Loading...
DSAC Agenda 05/04/2022For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia.Mill@colliercountyfl.gov Development Services Advisory Committee Agenda Wednesday, May 4, 2022 3:00 pm 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL 34104 Growth Management Building, Conference Rooms 609/610 NOTICE: Persons wishing to speak on any Agenda item will receive up to three (3) minutes unless the Chairman adjusts the time. Speakers are required to fill out a “Speaker Registration Form”, list the topic they wish to address and hand it to the Staff member before the meeting begins. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and speak into a microphone. State your name and affiliation before commenting. During the discussion, Committee Members may direct questions to the speaker. Please silence cell phones and digital devices. There may not be a break in this meeting. Please leave the room to conduct any personal business. All parties participating in the public meeting are to observe Roberts Rules of Order and wait to be recognized by the Chairman. Please speak one at a time and into the microphone so the Hearing Reporter can record all statements being made. 1. Call to order - Chairman 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes: a. DSAC Meeting – April 6, 2022 b. DSAC LDR Meeting – March 9, 2022 4. Public Speakers 5. Staff Announcements/Updates a. Development Review Division – [Jaime Cook] b. Code Enforcement Division – [Mike Ossorio] c. Public Utilities Department – [Matt McLean or designee] d. Growth Management Dept. Transportation Engineering Division – [Jay Ahmad or designee] e. Collier County Fire Review – [Shar Beddow or Shawn Hanson, Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal] f. North Collier Fire Review – [Chief Sean Lintz or Deputy Director Daniel Zunzunegui] g. Operations & Regulatory Mgmt. Division – [Ken Kovensky] h. Zoning Division – [Mike Bosi] For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia.Mill@colliercountyfl.gov 6.New Business a.Tree removal permit vs ICP/SDPi process and time allowance(s) – [Requested by Jeff Curl] b.LDC amendment – PL20220000207 Comparable Use Determination 7.Old Business 8.Committee Member Comments 9.Adjourn FUTURE MEETING DATES: June 1, 2022 – 3:00 pm July 6, 2022 – 3:00 pm August 3, 2022 – 3:00 pm Development Services Advisory Committee Meeting Wednesday, May 4, 2022 3:00 pm 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 Growth Management Department Conference Room 609/610 If you have any questions or wish to meet with staff, please contact Trish Mill at 252-8214 For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia.Mill@colliercountyfl.gov Development Services Advisory Committee Agenda Wednesday, May 4, 2022 3:00 pm 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, FL 34104 Growth Management Building, Conference Rooms 609/610 NOTICE: Persons wishing to speak on any Agenda item will receive up to three (3) minutes unless the Chairman adjusts the time. Speakers are required to fill out a “Speaker Registration Form”, list the topic they wish to address and hand it to the Staff member before the meeting begins. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and speak into a microphone. State your name and affiliation before commenting. During the discussion, Committee Members may direct questions to the speaker. Please silence cell phones and digital devices. There may not be a break in this meeting. Please leave the room to conduct any personal business. All parties participating in the public meeting are to observe Roberts Rules of Order and wait to be recognized by the Chairman. Please speak one at a time and into the microphone so the Hearing Reporter can record all statements being made. 1. Call to order - Chairman 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes: a. DSAC Meeting – April 6, 2022 b. DSAC LDR Meeting – March 9, 2022 4. Public Speakers 5. Staff Announcements/Updates a. Development Review Division – [Jaime Cook] b. Code Enforcement Division – [Mike Ossorio] c. Public Utilities Department – [Matt McLean or designee] d. Growth Management Dept. Transportation Engineering Division – [Jay Ahmad or designee] e. Collier County Fire Review – [Shar Beddow or Shawn Hanson, Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal] f. North Collier Fire Review – [Chief Sean Lintz or Deputy Director Daniel Zunzunegui] g. Operations & Regulatory Mgmt. Division – [Ken Kovensky] h. Zoning Division – [Mike Bosi] For more information, please contact Trish Mill at (239) 252-8214 or Patricia.Mill@colliercountyfl.gov 6.New Business a.Tree removal permit vs ICP/SDPi process and time allowance(s) – [Requested by Jeff Curl] b.LDC amendment – PL20220000207 Comparable Use Determination 7.Old Business 8.Committee Member Comments 9.Adjourn FUTURE MEETING DATES: June 1, 2022 – 3:00 pm July 6, 2022 – 3:00 pm August 3, 2022 – 3:00 pm April 6, 2022 1 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Naples, Florida, April 6, 2022 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Department Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 Horseshoe Drive North, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chairman: William J. Varian Vice Chairman: Blair Foley David Dunnavant James E. Boughton (excused) Clay Brooker Chris Mitchell Robert Mulhere Mario Valle Norman Gentry Marco Espinar (excused) Laura Spurgeon-DeJohn Jeremy Sterk Jeff Curl John English Mark McLean ALSO PRESENT: Jamie French, Deputy Department Head, GMD Lorraine Lantz, Principal Planner, Transportation Planning Ken Kovensky, Director, Operations & Regulatory Management Matt McLean, Director, Public Utilities Division Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Rick LoCastro, County Commissioner, District 1 Patricia Mill, Operations Analyst/Staff Liaison April 6, 2022 2 Any persons in need of the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Department. 1. Call to Order - Chairman Chairman Varian called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. A quorum consisting of 11 members was convened. (Two members arrived later.) 2. Approval of Agenda Mr. Curl moved to approve the agenda. Second by Mr. Valle. Carried unanimously, 11-0. 3. Approval of Minutes Chairman Varian noted that Eric Johnson was not present at the meeting and should be removed from the first page, and that on p. 16, Eric Johnson was listed under “h,” but no one provided a report for the Zoning Division, which the minutes noted. a. DSAC Meeting – March 2, 2022 Mr. Foley moved to approve the March 2, 2022, meeting minutes, with the above noted changes. Second by Mr. Mulhere. Carried unanimously, 11-0. b. DSAC-LDR Oct. 19, 2021 Mr. Curl moved to approve the Jan. 19, 2022, DSAC-LDR Subcommittee meeting minutes. Second by Mr. Mulhere. Carried unanimously, 3-0 (subcommittee members in attendance who attended the DSAC-LDR meeting). 4. Public Speakers None 5. Staff Announcements/Updates a. Development Review Division – [Jaime Cook, Director] Ms. Cook provided an update on staffing and building issues: • Since she was last here in February, a senior planner started under Cormac Giblin’s planning group. He has landscape experience, so while he goes through the training process, he’ll be helping Mark Templeton with landscape reviews, as well as site development plans and plats. • We are moving forward with offering a planner position to a current staff member, so that employee should be starting shortly and will be helping with building permits and insubstantial changes to SDPs and plats. • We had two inspectors and have now offered the senior inspector position to a candidate who works elsewhere in the County. He should be starting shortly. The other job is posted, and we are hoping to get that position filled as quickly as possible. • Permits: We have significantly decreased our delayed permitting. Planning reviews for commercial permits are now up to March 25. • Zoning Single-Family: We’re working on March 30, with about 124 that are past due. About 1½ months ago, we were at 800, so we’ve made significant progress. • A citizen has complained a lot about silt fencing on single-family building permits and small projects, so the 814 Erosion/Silt Inspection that used to be called in at the end, when you’re trying to get a CO and engineering inspectors to come out and do that, will April 6, 2022 3 now be done at the beginning, when you’re calling in your 200 Plumbing/Underground Inspection. We have had conversations with some contractors and builders, so many are aware that this is now being implemented at the beginning of building, but I just want to make sure that you guys were all aware of it, as well. Mr. Foley asked if the new senior planner, landscape reviewer was Mark Morton, Ms. Cook said it was. b. Code Enforcement Division – [Cristina Perez, Central District Supervisor] Ms. Perez presented the “Code Enforcement Division Report, Feb. 22-March 21, 2022.” • 628 cases were opened. • 358 cases were closed due to voluntary compliance. • There were 2,516 property inspections. • There continues to be a high number of lien searches, 1,607. Ms. Perez said the Central District runs from I-75 to Wilson Boulevard, which goes north to Collier/Lee County line and south to Davis. There are seven investigative territories. We are currently working with the Civic Association on some items of concern that they’ve brought to our attention. This week, we did some reorganization within our department to shift some of the investigators around, so we can strengthen all the territories equally and have equal staffing throughout the territories. As Ms. Cook stated, there have been several complaints made to Code Enforcement about silt fencing, so we’re working with the Engineering Department to address those cases. • This weekend, there’s a Community Neighborhood Cleanup and flyers are available if anyone is interested. • Code Enforcement works quarterly with associations in each district to provide a clean- up for the community, where they can bring debris, hazardous materials and yard waste, free of charge. We work with the Sheriff's Office, which provides us with its weekend program people who assist residents with putting their debris into containers, so, ultimately, it’s like a drive-through service. • The Vacation Short-Term Rental Registration is in process. About 1,000 have already registered. • Each district holds task-force meetings and the Central District Task Force meeting is tomorrow, the first Thursday of every month. Those dates and locations are on our website, if anyone is interested in attending a district task-force meeting. [Mr. Dunnavant joined the meeting at 3:09 p.m.] c. Public Utilities Department [Matt McLean, Director of Engineering Project Management] Mr. McLean submitted the Response Time Report: Utility Deviations, FDEP Permits, Letters of Availability and provided some product and other updates: • Over the first quarter of 2022, we’re not where we want to be with our Level of Service on Utility Deviations, DEP Permitting and Letters of Availability. We’ve had some staffing changes within the team. We have three open FTE positions that we are actively trying to backfill, so the numbers are not where we want them. We believe we April 6, 2022 4 started to rectify that greatly over the last 30 days and hope to meet and exceed expectations. • One of the mechanisms that allowed us to do that was that we’ve had to outsource as a temporary stopgap. We brought on three people to help out with these respective processes, as well as planning reviews affiliated with zoning applications. • Please route any questions and information that you need through our Utility Planning email, utilityplanning@colliercountyfl.gov, which is our mechanism to convey that information. We monitor that 24/7. • The agenda packet includes an update to approved products for a manual specification. The Florida Administrative Code changed in late 2021. Manholes used to have an open hole of a little over 20 inches and it’s now approved as a 24-inch opening to be able to get into a manhole. • That led to an update on County specifications to get that approved manhole, which has now been done at the staffing level. Those utility details are available in CAD and in PDF. If you need them, request them through our utility planning email. We’ll also update that on our website. d. Growth Management Dept. Transportation or Engineering Division – [Lorraine Lantz, Transportation Planning Director] Ms. Lantz provided several updates: • Our Transportation Planning Manager, Nelson Galeano, is here. He started on Monday two weeks ago and is from Manatee County. He has engineering and planning experience, so we are now fully staffed, a staff of four. • We have a public meeting tonight for the Collier Boulevard Phase Three/Project Three. This is for the remaining segment of Collier Boulevard that’s not six lanes yet. We’re at 60% plans for that. It’s from Green Boulevard down to City Gate North. We’re at 60% plans for that, as well. • We are coming out with a bridge-location study as to where the bridge will cross the canal to go to 39th Street. There’s a bridge or culvert at 25th Street right now that will become obsolete, so we’re trying to determine where to cross. The meeting will be from 5-7 p.m. tonight at the Golden Gate Community Center. Chairman Varian asked if there was a favorite spot to put the bridge. It wouldn’t be straight across Golden Gate Parkway, would it? Ms. Lantz agreed. Golden Gate Pkwy is one of the considerations, 25th is not, but 27th and 29th streets are all considerations we’re evaluating. The public meeting tonight will talk about public involvement as to where people want to see it and the pros and cons. But a determination on the location has not been made yet. Chairman Varian said he assumes they have to move the canal for that. Ms. Lantz said that depends on where the bridge goes. That will determine how much of the canal will have to be relocated. [Ms. Spurgeon-DeJohn joined the meeting at 3:13 p.m.] April 6, 2022 5 e. Collier County Fire Review – [Shar Beddow, Deputy Fire Marshal] Ms. Beddow detailed the monthly fire review statistics and provided several updates: • There were 613 building reviews this month. • There were 62 site reviews, with a one- and two-day turnaround. • Current staff has 938 entries in our mobilized system. • We’ve transitioned multiple personnel over to existing, so the new construction inspectors are routinely having to work overtime. We’re hoping for a couple of additional staff positions. • For the last three weekends, they held an MDA boot drive for three hours. We did incredibly well and brought in $10,000 for MDA. A lot of donors didn’t know what MDA was. • On May 10, the Lee and Collier County Fire Marshals will offer a fire-stopping class. It’s unlimited occupancy and there are currently about 35 are people attending. We did one about five or six years ago. We build the walls, install the fire-stopping, inspect it, then take a torch to it and destroy it. It’s one of the most interactive classes that you can engage in. Fire-stopping is one of the highest re-inspections that we have. There’s a flyer, if anyone is interested in signing up. • On July 12, we will be asking our own Phil Snyderburn to do a class for Lee and Collier County Fire Marshals on flammable and combustible liquid-storage compliance. He’s by far one of the most intelligent, articulate, flammable and combustible liquid people she knows, so we ask him to teach every couple of years. That class will be held at Bass Pro Shops. • We also will be asking Kelly, a direct employee of UL, to do a class on alternate- energy storage solutions, such as lithium-ion batteries, a fire hazard. They can’t put those fires out. The best they can do with sprinkler systems that they’re running tests on is just control them because of the way those cells are wrapped in all the batteries. It’s like they’re shrink-wrapped, so it’s already heating the cells below it or alongside it, so you can’t put the fire out. The best you can do is keep it checking. Firefighters have been hurt in these fires, so they’re trying to do a lot of studies on how to mitigate them. As an offshoot, three years ago, we had the big Hertz fire and 700 pounds of vehicles now are with plastics, and we’ve got all the hazards with the batteries, so moving ships have been sunk because they’ve had a fire in one of them and it burned it out. We’re also losing parking structures, so they’re trying to do more studies on how to mitigate these issues. • The County Fire Marshal’s meeting is tomorrow at 9 a.m. two buildings over from this. Chairman Varian noted that inspections seem to be falling a little bit behind. Ms. Beddow said they’ve authorized overtime and employees were just hired. Most people are routinely working overtime. She did 65 hours last week. We also have some other duties, we’ve had more fires and she doesn’t expect those to decline. There are brush fires. So sometimes, we’ll be on schedule, but then we’ll get pulled off. That’s why they’re trying to get additional staffing. If you run into a problem, your best bet is to plan ahead, if possible. She believed they’re three days out now. Chairman Varian confirmed it was three days. He had an inspection bumped from Monday to Wednesday. April 6, 2022 6 Ms. Beddow said she will ask the chief to change it to three days on the website. She said they lost several employees over the past two weeks to COVID or something similar, so that affected staffing. Chairman Varian commended her inspectors, noting that he worked with one last week who did photos of a shower-pan project. Ms. Beddow said if anyone gets behind, they should reach out to her. f. North Collier Fire Review – [Daniel Zunzunegui, Deputy Director] Mr. Zunzunegui outlined the monthly Fire Review Statistics and provided several updates: • We did about 700 plans last month and had a four-day turnaround for building review and three days for planning. • We did 671 building permits and 29 planning permits. The majority of plans were architectural additions, alterations, renovations. Following that was miscellaneous-trade permits. • Roughly 30 of the plans were coming in for a third review, which is a small fraction of that 700, so we’re doing a better job identifying where the deficiency is within the code and collaborating with our design professionals to make sure that second submittal is going to pass. • Regarding that queue, we are extremely busy, so we still have overtime open on the weekends to get ahead. Staff is tired. If you look at this many plans during the week, it’s hard to want to do that on the weekends, so that’s not mandated. But staff is welcome to put in the extra time. • Update on legislative changes for fire alarm systems: They passed the House and Senate and are on the governor’s desk for approval. We’re waiting to see when that’s finalized and what the implementation date will be. He believes it will be in July. This involves any kind of fire-alarm monitoring or an existing system with 20 devices or less. They can do a label permit. There will be no plan submitted and we’re required to give them one inspection with that label permit out in the field. There can be some difficulties with that because it’s an as-built system, so if we find a flaw and it’s got to be corrected, much of that is going to take place out in the field and without a plan review, so it makes it more of a challenge. Then we have to try to catch if there’s an engineering issue with that whole 5,000, which leads into the next item. • There was a change to the Administrative Code that ties in to the fire-alarm monitoring systems. It basically changed the minimum design detail that accompanies engineering, where it’s more of a statement. It used to state that for systems below the threshold requirements for mandatory use of professional engineering services, the engineer of record would specify a minimum design detail and a lot of times that would just say that we have a complete addressable fire alarm system with a job value of less than $5,000. Now, it’s been revised to read that all such plans shall include a disclaimer stating that the fire-protection system is exempt from professional engineering service and shall provide a clear understanding of the minimum system requirements expected to be installed by the contractor and permitted by the authority having jurisdiction. So, if they submit any kind of additional information, that can be reviewed for accuracy, but it’s not required. It’s a different kind of statement, and we already have our plans April 6, 2022 7 for how we’re going to address it. The interesting thing that came with this change for the Administrative Code on 61G Engineering for Alarms is there is new language that contains a sunset clause, so the Board of Engineers has to revisit these statements and if they don’t, it appears that this language goes away on December 30, 2026. It’s going to be interesting to see what happens in the future. • Master Plan Study: He mentioned last month that you might be receiving the external stakeholder surveys, but that’s going to be delayed until the strategic plan component. It’s coming, but a little later than expected. g. Operations & Regulatory Management Division – [Ken Kovensky, Director] Mr. Kovensky outlined the monthly activity report and provided updates: • The division was extremely busy last month, with over 5,500 permits applied for, which is over 20% more than the prior month – over 1,000 more permits. • There are over 400 permits in the queue. • Staff is currently working on March 31 permits, so we’re a little behind. We’re still meeting the deadlines that are imposed upon us, but we’re still using overtime and temporary staff. • The phone calls that have come in are at a record pace. We handled over 7,500 phone calls last month and had an abandoned rate of about 10%. Our Call Center staff has been beefed up a little over the prior few months. We’re pretty short-staffed and are still trying to hire temporary-services staff to beef that area up. • We probably have close to 25 vacancies throughout the entire building. We just got nine positions approved, so we’re trying to staff those. One of those already was selected and is in the process, and the others are posted. • The Operations Division has just three vacancies out of 75 full-time staff, so we’re doing well. • We had a retirement in our Customer and Contractor Licensing Section that just came up, a customer-service specialist position, so we’ll be posting for that. • A position he’s been working on getting reclassified for a while is another operation supervisor in the records room. That was approved by HR, is currently posted and is sorely needed for the records room. The operation supervisor who had double duty trying to manage that staff can concentrate on his core duties and will have somebody dedicated to handle the records room, which involves all the public records requests, processing customer inquiries and requests for records, as well as handling complaints that come in through the County or County Commissioners. • Temporary Services Staff: Keystaff is still a mixed proposition. We are constantly interviewing and constantly bringing people in at the same rate people up and leave, so we’re trying to find a balance there. We met with KeyStaff management recently to talk about where we are, the relationship and how important it is that they’re on board as key partners. That led into a separate meeting with their main recruiter, who shadowed several staff members a couple of days ago. They spent a half-day with us sitting down with each of the people and the positions that they try and recruit for to get a better understanding of what to look for to try to enhance their work-recruiting ability. • When Rose Burke left the Business Center manager position, we hired Kirsten Wilke as an interim manager, so she’s here. (He asked her to stand up.) She’s done a phenomenal job filling in. She’s pretty much picked up, not skipping a beat, so we’re fortunate that she’s accepted this role, at least for now on an interim basis. April 6, 2022 8 • We’re right in the middle of our budget season. We’ve already met with all the directors to identify needs going into the next year. We have a drop-dead date of May 5, where we get locked out of the system, so we have to have all our numbers in by then. I have a young, new finance staff, so we’re learning as we go and guiding them on how to build the budget. We always get it done, so we should really be hitting our stride in the next couple of weeks and will finish up. Chairman Varian asked about contractor licensing and the renewals that will come up this fall. A couple of years ago, we had a big crunch at that time. Do you have some thoughts as to making sure that group is ready for that this year? Mr. Kovensky said we have double renewals this year, so we’ll be sending out notices to both local and state contractors. Chairman Varian asked if that would be enough time to keep up with August 30, or the last day when everyone likes to send it in. Mr. Kovensky said we made great strides and just went electronic last year and that’s one area that we’ve had a lot of success with KeyStaff staffing. We have two KeyStaff people in our front office who are pretty experienced. They’ve been there for many, many months, so hopefully we’ll keep them around and we’ll be able to process as we go through it. We’re also making changes behind the scenes in CityView to streamline the process. Chairman Varian said we did this two years ago. There was a questionnaire that went out with a lot of questions that weren’t relevant for those of us that were renewing. Is that still going to happen again or has that questionnaire been changed? Mr. Kovensky said it’s been updated. h. Zoning Division – [Jamie French, Deputy Department Head, GMD] Mr. French noted that Commissioner LoCastro had made a commitment to attending the DSAC meetings and is here again today. Clearly, you’ve sparked his interest and he has been a great advocate for us and certainly a good steward for the community, so we appreciate his involvement with our agency. He said he’s neither for development or anti-development, but he’s for responsible development. It’s those words of wisdom that he encourages us to live by, and that he holds us to. We heard Shar (Beddow) talk about the implementation of overtime to be able to catch up with with inspections and what they’ve got to contend with. We’ve expended over 176,000 hours of overtime this fiscal year. Those are big numbers. If you look at the inspections, last month was probably the most inspection activity that we’ve seen, if not in the last 10 years, perhaps in the history of Collier County. We were 160 shy of hitting three with 30,000 inspections, with 27,000 of those just in building. That’s not all new development. It could be a shed, a fence, an air conditioner, a pair of shutters, or a new single-family home. It could be new residents or folks that are either living here or moving here. They’re real jobs. We recognize that they’re real jobs. He was at the Ritz Carlton today. He hasn’t been there in 2½-3 years. We issued a bunch of permits and the new GM invited him there to show appreciation to our staff, especially to Jon April 6, 2022 9 Walsh and to Jaime Cook, and everybody who pitched in and rolled up their sleeves to keep them open and able to continue to add back to our economy by hosting tourists and being a great employer for our community. It’s great to hear that feedback, but it comes with a great deal of pressure that we receive from clients in the community, some always not so good. Silt Fences: Mr. Lauer was opposed to a development being built near his home. Staff is neither for nor against it, but it went to the Planning Commission and the BCC. Unfortunately, Mr. Lauer has called us about a few things because he’s an active engineer and he’s out inspecting many sites throughout the community and silt fences is one of the areas we were failing. We’ve talked about the number of inspections. Clearly, we’re not infallible and we have to be better, but Mr. Lauer pointed out that we weren’t providing that silt-fence for protection to the environment, but the built-environments with regards to neighbors. So, we moved the silt-fence inspection up. Mr. French noted that Mr. Lauer may be visiting some of the DSAC members’ sites and he was at Gulf Coast Homes. Contractors have called about him. We’ve gotten very good direction and have some authority to apply some alternative methods within the LDC that empower us. We have some residents who have relocated here in the last 10 years who may have been in your professions in other states. They sometimes don’t grasp the idea that we are not always the authority with jurisdiction. When you get Water Management Permits, the state is the one with jurisdiction, and when you’re talking about DEP or ERP permits. The LDC says that all permits must be in place before you go into construction on some of these sites. Some community members don’t like that, and it has created a great deal of additional work for us because we are doing research. We are the County authority with jurisdiction, so we do our best. Even though they’re not you (they don’t represent a client that you do that actually pays for this Enterprise Fund), we do have an obligation, by statute, to provide them with those answers, so we work hard at that. We are starting to get some community complaints. He brought this up because he wants everyone to please be mindful of your sites, your neighbors and the environment because many of these lots are now infill properties. On many of them, the PUDs or the ordinances may have been in place many, many years ago, and the landowner or the developer has now decided to move through. He noted that in Foxboro in East Naples, the PUD is very old. Collier has wrapped around it, but those residents who border that Foxboro site have concerns about the Hampton Inn and the Lamborghini dealer going in there. They want to know when the County relaxed the standards to allow work Monday through Saturday from 6:30 a.m. to 7 p.m. That has been an ordinance since 1990. He understands they’ve moved in here in the last five to 10 years. It’s not that we don’t want to accommodate it, but just because the ordinance says you can do it doesn’t mean that you should not be mindful to the neighboring community. That’s what we ask. Unfortunately, if you don’t, it will serve as a distraction for you because it takes you away from doing your work when we have to send out Code Enforcement or Licensing. Or, he has to ask Jon Walsh to go take a look, which is one hour he’s not able to put toward a review. It’s a collaborative effort between the industry and staff as the regulatory body to be able to best manage the expectations of a community. Affordable Housing: Commissioner LoCastro arranged for Mr. French, Mike Bosi and James Sabo to speak with the affordable housing community. He told them it requires development involvement. Wherever the relationship may or may not have gone right or wrong, they can’t build it without your industry. The need is there, your employees need it, our employees need it, the April 6, 2022 10 community businesses and community need affordable housing to exist throughout the County. Where it’s placed is not up for us to decide. The regulatory body will help guide you through that petition. The one message we drove home is that without you at the table, it’s probably not going to happen. So, we’re encouraged by the feedback we received that the Affordable Housing chairman, as well as Steve Ruby and a number of members that many of you have worked with in the past, will be reaching out to you. We invited them to DSAC meetings because where best to engage with the industry but here? Even if it forces the conversation, at least the conversation is occurring. We looked at Anita Jenkins’ old position to determine whether we really need planning and zoning broken out. We’ve got a production element and planning and zoning for the entitlement piece for the petition piece. But as far as those long-range planning elements, to include resiliency, affordable housing and economic development, that’s a planning module. Most of you recognize that the County’s previous administrations chose to go in a different direction. We’re encouraging the County Manager’s Office to rethink that with us, and we do have a job description. He and Mike Bosi worked on it 30 days after the new County Manager came in and it was given to Sean Callahan, so it’s been going on that long. Deputy County Manager Amy Patterson and County Manager Mark Isackson already have given us the green light to engage with the HR department about a week to 1½ weeks ago to work on that job description, so we can get the right person there. That will encourage that relationship between the development community and the affordable housing mission because our community certainly needs everybody involved with this. The budget piece we are going to be requesting is at least three new code enforcement officers, predominantly because what you’re not hearing is the interaction that we have through Mike Ossorio’s group that I’m also charged with overseeing. There are a number of partnerships that exist, not just between those other authorities having jurisdiction, but the Sheriff’s Office, the police departments, Pollution Control, even internal. Vacation Rental by owner: The state has basically said you can’t do anything about it. They preempted local government from regulating the process, but they haven’t preempted us from requiring registration to identify a designated point of contact. So, in the event that we’ve got a property maintenance issue, a noise issue, a bad-tenant issue, we can address it with the property owner. We’ve established that point-of-contact. We’ve also made that information available to the Sheriff’s Office, as well as the local police agencies. Danny Condomina, the former code enforcement officer and former trainer within our group, now works in our process-improvement element and works with you on a regular basis. We sent him to the Sheriff’s Office free-of-charge to train them on how to navigate through that software on the public portal because we’ve made it available to the public. Based on the address you punch in, you can tell who the designated point of contact is and whether it’s a vacation rental. He also reached out to Col. Bloom’s office, (Commander) Jamie Cunningham and deputies because we want our partners in the field to be as well equipped with knowledge as they can be and understand what the code is. April 6, 2022 11 The three positions that we’re looking for are predominantly based on vacation rentals, noise complaints, night-time entertainment noise, especially with these pre-built environments where they’ve introduced something new and we need to be able to respond accordingly. Code Enforcement staff is usually off the road by 6-7 p.m., unless it’s a special mission, and they aren’t working at 10 p.m. During the day and weekends, we’ve got some part-timers or job-bank staff. The idea is that we would split the County up to be able to cover all nights and weekends to answer those community concerns, as well as work on some of the illegal parking we’re seeing and getting complaints on in East Naples and Golden Gate City. We know that they’ve filled in the culvert or they filled in the drainage, which floods out the neighborhood, so they can park their construction trucks or their window-washing trucks. We see this, but it only occurs at night. Salt Alley used to be the No. 1 area in Golden Gate City where we saw a lot of complaints. It’s crept into the neighborhoods, so we’re focused on community engagement and responding to those community needs. Mr. Mulhere said he’s assuming that the short-term vacation rental registration he’s talking about is unincorporated Collier County, not the city of Naples or the City of Marco Island? Mr. French said that was correct. Mr. Mulhere said he wanted to make sure because he knows Marco has 1,104 and they have to renew those every couple of years. Mr. French said it’s the actual registration and there are ticklers. Mr. Lauer has asked for all active construction sites. We purposely don’t maintain a report that shows all active construction sites because we get ticklers in CityView when things are due. Just looking at the activity, there are probably 30,000-40,000 active construction sites in this County at any given time, based on permit volume. Mr. Curl said that as a professional, he’s willing to share some of the burden, but not all of it. And a great example is, and you hit the nail on the head, we have so many new people moving here that they think have the same rules that they’ve had in Connecticut. What drives him up the wall is that there are other aspects that they’re completely unaware of, such as preserves. The other day, he heard someone say they didn’t have to maintain their preserves. They’re already approved, so no problem. When complaints come in, is there some sort of method of outreach? The new County website is a disaster and he understands why it was changed, an ADA lawsuit. It’s the most bizarre-looking thing to just hit the landing page. Where do I go? You’ve got literally three buttons and then the links don’t work. That’s a totally different issue, but have you ever thought about some quick way of responding to people with the correct information? You know, if there’s a landing page, for instance, and it says, “7 a.m. to 7 p.m. (whatever the work hours are), they’re allowed to be there” or “silt fence: call here if you don’t see it.” He doesn’t know what the solution is. But his point is, bad information is contagious and there’s a lot of bad information out there. Mr. French said he appreciates the question. Absolutely. Our Code Enforcement staff, under Mike Ossorio’s direction, is all about the educational component, as all our staff and directors are, to drive the ultimate result, which is compliance. It’s a lot more work to take someone in front of the Special Magistrate or the Code Enforcement Board just to put liens on and put those hardships against people who may need a simple correction. But as for clarifying the record and providing that information, absolutely. There are training videos out there. And April 6, 2022 12 even on the application process, it clearly illustrates and references those ordinances on what your allowable work hours are and what your responsibility is. Mr. Curl said you hit the other end. He’s talking more about frivolous complaints that come in that you can just nip in the bud and not waste staff’s time. Mr. French said they’ve taken numerous approaches, unfortunately, and it’s not an excuse when you’re looking at the voluminous nature of the work that we’re involved in now and not just the voluminous nature, but the complexity of the work. Construction is difficult because it’s supposed to be. Otherwise, everybody would be in it or those that were in it that weren’t supposed to be would be unlicensed, and then we would have another challenge, and we still have those challenges. We could always do better, and that’s homework for him, but he doesn’t know how to correct the way people think about things. Mr. Curl said he’s seeing more of it. The problem is that Facebook posts are allowing things to go viral in the wrong direction. Mr. French said he didn’t want to give this gentleman any credence, but our colleagues across the street were visited by someone who did not necessarily look approachable, with a camera in everyone’s face and wanted to gain access to the building. And it’s not that the denial of access should have ever been presented to this person, but the distraction that he intended to cause and the engagement, he took staff away from work that they should have been dedicated to doing. So, whether it’s a phone call or accusation, he learned a long time ago that the truth never gets in the way of a good story. So, clearly the best we can do is try to educate, respond accordingly, always be professional and in the event there are any questions, invite the party here. He’s made that mistake a number of times where he’s reached out to a community member only to get bombarded with many more questions, and it was a no-win situation. But he had an epiphany that perhaps he’d be able to answer their question and they would trust him. And that doesn’t necessarily always happen. He doesn’t know how to placate certain groups or individuals, especially when the best thing we can show is professionalism and continue to represent the agency we are committed to, not just your industry, but to the community that that we’re statutorily bound to serve. So, we try to do it with a smile. Ms. Spurgeon-DeJohn said it’s not a quick fix, but you could involve public information officer for the partner you’re referencing down the street, the transportation group. It does feel like what goes on in this building touches the public very intimately and a public information officer could mitigate a lot of things that you’re describing. Mr. French agreed, but said they’re all basically public information officers within this organization. The public information officer they had did an amazing job, but it still wasn’t good enough because the individual was focused on causing disruption. Ms. Spurgeon-DeJohn said she didn’t believe they tasked the public information officer with appeasing and making everyone in the world happy, but it alleviates what’s being described. It becomes a single point of contact who has all the answers to the top 10 or 20 beefs that are being circulated in the community. It’s something to think about. April 6, 2022 13 Mr. French said she was right and it’s something that they’ve focused on with the whole Business Center idea. Unfortunately, what’s happening is one of the discussions, as Ken brought up, he had conversations with the CEO of KeyStaff. There were some commitments that were made to him and our team. He hasn’t seen them yet, but part of the issue is that when you lose that retention, you lose a lot of knowledge and it takes away from the organization. He has to continually train. Then what happens is we lose the trainer because they get recruited by Pulte or somebody else because of the intrinsic knowledge they have about this organization and the regulatory process. Then we find ourselves in a stalemate. We are not the same organization we were when we all started 12-15 years ago. We have evolved, and in some areas more so than others, but, clearly, Laura, you’re absolutely right. It’s something that we should be revisiting, and it’s something that I know Ken holds near and dear to his heart as our Operations Director. Ken also is 100% in CityView, your public records, your regulatory element with regards to routing, scheduling pre-ops, answering questions, being available to the public and supporting every one of these groups. We designed that on purpose, to centralize that, so we all had skin in the game. Mr. Mulhere said he had a friend who was having some issues similar to what you’re describing with a neighbor. The neighbor wanted to research permits. After about a half a day, when I finally found that link that used to be there, called “Track My Application,” and then it said if it’s before this date or after this date, this was before that date, I found a way to get there. But it took awhile because there were 86 permits, and it wasn’t easy to find. He provided that link to his friend, who said he couldn’t believe how easy it is to find all this historical information. He told his friend it’s a lot different than it used to be when we had to search for paper files. He asked for a couple of files from the records room and they said it might be five to seven days, that they’re busy, and after six days, he was concerned and believed they’d lost the request, but on the seventh day, he got it. He wanted him to know that, to give him a compliment. Mr. French said he appreciated that. He noted that if not for DSAC’s engagement and information they shared with Commissioner LoCastro, which he took to the County Manager’s Office, the records room position wouldn’t have been approved. Nineteen years ago, when he was hired, he was the records room employee with Maria Estrada. The County has evolved since then. What he’s focused on is eliminating the need for that position by making it all digital. We’ve done a good job and unfortunately, over the years, we’ve had a number of staff taken from there and put throughout the County Manager’s agency. It may be a little too soon, but our intent is transferring records dating back to 1959 to current, which would be about a $4 million project. By statute, we’re only required to cover 14 years for single-family homes, and life of structure for commercial. He believes everyone finds value in having those records available so you can go back and look at the architecturals and the as-builts. Mr. Mulhere said a lot of people don’t know where to go for that information. Mr. French said thanked them for being good clients and mentors. April 6, 2022 14 Chairman Varian said he wanted to recognize Jonathan Walsh and Rich Long. What they do is fantastic. He can reach out to either one of them. He sends an email and they answer. He wanted everyone to know they’re cherished and are fantastic to work with. Mr. French said Jonathan Walsh told him today he’s being recruited by four firms. Chairman Varian said that would be a horrible loss. Mr. Mulhere noted that Jonathan is common-sense and customer-service oriented. You can’t ask for anything more. Mr. French said he agreed. When he hired Jon Walsh, he gave him a vision of what he wanted him to do. Many of you know Jon is registered and he’s appeared before the BCC on the tower issue in front of Commissioner LoCastro, when they gave him some bad information. Here you have someone with a level of education. Jon graduated from Manhattan (College) School of Engineering, he’s a registered PE in multiple states, a fire-suppression engineer and a floodplain manager. He’s worked in land-use planning and has multiple licenses, not just in construction, but as a building code official. It’s a rarity to have someone with that level of experience, education and licensing within a local government. We understand that he’s probably a very attractive option or would be a good candidate, as would Rich. But Rich has put us on notice that he’s good for a few more years before he retires, so we need to be mindful of that because that will impact your business. Mr. Varian said that on affordable housing, it’s us, the builders who are going to create it, but a lot of it is policy. Maybe Christian wants to talk about that shortly. Are there builders and developers on the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee? Mr. Valle said there were. He was on it for five years when he first got to Collier County. Mr. Mulhere said yes. Gary Hains is on it, and he works for David Torres. Mr. French said he spoke with Gary Hains, who agreed that the developer needs to come to the table. Mr. Mulhere said if a client asks if he can build something residential, he tells them they’re going to have to make a commitment to add affordable housing, minimally about 20%. So, we’ve got the message and we’re delivering that message. He’s pretty sure that things are moving in that direction right now, politically. Chairman Varian said he read an article about a local community that raised $250,000 for one affordable home. He was thinking affordable was $180,000, $190,000. Mr. Valle noted that the average price of a preconstructed home on the MLS in Golden Gate City is $400,000. April 6, 2022 15 Mr. Mulhere said there’s no easy solution. You’re talking about entry-level homes going for $380,000-$400,000. You don’t want to have to pay PMI, so you have to come up with 20%. Well, what’s 20% of $400,000? That’s $80,000. Good luck. Mr. Valle noted that it’s not the dollar amount, it’s the monthly payment and how that correlates back to their median income and as a percentage of their median income. If you do the math, it’s either that the mortgage rates go from 30 years to 35 or 40 to make a more affordable monthly payment, and then where does the down payment sweet spot come in? We all remember what no down payment looks like from 2005, 2006 and 2007. So, it’s about the balancing act of affordability because of the cost of construction materials that we all know are moving under our feet daily, and including labor. So, those are items we can’t manage. We can manage what the rates are and what the time frame is. That comes from the regulatory agencies. Mr. Mulhere said that economically speaking, it’s more feasible to accommodate a significant percentage, 20, 25 whatever, in a rental product of some number, 300, 340, 360, than it is to try to accommodate that for fee-simple ownership. But that’s a different challenge and it requires a different set of solutions. Mr. French noted that they have an item going to the BCC on the RFMUD with regards to if you build 100% affordable housing, it allows you to go from three units per acre to 12.2 units per acre. That’s a big deal. That’s one of the things he pointed out to the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. He understands that the need is now, we all understand that. You need to think about a long-term solution, long-term partnerships and to stay ahead and understand. He noted that department heads talk about planning for the future and then they get to Year 5. He reminded them they heard about the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension for five years. That’s why he talks about the need for a long-range planning position. Yes, we need short- term solutions. There’s no doubt this committee and this community have spoken and the Board has spoken. But from a staff perspective and as planning, engineering and building professionals, we look back and we say that’s the short-term, and we recognize that if the housing market softens, there are opinions out there that say the affordable-housing need goes away. He doesn’t think that’s the case all the time. But knowing what we know about this market, we really should have a long-range plan in place. A lot of folks come in for GMPAs and they’re looking for additional density. That’s when they really need to have an affordable-housing component or a discussion and not a buyout, but a discussion on what do we want to do, so if we can make that 12.2 units per acre a reality, it doesn’t require any TDR credits. You build 100%, and you’re automatically granted that and your sweet spot. So your sweet spot is anything north of 16 units per acre. You can usually make the number work. Mr. Curl said it’s almost folding in on itself. In other words, you’re encouraging more development. Now you just overloaded the transportation network again. Mr. French said that’s where you get into towns and villages. But maybe it’s not that. Maybe it’s in your already-built activity centers. So, when you look at some of these, if you look at the Bed Bath & Beyond Plaza, how old is that? It was built when he was in high school. We’re dealing with some of the restaurants in there that are trying to get site-development April 6, 2022 16 plans and the owner is absent and doesn’t really engage. It’s owned by a single gentleman who is up there in age and he does not care. But why not begin that negotiation early on to find out what the interest is because it’s already a built environment? You’ve got plenty of parking, so much impervious space. Mr. Curl said it’s around the corner, it’s at the old Sweetbay. Mr. French said our code speaks to concentrating on those activity centers. Mr. Mulhere said any land within 1½ miles of the urban area that you could incentivize and do some good things there. They have urban services, they are close to an hour or have direct access to an arterial roadway. You’ll have transit, so he’s got a new goal. Mr. French said that’s absolutely right. So, it’s not an encouragement of what’s going on in the eastern lands. But throw no consideration out the window is all that staff is saying. Mr. Dunnavant said it’s far from affordable, but they had a land cost that was over the top and it maybe apartments, what used to be a commercial complex, but it’s not anybody’s affordable housing. He appreciates other alternatives to it because he knows at the CBIA, they spoke to the BCC at the time and put together a sector of 30 different business groups in the community and the only tangible one they came up with was Phase One new construction to create affordable housing, so now we’re going to make a fund that goes to affordable housing, not how it goes out … Mr. French (finished his sentence) .. and drives up the cost of construction. I got it. Mr. Dunnavant said your only solution is to drive up the cost of construction, too? Mr. French said there is a residual risk that you run with a banker that backs it, the underwriters that are carrying the note because that construction and your time and material don’t come for free. Mr. French asked if Commissioner LoCastro had anything to say. Commissioner LoCastro said the last meeting he attended, his first one, was very valuable. The homework assignment he took home was to meet with HR. He met with HR, the County Manager and two deputy County Managers about giving a lot more support to HR. Jamie confirmed that has started. That’s the kind of thing he wants to leave here with, things that maybe you are working on, but simultaneously, he can work on. He plans on asking HR if they followed up on what he spoke to them about. He chairs the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee. They always say if you want to effect change, get a seat at the table. The previous commissioner who chaired AHAC didn’t have a really great attendance record. We’ve done a lot of different things now, having Jamie attend with Mike Bosi at the last meeting and maybe making that a recurring thing. It was very valuable for separating rumor from fact. We turned over some of the people that had gone past their term limits. Our current chair chairman is Joe Trachtenberg, who was the chairman of the board of St. Matthew’s House, and he brings a long business executive resume. He April 6, 2022 17 personally recruited him to be on the committee after the committee chair decided to resign. Joe Trachtenberg decided to run and won unanimously. We’ve been working closely together. At our next AHAC meeting, we’re going to get a report on affordable housing. After the BCC approved affordable housing, a year later you can go back to that unit and find that 63 of those units were rented by teachers and dishwashers and nurses. The County was sort of checking on developments that were built three or four years ago, with the 20% or 30% affordable piece. There are places that we cut the ribbon on a while ago and everybody took credit for having 63 affordable units in there. We actually don’t. Some of those communities were maybe affordable for six months and then they threw those back into the inventory, or they put a nurse in there, but doubled the rent a year later. That wasn’t part of the agreement, and so it’s not a matter of just saying, “Look what we did.” Did you really do it? So, the County was calling. We have a spreadsheet on the website where you can look at everything. All the rental communities that are in bold are the ones that are supposed to have affordable units. Then you can do a deeper dive to figure out how many. The County was checking periodically, but at the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee meeting, the folks connected to our housing team admitted that when they called to check, they probably don’t do it frequently enough. And when they do, the rental community knows it’s the County calling. They have caller ID and know that we’re not a secret shopper and just checking So, what we’ve been doing over the last several weeks is the County is not checking on those units anymore. Julissa Rodriguez, a single mom who works hard and is having a hard time finding affordable housing, got together a group of mostly single aggressive, moms who want to get things done. He met with them and gave them the spreadsheet. Jacob Burrow, who was part of our housing team, was part of that meeting, so we asked them to be secret shoppers and to call and say, “Hi, I’m Debbie Johnson and I heard you have 63 affordable units. Do you still have some available?” They say they don’t, they’re all full. So, the secret shopper asks if they weren’t full, what would the rent be? They are being inquisitive. The feedback he got is not good. A Naples Daily News reporter who attended one of his town hall meetings picked up on this story and downloaded the Excel spreadsheet. She sent him a text last night and said she’s called a few places and asked for the manager and the manager said, “Oh, we don’t do that anymore. We did that about three years ago, but everything is the exact same price right now.” He warned her not to rely on 20-somethings who pick up the phone and to confirm the information she initially receives with management. So, he believes the County will have some recourse against those complexes. The sin is that people who are paying full price now aren’t first-responders and blue-collar workers. What are you going to do, throw them out on the street? What’s going to end up happening is those complexes are probably going to get hit with a huge violation. In some cases, however, the violation probably will be less than the money they’ve collected all this time. So, he’ll work with the County Attorney on that. The signal he wants to send to the developments the County recently approved, is: Be careful, we’re actually watching now. If you’ve agreed in perpetuity or for 20 or 30 years to keep those 63 units affordable, he’s going to make sure they do it and ensure that those units aren’t facing the garbage cans, while the April 6, 2022 18 full-price units face a lake, or that the carpeting for the affordable units didn’t come from Big Lots, while the other units have Clive Daniel carpeting. [Mr. Mulhere left the meeting at 4:18 p.m.] You’re promising to keep the same level of quality on your apartment complexes, but you’re taking a little bit of a hit on the rent to help the affordable-housing crisis. He’s been trying to educate citizens. Some of the developments aren’t in locations where they would be very popular, or a developer says, “Yeah, I’ll put in 30% of the units to be affordable.” Then they get other positives, such as increased density and other things that now are on the table. The average resident often doesn’t know that. He knows because he’s had 140 town hall meetings since he was elected. You should be hearing soon about the results of the affordable- housing calls. Julissa Rodriguez is going to give us her feedback and we’re not going to take that as fact, but as feedback. Then County staff will follow up on that feedback to get definitive answers, even if we have to go down there and sit down with the senior leadership. There might be some hell to pay for some of these communities. He met with Paul Hiltz, NCH’s CEO. He’s trying to do a lot of extra things for NCH workers to either subsidize their housing, or a host of things. They’re starting to lose a lot of workers to Lee Health, which is aggressively advertising “Come work for us. We have a community that is a little bit more affordable to live in.” They don’t necessarily throw them a higher salary, but they’re advertising a lot of other perks. Lee Health is stealing a lot of people at almost the exact same salary. So, those are some things we’re talking about in the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee meetings. You may have heard that several meetings ago, the Commissioners voted on about seven different programs that you can apply for in the County to get some rent-relief help with utilities and other costs. The average citizen really isn’t educated on that. The pushback he’s giving in his town hall meetings is, God helps those who help themselves. If you’re sleeping in your car, you’ve got to dig into the programs. No one is going to knock on your door and hand you a bag of money. As Commissioners, we voted unanimously on the programs that we control. There are a few that we work on in tandem with the State, so we don’t have as much flexibility, but we open the aperture of who can be eligible. You can make a little bit more now and still be eligible for some of the programs that we have, and that’s because we got feedback from some people who said they missed the threshold by $1,000, or a year or they missed out on this much help. We’ve been able to adjust it a bit more, be a little bit more flexible and much more aggressive on advertising these programs to make sure people are really aware. Anything that you talk about in here, he’s listening as the eyes and ears of all five Commissioners, whether they’re here or not. He will take it back as a homework assignment. Please let him know. He heard about Jonathan and Rich. DSAC is where the sausage is made, the boots-on-the-ground folks. A lot of what you’re seeing sometimes doesn’t trickle up into the Commissioner’s building, but he will share what’s important with Commissioners. He doesn’t care what district it’s in. He’s going to continue to get HR support for Growth Management and a few other things on his list from this meeting. April 6, 2022 19 6. New Business None 7. Old Business None 8. Committee Member Comments (None) 9. Adjourn Future Meeting Dates: May 4, 2022, 3 p.m. June 1, 2022, 3 p.m. July 6, 2022, 3 p.m. Mr. Valle made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded. It carried unanimously, 12-0. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the chairman at 4:23 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ______________________________________ Chairman, William Varian These minutes were approved by the Committee/Chairman on ________________, as presented (choose one) _______, or as amended ________. March 9, 2022 1 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING Naples, Florida, March 9, 2022 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee-LDR Subcommittee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Department Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Chairman: Clay Brooker Robert Mulhere Mark McLean Jeff Curl Blair Foley ALSO PRESENT: Richard Henderlong, Principal Planner Eric Johnson, LDC Planning Manager Sean Kingston, Senior Planner Mike Bosi, Director, Planning & Zoning Mark Templeton, Principal Planner, Development Review Andrew Youngblood, Operations Analyst Jamie French, Deputy Department Head, GMD Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review March 9, 2022 2 Any persons in need of the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Department. 1. Call to Order - Chairman Chairman Brooker called the meeting to order at 3 p.m. A quorum consisting of five members was convened. 2. Approval of Agenda Mr. Foley made a motion to approve the agenda. Second by Mr. Curl. Carried unanimously, 5- 0. 3. Old Business None 4. New Business a. LDC Amendments i. PL2021000766 – Off-Site Boat Storage Chairman Brooker said there was a request to continue this item. Mr. Mulhere said he would recuse himself from the matter because he represents the applicant. Mr. McLean made a motion to continue PL2021000766– Off-Site Boat Storage. Second by Mr. Curl. Carried unanimously, 4-0; Mr. Mulhere recused himself. Mr. Foley asked why there was a request to continue and by whom. Mr. Mulhere said Jamie French asked him to meet with the Parks & Recreation staff first. It’s not a site-specific amendment, but it involves Port of the Islands. He was asked to hold a voluntary neighborhood information meeting. That’s what occurred two years ago, so he will talk to his client about it. He thought it would be better to finish that process first before bringing it to DSAC-LDR. They agreed to some language revisions and he didn’t want to bring this before the DSAC-LDR twice. He wants to resolve the issues with language and bring it before DSAC-LDR and then DSAC. Mr. Johnson said the next DSAC-LDR meeting is in June and he’s looking for another date for the DSAC-LDR meeting. Mr. Curl said he also was originally minimally involved in this matter. ii. PL20220000207 – Comparable-Use Determination (CUD) Update [Sean Kingston] Mr. Kingston presented a PowerPoint presentation, “Planning & Zoning Division CUD Update.” He reported that: • On Oct. 12, 2021, the Board directed staff to bring back a LDCA utilizing the Conditional-Use approval process for CUDs on a site-specific basis. The Board decided a CUD should be applicable to parcels seeking a CUD within the zoning district being examined, and not to all zoning districts for the proposed use. March 9, 2022 3 • The current method of comparing uses with other more intensive zoning district uses without having to assess the full effect the CUD would have on neighboring or adjacent properties was objectionable. • This LDCA shall require a CUD to be made by conditional-use approval in non- PUD districts as decided by the Hearing Examiner or the Board of Zoning Appeals, rather than the Planning Commission. • The CU process addresses ingress and egress to property and structures, noise, glare, odor, and traffic flow, to be fully assessed for compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties on a site-specific, case-by-case basis. The Proposed Revisions Are: • CUDs shall be applicable in the C-1 through C-5, Industrial, Business Park, Civic and Institutional, Golden Gate Parkway Overlay and Immokalee Mainstreet Overlay Zoning Districts, including PUDs only by CU approval. • CUDs shall be decided by the HEX or BZA. • In LDC section 2.03.07 F., Table of Uses, line item No. 2 listed under Commercial Uses is relabeled from “C” to “CU.” Line item No. 32 is changed from “P” to “CU” under Economic-Development Uses. • Revision to the Administrative Code Chapter 3 L, Subsection “Applicability” in Attachment “A.” Staff recommends that petition LDCA-PL20220000207 be forwarded for approval, including the revisions presented by staff. Mr. Johnson listed the changes that were made: Pages 1, 5, 11, 12, 14, 15. Mr. Kingston said they are highlighted in yellow. Mr. Mulhere questioned why Santa Barbara and other overlays, the larger ones, such as four or five in Immokalee, didn’t need changes. Mr. Henderlong said that in 2020-44, when the amendment was changed and [Land Development Code Manager] Jeremy Frantz was here, staff went through and looked at how that changed the Comparable-Use Determination when that amendment was done. That’s the root. That amendment was used and made to conform to these new changes. Mr. Mulhere said he’d hate to see some overlay that has the Comparable Use and it’s not a Conditional Use and someone takes advantage of it. Mr. Henderlong said that was a good recommendation and they would conduct a second review on this before it goes to DSAC. Mr. Mulhere said he had a question about the first substantive change under Commercial Zoning Districts C-1, Permitted Uses No. 41, which was struck in its entirety. He understood that they wanted to eliminate the Comparable-Use process that would relate generally to any commercial use or professional service that is comparable in nature to the foregoing, but that’s going to slip down to a Conditional Use rather than a permitted use. He cited concern about the remaining March 9, 2022 4 phrase, “including those that exclusively serve the administrative as opposed to the operational functions of a business – and are associated purely with activities conducted in an office.” That used to be a judgment call made by the planning manager, zoning director, etc. Mr. Kingston said the CU process would look at each use that is being proposed to be comparable. Before, this went to the comparable use determination section and since this is being deferred to the conditional use process, it will… Mr. Mulhere said he couldn’t think of something in C-1 that isn’t an office that might require an office. You’d hate to make someone go through a CUD to have an office and a use that is permitted. That language there, which used to be administrative but then was subject to CCPC or Hearing Examiner, says, “including those that exclusively serve the administrative as opposed to operational functions of a business and are associated purely with activities conducted in an office” in the Professional Office District. He didn’t know all the permitted uses there. He questioned if any of those permitted uses there have the ability to have an office—an administrative office for their business? It assumes it’s a use that is not expressly permitted, including those that don’t have an office. Mr. Johnson responded in the affirmative and listed the permitted uses in C-1 (zoning district): accounting, adjustment and collection services, advertising agencies, architectural services, auditing, automobile parking lots, barber shops, beauty shops, bookkeeping services, and business consulting services. Mr. Mulhere said he was OK with those uses. No one would object if they had a little office. Mr. Johnson clarified that the conventional zoning district, or rather the non-PUDs, would go through the CU process, whereas the PUDs would still retain the CUD process. Mr. Kingston explained that the process just applies to PUDs and the process is decided by HEX or BZA. Mr. Mulhere asked what the difference was. Mr. Kingston said the CUD process is simpler whereas the CU process is more complex. The CUD process addresses ingress and egress to property and structures, noise, glare, odor, traffic flow to be fully assessed for compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties on a site- specific, case-by-case basis. It’s intended to be site specific. Mr. Mulhere noted that the reality is if it’s a use that has a negative connotation, you would be asking for the same things. Chairman Brooker asked if the notice requirement was the same for the two processes. Mr. Johnson said it was. Mr. Henderlong said it must go through a full advertised hearing and there’s a Neighborhood Information Meeting, NIM. It’s different if it’s a PUD. It can go directly to advertising for the March 9, 2022 5 HEX and BZA. If it’s a conditional use, the Planning Commission gets involved and they must make a recommendation on it. Chairman Brooker thought it was HEX, not the Planning Commission. Mr. Mulhere said it depends on whether it’s a major or minor conditional use and if it involves heightened public interest. Mr. Johnson said Conditional Uses are earmarked for the HEX, but if there’s heightened public interest, the BZA is the decision maker and it must go to a Planning Commission hearing first. The decision maker is still the BZA. He didn’t recall if the CUD process required a mail-out. Chairman Brooker said a sentence confused him, the whole idea of pyramid zoning. Everything in C-1 is permitted in C-2 with additional uses, everything in C-2 is permitted in C-3, but with additional uses. So that’s now a problem. If we determine that something is comparable to C-1, it’s not necessarily comparable in C-2? It is logically flawed by definition. Mr. Johnson said he believed that in the beginning of each of the zoning districts, it says “any use that’s permitted in the preceding zoning district.” Chairman Brooker said if there’s a determination that something is comparable to C-1, by definition it’s comparable to C-2, C-3, C-4 and C-5. That’s not what the background says. Mr. Bosi said the direction to provide for this clarification resulted from the Isle of Capri Food- Truck Park. Staff made the determination that a food-truck park was a Comparable Use within a specific zoning district. He detailed the genesis of how the LDC amendments came about: • The Board of County Commissioners, after reviewing the appeal hearing, provided direction that they didn’t want the ability for one parcel of land to seek a CUD within a zoning district and that determination applies zoning district countywide. • That would mean any parcel zoned the same as the parcel going through the CUD would receive the benefit of that additional use. • Prior to a change about three years ago, the Comparable-Use Determination for a zoning district was housed within the conditional use, meaning it was only for that parcel, specifically for that parcel, and you would be able to put additional conditions on the process if you felt there was some external exertion from that use to the adjoining properties that needed to be further addressed. • The BCC said to bring it back and in the zoning districts, make it site specific because a CUD in a PUD is only applicable to that specific PUD. • The BCC wants that same type of limited reach for a CUD in a zoning district to be that limited and that’s why it’s now being proposed to bring it back where it originally was, in the conditional uses within the individual zoning district. Mr. Mulhere said in the old days, it was determined by the planning director. He didn’t believe the county ever used a zoning letter, but if you look at the old PUDs, you see it was administratively decided. March 9, 2022 6 Chairman Brooker said he appreciated that information. It makes sense. What was written did not. The definition of pyramid zoning is logically flawed. Mr. Bosi said it’s being proposed because they did not want one parcel of land to be able to add a use and then that use becomes available to every parcel of land with the same zoning classification. Mr. Mulhere extended the argument to say that a CUD could be approved, maybe up to three times, and the obvious thing to do would be to add that as a permitted use to the zoning district, as opposed to a food truck park, which generates noise and odors and may have special conditions placed on that. Mr. Brooker asked if it was Celebration Park that prompted this change. Mr. Bosi responded that it was a food truck park proposed on the Isles of Capri. Mr. Henderlong [displayed a page on the PowerPoint presentation] told Chairman Brooker that the language says, “The Hearing Examiner or the BZA shall hold at least one advertised public hearing. The decision-maker will be the Hearing Examiner or the BZA. If the PUD ordinance language identifies the CCPC or the Planning Director (or other similar County staff) as the authority to determine a use is comparable, compatible, and consistent, a Staff Report will be presented to the Hearing Examiner or the CCPC for approval of the Comparable Use Determination. The Zoning Division will review the application and identify whether additional materials are needed. Staff will prepare a Staff Report to present to the Office of the Hearing Examiner or the CCPC for a decision. That’s where the Planning Commission would come in. Chairman Brooker thanked him for the clarification and suggested that they make that one sentence of background information in the LDC amendment clearer. Mr. McLean made a motion to recommend approval as revised, with two caveats: that staff will look at the overlays mentioned by Mr. Mulhere and clarify the introductory language Chairman Brooker cited. (There were no public speakers.) Second by Mr. Curl. Carried unanimously, 5-0. b. Tree-Removal Permit vs. ICP/SDPI Process Mr. Curl said this issue began with a Code Enforcement complaint he was involved with. They were directed to go through either the ICP or SDPI process. The problem is that Code Enforcement dropped the complaint because the plan was approved. He’d already told the property owner they had three years to install it. Technically, there are escalations in Code Enforcement, such as 30 days and six months. That’s nowhere near three years. So once these homeowners or HOAs were hit with something they didn’t plan on installing right away, they felt under pressure. But then they had a reprieve, a three-year time frame versus a 30-day time frame, and that’s where this fell apart. A discussion ensued and the following points were made: March 9, 2022 7 • If there’s a Code Enforcement violation, part of the remedy for removal of trees without the appropriate approval would be an ICP or an SDPI. • Code Enforcement’s time frame is always unrealistic because they don’t understand what it takes to achieve that remedy, but as soon as they understand how long it takes, they usually give the violator more time. • The time frame should be the one that applies to an ICP or an SDPI. • The problem is that Code Enforcement closes the case after a plan is approved and should not be returning to inspect the property if the homeowner believes there is a three-year time frame. • This issue could be resolved by a staff supervisor. • There should be some language, a stipulation, that goes in the approval letter that says the violator has 60 days or six months, some sort of a time frame. • Homeowners could keep Code Enforcement Investigations Manager Jeff Letourneau updated on the status of the violation and remedy. • Code Enforcement could provide up to a one-year extension because a year may not be enough time for certain cases, such as those involving DOT permits. • Code Enforcement cases are typically not closed until the trees are put in and the property is back in compliance. • A state statute allows Code Enforcement to set its own timeframes, six months, 12 months or whatever they believe is reasonable. • Homeowners should be issued a notice of violation, saying they must go before the Code Enforcement Board, which must provide a timeline for compliance. Otherwise, there is no pressure to remedy the violation. • A Code Enforcement officer should issue a Notice of Violation if a homeowner has an SDPI, just to allow the case to go before the Code Enforcement Board to set a timeline; the officer would not recommend a violation. • SDP letters specify a three-year timeline, but SDPI letters do not. • Having inspectors check properties for compliance after homeowners provide a plan is not the best use of staff time. • When homeowners provide an SDPI, Code Enforcement should open a new case to follow through and ensure the property is in compliance and that trees were planted. • Two solutions: Do not close the Code Enforcement case, or change the SDPI language. • For a Code Enforcement case, requiring a letter from an engineer is an additional expense, but some sort of certification letter could be required to verify that trees were planted and the property is in compliance. • A one-year timeline would be a good start, with the possibility of an extension. • Code Enforcement officers should be educated about the need not to close a case to ensure the violation is monitored and brought back into compliance. • A checklist should be used. • If it’s a contractor/builder, once they acquire the permits, the contractor licensing laws will kick in. • In the past, violators were charged four times what a permit costs. Chairman Brooker made a motion to bring this matter before the DSAC for further discussion and before Mike Ossorio or a designee to discuss with DSAC. Second by Mr. McLean. The motion passed unanimously, 5-0. March 9, 2022 8 [Mr. Mulhere temporarily left the meeting at approximately 3:45 p.m. and returned at approximately 3:49 p.m. He left the meeting at 4:05 p.m.] c. Confirm Remaining 2022 meeting dates: i. June 15, 2022 (or earlier; TBD) ii. September 21, 2022 iii. December 14, 2022 5. Public Comments None 6. Adjourn There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the chair at 4:08 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE ____________________________________________ Chairman: Clay Brooker These minutes were approved by the subcommittee/chairman on ________________, (check one) as presented _______, or as amended ________. Code Enforcement Division Monthlv Report o Cases opened: . Cases closed due to voluntary compliance: . Propertyinspections: . Lien sea rches requested: Trends Cases Opened Per Month Mar ch 22, 2022 - April 21, 2022 H ighlights 622 399 2594 1,92s 702 632 644 900 800 700 600 s00 400 300 200 100 0 809 755 761 652 665 642 628 622604 Apr-21 May-21 lun-21 Jul-21 Aug-21 Sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Ma.-22 3198 3012 2180 2813 2635 2649 2566 2508 2St6 2594 2352 2214 Apr-21 May-21 lun-21 .,ul-21 Aug-21 Sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan 22 Feb-22 Ma"-22 3s00 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 s00 0 This report reflects monthly data from March 22,2022 - Aptil2L, ZO22 Code !nspections Per Month March22,2022- Apnl21.,2022 Code Cases by Category 4181 4009 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Ori gin of Case r code oiv. tnitiated cases r Coftpla int hitiated Cases 316 246 2027 2022 3000 2000 1500 1000 Bayshore lm mo ka lee 2580 CRA Case Opened Monthly a Monthly open Cases aTotal opened cases to Date (Report inltlated Septemb€r 2O1a) s00 0 1693 37 This report reflects monthly data from March 22,2022 - April Zf, ZO22 2500 t------ March 22, 2022 - April 21, 2022 Code Cases by Category Ve8etation Requirements 4% Animals Accessory Use Vehicles 16% Site Devel opment 16% signs Property Maintenance 9% Parking Enforcement a% Land Use Noise 3% Nuisance Abatement 22yo Occupatlonal Licensing Case Type Common Issues Associated with Cas€ Type Accessory Use - Fence permits, fence maintenance, canopies, shades, guesthouse renting etc.Animals - Prohibited animals, too many animals, etc.Commercial - Shopping carts Land Use - Prohibited land use, roadside stands, outdoor storage, synthetic drugs, zoning issues, etc.oise - Construction, early morning landscnping, bar or club, outdoor bands, etc. Nuisance Abatement - Litter, grass overgroMh, waste container pits, exotics, etc.occupational Licensing - Home occupation violations, no business tax receipts, kenneling. etc. Parking Enforcement - Parkjng within public right-of-way, handicap parking, etc. Property Maintenance - unsanitary conditions, no running water, green pools, structure in djsrepair, etc.Protected Sp€cies - Gopher Tortoise, sea turues lighting, bald eagles, etc. Right of Way - Construction in the public right-of-way, damaged culverts, obstruction to public right-of-way, etc. 9!Sn: - No sign permits, illegal banners, illegal signs on private property, etc.Site Deyelopment -Building permits, building alterations, land alterations, etc. Temporary Land Use - Special events, garage sales, promotional events, sidewalk sales, etc. Vegetation Requirements - Tree maintenance, sight dislance triangle, tree pruning, land clearing, landfill, preserves, etcvehicles - License plates invalid, inoperable vehicles, grass parking, RV parking, other-vehicle paiking etc ' This report reflects monthly data from lvtarch 22,2022 - Aptil ZL, ZO22 Right of Way 3% February 22,202L- March 21.,2022 Code Cases by Category V€g"t Uon Requireflpnts 3X Animals 196 Acteslory Us€ 2r5 Nulsance Abatement 25% Slte Development t7% Occupational Licensing 1,6 Rlght of Way 2X Property Mdntenafte vx PartinS Enforceflpnt 7i6 Case Type Common fssues Associated with Case Type' Accessory Use - Fence permits, fence maintenance, canopies, shades, guesthouse renting etc.Animals - Prohibited animals, too many animals, etc.Commercial - Shopping carts Land Use - Prohibited land use, roadside stands, outdoor storage, synthetic drugs, zoning issues, etc.Noise - Construction, early morning landscaping, bar or club, outdoor bands, etc. Nuisance Abatement - Litter, grass overgroMh, waste container pits, exotics, etc. Occupational Licensing - Home occupation violations, no business tax receipts, kenneling. etc. Parking Enforcement - Parking within public right-of-way, handicap parking, etc. Property Maintenance - Unsanitary conditions, no running water, green pools, structure in disrepair, etc. Protected Species - Gopher Tortoise, sea turtles lighting, bald eagles, etc. Right of Way - Construction in the public right-of-way, damaged culverts, obstruction to public right-of-way,tc.Signs - No sign permits, illegal banners, illegal signs on private property, etc. Site Development -Building permits, building alterations, land alterations, etc. Temporary Land Use - Special events, garage sales, promotional events, sidewalk sales, etc. Vegetation Requirements - Tree maintenance, sight disiance triangle, tree pruning, land clearing, landflll, preserves, etc.Vehicles - License plates invalid, inoperable vehicles, grass parking, RV parking, other vehicle parking etc. This report reflects monthly data from February 22,2021- March 21,2022 tand U9e Norse 2% Signs January 22,2022- February 21,,2022 Code Cases by Category Vegetation Requirements 3% Temporary Use Animals Accessory Use Vehicles 20% Site Development t3% Right of W 2% Property Maintenance 9% Parking Enforcement 6vo Cas€ Type Common Issues Associated with Case Typ€ Accessory Use - Fence permits, fence maintenance, canopies, shades, guesthouse renting etc.Animals - Prohibited animals, too many animals, etc.Commercial - Shopping carts Land Us€ - Prohibited land use, roadside stands, outdoor storage, synthetic drugs, zoning issues, etc.Noise - Construction, early morning landscaping, bar or club, outdoor bands, etc. Nuisance Abatement - Litter, grass overgroMh, waste container pits, exotics, etc. Occupational Licensing - Home occupation violations, no business tax receipts, kenneling. etc. Parking Enforcement - Parking within public right-of-way, handicap parking, etc. Property Maintenance - unsanitary conditions, no running water, green pools, structure in disrepair, etc. Protected Species - Gopher Tortoise, sea turtles lighting, bald eagles, etc. Right of Way - Construction in the public right-of-way, damaged culverts, obstruction to public right-of-way,tc.Signs - No sign permits, illegal banners, illegal signs on private property, etc. Site Deyelopment -Building permits, building alterations, land alterations, etc. Temporary Land Use - Special events, garage sales, promotional events, sidewalk sales, etc. Vegetation Requirements - Tree maintenance, sight distance triangle, tree pruning, land clearing, Iandflll, preserves, etc.Vehicles - License plates invalid, inoperable vehicles, grass parking, RV parking, other vehicle parking etc. This report reflects monthly data from January 22,2022 - February 21,2022 I Land Use 8%Noise Abatement Signs 26% Occupational Licensing 3% Public Utilities Department Engineering and Project Management Division 0.1 1.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.9 2.3 0.9 1.2 1.8 2.2 11 4 14 17 9 11 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 RequestsBusiness DaysResponse Time -Utility Deviations Requests Completed Sufficiency Review Time Substantive Review Time Requests Received Public Utilities Department Engineering and Project Management Division 5 0 11 31 11 13 7 8 15 3 7 8 3 2 3 6 2 9 4 7 10 14 17 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 RequestsBusiness DaysResponse Time -FDEP Permits Requests Completed Initial Review Time Revision Review Time Director Approval Time Requests Received Public Utilities Department Engineering and Project Management Division 1 2 1 1 1 4 14 19 12 36 18 12 32 32 33 52 37 20 8 12 9 15 16 5 0 5 10 15 20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21 Jan-22 Feb-22 Mar-22 RequestsBusiness DaysResponse Time -Letters of Availability Requests Completed Minimum Average Maximum Requests Received April 2022 Monthly Statistics 14/2022 Growth Management Department Building Plan Review Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 2 - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-223,948 4,093 4,932 4,687 4,760 4,450 4,484 3,951 4,633 3,915 4,801 6,258 5,939 5,949 6,534 4,837 5,075 4,554 4,564 4,248 3,913 4,296 4,608 5,574 4,980 All Permits Applied by Month Mechanical, 770 Fire Alarm Monitoring, 84 Bldg Add/Alt , 388 Well Permits, 97 Bldg New 1&2 Res, 211 Shutters/Doors/ Windows, 608 ROW Residential, 105 Roof, 518 Solar, 165 Plumbing, 387 Pool, 174 Electrical, 369 Aluminum Structure, 185 Gas, 242 Fence, 186 Top 15 of 35 Building Permit Types Applied Building Plan Review Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 3 $- $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 Apr-20Jul-20Oct-20Jan-21Apr-21Jul-21Oct-21Jan-22Apr-22Monthly Multi-family & Commercial Total Construction Value by Applied Date Multi-family Commercial $- $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 Apr-20Jul-20Oct-20Jan-21Apr-21Jul-21Oct-21Jan-22Apr-22Monthly 1 & 2 Family Total Construction Value by Applied Date 1&2 Family $- $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22Monthly Total Construction Value by Applied Date 1&2 Family Multi-family Commercial Building Plan Review Statistics 44/2022 Growth Management Department 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22Apr- 20 May- 20 Jun- 20 Jul- 20 Aug- 20 Sep- 20 Oct- 20 Nov- 20 Dec- 20 Jan- 21 Feb- 21 Mar- 21 Apr- 21 May- 21 Jun- 21 Jul- 21 Aug- 21 Sep- 21 Oct- 21 Nov- 21 Dec- 21 Jan- 22 Feb- 22 Mar- 22 Apr- 22 Commercial 4 5 7 5 6 3 3 3 6 7 5 11 8 12 9 6 13 13 3 4 8 5 7 4 4 Multi-family 9 5 2 10 10 11 1 7 7 11 19 11 6 6 17 11 15 5 6 12 9 10 12 15 3 1&2 Family 192 205 196 234 296 248 352 244 314 357 195 386 412 460 445 374 403 218 330 286 295 346 217 333 255 New Construction Building Permits Issued by Month 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Apr-20Jun-20Aug-20Oct-20Dec-20Feb-21Apr-21Jun-21Aug-21Oct-21Dec-21Feb-22Apr-22New Multi-family Building Permits Issued by Month 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Apr-20Jun-20Aug-20Oct-20Dec-20Feb-21Apr-21Jun-21Aug-21Oct-21Dec-21Feb-22Apr-22New Commercial Building Permits Issued by Month Building Inspections Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 5 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-2220231187202097120402200301989923098197512260820341221842549123638221552548922153246912370725758245762650623386245072983425544Building Inspections Structural, 11,072 Well, 96 Electrical, 5,266 Plumbing, 3,224 Septic, 159 Mechanical, 2,624 Land Development, 1,844 Gas, 788 Pollution Control, 6 ROW, 461 Types of Building Inspections Land Development Services Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 6 - 50 100 150 200 250 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22148 134 145 144 174 173 158 153 140 141 186 196 161 210 189 193 174 209 220 232 157 179 182 195 199 All Land Development Applications Applied by Month 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Short-Term Vacation Rental Registration Garage Sale Permit Zoning Verification Letter Special Event Permit Site Development Plan Insubstantial Change 1416 327 156 122 109 Top 5 Land Development Applications Applied within the Last 6 Months Land Development Services Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-2212173019122333173230242534332532323433211730373042Pre-application Meetings by Month - 20 40 60 80 100 120 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-229 25 27 22 20 16 22 26 19 23 25 14 33 17 28 8 7 6 11 5 6 8 6 21 12 19385353617578725152477861487451677268504241617776Front Zoning Counter Permits Applied by Month Temporary Use Commercial Certificates 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-229 7 13 0 14 15 8 2 9 9 10 17 5 7 11 21 9 1 28 59 11 2 20 54 9Number of PagesPlat Pages Recorded per Month 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-223 2 3 0 2 1 3 1 2 2 3 4 2 2 2 4 2 1 4 4 3 1 3 5 1 Number of New Subdivisions Recorded per Month Numberof SubdivisionsLand Development Services Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 8 Yearly Totals 2020 -25 2021 –33 2022 -10 Yearly Totals 2020 -152 2021 –188 2022 –85 Land Development Services Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 9 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-224962111055866679312783133104108Monthly Total of Subdivision Applications (PSPA, PSP, PPL, PPLA, ICP, FP, CNST) by Month - 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-226 10 7 11 10 14 6 11 6 6 5 7 13 7 9 10 13 13 13 11 12 14 8 6 13 Monthly Total of Subdivision Re-submittals/Corrections (PSPA, PSP, PPL, PPLA, ICP, FP, CNST) by Month Land Development Services Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 10 - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-2238 27 30 37 42 45 35 30 23 21 42 42 38 46 49 41 20 39 61 46 40 39 24 43 42 Monthly Total of Site Plan Applications (SIP, SIPI, SDP, SDPA, SDPI, NAP) by Month 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-2238422933334552425126364341405145402737303745423539Monthly Total of Site Plan Re-submittals/Corrections (SIP, SIPI, SDP, SDPA, SDPI, NAP) by Month Reviews for Land Development Services 4/2022 Growth Management Department 11 - 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22812 807 929 1,081 888 1,120 1,147 999 999 782 900 1,251 1,116 1,052 1,292 1,085 1,129 1,017 1,293 1,038 1,269 1,043 1,126 1,324 1,297 Number of Land Development Reviews 96.9 3.1 Percentage Ontime for the Month Ontime Late Land Development Services Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 12 $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 $30,000,000 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22Total Applied Construction Valuation Estimate Construction Estimate Utility Estimate 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22Inspections per monthSite & Utility Inspections Final Subdivision Inspection Final Utility Inspection Preliminary Subdivision Inspection Preliminary Utility Inspection Tie In Inspection Apr- 20 May- 20 Jun- 20 Jul- 20 Aug- 20 Sep- 20 Oct- 20 Nov- 20 Dec- 20 Jan- 21 Feb- 21 Mar- 21 Apr- 21 May- 21 Jun- 21 Jul- 21 Aug- 21 Sep- 21 Oct- 21 Nov- 21 Dec- 21 Jan- 22 Feb- 22 Mar- 22 Apr- 22 North Collier 38 36 33 42 33 47 44 37 32 25 33 37 39 39 55 32 43 23 48 41 49 29 31 29 49 Collier County(Greater Naples)48 62 62 52 61 59 62 61 51 44 53 71 72 60 74 61 39 53 80 70 68 56 56 62 69 Fire Review Statistics 4/2022 Growth Management Department 13 Total Number of Building Fire Reviews by Month Total Number of Planning Fire Reviews by Month Fire District Fire District 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22DaysBuilding Fire Review Average Number of Days Apr- 20 May- 20 Jun- 20 Jul- 20 Aug- 20 Sep- 20 Oct- 20 Nov- 20 Dec- 20 Jan- 21 Feb- 21 Mar- 21 Apr- 21 May- 21 Jun- 21 Jul- 21 Aug- 21 Sep- 21 Oct- 21 Nov- 21 Dec- 21 Jan- 22 Feb- 22 Mar- 22 Apr- 22 North Collier 565 510 642 645 564 558 588 429 586 427 482 630 706 741 1044 687 775 608 654 504 449 470 503 671 646 Collier County (Greater Naples)355 324 462 418 409 400 439 403 446 460 475 451 473 456 586 401 480 382 411 409 393 323 503 613 538 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Apr-20May-20Jun-20Jul-20Aug-20Sep-20Oct-20Nov-20Dec-20Jan-21Feb-21Mar-21Apr-21May-21Jun-21Jul-21Aug-21Sep-21Oct-21Nov-21Dec-21Jan-22Feb-22Mar-22Apr-22DaysPlanning Fire Review Average Number of Days Tree removal permit vs ICP/SDPi process (re: Code enforcement) and time allowance(s) The current LDC provides for up to 10 ten trees, over a 5 year period, be removed via the tree removal permit process. Mark Templeton can provide data on tree removal with the removed completed tree replacement timeframe (resembling a code enforcement action). Removal of over 10 trees, however, require an ICP or an SDPi to verify Planning requirements are met in buffers, vehicular use, building foundation, and/or general trees. However, time allotments are is disparate among these processes, even more clouded when required as part of a Code enforcement action. We received a call from an arborist regarding a code enforcement action. Over 10 trees were removed from the site, and they were guided to the SDPi process by Code or Planning. Upon approval of the SPDi-verified and/or added trees (amending the original SDP), to meet code, the action was terminated. Our office advised the Owners they had 3 years to complete the plan (due to the code complaint removal). Various issues for LDC clarification, amendment, and/or additional process: Code complaint for tree removals beyond 10/TRP Scope? Code case: 30 days for completion, typically on complaints? 6 months-12 months completion(s)? 3 years for completion of permit items per amendment applications? A TRP has a separate timeline that speaks to a tree installation required AFTER tree removed (only applicable to under 10 trees removed)-model for an over 10 process? Agenda item: 6.a. MERGE Landscape Architecture Business license # LC26000561E design LLC LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE info@emergedesign.biz | 239.272.7933 4010 8th AVE. SE, NAPLES, FL 34117 THIS DRAWING IS THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY, DESIGN, AN D CREATION OF eMERG E Des ign LLC, AN D SHALL N O T B E R E P R O D U C E D I N W H O L E O R I N P A R T W I T H O U T T H E P R E V I O U S , E X P R E S S E D W R I T T E N C O N S E N T O F e M E R G E D e s i g n L L C © 2 0 2 1 Jeffrey S. Curl ASLA CLARB Registered Landscape Architect FLA. LIC.: LA#6666769 1 of 3 AMBERLY VILLAGE SDPI COVER SHEET revision/issue date:07.02.21 date:06.21.21 filename:210702-AV SDPI.dwg project number:2130 COVER SHEET INFORMATION: project title: AMBERLY VILLAGE name of owner(s): ANCHOR TREE SERVICE on behalf of AMBERLY VILLAGE COMMONS ASSOC address: 954 CLARELLEN DRIVE, FORT MYERS, FL 33919 telephone: 239.354.0973 name of agent: JEFFREY S CURL ASLA | CLARB firm: eMERGE DESIGN LLC address: 4010 8th Ave S.E., Naples, FL 34117 telephone: 239.304.9443 application type: Insubstantial Change to Site Development Plan (SDPi) CHANGE TO SDP 88-109 original approvals: R-87-7C; PUD 87-7(1) 93-4; 87-7(2) 96-72; PDI-PL-13-644; HEX 2014-11; SDPI PL20160002269; SDP 89-2598; 89-2593; 88-50 zoning designation: PUD ORD. 96-72 [ROYAL WOOD GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB] VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE NORTH FOLIO NUMBERS / LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: 1 1 1 1 Date: Reviewed and Approved For: Permit Issuance PL20210001521 7/12/2021 TREES QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT CAL SIZE DETAIL CON ERE 6 Conocarpus erectus / Buttonwood 25 gal 1.75"Cal 10` O.A., 4`-5` SPR. CON SER 43 Conocarpus erectus sericeus / Silver Buttonwood B & B 2"Cal Single leader; 14` O.A. HT. SHRUBS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME SIZE FIELD2 FIELD3 DETAIL TRI FAK 1,020 Tripsacum dactyloides / Fakahatchee Grass 1 gal 24" O.A., 4` O.C. GROUND COVERS QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT FIELD2 FIELD3 DETAIL HEL DEB 694 Helianthus debilis / Dune Sunflower 1 gal 12" O.A.36" O.C. PLANT SCHEDULE Irrigation shall be zoned separately for sod / plantings Required VUA Green space, Buffers, BFPA, and General Landscaping meet requirements or shall be brought up to minimum Code ROYAL WOOD BOULEVARD 60' R.O.W./ Private ZONING: PUD LAND USE: GOLF COURSE ZONING: PUD LAND USE: GOLF COURSE ZONING: PUD LAND USE: LAKE 55.31'46.32'15.10'14.87'7.92'12.44'5.05'17.34'47.81'54.48'54.48'47.81'8.79'39.87' BUILDING PERIMETER CALCULATION: BUILDING TYPE 2 (2 * 7.92) + (2 * 12.44)=40.72 (2 * 5.05) + (2 * 17.34)=44.78 (2 * 47.81) + (2 * 54.48)=204.58 (2 * 47.81) + (2 * 54.48)=204.58 TOTAL = 494.66 (HALF PERIMETER TOTAL) 494.66 * 2 = 989.32 (BUILDING LESS CENTRAL BREEZEWAY) (2 * 8.79) + (2 * 39.87)=97.32 (CENTRAL BREEZEWAY) 989.32 + 97.32 = 1,069.06 (BUILDING TYPE 2 TOTAL PERIMETER) BUILDING PERIMETER CALCULATION: BUILDING TYPE 1 (2 * 55.31) + (2 * 46.32)=203.26 (2 * 15.10) + (2 * 14.87)=59.94 TOTAL = 263.20 (HALF PERIMETER TOTAL) 263.20 * 2 = 526.40 (BUILDING TYPE 1 TOTAL PERIMETER) 1 2 EXISTING VUA AREA: 74,714.01 S.F. / 1.72 Ac. 9B & B CON SER 1 25 gal CON ERE 125 gal CON ERE 1 25 gal CON ERE 125 gal CON ERE 1 25 gal CON ERE 1 25 gal CON ERE 2041 gal TRI FAK 1371 gal HEL DEB ZONING: PUD LAND USE: GOLF COURSE 10B & B CON SER 2041 gal TRI FAK 1371 gal HEL DEB 6B & B CON SER 2041 gal TRI FAK 1381 gal HEL DEB 8 B & B CON SER 204 1 gal TRI FAK 138 1 gal HEL DEB 10 B & B CON SER 204 1 gal TRI FAK 138 1 gal HEL DEB AMBERLY CIRCLE MERGE Landscape Architecture Business license # LC26000561E design LLC LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE info@emergedesign.biz | 239.272.7933 4010 8th AVE. SE, NAPLES, FL 34117 THIS DRAWING IS THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY, DESIGN, AN D CREATION OF eMERG E Des ign LLC, AN D SHALL N O T B E R E P R O D U C E D I N W H O L E O R I N P A R T W I T H O U T T H E P R E V I O U S , E X P R E S S E D W R I T T E N C O N S E N T O F e M E R G E D e s i g n L L C © 2 0 2 1 Jeffrey S. Curl ASLA CLARB Registered Landscape Architect FLA. LIC.: LA#6666769 2 of 3LANDSCAPE/IRRIGATION NOTATION PLAN UPON EXISTING IRRIGATION ADJUSTMENT, VERIFY EXISTING RAIN SENSOR, CONTROLLER AND COVERAGE PER THE LDC NATIVE/ ZONE MISCELLANEOUS SOD STENOTAPHRUM SECONDATUM / ST. AUGUSTINE 'FLORATAM'SET ON FINAL GRADE DEVOID OF ROCKS MULCH VITAMULCH 3" DEPTH, AFTER WATERING IN 0 40'80' 0 1 2 NORTH 1" = 40' scale: VUA Y / 10 Y / 10 PROJECT CALCULATION TABLE: I. PERIMETER BUFFERING (Per LDC Sec. 4.06.02). EXISTING / NONE REQUIRED (GOLF COURSE); NO CHANGES II. VEHICULAR USE AREAS (V.U.A.) AND R.O.W. (Per LDC Sec. 4.06.03). 1. Landscape islands: min. 8' wide / 100 s.f. Required one tree per island. Existing trees retained qualify for increased consecutive parking spaces. Parking stall shall be < than 50' from a tree. 2. Green Space Requirements for Buildings > 40,000 s.f: a. Shopping Centers require 7% min. size of v.u.a. must be developed as green space in the front yard or courtyard and is in addition to the building perimeter planting; however, this may count toward open space requirements (LDC Sec. 4.02.01); GREEN SPACE / COURTYARD EXISTING PER PLAN b. Benches required: 1 foot per 1,000 s.f. of building area. 75% of the benches may be located adjacent to the building along paths, walks, and within arcades/malls; BENCHES EXISTING 3. Green Space Requirements for Buildings > 20,000 s.f: a. Trees in V.U.A. must be min. 14'-16' HT., 6'-8' SPR., 3"-4" CAL. WITH 6' OF C.T. b. The first row of landscape islands closest to the building must be landscaped with trees, palms, (min. 7' C.T.) shrubs, and groundcovers. TREES REPLACED AT ONE PER REQUIRED LANDSCAPE ISLAND AND/OR 74,714.01 S.F. * 10% = 7,471 / 250 = 30 TREES MATERIALS EXISTING AND REQUIRED ABOVE ARE LABELED AS "VUA" III. TREE CREDITS FOR PRESERVED TREES (Per LDC Sec. 4.06.04.B). EXISTING; NO CHANGES IV. MINIMUM LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING; NO CHANGES V. BUILDING FOUNDATION PLANTING AREA (B.F.P.A.). [SEE CALCUATION INSET, RIGHT] Buildings under 10,000 S.F. = (TOTAL OF ALL FACADES) x.25x10'; 5' minimum bed Width; Tree/Palm 1/300 S.F. BUILDING TYPE 1: 526.40 S.F. * .25 * 10 = 1,316.00 S.F. / 5 TREES Buildings over 10,000 S.F. / less than 50' zoned height = (TOTAL OF ALL FACADES) x.45x15'; 14' Height; 10' minimum bed Width; Tree/Palm 1/400 S.F. BUILDING TYPE 2: 1,069.06 S.F. * .45 * 15 = 7,216.55 / 18 TREES MATERIALS EXISTING AND REQUIRED ABOVE ARE LABELED "BFPA" VI. TREES AND SHRUBS. 1. TREES AND PALMS SIZED PER V.U.A./B.F.P.A. ABOVE 49 ADDITIONAL TREES REQUIRED x 75% = 37 NATIVE TREES REQUIRED 100% PROVIDED, OFFSETTING NON-NATIVE QUEEN PALMS (NET >50% PROVIDED) 1,714 SHRUBS REQUIRED x 50% = 857 NATIVE SHRUBS REQUIRED 100% PROVIDED, OFFSETTING NON-NATIVE IXORA/SCHEFFLERA (NET >50% PROVIDED) SPECIES MIX: For 1 - 10 trees: 1/ For 11 - 20 trees: 2 / For 21 - 30 trees: 3 / For 31 - 40 trees: / For > 40 trees: 5 [MIX PROVIDED VIA EXISTING BFPA, BUFFER TREES AND PALMS, INCLUDING LIVE OAK, QUEEN PALM, SLASH PINE, HOLLY] VIII. PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS. (5.05.08. E.Z.h.) EXISTING; NO CHANGES Property Line / R.O.W. (Typ.) BFPA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA VUA Note: coord. with water meter & water line Property Line (Typ.) CALCULATIONS INSET FOR BUILDING FOUNDATION PLANTING AND VEHICULAR USE AREA TAKE-OFF BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPABFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA 3:1 (PALMS) BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA BFPA Y / 10 Y / 10 AMBERLY VILLAGE SDPIrevision/issue date:07.02.21 date:06.21.21 filename:210702-AV SDPI.dwg project number:2130 1 1 Clouded trees removed (typ.)1 Ex. Queen Palm (typ.) Ex. Live Oak (typ.) 1 1 Ex. Live Oak (typ.) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Date: Reviewed and Approved For: Permit Issuance PL20210001521 7/12/2021 MERGE Landscape Architecture Business license # LC26000561E design LLC LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE info@emergedesign.biz | 239.272.7933 4010 8th AVE. SE, NAPLES, FL 34117 THIS DRAWING IS THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY, DESIGN, AN D CREATION OF eMERG E Des ign LLC, AN D SHALL N O T B E R E P R O D U C E D I N W H O L E O R I N P A R T W I T H O U T T H E P R E V I O U S , E X P R E S S E D W R I T T E N C O N S E N T O F e M E R G E D e s i g n L L C © 2 0 2 1 Jeffrey S. Curl ASLA CLARB Registered Landscape Architect FLA. LIC.: LA#6666769 3 of 3LANDSCAPE/IRRIGATION DETAILS, NOTES, AND SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL NOTES 1. MULCH: Min. 3" layer (after watering in) required, Extending min. 12" ring fromtrunk in all directions. 25% MAX. ALLOWABLE CYPRESS MULCH. 2. BERMS: For grass stabilized: max. 4:1 slope, For groundcover stabilized: 3:1 max. with the toe of the slope set back 5' for the edge of R.O.W./Property lines. Berms are permitted in easements provided written approval received from all interests under said easement. Berms adjacent to I-75 have exemptions to these requirements. 3. STAKING. Re-staked within 24 hours of a blow over / staking failure. Remove between 6 and 12 months after planting. 4. LIGHT POLES. Contractor shall ensure placement of all trees maintain a minimum 12.5' horizontal clearance between the trunk and face of street light poles. 5. EASEMENTS. Written permission must be obtained for any planting. 6. LIMEROCK. Shall be excavated from planting holes / planting areas in parking lots. 7. SIGNAGE. Indicate to reduce conflicts. 8. MAINTENANCE. Shall abide by all Codes. Removals shall be verified with pertinent Codes, Surveys, Permits, etc. prior to action. 9. IRRIGATION. 100% coverage required, timers with automatic overrides for rain, separate zoning is required for different water use areas, and watering within guidelines established by the SFWMD andor local municipality. 10. PLANTINGS. Plantings must be a minimum of 24" from the back of curb. NO SCALE RAIN-CLIK INSTALLATION DETAIL WALL NOTE: MOUNT RAIN-CLIK ON ANY SURFACE WHERE IT WILL BE EXPOSED TO UNOBSTRUCTED RAINFALL, BUT NOT IN THE PATH OF SPRINKLER SPRAY. R LEAD WIRES TO CONTROLLER PVC LATERAL LINE PLASTIC VALVE BOX TO SPRINKLERS CONTROL WIRE SCHEDULE 80 PVC NIPPLE MAIN LINE FITTING MAIN SUPPLY LINE HUNTER ELECTRIC VALVE FINISH GRADE WITH COVER R 90° ELL-PVC NO SCALE INSTALLATION DETAIL R PGV1-GLOBE IRRIGATION DETAIL MP ROTATOR SPRINKLER NOT TO SCALE R LATERAL PIPE LATERAL TEE OR ELL FINISH GRADE MODEL MPR40-06-CV WITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLED SWING JOINT: HUNTER 'PRO-FLEX' TUBING, HSBE-050 ELBOWS (2), & MARLEX STREET ELBOW (1) WITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLEDWITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLEDWITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLEDWITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLED MPR40-06-CV IRRIGATION DETAIL MP ROTATOR SPRINKLER NOT TO SCALE R WITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLED LATERAL PIPE LATERAL TEE OR ELL FINISH GRADE MODEL MPR40-12-CV WITH 'CV' OPTION INSTALLED SWING JOINT: HUNTER 'PRO-FLEX' TUBING, HSBE-050 ELBOWS (2), & MARLEX STREET ELBOW (1) MPR40-12-CV CONTROL WIRE IN ELECTRICAL CONDUIT. SIZE AND TYPE PER LOCAL CODE R NO SCALE PRO-C CONTROLLER IRRIGATION DETAIL *VERIFY EXISTING STATION #'s - WITH MODIFIED ZONE(S), if applicable, FOR NEW MODEL CONTROLLER. MOUNT CONTROLLER WITH LCD SCREEN AT EYE LEVEL. CONTROLLER SHALL BE HARD-WIRED TO GROUNDED 110 VAC SOURCE. MINIMUM CLEARANCE FOR DOOR OPENING EXTERIOR WALL MODEL PC-XX00* ELECTRICAL SUPPLY CONDUIT. CONNECT TO POWER SOURCE. J BOX INSIDE CONTROLLER. LDC IRRIGATION NOTES: 1. The site is to contain 100% Irrigation Coverage via an efficient system utilizing standards common to the industry. 2. The Irrigation system is to be controlled by a rain sensor switch connected to the System controller. The location of the System controller is to be verified and coordinated as necessary to provide access and electrical connection(s). 3. Verify PSI / GPM for jockey pump application. Also, see note #5 for additional equipment to be installed. 4. Irrigation sleeving locations indicated are diagrammatic and serve only as a guide for installation purposes. Irrigation sleeving is to be a minimum of Schedule 40 PVC. This work is to be coordinated by the General Contractor. The Irrigation Contractor/Subcontractor shall not be responsible for sleeving installation unless this work is in the Irrigation Scope of Work. Sleeving shall be clearly marked, flagged, or otherwise delineated above grade to avoid damage and provide ease of location for future use. Sleeving shall be utilized in areas where piping must cross a greater than 5' width, such as roads and walks. 5. Backflow Preventer shall be required per Industry standards and Collier County Codes. 6. Avoid overspray on pavement, buildings, etc. Utilize pressure-compensating heads for elimination of aerosol spray (This is a standard feature of MP Rotator, Hunter spray heads). 7. Verify pressure and flow rate after the Meter/Backflow assembly prior to bid submission. The design is based upon the following operating parameters: 60 GPM Max. and 40 PSI Min.-60 PSI Max. 8. Pipe sizing shall be determined by the Friction Loss Method and water velocity shall not exceed 5 cubic feet per second. 9. Constant pressure piping shall be SCH 40 PVC. 10. The Irrigation Contractor shall supply As-built drawings and material cut sheets upon installation completion and as a term of Final Acceptance. This cost shall be accommodated in the bid. 11. Zones shall be marked in the controller box and corresponding valves shall have affixed to the Valve Cover a waterproof, fade-resistant tag. 12. Verify installation and parts warranty prior to Contract execution. 13. Irrigation heads in planting beds shall be 12" pop-up minimum and 6" pop-up minimum in sod areas. Risers, if installed, shall be black pvc consistent with later piping. Substitution(s) shall not be accepted unless the L.A. is notified prior to installation. If substituted without notification, a CREDIT shall be issued to the client for comparable pop-up sprays. Verify remaining type(s), if necessary. Install quick couplers as required or as noted. 14. This system shall be automated, provide a moisture sensing device, and will avoid the application (or indirect runoff of irrigation water) of water to impervious areas. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION NOTES: 1. A set of Construction Documents and/or Approved Code-required Plans shall be on site at all times. 2. All utilities, easements, right-of-way, Ownership, and/or other survey data shall be verified by the General Contractor, Sitework Contractor, and/or Landscape Contractor prior to the Commencement of Work. 3. Compliance / Permit acquisition and/or display is required for Code-relevant requirements (such as, but not limited to: removals, trimming, replacement, etc.). 4. Verify Plant Quantities and Specifications with the Landscape Architect (also referenced as "L.A." hereafter). Notify the Landscape Architect immediately if discrepancies are noted. Planting Plan shall take precedence over 'Plant List Quantities.' The L.A. reserves the right for material rejection if the installation does not correspond to the Plant List 'Specification / Remark'. 5. Plant material is to be Florida Grade #1 minimum and Florida Fancy for plant material specified as "Specimen." Trees are to be considered single trunk and meet the minimum standard for Code within the applicable jurisdiction. 6. Sizes/specifications are considered minimum. Installation material is to meet or exceed these requirements - verify any discrepancy prior to material purchase, delivery, and/or installation. 7. The Landscape Contractor shall verify the location of plant material with the L.A. prior to installation - contact the L.A. for specific guidelines. If a site conflict / potential is noted, notify the Landscape Architect prior to material installation. The L.A. reserves the right for material relocation if the installation does notcorrespond to the Planting Plan. 8. The Landscape Contractor and/or Irrigation Contractor shall be responsible for damaged site utilities, infrastructure, etc. Repair / Replace shall be a requirement. 9. Verify site removals, relocations, and/or protected items prior to Bid Preparation. This may include but not be limited to: sod, soil, plant material, stumps, etc. The Landscape Contractor shall be required to complete work as outlined with the Planting Plan(s), Specifications, and Notes. 10. Quantities and specification are subject to adjustment, relocation, and/or removal during or after the installation and subsequent approval process by the L.A. 11. Exotic(s) or Nuisance Plants as defined by the local agency(ies) shall supercede State requirements; however, the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC) and/or UF-IFAS Standards shall be used as a database to justify removals if no local ordinance/Code requirement exists. 12. The Landscape Contractor shall execute pruning via a Certified Arborist and using standards as established by the International Society of Arboriculture. All pruning, upon request, shall be advised by the L.A. 13. Trees and palms over 8' in height shall be staked. 14. The Landscape Contractor and/or Irrigation Contractor shall be responsible for: 1) plant warranties and replacements, as specified within their respective agreement(s) 2) plant material maintenance until "Substantial Completion" 3) plant material protection adequacy 4) Scope of Work verification and execution 5) coordination of all Subcontractor(s) 15. The Owner / General Contractor shall be responsible for: 1) Providing Final Grade, Site Access, Security of the site 2) Contract review and acceptance of terms 3) Plant / Irrigation Maintenance coordination 4) Payment milestones 16. Contractor shall ensure placement of all trees maintain a minimum 12.5' horizontal clearance between the trunk and face of street light poles.ArborBraceGuy line ArborAnchorTM No mulch near trunk Tension Buckle Create watering ring / Rootball flush with existing grade 3" Mulch ArborBraceR (305) 992-4104 Loop loose end of webbing around leading branch of tree. Tie 1/2 knot onto backside of buckle. Pull buckle towards ArborAnchor to tension line. ArborAnchor driven below grade to necessary depth determined by soil. (1.5 to 2.5 feet as required) TREE GUYING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE Palm Brace System - minimum of 3 per palm ArborBrace Toe Nail 3 - 2" X 4" Wood Braces to Battens DO NOT Nail into Trunk 3" Mulch 3" Depression Soil and Fertilizer As Specified 2" X 4" X 24" Stake min. 3" Below Grade Flag (min. of 2 locations; 6" and 5' above grade) for visibility 6' MIN. CONTRACTOR NOTES 1. Verify Head Trimming / Detail is applicable to pinnate and palmate species - coordinate height(s) with G.W./Crown Shaft 2. Palms over 8' shall require staking Keep mulch 6" From Base / Root ball flush with existing grade of Palm PALM STAKING DETAIL NOT TO SCALE ArborBraceR (305) 992-4104 AREA CONTAINING SIDEWALK, PAVED AREA, OR UNDERGROUND UTILITY 10' OR LESS TO SIDEWALK, PAVED AREA OR UNDERGROUND UTILITY 18" MINDEPTHMAX 2" BELOW ADJACENT GRADE. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACTOR TO MONITOR AND MAINTAIN THIS BARRIER IN PERPETUITY. 4" WIDE MIN REINFORCED SUBGRADE CURB 18" MIN BELOW FINISHED GRADE 10' or less ROOT BARRIER ZONE: Building, sidewalk, or paved edges occurring within this zone shall be protected and maintained from tree roots with the aid of a root barrier PLAN *THICKENED EDGE/SIDEWALK SECTION * ALTERNATE METHOD = SET ROOT BARRIER MATERIAL FLUSH AGAINST SIDEWALK PER MANUFACTURER SPECIFICATION. VERIFY FOR CODE COMPLIANCE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. SIDEWALK PLANTING AREA ALTERNATE SECTION ROOT BARRIER DETAIL NOT TO SCALE BASE AND/OR SUBGRADE PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 4" MIN WIDTH BARRIER/PROTECTION. SUITABLE ROOT ENGINEER FOR STRUCTURAL CONSULT BUILDING CONTRACTOR. LANDSCAPE LOCATIONS FOR THE THICKENED EDGE FLAG AND/OR MARK ROOT BARRIER (TYP.)20' RMin .15' orless2 0 ' R o o t B a r r i e r Z o n e ( t y p . ) IRRIGATION LATERAL SIZING IRRIGATION MAINLINE SIZING VERIFY EXISTING FUNCTION / PLACEMENT VERIFY EXISTING FUNCTION / CAPACITY AMBERLY VILLAGE SDPIrevision/issue date:06.21.21 date:06.21.21 filename:210621-AV SDPI.dwg project number:2130 Date: Reviewed and Approved For: Permit Issuance PL20210001521 7/12/2021 1 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT PETITION PL20220000207 SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT This Land Development Code (LDC) amendment is intended to further revise and clarify the procedures and approval process for Comparable Use Determinations within zoning districts and planned unit of developments after the Board approved a similar amendment in 2020. ORIGIN Board of County Commissioners (Board) HEARING DATES LDC SECTIONS TO BE AMENDED BCC TBD 2.03.00 2.03.03 2.03.04 2.03.05 2.03.07 2.03.09 10.02.06 Zoning Districts; Permitted Uses, Accessory Uses, and Conditional Uses Commercial Zoning Districts Industrial Zoning Districts Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts Overlay Zoning Districts Open Space Districts Requirements for Permits CCPC TBD DSAC 5/4/2022 DSAC-LDR 3/9/2022 ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS DSAC-LDR Approval with recommendations DSAC TBD CCPC TBD BACKGROUND: Prior to the adoption of Ordinance 2020-44, an applicant requesting a Comparable Use Determination (CUD) would file an application for a Zoning Verification Letter (ZVL) and then have the ZVL (including backup material) affirmed by either the Hearing Examiner (HEX) or Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). This process was criticized by customers for being confusing and by staff for having no formal evaluation criteria. When the Board adopted Ordinance 2020-44, the CUD process was changed to eliminate the ZVL. Staff now evaluates each application based on the new standards and provides a written Staff Report with a recommendation to either the HEX or BZA. The CUD process is currently connected to the list of permitted uses in the Commercial Zoning Districts (C-1 through C-5), Business Park (BP), Public Use (P), Golden Gate Parkway Overlay District (GGPOD), and the Planned Unit Development district (PUD), when such PUD contains specific provisions within its respective ordinance. The Bayshore Zoning Overlay District (BZO) and the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay District (GTZO), formerly known as the Bayshore Mixed Use District (BMUD) and the Gateway Triangle Mixed Use District (GTMUD), also contain provisions allowing the County Manager to make a final determination as to whether a particular use, which is unlisted in the Table of Uses, is within the same class of uses as a listed use. This provision was established by Ordinance 2012-39 and overlooked in the formation of the recent updates to the CUD process. This proposed LDC amendment shall delete these provisions. The C-1 through C-5 zoning districts also contain a provision allowing for other permitted commercial uses and professional services to be considered comparable. This provision shall be revised, so that only uses which exclusively serve the administrative functions of a business shall be permitted. This change is appropriate, because those commercial uses and professional services that are purely associated with activities conducted in an office are permitted throughout all these commercial zoning classifications. 2 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx On October 12, 2021, the Board directed staff to bring back an LDC amendment emphasizing the need for having the conditional use process be applied to CUDs. It was the Board’s concern that comparable uses should be examined for comparability, compatibility, and consistency on a site-specific basis only and not applied uniformly to all areas within the County sharing the same zoning district or to other zoning classifications having higher intensities. As such, this LDC amendment shall clear any confusion or the misapplication of the scope of a CUD, so that each request is restricted to a site-specific location (e.g., lot, parcel, tract of land, etc.) and correct any unintended consequence of expanding the CUD process beyond for which the Board intends. It shall also authorize a CUD for whenever there is a list of permissible by right, accessory, or conditional uses. As proposed, the CUD process shall be combined with the conditional use provisions of LDC section 10.08.00 for all zoning classifications, except for when a PUD explicitly contains the provision, “any other use which is comparable in nature with foregoing uses and is consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of the district” or any similar phase that provides for a comparable use which is not clearly defined or described in the list of permitted uses and requires the discretion of the County Manager or their designee. In this instance, only the procedures and standards of LDC section 10.02.06 K. shall apply. Unlike other zoning classifications, PUDs are different because they are planned developments under unified ownership or control, limited to their legal boundaries at a specific location in the County, and contain a tailored list of allowable uses and development standards. The CUD would ultimately be decided by either the HEX or BZA, depending on the scope of the application. The conditional use provisions of LDC section 10.08.00 allow for the hearing bodies to place special conditions on each request, as deemed appropriate, to ensure the application will not adversely affect the public and the surrounding properties. A companion amendment to the Administrative Code will establish in Chapter 3, a new subsection C.4, “Conditional Use-Comparable Use Determination (CU-CUD)” and modify Chapter 3. L to read “Comparable Use Determination in PUDs (PUD-CUD).” DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Recommendations The subcommittee unanimously recommended approval on March 9, 2022, with two caveats: that staff will look at all the overlay districts and see if any others need to be changed in accordance with these measures and to clarify the narrative’s background section in terms of how the system of allowed comparable uses in zoning districts is described. The narrative has been revised and all overlay zoning districts are included in the amendment. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS The CU-CUD application fee shall be charged the same fee as for a Conditional Use Permit at $4,000. For a PUD-CUD application, the fee remains the same at $1,000 and $100 per hour as needed upon completion of staff’s review and research and provided a Conditional Use Permit is not required. GMP CONSISTENCY The proposed LDC amendment has been reviewed by Comprehensive Planning staff and may be deemed consistent with the GMP. EXHIBITS: A) Administrative Code Chapters 3 C.4. and 3 L. DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 3 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx Amend the LDC as follows: 1 2.03.00 – ZONING DISTRICTS; PERMITTED USES, ACCESSORY USES, AND CONDITIONAL 2 USES 3 4 In order to carry out and implement the Collier County GMP and the purposes of this LDC, the 5 following zoning districts, district purposes, and applicable symbols are hereby established: 6 7 A. Rules for Interpretation of Uses. In any zoning district, where the list of permitted uses 8 contains the phrase "any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing 9 uses and is consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of 10 the district" or any similar phrase which provides for a use which is not clearly defined 11 or described in the list of permitted uses, which requires the discretion of the County 12 Manager or designee as to whether or not it is permitted in the district, then the 13 determination of whether or not that use is permitted in the district shall be made 14 through the process outlined in LDC section 10.02.06 K it may be determined through 15 the process outlined in LDC section 10.02.06 K. that an unlisted use is comparable 16 in nature to a use that is permissible by right, or as an accessory or conditional use 17 in that respective zoning district. 18 19 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 20 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 21 22 2.03.03 – Commercial Zoning Districts 23 24 A. Commercial Professional and General Office District (C-1). The purpose and intent of the 25 commercial professional and general office district C-1 is to allow a concentration of office 26 type buildings and land uses that are most compatible with, and located near, residential 27 areas. Most C-1 commercial, professional, and general office districts are contiguous to, 28 or when within a PUD, will be placed in close proximity to residential areas, and, therefore, 29 serve as a transitional zoning district between residential areas and higher intensity 30 commercial zoning districts. The types of office uses permitted are those that do not have 31 high traffic volumes throughout the day, which extend into the evening hours. They will 32 have morning and evening short-term peak conditions. The market support for these office 33 uses should be those with a localized basis of market support as opposed to office 34 functions requiring inter-jurisdictional and regional market support. Because office 35 functions have significant employment characteristics, which are compounded when 36 aggregations occur, certain personal service uses shall be permitted, to provide a 37 convenience to office-based employment. Such convenience commercial uses shall be 38 made an integral part of an office building as opposed to the singular use of a building. 39 Housing may also be a component of this district as provided for through conditional use 40 approval. 41 42 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial 43 Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are 44 permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the C-1 commercial 45 professional and general office district. 46 47 a. Permitted uses. 48 49 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 4 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1 2 41. Any other commercial use or professional service which is 3 comparable in nature with the foregoing uses including those that 4 exclusively serves the administrative as opposed to the operational 5 functions of a business and are is associated purely with activities 6 conducted in an office, as determined by the Hearing Examiner or 7 CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 8 9 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 10 11 B. Commercial Convenience District (C-2). The purpose and intent of the commercial 12 convenience district (C-2) is to provide lands where commercial establishments may be 13 located to provide the small-scale shopping and personal needs of the surrounding 14 residential land uses within convenient travel distance except to the extent that office uses 15 carried forward from the C-1 district will expand the traditional neighborhood size. 16 However, the intent of this district is that retail and service uses be of a nature that can be 17 economically supported by the immediate residential environs. Therefore, the uses should 18 allow for goods and services that households require on a daily basis, as opposed to those 19 goods and services that households seek for the most favorable economic price and, 20 therefore, require much larger trade areas. It is intended that the C-2 district implements 21 the Collier County GMP within those areas designated agricultural/rural; estates 22 neighborhood center district of the Golden Gate Master Plan; the neighborhood center 23 district of the Immokalee Master Plan; and the urban mixed use district of the future land 24 use element permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for commercial and the 25 goals, objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier 26 County GMP. The maximum density permissible in the C-2 district and the urban mixed 27 use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained 28 in the future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density 29 permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the density permissible under the 30 density rating system. 31 32 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial 33 Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are 34 permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the C-2 commercial 35 convenience district. 36 37 a. Permitted uses. 38 39 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 40 41 73. Any other commercial use or professional services which is 42 comparable in nature with the foregoing uses including those that 43 exclusively serves the administrative as opposed to the operational 44 functions of a business and are is associated purely with activities 45 conducted in an office. 46 47 74. Any other commercial convenience use which is comparable in 48 nature with the list of permitted uses and consistent with the 49 purpose and intent statement of the district, as determined by the 50 Hearing Examiner or CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 5 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 1 75.74. An existing lawful structure over 1,800 sq. ft. as of July 14, 2014 2 may be occupied by any C-2 permitted use with a 1,800 sq. ft. or 3 greater limitation. 4 5 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 6 7 C. Commercial Intermediate District (C-3). The purpose and intent of the commercial 8 intermediate district (C-3) is to provide for a wider variety of goods and services intended 9 for areas expected to receive a higher degree of automobile traffic. The type and variety 10 of goods and services are those that provide an opportunity for comparison shopping, 11 have a trade area consisting of several neighborhoods, and are preferably located at the 12 intersection of two-arterial level streets. Most activity centers meet this standard. This 13 district is also intended to allow all of the uses permitted in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts 14 typically aggregated in planned shopping centers. This district is not intended to permit 15 wholesaling type of uses, or land uses that have associated with them the need for outdoor 16 storage of equipment and merchandise. A mixed-use project containing a residential 17 component is permitted in this district subject to the criteria established herein. The C-3 18 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for commercial and the goals, 19 objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County 20 GMP. The maximum density permissible in the C-3 district and the urban mixed use land 21 use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in the 22 future land use element of the Collier County GMP. The maximum density permissible or 23 permitted in the C-3 district shall not exceed the density permissible under the density 24 rating system. 25 26 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial 27 Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are 28 permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the commercial 29 intermediate district (C-3). 30 31 a. Permitted uses. 32 33 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 34 35 93. Any use which was permissible under the prior General Retail 36 Commercial (GRC) zoning district, as identified by Zoning 37 Ordinance adopted October 8, 1974, and which was lawfully 38 existing prior to the adoption of this Code. 39 40 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 41 42 95. Any other commercial use or professional services which is 43 comparable in nature with the foregoing uses including those that 44 exclusively serves the administrative as opposed to the operational 45 functions of a business and are is associated purely with activities 46 conducted in an office. 47 48 96. Any other intermediate commercial use which is comparable in 49 nature with the list of permitted uses and consistent with the 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 6 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx purpose and intent statement of the district, as determined by the 1 Hearing Examiner or CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 2 3 97.96. An existing lawful structure over 5,000 sq. ft. as of July 14, 2014 4 may be occupied by any C-3 permitted use with a 5,000 sq. ft. or 5 greater limitation. 6 7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 8 9 D. General Commercial District (C-4). The general commercial district (C-4) is intended to 10 provide for those types of land uses that attract large segments of the population at the 11 same time by virtue of scale, coupled with the type of activity. The purpose and intent of 12 the C-4 district is to provide the opportunity for the most diverse types of commercial 13 activities delivering goods and services, including entertainment and recreational 14 attractions, at a larger scale than the C-1 through C-3 districts. As such, all of the uses 15 permitted in the C-1 through C-3 districts are also permitted in the C-4 district. The outside 16 storage of merchandise and equipment is prohibited, except to the extent that it is 17 associated with the commercial activity conducted on-site such as, but not limited to, 18 automobile sales, marine vessels, and the renting and leasing of equipment. Activity 19 centers are suitable locations for the uses permitted by the C-4 district because most 20 activity centers are located at the intersection of arterial roads. Therefore the uses in the 21 C-4 district can most be sustained by the transportation network of major roads. The C-4 22 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for uses and the goals, 23 objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County 24 GMP. The maximum density permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the 25 density permissible under the density rating system. 26 27 1. The following uses, as defined with a number from the Standard Industrial 28 Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are 29 permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the general 30 commercial district (C-4). 31 32 a. Permitted uses. 33 34 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 35 36 141. Any other commercial use or professional services which is 37 comparable in nature with the foregoing uses including those that 38 exclusively serves the administrative as opposed to the operational 39 functions of a business and are is purely associated with activities 40 conducted in an office. 41 42 142. Any other general commercial use which is comparable in nature 43 with the list of permitted uses and consistent with the purpose and 44 intent statement of the district, as determined by the Hearing 45 Examiner or CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 46 47 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 48 49 E. Heavy Commercial District (C-5). In addition to the uses provided in the C-4 zoning district, 50 the heavy commercial district (C-5) allows a range of more intensive commercial uses and 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 7 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx services which are generally those uses that tend to utilize outdoor space in the conduct 1 of the business. The C-5 district permits heavy commercial services such as full-service 2 automotive repair, and establishments primarily engaged in construction and specialized 3 trade activities such as contractor offices, plumbing, heating and air conditioning services, 4 and similar uses that typically have a need to store construction associated equipment 5 and supplies within an enclosed structure or have showrooms displaying the building 6 material for which they spt6ecialize. Outdoor storage yards are permitted with the 7 requirement that such yards are completely enclosed or opaquely screened. The C-5 8 district is permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for uses and the goals, 9 objectives, and policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County 10 GMP. 11 12 1. The following uses, as identified with a number from the Standard Industrial 13 Classification Manual (1987), or as otherwise provided for within this section are 14 permissible by right, or as accessory or conditional uses within the heavy 15 commercial district (C-5). 16 17 a. Permitted uses. 18 19 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 20 21 182. Any other commercial use or professional services which is 22 comparable in nature with the foregoing uses including those that 23 exclusively serves the administrative as opposed to the operational 24 functions of a business and are is purely associated with activities 25 conducted in an office. 26 27 183. Any other heavy commercial use which is comparable in nature with 28 the list of permitted uses and consistent with the purpose and intent 29 statement of the district, as determined by the Hearing Examiner or 30 CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 31 32 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 33 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 34 35 2.03.04 – Industrial Zoning Districts 36 37 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 38 39 B. Business Park District (BP). The purpose and intent of the business park district (BP) is to 40 provide a mix of industrial uses, corporate headquarters offices and business/professional 41 offices which complement each other and provide convenience services for the employees 42 within the district; and to attract businesses that create high value added jobs. It is intended 43 that the BP district be designed in an attractive park-like environment, with low structural 44 density and large landscaped areas for both the functional use of buffering and enjoyment 45 by the employees of the BP district. The BP district is permitted by the urban mixed use, 46 urban commercial, and urban-industrial districts of the future land use element of the 47 Collier County GMP. 48 49 1. The following uses, as identified within the latest edition of the Standard Industrial 50 Classification Manual, or as otherwise provided for within this section, are 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 8 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx permitted as of right, or as uses accessory to permitted primary or secondary uses 1 or are conditional uses within the business park district. 2 3 a. Permitted primary uses. One hundred percent of the total business park 4 district acreage is allowed to be developed with the following uses: 5 6 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7 8 34. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the list of 9 permitted uses and consistent with the purpose and intent 10 statement of the district, as determined by the Hearing Examiner or 11 CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 12 13 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 14 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 15 16 2.03.05 - Civic and Institutional Zoning Districts 17 18 A. Public Use District (P). The purpose and intent of public use district (P) is to accommodate 19 only local, state and federally owned or leased and operated government facilities that 20 provide essential public services. The P district is intended to facilitate the coordination of 21 urban services and land uses while minimizing the potential disruption of the uses of 22 nearby properties. 23 24 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 25 26 4. The following uses are permitted as of right, or as accessory or conditional uses, 27 in the public use district (P). 28 29 a. Permitted uses. 30 31 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 32 33 14. Any other public structures and uses which are comparable in 34 nature with the list of permitted uses, and consistent with the 35 purpose and intent statement of the district, as determined by the 36 Hearing Examiner or CCPC, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06 K. 37 38 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 39 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 40 41 2.03.07 – Overlay Zoning Districts 42 43 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 44 45 F. Golden Gate Parkway Overlay District (GGPOD). 46 47 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 48 49 5. Table of Uses. 50 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 9 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1 2 b. Table 1. 3 Use Category Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict (GGPOD- AC)1 Downtown Center Commercial Subdistrict (GGPOD- DT)1 Residential Uses 1) Artist village. P P 2) Dwelling, Multi-Family, including townhouses. P P 3) Live-work units. P P 4) Any use listed as permitted in the underlying zoning. P P 5) Any use listed as a conditional use in the underlying zoning district. CU CU Commercial Uses2 1) Any use listed as permitted in the underlying zoning district. P P 2) Any use listed as a conditional use in the underlying zoning district. CU CU 3) Any use listed as a permitted use in any of the C-1, C-2, or C-3 zoning districts, without size limitations. P P 4) Any use listed as a conditional use in any of the C-1, C-2, or C-3 zoning districts, without size limitations. P CU4 5) Any use listed as a permitted use in the C-4 or C-5 zoning districts. P 6) Any use listed as a conditional use in the C-4 or C-5 zoning districts. CU4 7) Hotels and motels (7011, 7021, and 7041). P P Economic Development Uses2, 3 1) Aircraft and parts (3721—3728). P 2) Beverages (2082—2087). P 3) Communications equipment (3661—3669). P 4) Computer and office equipment (3571—3579). P 5) Construction, mining, and materials handling (3531, 3534- 3537). P DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 10 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 6) Dental laboratories (8072). P 7) Drugs (2833—2836). P 8) Electrical industrial apparatus (3621—3629). P 9) Electric lighting and wiring equipment (3641—3646, 3648). P 10) Electric transmission and distribution equipment (3612- 3613). P 11) Electronic components and accessories (3671—3679). P 12) Engines and turbines (3511—3519). P 13) Farm machinery and equipment (3523—3524). P 14) Furniture and fixtures, not elsewhere classified (2599). P 15) General industrial machinery and equipment (3561, 3563, 3565—3569). P 16) Household appliances, not elsewhere classified (3639). P 17) Household audio and video equipment, and audio (3651— 3652). P 18) Jewelers' findings and materials, and lapidary work (3915). P 19) Laboratory apparatus and analytical, optical, measuring, and controlling instruments (3821—3829). P 20) Manufacturing industries, not elsewhere classified (3999). P 21) Metalworking machinery and equipment (3546 and 3548). P 22) Miscellaneous electrical machinery, equipment, and supplies (3691—3692, 3695—3699). P 23) Miscellaneous industrial and commercial (3593—3599). P 24) Ophthalmic goods (3851). P 25) Photographic equipment and supplies (3861). P 26) Refrigeration and service industry machinery (3581— 3582, 3586-3589). P 27) Search, detection, navigation, guidance, aeronautical, and nautical systems and instruments (3812). P 28) Special industry machinery, except metalworking (3552- 3559). P 29) Surgical, medical, and dental instruments and supplies (3841-3845). P DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 11 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 30) Transportation equipment, not elsewhere classified (3799). P 31) Watches, clocks, clockwork operated devices, and parts (3873). P 32) Any other Economic Development use which is comparable in nature with the list of permitted uses contained herein and consistent with the purpose and intent statement of the GGPOD as determined by the Hearing Examiner or Board of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to LDC section 10.02.06. P 1 Notes: 2 1 See LDC section 2.03.07 F.6. for specific prohibitions in the GGPOD. 3 2 See LDC section 4.02.26 B.14. for pollution control standards. 4 3 See LDC section 4.02.26 C. for design standards specific to Economic Development uses. 5 4 Vertical mixed use developments shall be permitted uses. 6 7 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 8 9 I. Bayshore Zoning Overlay District (BZO). This section provides special conditions for the 10 properties adjacent to Bayshore Drive as identified by the designation "BZO" on the 11 applicable official Collier County Zoning Atlas Map or map series. 12 13 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 14 15 4. Bayshore Zoning Overlay District (BMUD) Subdistricts. 16 17 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 18 19 b. Use Categories and Table of Uses. 20 21 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 22 23 ii. Interpretation of the Table of Uses. 24 25 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 26 27 b) Any use not listed in the Table of Uses is prohibited unless 28 the County Manager or designee may determine that it falls 29 within the same class as a listed use through the process 30 outlined in LDC section 1.06.00, Rules of Interpretation. 31 32 c)b) Mixed Use Projects shall be limited to the permitted, 33 accessory and conditional uses allowed in the BZO-NC and 34 BZO-W subdistricts, and subject to the MUP approval 35 process as outlined in LDC section 10.02.15. All other 36 projects may elect to establish uses, densities and 37 intensities in accordance with their underlying zoning, 38 except as restricted in LDC section 2.03.07 I.4.b.iv., or in 39 accordance with the Overlay Subdistrict. However, all 40 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 12 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx projects must comply with site development standards as 1 provided in LDC section 4.02.16. 2 3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4 5 N. Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay District (GTZO). This section contains special 6 conditions for the properties in and adjacent to the Gateway Triangle as identified by the 7 designation "GTZO" on the applicable official Collier County Zoning Atlas Map or map 8 series. 9 10 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 11 12 4. Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay District (GTZO) Subdistricts. 13 14 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 15 16 b. Use Categories and Table of Uses. 17 18 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 19 20 ii. Interpretation of the Table of Uses. 21 a) Any uses not listed in the Table of Uses are prohibited. In 22 the event that a particular use is not listed in the Table of 23 Uses, the County Manager or designee may determine that 24 it falls within the same class as a listed use through the 25 process outlined in LDC section 1.06.00, Rules of 26 Interpretation. 27 28 b)a) The Table of Uses identifies uses as permitted uses (P); 29 accessory uses (A); conditional uses (CU), or a combination 30 of the three. Blank cells indicate that a use is not allowed in 31 the corresponding subdistrict; however, such use may be 32 permitted by the underlying zoning designation. 33 34 c)b) Mixed Use Projects shall be limited to the permitted, 35 accessory and conditional uses allowed in the GTZO-MXD 36 subdistrict, and subject to the MUP approval process as 37 outlined in LDC section 10.02.15. All other projects may 38 elect to establish uses, densities and intensities in 39 accordance with their underlying zoning or in accordance 40 with the Overlay Subdistrict. However, all projects must 41 comply with site development standards as provided in LDC 42 section 4.02.16. 43 44 45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 46 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 47 48 2.03.09 – Open Space Zoning Districts 49 50 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 13 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx A. Golf Course and Recreational Use District "GC". The purpose and intent of "GC" district 1 is to provide lands for golf courses, recreational uses, and normal accessory uses, 2 including certain uses of a commercial nature. Recreational uses should be compatible in 3 scale and manner with residential land uses. The GC district shall be in accordance with 4 the urban mixed use district and the agricultural/rural mixed use district of the future land 5 use element of the Collier County GMP. All uses shall be subject to design standards 6 established in LDC section 5.05.15 H, and other applicable LDC standards. 7 8 1. The following subsections identify the uses that are permissible by right and the 9 uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in the GC district. 10 11 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 12 13 c. Conditional uses. The following uses are permissible as conditional uses 14 in the GC district, subject to the standards and provisions established in 15 LDC section 10.08.00. 16 17 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 18 19 11. Any other recreational use which is compatible in nature with the 20 foregoing uses as determined by the Hearing Examiner or Board of 21 Zoning Appeals, as applicable. 22 23 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 24 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 25 26 10.02.06 – Requirements for Permits 27 28 K. Comparable Use Determination. 29 30 1. The following Comparable Use Determination (CUD) shall be used to determine 31 whether a use is comparable in nature with the list of permitted uses that are 32 permissible by right, the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses, 33 and the purpose and intent statement of each the zoning district, overlay, or PUD. 34 35 2. To be effective, the Comparable Use Determination shall be approved by the 36 Hearing Examiner by decision or Board of Zoning Appeals by resolution, at an 37 advertised public hearing based on the following standards, as applicable: 38 39 a. The proposed use possesses similar characteristics to other permitted 40 uses in the zoning district, overlay, or PUD, including but not limited to the 41 following: 42 i. Operating hours; 43 ii. Traffic volume generated/attracted; 44 iii. Type of vehicles associated with the use; 45 iv. Number and type of required parking spaces; and 46 v. Business practices and activities. 47 48 b. The effect of the proposed use would have on neighboring properties in 49 relation to the noise, glare, or odor effects shall be no greater than that of 50 other permitted uses in the zoning district, overlay, or PUD. 51 DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted 14 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 1 c. The proposed use is consistent with the GMP, meaning the applicable 2 future land use designation does not specifically prohibit the proposed use, 3 and, where the future land use designation contains a specific list of 4 allowable uses, the proposed use is not omitted. 5 6 d. The proposed use shall be compatible and consistent with the other 7 permitted uses in the zoning district, overlay, or PUD. 8 9 e. Any additional relevant information as may be required by County Manager 10 or Designee. 11 12 f. Except for properties located in a PUD, each petition for CUD shall require 13 minor conditional use approval or conditional use approval in accordance 14 with the procedures set forth in LDC section 10.08.00. If a PUD does not 15 contain the phrase, “any other use which is comparable in nature with the 16 foregoing uses and is consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and 17 intent statement of the district" or any similar phrase that provides for a use 18 that is not clearly defined or described in the list of permitted uses, which 19 requires the discretion of the County Manager or designee as to whether 20 or not it is permitted in the district, then the determination of whether or not 21 that use is permitted in the district shall be made in accordance with this 22 section and with the procedures set forth in LDC section 10.08.00. 23 24 3. The Administrative Code shall establish the process and application submittal 25 requirements to obtain a Comparable Use Determination. 26 27 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 28 # # # # # # # # # # # # #29 Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 15 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx C .4 . Conditional Use - Comparable Use Determination (CU -CUD) Reference LDC sections 2.03.00 A, 10.02.06 K, 10.08.00, LDC Public Notice section 10.03.06 B., C, or O, LDC section 8.10.00 and F.S. §125.66. Applicability A Conditional Use - Comparable Use Determination shall be used to determine if a new use is comparable, compatible, and consistent with the list of identified uses that are permissible by right, or the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in a standard zoning district, overlay, or a PUD ordinance, if such PUD does not contain the phrase, “any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of the district" or any similar phrase is not within the list of permitted uses to provide for an unlisted use. See Chapter 3.L. for additional information regarding Comparable Use Determination in PUDs. Pre-Application A pre-application meeting is required. Initiation The applicant files a “Conditional Use - Comparable Use Determination Application or an Application for Public Hearing for Conditional Use ” with the Zoning Division. See Chapter 1 D. for additional information regarding the procedural steps for initiating an application. Application Contents The petition should include material necessary to demonstrate that the approval of the conditional use will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the LDC, will be consistent with the Growth Management Plan, will not be injurious to the neighborhood or to adjoining properties, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The application must include the following: 1. Applicant contact information. 2. Addressing checklist. 3. A cover letter briefly explaining the proposed project. 4. Property Ownership Disclosure Form. 5. The date the subject property was acquired or leased (including the term of the lease). If the applicant has an option to buy, indicate the date of the option, the date the option terminates, and anticipated closing date. 6. The name and mailing address of all registered Home Owners Associations and civic associations whose members are impacted by the application. 7. Pre-application meeting notes. 8. A copy of the last recorded deed, contract for sale or agreement for sale, or a notarized statement of ownership clearly. 9. PUD Ordinance and Development Commitment Information, if applicable. Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 16 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 10. A written petition that shows how the proposed use satisfies the findings outlined in LDC section 10.08.00. 11. Property information, including: a. Legal description; or if the conditional use involves only part of a PUD, only a legal description for the subject portion is required; b. Property identification number; c. Section, township and range; d. Subdivision, unit, lot and block, or metes and bounds description; e. Address of subject site and general location; f. Size of property in feet and acres; g. Property owner’s name; and h. Verification being requested. 12. If the property owner owns additional property contiguous to the subject property, then the following information, regarding the contiguous property, must be included: a. Legal description; b. Property identification number; c. Section, township, and range; and d. Subdivision, unit, lot and block, or metes and bounds description. 13. Zoning information, including: Adjacent zoning and land use. 14. Conditional Use request detail, identifying current zoning district, type of use and present use of property. 15. A description of previous land use applications on the subject property, including whether a public hearing was held on the property or any abutting properties within the year preceding the application, and the nature of that hearing. 16. Conceptual site development plans at an appropriate scale showing the proposed placement of structures on the property, provisions for ingress and egress, off -street parking and off-street loading areas, refuse and service areas, and required yards, and other open spaces. The conceptual site development plan does not replace the site development plan (SDP) required by Chapter 4 of the Administrative Code. 17. Completed Statement of Utility Provisions. 18. Plans showing proposed locations for utilities. 19. Plans for screening and buffering the use with reference as to type, dimensions, and character. Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 17 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 20. Plans showing the proposed landscaping and provisions for trees protected by County regulations. 21. Plans showing the proposed signs and lighting, including type, dimensions, and character. 22. Environmental Data Requirements. See LDC section 3.08.00 A. 23. Environmental Data Requirements for PUD Zoning and Conditional Uses  See Chapter 7 A. of the Administrative Code. 24. Recent aerial photographs must be legible at the scale provided. The aerial shall identify plant and/or wildlife habitats and their boundaries. The identification shall be consistent with the Florida Department of Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Developments shall identify, protect, conserve, and appropriately use native vegetative communities and wildlife habitat. 25. An Architectural Rendering of proposed structures, if applicable,  See Chapter 4 A. of the Administrative Code. 26. Traffic Impact Study  See Chapter 7 B. of the Administrative Code. 27. If the property is located within an area of historical or archaeological probability, as identified at the pre-app meeting, a historical and archaeological survey or waiver application. 28. If the zoning district places additional requirements on the requested use, include documentary evidence that those requirements are met. 29. Permits: All Federal, State, and local permits shall be submitted prior to construction and before the pre-construction meeting. If approved by the County Manager or designee, an applicant may submit Federal, State, and local agency permits at the pre-construction meeting. 30. Owner/agent affidavit as to the correctness of the application. 31. Electronic copies of all documents. 32. Affidavit of Authorization. 33. A narrative statement that describes the determination request, the justification for the use by a certified land use planner or a land use attorney and addresses the standards within LDC section 10.02.06 K.2. 34. Additional materials may be requested by staff depending on the use and justification provided. Notice for Minor Conditional Use petitions Notification requirements are as follows.  See Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code for additional notice information. Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 18 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx 1. NIM: The NIM shall be completed at least 15 days prior to the Hearing Examiner’s receipt of the staff report and application materials in accordance with the applicable sections of the Administrative Code. The NIM shall be advertised, and a mailed written notice shall be given to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. 2. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing. 3. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: a. Date, time, and location of the hearing; b. Description of the proposed land uses; c. Application number and project name; d. PUD name and ordinance number; e. Proposed permitted use; f. Description of location; and g. 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. 4. Sign: Posted at least 15 days before the advertised Hearing Examiner hearing date.  See Chapter 8 E. of the Administrative Code for sign template. [Please note: If the Minor Conditional Use petition is to be heard before the BZA, the notice procedures shall be the same as the procedures for all other Conditional Use petitions listed below.] Notice for all other Conditional Use petitions Notification requirements are as follows.  See Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code for additional notice information. 1. NIM: The NIM shall be completed at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. The NIM shall be advertised and a mailed written notice shall be given to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days prior to the NIM meeting. 2. Mailed Notice: Written notice shall be sent to property owners in the notification area at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing. 3. Newspaper Advertisements: The legal advertisement shall be published at least 15 days before each advertised public hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The advertisement shall include at a minimum: a. Date, time, and location of the hearing; b. Description of the proposed land uses; c. Application number and project name; d. PUD name and ordinance number; e. Proposed permitted use; Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 19 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx f. Description of location; and g. 2 in. x 3 in. map of the project location. 4. Sign: Posted at least 15 days before the advertised public hearing date.  See Chapter 8 E. of the Administrative Code for sign template. Public Hearing for Minor Conditional Use petitions The Hearing Examiner or BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. If the BZA is the final Decision Maker, the Minor Conditional Use petition shall follow the same public hearing process as all other Conditional Use petitions. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. Public Hearing for all other Conditional Use petitions 1. The EAC shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing, if required. 2. The Planning Commission shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. 3. The BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. Decision maker for Minor Conditional Use petitions The Hearing Examiner or BZA. If the PUD ordinance language identifies the CCPC or the Planning Director (or other similar County staff) as the authority to determine a use is comparable, compatible, and consistent, a Staff Report will be presented to the Decision Maker for approval of the Comparable Use Determination. Decision Maker for all other Conditional Use petitions The BZA, following a recommendation from both the EAC, if required, and the Planning Commission. If the PUD ordinance language identifies the CCPC or the Planning Director (or other similar County staff) as the authority to determine a use is comparable, compatible, and consistent, a Staff Report will be presented to the Decision Maker for approval of the Comparable Use Determination. Review Process The Zoning Division will review the application, identify whether additional materials are needed, and prepare a Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner or BZA. Recording of Developer Commitments Within 30 days of approval of the conditional use, the owner or developer at its expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the conditional use. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of Chapter 695, F.S. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the assigned Principal Planner, Zoning Division, within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. Updated Resolution 2022-## Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 20 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx L. Comparable Use Determination in PUDs (PUD -CUD) Reference LDC sections 2.03.00 A, 10.02.06 K, LDC Public Notice section 10.03.06 O, LDC section 8.10.00 and F.S. §125.66. Applicability A Comparable Use Determination may shall be used to make a determination that determine if a new use is comparable, compatible, and consistent with the list of identified permitted uses in a standard zoning district, overlay, or PUD ordinance. that are permissible by right, or the uses that are allowable as accessory or conditional uses in a PUD ordinance if such PUD contains the phrase, “any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and is consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of the district" or any similar phrase in its list of permitted uses to provide for an unlisted use. See Chapter 3. C.4. for addition information regarding the Conditional Use - Comparable Use Determination. Pre-Application A pre-application meeting is not required. Initiation The applicant files a “Comparable Use Determination Application” with the Zoning Division. See Chapter 1 D. for additional information regarding the procedural steps for initiating an application. Application Contents The application must include the following: 1. Applicant contact information. 2. Property information, including: • a. Site folio number; • b. Site Address; • c. Property owner’s name; and • d. Verification being requested. 3. A narrative statement that describes the determination request, the justification for the use by a certified land use planner or a land use attorney and addresses the standards within LDC section 10.02.06 K.2. 4. Additional materials may be requested by staff depending on the use and justification provided. 5. PUD Ordinance and Development Commitment i-Information, if applicable. 6. Electronic copies of all documents. 7. Addressing checklist. 8. Affidavit of Authorization. 9. Property Ownership Disclosure Form. Attachment A - Administrative Code DRAFT Text underlined is new text to be added Text strikethrough is current text to be deleted Collier County Land Development Code | Administrative Procedures Manual Chapter 3 | Quasi-Judicial Procedures with a Public Hearing 21 G:\LDC Amendments\Advisory Boards and Public Hearings\DSAC\2022\May 04\Meeting Materials\Word Version\PL20220000207 - CUD updates.docx Completeness and Processing of Application The Zoning Division will review the application for completeness. After submission of the completed application packet accompanied with the required fee, the applicant will receive a mailed or electronic response notifying the applicant that the petition is being processed. Accompanying that response will be a receipt for the payment and the tracking number (i.e., XXPL201200000) assigned to the petition. This petition tracking number should be noted on all future correspondence regarding the petition. Notice Notification requirements are as follows.  See Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code for additional notice information. 1. Newspaper Advertisement: At least 15 days before the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. The legal advertisement shall include: • a. Date, time, and location of the hearing; • b. Application number and project name; • c. PUD name and ordinance number; • d. Proposed permitted use; and • e. Description of location. Public Hearing 1. The Hearing Examiner or the CCPC BZA shall hold at least 1 advertised public hearing. See Chapter 9 of the Administrative Code for the Office of the Hearing Examiner procedures. Decision Maker The Hearing Examiner or the CCPC BZA. If the PUD ordinance language identifies the CCPC or the Planning Director (or other similar County staff) as the authority to determine a use is comparable, compatible, and consistent, a Staff Report will be presented to the Hearing Examiner or the CCPC Decision Maker for approval of the Comparable Use Determination. Review Process The Zoning Division will review the application and identify whether additional materials are needed. Staff will prepare a Staff Report to present to the Hearing Examiner or BZA Office of the Hearing Examiner or the CCPC for a decision. Appeal Appeal of a Comparable Use Determination shall be pursuant to Code of Laws and Ordinances section 250-58 Updated Resolution 2020-203 2022-##