BCC Minutes 04/22/1980 R
-
-
-
-
.~
;;1
L~__i
..1
I!
~I
."
./
Naples, Florida, April 22, 10~1
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Conmissioners 1n and
for the County of Collier, also acting as the Governing Board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in Regular Session in
Building "F" of the Courthouse Complex with the following members
present:
CHAIRMAN: Clifford Wenzel
VICE-CHAIRMAN: Thomas P. Archer
John A. Pistor
C. R. "Russ" Wimer
David C. Brown
ALSO PRESENT: William J. Reagan, Clerk; Harold L. Hall, Chief
Deputy Clerk/Fiscal Officer; Darlene Davidson and Jean Swindle
(10:30 A.M.), Deputy Clerks; C. William Norman, County Manager,
Donald Pickworth, County Attorney; Anthony Pires, Assistant County
Attorney; Terry Virta, Community Development Administrator; Danny Crew,
Planning Director; Richard Henderlong, Plann'lr; Thomas Hafner, Public
Safety Director; Jeffory Perry, Zoning Director; Clifford Barksdale,
Public Works Administrator/ County Engineer; Mary Morgan, Administrative
Aide to the Board; and, William McNulty, Communications Coordinator,
Sheriff's Department.
BOARD OF COU~TY COMMISSIONERS
AGEtlDA
April 22, 1980
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS SPEAKING ON A~Y AGENDA MUST REGISTER
PRIOR TO THE ITEM BEING HEARD.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS ~IHICH
ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED I~ WRITING
WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST
13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL
BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS" AT 11 :00 A.M.
1. INVOCATION
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
BO:l.< 052 PACE 640
"
j
t:
,.
~
~
~
I,f,'
'i
I
~
II
~
1
I
~
r
-",
... ~~~~,!~,.,'"
~"~"'';,;,:-:'':'
l_~!
]
I....~J
April 22, 1980
18. PUBLIC PETITIONS
19. ADJOURN
WORKSHOP AGENDA
(after conclusion of the above agenda)
1 .;;
Status Report reo County Water Supply, Treatment and
Distribution System by Consultant Smallwood; Proposed
alternatives to financing said project.
. AGENDA - APPROVED WITH AUDITIONS
Commissioner Pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Archer and
carried unanimously 5/0, that the agenda be approved with the following
addi tions:
a.
A workshop has been scheduled for today re financial alternatives
for funding the County Water Transmission, Treatment and
Distribution System. (BCC action 4/15/80)
b.
Acceptance of check for rental for one year from U. S.
Coast Guard, Flotilla 95 - added as Item #5
c.
Problem re lots and trailers on Plantation Island - added as
Item #15
MINUTES OF APR[L 1, 1980 - APPROVED AS PRESENTED
Commissioner Archer moved, ~econded by Co~~issioner Pistor and carried
unanimously 5/0, that the minutes of April 1. 1980 be approved as presented.
CHECK FOR $1.00 ACCEPTED FROM U.S. COAST GUARD, FLOTILLA 95 FOR ONE YEAR'S
RENT FOR TOLL BOOTH BUILDING ON MARCO ISLAND BRIDGE
Pursuant to Commissioner Pistor stating the old toll booth that has
been rented by the County to the U. S. Coast Guard, Flotilla 95 to be
used for their headquarters was dedicated on Sunday, April 20, 1980, and
that he attended said dedication and was presented.with a check for $1.00
for the first year's rent, Corrvnissioner Archer moved that the Board accept
Lhe check. Commissioner Pistor seconded the motion, and it carried
unan imous ly 5/0.
MOK 052 PACE 644
-~
-
-- -A--
-
'.
-~--'-'---'--"''''
&OO~
052 PAGE 645
Apri 1 22, 1980
ORDINANCE NO. 80-40 RE MANDATORY LETHAL YELLOWING INOCULATION AND
TREATMENT - ADOPTED
Legal notice having oeen published in the Naples Daily News on
April 2. 198D as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Cler~, public hearing was opened to consider the adoption of an
ordinance re mandatory inoculation and treatment of trees for lethal
yellowing.
Assistant County Attorney Pires stated that he has drafted a
proposed ordinance regarding the mandatory inoculation and treatment
pursuant to Board direction and that the proposed ordinance will supersede
the Emergency Ordinance No. BO-32. He pointed out the following amendments
that he recommends be incorporated in the final draft for the Chairman's
signature:
1. Section One, Public Nuisance - a more clear definition shall
be incorporated into this section regarding "coconut palms".
Same shall read "coconut palms of the species cocos nucifera,
except for golden malayan species".
2. Section Six, line three - the words "by themselves" after
the word inoculated. This allows the property owner the
choice of doing the inoculation himself or having it done
professionally.
3. Section Fourteen, Effective date - The effec.ive date shall
be July 1, 1980, rather than "upon becomi~~ Jaw".
Commissioner Pistor pointed out a typographical error in Section Six,
and said th'lt thl? sixt.h word reads "with" and should read "wish" and
Mr. Pires concurred.
Hearing no one was registered to address the matter, Commissioner
Archer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Pistor seconded
the motion and it carried unanimously 5/0.
Commissioner Archer moved, second~d by Commissioner Pistor and
carried unanimously 5/0. that the ordinance as numbered and entitled
below be adopted and entered into Drdinance Book No. 11, same having
been a~ended as described by Mr. Pires and Commissioner Pistor.
II
-'--~~'''''''''-
\
-
.....~
-
--
--
-
,~;' , y..':" .'.
j' .. '
~... .
I.___I
J
April 22, 1980
ORDINANCE NO. 80-~
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A I1ANDATORY LETHAL YELLOWING
DISEASE INOCULATION PROCnAM; DECLARING COCONUT PALMS
INFECTED WITH THE LETHAL YELLOWING DISEASE TO BE A
PUBLJ.C NUISANCE; PROHIBITING THE SALE OF TIlE COCONUT
PALM KNOWN AS THE JAMAICAN TALL; REQUIRING l1/\.NDATORY
INOCULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR A PUBLIC NOTICE: PROVIDING
FOR PROCEDURE TO INDICATE COMPLIANCE; PROVIDING NOTICE TO
NON-COMPLYING PROPERTY OWNERS; AUTHORIZING ABATEMENT
BY COLLIER COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE EXISTENCE OF A NUISANCE; PROVIDING FOR ASSESS-
MENT ON PROPERTY ~iEREIN A NUISANCE IS ABATED BY
COLLIER COUNTY; PROVIDING A HEARING TO CONTEST AN
ASSESSMENT; PROVIDING A I1ETHOD OF SERVING NOTICE TO
PROpeRTY OWNERS; CONFLICT MID SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING
FOR PENALTIES; ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
PUBLIC HEARING RE PETITION R-79-10C (FISHERMAN'S COVE) CONTINUED
FOR ONE WEEK
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
~1arch 21, 1980 as evidenced by Affidavit of Publ ication filed with the
Clp.rk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition R-79-10-C, Whispering
Pines. Inc.. requesting a rezoning from "RM-2", "RM-2ST, "RM-1" and
"RM1-ST" to "GC" Golf Course and "GC-ST" Golf Course Special Treatment for
property located in Sections 11. 14 and 23, T50S, R25E which is 10(lt~1
between Kelly Road and the City limits for property known as Fisherman's
Cove.
Planner Richard HenderluJIY ~Ldted that the staff's recorrmendation
regarding Petition R-79-10-C i~ that the Board not hear the Petition at
this time, and that the petitioner, Lloyd Sheehan, refile his petition
and subsp.quently present it before the CAPC again prior to presenting it
to the BCC for final action. He said that this recommendation is based
on the memorandum from Assistant County Attorney Pires, dated 4/22/80,
in which Mr. Pires states that this is the correct procedure to follow
because Mr. Sheehan has previously requested and was granted a withdrawal
of said petition on January 8. 1980.
COJTJT1issioner Wimer stated that he has been requested to continue
Petition R-79-10C fo~ one week, and Chairman Wenzel asked the petitioner
if he would agree to this?
BOOX 052 PACE 646
if
,
,
-
-
---
. . '}
:,.__._-~
-.....-
BOOK
052 PAGE 647
April 22, 1980
Mr. Daniel Conley, Attorney for the petitioner, agreed to the
deferment for the purpose of meeting with County Attorney Pickworth
t~ discuss the aforementioned legal 6pinion regarding the necessity for
refillng petition R-79-lOC. Ile said that he wishes to have the opportunity
to show cause for not having to ref!le the petition. Mr. Pickworth
stated that he concurs with Mr, Pires' legal opinion; however, in fair-
ness to the peti tioner, he is ~,; 11 ing to put off a decision by the Board
as to whetller or not they should in fact hear lhe petition as the
petitioner requests, and he noted that he is willing to meet with Mr.
Conley and give him the opportunity to point out legal reason that would
substantiate the petitioner's position in the matter.
Commissioner Wimer moved to continue the public hearing for one
week, and Commissioner Pistor seconded the motion.
County Attorney Pickworth stated that the Board could decide
whether or not they would hear the petition at the next meeting, and
Chairman Wenzel asked if there was anyone registered to address the
matter. Mr. Arnold Lamm stated that he Objected to not having the public
hearing at this time, as he cannot be here next week, and will be out of
the County until after May 15, "',::" otherwise, he re'~uests the matter be
continued until after May 15, 1980.
He said it is his opinion that, legally, the subject petition should
be canceled, because it was withdrawn, and the petitioner be required to
resubmit the petition and go through the steps required of any new
rezoning petition. He referred to a l~tter dated 4/16/80 in which he
outlined his position, and at that point Chairman Wenzel asked for
County Atco.ney Pickworth's recommendation.
Mr. Pickworth stated that the Board may wish to continue the matter
of deciding whelher or not to hear the subject petition, during next
week's meeting, and at that point in time, a public hearing can be
scheduled for after May 15, so as to allow Mr. Lamm to be present, if
the Board is to hear the petition at all; and, if the petition is to be
refiled, then, the CAPC hearing can be scheduled for after May 15, 1980
also,
...--..-,.
,-
-
-~-
Ll
", '-~. ;
".'..,
...~ ---';"l~'
'f "\1 .
1.__.1
-]
April 22, 1980
Mr. Lamm objected, and stated that he wants the hearing to proceed
and if it is not to continue, he wishes to go on record as strongly
objecting because he feels the Board is denying his rights to attend thA
subject p~blic hearing.
Commissioner Pistor explained that the only thing that will be
considered next week, at the time that Mr. Lamm will not be able to
attend, will be the technicality regarding the proper procedure for
cithcr hcaring the ~ubjcct petition or rejecting ~ame and requir~ng
the petitioner to refile a new petition.
Chairman Wenzel stated that if the petition is found to be invalid,
then, all subsequent hearings, i.e. C.A.P.C., will be scheduled for after
May 15, 198D, and if the subject petition is found to be a val id one, then,
the public hearing before the OCC will be scheduled for after May IS, 1980.
Attorney Conley stated that next week there is to be a decision on
whether or not the Board is to hear the petition, and that it will not be
a publ ic hearing; therefore, no one has a right to be heard. Chairman
Wenzel agreed and stated that only the merit of Petition R-79-10C
will be considered. Mr. Conley stated that tile pet1 tioner has no objections
to scheduling the public hearing after May IS, and Commissioner Archer
then asked Mr. Lamm if he has seen the memvrandum regarding the legal
opinion of the County Attorney's office and Mr. Lamm stated that he has
not. Commissioner Archer gave Mr. Lamm a copy of same memorandum and
i
Mr. Lamm relinquished the floor to Mr. Baird McLain.
Mr. McLain stated that he 3nd other residents opposed to the petition
have come to public hearings time and time again, only to find that the
public hearing has been deferred for another time. He requested that
Mr, Lamm's statements be considered, and that the entire matter be
scheduled for after May 15. 1980.
*9:22 A,M. - Cummissioner Wimer left the room.
Mr. r~cLaill asked if the publ ic will be allowed to attend the meeting
between the petitioner and Mr. Pickworth? Mr. Pickworth replied negatively,
explaining that there will be no public meeting, and that it is his
opinion that the petitioner will probably submit their arguments in writing
for his consideration.
8Oa~ 052 PACE 648
,
('
"--
. '...... I. ),
-.-..-- ,---- /
~
MOK
052 mE 649
Apdl 22, 1980
I
Chairman Wenzel and Commissioner Archer clarified the object for
the continuation of the ~'Jbl ic hearing for one week, as to allow for the
retitioner to respond to the legal opinion set forth in Mr. Pires'
memorandum and as explained today, specifically, that the subject
petition is no longer valid, because it has been withdrawn, and that the
petitioner needs to refile his petition for a rezoning and present same
before the CAPC prior to a publ fc hearing before the BCC hearing.
* 9:27 A,M. - Commissioner Wimer rejoined the meeting.
Upon call for the question, the motion on the floor carried
unanimously S/O.
PETITION FDPO-BO-V-7. WILLIAM SLOCUM - DEFERRED FOR TWO WEEKS TO S/6/80
BY REQUEST OF PETITIONER
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
April 6, 1980 and in the Marco Island Eagle, on April 10, 1980, as
evidenced by Affidavits of Publication on file with the Clerk, public
hearing was opened to consider Petition FDPO-8D-V-7, filed by William
Slocum, requesting a variance from the minimum base flood elevation as
required in the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance No. 79-62.
Planning Director Oanny Crew stated that the petitioner has
requested that Petition FDPO-80-V-7 be continued for two weeks.
Ccmmissioner Archer moved, seconded hy Commissioner Pistor and
carried unanimously S/O, that Petition FDPO-80-V-7 be continued for two
weeks, until May 6, 1980, as requested by the petitioner.
ORDINANCE NO. 80-41 RE PETITION CP-79-13C, THE COMMONS, FOR COMPREHENSIVE
LANO USE AMENDMENT FDR PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 34, T49S, R25E -
ADOPTED
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
April 7 and 16, 1980 as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition CP-79-13C,
filed by John T. Conroy for Anthony V. Mincolla, requesting a Comprehensive
Land Use Amendment from 6.22-30 Residential Land Use to Commercial Land
Use for property located in Section 34, T49S, R2SE, which lies on the
east side of Goodlette Road between Renfroe Landscaping and Goodlette
Arms Apartments.
"._,
,
fr
I'
:1
Ii
f.
.......- ---
-
-.~=----_.
L___L
.J
April 22, 1980
Planner RIchard Henderlong presented the subject petition, and
pointed out the gener~l location on overhead maps and stated that the
subject petition is a companion petition to two other petitions that are
be 1 ng pre sen ted today. He sa i d tha t thf! property will be deve 1 "'ped as a
PUD for professional office parK, and related residential uses; is
approximately 52 acres in size; is located approximately 1 mile south
of Golden Gate Parkway, and, lies adjacent to Goodlette Road.
Pursuant to describing the various zoning surrounding the proposed site,
/k. Henderlong stated that the proposed development is referred to as
"The Corrmons" and then related the various staff cOl11T1ents regarding their
review of the subject petition as more fully defined within the Executive
Summary. He concluded his presentation by saying that both the CAPC and the
staff recommendation is for approval by the Board.
Planning Director Danny Crew stated that the proposed project is
anticipated at approximately a 20 year build-out. He noted that one
concern the CAPC had regarding the subject petition was that it was not
accompanied with a specific site plan relative to the various kinds of
buildings and the types of buildings that will eVFntually be constructed
in the proposed project. He added that the developer has agreed to come
before the CAPC, with each plan for a building as it comes up over the
npxt ?O ypars, and that the approval of said buildings from the CAPC is
required prior to construction of each one.
The petitioner was represented by Mr. Thomas Peek, of Wilson,
Miller, Barton, Soll and Peek. Mr Peek stated that also present was Mr.
Jack Conroy, the petitioner; Mr. Jack Barr, the traffic planner for the
project; Ray Link, the Environmental Consultant for the project; and
Wafaa Assaad, the Planner for the prcject; and, that all of these gentlemen
will be happy to answer any questions the Board might have regarding
"The Commons".
He pointed out various components of the project on various drawings
and maps and stated that currently the City water supply can be tapped
onto for the proposed project; however, sewage disposal is not available
eoa~ 052 PAGE 650
11':-
"
},
II'
0'
I
aOOK
052 fACE 651
April 22, 1980
ilt this time. He said that there will be a temporary package treatment
plant for sewage, and that plans to connect to the County system in the
future, when available, are being made. Mr. Peek stated that all the
traffic questions have been adJressed by the Traffic Planner and all the
County r~q'Jiref11('nts have been met, and he pointed out the fact that
there will be no new outlets onto Goodlette Road, as The Commons will
share the same access road as the Racquet Club is using now and that same
access will be widened and resurfilced by the developer of The Commons.
lie slated that lhe density requirell1ent~ for the property will be lower
.
with the development than they were with the original zoning, and only
up to IDO dwelling units will be constructed in The Commons. Mr. Peek
explained the water management aspects of the project as well as the fact
that certain existing "wetland" or "mangrove areas" will be set aside and
preserved in their natural state. He stated that what is proposed and is
set out within the proposed PUD to come before the Board later today is
that the maximum amount of floors for anyone building be 6 occupied
floors, over 2 floors of parking and together they shall not be over 80
feet in height.
After a brief discussion regarding the location of the proposed
project relative to the airport landing strips, runways, and downwind
pattern and after being assured that there will be no conflict between
the two, ~Ir. Jack Stanley, representing the petitioner addressed the
Boa rd.
Mr. Stanley stated that he is related to the owner of the subject
property, and that at one time the only person who has offered opposition
to the proposed development has been Dr. Hussey, who sent his objections
via letter. Mr. Stanley said that Dr. Hussey and his uncle, Mr. Mincolla,
were involved in a business venture regarding the subject property, and
that it is his opinion that Dr. Hussey's objections to the proposed
project are based on his feeling that the property would be best developed
as a medical facility or a nursing home type of venture, as he had hoped
at one time to develop himself. He stated that Dr. Hussey no longer has
any interest in the subject property.
..
r ...
"
,.
L-.]
(_~.J
April 22, 1980
Mrs. Francis Hussey, representing Dr. Hussey, stated that contrary
to what Mr. Stanley has said, she and her husband are objecting to the
proposed development becausp of the lack of definitive plans for the type
of buildings that will be built within said development.
Commissioner Wimer moved to close the public hearing and Commi~sioner
Archer seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
Conmissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
un~nimously 5/D, that the Ordinance as numbered and entitled below re
Petition CP-79-13-C, as filed by John T. Conroy for a Comprehensive Land
Use Amendment, be adopted and entered into Ordinance Book No. 11.
ORDINANCE 80- 41
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 79-32
THE COMPREHENSIVE Pw\N FOR COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE LAND USE ELEMENT
WORK STUDY AREA MAP NUMBER 12 RESIDENTIAL
6.22-30 TO COMMERCIAL LAND USE ON THE
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: PROPERTY
LOC^TED IN SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 25 EAST ON THE EAST SIDE OF GOODLETTE
ROAD "NO BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
ORDINANCE NO. 80-42 REZONING PROPERTY KNOWN AS "THE CO~'''''ONS'' FROM "RM-l",
"RM-2" to "A-ST" TO COMMERCIAL PUD, SECTION 34, T49S, R25E - ADOPTED
SUBJECT TO STAFF AND CAPC STIPULATIONS
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
~~rch 21, 1930 J~ evidenced by Affid~vit of Publi~ation filed with the
Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition R-79-45-C, filed
by John T. Conroy for Anthony V. Mincolla, requesting a rezoning from
"RM-l", "RM-2", and "A-ST" to Commercial "PUD" for property located in
Section 34, T49S, R25E, and situated on the east side of Goodlette
Road between Renfroe Landscaping and Goodlette Arms Apartments.
In light of the fact that the subject petition is a companion petition
~o previous Petition CP-79-13C which has been approved, and upon noting
that there were no further persons who wished to address the subject
petition, Commissioner Wimer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner
Pistor seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
800X 052 PACE 652
-
.ill
-
MO~
052 PACE 653
April 22, 1980
Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried unanimously 5/0, that Petition R-79-45C be approved, subject to
staff and CAPC stipulations as contained in the Executive Summary; and
that the Ordinance as numbered and entitled below be adopted and entered
into Ordinancol Book No. 11.
ORDINANCE 80 -~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 76-30, TilE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AHE^ 01-' TilE COASTAL AREA
PLANNING DISTRICT BY AMENDING THE ZONING
ATLAS MAP NUMBER 49-25-B BY CHANGING THE
ZONING FROM "RM-2" MULTI FAMILY, "RM-l"
MULTI FAMILY MD "A-ST" AGRICULTURE SPECIAL
TREATMENT TO "pUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
ON THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: A
PORTION OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH
RANGE 25 EAST ON THE EAST SIDE OF GOODLE~TE
ROAD
DEVELOPMENT ORDER NO. 80-1 RE PETITION DRI-79-1-C FOR "THE COMMONS"
APPROVED
Legal n0tice having been published in the N<.ples Daily News on
February 17. 1980 as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition DRI-79-1-C,
an application filed pursuant to Section 380.06, Florida Statutes,
from Anthony V. Mincolla/John T. Conroy, for development approval for a
Development of Regional Impact for property located in Section 34,
T49S, R25E, situated on the east side of Goodlette Road.
In light of the fact that this is a companion petition to Petitions
CP-79-13C and R-79-45-C, which were approved by the Board earlier today,
and noting that there were no further persons who wished to address the
subject petition, Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner
Pistor and carried unanimously, to close the public hearing.
Commissioner Wimer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried unanimously 5/0, that Development Order No. 80-1 re Petition
DRI-79-1-C be approved.
"!"~--'.,
^ .........
f ~
-"
'...
. 'tji
'. I,
'''Ii
..
eO!lK
052 PAGE 005
April 22, 1980
~,
PETITION R-80-5-C, LELY ESTATES INC., REQUESTING REZONING FROM "PUD"
TO "PUD-ST" FOR PROPERTY IN SECTIONS 6 & B, T48S, R2SE - KNOWN AS
BAREFOOT BEACh - DENIED
legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
March 21, 1980 as evidenced by Affidavit of Publicatio~ filed with the
Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition R-80-S-C, as
filed by Lely Estates, Inc., requesting a rezoning from "PUDlO to "PUD-ST",
for property located in Sections 6 & 8, T48S, R25E, for the northeastern
and southeastern conservation areas of Barefoot Beach PUD, located
southeasterly of the recreation center.
Planner Richard Henderlong explained that the subject petition is for
a rezoning of th~ Garefoot Beach PUD, specifically for the designation of
lOST" on that portion of the PUD that is presently designated as conservation
area .0". He added that the purpose in obtaining the "ST" on the "0"
property is to allow the applicant to make use of the "ST/TDR" process,
whereby the appl icant can transfer the development rights of the "ST"
land to a more suitable location; this transfer of development rights does
not have to be to lands that are contiguous to the Barefoot Beach property.
Mr, Henderlong went on to say that staff has reviewed the subject petition;
that the intent of the "ST/TDR" concept is to provide for the protection
and the preservation of environmentally sensitive lands; and that the
~tJff fccl~ that the ~ubject land w~s previously the subject of rezoning
negotiations in 1977, during the approval process of the PUD Ordinance
No. 77-48. He said that during the "give and take" process of approval
for the aforementioned PUD, the subjer~ lands were placed in a perpetual
preservation status; therefore, because the petitioner has previously
received compensation, and because the lands are already preserved, there
is no need for the "ST" designation; and, the subsequent issuance of TDR's
would constitute "double compensation" for the same property. Mr.
Henderlong stated that based on the above-referenced reasons, staff recommends
denla~ of Petition R-80-5C.
Regarding the CAPC hearings on March 20, 1980 and April 3, 1980,
concerning the subject petition, Mr, Henderlong noted that during the
former meeting, the CAPC requested a legal opinion from the County Attorney
"
I ~ ___ !
.J
I.__J
i
April 22, 1980
regarding "double compensation" and that same was offered by Mr. Pires
during the latter meeting. He reported that Mr. Pires told the CAPC that
he could not determine whether or not the designation of the subject
lands for preservation was a determinant; however, the preserved land
designatio:1 within the PUD is for the same inte"t as an "ST" overlay and
!
I
il
;1
there is no need for the requested."ST" overlay. Mr. Henderlong also said
that, at that time, Mr. Pires reported to the CAPC that there is the
problem of setting a precedent to be considered, and that if this request
is granted regarding the "ST" overlay on presently zoned lands within a
PUD, then, perhaps there might be a trend towards prior PUD's requesting
"ST" overl ays, strictly for the use of "TDR'S".
iI
.,
;1
II
Ii
:1
I.
i'!
;')
il
II
~
'I
II
J
'l
:!
i
J
I
I
I
Mr. Pires stated that CAPC reccmmends denial of the subject petition
because of the pri nc i p 1 e tha t "a fter~ the'fact" "S}" and "TDR" actions are
not advisable; and, that "PUD's" should not have "ST" overlays on them
because the "ST" areas are protected already as part of the "PUD" Ordinance.
Mr, Louis Capek, representing the CAPC, stated that he concurred
with the report made by Mr, Henderlong, and that the CAPC is very concerned
with "setting a precedent" in this case,
Mr. William Vines, Urban Planner, representing the petitioner, stated
that he is presenting two petitions today; the first of which is a petition
for a rezoning from "PUD" to "PUD-ST", for the purpose of making the
application possible for TDR's that will be submitted later today, if the
subject petition is approved.
Mr. Vines gave the rationale for the approval of the subject petition
as being simply that the proposed area for the "ST" is mangrove-wetlands;
is identified as, and must be, preserved in its natural state; is shown in
the Comprehensive Plan as an area of environmental sensitivity and, therefore,
he regards the "ST" designation to be entirely in order. He said that if
the Board agrees, then, the second matter of the remaining petition becomes
el igible for consideration,
Planning Director Danny Crew concurred with the purpose of the
designation "ST" as covered ear1ier by Mr. Henderlong and reaffirmed the
position of the Planning Department as one of not feel ing that the "ST"
BO~~ 052 PACE 666
. " } \
...-.-.--"-.. -. _. 'j
--1
I
i'
MDK
052 PACE 667
April 22, 1980
is neccssary in order to preserve the area in question, as it is presently
preserved withl~ the PUD Ordinance. He covered the so-called "compensa-
tion" that the developer of Barefoot Beach received during the "give and
take" process of developing the PUD Document, and that although he, per-
sOllally, is in favor of the "ST/TDR" process, he feels that this particular
request Is not a valid one because the developer has already received his
just compensation for the lands in question.
Attorney George Vega, representing the petitioner, stated that he
categorically denies his client received any compensation for the designa-
tion of the subject lands presently identified as Conservation area "0",
within the Barefoot Beach PUD. He said that he feels that any legal
problem should be addressed by the County Attorney, and that he has
spoken to him and that he has not becn able to substantiate via tapes and
minutes of the hearings, etc. during which the subject PUD was developed,
any proof of compensation to the developer for setting the subject property
aside as a preserved area. He also stated that when the subject PUD was
developed, it was reccived very well by the County as it is a single-
family developmcnt and not multi-family, thercfore has a low density ratio;
then, suddenly, when the developer is filing for the "ST/TDR" process, as
pointed out to the pctitioner by Neno Spagna, who was the Community Oevelop-
ment Administrator for the County at that time, as the "thing to do be<:alJse
the developer is entitled to it", the County is claiming "double compensa-
tion". Hc furthcr pointed out that it is his feeling that the petitioner
is requesting the zoning change and should be granted same, because the
entire process "fits exactly into the TDR Crdinance". He stated that the
developer of Barefoot Beach is entitled to any benefits and encouragement
that are outlined within the TDR Ordinance, for the setting aside and not
developing environmentally sensitive lands.
Comnissioner Archer a~ked Mr. Vega when Mr. Sapgna spoke to him, and
encouraged him to have his client, the petitioner, make the request for
the "ST" overlay? Mr. Vega stated that Mr. Spagna had spoken to him on
several occasions, some three months ago.
Commissioner Archer clarified what he feels constituted the original
compensation, and stated that the staff is referring to set-backs,
I'
., ...- ..
,-- .
!
I,
!I
Ii
1
!
0-
-
w_
-
~. __'l.."",;",
."....'
" ..'J'
"
)::1:'
[__.1
J
....J
April 22, 1980
encroachments, etc. rather than "density trading-off" as referred to by
Mr. Vega He said that this compensation took place as part of the "give
and take" process of developing the subject PUD. He said that in light
of this fact, he sees no reason for additional "giving and taking" at this
time; howeVer, he does see a possible so-caned "double-dipping" of sorts,
if additional compensation is given. Mr. Vega responded that he is not
aware of any so called "double-dipping" because when the PUD was developed,
he is not aware of any compensation at that time. He added that he
considers the "TDk" process as an "encouragement" to developers for going
"low-density" rather than "high-def1sity" for a particular parcel of land.
Commissioner Archer responded that he considers the "encouragement" that
took place was regarding a planned "nit development, and that if the Board
is to go into the record to substantiate any "give and take" conversations
that might have taken place between the developer and the staff in order
to develop the subject "PUD" then, perhaps the best thing to do is to do
away with that type of system, and come before the Board, on record, and
do any bargaining that may be necessary to satisfy both parties. He said
tha t he is aware tha t there was no "TDR" process at the time of the
development of th"! PUD. however, he said there was some "swapping" of
" th i s for tha t" at tha t time.
Chairman Wenzel asked Planning Director Crew to explain exactly what
the petitioner will be gaining if the subject petition is approved, if there
is no density to be achieved. Dr. Crew stated that if the "TDR" process
is to be granted, then, the petitioner will be able to increase the density
of lands other than Barefoot Beach.
Dr. Crew ~tated that he has spoken with Dr. Spagna, and he relayed
to the Board that when Dr. Spagna encouraged the petitioner to come forward
and request the "ST" designation for the "TDR" process, he was not aware
of the fact that the developer was planning to do so for lands set out
as preserve in the original PUD, and that it was not until Dr. Crew showed
Dr. Spagna the relative maps, that he became aware of this.
Dr. Crew stated that there was some confusion over the exact
BOOK 052 PACE 668
....._.t_
".
BOOK
052 PACE 669
. April 22, 1980
intent of the developer and that Dr. Spagna had misunderstood same
intention~. He added that density is not the only type of compensation
that can be received by a developer during the "give and take" process of
developing a PUD. He said that in the case of this particular PUD, the
compensatiol~ was in the form of various challges in land use amon~ other
things. He urged the Board not to look at "compensation" as only regarding
density.
There was some discussion regarding the encouragement of Dr. Spagna
towards the developer; the beJrlng that this encouragement has had on the
petitioner; and various concerns regarding these matters as expressed
by Chairman Wenzel and Commissioner Archp.r.
Mrs. Charlotte Westma~, representing the League of Women Voters,
addressed the Board and strongly opposed the subject petition, citing her
reasons as the problem with setting a precedent; the fact that there was
previous compensation; and the lack of necessity for an additional layer
of "protective measures" for lands already protected in the PUD document.
She read parts of the EAC meeting of March 19, 1980, during which the subject
petition ~~s reviewed, and expressed her feeling that there is evidence of
i
I
the aforementioned facts within same. She also brought forth the fact that
the petitioner has in mind to deed the subject lands over to the Collier
County Conservancy, as noted within the aforementioned EAC minutes.
Mr. Vines stated that the question of "ST" desigrlation has never
been an issue; the issue is the staff's claim that the developer has
received compensation; and, there is no proof of this compensation in
the records. He said that the Board should remember that the developer
has designed a development with very low density, and that this is in
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. He said that according to the
TDR Ordinance, Lely Estates, Inc., is just going through the established
procedures; and that If the Board is not happy with this, then, they should
change the Ordinance. When asked by Commissioner Archer where the developer
plans to use the "density compensation" arrived at through the TOR process,
--
IIJ~- -
".
- .~ ''';'''r.
L..1
J
I
April 22, 1980
iF granted, Mr. Vines said that there are no specific plans regarding where
they will be used. Commissioner Wimer asked Mr. Vines if the petitioner
would sell the development rights, and Mr. Vines stated that the relative
Ordinance specifies that the developer may do so.
Commissioner Wimer stated that he find" no fault with the petitioner;
he was asked to make this appeal; and. he did so. IJe said that he is
against the TOR process in general, as it is written within the TOR Ordinance.
and that he cannot vote in favor of any "ST/TDR" requests under the guidelines
of the present Ordinance. He apologized to the petitioner, for the position
that he has been placed in by a member of the County staff, and also stated
that he is in favor of "doing away" with the TOR Ordinllnce. or lit least
amending it so as to specify that all transfer of development rights must
be made to contiguous lands. He said that he has requested staff to study
this matter in the past and is call ing for the same thing again, citing
a conversation with Planning Director Crew earlier today during which Dr.
Crew reported that developers are selling these "TOR's" in some areas for
as high as $6,ODO; and his concern is with the question of "where is this
density going to end up".
Mr. Mike Zewalk, representing North Naples Civic Association, con-
curred with Commissioner Wimer, and added that he was in favor of "TDR"
only if the resultant density is to be on contiguous lands.
Mr. \-lade Schroeder, past C.ClPC member, hrought forth the question of
what would happen if someone were to purchase the "protected" lands for
a small sum of money, and then the purchaser came before the Board and
petitioned for the "TDR's" for that protected lands, same lands being
designated "ST". County Manager Will iam NOnTIan stated that this is a
legal question that will need to be addressed by the legal staff after
study of the question.
Assistant County Attorney Pires concurred, and added that he wants
to make the Board aware that prior to the adoption of the subject PUD,
the lands that make up the PUD were zoned various types of land; and, that
a "rezoning" took place when the subject PUD was approved. He added that
the subject "protected lands" were designated as "protected" at that time.
BOOK 052 PAGE 670
-
-'.T
r
-'
-
..
BOOK
052 PACE 671
April 22, 1980
Hearing that there was no one further to address the Board, Commis-
sioner Arch~~ moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried unanimously
that the public heuring be closed.
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
4/1, that Petition R-BO-SC, as filed by Lely Estates, I~c., regarding the
Barefoot Beach PUD be denied. Commissioner Browned voted against the
denial, stating that he feels the Board members should stand behind their
previous action regarding the adoption of the "ST/TDR" Ordinance.
PETITION TDR-80-1-C, LE~;' ESTATES, INC., REQUESTING APPROVAL OF TOR FOR
"ST" LANDS WITHIN BAREFOOT BEACH PUD - DENIED
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
April 2, 1980 as evic~nced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the
Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition TDR-BO-l-C, as filed
by Lely Estates, Inc., requesting approval of the TOR for liST" lands
within the Barefoot Beach PUD, located in Sections 6 and 8, T48S, R2SE.
Pursuant to Board action taken with the Companion Petition R-BO-S-C,
presented for public hearing earl ier in the session today, and resulting
in a denial of the petitioner's request for an "ST" designation for the
lands in question re~arding the subj ect TOR request, it was the consensus
of the Board to further deny the subject petition by official action.
Hearing there was no one further to speak on the matter, Commissioner
Wimer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Pistor seconded
the motion and it carried unanimously.
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
with a 4/1 vote, that Petition TDR--80-1-C be denied. Commissioner Brown
voted in opposition to the denial.
The vote was verified by Clerk Reagan, as 4/1, with Commissioner
Brown voting "No".
'f ....,
.--
"'.....
I
-
-
IJ
_._~.1..~-~____~
-,
1____1
. '_J
April 22, 1980
PETITION V-80-7-C, HOLLAND-AMERICAN INVESTMENTS CORP., REQUESTING A
VARIANCE OF THE REQUIRED 15' SETBACK FOR PARKING FACILITIES LOCATED
ON LO':'::; 21, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 & 34, COLLIER CITY - CONTINUED TO
4/29/80
.
..
.
,.
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
Marcil 30, 19BO as evidt>nced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the
Clerr., public hearing was opened for consideration of Petition V-80-7-C,
as filed by Holland-American Investments Corp.. requesting a variance of
the required 15' setback for parking facil ities located on Lots 21, 28,
I
Ir
II
I
I.
I
I
29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 34. Collfer City.
Zoning Director Jeffory Perry presented Petition V-8D-7-C, and
I
I
~
}.
stated that the request is for a variance from the 15' setback from the
front of a building, as required in the "GRC" district. He said the
Executive Summary contains the drawings of the existing and the proposed
parking facilities relative to the petitioner's request, noting that the
parking facilities are for an eXisting building in Old Marco Square.
Mr. Perry stated that although the considerations regarding the
reasons for the variance are valid, staff does not find the criteria has
been met that would establish the required "hardship" on the part of the
petitioner. He said that staff recommends denial of the subject petition.
Chairman Wenzel asked if the Traffic Planner reviewed the petition and
concurs with the recommendation. r1r. Perry an~wered affirmatively,
clarifying the recommendation as being based on the lack of mp~ting the
requirements for a legal hardship.
Commissioner Pistor stated that after studying the draWings, he has
discovered that two of the entrance ways onto Bald Eagle Drive will be
eliminated through the new proposed parking facilities; and, that this would
aid in the problem of traffic and accidents along same street in Marco. He
stated that this consideration may not constitute any "hardship" on the
applicant; however, it constitutes an advantage to the County, and to the
residents in Marco. He cited several instances where accidents have taken
place at or near the subject parking area; and, he stated that he was in
favor of eliminating any traffic flow onto Bald Eagle Drive.
Chairman Wenzel asked Assistant County Attorney Pires if a varianc.,
could be granted because of a "hardship" on the citizens of the County,
BJ0K 052 PACE 672
----
-
_.. ........~.__ _____.___.o ._____ (.)' \
il:
i
MaX 052 fACE 613
April 22, 1980
rather than because of a "hardship" on the part of the petitioner? Mr.
Pires answerb~ that the "hardship" relative to a variance must be on the
prJperty owner himself.
Commissioner Wimer stated that the request of the petitioner appears
to be in the best interest of the public. and, that the ~ommissioners are
here to serve the public safety and welfare. He asked if the Commissioners
could act on behalf of the citizens' welfare regarding this petition?
Mr. Pires pointed out that within Mr. Virta's addendum ~o tho Executive
Summary, dated 4/2/80, the safety of the publ ic and the welfare of the
citizens can be accomplished by the petitioner rearranging the parking by
placing it adjacent to his building and putting his driving lanes in the
setback, thereby reducing the number of driveways and still be in con-
formance with the Zoning Ordinance.
In answer to Chairman Wenzel's question of whether or not the applic~nt
.
Is wfll ing to meet the suggested rearrangement of the subject parking'
arrangements, Mr. Darrell March of Marco Island Engineering, representing
the petitioner, answered that the suggestions by Mr. Virt~ were discussed
and found to be less than optimum because of the turning radius needed for
case on the part of the drivers. and also the ease with which the drivers will
have regarding access to the parking facilitie~ does not afford conforming to
the suggested rearrangement.
He referred to the "safety" aspects of the request and stated that
many drivers now have to back out onto Bald Eagle Drive, and this will be
remedied by his proposal; also there will be two additional parking places
if his requested variance is approved.
After a discussion regarding various alternative methods of
design for the proposed parking area, and the suggestion being made that
the Engineer study the matter further, Mr. March agreed to work up a new
design, and incorporate some of staff's recommendations into S3me design.
Commissioner Archer moved to continue the public hearing regarding
Petition V-80-7C for one week. Commissioner Pistor seconded the motion
and it carried unanimously 5/0.
'--1
c-
:.
I
-
_...___ --....-..,;:';:-ot
.', . ,.
L._~I
.J
I ._' .'_J
Apri 1 22, 1980
*
*
*
Recess from 10:30 A.M. to 10:35 A.M. at which time the meeting was
reconvened with Deputy Clerk Jean Swindle replacing Deputy Clerk
Darl~ne Davidson and Commissioner Wimer absent for the remainder
of the session.
*
*
*
PETITIUN CP-BO-4-C, BRUCE GREEN & ASSOCIATES, REQUESTING A COMPREHENSIVE
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL 0-6.22 TO RESIDENTIAL
6,22-30 ON LOT 104, NhPLES GROVE AND TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE FARMS ND. 2 _
ADVERTISING AUTHORIZED FOR PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 3, 1980
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by CommiSSioner Pistor and carried
4-0, with Conmissioner Wimer absent, that Petition CP-OO-4-C filed by
Bruce Green and Associates requesting a Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amend-
mcnt from commercial and residential 0-6.22 to residential 6.22-30 on
L~t 104, Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little Farms No.2, be advertised
for public hearing June 3, 1980.
PETITION R-80-8-C, BRUCE GREEN & ASSOCIATES, REQUESTING REZONING FROM "GRC"
GENERAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL AND "RM-1" RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY TO "PUD"
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON LOT 104, NAPLES GROVE AND TRUCK COMPANY'S LITTLE
FARMS NO. 2 - ADVERTISINC AUTHORIZED FOR PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 3, 1980
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pis tor and
carried 4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that Petition R-80-8-C,
filed by Bruce 'Green and Associates, requesting rezoning from "GRC" general
retail commercial and "RM-1" residential multi-family to "PUD" planned
unit development on Lot 104, Naples Grove and Truck Company's Little
Farm~ Ne. 2, be advertised for publ ic hearin!) June 3, 19RO.
PETITION CCCL-80-l-C, WAFAA ASSAAD OF WILSON, MILLER, BARTON, SOLL &
PEEK, INC.. REQUESTING A COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE VARIANCE ON
PROPERTY IN SECTION 16, T49S, R25', NAPLES CAY - DELETED PER PETITIONER'S
REQUES T
According to County Manager Norman's statement, he had received a
request from the Petitioner asking that Petition CCCL-80-l-C be deleted
until it can be heard with a companion petition at a later date. Com-
missioner Al'chf'r moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried 4-0,
with Conrnissioner Wimer absent, that Petition CCCL-80-l-C, be deleted
from the agenda, to be heard at a later date.
Boa~ 052 PACE 674
V'
. .,,~~,._ ___ '. 1
-',
B[)~~ 052 PACE 675
April 22, 1980
PETITION NZ-80-2-C, COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT
TO ZONING ORDINANCE 76-30 BY INSERTING A DEFINITION OF LIVE-ABOARD VESSEL
AND PROVIDING FOR LIVE-ABOARD VESSELS - ADVERTISING AUTHORIZED FOR
?~BLIC HEARING MAY 13, 198D
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0, hith Commissioner Wimer absent, that Petition NZ-80-2-C filed
by the County Planning Department, requesting an amendment to Zoning
Ordinance 76-30 by amending Section 3, definitions inserting a definition
of live-aboard vessel and amending Sections B, 21, 21.1, 22.11, 22.111, 22.IV,
23, 25, 27, 34, 35, 37 and 38 providing for live-aboard vessels, be
advertised for public hearing May 13, 1980.
PETITION NZ-80-3-C, COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT
TO ZONING ORDINANCE 76-30 BY AMENDING SECTION 37, A-AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS
BY ALLOWING MOBILE HOMES IN THIS DISTRICT AS A PROVISIONAL USE - ADVERTISING
AUTHORIZED FOR PUBLIC HEARING MAY 13, 1980
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0, with Commissioncr Wimcr absent, that Petition NZ-BO-3-C
filed by County Planning Departmcnt requesting an amendment to Zoning
Ordinance 76-30 by amending Section 37, A-Agricultural Districts, by
allowing mobile homes in this district as a provisional use, be advertised
for public hearing May 13, 1980.
PETITION NZ-80-4-C, COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUESTING AMENDMENT TO
ZONING ORDINANCE 76-30 BY AMENDING SECTION 48 BY CHANGING PROCEDURES FOR
PRDPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION FOR COASTAL AREA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS
~!HE,'! OVER 5'; OF COUNTY LAND IS INVOLVED AND RY CHANGING NOTICE OF CAPC
MEETINGS POSTING REQUIREMENTS - ADVERTISING AUTHORIZED FOR PUBLIC HEARING
MAY 13, 1980
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
curried 4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that Petition NZ-BD-4-C
filed by County Planning Department requesting an amendment to Loning
Ordinance 76-30 by amending Section 4B by changiny ~rocedures for property
owner notification for Coastal Area Planning Commission meetings when
over 5% of county land is involved and by changing notice of CAPC meetings
posting requirements, be advertised for public hearing May 13, 1980.
.. .--,
r
~ -
I ,..... .... -
....., ' "I
....1.~:-... --'--:or:-~--
L__J:
....J
April 22, 1980
PETITION TO VACATE A 3 FOOT DEEP LAKE EASEMENT LOCATED WITHIN TRfl.CT J,
LELY GOLF ESTATES. SAINT ANDREWS WEST - ADVERTISING AUTHORIZED FOR
PUBLIC HEA,;lNG MAY 13, 1980
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the petition to vacate
a 3 foot deep lake easement located within Tract J, Lely Golf Estates,
St. Andrews West, be advertised for public hearing May 13, 1980.
PETITION V-80-B-C, VIRGIL MARCUM, REqUESTING SETBACK VARIANCES ON LOTS
IN WOODLAND PARK, AN UNRECORDED SUBDIVISION - ADVERTISING AUTHORIZED FOR
PUBLIC HEARING MAY 13, 1980
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0, with CommIssioner Wimer ab~ent, that Petition V-80-8-C
fi'~d by Virgil Marcum requesting setback variances on lots in Woodland
Park, an unrecorded subdivision, be advertised for public hearing
May 13, 1980.
CHAIRMAN AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE TWO LEAA GRANT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE COUNTY
AND COLLIER COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH CLINIC, INC. FOR THE YEARS 1979 AND 1980 _
AGREEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1979 RE SAME REPEALED
Following County Manager Norman's explanation that acceptance of the
two submitted LEAA grant agreements betwe2n Collier County and Collier
County Mental Health Clinic, Inc. will finalize the recent revised require-
ments placed by the State on all LEAA grant funded Criminal Diversion Programs,
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried 4-0,
with Conmissioner Wimer absent, that the Chairman be authorized to execute
the following LEAA grant agreements:
For the year 1979 - Grant #79-AA-09-EB02 in the
amount of $31,666
For the year 1980 - Grant #79-AA-09-EB02 in the
amount of $28.911
I
Also, that the agreement dated February 12, IS!~ which is superseded by the
above agreement for the year 1979, be repealed.
*
*
*
*
*
*
p"1"l,,..
_....Jl\
052 PACE 676
--
-
eOQK 052 PACE GS7
April 22, 1980
GUN PERMIT NO. 80-4 ISSUED TO MR. NELSON A. FAERBER, SR.
County Manager Norman stated that Mr. Faerber's application to carry
a concealed pistol has met all the requirements of County Ordinance 79-86
and identified his need as being the transportation and sale of historic
handguns (such guns being classified as control lad sub~tance by the Oepart-
ment of Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms). Mr. Norman said
that the only transport available is personal transport as it is not
practical for security services tu transport handguns, nor do security
services possess a license to deal in firearms, which Mr. Faerber does have.
In addition, the Sheriff's Office reports that no record has been found of
any disqualifying activity or conviction.
Conrnissioncr Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried
4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that Gun Permit No. 80-4 be issued to
Mr, Nelson A. Faerber, Sr,
COUNTY EXPENSES REGARDING THE "BAY WEST SITE" ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIND AND THE
COLLIER COUNTY MUSEUM IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,700 - APPROVED
Museum Director Mary Manion presented the request, giving a review of
the material that had been collected from the "Bay West Site" and naming the
archaeological find as one of the most significant finds in recent history.
She stated the collection contains the rem"ins of over fifty deliberate
burials, lithics, worked wood and remains of a wooden spear throwing stick
(atlatl) which dates the subject site to approximately 6,000 B.C., also
three skulls with intact brains were discovered and are believed to be
the only organic remains from the Archaic period in the United States. She
concluded her remarks by naming the following donors:
University of Miami - 35 Radio-Carbon dates valued over $5.000
Florida State Museum - Use of the ~!seum's facilities to treat
and stabiliz~ the wooden artifacts
Members of SW Florida
Archaeological Society - Innumerable hours working at the
site andlor Museum together with
monetary donations
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
4-D, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the request for $1,700 made by
the Museum Director to cover expenses related to the "Bay West Site"
archaeological find be appruved and that Fiscal Officer Hall be authorized
to prepare the necessary budget amendment for the transfer of said monies
from the Contingency Fund.
1f -.-,
~._-~~-
1.__1
J
April 22, 1980
COUNTY ENGINEER AUTHORIZED TO CERTIFY THE FOLLOWINC: AS BEING QUALIFIED TO
APPRAISE RIGHT-OF-WAY PARCELS FOR THE APPROVED ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
AND TO NEGOTIATE RIGHT-OF-WAY APPRAISAL AGREEMENTS OVER $2,000 WITH SAME
FOR SUBSEQUENT FINAL APPROVAL AND EXECUTION BY THE BOARD: J.E. CARROLL,
!WNTER HAMILTON, DONALD R. JO:mSON, WILLIS E. KUSHMAN AND THEODORE M.
MORGAN
County Fngineer Barksdale stated he had evaluated five fee appraiser,
~fter following applicable provision of the FDOT qualification requirements
for professional status, past record and experience, and adequacy of personnel,
who are fully qualified to perform right-of-way appraisals for one or more
of five road improvements. Initial appraisals are required for about 30
pJrcels in the right-of-way to four lane Pine Ridge Road from U. S. 41 to
C. R. 31. and for about 90 parcels to build Golden Gate Boulevard from 1-75
to C, R. 951. Appraisal updates may be desired for settlement or necessary
~or condemnation for approximately 28 parcels required to extend Pine Ridge
Road to 1-75. about 9 parcels to build Golden Gate Boulevard from C. R. 31
to 1-75. and about 8 parcels to connect Santa Barbara Boulevard to
C. R. 856. Contract processes for fee appraising are exempt from the pro-
visions of the Consultants Competitive Negotiation Act and Section 14-75.04,
Florida Administrative Code on competitive selection of FDOT consultants,
nevertheless, Mr. Barksdale stated he is currently authorized to purchase
appraisal services up to $2,000 only with purchases of $2,000 and up to be
approved by the Board. Appraisal fees for the three road improvements
indicated above with the hiyhesl flUIlIUl:!r of parcels to be appraised may
J. E. Carroll, SRA, RM
Hamil ton Hunter, MAl
Donald R. Johnson, ASA, SRA, RM
Willis E. Kushman, MAl
Theodore M. Morgan, MAl, SRPA
I
exceed $2,OOD. He asked that he be authorized to certify the following
five fee appraisers as qualified for the aforementioned appraisal assignments:
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
4-0, with COIlJ11iss,Jner Wimer absent, that tile County Engineer be authorized
to certify the five above-referenced fee appraisers as being qualified
to appraise right-of-way parcels for the approved Road Improvement Program
and to negotiate Right of Way Appraisal Agreements over $2,000 with same
II
for subsequent final approval and execution by the Board.
BO~K 052 PACE 688
--..---..-.. ...__..~"_..-.~....
BO~K
052 PACE 68S
April 22, 1980
RESOLUTION NO. 80-88 (FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY) - ADOPTED - CHAIRMAN AUTHORIZED TO
SIGN CONTRACT RE SAME - FILING OF THE MAP OF SURVEY AND LOCATION RE SANTA
BARBARA BOULEVARD IN OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT - AUTHORIZED
County Engineer Barksdale requested that the submitted FDOT Right-of-Way
resolution together with the companion contract, be approved in order for the
extension of Santa Barbara Boulevard (from Radio Road northerly approximately
1,080 miles to a point in Section 28, Township 49 South, Range 26 East) to be
completed and at the same time, that the Map of Survey and Location be authorized
for filing in the office of the Clerk of Circuit Court.
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that Resolution No. 80-88 re the com-
pletion of Santa Barbara Boulevard, be adopted; that the Chairman be authorized
to sign the companion contract and that the Map of Survey and Location re
same be authorized for filing in the office of the Clerk of Circuit Court.
*
I
,
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
'-1
r~."
-
-
.-- ,....._---~..:'-----
L__-J
..,,)
I.. . _J
April 22, 1980
CHAIRMAN AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE RIGHT-OF-WAY AGREEMENT FOR AIRPORT ROAD AND
CANAL IMPROVEMENT AND TO MAKE PAYMENT FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE AGREEMENT
County Engineer Barksdale explained that he plans to advertise for
bids to construct the four laning of Airport Road from Golden Gate Parkway to
Cougar Drive within the next 30 days and identified the proposed construction
as being a design that will realign the Airport Road canal eastward, enlarging
it in accordance with the Water Management District 7 report. He said the
existing right-of-way for this improvement is 200 feet wide (IOD feet road
and 100 feet cnnnl) except beginning about 1325 feet north of Golden ~~te
Parkway where the canal right-of-way tapers to 50 feet wide at the Parkway
and continues about 1960 feet south at this width to the Golden Gate
Canal. The design for the road and canal improvement requires 100 foot side
right-oF-way for the canal; therefore, acquisition of about 3.3 acres is
i:
I
I
I.
pi
'.
;1
"
It
I;
i\
,
!
~
I:
l
l
"
,
1
necessary from the Edith Collier Sproul Trust. He concluded his presentation
with the statement that the Trustees have agreed to convey their interest by
Quit Claim Deeds for an acceptable price of $18,781 ($6,000 per acre) which
is available in the current road construction budget.
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the Chairman be authorized to execute
the Right-of-Way Agreement and additionally, ,authorize the payment for the
right-of-way as indicated in the said Agreement.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BO:l~ 052 PACE .700
r--- -
I
'-",
L~ .!
J
April 22, 19BO
EMERGENCY OROINANCE NO. BO-43 SUPERSEDING ORDINANCE NO. 75-5 AND RECON-
STITUTING THE GOODLAND WATE~ DI5TRICT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A WATER
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM TO BE FINANCED THROUGH BOND ASSESSMENTS AND REVENUES-
ADOPTED
County Attorney Pickworth explained the need for the adoption of an
emergency ordfn~nce which would provide for the reconstituting of the
GoodlJnd Water uistrict in order to construct a wat~r distribution system
to be financed through bond assessments and revenues. The establishment
of the Goodland Water District as a Municipal Service Taxing District
through the adoption of the proposed emergency ordinance will not only ~1l0w
the above-referenced method of financing but will also eliminate some of
the time cO(lsuming "~nags" that have developed. Corrrnissioner Archer
moved, seconded by Cornnissioner Brown and carried 4-0, with Commissioner
Wimer absent, that a state of emergency be declared, following which
Co~nissioner Pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Archer and carried
4-0. with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the Emergency Ordinance as
numbered and titled below be adopted and entered into Ordinance Book No. 11.
ORDINANCE NO. 80-43
AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING AND SUPER-
SEDING COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO.
75-5 CREATING THE GOODLAND WATER DIS-
TRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING
THAT SUCH DISTRICT SHALL BE AND HAVE
ALL THE POWERS OF A MUNICIPAL SERVICE
TAXING AND BENEFIT DISTRICT UNDER
SECTION 125.01(1), FLORIDA STATUTES AND
THE POWERS OF A WATER AND SEWER DIS-
TRICT UNDER CHAPTER 153 FLORIDA STAT-
UTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING
WATER FACILITIES IN THE UNINCORPORATED
AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY COMPRISING SUCH
DISTRICT; AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION
AND CONSTRUCTION OF WATER SUPPLY AND
DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES AND APPURTENANT
FACILITIES IN SUCH DISTRICT; PROVIDING
FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY SUCH
DISTRICT TO FINANCE THE COST THEREOF;
PROVIDING FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH
BONDS FROM REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE
OPERATION OF SUCH FACILITIES, ASSESS-
MENTS AGAINST PROPERTIES SPECIALLY
BENEFITED BY SUCH FACILITIES, TAXES
WITHIN SUCH DISTRICT ONLY AND OTHER
FUNDS OF SUCH DISTRICT OR COLLIER
COUNTY DERIVED FROM SOURCES OTHER,
THAN AD VALOREM TAXATION AND LEGALLY
AVAilABLE FOR SUCH PURPOSE; AND PROVID-
ING THE METHOD BY WHICH THIS ORDINANCE
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
BC:l,< 052 PACE .706
Ii
!
",
B'O~K 052 f,IGt 707
April 22, 1980
RESOLUTION GW-80-1 ORDERINC THE CONSTRUCTION OF ASSESSABLE IMPROVEMENTS
fOR THAT PORTION CF THE PROPOSED GOODLAND WATER SYSTEM TO BE FINANCED
THROUGH THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS UPON BENEFITED PROPERTIES - ADOPTEO
County Attorney Pickworth presented the proposed resolution, stating
that it orders the construction of water improvements in the Goodland Water
District with the cost being financed ~y a combination of both special
assessments and revenues.
Commissioner Pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Archer and carried
4-0, ~lith Co:nmissioner Wimer absent, that Resolution No. GW-80-1, orderi~g
the construction of assessable improvements for that portion of the proposed
Goodland Water System to be financed through the levy of special assessment
upon benefited properties, be adopted.
*
*
J
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
r--.
,---
,
~:.~1..'CJ::'"..7--
1
!
J
J
Apri 1 22, 1980
RESOLUTION GW.,80-2 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE OF COST
OF WATER IMPROVEMENTS IN GOODL.AND WATER DISTRICT AND THE FILING OF SAME BY
THE CONSULTING ENGINEER - AGQPTED
County Attorney Pickwvrth presented the !:ompanion resolution to
Resolution GW-80-1 which signifies the filing of the plans and specifica-
tions and cost estimate of water improvements in tne Goodland, Water District
by the Consulting Engineer in the Clerk to the Board's office. Also,
Mr. Pickworth stated, the resolution sets the time for a public hearing
on the confirmation of the Oistrict's Resolution GW-80-1 as being r~ay 13, 1980,
Commissioner Pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried
4-0. with Commissioner Wimer absent, that Resolution GW-80-2, be adopted.
*
( *
i.
I-
"
/,
I-
Ii
1 :
,I *
"
<
I: *
Boax 052 PACE .7J4
BO~~ 052 PACt 719
April 22, 1980
PAYMENT OF ROUTINE BILLS - AUTHORIZED
Following Fiscal Officer Harold Hall's statement that the bills
being presented for approval of payment have been prepared following
established procedures and that funds are available, Commissioner Pistor
moved. seconde<.l by Conrnissioner Brown and carried 4-0, with Commissioner
Wimer absent, that the bills be approved for payment as witnessed by the
following checks issued from April 16, 1980 through April 22, 19BO:
FUND
CHECK NOS.
6968 - 7227
1583 - 1725
Co un ty Chec ks
BCC (CErA) Payroll
BUDGET ^MENDMENT 80-81 TO TRANSFER FUNDS FOR PURCHASE OF DESK AND CHAIR
FOR THE BUILDING MAINTENANCE DEPARTMENT - AnQf!~D IN THE AMOUNT OF ,$330
Conmissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0. with Commissioner Wimer absent, that Budget Amendment
80-81 re the transfer of funds for purchase of desk and chair for the
Building Ma intl'nance Department in the amount of $330, be adopted.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
.--J
"'"
-,
eO:l~ 052 PAGE 721.
Aprll 22, 1980
DISCUSSION REGARDING THE REZONING OF 10 LOTS IN PLANTATION ISLAND FOR
MOBILE HOMES - CONTINUED UNTIL APRIL 29, 1980 - STAFF DIRECTED TO MAKE
RECO~MEtmATIorl
70ning Director Jeff Perry stated that a problem concerning the
zoning of 10 lots in the area of Plantation Island had been brought to
the attention of the Zoning Department within the last few ~eeks. He
explained that Plantation Island is, with the exception of the above-
referenced 10 lots, completely zoned mobile home and when Mr. William
Isaacs, who had just recently purchased a lot in the subject area for his
mobile home, requested building permits for the installation of his home,
the discrepancy was found. Mr. Isaacs' lot is one of the 10 lots zoned
multi-family instead of mobile home and, at that time, the planning depart-
ment initiated a rezone petition that will correct the obvious error.
Planning Director Danny Crew explained that the standard procedure for
rezoning property takes approximately 6 weeks in order for the petition
to be reviewed by all the necessary agencies and this particular petition,
R-SO-II-C, is now only three weeks into the procedure.
Discussion followed with Mr. Isaacs reviewing his request and
reiterating the need for his prompt move onto the Plantation Island lot;
the possibility of eliminating some of the time involved in the standard
rezoning procedure; the request by Commissioner Crown that the people
involved be allowed to move their trailers onto the subject lots before
anymore time has passed by and the suggestion by both County Manager Norman
and County Attorney Pickworth to continue the item until next week,
April 29, 1980.
Commissioner Brown moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and carried
4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the item be continued until
April 29, 1980 and that the Staff be directed to bring a definite recom-
menuation conccrning thc temporary placement of the subject mobile homes on
the lots in Plantation Island.
,..
r
._-'-
--- - -- -. - - . ._..' . ---_..
"'''''.---
~~
.'
l...,,_l
l J
\:
April 22, 1980
CERTIFICATES FOR CORRECTION RE 1976 AND 1979 TAX ROLLS - APPROVED FOR
CHAIRMAN'S SIGNATURE
C0mmissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the following Certificates
for Correction on the Tax Rolls be approved and that the Chairman be
authorized to sIgn same:
NOS. DATED
1979 Tax Roll 496 through 526 April 8, 1980 through Apri 1 21, 1980
1979 Personal Property 172 through 174 April 15, 1980
I, 1979 Personal Property 176 through 180 April 17, 1980
1976 Personal Property 334 and 335 March 26, 1980
CHAIRMAN AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER AND LEE CDUNTIES
PERTAINING TO AMBULANCE SERVICE FOR BONITA SHORES
Commissioner Pistor moved, seconded by Commissioner Brown and carried
,..
!
4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the Chairman be authorized to
,,';
execute an agreement between Collier and Lee Counties which will provide
emergency medical services to the people in Bonita Shores.
*
\
r
:t
I'
*
"
*
*
* * *
h
i *
I
50JK 052 PACE 722
.---
BO~K
052 PACE 727
April 22, 1980
REQUEST TO UTILIZE A TRAILER AS TEMPORARY RESIDENCE IN THE GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES AREA SCHEDULED ON APRIL 29, 1980 AGENDA - PROPOSED ORDINANCE
REGARDING 90 DAYS ALLOWANCE FOR USING A TRAILER AS TEMPORARY RESIDENCE
IN THOSE SITUATIONS THAT QUALIFY - TO BE REVIEWED ON APRIL 29, 19BO
Following Administrative Aide Mary Morgan's presentation of a letter
from Arthl'r McDonncll, rcprcsenting Alfred Soriano, reqllesting the Board
to schedulc his cl icnt's petition to util ize a trailer as a temporary
residence at 530 11th Street, S,W.. Golden Gate Estates, during a
period of const:uction, it was noted that the item has been placed on the
agenda for April 29. 1980. In conjunction with this request, County
Manager Norman reminded the Board that, at their request, an ordinance
addressing this situation will, also, be brought to the Commissioners for
review.
CHAIRMAN AUTHORIZEO TO SIGN LETTER OF OPPOSITION RE PRE-FILED LEGISLATION
RELATING TO \oIATER ReSOURCES WHICH WOULD PROVIDE fOR A STATE WIDE RESOURCES
BOARD
Administrative Aide Mary Morgan presented the written request from
Wi thlacoochec Regional Water Supply Authority, asking that the Board of
County Commission oppose the pre-filed legislation relating to Water
Resources (amending Chapter 373, F,S.) which would provide for a State
Water Resources Board. Ms. Morgan stated the opposition is based upon
the following:
(a) Invasion of home rule powers of local government
(b) Places water supply functions in \oIater Management Districts
and creates a conflict of interest with respect to their
regulatory functions
(c) Seeks to levy ad valorem taxes to support this state
agency which is. 'ntrary to Article VII, Sec. I(A) of the
Florida Constitution
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0, with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the Chairman be
authorized to sign said letter of opposition, including the above-
referenced thr",,, ~rotJnds, and submi t same to the proper authori ty.
CHAIRMAN AUTHORIZED TO SIGN LETTER OF OPPOSITION REGARDING LEGISLATION
WHICH WOULD PLACE CONTROL OF DISTRICT MENTAL HEALTH BOARDS UNDER THE
PURVIEW OF H.R,S,
Administrative Aide Mary Morgan presented a letter from the
Southwest Florida Mental Health Board regarding legislation which would
-
\,
r
i
"
-
j
t
..-...- ...~ "-.---: -.,------' . - _.-.. --- ......,--.-.. -..----.-
~, ; t
l I
...,"'"..
L_.J
April 22, 1980
place total control of the local community mental health under the purview
of the State HRS; proposes to make the County Coomission appointed Boards
advisory only with no authority or control over the programs or the use
of funds (including the locally provided funds) and/or place the control
of funding under fiRS without any controls by the Board, yet leaving the
Board responsible for quality and quantity of service. She stated that
the SW Florida Mental Health Board views this legislation as an effort
to erode local control and fiscal responsibility and asked that this
Ro~rd support it in its resistance to such legislation.
Commissioner Archer moved, seconded by Commissioner Pistor and
carried 4-0. with Commissioner Wimer absent, that the Chairman be authorized
to sign a letter of opposition regarding the above-referenced legislation.
LAKE TRAFFORD MEMORIAL GARDENS CERTIFICATE DEEDS NUMBERED 215; 216; 217;
and 218 RECORDED AND FILED FOR THE RECORD
Pursuant to action of the Board January 10, 1978 wherein the Chairman
was authorized to sign various deeds to Lake Trafford Memorial Gardens
cemetery lots as the need arises. the following Deeds numbered 215; 216;
217 and 218 were recorded and filed for the record.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
eOJ:< 052 PACE 728
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
ii;
\~
BO~X 052 PACE 733
April 22, 1980
STAFF AND COUNTY MANAGER DIRECTED TO LOOK INTO POSSIBILITY OF HAVING A
SECOND AMBULANCE PLACED IN THE IMMOKALEE AREA - DISCUSSION RE MSTD'S
SUPPLYING TIllS AND OTHER REQUESTED SERVICES TO BE WORKSHOPPED DURING
THE "DOUBLE TAXATION" SESSION OF APRIL 29, 1980
i'
Per ConUllissioner Brown's request, the Staff and County Manager were
directed to look into the possibility of having a second ambulance,
/1k1nned with a[lpropriate personnel. placed in the Immokalee area.
Additionally, it was noted that this subject will be reviewed during the
workshop session of April 29, 1980 when the item of MSTD's supplying
this and "ther reqlJested services will be on the ilgenda.
There being no objection, the Chair directed that the following
I
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE - FILED ANDIOR REFERRED
correspondence be filed andlor referred to the various departments as
indicated below:
1. Memo dated ~/16/80 from Commissioner Wimer regarding dual
taxation and his suggestions regarding the planning, building
and zoning departments, the roads and the Sheriff's budget
(Said subject "double taxation" scheduled for a workshop on
4/29/80) filed.
i
.1
2. Three pieces of correspondence regarding American Ambulance _
copies sent to County Manager and filed.
(a) Copy of 4/16/80 letter from Clerk William J. Reagan to
Mrs. Carl Smith regarding the high quality of service
re American Ambulance.
(b) letter dated 4/17/80 from Rachael L. C. Kuhn indicating
that she does not understand why the County would award
the contract to American Ambulance.
(c) Letter dated 4/17/BO from Kenneth C. Foster indicating
that he is not happy with the Board's action regarding
American Ambulance's contract.
3. Copy of Waste Management, Inc. 's Addendum 1, Attachment A for
the ra tes.""'l'oved - filed for the record.
4. Letter dated 4/14/80 from Mrs. Donald Walker regarding the
service she is receiving from WMI - Copy sent to Engineering
and fi led.
i
,
,
'I
I
I
5. Letter dated 4/15180 from Richard J. Coyle indicating that he
has no objections to oil exploration (PU 80-3-C) Copy to
Planning and filed.
6. Copy of letter from Wilson Miller, Barton, 5011 & Peek, Inc.
regarding the bid proposals for the county's road projects _
original letter sent to Engineering on 4/15/80 - filed for
the record,
. ~
( .-
h..___._'_ _ _.__._.~.-
BO~~
052 PAGE '735
Apr il 22, 198D
20. Minutes from the City of Naples for their meeting of 4/2/80 -
filed for the record.
21. Memo dated 4/15/80 from Utility Director Berzon to the BCC
regarding firms who have submitted engineering proposals on
the transmission and plant expansion - filed fur the record.
22. Public Service Commission Notices - filed for the record:
(a)
Docket 800300-CCT for GEE EL Transportation, Inc, for
emergency temporary authority
Docket B00208-CCT for emergency temporary authority by
Courier Services International, Inc.
Docket 8D0247-CCT for Miami Transfer Co., Inc. for extension
of certificate #L-116
Docket 800321-CCT for Lieberman Moving & Storage, Inc. for
extension of certificate 1531
Docket 800269-LCCT for transfer of certificate 819 from
Ralph and Nancy Crapse to R & D Trucking, Inc.
Docket 800271-CCT for Smalley Transportation Co. to establish
a tariff for parcel express operations
23. Departmental reports received and filed for the record:
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(a) Library (March 1980)
(b) Social Services (February 1980)
24. Senate Journals received and filed for the record.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting
was adjourned by order of the Chair - Time: 11:30 A.M.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BORAD(S) OF SPECIAL
DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
c~{~---
-... \' ,
ATTEST:
WI~LIAM J. REAGAN, r:LERK
.'-"1,1.., , /
/J.;tI+J' ,
1'\
f