The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 05/25/2021 Item # 2B (BCC Minutes 04/27/2021)05/25/2021 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 2.B Item Summary: April 27, 2021 BCC Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 05/25/2021 Prepared by: Title: Sr. Operations Analyst – County Manager's Office Name: Geoffrey Willig 05/12/2021 10:46 AM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Corp Fin & Mgmt Svc – County Manager's Office Name: Mark Isackson 05/12/2021 10:46 AM Approved By: Review: County Manager's Office Geoffrey Willig County Manager Review Completed 05/12/2021 11:00 AM Board of County Commissioners Geoffrey Willig Meeting Pending 05/25/2021 9:00 AM 2.B Packet Pg. 16 April 27, 2021 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida Tuesday, April 27, 2021 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County \4*1V Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such *0� special districts as have been created according to law and having 1 conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in &&IV REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, ^0" �� 16r, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: C airman. ALSO PRESENT: Penny Taylor William L. McDaniel, Jr. Rick LoCastro Burt L. Saunders Andy Solis Leo Ochs, County Manager Daniel Rodriguez, Deputy County Manager Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations Page 1 April 27, 2021 MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning. Here we are. It is April 27th, and I believe today Reverend Edward Gleason of Trinity by the Cove will give us our invocation, and I will ask Commissioner Saunders to lead us in the Pledge. Item # 1 A INVOCATION BY REVEREND EDWARD GLEASON OF TRINITY BY THE COVE EPISCOPAL CHURCH REVEREND GLEASON: Almighty God, teach our people to rely on your strength and to accept their responsibilities to their fellow citizens; that they may elect trustworthy leaders and make wise decisions for the well-being of our society and community; that we may serve you faithfully in our generation and honor your holy name, and we pray you send down upon those who hold office in this county the spirit of wisdom, charity, and justice; that with steadfast purpose, they may faithfully serve in their offices to promote the well-being of all people. We offer our prayers of thanksgiving for the service of Leo Ochs. We offer these, our petitions and desires, through your holy name. _ ),*** Amen. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison, and the proceedings continued as follows:) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I would like to take a few minutes right now at the beginning of this agenda to acknowledge our County Manager Leo Ochs. This meeting is Leo's final meeting presiding as County Manager. He is retiring after 35 years, since 1986 with the county, and almost 12 since September 29th, 2009, of those years as Page 2 April 27, 2021 County Manager. Leo expressly asked that his retirement be quiet, no festivities or long goodbye. So to respect his wishes, we are taking this time to say thank you for his service and for each commissioner to speak personally about Leo and working with him. I'm first. MR. OCHS: Be kind. ,ON CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: First of all, he is an amazing man who survived five bosses year after year and, mind you, not always the same bosses. That is a feat in itself. _ 9%a To Leo, your sense of humor carried me through many stressful times. You have always been quick to smile and to look on the bright side of most situations with humor and grace. You carry years of valuable government experience with you, Leo, and you brought that expertise into your role as a decision maker and leader, never forgetting compassion and patience. It has been a pleasure working with you, Leo. Thank you.' MR. OCHS: Thank you. �-, 6) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, our Vice Chair. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, first off, how did your request for a quiet departure go? MR. OCHS: Just about the same way all my requests go. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have to say this: You know, Leo, you and I have been friends a long time. I've got a long, long history with Collier County in multiple arenas along the way, and I think I probably said it best when I was writing up our last review when you were coming up for another couple of years. And I have to say, you have been participatory in creating the community that we all know and love. You have been an amazing leader for our employees and the folks that work for Collier County all across the board. And I have to say I'm extremely proud to have worked with Page 3 April 27, 2021 you. And in parting, as we usually do when we say goodbye, take no prisoners. MR. OCHS: Leave none standing, sir. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Madam A Chairman. So you started in 1986. That was the year that I got elected to the County Commission the first time. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. _/�� COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We were both a whole lot younger and our hair was a whole lot darker. MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. ama, t COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So I've really enjoyed working with you. I certainly appreciate all the professionalism that you've brought to the position of County Manager, and you've brought stability to the county for decades, and that's something to be very proud of. I know we haven't seen the last of you. I know that you're going to be involved. I've got a couple committees I'd like to see you serve on. — 'W MR. OCHS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I just want to wish you and your family the best and many years of happy and fulfilled retirement. MR. OCHS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you for your service. MR. OCHS: Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Penny Taylor brought a motion saying that you wanted a small celebration, but she wanted to have something a little bit bigger. It only passed 3-2 I just want you to know. NM April 27, 2021 Also, if you heard, Leo's been here a long time. When he first came to the building here, he had sideburns, and he drove a Ford Pinto. Can I have the first slide, please? No, I'm just kidding. You know, Mr. Ochs, I'll just tell you, as a -- you know, we're going to read a proclamation a little bit later about Military Appreciation Month, and I can tell you, as a, you know, military retired Air Force officer -- and there's military people here in the room -- we respect and applaud loyalty and dedication. It means a lot. ^�� And, I mean, if we look at your years of service here, you'd be a general officer, you know, at the county level, that's for sure. And I think serving your country or serving your community, it's all about service, and public service is one of the most noble professions. It certainly can be thankless, you know, at times, but it can be extremely impactful. And what you've been a part of here in Collier County will, you know, last for many, many years. You've touched so many people here. I'm sure that we could pack this room with people that would consider you a mentor, you know, a friend. And in the military, we always say, your job as a leader is to make more leaders, and I'm sure the county is full of folks that have been touched by, you know, your excellence, you know, your experience, and that won't -- that won't go away anytime soon. But I also agree with Commissioner Saunders, you know, it's like, what's with this retirement stuff? There's a lot of things you can still do, so we expect to -- you know, we'll give you a front -row parking spot if you need one. But thank you so much. Your hard work is noticed and much appreciated. MR. OCHS: Thank you very much, sir. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. And I'll echo everything WM April 27, 2021 that's already been said and add a little bit that, you know, I think, Leo, you've been one, if not the -- one of the best leaders that the county has had. I mean, you know, I'm always seeing things in terms of winning football seasons, right? So, you know, Leo versus hurricanes, 3 and 0, right? MR. OCHS: Right. 4 , COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Leo versus recessions, at least 2 and 0, right? And Leo versus a pandemic, you're -- MR. OCHS: The jury's s still out. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No, no. I think you're winning that one, too. P�� So undefeated in so many ways in guiding the county through really difficult, difficult times, making difficult decisions. You know, I can only imagine the decisions that had to be made by you during the recession, you know, with people that, you know, that had worked for the county for many years. So the county and Collier County and all the residents have been blessed to have you as its leader. You're a great public servant, and best of all, I think it's -- you've been a great friend to me, too, personally. So thank you for all you've done for the county, for the commissioners. You know, dealing with five -- I'll just speak for myself -- knuckleheads, this one knucklehead, and helping to guide us, too, because when we take this office, I don't think anybody can appreciate the complexity of, you know, how complicated things are and what a big operation this actually is in so many different ways, you know, from parks and recreation to -- you know, to utilities and the beaches and things like that. So thank you for being a great friend also, and I will personally say I will not ask you to serve on any committees for at least three months. MR. OCHS: Oh, okay. Three months it is, okay. You've got April 27, 2021 it. Thank you, sir. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Thank you. You know, Madam Chairman, if I could -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no, no, not yet. I think -- I think we should have a photograph in front of the dais, please. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This isn't your show!& CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm the chair. f �MR. OCHS: But I have to make a few remarks, ecause I was planning to do that at the end of the meeting -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Not at the end. MR. OCHS: -- but since you did this now, I'll do it right now. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I know, I know. Okay, okay. All right. MR. OCHS: First of all, I want to thank each one of you for the kindness and the encouragement, the support, all the professional courtesies that you've extended me over the times that we've worked together. You know, nobody appreciates public service more than me, and I certainly admire all of you for taking on the mantle of public service. I know our community is much better for all of you having taken on that commitment. I also, if I could just take this opportunity to thank all of the many prior county commissioners, constitutional officers, local elected and appointed officials that I've had the privilege to serve with over the last 35 years. All of them in their way, as you all know, have helped build that legacy of sound public policy -making and operational excellence that we hope to continue and build upon as we look forward to the future. Also, I want to acknowledge our business community and our not -for -profit leaders in the community. They've done so much to Page 7 April 27, 2021 help our community grow in a positive way and to prosper. And I know all of you joined me in your appreciation for the partnerships that we've been able to establish with our business and our not -for -profit community. I think about important issues that this board has taken on with their help, like affordable housing, community mental health, economic diversification, workforce training. All these things are possible in our community particularly because we have such strong collaborations, I think. And so I'm grateful to them for that kind of assistance. And, finally, but most importantly, for the men and women of our County Manager's agency for the tireless work that they do day in and day out to provide world -class public services to our residents and visitors. Any success that I've been able to achieve is directly attributable to the talent and the professionalism and dedication to that group. So I'm eternally grateful to them for all that they've done. And it's really been the highlight of my professional career to help support and lead those efforts because they're just such tremendous public servants. So with that, Commissioners, you know, I'm obviously proud of the work that we've achieved together, and I'm not going away. Debbie and I have spent more time and lived longer in Collier County than we have in our own hometowns, so this is home for us. We've got plenty to do, and I'll continue to stay engaged and see if I can plug in to help the community wherever I can, but I wish you all great success and prosperity in the future. So God bless you all. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Following the photo, will the county sheriff please remove Mr. Ochs from the chambers. April 27, 2021 (Applause.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So we have a little something for you, and we suggest you do not open it with the cameras rolling. MR. OCHS: That's interesting. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We'll leave it right there. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Leo, that present in t ck, it needs to be fed in the next hour, so just keep an eye on it. MR. OCHS: All right, Rodriguez. That's how you delegate. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: All right. Now we can go to work. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Now let's get to work. Item #2A TODAY'S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.) - APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES nX"*L MR. OCHS: Okay. 'Let's go to work. Thank you all very much. It's been a pleasure. Commissioners, let's take a look at our proposed agenda changes for the Board of County Commissioners' meeting of April 27th, 2021. The first proposed change is to continue Item 6A to the June 8th, 20211 BCC meeting. That is a public petition that was requested to be continued by the petitioner. The next proposed change is to continue Item 16K1 from the County Attorney's consent agenda and move that to the May 11 th, 20211 BCC meeting. That request was made by Commissioner McDaniel. The next proposed change is to move Item 16A10 from the April 27, 2021 consent agenda to become Item 11 D under the County Manager's report. This item was moved at Commissioner McDaniel's request. It involves a request for a local match by the county to a Naples Pathway Coalition grant award for the Paradise Coast trail feasibility study. And the next proposed change is to withdraw Item 16D5. This is a staff request for withdrawal of a budget amendment that Mr. Isackson will work on during your upcoming budget workshops. We have two time -certain items this morning, Commissioners. The first is Item 11 C that will be heard at 9:30 a.m. That's an agreement proposed with the BigShots Golf, Incorporated, for the Golden Gate Golf Course property, and also we have a time -certain for Item 11 A. That is at -- excuse me -- 10:45 a.m. after your morning break having to do with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers status report on their feasibility study. And those are all the changes that I have, Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. So let's start with our Vice Chair. Commissioner McDaniel, any changes or amendments to the -- or declarations? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Declarations? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ex parte. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No changes and one declaration on 17B. I have had correspondence and phone calls in regard to that item. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS : Madam Chair, I have no changes to the agenda and no disclosures as well. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No changes and no disclosures. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And, Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No changes. On Item 8A Page 10 April 27, 2021 I've had meetings and calls; 9B I've had meetings. MR. OCHS: Sir, I'm sorry to interrupt you. We'll do those disclosures when we hear those items. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. So nothing on what you just mentioned to the changes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Excuse me. No disclosures on 1713, and the advertised public hearing -- okay. No disclosures on 1713, and no changes to the agenda. So do I hear a motion to accept the agenda -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So moved. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- as presented? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. r� COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. � COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. It carries unanimously. Page 11 April 27, 2021 Item #2B APRIL 6, 2021 BCC/CRA WORKSHOP MINUTES - APPROVED AS PRESENTED MR. OCHS: Item 2B is approval of the workshop meeting minutes between the Board of County Commissioners and the CommunityRedevelopment Agencies. It was held on April 6t� 2021. W-11�kl 11* CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do I hear a motion for approval? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Move to approve the minutes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.�"� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. ` COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) 111 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Madam Chair. Item #4 1 N PROCLAMATIONS — ITEMS # 16H 1, # 16H2, # 161-13 AND # 16144 READ INTO THE READ MR. OCHS: We move to today's proclamations that appear on your consent agenda this morning. I'll read these, as has been our Page 12 April 27, 2021 custom during the pandemic. Item 16H 1 is a proclamation congratulating Collier County residents Ms. Katie Larsen, Ms. Skye Allen, and Ms. Olivia Veliz, and extending best wishes to them for successful outcomes at the 2021 Miss Florida USA and Miss Florida Teen USA competition on July 18th, 2020 [sic], upcoming in Orlando, Florida. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we do have someone her today. MR.00HS: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Madam Chair, if we could, I'd like to -- are your -- are your -- MS. LARSEN: They had finals.v� COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't want to call them opponents; your competitors. Would you mind coming to the mic and giving us a brief hello and what you're doing. And just so you know, I've been knowing Ms. Katie for a long, long time. She was our swamp buggy queen back in the day. MS. LARSEN: I was, correct. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: She competed with my daughter for that position, and I'm -- so I've been knowing Ms. Katie for a long, so I'd really like to hear a few words, please. MS. LARSEN: Of course. Good morning, everyone. My name is Katie Larsen. You usually know me in my official capacity working for Congressman Donalds. This summer I will be competing with Miss Florida -- the Miss Florida organization under the Ms. Universe organization itself. Unfortunately, Skye and Olivia, my fellow Collier County residents, had finals and were unable to make it because they're studying. I wish I was still in college like them. Unfortunately, I'm not. But I'm very grateful for you guys to issue this proclamation honoring us Page 13 April 27, 2021 as Collier County residents competing this summer. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you very much, and we wish you all the best -- MS. LARSEN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- and appreciate your participating. MS. LARSEN: Thank you. MR. OCHS: Best of luck. A lause. C pp ) MR. OCHS: Item 161-12 is a proclamation designating May 6th, 2021, as National Day of Prayer in Collier County. The proclamation will be mailed to Susan Thigpen of New Hope Ministries. �*W--q&-, Item 161-13 is a proclamation designating May 2021 as National Foster Care Month in Collier County. The proclamation will be mailed to Laura Lafakis of Youth Haven of Naples. And Item 161-14 is a proclamation designating May 2021 as Military Appreciation Month in Collier County, to be presented and accepted by Commissioner LoCastro on behalf of members of the military. Commissioner. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you very much. I want to thank Madam Chair and the County Manager, soon to be ex -County Manager; just kidding. This is an important proclamation to me, being a retired, you know, Air Force officer. But it's important to all of us, everybody that's sitting up here. We all work so hard to support our military. And I can tell you, I've lived in a lot of towns all over the country, all over the world, a lot of us have. This is such a patriotic town, and I think we take great pride in the patriotism of our World War II veterans who are here who are, you know, unfortunately Page 14 April 27, 2021 slowly becoming a smaller number. Our Vietnam veterans, if you didn't know, March 29th was Vietnam Veteran Appreciation Day, and a lot of big events in town. So if you'd just indulge me -- and there's some veterans here who have served their country and some that you need to know actually work on our own county staff. Sometimes there's veterans among us that you don't even know, and I'm going to point out a couple. But if you'd indulge me to read this proclamation. It may just sound like some words to people who are online and watching, but I can tell you to the men and women in uniform and the people here who have worn the uniform, you know, alongside me and alongside others, these words mean a lot, and this recognition means a lot. Proclamation: Whereas, recognizing the United States Armed Forces and supporting the designation of a National Military Appreciation Month, raising awareness that the freedom and security citizens of the United States enjoy today are the result of the bloodshed and the vigilance given by the United States Armed Forces over the history of our great nation; and, Whereas, recognizing the sacrifices that members of the United States Armed Forces and the family members that support them make which have preserved the liberties and enriched this nation making it unique in the world community; and, Whereas, to foster and to say in such a commitment, it is vital for the youth of the United States to understand that the service provided by members of the Armed Forces and their families is an honorable legacy that protects the freedoms en j oyed by citizens of the United States as well as citizens of many other nations; and, Whereas, on April 30th, 1999, the Senate passed Senate Resolution 33, the 16th Congress, as National Military Appreciation Month calling on the people of the United States in a symbolic act of Page 15 April 27, 2021 unity to observe a National Military Appreciation Month in May to honor the current and former members of the Armed Forces, including those who have died in the pursuit of freedom and peace; Whereas, it is important to emphasize to the people of the United States the relevance of the history and activities of the Armed Forces; and, Whereas, the month of May was selected for this display of patriotism because the month -- this month we celebrate Victory in Europe Day, VE Day; Military Spouse Day; Loyalty Day; Armed Forces Day and Week; and Memorial Day. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May 2021 be designated as Military Appreciation Month in Collier County. Done and ordered this 27th day of May -- of April 2021, signed Board of County Commissioners, Penny Taylor, Chairwoman. (Applause.) 6, - 'V , COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: If you all would come forward. We have the VFW post commander, Dr. JB Holmes; Command Sergeant Major Burch, who still fits in his uniform and I think can do 100 push-ups; Ronnie Lee Gannon, VFW auxiliary, is here. And you know, let me just point out a few members. Everybody knows Barry Williams, Parks and Rec, and does a whole bunch of things, but I bet you some of you didn't know he's a fellow Air Force veteran who served our country honorably at a very difficult base, Dover Air Force Base. And I know we have other county employees who you're seeing here who are all veterans, so... COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How about a smile, Jake. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: We can Photoshop JB out. I want to present this to you, Dr. Holmes, for all your work at the VFW post, and he will put that -- and find it a place on behalf of all Page 16 April 27, 2021 of us, thank you, sir. (Applause.) COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: We've got some vets on the county staff, right? MR. OCHS: Absolutely, absolutely. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Item #5A RECOGNIZING THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR RECEIVING THE ACCREDITATION FOR QUALITY PUBLIC PROCUREMENT CERTIFICATION FROM THE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC PROCUREMENT. ACCEPTED BY SANDRA HERRERA — PRESENTED MR. OCHS: Commissioner, we move to Item 5A this morning. This is a presentation to recognize our Procurement Services Division for receiving the accreditation for quality public procurement certification from the Institute for Public Procurement. Accepting the award is our outstanding Director, Sarah Herrera. Sandra. f (Applause.) MS. HERRERA: Good morning. Good morning, Commissioners. It's a pleasure to serve as a Procurement Director. The team has worked very hard for these two achievements, and I am very proud of them. Thank you, Leo and Dan. MR. OCHS: Well, she's too modest. Let me tell you a little bit about these things. Yeah, and we'll get your picture as well, Sandra. Page 17 April 27, 2021 Commissioners, the accreditation for quality public procurement that was achieved by our organization is a testament to the commitment to professional practices and demonstrated abilities. While the institute represents over 3,000 governmental agencies throughout the U.S. and Canada, only 159 of those 3,000 are able to obtain this particular certification, so that's a great achievement. And also with respect to the other award for the Achievement of Excellence in Procurement, Collier County is one of only 32 agencies in the entire state of Florida and one of only 40 counties throughout the U.S. and Canada to receive that kind of award. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Wow. �1% 6%, MR. OCHS: So, again, that's a testament to Sandra and her team and their dedication to excellence in public services and procurement, so thank you, Sandra and your whole team. (Applause.) &&I V CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, my goodness me. They weigh a lot. You know what, maybe we can go down, gentlemen. MR. OCHS: Yeah, we need another picture. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Procurement is the heart of government. If you don't procure right, you don't have the people's trust. Congratulations. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Leo, we might have to re -think your gift now that I see all this stuff. MR. OCHS: Yeah, geez. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That's not all of it; that's not all of it. MR. OCHS: Oh, okay. (Applause.) MR. OCHS: Congratulations. Fantastic. Item #5B April 27, 2021 COVID-19 STATUS REPORT — UPDATE GIVEN MR. OCH: Commissioners, that moves us to Item 5B this morning. This is a recommendation to accept the COVID-19 status report from Ms. Kimberly Kossler, your Department of Health Administrator, and also Mohammad Abbasi will make the presentation. MR. ABBASI: Good morning, Commissioners. Mohammad Abbasi, Florida Department of Health in Collier County. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning. MR. ABBASI: So we'll start by looking at emergency department visits for influenza -like illness syndrome on the left-hand side of the slide with the number of daily visits for the last 14 days, and the trend is downward. And on the right-hand side are the number of visits from January 2021. And if you see on the right side of the slide, we see a continuing upward trend starting around the third week of March. Moving on to COVID-like illness syndrome. And on the left-hand side, again, the number of visits over the last 14 days, the trend is downward, and on the right-hand side it's a similar trend as the influenza -like illness syndrome. We see an upward trend starting around first week of March, and for the last two weeks, the numbers seem to have plateaued. Positivity rate for the last 14 days on the left-hand side. There's a slight downward trend but, again, if you look at the long-term trend, we were at a low of 5.5 percent third week of March, and we continue to increase to a high of 8 percent about a week ago, and now our positivity rate is around 7.8 percent for the last 14 days. Hospital capacity, even though the overall hospital capacity over the last 14 days has slightly increased, but the trend is downward for the COVID-filled beds over the last 14 days. Page 19 April 27, 2021 And looking at the number of cases in our hospitals, there's a steady downward trend starting around third week of January up until two weeks ago, and then the numbers have gone up slightly, what seems to have kind of plateaued. I'll hand it over to Kim to talk about vaccinations. Thank you. MS. KOSSLER: Hi. Good morning. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning. MS. KOSSLER: So as far as total cases for COVID reported to date, we're at 34,948. Deaths related to COVID, 517. The median age for distribution of cases dropped by 1 to 44. For our vaccination efforts, we have over 302,000 doses that have been administered. That's over 184,000 people vaccinated and 129,000 completed series. Our percentage for 65-plus population with one or more doses is at 84 percent, and our percentage of 16-plus population is at 55 percent. Our current state goal, they expect us to be at 80 percent for our 65-plus and 50 percent for our 16-plus by June. So we have already met and exceeded that goal, and I have to attribute that, honestly, to the community partnerships and the collaborations, because we could not do it without them. So we have -- for the statewide initiative, to get more private providers on board, they've begun the process for registering them and -- on that vaccinationfinder.org website. So more people will be able to find more areas to go for medical providers that are offering vaccine. We also -- in addition to that vaccinationflnder.org, that's the CDC tool, the Florida Department of Health also has site locators listed on their website, which is floridahealthcovid-19.gov. So our main vaccine distribution site is still currently at the North Collier Regional Park, but we do have plans underway to begin transitioning from that community pod in May and integrate back to the Health Department clinics along with utilizing mobile missions Page 20 April 27, 2021 for targeting populations throughout the community. Examples are faith -based sites and workplace sites. So as of April 5th, all Florida residents became eligible to receive any vaccine that's prescribed from the Food and Drug Administration. J&J is now back available to the public with the advisement of the rare risk factors for developing blood clots. Public events continue to be posted for appointments on Our Florida Department of Health Collier website. Again, as usual, if anyone's having any difficulty scheduling an appointment, they can call our call center line. We're still working seven days a week currently, and that's 252-6220. We also have an email dedicated for COVID; that's covidl9collier@flhealth.gov. ` a And we're still doing testing. Testing is still being provided by us as well as various locations throughout the county. To date, over 194,000 tests have been reported, and we're still seeing an average of 7,000 tests every week. � - "qpw �— MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, we have Mr. Mullins here to provide some comparative data as he has in the past. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you. MS. KOSSLER: And I'll just say thank you. I know I haven't gotten to know you but thank you for all your commitment to public health and our agency over the years, and congratulations on your retirement. .` MR. OCHS: You're very welcome, Kim, and we're glad to have you on board. MR. MULLINS: Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, John Mullins, Government Affairs Manager, and I'm back with an updated series of Commissioner McDaniel slides plotting state Department of Health daily coronavirus report data on three topics: Positivity rate, hospitalizations, and fatalities. With this set of charts, we have completed a one-year cycle from Page 21 April 27, 2021 when the county -by -county information became available. And as a reminder, and in case there are some viewing these for the first time, there are going to be two charts for each of the three topics, one being a Southwest Florida comparison of Collier, Lee, and Charlotte Counties and the other a wider selection of populous counties. And regardless of chart, Collier County will be represented by the red line on each. Now, the highlighted sections of the daily report are where the data were collected. And regarding positivity, please keep in mind that the report states that the rate is calculated excluding people who have previously tested positive. Now, on the positivity charts for the Southwest Florida counties, the colored number at each data point is the total number of tests listed in that daily report. On the positivity charts for the wider selection of counties, I've had to omit the number of test results because it now renders those charts unreadable. The circle and cross represents the date that a mask order was put into effect by county, and as depicted on some of the charts, you'll see a couple of counties had mask orders in place prior to the public availability of county -by -county data. So starting with the positivity rates in Southwest Florida, the slide that you have in front of you, you can see that the positivity rates in Collier and Lee have increased over the last month, and this data, of course, complements what the Department of Health has already stated. Hospitalizations in all three Southwest Florida counties have also increased; however, fatalities have dropped with the exception of Lee County. Now, in some of the more populous counties, there's been a slight uptick in positivity rate with the exception of Pinellas; a slight uptick in hospitalizations in all of the included counties; but a slight decrease in fatalities with the exception of Broward. Page 22 April 27, 2021 And with that, I will yield to any questions or for Commissioner McDaniel's evaluation. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, I don't have an evaluation. I want to thank you for bringing forward this information because it -- for me, at least, it gives us an opportunity to compare how our community is faring in relationship to our neighbors so -- and I thank you for that. .6N MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, that's all we have on Item 5B. We do have a time -certain item if you'd like to move to that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Madam Chair, can I just -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Of course. , -,., * � COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'd like to just give a quick shout out. No, no, just a quick shout out to the Pelican Bay Foundation and the North Collier Fire. They partnered to make the -- a large portion of the Pelican Bay Community Center a vaccination site. And I'm not sure how many thousands of people have been vaccinated through there. But I think it was a great example of community coming together, you know, to tackle this huge logistics issue that we have. So thank you to the Pelican Bay Foundation for doing that and the North Collier Fire District. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. 1 Item #7 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, before we go to 9:30, if you don't mind, we do have one registered speaker under public comments. Page 23 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MR. OCHS: I'd hate to have them have to wait the balance of the morning. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no. I would agree. MR. MILLER: Yes. Your one registered speaker is Jacqualene Keay. MS. KEAY: Good morning. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning. MS. KEAY: I have been using Facebook now for only 14 months, and I am shocked at the level of hate, meanness, and racism I have seen. As people hide behind anonymity of their monitors, they need to understand that words have meanings and consequences. Hate can only give birth to hate. Your posts will attract people with similar ideology. As the saying goes, birds of a feather flock together. The truth of your heart will manifest in your posts and comments even if you hide that truth while in the community. Because of my background in psychology, I spend an exorbitant amount of time observing people in situational contexts. By and large, most people are kind with good hearts. Those using words as weapons are loudest, and though they are few, their numbers are growing due to radicalization. Now I have found my voice. I will speak up for those who do not have a voice. I would like to share a recent incident in which I finally had the courage to speak up. I would like to share my experience with the author and friends of the non-profit organization Fallen Officers. About two weeks ago I saw two posts and comments that I felt were inappropriate, and I made comments in a complaint. Those posts were from Fox News. One showed the black mayor who pulled down the thin blue -lined flag and another showed Daunte Wright's Page 24 April 27, 2021 picture juxtaposed to Officer Potter's picture, and the post highlighted the riots. They called it riots. What possible good could come from posting such articles on a non-profit site? You can imagine some of the responses to these posts. One said, leave the fag alone. If he had not been breaking the law, this would not have happened. Another made light of Mr. Wright's death. Some felt his death was his fault and he got what he deserved. 0�� The stereotypical response from Fallen Officers to my concern are at the core of racism. It is the racist ideology that blames the victim. Okay. Here's the quote: Here is a simple way of thinking. Don't break the law, exclamation. Don't resist arrest. Amazing how groups turn a fellow into a God. I took a picture of that comment just in case it was deleted. So systemic and antiblack racism permeates every person in every walk of life even if those who perpetuate it deny it. So hate is destructive and pervasive; however, love is the most powerful force in this universe, and love does conquer hate. People just need to be aware that some of their words and actions and comments do hurt other people. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Item # 11 C AUTHORIZING STAFF TO NEGOTIATE A LAND LEASE AND OPERATOR AGREEMENT WITH BIGSHOTS GOLF, A DIVISION OF CLUBCORP USA, INC., FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A PUBLIC GOLF COURSE AND ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX AT THE FORMER GOLDEN GATE GOLF COURSE PROPERTY FOR Page 25 April 27, 2021 SUBSEQUENT CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD - MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF' S RECOMMENDATIONS — APPROVED MR. OOHS: Commissioners, Item 11 Cis a recommendation to authorize staff to negotiate a land lease and operator agreement with BigShots Golf, a division of C1ubCorp USA, Incorporated, for the construction and operation of a public golf course and entertainment complex at the former Golden Gate Golf Course property for subsequent consideration by the Board. And Mr. Geoff Willig will make the presentation. MR. WILLIG: Good morning, Commissioners. Geoff Willig, for the record. Q%hl ` a Last year in December you -all had asked and tasked staff to go out and issue another ITN for a partner to redevelop the golf course. Since that time -- and also your direction was to add to the length of time that we had that out on the street as well as avoid the holidays. As the last time we had gone out for an ITN for this, we were in the midst of the Christmas and New Year's holidays. So we've done that. We were out on the street for 60 days this time instead of 30 days, and we started the -- we started the solicitation advertisement in the middle of January. So through that process, we had -- we had reached out to 300 -- or 34,614 firms. We had 180 firms view the proposal, and also we had worked with the National Golf Foundation who promoted it to their membership and gave us an additional set of notifications of 1,737 emails to their membership and folks that they're in contact with. Through that process, we received only one response to the proposal, and this morning we have individuals from BigShots here that will present their proposal to you and be here to answer any questions that you might have. Page 26 April 27, 2021 And following that, I'll get back up here, following your direction, and have a couple more questions. So I'll turn it over here to Randall Cousins and Dave Pillsbury. And give me a moment. Let's -- so I can load up their presentation. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders, did you want to say anything? Later, okay. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: While the petitioner i coming up, kind of remind the Board -- I think it's been stated -- but this is really Step 2 of a multistep process. Our first step was the issuance of the ITN, and I believe the Board unanimously directed staff to issue that ITN. _POO The next step after today, if this moves forward, the next step will be to review and approve or reject a proposed contract. So we're not here today to actually approve a contract. We're here today to approve, really, a concept. And so I'm looking forward to hearing the details. MR. PILLSBURY: Well, thank you. It's an honor to be here, and I en.oyed, in particular, the recognition of the veterans. We do a lot of work with veterans organizations and, you know, we wouldn't be here today witnessing government at work without the sacrifice of so many who have come before us, so I'm glad I got to witness that. My name is David Pillsbury. I'm the CEO of ClubCorp. ClubCorp is an organization that's been around since 1957. We've got deep roots across the United States. We started in Dallas, Texas, at a little club called Brookhaven Country Club, which is right by 635, and we've grown to over 200 clubs across the country. We have four lines of business. We have our golf and country club division. The closest golf and country club we have to Collier County is in Jupiter, Jupiter Country Club. We also have a second line of business called city clubs, and our city clubs are basically downtown business clubs, and the closest one Page 27 April 27, 2021 we have to Collier County is in Fort Lauderdale, the Tower Club in Fort Lauderdale. The third line of business are stadium clubs, which is a very exciting business for us, and it's all, again, membership based. But they're based out of football stadiums. The closest one we have in Florida is Florida State University. We've been there for 22 years actually partnering with the Boosters. So we run the stadium club. It's called the University Club at Florida State. 7%44� .r The fourth line of business we have is called BigShots Golf, and we're very excited about BigShots Golf for some reasons that I think you'll understand here in a few minutes. So we've been doing this for a long time Our clubs are mini community centers. They're a nexus for the community, so we understand how communities work. Our clubs are where business is done. It's where celebrations are done. It's where celebrations of life are done. It's where people come to escape the day-to-day rigors of their lives to enjoy fellowship with people that they like and want to be around. And so we believe that what we're going to be talking to you about today is just that. It is a centerpiece of a community. And I think that will begin to take shape as we walk through the presentation. So it's an honor for me to be here. We appreciate the consideration. There's been a lot of work over the last year. We'll talk a little bit about where we were before and how we got to where we are today. But I wanted to start with a couple of opening comments. First, I'd like to congratulate the Commission on what you're accomplishing with the sports complex. And you might find it odd that I'm starting my presentation with a congratulations about the sports complex but let me tell you why I am so impressed with the fact you're doing it. A, I understand that I'm sure it was not without controversy. April 27, 2021 Probably great controversy because big things don't happen without a lot of debate and controversy. I know that you're going to spend over $100 million, a lot of money. But why? Because you're going to create an economic driver for the community. You're going to add a community amenity that everyone in this community will benefit from. You've created a regional iconic asset. I have five kids. They all played club sports. They would have all played in your complex had they still been playing. My last one's still playing volleyball at FIU. So that's a bold move that will change the face of Collier County for years to come far beyond any of us, and that's really what we're here to talk about as it relates to the Golden Gate project. Here's a golf course that's gone fallow. It's basically a weed patch that's being mowed for the surrounding residents so it's not an eyesore. And you had the vision to buy this piece of real estate, and I'm sure that was not without controversy. It was a big investment. But now the county owns this golf course, this property, this valuable real estate forever, for as long as the county wants to own it. So the question is, what do you do with it? Well, there's been some great progressive thinking about how to use pieces of the land to add important community assets, affordable housing, potentially veterans. I don't know very much about all the considerations you guys have undertaken for the use of that land. It's very valuable land, and hopefully there's not a scenario that prevents the county from continuing to own that land going forward. So that land will simply appreciate over time. What we're here to talk to you about is an alternative use for a part of that land, and it's been an exciting opportunity. And I want to explain to you why by giving you a bit of a backdrop here that you might not be aware of. There's been an amazing confluence of events in the world of Page 29 April 27, 2021 golf and entertainment over the past decade. And you might wonder, well, what does that mean? Well, this is a sport where, unlike any other sport, 45 weeks a year this sport is on television Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Maybe to the chagrin of some, but to the great joy of others. Now, why is that important? It's important because golf has become part of Americana. It's certainly part of Florida's DNA. It's certainly part of Collier County's DNA. ^� One big problem: Access and friction. What does that mean? Well, 25 years ago TopGolf came to the United States, and TopGolf came with a new idea, an idea that you could create a game, make this fun, so it's not just hitting golf balls. There's a game. An idea where all you had to do was bring a credit card. So what did that do? It took the friction out. I So for someone that was interested in golf, all they had to do was bring their credit card, and they could experience the joy of the game and the fraternity of being with your friends, and incredibly diverse, by the way. You go look down a tee line at one of our BigShots facilities or a TopGolf, you see every age group. You see every ethnic group. They're all there. Why? Because they're curious about this great game, but they're not willing to go buy a set of clubs. They may not even know how to make a tee time. They might not know what a tee time is. They might not know where to go to play golf. Who do I talk to? That's for the insiders in golf, the people that already play, and they're important, too. 1,,-, But golf has excluded a lot of people because of the friction. Well, there's been a confluence of forces started by TopGolf. Now, you've read about this. Tiger Woods has his new putting concept. They're going to open five or six facilities throughout Florida for putting, indoor putting. There's Putt Shack, which is coming from the UK, which is indoor putting and entertainment. Again, you play Page 30 April 27, 2021 in groups of four. It's people together enjoying one another's company and enjoying the sport without the friction of having to go through all those steps you have to go through to play golf. There's Drive Shack. They're going to build 20,000-square-foot indoor putting facilities. TopGolf continues to grow. And then, of course, there's BigShots. Now, why is that? It's because there's this confluence of forces. People are looking for wholesome, family outdoor entertainment, and they're curious about golf because they or someone they love had been watching it on television for 20 years. So we have an opportunity here to put all of this under one roof. Now, what does that mean? Well, we're not just doing indoor putting. We're not just doing outdoor putting. We're not just doing gamification. We're doing it with the best technology available. We're not just doing food. We're doing food right. Scratch kitchens, farm to table, affordable, delicious food, and we have the chance to deliver high -quality, affordable golf so we can take these people who hit that one shot -- you know, when you go play TopGolf or BigShots for an hour and you've never played golf before, you've never picked up a club before, but you hit that one shot, and you go, wow, I think I might be able to do this again. I could replicate this. Well, the problem with TopGolf, they have no transition plan. There's nowhere for me to go. How do I convert people that are interested kids, young adults, women who say, look, this sounds like a fun sport. What do I do next? Well, by having BigShots putting and golf all under one umbrella, we can connect the dots. We can truly create an integrated amenity the likes of which does not exist in America. Nicklaus did his first 12-hole golf course; it's in Tennessee. We know about TopGolf. We know about all these putting concepts, but we have a chance to put it all under one roof for the benefit of the community, to create an economic driver, and to create an iconic asset that will be Page 31 April 27, 2021 the envy of cities all over the United States. I'm being interviewed right now by the New York Times, and we talked about this. I said, look, we're a candidate for this project. This is a game -changer project, we believe. Now, you own the property. Golf, unfortunately -- it's N, interesting, when you look at all the growth of TopGolf and putting concepts, you wonder, how come new golf courses aren't being built? Because they don't make economic sense. It doesn't work, which is why all these alternative concepts are popping up, but then there's nowhere for these people to go to learn to play the game, yet golf is part of our DNA as a county and as a state. So it seems to me this is a continuation of what you started, which is to invest in the community in a compelling way, not without controversy, not without tough decisions, but by creating an asset that's your asset that is improved by the county as it relates to the golf, as it relates to the BigShots and the putting. We make that investment. You don't have to make that investment. We then pay you rent so you don't have an ongoing operating expense like you do with the sports complex which, again, I think is a brilliant move. This is self-supporting. It's a sustainable project. These are the kinds of public/private partnerships that we think really make sense for communities. What I'd like to do is just walk you through a quick overview of what this project looks like and highlight a couple of key points that we'd like you to consider as you think through the decision as to whether or not this project should move forward. So this is really a convergence of forces. We think we've got an incredible entertainment concept with BigShots which we'll talk about in a second, but you also have the experience -- I'm the fifth CEO in the history of this company. This is a stable legacy company. We are not a startup. We are not, you know, just going Page 32 April 27, 2021 to show up. We come and partner with you. We're here to stay, and it's important for you to know that. And then, of course, we think we've got a real opportunity with the golf course. So this is this 12-hole concept, and it's important to just take a second and reflect on why 12 holes, because people say, well, I -- golf courses are 18 holes. Why would we do a 12-hole golf course? It doesn't make any sense. Well, what did I just spend 10 minutes talking about? Friction. Part of what makes golf difficult for people to play is time. q% � A So the way we re -think golf is by reducing the amount of time it takes to play, which takes friction out, which means you can play three holes. You can come and play BigShots for an hour and then take your same group of four people and go play three holes or six holes or nine holes. Or even 18 holes, because we're going to have multiple tees. So you can play a hole twice without playing the same hole. 6, - '1* �'— y Jack Nicklaus, who will be our partner on this, is so excited about this 12-hole concept. In fact, he has done his first 12-hole golf course; it's in Tennessee. And he's excited about this because he believes that these 7,500-yard golf courses that are incredibly intimidating are one of the reasons why people don't pick up the sport, why your residents don't pick up the sport. Well, A, they need to have access; B, they need someone to take the friction out when they make that transition to play; and, then, C, they need to be able to play three holes, six holes, nine holes, whatever they have time to play, and that's what's brilliant about the 12-hole concept. So, you know, we have a company full of 18-hole golf courses. We have 212 18-hole golf courses. I'm more excited about 12 holes than I am about our 18-hole golf courses because I think we have a chance to bring golf to a new community. And then, of course, Page 33 April 27, 2021 you've got BigShots, which we'll talk about next. So what is it? So this is what we call eatertainment. It's a new word, right? And eatertainment is where people gather to share a culinary experience with entertainment. Now, you can have either/or in lots of places. Casual dining and what's called fast casual dining has grown 10, 15 percent a year for the past seven or eight years minus the pandemic. Entertainment has grown at 6 or 7 percent a year, but the combination of the two is relatively new, and TopGolf has really broken the glass ceiling that we see so clearly now, which is this is how people want to spend their leisure time. poo#.,. Our venue features both indoor and outdoor, so it's an all -season experience. We have heaters. We have misters so that the hot summers won't keep people from enjoying the experience and neither will that rare cold snap that we have here in the Naples marketplace. BigShots is built around fun, and no friction. This is just an example of kind of what it looks like. This is people enjoying food, sitting in lounge chairs. This is at a bay, at a tee station. We would have 62 of these bays. And then we'd have a bar, and we'd have dining, and we'd have private event rooms for meetings, and we'll have lesson space and activities during the day for some other very important constituents that we'll talk about here in just a second. This is for everyone. So this is not for an elite class. This is not a private club. This is all -access. This is about bring your credit card and have fun. It's also about people that have been left behind. In particular, kids that have been left behind, and we are so lucky to have a national organization called the First Tee. It's been around for 25 years. I've been very involved. I was their keynote speaker at the 10-year anniversary. I care deeply about this organization. Page 34 April 27, 2021 And there is a tremendous chapter here in Collier County for the First Tee. What does the First Tee do? They take kids that otherwise would not have the opportunity, and they teach them life skills, core values, and healthy habits using golf as the vehicle. It's not really about golf. It's about teaching these kids how to live, and it works, and it works because they're now doctors and lawyers all of whom have come through the First Tee. i * Well, the First Tee right now doesn't have a home, and we would like to make this their home. And this is a proactive community outreach program for kids that might not otherwise have the opportunity to enjoy this sport. And I could tell you stories about players that are trying to make it on the PGA tour that came to the First Tee or, maybe even more importantly, the doctor or the lawyer whose values were shaped by their experience as a kid in the First Tee program. You go through levels of graduation all the way up to par, birdie, eagle, double eagle, and those are -- those correspond with your ability to pass certain tests around your understanding of life skills. Not golf skills; life skills. Golf is a game about honor and trust and telling the truth and following the rules and doing things that make our society go around, and the First Tee helps embed that in these incredible young people, and so we're excited to call this facility home for the Collier County First Tee. X I mentioned C1ubCorp. You know, I just think it's important to drive home here that, you know, we're not a couple guys out of a garage here with an idea, and BigShots is alive. It's real. We opened in Fort Worth two weeks ago. We're opening in Springfield, Missouri, May 15th, we broke ground on January 27th in Bryan, Texas, for BigShots Aggieland at their sports complex, interestingly enough, that the county and the city are building there in collaboration with the university. Page 35 April 27, 2021 So as I mentioned, the golf course would be championship caliber. In other words, if you are a good player and you want to play from the back tees, you're going to have a great golf experience. This is not meant to be what has come to be known as sort of the multiple golf course. This is high quality. This is execution at the highest level where each of you and everyone in this room would be very proud to say this is my home club. This is my home course. This is a county golf course, and we could be proud of the conditions of this golf course. The reality is the golf course isn't going to make a lot of money. If it breaks even, we'd be thrilled, but we think, obviously, the BigShots Golf, where we're investing our capital, we think there'll be a return on that investment, or we wouldn't be in that business. So reduced green fees, obviously. We would have resident/nonresident rates. We'd have peak and off peak times. We'd have discounts for senior citizens. We would do all those things that are logical to do to occupy the golf course when people that are working, for example, who are not retired don't have time to play. So a lot of financial incentive to get people to play during the weekdays and so forth. So prime time would be saved for people that have time. Don't have time to play and have the means to pay. So the facility, just to remind you -- I think you probably remember most of this, but just in case you don't -- this is a two-story facility. Just by comparison, if you've seen TopGolfs, they're three stories. They're monstrosities. They're 105 bays. This is a more of a boutique version. It's much smaller with the 60 hitting bays. It's a -- it feels like a sports entertainment facility; lots of televisions, lots of sports on TV, a lot of sound. It's got a real kind of vibe to it in terms of, you know, music playing. It's a great place to want to hang out. I mentioned private dining on the first floor and flexible event Page 36 April 27, 2021 space on the second floor and then, obviously, food and beverage service throughout the facility including out on the putting -- on the putting course. We'll have 36 holes of putting at this facility. And it's not just, you know, a flat putting on course. This is interesting and fun, not quite miniature golf, but entertaining, something that people want to come back and enjoy which, again, is taking what many of these other concepts are doing inside and making it sort of indoor/outdoor here as part of a broader entertainment complex. This is a visual of what it looks like. So if you were to go to Fort Worth today, this is what you would see. It's beautiful. It will, I think, be a terrific visual amenity to the Golden Gate community. Inside it's what you would expect, you know. It's like kind of a sports bar, very casual, nice finishes, contemporary in its look and feel. This is a little bit of a perspective on the putting. The see -through there where the umbrellas are, behind that, those are garage door -- type doors that open, so there's a lot of open space. So during the beautiful months here in Naples, that would all be open for dining by the entire community. This is just an example of what a bay looks like. So this is -- the tech is all embedded in a radar tracking device. We use Doppler radar to track all the activity from the balls. This, as you see, is the Doppler tracking device there, and we track all the data. So for the nerds that really like golf, you get every piece of data you can imagine on your swing and on moment of impact, and you'll have an app that you'll be able to carry all your data with you. One thing that's pretty interesting is you can compete live with other BigShots facilities. So we have one in Vero Beach. You can compete live with Vero Beach, live with Fort Worth, Texas, which is really fun, particularly for the millennial crowd. That's a really enjoyable part of BigShots. Page 37 April 27, 2021 This is actually Vero Beach, so this is what we call generation one. This is -- these things evolve, you know; as each iteration occurs, they get better and better and better. This is only a 30-bay. This is the small version, and you can see the putting course down below. This is actually -- these are actually shots of Vero Beach and of Fort Worth. And these are actually the games. So what happens, just to -- kind of hard to wrap your head around it. What you do is you hit a shot, and you look down at your screen, and on the screen you're hitting through these virtual targets. So, for example, as you look to the lower right, the balloons and you see an airplane, those are all moving. So, obviously, if you hit a moving target, you score more points. And the way we built the games is we have a game that's called ping pong -- I'm sorry, it's called -- it's called pinball, you know, when you ball the -- the reason why pinball is because we didn't want it to be skill based. All you've got to do is pull the hand back, and the pinball releases and bells go off, and you start scoring points. So the seven -year -old kid can beat his dad who might be a one handicap, because it's not skill based. And then as you go through each of the games, they become more and more skills based, so everybody has fun. That's the point, and that's what keeps people coming back. So that's really the quick flyover. There's obviously a lot of detail. The city [sic] staff has been terrific. I think they understand in much more intimate detail all the different elements, but I think it would be a good idea for us to pause and just ask what your questions might be. I'm sure there are several, and I'd be happy to answer those questions, and if I can't, Randall Cousins is here with me, and he's intimately involved with your staff on the project and can answer whatever questions I can't handle. April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just two quick questions and then a quick comment. One of the complaints I've heard is that this could create noise in the neighborhood. Now, it looks like everything's directed away from the neighborhoods, the lighting and everything. Can you comment on the type of lighting and what could be expected in terms of any noise that would be emanating from this facility. MR. COUSINS: Yeah. We actually intend to comply with the existing light and noise pollution regulations. We're very aware that there's a community at the back end of this parking lot, and it's very important for them to have a good experience as well. From a lighting perspective, the lighting for driving ranges has really come a long way. You don't want to -- basically, any light spillage is wasted light. And so, you know, at night when you're on these ranges, you want to be able to see that ball track, but anything beyond that and, you know, the lighting that's necessary in the parking lot would just be extra, so we're very aware of that concern and are working that into the design. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. What about noise? Again, it looks like everything's kind of directed towards 951 and Golden Gate Parkway, but any particular concerns about noise? MR. COUSINS: As I said, we fully intend to comply with the existing noise regulations. And you're exactly right, the bays where you would be standing and hitting golf balls is towards that intersection, and so your back would be to that community, that Par 1 community. So we don't think there's going to be a significant amount of noise. MR. PILLSBURY: I think, actually, most of the -- most of the noise will be actually contained within the sports bar area. The actual hitting bays itself, there's some background music, but it's Page 39 April 27, 2021 really the talking and the conversing among the patrons. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And then one last question. You mentioned First Tee. Is there anyone here from First Tee? MR. PILLSBURY: Is Cindy here? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Can you spend just a little bit of -- a couple minutes on what type of relationship you would have with First Tee and what their reaction is.� MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. So the First Tee, they're looking for a home, and they would actually build a small structure on the property as part of the project, which would be their -- their headquarters, and it would be their classroom, and then they would use, on a complementary basis, BigShots. They would get access to the golf during off peak times for the kids, but they would do all of their programming for Collier County out of this facility and out of their structure that they would build and they would fund on their own. h., _ "R�w '*— COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Hi, Mr. Pillsbury. Thanks for that presentation. Wow, have I gotten a lot of emails on this, okay. A couple of statements I just want to make. Everybody that's worried that 12 holes isn't really golf, I've been all over the country, and a lot of us have, so I'm speaking for a group. Twelve -hole golf courses exist. I mean, I've played one in Colorado, and when you got to the second tee box on Hole 3, which was now Hole 13, it was a totally different golf course. So I mean, you know, we've all gotten a lot of emails, oh, don't ruin it with a 12-hole course. I'm glad that Commissioner Saunders opened up in the beginning saying we're not -- we're not voting on construction tomorrow. So people really need to hear this. We're going through April 27, 2021 a very methodical process, but I'm here to echo what you said about 12-hole courses. I'm not saying it's the approved solution, but when trying to make a footprint fit, you're trying to -- you know, you own a calculator. You're trying to do the algorithm. You know, you can do anything, but you can't do everything. So I understand that concept, and it exists. Like you said, I do know Jack Nicklaus just built a course, but plenty of other people have. Here's just a couple of -- you know, so that you can see where I'm coming from. My biggest concern is compatibility and synergy with what's already around there, so I'll leave it at that. And I know we share that concern. It's already been asked; noise, things like that. �*W--q&-, 11* You know, shoehorning in something that's this amazing, but maybe the community, it doesn't -- you know, it's a great thing in a certain location. We need to figure out if this is it. Here is my biggest concern, so we just honored veterans here, and I appreciated your comments. I am getting an unbelievable amount of emails from veterans, because I'm a retired Air Force colonel, some of them in the room here saying, vote for golf so we can get our VA nursing home. And so we've got to make sure, you know, you -- and rightly so, you didn't present anything about a VA nursing home, but there is -- there are slides out there that show a little square that says VA nursing home, and it's a placeholder, you know. I'm not sitting here saying anybody's promised anything, but there is a perception out there that this is all tied, in some people's minds, to a VA nursing home. One of the things that I've said -- and I met with some of your group and some others. Some people think VA stands for veteran. Is doesn't. It stands for Veterans Administration, and I haven't heard that the VA based out of Washington, D.C., that I have a lot of Page 41 April 27, 2021 experience with is coming down here to build a veterans nursing home. So I don't say that they can't, and I'm not -- these aren't negative comments by any stretch, but it's really to separate rumor from fact so that people watching this aren't saying, wow, if you -all don't vote for golf course, you hate veterans. The home's not in design, and I haven't heard that the Veterans Administration has us number one on the list to partner with us for a veterans nursing home. I hope they do. But, you know, and those like Commissioner Saunders were saying, we're doing very methodical steps here. `But I just want to get that, you know, on the record. The other thing is having a bit of a healthcare background being the, you know, COO of Physicians Regional here and also being the base commander of several military bases with very large hospitals, having a nursing home has a whole medical piece that goes with it. You can't just draw a box, say VA nursing home, and some people think that just means veterans home, but VA actually means Veterans Administration, like I said. But then the other component piece -- and I know that's not your job so I'm not here saying, you know, build the VA nursing home, you know, BigShots, and then come in with your -- but it's really more for the people who are watching this, who are hearing this and maybe don't know so much about it but they think, just vote on this so we can have our nursing home. I'm getting a lot of emails like that, and that's where we're just trying to separate rumor from fact. In some of these earlier conversations, there were conversations about possible workforce housing on this footprint. And so, you know, I don't know if this absorbs some of that or not. And we're going to go through methodical steps, but I just want to make sure that folks out there know BigShots isn't building workforce housing Page 42 April 27, 2021 and a Veterans Administration nursing home. These are other things that could be done on this property. Maybe it's a totally separate project. We'll wait and hear how that comes. But I can't tell you the number of emails that I've gotten from fellow veterans that just say, please vote on golf so that we can have our VA nursing home and, you know, that's not actually -- you know, that's apples and chairs. So just to say that, and make sure that you're not implying -- and I don't believe you are, so I'm not saying that. But that folks do understand what we're trying to do on this very complicated piece of property that we want to maximize without promising some things that aren't coming. I mean, I've had people that have said, you know, build a nursing home and workforce housing first and then squeeze the golf in. I mean, these are notes that I think we've all sort of gotten. So, you know, I just wanted to mention that. Make you -- I'm sure you're aware of it. But also, you know, VA doesn't mean veteran. It means Veterans Administration. And, you know, I can tell you, if the folks in DC got wind that all of a sudden, you know, we're advertising that possibly, or people are perceiving -- we're not advertising, but people might have a perception when they see that, that somehow we're getting the next VA hospital, VA nursing home, that's a stretch. But I appreciate the presentation here. It's obvious that you've done a lot of architectural work and design -- like you say, you all have done this before -- to figure out how this could best fit if we were to move forward, you know, with it and whatnot. But I just wanted to sort of caution on the veterans piece and the workforce housing people, because to some people this is great. They care a lot more about the other piece, and they think it's all together -- and maybe it will be all together. Maybe we'll decide, hey, you know, Page 43 April 27, 2021 it's all or nothing kind of thing. But that's an important piece to, you know -- to, you know, an elderly community here, veterans, that are in this community here and maybe aren't following this as closely as we are. So I just wanted to mention that. Thank you, sir. MR. PILLSBURY: Commissioner, thank you for the A clarification and, I mean, our job is to try and give you the best community asset and minimize the use of real estate so you have alternative uses for that real estate that you can pursue. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: For other -- MR. PILLSBURY: For other purposes, for whatever you see is best, the highest and best use for your community. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But there are some that think if we said yes to this, all those other things automatically come. And they're -- you know, they're misinformed, and so we're trying to make sure that people do understand what we're doing here. So thank you, sir. N\N CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just -- I'm sorry. I'm going to break in here. Just so that you're clear and the public is clear, there are three separate entities at this point being considered for this piece of land. One is going ahead. It's the affordable housing. That's to the south. Then we have BigShots Golf, which is here before us, and we have the nursing home, which is more than a wish of a commissioner, and I think I'd like to turn to Commissioner Saunders so he can explain his history with this issue. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just real quickly, and Commissioner McDaniel and I visited the VA in Washington, D.C. -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And in Tallahassee. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- so everyone's aware of the proposed project. But this was a project that would be funded partially through the one -cent sales tax that the Commission placed April 27, 2021 on the ballot a couple years ago. I think there's -- I'm not sure of the number. I think it may be $30 million that's in that pot of money for a project. And this -- the veterans nursing home is not connected in any way whatsoever with this. If we turn this project down on BigShots, it has nothing to do with the veterans nursing home. That's a separate project, a separate parcel. And we're in line to get the approval at some point. The hope is that the state Department of Veterans Affairs will approve Collier County for the next veterans nursing home based on the fact that we are providing the local match for that project. Totally unconnected. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No, absolutely. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: My hope is that both of these projects will go through. And I'll talk to -- or turn to the Chairman in terms of the workforce housing project. That's already underway. A separate parcel. It's funded, and it's on its way. So we've got these three projects that are on the table, but they're not connected to each other. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just wanted to add, I think the importance of my comments were I want to make sure people understand that your golf doesn't make those other things automatic. They are three separate. So, I mean, you know, I've gotten one-liners that just say, please vote for the golf, and, you know, they don't know anything about it, so we can get the others. And so, you know, I confirm every single thing that I've just heard here, but to the public, I hope a lot of people are watching that realize they are three separate projects. Saying yes to golf and even it happening doesn't automatically -- it's not tied. I hope it all does, but it's not tied, I think, is the key thing, and you know that. We all know that. I want to make sure that this is the first big public hearing where there's quite a few out there that don't, and we've been flooded with emails from some people that have sort of said that that think it is, Page 45 April 27, 2021 that if we -- so thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So -- right, there's three different ideas for this property. And I don't know if the County Manager or Mr. Willig or somebody can give us an idea of -- there's some aerial photographs showing the current layout of the golf course, what's proposed. And my question is, is maybe we can just point out the areas where we're thinking about these other uses, because one of the things I heard was that First Tee would be creating their own facility, and I'm kind of interested in knowing where that would be. And I'll just -- I'll just -- you know, I've had my reservations from the beginning, which I still have, about the county ending up in the golf business, and so where that building would be if that's even just conceptually, would, I think, be helpful for me. MR. WILLIG: Commissioners, so I'll try to use the telestrator here as best as my John Madden skills can handle. In the bottom part here, that yellow box, that's where -- south of that even is where we're -- through the ITC, intent to convert, we had anticipated putting the essential services housing piece. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. MR. WILLIG: The state veterans nursing home, in the ITC process, we've identified this area up here to the north and to the east of current hotel property as where we would locate the veterans nursing home. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And so -- MR. OCHS: Show him where the First Tee. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. If you've got your -- yeah, where would the First Tee theoretically be? MR. PILLSBURY: It would be right there. There would be about an 8,000-square-foot building at the end of the parking lot. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh, at the end of the parking lot, April 27, 2021 okay. MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah, right there. And, obviously, that needs to be approved and reviewed and all that stuff. So that would come on down the road. That wouldn't be in the first phase. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. So, essentially, there's what are now Holes 4 and 5 along 951 -- or, sorry, Collier Boulevard. I'm dating myself -- is where the workforce housing goes. Okay. And so my question is, what -- number one, is where Hole 16 -- 15, 16, and 17 doesn't look to be as part of the layout. NJ CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: This is COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This is 12-hole -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: This is the new one. This is -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No, that's what I'm saying, right. And so on their 12-hole, there's what is now 15, 16 and 17 not being used. Is -- is there any -- is that land that you don't want to lease? I'm just trying to figure out what it is y CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You need an overview. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- what we're going to be left with, if anything. MR. WILLIG: I In terms of at least the intent to convert, this section up here, 16 and 17, we had kind of identified that as potentially a space for some government building in the future but, obviously, that area is flexible, and should BigShots decide, hey, we want to loop in, come in around here using 15 and some of 17 to make a hole, that could be done. So there's no -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So that's still a part of what's going to be negotiated in this -- if we approve this ITN? MR. WILLIG: Yes, and I'll turn it over to David. MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. What we would do -- thanks, Geoff. I think what we would do is we would have Jack Nicklaus Page 47 April 27, 2021 actually -- have you guys say, here's the land that we want to preserve, so come up with the best layout for 12 holes you can within this envelope. So that's what you want to do. You don't want to let an architect start with a blank canvas. You want to say, here are your constraints. So you guys tell us, hey, we want to preserve this land for the future -- I mean, you own all the land, so you have all of it for the future, but you might want to use part of it sooner than later, shorter than the leasehold term. So we would then design around your land requirements. _ W% ` a COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. It seems like a bit of a chicken and the egg issue for me, but -- okay. I just wanted some clarification as to what parts that aren't covered by the 12-hole proposal that we're looking at would -- whether that's going to be part of what's negotiated or not. So at this point, I guess, the answer to that question is we don't know? �, %, MR. PILLSBURY: Well, this is a -- this is a land map based upon the feedback we've gotten from the county -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR. PILLSBURY: -- as to the land that you're trying to protect. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR. PILLSBURY: I think the key point here, Commissioner, is that -- is that we're flexible. If you guys decide differently that there's another parcel that you would like to protect, we can reroute the golf course. I mean, obviously, there are some constraints. 'IN COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sure. MR. PILLSBURY: But we've got a fair amount of flexibility. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I understand. Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, and then I think we're -- we are going to take about a 10-minute break. MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, and I don't mean to interrupt -- 0-= April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MR. OCHS: -- but you have just set conditions. You've got 14 registered speakers, you have a 10:45 with the Army Corps that we'll try to push back a little bit, but -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Yes; yes, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to take break before I go? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no. You're on the gun. You're on the clock right now; it starts. VNJ COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go. Thank you, Mr. Pillsbury, for coming here today and the presentation. I can't remember -- MR. COUSINS: Randall. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Andrew? MR. COUSINS: Randall. �, v COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Randall; forgive me. One of the comments I want to make, and I want to say because I figure you're going to be the one that's here on site every day. He'll be gone doing whatever he does for ClubCorp. If we do, in fact, approve this project, there's a community 360 degrees around this BigShots facility. You're pointing that -- that proposition is pointing that at an intersection, but there's two square miles of very rural low -density housing out there on the other side of 951. And you're not dating yourself, Commissioner Solis. It will always be 951. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: 951. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So just remember that as we go forward. For you, sir, thank you. I love the concept of BigShots. I think it's just a hoot. I love April 27, 2021 it. I love the game of golf. You said it correctly; it is, in fact, a way of life for people to learn life skills, not just play a game. And, for the record, hit it as it lies. MR. COUSINS: That's it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I've got to share with you, I have concerns about the investment that's being requested with regard to the taxpayers' money. I need that to be solidified, what my ROI is, what type of -- what type of time frame am I looking at for that rate of return to, in fact, come back to our community. I'm not a fan of BigShots on this site, just so you know. I have expressed this concern to you on a regular basis that this is a lot on one piece of property. And, irrespective of what Commissioner LoCastro says, I'm not a fan of 12 holes; never have been. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I didn't say a fan. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not saying there isn't room for something new. Look what our game has evolved to in the recent past. Please understand that; I'm not going to stomp my feet here, but I'm not a fan. So with that -- of the 12-hole facility. There's some really, really nice 9-hole facilities that aren't jamming so much in that I think we might could have a look at. So with that -- that's my questions for you or comments. And, Jeffrey, if you don't find, maybe -- because it's continued -- it's come up here multiple times, and I thought you were heading there, Commissioner Solis. I wanted to ask how we're coming with the rezone. There was a discussion about us -- Jeffrey, are you -- is he -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I've asked him to pull up the overview of the golf course. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. Our entire proposal of a PUD, what we're -- we're zoning this whole piece of property for these potential multiple uses, and how are we coming through with Page 50 April 27, 2021 that? That might help clarify, Commissioner LoCastro, some of the comments that we're making about one or the other or so on, so... COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I could make a little bit of clarification on the golf course aspect of it and the associated BigShots facility. Our County Attorney has opined that the existing zoning is sufficient for that -- those uses on that part of the parcel. �- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, okay. Ak COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The rezone will only be for the -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Veterans -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, the workforce housing, the veterans nursing home, and if there's any other facility. Those parcels will have to be rezoned, but there's no rezone required for this overall project. ,Nv Am I correct, Mr. Klatzkow? That's my recollection of your comments. N6 MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. I believe you have a staff interpretation to that effect in place. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm sorry? MR. KLATZKOW: You've a staff interpretation that the proposed use is an accessory use to the golf course, so it's fine. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm done. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay? All right. So just -- Mr. Willig, just to explain a little bit what we're looking at just so everybody can get the idea. MR. WILLIG: Yeah. So, again, I'm using my John Madden skills. This, about here, is what the county owns, excluding -- excluding this part in the middle. Also, at about that spot we have a current telephone tower in the Comcast facility right next to our -- the water plant that was acquired by the county, and to Page 51 April 27, 2021 the south here is where the current maintenance facility is. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Affordable housing, where is that going to be built? MR. WILLIG: So we've identified about 30 acres down here. That would be the essential services workforce housing piece. We've got -- in the ITC document, that section up there is where we've identified for the state veterans nursing home, and then over here is where we've identified space for a potential government office building. _ W% ` a The maintenance road that runs through will have to maintain access to that, again, because of the Comcast and telephone -- or the tower that is there that the county doesn't own and is -- has its own easement. �� 11* The piece that we're considering today for the BigShots piece and golf course piece would encompass this area excluding the Par 1 and also the maintenance -- the water and cell phone tower, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much for that. Okay. So just so that -- you know, I'm always optimistic. Can we hear a motion? Are we ready to make a decision whether we want to look at this again and send staff back for negotiation, or -- I'm just bowing to everyone. Actually if there is a motion, we can vote on it. Then we can give these gentlemen, you know, time to leave, and we'll take our break and then come back with Army Corps. MR. OCHS: You still have some speakers, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, that's right, 14 of them. So those -- I'm going to ask you -- and I'm not -- I want to hear from all of you. Three minutes is your time to speak. We are going to hold that exactly to three minutes. If you agree with the speaker that has come before you, if you would just say I agree for the reasons stated so that it's not repetitive, we would appreciate it, but everyone has three minutes to speak. Page 52 April 27, 2021 So at this point, let us take a break, I think, for our dear Terri who's looking a little pale here, and we'll come back; 10 minutes. Okay. So let's make it 10:45. Let's come back at 10:45. (A brief recess was had from 10:35 a.m. to 10:45 a.m.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. I think now we're going to go into public comment on this matter. MR. MILLER: I'd like to remind our public speakers here in person you can alternate between the two podiums. Our first speaker is Dr. JB Holmes. He will be followed by Gary Hodgson, and then Dave Marren. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Hodgson, if you're here, you can be waiting at another podium. MR. MILLER: Mr. Holmes will be first. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Holmes, you can be right here. MR. MILLER: And, Mr. Hodgson, if you'll wait, you'll be second here. KN MR. HODGSON: Thank you. MR. HOLMES: Commissioners, Madam Chair, my name is Dr. JB Holmes, Commander, Golden Gate Veterans of Foreign Wars. I'm here today to talk to you about the golf course -- proposed golf course project, and I appreciate Mr. Pillsbury's comments. They were very, very interesting, so thank you, Mr. Pillsbury. MR. PILLSBURY: Thank you, sir. MR. HOLMES: I've also worked with Geoff Willig on this project, and we know that the veterans nursing home -- state veterans nursing home, Mr. LoCastro, so we get it right -- state veterans nursing home costs an average of $50 million, and our portion of that would be 35 percent, and we've already set aside $30 million of that from the 1 percent sales tax. So we're -- it would be more than covered financially. But it would be the only, really veterans Page 53 April 27, 2021 healthcare facility in Collier County. So it is badly needed. And I'd also like to talk about the golf course. And as Mr. Pillsbury said, we have left people behind in this, and we have left veterans behind. There's no facility where we can actually go and golf. And golf is one of our -- one of our largest fundraisers. The largest fundraiser for the VFW, for the American Legion, and for the Marine Corps league. It's our largest fundraiser of the year. So -- and last year, of course, as we know, everybody suffered from COVID-19. We didn't make --we were closed for 16 months and then open and closed again for another two months or so. So it was a very, very difficult year, but we managed to fund all of our projects. But we were -- at the end of that time period we were running on a, virtually, day-to-day basis to fund our donations and our charitable operations. So if we don't have the golf course, the golf tournaments that we run are our biggest fundraiser, as I said previously. And we fund, in Mr. McDaniel's district, the Lake Trafford Memorial Cemetery, the veterans cemetery out there. We have funded that completely, and we've maintained it for 10 years since it was abandoned by the county. We replaced all the headstones, put in a flagpole and a garden and benches and fences, little, nice picket fences, all at our own expense. And at Christmas we put the wreaths on all the graves out there. And right now we're spending almost $3,000 to replace the crosses and Stars of Davids on all the graves all at -- are funding all at our expense. And it goes on and on the many, many projects that we do. Mr. LoCastro can speak to that; as a member of the VFW, he can speak to that; that the projects we do in the hospitals and scholarships throughout the county and our ritual team, it's very extensive. And we need those -- we need to have that funding from the golf course. I see my time is up, so thank you very much, Commissioners. Have Page 54 April 27, 2021 a great day. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Gary Hodgson. He'll be followed by Dave Marren and then Cece Zenti. MR. HODGSON: Good morning, Commissioners, Madam Chair, and your staff. We really appreciate today the chance to interact with you. My name is Gary Hodgson. I am the coordinator for the Green Space Alliance in the neighborhood that we call -- recently been known as Collier County -- I'm sorry, as the Golden Gate Country Club. The course hosted early LPGA tournaments. As a matter of fact, Jan Stephenson won her first tournament here in 1976, as it was then called the Sheraton Golden Gate and Country -- Golden Gate Inn and Country Club. So over the decades, the course has provided an affordable golf course venue for Collier County residents and visitors who could not afford to fork over a large percentage of their incomes to meet membership fees and fee requirements at other courses. But in addition to affordability, there's been a few other blessings the golf course brought with it to this diverse community of working families. The First Tee, the Kiwanis, the community center, and the professional staff at the golf course would teach local young people core values such as honesty, respect, and responsibility. Golfers from the community would annually sponsor fundraising events for scholarships to local high schoolers to help with their educational aspirations. And let's not forget the beautiful parks. The beautiful oaks and the many palm tree varieties that Davis [sic] Engineering actually inventoried in an effort to ensure the presentation and the preservation as part of the natural habitat that we treasure. The 110 acres, at least 110 acres, that we believe should be Page 55 April 27, 2021 allocated for the course is home to owls, eagles, woodpeckers, osprey, wood storks, great blue herons, ducks, fish and, of course, the many squirrels, snakes, and the occasional alligator that make up the environment from which we all benefit. I hate to think of what would have happened if the golf course had been paved over when the last hurricane hit our community. Who knows how extensive the flooding may have been and the cost to recuperate and recover. Once this green space has been lost, there is no chance to correct that mistake. It will be gone forever. But here's the good news that many of you already know. America has seen a resurgence in golf. According to Business Week, in an article called Course Correction, rounds of golf in 2020 increased 14 percent over the rounds of golf in 2019. And the National Golf Foundation says the vast majority of rounds were played on public facilities, and so I want to ask with -- ask -- 6& 11 ""� *, — A CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mank you. MR. HODGSON: -- you vote in favor of the golf course as a component of this renovation project. Thank you very much for -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Your next is Dave Marren. He'll be followed by CeCe Zenti and then -- oh, wait. That was Dave Marren, was it not? MR. HODGSON: No, that was Gary Hodgson. MR. MILLER: Okay. I'm sorry. Next is Dave Marren, followed by CeCe Zenti and then Kaydee Tuff. My apologies. MR. MARREN: Good morning, Commissioners and staff. My name is Dave Marren, and I represent Par 1 Homeowners Association, the doughnut hole in the center of the golf course or the property that's under discussion today. Page 56 April 27, 2021 I've spoken at these meetings many times to voice my personal and Par 1 Homeowners Association residents support of a private/public golf facility at the former Golden Gate Golf Course. I'm here again to continue to give voice to Par 1 residents, local community residents, and the many Collier County golfers who do not belong to private clubs. These residents include essential workers and their families, retirees and kids who, when the Golden Gate Golf Course was open, had the opportunity to learn the game and were taught the integrity golf demands of all players. Once the club closed, this learning experience and character -building opportunity went with it. I believe there are many soft and hard benefits that will flow back to all Collier County residents if you choose to go forward with a golf course on this property, as I truly hope you will. Golf is a sport that embraces diversity, whole -family participation, and teaches integrity. Golf is not dead, especially in Collier County. The latest statistics shows increases in both new participants and total rounds played. The same is true for almost every county in Florida. - ",- Look at the pace of housing development along 951 or Collier Boulevard. The population increase is anticipated in the county and especially in this district. Most of the new development will not have a golf course as an amenity. A good portion of new residents will be golfers, and they will want to golf, which will only serve to drive the availability and cost of golf up for everyone at the few public courses in Collier County. In season, rates at these public courses run over $100 per person to golf. Most essential workers, their families, and many other county residents will continue to be priced out of the opportunity to golf in Collier County. Those green fees and tax dollars will flow out of Collier County. Page 57 April 27, 2021 I have personally experienced playing at courses ClubCorp owns and manages in my former hometown. These courses are well maintained and professionally managed. They also serve a diverse population at reasonable community pricing. I would expect nothing less of ClubCorp in Collier County. I ask each of you commissioners to fully consider this agreement you will be deciding on be structured to ensure a positive economic and quality -of -life impact on the local community, the county's diverse population both current and future, and fill a significant gap in the recreational needs of Collier County residents and their families. I also ask the commissioners to vote yes on this issue to work with ClubCorp, local county residents, and move forward with a golf component on this project. �*W*-,, 11* Thank you again for your time and consideration. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is CeCe Zenti. She'll be followed by Kaydee Tuff, and then Richard Klaas. MS. ZENTI: Good morning. Madam Chair, Commissioners, my name is CeCe Zenti, and I reside at 4226 27th Court Southwest. I've owned that condo for 20 years, and I overlook the tenth fairway at the Golden Gate Golf Course. As Vice Chair of the Golden Gate Economic Development Zone Advisory Board and the secretary of Par 4 Condo Association, we view this vote today as critical as we move forward to revitalize the Golden Gate Parkway corridor. The proposed project of a golf course and entertainment package would be an excellent opportunity to preserve a tradition, the Golden Gate Golf Course, and could be the anchor to the corridor at the intersection of Golden Gate and Collier Boulevard. The project proposed today by ClubCorp offers an attraction unlike anything currently available in Collier County and provides an opportunity to reintroduce Golden Gate City to Collier County and beyond. April 27, 2021 Golden Gate Golf Course was the home of First Tee in those early years. What a reunion to have First Tee once again making their home on this golf course for all the Collier County kids. Because I serve on the Golden Gate Community Center Advisory Board, like you, I am acutely aware of the need to provide programs for the kids of all ages in Golden Gate and Collier County, and for the Golden Gate kids to be within walking and biking distance of this amenity is a huge win for these youths. Our constituency, yours and ours, is most interested in your thoughts and action today. In closing, we want to thank you for rescuing this parcel from 720 housing units. We thank you for taking your time to listen, meet with, and respond to our emails. We are most grateful for the opportunity to petition decision -makers who welcome our comments. N I/we would be remiss if I did not acknowledge all the Collier County staff we have contacted. All have been most gracious, and in -- and we do thank them for that. We sincerely ask for your support today and look forward to a positive vote for Collier County and Golden Gate revitalization. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kaydee Tuff. She'll be followed by Richard Klaas and then Dave Bekkerus online. MS. TUFF: Thank you. My name is Kaydee Tuff. I'm the president of the Golden Gate Civic Association. I also serve on the Golden Gate Economic Development Advisory Board. Russell and I were watching television on Saturday, and we saw the pickleball tournament. It's the national championship. And I thought to myself, what an amazing moment for East Naples, just having that -- that being the limelight and the national attention. And, of course, that all happened because the commissioners Page 59 April 27, 2021 believed in the potential of a recreational opportunity. And I believe that's what we have here today. As president of the Golden Gate Civic Association and a member of the Economic Development Advisory Zone, I'm excited that ClubCorp could kick off some much -needed renovation for our community. It's hard for a community to lose a golf course, and I think you don't know what that's like until you're one of the people that live near it, on it, or use it. The loss goes way beyond property values. Losses, that it's been a home to a national LPGA tournament championship, a vibrant First Tee program, and hundreds and hundreds of charity golf tournaments. We believe that ClubCorp's proposal will save taxpayers -- actually, it will save them money on construction and maintenance costs that might be used in other uses. It retains county ownership and, unlike a passive park, it will create some income. If your concern is the money that you would be spending, I'm asking that you allow our community to raise the funds. We've done this before. We have a strong history of funding our own infrastructure. We don't want to have to do this, but we've done it before. IWA Ntj We have two municipal taxing districts and more recently our Economic Development Zone. The Golden Gate Civic Association believes in this proposal and its potential not only for the community but for all of Collier County, the residents and most especially the people that will move into your essential services building and the seniors that will be living there. It's an opportunity for all of Collier County. Please approve ClubCorp's proposal to give our community -- or give our community time to raise the funds ourselves. We thank you for this opportunity. And I'd just like to end with, Commissioner McDaniel, you're not a fan of a 12-hole golf April 27, 2021 course, but I'm sure that a lot of tennis players weren't big fans of pickleball when it started, right? And now we have a national championship happening right here in our community, and maybe one day we'll be on national TV for our BigShots Golf championship. You never know. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Richard Klaas. He'll be followed by Dave Bekkerus and then Dave Scott. Bruce Bekkerus, excuse me. And then Dave Scott. IPN�A.r CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. Who's following Mr. Klaas? MR. MILLER: Mr. Klaas is followed by Bruce Bekkerus and then Dave Scott. Those are online. 2V 11116, CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Online, okay. MR. MILLER: This is our last in -person speaker. MR. KLAAS: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Dick Klaas. I think you've all heard enough from me in the last few weeks. & I'm just here with Mr. Pillsbury. So I'm more than interested in you doing the right thing here today, and I think you will. So thank you very much. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. MR. MILLER: We'll move to our online speakers now. Our first speaker is Bruce Bekkerus. He'll be followed by Dave Scott and then Gary Luginbuhl. Mr. Bekkerus, I see you're with us. You have three minutes, sir. You may proceed. MR. BEKKERUS: Good morning. I'm joining you from Moorhead, Minnesota, today. I do own property in the Pars. I'm very excited about what I've seen here today. This has been the most clear information that I've seen on this project, and I hope that you as commissioners vote in my best interest. Page 61 April 27, 2021 Thank you. MR. MILLER: All right, then. Our next speaker is David Scott, followed by Gary Luginbuhl and then Leonard Scara. Mr. Scott, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. And there you are. Mr. Scott, you have three minutes. MR. SCOTT: Yes, a couple questions. First one is, can you -- the commissioners and the listening public here, can you picture a seven -story apartment building for affordable housing dominating the environment over in the corner of the golf course? It seems to me to be rather large and a monstrosity. I don't see any other seven -story building in the Golden Gate community anywhere. And I would like to see a four-story apartment building going over there. I think it would blend in better with the landscape and the overall environment of Golden Gate. Secondly, the -- currently the vacant golf course land is being used as a public park. If the golf course is approved, what provisions are being made for the hundreds of people in a non -golfing community using that area now? Perhaps some of that -- Holes 15, 16, and 17 can be used to support a public park in that corner. And, lastly, what kind of promise do we have that the -- if the golf course is voted down, that the commissioners are going to continue to carve out the available land and use it for other developments? Thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Gary Luginbuhl. He'll be followed by Leonard Scara, and then Richard Connolly. Mr. Luginbuhl, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. If you'll do so at this time, sir. Mr. Luginbuhl, if you can unmute yourself, it is your time to speak. Page 62 April 27, 2021 We're going to try to move on, Oscar. Let's try Leonard Scara. Leonard Scara, you're being prompted to unmute yourself. If you'll do so at this time, sir. Mr. Scara, you have three minutes. Please begin. MR. SCARA: Thank you very much. My name is Leonard Scara, and I have been a resident of the Pars for the last 35 years. My reason to visit you folks today was to see, you know, what progress is going made. I'm very interested in what's happening with the golf course property. And all I really wanted to say here is I'm very impressed by your attention in this matter and that you're going to actually consider all this to be very, very important. And that's it. Thank you very much. I wish you luck on your vote, and I would encourage you to approve the golf course vote. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Next speaker will be Richard Connolly followed by Russell Tuff, and then we will try to get back with Mr. Luginbuhl. Mr. Connolly, are you with us, sir? I see you. There you are. You have three minutes, sir. Go ahead. MR. CONNOLLY: Thank you very much. And I appreciate your time and effort to this matter. My name is Richard Connolly and basically I want to agree with what everybody said previously for the need of the golf course. But I just -- you know, you're voting on the land, but you're also voting on somebody's dreams. And, you know, my dad was a member of the Pars, and I got to go down there and play with him. You know, I'm going to retire down to the Pars this year and become a full-time resident, and it's been my dream to play with my kids also. So it's something that's very important to me, and I just hope that you take the time to do that. You know, the essential working Page 63 April 27, 2021 housing -- you know, the workers in that essential housing, a lot of them are first responders, and we know how stressful that job is at this time. And I'm a retired police officer myself, and golf has always been a way for me to get away from everything. So I'm sure that they would find it to be a very affordable place and easily accessible for them to enjoy some quality time out on that course. '� * 4�"4 So thank you so, so much for your time and effort. I real appreciate you all being here. _ MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Russell Tuff. After that we'll try Gary Luginbuhl one more time. Mr. Tuff, you have three minutes, sir. Please begin. MR. TUFF: Good morning, Commissioners. And I'm old like you. I've been here for over 30 years and still call it 951. And, you know, we've all lived through all the ups and downs of the area. We've seen the community flourish, and we even had our own Golden Gate Chamber of Commerce. We had our own visitor center. We had our active civics. And then the economy tanked, and that all changed. "*, And we fought hard to change our community. You know, we had multiple families living in many houses, and then the economy tanked again in the 2005 area, and all of a sudden we could afford young couples moving in, retirees coming in. The community has increased its value and its property. It's just a wonderful -- wonderful things that are happening now. 1,,, And some of that -- you know, we had the Golden Gate Golf Course, and we had good owners of the Vocisanos, and they were good folks until the new folks, the younger generation's coming over. We've seen a serious decline, and that's a big -- heart of our community. And one of the things that -- you know, we passed the April 27, 2021 development for the west side of Golden Gate Parkway, and what gets put in those commercial areas is dependent on what the residences is and what other business opportunities there are. And right now we have a great opportunity. One, if we don't have good amenities and a wonderful place for people to live for the workforce housing, it won't become that. It will become affordable housing, and it will be people that are not necessarily going to advance the economics of that area. �� It's also an opportunity zone. It's a small investment to make to help that happen. And the commercial, we all want that commercial to be good, and this is a gem of a piece to have that happen. This community has been neglected in the past. We had -- we couldn't get fire service, so we banded together; formed our own fire district. We couldn't get a community center, so we banded together, taxed ourself again for the community center. We couldn't get ourselves beautified through the county, so we set up our own beautification, and now we have beautiful things in our community. And what I'm asking is to invest in this community, invest in what will be the anchor, the workforce of your community, and make it a wonderful, pleasant place for them. The type of people that we bring in will enhance our school districts, and it will enhance our community in great ways. And you have that opportunity sitting in your hands right now, and I would ask you, please invest in this community. -* CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I'd like to try Mr. Luginbuhl one more time. Gary Luginbuhl, you're being prompted to unmute your microphone. Please do so at this time, sir, if you wish to speak. (No response.) MR. MILLER: Nothing. Thank you, ma'am. Page 65 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's it. All right. So the public comment portion of this will be closed. Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, I don't know if there's any more comments from the Board. I'm going to go ahead and make a motion. I think we all heard enough in terms of where we are right now. And I just want to remind the Board, there are a lot of holes in this project right now. Those holes will be filled -- I don't mean golf holes. Those holes will be filled when a contract comes back to us for our approval. So a positive vote today is not a vote to sign a contract with anybody. It's a positive vote to move forward to negotiate the terms. W • 10L A � There's some terms that I think need to be resolved. Right now there's an ask of $7 million for the county to put into the golf course. I'm assuming there's some flexibility on that. That's a number that needs to be negotiated. � - — * No matter what we do with that property, if it's going to be a passive park, a golf course, whatever we do with it in that regard, it's going to cost taxpayers' dollars. We now have in front of us a proposal where we will be spending some taxpayer dollars to improve a golf course that we own, but we'll get a rate of return on it. We'll get a percentage of the gross revenue of the overall project. Now, the golf course may lose money. That doesn't matter to us. We'll still get 3 percent of the gross revenue to the golf course, and the maintenance and all of that will be on the -- on ClubCorp. There will be no expenditure from the county going forward. So with the understanding that there's some issues that need to be resolved, I'm going to simply read the recommendation from staff: To authorize staff to negotiate a land lease and operator agreement with BigShots Golf, a division of ClubCorp USA, Inc., for the construction and operation of a public golf course and entertainment - •• April 27, 2021 complex at the former Golden Gate Golf Course property for subsequent -- subsequent consideration by the Board. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So there's a motion on the floor. Is there a second? I'll second it. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Could I make a comment? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead. Yes. plqk � COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I just wanted to say briefly -- I mean, actually, Commissioner Saunders said exactly what I wanted to also make clear is that we're going through some steps in three separate projects. I do want to throw a shout out to Mr. Klaas who has just been so available, has answered so many of our questions. I mean, I can only speak for me, but he's a great representative who understands this whole project, and I think the reason why I didn't have as many questions is because he spent time in my office. And I hope he's a big part of this. He's local, understands things, and so thank you very much, sir. Just a very brief question, and it might keep us all from getting 100 emails from people. There will be six holes that have two tees. So if somebody wants to play 18 holes, they don't have to play six holes again. They could play 18 holes, correct, Mr. Pillsbury? MR. PILLSBURY: Absolutely, Commissioner. There will be multiple tees on every hole. So the idea is to create lots of different combinations so that you never have to play the same hole again. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You know those diehard golfers are going to send us all emails. MR. PILLSBURY: Oh, 100 percent. And listen, that's why Jack's so excited about this project. I mean, it's an architectural challenge, right, to create a different golf hole. So the sightlines are very different from a different tee box, so it really actually feels like a different golf hole. Page 67 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes, sir. Thank you. MR. PILLSBURY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I'm going to support the motion this morning and, of course, the second, just -- but I said what I said before. I still have those same reservations and concerns. And just so you know, Commissioner LoCastro, every time I walk up to the tee, it's a new hole even if I've already been there. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, me, too. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So it's a -- I certainly commend Commissioner Saunders for the efforts that he's made in Golden Gate with the Enterprise Zone and everything that we're doing in Golden Gate City proper, and I think this would be a wonderful addition to what you've already started and accomplished for that community. So I'm going to support the motion for now, and, of course, as my concerns get addressed and answered, we'll make a decision when we bring that back. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'm going to support the motion as well. I think the -- you know, I like the idea of bringing something to the community. My reservations are the same -- and I'll just say that one of my biggest concerns is, is that you know, as a former litigator, I always have to look at the downside, and the downside seems to me that if the county ends up having to -- gets the property back, let's say, for whatever reason, then we have a property that we've already invested money in for golf that maybe hasn't worked again and a building that really only has one use. I mean, the building isn't going to have any other kind of use. So these are the things that I'm concerned about that, in this negotiating process, I want someone to at least keep in - •i April 27, 2021 mind while we're negotiating these -- the term for whatever agreement's going to come back to the Board. That's all. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. We have a motion on the floor and a second, and we are following the directions of staff in their executive summary as spoken by Commissioner Saunders. Again, we are not approving this. We're asking for more details and, as Commissioner McDaniel says, the devil's in the details. 4t' So thank you very much. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) �N CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you. MR. KLATZKOW: Commissioners, may I make a suggestion? This is an outlier deal with a lot of holes in it and a lot of ramifications. I'd like the ability to, as this thing's being negotiated, to be able to go to Commissioner Saunders with different proposals, have Commissioner Saunders give out the feedback to it. This is going to be -- again, a lot of holes in this deal. It's an outlier deal. And I think you'll get a better deal if staff and I can do that, assuming Commissioner Saunders is agreeable to this. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm very comfortable with that, sir. You understand this probably better than most given your background in the law. MR. KLATZKOW: I've been negotiating deals for many, many years, and I'm telling you this is going to be a difficult one. April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I'm comfortable. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't have any issue in terms of being -- I'm not sure if that would be, like, a liaison from the Board to your office or how that would ever work, as long as you make sure there are no Sunshine issues, no public records issues, that sort of thing. I'm okay with participating with you in negotiating or helping to come to terms. I don't have an issue with that. MR. KLATZKOW. Okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Anyone els (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So, so be it. , That's the way it will continue. to., '%, 4 '* MR. WILLIG: Thank you, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. k COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I want to thank the Board, at least take a quick second. It was mentioned at one point that Golden Gate City had been somewhat ignored from time to time and that they had to do a lot of things on their own to get the amenities that were necessary. There are almost 30,000 people living in Golden Gate City. There are over 29,000 people living there now, and this is the last step in a process to really improve the quality of life in that community. And so I want to thank the Board for at least going this far to begin the negotiations. I think this will be a -- I use a term that somebody else had said, a game changer for that community plus it will be an amenity for the entire county that will be something that will work very well with our sports complex and other things we're doing. So I just want to thank the Board for your consideration this morning, and I want to thank the folks with BigShots and ClubCorp. That was an excellent presentation and really cleared up a lot of stuff. So I'm looking forward to hopefully coming back -- I want to set a deadline. I want to come back the second meeting in May. Now, Page 70 April 27, 2021 we may not have an agreement by the second meeting in May, but I want to set that as a deadline -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think that the -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- to plan on coming back. If it takes another couple weeks, that's fine but let's shoot for the second meeting in May to have the agreements that are necessary to have this put in place. That's going to put a burden on everybody, but let's get 'er done. �� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. Let's get it don Item # 11 A PRESENTATION FROM THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ON THE STATUS OF THE COUNTY COASTAL STORM RISK MANAGEMENT FEASIBILITY STUDY; AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO SIGN A NON -BINDING LETTER IN SUPPORT OF THE RECOMMENDED PLAN IDENTIFIED IN THE COLLIER COUNTY STORM RISK MANAGEMENT FINAL REPORT; AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE FINANCIAL & MANAGEMENT SERVICES, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO SIGN A NON -BINDING LETTER OF FINANCIAL SELF CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL CAPABILITY FOR AGREEMENTS, AND AUTHORIZE BOTH LETTERS TO BE PROVIDED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS - MOTION TO ACCEPT PRESENTATION, AUTHORIZE COUNTY MANAGER TO SIGN THE NON -BINDING LETTER AND HAVE STAFF WORK WITH DR. SAVARESE REGARDING A TASK FORCE — APPROVED MR. OCHS: Commissioner, that takes us to Item 11A. This Page 71 April 27, 2021 was your other morning time -certain here -- excuse me -- time -certain hearing item. It's a recommendation to accept a presentation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the status of the county Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study; also to authorize the County Manager to sign a nonbinding letter in support of the recommended plan identified by the Corps; authorize the Corporate Financial Management Services director to sign a nonbinding letter of financial self -certification; and authorize both letters to be provided to the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Ms. Amy Patterson will begin the presentation this morning. Amy? Mo-. I*. * � CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If I may, just a few remarks. I have spoken to some of the public and certainly staff about this issue, but I really want to put it on the record in this meeting at this time. I asked for this to come forward purely for informational. I never wanted a nonbinding letter of support. I never expected documents to be signed. This is the first meeting, public meeting with the full board that we have ever had since this plan has been brought forward in being created. That means whether there is an agreement for a nonbinding support, this is really very informational. I know a lot of you have concerns, some valid concerns about this. But in no way do I expect this to be signed, sealed, delivered. And I think staff is going to repeat this again just so everyone is clear. There is no "this is it," "this is the plan." This is really a public meeting so that everyone can take a look at this plan. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And just in that vein, is there --is there a clock ticking for us on this? There is a clock ticking? MR. OCHS: Yes. And Ms. Patterson will explain that in the Page 72 April 27, 2021 presentation, sir. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, she'll explain that. Because even though whatever action we discuss today, I'm wondering if this isn't important enough that we have a workshop on this. I mean, this is the -- I realize probably the long distant future of the county -- because this is something that will be decades in the making, but I'm just throwing that out there that maybe it's important enough that we have a workshop to discuss this where we can focus on this and not have other things on the agenda. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good. Thank you. MS. PATTERSON: Okay. Good morning. Amy Patterson, for the record. I'm the Director of the Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees, and Program Management. As Commissioner Taylor indicated, we're here at her request to have the Army Corps give a presentation on where this process is, and the second part is to discuss these nonbinding letters of support. As Commissioner Taylor also completely accurately said, this is just a step in the process. This is not a determination on what ultimately will be constructed, if anything. So how we wanted to take this forward is we're going to turn it over to the Corps by Zoom. They're going to walk you through where we are and tell you some really important information about this process, and then staff will be back up to talk about the nonbinding letters of support and answer any questions of the Board at that time. So with that, we'll hand it over to the Corps. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. OCHS: Good morning. MR. HUGHES: Good afternoon or, excuse me, good morning. Dan Hughes. I am the Chief of the Planning Resources Section for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I'm residing in Norfolk District, Page 73 April 27, 2021 and I really appreciate the opportunity to give this briefing today and answer any questions that the County Commissioners may have on this project. You know, it has been about two -and -a -half years of work working with the county and, you know, we're here today to answer any questions, and if there are any follow-up meetings or anything that is additionally needed, we're more than happy to sit down with you and talk about any path to the project as we go through it. Okay. Let me see if I can get my screen to share here so everyone can see. Okay. Just to note, I also have a couple of other people in the room with us. And -- Ashton Burgen (phonetic) is the project manager for this project. I also have some of my lead planners, my engineers with us as well. And, you know, if required, I can bring in their expertise, and they can introduce themselves for that. Can everyone see the presentation fine? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. * ' '* MR. HUGHES: Okay. Okay. All right. So let's -- okay. So, I mean, our purpose here is to provide just a general project update to the County Commission, address any questions, you know, and, if possible -- we'll talk more about the letter of approval. I understand what the County Commissioners said there at the beginning. You know, it's not something that we're looking -- you know, we need signed at the end of this meeting. Certainly, we can continue to work with you -all and answer any questions for it. Some of the basic information is that, you know, who are reports [sic]? When our reports are approved by the chief of engineers, General Spellmon up at headquarters. Before the -- you know, as part of that process, you know, for the transmittal to Congress, they do like to see that there's a letter of support, some sort of, you know, understanding the county understands its final commitments. But please also understand at this time a letter of approval or financial Page 74 April 27, 2021 support does not actually commit the county to actually any type of construction or actually any funding at that time. That comes much later when we actually move closer to actual project construction. We'll just start with the bottom line up front as we use within the Army Corps of Engineers. You know, our recommended plan is a combination of structural measures, and structural measures -- these are structures that we're going to be building to keep water out of those areas. Nonstructural, these are areas where we can, you know, help reduce damage to structures, but we do intend that -- you know, there may water that gets into those areas. We're going to be looking at some portions of beach renourishment, beach stabilization, and also some of the critical infrastructure throughout the community, fire stations, police stations, things like that. Total first cost, that's in today's dollars for the project, is roughly $2.1 billion. And that is a significant amount of funding on both sides. We understand that. But it also comes with a long-term commitment. You know, we're working, you know, cooperatively over the next 50 years. For the beach side of the project, this includes eight cycles of nourishment, so about every seven years, with the last one being a little shorter, we're going to be working, you know, with the county to renourish those beaches to make sure that the berm area or the wearable features of those berms are renourished and that the dunes, which are our protective feature, are stabilized. You know, looking at some of the average annual benefits every year, you know, it was about 1 point -- or excuse me -- 158 million. The average annual cost is about 100 million a year. When we look at this, our benefit -to -cost ratio, that's our BCR, we look at it as it's -- right now it's sitting at about 1.6 for the project overall. Overall, you know, when we do our budgeting and our planning, we Page 75 April 27, 2021 do apply contingency for things that could not be accounted for in the study. Things -- you know, changes in prices of, like, fuel, material cost, things like that. So the project does have a 31 percent contingency applied to the overall $2.1 billion, okay, so that's what that adds up to in there. The overall study authority comes from our 2000 -- 2007 Water Resources Development Act. So this is Section 4033, which allows the Corps of Engineers to actually work with Collier County to study hurricane storm damage reduction in the vicinity of Vanderbilt Beach, Park Shore, Naples beaches. You know, what really got this study off the ground was the budget -- the bipartisan Budget Act of 2018. During this time there were a lot of storms going up and down the East Coast, and so at that time Congress passed this 2018 supplemental bill which actually fully funded this feasibility study. You know, the feasibility studies are designed to be a three-year project and $3 million in costs. That's what Congress has set in law for the Corps of Engineers to get through these processes. But with this in 2018, they actually gave us the full funding. Typically, these are cost shared at 50150 where the Corps would provide $1.5 million, and the local sponsor would also pay $1.5 million for the overall project. The study started out with looking at focused areas both in the north county and then in the southern portion of the county around Marco Island. And, you know, we continue to see this in -- you'll see that as we go through this -- you know, and please pay attention to these shaded areas that are numbered 1 through 6. These are areas that we believe we could focus in on our concentration areas. As we move through the study, we developed these areas for analysis in places that we could work with. Okay. The background is to analyze and evaluate the county's exposure to coastal storm risks and develop alternatives, see if we can Page 76 April 27, 2021 manage risk to residents, industries, businesses that are critical to the nation's economy. That's why the Corps of Engineers always participates in these things. You know, we want to make sure that we can help the county create a long-term strategy for resilience. Some of the things to remember is that, you know, there are things that we can partner with. Some of the things, you know, in areas that we can work with Collier County, but the Corps of Engineers can't be, like, the 100 percent solution. You know, there are areas that, you know, due to, you know, cost share or the benefit -to -cost ratio in some of these projects that, you know, the Corps of Engineers cannot participate in and cannot recommend for the support of those areas, you know, strictly because, you know, it's basically outside our ability to cost share on those project areas. Overall, you know, we believe that this creates a good first step for overall resilience with the county. It's a good partnership and allows us to partner on areas where we can and then will allow the county to focus on areas where we can't partner on. Okay. Also associated with the study, we conducted an environmental impact statement. It's been prepared. It's still in the draft process. You know, once this study is complete and signed by the chief of engineers, eventually it will go through a couple of other headquarters and other federal agencies for review, and then once we get authorization from the Office of Monetary Budget, the assistant secretary of the Army will sign the Environmental Impact Statements for the project. The overall project, you know, is based within our concept of -- I'm getting a little feedback there -- within the concept of examining problems, opportunities, objectives, and constraints. Now, I just want to highlight the overall objectives here for that. You know, we're really focusing on coastal storm risk associated with damages and economic loss from wave action and flooding Page 77 April 27, 2021 inundation. And so when you get these storms coming ashore, they have the power to overtop beaches, go back into the community, and flood and damage those communities back there. We want to try to manage that risk to critical infrastructure because we realize that after the storm, you know, when we're pulling ourselves all back together, critical infrastructure is what's needed most, you know, police stations, fire stations, areas that are critical for the reopening of government and services to the community at large. We want to manage the risk of damage impacts to environmental resources, you know, understanding that there are vital resources and environmental conditions that exist in Collier County that are very unique to the area, to the region. We want to make sure that we're looking out for those, trying to reduce any impacts that we can. &&I %L Finally, we also want to make sure that we're managing risk to life, health, and safety during storms. So we want to be able to look at our projects and say, you know, if we build this here, does this increase risk to public safety, or does it decrease the risk to public safety? And so we want to make sure that we're always decreasing the overall risk, you know, and make sure that we're protecting people's lives with the structures that we can create. Okay. Existing conditions, we throw in here just so that -- you know, we do work with the county, with the county staff to understand the existing conditions, but I'm sure -- I'm going to skip through this. You guys are probably the people most in know of the county's existing conditions but at the same time, you know, the county is at risk of damages. You know, I think we all remember Hurricane Irma, you know; there was significant amount of damages that occurred from that, but that was still not a direct hit. You know, as it came by, it caused significant damages for -- to the county, but if April 27, 2021 we -- you know, we're always looking out for those ones that are going to come truly perpendicular from the coast, come across the Gulf of Mexico, things like that. Those could be very scary storms, as we saw with Hurricane Katrina, when they come directly at a coastal environment or like most recently in Mexico Beach up in the Panhandle where a storm can really start to push a lot of that water directly at a beach. Okay. Some of the things we also take into account with our studies is sea level change. You know, we utilize -- you know, in Naples there is a gauge for recording average sea level rise and things like that. We're utilizing what we call the -- you know, the Army Corps' intermediate curve. We look at sea level change and so that when we design our features, we incorporate the additional heights for our expected sea level change. And so this project really tracks -- you know, a lot of our designs are utilizing the intermediate curve. And so when we design them for today's standards and we say, you know, this is going to be X feet high, we then want to make sure that we add in the 1.6 feet additional height, because we want to make sure that our project can handle, you know, increases in sea level rise, but it also -- we also tend to also look at, you know, our studies from much further out. And so a lot of our designs are also designed so that they could be adapted, and we do adaptive manage it so that if we do start tracking over the next 50 years at the high curve where that 1.6 could jump to four feet, that we can adaptively manage these projects and increase the heights, as needed, to structures or to do elevations and things like that that we need to do. The study looked at a variety of alternatives. You know, one of the things we did realize, you know, initially this study was primarily focused in on beach stabilization and really looked at a really coastal effort. But as the study began, we also started to look at what we Page 79 April 27, 2021 call back bay components. You know, when looking at, you know, what happens to the shoreline but immediately, you know, as you get those coastal barrier islands, what happens if the water gets past those into the bay and into those communities behind it or what if the water comes in through the inlets and, you know, basically overfloods those areas in the back area? And so we looked at the entire county initially for just the beach. We just wanted to do a beach watch. We looked at, you know, all the way from the top of the northern end of the county all the way down through Marco Island and looked at each beach segment to see what we could do for that. Then we also started to look at what we could do for these what I call back bay components, where we would look at if we want to do the beach and we want to do a structural component. Now, keep in mind, a structural component in this case is meaning that we're going to be utilizing a beach dune, our beach stabilization to create sort of a levy effect on the beach with that dune, but we also want to make sure that we have structural components that don't allow the water to seep [sic] low through the navigation inlets. We would put a structural element there or a gate that could be closed and operated at times of these critical storm surges. So that, you know, normally the gates would be open most -- you know, most days. If you've got a hurricane approaching, you know, there'll be a plan created for when the gates would close. But the idea is to seal off the beach and the inlet to prevent water from going past that area, okay. But keep in mind, you know, with these, there's also -- we're required to look at opportunities for nonstructural, because we realize that our structural elements that we build -- if we want to build a gate to close off an inlet or we want to build a beach defensive line, these can be pretty significant in cost. And so we also look at nonstructural areas to see where, if we can't afford to do those l April 27, 2021 structural features or there's just not enough economic benefits or damages that would be reduced in those areas or the -- just sheer price of putting those structural features in outweighs the actual project benefits, then we look at nonstructural features where we can do elevation floodproofing. You know, we can elevate a home to get it up and above the water, things like that. But then we also look at combinations of it, because we realize when we're looking at sort of a countywide analysis of this, structural isn't going to work everywhere. We can fill in some places with nonstructural, and there might actually be places where we can do neither, and we have to pay attention to those things. And so we created these combination plans. Q%kL ` a Initially at an earlier junction in the plan, at one time we did have this alternative called 4A, but it's really been -- it's been excluded. The actual current recommended plan is Alternative 4, which is a combination of structural and nonstructural measures utilizing beach and dune, structural gates in areas where we can, and then nonstructural in other areas where we cannot do those structural elements, okay. I just want to give you guys -- start giving you some more depth onto this and how this all comes together. You know, it really starts with looking at -- you know, we start looking at beaches and how we're going to protect them. We start looking at our borrow areas. You know, currently the county has invested and utilized some of these borrow areas, these offshore borrow areas. T 1 and T2, they're approximately 30 nautical miles offshore of the City of Naples. Unfortunately, there aren't any -- currently aren't any identified closer borrow areas. So this did represent a significant amount of costs, transportation cost of this material to the beach. But we are looking at about almost nine million cubic yards of sand that's going to be deposited on these county beaches for the protection, okay. April 27, 2021 We do know that, you know, the sand should be available for the next 50 years. There should be plenty of sand out there. We've worked with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, BOEM, as a partner on there, and they're one of the cooperating agencies on these studies. They'll be utilizing our NEPA documents for their own certification and use of these borrow areas when we get ready to do this. Our economic modeling. The Corps utilizes certified models. There are a lot of economic models out there that people often come to us and say, well, my economic model shows this, you know, and then you go to a different region, and they bring in some other professor and say, well, the economic shows this. At the Corps of Engineers, we have standard economic models that we utilize, and they get certified by experts, and they go throughout the nation and do independent peer reviews and things like the economic models. So the economics that we apply here in Collier County are the same economic models that we're using over in Miami -Dade, the same ones that we're currently using down in the Florida Keys projects, the current ones that we're using over in San Francisco or up in Maine. So they apply to the nation, and they get developed that way. You know, currently as I already stated, we're utilizing the intermediate sea level curve. We utilize a structure inventory based on the Collier County assessor data and Florida DEP statewide building footprints so that when we go in there and look at the buildings, you know, we can get their certified elevations if there's -- if they're available to make sure that we have the proper elevation for these structures so that when we -- our models say that water's coming in, we get the correct height that the building is at so we can see how the flooding then meets those waters and what type of damages have been applied. April 27, 2021 For benefits we're required to utilize a 50-year period of analysis although, you know, many of these projects that we do with the Corps of Engineers, you know, they are designed to last more than 50 years. And so they -- you know, the county, at the end of the 50 years, can continue to utilize these projects, can continue to gain benefits from these projects, but our economic analysis, you know, what we report up to Congress, utilizes a standard 50-year period of analysis. In looking at some of our beach analysis and structural une measurements, we did try to optimize it. We tried to find the best height or the best fit, you know, where there's a best price point, unfortunately. And we look at both 10 feet, 12 feet, and 14 feet for the dune heights that we plug into these economic models so that we can then find out what the damages and benefits are for the project and what also is the residual risk to these projects. Because as we all know, that when we have a 14-foot-high dune, there will still be residual risk to Collier County. You know, the effort here is to, you know, provide the most benefits to the most frequent types of storms, but there can also be significant storms that can still overtop these features, and it does create residual risk, and we do try to stress these within our reports, and any time that we present to anybody, that we always caution everybody that there are -- even when these projects are built, there are always residual risks. You know, some of these storms out there, these storm surges can be monstrous. You know, we're all familiar with Hurricane Katrina and its 35 feet of storm surge -- or 38 feet of storm surge. So, you know, something of that size could easily overtop the 14-feet-high dune. But, you know, the typical storms, the ones, the Is, the 2s, you know, that's more -- you know, they're more frequent. That's what we're looking at to try to provide benefits for so that we April 27, 2021 don't have to create a -- you know, because as we design for those significant heights, there's also a significant cost increase to these projects, okay. So overall, our recommended plan, it's a mixture of structural features that includes storm surge barriers at inlets, there will be a mixture of sector gates, sluice gates, tainter gates. These are various types of gates that are designed -- you know, the larger the gate is, you know, where we're expecting a lot more pressure on the system as storms go by, those would be, like, a tainter gate. Some of the sluice gates, you know, up on the Gordon River, we could probably deal with, you know, some sluice gates in those areas because there's not as much water pressure on the overall system, okay. 1"W-1w, 11* Included in there is pump stations. When we do seal these areas off, when we try to hydrologically separate these areas within the plan, we want to make sure that we're paying attention to water on the other side, because there will also be significant rainfall events associated with the storm surge, and we will want to make sure that we have pumps in place to put water back on the other side of these facilities. 114, k At Wiggins Pass there would be two jetties to help stabilize that inlet for the construction of the gates. We'd be looking at almost over 11 miles of beach and dune, berm fill, beach stabilization. And then on our nonstructural measures, we'd be looking to work with the public. And the nonstructural is always -- for this part it would be voluntary for the public. And so we looked at the study, and we can see that we can do about 290 structures where we could recommend that we could work with the property owners to provide some sort of elevating of the structure, lift it off the ground, put it up on new piers, get it to a higher elevation in case there is storm surge that comes into the area so that as water comes in, the structure's 0-1=11 April 27, 2021 elevated, and the water should be underneath the structure and, you know, the contents, that damaging factor to people's homes where you frequently see after a lot of these storms where, you know, the contents of people's homes, you know, they're taking out all the drywall, but they're also taking out all their personal belongings, dumping them on the side of the street because, you know, when that water comes in, it comes in with a lot of silt and a lot of damaging forces. rzNqw We'd also be looking at floodproofing about 490 structures. When we floodproof structures, it's generally to about three feet in elevation that we can floodproof structures. Currently there are no structures that would be recommended for acquisition or demolition. Okay. And as I said before, the total project first cost, that is in today's dollars, is about $2.1 billion. You know, there is a -- every seven-year, a renourishment cycle that we would be partnering with the county on to maintain these beaches, to maintain these dunes associated with the project. Now I just want to get into a little more of the specific by -area details to help you understand what we're going to be working with. These are basically the planning areas or portions of the county that we're looking to do structural features. These are areas that when we first went down -- if you recall some of these areas, we went down the entire beach of the county. We looked at Planning Area 1, 2, 3, 4, you know, and 6, and looked at all the beaches to say, if we could just do the beach alone, that the beach would have significant benefits if we just worked on the beach. And then if we looked at, well, could we close it off with a gate, are there significant benefits for that? So that was done early on in the project. What carried through with the project based on the economic benefits are areas -- planning areas -- what we call Planning Areas 1, April 27, 2021 3, and 5, as you can see these portions of the county. You know, so what we'd be looking at in Planning Area 1 is we would start off -- and, you know, our goal is to make sure that water doesn't wrap around or get around the beach protected feature. And so there are some dunes and walls and lower berms that will be needed to help us prevent that wraparound structure so, you know, when you're lugging up there, you know, at the very top, you know, we'll have a wall coming down the wall -- down the road. We'd be having a surge barrier at Wiggins Pass. You know, our beach and dune berm fill material there, and then on Vanderbilt there we would also be coming another flood wall that would run in on the interior, because if water does get into that area, we want to make sure that it doesn't backtrack around the protected features that we (indiscernible). And this is also what we'd see within Planning Area 3 on Seagate Drive. You could have a flood wall, a gate at Doctors Pass, and then down on the beach berm and fill down there at the end. On Planning Area 3 we did extend the beach dune berm a little to prevent the wraparound. That was actually more cost effective than running a wall into the interior of the community. And so we were -- that little shaded green area that you see at the very southern area of Planning Area 3, that's designed to prevent wraparound into those communities so that water doesn't get around the Planning Area 3. Then in Planning Area 5 which, you know, you're probably familiar with the Gordon River, Tamiami Trail, they're installing flood wall and gates to prevent storm surge from going fully up the river. Further south, you know, we did initially look at if there were ways to put a gate closer there. But as you know, the further south is the environmental preserve, Fish and Wildlife Service in the cobra zone that prevents us from building anything in those areas. So, you -1 i• April 27, 2021 know, we can definitely see that water has a route in through that area. It's really limited us to where we could work in this area, but we felt that there's a good area right there on Tamiami Trail where we can create a significant feature, but this also gives us the benefit to that whole Planning Area 5. They're looking at over 17,000 structures in that area, including the Naples Airport. So each of these, when we're talking about structural solutions, you know, we're looking at almost 40,000 structures that are behind some sort of structural feature or structural protection, okay, for the overall project. Portions of the community where we could not participate and in those structural features are areas -- Planning Area 2, 4, and 6. These are the areas. So, you know, 4, when you look at it, as we discussed, the Gordon River, water's going to get up in there. We did not have a way to significantly block it. And so we do -- you know, water will have the ability to travel up the Gordon River through the inlet or from further south down into the wildlife preserve there. Water -- as you can see, there's already breaches in those -- that barrier island. Water's going to get into those areas, so we were looking at what we can do for nonstructural elevations, floodproofing, things like that. And then in Planning Area 2, we did look at this area as well for, initially, on the beach. You know, we determined we could not close off the pass there, but we did want to make sure that we looked at the possibility of any floodproofing or elevations. This area actually is, you know, one of the more higher areas within the community, and it does have that nice mangrove front out in front of it which does provide some of the protection for it in our analysis. And then down on Marco Island, you know, we did look at the structures there for elevation and floodproofing and what we could do April 27, 2021 down there in that area, to look at -- that included, like, Goodland and Isle of Capri, you know, to include some of those areas in there. And so we wanted to be able to do a nonstructural for those areas so that we can work with these communities or those structures that are most at risk or could receive damages, and they could most benefit from this project. Also included within the project is our critical infrastructure. Now, when we first looked at -- you know, we worked with emergency operations. We worked through Gary McAlpin in the beginning. Gary's a great help to this overall project. Miss him; sad to be retired. But we worked out -- we initially identified over 88 structures -- critical infrastructure that we wanted to protect. From that, some of them are already behind the natural -- the structural protection, and so then we look at those areas where we have nonstructural and make sure that we can then go in and offer floodproofing for those critical infrastructure in those areas, okay. So we'd be looking at 32 facilities. We would look across the county if we're doing some sort of floodproofing to make sure that these critical infrastructures are more resilient to flood damage and storm surge. Turning to some of the environmental work that we've also been working on. You know, throughout our environmental -- our EIS that we've been working on, we've been partnering with various state, local agencies, you know, some of the main partners that we've been working with for, like, the federal level are the EPA; National Marine Fisheries Service; you know, also is Fish and Wildlife Services, they should be on this; BOEM, Bureau of Ocean Emergency Management to look at the offshore borrow areas and things like that that we'd need. Currently within our environmental impact analysis, you know, we do anticipate there are some minor impacts that will be created - ii April 27, 2021 from the structural construction. Mangroves, about 10-and-a-half acres. Hard bottom habitat, you know, we do realize that there is hard bottom just offshore and off of Naples, and so we've been working really closely with Florida DEP to make sure that we minimize any impacts to hard bottoms for those. There's also, within the bay, some submerged aquatic A vegetation. Vegetated dunes, you know, when we go in there, the current dunes within those structural areas we'll be -- yes, we'll be cutting out the current vegetation, but when we come back and when we build up that dune, we'll be replanting those dunes with more vegetation. We also do make sure that we also take into account sediment transport. You know, going past some of these inlets, making sure that the sand is able to continue to migrate down the coast or the way that it typically migrates across some of these inlets. So, you know, as part of our beach analysis, you know, for instance, you know, if we're doing work in Planning Area 1, you know, the southern end of 1, you know, the beach renourishment in those should be able to continue to feed some of the beaches to the south in Planning Area 2 and down in Planning Area 3. Also associated with this, whenever the Corps of Engineers does work on beaches, there is a public -use requirement. As you guys are very familiar, you know, the State of Florida claims ownership for most of the -- up to the high-water mark from the beaches. As part of any work that we do on our beaches, the Corps of Engineers is required to make sure that -- because we're spending public funds throughout the nation, you know, people throughout the nation would be -- you know, their taxes pay for all of these projects that we do so that we're all in this together -- we do require that there is public use. And so specifically within the Planning Areas 1 and 3, we would be looking at -- the county does have to require some sort of easement 0m April 27, 2021 for public access for these projects. So if we're going to be building, you know, or redoing the beach in Planning Area 3, we would need to resolve some of these beach -access issues through either easements or right-of-ways, whatever we can obtain, so that we can guarantee that the public has the right to get to the beach. ,.,q, � Now, the STOA (phonetic) understands, we do -- we're very familiar with working for this. You know, there's been a lot of beaches within the state of Florida that, you know, the Corps has worked and currently renourishes on annual cycles and things like that. You know, it's just one of those things that we all have to continue to work on. Moh-I llk� � I*, Okay. Our recommended plan does -- as I stated before, does have residual risk to it. And it is important that everybody understands that, you know, while we can participate in some of these areas, you know, while we can design protective features, there are still residual risks, and there will be still work to do on the overall county resilience to make the county safer from these coastal storms, okay. Ink. NL And so after our plan, there's still 64 percent of the future damages, so we do anticipate that, you know, windstorms come into these areas. Some of them will have the ability to overtop some of these features. You know, there will still be structures that get into some of these areas. There will still be water that can get into some of these areas where we could not partner with -- with the county on, you know, and there's still significant numbers of structures that could be exposed to inundation even with implementation of the plan. You know, either these areas where we could not justify the cost to benefit. There's also some structure types that we cannot work with. For instance, it's very difficult within the Corps of Engineers to elevate mobile homes, just in the nature of the construction of those April 27, 2021 things. But we do believe that, you know, we are contributing to the overall resilience of the community and, you know, while we can partner on our portion, it does leave work to be done that the community does need to continue to work with, okay. Nonstructural measures will reduce damage to structures expected to sustain damage. So some of them, you know, while we do -- if we floodproof a building, when we floodproof it, basically we're going to make it safe up to about three feet. You know, if it's -- water comes in and hits, like, a four feet level, it could still receive damages above that floodproofing. rN3` And there are limits that we can do on floodproofing because at certain points the weight of the actual water, you know, that we're trying to hold out with that floodproofing and those materials puts too much pressure on the structured walls and can actually push a structure in. � - " '* So we always want to make sure that we're very careful with any floodproofing activity that we do to make structures, you know, floodproofable to certain levels, but there still could be residual damages when that water exceeds those levels, okay. So -- and then, as I have repeated, it's not designed to be the complete singular solution to eliminate coastal storm risk. There is still significant risk to the community from coastal storms. We always encourage people to heed the word of their Emergency Management, Emergency Operations, you know, local officials when any storm is approaching. Please be -- you know, for everyone that is listening, you know, we may be out there just days before finishing up construction of a project, but we still need to heed the words and be safe, because there's always residual risk. We want to make sure that the community always understands these residual risks and does not always -- you know, does not think that they're 100 percent Page 91 April 27, 2021 guaranteed safe. You know, we are trying to reduce damages, we are trying to reduce life loss and things like that, but sometimes these storms can still overpower these systems that we put in place. I'm getting there. I've got about three more slides. Just looking at some of the things that we've gone through, these are internal core milestones the Corps of Engineers used to track our studies. We started out with a cost -share agreement which was -- in this case it was very simple, because there is no cost share. It was fully funded by the federal government. We had a tentatively selected plan on March 26th. At that time the draft report was released to the public. We'd gone through an agency decision milestone where we presented to leadership within the Corps of Engineers to say, this is our recommended plan, and then we have an upcoming state and agency review where the report will be put out for public consumption again. It will be -- a copy of the report will be sent to the County Commissioners as well. It will also be sent to the Governor of Florida, various federal agencies, you know, to review the overall project and do that. Once we finish out with our state and agency review, we are looking at trying to finalize the report and get it in preparation for our Chief of Engineers General Spellmon's signature on that report and so that we can then align the study and put it in place, align it for our next what we call Water Resources Development Act. Congress passes a Water Resources Development Act once every two years; sometimes it's three years. The longest I think it's ever gone is maybe seven years. But they pass these budgetary acts that then implement or authorize the Corps of Engineers to proceed with the implementation of these projects. And so that's what that actual report is designed to do. It's to provide Congress sufficient information so that they can give us either a yea or a nay on whether or not they want to do this project, they want the Corps of Engineers Page 92 April 27, 2021 to work on this project. Generally, it's -- you know, we have a good BCR of 1.6 that should allow this project to be included into the next WRDA bill, and that would actually keep us in line so that we can then be eligible for construction funds. And so when I say that, only Congress can authorize us to move forward or authorize the actual project. And so they have to tell the Corps of Engineers that, yes, they accept the report, the conditions, they accept the recommended plan, and that it's okay to then move forward, and then we can then -- the Corps of Engineers can start putting our budget requests into our annual budget cycle to actually get construction authority to actually build and implement these projects. And so they do take a little time to go through. Currently, the project is on. You know, as I stated up front, we're mandated onto a three-year schedule by Congress, $3 million in three years, to go through this process and create these studies and recommend a recommended plan up to them for approval, okay. The next slide is really the last one. I just wanted to give you guys just a little bit of what happens afterwards. And so we're looking at our Water Resources Development Act in 2022. That's the next possible one that this project would qualify for. And then, again, that's up to Congress. If they don't pass one in '22, they could pass one in '23 or '24, but we want this project ready for when that next WRDA bill becomes -- when it starts to be developed, we want to make sure the project is ready to be included in there so that Congress can authorize and accept the recommended plan. Subject to their authorization and appropriations of funding from Congress, we would then move towards what we call a design agreement, which we would be looking at around 2023. And so that would begin -- that is when you'd first start to see some financial requirements from Collier County. As part of that executed agreement, you know, we'd be starting the design. Currently our Page 93 April 27, 2021 design -- and because we're limited to the three-year studies -- it used to be that these studies used to take about 22 years to complete, and they would be extensive, and we would study them to death, basically. But in 2012 everything changed, and we were limited to three years and $3 million to get these projects executed as quickly as possible. And so with that, we would then want to start looking at how quickly we can get through this project and executed design agreement. So once Congress authorizes the project in WRDA, we can then look towards executing a design agreement with the county, and we'll enter into a period of what we call preliminary engineering design. We will start designing some of the features. You know, we do realize we'll be looking at -- you know, in talking with the county staff, that the interest would be within the beach work first, starting on some of the beach nourishment activities while we design some of the gate enclosures, things like that. So we'd be looking at executing a project partnership agreement. Now, this is really where you start to get into a large-scale funding commitment is that project partnership. We'd be looking -- if everything stays on track, looking at about 2024 where we would start to require those significant cost shares for that portion of the project that we want to implement, okay. So please keep in mind that even though Congress -- we're asking Congress to authorize this entire project. The Corps of Engineers realizes $2 billion -- as a corporate engineer, I don't have $2 billion right now to work on this project, you know. We're going to get the funding just like everybody else, in incremental phase -able construction portions, and so that's why we also have some of these planning areas to help us break up the portions of the county into constructible units where we can then work, we can get our budgetary requirements, the sponsor can get their portion of their funds lined up April 27, 2021 so that we can work together most efficiently and then work our way through the project. But at any given time, you know, if you want to do Planning Area 1, then you focus in on Planning Area 1. It does not mean you have to do any work in Planning Area 2. It does not mean you have to do Planning Area 3. Those would be subject to additional partnership agreements and when the county is ready to build them and when the Corps of Engineers also can appropriate those funds forward. We would be looking at getting a new start designation for construction in 2025; June 2025. And that's when we'd actually start issuing the first contract for construction activity, okay. Overall, within our current analysis, we'd be looking at completing all construction by 2035. And you can see how this is -- it's a phased implementation because we all realize -- you know, if we did have the funding available and we wanted to do it all at once, that would be a lot of work, but it could be done. But at the same time, we typically do a lot of these projects in phased implementation. And so over a decade, we would be working with Collier County to implement different portions of this project in the order that Collier County wants to work on these portions of the project, okay. At this time, I mean, that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions. I can leave the slide show up. I could go back to any of the slides that you'd like to see or discuss, and whatever's convenient. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I do have a question. Thank you very much for this presentation. The project, the design, what percentage of deviation do you expect that you can tolerate in order to get funding? Meaning, I've heard that the neighbors can come back and you can work with the Page 95 April 27, 2021 neighbors and just because the project is as it is today, that it is going forward, that there's room for it to change. Can you -- can you tell me what percentage of the design do you -- would you tolerate with the Army Corps, tolerate in terms of modifying the design; 10 percent? MR. HUGHES: So that is -- that's a good -- that is a great question, and it really is, you know, project based. I mean, currently our designs are situated at a feasibility level of concept. That means around less than 10 percent of design. And so we do have a lot of design work still to do to bring each of these areas up to where we, you know, have a 100 percent design whereby we would issue a contract for those specific areas. Now, even as we go from 10 to 100 percent, there is going to be changes. We're going to have to look closely at areas where we plan to build walls, build gates, and make sure those areas are the correct alignment and things like that. &there's always variation in any construction. % 4V Okay. Now, there can be some areas that can -- there is some flexibility on some areas where we also will look at to say, you know, does this make sense? You know, prior to construction, we go to process what we call value engineering where we look at it and say, does that really make sense? We could do a lot more if we did it this way, and we could, you know, make slight design changes for that, okay. But also considering that, you know, we're looking at an end construction date of 2035. There are many processes within the Corps of Engineers where we can go back and look at these projects again. Once they are authorized by Congress, once you have this authorization, we can then use what we call Section 216 of -- I think it's WRDA 2014 that allows us to go back and reinvestigate areas and see if there's something has changed. We can say, you know, if the - •• April 27, 2021 economics have changed for that community or we've noticed something different or, you know, the engineering has changed and science has changed, we've learned something new, we can go back and look at these areas again, and you can continue to do this, you know, based off this project. Now, there would be cost -share requirements and get -- you know, making sure that -- you know, that we're working together on this. But there is -- I mean, so there's some flexibility within design itself. There's going to -- it's required to have some sort of flexibility to make sure that we get the best design possible when we're at 100 percent. But even after we design a feature and we've implemented that construction of that feature, it doesn't mean that we can't come back at a later date throughout the partnership, you know, the 50-year partnership of these projects, and look at them again. Some of the projects that the Corps of Engineers is currently doing on, like in Pinellas County and on Miami -Dade -- Miami Beach, excuse me -- Miami Beach. You know, those projects are over 50 years old and coming -- their end date -- our partnership's coming up, and so they're reevaluating them again, because those were just -- those are really beach stabilization more for recreation -type benefits, and now they're looking at them under coastal storm protections to see how they can improve those projects and make sure that they're up to date. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a lot more questions. MR. HUGHES: Does that answer? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, you did. I have -- I'm going to -- I'm going to turn, if none of my colleagues -- oh, for some reason I've got something going on here. Anyway, so just put your hands up, Commission. Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. I've got a number of Page 97 April 27, 2021 questions. One is, are there other areas right now that already, say, through this initial process and into construction in this same process? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Somewhere else. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Somewhere else, right. MR. HUGHES: Partnering with the Corps of Engineers? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. MR. HUGHES: You know, currently I know the Corps of Engineers is working in Flagler County. We have a long history of working with Pinellas County. As I said, that proj ect's been in existence over 50 years. You can see the initial, you know, where, you know, the entire beach disappeared and it was nothing but a seawall in front of some of these major hotels and stuff like that. So in the '70s they partnered with the Corps of Engineers to rehabilitate those beaches, rehabilitate that environmental condition. The same with Miami Beach; they had some really bad stuff. I mean, we worked -- you know, right now I'm based out of the Norfolk district. For over a decade I've worked out of the Jacksonville office, you know, and I worked on St. Johns County, Flagler County, Broward County, Miami -Dade, you know, Lee County, and Pinellas County, you know, major coastal communities. But at the same time, you know, this coastal storm protection is something new within the Corps of Engineers. In the past we really looked at beach stabilization as, you know, trying to protect the structures that are immediately adjacent to the beach, you know, that first row of housing, you know, that's really going to get the really big brunt impact of it. But the Corps of Engineers is starting to realize that, you know, these coastal storms and that associated storm surge goes much further inland and creates havoc in interior communities, which, you know, I think everyone saw on the news what happened with Mexico wMm April 27, 2021 Beach in that unfortunate community where it, you know, really went back into those neighborhoods. We saw a lot of -- we saw a lot of also this destruction on Hurricane Sandy up in New Jersey where it ripped right through some of the dune features that the community had or the natural dunes, and it crossed those bays and went into town into the next community in. And so we've really started expanding our work to address these coastal storm surge events. And so, yeah, it's been a change over the last decade to our reach and what we're trying to protect. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So, again, in terms of this particular process, looking at the storm damage in a much broader area than just beachfront, I mean, I'm just trying to get a sense of where is this happening -- where else is this happening, how is it happening, so that at least I have something to look at. MR. HUGHES: Currently -- yeah, currently, my staff are working on three Florida counties right now. We're working in Miami -Dade. You know, you probably heard it on the news where we're proposing a floodwall downtown Miami. We're also working with Monroe County in the Florida Keys. The Florida Keys is a very unique place. We can't create any type of beach -type defenses because it being an island -- and this is some of the same thing with Marco Island is that, you know, the water is going to come in and wrap around, but the Keys are even worse off because the water could be coming from the Gulf or the Atlantic side. And so, you know, it creates a lot of -- a lot of potential damage. And so we're doing a lot of non-structural work with the Florida Keys and Monroe County. Those are three activity projects that we're working on right now out of my office right now. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And just focusing in, obviously in District 2, the Area No. 2, which is, essentially, the April 27, 2021 Pelican Bay area, I made some notes, and I just want to make sure I understand what they mean. Number one is that there was a reference in your slide presentation that -- right, this is the one -- that there's only five structures that would be impacted in District 2. Is that what that means? MR. HUGHES: Those are structures where we can -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean Planning Area 2 kN MR. HUGHES: -- identify-- correct. In Planning Area 2, these would be structures that we've identified where we can justify our cost -to -benefit ratio. It does not mean that there's only five structures that would be impacted. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. It's cost -to -benefit ratio. MR. HUGHES: And we have to take into -- yeah. And so, like, when you have large-scale, you know, modern condominiums that are closer to the shore and things like that, a lot of their first floors are typically parking garages or a lobby and things like that, and that helps gets the residential units much higher in the air. And so, yeah, storm surge is going to come in, but the amount of damages, the structural damages are not, for us -- for partnership with the Corps of Engineers, the structural damage does not necessarily outweigh the cost of implementing those structural features. And so, yeah, it's pretty pricy to bring the sand to the beach to create beach structures, things like that. And so we have to -- so we look at the large areas to say, you know, what is the overall damages that would occur in this area if we don't do anything? And then if we do something, what are the damages reduced, okay. And that damages removed is what creates the economic benefit when we can say, you know, the benefit totals about 100 million annually or something like that. Then we have to weight that to the actual cost of implementing that feature. So in some areas, yes, where we might get 100 million annual benefits, we got 110 million annually in costs. Page 100 April 27, 2021 And so for the Corps of Engineers, our benefit -to -cost ratio falls below 1.0, which then prevents us, by our own regulations, from cost sharing in those areas. So it doesn't mean that they're -- we don't identify or see that there's risk or residual risk to these communities. It's just that our participation, by our own regulations, is very limited to what we can partner in. So that's why I always state, you know, this isn't the complete end-all for community resilience, but we can partner in where we can partner in and bring those federal dollars to Collier County to help solve a portion of the problem so that then Collier County can continue to work on the overall problem, you know, at -- you know, in these other areas as well as we need to. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Let me just run through a couple of other questions, because a couple things jumped out at me in Planning Area No. 3, which as I recall was the -- can you go to 3. That's the Vanderbilt Beach area. Am I right on that? MR. HUGHES: Uh-huh " `�� 6 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: fYes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, it's south. It's south. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sorry. That's -- no, it's No. 1. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, No. 1. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Number 1, as I recall, there was a reference about needing additional access -- MR. HUGHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- in those areas in order for some of these projects to move forward. Is that -- is that a condition -- MR. HUGHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- to any of this happening or -- MR. HUGHES: That is a condition to this happening. Yeah, unfortunately, that is -- you know, because we do assign recreational benefits to help the project out, but at the time, by law, when the Page 101 April 27, 2021 Corps of Engineers puts sand on a beach, we have to be able to guarantee that there is public access, which has been a law on the books. It was more designed for when we were doing beach stabilization for recreational and economic improvement, but the law still is there and still mandated, even though we're really -- we're stabilizing the beach, we're really trying to prevent coastal storm surge. And so our uses change, but the regulation is still there, and we still have to comply with that. So, yes, there is a slide there, you know, that -- I think you were referring to this slide here. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. `qw, MR. HUGHES: That -- you know, we basically -- all the circles we go through and we look at it and say, is there some sort of public access; we worked a lot with Gary and Andy to go through that. And we identified some areas where the county would need to obtain easements for right of access to that beach for us to work in those areas, okay. 6, - ""W '*,- You know, a good case of this recently that was probably in the news was up in Flagler County. You know, they did have difficulty obtaining some of these easements. Some individual holdouts on it, but eventually they were able to obtain the necessary easements to exercise that construction authority in time. And so it is something that we do recognize is controversial. That's why I've made sure that this was on our slide show, but this is a required commitment for the county, or the county needs to understand that we do need these access issues to do these beach projects. MR. OCHS: Commissioner Solis, it's Leo. You can see two of those three are up in Barefoot Beach, not necessarily on Vanderbilt Beach proper. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. No, I see that. They go all the way up to Barefoot. Page 102 April 27, 2021 MR. HUGHES: Correct. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: May I just ask a question to piggyback on what you said. Are these beach accesses permanent then, because -- MR. HUGHES: Correct. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- it's not something that's going to be lifted once the improvement MR. HUGHES: No. As long as this project is in existence for 50 years with each of these renourishments, we would expect that access to remain. At the end of the 50 years or anytime where the county chooses, you know, it doesn't want to do the project, then that would be up to you -all if you wanted to terminate those easements, things like that. **W.-W, 11* But at the same time there's also tremendous amount of economic benefit to those coastal communities. And so by providing beach access, you know, we're also implementing a -- you know, in front of these areas, you know, a renourishment every seven years on these projects, stabilizing that dune as a protected feature, because we all know the power of these storms. Once they get into these dune systems and, you know -- it is -- you know, I was living in Florida in St. Pete in 2005, and with those bad series of hurricanes that came through -- remember Hurricane Charley and everything coming through there, you know, you had so many repetitive storms week after week that, you know, there's not time to get out there and fix some of these dune features. And these dunes, you know, they take time, the vegetation to stabilize and things like that. And so, you know, we are working together to create these stable features in front of people's homes, those valuable properties out front, you know. And so there is -- I would think there is some sort of incentive to participate and work with the local community to obtain necessary easements. You know, we do recognize, you Page 103 April 27, 2021 know, how the property is owned, and, you know, the access that the State of Florida has. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And just --let me just finish up real quick on that same note. So the access requirement is essentially a statutory one for the Corps to contribute to say beach renourishment? MR. HUGHES: Correct. -,� (N\ COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And the -- is the extent of that access -- that's all defined in statutes -- V MR. HUGHES: Yes. —� COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- and promulgated in rules? MR. HUGHES: Yes, yes. -- W*o'N.V 11116, COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So MR. HUGHES: Generally, it requires a small amount of parking and some sort of, you know, easements where a person can traverse down to the beach to that amount. You know, in working with the county and working with Gary and Andy, we realize the county does have significant parking features throughout the county. It has also a significant bus system through the county that -- you know, that it could be reasonably assumed that a person could get off a bus and easily find an access to a beach. So I'm not necessarily as concerned about the parking as an actual access where someone could walk from the road down to the public area and portion of the beach. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And are the -- I mean, because in Planning Area 2, there's parking areas and access points basically at two beach access -- MR. HUGHES: Yes. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- at the two ends. And while there is maybe some access to the estuary on the land side, landward side of the beach, the two parking areas are at either end. So I'm Page 104 April 27, 2021 just -- I want to understand how any of this would affect Planning Area 2 given that it is a large area of the coast with an estuary that water would get into, obviously, if there was a major storm surge. MR. HUGHES: Well, currently Planning Area 2 is not designed for a structural element. There would be a non-structural there. So there's no -- there's no access requirements within Planning Area 2, if that was your question. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: There's no access even -- because -- well, then maybe I've confused myself. I thought that in order for there to be some participation from the Corps for nonstructural work, i.e., beach renourishment, that there had to be access. Q%kL ` a MR. HUGHES: For beach renourishment -- okay, so there's no -- there's no planned -- beach nourishment planned for Area 2. So this is all nonstructural in Planning Area 2. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And that's what I'm trying to understand. There's no beach renourishment planned in this plan that we're talking about, and that's because why? I'm just trying to connect the dots for myself and others. MR. HUGHES: Yeah. There are multiple reasons, you know, but it really comes down to the cost versus the benefits of it. And so in our analysis, looking at that, it is a tremendous amount of cost to bring material to that area, but then the damages that are reduced that creates the damages, basically, are lower than the other areas where we are able to apply structural features. And so the cost of the material -- if we wanted to close off that, put a gate structure there, the cost of that gate, those costs would not outweigh the economic damages presented. And so we have a BCR that is really below the threshold that we're required to have that is 1.0 of benefit -to -cost ratio. And so in this case, you know, the -- when we were doing the analysis on this Page 105 April 27, 2021 for Planning Areas 2 and 4 and 6, you know, each of those, the costs of creating those features really outweighed the benefit that we would get, but then also in Planning Area 6. We do have a significant issue with water coming from multiple directions. And so, you know, establishing just a beach for damage reduction, water's still going to get into those inlets by itself, you know, and there's a lot of, actually, canals on Planning Area 6 that will get a lot of water in those in that area. And so a nonstructural solution would work best for that area. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. That's all I had. Thank you. %& CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Sir, I'm Rick LoCastro, the commissioner that represents District 1, so a big chunk of that is Marco, Isles of Capri, and Goodland. So, I mean, you've answered some of my questions. Now, some of them have me very concerned that, you know, the cost of a structural solution is more than what -- you know, it outweighs what the damages are going to be type of thing but, you know, I sit there and go, wow. I know you've got some nonstructural solutions, but there's an awful lot, like I said, around Marco. Realizing you can't protect everything, my question is: Can you just elaborate -- I'm sorry? Can you just elaborate a little bit more on focusing on Marco, Isles of Capri, and Goodland as to what you think the beneficial nonstructural solution would be. I mean, there's a lot of people listening, and I don't want them to get the -- MR. HUGHES: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- wrong impression that we're writing those areas off because it's not cost effective. MR. HUGHES: No. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So could you elaborate a Page 106 April 27, 2021 little bit, sir. MR. HUGHE S : Exactly, okay. So when you look at those areas, I mean, certainly, like, you know, in Planning Area 6, you do have a healthy beach, you know, that does reduce damages, and that's coming in, but at the same time, you know, we look at that and say, can we do a structural feature there? How could we block water from getting there? And that's what structural means. We're going to stop the water from getting around on us. But when we really look at this area, you know, Marco Island is an -- it's an island for a reason. You know, the water can come in from multiple sides, even especially to the south, which is a -- you know, which is a preserve area there. It's very difficult to block off. And then the internal canal system itself that it has, when water comes in -- so if we were able to block it off from one direction, the water can still come in from another direction. But then when we look at the coastal community there, there is a lot of new development. Like I explained before, those coastal high-rises, you know, they have garages in the basements. They have that -- you know, that lobby, you know, second, third floor sometimes, you know, over these garages. That really reduces their structural damage that we're going to see. But then when we look around Marco Island, there's a lot of individual properties on Marco Island itself. And you can tell the difference -- when you drive around your community, you're going to -- it's easily -- you're easily able to see homes that are older versus homes that are brand new because the development -- the code for builders has changed significantly over decades, and you can see houses that are much higher -- they have a much higher elevation because the foundation that they've been placed upon is significantly higher. Page 107 April 27, 2021 So you have elevation requirements on a pad that these houses are going to be put upon that are much higher, and that gets them up out of that initial water levels. But then when you look at some of your older homes within your community, those are the ones we want to target because they are built basically on grade, you know, on natural elevation, things like that. And we want to make sure that we can do some work on some of those homes to get them elevated, to get them up higher out of the water to reduce the damages that they could be exposed to. And then there's also a lot of businesses that are in the community that also built somewhat on grade level, and so we want to offer floodproofing in those areas to be able to help those communities. You know, the water will come in. Hopefully it doesn't exceed that floodprooflng level, and so it should remain tight, you know, and then those businesses and those commercial structures can reopen after a storm passes. ` l `%�— And so the overall goal is, yes, where we can -- where we see that there are homes at risk that we can partner in, we want to identify those, but at the same time that is also going to be voluntary for these areas. You know, generally we do it in areas where we've done nonstructural. We've ranges between 70 and 90 percent participation out at communities because it can be a good opportunity for homes to get homes elevated and protected and realigned for the next 50 years of coastal protection for that area. And so we did look at some of those areas. I remember Isles of Capri, visiting the fire station there; it's right on the water. But even that, it's been elevated already. So, you know, the county has already taken steps through its building code and also recognition of some of these Code of Law issues. Now, I think we've seen, you know, the Florida Building Code drastically changed after Hurricane Andrew for elevations and 011MM April 27, 2021 building requirements. And so what we do see, though, out there in these communities is a mix of pre- and post -Andrew construction. And so generally a lot of the pre -Andrew construction, you know, those are opportunities where we can see where we can work on those homes and help these people, you know, get a little safer, get a little more resilient. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So in every instance, Isles of Capri, Goodland, and Marco specifically, all your recommendations are nonstructural answers? v MR. HUGHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Corre MR. HUGHES: Correct. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay44 MR. HUGHES: Correct. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. HUGHES: Because of the difficulty associated with where they are situated and the geographic features. So they don't have, like, a really inland area that we can tie into or prevent that water from wrapping around. It is very difficult. This is one of the major challenges that we are faced with in the Florida Keys, you know, that with all the islands there, the water's going to keep -- has the ability to come from multiple directions and push it different areas, and so we just can't seal it off completely. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. HUGHES: That's where we fall back to nonstructural. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Dan, if you could go to the slide that talked about the contemplated percentage of protection. MR. HUGHES: I'll see if I get the right one. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: At the end. MR. HUGHES: Residual risk. Okay. Residual risk. Page 109 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There you go. And that's the one I wanted to -- I wanted to have just a brief comment about, and it's something for all of us, for all of the districts and for all of the community. This is -- this is such a difficult moving target for anyone to actually ascertain and determine how much can be spent and where it can best be spent, because nobody knows when our good Lord's going to send us another storm and what direction it's, in fact, going to come from. ` 17 And your top line there talking about -- we're only talking -- you know, we'll reduce the aggregate damages by a maximum of 36 percent. If, in fact, this is all done, if, in fact, Congress passes the bill, if, in fact, it goes through and gets to construction and bid and done by 2035, if, in fact, all that's in place -- so my question, or my thought, is with regard to this: I mean, we certainly want to move forward. We really appreciate the Corps' help and assistance to help us help ourselves, and that's my ask or discussion. As you're moving through here, we have an enormous amount of regulatory bodies that we have to get through on a local basis to assist us with our borrow areas, as you refer to them, and being so excessively far away and the enormous amount of expense we have to go through for the hopper dredges, which is the only mechanized ability to relocate that sand, help us with our offshore permitting requisites to allow for some assistance on our own and also, if you can, help us with the EPA permitting, which is the same regulatory agency, just in allowing us to go forward with our own nonstructural beach renourishment and dune construction facilities that we can do where we know we need them. That's all, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We've got it. We've got those permissions. Okay. So I think we're going to break for -- we're going to rejoin here back at 12:45. We're going to take public comment at that time. Commission, if you would let the County Page 110 April 27, 2021 Manager know -- we're going to have a working lunch today, because we're not going to get through this day. We've got a couple other issues. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Did you say 12:45, so we've got seven minutes? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right, right now, and then i we're going to take a break, yes, sir. So please let the County Manager know about lunch. MR. OCHS: Ma'am, I'm sorry. Are you -- did you say you're going to do public comment before you -- N CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Before lunch? MR. OCHS: Yes. 4110- � � CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, that was the plan. MR. OCHS: So back at 12:45. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: 12:45, yes. Sorry, I got that -- (A brief recess was had from 12:39 p.m. to 12:45 p.m.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic. Ladies and gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Now we're going to proceed to public comment. MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. Your first public comment is Erik Brechnitz. He will be followed by Steve Barrett, and then Douglas Hagerman. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And if you're in the chambers, please use two podiums here. You have three minutes. If you're online, I think Troy will -- MR. MILLER: I've only got one online, I do believe. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Everyone else is here. So if you -- the second speaker is who? MR. MILLER: That was Steve Barrett. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. If you'd take your place at the Page 111 April 27, 2021 second podium, please, to be ready. Thank you very much. MR. BRECHNITZ: Madam Chairman, before I get started, I have a handout for the Commissioners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If you would give it to -- MR. MILLER: I'll take care of it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- here, and we can pass it fo \d. Thank you. MR. BRECHNITZ: Thank you. Also, with your indulgence and with respect, Madam Chairman, I'm representing all of Marco Island today. My presentation isn't long, but I might go over just a few seconds, and I would appreciate maybe giving a little extra time to finish up. 1W*W.1q&_, 11* CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I can give you an extra minute, sir, and that would be it. �, v, A MR. BRECHNITZ: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't mean to be stingy on this, but I think you understand the time constraints. MR. BRECHNITZ: I get it. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. BRECHNITZ: Great. So first of all, you were -- the motion that you're not making any commitments today is true. There's no financial commitments that the county board is making relative to this plan, but what you are -- if you approve it, you are approving the plan, and there's very little change that will be made. So this is really an important decision and an irrevocable decision for parts of the county that have issues with this plan. The City of Marco Island supports the objective of this study. It's important to develop a regional plan to address the vulnerabilities and excessive flooding from storms and also potential sea level rise. Marco Island is the county's only barrier -island community. We Page 112 April 27, 2021 have 17,500 people that reside on Marco Island permanently. We have 50,000 that are there seasonally, and at 17,5-, we are only 5,000 in population smaller than the City of Naples. So it's a significant part of Collier County. We don't support this tentatively selected plan that was presented to you by the Corps primarily because it excludes beach resiliency, dune features, and any other structures in its recommendation for Marco Island. As a matter of fact, the northwest portion of Marco Island, which exceeds two -and -a -half miles of beach, was not even studied in the Corps' study. Now, the Corps of Engineers gave you the answer for that. There is no public access every quarter mile on that piece of beach, and I get that. If this were a renourishment project, if this were a project for recreation, we understand that. As a matter of fact, that portion of the beach has been renourished by the residents routinely for the last 22 years, but this is not a renourishment program for recreation. It's a resiliency program. It's to protect the structures that are there. And in this two -and -a -half miles of beach that wasn't even looked at, there are over 400 single-family residences and numerous multifamily residences there. Literally, billions of dollars of assessed valuation exists that weren't even looked at. As far as the cost -benefit analysis is concerned, using a cost -benefit analysis for beach nourishment in Naples is not the same as Marco Island. We have borrow areas that are less than a mile off our shore. We renourish beaches routinely for $16 per cubic yard as opposed to the 40 or 45 dollars or $50 that Naples pays to truck it in. So our -- if the cost -benefit study was the same kind they used for Naples, it is flawed. Some other things I want to get to is that the -- it is unlikely that any of these structures that the Marco Island -- or that the Corps of Engineers want to renourish and raise up, they're all old structures, Page 113 April 27, 2021 and they're not likely to happen. They just -- they'll -- they just won't take the pounding of raising them up. The only reason Marco Island wasn't considered for structures is because it is a barrier island and, as the Corps noted, it is covered on all sides. But the major part of our flooding comes from the west and the high tides that come in. And we need our western beaches protected; that is critical. a * �- And I know my time is up, Madam Chair, but if this plan is accepted today, there won't be an opportunity for federal funding to add the needed features for Marco Island and, as a result, unless the county plans to direct other funds to address coastal resiliency on Marco Island, I urge you to have the county staff and the U.S. Corps of Engineers reassess the plan for Marco and take into consideration the huge amount of property damage that would be done if structures are not provided. • Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: 'Thank you very much. And I think you're opposing it because, number one, as stated, but the second reason you're opposing it is your correspondence to the Army Corps has gone unanswered. MR. BRECHNITZ: Yes. We have not -- we have not had a satisfactory answer. The answer that we gave was -- is that it was -- there was no -- the cost benefit didn't make sense. I have not seen any numbers to support that position. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. MR. BRECHNITZ: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Steve Barrett followed by Douglas Hagerman, and then Brett Cohan. MR. BARRETT: Thank you very much for this opportunity. My name is Steve Barrett. MR. MILLER: Can you adjust the mic, sir. Closer to you, Page 114 April 27, 2021 thank you. MR. BARRETT: Okay. Thank you for the opportunity. My name is Steve Barrett. I currently serve as president of the Naples Cay Condo Association board. Naples Cay, shown here on the monitor, is a community of eight buildings on the Gulf tucked between Clam Pass on the north and Seagate Drive to the south. Behind us to the east is the Seagate neighborhood, four streets all separated by canals. Four hundred households in total virtually surrounded by water. Now, our community has had major concerns with this plan since last August. First, there's no evidence that less costly options were ever explored or evaluated. At over $3 billion, this is an engineering wonder that will take years to build and cost over a million dollars a year to operate and maintain while only reducing our coastal storm risk management exposure by 36 percent. Second, the cost -benefit analysis contains no accounting for indirect costs and negative social and cultural impacts, including permanent aesthetic impairments, quality -of -life declines, and potential tourism drops during what will now be a 10-year construction period. y V.; Finally, and most disappointingly, there has been no response from the Corps or county staff to legitimate concerns and questions raised by communities up and down the coastline. Zero, zip, nada. We hear lots of assurances like, don't worry, the TSP is just a 10 percent conceptual design; there's lots of time for changes; the county has never committed to actually begin the project, even after authorization. Now, I would ask, is that really the case? So here we are seven months later, still no responses, no changes to the plan. Instead, we're hearing today that something must be signed by the County Manager, a document in its current form that cites the county's intent to continue down this path. Page 115 April 27, 2021 Well, that's incredible and, frankly, it's an insult to all the county citizens led to believe they'd actually have some input on this massive and potentially transformational project. When the TSP draft was released to the public last year, it was accompanied by a video of the Corps' Colonel Kinsman. His final sentence: We want your input to make this a better project. Well, if that's still believable, we respectfully submit this input. First, do not sign anything today. Hit the pause button on this project. f% ` a Number 2, address and respond to all the community input already received. -POD Number 3, explore alternative storm risk reduction approaches that are lower cost or more incremental. Focus on the dunes, our first line of defense. And, finally, build some trust within the Collier County community. Actually meet with residents to discuss issues and concerns and collaboratively explore options and possible solutions. Much more engagement and follow-up is needed. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm going to have to -- thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker Douglas Hagerman. He'll be followed by Brett Cohan and then Jim Hoppensteadt. MR. HAGERMAN: Good afternoon. Doug Hagerman here. I also live in Naples Cay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You may want to straighten your -- there you are. MR. HAGERMAN: There we go. First point today. Rather than protecting us, the TSP significantly harms Naples Cay. We're located north of Seagate Drive, which is roughly this blue line. This is our community right here. These are the Seagate homes. Page 116 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's got to be a microphone somewhere. MR. HAGERMAN: Oh, it's a microphone, okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Good. How's that? All right. So the blue wall is the 14-foot-high, 4,500-foot-long seawall that we'll drive past every day to get to our community, but that doesn't protect us, because what it's really doing is preventing the water from going through our community and around backwards into Area 3. The berm comes up the beach here and stops just short of our community. It connects at a right angle with that wall, so that's what we will -- that's what we will be subjected to if this plan is constructed. This is a picture taken from out over the Gulf. You see our community on the left unprotected, and you see that black angle. That's the dune and the wall. So they're protecting everything south, even though we're really in exactly the same boat to the north -- north of those structures. So as a result, you can see from those pictures that we have all the gain -- I'm sorry -- all the pain and none of the gain. We can expect significant inundation when the water pours through our lower elevation around the areas south and north of us, yet we get to live next to that wall and those dunes every day. So my second point I'd like to make, this study completely missed the ball on Area 2. The TSP abandons Area 2 without actually analyzing the structural protection of it. There is no cost -benefit analysis of structural protection of Area 2 in the document, even though we're very similar to the areas to the north and the south of us. We've been trying to raise these issues since August. In September we submitted a detailed comment letter, and no response has been received. Page 117 April 27, 2021 At the very beginning of the report, it says that the objective is to recommend a project that would be -- quote, reduce the coastal storm risk throughout the study area. In actuality, harming Area 2., this plan fails to meet that objective. The idea of protecting only some portions of the coast and trying to wall them off from the inundated parts is folly, and that's because consistent and continuous is a fundamental principle of coastline protection. If part of the coast is going to be protected, all of it should be. You need a plan that furthers the well-being of the whole community, and this plan fails that test. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Brett Cohan. He'll be followed by Jim Hoppensteadt, and then Neil Dorrill. MR. COHAN: Madam Chair, Commissioners, my name is Brett Cohan. I'm going to be very brief, because I agree with everything that the past two speakers just said. Commissioner Taylor, thank you very much for starting this meeting off by advising that this is -- should have been just an update and not an approval process with a letter. Commissioner Solis, you asked some excellent questions during the presentation, and now I -- one of the points is, that's already been discussed, is the cost -benefit ratio. And I know what was explained to all of you, and you've nodded your heads, but we've asked these same exact questions about how they came up with the cost -benefit ratio, and they haven't been answered -- we haven't gotten the answers to our questions. So please be aware of that. And please consider also your opening comment, Commissioner Solis, about maybe a public workshop on this, too, because a lot -- I'd say the majority of the residents throughout the county don't know what's being discussed right now. So, thank you very much, all. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Jim Hoppensteadt. He'll Page 118 April 27, 2021 be followed by Neil Dorrill, and then Michael Savarese. MR. HOPPENSTEADT: Commissioners, thank you very much. Clearly, this is a critical issue for Collier County, not only for storm resiliency but sea level rise and a lot of other water -intrusion issues. That's where it's so difficult to understand why in a plan there's holes left. You heard Mr. Hughes say that inland inundation is a concern, and yet, Area 2 is a big gaping hole between Areas 1 and 3. Area 2 has the exact same topography as Areas 1 and 3. And, in fact, we have greater public access. We have one of 200 five-star hotels in the country. Tourism is the number -one source of revenue for Collier County, and Pelican Bay offers the most parking and the most beach access. We also -- there's also a 530-acre estuary that the county owns, and the county owns 57 percent of the beach in Area 2. It's also the only coastal Natural Resource Protection Area in the mangroves. None of that's been accounted for. None of that's been incorporated into any cost -benefit analysis. The loss of the Ritz, the loss of Naples Grande, two of the largest hotels in the county, are in this planning area, not considered, and yet they've identified in the plan 515 structures that they say need to be either raised or acquired. I don't know where these 515 structures are. But in a community that has a value of roughly a million dollars a structure, they've identified 515 that need some type of nonstructural approach. It doesn't make any sense from a holistic standpoint -- and the report says their objective is a holistic standpoint -- not to continue shoreline and berm mitigation and enhancements all up and down the coast. It doesn't make any sense for Area 2. It doesn't make any sense for Area 4. There's no reason that these things can't be enhanced. Page 119 April 27, 2021 Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Neil Dorrill. He'll be followed by Michael Savarese, and then our first online speaker, Rachel Rhode. MR. DORRILL: Commissioners and Mr. Hughes, I'm here today on behalf of your advisory board, the Pelican Bay Services Advisory Board. It is somewhat unusual for them to have an elevated level of concern to ask their staff to come down here with respect to some of the same things you've heard today. They're previously on record in having provided an associated list of concerns and questions as it relates to not only the economic but the environmental impacts specifically that the primary stated objective of this study is to reduce risk and damage, economic loss, and environmental impacts due to wave energy and storm events. But with respect to Planning Area 2, none of their concerns have yet had an opportunity to be responded to or acknowledged and, specifically, some of the things that you have heard. The Board of County Commissioners is the largest landowner within Planning Area No. 2. Five hundred sixty acres of adjacent or contiguous areas of upland beach or conservation area within the only Natural Resource Protection Area on the West Coast of Florida, two of South Florida's largest beach resorts and hotels, two of the largest public beach and associated parking facilities, and in the case of critical infrastructure, one of the largest sewage master pump stations in the unincorporated area are all within the velocity zone of this target area. So I think I'll just stop there to indicate that PBSD's previously on record, on your behalf, unresponded to, desirous of being a partner but very, very curious and concerned as to why some of these key areas within Planning Area 2 remain to be fully addressed. Thank you. Page 120 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Michael Savarese, and he will be followed by Rachel Rhode and then Ronald Nordmann. DR. SAVARESE: Thank you. Commissioners, thanks for the opportunity to speak. I just wanted to say -- oh, I'm Mike Savarese. I'm a faculty member, a professor of coastal resilience at Florida Gulf Coast it - University. I know many of you and interacted with you I'm here not to speak as an advocate for or against the Corps project, so I feel a bit like a fish out of water after hearing the concerns voiced about Planning Area 2.^V� I saw during the conversation among you the frustration associated with that residual risk of 64 percent that's still out there. What I want to share with you is just some thoughts as to how that residual risk can be addressed in a proactive way. The speaker for the Corps mentioned earlier that the project that's going forward is a -- is not meant to be the singular solution for solving all of the county's problems, and I think that's the frustrations you're hearing here associated with particular planning areas; how do you deal with a barrier island that is completely surrounded by water and so on. What I can tell you is that the NOAA projects that are moving forward and that are ready to be implemented, the tools themselves, will help address those other relative risks, the ACUNE work that -- ACUNE is the acronym that stands for the package of tools -- will allow the county to look at other types of vulnerabilities and explore other kinds of solutions. I can also tell you, that wasn't mentioned in the Corps presentation, is that as the Corps project transitions into the design phase, assuming it takes that path, it moves from the Norfolk office to the Jacksonville district office. And I can tell you the ACUNE Page 121 April 27, 2021 working group, the people from U.S. Geological Survey, University of Florida, Florida Gulf Coast University, and all the end users that have been involved in city and county government are going to be integrated in with the Army Corps, and the Army Corps at the Jacksonville district office has agreed to work collaboratively with us to help find other solutions and other kinds of perceptions, if you will, of the implications of the Army Corps project as well as the ACUNE project, so I view that as very promising. ;�A_ The last thin I'd like to say -- and I guess this is a g Y recommendation. It's not coming as an advocate. It's just coming as someone who's worked with people in government for a long. I genuinely believe there hasn't been a generous and open conversation about this. 1W*W.1q&_, 11* Commissioner Solis, you had mentioned a workshop. Rather than a workshop, maybe what you should think about is maybe a task force, a task force that comes -- that brings people together, both the public, government, staffers, as well as scientists and the Corps, and address this problem head on, how do you come up with a pluralistic solution to Collier County's resilience and consider the Corps project in concert with other possibilities. And I would argue, again, in my non -advocate voice here, that that could happen, that task force could happen with the Army Corps project moving forward or without. And I would offer up the Water School services if you need help in thinking about a task force and facilitating one. So thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Rachel Rhode. She'll be followed by Ronald Nordmann. Rachel, you're being prompted to unmute yourself, if you'll do so at this time. Rachel Rhode, R-h-o-d-e. (No response.) MR. MILLER: I'm not seeing a response from her. Oscar, Page 122 April 27, 2021 let's move on to Ronald Nordmann. Ronald Nordmann, you're being prompted to unmute yourself at this time. There you are, sir. You have three minutes. MR. NORDMANN: Thank you. The Army Corps of Engineers gentleman told us about $2 billion coming into Collier County as current dollars. What wasn't mentioned was the money that would be asked for by Collier County residents in terms of taxes over the course of the next 50 years. It's a number that I believe, in current dollars, is $1.1 billion or $60 million per year. I think that we need to address not only what the government intends to spend on this project but what the taxpayers of Collier County need to put up over the course of the next 50 years. Thank you. MR. MILLER: And we'll try Rachel Rhode just one more time. If you're there, Rachel? (No response.) MR. MILLER: She is not responding, ma'am. That's all of our public comment. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you very much. So now I don't have a screen up here, so I'm open for comments. Yes, I think it's important to hear -- for the public viewing, the three commissioners at this end have coastal communities. We understand COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So does this one, by the way. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right. Down in Everglades City." "-0 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My little community is not even on their map. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. Well, that's -- yeah. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, well. Page 123 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There we go. Okay. Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So going back to my original question, and that was, is there a clock ticking? And I'm assuming that the clock that's ticking is three-year, $3 million time frame which this has to be done pursuant to the Corps legislation. Is that what we're talking about? � * 'V►'4 MR. OCHS: I'm going to ask Mr. Hughes to confirm that. MR. HUGHES: Correct. I mean, there currently is. You know, our studies are designed to be three years in length. You know, if there are significant issues, or sometimes some studies do -- are just so massive. You know, like, they did all of Texas coastal. That was a 10-year study. But it had to seek a waiver and cost waiver for it. r� I But the regulations are for three years and $3 million, and that's what every project is striving to maintain and get this work done, because it's imperative to get these projects authorized by Congress so that we can get them built on a reasonable schedule. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Just so I understand the downsides, if this isn't presented to Congress in this three-year cycle, then what happens? MR. HUGHES: Yeah. Well, we're really shooting for (indiscernible). I mean, one, we do have to be compliant for us because, you know, our headquarters, you know, they control our funding, and so, you know, the funding is designed to last three years. And so we would just, simply, you know, finish up with the funding we have. But at the same time, our ultimate goal that we're shooting for is this Water Resources Development Act, which is slated for FY '22. So hopefully that would be the first opportunity. If we can get this project approved by General Spellmon, it would then be going to the Page 124 April 27, 2021 list of completed projects and hopefully approved and authorized under that WRDA bill. If not, if it does not get approved, you know, if we are not able to get it into that WRDA bill, it would then be subject to the next WRDA bill that would come along, which they do -- like I said, they do come along every other year. Sometimes it's three years. The longest I've seen is seven years. You know, so there is variation within that. It's all -- you know, that's up to�" Congress to decide. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And my last question is, so we've heard from some concerned residents, some concerned organizations about gaps which they feel are in this plan that would either damage them or leave them out of, you know, the work that's going to be done and funded. I mean, how do we resolve these issues -- we're elected to represent the folks, certainly some of the ones that spoke from the Planning Area 2, and, you know, how do we resolve these issues? Is there a solution to these issues or -- and I'm assuming that unless -- unless the County Manager signs these nonbinding letters that it can't be submitted to Congress? You have to have those to submit this to Congress? MR. HUGHES: Correct. I mean, to get to -- actually to the various stages of review, you know, to get it to General Spellmon's desk, those letters are required -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MR. HUGHES: -- as part of the submission packet that we have. ** 11' But, please, just keep in mind, I mean, there are portions that we can participate in and areas that we can participate in. If there are areas, you know -- and I really am excited that, you know, a lot of people have come out. I understand their concerns on some of these areas, and I appreciate their recognition of the risk that their communities face, but at the same time, there are limits to what at Page 125 April 27, 2021 least the Corps of Engineers can participate in, you know, and hopefully, whether -- you know, what this ultimately does is -- you know, overall Collier County has a storm risk associated with it. There is going to be storms. There will be a day where there is a -- something bigger than Irma that comes directly at Collier County. It's just a matter of when. So the risk is there. What the Corps can do is help make the community more resilient by bringing those portions of the federal dollars for the areas that we can participate in. There are always going to be areas that we cannot participate in. We would encourage the county to use savings from the overall. You know, if we can contribute on this area for 65 percent, you know, federal funds, maybe there is a gain there in the overall community that Collier County can then utilize for other projects to implement on its own to help it manage its own resilience efforts and start to plug some of those gaps in overall project resilience. Okay. So while we're in, like, Planning Area 2, we are offering some nonstructural work there that we think we can do in that area. It does not preclude Collier County from doing the same design or the same features within that area if it wants to on its own. You know, prior to this study, Collier County does have a long history since 1996 of renourishing its own beaches, and it has benefited from those. I think we saw some benefits during Hurricane Irma from those resilience efforts and beach stabilization efforts, you know, creating those wearable surfaces in those areas. So there are things that we can participate on and cost share with, and certainly we work with the community to improve, but there always are going to be areas that Collier County is going to have to continue to work in -- on its own to maintain that full higher level of resilience that we'd like to see in every community. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Thank you. Page 126 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you. First of all, I don't think anybody here is throwing the Army Corps of Engineers under the bus. I mean, there's been a lot of work that's been done here, and so I think it's commendable. But, you know, we heard from multiple unrelated citizens that had some significant concerns. Most notably not being heard, and that concerns me greatly. ezA.r And I think we can do anything, but we can't do everything. So I know we can't build a wall totally around all of Collier County to keep every single thing out. But I think there's a difference between risk and gaps. And hearing that there's a lot of concern that areas maybe weren't looked at or maybe weren't as aggressively looked at or maybe citizens just didn't get the feedback because they voiced some concerns, I think, bears consideration. A few things that I heard here that I really -- I really liked. First of all, I don't think anybody wants to get the letter to the General late, especially me. I mean, being retired Air Force, I know what that's all about. We don't want to slow anything down. But I think everybody here wants to make sure we measure twice and cut once and really give this more than just a college try. I think doing a deeper dive and maybe -- you know, I'm just making a proposal here, but somehow better consolidating citizen input. Maybe everybody blasted a bunch of feedback notes to the Army Corps and, you know, I know what it's like to be overwhelmed by those. So I'm not saying I have the approved solution. But if we wind up doing a deeper dive discussion, whether it's a concerted effort to have some sort of meeting or strategy team or whatever we call it, I think those comments getting to you -all and getting the answers back, and if there's some way we can better consolidate it so you're not just getting, you know, random feedback from citizens Page 127 April 27, 2021 that's overwhelming in the Army Corps is something to discuss. And I think, lastly, what I liked hearing -- and I don't remember the speaker's name but, boy, we're so fortunate to have the FGCU Water School here, and even though I know they're continuing to get bigger and better and whatnot, to be able to utilize that incredible resource in some way, shape, or form as part of this plan seems to be a no-brainer. So I've got some concerns. I'm not here to rubber stamp anything, and I know that's not what we're asking to do, and I certainly don't want to slow things down. But feedback I heard from citizens mirrors my own concerns, which is more discussion to make sure that we know the difference between risks and gaps; that we also leverage the FGCU Water School, if that can be a big plus for us, and then also make sure that citizen comments that may have found their way to Army Corps but citizens were hoping for a reply or hearing their concerns voiced in the report somehow, maybe we could make another stab at that or come up with a better way to make sure that, you know, all communities feel well represented and that they're heard before we just start drawing the maps. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, one quick comment, and it just has to go with, similarly, to what you folks have already said. We're not here today to vote on anything other than accepting this report as it sits today. I really like Dr. Savarese's suggestion of a task force. I think that might be an entity that we can establish to help consolidate the comments from the community and funnel those directly in a common voice, necessarily, especially with the Water School's assistance in helping us arrange that. So I'm in support of moving forward but certainly, as Commissioner LoCastro said, it's imperative that our community is Page 128 April 27, 2021 heard, because there's a lot of -- though we have similarities, there's a lot of diversity at the same time. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Just so -- a point of clarity. The people that spoke are not average citizens. These are leaders within communities: Naples Cay, Seagate, City of Marco Island, and Pelican Bay. They have -- and also the Pelican Bay Services board, and the gentleman who spoke for that was a former County Manager. They're not here with their time because this is something that is something that they're not concerned about. This -- the reverberation and the lack of communication from the Corps has been rippling through this community since December. a%, ` a It is unfortunate, when I read -- and I looked clearly -- and thank you so much for your presentation. It's very clear that you didn't respond because you're not going to do anything. And I understand that. But could the Corps design, for these areas, without getting federal money, i.e, the county would pay for it; is that a possibility, so that you would -- the federal money would go aside, and you'd look at these areas and work with the communities involved? MR. HUGHES: That is correct. I mean, the Corps of Engineers, I mean, we frequently partner -- you know, with the communities that we're partnering with, sometimes they actually have projects that they want to do just adjacent to ours, and, you know, we can work with them. There are certain regulations that do allow us to work on projects at 100 percent. You know, if county wanted to pay for, you know, the study 100 percent or the analysis or the action, you know, and the construction, I mean, that would all be there. But then there's also opportunities -- and, you know, like, I know we've talked with Andy and we've talked with the staff at Jacksonville for the actual implementation of the construction, if there were areas that the county wanted to look at as part of its own nourishment program, Page 129 April 27, 2021 you know, about coordinating with those with us so that the work can occur at the same time so we can capitalize on cost savings for our project sponsor. You know, we frequently see this within our dredging industry where, you know, we'll know that we'll have a big project being mobilized. And the cost of a dredge mobilization is actually a pretty significant cost. To actually get a dredge offshore, you know, as you're probably aware from your own renourishment activities, it's pretty expensive. But, you know, if our project is always going to already be there renourishing, that allows those local communities to actually go ahead and contract with those agencies, if they can, and save on mobilization costs and just pay for the work that needs to be done. � And so there are ways to do what we call betterments to projects where if the county wants to add certain features in, those could be considered, but there's also opportunities to, you know, work with the companies that we're contracting with and, you know, we would -- we definitely would encourage, if there is any way to piggyback into some of these projects to create community savings during the mobilization of these activities, that would be great and, you know, certainly, the Corps of Engineers nationwide would be committed to that, not just -- you know, it doesn't matter whether it's Norfolk or Jacksonville. You know, we frequently do this throughout the nation. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So, you know, when this -- when this was presented and there was always conversation about the federal government coming in and helping with beach nourishment -- and when I first got on the Commission in 2014, that was my first question, what happened? What happened? Why didn't -- why are they -- up the road are they doing it, and why isn't Collier County? You know, in my limited experience with beach renourishment, Page 130 April 27, 2021 I was envisioning wider beaches and some dunes and some plantings. This is night and day. Would the Corps partner with Collier County to do that kind of beach renourishment, recreational beach renourishment, making our beaches wider, no structures, you know, no 12- to 14-foot dunes and, you know, thousands of feet of walls; would they consider doing that as a partner not with federal money or with little -- MR. HUGHES: We can certainly partner -- yeah, without the federal funding, you know, for us, the cost sharing, those are tied to those specific, you know, greater goals -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Plans. rz!zl MR. HUGHES: -- of reducing those damages. But for just, you know, creating a wider beach itself, you know, the county can always ask the Corps of Engineers to do it, but it would cost the county at 100 percent to have the Corps of Engineers do it. And sometimes there's -- you know, sometimes, you know, we have a lot of the great technical engineering ability. You know, we're the largest engineering firm in the world. But at the same time, you know, sometimes things can be done cheaper locally. I mean, that's just the way it is sometimes. And so, yes, I mean, there are certain ways that we can do that. I mean, within the beach profile itself, you know, we look at the berm or the place -- you know, the berm where most people would think, this is where I lay down my blanket to recreate, you know, that's a wearable surface. And so we look at that, but we're really modeling to prevent those damages. And so our importance is a little further back up that beach on that vegetated dune where we're going to see that's going to be where the water gets stopped. I mean, some of the, you know, shoreline erosion will occur in that berm, but we'll come back and we'll restore that portion of it. Now, if the county wanted to exceed portions of that, yes, the county can probably exceed those Page 131 April 27, 2021 at 100 percent cost to the county. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Madam Chair. MR. HUGHES: You know, some of the things we need to keep in mind -- and when we're looking at the berm and making a wider beach, we wanted to be very careful, especially in the northern part of the county where we're looking at, you know, those offshore resources, those hard -bottom impacts that are just off shore. Do we want to make sure that the -- you know, the berm which extends out to that toe, we want to make sure that there's -- you know, we're not eating up that hard bottom, because the mitigation costs associated with the impacts of those hard bottoms are very significant but, at the same time, you'd run into a lot of difficulty with permitting such actions with Florida DEP because, you know, hard bottoms is a valuable resource for the environment as well, and so you want to be cautious of that interface and snug up that beach where we need to and things like that. So that goes into a lot of the engineering work that's behind the scenes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So I'm just trying to focus in on what the decision point is that we're being asked to make here, and it's -- one, it's more than just accepting the report. It's also directing the County Manager to sign these letters saying that we will participate financially, right? MR. OCHS: Yes. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's -- MR. OCHS: They're pre -- as I understand it, those are prerequisites -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Prerequisites. MR. OCHS: -- to getting this study completed on time. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So it seems to me that the decision point is, do we direct the County Manager to sign those and thereby Page 132 April 27, 2021 keeping us within the three-year, $3 million process to be eligible for funds for whatever's in the plan, theoretically, right now, or do we not do that and remove the whole thing from this cycle, right? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, that's -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I say that, and now I feel like what I should have started with: Are we going to throw the baby out with the bathwater? Is that -- so that's my question going back to where I started for staff. MR.00HS: Yes. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's what we're here today to do? MS. PATTERSON: Correct. And these letters to be signed by the County Manager are nonbinding. They're keeping the process moving, but it is not a commitment of funds. We still have the flexibility to leave this process at any time, but what this does is it gets us to the next step in the process -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. MS. PATTERSON: -- to ultimately to the chief signing off on this 10 percent feasibility to move it onto the next phase, as Dr. Savarese was describing also, so that we can then move through the authorization and appropriation process, still giving plenty of time, as outlined by the Corps, to continue the public outreach to refine the plan. And they're speaking of even changes when you're going through engineering, through the design, and ultimately into construction because of that -- looking for that value. So as a staff, we've renewed our promise to the stakeholders to continue to work through their issues. I hear their frustration, and we understand that, and we want to be collaborative to the greatest extent possible while not stopping the process. Page 133 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. So what I'm hearing, number one, is that this -- I'm having a flashback to, like, the MPO process where we start putting things in a plan that's 40 years long, okay, to get the funding there when we need it. So that's kind of what this process is. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Only 25 years. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Twenty-five years, okay, whatever it is. But secondly, if there are aspects of something that's inNie plan as the design is developed and it's problematic for us, the county, I mean, we're not -- we're not forced to go forward in any way with a project that we don't necessarily agree with, because we have to put up the matching funds. If we don't put up the matching funds, it doesn't go anywhere. N MS. PATTERSON: Correct. We'll get to a place where we have to sign a funding agreement, and that's going to be where the rubber hits the road. And if we're dissatisfied at any time up to that point, we don't have a financial commitment. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. And then third, what I heard Mr. Hughes say was that -- that to the extent that there are areas of the plan that the Corps cannot use this process to fill, I mean, we as the county still can address these areas with our own funds, and the Corps will work with us. There may not be a match, because the match has constraints on it. MR.00HS: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. MS. PATTERSON: That's correct. That's also the process with Dr. Savarese and the ACUNE tools where he's going to collaborate with Jacksonville to look at other solutions for these areas and for the county in general. So we do have multiple partners running parallel paths here and coming into a collaborative process. Page 134 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. So the long and the short of it is, then, for me, I think, that do we stop the whole process and take ourselves out of potentially a $2 billion funding source, or do we keep the process moving forward and work to fill these gaps that I think are there? And I agree with the folks from planning district -- or Planning Area No. 2, including Seagate and Pelican Bay and all that, that are problematic. I mean, if there are easements that we have to obtain for access in areas that aren't -- that aren't a preserve or some other area that it would be easy to do, I mean, there's some real hurdles in a lot of this stuff, so none of this is going to be set in stone. You know, I think we 4%N3 1%, should -- unfortunately -- well, I shouldn't say unfortunately. I think we can't -- it's not a perfect plan, but it's $2 billion worth of funding, and we have to -- I don't know that -- we can't throw the baby out with the bathwater, right? MS. PATTERSON: Right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion that kind of summarizes where I think we have to be, and that is to accept the report, authorize the Manager to sign the letters, and direct staff to work with Dr. Savarese and help us create a task force. I'm not sure who would be on that task force, but to report back to us how we can set that up so there's much more public involvement, much more public education as to what we're going to do, but we cannot stop this project -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- under these circumstances today. That's my motion. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So you're going to move next to some gates, right? Page 135 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're going to buy your -- I don't know. There's a -- I know what you're saying, but this is so draconian. It's so contra to what we are about as a community. I never dreamed we would have to be signing nonbinding letters of support at this point. I really just wanted to bring it out to %, N get -- maybe to create a task force, which I think is a great idea because I knew there was a lack of communication. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: But if we don't sign those letters now, that sounds like it kind of puts an end to the process, and I don't think we're prepared -- we can always put an end to the process -- we're not committing to do any of this -- but I don't think we're in a position to end the process right now. And I think we can still work with the Corps to amend that process as we go forward as long as we're not killing the project today. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So then -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's the whole point. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I just have a quick question for the Corps again. How interdependent are these planning? Maybe you do one and you just -- or maybe let's get it where it's -- 3 and you decide, uh, the people don't want to do 4. How interdependent are these planning areas? MR. HUGHES: So each of the planning areas are designed to work as separate functioning units, and that's where we have, like -- between 1, 2, and 3, you have those walls that run inland a little to hydrologically isolate those areas. And so they are designed to work. So if you just wanted to do Planning Area 1, you could do it, you know. If you just want to do 3, or if you just want to do the nonstructural throughout those communities, you can do that as well, you know. And so that's the way it's designed to work. You know, if you wanted to concentrate Page 136 April 27, 2021 on Planning Area 5, we could work in there. But that's how they're designed to work -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. HUGHES: -- is separable elements, but that also aligns with, you know, phasing for construction the federal [sic] lines there, to allow all us to -- all of us to acquire the funding necessary to work in each of those areas. r �` CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. V Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'm not a big fan of signing letters and then saying, however, but, comma, we still have these other five things to do, sort of like with the Big Cypress Basin. But can you give us a little detail that -- I mean, on the timeline. I mean, if we didn't sign the letters today, just say hypothetically, would we have a window of time to put together a task force and, basically, I don't want to say make all sides happy, but give us more confidence that we truly are not missing out on a financial opportunity. I mean, at the end of the day today, do you need a copy of the letter today, or what is our window of time? And could we squeeze in some discussion, or is the second option of, you're signing the letter, it's nonbinding; we hear you with the task force and all the other things that will happen simultaneously and aggressively so that the letter's working for you and it's not slowing anything down, but some of the answers that are going to come from the task force are going to catch up to that letter and keep things moving forward. What's your reply to that? MR. HUGHES: Correct. I mean, overall on our schedule, we had requested the letter in May, and so that's why we had -- you know, working with Andy at -- you know, to arrange this meeting to provide any information that was needed and associated with that Page 137 April 27, 2021 letter. It's designed to be in a packet in May so that in late July we can get authority to rerelease the report to -- you know, to everyone again. And that report will also address a lot of the public comments as well, and there will be a comment matrix in the back for that. But in order to get authority to release that report, I do need the letter in hand for support for that. So I'm not sure exactly, you know, how much time a task force would be, if it was a matter of, you know, a week or so, yeah, but we do kind of need a letter of some sort of support as soon as possible. You know, my experience with task forces is that, generally, you know, when you're looking at it, it's generally six months to a year. That time we do not have. That would delay the overall project schedule because, again, we are looking to get this to the chief of engineers at the end of September so that he can sign it in October. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: _ But if we sign the letter now -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: If we sign the letter now and, granted, you know, I don't know that we're looking to do a task force tomorrow but definitely not a year. But value came out of aggressive discussion using the FGCU Water School and other type of options, task force or what have you, could we catch those comments up to that July time frame to strengthen our position with much more detail and citizen comments that have been heard without negatively affecting this entire process? MR. HUGHES: Yes. You know, to make it short, I mean, certainly we are always -- you know, especially with state and agency's review, you know, that actual review is going to come out of -- you know, those letters will come out of headquarters, and they will be looking for additional comments, especially from the County Page 138 April 27, 2021 Commission on things that they're interested in, comments from Collier County, you know. And so that can be any of those -- any of those questions or informational requests can be incorporated into the final report, but we are moving towards that final stage of the documents and moving towards a final recommended plan that can be implemented. ,.,q, 1*1 So there is some room, but we are running out -- we're running into the time clock and running towards -- through the summer and getting this finished up by September. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. So I don't think there's any other comments. Before we vote on the motion, I just received an email from Brad Cornell, who's Southwest Florida Policy Associate of Audubon, and I'm just going to read this out loud because for -- somehow he wasn't registered on the speaking, Troy. &&I V y So he said, I am registered to speak on Zoom under public comment for 11 A but somehow it was missed, so if I may. Audubon has submitted two letters last September on TSP which have not received any response by the county or the Corps. I urge the county not to sign the support letters yet. Benefits are not realized for all Collier citizens. They need better socioeconomic equity; too heavy on gates, walls, and concrete; needs more natural and nature -based features like mangroves, wetlands, seagrasses, reefs, etcetera. The Army Corps should coordinate with ACUNE of OF and FGCU. Audubon supports the idea of a task force backed up by the Water School. Thank you very much. So we have a motion on the floor and a second to accept the recommendation of staff to sign nonbinding support letters as well as having staff work with the Water School and Dr. Savarese. DR. SAVARESE: May I say something? I'm worried that my suggestion -- I'm not allowed to? Page 139 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just working with Dr. Savarese regarding a task force. Yes. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Dr. Savarese's comments may be important because -- DR. SAVARESE: I think they are important. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, you need to come up here, sir. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And while he's coming up, the purpose of -- in my making the motion wasn't to say that this report is something that should be implemented. It's simply to keep the time frame moving. We've been advised that this is nonbinding and that we can back out at any point in time, but by keeping it going we have the opportunity to improve the report and answer some of the questions that our citizens have raised on Marco Island, Seagate, Pelican Bay. And that's the purpose. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And control it even after the fact by the funding match. If the -- if we don't go forward now, it stops and we -- and I did have my hand raised for a brief comment, by the way. I'm not just -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Sorry. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- editorializing here. This is nonbinding. We have the control -- I'm sorry for pointing at you. We have the control mechanism for going forward or not if we don't like what happens by not producing the match, so I don't think we're getting in trouble. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Dr. Savarese. DR. SAVARESE: Yeah. I worry that my suggestion of creating a task force is viewed as the ultimate problem solver for this issue. It's very complicated. And a task force is not going to be a simple or quick kind of a process. It's going to take a while. I would argue it would have been nice if the task force existed a year ago and these conversations were already had. Page 140 April 27, 2021 So please do not vote on this motion thinking that the task force is going to solve your problems in a couple of weeks. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, no. DR. SAVARESE: It's not going to happen. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We know that. DR. SAVARESE: And I made an offer of assistance for my own mind, not from the institution. I know the Water School is interested in facilitating. But it really involves commitments from other people. I envision the Water School may be facilitating the conversation we have. We have professionals that have those kinds of skills, consensus -building skills. But it's really a commitment of people's time; your time, staff time, public's time. So it's not a -- it's not a quick and easy fix. So thank you. ' CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I want -- I want to just say that I understand what you're saying, and I'm glad that we gave you the time to come to the podium and clarify that, or else maybe you're going to get a call from the FGCU president saying he wants to talk to you in 10 minutes. — ' "*, But I think -- to get back to Commissioner Saunders' point, I think we do have time to at least -- even if it's short, maybe not a full-blown task force that would have unnetted a bunch of things for a year, but to make sure citizens are heard, we catch those comments up to the letter, and we have the strongest possible package, you know, going forward that's more representative of those areas where we think there's significant gaps and/or citizen voices haven't been heard or feedback hasn't been included. So we have a lot of homework to do in a short amount of time, but -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And just another comment as Page 141 April 27, 2021 we go to vote on the motion. I'd like for staff to explore contracting with FGCU if that would be something to benefit any task force we put together, and kind of report back to us over the next couple of four weeks or whatever as to -- you know, is there a role for us to play with FGCU in evaluating these things, and I think Dr. Savarese could probably assist in answering that question. MS. PATTERSON: No problem. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Ready to vote? COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And -- _9% CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, we're not yet? Commissioner. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: One last thing is, I think -- the more I think of this, stopping the process really impacts the areas that would benefit from the $2 billion worth of improvements. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right? I mean, we can't forget that if we stop this, then the other planning areas that are included in a lot of this work, I don't know that we've done them any favors if we were to stop it. So, yeah, I'm going to support the motion. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you very much. We're going to break for lunch. We will resume our meeting at 2:46. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: A whole hour? Page 142 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Is -- 2:46, is that an hour? Half an hour. Half an hour. Pardon me. What am I looking at? Oh, no, no, 2:16. 2:16, right? (A luncheon recess was had from 1:46 p.m. to 2:16 p.m.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic. Item #8A \Q A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW A COMMUNICATIONS TOWER ON LANDS ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) WITHIN THE MOBILE HOME OVERLAY (MHO) AND DESIGNATED RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE -SENDING LANDS WITHIN THE NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA OVERLAY AND NORTH BELLE MEADE OVERLAY IN THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 2.01.03.G.4.A AND 2.03.08.A.4.A(3)(A) OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON .95± ACRES OF A 5.0+1- ACRE TRACT LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE NORTH - SOUTH EXTENSION OF BENTON ROAD, IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20180002327] - MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE JUNE 22ND BCC MEETING — APPROVED MR. OCHS: We move now back to Item 8, Board of Zoning Appeals. Item 8A requires ex parte -- ex parte disclosure be provided by our commission members, and all participants are required to be sworn in. This is a recommendation to approve a resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals establishing a conditional use to allow a communications tower on lands zoned rural agricultural within the Page 143 April 27, 2021 mobile home overlay and designated Rural Fringe Mixed -Use sending lands within the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay and the North Belle Meade's Overlay in Collier County. This parcel's located on .95 plus -or -minus acres of a five -acre tract located on the east side of the north/south extension of the Benton Road. Madam Chair, it would be appropriate for ex parte disclosure at this time. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I have had meetings, phone calls, and I think an email or two. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And the same; correspondence, emails, and telephone calls. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I've had meetings and phone calls. � - "R* � CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I had an email from Ms. Clark and a Zoom call with Ms. Jahn. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I've had meetings, correspondence, and emails. So would -- those who wish to testify need to rise and be sworn in. Raise your right hand, please. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. OCHS: We'll begin with the petitioner. MS. JAHN: Good afternoon. I'm Mattaniah Jahn, 935 Main Street, Suite D 1, Safety Harbor, Florida, 34695. I have a PowerPoint presentation that's being pulled currently for my -- for my presentation. I have Santiago Torres with Verizon Wireless should you have any questions about Verizon's RF need; Kelly Shanahan with RPM Page 144 April 27, 2021 Engineering should you have questions about the structural integrity report in our file on the Alpine tower; and also Vince Casiero with Capital Telecom should you have questions about the project; and they have all taken an oath. I come before you today with staff and Planning Commission recommendations of approval for a conditional use to allow a 225-foot-tall guyed style communication tower on Parcel 32634720009. Do you have a mouse here? I do. Perfect. So this is a far aerial showing the project, and in this aerial, up is north. The green marker that you see is the proposed Benton Road relocation tower, and then you can also see a green and a magenta box. Those are parcels that are under ownership or control of Capital's landlord. This is a closer aerial, again, up is north. The color coding for the parcels are the same. The green marker is the tower. You'll see that the parent parcel is vegetated. It's covered with sabal -- it's covered with cabbage palms, and it is down at the end of Benton Road on the western end. And then this is the closest fitted -- closest view. Again, up is north, and the color coding is the same. So to the north of the project is a single-family house, Benton Road, and then one more single-family house. To the south is a driveway to a -- that goes to a single-family house that's off to the east, and then more vegetated acreage owned by Capital's landlord. To the east is vegetated acres, and then there's two houses; one to the southeast and one to the northeast. To the west are Benton Road extension and then vegetated acreage. Mature cabbage palm coverage exists throughout, helping to break up view sheds, and as you transition east along Benton Road, that does turn into taller pine canopy once you get out past Lamb's Page 145 April 27, 2021 Lane, approximately. And the parcel is zoned agricultural with a mobile home overlay and a future land -use designation of North Belle Meade. The parcel has an RFMUD sending district overlay, but development rights have not been severed from this property. This site is a little different than most as far as treatment under your code because normally communication towers are permitted in agricultural zoning when you meet the setbacks, which we do in this case. So if we were not in the RFMUD, we would not be coming before you. We would be administrative zoning; however, the conditional use is triggered by the environmental overlay. So this conditional use, while we are going through the conditional -use process, it's triggered by the environmental overlay rather than needs to modify the built -- based on the built environment. This is Sheet Al from the plan set, and it just shows the location, the guyed tower in the lower right-hand corner of that five -acre parcel that we are on. You can see that there are two other parcels that we run access across up to Benton Road. Ninety percent -- as required by your code, 90 percent of this five -acre parcel had been placed under a managed -- or will be placed under a managed preservation plan and conservation easement. And then this is Sheet C 1 showing the same thing without the aerial underlay. ` You'll also notice that on this plan there is a circle surrounding the tower. That is the -- and it is located here, if you can see my mouse. That is the fall zone radius. So in the unlikely event of failure, the guyed tower will not just collapse; it would actually fold over upon itself. This guyed tower meets or exceeds the code -required lot line setbacks in all directions as well as the code -required separations in this instance. Your code requires 50 percent of tower height from Page 146 April 27, 2021 the -- from lot lines -- from the lot lines. One thing that is interesting is that your code does have a two -and -a -half times tower height separation in it for higher density residential -- for high -density residential areas, areas with six or more development units per acre, and we actually exceed that -- even that separation, even though it doesn't apply to us, to all built residential structures in the area. i * -'*k" This is just a separation aerial that I put together on Google Earth, and it shows the approximate distances. And you can see the nearest house to the north is 1,065 feet or 4.8 times tower height; the nearest one to the northeast is 1,038 feet or approximately 4.7 times tower height; to the southeast, 710 feet or 3.2 times tower height; to the south is 851 feet or 3.8 times tower height, and to the southwest is 857 feet or 3.9 times tower height. This is an elevation showing the guyed tower. And, again, it shows that top of steel at 220. It does show antennas extending up to 225. This shows that the tower will be designed for collocation. It's designed to collocate up to four carriers, and I'll be going into that in a second, because we are actually coming to you with two carriers committing to collocate on this tower which, again, is a bit unusual. Verizon will be collocated at the top of the guyed tower, and then AT&T will be the second carrier collocating on this tower. Also of note, Altius Broadband will be collocating to place wireless Internet antennas on the tower. Capital's making the remaining space on the tower available at market rate. As Verizon's located at the top, this is the minimum height to achieve their RP objective. They're trying to emulate a collocation that they currently have at the -- at a tower located to the northwest. So they're just trying to match and replicate that except with modern antennas and equipment. And then AT&T and Altius will be located Page 147 April 27, 2021 at lower heights on the guyed tower. This is a plan -- this is Sheet C2 from the plan set just showing that the compound, the equipment area at the base, it's enclosed by a concrete wall, is provisioned for collocation. There's adequate equipment area down there. If you've heard me present before, you've heard me say that modern communication towers serve two functions. They fill in gaps in coverage and they offload capacity strain from neighboring towers. Towers are like roads in that they can only handle so much traffic before they start to dysfunction and ultimately max out. This tower is primarily going to be providing capacity strain relief, but it does also achieve some improvements in coverage out at the perimeter of its coverage area. 1"W'W" 11* The baseline goal for Verizon in this instance is to modernize their deployment so that way that they can have the equipment necessary to handle capacity and also have forward compatibility as we move into our next phases of cellular coverage. I will also note that FCC Order 18-133 at Paragraphs 37 through 40 did state that a lack of capacity can create a significant gap in coverage. And the logic's kind of simple, right? You could have great signal strength, but the tower can't take your connection. You don't have coverage. You heard me say that Verizon's currently collocated on a tower owned by Alpine Communications to the northwest and that they need to modernize their deployment. So this is the RP package that was submitted, and I'm going to skip ahead to the area map. And in this map, up is north. And the blue dots that you see on this map are existing Verizon collocations. You'll see one red dot down to the southwest near Alligator Alley. That's one tower that Verizon's not collocated on. Our yellow dot in the middle is the proposed Capital guyed tower, and then the blue dot April 27, 2021 marked B is the Alpine tower. As you can see from this aerial, Verizon's collocated to the northwest at Dot E., the southeast at Dot C, and the southwest at Dot D. Again, they aren't collocated on Dot F, but that tower is so far away that it would not be able to mimic the coverage that's being provided at the Alpine tower. M'qk *�. That existing Alpine tower is approximately .34 miles to the northwest and, unfortunately, it cannot be used for Verizon's deployment anymore. The Alpine tower lacks the structural capacity necessary for Verizon's modernized deployment. - Essentially, what's happened in the industry is that equipment -- the antennas have gotten bigger and heavier, so they present more wind load. The radios that they use that used to be at the base are now up at the top next to the -- next to the antennas, and that adds weight and wind loading, and that equipment itself has also gotten bigger and heavier. , -- ",*—') This is the RF map from the package. And I apologize for the scrivener's error on the color coding, but this shows the current coverage that is provided from the Alpine tower. And I added some community labels since the last time I presented this just to help with context. So you can see the one label pointing to the Benton Road area, and next you can see another arrow pointing to Woodlands Estates area. It also serves Frangipani area and then, finally, the rural estates to the north and the east. This tower also does reach out and provide some coverage along -- provide coverage along Alligator Alley as well. And since -- and as this works, you can see from the layout of the network that this tower also removes capacity strain. Any improvements in this tower removes capacity strain from the collocations to the southeast and the northwest, so it causes a ripple effect on those towers in that they perform better and have more Page 149 April 27, 2021 resources in them to serve their areas. This is the coverage after Verizon moves over to the Capital tower. And you can see that the coverage has expanded a little bit because coverage is a secondary benefit of this tower. Again, just for -- and just to highlight that, since I know there have been some questions about it, these blue arrows point to the areas where coverage has been improved. If you like, I can flip back and forth between the two slides. But you can see that there are increases in raw coverage. The other thing that's happening, though, that doesn't show up on maps is the capacity off -- the capacity that the actual deployment improves, and that's just something that doesn't really present on maps. Q%kL ` a I'm now moving on to AT&T. And, finally, there is one last coverage map shown without either the Alpine or the Capital tower, and that's just to give some context as to the area that is covered by this. So this shows -- just to help show the raw area that's covered by this deployment in either configuration. All right. This is the search ring for -- that Verizon gave Capital Telecom. And then this is the -- this is a collocation letter from AT&T dated March 11 th, 2021. In March, AT&T committed to collocate on the Capital tower, and this is going to be introducing coverage for them for the first time. So I'm showing you the AT&T propagation maps, and in this map you can see different color codings. Green and yellow are reliable service, and then red and magenta are unreliable service. The blue plus sign in the middle is the Capital guyed tower. And, again, I've added arrows just to give some context. And you can see the Benton Road area shown in red -- generally in red, Woodlands Estates is also generally in red, Frangipani has some yellow coverage, and then the rural estates also have red. And then you can see with the after that there is a significant improvement in Page 150 April 27, 2021 coverage, first at the Benton Road area, the area that the tower is primarily serving. Also the Woodlands Estates area, Frangipani, and finally the rural estates. And, again, this is coverage that AT&T currently does not have. One thing to note is that AT&T listed on their letter of intent that their optimal height would be 250 feet above ground level. They're actually taking a 50-foot decrease in height to collocate on the Capital tower. They're coming down to 200 feet above ground level. Also, this will be an AT&T first net site, and what that means is it has extra antennas and equipment on it that provides a national first responder or wireless network and, basically, it allows first responders to preempt commercial traffic on the network so that way they can have connectivity for things like dispatch and the rest, and that's a federal program, ultimately. It's a public/private partnership that was awarded to AT&T, and they have requirements to deploy sites throughout the U.S., and this is going to be one of those. Finally, I'm showing the -- I'm showing the letter of intent for Altius Broadband, and this is -- as I said, they will be collocating on the Capital tower. Moving on to neighboring tracts. We held two NIMs; one in July 2019 and one in November 2020. In the July 2019 NIM we had neighbors attend as well as staff from Alpine. The Alpine staffers basically said that their tower has plenty of capacity on that, and our neighbors then saw our towers unnecessary. So we did have some neighbor opposition at the beginning of this project that lasted through a portion of it. There was also concerns about using Benton Road. This is a private road, and it's kind of a situation where different -- there's no one really appointed to -- there hasn't really been a formal maintenance structure. So, unfortunately, that means it has been undermaintained. There is a family, the Alvarezes, who Page 151 April 27, 2021 are heading up maintenance currently. But the particular concern at the July 2019 NIM wasn't so much Benton Road itself, but it was particularly focused on Benton Road extension, the portion to the west that turns south when you look at the maps. And, originally, Capital had -- Capital had developed a -- had a driveway that went to Benton Road extension. It was a short driveway. And what I'm showing you right now is a map of Benton Road. When I say "Benton Road," I'm including a portion of Woodlands Estates Road on the eastern side and then Benton Road extension to the west. And as part of that redesign -- in between the two NIMs, Capital actually redesigned the site a bit to provide a much longer access drive back to Benton Road proper so that way they would not be crossing over Benton Road extension, which is generally considered a much more sandier road. ft�, V Around that same time, Alpine Communications filed an objection letter, and that included, among other things, that their tower had capacity for Verizon's upgrade collocation. You'll probably hear them say that they don't feel they were reached out to about upgrading the collocation and then also they were saying there was no legal access along Benton Road. And they were correct in that there are -- there were two breaks in the easements for Benton Road shown at these two red markers on your screen, and nobody west of that second red marker had legal access off of Benton Road, none of the property owners. In the intervening time period, Capital actually found these property owners and obtained access easements from them that provide access not just for Capital but for other members of the public. All right. And, again, this is the area I'm highlighting as not having had legal access. This blue line in the arrow shows that shorter driveway I've been talking about. This green line with the arrow next to it shows the Page 152 April 27, 2021 longer driveway that Capital's currently proposing, and then this shows the legal route for our project. We also had a second neighborhood information meeting in November 2020. We had more neighbors attend at that point as well as more Alpine staffers. And, again, the Alpine staffers maintain that their tower had capacity. The time concerns came up about Benton Road maintenance, environmental impacts of the guyed tower, and RF emissions. As far as RF emissions go, I will draw the Board's attention to the Telecom Act of 1996 and the fact that it does prohibit local jurisdictions from making decisions about communication towers based upon the environmental effects of RF emissions. I jumped into this a little bit when I was talking about the NIMs, but Alpine filed an objection letter in July 2019 -- you'll see that on file -- claiming that Verizon did not talk to them about updating their collocation and that Benton Road is a private road with no legal access. I ran through the legal access issue just now. Verizon's currently in landlord/tenant relationship with Alpine. And I'm not privy to the lease, but I do know their standard policy is to upgrade collocations before embarking upon, in this case, a two -and -a -half year j ourney for zoning, because that's the simplest way to serve your customers. More importantly, you have a failing structural analysis in the record that was provided with this application in 2018 and also a 2020 follow-up letter from Kimley-Horn basically saying we looked at your math, and we agree it is correct math. Alpine also raised a concern about RF interference; however, there is an AM screen in the file, as well as a noninterference letter from Verizon. Basically, the FCC requires that they -- they perform intermodulation studies before and after constructing a tower. The FCC requires that they cannot interfere with other broadcasters; Page 153 April 27, 2021 otherwise they jeopardize their licenses, which is the foundation of their business. We ran through the parent parcel access rights and that Capital fixed these. Let's see. You will also likely hear from Mr. and Ms. Harring. They're my neighbors to the north on the north side of Benton Road. So they are -- they are -- the distance that I gave you to the nearest house to the north, they are further, and Benton Road is in between. Let's see. At the Planning Commission, you did hear -- the Planning Commission did hear from Mr. McMahon after the commission meeting because of commitments that we make on the record. He actually came up to me and thanked me for making those commitments, and it seems that everything is in good shape there. At the neighborhood information meeting, if you listen to the recording, you would have heard from Mr. and Ms. Alvarez. They're our neighbors along Benton further to the east, and they're the ones who have basically shouldered the burden of maintaining the road, and their equipment was damaged by a fire that happened during the pendency of this application. And Capital has actually reached out to them, met with them to arrange to support their efforts to maintain Benton Road, including some equipment repairs as well as an ongoing maintenance on a pro rata basis for Benton Road. Let's see. Moving on to housekeeping. You have in the record an FAA determination of no hazards to air navigation. This will require red lighting for the FAA, but those lights logically point up to the planes; a listed species survey; as well as a NEPA report showing no impact to -- no environmental impact from this tower. Capital also stipulated to the following on the record at the Planning Commission hearing: Capital will maintain the road, Benton Road, including the portion of Woodlands Estates from the Page 154 April 27, 2021 canal to the tower driveway in the condition that it currently is during construction. At the end of the construction, Capital will grade and compact Benton Road, including that portion of Woodlands Estates Road from the canal to their driveway, and that sets, basically, a baseline for continued maintenance. And afterwards, Capital will pay its fair share of the maintenance cost for the road from the canal to its driveway. Finally, I'd like to touch on the public safety aspect of this tower. These are your -- these are 911 call statistics for Fiscal Year 2017 then also 2018, and what it shows is in Fiscal Year ' 17/' 18, 80 percent of all calls received by the Collier County Sheriffs Office came from wireless numbers, and what that shows is that reliable wireless connectivity isn't a luxury; it is a necessity. During the Planning Commission meeting, I did go through all of the conditional use factors and discussed them. In the interest of time, I will skip those today and defer you to both my project narrative as well as your staff report that is in the file. We would respectfully request that you approve the guyed tower as recommended by your Planning Commission and your staff, and I reserve remaining time for rebuttal. That's -- and that concludes my direct presentation on this. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any questions, Commission? Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to go first, or do you want me to? Does the tower meet all of the FCC requisites for alternative power and fuel sources in the event of a large power outage? MS. JAHN: I do know that Verizon is anticipating to put a generator on site, so it will have backup power to have continuous operation. So continuous operation a requirement for the tenants. Capital doesn't design that into the tower itself beyond making Page 155 April 27, 2021 the -- designing the tower to meet the existing codes. Did I answer your question? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not quite sure. MS. JAHN: Okay. So to facilitate the tower to operate continuously -- let's say power was lost to the area -- the tenants put their own generators in. rq.. � COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh. So Capital provides a tower. The tenants take care of the power issue to support their antennas? MS. JAHN: Correct. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's not done by the landlord of the tower? VIOL' � * I*, MS. JAHN: Correct. It's much like, say, a shopping plaza. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I gotcha. I understand now. Thank you. MS. JAHN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I have two quick questions. Even though the tower's far enough east from Benton Road, why wasn't more of the property used to even put it deeper into the property just for aesthetics or visibility? I'm sure there's a reason. It's more out of curiosity. I'm not saying it's wrong where it is. I was just curious, when you look at all the property you have, why wasn't it further away from the road and also further away from the Alpine tower? It seems like there's a lot more acreage to work with there. Why that particular location? MS. JAHN: Yes. So I will -- let me see if I can switch back here. Can I get to that screen where I can see all my slides and quickly move between or -- MR. MILLER: Leo will help her. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Troy. MS. JAHN: Okay. So I'm Mattaniah Jahn, again. And I'm Page 156 April 27, 2021 just taking you back to the aerial that I showed in the beginning, and this shows landlord property. And you can see the green marker again shows the location of the guyed tower. Now, one of the things that -- one of the things that's going on that's a design constraint is that Verizon is trying to mimic the coverage that they currently have from the Alpine tower. So they can't move too far away from it. For example, that's why that one red dot I showed you wouldn't work. They have to be actually rather close to it. So they couldn't move off into the Estates or something like that. _ W% A The other thing is that with this -- with this siting, it actually keeps it away from the majority of residential -- or houses along Benton Road, because we're down at the western end. As opposed -- as to why it's on the west side versus the east side, I think there was -- they were hoping to keep access simple. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Short road. MS. JAHN: But again, placing it here keeps it as far away from those houses that are off to the east as well and helps it to better mimic the COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You've already said in time of a bad storm or something, collapsability, it wouldn't collapse on the road. The area that it could fall would never cover the road, you know, in case of emergency or something like that. It would never block the road no matter how it fell because of the way that it's constructed? MS. JAHN: Correct. It's designed to be contained within th,4 -- w COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: In that circle, right. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Page 157 April 27, 2021 MR. OCHS: Staff presentation? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, please. MR. BELLOWS: Good afternoon. For the record, Ray Bellows with Zoning Services. The petition before you today is a conditional use that's allowed in the -- pursuant to Sections 2.01.03.G and 2.03.08 of the Land Development Code. It's consistent with the conditional use criteria as spelled out in your staff report, and staff is recommending approval subject to the conditions outlined in your executive summary. I can answer any questions. Ir CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any questions? (No response.) 7'"", )4 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. All right. Now well -- MR. MILLER: Madam Chairman, we have nine registered speakers for this item. Your first speaker is Linda Fink. She'll be followed by Donna Alpert and then Al Baxa. I'd like to ask the speakers to please use both podiums. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You'll be given three minutes, and so if -- whoever starts first and then -- MR. MILLER: Ms. Linda Fink can come here. If Ms. Donna Alpert could wait at the other podium, that would be great. Thank you, ma'am. You have three minutes. MS. FINK: Hello. My name is Linda Fink. I'm with Forsyth and Brugger. Jack Brugger and I represent Alpine Towers located here in Collier County. We have with us Donna Alpert, Al Baxa, Doug Lampert. He's a staff engineer with engineer -- with Electrics Research, Inc., who can answer any engineering or technical questions that you might have. We have him on the phone, I believe. His firm does everything from build towers, manufacture antennas, and to perform Page 158 April 27, 2021 analysis for existing towers. In making -- as you're all aware, in making a decision or recommendation that falls under the purview of the Collier County Land Development Code, the objective of the Board of County Commissioners, along with the Collier County Planning Commission, is to be sure that any particular project is in harmony with all of the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. PZA qW That creed, I submit, is the purpose of our Land Development Code, and we will show how the project submitted by Capital Telecom Holdings is, in fact, not in harmony with the code; more specifically, Section 5.05.09, communications towers. Collier County Land Development Code, Chapter 5, Section 5.05.09.1) states in pertinent part, shared use of towers, a tower with a height in excess of 185 feet above natural grade shall not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates that no old or approved tower within the effective radius can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna and ancillary equipment. As stated by Mr. Klatzkow at the Collier County Planning Commission meeting on March 18th of this year, the key issue to be determined for approval pursuant to the code turns on whether or not the proposed equipment could be put onto an existing tower. This is a prerequisite for approval. The applicant must demonstrate that no old or approved tower within the effective radius can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna and ancillary equipment. Mr. Finn conceded that the staff has not looked into this issue at all. Independently, and without approaching Alpine Tower, Capital Telecom did their own structural analysis report in July of ' 18 conducted by EBI Consulting. This structural analysis report that is the basis and support for Capital's contention that Alpine Tower is out of date and inadequate to accommodate Verizon's load and Page 159 April 27, 2021 capacity is faulty. We will present evidence that EBI Consulting applied the wrong wind factor in their structural analysis. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You can -- MS. FINK: If I can continue. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You can continue. MS. FINK: If you turn to Electronics Research Structural Analysis Review submitted as our Exhibit E to our Letter of Concern, it shows on Page 11 a comparison chart. Just a bit of background information, the cantilevered sections of a tower are supposed to be analyzed with a higher wind factor than the main part of a tower to account for the whipping effects of the wind at that higher altitude; thus, the cantilevered parts are analyzed separately from the rest of a tower with a high wind factor. Alpine's cantilevered section starts at 943 feet above ground to the very top of the tower to 1,016 feet at the summit. We submit that ABI [sic] Consulting applied this higher wind factor on the overall tower model and, therefore, the stress percentages are correct -- are incorrect. These incorrect stress percentages are the reason why the conclusion was made that Alpine Tower cannot support the loading capacity of Verizon's new antenna; however, when Mr. Lampert, staff engineer at Electronics Research, applied the higher wind factor to the whole tower, he achieved similar results to EBI Consulting's results, as you can see on the comparison chart on that Page 11. The first column is the EBI Consulting analysis result applying the high wind factor for the leg percent capacity, the middle is from Lambert's result also applying the incorrect high wind factor, and the last column is Mr. Lampert applying the correct wind factor. You can see the difference in the results. It follows that how can Capital Telecom demonstrate that Alpine Tower cannot accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna and ancillary equipment if the wrong factors were applied during analysis? Page 160 April 27, 2021 The second part of the Land Development Code Chapter 5, states, for the purpose of discovering availability for use of towers within the effective radius, the applicant shall contact the owner of all old and approved towers within the effective radius that can possibly accommodate the needs of the applicant. A list of all owners contacted, the date of each contact, and the form and content of e4ch contact and all responses shall be part of the conditional use k "%. application. Alpine Tower was never contacted by the applicant to discuss availability. _ 9% ` a The applicant in the instant case has, therefore, not complied with Section 5.05.09.D.1 requiring the applicant to contact owner of all old and approved towers within the effective radius that can possibly accommodate the needs of the applicant. Instead, Capital Holdings unilaterally had a tower analysis performed back in July of 2018, then had that incorrect analysis reviewed by Kimley-Horn in November of 2020 trying to make an end run around the requirements of the code. &V 4W The code goes on to state that if it had been determined that the tower owner will allow structural changes and the tower can accommodate the proposed antenna if reasonable structural changes are made only if the costs of the required changes to be made are financially impracticable, would such tower be deemed unavailable to the applicant? The code anticipates structural changes being made to existing towers to accommodate additional antenna if necessary. Alpine Broadcasting is not unfamiliar with making such structural changes to its tower when necessary, and although to date neither Electronics Research nor Alpine Broadcasting has been provided with a list of proposed equipment or an order for a structural analysis to assess new equipment impact on the tower, Alpine is confident that Verizon's new antenna could be supported by the existing tower with Page 161 April 27, 2021 minimal reinforcements. I would like to address certain statements made by Capital Telecom in her presentation. One, Capital contends that WAVV -- the WAVV-FM tower is not built to modern specifications. The existing tower has been analyzed under the applicable version of the ANSI/TIA-222 standard and Florida Building Code for every equipment change proposed since the tower was built in 1986. When necessary, the tower capacity has been upgraded with reinforcements to maintain compliance with the applicable design standards at the time of the equipment change. To state that the WAVV-FM tower is not built to modern specifications is false. Q%kL ` a Kimley-Horn's review dated November 11, 2020, of the structural analysis of the WAVV-FM tower conducted by EBI Consulting in July of 2018 was based upon references to a previous structural analysis by Electronics Research dated March 2011 and calculations dated April 2011. These resources were the sole basis of Kimley-Horn's conclusion that the WAVV-FM tower does not have adequate capacity to support the design loading pursuant to the 2017 Florida Building Code and ANSI/TIA-222-G standard; however, the review states that Kimley-Horn cannot confirm the accuracy of the ERI analysis, only that the EBI Consulting analysis is appropriate based on available information. Capital Telecom contends that the proposed communications tower will be providing coverage to an area that did not have coverage before. A new tower a few hundred feet from the existing site is highly unlikely to provide coverage to a currently unserviced area. One may assume this reference is to an upgrade in service, i.e., 5G, by this statement. Upgrades to 5G service have been accomplished at several existing Verizon sites in that ERI has analyzed without construction of a new tower. Page 162 April 27, 2021 To clarify, it is an upgrade on the equipment that is mounted on the tower that provides a service upgrade, not the tower itself. Capital Telecom contends that the WAVV tower does not have the capacity to serve coverage needs. We assume this statement is based on the faulty Kimley-Horn review of EBI Consulting's Structural Analysis Report that was submitted to the Collier County as part of Attachment K, application backup materials Exhibit B. 'Vil 'k" The WAVV-FM tower has not been analyzed by ERI for Verizon since 2011, at which time a small amount of bracing reinforcements were required to bring the tower into compliance with the applicable design standard at the time, which Verizon agreed to have fabricated and installed by ERL dqok-� llk� * Ilik The tower has a fair amount of reserve capacity remaining in it, but the impact of any equipment changes has to be assumed on a case -by -case basis to determine if there are structural issues that require modifications to the tower. Changes in loading at one elevation on a guyed tower will affect member stresses throughout most if not all of such a structure. This is standard practice in the industry. Capital Telecom contends that the WAVV tower is not using modern antennas that have a higher traffic capacity. Each tenant supplies their own antenna for its use on the tower. Given the structural integrity of the existing tower, WAVV-FM is confident that the choice of antenna Verizon desires to deploy could be supported by the existing WAVV tower with minimal reinforcements. I,,, To date, ERI has not provided a list of Verizon's proposed equipment or an order for a structural analysis to assess the new equipment's impact on the tower; therefore, further comment cannot be made on that issue, and it is misleading to say otherwise. Capital Telecom Holding contends that the WAVV-FM tower lacks structural capacity for Verizon's new deployment. Again, each Page 163 April 27, 2021 tenant supplies their own antenna for use on the tower. While it may be correct that the tower does not have the capacity to support Verizon's new deployment without reinforcements of some kind, WAVV-FM is very certain that the overstresses reported in the EBI report are incorrect and an extreme overstatement of the work that would be required. The location of the reported overstresses is a strong indicator of this. The overstresses reported in EBI's analysis are near the top of the main tower, not at the 220-foot level where Verizon's equipment is to be located. It cannot be stated enough times, this tower has been reinforced to meet applicable code at the time of every tenant's equipment change or addition, and at this point WAVV-FM has no reason to believe the tower could not be reinforced to support Verizon's loading, whatever that might be. Capital Telecom states that the pink, red, or magenta shown in the maps is unreliable coverage. This is misleading, as it infers that WAVY tower does not provide reliable coverage. While a change to the equipment proposed by Verizon to deploy may fill coverage issues, adding a site a few hundred feet away in an area as devoid of topographic features as this area in South Florida is unlikely to result in a gain in coverage. More likely, this is an equipment issue which could be easily addressed by choice of antenna to be deployed on the existing WAVV tower. Capital Holding contends that WAVV -- that the WAVV tower structurally fails from a code standpoint. The Collier County communication tower inspection checklist that is included in Exhibit D in our letter of concern dated March 4, 2019, speaks for itself. This tower checklist is performed by Collier County every three years for guyed towers to ensure that the tower is in good repair. The next inspection would be performed in March of 2022. We Page 164 April 27, 2021 assume this statement is based on the faulty Kimley-Horn review of EBI Consulting's Structural Analysis Report that was submitted. Moreover, ERI has performed a structural analysis for Verizon in 2011 in which reinforcements were designed and installed to accommodate their proposed loading charges, all of which conform to the then current code standards Capital Telecom contends that it will provide improved.. coverage for Verizon over the WAVV tower. Again, each tenant supplies their own antenna for use on the tower. WAVV-FM is confident that the choice of antenna Verizon desires to deploy could be supported by the existing WAVV tower with minimal reinforcements. Q , � In addition, unless Capital Telecom is proposing a replacement structure design to a higher risk category designation than Risk Category 2, which is the current designation of the WAVV-FM tower, the reference to 911 service and improved coverage is misleading, as there is no gain in coverage by adding a new tower that the existing tower could not handle. Capital Telecom states that the proposed tower would improve coverage capacity and compatibility for Verizon and provide new coverage for AT&T as well as providing wireless broadband service. This is misleading, as the WAVV tower could service all of these needs. —,W` Verizon is currently on the WAVV-FM tower. ERI completed a structural analysis for AT&T to perform an equipment upgrade on the WAVV tower. A small amount of reinforcements would be required to allow the installation of AT&T's equipment; however, this standard is -- this is standard practice, and similar reinforcements to the WAVV structure have been performed throughout the tower's lifespan. Small amounts of reinforcement have been fairly Page 165 April 27, 2021 regularly -- have been required fairly regularly whenever a tenant increases their loading significantly or when major changes to the tower design standard come into effect, and this structural analysis for AT&T was done in February of 2021. Capital Telecom Holdings contends that WAVV -- the WAVV tower would not be able to support the proposed load shown in Mr. Kelly Shanahan's report, specifically the tower legs in several sections would become overstressed. Again, this is -- this -- we assume this statement is based on the faulty Kimley-Horn review of the EBI Consulting Structural Analysis Report. The WAVV tower has not been analyzed for Verizon since 2011, at which time a small amount of bracing reinforcements were required to bring the tower into compliance with the applicable design standard at the time. � To specifically address the misstatement that the existing tower would not be able to support the proposed load in Mr. Shanahan's report, there are no tower -leg issues in the area pointed out in that report, and any overstresses that they report are due to an improper application of the 222-G or 222-H standard in their analysis. Further, the EBI analysis from 2018 is outdated in that the 222-G standard is no longer the correct design standard nor is the Florida Building Code, 6th edition, the correct version of the building code. As of January 1 st of this year, the 222-H standard and the FBC 7th edition are the applicable design standards for this site. Lastly, the loading in the EBI report is not correct, and there have been several equipment changes since 2018. Design standards change as steel design methodology and wind engineering increase in knowledge. The 2018 structural analysis completed for Sprint under the 222-G standard passed and was compliant under the 2017 Florida Building Code. The structural analysis of the tower completed for AT&T revealed the need to add Page 166 April 27, 2021 reinforcement pursuant to their loading modifications and the Florida Building Code; however, this would be taken care of with an order for a reinforcement design and, once performed, the new loading capacity would be met as well as compliance with the current code. The overstresses are minor and readily fixed. Updating is standard practice in the industry. Lastly, Capital Telecom contends that the WAVV tower is over 40 years old, built to older codes and, thus, outdated and, therefore, there is a need for a new tower versus the existing WAVV-FM tower. The WAVV-FM tower was built in 1986. It is currently 35 years old. While it is true the tower was built to an older version of the design standard, the tower owner and the various tenants over the years have done an excellent job of keeping the structure up to current standards by installing reinforcements as needed to accommodate loading changes as they occur. This is standard practice in the industry. � - -- The tower was built by one of the most reputable tower designers and fabricators of that time, providing a structure that has met the needs of many different tenants and types of service over the years while generally requiring only minimal reinforcements. The tower is fairly easy to reinforce when necessary since all the bracing members are bolt -on and, thus, able to be fairly easily changed out when needed. The applicant in the instant case has not complied with 5.05.09.D.1 requiring that the applicant contact the owner of all old and improved towers within the effective radius that can possibly accommodate the needs of the applicant. The code takes into account structural changes that may be necessary to accommodate antenna. Only if financially impracticable would the existing tower be deemed unavailable to the applicant. As well, it should be noted that in the instant case the Page 167 April 27, 2021 applicant is not a cell phone service provider looking to accommodate its antenna; rather, the applicant is a proposed cell tower itself hoping to lease space to potential cellular service tenants. We have also attached an environmental comments report prepared by Synecological Analysis, environmental evaluation and advocacy, for your review regarding the proposed location of the new tower. I would like to have Brown Collins, who is an ecologist with Synecogical Analysts, comment. He has more than 48 years of experience in Southwest Florida, his CV is attached to our letter of concern, and he'll be speaking on the environmental impacts. Thank you very much for your time. MR. COLLINS: Madam Chair, can I just -- I don't know how you want -- I didn't realize these people were all in a group with this one organization and that they weren't going to be -- do you want them all to speak, or do you just want them to me speak as they want? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think the -- this is the other side, so they should speak -- I think the attorney will bring them up. I think there's a -- Ms. Alpert, I'm sorry. I think I brought you up too quickly. I do apologize. But I think you would like to have a rebuttal at this point? MS. JAHN: Madam Chair, Mattaniah Jahn again. If there's going to be additional members of the public speaking, if you intend to have them speaking, then I would hold my rebuttal until the end. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. All right. Thank you. MS. FINK: If the commissioners have any questions for our engineer, Mr. Lampert, he is available for technical questions on the phone. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, I don't see any. Thank you. MS. FINK: And I'll call Brown Collins. Thank you. MR. COLLINS: Good afternoon. My name is Brown Collins. Brown like the color is my first name. I'm with Synecological April 27, 2021 Analysts. It's a local environmental consulting firm. And I was asked to look at the record, and to the extent I could evaluate the site in the -- you know, around conditions. And it was sort of odd looking at it, because I've spent a long-time permitting facilities, and there's usually a logical route to get to the end of where you're going. And if this was where's Waldo, I haven't found it yet, because in sort of short order, the applicant is asking for a conditional -use permit in proximity to a capable nearby facility in a Natural Resource Protection Area in proposed critical habitat unit for a federally listed species on what seems to be a site that was cleared with no approval from anybody in one of the most fire -prone areas of the county. That's without any federal alternatives discussion as required under the Clean Water Act. So it just doesn't logically impute to me. I am familiar with the general area. I did not access the site, but I checked across the -- you know, I drove by. I looked. I checked the surrounding area. And I -- you know, I just don't understand it. Normally, on at least the towers that -- and I'll average probably in my practice a tower, maybe two towers a year of the size of the Alpert Tower. And normally you go through a progression, and this is certainly one of them, but there normally is parallel processes from the state and the federal agencies. The applicant here got a 10-2, certification from the state, which is fine, because of the nature of their facility, but so far as I can tell, there were no state wetlands staff on site. A 10-2 certification, the staff will normally check between 5 and 10 percent of the permits issued under that. So perhaps someone was there, perhaps someone wasn't. I checked with the local office of the Corps of Engineers to see if there was any record in the federal permit chain for any Clean Water Act evaluation of this facility, and they said they had no record Page 169 April 27, 2021 of one. There's lots of information in the environmental record here. At the gross level, the further you go down the cone of reference, the less specific information there is about this. There's a very detailed treatment of the Florida bonneted bat but no notation subsequently in the record that this is now included in the proposed critical habitat unit, and critical habitat units are a parallel and equally important to the Endangered Species Act. So the act -- you know, first you identify the species, then you create the critical habitat units to give sustainability to the species and hopefully some umbrella of safety and protection for it, and I don't think that was noted. There is a very good floristic evaluation of the site they -- it's sort of like reading the botanical phone book. You go down and say, who and who and who lives here? But in terms of the ecological character of the site, the history -- in the letter that I submitted, the Brugger firm, there's a photo of cleared trees on the site, which just happens to be where the tower is. And with doing this progression of activities, there's a considerable probability this area, prior to a series of fires, would have been considered a wetland, because many of the sites near by -- the Willow Run Mine is a good example -- where you get fires so hot it will burn the base of the palm tree below ground level, and they're typically replaced with things like bracken fern and cabbage palm, which is what you have on this site. So that's -- you know, that's my logical route and brief environmental summary of what gives me pause here. If you have questions, I'll be glad to answer them. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. Thank you very much. MR. COLLINS: You bet. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So is that -- anyone else to present? MS. JAHN: Madam Chair, may I ask for a point of Page 170 April 27, 2021 clarification? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. MS. JAHN: Members of the public objecting to an application get three minutes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's correct. MS. JAHN: We've gone far beyond that just with -- A CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I considered him an expert, but maybe that was misconstrued. No? V*4*:�' MR. KLATZKOW: No, this is fine. This is a battle of two tower owners, and one tower is saying that you should use my tower, and the other tower is saying I can't use your tower because it's no darn good, and it's as simple as that. Mp", � A CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So it's okay -- MR. KLATZKOW: It was fine. You've heard from the two tower owners. The public generally gets three minutes. MR. MILLER: I do believe I have some actual just public comment splintered in with this. So when you're ready for that, let me know. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So have you finished your experts? MR. BRUGGER: I'd like Mr. Baxa to speak as to some recent activity that's going on. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And his qualifications are? MR. BRUGGER: He is the tower engineer. MR. BAXA: I am the broadcast engineer. I'm the chief engineer for WAVV-101 Radio. I'm also the site manager for the Alpine tower. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MR. BAXA: And I have been in negotiations with AT&T as recently as last week with regards to them locating on our tower. As was stated earlier, the optimum height for AT&T would be at 250 feet, which the new tower could not provide, but Alpine can Page 171 April 27, 2021 provide that for AT&T. A tower study has been done by ERI for AT&T, and the Alpine Tower can accommodate AT&T as well as Verizon. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Any questions? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I have questions. I ink you're the subject -matter expert I've got my questions for. MR. BAXA: Sure. _1 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: One question was already answered, but I just wanted you to confirm it. So the tower -- the current WAVY tower's 35 years old, correct? MR. BAXA: Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: What you just stated about AT&T and Verizon, that the WAVV tower can accommodate it but with some additional construction to get it to that height. MR. BAXA: Yes. &&I V *61 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Has WAVV budgeted that into their budget? Are they -- you know, even -- MR. BAXA: Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- though, like you said, it could handle it, would WAVV be willing to do it? Have they already -- MR. BAXA: Absolutely, yeah. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. And then buried in your conversation, I picked out one little piece that I hope I get right. But you had said there was an inspection done in 2011 showing that reinforcement was suggested. I was just wondering if it was done -- MR. BAXA: Yes, it was. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- in 2011. MR. BARRETT: Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And then in your conversation, too, you said, with minimal structural reinforcement, Page 172 April 27, 2021 we could address any overstresses by future customers. So I guess that sort of dovetails into a previous question I asked. You're prepared to do those? MR. BAXA: Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And then lastly, has you lost -- has WAVY lost any customers on that tower yet? I know you're going back and forth with new tower, old tower, but has anybody taken their antenna off of your tower waiting for the new one? M ` a MR. BAXA: No, no nobody has yet. Verizon is still on the WAVV tower. Of course, Nextel is no longer on the tower. When the analysis was done by EBI, they still had the Nextel antennas on the tower, which had been long gone. As we all know, Nextel is out of business. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right. MR. BAXA: And so they no longer exist, so -- which, again, is another reason why the EBI tower study is flawed. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: How long would it take to add that additional height that you need for Verizon? And what would the cost be? MR. BAXA: Yeah, it's not a matter of height. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. MR. BAXA: It's just a matter of doing structural reinforcement. I believe that the total would be about 30- to $351000. ' - 4 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Thank you. MR. BAXA: You're welcome. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have a question. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Yes, Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Before you go Page 173 April 27, 2021 away -- and maybe you or Jack, one. I heard -- for you, ma'am. Linda, forgive me, will you come up, please. I have a question for you. MR. BAXA: Are you done with me? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I think I'm done with you. MR. BAXA: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. During your presentation, Linda -- and, again, that's where it became fairly evident to me what our County Attorney said, that we have two competing towers here that are looking for business. I guess my question is, you made several representations that, upon request with a simple modification of structural enhancement, Verizon could have what they want, AT&T could have what they want. Why isn't that already done? MS. FINK: I don't know. The Capital Telecom has never -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: _ Well, they don't have to come talk to you. I'm talking 4%, MS. FINK: No, they don't, but I don't know their private dealings, them and Verizon having some side deal. I have no idea what goes with their dealings. I just know that per the code we're supposed to be approached as an existing tower to see if we have the capability of putting what they propose as a new antenna on before any new tower is approved. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I see. Okay. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Brugger. MR. BRUGGER: I'd like -- if I could, John Brugger. Linda is with my firm, and she did the research on the paper she submitted. Verizon never approached for an upgrade on the tower. Their last upgrade took place in 2011. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. MR. BRUGGER: AT&T, Ms. Jahn's suggests that she's got a Page 174 April 27, 2021 letter of intent, but twice in April AT&T has met with the Alpert Tower about -- they want the additional height. As they said -- Ms. Jahn said, they intend to drop them down below 200 feet. They want the -- it appears -- we haven't got a signed deal yet, but they've been meeting regularly during April to upgrade their equipment. They do have, although we haven't received it yet, the specs. I believe, Al, is that correct, for upgrading the tower % 114 MR. BAXA: Yes. ��/ MR. BRUGGER: -- that AT&T has come forth with. They haven't been delivered to us yet, but the tower would be upgraded to allow AT&T to work at the height that they w There would be no problem. If Verizon comes forward and presents their equipment to ERI, our tower equipment engineer, which can be checked by theirs, EBI, to determine the cost of an upgrade if they want to put heavy equipment on -- and as Ms. Fink said, the coverage area is not controlled by the height of the tower necessarily. If they want more height, Alpine Tower's got a thousand feet. It's about the equality of the equipment. They want to upgrade their equipment; that's going to upgrade the coverage area. But, again, the code says you go to the existing towers first before you just put another tower in next door. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My question -- thank you, Jack. My question comes to the County Attorney -- if I may, Madam Chair. My question for the County Attorney is is if -- was there sufficient documentation to show that code was followed with regard to the new tower request? MR. KLATZKOW: The applicant has the burden of proof on this. The applicant has to demonstrate to you that there's no old or approved tower that could do what they want to do. They've Page 175 April 27, 2021 submitted all the evidence to you, all right, and you need to make a ruling on it one way or the other. Staff does not have the expertise to take a look at the two expert reports and say this one's good and this one's not good. They're just not in the tower business. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: With specific representation from the Alpine folks with the -- with the theoretical violation in the code that they weren't approached in an appropriate manner, was that done or not? That's not our job to ascertain -- MR. KLATZKOW: It is precisely your job, because this is a quasi-judicial hearing, and you get to make the you get to make the determination. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So then staff would make a recommendation of approval of an application for a conditional -use change if there wasn't sufficient documentation to show that the code wasn't followed? � - N* '* MR. BRUGGER: That's what's occurred. MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. I'm being distracted by a cell phone. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not being argumentative. MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, sir. You've got two things going here. Usually what we're talking about is a conditional use, and it's relatively easy for staff to review it, and then the Board reviews it. Here you've got a twist on it because it's more than just a conditional use. There's a prerequisite in the LDC that in order to have the applicant even come forward, they have to demonstrate that there's no other tower that can do this. Again, it's a burden of proof. If you believe from what you've heard that the applicant has met its burden of proof, that they cannot use their tower, all right, then you would -- you deny it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And this isn't resonating with Page 176 April 27, 2021 me. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no, no. You're talking about two things. What was stated by Mr. Brugger is that the applicant was required to come to the existing cell tower -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that's their contention. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- owners to announce that they were going to do that. They indicated that that has never happened. Is it required that the applicant show that they come -- that they actually have contacted or some kind of proof? _ W% ` a MR. KLATZKOW: Let me put the LDC provisions up. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Kind of. And that's -- and that flows in line with what our County Attorney said earlier, that this is two competing towers. �*W--qft-, 11* We're being asked to approve a conditional use. Our code alleges -- or our code says you have to give -- that the new applicant for the new conditional use has to give sufficient notice to the previous tower, and they're representing that that wasn't done. That has nothing to do with the capacity and enhanced service and all that other stuff. And then there are -- there are lease arrangements that are involved with Verizon and AT&T that haven't been effectuated on the new Alpine tower that are necessarily in the works, but that's not why we're here today. We're here to talk about this -- and I wanted clarification from you -- MR. KLATZKOW: It falls under D. It's the applicant must -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: D.1. MR. KLATZKOW: The applicant must demonstrate that no old or approved tower within the effective radius can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna. For purposes of discovery availability for the use of towers, the applicant shall contact the owner, you know. So it's the applicant's burden. The twist on this one is that this provision assumes that Verizon would be the tower Page 177 April 27, 2021 owner as well. Here you've got two independent tower companies, all right. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh. MR. KLATZKOW: And so I don't have anybody from Verizon here that I see -- and I might be mistaken -- to say whether or not Verizon actually contacted the old tower owner and asked. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: But it's not Verizon -- forgive me. I don't -- N MR. KLATZKOW: It is not Verizon's -- _ f% COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm a little bit tired, but I -- and maybe I'm not asking the question properly. This isn't a Verizon or an AT&T issue. This is an applicant that is applying for a conditional use in our community. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And it's represented by the current tower owner that they were not properly initiated per this portion of our code. They weren't properly communicated with per this -- per this condition of our code. That's their representation. MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I have a staff recommendation coming to me that says they recommend approval of this conditional -use request. MR. KLATZKOW: You will need to ask staff whether or not they reviewed that issue. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Gotcha. MR. BRUGGER: Please note, the statute -- or the ordinance says "shall." COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand -- I got that, sir. MR. KLATZKOW: You also have the applicant that you can ask the direct question to, you know, did you contact the owner? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And, again, now that Page 178 April 27, 2021 we -- now that I see what's, in fact, going on here and that I have two competing tower owners with a bunch of different tenants that are hooked to the same tower, they're both going to say, necessarily, whatever they need to. I need to hear from my staff that's making the recommendation that our code was adhered to. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: He's right there. He's right there COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. Yes, that was an issue for staff, and we did verify that this communication did occur, and we had proof that the communication was made. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And it was in the parameters of our code? MR. BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Now, before you go away, environmentally -- there was environmental representations made by Brown. Did we review any of the environmental requisites on the application for the conditional use? MR. BELLOWS: It was routed to our environmental staff, and I'd have to look closely what their response was. But we did have a recommendation of approval. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And what -- what communication? You said you had proof. What was the proof? MR. BELLOWS: It was part of their application package that they� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They said they did? MR. BELLOWS: Well, there was a letter, I believe. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Environmental Services. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, I don't mean the Environmental Page 179 April 27, 2021 Services. I mean the actual contact from applicant to the -- MR. BELLOWS: Yes. It was my understanding in the file that there's a letter. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I didn't see that. MR. BRUGGER: I'd like to see the letter. It doesn't exist. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, I didn't see it. MR. BELLOWS: I'll have to double-check. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Could you get somebody to do that right now while we're going through this? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. MR. BRUGGER: And, again, the proof that our tower does not meet standards is based on a 2011 study which they worked -- reworked using an incorrect formula. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And understand, sir, my decision's not based upon their representations of the quality of your tower or size, shape, color, any of those lines. My decision here is with whether or not they followed our code, and my staff s making the recommendation similarly that came to us from the Planning Commission. Their representations about your property really doesn't matter anymore than your representations about theirs to me. MS. FINK: May I make a comment? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course. MS. FINK: I have a copy of the transcript that was from the last meeting, from the March meeting. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Planning Commission meeting? MS. FINK: Yes. And on Page 62 of the transcript, stated by Mr. Klatzkow, the key issue to be determined for approval pursuant to the Florida Land Development Code turns on whether or not the proposed equipment could be put onto an existing tower. The applicant must demonstrate that no old or approved tower within the April 27, 2021 effective radius can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna and ancillary equipment. And Mr. Finn conceded in that transcript that the staff had not looked into this issue at all. I have copies of the transcript with me if everyone wants a copy. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So a question to Mr. Klatzkow, or I guess the County Manager. How would staff verify that? They would have to bring in their own experts. MR. KLATZKOW. Is Mr. Finn here? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Who is Mr. Finn?� MR. KLATZKOW: He's your staff person. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, the staff person that reviewed the application. w4h, "%, A *� MS. JAHN: This is Mattaniah Jahn. May I be heard? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Can we just -- you definitely can be heard. Let's close this one, and then we'll -- you will have the floor, ma'am. 6, - F """ — MR. FINN: Yes. for the record. I'm Tim Finn. Princibal Planner. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Did you review the codes requisite for the current applicant to communicate with the existing tower that's 200 feet away? MR. FINN: I did not. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Who did? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Who did or who would? MR. FINN: This petition was under two previous planners. When I had got this petition initially back in December, it was assumed that they had done the work. MR. KLATZKOW: Mr. Finn, do we know for a fact whether or not anybody from staff reviewed this issue? It's yes or no. MR. FINN: No. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll move for a continuance Page 181 April 27, 2021 until we get that figured out. We can't -- I can't make a -- I can't make a decision on this if -- with the staff recommendation for approval if I can't substantiate that that was fulfilled. I don't think -- I don't think it would be prudent for me to make that decision. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think that's -- you know, I think that's very wise, I think, at this point. Because staff has claimed something in the executive summary that they can't substantiate, I think we have to ask for a continuance. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I would agree. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I would just add that, one, I don't know if -- it's probably up to the applicant whether or not they would want a continuance. I would suggest that that's probably a very prudent thing. &&, V MR. KLATZKOW: No, it's not up to the applicant. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: For the Board. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We can continue something even if the applicant -- I MR. KLATZKOW: Given the circumstances, if the Board wants -- I don't know -- how much time, Mr. Finn, do you need to go through this to make a verification? MR. FINN: I'll have to defer to my manager, Ray Bellows. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, if we can continue it, I would be in favor of that, but I would also add that the applicant has the burden to show that the tower is, essentially, not suitable. And so what I'm going to want to hear is from the applicant's engineers as to why this tower is not suitable. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And there's a whole lot of other things that it seems to me that the burden is on the applicant to show Page 182 April 27, 2021 that I haven't heard yet, so -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, they do have it in the written literature, and I actually had a meeting with Ms. Jahn -- I'm interrupting you, but I don't mean to. But even at that point, it's he said/she said. If we don't have our own independent engineer verifying it -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I agree. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- then we're nowhere. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was going to be my comment to what you're saying. I mean, again, it's -- their engineer represents that there are deficiencies in the existing tower. The existing tower says no, we can -- with $35,000, we can fix it and make it go. We have staff -- we have staff engineers that need to be reviewing these things, I think, to be able to make an assertation as to whether or not they fit the code and approval of the conditional uses as requested. I know a lot about engineering but not enough to compare two different engineers' reports on something. That needs to be done by our staff. ) � � MR. KLATZKOW. I don't know that you have the technical expertise on staff. I mean, Leo? This is a very technical issue. Staff can come back and tell you whether or not they believe the applicant spoke with the existing tower owner, but I don't know if we have the technical expertise on staff for something like this. This is very specialized stuff. I just don't know. ., COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You're absolutely surrounded, Mattaniah. So just be still. MR. COHEN: Thaddeus Cohen, Department Head, Growth Management, for the record. We would have to go to an outside firm in order to do that type of work. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And so -- Page 183 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Let's do it. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And this is maybe an oversimplified question, and it goes along with what Commissioner Solis was talking about: How can I get a recommendation of approval from my staff if that wasn't ascertained to be fulfilled within the code? If the burden of proof is on the applicant and that burden of proof wasn't fulfilled, or ratified by my staff, how could I get an approval -- or a recommendation of approval? MR. COHEN: What I would say is that we will need to go back and take a look at the basis for that. What you've heard from our staff is that was not looked at, and what you're weighing is what we weighed, which was the he or the she and the she on both sides and made that value judgment. But if we want to move a step further to take a look at the technical aspect of it, it would be my opinion that we pause, allow us to bring someone else in and do that value judgment on our behalf. - F '--- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we need to. Ms. Jahn, do you want to - MS. JAHN: Just to follow up, Mattaniah Jahn again. And just to follow up on the documentation regarding the request, you won't see a request from Capital because conversations about collocation, since this is a build -to -suit site, happen between the carrier -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Say that again, please. You -- say that again, please. You won't find written communication from Capital to Alpine because? MS. JAHN: That conversation happens between the carrier and the existing tower owner. The other thing that's going on is that this -- your code is based on the idea of a new entrant coming into the area saying, I want to add a tower, so your code logically says, go ask the existing tower MG = April 27, 2021 owner if they can modify their tower. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That would be AT&T or Verizon in this particular -- or some other company that was actually a provider? MS. JAHN: It wouldn't be Verizon in this instance; it would be T-Mobile. The idea that a carrier themselves are going to apply for a tower is out of step with the current state of the industry. The vast majority of towers are built in a build -to -suit standard, which means that the carrier says, in this case Verizon, says, Capital, we can't upgrade our collocation here. You need to find us a tower of this height. The approach to this, since we are running backwards to the fact pattern assumed by your code, because your code assumes a new entrant, let's say it's T-Mobile coming in to add a tower, because I'll just pick on them. Instead, it's Verizon currently being on that tower and having intimate knowledge of the status of that tower moving off, we don't exactly fit in your code. So what we provided was a structural analysis showing just how badly this existing tower fails, and I am ready to have Mr. Shanahan provide more -- provide testimony on that. That said, if you need from a procedural perspective for Capital to send a letter to Alpine saying, here's the loading that's been in the record for the past -- since July -- since October 2018, can you make it work on your tower, we will do that, and we will request a continuance. I do submit that the idea that they had no idea what the loading is, is a bit disingenuous because it's been in the record in that structural analysis since we applied for since -- in 2018. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think the issue is, is that your engineer says this, and the Alpine Tower says this. I think the issue is we need to know, and we need an unbiased expertise -- expert opinion separate from both entities to verify or to negate what is Page 185 April 27, 2021 being brought to us. This will make our decision -making a lot easier and, frankly, accurate. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, could I inquire? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Are there any others -c speakers, or is this -- MR. MILLER: As near I can tell, I have four people that are not affiliated with these organizations that are waiting to speak. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The reason I ask is I would recommend that we finish the public hearing. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm fine with that. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And then we continue this to the next meeting for the sole purpose of hearing the engineering issues there, then make a decision as opposed to any other evidence or testimony. � - "qp* y-- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm comfortable. And that the engineering issues will be held at the next meeting, not right now. At that point then both will be brought up, and then we can have it examined. MS. JAHN: Okay. So by "engineering," you mean that each side -- each -- Alpine and Capital will present their structural analyses and why they disagree; is that correct? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, but you -- well in advance our expert will be examining the written documents on both -- for both towers, on the engineering of both towers. MR. KLATZKOW: And I would defer to Thaddeus on that. I don't know that that's enough time to go out and get an expert, two weeks. MR. BRUGGER: Excuse me. I don't believe we've got a complete equipment list of what the antenna hang on the tower. She April 27, 2021 says it's in their 18th [sic] study, but it didn't list the equipment so we could determine what's needed. AT&T has provided us with that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So given that, then I think we definitely need to hear the rest of the public comment and then allow you both to work this out, because if we're going to bring in an expert, we need to understand -- we need to have -- we don't need you to come back and say, well, this isn't completed. This isn't 'w complete. ^N! COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Madam Chair -- and I'm totally okay with finishing up with the public comment and going on with the -- and bringing this back in a couple weeks. But just rereading this right here where -- that's up on the screen, it's -- you know, we -- there apparently, as represented by the Alpine Tower folks, wasn't the notice sent to them to accommodate that. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Because the applicant -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: _ And then a whole bunch more. &N, CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. There was a technical reason for that, but I think the big -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Technical reasons or not, I don't mean to -- I'm not arguing with you, please. I'm just -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm just -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There wasn't -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There wasn't even though -- even though a substantive period of time has transpired, it's supposed to be -- that time clock doesn't start to tick, the way I interpret that, as -- for and until that notice is sent to the existing tower owner that a use change or a facility change is about. MS. JAHN: If you are feeling procedurally -- Mattaniah Jahn, again. Page 187 April 27, 2021 Commissioner McDaniel, if you are feeling procedurally snagged, we will send that letter. It's going to come -- as far as loading goes, the loading is provided in the form of, I believe, square inches of loading. But we will request a continuance and provide that letter so that way we can document your file. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well -- and that starts the first process. That, apparently, would then take care of that issue there maybe, and then we also -- then we get to get in and talk about the rest of the engineering and the other things that have now popped up on the screen. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I just add that there's -- Paragraph No. D.1 continues, and then there's a whole bunch of other provisions that are relevant to the decision that we have to make. You know, I would suggest that the applicant -- I don't think the applicant can say, well, I'm not -- I'm not a provider, so I don't need to provide some of this information. It says that the applicant -- for purposes of discovering availability for use of towers within the effective radius, the applicant shall contact the owner of all approved towers within the affected radius that can possibly accommodate the needs of the applicant. And later on it talks about the applicant providing the specifications for what is going to be hung on the tower. _,W` So, you know, I don't -- I don't think that we can make a decision if all those dots aren't connected, and to say that, well, the owner of the tower that's the applicant isn't going to hang anything on its own tower and that way there's a -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They don't have to do that. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: They don't have to do that. I don't think we can make a decision that way. MR. BRUGGER: Thank you. And she suggested -- o i i April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, Mr. Brugger. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. MS. JAHN: Mattaniah Jahn, again. The approach -- the theory of this application is that the Alpine Tower cannot possibly accommodate Verizon's upgraded collocation because it fails so badly, and that's -- the documentation brought for that was the structural analysis, and that's why we are -- procedurally, where we are at. Again, if you want us to request a continuance for a set period of time so that way we can provide you that request -- I don't know if they will answer it in time, but we will provide the request, and we'll provide time, then we will. 1%, ,%, A *� But, again, our approach to this, because we don't fit readily within the logic of this, is that it fails so badly it can't accommodate Verizon, and that's how we got to this place today. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And where we are today is we have to have -- we have to under -- we have to have a third party review that, and that would be -- that would be the county, and it's going to take about a month, probably. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There has to be -- and on top of that, there has to be some -- again -- and I don't -- I'm not arguing with you, but you're applying your own logic to our code with regard to your requisites for what you want to actually accomplish, and I'm not sure your logic applies to this code as I see it. I understand your contention. I understand your reasoning. But I'm not sure I concur with your logic for why you didn't feel you needed to fulfill the notification processes that are delineated right here. MS. JAHN: Mattaniah Jahn, again. I understand, Commissioner McDaniel, and we will go through the notification process. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I -- M = April 27, 2021 MR. BRUGGER: John Brugger for Alpine Tower. We'd like a list of the equipment, and we'd be glad to provide them with our analysis after it's done by our engineers with the correct formula. But we need a list of equipment, not a pressure per square inch. Distance off the tower, other things could affect the stress load. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I'll just -- can I just add one last thing -- and this will be all I have to say -- is we're sitting -- this is a quasi-judicial proceeding, so we're sitting here kind of as judges. I'm a little concerned with now going out and hiring our own engineer and spending money on that. My feeling is, as a litigator, was the two parties -- well, especially the applicant has the burden, has to come and convince us that their engineer is right. Yes, we're not engineers but, you know, I just -- I think we could start spending a lot of money that maybe we shouldn't spend and haven't spent in the past. &&, V COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I agree with you. We should not be hiring and doing that, but we can evaluate an engineering report -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sure. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- from both parties and then make a decision. I agree with you, we should not be spending a whole lot of money to have -- three engineers would then be involved, and that makes no sense to me. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, I don't -- I agree. I don't want to shut anybody down here and not look at all the different processes, but if the burden of proof was supposed to come to this meeting and it didn't happen, I mean, technically, I could tell you I could -- I feel like anybody here could make the motion and say "disapproved." I'm disappointed that the staff that went through all those steps didn't catch something like this, but this is part of the process. But I Page 190 April 27, 2021 certainly wouldn't support us -- like what Commissioner Solis and Saunders both said, I agree that, you know, I don't think the burden's on us to bring out outside engineers and whatnot. I think the burden's on the applicant. And if they haven't made it -- I mean, I've actually heard enough right now to actually vote on it. But if we want to give everybody the benefit of the doubt, which we do; we're trying to be accommodating and whatnot. There's missing pieces here. I don't think we go through too many gyrations on the staff s point. I think the burden's on your side, and information needs to be provided on your side. I do have one question for Mr. Klatzkow. Let's say that the applicant comes to WAVV and WAVV says, yep, our tower would need reinforcement but we can do it, but then the -- but AT&T or Verizon says, yeah, but we don't want to put our antenna on a 35-year-old multiple reinforced tower. Would they have the -- would they have the latitude to -- would that be enough to say, we know you can do it, but we don't want to hang our expensive piece of equipment on something that's being reinforced several times, and it's 35 years old?" MR. KLATZKOW: Your code is imperfect. It's also outdated. I don't know what else to tell you. I mean, I think this boils down to how much they want to charge Verizon compared to the other one, and we haven't heard that. I haven't heard from Verizon talking about they can't possibly accommodate us because of the weight. I've just got, really, testimony from the two people who are wanting to rent out their spaces. So it's an imperfect code, and this just doesn't fit within our code. It was never contemplated. Your code did not contemplate a dispute like this; it just didn't. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I anticipate this will -- that depending on how this happened, what goes forward, we might look at more of Page 191 April 27, 2021 these kind of disputes. So I think it behooves us to do it properly. I would disagree in this case. I think we need to -- I don't expect us to spend a lot of outside money but -- or taxpayers' money for an expert but, my goodness, staff has verified something that they don't even know that they can because it's been two years, and there's been such an upheaval in Growth Management, no one has tracked it. 8,k ,,,, So I think it behooves us to hire that outside engineer and just get an evaluation of it, and then to bring that back. And I don't know if staff can change its recommendation based on that ` 4 recommendation or it stands as presented, Mr. Klatzkow. MR. KLATZKOW: They can come back and change their recommendation. � *� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I think they need to do their homework. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The homework needs to be done whether it's -- excuse me, Commissioner Saunders. We're having a little bit of communication issues, so -- I saw him reaching for his button, and I think,�.� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no, it doesn't -- we don't have a button. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: In terms of us hiring an engineer, we've heard from two -- I think three of us that we don't want to hire an engineer. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We can sit up here -- she can get their engineering analysis done, they can report that, they can get their engineering analysis done, and then we'll make a decision as to who we believe has carried the burden. That's the normal way of doing it, and that's what -- and I think maybe 30 days. Is that -- we have two meetings in May. The second meeting in May to bring this back. No public hearing, just the issue of can their tower handle Page 192 April 27, 2021 your client's equipment. MS. JAHN: This is Mattaniah Jahn again. I presume 30 days will be okay, but if I may just have a couple minutes to get with my client. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Sure. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And, meanwhile, I think we'll go into public comment. 1' MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's gg our suggestion. y MR. MILLER: And forgive me if these aren't public commenters, but I believe they are. Mr. Donald R. Harring. MR. HARRING: Yes, I have a question. a MR. MILLER: Sir, you're going to have to come to the microphone. MR. HARRING: My name is Donald R. Harring. I'm retired. I moved to Florida in 1986. I met Norman Alpert at the time when he was looking for easements in order to put in Benton Road. At the time we were discussing the fact that he had so many problems getting the easements, and he had to acquire a piece of property. It was owned by Katz, who was located in Canada at that time. And if you bring up that PowerPoint presentation with the two red lines on it, can I get that? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Sir, you have three minutes, sir. You have probably two minutes. MR. HARRING: That easement, that little red dot, that was part of Katz' property. When Norman sold me 10 acres, which was Katz' property, he retained a 30-foot-by-30-foot section of Benton Road which he never sold. That belongs to him or his heirs. I was the first ownership after the time when he sold it, and then I sold it after that missing that 30-by-30-foot section. So that red dot was never approved. Page 193 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kenny Lawry, and then we have Bradley Cornell and Meredith Budd online. I hope I'm getting your last name right, sir. MR. LAWRY: Commissioner McDaniel, how you doing? Distinguished guests. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm doing well. How are you? MR. LAWRY: Not bad. Long time no see. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I didn't hardly see you with the -- MR. LAWRY: Yeah. You remember me. We got burned out last year. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I remember you, sir. How you making out? &&, V MR. LAWRY: Not bad. Appreciate all the help. Thank you. I have a question for the lady there. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, I'm sorry. You have to direct your questions tome. MR. LAWRY: Do you guys know if the upgraded collocation, when they put these new -- or when they transfer their stuff from their old tower to the new tower, is that going to be upgraded? Is it going to be 5G? Is it going to be -- do you guys know any of that -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We don't know -- MR. LAWRY: -- or is it just going to be the old equipment, unbolted, removed, and put on the new tower? Is that going to give it better quality -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We don't know. MR. LAWRY: -- you know, Verizon -- I mean, because that's who I have, Verizon. I live right down the road from there. So I'm thinking all this pomp and circumstance, if it's not going to be Page 194 April 27, 2021 upgraded, they're just going to upgrade the collocation area and not the actual transmitter to give people better coverage, than what's the whole point? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You have a point well taken, sir, and you can ask when this meeting's finished. I'm sure you can direct your questions to Ms. Jahn, and she'll be able to -- MR. LAWRY: You guys don't know? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's not part -- firs f , we usually don't answer questions -- MR. LAWRY. Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- to the public. Send me an email, and I'll answer. 1W*W.1q&_, MR. LAWRY: All right. Thank you, sir. Have a good day. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Or call me, either one. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Bradley Cornell, and he will be followed by Meredith Budd. ► W Brad, I see you're there. You have three minutes. MR. CORNELL: Thanks very much. Madam Chair and Commissioners, this is Brad Cornell. I'm here on behalf of Audubon Western Everglades and Audubon Florida. I wanted to comment on this communication tower relative to migratory bird issues primarily. Florida is a major migratory flyway, including this area, and 6.8 million migratory birds a year are killed by com towers, and most of those deaths could be prevented by better siting, design, or other reasonable steps to avoid and minimize the impacts. So the way to do that is follow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidance on com towers that was written in April 2018, and they say towers should not have guy -wires in the design. You should use a lattice structure or a monopole and, as evidence of that, Page 195 April 27, 2021 the Big Cypress Basin is currently working on installing a new tower that's 300 feet near Lake Trafford with no guy -wires. Also, there's a problem with steady burn lights that attract birds and cause them to fly until they exhaust themselves and drop or hit the guy -wires or the tower. The way to get around that is to use flashing lights. So the current proposal has L810 sidelights that are steady burn. They should be L81017, which flash on the sides, and then that complements the currently proposed top light, which is also a flashing light. Another strategy which should be implemented is the use of aircraft detection lighting systems which basically turns off the lights when there are no airplanes around. The lights actually detect the radar used by airplanes at night, and that's good for neighbors and it's good for birds and the tower. And the other lighting thing is to downshield and use a motion detector on all the ground lights, you know, the security lights around the ground facilities. That's really, really important for wildlife buffering. I just want to also flag the need to not do any vegetation clearing during bird nesting season which is, you know, spring and summer. That's for obvious reasons; not to be killing baby birds in the nest. So Audubon asks that these really reasonable and prudent steps be taken to prevent needless migratory bird deaths from that com tower. We really appreciate your consideration of those design conditions. Thanks. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, my final public commenter on this item is Meredith Budd. And, Meredith, there you are. You have three minutes. MS. BUDD: Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Commissioners. Meredith Budd on behalf of the Florida Wildlife Federation. Thank you for the opportunity to Page 196 April 27, 2021 comment today here virtually. I'm also commenting on the communication towers as it relates to conflicts with migratory birds. These towers, as we all know, serve important roles for our technologically -based society. They facilitate TV, radio, wireless communication, but they do pose a deadly threat to birds. 1%, As Brad mentioned, there are different types of towers And what is being proposed before you today is a guyed -wire tower, and the guy -wires, which help to support tall towers, are difficult for birds to see, especially at night or in bad weather when those towers are lit, as Brad had mentioned. So birds circling the towers easily collide, and they're easily injured or even killed by the impact. The Federation actually submitted comments back when the item was brought to this Planning Commission to allow communication towers in the RFMUD back in 2019 making notes that if this use was allowed, which it was to be consistent with federal guidelines, that it would be imperative for the communication towers to be consistent with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service guidelines for birds. These guidelines specifically state in terms of guy -wires, quote, we recommend using free-standing towers such as lattice towers and monopole structures, end quote. They do note that if the guy -wires are used, excluder [sic] devices can be implemented, and the applicant's doing that, but the main recommendation is to avoid the guy -wires completely. And a study was published in the Journal of Wildlife Management that shows that bird fatalities may be prevented by 69 to 100 percent by constructing unguided towers instead of guyed. As Brad mentioned, our Big Cypress Basin has an existing -- or, excuse me, is proposing a new tower that's 300 feet tower unguided. They actually have an existing tower by Faka Union, also unguided. So it is possible, it is feasible, and it's being done. So for the Page 197 April 27, 2021 current proposal, especially being located in North Belle Meade, it would be inconsistent with the intent of the RFMUD overlay in the North Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area for this tower to pose such a risk to wildlife in these sending lands. It doesn't mean we're opposed to the communication tower, just to the proposed use of the guy -wires. plgk 1*1 So I urge you today to require that the applicant, or when you do make your final decision, to require that the applicant be truly consistent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommendation to avoid guy -wires just like our Big Cypress Basin has done and will continue to do with their future communication towers. Again, it's possible, it's feasible, and there's no reason why the applicant can't use unguided towers. *-F� So thank you so very much for your time, and I appreciate you listening to my comments. &&I V W CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. MR. MILLER: That was your final public comment, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. So we will continue this to the second meeting in May, Ms. Jahn. Does that work for you? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Does she get to pick, or do we? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We do. I'll make a motion that we continue this to the second meeting in May, and -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'd like to hear from Ms. Jahn. MS. JAHN: Based upon the additional information that was brought up by Ms. Budd and also by the other environmental group, let me just check one more time on timeline. I might request a 60-day continuance possibly, if that would be okay. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MS. JAHN: Let me just do a quick check on that time. April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I assume that the public hearing has been closed. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, the public hearing is closed, and I think our -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Why don't we just continue this indefinitely and allow them to come back when they're ready. That way there they're not COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Because she's going to let us know in about 30 seconds, and then if you continue it indefinitely, I think you have to readvertise, and I think there's complications with it. Q%k, ' W MR. KLATZKOW: We've closed the public hearing, so I'm not too concerned about the advertising now. It's just for them coming back at you. %, W COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So there's a bunch of time frames in the ordinance as well.�� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Thirty days here, 30 days there. MS. JAHN: If I may beg your indulgence. I apologize. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. There's -- I was just reading the next page of the ordinance, and there's a whole bunch of other provisions that relate to all this, and there's even -- there at the bottom of what's on the visualizer, there's 30 days after the applicant's inquiry about what the tower can hold, and there's just a whole bunch of stuff in there. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The old tower not renting to the new tower, and -- COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- so on and so forth. MS. JAHN: This is Mattaniah Jahn. I would like to request a Page 199 April 27, 2021 60-day continuance. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. MS. JAHN: So we will be back then. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. We'll see you in -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That would be our second meeting in June. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: June. MR. OCHS: June 22nd. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make the motion for a continuance for 60 days. 14% COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: A e. Y COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, could I just ask the applicant, you're going to give some consideration to the issue of the guy -wires and all of that; is that one of the reasons why you need the 60 days? MS. JAHN: Yes. So this -- we are going to look into that and likely also bring back the consultant who prepared the actual NEPA report. I know we did have Andrew -- Andy Woodruff here to talk about on -site conditions and the like. But, yes, we will be digging into that as well. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No pun intended. Page 200 April 27, 2021 MS. JAHN: Well, it has bird diverters to it. It already complies, but... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) 19 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. MS. JAHN: Thank you for your time. � N CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're welcome. I think our court reporter is deserving a break. What I'd like to do, because it is 4:00, let's give her half an hour. I mean, I'm working her pretty hard. Ten minutes here, half an hour here. You don't need -- how much time do you need? THE COURT REPORTER: Ten is fine. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Ten minutes. So it's -- help me everyone. 4:17. (A brief recess was had from 4:07 p.m. to 4:17 p.m.) MR. OCHS: Madam Chair, you have a live mic. Item # 11 B AN UPDATE ON COVID-19 RELATED RELIEF FUNDING AND ONGOING COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ANY FUNDING AGREEMENTS NECESSARY FOR THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT CORONAVIRUS STATE Page 201 April 27, 2021 AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUND - CONTINUED TO THE MAY 11 TH BCC MEETING AT STAFF' S REQUEST — CONSENSUS MR. OCHS: Staff s requesting to continue Item 11 B to your next meeting, May 11 th. That's the COVID-19 Relief Funding Status Report. In the interest of time, I think if the Board would indulge us, we'd just make that report next meeting. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Comfortable? We're comfortable. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm fine with that. Item #11D A LOCAL MATCH AGREEMENT WITH THE NAPLES PATHWAYS COALITION TO REIMBURSE THE COALITION UP TO $601000 FOR THE PARADISE COAST TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT — APPROVED � '*. MR. OCHS: And also, if the Board would indulge us, we'd like to move 11 D forward at this time. 11 D was previously 16A 10 on the consent agenda. This is a recommendation to approve a local match Naples agreement with the Naples Pathways Coalition to reimburse the coalition up to an amount of $60,000 for the Paradise Coast Trail Feasibility Study and authorize the Chairman to execute the agreement. This item was moved from the consent agenda at Commissioner McDaniel's request. Sir. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. And I just want to make it very clear, I'm not in opposition of this proposition and, of course, you know how I feel about studies. But I am not in favor of Page 202 April 27, 2021 this matching contribution coming from the General Fund. I think -- I think it could and should either come from the MPO and/or the TDT tax, and that's the reason I pulled it forward. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I know there are time constraints, and I know that -- well, that's what I know. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So you want to make a motion? MR. OCHS: Well, the funding for the match, I believe, Trinity, is currently earmarked for the Transportation Capital Fund? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right. That comes out of General Fund, though. MS. SCOTT: Yes. It is out of the funding that -- through our budgeting process that we allocate towards pathways wasn't anything additional that we asked for. It was out of our line item for pathways. &&, V COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Is it up to 60,000 or it's 60-? MS. SCOTT: It is up to $60,000. So as they progress with their consultant, if it's less, then we're only paying I believe it's 17 percent of each invoice up to $60,000. So that is our maximum contribution. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So does that change your mind now that you know that there's a line item within transportation that is allocating money to pathways? COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It doesn't change my mind. I still think it ought to be paid out of TDT funds. I understand. I mean, I got a big long email yesterday from the coalition with regard to the where -ins and where -outs, and this is -- this is a time -sensitive issue, but I still feel the way that I feel, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do we have public speakers? Page 203 April 27, 2021 MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. I have three registered speakers for this item. Michelle Avola will be followed by George Dondanville, and then Matt Smith. MS. AVOLA: Good afternoon. Michelle Avola from Naples Pathways Coalition, for the record. And, yes, you -all did hear from me yesterday, so you probably are up to speed on the things that I will be sharing with you. But just as a reminder, the Paradise Coast Trail, this is going to be a game changer for the entire region. Collier County has so much to gain from this project. And the fact that we have been able to get $250,000 signed into the budget in mid -pandemic last year, that needs to be encumbered by before the end of this fiscal year, which the clock is ticking, and the $250,000 from the state and then $30,000 from the City of Naples with a $60,000 investment from the county where, really, the county has really the greatest benefit to be -- to be had. 11"W y�' y Safety, obviously, is close to my priorities. Health and wellness, sustainable, expands transportation options, but the economic impact of this investment is off the charts. When you look at property values, when you look at business increases, when you look at your tax revenue -- and, yes, tourism will certainly be a benefit as well to have a destination trail for Collier County. It's not going to just benefit tourism, however. And this is going to be a project and a process for a number of years, and the TDC will have time to get involved and invest in this, as will the MPO. But the urgency of this right now is the $250,000 is contingent on this local match. We've raised over $100,000, but it's been spent on the first consulting contract that got us to this point, developing the strategic vision, working with the county and the MPO to be able to develop a study corridor that has legs that can be built. And working with Trinity's office for going on three years Page 204 April 27, 2021 now for this project, looking at where this project will benefit the county, starting in the heart of Naples, then going out to the new Paradise Coast Sports Complex, further up to Ave Maria and Immokalee, north and south corridor from Bonita Springs all the way down Collier Seminole State Park with the desire to connect with Marco Island in the future, this is going to benefit the entire county. Sixty thousand dollars is a small investment for the return we're` going to gain. Thanks. ;ZA MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is George -� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I just was going to ask a question. So they're requesting 60,000 from the county.. There's 30- from the city? N MS. AVOLA: Uh-huh. 'k, COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's 90-. MS. AVOLA: We're providing the other 10-. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: '� Other 10-. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. That's all. MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is George Dondanville, and he would be followed by Nat Smith. MS. AVOLA: George had to leave. MR. MILLER: George had to leave. Then Nat Smith. Mr. Smith, you will be our final registered speaker for this item. MR. SMITH: Good afternoon. Thank you. Nat Smith, Naples resident, taxpayer, bicycle rider, grandparent, veteran, NPC board director as well. Welcome the opportunity to speak to you. I spoke at the City Council meeting, Naples, where the city approved that day their contribution to the feasibility study. Going to make the same two points I made that day supporting this study. First of all, it's a study. We're not asking Collier County to commit Page 205 April 27, 2021 to anything other than a feasibility study, which I feel is good planning. I didn't do as well on my math SATs as I did in the English, but this seems to me like a screaming bargain. It's what, when I was in the business world, we called OMP, other people's money. The county is being asked to contribute 17 percent. Other folks are putting up the other 83. It's a good deal because the county will get 100 percent of the economic benefit. And, you know, you can start with wellness, tourism revenue, recreational use, outdoor exercise. I guess the second point I made to the City of Naples is that Baker Park has been a home run. The pandemic has shown that people are desperate for outdoor recreation, and that's what we are trying to promote. The Paradise Coast Trail will allow a mindful, responsible way to plan ahead for the future. It sets the stage for all sorts of possible futures. It's good planning. So I would respectfully ask you -all to approve county funding for the feasibility study today. Let's not miss this opportunity. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. All right. The public comment part of this issue has been closed. Do I hear a motion? Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Do I hear a motion? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll move for approval. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'll second it. Motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. Page 206 April 27, 2021 CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries 4-1. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Commissioners. Item #9A ORDINANCE 2021-19: AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES (RGGE) SUB -ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN (GGAMP) AND GGAMP FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND RGGE MAP SERIES, SPECIFICALLY TO ESTABLISH THE IMMOKALEE ROAD - ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT AND BY CONDITIONAL USE IN THE COMMERCIAL INTERMEDIATE ZONING DISTRICT (C-3), AND SELECT USES IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-4) ZONING DISTRICT, AT A MAXIMUM INTENSITY OF 2001000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, COMPRISING APPROXIMATELY 19.13 ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF RANDALL BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST — ADOPTED W/CHANGES Item #9B ORDINANCE 2021-20: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE Page 207 April 27, 2021 COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AN ESTATES (E) ZONING DISTRICT TO A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW UP TO 2001000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS BCHD I CPUD ON PROPERTY LOCATED APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF MILE NORTH OF RANDALL BOULEVARD ON THE WEST SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 19.13± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE — ADOPTED W/CHANGES MR. OCHS: Now we move to Item 9A and 9B. These are companion items. They'll be heard together but voted on separately. Let me begin with Item 9A. This is a recommendation to approve an ordinance amending the Rural Golden Gate Estates sub -element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Map specifically to establish the Immokalee Road Estates commercial subdistrict to allow uses permitted by right and by conditional use in the commercial intermediate zoning district C-3 and select uses in the general commercial C-4 zoning district at a maximum intensity of 200,000 square feet of gross floor area and also to transmit the adopted amendments to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. The subject property comprised of approximately 19.13 acres is located on the west side of Immokalee Road approximately one-half mile north of Randall Boulevard. This is an adoption hearing and, as 011 M April 27, 2021 I mentioned, Item 9B is a companion rezoning item which will require participants to be sworn in and also for the Board members to provide ex parte disclosure. So, Mr. Klatzkow, would it be appropriate for the Board to make sure ex parte at this point? MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Let's start with Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I do have disclosures: Meetings, correspondence, and phone calls. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I will also have the same thing: Correspondence, emails, and telephone calls. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner LoCastro. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I had meetings and phone calls. 6& V ""k 1*-,- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: 'And, Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I had a Zoom meeting with the owner's -- the applicant's representative, and an email. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I've had meetings and correspondence. So all those who are going to give testimony, please rise and raise your left hand. THE COURT REPORTER: Right hand. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, right hand. Late in the day, isn't it?* COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Never heard that before. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, raise your left hand. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. DAVIES: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Noel Davies Page 209 April 27, 2021 with the law firm of Davies Duke. I'm here on behalf of an affiliate entity of Barron Collier Companies. The project team is here today, and the subject property is located just north of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard. This is a four -parcel assemblage across the street from the Orangetree neighborhood. Three of the parcels abut the six -lane portion of Immokalee Road as it runs north/south, and we also have a western finger parcel that abuts Fourth Street Northeast. We were previously before you back in October for our transmittal hearing on the GMPA, and you unanimously approved our request for 200,000 square feet of commercial uses. We're back today for our adoption hearing along with the companion PUD application. rlk This is the existing future land use and proposed land -use designations and also the existing zoning and proposed PUD zoning. Again, we're requesting 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, including C-3 uses plus certain very limited C-4 uses, which are listed on this slide. — `* '*. We are providing an interconnection to the north and to the south. Per your request at transmittal, we have a signed shared -access agreement with Mr. Crown, our future neighbor to the south. This agreement will provide the interconnection between the two properties. We have been working closely with our neighbors on Fourth Street Northeast since the beginning of the process. We agreed to prohibit access to our site from Fourth Street. The only access point will be on Immokalee Road. And recently we were able to work through the details or an arrangement with our neighbor immediately to the north of the western finger parcel, Mr. Themel, to allow him to purchase a portion Page 210 April 27, 2021 of that finger parcel and use it for a second personal driveway. This was all memorialized last week. And I do want to thank your staff and County Attorney's Office for working so quickly with us on it. This slide shows the revised GMPA and PUD language to accommodate Mr. Themel's request and has been blessed by County Attorney's Office and your staff. ", &N%, We did also make some changes to our master plan. Incident to that arrangement with Mr. Themel, we shortened our water management lake, and you'll see open space on this version of the master plan on the western 365 -- excuse me -- 361 feet of that parcel. � • A � staff Your is in support of our request. The only point of disagreement with staff is the hours of outdoor amplified sound. The applicant is requesting midnight on weekends for parcels abutting Immokalee Road, and staff would like to condition that to 10:00 p.m. on weekends. KIRS� 4W That concludes the brief version of my presentation, Madam Chair. I'm happy to answer questions, and the team is here as well. Thank you, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You've got one question. One question. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: One? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: One. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: What if I raise two hands? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: He can have one question with six parts. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And I want to thank you for cooperating with Mr. and Ms. Themel. That was admirable what the applicant did -- MR. DAVIES: Absolutely. Page 211 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- to help mitigate the impacts of that retention pond next to their home. They actually called me last night and spoke about that. I was inquisitive about your capacity to limit a structure on someone else's piece of property in order to fulfill in your open -space requisites that were required for your PUD, and my -- and I'm told that you can do that, so that's an allowable request. But my question is, is could I ask -- what I would like to know is -- because I know -- I've had multiple conversations with the applicant about contiguous properties that might be acquired to add to and so on. I would like if you are able at some time in the future to meet the minimum open -space requirements for your PUD, that you lift that restriction on those folks so they could at least -- they could legally build a guest home on this piece of property, and that would allow them better utilization of that. If the applicant would -- I'm not conditioning my approval on that. Th you just an additional nicety, if ou will. 0� MR. DAVIES: No, absolutely. And if I may, Commissioner, we'd be more than happy to work with Mr. Themel with respect to that. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. MR. DAVIES: That is -- the reasoning is the open -space requirements. If something should arise in the future where there's additional open space available such that that restriction could be removed, we'd be happy to work with Mr. Themel on that. MR. KLATZKOW: Perfect. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I had -- I spoke with them about that last night, and they were satisfied with that, so... COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I've got a question. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Davies, are you Page 212 April 27, 2021 agreeable to the 10:00 p.m., or where does that stand? MR. DAVIES: At this point we're still requesting the midnight on weekends just for the parcels that abut Immokalee Road. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Amplified or not amplified? MR. DAVIES: Outdoor amplified sound is the language. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You know -- and, again, this -- we talked about this. If I may, who's going to get the phone calls when the -- I won't be answering the phone on weekends after 10:00, just in case anybody calls. But I have --we have had concerns in the past. We have had complaints in the past when similar type uses have gone in and have had outdoor amplified sound after 10:00. So I would --I would caution in regard to the applicant's request to go -- to go to midnight, and I wouldn't be -- yeah. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm going to go a little further. I don't have a problem with indoor amplified music till midnight, but I have a problem with outdoor amplified music till midnight. So I will support this petition if we go to the 10:00 p.m. on weekends, not the midnight, for outdoor amplified music. I've heard complaints from different parts of the county with -- the sound does travel a long way, so that would be my only condition -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It sure does. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- for voting to approve this. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That would be my same stance as well. I mean, just in the short time I've been in this seat, outdoor sound past 10:00 is not a common occurrence around here, so this would be -- CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- you know, a very unique situation and, I think, overkill. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And, you know, the other Page 213 April 27, 2021 thing to take into consideration, this is the first of many to come. We know the applicant to the south is coming in with a several -hundred -- 300-unit or multifamily housing condominium to the south -- directly to the south of this, and that could provide an issue as well, so... CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: They can have non-amplifie ,sic, but amplified, no. �� COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Outdoor. Ikk MR. KLATZKOW: It's not music. It's TVs. I think that's really the core of it. So you have an -- so you have, like, a sports bar with an outdoor seating area, and then the sound just transmits. It's just really not music. It's TVs. dqph_� "*� * Ilik CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, it's not a band or -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, it's sound at large does -- it could be music, but -- 4\N� MR. KLATZKOW. Yes. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Once you approve this, it gives you a lot of latitude. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It opens the gate. I am supportive of holding it to -- indoor up until midnight is fine, but outdoor amplified should quit at 10:00. MR. DAVIES: And if I may, Madam Chair, I was able to confer with my client just briefly. If that's the will of the Commission with respect to this application, then we're not going to stand in the way of a motion with respect to that, having the 10:00 p.m. for outdoor amplified sound. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do we have any public speakers? MR. MILLER: Yes, we do. Shannan Themel is with us online. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Mrs. Themel. Page 214 April 27, 2021 MR. OCHS: Troy, if you could just -- Madam Chair, could I just check with Ms. Jenkins to see if we need anything from staff s perspective on the record? CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course. MS. JENKINS: Good afternoon. Anita Jenkins, your Division Director. Staff is recommending approval on 200,000 square feet for your Growth Management Plan. It is your adoption hearing today. And we do agree with the limitation of 10:00 p.m. for outdoor noise. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you. Thank you, County Manager. MR. OCHS: Yes, ma'am. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Were going to -- MR. MILLER: Shannan Themel, you're with us online. If you'll unmute at this point, we're ready for your comment. There you go, you have three minutes. ""a, '* MS. THEMEL: Okay. Hi there. I just wanted to say that we did reach the agreement with Austin with BCHD as well as with Nick, and we are on board with their project that they will be continuing on to do and also just wanted to thank Bill for working with us as well. Thank you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's it? MR. MILLER: Yeah. That's our only public comment on this item. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm going to make a motion for approval as per -- as per our recommendations with the adjustments to the time of outdoor amplified sound. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second. MR. OCHS: Mr. Klatzkow, excuse me, do we need to do separate motions? Page 215 April 27, 2021 MR. KLATZKOW: Sometimes we do; sometimes we don't. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was going to be my question. Can I include both of the items in one, or do you want -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. Yes, you can include both items. They're contingent on each other. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would like to do that, ifi we're not violating any procedure. J� CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, it's fine. Does the second motion marker agree to the amendment? COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So there's a motion on the floor and a second for both items. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye. COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Ay CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.,, COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: 'Aye. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: +Those opposed, like sign. (No response.) — ", CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. MR. DAVIES: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, County Commissioners. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you for your patience. MR. OCHS: Thank you, gentlemen. '**40-1 Item # 15 STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS MR. OCHS: Madam Chairman, mercifully, I believe we're on Item 15, staff and commission general communications. Nothing Page 216 April 27, 2021 more from me, ever. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Leo's going to drop the mic. MR. OCHS: That's it. Where is that thing? Thank you all again. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Absolutely. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: County Attorney? MR. KLATZKOW: Leo, it's been a pleasure. MR. OCHS: Thank you, Jeff. Same to you. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis. COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I was going to share some information from the TDC, but I think I'll save that to the next meeting. But the good news is the numbers are heading in the right direction, and the hotels are getting busier, and it's all looking very, very promising. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's good. Commissioner LoCastro. 6, - '1W " = COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll just say, you know, today was a great day. There were a lot of positive things that happened here today. I think pretty much everything, Leo, starting with you. I remind everybody about Military Appreciation Month in May. We have an awful lot of veterans that work right here in our building, some who came forward, so please thank them for their service. Just a reminder about our -- you know, we've got three great projects that I know we're all committed to aggressively working with to make happen, and that's the golf that we heard about today, the veterans nursing home or housing, and then workforce housing. So, you know, just help to spread the word about -- and correct the record so that, you know, the public knows exactly what we're working to do. The Army Corps of Engineers certainly left us with a few homework assignments but looking forward to moving that forward. Page 217 April 27, 2021 And one last announcement. Tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. at the Marco Executive Airport terminal we're going to be cutting a ribbon on our new terminal there. I know Commissioner Taylor and myself, maybe some others, you know, are going to be there. We've got a good crowd. Donna Fiala's going to be out there. We've got a whole group of people. So if you would like to see the new airport terminal, it's a huge addition to our county, a huge upgrade, and we're going to have a really nice ceremony there tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. I hope to see you there. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Commissioner Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't have anything to add other than to send Leo on his way with best wishes and, again, thank you for all your service. , I MR. OCHS: My pleasure. Thank you, sir. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. I only have one item, and it has do -- we were talking -- I was alerted because of the circumstances because of the no heavy trucks on Logan Boulevard issue that we've been talking about that -- and you'll recall I've had rather -- I've been rather disgruntled about the utilization of Massey Street that comes down off of Immokalee Road and Woodcrest and goes into that circle at Treeline, and we put no heavy trucks, and -- but what ended up transpiring -- and I just found out about this, was we put "no dump trucks on public roads "-- I was concerned about Massey because it's a private road, and we're utilizing it for public use. We put "no dump trucks" on Treeline and Woodcrest, and a couple of dump trucks got speeding -- or got tickets for violating those signs. And it's certainly -- I want to make it clear, it was never my intent to prohibit dump truck traffic on Woodcrest or Treeline which are public -paid -for roads. It was only prohibiting Page 218 April 27, 2021 that heavy truck traffic on Massey. And so I'd like staff -- if I could, I'd like to have staff look into that and, if it's possible, fix that so that we -- it was never my intent. If you'll recall, I wanted to put a gate just south of Mockingbird, the division there that's off of Massey. I was wanting to put a gate to block Massey off just to keep everybody out, because it's a private road. And so we cured an issue but created another one by putting signs up on our public roads. MR. OCHS: We'll get'er fixed. COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Just -done more. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, you said one. , COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Goodbye, my friend. Thank you. MR. OCHS: Thank you. �� rN CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Just one short item. I received an email -- I think we all did today -- about Ms. Gaynor's memorial service, which is on May the 2nd at Hodge -- COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Hodge's. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- Hodge's Memorial Gardens outside at 3:00. One of the -- they are going to be asking organizations if they'd like to put a card, you know, representing the organization and say something about Ms. Gaynor's contribution. If you allow me, if you trust me to do that -- I just got it this afternoon so -- or else I would have brought it to you. So if we're in agreement, that's what I'll do. 4"M *, -# N In which case, thank you, sir. Thank you for everything that you've done. MR. OCHS: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And go hug that grandbaby. MR. OCHS: I will. CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Meeting's adjourned. Page 219 April 27, 2021 COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Leo, we'll see you in 90 days at one of the committee meetings as a volunteer, right? * * * * Commissioner Solis moved, seconded by Commissioner Saunders and carried that the following items under the Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted Item # 16A 1 RESOLUTION 2021-85: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF CHATHAM WOODS, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20150002912, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE SECURITY Item #16A2 i FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND ACCEPTANCE THE CONVEYANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR WINDING CYPRESS PHASE 313, PL20190002096 AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $400 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT Item # 16A3 FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND ACCEPTANCE THE CONVEYANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR CRANE POINT AND BIMINI ISLE UTILITIES CONVEYANCE, PL20190002294 AND AUTHORIZE Page 220 April 27, 2021 THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE FINAL OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $49000 TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED AGENT Item # 16A4 AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF A ROAD RIGHT- OF-WAY, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY EASEMENT (PARCEL 322RDUE) REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION. [PROJECT NO. 601681 — FOLIO #37490480009 Item # 16A5 AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF LAND (PARCEL 1107FEE) REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION. [PROJECT NO. 601681— A PORTION OF FOLIO #37492160107 %Item #16A64; RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN, WITH AN ACCRUED VALUE OF $9621377.79 FOR PAYMENT OF $11877.79 IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. DOMENIC P. TOSTO, AKA DOMENIC TOSTO, TR., AND JOANNE M. TOSTO TR., OF THE FAM. LIV. TR., RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT FOLIO NO. 01199120006, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA - THE VIOLATIONS CONSISTED OF LITTER, NEGLECTED MAINTENANCE, AND UNSAFE CONDITIONS OF AN ABANDONED PROPERTY COMMONLY REFERRED Page 221 April 27, 2021 TO AS THE "DOME HOUSE." WHICH IS NO LONGER WITHIN COLLIER COUNTY' S JURISDICTION Item # 16A7 THE CLERK OF COURTS TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,700 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER PL20190002704 FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH ESPLANADE GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES — HATCHER PROPERTY Item #16A8 11 THE SELECTION COMMITTEE'S RANKING OF REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ("RPS") NO. 20-7821, "DESIGN AND PERMITTING FOR COMPREHENSIVE WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT PROJECT," AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP RANKED FIRM, TAYLOR ENGINEERING, INC., SO THAT STAFF CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING Item # 16A9� �.. � THE SELECTION COMMITTEE'S RANKING FOR REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ("RPS" NO.20-7818), "UPPER GORDON RIVER IMPROVEMENTS," AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE TOP -RANKED FIRM, JOHNSON ENGINEERING, INC., SO Page 222 April 27, 2021 THAT STAFF CAN BRING A PROPOSED AGREEMENT BACK FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING Item # 16A 10 — Moved to Item # 11 D (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Item # 16B 1 t*s1z` A LANDSCAPING LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH MOORHEAD MANOR MOBILE HOME PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO PROVIDE IRRIGATION, LANDSCAPING AND MAINTENANCE WITHIN THE DESIGNATED AREA ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4260 BAYSHORE DRIVE, NAPLES FLORIDA, 34112 WITHIN THE BAYSHORE BEAUTIFICATION MSTU BOUNDARY AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT ^:" or, Item #16C1 ^ �� RESOLUTION 2021-86: AUTHORIZING THE CANCELLATION OF 2021 TAXES UPON AFEE-SIMPLE INTEREST IN LAND COLLIER COUNTY ACQUIRED BY WARRANTY DEED FOR CONSERVATION COLLIER AND WITHOUT MONETARY COMPENSATION 'NOJIteC2 EASEMENT AGREEMENT WITH DIAJEFF LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, AND ALISAN LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, EACH AS TO Page 223 April 27, 2021 AN UNDIVIDED ONE-HALF INTEREST, AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $100 FOR THE ACQUISITION OF A UTILITY EASEMENT FOR PROPOSED WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. [PROJECT NO. 70141 ] — LOCATED ON PALM DRIVE, FOLIO #003 93 600007 Item #16C3 AWARD REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. 20-7803, "FUEL STORAGE TANK SYSTEMS TESTING AND SERVICES," TO PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CONTRACTORS, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENTS — AWARDED TO GUARDIAN FUELING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC (PRIMARY) AND JF ACOUISTIONS, LLC (SECONDARY) Item #16C4 N % \ \1 A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $7001000 REALLOCATING FUNDS FROM WITHIN EXISTING WATER - SEWER OPERATING BUDGETS TO FUND EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND REPAIRS WITHIN THE PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT'S WASTEWATER DIVISION — FOR THE REPAIR OF THE 36" DISCHARGE FORCEMAIN AT MASTER PUMP STATION 302 Item # 16C5 AWARD OF INVITATION TO BID NO. 21-7855, "ORANGE TREE WASTEWATER PLANT WALKWAY IMPROVEMENTS," TO ATLANTIC CONCRETE & MECHANICAL, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $126,063, AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN Page 224 April 27, 2021 THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT. [PROJECT NO. 70173] - ADDING AN ADDITIONAL CATWALK CONNECTION FROM THE TREATMENT BASIN AREAS TO THE HEADWORKS STRUCTURE Item # 16D 1 A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE INTEREST EARNED FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 2020 THROUGH DECEMBER 2020 ON ADVANCED LIBRARY FUNDING RECEIVED FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO SUPPORT LIBRARY SERVICES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE USE OF COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS Item # 16D2 1%k - 4� \ THE SUBMITTAL OF AN FY20/21 GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION FLEXIBLE FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $50000 FOR THE PURCHASE OF A 40 FT. FIXED -ROUTE BUS THROUGH THE FEDERAL TRANSIT AWARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Item #16D3 A SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND COLLIER HEALTH SERVICES, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,17000.39 TO SUPPORT COVID TESTING AND CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES UTILIZING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE BOARD Page 225 April 27, 2021 Item # 16D4 A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE INTEREST EARNED ON THE CORONAVIRUS AID RELIEF FOR THE PERIOD JULY 2020 THROUGH NOVEMBER 2020 ON ADVANCED FUNDING RECEIVED FROM THE FLORIDA i DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO SUPPORT PROGRAMMATIC EXPENSES UNDER THE CARES PROGRAM — INTEREST EARNED WAS $22.346.94 Item # 16D5 — Withdrawn (Per Agenda Change Sheet) Q%kl � * � RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO FULLY FUND THE RESTORATION OF THE 1909 HASKELL & BARKER CABOOSE AT THE NAPLES DEPOT MUSEUM -ADDING $51,991.41 IN RESIDUAL MONIES FROM COMPLETED PROJECTS AT THE NAPLES DEPOT MUSEUM AND $47,956.95 FROM THE DEFERRED GARDEN ENHANCEMENT PROJECT AT COLLIER MUSEUM AT GOVERNMENT CENTER Item #16DQ AN AGREEMENT WITH DAVID LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $45000 TO OPERATE A DRUG COURT PROGRAM UTILIZING FUNDS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS ADULT DRUG COURT DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM - AS A CONDITION OF THE AWARD, DLC WILL CONTRIBUTE MATCH FUNDS IN THE FORM OF PARTICIPANT FEES AND IN -KIND SERVICES GENERATED Page 226 April 27, 2021 BY THE DRUG COURT TEAM WHILE OPERATING THE PROGRAM Item # 16D7 AWARD REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. 20-7788, PARATRANSIT DEMAND RESPONSE SOFTWARE, TO ECOLANE USA, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $3221962.98 FUNDED WITH FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA) SECTION 5339 AND SECTION 5307 GRANTS AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT — INCLUDING (5) FIVE YEARS OF MAINTENANCE, SERVICES, WARRANTY AND LICENSING FEES sAr\� Item # 16E 1 44 1%k - 4 �% MODIFICATIONS TO THE 2021 FISCAL YEAR PAY AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN WHICH CONSIST OF THE REMOVAL OF THREE OBSOLETE CLASSIFICATIONS AND TWO RECLASSIFICATIONS MADE FROM JANUARY 1, 2021 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2021 Item # 16E2 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY AND NOTIFICATION OF REVENUE DISBURSEMENT Item # 16E3 Page 227 April 27, 2021 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING BOARD APPROVAL Item # 16E4 N\ THE COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE COLLIER EMS/FIRE BARGAINING UNIT, SOUTHWEST FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS AND PARAMEDICS, LOCAL 1826, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS, INCORPORATED — AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Item #16F1 N % \ \1 A SATISFACTION AND RELEASE OF LIEN FOR NEW HOPE MINISTRIES, INC., DUE TO THE IMPACT FEES BEING PAID IN FULL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM, AS SET FORTH BY SECTION 74-203 (I) OF THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES — LOCATED AT 7675 DAVIS BLVD. Item # 16F2 A TRANSFER OF TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE CREDITS IN THE AMOUNT OF $650,576.01, HELD BY PARKLANDS ASSOCIATES I, LLLP, ARISING OUT OF AN AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPER AGREEMENT DATED MAY 10, 2016, Page 228 April 27, 2021 RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 5274, PAGE 411 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY — RELATED TO THE COMPLETION OF LOGAN BLVD EXTENSION FROM IMMOKALEE ROAD TO BONITA BEACH ROAD N Item # 16F3 �\Q RESOLUTION 2021-87: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED BUDGET Item # 16F4 CLARIFICATIONS TO THE COLLIER COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO ASSIST SOLE PROPRIETORS UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS/NOT FOR PROFIT LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAM Item#16H1 PROCLAMATION CONGRATULATING COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENTS MS. KATIE LARSEN, MS. SKYE ALLEN AND MS. OLIVIA VELIZ AND EXTENDING BEST WISHES TO THEM FOR SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES AT THE 2021 MISS FLORIDA USA® AND MISS FLORIDA TEEN USA® COMPETITION ON JULY 18, 2021 IN ORLANDO, FLORIDA — ADOPTED Item # 16H2 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 6, 2021 AS NATIONAL Page 229 April 27, 2021 DAY OF PRAYER IN COLLIER COUNTY. THE PROCLAMATION WILL BE MAILED TO SUSAN THIGPEN, NEW HOPE MINISTRIES — ADOPTED Item # 16H3 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 2021 AS NATIONAL FOSTER CARE MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. THE PROCLAMATION WILL BE MAILED TO LAURA LAFAKIS, YOUTH HAVEN OF NAPLES — ADOPTED v wx Item # 16H4 PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 2021 AS MILITARY APPRECIATION MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. PRESENTED AND ACCEPTED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO ON BEHALF OF MEMBERS OF THE MILITARY — ADOPTED Item # 16I1 MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE Page 230 April 27, 2021 Item # 16J 1 THE USE OF $500 FROM THE CONFISCATED TRUST FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE FLORIDA MISSING CHILDREN'S DAY FOUNDATION — BEING HELD IN TALLAHASSEE, DATE NOT SET Item # 16J2 � Aw RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS WERE DRAWN FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN APRIL 1, 2021 AND APRIL 14, 2021 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06 Item # 16J3 _w BOARD APPROVED AND DETERMINED VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF APRIL 14, 2021 r z Item # 16K 1 — Continued to the May 11, 2021 Meeting ,,V (Per Agenda Change Sheet) MM RECOMMENDATION TO TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION WITH RESPECT TO A PUBLIC PETITION REQUESTING THAT COLLIER COUNTY ENACT AN ORDINANCE TO PROTECT FIREARM OWNERS FROM FEDERAL OR STATE GOVERNMENT INTRUSION Page 231 April 27, 2021 Item # 16K2 A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $126,650, INCLUDING STATUTORY ATTORNEY'S FEES FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 195FEE, REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT, 0* PROJECT NO., 60168. (FISCAL IMPACT: $126,820, WHICH INCLUDES THE STATUTORY $170 CLERK'S FEE) Item #16K3 11v AN AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES WITH THE LAW FIRM OF HOPPING GREEN & SAMS, P.A., EXTENDING THE AGREEMENT FOR TWO YEARS, WITH THREE ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR RENEWAL TERMS, WITH NO CHANGE IN CURRENT RATES - SETS FORTH THE CRITERIA UNDER WHICH PAYMENT WILL BE MADE WHEN SERVICES ARE REOUESTED Item #16K44; % CRA RESOLUTION 2021-88: RE -APPOINTING MAURICE GUTIERREZ, MICHAEL SHERMAN AND APPOINTING DAVID SLOBODIEN TO THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD Item # 16K5 RESOLUTION 2021-89: APPOINTING LEE RUBENSTEIN AND GEORGE ANDREOZZI AS ALTERNATE MEMBERS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD Page 232 April 27, 2021 Item # 17A ORDINANCE 2021-17: AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE NC SQUARE MIXED -USE OVERLAY ON LAND IN THE AGRICULTURAL/RURAL DESIGNATION AND RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT -RECEIVING LANDS TO ALLOW UP TO 441400 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 1200 SQUARE FOOT DAYCARE LIMITED TO 250 STUDENTS, AND A MINIMUM OF 120 AND MAXIMUM OF 129 AFFORDABLE HOUSING RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE ADOPTED AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 24.4± ACRES AND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND CATAWBA STREET APPROXIMATELY 1.6 MILES WEST OF WILSON BOULEVARD IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. (ADOPTION HEARING) (COMPANION TO ZONING PETITION MPUD- PL20180002234, NC SQUARE MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT - AGENDA ITEM # 17B) Item # 17B ORDINANCE 2021-18 : AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04- 415 AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE Page 233 April 27, 2021 UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN THE MOBILE HOME OVERLAY AND THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT OVERLAY -RECEIVING LANDS TO THE )vt- MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) WITHIN THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT OVERLAY- RECEIVING LANDS FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS NC SQUARE MPUD, TO ALLOW UP TO 44,400 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES, A 121000 SQUARE FOOT DAYCARE, AND A MINIMUM OF 120 AND A MAXIMUM OF 129 DWELLING UNITS WITH AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND CATAWBA STREET APPROXIMATELY 1.6 MILES WEST OF WILSON BOULEVARD IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 24.4± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (THIS IS A COMPANION ITEM TO AGENDA ITEM # 17A) Item # 17C - K'4 N*�l RESOLUTION 2021-90: AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED BUDGET Page 234 April 27, 2021 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:44 p.m. 4\w BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX ' OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL PENNY TAYLOR, CHAIRMAN ATTEST _ w CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK NV These minutes approved by the Board on , as presented or as corrected TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI LEWIS, FPR, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. Page 235