Agenda 12/18/2006 W
Naples City Council
Collier County Board of Commissioners
J oint Workshop
December 18, 2006
Agenda
Naples City Council
Board of County Commissioners, Collier County
City Council Chamber, 735 Eighth Street South, Naples, Florida
City of Naples
Mayor: Bill Barnett
Vice Mayor: Johnny Nocera
City Council: William R. MacIlvaine, Gary Price II, John F. Sorey III, Penny Taylor, William Willkomm III
City Attorney: Robert D. Pritt. City Clerk: Tara A. Norman' City Manager: Dr. Robert E. Lee
Collier County
Chairman: Frank Halas
Vice Chairman: Jim Coletta
Commissioners: Donna Fiala, Tom Henning, Fred Coyle
County Manager: Jim Mudd' County Attorney: David C. Weigel
Joint Workshop
Monday, December 18,2006
1 :00 p.m.
I. Roll call
2. Set agenda
3. Naples Bay SWIM
4. Annexation
5. Discussion on an Interlocal Agreement for Mutual Review of Land Use Items on
City/County Boundary
6. Federal and State Lobbyist for City County Funding Requests
7. Preservation of Keewaydin Island
8. Fifth Avenue Community Redevelopment Agency Update Including Expenditures
Workshop Meeting of Monday, December 18, 2006
Page 2
9. City Service Fees and County Subsidies for Capital Improvements in the City
10. Update on City's Plans for Four Comers Bypass
11. City I County Relations
Public Comment (3 minute limit)
Adjourn
NOTICE
Welcome to today's City County Joint Workshop. Any information which is provided in advance of this
meeting on items listed below may be inspected in the office of the City Clerk, Room B, City Hall, or at the
Collier County Public Library Research Section, 650 Central Avenue. See also City of Naples home page,
http://www.naplesgov.com or call the City Clerk's Office, 213-1015. All written, audio-visual and other
materials presented to the City Council during this meeting will become the property of the City of Naples and
will be retained by the City Clerk.
Any person with a disability requiring auxiliary aids and services for this meeting may call the City Clerk's
Office at 213-1015 with requests at least two business days before the meeting date.
What's required of a SWIM Plan?
. WMD responsibilities (Chapter 373.453, F.S.):
Maintain a list that prioritizes wJh~r bodies of
regional or statewide significance and rOVH~W it
every five years with public input
WMDs can develop SWIM plans fOI water bodies
011 their priority lists
SFWMD to give priority to:
Lake OkeccllObee
B1scayne SaV
Lake Wmth LaDOOI1
Indiall Rivet Laooon
,111' I I! J I ill! 111,\
/\ I I
II ( I
What's required of a SWIM Plan?
. Description of the strategies and a schedule
for related management action for restoring or
protecting the waterbody to Class III or better
and to hel achieve state-ado ted TMDLs
. Description of the management actions
needed to maintain the waterbody once it has
been restored and to prevent future
degradation
. Estimation of funding needed to carry out the
strategies with a listing of available and
potential sources
\; I 'j
I I It I
What's required of a SWIM Plan?
Description of the waterbody system:
uses, hydrology, causes of degradation
Identify all governmental units having
jurisdiction in its drainage basin
Description of land uses in the basin
Identify the point and non-point sources of
~ollution discharged to the
waterbody and tributaries
1
'1.1 i; "l I ',11 " I
Naples Bay SWIM Plan
Adoption Schedule
. December 7,2006 - Brief Big Cypress
Basin Board members and interested
parties (local area workshop)
. January 4, 2007 - Brief WRAC members
and ask for approval to send to SFWMD
Governing Board
. January 11,2007 - SFWMD Governing
Board Adoption at its meeting in Naples
1 (I
Conditions Leading to Need for
Restoration and Protection
. 60 years of canal drainage and urban growttl tlave
reduced water clarity, increased contaminants and
nutnents. and reduced dissolved oxygen in Naples Bay
. ~6t~I~111~~~i~1~~{~t~ .a;~I~i~1~v:111~)lr~~71~~'~~1~~~1i~;.rsn~~ of
freshwater reaching Naples Bay
. Cll,H1gCS in salinity pauerns have caused declines in
sea[lfass beds and Impacted all levels of the flora and
fauna
. FDEP 11135 listed seven waterbody segments in Naples
~fl~g~ 1~)~;W~r-~1-tj/~ootoTeetin9 water quality standards
',\' ,\ 1 I I,' ,'1 rJ:, (',1 i
Naples Bay SWIM Goals
. Protect and improve surface water quality
. Preserve and restore, where appropriate,
native ecosystems along with their water
resource related functions
. Maintain the integrity and functions of
water resources and related natural
systems
. Improve degraded water resources and
related natural systems to a more natural
fu nctional ity
2
I I! ) I l' I~ r It'
Naples Bay SWIM Initiatives
. 1. Water Quality-
1110111101 weltel. C]lIi!ll1y ill1Cl flow illle! l110del
wilter Qllillity - cTillCill elUl1I0;llts olllllS
Illltiatlve
.2. Water Quantity-
Ickmtity illllows Iro:n Cilllills d:lc1 StOIll JV.hl 101
conclLllts InclllcJII1(111ll11~)O!II' cilsclldr(1os
a IlCI llIeclld 11ISIlIS 10 !ec Lice I !H~se excess
tlows 10 restore llIo!e 11"llIr,l; Ie!
qll,mlily 01 frOS!\WdtO! r:OII'qIO tile
!,I I I I),'
,\ ~, i\ {, I \ 1 I r.; I) I
4. Habitat Assessment, Protection
and Restoration Initiative
. Strategy: Provide Habitat Assessment,
Protection and Restoration
Inventorying bOl.l1 natural and disturbed
habitats in the watershed is needed to quantify
impacts to the system.
Set biologicallargets to form the basis for
efforls 10 enhance or restore the function of
degraded areas l.l11"01I0h selective habitat
enhancelnenl ;Hograrns and ;JrOj8C1S
3
I,; i I' :.'\ f I
L I '; 1 1 .. I' I ,\ ,.,' ,\ I I, \1;\"" t, I ""
1. Water Quality Initiative - Action
Steps
. Strategy: Evaluate the Existing Water
Quality Monitoring Network to
Determine Its Ability to Detect Change
Provide monitoring opllmlzatlon metllOdology
Review and update wale!' qualllv database
Implemenl optimized monllorlng program
. Strategy: Hydrologic and
Hydrodynamic Water Quality Modeling
Assist III polllltant 10;ldln~111l0del developl118111
& testlll[J
2. Water Quantity Initiative - Action
Steps
. Strategy: Improve the Timing of
Freshwater Flows into Naples Bay
Assess feasilJillly of developing a sallnlly
model
Develop and operate a salinity model (If
leasible)
Evaluate feasibility for- aquifer storage and
!'ecovery (ASR) wells, canal re-routing and
stormwatel' recycllllg as altematlve waler
sllP',ll,;'
C(1I1sider "lIlemaklng efforls
'II 'f (I
3. Watershed Master Planning and
Implementation - Action Steps
. Strategy: Evaluate Existing Stormwater
Master Plans
Examine covera[Je of slormwaler plalls
Evaluate exlslin[J plans for flood abatemenl
and water quality improvement
. Strategy: Assist in the Development of
Local Stormwater Master Plans and
Implementation Schedules
(-\sslst ii', tile development 0' 111:1Sle, plalls
',(' I) I II 1 r\ 'I I' ,\ \",
" [I [, I il Ill) 1'111,\ \",
,\1/, t: i, II ",I \
1/ (1
4. Habitat Assessment, Protection
and Restoration - Action Steps
. Strategy: Provide Habitat
Assessment, Protection and
Restoration
Develop maps of available habitat
Develop strategies for habitat protection
Facilitate habitat restoration initiatives
Funding Estimates
Initiative Yrl Yr 2 Yr3 Y,4 Yr5
"v'V8te~ Quality S75K S90K S75K S75K S75K
\JVater Quantity S25K SoOK S30K S25K S25K
Watershed Master S l,050K Sl,150K Sl,120K Sl,120K Sl.120K
P!annmg and
I'"npiemenlatlon
Haa!lat Assessme'1\ S50K S50K S30K S30K S30K
Protector, ar,d
Restorat:o'l
Totals ~OOK ~~ i1~ ~ ~
4
f I I, If 111,\ '.\ /" I li ,.,..\ r,:\" I I:, r 11 I', I ill I 1
Summary
. Full implementation of Ul(j Naples Bay
SWIM Plan as pl-esented today Will cost
-$().:\ 1 million over the next 5 years
does 110111Ie311 tile EldV will ile restored III
yearsl -
TillS IS tile IJl0QIIll1111n of illl ()1I~IOtrlD etlort
. The Plan will he updated penodicdlly and
include findin~Js from the Southwest
Florid,] Feasibility Study and as TOtll
Mdxiillum D. aily L. Odd AlloCclliolls an,
dev()loped by FDEP
I It I I ,'II,' I :l;\
,'I I
Naples SWIM Planning Project
Team
. Carla Palmer, PE, Plan Manager
. Liz Abbott, PMP, Editor & Project Manager
. Bob Chamberlain, Ph.D., Lead Env. Scientist
. Peter Doering, Ph.D.. Chief Env. Scientist
. Tim Lieberman, Sr. GIS Analyst
. Ananta Nath, PE. D. WRE, Chief Consulting Engr.
. Denis Frazel, Ph.D., Consulting Project Manager
,; II 11 I Ii : I II II I I. 1\ 1/" (, I I II ;.: ^ r.; ;, " i ',1 ., I II 1 " I fl Ii'
SFWMD Naples Bay SWIM Plan
Review Process
.",. ~.....
I ',. ---T~
, ~,;Jllh
~
EZ!:m!I
l
III
)'.':"'1 1
""'- ,""
( I " --1!ll!!III!!!II!
) IIlIilIiIiIiiiI
5
Community Development
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Dr. Robert Lee, City Manager
Robin Singer, Community Development Director
December 13, 2006
Annexation Procedures - Agenda Item 4
Listed below are the annexation procedures approved by the City Council at their regular
meeting on December 6, 2006. As part of the City's visioning process City residents will be
asked to provide input regarding a new annexation policy to further define how the City will
respond to requests for annexation.
The following steps shall be followed when a petition is submitted to the City for annexation of
property:
1. The Applicant shall meet with City staff regarding statutory compliance;
2. The County shall be notified that the City has been asked to consider an annexation
petition;
3. The City Council shall consider whether the proposed annexation should be considered;
4. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a petition with all necessary consent forms and
fee;
5. The City shall notify the County that a petition has been submitted;
6. The City Clerk's Office shall verify the consent forms;
7. Staff shall prepare an Urban Services Report to include a financial feasibility formula, an
analysis of the effects of the proposed annexation on existing levels of service to the
City and adjacent areas, whether the City will provide utility services within the proposed
annexed area and provide Council with recommendations;
8. The Planning Advisory Board shall review the petition and report;
9. The City Council shall discuss the petition, report and the Planning Advisory Board's
recommendation at a workshop;
10. The Urban Services Report shall be forwarded to the County; and
11. The City Council shall consider an annexation ordinance and any required referendums
are scheduled.
c:r:: p' p? /y /
C;j?n~ ~?Vr:~f'3 a?;e~Je. . .
'~~I~C.e k r~kM ~w .1ef!:. ((];/?d& ?~I. ~?#;:rt;?iP'e ck
Agenda I tern
Meeting of 12/6/06
RESOLUTION 06-
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NEW PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERATION OF
ANNEXATION PETITIONS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,
the
for
case
City's current policy on annexation allows
consideration of annexation petitions on a
by case basis; and
WHEREAS,
recent events have
the current policy
to address this
process; and
caused
and a
issue
the City
decision
during
to re-evaluate
has been made
the visioning
WHEREAS,
at the October 16, 2006 City Council Workshop a
consensus was reached to establish a new
procedure that will increase notification to the
County, include the Planning Advisory Board in
the annexation petition review process and expand
the scope of the staff report to include
financial feasibility, utility service areas and
the City's level of service; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NAPLES, FLORIDA:
Section 1.
That the following steps shall be followed when a
petition is submitted to the City for annexation
of property:
1. The Applicant shall meet with City staff
regarding statutory compliance;
2. The County shall be notified that the City
has been asked to consider an annexation
petition;
3. The City Council shall consider whether the
proposed annexation should be considered;
4. The Applicant shall prepare and submit a
petition with all necessary consent forms
and fee;
5. The City shall notify the County that a
petition has been submitted;
Resolution 06- Page 2
6. The City Clerk's Office shall verify the
consent forms;
7. Staff shall prepare an Urban Services Report
to include a financial feasibility formula,
an analysis of the effects of the proposed
annexation on existing level of service to
the City and adjacent areas, whether the
City will provide utility services within
the proposed annexed area and provide
Council with recommendations;
8. The Planning Advisory Board shall review the
petition and report;
9. The City Council shall discuss the petition,
report and the Planning Advisory Board's
recommendation at a workshop;
10. The Urban Services Report shall be forwarded
to the County; and
11. The City Council shall consider an
annexation ordinance and any required
referendums are scheduled.
Section 4.
This resolution shall take effect immediately
upon adoption.
PASSED IN OPEN AND REGULAR SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA, THIS 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2006.
Bill Barnett, Mayor
Attest:
legality:
Approved
as
to
form
and
Tara A. Norman, City Clerk
Robert D. Pritt,
City Attorney
Date filed with City Clerk:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NAPLES CITY COUNCIL
A:;enda Item_~
For the Meeting of...LDJ.) f /4..t,-
~
Approval of a proposed interlocal agreement between the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners and the City of Naples City Council to establish an area of mutual concern
within which both the City of Naples and Collier County will provide a courtesy review of
proposed land use petitions and land development projects involving incorporated and
unincorporated areas within one-half (112) of a mile of the mutual geographical boundary
of the City and the unincorporated areas ofthe County.
OBJECTIVE: That the Board and the City Council review the proposed interlocal agreement
and provide guidance and direction to staff to finalize an agreement providing for a courtesy
review by the respective staffs for any proposed land use and land development projects within
one-half (112) mile ofthe city-county limits.
CONSIDERATIONS: The incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County continue to
experience growth and redevelopment. New and future development within 1h mile of the city-
county limits could have impacts on the character, economy, infrastructure and essential public
services of either the City or the County. These potential challenges, opportunities and impacts
related to land development can be addressed in a proactive manner through dialogue and
communications between the County and the City governments as well as the respective staffs.
As such, it is recommended that procedures be established to review and comment on the other
Party's land use petitions involving incorporated and unincorporated areas within a proposed
"area of mutual interest" of one-half (1/2) mile of the shared city-county boundary. Upon final
approval of the interlocal agreement, the respective staffs will be afforded the opportunity to
review and comment on pending land use petitions or proposed developments. Such review and
comment by either Party is intended to occur in a timely manner and be of a non-binding nature.
The types of land development activities and/or petitions subject to consideration may include
rezonings, Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezones, amendments to Planned Unit
Developments (PUD's), Development of Regional Impacts (DRI's), Conditional Use petitions
and any proposed developments or re-development Site Development Plans (SDP's).
FISCAL IMPACT: Costs of staff time associated with the respective reviews will be absorbed
by the respective jurisdictions as a normal cost of doing business. For all petitions or projects in
the area of mutual interest that are subject to a courtesy review, the reviewing Party will be
provided one stamped set or recorded copy of the approving Party's approved plans or
documents at no expense.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None directly, although zoning proposals within
one-half mile of the City and the County could impact the policies and provisions of the
respective Growth Management Plans.
RECOMMENDA TION: That during the joint meeting between the Board of County
Commissioners and the City Council of the City of Naples, the Board and City Council provide
guidance and direction regarding the attached interlocal agreement.
Prepared by: Joseph K. Schmitt, CDES Division Administrator
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATIVE
GOVERNMENTAL EFFORTS
This Agreement is hereby entered into between the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (hereafter "the County") and the City of Naples (hereafter "the City"). The
City and the County may also be referred to as the "Parties" or in their individual capacity as
the "Party."
WHEREAS, the City was incorporated by Special Act of the Florida Legislature that
was approved on .....
WHEREAS, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires all municipal governments to
prepare and adopt a Comprehensive Plan, including an Intergovernmental Coordination
Element, within three years of incorporation; and
WHEREAS, the Naples City Council adopted the City's Comprehensive Plan on;
and ......
WHEREAS, [insert City's Policy on cooperative efforts]
WHEREAS, the Parties acknowledge that certain development occurring within the
City and County require collaborative efforts to maintain consistent standards of development
and community character.
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to encourage growth, consistent with sound planning
and environmental principles, and wish to engage in collaborative efforts to achieve that end.
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to establish procedures, set out below, designed to
effectuate review and comment on each other's land use petitions within one half (112) ofa
mile of the mutual geographical boundary of the City and the unincorporated areas of the
County.
WHEREAS, the Parties agree to review the petitions in a timely manner and in
compliance with the provisions of this Agreement, as set out below.
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that any review and comments are of an advisory nature
and thus are considered a courtesy and not binding.
THEREFORE, to accomplish the aforementioned goals, the Parties agree to the
following:
1. That all new development within the defined geographical area described
above may have a significant impact on the services provided by both the
County and the City and thus is of interest to both parties.
2. Within the defined geographical area, the following types of land
development activities and/or petitions may be reviewed by the Parties:
a. Rezonings, including Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezones.
b. Amendments to Planned Unit Developments (PUD's).
c. Developments of Regional Impact (DRI's).
d. Site Development Plans (SDPs) and final plats.
3. That the City or County will be provided with one complete set of
documentation necessary to review the project/petition.
4. That the Party conducting the courtesy review will have ten (10) working
days upon receipt of the documentation to complete the review and remit
any comments, whether written or oral, to the appropriate staff of the other
Party.
NOTE: A working day is defined as any day that is not a weekend or
an established Federal Holiday.
5. For all projects or petitions within the defined geographic area and
approved by the reviewing Party, the reviewing Party will receive a
stamped set or recorded copy of the approved plans or petition at no cost.
6. Any review and comments are of an advisory nature and thus are
considered a courtesy and not binding in nature.
THA T UPON EXECUTION, this Agreement for Cooperative Governmental Efforts shall be
recorded in the Official Record Book of Collier County, Florida at the County's expense.
CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA
BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY
By:
By:
(Mayor)
(Chairman)
Attest: Dr. Robert E. Lee,
City Manager
Attest: Dwight E. Brock,
Clerk of Courts
Approved as to form and
sufficiency for the City of
Naples, Florida:
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legal
sufficiency for Collier County
Naples City Attorney
, Esquire
David C. Weigel, Esquire
County Attorney
Office of the City Manager
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of County
Commissioners
Dr. Robert E. Lee, City Manager ck..
December 13, 2006
Federal and State Lobbyist for City County Funding Request-
Agenda Item 6
Competing for State and Federal grant dollars is an important function and challenge for cities
and counties. The County has engaged lobbyists to assist in pursuit of funding and to facilitate
committee meetings on local government issues.
The City Council held a Workshop earlier in the year to discuss the use of lobbyists to assist in
City specific issues and projects. At that time, a decision was made to work directly with the
legislators, but to utilize professional assistance on specific projects/issues.
The County has offered to utilize their lobbyists to assist the City with their priorities. This
Workshop item will enable the County Commissioners and City Council Members to share
their ideas, concerns, and recommendations regarding the use of lobbyists.
C?~ /: /' /i" /'
C~41;;Y) aVf'? 45 rufe-roe. . .
(J;/ ,/' /) / /y
./eM~Ce: << cl41fiM tf~~e .r~. .
/I' /. ),/'
(~fbtd1/ C71. J~h;at' U/t5 at:.
Keewa,din Island
Presentation to the
City Council-County Commission Joint Workshop
Regarding Public Vessel Access to Keewaydln Island
December 18,2008
SynlPsls II BlanlllrecUln
. Priorities identified at PARAB-sponsored
Beach Access public workshop
. Maintain variety of beach experiences
. Develop access to Keewaydln
. Vessel Access to Keewaydin
. Supported at BCC-PARAB Workshop March
31,2005
. Identified as 1 of 6 priority projects at BCC-
PARAB Workshop June 7, 2005
Public Vlssel Acce. II lelwav_ln Island
. Joint project of Collier County, City
of Naples, and Rookery Bay
· Currently in conceptual stages only
. Proposes new public vessel access
at north end of island via ferry
. Envisioned as a nature-based
educational experience
. NOT a solution to beach access
issues countywide
IIsIDI'I oIl11e
Cllller CounlY .each Acce. InWaDve
1999 - BCC hears Initial Beach and Boat Access Report
March 2003 - BCC hears 2003 Beach and Boat Access
Report
May 2003 - BCC adopts Beach and Boat Access Master
Plan
September 2003 - BCC considers utility franchise fees
as source to fund Initiatives
March 2004 - BCC accepts final report of the Revenue
Commission suggesting potential funding sources
February 2005 - PARAB holds publiC meeting to garner
Input on beach access Issues
March 2005 - First BCC/PARAB Joint workshop
June 2005 - Second BCC/PARAB Joint WOrkshop held;
six prlortty projects Identified
Land Manl.e.nl Inlllallves
. Proposed City-County-State partnership
. Rookery Bay Public Forum
week of January 29
. Boater Stewardship Alliance
. Collier County Code Enforcement
. Collier County Sheriff's Office
. City of Naples PESO
. City of Naples Natural Resources
. Collier County Natural Resources
ClnclPlualVesselAcce.llcaUln
1
Conceptual Vessellccess LocaUon
t----
P.....se. Inlrastncture
. Dock (for ferry access only)
. Composting Restroom (for patron
use only)
. Dune Crossover
. Screened Pavilion
. Storage Space
Conceptual Vessel Iccess LocaUon
2
Proposed Milestones
2007 - Partnership, Planning and
Permitting
2008 - Construction
2009 - Begin Operation
3
pO'I.dal Fua.laB SIUrclS
. Capital infrastructure funded through
the beach park project allocation of
TOC funds (Fund 183)
.8ewavdin Island
l.
I
. Grant opportunities will be explored
Presentation to the
City Council-County Commission Joint Workshop
Regarding Public Vessel Access to Keewaydln Island
December 18, 2008
. Operating costs to be partially offset
by user fees
4
townsendamanda
Subject:
townsendamanda
Friday, October 27,200611:42 AM
ramsey-m; WilliamsBarry; keith.laakkonen@dep.state.f1.us; gary.lytton@dep.state,f1.us;
mbauer@naplesgov.com
Minutes-Collier County/Rookery Bay/City of Naples 1 0~27 -06
From:
Sent:
To:
All,
Here's a summary of the discussions at today's meeting. If you have any additions or corrections, please let me know.
AOT
++++++++++++++++++++
Topic: Potential Partnerships between RBNERR, CCPRD, and CON
Attendees:
Marla Ramsey, Collier County Public Services Administrator
Barry Williams, Collier County Parks and Recreation Director
Amanda Townsend, Collier County Public Services Operations Analyst/Planner
Keith Laakkonen, Rookery Bay NERR Resource Management Coordinator
Mike Bauer, Cit of Naples Natural Resources Manager
Items discussed:
Keith forwarded the RB agreement with Naples Bay Resort as promised. All parties will review and forward to Keith their
comments for which aspects are pertinent as he drafts a site-specific agreement for public access to the north end of
Keewaydin. A brief update for where Basil Street Partners is with their project was discussed.
The general interlocal drafted by Amanda simply recognizes a willingness to work in a cooperative spirit and contains no
project-specific information. It can be adapted to be a three-way agreement and, as previously discussed, should probably
be brought forth with the site-specific agreement Keith is drafting.
Keith has reviewed the FAC regarding activities and enforcement in state buffer preserves and the county ordinance
regarding natural resource protection and enforcement. The County code is stricter and more detailed, but the two are not
at odds. A site-specific agreement can give county rangers authority under their code on state land, but county rangers can
tailor which aspects of their ordinance they enforce in accordance with RB practices.
There was discussion regarding carrying capacities. The acreage of the north-end area is not a limiting factor. Basil Street
used the septic system's capacity to define their original persons-at-any-given-time number of 56. They may be reducing
this number.
Programming was discussed. All parties agree that the project has good potential to be a field-trip destination for school
children. Mike is excited about the possibilities the project has to expand CON interpretive programming if staff can be
added.
Mike brought this project forward to David Lykins and the City Manager, who has asked him to make a presentation to the
City Council Monday November 13 (meeting begins at 8:30). Barry will try to be in attendance and Keith will ask Gary to
attend if he can. Keith will forward to Mike statistics on island use and infractions over time for use in his presentation.
Keith will discuss with Gary setting a date for their public forum prior to Mike's presentation on the 13th, so that such a date
can be announced at that time. The public forum will probably be in December or January.
Marla will contact Dr.VanDongen and invite him to the group's next meeting, which is scheduled for November 17 at 10 am
at the Public Services Division office. If she needs his contact information Keith has it.
Gary will be contacting appropriate Conservancy board members as discussed previously.
Keith mentioned that Lt David Johnson or the CC Sherriff's Office is putting together a Marine Alliance Partnership with
1
various Law Enforcement and other agencies locally. The group is new and is still formulating its mission and goals, but it
might be wise to participate in their efforts early on. He will forward whatever information he has to the group.
The next meeting is scheduled for 11/17 as indicated above.
2
-----.----
townsendamanda
From:
Sent:
To:
townsendamanda
Friday, October 13, 2006 3:24 PM
ramsey-m; WilliamsBarry; keith .Iaakkonen@dep.state.fl.us; gary .Iytton@dep.state. fl. us;
'mbauer@naplesgov.com'
Minutes-Collier County/Rookery BaylCity of Naples 10-13-06
Subject:
All,
Here's a summary of the discussions at today's meeting. If you have any additions or corrections, please let me know.
AOT
++++++++++++++++
Topic: Potential Partnerships between RBNERR, CCPRD, and CON
Attendees: Gary, Lytton, Rookery Bay NERR Environmental Administrator
Marla Ramsey, Collier Count Public Services Administrator
Barry Williams, Collier County Parks and Recreation Director
Amanda Townsend, Collier County Public Services Operations Analyst/Planner
Keith Laakkonen, Rookery Bay NERR Resource Management Coordinator
Mike Bauer, City of Naples Natural Resources Manager
Discussion opened regarding how to move forward with interlocal agreements.
Subsequent to the RB, CC, CON site visit to the north end of Keewaydin on 10/9/06, RB would like to address some of the
details of a that particular project Pertinent topics were:
· The amount of infrastructure proposed for the destination site: All agreed this should be limited to a dock, dune
crossover boardwalk, a family (single) composting restroom, a screened pavilion for shelter from the weather and brief
interpretive talks, and storage space for park ranger supplies and equipment Amanda will research composting rest
rooms.
· Numbers of site visitors: The current agreed-upon concept is approximately 20 to 25 visitors at a time
· Restroom access: All agreed that the rest room and dock should be available only to shuttle service users, A key-code
or swipe card (solar powered) can be used for the rest room,
· Other limitations: Keith will forward the most recent draft of the agreement between RB and Naples Bay Resort to CC
for review. It contains numerous provisions for limiting practices so as to avoid negative environmental impact.
· Keith will begin to draft a site-specific three-way agreement for this project.
· Mike continues to recognize the advantages of this project to the CON (namely, proactive, controlled access to the
north end of the island) and supports it; at this time he does not anticipate the CON participating actively in either the
shuttle service or interpretive programming at the site; he would like to receive supporting data from RB regarding
usage trends and infractions occurring on Keewaydin.
Discussion of an education and enforcement presence covered both the north-end site and the south end of Keewaydin.
· Both the CON and CC are willing to support education and enforcement on the island with human resources as
funding permits.
· Collier County Park Rangers newly have the authority to issue citations for infractions on and within a given distance of
park property.
· The Collier County Special Master presides over Park Ranger-issued citations.
· CC provided RB with the ordinance and fine schedule associated with the Rangers' ticket-writing authority.
· Keith will review this ordinance in accordance with State regulations and return with recommendations as to how
County Park Rangers' authority either fits or diverges from RB's powers andlor management objectives,
The proposed public forum regarding public access to RBNERR was discussed.
· RB expects that the meeting will be scheduled for December.
1
. Several stakeholder agencies/entities should be met with prior to the public forum. These include: CON Mayor, David
Lykins, Mike Leslie (Mike will coordinate), Conservancy Board Members Jim Murphy and Dudley Goodlette (RB will
coordinate), Island land holders Donohue and VanDongen (RB will coordinate).
The above parties will reconvene Friday 10/27/06 at 10 am at the Public Services administration office on the Collier
County Government Complex campus.
,
2
townsendamanda
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
townsendamanda
Friday, September 22,20065:12 PM
ramsey-m; WilliamsBarry; gary.lytton@dep,state.fl.us; keith.laakkonen@dep.state.f1.us
Minutes-Collier County/Rookery Bay 9-22-06
EAC minutesMay3.doc; to EAC 5-3-06.ppt
All,
Here's a summary of the topics discussed at today's meeting. If you have any additions or corrections, please let me know.
AOT
**.*****
Topic: Potential Partnerships between RBNERR and CCPRD
Attendees: Gary, Lytton, Rookery Bay NERR Environmental Administrator
Marla Ramsey, Collier Count Public Services Administrator
Barry Williams, Collier County Parks and Recreation Director
Amanda Townsend, Collier County Public Services Operations Analyst/Planner
Gary began the meeting by explaining that over the course of the summer he has had a series of meetings and
discussions with Jim Murphy, Jack Donohue, Dudley Goodlette, Coleen Castille, Bob Ballard, Mike Bauer and others in
response to the 5/3/06 Collier County Environmental Advisory Council meeting agenda item regarding a potential
partnership between RBNERR and CCPRD for access to the north end of Keewaydin Island
Marla and Amanda explained that the presentation was made at the request of the EAC, which probably so requested in
response to the outcomes of the BCC Beach Access Workshops held the previous spring and summer. The presentation
emphasized that the plans are conceptual in nature and that any plan would be in compliance with the RB Management
Plan, etc. (The presentation made to the EAC and the minutes of that meeting are attached.)
All agreed that the proposed project is still viable but that care must be taken to address the concerns of neighbors,
stakeholder organizations such as the Conservancy, state and local agencies and government officials, and the general
public.
To that end, Gary proposes to hold a public forum some time this fall (late Oct/early Nov) with a focus of visitor use
management within Rookery Bay NERR.
Ideas were discussed as to what to present to the public at that forum. All agreed that neither a "blank slate" nor a "final
plan" were appropriate, but that a series of concepts and options should be offered for comment.
Gary asked that the County consider including the City of Naples, with Mike Bauer as its representative, in all future
discussions regarding the specific project of public access to the north end of Keewaydin. The County is amenable.
A site visit to the north end site was scheduled for Barry, Mike, Keith Laakkonan and Amanda (if available) for 9/29,
meeting at Rookery Bay at 9 am.
Regularly scheduled meetings including representatives from RB, CCPRD, and the City will be held every two weeks on
Fridays at 10 am at the Public Services Division Office beginning 10/13.
All agreed that following the public forum meeting this fall, an overarching interlocal agreement between RB and CC and a
site-specific agreement among RB, CC, and the City for the north-end project will be developed and brought forward to
each entity's governing body.
+++++++++++++++++
Other topics addressed were:
1
Management presence on Keewaydin (both at the south end and at the north end site): Strategies for who will staff and
how to fund were discussed.
Shell Island Road: Gary shared that the Conservancy is interested in selling the boat ramp property to RB. Time table is
still unknown.
Collier Boulevard Boating Park Expansion: CCPRD will check on resubmittal status and communicate to RB. RB will
attempt to help expedite.
Isles of Capri Canoe Launch Park (somehow Amanda got the name Turkey Creek Park-where did that come from, or is
she imagining things?): CCPRD has included some development $ in its 5-year capital plan
~ ~
EAC to EAC 5-3-06.ppt
lutesMay3.doc (63 I (2 MB)
2
City of Naples CRA Update
City-County Joint Meeting
December 18, 2006
Taxable Value In the TIF
I.. . .t~''-~- .-.~
1/11/lllllllll
'-'"
~=
C:)__
-+-
;'~~,-
Involving Residents
Charrettes and Community Planning Workshops
Year
94/95
95/96
96/97
97/98
98/99
99/00
00/01
01/02
02/03
03/04
04/05
05/06
Annual TIF Revenues
City TIF County TIF
$ 1,265 $ 3,674
4,067 12,025
12,527 37,559
20,556 75,673
56,350 169,575
104,116 309,332
145,016 430,283
255,810 862,459
334,086 1,163,809
381,150 1,331,347
455,139 1,521,264
596,000 1,999,477
1
PROJECT
5'" Ave S
2nd Ave N
Parking Garage
41-10 Area
4'" Ave N.
6'" Ave S
Merihue & Menefee Parks
5~ Ave N
Jasmine Cay Apts
12'" Ave
CRA Office Furniture/Equip
River Park
Police Bike Equip
D-Downtown Design Work
Carver Apts Ughting
DPZ 5~ Ave S Update Plan
Purchase of 1098 3" Ave S
5'" Ave On-street Parking
TOTAL
$TIF AMOUNT
504.528
149.198
4.954.352
2,978.078
217.344
954,210
56.684
219.048
57.275
3.300
5.907
11,363
4.600
112.878
18,885
17,651
512,521
69.584
10,847,406
YEAR
94-96
96/97
96/97
97-00
97-01
98-01
99-01
01-03
02/03
04/05
05/06
05/06
00-05
01-06
01102
02-04
02/03
05/06
Current Year CIP Projects
$BUDGETED AMOUNT
5,000,000
1,200,000
200,000
72,000
250,000
125,000
6,847,000
PROJECT
New Parking Garage
41-10 Road & Streetscape
River Park Neighborhood
Street & Sidewalk Sweeper
Park Street Project
Lighting Design & Replacement
TOTAL
2
Redevelopment of 5th Avenue South
-~ .
Carver Apartments Rehab-Project Based Section 8
3
Von Liebig Art C
enter Expansion
4
CAFE LURCAT
MERAltU
PAR
Small In-Fill Pro"ects
Central Avenue
Enterprise Plaza
:fl:;ii'tt,
Larger In-Fill Projects
5
Bayfront
FOUR
Pedestrian Connectivity Downtown
COR N E R S . NAPLES
, flORIDA
, ,~~':,~~:::;r~i7::~~;,
.'j Ji: . ~f."'.
,:=~
~,
iHAlM AND ACT;Y~- lIR~~:
6
FifLh ..;v<~rIlJl; ;::.out.h
Regul3tmg PI.'}'l
1::1-1- ,-:f~'~ -'~c:elrllii!~~}\-
I.e.,... ......, ......'....... ....",...'.,...,
'iL r:I'L' iJ' ,"'..'..'
'1Lt......:..LIJ'l.:J:.:':" .., .... ii '
I ..... I.. ,.-...-.....,
:l[CJtllr:e!/it(1i\~
1:'r-l.'~':I'I: I ,,\\"
J'-'i_. ,--~~:!.!:.:'~.,.!.. _ _,~-_-___ '~',
[ J ----
~J:l --~
l:C:J--
.$.
""'1--
1iilIiI=-
New on-street parking added
6th Av. S. 8th St S Develllpll'\o!nt
"l.."':'r'
'=
TH IR 0 'L EVEL 'F LOOR 'PL AN
7
8
.
.
-'f!~;,
Public Facilities Use
Impacts
City Parks & Beaches
Decernber18,2006
.,
iii
}~~;':,
Public Parks Impacts
. Newly constructed facilities permit the City:
. To reasonably adapt to increased growth
. Support traditional or historical uses
. Provide a user convenience
. Support youth and family recreational and
cultural interests
. Derive a general fund financial benefit from
increase uses through additional program
services, fees and revenue
.
.
X,;(,"
It()'
Public Parks Impacts
. The benefit of the single tier user fee
approach is that the borders of the City
and County become transparent
. Regardless of residency location, whether
individuals utilize a City or County park the
use & rental fees would be consistent.
.
.
lili;'" ,
Public Parks Impacts
. Population increases continue to impact all
City facilities and public infrastructure
including but not limited to actively
programmed parks, community centers,
streets, ballfields and beach access.
.
.
~~i:;
Public Parks Impacts
. The City Council recently authorized an
increase in parks user fees to reflect
current demands, provide consistency with
Collier County parks user fees and
establish a single fee structure regardless
of residency status.
. The revised City fee structure is contingent
upon further or additional financial
consideration or commitment by Collier
County to fund capital park improvements
within the City.
.
Iii
-:: '
Public Parks Use Summary
1
.
..
!l:F
Public Parks Use Summary
.
..
,:~<r;..
Public Parks Impacts
. Challenges
. Level of Service & Capacity
;iProgram Sustainability
ulncreased Routine Maintenance & Supplies
,Regionalized Parking
; J Infrastructure Impacts
,Capitalized Replacement
Increased 0 & M
,Security, Safety and Vandalism
.
II
."/2(,
Public Parks Use Impacts
. Fleischmann Skatepark
. Grand Opening September 9, 2006
;Skate Park Membership (as of 10/04/06)
[,2203 members
r 315 City Resident - 1,888 County Resident
14% City Resident - 86% County Resident
.
..
s
Public Parks Impacts
. City parks, although planned and designed for
neighborhood utilization, are in most instances
supporting some level of increased population
growth, community requests, public purposes
and reQionalized uses,
. Examples
i Art Shows - All parks...40,000+ attendance
Concerts - Cambier bandsheIL..8,000+ attendance
Special Events - All parks... 10,000+ attendance
.
II
;;,~i
Public Parks Impacts
. City Park Development & Uses
! IOpen Space Preservation - Neighborhood
Uses and Passive Enjoyment
Development of City Facilities with Emphasis
Towards More Urban Uses
.. Cultural programs and facilities
.. Gathering places for social interaction
Traditional programs and services transition
to educational and life enrichment options
.
..
'!i;r
Public Parks Use Impacts
. Youth Leagues utilization of city facilities:
. Greater Naples Little League (Boys Baseball)
. 2006: 381 participants = 166 City //215 County
(44% City /56% County)
. 2005: 370 participants = 162 City 1/208 County
(44% City /56% County)
. Boundaries set by the Boys Little League
2
.--.,
..
lli"~}
Public Parks Use Impacts
. Greater Naples Little League (Girls Softball)
. 2006: 156 participants = 38 City //118 County
(24% City /76% County)
. 2005: 153 participants = 35 City 1/115 County
(25% City / 75% County)
. Boundaries set by the Girls Little League
Association (Boundaries expanded in 2003)
.1Ii
lifE',
Beach Parking
Expenditures Total
. Pier
. Lowdermilk
. Police Enforcement
. Beach MaintlRepair
. Meters, Fireworks, Admin
. Capital
$1,460,064
$ 21,300
$ 33,500
$ 360,306
$ 479,251
$ 447,707
$ 118,000
.
II
ilrk;-
Beach Parking
Interlocal Revenues
. Collier County 2003 $390,000
. Collier County 2004 $461,611
. Collier County 2005 $347,906
. Collier County 2006 $358,385
. Collier County 06-07Budget $450,000
.
.
IE::"
Public Parks Use Impacts
. Naples Gators (Youth Football)
. 2006: 229 participants = 43 City 1/186 County
(19% City /81% County)
. 2005: 224 participants = 40 City 1/184 County
(18% City /82% County)
. 2004: 213 participants = 38 City 1/175 County
(18% City / 82% County)
. 2003: 193 participants = 31 City 1/162 County
(16% City /84% County)
. No Boundaries - Registrations Countywide
..,.
Ii;;;":
Beach Parking
Revenues Total
. Parking Meters:
. Parking Tickets:
. Concessions:
. Other Misc. Fees:
. Collier County:
$520,000
$244,000
$ 84,000
$ 35,600
Following Slide
.
..
~t
Beach Parking - Interlocal
. Contract prepared by Collier County
. Term 10/1/03 to 9/31/08
. County pays 82% of net loss of fund
. Limits cost increase to 5% of prior year
. Payment due - 50% on 3/31 and 50% on 9/30
. City bills based on audited financials, excludes
fireworks, depreciation on grant funded projects
and costs and revenues related to Lowdermilk
and Pier concession areas,
3
. ke . ~'4,5,~:
.. ..
Beach Parking Beach Parking
CIty County Temps No pennit Total Police Survey (Counted Permits Only)
07118/2005 28 164 5 106 303 City County Total
% ofTotal 9% 54% 2% 35% 100%
% of 5tickers 1S% 8S% 07/14/2003 51 456 507
07102/2004 132 346 27 161 666 % 10% 90%
% ofTotal 20% 52% 4% 24% 100%
% of Stickers 28% 72%
06123/2004 86 193 20 73 372 07/10/2003 41 270 311
% of Total 23% 52% 5% 20% 100% % 13% 87%
% of Stickers 31% 69% I I
-.
~,~{.
.
..
-~.:
Beach Parking
Public Facilities Impact Trends
. Beach Access - Defined Parking Spaces
. City - "Metered 625
. City - Permit Spaces 460
. City - Free Spaces 420
. City - Handicap Spaces ~
1,530
Additional Parking-DocklLandings/Broad Ave - 153
* Note this may be slightly lower today
. City boundaries defined
. City population growth minimal
. City infrastructure will continue to be
impacted by:
I Countywide population growth
I I Increased tou rism promotion & visitation
I I Historical & traditional event locations in City
Primary beach access locations in City
.-
..
I$i~"
Public Facilities Use
Impacts
City Parks and Beaches
December 18, 2006
4
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FlORIDA
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
4 Corners Continuing Commmee
Jon Kukk, City of Naples Design Review Board
Alex Pezeshkan. City of Naples CRAAB Board
Ca~ Erickson. City of Naples SAC
Falconer Jones III, City of Naples Planning Advisory Board
Chet Hunt. City of Naples CRA
Matthew Kragh, AlA Florida Southwest
Iltll~HtlC; I. I'I'iH'.;IJ.CIAH Okll:Nl[n P1J[;IIC f/(AI.M IIr-Ie ,,("IIVI; \I~ilAr'J tr'.IVlflOHM(.'..1
Fout' l."lrtl(t'C H1r(')"t.ynQt~ . ;\fh ...t.~'nHI.. .~>ou(11 rot("':
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
1
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, flORIDA
~:ttt~iJfe~,~ ..~
i,;.rlNIH,_:. " PfIH'sr~l"'H C!lotlfrHr,n ~U~llC RfAlM A.nL "C.l'',Il (Ji~h;<j.l
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, flORIDA
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, flORIDA
r~~~
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, flORIDA
~..~~.,
~"'~"Ii-
..~.",
2
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
--l
----f
"'1~Y.._'_' ....~'.. "......
..~. ". '., . ........
", .. ,
r ,\ '("1
J--
J...--
'''i~'''__
:---. ,,-.,'
/' 'r,
,I
--{ ',;""
''(,.
1'1"0;:-:;'
.,
IT
':' I
~
.-
FOUR CORNERS.NAPlES, flORIDA
FOUR CORNERS.NAPlES, flORIDA
.,.
; ~':"",
FOUR CORNERS.NAPlES, FLORIDA
--l
FOUR CORNERS.NAPlES, flORIDA
FOUR CORNERS. NAPLES, FlORIDA
3
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
Du.ny proposed .. round-
a-bout in hi. oritln_' 5'"
Ave. M..ter Plan
FOUR CORNERS.NAPLES, FLORIDA
,:7
\"
}t:~
q
~h:
~
".::s:-.
~
!,;If
, ~...
....,:r.i
;"",;
~ ~\L,.:,~',~',., L
;;:.;. .~
, \ .
4