Commissioner McDanielEx parte Items – Commissioner Bill McDaniel
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA
January 14, 2025
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS – None
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS –
9.C. This item requires that ex-parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Recommendation to approve an Ordinance rezoning property from the Myrtle
Woods Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) and RMF-6 zoning
districts to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district for a
project to be known as 5396 Myrtle Lane Commercial Planned Unit Development
(CPUD), to allow development of up to 200,000 square feet of gross floor area of
indoor self-storage/warehousing and up to 3,000 square feet of gross floor area of
other commercial uses on property located on the southwest quadrant of
Tamiami Trail East and Myrtle Lane in Section 29, Township 50 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 8.24+/- acres; (Companion to items 9A
and 9D) (2024-2256)
NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls
9.D. This item requires that ex-parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20240005670 to disclaim, renounce
and vacate the County and the public interest in the 20-foot drainage and utility
easement located along the southwesterly border of Lots 24 through 28, Block
“A” of Unit No. 1, Myrtle Cove Acres, as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 38 of the
Public Records of Collier County, Florida, located in the southeasterly quadrant
of U.S. 41 and Myrtle Lane, in Section 29, Township 50 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida, and to accept Petitioner’s grant of a 15-foot wide by 520-
foot long drainage easement to replace the vacated drainage easement.
(Companion to items 9A and 9C) (2024-2281)
NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls
Ex parte Items – Commissioner Bill McDaniel
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA
January 14, 2025
9.F. This item requires ex-parte disclosure to be provided by the Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to
be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance rezoning real property
from an Intermediate Commercial (C-3) Zoning District to a General Commercial
(C-4) Zoning District limited to 11,000 square feet of gross floor area of
commercial uses, of which 5,000 square feet of gross floor area may be carwash,
with conditions; providing partial repeal of Ordinance No. 00-81 and Resolution
No. 12-253. The subject property is located on the south side of Tamiami Trail
East, 350 feet east of the intersection of Tamiami Trail and Barefoot Williams
Road, in Section 33, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 1.92+/-
acres, and by providing an effective date. (Companion to item 9E) (2024-1989
NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls
CONSENT AGENDA – None
SUMMARY AGENDA-
17.A. This item requires ex parte disclosure to be provided by the Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to
be sworn in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution designating Metro South
as a Mixed-Use Project (MUP) in the Gateway Triangle Zoning Overlay District,
Commercial Mixed-Use Sub-District (GTZO-MXD), comprising 0.64± acres
pursuant to Land Development Code Sec. 2.03.07.N.4; providing for designation
as “MUP,” and approving up to a maximum of 8 residential dwelling units,
including 7 bonus density units as determined through the SDP process and
3,860 square feet of permitted commercial uses, with one deviation; and
providing for conceptual site plan approval, for parcels located south of Tamiami
Trail East, approximately 295 feet east of Bayshore Drive. (2024-1990)
NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls
Ex parte Items – Commissioner Bill McDaniel
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA
January 14, 2025
17.B. This item requires that Commission members provide ex-parte disclosure.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20240002006, to conditionally
disclaim, renounce, and vacate a portion of the Trail Boulevard, depicted as an
80-foot right of way adjacent to Lots 25 through 30, Block A, Pine Ridge, as
recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 24, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida,
located approximately 200 feet north of Pine Ridge Road (C.R. 896), abutting the
east side of Tamiami Trail North (U.S. 41), located in Section 10, Township 49
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (2024-2276)
NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls
1
Cristina Tiberia
Subject:In Person Meeting w/Commissioner McDaniel re: Mrytle Lane GMPA/PUDR
Location:3299 Tamiami Trail East 3rd Floor
Start:Fri 1/10/2025 2:30 PM
End:Fri 1/10/2025 3:00 PM
Recurrence:(none)
Meeting Status:Accepted
Organizer:Richard Yovanovich
-----Original Appointment-----
From: Richard Yovanovich <ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 9:26 AM
To: Richard Yovanovich; Cristina Tiberia
Subject: In Person Meeting w/Commissioner McDaniel re: Mrytle Lane GMPA/PUDR
When: Friday, January 10, 2025 2:30 PM-3:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).
Where: 3299 Tamiami Trail East 3rd Floor
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme
caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
1
Cristina Tiberia
From:jon virgin <jvirgin55@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, January 8, 2025 8:37 PM
To:Burt Saunders; Chris Hall; Dan Kowal; Bill McDaniel; Rick LoCastro
Subject:5396 Myrtle Ln., PL20230016211, PL20230016212
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme
caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Opposition to Proposed U-Haul Project
I am unable to attend the meeting as I work, so I’m writing to express my strong opposition to the
proposed zoning change for the U-Haul project in our neighborhood on Myrtle Lane.
Zoning restrictions are in place for a reason—to protect communities and ensure thoughtful,
sustainable development. Changing these rules to accommodate projects like the proposed U-Haul
undermines the very purpose of zoning laws and sets a dangerous precedent. This U-Haul is highly
concerning for several reasons that directly impact the safety, environment and quality of life for our
community.
1) Increased Flooding Risk: The area is already prone to flooding, and additional construction will
exacerbate the problem. Our infrastructure cannot handle further strain and this project would put
homes and families at greater risk.
2) Traffic and Safety Concerns: The proposed site is at the corner of a narrow, dead-end street
that is only 17 feet wide. Adding more potential traffic from U-Haul trucks and customers would create
significant congestion and pose safety hazards. Exiting onto US41 without a stoplight would further
endanger drivers and pedestrians.
3) Environmental Impact: The removal of trees for this development is displacing wildlife, and this
project will worsen the problem. Our community has already seen increased encounters with wild
animals due to habitat loss, and this would only compound the issue.
4) Unsuitable Location: This site is simply not appropriate for a project of this scale. A more
suitable location with better infrastructure and less environmental impact must be considered.
Our neighborhood deserves to be protected from developments that prioritize profit over the well-
being of residents and the environment. I urge you to deny the zoning change for this project and
advocate for the community you represent.
Thank you for considering the voices of the people most directly affected. I trust you will make the
right decision for our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Jon Virgin
5219 Myrtle Lane
Naples, FL 34113
1
Cristina Tiberia
From:Kathy Smith <smithlife.llc@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, January 8, 2025 12:09 PM
To:Rick LoCastro; Chris Hall; Burt Saunders; Dan Kowal; Bill McDaniel
Subject:5396 Myrtle Lane, PL 20230016211, PL 20230016212
Attachments:RainTree Ln_41 East.jpeg
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme
caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
To the Collier County Board of Commissioners;
This email is regarding the request to change the zoning for the above property. The residents on Myrtle Lane do
not agree with this request for numerous reasons. There were many residents at the May 6th Neighborhood
Information Meeting, and at the November 21st Planning/Advisory Board meeting voicing our concerns about the
proposed U’Haul Facility. We’ve heard from Metropolitan Naples, LLC, Q. Grady Minor & Associates, and Mr.
Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Why haven’t we heard from any representatives from U’Haul?? Or the owners
themselves, KC Naples LLC?? Some residents could not attend these meetings due to the inconvenient times,
however we had our own neighborhood meeting with 33 neighbors in attendance. We’ve had discussions
concerning the proposed project and feel that this type of facility is not good for our neighborhood. This is not just
a U’Haul truck rental facility. They are requesting a storage facility 50’ - 60’ high, stackable pods, commercial
equipment, propane tanks, truck and trailer storage, and many items not listed that come up during meetings.
There are too many storage facilities already in our area, one is RIGHT NEXT DOOR to this proposed project,
CubeSmart! This type of facility would be better suited in an industrial park or a highly dense commercial area, not
in a small residential neighborhood like ours. We always knew that something would be built there eventually, but
never imagined what is being proposed. We feel that the current zoning should remain and not allow any access
to/from Myrtle Lane. A perfect example would be the commercial building at the corner of Raintree Lane and
Tamiami Trail East. Attached is a photo of the property, a single-story building with a few businesses, no access to
Raintree Lane except a removable chain for emergency vehicles.
A huge concern for all of us is the obvious, the traffic in our neighborhood. This will bring too much traffic and
unwanted guests to our neighborhood, during construction and afterwards. Our neighborhood does not have
sidewalks and we have many young children/grandchildren that play outside and ride bikes, and residents walking
pets. My son was hit in the crosswalk at Broward and 41 walking home from school, by a red-light runner. Now
there is a possibility of adding more congestion to that area with more traffic and inexperienced U’Haul drivers
?? Mr. Yovanovich offered, as a courtesy, for the residents to use the U’Haul parking lot as a cut through to the
light at Broward and 41. Talk about confusion and a huge liability!?
Many of the residents on Myrtle Lane have been in their homes for several years, some for 25–55 years. Our family
purchased two lots in 1968, and our home in 1973. The most impacted resident would be 5371, her husband built
their home in 1971 and they raised their four children there. She is now a widow and scared of what this type of
project will bring. There will be noise from commercial trucks and equipment, constant back-up beeping, added
traffic from misguided U’Haul drivers, unsafe environment from propane tanks and pollution, and poor aesthetics.
Metropolitan Naples LLC, Q. Grady Minor & Associates, and Mr. Yovanovich can sell you all day long how
beneficial this project will be to the community, that’s their job, they’re being paid to sell you on it. When this is
over, it’s the residents that will have to live with it. When you make your decision regarding this proposed project,
our neighborhood is begging you, our County Commissioners, to take into consideration the impact this will have
on the residents. There is a reason for zoning restrictions and regulations, and this is a perfect example
why. Please leave the current zoning in place and do not allow a facility of this proportion next to our
neighborhood.
2
Sincerely,
Joey & Kathy Smith
Captain Joey Smith
Kathy Smith
5240 Myrtle Lane ~ Naples, FL 34113
smithlife.llc@gmail.com
Smith Life LLC
Smith Yacht Services LLC
m
pm., W-,,
7,7
;7�
1
Cristina Tiberia
From:Steve@stevefuller.com
Sent:Tuesday, January 7, 2025 3:34 PM
To:Burt Saunders; Chris Hall; Dan Kowal; Rick LoCastro; Bill McDaniel
Subject:U-Haul Mega Center located at Myrtle Lane
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme
caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Dear County Commissioner, I am writing to you with detailed points of information regarding an upcoming agenda
item for the Tuesday January 14th meeting. Agenda item has not been posted yet.
We are of the opinion that this is an inappropriate location for this project and do not support the Re-zone just to
accommodate a Developer. Hopefully you will have an opportunity to drive to the site on US 41 at Myrtle Lane and
Broward Road traƯic light to become familiar with the unique misaligned and dysfunctional intersection.
Below are a few points to consider on the project as a whole, as to why we believe this should not be
approved. Most of these points are above and beyond the traƯic concerns.
We truly feel the Developer representative has been dismissive of our concerns and also has diminished the true
size scope and impact of this project. In Short this project is better suited for a parcel near the Interstate. Or at
least adjacent to major arterial intersections that have the infrastructure to support this very large Warehouse/
Storage /Rental /Propane Center, unlike anything we have seen in Collier County, but does exist in larger cities.
Zoning: the current zoning DOES NOT allow for warehouse storage, the petitioners representative will
continuously say it is a minor change to the zoning code, but he seems to keep overlooking the RMF 6
land that is being converted in addition to the current intermediate commercial zoning. What the
petitioner is proposing is Heavy Commercial Zoning
NOT your AVERAGE SELF- STORAGE: this is much greater than “Self – Storage” this is warehouse
storage and outdoor truck and trailer storage --- not allowed by current zoning regulations at this
location.
There are a proposed 1297 self-storage units in the 4-story building.
Warehouse storage of U-haul pods in a second building “1 story” HOW HIGH? Those things can be
stacked 3-4 high so that could end up being a 30-foot building.
HEAVY COMMERCIAL: PODS come in on a large flatbed truck and are loaded, stacked, and unloaded
by a forklift.
SCALE: The 200,000 square feet of warehouse space is over 4 stories at 50 – 60 feet tall. The ground
space covered by this building is essentially the same size as a single lot in our neighborhood. 50 Feet
tall up to 60 feet with embellishments and signage.
RENTAL TRUCK AND TRAILER STORAGE: Meeting notes suggest 2500 square feet of “Truck
Rental” Likely this is just the office space to fill out the paperwork, because the site plan and any visit
to any u-haul location will show the ENTIRE parcel will be dedicated to Truck and Trailer storage. In this
case, less the buildings, that may mean up to 5 acres of “storage”.
2
MAINTENANCE OF THE FLEET: Rental Trucks, Trailers, Auto – Haulers, Forklifts and Flatbed Delivery
Trucks all require maintenance. This is intended to be a regional MEGA MOBILITY Center. Where will all
these vehicles be serviced and maintained? If at another site, show us.
LP Tanks: Where are they located? Adjacent to the Multi-family zoned land? No-Where are the tanks
shown on the site plan.
BASE-FLOOD ELEVATION AE 7. Finished floor height must be at base flood elevation plus 1’ So there
is no doubt that the buildings and pavement this will be raised, meaning more than 5 acres of the 8.25
acres of land twill be raised and impermeable. The onsite drainage catch basins and pipes all lead to
an earthen ditch / canal behind half of our homes, That canal is not controlled by a weir, rather an
earthen dike so there is little flood control.
EASEMENT: There currently an easement that has electric power lines, is that easement being paved
over and being asked to be abandoned? What exactly happens to those utilities?
TRAFFIC: There has been a discussion of a “turn-lane” or deceleration lane. Where would that start?
Currently this lane does not exist for Myrtle. And we do not understand how this can be facilitated in
the short space between Myrtle and the access to this facility at the light appx 100 feet
away. How long does a deceleration lane need to be to accommodate a 26’ box truck with an
overall length of 34 feet, likely towing an auto-hauler for a total of 55’ with a Gross Vehicle Weight
up to 33,000 pounds? (For reference the average American Vehicle is 4200 pounds.)
ACCESS: Is the true owner of this property U-Haul (not the developer Metropolitan) really going to
want our neighborhood vehicles to cut through their parking lot to access the light at Broward and 41?
This might seem to be a liability issue.
This Access issue is an on-going safety concern for Myrtle Lane, and whether it is this development or
another; as the street is built out this is going to be a greater safety concern. Is using this project’s
parking lot as a “pass-through” going to be the best traffic solution?
MORITORUM: The developer Representative claims there is a “need” for this facility, In the stretch of
41 East between downtown there are currently 8 Storage centers one Auto Storage “Man – Cave” to be
built in front of Treviso and one Warehouse Condo also to be built in the same general area. Is there
really a need? Maybe a moratorium on building of storage centers is a better idea. Heavan, forbid we
take clues from Cape Coral and Fort Myers.
Make no mistake, this is not being developed by Metropolitan for Metropolitan Development. It is being developed
to displace the existing U-Haul, so Metropolitan can build more high-rises in a congested area.
Why have there been no U-Haul reps at the NIM meeting or LDC meeting, we need to hear them speak, we need
them to answer our questions, they will be our neighbors not Metropolitan Development.
Thank-You
Steve Fuller, 5259 Myrtle Lane
Direct: 239-821-4200
1
Cristina Tiberia
From:Sam <sam@naplesrealestate.com>
Sent:Tuesday, January 7, 2025 11:45 AM
To:Burt Saunders; Chris Hall; Dan Kowal; Rick LoCastro; Bill McDaniel
Subject:5396 Myrtle Ln., PL20230016211, PL20230016212
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme
caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Opposition to Proposed U-Haul Project
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed zoning change for the U-Haul project in
our neighborhood on Myrtle Lane.
Zoning restrictions are in place for a reason—to protect communities and ensure thoughtful,
sustainable development. Changing these rules to accommodate projects like the proposed U-Haul
undermines the very purpose of zoning laws and sets a dangerous precedent. This U-Haul is highly
concerning for several reasons that directly impact the safety, environment and quality of life for our
community.
1) Increased Flooding Risk: The area is already prone to flooding, and additional construction will
exacerbate the problem. Our infrastructure cannot handle further strain and this project would put
homes and families at greater risk.
2) Traffic and Safety Concerns: The proposed site is at the corner of a narrow, dead-end street
that is only 17 feet wide. Adding more potential traffic from U-Haul trucks and customers would create
significant congestion and pose safety hazards. Exiting onto US41 without a stoplight would further
endanger drivers and pedestrians.
3) Environmental Impact: The removal of trees for this development is displacing wildlife, and this
project will worsen the problem. Our community has already seen increased encounters with wild
animals due to habitat loss, and this would only compound the issue.
4) Unsuitable Location: This site is simply not appropriate for a project of this scale. A more
suitable location with better infrastructure and less environmental impact must be considered.
Our neighborhood deserves to be protected from developments that prioritize profit over the well-
being of residents and the environment. I urge you to deny the zoning change for this project and
advocate for the community you represent.
Thank you for considering the voices of the people most directly affected. I trust you will make the
right decision for our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Sam Wells & Jon Virgin
5219 Myrtle Lane
2
Naples, FL 34113
1
Cristina Tiberia
From:Kathy Smith <smithlife.llc@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, January 12, 2025 8:54 PM
To:Rick LoCastro; Chris Hall; Burt Saunders; Dan Kowal; Bill McDaniel
Subject:Petition / 5396 Myrtle Lane, PL 20230016211, PL 20230016212
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme
caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Hello County Commissioners...Please see the petition from Myrtle Lane residents with 54 signatures.
There are 37 homes on Myrtle Lane, five of those are currently vacant. Three of these homes, located
next to this proposed project, have been purchased by KC Naples Tamiami LLC. There are three
residents that have been out of town, however they support this petition.
We are hoping that we can count on our County Commissioners at the meeting on Tuesday.
2
3
Captain Joey Smith
Kathy Smith
5240 Myrtle Lane ~ Naples, FL 34113
smithlife.llc@gmail.com
Smith Life LLC
Smith Yacht Services LLC