits. Exhibit B, I have seven photographs taken on June 8, 2009, of the interior of the garage. MR. KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photographs? MR. BOSA: Yes, he has. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion that we accept. MR. DEAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? All those in MR. KELLY: Actually, I do have a question about the respondent's representative and relationship to the respondent. MR. BOSA: He has the power of attorney for the respondent. His name is -- Mr. Spalding has power of attorney. MR. KELLY: Thank you. No further. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. We have a motion, a first and a second. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? Page 42 Nov~m~et19,~o~~ (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Go ahead. MR. BOSA: On June 8, 2009, I met with Mr. Brian Spalding to grant me access into the garage of the home. After he signed an entry consent form, I inspected the garage and found that it had been converted into a living space. Mr. Spalding stated that the home was under lis pendens and that the current owner was attempting to renegotiate the mortgage to keep the home. Currently the home is occupied by the son of the respondent. On August 20,2009, I hand delivered the NOV to the home. A gentleman by the name of John, who claimed to be a roommate of the homeowner, took the NOV but refused to sign. I then spoke with Mr. Spalding on September 22, 2009, and he stated the violation still remains. And the case was prepared for today's hearing. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Mr. Spalding, can you state your name for the record? MR. SPALDING: Brian Spalding with Crown Consulting. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Crown Consulting, okay. And can you tell me your relationship with the owner? MR. SPAULDING: I have power of attorney for Ms. Licci, and I also represent her as a real estate consultant. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good. Do you have anything to add regarding this? MR. SPAULDING: No, just -- we agree with the findings. We became aware -- I was able to do a physical inspection of the property. This property is in pre-foreclosure. I believe the filing was November 14th of2008. I was contacted by Ms. Licci in May to assist in her options. An appraisal was done on May 12,2008. At that time, through the physical inspection, we recognized that there was an improvement to Page 43 16 I 1 /?J?J November 19,2009 the garage. We did a permit search; showed there was no permit. On June 8th we sent a contract to the current lender, which is Sun Coast Federal School (sic). Made them aware that there is a violation. We sent them the report that was given to us. On October 28,2009, there was a court-ordered hearing. They did not show up. The owner, Ms. Licci, through a series of financial hardships, is not able to abate this issue on her own. There is a buyer right now -- we have it under contract -- who is aware of the violation, who has agreed that ifhe can purchase that property, that that would be done, and he would pull the necessary permits and do the necessary demolition and then bring back the garage to its original condition, which would be in full compliance. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What stage of the process are you in with the buyer? MR. SPAULDING: We have a fully executed agreement that was delivered to the lender on June 8th. We received an approval letter with stipulations. The stipulations we would not agree with, so we're kind of at a standstill. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Who would not agree with? MR. SPAULDING: I'm sorry? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Who would not agree with the -- MR. SPAULDING: The owner, the property owner, did not agree with some of the stipulations that the lender had imposed upon the approval of the sale. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: When was the closing supposed to take place? MR. SPAULDING: There's -- in these types of transactions, usually closings are not set in a traditional sale that you would normally have. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, they're set once the bank tells you that they -- MR. SPAULDING: Yes. Page 44 16 I 1 f!;?J November 19, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- approve a sale, usually 30 days. MR. SPAULDING: That is correct. A closing date was never set because the stipulations were not met, so there was not -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, usually in the letter that's approved from the bank, the approval letter for the -- MR. SPAULDING: There was not on this particular one, sir. I do agree with what you're saying, but in this particular instance, there was not a closing date set. It is still open. MR. KAUFMAN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that a violation exists. MR. KELLY: We have a speaker, reminder. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yeah. We have one speaker. MS. RAWSON: Well, no. I guess he was the speaker. MR. SPAULDING: I didn't know. I didn't realize. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MS. RAWSON: He signed the speaker card, but he is actually the power of attorney. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Very good. MR. LARSEN: I'll second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Page 45 16 I 1 tJ?; November 19,2009 MR. ORTEGA: Just one note, for the record. When citing building codes, the 2004 building code is no longer our building code. It's 2007. And they're actually citing this in our package, just for the record. And this is not the -- and I mean, this is across the board. MR. KELLY: Isn't -- isn't the code applicable to when the renovations were actually completed? For instance, if this was done during that time, then that's the code they would cite them by. MR. ORTEGA: It's when the permit is applied for, at that point. And, of course, the 2007 building code became effective March 1st. So anything after that would have to be the 2007, not the 2004. MR. BOSA: Yeah. A permit was never applied for, never in applying status. MR. KELLY: All right. MR. LARSEN: And the deed was recorded on 9/21/07. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: So I guess, Jean, a question. MS. RAWSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: In light of this, should they be cited based on the 2007 Florida Building Code? MS. RAWSON: They were cited under Collier County Land Development Code 04-41. MR. KELLY: It's like almost inconsequential, the ordinance. MS. RAWSON: And it always says as amended. MR. KAUFMAN: I guess going forward, the sheet that we have in our package that shows the building code for 2004, you may want to look at that to be updated for future cases. MR. KELLY: It's inconsequential. They're in violation of an ordinance which says they have to have a permit. It doesn't matter what building code it was pulled under. MR. LARSEN: Well, you know, for purposes of the motion, I believe Mr. Spalding did admit that basically they were in violation. So it's not even a contention before the board based upon that admission. Page 46 16 I 1~?J November 19,2009 So I guess the motion, which has been seconded, is just to find them in violation, and then we can discuss any recommendations as to penalties. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We had a motion, we had a second. Did we vote on it? All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSON: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. I think we did vote on that. MR. DEAN: Yeah, we did. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Just wanted to make sure. Okay. Recommendation? MR. BOSA: The county recommends that the Code Enforcement Board orders the respondent to pay all operational costs in the amount of $81.72 incurred in the prosecution of this case within 30 days and abate all violations by applying for and obtaining a Collier County building permit or demolition permit for the conversion or improvement and obtain all related inspections through a Certificate of Completion within X amounts of days from the date of this hearing or a fine of X amount a day will be imposed until the violation is abated. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would anyone like to take a stab at it? MR. KAUFMAN: I'll try. The operational costs of$81.72 -- I'm Page 47 16 I 1 0~ November 19,2009 trying to fill in the blanks -- apply for the permits within 60 days, the fine for exceeding the 60 days would be $200 a day, and that all permits and completion of the project be done within 120 days, that's after the 60 days, or a fine of $200 a day be imposed. Doesn't make sense, Jen? 1 saw the scowl. MS. WALDRON: You're breaking it up into to two sections, which normally isn't what we do, but it's up to you. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. Let's just make it the $200 a day and the 120 days to have it completed. MR. SPAULDING: Can I speak prior to that? Is that allowed? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Public hearing is currently closed. MR. SPAULDING: Oh, okay. MR. BOSA: Just got to read the second part here which I missed out on. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, go ahead. MR. BOSA: 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 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 LEFEBVRE: Thank you. MR. LARSEN: All right. If! understand this correctly, there is a garage that is converted, and there's a wall down the middle of the garage into two units, correct? MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: Okay. And no permits were obtained for that conversion? MR. BOSA: No, sir. As of yesterday when I checked, no permits at all. MR. LARSEN: Is the unit being occupied? Page 48 16 1 1 ~I:J November 19,2009 MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It's a little bit late for -- MR. LARSEN: For purposes of the recommendation and the time frame for which they have to comply -- MR. DEAN: Can I ask a question? What do you mean, a little late? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, that should have been part of the case itself. MR. DEAN: I mean, what concerns this board, and it has been for the four years I've been on it, is to me, that's a safety issue. A son and his family live in the property and they have no permits, and this is added onto the home, and wiring might be hanging anywhere. If it's an electrical problem, there could be a fire tomorrow, and here we sit as a board saying, wow, you know, and I -- to me there's got to be a way to shut it off, and I mean now, and that's how I feel; because I have a lot of articles in my packet about, in other states, where families just died in a fire because of electrical wiring, and that's the purpose of getting a permit, and we're real strong about that on this board, and I know that. And to me, if you don't have a permit, you've got to close it down, period. Thank you. MR. KELLY: I concur with Mr. Dean. MR. LA VINSKI: Yeah, I would support that decision myself. MR. KAUFMAN: I'll withdraw my motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear another motion? MR. DEAN: Well, I'd like to know, is there a way to -- like is there a wall going down -- where they added the garage, is there a way to seal that off, turn off that electric, and just have the home function as it -- because it's permitted. MR. SPAULDING: There is. MR. DEAN: There is. So can we do that? MR. SPAULDING: We can. Page 49 161 1 Pi) November 19, 2009 MR. DEAN: So that would be part of my motion is, as of now. MR. ORTEGA: However, you will need a permit for the work to be done in order to do that? MR. DEAN: Well, I don't know. Tome, ifit'sjust--you're shutting it off, you've got a fuse box, you turn it off. I don't think you need a permit to do that. MR. SPAULDING: It's a breaker to that unit, to that section. MR. DEAN: It's a breaker, so you just flip the switch. MR. ORTEGA: But if you're going to separate the two spaces, there has to be some type of wall. Setting a breaker off, anybody can come and turn it right back on. MR. DEAN: That's true. Anybody can do anything, but my concern is the son and a family that live there. That's-- MR. LARSEN: You know, it's important for the board to take a position that basically there was a directive that the electricity be terminated to this unit. I mean, you know, whether or not they violate the direction of the board is something that we can't foresee at this point. I agree with Mr. Dean, I don't believe it's too late to inquire into these matters. I think it's very important that we know the status of the property as we're making our determination as to the penalty to be imposed. You know, we don't want to be punitive and we don't want to deny people due process, but by the same token, we have to protect the citizenry of this county; therefore, I'm of the mind that an immediate order be issued to terminate the electricity to this offending unit. And, you know, ifthere is anybody opposed to that, I'd like to hear their reasons why. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Mr. Chairman, you can always request that the breaker be physically removed also. MR. KELLY: I wanted to comment on Mr. Larsen's statement. I think you're right. I think, you know, if you, sir, the respondent have Page 50 16 J 1 e;3 November 19, 2009 the capacity to get in the unit and you say that you could waive service and take care of that for us within 70 hours, I think we, as a board, would feel great. MR. SPALDING: That's what our position is. We would like to waive the 60 day and have this imposed immediately so that there's an immediate response from your board saying that this violation -- you have already agreed that a violation exists. We would like to see that the violation is abated immediately and not given 60 or 120 days due to the electric aspect of it. There are inhabitants there. MR. KELLY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would you like to make a motion, Larry? MR. DEAN: No. Mr. Larsen, make my motion. MR. LARSEN: I would move that basically the electricity be terminated to this offending unit within 48 hours. Failure to do so will result in penalties accruing at the amount of $200 per day. Now, in regard to their permits, you know, it's always difficult to estimate how much time it will take to get the permits in order. But I think under these circumstances, we'd ask that the permits be obtained within 30 days or demolition occur within the period of30 days; otherwise, a fine of $200 per day will accrue. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Permits and -- okay. So permits wouldn't be the CO. MR. LARSEN: Additionally, in regard to the cost of prosecution, that they be paid within 30 days. MR. SPAULDING: Would that be 400 a day? MR. LARSEN: No, it would be 200. MR. SPAULDING: Two hundred for electric and 200 for the permit? MR. LARSEN: No. It would be just the $200 per day. All right. It'd be $200 per day should you not terminate the electric to the unit. MR. SPAULDING: Within 48 hours? Page 51 16 1 1 ~ November 19,2009 MR. LARSEN: Within 48 hours, okay. That's the first part. So I guess you're correct, sir, now that I understand your question. And then should -- MR. SPAULDfNG: And then thirty days later if the abatement is still not done, then we would accrue an additional $200 a day. MR. LARSEN: Right. MR. SPAULDING: So first 0 to 29 is 200,30 on would be 400 a day. MR. LARSEN: That's correct. MR. SPAULDING: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Now, would there be an inspection after the 48 hours to make sure that the power was, in fact, terminated? MR. LARSEN: I believe that would be prudent. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And terminated, we mean the circuit breaker would be disconnected; is that correct? Is that what we're -- MR. LARSEN: You know, I-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Short of just flipping a switch, because when they see code enforcement at the door, they can flip the switch off. MR. LARSEN: You know, I hate to get into the technical aspects of it, but my motion would be that the service be disconnected to that unit. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Disconnected to the garage. MR. SPAULDING: FPL, you mean, disconnecting? MR. LARSEN: To the -- to-- MR. SPAULDING: Are you talking within the structure itself, the area that's in violation to be terminated? MR. LARSEN: Right. MR. SPAULDING: Or the entire structure? MR. LARSEN: No, just the area that's in violation. So, for example, if there was new wiring ran to that service box, that that Page 52 NovfmPe)19, 2~09'~ wiring be disconnected. Now, I assume that you might have to have an electrician look at this, but, you know, that's above my pay grade. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Jean, do you have that? Is that clear enough? I want to make it specific -- as clear as possible because I just don't want the circuit breaker to be turned off. MS. RAWSON: Well, here's -- no, I got that part. We need to shut off the electricity. Within 48 hours we probably won't even have a signed order and so I think it's incumbent on the respondent to notifY the county within 48 hours that it's done, because we won't have an order within 48 hours. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. RAWSON: And then if it's not done within the 48 hours, of course, this order would then go into effect. MR. KELLY: Jean, does it do anything that I asked if the respondent would waive service in this situation? MS. RAWSON: Well, the waiving of the service would be for the next meeting. MR. KELLY: Oh. MS. RAWSON: We just won't have a signed order within 48 hours, so it's incumbent upon the county and respondent to get together within 48 hours and be sure that that's happened. This order will go into effect; it will just be after the fact. MR. LARSEN: Okay. All right. So the -- part of my motion would be that the county is directed to inspect the premises within 48 hours to assure compliance with this board's order. MR. BOSA: Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: Mr. Dean, is the motion-- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you second the motion? MR. LARSEN: -- satisfactory? MR. DEAN: I second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: There you go. Any further Page 53 161 1 fj) November] 9,2009 discussion? MR. ORTEGA: I would probably add that it be done, the work be done by a licensed electrical contractor. MR. LARSEN: Motion is so amended. MR. DEAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. SPAULDING: Thank you for your time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do you understand what we just did? MR. SPAULDING: I do. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Very good. We'll take a little bit of a break. Ten minutes. We'll be back at 25 of. (A briefrecess was had.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I'd like to call the Code Enforcement Board back to order. MS. WALDRON: I don't think we're recording. THE COURT REPORTER: I turned it on. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Figure out where we are. MS. WALDRON: Number five of the hearings. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Page 54 161 1 03 November 19,2009 MR. DEAN: Yeah, Pamboukis. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. This name. MR. DEAN: Pamboukis. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Agathonicos Pamboukis. It's a real tough name. One of the most difficult ones I've seen yet. MR. DEAN: You pronounced it perfect. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yeah. MR. KAUFMAN: Easy for you to say. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Case number CESD200911000. Is the respondent present, because I'd like to have a pronunciation on it. He is not. Okay. Thank you. If you would swear in the investigator, please. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. WALDRON: This is reference to violation of ordinance, the Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section 1 0.02.06(B)(1 )(a). Description of violation: Structural, electrical, and plumbing improvements made to structure without first applying for and obtaining all required permits to perform such improvements. Location/address where violation exists: 201 Santa Clara Drive, Unit #9, Naples, Florida, folio 46573004801. Name and address of owner/person in charge of violation location: Agathonicos Pamboukis, 1874 Englewood Avenue, Akron, Ohio, 44312. Date violation first observed: June 24, 2009. Date owner/person in charge given Notice of Violation: June 25, 2009. Date on/by which violation to be corrected: July 25, 2009. Date ofre-inspection: October 22,2009. Results ofre-inspection: Violation remains. I'd like to now present Investigator Reggie Smith. MR. SMITH: Good morning. For the record, Investigator Page 55 Novlm~e} 19, f009 ~ Reggie Smith, Collier County Code Enforcement. This case is in reference to case number CESD200900 11 000 dealing with the violation of structural, electrical, and plumbing improvements being made to a condo unit without permits, located at 201 Santa Clara Drive, Unit #9, Naples, Florida, 34112. Service was given on the 25th of June, 2009, by posting of the property in the Collier County Courthouse. A Notice of Violation was mailed regular and certified mail on the 26th of June. Proof of service was received on the 6th of July, 2009. I would like now to present the evidence in this case with the following exhibits. Exhibits A is a series of photos 1 through 5 all dated the 24th of June of2009, and Exhibit B is a letter from the owner to -- addressed to myself and the Code Enforcement Board. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion we accept the exhibits. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear -- MR. KELLY: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- hear a second? Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSON: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. SMITH: Exhibit Al is a photograph upon entry to the unit basically just showing work happening at this unit. Doesn't exactly Page 56 16\ It;J November 19,2009 show a violation there, just for a reference. A2 is a photo of one of the bathrooms showing electrical work. The back wall is all replaced drywall, and below that you can see the plumbing work. A3, again, is a photo of drywall being replaced on all three of those walls visible in the photo. A4 is a picture of the kitchen area where the water heater normally exists and some work being done there. Looks like drywall and whatnot. A5 is a picture of the kitchen with the entire sink being removed and the plumbing being worked on there with some electrical wiring hanging there. Exhibit B is a letter that I received via email yesterday at three p.m. from the owner basically telling his story from June of this year up till today of how he's been troubled with an unlicensed contractor and basically asking for a continuance. I did return his email advising him of the exact wording of our Notice of Hearing that was sent certified mail, the five-day requirement for requesting a continuance. But I thought this was important. It basically is telling -- him telling us what he's done, naming a contractor who has been given a citation by our contractor's licensing officer. He was an unlicensed contractor. So I told him I would present that today, and the board would take that into account. MR. KAUFMAN: Make a motion that we find this respondent in violation. MR. LARSEN: I second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? MR. SMITH: Just as of yesterday, researching the permitting, no -- permits have still not been applied for, for any improvements to this unit. And this is a condo unit, so the owner would not be able to pull the permits himself. He is out of state and cannot find the contractor. Page 57 16 I 1 ~~ November 19, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Because it says that he has tried to pull permits; is there any record of that? MR. SMITH: The only record of that is me providing him permitting's phone number for him to get the information that's required. They basically told him you're out of state, this is a condo unit. A licensed contractor has to pull the permits for this. You would not be allowed to do this. His story is that he had a contractor that he believed was licensed, and until we arrived and found that he was unlicensed, he's kind of out the wrong way. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The -- the gain access, you gained access due to the fact that there was a contractor there; is that correct? They let you in? MR. SMITH: Correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any other further -- or any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Can I hear your recommendation now? MR. SMITH: County's recommendation is 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 Page 58 16 1 1 ~? November 19,2009 30 days and abate all violations by applying for and obtaining a Collier County building permit or demolition permit for all unimproved -- or unpermitted construction improvements to the unit, all related inspections through a Certificate of Completion within the Code Enforcement Board's recommended amount of days of the date ofthis hearing or a fine of, again, the board's recommended amount of money 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. I f 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. MR. KAUFMAN: Is this property vacant? MR. SMITH: Yes. This property was purchased in April of this year. MR. LARSEN: Out of foreclosure sale, right? MR. SMITH: Possibly, from the bank. This was most likely a foreclosed property, went back to the bank, and he purchased it. MR. KELLY: Can I ask a question just about the time line so that I understand a little bit better? I'm going to take a cue from Mr. Larsen. Did this email come after your phone conversation where you gave him the phone number from the permitting department? MR. SMITH: Definitely. MR. KELLY: Okay. MR. SMITH: I do have a series of emails going back and forth from myself and this owner starting -- MR. KELLY: Well, my question is this. Maybe this will save some time. Do you think he knew that he needed a contractor that was licensed and would pull a permit? Page 59 16 \ 1 tJ3 November 19,2009 MR. SMITH: Initially-- MR. KELLY: Yes. MR. SMITH: -- I believe he thought he had a licensed contractor. And in his letter there he states that he feels that that licensed contractor knew all of the ordinances and everything that we have here to do the work correctly. Obviously not. I do have a series of emails here from early on beginning on -- our email conversation started on the 25th of August. MR. KELLY: That's okay. MR. SMITH: Okay. And from the very beginning there I had told him a licensed contractor is required to pull a permit whether the permits -- or the improvements are to stay or to be demo'd. MR. KAUFMAN: Can I ask ifhe has, since you have contacted him, tried to get a hold of a licensed contractor. MR. SMITH: At one point in time he told me over the phone that he did hire somebody. I put it in my case notes. Nothing came from that. It was never mentioned again. Nothing was ever applied for in the county permitting. MR. LARSEN: His letter indicates basically he wants an indefinite period of time to work out an arrangement with the contractor and obtain a permit because he won't be down here until after the turn of the year. MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. MR. DEAN: Let me ask one question. The -- when somebody gets a -- going for permitting, do they have to go through the condo association to get approval? MR. SMITH: I'm not sure. MR. ORTEGA: In most cases. MR. DEAN: Is it? MR. KAUFMAN: Depends on the condo association's, their rules and regs. MR. DEAN: So Florida Statute doesn't require anything like that Page 60 16 1 1 bb November 19,2009 or wouldn't be involved with that or anything? MS. RAWSON: No. It depends on the rules and regulations of the condominium association. MR. DEAN: Okay. MS. RAWSON: And I'm not an expert on condominium law, but I don't think so. MR. KELLY: Well, if! may, I move to accept the county's recommendation with 60 days and $200 per day. MR. LARSEN: I second that motion. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Permits and all? MR. KELLY: Yeah, completed, just as it was read to us, yeah. MR. DEAN: And operational costs, 81.15. MR. KELLY: Everything, yep. MR. DEAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. Thank you very much. MR. SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: We're going to be moving on to imposition of -- imposition of fines, correct? Okay. Page 61 16 I 1 h3 November 19,2009 And the first one will be Domenic P. Tosto, case number 2005010592. And I know he -- there he is. You're up. MR. TOSTO: Sorry. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Ordinance 04-58, the property maintenance code, Section 6, Paragraph 12, Section 11, 12, 15, and 16, and Collier County Ordinance 2005-44, the litter and weed ordinance Section 7 and 8. The location of the violation is the folio number 01199120007. Description of violation: No progress and a continuation of neglected maintenance and unsafe conditions relative to a storm-damaged, two-story concrete and wood frame, seven-do me-shaped residential structure. All same premises left unattended and a potential hazard. Also litter and abandoned property consisting of, but not limited to, fire damage, weather damage, structural elements, plumbing installations, construction materials, metal, plastic, and paper items left uncontained and unattended throughout this entire area of critical state-concern, special treatment zoned property. On April 26, 2007, 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 4224 PG 0252, for more information. The respondent has not complied with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 19,2009. The county's recommendation is to issue an order for fines at the rate of$250 per day for the period between November 2,2007, to November 19,2009, 746 days, for the total of$186,500. Fines continue to accrue. Previous operational costs of $1 ,295.34 have not been paid. Additional operational costs of $82.45 have incurred for the Novelg 119, 20t9~? imposition of fines herein. The total recommended lien amount is $187,877.79. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: This board heard this case, I think it was back about three years ago probably? MR. TOSTO: We've heard it -- you guys have heard it several times, particularly when a new person takes over the case, like Mr. Seabasty. He just took over the case a couple of months ago, and he contacted me, and we actually had a hearing last month that we never actually made it to you guys. It was scratched before because we had -- their attorney -- your attorney came down and I had explained what went on, and we brought everything up to date. And it seems as though when I left that meeting that all was good and we were just going to continue on as we were; however, it seems as though something happened in between that 30-day period and today to bring us to this point. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. There's several new board members. This is a somewhat complicated case with many different state and federal agencies involved. I'm not sure if we want to hear a little bit of an update. I mean, maybe you can -- MR. TOSTO: Sure, I would love to. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. TOSTO: We've been issued a letter of intent from the Army Corps of Engineers stating that it's their intention to issue us a boat dock, and all of the abutting properties have been notified to that. We've recently -- on November 5th we had a meeting with DEP to go over construction procedures, okay. It's my understanding that they're leaning in the direction of issuing a permit. Now they want to know how you're going to do the construction, you know, how long is the crane going to be on the beach, how big is the envelope, the working envelope, going to be, you know, how are we going to not impact the seven endangered species that you're working around to the least as possible. Page 63 16 I 1 h'1 November 19, 2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Maybe you can give a 30-second synopsis of what you're trying to do for some of the newer board members. MR. TOSTO: Sure, sure. MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chairman, can I have the respondent identifY himself, please. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Sorry. MR. TOSTO: Sure. My name is John Tosto, John Joseph Tosto. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And you're the son ofDomenic, correct? MR. TOSTO: Correct. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. Just a quick 30-second synopsis of what you're trying to do. MR. TOSTO: Okay. I am trying to renovate the property that myself and my family own on Cape Romano and -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It's a series of dome buildings. MR. TOSTO: It's six -- it's dome structures. What happened is they built the domes right on the sand with no penetration, and when the waves came, washed away the sand, and the domes, you know, kind of tilted however they wanted. We're -- it's our plan to build a new foundation, cut the domes from the old foundation, put them on the new foundation and demolish the existing foundation. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Is the boat dock part of what you need to bring in materials and so forth? You'll need a boat dock? Is that the first step? Or can you do -- can you -- MR. TOSTO: No. Typically on an island, build a boat dock is the first thing that's put in for that, but no, we don't need that for that. Most of the equipment will be coming over by barge. And the barge has a gate that actually opens up right on the beach, so, no, we don't need the boat dock to proceed. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. What are you waiting for Page 64 16 I 1~?J November 19,2009 right now? And, again, in previous times that you've come in front of us, you've given us a time frame on when you expect certain things to be done. So if you could maybe go into that. MR. TOSTO: We are -- there's three parts to this. There's the Army Corps of Engineers, there's the DEP environmental permit, and there's the Collier County permitting. We expect to be -- we are going to ask to let Collier County let us apply for a permit before the environmental resource from the DEP is issued, and we expect to have those plans ready in December to go to Collier County. Depending on their turnaround time, I'm hopeful that sometime in February we could be issued a permit. If that is the case, it still leaves a 60-day window before the start of turtle season. It's my plans to go ahead and get the structure, get the new foundation built, get the pods onto their new foundation and demo the old structure before this coming May, turtle season. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Would you need any DEP or environmental permits or anything like that to do that? MR. TOSTO: We do. The way that we're structuring the build right now is it's -- it actually qualifies for an exemption from the state DEP permitting, and we went over a couple of the last concerns on the 5th, and right now we're putting together the procedures of the construction. So the answer to your question is, no, we do not need a DEP environmental resource permit as long as they grant us the exception. MR. KAUFMAN: Could I ask for an additional 30 seconds? MR. TOSTO: Sure, absolutely. MR. KAUFMAN: This -- these dome structures were built with permits way back when? MR. TOSTO: Correct, in 1981. MR. KAUFMAN: 1981? MR. TOSTO: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: With proper permits, et cetera? Page 65 16 I 1 b3 November] 9,2009 MR. TOSTO: Absolutely. MR. KAUFMAN: It was less than 30 seconds, but let me follow up with, in the description of the violation, it's a PM violation of maintenance where it says -- is it still littered with plastic and metal and -- MR. TOSTO: I get out there as often as I can, and I've stated this before; not only do I clean my property, but I clean the whole island, the whole 3,000 feet of beach. And I've been going out there for 15 years. The island is cleaner now than it ever has been, other than the concrete structures that I can't physically move. MR. KAUFMAN: Thank you. MR. ORTEGA: I have a question. With regards to the state and DEP, you're actually adding a foundation system? MR. TOSTO: We are removing the old foundation and adding a new foundation system, yes. MR. ORTEGA: And the state is granting you exemption on that? MR. TOSTO: Yes. Well, I haven't seen the exemption yet. We qualifY for the exemption. We've had a meeting that was all positive. You know, where it goes from here, I'm not sure. MR. ORTEGA: This meeting was with Jennifer Cowher, the local DEP representative? MR. TOSTO: In Fort Myers. MR. ORTEGA: Uh-huh. MR. TOSTO: Yes. MR. ORTEGA: Jennifer's in the position to offer a field permit when there's an exemption; however, in light of what they're doing, I find it hard to believe that they're going to be granted an exemption. But regardless, going back to Collier County, you can apply for your building permit at any time. You will not be granted that permit until the release from the DEP occurs. MR. TOSTO: Oh, I was not aware of that. I was not aware of Page 66 16 I 1 h~ November 19, 2009 that. I was told by Turrell & Associates, who's doing the permitting, that we would actually need a physical DEP permit to bring our plans to Collier County. MR. ORTEGA: You can apply at any time, but the environmental will not release it -- or the building department will not release it. They'll put a hold on it until you submit that. MR. TOSTO: Okay. Thank you for that understanding. MR. KELLY: Well, I have a much larger issue with the original order. Everything in the original order talks about demolition. There's nothing in there where it speaks about reusing any part of the structures or bringing them up to code or any type of rehab. It strictly talks about demolition, and that's not obviously the direction that you want to go. MR. TOSTO: Right. Originally the -- the order was actually given to the previous owner. I bought the parcel with the order in place. At that time, the fellow who did the investigation for Collier County deemed them un-repairable. Shortly thereafter we brought my engineer out there, and we did some studies on the property, and he stamped a letter saying that they are repairable. At that point, I think that -- I think maybe the verbiage should be shifted from demolition or repairable and something to get them into compliance. MR. KELLY: Okay. MR. LARSEN: You finished? MR. KELLY: I have more, but go ahead. MR. LARSEN: Are these units being occupied? MR. TOSTO: No, they're not. MR. LARSEN: In regard to the operational costs, how come they have not been paid yet? MR. TOSTO: I'm not sure. MR. LARSEN: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think what Mr. Larsen is trying to Page 67 16 I 1 07; November 19,2009 say is that he'd like -- we like to see, as a board, those being paid as soon as possible. MR. TOSTO: Okay, okay. The reason why I haven't paid them is -- well, for one thing, my finance doesn't kick in until I have a permit in my hand, so this is all -- I've been footing the bill, you know, 100 percent. But that's not the reason why I haven't paid. The reason why I haven't paid is that I was -- it was my understanding that when the time came that you had a building permit, we'd go in front of the board and we'd assess funds due, because obviously it's a lot more than $1,200 that I have to -- or $1,400. MR. KELLY: Just for clarification, this board doesn't have any jurisdiction over the operational costs, so -- MR. TOSTO: Okay. MR. KELLY: Although we could or may abate or reduce the actual fines that are accruing, we have no jurisdiction to do so on the operational costs. Those would be due regardless. MR. TOSTO: Okay. So it's my understanding that says you got -- I should make payments on this sooner than later. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Correct. MR. LARSEN: Well, it's always better to have paid the operational costs and come before this board than it is to have on these documents stated that you didn't pay the operational costs previously ordered. MR. TOSTO: Okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Now, in light of his testimony, if we were to impose a fine -- or a lien on his property in the amount of 187- and some change, almost 188-, that could definitely impinge on him getting financing for his property. MR. LARSEN: Well, that's my concern. My concern is that basically it's a lot of money, and that for whatever reason, this has dragged on since July of2007. And I'm not familiar with the units or the property, but -- Page 68 16 I 1 0?J November] 9,2009 MS. WALDRON: Mr. Chairman, if the county could clarifY some points on this case, please. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. SEABASTY: Good morning. For the record, Jim Seabasty, code enforcement investigator. I've taken this case over, and when I did, I found out there was a little bit of confusion. A Mr. Skipper owned the property. He sold it to the Tosto Living Family Trust. At that time Mr. Skipper's folio number was used. Since then the folio number has changed. Now, Skipper was the parent folio number. Now we have the actual folio number which belongs on that property, which is 01199121006, and that's for 999 Morgan Island. Mr. Tosto, I believe his dad was here in April 26th of'07 when we had the finding of fact, and at that time I believe he was directed to get a permit. In June 22nd of'07 a demolition permit was applied for. As of this date of7:58 this morning, that demolition permit has not been obtained. The buildings are still there, and we don't have a permit. MR. ORTEGA: I have a concern. If, indeed -- ifthis property can be developed and the houses put back together, especially if there's more than 50 percent substantial damage to it, is there a letter from the state that states that this is happening? MR. SEABASTY: If I may? We have an application that was turned into DEP, an Arielle Poulos, who is in charge, she received the application. I have a copy of the application with remarks as what must be done before the property can get a permit, before the state will issue the okay for Mr. Tosto to come to the county to get his permit. There's quite a few items on this. Some have to do with full storage, bunkers, septic, and the dock. So this just came in -- this document was November 5th of2009. MR. KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen that document? MR. SEABASTY: Excuse me? Page 69 16 I 1 0, November 19,2009 MR. KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen that document. MR. SEABASTY: I believe he -- did you get one, John? MR. TOSTO: Turrell, Hall & Associates is doing the environmental services and, you know, the permitting. Yes, they have that document as well as all other documents. And just for the record, Arielle Poulos has been taken over by some -- her position has been taken over, so not only do we have -- have had this change hands three different time, we've had that change hands three different times. So every time somebody changes hands, there's a new group of -- a new group of questions. MR. SEABASTY: And we cannot seem to -- excuse me. We cannot seem to find permits for these original buildings. MR. TOSTO: Oh, I have a copy of the original permit. MR. SEABASTY: He might have. Sometimes they get-- MR. KAUFMAN: I have a question going back to what you said earlier that things change every time there's a different player from the county's perspective. What do you mean things are okay and they were going down the road and everything was fine until the change? MR. TOSTO: Well, everybody, like certain members of the board, I'm sure, remember the -- remember the situation when we sat here last year. When Mr. Seabasty came into play, it seemed as though we started over. You know, he called me in, he says, you've got a violation; and he was very nice, by the way. You all have been very nice, and I thank you for that. But it seems as though everything is erased and we're starting over. I mean, 30 days ago I sat in the hallway before the hearing and he said, the attorney and him, Mr. Tosto, thank you for coming and everything's good. A week later I get a letter, imposition of fines. So I'm not really sure how -- what causes this to happen. I'm really not sure. All's I see -- all's I can be a witness to is what I see, you know, what happens to the case. Page 70 Novem~e?]~, 200~~ 1 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions from the board? MR. SEABASTY: If! may, one more point. We had a period of approximately two years where nothing really moved forward. At one time they did apply for a DEP permit, but then that was pulled back. And until recently nothing has really happened with the property. MR. KAUFMAN: One question. I'd like to know what you're asking for. I mean, we have before us the imposition of fines. What are you asking for? MR. TOSTO: What I would ask -- I would ask is that you table the fines until I have a building permit. MR. KAUFMAN: And you think you'll have the building permit within? MR. TOSTO: I don't see any reason why we won't have building permit, at the latest, May l. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But can you start construction with the turtle season? MR. TOSTO: If! get the building -- I need a 60-day window from -- before turtle season starts. If I get the Collier County permit before then, I can put the foundation in within that 60-day period. If not, we're on hold for another six months until the turtle -- turtle nests hatch. MR. SEABASTY: Sir, if I may, when I spoke with the people from DEP, Arielle and the new lady who's taking over, Sue Lytoff (phonetic), they're not sure whether or not they're actually going to issue a permit, so I don't know exactly what they're telling Mr. Tosto, okay. The only thing I can go by is what they sent me in this package here saying that these were the things that had to be met, these conditions, so -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Go ahead. MR. KELLY: I've got a couple comments. I remember this case well. I remember your father and everything that we've gone through over the last two-and-a-halfyears together. I believe the structures Page 71 16 1 1 &3 November] 9,2009 have been there since '92, and they're in pretty much the same condition when Andrew -- MR. TOSTO: '81. MR. KELLY: But since '92 when Andrew pretty much tore apart the beach and put them into the tilted condition that they are, they haven't been inhabited, if I'm not mistaken. MR. TOSTO: In '99 is when they actually became uninhabited. Mr. Skipper bought it in '97. They were -- the beach was still 100 feet from the -- and they were okay. MR. KELLY: But my point is we're talking ten years without really any health, safety, or welfare type issues to the public. It's just an eyesore, and I believe that's why this was originally brought to us. A point to make are that these fines that we mayor may not impose are not necessarily a lien until they're forwarded to the County's Attorney's Office; is that correct? MS. RAWSON: No. MS. WALDRON: You make a verbal order today, and the lien is in effect as of your verbal order today. MR. KELLY: So that's going to hurt any chances of getting financing. MS. RAWSON: This will get recorded as soon as it's signed. MR. KELLY: The other question I have is -- well, two more, two more points. One, does demolition really hurt the process? Is there any way that you could get your demo permit, gain access to the site, remove the structures, barge them, temporarily store them somewhere, get all your permitting, do your foundation work and then bring them back out via barge down the road? MR. TOSTO: No. MR. KELLY: And then the last point is this. If you really are interested in going forward with reconstruction and that's the way the county and the board see to find leniency, then this original order should be scrapped. I think that we should -- if that's the case, if that's Page 72 16 I 1 &3 November 19, 2009 the will of the board, I think we should throw out the original order and create a new one giving you the time that you need, and that will then table the fines because they wouldn't -- you wouldn't be in violation. We'd have a whole new order. MR. TOSTO: That's sounds like a wonderful thing in my eyes. Let me answer your first part of that question is, no, I can't do anything out there with a DEP permit; and I can't do the demo without actually taking the pods, the pod being the top part of the structure that we're saving, and putting it on the beach. I need to get a crane out there to do the demo, so, no, they're not going to let me do anything until we've got a building permit. MR. KELLY: Well, that brings up another point. IfDEP has to approve you to even get a demo permit or do any type of work, can we even enforce this order? How can county tell you to go get a demo permit and have this all completed in a certain amount of time if, yet, it's a government agency that's not allowing you to do it in the first place to execute that permit? MR. TOSTO: Well, that's -- that has been a concern the whole time. I don't -- I'm not an attorney, and I don't really know the answer to that. MR. KELLY: No, nor am I. I'mjust throwing out ideas, you know, as to how to resolve this so it's mutually acceptable for everyone involved. MR. TOSTO: Sure, sure. MR. SEABASTY: Sir, excuse me. DEP has no order to tell us whether or not he should get a demo permit. That's the county. DEP doesn't get involved in that. MR. KELLY: Right, I understand. But I think what -- the point that was being brought up is, let's say, for instance, Collier County issues a demo permit, and then he rolls heavy equipment onto the beach; now all of a sudden DEP puts a stop order on the project until they issue permits where they'll allow the equipment on the beach. Page 73 16 I 1v? November 19,2009 MR. ORTEGA: I don't think Collier County's going to issue any permit without approval from the DEP regardless, demo or otherwise. That's going to be step one. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Mr. Kelly's point is, nothing can be done without DEP, so any order we have can't be enforced. I mean, even if we said, allow the county to go out there and take care of it, they can't do it without a DEP permit. So I see Mr. Kelly's position. What I do want to see and where I'm kind of in a quandary here is, this has been going on for over two years. I don't know -- this doesn't seem like everybody's working in sync. Seems like there's some kind of disconnect somewhere, and I'd like to see that disconnect taken care of. And you've been in front of us several times, and we've given extensions, and I'd like just to see this is the last extension if we were to give it. I'm -- kind of don't want to see it dragged out much further. We're going to be going into three years come upon -- if we were to extend this another six months. So that's, I think, quite ample time to either get it done or have a demo permit and go that -- MR. LARSEN: See, my problem here is that I haven't heard anything today which really serves as a basis to deny the county the relief it requests. I mean, the county came before us on notice to the respondent seeking an imposition of lien. There was no notice to the county that there was going to be any application to vacate the previous order of the board nor was there any kind of application placing the county on notice that, you know, other relief was going to be requested besides the relief that the county asked for, which is the imposition of their lien. Now, I'm very sympathetic to the respondent in regards to juggling multiple agencies, but I agree with the chairman that basically this has been going on since July of2007. So if there's going to be any fashion in the relief other than the Page 74 16 I 1~? November 19,2009 imposition of lien, I think it has to take into consideration that not a great deal has been accomplished, nor have the operational costs been paid during the last two-and-a-halfyears. So with the exception of imposing the lien, I don't think we should do anything in regard to vacating the underlying order. And in regard to an extension of time, I think the county really needs to be -- their position needs to be taken into consideration, especially the safeguard -- you know, I don't know ifthere is anybody even using Cape Romano at this point. Is there anybody out there besides yourself? MR. TOSTO: That's the only structure left on the island. MR. KELLY: But there are hundreds of people every weekend who visit. MR. LARSEN: Pull their boats up. MR. TOSTO: Sure, it's a -- MR. LARSEN: Are they using structures for any purposes whatsoever? MR. TOSTO: Yeah. I mean, everybody that pulls up on the island wants to go take a look at the house, absolutely. MR. KELLY: Can I play devil's advocate just for a second? MR. TOSTO: Sure. MR. KELLY: Let's say tomorrow the DEP grants you your permits, you come in here, environmental grants you theirs from Collier County, and you start construction on this. You complete construction, you have a beautiful home exactly the way you want it. You are still in violation of this order because it specifically says you have to demolish it, period. MR. TOSTO: Well, we will-- we will be demolishing 50 percent of the structure. Over 50 percent of the structure foundation. All's we're keeping is the actual pods on top of the foundation. So would that still -- would that still -- I mean, I did apply for a -- and I thought that I was issued -- Jim, I thought that I was issued a Page 75 Nove!~r ~9, 2~9 ~~ minor demo permit back a year-and-a-half ago when I was out there with the machine cleaning up. I believe that I was issued a minor demolition permit after that order was given. MR. SEABASTY: No. No, Mr. Tosto. The permit that was applied for was applied for on the 22nd of June of2007. MR. TOSTO: Okay. MR. SEABASTY: And that was never obtained. Mr. Dunn put a permit hold on that. MR. TOSTO: Okay. MR. SEABASTY: Okay. As far as another permit to clean up, I don't have any record of that. MR. TOSTO: The permit -- the application that you're look at, is it for a major or a minor demolition? MR. SEABASTY: It's just for a demo. MR. TOSTO: Just for -- MR. SEABASTY: And that will be after the court case of April 26th. That's after your hearing. If the board would like, I do have some current photos that were just taken if they would like to see what the structures look like at this time. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: It was also in the paper, what, last week, I think. MR. DEAN: It was in the newspaper. MR. SEABASTY: Well, these photos were taken on the 19th of October. MR. KELLY: Could you repeat again what you just said about the court date in April? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That was our -- MS. RAWSON: Hearing. MR. KELLY: Oh, our hearing. MR. SEABASTY: That was your hearing date. I'm sorry. MR. KELLY: And you also said that Mr. Dunn put a hold on the Page 76 16 I 1 03 November 19,2009 demo permit? MR. SEABASTY: Yes, sir. MR. KELLY: Why was that? MR. SEABASTY: Mr. Dunn put a hold on the demo permit because he wanted a -- proof of power of attorney from John. MR. KAUFMAN: Has the respondent seen the photos? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The question I have, is this testimony? I mean, is this, you know, evidence that we're -- MS. RAWSON: It's not technically a hearing, as you know. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Right. MS. RAWSON: But we've pretty much turned it into one because it's a very unusual case. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes, this is -- MS. RAWSON: And ifit would help the board to see the photographs, I think that's fine. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: There are some newer members, so it might kind of help. MS. RAWSON: Right. MR. SEABASTY: And this is an unsecured structure. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a motion to-- MR. DEAN: Motion to accept. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- accept? Do I hear a second? MR. KAUFMAN: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. Page 77 16 I 1 ~3 November 19,2009 MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) MR. KAUFMAN: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Yes. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to -- I wasn't on the board in 2007. But what is it that's been sitting there for two years? And I tend to agree with Mr. Kelly. What is the downside of granting an -- either table it, extend it, or whatever you want to -- whatever pleases the board to doing this? Is there something that's happening to the environment that's detrimental to the environment? Obviously the structure is being eroded by the water there. Is that in danger of falling into the water and polluting the area that it's in? MR. TOSTO: No, there's -- in my opinion there's very little -- I think it's -- to me it would be more of a safety issue than an environmental issue. You know, we're worried about somebody getting hurt out there, you know, because it's very hard to secure the structure. MR. KAUFMAN: The structure's not posted do not trespass? MR. TOSTO: It is posted. MR. KELLY: To the board, typically we have two options here. We either fine the property as requested by the county, or we have to change the original order and grant an extension or something because it's not in compliance and the operational costs have not been paid. So we can't reduce the fine, and we typically don't, unless we're in compliance. So we should decide one way or the other which way we're going and start working on a resolution. MR. LARSEN: I agree with Mr. Kelly in that regard. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Would you like to make a motion to amend our order or impose the fines? MR. KELLY: You know, I wish we could just kind oflike, you Page 78 Novemle?l~, 20~~3 know, throw a couple back and just talk about this in layman's terms because, you know, if we start throwing out motions, it could get into a 20-minute discussion just trying to change that motion. Perhaps polling the board to see which way they want to go. Do they want to just impose the fines and, you know, let the parties deal with this, or do they want to start working on an extension or amending the initial one? MR. LARSEN: Well, 1- MS. RAWSON: Let me just say one thing. For you to vacate an order of April 30, 2007, which was entered into by a stipulation, albeit it was a different owner, is going to be difficult. MR. KELLY: What about granting an extension? MS. RAWSON: Well, obviously you have the right to do that. MR. LARSEN: Yeah. I agree, I -- you know, I don't feel that basically amending, vacating, rewriting an order that's been in existence and which everybody has been operating on for such a long period of time is in this board's best interest. In regard to the imposition of the lien, we always have the ability to abate the lien at a later date but, you know, this lien is $187,000. And my concern is that it might do more harm than good by imposing the lien at this time; however, the respondent's testimony in regard to what's going to happen in the near future, you know, has not been that strong. I mean, basically a lot of things are up in the air, and my concern is, if we give three months or six months extension of time without imposing a lien, then basically we might find ourselves back in the very same position three months or six months down the road with nothing else happening. And although I'm not adverse to granting an extension if an extension is to be granted for the imposition of liens, I'd like it to be shorter rather than longer just to spur some kind of activity on this project. Page 79 1 6 1 1 ~3 November 19,2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, how about if we impose a certain time frame to move it along with the respondent coming back every two months or something to tell us what progress is being made? MR. LARSEN: I'd also like to see those operational costs paid finally. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Absolutely, absolutely. Okay, we-- MR. KAUFMAN: I agree with both my colleagues. I think that an extension of time would benefit the county more than issuing the lien on this property. MR. LA VINSKI: I just wonder if we're ever going to see any resolution based on some of the comments that he read, the investigator read, about fuels and all this kind of stuff. I think we're just whipping a dead horse, that we'll be here two years from now. MR. DEAN: I kind of feel the same way, because it is a safety issue, as they stated, and he agreed to, that people do pull their boats up there and climb on that structure, and the structure is getting old. And to me, it's been a long time. I was on the board at the time two-and-a-halfyears ago, so -- and this -- I don't understand why it's been so drawn out. And then all of a sudden I saw the picture in the paper. I don't know what they're going after, but there it was again. And so I feel -- I'd like to end it right here and go with the recommendation. MR. LA VINSKI: I agree. MR. KELLY: Let me throw one more wrench out there. And I appreciate the respondent's willingness and -- or, I'm sorry, wish to reuse the structures; however, geodesic homes are still being built, and I don't think they're -- you know, there's not a reason why you couldn't demolish it now and then get your permits and come back and just build from scratch later on down the road with a newer structure that meets current codes. MR. TOSTO: If! take that structure off the beach, there will Page 80 161 1 ,~ November] 9,2009 never be another structure permitted on that beach. MR. KELLY: I see now. Thank you. MR. DEAN: I got it. MR. ORTEGA: That's why I brought that point up about the substantial -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Mr. L'Esperance, you haven't made any comments. MR. DEAN: Let me just ask one thing. A lot oftimes when a structure is there, and as long as you don't tear it all out and you can add to it, and then it's okay, you get permits and all that; but you're talking about moving the entire structure, the base, from one place to another, and I don't -- to me, that's a legal thing. I don't see how they can do that. MR. TOSTO: Well, we -- originally we permitted to raise the structure right where it is. The DEP had some reservations about that because of the shoreline. You know, we wouldn't be -- we wouldn't be 50 feet from the mean high water mark. So in order to -- in order to be able to fall into this exemption category, we agreed to one of the things that they were asking for, and that's to bring the structure within 50 feet of the mean high water line. As far as the 50 percent rule, you know, it's my understanding that has to do with if we're below flood, and the structure is below flood. It's built to the old code, which was 12 feet. Now the code's 15 feet. It is below flood, but we plan to raise it above flood, so I'm not necessarily sure if the 50 percent rule applies here. MR. ORTEGA: The 50 percent rule is not what you just indicated as far as being below the floodplain. It has to do with substantial damage. And when you have provisions in the code or state law where they may say if there's more than 50 percent damage, you cannot put it. Now, if you're going to relocate that structure, you're exceeding 50 percent. That's not my -- that's only a thought. Page 8] 16 I 1 {)j November] 9,2009 That's up to the state. MR. LARSEN: All right. Let me ask you, Mr. Tosto, if we impose the fines today, the 186,000, what hardship do you suffer other than having to pay those fines? MR. TOSTO: Well, as we've stated before, 30 days ago I was in the hallway in a conference with Mr. Seabasty and your attorney, and we ended up the -- we ended it up, everything was all good, okay. The next day, an article came out in the Naples Daily News, okay. Although I had a great conversation with the editor for the Naples Daily News, he still, you know, drifted towards the $186,000 lien, okay. They've sent another reporter, which is here today and is going to report. What I'm afraid of, if you impose that fine on me, it's going in the wrong direction now. It's going where -- it's going in the wrong direction, and that's my fear. MR. LARSEN: So it's -- you feel that the image of the project will be diminished? MR. TOSTO: Absolutely. MR. LARSEN: But you don't have financing in the pipeline which will be adversely affected by this imposition? MR. TOSTO: Oh, that would be hugely affected, absolutely. More important to me would be the diminishing of the project. I mean, the $186,000, when all's said and done, probably isn't as big as me obtaining the permit. MR. KAUFMAN: That sort of reminds me of an execution where the governor calls in and says, we're going to give you a reprise (sic) and -- but we can still execute you six months down the line; and I'd like to know the board's opinion of, what do we lose by giving a set date as the chairman has pointed out where it doesn't drag on for two years from now? What do we have to lose? MR. LARSEN: Well, I'm not sure what you're asking, Mr. Kaufman, because the only thing before the board today is the/ Page 82 16 I 1 b8 November 19, 2009 imposition of the fines, whether we impose the fines or not impose the fines. It's not whether or not we basically give any other relief to the respondent. So I'm not sure what your question is about what we lose. MR. KAUFMAN: Well, it's my understanding from the respondent that if you impose the fine, probably there'll be no ability to pull a mortgage or what needs to be done to proceed with the construction, unless I'm understanding -- MR. TOSTO: It would be more difficult, clearly more difficult. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can we do this? Can we withdraw this and then have it in front of us again in May? And so not impose the fines, not rewrite the order, but the fines would keep on -- MS. RAWSON: Well, I don't think you can withdraw it. The county can withdraw it. I guess you could, you know, move to continue it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And that way we don't have to redraw the order. The fines still keep on -- keep on going. MS. RAWSON: Yes, they do. MR. KAUFMAN: Can we continue it and also request that the $1,295 operational costs be paid? CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But that's changed. MS. RAWSON: There's already an order that the operational costs be paid within 30 days of2007. MR. KAUFMAN: Okay. MS. RAWSON: Now there are some additional operational costs, so I think, you know, Mr. Larsen gave a word to the wise, so you've already got an order. MR. LARSEN: My concern is that basically we would just be back in the same position we are three months or six months or next May that we are here today, because I don't have a great deal of comfort in listening to the testimony today in regard to obtaining permits, having all of this work done. And by his own admission, the respondent was quite candid in Page 83 16 I 1 fJ3 November 19,2009 regard to the safety factor here. So I'd, you know, be very concerned about putting this off for an indefinite period of time or for an extended period of time. MR. LA VINSKI: Right. If you look at those pictures that he passed around, I'd be afraid to walk under that thing today, let alone 90 days from now, and somebody's -- could get squashed down there. MR. SEABASTY: Sir, if! may? This case actually originated back in 2005 by the other owner, Mr. Skipper, who then, again, sold to Mr. Tosto, who was at that hearing in '07 where they did the stipulation. To clarifY, the last board meeting we asked to withdraw it with Mr. Wright, our attorney, only for the fact of the folio number, the parent folio number against the actual parcel number. Downtown they never did change the address from the previous owner to the Tostos, and that's where that little confusion. But it's all off the parent number with this sub-folio number here. MR. KELLY: I'm an eternal optimist, but unfortunately I don't feel as though this is ever going to see a new structure. There's just so much working against, and there's a public will right now, too. MR. TOSTO: I can appreciate that, and I realize that that's a big -- you know, that's a big consensus; however, in the past 30 days, we have a letter of intent from the Army Corps of Engineers and a nod, if you will, from the DEP. This absolutely is going forward. And I think if you postpone it till May -- although I can get some literature to you right away -- you will have a lot of information, and -- MR. SEABASTY: If I may, I'm not aware of anything from Army Corps. The only thing, like I say, I have is the -- from DEP. And one of their concerns was -- and like Mr. Tosto said, 50 feet from the high mean; however, they also say, move them to stable ground, upland stable ground. I don't know. I'm not an environmentalist. I'm not an engineer. I don't know ifthere is stable upland ground. MR. LARSEN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion. Page 84 16 I 1 ftJ?; November 19,2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Go ahead. MR. LARSEN: Based upon the testimony/evidence presented before this board today, I'd like to make a motion to impose the lien in the amount of$187,877.79. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. LA VINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. Motion passes. Fines have been imposed. MR. TOSTO: Okay. Thanks for your time, guys. The next case will be Gentilhomme and Jean Saurel Louissaint CESD20080014978. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Can you state your names for the record, please. MR. WALKER: For the record, Weldon Walker, Collier County Code Enforcement. MR. LOUISSAINT: Louissaint. My name is Louissaint, Genti lhomme Louissaint. MR. 1. LOUISSAINT: Jean Saurel Louissaint. Page 85 16\ 1 (!J!> November 19,2009 MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Buildings and Buildings Regulations, Article II, Florida Building Code, Adoption and Amendment, Florida Building Code Section 22-26(b)(1 04.1.3 .5). Location of violation: 520 Palmetto Avenue, Immokalee, Florida, folio number 65070600006. Description of violation: Newly constructed shed to rear of property. Improvements done prior to obtaining valid Collier County building permits. On June 25, 2009, 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 4470 PG 2677, for more information. The respondent has complied with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of September 30, 2009. The county's recommendation is to issue an order imposing a lien for the fines at the rate of $200 per day for the period between September 26,2009, to September 30,2009, five days, for the total of $1,000. Operational costs of$86.71 have been paid. Additional operational costs of $74.65 incurred for the imposition of fines hearing. The county's recommendation is to issue an order imposing a lien in the amount of$I,074.65. MR. LARSEN: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to abate the fines in the amount of $1 ,000 but to impose the additional operational costs of$74.65. MR. KAUFMAN: Second. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I second that motion. MR. KELLY: I have a comment on this. How is it that we're ever going to be able to abate any fines if at the last minute they get Page 86 16 I 1 (b? November 19,2009 another set of costs? This is all brand new to us. MS. WALDRON: It's brand new to us as well. MR. KELLY: What's going on? I mean, we want to help the people out. MR. DEAN: It went past the -- MS. WALDRON: Well, we -- but as -- we also have hard costs that are incurred in bringing this case forward for an imposition of fines hearing, as we do in a finding of fact hearing. We have hard costs that are expended by the county in order to prosecute this case here. MR. KELLY: So we've got to file a lien, it's going to be recorded publicly; it will come up on their credit reports if anyone pulls a public records search for $74.65. MR. LARSEN: Unless they pay it today. MS. WALDRON: Unless they pay it. MR. KELLY: Sorry. MR. LARSEN: Do you understand? MR. LOUISSAINT: Yes, sir. MR. LARSEN: Well, the motion hasn't been voted on yet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Hasn't been -- has a second -- MR. L'ESPERANCE: Yes, I seconded it. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: But we're in discussion. It's been seconded. But we're in discussion phase right now. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Are you in a position to pay the $74.65? MR. LOUISSAINT: Yes, sir. MR. L'ESPERANCE: So it's not imposed as a -- MR. LOUISSAINT: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. It's not a lien. MR. KELLY: Perhaps, you know, if they do show up in these cases in the future, we can maybe pull them aside and get that paid for so -- MS. WALDRON: Yes, sir. Page 87 16 I 1 {))'J November] 9,2009 CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. We have a motion, second. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KELLY: There is further discussion. Real quick. How soon can you pay it? Can you pay it like right now? MR. LOUISSAINT: Right now. MR. KELLY : Well, then we don't need it. If they pay it right now -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Well, we need to -- we need to make a motion to abate. MR. DEAN: We've got to put on the thousand dollars. MR. KELLY: But the motion was to abate it but to charge the $74.65. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Which still has to be paid, so I think it's appropriate to proceed. MR. KELLY: Right. He'll pay it right now, then we won't need it at all. MR. WALKER: I'd like to say something, if I could, please. Upon coming to this hearing, he was prepared to pay the operational costs. I had instructed him to wait till afterwards. So he would have technically had them paid before this hearing, which means that there wouldn't -- MR. LARSEN: Right. I'll modifY my motion. Basically my motion is now as follows: That we abate the $1,000 predicated upon the payment of$74.65 before the end of the proceedings today. Should the $74.65 be paid, the $1,000 will be abated, and no imposition of lien will be filed. MS. RAWSON: Actually, if that happens and we know that before we leave today, we don't need any order. MS. WALDRON: Well, we do need an order saying the fines Page 88 16 I 1 e;'? November] 9,2009 were abated. MR. KELLY: Right. MS. RAWSON: Okay. MR. KAUFMAN: And I modifY my second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll modifY my second; I'll co-second it with you, Mr. Kaufman. MR. DEAN: You amend the motion. MR. L'ESPERANCE: I'll amend it, yes. MR. DEAN: Amend the motion is easier. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LAVINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. WALKER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All right. That was harder than it should have been. MR. KAUFMAN: So the additional cost is for the coffee. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I think this is the last hearing, which is Alberto and Franco (sic) -- MR. ORTEGA: Mr. Chairman, although the respondents don't seem to be here, I have a conflict with this case, so -- but as an alternate, I won't be voting anyways, so -- CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: -- and Leon. Does he have to file? MR. LARSEN: Yeah, I think he still needs to fill out the Page 89 No!e~bt 19,~009~; requisite form. MS. RAWSON: I'll give him the form. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And can you just state the reason? MR. ORTEGA: Yes. Originally when this case started, it had to do with a contractor taking half the money or most of the money, and they were left in left field, so we were trying to help them. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay, very good. If that's correct, you have to state for the record, Jean? MS. RAWSON : Yes, he needs to fill this out. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: For the record. MS. RAWSON: And I'll leave it with the court reporter. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Thank you. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. WALDRON: This is in reference to violation of Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 22, Article II, Florida Building Code, Section 22-26(b )(104.5.1.4( 4). Location of violation: 5348 18th Court Southwest, Naples, Florida, folio number 36246760000. Description of violation: Permits expired for addition on house, garage conversion, and shed. On June 25,2009, 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 4470 PG 2685 for more information. The respondent has not complied with the Code Enforcement Board orders as of November 19,2009. The county's recommendation is to issue an order imposing a lien for fines at the rate of $200 per day for the period between October 26, 2009, to November 19, 2009, 24 days, for the total of $4,800. Fines continue to accrue. Operational costs of $87 have not been paid. Additional ePage 90 1 6 I 1 J);?J November] 9,2009 operation costs of$72.70 have incurred for the imposition of fines hearing. The county's recommendation is to issue an order imposing a lien in the amount of$4,959.70. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Has there been any contact with the owner, respondent? MR. RENALD: Yes, I did speak with the respondent the other day. Still same issue as last time, financial issues. They can't afford to fix this problem. This is a very expensive problem that they have, and they're still trying to come up with funds to take care of this. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Did they have any time frame? MR. RENALD: No. They don't know when they'll be able to fix this problem. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. MR. DEAN: Just one question. The addition on the house and the garage conversion and shed, has that all been completed? MR. RENALD: No, it hasn't. The garage conversion has not been completed, and the addition that's to the rear of the property hasn't been completed. It's like a big opening in the back of the house because the job was not finished. So, you know, they're just sitting in that situation. MR. KAUFMAN: I'd like to make a motion that we impose the lien amount. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do I hear a second? MR. LA VINSKI: Second. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All those in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSEN: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. Page 91 1 6 1 1 h3 November 19,2009 MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Motion passes. MR. RENALD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Do we have any new business? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Okay. Any -- well, reports? We have that one report with the foreclosures which is part of the consent agenda. Comments? Oh, sorry. MS. FLAGG: It's okay. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: What do we -- is this under comments or is this new business? MS. FLAGG: No, this is actually under reports. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Reports, all right. MS. FLAGG: Under reports, the Blight Prevention Program is now officially one year old. And also as of the one-year mark, the banks, there's -- we're working with over 80 banks to abate code violations. The banks have now expended over a million dollars in Collier County to abate code violations even though they don't have certificate of title to the property yet, so they're abating these violations in the lis pendens, and as of the one-year mark, 600 -- the banks have abated 695 code violations. In addition, just to give you kind of an update on where the department is at, we continue to receive approximately 140 new cases every week. The investigators are closing approximately 100 cases every week with voluntarily compliance. The lien work that we're doing, the searching of the code cases, determining whether there's a lien helping people assure that they Page 92 1 6 I 1~? November 19,2009 don't buy properties with liens on them or with code cases on them without knowing about it, we're doing about 146 searches a week for community members, which brings me to the -- we have now formalized two new services to the community, which is the brochure that I've given you, so these services are the code property inspection and the code and lien search. So a community member -- this is on the code enforcement website, and these brochures are also being distributed to community members. Basically titled, thinking of buying a home or investment property. This is a brochure that tells perspective buyers of these services that are available to them to assure that they don't buy a property . You had several cases here where they had purchased properties and had no idea that there were prior code violations and cases on them. So this lets them know up front that they have some options to gets that -- to find that information before they actually invest their money to buy a piece of property. In addition, this past week, we had our first training session of approximately 30 home inspectors. We provided training, because we're trying to also encourage the private market solution besides just having code do the inspections. These 30 home inspectors were trained on how to search for the zoning and permit information to determine ifthere's code violations with the goal being that they will incorporate this review into their home inspection. We're working with Naples Area Board of Realtors to get this information out and also the home inspection associations. Home inspectors currently in the State of Florida are not required to be licensed at this point; however, the state statute did change, and effective July of 20 10, home inspectors will require licensure. So we're trying to get ahead of this and providing the information to our community to let them know that they need to take advantage Page 93 1 6 I 1 b3 November 19,2009 of having a code property inspection done before they buy something and also a lien search done to know whether or not there's any current open code cases or liens on the property before they actually invest their money to purchase it. In addition, the -- just as another clarification, there are actually four opportunities for a community member not to have to pay fines. The first opportunity is that -- if they receive a Notice of Violation by the investigator to abate before the timeline set. The next opportunity is to abate when there's a hearing before the Code Enforcement Board. The next opportunity is to come into compliance at the time of the imposition of lien. The fourth opportunity is, if the Code Enforcement Board imposes a lien and, let's say, in the last case, 188,000 lien because it's been in noncompliance for two years, then at a later date if they come into compliance, then they can request and we will take it to the BCC advising they are in compliance and request that the BCC waive the fines. So there are multiple opportunities for our community members not to incur any fines. We help them do that. The goal is compliance. At that point that they come into compliance, then we work with them on the fines. The purpose of a lien is we're trying to assure that the banks do not pass on these properties with open code violations. And banks do check -- when they have to sell a property, someone's coming in and buying, they do check whether there's a lien. That does show up, and they see that. Sometimes ifthere's only an order but a lien hasn't been imposed, the bank has passed on that property to a buyer that wasn't aware of it because they didn't get a lien search done. When they go to a title company, they will typically search for a lien. So if a lien has been imposed, that is going to show up; but if the lien has not been imposed, then that new buyer may get caught off guard by an order having being entered, and they're going to be Page 94 1 6 I 1 (93 November] 9,2009 responsible for that code case and those fines that have accrued until they come into compliance. So that's the other reason we're doing this search for the community members, and we're also getting this information out to the Naples Area Board of Realtors to let folks know that they have -- for $25, they can find out ifthere's anything going on with their property before they actually invest their hard-earned money into purchasing it. MR. KELLY: Quick question. The $25. That's only if there was an existing violation, correct? MS. FLAGG: We search everything for them. We search whether there is a citation on the property; we search if there's a case open on the property; we search if there's been a hearing, if there's been an order issued. We do a complete search for $25, and they get it in two days or less. MR. KELLY: And what about a house? Let's say, for instance, someone was looking to buy and they call in one of the home inspectors who have been through your training. That inspector is able to look for code violations; for instance, maybe someone converted a garage into a living area without permits. That investigator, is he -- does he have access, let's say, for instance, CD Plus to see if there was ever permits pulled? MS. FLAGG: What they did is they trained them on how to access the information and what they needed to look for, so, yes. And our goal is to help the home inspector. Our goal is to ultimately help the community that, before they invest their hard-earned money, make sure that they understand what they're facing on that particular piece of property. MR. KELLY: Is a list of the approved home inspectors somewhere on the site, or is there a way to -- MS. FLAGG: There is no approved list of home inspectors. These are just 30 individuals that voluntarily chose to attend the training to learn how to do it. Page 95 1 6 1 1 f!;'} November 19,2009 What the community members need to understand is, when they decide to employ a home inspector, they need to be very specific in their questioning saying, do you know how to do a code property inspection, not just whether the faucets turn on and off or there's a leak, but do you know how to do a code property inspection. If the answer is yes, they should get included in their home inspection report specificity in terms of permitting, that there are no unpermitted structures on the property and that the property is properly zoned for what they intend to use it -- if you-all will remember that one case where the couple expended over $800,000, purchased a piece of property with the intent of it being a rental piece of property, to come to find out that it was in a zoning that did not permit rentals, and on top of that, the properties had not -- they had been built but not permitted. So that couple lost the 800,000 that they'd invested, lost the 300,000 that they had spent to improve the properties, and ended up having to declare bankruptcy. MR. DEAN: One comment. It's nice, like you said, July 1st in 2010 they'll be licensed, and I know other states have this. And you certainly, Diane, should be commended for your steps and the things you've done, because I see how a lot of people work, how they get hurt, it goes with the land, they buy the property and then they're stuck. So you've certainly done a lot. And this is really a giant step for Collier County and code enforcement, what you've done. So I'd say thank you very much. You're really helping the community. MS. FLAGG: Well, thanks, and it's a large team. I mean, there's 50 members of the code enforcement team, and they're all working very hard, because their goal is compliance. They want to help. This is also -- this information is on the code enforcement website, as is a lot of other information, such as community resources. If they go to the Colliergov.net website, click on the Code Enforcement Department, they will find information on where to -- for Page 96 16 l 1 {!J?J November 19, 2009 food banks, for the sheriff, Florida food program, for medical assistance, for transportation assistance, for foreclosure assistance, and it will take them to other websites. So it's pretty much of a comprehensive approach to what we're facing as a community in trying to assist them. I will also tell you one other thing, which we have a workshop. The Collier County Foreclosure Task Force has a workshop coming up with the board in January, and we will be talking about a lot of components of the foreclosure crisis that's not only affected our nation but also our community. And one of the things that we'll be covering is what's next. And I know that community members are reading a lot about, the recession is over. I will tell you that there's another shoe that's yet going to drop, and that shoe is the commercial properties. So the first shoe was the residential properties and the foreclosures occurring with the residential properties. What we're beginning to see now are the commercial properties, and whereas the residential property was 80,000 to 2 or 3 million, the commercial properties are ten, 20, 30, 40 million. So when commercial properties start to fail, the bank holding the note on that commercial property is also going to be affected. And you have seen banks continuing to fail, being taken over, or FDIC coming in. And I will tell you, the next shoe for Collier County is the commercial properties. MR. KAUFMAN: There's also a form that's being -- the wording on the form is being finalized at NABOR to include in the package on all sales that references -- MS. FLAGG: To get this. MR. KAUFMAN: -- this information. MR. KELLY: You've spoken like a true leader deflecting Mr. Dean's compliment, but I want to thank you, Director Flagg, directly for your work. Page 97 16 I 1 /?;? November 19,2009 MS. FLAGG: Thank you. MR. KELLY: I do have one quick point. The second to the last case that we had on their imposition of fines, they had that new second round of op. costs that are put in to bring them in front of us for the hearing to impose fines. Is there any way that the respondents can be notified ahead of time that it sits favorably with the board if those new costs are also paid along with the original op. costs? MS. FLAGG: The investigators are certainly informing the respondents of that, and we'll do a double effort with that. I think what you're seeing is the investigators are working very closely with respondents. Their goal is, as is their new mission statement, they're only after compliance. That's what they're trying to do. And they'll do whatever they can do to assist them in reaching compliance. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Under comments, I just want to welcome Jean back to the board. MS. RAWSON: Well, thank you. Thanks for my little vacation. MR. KAUFMAN: Do you want to vote on that? MS. RAWSON: I'm delighted to be back. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And just wish everybody Happy Holidays, Thanksgiving, and New Year's and so forth, so -- MR. DEAN: Happy Thanksgiving, Merry Christmas. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: And-- MR. DEAN: And see you January 28th unless the workshop doesn't have a date yet. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: The workshop will be for who? MR. LARSEN: That would be in front of the Board of County Commissioners. MS. FLAGG: Right. The workshop is for the Board of County Commissioners with the foreclosure team. MR. DEAN: I can watch it on TV, I see. MR. KELLY: When is it? Page 98 16 1 1 &3 November 19,2009 MS. FLAGG: January 27th. Hang on. I'll get it. MR. DEAN: Day before our meeting. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: That would be two days before our meeting. MR. DEAN: The twenty-eighth. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Ours is the 28th. MR. LARSEN: Just to be clear, that's a workshop that has nothing to do with this advisory panel, right? MS. FLAGG: The workshop is with the Board of County Commissioners and the Foreclosure Task Force. The foreclosure -- there's multiple task forces, so I don't want to confuse you. We have the community task forces that the code enforcement investigators work with the Sheriffs Office and the other community members to address neighborhood issues. Then we have the Collier County Foreclosure Task Force, which is comprised of the professionals within the community in the legal profession, the real estate profession, code enforcement, the Sheriffs Office, and that's kind of a bigger picture task force, and it was initially started to see what we could do from a pro bono standpoint, because you have a lot of folks involved that are not being compensated for their time to help community members through the foreclosure process that they're facing. There was recently, what you probably saw advertised, a foreclosure workshop at Gulf Coast High School. It was attended by about, Mr. Larsen, 200 folks? MR. LARSEN: Over 200 people. I'd like to commend the code enforcement and their director for their attendance and their participation on the foreclosure task force, because it has resulted in assistance being given to the poorest of the poor of Collier County, and actually we've had people come over from the east coast as well as Hendry County, Lee County, Charlotte, Sarasota, Glades, so it's -- it was pretty well attended, and the code enforcement people do a great Page 99 16 I 1 ~3 November 19, 2009 job at those functions as well, because everybody has a question for code enforcement. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any other questions? MR. LARSEN: Motion to adjourn. MR. DEAN: Second. MR. KELLY: Oh, I need an excused absence for the next month. I won't be in town. MR. DEAN: Second. MS. FLAGG: Okay. And let me clarifY, too. That workshop with the Board of County Commissioners is January 27th at one p.m. in the boardroom. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All in favor? MS. RAWSON: And our next meeting is here, too, as well. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: All in favor? MR. KAUFMAN: Aye. MR. LARSON: Aye. MR. KELLY: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Aye. MR. DEAN: Aye. MR. L'ESPERANCE: Aye. MR. LA VINSKI: Aye. CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: Any nays? (No response.) CHAIRMAN LEFEBVRE: I didn't think so. Page 100 16 I 1 PJ5 November] 9,2009 ****** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:01 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD , 1;// . tf.. I ,/ '{ //' I . ,. /' / /.',.- ---.~ ae.. / 'j, y(.Jc. q,ERA{ EFEBVRE, Chairman These minutes approved by the board on presented or as corrected as TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICES, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS. Page 10 1 .~'-"-'-~'--'---._----- ----- Fiala Halas Henning "1' Coyle e: Coletta _ e 16 I 1 &1 January 7, 2010 ,,- ....- ..."~-"" ~'- "\ ..~r 'I..... '.,J ~.,..\ ....1 " !.-. l; I' "'\' ,-,... .. t ~ 'u ,,-' ",.." " " .. ,." TRANSCRJPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples. Florida January 7. 2010 rt":rt i :')il~P I ..... l , ....'~..u ,U_ .; i ""'\ ,',"'(--V\,.,<..>,-", t:';.;,'" '. ' , ,~~,',,: ) _.0' '0" ,I._,~'_,..,; ".., -' LET IT BE REMEMBERED. that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Govemment Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Donna Reed-Caron Karen Homiak (Absent) Tor Kolflat Paul Midnev ~ Bob Murray Brad Schiffer Robert Vigliotti David J. Wolfley ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Nick Casalanguida, CDES Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager Thomas Eastman, CC School District, Real Property Director Page I " ":')'P~ f,,; - ~' '," _"_'''."_''__'_~.__'_ _ ___.,......_. '__'_'_"_'A',__ ._~-----~~_. 161 1 eA- January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the January 7th meeting o[the Collier County Planning Commission. If you'll all please rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. if you haven't realized it yet, it's cold out there. And this weekend it's supposed to be colder. So J have to stali out by saying thank you very much to the records department for the coffee today. It's going 10 warm all of us up. So we appreciate it. Roll call by our secretary, please. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Koltlat? COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm here COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Midney is absent. Commissioner Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTrI: Chainnan Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Vigliotti, myself. is present. Commissioner Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Wolfley" COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: And Commissioner Ilomiak is absent. Oh, Commissioner Midney just showed up. And Mr. Eastman is here, for the record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great. Item #3 ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA CHARIMAN STRAIN: Okay, addenda to the agenda. Are there any changes') Ray, do you know of any? MR. BELLOWS: No continuances that I'm aware of Item#S PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, now, our next meeting is on January 21st? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's for the CIE. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's our next regular meeting, but all the regular items have been.. MR. BELLOWS: Yes, the next-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- continued. MR. BELLOWS: -- meeting will be the 21 st, a regular county commission meeting. I have on the calendar that you have an LDC amendment meeting on the 28th, the following Thursday. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR. BELLOWS: And let's see -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the 21 st, as far as that goes, though, Ray, the only thing left on that agenda I believe is the CIE. MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And for members of the Planning Commission, that's the booklet that was just passed out by David Weeks. Page 2 16\ 1 IiI: January 7, 2010 The other agenda items, and there were four of them, had to be continued I believe for advertising or other purposes? MR. BELLOWS: Two for other purposes, one for advertising. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So I don't know how long of a day that will be until we read the docwnent that was passed out today. But that's the only thing on the agenda. Does anybody know if they're not going to make it to the meeting on the 21 st? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll be here. But I have a question about the LDC meeting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Which when are we going to get those things? Is there a lot of them or is there a few of them? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: We did get them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We already got them. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: We did? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. We didn't want you to have them because you ask too many questions. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Let me check to make sure I have them. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. If you don't, we'll get some to you ASAP. Item #4 NEW BUSINESS - REVISIONS TO THE GMP AMENDMENT HEARING SCHEDULE FOR THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN PETITION CP-2008-5 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, new business. New business. I guess that's David -- oh, no, that.. yeah, David, what have you got to say about it? MR. WEEKS: For the record, David Weeks ofthe Comprehensive Planning Department. At your last meeting we discussed the Immokalee Master Plan Growth Management Plan amendment petition schedule. And we have agreed on February the 16th as the hearing date. The only question to resolve is the location. It originally had been planned to be held in Immokalee, but at your last meeting it was discussed to hold it here, and -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It looks like unless there's an objection from any Planning Commission member, we're going to hold it here. MR. WEEKS: Sounds good. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Planning Commission absences, we already discussed that. Item #6 APPROV AL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19, 2009 AND DECEMBER 3, 2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Approval of minutes. We have two sets. Let's start with the first one. Is there a motion to approve or change November 19th, 2009? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: So moved to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti. Seconded by? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Page 3 -".,,~---,-_.._-~-_. n. _.._..__, -- ._-- _"'''_"M~.~_ -~. -..._, ".~ ~1 __._,....__~_._>._ __ ____ 161 1 ~* . January 7. 2010 COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ave. . COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Ave. . COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Ave. . COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ave. Anybody opposed" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Next one is December 3rd. 2009. a same motion. COMMISSIONER V1GLlO1TI: So moved to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron') COMMISSIONER CARON: I have a correction on Page 46. At the very top, the second line, the word is respected typed here, and it should be represented. But Mr. Passidomo or whoever represented him. I'm sure we all respect Me. Passidomo. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I think Cherie' wanted to make sure we did, so that's why she changed the word. Okay. so with that correction is there still a motion to approve as corrected') COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. there is CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Mr. Vigliotti. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And I will second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Mr. Schiffer. All in favor, signifY by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ave. , COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Ave. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ave. , Anybody opposed') (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Item #7 BCC REPORT - RECAPS ~ DECEMBER 15,2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, the BCC recaps') MR BELLOWS: There is no land use items to present at this time. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank vou. , Item #8 CHAIRMAN'S REPORT CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The chainnan's report. Kind of want to make a few statements. There's been a lot of announcements that all of you have seen with changes over at the community and developmental services. A lot of Page 4 161 1 ~ January 7, 2010 people have left. The budget's getting harder and harder to deal with. A lot oflay-offs had to occur, and there are a lot of people that we have worked closely with for quite some time, and we will sincerely miss those individuals. A couple people have been moved who were very close to this commission, one being Susan Murray. She is in another department in the county now. We'll miss her expertise and professionalism for sure in resolving the zoning and Land Development Code issues. And especially our friend Joe Schmitt. Joe has been moved out of Deve]opmental Services to the County Manager's office. I want Joe to know I personally and] think the rest of this commission have thought very much of Joe. He did a great job for us. He was always attentive and responsive to our needs and fought for our concerns, and I certainly will miss him. Now, with that said, we have a problem. We now have Nick Casalanguida in charge. COMMISSIONER CARON: Oh, no. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I figured out a solution to the problem. And every now and then you'll hear me say to Nick, we're going to tell Connie. Now, Connie isn't Nick's secretary, isn't his administrative assistant, that's his mom. And] understand she watches the show. So if we have trouble with Nick, we know how to take care of it now. So Connie, ] hope you're listening, because you may have a lot of work cut out for yourself. So Nick, congratulations, ] think, on your new position and I know that as one Planning Commission member, and I think I speak for all of us, we will certainly do our best to work with -- work every way we can to make the transition smooth. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that does bring up one other point. Some of the cases we have today and some coming up in the future were worked on by people who are no longer here, and so we're going to have to have a little more tolerance with staff who do stand up today and try to make presentations. Because they may not have been the ones who were involved as deeply in the project. And in that regard it also brings on added responsibility for the Planning Commission, because if we were careful before and if we read thoroughly before, we need to read 10 times thoroughly now. Not to find mistakes but to find things that need to be further considered or discussed. Because with a short staff, a lot of stuff's got to move through at the same rate with less people, and there is a chance that things may be missed. We're here to help make sure they don't get missed. And so from now on I think we're going to have even a further more intense job than we've been doing in the past. So with that in mind, we'll move on. Nick, it's good to see you here today. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know it took a promotion, or] guess.. I don't know if you want to call it a promotion or not, but a transfer to a different department.. to get you attend our meetings. So we'll certainly make them entertaining for you. Item #9A PETITION: PUDZ-2007-AR-12294, THERESA COOK, EXECUT]VE DIRECTOR OF THE COLLIER COUNTY A]RPORT AUTHORITY AND CDC LAND INVESTMENTS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With that, we'll move on to our consent agenda items. The first one is Petition PUDZ-2007-AR-12294, Theresa Cook, Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority and CDC Land Investments. After -- any comments from the Planning Commission on the consent item that's in their package? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: I'd like to-- CHAIRMAN STRA]N: Mr. Midney? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: -- make a motion to approve. CHAIRMAN STRA]N: Okay, motion made by Mr. Midney-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAfN: -- to approve the consent item. Page 5 ,.- "-'--"'---"~'-'~ .-- " 161 1 eJ~ Januarv 7. 20 I 0 ~ Second by Mr. Murray. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signily by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Ave. ~ COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Ave. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ave. ~ Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Item #9B PETITION: PUDA-PL2009-78L CRAIG T. BOUCHARD OF JENNIS REALTY. LLC CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 111e next consent item is Petition PUDA-PL2009- 78 (sic), Craig T. Bouchard of Tennis Realty, Inc., and it's for the Naples Bath and Tennis. Is there any discussion or motion on that item? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: So moved. COMMISSIONER MURRA V: Move to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray made a motion to approve, seconded by Mr. Vigliotti. Any comment? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Ave. ~ COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY Aye. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Item #10A & Item #10B PETITIONS: V A-PL2009-37 AND CU.2008-AR-14085, FLO TV, INe. (DISCUSSED TOGETHER) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, we're going to go into our regular public hearings. And so for the benelit of the public that's either listening or in the audience, we have two continued items: One is called FLO TV, and actually that's two petitions but it's the same basic item. That was continued from September. So that's first on the agenda by policy. Page 6 16 I 1 h~ January 7, 2010 The second one is Magnolia Pond. That is also continued from December. And that is another by policy, second in line. I know there's been a lot of discussion about when are we going to hear the c.A.T. transfer station site. That will be the first one up on the -- today's agenda after the continued items. So I would expect we're going to spend a good hour or more on the first two items, and then we'll be getting into the c.A.T. right after that at the earliest. I will try to make an announcement as we move forward how close we're getting to hear the C.A.T. one, as I can best judge it. So I know -- if any of you are watching and waiting to come down here, that's the best we can do at this point. And with that, I'll ask all -- we have two petitions, Petition V A-PL2009-37, FLO TV, Inc., and Petition CU-200S-AR-140S5, FLO TV, Inc. Both will be heard concurrently, be voted on separately. All those wishing to participate in either one of those, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there disclosures on the part of the Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, hearing none, start with the presentation. Welcome back to our coast. MS. MADISON: Thank you. Happy new year. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. MS. MADISON: Good morning, Planning Commission members, Chairman Strain, members ofthe county staff and County Attorney's Office. Once again, my name is Kimberly Madison, attorney with Ruden-McClosky, 401 East Jackson Street, Tampa, Florida. With me is Mr. David Hallowell of Black and Veatch Construction, and Mr. Tony Renda, as well as Jerry Heckerman, both representatives of the property owner, Renda Broadcasting. And we are here on behalf of the conditional use and variance petition submitted on behalf of FLO TV, Incorporated. Before I begin my presentation, and if it pleases the Commission, I would like to submit exhibit books, which are a composite of everything that's been submitted on both applications to date. I think they'll aid in the presentation. And they also have copies of the information that was requested by the Commission at the last meeting and subsequently submitted to the county. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you do, Ijust want to make sure, is everything that you're submitting been submitted to staff so it -- MS. MADISON: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: .. has staffs review and most likely then was included in our packages already? MS. MADISON: That is my hope. Yes, it was submitted to the staff. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you. Better make one for the -- you've got to make sure our court reporter has one, too. MS. MADISON: I've provided both court reporters. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Do we need to read these right now before your presentation? MS. MADISON: It has everything that's been submitted. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Can you give us two months to read -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've got to caution members, we have to be on record, so if we're looking for a response from the young lady, we need to get her back at the mic. Did everybody get their book? COMMISSIONER CARON: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. We're missing a couple. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Actually, mine was a statement. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do we need-- MS. MADISON: How many more? One more? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: One more. Well, here, she can have mine. This is all data that's in our package anyway; is that correct? MS. MADISON: Yes. Page 7 '_' ._"O,__._.....___~,"__.,""__, . -~.'----'~- 16\ 1 0~ . January 7. 20 I 0 COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, how do we know'! I mean -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we're not considering the book. She's passing it out for the record. We're considering what the staff gave us and what the presentation and the public testimony will be today. The book I believe is more for your positioning, should this ever have to be appealed, you want to have everything on record that you can and that it be as complete as possible so you can use it in further appeals. MS. MADISON: Absolutely. MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, and let me just put down for the record. since we're now handing out stuff for the record, if there's anything in here, ma'am, that's not in our packages previously, we're not looking at them here. MS. MADISON: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: If you want a continuance so we can review that, we're happy to grant you one now. MS. MADISON: I don't need that. I'm very confident that everything has been submitted to John-David, who's no longer here. MR. KLA TZKOW: Okay. Because I'm not looking at this. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I'm not going to. MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, this is -- MS. MADISON: I can take them back. MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, whv don't vou-- ~ . MS. MADISON: I'm sony. MR. KLATZKOW: Why don't you take them back. MS. MADISON: Okay. I would like to just submit it on the -- I do have the right to submit it on the record for -- MR. KLATZKOW: I'm a quick reader, but I'm not this quick. MS. MADISON: Okay. Not a problem. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It didn't matter to mc whether wc had them or not, becausc we only can read what we read up till today. so -- COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Except you wouldn't be able to discern that in a field situation. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wcll, they still can submit it fix the record, so-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm going to keep minc. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know. on second thought, let us havc those -- no, I'm just kidding. We've had enough. MS. MADISON: Thcy were really more for reference. but if you have all that stuff in ITont of you, I'll be referencing it today, so please feel tree to look at it. We're here before you today to request approval to separate and yet interrelated petitions. At the outset it's important to know that these petitions as stated previously are for to -- to legitimize the continued existence of a tower which currcntly exists at 5860 Crcws Road. Naples. Collier County, Florida. We do not seek to construct a new tower: rather, if both petitions are approvcd, it will legitimize the continued existence of onc that already exists and allow the applicant, FLO TV, to utilize that tower for thc purpose of installing an antenna and rclated equipment. 11mt being said, I'd like to address the first petition, which is for the conditional use. If you wilt recall, on October 15th, 2009, this commission heard ncarly two hours oftestimony and evidence at a public hearing for the conditional use petition that was continued to today. We would like to incorporate that hearing into the record. For the purposcs of to day's hearing, I will focus my presentation on the specific inquiries that were made by the Planning Commission in relation to this petition at the last hearing. Specifically the Planning Commission requested additional infonnation from the petitiouer, as well as from county staff. County stafThas since addresscd those inquiries directed to it in its supplemental staff report. So if it pleases the Commission. I will narrow my presentation to the inquiries that were raised in direction to the petitioner, the property owner and/or the engincers. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's fine. Aud one ofthc things that we had asked you to do is clean up who represents who. That was a qucstion last timc. MS. MADISON: Yes. Pagc 8 161 PJ~ January 7, 2010 1 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I just want to make sure you put that on record so we're covered. MS. MADISON: Yes, I am here on behalf of the property owner and the applicant. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ll1ank vou. ~ MS. MADISON: At the October 15th hearing we were asked to submit at a minimum copies of the most recent inspection report for the tower that is the subject of this request. Copies of that inspection report were submitted to Mr. Moss prior to this hearing. lfit pleases the Commission, and they do not have those directly in front of them, I have copies in the exhibit books, which were demonstrative in nature. The report does certifY that the tower passes inspection. The second request was for clarification of the collapse zone for the tower. Section 5.05.09, sub G, sub 7, as you're aware, exempts this particular tower from the collapse zone requirement. Nonetheless, it was the Planning Commission's desire to have an in-depth analysis of the collapse zone for this site. We have provided that analysis. It was provided prior to this hearing date. And if you do not have that immediately available to you, I can provide a copy of that as well. The next request was made for the copies of the most recent filings with the Collier County Mosquito Control District. The applicant submitted on October 15th, and the staff confirmed at the initial hearing, that the site was compliant with the requirements set forth by Collier County Mosquito Control. But the Planning Commission requested to review the most recent filings. We have since provided copies of those. And if you necd to review those, I have them available with me as well. We were requested to provide a copy of the redacted F811ease. That has since been provided. It certifies that the lease is certifiable for nine -- I believe nine extensions of a one-year term. And we have testimony present today that will certifY that the FBI has in fact been a tcnant there for over 20 years. We were also asked to clarifY and delineate the distances by which separate adjacent residential and/or housing from the subject site. We have revised the site plan to include that infonnation. That was previously provided and is available to review today, if it pleases the Commission. We ask that you make a final decision on this, being a conditional use application. As such, we stipulate that we do meet all the published criteria in the Land Development Code for issuance ofthis conditional use permit. Additionally, we've worked diligently with county staff members to provide the information that was requested by the Commission at the October hearing. Staff has rcviewed this additional information and has maintained its recommendation of no objection to the request, which was the initial recommendation in October. We have since re-noticed the hearing and have not received any inquiries from the public, despite that fact. The staff report we believe constitutes competent substantial evidence as a matter of law. And -- I'm sony, before I close, one additional request that was made was that we have two Florida -- not two, but a Florida certified engineer here to address questions as needed by the Commission. And we do have two engineers here today, Mr. Hallowell and Mr. Heckerman, who can address any additional questions, as necessary. And I will allow them to step up and answer the questions as needed. But to close, I would ask that based on our compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, the staff requirement -- or I'm sorry, the staff recommendation of approval, our compliance with the requests that were made in October as well as the lack of public opposition, we do renew our request for approval of this conditional use petition, and we are available to answer any questions that you may have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I want to thank you for the thorough job you did in attending to every single one of questions. I did.. I have a list from before, and you have responded to each one. That's appreciated. Okay, are there any questions from the Planning Commission, now that we have the remaining information that we didn't have the first time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, staff report? MS. GUNDLACH: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Nancy Gundlach, and I am filling in for John-David Moss today for this petition. And staff is recommending approval of this conditional use and variance as well. And I do have a change to one ofthe conditions of approval for the conditional use. And that is the last Page 9 -~-,._.,----- ,,-,-- -'~-<-""-"-~ .-... "_._--- "~----,~_...-...~- " , . condition of approval, condition of approval number six. And we arc changing the time period on that. And that's the time period that should the government entity ever leave the tower site, they will have six months to find a replacement instead ofthe stated 60 days. And with that, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Yes. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Is there any sanction being applied to the applicant for not having tom down the old tower, as they agreed? MS. GUNDLACH: By sanctions, you mean punishments? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Punishment. MS. GUNDLACH: There is a double conditional use fee. And Ray, can you think of any other0 MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. This pctition was not brought to the Code Enforccment Board for furthcr action, and the applicant took the action to submit the conditional use. So there is no other-- MR. KLA TZKOW: And for the record, sincc the time of the issuance ofthat conditional use, we've changed our public policy in the county and we're now looking to have multiple towers on sites. So rather than having single towers throughout the county, the county policy is now to put multiplc towers on these sites. So really from a code enforcement standpoint we'd he enforcing a public policy that's no longer a public policy. That conditional use that would have required them to take it down was under an old public policy. The present public policy would really be to keep them both up there. COMMISSIONER CARON: But.- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Ms. Caron') COMMISSIONER CARON: But thev were under the old -- . MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- conditional use -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. And there's the-- COMMISSIONER CARON: -- when they decided on their own not to dismantle the tower-- MR. KLA TZKOW: They should have dismantled the towcr, yes, I agree. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- as they should have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav, Mr. Schiffer') . COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And maybe Ray, you could answer this, because I know Nancy, you're new and it's an unfair question. Ray, you have detennined that this is an essential service as per 5.05.090 MR. BELLOWS: Yes. We ran this question by the zoning director, Susan lstenes, at the time, and it was her opinion that that was the intent, her opinion, that this qualified as an essential service tower site. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Have you read GJ of that and come to that conclusion yoursel!? MR. BELLOWS: We got that from the zoning director. who is the one authorized to make that detenn ination. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So she states, and it's your position, that this is an essential service tower-- MR. BELLOWS: That's coneet. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: .. as per G.3 of 5.05.09') MR. BELLOWS: Conect. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other questions of staff! COMMISSIONER MURRAY 1-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray" COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, I don't want to belabor this, but -- and I understand, I think, the reason for six months. But if it's deemed to be an essential service tower because there's an antenna on there that's appropriate because of governmental involvement, but if the government entity goes away and you give them six months and they can't get another entity, they have to take the tower down; is that correct? Page 10 16 I 1 ~f January 7, 20 I 0 MR. BELLOWS: It goes through code enforcement action and that could be one of the solutions. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So if -- MR. BELLOWS: Certainly they can't operate it unless it is deemed to be an essential service tower, and they have to have some kind of essential service on it. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: I understand sometimes that we have to struggle to try to make things fit that don't seemingly fit. But a duck is a duck is a duck. And if it's essential services tower because we've said so because a governmental antenna can be on it, then I don't see how it can change its status by the absence temporarily of it. But if it can be taken down because it no longer has a governmental entity's antenna on it, how then is it an essential services tower? It's a conundrum. MR. BELLOWS: Like any use that is approved by the county commission, if at some point in the future the use changes and is not operating as (sic) the manner that it was approved, then it's subject to code enforcement action to get compliance or to take whatever remedial action to correct it. And in this case a tower, if it doesn't have an essential service use, could be subject to be tom down. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Ray, if they have that problem, one of the solutions would be to come back in and seek further public processes to relieve themselves-- MR. BELLOWS: That's a good point. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- of any concerns they have. MR. BELLOWS: That is correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: One of the other issues with the conditional use that they are supposed to be living wlder today is the height of the tower. It was stated that the new tower would be 394 feet. And we all know that the tower is actually 452 teet. MS. GUNDLACH: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER CARON: Again, why are we sanctioning -- when people make commitments to this county, why are we then going back to sanction and say oh, it's okay that you absolutely did not follow what you were supposed to follow? You made a commitment, it's in writing and you decided not to be bothered to construct something that you wanted to construct. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, if I may, I'd like to try to answer that one. It's --1 don't think the county's condoning actions that are inconsistent with their approval. We are trying to rectify the problem in the limits that the code allows. And the code does allow them to come in and apply for a conditional use to rectify the problem. COMMISSIONER CARON: So just for everybody else out there, it's okay to say that you're going to do one thing, decide to do something else, and then just come in after the fact and say sony, guys, now grant me an exemption to -- MR. KLA TZKOW: They do that.. Commissioner, they do that at their parallel. If they don't get this conditional use, at that point in time there will be code enforcement proceedings. And at that point in time we will move to tear down the tower, okay? So, you know, it's within the public policy ofthis board to make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners who will then make a public policy as to what consequences are going to flow from, you know, their prior actions. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ray, were there any public complaints concerning either of these towers? MR. BELLOWS: Not to my knowledge. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The neighbors were notified of to day's meeting? MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you have any complaints, e-mail, telephone call, anybody have any concerns? MR. BELLOWS: Nothing on record. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And again, Nancy, I'm going to do it to Ray, because it isn't fair to do it to you. MS. GUNDLACH: Fine with me. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ray, has anybody in the department with a structural knowledge reviewed Page II ---,,-~~^~._~-~_. '-~--""~'---'~"-" . -- '-~---'..__.,.-.,'-'-"", \ 16 I 1 0~ January 7, 2010 the analysis of the collapse zone? Thc collapse zone is an important part of a tower. It's supposed to be two and a halftimes the height of the tower. unless it's an essential service tower. Now, I don't agree with that, but I'll bow to your prior conversation. But has anybody reviewed that? Espccially this engineer's letter in the second to last paragraph says the above is just an estimate so it esscntially neuters, you know, the prior part of it anyway. Has anybody reviewed this to say that these towers are in structural, you know -- MR. BELLOWS: Well, like any structure built in Collier County. it goes through a site development plan review process. And then as building penn its are issued in construction. their inspections, our engineering staff review those plans and make those detemlinations. I think the thing that came up last meeting, as I recall, is the maintenance reports. The code requires these towers to submit these maintenance reports to the county. And one of the things that wasn't clear at the last meeting is who reviews those and how do we track those monitoring reports. And John-David Moss was working with Joe Schmitt to create a process within CDES to ensure that those reports are being looked at through the statT ofCDES. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But they haven't been on this site prior. The engineering analysis, unless I read it wrong, is only -- the repOJ1 is only for one tower, and I'm not sure which tower it is. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: It's in the book, it isn't in our-- MR. BELLOWS: If they're -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- other infonnation. MR: BELLOWS: -- deficient on that, we will follow up with them and-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But the concern I have is, let me get to it, is the collapse zone thing. Is that __ I know of a tower, an experience where a cable snapped and it fell way out of the cable zone like they're describing it only does. Two towers nested together, one being an old one, if it's in disrepair and it starts to come down, it could take the cables out of the new one. So I'm not really comfortable that this has met the collapse zone. Once again. collapse zone's only a problem if it's not an essential service tower. Which you guys are saying that this is either owned or leased by the government. So -- but -- so nobody has looked at that, nobody has reported to you that these -- you're comfortable with this engineering? MR. BELLOWS: Well, engineering reports have been submitted. I wasn't the planner involved in reviewing all those things, but we can double check that and get back to you. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: What was submitted was one letter stating the towers only fall within the cable outline. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. And like I said, though, the towers are inspected and they can't get a C.o. without passing all the inspections. And then as the years go by there arc engineering maintenance inspections, and we're getting copies of them. And I don't know if we have all ofthem on this one. but if we don't, we will get them. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But you admitted, and we llnally got one done in December, that they haven't been done on these towers. MR. BELLOWS: I'm not sure what the process was. It doesn't (sic) be clear at this point what was being done. But we have a process in place now and -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But nobody in this room is aware-- MR. BELLOWS: -- going onward into the future we've identilled an issue and now we've corrected it. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. So what you're saying is you're going to assure everybody that these towers are going to be inspected immediately, and any kind of structural deticiency will be corrected. MR. BELLOWS: I didn't say -- thc county doesn't inspect them. The property owner, the tower owners hire their engineers, inspect, and they tile reports with the county. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And thev're reviewed bv') . . MR. BELLOWS: Engineers. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. Page 12 16' 1 r'};~ January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody clse have any questions? Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: One of the issues that I raised was the question ofliability associated with the other tenants on there and whether or not the liability would be shared or what the implications for the county would be in the event of a collapse because we're designating it essential services; whereas, the possibility exists that, if I recall correctly, there are residential properties that are fairly close. Have we resolved the issues of the other liability questions? I recognize --let me preface by saying I recognize that this is a lessee coming before us seeking -- this is a lessee coming before us seeking to utilize a property, okay. And it can be done. It's done in stores and so forth. I understand that fully. But we have multiple tenants in this case. What -- did we explore') Did we work with the law, the legal office and try to determine whether or not liability will be -- we're going to be impacted by this? I don't want to go further than that statement. MR. BELLOWS: Well, typically the property owner is the one that has any kind of liability if there are problems associated with maintenance or anything else. Safety is the property owner's concern. Now, they may have worked out some arrangements with people they lease space to for proper utilization of those towers, but when it comes down to liability, it's the property owner. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay, let me go a little step further. Not to belabor this, but frankly, I'm concerned. The governmental entity goes away. They have six months. One month into that period that tower no longer has a governmental entity. Is that still an essential services tower? MR. BELLOWS: Well, we would start the Code Enforcement action, and -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: You're not answering my -- MR. BELLOWS: Well, our opinion is it is not an essential service tower in that regard. And that's why we would start code enforcement action after six months. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: And I apprcciate that. What I'm driving at is that under those circwnstances should the collapse occur and it extends out into thc residential properties, what then? That's the __ MR. BELLOWS: That's an cxcellent question -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: .. concern I have. MR. BELLOWS: -- and I'm glad you asked. But still the answer is it's the property owner's responsibility. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I would -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Use the mic., Mr. Mun'ay. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: What? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We can't hear you, you're too far from the mic. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Am I? I apologize. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No,just then you were is the only time. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I would hope that, Mr. Klatzkow, you can help me with that regard, because that's a sticking point for me, quite frankly. And I have no personal matter in this, but I'm concerned. Ifthere's any liability for this county associated with it, I think we need to get that matter cleared up. MR. KLA TZKOW: I'm not concerned with the liability issue. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Thank you. That's good enough for me. MS. MADISON: I was going to respectfully add, if you like I can just state for the record the specific code provision. It's 5.05.09, sub G, sub 9, and it does state.. I'm sorry, sub 8. All owners of approved towers are jointly and severally liable and responsible for any damage caused to off-site property as a result of a collapse of any tower owned by them. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I've been to court where those things have been contcsted. Thank you. MS. MADISON: Ijustwant to cite-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bob, you need to get closer to your m ic if you're going to speak. Okay, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: Just one other question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then Ms. Caron. MR. BELLOWS: I believe the applicant has an engineer here too if you want some testimony from the Page 13 <"'~"M"~__,_.O_._.~, -"-,,,~_..,, _ _ .. __"._.._",.."..~. ._.~___'_,'__._ ,., " u . '.; , , 161 1 0f Januarv 7, 2010 " . engmeer. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Ms, Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, and this may be for the engineer. Obviously I think the county policy needs to change with respect to essential services. Because if one of these towers does fall and they don't all collapse within the collapse zone -- I mean, the towers are meant, if something happens to them, to fall within a collapse zone, However, if somebody cuts a guy wire, all you have to do is cut one ofthem and it will fall over, just like a tree, pretty much, Yes, please come up here and we'll talk about it Because -- and we'll talk specifics as well. Here's our engmeer. MR HECKERMAN: Good morning. My name is Jerry Heckennan, I'm the chief engineer for Renda Broadcasting, I've been with them for going on 14 years. I've been an engineer for about 40 years. I've been in the field and I can assure you, when you read the document closely, the towers are constructed to the TIA and the EIA standards, And these standards include an inner and outer guy points. Cutting one wire will not make the tower fall. You would have to cut all of the guylines. Even if you cut tl)ur on the outer guyline, the tower would still fold at its halfway point. Because in the standards it is designed to have your inner guy points go up at the 50 percent lower level ofthe tower and a second set of guy points that are further out the second half. That would be the worst case scenano. Ninety percent of all tower collapses do not happen because 01" broken guywires. They happen due to the twisting motion of a tower because of devices on the tower that cause the tower to twist, which is called the loading. So if you have antennas sticking on the tower that stick out like this and the wind blows, that is the chief cause of a tower coming down. And it twists, And as it twists, it comes upon itself. COMMISSIONER CARON: So let's talk about what happened in September of'09 out in Oregon. MR HECKERMAN: I'm not -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Guywires were-- MR. HECKERMAN: -- familiar with that case. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- cut Guywires were cut It was done by an environmental terrorist group, They cut the guywires on KRKO and the thing went down just like a ttee. It would be pretty hard to be in your business and not to have read about that MR. HECKERMAN: I did. And there are exceptions to any case. COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, there are exceptions, And so if you lived in a home right over here, wouldn't you want to know that you were protected, that if that thing went over for whatever reason -- MR, HECKERMAN: Currentlv there are -- ~ COMMISSIONER CARON: -- ifit went over during a hurricane or-- MR, HECKERMAN: -- no residential homes within 500 feet of the tower-- COMMISSIONER CARON: Currently. MR HECKERMAN: -- is my understanding, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir, you're going to have to wait till she finishes, because the recorders can't pick up both conversations at the same time, Thank vou. COMMISSIONER CARON: Currently there are no homes, but the zoning is residential. It is zoned for homes right there. So that's all. That's my only point And if the tower had been built to the specifications that it was supposed to be, we might not be in this position, I don't know, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schitfer') MS, MADISON: Can Ijust before we proceed have Mr. Heckennan state his name, And for the record, I believe the court reporter requested that MR HECKERMAN: Jerrv Ileckerman, H-F-C-K-E-R-M-A-N. ~ . CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Ms. Madison, that was something I should have caught Appreciate it Brad" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Jerry, looking at the tower inspection report, which tower was inspected? MR. HECKERMAN: Both towers have been inspected, You should have two reports there, Page 14 161 Ifbt January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: [n the book that you just gave us, the only place we have it there's only one tower. And you're a licensed engineer in the State of F[orida? MR. HECKERMAN: Yes. I'm federally licensed too. COMMISS[ONER SCH[FFER: [n the report, though, it does state that one of the guy[ines -- did you review that, one of the guy[ines has a temporary splice that should be replaced? MR. HECKERMAN: Yes. And the reason that it wasn't replaced at this time is because if this gets approved the tower will have to be beefed up for additional antenna,. And my understanding is that FLO TV will pay to beef the tower up to newer, stronger standards and replace guy lines as necessary. COMM[SSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. The -- okay, so then essentially [ must be reading the oldest tower's report? MR. HECKERMAN: Yes. The new tower was brought up to G standards in the last year when the standards changed from I' to G. COMMISSIONER SCH[FFER: [don't know what that means, but-- MR. HECKERMAN: Okay, well, the standards got tighter in the last couple of years. COMM[SSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. So you do have two of these reports? MR. HECKERMAN: Yes. COMMISS[ONER SCH[FFER: Okay. And then they're signed by a guy named Darrell Elliott. So what is he, he's a structural engineer, or-- MR. HECKERMAN: Darrell Elliott is the -- has been in the tower business for quite a long time. We did bring his resume about his experience. He is an EE engineer. And I have that document here. I'm assuming this was all submitted, correct0 MS. MADISON: No. MR. HECKERMAN: But I do have his qualifications here. Also, he works with the people that stamped. And if you look carefully on the stamped letter by Structural Components, it says both towers were constructcd, meeting all the EIA TIA Section 2-22 requirements, which is the requirements that this county and just about every county in the United States goes by. The only difference is, is since then the I' requirements have changed to G, which means some stronger bracing will need to be put on the tower, and some extra guywires, which FLO TV is prepared to do if we get this approved, because it's going to be necessary. COMMISS[ONER SCH[FFER: Okay. But EE is electrical engineer, not a structural engineer. MR. HECKERMAN: TlA. They're combined entities. Electrical Industry Association and Telecommunications Industry Association provide the standards for towers. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. But an EE designation in the State of Florida would mean electrical engineer, correct? MR. HECKERMAN: No, but Structural Components did stamp. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: All right. But that's another requirement. MR. HECKERMAN: And in the requirements of the county, it says -- the inspection says any qualified tower professional that's been doing this for years and years and years. These people build -- in this report I can show you pictures where they build giant 2,000-foot towers, antennas on top of buildings. Darrell's quite experienced. COMMISSIONER SCH[FFER: [s this the only county that requires annual or biannual inspections? MR. HECKERMAN: I've never seen this anywhere in my 40 years of experience except for here. Now that I'm aware of this requirement, we are going to make sure that it gets followed to the T. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRA[N: Ms. Caron. And then Brad, you need to pull that closer next time you're on the mic. Go ahead, Ms. Caron, then Mr. Murray. COMMISSIONER CARON: I just have one other qucstion. On the old tower that we're trying to get a conditional use for here today, essentially is LoJack, wauts to be FLO TV, and the FBI, or some government entity. Is that pretty much -_ MR. HECKERMAN: And Reach I'M, which has a translator-- COMM[SSIONER CARON: Yeah, that's a ham. MR. HECKERMAN: -- on the tower. Page I 5 ,..~.,.._--~.. ---_.--, - --- "." ^'" _.~._"._~~_...._,,-,,~~-,.,.~-_. -""'-'-~'._----_._~- , ,I '. . 16 I 1 b~ January 7, 20 I 0 COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah. that's a ham thing. Would there -- would it be possible for those entities to be on the new tower" MR. HECKERMAN: No. There is no more space to put anybody on the new tower. And this is why we would like to be able to have this tower beefed up and made available, not only for these tenants but for other people that may need to have a place to put an antenna in the future. Because right now it's hard to get a tower anywhere. [n the world of today, the communications and the electronics, you know, towers are in need. And if you already have a tower that's existing that's capable of adding future tenants, I think we're doing the county a service. COMMISSIONER CARON: What's left on that -- on the old tower certainly doesn't take up much wind load. MR. HECKERMAN: Currently what's on the tower right now does not havc a lot of wind load. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right What about FLO TV, thev're not.. ~ . MR. HECKERMAN: FLO TV is going to have a little bit of wind load. Definitely. We've already looked at some structural analyses. The tower is going to have to have structural work done to put the new tenants on to meet code. COMMISSIONER CARON: The old tower-- MR. HECKERMAN: The old tower, yes COMMISSIONER CARON: -- is going to require structural. okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick, you wanted to comment befi."e Mr. Murray" MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. For the record, Nick Casalanguida. I've spoken to the applicant, and based on the discussion there's a condition of approval they will provide a structural report, certifIed by an engineer, every year to the county on the condition of both towers, the guywires and anything that would encumber that tower. And I would suggest we put that as a condition of approval on this application. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Isn't that part of the code" MR. CASALANGUIDA: It is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then we wouldn't need it as a condition of approval because they've got to do it, right? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well. maybe we can go a little farther with that in tenns of that review. We'll check the code. But I think if the concem is that review, that rep011 could certainly be part of that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. Murray') COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Sir,just one quick -- here [am. .lust one point Your engineering degree is what, civil, professional, electronics? What is it, siro MR. HECKERMAN: Radio. It's in the field of broadcasting, radio. I have worked with the towers. I've been involved with as many as 30 towers being erected. Also, I also work with a couple of tower companies and assist them in actually building a few towers. I'm also a ham radio operator and I also have my very own tower at my house. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: I'm sure. Thank you MR. HECKERMAN: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there any other questions of anybody at this point? Mr. Koltlat? COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Ray, after hearing what you've heard this moming, added to what we received in our packet, does the staff still recommend approval for this project? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, we do. COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Thank vou. ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. are there any other questions at this time" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, do we have any public speakers? MR. BELLOWS: No speakers on this item. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, with that we will close the puhlic hearing and entertain a motion from the Planning Commission. Page 16 16JaLry7~olO 0t Mr. Vigliotti? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I'd like to make a motion to approve. Do we need to approve these separately or together? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Separately. So we've got to say one first, then we've got to vote on that, then we've got to go to the second one. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Okay. I recommend approval on PL2009-37, FLO TV. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, is there a second? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, motion made to approve and -- by Mr. Vigliotti, seconded by Mr. Murray. I assume the approval is subject to conditions and stipulations in thc staff report? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I hope so. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes, of course. And staff approval. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any discussion" COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, I will not vote for the motion. I feel very strongly that the issue is that Renda Broadcasting agreed to a conditional use, and that among the requirements was that the old tower come down after the new tower was constructed. And in addition to that, the new tower was supposed to be 394 feet, not 455 feet. And I think if this particular conditional use could not be -- they couldn't live by that conditional usc, then I don't know that we expect that they will live by the new one. So I'll vote against the motion. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: The reason I seconded it and I will vote for the motion is because the concerns I had, which were the matters of liability and potential injury to somebody in the future have been effectively resolved. The fact that there have been two towers there, that perhaps that one of them should have come down is now moot in my mind, especially in light of public policy and the need for towers. As long as we're structurally okay and we've done every1hing we could to protect the public, even though it may have been a wrongful act to fail to bring them down, perhaps we can benefit from it anyway. So that's my maybe illogic, but that's why I voted. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Midney? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Yeah, I'd like to echo what Mrs. Caron said. I think based on their past record, I'm concerned that this company will meet the commitments that they're committing to today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, and I will be supporting the motion. I think that the fact that we had a code that wasn't to as much benefit as it could have been in the past and we saw that it needed correction and the correction was that multiple towers are a good thing, this one has no reported incidences around it, there's no complaints, Ijust don't see any reason why it shouldn't be there. So I certainly will be supporting the motion. Anybody else? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: 1'11"- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, as much as I want to vote against it, I will support it based on the fact that I do think clustering the towers is the most efficient and smartest use of towers. I think we're going to structurally concern (sic) it. I really disagree that it's an essential service tower and like (sic) somebody in staff to read the code I read and get back to me and tell me why, you know, it looks black to me but you're saying it's white. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that, I'll call for a vote and it should be by both hand and voice. All those in favor of the motion for approval of the variance, signify by saying aye and raising your hand. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Ave. , COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Pagc I 7 _...._"._._--_.,,---~----,._._.,,-_.--, . , -- ..,"~.~~, .-....- ,"......-.,,-. .'''''---"''"'"~''''''-'~.'' "'--'~"'~~'--~.~' -..........-..-. -. - ",.' , 161 1 0~ January 7, 2010 One, two, three, four, five, six, in favor. Those opposed? COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Two against. L CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, the next one, is there a motion on the conditional use? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I will make a motion to approve CU-200S-AR-40S5, FLO TV, for approval, with all the conditions we spoke about today and staff approvaL COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, a motion made and seconded with the stipulations. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: My position will be the same as for the previous one, and I will be supporting the motion. All those in lavor, same sign, signifY by saying aye and raising their hand. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Ave. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Avc. One, two, three, four. five, six in favor. Those against? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave. ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Two against. Okay, thank you very much for your attendance today. And that-- we'll be done with that one. MR. KLATZKOW: Just for the record, the reasons for the negative votes were the same as previously stated? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: (Nods head atlinnatively.) MR. KLA TZKOW: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, next item up -- and by tile way, for those people on the C.AT. transfer station, we probably aren't going to catch you by 9:30, so it will be closer to 10:00 before we start, if we get that far by then. I'm being optimistic. Item #9C PEnTlON: PUDZ-A-2006-AR- I 03 IS, P A WEL AND TER YL BRZESKI, MAGNOLIA POND HOLDINGS. LLC CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next petition is PU DZ-A-2006-AR-1 031S. It's Pawel and Teryl Brzeski, Magnolia Pond Holdings, LLC. All those wishing to participate in this item, please rise to be swom in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Arc there disclosures on the part of the Planning Commission? Mr. Vigliotti? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I had a brief conversation with Patrick White. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, Patrick White called me, we had a brief conversation. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? Page I S 1 9anLy 7, 110 ~ COMMISSIONER CARON: And I had a brief conversation with Mr. Hancock. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I did too with Mr. Hancock. Anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think I might have had a conversation with Patrick sometime in the past, Ijust can't recall it ofThand. Not recently, though. Okay, with that, we will turn it over to the applicant. MR. WHITE: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Happy new year to you and the staff. And indeed, you mentioned the cold, and I have one, courtesy of my son, so please forgive my voice. Patrick White, with the law finn of Porter, Wright, Morris and Arthur, Naples office. Here today on the agenda item you referenced, Mr. Chairman, we note that there arc a number of housekeeping issues we need to address before we get into the true substance of the presentation. It's going to be pretty much a dual effort between myself and Tim Hancock of Davidson Engineering. He will be handing out through staff a tract changes version of the PUD document that you're receiving now. We also have prepared an addenda that has 13 items that have come to our mutual attention working witl] the staff and with the Chair in addressing a series of issues that Tim will enumerate and go through one by one. In addition, before we get to that, there are two aspects of the staff report that I'd like to make mention of that are minor points, but ones that I think warrant being corrected on the record. First is as to the owners. And this has been backed up with affidavits that have been previously provided to the County Attorney's Office. There are three series of ownerships. The first two of those are correctly stated in LLC where Ms. Teryl Brzeski, Teny Brzeski, is the manager ofthat LLC. Second item is a land trust number 1.B. Ms. Brzeski again is the trustee of that trust. Thirdly, the five-acre parcel that's actually the unzoned piece or the differently zoned piece that's being added into this mixed PUD is one that is owned by Mr. and Mrs. Brzeski as tenants by the entirety. So what we would do isjust correct the record to reflect that there's a third owner, Teryl and Pawel Brzeski, husband and wife. That, as I said, was for the five-acre piece that's presently zoned ago that we're bringing into this PUD. Second item, a little minor, maybe more personal. As agent, our law firm recently moved and the new address is 9132 Strada Place, third floor. All other information remains the same. Correspondingly to the amendments to the staff report, we will further amend the application to reflect the ownership interest that I've just referenced, and that is under the disclosure of interest information that is on Page 2 of the app. under small letter "a", just for the record's purposes, and that's where we would indicate 100 percent ownership in the individual status of husband and wife of Mr. and Mrs. Brzeski. I would note for the record that both Mr. and Mrs. Brzeski are present today, but unless you have specific questions of them, we're not anticipating any remarks from them. One of the other items that was provided to staff, as you're aware, there was hand-off of this project to Ms. Deselem. And in making sure since Monday that all of the I's are dotted and T's are crossed, we provided a follow-up affidavit of posting notice and photographs to ensure that the notice is proper with respect to the dates. As you see on your visualizer, Mr. Hancock will be providing a brief Power Point that will help orient towards the project. And what I believe at this point is probably best to do is to just simply indicate for the record that Mr. Hancock obviously is an expert in plmming and has been I'm certain recognized by this body as such on numerous occaSIOns. And with that said, I believe that's enough rrom me. We're going to do our best to wrap this up. I'm not aware of any public opposition, but] would like to reserve some time to respond and to address any comments that any of the Commissioners may have working in tandem with Mr. Hancock. Are there any questions at this time, Commissioners" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Doesn't look like it, Patrick. We'll move on. MR. WHITE: Simply note for the record that at this point we have a recommendation of approval from staff. Thank you. MR. HANCOCK: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. For the record, Tim Hancock with Page 19 M"_._~.._~~__<_____._"~_..__..~,,~,_~...._.._..___.>._..... ,,<'n_.__'_ ..._....~.,._--_..._,--..__ '_ " ---"'.'-'''''''-_0 ...~_ ~_._._~.~_~_,_.._..~_~~~_ ...__..._____.______..____ .on " 161 1 0~ . \ ~ January 7, 2010 Davidson Engineering, and working with Patrick White as co-agent for Magnolia Pond Holdings, LLC and Land Trust 1-8. The application before you today seeks to amend the existing sunsetted zoning for the Magnolia Pond PUD, The previously PUD allowed for the development of231 multi-family units on 42 acres ofland. The PUD proposal in tront of you today serves to increase the land mass from 42 acres to 47.05 acres through the addition of a previously un zoned agricultural parcel to the north and east. However, in doing so we do not seek to increase the number of developable units. They'll remain at 231. What that effectively docs is reduces the gross density from 5.49 units per acre to the proposed 4.91 units per acre. Certainly not a substantial reduction, but a reduction just the same. The second component of the application seeks to amend the list ofpennitted uses to clarify some undefined tenns that were in the prior PUD, such as townhomes and garden apartments that go undefined in the current Land Development Code. We also wish to add assisted living facilities as a permitted use within the project. Just as many projects have come before you in recent months and requested a combination of assisted living facility and/or residential uses, this application seeks to penn it the conversion of a fonner residential PUD to ALF uses for part or all ofthe project. I'll address that conversion issue a little more fully later in my presentation. The site is located approximately one-half mile west of951 and is bisected by Magnolia Pond Drive. Magnolia Pond Drive serves residential and institutional uses located along its length and temlinates at Golden Gate High School, where my wife is the Dean, so I'm compelled to say Go Titans at this point. Take that one back to the office, Mr. Eastman. All right. To the north is existing and developed RSF-3 zoning across the Golden Gate canal, which measures a little more than 125 (sic) in width. The project has approximately 650 feet of frontage on the canaL To the east, which is to the right of the drawing you're looking at, is Mike Davis Elementary School. Approximately 400 feet with a common shared border, followed by a preserve extending further south all the way to Magnolia Pond Drive. As you cross Magnolia Pond Drive, the adjacent land is zoned for Collier Boulevard mixed use commerce center. This penn its a residential density of up to 10 units per acre with hundreds of thousands of square feet of commercial and hotel use. To the south is the ]-75 right-ot~way measuring approximately 350 feet in width with multi-family zoning across the right-ot~way, ranging from four to 13 units per acre. And again to the west is Golden Gate High SchooL The property is designated as urban residential subdistrict in the Growth Management Plan, and as such is afforded the opportunity to request up to 16 units per acre. Because the property is located within the density band of the activity center at 1-75 and 951, it is eligible to request up to seven units per acre. However, as stated previously, the approval before you today is for a maximum of 231 residential units, a density of less than five units per acre. While I could regale you ad nauseam as to how the project meets the goals and objectives of the GMP, staff has done a tine job of summarizing the project's consistency in their staff report, so I'll let the application and report stand as sut1icient evidence in that regard. As part of the PUD amendment, the master plan has been updated to renect the required preserve, water management, project access conditions, and desired amenities. The site plan is dominated hy the required preserve area to the south, or bottom ofthe drawing before you. Gfthe total 47.05 acres, 41.1 are deemed to be indigenous and thus the required preserve area equals 10.28 acres. Based on the adjacent zoning approvals, the largest contiguous preserve exists along the southeast portion of the project, which is the lower right-hand comer of the drawing. This fact, combined with the desire to buffer the project as much as is reasonable ]rom the noise of 1-75, resulted in the preserve area being located along the south and southeast property lines. The only species of concern evident in our survey's is a fair number of gopher t0l1oises. At the time of submittal of this application oft~site relocation was the prcferred method, but there may be a change in focus going on at the state level to encourage on-site retention where preserves are large enough and suitable with vegetation. At the time of development order, oft~site relocation, on-site retention or a combination of both will be utilized in accordance with state and tederal regulations to address the presence of the gopher tortoises. Page 20 16 I 1 January 7, 20] 0 ~ The project proposes buffering consistent with Land Development Code requirements for the perimeter of the project, including a 10-foot Type D buffer along Magnolia Pond Drive. The Type D buffer is the most intensive buffer in the Land Development Code, and provides for the option of placing a privacy wall within that buffer. The project also proposes an interesting amenity along Golden Gate canal that may require a little bit of explanation. The applicant was approached by the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department during the rezone process and asked to grant a 20-foot easement along the canal !Tontage for the purpose of constructing a bicycle and pedestrian pathway that will ultimately connect 951 to Santa Barbara Boulevard. The county apparently has all the necessary pieces to accomplish this, cxcept for the Magnolia Pond !Tontage. We're the last remaining link. The issue for us was that.. [ looked at it and we saw the access to the canal as being a recreational amenity for the community. And by granting a 20-foot easement along that canal, that serves a purpose of almost severing the connectivity between the community and the canal. A fter some thought, a design was created that we feel preserves and even improves the access, while granting this 20-foot easement, which is the -- it doesn't show it very well in the visualizer but it's a small pink strip across the top of the site plan. The concept as shown on the master plan is to grant the request to the easement, but permit the developer in the future to construct a lake parallel to the canal and create connections to the canal that would require the installation of pedestrian bridges so the county pathway would remain intact but allow for access to and !Tom the canal by residents within the development. The creation ofthis connected lagoon would also reduce or eliminate the need for any boat docks or access facilities along the canal. And in short, we were able to basically take what I saw as a liability and turn it into an interesting amenity that will give the community access for recreational purposes to the Golden Gate canal system without having to operate within that easement for structures and any boat docks or launching facilities. We see it definitely as something ofa small-scale kind ofa canoe and kayak launch type facility. Again, if you've ever fished the canals, they are loaded with bass and oscar and blue gill, and there's quite a bit of recreation that goes on there. So we've been able to satisfy the 20-foot request from the county without adversely impacting the plan for the community. A second -- and then one thing I do want to mention is during the neighborhood information meeting the property oymers across the canal expressed a desire to keep the plan as it was shown, because it provided for a greater distance between the canal and what would be the buildings. While I eXplained to them that I could not guarantee that a lake would be located in that location, what we did do is, being responsive to their concerns, is installed a minimum 300-foot setback for any structures that would reach three stories. That would allow for two-story structures to be located across the canal !Tom homes that are zoned that allow for two-story construction. But if a three-story structure is to be built, the minimum separation from the property line would be 300 feet. Hopefully the plan will be constructed as shown. If not, at least any taller buildings than two stories will have an increased separation. The project has a secondary public benefit in that it will result in the conveyance to Collier County of a 30-foot easement for maintenance and required improvemcnts to an existing water management ditch that runs the length of the entire eastern property line. This easement actually serves not just our project by any means but believe it or not serves projects south ofI-75 from the Radio Road extension road northward. I've worked on projects down there, and] was interested to find out that projects that far south actually have their stonnwater flow north underneath 1-75 ultimately into the Golden Gate canal. That conveyance was never really clear and the ability for the county to maintain that easement was not in place. What we've agreed to do is !,'fant the 30-foot easemcnt to the county at no cost. And we've agreed to do so within ] 20 days of receiving a written requcst from the county. But in actuality, both of these easements are in the process of being granted. We've obtained the legal descriptions, we've done some preliminary review with the County Attorney's altice, and by the time we end up before the board we hopefully will have both easements granted and have that behind us. Nonetheless, we've included in the PUD that requirement to ensure that it happens. The PUD has been completely updated in an effort to comply with the current PUD format, and it contains a request for two deviations. The first is to allow for reduction in the internal buffer requirement from 15 fcet to 10 feet Page 2 ] "'_""~._'~e.'_",___,,_ _,~'__>'O"_'__'__M_' ._..._._ _~_._, 16\ 1 0~ Janumy 7, 20 I 0 where multi-family development directly abuts single-family or two-family development and where a similar architectural theme is applied. The plantings would still meet the Type D requirement, but would be placed in a I O-foot buffer easement instead of a 15- foot. Since the building massing between thc two uses only varies by three feet in height, this seemed to be a small request to save some internal space without sacriticing the quality of the butTer. The second deviation is to request a 50-foot internal right-ot~way cross-section, instead ofthe standard 60-foot required by the county. Since all required utilities, sidewalks and pavement widths can be accommodated in a 50-foot easement and since the roads will remain private, the nccd for 60 feet was not deemed necessary. The staff does support both of these deviations. Before turning things back ovcr to Mr. White to cxecutc a wrap-up and clean up any of my mistakes, we also had an addition to a change in planners to Ms. Deselem. We reccived some additional commcnts from the County Attorney's Office this week and had somc input from the Chainnan. And by the time we wrapped up all these little changes, I ended up with a list of about 13. And I thought for the sake of clarity, thc easiest way to address those may be to preparc what I call a tract changes document, which has been handed out to each of you. And I would like to, with the pennission of the Chair, to just really go page by page, discuss those changes, go over each one ofthem with you, and then I have a written addenda that addresses that, that if it would be helpful during the course of any type of a motion for the project, I'd be happy to provide that to you also. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Tim. MR. HANCOCK: The tirst change is that Pages I and 2 of the PUD you received have bcen removed. They were a title pagc and a list of exhibits and are no longer necessary in the current PUD format. The second change is under Exhibit A, Item A.l. Ms. Desclem recommended capping the number of residential singlc-hlmily units to 125, which is the number that is reflected in the TIS. Thc petitioner has no objection to this change. The next change on that same page, Exhibit A, Item AA, there is a conversion ratio related to net acres of assisted living facilities and net developable units, which has apparently caused some confusion. To be perfectly honest with you, when I originally wrote this, the four-to-one ALF to residential ratio that has become commonplace was not bcing Llsed. And what I tried to do was subtract out the lake and preserve areas to create a netinet situation. So if an ALF were built on one acre, it would reduce the density by a commensurate number of units. In doing so, while it made perfectly good sense to mc, apparently I was the only onc. So what we've included here is basically language that is more comfortable to this body and something you've seen before and doesn't require a degree in mathematics to get there. And so what we've added here is we've inserted under Item AA that for each four ALF units developed -- and I'm sorry, there should be a strike-through there also. In the exclusive of preserve arcas, lakes, easements, buffer units, that will go away. So it would read, for each tl)Ur ALF units, one residential unit shall be subtracted from the maximum of231 pennitted dwelling units. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, that answers my question, because it didn't make any sense. Thank you. MR. HANCOCK: Oh, it made scnse. You just had to spend a lot of time with me to figure it out. COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, no, what didn't make sense was the 8.27 units stuck in there out of nothingness. MR. HANCOCK: Oh, I -- yes, in trying to make these changes, I will admit that I .- I hope that's the only mistake I have from here forward, but I can't promise that. Also, on Exhibit A, and I'll go to the next page, on Item B.6, Ms. Deselem also noted that we had some antiquated language there that referred to the county manager or designee, which should have been replaced with board of zoning appeals. We made that change in A.6. And also, upon her recommendation, we added that same -- I'm sorry, under B.6 wc added that same language under A,5 under permitted uses. Again, a standard reference to say any pennitted uses must go through the BZA as opposed to county manager or designee. The next change is on Table 1, Exhibit B. And in the tract changes document you have, tl,at's going to be page number three. Under the single-family and two-family categories, the setbacks for principal and accessory structures was listed as N/ A, not applicable. The chairman pointed out this seems to be kind of confusing mld so Page 22 16' 1 rOt January 7, 2010 suggested revising this to read 20 feet and 10 feet respectively for principal and accessory structures. And that is the change you see toward the bottom there. Just below that there was a lake setback of 20 feet, which because of the required 20-foot lake maintenance easement that was redundant, so we have removed it, The next change is in the footnotes of Table I. Under footnote six it's stated, minimum floor area of the ALF, and that should have been maximum. Thank you, Commissioner. So that change has been made. And the next change was an addition that I made under footnote eight after discussing this with the Chainnan. And one of the concerns there was as you go down Magnolia Pond Drive, if you look at the site plan, you very conceivably could have the rear of the homes facing Magnolia Pond Drive. A Type D buffer can be a fully vegetated butfer, and you have the option of placing a wall in there. It was pointed out to me that with a 10- foot accessory structure setback you could have accessory structures butting up against a 1 O-foot vegetative butfer along Magnolia Pond Drive. For strictly aesthetic purposes and something that I think would probably happen as a matter of course anyway, what I've put in here is that the buffer along Magnolia Pond Drive shall be a Type D buffer of either 10 feet in width with a six-toot privacy wall or 15 fect in width if only vegetation is installed. So what I've tried to do is if they choose not to do a wall, we've increased the buffer width to give a little more setback for accessory structures and whatnot to hopefully address what is potentially an aesthetic concern. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Just because you're making corrections as we go, if you go up to maximum zoned height and run across, you want 35 feet and two stories, and 20 feet for the clubhouse. So the other 35 feet is extraneous, it needs just to come out -- MR. HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- all the way across. Do you see where I'm-- MR. HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- talking? MR. HANCOCK: All after clubhouse in that entire line there's a second number of 35 feet in there. COMMISSIONER CARON: And the same under maximum actual height, 42 feet needs to come out all the way across. , It's just a formatting thing, right? Because you want 42 feet and 27, 42, 27, 45, 27, 45, 27. And underneath that final 42 feet is extraneous, right? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: No. MR. HANCOCK: I don't believe so. Because it deals with -- let's see. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark, can I say something? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, go ahead, Brad. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I think what they're doing thcre, Donna, is they're saying that accessory buildings are 20 feet, except the clubhouse is 35. MR. HANCOCK: That's correct, It should read more clearly than it does. It runs together a little bit there. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, the question that Donna has is -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Oh, I see. So all right, yeah, it doesn't read cor -- yeah. MR. HANCOCK: Yeah, the accessory -- what it says there is accessory buildings are 20 feet. A clubhouse, which they've drawn out scparately, would be at 35 feet. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. Then drop it down onto a separate line so that-- MR. HANCOCK: Yes. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- it's understood. Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Or Tim, what would make you assume the clubhouse is an accessory building, not a principal building? I think the clubhouse would be considered principal, so you could-- MR. HANCOCK: We could strike it altogether. Okay. COMMISSIONER CARON: Is that the way -- MR. HANCOCK: Well, clubhouses -- COMMISSIONER CARON: -- the county normally does it, though? MR. HANCOCK: More than not I've had clubhouses deemed to be accessory to a residential community. Page 23 -- '__~'_____""._______'..._c_.__,""._~__,,__..'____m" _, __<',_ ,._,_w" ._., "__"'_~'__~""''' - ~""'..~.",_ "_,~_,"",,,,"~"__""__.'..,"O"~., _.,,_, _ , \ 16! 1 0~ January 7,20 I 0 CHALRMAN STRAIN: But it's a principal structure. And accessory uses would be accessory to it as a principal. How did staff look at it when they reviewed it" Now, I caught staff offguard because they're chatting, but .. MR. BELLOWS: We're chatting about it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay. how did you interpret the clause that Ms. Caron pointed out and Brad's been talking about as well? MS. DESELEM: For tbe record, Kay Deselem. Principal Planncr with Zoning. Yeah, at first I was following along, and yeah, I thought, sure, she's right, that was just extraneous. But when I look at it, I think I understand now what he's saying. that he did want the clubhouse to be higher. And with Tim, I usually look at a clubhouse as an accessory structure. It's usually accessory. The principal use is either the residential units or whatever. But in looking at the list of uses, I don't see the clubhouse itself listed for either. Yeah, I was just looking at it quickly, Ray and I were looking, and it looks like it may come under recreational uses, but it's not. There is something that says recreation buildings, but in actuality a clubhouse per se is not listed as a use. So it might be appropriate to add that use to an accessory and then it's c1car. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. I think that may gct into another concem, though, is you know how you've got your top of your columns, you have four different uses up there" You probably should add the clubhouse as another use so that you can list its front side yard and the whole nine yards n COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- because you're not going to want your clubhouse without a side yard setback the same as to a single-family home, say. MS. DESELEM: That's more customary. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, that is more customary and I suggest we do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, I think what we're going to end up doing then, Tim, is somehow this is going to have to get done during lunch or break and you can bring it back today for finalization this afternoon, if you want. But I think we're going to need to see how that lays out, because all those setbacks and everything else are going to be something we need to understand. You've got a better suggestion. or do you have one? MR. HANCOCK: No, sir, I think that's somcthing we can do. And ifit.. if the Commission will allow, I'd be happy to, as soon as we're done here, head back. make those changes and bring at least that portion of the document back to vou. ~ I know we'll be back to you for consent agenda, if we receive an approval, with changes for you to review. I don't know if you feel like that change itself could be handled on consent or whether or not it should be handled separately today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we'd have to work through every one of your other standards; your side yards, rear yards, front yards and et cetera for the clubhouse. If you create a separate column, you're going to have to fill in all those same standards. If you know what those are, we can verbally go through them and if the Commission feels comfortable enough it may work. MR. HANCOCK: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I think we have to get to that point. And this may help you: We need to take a break for the court reporter, and this might be a good time to break. You can think about what we just said, decidc how you want to handle it, and we'll come back here at five after 10:00 and resume. MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir, okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you, we'll do that. (Recess. ) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everybody, welcome back from break. And when we Icft, we were being entertained by Mr. Hancock. and he shall continue. MR. HANCOCK: I appreciate the broad version of entertainment. Based on your recommendation n I appreciate the time, Mr. Chairman n I think what would be the cleanest would be to add the table -- to the table a column of clubhouse on Exhibit B. table one. And what I'd like to do is just Page 24 16 I 1 ~1 January 7, 2010 go down each category and give you what we feel is the appropriate number or standard to be filled in. So what we'll propose is adding a fifth column for clubhouse. Under minimum lot area, 7,500 square foot. Under minimum lot width, 50-foot interior, 60-foot comer. In this case same as the single-family. Front yard setback, 25 feet. Side yard setback, IS feet. Rear yard setback, 20 feet for principal. I don't believe accessory structure setback is applicable, but to avoid confusion maybe just put 10 feet in there anyway, just in case there's an accessory structure on the clubhouse parcel for some reason. MPUD boundary setback, 20 fcet with notation three, and 10 feet for acccssory structure. Garage setback, not applicable. Second page. Natural habitat preserve area setbacks, 25-foot principal, 10-foot accessory. Distance between principal structures, one-half the sum of building heights. Distance between accessory structure, 10 feet. Maximum zoned height, 35 feet. And of course we will remove the clubhouse notation tTom tbe other four columns. Maximum actual height, 42 feet. And again, removing the clubhouse notation from the other four columns. Minimum floor area, 1,200 feet. And minimum carport or garage per unit, not applicable. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before we move on, let's make sure we all have -- since we walked through that, let's just discuss any ofthe items. And my first question would be ifthis is not listed as one of the principal uses or accessory uses, are we going to add that terminology to one or the other? And then which one is it? And then that one might spur another question. For example, a clubhouse, at least all the ones I'm used to seeing, have accessory structures to themselves, and so you haven't addressed that yet in your standards. So you may -- whereas in the second page where you've got 10 and 35 h or 35 feet for your zoned heigbt, [ think you nced to address your accessory building height in both of those categories, maximum and actual, so -- MR. HANCOCK: In which case I would replicate the standards for 20 feet for accessory buildings under the zoned height and 27 feet under actual. As to the first part of that, because we've created a separate column for it, I think it's fair to say we're not going to see a clubhouse being built without residents or an ALF facility in place. Whether it's listed as a permitted use or an accessory use, I'm -- I'll be honest with you, I'm not sure it matters in the end. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What is staffs preferencc? Since you're the ones that are going to have to monitor and control this. Don't say you don't care. MR. HANCOCK: Why don't I suggest we put it under pennitted accessory uses and structures, under number two, recreational uses and facilities, including clubhouses, swimming pools and so forth. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, does that work? MS. DESELEM: Kay Deselem for the record. '[bat's acceptable. And that's more customary with what we've done in other petitions. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And thcn the other thing I think I'd want to consider, Tim, is when we look at clubhouses, because of the activities there, and some have dining, some have a lot of other uses, they don't become a compatibility issue as much interior, but they do exterior. So your MPU D boundary sctbacks for those -- for the clubhouse and its accessory uses I would think may be more of a concern compatibility-wise than a single-family housc would be. Especially if you've got activities around a pool and things like that, you don't want it up against another outside your facilities. So you might want to consider using larger principal and accessory setbacks wherc it is against an MPUD boundary. MR. HANCOCK: '[be only reason that I didn't factor that in is when you look at what's around us, the only residences are to the north across a I 25-foot canal. And then we have a high school, an elementary school and preserve to the south. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What's to your -- I can't remember what's to your east. MR. HANCOCK: To my east is Mike Davis Elementary School and then preserve all the way down to Magnolia Pond Drive. Then when you get across Magnolia Pond -- I'm not adverse to it. I'm just -- I'm thinking on the north end of the project we may have a -- in that lagoon area ifthere were a clubhouse to be located there, it would be closer to Mike Davis Elementary School. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. Tom, from the school's perspective, do cating facilities, recreation facilities at Page 25 'q-,.~~._~_._--~ '". .__~ '~"_'_"~'""-~_~"_"'_"__'_" .'_'.."M ,_. '_'_~<'~'" ,. ..v__......_,.._~ \ 16 I 1 01 Januarv 7. 2010 - a clubhouse have any impact on the learning facilities within a school? And is there a concem from your perspective. since you're here for exactly this kind of example" MR. EASTMAN: The use appears to be compatible. And looking at the school site. it's really the back end of the school that has deliveries and such. And I don't think that the noise from that would disrupt students in the classroom. Usually it's the reverse situation, that residents are complaining about what's going on on the school site. I think what the applicant's asking for here in terms of uses is compatible with a school situation. I appreciate you asking, Mr. Chainnan. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else have any questions on this issue before Tim finishes up? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well. Mark" CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Mr. Schiffer. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is this an appropriate time to be discussing these tables in general or should wc-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't -- Tim, does it matter? Is it going to interrupt your presentation for us to just start questioning now, or do you want to -- MR. IlANCOCK: No, sir, I'm flexible. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav. - COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Tim, one problem I have is the setback frol11 1-75. And especially in some cases you're allowing that to be 20 feet. Would you have a problem making all structures at least 100 feet froml-75? You've done that for three stories. But I think one of the nicest features of Collier, which we're starting to lose, and this could even lose more, is the vegetation along 75. MR. HANCOCK: Because of the preserve location shown on the master plan, we're going to have a buffer there regardless. And as you know, we can't change that wholesale without coming back before this body. So I feel like that accomplishes that, what you're asking about. I don't know about 100 feet I think when you get to that lower len corner as you look at the master plan, we may be talking about something around 75 feet or so there. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well, could you do 75 feet all along it? MR. HANCOCK: Along 1-75') COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER Right MR. HANCOCK: I don't think that adversely impacts our plan. And ifthat -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I don't either. MR. HANCOCK: If that gives you a degree of comfort, I'm fine with that I guess the best place to put that would be under MPUD boundary setback. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Tim, the best place might bc -- remember the table you took out? Just add a line MPU boundary at 75 and thenjust throw 75 feet across the table. MR. HANCOCK: Okay. So we'll add a line there that says MPUD setback from 1-75, and include 75 feet in each category. I don't -- if that gives you a greater degree of comfort, I don't believe it adversely affects the plan. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murrav? - COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Just out of curiosity, Tim. The tumaround there, is that 1,000 feet or 500 feet or -- MR. HANCOCK: It exceeds the -- it's prctty long. I want to say it's over 600 and some odd feet But we do have a pedestrian connection, a sidewalk connection at the end of that to allow students who may be going to Golden Gate High School, for exanlple, to makc that access. One of the problems we had is -- I can foresee this project really being developed as a north and south. Somebody may develop both sides at the same time. But there's also the possibility that someone may develop the north side or the south side lirst And the idea of having a loop road there and an access closer to the high school, just an added cost down the road that we wanted to try and avoid. So it's a long cui-dc-sac, but I dare say \\'e've got communities with far greater etTective cuI-dc-sacs all over town. Page 26 16 1 1 ~1 January 7, 20]0 COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And it's what, 20-foot wide, at least? MR. HANCOCK: Fifty-foot wide would be the right-of-way. Or are you talking about the sidewalk connection? COMMISS]ONER MURRAY: I'm talking about to the cul-de-sac turnaround for the fire equipment and so forth. MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir, minimum radiuses are established there. It's a 50-foot exterior radius. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I know that Brad would normally ask that question, but J __ COMMISS]ONER SCH]FFER: Well, that was on my list And this one's very long. It's not a 600 -- this is a rather lengthy thing. Could you not put a turnaround somewhere in the midpoint of it? The concern is that for cu]-de-sacs with emergency vehicles, if they make a wrong turn it takes them a long time to correct that What would be the problem -- ] mean, most communities around the state, we -- they honor that better than they do in Collier. And the solution is a turnaround in the center and it ends up becoming an asset to the community anyway. Are you asking for a deviation /Tom that anyway? I didn't see that MR. HANCOCK: No, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So you really aren't allowed to do this site plan without it, so __ MR. HANCOCK: We can do one of two things: We can either show an additional turnaround kind of at the midpoint of that cul-de-sac, if you will-- COMMISS]ONER MURRAY: Good idea. MR. HANCOCK: -- graphically, and then at the time of development order the code requirements would come to play. COMM]SSIONER SCHIFFER: Right, because it becomes a traffic calming device. Right now you've got a terrific drag strip being built and it would be -- take away that a little bit MR. HANCOCK: It is going to hurt our drag racing market of residence, but I think we can accomplish that COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You're not asking for the deviation, and your site plan would be amended to show an approximate location of a turnaround. Good. MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tim, that will probably -- ] would assume, since you want to retain as much buildable area as you can, that means you're going to probably push the south strip of residential down and bump out the lake, something like that? Is that -- because you're going to have to redo the master plan when you come back for consent, I would assume. MR. HANCOCK: We probably will absorb it in the lake and not affect the preserve. CHAIRMAN STRA]N: Okay. MR. HANCOCK: We're I think just a little bit over on our lake size, which is where I like to be, as opposed to the opposite. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if the fire department turns down that wrong street looking for a fire, I think we've got bigger problems anyway. Any other questions of -- well, first of all, Tim, did you finish your presentation, or did you have more you want to continue with" MR. HANCOCK: Unfortunately I have I believe two more. CHA]RMAN STRA]N: Okay. MR. HANCOCK: We left off at the table. The next change is on Exhibit F, which is Page] ] in the document you were provided this morning. And that is that under Exhibit F, item 3.C, the County Attorney has requested c1ariJying language with regard to the 30-foot easement along the eastern property line. The requested language is shown here identiJying the easement as a drainage, utility and access easement and indicating that it is to be conveyed at no cost to the county. Now, this item does carry over. It later where a fair share contribution toward the cleanout cost of the MGG-15 drainage swale was discussed. And I wanted to put on the record and we've discussed this with transportation staff, that the donation of the easement will more than satisJy the site at cost, and therefore the reference Page 27 '<'<~..._-.'">"_.__._-_.__.__._-~.- .., '~"~"'~_""._,.~.,_____._.._._,o.___.._..."..". ~~..". _. < .....,"~~,,~._____._.~__,_._ 16 I 1 tOq January 7,20 I 0 to cost-sharing in the PUD is to be removed. And both Mr. Casalanguida and Mr. Podczerwinsky are here and can confirm that. Make me pretty stupid to say it if I didn't think they would confirm it, but I don't want to rule that out. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And just forthe record, that's ltem4.D on Page 12? MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that's going to be removed. Nick, do you know if that's in agreement? MR. CASALANGUIDA: That is in agreement. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav. MR. HANCOCK: It's D. Following to Item 4.E on Page 12. we have added language to the PUD basically that states that the 20-foot.. Ms. Deselem picked this up. The 20-foot casement along the canal will be conveyed to the county within 30 days of approval of the PUD. While we had stated that, it was not in the PU D. The reason ft)r that was that we thought it would have been done by now, but we're still working on it and we're very. very close. But we want to put that in the PUD to ensure that that commitment is upheld. Language has further been added under Item 6.A, Page 13. This is architectural language that was in the previous pun with respect to the development on the site. The Chairman asked if we would consider putting that language back in. He thought it was beneficial. We saw it again as not being adverse to the project in any way, so we have added that language back in from the originally approved pun, which requires that an architectural theme shall include similar architectural design and similar material throughout all the buildings, signs, fences, walls and so forth. Again, typically done, but this ensures that it will be addressed. Language has then been added under Item 7.A. at the request of the County Attorney. They were seeking further clarification on the definition of a care unit with respect to the ALF use. So the language we've proposed is nearly identical to that which this body has reviewed for at least one other similar project. And I sense we're kind of struggling with how to define ALF project to project, and I think this is the latest and !,'Teatest language that the County Attorncy's Office was comfortable with. So that's the purpose of that language there. is to ensure that you get an ALF and not a market rate project that's disguised as an ALF I believe is the concem there. And that, sir, is the end of my all too lengthy changes document. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. let's start with questions of Tim or anybody with the applicant fTom the Planning Commission before we go to staff Any questions that haven't been asked already'? COMMISSIONER CARON: I just have one. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron" COMMISSIONER CARON: You're going to be using the canal for stann water drainage; is that correct" MR. HANCOCK: That's the ultimate discharge, yes. COMMISSIONER CARON: Does that stann water have to be treated before it goes into the canal? MR. HANCOCK: Oh. yes. ma'am. Matter offact, if we create that lagoon that connects to the canal, it cannot be used as a part of our stonnwater system if it directly connects to the canal. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. and that's -- I just wanted to confirm that for the record. MR. HANCOCK: That would clearly be an amenity. but not a part of our stormwater management system. COMMISSIONER CARON: Thanks. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tom'? MR. EASTMAN: Tim, the property to the north. the north parcel, would potentially students be able to access Mike Davis and Golden Gate High School by using the pathway that Parks and Rec is proposing? MR. HANCOCK: I believe that answer is yes. Yes. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. And then the parcel to the south-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you pull your mic a little closer to you, Tom? Thank you. MR. EASTMAN: The parcel to the south. could you walk through how a student might walk to either the elementary or the high school and the provisions that would be made for that" MR. IIANCOCK: Certainly. If you kind of bisect that southern piece to an cast half and west half, on the Page 28 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 east halfwbere the entry road comes in there will be sidewalks. We're not requesting a deviation on sidewalks. There will be sidewalks on both sides ofthat roadway that cDlmect to Magnolia Pond Drive. In Magnolia Pond Drive there are currently sidewalks that access both Golden Gate High School and Mike Davis Elementary. So their -- what I don't recall off the top of my head is whether that sidewalk is on both sides of Magnolia Pond Drive or just on the north side. If it's just on the north side, we'd have to have a crosswalk and access conditions constructed there. To the west end where the cul-de-sac is, we are showing a pedestrian sidewalk connection, again back to the right-of-way, to connect to the sidewalk that exists within the Magnolia Pond right-of-way for access to the high schooL MR. EASTMAN: Thank you. MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Tim, on your new Exhibit A, you added under A-I single-family units limited to 125 units. But on the beginning sentence in Exhibit A your maximum number of dwelling units is 231. I'm going to get into your TIS in a minute, but I know that we have a higher impact from single-family than we do multi-family. But was your intention here to limit the units to 125 overall and they could all be single-family, or do you expect then to have 125 units and a difference between 231 and 125 potentially in multi-family? MR. HANCOCK: No, sir, my intent was not to cap at 125 units. This was an addition that Ms. Deselem requested. The bottom line is we can only have -- if we did all single-family, we could only get 125 units on it, period, without doing something dramatic. If we did multi-family, it's 231. You know, I left it wide open, because the difference in the TIS between the 231 multi-family and the 125 single-family is not significant. They're fairly close to eacb other. So I added this language at the request of Ms. Deselem. But it does bring up a confusing situation. If you did -- physically we can't do both. We couldn't do 125 single-family and 100 multi-family. Ijust know that from a site planning standpoint. Beyond that I'm not sure how I could convey that to you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the problem that your TIS presents is that you produced a TIS as producing either 125 single-family or 231 multi-family, not a mix. So if you do the 125 single-family and you want to add to that the difference in some kind of multi-family -- and I understand what you believe a good planning exercise would mean, but there are a lot of planners out there, especially some that we've seen plenty of times in front of us, that would stack stuff on top of stuff and somehow we'd end up with a lot morc units than we anticipated. And we've had projects like that numerous times. So how do we correlate your TIS that's "or", not either or not mixed, but "or" with now the numbers that you've put in Exhibit A? Because now you've got either 125 units of single-family and that's it or 231 of multi-family. And what I saw was the combination of them based on what you originally had in your Exhibit A. Now, it doesn't look like if you combine the Exhibit A with the TIS you can do a combination if you go and max out the single-family at 125. And if that's the case, why don't we just say that. MR. HANCOCK: Well, the intent is if you build 125 single-family units, you're done. That was my intent. I think the protection you're seeking, Commissioner, may occur under Item 4.C in the traftic section on Page 12 where any mixed residential development proposed shall not exceed the 131 p.m. peak hour trips. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. And I was going to get to that, because that produces another problem in regards to the ALl'. I didn't see in your TIS where the ALl' was addressed. So how are you going to account for the traffic in the ALl' if you're going to cap your traffic at just the single-family? MR. HANCOCK: I believe as we went through the TIS the discussion with transportation was to present as much as possible a practical worst case scenario. The ALl' use, if it were involved, would chew up a portion ofthat 131 p.m. peak hour trips. And so with that ceiling, I think the transportation staff felt that we'd identified worst case, but the way to create a ceiling so that we couldn't throw a larger mix in there would be to cap us at the 131 trips. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if you build 125 units, because of the TIS you couldn't build any ALl'; is that what you're -- MR. HANCOCK: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that the acknowledgment that you realize? Page 29 '''"_''_'__'"'~'_'O_k_.,."__.__"__._"""_,_"""",,,,...., - .._-". _. "-"'"~'___~W,.,=.<.._ "', _<",_,",.._. .,,__.__,.__.~._..,___",.____ ........ __.__ , , \: . I , 16\ 1 0~ January 7, 2010 MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir, that is our intent in fact. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, Ijust wanted -- that I didn't understand, but it's clear now. Thank you. In number four, AA, your four ALE units and how they equate, you're going to reduce one residential dwelling unit, subtract it from the 231. Now, what if you only build 125'1 Will you still subtract the ratio of ALE units to residential? See, I mean, say you decide to build 200 with the ALE but yet the ALE doesn't discredit the 23 1 at all. You're just always going-- you're working against the 231 when in reality you're going to be -- you really have 125. You could have 125 residential units and be done with this project. Would you have an ALE with 125 residential units'? MR. HANCOCK: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why'? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Too full. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know that, Bob, I want him to say it for the record. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: 1 apologize. MR. HANCOCK: Because our minimum development standards established in the document and the intent of the project is that if it were to build out at single-family at 125 units, we would consume all of the available land. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. HANCOCK And the trips. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If we go to Page 4, footnote number seven, your reference to the parking requirements. Ray, do we have a different parking requirement in the LDC for independent living units than we do for multi-family? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. The I.and Development Code under !,>roup housing has parking requirements for ALl'. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Arc tbey more or less stringent than multi -- MR. BELLOWS: I think it's less. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Less stringent. So that's a more stringent criteria? MR. BELLOWS: I believe it is. I'd have to double check, but I believe it is. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Under your general notes on your master plan, number two, that general note is the old general note. I don't believe it's any longer still consistent now with the language you changed in the text. MR. HANCOCK: It will have to be amended, yes, sir. I failed to mention that in my notes, but that's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On Page 11, Exhibit F, a list of developer commitments. You have some water management commitments in here. A and Band F. I believe. arc all currently required by the Land Development Code. Ray, sony to -- MR. BELLOWS: That's all right, I just wanted to verify that other question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If I asked Nick this in his lirst day on the job here, more or less, I'm going to get a transportation answer, and I really don't want that, so 1 thought I'd ask you. Page 11 on Exhibit F, 3.A, Band E, are those already requirements of the Land Development Code? MR. BELLOWS: Let me get to that page. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's the handout that Tim provided in the beginning ofthe meeting. MR. BELLOWS: That's redundant information. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, the purpose of the new fonnat was to remove that kind of stuff, right? MR BELLOWS: Well, I think the reason it's there is because it may have come out of the EAC, but they are redundant to code requirements. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, then I think they should be in here if we're trying -- otherwise, let's just take the entire Land Development Code and put it in every single pun. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, I agree. I think Melissa was the one that prepared this staff report, but it's my understanding that-- MR. PODCZERWINSKY: B is not redundant to-- COMMISSIONER CARON: I was going to sav, B-- '.-- '- ~ MR. BELLOWS: Well, B is not. Page 30 16 1 1 0~ January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, I'm just asking, which one -- the redundancies, though, the whole objective of consolidating our new fonnat was to do away with the multiple redundancies we had because they become a problem as our code and policies change in the future. MR. BELLOWS: I agree. And I think in this case we had something that may have come from an EAC staff report. John Podczerwinsky had just indicated B is not redundant, but we'll verify that too. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, if A and E are redundant, could they be removed by consent? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then the last page, 1 think C is where I had my questions, but you already clarified those in our previous discussion. That's all I've got on these. Does anybody else have any more questions? Mr. Schiffer" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, can we talk a second about the architectural theme? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, you have to be a licensed architect to do that. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is it important that we make all the buildings stucco? And here's the concern. I mean, this -- as we go into the greener world, these stucco walls are not the most sophisticated. So why are we locking every building to be stucco? MR. HANCOCK: Personally I -- as someone who was born and raised in Florida, I hate stucco. It has nothing to do with Florida. So I'm happy to remove that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just take that sentence out. MR. HANCOCK: And just remove the scntence. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think the objective, Brad, was to make sure there was some common architectural elemcnt to the project. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And let's -- I mean, what's thc virtue of that? I mean, that's another thing is that there are a lot of people complaining that some of our communities -- you know, it's difficult to tell one unit from another. And it also ends up making something look bigger when you make everything look the same. In other words, if you have 10 houses in a row and they all look the same, they look like one big building versus smaller buildings in different styles, which is kind of the new urbanist approach anyway. So do we want to really lock that in? MR. HANCOCK: Tne real benefit I see in this paragraph as it applies to the project that we've discussed here today where you may have an ALF and then there may be some single-family or multi-family on another portion of the project, as long as we stay within that trip cap, is that the code has always pushed us toward a cohesive development, not broken apart into many pieces. While I may philosophically agree with you, but yet I live in a planned community in a stucco house, it's just kind of the reality of what we're dealing with. So I'm okay with pulling that. The only thing I like about having this in here, Mr. Schiffer, is that it does require some forethought and continuity between what may be two different uses, a single-family and a multi-family, and that's good for real estate values. I'm not sure whether it's good to the eye. That's a personal opinion. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Maybe I'm missing, what are we preventing with that? I mean, what is it that goes wrong when you don't have a common architectural theme, other than the scalc of the dcvelopment drops? MR. HANCOCK: I think you deal more with a perceptionITom people who live around the projcct that, you know it-- , COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: If you want it, you can have it. So what we'll do is we'll cross out all buildings shall be primary finished in light subdued colors. You want that? And then we'll just cross out everything after that. MR. HANCOCK: I don't see any reason to control color in this document. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I don't either. MR. HANCOCK: Or finish. But architectural cohesiveness is something that I think people have expressed a support for, so I'm more apt to leave it in at this point. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So we'll kill that whole sentence. All buildings shall -- we'll just wipe out that whole sentence. Page 3 I .. --.....~.__._~-"_._--_._--_.~.._". ._-~..- _,._,____...,.,_...._m._'__~~ --_....._.'"._~._-_._-_. ~_.__.._---- 161 1 rJ;~ Januarv 7. 2010 MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. That's a step in the right direction. But you could be limiting something better, that's my concern. MR. HANCOCK: I understand. I can't say I disagrec with you, but-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me there any other questions of the applicant at this time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Tim, thank you. MR. HANCOCK: Thank vou. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We'll have staff report. MS. DESELEM: Good morning. For the record, again, Kay Deselem, Principal Planner with Zoning. You do have a copy of the staff report on record. It is revised, dated 11/17/09. And it goes into detail, but since you've already had a lengthy presentation and discussion with the applicant over the issues, I won't belabor the points, othcr than to cite the specific sections of that staff report. Beginning on Page I shows the geographic location. As you've seen in the different exhibits you've seen anyway, there is a project description. On Page 2, the surrounding land use and zoning is provided to you in significant detail in that section. There's another aerial that mirrors what you have been presented today. There is a discussion as noted in Tim's presentation of the growth management issues. And there also includes the transportation analysis and the conservation and coastal management element analysis as \vell. Staff is recommending that this petition as amended through the hearings so far be deemed consistent with the Grow1h Management Plan; that is, all applicable elements of that plan. Going on on Page 5 is the analysis. rhis includes environmental review staff and transportation staff, utility review, emergency management staff review, Parks and Rec revic\v, an affordable housing review and zoning staff reVIew. In the environmental review you see comments about the native preserves and gopher tortoise relocation. In the transportation review you see review comments about the significant impacted roadways. In the Parks and Rec review you see discussions about what's already been discussed about the casement that's going to be dedicated for the 20-foot wide easement to accommodate the sidewalk. And then it goes on to the loning review. And in this zoning review it shows an analysis of the proposed MPUD and the existing MPUD. And it's also followed and suppol1ed by PUD findings onc through eight with analyses of each of those findings and the relone findings beginning on Page 9. All these findings are in support of stalTs recommendation for approval. We have worked very diligently in the last few days. It's been a tough few days for Tim, I know we've driven him nuts, but trying to get the changes made to the PUD document that you saw this morning. And we are comfortable with what is proposed in the changes. We do have transportation staff here that can address any questions you might have for them. And there is someone here from environment staff as wel I. Other than that, if you have questions, I'd be happy to address them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron, then Mr. Wolflev. , COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, Ijust want to get to the deviations. And let's talk about deviation number two first. And Kay, this is really for transportation and/or your new boss. The deviation that seeks relief from the minimum right-ofway, which is 60 feet, we get this request with every single thing that comes before us. Why do we have this minimum? Did you all have a reason for it to begin with" And if it was valid as a minimum to bcgin with, why do we keep allowing deviations from them? Or please could we get it changed in the next LDC cycle. MR. CASALANGUIDA: For the record, Nick Casalanguida. It's a typical section, even on our pnblie roadways as well as private roadways, that we recommend. It's optimized buffer, optimized setbacks, optimized curb and pavement width. If the design speed of the road is lower. the pavement width can be smaller. If they want to put the sidewalks in the back of curbs sometimes and widen the sidewalk to six feet, they can do certain things to minimize that width. So it's a recommended standard. And applicants, based on their design of their property, the speed of the Page 3:2 161 1 rb~ January 7, 2010 road, can always make adjustments. It's reviewed typically internally by engineering, which is now our staff, externally by transportation. But we can come back and provide maybe an update in the next eycle of the LDC. We'd be happy to do that. COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, it's become a deviation in every single thing. So if there is a legitimate reason for 60 feet, then we should be using 60 feet and we shouldn't be granting these deviations. If it should be 60 feet with conditions that you can go to 50 feet if thus and so happens then -- you know, then we should state it that way. MR. CASALANGUlDA: Sure, we could do that. COMMISSIONER CARON: I mcan, I don't know, you all will figure that oul. But it just seems like"- MR. CASALANGUIDA: We could qualify it so it's not a deviation. They can pick off a menu based on speed or different options ofthe road so it still meets the criteria. We'll look into that. COMMISSIONER CARON: And the other one is deviation number one, where we typically.. or what we're seeing now is we want to put the landscaping requirements in a smaller space. And I brought this up before and I just want to bring it up again. I want to know if somebody is tracking this in any way. We keep doing this but we don't know whether it's successful or not. Is this the right thing to do be doing? It seems okay. We keep doing it. But are these landscaped areas successful, I mean, or are we putting too much into a too small area? MR. CASALANGUIDA: When you say succcssful, do the plants survive; is that your question? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, are things surviving. MR. CASALANGUlDA: Sure, I can have -- COMMISSIONER CARON: I mean, I know that ifit all died off they'd have to replant it. But if it's not a successful strategy, we also -- why would we continue to do it? MR. CASALANGUlDA: If it's your pleasure, I can respond to both ofthose items in the next Planning Commission meeting or just send you an individual e-mail just to follow up. COMMISSIONER CARON: I think everybody would probably like to know. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure, happy to do that. COMMISSIONER CARON: Good. MS. DESELEM: If I might offer, on deviation two there is a section of the LDC that allows projects that are non-PUD that won't be coming before anybody for deviations to seek substitutions based on engineering criteria. And that's customarily done, as he said, internally. So yeah, that's a very common thing that's done. COMMISSIONER CARON: But this is a PUD. MS. DESELEM: Right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Wolfley? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Yes, sir, regarding the traffic impact study done in December of'08, trip distribution assignment, Nick and I spoke for a moment, and I'd like to -- my question was regarding how are we going to handle the intersections at Magnolia Pond Drive and 951 or Collier Boulevard, and how is that whole thing going to work? Because it seems like we're adding it especially in the morning, in the afternoon. And I think you may have stood up there at the same time and -- but Nick did such -- MR. PODCZERWINSKY: I thought you were about to ask a different question. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: -- a great job and a great diagram. MR. PODCZER WINSKY: l'd like to give it to Mr. Casalanguida, if he'd like to take it. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: How are we going to do it? Are we going to leave the lights there so close to 1-75, or what are we going to do therc? How are we going to handle that? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Hc appears to be gloating too much, referring the question to me. The intersection of Magnolia Pond and 951 is currently in a design right now. The final permits are being obtained. So that intersection approach heading east out of Magnolia is being widened as part of the Collier Boulevard project. Also secondary with the Noah's Way realignment that's owned by Mr. Benderson to the north, that intersection will be moved to the north at a point in time in the future as part of our project as well. Both of those improvements will take into account the necessary tramc to get these projects handled coming out of Magnolia Pond Drive. Page 33 ,.,.",--..-- -_. -'..~~-._".._"'- , '"'~'''''''''''-,^_,,_--'''_-,,-_..",-'~ 16/ 1 Gcf . January 7, 2010 . . And again, as Mr. Feder, my boss, pointed out, you always have a hard time when those schools come in at that peak hour. You don't design the road for that peak peak 20 minutes when the schools come in and out There's going to be congestion on all of our roads at that point in time. But that intersection is being improved. Within the next one year that capital project will start. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: So -. but basically what you're saying is that Noah's Way, which is north, closer to the canal, is going to be signalized. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: And the Magnolia Pond Drive will not be signalized. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Will be directionalized. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Directionalized. MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Arc there any other questions of staff? Mr. Schiffer" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Kay, maybe Ray could answer this because of the legacy here. Ray, why is this called a mixed use when all the uses arc residential? MR. BELLOWS: We knew you were going to ask that, so we were prepared. It is a addition ofthe ALF, which is a group facility found under community facility zoning. That in conjunction with the residential pursuant to our code qualifies as a mixed use. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. Becausc I wouldn't want to confuse it with a real mixed use. MR. BELLOWS: Well. it meets the minimum detinition. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, that's why. Got it CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that it Brad" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm done, yeah. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, I'vc got a couple of questions. Under the emergency management review, I just think it's interesting that we ask them to comment, but they can never do anything but CY A their position. Yet we never get a feedback from them that tells us anything positive. It's just that n let me read this to you: Residential development in this area further taxes an already tight evacuation and sheltering situation within Collier County. While there is currently no impact mitigation required for this, it should be noted that approval of this MPUD increases the evacuation and shelter requirements for the county. Now, that department has put us on notice ever since we startcd asking them to review these PUDs, with almost the same language. This one actually is a little more n seems a little stronger than language in the past Is anybody in the county taking it as a hint that we might want to do something about this, that we may want to figure out a way to not have this liability on every project we approve'! Is anybody looking at it; do you know? MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, but we can. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know you guys are overtaxed right now, but when things turn around, a year, whatever it takes, I think it's something from a county perspective it would be wise for us to start looking at We used to have it different than we do now, and I think it would warrant further review. And Kay, on the last paragraph of Page 6 of 16, your sentence is as follows: As stated earlier, part of this petition request is a rezone of a five-acre parcel which will be added to the original 42-aere property at the northeast comer of the Mab'11olia Pond PUD. Although there is no increase in the number of residential units, the site will be permitted to be developed as an assisted living facility. When you said the site, were you referring to the whole PUD or just that north five-acre tract that was added? MS. DESELEM: J believe that actually references the subject property, which is the entire acreage, it's not just that piece. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just wanted to make sure that's what your analysis was. Because that's not how the PUD was written, so -- okay, that's the only questions I have. Anybody else') (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Kay Page 34 161 1 B~ January 7, 2010 Are there any public speakers, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: No public speakers have registered. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then Tim, do you want to rebut anything the public speakers didn't say? Any closing comments? MR. HANCOCK: I believe Mr. White has a couple of very quick comments. But I personally just want to thank you for your time in working through the difficulties today. This was an unusual situation. I do appreciate it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Scc, I know that ifI asked Patrick, he'd have stand (sic) up said something, but here we go. MR. WHITE: Thank you, Mr. Strain. No, I just want to again echo that this is a project that has not only a history of being the longest in my professional working relationship with the clients, but has probably a 20-year history. We believe that we have reconfigured the project we've brought the additional lands in, we've addressed what the staff concerns arc, we have the determination of consistency, recommendations of approval, and I believe that we have addressed your questions adequately. We will work diligently with regard to the easement issues to have those conveyed, and as well to make all of the changes that we have tracked and provided an addenda for. And at this time I would ask for a motion of approval if you would, please. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, now, we'll close the -- Ray, since there are no public speakers, we will close the public hearing. Patrick, you jumped back up for some reason. MR. WHITE: I simply wanted to indicate that Mr. Barry Williams is here from Parks and Ree, and he wasn't mentioned as being part ofthe staff, but we have worked with him and his folks and I believe that they are in support as wel!. I do not want to speak for him, but I think it's fair to say that they'd like to see us go forward. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Okay, with that, we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion. Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, I would make a motion that we recommend -- forward with a recommendation of approval PlJDZ-A-2006-AR-1 03 I 8, the Magnolia Pond MPlJD. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I'll second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion's heen made by Mr. Schiffer, seconded by Mr. Vigliotti. And I'm assuming, though, your motion is subject to the Exhibit A that was passed out with all the corrections that we discussed today that will come back to us on consent Is that __ COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yes. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, both the-- COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- motion maker and second acknowledge that? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Correct CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else? Is there any discussion on the matter? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, Ijust-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: -- want to make sure it's also with other stipulations that have been made by staff. And, I mean, for things like the gopher tortoise management plan and whatever else that might not have gotten into the changes. I just want to make sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, well, any other -- and Tim, when you come back on consent, you'll have all this cleaned up in a document that we can review at that point, so -- subject to the motion. Okay, ifthere's no discussion, all those in favor of the motion, signifY by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. Page 35 ._.~.,.,._--- -'_.-_._'"-,,---,,~.. ."" '. ( 161 1 e;~ Januarv 7. 20 I 0 ~ . COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Ayc. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Avc. ~ COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ayc. Anybody opposcd? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Thank you all very much, and we'll see you on consen!. Now for the people who have becn waiting f"r thc CAT. issue, we're about to start it. So I noticcd that I think most of you have been here. Item #IOD PETITION: COLLIER COUNTY ALTERNA TIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES DEPARTMENT - BUS TRANSFER ST A nON CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The next petition up is Petition ClJ.PL- "009-405, the Collier County Alternative Transportation Modes Department for what's considered a CA.T transfcr station on Radio Road. All those wishing to participate in this item. please rise to bc sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) (At which time, Commissioner Vigliotti exited the boardroom.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Disclosures on thc part of Planning Commission. Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yes, I had a phone conversation with Michelle Arnold regarding the issues on this job. Essentially it was discussing thc activity that would occur on the site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody clseo Mr. Murray? ~ COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I too had a telephone conversation with Ms. Arnold and this lady planner. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This lady planner? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Miss Abra IIorne. MS. HORNE: It's a tricky name. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody clse'l , - (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I also had a meeting with Michelle Arnold and Ms. Horne, and we wcnt oyer many ofthe issucs we'll be going oyer today. With that, I think that's the last disclosures. Okay, it's yours. MS. HORNE: Thank you. Again, my name is Abra, I know it's tricky, Home. You can call me Mrs. Horne, ifthat's easier. Before I begin my presentation, I'd likc to briefly qualifY myself as an expert witness, if you don't mind, since this is a quasi judicial hearing. I have 18 years of experience in both land use and transit planning. Half of my career I worked in the public sector for the local governments of Ocoee and DeLand. I reviewed a number of -- an extensivc number of land use petitions and conditional uses. I'm also a member of the American Planning Association and the American Institutc of Certified Planners. I served as the development review coordinator for the City of DeLand. I served as the long-range planner for the City ofOeoee, responsible for the Evaluation and Appraisal Rcport. as well as tbe Growth Management Plan and the maintenance of the Land Development Code. Page 36 16 I 1 (bq January 7, 2010 As a consultant I have not only served as an extension of staff for numerous local governments and reviewed conditional use applications there, but I have also focused my practice on transit facilities here in Florida. Since joining the private sector, the focus of my efforts have been transfer stations, light rail, bus service, transit development plans and the like. Most recently I appeared before Seminole County and Orange County in 2006 and 2008 to review conditional use applications. Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. The reason that we are here is Wilbur Smith is here to represent the alternative transportation modes department. I have with me here today a principal from Wilbur Smith Associates, Chris Swenson, and our traffic engineer, Revo Kanilwa. And we will all be speaking to you today in answering any questions that you may have. I do have a cough drop to try and keep my voice. The proposed requested use is a -- to add bus passenger transfer -- that's easy to say. Bus passenger transfers at an existing facility located at 8300 Radio Road. We submitted an application based on a zoning verification letter for a conditional use to add these uses. I'd like to note a few things for the record. We have reviewed the staff report, and I would like to enter it into the record and make a few specific notes. In particular, there are approximately 939 unique sil,'11atures rather than 1,000 on the petition. We disagree with the statement in the staff report that consistency is only obtained through applying conditions to this use. Through the presentation that I'm about to give, we hope to demonstrate that the conditional use, if approved, would represent a very minor addition of activities that would increase the public safety and welfare and enhance the quality of life in Collier County. And therefore it is a minor modification of existing conditions. What is a bus passenger transfer facility? It's a place for several routes to come together, for passengcrs to safely move from one bus to another. There is a place for passengers to wait and to buy tickets and have other passenger amenities such as vending machines. A place where passengers may be dropped off by their spouse or another person. It is important to move -- I'm getting ahead of myself. Reasons for the transfer might include moving from one route to another to make a more efficient travel pattern and reduce commute times from home to work. If your homc is locatcd on onc bus route and your work opportunity or other recreational or medical opportunities are located on another routc, you would make a transfer at such a station. One ofthe things I wanted to spend a little bit of time on today is the existing operations. I have a history teacher that my husband and I both had in junior high school here in Florida, and he said you cannot know where you're going until you know where you have been. So in that vein I wanted to talk a little bit about what happens today on-site so that we're very clear about those activities. I know that it was described in the staff report, but I want to go over those activities. At the beginning of the day, around 3:30 in the morning today, the drivers arrive, the bus drivers for fixed route transit amve at the site. They turn on their buses. They do a vehicle inspection. They walk around the bus to make .sure that it is safe and adequately maintained. If it is not in proper working order, then anothcr bus would be started and the first bus would be put into maintenance. Fleet maintenance operates at this facility. There are 23 fixed route buses. Those are not all operated all the time because they maintain what is called a spare ratio, a number of buses that will remain on-site to allow for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities. There is also paratransit vehicles that currently operate on this site. What docs that mean? There are about 20 vehicles that are owned by the county, there are also other vehiclcs that arc owned by separate operators that provide on-call services for people who are unablc for various reasons to ride fixed route transit. Those people are certified annually, so they need to go to the C.A.T. operations center and be evaluated for what their capacity is to use transit. The reason this is important and that it allows C.A.T. to operate efficiently is that paratransit trips cost approximately threc times as much as fixed route trip. So we would prefer, ifsomeone is capable, that we move them on a fixed route system. We fccl that the transfer facility is one of those opportunities to move some passengers more safely to the fixed route scrvice. Other examples of activities that t~ke placc on.site are that -- employees and supervisor vehicles. So together wc have approximately 43 vchicles that are stored overnight. They are county vehicles. And they are also maintained Page 37 '-~'~--'-"._"--'~'-"--'.~_.'"---- "-,...._-""'""'_._"',.~._""'-".,--,...,.'--._...-. ..~--_.,,--_..__., _,_" n._.....--....__ ','\ , 16/ 1 0* Januat"V 7, 2010 " and washed at the end ofthe day inside and out. So employees arrive throughout the day, therc's a second shift of bus operators that arrive and supervisors that drive them out to the bus routes so that continuous operations are pennitted. In addition, as noted in the staffrcport, thcre is a sale ofvehiclcs that occurs on a regular basis. There is also a collection and counting of fare box revcnues. I think I've covered most ofthc things that happen there. I'd like to go on to the next slide regarding existing bus routes. There arc three current CAT. bus routes: Route 3.A and B, route five and route six that are shown on this slide. Our graphic artist took a couple of Iibertics and so the dots that are located -- the green and blue dots should be located slightly cast and west of where thcy are on this slide. But the point that I'd like to make is that today the purple route already travels along Radio Road and serves East Naples. It stops adjacent to the CA.T. operation center today on strect 20 times per day. The same thing is true for route five and six, they both operate along Davis Boulevard today, and they stop along Davis Boulevard a combined total of 34 times per day for a grand total of 54 stops along and adjacent to this sIte. By improving this site and allowing felr safc circulation of buses off street, you would reduce potential conflicts with drivers on street who have to wait behind buses that are stopping to pick up and discharge passengers along the roadway. You can see that the cireu -- this illustrates the circulation today -- I'm sorry, the future condition. Plus this area that I will show you in red is the difference that we are requesting in conjunction with the conditional use. In other words, evcrything that is shown for bus circulation for the purple route today is shown in purple now, and the red is the difference that would be requested as a result of the conditional usc. I also indicated the time points that are shown on the schedule, so you can see which areas the purple route serves. This is route fivc, as we would propose to circulate it if the conditional use were approved. Again. I showed you earlier that it currently operates along Davis Boulevard. And the area in red is where we would request that the routes deviate to enter and exit the Radio Road facility. The reason this is important is that it reduces unnecessary circulation along Radio Road. We are not proposing to reroute the bus routes along Radio Road. Wc would simply go to the traffic signal located at Davis and Radio Road to make the turning movement. Again, I've shown the timc points for the bluc route. The yellow route has a similar circulation pattern in this vicinity. And again, the only change from current conditions that operate today is the area shown in red. I've shown again the time points. The route six providcs access to homes, businesses and other destinations in Immokalce and Naples. So why is a passenger transfer faci I ity nccded? In particular, J wanted to mention, in case you hadn't -- you probably know this, but Policy 12-10 of the Transportation Element incorporates and adopts the transit development plan by reference into the comprehensive plan, Growth Management Plan. This table 120 was taken out of the last rmljor update to the transit development plan. What they do during the development ofthe transit development plan is they intervicw passengers who are riding CAT. fixed route transit and they have a directed questionnaire. This is the response to a directed questionnaire that indicates that passengers arc looking for a safe place to make transfcrs and to wait for buses, they are looking felr availability of bus route information, dependability of CA.T. buses, on-time performance, and ability to get to where they want to go. These are the reasons that we believe that the CA.T. passenger needs would be met by adding a transfer station. In accordance with that, we have developed a site plan that reduces the potential for conflicts between single occupant vehicles, pedestrians and the buses as they operate. You'll notice what we call a sawtooth bus bay. What that does, it allows the drivers to operate in a forward motion only, so there are no backing of vehicles and no hacking alarms required. Shelters would be added. although not shown in these pictures. The picture on the leii I should point out is the way the area looks today. The picture in the center is thc proposed passenger waiting area and sawtooth bus bay parking spaccs. That's where the buses would park and the passengers would be in the center, somewhat like the Page 3 X 16\ 1 0~ January 7, 2010 illustration on the right. It's a photograph that I thought might make it easier to show what the parking looks like once it's in place. We would also add shelters to protect the passengers from inclement weather. And thcre would be an opportunity, because this is located in front of the C.A.T. op. center, for eyes on the passengers throughout thc day. Supervision of transfer activities, if you will. The proposed Phase I improvements would be pavement markings, bus parking spaces, bollards, parking and crosswalks. Phase II improvements would include a vehicle storage area in the vacant portion of the site shown on the photograph here, a pad for fueling activities, and a driveway improvement on Radio Road, although not shown in this picture. It's a very minor improvement on Radio Road. One of the questions that we have heard from thc community is did the county look at other sites. Over a three-year period before I became involved with this project, the county looked at over 25 sites to serve as a potential maintenance, administration and operations base, as well as passenger transfer opportunities. They knew and contemplated in the transit dcvelopment plan that is incorporated into the comprehensive plan by reference that they were reaching the maximum capacity for both the County Barn and thc government center operations for transfers. As such, they anticipated the need for a new site and they idcntified criteria and they looked at a number of sites. Shortly after the conclusion of these studies the Gallman Oldsmobile site bccame available and the seller was willing to sell to meet the county's pressing schcdule and price considerations. The facility was selected because it met a number of the criteria that were used to evaluate the other sites that the county considered. Spccifically, the site availability, the size. As I said, two uses werc contcmplated that might be needed and so a site that more than met the county's existing needs for maintenance. And so maintenance and passenger transfer is what occurrcd at one location. Proximity and accessible to arterial roadways. The cost of site improvements. Proximity to existing routes, particularly in the East Naples area. Central location to the bus system so that buses do not have to go a long way around to go back to a transfer station. And good accessibility. Another item that when wc were meeting with the public we realized is that there is not a clear understanding of the different types of transfer facilities, not only here in Collier County but around the country. We stuck to identifYing two types of transfer facilities which are in question here: Major transfer facility and a secondary transfer facility. As you know, in Collier County we also have passenger transfers that occur on street. For example, at the Coastland Mall they are now making transfers on street. A major transfer facility is anticipated to handle between 60 and 75 percent of passenger activities. It is supervised and publicly owned. The reason that we recommend to our clients that the sites be publicly owned is that you are master of your destiny, just like any other developer. You control what happens on your site. Off-road bus parking and circulation is also offered at major transfer facilities, and you can park your car all day and ride. So for example, here at government center therc's an existing parking structure. Secondary transfer facilities handle multiple routes. In this case we anticipate between 25 and 40 percent as a typical guidance. It is supervised and publically owned for the same reason: You want to increase the passenger safety, you want to reduce the eonllicts between buses and cars and pedestrians, you want to have the opportunity to provide the amenities that are needed. Typically we would provide drop-off 10 minute or less parking spaces for what we call kiss and ride opportunities. Another item that we heard quite a bit about was that this is not an appropriate location for a transfer facility. So what we did is we looked at the state guidance. The Florida Department of Transportation and the Florida Department of Community Affairs has initiated a study to look at where are the appropriate locations for transit and transit facilities, and what types of land use patterns support which type of investments and transit. And so what you see along the bottom is the hierarchy ofland uses. And you can tell by the arrow at the top there is a close linkage between land use and public facilities. In particular, in Collier County on your comprehensive plan you've identified in the Future Land Use Element on Pages 8, 9 and 10 that there is a sil,'l1ificant gap between your planned residential development, approximately 25,000 dwelling units, that are not adequately planned for in tenns of transportation. As you can see at the top, transit provides an opportunity to serve those needs, those lmmet Page 39 - .. ',--_.'--- --- _._._-~..~--- - - --., ,.. .,.-...... -,.... ,,., -_.""..~" -.""'_"_ _.~~~,_.~..__.".__..,. __.____..~_"'_,~...... __._"__.M" ..___. " I . 16 J January~, 20~~ needs. So what the Department of Transportation has indicated on their website as an appropriate location, and this being one ofthem, is a T-3 suburban transect. Collier County, as I mentioned. faces quite a few challenges, particularly you arc the single largest county in tenns of land area. That affects the provision of transportation and specifically in the analysis I've been able to do over the past year. the provision oftransit and paratransit transit services. Having such a broad service area and trying to operate in those areas is very challenging. What we typically advise our clients and what we suggest is that you focus on an urbanized area as shown on your Future Land Use Map here. And that allows you to locus your services to enhance the quality of life, to meet the needs of an aging population that eventually may want to choose not to drive every day, to alleviate the traffic congestion or at least provide a transportation choice. preserve natural resources. increase energy efficiency, which is increasingly a requirement of getting any federal funding I<lr a wide variety of money that the county would use, and provide cost effective transportation services. as I mentioned. So when you look at the proposed areas where we have transfer opportunities that arc identified in the transit development plan, you can see that we are focusing our services within that same area, that urbanized area. As I mentioned, Collier County, aloug with all ofthe other transit agencies in the state, annually prepares a transit devclopment plan. The annual updates arc minor updates. but the major update, you'll see I've noted a few ligures throughout my presentation. The last major update was done in 2005. So some of our socioeconomic characteristics are slightly dated, but those will be updated this year as the county is conducting their major update right now. It's required by state law. And the TOP must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan. And as I mentioned, the transportation element incorporates it by' reference. So when we look at this site specilically. transit is serving the urban area. The C.A.T. laeility is located within a residential density band. It is also approximate to interchange activity centcr. And I'd like to note for the record that it is located within a TCMA idcntified in the transportation element. Issues and considerations and questions raised by the community: Passenger destinations. We had quite a few questions regarding where our passenger is going to and coming from. Again. as I mentioned, this is an onboard survey that was conducted as part of the last major update to the Transit Development Plan, but it gives you a good indication of where our transit riders live and are going to work. We also had questions regarding the passenger characteristics, what is the average age of your passengers. As you'll notice, the 19 to 24 age group is significantly larger than all the other age groups. What was notable, though, is that these are not students, if you will. that are going to educational opportunities. these trips are almost exclusively work trips, when we look at those onboard surveys that were completed. Household income is another important characteristic that we look at in providing transit service and that we were asked about, so I wanted to provide this infornlation. As you can see, income is an issue for a lot of the C.AT. passengers. These are the lolks that arc most in need. particularly in these adverse economic times. and transits provides them in some cases the only opportunity (0 be self-sufticient and remain employed in such challenging economic times. The race of our passengers is also indicated here. Again, Hispanic passengers are a significant portion. And I wanted to just show you this in response to some of the questions we've heard. This traftie impact slide, I'd like to give Revo Kanilw". who is our traffic engineer, the opportunity to corne up, introduce himselfbrietly and give you his qualilications, if I may. MR. KAN IL W A: Good morning. My name is Revo Kanilwa. I'm-- THE COURT REPORTER: Would you spell thaI, please. MR. KANILW A: Revo Kanilwa is R-E-V-O. Last name K-A-N-I-L-W-A. I'm a trallic engineer with Wilbur Smith Associates, and I'm a registered engineer in the State of Florida. I've been doing a draft engineering status I<lf the last 12 years. And I was involved in the preparation ofthe TIS, which was done as part ofthis conditional use application. What 1 want to talk about is the table that is shown on the display there. What this table is showing basically is belore everything else there was a dealership at this site. And this dealership had some trips that were being generated lor during the morning peak hour and afternoon peak hour. And as you can see there in the figure indicated, \VC have six to eight vehicles in the morning and eight Page 40 16 I 1 ~A January 7, 2010 vehicles in the afternoon peak hour. Now, when that dealership was gone, with the current use that is taking place there, which is the C.A.T. facility, without any transfer taking place the number of trips that were being generated rrom the site actually went down as compared to when the dealership was there. It went down by 37 vehicles in the morning peak and 47 vehicles in the afternoon peak. Now, if we add on to the new trips that is going to come as a result of transfer activities taking place at the site, that reduction compared to the previous -- to the dealership times is going to go down to 27 vehicles in the morning. That means we're taking away 27 vehicles from the traffic that would have existed if that dealership had gone on being there. We're going to reduce that by 27 vehicles. And in the afternoon that number is going to be 37 vehicles. So what I think I'm saying is that with the current use and with the additional use that we are here for, the condition is actually even better than compared to what would have been there if the dealership had remained. So the bottom line is this transfer use taking place there has no -- has absolutely no impact on their existing conditions as far as traffic conditions are concerned. I think with that I'll take it back to Abra. MS. HORNE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's a question. Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Ijust have a question on this chart. There arc several asterisks, and they are not noted at the bottom. What are they for? MR. KANILW A: This asterisk came from a previous report that was a part ofthc-. MS. HORNE: URS. MR. KANIL W A: By URS, which those are another application that was done before, and I think it was submitted in 2007 or 6? MS. HORNE: 2006. MR. KANIL W A: Six, yeah. And these are numbers that came from that study. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does that answer the qucstion? That's not the question she asked. She asked what do the asterisks represent Where is the footnote that they are -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Where's the foot-- MR. KANIL W A: That's what I'm saying, that they're referring to the source of where these numbers came from. They came rrom that report that was done previously. COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, it should be footnoted. MS. HORNE: Actually, Revo is correct, the source for the one asterisk is June, 2007, traffic study for SDPAARI 1842 approving the change from Land Use Code 84 I, new car sales, and approving less impactful Land Use Code 1 10. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. MS. HORNE: And then the double asterisk refers to May, 2009 traffic study for CUPL2009000405, evaluating the impacts that are presented only by the proposed transfer facility. That would be the __ COMMISSIONER CARON: That's the current one, thank you. MS. HORNE: Yes. Thank you for asking for the clarification. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Wolflcy? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: While we're on that subjcct, it's just so difficult for me to see how only 10 trips, additional trips, will be generated rrom a transfer station. You were waiting on that, weren't you? MS. HORNE: I'm ready. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: From existing. I can't even -- unless people are going to walk there, there's going to be more -- even more buses than 10, isn't there? MS. HORNE: No, sir. Actually I'm going to keep Revo up here, because I __ COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: That's fine. MS. HORNE: Okay. When we looked at the transit development plan onboard surveys, we examined how Page 4 I _'W_"__,__"~..~,...,~,..._.., _ _.~"_'. "', .._'.~ ~ , ""-~._"--~-~-,_,_--,_---_,,__,_----_,_,,_,_----_,- ! , 161 1 I?~ .January 7, 20 I 0 many people approach transit in Collier County. These are existing riders that were surveyed. and a very high percentage of them were surveyed, higher than most other onboard surveys conducted in Florida. And what it indicated was most of your passengers approach transit by walking. The reason that's so important and that I had my little cheerleading moment was that is exactly what makes this location so appropriate. It is not located exclusively in a residential area, it's a mixed use area. But there arc excellent sidewalks along Radio Road so that an individual who either has a destination on Radio Road or lives on Radio Road can walk to the facility easily and make a transfer. The second thing that I'd like to note is that Revo did an analysis of the number of buses. You may remembcr the slide that I showed much earlier in the slide show that had those little red things that came over. And the reason that's important. and I'd like to emphasize it. buses already operate along these roads and already stop and discharge and board passengers along these roads. As I indicated in my earlier slide, 54 stops, 54 times a day the buses stop and load and discharge passengers. So the only thing that is being requested in conjunction with this conditional use is that bus crossing the driveway to get in on the purple route and a minor deviation of about 2,000 feet for the yellow and the blue route to come up Radio Road so they can go into the site. And what that does is it stops buses ti'om -- it eliminates the need for buses to be stopped in the travel lanes on existing roadways causing contlicts. and creates a safe place where people can load and discharge. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: One more thing. How many parking lots for vehicles are there -- will be there? MS. HORN E: Ilow many -- you mean how many -- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: How many parking spaces? MS. HORNE: Oh, the short-term parking spaces. I will have to double check the number, but it was approximately 12. It's shown on the site plan in a bubble. We showed short-term parking. It's like 10 minutes. You know, you would just -- as you were driving to work. maybc at the airport. you would drop offa spouse and they would get 011 a bus to go to a different destination. So if you had a one-car household, it's a way for both of you to get to where you're going without having to drive the person all the way there. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: I see. So it's not like a New York City thing where you can park your car and travel to Manhattan or whatever. MS. IIORNE: No. that's what we would anticipate at a major transfer facility like govenunent center. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: I sec. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: .Just lor c1arillcation. the chart that's here, David, is for peak hour. So the lObus trips you see don't mean that's lOa day. That's only 10 at the peak hour time. So that's the ditference in what you may have been trying tn -- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Thank you. Chair. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, in your dissertation you mentioned that you're reaching capacity at the campus. And are the transfers that are being contemplated for this location the same bus route transfers that currently exist at thc campus" MS. HORNE: I'll clarity, because I'm not sure I understood the way you asked your question. We anticipate that thc yellow, the purple and the blue route is what would have tTansfers occurring at Radio Road. So the routes that already go by this sitc would just go into that site. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Are the bus routes that are at the county campus right now the same bus routes as those" MS. HORNE: Yes. Some of those -- in fact. I want to double check. I bclieve all ofthosc routes also make a stop at government center. The advantage as a transit passenger is you don't have to double back twice as far to get to wherc you're . gOl11g. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I appreciate that. I had heard that they might have heen contemplating building at the Collier County campus, building a structure to facilitate, to house people during inclement weather and so forth. Is that still going forward? Page 42 161 1 ~q January 7, 20] 0 MS. HORNE: Absolutely. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So we really would have two bus transfer points. MS. HORNE: And it is appropriate to have it. As I pointed out earlier, you have such a large service area. I'm going to step aside for a moment. MR. FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: I noticed that Nick left when you got up. MR. FEDER: Yeah, you never see us both in the same place, believe it or not. No. The government center is our primary and will remain our primary transfer center. Yes, we are planning some improvements. The routes that are here will also have a transfer capability there, allowing people, depending upon the nature of where they're going on the route, to have both options. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So it is possible for a person.. not that I hope that they have to do this -- but it's possible for a person in line yellow, and I don't know what the difference is, to transfer at one location, get to the campus and transfer to another bus or another route? MR. FEDER: 'nmt's an option. If they were going, let's say, to north county, yes. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So in other words, this -- docs this complete the circle, so to speak, of all needs? MR. FEDER: Far rrom it. We have obviously needs throughout the county for"- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: No, I'm talking about"- MR. FEDER: -- further transit. But as far as that, yes, it does. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Transfers is what -- MR. FEDER: Yes, transfers. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: -- I'm solely interested in. MR. FEDER: Yes. These are the two primary transfers we anticipate, and the primary one being at the government center. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So to make it for c1arifieation purposes, the intent here is to provide opportunities for buses instead of discharging and bringing passengers on in the street where there's a sign that says C.AT where they may be out in the rain, you're talking about bringing them into a facility where they can go inside, they ean wait for their bus and then go back to another location. MR. FEDER: Exactly. And especially those three routes as noted are passing that area today. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: One last question. As we're going forward in the future, and I know we all have horizons that we work with. Right now you have "X" number of buses. And I don't know what that number is, and I appreciate there's an inventory that's functioning and there's one that's held. MR. FEDER: Generally about 18 vehieles a day. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's fine. When would we make our next leap into the future to acquire additional buses that may impact on this? And if we were, would the facility that we currently have there be suitable to contain those additional buses? MR. FEDER: Second part of your question first. Yes, it would be, and that's part ofthe general development plans, even outside of this conditional use for a transfer that are being done on-site and maintenance. To the tirst part of it, we already saw that our passenger levels went up to a million some three years ago. They're slightly reduced. Some of that is becausc we havcn't been able to expand the network financially. We see that coming for a while in the future. But we're looking for transit to be some of our answer, especially out in the eastern part of the county, as opposed to multi-Ianing looking at transit options as part of our vehicle as well, so to speak. And so we would expect some growth. What you had and was looked at here was a five-year transportation impact statement, because that's the process to look out, live years, to look at whether or not the roads have the capability to handle, which they usually do, even at two lanes. But we said we'd wait till four-laning, which we did. But expect that we'll see some !,'Towth in the future that may even exceed, and we'll have to address that in the future. We're agrceing to some conditions here today that you'll discuss that are hopefully an orientation to the community's concerns and their fears that wc will limit the activities at this site. And hopefully they'll find that some of those issues are not a concern when and ifout into the future we need expansion. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Those when and if situations would be another conditional use application. Page 43 __'~""__~"'_'_'__~H._"'_""..'_'_____'_, ^,','_. .. 161 1 ~ Januarv 7, 20 10 . MR. FEDER: Either that or rezoning the site .. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. MR. FEDER: -- or something of that naturc, yes. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Onc last question regarding safety issues for all people. It is my understanding that you don't simply carry people who are in labor work, you do also carry business people, and that's a good thing. MR. FEDER: Everybody, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: But there is a concem, I think everybody realistieally should have it, the gorilla in the room needs to be talked about it concern for safety, And so I'm going to ask you about whether or not the facility that you intend to have there, will it be supervised so that there is a modicum of safety" MR. FEDER: Yes, And we're doing that. Even when we have transfer activities today at the govemment center we have individuals down there specifically at the site throughout opcrational hours. We will do that We did that when wc were over at the Vo-Tcch. And thcrc will always be, And that's one of the benefits here that we have, even for a secondary or not primary transfer site. It's right there at the depot whcre staff works. there's always a constant oversight COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And as far as issucs, statisticallv I'm told -- I'm infonned that we've had no , problems at the campus. and it is because we have supervision. MR, FEDER: Yeah. we have had-- COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: The assumption being that MR. FEDER: We've had very little problems, And I was going to go over that You have statistics that are not necessarily attributable to us. But you'll see they don't change. even whcn we were there and after we left even at the V o-Tech. So it's been a good operation. but it's one that we would always oversee. And it's not one that is 24-hour operations either. I know there was some of those concerns raised by the community. COMMISSION ER MURRAY: Thank vou. , CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. I lome, did you finish your presentation" Because typically we wait for our questions till the presentations are completed. Hopefully thcy'll answer some of our questions. MS, HORNE: I did not I have u let me see how many more. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why don't we just continue normally. and if you could finish your presentation, By the way, for members of the public, we generally take a lunch hreak. It starts sometime between II :30 and 12:00 at a convenient point We will most likely be taking one fairly soon. So I don't know if we'll get to the public's questions before lunch, but I just wanted to keep you aware of that Okay. go ahead, Ms. Home. MS. HORNE: Thank you, sir. The area -- one of the concerns we have heard IrOln the community is that properties would be devalued. And what we saw when we looked at historic photographs. this one, this 1995 aerial photograph was taken from the property appraiser's website, is that the commercial uses preceded the residential development and the acquisition of single-family homes. In addition, I talked a little bit earlier about what the guidelincs are for orienting development and transit together. I indicated that this is not an exclusively residential community as it has been characterized in somc ofthe articles that I have seen in the newspaper. And I wanted to put thaI on the record. In particular. there are vacant commercial properties that j've noted on this aerial photograph that should be noted. There is residential development and multi-family. So this is a mixed use suburban area, as was consistent with the transect provided by the Departmcnt of Transportation. Density is worth mentioning as well. I'm SOllY. The density in Sherwood Park is 4.2 units per acre. There are two undeveloped commercial convenience tracts, measuring about seven acres undeveloped, approximately 10 acres to the east. Cedar Hammock PUD to the south is at a density of approximately one unit per acre. And the Ibis Club at Naples has a density of approximately 8.9, according to the staffrcport As mentioned earlier, we did look at crimc statistics to be able to respond to the questions that we've been Page 44 161 1 tA January 7, 2010 asked about transfer activities. As I mentioned at the meetings that we had with the community and to you earlier, the opportunity to have eyes on passenger activities serves as a deterrent to any antisocial behavior. Nonetheless, it's always important to look at the statistics. We did try and colleet data for the government center use from the Sheriff's Office. Unfortunately the Sheriff's Office does not distinguish -- and this is worth noting for all erimes statisties -- a eall that is made by an offieer is attributed to where the offieer looks up and says, I am adjaeent to. With Lorenzo Walker Institute, you can imagine that was an easy location for an officer to identifY. So in some cases the accidents may not necessarily have been on site, just as one example. And when we tried to collect data for government center, what we found is they could not distinguish between calls for service that occurred at the jai I, at the courthouse, at the administration center, at the museum or any other building on-site, including the parking garage. So we wouldn't be able to make a difference. What we do know, though, is that the way the transit is opcrated here in Collier County, any time there is any type of incident that relates to passenger fixed route service or paratransit services, Michelle Arnold is called. And she has not gotten calls related to the activities at government center. And we feel that it is because it is a supervised activity. That being said, one of the things we heard concerns about was burglary, theft or eriminal mischief And you'll notice that the transfer activities left Lorenzo Walker Institute in 2007, and that did not affect in one way or another the burglary or other activities and reports of incidents. Noise: As I mentioned earlier about operations, there's a couple things that are worth noting. One is that over time the C.AT system is investing increasingly in energy ellicient buses which have less emissions and lower noise. Also, we do not anticipate that -- in fact, I'd like to point out that the departure of buses in the morning and the wanning up of buses in the morning is more intense, i.e., 18 buses, than the three, four or five buses that would go through this site as part of a permitted use within an hour. So the noise activity would actually be lower in terms of per hour in the middle of the day when the noise is less notable to the community. When we met with the community, they did not identify noise in the early morning hours as something that presents an issue for them. We were also asked about project costs. Vou asked a little bit about that earlier. These are the federal government funding sources, 5309 and 5307. What I'd like to point out specifically, since I'm fairly certain most people don't know what those grant sources are, is that money is separate and apart from operating funds. It is a peculiar instance that in working with the federal government FDA administration, there are opportunities for urban areas, such as Collier County, more opportunities to providc capital assistance to us to improve our services than there is for operating funds. Rural systems, especially in Florida, typically are able to obtain both fedeml and state monies to assist with transit operations costs, but they are two totally and separate distinct pots of money, and so spending money on improvements such as a transfer facility is not taking money out of the pocket for improving operations and reducing headways, for example. So this is the funding. The first line is the engineering and documentation required by the federal government. We call it environmental documentation. And the second line is the funding for the actual improvements on the site. And it includes a wide variety of improvements. In general, I agree with the staff report. I did submit my comments on it as I noted at the beginning of my presentation. I specifically do not feel because of the nominal nature of change in the requested use that the conditions are required to make it consistent with the zoning and Growth Management Plan. I feel that through the prcsentation that I've made, I have demonstrated that. But I wanted to point that out for the record. Also, I'd like to mention a few of the transportation elements, goals, objeetives and polieies that were not listed in the staff report for eonsisteney. It will just take a moment, and then I can submit it into the reeord. I already mentioned Policy 12.10. Policy 12.7, 12.8 and 12.9, those all deal with the integration of the transit system into the planning process. Objective 10, the county shall encourage safe and efficient mobility for the public. Page 45 .. ....... ___'__~",_,'.__M"__""_',__ __._._,._..._....._ -"-.'"~-'-''''---'' - 161 1 M . .' Januarv 7. 2010 . . Policy 7.3 and 7.4, Objectivc 7. Policy 5.6, I'd specifically like to read this onc. The county shall designate transportation concurrency management areas to encourage compact urban development where an integrated and connecting network of roads is in place that provide multiple viable altemative travel paths or modcs -- that being transit is one of them -- for common trIpS. Purposes within each TCMA shall be measured based on the percentage oflane miles meeting the LOS described in this Transportation Element Policies 1.3 and 1.4 of this clement. The following transportation concurrency management areas are designated. Again, this is policy 5.6.B. Essential TCMA. This area is bounded by Pine Ridge Road on the north, Collier Boulevard on the east, Davis Boulevard on the south, and Livingston Road extended on the west side. Objective four. The goal-- the primary goal of the transportation clement: To plan for, develop, operate a safe, efficient and cost-elfective transportation system that provides for both the motorized and non-motorized movement of people and goods throughout Collier County. And objective one. In addition, I'd like to make a brief reference to Pages 7 and 8 of the Transportation Element. And earlier you'll note that I mentioned Pages 8, 9 and 10 of the Future Land Use Element, where you identify a gap between land use and transportation planning. With that, and the presentation that we've made, we feel that the proposed conditional use is consistent with the zoning code, consistent with the Growth Management Plan, compatible with the neighborhood, not detrimental to the public welfare. In hlct, we feel that it will enhance the quality of life for a significant portion ofthe community. Provides adequate ingress and egress to the property. The elfect on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic and odor elfects is not adverse. In tel1ns of economic impacts, we feel that this is actually positive as it provides access to jobs and other opportunities throughout the community, and compatibility with the adjacent properties in the district. Just to summarize what I've already stated. the requcst is an incremental change, for routes that already travel by here would now enter the C.A.T. operation ccnter. Riders arriving by bus would move to another bus. The commercial uses wcre built here first. And this was purchased as both the administration and future minor passenger transfer center. As a good neighbor, it was agreed that the county would wait until Radio Road improvements were made. We also had an additional meeting that was not required in addition to the NIM meeting to meet with the community. And we extended our conditional use process to meet the needs of folks that do not live herc lull-time so they would be back after the holiday period to have this hearing. So with that, I will relinquish the -- oh, I'm sorry, I did forget one other thing. I'm sorry. We also reviewed the proposed conditions of approval. We noted that we would like to modify condition number two with the underlying text: So long as these changes remain consistent with the permitting requirements of the Water Management District and any other applicable agency, as well as all applicable development standards. With respect to some of these con -- with respect to these conditions, we feel that we are agreeing to them not because we feel they are necded but in order to scrve as a good neighbor. In particular, number five, this transfer station use shall be added to the existing uses permitted on-site and shall allow the addition of transfer activities for no more than four CAT. lixed routes. And number six, no more than 10 fixed route p.m. peak hour two-way bus trips per hour to Radio Road can be generated by this transfer station use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, is that the end of your presentation? MS. HORNE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, I'm sure that there are questions from the Planning Commission, and we have the staff report and the publ ic speakers yet to occur. Does the Planning Commission wish to move forward into the lunch hour? Do you want to take an carly lunch to get through the line downstairs now and then come back and start Iresh? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yes. COMMISSIONER CARON: Y cs. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thai seems to be the general consensus. So since your presentation is done and it will give time It)r plenty of the people here to think about what you said. and I'm sure they're going to have comments, Page 46 161 1 0* January 7, 2010 we'll resume at 12:40 back in this room. Thank you. (Luncheon recess.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, it's 12:40, we're back on record. And ifC.AT isn't ready, then I guess we'll just skip them. I knew you were here. Okay, where we left off and the way that we'll proceed is we now have questions from the Plarming Commission ofthe applicant And then after that we have the presentation by county staff, which the applicant is not in this case. We have questions then of Planning Commission of county staff. Then after that we ask for public speakers. We start with the registered speakers, and anybody who isn't registered but would like to speak, we'll give them the opportunity to speak as well. As long as you get your name on record. So with that in mind, I'll tum to the Planning Commission for questions of the applicant Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Ijust have to have one qualification here. I had asked this question to you earlier, and I'm still curious about it You had made your statemcnt that we were reaching capacity at the campus. Will this new set of transfer .. this new transfer station rcduce that problem? Not from what I heard from the conversation that we had with the administrator. So tell me, please, how this will -- MS. HORNE: How this will work. I like to explain it in tenns ofthe grid street pattem that most people are familiar with. Transportation network, whether it's transit vehicles, buses or any other type, needs to work in a i,'Tid pattem so that it interconnects throughout the community. If you remember the slide I showed earlier wherc I showed the urban growth area.. or the urbanized area from your Growth Management Plan. And then I comparcd it to transfer opportunities within the C.A.T. system. You want to create that grid that connects whcre people live and where people work or other destinations they may want to go to, and it needs to be done on a rcgular basis so that you don't always have to go back to thc point of origin, government center, for example, to get to where you ultimately want to go. In tenns of capacity, when we talk about govemment center, we're talking about the number of vehicles that would come into this facility. So you would make connections at other points throughout the community, and that would alleviate the full demand on this location. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: If I understand you correctly, what I think you're suggesting or inferring is that because you have another alternative transfer station, you somehow realize additional capacity? MS. HORNE: For example, you could detennine that hypothetically the blue route no longer needs to go all the way to government center. You would base that on the ridership inputs. Remember the slide I showed you that asked people rrom the last major update where are you going to and coming from? You would look at that and you would compare it to the route and the folks that are being served along the blue route, and you may detennine that they don't necessarily need to go all the way to govemment center and you could reconfigure the route, alleviating or creating a new slot, if you will, at govemment center for another route in the future as the system grows. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I suppose that's what you could do, but that's not what the administrator said. All right, well, I understand. We're talking about the specifics, so I'm not going to go much further than that But just reconfirming, if you know, you reconfirmed that we're going to build a facility more permanent at the campus. MS. HORNE: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Wolfley? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Earlier we had talked about, when you had the slide up, traffic impacts are reduced. MS. HORNE: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: And I don't know why, because we always talk about things about peak hour generation and so on. And I didn't even notice it. I wasjustthinking of total traffic. Could you please go over, if you have the numbers, during a daily period, including peaks, how much tTips Page 47 -~ _.~---~,_.,--~--~_." ---'~-'---""-'----"--"_. ...,.-~_..-..--,.,.._.. ,,-,', "_..."~--~~.'_._._.- 16/ 1 ffL Januarv 7, 2010 " will be generated in totaL MS. HORNE: I'm going to go ahead and ask Revo Kanilwa to come up and respond to that question, as he is our traffic engineer. MR. KANIL W A: Again fClr the record. my name is Revo Kanilwa. And our traffic impact that we did. we focused solely on the peak hours, because that's when we know we have the most impacts on the roadways. So we delve into there. because we know -- the 10 routes that we're talking about the lObus routes we're talking about are spread throughout the day. So for each hour you're going to have those 10 buses. So essentially during the peak hours. that's when you have the most impact and that's what we tried to focus on. So -- but we can get you the daily numbers. if the Planning Commission-- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: What -- it kind of surprises me. because I would think that -- because I know nothing about the routes. And how -- and Ijust learned how many vehicles we have in the county. And I'm just con __ you know, we've got a few residents here, and they don't just listen to it at peak hour. Or they -- you know, it's all day long. I'd like to find that OUL I'hank you. MS. HORNE: To respond more directly to your question, I identified in one of the slides in our slide show how many times the bus today goes by the site. And I think that answers -- whoops, I went too far. I think that answers your question. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: We're not seeing anything. MS. HORNE: Oh. I'm sony " COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Are you talking ahout current C.A.T. bus routes'l Current C.AT. bus routes. is that what you're looking at~ MS. HORNE: Basically 54 times a day, is what's presented on that slide. existing bus routes travel past this location. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Okay. So you are saying -- docs that make it 54 or 108'1 I'm not trying to be funny here, I'm just -- MS. HORNE: No, I counted both directions. and I took that olf ofihe schedule. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Okav. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: That's one route. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: The CAT routes stop here. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's fix all routes, right" MS. HORNE: That's for the three routes that currently travel by this location. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Okay, thank you. MS. HORNE: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions of the applicant at this time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ma'am, while we're focusing on traIlic, can you put up the slide that shows route five with the red overlay. MS. HORNE: Yes. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's route three. There you go. Is that a right-in and then a right-out. or how is that -- you're left in and left out, is that how that works at that intersection? MS. HORNE: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And what about the next route, I think it's six. MS. HORNE: It's the same operations. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's left in and left ouL Is there a reason you wouldn't have made the transfer from the other direction so you would have a right in/right out" MS. HORNE: In fact, to be more precise, they would do it in hath directions. because an outbound bus would have to make a left onto Radio Road. And an inbound bus would have to make a right onto Radio Road. Does that make sense? Page 48 19anuL 7, 2~0 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, I understand. That's why if they're coming past there from both directions, I was wondering if you had both directions needed to enter, and your answer is yes. MS. HORNE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: In your additional trips on Radio Road, the existing route 3,A and 3.B already is on Radio Road; is that correct? MS, HORNE: Yes, sir, and it stops in ITont ofthis site. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, And we're seeing an increase in 10 peak hour and whatever it is during the day, But let's just work with peak hour. It isn't because ofJ.A and 3.B then; is that correct? There's no increase to your daily peak hour based on 3.A or 3.8? MS, HORNE: This has been a matter of debate is when do we count the trip. I mean, we're almost counting the trips twice because, as I said, the vehicles are already operating along the roadway. So what we did is we counted the trips that would be generated for C.AT, ops as they cross the driveway threshold; Is that correct, Revo? MR. KANILWA: That's correct CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So 3.A and 3.8, ifthey're including in the 10, are already there? MS. HORNE: Are already on the sei,'1I1ent of Radio Road, Now the __ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the 10 is not an increase based on -- see, I'm trying to understand the increase intensity. And the chart you showed showed a reduction Irom the dealership and then an increase because of this change, But the increase still was below the dealership, But I'm wondering if the increase reflects what you already had on the road from the 3,A and 3.B. Because if you have, it's nothing to do then with this application; is that a fair statement? MS. HORNE: That is a fair statement We are double counting in order to meet the requirements ofa traffic impact statement CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, then we have another tricky question. So you really don't have 10 additional impacts a day, because half of the routes are already there. MS, HORNE: Three of the routes arc already there. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, two of the routes are already there, 3.A and 3.B are already on Radio Road, MS, HORNE: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 5 and 6 are not MS, HORNE: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now, in your traffic impact statemen1, you have the statement: Four bus trips were converted into equivalent passenger car trips using a conversion factor of two passenger car trips per one bus trip, And then if you go to your chart, in your TIS it does have the peak hour of 10. But the way I read it, the 10 represents only five bus trips, and ofthe five you're telling me two and a half ofthose -- I don't know how you get a half a bus -- but two and a half bus trips are already there because two of the routes are already being on that street MR, KANIL W A: Yes. Actually, in our analysis what we did is we assumed that the 10 trips that we're talking about, the lObus trips we're talking about, we're looking at five years out So we are assuming that we're going to have five routes allowed to use this facility. Now, if you take five bus routes and each bus operates at a headway of30 minutes, you're going to drive the 10. And thus, that's where the 10 is coming from. But to go back to what you said earlier, actually the 10 bus routes that we're talking about, some ofthem already exist on this road, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right MR, KANIL W A: So actually the impact that the buses are causing is far less than what we're applying in the TIS, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, in the TIS it says proposed year 2014 you're looking at peak hour, peak directional volumes of 10 project trips. But because of that calculation that they use to equate two cars for every one bus, the 10 trips you're looking at are vehicle trips, which are really only five bus trips then; is that fair to say? MR, KANIL W A: No, no, actually, it's lObus trips. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm sure somebody in transportation must have realized that too when they Page 49 ,- --'-"<'~--~-"~-'- , - ---_._".._..''"..'"-_._..._..._.._.,~-~,.~..".~"-........~,.~,'.".,.<.., .. _......_..,-.,--,'~,~,,~-~_._-"....- -...... '-"-"_~"__'"'~"'w<.".~_. ."",...,. ,,~.,._._._.,_. ._.._.____'_..__._._____.__ 161 1 et\ Januarv 7, 20 I 0 " did the analysis. MR. KANIL W A: In terms of vehicles, we're talking about 20 vehicles. And where the vehicles come in is when we're doing the analysis now to see what is the impact of these so-called additional trips doing to the capacity of Radio Road. But the number of bus trips is 10 based on 30-minutes intervals for five routes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the 10 that you're calculating then don't take off for the existing background traffic. It's adding the background traffic back in again. MR. KANILWA: Right. right. MR. SWENSON: Mr. Strain, with your pennission. Chris Swenson. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, if you'd please identify yourself MR. SWENSON: Certainly. Chris Swenson. C-H-R-I-S. S-W-E-N-S-O-N. I'm a senior engineer with Wilbur Smith Associates, and I have reviewed the traftlc study. I'm a registered engineer in the State of Florida since 1988, hold a bachelor and a master's degrce from the Georgia Institute of Technology and I've been doing transportation planning in Southwest Florida for more than 20 years. We do see some increase also in use from this facility. And some of the 10 trips are actually a decrease in headway. In other words. the buses will be somewhat more frequent. So while you are correct, we've had to do some double counting because the requirements of the traffic impact statement look at trips in and out of the driveway. And those trips that weren't coming in were not there. We are looking at some increased service also, which has increased the number of trips. And that's reflected in the traffic impact statement. Now, you made some very astute comments that we really aren't impacting Radio Road that much. To take that even further, because transit trips will encourage a modal shift, the fact is that while you may increase bus trips in and out of that driveway, the impact on Radio Road intenllS of Iota I trame may in fact be negative. Now. that's not something that we -- negative as in reduced number of trips. not negative as in a bad impact. We did not take that into account in the analysis. as it's not required. And the impact on Radio Road and Davis Boulevard is so minor compared to the available capacity. But the fact is is that the TIS probably does overstate the impact, perhaps significantly, because we did not take into account the reduced automohile trips due to the increased transit trips. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: If you were to put on that slide that shows the red overlay on route jive or six-- because I think I'm understanding now where the additional trips are coming from. And it helps to understand some of the other letters I've read. That red overlay, that's the area that the additional trips are in; is that correct? Well, as soon as it turns red. There it goes. Now, the 10 additional trips, you're counting those as 10 additional trips because they're in that red area, is that an affirmative? And on route six it's the same thing. MR. SWENSON: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So additional trips past the red area, there are none. MR. SWENSON: That is essentially correct. The increased trips are from the reduced headway on the purple route. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Where the red routes are for five and six, the red additional trips, are any of those past a residential area? MR. SWENSON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav. thank vou. " . Go ahead, Ms. Caron. COMMISSIONER CARON: Ijust had a question on Davis. Why arc we not using that interconnect.. well, it's not an interconnect. Why are we not taking routes five and six off of Davis? MS. HORNE: Yes, ma'am. In the near future the Department of State is going -- Department of Transportation is going to be improving Davis Boulevard. While the maintenance oftramc activities are going on, it is not our recommendation that it would be safe for buses to make a left turning movement in a maintenance of traffic area during construction activities. While we think it is possible in the future that it may be appropriate to circulate lIsing the existing driveway to Davis Boulevard in the Page 50 " 16JaI~uary 7,lo10 f; near term, in the period that we contemplated it did not make for safe operations. COMMISSIONER CARON: But what about just a right back out? MS. HORNE: That area-- COMMISSIONER CARON: Can't you get buses in there? MS. HORNE: The secondary issue that we would be concerned about is there -- the C.AT facility is fenced off behind -- in between wherein the original dealership's showroom building is, if you will, which we call building one, and where maintenance activities take place. And it is fenced all the way down and around to the Davis Boulevard entrance. Today that is how operations occur. That area is kept secure. The Federal Transit Administration has a preference for security, and so we contemplated whether it would make sense to circulate in that area, and for the time being we did not feel it was appropriate, for those reasons. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. But that's really a matter of just changing some fencing. If you were to .. I mean, eventually at some point you're going to have a road that will go around that property and come out onto Davis at some point. MR. FEDER: And it exists today. The primary issue is as was noted. You've got Davis about to go under construction. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. And I understand-- MR. FEDER: Just as we committed to the community, we wouldn't pursue the conditional use until we had finished the four-Ianing on Radio, that would be the same issue. We're looking at a velY minor involvement on Radio on those two routes. And we're also taking advantage of a signalized intersection there. Because even though you can take a right out, it ends up being a left in. And so right out's a possibility in the future, but again, why push that through the construction site when you can go to a signalized area during a construction activity. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick wants to usurp your comment somehow. Go ahead, Nick. MR. CASALANGU IDA: Not at alL I've been listening to the conversation for a while, and I'm trying to stay within my new role and let them talk about it. But I've got to point something out and be clear here. [n 2014 there's over 1,000 vehicle trips available on both ofthose facilities. If you do the multiplier or the denominator, there's 500 bus trips available for capacity. So I think the discussion between the residents and discussion of capacity and traffic analysis needs to be brought up on the table. There's plenty of capacity on those roads to handle the bus trips. The question I think from the residents in the public meeting is how many buses will we see from a perspective. But the roads have plenty of capacity. It's not a capacity issue at aiL Quite frankly, the analysis they've done, and they've done a very good analysis, is overkilL They've done an operational analysis for exiting and entering the site, intersection analysis for minimal impacts to the roadway. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick, by the way, we're the people you need to be directing your discussion to. MR. CASALANGlJIDA: Sony, Ijust-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you get interaction with the public, we have a real serious problem, because that's not how these meetings work, so -- MR. CASALANGlJIDA: My apologies. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- work towards us, please. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure, So to keep that in mind, it's not a capacity issue, it's not an operational issue, it's a discussion of how many buses you expect to see. Typically we don't limit something like this if there's plenty of capacity. But on the record they've said how many buses, approximately lOin the p.m. peak hour. There's enough for 500 on that road. So let's be clear. Ijust want to make sure for the record it's not an issue of capacity at alL CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How many lanes is Radio Road now? MR. CASALANGlJIDA: Four. CHA[RMAN STRAIN: Four lanes. It just got finished, didn't it? MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRA[N: So the king of six-lane roads, you, and Collier County made that one four-- Page 5 I -,,,_._,.,.......'-,.,, ---- ....- -,.. _, _' n....'._ . _'__'_'""___.__.__"...h... .....'._'.____.._..._. ._._ 161 1 \?J~ January 7, 20 I 0 , MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's my boss. CHAIRMAN STRA]N: I low did you make it four instead of six" Because I was told tbe county standard was always to be six from here out. Not that I agree with you, but I'mjust curious as to why we didn't do it differently on this road. And you're even talking about tearing down homes to put in six-lane roads in other parts ofthe county. MR. CASALANGUlDA: He had to go there. MR. FEDER: He was only my com padre in that. I guess I'm the king of that one. What I will tell you is Radio Road is constrained further to the west. And with Davis coming in at six lanes, there was only a need to go to lour. There's plenty of capacity, as Nick points out. There's actually capacity in everything we're discussing when it was two lanes. but the commitment we made early on to the community was that we would wait because we had already started up the construction. We didn't want to do it during construction on Radio either until we're linished with the lour-laning on Radio Road. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you said in your previous statement that you had] guess mentioned to the public or told the public that if you could use Davis Boulevard sometime in the luture, you would; is that a fair statement? MR. FEDER: I will tell you right now, what we're asking for in this conditional use is on Radio, as you've seen the indications. But I imagine in the future we'll be using Davis as well. The primary reason for the Radio, though, is because you're coming to a signalized intersection, and that's the safest operation. So even after the construction in many respects that would be primary, but I think Commissioner Caron eOITectly pointed out that right turns out might be viable. It's the left turns even with the turn lane still are better at a signalized. So right now we're focusing on Radio for this limited number that we're asking in this conditional use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because if you use the right tum right out even in the future when Davis Boulevard is six-Ianed. you'd cut the use of Radio Road and the portion that you have to use it in lor those two routes by 50 percent. MR. FEDER: Yeah. And again. it's a very small portion of Radio Road that we're even proposing to use, but yes, that's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner, that 10 number that was thrown out there was for analysis purposes. It wasn't to maximize, even though that's being used as a maximization number. It was to say what's anticipated based on the routes that are distributed on that network it would be 10 trips. It was never intended by the consultant to say there wouldn't be 15 at one point in time, although it's being construed as such right now. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But see, Nick, every developer comes in here with a TIS, and we actually lock them into their TIS. We can't treat government any differently. And so if you guys came in with a number you didn't really mean, you should have told us what you really meant. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Understood. And just like the developers do when they're on the dais sometimes and they ask questions, you ask them questions, they clarity it. And that's the appropriate time to do it is today is to make sure you understand what we're asking t(,r. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then I have one other question. In your presentation you have one chart, number IS, that refers to a definition for primary and secondary, or is it -- I'm not sure if you call it main, whatever you called it, entrance -- or uses. Back up, right there. Major transfer facility and a secondary transfer facility. In the stall report there was a reference to this as being a non-primary transfer site versus the main county site. It would seem to me that if you really want to be ace urate in the way you refer to this, this would be the seeondary transfer facility and the county site would be the major transfer facility. ]s that a elearer statement7 And the reason that's important is if this succeeds and YOll have other hurdles to get over here today, and we're only talking about traffie but there are other issues that we need to vet out, any of that kind of language that isn't defined becomes a problem. But you've actually defined language in this slide that might be effective in curing that issue. So -- and that would -- is considered a secondaI)i transfer site thell. MS. JjORNE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Any other questions of the applicant before we go to the staff report? COMMISSIONER CARON: Well. Page 52 161 1~ January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Ms. Caron. COMMISSIONER CARON: I'm sorry. Because I think you bring up a good point with that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER CARON: Because if this is going to be a definition, then I think it's an incomplete one, based on what's happening there right now today. MS. HORNE: What would you like to see us clarity? COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, are there not other uses happening on this site right now today? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. they're not part of the conditional use. MS. HORNE: There are, but they're not part ofa transfer facility. Those are uses that are currently pennitted and that currently operate on-site. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. So we'll separate out the two, okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Nonnan Feder. With your indulgence, just to clear up some of the discussion on the traffic impact statement. Usually the developer is only coming in to you with net traffic analysis. You've got gross traffic analysis. Because we wanted to make sure that it was clear that with all issues that the site would still be maintained, not just this increment that we're looking for for these transfer activities. But that being said, we're fine restricting ourselves to that, even though that was only intended to be a five-year look at whether the system could handle it. And it was on gross traffic, not on net. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Okay, if there's no other questions of the applicant, then we'll go to staff report. MS. DESELEM: Good afternoon. For the record, Kay Desclem, Principal Planner with Zoning. You have in your possession, and I did hear the applicant also put it on the record, the staff report with the revision date of 12/22/09. And again, like the similar petitions, the applicant has made a very thorough presentation, so I'll hit the high points of the staffrep0l1 and then respond to questions, if that's acceptable. On Page I you have the requcsted action. This mirrors what was advertised for the public. You have the geographic location, which has been illustrated in several documents from the agent. On Page 2 you have the purpose and description of the project, and we've discussed that at great length as part of the applicant's presentation. And you have the surrounding zoning and land uses and an aerial photograph that shows the relationship of those uses. You have the Growth Management Plan consistency review, beginning with Future Land Use Element discussion. Followed by the transportation element discussion. Staff does recommend that this be found consistent with the Future Land Use Element and the transportation element, as those elements are applicable in this case. And, therefore, we believe it could be deemed consistent with the overall GMP. Going on on Page 5 you have the analysis that is required by the Land Development Code. This has the findings of fact in support of staff's recommendation of approval, beginning with number one that cites the LDC section that allows this petition to go forward as a conditional use in this PUD district. Staff has provided our analysis of that issue and believes that it is appropriate to do so. And number two, it's required that this be found consistent with the Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan. And staff does believe as conditioned and as those conditions have been discussed and amended through today, we do believe that this petition is consistent with both the Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan. And noting the details provided in that analysis. Number three talks about ingress and egress in reference to automobile and pedestrian safety, convenience, traffic flow, control and access in case of fire or catastrophe. And again, transportation planning statfhas cvaluated this, as has zoning, and we believe this petition is consistent with this requirement as welL Going on to Page 6, you have number four that talks about the eft"cts of the conditional use on the neighboring properties. There is a discussion regarding this issue on tllat page, but staff is of the opinion and has the general idea that this as conditioned would be compatible with the neighborhood. Page 53 ---"",,, ---_.,~,_._-_.._".,,_._-_._--_._-- .' 16) 1 0~ Januarv 7. 2010 . That goes into number live as well, talking about compatibility. And again, staff has recommended, with the conditions that we have imposed or are rccommending be imposed, we believe this petition is compatible. We have provided as to the applicant an aerial photograph showing this particular area in 1995 reflecting that the commercial uses have been on this area for some time. On Page 7 it goes on to talk ofthe Environmental Advisory Council. There is no recommendation, because the project was not required to go beforc that body. There is a neighborhood information synopsis that begins on Page 7 and continues on to Page 8. Also as part of the attachments to the staff report, you had the applicant's more complete synopsis of that neighborhood infonnation meeting. The County Attorney's OtTice has revicwed the document, as is noted on Page 9, and the recommendations of staff begin at the bottom of Page 9. As was submitted to you as the last slide Itlf the petitioner this moming, we have had some modifications to that staff report. And I have a draft dated 1/6/1 0(3) that references the changes to conditions two and five. And also there were additional changes to condition six that were not shown as underlined. I'll read those beginning after the word 10, fixed route, p.m. peak hour, two-way is also additional language in that condition. We do have other staff members here available for you, should you have questions. Most importantly, as already been noted, transpOltation staff is here and they can address any questions you have regarding transportation. Other than that, I'm available for any questions you might have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there qucstions lor Kay') (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, let's take a look at their sheet where they have requested changes to your stipulations. And number two, they want to add the verbiage, the permitting requirements of the Water Management District and any other applicable agency as well as. Now, they're adding that to your dep3ltmcnt's approval of minor changes. Can you make changes without the approval of the Water Management District" MS. DESELEM: I'm not eeltain of that. To my knowledge it would require changes to their documents. And as long as what changes they may make to their documents are still consistent with ours-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray'> I mean, it seems like needless language, becanse you all cannot do anything the other agencies that we defer to don't allow you to do. So why do we need language in there that says that, when again it's redundancy that I keep harping on') MR. BELLOWS: I agree, we can't speak I()f that agency. And they -- we defer to them anyways on those types of matters. so I think it's redundant. MS. DESELEM: The applicant had askcd lor this to be added. Wc basically don't have any hard feelings one way or another. We don!t care if it's added and we don!t see the necessity for it either, so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And as I,,, as the rest of their changes, I might have missed it, you didn't have any problem with them? MS. DESELEM: That's correct. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. CHAJRMAN STRAIN: I was trying to read something at the same time, so -- Mr. Murray? COMM1SSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, could you take that piece off there and show us that last slide that was on there, please? Well, you can just probably go right to the slide. I want to understand something, if I can, please. You speak of a major transfer facility, but in number four you hear -- there you speak of a non-primary transl,,, site. Now, I understand the word difference, but I'm tlying to understand what you're really looking for. If it's a major transfer facility and thcn there's a secondary transfer facility, where is the primary transfer site going to bc? MS. DESELEM: The primary -- what this has come Irom is the ncighborhood infonnation meeting. 1n all candor, this is the first I've seen these today. This is new language to me; 1 hadn't seen this. Wc were trying with the applicant and stalfto work through how we can designate and differentiate between the fact that the transfer facility at the main govcmment complex is supposed to be the biggy. That's the primary, the principal, the, you know, semantics tlying to come up with thc right tcrm. And this is what we had agreed upon, to call that the primary or to rcference that as thc primary as it's donc through a lot of the documentation provided to this Page 54 161 January 7, 2010 ~ 1 ptf point by the petitioner. And understanding that this site would never become that. And the other conditions, like the four routes, the 10 routes, the 10 trips, that's all to support the fact that this is the non-primary. That's how you can limit this to keep it what it's proposed now so that it can't become the primary site. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Is there any reference within -- because I read this, but I don't have a recollection in detail that we ever discussed a primary transfer site. Or for that matter, a major transfer facility. Maybe it's an unnecessary concern, but I have a concem here that if we agree with stip four, when somebody goes to try to figure out what that means, they're going to run into what? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Didn't we .. in our previous discussion, that was what I pointed out, why don't we use the terms secondary and major, since they're defined now by the slide. COMMISSIONER MlJRRA Y: Well, okay, maybe I didn't hear what you were referencing. Maybe I was in la la land thinking about this. But if that -- we've solved it, then fine. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. No, everybody secmed to think that was a better way to define it. MS. DESELEM: Yeah, and that's perfectly acceptable with us. It's always better to make it more clear. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's what I was-- MS. DESELEM: And I had never seen this before. And I'm, you know-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: My apologies if I was -- I was probably thinking about the question I was going to ask and wasn't listening as intently. Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions of staff at this time') Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: In number two it says that the zoning and land development review director can approve minor changes, including things like siting and height. Is there any height -- what's the height restriction right now on this? MS. DESELEM: I'd have to go back to the PlJD document. Right off the top of my head I do not recall. I'd have to go back and look. If you want me to, allow me to take a minute? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, before you do, the intent of what the zoning director could do were within the administrative limitations of the zoning director. Meaning you already have latitude for doing an administrative approval of a setback if it is so many inches or a certain percentage. Is that the intent here of number two is not to go beyond those percentages, or are you -- is something being suggested in two that would take it beyond that? MS. DESELEM: The idea of this is to make it clear that this is the limitations. It still has to be consistent with all applicable development standards read into that. You still have to get a site development plan approval. This doesn't supersede that. But as part of that site development plan approval process, if something comes to light that you need to tweak something a bit, it gives you some allowances to do that through the administrative procedure. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. And usually, you know, or at least for some things the code is fairly specific and you can only do it by a certain percentage or whatever. But we have run into problems in this county with somcbody's interpretation of a minor change versus the community's interpretation of a minor change. So I just would like it to be specific to the code as it exists and not create language for it. I mean, if the code allows you to change the height by three feet, then that's what the code says you can do. If the code allows you to change a setback by 25 percent, then that's what the code allows you to do. I don't want somebody else to be interpreting what a minor change can be. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But Ray, let's go back into -- I think it solves Commissioner Caron's problem. The number two by the approval of minor changes, wouldn't those mean to the extent you can administratively do so~ MR. BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, so-- MR. BELLOWS: The LDC has a definition of that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that means you can't do something beyond what you currently administratively can do -- MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- for setbacks and things. That's what I'm gelting at. Page 55 - ,,---~-,,-- ~ --_._- ---_._~""'-..~ ',-'-' - .'-"---~~, ~",~_.","""~"",,,,,,.,,,-,,_,,-,,",,,,~~<~~~,,__,,___'__'_C"~~ '.. ._,'__.___._._,..._ " _".___~"__ . , 16 I I January 7, 2010 leA COMMISSIONER CARON: But that's what I'm saying, use the language we've already got. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, the language placed in the conditional use is just to make sure it's clear that what can be shifted as a minor adjustment of a building footprint and not force it into some kind of new conditional use or an amendment to a conditional use. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Subject to what stalf can administratively allow to be done now. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, in that same item we're here for a conditional use for a transfer station. MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Arc we intending to locate buildings, change the heights of buildings, add structures, or are we really just putting either a block or a concrete or some kind of a platfon11 out there so that the buses can pull up and -. I thought everything was in place already. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. This is a somewhat unique situation. We have two different types of zoning we're dealing with. One is this is properties within a PUD which has a master plan which regulates certain development intensities as pursuant to the master plan. There's language in the master plan and in the LDC that allows minor changes to those master plans without triggering some kind of pun amendment. We also have criteria that says if you meet all this criteria for the changes or to an extent that meets the criteria for what's called the pDI or master plan change, that requires approval by the Planning Commission. So cverything's defined in the I -,DC of how much YOll can impact or change \,'hat\ shown on a master plan. The same concept applies to a conditional use. That's a use that is allowed on the subject property pursuant to additional conditions of approval or regulations or saleguards. And that's why we require kind of a conceptual site plan to be attached to a conditional use. Now, the current lacility's operating under the auspices of the pun document, and they would not be locked into the conceptual site plan fonnat. But they are locked into the -. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: pUD. MR. BELLOWS: n pUD master plan. But they have now this second document that's locking them into the facilities that are shown. This gives the assurance to the residents who arc coming to these meetings that what is approved by this Commission and the Board of County Commissioners is what they're locked into, and two weeks later there's not four other buildings on-site. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So you're telling me that this clause too doesn't exist in the pUD as it already is extant. MR. BELLOWS: They're similar language, that's alii can say. But similar's not quite the same. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm just suggesting you may not need it at all in there, because ofthe fact that that's not what we're here for. But that's not -- as long as COlllmissioner Caron's views are appreciated and we go with the language that we're used to. I certainly don't have a problem. It's often said we have things in here that are not necessarv. ~ MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. And this is -- like I said. it's a very unique situation. You don't get many conditional uses within PUDs, and this is one ofthelll. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okav. ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Sehiner? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But now I have a problem. Because I was under the impression that they're going to be able to cover these vehicles. They probably won't. Because in the auto dealership master plan I'm sure that there was no cover out there in the middle of that islanu. So my question is why did they create a new island? Why didn't they put this up against -- you know, reverse it 180 degrees and put it up against the building where the people could use the cover of the existing auto dealership and stulf.' Or I guess Kay, maybe you could make me comfortable by saying yes, they would be able to build shelter out by those bus drop-offs. MS. DESELEM: Let me respond to say that I don't see why they couldn't, because it's not going to increase impervious arca. Because it would be a cover going over an already impervious area. So it wouldn't create any issues Page 56 16 I 1 # January 7, 2010 as far as water management or parking or anything else that would require other alterations to the site, So I would believe in my mind that the addition of a cover for that would not trigger anything that would be above and beyond a minor change that could be done, This particular site already has site development plan approval as an amendment, up to the point that you see now without that bus transfer sawtooth design, So what they would have to do would be to come in and amend that And it could be done, like I said, as an insubstantial change even, I'm not sure of that, I'd have to evaluate it But it's not going to increase things that would normally be looked at COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So when we get these conceptual plans, to me adding another structure where we didn't think one was would not be a minor change, I mean, we review these all the time, we let these PUO plans go, So what you're saying, the addition of a roofed area out in the middle ofthat parking lot would not be an issue based on the original PUO, Which is the conceptual site plan that we have up until this, or what happens? MS,OESELEM: Well, wc've gonc beyond the original PUO in that this already has a site development plan that reflects the buildings that are on-site, So, you know, it would be in conjunction with that site development plan, And like I said, I don't believe it would have impact as far as what staff would normally review, As far as I understand the application has been represented and as I understand it to be, they're not proposing any more buildings as far as like those that would house offices or the like, It's just they show that sawtooth design on the site plan so you know it's going to be there, And I think it's been pretty clearly articulated that they hope to cover that to provide shelter to the passengers, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. Have they added any buildings to this site since the county's taken ownership? MS, OESELEM: Not that I'm aware of They can respond perhaps better to that than I, but not that I'm pcrsonally aware of COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So wc are essentially going by the original PUO. So this -- okay, so Ray, would this have to fall under the original PUO conceptual plan if they change that plan? And to me, in the building world a structure, an open structure's a structure, as this site has open structures where they use to park the cars under them, MR, BELLOWS: Yeah, for the record, Ray Bellows, The conceptual plan that you're rcviewing today with this conditional use is consistent with the PUO master plan, so no change to that document would be requircd, Now, if there is to be in the future some kind of covered area over the exis -- what's shown currently on this plan and if it's just a covercd thing, thcn that would fall under that language that was being recommended in two as a minor change. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, so that's a minor change, Because these people should be covered up by that All right, thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions of staff? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, thank you, Okay, Ray, do we have -- let's start with the registered public speakers, And by the way, everybody that is wanting to speak, first of all, we need to be assured you've been sworn in, So if you haven't been sworn in, please tell the court reporter that as you come up to the microphone, Second of all, we just need you to identify your name and address for the record, Go ahead, MS,OESELEM: Ifl may, I'm sorry, I forgot to respond to Ms, Caron's question, The height approved in the PUO, Nick was kind enough to pull it out, it is 50 feet COMMISSIONER CARON: Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, first speakcr, Ray, And we can use either microphone you feel comfortable at MR, BELLOWS: There are four registcred speakers. The first speaker is Rudy Petorelli, MR, PETORELLI: Hi, Good afternoon. And I'd like to thank the chairman for moving us up rather than Page 57 _a..~~___~_ -"~~'--'-'-' --...., - ,.,' .,...~-..._".,_...~....._''''~_,,__...., ';""_',~_~_.._=_M'~_"_'~~"~'_~~u',_,__,"~,_,_,_,,,~~_ ... _"~._.._.~.' ..._,'___M._..__n 161 1\!J~ January 7. 2010 holding us till late in the afternoon, Only downside ofthat is we've got to go back out into the cold a little sooner. But we can put up with that For the record my name is Rudy Petorelli. 1'-1'- T-O-R-E-L-L-L And I'm going to present the position paper of the ENACTS organization, which is a group of people around the -- on the Radio Road and Davis Boulevard neighborhood, Not all of the residents. naturally, but quite a few of them, And you have the signatures. I believe, of 959, they said, residents who are against this particular site, Now, here is the ENACTS position. which we have sent to the Commission I believe a couple ofwecks ago, ENACTS is a group of residents located in East Naples along Radio Road and Davis Boulevard who are strongly opposed to the placement of a CAT. bus transfcr station at the CA,T. operations center on Radio Road. Thc surrounding area contains in excess of 15.000 rcsidents who will be most directly affected by placing the transfer station at that site, At the outset we want to assure you \ve are not opposed to expanding bus service in Collier COllnty. In fact. we support the expansion of bus service. of a safe, convenient. affordable public transportation system, What we are opposed to is placing this one facility in the middle of a residential area, I've heard people here say it's not residential. This board in pm1icular should know. since the Morandi site until now, that East Naples area has been one of the most built up areas with residences, So it's a complete change from what it was even five years al2:o. ~ In fact, our communications with other similar -- others similar to Collier County. We had 15 other communities here, It's really II, if you want to change your rep0I1 there, And we found that bus transler stations in 1110st cases were not located in residential areas, The lact that this site was previously used as a car dealership is not gennane. since as I said before the area has changed drastically, Now, we found in our research that not only were transfer stations cited outside of residential areas, but the use of nonresidential sites was preferred to bel1er accommodate and al1ract the main player and bus transfer, and that's the rider. [n 2005 the University of South Florida did a study at the request of Collier County, [n fact, they did Collier County and Lee County, Although the study was a park and ride study, or analysis. the results apply equally to transfer stations, Because the only difference between park and ride and ride in a bus and ride is that you don't drive a car in in one of them, What they said is this: The facility must be conveniently located to entice more people to use the bus, And 1'111 sure that's what CAT wants, that's what Collier County wants, that's what ENACTS wants, we want increased ridership, They also said the facility's proximity to activity centers is important to attract commuters, Examples given were grocery and retail shopping, Two sites on the list were Wal-Mart stores, personal services like dry cleaning, video rental, restaurants, This allows commuters to combine daily travel for a variety of purposes , That makes an extreme lot of sense, not only to the people here in ENACTS, but I'm sure to many other residents of Collier County, The study identified 32 sites they felt were suitable. None of those were in a residential area, They were all activitv sites. " This type of incremental approach using development sites that ENACTS is suggesting is exactly what the University of South Florida said in November of 2005 when they did the study for Collier County and CAT This approach they said limits initial investment since the sites are already developed and can be expanded or contracted fast and easily as ridership warrants, That's an imp0l1ant point Now, the Los Angeles Metro Transportation Authority, although that is a lot larger than ours, the philosophy they have still applies, They did a major study of bus and train traffic, Among their recommendations were: The heart ofthe proposal was to develop transit centers throughout the county, They recommended the creation of 19 centers throughout LA County at popular destinations, like UCI ,A, train stations, job centers, government buildings and the Warner Center. They felt the creation of many of these centers saves time, money, and makes bus transport more convenient and may attract new riders. There's a second study that says. attract new riders, which is what we all want. We at ENACTS are recommending a similar system. We believe that transfer locations, not transfer centers, can be disbursed throughout Collier County to activity centers or destination sites along existing bus routes to make bus travel more convenient and attractive to existing riders and possibly attract new riders. Page 58 16 I 1 January 7, 2010 We feel this system can be accomplished with very little new capital investment by the county, especially with the cooperation of businesses at these new sites, And none of us can imagine that any business center or mall or whatever would object to bus loads of customers coming onto their site, In fact, we identified Wal-Mart store on Route 951 as an attractive destination and an alternative to Radio Road, That site is only 1.2 miles from Radio Road CA,T, site and one minute by car. Right in the area that CAT wants to put a transfer station, Why Wal-Mart? If you do a Google search on the Internet ofWal-Mart bus stops, you get 267,000 hits, The listed articles indicate one, hundreds of bus stops nationwide are at existing Wal-Mart stores, Two, requests for residents for stops at Wal-Mart stores where no stops exist And three, information for riders indicating which bus stops at the Wal-Mart stores, People want to know that because that's whcre they want to the take a bus, This indicates that Wal-Mart truly is an activity center and a destination site, Now, here's a news excerpt showing why we talk about Wal-Mart, What they did in Austin, Minnesota, July, 2008, Austin residents will see benefits that go beyond low prices, (me-stop shopping convenience when the new Wal-Mart Supercenter opens Wednesday, The store has takcn steps to support local suppliers, improve road conditions and offer shoppers a product selection to fit their needs, In addition to uncompromising value and selection. the store includes a number of features that promote easy access while building on the aesthetics of the community, For instance, Wal-Mart built a new road behind the store, three retention ponds, a bus stop, a bike path, while adding two traffic lights, Evidently thousands of dollars of investment that didn't come out of Austin, Minnesota's budget This is only one instance ofWal-Mart cooperating with cities and towns in new and innovative ways, Now, that's our main issue, There is a bctter site, We think the site within a mile of Radio Road is a better site, not only for the riders but for the county, Other issues arc safety and property values, We believe the increased traffic noise, 24-hour lighting safety issues, including safety of children using school buses, air quality issues, will negatively affect property values in the area and increase security concems. Traffic. CAT, estimated in five years from our calculations, over 200 buses a day will be entering and exiting that site, Also, they mentioned the possibility of express buses coming off [-75 and going to that site, I didn't hear that mentioned today. Add this to the normal automobile traffic increase and you have what we consider a residential area not capable of handling this amount of and type oftraftic, It know the experts say it can, and they talk about maybe you don't want to see that many buses. That's exactly the point. We don't think we should see 200 buses, which may be understated, by the way CAT has grown from the beginning of their inception till now; 200 may be low, But we don't want to see that many buses on that road because we feel there's a better place fix it. The justification for the Radio Road site, A neighborhood information meeting was held on December 3rd regarding the proposed transfer center on Radio Road, One attendee asked the panel whether Wal-Mart on Route 951 had been contact regarding the use of their site for bus transfers, The answer was no, Wal-Mart was not contacted, Another asked whether it was true that one ofthe main reasons for choosing the Radio Road location was the ability to sell bus tickets and/or passes, The answer also was no, The following e-mail, which was sent to ENACTS from the then director of alternative transportation contradicts both ofthose answers. From Diane Flagg to Bill Connie, dated January 7th, 2008, quote, we did discuss the utilization of the Wal-Mart parking lot fix passengers to transfer to other bus routes with a Wal-Mart rep at Davis and Collier Boulevard, And they were open to the concept. This is an opinion -- this is an option, however. It does restrict additional customer services that would be available to them at the CAT, operational center nearby, As many of Collier area transit passengers are transportation dependent and have the additional services offered at the CAT operation centers are obtaining LD, cards, purchase of multiple bus passes and transfer training, That I don't know what it is, transfer training, [don't think you have to train people on how to transfer on buses. But anyway, the obvious question that comes to mind is why can't these functions be done at the existing government center? That's the main transfer facility, Also, is there the distinct possibility that if the Wal-Mart site is used, Wal-Mart would be willing and able to perform those functions? We don't know, because they haven't been contacted, It seems to us that the Wal-Mart proposal is a win/win situation, The riders benefit because they have a Page 59 - - "--..-..."-.-,......,..---'.""......,-..- '-'.,'," .,.-,,~,.~-_.~_. ". -,. ._".".._----_.~.._._,._,._." 161 1~L\ January 7.2010 pleasant, convenient destination site from which to make transfers, They can shop, they can rest in between trips, The county will probably benefit, because if this type of plan is viable, it could save the county thousands of dollars in the future in infrastructure investment as the system expands and possibly increascs ridership, CA,T, can follow the population grov.1h and the stores that go along with it. The 15,000 residents around Radio Road and Davis Boulevard will benefit by not having a disruptive service in their midst. We're snre Wal-M3I1 is already convinced that this kind of devclopment is good for business, In fact. Collier County has innumerable activity centers in addition to Wal-Mart as recommended by the University of Southwest Florida study, We originally statcd therc must bc a better place, We think we have proven thcre are many better places, Now, I just havc one request from ENACTS that won't take long, Just as an addcnda, Because of answers we got at the Decembcr, 2009 meeting about Wal-Mart specifically. and the confusion in the e-mails that we looked at before, we don't know and we don't believe Wal-Mm1 has bccn officially contacted with a written proposal as to what they might be willing to do to accommodate a station only one milc from the current CAT, site. 11 might be substantial. Thcy may say no. But they have alrcady -- after the confusion of these prior e-mails, one of our members of ENACTS wrotc to CAT, and said since that mecting, ycs, they wcre contacted and thcy indicatcd they havc an interest in increasing public transportation in that area, Now, since we've been involved in this process for about three years, we don't think it's an outrageous request to ask this Commission to table this conditional approval pcnnit lor now. maybe a couple of months, and let's get an official written in writing recommendation or proposal from \Val~Mart as to what they're willing to do with a comparison of \vhat are the costs going to be to get this transportation facility on Radio Road up and going? I've gotten more confused today. because I thought -- first of all. I thought because we're going to be really minimal. Now I'm -- for capital construction. Now I'm really confilsed what I heard during the last part ofthat presentation. There's more to this than we realize. But not only that, I heard about security, What are we going to spcnd over thc next live years with an estimatcd 200 buses a day? What are wc going to spend on sccurity'! How many people does that involve? It's a 24 hours a dav -- ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Siro MR. PETORELLl: But anyway -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just so you know. wc normally limit spcakers to about Ilvc minutes and ask that you try and limit that You've been going lor almost 15, And-- MR. PETORELU: Okay. Well, they told me 10 minutes and I thought I could do it in -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's Jlnc, I just need you to kind of wrap it up because we have other speakers-- MR, PETORELLI: Yeah, I'm all wrapped up, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. sir. MR, PETORELLI: Thank you very much t()f-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: No. 1-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray has a question, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: I have a question 1(11' you, sir. Now, you clearly -- you folks are f()cusing on Wal-Mart as the answer to this thing. MR, PETORELLI: Yes, COMMISSIONER MIIRRA Y: And you said you've been organized now for threc years. MR,I'ETORELLI: Two to three, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Two to three, Have you made any ovcrtures directly to Wal-Mart to find out the answers to thc questions you pose? MR, PETORELL!: Yes, we have, and I did personally, And they said that has to come from the agency directly to the manager at the local Wal-Mart and they would consider it from there. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. And the othcr question that I have relating to it. you've referenced a bus stop, I think that might be considerably different from a bus transfer point And you, in your reading of many things. you talked about bus stops and you talk about Wal-Mart desires greatcr transit opportunities, ct cetera, But I didn't really clearly understand anything that you said in therc to mean that they were in all the other parts of the country that you re1erenced actually operating bus transfer points, Are you Page 60 ~ 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 saying that that's happening in other places? MR, PETORELLI: No, I don't know that specifically, But because of the number of references of buses going to Wal-Mart, 1 would assume they're either going through there and not making transfers and in other cases they may be getting off one bus and going to another. [don't know that, but I'm just making an assumption, It must be __ ofthose hundrcds of sites. there must be some transfers, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm quite sure that every business would be happy to have a busload of people coming in with a potential for them to shop in the place, That's considerably different than a bus transfer point I'm not going to go any further with it I appreciate your comments, and thank you for representing some folks, MR, PETORELLl: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please, MR, BELLOWS: Susan Riedel. MS, RIEDEL: My name is Susan Riedel, R-I-E-O-E-L I'm a resident, owner and board member at Sherwood Park on Radio Road, I don't like nimbi arguments, but I found today's presentation very interesting, because I'm more confused than I think some of you were by the numbers that were thrown around in the earlier presentations, 11 looked like we were talking about three bus lines? Well, maybe it's really four bus lines, because there's an A and a B. And then there were referenccs to five bus lines, ] 0 bus routes. I've gotten very confused as to how many trips, routes, lines we're rcally talking about coming into that facility, But evcn beyond the bus routes that we're talking about, what seems to distinguish a bus transfer facility [rom simply having a bus stop where people can transfer ti-om one bus to another, which apparcntly is the case at CAT stops in the county, there was the kiss and ride, And so far I've not heard anybody talk about the additional trips in and out of that facility that the county transportation authority expects from that kiss and ride capability, In one respect it looked rcally nice that all this extra traffic was being concentrated in a very small part of Radio Road, down in an area where there was already commercial activity taking place. But Sherwood happens to be right at that point. And I think many of my fellow neighbors would be extremely concerned about not so much the additional bus traffic, because clearly the bus drivers have safety records that get evaluated and are trained to deal with traffic congestion, But now we're talking about the potential fix many, many more private automobiles going in and out of that facility, And I haven't heard anyone ti-om either the presenters earlier or the Commission ask what kind of capability we're really talking about, what kind of traffic that we're talking about ti-om that additional function at that facility, The suggestion that the presence of a transfer point there would actually reduce local traffic on Radio Road struck me as kind of strange, unless you all are talking about reducing or eliminating any of the bus stops that are already present on Radio Road, As long as those are in place, I can't see somebody walking from the dcvelopments down near Santa Barbara all the way back to the transfer point at Davis Boulevard in order to take a bus into town, So the suggestion that traffic will somehow be reduced by that struck me as rather odd, But going beyond the traffic load and those kinds of vehicular safety issues, I think many of us are concerned about the wait time between buses and the activities and security that will actually take place on the property, We didn't hear anything yet today, And unfortunately I was out of town when the earlier neighborhood meetings were held, Not as a seasonal resident, but simply on a trip, We heard about vending machines, Are those going to be available 24 hours a day or are those going to be closed up when there's no bus traffic through there? What are the bus hours? How will that facility be controlled when the staff who are supposed to provide supervision -- although 1 would have thought they were doing their jobs, not looking out the windows at the bus platforms -- how is that supervision going to occur outside of the business hours of the operations center? Thosc are the kinds of questions I hope you will continue to ask. And I again thank you very much (or the opportunity to speak today, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Next speaker, Ray. MR BELLOWS: Marilyn Ormson. MS,ORMSON: I don't need to speak now, thank you. my points have becn addressed, Page 61 .-.- '-'~____'__"e'~_'_~,___,,_'.~_"'-'_''-_'_'.' ".... ,.".e~~""_"~_""_""~",,,",~,'_"_..,__~'.."n~, ..,..., ",-"-".-'-,,.", _. , __ 161 I ~~ January 7, 2010 MR. BELLOWS: Ken Ormson, MR. ORMSON: I say the same. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there anybody here from the public that would like to speak who hasn't been called? Yes sir. Come on up and -- have you been sworn') When you get up here, I need to ask if you've been sworn !fl. MR. MOSER: My name is Scott Moser. And I thought I was sworn in, I thought I gave you an affidavit THE COURT REPORTER: Would you spell your name, please, MR. MOSER: Moser. M-O-S-E-R. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav. sir. thank vou ~ - MR, MOSER: I'm here actually representing Rhonda Borden to read a portion of an editorial that appeared in today's Naples Daily News, Rhonda is president ofthc Sherwood III Condominium Association, She's a paralegal at the firm of Robbins, Caplan, Miller and Ciresi, And I encourage the Commission to read the editorial in its entircty, The early portions of Rhonda's editorial is a sarcastic and clever rcsponse to a December 8th editorial in the Naples Daily News, It compared the Morandi Dealership alkla bus terminal alkJa transfer station to other projects and many of its aftermaths, I would like to read into the record portions of this editorial that raise questions rcgarding thcse decisions made during the progrcssion of this project This is Rhonda in her article: The argument that the residents who are affccted by the bus hub are trying to present is that the bus hub is in a residential area. This area has been zoned in accordance with the Land Development Code of Collier County. The present zoning will not allow it to become a passenger transfer facility, Therefore, the only way to circumvent the rezoning is to petition for a conditional use from the county to allow it to become a true bona fide bus hub under the category of essential services such as a school, a fire station. or police station, While the public transportation is an asset. important to municipalities, to compare it to the requisites of education, public safety and the public welfare is a stretch, The Naples Daily News reported it was unsuccessful in finding a transit system without centralized transfcr positions, No one questions that The real questions that need to be answered are: Is this located within 500 yards of residential dwellings'! Are the surrounding communities impacted by a potential 200 buses pcr day traveling to and from the hub? Are property values affected by the incrcase in traHic, noise. diesel fumes and industry near their homes? Is one of the access roads adjacent to the facility a state road with only two lanes of traffic not slated fix expansion any time soon? Did the county -- excuse me. was the purchase ofthc property at this location approved because it was not intended to be a transfer passenger facility') Did the county flip-flop aftcr this propcrty was purchased and say it was always intended to be a transfer station') Residents fear the exact things the Land Development Code in Collier County was written to prevent: Poor zoning and poor planning, Residents want to preservc their quality oflifc and property values, Zoning is the only mechanism in placc to protect property values and prescrve quality of life issues. Residents ask the County Commission and Planning Commission to be true to the original zoning of the Morandi dealership, Do not circumvent the original zoning by using tenlls like conditional use or essential services, Those are the essential elements of Rhonda's remarks, Some thoughts of my own, Earlier during this morning's meeting. one of the board members used a phrase, if it looks like a duck, it's a duck, Another member chastised a petitioner about the noncompliancc with contractual obligations rcgarding a tower, and voted no against the petitioner's request because ofthis flip-flop, The testimony of and the presentation by the representation of Wilbur Smith and Associatcs was full of statistics that are quite divergent from other opinions. I hope the Commission performs its due diligence to be sure that the 10 additional buses entering or leaving Radio Road do not multiply by 10 or 20 in 10 ycars. With all due rcspect to the Commission members, judging the history of the proposed bus hub. there are many varied opinions and many varied aspects of information surrounding it. The bus hub is your duck, It is not the duck being portrayed. Thank you for your courtesy, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank vou, Does anybody elsc wish to speak') Page 6 0 16 I 1 f;~ Januarv 7, 2010 . Yes, ma'am, please come on up and identify yourself And were you sworn? You'll have to answer that question when you get up here, if you don't mind, MS, MOL YN: And I also gave a paper. MR, BELLOWS: They were on the wrong public hearing, MS, MOL YN: Yes. I was sworn in, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, MS, MOL YN: My name is Karen Molyn, M-O-L-Y-N, I'm a resident at Sapphire Lakes on Radio Road, I'm really impressed with your task and your job that you have here with all your ALF's and your TSl's and your PUOs, Well, I'm from E-N-A-C-T-S, And I'm going to present something for a gentleman named Bill Kearney who went with me to a meeting two and a half years ago, And the Morandi dealership had already been purchased and they were now trying to explain to us why it should become a transfer site. They said the dealership was purchased without any opposition. Well, you can't oppose sometlling that you don't know about So this has been a concern of Bill's for a long time, And he's met with the transportation stall' and Nonnan Feder and his staff So I'd like to read his comments, And I apologize if I'm being redundant with some things, He says, I have been involved with ENACTS since the beginning of our opposition, well over two years ago, We have attended community meetings called by our local commissioners, have met with all commissioners on an individual basis, and have met with Mr. Feder and his staff past and present on a regular basis, All of these meetings that have been held over the past two years were for one purpose: That being to express our strong opposition to placing a bus transfer site at the op center on Radio Road and to share our reasons for this and to offer viable alternatives to this placement. We have tried to maintain an environment that was cooperative and cordial during these sessions, and 1 believe that was achieved, Unfortunately it is now very evidcnt to us that all we have shared and all that we have suggested has fallen on deaf ears as far as the county is conccrned, The county has given us very little if any seriousness to our reasons for opposition and to our suggestions for alternatives, As we look back, it surely appears that the county was merely going through the motions to justiry the time and service to the community members it scrves and that the decision had already been made that a bus transfer site would be placed at the out center. In other words, it was a done deal. As a reminder of some of our concerns and inlolTIlation, you've all spoken about that today, including traffic and congestion, the more buses now that I'm leaming we'rc talking about, parking. When I drive by there now, that parking lot looks three-quarters full. What's it going to be like when we have more people dropping off or parking their car? Noise impact on residents you've discussed, Safety for pedestrians and our most prized possession, our children, And Sherwood is right there, And I watch those children, I'm a former teacher, I watch those children wait for that bus. I watch for the children wait for their bus at Sapphire Lakes, And we also are going to have increased residential construction in the area, I'm not talking commercial; residential construction in the area, More people, more vehicles, more traffic, more safety concerns, et cetera, Now, ENACTS has conducted surveys of at least nine other counties, and you've heard about that, the size of greater Naples, and found out that those surveyed, less than three percent of the total number of transfer sites were located in residential areas. And we consider ourself a residential area, I drive down Radio Road, llook at the bowling alley, 1 can't see it It has a nice long road that goes back and it's very well landscaped, I look at the CAT center, what is it 1,000 feet from the curb? And they're going to have all those buses coming in? Now, 97 percent were located in commercial areas for the convenience of the passengers, We do have some degree of hope, And that is to do all we can to gain the support of the County Planning Commission today and the County Commissioners in March when the final decisions will be made, You have our petitions, We presented them to the Commissioners, and we're continuing to get petitions so that we can show -- we have a few people here today, but there are many more who feel the same way that we do. We will continue to educate the mcmbers of our community who will be most affected by this decision and show all in the county that we truly mean business. People say we've been too nice, it is now time to deliver a very Page 63 '"._ '_'"_,'''_''_'__._.''__a_.'___..,.~. _._., ,_"',.w ......._".. __ , ~ -"-~~'~'"--"-~.'.-'..--'~.--~.~-"- --.~'" 16Jarv 7.11~~ ~ strong message, that our opposition has the support of all of our citizens most effective, Please be awarc that there is a better place for this transfer site, It is time for the county to step forward and look at these viable alternatives rather than to keep giving reasons why it can't be done. There is a better choice, If the county really makes decisions based on providing the passengers convenience at thcir transfer sites, then how can the op center be .instilled as a viable location? It just doesn't makc sense, Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Is therc anybody else that wishes to speak'> (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Now, is there any -- would the applicant like any time for rebuttal? MS, HORNE: Yes. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Please try to limit yourself to about 10 minutes, okay? MS, HORNE: Yes, sir. 1 think I'm going to start with the USF study, iryou don't mind, You may have noted that when the representative discusscd -- I'm sorry, I'm -- Mr. Petorelli, presented the recommendations from the USF study, you'll noticc there wcre a number of parallels between the presentation that I made on the guidance related to it. It's two ends orthe same transportation system. The passengers nee" to get Irom where they live to where they either work or other destinations thc.y want to go through throughout their active day. All ofthc presentations that we'vc heard about bus stop locations that focus on Wal-Mart and other commercial uses arc the destinations, But transit trips begin. palticularly in Collier County as I indicated, based on the surveys that were done of~/our passengers. begin at home and they are walk trips. That is the approach. In tact, the Department of Transportation's tool that they' require all transit s:ystems in Florida to use to estimate transit ridership is called a transit boardings estimation tool. The rea ",on that's imp0l1ant is boardings are close to where people livc, And so that's point number one I'd like to rebut, that this is a residential area, I'm just going to restate what I said earlier, this is a mixed use area, It is not exclusively residential. It is within the density band, I presented more on that earlier, so I don't want to belabor that point. In terms of the process, wc madc this application based on the zoning lettcr that indicated the process that we should follow, and we have done that. Wc have mct with the community to describe the form of development and hear if there are ways that we could make it more acceptablc. Let's see, Specifically one orthe larger points relates to 700 buses, I disagree with that number. I do believe we prcsented that. I do -- also there was -- the statement that it was confusing when we start talking about routes versus trips. That is true; that's why I brought tratIic experts with me hcre today, There are threc routes: 3,A, 3.8. livc and six which go by this site alrcady, and I illustrated that I think clearly, So that is the rcquest is those routes, And we grcw the lilture routes by anticipating what would happen if we improved service by reducing the amount of time that a person waits at a stop for the next bus, And that's how we anticipated future growth at this stop location, The noise and fumes is another comment that was brought up, Again, if you look at the number of buses that leave at the beginning of the day and return at the end of the day, the hourly circulation that would happen on this site is much lower than that We're talking in the future five buses that would exit the site, And that's the noise and fumes that are related to that I also vvant to remind you that as \ve move tOr\vard, this system is looking to become more energy efficient and have vehicles that make less noisc and produce less exhaust In tenllS of pall and ride, when we -- the reason that the traffic impact study -- and I will allow one of our experts to interrupt me if I get this wrong -- is when you look at trips that are kiss and ride trips, that you're dropping olfyour spouse, hypothetically, or you're dropping olf your son or daughter at a passenger transter facility, those are calculated as pass-by trips or divcrted trips. In other words. you're already driving by there, you're not going out of your way to go to this location. And they arc not counted separately'. They're considered background traffic. Did I get that right? MS. RIEDEL Right Page 64 16 I 1 January 7, 2010 MS, HORNE: Thank you, The state road is slated for improvements, You'll see in the packet that I gave -- that we gave you with the application that part of our analysis was to look at the improvements that are proposed along Davis Boulevard, Let me see, I do not believe this is poor zoning or poor planning specifically. I think that's one of the areas where I'm uniquely qualified to testifY, As I said, I am a land use and transportation planner. That is not very common. What we look for in the future is to make investments in a systematic way in a community that each investment reinforces the other. The way that we plan land reinforces the way that we plan transportation and back and forth, And that is the way that it should happen, And in my opinion, based on your comprehensive plan, we focus that investment in the urbanized area and would continue to do so, The last thing that I will mention relates to the Wal-Mart, This is something we hear a lot As I said earlier in my presentation, we advise our clients against locating on private property because for any reason, It could be a whim, But it's generally the highest and best use, A propcrty owner can change their mind about allowing you to circulate on that As a case in point, I am planning a transit project in Jacksonville, Florida right now that currently has one bus route, just like the Wal-Mart on Collier Boulevard. Has one bus route that comes into the site, Wal-Mart is happy with that, because it's about 19 to 25 passengers a day, And it's one vehicle that circulates through about every hour, similar to what we're looking at here, We are planning to improve their transit system and provide what's called bus rapid transit It's a lot like an express bus, It comes through every 10 to 15 minutes, When we talked to Wal-Mart on that case. they said in fact they don't want us to come through their property anymore because it creates too many connicts, One bus circulating through their parking lot not so bad; multiple buses circulating through their parking lot is not good, And if I could make the comparison, the business case, if you will, for any retailer, whether it's Wal-Mart or somebody else, if you're talking about 19 to 25 passengers a day, and the e-mail that they referenced earlier from Diane Flagg estimated that Wal-Mart would have to make improvements in the range of$30,000 to accommodate the one bus route, And that just doesn't make good business sense, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray, belilre-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yes. I have a question, MS, HORNE: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: There are two conditions, One is kiss and ride, the other one is park and ride, Park and ride has been referenced in your document I don't agree with you completely on your kiss and ride thesis, People do in fact, if it becomes the attractant to go to a bus depot, they're going to drive there on purpose, But it may be moot because it may not be a lot But I do want to qualifY further with the park your car all day and ride transit That was a very relevant question that was raised and I don't think we had any testimony regarding what numbers were projected, It's a key element in a major transfer facility, but we did not hear any projection of numbers, whether in the near tern] or in a horizon three to five years out Have you got any information on that? MS, HORNE: I do not have an exact calculation on that I do have some inferences that we can make, But-- MR, FEDER: I'll give you an easy answer. We're not planning on having park and ride at this facility, At the major that you saw there where we do have ability on campus with a parking garage and the like, we will be utilizing that Although we've been struggling mightily to try and get park and ride with van pools, bus, car pools, I haven't seen a lot of that in the nature of this county, But nonetheless, the intent is not to have park and ride at the CA.T, depot but rather at the government center COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So I should -- MR. FEDER: -- major transfer. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I should strike a line through that right here? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, the secondary transfer facility is what this, The secondary transfer facility doesn't have park and ride, it has drop-off passengers, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm looking at major transfer facilitics, Page 65 _. -.-- ,--.... --"--">'~""'-~_"'~'_-~'.'~-~~';"-=-."_-,.,_._..~ , 16 I 1 &~ January 7. 2010 MR. FEDER: And again -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right, but this-- MR, FEDER: -- this is the seeondaly. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: This is the seeondarv, . MR, FEDER: The non-primary -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you I,)r cOITecting that MR, FEDER: -- now defined as seeondarv, Correct . COMMISSIONER MlJRRA Y: All right, I got that messed up with the major, minor. MR, FEDER: ['II be extremely brief: but I'd appreciate the board's -- Commission's indulgence, Norman Feder, for the record. Transportation Administrator. What was noted, and I'll just follow up and I'll try not to repcat One facility, no, we're not looking at only one transfer facility. \\/e're looking at one major, one secondary, and \ve have some other transfer activities within the county already today, And going to Mr. Murray's comments. which I think were pretty well to point, what has been relayed mostly on this issue ofWal-Mart-- and we're utilizing K-Mart, Wal-Mart and others today where we ean -- are basically a destination where we have a route that stops there, people get ofL go to that destination, later another bus comes, they get back on and they go on their way. They are not structured, And that's the real critical paI11,)r transter activities, whether they be a major or a secondary. Even on a secondary', which we're talking ahout here, )'OU'VC got more than one bus coming in. And from safety and operations, YOll don't conflict \vith parking lot and people moving, you've got to have safe operations. That's \\illv the 53\\tooth. And it becomes more constraining. . ~ As a matter of fact, even on the single bus application where we tried it at Coastland Center and we had on the property at Coastland Center, and that's the biggest mall we have here. they've asked us. and we now are doing it out on the street. because they found that it conllieted. Will Wal-Mart tell you every single time that they want increased transit opportunities for people to get to their shopping area? Of course they will. But it's morc of a bus stop issue, And then the other thing, because therc wcre live definitive things said by Mr. Moser. One was that within a residential area, I need to point out that the CA.T. facility's both on. basically adjacent to and across from commercial. The routing that YOtl S3\V there was coming niT of Davis and not going past the commercial general area here, And the routes 3.A. 3,13, that route basically Cl1mhined is alrcady traveling on Radio today, The only thing you \\iould be doing is not having it stop at the transfer area on the roadway where itls more dangerous for vehicles and others, Number two, the issue of two and thrce -- "00 buses and then properly done by the tratTic figures and the like, No, And actually, many ofthose trips are already there. we've already had that discussion, And again, what we're dealing with as far as capacity, especially since we waited till the four-Ianing of Radio Road, is minuscule to the impact capabilities or the capacity, State road? Yes, it is being widened, And we had that discussion as well. And then last, was properly intended to bc transfer. And to the discussion of well, they came out and then later told us we're going to do transler, we bought it I,,, both, presented it to the board in purchase for both, but acknowledged based on the determination that transter would require conditional use, And we told the board that we'd go at that and meet with the community, I do want to thank the community. and I do agree with the last speaker that the effort has been cordial, and it's always intended to be that and it will continue to be, We want to be a good neighbor, we've tried with the operation so far. I'm pleased that we haven't had concerns raised with everything we're doing therc now, We're going to try and make sure that stays the way things arc, even if \\ie get this conditional use approved. I thank you tor your time, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Mr. Schiller, then Ms, Caron, Nonn, I think you may want to stay up here, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well. or Michelle's team, You know. one of the questions someone brought up that I brought up too is I'm under the impression that the Page 66 ~~ Jl E> Lanua~.2010 - transfers are going to happen rather quickly, My concern for this may be not the same as thc neighbor. But essentially how long do you think somebody would be waiting for their transfer in this condition? I mean MR, FEDER: Maybe about a half an hour, probably, at most MS, HORNE: It does depend on scheduling, but we would recommend that the scheduling be what we call pulse scheduling so that the vehicles come in at the same time and depart at the same time, If you were to stand at the appropriate time of day here at government center. you would see what is a pulse system wherc the buses comc in, people get off of one bus onto the other. It's between two and six minutes, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So there won't be large groups of people hanging around-- MS, HORNE: For long periods oftimc, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You only have two spots, so it can't be that large, so-- MS, HORNE: We have morc sawtooth spaces than that Four spaces we have, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Where are they then? Becausc I can see two, MS, HORNE: There's two -- let me -- whoop, going the wrong way, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I see two, MS, HORNE: There we go, Arc you going to be able to see the mouse if I move it on here? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ycs, MS, HORNE: Okay, This is one space, this is another space, there's another space here and another space here, Also, regarding thc shelter that was discussed earlier, I believe. and I'll have to look at the original plans back at my office, which is larger than thc one I havc in my binder. I'm sorry I can't read it at this scale, I bclieve it had a note that said we wcre going to put shclters, but I will verify that COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. But there is no sawtooth on the Icft-hand side of that, correct? MS, HORNE: Right, it's a pull up straight and discharge passcngers out the right side of the vehicle, So there's two spaces on one side ofthe sawtooth and thcn the other buses go around and come into the spaces, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I got it thanks, Cherie', arc we doing okay f<lr you'l Another -- Donna, would you mind waiting until we get back from break ') COMMISSIONER CARON: No, I'll wait. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're a little past the time we normally give you a break, so why don't we take and IS-minute break and come back at 2:30 and finish up, (Reccss.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everyone, we're back from our break, Are you all set, Cherie'? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Norm Feder, I think you were up there, And Ms, Caron had a question for you and so -- I think it was for you, Lct's start there. COMMISSIONER CARON: The picturc that's up on the screen right now on the left-hand side, is that an actual picture ofthe site? I know it's in there for the -- MR. FEDER: The left-hand side is a picture of the site, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, So it looks like the site is -- there's a wall against where the apartments would be and landscaping, That looks like that's quite significant. MR, FEDER: That was put in after we took over the site, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. It looks like there's significant landscaping out to Radio, That would be Radio in front there, cOlTec(? MR. FEDER: Correct. COMMISSIONER CARON: So landscaping and buffering around this site is pretty significant. Is it to code or maybe even above -- MR, FEDER: It's actuallv above-- - COMMISSIONER CARON: -- what is rcquired'! Page 67 ". ,~ ,-,- ..." ".,"._~".^-~_ ~"~""'~__""___'.._.._,....",."""._~.,..__,~_...<.,~... 'w'>>...,_" ,",,, " ,._._._.,._--_.._~._--". " 16 I 1 ~\ Januarv 7. 20 I 0 . MR. FEDER: -- code, we believe, It's abovc code requirements, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, good, One of the main issues for the community is the fear that while they're dealing with 54 trips a day today, they're concerned that that's going to morph into 200 trips a day. If you go to the hierarchy of the facility types, and we gct back to the secondary transfer facility definition, what we are going to now use as a dcfinition for that. it says that this sitc should bc able to handle between 25 percent and 40 percent of your overall bus routes, Now, while this particular site is going to bc limited to the four cun'ent routes, what does that 25 to 45 percent represent" What can it morph to? MR, FEDER: Before I tell you wrong, I'm going to transfer that over to someone that's worked on that number to begin with, But what I will tell you is first I want to make sure that it's clear. right now you've got three routes utilizing that site; 3,A and 3,B is a single route and then the other two routes, The only thing we looked for on this, because wc went through severc restrictions that weren't because of traftic but we're trying to respond to the community. was only to four routes, So that's the first part I'll tell you, As far as to the other, I'll defer to people that work the numbcrs up. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. thank you, MS, HORNE: I'm sorry to ask you to do this. but I want to respond appropriately, Could you rcpeat the qucstion" COMMISSIONER CARON: Well. in your definition here it says that a secondary transfer facility can handle between )5 and 40 percent ofthe routes. Now, we're limiting the site to only fOUL Where on the spectrum of 25 to 40 does that fall') MS, HORNE: I need to do a count I should know that from memory. but I'm atraid I've been awake a little too long this week, COMMISSIONER CARON: That's okay, Ijust want to-- MR FEDER: We're just under 70 routes, You're at about 25 percent at four. COMMISSIONER CARON: At fc)ur" MR FEDER: Ycs, COMMISSIONER CARON: Would that be-- MR FEDER: So that gives you a frame ofrefcrence, And again, if you approve this request with the conditions. then it's no more than four. So I can answer the question what the max is. But in answer to your percentage question, four routes -- or there's three routes today, excuse mc, on 18, so you're not quite 20 percent COMMISSIONER CARON: Okav, , Go ahead, you can continue, MS, HORNE: I think Norman answered the question. COMMISSIONER CARON: All right Well, Ijust -- because the percentage is great But a percentage of what it is today and a percentage of what you expect it to grow to. and that's the number that people fear, And so what I'm trying to do is give the community a sense of what that number will be so that they arc not sitting here thinking that they're going to end up going from 54 bus trips a day to 200 trips a day, if that's not your intent Ifthat is your intent, then state it and so be it MS, HORNE: I'm going to ask Norm to stick by me a scc just to keep me on track, MR, FEDER: The intent was gross trips, MS, HORNE: Right And we were talking in terms of routes in our definition that we have up here, that you would have multiple routes, And I guess when I read the condition, and con'cct me if I'm wrong, I see you've already put a limitation, So then this percentage definition is somewhat moot Am I with you still? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, No. that's good, Because you're right, we were talking about routes here and not buses. But let's get back to the overall -- MR. FEDER: Commissioner. best way I can answer your answer honestly is we didn't come up with thet Page 6R 161 1 M January 7, 2010 number 200, That was presented, COMMISSIONER CARON: I know, MR, FEDER: Okay, We are telling you that the nature of how you would split it overall depends on the size your operations are, okay? Now, realistically what we agreed to, ifthat's what this board endorses, approves, is limiting it to four. So that's the best answer I can give you, Because again, 25 percent of what size system and how many routes and how many buses, Today I'm running 18, But if I'm running 36, it's a different number. COMMISSIONER CARON: But the community here is protccted because you've limited it to four, and we're also limited by the -- MR FEDER: The 10 peak, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: The 10, yeah. MR, FEDER: And again, we did that not because we felt the systcm couldn't handle it, but to respond to the community. COMMISSIONER CARON: Understood, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other questions? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I believe you're done with your rebuttal. And with that, then we will close the public hearing and we can celtainly have discussion if the Planning Commission feels before a motion's made. Or if someone feels like thcy want to make a motion, then we're up for that too, It's the time we're at right now. Mr. Midney? COMMISSIONER MlDNEY: I'd like to move that we approve this petition, subject to staff recommendations. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'll second that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I guess discussion, And Mr. Midney, there's quite a few things that went on here today that we probably need to talk about in regards to conditions. The staff conditions were submitted by us in our original packet, but the applicant has submitted some alternatives, The stafJdoesn't have problems with the altematives, but even the alternatives have problems, And through our discussion, for example, numbers one through six and number two, it was redundant, so the additional language there was suggested to be dropped, it wasn't needed, Number four, where it references non-primary it was supposed to now reference secondary, And where it references main, it was supposed to reference major transfcr facility, And at the same time I think it would be appropriate on number four to add the criteria that you see on the slide that was just in front of us for a secondary transfer site, since this is what it's been committed to be, And that would keep the definition then consistent with the CU, And number five there were some changes on that that staff accepted, they're just clarifications, There was anothcr -- Norm had said that the use of Davis -- the Davis entry was to the extent the FOOT designs would allow the necessary turning movements. I believe that was something that would be acceptable to the transportation department, but it's contingent upon the FOOT design of that final six-lane configuration, Is that fair to say, Norm? MR. FEDER: Make sure that ]'m very, very clear here, I was asked by Commissioner Caron whether or not we could utilize that. My orientation was yes, obviously wc wouldn't look at that right now because it's going to be under construction, But also even in the futurc. unless opcrations change with what we presented to you, the idea is to utilize the signalized intersection, possibly using some right turns out on Davis ovcr time. But predominantly to keep it as is proposed to you to utilize the intersection with the sigllal at Radio and Davis, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So do you have any concerns with the stipulation that says you'll use the Davis entry to the extent the DOT designs and allow you the necessary turning movements? MR. FEDER: And operational -- DOT designs and operational safety allows or warrants, ifthat's what you're Page 69 d_."~~._._"..".~_. &~_~'''__'__'_'''''.'_'."_''__'_'_'_'__ __. 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 requesting. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think it necds to be in there. because just the fact you would even use it for 50 percent, and that's the right in/right outs. which are rather safe turning movements under most conditions, would save 50 percent of the additional traffic -- MR, FEDER: For two of the -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: --that is on that one little segmcnt to the east of Radio Road, MR, FEDER: Yeah, for two of the threc routes, And again -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right MR, FEDER: -- right now if you have the signal moving and opening. you're a lot safer under signalized, So I'd like to note that obviously we're going to work for that improvement It's an option. but we'rc still emphasizing use of the signal. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anyway. those are a couple of the conditions that wc talked about Me. Midney is nodding his head, he has no problem with them, Mr. Murray has no problem, Is there anv other -- - COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Just a question, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. SehilTer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: In number I()ur. what is the reason for the second sentence? I mean. wouldn't the first sentcnce be enough') I mean. it's -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, I don't-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- stating that in the future if you ever -- I mean, it will end up being semantics, I think let's just make it clear with the first sentence, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if we leave the first sentence in, then the problem becomes if the county changes its main transfer station -- oh_ no, this say's any designation of this site as Collier County's main transfer station is prohibited. Why wouldn't we \vant to sa)i that? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah. you need to say that. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ijust don't think it's necessary, but okay, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean, it doesn't hurt. And we're going to define the secondary station as we had in our handout. Page 15, Is there any other comments from the Planning Commission? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I will be supporting the motion f(lr the following reasons: This was referenced as an essential service, A question came up that it's not like a school or a fire station, Well, it isn't. But essential services can be governmental facilities, And that's exactly what this is. The current facility is a C-4 use. which is a high intensity commercial use, There's -- I don't see though the testimony of the public where a car dealership is any better than a transfer station in regards to the uses being put forth here today and the testimony from the stafT and the applicant that provided that there are actually less trips on the road, I didn't -- I heard a lot of comment from the citizens that they don't want it here, And that's fine, we understand that. But a zoning basis is not simply we don't want it here, You found other places where you'd like to see it I can tell you right now, I'd like to see Nick's road system going a lot of other placcs than my backyard, but that's unfortunately sometimes where it ends up. So without providing lack of compatibility reasons. it's rcal hard to find a zoning reason why this is such a bad place, There's going to be less traffic. The additional parts of not in the middle of a residential area, as I heard testified to, it's clearly not in the middle of a residential arca, It's surrounded on two or three sides by commercial. So for all those reasons. and for the lack of any signilicant detriments that I could hear, I'm going to be voting in Javor of the motion, Anybody else havc any comments bef()re I call for the vote') (No response,) CI.IAJRMAN STRAIN: All those ill favor. signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye. Paoe 70 b COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave, o CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carrics 7-0, Thank you, (At which time, Commissioner Wolfley exited the boardroom,) Item #IOE PETITION: RZ-PL2009-469, EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT NO, 26 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, The next item up, which I know some people havc waited patiently for, members of the fire department Of course there's been no fires, so I guess you're lucky today, Petition RZ-PL2009-469, East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District No, 26 tor a new station -- or a new site on East Tamiami Trail. All those wishing to participatc in this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly swom,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are thcre any disclosures on the part of Planning Commission? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I had a discussion with Mr. Duane, and at the time I didn't have a lot of information that I had to discuss with him, but I think he knows that I let staffknow and the planner know that I had a problem with the way the references were to the conceptual site plan, because that's definitely in conflict with the release of not having an EIS, So I think we're going to -- hopefully you've got a new plan to give us today, With that, it's all yours, MR. DUANE: For the record, Robert Duane, representing the East Naples Fire ~istrict I've been advised that the plan I am sharing with you is really an access management plan, We were initiating the permitting process for this fire station, which is located on East Tamiami Trail depicted on the aerial photo here at the intersection of Lake Park Boulevard, The zoning ofthe property is C-3, an agriculture, We're going to the P district We have a recommendation of staff approval. The EIS waiver was granted for several reasons, one of which Ijust mentioned to you, We were initiating the permitting process at that point and wanted to get a little further into it Secondly, your comprehensive plan is changed in the recent past where sites of this size are no longer required to have an EIS, but your land development code is catching up in this cycle to codifY that change, So it may very well be when we do come in for site plan approval that an EIS may not bc required if the code does not change, and obviously we will be preparing an EIS at that time, And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Arc there qucstions from the Planning Commission? (No response.) COMMISSIONER CARON: You have to go with your-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I am, Bob, if you were told about my concern, it could have been simply rectified by changing the plan that you have up there and passing a new one out today that took the words conceptual site plan off it and left access management plan, Why wouldn't you have done that? MR. DUANE: I had been -- only was advised five minutes ago by Mr. Bellows that he was calling the plan an access management plan and not a conceptual site plan, so I did not havc the benefit of having that information Page 7 I "M.'____ ..._"._..._,._....___~ no..'_' __ "'" --, - - .---.... -- , '.. ~"" '~.._----=_..__..,..._,---"..- .,'--~-"" ',," , 161 1 ~~ January 7, 20 I 0 before I came to thc podium today. MR, BELLOWS: I couldn't get ahold of him earlier to ask him to bring onc, But I thought we could get that put on as a consent when it comes hack. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So there's not going to be an objection to changing the language on the plan that you produced? MR, DUANE: Not at all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, And Ray. do you know why stafTwould have rcferred to it as a conceptual site plan. knowing that if they did it would have required an EIS? MR, BELLOWS: I'm not sure what the planner was thinking when they werc dealing with Mr. Duane on this, But in my opinion they should have been following our past examples where we've had straight zoning with a map of development area or access area, That is what we're calling these maps or additional documents attached to standard rezone ordinances, The code doesn't require these types of development maps to be provided, but it is useful for planning purposes. And we are going to be looking at the code requirements lor standard rezonings to require such maps of development arcas or access areas. There is a concern with environmental staff that sometimes these maps might sho\v, depict preservation areas, such as the one used in this case. And the concern is that somehow they're going to be -- county will be approving some kind of a preserve area when it's not really been vetted through the EAC, And that's what we want to avoid by calling it a map of development area. And I apologize for Ms, Zone not catching that earlier. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh. okay. The rcference to the fact that an EIS isn't required and that the LDC is going to be changcd, do you know specifically what the language is for the LOC change'! MR, BELLOWS: Sav that again') ~ L CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Therc's a referencc that this site would no longer have been required for an EIS because of its size. Do you have -- arc you familiar-- MR. BELLOWS: Well, it's undcr 10 acres, so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So the way the change is coming down-- MR, BELLOWS: We have environmental staff to explain that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- anything under 10 acres is not requircd for; is that what you're telling us? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner') Nick Casalanguida, lor the record, There's an LOC cycle amendment coming I()\'\vard from the planning staff to document that MR. KLA TZKOW: If the comp, plan's bceu changed so it no longer requires it, that's the end of it I mean, that trumps the LDe. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you, MS, MASON: Excuse me, For the rccord, mavbe I could c1arifv a little bit . . . The Growth Management Plan change took away the arbitrary acrcage requirements that are currently in there, But it just says that they will develop criteria. It isn't necessarily saying that an acreage would kick it in or not And it did just -- the first hearing of the EIS requirement wcnt before the EAC -- I'm sorry, I forgot to say my name for the record. Susan Mason with Environmental Services section. It did go to the EAC just yesterday, and there werc some concems, and they're going to be talking about it a little bit more, But it will certainly be coming beforc your board, It's gone before many stakeholders' meetings. And who knows what the final outcome will be. But it mayor may not -- f(Jr this site mayor may not require an EIS, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you don't know yet MS, MASON: I don't know vet. CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Okay. Thank you, Now. are there any other questions of the applicant" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How about statfreport'? Is that you, Ray'? MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh. hoy, MR. BELLOWS: For the record. Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager. I'm tilling in for Melissa Zone on this Page 72 161 Jb January 7, 2010 item. Mr. Duane did provide a good overview of the project It is a rezone to the public use zoning district, which includes a safety service facility, such as fire stations, The project is consistent with the comprehensive plan, All reviewing staff has recommended approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions, It looks to be a straight forward rezone, We have conditions of approval and we're subject to the change to the conceptual -- not conceptual plan, the map of development and access to make that reflected on the revised resolution when it's brought back to you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ray, number two, what exactly does that mean? It states, the applicant has agreed to go before the environmental advisory commission with the Environmental Impact Statement prior to site plan approval. Does that mean that the final approval of this is based on the EAC? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Good question, Brad, MR, BELLOWS: That is reflective of the current requirements that -- at the time of site development plan review is the way I would have written it. This project would be required to submit an Environmental Impact Statement and go to the EAC At the time of site development plan review, not prior to, I'll have Susan Mason clarify the last part, MS, MASON: Excuse me again, For the record, Ijust wanted to clarify that it would be whatever requirements were in effect at the time they come in for SDP. It may be something like provide necessary environmental information to do the evaluation or it could be an EIS or it could be an EAC hearing, I just don't know. But if we could make it reference whatever is in effect at the time of SDP, that would be appreciated, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the EAC would be reviewing, It's not the rezone request today, That would be done through this process, They were simply reviewing the SOP that would follow the rezone process, MS, MASON: They would be required to review -- at this point they would have to review and approve the EIS, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If one's required, MS, MASON: If one's required, But ifthere's no EIS requirement or review by the EAC, it wouldjust be an administrative staff review, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I have a question. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: If the language had -- ifthe language had not yet been determined and you used a phrase to describe where you wanted to go with it or where it was going to go, and they're ready to go and it's site development plan, are they going to get held up because we don't have the LOC qualified? Me. Klatzkow indicated, I thought with definition, that if the GMP changed it and then you came in and you said well, it's not quite that, so now we're going to go into Never Never Land with this thing and it could sit there for God knows how long. MS, MASON: Well, I -- you know, they could come in and do a filrJnal request for like an interpretation from the appropriate staff member of how the LOC should be applied right how. My understanding of reading the language that's in the Growth Management Plan, it just opens it up to not always require it for certain sites, Right now it says for coastal high hazard area. Or previously the GMP said for coastal high hazard area anything 2,5 acres or greater had to have an EIS, unless it met some exemptions, And for everywhere else it was 10 acres or more, But now the GMP says that stalf -- or the LOC shall be amended to require an EIS or environmental information as necessary, And I'm paraphrasing what it says. But, I mean, it's __ COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, I recognize that And maybe we should be looking for the GMP language to see in fact what we are talking about. Because I find that to be an impossible situation, We will have said what we've said and it could hang out there for months and God knows how long, and then it could be going around and around, MS, MASON: I'll go look up the GMP section and find the exact words, But what I would say, how I would apply the code would -- currently if they came in today, they would be required to do an EIS and get that approved prior to the SOl' approval; however, if the LOC is amended, to allow Page 7J ..~..._"~-".~_. ._--_.~--~ '~_'~~~_~""_"",~~_",,,,,,,,,,,_~,,_,,,'_'~...-..... m~....__,.. ._._..____ ,..,.__u.~_......__....____.._ ____... . 16 .1uarv bo~~ them to be exempted from that Because thc LOC is very specitic with what's required and what's not And it's still consistent with the Growth Management Plan, it's just more spccific than the Growth Management Plan, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Except -- and I appreciate that's what the intent is, but my understanding of this convcrsation is that it's not yet a known what's going to bc said. and B, we don't know whether that will put something into even a worse situation. because you're saying there is a speculation of it could be several possibilities, MS, MASON: Right. It hasn't gone through any -- except tor the EAC, they haven't even finalized -- at least I don't recall that they finalized a vote on it ycsterday, And after it gocs through your board and then into the Board of County Commissioncrs, they'll have thc final say on who has to do an EIS and who doesn't, or if an EIS is even still cxisting, I mean, thcre's all kind of -- it could go Irom what exists today to anything that's consistent with the Grov.1h Managcment Plan, What I'm just trying to clarify is the LDC today. thc requirement for whcn an EIS is required and when it's not it is still consistent with the current languagc in the GMP, The Growth Management Plan was amended to allow some changes to the current Land Development Code. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: The intcnt heing to make something easier, not more difficult, correct'? MS, MASON: Well. I think thc intent was not necessarily to make it easier, but to only require the process when there's value to it. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, would you help us out here, MR, BELLOWS: Yeah. I think I have the solution, Because the LDC will apply no matter what's in cffect now or what's going to be in effect at the time the amendment is approved, I don't -- therefore, I don't see the purposc of having two in therc at all, One way or the other the LOC has language that's going to apply. whether it's the currcnt language or the amended language. So Ijust recommend taking two out altogether. It's kind of redundant anyways, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Docs that get vou QUVS-- <.-. ~ '-. COMMISSIONER SCIIIETER: Yeah COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Yeah, CIIAIRMAN STRA IN: -- Brad and Bob. where vou want to be? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm happy. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I thought Ray would have a solution, So Iligured ifhe could just express it we would be ahead of the game, Okay, are there any othcr questions of staff' COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: No. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nonc? I can see thcre's not a lot of public speakers, MR, BELLOWS: No spcakers. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you want to rebut anything. Bob. that thc public didn't say? MR. DUANE: No. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, with that we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER I'll make a motion CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, sir COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I would move that we forward with a recommendation of approval RZ-PL2009-469, with the removal of condition numbcr two and the changing on Exhibit C. the title, from conceptual site plan to access site plan, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made and seconded, Is there any discussion? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor. signify by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Ave. " Page 74 161 1 b1 January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER MlDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave, . CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It passes. 6-0. COMMISSIONER CARON: Six? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, Me. Wolfley left about an hour ago, And -- or half an hour ago, I can't remember which, and Me. Vigliotti left at noontime, So do we have any -- well, that's it, we're over with, You guys can stop talking now, Item#]] OLD BUSINESS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Old business, We have none, Thank you. Item#]2 PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Public comment" I don't think there's any left Item #]4 ADJOURN CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a motion to adjourn? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Murray. COMMISSIONER CARON: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Ms, Caron, All in favor, signify by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're out of here, Thank you, ***** There being no further business for the good of the County. the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:58 p,m, Page 75 ,..._..__._~- - ""'" , ~ --.. -,,--- COlLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARK STRAIN. Chainnan These minutes approved by the board on _.. _ __ as presented Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc.. by Cherie' R, Nottingham, Page 76 16/ l~ JanllaJ'V 7. 20 I 0 " or as corrected " 1 6 I 1 0t January 7, 2010 TRANSCRIPT OF TilE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida January 7, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a,m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Govemment Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Donna Reed-Caron Karen Homiak (Absent) Tor Koltlat Paul Midney Bob Murray Brad Schiffer Robert Vigliotti David J, Wolfley ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Nick Casalanguida, CDES Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager Thomas Eastman, CC School District, Real Property Director Page I .......~....._..._~.._.-".."'~,-,..,,._...'"~.,"'_ '__^.'__"_"'~_' .-.... ..._.. ,-' .""',.m_w'M', .-._...,_,..._'",.,<..'....A_..m.. "_"_ '~~~"""""""'; ._.,,,_~_...__._..,_ 16 J 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning. everyone, Welcome to the January 7th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission, If you'll all please rise for Pledge of Allegiance, (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if you haven't realized it yet. it's cold out there, And this weekend it's supposed to be colder. So I have to start out by saying thank you very much to the records department for the coffee today, It's going to wann all of us up, So we appreciate it. Roll call by our secretary. please, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Koltlat'1 COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner SchilTer'l COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm here, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Midnev is absent. Commissioner Caron'? COMMISSIONER CARON: I-Iere, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Chainllan Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Vigliotti. myself. is present. Commissioner Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Here, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Commissioner Wolllev'! - COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Here. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: And Commissioner 1I0miak is absent Oh, Commissioner Midney just showed up, And Mr. Eastman is here. for the record, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great. Item #3 ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA CHARIMAN STRAIN: Okay. addenda to the agenda. Are there any changes'? Ray, do you know of any? MR BELLOWS: No continuances that I'm aware of. Item #5 PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. now. our next meeting is on January 21st? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's for the CIE. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's our next regular meeting, but all the regular items have been-- MR. BELLOWS: Yes, the next -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- continued. MR. BELLOWS: -- meeting will be the 21 st, a regular county commission meeting, I have on the calendar that you have an LOC amendment meeting on the 28th. the following Thursday. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right MR, BELLOWS: And let's see -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the 21 st. as i'ar as that goes. though, Ray, the only thing left on that agenda I believe is the CIE. MR, BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And for members oi'the Planning Commission, that's the booklet that was just passed out by David Weeks. Page 2 The other agenda items, and thcre were I,mr of them, had to be continued I believe for advertising or other purposes? MR, BELLOWS: Two for other purposes, one for advertising, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So I don't know how long of a day that will be until we read the document that was passed out today, But that's the only thing on the agenda, Does anybody know if they're not going to make it to the meeting on the 21 st? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll be hcre, But I have a question about thc LOC meeting, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Which when arc we going to get those things? Is there a lot of them or is thcre a few of them? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: We did gct them, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We already got them, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: We did? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Yeah, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ycah, We didn't want you to have them because you ask too many questions, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Let me chcck to makc sure I have them, MR, BELLOWS: Yeah, If you don't, wc'lI get some to you ASAP, Itcm #4 NEW BUSINESS -- REVISIONS TO THE GMP AMENDMENT HEARING SCHEDULE FOR THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE IMMOKALEE AREA MASTER PLAN PET1TION CP-2008-5 ~- ..- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, new business, Ncw business, I guess that's David -- oh, no, that -- yeah, David, what have you got to say about it? MR WEEKS: For thc record. David Weeks of the Comprehensive Planning OepaI1menL At your last meeting we discussed the Immokalee Master Plan Growth Management Plan amendment petition schedule, And wc have agreed on February the 16th as the hearing date, The only question to resolve is the location, It originally had been planned to be held in Immokalec, but at your last meeting it was discussed to hold it here. and -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It looks like unless there's an objection from any Planning Commission member, we'rc going to hold it here. MR, WEEKS: Sounds good, Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Planning Commission absences, we already discussed that Item #6 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 19,2009 AND DECEMBER 3, 2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Approval of minutes, We havc two sets, Let's start with the first one, Is there a motion to approve or change November] 9th, 2009? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: So moved to approve, CHAIRMAN STRArN: Mr. Vigliotti, Seconded by? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer. A II in favor, signify by saying aye. Page 3 M"'_"."-_.'"_~__'__"""_'__~___~_m~ _~_.".._, _ _"'~' .....n_,"___ l'~uL 7.2J~~ COMMISSJONER SCHIFFER: Ave, ~ COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Ave, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Ave, - COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Next one is Oecembcr 3rd, ?009. a same motion, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: So moved to approve, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron') COMMISSIONER CARON: I have a corrcction on Page 46. At the very top, the second line, the word is respected typed here. and it should be represented. But Mr. Passidomo or whoever represented him, I'm sure we all respect Mr. Passidomo, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I think Cherie' wanted to make sure we did, so that's why she changed the \vord. Okay, so with that correction is there still a motion to approve as eoneeted') COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. therc is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Mr. Vigliotti, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And I will second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Mr. Schiffer. All in favor, signifY by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Item #7 BCC REPORT - RECAPS -: DECEMBER 15, 2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, the BCC recaps" MR. BELLOWS: There is no land use items to present at this timc, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank von, - Item #8 CHAIRMAN'S REPORT CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The chairman's report. Kind of want to make a few statements, There's been a lot of ann olin cements that all of you have seen with changes over at thc community and developmental services. A lot of Page 4 , 16 J 1&~ January 7, 2010 people have left The budget's getting harder and harder to deal with, A lot of lay-ofts had to occur, and there are a lot of people that we have worked closely with for quite some time, and we will sincerely miss those individuals, A couple people have becn moved who were very close to this commission, one being Susan Murray, She is in another department in the county now, We'll miss her expertise and professionalism for sure in resolving the zoning and Land Development Code issues, And especially our friend Joe Schmitt, Joe has been moved out of Developmental Services to the County Manager's office, I want Joc to know I personally and I think the rest of this commission have thought very much of Joe. He did a great job for us, He was always attentive and responsive to our needs and fought for our concerns, and I certainly will miss him. Now, with that said, we have a problem, We now have Nick Casalanguida in charge, COMMISSIONER CARON: Oh, no, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I figured out a solution to the problem, And every now and then you'll hear me say to Nick, we're going to tell Connie, Now, Connie isn't Nick's secretary. isn't his administrative assistant, that's his mom, And I understand she watches the show, So if we have trouble with Nick, we know how to take care of it now, So Connie, I hope you're listening, because you may have a lot of work cut out for yourself So Nick, congratulations, I think, on your new position and I know that as one Planning Commission member, and I think I speak for all of us. we will certainly do our best to work with -- work every way we can to make the transition smooth, MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that does bring up one other point. Some of the cases wc have today and some coming up in the future were worked on by people who are no longer here, and so we're going to have to have a little more tolerance with staff who do stand up today and try to make presentations. Because they may not have been the ones who were involved as deeply in the projcct. And in that regard it also brings on added responsibility for the Planning Commission, because if we were careful before and if we read thoroughly before, we need to read 10 times thoroughly now, Not to find mistakes but to find things that need to be further considered or discussed, Because with a short staff, a lot of stuff's got to move through at the same rate with less people, and there is a chance that things may be missed, We're here to help make sure they don't get missed, And so from now on I think we're going to have even a further marc intense job than we've been doing in the past So with that in mind, we'll move on, Nick, it's good to see you hcre today, MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know it took a promotion, or I guess -- I don't know if you want to call it a promotion or not, but a transfer to a differcnt department -- to get you attend our meetings, So we'll certainly make them entertaining for you, Item #9A PETITION: PUOZ-2007-AR-12294, THERESA COOK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND CDC LAND INVESTMENTS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With that, we'll move on to our consent agenda items, The first one is Petition PUOZ-2007-AR-12294, Theresa Cook. Executive Director of the Collier County Airport Authority and CDC Land Investments, After -- any comments from the Planning Commission on the consent item that's in their package? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: I'd like to-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Midney? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: -- make a motion to approve, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, motion made by Me. Midney-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- to approve the consent item, Page 5 . ~ ,.,.,~_,.".,... .m.'_ _,....N.___ '_""<_,.'_'._""._ ,,-.-,._.' , -., ~". ","<'-"~",,"-,,",,.""',.."-, -'.;,.,......_., .," ...._. ..~...-,.~."."..,~,,_.,_......,,_.,._~,.;_._~."._~~..~..~.-.--.->- 16Juary 7,~0~~ Second by Mr. Murray, Discussionry (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor. signify by saying aye COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Ave, COMMISSIONER VIGLlO ITI: Aye COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ave ~ ' Anybody opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN S fRAIN: Motion carries 8-0, Item #9B PETITION: PUDA-PL2009-78I. CRAIG T. BOUCHARD OF TENNIS REALTY, LLC_ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The next consent item is Petition PUDA-PL2009-78 (sic), Craig T, Bouchard of Tennis Realty, Inc" and it's for the Naples Bath and Tennis. Is there any discussion or motion on that item? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: So moved. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Move to approve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray madc a motion to approve. seconded by Mr. Vigliotti, An\' comment? . (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor. signify by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye, COMMISSIONER MLJRRA Y: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Ave. ~ COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave, ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0, Item #IOA & Item #IOB PETITIONS: V A-PL2009-3 7 AND CU-2008-AR-14085, FLO TV. INC, (DISCUSSED TOGETHER) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, we're going to go into our regular public hearings, And so for the benefit of the public that's either listening or in the audience, we have two continued items: One is called FLO TV, and actually that's two petitions but it's the same basic item. That was continued from September. So that's first on the agenda by policy Page 6 IJtua! 7,2oJ (b~ The second one is Magnolia Pond, That is also continued from December. And that is another by policy. second in 1 ine. I know there's been a lot of discussion about when are we going to hear the CA.T. transfer station site, That will be the first one up on the -- today's agenda after the continued items, So I would expect we're going to spend a good hour or more on the first two items, and then we'll be getting into the CAT right after that at the earliest I will try to make an announcement as we move forward how close we're getting to hear the CA.T. one, as I can best judge it So I know -- if any of you are watching and waiting to come down here, that's the best we can do at this point And with that, I'll ask all-- we have two petitions, Petition V A-PL2009-37, FLO TV, Inc" and Petition CU-2008-AR-14085, FLO TV, Ine, Both will be heard concurrently, be voted on separately, All those wishing to participate in either one ofthose, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there disclosures on the part of the Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, hearing none. start with the presentation, Welcome back to our coast MS, MADISON: Thank you, Happy new year. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, MS, MADISON: Good morning, Planning Commission members, Chairman Strain, members of the county staff and County Attorney's Office, Once again, my name is Kimberly Madison, attorney with Ruden-McClosky, 40 I East Jackson Street, Tampa, Florida. With me is Mr, David Hallowell of Black and Veatch Construction, and Mr. Tony Renda, as well as Jerry Heckerman, both representatives of the property owner, Renda Broadcasting, And we are here on behalf of the conditional use and variance petition submitted on behalf of fLO TV, Incorporated, Before I begin my presentation, and if it pleases the Commission, I would like to submit exhibit books, which are a composite of everything that's been submitted on both applications to date, I think they'll aid in the presentation, And they also have copies of the information that was requested by the Commission at the last meeting and subsequently submitted to the county, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you do, Ijust want to make sure, is everything that you're submitting been submitted to staff so it -- MS, MADISON: Yes, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- has staff's review and most likely then was included in our packages already? MS, MADISON: 111at is my hope, Yes, it was submitted to the staff, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you, Better make one for the -- you've got to make sure our court reporter has one, too, MS. MADISON: I've provided both court reporters, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Do we need to read these right now before your presentation? MS, MADISON: It has everything that's been submitted, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Can you give us two months to read-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I've got to caution members, we have to be on record, so if we're looking for a response from the young lady, we need to get her back at the mic, Did everybody get their book? COMMISSIONER CARON: No, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, We're missing a couple, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Actually, mine was a statement CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ])0 we need-- MS, MADISON: How many more? One more'? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: One more, Well, here, she can have mine, This is all data that's in our package anyway; is that correct'? MS, MADISON: Yes, Page 7 '--""'--'-'-,^.."..-,,- '''''.- - --,,, -"-- '~'~'-"'~~_."""-'. ,''-, _.-,-." - ,.,., "-....,, '," ," -""~-".,~.,~.".,.,,,._., <.-., " _ n'", __' ... ,_ ,.___...,."._".....~ "'. .", _",,, ___._ ,._.._____._~.__'M'._ ..__ "._,_,~._.__...... , 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well. how do we know') I mean-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. we're not considering the book, She's passing it out for the record, We're considering what the staff gave us and what the presentation and the public testimony will be today, The book I believe is more for your positioning, should this ever have to be appealed, you want to have everything on record that you can and that it be as complete as possible so you can use it in further appeals, MS, MADISON: Absolutelv, MR, KLATZKOW: Yeah, and let me just put down for the record. since we're now handing out stuff for the record, if there's anything in here. ma'am. that's not in our packages previously. we're not looking at them here, MS, MADISON: Okav, MR, KLA TZKOW: If you want a continuance so we can review thaI. we're happy to grant you one now, MS, MADISON: I don't need that. I'm very confident that every1hing has been submitted to John-David. who's no longer here. MR KLATZKOW: Okay, Because I'm not looking at this, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I'm not going to, MR KLATZKOW: I mean. this is-- MS, MADISON: I can take them back. MR KLA TZKOW: Yeah. whv don't YOU -- . . MS, MADISON: I'm sorry, MR, KLA TZKOW: Whv don't vou take them back, . . MS, MADISON: Okay, I would like tojust submit it on the -- I do have the right to submit it on the record for-- MR, KLA TZKOW: I'm a quick reader. but I'm not this quick, MS, MADISON: Okay. Not a problem, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: It didn't matter to me whether we had them or not, because we only can read what we read up till today, so-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Except you wouldn't be able to discern that in a field situation. CHAIRMAN STRA1N: Well, they still can suhmit it for the record, so-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm going to keep minc CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know. on second though!. let us have those --no, I'm just kidding, We've had enough. MS, MADISON: They were really more for reference. but if you have all that stuff in front of you, I'll be referencing it today, so please feel free to look at it. We're here before you today to request approval to separate and yet interrelated petitions, At the outset it's important to know that these petitions as stated previously are for to -- to legitimize the continued existence of a tower which currently exists at 5860 Crews Road, Naples, Collier County. Florida, We do not seek to construct a new tower: rather. if both petitions are approved, it will legitimize the continued existence of one that already exists and allow the applicant, FLO TV, to utilize that tower for the purpose of installing an antenna and related equipment. That being said. I'd like to address the first petition, which is for the conditional use, If you will recall, on October 15th, 2009. this commission heard nearly two hours of testimony and evidence at a public hearing for the conditional use petition that was continued to today. We would like to incorporate that hearing into the record, For the purposes of to day's hearing, I will focus my presentation on the specific inquiries that were made by the Planning Commission in relation to this petition at the last hearing, Specifically the Planning Commission requested additional inl;mnation li'om the petitioner, as well as from county staff County staff has since addressed those inquiries directed to it in its supplemental staff report, So if it pleases the Commission, I will narrow my presentation to the inquiries that were raised in direction to the petitioner, the property owner and/or the engineers. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's line. And one of the things that we had asked you to do is clean up who represents who. That 'vvas a question last time. MS. MADISON: Yes. Page 8 161 1 PJ January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And [just want to make sure you put that on record so we're covered. MS, MADISON: Yes, I am here on behalf of the property owner and the applicant CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, MS. MADISON: At the October 15th hearing we were asked to submit at a minimum copies of the most recent inspection report for the tower that is the subject of th is request Copies of that inspection report were submitted to Mr. Moss prior to this hearing, If it pleases the Commission, and they do not have those directly in front of them, I have copies in the exhibit books, which were demonstrative in naturc, The report does certiry that the tower passes inspection, The second request was for clarification of the collapse zone for the towcr. Section 5,05,09, sub G, sub 7, as you're aware, exempts this particular tower from the collapse zone rcquirement Nonetheless, it was the Planning Commission's desire to have an in-depth analysis of the collapse zone for this site, We have provided that analysis, It was provided prior to this hearing date, And if you do not have that immediately available to you, I can provide a copy of that as wclL The next request was made for the copies ofthe most recent filings with the Collier County Mosquito Control ~istrict. The applicant submitted on October 15th, and the staff confirmed at the initial hearing, that the site was compliant with the requirements set forth by Collier County Mosquito Control. But the Planning Commission requested to review the most recent filings, We have since provided copies of those, And if you need to review those, I have them available with me as well. We were requested to provide a copy ofthe redacted FBI lease, That has since been provided, It certifies that the lease is certifiable ror nine -- I believe nine extensions of a one-year term. And we have testimony present today that will certiry that the FBI has in fact been a tenant there for over 20 years, We were also asked to clarify and delineate the distances by which separate adjacent residential and/or housing from the subject site, We have revised the site plan to include that infonnation. That was previously provided and is available to review today, if it pleases the Commission, We ask that you make a final decision on this, being a conditional use application, As such, we stipulate that we do meet all the published criteria in the Land Development Code for issuance of this conditional use permit Additionally, we've worked diligently with county staff members to provide the information that was requested by the Commission at the October hearing, Staff has reviewed this additional inf,mnation and has maintained its recommendation of no objection to the request, which was the initial recommendation in October. We have since re-notieed the hearing and have not received any inquiries from the public, despite that fact The staff report we believe constitutes competent substantial evidence as a matter of law, And -- I'm sorry, before I close, one additional request that was made was that we have two Florida -- not two, but a Florida certilied engineer here to address questions as needed by the Commission, And we do have two engineers here today, Mr. Hallowell and Mr. Heekennan, who can address any additional questions, as necessary, And I will allow them to step up and answer the questions as needed, But to close, I would ask that based on our compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, the staff requirement -- or I'm sorry, the staff recommendation of approval, our compliance with the requests that were made in October as well as the lack of public opposition, we do renew our request for approval of this conditional use petition, and we are available to answer any questions that you may have, CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Okay, I want to thank you for the thorough job you did in attending to every single one of questions, [did -- I have a list from before, and you have responded to each one, That's appreciated, Okay, are there any questions from the Planning Commission, now that we have the remaining information that we didn't have the first time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, stafTreport? MS, GUNDLACH: Good morning, Commissioners, I'm Nancy Gundlach, and I am filling in for John-David Moss today for this petition, And staff is recommending approval of this conditional use and variance as well. And I do have a change to one ofthe conditions of approval for the conditional use. And that is the last Page 9 '-""._".~'."- -- '--'__"_"""<"'''.''~'-''__.'~~''.'~'"''~'".__'_."~,,.,.'~".~..~.-"...,... ""_""'~_."~.,-,,,,-.,,_,,~_,,..,~..._o___~~~_._._~.,_.~"~ ,..._,_.._~. 16 I., 1 ~t January 7. 2010 condition of approval, condition of approval number six, And we arc changing the time period on that And that's the time period that should the government entity cver leave the tower site, they will have six months to find a replacement instead of the stated 60 days, And with that, if you have any questions, i'd be happy to answer them, Yes, COMMISSIONER MlDNEY: [s there any sanction being applied to the applicant for not having tom down the old tower, as they agreed? MS. GUNDLACH: By sanctions, you mean punishments? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Punishment. MS, GUNDLACH: There is a double conditional use fee, And Ray, can you think of any other'? MR, BELLOWS: For the record. Rav Bellows. . < This petition was not brought to thc Code Enforcement Board for further action, and the applicant took the action to submit the conditional use, So thcre is no other-- MR. KLATZKOW: And for the record, since the time of the issuance of that conditional use, we've changed our public policy in the county and we're now looking to have multiple towers on sites, So rather than having single towers throughout the county. the count)' policy is no\-v to put multiple towers on these sites. So rcally from a code cnt,)Ccement standpoint wc'd be enforcing a public policy that's no longer a public policy, That conditional use that would have required them to take it down was under an old public policy, The present pub[ie policy would really be to keep them both up there, COMMISSIONER CARON: But-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Ms, Caron') COMMISSIONER CARON: But they were under the old -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- conditional use-- MR, KLATZKOW: Yes, And there's the-- COMMISSIONER CARON: -- when they decided on their own not to dismantle the tower-- MR. KLATZKOW: They should have dismantled the tower. yes, I agree. COMMISSIONER CARON: -- as they should have, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. SehilTer'.' COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And maybe Ray, you could answer this, because I know Nancy, you're new and it's an unfair question. Ray, you have dctermined that this is an essential service as per 5.05,09? MR, BELLOWS: Yes. Wc ran this question by the zoning director, Susan Istenes, at the time, and it was her opinion that that was the intent, her opinion, that this qualitied as an essential service tower site. COMMISSIONER SCHIFfER: Ilavc you read G.3 ofthat and come to that conclusion yourself? MR. BELLOWS: We got that trom the zoning director, who is the one authorized to make that determination, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So she states. and it's your position, that this is an essential service tower-- MR. BELLOWS: That's corrcct COMMISSIONER SCHifFER: -- as per G.3 of 5,05,()9" MR, BELLOWS: Correct COMMISSIONER SCII[FFER: Okav, < CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any othcr questions of staff) COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I-- CHAiRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray'! COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Yeah, I don't want to belabor this, but -- and I understand, I think, the reason for six months. But if it's deemed to be an essential service tower because there's an antclma on there that's appropriate hecause of governmental involvement, hut if the gO\icmment entity goes away and YOll give them six months and they can't get another entity. they have to take the tower do\vl1; is that correct? Page 10 161 1~ January 7, 2010 MR. BELLOWS: It goes through code enforcement action and that could be one ofthe solutions, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So if-- MR. BELLOWS: Certainly they can't operate it unless it is deemed to be an essential servicc tower, and they have to have some kind of essential service on it COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I understand sometimes that we have to struggle to try to make things fit that don't seemingly lit But a duck is a duck is a duck, And if it's essential services tower becausc we've said so because a governmental antenna can be on it, then I don't see how it can change its status by thc absence temporarily of it But if it can be taken down because it no longer has a govelllmental entity's antenna on it, how then is it an essential services tower" It's a conundrum, MR. BELLOWS: Likc any use that is approved by the county commission, if at some point in the future the use changes and is not operating as (sic) thc manner that it was approved, thcn it's subject to code enforcement action to get compliance or to take whatever remedial action to correct it And in this casc a tower, ifit doesn't have an essential service use, could bc subject to be tom down, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Ray, ifthey have that problem, one of the solutions would be to come back in and seek further public processes to relieve themselves -- MR. BELLOWS: That's a good point CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- of any concerns they have. MR, BELLOWS: That is correct CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron" COMMISSIONER CARON: One of the other issues with fhe conditional usc that they are supposed to be living under today is the height ofthe tower. It was stated that the new towcr would bc 394 feel. And we all know that the tower is actually 452 feet MS, GUNOLACII: Uh-huh, COMMISSIONER CARON: Again, why are we sanctioning -- when pcople make commitments to this county, why are we then going back to sanction and say oh, it's okay that you absolutely did not follow what you were supposed to follow? You made a commitmcnt, it's in writing and you decided not to be bothered to construct something that you wanted to construct, MR BELLOWS: Yeah, if I may, I'd like to try to answer that one, It's -- I don't think the county's condoning actions that are inconsistent with their approval. We are trying to rectify the problem in the limits that the code allows, And the code does allow them to come in and apply for a conditional use to rectify the problem. COMMISSIONER CARON: So just for cverybody else out there, it's okay to say that you're going to do one thing, decide to do something else, and then just come in after the fact and say sorry, guys, now grant me an exemption to -- MR, KLA TZKOW: They do that -- Commissioncr, they do that at their parallel. If they don't get this conditional use, at that point in time there will be code enforcement proceedings. And at that point in time we will move to tear down the tower, okay" So, you know, it's within the public policy of this board to make a recommcndation to the Board of County Commissioners who will then make a public policy as to what consequences are going to flow from, you know, their prior actions. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Ray, were there any public complaints concerning either of these towers? MR, BELLOWS: Not to my knowledge, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The neighbors were notified of to day's meeting? MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you have any complaints, e-mail, telephone call, anybody have any concerns? MR. BELLOWS: Nothing on record, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And again, Nancy, I'm going to do it to Ray, because it isn't fair to do it to you. MS, GUNDLACH: Fine with me. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ray, has anybody in the department with a structural knowledge reviewed Pagc II n.... ""_'__"'__"_ .,~._._. _.,_,_. ,._"~,~, .....,......... ,- .. ,'.,-,- ..."",....." _.',.- ~'~"___"_".,.,~__, _____......,_,'~,. '"~,...~."_".u.,_~.~,,..,.,._;.. 1 6 }lI1uarv f 20 f& ~ the analysis oftlle collapse zone'? The collapse zone is an important part ofa tower. It's supposed to be two and a halftimes the height of the tower, unless it's an essential service tower. Now. I don't agree with that, but I'll bow to your prior com/ersation. But has anybody reviewed that? Especially this engineer's letter in the second to last paragraph says the above isjust an estimate so it essentially neuters. you know, the prior part of it anyway. Has anybody reviewed this to say that these towers are in structural, you know -- MR. BELLOWS: Well, like any structure built in Collier County, it goes through a site development plan review process. And then as building penn its arc issued in construction, their inspections, our engineering staff review those plans and make those detenninations. I think the thing that came up last meeting. as I recall. is the maintenance reports, The code requires these towers to submit these maintenance reports to the county, And one of the things that wasn't clear at the last meeting is who reviews those and how do we track those monitoring reports. And John-David Moss was working with Joe Schmitt to create a process within COES to ensure that those reports are being looked at through the stafl of CDES. COMMISSIONER SCHII'FER: But they haven't been on this site prior. The engineering analysis, unless I read it \vrong, is only -- the rep0l1 is only for one tower, and rm not sure which to\\'cr it is. MR, BELLOWS: Yeah, COMMISSIONER SCIIIFFER: It's in the book. it isn't in our-- MR. BELLOWS: If they're -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- other information. MR, BELLOWS: -- deficient on that. we will follow up with them and -- COMMISSIONER SCIIIFFER: But the conccrn I have is. let me get to it, is the collapse zone thing, Is that __ I know of a tower, an experience where a cable snapped and it fell way out of the cable zone like they're describing it only does, Two towers nested together. one being an old one. if it's in disrepair and it starts to come down, it could take the cables out of the new one, So I'm not really comfortable that this has met the collapse zone, Once again, collapse zone's only a problem if it's not an essential service tower. Which you guys are saying that this is either owned or leased by the government. So -- but -- so nobody has looked at that, nobody has reported to you that these -- you're comfortable with this engineering? MR, BELLOWS: Well, engineering reports have been submitted, I wasn't the planner involved in reviewing all those things. but we can double check that and get back to you, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: What was submitted was one letter stating the towers only fall within the cable outline, MR, BELLOWS: Yeah, And like I said. though. the towers are inspected and they can't get a CO, without passing all the inspections. And then as the years go by there are engineering maintenance inspections, and we're getting copies of them. And I don't know if we have all of them on this one, but if we don't, we will get them, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But you admitted, and we finally got one done in December, that they haven!t been done on these towers. MR, BELLOWS: I'm not sure what the process was, It doesn't (sic) be clear at this point what was being done. But we have a process in place no\\' and -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But nobody in this room is aware-- MR. BELLOWS: -- going onward into the future we\re identified an issue and now we've corrected it. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, So what you're saying is you're going to assure everybody that these towers are going to be inspected immediately. and any kind of structural deficiency will be corrected. MR, fHoLLOWS: I didn't say -- the county doesn't inspect them, The property owner, the tower owners hire their engineers, inspect, and they file reports with the county, COMMISSIONER SClIIFFER: And thev're reviewed bv') - - MR, BELLOWS: Engineers. COMMISSIONER SClIlFFER: Okav, . Page 1:2 ~ lrfLl7,20~ ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else have any questions') Mr. Murrav') " COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: One of the issues that I raised was the question of liability associated with the other tenants on there and whether or not the liability would be shared or what the implications for the county would be in the event of a collapse because we're designating it essential services; whereas, the possibility exists that, if I recall correctly, there are residential properties that are fairly close, Have we resolved the issues of the other liability questions? I recognize -- let me preface by saying I recognize that this is a lessee coming before us seeking -- this is a lessee coming before us seeking to utilize a property, okay, And it can be done, It's done in stores and so forth, I understand that fully, But we have multiple tenants in this case, What -- did we explore? Did we work with the law, the legal office and try to detennine whether or not liability will be -- we're going to be impacted by this? I don't want to go further than that statement MR. BELLOWS: Well, typically the property owner is the one that has any kind ofliability if there are problems associated with maintenance or anything else, Safety is the property owner's concern, Now, they may have worked out some arrangements with people they lease space to for proper utilization of those towers, but when it comes down to liability, it's the property owner. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay, let me go a little step further. Not to belabor this, but frankly, I'm concerned. The governmental entity goes away, They have six months, One month into that period that tower no longer has a governmental entity, Is that still an essential services tower? MR. BELLOWS: Well, we would strut the Code Enforcement action, and __ COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: You're not answering my-- MR, BELLOWS: Well, our opinion is it is not an essential service tower in that regard, And that's why we would start code enforcemcnt action after six months, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I appreciate that. What I'm driving at is that under those circumstances should the collapse occur and it extends out into thc residential properties, what then" That's the __ MR, BELLOWS: That's an excellent question -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: -- concern I have, MR, BELLOWS: -- and I'm glad you asked, But still the answer is it's the property owner's responsibility, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I would-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Use the mic" Mr. Murray, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: What? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We can't hcar you, you're too far fTom the mic, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Am I? I apologize, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, just then you were is the only time, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I would hope that, Mr. Klatzkow, you can help me with that regard, becausc that's a sticking point for me, quite frankly, And I have no personal mattcr in this, but I'm concerned, If there's any liability for this county associated with it, I think we need to get that matter cleared up. MR, KLATZKOW: I'm not concerned with the liability issue, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you, That's good enough for me, MS, MADISON: I was going to respectfully add, if you like I canjust state for the record the specific code provision, It's 5,05,09, sub G, sub 9, and it does state -- I'm sorry, sub 8, All owners ofapprovcd towers are jointly and severally liable and responsible for any damage caused to off-site property as a result of a collapse of any tower owned by them, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I've been to court where those things have been contested, Thank you, MS, MADISON: Ijust want to cite-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Bob, you need to get closer to your mic if you're going to speak, Okay, Ray? MR, BELLOWS: Just one other question, CI [AIRMAN STRAIN: Then Ms. Caron, MR, BELLOWS: I believe the applicant has an engineer here too ifyoll want some testimony from the Page 13 _ '_M._. "__"_"___~_"'_"~"',_ "__"'~'__"~__."_ .", _,_ .n'_ ..._ ,___._ '_~~'__~_,~~_,;~~_~_.,,__~'___'._~,~_'_.' ',', " ",._' "..._,,_ .".. __ J___.... _""'U"_M"."___"'_ _">"'~__+"_'_"'.__ '" ,,_, _..,_.....__,..._,_._..,.",". _,_''_.,. , ~ ~~ 1 6Juary 7,110 . engmeer. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank vou. - Ms, Caron" COMM1SSIONER CARON: Yeah, and this may be for the engineer. Obviously [ think the county policy needs to change with respect to essential services, Because if one of these towers docs fall and they don't all collapse within the collapse zone -- I mean, the towers are meant, if something happens to them, to fall within a collapse zone. However. if somebody cuts a guy wire, all you have to do is cut one of them and it will fall over. just like a tree. pretty much, Yes. please come up here and we'll talk about it Because -- and we'll talk specifics as well. Here's our engmcer. MR. HECKERMAN: Good morning, My name is Jeny Heckennan, I'm the chief engineer for Renda Broadcasting. I've been with them for going on 14 )'cars. I've been an engineer for about 40 years. I've been in the field and I can assure you, when you read the document closely, the towers are constructed to the T1A and the EIA standards, And these standards inclnde an inner and outer guy points, Cutting one wire will not make the tower fall. You would have to cut all of the guylines, Even if you cut four on the outer guyline. the tower would still fold at its halfway point. Because in the standards it is designed to have your inner guy points go up at the 50 percent lower level of the tower and a second set of guy points that are tlu1her out the second half That would be the worst case scenano. Ninety percent of all tower collapses do not happen because of broken guywires, They happen due to the twisting motion of a tower because of devices on the tower that cause the tower to twist, which is called the loading. So if you have antennas sticking on the tower that stick out like this and the wind blows, that is the chief cause of a tower coming down. And it hvists. And as it t\....iSt5. it comes upon itself. COMMISSIONER CARON: So let's talk about what happened in September of'09 out in Oregon, MR. HECKERMAN: I'm not-- COMMISSIONER CARON: Guywires werc-- MR, HECKERMAN: -- familiar with that casc, COMMISSIONER CARON: -- cut Guywires were cut It was done by an environmental terrorist group, They cut the guywires on KRKO and the thing went down just like a tree. It would be pretty hard to be in your business and not to have read about that MR. HECKERMAN: I did, And there are exceptions to any case. COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, thcre are cxceptions. And so if you lived in a home right over here, wouldn't YOll want to know that you \verc protected, that if that thing went over tlJr whatever reason -- MR, HECKERMAN: Currently there are-- COMMISSIONER CARON: -- ifit went over during a hurricane or-- ~ MR, BECKERMAN: -- no residential homes within 500 feet orthe tower-- COMMISSIONER CARON: Currently, MR, HECKERMAN: -- is my understanding, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir, you'rc going to have to wait till she linishes. because the recorders can't pick up both conversations at the same time, Thank VOl!. COMM1SSIONER CARON: Currently there arc no homes. but the zoning is residential. It is zoned for homes right there. So that's all. That's my only point. And if the tower had been built to the specifications that it was supposed to be, we might not be in this position, I don't know. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer" MS, MADISON: Can I just bef"re we proceed have Mr. llcckerman state his name, And I,,, the record. I belicve the court repOlter requested that. MR, HECKERMAN: Jerrv Heckerman, H-E-C-K-E-R-M-A-N. ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Ms. Madison. that was something I should have caught Appreciate it. Brad') COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Jerry. looking at the tower inspection rcpoll, which tower was inspected? MR, HECKERMAN: Both towers have been inspected, You should have two reports there, Page I 4 16 I 1 0q January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: In the book that you just gave us, the only place we have it there's only one tower. And you're a licensed engineer in the State of Florida? MR. HECKERMAN: Yes, I'm fedemlly licensed too, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: In the report, though, it does state that one ofthe guylines -- did you review that, one ofthe guylines has a temporary splice that should be replaced? MR, HECKERMAN: Yes, And the reason that it wasn't replaced at this time is because if this gets approved the tower will have to be beefed up for additional antennas, And my understanding is that FLO TV will pay to beef the tower up to newer, stronger standards and replace guylines as necessary, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, The -- okay, so then essentially J must be reading the oldest tower's report? MR. HECKERMAN: Yes. The new tower was brought up to G standards in the last year when the standards changed from F to G, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I don't know what that means, but-- MR, HECKERMAN: Okay, well, the standards got tighter in the last couple of years, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, So you do have two ofthese reports'? MR, HECKERMAN: Yes, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, And then they're signed by a guy named Darrell Elliott So what is he, he's a structural engineer, or-- MR, HECKERMAN: Darrell Elliotr is the -- has been in the tower business for quite a long time. We did bring his resume about his experience, He is an EE engineer. And I have that document here, I'm assuming this was all submitted, correct? MS, MADISON: No, MR, HECKERMAN: But I do have his qualifications here, Also, he works with the people that stamped, And if you look carefully on the stamped letter by Structuml Components, it says both towers were constructed, meeting all the EIA T1A Section 2-22 requirements, which is the requirements that this county and just about every county in the United States goes by, The only difference is, is since then the F requirements have changed to G, which means some stronger bmcing will need to be put on the tower, and some extra guywires, which FLO TV is prepared to do if we get this approved, because it's going to be necessary. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, But EE is electrical engineer, not a structural engineer. MR, HECKERMAN: TIA, They're combined entities, Electrical Industry Association and Telecommunications Industry Association provide the standards for towers, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, But an EE designation in the State of Florida would mean electrical engineer, correct? MR. HECKERMAN: No, but Structural Components did stamp, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: All right But that's another requirement MR. HECKERMAN: And in the requirements of the county, it says -- the inspection says any qualified tower professional that's been doing this for years and years and years, These people build -- in this report I can show you pictures where they build giant 2,000-foot towers, antennas on top of buildings, Darrell's quite experienced, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is this the only county that requires annual or biannual inspections? MR, HECKERMAN: I've never seen this anywhere in my 40 years of experience except for here, Now that I'm aware of this requirement, we are going to make sure that it gets followed to the T. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron, And then Brad, you need to pull that closer next time you're on the mic, Go ahead, Ms, Caron, then Mr. Murray, COMMISSIONER CARON: I just have one other question, On the old tower that we're trying to get a eonditional use for here today, essentially is LoJack, wants to be FLO TV, and the FBI, or some government entity, Is that pretty much -- MR. HECKERMAN: And Reach I'M, which has a translator-- COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, that's a ham, MR, HECKERMAN: -- on the tower. Pane 15 b ,,,., .. ~"~~'~'''.~,',._^_., ...._ ....__.._' ,"~""_~_",,~_,,,_,,"__'~_'" __..,. ".~.,.~... ,'''." '_.n.,. ~.'~""",;'.^'"",""". ;".. ""~>>''''__'...,.<,,",.,.~',, ......,,,., _ ," 16 I 1 bt Januarv 7. 2010 - COMM1SSIONER CARON: Ycah. that's a ham thing, Would there -- would it be possible for those entities to bc on the new tower'? MR, HECKERMAN: No. There is no more space to put anybody on the new tower. And this is why we would like to be able to have this tower beefed up and made available, not only for these tenants but for other people that may need to have a place to put an antenna in the future. Because right now it's hard to get a tower anywhere, In the world of today. the communications and the electronics. you know. towers are in need, And if you already have a tower that's existing that's capable of adding future tenants, I think we're doing the count\' a service. ~ ~ COMMISSIONER CARON: What's left on that -- on the old tower certainly doesn't take up much wind load, MR. HECKERMAN: Currently what's on the tower right now does not have a lot of wind load. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right What about FLO TV. they're not -- MR, l-IECKERMAN: FLO TV is going to have a little bit of wind load, Definitely, We've already looked at some structural analyses, The tower is going to have to have structural work done to put the new tenants on to meet code. COMMISSIONER CARON: The old towcr-- MR, HECKERMAN: The old tower, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: -- is going to rcquire structural. okay. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick, you wanted to comment before Mr. Murray'? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure. For the record, Nick Casalanguida, I've spoken to the applicant. and based on thc discussion there's a condition of approval they will provide a structural report. certified by an engineer. every' )'car to the county on the condition of both towers, the guy\vires and any1hing that would cncumber that tower. And I would suggest we put that as a condition of approval on this application, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Isn't that pmi ofthc code') MR, CASALANGUIDA: It is, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then we wouldn't need it as a condition of approval because they've got to do it, right? MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well. mayhe wc can go a little filrther with that in temlS of that review, We'll check the code. But I think if the concern is that review. that repOli could certainly be part of that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. Murray') COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Sir.just one quick -- here I am, Just one point. Your engineering degree is what, civil, professional, electronics? \Vhat is it sir? MR. HECKERMAN: Radio, It's in the lleld of broadcasting. radio, I have worked with thc towers, I've been involved with as many as 30 towers being erected, Also. I also work with a couple of tower companies and assist them in actually building a few towers, I'm also a ham radio operator and I also have my very own tower at my house, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm sure, Thank VOlL ~ MR, HECKERMAN: Okav, ~ CIIAIRMAN STRA IN: Okay, are therc any other questions of anybody at this point? Mr. Kolflat? COMMISSIONER KOLFI,AT: Ray. after hearing what you've heard this morning, added to what we received in our packet, does the staff still recommend approval for this project? MR, BELLOWS: Yes, we do. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Thank vou, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there any other questions at this time'? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray. do we have any public speakers') MR, BELLOWS: No spcakcrs on this item, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. with that. we will close thc public hearing and entertain a motion from the Planning Commission. Page I 6 Mr. Vigliotti? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I'd like to make a motion to approvc, Do we need to approve these separately or together? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Separately, So we've got to say one first, then we've got to vote on that, then we've got to go to the second one, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Okay, I recommend approval on PL2009-37, FLO TV, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, is there a second? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Okay, motion made to approve and -- by Me. Vigliotti, seconded by Mr. Murray, I assume the approval is subject to conditions and stipulations in the staffreport? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I hope so, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. of course, And stall approval. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any discussion" COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron" COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes. I will not vote lix the motion, I feel very strongly thatthe issue is that Renda Broadcasting agreed to a conditional use, and that among the requirements was that the old tower come down after the new tower was constructed, And in addition to that, the new tower was supposed to be 394 feet, not 455 feel. And I think if this particular conditional use could not be -- they couldn't live by that conditional use, then I don't know that we expect that they will live by the new one, So I'll vote against the motion. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And Me. Murray" COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: The reason I seconded it and I will vote for the motion is because the concerns I had, which were the matters of liability and potential injury to somebody in the future have been effectively resolved, The fact that therc have been two towers there, that perhaps that one of them should have come down is now moot in my mind, especially in light of public policy and the need for towers, As long as we're structurally okay and we've done evel)'thing we could to protect the public, even though it may have been a wrongful act to fail to bring them down, perhaps we can benefit from it anyway, So that's my maybe illogic, but that's why I voted, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Midney? COMMISSIONER MlDNEY: Yeah, I'd like to echo what Mrs, Caron said. I think based on their past record, I'm concerned that this company will meet the commitments that they're committing to today, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, and I will be supporting the motion, I think that the fact that we had a code that wasn't to as mueh benefit as it could have been in the past and we saw that it needed correction and the correction was that multiple towers are a good thing, this one has no reported incidences around it, there's no complaints, I just don't see any reason why it shouldn't be there, So I certainly will be suppol1ing the motion, Anybody else? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Schifler? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, as much as I want to vote against it, I will support it based on the fact that I do think clustering the towers is the most efficient and smartest use of towers, I think we're going to structurally concern (sic) it I really disagree that it's an essential service tower and like (sic) somebody in staff to read the code I read and get back to me and tell me why, you know, it looks black to me but you're saying it's white, Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, With that, I'll call for a vote and it should be by both hand and voice, All those in favor of the motion for approval of the variance, signify by saying aye and raising your hand, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLfLAT: Aye, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLfLEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ave. ~ Page I 7 ".. '-'--".-,-..-".- .'-"~-""-_'" ""....,,,.._,,_~_ '__'_~__"_"_.."" ~.-_ .". ',' .,,,..-~ ,__._..._.~ ,_. ',_.A_M _._.~_ ~_" ,',,__ ,_.."",_ 16 Luarv+~~ - . One, two. three, fouf, five, six, in favor. Those opposed') COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Two against CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, the next one. is there a motion on the conditional use" COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I will make a motion to approve CLJ-2008-AR-4085, FLO TV, for approval. with all the conditions we spoke about today and staff approval. COMM ISSION ER MLJRRA Y: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. a motion made and seconded with the stipulations, Discussion? (No rcsponse,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: My position will be the same as for the previous one, and I will be suppOlting the motion. All those in favor. same sign, signify by saying aye and raising their hand, COMMISSIONER SCHfFFER: Aye COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Ave. . COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Ave. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Ave, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ave, One, t\\'o, three, laUf, five, six in j~lVOr. Those against? COMMISSIONER MJDNEY: Ave, . COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Two against. Okay. thank you very much fC" your attendance today, And that -- we'll be done with that one, MR, KLA TZKOW: Just Itlr the record. the reasons for the negative votes were the same as previously stated" COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY (Nods head atlirmatively.) MR. KLATZKOW: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, next item up -- and by the way, for those people on the CAT, transfer station, we probably aren't going to catch you by 9:30. so it will be closer to 10:00 beforc we start, if we get that far by then. I'm being optimistic. Item #9C PETITION: PUDZ-A-7006-AR-10318. PA WEL AND TERYL BRZESKI, MAGNOLIA POND HOLDINGS, LLC CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next petition is I'lJOZ-A-2006-AR-1 03 18, It's Pawel and Telyl Brzeski, Magnolia Pond Holdings, LLC All those wishing to participate in this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakcrs were duly sworn,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are therc disclosures on the palt of the Planning Commission? Mr. Vigliotti? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I had a bricf conversation with Patrick White. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, Patrick White called Ille. we had a brief conversation, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron') Page I 8 161 lOA January 7, 20 I 0 COMMISSIONER CARON: And I had a brief conversation with Mr. Hancock, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I did too with Mr. Hancock, Anybody else" (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAfN: And I think I might have had a conversation with Patrick sometime in the past, Ijust can't recall it offhand, Not recently, though, Okay, with that, we will turn it over to the applicant MR. WHITE: Good morning, Me. Chairman, Commissioners, Happy new year to you and the staff And indeed, you mentioned the cold, and I have one, courtesy of my son, so please forgive my voice, Patrick White, with the law finn of Porter, Wright, Morris and Arthur, Naples office, Here today on the agenda item you referenced, Mr. Chainnan, we note that there arc a number of housekeeping issues we need to address before we get into the true substance of the presentation, It's going to be pretty much a dual effort between myself and Tim Hancock of Davidson Engineering. He will be handing out through staffa tract changes version of the PUO document that you're receiving now, We also have prepared an addenda that has 13 items that have come to our mutual attention working with the staff and with the Chair in addressing a series of issues that Tim will enumerate and go through one by one, In addition, before we get to that, there are two aspects of the staff report that I'd like to make mention of that are minor points, but ones that I think warrant being corrected on the record. First is as to the owners. And this has been backed up with affidavits that have been previously provided to the County Attorney's Office, There arc three series of ownerships, The first two of those are correctly stated in LLC where Ms, TerylBrzeski, Terry Brzeski, is the manager of that LLC. Second item is a land trust number 1.8, Ms, Brzeski again is the trustee of that trust Thirdly, the five-acre parcel that's actually the unzoned piece or the differently zoned piece that's being added into this mixed PUO is one that is owned by Me. and Mrs, Brzeski as tenants by the entirety. So what we would do is just correct the record to reflect that there's a third owner, Teryl and Pawel Brzeski, husband and wife. That, as I said, was for the five-acre piece that's prcsently wned ago that we're bringing into this PUO, Second item, a little minor, maybe more personal. As agent, our law firm recently moved and the new address is 9132 Strada Place, third floor. All other information remains the same, Correspondingly to the amendments to the staff report, we will further amend the application to reflcct the ownership interest that I've just referenced, and that is under the disclosure of interest information that is on Page 2 of the app, under small letter "a", just for the record's purposes, and that's where we would indicate 100 percent ownership in the individual status of husband and wife of Mr. and Mrs, Brzesh I would note for the record that both Me. and Mrs, Brzeski are present today, but unless you have specific questions of them, we're not anticipating any rcmarks tram them, One ofthe other items that was provided to staff, as you're aware, there was hand-off' of this project to Ms, Oeselem, And in making sure since Monday that all ofthe I's are dotted and T's are crossed, we provided a follow-up affidavit of posting notice and photographs to ensure that the notice is proper with respect to the dates, As you see on your visualizer. Mr. llancock will be providing a brief Power Point that will help orient towards the project And what I believe at this point is probably best to do is to just simply indicate fi,r the record that Mr. Hancock obviously is an expert in planning and has been I'm certain recognized by this body as such on numerous occaSIOns. And with that said, I believe that's enough from me, We're going to do our best to wrap this up, I'm not aware of any public opposition, but I would like to reserve some time to respond and to address any comments that any of the Commissioners may havc working in tandem with Mr. Hancock, Are there any questions at this time, Commissioners'! (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Doesn't look like it, Patrick. We'll move on. MR. WHITE: Simply note for the record that at this point we havc a recommendation of approval from staff Thank yon, M R, HANCOCK: Good moming, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, For the record, Tim Hancock with Page 19 -,,-~..,,<.~~,.- +"",,~.-~,".""".""""',.'-^"""'-'-'~~- " , ..~- 16 I 1 0~ Januarv 7. 20 I 0 Davidson Engineering. and working with Patrick White as co-agent f(lr Magnolia Pond Holdings. LLC and Land Trust l-B, The application before you today seeks to amend the existing sunsetted zoning for the Magnolia Pond PUO, The previously PUD allowed forthe development oP31 multi-family units on 42 acres ofland. fhe PlJO proposal in Iront of you today serves to increase the land mass Irom 42 acres to 47,05 acres through the addition of a previously unzoned agricultural parcel to the nOl1h and east. However, in doing so we do not seek to increase the number of developable units. They'll remain at 231, What that effectively does is reduces the gross density from 5.49 units per acre to the proposed 4,91 units per aere, Certainly not a substantial reduction, but a reduction just the same, The second component of the application seeks to amend the list of permitted uses to clarify some undefined terms that were in the prior PUO, such as townhomes and garden apartments that go undefined in the current Land Oevelopmcnt Code, We also wish to add assisted living facilities as a pennitted use within the project. .lust as many projects have come before you in recent months and requestcd a combination of assisted living facility ancl/or residential uses, this application seeks to pemlit the conversion of a fonncr residential PUO to ALF uses for part or all of the project. I'll address that conversion issue a littlc more fully latcr in my presentation, Thc site is located approximately one-half mile west of951 and is bisected by Magnolia Pond Drive. Magnolia Pond Drive serves residential 'll1d institutional uses located along its length and terminates at Golden Gate High School, where my wife is the Dean. so I'm compelled to say Go Titans at this point. Take that one back to the office. Mr. Eastman. All right ~ To the n0l1h is existing and developed RSF-3 zoning across the Golden Gate canal. which measures a little more than 175 (sic) in width, The project has approximately 650 feet oflrontage on the canal. To the east, which is to the right of the drawing you're looking at, is Mike Davis Elemcntary School. Approximately 400 feet with a common shared border. I(lllowed by a preserve extending further south all the way to Magnolia Pond Drive, As you cross Magnolia Pond Drive. the adjacent land is zoned for Collier Boulevard mixed use commerce center. This permits a residential density of up to 10 units per acre with hundreds of thousands of square feet of commercial and hotel use. To the south is the 1-75 right-of~way measuring approximately 350 feet in width with multi-family zoning across the right-or-way, ranging from four to 13 units per acre. And again to thc west is Golden Gate Iligh School. The property is designated as urban residential subdistrict in the Growth Management Plan, and as such is aftixded the opportunity to request up to 16 units pcr acre, Because thc property is located within the density band of the activity center at 1-75 and 951, it is eligible to request up to seven units per acre. Howevcr, as stated previously, the approval before you today is for a maximum of231 residcntial units, a density of less than Eve units per acre. While I could regale you ad nauseam as to how the project meets the goals and objectives ofthe GMP, staff has done a fine job of summarizing the project's consistency in their staff report. so I'll let the application and report stand as sufficient evidence in that regard, As part of the PUO amendment, the master plan has been updated to retlect the required preservc, water management, project access conditions, and desired amenities, The site plan is dominated by the required prescrve area to the south, or bottom of the drawing bef(Jre you, Of the total 47,05 acres, 41.1 are deemed to he indigenous and thus the required preserve area equals 10.28 acres. Based on the adjacent zoning approvals, the largest contiguous preserve exists along the southeast portion of the project, which is the lower right-hand comer of the drawing, This fact, combined with the desire to buffer the project as much as is reasonable from the noise of 1-75. resulted in the preserve area being located along the south and southeast property lines. The only species of concern evident in our surveys is a fair Ilumber of gopher tortoises. At the time of submittal ofthis application on~site relocation was the preferred method, but there may be a changc in focus going on at the state level to encourage (m-site retention where preserves are large enough and suitable with vegetation. At the time of development order, on'-site relocation, on-site retention or a combination of hoth will be utilized in accordance with state and federal regulations to address the presence of the gopher tortoises. Pa~e 20 L 16 I 1 Januarv 7. 2010 ~ . The project proposes buffering consistent with Land Development Code requirements for the perimeter of the project, including a 10-foot Type D buffer along Magnolia Pond Drive. The Type 0 buffer is the most intensive buffer in the Land Development Code, and provides for the option of placing a privacy wall within that buffer. The projeet also proposes an interesting amenity along Golden Gate canal that may require a little bit of explanation, The applicant was approached by the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department during the rezone process and asked to grant a 20-foot easement along the canal frontage for the purpose of constnlcting a bicycle and pedestrian pathway that will ultimately connect 951 to Santa Barbara Boulevard, The county apparently has all the necessary pieces to accomplish this, except f,x the Magnolia Pond frontage, We're the last remaining link. The issue for us was that -- I looked at it and we saw the access to the canal as being a recreational amenity for the community, And by granting a 20- foot easement along that canal, that serves a purpose of almost severing the connectivity between the community and the canal. After some thought, a design was created that we feel preserves and even improves the access, while granting this 20-foot easement, which is the -- it doesn't show it velY well in the visualizer but it's a small pink strip across the top of the site plan, The concept as shown on the master plan is to grant the request to the easement, but permit the developer in the future to construet a Jake parallel to the canal and create connections to the canal that would require the installation of pedestrian bridges so the county pathway would remain intact but allow for access to and from the canal by residents within the development The creation ofthis connected lagoon would also reduce or eliminate the need for any boat docks or access facilities along the canal. And in short, we were able to basically take what I saw as a liability and turn it into an interesting amenity that will give the community access t,x recreational purposes to the Golden Gate canal system without having to operate within that easement for structures and any boat docks or launching facilities, We see it definitely as something of a small-scale kind of a canoe and kayak launch type facility, Again, if you've ever fished the canals, they are loaded with bass and oscar and blue gill, and there's quite a bit of recreation that goes on there, So we've been able to satisfY the 20-foot request from the county without adversely impacting the plan for the community, A second -- and then one thing I do want to mention is during the neighborhood information meeting the property owners across the canal cxpressed a dcsire to keep the plan as it was shown, because it provided for a greater distance between the canal and what would be the buildings. While I eXplained to them that [ could not guarantee that a lake would be located in that location. what we did do is, being responsive to their concerns, is installed a minimum 300-toot setback for any structures that would reach three stories, That would allow for two-story stl1Jctures to be located across the canal Ii-om homes that are zoned that allow for two-story construction, But if a three-story structurc is to be huilt, the minimum separation from the property line would be 300 fcet Hopefully the plan will be constnlcted as shown, Ifnot, at least any taller buildings than two stories will have an increased separation, The project has a secondary public benefit in that it will result in the conveyance to Collier County of a 30-foot easement for maintenance and required improvements to an existing water management ditch that runs the length ofthe entire eastern property line, This easement actually serves not just our project by any means but believe it or not serves projects south of 1-75 from the Radio Road extension road northward, I've worked on projects down there. and I was interested to find out that projects that far south actually have their stormwater flow north underneath 1-75 ultimately into the Golden Gate canal. That conveyance was never really clear and the ability for thc county to maintain that easement was not in place, What we've agreed to do is grant thc 30-foot easemcnt to the county at no cost And we've agreed to do so within 120 days of receiving a written rcquest from the county, But in actuality, both of these easements are in the process of being granted, We've obtained the legal descriptions, we'vc done somc preliminary review with the County Attorney's Office, and by the time we cnd up before the board wc hopefully will have both easements granted and have that behind us, Nonetheless, we've included in the PUO that rcquirement to ensure that it happens, The PUO has been completely updated in an eftortto comply with the current PUO format, and it contains a rcquest for two deviations, Thc first is to allow Jor reduction in the intemal buiTcr requircment from 15 feet to 10 feet Page 2 I ,,~_..__,'.. ~~"_''"+'''''_r_'''''''-''.. .. ~._' ,_ '0 _ _'" _ _ .. ""..._._."___"_~_" ..,_,,'."~"~'_"'.__,._,..__,,___~.~...__.____.,.v__"__,~~._~___.",_____.,____".___..,____.___._""_.___. _._ '. where multi-family development directly abuts single-family or two-family development and where a similar architectural theme is applied. The plantings would still meet the rype [) requirement, but would be placed in a I O-foot buffer easement instead of a IS-foot. Since the building massing between the two uses only varies by three feet in height, this seemed to be a small request to save some intemal space without sacrilieing the quality of the buffer. The second deviation is to request a 50-foot intemal right-of~way cross-section. instead of the standard 60-foot required by the county. Since all required utilities. sidewalks and pavement widths can be accommodated in a 50-foot easement and since the roads will remain private. the need for 60 feet was not deemed necessary, The staff does support both of these deviations. Before tuming things back over to Mr. White to execute a wrap-up and clean up any of my mistakes, we also had an addition to a change in planners to Ms, Deselem, Wc received some additional comments tram the County Attorney's Office this week and had some input Irom the Chainnan, And by the time we wrapped up all these little changes, I ended up with a list of about 13. And I thought forthe sake of clarity. the easiest way to address those may be to prepare what I call a tract changes docnment. which has been handed out to each of you, And I would like to, with the permission of the Chair, to just really go page by page. discuss those changes, go over each one of them with you, and then I have a written addenda that addresses that that if it would be helpful during the course of any type of a motion for the project, I'd be happy to provide that to you also, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. Tim, MR, HANCOCK: The first change is ttmt Pages I and 2 ofthe PliO you received have been removed, They were a title page and a list of exhihits and are no longer necessary in the current pun fOnllat. The sccond change is under Exhibit A, Item A, I, Ms, Deselem recommended capping the number of residential single-family units to I "5. which is the number that is retlected in the TIS, The petitioner has no objection to this change, The next change on that same page, Exhibit A, Item AA, there is a conversion ratio related to net acres of assisted living facilities and net developable units. which has apparently caused some confusion, To be perfectly honest with you, when I originally wrote this, the 1(1lIr-to-one ALF to residential ratio that has become commonplace was not being used. And 'vvhat I tried to do was suhtract out the lake and presen'c areas to create a net/net situation. So if an ALF \vere built on one acre, it \vOLdd reduce the density by a commensurate number of units. In doing so, while it made perfectly good sense to me. apparently I was the only one, So what we've ineluded here is hasically language that is more comf0l1ahle to this bod)! and sOlnething you've seen before and doesn't require a degree in mathematics to get there, And so what we've added here is we've inserted under Item AA that for each four ALF units developed -- and I'm sorry, there should be a strike-t1u-ough there also. In the exclusive of preserve areas, lakes, easements, buffer units, that will go away. So it would read, I(lr each t(JUr ALF units. one residential unit shall be subtracted from the maximum 01'231 permitted dwelling units. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. that answers my question, because it didn't make any sense, Thank you, MR. HANCOCK: Oh, it made sense. Youjust had to spend a lot of time with me to figure it out COMMISSIONER CARON: Well. no, what didn't make sense was the 8.27 units stuck in there out of nothingness. MR, HANCOCK: Oh, I -- yes, in trying to make these changes, I will admit that I -- I hope that's the only mistake I have from here t()rward, but I can't promise that Also, on Exhibit A, and I'll go to the next page, on lteITl 8.6, Ms. Deselem also noted that we had some antiquated language there that referred to the county manager or designee, which should have been replaced with board of zoning appeals, We made that change in A.6. And also, upon her recommendation, we added that same -- I'm sorry. under B,6 we added that same language under A.5 under permitted uses. Again, a standard reference to sa)' any permitted uses must go through the BZA as opposed to county manager or designee. The next change is on Table I, Exhibit B. And in the tract changes document )'ou have. that's going to be page number three. Under the single-family and tWl)-hunily categories, the setbacks for principal and accessory structures was listed as NI ^. not applicable. rhe chainnan pointed out this seems to be kind of confusing and so Page 22 16 I 1 January 7, 2010 N suggested revising this to read 20 feet and 10 feet respectively for principal and accessory structures, And that is the change you see toward the bottom there. Just below that there was a lake setback of20 feet, which because of the required 20-foot lake maintenance easement that was redundant. so we have removed it. The next change is in the footnotes of Table 1, Under footnote six it's stated, minimum floor area of the ALF, and that should have been maximum, Thank you, Commissioner. So that change has been made, And the next change was an addition that I made under footnote eight after discussing this with the Chairman, And one of the concerns there was as you go down Magnolia Pond Drive, if you look at the site plan, you very conceivably could have the rear of the homes facing Magnolia Pond Drive, A Type 0 buffer can be a fully vegetated buffer, and you have the option of placing a wall in there, It was pointed out to me that with a 10-foot accessory structure setback you could have accessory structures butting up against a I O-foot vegetative buffer along Magnolia Pond Drivc, For strictly aesthetic purposes and something that I think would probably happen as a matter of course anyway, what I've put in here is that the buffer along Magnolia Pond Drive shall be a Type D buffer of either 10 feet in width with a six-foot privacy wall or 15 feet in width if only vegetation is installed, So what I've tried to do is if they choose not to do a wall, we've increased the buffer width to give a little more setback for accessory structures and whatnot to hopefully address what is potentially an aesthetic concern, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron') COMMISSIONER CARON: Just because you're making colTections as we go, if you go up to maximum zoned height and run across, you want 35 feet and two stories, and 20 feet for the clubhouse, So the other 35 feet is extraneous, it needs just to come out-- MR, HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am, COMMISSIONER CARON: -- all the way across, Do you see where I'm -- MR. HANCOCK: Yes, ma'am, COMMISSIONER CARON: -- talking? MR, HANCOCK: All after clubhouse in that entire line there's a second number of 35 feet in there, COMMISSIONER CARON: And the same undcr maximum actual height, 42 feet needs to come out all the way across. It's just a fonnatting thing, right? Because you want 42 feet and 27, 42, 27, 45, 27, 45, 27, And underneath that final 42 feet is extraneous, right? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: No, MR, HANCOCK: I don't believe so, Because it deals with -- let's see. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark, can I say something? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, go ahead, Brad, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I think what they're doing there, Donna, is they're saying that accessory buildings are 20 feet, except the clubhouse is 35, MR, HANCOCK: That's correct It should read more clearly than it does, It runs together a little bit there, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, the question that Donna has is-- COMMISSIONER CARON: Oh, I see, So all right, yeah, it doesn't read cor -- yeah, MR, HANCOCK: Yeah, the accessory -- what it says there is accessory buildings are 20 feet A clubhouse, which they've drawn out separately, would be at 35 feet COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, Then drop it down onto a scparate line so that-- MR. HANCOCK: Yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: -- it's understood, Okay, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Or Tim, what would make you assume the clubhouse is an accessnry building, not a principal building? I think the clubhouse would be considered principal, so you could -- MR, HANCOCK: We could strike it altogether. Okay, COMMISSIONER CARON: Is that the way-- MR, HANCOCK: Well. c1ubhouses-- COMMISSIONER CARON: -- the county normally does it, though? MR, HANCOCK: More than not I've had clubhouses deemed to be accessory to a residential community, Page 23 , ~"_'. "_'__""._~"'_'~'_M"_.._"""'_"'_""'_ ' "'W_""_'__"'_""_'_"'__~_'~_"'_'~ , . - _._"._-_._.._-_........_~,-~--~...- .i. 161 1 0~ Januarv 7. 20 I 0 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But it's a principal structure, And accessOlY uses would be accessory to it as a principal. How did staff look at it when they reviewed it? Now, I caught stalf offguard bccause they're chatting, but -- MR, BELLOWS: We're chatting about it. " CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, how did you interpret the clause that Ms. Caron pointed out and Brad's been talking about a, well? MS, DESELEM: For the record. Kay Oeselem. Principal Planner with Zoning, Yeah, at Ilrst I was following along, and yeah, I thought. sure, she's right. that was just extraneous, But when I look at it. I think I understand now what he's saying. that he did want the clubhouse to be higher. And with Tim. I usually look at a clubhouse as an accessolY structure, It', usually accessory, The principal use is either the residential units or whatever. But in looking at the list of uses. I don't see the clubhouse itsclf Iistcd for eithcr. Yeah, I was just looking at it quickly, Ray and I werc looking, and it looks like it may come under recreational uses, but it's not. There is something that says rccrcation buildings. but in actuality a clubhouse per se is not listed as a use, So it might be appropriate to add that use to an accessory and thcn it's clear. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. I think that may get into another concern, though, is you know how you've got your top of your columns, you have f,)ur different uscs up there'l You probably should add thc clubhouse as another use so that VOll can list its front side \'ard and the whole nine vards -- ~. ~ ... COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: -- because you're not going to want your clubhouse without a side yard setback the same as to a single-familv home. say. '--- . . ~ MS.OESELEM: That's more customarv. , MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, that is morc customary and I suggest we do that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Wcll, I think what we're going to end up doing then. Tim, is somehow this is going to have to get done during lunch or Iireak and you can bring it back today for linalization this afternoon, if you want But I think we'rc going to need to see how that lays out. bccanse all those setbacks and cvel}thing else arc going to be something we need to understand. You've got a better suggestion. or do you have one? MR, HANCOCK: No, sir, I think that's something we can do. And if it -- if the Commission will allow, I'd be happy to. as soon as we're done here. head back. make those changes and bring at least that portion of the document hack to VOll. , I know we'll be back to you f<)f consent agenda, if we receive an approval, with changes for YOll to review. I don't know if you feel like that change itsclfcould be handled on eonsent or whether or not it should be handled separately today, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we'd have to work through every onc of your other standards; your side yards, rear yards, front yards and ct cctcra for the clubhouse. If you create a separate column, you're going to have to fill in all those same standards, If you know what those are. we can verbally go through them and if the Commission feels comfortable enough it may work. MR, HANCOCK: Okay, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But I think we have to get to that point. And this may help you: We need to take a Iireak I,,, the court reportcr, and this might be a good time to break, You can think about what wc just said, decide how you want to handle it, and wc'lI come back here at five after 10:00 and resume, MR. IIANCOCK: Yes, sir, okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you, we'll do that (Recess,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, evel}body. wclcome back I,'om break. And when we left, we were being entertained bv Me. Hancock. and he shall continue, , MR HANCOCK: I appreciate the broad version of enteltainment. Based on your recommendation -- I appreciate the lime. Mr. Chairman -- I think what would be the cleanest wnuld be to add the table -- to the table a column of clubhouse on Exhibit Il. talile one. And what I'd like to do is just Pane 24 ~ 16 JLary ~2010 ~~ go down each category and give you what we feel is the appropriate number or standard to be filled in, So what we'll propose is adding a fifth column for clubhouse. Under minimum lot area, 7,500 square foot Under minimum lot width, 50-foot interior. 60-foot corneL In this case same as the single-family, Front yard setback, 25 feet Side yard setback, 15 feet Rear yard setback, 20 feet for principal. I don't believe accessory structure setback is applicable, but to avoid confusion maybe just put 10 feet in there anyway, just in case there's an accessory structure on the clubhouse parcel for some reason. MPlJO boundary setback, 20 feet with notation three, and 10 feet for accessory structure, Garage setback, not applicable, Second page, Natural habitat preserve area setbacks, 25-foot principal, 10-foot accessory, Distance between principal structures, one-half the sum of building heights, Distance between accessory structure, 10 feet Maximum zoned height, 35 feet And of course we will remove the clubhouse notation from the other four columns, Maximum actual height, 42 feet And again, removing the clubhouse notation from the other four columns, Minimum floor area, 1,200 feet And minimum carport or garage per wlit, not applicable, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before we move on, let's make sure we all have -- since we walked through that, let's just discuss any ofthe items, And my first question would be if this is not listed as one of the principal uses or accessory uses, are we going to add that tenninology to one or the other? And then which one is it? And then that one might spur another question, For example, a clubhouse, at least all the ones I'm used to seeing, have accessory structures to themselves. and so you haven't addressed that yet in your standards, So you may -- whereas in the second page where you've got 10 and 35 -- or 35 feet for your zoned height, I think you need to address your acccssory building height in both of those categories, maximum and actual, so -- MR. HANCOCK: In which case I would replicate the standards for 20 feet for accessory buildings under the zoned height and 27 feet under actual. As to the first part of that, because we've created a separate column for it, I think it's fair to say we're not going to see a clubhouse being built without residents or an ALF facility in place. Whether it's listed as a permitted use or an accessory use, I'm -- I'll be honest with you, I'm not sure it matters in the end, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What is staffs preference" Since you're the ones that are going to have to monitor and control this, Don't say you don't care, MR, HANCOCK: Why don't I suggest we put it under pennitted accessory uses and structures, under number two, recreational uses and facilities, including clubhouses, swimming pools and so forth, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, does that work? MS,OESELEM: Kay Oeselem for the record, That's acceptable. And that's more customary with what we've done in other petitions, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then the otherthing I think I'd want to consider, Tim, is when we look at clubhouses, because ofthe activities there, and some have dining, some have a lot of other uses, they don't become a compatibility issue as much interior, but they do exterior. So your MPlJO boundary setbacks for those -- for the clubhouse and its accessory uses I would think may be more of a concern compatibility-wise than a single-family house would be, Especially if you've got activities around a pool and things like that, you don't want it up against another outside your facilities, So you might want to consider using larger principal and accessory setbacks where it is against an MPUO boundary, MR, HANCOCK: The only reason that I didn't factor that in is when you look at what's around us, the only residences are to the north across a I 25-foot canal. And then we have a high school, an clementary school and preserve to the south, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What's to your -- I can't remember what's to your east MR, HANCOCK: To my east is Mike Davis Elementary School and then preserve all the way down to Magnolia Pond Drive, Then when you get across Magnolia Pond -- I'm not adverse to it I'm just -- I'm thinking on the north end of the project we may have a -- in that lagoon area if there were a clubhouse to be located there, it would be closer to Mike Davis Elementary School. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Tom, from the school's perspective. do eating facilities, recreation facilities at Page 25 -".._~, ~.....,".~~-~...,-~~--,-,_._..,_..~"-".<..._~..~.._..-.., _ _ n...__....,.___.-...,..,.....__"'_.. _ _",' '__H".'_'_"'_'__"'_"'_ I 16 J ) ~~ January"";, 70 I 0 a clubhouse have any impact on the leaming facilities within a school? And is there a conccm from your perspective, since you're here for exactly this kind of example? MR, EASTMAN: The use appears to be compatible. And looking at the school site, it's really the back end of the school that has deliveries and such. And I don't think that the noise from that would disrupt students in the classroom. Usually it's the reverse situation. that residents arc complaining about what's going 011 on the school site. I think what the applicant's asking for here in tenns of uses is compatible with a school situation, I appreciate you asking, Mr. Chainnan, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else have any questions on this issue before Tim linishes up" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well. Mark'.' CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. Mr. Schiffer. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is this an appropriate time to be discussing these tables in general or should \ve -- CI IAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't -- Tim. does it matter" Is it going to intelTupt your presentation for us to just start questioning now, or do you want to -- MR, HANCOCK: No. sir. I'm flexible, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav, COMMISSIONER SCHIfFER: Tim. one problem I have is the setback from 1-75. And especially in some cases you're allowing that to be 20 feet Would you have a problem making all structures at least 100 feet from 1-75? You've done that for three stories. But I think one of the nicest features of Collier. which we're starting to lose, and this could even lose more, is the vegetation along 75, MR, IIANCOCK: Because of the preserve location shown on the master plan, we're going to have a buf1er there regardless, And as you know, we can't change that wholesale without coming back bet(xe this body, So I feel like that accomplishes that. what you're asking about. I don't know about 100 feet. I think when you get to that lower lell comer as you look at the master plan, we may be talking about something around 75 feet or so there. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well, could you do 75 fee! all along it" MR, HANCOCK: Along 1-75'.' ~ COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Right. MR. HANCOCK: I don't think that adversely impacts our plan, And if that -- COMMISSIONER SCIIIFFER: I don't either. MR. HANCOCK: If that gives you a degree of comfort, I'm tine with that I guess the best place to put that would be under MI'UD boundary setback, COMMISSIONER SCIIIFFER: Tim. the best place might be -- remember the table you took out'! Just add a line MPU boundary at 75 and thenjust throw 75 feet across the table, MR, HANCOCK: Okay, So we'll add a line there that says MI'LJD setback from 1-75, and include 75 feet in each category. I don't -- if that gives you a greater degree of comfort, I don't believe it advcrsely affects the plan. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Thank vou CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray" COMMISSIONER MlIRRA Y: Just out of curiosity, Tim, The turnaround there, is that 1,000 feet or 500 feet or -- MR, HANCOCK: It exceeds the -- it's pretty long, I want to say it's over 600 and some odd feet But we do have a pedestrian connection, a sidewalk connection at the end of that to allow students who Illay be going to Golden Gate High School, for example. to make that access. One of the problems we had is -- I can f(lreSee this project really being developed as a north and south, Somebody may develop both sides at the same time, But there's also the possibility that someone may develop the north side or the south side lirst. And the idea of having a loop road there and an aecess eloser to the high school,just an added cost down the road that we \vanted to try and avoid. So it's a long cul-de-sac, hut I dare say' we've gol communities \\lith far greater efrective cul-de-sacs allover tOW11. Page ') 6 COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: And it's what, 20-foot wide, at least? MR. HANCOCK: Fifty-foot wide would be the right-of-way, Or are you talking about the sidewalk connection? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm talking about to the cul-de-sac turnaround for the fire equipment and so forth, MR, HANCOCK: Yes, sir, minimum radiuses are established there, It's a 50-foot exterior radius, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I know that Brad would nonnally ask that question, but I -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well, that was on my list And this one's very long, It's not a 600 -- this is a rather lengthy thing, Could you not put a turnaround somewhere in the midpoint of it? The concern is that for cul-de-sacs with emergency vehicles, if they make a wrong turn it takes thcm a long time to correct that What would be the problem -- I mean, most communities around the state, we -- they honor that better than they do in Collier. And the solution is a turnaround in thc center and it ends up becoming an asset to the community anyway, Are you asking for a deviation from that anyway? I didn't see that MR HANCOCK: No, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So you really aren't allowed to do this site plan without it, so -- MR HANCOCK: Wc can do one of two things: We can either show an additional turnaround kind of at the midpoint of that cul-de-sac, if you will-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Good idea, MR HANCOCK: -- graphically, and then at the time of development order the code requirements would come to play. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Right, because it becomes a traffic calming device, Right now you've got a terrific drag strip being built and it would be -- take away that a little bit MR. HANCOCK: It is going to hurt our drag racing market of residence, but I think we can accomplish that COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You're not asking for the deviation, and your site plan would be amended to show an approximate location of a turnaround, Good. MR, HANCOCK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tim, that will probably -- I would assume, since you want to retain as much buildable area as you can, that means you're going to probably push the south strip of residential down and bump out the lake. something like that? Is that -- because you're going to have to redo the master plan when you come back for consent, I would assume. MR,IIANCOCK: We probably will absorb it in the lake and not affect the preserve, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, MR.IIANCOCK: We're I think just a little bit over on our lake size, which is where I like to be, as opposed to the opposite, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if the fire department turns down that wrong street looking for a fire, I think we've got bigger problems anyway, Any other questions of -- well, first of all, Tim, did you finish your presentation, or did you have more you want to continue with? MR HANCOCK: Unfortunately I have I believe two more, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav, " MR, HANCOCK: We left off at the table, The next change is on Exhibit F, which is Page I ] in the document you were provided this morning, And that is that under Exhibit F, item 3,C, thc County Attorney has requested clarifying language with regard to the 30-foot easement along the eastern property line, The requestcd languagc is shown here identirying the easement as a drainage, utility and access easement and indicating that it is to be conveycd at no cost to the county, Now, this item does carry over. It later where a fair share contribution toward the cIeanout cost of the MGG- 15 drainagc swale was discussed, And I wanted to put on the record and we've discussed this with transportation staff. that the donation of the eascmcnt willmore than satisfy the site at cost, and thercfore the reference Page 27 , '^""".' ._.._,...___.,..,_ "'"_""",~'_"'~_""__'H"""_~"_'.~~,-,,,,_~~~,._'~,",,_,,, .'- ''''.' _"_,,__,, _",'m..', _, ,_._~.~__.. 16 I le4 .Ianuarv 7. 20 I 0 " to cost-sharing in the PlJO is to be removed, And both Mr. Casalanguida and Mr. I'odczerwinsky are here and can confirm that Make me pretty stupid to say it if I didn't think they would confirm it. but] don't want to rule that out CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Andjust for the record, that's Item 4.0 on Page 120 MR, HANCOCK: Yes. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that's going to be removed, Nick, do you know ifthat's in agreement? MR, CASALANGUIDA: That is in agreement CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav. MR, HANCOCK: It's 0, Following to Item 4.E on Page I). we have added language to the PUD basically that states that the 20-foot -- Ms, Oeselem picked this up. The 20-foot casement along the canal will be conveyed to the county within 30 days of approval of the PlJO. While we had stated that, it was not in the I'LJD, The reason for that was that we thought it would have been done by now. but we're still working on it and we're very. very close, But 've want to put that in the PUO to ensure that that commitment is upheld, Language has further been added under Item 6,A, Page 13. This is architectural language that was in the previous PUO with respect to the development on the site, The Chairman asked if we would consider putting that language back in, He thought it was beneficial. We saw it again as not bcing adverse to the project in any way. so we have added that language back in from the originally approved PlID. which requires that an architectural theme shall include similar architectural design and similar material throughout all the buildings. signs, fences, walls and so forth, Again, typically done, but this ensures that it will be addressed, Language has then been added under Item 7.A. at the request of the County Attorney. They were seeking further clarification on the definition ofa care unit with respect to the ALF use. So the language we've proposed is nearly identical to that which this body has reviewed tor at least one other similar project And I sense we're kind of struggling with I"", to de line ALF project to project, and] think this is the latest and greatest language that the County Attorney's Office was coml')I1able with, So that's the purpose of that language there. is to ensure that you get an ALF and not a market rate project that's disguised as an ALF I believe is the concern there, And that. sir, is the end of lIlV all too Ielli!thv chanl!cs document. ~ L.' ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. let's stali with questions of Tim or anybody with the applicant from the Planning Commission before we go to staff'. Any questions that haven't been asked already" COMMISSIONER CARON: I just have one, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron') COMMISSIONER CARON: You're going to be using the canal I,,, storm water drainage; is that correct? MR, HANCOCK: That's the ultimate discharge. ves, c _ COMMISSIONER CARON: Does that stonnwater have to be treated before it goes into the canal? MR, IIANCOCK: Oh, yes. ma'am, Matter of fact, if we create that lagoon that connects to the canal, it cannot be used as a part of our storm water sy'stem if it directly connects to the canal. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. and that's -- I just wanted to confirm that t,)C the record. MR, HANCOCK: That would clearly be an amenity. but not a part of our stonnwater management system, COMMISSIONER CARON: Thanks, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tom') MR. EASTMAN: Tim, the propcrty to the nOlih, the north parceL would potentially students be able to access Mike Davis and Golden Gate High School by using the pathway that Parks and Ree is proposing? MR, HANCOCK: I believe that answer is yes. Yes. MR. EASTMAN: Okay. And then the parcel to the south -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you pull your mie a little closer to you, Tom? Thank you, MR. EASTMAN: The parcel to the south. could you walk through how a student might walk to either the elementary or the high school and the provisions that would be made [')C that? MR. HANCOCK: Cel1ainly. If you kind of bisect that southern piece to an east half and west halt; on the Page 'x 1 ~nuL uJo 0~ " east half where the entry road comes in there will be sidewalks, We're not requesting a deviation on sidewalks, Therc will be sidewalks on both sides of that roadway that connect to Magnolia Pond Drive, In Magnolia Pond Drive there are currently sidewalks that access both Golden Gate High School and Mike Davis Elementary, So their -- what I don't recall off the top of my head is whetherthat sidewalk is on both sides of Magnolia Pond Drive or just on the north side, If it's just on tbe north side, we'd have to have a crosswalk and access conditions constructed there, To the west end where the cul-de-sac is, we are showing a pedestrian sidewalk connection, again back to the right-of-way, to connect to the sidewalk that exists within the Magnolia Pond right-of-way for access to the high school. MR. EASTMAN: Thank you, MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Tim, on your new Exhibit A, you added under A-I single-family units limited to 125 units, But on the beginning sentence in Exhibit A your maximum number of dwelling units is 231, I'm going to get into your TIS in a minute, but I know that we have a higher impact from single-family than we do multi-family, But was your intention here to limit thc units to 125 overall and they could all bc single-family, or do you expect then to have 125 units and a difference between 231 and 125 potentially in multi-family? MR, HANCOCK: No, sir. my intent was not to cap at 125 units. This was an addition that Ms. Oeselem requested, The bottom line is we can only have -- if we did all single-family, we could only get 125 units on it, period, without doing something dramatic, If we did multi-family, it's 231, You know, [left it wide open, because the differencc in the TIS between the 231 multi-f;unily and thc 125 single-family is not significant They're fairly close to each other. So I added this language at the request of Ms, Oeselem. But it does bring up a confusing situation. If you did -- physically we can't do both, We couldn't do 125 single-family and 100 multi-family. I just know that from a site planning standpoint Beyond that I'm not sure how I could convey that to you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the problem that your TIS presents is that you produced a TIS as producing either 125 single-family or 231 multi-family, not a mix, So if you do the 125 single-family and you want to add to that the difierence in some kind of multi-family -- and I understand what you believe a good planning exercise would mean, but there are a lot of planners out there, especially some that we've seen plenty of times in front of us, that would stack stuff on top of stuff and somehow we'd end up with a lot more units than we anticipated, And we've had projects like that numerous times. So how do we correlate your TIS that's "or", not cither or not mixed, but "or" with now the numbers that you've put in Exhibit A? Because now you've got either 125 units of single-family and that's it or 231 of multi-family, And what I saw was the combination of them based on what you originally had in your Exhibit A, Now, it doesn't look like if you combine the Exhibit A with the TIS you can do a combination if you go and max out the single-family at 125, And ifthat's the case, why don't we just say that MR, HANCOCK: Well. the intent is if you build 125 single-family units, you're done, That was my intent I think the protection you're seeking, Commissioner, may occur under Item 4,C in the traffic section on Page 12 where any mixed residential development proposed shall not exceed the 13 I p,m, peak hour trips, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right And I was going to get to that, because that produces another problem in regards to the ALF, I didn't see in your TIS where the ALl' was addressed, So how arc you going to account for the traffic in the ALF if you're going to cap your traffic at just the single-family? MR, HANCOCK: r believe as we went through the TIS the discussion with transportation was to present as much as possible a practical worst case scenario. The ALl' use, ifit were involved, would chew up a portion of that 131 p.m. peak hour trips, And so with that ceiling. I think the transportation staff felt that we'd identified worst case, but the way to create a ceiling so that we couldn't throw a larger mix in there would be to cap us at the] 31 trips, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if you build 125 units, because of the TIS you couldn't build any ALl'; is that what you're -- MR. IIANCOCK: That's correct CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that the acknowledgment that you realize') Page 29 1 ~anLv 7.Jl?1 - MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir, that is our intent. in fact. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Well, Ijust wanted -- that I didn't understand, but it's clear now. Thank you, In number four, AA, your f()ur ALF units and how they equate. you're going to reduce one residential dwelling unit, subtract it from the 231. Now, what if you only build 125" Will you still subtract the ratio of ALF units to residential" See, I mean, say you decide to build 200 with the ALE but yet the ALE doesn't discredit the 23 I at all. You're just always going -- you're working against the )31 when in reality you're going to be -- you really have I 75, You could have 125 residential units and be done with this project. Would you have an ALF with 125 residential units? MR, HANCOCK: No, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Whv'! COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Too full. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know that. Bob, I want him to say it for the record, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: I apologize, MR,IIANCOCK: Because our minimum development standards established in the document and the intent of the project is that if it were to build out at single-family at 125 units, we would consume all of the available land, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, , MR, HANCOCK: And the trips. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, If we go to Page 4, footnote number seven. your reference to the parking requirements, Ray, do we have a different parking requirement in the LDC for independent living units than we do for multi-family? MR BELLOWS: Yes. The Land Development Code under ,;roup honsing has parking requirements f()r ALl'. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are they more or less stringent than multi -- MR, BELLOWS: I think it's less. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Less stringent. So that's a more stringent criteria" MR BELLOWS: I believe it is, I'd havc to double check. but I believe it is. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Under your general notes on your master plan, nLllnber two, that general note is the old general note, I don't believe it's any longer still consistent now with the language you changed in the text MR HANCOCK: It will have to be amended. ves. sir. I tailed to mention that in mv notes, but that's correct. , - CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On Page II. Exhibit r. a list of developer commitments, You have some water management commitments in here, A and Rand F. I believe. arc all cUn'entIy required by the Land Development Code, Ray, sorry to -- MR, BELLOWS: That's all right, I just wanted to verify that other question, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If I asked Nick this inliis first day on the job here, more or less, I'm going to get a transportation answer, and I really don't \vant that so I thought I'd ask YOll. Page lion Exhibit F. 3,A. Band E, are those already requirements of the I ,and Development Code? MR. BELLOWS: Let me get to that page. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's the handout that Tim provided in the beginning ofthe meeting, MR, BELLOWS: That's redundant infonnation, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, the purpose of the new fonnat was to remove that kind of stuft~ right? MR. BELLOWS: WelL I think the reason it's there is because it may have come out of the EAC, but they are redundant to code requirements. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, WelL then I think they should be in hcre if we're !lying -- otherwise, let'sjust take the entire Land Development Code and put it in every single PUO. MR, BELLOWS: Yeah. I agree. I think Melissa was the one that prepared this staffrepOJ1. but it's my understanding that -- MR I'OOCZERWINSKY: 13 is not redundant to-- COMMISSIONER CARON: I was going to say. 13-- MR. BELLOWS: WelL B is not Page 30 l2J, 201)~~ ~ . COMMISSIONER CARON: Right CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Okay, Well, I'm just asking, which one -- the redundancies, though, the whole objective of consolidating our new format was to do away with the multiple redundancies we had because they become a problem as our code and policies change in the future, MR. BELLOWS: I agree, And I think in this case we had something that may have come from an EAC staff report, John Podczerwinsky had just indicated B is not redundant, but we'll verity that too, CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Okay, Well, if A and E are redundant, could they be removed by consent? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then the last page, I think C is where I had my questions, but you already clarified those in our previous discussion, That's all I've got on these, Does anybody else have any more questions? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah. can we talk a second about the architectural theme? CHAIRMAN STRAfN: No, you have to be a licensed architect to do that COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Is it important that we make all the buildings stucco? And here's the concern, I mean, this -- as we go into the greener world, these stucco walls are not the most sophisticated, So why are we locking every building to be stucco? MR, HANCOCK: Personally I -- as someone who was born and raised in Florida, I hate stucco, It has nothing to do with Florida. So I'm happy to remove that. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Just take that sentence out MR. HANCOCK: Andjust remove the sentence. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think the o1:ljective, Brad, was to make sure there was some common architectural element to the project COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And let's -- I mean, what's the virtue of that? I mean, that's another thing is that there are a lot of people complaining that some of our communities -- you know, it's difficult to tell one unit from another. And it also ends up making something look bigger when you make everything look the same, In other words, if you have 10 houses in a row and they all look the same, they look like one big building versus smaller buildings in different styles, which is kind ofthe new urbanist approach anyway. So do we want to really lock that in? MR, HANCOCK: The real benefit I see in this paragraph as it applies to the project that we've discussed here today where you may have an ALF and then there may be some single-family or multi-family on another portion of the project, as long as we stay within that trip cap, is that the code has always pushed us toward a cohesive development, not broken apart into many pieces, While I may philosophically agree with you, but yet I live in a planned community in a stucco house, it's just kind of the reality of what we're dealing with, So I'm okay with pulling that. The only thing I like about having this in here, Mr. Schiffer, is that it does require some forethought and continuity between what may be two different uses, a single-family and a multi-family, and that's good for real estate values. I'm not sure whether it's good to the eye, That's a personal opinion, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Maybe I'm missing, what are we preventing with that? I mean, what is it that goes wrong when you don't have a common architectural theme, other than the scale ofthe development drops? MR, HANCOCK: I think you deal more with a perception from people who live around the project that, you know it-- , COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: If you want it, you can have it. So what we'll do is we'll cross out all buildings shall be primary finished in light subdued colors, You want that? And then we'll just cross out everything after that MR, HANCOCK: I don't see any reason to control color in this document COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I don't either. MR, HANCOCK: Or finish, But architectural cohesiveness is something that I think people have expressed a support for, so I'm more apt to leave it in at this point. COMMISSIONER SCIIIFFER: So we'll kill that whole sentence. All buildings shall -- we'll just wipe out that whole sentence, Page 31 c -'- ..--.-.-,-.,----......,--.-.,....---., .-.---""--.. .,--_.~,.'--' ..- '" ...".-~.,..".'".,.,,~-~--.~""...,-"". --~..~~~"-'-' , 16 I 1 11~ January 7. 2010 MR. HANCOCK: Yes. sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. That's a step in the right direction, But you eould be limiting something better, that's my concern. MR, HANCOCK: I understand. I can't say I disagree with you. but -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other questions of the applicant at this time" (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Tim, thank you, MR. HANCOCK: Thank you CHAIRMAN STRAIN We'll have stafTreport. MS.OESELEM: Good morning, For the record, again. Kay OeseJem, Principal Planner with Zoning, You do have a copy of the staff report on record. It is revised, dated 11/17109, And it goes into detail, but since you've already had a lengthy presentation and discussion with the applicant over the issues, I won't belabor the points, other than to cite the specific sections of that stafTreport. Beginning on Page] shows the geographic locatioll. As you've seen in the different exhibits you've seen anyway, there is a project description, On Page 2, the surrounding land use and zoning is provided to you in significant detail in that section, There's another aerial that mirrors what you have been presented today. There is a discussion as noted in Tim's presentation of the growth management issues, And there also ineludes the transportation analysis and the conservation and coastal management element analysis as well. Statl is recommending that this petition as amended through the hearings so tar be deemed consistent with the Grow1h Management Plan; that is. all applicable elements ofthat plan. Going on on Page 5 is the analysis.fhis includes environmental review staff and transportation staff, utility review. emergency management staff review, Parks and Rcc revic\v, an affordable housing review and zoning stafT review. In the environmental revic\\' you see comments about the native preserves and gopher tortoise relocation. In the transpOrliltion review YOll see review' cOlTlments about the significant impacted roadways. In the Parks and Rec review )'ou see discussions about \vhat's already been discussed about the casement that's going to be dedicated t()r the 20-foot wide easement to accommodate the sidewalk, And then it goes on to the zoning revic\\i'. And in this zoning rev'ie\V it shows an analysis of the proposed MPUD and the existing MPUO, And it's also f()lIowed and supported by PLJO findings one through eight with analyses of each of those findings and the rezone findings beginning 011 Page 9. All these findings are in support of staffs recommendation Ii" approval. We have worked very diligently in the last few days. It's been a tough few days for Tim, I know we've driven him nuts, but tr~ying to get the changes Illade to the PU!) document that .you saw this morning. And we are comfortable with what is proposed in the changes. We do have transportation staff here that can address any questions you might have ti" them, And there is someone here from environment staff as \vell. Other than that. if you have questions. I'd be happy to address them. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron. then Me. Wolflev, COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, I just want to get to the deviations, And let's talk about deviation nwnber two first And Kay, this is really for transportation and/or your new boss, The deviation that secks rclief from the minimum right-or-way. which is 60 feet. we get this request with every single thing that comes before us. Why do \I,/e have this minimum? Did you all have a reason for it to begin with? And ifit was valid as a minimum to begin with, why do we keep allowing deviations from them? Or please could we get it changed in the next LOC cycle. MR, CASALANGUIDA: For the record. Nick Casalanguida, It's a typical section, even on our publ1c roadways as well as private roadways, that we recommend. Itls optimized butler, optimized setbacks, optimized curb and pavement width, Ifthe design speed of the road is lower. the pavement width can be smaller. If they want to put the sidewalks in the back ot'curbs sometimes and widen the sidewalk to six feet. they can do certain things to minimize that width, So it's a recommended standard. And applicants. based on thcir design of their propcrty. the speed of the P'loe,J <b ,.- 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 road, can always make adjustments, It's reviewed typically internally by engineering, which is now our staff, externally by transportation, But we can come back and provide maybe an update in the next cycle of the LOC. We'd be happy to do that COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, it's become a deviation in every single thing, So ifthere is a legitimate reason for 60 feet, then we should be using 60 feet and we shouldn't be f,'Tanting these deviations, If it should be 60 feet with conditions that you ean go to 50 feet if thus and so happens then -- you know, then we should state it that way, MR, CASALANGUIDA: Sure, we could do that. COMMISSIONER CARON: I mean, I don't know, you all will figure that out But it just seems like __ MR. CASALANGUIDA: We could qualify it so it's not a deviation, They can pick offa menu based on speed or different options of the road so it still meets the criteria, We'll look into that. COMMISSIONER CARON: And the other one is deviation number one, where we typically -- or what we're seeing now is we want to put the landscaping requirements in a smaller space. And I brought this up before and I just want to bring it up again, I want to know if somebody is tracking this in any way, We keep doing this but we don't know whether it's successful or not Is this the right thing to do be doing? It seems okay, We keep doing it But are these landscaped areas successful, I mean, or are we putting too much into a too small area') MR. CASALANGUIDA: When you say successful, do the plants survive; is that your question" COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, are things surviving, MR, CASALANGUIDA: Sure, I can have -- COMMISSIONER CARON: I mean, I know that if it all died offthey'd have to replant it But if it's not a successful strategy, we also -- why would we continue to do it? MR CASALANGUIDA: If it's your pleasure, I can respond to both of those items in the next Planning Commission meeting or just send you an individual e-mail just to follow up, COMMISSIONER CARON: I think everybody would probably like to know, MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure, happy to do that COMMISSIONER CARON: Good, MS,OESELEM: If! might offer, on deviation two there is a section ofthe LOC that allows projects that are non-PUD that won't be coming before anybody for deviations to seek substitutions based on engineering criteria. And that's customarily done, as he said, internally, So yeah, that's a very common thing that's done, COMMISSIONER CARON: But this is a PUO, MS,OESELEM: Right CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Wolfley" COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Yes, sir, regarding the traffic impact study done in December of'08, trip distribution assignment, Nick and I spoke for a moment, and I'd like to -- my question was regarding how are we going to handle the intersections at Magnolia Pond Drive and 951 or Collier Boulevard, and how is that whole thing going to work? Because it seems like we're adding it especially in the morning, in the afternoon, And I think you may have stood up there at the same time and -- but Nick did sueh __ MR, POOCZERWINSKY: I thought you were about to ask a different qnestion, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: -- a great job and a great diagram. MR. POOCZERWINSKY: I'd like to give it to Me. Casalanguida, ifhe'd like to take it. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: How are we going to do it? Are we going to leave the lights there so close to 1-75, or what are we going to do there? How are we going to handle that? MR, CASALANGUIDA: He appears to be gloating too much, referring the question to me, The intersection of Magnolia Pond and 951 is currently in a design right now, The final permits are being obtained, So that intersection approach heading east out of Magnolia is being widened as part of the Collier Boulevard projeet Also secondary with the Noah's Way realignment that's owned by Me. Benderson to the nOlth, that intersection will be moved to the north at a point in time in the future as part of our project as well. Both ofthose improvements will take into account the necessary traffic to get these projects handled coming out of Magnolia Pond Drive. Page 33 '_._~...._..__.___~ 0'" _~,_,______ _~~._._._ ,',_"'" I' January 109 7,2010 161 And again, as Me. Feder, my boss, pointed out, you always have a hard time when those schools come in at that peak hour. You don't design the road for that peak peak 20 minutes when the schools come in and out There's going to be congestion on all of our roads at that point in time. But that intersection is being improved, Within the next one year that capital project will staI1, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: So -- but basically what you're saying is that Noah's Way, which is north, closer to the canal, is going to be signalized. MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes. sir. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: And the Magnolia Pond Drive will not be signalized, MR. CASALANGUIDA: Will be directionalized, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Oirectionalized. MR CASALANGUIDA: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Thank VOlL . . CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other questions of staff) Me. Schiffer" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Kay. maybe Ray could answer this because of the legacy here. Ray. why is this called a mixed use when all the uses arc residential? MR. BELLOWS: 'y../c knc\v )/Oll were going to ask that so we were prepared. It is a addition ofthe ALl', which is a group t;leility found under community facility zoning, That in conjunction with the residential pursuant to our code qualifies as a mixed use. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, Becausc I wouldn't want to confuse it with a real mixed use, MR. BELLOWS: Well. it mects the minimum definition, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okav. that's whv, Got it. . . CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that it, Ilrad" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm done. veah, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. anybody elsc" (No response.) CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, I've got a couple of questions, Under the emergency management review, Ijust think it's intcresting that we ask them to comment, but they can never do anything but CY A their position, Yet we never get a feedback from them that tells us anything positive, It'sjust that -- let me read this to you: Residential development in this area further taxes an already tight evacuation and sheltcring situation within Collier County. While there is currently no impact mitigation required for this, it should be noted that approval of this MPl!ll increases the evacuation and shelter requirements forthe county, Nov\', that department has put LIS 011 notice ever since V."C started asking them to review these PUDs. with almost the same language, This one actually is a little more -- seems a little strongcr than language in the past, Is anybody in the county taking it as a hint that we might want to do something about this, that we may want to figure out a way to not have this liability on every project we approveo Is anybody looking at it; do you know? MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. but wc can. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know you guys arc overtaxed right now, but when things turn around, a year, whatever it takes, I think it's something Irom a county perspective it would be wise t(1r us to start looking at We used to have it different than we do now. and I think it would \vatTant rUl1her review. And Kay, on the last paragraph of Page 6 of 16. your sentence is as tollows: As stated earlier, part of this petition request is a rezone of a five-acre parcel which will be added to the original 42-acre property at the northeast corner of the Magnolia Pond PUll. Although there is no increase in the number of residential units, the site will be permitted to be developed as an assisted living facility, When you said the site, were you referring to the whole pun or just that north live-acre tract that was added? MS, DESELEM: I believe that actually rctercnecs the subject property, which is the entire acreage, it's not just that piece. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ijust wanted to make sure that's what your analysis was. Because that's not how the PUO was written, so -- okay, that's the only questions I have, Anybody else'! (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Kay, Page 34 16 I 1 January 7, 2010 ~f Are there any public speakers, Ray? MR, BELLOWS: No public speakers have registered, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then Tim, do you want to rebut an)1hing the public speakers didn't say? Any closing comments? MR. HANCOCK: I believe Me. White has a couple ofvcry quick comments. But I personally just want to thank you for your timc in working through the difficulties today. This was an unusual situation, I do appreciate it CHAIRMAN STRAIN: See, I know that if] asked Patrick, he'd have stand (sic) up said something, but herc we go, MR, WHITE: Thank you, Me. Strain. No, I just want to again echo that this is a project that has not only a history of being the longest in my professional working relationship with the clients, but has probably a 20-year history, We believe that we have reconfigured the projcct, we've brought the additional lands in, we've addressed what the staff concerns are, we have the determination of consistency, recommendations of approval, and I believe that we have addressed your qucstions adequately, We will work diligently with regard to the easement issues to have those conveyed, and as well to make all of the changcs that we have trackcd and provided an addenda for. And at this time I would ask for a motion of approval if you would, please, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, now, we'll close the -- Ray, since thcre are no public speakers, we will closc the public hearing, Patrick, youjumped back up for some reason, MR. WI liTE: I simply wanted to indicate that Me. Barry WillianlS is here Ii-om Parks and Rec, and he wasn't mentioned as being part of the stan; but we have worked with him and his folks and I believe that they are in support as well. I do not want to speak for him, but I think it's fair to say that they'd like to see us go forward, Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Thank vou, ~ Okay, with that, we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion, Me. Schiffer') COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah. I would make a motion that we recommend -- forward with a recommendation of approval PlJOZ-A-2006-AR-1 03 18, the Magnolia Pond MPUO. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I'll second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion's been made by Mr. Schiffer, seconded by Me. Vigliotti, And I'm assuming, though, your motion is subject to the Exhibit A that was passed out with all the corrcctions that we discussed today that will come back to us on consent Is that -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yes, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, both the-- COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- motion maker and second acknowledge that? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yeah, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Correct CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Anybody else? Is there any discussion on the matter? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah. Ijust-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms, Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: -- want to make sure it's also with other stipulations that have been made by staff. And, I mean, for things like the gopher tortoise management plan and whatever else that might not have gotten into the changes, I just want to make sure, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, well, any other -- and Tim, when you come back on consent, you'll have all this cleaned up in a document that we can review at that point, so -- subjcct to the motion, Okay, iftherc's no discussion, all those in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ayc, COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye, Page 35 IJtuaL 7.20~ &~ COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Ave " COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Ave, COMMISSIONER CARON: Ave, " CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carrics 8-0, Thank .you all vel)' much, and we'll see YOll on consent. Now for the people who have been waiting lor the CA.T, issue, we're about to start it So I noticed that I think most of vou have been here, " Item #100 PETITION: COLLIER COUNTY ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES DEPARTMENT - BUS TRANSFER STATION CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The next petition up is Petition CU-I'L-J009-405. the Collier County Alternative Transportation Modes Department for what's considered a CA.'j . transfer station on Radio Road, All those wishing to participate in this item, please risc to he s\\:om in hy the court repol1cr. (Speakers were duly sworn,) (At which time, Commissioner V igliOl1i exited the boardroom.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Disclosures on the part of Planning Commission. Mr. Schiffer') COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yes, I had a phone conversation with Miebelle Arnold regarding the issues on this job. Essentially it was discussing the activity tbat would occur on the site, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else') M r. M ulTav? . COMMISSIONER MlJRRA Y: And I too had a telephone conversation with Ms, Arnold and this lady planner. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This lady planner? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Miss Abra Horne, MS, HORNE: It's a trickY name. " CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anvbodv clse') " " (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I also bad a meeting with Michelle Arnold and Ms, !-lame. and we went over many of the issues we'll be going ovcr today, With that I think that's the last disclosures. Okay, it's yours, MS.llORNE: Thank you, Again, my name is Abra, I know it's tricky, Home. You can callmc Mrs. Home. if that's easier. l3ef,>re I begin my presentation. I'd like to brielly qualify myself as an expert witness. if you don't mind, since this is a quasi judicial hearing. I have 18 years of experience in both land use and transit planning, Ilalf of my career I worked in the public sector for the local governments of Genee and DeLand. I reviewed a number of -- an extensive number of land Lise petitions and conditional uses. I'm also a member oCthe American Planning Association and the American Institute ofCertitied Planners. I served as the development review coordinator f(Jr the City of DeLand. I served as the long-range planner for the City. ofOcoee, responsible for the Evaluation and AppraisJI Rep0l1. as \\'c11 as the Gro\vth Management Plan and the maintenance of the Land Development Code, Page] 6 16 I 1 January 7, 2010 ~~ As a consultant I have not only served as an extension of staff for nLllllerous local governments and reviewed conditional use applications there, but I havc also focused my practice on transit facilities here in Florida, Since joining the private sector, the focus of my efforts have been transfer stations, light rail, bus service, transit development plans and the like, Most recently I appcared bcfore Scminole County and Orange County in 2006 and 2008 to review conditional use applications, Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today, The reason that we are here is Wilbur Smith is here to represent the alternative transportation modes department J have with me here today a principal from Wilbur Smith Associates, Chris Swenson, and our traffic engineer, Revo Kanilwa, And we will all be speaking to you today in answering any questions that you may have, I do have a cough drop to try and keep my voice, The proposed requested use is a -- to add bus passenger transfer -- that's easy to say, Bus passenger transfers at an existing facility located at 8300 Radio Road. We submitted an application based on a zoning verification letter for a conditional use to add these uses, I'd like to note a few things for the record, Wc have reviewed the staff report, and I would like to enter it into the record and make a few specific notes, In particular, there are approximately 939 unique signatures rather than 1,000 on the petition. We disagree with the statement in the staff report that consistency is only obtained through applying conditions to this use, Through the presentation that I'm about to give, we hope to demonstrate that the conditional use, if approved, would represent a very minor addition of activities that would increase the public safety and welfare and enhance the quality of life in Collier County, And thereforc it is a minor modification of existing conditions, What is a bus passenger transfer facility? It's a placc for several routes to come together, for passengers to safely move from one bus to another. 'fhere is a place for passengers to wait and to buy tickets and have other passenger amenities such as vending machines. A place where passengers may be dropped off by their spouse or another person. It is important to move -- I'm getting ahead of myself. Reasons for the transfer might include moving from one route to another to make a more efficient travel pattern and reduce commute times 1Tom home to work, If your home is located on one bus route and your work opportunity or other recreational or medical opportunities are located on another route, you would make a transfer at such a station. One of the things I wanted to spend a little bit of time on today is the existing operations, I have a history teacher that my husband and I both had in junior high school here in Florida, and he said you cannot know where you're going until you know where you have been, So in that vein I wanted to talk a little bit about what happens today on-site so that we're very clear about those activities, I know that it was described in the staff report, but I want to go over those activities, At the beginning of the day, around 3:30 in the mOll1ing today, the drivers arrive, the bus drivers for fixed route transit arrive at the site, They turn on their buses. They do a vehicle inspection. 1l1ey walk around the bus to make sure that it is safe and adequately maintained, If it is not in proper working order, then another bus would be started and the first bus would be put into maintenance, Fleet maintenance operates at this facility, There arc 23 fixed route buses. Those are not all operated all the time because they maintain what is called a spare ratio, a number of buses that will remain on-site to allow for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance activities, There is also paratransit vehicles that currently operate on this site, What does that mean'! There are about 20 vehicles that are owned by the county, there are also other vehicles that are owned by separate operators that provide on-call services f(lr people who are unable for various reasons to ride fixed route transit. Those people are certified annually. so they need to go to the CA.T, operations center and be evaluated for what their capacity is to use transit. The reason this is important and that it allows CAT. to operate efficiently is that paratransit trips cost approximately three times as much as lixed route trip. So we would prefer, if someone is capable, that we move them on a fixed route system. We feel that the transfer facility is one ofthose opportunities to move some passengers more safely to the fixed route service. Other examples of activities that take place on-site are that -- employees and supervisor vehicles. So together we have approximately 43 vehicles that are stored overnight. They are county vehicles, And they are also maintained Pane 37 b - -._....""._^_.~_._-.- .. "'-"~"_... - '.-.-,....,.-.-.-....-...---..... " 161 l/[A Januarv 7. 20 I 0 ~ and washed at the end ofthe day insidc and out So employees arrive throughout the day. there's a second shift of bus operators that an'ive and supervisors that drive them out to thc bus routes so that continuous opemtions are permittcd, In addition, as noted in the staff report. therc is a sale of vehicles that occurs on a regular basis, Thcrc is also a collection and counting oftare box revenues, I think I'vc covered most of the things that happen there, I'd like to go on to the next slidc regarding existing bus routes. Thcre are three current CAT bus routes: Route 3,A and 13. routc five and route six that are shown on this slide, Our graphic artist took a eouple of liberties and so the dots that are located -- the green and blue dots should be located slightly east and west ofwhcrc they are on this slide. But the point that I'd likc to makc is that today the purple route already travels along Radio Road and serves East Naples, It stops adjacent to thc CAT, opcration center today on street 20 timcs pcr day, The same thing is true for route five and six. they both operate along Davis Boulcvard today, and they stop along Davis Boulevard a combined total of 34 timcs per day for a grand total of 54 stops along and adjacent to this site. By improving this site and allowing t(lr safe circulation of buses off street, you would reduce potential conflicts with drivers on strect who have to wait behind buses that are stopping to pick up and discharge passengers along the roadwav, , . You can see that the circu -- this illustrates the circulation todav -- I'm sorry. thc lilture condition, Plus this . - area that I will show you in red is the difTerence that we are requesting in conjunction with the eonditionaluse, In other words, everything that is shown filr bus circulation for the purple route today is shown in purplc now, and thc red is the differencc that would be requested as a rcsult of the conditional use, 1 also indicated the time points that arc ShovVll on the schedule, so you can see V\i'hich areas the purple route serves. This is route five, as we would propose to circulate it if the conditional use wcre approvcd, Again, I showed you earlier that it currently operates along Davis Boulevard, And the area in red is where we would rcquest that the routes deviate to enter and cxit the Radio Road jircilitv. The reason this is important is that it reduces unnecessary circulation along Radio Road. We are not proposing to rcroute the bus routes along Radio Road, Wc would simply go to thc trallic signallocatcd at Davis and Radio Road to make the turning movement. Again, I've sho\vn the time points for the hlue route. The yellow' route has a similar circulation pattcl11 in this vicinity. And again, the only change from cutTent conditions that operate today is the area shO\VIl in red. I've shown again the time points. rhe route six provides access to homes. businesses and other destinations in Immokalee and Naplcs, So why is a passenger transfer facility needed? In particular. I wanted to mention, in case YOll hadn't -- you probably know this, but Policy 12-10 of the Transportation Element incorporates and adopts the transit development plan by reference into thc comprehensive plan. Growth Management Plan. This table 120 was taken out of the last major update to the transit development plan, What thcy do during the development of the transit development plan is thcy intcrvicw passengers who are riding c.A.T. fixcd route transit and they have a directed questionnaire, rhis is the response to a dircctcd qucstionnaire that indicates that passengers are looking Ii" a safe place to make transfcrs and to wait fClr buses, they arc looking for availability of bus route infonnation, dependability of C.A.T. buses, on-time perfonnance, and ability to get to \\/here they \vant to go. These arc the reasons that we believe that the C.A.T. passenger needs would be met by adding a transfer station. In accordance with that, we havc dcveloped a site plan that reduccs the potentiallc)r conOicts betwecn single occupant vehicles, pedestrians and the buses as they' operate. youtll notice what we call a S3\vtooth bus bay. What that does. it allows the drivers to operate in a forward motion only. so there are no backing of vehicles and no backing alanns required. Shelters would be added. although not shown in these pictures. Thc picture on the left I should point out is the \vay the area looks today'. The picture in the center is the proposed passenger waiting an.:a and sawtooth bus bay parking spaces. Thatts where the buses \\tolild park and the passengers \vould be in the cenlLT. somc\vhat like the Page -' X c 16 I 1 ~.~ January 7, 2010 illustration on the right It's a photograph that I thought might make it easier to show what the parking looks like once it's in place. We would also add shelters to protect the passengcrs from inclement weather. And there would be an opportunity, because this is located in front of the C.A.T, op, center, for cycs on the passengers throughout the day, Supervision of transfer activities, if you will. The proposed Phase I improvements would be pavement markings, bus parking spaces, bollards, parking and crosswalks, Phase II improvements would includc a vehicle storage area in the vacant portion of the site shown on the photograph here, a pad for fueling activities, and a driveway improvement on Radio Road, although not shown in this picture, It's a vcry minor improvement on Radio Road, One of the questions that we have heard from the community is did the county look at other sites, Over a three-year period before I became involved with this project, the county looked at over 25 sites to serve as a potential maintenance, administration and operations base, as wcll as passenger transfer opportunities, They knew and contemplated in the transit development plan that is incorporated into the comprehensive plan by reference that they were reaching the maximum capacity fClr both the County Barn and the govemmcnt center operations for transfers, As such, they anticipated the need for a new site and they identified criteria and they looked at a number of sites, Shortly after the conclusion of these studies the Gallman Oldsmobile site became available and the seller was willing to sell to mect the county's prcssing schedule and price considerations. The facility was selected becausc it met a number of the criteria that were used to evaluate the other sites that the county considered, Spccifically, the site availability, the size. As I said, two uses were contemplated that might be needed and so a site that more than met the county's existing needs for maintenance. And so maintenance and passenger transfer is what occurred at one location. Proximity and accessible to arterial roadways, The cost of site improvements, Proximity to existing routes, pmticularly in the East Naples area. Central location to the bus system so that buses do not have to go a long way around to go back to a transfer station, And good accessibility, Another item that when we were meeting with the public we realized is that there is not a clear understanding of the different types of transfer facilities, not only herc in Collier County but around the country, We stuck to identitying two types of transfer facilities which are in question here: Major transfer facility and a secondary transfer facility, As you know, in Collier County wc also have passenger tnmsfers that occur on street. For example, at the Coastland Mall they are now making transfers on street. A major transfer f'lcility is anticipated to handle between 60 and 75 percent of passenger activities, It is supervised and publicly owned, The rcason that we recommend to our clients that the sites be publicly owned is that you are master of your destiny, just likc any other developer. You control what happens on your site, Off~road bus parking and circulation is also offered at major transfer facilities, and you can park your car all day and ride, So for example, here at government center there's an existing parking structure, Secondary transfer facilities handle multiple routes. In this case we anticipate between 25 and 40 percent as a typical guidance, It is supervised and publically owned for the same reason: You want to increase the passenger safety, you want to reduce the conflicts bctwcen buses and cars and pedestrians, you want to have the opportunity to provide the amenities that are needed, Typically we wonld provide drop-off I 0 minute or less parking spaces for what we call kiss and ride opportunities, Another item that we heard quite a bit about was that this is not an appropriate location for a transfer facility, So what we did is we looked at the state guidance, The Florida Department of Transportation and the Florida Department of Community Affairs has initiated a study to look at where are the appropriate locations for transit and transit facilities, and what types of land use patterns support which type of investments and transit. And so what you see along the bottom is the hierarchy of land uses, And you can tell by the arrow at the top there is a close linkage between land use and public lacilities. In particular, in Collier County on your comprehensive plan you've identified in the Future Land Use Element on Pages 8, 9 and 10 that thcre is a significant gap between your planned residential development, approximately 25,000 dwelling units, that are not adequately planned for in terms of transportation, As you can see at the top, transit provides an opportunity to serve those needs, those unmet Page 39 __""._>,____,___"" '.on" _0 ,_,. _.n ,_._.~_,.,__" ,__.~"_,_.'_,_.,'w'" _,_, ._' ___ n'" , 1 g,m!rv 7. 2~0 ~~ needs, So what the Department of Trans pOi tat ion has indicated on their website as an appropriate location, and this being one ofthem, is a T-3 suburban transect Collier County, as I mentioned, faces quite a few challenges, particularly you are the single largest county in tenllS of land area, That affects the provision oftransportation and specifically in the analysis I've been able to do over the past year. the prnvision of transit and paratransit transit services, Having such a broad service arca and trying to operate in those areas is very challenging, What we typically advise our clients and what we suggest is that you focus on an urbanized area as shown on your Future Land Use Map here, And that allows you to focus your services to enhance the quality oflife, to meet the needs of an aging population that eventually may want to choose not to drive every day, to alleviate the traffic congestion or at least provide a transportation choice, preserve natural resources, increase energy efficiency, which is increasingly a requirement of getting an); federal funding for a Vo,'ide variety of money that the county would use, and provide cost effective transportation services, as I mentioned. So when you look at the proposed areas where we have transfer opportunities that are identified in the transit development plan. you can see that \\-iC arc focusing our services vvithin that same area, that urbanized area. As I mentioned, Collier County. along with all of the other transit agencies in the state, annually prepares a transit development plan, The annual updates are minor updates. but the major update, you'll see I've noted a few figures throughout my presentation. The last m,~jor update was done in 2005. So some of our socioeconomic characteristics are slightly dated, but those will be updated this year as the county is conducting their major update right now, It's required by state law, And the TDP must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan, And as I mentioned, the transportation element incorporates it by reference. So when we look at this site specifically. transit is serving the urban area, The C.A.T. facility is located within a residential density band. It is also approximate to interchange activity center. And I'd like to note for the record that it is located within a TCMA identified in the transp()Jtation clement Issues and considerations and questions raised by the community: Passenger destinations. We had quite a few questions regarding where our passenger is going to and coming trom. Again, as I mentioned, this is an onboard survey that was conducted as part of the last major update to the rransit Development Plan, but it gives you a good indication of where our transit riders li\'e and are going to work. We also had questions regarding the passenger characteristics. \vhat is the average age of your passengers. As you'll notice, the 19 to 24 age group is significantly larger than all the other age groups. What was notable, though, is that these arc not students, if you \vill, that arc going to educational opportunities, these trips are almost exclusivel)' work trips, \vhen we look at those on board surveys that were completed. Household income is another important characteristic that we look at in providing transit service and that we were asked about, so I wanted to provide this information. As you can see, income is an issue for a lot of the C.A.T. passengers, These are the folks that are most in need. particufarly in these adverse economic times, and transits provides them in some cases the only opportunity to he self-sufficient and remain employed in such challenging economic times. The race of our passengers is also indicated here, Again, Ilispanic passengers are a significant portion, And I wanted to just show you this in response to some of the questions we've heard. This traffic impact slide, I'd like to give Revo Kanilwa. who is our tratlic engineer, the opportunity to come np, introduce himselfbrieny and give you his qualifications, il'lmay, MR. KANILW A: Good morning. Mv name is Rcvo Kanihva. rm-- c , THE COURT REPORTER: Would you spell that, please, MR, KANILWA: Revo Kanilwa is R-E-V-O, Last name K-A-N-f-L-W-A, I'm a traffic engineer with Wilbur Smith Associates, and I'm a registered engincer in the State of Florida, I've been doing a draft engineering status fi.Jr the last 12 years, And I was involved in the preparation of the TIS, which was done as part of this conditional use application. What I want to talk about is the table that is shown on the display there, What this table is showing basically is before everything else there was a dealership at this site, And this dealcrship had some trips that were being generated for during the morning peak hour and aflernoon peak hour. And as YOll can see there in the figure indicated. we have six to eight vehicles in the morning and eight Page 40 c 16 I 1 January 7, 2010 ~~ vehicles in the afternoon peak hour. Now, when that dealership was gone, with the current use that is taking place there, which is the CAT facility, without any transfer taking place the number of trips that were being generated from the site actually went down as compared to when the dealership was there, It went down by 37 vehicles in the morning peak and 47 vehicles in the afternoon peak, Now, if we add on to the new trips that is going to come as a result of transfer activities taking place at the site, that reduction compared to the previous -- to the dealership times is going to go down to 27 vehicles in the morning, That means we're taking away 27 vehicles from the traffic that would have existed if that dealership had gone on being there, We're going to reduce that by 27 vehicles, And in the afternoon that number is going to be 37 vehicles, So what I think I'm saying is that with the current use and with the additional use that we are here for, the condition is actually even better than compared to what would have been there if the dealership had remained, So the bottom line is this transfer use taking plaee there has no -- has absolutely no impact on their existing conditions as far as traffic conditions are concerned. I think with that I'll take it back to Abra, MS, HORNE: Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's a question. Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Ijust have a question on this chart, There are several asterisks, and they are not noted at the bottom, What are they for') MR, KANIL W A: This asterisk came ffom a previous report that was a part ofthe-- MS, HORNE: URS, MR, KANILW A: By URS, which those are another application that was done before, and I think it was submitted in 2007 or 6? MS, HORNE: 2006, MR, KANILWA: Six, yeah, And these arc numbers that came from that study. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does that answer the question? That's not the question she asked, She asked what do the asterisks represent Where is the footnote that they arc -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Where's the foot-- MR. KANIL W A: That's what I'm saying. that they're referring to the source of where these numbers came from. They came Irom that report that was done previously, COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, it should be footnoted, MS, HORNE: Actually, Revo is correct. the source lor the one asterisk is June, 2007, traffic study for SOP AAR 11842 approving the change from Land Use Code 841, new car sales, and approving less impactful Land Use Code 110, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, MS, HORNE: And then the double asterisk refers to May, 2009 traffic study for CUPL2009000405, evaluating the impacts that are presented only by the proposed transfer facility, That would be the -- COMMISSIONER CARON: That's the current one, thank you, MS, HORNE: Yes. Thank you for asking for the clarification. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Wolfley? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: While we're on that subject, it's just so difficult for me to see how only 10 trips, additional trips, will be generated from a transfer station. You were waiting on that, weren't .you? MS, HORNE: I'm readv, - COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: from existing. I can't even -- unless people are going to walk there, there's going to be more -- even more buses than 10, isn't there? MS, IIORNE: No, sir. Actually I'm going to keep Revo up here, becausc I -- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: That's fine, MS, HORNE: Okay, When we looked at the transit developmcnt plan onboard surveys, we examined how Page 41 ~ "~..~._._,__.'"'_"',,___"'_" ,_ _. MO' ._."_,._ ',"."-."'" .., -, ,,--,.. ..,-,., .~""""".'"''''''''~''''''''' ;.."....,.'-._~..".~._~'.~._.__...._"-~""'=~--_.~,-~,.~~--....--."."...-...,..,-. _....."--"._-"~.~.~.. .. 1.~u}ry 7, 2JO 0~ many people approach transit in Collier County, These are existing riders that werc surveyed, and a very high percentage of them were surveyed, higher than most other onboard surveys conducted in Florida, And what it indicated was most of your passengers approach transit by walking. The reason that's so important and that [ had my little cheerleading moment was that is exactly what makes this location so appropriate, It is not located exclusivelv in a residential area. it's a mixed use area. But tJlere are excellent sidewalks along Radio - ~ Road so that an individual who either has a destination on Radio Road or lives on Radio Road can walk to the facility ~ easily and make a transfer. The second thing that I'd likc to note is that Revo did an analysis of the number of buses, You may remembcr the slide that I showed much earlier in the slide show that had those little red things that came over. And the reason that's important. and I'd like to emphasize it. buses already operate along these roads and already stop and discharge and board passengers along these roads, As I indicated in my earlier slide. 54 stops, 54 times a day the buses stop and load and discharge passengers. So the only thing that is being requested in conjunction with this conditional use is that bus crossing the driveway to get in on the purple route and a minor deviation of about 2.000 feet for the yellow and the blue route to comc up Radio Road so thcy can go into the site, And what that does is it stops buses Ii-om -- it eliminates the need for buses to be stopped in the travel lanes on existing roadways causing eonllicts. and creates a safe place where people can load and discharge, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: One more thing. I low many parking lots f,,, vehicles are there -- will be there'} MS, HORNE: Ilow many -- you mean how many-- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: llow many parking spaces') MS, HORNE: Oh, the short-term parking spaces. I will have to double chcck the number, but it was approximately ]2, It's shown on the site plan in a bubble, We showed short-tenn parking, It's like 10 minutes. You know, :you would just -- as you were driving to work. maybe at the airport. you would drop off a spouse and they would get on a bus to go to a different destination. So if you had a one-car household. it's a way' for both of you to get to \.vhcrc you're going without having to drive the person all the way there. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: I see, So it's not like a New York City thing where you can park your car and travel to Manhattan or whatever. MS, HORNE: No, that's what we would anticipate at a major transfer facility like government center. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: I see, Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just fix clarification, the chaJ1 that's here, David, is for peak hour. So the lObus trips you see don't mean that's] 0 a day, That's only 10 at thc peak hour time, So that's the difference in what you may have bccn trying to -- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Thank vou. Chair. ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray') COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Yeah. in your dissertation you mentioned that you're rcaching capacity at the campus, And are the transfers that are being contemplated lor this location the same bus route transfers that currently exist at the campus? MS, HORNE: I'll clarify, because I'm not sure I understood the way you asked your question, We anticipate that the yellow. the purple and the blue route is what would have transfers occurring at Radio Road, So the routcs that already go by this site would just go into that site. COMMISSIONER MlJRRA Y: Arc the bus routes that are at the county campus right now the same bus routes as those? MS, HORNE: Yes, Some of those -- inlaet. I want to double check, I believe all of those routes also make a stop at government center. The advantage as a transit passenger is you don't have to double back twice as far to get to where you're , gOlllg. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: And I appreciate that. I had heard that they might have been contemplating building at the Collier County campus. building a structurc to facilitate, to house people during inclement weather and so forth, Is that still going j')fward') Page ,~2 161 1 ~i January 7, 20 I 0 MS, HORNE: Absolutely, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So we really would have two bus transfer points. MS, HORNE: And it is appropriate to have it As I pointed out earlier, you have such a large service area, I'm going to step aside for a moment MR, FEDER: For the record, Norman Feder, Transportation Administrator. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I noticed that Nick left when you got up, MR, FEDER: Yeah, you nevcr see us both in the same place, believe it or not No, The government center is our primary and will remain our primary transfer center. Yes, we are planning some improvements, The routes that are here will also have a transfer capability there, allowing people, depending upon the nature of where they're going on the route, to have both options, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So it is possible for a person -- not that I hope that they have to do this -- but it's possible for a person in line yellow, and I don't know what the difference is, to transfer at one location, get to the campus and transfer to another bus or another route? MR. FEDER: That's an option. If they were going, let's say, to north county, yes, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So in other words, this -- does this complete the circle, so to speak, of all needs? MR, FEDER: Far from it We have obviously needs throughout the county for-- COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: No. I'm talking about-- MR, FEDER: -- further transit But as far as that, yes, it does, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Translers is what-- MR, FEDER: Yes, transfers, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: -- I'm solely interested in, MR, FEDER: Yes, These are the two primary transfers we anticipate, and the primary one being at the govenuncnt center. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So to make it for clarification purposes, the intent here is to provide opportunities for buses instead of discharging and bringing passengers on in the street where there's a sign that says CA,T, where they may be out in the rain, you're talking about bringing them into a facility where they can go inside, they can wait for their bus and then go back to another location, MR, FEDER: Exactly. And especially those three routes as noted are passing that area today, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: One last question, As we're going forward in the future, and I know we all have horizons that we work with, Right now you have "X" number of buses, And I don't know what that number is, and I appreciate there's an inventory that's functioning and there's one that's held, MR, FEDER: Generally about 18 vehicles a day, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's fine, When would we make our next leap into the future to acquire additional buses that may impact on this? And if we were, would the facility that we currently have there be suitable to contain those additional buses? MR, FEDER: Second part of your question first Yes, it would be, and that's part ofthe general development plans, even outside of this conditional use for a transfer that are being done on-site and maintenance. To the first part of it, we already saw that our passenger levels went up to a million some three years ago, They're slightly reduced, Some of that is because we havcn't been able to expand the network financially, We see that coming for a while in the future. But we're looking for transit to be some of our answer, especially out in the eastern part of the county, as opposed to multi-Ianing looking at transit options as part of our vehicle as well, so to speak. And so we would expect some growth, What you had and was looked at here was a five-year transportation impact statement, because that's the process to look out, five years, to look at whether or not the roads have the capability to handle, which they usually do, even at two lanes, But we said we'd wait till four-laning, which we did. But expect that we'll see some growth in the ti.lturC that may even exceed, and we'll have to address that in the future, We're agreeing to some conditions here today that you'll discuss that are hopefully an orientation to the community's concerns and their fears that we will limit the activities at this site, And hopefully they'll find that some of those issues are not a concern when and if out into the future we need expansion. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Those when and if situations would be another conditional use application. Page 43 1 qaLry 7.l10 ~~ MR. FEDER: Either that or rezoning the site -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. . MR. FEDER: -- or something of that nature, yes, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: One last question regarding safety issues for all people, It is my understanding that you don't simply carry people who are in labor work. you do also carry business people, and that's a good thing, MR. FEDER: Evervbodv, . . COMMISSIONER MURRAY: But there is a concern, I think everybody realistically should have it, the gorilla in the room needs to be talked about it. concern for safety, And so I'm going to ask you about whether or not the facility that you intend to have there. will it be supervised so that there is a modicum of safety" MR. FEDER: Yes, And we're doing that. Even when we have transfer activities today at the government center we have individuals down there specifically at the site throughout operational hours. We will do that. We did that when we were over at the Yo-Tech, And there will always be, And that's one of the benefits here that we have, even for a secondary or not primary transfer site, It's right there at the depot where staff works, there's always a constant oversight COMMISSIONER MlJRRA Y: And as far as issues. statistically I'm told -- I'm infonned that we've had no problems at the campus, and it is because we have supervision. MR. FEDER: Yeah. we have had-- COMMISSIONER MlIRRA Y: The assumption being that. MR, FEDER: We've had very little problems. And I was going to go over that You have statistics that are not necessarily attrihutable to us, But you'll see they don't change. even when we were there and after we left, even at the Yo-Tech, So it's been a good operation, but it's one that we would always oversee, And it's not one that is 24-hour operations either. I know there was some of those concerns raised by' the community. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. I lome, did you finish your presentation? Because typically we wait for our questions till the presentations are completed. ! lopefully they'll answer some of our questions. MS, HORNE: I did not. I have -- let me see how many more, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why don't we just continue nonnally. and if you could finish your presentation. By the way, f'lr members of the public, we generally take a lunch break, It starts sometime between 11:30 and 12:00 at a convenient point. We will most likely be taking one fairly soon, So I don't know if we'll get to the publicls questions before lunch. but Ijust wanted to keep you mvare of that. Okay, go ahead, Ms, Horne. MS. IIORN F: Thank vou. sir. . The area -- one of the concerns we have heard Ii-om the community is that properties would be devalued, And what we saw when we looked at historic photographs, this one, this 1995 aerial photograph was taken from the property appraiser's website, is that the commercial uses preceded the residential development and the acquisition of single-family homes, In addition, I talked a little bit carlier about what the guidelines are f'lr orienting development and transit together. ! indicated that this is not an exclusively residential community as it has been characterized in some of the a1ticles that I have seen in thc newspaper. And I wanted to put that on the record, In particular. there are vacant commercial properties that I've noted on this aerial photograph that should be noted. There is residential development and Illulti-nlmily. So this is a mixed use suburban area, as was consistent with the transect provided by the Department ofTransportat;on. Density is worth mentioning as well. I'm sorry. The density' in Sherwood Park is 4.2 units per acre. There are two undeveloped commercial convenience tracts, measuring about seven acres undeveloped, approximately I () acres to the east Cedar Hammock PUO to the south is at a density of approximately one unit per acre, And the Ibis Club at Naplcs has a density of approximately 8.9. according to thc statf report. As mentioned earlier, \\'e did look at crime statistics to be able to respond to the questions that we've been Page 44 ~ 16 1 1 January 7, 20]0 ~f asked about transfer activities. As ] mentioned at the meetings that we had with the community and to you earlier, the opportunity to have eyes on passenger activitics serves as a deterrent to any antisocial behavior. Nonethe]ess, it's always important to look at the statistics, We did try and collect data for the government centcr use from the Sheriffs Officc, UnfOltunately the Sheriffs Office does not distinguish -- and this is worth noting for all crimes statistics -- a call that is made by an officer is attributed to where the officer looks up and says, I am adjacent to, With Lorenzo Walker Institute, you can imagine that was an easy location for an officer to identifY. So in some cases the accidents may not necessarily have been on site, just as one example, And when we tried to col]ect data for government center, what we found is they could not distinguish between calls for service that occurred at the jail, at the courthouse, at the administration center, at thc museum or any other building on-site, including the parking garage, So we wouldn't be able to make a difference, What we do know, though, is that the way the transit is operated here in Collier County, any time there is any type of incident that relates to passengcr fixcd route scrvice or paratransit services, Michelle Arnold is callcd, And she has not gotten calls related to the activities at government center. And we feel that it is because it is a supervised activity, That being said, one ofthe things we heard concerns about was burglary. theft or criminal mischief And you'll notice that the transfer activities left Lorenzo Walker Institute in 2007, and that did not affect in one way or another the burglary or other activities and repOlts of incidents, Noise: As] mentioned earlier about operations, there's a couple things that are worth noting, One is that over time the CAT, system is investing increasingly in enerh'Y efficient buses which havc less emissions and lowcr noise, Also, we do not anticipate that -- in fact, I'd like to point out that the departure of buses in thc morning and the wanning up of buses in the moming is more intense, i,e., 18 buses, than the three, four or five buses that would go through this site as part ofa pennitted use within an hour. So the noise activity would actually be lower in terms of per hour in the middle of the day when the noise is less notable to the community, When we met with the community, they did not identifY noise in the early morning hours as something that presents an issue for them, We were also asked about project costs, You asked a little bit about that earlier. These are the federal government funding sources, 5309 and 5307, What I'd like to point out specifically, since I'm fairly certain most people don't know what those grant sources are, is that money is separate and apart from operating lunds, It is a peculiar instance that in working with the federal government FDA administration, there are opportunities for urban areas, such as Collier County, more opportunities to provide capital assistance to us to improve our services than there is for operating tlmds, Rural systems, especially in Florida, typically are able to obtain both federal and state monies to assist with transit operations costs, but they are two totally and separate distinct pots of money, and so spending money on improvements such as a transfer facility is not taking money out of the pocket for improving operations and reducing headways, for example, So this is the funding, The first line is the engineering and documentation required by the federal government. We call it environmental documentation. And the second line is the funding IDr the actual improvements on the site, And it includes a wide variety of improvements. In general, I agree with the staff report, I did submit my comments on it as ] noted at the beginning of my presentation, I specifically do not feel because ofthe nominal nature of change in the requested use that the conditions are required to make it consistent with the zoning and Growth Management Plan, I feel that through the presentation that I've madc, I have demonstrated that But I wanted to point that out for the record, Also, I'd like to mention a few of the transportation elements, goals, objectives and policies that were not listed in the staff report for consistency, It will just take a moment, and then I can submit it into the record. I already mentioned Policy 12.10, Policy] 2,7, 12,8 and] 2,9, those all deal with the integration of the transit system into the planning process, Objective] 0, the county shall encourage safe and efficient mobility for the public. Page 45 ,_.._~.~,...,._-..,.~,..",.~~--..,_.._..,--,...,... ..._'_.'-~' ..,,-.-,-,.-- - "'( 19an!ary 7, 10 b~ , Policy 7.3 and 7.4. Objective 7. Policy 5,6, I'd specifically likc to read this one, The county shall designate transportation concurrency management areas to encourage compact urban development where an integrated and connecting network of roads is in placc that provide multiple viable alternative travel paths or modes -- that heing transit is one of them -- for common trips. Purposes within each TCMA shall be measured based on the percentage of lane miles meeting the LOS described in this Transportation Element Policies 1.3 and I A of this clement. The following transpork'ltion concun"cncy management areas are designated. Again, this is policy' 5.6.8. Essential TCMA, This area is bounded by Pine Ridge Road on the north. Collier Boulevard on the east, Davis Boulevard 011 the south, and Livingston Road extended 011 the west side. Objective four. The goal -- the primary goal of the transportation element: To plan for, devclop, operate a safe, efficient and cost-effective transportation system that provides for both the motorized and non-motorized movement of people and goods throughout Collier County. And ohjective one, In addition. I'd like 10 make a briefrefcrence to Pages 7 and 8 of the Transportation Element. And earlier you'll note that I mentioned Pages 8, 9 and 10 of the Future Land Use Element. where you identify a gap between land use and transportation planning. With that. and the presentation that we've made. we leel that the proposed conditional use is consistent with the zoning code, consistent with the Growth Management Plan, compatible with thc neighborhood, not detrimental to the public welfare, In fact, we lecl that it will enhance the quality of life for a significant portion of the community, Provides adequate ingress and egress to the propel1y. The effect on neighboring propel1ies in relation to noise, glare, economic and odor effects is not adverse. In terms of economic impacts, we feel that this is actually positive as it provides access to jobs and other opportunities throughout the community, and compatibility with the adjacent properties in the district Just to summarize what I've alremly stated. the request is an incremental change. for routes that already travel by here would now enter the C.AT. operation center. Riders arriving by bus 'vvould move to another bus. The commercial uses were built here first. And this \vas purchased as holh the administration and future minor passenger transfer center. As a good neighbor, it was agreed that the cOllnty would wait until Radio Road improvements were made. We also had an additional meeting that was not required in addition to the NIM meeting to meet with the community. And we extended our conditional use process to meet the needs of 1{)lks that do not live here full-time so they would be back after the holiday period to have this hearing. So with that, I will relinquish the -- oh. I'm sorry, I did forget one other thing, I'm sorry, We also reviewed the proposed conditions of approval. We noted that we would like to modify condition number two with the underlying text: So long as these changes remain consistent with the pennitting requirements of the Water Management ~istrict and any other applicable agency. as well as all applicable development standards, With respect to some of these con -- with respect to these conditions, we feel that we are agreeing to them not because we feel they arc needed but in order to serve as a good neighbor. In particular, number five, this transfer station use shall be added to the existing uses permitted (lIl-site and shall allow the addition of transfer activities for no more than f()LIr c.A,T, lixed routes. And number six. no morc than 10 jixed route p.m. peak hour two-way bus trips per hour to Radio Road can be generated by this transfer station use. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, is that the end of your presentation') MS, I lORN E: Yes. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now. I'm sure that there are questions Irom the Planning Commission, and we have the staff report and the public speakers yet to occur. Does the Planning Commission wish to move fOr\vard into the lunch hour'! Do you want to take an early lunch to get through the line downstairs now and then come back and start fresh'? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: That seems to be the general consensus, So since your presentation is done and it will give time j()r plenty of the people here to think about what you said, and I'm sure they're going to have comments. Page 46 16\ 1 ~~ January 7, 20 10 we'll resume at 12:40 back in this room, Thank you, (Luncheon recess.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, it's 12:40, wc're back on record, And if CAT isn't ready, then I guess we'll just skip them, I knew you were here, Okay, where we left off and the way that we'll proceed is we now have questions from the Planning Commission of the applicant And then after that we have the presentation by county staff, which the applicant is not in this case, We have questions then of Planning Commission of county staff. Then after that we ask for public speakers, We start with the registered speakers, and anybody who isn't registered but would like to speak, we'll give them the opportunity to speak as well. As long as you get your name on record, So with that in mind, I'll tum to the Planning Commission for questions of the applicant Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I just have to have one qualification here, r had asked this question to you earlier, and I'm still curious about it. You had made your statement that we were reaching capacity at the campus, Will this new set of transfer -- this new transfer station reduce that problem? Not from what I heard from the conversation that we had with the administrator. So tell me, please, how this will -- MS, HORNE: How this will work, I like to explain it in terms ofthe grid street pattern that most people are familiar with. Transportation network, whether it's transit vehicles, buses or any other type, needs to work in a grid pattem so that it interconnects throughout the community, If you remember thc slide I showed carlier wherc I showed the urban growth area -- or the urbanized area from your Growth Management Plan, And then I compared it to transfer opportunities within the CA,T, system, You want to create that grid that connects where people I ive and where people work or other destinations they may want to go to, and it needs to be done on a regular basis so that you don't always have to go back to the point of origin, government center, for example, to get to where you ultimately want to go, In tenns of capacity, when we talk about government ccnter, we're talking about the number of vehicles that would come into this facility, So you would make connections at othcr points throughout the community, and that would alleviate the full demand on this location. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: If I understand you correctly, what I think you're suggesting or inferring is that because you have another alternative transfer station, you somehow realize additional capacity? MS, HORNE: For example, you could determine that hypothetically the blue route no longer needs to go all the way to government center. You would base that on the ridership inputs. Remember the slide I showed you that asked people from the last major update where are you going to and coming from? You would look at that and you would compare it to the route and the folks that are being served along the blue route, and you may deternlinc that they don't necessarily need to go all the way to government center and you could reconfigure the route, alleviating or creating a new slot, if you will, at government center for another route in the future as the system grows, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I suppose that's what you could do, but that's not what the administrator said, All right, well, I understand, We're talking about (he specifics, so I'm not going to go much further than that But just reconfirming, if you know. you reconfinned that we're going to build a facility more permanent at the campus, MS, HORNE: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Okay, thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Wolfley? COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Earlicr we had talked about, when you had the slide up, traffic impacts are reduced, MS, HORNE: Uh-huh, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: And I don't know why, because we always talk about things about peak hour generation and so on. And I didn't even notice it I was just thinking of total traffic, Could you please go over, if you have the numbers, during a daily period, including peaks, how much trips Pagc 47 , 16 \ - , will be generated in total. MS, HORNE: I'm going to go ahead and ask Revo Kanilwa to come up and respond to that question, as he is our traffic engineer. MR, KANILW A: Again for the record. my name is Revo Kanilwa, And our traffic impact that we did. we focused solely on thc peak hours, because that's when we know we have the most impacts on the roadways, So we delve into there, because we know -- the 10 routes that we're talking about, the lObus routes we're talking about are spread throughout the day. So for each hour you're going to have those 10 buses, So essentially during the peak hours, that's when you have lhe most impact and that's what we tried to focus on. So -- but \\'C can get you the daily numbers_ if the Planning Commission -- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: What -- it kind of surprises me. because I would think that -- because J know nothing about the routes. And ho\v -- and Ijust learned how many' vehicles we have in the county. And I'm just con -- you know, we've got a few residents here. and they don'l just listen to it at peak hour. Or they -- you know, it's all day long, I'd like to find that out Thank you, MS, HORNE: To respond more directly 10 your question. I identified in one ofthe slides in our slide show how many times the bus today goes by the site. And I think that answers -- whoops. I went too far. I think that answers your question, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: We're not seeing anything, MS, HORNE: Oh. I'm sorrv. . , COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Are youlalking about current CAT. bus roules" CUlTent CA.T. bus routes, is that what you're looking at? MS, HORNE: Basically 54 times a day, is what's preseuted on that slide, cxisling bus routes travel past this location. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Okay, So you are saying -- does thaI make it 54 or 10S? I'm not trying to be funny here, I'm just -- MS, HORNE: No. I counted both directions. and I look that off ofthe schedule, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Okav. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: That's onc route, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: The CAT, roules stop herc. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's for all routes. righI" c MS, HORNE: That's for the three routes that currently travel by this location, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Okay. thank you. MS, HORNE: You're welcome, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions of the applicant at this time? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ma'am. while we're I()eusing on tranic. can you put up the slide that shows route five with the red overlav. , MS, HORNE: Yes. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's route three, There vou go, , c Is that a right-in and then a right-out. or how is that-- you're lell in and left out, is that how that works at that intersection? MS, HORNE Yes, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And what about the next route. I think it's six, MS. HORNE: It's the same operations. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: It's lelt in and lelt out Is there a reason you \vouldn't have made the transfer from the other direction so YOll would have a right in/right out" MS, HORNE: In fact, to be more precise, they would do it in both directions, because an outbound bus would have to make a left onto Radio Road. And an inbound bus would have to make a right onto Radio Road, Does that make sense? Page 48 16\ 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Y cab, I understand, That's why ifthey're coming past there from both directions, I was wondering if you had both directions needed to enter, and your answer is yes, MS, HORNE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: In your additional trips on Radio Road, the existing route 3,A and 3.8 already is on Radio Road; is that correct" MS, HORNE: Yes, sir, and it stops in tTont of this site, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, And we're seeing an increase in 10 peak hour and whatever it is during the day, But let's just work with peak haUL It isn't because of3,A and 3,B then; is that correct? There's no increase to your daily peak hour bascd on 3,A or 3.B? MS, HORNE: This has been a matter of debate is when do we count the trip, I mean, we're almost counting the trips twice because, as I said, the vehicles arc already operating along the roadway, So what we did is we counted the trips that would be generated for CAT, ops as they cross tJle driveway threshold; Is that correct, Revo'l MR.KANILWA: That'scorrect CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So 3,A and 3.8, ifthey're including in the 10, are already there? MS, HORNE: Are already on the segment of Radio Road, Now the -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the 10 is not an increase based on -- see, I'm trying to understand the increase intensity, And the chart you showed showed a reduction from the dealership and then an increase because of this change, But the incrcase still was below the dealership, But I'm wondering if the increasc reflects what you already had on the road from the 3,A and 3,B, Because if you have, it's nothing to do then with this application; is that a fair statement? MS, HORNE: That is a fair statement We are double counting in order to meet tJle requirements of a traffic impact statement. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, then we have anothcr tricky question, So you really don't have 10 additional impacts a day, because half of the routes are already there, MS, HORNE: Three of the routes are already there, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. two of the routes are already there. 3.A and 3,B are already on Radio Road, MS, HORNE: Ycs, sir, I'm sorry, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 5 and 6 are not MS, HORNE: Ycs, sir, I'm sorry, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Now, in your traffic impact statement, you have the statement: Four bus trips were converted into equivalent passenger car trips using a conversion factor of two passenger car trips per one bus trip, And then if you go to your chart, in your TIS it docs have the peak hour of 10, But the way I read it, the 10 represents only five bus trips, and of the five you're telling me two and a half of those -- I don't know how you get a haIfa bus -- but two and a half bus trips are already there because two of the routes are already being on that street MR, KANILW A: Yes. Actually, in our analysis what we did is we assumed that the 10 trips that we're talking about, the lObus trips we're talking about, we're looking at five years out So we are assuming that we're going to have five routes allowed to use this facility, Now, if you take five bus routes and each bus operatcs at a headway of30 minutes, you're going to drive the 10, And thus, that's wherc the 10 is coming from, But to go back to what you said earlier, actually the 10 bus routes that we're talking about, some of them already exist on this road, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. MR. KANIL W A: So actually the impact that the buses are causing is far less than what we're applying in the TIS, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well. in the TIS it says proposed year 20 14 you're looking at peak hour, pcak directional volumes of 1 0 project trips, But bccause of that calculation that they use to equate two cars for every one bus, the 10 trips you're looking at are vehicle trips, which are really only five bus trips then; is that fair to say? MR, KANILW A: No, no, actually, it's lObus trips, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I'm sure somebody in transpOliationmllst have realized that too when they Paoc 49 b I 1,~L~ 7.20~ 0t did the analysis, MR KAN1LW A: In terms of vehicles, we're talking about 20 vehicles, And where the vehicles come in is when we're doing the analysis now to see what is the impact of these so-called additional trips doing to the capacity of Radio Road, But the number of bus trips is 10 based on 30-minntes intervals for five routes, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the 10 that you'rc calculating then don't take off for the existing background traffic, It's adding the background tral1ic back in again, MR, KANILWA: Right, right MR, SWENSON: Mr. Strain. with your permission, Chris Swenson, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. if you'd please identify yourself MR. SWENSON: Certainly, Chris Swcnson, C-H-R-I-S. S-W-E-N-S-O-N, I'm a senior engineer with Wilbur Smith Associates, and I have revicwed the tratlic study, I'm a registered engineer in (he State of Florida since 1988, hold a bachelor and a master's degree from thc Georgia Institute of Technology and I've been doing transportation planning in Southwest Florida for more than 20 years, Wc do see some increase also in use from (his facility. And somc of the 10 trips are actually a decrease in headway, In other words. the buses will be somewhat more frequent. So while you are COlTeet, we've had to do some double counting because (he requirements of the traffic impact statement look at trips in and out ofthc drivcway, And those trips that weren't coming in were not there, We are looking at some increased service also, which has incrcased the number of trips. And that's reflected in the traffic impact statement. Now, YOll made some vel)' astute comments that we rcally arcn't inlpacting Radio Road that much. To take that even further, because tranSIt trips will encourage a modal shin, the fact is that \\i'hilc you may increase bus trips III and out oftl1at driveway, the impact on Radio Road in terms oftolal traffic m3)"' in fact be negative. Now, that's not something that \\'C n negative as in reduced number of trips, not negative as in a bad impact. We did not take that into account in the analysis, as it's not required. And the impact on Radio Road and Davis Boulevard is so minor comparcd to the available capacity, But the fact is is that the TIS probably docs overstate thc impact, perhaps significantly, because we did not take into account the reduced automobile trips due to the incrcascd transit trips, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you wcrc to put on that slide that shows the red overlay on route five or six-- because I think I'm understanding now where the additional trips are coming from, And it helps to understand some of the other letters I've rcad, That red overlay, that's the area that the additional trips are in: is that correct? Well, as soon as it turns rcd, There it goes, Now, the 10 additional trips, you're counting those as 10 additional trips bccausc thcy're in that red area, is that an aftinnative? And on route six it's the same thing, MR, SWENSON: Correct. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: So additional trips past the red area, there are none, MR. SWENSON: That is essentially correct. The increased trips are from the reduced headway on the purple route. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Where the red routes arc ILx five and six, the red additional trips, are any of those past a residential area" MR. SWENSON: No, sir. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. thank you, Go ahead. Ms. Caron. COMMISSIONER CARON: Ijust had a question on Davis, Why are we not using that interconnect -- well, it's not an interconnect. Why are we not taking routes five and six off of Davis? MS, IIORNE: Yes, ma'am, In the near future the Department of State is going -- Department of Transportation is going to be improving Davis Boulevard. While the maintenance oftraftic activities are going on, it is not our recommendation that it would be safe for buses to make a left tuming movement in a maintenance oftraftk area during construction activities. While we think it is possible in the future that it may,' be appropriate to circulate using the existing driveway to Davis Boulevard in the Page SO L , , ~ 16\ 1 0q January 7. 2010 near term, in the period that we contemplated it did not make for safe operations, COMMISSIONER CARON: But what about just a right back out? MS, HORNE: That area -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Can't you get buses in there? MS, HORNE: The secondary issue that we would be concerned about is there -- the C.AT facility is fenced off behind -- in between wherein the original dealership's showroom building is, if you will, which we call building one, and where maintenance activities take place, And it is fenced all the way down and around to the Davis Boulevard entrance, Today that is how operations occur. That area is kept secure, The Federal Transit Administration has a preference for security, and so we contemplated whether it would make sense to circulatc in that area, and for the time being we did not feel it was appropriate, for those reasons. COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, But that's really a matter of just changing some fencing, If you were to -- I mean, eventually at some point you're going to have a road that will go around that property and come out onto Davis at some point MR FEDER: And it exists today, The primary issue is as was noted, You've got Davis about to go under construction. COMMISSIONER CARON: Right And I understand -- MR FEDER: Just as we committed to the community. we wouldn't pursue the conditional use until we had finished the four-Ianing on Radio, that would be the same issue, We're looking at a very minor involvement on Radio on those two routes. And we're also taking advantage ofa signalized intersection there. Because even though you can take a right out, it ends up being a left in. And so right out's a possibility in the future, but again, why push that through the construction site \vhen you can go to a signalized area during a construction activity. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick wants to usurp your comment somehow. Go ahead, Nick, MR CASALANGlIIDA: Not at all. I've been listening to the conversation for a while. and I'm trying to stay within my new role and let them talk about it But I've got to point something out and be clear here. In 2014 there's over 1,000 vehicle trips available on both of those facilities, If you do the multiplier or the denominator, there's 500 bus trips availahle for capacity, So I think the discussion between the residents and discussion of capacity and traffic analysis needs to be brought up on the table, There's plenty of capacity on those roads to handle the bus trips. The question I think rrom the residents in the public meeting is how many buses will we see from a perspective, But the roads have plenty of capacity, It's not a capacity issue at all. Quite frankly, the analysis they've done, and they've done a very good analysis, is overkill. They've done an operational analysis for exiting and entering the site, intersection analysis for minimal impacts to the roadway, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nick, by the way, we're the people you need to be directing your discussion to. MR, CASALANGUIDA: Sorry, I just-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you get interaction with the public, we have a real serious problem, because that's not how these meetings work, so -- MR, CASALANGUIDA: My apologies, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- work towards us, please. MR, CASALANGUIDA: Sure, So to keep that in mind, it's not a capacity issue, it's not an operational issue, it's a discussion of how many buses you expect to see, Typically we don't limit something like this if there's plenty of capacity, But on the record they've said how many buses, approximately lOin the p,m. peak hour. There's enough for 500 on that road, So let's be clear, I just want to make sure lor the record it's not an issue of capacity at all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How many lanes is Radio Road now') MR. CASALANGUIDA: Four. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Four lanes, It just got finished, didn't it? MR, CASALANGUIDA: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the king of six-lane roads, you, and Collier County made that one four-- Page 51 _. .- '--""-".---~.-'..,.....~",,,,,,, ,..~..,',~-~^, ''''^',;"","",-~~.~.",---",.....~.~,,--,....~ '..- - ,- ",---..-,,",-----..,,---..-..,---.,--.. 16 I 1 & Januarv7.2010. ~ ~ MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's mv boss. ~ CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How did you make it fi:lLIr inSlead of six? Because I was told the county standard was always to be six Ii-om here out Not that I agree with you, but I'm just curious as to why we didn't do it differently on this road, And you're even talking about tearing down homes to put in six-lane roads in other parts of the county, MR, CASALANGUIDA: He had to go there, MR, FEDER: He was only my com padre in that. I guess I'm the king ofthat one, What I will tell you is Radio Road is constrained further to the west And with Davis coming in at six lanes, there was only a need to go to four. There's plenty of capacity, as Nick points out. There's actually eapacity in everything we're discussing when it \vas t\vo lanes, hut the commitment \vc made carlyon to the community was that we would wait because we had already started up thc construction. We didn't want to do it during construction on Radio either until we're finished with the fClLIr-laning on Radio Road. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: And you said in your previous statement that you had I guess mentioned to the public or told the public that if you could use Davis Boulevard sometime in the !llture, you would; is that a fair statement? MR, fEOER: I will tell you right now. what we're asking !c)r in this conditional use is on Radio, as you've seen the indications. But I imagine in the future \ve'lI be using Davis as \vell. The primary reason for the Radio, though. is because you're coming to a signalized intersection, and that's the safest operation. So even after the construction in Illany respects that \vould be primary, but I think Commissioner Caron correctly pointed out that right turns out might be viable. It's the left turns even with the turn lane still are better at a signalized. So right now we're focusing 011 Radio f()f this limited number that we're asking in this conditional use. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because if you use the right turn right out even in the future when Davis Boulevard is six-Ianed, you'd cut the use of Radio Road and the portion that you have to use it in !c)r those two routes by 50 percent. MR, FEDER: Yeah. And again. it's a vcry small portion of Radio Road that we're even proposing to use, but yes. that's cOlTect. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you. MR. CASALANGULDA: Commissioner, that 10 number that was thrown out there was for analysis purposes. It wasn't to maximize, even though that's being used as a maximization number. It \vas to say what's anticipated based on the routes that are distributed on that network it would be 10 trips, It was never intended by the consultant to say there wouldn't be 15 at one point in time, although it's being construed as such right now, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But see, Nick, every developer comes in here with a TIS, and we actually lock them into their TIS, We ean't treat govel11mcnt any differently, And so if you guys eame in with a number you didn't rcally mean, you should have told us what you really meant MR, CASALANGUIDA: Understood, Andjust like the developers do when they're on the dais sometimes and they ask questions, you ask them questions. they clarify it And that's the appropriate timc to do it is today is to make SlIre you understand what we're asking for. o IAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, And then I have one other question, In your presentation you have one chart, number 15. that refers to a definition for primary and secondary, or is it -- I'm not sure if you call it main, whatever YOll called it, entrance ~~ or uses. Back Lip, right there. Major transfer facility and a secondary transfer facility, In the staff repOlt there was a reference to this as being a non-primary transfer site versus the main county site, It would seem to me that if you really want to be accurate in the way you refer to this, this would be the secondary transfer facility and the county site would be the major transfer facility, Is that a clearer statement'? And the reason that's important is ifrhis sllcceeds and you have other hurdles to get over here today, and we're only talking about traffic but there arc other issues that we need to vet out. any of that kind of language that isn't defined becomes a prohlem. But you've actually defined language in this slide that might be effective in curing that issue. So -- and that would -- is considered a secondarv transfer site thell. MS, HORNE: Yes. sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Any other questions of the applicant bet(lre we go to the stalTrcpOli? COMMISSIONER CARON: Well. Page 52 ~ 161 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Ms, Caron, COMMISSIONER CARON: I'm SOrry, ~ Because I think you bring up a good point with that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank vou, ~ COMMISSIONER CARON: Because if this is going to be a definition, then I think it's an incomplete one, based on what's happening there right now today. MS, HORNE: What would you like to see us elarify? COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, are there not other uses happening on this site right now today? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, they're not pal1 of the conditional use, MS, HORNE: There are, but they're not part of a transfer facility. Those arc uses that are currently permitted and that currently operate on-site, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. So we'll separate out the two, okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav, ~ MR. FEDER: Mr. Chairman, for the record, Nonnan Feder. With your indulgence, just to clear up some ofthc discussion on the traffic impact statement Usually the developer is only coming in to you with net traffic analysis, You've got gross traffic analysis, Because we wanted to make sure that it was clear that with all issues that the site would still be maintained, not just this increment that we're looking f,x f,)r these transfer activities, But that being said, we're fine restricting ourselves to that, even though that was only intended to be a five-year look at whether the system could handle it And it was on gross traffic. not on net CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Okay, if there's no other questions of the applicant, then we'll go to staff report, MS,OESELEM: Good afternoon. For the record, Kay Oeselem, Principal Planner with Zoning, You have in your possession, and I did hear the applicant also put it on the record, the staff report with the revision date of 12/22/09. And again, like the similar petitions, the applicant has made a very thorough presentation, so I'll hit the high points of the staff report and then respond to questions, if that's acceptable, On Page I you have the requested action, This mirrors what was advertised for the public, You have the geographic location, which has been illustrated in several documents from the agent. On Page 2 you have the purpose and description of the project, and we've discussed that at great length as part of the applicant's presentation, And you have the surrounding zoning and land uses and an aerial photograph that shows the relationship of those uses, You have the Growth Management Plan consistency review, beginning with Future Land Lise Element discussion, Followed by the transportation element discussion, Staff does recommcnd that this be found consistent with thc Futurc Land Use Element and the transportation element, as those clements are applicable in this casc, And, thercforc, we believe it could be deemed consistent with the overall GMP, Going on on Page 5 you have the analysis that is required by the Land Development Code, This has the findings of fact in support of stall's recommendation of approval, beginning with number onc that cites the LOC section that allows this petition to go forward as a conditional use in this PUO district Staff has provided our analysis of that issue and believcs that it is appropriate to do so, And number two, it's required that this be found consistent with the Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan, And staff does believe as conditioned and as those conditions have been discusscd and amended through today, we do believe that this petition is consistent with both the Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan, And noting the details provided in that analysis, Number thrce talks about ingrcss and egress in reference to automobile and pedestrian safety, convenience, traffic flow, control and access in case of tire or catastrophe. And again, transportation planning staff has evaluated this, as has zoning, and we believe this petition is consistent with this requircment as wclL Going on to Page 6, you have numbcr four that talks about the effects of the conditional use on thc neighboring properties, There is a discussinn regarding this issue on that page, but staff is of the opinion and has the general idea that this as conditioned would be compatible with the neighborhood, Paoe 53 b . ,,'.. .~~....~.,_._,...~-~'.._"_..,,_.',, .... ".,,~.~._,. ""."-'.-'".' , . 16 I 1 0~ Januarv 7. "0 I 0 . That goes into number live as well, talking about compatibility, And again. staff has recommended, with the conditions that we have imposed or arc recommending be imposed. \\ie believe this peti60n is compatible. We have provided as to thc applicant an aerial photograph showing this particular arca in 1995 reflecting that the commercial uses have been on this area for some time. On Page 7 it goes on to talk of the Environmental Advisory Council. There is no recommendation, because the project was not rcquired to go before that body. Therc is a ncighborhood infi.mnation synopsis that begins on Page 7 and continues on to Page 8, Also as part ofthe attachments to the staffrcport. you had the applicant's more complete synopsis of that neighborhood information meeting. The County Allomey's Office has revicwed the document as is noted on Page 9, and the recommendations of staff begin at the bottom ofPagc 9, As was submitted to you as the last slide t(lI' the petitioner this morning, we have had some modifications to that staff report, And I have a dran dated 1/6/1 0(3) that rcferences the changes to conditions two and five, And also there were additional changes to condition six that werc not shown as underlined, I'll read those beginning after the word 10, fixcd route, p,m, peak hour, two-way is also additional language in that condition, We do havc othcr staff members here available I'm you. should you have questions, Most importantly, as already been notcd, transp0l1ation staff is here and they can address any questions you have regarding transportation. Other than that, I'm available for any questiolls )'Oll might have. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, arc there questions fi.1f Kay') (No response.) CI-IAIR~1AN STRAIN: Kay, let's take a look at their sheet where they have requested changes to your stipulations. And number t\\/o, they want to add the verbiage, the pcnnittillg requirements of the Water Management District and any other applicable agency as well as. Now, they're adding that to your department's approval of minor changes, Can you make changes without the approval ol'the Water Management District" MS. DESELEM: I'm not certain of that To my knowledge it would require changes to their documents. And as long as \-vhat changes they may make to their documents arc still consistent with ours-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray" I mean, it scems like needless language. because you all cannot do anything the other agencics that we deter to don't allow you to do, So why do we necd language in there that says that, when again it's redundancy that I keep harping on? MR, BELLOWS: I agree. we can't speak Ii", that agency, And they -- we defer to them anyways on those types of matters, so I think it's redundant. MS, Dr:SELEM: The applicant had asked ti.lr this to be added. We hasically don't have any hard feelings one way or another. Wc don't care if it's added and we don't see the necessity f()r it either, so-- CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And as lar as the rest of their changes. I might have missed it, you didn't have any problem with them'l MS, DESEI ,EM: That's correct. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I was trying to read something at the same time, so -- Mr. Murray') COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, could you take that piece otlthere and show us that last slide that was on there, please? Well. )iOU can just probably go right to the slide. I want to unders18nd something, if I can. plcase. You speak or a major transfer facility, but in number four you hear -- there you speak of a non-primary transfer site. Now, I understand the word difference, hut I'm trying to understand what you're really looking for. Ifit's a major transfer facility and then there's a secondary transfer facility', where is the primary transfer site going to be? MS. DESELEM: The primary -- what this has come Irom is the neighborhood infonnation meeting, In all candor, this is the first I've seen these today'. This is new language to me: I hadn't seen this. We were trying with the applicant and staff to work through how \ve can designate and differentiate between thc fact that the transfer facility at the main government complex is supposed to be thc biggy, That's the primary, the principal, the, YOll know, semantics tr)'ing to come up with the right 1CI111. And this is what \ve had agreed upon, to cal1 that the primary or to rcference that as the primary as it's done through a lot of the documentation provided to this Page 54 , , 16 I 1 ~q January 7, 2010 point by the petitioner. And understanding that this site would never become that. And the other conditions, like the four routes, the 10 routes, the 10 trips, that's all to support the fact that this is the non-primary, That's how you can limit this to keep it what it's proposed now so that it can't become the primary site. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Is there any reference within -- because I read this, but I don't have a recollection in detail that we ever discussed a primary transfer site, Or for that matter, a major transfer facility, Maybe it's an unnecessary concern, but I havc a concern here that if we agree with stip four, when somebody goes to try to figure out what that means, they're going to run into what? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: ~idn't we -- in our previous discussion, that was what I pointed out, why don't we use the ternlS secondary and major, since they're defined now by the slide, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, okay, maybe I didn't hear what you were referencing, Maybe I was in la la land thinking about this, But if that -- we've solved it, then fine, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, No, everybody seemed to think that was a better way to define it. MS.OESELEM: Yeah, and that's perfectly acceptable with us, It's always better to make it more clear. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's what I was-- MS, DESELEM: And I had never seen this before. And I'm, you know-- COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: My apologies if I was -- I was probably thinking about the question I was going to ask and wasn't listening as intently, Thank you, CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions of staff at this time? Ms, Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: In number two it says that the zoning and land development review director can approve minor changes, including things like siting and height. Is there any height -- what's the height restriction right now on this? MS,OESELEM: I'd have to go back to the PUD document Right offthe top of my head I do not recall. I'd have to go back and look, If you want mc to, allow me to take a minute? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, before you do, the intent of what the zoning director could do were within the administrative limitations of the zoning director. Meaning you already have latitude for doing an administrative approval of a setback if it is so many inches or a certain percentage. Is that the intent here of number two is not to go beyond those percentages, or are you -- is something being suggested in two that would take it beyond that? MS, DESELEM: The idea of this is to make it clear that this is the limitations, It still has to be consistent with all applicable development standards read into that You still havc to get a site development plan approval. This doesn't supersede that But as part ofthat site devclopment plan approval proccss, if something comes to light that you need to tweak something a bit, it gives you some allowances to do that through the administrative procedure, COMMISSIONER CARON: Right And nsually, you know, or at least for some things the code is fairly specific and you can only do it by a certain percentage or whatever. But we have run into problems in this county with somebody's interpretation of a minor change versus the community's interpretation of a minor change, So I just would like it to be specific to the code as it exists and not create language for it I mean, if the code allows you to change the height by three feet, then that's what the code says you can do. If the code allows you to change a setback by 25 percent, then that's what the code allows you to do, I don't want somebody else to be interpreting what a minor change can be, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But Ray, let's go back into -- I think it solves Commissioner Caron's problem. The number two by the approval of minor changes, wouldn't those mean to the extent you can administratively do so? MR, BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, so-- MR, BELLOWS: The LOC has a definition of that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that means you can't do something beyond what you currently administratively can do -- MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CIIAIRMAN STRAIN: -- for setbacks and things. That's what I'm getting at Page 55 " ',-,' _. _.,....~....~._-,._,,~.-~-.-.,--_._'''"''~~,~ ._~._-~.. .~ -_.~,.- ___'M_'__"_"~___'__"__'_ ... , 161 1 7. 7010 ~~ \ ,. Januan' COMMISSIONER CARON: nut that's what I'm saying, use the language we've already got MR, BELLOWS: Yeah, the language placed in the conditional use is just to make sure it's clear that what can be shifted as a minor adjustment of a building footprint and not force it into some kind of new conditional use or an amendment to a conditional use . CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Subject to what stafl can administratively allow to be done now, MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okav. Mr. Murrav'? . - COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah. in that same item we're here lor a conditional use for a transfer station, MR, BELLOWS: That's correct. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Are we intending to locate buifdings, change the heights of buildings, add structures, or are we really just putting either a block or a concrete or some kind of a platfonn out there so that the buses can pull up and -- I thought everything was in pface already, MR, BELLOWS: For the record. Rav Bellmvs, This is a somewhat unique situation, Wc have two different types of zoning we're dealing with, One is this is properties within a PUO which has a master plan which regulates ccrtain development intensities as pursuant to the master plan, There's language in the master plan and in the LDC that allows minor changes to those master plans without triggering some kind of I'UD amendment. We also have criteria that says if)iOU meet all this criteria Cor the changes or to an extent that meets the criteria for what's called the PDI or master plan change, that requires approval hy the Planning Commission. So everything's defined in the LDC of how mllch you can impact or change what's shown on a master plan. The same concept applies to a conditional lIse. That's a LIse that is aIlO\\..ed Oil the su~ject property pursuant to additional conditions of approval or regulations or safeguards. And that's why we require kind of a conceptual site plan to be attached to a conditional use, Now, the current facility's operating under the auspices o!' thc PI! () document, and they would not be locked into the conceptual site plan f()rmat. But they are locked into the -- COMMISS10NER MURRAY: PLIO. MR, BELLOWS: -- pun master plan, But they have now this second document that's locking them into the facilities that are shovm. This gives the assurance to the residents who arc coming to these meetings that \\:hat is approved by this Commission and the Board ofCoullt)' Commissioners is \-vhat they"re locked into, and t\yO \vccks later there's not four other buildings on-site. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So you're telling me that this clause too doesn't exist in the pun as it already is extant. MR. BELLOWS: They're similar language, that's all I can say. But si1l1ilar's not quite the same. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm just suggesting you may not nced it at all in there, because of the fact that that's 110t what we're here for. But that's not -- as long as Conunissiollcr Caron's views are appreciated and we go with the language that we're used to. I eeltainly don't have a problem, It's often said we have things in here that are not necessarv. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, And this is --like I said. it's a very unique situation. You don't get many conditional uses within I'UDs. and this is one ofthem. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer') COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But now I have a problem, Because I was under the impression that they're going to be able to cover these vehicles. They probably won't Because in the auto dealership master plan I'm sure that there was no cover out there in the middle of that island, So my question is why did they create a new island') Why didn't they put this up against -- you know. reverse it 180 degrees and put it up against the building where the people could use the cover of the existing auto dealership and stuff') Or I guess Kay, maybe you could make me coml()rtable by saying yes. they would be able to build shelter out by those bus drop-offs, MS. DESELL:M: Let me respond to say' that I don't sce why' they couldn't, because it's not going to increase impervious area. Because it \vould be a covcr going o\/cr an already impervious area. So it wouldn't creatc any isslles Page 56 16 \ 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 as far as water management or parking or anything else that would require other alterations to the site. So I would believe in my mind that the addition of a cover for that would not trigger anything that would be above and beyond a minor change that could be done, This particular site already has site development plan approval as an amendment, up to the point that you see now without that bus transfer sawtooth design, So what they would have to do would be to come in and amend that And it could be done, like I said, as an insubstantial change even, I'm not sure of that, I'd have to evaluate it But it's not going to increase things that would normally be looked at COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So when we get these conceptual plans, to me adding another structure where we didn't think one was would not be a minor change, I mean, we review these all the time, we let these PUD plans go, So what you're saying, the addition ofa roofed area out in the middle of that parking lot would not be an issue based on the original PUO, Which is the conceptual site plan that we have up until this, or what happens? MS,OESELEM: Well, we've gone beyond the original PUO in that this already has a site development plan that reflects the buildings that are on-site, So, you know, it would be in conjunction with that site development plan, And like I said, I don't believe it would have impact as far as what staff would nonnally review, As far as I understand the application has been represented and as I understand it to be, they're not proposing any more buildings as far as like those that would house offices or the like, It's just they show that sawtooth design on the site plan so you know it's going to be there, And I think it's been pretty clearly articulated that they hope to cover that to provide shelter to the passengers, COMMISSIONER SCHLFFER: Okay, Have they added any buildings to this site since the county's taken ownership? MS, OESELEM: Not that I'm aware of. They can respond perhaps better to that than I, but not that I'm personally aware of COMMISSIONER SCHLFFER: So we are essentially going by the original PUO, So this -- okay, so Ray, would this have to fall under the original PUO conceptual plan if they change that plan? And to me, in the building world a structure, an open structure's a structure, as this site has open structures where they use to park the cars under them, MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, for the record, Ray Bellows, The conceptual plan that you're reviewing today with this conditional use is consistent with the PUO master plan, so no change to that document would be required, Now, if there is to be in the future some kind of covered area over the exis -- what's shown currently on this plan and if it's just a covered thing, then that would fall under that language that was being recommended in two as a minor change. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, so that's a minor change. Because these people should be covered up by that All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Kay, thank you, Okay, Ray, do we have -- let's start with the registered public speakers. And by the way, everybody that is wanting to speak, frrst of all, we need to be assured you've been sworn in, So if you haven't been sworn in, please tell the court reporter that as you come up to the microphone, Second of all, we just need you to identifY your name and address for the record, Go ahead, MS, OESELEM: If! may, I'm sorry, I forgot to respond to Ms, Caron's question, The height approved in the PUO, Nick was kind enough to pull it out, it is 50 feet COMMISSIONER CARON: Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, first speaker, Ray, And we can use either microphone you feel comfortable at MR. BELLOWS: There are four registered speakers, The first speaker is Rudy Petorelli, MR. PETORELLI: Hi. Good afternoon, And I'd like to thank the chairman for moving us up rather than Page 57 "~"""""-'-" - , '~.",---~,"~'..~ \ l' Q I ," ~ I i <.J. anuary 7, 2!O ~~ holding us till late in the afternoon. Only downside of that is we've got to go back out into the cold a little sooner. But we can put up with that For the record my name is Rudy Petorelli, P-E- T-O-R-E-L-L-L And I'm going to present the position paper of the ENACTS organization, which is a group of people around the -- on the Radio Road and Davis Boulevard neighborhood, Not all of the residents, naturally, but quite a few of them, And you have the signatures, I believe, of 959, they said, residents who are against this particular site, Now, here is the ENACTS position, which we have sent to the Commission 1 believe a couple of weeks ago, ENACTS is a group of residents located in East Naples along Radio Road and Davis Boulevard who are strongly opposed to the placement of a CAT, bus transfer station at the CA,T, operations center on Radio Road, The surrounding area contains in excess of 15.000 residents who will be most directly affected by placing the transfer station at that site, At the outset we want to assure you we are not opposed to expanding bus service in Collier County, In fact, we support the expansion of bus service, of a safe, convenient, affordable public transportation system, What we are opposed to is placing this one facility in the middle of a residential area, I've heard people here say it's not residential. This board in particular should know, since the Morandi site until now, that East Naples area has been one of the most built up areas with residences, So it's a complete change /Tom what it was even five years ago, In fact, our communications with other similar -- others similar to Collier County, We had 15 other communities here, It's really 11, if you want to change your report therc, And we found that bus transfer stations in most cases were not located in residential areas, The fact that this site was previously used as a car dealership is not germane, since as I said before the area has changed drastically. Now, we found in our research that not only were transfer stations citcd outside of residential areas, but the use of nonresidential sites was preferred to better accommodatc and attract the main player and bus transfer, and that's the rider. In 2005 the University of South Florida did a study at the request of Collier County, In fact, they did Collier County and Lee County, Although the study was a park and ride study. or analysis, the results apply equally to transfer stations, Because the only difference between park and ride and ride in a bus and ride is that you don't drive a car in in one of them, What they said is this: The facility must be conveniently located to entice more people to use the bus, And I'm sure that's what CAT wants, that's what Collier County wants, that's what ENACTS wants, we want increased ridership, They also said the facility's proximity to activity centers is important to attract commuters, Examples given were grocery and retail shopping, Two sites on the list were Wal-Mart stores, personal services like dry cleaning, video rental, restaurants, This allows commuters to combine daily travcl for a variety of purposes, That makes an extreme lot of sense, not only to the people here in ENACTS, but I'm sure to many other residents of Collier County, TIle study identified 32 sites they felt were suitable, None of those were in a residential area, They were all activity sites, This type of incremental approach using development sites that ENACTS is suggesting is exactly what the University of South Florida said in November of2005 when they did the study for Collier County and CAT. This approach they said limits initial investment since the sites are already developed and can be expanded or contracted fast and easily as ridership wanrants, That's an important point Now, the Los Angeles Metro Transportation Authority, although that is a lot larger than ours, the philosophy they have still applies. They did a major study of bus and train traffic. Among their recommendations were: The heart of the proposal was to develop transit centers throughout the county, They recommended the creation of 19 centers throughout LA County at popular destinations, like UCLA, train stations, job centers, government buildings and the Warner Center. They felt the creation of many of these centers saves time, money, and makes bus transport more convenient and may attract new riders. There's a second study that says, attract new riders, which is what we all want. We at ENACTS are recommending a similar system. We believe that transfer locations, not transfer centers, can be disbursed throughout Collier County to activity centers or destination sites along existing bus routes to make bus travel more convenient and attractive to existing riders and possibly attract new riders, Page 58 ) , 1 6 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 We feel this system can be accomplished with very little new capital investment by the county, especially with the cooperation of businesses at these new sites, And none of us can imagine that any business center or mall or whatever would object to bus loads of customers coming onto their site. In fact, we identified Wal-Mart store on Route 951 as an attractive destination and an alternative to Radio Road, That site is only 1.2 miles from Radio Road CAT site and one minute by car, Right in the area that CAT wants to put a transfer station, Why Wal-Mart? If you do a Google search on the Internet ofWal-Mart bus stops, you get 267,000 hits. The listed articles indicate one, hundreds of bus stops nationwide are at existing Wal-Mart stores, Two, requests for residents for stops at Wal-Mart stores where no stops exist. And three, information for riders indicating which bus stops at the Wal-Mart stores, People want to know that because that's where they want to the take a bus, This indicates that Wal-Mart truly is an activity center and a destination site, Now, here's a news excerpt showing why we talk about Wal-Mart, What they did in Austin, Minnesota, July, 2008, Austin residents will see benefits that go beyond low prices, one-stop shopping convenience when the new Wal-Mart Supercenter opens Wednesday, The store has taken steps to support local suppliers, improve road conditions and offer shoppers a product selection to fit their needs, In addition to uncompromising value and selection, the store includes a number of features that promote easy access while building on the aesthetics of the community. For instance, Wal-Mart built a new road behind the store, three retention ponds, a bus stop, a bike path, while adding two traffic lights. Evidently thousands of dollars of investment that didn't come out of Austin, Minnesota's budget This is only one instance ofWal-Mart cooperating with cities and towns in new and innovative ways, Now, that's our main issue, There is a better site, We think the site within a mile of Radio Road is a better site, not only for the riders but for the county, Other issues are safety and property values, We believe the increased traffic noise, 24-hour lighting safety issues, including safety of children using school buses, air quality issues, will negatively affect property values in the area and increase security concerns. Traffic, CAT, estimated in five years fTom our calculations, over 200 buses a day will be entering and exiting that site, Also, they mentioned the possibility of express buses coming off 1-75 and going to that site, I didn't hear that mentioned today, Add this to the normal automobile traffic increase and you have what we consider a residential area not capable of handling this amount of and type of traffic, It know the experts say it can, and they talk about maybe you don't want to see that many buses, That's exactly the point. We don't think we should see 200 buses, which may be understated, by the way CAT, has grown fTom the beginning of their inception till now; 200 may be low, But we don't want to see that many buses on that road because we feel there's a better place for it The justification for the Radio Road site. A neighborhood information meeting was held on December 3rd regarding the proposed transfer center on Radio Road. One attendee asked the panel whether Wal-Mart on Route 951 had been contact regarding the use oftheir site for bus transfers. The answer was no, Wal-Mart was not contacted, Another asked whether it was true that one of the main reasons for choosing the Radio Road location was the ability to sell bus tickets and/or passes, 'Ibe answer also was no, The following e-mail, which was sent to ENACTS fTom the then director of alternative transportation contradicts both of those answers. From Diane Flagg to Bill Connie, dated January 7th, 2008, quote, we did discuss the utilization of the Wal-Mart parking lot for passengers (0 transfer to other bus routes with a Wal-Mart rep at Davis and Collier Boulevard, And they were open to the concept This is an opinion -- this is an option, however. I( does restrict additional customer services that would be available to them at the CAT operational center nearby, As many of Collier area transit passengers are transportation dependent and have the additional services offered at the CA.T, operation centers are obtaining 1.0, cards, purchase of multiple bus passes and transfer training. That I don't know what it is, transfer training, I don't think you have to train people on how to transfer on buses. But anyway, the obvious question that comes to mind is why can't these functions be done at the existing government center? That's the main transfer facility, Also, is there the distinct possibility that if the Wal-Mart site is used, Wal-Mart would be willing and able to perform those functions? We don't know, because they haven't been contacted, It seems to us that the Wal-Mart proposal is a win/win situation, The riders benefit because they have a Page 59 I.; 16 I 1 . January 7, 2010 ~~ pleasant, convenient destination site from which to make transfers, They can shop, they can rest in between trips, The county will probably benefit, because if this type of plan is viable, it could save the county thousands of dollars in the future in infrastructure investment as the system expands and possibly increases ridership, CAT can follow the population growth and the stores that go along with it The 15,000 residents around Radio Road and Davis Boulevard will benefit by not having a disruptive service in their midst We're sure Wal-Mart is already convinced that this kind of development is good for business, In fact, Collier County has innumerable activity centers in addition to Wal-Mart as recommended by the University of Southwest Florida study, We originally stated there must be a better place, We think we have proven there are many better places, Now, I just have one request from ENACTS that won't take long. Just as an addenda, Because of answers we got at the December, 2009 meeting about Wal-Mart specifically, and the confusion in the e-mails that we looked at before, we don't know and we don't believe Wal-Mart has been officially contacted with a written proposal as to what they might be willing to do to accommodate a station only one mile from the current CAT, site, It might be substantial. They may say no, But they have already -- after the confusion of these prior e-mails, one of our members of ENACTS wrote to CAT. and said since that meeting, yes, they were contacted and they indicated they have an interest in increasing public transportation in that area, Now, since we've been involved in this process for about three years, we don't think it's an outrageous request to ask this Commission to table this conditional approval pennit for now, maybe a couple of months, and let's get an official written in writing recommendation or proposal from Wal-Mart as to what they're willing to do with a comparison of what are the costs going to be to get this transportation facility on Radio Road up and going? I've gotten more confused today, because I thought -- first of all, I thought because we're going to be really minimal. Now I'm -- for capital construction, Now I'm really confused what I heard during the last part of that presentation, There's more to this than we realize, But not only that, I heard about security, What are we going to spend over the next five years with an estimated 200 buses a day? What are we going to spend on security? How many people does that involve? It's a 24 hours a day -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir? MR, PETORELLl: But anyway -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just so you know, we normally limit speakers to about five minutes and ask that you try and limit that You've been going for almost 15, And -- MR. PETORELLl: Okay, Well, they told me 10 minutes and I thought I could do it in-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's fine, I just need you to kind of wrap it up because we have other speakers-- MR, PETORELLl: Yeah, I'm all wrapped up. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: lllank you, sir. MR, PETORELLI: Thank you very much for-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: No, I -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray has a question, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I have a question for you, sir. Now, you clearly -- you folks are focusing on Wal-Mart as the answer to this thing, MR, PETORELLl: Yes. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And you said you've been organized now for three years. MR, PETORELLl: Two to three, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Two to three, Have you made any overtures directly to Wal-Mart to find out the answers to tlle questions you pose? MR, PETORELLl: Yes, we have, and I did personally, And they said that has to come from the agency directly to the manager at the local Wal-Mart and they would consider it from there, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay, And the other question that I have relating to it, you've referenced a bus stop, I think that might be considerably different from a bus transfer point And you, in your reading of many things, you talked about bus stops and you talk about Wal-Mart desires greater transit opportunities, et cetera, But I didn't really clearly understand anything that you said in there to mean that they were in all the other parts of the country that you referenced actually operating bus transfer points, Are you Paoe 60 " 1 J~uL 7, 20t ~A saying that that's happening in other places? MR, PETORELLI: No, I don't know that specifically, But because of the number of references of buses going to Wal-Mart, I would assume they're either going through there and not making transfers and in other cases they may be getting off one bus and going to another. I don't know that, but I'm just making an assumption, It must be -- of those hundreds of sites, there must be some transfers, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm quite sure that every business would be happy to have a busload of people coming in with a potential for them to shop in the place, That's considerably different than a bus transfer point. I'm not going to go any further with it. I appreciate your comments, and thank you for representing some folks, MR, PETORELLI: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Next speaker, please, MR. BELLOWS: Susan Riedel. MS, RfEOEL: My name is Susan Riedel, R-I-E-O-E-L I'm a resident, owner and board member at Sherwood Park on Radio Road, I don't like nimbi arguments, but I found today's presentation very interesting, because I'm more confused than I think some of you were by the numbers that were thrown around in the earlier presentations, It looked like we were talking about three bus lines? Well, maybe it's really four bus lines, because there's an A and a B, And then there were references to five bus lines, lObus routes. I've gotten very confused as to how many trips, routes, lines we're really talking about coming into that facility, But even beyond the bus routes that we're talking about, what seems to distinguish a bus transfer facility from simply having a bus stop where people can transfer from one bus to another, which apparently is the case at c.A.T. stops in the county, there was the kiss and ride, And so far I've not heard anybody talk about the additional trips in and out of that facility that the county transportation authority expects from that kiss and ride capability, In one respect it looked really nice that all this extra traffic was being concentrated in a very small part of Radio Road, down in an area where there was already commercial activity taking place, But Sherwood happens to be right at that point And I think many of my fellow neighbors would be extremely concerned about not so much the additional bus traffic, because clearly the bus drivers have safety records that get evaluated and are trained to deal with traffic congestion, But now we're talking about the potential for many, many more private automobiles going in and out of that facility, And I haven't heard anyone from either the presenters earlier or the Commission ask what kind of capability we're really talking about, what kind of traffic that we're talking about from that additional function at that facility, The suggestion that the presence of a transfer point there would actually reduce local traffic on Radio Road struck me as kind of strange, unless you all are talking about reducing or eliminating any of the bus stops that are already present on Radio Road, As long as those are in place, I can't see somebody walking from the developments down near Santa Barbara all the way back to the transfer point at Davis Boulevard in order to take a bus into town, So the suggestion that traffic will somehow be reduced by that struck me as rather odd. But going beyond the traffic load and those kinds of vehicular safety issues, [think many of us are concerned about the wait time between buses and the activities and security that will actually take place on the property, We didn't hear anything yet today, And unfortunately I was out of town when the earlier neighborhood meetings were held, Not as a seasonal resident, but simply on a trip. We heard about vending machines, Are those going to be available 24 hours a day or are those going to be closed up when there's no bus traffic through there? What are the bus hours? How will that facility be controlled when the staff who are supposed to provide supervision -- although I would have thought they were doing their jobs, not looking out the windows at the bus platforms -- how is that supervision going to occur outside of the business hours of the operations center? Those are the kinds of questions I hope you will continue to ask, And I again thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Next speaker, Ray, MR. BELLOWS: Marilyn Ormson. MS,ORMSON: I don't need to speak now, thank you, my points have been addressed, Page 61 I;' MR. BELLOWS: Ken Ormson, MR,ORMSON: I say the same, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there anybody here from the public that would like to speak who hasn't been called? Yes sir. Come on up and -- have you been sworn') When you get up here, I need to ask if you've been sworn , m, MR, MOSER: My name is Scott Moser. And I thought [ was sworn in, I thought I gave you an affidavit THE COURT REPORTER: Would you spell your name. please, MR. MOSER: Moser. M-O-S-E-R. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. sir, thank you, MR, MOSER: I'm here actually representing Rhonda Borden to read a portion of an editorial that appeared in today's Naples Daily News, Rhonda is president of the Sherwood III Condominium Association, She's a paralegal at the firm of Robbins, Caplan, Miller and Ciresi, And [ encourage the Commission to read the editorial in its entirety, The early portions of Rhonda's editorial is a sarcastic and clever response to a December 8th editorial in the Naples Daily News, It compared the Morandi Dealership a/k/a bus terminal a/kIa transfer station to other projects and many of its aftermaths, I would like to read into the record portions of this editorial that raise questions regarding these decisions made during the progression of this project This is Rhonda in her article: The argument that the residents who are affected by the bus hub are trying to present is that the bus hub is in a residential area, This area has been zoned in accordance with the Land Development Code of Collier County, The present zoning will not allow it to become a passenger transfer facility, Therefore, the only way to circumvent the rezoning is to petition for a conditional use from the county to allow it to become a true bona fide bus hub under the category of essential services such as a school, a fire station, or police station, While the public transportation is an asset important to municipalities, to compare it to the requisites of education, public safety and the public welfare is a stretch, The Naples Daily News reported it was unsuccessful in finding a trmlsit system without centralized transfer positions, No one questions that The real questions that need to be answered are: Is this located within 500 yards of residential dwellings? Are the surrounding communities impacted by a potential 200 buses per day traveling to and from the hub? Are property values affected by the increase in traffic, noise. diesel fumes and industry near their homes? [s one of the access roads adjacent to the facility a state road with only two lanes of traffic not slated for expansion any time soon? Did the county -- excuse me, was the purchase ofthe property at this location approved because it was not intended to be a transfer passenger facility? Did the county flip-flop after this property was purchased and say it was always intended to be a transfer station? Residents fear the exact things the Land Development Code in Collier County was written to prevent: Poor zoning and poor planning. Residents want to preserve their quality of life and property values, Zoning is the only mechanism in place to protect property values and preserve quality of life issues, Residents ask the County Commission and Planning Commission to be true to the original zoning of the Morandi dealership, Do not circumvent the original zoning by using terms like conditional use or essential services, Those are the essential elements of Rhonda's remarks, Some thoughts of my own, Earlier during this morning's meeting, one of the board members used a phrase, if it looks like a duck, it's a duck, Another member chastised a petitioner about the noncompliance with contractual obligations regarding a tower, and voted no against the petitioner's request because of this flip-flop, The testimony of and the presentation by the representation of Wilbur Smith and Associates was full of statistics that are quite divergent from other opinions, [ hope the Commission performs its due diligence to be sure that the 10 additional buses entering or leaving Radio Road do not multiply by 10 or 20 in 10 years, With all due respect to the Commission members, judging the history of the proposed bus hub, there are many varied opinions and many varied aspects of information surrounding it. The bus hub is your duck. It is not the duck being portrayed. Thank you for your courtesy, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Does anybody else wish to speak? Page 62 " 161 If A January 7, 20 10 Yes, ma'am, please come on up and identify yourself. And were you sworn? You'll have to answer that question when you get up here, if you don't mind, MS, MOL YN: And I also gave a paper. MR BELLOWS: They were on the wrong public hearing, MS,MOLYN: Yes, I was sworn in, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, MS, MOL YN: My name is Karen Molyn, M-O-L-Y-N, I'm a resident at Sapphire Lakes on Radio Road, I'm really impressed with your task and your job that you have here with all your ALF's and your TSl's and your PUDs, Well, I'm from E-N-A-C-T-S, And fm going to present something for a gentleman named Bill Keamey who went with me to a meeting two and a half years ago, And the Morandi dealership had already been purchased and they were now trying to explain to us why it should become a transfer site, They said the dealership was purchased without any opposition, Well, you can't oppose something that you don't know about So this has been a concern of Bill's for a long time, And he's met with the transportation staff and Norman Feder and his staff, So I'd like to read his comments, And I apologize ifl'm being redundant with some things, He says, I have been involved with ENACTS since the beginning of our opposition, well over two years ago, We have attended community meetings called by our local commissioners, have met with all commissioners on an individual basis, and have met with Mr. Feder and his staff past and present on a regular basis, All of these meetings that have been held over the past two years were for one purpose: That being to express our strong opposition to placing a bus transfer site at the op center on Radio Road and to share our reasons for this and to offer viable alternatives to this placement We have tried to maintain an environment that was cooperative and cordial during these sessions, and I believe that was achieved. Unfortunately it is now very evident to us that all we have shared and all that we have suggested has fallen on deaf ears as far as the county is concerned, The county has given us very little if any seriousness to our reasons for opposition and to our suggestions for alternatives, As we look back, it surely appears that the county was merely going through the motions to justify the time and service to the community members it serves and that the decision had already been made that a bus transfer site would be placed at the out center. In other words, it was a done deal. As a reminder of some of our concerns and infonnation, you've all spoken about that today, including traffic and congestion, the more buses now that I'm learning we're talking about, parking, When I drive by there now, that parking lot looks three-quarters full. What's it going to be like when we have more people dropping off or parking their car? Noise impact on residents you've discussed, Safety for pedestrians and our most prized possession, our children, And Sherwood is right there, And I watch those children, I'm a former teacher, I watch those children wait for that bus, I watch for the children wait for their bus at Sapphire Lakes. And we also are going to have increased residential construction in the area, I'm not talking commercial; residential construction in the area, More people, more vehicles, more traffic, more safety concerns, et cetera, Now, ENACTS has conducted surveys of at least nine other counties, and you've heard about that, the size of greater Naples, and found out that those surveyed, less than three percent ofthe total number of transfer sites were located in residential areas. And we consider ourself a residential area, I drive down Radio Road, I look at the bowling alley, I can't see it It has a nice long road that goes back and it's very well landscaped, I look at the CAT center, what is it 1,000 feet from the curb? And they're going to have all those buses coming in? Now, 97 percent were located in commercial areas for the convenience of the passengers, We do have some degree of hope, And that is to do all we can to gain the support ofthe County Planning Commission today and the County Commissioners in March when the final decisions will be made, You have our petitions, We presented them to the Commissioners, and we're continuing to get petitions so that we can show -- we have a few people here today, but there are many more who feel the same way that we do, We will continue to educate the members of our community who will be most affected by this decision and , 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 strong message, that our opposition has the support of all of our citizens most effective, Please be aware that there is a better place for this transfer site, It is time for the county to step forward and look at these viable alternatives rather than to keep giving reasons why it can't be done, There is a better choice, If the county really makes decisions based on providing the passengers convenience at their transfer sites, then how can the op center be justified as a viable location? It just doesn't make sense. Thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Is there anybody else that wishes to speak" (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Now, is there any -- would the applicant like any time for rebuttal? MS, HORNE: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Please try to limit yourself to about 10 minutes, okay? MS, HORNE: Yes. sir. I think I'm going to staI1 with the USF study, if you don't mind, You may have noted that when the representative discussed -- I'm sorry, I'm -- Me. Petorelli, presented the recommendations ftom the USF study, you'll notice there were a number of parallels between the presentation that I made on the guidance related to it It's two ends of the same transportation system. The passengers need to get from where they live to where they either work or other destinations they want to go through throughout their active day. All of the presentations that we've heard about bus stop locations that focus on Wal-Mart and other commercial uses are the destinations. But transit trips begin, particularly in Collier County as I indicated, based on the surveys that were done of your passengers. begin at home and they are walk trips, That is the approach, In fact, the Department of Transportation's tool that they require all transit systems in Florida to use to estimate transit ridership is called a transit boardings estimation tool. The reason that's important is boardings are close to where people live, And so that's point number one I'd like to rebut, that this is a residential area, I'm just going to restate what I said earlier, this is a mixed use area, It is not exclusively residential. It is within the density band, I presented more on that earlier, so I don't want to belabor that point In terms of the process, we made this application based on the zoning letter that indicated the process that we should follow, and we have done that We have met with the community to describe the form of development and hear if there are ways that we could make it more acceptable, Let's see, Specifically one of the larger points relates to 200 buses, I disagree with that number. I do believe we presented that I do -- also there was -- the statement that it was confusing when we staI1 talking about routes versus trips, That is true; that's why I brought traffic experts with me here today, There are three routes: 3,A, 3.8, five and six which go by this site already, and I illustrated that I think clearly, So that is the request is those routes, And we grew the future routes by anticipating what would happen if we improved service by reducing the amount of time that a person waits at a stop for the next bus, And that's how we anticipated future growth at this stop location, The noise and fumes is another comment that was brought up, Again, if you look at the number of buses that leave at the beginning of the day and return at the end of the day, the hourly circulation that would happen on this site is much lower than that We're talking in the future five buses that would exit the site, And that's the noise and fumes that are related to that I also want to remind you that as we move forward, this system is looking to become more energy efficient and have vehicles that make less noise and produce less exhaust. In terms of park and ride, when we -- the reason that the traffic impact study -- and I will allow one of our experts to interrupt me if [ get this wrong -- is when you look at trips that are kiss and ride trips, that you're dropping off your spouse, hypothetically, or you're dropping off your son or daughter at a passenger transfer facility, those are calculated as pass-by trips or diverted trips, In other words, you're already driving by there, you're not going out of your way to go to this location, And they are not counted separately, They're considered background traffic, Did I get that right? MS, RIEDEL: Right. Page 64 16/ 10, January 7, 2010 MS, HORNE: Thank you, The state road is slated for improvements, You'll see in the packet that I gave -- that we gave you with the application that part of our analysis was to look at the improvements that are proposed along Davis Boulevard, Let me see, I do not believe this is poor zoning or poor planning specifically, I think that's one of the areas where I'm uniquely qualified to testity, As I said, I am a land use and transportation planner. That is not very common. What we look for in the future is to make investments in a systematic way in a community that each investment reinforces the other. The way that we plan land reinforces the way that we plan transportation and back and forth. And that is the way that it should happen, And in my opinion, based on your comprehensive plan, we focus that investment in the urbanized area and would continue to do so, The last thing that I will mention relates to the Wal-Mart, This is something we hear a lot As I said earlier in my presentation, we advise our clients against locating on private property because for any reason, It could be a whim, But it's generally the highest and best use. A property owner can change their mind about allowing you to circulate on that As a case in point, I am planning a transit project in Jacksonville, Florida right now that currently has one bus route, just like the Wal-Mart on Collier Boulevard, Has one bus route that comes into the site, Wal-Mart is happy with that, because it's about 19 to 25 passengers a day, And it's one vehicle that circulates through about every hour, similar to what we're looking at here, We are planning to improve their transit system and provide what's called bus rapid transit. It's a lot like an express bus. It comes through every 10 to 15 minutes. When we talked to Wal-Mart on that case, they said in fact they don't want us to come through their property anymore because it creates too many conflicts. One bus circulating through their parking lot not so bad; multiple buses circulating through their parking lot is not good, And if [could make the comparison, the business case, if you will, for any retailer, whether it's Wal-Mart or somebody else, if you're talking about 19 to 25 passengers a day, and the e-mail that they referenced earlier from Diane Flagg estimated that Wal-Mart would have to make improvements in the range of$30,000 to accommodate the one bus route, And that just doesn't make good business sense, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr, Murray, before-- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yes, I have a question, MS, HORNE: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: There are two conditions, One is kiss and ride, the other one is park and ride, Park and ride has been referenced in your document I don't agree with you completely on your kiss and ride thesis, People do in fact, if it becomes the attractant to go to a bus depot, they're going to drive there on purpose, But it may be moot because it may not be a lot But I do want to quality further with the park your car all day and ride transit That was a very relevant question that was raised and I don't think we had any testimony regarding what numbers were projected, It's a key element in a major transfer facility, but we did not hear any projection of numbers, whether in the near term or in a horizon three to five years out Have you got any information on that? MS, HORNE: I do not have an exact calculation on that. I do have some inferences that we can make, But-- MR, FEDER: I'll give you an easy answer. We're not planning on having park and ride at this facility, At the major that you saw there where we do have ability on campus with a parking garage and the like, we will be utilizing that. Although we've been struggling mightily to try and get park and ride with van pools, bus, car pools, I haven't seen a lot of that in the nature of this county, But nonetheless, the intent is not to have park and ride at the CAT, depot but rather at the government center COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So I should-- MR, FEDER: -- major transfer. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I should strike a line through that right here? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, the secondary transfer facility is what this, The secondary transfer facility doesn't have park and ride, it has drop-off passengers, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm looking at major transfer facilities. Page 65 , 16 I 1 JanualY 7. 2010 \btt MR, FEDER: And again -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right, but this -- MR FEDER: -- this is the secondary, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: This is the secondary, MR. FEDER: The non-primary -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you for correcting that MR FEDER: -- now defIned as secondary. Correct COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: All right, I got that messed up with the major, minor. MR FEDER: I'll be extremely brief, but I'd appreciate the board's -- Commission's indulgence, Nonnan Feder, for the record, Transportation Administrator. What was noted, and I'll just follow up and I'll try not to repeat One facility, no, we're not looking at only one transfer facility. We're looking at one major, one secondary. and we have some other transfer activities within the county already today, And going to Me. Murray's comments, which I think were pretty well to point, what has been relayed mostly on this issue ofWal-Mart -- and we're utilizing K-Mart, Wal-Mart and others today where we can -- are basically a destination where we have a route that stops there, people get off. go to that destination, later another bus comes, they get back on and they go on thcir way. They are not structured, And that's the real critical part for transfer activities, whether they be a major or a sccondary, Even on a secondary, which we're talking about here, you've got more than one bus coming in, And from safety and operations. you don't conflict with parking lot and people moving, you've got to have safe operations. That's why the sawtooth, And it becomes more constraining, As a matter of fact, even on the single bus application where we tried it at Coastland Center and we had on the property at Coastland Center, and that's the biggest mall we have here. they've asked us, and we now are doing it out on the street, because they found that it conflicted, Will Wal-Mart tell you every single time that they want increased transit opportunities for people to get to their shopping area? Of course they will. But it's more of a bus stop issue, And thcn the other thing, because there werc five definitive things said by Me. Moser. One was that within a residential area, I need to point out that the CA,T, facility's both on, basically adjacent to and across from commercial. The routing that you saw there was coming ofT of Davis and not going past the commercial general area here, And the routes 3.A, 3,B, that route basically combined is already traveling on Radio today, The only thing you would be doing is not having it stop at the transfer area on the roadway where it's more dangerous for vehicles and others, Number two, the issue of two and three -- 200 buses and then properly done by the traffic figures and the like, No, And actually, many of those trips are already there, we've already had that discussion, And again, what we're dealing with as far as capacity, especially since we waited till the four-Ianing of Radio Road, is minuscule to the impact capabilities or the capacity, State road? Yes, it is being widened, And we had that discussion as well. And then last, was properly intended to be transfer. And to the discussion of well, they came out and then later told us we're going to do transfer, we bought it for both, presented it to the board in purchase for both, but acknowledged based on the determination that transfer would require conditional use, And we told the board that we'd go at that and meet with the community, I do want to thank the community. and I do agree with the last speaker that the effort has been cordial, and it's always intended to be that and it will continue to be, We want to be a good neighbor, we've tried with the operation so far, I'm pleased that we haven't had concerns raised with everything we're doing there now, We're going to try and make sure that stays the way things are, even if we get this conditional use approved, I thank you for your time, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Me. Schiffer, then Ms, Caron, Norm, I think you may want to stay up here, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well, or Michelle's team, You know, one of the questions someone brought up that I brought up too is I'm under the impression that the Page 66 , 161 104 January 7, 2010 transfers are going to happen rather quickly, My concern for this may be not the same as the neighbor. But essentially how long do you think somebody would be waiting for their transfer in this condition? I mean MR, FEDER: Maybe about a half an hour, probably, at most MS, HORNE: It does depend on scheduling, but we would recommend that the scheduling be what we call pulse scheduling so that the vehicles come in at the same time and depart at the same time, If you were to stand at the appropriate time of day here at government center, you would see what is a pulse system where the buses come in, people get off of one bus onto the other. It's between two and six minutes, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So there won't be large groups of people hanging around-- MS, HORNE: For long periods of time. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: You only have two spots, so it can't be that large, so -- MS, HORNE: We have more sawtooth spaces than that Four spaces we have, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Where are they then? Because I can see two. MS, HORNE: There's two -- let me -- whoop, going the wrong way, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I see two, MS, HORNE: There we go, Are you going to be able to see the mouse if I move it on here? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yes, MS, HORNE: Okay, This is one space, this is another space, there's another space here and another space here, Also, regarding the shelter that was discussed earlier, I believe, and I'll have to look at the original plans back at my office, which is larger than the one I have in my binder. I'm sorry I can't read it at this scale, I believe it had a note that said we were going to put shelters, but I will verifY that COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, But there is no sawtooth on the left-hand side of that, correct? MS, HORNE: Right, it's a pull up straight and discharge passengers out the right side of the vehicle, So there's two spaces on one side of the sawtooth and then the other buses go around and come into the spaces, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I got it, thanks, Cherie', are we doing okay for you? Another -- Donna, would you mind waiting until we get back from break? COMMISSIONER CARON: No, I'll wait CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're a little past the time we nonnally give you a break, so why don't we take and IS-minute break and come back at 2:30 and finish up, (Recess,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everyone, we're back from our break, Are you all set, Cherie'? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, thank you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Norm Feder, I think you were up there, And Ms, Caron had a question for you and so -- I think it was for you. Let's start there, COMMISSIONER CARON: The picture that's up on the screen right now on the left-hand side, is that an actual picture of the site? I know it's in there for the -- MR FEDER: The left-hand side is a picture of the site, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, So it looks like the site is -- there's a wall against where the apartments would be and landscaping. That looks like that's quite significant. MR, FEDER: That was put in after we took over the site, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: Right It looks like there's significant landscaping out to Radio, That would be Radio in front there, correct? MR. FEDER: Correct COMMISSIONER CARON: So landscaping and buffering around this site is pretty significant, Is it to code or maybe even above -- MR, FEDER: It's actually above -- COMMISSIONER CARON: -- what is required? Page 67 -- "-" _.,-^,---",,,,---,,.~,,'~,''''''''-'~-'-'. '-- 1 FaLL 7,21 ~ MR, FEDER: -- code, we believe, It's above code requirements, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, good, One of the main issues for the community is the fear that while they're dealing with 54 trips a day today, they're concerned that that's going to morph into 200 trips a day, If you go to the hierarchy of the facility types, and we get back to the secondary transfer facility definition, what we are going to now use as a definition for that, it says that this site should be able to handle between 25 percent and 40 percent of your overall bus routes, Now, while this particular site is going to be limited to the four current routes, what does that 25 to 45 percent represent? What can it morph to? MR, FEDER: Beforc I tell you wrong, I'm going to transfer that over to someone that's worked on that number to begin with, But what I will tell you is first I want to make surc that it's clear, right now you've got three routes utilizing that site; 3.A and 3.8 is a single route and thcn the other two routes. The only thing we lookcd for on this, because we went through sevcre restrictions that weren't bccause of traffic but we're trying to respond to the community. was only to four routes, So that's the fIrst part I'll tell you, As far as to the other, I'll deter to people that work the nLl1nbers up, COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay. thank you, MS, HORNE: I'm sorry to ask you to do this. but I want to respond appropriately, Could you repeat the question? COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, in your definition hcrc it says that a secondary transfer facility can handle between 25 and 40 perccnt of the routcs, Now, we're limiting the site to only fOUL Where on the spectrum of 25 to 40 does that fall? MS, HORNE: I need to do a count I should know that from memory, but I'm afraid I've been awake a little too long this week, COMMISSIONER CARON: That's okay, I just want to -- MR FEDER: We're just under 20 routes, You're at about 25 percent at fOUL COMMISSIONER CARON: At four') MR, FEDER: Yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: Would that be-- MR, FEDER: So that gives you a frame ofreJerence, And again, if you approve this request with the conditions, then it's no more than four. So I can answer the question what the max is, But in answer to your percentage question, four routes -- or there's three routes today, excuse me, on 18, so you're not quite 20 percent COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, Go ahead, you can continue, MS, HORNE: I think Norman answered the question, COMMISSIONER CARON: All right Well, I just -- because the percentage is great But a percentage of what it is today and a percentage of what you expect it to grow to, and that's the number that people fear, And so what I'm trying to do is give the community a sense of what that number will be so that they are not sitting here thinking that they're going to end up going from 54 bus trips a day to 200 trips a day, if that's not your intent. If that is your intent, then state it and so be it MS, HORNE: I'm going to ask Norm to stick by me a see just to keep me on track. MR. FEDER: The intent was gross trips, MS, HORNE: Right. And we were talking in terms of routes in our definition that we have up here, that you would have multiple routes, And I guess when I read the condition, and correct me if I'm wrong, I see you've already put a limitation, So then this percentage definition is somewhat moot Am I with you still? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, No, that's good, Because you're right, we were talking about routes here and not buses, But let's get back to the overall -- MR. FEDER: Commissioner, best way I can answer your answer honestly is we didn't come up with the Page 68 16\ 1 ~t January 7, 2010 number 200, That was presented, COMMISSIONER CARON: I know, MR, FEDER: Okay, We are telling you that the nature of how you would split it overall depends on the size your operations are, okay? Now, realistically what we agreed to, if that's what this board endorses, approves, is limiting it to four, So that's the best answer I can give you, Because again, 25 percent of what size system and how many routes and how many buses, Today I'm running] 8, But ifl'm running 36, it's a different number. COMMISSIONER CARON: But the community here is protected because you've limited it to four, and we're also limited by the -- MR. FEDER: The 10 peak, yes, COMMISSIONER CARON: The 10, yeah, MR. FEDER: And again, we did that not because we felt the system couldn't handle it, but to respond to the community, COMMISSIONER CARON: Understood, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I believe you're done with your rebuttal. And with that, then we will close the public hearing and we can certainly have discussion if the Planning Commission feels before a motion's made, Or if someone feels like they want to make a motion, then we're up for that too, It's the time we're at right now, Mr. Midney? COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: I'd like to move that we approve this petition, subject to staff recommendations. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'll second that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I guess discussion, And Me. Midney, there's quite a few things that went on here today that we probably need to talk about in regards to conditions, The staff conditions were submitted by us in our original packet, but the applicant has submitted some alternatives. The staff doesn't have problems with the alternatives, but even the alternatives have problems, And through our discussion, for example, numbers one through six and number two, it was redundant, so the additional language there was suggested to be dropped, it wasn't needed, Number four, where it references non-primary it was supposed to now reference secondary, And where it references main, it was supposed to reference major transfer facility, And at the same time I think it would be appropriate on number four to add the criteria that you see on the slide that was just in front of us for a secondary transfer site, since this is what it's been committed to be, And that would keep the definition then consistent with the CU. And number five there were some changes on that that staff accepted, they're just clarifications, There was another -- Norm had said that the use of Davis -- the Davis entry was to the extent the FDOT designs would allow the necessary turning movements, I believe that was something that would be acceptable to the transportation department, but it's contingent upon the FOOT design of that final six-lane configuration, Is that fair to say, Norm? MR. FEDER: Make sure that I'm very, very clear here, I was asked by Commissioner Caron whether or not we could utilize that My orientation was yes, obviously we wouldn't look at that right now because it's going to be under construction, But also even in the future, unless operations change with what we presented to you, the idea is to utilize the signalized intersection, possibly using some right turns out on Davis over time, But predominantly to keep it as is proposed to you to utilize the intersection with the signal at Radio and Davis, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So do you have any concerns with the stipulation that says you'll use the Davis entry to the extent the DOT designs and allow you the necessary turning movements? MR. FEDER: And operational -- DOT designs and operational safety allows or wanrants, ifthat's what you're Page 69 _"'M,__'.~,,~~. _.",.._<-_~."__,,,,_""_.,. ", ,,_._,.._..,~.._'~--' 16 I 1 ~~ January 7, 2010 requesting, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think it needs to be in there, because just the fact you would even use it for 50 percent, and that's the right in/right outs, which are rather safe turning movements under most conditions, would save 50 percent of the additional traffic -- MR. FEDER: For two of the -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- that is on that one little segment to the east of Radio Road, MR, FEDER: Yeah, for two of the three routes, And again -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right MR. FEDER: -- right now if you have the signal moving and opening, you're a lot safer under signalized, So I'd like to note that obviously we're going to work for that improvement It's an option, but we're still emphasizing use of the signal. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anyway, those are a couple of the conditions that we talked about Mr. Midney is nodding his head, he has no problem with them, Mr. Murray has no problem, Is there any other-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Just a question. CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Mr. Schiffer" COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: In number four, what is the reason for the second sentence? I mean, wouldn't the first sentence be enough? I mean, it's -- CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Yeah, I don't-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- stating that in the future if you ever -- I mean, it will end up being semantics, I think let's just make it clear with the first sentence. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if we leave the first sentence in, then the problem becomes if the county changes its main transfer station -- oh, no, this says any designation of this site as Collier County's main transfer station is prohibited, Why wouldn't we want to say that" COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, you need to say that COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ijust don't think it's necessary, but okay, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I mean, it doesn't hurt, And we're going to define the secondary station as we had in our handout, Page 15, Is there any other comments from the Planning Commission'! (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I will be supporting the motion for the following reasons: This was referenced as an essential service. A question came up that it's not like a school or a fire station, Well, it isn't But essential services can be governmental facilities, And that's exactly what this is, The current facility is a C-4 use, which is a high intensity commercial use, There's -- I don't see though the testimony of the public where a car dealership is any better than a transfer station in regards to the uses being put forth here today and the testimony from the staff and the applicant that provided that there are actually less trips on the road, I didn't -- ] heard a lot of comment from the citizens that they don't want it here, And that's fine, we understand that But a zoning basis is not simply we don't want it here, You found other places where you'd like to see it I can tell you right now, I'd like to see Nick's road system going a lot of other places than my backyard, but that's unfortunately sometimes where it ends up, So without providing lack of compatibility reasons, it's real hard to find a zoning reason why this is such a bad place, There's going to be less traffic, The additional parts of not in the middle of a residential area, as I heard testified to, it's clearly not in the middle of a residential area. It's surrounded on two or three sides by commercial. So for all those reasons, and for the lack of any significant detriments that I could hear, I'm going to be voting in favor of the motion, Anybody else have any comments before I call for the vote'! (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAfN: All those in favor, signifY by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Ave, Page 70 161 1~~ January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0, Thank you, (At which time, Commissioner Wolfley exited the boardroom,) Item # JOE PETITION: RZ-PL2009-469, EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT NO. 26 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, The next item up, which I know some people have waited patiently for, members of the fire department Of course there's been no fires, so I guess you're lucky today, Petition RZ-PL2009-469, East Naples Fire Control and Rescue ~istrict No, 26 for a new station -- or a new site on East Tamiami Trail. All those wishing to participate in this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there any disclosures on the part of Planning Commission? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I had a discussion with Me. Duane, and at the time I didn't have a lot of information that I had to discuss with him, but I think he knows that I let staff know and the planner know that I had a problem with the way the references were to the conceptual site plan, because that's definitely in conflict with the release of not having an EIS, So I think we're going to -- hopefully you've got a new plan to give us today, With that, it's all yours, MR DUANE: For the record, Robert Duane, representing the East Naples Fire ~istrict I've been advised that the plan I am sharing with you is really an access management plan, We were initiating the permitting process for this fire station, which is located on East Tamiami Trail depicted on the aerial photo here at the intersection of Lake Park Boulevard. The wning of the property is C-3, an agriculture, We're going to the P district We have a recommendation of staff approval. The E1S waiver was granted for several reasons, one of which I just mentioned to you. We were initiating the permitting process at that point and wanted to get a little further into it Secondly, your comprehensive plan is changed in the recent past where sites ofthis size are no longer required to have an EIS, but your land development code is catching up in this cycle to codifY that change, So it may very well be when we do come in for site plan approval that an EIS may not be required if the code does not change, and obviously we will be preparing an EIS at that time, And I'd be happy to answer any questions that you might have, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there questions from the Planning Commission? (No response,) COMMISSIONER CARON: You have to go with your -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I am, Bob, if you were told about my concern, it could have been simply rectified by changing the plan that you have up there and passing a new one out today that took the words conceptual site plan off it and left access management plan, Why wouldn't you have done that? MR, DUANE: I had been -- only was advised five minutes ago by Mr, Bellows that he was calling the plan an access management plan and not a conceptual site plan, so I did not have the benefit of having that information Page 7 I "..__..,.___._'.._..~..._.".,. _',_ "," "'~'''_h_'.___'''~__'''_,__ _" ,.."" '. _.._'" ."._,-~_.- t?aryt2ol01 ~ before I came to the podium today, MR, BELLOWS: I couldn't get ahold of him earlier to ask him to bring one, But I thought we could get that put on as a consent when it comes back, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So there's not going to be an objection to changing the language on the plan that you produced? MR, DUANE: Not at all. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, And Ray, do you know why staff would have referred to it as a conceptual site plan, knowing that if they did it would have required an EIS? MR, BELLOWS: I'm not sure what the planner was thinking when they were dealing with Mr. Duane on this, But in my opinion they should have been following our past examples where we've had straight zoning with a map of development area or access area, That is what we're calling these maps or additional documents atrached to standard rezone ordinances, The code doesn't require these types of development maps to be provided, but it is useful for planning purposes, And we are going to be looking at the code requirements for standard rezonings to require such maps of development areas or access areas, There is a concern with environmental staff that sometimes these maps might show, depict preservation areas, such as the one used in this case, And the concern is that somehow they're going to be -- county will be approving some kind of a preserve area when it's not really been vetted through the EAC. And that's what we want to avoid by calling it a map of development area, And I apologize for Ms, Zone not catching that earlier. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, okay, The reference to the fact that an EIS isn't required and that the LDC is going to be changed, do you know specifically what the language is for the LOC change') MR, BELLOWS: Say that again? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There's a reference that this site would no longer have been required for an EIS because of its size, Do you have -- are you familiar-- MR. BELLOWS: Well, it's under 10 acres, so-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So the way the change is coming down -- MR, BELLOWS: We have environmental staff to explain that CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- anything under 10 acres is not required for; is that what you're telling us? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, MR. CASALANGUIDA: Commissioner? Nick Casalanguida, for the record, There's an LOC cycle amendment coming forward from the planning staff to document that MR, KLA TZKOW: If the comp, plan's been changed so it no longer requires it, that's the end of it I mean, that trumps the LOC. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you, MS, MASON: Excuse me, For the record, maybe I could clarify a little bit The Growth Management Plan change took away the arbitrary acreage requirements that are currently in there, But it just says that they will develop criteria, It isn't necessarily saying that an acreage would kick it in or not And it did just -- the first hearing of the EIS requirement went before the EAC -- I'm sorry, I forgot to say my name for the record, Susan Mason with Environmental Services section, It did go to the EAC just yesterday, and there were some concerns, and they're going to be talking about it a little bit more, But it will certainly be coming before your board, It's gone before many stakeholders' meetings, And who knows what the final outcome will be. But it mayor may not -- for this site mayor may not require an EIS, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you don't know yet MS, MASON: I don't know yet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Thank you, Now, are there any other questions of the applicant? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How about staff report? Is that you, Ray? MR, BELLOWS: Yeah, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, boy, MR, BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager. I'm filling in for Melissa Zone on this Page 72 16 I 1 0q January 7, 20 I 0 item. Mr. Duane did provide a good overview of the project. It is a rezone to the public use zoning district, which includes a safety service facility, such as fire stations. The project is consistent with the comprehensive plan. All reviewing staffhas recommended approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions, It looks to be a straight forward rezone, We have conditions of approval and we're subject to the change to the conceptual -- not conceptual plan, the map of development and access to make that reflected on the revised resolution when it's brought back to you, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Ray, number two, what exactly does that mean? It states, the applicant has agreed to go before the environmental advisory commission with the Environmental Impact Statement prior to site plan approval. Does that mean that the final approval of this is based on the EAC? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Good question, Brad. MR BELLOWS: That is reflective of the current requirements that -- at the time of site development plan review is the way I would have written it This project would be required to submit an Environmental Impact Statement and go to the EAc. At the time of site development plan review, not prior to, I'll have Susan Mason clarify the last part. MS, MASON: Excuse me again, For the record, I just wanted to clarify that it would be whatever requirements were in effect at the time they come in for SOP, It may be something like provide necessary environmental information to do the evaluation or it could be an ElS or it could be an EAC hearing, I just don't know, But if we could make it reference whatever is in effect at the time ofSDP, that would be appreciated, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the EAC would be reviewing. It's not the rewne request today, That would be done through tllis process, They were simply reviewing the SOP that would follow the rezone process, MS, MASON: They would be required to review -- at this point they would have to review and approve the EIS, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If one's required, MS. MASON: If one's required, But if there's no EIS requirement or review by the EAC, it would just be an administrative staff review, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I have a question, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Me. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: If the language had -- if the language had not yet been determined and you used a phrase to describe where you wanted to go with it or where it was going to go, and they're ready to go and it's site development plan, are they going to get held up because we don't have the LOC qualified? Mr, Klatzkow indicated, I thought with definition, that if the GMP changed it and then you came in and you said well, it's not quite that, so now we're going to go into Never Never Land with this thing and it could sit there for God knows how long, MS, MASON: Well, 1-- you know, they could come in and do a formal request for like an interpretation from the appropriate staff member of how the LOC should be applied right how. My understanding of reading the language that's in the Growth Management Plan, it just opens it up to not always require it for certain sites. Right now it says for coastal high hazard area. Or previously the GMP said for coastal high hazard area anything 2.5 acres or greater had to have an EIS, unless it met some exemptions, And for everywhere else it was] 0 acres or more. But now the GMP says that staff -- or the LOC shall be amended to require an EIS or environmental information as necessary, And I'm paraphrasing what it says, But, I mean, it's -- COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, I recognize that And maybe we should be looking for the GMP language to see in fact what we are talking about. Because I find that to be an impossible situation. We will have said what we've said and it could hang out there for months and God knows how long, and then it could be going around and around. MS, MASON: I'll go look up the GMP section and find the exact words, But what I would say, how I would apply the code would -- currently if they came in today, they would be required to do an EIS and get that approved prior to the SOP approval; however, if the LOC is amended, to allow Page 73 - .'---"._. _.,-,-.,-, -- "'--"-~-~"-'--""-"'~-- .,. 161 1 January 7, 2010 fbtf them to be exempted from that Because the LOC is very specific with what's required and what's not And it's still consistent with the Growth Management Plan, it'sjust more specific than the Growth Management Plan, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Except -- and I appreciate that's what the intent is, but my understanding of this conversation is that it's not yet a known what's going to be said, and B, we don't know whether that will put something into even a worse situation, because you're saying there is a speculation of it could be several possibilities, MS, MASON: Right. It hasn't gone through any -- except for the EAC, they haven't even finalized -- at least I don't recall that they finalized a vote on it yesterday, And after it goes through your board and then into the Board of County Commissioners, they'll have the final say on who has to do an EIS and who doesn't, or if an EIS is even still existing, I mean, there's all kind of -- it could go from what exists today to anything that's consistent with the Growth Management Plan, What I'm just trying to clarify is the LOC today, the requirement for when an EIS is required and when it's not, it is still consistent with the current language in the GMP, The Growth Management Plan was amended to allow some changes to the current Land Development Code. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: The intent being to make something easier, not more difficult, correct? MS, MASON: Well, I think the intent was not necessarily to make it easier, but to only require the process when there's value to it CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, would you help us out here. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, I think I have the solution, Because the LDC will apply no matter what's in elfect now or what's going to be in effect at the time the amendment is approved, I don't -- therefore, I don't see the purpose of having two in there at all. One way or the other the LOC has language that's going to apply, whether it's the current language or the amended language, So I just recommend taking two out altogether. It's kind of redundant anyways, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does that get you guys-- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- Brad and Bob. where you want to be? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm happy, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Yeah, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I thought Ray would have a solution, So I figured ifhe could just express it we would be ahead of the game, Okay. are there any other questions of staff! COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: No, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: None? I can see there's not a lot of public speakers, MR. BELLOWS: No speakers, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you want to rebut anything, Bob, that the public didn't say? MR. DUANE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, with that we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll make a motion, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I would move that we forward with a recommendation of approval RZ-PL2009-469, with the removal of condition number two and the changing on Exhibit C, the title, from conceptual site plan to access site plan, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made and seconded. Is there any discussion? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signifY by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. Page 74 1 6 I 1 f?t January 7, 2010 COMMISSIONER MIONEY: Aye, COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It passes, 6-0, COMMISSIONER CARON: Six? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, Mr, Wolfley left about an hour ago, And -- or half an hour ago, I can't remember which, and Mr. Vigliotti left at noontime, So do we have any -- well, that's it, we're over with, You guys can stop talking now, (tem#11 OLD BUSINESS CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Old business, We have none, Thank you, Item #12 PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Public comment? I don't think there's any left, Item #14 ADJOURN CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a motion to adjourn? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray, COMMISSIONER CARON: Second, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Ms, Caron. All in favor, signify by saying aye, COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye, COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye, COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye, COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye, CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye, Anybody opposed? (No response,) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're out of here, Thank you, ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:58 p,m, Page 75 -^'~~-'--'--"-'~-~'-'--"'---- "------>"--'- ,'._'~'=- .. ~,."" --- .__" ".,_,.__~w___w__. ____".,'''_ ., '-_.~- STRAIN. Chairman These minutes approved by the board on _ ~ - '-f - I b t/ as presented Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc" by Cherie' R, Nottingham, Page 76 1 ~nu~ry 7, 2!O ~q or as corrected Fiala Halas . Henning Coyle Coletta -----~ 16 I 1 tJ6 December 16, 2009 // \/ SCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE -.-- CONTRACTORS' LICENSING BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY Naples, Florida December 16,2009 "..,..;.r_", i' ' - ',:i',' .- , '.. '. -, ~,.., {~ LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Contractor 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 CDES on Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Richard Joslin Michael Boyd Lee Horn Terry Jerulle Kyle Lantz Thomas Lykos Patrick White ALSO PRESENT: Patrick Neale, Attorney for the Board Robert Zachary, Assistant County Attorney Michael Ossorio, Contractor Licensing Supervisor Page 1 Misc. Corres: Dale: D ~ -- 0 *"" ..ita :r(\ (',qlielIIo. ..._.._-_.."---~~-'~._",,,_-_, ",._.~,--_...... _.,,,--.----,, ,-..-. ,', _...._.,_.."....,"~-,_._...~ ,--~_..~.-.....- . .."...~~._,...." ......,,,._..._.._.. _.....___.n_.H...._<_.... . Decelb~r 6, 2 ~b 9 MR. YBACET A: Gentlemen, good morning. Just a little reminder, please talk into the microphone. They are directional, and we need to record everything on this meeting. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. That is very good information. Thank you. Also, by the way, gentlemen, before we start, we're going to speak one at a time, nice and clear so the court reporter can hear everything we're saying. Ready to go? I'll call to order the Collier County Contracting Licensing Board meeting of December 16th, 2009. 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 that testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. I'll open the meeting starting with roll call starting to my right. MR. LANTZ: Kyle Lantz. MR. JERULLE: Terry Jerulle. MR. L YKOS: Tom Lykos. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Richard Joslin. MR. BOYD: Mike Boyd. MR. HORN: Lee Horn. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Gentlemen, staff, is there any deletions or additions to the agenda? MR. JACKSON: Good morning. For the record, Ian Jackson, Contractor Licensing. Under new business, an addition. The board needs to vote on a motion to pay civil penalties. That would be under new business. Under new business, we have a deletion of Roy Tomasch to qualify a second entity. And to replace that we have an addition of Katherine Grant. And she's looking to qualify a second entity as an addition. That documentation I passed out just a few minutes ago. Page 2 .. >._. . . C'__~"__'~___' '.__n_ '_...._.____.._,,_._.w.~__~._ __~ _"'.,.,' _"_M__"~<___~_','__" 6 I PJ0 Decem er 16, 20 And that concludes additions and deletions. MR. L YKOS: Motion to accept the changes, Lykos. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We have a motion. MR. JERULLE: Second, Jerulle. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: A second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries for the agenda. If everyone's looked at the minutes for the October 21 st meeting, I need a motion to approve. I do have one change on it. I believe in the roll call Eric Guite' was listed as being here. I don't believe he was here in October; is that correct? MR. OSSORIO: That's correct. Eric Guite' is no longer a board member. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Strike that out then. Any other changes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need a motion to approve. MR. LANTZ: Motion to approve, Lantz. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need a second. MR. JERULLE: Second, Jerulle. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. Page 3 _ ___ _ _~__'__"'_~'",,_,,_. 'w "__~"'__'____"""'_'" ~. .__.._._.........,__~_.,,_.__.__.."_*._. ,.".....".__.__.,._...,.,..-~,... ..... ... _......_...._"'____.."_'""~_,.__..... ...u.._. __ .. 16 I 1 p& December 16, 2009 MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Under discussion, Mr. Ossorio, we have the end of the month report from you, huh? MR. OSSORIO: Good morning, Mr. Chairman. For the record, Mike Ossorio, Collier County Contractor Licensing Supervisor. We have the end of the month report and it should be in front of you. And it's for OctoberlNovember. And we're currently working on December, of course. Just a little footnote as well, our fees did get raised in between our last board meeting. It's been approved and we are scheduled to implement our fee increase January 1st, 2010. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Did the fees that we worked for so hard give you more opportunity to do your job a little better? MR. OSSORIO: It should. As far as my recollection is concerning the fee increase is that that fee increase is somewhat going to go ahead and add us another individual the next several months, the next budget cycle. So with that said, yes, it's going to help us greatly next -- 2010. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Good, glad to hear that. Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Michael, can you do me a favor? When you make this report to us, I know that Gary Mully (phonetic) did some projections for this fiscal year. Could you have a column that has what Page 4 _,~__..._._>__"__,_.._..,,,___.__,_._._.."".~.,,..m_w_~, ., m..__~___~,,_._.,,___,,~~,_~.~,.~~ ~._._..~_",' --....,__._.-,__o.',.._..w'" __ ._~-'-_.~'-", -'-".~,---~- 1 6 I 1 tJ0 December 16, 2009 we budgeted on a month-by-month basis so we can see the performance based on the budget? Can you add that to this report? MR. OSSORIO: No problem. MR. L YKOS: Thank you. MR. OSSORIO: Now, this will be probably the last time you'll see this report. This is a CD Plus report. We actually are going into what you call CityView, which is a new program for us. I don't know how it's going to look. But I understand, I will get with Gary and we'll get something to you at the next board meeting. MR. L YKOS: All right, thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, so much for that. Under new business, you want to make the motion for the civil penalties right now before we get into the other items? MR. OSSORIO: For the -- just to clarify real quick, we did do a sting operation, too. I just wanted to let you know that it was highly successful. We worked with the State of Florida and we worked with The Economics Crime Unit and we got 14 gentlemen arrested. One of them you I think you might know, he was at our last board meeting. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. I heard rumors on that one. I have one other question. On the citations that are listed, whenever we get a packet here, we have the nomenclature that's on it as far as the date, times and whether penalty was served and what they got as far as the citation goes. Unless it's on the back of the citation, there's nowhere on it that indicates how long they have to pay that fine or how long they have to pay that penalty. Is it listed somewhere on the back of the -- MR. OSSORIO: On the back it says that the individual has 10 days to contest it. After 10 days, it's considered -- you've been considered guilty, or been found in violation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: So you have 10 days, 10 working days to contest the violation. Page 5 _ ._,._."_~_"_ ___'_,n__.__.'''_'_ __""_""__'_"""'M.".__~__~_ - 'o_'~<_ ,. -.....,__~,__~_ '~___H"_'_" __'__"""","__,~_._""._'___"W'_" 16 I 1 ~0 December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right, but it doesn't say anything about the time span as far as how much time they have to actually pay the fine. MR. OSSORIO: They have 10 days. Either pay the fine or contest it. What typically -- this is a business practice. We decided that we would give the opportunity of 10 days to pay it or contest it. After 10 days we will send that individual a reminder; it's a 10-day letter which I sign. After that then we bring it back to the board for the board to find them in violation. And we've done that administratively through this office, through the board for many months now. You just sign it and then we send that to the last known address. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: That's a business issue. But they only have 10 days to contest -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Ten days. MR. OSSORIO: -- it or pay it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, okay. Okay, opening with new business then. I'm looking for a Mr. Carl F. Brewer. Are you present? Would you please come up to the podium, please, and be sworn . m. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MR. BREWER: Good morning. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Brewer gets started in his presentation, I want to just go ahead and bring you back several months ago. We had Mr. Palmer here, contested his citation, and contested the ability to be able to stump grind. And in the board's order that they gave Mr. Palmer 60 days to really come into compliance -- (At which time, Mr. White enters the boardroom.) MR. OSSORIO: -- and gave him a provisional certificate to be Page 6 '--'--~-~---"-'-'- -..-, --'- '--".~---"'" ... ..,...,--""",- . .--'.-"~"'-'-'~ _..~....-......._"_..",.,." - .... ."'..-- , .. "~----"-"'-'-"- ..~--_."--- 16 JIbS December 16, 2009 able to go ahead and continue his business as a stump grinding (sic). And with that said, the board also said to Mr. Palmer that if you wish to waive the business procedure test, you must come back with a full application and show why that he or she, or Mr. Palmer in general, should not be able to take the business procedure, because he was in business for so many years. With that said, Mr. Palmer decided to sell his business. He didn't elect to go through the process and he sold his business to another individual that actually took the exams, passed the business procedure and the tree exam and did everything he needed to do to come into compliance. So Mr. Palmer was off the table. But Mr. Brewer was here accompanying Mr. Palmer, and Mr. Brewer is here today, that you basically said any person that had a business tax receipt saying stump grinding had the same affordability to go ahead and get a provisional. So Mr. Brewer got a provisional license to be able to continue his business. And now he is here today to waive the testing for the business procedure test, due to the fact that he thinks he's been in business for so many years. So this is why Mr. Brewer is here today. Am I correct? MR. BREWER: I think so. MR. OSSORIO: So with that -- MR. BREWER: There's a lot that has been going on for a long time. I have one more document that -- THE COURT REPORTER: Mr. Brewer, I'm sorry to interrupt, you need to be on the microphone when you speak. MR. BREWER: I just want to introduce -- THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, but you need to be on the microphone. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Jackson can get them from you from the podium, please. Thanks. Page 7 _ '_'_'___"_'_."_'_"M"_._.__~,._~~___.._..,____..__.,.__W'_"_ __ " '__," _.._."~_,~,."~~",,,,,,,,_,^______,._,,.,, -..'''._...."n__.ob>__.> .__-"",="__.__''''.,_.._~,,._.._.M'___'''' ." '." "'_~,.>___..-.___m'.__._______.~_", Decembt96,1200J ~? Just for the record, everyone that's going to come before the board -- MR. BREWER: This only goes to -- I'm sorry. This goes -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Excuse me one second. Just for the record, everyone else that's going to come before the board, just be advised that the speaking must be done at the microphone and there is no wandering around as far as the hand papers. These all have to be documented and submitted as evidence. Okay? MR. BREWER: Okay. Sorry about that. This just wasn't in the original package. This only pertains to experience, background and so on and so forth. It was -- the meetings that I attended, it just seemed as though the information that was put forth in meetings didn't filter out to the front desk in quite the manner that I anticipated. I know I provided all the documentation, backgrounding and so on and so forth that I was asked to do. I brought it into front desk out here. And then they hit me with, well, you've got to do the business law course and certification and so forth, and I said no, that's not my understanding, nor was it -- the bottom line in the meeting to my knowledge that I do have the background and the affidavits and so on and so forth that, you know, that should be -- I don't know, I hate to use the word grandfathered in, but the same as the rest of the details I was asked as far as the insurance and the experience and affidavits to that effect. The only reason I even bothered with the class transcripts there was there was some discussion at that point going back to Mr. Palmer's involvement that he did in fact have business background. In fact, the people involved were under the impression somehow or other that Palmer was a CPA. He never was, never said he was. I don't know how that came across. But bottom line is I've been up and running for five years, I've Page 8 _. ._,____._...,.~.<>_~m_._~".",,_,___,~__.__,......_. _ ._.".__.._._.....,__-=__~....."~.."._-.__._..,,..'.._,..,~_.."...-"'_~'.M~_~______,_._"^_.,,...~ _ _ __ .__...~...._.~,,____~__.,,'.,____._.___ "'_'_'_."_'"__,._.".m._,,~._, 16 lItiS December 16, 2009 got the background, I've got the experience. Two-thirds to three-quarters of the information in -- that's purveyed by the business law course does not apply to a proprietorship operation with one man running it without employees, et cetera. I do have all the proper insurances, I do have the background, my record is clean. And that's kind of where it stands. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I'm just going to ask staff, what's your recommendation, staff? MR. OSSORIO: My recommendation is that we approve his license to restrict it to stump grinding only. And ifhe wishes to be a tree company or a tree contracting (sic), that he fill out a full application, show experience and credit and also retake the tree -- actually take the tree exam. MR. BREWER: Which basically I have no need for that. All I want to do is basically grind stumps and occasionally we will, you know, haul off some trash, some cut branches and so forth. But I'm a stump grinder, that's all I do. I'm the little '01 guy that follows the guys around that cuts the trees down and grinds up what's left. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. So you're content with the recommendation that staff has given, that the only licenses you're looking for is just to have stump grinding only. MR. BREWER: Yeah, although there was some discussion at that point where they wanted to roll it at all together and -- you know, which is fine, except that I don't have any particular need for it as far as the trimming and even tree removal. But I'm certainly not wanting to go into a full tree service, so to speak. I'm not going to be climbing up trimming and -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Understanding, though, that if we approve this, that you're going to have a stump grinding license only. MR. BREWER: That's all I've ever had. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Page 9 , ._.~___".._,"__,._~.....".~_..~,,___,.__._.,,_,_____h , _"__,,.,_,"',..'."'~n"'=,_" _, ,...."__....______,_h..__.'"",_""...,,".._..-........_>~.~"....,.........."...=.,~,.---,"-'" _._.,,,.~-__. ~_._","~~_..._-,._. _..-..,,_._,,---~' DecemJePll200~ ~ MR. JERULLE: And understanding that you cannot trim any trees or cut any trees down. MR. BREWER: Now trimming was always part of the deal. Cutting trees down was restricted to 12 feet or less. And occasionally that does happen with the stump grinding where they'll leave a, you know, good size chunk standing up there. But I'm certainly not going to be cutting down any full trees or anything of that nature. And you do occasionally have to trim just to make access to stump grinding jobs and so forth, but I'm not looking to go into the trimming business, so to speak. But trimming was always part of the licensure to begin with. What changed was they wanted to change or have changed my status from just a proprietor to a -- what was the term they came up with, Michael, a specialty contractor or something of that nature? As far as Palmer and I were concerned, they wanted to basically -- was that the term, specialty contractor? MR. OSSORIO: Well, under the code you are considered a specialty contractor, but you are restricted. Now, with that said, stump grinding, if we do restrict your license today, you will not be doing any trimming. There's nothing in the provision of the code that says 12 feet or less. If you trim a tree and you contract to trim a tree, then you can't do it. You need to just strictly do stump grinding. Typically for experience the tree company comes in there, takes the trees away and the stump grinder comes after and takes the stumps out. That's what we're looking at for today. MR. BREWER: Yeah, although it can happen that, you know, the homeowner will contract us directly. And we do get involved in the removal process. Not that we do it, but we arrange for it and so forth. And sometimes that gets us involved in the, you know, cleaning up the debris and so forth. But basically what we do is grind stumps. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Well, we're going to just say it the bottom line this way: Okay, your license that we're going to try to Page 10 161 1~/? December 16, 2009 approve here now is going to allow you to grind stumps. That's it. No trimming, no going up any distance. You're going to have a stump sitting there, you're going to go in and grind it and you're perfectly legal. MR. BREWER: Yeah, which is -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: If you get involved in trimming a tree, then don't be surprised if you get cited. Now, are we clear? MR. BREWER: Right, now -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Are we clear? MR. BREWER: Yes, sir, I understand. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Thank you. Can I get a motion? MR. BREWER: I was going to say, I had an additional license as well that did specifically mention tree trimming, and that was basically what you call your handyman license. Now, where do I stand there? Is this going to affect that? I don't know. I haven't heard anything on that. We haven't gone into that, frankly. MR. OSSORIO: Under the handyman exemption, and also the handyman ordinance and also the handyman checklist, it doesn't say tree trimming on there. MR. BREWER: Well, it provides for the cleanup option -- MR. OSSORIO: Which is fine. What the Chairman is saying to you is that you're not going to trim trees. Now, if the tree's down, you can surely take your chainsaw and you can cut it up in little pieces and take it away. If it's been cut. You can't trim trees for a living. So stump grinding only. And to remove MR. BREWER: I don't want to -- frankly I don't want to trim trees for a living. I don't picture myself climbing -- at 63 years of age climbing any palm trees. I'm not too interested. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. All right, with that said, do I hear a motion? Page 11 161 1 ~6 December 16, 2009 MR. L YKOS: I'm not convinced yet that this gentleman understands what his license is going to allow him to do and what the restrictions are. So if you're calling a vote right now -- MR. BREWER: I understand what you're -- MR. L YKOS: -- it's not going to get by me. I'm not convinced, sir, that you understand the limitations of the license that we're going to give you. MR. BREWER: I've been operating under those limitations for six years, sir. I know exactly what the license pertains to and what it means. I just had some questions that I voiced. And if that -- you know, if that concerns you, I'm sorry, but that was, you know, strictly trying to get some information here. MR. L YKOS: Well, I'm concerned because you've already expressed a lack of understanding of what this license would allow you to do. MR. BREWER: I wasn't aware that I had done so. That license allows me to grind stumps, period. MR. L YKOS: That's correct. MR. BREWER: Said and done. MR. L YKOS: You can't trim trees on the way back to a stump to have access to it. MR. BREWER: That's why I asked the question, sir, just to make sure that we're all clear on that. MR. L YKOS: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I think at this moment we have given him the criteria as far as what his license is going to cover. And what he does with that license is going to fall into his hands. We're just honoring the fact that we have set up some criteria for stump grinding. And as long as -- MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- he understands it. MR. WHITE: One question. And I'm not sure who may be theo Page 12 161 Ibt:J December 16, 2009 appropriate person to answer this. But is it still a tree after the top has been removed and there may still be branches on the stump of a tree? Because I don't want to get into that in some future citation case where, you know, the man's charged with tree trimming and the defense is going to be well, that's not a tree, it's a stump. I just would like to make sure it's clear, since we're going to the nth degree of detail and there are likely going to be other potential applicants under this process, to get that point out on the floor in whatever discussion is necessary to make sure we're not going to run afoul of the rules down the road. MR. BREWER: That's why I asked about that 12-foot thing. I was told that up to 12 feet there was no permit or licensure or whatever, involvement as far as, you know, removing -- some people consider anything that's been cut down a stump, regardless of what they leave. I've run into that from time to time. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Ossorio, what's your thoughts on that? MR. OSSORIO: My thought is, is that Mr. Brewer is not going to be trimming trees. If he contracts to trim a tree and to remove a stump, he'll be cited. If one of my investigators goes on the job site and he has a chainsaw in his hand and he has one little branch he's got to cut off the stump side of it, we're not going to give him a ticket for that, absolutely not. But we are going to talk to the homeowner and if Mr. Brewer is there and he is contracted to trim the tree and to remove the stump, that's when we'll be issuing him a ticket, because that's contracting. So we're on the same page. MR. WHITE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need a motion. MR. LANTZ: I move we accept the application of Mr. Brewer and waive his business exam. MR. WHITE: I'll second it. Page 13 161 1 tf December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We have a motion and a second. All in favor -- any discussion? MR. NEALE: I would recommend as part of the motion and second that you clarify that it's a motion to grant a restricted license for stump grinding only. Even though there's been all the discussion, that should be part of the motion. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Correct, okay. You want to change your motion to signify that? MR. LANTZ: I move we accept Mr. Brewer's application for a license restricted to stump grinding only and waive his examination of the business and law test. MR. WHITE: Seconder agrees. That was my original understanding. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mine too. We have a motion. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? MR. L YKOS: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries 6-1. Thank you, Mr. Brewer. Again, pay attention to what you're doing out there, okay? MR. BREWER: I shouldn't have any problem doing what I've been doing all along. Real quickly, temporary license -- MR. WHITE: You need to be on the microphone, sir. Page 14 16 1 1 bS December 16,2009 MR. BREWER: I'm sorry. I was issued a temporary license. Will that just carry forth or do I need to go out and get a new one, or -- I mean, it's a regular looking license, it just says -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What you need to do is -- MR. BREWER: -- temporary typed in on it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- go before licensing, not today but tomorrow. They'll have all the paperwork here. Then you go back there and they'll explain whatever items you have to have to carry on your new license -- MR. BREWER: Okay, all right. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- or your new restricted license. MR. BREWER: I wanted to know how to handle it, that's all. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right, I'm looking for a Mr. John 1. Puterbaugh. Would you please come to the podium and be sworn in, please. THE COURT REPORTER: Mr. Neale, would you like me to swear in the staff for the day? MR. NEALE: Why don't you do that, just swear them in for the day. That way we don't have to do it every time. (Mr. Ossorio, Mr. Jackson and Mr. Puterbaugh were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Puterbaugh, you're here to reinstate your license without retesting, I understand? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Elaborate a little bit more on that. MR. PUTERBAUGH: Well, I've been in business for 15 years now, and the past month -- or a couple months ago there when this all came to a head here I didn't realize that I had not gotten the renewal application in the mail to continue to fill out for my license and whatnot. As you see in my package, I've kept up everything else to do with my business: Licenses, insurance, the whole nine yards. And Page 15 Decemt91!,201 eP somehow this, to be quite truthfully with you, slipped through the cracks. I'm usually pretty on top of things and have made changes, so this does not happen again. I'm hoping you'll see in good faith that I've been taking care of my business and doing my business with the best that I can do it and taking care of people basically like I always say, to take care of people like you'd like to be taken care of. And I just quite truthfully, like I said, this just slipped through the cracks. I don't -- I do pool service and repair and I never have had issues of pulling a license, but I was going to install a pool heater and come to find out that my license hadn't been renewed. And that's when I finally found out that -- I went down to the county there and they said it hadn't been renewed because you didn't send in the money. And I never got any application to renew at that time. And like I said, I let it slip through the cracks and I'm hoping you'll see in good faith that I've kept everything up, that I can just pay the old past due amounts and keep doing business as I have for 15 years with no citations of any kind other than I have right now. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The license that you are -- have let lapse is the swimming pool license, the -- MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- swimming pool service license? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, I'll just give you a quick overview real quick about the history of the board and the history of reinstating a license. There's a county license and then there's a state certificate, and I believe this gentleman has kept his state registration up; am I correct? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Everything has been kept up. MR. OSSORIO: He has his continuing education, he has continued with the state. Unfortunately that the ordinance basically says that if you don't renew your certificate within a certain amount of time and you have not taken the exam within a three-year period, you Page 16 ,,_~~~------~"~~'<~'--"'-'-'~"-"-'"--'-"---"~-'-'""'--'-"._-~---."--'-- 1 6 I I P.J5 December 16, 2009 must retest. We've in the past -- he's not the only one, but there's been several in the past said ifhe -- the board's opinion has been that ifhe's kept the state registration, he's current with the state and his continuing education, therefore we will reinstate his certificate, he can apply for a license and pay his back fees. That's been the norm. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. I just have one other question. After reviewing the packet and in your letter you stated that you kept up with your continuing education? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Everything in your continuing education really has nothing to do with pools other than Workmen's Comp, and you have one hour of credit. You realize you have to have 14 hours a year -- every other year? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So where are the other hours? MR. PUTERBAUGH: The -- I did all the hours that they -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm seeing a lot ofHV AC. I'm seeing a lot of preventing and investigating accidents. A lot of these are unaccredited courses. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just for my own purposes, I went through this packet and that's fine, I saw some things in there that were really not pertaining to what we're here today about. But my assumption is, is that when you deal -- maybe you can correct me, but when you renew your state license, they do not let you renew your state certificate until you show proof that you have continuing education. So therefore it would be updated. So that's my understanding. So ifhe is a current state registration then he's kept up with his continuing education. MR. PUTERBAUGH: I've looked through the things too, and I always try to go for certificates that are -- you know, help out my Page 17 161 l~ December 16, 2009 license and my knowledge of keeping up. They didn't offer anything for swimming pool. That's why you see the HV AC, the ones I have seen in there. And if they have one, I would gladly, you know, do it. But the company, RedVector, I've used for quite a few years. I've seen nothing in there to do with pools or I would love to take something like that to keep up. And I'm always ready to further my knowledge, and there's never a day I don't try to learn something. So, I mean, if they had something, I would definitely go take it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, I'm a swimming pool contractor also, and they do have items for swimming pools. You just have to look a little deeper into the -- if you're doing this on line. MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. You've dealt with RedVector? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm sorry? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Have you dealt with RedVector? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes, it's in there. MR. PUTERBAUGH: Okay. Well, I definitely will look up further, because like I said, I'm always ready to do something more to further my knowledge for my -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And the reason-- MR. PUTERBAUGH: -- customers and myself. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- is because of all the new laws that are changed and all the new codes that are changed that this is information that you need to know if you're going to take care of swimming pools. MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Now, what it appears is that you have another license; is that the case? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: An HV A license? MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yep. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And by the name of the company, it Page 18 161 1tlJ December 16, 2009 sounds like you're doing more HV AC than you are swimming pools. MR. PUTERBAUGH: Well, actually it's just the opposite. I do geothermal heating and cooling. And geothermal pool heating is a big thing down here for us, and I've been doing it for quite a few years. I've been in business for myself for 15 years, and I've worked alongside my dad for I don't know, since I've been 15 years old. And he's had his business down here about 20 some years, and that's 90 percent of his work is the geothermal, so that's why I went with the geothermal name. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Please of the board, any other questions? MR. JERULLE: You mentioned you've never been cited by Collier County? MR. PUTERBAUGH: I have just recently, here, the -- MR. JERULLE: Besides this. MR. PUTERBAUGH: No. MR. HORN: I had a question, sir. Your insurance certificate that we have in the back actually expired. Do you have a new current one? MR. PUTERBAUGH: I do have a current one. Would you like me to -- I have copies here for you, actually. MR. HORN: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Jackson, if you want to get one copy just to verify that it is current. And maybe if staff doesn't have it on file yet then maybe that needs to be addressed. I had one other question, though. Normally -- now, this is just on my end of it. Normally when I go to get my license renewed from Collier when I come in with my state certified license, I come in here and before I can even get a license renewed I have to go before the tax collector and pay the tax fee and also then get a compo card, and then Maggie will then -- or one of the girls will then carry me over and issue my other compo card number. Page 19 161 I fJJ5 December 16, 2009 Is this something that may have got lost in the glitch, or -- MR. OSSORIO: No, actually, it's reversed. The business tax receipt send their notice out a month or two before ours. So typically what happens is, is that the individual, the company gets the business tax receipt in the mail and then they renew that certificate. And we send ours out in obviously September. And they don't renew it. And then they keep renewing their business tax license every year not with us and we don't get notified. We're working with the Tax Collector to fix that issue. We used to be a little closer together on our renewals. And we have actually communicated with the Tax Collector. And when they send their notice out they also say on the back of it in big, bold letters, don't forget to renew your Collier County certificate now. So we won't get that. We send ours out. Unfortunately sometimes they get -- you know, applicants or certificate holders forget to renew. And then we catch them, could be years. Because they keep renewing their certificate and not renewing ours. Because we only send out two notices. We send out the certificate and then we send out a suspension letter in January to say you've been suspended. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: I make a motion we reinstate the license without retesting. MR. LANTZ: Second, Lantz. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: A motion and a second that we reinstate the license without retesting. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll call for the vote. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. Page 20 161 1 p/) December 16, 2009 MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. All set. MR. PUTERBAUGH: Thank you all. I appreciate it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You know you can't do all this until tomorrow, okay? When the paperwork -- MR. PUTERBAUGH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- is back there, then anytime after tomorrow you come in and get it renewed. MR. PUTERBAUGH: You all made my year. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. MR. L YKOS: Appreciate the effort on your packet. It was a good packet. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, do we have a Mr. Leon F. Pasiuk? MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, we won't be hearing this citation today. We'll withdraw it and we might bring it back at a later date. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. WHITE: You're withdrawing the hearing or the citation? MR. OSSORIO: Well, let me stand up for this one. We're going to go ahead and withdraw the citation and not hear the case. So that will be dismissed. You probably won't hear this case again. I'll send a notice to the violator and let him know what the county's position is. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Page 21 161 1 ~s December 16,2009 MR. L YKOS: Hold it, Michael. Why are we -- why are you rescinding the citation? MR. OSSORIO: There's been an issue with one of our investigators, and we are working with Human Resources and one of my investigators. So there might be some issues with citations with that particular one. So we're going to go ahead and dismiss this one. But I will be talking to the violator and let him know where we stand and what requires a license and what doesn't. But for right now we won't be hearing this case. MR. L YKOS: This was a pretty egregious case. MR. WHITE: I appreciate the clarification. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, how about Faustino Torres. If you'd come to the mic. and be sworn in, please. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Torres, you are here to qualify a second entity; is that correct? MR. TORRES: That is correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And currently you -- let's see here. You owned Parisino (sic) Landscape, Inc.; is that correct? MR. TORRES: Paraisso Landscaping. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And you sold it. MR. TORRES: I sold Paraisso Landscaping, Incorporated. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And what -- and you're trying to now license Watering Technologies, Inc. MR. TORRES: Correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is that the same kind of operation, irrigation? MR. TORRES: No, it will be irrigation only. Sprinklers, maintenance, installation only. MR. JERULLE: But you still qualify the other company? MR. TORRES: That is correct. MR. L YKOS: And you receive no compensation from the other Page 22 16 I 1 00 December 16, 2009 company? MR. TORRES: No, unless I do permit pulling or some other advice to them or some kind of physical work. Otherwise, I would not -- I do not receive any compensation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Are you going to be any kind of a percentage stockholder in the company at all? MR. TORRES: No. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: A director? MR. TORRES: No. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No officer? MR. TORRES: No officer, no, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Check writing abilities, no? MR. TORRES: No, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're just going to put your license out there in the wind. MR. TORRES: I actually hold a note on the sale. So actually -- you know, since I'm holding the note I have -- I wanted to monitor that. And I have an agreement with the owners that I will check in with them and have a meeting monthly to see the performances and also have the ability to go on the outside to make sure that they are all correct and doing the way it's supposed to be legally for the licenses. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Questions from the board? MR. WHITE: Just one, Mr. Chairman, if! may. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Go ahead. MR. WHITE: Does your agreement exist in writing? MR. TORRES: It is in the contract. But I don't think it spells clearly just like I said it. It's just that I -- the dilemma here is that Collier, Lee or pretty much, you know, the counties that I am familiar with, they do not issue you a license if you do not have the three-year experience. These people is from out of state so therefore they cannot get their license until they have three years of experience. So that's the reason why I'm qualifying them. Page 23 December J/~Ob9 11!/) And I don't know if this is common in all the business when they sell, but the agreement verbally was that I will stay with the company for some time until they take over and they feel familiar with the company, with the business. In the meantime, they will acquire the licenses. So they ran into a big problem when they came and bought the business. I show them everything and then they said, well, okay, now it's time to start working the license. The issue came, well, do you have three years experience, do you have people to sign the three letters that is required that you have been actually in business? So they ran into that dilemma, and say well, unfortunately we're stuck. What are we going to do? So since my agreement was to help them until they take over, which was hoping to be, you know, two, three months, six months max, it's not going to happen until three years when they acquire all this experience that the licensing board is reqUIrIng. MR. WHITE: Thank you for that explanation. My point in asking the question was because you're not an owner of anything more than essentially I guess what a lawyer like me would call an equitable interest because of the note, a financial interest, you don't have any control over things that you may see that aren't being done correctly. How will that work if there's something you see that needs to be done differently and they don't agree? MR. TORRES: If they don't agree, then we'll probably go and-- I don't know. I mean, I usually just cross the bridge when I get to it. But in this case if I have to discuss it and if I have to think about it, I will say, well, I'll sit with them and say well, you know, I'm going to have to cancel my qualifying you to continue business because you -- I mean, I have the right to -- MR. WHITE: I understand. MR. TORRES: -- stop the business immediately if they're not doing what I want -- how I think it should be done. That will be my Page 24 16 1 1 PJS December 16, 2009 action to that. MR. WHITE: I appreciate your answer, and I think it's an appropriate and acceptable one, at least to me. And I wanted to understand what would happen. And usually you have that percentage of ownership, or you have the position of some officer so that you have authority to direct how things are done by the company that you're otherwise qualifying. If your intention is that if they're not going to follow your direction that you will withdraw your qualification of the company, then that to me seems to be an adequate circumstance. But we'll leave that up to the rest of the board members. MR. TORRES: I may explain why it came to this. It was not intending to be that way. I said a little while ago and I will say it again, it was not intended for me to qualify them. Unfortunately since the licensing board, Collier County doesn't give a license to somebody who bought a business, I don't know. I was thinking, you know, some people out of country come and buy a business for half a million and they automatically get some kind of status, legal status to work in the u.s. I figure, you know, from somebody already here, it will be practically the same, I don't know. And that's what I assume. I assumed that I was going to be able to sell the business and walk away with a note or walk away with my money and start enjoying it. But it didn't happen that way unfortunately. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: It sounds like maybe you set it up a little bit incorrectly then. Because if that's what you wanted to do, what you should have done was sold the business and you could have put in a stipulation in a contract form whereas you were going to license the business for "X" amount of time, six months, a year. MR. TORRES: I did. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And give them an ample amount of time to find a suitable license holder to go pass the test and have the same Page 25 16 I 1 ~0 December 16, 2009 license that you have. MR. TORRES: I did. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And after that period then you're off scot free. Right now it's just an open business where there's no bottom end to it. It could go on for -- if they don't get a license for the next 10 years, you're still licensing that company. MR. TORRES: Practically the way it is, and I may be wrong, the way it is right now, they operate in Paraisso Landscape, d/b/a Theta Landscaping, Inc., or LLC. Which they're -- right now my job with them is to make sure all their credits, all their finances go to Theta Landscape, not Paraisso Landscaping, Inc., or Paraisso Landscape, as they name it. So I know, I -- you know, I think about it every day and I try not to let it go over my head. But, you know, as soon as they can get rid of it, I mean, I'll be happy to. Unfortunately, again, I mean, if they can get their license, I think they'll be much happier, because they're probably sick of me already. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I think probably this really has no bearing on the fact of us giving you the license or not, but I think it would be your best interest to maybe get ahold of someone, maybe an attorney of some sort, and try to come up with a real contract that's signed and sealed that protects your interest as well as theirs. MR. TORRES: Well, I think you're right and I agree with you. But the best thing to do is, I mean, is there any way? I mean, you are the guys who can actually make that change. Because for their own benefit, I mean, they need to get their license. And they will get their license because they wanted to operate and they wanted to work. Why cannot they get a license if they can pass all the tests, it's set. I mean, they will not have the experience working with somebody else for three years. You know, that's one of the requirements that's pretty much lacking them to get their license. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I understand what you're saying. But Page 26 16 I 1 December 16, 2009 &~ still, this is -- I'll just call for the members of the board to discuss further. Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Do we have a motion? MR. WHITE: I make a motion to approve as requested. MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, Mr. Torres, you are now Watering Technologies, Inc. MR. TORRES: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Good luck to you. MR. TORRES: You all have wonderful holidays and appreciate it, thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Same to you. MR. L YKOS: Good luck, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, Mr. Gary Bloom, are you present, please? (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Bloom, you are here before us today to reinstate a license without retesting; is that correct? MR. BLOOM: That's correct -- no, I have tested. I have tested in Page 27 161 1 ~fJ December 16, 2009 August and passed all my tests. MR. L YKOS: That was my big question. MR. BLOOM: I'm here because -- MR. LANTZ: That was mine, too. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, Mr. Ossorio, did he take the test and pass it, or if that's the case, then why is he here? I see an exam that was taken on 8/8 of 2009; is that what you're speaking of? MR. BLOOM: That's correct, yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You got a 78 percent on it? MR. BLOOM: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And a sizeable 84 percent on your business and law. MR. BLOOM: That's correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm confused. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, unfortunately the agenda doesn't speak for itself, but I believe he's here because of the credit issue. I can't reinstate it because there's some credit problems on his personal. His business -- his new business is less than a year old; am I correct? MR. BLOOM: That's correct, yes. MR. WHITE: I certainly noted that, Mr. Chairman, as well. MR. L YKOS: Mr. Neale, these always get difficult. Because if! remember right, we're not supposed to consider the personal credit unless there isn't enough information on the business. Can you -- MR. NEALE: Well, you can if the business has been in business less than a year. Then you can consider personal credit. It's supposed to be only for -- the thing you're supposed to look for most is whether they paid their contracting obligations. And typically this board has looked more to have they taken care of a customer as opposed to the vendors, frankly. You know, you want to make sure the customer doesn't -- the person who contracts with them doesn't get hurt as opposed to the vendor. But typically what you look to is -- what this board has looked to Page 28 161 1 ~~ December 16, 2009 is the -- is did they pay contracting obligations and does it appear that he will be able in the future to pay contracting obligations if he is granted a license. What this board has also done in the past is grant restricted or probationary licenses for a period of time, with the person to bring back credit reports in the future. So those are options this board has undertaken in the past. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Bloom, you're I guess well aware of the credit report that's here? MR. BLOOM: Yes, sir, I am. And I've been working on that for the past couple of years. And since September I've taken care of five of those things for collection. I haven't got a new credit report yet, but I'd be more than happy to get another one and continue to send you an updated credit report every six months. I have a license in Broward County for glass and glazing, and I've retested to the standard for the licenses that I need to hold. And I want to expand my business a little bit, you know, to earn more money. And that's why I'm requesting to, you know, be approved for Collier County. I don't live in this county, I live in Broward County, and I need to get a Palm Beach license, but I have to have this one straightened out first. I used to live here and I moved over there. I lived here in the Nineties and I moved over to Broward County. And I let things lapse and I've retested and done the best that I can right now. MR. WHITE: At what point will your -- I'm sorry, here sir. At what point will your one year for business credit report be available? MR. BLOOM: In April. That's when I registered with Broward County . MR. HORN: Mr. Bloom, do you have an updated liability insurance with you for us to see? Because this expired -- Page 29 December ~,qo~9 1 P;5 MR. BLOOM: I faxed all that over -- I think I do have one here, but I faxed all that over to Maggie, I don't know, back in -- when I renewed it on the 2nd, December 2nd. She should have the fax that I sent her. MR. HORN: Yes, sir, the policy you sent actually expired on December 2nd. MR. BLOOM: Yeah, but I sent her the new one. MR. HORN: Okay. MR. BLOOM: I faxed a new one on the 2nd, or the 3rd, probably. MR. HORN: I understand, sir, it's just in our packets we have the old one. That's all I'm saying. MR. BLOOM: Okay. Let me see if I have that with me. Here's a new one right here. Here's the receipt that I paid. MR. HORN: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And it is current, Ian -- Mr. Jackson? MR. JACKSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Being to the fact that you are trying to pay some of these debts off, apparently you're doing some of this in good faith before you got here. I see a lot of old ones for a lot of money, though, and that doesn't make me sit very well, beings the fact that your business is in Pompano Beach now; is that correct? MR. BLOOM: That's correct, yes -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: That's where you're operating out of? MR. BLOOM: Yes. The reason they're so old. Back in 2005 when I lost -- I did have a license back then and I let it expire. I lost my apartment in Hurricane Wilma, I lost my shop, and then a month later my mother died. And I just kind of just, you know-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, I'm to the belief to -- MR. BLOOM: Some of the things, you know, brand new furniture and stuff was just out the door when the roof came off. Page 30 161 1 ~6 December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I know we all go through hard times. MR. BLOOM: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I would be inclined -- Mr. Lykos, go ahead. MR. L YKOS: I was going to ask Michael ifthere was a recommendation from staff on this. MR. OSSORIO: I recommend that we approve it with restricted six months and he'll come back in April or May with a current credit report on his personal credit and also a credit on his company too as well. Because it will be over -- MR. BLOOM: Yes, sir. MR. OSSORIO: -- 12 months. My question is when you went to Dade County -- MR. BLOOM: Broward County. MR. OSSORIO: Broward County. Did you go in front of their licensing board too with this credit or did they administratively just give it to you? MR. BLOOM: Well, evident -- I didn't have any problems over there. I went to renew everything and they just renewed everything. I went with the corporate papers, the insurance, and they gave me my competency and my occupational license with no trouble at all. I gave them the same things that you have in front of you. MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman? Notwithstanding the, quote, trouble, I'm confident that with the staffs recommendation that that's the form of a motion, Mr. Chairman, that I would be happy to make, and we'll see you next year, that being to reinstate with a requirement you provide us in six months the updated personal and your business credit report. And at that time we'll review your license. MR. BLOOM: Yes, sir, okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: In six months? MR. WHITE: Six months. MR. BLOOM: Six months. Page 3 1 December 16~2~OJ 1j;s MR. WHITE: And -- did you mean restricted as a time? MR. OSSORIO: No restriction -- well, the restriction would be probation. MR. WHITE: Right. MR. OSSORIO: So he'd be under my jurisdiction for six months. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Probationary license with restriction for six months. MR. OSSORIO: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I have a motion. MR. WHITE: That would be the form of my motion. MR. HORN: I'll second as stated, Horn. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second. Any further discussion? MR. LANTZ: I have a question. It was stated that ifhe's in business for a year or more then the personal credit is not involved in the discussion on getting a license. So in six months he will have been in business for a year. So should it be just the business as opposed to the personal credit also? MR. WHITE: The reason why I agreed with the staffs recommendation is that I do want to see the personal credit to make sure that there's continuing improvement on that side. It may not get as much weight then as it has now for me. But I think that by putting it in as a stipulation under this approval, if we get that today, it gives us that latitude. And Mr. Neale, if you have a-- MR. NEALE: Yeah, the board certainly has a -- because the initial approval was based on personal credit and the board wants to review how he's handling that, certainly the board has the authority, I believe, to request it and review his personal credit again when he comes back under the same continuing order. MR. LANTZ: Works for me. Page 32 161 1 es December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So then we would have a credit report for the business and for the personal. MR. NEALE: Right. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And we could use both of those in our analysis at that time. Okay. Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Michael, I would ask you to save a copy of the current credit report and attach that to the packet six months from now so we can see the old credit report and the new credit report and not just have the new one. MR. OSSORIO: Okay. MR. WHITE: Motion maker would agree to that modification to the motion as a condition. MR. HORN: I'll amend my second also. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I have a motion and a second. Is there any -- any other discussion? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: None. Okay, I'll call for the vote. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. You understand the motion. You understand what to do now, right? MR. BLOOM: Yes, sir. Thank you very much, and you all have Page 33 161 December 16, 2009 1 0s a Merry Christmas. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You do the same. Next we have a Roy Tomasch. MR. HORN: We took that off. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We took that off? MR. L YKOS: It's been removed, yeah. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. Then lastly we have a Katherine Grant. Are you present? MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Grant just gave this packet to me today, but I believe Mrs. Grant qualified two companies at one time. She dismissed one company and now she wants to qualify another company. So that's why she's here today. Am I correct? MS. GRANT: Yes. MR. NEALE: Just for the advice of the board, this board unanimously did approve Mrs. Grant to qualify a second entity in October of2007. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, so you're going to sponsor a new company, Protection Flooring, LLC? MS. GRANT: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And you're currently sponsoring Grant Installation, Inc. MS. GRANT: Yes. And International Carpet and Blinds, which I want to discontinue qualifying, because they have went out of business. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You have to give us just a moment here to review this just for a second, since we just got it. MR. OSSORIO: Mrs. Grant, you're saying you have two licenses you want to qualify for tile and marble and floor covering -- MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. MR. OSSORIO: -- is that it? Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Does staff have recommendations? Have Page 34 December f6~J09 1 ~~ you looked at this packet or is this new to you too? MR. OSSORIO: I have no objections. I did take a quick look at this. But what is your capacity with Production Flooring, LLC? MS. GRANT: I am the owner of Production Flooring. MR. OSSORIO: No questions. MR. WHITE: You're a manager or managing member of the LLC? MS. GRANT: Yes, I'm the owner of the company. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: With the company that went out of business -- MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- that you're not going to qualify any longer, did that have any negative effects on you as far as financially or -- MS. GRANT: No, I just -- I was working for them and qualifying the company, but no. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I see. They just closed the doors? MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. MR. L YKOS: You currently are qualifying Grant Installation, Inc.? MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. MR. L YKOS: And that is a flooring installation company? MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. MR. L YKOS: And you want to qualify Production Flooring-- MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. MR. L YKOS: -- which is also a flooring installation company? MS. GRANT: It's a retail store who will sell installation with their jobs, yes. MR. L YKOS: So you're going to be qualifying two different flooring installation companies, effectively? MS. GRANT: Yes. Because in Collier County if you have a Page 35 16 I ~7 December 16, 2009 showroom and you sell jobs that you include installation on to a homeowner, then the company needs to hold a qualification too. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: To be able to install is what she's speaking of. Right? MS. GRANT: In order to collect money from the customer for the installation. In order to include the installation in your package to sell to the customer. MR. L YKOS: I understand. MR. HORN: I have a question for staff. From looking at this packet, it looks like we have a lot of corporate info. on the company that she's trying to no longer qualify, International Carpet and Blinds. But the company you're still qualifying, Grant Installation, Inc., unless I'm missing it, I don't see any of the financial statements or reports or anything on it in here at all. MS. GRANT: They told me that I just needed to bring the stuff for International Carpet and Blinds, because that's the second entity that I have. And I'm trying to replace that with the new second entity. MR. WHITE: So the point would be that you would demonstrate a positive record with the current second qualifying company. MS. GRANT: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The only other thing I'm having a problem with is the credit application. I'm seeing a lot of collections. You want to elaborate a little more on that? MS. GRANT: On the personal credit application? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: This is against Katherine G. Grant. MS. GRANT: Yes. I owned a home in Collier County, which is going through a short sale right now. So I'm not sure if that's what you're referring to. MR. OSSORIO: Actually, Mr. Chairman, it looks like it's mostly medical. We tend not to look at medical per se too much. MS. GRANT: Yeah, I don't think there's anything else negative on there that I'm aware of. Page 36 161 December 16, 2009 1 (00 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: One is the conventional real estate for 150,000 for P&L write-off. MS. GRANT: That's my short sale that I'm in the process of going through. MR. WHITE: The foreclosure with, I don't know, BAC home loans? MS. GRANT: There is no foreclosure, it's part of the short sale. It has a first mortgage and a second mortgage. They have revoked the foreclosure process and are working on doing the short sale. MR. NEALE: All it shows is that it was filed, it doesn't show that it was a completed foreclosure. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is this correct, Mr. Neale, that actually this credit app. doesn't apply because of the fact this is a personal credit? MR. NEALE: Well, how long has the new entity been in business? MS. GRANT: Since August I believe is when I formed the corporation. MR. NEALE: Okay, so you do look at the personal credit because it's a less than one year entity. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Less than a year old. MR. NEALE: But I would suggest to the board that if someone has a short sale or a foreclosure in Collier County, they're not in a very small group of people. MS. GRANT: Thank you. MR. WHITE: Just as a point of information, staff, how will we handle administratively, assuming we approve this second entity, the disqualification, for lack of a better word, ofInternational? I mean, does she have to withdraw that first? I mean -- MR. OSSORIO: Yes. And I believe she did already; am I correct? MS. GRANT: No, I'm not sure what I need to do in order to do Page 37 16 I 1 b~ December 16, 2009 that. That was a question, do I just go see Maggie and just tell her that I want to discontinue that qualification? MR. OSSORIO: No, typically -- I was assuming that it was already been done (sic). Typically we only like to qualify two companies at a time. MS. GRANT: Right. MR. OSSORIO: There's nothing in the rule book that says you can't qualify more than two. MS. GRANT: Right. MR. OSSORIO: But typically we like to do two. So if this gets approved you'll give us a certified letter that you sent to the company saying that you disqualified their company as a qualifier for tile and marble. And then we would put that in the file. And then we start our new process of this. MS. GRANT: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: That's how we would handle it. MR. WHITE: How long do you think it would take to do that and acknowledge it and have it in your files? MS. GRANT: The letter I can -- MR. WHITE: Thirty days? MS. GRANT: Oh, I can do the letter today. MR. WHITE: Fifteen days? MR. OSSORIO: Fifteen days, sure. MS. GRANT: Yeah, I'll have it done today. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: It's just a letter she has to write and it has to be -- MR. OSSORIO: Yeah. And then we put it in the file. MS. GRANT: I'll just bring it in to Maggie. MR. NEALE: I'd just like to make one statement. And Mr. Ossorio said something, I think he may have misstated that while the ordinance does specifically say under 22-182.A.2 that a qualifying agent may qualify no more than one firm practicing the Page 38 DecembJ 1~, Jo091 ~0 same trade without prior approval of the board and in no event more than two firms at the same time. So what I would suggest to the board, just to make things clean, is that as part of your motion in granting, if you choose to grant, is that it -- well, that it -- the motion would terminate her qualification of International and grant her approval to approve -- to qualify the new entity. MR. WHITE: I don't know that we can unilaterally do that. I think it makes more sense since she has to write a letter, according to the way that was explained a moment ago about the administrative process, I might be a bit more comfortable with an approval that becomes effective upon a letter being received and filed by the county of International having been disqualified. MR. NEALE: Yeah, I don't have a problem either way. I just the -- the fact that the second entity is a privilege, not a right. And so that the only way you can qualify a second entity is by this board's approval. MR. JERULLE: Can you read that again, Mr. Neale, please? MR. NEALE: Sure. It's qualifying agent may qualify no more than one firm practicing the same trade without prior approval of the Contractor's Licensing Board, and in no event more than two firms at the same time. MR. JERULLE: See, and I have a problem with one person having two licenses to do the same trade. It gets a little dodgy or sticky when clients somehow get two proposals that could end up from the same person. MR. NEALE: But this is specifically permitted by the ordinance. It specifically refers to same trade. MR. JERULLE: If approved by the board. MR. NEALE: Right. And that's been -- MR. JERULLE: And that's my point. MR. NEALE: That's been the normal practice of the board to do Page 39 16 1 1 {t;0 December 16, 2009 that, so -- MR. JERULLE: To give one person two licenses for the same trade? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sure. Done it many times. MR. NEALE: That's the only reason someone would come in front of the board for a second entity approval, is because it was for the same trade. If it was for a different trade, they wouldn't need a second entity approval. MR. JERULLE: I still have a problem with it ethically, and I can't see -- I'm just giving my opinion is that I have a problem with it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: I'm just curious about workers' comp coverage. Is there now going to be four exemptions or is it -- MS. GRANT: Both companies go through a payroll service which provide workers' comp insurance. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: I agree with Mr. Jerulle. I've seen these companies where one person runs two different businesses, and you can run one business into the ground or one person has the workers' comp and then one company hires the other company. And it seems like it's done more as a way to skirt around rules and regulations than it is to have two legitimate businesses operating. I've seen it before as well. So I'm with you. And you've got two general contractors here that deal with subcontractors on a regular basis. This is the kind of stuff that we see. MR. NEALE: No, understood. It's just it's specifically permitted by the ordinance, so that -- MS. GRANT: Well, to explain my situation, it's -- Production Flooring would not even need to be certified for the contracting licenses other than the fact -- I mean, Production doesn't use them. We hire licensed subcontractors to do our installations, or we will hire Page 40 December~~2!09 I ~s licensed contractors. So it's just in Collier County if you have a showroom and you're doing retail sales, you are required to hold a license. MR. WHITE: And the nature of the business of the other entity that you're continuing to qualify? MS. GRANT: Is installation only. MR. WHITE: And therefore essentially distinctly different. MS. GRANT: Right. MR. WHITE: That's what I understood her earlier, that -- what was the circumstance with regards to International? Which ofthe two is International more like? MS. GRANT: Production. International was a showroom also who just had to have the license as a technicality, because that's what Collier County requires. But they also used licensed subcontractors to actually do their installations. MR. WHITE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: I think my question is to Michael. If International is only selling tile, they don't need a license. If they're selling the installation they need a license, is that -- MR. OSSORIO: That's correct. MS. GRANT: Yes. MR. LANTZ: Okay. Which is different from what you were saying. So I just want to clarify. MS. GRANT: Well, what you do is when you sell a job to a customer, you sell it to them including installation. Okay, the customer pays you for the job. You in turn pay the subcontractor -- MR. LANTZ: I understand. But to me that's not retail sales. Retail sales is you walk into Home Depot, you buy a -- MS. GRANT: Cash and carry. MR. LANTZ: -- case of tile, and so you wouldn't need a license for that. Page 41 161 December 16, 2009 1 0, MS. GRANT: You would not need a license to do a cash and carry, right. But if you're going to do a quote which involves start to finish process, then you -- in Collier County you have to -- the company has to be qualified. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Michael, can a flooring company hire subcontractors? MR. OSSORIO: Yeah, I have no problem if a licensed floor covering company requires assistance or needs to subcontract out flooring. That particular aspect of it I have no problem with it. MS. GRANT: I believe that's what most of -- MR. NEALE: Yeah, the general rule -- MS. GRANT: -- the flooring stores do. MR. NEALE: -- is that the contractor can hire someone as a sub within the bonds of their license. MR. L YKOS: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: Now, a general contractor has the ability to the subcontract outside his trade: Electrical, plumbing, mechanical. Now, can a floor covering subcontract electrical? Absolutely not. MS. GRANT: No. MR. L YKOS: Within their own trade. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Within their trade. MR. OSSORIO: Yeah. MR. NEALE: Yeah, a flooring company couldn't go out, as Michael says, subcontractor a plumber, couldn't subcontract a -- MR. L YKOS: I just wanted to make sure they could actually sub out to another company outside of their own, versus having their own employees. MR. OSSORIO: As long as that sub is licensed and insurance and has proper insurance, yes. MR. NEALE: Yeah, it has to be a licensed sub, just like any other sub, yeah. Page 42 161 l~, December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll call for a motion, or does staff have a recommendation? MEMBER FROM THE AUDIENCE: Talking about -- I'm sorry, I'm here for my other company, but -- THE COURT REPORTER: Excuse me-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Excuse me. MR. WHITE: Sir, no. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Not right now, sorry. I think we've heard enough at the moment. MEMBER FROM THE AUDIENCE: Because the company she's talking about owes my company $2,000 when they closed, so that's -- MR. HORN: I don't think it applies, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: At this moment it doesn't apply. MR. WHITE: Well, do we have an objection? Is it appropriate to hear any public input on a license application? I think that's the question. MR. NEALE: I think the board -- basically the board has the ability to hear evidence presented that would be relevant to the application. MR. WHITE: If it's something that doesn't appear on a personal credit report and that is something we're entitled to give weight to, then Mr. Chairman, I'd be interested in having the gentleman sworn and hear what he has to say. MS. GRANT: Ifhe has-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I just don't want to break the protocol here. Because I think it would become -- if there's something to do with dollars and cents of one company owes another one, wouldn't it become a civil matter and not a licensing fact? MS. GRANT: Right. Page 43 December 1~,~0~9 I ~~ CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Am I right there, Mr. Neale, or not? Or is that type of testimony something that we need to hear or don't need to hear? MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm getting the effect that that's what it's about. MS. GRANT: And if it's about International Carpet and Blinds, I was not an owner or officer of that company, so I don't see how that would affect me. But that's your opinion. MR. WHITE: Technically, Mr. Grant, that's not on the record, because I haven't heard what he said because it wasn't sworn, nor did he say it at the podium. So I just want to get it on the record, get it cleaned up, and if there's, quote, an issue about due process, to me I'd rather err on the side of hearing something that I may discuss with you -- the board may discuss later and come to the conclusion it's not relevant. But I don't know at this point. MR. NEALE: I'm just looking at the ordinance, sort of a case of first impression here. So where's out -- the ordinance specifically says that if an applicant proposes to engage in contracting as a partnership, corporation, business trust or other legal entity, the application shall apply through a qualifying agent and comply with all requirements and responsibilities contained in Florida statutes. Any business organization desiring a certificate of competency in Collier County shall submit the following information on forms provided by the Collier County Contractor Licensing supervisor. Organization name, et cetera, copy of the certificate of incorporation, list of all contracting businesses owned in the last five years, credit report. If the business organization has been less than a year, credit report on every business organization in which the applicant/qualifier was an agent is required. A list of all outstanding debts related to the business organization's contracting business which the business organization has not paid or refuses to pay and a statement of the Page 44 16 / Ib~ December 16, 2009 reasons for nonpayment. Signature of an authorized officer. The qualifier information: Name, date of birth, certificate of competency. Complete list of all outstanding debts related to the qualifying agent's contracting business which the qualifying agent has not paid or refuses to pay and a statement of the reasons for nonpayment. The only thing really is these are all statements to be presented. There's really nothing in the ordinance that provides for third-party testimony. It's really the testimony is from the applicant and the application as provided. So I don't see any provision for third-party testimony. The only provision would be if they were seeking licensure as a new application and they are looking to waive testing requirements, then the board can review other evidence presented at the hearing as far as waiving testing requirements. But as far as a straight application for qualifying an entity that exists with a qualifier that's already licensed, I don't see the provision for a third-party testimony. MR. WHITE: Nor is there any preclusion-- MR. NEALE: And plus this is not an open public hearing, so there's no opportunity for the applicant to prepare -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm going to deny the fact-- MR. NEALE: -- for testimony. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- of what you're asking for at the moment. Just to keep protocol the same. I don't think we want to get into something of this nature right now. Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Question 5-E of the application to qualify second entity says, do the business or businesses you presently qualify and/or wish to qualify have any outstanding liens against them or against the property of consumers as a result of construction work or a contract they had with your firm. So if -- and Ms. Grant has testified that the answer is no. So unless there's any proof of a lien existing on a property of a consumer Page 45 December 16, 2~g / J' or on that business, whether somebody comes up here and says I'm owed money doesn't mean anything, because this specifically says liens on a consumer's property or on the business. So without any legal documentation, it's irrelevant. MR. WHITE: See, I didn't hear what he said so I don't know what he was going to say. MR. NEALE: And this is all under -- everything on this application is under oath and under penalty of perjury, so -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. MR. HORN: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And we're allowed to hear hearsay, but we can't open it to a third party -- MR. NEALE: Well, you can hear hearsay in a regular public hearing. These are not public hearings. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. MR. WHITE: I appreciate the information and clarification. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, with that said, any other discussion, or is there a motion? MR. BOYD: I move we approve. Boyd. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I have a motion to approve. MR. WHITE: I'd second, with a request to condition that approval upon it not becoming effective until the staff has received and filed a letter withdrawing the qualification of International Carpet and Blinds, Incorporated. MR. BOYD: I'll amend my motion to say what you said. MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I'll call for the vote. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. Page 46 December ll2~ol lib ~ CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? MR. JERULLE: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Approved 5-2. MS. GRANT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. Don't forget the letter immediately. MS. GRANT: I'll bring it back this afternoon. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. Okay, we're looking for going to old business. Sonia M. Pajaro, are you here? Come to this podium, be sworn in, please. (Speaker was duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Ms. Pajaro, you were before us I guess some time ago. MS. P AJARO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And you were required to bring back before us another credit report, correct? MS. P AJARO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Showing that you have made efforts to try to straighten some of it out. MS. P AJARO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Members of the board, have you taken a look at the credit report to see ifthere's any changes or anything question-wise you want to ask this young lady? MR. L YKOS: Well, we don't have her old credit report so we can't compare it to what it was at the time that we gave her, her probationary license. But I do see a release of judgment in here and a settlement Page 47 16 1 1 December 16, 2009 06 stipulation, so obviously she's making a concerted effort to clean up her credit. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Neale, could you bring back what was in the hearing when we reviewed this case? I believe she was on a six-month probation; is that correct? MR. NEALE: Yes, she was. MR. OSSORIO: It was back on May 20th. MR. NEALE: May, okay. MR. OSSORIO: My notes are probationary period for six months, needs to return to CLB in six months for review of license. To provide a new credit report to the CLB upon review of the license at the above mentioned CLB meeting. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. NEALE: Yeah, six-month probationary, credit report six months from the date of the hearing. At that board (sic) the board has three -- at this point the board has three options: Whether to get an unrestricted license, deny further licensure or extend the probationary period. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm just -- as looking through it, I have gone through this already and I see where you've got $1,397 paid off and a release on it. Also, this must be a stipulation of some type of a settlement agreement? MS. P AJARO: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: For a $4,000 debt, thereabouts? MS. P AJARO: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Which you've entered into a stipulation to try to make payments to pay this off? MS. PAJARO: Exactly. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And then also one last one that apparently appears to be a -- your attorney's applying for you for a notice of appearance. MS. PAJARO: Right, right. We're working on several one of Page 48 December~t>2l09 1 ~6 them. That one, I want to say that they wanted a settlement and I didn't agree with it, and my attorney is still working on it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Pleasure of the board? I would-- I'd recommend that we just continue the probation for another six-month period and see if this credit application just continues to be reduced and we move along. MR. WHITE: If that's a motion, Mr. Chairman, I'd second it with one additional requirement, that we get a copy of this credit report attached in the one attached to what we get six months from now. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I'll amend my motion. MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Michael, you can do that? MR. OSSORIO: Makes sense to me. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right, thank you. MR. L YKOS: How about one more amendment to that before we move on to call the vote. The -- there's one stipulation for settlement in here that the payments have to be made on a monthly basis. Of course we want to confirm that those payments are being made. Because something could happen right before she appears before us, and we wouldn't know that the payments weren't being made. So I'd like confirmation of the fact that any of the settlements that include regular payments, that those payments are being made. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll amend my motion to say that. MR. WHITE: Second. And I'm assuming those are paid by check? MS. P AJARO: Money orders. MR. WHITE: You could provide copies of those? MS. P AJARO: Sure. MR. WHITE: That would be -- I'd request that as a form of Page 49 161 December 16, 2009 1 ~0 proof. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle, do you have-- MR. LANTZ: I just have a question again towards Michael. To me her credit report looks pretty good. I'm wondering what the number is. If someone were to come in with a new application, what the number is where we'd come to the board as opposed to just automatically being approved. MR. OSSORIO: There is no finite number. If the applicant -- if the applicant -- this is in general terms. If the applicant is seeking a license, a certificate, and the business has been open for 12 months, I weigh heavily on the business application. If it's less than 12 months and the credit appears to be related to a housing issue or a medical issue, I don't weigh too heavy on those. But if it's a credit card issue, not paying your debts and your credit card bills or other items, then I refer those to the licensing board. On this particular case if this applicant was just applying for a license with no 12 months with a business, I probably would refer this back to the board in the first place. So we're back to where we started. MR. LANTZ: Okay. I'm happy. MR. OSSORIO: If that makes any sense. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right, I've got a motion with its amendments. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: No. I'll call for the vote. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. Page 50 16 I I ~0 December 16, 2009 MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries unanimous. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, I recommend we take a break for a few minutes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. You're all set. MS. P AJARO: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Another six months, come back, okay? MS. P AJARO: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And don't forget to bring some of the paperwork back that we need that -- MS. P AJARO: Okay. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- canceled checks to be making those payments and then you'll be good to go. MS. P AJARO: Thank you, I'll do. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. All right, we'll take a short what, 15 minutes? Okay, and we'll be back. (Recess. ) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll call back to order the Contractor Licensing Board meeting of December 16th, 2009. The next item on the agenda is a public hearing. Hearing No. 2009-11, Patrick H. Atchison, d/b/a Patrick H. Atchison Carpentry, Inc. Are you present? MR. ATCHISON: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Would you please come up to the podium to be sworn in, please. (Speaker was duly sworn). CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Before we get started, Mr. Ian Jackson, you're already sworn in, correct? MR. JACKSON: Yes. Page 51 161 1~0 December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Before we get started, I'm just going to give an insight, because we have two other cases, and I'll say this one time, that way I can just read it once for you so you all understand what's going on here. Are the other two respondents here for the other two cases? Okay, just so you have an idea. The hearings are conducted pursuant to the procedures set out in the Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, and the Florida Statutes, Chapter 489. These hearings are quasi judicial in nature. Formal rules of evidence shall not apply, but fundamental fairness and due process shall be observed and shall govern the proceedings. Irrelevant, immaterial or cumulative evidence shall be excluded. But all other evidence of a type commonly relied upon by reasonably prudent persons in the conduct of their affairs 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 sufficient by itself to support a finding unless such hearsay would be admissible over objection in civil actions in court. The rules and privileges shall be effective to the same extent that they are now and hereafter be recognized in civil actions. Any member of the Contractor Licensing Board may question any witness before the board. 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 chair person shall have all powers necessary to conduct the proceedings at the hearing in full, fair and impartial manner and to preserve order and decorum. Page 52 161 December 16, 2009 1 b6 The general process of the hearing is for the county to present an opening statement where it sets out charges and in general terms how it intends to prove them. Respondent then makes his or her opening statements, setting out in general terms the defenses to these charges. The county then presents its case in chief, calling witnesses and presenting evidence. The respondent may cross-examine these witnesses. Once the county has closed its case in chief, then the respondent puts on his or her defense. They may call witnesses and do all things described earlier; that is, call and examine witnesses, introduce exhibits, cross-examine witnesses to impeach any witness, regardless of which party called the witness to testify, interview any evidence presented against the party. After the respondent puts on his or her case, the county gets to present a rebuttal to the respondent's presentation. When the rebuttal is concluded, then each party gets to present closing statements and the county getting a second chance to rebut after the respondent's closing argument. The board then closes public hearing and begins deliberations. Prior to beginning deliberations, the attorney for the board will give them a charge, much like a charge to a jury, setting out the parameters on which they base their decision. During deliberations the board can ask for additional information and clarifications from the parties. The board will then decide two different issues: First whether the respondent is guilty of the offenses charged in the Administrative Complaint. A vote will be taken on this matter. If the respondent is found guilty, then the board must decide the sanctions to be imposed. The board attorney at this point will advise the board of the sanctions which may be imposed and the factors to consider. The board will discuss sanctions and take a vote on those. Page 53 16 I 1 ~0 December 16, 2009 After the two matters are decided, the Chair, or in his absence the vice chair, will read a summary to the order to be issued by the board. This summary will set out basic outline of the order but will not be exactly the same language as the final order. The final order will include the full details required under state law and procedure. With that being understood, Case No. 2009-111, Board of County Commissioners County (sic), Florida, versus Patrick H. Atchison, d/b/a Patrick Atchison Carpentry, Inc. License No. 21277. Mr. Atchison, you are charged with Count I, 4.1.2, contracting to do any work outside of the scope of his or her competency as listed on his or her competency card and as defined in this ordinance or as restricted to the Contractor Licensing Board. With that said, Mr. Jackson, would you like to open with your opening statements, please. MR. JACKSON: Thank you. For the record, Ian Jackson, Contractor Licensing, Collier County. I would first ask that that packet be entered into evidence. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need a motion to do so. MR. LYKOS: So moved, Lykos. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And a second? MR. LANTZ: Second, Lantz. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second that this packet be entered into -- Case No. 2009-11 into evidence. All signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? Page 54 16 I 1 09 December 16, 2009 (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries unanimous. MR. JACKSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. MR. JACKSON: As said, we're dealing with a contractor working out of the scope of his or her license. And the county will show that Mr. Atchison contracted, performed and was compensated for roofing as a carpentry contractor, which is of course prohibited. Thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You're welcome. Mr. Atchison, do you have an opening statement regarding your complaint? MR. ATCHISON: Well, they -- it started out as doing a favor for a friend and thought I was doing him a favor. They said they needed some plywood replaced on a roof because it was all rotted out. And I talked to the people the first time and I said, well, why don't you have -- you know, they said they had other roofers that repaired their roof. And I said, well, what's the time limit on that? And they said it was still under warranty. And I said, well, you need to contact them again. And two weeks later they called me back up and said that they wanted me to come out and replace some plywood that was rotted. So I told them, well, you know, I would do it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So under testimony of oath, then you are admitting to the charge that you were guilty of the charge, that you did the work? MR. ATCHISON: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Jackson, you want to begin your producing of the case? MR. JACKSON: Well, with what has just transpired, I'll try to make it as efficient as possible. Page E.4 in the evidence packet is the written contract showing Page 55 Decembl P6, '20091 0g explicitly roof, showing a payment of $1,100. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: On that note, I have just one last question. In the -- with maybe a civil premium. But was the contract paid in full, or do we know that? MR. JACKSON: The $2,500 contract I believe was amended, and I think that amendment is on E.5, to exclude some work on a door that was supposed to be done. That was a deduction of 200, which would have brought the contract to 2,300. So to answer your question, the complete price of the contract was not paid. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN : Was not -- the final end of the final amount. MR. JACKSON: Correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Continue. MR. JACKSON: I'd like to point out on E.7 we have the definition from the Collier County Ordinance of what a roofing contractor can perform. And E.8, showing what a carpentry contractor can perform, to clarify who's responsible for certain aspects of roof work. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. MR. JACKSON: And I will rest at that and be happy to answer any questions that the board may have. MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. White. MR. WHITE: Looking to the scope of work under both roofing and carpentry, can you give me your assessment of whether the removal of roofing materials is covered under either/or one -- or either/or both of those somehow? What I'm trying to get to, Mr. Jackson, is it unlicensed under a carpentry designation to remove roofing materials? Because I don't see it as part of roofing, so I'm just looking for some clarification. Trying to break this down into pieces. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. White, to answer your question, not related Page 56 1 6 I 1 fb0 December 16, 2009 to this issue, the act of working on a roof and removing the roofing items is considered a roofing job. And we look at what he contracted to do and we look at what a carpentry company can do. In other words, if it's a flat deck, it's a roof and there's some sheathing issues, typically what ends up happening is that if the carpentry contractor was removing some of the roofing material and replacing the sheathing and then that job was completed, he gets paid for that work. And then the roofing company puts the flat deck on. That obviously didn't happen here. He did the A to B to C and finished and contracted and got paid for (sic) compensated for it. So I would answer your question is we look at all those items. But the act of carpentry is replacing the sheathing. The act of roofing is repairing the roof and/or maintaining the roof. MR. WHITE: I appreciate the clarification, thank you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: By the pictures, Mr. Ossorio, where there actually was no sheeting (sic) or any roofing materials removed that don't show in the pictures. Is that true? MR. OSSORIO: If you look at E.9, and maybe Mr. Jackson will be able to elaborate a little more, that is the finished product of what Mr. Atchison did. So obviously he took some sheathing and replaced some sheathing, whatever it is, and the price of 1,100, and put the roofing material back on. The 90-pound whatever it is, a roll on, and then put the bricks on top to secure it. And you can look at E.1 0, and that when a licensed company went in after and repaired it. Now, the county's not seeking for any restitution, because the homeowner's really not affected by it because the homeowner didn't finish the contract and the roofing company went out there and did the roof at no charge. So there is no -- we don't need to hear testimony on that particular item. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Jerulle? Page 57 1 6 I 1 r?JS December 16, 2009 MR. JERULLE: Safe to say that no permit was ever pulled, no demolition permit, no roofing permit? MR. JACKSON: That is accurate, no permit. MR. WHITE: You're saying by Mr. Atchison. But did Affordable? MR. JACKSON: To my knowledge Affordable did the roof repair without a permit. Now, whether there was one required for that extent of a repair, I don't believe there was. MR. OSSORIO: Now, everyone knows about -- and I'm not going to elaborate, but everyone knows on a detached single-family home if it's under $1,500, then it's not -- obviously then it would be exempt, no permit is required. And we're trying to follow the same premise with this. Obviously this took place prior to the new ordinance that came into effect. But it's one of the things we'll be talking to the homeowner about. But that is a homeowner's issue, because the homeowner hired an unlicensed contractor and the homeowner bears the responsibility of getting a building permit. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Atchison, do you have anything you want to ask, or question the case against you on? MR. ATCHISON: I just have the pictures of when I did pull the materials off and replaced it with the plywood. There was several very rotted areas. And that's basically what I was -- you know, told them I would do and put the roll roofing back on the way it was. And when -- like there was a door issue. The reason I told her she didn't need the door is because the door and the jam was a solid aluminum. There was no damage to the door. I tried to explain that to her. And she -- because the door didn't -- the little window in the door didn't slide right, she wanted a new door, so -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I don't believe that the door is really an issue at the moment. MR. ATCHISON: No, not really. But, I mean, they wanted me to do it. I asked them to go to their roofing company in the first place. Page 58 16\ December 16, 2009 1 [b0 And I don't know what the reason was, but she called me back and said that she wanted me to do it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Are you aware, Mr. Atchison, of what your license allows you to do as a carpenter? MR. ATCHISON: I am now. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You weren't then? MR. ATCHISON: Well, I thought because I was working with the wood that I was under my, you know, realm of work, doing carpentry work. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I think like Mr. Ossorio said, if it was only the plywood, you'd have been all right. But when you went into the tarpaper, that's what got you. MR. ATCHISON: Yeah. Well, I wasn't that much on the law, I guess. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any other questions of the board? (No response.) MR. JERULLE: Michael, did he have to take the business exam when he received his carpentry license? MR. OSSORIO: Yeah, he took the trades test and he also took the business procedure test. MR. JERULLE: Mr. Atchison, do you know what date that was when you took that test? MR. ATCHISON: Maybe four or five years ago. MR. JERULLE: Do you remember everything in the test or in the exam? MR. ATCHISON: I mean, at that time I probably did. I'm a carpenter, I'm not really that much on law. I know better now. MR. L YKOS: Motion to close the public hearing. MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second to close the public hearing. Any discussion on that? Any further questions? Page 59 16 I 1 6~ December 16, 2009 (No response.) MR. HORN: Do we need to hear closing statements or no? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. We'll hold on the motion just for one second. Mr. Jackson, would you like to give a closing statement first? MR. JACKSON: I'll make a brief closing. Again, E.4 is fairly explicit as to what was contracted for, what was compensated for and what was performed, which is clearly out of the scope of a carpentry contractor. And with that, I'll conclude my closing. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Atchison, do you have any closing statements you'd like to say? MR. ATCHISON: All I can do is apologize and I'm not going to do anything again other than what I do as a trim carpenter. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I have a motion and a second on the floor to close the public hearing. Any other discussion on that? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I'll call for the vote. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Public hearing is closed. At this point the board will go into deliberation. MR. NEALE: Let me just lead off here. And what I propose we Page 60 1 6 I 1 (bS December t ~ 2009 do, since we have three hearings today and short circuit things, most of the charge to the board will apply to all of the hearings, with the exception that the charges that the board is to consider will be different in each of the hearings. So in the sake of time, instead of going through this whole charge on every hearing, I request that the board allow me to just go through it this one time and then if you have questions on other areas, just go ahead. So if that's okay with the board, I'd-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sounds perfect to me. MR. NEALE: In this matter the board shall ascertain in its deliberations that fundamental fairness and due process were afforded to the respondent. However, pursuant to Section 22-202.G.5 of the Collier County Ordinance, the formal Rules of Evidence as set out in the Florida Statutes shall not apply. The board in this matter shall consider solely evidence presented at the hearing in the consideration of this matter and shall exclude from its deliberations irrelevant, immaterial and cumulative testimony, as Mr. Joslin spoke of earlier. It shall admit and consider all other evidence of a type commonly relied upon by a reasonably prudent person in the conduct of their affairs. And this is whether or not the evidence so admitted would be admissible in a court of law or equity. Hearsay may be used to explain or supplement other evidence, but by itself is not sufficient to support a finding in this or any other case, unless it would be admissible over objection in a civil court of law or equity. The standard of proof in this case where the respondent may lose his privileges to practice his profession is that the evidence presented by the complainant, in this case, Board of County Commissioners, must proof the complaint's case in a clear and convincing manner. This burden of proof on the complainant is a heavier burden than the preponderance of evidence standards set out in standard civil cases. The standard and evidence are to be weighed solely as to the Page 61 16 1 1 0~ December 16, 2009 charges set out in the complaint as the Collier County Ordinance Section 4.1.2 and as set out in the complaint, which is contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency, as listed on his or her competency card, and as defined in this ordinance or as restricted by the Contractors Licensing Board. In order to support a finding that the violation -- that the respondent is in violation of the ordinance, the board must find facts to show the violations were actually committed by the respondent. The facts must show to a clear and convincing standard the legal conclusion that the respondent was in violation of the relevant section. These charges are the only ones that the board may decide upon, as those are the only ones to which the respondent had the opportunity to prepare a defense. And any damages awarded must be related to those charges. The decision made by this board shall be stated orally at this hearing and is effective upon being read. The respondent, if found in violation, has certain appeal rights to this board, the courts and the State Construction Industry Licensing Board, as set out in the Collier County Ordinance and in the Florida Statutes and Rules. If the board for some reason is unable to issue a decision immediately following the hearing because of questions of law or other matters of such a nature that the decision may not be made at this hearing, the board may withhold its decision until a subsequent hearing. The board shall vote based upon the evidence presented on all areas, and if it finds the respondent in violation, 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. The board now will enter into deliberation on the liability phase. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. First point of order would be to Page 62 161 1 ~0 December 16, 2009 determine if the gentleman, Mr. Atchison, is guilty. MR. L YKOS: Based on his own admission, guilty. I make a motion that we find the respondent guilty. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I have a motion. MR. LANTZ: I second it. Lantz. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And I have a second for the guilty factor of Count 1. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Mr. Atchison, you have been found guilty of Count 1. Mr. Neale? MR. NEALE: Yes. Since the board found the respondent in violation of the Collier County Ordinance, it now has to decide on sanctions to be imposed. The sanctions available to be administered in this matter are set out in Section 22-203.B.1 of the ordinance, or Section 4.3.5. The sanctions which may be imposed include: Revocation of the Certificate of Competency; suspension of Certificate of Competency; denial of issuance or renewal of the Certificate of Competency; a period of probation of reasonable length, not to exceed two years, during which the contractor's licensing -- contracting activities shall be under the supervision of the board and/or participation in a duly accredited program of continuing education. Probation may be Page 63 16 j 1 00 December 16, 2009 revoked for cause by the board at a hearing noticed to consider such purpose. Restitution may be ordered. A fine not to exceed $10,000 per incident may be imposed. A public reprimand may be issued. A reexamination requirement may be imposed. Denial of the issuance of permits or requiring issuance of the permits with conditions. And an award of reasonable legal and investigative costs. In imposing these sanctions, the board shall consider certain factors: One being the gravity of the violations; second, the impact of the violation; third, any actions taken by the violator to correct the violation; four, any previous violations committed by the violator; and any other evidence presented at the hearing by the parties that is relevant as to the sanction that is appropriate for the case, given the nature of the offense. The board shall also issue a recommended penalty for the State Construction Industry Licensing Board. The penalties that may be recommended may include: A recommendation for no further action; a recommendation of suspension, revocation or restriction of the registration; or a fine to be levied by the State Construction Licensing Board. Now the board should deliberate on sanctions. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, any recommendations? Any recommendations from staff? MR. JACKSON: County has a recommendation. A civil penalty or a fine of $2,000; investigative costs of $750; one-year probation; and the civil penalty and investigative costs paid within 10 days or revocation of license. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any more comments from the board members? Kyle, sorry. MR. LANTZ: I would like to say I agree with most of that. However, Mr. Atchison flat out admitted many times that he's not familiar with the laws that govern his license, so I think we have to add something in there, either continuing ed. or -- Page 64 161 1 P/) December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Retest. MR. LANTZ: -- retest or something to that effect to familiarize him with it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: At least with the trade test anyway, right? MR. LANTZ: I don't know which test tells you what you can do and what you can't do. I don't -- MR. HORN: Mr. Chair, from what we've heard from the defendant, I think there's a need for both tests to be redone, for his safety and the consumers. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Julie (sic). MR. JERULLE: Mr. Jackson, you came up with $2,000 plus 750 is what you're recommending? MR. JACKSON: 750 investigative cost. MR. JERULLE: May I ask how you arrived at the $2,000? Just a number you came up -- now I'm not trying to put you on the spot, I'm just asking. MR. JACKSON: Understood. MR. OSSORIO: The maximum fine is 10,000, and we took that and divided it up, you know, four or five different ways, and it came to A, he's present here, B, he admitted that he did wrong. But then again, there was a complainant involved. And so therefore it was a $2,000 fine. That's how we came up with it. It wasn't a number we sat around and threw around, it was a number that we did from -- we started from 10,000 and we worked our way down to 2,000. MR. JERULLE: Because personally I like the probation and I like the continuing ed. I agree with the fine. I'm not sure I'm at $2,000. And I agree with the reimbursement for the investigative costs. And I would also -- I don't think there's any action needed to the state. MR. JACKSON: Correct. Page 65 16 1 1 00 December 16, 2009 MR. JERULLE: And I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I don't feel that there is, and I didn't remember you saying that. MR. JACKSON: I did not. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What's your-- MR. OSSORIO: Just be ware that if we did notify the state, there could be some serious issues for him in the future. This is a Tier 2 license in the State of Florida, a roofing contractor. If we did turn this over to the state, there could be some serious issues for him in the future. MR. JERULLE: May I ask a question? Have you had any citations -- MR. ATCHISON: No, sir. MR. JERULLE: -- previously to this? I get the impression that he's a good guy that made a mistake. And, you know, personally I would like to see a smaller fine. MR. WHITE: Would you be okay with a public reprimand and paying the administrative investigatory costs? MR. JERULLE: That's a good question. I'll think about that while we're discussing this. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I honestly think there is a fine involved. There is a fine due, I mean, just for the fact that it is a Tier 2 contractor. And I think that's something that we need to address for sure. Maybe not to the point of the $2,000, but some type ofa suitable fine. There could have been some serious issues with this if it had gone further, no doubt. And he should know better. He's been in business here a long time. But he made a mistake. I would go along with more on the $1,500 range. Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: I agree with Mr. Jerulle, I think $2,000 plus 750 investigative costs, that's too much for the offense. I'll throw out for discussion a $750 fine, then you have 750 in investigative costs, that's Page 66 1 6 I 1 ~6 December 16, 2009 $1,500. That's more money than he even got as a deposit on the job. He never got the balance of the contract. So you're looking at $1,500 out of pocket. Plus I agree with Mr. Lantz, business and law test and the trade test. It's going to take him some time and cost him some money to recover from this. That's my recommendation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, I disagree. I don't think we're here to make a -- we're here to help someone out because they did something wrong. MR. WHITE: I started from the point of view, Mr. Chairman, that a public reprimand probably was appropriate. So I'm not adverse to the suggestion of a $750 fine. I think the thing I'd like to know is I'm assuming that he had to pay for the materials as well, so he's out of pocket for those too, you know. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: I'm one usually who is into a lower fine than a higher fine. And I think this is a case of a good guy who's -- from what he said, he's a trim carpenter by trade, got offered to do work that was probably more than he should have done. Probably being on the roof fixing the sheathing ifhe's a trim carpenter by trade is probably pushing the limits, and then when you add the roofing on top is really pushing the limits. Jobs are tight right now, people are taking whatever they can get. And I think he's one of half the people in Collier County who are in the same situation. That being said, I understand where he's coming from and I think he's a pretty good -- seems like a pretty good guy from what I've known him from the last five minutes. But I think there should be some kind of deterrent on there, because he's one of many who do the same thing. And if he gets away with just an investigative fee and no fine, then there's no deterrent for the next guy. Page 67 1 6' 1 [h6 December 16, 2009 I mean, take a look at Craig's List. You know, all you see is I'll build your house for you for nothing. And I think if there's no deterrent, then there's no reason for somebody else to -- there's no reason for somebody to make the right choice. And that's why I feel it should be a -- I'm happy with the $2,000 fine. It could be a little bit lower, but far from a public reprimand. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any further discussion? Any other ideas? MR. BOYD: I personally like the 750, 750 and continuing education. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Do you think that's enough for a determent to stop someone from doing it again? MR. BOYD: Hopefully. But we've had people that come in here before and didn't even admit they did anything wrong and we've let them off with less. MR. WHITE: There's two kinds of deterrents. There's a specific deterrent to this individual and then there's a general deterrent. I don't think if we imposed a $10,000 fine on this gentleman that it would deter generally other folks who would seek to try and subvert, get past the rules. To me the specific deterrent here I think is the thing I'm comfortable with, the 750. The gravity of the violation, the means by which it was resolved, the impact on the consumer, who are not here to complain. The fact that they were stated to be friends, that he tried to get them to do the right thing, the fact that he has admitted to the wrong doing, to me all in combination with the fact that there's no prior violations, makes me feel that this specific deterrent of750 is adequate. And it's almost Christmas. MR. L YKOS: Well, that's not relevant. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, sometimes it is. For Christmas people it's revellent (sic). I need some kind of a motion then. Let's put it before a motion, Page 68 161 IJ/J6 December 16, 2009 let's see what happens. Sounds like we have a kind of meeting of the minds with the 750 -- MR. L YKOS: Well, we have a 750. MR. JERULLE: I'm still thinking. I'm still listening. MR. L YKOS: I think we may have a little more work to do. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: A little bit more in the center. MR. L YKOS: Before we call a vote, yeah. MR. WHITE: I'd make the motion, Mr. Chairman, that we-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, be careful now, because it might fail. See, we don't want to do that either. MR. NEALE: Well, that's okay. MR. L YKOS: Yeah, the motion could fail. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. NEALE: Yeah, that's not an issue. MR. WHITE: They don't cost anything, as far as I know. I make a motion that based on the finding of guilt, that a fine of $750 be imposed; the investigative cost of $750 be levied as well, both to be paid within 10 days; that within I would say 90 days to take and complete the business and law, as well as the carpentry trade exams and pass them both; and that there be no action taken with respect to the State CILB. MR. HORN: Probation? MR. WHITE: And probation until such time as the law and trade exam are passed? Was that the staff recommendation, or was it for longer? MR. JACKSON: 12-month probationary period was the recommendation. MR. WHITE: I'd agree to a 12-month probationary as part of the motion. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And the time span for the fine and the investigative cost to pay -- MR. WHITE: I believe the recommendation is 10 days to have Page 69 161 1 Pi) December 16, 2009 them paid. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Ten days. And also take the business law within 90 days. MR. WHITE: And pass. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And pass the test. MR. HORN: And the carpentry? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right, the carpentry-- MR. HORN: Trade exams. MR. WHITE: Business law. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And complete the carpentry test with business and law. MR. WHITE: Agreed, yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I have a motion. MR. BOYD: Second, Boyd. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Everyone understands that motion? I have a second from Mr. Boyd. Any further discussion? Mr. Jerulle? MR. JERULLE: No, I'm good. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Then I'll call for the vote. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. MR. JACKSON: Mr. Chairman, if! may, I just want to clarify the motion one last time. Fine of750. Cost of750. Business test and Page 70 161 1 ~~ December 16, 2009 trade test passed within 90 days. 12-month probationary period. Pay the fine and the cost within 10 days. There was no penalty if it's not paid within 10 days, I believe, in the motion. MR. WHITE: I think that the traditional way I've understood these motions is that his license would be revoked if not paid within 10 days. MR. JACKSON: Thank you. And no recommendation to the state. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Or it could be suspended until paid. MR. NEALE: Well, you need to -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: That's just a toss-out. MR. NEALE: Yeah, but that needs to be part of the motion. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. Which one would you rather have, is it revoked if he doesn't pay it within 10 days or is it suspended until it is paid? MR. WHITE: Would I have the ability to ask the violator, the respondent, if he can pay it within 10 days. MR. NEALE: Certainly. MR. ATCHISON: No, sir. MR. WHITE: No, sir? MR. ATCHISON: No, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, that's the reason why I asked the. question. MR. WHITE: Then I would recommend it be suspended until paid. MR. NEALE: Do you want a date certain on -- MR. JERULLE: Can I ask -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is there -- okay. I was going to ask, is there one more option we can give him as far as the 10-day time span to pay this? Could it be done over a longer period of time, considering that this is Christmastime. And if we give him 10 days and he can't do Page 71 1 6 I 1 00 December 16,2009 it and his license is suspended, ifhe does gets more carpentry work then we're still not going to get the dollars and cents through. So would we be advisable to maybe extend the payment time just a shade longer? MR. NEALE: The board has-- MR. L YKOS: Passed a motion. MR. NEALE: Well, has passed a motion. But the board can -- either the motion or the seconder can request that the motion be reopened and that it can be voted upon again. So what I would say is that the board in the past has used broad latitude in deciding how long someone has to pay a fine. It's been everything from 10 days to multiple months, depending on the size of the fine and the circumstances of each individual case. So I think the board has broad latitude in deciding when the terminal date is for the fine. MR. JERULLE: So a motion to reopen the motion? MR. NEALE: Uh-hum. MR. L YKOS: Second, Lykos. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second to reopen the motion on the floor. All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, let's revisit. MR. WHITE: May I inquire of the respondent, Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sure. Page 72 1 6' 1 (OS December 16,2009 MR. WHITE: Mr. Atchison, you've heard the dialogue and discussion here. Can you help us out? The thing I'd like to focus on is making sure that the first $750 for the county's cost be reimbursed as soon as possible. That's my personal preference. I don't know how the other board members feel. But in answering the question on your ability to pay this over time, I'd ask you to keep that in mind. MR. ATCHISON: Well, right now I'm not working, and the people that I do work for, I don't foresee anything for the next two months anyway. My wife is working, I'm not. You know, the -- the amount of problems here is I thought maybe a reprimand would have been fine, because I'm -- I know I did wrong now. I just can't afford it right now. MR. LANTZ: I would be happy with six months. But that's just me. MR. JERULLE: For both or-- MR. LANTZ: For the total fine to be paid within six months. He still has to pay to take the test, I believe, right? That's not free, right? MR. JACKSON: Correct. MR. L YKOS: That's correct. MR. WHITE: And he is otherwise on probation. If it's not paid, then theoretically we would have the case back before us again within, say, seven months for failure to have paid. MR. JERULLE: I do like your idea, though, of having him reimburse the county as soon as possible. MR. JACKSON: Mr. Chairman, if! may? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Jackson, go ahead. MR. JACKSON: We've had previous cases where fines upwards in the amount of the -- approaching the $10,000 range being required to be paid within 60 days, for what that's worth. MR. JERULLE: And those are from -- MR. JACKSON: Different companies. MR. JERULLE: -- contractors that -- Page 73 1 6 I 1 06 December 16,2009 MR. JACKSON: Different violations. MR. JERULLE: -- do a larger amount -- MR. JACKSON: Certainly. MR. JERULLE: -- or a larger volume -- MR. JACKSON: Certainly. MR. JERULLE: -- of work than a single carpenter does, so-- MR. NEALE: The board has also provided for payment plans on fines in the past, too, so -- MR. LANTZ: That's a good point. MR. ATCHISON: If! could say one thing? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Let's hear what you have to say, sure. MR. ATCHISON: Mr. Jackson-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What could you do? MR. ATCHISON: -- you know, when I talked to you-- MR. JACKSON: Yes, sir. MR. ATCHISON: -- and you told me that there's a lot of people that got into situations like this and you told me that it could be a wrist slap, because they've had some like that. And I didn't think it was that strong that what I did to cause me, you know, $2,000, basically. Because it's $1,500 you're asking for this and then my schooling, the time off. I was I felt a little misled. MR. JACKSON: May I address that? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Sure, Mr. Jackson. MR. JACKSON: Mr. Atchison, I don't think I would have ever used the word wrist slap. MR. ATCHISON: I'm sorry, you did. MR. JACKSON: I covered what the potential penalty from the board could be, which is stated on the notice of hearing that you were issued, which at the lowest level would have been an oral reprimand, which you could consider a wrist slap. And then worst case scenario, revocation of your license and monetary fines. And I know I covered that. Thank you. Page 74 161 1 06 December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Two comments. First, Mr. Atchison, one of the things that we have to consider is the potential risk to the homeowner. And in doing a roof repair, there's a lot of damage that could occur from an inappropriate repair. Water leaks that could damage the structure and really put the property and the owner at risk. So this is different from not building a fence well. This is -- okay, so we have to consider that. I think you can tell from our conversation that there's really two things we're trying to weigh. One is the gravity of the situation and your ability to pay. Because if we give you a fine that you can't pay then we don't achieve what we're trying to achieve. The other thing is if it's too lenient, then what's to stop you the next time you have a situation arise from doing it again? So we have all those things we're trying to weigh. MR. ATCHISON: I already know what the answer to that is. I wouldn't do it. MR. L YKOS: I understand. But you should have known not to do it the first time. So we have a lot of things we're trying to weigh. And my point is, if we don't ask for your input, don't give it to us. Because at this point I don't think you're helping yourself. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: How about we put the time span on 90 days for payment and resolve it? It's paid, it's paid. MR. WHITE: If that's the form of a motion amending the prior vote, I'd second it, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I didn't make the motion but I'm just throwing it out. I think Kyle, did you make the motion originally? MR. WHITE: He had said six months. MR. NEALE: If you have it as a motion and a second, you can continue to discuss it and -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, I'll put it out as a motion then, that Page 75 161 1 00 December 16, 2009 this is a $750 fine and $750 investigative costs to be paid within 90 days; to take the business trade and law test for carpentry within 90 days; 12-month probation; and he be -- license would be then suspended if the payments are not made within these parameters. MR. WHITE: And no action to the state. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And no action to the state. MR. WHITE: Second. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Call for the vote. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. Okay, I think you can well see we've leaned over quite a bit from the numbers that we had come up with originally. Appreciate it as a I guess Christmas gift in a sense. Do what you can to try to pay it. If not, try to do something to make payments on it but do something with it. Okay? MR. ATCHISON: All right. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, in the Case No. of2009-11, License No. 21277, Board of Commissioners, petitioner versus Patrick H. Atchison, d/b/a Patrick Atchison Carpentry, Inc., this cause came on or before public hearing before the Contractor Licensing Board on Page 76 1 6 j 1 (06 December 16, 2009 December 16th for consideration of the Administrative Complaint filed against Patrick H. Atchison and d/b/a Patrick Atchison Carpentry, Inc. Service of the complaint was made by certified mail, personal or hand delivered publication in accordance with Collier County Ordinance, 90-105, as amended. The board, having heard testimony under oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters thereupon issues its finding of fact, conclusions of law and order of the board as follows: That Patrick H. Atchison is the holder of record of Certificate of Competency No. 21277. That the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida is the complainant in this matter. This cause -- whoops. That the allegations as set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I, 4.1.2, contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency as listed on his or her competency card and as defined in this ordinance, or as restricted by the Contractor Licensing Board are found to be supported by the evidence presented at the hearing. Conclusions alleged and set out forth (sic) in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I: Contracting to do any work outside the scope of his or her competency as listed on his or her competency card and as defined in this ordinance or as restricted by the Contractor Licensing Board are approved, adopted and incorporated herein to wit: The respondents (sic) violated Section 4.1.2 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 on the foregoing finding of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 489, Florida Statutes in Collier County, Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, by a vote of seven in favor and zero opposed, a majority Page 77 161 1 Pi) December 16, 2009 vote of the board members present, the respondent has been found in violation as set out above. Further, it is ordered by a vote of seven in favor and zero opposed, a majority vote of board members present at the following disciplinary action, sanction and related orders are hereby imposed upon the holder of contractor Certificate of Competency No. 21277. The sanctions are: $750 fine and $750 investigative cost to be paid within 90 days of today's date; that Mr. Atchison be required to take the business and trade test for carpentry license within 90 days of today's date; he be placed on a 12-month probationary period; and that no further action with the state be imposed. And that's so ordered. And we'll move right along to the next case. I need Mr. Daniel Sago (sic), d/b/a Magic Flooring (sic) Finishing, LLC. Case No. 2009-14. Against license No. 31305. I need to motion to enter this packet into evidence, please. MR. LANTZ: So moved, Lantz. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I need a second. MR. JERULLE: Second, Jerulle. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Saro, you've been charged with Administrative Complaint Count I of 4.1.6, you disregard or violates in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County, any of the building, safety, health, insurance or Workmen's Compensation laws of the State of Florida or ordinances of this county. Page 78 ----,~_.....".,."..._._,.~-----........_,------- 161 December 16, 2009 1 ~6 I'll open the case with Mr. Jackson, you're going to present this one also? MR. JACKSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right, sir. (Speaker was duly sworn.) MR. JACKSON: For the record, Ian Jackson, Contractor Licensing for Collier County. My opening statement: You'll hear testimony showing that Mr. Saro had violated the Workers' Compensation laws by recruiting an individual to assist him in his contracting business without providing the required Workers' Compensation coverage. And that will conclude my opening. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. Mr. Saro, would you like to give an opening statement, please. MR. SARO: I had a repair job on actually removal of old flooring, and because of the times and I'm just working with my colleague. I needed someone to help me to remove it because of the time frame we had for the job. And I asked my friend to advise me somebody who can help removal. So I did. He help me actually with the removal. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So according to the charge that was presented against you, you hired someone and then didn't have any Workmen's Comp insurance on him; is that correct? MR. SARO: That's correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: And you're admitting to that charge? MR. SARO: I do. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Jackson, do you have anything further you'd like to add or continue with the case, please. MR. JACKSON: Again, I'll try to make this as brief as possible, considering where we are now. Mr. Saro provided a written statement that was included in your packet, explaining what had happened. Page 79 16 1 100 December 16, 2009 Again, on October 14th, I met with Daniel Saro at the job site where he had an employee working, utilizing electric chipping equipment and of course no Workers' Comp coverage for this individual. I had previously met with Mr. Saro with the same issue which was, forgive me, March of -- no, December of 2008, where he was issued a citation for the same violation by Allen Kennette. MR. SARO: I'm sorry, I did not meet you then. MR. JACKSON: I'm sorry? MR. SARO: You said you met with me about it. It wasn't you. MR. JACKSON: That was Mr. Kennette, Investigator Kennette who Mr. Saro met with for a Workers' Comp violation. I'll rest there and answer any questions you may have. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So through your testimony, this is his second time that he's had the same violation? MR. JACKSON: Second time, to my knowledge. MR. SARO: May I say -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Has there been any other, Mr. Ossorio? MR.OSSORIO: Thank you, Chairman. Ian, I've just got a couple of questions for you. When you were on the job site, Mr. Saro was there; am I correct? MR. JACKSON: Correct. MR. OSSORIO: What did he tell you about the other individual working there? MR. JACKSON: He initially told me that that was his business partner, Peter Campbell, the other managing partner of the LLC who has an active current Workers' Comp exemption through the company. MR. OSSORIO: Was that Mr. Campbell? MR. JACKSON: That was not Mr. Campbell. MR. OSSORIO: No other questions. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Ian, what specifically did you see the two men Page 80 16 1 l~ 6 December 16, 2009 doing on the job site? MR. JACKSON: They were utilizing electric chipping hammers removing flooring. MR. L YKOS: Both gentlemen were doing that? MR. JACKSON: Both gentlemen. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Go ahead, Mr. Julie (sic). MR. JERULLE: Was a permit required for this work? MR. JACKSON: No, not for this job. MR. JERULLE: Single-family home? MR. JACKSON: Single-family home. Flooring. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So am I hearing the testimony correctly, that when you approached these two gentlemen, that the person that was actually doing the work said that he was someone else? MR. JACKSON: The gentleman that was recruited to help Mr. Saro, initially I was being led to believe that that was Mr. Campbell, the managing partner who also has an exemption. And then when I asked the individual, what's your name, he told me Campbell. And with my previous knowledge of Mr. Saro and Campbell, I knew that wasn't Peter Campbell. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: So he was trying to basically tell you a lie so that he wouldn't be in trouble. And Mr. Campbell would have been okay if it would have been Mr. Campbell. MR. JACKSON: Had that been Mr. Campbell-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We wouldn't be here. MR. JACKSON: -- no issue. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Gotcha. MR. HORN: Mr. Chair, I have a question then probably for our attorneys then. Being that that's a false statement to a government official, do we have another criminal issue here to recommend to some other venue? MR. NEALE: That really is within the purview of the staff! think to make that recommendation, if that's the case. But certainly Page 81 December f6~ob9 1 V ~ it's evidence that the board can consider in this matter. Within the bounds of the fact that what you're getting is hearsay. MR. HORN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any other questions? Mr. White? MR. WHITE: Just -- you've read the gentleman's statement. In it he says that he not only takes full responsibility, he says he will make sure it will not happen in the future. What confidence do you have in that statement? MR. JACKSON: With the information that I gave Mr. Saro on how not to have this happen again, and I hope my -- I hope it's not blind faith, but I would trust that he would take the information that I gave him and utilize it and not have this happen again. Utilizing day labor organizations when he needs temporary type labor. Ifwe have a certificate from a day labor organization showing coverage, again, no Issue. MR. JERULLE: What happened last time he was caught? MR. JACKSON: The initial time, according to the county database, he was issued a citation by Allen Kennette for a Workers' Comp violation, first offense. Second offense is when -- is this offense. Based on the circumstances, it's appropriate to schedule a board hearing for this. MR. WHITE: Do you know under that citation what any of the facts were? And were they, if you do know, somewhat similar to these? For example, it could have been he didn't have insurance or it lapsed or -- MR. JACKSON: I don't know the details to the first case. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. MR. BOYD: I've got a question. According to the history, he was here before us in March of 2008, requesting to qualify a second company, and we approved it. Did we know about this previous? MR.OSSORIO: No. As you can see, if you look at E.5, it says Page 82 Decembef 1~, 10091 06 3/19/2008 went before the board. MR. WHITE: Some six and a half -- or almost six months later he got the citation. MR. OSSORIO: That's right. MR. BOYD: So he has another company he's qualifying. MR. JACKSON: He qualifies two companies, correct. The company that was contracted for this job was Magic Floor Finishing, LLC. MR. WHITE: Do we know as to the December, '08 citation what entity that was? Was it Magic Flooring or was it different, the other qualified entity? MR. OSSORIO: That I can find out in a few minutes for you. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: It might be helpful if we know that, probably. Any other questions? MR. WHITE: Not of the staff, no. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Jackson, do you have anything else at the moment? MR. JACKSON: The county rests. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Saro, do you have anything in response as far as the allegations you've heard against you? MR. SARO: I question -- the citation was done on the same company. The thing was, was the person was not working on the job, he was helping me deliver the materials for the job. And when the gentleman, I forgot his name, approached us, he saw the person on the job. But at that time we were really busy, he send me the citation and I just paid it. I didn't really went to Michael or anybody to dispute it, because I just didn't have the time, so I just paid it at that time. But it was in the same company, yes. The other company I qualify has a tile and marble. This is a floor covering. It's wood and carpet and stuff like that, so -- Page 83 16 I 1 00 December 16,2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: How many people do you have under the marble company? Employees. MR. SARO: It's just in each one I have one partner. Managing partner. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Same partner or different partner? MR. SARO: No, it's different partners. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Different partner. MR. SARO: Urn-hum. One is a tile guy, one is a wood guy. And me. I do both. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: So I'm just making assumption here, you have three Workers' Comp exemptions -- MR. SARO: Yes. MR. LANTZ: -- under your license, theoretically? MR. SARO: Yes. MR. HORN: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN : Yes. MR. HORN: Mr. Saro, I just want to make sure, do you understand the reason for having Workmen's Comp insurance, to protect individuals and corporations and why it exists? MR. SARO: Yes, I do. MR. HORN: Okay. I just want to make sure you understand it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'm not so sure he does-- MR. SARO: It what I did not know is-- MR. HORN: It's his second violation. MR. SARO: What I did not know, that I can use laborers, like Ian explained me after the -- so next time I will definitely use the laborers, because it was exactly what I needed it for, just one day help me with the removal of an old flooring. And like you also asked, we really do not need a license for that. So, I mean, I know I am licensed and I was on the job, so I understand that it was my responsibility to get a Workers' Comp on Page 84 Decembe]l~ do091 00 the gentleman. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. White? MR. WHITE: This is a tough question, okay. Having lied to one public official in a premeditated way, why should I believe that you're now being truthful in your statement that says you'll make sure this won't happen in the future? Especially in light of the fact that there was a violation a year ago of almost the same law. MR. SARO: I did this job for almost four years and I always make sure that the customer and everybody around is happy. And I've been doing my job 100 percent. I can get you hundreds of statements from customers which are happy with my work. I understand that at this time, you know, this one day I did not play by the rules. But I just wish I knew that I could use the laborers and use them, because it's -- you know, right now we are not that busy that I can really hire someone and pay him on a payroll, but the laborers would be really something which I could use sometimes. MR. WHITE: Mr. Saro, don't take this the wrong way, but I don't think you answered my question. I wasn't asking you about the quality of your work or the satisfaction of your customers, I was asking you about why I should believe you as saying you're going to not have this happen in the future is a truthful statement. You have gone ahead and in a predetermined way, with a laborer you had, told that person what they were supposed to do to try to avoid the law. So why should I believe you are now telling the truth when you've lied intentionally to a public official? We're essentially a volunteer board, public officials. How do I know you're not lying to me today? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The other thing is I can't honestly believe, Mr. White, that he actually didn't know that he couldn't use other laborers. Otherwise there would have been no reason for him to try to tell that man to tell a county official he's somebody else. I mean, he knew or he wouldn't have said that. I mean, he would have just got Page 85 ,_...._,.~-_.....---,--~._.,"~._--,.......~--~-~_.~-,--.,--""..-.._._--,~_._-- 16/ 1 (D0 December 16, 2009 flat caught. MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman, I understand your point. The point of my question to you, Mr. Saro, has to do not so much with what I'm pretty certain based on you volunteering that you violated the law that you're charged with breaking, but the actual punishment. So I encourage you to give me the best answer you can muster on the question of why we should believe you today. Because it bears greatly on my sense of what an appropriate level of deterrence is, as well as other aspects of what we would impose as punishment. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, just a quick question. I'll give you the history on 12/3 of2008, Allen Kennette, one of my investigators, I'll read you his report on a quick note. Daniel Saro, qualifier of the company, working at 980 Eighth Avenue South with a third worker, showing no coverage for insurance. Stated that he had it and would show up in our office before 10 days are up or pay ticket and get proper insurance. So obviously he communicated with Mr. Kennette. Mr. Kennette told him he needed Workers' Comp insurance on the individuals, and I guess he stated to Mr. Kennette that unfortunately that I have coverage but it's in the office and I'll return. And obviously he didn't so he paid his ticket within 10 days. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, so it was the same company, it was the same charge. MR. OSSORIO: It appears to be Magic Floor Finishing, LLC, that is correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I think the rest of this is a moot point. The gentleman's already pretty much admitted guilt. So let's move right along. MR. L YKOS: Let's move to closing statements. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Let's get this off the books here. Mr. Jackson, I ask for your closing statements, please. Page 86 1 6 I 1 ~0 December 16, 2009 MR. JACKSON: The county rests. I don't have anymore closing statements. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Mr. Saro, do you have any closing statements that you'd like to add-- MR. SARO: No. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: -- in response? No. Okay, then I'll ask for a motion to close the public hearing. MR. LANTZ: I move we close the public hearing. MR. WHITE: Second, White. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion and second twice. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Close the public hearing. MR. NEALE: As noted before, you know, I've already given the board the normal charge. The offense here is different. It's 4.1.6, disregarding or violating in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County, any of the building, safety, health, insurance or Workers' Compensation laws in the State of Florida or the ordinances of the county. MR. L YKOS: Based on the respondent's admission and the evidence presented, I make a motion we find the respondent guilty. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The motion is he's found guilty. MR. JERULLE: Second. MR. BOYD: Second. Page 87 161 December 16, 2009 l~S MR. JERULLE: Jerulle. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I have a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll call for the vote. All those -- signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. LYKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries. All right. And the same sanctions? MR. NEALE: Yeah, same information as far as sanctions. If you want to ask any questions. MR. BOYD: I've got a technical question for Mr. Neale. How does this affect the other license? MR. HORN: The other company he qualifies? MR. BOYD: Right, the other qualifying entity. MR. NEALE: Well, ifhis license were suspended, revoked or whatever, both entities go. Because ifhe's the qualifier for two, he's the licensee on two, he loses his license, they both lose their qualifier. MR. SARO: But they're two different licenses. MR. HORN: I'm sorry? MR. SARO: I think they are two different licenses. One is for flooring covering, one is for marble and tile. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. But what you've done is you've qualified a second entity. In other words, your one license qualifies Page 88 161 1~6 December 16, 2009 the second company, correct? So they both tie together. So if you lose one, you lose the other one. MR. NEALE: What I would suggest to the board, though, is that any sanctions that the board may find that you make sure in the record to refer to whether you want these sanctions to apply to one license or both licenses. Because you have the respondent up here, and while the charges were specific, you do have the person, the respondent here, and it's him that is licensed. And I think you want to refer to one or both licenses in any deliberation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Is there a way to find out relatively quickly which one is the primary and which one is the second? MR. NEALE: As far as? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Or do we know which license was first? MR. NEALE: It-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: It doesn't matter? MR. NEALE: -- really -- I don't think it's relevant. It's just he's licensed in both trades. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. MR. HORN: I have a question actually for Mr. Lykos or Mr. Jerulle. Because as a consumer, you know, hearing both your expertise in past cases. As a contractor when they're not using Workmen's Comp when they should, I just want to make sure I understand this right for the record. That gives them the ability to underbid other contractors, and if something were to happen to one of those individuals not insured, they would have the ability to sue besides the person they're working for, the place they're working and would have obvious financial harm to all parties. I just wanted to make sure that's -- MR. L YKOS: Absolutely. MR. HORN: -- my correct understanding. MR. JERULLE: That's right. That's right. And time limit is not -- whether you're delivering materials or Page 89 16/ 1(06 December 16, 2009 working on the job, you set foot on that property, the liability starts. MR. HORN: Okay. MR. WHITE: Just -- Mr. Chairman, a question for the staff. To what trade does License No. 31305 relate and apply? MR. JACKSON: We're in the process of getting that information. I believe that is a floor covering license, but I'll be able to verify that in just a minute. MR. WHITE: Thank you. I appreciate you anticipating the question as well. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What are the thoughts from the board as far as -- MR. L YKOS: Well, do we have a recommendation from staff? MR. OSSORIO: If you look -- Mr. White, if you look on EA. MR. WHITE: Yes. MR. OSSORIO: I guess have should have reviewed this. But obviously it says floor covering contractor. MR. WHITE: Yes. MR. OSSORIO: And the certificate of 31305. 31305 on your top left. So this is floor covering. MR. WHITE: Uh-huh. My point for the record was I'm not disputing what Mr. Neale said, I just know that we've charged a particular license and licensee with these violations. And although it may have some impact on the other qualifying company, I don't know that it necessarily has an impact on the other license, so I think that's the distinction. MR. NEALE: Yeah, and I think the issue that I'm -- the way I'm approaching it is since the licenses are personal to him and that ifhe's found in violation as a person then it would impact -- potentially impact both of his licenses, even though only one license is charged under this particular case, I can see arguments on either side, but I think it's the personal nature of the license that I'm looking to here. MR. WHITE: Then I guess the other part of my question to staff Page 90 Decembe}l~ 21009 1 (OS would be as to his other license, what specialty contractor or what contract type of license is that? MR. OSSORIO: Okay, just a quick background. You have a floor covering license and you have a tile and marble license. This gentleman has a floor covering license all by itself. He came to the board some years ago to qualify Royal Floor Covering and CSI Improvement Company under his tile and marble license. And then he came back in front of the board and he qualifies CSI Improvement, LLC for floor covering. So I would say to you that his Royal Flooring Covering and his CSI Improvement for tile and marble are separate. But I would say to you that the Magic Floor Finishing, the floor covering license and the floor covering license he qualifies for CSI Improvement would be relevant. We didn't take his tile and marble license to the board because he was actively laying tile, he was removing tile. And his company at that particular time was Magic Flooring. So there was no charge of working outside the scope of his license, because we did not witness him putting the flooring down. But obviously he's a certified company with our office, he has a worker there, it's Magic Flooring. There's a Workmen's Compo violation. So therefore this is why his floor covering license is here today. So I would say to you that the only thing we're looking at is his floor license, which would be his CSI and his Magic Flooring Finishing. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: While you're there, what are the recommendations from staff? MR. JACKSON: The county's recommendation is a fine of $2,500 paid within 10 days or a revocation of the license; $250 cost; one-year probation; and business and law passed within 90 days. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, $2,500 fine to be paid within 10 Page 91 161 1 6 December 16, 2009 t?J days. Revocation of the license if not paid? MR. JACKSON: Correct. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: $250 administrative cost. And to pass the business and law. And trade test also, or just business and law? MR. JACKSON: Just the business and law. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Within 90 days. MR. JACKSON: Within 90 days. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: What was the last part? MR. JACKSON: One-year probation. MR. JERULLE: May I ask? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Go ahead. MR. JERULLE: And maybe I didn't hear you. You said 250 or 750? MR. JACKSON: Cost of 250. MR. JERULLE: And the difference between the 250 in this case and the 750 in the other case? MR. JACKSON: I spent three times the amount of work on the previous case as I did on this one. MR. JERULLE: Okay. MR. OSSORIO: There's a difference. Unfortunately the previous case there was a complainant, and we interviewed the complainant at length at the home, in the office, home, office, and so there was a difference in time. MR. JERULLE: Got it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: I have a question for staff. I'm just curious because I don't know how it works. But do you guys go to the Division of Workers Comp and do a complaint and file it over to them, or is this something only handled in-house or -- MR. JACKSON: I'll touch on that. MR. LANTZ: -- how does that work? MR. JACKSON: Division of financial services, a state agency Page 92 December f6~J09 1 ~0! for workers' comp, typically needs to physically see them working on the job site for them to take action. If the people are on a job site and having lunch and they don't have workers' comp coverage, I don't think the state's going to take action. And this has been addressed with the state. If we have a finding from a board such as yourselves showing that they were in violation, would that substantiate a violation at the state level? And they said no, we need to physically see them doing the work. MR. OSSORIO: But the good news is, is that I know they beefed up the Workers' Comp agents. Supposedly we have four in Collier County. And I don't know where they're at, but there's four. And they also have a GPS in their vehicles. So in other words, they need to be out in the field. So I was told by the director of the Workers' Comp agent that you're going to see a big difference within the six months, so we'll see. MR. WHITE: Do you have their cell phone numbers? MR. OSSORIO: Yes, we do. MR. JERULLE: No, they're on my jobs. And they're out. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yeah, I know. They've been on a couple of mine. MR. JERULLE: Which is good. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: Couple of comments on staffs recommendation. Number one, I think the fine is way too low. This is a second offense. The gentleman lied to Mr. Jackson when he arrived at the site. I think those two points are extremely relevant. So I think the fine should be at least $5,000. Number two, the -- this appears to be a business philosophy of this gentleman, not just of this company, because he has more than one business. And I think we need to definitely do something about his other license and the other business. This is about how this man runs his company -- companies. This is not -- I don't think this is just Page 93 16 I 1 tJ6 December 16, 2009 an isolated incident, I think this is about a business philosophy. So I think we need to address a larger fine and we need to address his other license and the other business entity. MR. JERULLE: I agree. MR. OSSORIO: Well, Mr. Lykos, I will tell you that the fine, we did look at the fine and see if there was any difference. We try to be consistent. I know that previous cases, if it was a second offense I think it was 2,500. And pertaining to the line of what we just said, as my friend Paul Balzano told me years ago, 15 years ago, he said how do you know when a contractor's lying and I said what. And goes, when their lips are movmg. So that's not uncommon that -- unfortunately when you go to a job site the first initial when you're communicating with someone is not being truthful. So it happens. I take no offense to it. I understand what Mr. White is saying, but I don't take offense to somebody lying to me. If you did, we couldn't do this job. So we try to be consistent. And that was the nature of the 2,500, it was a previous. If it's a second offense typically it's a $2,500 fine. MR. WHITE: May I comment, Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You sure may. MR. WHITE: I'm glad to hear that that statement is made about professionals other than lawyers about their lips moving, number one. This isn't personal with me. I view it as a statement made essentially, although I'm not a public official, per se, to a public body. And I look at the facts which are that a year ago he fabricated a statement about having Workers' Compensation when he knew he did not. Lie number one. When approached in this case he not only had a prefabricated story worked out, he compelled a laborer, quote friend, end quote -- I don't treat my friends that way -- to again tell an untruth to a public official, premeditated. Page 94 16 I 1 ~0 December 16, 2009 And the third time today when asked why I should believe what he's telling us in his written statement, there was no adequate answer. So I'm certainly of a mind that in looking at a specific deterrent in this case that $2,500 doesn't come close for me. And to attempt in a written statement to play upon one's generosity of spirit in the Christmas season to me I find inappropriate. So a $5,000 fine to me, we're starting to get warm. But it ain't personal. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Lykos? MR. L YKOS: The other comment I would make, and I asked Mr. Jackson about this earlier, here we have somebody who is not covered by Workman's Comp, who is operating electronic chipping equipment to remove flooring. So not only is somebody not covered by Workers' Comp -- Mr. Saro, did you take the time to train your friend in how to use equipment and how to operate safely in this environment? MR. SARO: Yes. MR. L YKOS: You had training. You taught him how to use this electrical trimming equipment before you allowed him to start doing the work? MR. SARO: Yes. MR. L YKOS: You just didn't have Workers' Comp for him. MR. SARO: Yes. MR. L YKOS: Okay. I guess I should believe that. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Absolutely. MR. WHITE: Under oath. MR. L YKOS: So I understand your point, Michael, about being consistent in how we apply penalties, but this one is a little bit more offensive than others. MR. OSSORIO: What I mean I don't take -- I mean, board, you should take personal note that if somebody lies to you. But unfortunately in the licensing field I don't take it personally and that's what I meant. Page 95 December11 ~ 1009 1 0'1 MR. HORN: If we're only suspending and not revoking, based on what you said, Mr. Lykos, about -- from previous cases I recall we had a gentleman with similar types of problems where we had required them to call in every job to the office, and then obviously they're busy, but on occasion they might show up and check them on the job. That might be a possible part of the solution, if we're not revoking. I just wanted to suggest that. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: The motion I believe was revocation. That was the recommendation of staff. MR. HORN: Oh, I understand. MR. L YKOS: We haven't made the motions yet. That's a good point. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any other comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Anybody want to take a stab at a motion? MR. WHITE: I'll resist the temptation. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Well, let's see if the dollar and cents factor falls into it then. Does the board agree that the $5,000 is a reasonable fine? MR. WHITE: From my perspective, Mr. Chairman, it has to do to some degree with the time frame that's given to pay it and what happens if it's not paid within that time frame. To his license. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Second point would be then if it does effect the time payment, effects the license, is it going to effect all of his licenses? MR. WHITE: Well, certainly his floor covering license and both of the qualified entities would seem to be the nature of the discussion we've had so far. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: I'll make a motion, unless that's what Terry's hand's up for. Page 96 16 1 1 b0 December 16, 2009 MR. JERULLE: No. May I ask-- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: We're still in discussion. MR. JERULLE: Before you make a motion, may I ask a question? Would you please repeat your recommendation again? MR. JACKSON: $2,500 fine, paid within 10 days or revocation. We can make that revocation of the flooring license, which would affect both companies that are qualified. A cost of $250. One year probation. And business and law passed within 90 days. MR. JERULLE: So you do not recommend to suspend his license for a period of time? MR. JACKSON: No. A probationary period of one year where if there is a violation, it would be immediately scheduled for a hearing in front of the board to substantiate the violation, and then the board could take appropriate action there. MR. JERULLE: And what has the board done in the past regarding suspension of license? Is it because of a second case or because of a third case? Is there some sort of rule of thumb that the board has done, made a ruling of? MR. OSSORIO: Typically when a respondent is present for the licensing board, we don't ask for a suspension. Typically don't, unless the board deliberates on that. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Normally we have -- normally in the past what we've done is we've given parameters of payment for the fine sections. And if the fines generally are not paid within a period of time, that's when the license would be suspended. Which normally that's the way it's been for the past 10 years I've been on the board. We don't necessarily always go to try to suspend a license, because that stops -- that takes the dollars and cents from maybe ever commg m. MR. JERULLE: And the difference between suspension and revoke is? Page 97 16/ l~S December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Suspended is a suspended license until action takes occur -- till it happens. Revocation is immediately it's gone. And then he has to go through the whole process of testing and coming back again to reapply. MR. OSSORIO: Which we have done. We've revoked licenses in the past and then years later that applicant is back in front of the board and we reinstate his license. MR. JERULLE: And suspension would mean that it's gone from a certain date until he does something -- CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. MR. JERULLE: -- and then comes back without taking the test. MR. NEALE: Well, suspension can be set out with any particular terms that this board decides are the triggering events for that, the termination or beginning of the suspension. And the board's had a fairly broad scope in terms of -- I just looked, I've been doing this for 13 years now. And the board has a pretty broad scope and has utilized that scope in terms of creating and the triggering event for a suspension, both of what causes a suspension and what removes the suspenSIOn. MR. JERULLE: So as an example, we could suspend today until the $5,000 fine was paid. MR. WHITE: Exactly. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. And normally in that suspension factor in the past we have always let that testing result be part of that process, so that he must take the test or be suspended or he must pay the fines or be suspended. So there's a lot of criteria added to it so that we were able to keep a handle on that particular charge and get the fine paid before it was suspended. And if he didn't do it then the license was suspended. MR. NEALE: One factor the board has taken into account here as far as suspensions is whether the board -- whether the respondent will be able to pay the fine if the license is suspended. In other words, Page 98 161 December 16, 2009 1 ~? will they be able to generate the cash flow to pay the fine. And so the suspension is typically -- has often been withheld until such time as the fine is paid, or at some time certain during which the time can be -- the fine can be paid. MR. JERULLE: And we're talking about just applying this to one license, because he still has another license that he could be actively working on and generating income. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. Now, the suspension factor could be changed or could be added to it also, though, because the suspension could also apply to the other license if this particular license is not taken -- honored and this particular offense is not taken care of, it could also apply to the second license, if we deem it that way in the motion. MR. NEALE: The board certainly -- it's my opinion that the board would have it within its purview to say that if a certain event does not take place, i.e., completing a test or paying the fine, that he would come back at that hearing; the board could specifically state that both licenses would then be under review. MR. JERULLE: Okay. MR. WHITE: Just one question, if! may, of staff. It has to do with whether there are any types of training offered by the division of financial services with regards to Workers' Compensation laws. In other words, something beyond simply the business and law aspect of it. I want to give the gentleman the benefit of the doubt that he can learn as much as possible about how those laws operate. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Continuing education is the best way. MR. OSSORIO: We had a case last year that you specifically ordered that gentleman to take a Workers' Comp class. I believe that was through either CBIA, they offer some, or on-line courses. So there is a method, if you wish to. MR. WHITE: Can you elaborate on the CBIA process? I'm not comfortable with on-line. I want -- I would prefer that there be an Page 99 16 J 1 ~S December 16, 2009 interaction with others able to measure the level of interest and commitment in participating in that process. So what is the CBIA aspect? Can you -- MR. OSSORIO: Well, the CBIA, they have -- I mean, maybe Mr. Lykos can elaborate, but I know that they have speakers and they have courses on particular items that you train on for continuing education. This particular gentleman, if I remember correctly, there was a Workers' Comp course in Fort Myers and he drove up there for three or four hours. So it was a three-hour course that he had to come with to get it. So there are courses out there. One of the things that you can put in your motion, that you can't take an on-line course, you physically have to go through some kind of training and certificate to show back to the board or to the licensing supervISOr. MR. L YKOS: Just for the record, CBIA doesn't have any classes scheduled till April of next year. MR. LANTZ: On another note, Workers' Comp is one of the few things that are required for state licenses as what you do. So if you look around, there's thousands of Workers' Comp continuing ed. classes out there. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right, yes. MR. LANTZ: It's the one thing that if you're looking for a continuing ed. class, you can always find a Workers' Comp class. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: That's one of the primary continuing education classes that are offered nine times out of 10 for any trade, just about. MR. WHITE: Certainly it was a recurring theme both on my service to this board as well as my time with Lee County and Cape Coral. So yeah, it's a primary for misunderstanding, I guess. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay, where were we? MR. LANTZ: I'll make a motion. Page 100 161 1 ib6 December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Recommendations? Okay, one more mention of discussion here just before we get into it: The dollars and cents, number one, the time span for payment to happen. The staffs recommendation of the $2,500 paid within 10 days, or if it's a $5,000 or however many dollars the board decides on, to be sure you indicate the number of days he has to pay this. Undering (sic) the fact that if we're going to fine him, we need to collect the money. So let's get it to the point where we can make it somewhat simple to try to do both. I mean, I'm not trying to give him any -- cut any corners with him, but I just want to make sure it does get paid if we're going to do this. You all ready? MR. LANTZ: I'm ready. All, I move that we fine him $500 -- MR. NEALE: Five hundred? MR. LANTZ: Oh, I'm sorry, $5,000. $250 for admin. costs, which have to be paid within 45 days. Also, he is subject to passing the business and law test within 90 days and two hours of Workers' Comp continuing ed. class within 90 days. If any of these are not done in that time frame, both of his licenses and both of his businesses should be suspended until they are done. However, if none of them are done by the next license renewal cycle, then they should be revoked at that time. As well as given one-year probation. MR. WHITE: I second, with a request to consider amending your motion that each of his jobs, while he's under probation, would have to be called in for both of his licenses. MR. LANTZ: Sounds good to me. MR. WHITE: That would be for tile and marble and for floor covering license jobs. COMMISSIONER HORNIAK: Recommendation to the state, or Page 10 1 16/ 1 00 December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Do we have the other license number? Because I want to read this into the motion eventually. We have the 31305, but I don't have the other one. If we're going to keep those both licenses going into effect. MR. WHITE: That's second to his amended. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) MR. OSSORIO: May I approach? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes, sure. MR. OSSORIO: Does it make sense? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. MR. OSSORIO: This one, this one, and this one. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll just give them all. Thank you. Okay, I've got a motion and a second on the floor for the motion. Everyone understands the motion, right? I'll call for the vote. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. MR. L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Motion carries unanimous. MR. JACKSON: Mr. Chairman, may I go over the motion one last time for clarity? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: You certainly may. I'm going to read it in -- you can read it right into the minutes, if you'd like. MR. JACKSON: Five thousand dollar fine. $250 cost, paid within 45 days. Business and law exam and two hours continuing Page 102 Decemte911, 20J 05 education within 90 days. If any of those items don't happen, the license is immediately suspended. One-year probationary period. Call all the jobs in. If the license is suspended and nothing happens with the fines or the testing, the license is revoked at the end of this licensing term, which would be October 1st of2010. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Right. And that would be license numbers 31305, 31891, 32841 and 32842. MR. HORN: Mr. Jackson, just to be clear, I believe that's on both his licenses he needs to call in, not just the -- MR. JACKSON: Understood. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: That covers all the licenses he holds. MR. NEALE: All his licenses, yeah. MR. WHITE: I apologize, did you say one-year probation? MR. JACKSON: Yes. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right, we're finished. MR. SARO: What is the time I have to pay, 90 days? MR. NEALE: Forty-five days. MR. SARO: Forty-five days? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: All right. And the order of the board is: This cause came on before public hearing for the Contractor Licensing Board. Hereinafter on December 16th for consideration and Administrative Complaint filed against Daniel Saro, d/b/a Magic Flooring Finishing LLC. Service of the complaint was made in accordance with the Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended. Board, having at this hearing heard testimony under oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters thereupon issues its findings of fact, conclusions oflaw and order of the board as follows: That Daniel Saro, d/b/a Magic Flooring, LLC, is the holder of record of License No. 31305,31891,32841, and 32842. Page 103 161 1 85 December 16, 2009 That the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is the complainant in this matter. That the board has jurisdiction of the person of the respondent and that Daniel L. Saro was present at the public hearing and was not represented by counsel at the hearing on December 16, 2009. All notices required by Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, have been properly issued and were personally delivered. The respondent acted in a manner that is in violation of Collier County ordinances and is the one who committed the act. That the allegations as set as forth (sic) in Administrative Complaint as to Count I, 4.1.6, disregards or violates in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County any of the building, safety, health or insurance of Workers' Compensation laws in the State of Florida, or ordinance of this county are to be found supported by the evidence presented at the hearing. Conclusion of law alleged and set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I are approved, adopted and incorporated herein: To wit, the respondent violated Section 4.1.6, or disregards or violates in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County, any of the building, safety, health, insurance or Workers' Compensation laws of the State of Florida or ordinances of this county of Collier County, and Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, in the performance of his contracting business. 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, in Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, by a vote of seven in favor and zero opposed, a majority vote of the board members present, the respondent has been found in violation as set out above. Further, it is ordered and by a vote of seven in favor and zero opposed, or a majority vote of board members present, that the following disciplinary actions and sanctions and related order are Page 104 Decel~ 1'6, 20!9 b 5 hereby imposed upon the holder of contractor's Certificate of Competency No. 31305, 31891, 32841 and 32842, that Daniel Saro, d/b/a Magic Flooring (sic) Finishing, LLC is to pay a $5,000 fine and a $250 administrative cost to be paid within 45 days; to require to be -- take a business and law test for the Magic Floor Finishing trade; and also to take two hours of Workmen's Comp continuing education classes within 90 days; facing one-year probation from today's date; and each job is to be reported to staff at contractor licensing. And if none of these items are done within the times set out that (sic) within the parameters of payments schedules, that his license -- all licenses, number 31305,31891,32841 and 32842 are immediately suspended. And it's so ordered. MR. NEALE: And? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Did I miss something? MR. NEALE: Yeah, and also if none of this is done by the next license cycle, that his licenses are revoked. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. And if all these items are not done by the next license cycle, that the licenses then are hereby revoked. And so ordered. Thank you. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chair, can we take a 10-minute break? CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes, we can. (Recess.) CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: I'll call back to order the Collier County Contractor Licensing Board, December 16th, 2009. Meeting back to order again. At this moment I'm going to step down as chair and I'm going to turn it over to my vice chair who is going to present this next case. Mr. Tom Lykos. Only because of the possibility ofMr. Lykos being elected to the chair as coming up for the new year. So at this time, Mr. Lykos? CHAIRMAN L YKOS: So I get to practice. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Yes. Page 105 16 1 1 &t; December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. MR. JACKSON: There's that practice again. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: There's that practice again. Okay, we'll call Hearing No. 2009-15. Is Mr. Peter Geresdi here, please? Please step up and be sworn in. (Mr. Geresdi and Ms. Clements were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. MS. CLEMENTS: Okay. The packet -- I would like to have the packet entered into evidence. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, I need a motion, please. MR. LANTZ: So moved, Lantz. MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: All those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN LYKOS: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. MS. CLEMENTS: This is another case ofthe Workers' Comp violation. I was on a job site on November 13th, 2009 and Mr. Geresdi here had himself and a worker on job site. They were using power saw and tools installing a cabinet. It was like a desk, floor to ceiling, and it kind of wrapped around the room cabinet. And I checked and there was no Workers' Comp for the employee. Page 106 Decem~ePl 1, 200! 00 I also have a statement from him. It's E.2 in the evidence -- I'm sorry, E.9 in the evidence packet that states that Yanos Szauer was the employee and that he didn't have Workers' Comp for him and that he is being paid salary. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, thank you. Mr. Geresdi, opening statement? MR. GERESDI: Yes. Yanos Szauer became a part of our company actually about a year and a half ago. He was an officer. And by that time my wife and our accountant did all the paperwork and somehow we -- or they misfile or something for his exemption. A company only three person, actually, two now, me and him. And I went down to the office in Fort Myers. Because I been telling her and I saw her, Yanos has exemption because he's a officer. That's why we put him on the corporation back then. And I find out his name was misspelled. The papers didn't show correctly. But basically we have the exemption for him in the present, so I don't know. Back then I thought we have it, which we didn't apply, I guess. About a year and a half ago, so -- so I don't know what happened then. We put him on the corporation, and from that point on I believe he didn't apply for the exemption, so -- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. Karen, you want to go ahead and proceed with your case? MS. CLEMENTS: Well, the day that I was out there, the gentleman, the employee didn't have his driver's license on him. No identification. When I checked SunBiz I didn't see -- my computer goes in and out in the area where I was, so I couldn't get whether he was actually there or not on corporate papers. I called into the office and I have bad phone connection in that area also, so they were trying to call me back, I guess, and I didn't -- when I finally did get the computer to work again, I could not find under the spelling that he had given me a Workers' Comp exemption Page 107 Decem!rq 61, 200l fb5 for Yanos. So at that point I knew, you know, that there was no Workers' Compo But like he's saying, apparently his name was misspelled on corporate papers to begin with, and their accountant didn't follow through apparently with Workers' Comp paperwork. This is a third violation also. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I understand. And what is it that -- what paperwork did you bring with you that Mr. Ossorio is getting copies of? MR. GERESDI: The exemption, Workman's Compo CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Well, we need to see that to see what the date on that is. MR. HORN: Mr. Lykos, in here he states that at that time ofthe event when Ms. Clements questioned him, he wasn't covered, unless I'm reading all this wrong. MS. CLEMENTS: On E.9. MR. HORN: Okay. MR. JOSLIN: Well, he wouldn't have been covered under Workmen's Comp insurance. MS. CLEMENTS: No, exemption. MR. JOSLIN: But ifhe did have a valid exemption that was misfiled by the state through a spelling error, that would be a clerical error. So I'm not sure that we could pursue too far. MR. OSSORIO: Okay, Mr. -- just to clarify real quick, there are two issues. The first issue is, is that he's stating the fact that the gentleman is part officer of the corporation. With that being said, we could not find that. You could be an officer of the corporation and not be exempt. So therefore you become a statutory employee of the company. So our theory is, is what transpired is, is that indeed the gentleman on the job site could have been an officer of the corporation, but he didn't have the exemption. I believe the date -- if Page 108 16 I 1 ~ December 16, 2009 b he puts it in evidence, you'll see when the effective date of the exemption. MR. GERESDI: Yeah, it's 11/30. MR. OSSORIO: 11/30. And when were you out there, Karen? MS. CLEMENTS: The 13th of November. MR. OSSORIO: Okay. So approximately two weeks later you did go up to the Fort Myers office and pursue getting the exemption that you are needed to do to be able to work as pursuant to the Statute in 440. MR. JOSLIN: Okay, one more question then. On the exemption that he's speaking of saying that he had applied for an exemption but the name was misspelled, do we have any record of the state or Workmen's Comp having an exemption form that had been filed before the new one came out? MR. GERESDI: No, it's not for the Workmen's Compo That's for the company. But the -- MR. OSSORIO: We're not here about the company. We're not here about corporations. We don't enforce anything corporation. We -- he could have been an officer of the corporation, I'm not disputing that. I'm not here to talk about that. That's what he says, okay, I believe him. However, in the Workers' Comp exemption database, he's not there. He did do it after we told him to. So there's -- one issue is the corporation has nothing to do with us. If that's what he says, I tend to believe him. That might be. But the exemption he didn't get till after Karen issued a stop work order and told him to get the exemption for his corporate officer. That's where the Workers' Comp lies. MS. CLEMENTS: I'm sure he went pretty much right that day, because it takes two weeks to get it. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Get it, right. So there was never really an exemption form filed before that incident happened. Page 109 16 I 1 fJ5 December 16, 2009 MR. GERESDI: That we thought we had. That's why I been telling her, you know, he had paperwork. Because back then the accountant did it and my wife did all the paperwork and all that, so I had nothing to do with it. So she told me -- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Give me one second, Mr. Geresdi. Could you please just slow down a little bit. It's a little bit hard to understand with your accent. Could you just slow down a little bit? MR. GERESDI: Okay. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. MR. GERESDI: Okay. A year and a half ago when he got part of the company, I thought we did all the paperwork. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: One moment. One moment. A year and a half ago what happened? MR. GERESDI: He became the part of the company. Like he's been officer of the company. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: He became an officer of the company a year and a half ago. MR. GERESDI: At that time I thought we applied for his exemption as I did myself. And Andrea. And somehow it skipped and I find out the office down in Fort Myers, they couldn't find his name, not after his social. So probably in the past year and a half he didn't have either a Workmen's Comp or the exemption. So now as soon as I find out, I did it. So from the 11 th afterward we have everything set for him. But before, it wasn't, basically. MR. JOSLIN: When he applied-- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Hang on. MR. JOSLIN: I'm sorry. Go ahead. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Terry? MR. JERULLE: Just so I -- and correct me if I'm wrong. On 4/2/08 you were cited for Workman's Comp, or lack of Workman's Comp, correct? Page 110 16 I 1 fO~ December 16, 2009 MR. GERESDI: For him, right. MR. JERULLE: On 5/6/2009 you were also cited. And then again on 11/13/2009 you were charged. So this is the third time. MR. GERESDI: Yeah. MR. JERULLE: Okay. And you're the owner of the company. MR. GERESDI: Uh-huh, yeah. MR. JERULLE: And you're responsible for all aspects of that company. MR. GERESDI: Yes, basically. MS. CLEMENTS: I think the dates are wrong. It was January 28th, 2008 he received a citation. That was given by Allen, I believe -- or Andy. It was Andy. And then 4/30/09 was a citation issued by me. MR. JERULLE: I'm looking at the paid dates. MS. CLEMENTS: Oh, okay. MR. JERULLE: I see it now. 1/28 was the citation, 4/30/09 was a citation. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Jerulle, you're absolutely correct. If you actually look at those pay dates, you'll see they've got a clerical issue. 300 and 300. The first offense is 300. Usually the second offense, if it's a Workers' Comp issue, we forward to the licensing board. Unfortunately Karen Clements, at the time when she issued the $300 citation, either the system wasn't up or it wasn't operating or we didn't do our homework, that she issued a $300 penalty thinking that this was the first time that they've communicated. But unfortunately it wasn't. So he paid it. So we left it as-is. And this is the third time he's back. So this is where we are today. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Kyle? MR. LANTZ: Are all three violations for the same guy? MR. GERESDI: Yeah. Yeah. MR. LANTZ: Why didn't you get it -- I would have thought after the first time a year ago you would have known that it didn't -- Page III __~...~~_".M __. ._~__,.___ 161 1 /?f; December 16, 2009 MR. GERESDI: The re -- I don't -- actually we went, and I -- probably my wife called in and they -- like I said, the name was misspelled, we just find out. So it's -- the whole thing was kind of a mix up from our part, of course. But I don't know. I really don't know. And now I did -- I went in personally first time, you know. So I basically straightened out the whole situation what been happened, so CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Mr. Geresdi, in January of '08 you were cited for not having Workers' Compensation for this person. In April of '09 you were cited for not having Workers' Comp for this person. You're telling us there was either a spelling mistake or a clerical error. Do you have any documentation with you to prove what it is that you're saying to us today? MR. GERESDI: Other than the new one, no. He didn't have it. I know he didn't have it. That's the problem. I know it now -- by now I know, because I went in and we couldn't find his name on the system. Either after his name, after his Social. So they told me ifhe's on the -- you know, he had an exemption, should come up with the Social Security numbers. But they couldn't find it. So the thing is when they put him on the corporation like an officer, we kind of missed to apply for the exemption of the Workmen's Compo So within a year and a half or two years, yeah, he did not have the coverage or the exemption. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Let me explain what we're trying to accomplish. MR. GERESDI: Sure. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: At this stage what we're trying to figure out is whether or not you are guilty of the charge brought against you. MR. GERESDI: Yeah, I guess I'm -- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: So the question is whether or not you had Workers' Compensation coverage for this gentleman. If you Page 112 161 1 if; December 16, 2009 applied for it and there was a spelling error, then I think the board would be willing to listen because you put an effort in. If you don't have any proof for us that you made attempts to get this gentleman either covered with Workers' Compensation or to get his Workers' Comp exemption recorded, then we are not -- we're left with a question of whether or not you're guilty of not having Workers' Compo MR. GERESDI: That's -- I know, I got it. The only thing, I really can't prove it because the Workmen's Comp couldn't find anything. So the thing is the time we put him on the corporation, which is about two years, a year and a half before today, but that part we didn't have any coverage. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, thank you, Mr. Geresdi. MR. OSSORIO: Mr. Chairman, if you look at E.7, top left-hand side. And we're not disputing that might be an issue. You see where that could cause a problem? MR. WHITE: Uh-huh. MR. JOSLIN: What page was it again? MR. OSSORIO: E.7, top left-hand side. MR. WHITE: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN LYKOS: Mr. White? MR. WHITE: Procedurally we're at a point where I could ask a question of the staff? CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Uh-huh. MR. WHITE: Do you have copies of the document he gave you earlier about -- MR. OSSORIO: I do. MR. WHITE: Can you distribute those? I'd like to compare the spellings and the dates, and if I understand correctly. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Do I need a motion to have this entered into evidence? MR. JOSLIN: Yes. MR. NEALE: Uh-huh. Page 113 . "._----~'-~----,-,.._-_."._~_._~,--~---......,_.._..-_._..,.,,-, -. 161 1bC) December 16, 2009 MR. WHITE: So moved. MR. JOSLIN: I make a motion we enter this new paperwork into evidence. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I have a motion, I have a second. All those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. MR. WHITE: Well, they got some of the letters right. MR. JOSLIN: If I could just ask one question here. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Mr. Joslin? MR. JOSLIN: This is where I'm a little confused, or I'm a little __ maybe understanding what might have happened. In order to be able to file a Workmen's Comp exemption form, you have to be an officer of the corporation, correct? Until you're an officer of the corporation, and it's listed with SunBiz or the Department of State, even if you file for an exemption form, it's not going to go through, because you're not an officer of the corporation. So it would be declined. When he filed to have him being placed on as an officer of that corporation, if the name came back improper or it was spelled wrong, then even if the man would have applied for a Workmen's Comp exemption form, he wouldn't have gotten it, because the spelling of a corporate officer was incorrect. So my question is, is I guess is this something that is really this Page 114 1 6 J 1 (b? December 16, 2009 gentleman's fault, in an essence? Now, maybe it is as a license holder or as a business owner to have followed up on it to get the form in his hands, but there is definitely a clerical error, you can see it, in the two different spellings. MR. NEALE: One point I would like to make is that you can be an officer of a corporation without being listed on the SunBiz records. I mean, I've got lots and lots and lots of clients that have numerous officers that are never put on SunBiz. MR. JOSLIN: Okay. MR. WHITE: It certainly is not the only proof. MR. JOSLIN: Right, I understand. MR. NEALE: You know, the corporate records, the internal corporate records are really the only valid source of information as to who is a corporate officer or not. SunBiz is interesting, but Mr. White can probably comment on this as well as I can, if not better, it certainly is not an accurate depiction of who is a corporate officer and who is not. MR. WHITE: Mr. Geresdi, what is the correct spelling of the last name of the gentleman we're referring to as Yanos. MR. GERESDI: Szauer. S-Z-A-U-E-R. Just like you have it on the new exemption paper. MR. WHITE: So the exemption is correct -- MR. GERESDI: Yeah. MR. WHITE: -- and the SunBiz record for the Department of State is incorrect. MR. GERESDI: Yeah. MR. HORN: Mr. Chair? CHAIRMAN LYKOS: Yes, sir. MR. HORN: Or Chairs, excuse me. This is the third violation in a two-year period, so as the owner and license holder, it's their responsibility to make sure he gets that exemption done, even ifthere's a mistake on the records. I don't see Page 115 --- 161 1 PJ0 December 16, 2009 how we can blame the state when it's your own due diligence when it's your own company and it's, excuse the expression, your butt on the line. I don't see how we're talking about how it's the state's fault because if they made a mistake, he never followed up for two years and three violations later. Just my opinion. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Good point. MR. WHITE: Well, one of the things I also note, gentleman, is that Count I of the violation says the very first word, disregards or violates in the performance of. There's a degree of disregard here that the repeated violations make evident to me more likely than not that the gentleman's guilty. But we're not to that phase in the process. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Right. MR. WHITE: I just haven't heard him acknowledge that. He doesn't need to. But on the other hand I think that the records are proving a point. MR. HORN: As we discussed in the previous case, you had for two years no Workmen's Comp that you're paying on your employee, was that due to your bidding process with your competitors also. Something to keep in mind, as you gentlemen know better than I will, so -- MR. JERULLE: Good point. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Karen, do you have any other evidence to add to this case? MS. CLEMENTS: I know he wholeheartedly told me he was covered. I genuinely think that he thought he was. But then after he signed his statement I think he realized he wasn't licensed. I mean, he states right here in E.9. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Mr. Geresdi, do you have any other evidence to enter in this case? MR. GERESDI: No, that's all I have. MR. JERULLE: Is this the only entity that you license? MR. GERESDI: No. I'm a painter too. I have three licensing: Page 116 16/ 1 f);S December 16, 2009 Two for Collier, one for Lee. MR. JERULLE: And do you have exemptions in those other entities? MR. GERESDI: Yeah, all ofthem, sure. There's only two of us, so I do exempt for Workmen's Compo MR. JERULLE: You have the same partners in the __ MR. GERESDI: Same, yeah. MR. JERULLE: -- other two entities? MR. GERESDI: Yeah, Yanos and me, and my wife, actually. MR. JERULLE: Just one company, two licenses, correct? MR. GERESDI: Yeah, that's right. No, never had employees or something like that. It's only two of us. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Karen, closing remarks? MS. CLEMENTS: I don't have any. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Mr. Geresdi, closing statement? MR. GERESDI: No, thanks, that's it, thank you. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, is there any other questions from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. MR. LANTZ: So moved, Lantz. MR. JOSLIN: Second, Joslin. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: All those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. Page 117 Decemb~ ?6,/20091 b ') MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. Okay. MR. WHITE: I'd make a motion, Mr. Chairman, that there be entered a finding of guilt in this case with respect to Count 1. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I have a motion. I need a second. MR. LANTZ: Second, Lantz. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: All those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Opposed? MR. JOSLIN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, motion carries 6-1. Okay. Do I read now or I don't read till after we -- MR. JOSLIN: No, Mr. Neale, he's already read that. MR. NEALE: Yeah, at this point, you know, we're just reiterating what was said previously as far as the deliberations of the board and so forth at this point. Again, this is essentially the same charge as was made last time, the disregards or violates in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County any of the building, safety, health, insurance or Workers' Compensation laws of the State of Florida ordinances of this county. So that's the charge that you're considering at this point. Page 118 16 1 1 ~S December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Recommendation from staff? MR. OSSORIO: We seem to get this wrong part of the time, so I CHAIRMAN L YKOS: It's a starting point. MR. OSSORIO: I understand his dilemma, as I think he is telling the truth referencing having that gentleman be on corporate records with him. But unfortunately there was a clear violation of Workers' Comp, because that officer is a statutory employee of the company and he has a duty to response (sic) to make sure he's protected on the job site. Three times. So we recommend a $5,000 fine, $250 investigative cost, one-year probation. MR. JERULLE: Any exams or testing? MR. OSSORIO: No. MR. JERULLE: And no action to the Florida state? MR. OSSORIO: None. MR. LANTZ: Well, I'll start off. I personally think $5,000 is too high of a fine. I understand the third offense. I think truly he felt he was not doing anything wrong. I think he should have some -- either take the business and law test or take some Workers' Comp continuing ed. to understand what the rules are that he was breaking. But I think $5,000 is too high of a fine. MR. JERULLE: I respectfully disagree. Because it may be the second offense, but if you're running a business, which he's doing, not just installing cabinets, but he's running a business and two other businesses by his own admission, you've got to know you need Workmen's Compo And you have to know. And who fills out the form? If -- my understanding is if you're filling out a Workmen's Comp application, you have to fill it out, nobody else can fill it out for you, right? I think you have to sign it. You cannot sign your own -- you cannot proofread and get your own name right if that were the case? I just have some questions that -- in my mind that I tend to agree Page 119 '-'--"--'--"-~----~.","~--~ ,.......,. '---"'-"-' 1 6 I 1 b6 December 16, 2009 with the recommendations of the staff. MR. GERESDI: Can I speak, sir? CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Yes, sir. MR. GERESDI: The exemption is every two years. So you fill it out once, we don't -- you know. And back then I didn't do it personally, my wife did it. She was the bookkeeper. So I have no, you know, control over it. So that mean I thought we have everything set. But basically not. It's not something every day I do for filling out paper. MR. JERULLE: But the person that's exempt has to sign it, correct? MR. GERESDI: Yeah, he's filing the paper. MR. JERULLE: He has to proofread it before he signs it, correct? MR. GERESDI: Yeah, two years ago, actually. Because mine is MR. JERULLE: And the bookkeeper is writing checks to this person, correct? MR. GERESDI: Yeah. But that's not -- MR. JERULLE: You would think that the name wouldn't -- of all the things that would get messed up, you would think the name wouldn't be one of them. MR. GERESDI: Yeah, okay. MR. OSSORIO: Just be aware that on April of this year he was informed of what he needed to do in April. So five months later or seven months later we've still got the same problem. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I have two comments. One is you see this document that you gave us today that shows Yanos's -- well, if you thought he was Workers' Comp exempt two years ago, how come you didn't have one of these two years ago? If you've got one for yourself -- MR. GERESDI: Right. Page 120 161 1 PJ? December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN L YKOS: -- wouldn't you think you needed to have one for him, if he was exempt as well? MR. GERESDI: I know, that's what I'm saying, I clear everything up personally. Before that I didn't do anything of -- any paper thing, nothing. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Well, as the owner of the company-- MR. GERESDI: So now I did. Well-- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: What happens between you -- MR. GERESDI: -- wife and husband company -- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: -- and your wife is a family issue, but in business you're the owner of the company, you're responsible. MR. GERESDI: I understand. I understand. Sure. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: The other comment I was going to make, which sometimes we lose sight of when we talk about Workers' Comp, is if that gentleman would have gotten hurt and he goes to the hospital and because of your misunderstanding about how the law works his medical bills would not be covered and his only recourse may be to have to sue you and to sue the homeowner. And that's what this is about. This isn't about filling out paperwork so you can run a business. This is about protecting your clients and protecting the employees of your company. This isn't just about filling out some paperwork because that's what the law tells me to do. That's critically important. And that's what the issue is here, not whether or not somebody's name was spelled right and the paperwork was filled out correctly. Any other comments from the board? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I don't have a motion, or do I have a motion? Did you make a -- no, we didn't make -- no, nobody made a motion. We have a recommendation from staff but we don't have a motion yet. Well, here's what's on the table: $5,000 fine, $250 in Page 121 161 1 (Os December 16, 2009 investigative costs, one-year probation, and a Workers' Comp continuing education class. Those are the topics that have been brought up. MR. HORN: Mr. Chair, I think there might be a need for a business and law exam, just so he's aware of all laws and protection for him and his employees and his clients, just to be safe. It's a good reminder. MR. JERULLE: Michael, did you give a recommendation as to payment, the terms? MR. OSSORIO: Our recommendation was payment within 10 days, but obviously that might change. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Does anybody feel that this case is dramatically different from the one we just heard previously? MR. WHITE: I think the difference, Mr. Chairman, may be in intent. But the effect, there is no difference. And if the underlying rationale for the law and the purpose for it being complied with strictly are as we've said and as we've said repeatedly to many people who have appeared before us, then I don't know that the intent matters. The first word in it, I repeat, is disregard. Disregard means you let somebody else do -- you don't regard as you being responsible. Something that you ultimately can be held accountable for. Today's the day that you're being held accountable for disregarding twice before what it was you needed to then do. And the specific deterrent here to me is less important than a general deterrent to other people who for the third time would choose to disregard the law. And so although I understand Mr. Lantz's point, I tend to agree with maybe what may be the majority view of staffs recommendation of the fine amount. But I don't believe that the time frame for its payment is probably something I'm comfortable with. But that's my only comment. Thank you. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, the previous case we had a $5,000 Page 122 16/ 1 t!J0 December 16, 2009 fine and $250 in investigative cost that was due within 45 days, we had one year probation, we had Workers' Comp continuing education class and the business and law test and passed within 90 days. And we had suspension if these time lines were not met, and revocation if the time lines were not met by the time the licensing cycle changed, which was October 1 of201O. Is that pretty much what we had on the last one? MR. HORN: And calling in the jobs. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: And calling in the jobs, that's right. Is everybody comfortable with the comparable discipline for this case? MR. LANTZ: Sure. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay. Well all somebody's got to do is make a motion and we can be done. MR. WHITE: The difference I see, Mr. Chairman, is again going back to intent. And because there isn't that intent here, I don't know that there's the necessity of calling in the jobs, number one. But I think -- I otherwise agree with what we did in terms of sanctions in the last case applying in similar fashion to this case. There was a specificity I think of two hours of Workers' Compo I don't know how that actually plays out in terms of the courses that are available or not. But there ought to be something that definitely demonstrates compliance with a Workmen's Compensation course. So that said, I would otherwise be comfortable if someone made a motion in that regard. MR. JOSLIN: I think too, wasn't the time span for the payment 90 days? MR. WHITE: It was 90. MR. JOSLIN: Ninety days, right. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: And I though it was 45 days for payment and 90 days for the classes. MR. JOSLIN: Yeah, that's right, I'm sorry. Page 123 16 1 1 f!JC; December 16, 2009 MR. NEALE: Payment was 45 and 90 days for the course. MR. JOSLIN: Ninety days for the classes, that's correct, yes. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Mr. Jerulle? MR. JERULLE: I'll try to make a motion of a fine of $5,000 payable in 45 days. Fine of $250 for the admin. costs, payable within 45 days. One year of probation. Two hours of Workman's Comp to be completed within 90 days. One hour of business law to be completed within 90 days. Am I missing something? MR. HORN: I think you said one hour of business law. MR. JERULLE: Yes. MR. LANTZ: As opposed to the test? MR. JERULLE: Oh, excuse me, I got carried away. The retaking of the business test. MR. WHITE: And that if those time periods are exceeded, the license would be suspended until they were completed. And if they were not otherwise complied with by October 1, 2010, the license would be revoked. MR. JERULLE: Yes. MR. WHITE: And I would, if you'd accept those as amendments, make that second. MR. JERULLE: Correct, I do. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, so I have an amended motion, I have a second. If I could make one more amendment to that motion. Because we have a multiple license holder again, if we attach this to all licenses as we did previously. MR. WHITE: I considered that, Mr. Chairman, in seeking to amend the motion. I think again going back to the intent question that this is probably an adequate deterrent, given the dollar amount of the fine. And because there isn't that intent, I don't see the necessity of it being connected to other licenses. Page 124 161 l(bS December 16, 2009 If he's going to do this again and not get the message, maybe so. But going back to the idea of giving him the opportunity to be able to earn the income to pay the fines timely, I chose to not expand it into the other licenses in amending my second. MR. NEALE: I would also suggest to the board that ifhis license becomes suspended and he is brought back in front of this board to consider that as suspension, that the board then could expand the hearing at that point in time to reach to all of his licenses. So I think the result would end up being effectively the same. Do you agree, Mr. White? MR. WHITE: I do agree with that, and it factored into my thinking on it as well. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: It was your motion, are you fine with that? MR. JERULLE: Yes. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay. Then I have a motion, I have a second. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, all those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Motion carries. Now I read. MR. JOSLIN: Yes. Page 125 16 I 1 ~~ December 16, 2009 CHAIRMAN L YKOS: This cause came on for public hearing before the Contractors Licensing Board on December 16th, 2009 for consideration of the Administrative Complaint filed against Peter Geresdi, d/b/a Euro Trim, Incorporated, License No. 25371. Service of the complaint was made in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended. The board having at this hearing heard testimony under oath, received evidence and heard arguments respective to all appropriate matters thereupon issues its findings of fact, conclusions of law and order of the board as follows: Peter Geresdi is the holder of record of License No. 25371; that the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is the complainant in this matter; that the board has jurisdiction of the person of the respondent and that Peter Geresdi, d/b/a Euro Trim, Incorporated was present at the public hearing and was not represented by counsel at the hearing on December 16th, 2009. All notices required by Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, have been properly issued and were personally delivered. The respondent acted in a manner that is in violation of Collier County ordinances and is the one who committed the act. That the allegations of fact as set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I, 4.1.6, disregards or violates in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County any of the building, safety, health, insurance or Workers' Compensation laws of the State of Florida or ordinances of this county are found to be supported by the evidence presented at the hearing. The conclusions of law alleged and set forth in the Administrative Complaint as to Count I, 4.1.6, disregards or violates in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County any of the building, safety, health, insurance or Workers' Compensation laws of the State of Florida or ordinances of this county are approved, adopted and incorporated herein to wit: The respondent violated Page 126 16 I 1 0~ December 16, 2009 Section 4.1.6 of Collier County Ordinance 90-105, as amended, in the performance of his contracting business in Collier County by acting in violation of the sections 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 Collier County Ordinance No. 90-105, as amended, by a vote of seven in favor and zero opposed, a majority vote of the board members present, the respondent has been found in violation as set forth above. Further, it is hereby ordered by a vote of six to one -- I'm sorry, six in favor and one opposed by a majority vote ofthe board members present that the following disciplinary action and related order are hereby imposed upon the holder of the contractor's Certificate of Competency No. 25371. MR. NEALE: Just one point. I think, if I'm not mistaken __ CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I switched them? MR. NEALE: -- the vote on the sanctions was unanimous, the vote on the guilt was 6-1. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: I think you're right. So do I need to restate it? MR. NEALE: Just make the correction. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Just correct it? All right, thank you. The sanctions are: $5,000 fine, payable within 45 days; $250 investigation fees, paid within 45 days; one-year probation; a two-hour Workers' Comp continuing education class which must be completed within 90 days; completion of the business and law; a passing grade on the business and law test to be completed within 90 days. That if the deadlines above are not adhered to, the license will be suspended. And if they're not completed by the end of the licensing cycle, which is October 1 of201O, the license will be revoked. Page 127 16 I 1 P}7 December 16, 2009 So ordered. MR. JOSLIN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you, sir. MR. GERESDI: Will I get this in the mail? I got to mail out all these, or -- CHAIRMAN L YKOS: You want to contact the licensing office tomorrow and they'll have all the information for you on exactly what you need to do. MR. OSSORIO: What typically happens is that you'll come see me, we'll sit down, we'll come up -- we'll draw up some kind of a solution for you. And then when we get the finding of facts, we send those certified and we put that in your file. But we'll be -- come see us tomorrow, talk to Karen and we'll take care of it. MR. GERESDI: All right. Thank you. MR. JOSLIN: Thank you. Very good. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Thank you. MR. JERULLE: We're adjourned? CHAIRMAN L YKOS: No, we're not adjourned. I have one more item of business. We need to elect a vice chair for next year. So who has an interest in being vice chair next year? MR. JOSLIN: Mr. Jerulle, you were originally I believe-- MR. JERULLE: I would like to nominate Kyle Lantz. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Do you accept that nom -- does anybody else have an -- MR. LANTZ: Sure. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: -- interest in being vice chair? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: No. Do you accept that nomination? MR. LANTZ: Sure. Page 128 161 1 00 December 16,2009 CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, all those in favor of having Kyle Lantz serve as vice chair next year, say aye. MR. BOYD: Aye. MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. MR. JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Congratulations, Mr. Lantz, you're vice chair next year. MR. LANTZ: All right. Do I get a pay raise? MR. WHITE: Double what you got last year. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Yeah, you get a meal expense and traveling expenses. It's a great deal. MR. NEALE: As long as you pay them yourself. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Right, as long as you pay them yourself. I just had a note. Michael, we're skipping January? MR. OSSORIO: Yes, there will be no board member in January, but we are going to be heading up in February and in March, probably. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay, we are back here in February? MR. OSSORIO: February we'll be in the main complex. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Okay. I need a motion to adjourned. MR. LANTZ: So moved. MR. JOSLIN: So moved. MR. JERULLE: Second. MR. WHITE: Second -- third. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: All those in favor? MR. BOYD: Aye. Page 129 16 1 1 December 16, 2009 P./5 MR. LANTZ: Aye. MR. JERULLE: Aye. CHAIRMAN JOSLIN: Aye. MR. WHITE: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Aye. MR. HORN: Aye. CHAIRMAN L YKOS: Merry Christmas everybody. Enjoy your holidays and your families. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 1 :20 p.m. as Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 130 (' iT '_>"l"l;<'h~',i()I\:.r; Fiala .F- ' Halas .....s= Henning Y / Goyle . Coletta. J"C-j 'fY 16/ 1 Btt January 6, 2010 RECEIVED ~Etti G 2010 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, January 6, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that 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 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610, Collier County Community Development and Environmental Services Center, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: CHAIRMAN: William Varian Ray Allain James Boughton Clay Brooker Laura Spurgeon Dejohn Dalas Disney David Dunnavant Marco Espinar Blair Foley Regan Henry George Hermanson (Excused) David Hurst Reed Jarvi Robert Mulhere Mario Valle ALSO PRESENT: Nick Casalanguida, Interim Administrator, CDES Judy Puig, Operations Analyst, CDES - Staff Liaison James French, Deputy Director/Operations Manager, CDES Bob Dunn, Director, Building Review & Permitting Phil Gramatges, Interim Director, Public Utilities Michael Greene, Manager, Transportation/Planning Stan Chrzanowski, Sr. Engineer, Engineering & Environwental Services Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager MISC, \,orres: John Kelly, Planner - LDC Section Date: 0 Item ,1~Ul Copies 10: Jan!~6, tOlO 1 (bV I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 3:05 PM by Chairman William Varian who read the procedures to be followed during the Meeting. II. New Committee Members Chairman Varian welcomed Ray Allain, Regan Henry, and David Hurst to DSAC. III. Approval of Agenda Marco Espinar moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Robert Mulhere. Carried unanimously, l2-0. IV. Approval of Minutes - December 2, 2009 Meeting Dalas Disney moved to approve the Minutes of the December 2, 2009 Meeting as submitted. Second by Reed Jarvi. Motion carried, 9-"Yes"/3-"Abstentions." Ray Allain, Regan Henry and David Hurst did not vote since they did not attend December 2nd meeting. V. Public Speakers (Will be heard as the Item is discussed) VI. Staff AnnouncementslUpdates A. Public Utilities Division Update - Phil Gramatges, Interim Director A question was asked concerning the water surcharge for commercial buildings. Mr. Gramatges stated the size of the water meter determines the scale and a surcharge is assessed if usage runs over the allotted limit. Information is available on the County's website, B. Fire Review Update - Ed Riley, Fire Code Official (absent) · The monthly report was distributed to the Committee in their information packet · Ken Abler, Defuty Fire Code Official, is retiring and a reception will be held on January 25' (Laura Spurgeon Dejohn arrived at 3:11 PM) C. Transportation/Planning Update - Michael Greene, Transportation Planning Manager · Vanderbilt Beach Bridge - FDOT revised the completion date to April, 20 I 0 · Santa Barbara Extension - projected completion date is June, 20 I 0 · Obtained an $800,000 Grant for the 175/951-Davis Interchange There was a discussion concerning status of the Department, revisions and personnel within the Department. D. CDES Update - Nick Casalanguida, Interim Administrator . 13 individuals were laid off within CDES · James French is the Deputy Director/Operations Manager for CDES 2 161 January 6, 2010 1 r?; ct Mr. Casalanguida outlined the restructuring plan. Transportation Planning, Comprehensive Planning, Zoning & Land Development, and Engineering will be brought together under the umbrella of CDES, There will be a greater emphasis on the quality of customer service, efficient daily operation, improving the intake process, and he noted the following: . Carolina Valera is the Architectural Review Supervisor · Everildo Ybaceta and Mike Levy will track petitions and provide project updates . The CDES flow chart is being revised Challenges: · Electronic submittal - goal is to be running within six months · CityView was to "go live" in February but was postponed, A delivery team has been assembled to pinpoint problems within the system · Submittals - developing a "concierge" approach for client services to reduce redundancy and waste · Time/costs will be tracked for Board of County Commissioners' projects It was suggested to add a DSAC member to the CityView team to represent the business committee, A schedule of topics to be reviewed and analyzed will be distributed to the Committee, VII. Old Business A. LDC Amendments - Patrick White, Esq. (Vanderbilt Beach Residents' Assn.) Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, noted copies of the revised Amendment, prepared by Mr. White, and the Table of Minimum Yard Requirements, prepared by John Kelly, were distributed to the members, Section 2.03.07 - Overlay Zoning Districts Purpose: To modify land development Regulations to clarify existing provisions to achieve intent ofthe Vanderbilt Beach Residential Tourist Overly (VBRTO). Reason: To address impacts from recent, unanticipated development within the overlay district and adjacent waters. Mr. White reviewed the changes made to "Item 6, Dimensional standards" under Paragraphs "c. - Minimum yard requirements" (on Page 4), and "f. - Distance between structures" (on Page 5), and to "Item 13 - Vested rights" (on Page 6), There were no objections to the changes, It was mentioned that during the October meeting, a suggestion was made to the Vanderbilt Beach Residents' Association to speak with the various property owners who would be affected by the changes in the Code. Mr. White stated discussions were held with the individuals who were most likely to be affected and their concerns were addressed. (Mario Valle arrived at 3:45 PM) 3 161 1 0~ January 6, 2010 Discussion continued concerning the current build-back policy, "Bert Harris" concerns, and full disclosure to the community, Also discussed were the differences on Page 3 between "Item 5, - Development criteria," in Paragraph b. iii and Paragraph c. iii, as well as who determines the sufficiency of Notice and the synopsis. Suggested changes: (1) In "Item 5, Development Criteria" under Paragraph "d, Site improvement plans and site development plans," on Page 4, the language was changed as follows: "In addition to the requirements of Section 1 0,02.03,B, upon any Site Improvement Plan or Site Development Plan application."," (Capitalized initial letters for site improvement/development and added the word, "Plan") A lengthy discussion ensued concerning the notification requirements contained in the Amendment, triggers, thresholds, FEMA's Substantial Improvement Rule, and "zoned" height versus "actual" height. A question was asked concerning the membership of the Vanderbilt Beach Residents' Association. Public Speaker: William B. Eline, President, Vanderbilt Beach Residents' Association, stated owners of businesses can apply to be members of the Association. A question was asked concerning Staff's position regarding the Amendment. Mr. White stated staff made him aware of any opposition to the revisions. Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, stated he had not been part of previous discussions concerning the revisions, but Staffs position will be determined when a report is presented to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners, Mario Valle moved to recommend approving the Amendment as revised above and to forward it to the Board of County Commissioners for review. Second by Robert Mulhere. Motion carried, 11-"Yes"/3-"No." Dalas Disney, Reed Jarvi and Marco Espinar opposed. B. Update: Building Fee Post-Implementation Commitments - Bob Dunn, Director, Building Review & Permitting · 20 pages of review comments were submitted by developers/contractors and will be sent to CBIA for comment · Re: list of items frequently cited by Inspectors as reasons for failure has been sent to CBIA · Types of permits and routing information will be sent to the Committee for their review . 5-dayI15-day turnaround report: will be submitted on a monthly basis to the Committee as well as to CBlA (A sample report was submitted to the Committee as an example of future reports,) . New Permit Fees are posted on the website 4 161 January 6, 2010 1 6~ · A "Building Block" concerning Fire Plan review has been posted on the website . Multiple inspections are being tracked VIII. New Business A. Utility Acceptance Bond - Phil Gramatges (re: email from Doug Lewis/Dalas Disney) A copy of the email from Doug Lewis to Dalas Disney was distributed to the members concerning Mr. Lewis' comments regarding the 10% Utility Conveyance Bond (10% of the cost of the project) which is required for all projects, His concern is that an additional $4,000 cash bond, which is also required, is punitive for developers, Mr. Disney questioned whether both bonds should be required. Mr. Gramatges stated the bonds were a form of "insurance" in case the utilities installed by the developer require repair by the County and is a protection for taxpayers against additional assessments, He will not support eliminating the bonds, stating when the utilities are transferred to the County, the Ordinance does provide for a reduction to developers. Stan Chrzanowski, Senior Engineer, stated the cash bond would be used if the 10% bond was not sufficient because it would facilitate quick repairs, and was also an incentive to complete the legal paperwork concerning the one-year inspections, It was pointed out that paper bonds are easily cancelled and a suggestion was made to modify the Ordinance by inserting a sliding scale for cash bonds. A request was made to provide the Committee with exact figures regarding the number of developers who did not comply with the requirement for inspections. B. Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman for 2010 Clay Brooker nominated William Varian to serve as DSAC Chairman for the 2010 term. Second by Robert Mulhere. Motion carried, "13-Yes," with one abstention. Mr. Varian abstained. Robert Mulhere nominated David Dunnavant to serve as DSAC Vice Chairman for the 2010 term. Second by Clay Brooker. Motion carried, "13-Yes," with one abstention. Mr. Dunnavant abstained. IX. Committee Member Comments (None) Next Meetinl! Dates: February 3, 2010 - 3:00 PM March 3, 2010 - 3:00 PM April 7, 2010 - 3:00 PM May 5, 2010 - 3:00 PM There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chairman at 5:00 PM. 5 16 I In January 6, 2010 r.Jfp DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE [j~ William Varian, Chairman The Minutes were app~ by the Board/Committee on as presented ~ or as amended . J\3-'~~o 6 __'~_~_._,H."'~_'^_'''___'''',__,_",_,_""__~""",,,~__"'_"~'''_______'_'''''~''__ ._....._.__ 16 1 . 1 ~i ~, r::CEIVED Fiala FEB 0 3 2010 De~.tn~ .,,,"n' .,1 County Com",'s,i"n." g~~:a t 61 (J> MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, December 2, 2009 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Community Development Services Conference Room #609/610,2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Judith Hushon Andrew Dickman Noah Standridge Michael V. Sorrell Patrick Peck ALSO PRESENT: Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Susan Mason, Principal Environmental Sn~cialist , <1\"&C "OTres Summer Araque, Sr. Environmentalist SpecIalIst . - Stephen Lenberger, Sr. Environmental SpButiBlist 03 ~ 10 ... lGILl l 1 _ _ .' n_, ....,.,~__"'___~..".._.-.,.....,_~_____ . -.--..--...-- 161 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA December 2, 2009 9:00 A.M. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ROOM 609/610 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104 I. Call to Order II. RollCall III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of November 4, 2009 meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. LASIP (Lely Area Stonnwater Improvement Project) Mitigation Park Site Development Plan SDP-2008-AR-13778 Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East VII. New Business A. LDC Amendments 1. LDC sections 1.08.02 and 3.05.07: Native Vegetation Definition & Single- Family Preserve Setback Clarification 2. LDC section 2.03.08: Aquaculture Excavations VIII. Old Business A. Update members on projects IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Staff Comments XII, Public Comments XIII. Adjournment ***..************************************.*********.**..*.*~***** Council Members: Plejlse notify l!ummer Araque, Environmental Services Senior Envlronm4!ntal Spec;iaUs.t no laJtr than 6:00 p.m. on ~ber 24, 2.909 if ~9u cannot attend this mutll)B or If yqu hilve a conflict and will-.!.atti!) ~ro", voting on aJ!etltJon (252- 6290\. General Public: 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 proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 1 81 I J 161 1 to 1 December 2, 2009 I. Call to Order Chairman Uushon called the meeting to order at 9:00 A.M. II. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Standridge moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Sorrell. Carried unanimously 5-0. IV. Approval of the November 4, 2009 meeting minutes Mr. Peck moved to approve the minutes of the November 4, 2009 meeting subject to the following revision: . Page 4, paragraph 3, line 2 - from"., .Audobon..," to ".. .Audubon.,," Second by Mr. Sorrell. Carried unanimously 5-0. V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences Mr. Standridge maybe absent for the January 6,2010 meeting. VI. Land Use Petitions A. LASIP (Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project) Mitigation Park Site Development Plan SDP-2008-AR-13778 Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East Margaret Bishop Transportation Division, Stormwater Management Division, Project Manager introduced Dan Brundage of Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc. and Craig Smith ofW, Dexter Bender & Associates, Inc. to present the project. Dan Brundage provided an overview of the project highlighting the following: . LASIP is a long running (since the 1970's) County project involving a comprehensive drainage plan for approximately 11,000 acres, . The project is bordercd on the North by Radio Road, South by Rookery Bay, East by Collier Blvd on the West by Sabal Bay and a power line easement. . The improvements involved construction of new canals, improving existing canals, construction of weirs to control the flow of water to preventing dehydration, construction of new pumping systems and "spreader lakes and swales," etc, . A portion of the project required County acquisition of a 99 acre parcel funded by a Florida Community and Trust (FCT) Grant. . A condition ofthe Grant was public access be provided to the parcel. . The parcel is subject ofthe Site Development Plan under consideration by the Council. . The parcel is bounded on the East by Collier Blvd., the north by Islandia Development and the South by other residential properties, 2 _..~._,_._."_....,____,,..,_.__,.__._ ,,___.M. ~ 161 1 ~1 December 2, 2009 · The parcel will be improved with a small parking area, an ADA accessible picnic area, and an at-grade natural pedestrian trail. · A porous concrete material will be utilized for construction of the parking area allowing water to pass through the concrete and percolate into the ground, · The South Florida Water Management District Environmental Resource Permit and US Army Corps of Engineers permits have been obtained. Craig Smith provided an overview of the restoration that occurred on site highlighting the following: · The parcel was heavily invested with Melaleuca which was removed in 2007-2008, . The 87,000 cubic yards (cy) of waste Melaleuca ~educed to 1700 cy by burning'bn site)of incinerators, . The waste astlwas distributed throughout the site, . A season after the removal of exotics, the site was re-vegetated with native vegetation suitable for the site, . Monitoring indicates the re-vegetation is successful. Summer Araque, Sr. Environmental Specialist stated Staff recommends approval of the application, Discussion occurred noting the proposed Preserve is adjacent to other Preserves creating the continuity of approximately 500-600 acres of Preserve within the area. Mr. Sorrell moved to approve the application LASIP (Lely Area Storm water Improvement Project) Mitigation Park Site Development Plan SDP-2008-AR- /3778 Section 15, Township 50 South, Range 26 East). Second by Mr. Standridge. Carried unanimously 5-0. VII. New Business A, LDC Amendments 1. LDC sections 1.08.02 and 3.05.07: Native Vegetation Definition & Single- Family Preserve Setback Clarification LDC3:28, I - LDC3:28.2 LDC SECTIONili}: 1.08.02 Definitions; 3.05.07 Preservation Standards CHANGES: . Revise the definition of "native vegetation" for purposes of retention of native vegetation. . Clarify how the "native vegetation definition" is applied to partially cleared sites with native trees, and where the understory has been converted to lawn or pasture, . Clarify single-family preserve setback requirements, 3 . 16 / 1 01 December 2, 2009 . Revisions to address concerns of stakeholders Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist presented the proposed Land Development Code Amendment and provided an overview of the proposed amendment. Under Council Discussion the following was noted: . Chairman Hushon submitted written gramatical changes (typos, etc.) for Staffs consideration, . Consideration should be given to clarifying the language in Section Section 3.05.07B.2.g line 5 - 6, Mr. Dickman moved to recommend approval of the proposed Land Development Code Amendment (LDC sections 1.08.02 and 3.05.07: Native Vegetation Definition & Single- Family Preserve Setback Clarification) subject to the following revision: J. Page 8, Section 3. 05. 07B.2.g line 5- 6 -language change from "Marshes and similar type environments (640FLUCFCS Codes) shall be excluded from this exception." To "Marshes and similar type environments (640 FLUCFCS Codes) shall not be included in this exception." Second by Mr. Peck. Carried unanimously 5-0. 2. LDC section 2.03.08: Aquaculture Excavations LDC PAGE: LDC2:114-ll6 LDC SECTION(ID: 2,03.08 Rural Fringe Zoning Districts CHANGE: Limits aquaculture in sending lands to above-ground facilities only. REASON: Concern about abandonment of excavations in RFMU sending lands, once aquaculture business has ceased to operate. Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney presented the proposed Land Development Code Amendment noting it is a directive of the Board of County Commissioners, Mr. Dickman moved to recommend approval of the proposed Land Development Code Amendment (LDC section 2.03.08: Aquaculture Excavations). Second by Mr. SorrelL Carried unanimously 5-0. VIII. Old Business A. Update members on projects Summer Araque reported: . The proposed School District Transportation Facility located on the comer of Desoto and 6th Ave in Golden Gate has been cancelled (not moving forward). 4 "'.- ---' .-- _...........-...._,--,, _"_',.'.,'~~~---' -. -. , ___.".,~..~_.__M>_ -- 161 1 (b1 December 2, 2009 · The Collier County Resource Recovery Park was approved by the Board of County Commissioners. IX. Subcommittee Reports None X. Council Member Comments A hard copy ofth,e "lmmokalee Area Master Plan" was submitted for review to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). Chairman Hushon noted the Regular January EAC meeting (1106/2010) will include a review of the "lmmokalee Area Master Plan" and Council members should consider "environmental aspects" of the Plan as they provide comments, XI. Public Comments None There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 10:10 A.M. COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL u.....rlv ,> n . f.Iud~.(Y--..J ~hairman, Dr. Judith Hushon These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chairman on II ?/to as presented , or as amended. // , 5 ."""....i<:; " "'f(lrr'ISSiQOel:-;> : lllllHV AI , . 16 I 1 b1 / Fiala OF(~ JanuaJ;;l~,~l Henning Coyle Coletta - ~. '::CEIVED ,- FEB 0 3 2010 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, January 6,2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A,M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Community Development Services Conference Room #609/610,2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIRMAN: Dr. Judith Hushon Andrew Dickman Noah Standridge Michael V. Sorrell Patrick Peck ALSO PRESENT: Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Summer Araque, Sf. Environmentalist Specialist Stephen Lenberger, Sf. Environmental Specialist David Weeks, Planning Managcr Carolina Valera, Principal Planner Jeff Wright, Assistant County Attorney Laura Roys, Sr. Environmental Specialist Susan Mason, Principal Environmental Specialist I;.!... 1/!.~C. l-.~rres: ~.te ] .~- FfI:ft ".n____ ---'-. ., "-'-- ---'---.---.. . -- .~,,- .. ", .,....... " _0<1. , -~-~___., .., .. '"" ,---.--- 16 I COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL AGENDA January 6, 2010 at 9:00 A.M, CUMJ\.ilt,.NiT'i DE"'/ELCP:\J1Ef'i"- ,i\j'~L: ,-~r~\;;I:XU!'J;V-'i-~NTAL "3(:F~i,/lCLS ~:~i',:::.''!~1 :5~)~1':(;1C J'" ... . .. ., , " '-' ~.,' , . ." , . l, ,. ,'_' ~ ,; _ ,", ,1',,- ;,Jf,\- ':: J ~ i' ., ,-,"-,,'..'. "LJ~; i::..:, :::_ I. Call to Order II. RollCall III. Approval of Agenda IV, Approval of December 2, 2009 meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Marsilea Villas Planned Unit Development Rezone PUDZ-2007 -AR-11381 Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East VII. New Business A. LDC Amendments 1. LDC sub-section 10.02.02 A: Environmental Impact Statements B. GMP Amendments 1. Immokalee Area Master Plan Amendment - GMPA petition CP-2008-5 VIII, Old Business A. Update members on projects IX Subcommittee Reports X. Council Member Comments XI. Staff Comments XII. Public Comments XIII. Adjournment ***.**.******-***********--*.***************.***.******.*.~*~.* Council Members: Please notify Summer Araque, Environmental Services Senior Environmental Sl1ecialist no later than 5:00 (l.m. 0(1 December 30. 2009 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will ablltain f(2!IJ voting on a l!l\ltltion (252- 6290), General Public: 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 proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. , ---"~-'--'''~--'- -, . 1 Q)1 16 1 161 January 6, 20 I 0 I. Call to Order Chairman "ushon caned the meeting to order at 9:01 A.M, II. Roll Call Roll call was taken and a quorum was established, III. Approval of Agenda Mr. Sorrell moved to approve the Agenda. Second by Mr. Standridge. Carried unanimously 4-0. Mr. Peck arrived af 9:0] am IV. Approval of the December 2, 2009 meeting minutes Mr. Dickman moved to approve the minutes of the December 2, 2009 meeting subject to the following change: Page 3, paragraph 7, bullet point #2 - from "The 87,000 cubic yards (cy) of waste Melalellca was reduccd to 1700 cy by burning onsite in incinerators" to "The 87,000 cubic yards (cy) of waste Melaleuca were reduced to 1700 cy by burning in onsite incinerators. " Second by Mr. Standridge. Carried unanimously 5-0. - V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences None VI. Land Use Petitions A. Marsilea Villas Planned Vnit Development Rezone PVDZ-2007-AR-I1381 Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East The presenters were sworn ill Tim Hancock of Davidson J<:ngineer~bmitted the document "EAC Hearingfor ,- Marsilea Villas RPUD Rezone, presented by Davidson Engineering" (a hard copy of the Slideshow presentation), The following is a brief overview of the Petition: . The parcel is 10.75 acres in size and located y, mile west of Livingston Road and 1,5 miles north of Immokalee Road and currently zoned Agriculture, bounded on the North. East and West by a Royal Palm International Academy PUD and on the South by Imperial Golf Estates. . The property will be accessed via an existing cllrh cut on Livingston Road, . The applicant proposcs to develop 27 single family lots and related improvements, . The Preserve areas are located on the northerly side of the site and currently comprised of "poor quality wetlands" . According to County reglllations,~75 acres of Preserve Area are requircd. . The projcct proposes a total of 1 ,89 acres ofPrescrve in two locations - 2 ..-.....--.. - ------.. "-_.- .-....-.....--...-..---..-,--.. . . ....-_._-~" -"-.-. .._~"._~., ._-- . m" . , . . . . . 161 1 PJ1 January 6, 2010 Thc066 acre Preserve Area located in the northwest comer of the site will provide connectivity to thc Royal Palm PUD Preserve area and be cleared of exotics and replanted with native trees, Thc concept it to allow thc understory vcgetation to re-grow naturally, The 1,23 acrc Preserve Area located in the northeasterly comer of the site was a requiremcnt of the South Florida Watcr Management District (SFWMD), It is proposcd to be restored via removal of the exotics and minimal re-planting, It was the original intent of the applicant to locate the total Preserve Area along the westerly property line. contiguous to the Preserve area of the Royal Palm Academy PUD. During rcvicw of the Environmental Resource Pcrmit (ERP) by the SFWMD, the "District" required a Preserve Area to be located in the northeasterly comer of the property, The area was determined to be the "highest quality wetland" on site, The first year PUD Monitoring Report submitted to StatTwlll provide cvidence, including photographs, to determine if the Preserve understory is regenerating naturally, or if additional rc-vegetation measures are required, Discussion occurred on the reasoning for SFWMD requiring the Preserve to be located in the area proposed, as opposed to creating continuity with the adjacent preserve, Alicia Lewis, Boylan Environmental Consultants noted the main priority ofthe SFWMD is preservation of "higher quality wetlands" as opposed to "connectivity" of Preserves The SFWMD determined the proposed location of the 1.23 acre Preservc in the northeast corner of the site was most adequate to meet these priorities. Summer Araque, Sr. Environmental Specialist stated Staff recommends approval of the Petition, Mr. Sorrell moved to approve the Petition (Marsilea Villas Planned Unit Development Rezone PUDZ-2007-AR-I 1381 Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East) subject to the following condition: 1. After 1 year of clearing of exotics in the Preserves, the PUD Monitoring Report submitted to County Staff will proville evidence, including photographs, to determine if the Preserves re-vegetation is occurring naturally, or if additional re.vegetation measures are required. Second by I~lr. Dickman. Carried unanimous(v 5-0. Tim Hancock stated, in addition to the annual County PUD monitoring reports, the applicant will be required to complete 3 and 5 year monitoring reports in accordance with the SWFMD, ERP permit for the 1,23 acre Prcserve. , , 161 1 b1 January 6. 2010 VII. New Business A. LDC Amendments 1. LDC suh-section 10.02.02 - Environmental Impact Statements Stephen Lenberger, Sr Environmental Specialist presented the proposed Amendment. ..... LDC PAGE: LDCIO:6 . LDCIO:14 LDC SECTlON(S): 10,02,02 Submittal Requirements for All Applications CHANGE: Replace the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) with submission of environmental data in which to review projects. ./J:t" wo.,. (fif REASON: The need for having a separate EIS d09Ument and separate ElS approval process had bccn questioned.(that the environmental information already provided for applications is sufficient i~ to review applications for compliance with applicable LDC and GMP provisions. Removing the requirement for an EIS and identifying environmental data submittal requirements is warrantep and would streamline the pennitting process while.fusurintl~e necessary infonnation is provided)f>. ~ to review projects, Discussion occurred notin~ function of the Environmental Advisory Council is to review formal Environmental Impact Statements. If a formal EIS is not required, how will Staff determme which applications will require review by the EAC. Stephen Lenberger submitted a separate proposed LDC amendment which would "Amend the type o(Development Orders to he reveiwed by the HAC," and referred to Section 8,06.03,0.1-5, which outlined the proposed scope of Development Orders to be reviewed by the EAC. . The Council recommended the following be added to the Section 8,06,03,0 . Applications with sites of potential environmental contamination, . Applications proposing stonnwater discharges into Preserves, . Applications with lands containing Federally listed species including the Bald Eagle, Council discussion occurred noting the EIS is a standard document providing a consistent review format for the Council. The Council expressed concern the proposed Amendment may create different formats of environmental data submitted to the EAC for review. Stephen Lenberger noted the applicant will still be required to supply all necessary enviromnental data as required by the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code to assist Staff in completing a thorough review of an application, 4 ., ,,- "'~, .....-.......,,---....-. --.- __n_...._ , 161 1 01 . , , , January 6, 20 I 0 Thc Council recommended the following additions to the proposed LDC Amendment 10_02,02, . Page 12. item b.ii (Listed or protected species) addition of listed plant specIes, . Require the applicant to provide topographic maps to a level of 6 inch contours. · Determination of which portions of an EIS data will be required lor a proper environmental review of applications, ;Sif" / , In order to make an infonned dccision,onil1e proposed Amendment, the Council \{~a (4.,"'f>f&.~etermined more information is;:e<[1ilrcd, This includes clarification on which Sl-UVCV~ . Jype of proposed environryJ-el1tal data will be required for the individual .-\-t~.l,.I>JX P~.J.U" ilPplications and whici)JJevelopment Orders the EAC will be required to review. ~J.-- v:~\ #Ji) .' ().i\. (,,~~,i::.~ J?' ',- 0- lllr. Dickman m;ved to continue the item. Second by Mr. Peck. Carried 'N - ~ 0-\ tp-'l' unanimously 5-0, 1 ,!V--\ cJ;I-vY' \y.- ~ ~ '\-V ~ Break: 10:15am . . Recoln'ened: 10:25am V ~V->-- _ B. GMP Amendments 1. Immokalee Area Master Plan Amendment - GMPA petition CP-2008-S The following documents were submitted for review: . Immokalee Area Master Plan (TAMP) Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP.2008-5, dated November 20, 2009. . Letter from RWA, Assoc" Inc. dated January 4,2010 to Carolina Valera, Principal Planner and Laura Gibson, Sf. Environmental Specialist, from Robert Mulhcre, RW A Consulting, lnc, . Re: Response to StajJ'Recomlllelldations Re' CP.2008.05 lmmokalee Area MaSler Plan (lAMP) and comments or concerns raised bv EAC Chair .Il/dv HI/shan In IllllcetUlg with Boh A4ulhere and Pat Vanasse held on Wednesdav Decemher 30, 2009, . EAC Staff Report "Re: Petition CP.2008-5, Immokalee Area Master Plan Growth Managernel1l Plan, Amendment (Transmillal Hearing)" dated January 6,2010. Penny Pbillipi, Executive Director of tbe Immokalee Area Community Re-Development Agency introduced the item outlini~the membership of the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee and Immokalec Area Community Redevelopment Agency, She noted the Immokalee Vision: "Those ofu.\', who live ami ~1'ork in Immokalee, envision u great jZi/ure for our lOWIl. lYe see Ile~t' businesses ClndJob opportunities i"lnternational trade and distrihutioll, agri-husiness, ecotourism, recreation and entertainment and the constniction industry'. We see lmmokalee as an attractive clean community with affordahle workforce hOl/sing. neighborhood park, alld outstanding schools -- a place wher~ people walk alld hicl'cle to do their errands, alld 5 ----- .---- _.---~-"-- .--......- 161 1 b1 January 6, 2010 where parents are returning to the classrooms to finish their education and master new job skills, Main Street will have a Latin flavor" plazas, outdoor cafes, shops, and entertainment- attracting both the local community and the tourist who come to explore our unique ecology or gamble at the Casino." Fred Thomas, Chairman of the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee addressed the Council noting the area has the potential to be the heart of a "Mega-region" and the goal is to make it happen soon by expediting the development process, He is a wildlife photographer with a great appreciation for the environment. Robert Mulhere and Patrick Vanasse of RW A Consulting, Inc" ( developers of the lAMP at the direction of the Immokalee Master Plan and Visioning Committee) provided a Slideshow presentation "EAC Heanng 01- 06-10, 1mmokalee Area Mas/er Plan" which outlined the history of lmmokalee, identified the scope of parameters utilized in developing the lAMP and addressed the comments on the lAMP provided by Staff and EAC Chairman Dr. Judith Hushon, A hard copy of the presentation was provided for the record, Following the presentation, discussion occurred regarding possible impacts on the approved well fields in the area, and how they may be impacted by the future development proposed in the lAMP (future aqifer drawdowns impacting existing or proposed wells, regulation of potential contamination sources, etc.) Break: 12: 15 AM Reconvened: 12:55 AM ~eakers Nicole Ryan, Conservancy of Southwest Florida noted she met with Penny Phillipi and the Consultants who prepared the lAMP on January 5, 2010 and the parties are in conceptual agreement on revisions suggested below, The Conservancy is in favor of the lAMP as it will aid in protecting the environment while expediting the permit process, She recommended the following revisions to the lAMP: I. Page 46 B.3 - Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System (L vCKSS) Overlay - provide for any high quality wetland within the area to qualify for per acre density transfers to a Stewardship Receiving Area (even after restoration,) 2, Page 49, Section C.I paragraph 2 - recommended language change from "The additional wetland protection measur.;luo not apply to properties within the Overlay that are developed as of~hc adoption of this master . plan." to "The additional weiland proteettm measures do not apply 10 properties within the Overlav Ihat were developed prior to the adoption or 6 _ ,.---..._....~"'...~,,~ ." ""'_0.."_ .....- - -- .-,.-,_._'. \ I ,?S /. \ v\c. \,..' \ 161 & 1 b1 January 6, 2010 the applicable CCME policies, but willapp~v to al/new development subsequeli! to the adoption of these pJcies and all redevelopment" 3. Page 34 - Policy 4, I, I - Concern on referencing a TDR program without idcntifying the parameters ofthe Program, 4. Page 34 - Policy 4, 1 ,2 - languagc changc from "Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford to potential ccotourism"." to "Recogmzing the importance of Lake Trafford and the surrounding wetlands and natura! hahitat to the eco!Jyslem, economy "nd eco!ourism... " 5. Page 34 Policy 4.1 ,3 - languagc change Collier County Will continue to coopcrate with agencies on remediation efforts at Lakc Trafford,.." to "Collier County will continue 10 cooperate with agencies Oil remediation, restoratIOn and continuing lonf;:lerm ma/wgement efforts at Lake Trafford..." " 6, Providing a Con,ervation Dcsignation to the Immokalee Urban Area as appropnatc, 7. Page 24 Policy 1.1.3 - Clarifying the language on the requirements for mitIgation banking for public entities vs, private entities. 8, Page 31-32 - Policy 3,2,3 and 3,2.4 .. Remove reference to thc 175 bypass, Paul Midney, Immokalee Resident noted the Immokalcc residents are concerned with both environmental protection and economic development. He recommendcd: . Creating consistent (ennino~y when identifying the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System (l.TCKSS) throughout the lAMP, · Clarifying the native vegetation reqUlrements, cluster development, buffering zoncs, etc, within the LTCKSS. ~ . Amending thc Policy which curren~y restricts density shifting t those landowners who straddle the Immokalee Urban Area and the ural Land Stewardship Area (R1SA) . Reviewing the concept where a portion of the LTCKSS contains a zoning overlay which provides for high density residential and/or densi ty increascs, Mr. Dickman noted hc is in favor of the Plan, especially thc Policies providing for incentives. Tn addition, recognizcd the cooperation shown between the Consulants, Staff and the Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Mr, Dickman lef! the meeting at 1:45 PM Carolina Valera, Principal Planner and Laura Roys, Sr. Environmental Specialist addressed thc EAC Staff Report Re.' Petition CP-:!008-5, fmmokalee Area Master Plall Growth Management Plan, Amendment (7i-allsmillal Hearing)" dated January 6, 2010 and noted Staff r~commends transmital of the lAMP to the Department of Co mill unity Affairs subject to the 10 Staff recommendations providcd on page 10 and II of the Report, The following was highlighted: 7 ---'''.-.~._._- 161 1 b1 January 6, 2010 . The consultants favorably addressed recommendations #1-9, and provided a prompt response as requested in recommendation #10, . Recommendation #2 errofinliiusly referenced the L TCKSS Overlay. . Requested clarification on Policy 1.1.3 with regard to Collier County native vegetation preservation requirements, . Thcre are current regulations in place for the well field designations discussed following the Slideshow presentation. . Regarding the letter from R W A Consultants, Inc. to Randall J, Cohen, Comprehensive Planning Dcpartment Director, dated November 20, 2009, examples #1-4 did not originate from the Environmental Services Department. Mr. Peck noted ~ is favorable that all involved are on the "same page" in developing the lAMP, Robert Mulhere noted he would clarify the language in Policy 1,1.3 regarding Collier County off.site mitigation requirements, Mr Peck left rhe meeting at 2:00 PM Chairman Hushon moved to forward the lmmokalee Area Master Plan (Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP-2008-5) to the Board of County Commissioners subject to the following recommendations: (Final version of said lAMP Plan revisions to be reviewed by the Environmental Allvi"ory Council) 1, Standardize the Lake Trafford Camp Keais Strand System (L TCKSS) Overlay terminology throughout the document. 2. Allow any lands within the LTCKSS Overlay to qualify for dcnsity intensity blending, gJJv 3, Prohibit density increases within the L TCKSS Overla ,~..;IIIlP" 4, Allow wetlands within the L TCKSS Overlay restored to hIgh quality wetlands to qualify for density intensity blending. 5. Prohibit retroactive L TCKSS Overlay development applications, 6, Remove the Greentield Designation. 7, Policy 4.1, I - Postpone the TOR adoption process for a period of 2 years to detcrmine its feasibility and if a Growth Management Plan amendment is required, 8, Clarify Policies on how lands will be designated for "Conservation," 9, Separate the Mitigation Bank Policy into Public and Private Designations. 10. PoljfY 6, I ,7 to read - "Within two (2) years of adoption of the Pollev, Collier Coallty shall amend the Land Development Code to provide for a deviation process from the current native vegetation retention standards set forth in the CCME Policv 6, /, I for developments Within -""-- 8 - - ---".~--~- - ."~ ."'-"'--"-'--'--~---'-"'---- 161 1 th1 January 6. 2010 the lmmokalee Urhan Area, This deviation process shall be consistent with provisIOns set forth in CCME Poliq 6,},} (10)," 11, Goal #4 - expands language to include listed species protection for upland and scrub jay habitat within the lmmokalee Urban Area, 12, providefdata analysis on how the Immokalce Water and Sewer District intends to meet the demands of futurc development. 13, Policy 4, I ,2 line 1 - from "Recognizing the importance of Lake Trafford to potential ecotourism"," To "Recognizing Ihe imparlance o(Lake Trafford and the surroundUlg wetlands and natural habitat to the ecosystem, economy and cc%urism... " Policy 4, I ,2 .. lin~4~ - from - "Within 2 ycars of the adoption of the Policy, the County in conjunction with the lmmokalee Community Redevelopment Agency will amend the,.," to "Within 2 years of the adoption Oflhls Polic!'. the County ill conjunction with the [mmokalee Communitv Redcvelopmellt Agellc\' alld 0111' al'l'liellble State or Federal AgenCIes will alllend the... " 14, Policy 4.l.3Jine I - from "Collier County will continue to cooperate with agencies on remediation efforts at Lake Trafford..." to "Collier County 'will continue to cooperate H'ith agencies 0/1 remediatioll, res/oration und cOllll1luing jong..ferm mafla~emen( efforts al Lake haiford, " " . . Secolld by Mr. Stalldridge. Carried ulltlllimousty 3-0. Robert Mulhere stated he will consult with Collier ('OUIII\, Staff and Nicole Ryan of/he Conservallcy o/Southwest Florida 10 addri:!ss (he items in lite molion and the Staf/recommendatlOns outlined in the EAC Staf/Report and re-dlstribute the 104MI' with revisions to the EACforJinal review. VIJI. Old Business A. Update members on projects None IX. Subcommittee Reports None X. Council Member Comments XI. Public Comments None There being no further business for the good of the Connty, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chair at 2:25 PM. <) '.-." January 6, 2010 COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL c These Minutes were approved by the Board/Chaimlan on as presented ~__, or as amended ~___, ~J /~fJ ~ 10 16/ 1 en 161 or; I 1 I!:R/ Rf.Cf.\\lED fEB 0 4 1\)\\} ~\-".s\o-ners co{t'\,,, " .... otCOonW b')OCl.fU C~er County ~"Qb...-~_.-.m.. -- -- Community Development & Environmental SelVices Division Engineering & Environmental Services Floodplain Management Planning Committee Fiala Halas Henning Coyle Colette Ray Smith, Chairman Phillip Brougham Pierre Bruno Bob Devlin (Marco I.) Joseph Gagnier Christa Carrera (Naples) Brooke Hollander Lew Schmidt Dan Summers Jim Turner Carolina Valera Terry Smallwood (Everglades City) John Torre, Vice.Chairman Stan Chrzanowski Jerry Kurtz Travis Gossard Mac Hatcher Adoni Kokkinos Herb Luntz Clarence Tears Duke Vasey Christine Sutherland Meeting Minutes for 9-28-09 Special Meeting Start: 9:05 a,m. End: 10:21 a.m. Location: 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Room 610 Meeting Attendance: Ray Smith, Carolina Valera, Rick Zyvoloski (substitute for Dan Summers), Jerry Kurtz, Jim Turner, Mac Hatcher, Stan Chrzanowski, Travis Gossard, Brooke Hollander, Clarence Tears, Duke Vasey, Joseph Gagnier, Phillip Brougham, Lew Schmidt and Robert Wiley. Absent: John Torre, Adoni Kokkinos, Christine Sutherland (Excused), Herb Luntz (Excused), Pierre Bruno (Excused), Bob Devlin, Christa Carrera, and Terry Smallwood. There were four members of the public and one additional staff person in attendance. Meeting called to order by Ray Smith, Chairman. BUSINESS: 1. Initial discussion on needed revisions to the 2008 Floodplain Management Plan - Ray Smith began with an introduction into the issues that need to be addressed for FEMA to be able to accept the Floodplain Management Plan (FMP) as complete. A copy of the A W 510.1 form (Crosswalk) used by the Insurance Services Office (ISO) agent to score the County's FMP was distributed to Committee members. Robert Wiley explained that the Step 7 and Step 8 areas were not scored as sufficient and need rework to complete the minimum requirements. Committee discussion followed on why no credit was given for Crosswalk item 2A (planning process conducted through a planning committee). Robert Wiley will contact ISO regarding this, and it may be a matter as simple as locating the page referencing the FMPC membership. Phil Brougham directed that staff needs to contact the agencies identified in ~lEl?s~d 3D to see what we need to do to receive those credit points. Duke V asey directel~"ftjr to go back to the County Manager to see ifhe is still serious about the requirements for Floodplain Management Planning and the Community Rating System. He then mOtiOned. for a le~~ tp () c ~ Page I of2 Item #__~ J.D 'c,~iestolloIl\ ~ 161 1 /?J '6 be written to the County Manager asking for the name of the planner assigned to revise the FMP, The motion passed unanimously. Rick Zyvoloski is working on revisions to the Local Mitigation Strategy and offered to modify it to address mitigation strategies issues if that would assist in meeting the requirements of Step 7 and Step 8. Clarence Tears mentioned the ongoing coordination and joint planning efforts between the Big Cypress Basin and the County Stormwater Management Department. In addressing the Step 8 requirements, Phil Brougham emphasized we must get the various County departments to "buy in" on the man hours, cost (budget) and schedule needed to accomplish the Action Plan action items. He also asked about the County Attorney's ruling on the use of the State of Florida Model Ordinance. Robert Wiley explained the response received from the County Attorney that approved the use of the model. The County Attorney didn't see why we would want to use anything else since both the State and FEMA have already developed it for a starter document to cover the minimum requirements. 2. Public Comments - Tim Nance requested direction on when the Committee wanted to receive public comment on the DRAFT Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, Phil Brougham explained that the DRAFT ordinance document is not ready for comments pending addressing issues raised by the Collier County Planning Commission. Ray Smith advised that input should be sent to Robert Wiley, and Tim followed up by requesting that Robert keep the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association informed on future development activities for the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. Next Meeting: Monday, October 5, 2009 starting at 9:00 a.m. in Room 610 of the CDES building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104. (There will be a Special Meeting on Monday, September 28, 2009 starting at 9:00 a.m, in Room 610 of the CDES building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104.) y uke Vasey passed unanimously 10:21 a.m. Page 2 of2 Ct:,\J€.D ~f~ ~ 1.\)\\) ~'t'O ~O"e\" " O(\'lf\\\S~\ .,1 (,O'~('\~' C~er County ~"'- "-- ~ ~ __ - ---",-..1J Community Development & Environmental SelVices Division Engineering & Environmental Services Floodplain Management Planning Committee 161 Fiala (IF ~ Halas ~V ,(- Henning~ Coyle ~ Coletta .....J.c.I ( 1 gy;/ Ray Smith, Chairman Phillip Brougham Pierre Bruno Bob Devlin (Marco I.) Joseph Gagnier Christa Carrera (Naples) Brooke Hollander Lew Schmidt Dan Swnmers Jim Turner Carolina Valera Terry Smallwood !Everglades City) John Torre, Vice-Chairman Stan Chrzanowski Jerry Kurtz Travis Gossard Mac Hatcher Adoni Kokkinos Herb Luntz Clarence Tears Duke Vasey Christine Sutherland Meeting Minutes for 10-5-09 Regular Meeting Start: 9:05 a.m. End: 10:32 a.m. Location: 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Room 610 Meeting Attendance: Ray Smith, Carolina Valera, Ananta Nath (substitute for Clarence Tears), Rick Zyvoloski (substitute for Dan Summers), Jerry Kurtz, Jim Turner, John Torre, Mac Hatcher, Stan Chrzanowski, Travis Gossard, Brooke Hollander, Duke Vasey, Joseph Gagnier, Pierre Bruno, Lew Schmidt and Robert Wiley. Absent: Adoni Kokkinos, Christine Sutherland (Excused), Herb Luntz, Phillip Brougham (Excused), Bob Devlin, Christa Carrera, and Terry Smallwood. There were two members of the public and one additional staff person in attendance. Meeting called to order by Ray Smith, Chairman. OLD BUSINESS: I. Approval of minutes for the 9-14-09 Regular Meeting - Motion to approve by Duke Vasey; motion passed unanimously. 2. Assigned Planner for the revisions to the Floodplain Management Plan - Robert Wiley explained the change in the County Manager position with the retirement of Mr. Mudd for health reasons. Robert also discussed his e-mail communications with Joe Schmitt regarding the need for a planner to be assigned to this task. Joe had replied that Carolina Valera was to be the planner as she is already on the Committee. Carolina had also provided some e-mail comments indicating she felt that the job assignment was not clear and she needed a time frame. Phil Brougham asked that a letter be written to the County Manager addressing this issue and FMPC member meeting attendance. Mise, Cones: Stan Chrzanowski asked for Joe Schmitt to come to the meeting and explain his position on the planner. Duke Vasey asked for the FMPC to be set up as a direct Board of C_ Commissioners advisory committee instead of being under the County Manager. Travis Item # Page I of 3 ..-- .---- 161 Gossard motioned that all FMPC related communications (e-mails) be forwarded to the FMPC members and the motion passed unanimously. Ray Smith suggested that a letter be sent to the County Manager addressing the need for a staff planner that is not an assigned member of the Committee, the need for fimding support, and to get all correspondence to the members of the FMPC. Travis Gossard asked Stan Chrzanowski to go see if Joe Schmitt could come and address the Committee regarding his position on the planner. Stan reported back that Joe Schmitt would attend the meeting a little later. Duke Vasey motioned for the approval of the directions being discussed by the Committee. The motion passed 14-0 with 2 abstentions. Ray Smith asked Robert Wiley to approach the County Manager regarding the replacement of Mr. Kokkinos since he has not attended a meeting all year. Robert Wiley also agreed to see if Mr. Luntz desired to remain on the Committee and be able to attend the meetings. Joe Schmitt then arrived at the meeting and explained the cost ramifications to Funds 131 and 113 (fimding comes from development application fees) ifhe assigns a separate planner to work on the Floodplain Management Plan. With current staff reductions in place, he is already short on staff to accomplish their existing assignments. Phil Brougham suggested hiring a consultant planner, which means someone would have to work up a time and cost estimate to take to the County Manager. Pierre Bruno discussed his abstention on the previous vote. He was reviewing the criteria spelled out on the Abstention Form, and felt that he would like to be able to reconsider his position and not abstain. Duke Vasey motioned to reconsider the previous vote and the motion passed unanimously. Then Duke Vasey motioned to send a letter to the County Manager identifying the staff time needed to address the needed changes in the Floodplain Management Plan, review the Community Rating System (CRS) manual for items of higher value (point score) and include a cost/benefit analysis, use the 2005 State of Florida model ordinance and omit all higher regulatory items, and submit all of this under the direction of a dedicated planner. Carolina Valera asked for clarification of the work duties of the planner. Ray Smith stated the need for the County Manager's direction for the planner. The motion passed unanimously. Joe Schmitt then came back into the meeting and offered to use Robert Wiley, Mac Hatcher and Carolina Valera to break down the CRS activities for consideration. Ray Smith had to leave the meeting at 10:30 a.m. and John Torre assumed the chair but the meeting ended, NEW BUSINESS 1. Review of CRS Coordinator's Manual - Address the Floodplain Management Plan crosswalk item 2(a) at the November meeting. 2. Public Comments - None. Page 2 of3 1 rei 16 I Next Meeting: Monday, November 2,2009 starting at 9:00 a.m. in Room 610 of the CDES building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL 34104. Mo''''' ".~~'?:d"-P""", -"""y 10,,, ~ ~th, Ch. an ;f~~~ Robert Wiley, St Coordinator Page 3 on 1 0<1' RECEIVED FEEl 1 0 2010 Fiala Halas Henning Coyle Coletta 1611 fJq/ January 4, 2010 Kowd ()i C.:,ljnW (:ornfTIISSIOr1;~r;-; MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD Naples, Florida, January 4, 2010 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 Room "c" of the Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE CHAIR: Jim Klug Bill Arthur Darrin Brooks Peggy Harris Kaydee Tuff (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Vickie Wilson, Community Center Supeivl~gfs Date: b:) Item': .....,''''s !f;: 161 1 09 January 4, 2010 I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:07 PM by Chairman, Jim Klug IlL II. Attendance A quorum was established. III. Approval of Agenda Bill Arthur moved to approve the Agenda as submitted. Second by Darrin Brooks. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. IV. Approval of December 7, 2009 Meeting Minutes Bill Arthur moved to approve the December 7, 2009 Minutes as submitted. Second by Darrin Brooks. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. V. Old Business A. Recreation Highlights - Vickie Wilson reported the following: ;;- 19 groups and organizations participated in the Walk of Trees. ;;- 14 decorated Christmas trees were donated to needy families in the Golden Gate Community. Five trees were used to decorate the Community Center. ;;- Rock the Park attracted 350 spectators and participants, ;;- Bands stopped playing at 10 PM and no problems werereported. B. Band Shell Lighting - None. C. Tree Project Jim Klug suggested making the "Tree Project" a Community Event. He suggested recruiting help to plant trees from the Boy Scouts and serving hot dogs and hamburgers, D. Tech of Collier County Discussion took place concerning the funding for Tech of Collier County Services under the current and future contracts. Consensus was made the GGCC MSTU fund services through the Budget year. Future plans included cutting back services to one day per week. E. Golden Gate Community Center 5 Year Plan - None, VI. New Business A. Monthly Budget - None. VII. Member Comments 2 161 181 January 4, 2010 Darrin Brooks suggested promoting GGCC Programs with marketing tools available: >- Providing "Flyers" to schools, >- Marque updated frequently. >- Posting events on the Collier Citizen and Naples Daily News Calendars. >- Research on deadlines to find best times to submit updates to the newspapers. Peggy Harris stated this was the second year the "Trolley Rides" were not included in the Holiday Festivities. It was noted the cost for the "Trolley Rides" were approximately $1,800 and they were used to transport participants through Golden Gate to see homes that were decorated with lights, It has been a challenge to locate enough decorated homes to make a tour worthwhile. It was suggested hosting a "Community Tree - Family Event" in lieu of the "Trolley Rides" and provide music, games and caroling. Another suggestion was to plant an evergreen tree to use as "The Community Tree" and decorate it as it grows for a yearly tradition at GGCc. Peggy Harris stated the Golden Gate Civic Association would like to partner with the GGCC for future Holiday events through support and financial abilities. Jim Klug suggested the Kiwanis Club is also interested in partnering with GGCc. VIII. Public Comments - None, There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was moved and seconded to adjourn. The meeting adjourned by order of the Chair at 6:40 PM. COLLIER COUNTY GOLDEN GATE COMMUNITY CENTER ADVISORY BOARD TIJ These Minutes ~e approved by the Committee/Board oqA- / I ), 6 (6 , as presented V or as amended _' l 3 RECEIVED FEI:l 1 D 2010 _",\pSl''"'"'''' ~i~<!O"~~~" -< "4'-" ..... . '\'" r'~1\il_ 'II '0' ,go 4'~;'%~ t :.J4~"'1 '7 ~ 161 Of-I 1 (bID ;:";.1,,j .,( ,."..di"I" ,,,1",;'(11'''';":'''11,':''; AGENDA Fiala' Halas Henning Coyle Coletta COLLIER COUNTY HISTORICAL/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD WILL MEET AT 9:15 AM, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2010 AT THE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, CONFERENCE ROOM 610, LOCATED AT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE, NAPLES FLORIDA, NOTE: 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, ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE HAPB WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD, THESE MATERIALS WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, I. ROLL CALL/ATTENDANCE II. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA IV, APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 18, 2009 V. ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING & ZONING SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT: A. Update on Department Reorganization B, New Preservation Board Liaison VI. OLD BUSINESS: A. Election results of vacancies on the Board B. Historic Brochure status VII. NEW BUSINESS: C. S-year volunteer service award for Elizabeth Perdichizzi VIII. PUBLIC COMMENTS IX. BOARD MEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS X. ADJOURNMENT Mise, Corres: Date: 0 C:> D D Item# l~IC1.~l U RECEIVED FE8 1 0 2010 Fiala Halas Henning Coyle ~ ;\ ~ c..:R Coletta 16J 16'; ~ i1C::'ln'. n! (>;tJ~,,; c',>: ,;;n:st::..., ,;;;f5 ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE/RESCUE ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES JAN. 7,2010 ISLES OF CAPRI FIRE STATION ATTENDEES: Emilio Rodriguez, Fire Chief Kirk Colvin, Chairman Kevin Walsh, Advisory Board Member Ted Decker, Advisory Board Member Barbara Shea, Minutes Preparer I. CALL TO ORDER Kirk Colvin opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m, II. OLD BUSINESS A. Chiefs Report. ]. Responded to propane explosion on Little Marco Island. 2. Responded to a car accident on 951 with a fatality. 3. Responded to "search & rescue" for 2 missing kayakers in Rookery Bay. B. December 2009 Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. \. Copy of Minutes distributed. 2. Motion to approve December 2009 Minutes by Kevin Walsh. a. Motion seconded by Ted Decker. b. Motion carried unanimously. c. Minutes signed off by Chairman Colvin. C. Proposed increase in proposed IT allocated expenses. \. Chief Rodriguez met with Dan Summers to discuss this issue. 2. Future meeting of the ICFD Advisory Board with the IT Director. D. ICFD Dock Project Update, 1. Dock length estimated to be 264 feet. 2. Dock permitting process is the first phase of the dock prJ1iffit~orres: 3. Awaiting County Manager signature on permit applicati<mlle: 0 00 lU Illlm .: 1.0 Ceries to: III. NEW BUSINESS A. FY2011 budgeting process will begin in February 2010, B. The next ICFD Advisory Board meeting will be held Feb. 4, 2010. IV. ADJOURNMENT A. Motion to adjourn the meeting by Ted Decker at 7: I 0 p.m, I. Motion seconded by Kevin Walsh. 2, Motion carried unanimously. Appro,,'" ~ #' Date: 02. /01 12.01 n , I 161 Ib'\ , "n;,i";S,,,;Uil,'~i": Fiala Halas Henning Coyle Coletta OP I . 161 ,/ 1 tJl~ t: E. 'fij"O '\:3 ',~' l January 11,2010 1"(',1", f MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Napks, Florida, January II, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition 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 the Collier County Community Development Services Conference Room #609/610,2800 N. Horseshoe Dnve, Naples, Florida, with the following CHAIRJvIAN: Bill Poteet VICE CHAIRMAN: Michael Delate Tony Pires Jeffrey Curl Mimi Wolok (Excused) Jeremy Sterk Thomas Sobczak (Excused) Bob Dorta Annisa Karim ALSO PRESENT: Alexandra Sulecki. Conservation Collier Coordinator Jennifer White, Assistant County Att011ley Cindy Erb, Real Property Managemenl Melissa l"lennig, Principal Environmental Speciahst Mise, Correa: Date: 0 Item#: C'c:;,ies to: 161 Ibl~ January 11,2010 l. Roll Call Chairman Poteet called the meeting to order at 9:03AM, Roll call was taken and a quorum was established. II. Approval of Agenda Ilfr. Delate moved to approve tire Agenda Sllbject to tire followittg addition: Item Vl.e Pepper Ranch Feral Hog Control. Second by Mr. Curl. Cllrried unanimously 7-0. Ill, Approval of peccmber 14, 2009 Minutes Mr. Delate moved to approve tire minutes of the December 14, 2009 meeting. Second by lvlr. CurL Carried uttanimol/sl.v 7-0. IV. Committee Member Applications Alex SlIlecki, Conservatioll Collier Coordinator noted 3 member temIS expire on February 11. 20] 0, She provided Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Committee membership applications filed by Michael Delate and Robert Dorta. The County has advertised the vacancies 3 times over the past month. with the next deadline for applications due on January 2],2010, ,Hr. Pires //loved to recommend tire Board of COl/llty Commissiollers appoint Robert Dorta anti Michael [)elate to the Conservation Collier Land Acql/isitioll Committee. Second by 111r. Curl. Carried unallimously 7-0. V. Old BlIsjne~s a. Real Property Management Update - A-list properties Cindy Erb, Real Property Management provided the t()lIowing updates: Cvele 6 III'olJerties new appraisals received, Two property owners requested the appraisal infol111ation, No responses to date. Winchester Head to date, 44 parcels aeqllired totaling 61.91 acres, In November, 69 offer letters were sent out generating 5 responses, 3 no and 2 yes. One of the propenies (Stark) is presented today for approval, while the other (Ocean Investment Management Corp,) will bc rescheduled for review at next l11onthsmeeting. i. Contracts: St:lrk (WH) and Ocean Investment Management Corp. (WH) Ch1dy Erb presented the revised Executive Summary "Approve (//{ Agreement for Sale and Purchase/or 1.14 acres wit/un [he Winchester Head Mul/i-pareel Project under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program, a/ a COS/llot 10 exceed S14,575 (.S'tark)" dared January 11, 2010 and attached Agreement t(lr Sale and Purchase, ilIr. Dorta moved to approve the contract {recommend to the Board of County Commissioners to approve the Agreement for Sale alld Pur('hase (Stark). Secolld by Mr. Pires. Carried ullanimol/sly 7-0. 2 "'-"-"~-~<-,""-~---,.~",--- '-~-'----'---~-'='---~~-",-"-..._-~- 161 1 !!JI'V January 11, 2010 Ocean Investment Management Corp. - agreement under review, Chairman Poteet recommended the Outreach Subcommittee review the content ofthe landowner offer letter to determine it'the current t'oonat meets the goals of the Program. b. Budget Recommendations Melissa Hennig, Principal Environmental Specialist, provided a brief update on the Conservation Collier budget outlining funds available for Cycle 8, Estimates indicate there will be approximately $46M available t'or Cycle 8 purcliases, The Committee requested Stat'fto cmail copies of the spreadsheets to all members (includmg previous versions presented to the Committee), VI. New Business a. New Applications - Gateway Shoppes II LLC, Kelley Trust, Stolkey Trust, Vachon Alex Sulecki presented the following properties proposed for acquisition noting the properties may satisfy the criteria of the Program, but not tlie goals, The properties are presented to the Committee, but not evaluated timher unless at least 5 members vote for a complete evaluation, She provided the documcnt "17", fntewated Wildlife Habitat Ranking System 2008"(IWHRS) prepared by the Florida Fish and Wildlife of Conservation Commission, Onc of the purposes of the document is to provide technical lLssistance to various puhlic agencies tor "identij}'mg appropriate parcels for puhlic land acquisition/or wetland and upland habitat miligalioll process," The document will be utilized by thc Program to assist in evaluating potential properties for acquisition. The following was highlightcd during thc Slidcshow prescntations: Stolkev Trust . The property is Just under 5 acres in sizc. . It is loeatcd on the East side of Rivers Road, properties, at the northeast comer of the Preserve Lands . The site is currently developed with mobile homes and outbuildings, . It is accesscd from Moulder Drivc. . The FLUCCS (Florida Land Use Covcr and Forms Classification System) code indicates it is urban, built up, . The soils arc mapped as wetlands, . The IWHRS mdieatcs the site is not considered high in "species richness," hut is adjacent to properties with a high designation, . The IWHRS indicates the parcel is on the edge ot'''strategie properties." The Committee requested StafTto providc cJariJication on the East and West access points to the property, 3 161 1 Bt't January 11,2010 Kdlv Trust · The property is 2.27 acres in size located on Hidden Oaks Lane, . It is accessed via a paved public road · There is residential development adjacent on all sides of the property, · FLUCCS codes indieatcs the property is "urban huilt up" and "wetland," · The site is prevalent with exotics with soils mapped as "wetland," · Thc IWHRS classIfies the site as moderately inhabited with "species richness, " · The lWHRS indicates it is not within, but adjacent to moderately ranked strategic areas, Speaker Mary Anne Kelly, Landowner addressed the Committee noting the parcel is 660 feet in depth with the front 75 feet being upland, the middle 485 feet being wetland and rear 100 feet being upland. Due to these constraints, the parcel is considered "unbuildable," The property is currently listed for sale at a price of S 169,000. Glltewav Shoppes, II, LLC. · Thc property is 13 acres in size, located in the Mcllvane Marsh area, . [t is the remainder of an 83 acres parcel, of which 70 acres was donated to Rookery Bay Reserve for welland mitigation for the Artesia Point Development. · There is no access to this portion of the property, although there is access to the original parcel. . The soils are mapped as wetlands, . The FLUCCS indicate the lands arc classified as "wetlands," . The [WHRS classifies the site with moderate potential for "species richness. " · It is adjacent to the 369 acres in the Marsh currently held by Conservation Collier. . It is mapped as containing at least one listed species, . It is not mapped within an lWHRS strategic habitat conservation area, Speaker Bill Schrage, Managing Member, Gateway U, LI.C. noted the parcel was purchased 5 years ago at a cost of $492,000, It was to be utilized for wetland mitigation for the AJ1esia Point Dcvelopmcnt, of which only 70 acres was required, A study conducted by Boylan Environmental Consultants was completed on the parcel and he will forward it to Stuff. Vaehon · The parcel is 2,5 acres in size and located on Benfield Road, southerly, but not adjacent to the Benfield Road properties previously considered by tbe Committee, 4 161 1 fb(~ January 11,2010 · It is within the acquisition boundary oflhe Picayune State Forest and connects to the Forest on its eastern edge, · The Florida Department of Environmental Protection indicated they arc not interested in acquisition of the parcel (due to funding limitations), . The FLUCCS indicated the lands are classi fied as wetlands, . The soils are mapped as wetlands · lt is snrrounded by residentially developed propel1ies, · The IWHRS classifies the site with a high potential for "species richness" with listcd species habitat. · The lVvl-IRS indicates the property is in a "high priority area" for acquisition. · The parcel may be impacted by the Wilson Blvd. Ext./Benl1eld Road Conldor as the Transportation Department has identified alternative routes for the Corridor of "3A and 3B" in this area. . The Corridor is identified in the 2030 Transportation Plan as a "Managed Corridor." . The Transportation Department will continue to monitor the Corridor into the future, in an attempt to maintam its integrity (monitor pare cis for possible acquisition, monitor zoning appltcations, etc,) . If alternate 3A is selected, the property will not be impacted. . If alternate 313 is chosen. the property will be impacted and the Program will utilize the "exceptional bendits" process, Slleaker Claudine Au Clair, Transportation Planning Department confirmed the Dcpartment has approved the Corridor and identified altemates routcs 3A and 38 in this area, Due to fundmg coneell1S, no construction date has been confirmed and the project may be built in segments, The Board of County Commissioners has directed Staff to choose the best alternative route once funding has been indenti fied, Ms. Karim moved to hal'e Staff prepare all Initial Criteria Screening Reportfor the Swlkey parcel. Second by Mr. Delate. Mr. Pires expressed concern on the acquisition as there is existing residential activity on the site, wiih roads on both sides of the parcel and is an "isolated" parecl ,tfotioJl failed J 'yes" - 4 "110." II-Ir. Curl, Mr. Pires, II-Ir. Dorta anti Chairman Poteet voted "no. " Mr. Delate moved to l1lJtpl/rSlle acquisition of the Kelley parcel. Second by Mr. Pires. Carried uJlal/imollsly 7-0. Mr. Sterk moved to pl/rme ac:qllisition of the Gateway Slwppes II, LLC. parce/. Second by Ms. Karim. 5 161 1 0fZ, January II. 2010 Mr. Delate rc-itcrated his opposition to the acquisition of parcels in the Mcllvane Marsh area, Gateway Sltoppes fl, LLC motion carried 5 ".res" - 2 "no." Jl,-fr. Delate anti Mr. Pires voted no. Mr, Pires //loved to IlOt pursue acquisition of tlte Vachon parcel. Second by Mr. Delate. 1~lotioll carried 6 "yes" -1 "no." Mr. Sterk voted "no." b. Coordinator Communications Alcx Sulecki noted: . Staffwill be addressing the Board of County Commissioners on January 12, 201 0 for the Pepper Ranch Cattle Lease, the Mellvane March Interim Management Plan and Feral Hog Control on Pepper Ranch, . Pepper Ranch will have "public access" Irom February 3, 2010 through April 30, lOIO, A StalTperson will be available at the Lodge Wednesday through Sunday from 7:30am to 1:00pm, . Contact Staff Illr renewal of members parking penuits, c. Pepper Ranch Feral Hog Coutrol Melissa Hennig stated the item will be presented to the Board of County Commissioners on January 20,2010, She noted: . To control the Hogs on the property, the Committee am! BCe approved a entering into a eontraet with the USDA to eonlrol the Hogs, . The trapping program has hecn placed on hold hy the BCC pending an approved Youth Hunt in March, She requested Committee input on whether Staff should continue with the USDA contraet atter the Youth Hunt is conducted to control the Hogs, while Staff prepares a long nmge management plan, Ms. Karim nOled the approved Interim Management Plan provided direction to enter into the USDA contract lor trapping for I year. Following the year it was to be reviewed by the Committee. In addItion, the Policy did not exclude hunting. She recommended continuing the USDA contract and approved Policy, Mr. Dortll noted Youth Hunts arc not the most ellectlve tool to control the Hogs and the Program should be opened to all hunters. He requested clarification on why a Youth Hunt ]8 proposed, Ms. Hennig noted a Y ourh Hunt Program is quicker to implement than a program open to all hunters and Commissioner Coletta requested Youth Hunts. She will research the reason a Youth Hunt Program is a more expedited process. Staff is recommending Illoving forward with the USDA contract and pursuing hunting programs to control the Hogs at Pepper Ranch, 6 161 18!~ January 11,2010 1111'. Pires movell to recommend proi:eeding as Staff outlined with the USDA i:OnlY/lct am/working ",ilh the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 10 develop Youth and Adult hunting programs (al Pepper Ranch.) Secom/ by 111,,'. Karim. Mr. Dorta expressed conccl11 on the concept of cuthanizing the Hogs and prefers the hunting program, Motiofl carried 6 '~..es" -1 "lto." ,Itlr. Dorta voted "110." There Iviil be Public Meetingsfor (he Pepper Ranch Final Managemel!t Phlll a( (he lmlllokalee Public Lihrary on Januarv 28, 2010 from 5-7 pm and the Vinevards on February 11, 201 () ji'om 6 - 8 pm. VII. Sub-Committee Meeting neports A. Outreach - Tony Pires, Chair Mr. Curl noted at the last meeting, the Pepper Ranch public event was reviewed lor any recommendations lor fUTure similar events. Staffrecommcnded investigating the naming a Preserve or Preserve area after fonner Committee member Kevin Kacer. B. Lands Evalnatiou and Management - Mike Delate, Chair At the previous meeting, Staff presentcd a Preserve Categories and Opening Dates Matrix and Amenities Matrix for review, Geo.caching ,md public access was also discussed, C. Ordinance Policy and Procedures - Mimi Wolok, Chair Nonc VIII. Chair Committee Member Comments None IX. Public General Comments None x. Staff' Comments Melissa Hennig reported: . Lin,pkin Marsh Preserve was control burned on December 23,2009, . Nancy Peyton Preserve was control bumed and a handed female Red Cockaded Woodpecker has inhabited the newly installed arlificial cavity, . Caraeara Prairie Preserve may soon be approved as a Gopher TOl10lSe Preserve, . The fire breaks arc completc at Railhead Scrub Preserve with fire breaks on the South end slated for initiation, 7 -~.---_...,-~,.~_.._-",.-... 16/ 1 fJ'~ January 1],20.1 () There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at IO:28A.M. Conservation Collier Land Ac(\uisitioll Advisory Committee I .. AytlA: Bill Poteet, Chairma These minutes approved by the BoardiCommitlPe as prcsented______ or as amended . __...i~~__, J c:) l;j 8 ~.._...."-~'-_.'"._~-----.~--,_._- ."<'~-_.~_.._....___"_,......."....~___.~~..__..,.w",__,_____'" .. 1161 "MII.""t SIUII. M.s.7.1t. AdviSOry Oo".".lIt.. 2705 Horseshoe Dlive South Naples, FL :14104 January 7, 2010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: December 3, 2009 V. Budget Report-Caroline Soto VI. Utilities Report-Charles Arthur VII. Project Manager Report-Darryl Richard VIII. landscape Maintenance Report-ClM IX. Old Business A Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Member Vacancy X. Update Report A Maintenance - Bruce Forman B, Tax Analysis - Bud Martin XI. New Business XII. Public Comment XIII. Adjournment The next meeting is February 4,2010 at 2:00 P.M. ST. JOHNS PARISH LIFE CENTER 625111TH Ave. Naples, FL. 1 013 Mile. Corres: Dale: 03 09 r ~u Item # l (Q~L B-i 3. 8(\""I'''STr)' 161 1 ~13 IIMIi.,"" BIUII. At.s.7 J4. A""'SOIY 0011I11I1".. 2705 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL :14104 February 4, 2010 AGENDA I. Call Meeting to Order II. Attendance III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of Minutes: January 7,2010 V. Budget Report-Caroline Soto VI. Utilities Report-Charles Arthur VII. Project Manager Report-Darryl Richard VIII. landscape Maintenance Report-ClM IX. Old Business X. Update Report A Maintenance - Bruce Forman B, Tax Analysis - Bud Martin XI. New Business XII. Public Comment XIII. Adjournment The next meeting is March 4, 2010 at 2:00 P.M. ST. JOHNS PARISH LIFE CENTER 625111TH Ave. Naples, FL. .... 161 ".."."", 8Me. AU.7.1t. l? A...,'tID'" Oo",,,,ltt.. 2705 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL :-l4104 December 3, 2009 MINUTES I. Call Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order by Charles Arthur at 2:01 p.m. II. Attendance Members: Bud Martin, Charles Arthur, Bruce Forman, Bill Gonnering (Excused) County: Darryl Richard-MSTU Project Manager, Tessie Sillery- Operations Coordinator, Caroline Soto-Budget Analyst, Pam Lulich- Landscape Operations Manager, Gary McAlpin-Coastal Zone Management Others: Jim Fritchey-CLM, Chris Tilman-Malcolm Pirnie, Dick Lydon - Applicant, Darlene Lafferty-Mancan III. Approval of Agenda Add: XII. A. Press Release-Channel Drive Change: XI. A. to read: "Coastal Zone Management" Bruce Forman moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Bud Marlin. Motion carried unanimously 3-0. IV. Approval of Minutes - November 5, 2009 Change: Pg. 2, last paragraph, should read: "After discussion" it was clarified (3) individuals who paid (for conversion) will be reimbursed. Bud Marlin moved to approve the minutes of November 5, 2009 as amended. Second by Bruce Forman. Motion carried unanimously 3-0. V. Budget Report - Caroline Soto reviewed the following: (See attached) o Collected Ad Valorem Tax $298,793.70 Bud Martin noted an increase of $100,000.00 in anticipated Revenue. Caroline Soto reported an increase from 4,3 to 4.7 in the Millage Rate to maintain revenue stream. The Committee expressed dissatisfaction on Millage Rate adjustments without Committee input and it was perceived as Taxation without representation. 1 161 ~ 81' Darryl Richard conveyed Millage Rate adjustments have been employed since 2007. Staff will review the approved Budget (by the Committee) and report at the January 2010 meeting, o Available Operating Expense $174,853,78 o Open P,O, $157,031.04 Bruce Forman questioned the $5,000,00 Indirect Cost Line Item. It was clarified the $5,000.00 is charged bi-annually and is used for other County Staff. VI. Utilities Report-Charles Arthur Charles Arthur announced the acquisition of (19) Easements on Gulf Shore Drive is not required as the utility equipment will be located in the ROW. Channel Drive Darryl Richard reported: o ROW Permit was issued o $23,000.00 paid to FPl o $4,000.00 paid to Comcast o Will confirm with FPl the commencement date on mobilization Charles Arthur conveyed a Homeowner request that no Utility equipment be placed on his two lots (located by la Playa.) Chris Tilman will relay the request to John lehr. Chris Tilman and Darryl Richard continued: o Relocation of vegetation is required o Bus bench may require relocation o Executive Summary for Ordinance modification is on the BCC Consent Agenda for the December 15, 2009 VII. Project Manager Report-Darryl Richard (See attached)-Previously discussed under IV. VIII. landscape Maintenance Report-ClM-Jim Fritchey reported: o On going Maintenance is being conducted o Main line irrigation repair is complete o Palm trimming and mulching will be performed next week Charles Arthur left 2:45 p.rn. Dick Lydon requested ClM mow the Entry lots, IX. Old Business A. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Member Vacancy Staff noted December 10, 2009 is the deadline for applications to be submitted to Sue Filson, 2 .Dick Lydon announced he reapplied for the Vacancy. 161 IPJI? Charles Arthur returned 2:49 p.rn. X. Update Report B. Maintenance-Bruce Forman-None C. Tax Analysis-Bud Martin-None D. Liaison-Dick Lydon-None XI. New Business B. Coastal Zone Management-Gary McAlpin gave updates on Beach Park Facilities: Connor Park o The Irrigation and Landscaping Contract was pulled from the Parking expansion Contract due to Contractor pricing on change orders o Contract was re-awarded with a Bid Line Completion of 45 days o (2) pay stations will be installed to generate revenue for parks leading up to the beaches Gulf Shore Boulevard o Installation of Public Beach Access Signs o A Sign draft will be provided to the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee for review prior to installation o The signs should be similar in size with the current Recreation Park entry sign Connor Park lot size and the installation of Pay Stations were discussed. Statistics on the average number of cars visiting Connor Park was requested by the Committee. Gary McAlpin will provide Connor Park lot utilization to the Committee. Delnor Wiaains Pass State Park Proposed Restroom facilities: (See attachments) o (2) Entry lanes o Installation of Drop off location o Restroom Facilities o 18 parking spots o Property was deeded to the County by Maria Bay XII. Public Comment A. Press Release-Channel Drive After discussions it was concluded a Press Release will be distributed when the Ordinance Modification is approved. 3 16J Th~re being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at 3:24 p.m. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Committee /~ /1 L/ "- Charles A ',/"- ur, Vice Chairman These minutes approved by the Board/com~ee on as presented or amended ;-1 -10 The next meeting is January 7, 2010 at 2:00 P.M. ST. JOHNS PARISH LIFE CENTER 625 111TH Ave. Naples, FL. 4 1 PJf3 .... / 1 ~19 161 II..,,""" 8Me. At.s.7.1t. , fJPf~' 2705 Horseshoe Drive Soutlflala ~ . Halas . Naples, FL 34104 Henning~ Coyle Coletta _ (!.. . December 3, 2009 AdJlI90ty Oo",,,,ltt.. Summary of Minutes & Motions III. Approval of Agenda Add: XII. A Press Release-Channel Drive Change: XI. A to read: "Coastal Zone Management" Bruce Forman moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Bud Martin. Motion ca"ied unanimously 3-0. IV. Approval of Minutes - November 5, 2009 Change: Pg. 2, last paragraph, should read: "After discussion" it was clarified (3) individuals who paid (for conversion) will be reimbursed. Bud Martin moved to approve the minutes of November 5, 2009 as amended. Second by Bruce Forman. Motion carried unanimously 3-0. V. Budget Report - Caroline Soto reported the Collected Ad Valorem Tax $298,793.70 Bud Martin noted an increase of $100,000.00 in anticipated Revenue. Caroline Soto reported an increase from 4,3 to 4,7 in the Millage Rate to maintain revenue stream, The Committee expressed dissatisfaction on Millage Rate adjustments without Committee input. Staff will review the approved Budget (by the Committee) and report at the January 2010 meeting. Bruce Forman questioned the $5,000.00 Indirect Cost Line Item, It was clarified the $5,000,00 is charged bi-annually and is used for other County Staff, Misc. CVft::S: Date: Item # . (:0ries t., 161 1 013 Report for: December 3,2009 Meeting Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Tessie Sillery, Operations Coordinator, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Proiect Status (V A-32)- ACTIVE - Legal Review: underground utilities conversion project 10-12-09 County Legal provides legal opinion from Nabors Giblin & Nickerson, 1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 200, Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (letter dated 10-8-09 Gregory T. Stewart) 12.01-09 BCC Directed staff to bring back mofidied ordinance to include installation of power connection to private property owners 12-03-09 Staff has loaded Executive Summary and Proposed Modified Ordinance for BCC approval. (V A-31)- ACTIVE.. FPL Channel Drive (Design and Cost Estimate) 08-07-09 RYAN DRUMM SUBMITTAL - Channel Drive UFCA; and 'Draft' plans; Ryan confinns no existing underground FPL Facilities on Channel Drive 09-16-09 RYAN DRUMM 2nd SUBMITTAL -Channel Drive UFCA (dated 8-18-09); and 'Final' Channel Drive plans (marked 'check set') 09-21-09 Ryan Drumm confmns total cost for Channel Drive project is: $23,242,00; Staff will process payment on FPL Invoice upon BCC approval ofUFCA (pending legal review/approval) 11-03-09 UFCA is on BCC Agenda for Nov, 10,2009; Upon BCC approval invoice for $23,242,00 will be processed for FPL payment 12.03-09 ROW Penn it has been issued for project; Payment to FPL and Comcast for associated cost in process (pending confinnation with Budget Office) 03-26-08 09-24-09 (V A-30)- ACTIVE - Comcast Channel Drive & Phase One (Design and Cost Estimate) 10-06-09 10-15.09 11-03-09 12-03-09 Initial review of project with Cestari Maureen Channel Drive Plans forwarded to Comcast for quote of underground conversion for Corneast overhead utilities Mark Cook infonns County Staff that Comcast has re-assigned project review to himself and Andy Vaspasiano; Mark indicates he and Andy are working on "Channel Drive" Cost estimate, COM CAST (Mark Cook) CONFfRMS 100% of conversion of Comcast Utilities is to be by the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU as the project sponsor. Comcast indicates that there will be no 'reductions' in cost due to 'depreciation' of equipment/existing installation. Services are identified as 'new' and 'not in need of upgrade', Installation of underground conduit for Comcast is through Comcast contractor managed 'entirely by Comcast'. Comcast is currently working on Design and Cost Estimate for Channel Drive Project; after completion of this task, Com cast will coordinate on production of design plans and cost estimate for Phase One Project (pending final FPL plans for Phase One) Staff receives quote for $4,000 total project cost for Comcast Underground Conversion; all construction is by Corneast. Confinnation of payment to Comcast pending, ($4,000) (V A-29)- COMPLETED - Channel Drive Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement (UFCA) 10-13-09 County Legal fonnal approval for 'legal sufficiency' of Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement (UFCA); Signature from FPL requested 1 16\ 1 ~l? 10-28-09 Phone call from John Lehr (FPL) indicates that a 'revision' to the UFCA submitted by Ryan Drumm on 8.7-09 is necessary and that there should be 4 pages total rather than the current 'one page' (phone call wi John Lehr) Staff receives 'revised' UFCA Agreement; County Legal approves 10-14-09 (V A-28)- ACTIVE -Malcolm Pirnie; Phase I Construction Management Services (Vanderbilt Beach MSTU FPL Underground Power Conversion Project) 09-28-09 Notice to Proceed sent to Malcolm Pimie 10-14-09 Malcolm Pimie meeting with staff to review 10-14-09 FPL plan submittal. (V A-27)- ACTIVE - Phase One "Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement" (UFCA) 10-14-09 Currently as "Phase One" is still under preliminary design review - FPL has not submitted proposed language for PHASE ONE UFCA, however, as soon as (I) Design is completed and approved by County (Malcolm Pimie Review); and (2) Cost are identified in "Engineering Cost Estimate"; FPL will submit language for PHASE ONE UFCA, (V A-26)- ACTIVE -Malcolm Pirnie; Review preliminary design provided by FPL 10-09.09 Malcolm Pimie submits letter for review of Project Drawing submittals and recommendation related to which party should install the underground conduit for Phase One Project 10.15-09 Ongoing plan review for phase one design; need to confirm 'no easement' required for Phase One per 10-14-09 plan submittal. 11-03-09 Staff confirms Malcolm Pimie will provide report to Committee on 11-05-09 regarding 'easements' (V A.24)- COMPLETE -FPL receipt of Engineering Deposit 04-20.09 FPL confirms receipt of payment for $13,027,00 Phase One Deposit; Design to begin (V A-23)- ACTIVE - FPL Phase One Design 06-25-09 FPL Draft Design submittal Phase One Plans 10-14-09 FPL SUBMITTAL; PLANS FOR PHASE ONE PROJECT (Marked 'Preliminary') 11-10-09 Field Meeting to review Proposed "Easements" for Phase One Project; Ryan Drum FPL was in attendance with Chris Tilman, Darryl Richard, Jeff Gower, and Charlie Arthur, Inspection indicated that all of the easements proposed were not necessary, and that 'alternative' site planning would locate the electrical boxes within existing ROW, Follow-up meeting with John Lehr scheduled for December 8, 2009 (I pm) (V A.19) - ACTIVE-ONGOING - On Call Services - Malcolm Pirnie Engineering MP-FT -3657-08-03; PO 4500098566; On-going services for meeting attendance and preliminary investigation regarding underground power line installation. 10-15-09 Malcolm Pimie indicates 'renewal of services contract for FY-2010 is necessary for continuation of "On Call Services" for the MSTU FPL Project. (V A-18) - ACTIVE-ONGOING. - Maintenanee Contract - "Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Roadway Grounds Maintenance"; A ward to Commercial Land; Annual Maintenance 'base contract' per Quote Company Base + Mowing & Edging = Total Base Planting Services Total Quote Commercial Land Maint $32,988,00 (+$2,600) ~ $35,588,00 $25,491.00 $61,079,00 2 12-11-07 03-26-08 03-10-08 05-12-08 06-05-09 06-23-09 09-11-08 09-12-08 09-17-08 09-22-08 11-21.08 02-02-09 02.04-09 03-09-09 04-02-09 04-10-09 06-01-09 161 1 ~l? Brief summary of "Underground Utilities Conversion" project activity Since December 11, 2007 Initial BCC Approval of Agreement BCC Agreement date Dee. 11, 2007 TEAM TELECONFERNCE (FPL, COMCA5T, COUNTY, MSTU (CARTHUR), VBPOA (JACKIE BAMMEL, RWA, MALCOLM PIRNIE) PUBLIC MEETING AT ST, JOHNS Review of RWA Survey wi Malcolm Pirnie and C Arthur Confirmation of 4 residential units affected by "Channel Drive Pilot Project" with FPL (Ryan Drum); Field Meeting to review project; Affected Properties are: NANCE, HAROLD 283 CHANNEL BASTANI, KEN K 261 CHANNEL KOHLER, RUTH H 227 CHANNEL REYNOLDS TR, HENRY E 213 CHANNEL CHANNEL DRIVE: Hart's Electrical begins work per PO 4500107832 Review of 1st RWA Survey Submittal Sept 11, 2008 Confirmation of FPL Red-Line Comments for survey Sep, 12, 2008 TEAM TELECONFERENCE (FPL, MALCOLM PIRNIE) FPL "Pot Hole" digs recommended locations identified Sept 22, 2008 TEAM MEETING (C ARTHUR, J, BAMMEL, MALCOLM PIRNIE) FPL Approval of Survey Feb, 4, 2009 Staff request $13,027.00 Engineering Deposit Invoice Feb, 4, 2009 PUBLIC MEETING AT 5T, JOHNS MSTU Committee makes motion to proceed with "Channel Drive Project" Verification of easements for 'private property' April 10, 2009 CHANNEL DRIVE: Ryan Drumm (FPL) request ,pdf of ROW Agreement for review; forwarded via email . ~-""~~-'~"'~------~--"",._,,-~-,---, " 06-25-09 06-26-09 06-26-09 07-27-09 08.07-09 09-16-09 09-17-09 09-22-09 09-21-09 09.23-09 09-24-09 10-01-09 161 1 to(~ FPL Draft Design submittal Phase One Plans Staff request (1) Cadd file of Phase One Submittal; (2) Review indicates drawings are not sufficient for bidding purposes; (3) Full size prints 'to scale' requested' TELECONFERNCE; CALL IN FROM FPL (John Lehr, FPL; Troy Todd, FPL; Ryan Drumm, FPL; Darryl Richard, Collier County) Troy Todd (FPL) clarifies that "tariff charges" apply to Channel Drive Project (ref: Tariff No, 6 per PSC approved Tariff); $566.59 for the 4 properties on Channel Drive CHANNEL DRIVE: Hart's Electrical completed electrical from ROW to Home/Resident for the following Channel Drive Address': 213,283,263 and 227 RYAN DRUMM SUBMITTAL - Channel Drive UFCA; and 'Draft' plans; Ryan confirms no existing underground FPL Facilities on Channel Drive RYAN DRUMM 20' SUBMITTAL - Channel Drive UFCA (dated 8-18-09); and 'Final' Channel Drive plans (marked 'check set') CHANNEL DRIVE RESIDENT COORDINATION: Kent Smith called on behalf of Me. Nance to report that he has received the mailing/letter regarding Channel Drive project and that Me. Nance chooses to 'not participate' at this time due to financial concerns. He mentioned his wife was in the hospital and that he did not have the money to pay the $650.00 for his "private conversion" to underground, TELECONFERENCE (FPL, COUNTY LEGAL, STAFF, MALCOLM PIRNIE, C. ARTHUR) Recommendations: FPL to submit 'agreement' in word format (if pOSSible); staff to proceed with obtaining payment for 'private' underground conversion from property owners Nance and Bastani on Channel Drive, FPL confirms that survey has been accepted and 'Final Plans' are pending for Phase One Project, Ryan Drumm provides FPL Cost Breakdown for Channel Drive; Staff intends to process payment for an "FPL Invoice" upon BCC approval of UFCA (Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement) for Channel Drive; UFCA is pending completion of 'legal review' TOTAL CHANNEL DRIVE COST: $23,242,00 Message from Mr, Kent Smith (Legal Representative for Me. Nance (Property Owner at 283 Channel Drive); Mr, Smith stated that the 'owner' has 'no desire' to underground his private connection, and furthermore has 'no intention of spending any money on his home' (at 283 Channel Drive) related to the power line underground conversion, COMCAST COORDINATION; Channel Drive Plans forwarded to Comcast for quote of underground conversion for Com cast overhead utilities Phase One "Legal Description" forwarded to FPL for confirmation of FPL formal acceptance of 'Legal Description' per 'Right of Way Agreement Section 2, Sub-section (d)' 10-05-09 10-06-09 10-09-09 10.12-09 10-12-09 10-13-09 10-14-09 10-14-09 10-22-09 10.28-09 10-28-09 11-03-09 11-03-09 11-05-09 161 10r? FPL ACCEPTANCE OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION; John Lehr via email confirms FPL's official acceptance of the legal description for the Phase One Project; Staff request confirmation of "EXISTING FPL FACILITIES" per 'Right of Way Agreement Section 2, Sub- section (e)) documentation of all existing FPL underground facilities within the ROW that will not be included under ROW agreement (for Exhibit C) COMCAsT COORINDINATION: Mark Cook informs County Staff that Comcast has re- assigned project review to himself and Andy Vaspasiano; Mark indicates he and Andy are working on "Channel Drive" Cost estimate, **COMCAST CONFIRMS 100% of conversion of Comcast Utilities is to be by the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU as the project sponsor. Com cast indicates that there will be no 'reductions' in cost due to 'depreciation' of equipment/existing installation, Services are identified as 'new' and 'not in need of upgrade', Installation of underground conduit for Comcast is through Comcast contractor managed 'entirely by Comcast', Malcolm Pirnie submits letter for review of Project Drawing submittals and recommendation related to which party should install the underground conduit for Phase One Project County Legal provides legal opinion from Nabors Giblin & Nickerson, 1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 200, Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (letter dated 10-8-09 Gregory T, Stewart RWA Proposal submitted for survey of Phase II, III, and IV TELECONFERENCE (e. ARTHUR, STAFF, MALCOLM PIRNIE) FPL SUBMITTAL; PLANS FOR PHASE ONE PROJECT (Marked 'Preliminary') John Lehr notifies staff (via phone call evening of 10-14.09) that the 'one page' agreement submitted on 8-7-09 has to be revised to a new 4 page agreement (delivery pending from FPL) John Hart Electrical received check for $650,00 for Bastani on Channel Drive 'Private Can Conversion to underground, Bastani Channel Drive private conversion project completed by Hart's Electrical Revised UFCA Agreement received from FPL for BCC approval on Nov, 10, 2009 Confirmation of Comcast cost for Channel Drive Project is $4,000,00 per FPL plans, Scott Teach and Michelle Arnold teleconference with Nabors Giblin & Nickerson results ofteleconference to be presented at 11-05-09 MSTU meeting, Discussion Nabors Giblin & Nickerson legal consult related to 'underground conversion' and potential 'ordinance'; Committee makes motion to direct staff to pursue Ordinance 11-10-09 161 10\'Iy for the MSTU to pay for homeowner's conversion and Ordinance to 'require' participation and mechanism to address non-participation, Field Meeting to review Proposed "Easements" for Phase One Project; Ryan Drum FPL was in attendance with Chris Tilman, Darryl Richard, Jeff Gower, and Charlie Arthur. Inspection indicated that all of the easements proposed were not necessary, and that 'alternative' site planning would locate the electrical boxes within existing ROW, Follow- up meeting with John Lehr scheduled for December 8, 2009 (1 pm) 161 1 01~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2001-43, as amended (The Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit), per the Board's Dec 1, 2009 direction under Agenda Item 16B5 to incorporate provisions to facilitate the ongoing conversion of overhead utility distribution facilities to underground service within the MSTU boundaries. OBJECTIVE: To adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2001-43, as amended, the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit (hereafter the "MSTU") to incorporate provisions to facilitate the ongoing conversion of overhead utility distribution facilities to underground service within the MSTU boundaries. CONSIDERATIONS: As early as November 2, 2004, a community public opinion survey ofthe residents of the MSTU ranked the 'burial of overhead utilities' as their highest project priority. Since that date, the MSTU has: (1) amended its enabling ordinance to facilitate the overhead utility to underground service project, (2) cooperated with the Florida Power and Light Company ("FPL") to enter into a "Right of Way Agreement" for the conversion of the overhead utilities to underground facilities, and (3) recently obtained Board approval to enter into an Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement with FPL to convert overhead electric distribution facilities on Channel Drive located within the MSTU. The Channel Drive project specifically provides an opportunity to complete an overhead relocation of utilities on a smaller scale, which will assist in the eventual complete conversion of all overhead utilities underground within the MSTU. During the past two years the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU has had two (2) publicly advertised meetings (with individual mailings to each property owner within the MSTU Boundary) with over 200 people in attendance at each of these meetings. There was an overwhelming voice of support 'in favor' at both of these meetings, Despite the overwhelmingly positive sentiment of the MSTU residents at the meetings to convert overhead utilities underground, there are a few residents that have been reticent to cooperate in the necessary connection of service that will be required as the project with FPL proceeds. In order to obtain a twenty-five percent (25%) reduction in the fee from FPL, all the MSTU residents must participate in the relocation of overhead utilities underground, resulting in substantial savings in the cost of this project. The proposed amendment provides further direction and requires the cooperation of the MSTU residents to allow access to their premises to complete the overhead utility conversion project. In addition, the proposed amendment incorporates advance notice to advise the MSTU residents of the anticipated date of the underground conversion. Finally, the proposed amendment sought to be advertised recognizes the public benefit in promoting the aesthetic enhancement to the MSTU as well as the reduction of the instances of power outages that results from both natural and man-made occurrences and provides that the MSTU will fund the connections to private property to realize the FPL savings. Page 1 of2 161 1 bl~ Notably, this project is a seminal case in that FPL has not undertaken a similar overhead to underground conversion project of this magnitude, On December I, 2009 Collier County Board of County Commissioners directed staff to coordinate with the Office of the County Attorney and advertise the attached proposed amendment to the Vanderbilt Beach Municipal Service Taxing Unit Ordinance. The attached proposed Ordinance has been lawfully advertised, FISCAL IMP ACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this Executive Summary except the nominal costs for legal advertising. Upon approval of amendment to Ordinance No. 2001-43 all cost associated with the underground utility conversion project will be borne by the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action-SRT. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no Growth Management Impact associated with this Executive Summary. RECOMMENDATION: To adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2001-43, as amended, to incorporate provisions to facilitate the ongoing conversion of overhead utility distribution facilities to underground service within the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU boundaries. Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manager, Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Attachment: Proposed Amended Ordinance Pagel on 161 1 {b/? ORDINANCE NO. 2009- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE 2001-43, AS AMENDED (THE VANDERBILT BEACH BEAUTIFICATION MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT); AMENDING SECTION THREE, PURPOSE AND GOVERNING BODY; PROVIDING FOR A NEW SECTION GOVERNING THE CONVERSION OF OVERHEAD UTILITY DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES TO UNDERGROUND SERVICE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on July 31, 200 I, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 2001-43, establishing the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit; and WHEREAS, the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit Advisory Committee requested that the Board of County Commissioners amend and revise Section Three of Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-43; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2009, the Board of County Commissioners as the governing body of the Vanderbilt Beach Beautification Municipal Service Taxing Unit approved the amendment to Ordinance No, 2001-43, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-43, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows: SECTION ONE: Amendment to Section Three Purpose and Governing Body Section Three, Purpose and Governing Body of Collier County Ordinance No, 2001-43 is hereby amended to read as follows: I Underlined words are added; Struck Through words are deleted. 161 1 rbl3 SECTION THREE. Purpose and Governing Body The MSTU is created for the purpose of: (1) Providing curbing, watering facilities, plantings and maintenance of the median strips and right-of-way edges of roadways within the MSTU; (2) Providing traffic calming improvements, street lighting, and sidewalks within the MSTU; (3) Beautification and maintenance of other public areas within the MSTU as determined by the Advisory Committee; and (4) providing for the Burial of Power Lines within the MSTU, including providing underground trenching and burial of utility lines from the street or transformer to private residences and, as needed, arranging to locate the burial of such power lines alongside any existing utility easements, as well as. connecting service and/or disconnecting service to the external portions of the residences required as part of converting overhead utilitv distribution facilities to underground service but eKs!luling the expeneliture ef M8TV fllBels fer IH>)' additieool wiriflg er installatiefl ef iffij3ro'/elfleats or liflgraeles te eeFlReet sep.ice la residences reqllireel 13)' cllfrent cade ar reslllting frem afl)' other Harelware fleRsenfaffilit)', The governing body of the MSTU shall be the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, SECTION TWO: Conversion of Overhead Utilitv Distribution Facilities to Underl!round Service (a) The conversion of overhead utilitv distribution facilities to underground service is intended to nrovide aesthetic benefits, enhancing both the pronertv values and quality of life of the residents of the MSTU. and would reduce instances of nower outages resulting from overhead power lines from both natural and man-made occurrences thereby nromoting the health, safetv. and welfare of those residents. (b) The MSTU shall notify each nroperty owner that the existing overhead utility distribution service will be disconnected for conversion to underground facilities at least sixty 2 Underlined words are added; Struck Through words are deleted, ~,__"_,_"",_~"",,,,'_~_w~___~~__~~.,__,_..._.,__"~.__~_~ 161 18(, (60) days (hereinafter referred to as the "notice") prior to a specified daters) certain of the actual underground conyersion, The notice shall be served by certified mail. addressed to the owner or owners of the property described as their names and addresses are shown upon the records of the county tax assessor. or other such public records filed in Collier County. Florida. and shall be deemed complete and sufficient when so addressed and deposited in the United States mail. In the eyent such notice is returned by postal authorities. a COpy of the notice is to be seryed by a law enforcement officer. or other lawfully authorized process server. upon the occupant of the land or any agent of the owner thereof. In the eyent that personal service upon the occupant of the land or upon any agent of the owner thereof cannot be performed after reasonable search by a law enforcement officer or other lawfully authorized process server. the notice shall be served by physical posting on said property. (c) Within sixty (60) days from the date of the MSTU's notice that oyerhead utility distribution facilities are ready to be converted to underground distribution facilities. owners and occupants of propertv within the MSTU shall allow access to their premises and cooperate with the contractor retained for the proiect so that the conyersion of the oyerhead facilities underground can be accomplished. (d) Whenever overhead utilitv distribution facilities are converted underground. such facilities shall remain underground and may not thereafter be converted to overhead facilities. except with the prior approyal of the goyerning body. and only in instances necessarv to promote the health. safety and welfare of the MSTU residents, (e) This article mav be enforced by all available means authorized bv law. The MSTU. through its goyerning body. shall take anv and all steps necessary to ensure the health. 3 Underlined words are added; Struck Through words are deleted, 161 1 br, safetv. and welfare of all residents within the MSTU during the underground conversion of utilities. SECTION THREE: 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 this 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 FOUR: 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 Ordinance may be renumbered or re-Iettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word, SECTION FIVE: Effective Date This Ordinance shall be effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this day of ,2009, 4 Underlined words are added; Struck Through words are deleted, 16\ 1 0 rj; ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Deputy Clerk By: DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and Legal sufficiency: C- )f -J I --)7' .t/ , -<'--, L_ Scott R. Teach Deputy County Attorney 5 Underlined words are added; Struck Through words are deleted. 161 1/Ot; PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE NOVEMBER 19, 2009 The Collier County Board of Commissioners is seeking applications for positions on several advisory committees. The Affordable Housing Advisory Committee is seeking I member representing for-profit provider. This is a 9 member committee created by Ordinance 91-65 as amended to monitor the implementation of the Affordable Housing Task Force's recommendations, and the goals, objectives, and policies of the Housing Elements ofthe County's Growth Management Plan and the City's Comprehensive Plan; investigate the feasibility of tax increment financing for infrastructure for site development of affordable housing for low income households; develop means or mechanisms to encourage a voluntary program in which Realtors, and other holding deposits such as escrow accounts of earnest money deposits or security for rentals would deposit these in a selected bank where such bank would contribute to the Housing Trust Fund a gift calculated on the average collected balance for the month; investigate a plan for any linkage and inclusionary zoning recommendations; review and determine the effect of proposed ordinances of affordable housing and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners and the Naples City Council; and investigate any other relevant areas so directed by the Board of County Commissioners. The Board of County Commissioners will appoint 9 members, including the alternate member, and one of those must be a resident ofImmokalee. The City of Naples will appoint 2 members. The committee shall be comprised of members from the county-at- large, the City of Naples- at-large, and shall be comprised as follows: resides within jurisdiction of the local governing body making the appointments, residential home building industry, Real Estate, employer within jurisdiction, advocate for low income persons, banking and mortgage, essential services personnel, labor actively engaged in home building, Collier County Planning Commission, not-for-profit Affordable Housing, for-profit provider of affordable housing and an alternate. Terms are 3 years, The Bayshore Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee has I vacancy with the term expiring on March 3, 2010, This 7 member advisory committee was created on December 16, 1997, by Ordinance No. 97-82 to provide curbing, watering facilities, plantings and maintenance of the median strips of roadways within the MSTU; provide traffic calming improvements; and, beautification and maintenance of other areas within the MSTU. Members will also prepare and recommend an itemized budget to the Board of County Commissioners. Members must be permanent residents or owners of commercial property within the MSTU boundaries, Terms are 4 years. The Collier County Code Enforcement Board has 3 terms expiring on February 14,2010. This 7 member board, plus 2 alternate members, is composed of, but not limited to, individuals representing the occupations of architect, businessman, engineer, general contractor, subcontractor and Realtor and are considered, in part, on the basis of experience or interest in the areas of the codes and ordinances to be enforced. Members are required to file a Form 1 Statement of Financial Interest each year with the Supervisor of Elections. Terms are 3 years. The Consumer Advisory Board (CAB) has vacancies. This board was created on May 1,9001, by 1 (b r? Ordinance No. 2009-27. This 5 member board was created for the purpose of hearing any appeals from adverse administrative decisions regarding a public vehicle license permit. They will also hear all public consumer issues. No member of the CAB shall be a current motor vehicle for hire owner or operator, nor shall they be a family member of the same household of a current motor vehicle for hire owner or operator. Adverse decisions of the CAB may be appealed, within thirty (30) days, to the Board of County Commissioners, The CAB will be a quasi-judicial board, After initial appointments, terms will be 4 years, The Contractors Licensing Board has I vacancy in the category of Consumer, with the term expiring on June 30, 2010. This 9 member board determines the qualifications of applicants for the various categories of the Contractors' Certificates of Competency, They also hold hearings to determine if the holder of a certificate of competency of any contractor, master or journeyman should be disciplined. A minimum 3 members shall be in the category of "Consumer". The consumer representatives may be any resident of the local jurisdiction that is not, and has never been, a member or practitioner of any profession regulated by the Contractors' Licensing Board or any profession closely related to any such profession regulated by the Contractors' Licensing Board. Members are required to file a Form I Statement of Financial Interests each year with the Supervisor of Elections, Terms are 3 years. The County Government Productivity Committee has 6 terms expiring on February 4, 2010 and I vacancy due to a resignation with the term expiring on February 4,2011, This committee was created by Ordinance No, 2001-37 and is composed of II members, with the vice chair of the Board of County Commissioners serving in a liaison capacity, The members are appointed by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners for a two-year term and must be permanent residents and electors of Collier County. Committee members are required to possess special expertise and experience related to managing large organizations, and must be balanced in representing the views of the community, In addition to other skills, the Committee has a current need for skills in organization design, value engineering, human resources and economics. The committee reviews the efficiency of departments of County Government under the jurisdiction of the Board of County Commissioners. The committee may analyze and review existing structure, organization, staffing, management, functions, business practices, and procedures of any or all parts of county government and make recommendations for increased efficiency and cost-effectiveness. The committee may also assist in the implementation of those recommendations. The Environmental Advisory Council has I vacancy for an Alternate position, with the term expiring on July 28,2011. This 5 member (plus I alternate member) council was created by Ordinance 91-102, repealed by Ordinance 2004-41, as amended to act in an advisory capacity to the Board in matters dealing with the regulation, control, management, use or exploitation of any or all natural resources within the County, and the review of all land development petitions which require an environmental impact statement (EIS) per section 10,02.02 A of the Code, all developments of regional impact (DRI), lands with special treatment (ST) or Area of Critical State Concern! Special Treatment zoning overlays, areas of the county covered by interlocal agreements, any petitions which cannot be resolved between the applicant and staff. The membership will include technical and non-technical members. Technical members shall demonstrate evidence of expertise in one or more of the following areas related to environmental protection and natural resources management: Air Quality, Biology (including any of the sub-disciplines such as botany, ecology, zoology, etc.), Coastal Processes, and Estuarine Processes, Hazardous Waste, Hydrogeology, Hydrology, Hydraulics, Land Use Law, Land Use Planning, Pollution Control, Solid Waste, Stormwater Management, Water Resources, Wildlife Management, or other representative areas deemed appropriate by the Board such as, but not limited to, a representative of the development community. Alternate EAC members will be requested to attend meetings when regular EAC members have notified staff that they will be absent. Alternate members will participate in discussions and vote when replacing a regular member. Alternate members must be technical members that can demonstrate expertise in environmental protection and natural resource management. Terms are 4 years. .-.---."-----..."-.-.'.'---- 161 1 01' ~ ~~/'.. 00 '- ~t+- - '1{J ~'Ot".' ' ft. ,.., ,. " oNrl~1 '\ ~ -,-' om o~3 ~m~ ."Z 000 .em ~d "il f. ~ ~ - .., , REVISIONS O'.'C"""'" . '" ill; Dernor Wiggins Pass, State Park Collier County, Florida Coastal Zone Managemflnl ml ,. z ,JP~ ::- ,~'j z f'~ m ~B ;: , -I < Q J~, -"- 1] Vi =1 'I J... CO I> Z C-) QZ Z 6'~~ o i'2 _t; ;.0 ...;/ CJ -., r1 ~- ~~ --I T " N '=> ;::J o o -n 'U r:l )> ^ ~ .1l " " xn ;{ rn J:. (f'I ---I ".J , i V c- :r> z :;; m ~ , ;JJ m (fJ " ;JJ o o 5;; :r>'" -0 C -c = ~ "- o - X :J ,(0 -.J:r> o~ 0(1) "' Il> ,... -, G n " -, c o , r ~ " 2 (j; o c z ~ '--7--- $ Q ~ z '" 161 1 (Dr? -c .., o '"C o <<n tD c.. :xJ tD <<n r+ .., o o 3 " ~$ ,,2 ;-0 "12 " ." QJ n -. - -. r+ < 161 IIM11.,"" B... M.s.7.Jt. Ifb,y AdviSOry Oo".".ltt.. 2705 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, FL :-\4104 January 7,2010 MINUTES I. Call Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order by Charles Arthur at 2:00 p.m. II. Attendance Members: Bud Martin, Charles Arthur, Bruce Forman, Bill Gonnering County: Darryl Richard - MSTU Project Manager, Caroline Soto - Budget Analyst, Pam Lulich -Landscape Operations Manager Others: Chris Tilman - Malcolm Pirnie, Jeffrey Gower - Malcolm Pirnie, John Hart - Hart Electric, Michael Ward - RWA, Dick Lydon - Applicant, Gina Downs - Public, Darlene Lafferty - Kelly Services III. Approval of Agenda Add: XI. A. Elect Officers Bud Martin moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Bill Gonnering. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. IV. Approval of Minutes - December 3,2009 Change: Pg. 2, VI., should read: Charles Arthur announced the acquisition of (19) Easements on Gulf Shore Dr. "should" not "be" required as the utility equipment will be located in the ROW The Committee requested the following statement be added to the minutes under Pg 2. VI., third paragraph: "The Committee perceived the Homeowner request should be decided by FPL. " Bruce Forman moved to approve the minutes of December 3, 2009 as amended. Second by Bud Martin. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. V. Budget Report - Caroline Soto reviewed the following: (See attached) o Outstanding Ad Valorem Tax $776,162,18 o Available Capital Outlay $4,899,658.00 o Remaining open P,O,s $194,293,31 1 161 1 0(~ VI. Utilities Report-Charles Arthur reported: Channel Drive (Pilot Proiect) o Project is underway o Conduit Boring is complete o Approval to convert to Underground Utilities was received from all Home Owners o Walk through was conducted with FPL concerning Easements _ FPL requested installation of posts at the end of the ROW to mark Utility Box locations _ Upon completion of post installation an second walk through is required with FPL o New Switch Box Design is available - New Design is non submersible Chris Tilman noted the New Design is water resistant. After discussion the Committee was in agreement to continue with the original Switch Box (cost $50,000.00) in lieu of the New Design due to the higher cost ($70,000.00) for the new design. Charles Arthur announced the revised Ordinance passed and reviewed: o Draft Letter to Home Owners with overhead connections announcing their required participation for Phase I (Underground Utility Conversion) (See attached) o The Ordinance requires a 60 day notice and coordination of line burial with the Home Owner(s) After Committee review of the Draft Letter the following changes were suggested: Paraaraoh 2 o First sentence to read - "it will be necessary to have this connection converted' o Remove -See Figure 1 and Figure 2 Paraaraoh 3 o Last sentence to read - "Therefore, you will not be charged for this conversion" o Remove - Note: actual construction date will be provided to resident either by US Mail delivery or physical posting on the property) A map of (35) Properties required to convert from an overhead connection was reviewed. (See attached) Paraaraoh 5 o Add after the second sentence - "Based on FPL estimates this would amount to $1,500,000.00." 2 161 1 h(!J Darryl Richard reviewed Proposal by Malcolm Pirnie for Easement Assistance Services. (See attached) After discussions it was concluded to table the Malcolm Pirnie Proposal until the number of required Easements is determined or to submit an incremental formula for potential Easement acquisition(s). Darryl Richard reviewed RWA Phase I-Additional Services Proposal ($20,300.00) to field locate onsite utilities and potential FPL easements along Gulf Shore Dr. He noted Task Item #3 ($7,500.00) will be removed from the Scope of Services if FPL Easements are not required. (See attached) Bud Martin moved to approve the RWA Proposal (in the amount of $20,300.00.) Second by Bruce Forman. Motion ca"ied unanimously 4-0. It was announced Hart's Electric is not on the County Bid List. The Committee expressed satisfaction with the services of Hart's Electric and requested Staff to revisit the issue. Charles Arthur moved to direct Staff to re-discuss with the County to allow Hart's Electric to bid. Second by Bruce Forman. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. VII. Project Manager Report-Darryl Richard (See attached) - Previously discussed under IV. VIII. Landscape Maintenance Report-CLM-Jim Fritchey - None IX. Old Business A. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Member Vacancy Charles Arthur reported Applicant Steven Valdivia withdraw his application for the Committee Member vacancy. (See attachments) Bud Martin moved to recommend Dick Lydon (to the Board of County Commissioners for approval) for the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Member Vacancy. Second by Bill Gonnering. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. X. Update Report A. Maintenance-Bruce Forman-None B. Tax Analysis-Bud Martin - Reported Millage Rate information provided by Mark Isackson. (See attached) o Current Vanderbilt MSTU Millage Rate is .47 o The Committee can ask the BCC to increase Millage Rate to the original cap of .50 After discussions it was concluded the Revenue Stream is generating sufficient monies for current Projects. 3 ,XI. , New Business A. Elect Officers Bud Martin nominated Charles Arthur for Chairman, There were no other nominations. The nominations were closed and Charles Arthur is Chairman. 161 1 0/3 XII. Public Comment Dick Lydon announced on January 7,2010 at 7:00 pm a Panel Group for Ocean Waterway cleanup is being held at La Playa. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at 3:13 p.m. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Committee c!Jt4 ~ Charles Arthur, Chairman These minutes approved by the Board/co,\mittee on as presented or amended .;l-lt'ID The next meeting is February 4,2010 at 2:00 P.M. ST. JOHNS PARISH LIFE CENTER 625 111TH Ave. Naples, FL. 4 - ~ 161 II.."."", B~. M.s.7Jt. Adll/sory eo".".lttu Fiala Pf" ( rr' Fe 2705 Horseshoe Drive SOUdl Halas j;.\.l-/v1L :. Naples,FL :14104 Henning~ '..' '. Coyle " Coletta 1101 ~ J January 7,2010 Summary of Minutes & Motions III. Approval of Agenda Add: XI. A. Elect Officers Bud Martin moved to approve the agenda as amended. Second by Bill Gonnering. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. IV. Approval of Minutes - December 3, 2009 Change: Pg. 2, VI., should read: Charles Arthur announced the acquisition of (19) Easements on Gulf Shore Dr. "should" not "be" required as the utility equipment will be located in the ROW The Committee requested the following statement be added to the minutes under Pg 2. VI., third paragraph: "The Committee perceived the Homeowner request should be decided by FPL. " Bruce Forman moved to approve the minutes of December 3, 2009 as amended. Second by Bud Martin. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. VI. Utilities Report-Charles Arthur Darryl Richard reviewed RWA Phase I-Additional Services Proposal ($20,300.00) to field locate onsite utilities and potential FPL easements along Gulf Shore Dr. He noted Task Item #3 ($7,500,00) will be removed from the Scope of Services if FPL Easements are not required, Bud Martin moved to approve the RWA Proposal (in the amount of $20,300.00.) Second by Bruce Forman. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. It was announced Hart's Electric is not on the County Bid List. The Committee expressed satisfaction with the services of Hart's Electric and requested Staff to revisit the issue, Charles Arthur moved to direct Staff to re-discuss with the County to allow Hart's Electric to bid. Second by Bruce Forman,. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. MISC. Carres, Date: Item#:_____ 2C;7'\!BS to. IX. Old Business A. Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Member Vacancy Charles Arthur reported Applicant Steven Valdivia withdraw his application for the Committee Member vacancy. 161 10l? Bud Martin moved to recommend Dick Lydon (to the Board of County Commissioners for approval) for the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Member Vacancy. Second by Bill Gonnering. Motion carried unanimously 4-0. XI. New Business A. Elect Officers Charles Arthur opened the floor to nominations for Chairman. Bud Martin nominated Charles Arthur for Chairman There were no other nominations. The nominations were closed and Charles Arthur is Chairman. 16i 1 10540 GULF SHORE DR 2 127 SEABREEZE AVE 3 100 SEABREEZE AVE 4 189 CHANNEL DR 5 153 CHANNEL DR 6 129 CHANNEL DR 7 223 BAYVIEW AVE 8 151 BAYVIEW AVE 9 139 BAYV1EW AVE 10 103 BAYVIEW AVE 11 282 BAYVIEW AVE 12 10021 GULF SHORE DR 13 201 SEABREEZE AVE 14 191 SEABREEZE AVE 15 10381 GULF SHORE DR 16 257 SEABREEZE AVE 17 291 SEABREEZE AVE - 18 10341 GULF SHORE DR 19 136 SEABREEZE AVE 20 124 SEABREEZE AVE 21 112 SEABREEZE AVE 22 10310 GULF 51 lORE OR \13\14 23 177 CHANNEL DR 15 24 192 CHANNEL DR \2 :1~' 11 25 120 CHANNEL DR ',.;,-". 26 108 CHANNEL DR 18 " 'i21'~19, 27 257 BAYV1EW AVE ,3~ j _J..~ ';40' 28 239 BAYVIEW AVE ;,5 4 . 2' 10091 GULF SHORE DR 24 30 210 BAYVIEW AVE ';,~:\~ 31 10073 GULF SHORe OR 7'~8'~:. 32 152 BAVVIEW AVE 33 140 BAVVIEW AVE " '11)' :,.9~; 11 34 10047 GULF SHORE DR ;,33',32': ;30: 35 9180 GULF SHORE DR ~-- 36 9140 GULF SHORE DR " 37 NO SITE ADDRESS 38 10315 GULF SHORE DR 3' 10365 GULF SHORE DR 40 283 CHANNEL DR " ~36 -V" ..-- Hi I CDIlIer County Department of A1lernatl'le TransportatiOll Modes ColtierCounty, Florida Vanderbilt Beach MSTU ~__~~___.!:!~~[9.r:Qund_lnstalla!ion QLf::'_o~~tq!)~.:?hase L________ 1 f:> I?:> N I c>'... 161 1 0~ . From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: IsacksonMark Monday, December 07, 2009 5:56 PM RichardDarryl; soto_c StanleyTherese; lulich_P; arnold_m; sillery_t RE: Bud Martin Questions from 12-03-09 Follow up Completed Darryl, The Board of County Commissioners sets budget policy in February of each year and that policy provides a discussion on millage rates, Last year, the BCC adopted budget policy direction stipulated that the millage rates for MSTU's shall be set at the rolled back rate for each district. With this guidance, staff proceeds with a calculation of the millage rates and corresponding budget knowing that taxable value is the key in calculating the rolled back rate. The time tine for taxable value and therefore, budget appropriations is as follows.... 1. Estimated taxable value is calculated every year at the time of budget policy adoption in February based upon the State's Ad Valorem Estimating conference numbers, Last year that estimate showed a taxable value (TV) decrease of 23.S%, Correspondingly, the budget for all MSTU's was sized around a millage rate calculated based upon a 23.5% decrease in taxable value. 2, At the beginning of June, a preliminary estimate of TV is released by the Property Appraiser's office and this information is used to re-calculate the millage rate and adjustment 0 the budgets are made correspondingly up or down depending upon the impact. Usually reserves or capital appropriations are adjusted, 3, In July, the final estimate of taxable value is offered by the Property Appraiser's office on what is called the DR- 420 form, Once again the rolled back rate is re-calculated and budget adjustments are made similar to the process outlined in step 2, Final adopted budgets are based upon millage rates which reflect TV in this step. The above timeline has been used as a process at least during my five (5) year tenure with the County and probably before, The variable is always budget policy and how millage rates will be calculated, As a matter of procedure, you may want to consider refreshing the budget discussion with those MSTU's consistent with the receipt of TV and re- calculation of the millage rates. Approval of a preliminary MSTU budget is always important before the June BCC budget workshops. Once July taxable values are received, MSTU's would have a second opportunity to review their budget and offer endorsement prior to final adoption in September. Just a suggested timeline... Let me know if you have questions. Mark From: RichardDarryl Sent: Monday, December 07,20099:06 AM To: 5OIO_C; IsacksonMark Cc: StanleyTherese; lullch_P; arnold_m; slllery_t Subject: Bud Martin Questions from 12-03-09 Caroline, (Mark) 1 161 1 {j ~3 << File: Buds Questions.doc >> Bud's question is related to the initial FY-10 Budget Approved by the Vanderbilt Committee (see copy of millage; note: ,50 mill) Of course back when the Committee was considering their FY-lO Budget the projection was -23.50% reduction in property values. ACTUAL COMMITTEE APPROVED BUDGET FOR FY-l0: 1,702,1H,3116 FY 10 Estimated Taxable Value .23.50% Adj, 09 to 10 FY10 FYOI 0.5000 0.4380 851,078 974,567 Millage Extension Now, presently, the monthly Budget report indicates the actual FY-l0 millage rate at .47 mill with -6.73% reduction in property values, Or, reduction of -(.028 mill); Bud is making the point that the Committee should 'approve' this reduced millage rate; in the past we haven't required the Committee's to specifically approve the 'adjusted' millage rates due to the fluctuations in 'property values'; and as has been stated to all of the Committees the intention is to maintain the current 'revenue stream' without exceeding the 'millage cap' (for Vanderbilt is .50 mill) Most of the Committee's have now gotten used to this 'adjustment' in millage in relation to taxable value since the 2007 Florida Legislature 'mandatory rollback'; we might want to review this topic with the Committees once more so they don't forget 'why' this is happening (maybe a general memo to all Committee's would be appropriate; or someone mentioned a 'video'); One option would be for each Committee to 'motion' to allow staff to adjust millage rate as appropriate to obtain a stated revenue stream. (this way the Committee has 'control' (or voice) in what's happening to the millage rate); and staff would be required to report adjustments in millage rate as they occur. Bud Martin had some additional questions that he gave me after the meeting on 12-3-09 to pass along to the budget office for answer (see attached "Buds Questions.doc" ). Once we have these answers thought out - it would be a good idea to call Mr. Martin to review. (home: (239) 514-3067; mobile: (239) 269-5333; REPORT FROM 12-03-09 MEETING: 2,075,310,154 FY 10 July 1 Taxable Value ".73% Adj. 09 to 10 FY10 FY09 2 Mlllage Extension 0.4716 978,716 Thank you, 0lIl1yI Richartl, RLA, MSTU Project Manager Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes 2B8S Horseshoe DrIVe South Naples, Florida 34104 telephone: 239-2S2-SnS Fax: 239-252-6219 Cell: 239-253-9083 da rrvl rie ha rd@lcolliergov.net 161 0.4380 974,567 3 1 bl~ 161 1 bl9 Report for: January 7, 2010 Meeting Prepared by: Darryl Richard, Project Manger, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Tessie SilIery, Operations Coordinator, Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Project Statns (V A-32)- COMPLETED - Ordinance Modification: related to meter conversions 12-15.09 BCC Approves Ordinance 2009.70 (modification to ord 2001-43 creating Vanderbilt Beach MSTU) thus making provision for conversion of existing overhead meter connections; COMPLETED (V A-31)- ACTIVE - FPL Channel Drive Construction 12.03.09 ROW Permit has been issued for project; Payment to FPL and Comcast for associated cost in process (pending confirmation with Budget Office) 01-07-10 UNDER CONSTRUCTION; Project is under construction 3 of 4 residential meters have been converted to underground; remaining 4th residential overhead to be converted on 01108/10 (V A-30)- ACTIVE - Comcast Channel Drive Coordination 12-03-09 Confirmation of payment to Comcast pending, ($4,000) 01-07 -10 UNDER CONSTRUCTION; Com cast coordinating underground conversion of Comcast utilities with FPL. (V A-27)- ACTIVE - Phase One "Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement" (UFCA) 11-10-09 COMPLETED; UFCA approved by BCC for 'Channel Drive' 01-07-10 PENDING; UFCA agreement pending for overall Phase One (Engineering Cost Estimate pending from FPL) (V A-26)- ACTIVE -Malcolm Pirnie; Review preliminary design provided by FPL 12-08-09 IN PROCESS; Site Meeting with John Lehr, FPL Senior Engineer Project Manager, reviewing proposed easement sites. Some sites were indicated as not requiring easement while some others require further investigation with updated utilities detail drawing and updated field locating of existing utilities, (site specific detailed survey correlated with field location of utilities) (V A-19) - ACTIVE-ONGOING - On Call Services - Malcolm Pirnie Engineering On-going services for meeting attendance and preliminary investigation regarding underground power line installation. 01-07-10 Ongoing On-Call Engineering Services by Malcolm Pimie Engineering (V A-18) - ACTIVE.ONGOINCi- - Maintenance Contract - Award to Commercial Land; Annual Maintenance "base contract' per Quote 01-07-10 Ongoing Maintenance Services by Commercial Land Maintenance 12-11-07 03-26-08 03-10-08 05-12-08 06-05-09 06-23-09 09-11-08 09-12-08 09-17-08 09-22-08 11-21-08 02-02-09 02-04-09 03-09-09 04-02-09 04-10-09 04-28-09 161 1 ~f~ Brief summary of "Underground Utilities Conversion" project activity Since December 11, 2007 Initial BCC Approval of Agreement BCC Approval of ROW Agreement with FPL date Dec. 11, 2007 TEAM TELECONFERNCE (FPL, COMCAST, COUNTY, MSTU (e.ARTHUR), VBPOA (JACKIE BAMMEL, RWA, MALCOLM PIRNIE) PUBLIC MEETING AT ST. JOHNS Review of RWA Survey wi Malcolm Pirnie and e. Arthur Confirmation of 4 residential units affected by "Channel Drive Pilot Project" with FPL (Ryan Drum); Field Meeting to review project; Affected Properties are: NANCE, HAROLD 283 CHANNEL BASTANI, KEN K 261 CHANNEL KOHLER, RUTH H 227 CHANNEL REYNOLDS TR, HENRY E 213 CHANNEL CHANNEL DRIVE: Hart's Electrical begins work per PO 4500107832 Review of 1st RWA Survey Submittal Sept 11, 2008 Confirmation of FPL Red-Line Comments for survey Sep, 12, 2008 TEAM TELECONFERENCE (FPL, MALCOLM PIRNIE) FPL "Pot Hole" digs recommended locations identified Sept 22, 2008 TEAM MEETING (e. ARTHUR, J. BAMMEL, MALCOLM PIRNIE) FPL Approval of Survey Feb, 4, 2009 Staff request $13,027,00 Engineering Deposit Invoice Feb, 4, 2009 PUBLIC MEETING AT ST. JOHNS MSTU Committee makes motion to proceed with "Channel Drive Project" Verification of easements for 'private property' April 10, 2009 BCC Approval of Modified Ordinance adding installation of powerline within 'easement' to private properties. This is to allow installation of power from ROW Line to private property connection. 06-01-09 06-25-09 06-26-09 06-26-09 07-27-09 08-07-09 09-16-09 09-17-09 09-22-09 09.21-09 09-23-09 09-24-09 161 '&13 1 CHANNEL DRIVE: Ryan Drumm (FPL) request ,pdf of ROW Agreement for review; forwarded via email FPL Draft Design submittal Phase One Plans Staff request (1) Cadd file of Phase One Submittal; (2) Review indicates drawings are not sufficient for bidding purposes; (3) Full size prints 'to scale' requested' TELECONFERNCE ; CALL IN FROM FPL (John Lehr, FPL; Troy Todd, FPL; Ryan Drumm, FPL; Darryl Richard, Collier County) Troy Todd (FPL) clarifies that "tariff charges" apply to Channel Drive Project (ref: Tariff No.6 per PSC approved Tariff); $566,59 for the 4 properties on Channel Drive CHANNEL DRIVE: Hart's Electrical completed electrical from ROW to Home/Resident for the following Channel Drive Address'; 213,283,263 and 227 RYAN DRUMM SUBMITTAL - Channel Drive UFCA; and 'Draft' plans; Ryan confirms no existing underground FPL Facilities on Channel Drive RYAN DRUMM 20d SUBMITTAL - Channel Drive UFCA (dated 8.18-09); and 'Final' Channel Drive plans (marked 'check set') CHANNEL DRIVE RESIDENT COORDINATION: Kent Smith called on behalf of Mr. Nance to report that he has received the mailing/letter regarding Channel Drive project and that Mr. Nance chooses to 'not participate' at this time due to financial concerns, He mentioned his wife was in the hospital and that he did not have the money to pay the $650,00 for his "private conversion" to underground, TELECONFERENCE (FPL, COUNTY LEGAL, STAFF, MALCOLM PIRNIE, C. ARTHUR) Recommendations: FPL to submit 'agreement' in word format (if pOSSible); staff to proceed with obtaining payment for 'private' underground conversion from property owners Nance and Bastani on Channel Drive, FPL confirms that survey has been accepted and 'Final Plans' are pending for Phase One Project, Ryan Drumm provides FPL Cost Breakdown for Channel Drive; Staff intends to process payment for an "FPL Invoice" upon BCC approval of UFCA (Underground Facilities Conversion Agreement) for Channel Drive; UFCA is pending completion of 'legal review' TOTAL CHANNEL DRIVE COST: $23,242.00 Message from Mr. Kent Smith (Legal Representative for Mr. Nance (Property Owner at 283 Channel Drive); Mr. Smith stated that the 'owner' has 'no desire' to underground his private connection, and furthermore has 'no intention of spending any money on his home' (at 283 Channel Drive) related to the power line underground conversion. COMCAST COORDINATION; Channel Drive Plans forwarded to Comcast for quote of underground conversion for Comcast overhead utilities 10-01-09 10-05-09 10-06-09 10-09-09 10-12-09 10-12-09 10-13-09 10-14-09 10-14-09 10-22-09 10-28-09 10-28-09 11-03-09 11-03-09 16/ 1 ~13 Phase One "Legal Description" forwarded to FPL for confirmation of FPL formal acceptance of 'Legal Description' per 'Right of Way Agreement Section 2, Sub-section (d)' FPL ACCEPTANCE OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION; John Lehr via email confirms FPL's official acceptance of the legal description for the Phase One Project; Staff request confirmation of "EXISTING FPL FACILITIES" per 'Right of Way Agreement Section 2. Sub-section (e)) documentation of all existing FPL underground facilities within the ROW that will not be included under ROW agreement (for Exhibit C) COMCAST COORINDINATION: Mark Cook informs County Staff that Comcast has re- assigned project review to himself and Andy Vaspasiano; Mark indicates he and Andy are working on "Channel Drive" Cost estimate, **COMCAST CONFIRMS 100% of conversion of Comcast Utilities is to be by the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU as the project sponsor. Com cast indicates that there will be no 'reductions' in cost due to 'depreciation' of equipment/existing installation, Services are identified as 'new' and 'not in need of upgrade', Installation of underground conduit for Comcast is through Comcast contractor managed 'entirely by Comcast', Malcolm Pirnie submits letter for review of Project Drawing submittals and recommendation related to which party should install the underground conduit for Phase One Project County Legal provides legal opinion from Nabors Giblin & Nickerson, 1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 200, Tallahassee, Florida 32308 (letter dated 10-8-09 Gregory T. Stewart RWA Proposal submitted for survey of Phase II, III, and IV TELECONFERENCE (c. ARTHUR, STAFF, MALCOLM PIRNIE) FPL SUBMITTAL; PLANS FOR PHASE ONE PROJECT (Marked 'Preliminary') John Lehr notifies staff (via phone call evening of 10-14-09) that the 'one page' agreement submitted on 8-7-09 has to be revised to a new 4 page agreement (delivery pending from FPL) John Hart Electrical received check for $650,00 for Bastani on Channel Drive 'Private Can Conversion to underground, Bastani Channel Drive private conversion project completed by Hart's Electrical Revised UFCA Agreement received from FPL for BCC approval on Nov. 10, 2009 Confirmation of Comcast cost for Channel Drive Project is $4,000,00 per FPL plans, Scott Teach and Michelle Arnold teleconference with Nabors Giblin & Nickerson results of teleconference to be presented at 11-05-09 MSTU meeting, 11-05-09 11-10-09 11-10-09 12-08-09 12-15-09 01-04-10 01-04-10 161 1 13/3 Discussion Nabors Giblin & Nickerson legal consult related to 'underground conversion' and potential 'ordinance'; Committee makes motion to direct staff to pursue Ordinance for the MSTU to pay for homeowner's conversion and Ordinance to 'require' participation and mechanism to address non-participation. BCC Approval of UFCA Agreement with FPL for Channel Drive 'pilot project' Field Meeting to review Proposed "Easements" for Phase One Project; Ryan Drum FPL was in attendance with Chris Tilman, Darryl Richard, Jeff Gower, and Charlie Arthur. Inspection indicated that all of the easements proposed were not necessary, and that 'alternative' site planning would locate the electrical boxes within existing ROW. Follow- up meeting with John Lehr scheduled for December 8,2009 (1 pm) Meeting with FPL (John Lehr, Kate Donofrio, Ryan Drum) and Malcolm Pirnie (Chris Tilman, Jeff Gower) and County Staff (Darryl Richard); Review of easements proposed; approximately 50% of easements were determined to not be necessary; However, the other 50% of easements require (1) detailed re-survey, (2) placement of stakes in field identifying ROWand property lines, and (3) re-identification of utilities in the field (call into Florida One Call system) Staff will coordinate with Malcolm Pirnie and RWA for necessary project activity; additional proposal from RWA is necessary for scope of work identified. Proposal from Malcolm Pirnie for 'easement acquisition' is also recommended at this time in anticipation of possible requirement for easements. BCC Approval of Ordinance Modification to add 'private' connections to M5TU Ordinance thus allowing M5TU to complete 100% of private meter connections as required to obtain 25% GAF waiver from FPL. Draft Letter to 37 residents requiring underground conversion for meter connection under review Channel Drive Project Under Construction 161 1 (1/3 MALCOLM PIRNIE INDEPENDENT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS, SCIENTiSTS AND CONSULTANTS M<llwllll Prrnie, lne 4315 M~tro Pkwy, SlIire 520 Fort Myer:., FL33916 Phone (139) 332.1300 Fax (239) 332-17g9 WV.[lN,pllnle.com January 6, 2010 Mr. Darryl Richard, RLA Project Manager Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes 2885 Horseshoe Orive South Naples, Florida 34104 Re: Vanderbilt Beach MSTU - Phase 1 Easement Assistance Services Dear Mr. Richard: Malcolm Pirnie is pleased to provide the Collier County Department of Alternative Transportation Modes (Department) this scope of work for Easement Assistance Services for the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU (MSTU). The purpose of this project is to assist the County's efforts to acquire electric utility easements within the Phase 1 area of the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU not previously dedicated by plat, easement, or other legal instrument. This scope assumes that all easements will be granted voluntarily by the property owners. Any activities associated with easement acquisition through other methods (i.e. condemnation, prescription, etc.) will be Additional Services. Based on the information currently available, we anticipate the County will need to acquire approximately fifteen (lS) separate easements. SCOPE OF SERVICES The services for this project include the following tasks: TASK OSO - Proiect Management This task includes the work effort required for project planning, administration, and coordination. Specific activities included in this task include the following: . Managing and coordinating project activities and field personnel to control costs and maintain the project schedule. . Maintaining project files and data systems. . Preparing monthly invoices. . Providing internal quality control. . Internal and external project-re.lated communications. 161 1 013 1v\^lCO~ \1 'IRNh: Mr. Darryl Richard, RLA Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Phase 1 Easement Assistance Services January 6, 2010 Page 2 of 4 TASK 100 - Easement Document Preoaration Activities . Reviewing available County real property information for owner information. This scope assumes that such information is true and accurate. Any additional work necessary to verify property ownership will be Additional Services. . Reviewing available County and Florida Power and Light (FPL) documentation and field verify the location(s) and size(s) of easement areas needed by FPL for routine maintenance activities. . Coordinating with County staff regarding the standard easement agreement that will be used during the project. Malcolm Pirnie will use the standard easement agreement provided by the County, and will assist the County in drafting language to address the specific easement terms and conditions that are negotiated with the property owners. . Coordinating with surveyor(s) contracted by the County to obtain proper legal descriptions and sketches of the easement areas. . Coordinating with County staff to obtain reports necessary for the easement documents (i.e. Ownership and Encumbrance reports, etc.). The County will be responsible for paying all fees associated with such reports. TASK 200 - Easement Negotiation Activities . Locating, contacting, and coordinating with property owners to negotiate easement terms via conference calls, mail, fax, or electronic mail. This scope assumes that each property is owned by an individual(s), not by a corporation, trust or other legal entity, and that the property is not in foreclosure. If the property ownership is other than individual ownership, or is in foreclosure, Additional Services may be required. . Attending up to fifteen (15) meetings with County staff and property owners to negotiate easement terms and conditions. No travel other than local (within 50 mile radius of Naples, FL) car travel is included in this scope. TASK 300 - Proiect Meetings . Preparing for and attending up to four (4) meetings as requested by the County to review the project status. . Preparing for and attending up to two (2) meetings with FPL to ensure easement documentation meets FPL requirements for electrical service. DELlVERABLES Malcolm Pirnie will assemble and deliver to the County three (3) original easement packages for each easement successfully negotiated, up to fifteen (15) packages total. Each easement package will include the following: . A County standard easement agreement, with additional negotiated terms and conditions as approved by the County. . A legal description and sketch (provided by the County, signed and sealed by a Florida-licensed Professional Land Surveyor). 161 1 0/3 MAl ( O~1I,1 PIRNlt Mr. Darryl Richard, RLA Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Phase 1 Easement Assistance Services January 6, 2010 Page 3 of 4 . Copies of other County-provided documentation (i.e. Ownership and Encumbrance reports, etc.) specific to each easement that was generated during the project. ADDITIONAL SERVICES In addition to performing the work identified in this scope, Malcolm Pirnie will perform Additional Services as requested by the County. The need for such services may arise from the completion of the tasks identified above and cannot be fully defined at this time. However, it may be determined at some future date that these additional services are necessary to thoroughly complete or implement the Work. Examples of Additional Services may include technical evaluations, preparation of reports, or other activities deemed necessary by the County. It should be noted that the fees for these services have not been included in this scope. Such tasks and their level of effort, associated budgets and schedules will be described in detail in work authorizations to be issued at the time such tasks are requested by the County. SCHEDULE Malcolm Pirnie anticipates providing the professional services outlined above for a period of up to three hundred and sixty five (365) calendar days after receipt of Notice to Proceed, budget permitting. COMPENSATION Malcolm Pirnie will provide this scope of services under the terms and conditions of Contract oS-3657 Agreement for Project Management and Oversight Services for a lump sum fee of $64,990. The estimated fees for each task are as follows: Task Number Ta<,k N,H)w Estimated Task Fee 050 Project Management $3,710 100 Easement Document $9,080 Preparation Activities 200 Easement Negotiation Activities $47,340 300 Project Meetings $4,860 TOTAL LUMP-SUM FEE $64,990 The project budget is based on the scope of work as provided and is subject to cost adjustment resulting from any change in the scope or schedule of work. -'--~ 161 1 bJ?; MAl( O!J\1 I'IRNIl: Mr. Oarryl Richard, RLA Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Phase 1 Easement Assistance Services January 6, 2010 Page 4 of4 Malcolm Pirnie appreciates this opportunity to provide this requested scope of services, and will enjoy working with the County on this important project. If you have any questions regarding this scope or need any additional information, please feel free to contact Christopher Tilman, P.L or me at (239) 332- 1300. Sincerely, MALCOLM PIRNIE, INC. ~-h1, ~~ Robert H. French, P.E. Senior Associate M03746 <> ... <> N ui ~ ., ::I C ., ~ Qi ~ .. o ... '" ., '" ,;.. <> o z ~ u .. >- ~ c o u ~ ., u .~ ., '" ., u c .. :;;) 1;; .... "iij ~~ ~ .s; c u ., .. E ., ., 111 ~ .:!:~ :e.... ., ., " ~ c .. ., .s; > ... .. u ~ 8 ~o c ~ '6 </} ~ "" c "d 8 ";: ci -"~ ~'" >-- c . :~ 8 -sg ~'" c ~ ~ il'o cO . 0 ::;;::: ~'" . >-- ~ ~ . c :n~ - ~ u ~ . '" "e-<J1. ~ ~ ~~ "0 "^ c '" ;t~ ;; t! ~ 8 i5 o..ri E :!l ~'" ~ e ~ ~ o ~ . a t! . ... ~ C $ a~ t! tl ~ ~ C C 88 ;;;~~~ ~:!l ~ ~ ~oo8~ ~ N C o '" 0- ~ ~ ,8 , , ~ .~ ~ :~ ";; Ell) 1j ti ~~~ ItI lU ~ lii D:.. z ::; 'C: c: ~ 1i ~ E .:: .~ Q,I QJ ~ o <II '" QI ..t ~ ~:2 ~ ~ . >-- 51 8 8 8 0_1"1(1"1 8 .,0 M~ ~~ :1," '" 8 M 0 N ~ ... '" 8 00 '" 8 00 '" o o o :;; 3 M '" 7J, 8 o g ~~ '" '" 8 .0 R ., '" 8 N g M '" ;; , .0 :; ~ ~ Ii 0: 0 .0<> . , ~ ~ . , c 1: . w o q o '" 8 ~~~ ~ -a ~ .. j ~ i H! ~ >-- is ~~ ~ c . ~ x w .. g .0 , ~ 16l 1 8l~ 8 ~ i .. ,. 8 19 {?- 161 IG1? DlXT AI" CONSIILT1NC ...... ~, '.L .lL .Plallning .ViSU;lliZillioll . Civil Engin~~ring: . Surveying & \bpping January 5, 20 I 0 Darryl Richard Collier County Government Transportation Department 2885 South Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Professional Service Proposal for Vanderbilt Beach MSTU - Phase I Additional Services, FPL Related (RW A, Inc. File No. 080010.00.03) Dear Darryl, Please find below, the Scope and fees associated with the Additional Services needed to clarify the issues that could be created arising from the potential FPL easement needs along Gulf Shore Drive. I have left the original Project Profile and Project Assumptions in this proposal. PROJECT PROFILE (left in for background information) . Collier County (Client) intends to assist the MSTU with the redesign of the existing FPL aerial lines located within the MSTU boundary in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. . The Client desires to retain the services of RW A, Inc. and proceed with the Project as described within this proposal. . The Client has issued a request for proposal including a preliminary scope of services, and has asked the consultant to provide a proposal by February 6, 2008. . RW A will provide a detailed topographic and control survey and existing underground utility location of Phase I, as depicted on the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU powerline-underground installation exhibit, received on January 4, 2008. The surveying limits are 10' outside of the existing right-of-way of Gulfshore Drive South, from the South right-of-way line of Vanderbilt Beach Road to the North right-of-way line of Bluebill A venue, Gulfshore Court from Vanderbilt Beach Road to South Bay Drive and South Bay Drive to Vanderbilt Beach Road. . Phase I will include the three following streets: Seabreeze A venue, Channel Drive and Bayview Avenue. . The project will be permitted, designed and developed in four phases. 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples FL 34109 . (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com 161 Ib/3 PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS (left in for background information) . The client will make available all pertinent information associated with the project including, but not limited to, legal descriptions, existing surveys, permits, title policies and other available documents. . The vertical datum will be collected in NA VD 1988 and converted to NGVD 1929. . The surveying services will be completed and delivered within 90 business days after receiving an executed contract along with a Notice to Proceed and the marking of the existing utilities by Earth View, LLC. . All the additional surveying services, underground soft digs and radar tomography will be billed on a time, material and expense basis as per the approved rate codes stated within Annual Contract # 07-4112. . The surveying services outlined in the proposal is based upon the FPL scope of services received on January 10, 2008. . This proposal includes performing all services described within on a one-time basis. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.0 Location Detail Exhibits and Field Survev 1.1. Prepare (8 '.1," x II") exhibits of up to 22 specific sites of potential FPL easement locations, using the mark-ups prepared by Malcolm Pimie and the FPL Schematic drawings. The dimensions from the field survey, as described below in 1.2, shall then be illustrated on the exhibits. Those dimensions will be from the center of the double yellow line, to the nail set on the edge of pavement, then to the iron rod, and those dimensions measured to J1xed objects. 1.2. R W A shall revisit the site, recover the horizontal control, set an iron rod and cap along the right of way line, at each site. RW A shall then set a nail and disc perpendicular to the right of way line between the double yellow line, and another nail and disc on that line at the edge of pavement. Each nail and disc shall be painted with a white, six-inch triangle. R W A shall also measure distances to two J1xed objects from the set iron rod. R W A shall set one additional rod and cap marking the location of the existing 20' Utility Easement. 1.3. RWA shall also inspect each speciJ1c site and compare it to the existing survey. If there is any newly installed or replaced object, RW A shall locate that object and illustrate it on the exhibits and update the overall basemap. 2.0 Replace Stakes 2.1. R W A shall revisit the site the day prior to the follow up site visit, and replace any missing stake adjacent to the points set along the Right or Way, and the one set on the existing 20' easement. R W A shall reset those iron rods and caps, if needed. Consultant requests three days notice for scheduling purposes. Page 2 of4 S:\2008\08001O.00.PO Vanderbilt Beach MSTU\03\2009-12-] 7-1d PSA (OOOJ-0004)revOldoc ~_._--'t'...__. 161 Ihl3 3.0 Prepare Sketch and Descriptions 3.1. R W A shall prepare sketch and descriptions for fifteen (15) proposed FPL easements, to encompass the transformers to be installed. The sketches will be prepared in accordance with Ch. 61 G- I 7 F.A.C., and Collier County Right of Way Department Standards. The sketches shall be prepared for a unit cost of $500, per sketch, and will be billed in accordance with the number of sketches actually prepared. 4.0 Reimbursable Expenses 4.]. Expenses for blueprints, reproduction services, overnight or express delivery services, and vehicle mileage, shall be reimbursable to RWA, Inc. PROFESSIONAL SERVICE FEES The professional service fee estimates for the associated scope of services are listed below. Total Fee $ 12,000 $ 500 $ 7,500 $ 300 $ 20,300 ~ Fixed Scope of Services 1.0 Location Detail Exhibits and Field Survey 2.0 Replace Stakes 3.0 Prepare Sketch and Descriptions 4.0 Reimbursable Expenses T /M/E T /M/E T/M/E Note: T/M/E denotes Time, Material and Expense billing category. Stated Fee is an estimate only; client will only be billed for actual hourly costs related to individual surveying services. Deliverables . RWA will submit an Autocad Version 9 or higher electronic file in DWG format of those Specific Site, as well as hard copies of each site. If we locate additional information, RW A will also submit an updated basemap of the project area. Excluded Services The professional services to be provided by the Consultant are limited to those described in the Scope of Services. All other services are specifically excluded. Listed below are excluded services that may be required or desired by the Client: . Construction Layout Services . Preparation of Sketch and Descriptions . Easement Vacations . Special Purpose Surveys . Radar Tomography . Vacuum Excavation/Soft Digs Page 3 of4 S:\2008\0800JO,QQ,PO Vanderbilt Beach MSTU\03\2009-12-17-Id PSA (OOOI-0004)revOI.doc 161 Ibl3 Thank you for the opportunity to submit this professional service proposal. Please call if you have any questions. We will look forward to hearing back from you soon. Sincerely, /WjY-n- r Michael A. Ward, PLS Project Manager RWA, Inc. Enel.: Collier County Rate Code Billing Address Infonnation Page 4 of 4 S:\2008\0800lO.00.PO Vanderbilt Beach MSTUl03\2009-12-17-Jd PSA (OOOI-0004)revOl.doe 161 1813 D\lT.A'" 1)1'")IIIIl~ \";,,,,,);/,,",., {'O'SI'ITI'-'lj Cil'iIFJlgi""Willg ..a.. '"' '..l .... Sljl~,'}il\t & ~lall(lilJ~ Hourly Rate Code and Fee Schedule Effective January 1, 2010 SECTION 1: Hourly Rate Codes Compensation for staff time attributable directly to the performance of the contract shall be in accordance with the following Hourly Fees: PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT Classification Consultant i Consultant II Consultant III Consultant IV Consultant V Project Manager Principal Expert Witness Hourlv Fee $B5.00 $95.00 $10000 $12500 $150.00 $15000 $175.00 $250.00 TECHNICAL SUPPORT Classification Technician I Technician II Technician Iii Hourlv Fee $55.00 $6500 $7500 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT Classification Project Coordinator I Project Coordinator II Project Coordinator Iii Hourlv Fee $50.00 $5500 $6000 SURVEY FIELD CREWS Classification Field Crew (2 Person) Field Crew (3 Person) Field Crew GPS Field Crew Robot (1 Person) Field Crew Robot (2 Person) Hourlv Fee $100.00 $125.00 $150.00 $10000 $12500 SECTION 2: In-house Reimbursable Expenses Compensation for in-house items of expense and other charges incurred in connection with the performance of contract shall be in accordance with the following schedule: EXPENSE ITEMS Vehicle Travel Letter or Legal Copies (B & W) Letter or Legal Copies (Color) 11" x 17" Copies (B & W) 11" x 17" Copies (Color) Large Format Copies (24" x 36") Paper Piot (24"x36") Color Graphics (Image Quality) 24"x36" Velium Plot 24"x36" Mylar Plot $0.50 per mile $0.15 per copy $0.75 per copy $0.35 per copy $1.50 per copy $1.25 per copy $4.75 per plot $10.00 per square foot $7.00 per plot $9.00 per plot SECTION 3: Peripheral Reimbursable Expenses Compensation for purchases, items of expense, and other charges not scheduled above, incurred in connection with the performance of contract, shall be reimbursed at cost plus 10%. SECTION 4: Interest Charges Interest rate of 1-1/2% per month will be charged on invoices not paid within 30 days. SECTION 5: Rate Revisions Charges are subject to revision on or after January 1, 2011 l\Srvr-04\adminI00000100.00 ACFl000001,00,02 ACF _ Finance\0006 Pric;ngPoJicy\2010 Rate Code AdjustmenlSlStandard Rate Codes for 2010.01-01 doc 161 1 br? DlXTA'" CONSl,I.TI:--'<(j ..&.. "" f.L ..a. 'I'lannill~ .Vhll;!Ii,:llillll 'Cilil En~lll~cring '~or\l.)'ing"'" \fapl'ing STANDARD BUSINESS TERMS AND CONDITIONS These Standard Terms and Business Conditions (these 'Terms and Conditions") are attached to, and made part of, certain Proposals or Agreements for services by RWA Inc. (The Design Professionals) to the Client identified below (the 'Client'). These Terms and Conditions shall be deemed to be incorporated within such Proposals or Agreements. As used in these Terms and Conditions, the term "This Agreement" shaH refer to these Terms and Conditions together with such Proposals and Agreements. In the event of any inconsistency between these Terms and Conditions and such Proposals or Agreements, the provisions of such Proposals or Agreements shall govern. 1.0 Access To Site: Unless Client provides written notice to the contrary to the Design Professionals, the Design Professionals will have access to the Client's site for activities necessary for the performance of the services. The Design Professionals will take precautions to minimize damage resulting from these activities, but has not included in the fee the cost of restoration of any resulting damage and will not be iiable to the Client or any third party for any such damage except to the extent expressly provided in the Terms and Conditions. The Client agrees to investigate for and notify the Design Professionals of, any and aU dangerous or harmful conditions on or around the site and the Client will be liable for any damage to the Design Professionals' property and equipment or any injury to the Design Professionals personnel resulting from any such condition. 2.0 Dispute Resolution: Any claims or disputes made during design, construction or post-construction between the Client and the Design Professionals shall first be submitted to non- binding mediation. The Client and the Design Professionals agree to include a similar mediation agreement with all contractors, sub-contractors, sub- consultants, suppliers and fabricators, thereby providing for mediation as the primary method for dispute resolution among all parties. In the event that such mediation does not resolve all of the issues among the parties, the parties may then seek other relief in law or at equity. 3.0 Standard of Care: The Design Professionals make no warranties, express or implied, under this Agreement or otherwise, in connection with the services of the Design Professionals. All services and goods delivered or provided by the Design Professionals are provided "as is" and 'with all faulls". 4.0 Billings/Payments: The Design Professionals' standard billing rates will increase annually to reflect increases in inflation. Time and Material Expenses ('TIMIE") fees shall be billed monthly based on the time and materials expenses incurred to the billing date, plus reimbursable expenses, in accordance with the Design Professionals' Rate Code Schedule in effect at the time services are rendered. Any TIMIE estimate is for informational purposes only. The actual fee may be more or less than the estimate and is based on the Rate Cooe Schedule in effect at the time services are rendered. Lump sum fees shall be billed monthly based on a percentage of the Design Professional's agreement of scope completion, If extra or additional work is ordered, the Design Professionals will be paid on a time and materials basis in the absence of any other express written agreement between the parties. Invoices shall be payable within 30 days after the invoice date. The progress of the Design Professionals' service requires prompt payment. Past due amounts may incur a late fee of 1.5 % per month and the Design Professionals can, upon giving 7 days written notice to the Client, suspend services until payment in full is received (in addition to any other remedy available to the Design Professionals). Retainers shall be credited on the final invoice. The Design Professionals are entitled to collect reasonable fees and costs, including Document19 collection agency fees, attorney's fees and interest, as required to obtain collection of any fees under this Agreement. The Client acknowledges that the Design Professionals will invoice once each month. If the Client has any questions on the invoice, the Client agrees to send documentation noting the disputed charges to the Design Professionals' project manager within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the invoice. Failure of the Client to provide such notice to the Design Professionals within this period shall be deemed an acceptance by the Client that the invoice is correctly rendered 10 the Client and therefore payable within Ihe prescribed time. In the event of disputed or contested billing, oniy that portion so contested may be withheld from payment, and the undisputed portion will be paid by the Client without delay. No interest will accrue on any contested portion of the billing until the dispute is mutually resolved, so long as such dispute was made in good faith. The Client will exercise reasonableness in contesting any billing or portion thereof. Should the Client fail to pay the Design Professionals when payment is due, such failure shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. In such event, the Design Professionals' may seek all available remedies under this Agreement, at law or in equity. Failure of the Design Professionals to immediately assert a claim for such breach will not be deemed a waiver of the Design Professionals' right to assert such claim or any other claim. 5.0 Reimbursables: Project related expenses such as transportation, food and lodging, postage, shipping, document reproduction, communication charges and similar expenses shall be reimbursable to the Design Professionals. 6.0 Permit and Application Fees: The Client shall pay all permit and application fees required for project approvals directly to the authority having jurisdiction. 7.0 Indemnification: The Client shall, to the tuIIest extent permitted by law, indemnify and hold harmless the Design Professionals, its officers, directors, employees, agents and sub-consultants, from and against all damage, liability and cost incurred by the Design Professionals, including without limitation reasonable attorney's fees and defense costs, arising out of or in any way connected with the performance by any of the Design Professionals, its officers, directors, employees, agents and sub-consultants, of the services under this Agreement, excepting only those damages, liabilities or costs attributable solely to the gross negligence; willful, wanton or intentional misconduct; or statutory violations or punitive damages caused by or resulting from the acts or omissions of the Design Professionals, its officers, directors, employees, agents and sub-consultants; provided, however, that the amount of such indemnification shall not exceed an amount equal to the total contract price, per occurrence. For purposes of these Terms and Conditions, the "Total Contract Price" shall be the aggregate price to be paid by the Client to the Design Professionals for all services rendered to the Client pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 8.0 Limitation of Liability: Page 1 of2 DlXTA'" C()NSt,LTlr-.;(, .&. ...., ,.I.. .L 'IJl~nnill~ . Vi,u;tlilalll'll .('j,il En!-,in~':lillf' .SUr\'l'~ill~ &. \bppill~ The Client and the Design Professionals have had the opportunity to consider the relative risks, rewards and benefits of the project to both the Client and the Design Professionals and desire to allocate the risks in light of these rewards and benefits. Accordingly, the Client agrees that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Design Professionals' aggregate liability to the Client and any and all third parties, directly or indirectly resulting from any act or omission by the Design Professionals for injuries, claims, losses, damages or expenses arising out of this Agreement, from any cause or causes, shall under no circumstances exceed the lesser of $10,000 or the amount of the total contract price (as defined above). Such causes include, but are not limited to, the Design Professionals' negligence, errors, omissions, intentional torts, strict liability, breach of contract. The Design Professionals shall have no liability to client or any third party for damages resulting from the Client's loss of data, profits, use of products or for incidental or consequential damages, even if advised of the possibility of such damage and the Client will indemnify the Design Professionals in the event of any claim by a third party for such damages pursuant to the terms (and subject to the limitations) of the provision on indemnification in these Terms and Conditions. 9.0 Public Agency: Notwithstanding any statement or inference in this Agreement to the contrary, the provisions of these Terms and Conditions relating to indemnification and limitation of liability: (a) shall be deemed to be modified so as to comply with the provisions of section 725.06(2) and (3), Florida statutes, and (b) shall be of no force or effect if both (1) the Client is a public agency and the provisions of section 725.08(1), Florida statutes, apply to the services provided by the Design Professionals for such Client, and (2) the Client requests the Design Professionals to indemnify the Client as provided in said section 725.08(1) (in which event the Design Professionals shall indemnify the Client to the extent provided in said section 725.08(1 I). 10.0 De Minimis Claims: The Client agrees not to sue and otherwise to make no claim directly or indirectly against the Design Professionals on the basis of negligence, intentional tort, breach of contract or otherwise with respect to any act or omission of the Design Professionals unless the aggregate amount of such claim exceeds $2,000. If a claim exceeds $2,000, the Client may seek the entire amount of the claim (subject to the other provisions in these Terms and Conditions), including the first $2,000. 11.0 Termination of Services: This Agreement may be terminated by the Client or the Design Professionals upon written notice thereof should the other fail to perform its obligations thereunder in the reasonable determination of the terminating party. In the event of any such termination, the Client shall pay the Design Professionals for all services rendered to the date of termination, all reimbursable expenses, and all reimbursable termination expenses. The Design Professionals will not be required to turn over documentation related to this Agreement until the Design Professionals have received payment in full for all such fees and expenses. 12.0 Ownership of Documents: All documents and other materials produced by the Design Professionals under this Agreement shall remain the property of the Design Professionals and may not be used by the Client for any other endeavor without the written consent of the Design Professionals. Document19 161 1 ~t? 13.0 Sub-consultant & Out-of Pocket Expenses: Sub-consultant contracts and out-of~pocket expenses will be administered at cost plus 10% of the sub--consultant contract fee or expenses incurred in connection to contract related work. 14.0 Environmental Conditions: It is acknowledged by the parties that the Design Professionals' scope of services does not include any services related to the presence at the site of asbestos, PCBS, petroleum, hazardous waste or radioactive materials. The Client acknowledges that the Design Professionals are performing professional services for the Client and the Design Professionals are not and shall not be required to become an "arranger," "operator: 'generator" or "transporter' of hazardous substances, as those terms are defined in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1990. 15,0 Project Delays: The Client recognizes and agrees that various factors outside of the control of the Design Professionals can delay the performance of the work, the issuance of permits and licenses, and the overall construction of the project. The Client agrees that it shall not be entitled to any claim for damages against the Design Professionals on account of delays from any cause whatsoever beyond the control of the Design Professionals, including, but not limited to: the production of contract documents; issuance of permits from any government or agency; beginning or completion of construction; fire; inability to obtain materials; acts of god; severe weather; acts of war or terror; or performance by any other party of any phase of the work pursuant to this Agreement. The Client hereby waives any claim for such delays against the Design Professionals and, in the event of any such delay, the period of time for performance by the Design Professionals shall be exiended by the amount of such delay. Permitting is a regulatory function and the Design Professionals do not guarantee issuance of any permit or imply any ability to expedite such issuance. 16.0 General: This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the agreement between the parties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, and supersedes aU prior agreements, understandings and conversations, oral or written, on said subject matter. The provisions contained in this Agreement are severable. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement is unenforceable under applicable law, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and such unenforceable provision shall be deemed modified to the minimal extent necessary to become enforceable under applicable law. Neither party may assign or delegate its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party and any such attempted assignment or delegation is void (except that the Design Professionals may assign or delegate its rights or obligations to an affiliated entity or, in the event of a change of control of the Design Professionals, to its successor entity). This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and assigns. This Agreement (1) may not be amended in the absence of a writing signed by each party, and (2) is governed by the laws of the state of Florida. Page 2 of 2 161 D'XTAINC CONSULTING .4. '-, , ..L .... . PlalUling . VisuJlli~ation 'Civil Engineering ,SuIYeying & Mapping REQUIRED BILLING INFORMATION IN ORDER 10 SIMPLIFY OUR BILL.ING RECORDS, PLEASE FILL OUI THE FOLLOWING INFORAfATlON: INVOICE ADDRESSEE INFORMAlION: COMPANY NAME: CONTACT NAME: STREET ADDRESS: CITY, STATE & ZIP: PHONE NUMBER: FAX NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS: PO # (IF REQUIRED): _ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE DEPARTMENI INFORMATION CONIACT NAME: PHONE NUMBER: FAX NUMBER: E-MAIL ADDRESS: IF SPECIAL INVOICING PAY ApPLICATION OR PAY REQUEST FORMS ARE REQUIRED. PLEASE PROVIDE A COpy F:\OOOOO300 00 OPR\OOOOO] 00.01 aPM - Manage\0005 Standard Documents\PSA and Attachments\2007 Required Billing Information ,doc 1 ~I? 161 10\3 01/08/2010 17:08 FAX ~OOl Q,tp~ County ,~~,,,,,"'~fto!'..-~ 1,1( Transportation Services Division -. Mr. Tile Vanderbilt Beach MSTU bas ham wotking with Florida Power. COIIICllSl IIId CoIIiar Coont;y to convert aU ovcdJead eledrlcal and TV cable in the Vandelbilt Beacll area 10 uJld&qround. We are ple8sed to nodl)i you that tIti. conversion process is about to begin_ We ..... writlna you 10 infunn you that you will be included in Phase I of the project. Since you ~ have 811 ovatIead connection from duo _ to your home (See: F1sure 1). it will be nec<lIISlIl')' for you to have tItis connection converted to undelllJ'Olllld prior to FPL and Comcut puttloa their actual lines underground. Seo F1aure 2 for JIOIIl converslon ClOIIIICCtlon. In December. Ordinance Number 2009-70 was adopled to require all residents in the v.nderbih Be8ch lIl'e a to convert their individual o:oonectioos to ondcrJIround. The Ordlnance also allows the MSlU to 1"'>' duo cost of aueh conversion. Thaefunl,}'(IU will not be requirecllO pay any IIlOIlIO)' individually for tItia project. (Note: actualllOl18tluction date will be provided to rcsidcat either by US Mall deIlvery or physical poaing on 1""f'"!Y) Converting the power UtililiC8 to undertlround inlllallations will mm them mORl .....Istant to dunagc by hutriCllDe8 and seven lllomIlI, Improve aervlce and ~"l".we the 8CSIlultic qualities of the neighbodlood. The Project WOIk will be pllri'ormed by FP&:L, Comcut andllllbcontraclor and paid fur by tIte MS11J. Pardclpctioa of .11 110m""""""" i$ requlrod fur -.I -. In onIer lOr Ibe Projact 10 q..JiQ- fur . 15% d1lC01111t from FP&:L, there must be 100% conversion of.1l reaidentlal power _ within the project -. In llddItion, any connection nol COIIVClItIld to undergtound could have a negative effect on otbor homeowners in the event of.1tonn or other 0IJlaSe. The CHlIy llCtiH req...acd _ yoar part III, P1cuc complelc the enclosed information form wllb aU your conlBct Informalio.n 8IId retW1l it to me in the enolosed envelopo. Aoc:unde COIllaet iDfbrmBlion is requinld to notify YOll of 1be actual day YOlll" powar will be switc:hed to ondmll'uuud as your residence will temporarily be without power for 1 to 4 hours. n....nry -'- to PropertJ: During 1be conversion procellS a toIdnCtOr wID require _ to 1be ~ adj_t to your residential bomeIBtrucIure. This _ is temporary InIl anticipalIecI to be leu than 2 days for the inlllallldon of CClIICIIIIt 8IId wire III pIOYIde power servlc:e to your bome. It win not be nee 1 . Y ful'the c:catractm'to enter your home. Thank you fur your support oflbe Vanderbilt s-.h MS11J and this WI)' ~ project. If you havo any quostions or would like to _iow Ibo delalls nWded to the COIlv-m& of your ovemo.d power utllltMls 10 undersronnd instalJatloo.. pleue call me at (239) 252-9Oll3. Sincerely, DlInyI Richard. RLA, MSTU Project Manaaer Te1epbclDe: 239-252-5775 Pax: 239-252-6627 Cell: 239-253-9083 ..-.."-"..--'-----"----__..__.____~..._.._._.'.~___~...__ 1 161 1 fbl? From: Sent: To: Cc: RichardDarryl Monday, December 21,20099:11 AM Steven D. Valdivia; filson_s amold_m; lulich_P; sillery_t; (fbayview@aol.com); Bill Gonnering (bill@ipcnaples.com); bud_martin@comcast.net; ccarthur@earthlink.net; dlydon124@aol.com RE: withdrawal of application to Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee Subject: Importance: High Sue, I had a nice conversation with Steve Valdivia this morning, he has informed me that there has come up a new opportunity/commitment in his professional life. This commitment will involve considerable time and not allow him to serve the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Committee at this time. (see attached notification from Steve Valdivia) His application is officially withdrawn for this vacancy, should his commitments allow, he is interested in applying sometime in the future. Thank you, Darryl Richard, RLA, MSTU Project Manager Collier County Department of Aiternative Transportation Modes 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples, Florida 34104 telephone: 239-252-5775 Fax; 239-252-6219 Cell: 239-253-9083 da rrvlricha rd @lcolliernov. net From: Steven D. Valdivia [mailto:stevonmfl@yahoo.oom] Sent: Monday, December 21, 2009 9:03 AM To: RichardDarryl Subject: withdrawel Mr. Daryl Richard Due to recent committments, I will not be able to serve on the Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Board at this time. Please withdraw my name from consideration. Sincerely, Steven D. Valdivia 1 161 1 u0lJ MEMORANDUM DATE: December 11,2009 TO: Tessie Sillery, Transportation~ Sue Filson, Executive Manag Board of County Commissioners FROM: RE: Vanderbilt Beach Beautification MSTU Advisory Committee As you know, we currently have a vacancy on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit an application for consideration. I have attached the applications received for your review as follows: Steven D. Valdivia 260 Southbay Drive, #211 Naples, FL 34108 Richard E. Lydon 450 Tradewinds Avenue Naples, FL 34108 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation for appointment of the advisory committee within the 41 day time-frame, and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration. Please include in your return memo the attendance records of the applicants recommended for reappointment. Please categorize the applicants in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 252-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachments . . . 161 1 (1) Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (239) 252-8606 Fax: (239) 252-6406 ~pplication for Advisory Committees/Boards Name:_Steven D. Valdivia Home Pbone: (505) 4595006_ Home Address:_260 Southbay Dr # 211 Zip Code:_34108 Fax No. Business Pboue:_NA e-mail address:_stevonmfl@yaboo.com Place of Employment:_retired Board or Committee Applied for: _Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Category (ifapplicable):_lay person Example: Commission District, Developer, environmentalist, lay person, etc. How long bave yon lived in Collier County: Years: _4 years _ Montbs: _4 mos._ Are you a registered voter in CoBier County: Yes _x_ No_ Do you currently bold public office? Yes _ No _x_If so. what is that office? Have you ever been convicted of any offense against the Law? Yes _ No _X_ If yes, explaio: Do you or your employer do business with tbe County? Yes _ No _X_If yes, under wbat circumstances? Would you and/or any organizations with wbom you are affiliated benelit from decisions or recommendations made by tbis advisory board? Yes_No_X_lfyes, please list the organizations: NOTE: AU advisory board members must update tbeir profile and notify tbe Board of County Commissioners in tbe event that tbeir relationsbip changes relating to membersbips of organizations that may benelit them in tbe outcome of advisory board recommendations or they euter into contracts with the County. Do you now serve, or bave you ever served, on a Collier County board or committee? Yes _ No _X_If yes, please list tbe committeeslboards: - . . . 161 1 rQ\? Please list your eommunity aetivities (civic clubs, neighborhood associations, ete. and positions held: see Note, below Education: JH Francis US California San Fernando Valley CoUege California Georgetown Sehool of Foreign Service Wash. DC Calif State Unw. Los Angeles, Calif Experience: Past board member, Los Angeles Connty IDter-ageney Tuk Foree; -Past member, United Way Advisory Board, Los Angeles; and many others _ _Currently serve as co-ebair, Unw ofDl., ICHASS (supercomputer eenter); Occaslonalleeturer and Instructur; _ Author of two books from which I oc:easionally teach and/or train at nnwersity leveL _Real Estate investor and owner/manager of several properties Note: I have not participated In civic aetivitles slnee retiring in 1995. My career Included being an appointee of the Mayor, City of Los Angeles and the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles (over ten years). I Interaded with civic and servlee groups, church, edueatlon and other eommunlty groups. At this time, I would be willing to serve if your group should SO choose. Please lIlJacIr /IIfY additiOJUll inf_n you feel putinent. TIJis appIicotlfm slrould be fOTWtUded to St.e FilsolI, ExectItive MtI1Ul(fer to tire _ of CDIurJy eo-/ssionen, 3301 East TIIIIIilImJ Trtdl, Ntl}JIes, FL 34112. If you wislt, pI_e fax your application to (139)252-6406 or e-maU to .'ftUefil.wm(iiiCo/lierool'.neL Thank you. for volunteering to servt! the dtizens of Collier County. ~ 16 r--101? filson s Em: nt: 0: Subject: dlydon124@aol.com Friday, November 06, 2009 3:58 PM filson s New On-line Advisory Board Application Submitted Advisory Board Appli~ation Form Collier County Government 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 (239)252-8606 Application was received on: 11/612009 3:57:34 PM. Name: /Richard E. Lydon! Home Phone: ~39-597-274~ Home Address: 1450 Tradewinds Avej City: /Naple~ Zip Code: ~ Phone Numbers Fax: ~ Business: ~ .Mail Address: jdlvdon I 24(a)aol.coml Board / Committee Applied for: /Vanderbilt Beach Municipal Services Taxing Uni~ Category: /Not indicated! Work Place: lRetire~ How long have you lived in CoUier County: Imore than 151 Have you ever been convicted of any offense against the law? ~ /Not Indicated/ Do you or your employer do business with the County? ~ /Not Indicate~ NOTE: All advisory board members must update their profile and notify the Board of County Commissioners in the event that their relationship changes relating to memberships of organizations that may benefit them in the outcome of advisory board recommendations or they enter into contracts with the County. . Would you and/or any organizations with whom you are affiliated benefit from decisions or 1 161 1 ~\3 recommendations made by this advisory board? ~ .ot Indicatedj Are you a registered voter in Collier County? ~ Do you currently hold public office? ~ Do you currently or ever served on a Collier County Board or Committee? ~ ed, Alternate, Tourist Develo Please list our communi activities: anderbilt Beach Pro Owners Assn, Second District Assn, Presidents Council, E Conservatio Education: uate, Greenfield Hi School, Greenfield, IA Universi of Utah, DePaul Universi --No de Ex erience: er: International Travel Consultants, Wide World of Travel, China Business Co . . 2 161 Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Committee Attachments submitted for file with 11/05/2009 Vanderbilt Beach MSTU Advisory Board minutes. .~ ~"'~ Fia\a Halas Henning . Coyle :.J.-~ I r' P =. coletta r:;.~ ';.; . , w ."., . '..:" .,. "~ Misc. Carres: 0a1Il: Item # 1 e>[,? :) ... 0 Ul ~ ::1..,0 .......... :::!.......,: mCi:' ~z.. w:)" clL" Z .. c( ..., > 161 tJ\ 1; 1 "'0 ~~u;~8:g 0 0 iO~g~ : <')0 <0 0 , , , "':0 C"icOcricON~ .; 0 ~.-i~~ :8 00 ,... ".".N ~ 8 ...ill., ... 00 ~ ~N N C> "ii ,..... ~~ ;: .-i .-i or; ,.: Q. N .. ~~~~~~W~~WW0W"~WW"0000WW_ 0 V N 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 ~ <D 0 0 0 <Xl <Xl n v 0 0 0 0 0 v v 0 0 '" '" 0 <D ;;; N ;;; 0 ci 0 0 0 I- n 0 0 ..; c 0 N N or, " N " " ,- n " " .. 'c <D w n ~. 0- W " ~ " 0- N N " " N .~ "' N r- " C> N V N ," <D ...- E N ,> V V ,. ~ ~ "' WWWW~WWWV)WWWWWU)WWWWWW~ww~ <') '" o .; _ 1_ Olll~ '" -O.~ mo 0 I~~NM ~_9,..._ ""~Nm ~ ~N m ~~-~ ~~,...~,... ~~-~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;:8~8~~~~~~~~j mo 00 8 BOOO ~~too ooo~ ..."ltci.. 0 ::; ... 1;j UlInWqJWcncnc ~I~ ~ I!! IIIIIII~ c ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~c~~~ 9 ~ ~~--"ii: ~@ ~~I~~~~~ ~ j ~ c ~ ~ 2: 2: ::; .~ "' 6 ~,g go c 1ii 1ii 1ii ~ 'E -~8~~~1;~~' . ~U~i~Eii~~~~t ~5cc~I~~~~~~~~m~~~~J~~-~ Sge~~EE~;in~Bu:~~~~~o~~~~~ ~w ~~~91,~~~~~oU)oooo~~~~~; >~~~oowww~~wu=uoouoo~~~~~ c c o 0 I!! I!! - ~ ~ _...... I~ ~ II II~ ~ cc c~ ~_~~ ~~~~ . j~ 8~ o~~~~~~~ cc~c Ec ~~ I~ ~~~~fgi~ ~~~o ~~-~~ ~l ~~8B~~~~ a6~~~ ~u=~~ - c wllcEEEEcmm..~_ "~"EE><><""'" I!!----l'l~~ ~- ~~EEEWW~~j~~~~~~~~~c~~~g~ .ooooiiog~oo~~wmmmmmmmme> >uuuo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~zzz~~ a&i-~ sli:........ .!!:?l oS; '~...... -!~ .~~ ~v; caCl ... 0...... ~ .......1'0:. ~ ,.~.. .., Lt.d{; . ~ ~It: ..I........._....:.....!k:r!.~ ." 0 ~ .:;} I .. . <7'11~ J ',_.14'';<'. :E <> ~ ~~~~ONN ow~ O~~~NN ~~~ ~s~~~~~ 8~~ ~~~~~8 ~~- .~....N_;...._M~...._....~<M~~~M....O~....M oz~~~~~~~z~~~zz~~g~~~~-~~ Q. 8888888 808 888888-888 ~~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ............................ ............ ........................ ............ ,. "- ~ o Q. ~::~~ . .....:a::i~..; ~ MN ,... ,g_1l) ..... ..... . =lS~ ~ ~~~ - " 88888888888888888888 gg~gg~gg~gg~~~~g~gg~ MO~OOO~~O~_Il)~OOW~_OO .~~~ci ~~~~~~M~~N~~ ..... __ ~__NN NM~"" NOO l()aO ~8g8g~~~ggggg .-i8'g'Oc::iNNcOcicic:icid .... OIl)..........O)ooooo ..,.0 O.....-NO)MIOOOIl) ...: ci Il'i ci 0)- <0-"""- c\f i.O cD -..... ..- .... g~:2g8 o~:::g~ 8<ofOCD<O NNi8f?i ~ "'''' ....-...; "' <> ...: '" '" ,.: <') C!. U)-U')-utfttututututututWut WutWU)-U)-U)-utut0WututU)-utututt#tutututututfttutWU')- ---- co.......co.... !l!"'":"'":"!"l 1:NCOO..... ii:e~~~gj ,;,,,cD -..,f u c: r--. - " ~ >< w 8~8~~~ 8' MON"':"': ....0....""0 <') <0 0 Iri"'li"": ,...: ~ .; o <0 .; OJ .-i ~"' ~~ N'" :8gg8g~~ ..;NN~~.,;ci,; ...V:sOCSNiO:;r ClCt. ~ ~ _ ~..... f'-._ . MMIf)MMMU">O) C")N....NN .......... N '" N ;:: g ~ tit tit tit tit tit tit tit tit tit tit tltfh tltfhtltWtlttlttlttlttlttlttlttlttlttlttlttlt*tIt*tlttlttlttltWtlt_ Ii' , , , . , ~ E ~ u <0 ~ 0 N 'J <:c' ." 0 ~ 0 C> <0 co <0 co ., v n '" 0 C> <0 q) 0 ;; n ::. N ..; 0 .. " N m co M N ... N .. " <D N ,~ I- N N ~ ~ <0 .. N m N N "' oi ~ i v ., .. tlttlttlttlttlttltWtltWWtlt",," W0u~~~~~~mw~~~w~~~tIt*tltWtlttlttlttlttlt s- O !..~ i-g~ ~..~ s- O g o o :!- 8888 g2gg oCSoo ~g~~ 8 g ... .; q Wfo'ttB-tB-ffltB-fff"tB-UJ-fo'tfo'tfff" w, - U - ~~t;UJ~uzffi aJ SS~~~~~~~~ ~ :::E ~wo~ 1--00 Z w~i;~ug~~a:a::>8 ~~O;:~~"'"'~~tl!.. ..J..JClZl--cnLLLLa:a:t-OO ,;,,>Q';;wt-wffiffioo(/)ffi J::::E(/)jI.LLLLLLLWLL 0" QI-- t- Wz (/)(/) >- >- "#.(/)_.. <:J:(/)a::WZza::e::&n~ !5u:Jt;;~~G;~~~~"~ uou.~~C:::t-t-UU~1-- fflfflWfhfff"WfflWWWtltWtltUJ-WWtlt WtltWWtltWWW tit LL..J :::: C/) ~< <u 0 ~ ~..J..J ~I--~ ....l:::Ew Z 0 W 0 ~o <: ~z~ a::<~O m~W ooffi ~ ~U ~ W~I-- wa::wz Zz z~ _ ~Ul--~ "'"'_u ;;;~~:'i "'o~~::;w >z "~oo" Wt-U< WwOO -JW~W~~ WWZU ~~~~~>w~~~ ~~~G~~I--~ ~~8~ WOuwz~~owa::z <~ m~W~~C/)a::e:: u. ~wt-~8wu~uw~ ~o~a::~~ooffit-t-ffi~w u.Wuo a::~;..J z< Wt->-'I--LLt-l--U.>~ ~~wwC:::U.t-ffi~~~J:~-,a::J:<o~C/)C/)wwC/)a::~ ~ a::oWt-u ~-zU ~wt-~c:::czz8~;wW '1:.ffii~~~o~~i~~~~~ffit-oJ:ffi~o~~~~~g~ffiro -'w_~ ~W>_C/)~~~-, LL ~ul--t-mml--C:::C::: ~NM.~~~Gm~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~~~~~=~~~~~~~~=~i 0 0 ..... ..... CD CO 0 CD CO ..... 0 0 ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... 0 JJ JJ ~ ~ 0 0 0 JJ JJ ~ 0') C11 ~ W N ..... ..... ..... 0 C11 W N ..... ..... JJ JJ 0') JJ ..... ..... JJ JJ JJ JJ JJ JJ N N JJ JJ JJ JJ N N JJ ..... 0') 0') ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... N N JJ ..... N ..... ..... ..... 0') 0') N N N N N N ..... ..... ..... N N N N 0') 0') ..... 0') ..... ..... 0') 0') 0') 0') 0') 0') N Z Z N 0') 0') 0') 0') ..... ..... ..... Z Z ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... 0') Z )> )> 0') ..... Z ..... ..... ..... )> )> Z Z Z Z Z Z ..... 0') 0') Z ..... Z Z Z Z ..... ..... )> )> )> )> )> )> Z )> )> Z )> )> )> )> )> 0') C C 0') ~ 0 0 CD CD CD CD CO 0') )> (D (D )> ~ W N N 0') C C ~ r- C C C C C C C C ... ... C ~ C C C (D . . (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D (D r- ... )> )> ... r- (D 0') (D (D (D ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... N . . ~ ... I ... ... ... . . I I . . . . . . . CD N ~ . . . )> OJ C 0 OJ )> )> 0 OJ en z c )> ~ )> OJ )> ----- ---- ----- -------- .. ---- , \ ~------~-; I, 161 Ib/~ " ~ \ I, \ \ \ , " , -- . ---- t.r. "C "!'... ,f., , fu3 'tl Co c( - Gl C N cl; Z .... lD N .... a: .... o Page 1 of 2 f2J) 'tl Q. <i. - GI - 0 N cl: Z ... 10 N ... a: ... o Page 2 of 2 13 .,- / 1 Page 2 of 2 Il(l 2 Page 1012 r!J1'b - 'tl Q. ci. - Ql C M c:r: Z Page 2 of 2 1b I 1 - 'tl c.. ~ , lD .., ..J .., <( Z ... lD N ... a:: .., o - 'C Co ....: 0:3' . CD 0:3' ..J 0:3' c( Z .... CD ('II .... II: . 0:3' o 13 - 'tl Q. <i. - CII C "'" <( Z .... CD N .... a: It) o Page 1 013 _"__0'",,",,_ - " Co <i. - GI C .... c( z .- ID N .- a: on o Page 2 of 3 - 't:l C. <i. - Q) c .... <( z ... lD N ... a: It) o Page 3 of 3 161 1 01?J - "C Q. C'Ii '<3' ..J '<3' c( Z 0- CD N 0- Il: CD o Page 1012 161 f 1 tbl'J - 'C Co N '<t ...J '<t Cl: Z .... 10 C\I .... a: 10 o ..,.--~ , - \ . \ I \ \ \ \----" \ \ \ \ \ \ 16 I r"l bl? - "C a. ci 1611 I 13 Page 2 of 2 ~}? - 'tl Q. Z I <C - Q) o ID <C Z ... ID N ... II: CXl o Page 1012 Page 2 of 2 - 'C C- ui I <( Qj C lD <( Z ... lD N ... a: en o Page 1 of 2 161 ~11 fJ{3 "C Q. cri I <( Page 2 of 2 161 1.1 01'3 - 'C C- ell Qj C lD <C Z ... lD ('II ... II: o ... Page 2 of 2 ?J(!J - "C Co III - Ql o CD c( Z ... CD N ... a: o ... 16; ... ... Page 2 of 2 &\7 - "C D- c>> C\I ..J l.D < Z .... l.D C\I .... a:: .... .... c t: " 161 1 0r~ ~ ~13 - 'tl Co U .... Ql o ID c( Z .... ID N .... a: N .... Photo 2 .,- . .~,; 1 PhOtO~3 ' ~ " "':"1<;., . " << .' f~ - I~_. Page 2 of 2 161 1 tOr~ .,.,....'....'.0. Page 1 of 2 PJ13 ... .... lD N .... a: C') .... Page 2 of 2 2 Page 1 of 2 lQr3 - '1J Q. ei. Page 2 of 2 Page 1012 ~13 - " c. m - Gl C 01 c:( Z ~ CD N ~ a: It) ~ 1 0(~ - "C 0- m Page 2 012 161 1 0r3 - 'tl C- o - I ~l RJ(6 .,;;r. .'" e! .,; ;~ Page 2 of 2 - "C Co U - ~ O'l <C z ..... U) N ..... a: U) ..... _%-. '~~ .";<>f~; :111111 1 0C7 - 'tl Q. c:i III --- It 'It - Q) C al <l: z .... lC N .... a: .... .... !pi'illl ItllllllUd. Page 1 of 2 161 1 013 ..., .... a: .~ ;~" '~\'. ~~;"" ~ -I. Page 2 of 2 161 1 e; r?J - l\) c o .... <( z .... 10 ('II .... a: co .... 1 rOl, - '0 t!- al Page 2 of 2 - Q) c c .... c( z .... CD N .... a: Q) .... I - 'tl Co <i. Page 1012 161 1 {bl? ~ 11".11 - f\ Ifcr~. RE t:.:\i'<:C) . , .. FEe 1 0 2010 161~.1 r, January l~, 201~ LJ HU,1'C .' ):"'jr,, . ,-<y..,r-q:~'>S\i)n~.'(:C MINUTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE Fiala op I Halas Henning Naples, Florida, January 15,2010 Coyle Coletta LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Special Magistrate, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION in the Administrative Building "F," 3rd floor, Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Florida, with the following persons present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable Brenda Garretson ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor Michele McGonagle, Administrative Secretary ltem#: Copies to' !n~)15,201 C{ I. CALL TO ORDER The Hearing was called to ordcr at 9:00 AM by the Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson. All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. A. Hearing Rules and Regulations were given by Special Magistratc Garretson. The Special Magistrate noted that, prior to conducting the Hearing, Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officer(s) for a Resolution by Stipulation; the goal is to obtain compliance without being punitive. RECESS: 9:17 AM RECONVENED: 9:33 AM II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor, noted the following changes: (a) Under Item V (A), Stipulations were reached in the following cases: . Agenda #12, Case #CESD 20090003240 - BCC vs. Gregory & Amy Blocker . Agenda #10, Case #CESD 20090011816 - BCC vs. Abraham Veitia & Lesa Maria Perez (b) Under Item V (B), "Hearings," the following case was WITHDRAWN by the Deputy: . Agenda #2, Case #SO 166107-CEEX 20090018880 - BCC vs. Luis Cintron (c) Under Item V (B), "Hearings," the following case was WITHDRAWN by the County due to payment: . Agenda #3, Case #SO 172764-CEEX 20090017348 - BCC vs. Karolyn Karnehm c/o William Rogers, P A (d) Under Item V (B), "Hearings," the following cases were WITHDRAWN by the County: . Agenda #6, Case #FI 2009003 - BCC vs. Ibis Club International, LLC, c/o John D. Malarky, Schain, Burney, Ross, Citron, L TD . Agenda #13, Case #CENA 20090018159 - BCC vs. Edie Hunter (e) Under Item VI (A), "Motion for Imposition of Fines," the following case was WITHDRAWN by the County: . Agenda #6, Case #CESD 20080013392 - BCC vs. Miramar Beach & Tennis Club, Inc. The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as amended, subject to changes made during the course of the Hearing at the discretion of the Special Magistrate. 2 161 1 January 15,20 I 0 (j\ III, APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 4, 2009 The Minutes of the Special Magistrate Hearing held on December 4, 2009 were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as submitted. IV. MOTIONS A. Motion for Reduction/Abatement of Fines - None B. Motion for Extension of Time - None V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Stipulations: 12. Case #CESD 20090003240 - BCC vs. Grel!:orv & Amv Blocker The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Maria Rodrigucz. The Respondents werc not present. Violations: Florida Building Code, 2004 Edition, Chapter I Permits, Section 105.1 Failed to obtain required inspection and a Certificate of Completion for Permit #2009050227 for the outdoor corral lights Folio No: 00062400004 Violation address: 1404 Lemon Tree Drive, Immokalce A Stipulation was entered into by Re.\pondent, Gregory Blocker, on January 13, 20 I O. A Notice of Hearing was postcd at the property and the Courthouse on December 30, 2009. Investigator Rodriguez statcd only Mr. Blocker signed the Stipulation. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUlL TY of the alleged violation and ordered to either re-apply for a Collier County Building Permit, all required inspections and a Certificate of Completion, or obtain a Collier County Demolition Permit to remove the unpermitted improvements, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion on or before February 15, 2010, or afine of $100. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate, 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 Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the terms of the Stipulation. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $112.23 on or before February 15, 2010. 3 16Y'5,201 QJ The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $/12.23 10. Case #CESD 20090011816 - BCC vs. Abraham Veitia & Lesa Maria Perez The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Renald Paul who was present. Respondent, Abraham Veitia, was present and represented his wife, Lesa Maria Perez. Lesa Veitia, the Respondent's daughter, served as translator. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 04-41, as amended, Section I 0.02.06(B)(l )(A) Enclosing lanai and extending the lanai with no permits. Folio No: 36245560007 Violation address: 1848 520d Terrace SW The Respondents reside at 1848 520d Terrace SW, and Mr. Veitia confirmed his daughter translated the Stipulation for him prior to signing. A Stipulation was entered into by Respondent, Abraham Veitia, on behalfofhis wife, Lesa Maria Perez, and himself on January 15, 2010, Investigator Paul stated the Respondent admitted the violation. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUlL TY of the alleged violation and ordered to either obtain all permits and inspections required by Collier County and a Certificate of Completion, or obtain a County Demolition Permit, all required inspections, and a Certificate of Completion on or before May 15,2010, or afine of $200.00 per day will be imposed for each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 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 Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the terms of the Stipulation. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $112.42 on or before February 15,2010. The Respondent is to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance, Total Amount Due: $/12.42 4 Jl~ k, 2011 ~ \ Supervisor Waldron stated the following case was WITHDRAWN by the County: Agenda #1, Case #SO 135701-CEEX 20090018403 - BCC vs. Curtis Grimes V. PUBLIC HEARINGS B. Hearings: 4. Case #FI 2009001- BCC vs. Ibis Club International, LLC, c/o John D. Malarkv, Schain, Burnev, Ross, & Citron, L TD The Hearing was requested by Collier County Fire Inspector Barbara Sibley, Golden Gate Fire District, who was present. The Respondent was represented by Albert Miranda, Maintenance Supervisor. Violations: Florida Fire Prevention Code, NFP A 72, Chapter 10.5.1 ("National Fire Protection Association") Batteries arc the wrong size for the fire alarm system. Folio No: 00399400007 Violation address: 8225 Ibis Club Lane Mr. Miranda stated he was authorized by the management company, Condominium Concepts, LLC, to represent the Respondent. The Special Magistrate clarified John D. Malarky ofSchain, Burney, Ross, & Citron was not a Respondent in thc case, and confirnled the Florida Fire Prevention Code cited by the Inspector had been adopted by Collier County as an Ordinance. Inspector Sibley introduced the f()llowing Exhibits on behalf of the County which were marked and admitted into evidence: . Exhibit "A" - original Notice of Violation issucd on January 3, 2008 and signed by the Property Manager . Exhibit "B" - photograph - 4 amp battery installed in fire alarm panel . Exhibit "C" -- wiring legend/specs - submitted to Permitting . Exhibit "D" - email dated March 24, 2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "E" - email dated September 4, 2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "F" - email dated July 7, 2009 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "G" - certified letter sent to the Property Manager The Inspector stated an incorrectly sized battery was installed in the fire alarm panel at 8225 Ibis Club and the violation had not been abated. Mr. Miranda stated he assumed responsibility at the property approximately four months ago. He further stated batteries had been replaced, but this building may have been missed. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to hire a Certifiedfire alarm 5 161 1 January 15,2010 l' Contractor to install a correctly sized battery at 8225 Ibis Club Lane on or before January 29, 2010, or afine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondent. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$II2.03 on or before February 15, 2010. The Respondent is to notify the Golden Gate Fire District Inspector within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Inspector perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $/12.03 5. Case #FI 2009002- BCC ys. Ibis Club International, LLC, c/o John D. Malarky, Schain, Burney, Ross, & Citron, LTD The Hearing was requested by Collier County Fire Inspector Barbara Sibley, Golden Gate Fire District, who was prcsent. The Respondent was represented by Albert Miranda, Maintenance Supervisor. Violations: Florida Fire Prevention Code, NFPA 13, Chapter 6.7.4 ("National Fire Protection Association") Valves/connections not properly identified. Folio No: 00399400007 Violation address: 8275 Ibis Club Lane The Special Magistrate notcd the Findings made in Agenda #4, Case #FI 2009001, concerning representation and jurisdiction will remain the same for the remaining Ibis Club cases. Inspector Sibley introduced the following Exhibits on behalf of the County which were marked and admitted into evidence: . Exhibit "A" - original Notice of Violation issued on January 3, 2008 and signed by the Propcrty Manager . Composite Exhibit "B" - two photographs of the property . Exhibit "C" - email dated March 24, 2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "D" - cmail datcd September 4,2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "E" - email datcd July 7, 2009 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "I''' - certi lied lettcr sent to the Property Manager The Inspector stated signs identifying values and connections must face the roadway and be visible to fire equipment upon approach. The violation has not been abated. 6 1611 1 January 15,2010 t,\ Mr. Miranda stated the violation was abated but a site inspection had not been performed. Inspector Sibley stated she will conduct a follow-up site visit. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUlLTY of the alleged violation and ordered to provide proper, visible sign age at the property on or before January 29,2010, or afine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondent has 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 Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $111. 96 on or before February 15, 2010, The Respondent is to notify the Golden Gate Fire District Inspector within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Inspector perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $111,96 7. Case #FI 2009004- BCC ys. Ibis Club International. LLC, c/o John D. Malarky. Schain. Burney. Ross. & Citron. LTD The Hearing was requested by Collier County Fire Inspector Barbara Sibley, Golden Gate Fire District, who was present. The Respondent was represented by Albert Miranda, Maintenance Supervisor. Violations: Florida Fire Prevention Code, NFPA I. Chapter 18.3.4 ("National Fire Protection Association") Fire Department connections not accessible/visible due to landscaping Folio No: 00399400007 Violation address: 8285 Ibis Club Lane (See Agenda #4 for Disclaimer). Inspector Sibley introduced the following Exhibits on behalf of the County which were marked and admitted into evidence: . Exhibit "A" ~ original Notice of Violation issued on January 3, 2008 . Composite Exhibit "B" -two photographs of the property . Exhibit "c" - email dated March 24. 2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "D" - email dated September 4.2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "E" - email dated July 7,2009 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "F" - certitied letter sent to the Property Manager The Inspector stated the landscaping/overgrown hedges obscured the location of the 7 161 1 January 15,2010 ~\ Fire Department connections (hose hook-up) from fire apparatus entering the property. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to remove overgrown shrubbery to provide a clear view of Fire Department connections at the property on or before January 29, 2010, or afine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. lfthe Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondents. Ifnecessary, assistance may be requestedfrom the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$/I 1.96 on or before February 15, 2010. The Respondent is to notify the Golden Gate Fire District Inspector within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Inspector perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $111.96 8. Case #FI 2009005 - BCC ys. Ibis Club International, LLC, c/o John D. Malarky, Schain, Burney, Ross, & Citron, LTD The Hearing was requested by Collier County Fire Inspector Barbara Sibley, Golden Gate Fire District, who was present. The Respondent was represented by Albert Miranda, Maintenance Supervisor. Violations: Florida Fire Prevention Code, NFPA 13, Chapter 6.7.4 ("National Fire Protection Association") Valves/connections not properly identified Folio No: 00399400007 Violation address: 8290 Ibis Club Lane (See Agenda #4 for Disclaimer). Inspector Sibley introduccd the following Exhibits on behalf of the County which were marked and admitted into evidence: . Exhibit "A" - final Notice of Violation issued on June 10,2009 and signed by the Property Manager . Composite Exhibit "B" ~ three photographs of the property . Exhibit "C" - email dated March 24, 2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "0" - email dated September 4,2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "E" - email dated July 7, 2009 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "F" ~ certified letter sent to the Property Manager 8 '~'.."~_.--.-",,_.- 161 1 ~\ January 15,20 I 0 The Inspector stated the Fire Department connections were totally obscured from view of any fire apparatus entering the property. Mr. Miranda stated the violation was abated and introduced two photographs which were marked as Respondent's Exhibits "1" and "2" and admitted into evidence. Inspector Sibley stated she will conduct a follow-up site visit. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to provide proper signagefor the Fire Department connections at the property on or before January 29,2010, or a fine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate, If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondents. Ifnecesmry, assistance may be requestedfrom the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $111.96 on or before February 15, 2010, The Respondent is to notify the Golden Gate Fire District Inspector within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Inspector perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $111.96 9. Case #FI 2009006 - BCC vs. Ibis Club International. LLC, c/o John D. Malarky. Schain. Burney. Ross. & Citron. LTD The Hearing was requested by Collier County Fire Inspector Barbara Sibley, Golden Gate Fire District, who was present. The Respondent was represented by Albert Miranda, Maintenance Supervisor. Violations: Florida Fire Prevention Code, NFP A 13, Chapter 6.2.9 Inadequate supply of spare sprinkler heads in the box. Folio No: 00399400007 Violation address: 8225 Ibis Club Lane (See Agenda #4 for Disclaimer). Inspector Sibley introduced the following Exhibits on behalf of the County which were marked and admitted into evidence: . Exhibit "A" - Notice of Violation issued on January 3, 2008 and signed by the Property Manager . Exhibit "B" -photographs of sprinkler heads . Exhibit "C" - email dated March 24, 2008 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "0" - email dated September 4, 2008 to IBIS Property Manager 9 161 1 January 15,2010 t\ . Exhibit "E" - email dated July 7, 2009 to IBIS Property Manager . Exhibit "F" - certified letter sent to the Property Manager Power Outtage: 10:58 AM RECONVENED: 11:02 AM The Inspector stated Code requires six different sprinkler heads to be kept on site, but the Respondent had only four in the spare sprinkler head box. Mr. Miranda stated he will supply the proper number of correct sprinkler heads. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUlL TY of the alleged violation and ordered to provide the proper number of sprinkler heads on or before January 29,2010, or afine 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. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondents, Ifnecessary, assistance may be requestedfrom the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of$11I.96 on or before February 15, 2010. The Respondent is to notify the Golden Gate Fire District Inspector within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Inspector perform a site inspection to confirm compliance, Total Amount Due: $//1.96 11. Case #CEPM 20090008163 - BCC vs. Joseph H. Deroma Livin!!: Trust UTD The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Property Maintenance Specialist Joe Mucha who was present. The Respondent was represented by Rental Agent Mary Jayne Coyne Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ordinances, Chapter 22, Article VI, Section 22-231, Subsections 12B and 12P Structure that has exterior siding in deteriorated condition and vacant rental unit that needs interior flooring replaced. Folio No: 62769800000 Violation address: 836 96th Avenue N., Unit B, Naples, FL 34108 Ms. Coyne who resides at 730 99th Avenue North, Naples, Florida 34108, has been authorized by the owner to represent him. She stated the property is one ofthree lots that are either in foreclosure or foreclosure is pending. 10 12u!ry IS,!lO ~ \ Investigator Mucha introduced seven photorgraphs, taken on May 18, 2009, which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "A," and five photographs, taken on August 28, 2009, which were marked as County's Composite Exhibit "B." The Exhibits were admitted into evidence. Power Outtage: 11:16 AM RECONVENED: 11 :23 AM The Investigator stated he researched the subject property and found it is not currently in foreclosure. The Rental Agent stated there are three parcels with two sets of duplexes on each lot, and two of the three are in foreclosure. The subject property will also be foreclosed upon. She further stated in May 2009 she contacted a mold abatement company to inspect the property. It was determined there was a water leak from a hot water tank, but no mold. The tenant damaged the property by attempting to remove carpeting and was evicted for non-payment of rent. The property is vacant and no additional repairs were done. The Investigator explained the Ordinance requires a landlord to maintain his property whether it is occupied or vacant. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to replace or repair the damaged wood siding and replace the flooring on or before May 15, 2010, or a fine of $200,00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. If the Respondent has not complied by the deadline, the County is authorized to abate the violation by Contractor bid-out and assess the costs to the Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Re~pondent was ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $112.69 on or before February 15, 2010. The Respondent is to notify the Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $112.69 VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: 1. Case #2007050220 - BCC vs. Michael Schmidt & Vire:inia and James Schmidt II 1~1YI5,110 ~\ The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigative Investigator Carol Sykora. Respondents, Virginia and James Schmidt, were present and represented their son, Michael Schmidt. Violations: Collier County Ord. 2004-58, Sec. 6, Subsections 12C and 12P, the Property Maintenance Ordinance Damaged roof and sections of the ceiling that are damaged and in need of repair. Folio No: 60784200001 Violation address: 5257 Cypress Lane, Naples The Respondents reside at 5219 Maple Lane, Naples, Florida 34113. Investigator Sykora stated the violation has been abated. The Operational Costs of $267.90 for the initial hearing and the Operational Costs for the Imposition of Fines Hearing of $112.29 have been paid. The County requested imposition of tines in the sum of $137,400 for the period between February 20, 2008 through January 6, 2010 (687 days @ $200/day), for a total amount due of $137,400. The Respondents stated the lien had not been recorded when they purchased the property in July 2009, even though they paid for a property search by the County prior to closing. They obtained permits, have repaired the damaged roof, are in the process of restoring the remainder of the property, and requested dismissal of the tines. The Investigator stated the County would not object. The Special Magistrate ~.tated the Respondents performed their due diligence prior to buying the property and DENIED the County's Motionfor Imposition of Fines, 3. Case #CESD 20090002328 - BCC vs. Barrie & Deanne Kee. Jr. The County was represented by Code Enforcement Supervisor Jeff Letourneau. Respondent, Barrie Kee, Jr. was present and represented his wife, Deanne Kee. Violations: Collier County Land Development Code 2004-41, as amended, Section 1O.02.06(B)(1 )(E)(I) and Florida Building Code Article II, Section 22-26(B)(104.5.1.4.4) Swimming pool and metal work shop constructed without receiving Final Inspection(s). Permit(s) expired/abandoned without obtaining Certificate of Occupancy/Completion. Folio No: 41938720000 Violation Address: 5810 Standing Oaks Lane 12 161 ;, ~\ January 15,~10 Supervisor Letourneau stated the violation has been abated, and the Operational Costs 01'$117.70 for the initial Hearing were paid. The County requested imposition of Operational Costs (Imposition of Fines Hearing) in the sum of $112.16, together with fines in the sum of $700 for the period between November 19,2009 through November 25, 2009 (7 days @ $1 OO/day) for a total amount due of $812.16. The Respondent attempted to file a complaint against the builder for not obtaining final inspection as required, but he was unable to do so because of a misunderstanding regarding the Permit. He repaired all the damage and secured a final inspection. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion but waived payment of Fines and imposed only the Operational Costs in the sum of $112. 16. 4. Case #2006100419 - BCC vs. Gary L. Hauze The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Michelle Scavone. The Respondent was present. Violations: Collier County LDC 04-41, As Amended, Sec. I 0.02.06(B)(1 )(A), 1O.02.06(B)(1 leE), 1 0.02.06(B)(1)(E)(l) and Florida Building Code, 2004 Edition, Sec. 105.1. Barn built on estates zoned property without required Collier Co. permits Folio No: 37493120007 Violation address: 280 10th Ave. NE, 34120 The Respondent resides at 280 Tenth Avenue NE, Naples, FL 34120. Investigator Scavone stated the violation was abated and the Operational Costs of $1] 7.69 for the initial Hearing were paid. The County requested imposition of Operational Costs (for the Imposition of Fines Hearing) in the amount 01'$112.49, together with fines in the amount 01'$48,400 for the period from September 19, 2008 through January IS, 20 I 0 (484 days @ $IOO/day), for a total amount due 01'$48,512.49. The Respondent stated he was unaware his initial permit had expired, and was unable to obtain a second permit due to financial difficulties. He obtained a "Permit by Affidavit" in June 2009 and obtained a second permit in November 2009 at a cost of over $1,000. The process was further complicated due to different signatures by the Engineers on the drawings. A Certificate of Completion was issued prior to the Hearing and veri fied by the Investigator. He requested dismissal of the fines. The Special Magistrate DENIED the County's Motionfor Imposition of Fines or payment of Operational Costs. 13 1 ~nLy 1'5~010 ~\ V, PUBLIC HEARINGS B. Hearings: 14. Case #CEPM 20090015545 - BCC vs. Paul & Linda Christopher The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Ron Martindale who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ord, Chapter 22 Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI Property Maintenance Code, Section 22-231 (15) Private swimming pool not maintained. Presenting unsightly appearance, water stagnate. polluted with conditions conducive to insect infestation. Folio No: 51978031765 Violation address: 14739 Indigo Lakes Circle, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the Courthouse on December 29, 2009 and at the property on December 30, 2009. Investigator Martindale introduced one photograph, taken on October 12,2009, which was marked as County Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He stated the property is vacant and the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either clean and treat the pool water to remove the algae and provide bi-weekly treatments to maintain the pool water, or to chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool pursuant to HUD standards on or before Janurtry 25,2010 or afine of $250.00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. 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 Respondents. If necessary, assistance may be requestedfrom the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pity the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $112.29 on or before February 15, 2010. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $112,29 15. Case #CEPM 20090015934 - BCC vs. Bryon & Stephanie Goldizen The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Ron Martindale who was present. The Respondents were not present. 14 161 1 January 15,2010 ~\ Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ord, Chapter 22 Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI Property Maintenance Code, Section 22-231(15) Swimming pool not maintained containing stagnate, algae filled water conducive to harboring insect infestation. Folio No: 64626000103 Violation address: 3036 Old Cove Way, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 29, 2009. Investigator Martindale introduced one photograph, taken on October 8, 2009, which was marked as County Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He stated the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to either clean and treat the pool water to remove the algae and provide bi-weekly treatments to maintain the pool water, or to chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool pursuant to HUD standards on or before January 25,20/0 or afine 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. Ifthe 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 Respondents. Ifnecessary, assistance may be requestedfrom the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $//2.29 on or before February 15,20/0. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $/12.29 16. Case #CEPM 20080003112 - BCC vs. Jawed Dass & Mussarat Jawed Dass The Hearing was requested by Collier County Code Enforcement Investigator Ron Martindale who was present. The Respondents were not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ord, Chapter 22 Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI Property Maintenance Code, Section 22-231 (15) Pool water is black and filled with algae Folio No: 51147040121 Violation address: 8086 Tauren Court, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 29, 2009. 15 tQarL5, 2JO ~\ Investigator Martindale introduced one photograph, taken on November 5, 2009, which was marked as County Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He stated the violation has not been abated. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUlL TY of the alleged violation and ordered to either clean and treat the pool water to remove the algae and provide bi-week(y treatments to maintain the pool water, or to chemically treat the pool water and cover the pool pursuant to HUD standards on or before January 25,2010 or afine of $250. 00 per day will be imposedfor each day the violation remains thereafter, unless altered by a subsequent Stipulation or Order of the Special Magistrate. lfthe 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 Respondents. lf necessary, assistance may be requested from the Collier County Sheriff's Office to enforce the provisions of the Order. The Respondents were ordered to pay the Operational Costs incurred by Code Enforcement during the prosecution of this case in the amount of $112.49 on or before February 15, 2010. The Respondents are to notify Code Enforcement within 24 hours of abatement of the violation and request the Investigator perform a site inspection to confirm compliance. Total Amount Due: $112.49 C. Emergency Cases: None VI, NEW BUSINESS A. Motion for Imposition of Fines: 2. Case # CEPM 20090003534 - BCC vs. Robvn J. Voorhees The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Michelle Scavone. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Ordinance No. 2004-58, Section 12. Dangerous building on estates zoned property due to tire damage Folio No: 40685960004 Violation address: 3520 8th Avenue NE The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on January 4, 2010. Investigator Scavone stated the violation was abated by the County on October 9, 2009. 16 161 1 January 15,2010 ~\ The County requested imposition of Operational Costs in the amount of$118.14 for the initial Hearing and $112.09 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, reimbursement of abatement fees in the sum of $4,952, and fines in the sum of $8,000 for the period from September 8, 2009 through October 9, 2009 (32 days @ $250/day), for a total amount due of $13,182.23. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motionfor Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $13,1 82.23. 5. Case #CEPM 20090002094 - BCC vs. Jose A. Ortel!.a The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Thomas Keegan. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ord, Chapter 22, Article VI, See. 22-243 Unsecured windows on vacant mobile home Folio No: 61840440209 Violation address: 3085 Karen Drive, Naples, FL The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 29, 2009. Investigator Keegan stated the violation was abated by the County on October 5, 2009. The previously assessed Operational Costs in the amount of $117.70 were paid. The County requested imposition of Operational Costs in the amount of $112.29 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, reimbursement of abatement fees in the sum of $4,393.09, and tines in the sum of $3,000 for the period from September 6, 2009 through October 5, 2009 (30 days @ $100/day), for a total amount due 01'$7,505.38. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $7,505.38. 7. Case #CENA 20090010129 - BCC vs. James S. Louey The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws, Chapter 54, Article VI, Section 54-179 Litter consisting of but not limited to: wood, cardboard boxes, batteries, gardening tools, gas can, granite counter tops, cooler, pool pump, etc. Folio No: 24070920002 Violation address: 237 Burning Tree Drive 17 16 J 1 ~\ January 15,2010 The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 30, 2009. Investigator Musse stated the violation was abated by the County on October 14, 2009. The County requested imposition of Operational Costs in the amount of $117.70 for the initial Hearing and $112.16 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, reimbursement of abatement fees in the sum of $550, and fines in the sum of $2,300 for the period from September 22, 2009 through October 14,2009 (23 days @ $1 OO/day), for a total amount due 01'$3,079.86. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motionfor Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $3,079.86, 8. Case #CEPM 20090010278 - BCC vs. James S. Lonev The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ord, Chapter 22 Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI, Property Maintenance Code, Section 22- 231(1 2)(L) and Section 22-23 I (15) Pool is green, stagnate, and not properly maintained, also missing screen panels from the pool enclosure Folio No: 24070920002 Violation address: 237 Burning Tree Drive The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 30, 2009. Investigator Musse stated the violation was abated by the County on November 12, 2009. The County requested imposition of previously assessed Operational Costs in the amount of $ I 18.05, Operational Costs in the amount of $112.16 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, reimbursement of abatement costs to the County in the sum of $ I ,272, fines (pool maintenance) in the sum of $5,200 for the period from September 22, 2009 through November 12,2009 (52 days @ $1 OO/day), and fines (missing screen panels) in the sum of $2,600 for the period from September 22, 2009 through November 12,2009 (52 days@$50/day), for a total amount due 01'$9,302.21. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motionfor Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $9,302.21. 18 IJ~ual15, 10 ~l 9. Case #CEPM 20090005339 - BCC vs. Edward Slasienski The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Codc of Laws & Ordinances Chapter 22 Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI Property Maintenance Code, Sections 22-231(11), 22-231(12)(B), and 22-23I(12)(C) Roof in partial disrepair, exposed wiring, missing exterior lighting and holes to the exterior walls Folio No: 29781040001 Violation address: 1112 Highlands Drive, Naples The Notice ofI-Iearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 30, 2009. Investigator Musse stated the violations have not been abated. The County requested imposition of previously assessed Operational Costs in the amount of $117.70, Operational Costs in the amount of $112.03 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, and tines in the sum of $12,800 for the period from November 13, 2009 through January 15,2010 (64 days @ $200/day), for a total amount due of $13,029.73. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $13,029.73 and noted fines continue to accrue. 10, Case #CENA 20090005343 - BCC vs. Edward Slasienski The County was represented by Codc Enforcement Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ordinances, Chapter 54 Environment, Article VI, Weeds, Litter, and Exotics, Section(s) 54-179 & 54-184 Litter consisting of but not limited to; camper top, 2 inoperable lawn mowers, buckets, wood, metal, doors, windows, etc. Folio No: 29781000009 Violation address: 1100 Highlands Drive, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 30, 2009. Investigator Musse stated the violations have been abated. The County requested imposition of previously assessed Operational Costs in the amount of$117.78, Operational Costs in the amount of$112.03 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, and fines in the sum of $4,600 for the period from November 13,2009 19 IJ~uJy IS, 10 ~l through December 28, 2009 (46 days @ $lOO/day), for a total amount due of $4,829.81. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $4,829.81. 11. Case #CEPM 20090005344 - BCC vs. Edward Slasienski The County was represented by Code Enforcement Investigator Jonathan Musse. The Respondent was not present. Violations: Collier County Code of Laws & Ordinances Chapter 22 Buildings and Building Regulations, Article VI Property Maintenance Code, Section(s) 22-231(11) and 22-231(l2)(C) Roof in partial disrepair, exposed wiring, and missing exterior lighting Folio No: 29781000009 Violation address: 1100 Highlands Drive, Naples The Notice of Hearing was posted at the property and the Courthouse on December 30, 2009. Investigator Musse stated the violations have been abated. The County requested imposition of previously assessed Operational Costs in the amount of $117.52, Operational Costs in the amount of $112.03 for the Imposition of Fines Hearing, anf fines in the sum of $9,200 for the period from November 13,2009 through December 28, 2009 (46 days @ $200/day), for a total amount due of $9,429.55. The Special Magistrate GRANTED the County's Motion for Imposition of Fines in the total amount of $9,429.55, VII. OLD BUSINESS: None VIII. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Request to Forward Cases to County Attorney's Office as referenced in the submitted Executive Summary. None B. Request for Special Magistrate to Impose Nuisance Abatement Liens on Cases referenced in the submitted Executive Summary. The Special Magistrate reviewed the cases cited in the Executive Summary and GRANTED the County's request to impose Nuisance Abatement Liens. 20 161 1 January 15.2010 ~\ IX. REPORTS: None X. NEXT HEARING DATE - February 5, 2010, at 9:00AM, located at the Collier County Government Center, Administrative Building uF," 3rd Floor, 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida. There being no further business for the good of the County, the Hearing was adjourned by Order of the Special Magistrate at I :02 P.M. COLLIER COUNTY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE HEARING , renda Garretson, Special Magistrate The Minutes wer7 approved by the Special Magistrate on fe)>'(\;~ 5 \ ~ \ U , as presented L, or as amended . 21 RECEIVED FEB 0 4 2010 MINUTES OF THE HEARING OF THE COLLIER COUNT~"rlo;r;",,~'c:o"'miss'o"', SPECIAL MAGISTRATE - INTERSECTION SAFETY PROGRAM Fiala o(:l~ Halas B' 7.Jf" He.nn ing~ Coyle ~ Colatta - 161 1 C~ January 8, 2010 Naples, Florida, January 8, 2010 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Special Magistrate Intersection Safety Program, in and for the County of Collier, 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 persons present: SPECIAL MAGISTRATE: Honorable BTenda Garretson ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor Lt. Harold Minch, Collier County Deputy Sheriff Cpl. Michael Peabody, Collier County Deputy Sheriff Cpl. Chris Gonzalez, Collier County Deputy Sheriff eODies to: - .....--------oor-- IJ~ua~y 8, 2! 0 C V I. CALL TO ORDER The Hearing was called to order at 9:02 AM by the Honorable Special Magistrate Brenda Garretson, All those testifying at the proceeding did so under oath. A. Hearing Rules and Regulations were given by Special Magistrate Garretson. Special Magistrate Garretson noted that, prior to conducting the Hearing, the Respondents were given an opportunity to speak with their Investigating Officer(s) and view the video recording: the goal is to obtain compliance without being punitive, RECESS: 9:15 AM RECONVENED: 9:53 AM II, APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Jennifcr Waldron, Code Enforcement Supervisor, noted the following changes: (a) Under Item III (A), "Hearings," the following cases were WITHDRAWN by the County: . Agenda #2, Notice #1360900068831 - BCC vs. Agathe L. Agenor . Agcnda #3, Notice #1360900070506 - BCC vs, Agathe L. Agenor . Agenda #4, Noticc #1360900061034 - BCC vs. Brian J. All . Agenda #5, Notice #1360900073310 - BCC vs. Keith A, Anderson . Agenda #6, Notice #1360900018935 - BCC vs. Madelyn Astiazarain . Agenda #7, Noticc #1360900022721 - BCC vs. Madelyn Astiazarain . Agenda #8, Notice #1360900076891 - BCC vs. Lance Garrett & Yamilet Antonia Baker . Agenda #11, Notice #1360900058427 - BCC vs. Jaques Henri & Pamela B. Castelain . Agenda #12, Notice #1360900068617 - BCC vs. Roy Scott & Dawn Gowdish Claudio . Agenda #17, Notice #1360900063733 - BCC vs. William Harold Earls . Agenda #19, Notice #1360900023216 - BCC vs, Nicholas Gerard Finn . Agenda #24, Notice #1360900093268 - BCC vs. Todd Charles Johnson . Agenda #25, Notice #1360900073005 - BCC vs. Todd Charles & Dana Michele Johnson . Agenda #26, Notice #1360900104032 - BCC vs. Douglas Anthony King . Agenda #27, Notice #1360900070696 - BCC vs. Jane & Michael T. King . Agenda #28, Notice #1360900065019 - BCC vs. Carl R. Kovalcik . Agenda #30, Notice #1360900092237 - BCC vs. Joann M. & Martin A. LaFalce . Agenda #34, Notice #1360900096931 - BCC vs. Jesse S. Moreno . Agenda #36, Notice #1360900072858 - BCC vs. Luis R. Nunez . Agenda #37, Notice #1360900071561 - BCC vs. Luis R. Nunez . Agenda #38, Notice #1360900063741 - BCC vs. Stephen R. & Phyllis R. Ostrow 2 161 1 ~'V January 8, 2010 . Agenda #45, Notice #1360900081453 - BCC vs. Kessinger Lewis Rene . Agenda #47, Notice #1360900054427 - BCC vs. Manuella Robiou . Agenda #49, Notice #1360900067650 - BCC vs. Jcrald Dean Thomas . Agenda #50, Notice #2560900072320 - BCC vs. Tammy Renea Vural (b) Under Item III (A), "Hearings," the following cases were DISMISSED by the County: . Agenda #1, Notice #1360900040731- BCC vs. Moshe Abougzir . Agenda #22, Notice #1360900088045 - BCC vs. Guenther Vorrucken Inc. . Agenda #23, Notice #1360900068815 - BCC vs. Christy Marie Hicks . Agenda #40, Notice #1360900036440 - BCC vs. Raymond C. Perrine The Special Magistrate approved the Agenda as amended, subject to changes made during the course of the Hearing at the discretion of the Special Magistrate. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 18, 2009: The Minutes of the Intersection Safety Program Hearing held on December 18, 2009 were reviewed by the Special Magistrate and approved as submiued. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Hearings: 10, Notice #1360900074755 - BCC vs. Clvde L. Caldwell The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present. Thc County was rcpresented by Lt. Harold Minch. The Respondent resides at 3062 Driftwood Way, Unit #4301, Naples, Florida, and verified he is the registered owner of the vehicle. Date of Violation: October 12, 2009 Time: 6:27 PM Location: Intersection of lmmokalee Road and Airport-Pulling Road Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate. The Respondent stated he recently moved to Naples as a winter resident and was confused by thc lights at thc intersection. He further stated he applied the brakes before proceeding into the intersection and was "close enough to a full stop" without presenting a safety hazard. He contended the stop sign was a full car length-plus before the stop bar which confused him concerning where the car should actually stop. Thc Respondent introduced one photograph which was marked as Respondent's 3 161 lCrv January 8, 2010 Exhibit "A" and admitted into evidence. He replied he hesitated at the stop bar, then proceeded into the intersection. He stated it was necessary to proceed into the intersection beeause his vision was blocked. The Speeial Magistrate again reviewed the video. The Speeial Magistrate explained the Ordinance stipulates a driver is to come to a full stop and does not leave the decision to drivers to determine if a full stop is necessary. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay aflne of$125.00 and an administrative fee of $50. 00. The Relpondent is allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $/75.00 13. Notice #1360900085702 - BCC vs. Matthew Steven Colman & Maureen Monahan The Hearing was requested by the Respondents. Respondent Matthew Steven Colman was present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. The Respondent resides at 6795 Hunters Road, Naples, Florida 34109, and verified he is the registered owner of the vehicle. Date of Violation: October 20, 2009 Time: 9:12 PM Location: Intersection of Immokalee Road and Airport-Pulling Road Lt. Minch presented thc vidco for review by the Special Magistrate. The Respondent presented the following points: . It is clear that thc vehicle stopped, although it was past the line . There was a vehicle turning before his car . If the stop had been before the line, the sensors would not have triggered the cameras The Special Magistrate asked the Respondent why it was necessary for him to proceed into the intersection before stopping his vehicle. He stated in order to c1carly view on-coming traffic, he rolled forward into the inter- section. He further stated his first stop was a "rolling stop," and the second was a short stop. He contended the camera angle did not give a complete view of the area. The Special Magistrate stated the Respondent's car rolled into the intersection, did not clear the intersection, and did not come to a complete stop before entering the intersection. 4 161 1 Grv January 8, 2010 Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $62. 50 and an administrative fee of $50.00. The Respondent is allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $1 J 2.50 16. Notice #1360900071421 - BCC vs, Lissa Beth and Peter Daniel Donahue The Hearing was requested by the Respondents. Respondent Lissa Beth Donahue was present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. The Respondent resides at 651 II otll Avenue North, Naples, Florida 34108, and stated she is the registered owner of the vehicle. Date of Violation: October 9,2009 Time: 8:43 PM Location: Intcrsection of Vanderbilt Bcach Road and US 41/Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Minch prcscntcd thc vidco for rcvicw by thc Spccial Magistratc. Thc Rcspondcnt statcd her daughtcr sutfcrs from scvcrc asthma, and thc babysitter called hcr to comc home from work that evening to administcr trcatmcnt bccausc her daughter expcricnced an asthma attack. The Rcspondcnt furthcr statcd hcr daughtcr had been treated for a cold the previous day by hcr pediatrician. A cold will turn into pneumonia if hcr daughtcr docs not rcceivc a ncbulizer trcatmcnt in a timcly manncr. Thc Special Magistrate stated the Ordinance allows her to rccognize "exigent circumstances" and the Respondent's daughter's medical condition qualifies as an emergency situation undcr the Ordinancc. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found NOT GUILTY of the alleged violation. 20. Notice #1360900143824 - BCC vs. Gre!!.!!. Thomas Insurance A!!.encv, Inc. The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. The Respondent resides at 722 Bay Trce Court, Naplcs, Florida, and verified the vehicle is owned by the insurance agcncy and he is the owner of the business. Date of Violation: November 26, 2009 Time: 5:59 PM Location: Intersection of Pine Ridgc Road and US 41.Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Minch presented thc video for review by the Special Magistrate. 5 161 1 January 8, 2010 ('1/ The Respondent stated he called the Arizona number on the Citation to obtain information. He disputed the accuracy of the video stating when he ran the video on his computer, he observed there were different recording speeds. He called attention to the difference in the timing of the frames and stated the real time versus stated time was not the same. He claimed his vehicle came to a complete stop at a point in time that was not shown on the video. The Special Magistrate asked the Respondent to recall exactly where he stopped his vehicle and he stated he stopped twice. The first was at the stop line, but his view was blocked which necessitated entering the intersection where he stopped again in order to obtain a clear view of traffic. He further stated the stops were "short" but he was not aware of any regulation specifying how long to remain at a stop. The Special Magistrate viewed the video for a second time and stated she was unable to accept the logic of the science the Respondent was presenting concerning the progression of the frames. Lt. Minch objected to the Respondent's testimony and stated the video was a "real time" digital video which was difTerent from a film. He explained there are two sensors in the roadway which trigger the turning arrow and give a time/distance analysis of the speed whieh was noted at the top of the still photographs taken from the video which represented what occurred at the intersection. The Special Magistrate stated a violation had occurred and the evidence presented in the video and the still photographs supported her deeision. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $62. 50 and an administrative fee of $50. 00. The Respondent is allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $112.50 29. Notice #1360900051431 - Bee vs. Rasim F. & Tekin B. Kut The Hearing was requested by the Respondents. Respondent Rasim F. Kut was present The County was represented by Cpl. Michael Peabody. The Respondents reside at 1407 Milcourt Lane, Naples, Florida and Mr. Kut verified he is the registered owner of the vehicle. Date of Violation: September 5, 2009 Time: 6: 19 PM Location: Intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and US 41/Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Mineh presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate. (, 16' 1 January 8, 2010 tv The Respondent admitted his vehicle did not come to a complete stop. At the time of the violation, there were no notifications at the intersection that a camera was filming the traffic. He further stated the northbound traffic on US 41 had a red light with a turn signal, so he slowed down, was able to view on-coming traffic and knew he could make the turn without needing to stop his vehicle. The Special Magistrate asked the Respondent to explain his understanding of what the law required him to do at a steady red light. The Respondent replied he was required to stop and again stated he had not had sufficient notification of the new law at the time of the violation. The Special Magistrate stated the law (stop at red light) was of public record and that the Ordinance had changed in October 2009 concerning the amount of the fine charged. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125, 00 and an administrative fee of $50,00, The Respondent is allowed 60 days for payment, Total Amount Due: $175,00 48. Notice #1360900080067 - BCC vs. Thomas Michael Sullivan The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was present. The County was representcd by Lt. Harold Minch. The Respondent who resides at 2321 Washburn Avenue, Naples, Florida 34117, verified he is the registered owner of the vehicle. Date of Violation: October 16, 2009 Time: 9:59 PM Location: Intersection of Collier Boulevard and Golden Gate Parkway Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate. The Respondent referred to Sections 5(t) and (h) ofthe Ordinance as follows: "(j) If the vehicle driver was reasonably required to violate the applicable traffic control device to protect valuable tangible property and/or to prevent physical injury (or death) to any individual: " "(h) If'the appeal is based upon any other valid reason the vehicle owner in goodfaith believes justified the Special Magistrate voiding the noticed violation: " The Respondent stated due to weather conditions (wet roadway) it was difficult to make a hard stop at the yellow light because he was afraid he would have lost control of the vehicle due to hydroplaning. He further stated his only violation was a parking violation approximately 15 years ago. 7 161 1 lv January 8, 2010 The Special Magistrate stated there was no other car either behind or in front of the Respondent's vehicle, the situation did not qualifY as an "cxigent circumstance" and was not covered by either provision. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $62.50 and an administrative fee of $50.00. The Respondent is allowed 60 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $112.50 The Rcspondent objected stating the Ordinance permits exceptions. The Special Magistrate stated the situation was not dangerous for the Respondent not to pause his vehicle at the intersection. RECESS: 11 :20 AM RECONVENE: 11:55 AM The Special Magistrate noted proper Notice had been given to the following cases and the various Respondents chose not to appear. 9. Notice #1360900056216 - BCC vs. Karla Catalina and Donald E. Brown The Hearing was requested by the Respondents who were not present. The County was represented by 1,1. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 9, 2009 Time: 11:38 AM Location: Intersection of Pine Ridgc Road and Livingston Road Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehiclc did not stop at the red light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GU1LTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125, 00 and an administrativefee of $50. 00. The Respondent is allowed 21 daysfor payment, Total Amount Due: $175.00 ** Supervisor Waldron stated the following case was WITHDRAWN by the County: Agenda #14, Notice #1360900089597 - BCC vs. Marcella Marie Dantuono 15. Notice #1360900059756 - BCC vs. Jennifer L. Didonato Pucci The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 16,2009 Time: 2:21 PM R 161 1 t~ January 8, 2010 Location: Intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and US 4 I/Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the red light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125.00 and an administrative fee of $50.00. The Respondent is allowed 21 days for payment, Total Amount Due: $175.00 18. Notice #1360900057933 - BCC vs, Darhl John Ehre:ott The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 15, 2009 Time: 3:36 PM Location: Intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125,00 and an administrative fee of $50.00. The Respondent is allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 21. Notice #1360900051837 - BCC vs. Carol Allison Greiner The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 6, 2009 Time: I :21 AM Location: Intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and US 41/Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125.00 and an administrativefee of $50, 00. The Respondent is allowed 21 daysfor payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 9 lC;lty 8, ;g, 0 ~ ~ 31. Notice #1360900054799 - Bee vs. Robert Glenn Lardie The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. Thc County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 8, 2009 Time: 8:57 AM Location: Intersection ofPinc Ridge Road and Livingston Road Lt. Minch prescnted the video for rcview by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the rcd light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125. 00 and an administrative fee of $50. 00. The Respondent is allowed 21 daysfor payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 ** Supervisor Waldron stated the following cases were WITHDRAWN by the County: Agenda #32, Notice #1360900070910 - Bee vs. Julie Lee Mains, and Agenda #33, Notice #1360900047298 - Bee vs. Everett Barry Marley 35. Notice #1360900067254 - Bee vs. Grel1.orv Michael Murrav The Hearing was requested by the Respondents who were not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: October 6, 2009 Time: 6:37 AM Location: Intcrsection of Pine Ridgc Road and US 41/Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated thc vehicle did not stop at the light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of$125.00 and an administrativefee of $50. 00. The Respondents are allowed 21 daysfor payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 39. Notice #1360900065555 - Bee vs. Heather J. Paton The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. 10 161 1C"v January 8, 2010 Date of Violation: September 30, 2009 Time: 3:52 PM Location: Intersection of Pine Ridge Road and Livingston Road Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of$125.00 and an administrative fee of $50. 00. The Respondents are allowed 21 daysfor payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 41. Notice #1360900097962 - Bee vs. Pizza Mania IV, Inc. The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represcnted by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: October 30, 2009 Time: 8:32 AM Location: Intersection oflmmokalee Road and Airport-Pulling Road Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $62. 50 and an administrative fee of $5 0.00. The Respondents are allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $112.50 ** Supervisor Waldron stated the following cases were WITHDRAWN by the County: Agenda #42, Notice #1360900066926 - Bee vs. Walfrido S. Proenza Agenda #43, Notice #1360900064269 - Bee vs. Timothy Jon Protzman Agenda #44, Notice #1360900057255 - Bee vs. Albert J. Ramirez 46. Notice #1360900093706 - Bee vs. Kvle James Rhodes The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: October 27, 2009 Time: I :22 PM Location: Intersection ofImmokalee Road and Airport-Pulling Road II 1611CJv January 8, 2010 Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. The Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondents were found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of$62.50 and an administrative fee of $50.00. The Respondents are allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $112.50 51. Notice #1360900063246 - Bee vs. Matthew L. Werner The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 22, 2009 Time: 11 :23 AM Location: Intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and US 411Tamiami Trail N. Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Special Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. Thc Special Magistrate stated, bascd on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of $125.00 and an administrative fee of $50. 00. The Rei>pondent is allowed 21 days for payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 52. Notice #1360900061547 - Bee vs. eurtis U1vsses Williams The Hearing was requested by the Respondent who was not present. The County was represented by Lt. Harold Minch. Date of Violation: September 17,2009 Time: 2:47 PM Location: Intersection of Collier Boulevard and Goldcn Gate Parkway Lt. Minch presented the video for review by the Spccial Magistrate and stated the vehicle did not stop at the light. Thc Special Magistrate stated, based on the evidence presented, a violation occurred. Finding the Notice of Hearing was properly served, the Respondent was found GUILTY of the alleged violation and ordered to pay afine of$125.00 and an administrative fee of $50. 00. The Respondent is allowed 21 daysfor payment. Total Amount Due: $175.00 12 161 1 tf/,; January 8, 2010 IV. OLD BUSINESS: None V. NEXT HEARING DATE - February 1,2010 at 9:00AM, located at the eollier County Government eenter, 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Building F, 3,d Floor, Naples, Florida, There being no further business for the good of the eounty, the Hearing was adjourned by order of the Special Magistrate at 12:10 PM. eOLLIER eOUNTY SPEeIAL MAGISTRATE "-- The Minutes were approved by the Special Magistrate on as presented ~, or as amended ~ h'ort''1l \ ~Q 13