BCC Minutes 01/14/2025 RJanuary 14, 2025
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, January 14, 2025
LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following Board members present:
Chairman: Burt L. Saunders
Dan Kowal
Rick LoCastro
William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Chris Hall (telephonically)
ALSO PRESENT:
Amy Patterson, County Manager
Trinity Scott, Transportation Management Services
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
January 14, 2025
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
January 14, 2025
9:00 AM
Commissioner Chris Hall, District 2; – Chair
Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3; – Vice Chair
Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1
Commissioner Dan Kowal, District 4; – CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5; – CRAB Co-Chair
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIR. ADDITIONAL
MINUTES MAY BE CEDED TO AN IN-PERSON SPEAKER BY OTHER
REGISTERED SPEAKERS WHO MUST BE PRESENT AT THE TIME THE
SPEAKER IS HEARD. NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE HEARD FOR
PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC PETITIONS. SPEAKERS
ON PRESENTATIONS ARE LIMITED TO 10 MINUTES, UNLESS EXTENDED
BY THE CHAIR. ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON A CONSENT ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO THE BOARD’S APPROVAL OF THE DAY’S
CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS HEARD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE
MEETING FOLLOWING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
Page 2
January 14, 2025
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON PUBLIC PETITION MUST
SUBMIT THE REQUEST IN WRITING TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT
LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING. THE REQUEST
SHALL PROVIDE DETAILED INFORMATION AS TO THE NATURE OF THE
PETITION. THE PUBLIC PETITION MAY NOT INVOLVE A MATTER ON A
FUTURE BOARD AGENDA, AND MUST CONCERN A MATTER IN WHICH
THE BOARD CAN TAKE ACTION. PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO A
SINGLE PRESENTER, WITH A MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES, UNLESS
EXTENDED BY THE CHAIR. SHOULD THE PETITION BE GRANTED, THE
ITEM WILL BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT
ON THIS AGENDA OR A FUTURE AGENDA MUST REGISTER TO SPEAK
PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE AGENDA BEING
CALLED BY THE CHAIR. SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE
MINUTES, AND NO ADDITIONAL MINUTES MAY BE CEDED TO THE
SPEAKER. AT THE CHAIR’S DISCRETION, THE NUMBER OF PUBLIC
SPEAKERS MAY BE LIMITED TO 5 FOR THAT MEETING.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF
THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS
SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE
BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, SUITE
1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING
DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE
Page 3
January 14, 2025
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Invocation by Pastor Jesse Barrett - New Hope Naples ||| Pledge of
Allegiance: Carroll “Spider” Trantham, (US Army, 1968-1972 Vietnam
Veteran; Bronze Star, Purple Heart recipient; 101st Airborne, Member of
Operation Vet Help)
B. Swearing-in Ceremony of District 1 Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 3
Commissioner Burt Saunders, and District 5 Commissioner William L.
McDaniel, Jr. Oath to be administered by Collier County Circuit Judge
Joseph G. Foster.
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (ex
parte disclosure provided by commission members for consent agenda.)
B. December 10, 2024, BCC Meeting Minutes
C. Recommendation that the Board authorize the new Chair for both the Board
of County Commissioners and the Community Redevelopment Agency and
to execute all documents approved at both this meeting and those documents
which were previously approved but are pending signature.
3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
A. EMPLOYEE
1) 20 YEAR ATTENDEES
a) Zamira Del Toro - Engineering & Project Management
b) Paul Ducca - Information Technology
2) 25 YEAR ATTENDEES
Page 4
January 14, 2025
a) Juan Camps - Emergency Medical Services
b) Alan Drescher - Emergency Medical Services
c) Jennifer Guida - Museum
d) Beth Yang – Operations & Regulatory Management
3) 30 YEAR ATTENDEES
a) Stephen Chandler - Engineering & Project Management
4) 35 YEAR ATTENDEES
5) 40 YEAR ATTENDEES
a) Jeanine McPherson - Parks & Recreation
4. PROCLAMATIONS
A. Proclamation designating January 20, 2025, as a day to remember and
celebrate Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream. To be accepted by Diann
Keeys, Parade Chair.
B. Proclamation designating January 17, 2025, as Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King
Jr. Prayer Breakfast Day. To be accepted by Bishop Ric L. Neal and Wynn
Watkins.
C. Proclamation designating January 2025 as Human Trafficking Prevention
Month in Collier County. To be accepted by Linda Oberhaus, Chief
Executive Officer of The Shelter for Abused Women & Children.
5. PRESENTATIONS
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
Page 5
January 14, 2025
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA.
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Recommendation to adopt an Ordinance amending the Collier County Land
Development Code to establish provisions for Permanent Mobile Food
Dispensing Vehicles. (First of two hearings)
B. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance of The Board Of County
Commissioners amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, of the Collier
County Growth Management Plan, specifically amending the Future Land
Use Element and Maps to change the land use designation of the property
from Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to Urban
Commercial District, 5396 Myrtle Lane Commercial Subdistrict to allow the
development of up to 200,000 square feet of gross floor area of indoor self-
storage/warehouse and up to 3,000 square feet of gross floor area of other
commercial uses, and furthermore directing transmittal of the adoption
amendment to The Florida Department of Commerce. The subject property
is 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. [GMPA - PL20230016211] (Companion to items
#9C and #9D)
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)
Page 6
January 14, 2025
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)
E. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending the Collier County
Growth Management Plan to create the Barefoot Williams Commercial
Subdistrict to allow the development of 11,000 square feet of gross floor
area of commercial uses, of which a car wash may be 5,000 square feet of
gross floor area. The subject property is located on the south side of
Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41), approximately 350 feet east of the intersection
of Tamiami Trail and Barefoot Williams Road, in Section 33, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of ±1.92 acres.
(Companion to item #9F)
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)
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A. Recommendation to discuss a Resolution adopted by the Board of Directors
Page 7
January 14, 2025
of Ave Maria Civic Association opposing certain proposed relocation options
for the Naples Airport near the Ave Maria community. (William L.
McDaniel, Jr.)
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation that the Board receive an update from the Trust for Public
Lands (TPL) regarding the Seminole Gulf Rail Line acquisition and direct
the County Manager or their designee to 1) Provide $5,000 to TPL for
preparation of a grant application for the acquisition of the Seminole Gulf
Rail Line; 2) Pledge up to $899,000 toward the local match for the grant;
and 3) Work with partner municipalities on a Memorandum of Agreement to
formalize cooperation of the entities. (Trinity Scott, Department Head -
Transportation Management Services Department)
B. Recommendation to accept an update on the status of Board-directed
negotiations with Gargiulo Education Center, Inc., for the purchase of
Collier County-owned property located at 16140 and 16144 Performance
Way, no longer needed for an EMS station, including information on
Gargiulo's consideration of grant funding for property acquisition costs and
the construction of a child education center. (Trinity Scott, Department Head
- Transportation Management Services Department)
C. Recommendation to review the Board-directed comparison of various
Florida jurisdictions' multifamily parking requirements against those
adopted by the County, provide direction to staff regarding policy on parking
deviations and administrative parking reductions for multifamily projects,
and adjust the adopted parking standard through an amendment to the Land
Development Code. (Michael Bosi, Division Director - Planning & Zoning)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
Page 8
January 14, 2025
A. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA BY INDIVIDUALS NOT
ALREADY HEARD DURING PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENTS IN
THIS MEETING
B. STAFF PROJECT UPDATES
C. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
1) Naples Airport Authority Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Consent Agenda - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of
each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will
be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to authorize the County Manager, or designee, to
release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) in the amount of
$35,477.63 to the Project Engineer or Developer’s designated agent
for Jasper Flats, PL20230008506.
2) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $43,680, which was posted as a
guaranty for Excavation Permit Number PL20200000344 for work
associated with Watercrest at Hacienda Lakes.
3) Recommendation to authorize the Clerk of Courts to release a
Performance Bond in the amount of $5,340 which was posted as a
development guarantee for an Early Work Authorization (EWA) for
work associated with Venture Church, PL20240004015.
4) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the
plat dedications for the final plat of Ave Maria Unit 9 Del Webb at
Ave Maria Parcels 101, 103, 104 & 105, Application Number AR-
Page 9
January 14, 2025
9168 and PL20110001810, and authorize the release of the
maintenance securities in the amount of $282,532.56.
5) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements for the final plat of Del
Webb Naples Parcels 107-108, Application Number PL20160000906,
and authorize the release of the maintenance security in the amount of
$170,953.21.
6) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements for the final plat of Del
Webb Naples Parcel 109, Application Number PL20180000500, and
authorize the release of the maintenance security in the amount of
$460,461.04.
7) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements and acceptance of the
plat dedications for the final plat of Inland Village, Application
Number PL20170003955 (FP) and Application Number
PL20180002642 (SDPA), and authorize the release of the
maintenance security in the amount of $14,522.75.
8) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements and acceptance of the
plat dedications for the final plat of Isles of Collier Preserve Phase 9,
Application Number PL20160001197, and authorize the release of the
maintenance security in the amount of $262,678.
9) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the sewer utility
facilities for Bonita Bay Naples Clubhouse, PL20240012690.
10) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water facilities for Diamond Classic Plumbing,
PL20240008815.
11) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities and accept the conveyance of the potable water
and sewer facilities for Esplanade by the Islands - Phase 3C,
Page 10
January 14, 2025
PL20240006571.
12) Recommendation to approve final acceptance and accept the
conveyance of the potable water and sewer utility facilities for Seven
Shores Phase 1B, 1C & 1D, PL20240001231.
13) Recommendation to approve an Easement Use Agreement to allow a
screened lanai to encroach 1.7 feet into a County Lake Maintenance,
Drainage, and Access Easement located at 1249 Diamond Lake
Circle.
14) Recommendation to approve the properties on the Conservation
Collier Active Acquisition List (AAL) and direct staff to pursue the
projects recommended within the A-Category, funded by the
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Fund (1061).
15) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with
Cypress Cove Landkeepers Inc., f/k/a Cypress Cove Conservancy,
Inc., for a 10.00-acre parcel at a cost of $648,900, for a total cost not
to exceed $653,570 inclusive of closing costs.
16) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase
under the Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with 1)
Erik C. Fernandez & Terratrust LLC (“Fernandez”) for a 1.59-acre
parcel at a cost of $44,520; 2) JOL Property Ventures LLC for a 1.14-
acre parcel at a cost of $36,480; and 3) Abel Martinez Chavez for a
1.14-acre parcel at a cost of $36,480, for a total cost not to exceed
$122,210 inclusive of closing costs.
17) Recommendation to approve a Resolution and an after-the-fact right-
of-way permit authorizing the temporary closing of a portion of City
Gate Blvd North and determining that the closure is necessary for the
Magic of Lights event from November 22, 2024 – January 4, 2025, in
affiliation with Sports Facilities and the Paradise Coast Sports
Complex, to fulfill the Collier County’s right-of-way permit
application requirement for road closures.
B. TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Page 11
January 14, 2025
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the removal of
uncollectible accounts receivable in the amount of $435.00 from the
financial records of the CATT Transit Enhancement Fund (4030) and
Transportation Disadvantaged Fund (4033) in accordance with
Resolution 2006-252 and authorize the Chair to execute the attached
Resolution.
2) Recommendation to approve an Agreement for the purchase of right
of way (Parcel 1368FEE) required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Ext
– Phase 2 Project (Project No. 60249). Estimated Fiscal Impact:
$54,300.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Landscape Maintenance Agreement with Gulfshore Playhouse, Inc.,
for landscape, irrigation, and brick pavement improvements within
Goodlette-Frank Road, a public right-of-way.
4) Recommendation that the Board approve and authorize the Chairman
to sign a Landscape Maintenance Agreement ("Agreement") with
Valewood Maintenance Association, Inc., for landscape, irrigation,
and brick pavement improvements within Valewood Drive, a public
right-of-way.
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution and approve a Lease
Agreement with State Representative Yvette Benarroch for use of
County-owned office space.
6) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution that aligns with the Board's
approval of the Collier County Standard Form Long-Term Lease (Not
for Profit) with Warriors Homes of Collier, Inc., for the use of two
County-owned homes at 1973 and 2015 Bay Street, ensuring rent is
set at $1,000 per home, consistent with the agreement with Warriors
and as was orally presented in Agenda Item 11B on November 12,
2024.
7) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 2 under Agreement
No. 23-8099 to add sixty (60) additional days for the Veterans
Memorial Blvd. Phase 1 – Noise Barrier Wall Project. (Project No.
60198)
Page 12
January 14, 2025
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a
Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement with the Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT) reimbursing the County up to
$893,000 for the purchase and configuration of an Adaptive Traffic
Control System (ATCS) to be installed at thirteen (13) intersections on
Golden Gate Parkway, Santa Barbara Blvd., and Radio Road, execute
a Resolution memorializing the Board’s action, and authorize the
necessary Budget Amendment FPN 446342-1-98-01. (Project No.
33934, Fund 1841)
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Supplemental Agreement to the Local Agency Program (LAP)
Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to
increase the grant award from $2,100,000 to $2,220,000 for road
widening and paved shoulder construction on Corkscrew Rd between
the Collier County curve and Lee County curve, to adopt the
accompanying Resolution formally approving and authorizing the
chairman to execute same, and to authorize the necessary Budget
Amendments, FPN 446323-2-58-01. (Project No. 60233, Fund 1841)
10) Recommendation to approve Change Order No. 3, adding a total of
sixty-seven (67) days, correcting an error on Change Order No. 2
adjusting the contract amount to $22,886,658.04 under Agreement No.
20-7811 with Quality Enterprises USA, Inc., for the “Design-Build of
the Immokalee Area Improvements – Tiger Grant” project, and
authorizing the Chairman to sign the attached Change Order. (Project
No. 33563)
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 23-8095R,
“Maintenance and Repair of Balers, Compactors & Roll-off
Equipment,” to ABG Fabrication, LLC, and authorize the Chairman to
sign the attached Agreement.
2) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as ex-
officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District (CCWSD), award Request for Professional Services No. 24-
8211 for “Design Services for South County Water Reclamation
Page 13
January 14, 2025
Facility Electrical Service #1 Upgrades” to Johnson Engineering,
LLC, in the amount of $501,897, and authorize the Chairman to sign
the attached Agreement. (Project No. 70288)
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as ex-
officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District (CCWSD), ratify administratively approved Change Order
No. 2 and Change Order No. 3, providing for a time extension and use
of the Owner’s Allowance under Agreement No. 22-7992R, with
Haskins Inc., for the Palm River Areas 1 and 2 Public Utilities
Renewal project, and authorize its Chairman to sign the attached
Change Orders. (Project No. 70257)
4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners, as ex-
officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer
District (CCWSD) award Invitation for Qualifications (“IFQ”) No.
22-8056, “High/Medium Voltage Electrical Services” to MP
Predictive Technologies Inc., Electrical Engineering Enterprises Inc.,
Simmonds Electrical of Naples, Inc., and authorize the Chairman to
sign the attached agreements.
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to authorize the Chairman to sign a Memorandum
of Agreement between the Florida Division of Emergency
Management and Collier County to accept the transfer of a Tiger Dam
flood barrier system.
2) Recommendation to approve a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) between Collier County and the Florida Division of
Emergency Management to install a low-power gap radar station for
local real-time weather data.
3) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign the
First Amendment to the subrecipient agreement between Collier
County and Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency
(Immokalee) to amend Community Development Block Grant
Agreement #CD24-02 to allow for Phase I activities.
Page 14
January 14, 2025
4) Recommendation to approve and authorize a Budget Amendment to
recognize carry-forward interest earned, in the amount of $1,057.09,
for September 2024 on advanced library funding received from the
Florida Department of State to support library services for the use of
Collier County residents. (Public Service Match Fund 1840).
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution authorizing approval of a
substantial amendment to Collier County's U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Annual Action Plan for
Program Year 2023-2024 and Program Year 2024-2025, to reallocate
$1,000,000 from Program Year 2023 CDBG to Program Year 2024
CDBG activity to provide assistance to individual and families
through counseling and housing services impacted by recent
hurricanes, and authorize submission of the substantial amendment to
HUD.
6) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign a
Landlord Payment Agreement between Collier County and Sangaredi
LLC., allowing the Community and Human Services Division (CHS)
to administer the Rapid Re-Housing and Homelessness Prevention
Program through the Emergency Solutions and Rapid Unsheltered
Survivor Housing (RUSH) Grant Programs.
7) Recommendation to approve an after-the-fact Third Amendment to the
FY24 Older Americans Act Title III agreement # OAA 203.24.03
between the Area Agency on Aging of Southwest Florida, Inc., and
Collier County in the amount of ($5,000.00) bringing the total award
to $3,004,265.41. (Human Services Grant Fund 1837)
8) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign two
State Housing Initiative Partnership Agreement Amendments between
Collier County and (a) Habitat for Humanity Amendment #2 to
increase the per unit amount and (b) Collier County Housing
Authority Amendment #1 to clarify language and resolve a scrivener
error. (SHIP Grant Fund 1053)
9) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign thirty
(30) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives
Partnership loan program in the amount of $145,000.00. (SHIP Grant
Page 15
January 14, 2025
Fund 1053)
10) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign thirty
(30) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives
Partnership loan program in the amount of $220,479.10 and to
authorize the associated budget amendment to appropriate repayment
amount totaling $3,000.00. (SHIP Grant Fund 1053)
11) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign (43)
Releases of Lien in the amount of $565,449.14 for properties that
have remained affordable for the required 15-year period set forth in
the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Impact Fee Program
deferral agreements.
12) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign (39)
Releases of Lien in the amount of $512,849.22 for properties that
have remained affordable for the required 15-year period set forth in
the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Impact Fee Program
deferral agreements.
E. CORPORATE BUSINESS OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to sign an
Assumption Agreement assigning all rights, duties, benefits, and
obligations to Bowman Gulf Coast LLC d/b/a Robau, a Bowman
Company, concerning Agreement #18-7432-CE, “Professional
Services Library Civil Engineering Category”.
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to ratify and authorize payments related to work
performed by subcontractor Cladding Systems, Inc., that occurred
prior to the issuance of Payment and Performance bond being in place
between Cladding Systems, Inc., and O-A-K/Florida, Inc., d/b/a
Owen-Ames-Kimball Company, for the Main Campus Upgrades
under Agreement No. 21-7883-ST. (Fund (3018), Project No. 50214)
2) Recommendation to approve an Interlocal Agreement between the
Board of County Commissioners and North Collier Fire Control and
Page 16
January 14, 2025
Rescue District for the use of Mobility VPNs.
3) Recommendation to award Construction Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No.
24-8278, “Hurricane Ian Repairs – Clam Pass Parking Lot Wall,” to
Capital Contractors, LLC., in the amount of $129,750, approve an
owner’s allowance of $5,200 for potential unforeseen conditions, and
authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Agreement.
4) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No. 24-8284,
“Caxambas Hurricane Ian Permanent Fuel Tank Installation” to Don
Wood Inc., in the amount of $667,164.00, approve an Owners
Allowance of $123,504.00 for potential unforeseen conditions, and
authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Agreement (Project No.
50280).
5) Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions, or insurance proceeds)
to the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Adopted Budget. (The Budget
Amendments in the attached Resolution have been reviewed and
approved by the Board of County Commissioners via separate
Executive Summaries.)
6) Recommendation to authorize expenditures for the sole source
purchase of Prolake/Keeton aerators and related materials from
Keeton Industries, Inc., through a waiver from the competitive process
in the amount of $250,000 per fiscal year from Keeton Industries,
Inc., through Fiscal Year 2029.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to ratify administratively approved Change Order
No. 1, adding 8 days to the contract time and to use $9,582.30 from
the owner's allowance for Work Directive #1 under Agreement No.
23-8120 (Purchase Order 4500229417) with DEC Contracting Group,
Inc., for the “Bulk Aircraft Hangar at Marco Island Executive
Airport,” and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached Change
Order. (Project No. 33822)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Page 17
January 14, 2025
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) January 14, 2024, Miscellaneous Correspondence
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the
check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and
purpose for which the referenced disbursements in the amount of
$26,886,642.17 were drawn for the periods between November 28,
2024, and December 11, 2024, pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06.
2) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of December
18, 2024.
3) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the
check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and
purpose for which the referenced disbursements in the amount of
$101,216,963.78 were drawn for the periods between December 12,
2024, and January 1, 2025, pursuant to Florida Statute 136.06.
4) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of January 8,
2025.
5) Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners provide
approval to designate the Sheriff as the official applicant and point of
contact for the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,
Bureau of Justice Assistance Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant (JAG) FY ‘24 Local Standard grant. Authorize the
acceptance of the grant when awarded, approve associated budget
amendments, and approve the Collier County Sheriff’s Office to
receive and expend 2024 JAG Standard grant funds.
6) Recommendation to authorize the execution of a Budget Amendment
for $100,000 under Fund 1071 (Law Enforcement Trust) for
additional training expenses.
Page 18
January 14, 2025
7) Recommendation to authorize the execution of a Budget Amendment
to realign current funding within Collier County Capital Project Fund
(3001) in the amount of $635,000 to allow for the reimbursement of
funding to the Collier County Sheriff’s Office for the upgrade and
expansion of the telephone system for law enforcement (Project No.
50322) in year one of the project to accommodate the timing of
building preparations required for the project.
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to appoint Kevin Johnson to the Contractors
Licensing Board.
2) Recommendation to reappoint Larry Holloway to the Ochopee Fire
District Advisory Committee.
3) Recommendation to appoint three members to the Black Affairs
Advisory Board.
L. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Summary Agenda - This section is for advertised public hearings and must
meet the following criteria: 1) A recommendation for approval from staff; 2)
Unanimous recommendation for approval by the Collier County Planning
Commission or other authorizing agencies of all members present and voting;
3) No written or oral objections to the item received by staff, the Collier
County Planning Commission, other authorizing agencies or the Board, prior
to the commencement of the BCC meeting on which the items are scheduled to
be heard; and 4) No individuals are registered to speak in opposition to the
item. For those items which are quasi-judicial in nature, all participants must
be sworn in.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Page 19
January 14, 2025
(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.
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.
C. Recommendation to adopt a Resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers, and supplemental revenue) to the
Fiscal Year 2024-25 Adopted Budget. (The Budget Amendments in the
attached Resolution have been reviewed and approved by the Board of
County Commissioners via separate Executive Summaries.)
D. This item has been continued to the January 28, 2025 BCC Meeting.
Recommendation to repeal and replace Procurement Ordinance No. 2013-
69, as amended, with the attached updated Procurement Ordinance.
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
January 14, 2025
Page 2
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to
the commissioner meeting, the first one of the year.
I would like to remind you -- we have a pretty full agenda today,
several speakers. And for the speakers, there's a
three-minute -- three-minute limit. You'll get a warning at the two
minute and 30 seconds, and then 30 seconds later the little red light
will go off.
And if you haven't done so so far, we ask that you would silence
your cell phone so that Brick House doesn't go off right in the middle
of someone speaking. True story. I have that experience, so that's
why it's -- I'm sensitive to it.
So with that, let's get started with our prayer and our Pledge of
Allegiance.
Item #1
INVOCATION BY PASTOR JESSE BARRELL OF NEW HOPE
NAPLES AND PLEDGE OF ALLIGENCE LET BY CARROLL
“SPIDER” TRANTHAM
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. We have our invocation by
Pastor Jesse Barrett, New Hope Naples, and then our pledge will be
led by Carroll "Spider" Trantham, U.S. Army 1968 to 1972, Vietnam
veteran, Bronze Star, Purple Heart recipient, 101st Airborne, member
of Operation Vet Help.
PASTOR BARRETT: Good morning.
Heavenly Father, we come before you today with gratitude in
our hearts for the elected officials who serve the people of Collier
County. We ask for your guidance and wisdom as they gather to
make decisions that impact our community. May every discussion
January 14, 2025
Page 3
and every action taken here today be grounded in integrity, fairness,
and a deep desire to uplift and strengthen the community that they
serve.
As we approach Martin Luther King, Jr., Day, we pause to
reflect on the profound legacy of Dr. King. We thank you for the
courage and the vision you placed within him, a man who stood
boldly for justice, equality, and unity.
Help us to honor his memory not only in words but also in
actions, striving to build a community where every person is treated
with dignity and respect.
Lord, we entrust that this meeting will be yours today. We pray
for your blessing over every leader, staff member, and resident of
Collier County. May your peace, wisdom, and love guide us in all
that we do.
In Jesus' name, amen.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Swearing in?
Item #1B
SWEARING-IN CEREMONY OF DISTRICT 1 COMMISSIONER
RICK LOCASTRO, DISTRICT 3 COMMISSIONER BURT
SAUNDERS, AND DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER WILLIAM L.
MCDANIEL, JR. THE OATH TO BE ADMINISTERED BY
COLLIER COUNTY CIRCUIT JUDGE JOSEPH G. FOSTER –
COMMISSIONERS SWORN IN
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, yes. The next order of business is
going to be the swearing in of Commissioner Saunders,
Commissioner LoCastro, and Commissioner McDaniel, and the oath
will be administered by Judge Foster.
January 14, 2025
Page 4
JUDGE FOSTER: Who is starting?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Where do you want us at?
Do you want us to come down there?
MS. PATTERSON: Individual -- we're going to bring you
down individually so we can get photos.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Then I'm last.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes. So we'll start with Commissioner
LoCastro.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Be sure he raises his right hand.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The correct one. The correct
hand, not the right hand.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Judge, how you doing?
JUDGE FOSTER: Doing great. All right. Are you good?
How do you want --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No Bible?
JUDGE FOSTER: No, I did not bring one. Did you bring
one?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No. I'll put one never -- my
hand over my heart.
JUDGE FOSTER: Raise your right hand and repeat after me.
I do solemnly swear or affirm.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I do solemnly swear.
JUDGE FOSTER: That I will support, protect, and defend.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That I will support, protect,
and defend.
JUDGE FOSTER: The constitution and government of the
United States.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: The constitution and the
government of the United States.
JUDGE FOSTER: And of the state of Florida.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And of the state of Florida.
January 14, 2025
Page 5
JUDGE FOSTER: That I am duly qualified to hold office.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That I am duly qualified to
hold office.
JUDGE FOSTER: Under the Constitution of the state.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Under the Constitution of the
state.
JUDGE FOSTER: And that I will well and faithfully perform.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And that I will well and
faithfully perform.
JUDGE FOSTER: The duties of County Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: The duties of County
Commissioner.
JUDGE FOSTER: On which I am now about to enter.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: On which I am about to now
enter.
JUDGE FOSTER: So help me God.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So help me God, Pastor.
Thank you. Thank you, Judge. Appreciate it.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We probably could have got
a digital Bible from the pastor.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioner, did you want any photos
with your guest?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: We can do them after.
MS. PATTERSON: Whatever you'd like. Yeah, just real
quick.
Where is Maria?
We'll get the judge in here, too, because it makes it look official.
JUDGE FOSTER: It is official.
MS. CAPIZZI: And your assistant.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, do you want to take a
January 14, 2025
Page 6
couple with just us? Where is she? She is Aixa? Where is she?
Here. Get over here.
Could you take a couple of just me and Julia as well?
Next. Thank you.
JUDGE FOSTER: Please raise your right hand and repeat after
me.
I do solemnly swear or affirm.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I do solemnly swear and
affirm.
JUDGE FOSTER: That I will support, protect, and defend.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That I will support, protect,
and defend.
JUDGE FOSTER: The Constitution and government of the
United States.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The Constitution and
government of the United States.
JUDGE FOSTER: And of the state of Florida.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And of the state of Florida.
JUDGE FOSTER: That I am duly qualified to hold office.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That I am duly qualified to
hold office.
JUDGE FOSTER: Under the Constitution of the state.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Under the Constitution of the
state.
JUDGE FOSTER: And that I will well and faithfully perform.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And that I will well and
faithfully perform.
JUDGE FOSTER: The duties of County Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The duties of County
Commissioner.
JUDGE FOSTER: On which I am now about to enter.
January 14, 2025
Page 7
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: On which I am now about to
enter.
JUDGE FOSTER: So help me God.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So help me God.
JUDGE FOSTER: Congratulations.
(Applause.)
THE PHOTOGRAPHER: Do you want one by yourself?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We'll do one just the two of
us.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How do you do, sir?
JUDGE FOSTER: Commissioner, it's been so long.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Don't be messing me up.
The judge and I are friends. So if I mess this up, it's his fault.
JUDGE FOSTER: Now I may have to mess with you.
Please raise your right hand and repeat after me.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, sir.
JUDGE FOSTER: I do solemnly swear or affirm.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do solemnly swear and
affirm.
JUDGE FOSTER: That I will support, protect, and defend.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That I will support, protect,
and defend.
JUDGE FOSTER: The Constitution and government of the
United States.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The Constitution and
government of the United States.
JUDGE FOSTER: And of the state of Florida.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And of the state of Florida.
JUDGE FOSTER: That I am duly qualified to hold office.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That I am duly qualified to
January 14, 2025
Page 8
hold office.
JUDGE FOSTER: Under the Constitution of the state.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Under the Constitution of the
state.
JUDGE FOSTER: And that I will well and faithfully perform.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that I will well and
faithfully perform.
JUDGE FOSTER: The duties of County Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The duties of County
Commissioner.
JUDGE FOSTER: On which I am now about to enter.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: On which I am about -- now
about to enter.
JUDGE FOSTER: So help me God.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So help me God.
JUDGE FOSTER: Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're going to put the rose
between two thorns.
(Applause.)
Item #2A
APPROVAL OF TODAY’S REGULAR, CONSENT AND
SUMMARY AGENDA AS AMENDED (EXPARTE DISCLOSURE
PROVIDED BY COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT
AGENDA.) – MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
HALL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL –
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES (MOTION TO
MOVE ADD-ON ITEM #10B TO THE JANUARY 25, 2025, BCC
MEETING BY COMMISSIONER HALL; SECONDED BY
January 14, 2025
Page 9
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL THEN LATER WITHDRAWN BY
COMMISSIONER HALL)
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, we'll move on to agenda
changes. Once we've set the agenda, then we'll move on to the
changes of the Chair.
So I do have several items on our change sheet today for
January 14th, 2025.
First is proposed add-on 10B to be heard at 11 a.m. This is a
recommendation to approve the guaranteed maximum price first
amendment to Agreement No. 21-7919-ST, Construction
Management at Risk, with DeAngelis Diamond Construction, LLC,
for construction services for the Collier County behavioral health
project formerly the Mental Health Facility in the amount of
$49,856,251, authorize the Chairman to sign the attached
amendment, and approve the necessary budget amendment. This is
being brought to the agenda at Commissioner Saunders' request.
Next, move Item 16F4 to 11D. This is a recommendation to
award Invitation to Bid No. 24-8284, Caxambas Hurricane Ian
permanent fuel tank installation, to Don Wood, Inc., in the amount of
$667,164, approve an owner's allowance of 123,504 for potential
unforeseen conditions, and authorize the Chairman to sign the
attached agreement. This is being brought to the agenda -- to the
regular agenda by Commissioner McDaniel's request.
Move Item 16F6 to 11E. This is a recommendation to
authorize expenditures for the sole-source purchase of
Prolake/Keeton aerators and related materials from Keeton Industries,
Inc., through a waiver from the competitive process in the amount of
$250,000 per fiscal year from Keeton Industries, Inc., through Fiscal
Year 2029. This item is being moved to the regular agenda at
Commissioner McDaniel's request.
January 14, 2025
Page 10
A couple of agenda notes. Item 16A14, the table should read
"2,200,000 for the estimated value and $1,164,021 for the estimated
value per acre for the Category C property located at
1063 Shadowlawn." This note is at staff's request.
Also, we have Items 9C and 9D are companion items to 9B, not
Item 9A.
And, finally, we do have, as noted before, the time-certain of
11 a.m. for the central receiving facility's guaranteed maximum price.
Court reporter breaks scheduled for 10:30 and again at 2:50.
With that, County Attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing. Thank you, County Manager.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, any further changes to the
agenda and ex parte on the consent and summary?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: No changes, but I do have
a -- two on the summary. 17A, I have -- correction. 17B, I have
meetings.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like to have the Board consider moving Item 16A15 to the
main agenda. That's a good-news story in reference to Conservation
Collier, but there are some questions I think that the public may have
that I think staff -- and I've talked to staff about addressing those. So
I'd like to move 16A15 to the main agenda.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Then in terms --
MS. PATTERSON: Sorry. That will become 11F.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: In terms of ex parte, I do
have meetings and e-mails in reference to the summary agenda
Item 17A and Item 17B.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner McDaniel.
January 14, 2025
Page 11
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good morning, Mr. Chair.
I have -- I'm going to do my ex parte first. I do have ex parte
on 17A and B, and I'm assuming we're okay with how that's all
transpired.
I do have a comment on 16B5. That's a -- we have a new state
legislator, and I would like to recommend that going forward we
double the rent for those people, and I just want that noted in the
record that a dollar a year is just not enough, and since they're new,
we need to get more. Help offset our expenses. That's my
feel-good item.
My not feel-good item is Commissioner Saunders' request to
move the contractual arrangement from two weeks from now to today
with regard to the contract on the central receiving facility.
I understand why Commissioner Saunders has asked for that, but
on the same token, I think it's a disservice to our community from a
vetting standpoint. I wasn't notified of that change until yesterday,
and then an enormous amount of information was dropped on me to
be read and reviewed and comment on. I won't be short on comment
if, in fact, the agenda does sit as it is currently being recommended.
But I would suggest we not allow that to transpire and hold that
hearing at our second meeting in January as is previously scheduled.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I don't have any changes to
the agenda. On the summary, my disclosure is 17B, meetings.
I'll make a comment on David Lawrence Center. It might have
been last minute, although because of one of the positions I serve in
on a mental health committee with the David Lawrence Center, a
team -- maybe I was a little bit more read in. I didn't realize it was
being changed, but as far as the moving parts, I might be a little bit
more caught up. But I'll preface it by saying, whenever any
commissioner up here says they want more time, they want to do a
January 14, 2025
Page 12
deeper dive, they're not ready, they didn't get the time, I respect that.
So, you know, it doesn't matter if I feel like I'm ready, and, you
know, Scott Burgess is out there ready to give us a presentation. If a
commissioner is requesting that, you know, they want something
delayed a little bit because they want to do a deeper dive, I think that
only makes what we decide in the end stronger. So it was a little bit
of a last-minute thing. I mean, we're not building the Empire State
Building here, but there are a lot of moving parts, and it's real money
and some real questions.
So all right. I'll just echo that if, you know, Commissioner
McDaniel, in good faith, says that, you know, he would -- he would
like to not move it up to today, I would support that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I know I'm No. 3 on the
light, sir.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just as a clarification, I'm
prepared to hear the event today. It's the community. You can't
imagine the phone calls that I received from folks in the community
that were surprised that this got moved and the lack of notice. It's
not me. As I said, I'll -- I have my remarks and am relatively
prepared. It's the -- what I perceive to be as, the taking from the
community, that couldn't react in that short a time frame. But thank
you.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So you're good with talking about it this
afternoon?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'd rather we not. I'd rather,
on behalf of the community, as I suggested --
CHAIRMAN HALL: I got you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- that we relocate -- or move
it back to the second meeting in January as it was advertised and so
on and go forth.
January 14, 2025
Page 13
CHAIRMAN HALL: I understand.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Just the clarification was, it
isn't me; it's the community.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure. You want to --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. Let me explain why I
brought this up and what we're being asked to do today. I am
unavoidably going to miss the meeting on January 28th. There's no
way I'm going to be able to make that meeting and no way I'm going
to be able to call in. And so I want to have this thing heard when we
have a full board.
We can't put this off until February -- to our first meeting in
February because our contract with DeAngelis Diamond expires on
January 31 if we don't sign it and move forward with it.
So I moved this forward. Now, from a technical standpoint,
there really isn't anything new in this document or in this agenda
item. We are simply making some technical amendments to the
contract we already have.
And so, Mr. Chairman and Members, if we do not get this
approved at our second meeting in January, then the contract expires.
And I've been told by DeAngelis Diamond and folks that are in the
know on this, that we would be facing a 5- to $6 million increase in
cost if we don't continue with the agreement that we have.
And so I understand that this was last minute, but I'm requesting
it because it is -- some minor technical things that we're dealing with.
Nothing new to this board. We've had several public hearings on
how much this project costs. There are no surprises here.
And so, Mr. Chairman and Members, that's my request, to move
forward with this today.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Okay. I was -- I was glad to hear
Commissioner LoCastro say that he agreed, because I was thinking
the same thing. I -- this is a big deal, and I'm sitting here -- and I'm
January 14, 2025
Page 14
in a rock and a hard place, or between it, because we're only going to
have four for the second week of January but yet we haven't had a lot
of time to prepare today nor has the public had a chance to respond.
So being that -- this is where Solomon had to ask for wisdom.
Being that we are here actually to represent the public and to be the
public's best interest, I guess I'll make a motion between us to move
this meeting to the 28th; that will be my motion. And we'll just
decide it amongst us.
So, Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll second the motion. And
for a member -- for a matter of comment, I mean, contracts are
extended on a regular basis -- all of the time. Cost increases come
all of the time. And so I think the service to the community is
paramount here.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. And I'll just chime in.
You know, with all due respect to, you know, Commissioner
Saunders, like he said, there's nothing new here. He can put in
writing -- or if he's -- you know, there's many times some of us can't
be here.
So this isn't rocket science, so I think we can figure out, you
know, how to do it. If -- hopefully it's something that is acceptable
to him. I mean, if he is still staunch in his position, then I also
respect that and I would love to hear, you know, his rebuttal. But I
think if we keep it on the 28th so that we're not guilty sometimes of
catching stones from citizens improperly saying we stifle people at
the podium, we don't give them time to speak and all these things,
which is grossly unfair at times, we don't want to be guilty of doing
that here.
But if there's something that -- you know, Commissioner
Saunders, if he's unable to be here but he can at least be able to pass
January 14, 2025
Page 15
to the County Manager his thoughts or something like that, if there's a
way to do that, you know, I'd be for that. Let's -- you know, I think
we might be, you know, splitting hairs on this one, you know, a bit
too much.
And I don't want to have a rush to judgment. But if
Commissioner Saunders is staunch in saying that, "Hey, if I'm not
here, I don't think my position's represented or I have some
concerns," or whatever, and we're also up against a time frame with
the contractor, then that's a real issue as well. So I mean -- I saw
him light up. I'd love to -- you know, I respect what he has to say,
and I just want to make sure we do it right without kicking the can.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
If I -- if my memory is right, I believe me and you,
Commissioner Hall, came onto this board -- I think our first meeting
we had in January in 2023, they saved this particular item for us to
have that eight-hour marathon meeting to make this decision to bring
this forth to build a center to support our citizens here.
So I don't think this is something new. This is -- back in 2023,
we made a decision to build it. This just seems like government
again kicking the can down the road. It's not like this is a mystery.
We knew eventually the contract's going to come to us, and we're
going to have to look at it and have to agree upon it.
So I don't know that this is something that's a rush to judgment.
This is just a step in the process that we've already started over two
years ago. So I mean, that's my position on it.
I think the citizens have been very well versed that, you know,
they've had many hours to stand up here at the podium and express
their feelings about it, you know. So I just don't want to be the one
getting accused again, "There's government kicking it down the
road," and now -- it works the same way, you know. It's two-way
January 14, 2025
Page 16
streets. Then they're going to come back and say, "Well, they should
have got it done. Now they're going to spend more money on it."
So, you know, that's just my position, you know. So I just wanted to
make sure it was heard.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: On March 14th, 2023, the
county entered into this agreement.
On March 12th, 2024, the county amended the agreement.
On December 10th, 2024, we heard an update and report on this
project.
So the public has been well informed. As a matter of fact, I
don't think there was anybody here at our latest hearing that was in
opposition to this. We did have Scott Burgess and some of those
folks from David Lawrence Center here. We didn't have a roomful
of people that were concerned about this.
But here's kind of the issue. And to talk about rush to
judgment, this is definitely not a rush to judgment. That's why I
mentioned those different dates where this board has heard this item.
We're going to have a split board on January 28th. We'll have
four commissioners. If there are two commissioners that want to kill
this project, this project is dead on that date because on January 31st
the agreement expires, and the costs will go up 5- or $6 million, and I
don't see this board spending another 5- or $6 million on this project.
So I'm just simply going to say today that a vote not to hear this
today is a vote to kill this project, and I'm hoping that the Board will
not make that decision today.
So, Mr. Chairman, I would ask the Board not to adopt your
motion.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I'll withdraw my motion. I would rather
have five of us to hear all of it than to put us in a precarious situation
with just a split board. So I'll withdraw my motion, and we'll --
January 14, 2025
Page 17
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Ex parte. I have ex parte on 17B. I
have meetings, and that's it, and no changes to the agenda.
And, Troy, do we still have a public speaker for --
MR. MILLER: I do, Mr. Chair. I have one registered speaker
for Item 17B, Lloyd is -- I think this is Bowin.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Bowein.
MR. MILLER: Bowein. Yes.
Can you come up, sir. Right here at this mic. Please begin by
stating your name for the record.
MR. BOWEIN: My name is Lloyd Bowein, and I'm here on
behalf of Pine Ridge Plaza, which is just north of where the proposed
vacation of the right-of-way is.
My only concern is there's a furniture store, Pine Ridge Plaza
and Masonic Lodge that, you know, we have a good view from the
highway of, you know, traffic going by and seeing where we are.
Just so long as that area between the east side of 41 and the west side
of Pine -- of Ridge Boulevard is not trees and stuff where we can't
see our buildings, I'm fine with it. Like, putting new sod, putting in
concrete driveways, putting in gutters, all that's fine with me.
I'm sort of going blind, because I really haven't been able to see
exactly what they're proposing. I know we're in the very beginning
of it. And I will be talking to the McCabes during this meeting and
see what we can come up with.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I ask --
CHAIRMAN HALL: Sure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You had an opportunity to
speak with the developers this morning. Are you semi satisfied that
they're going to cooperate and maintain the visibility for the tenants
and the businesses that are along there?
January 14, 2025
Page 18
MR. BOWEIN: Well, basically, we had time to say hello by
the time I found out who they were. So we really haven't discussed
it. But they seem to be very pro pleasing the neighbors.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. BOWEIN: But like I say, I'm sort of running blind
because I really don't know what they're proposing to put there. I
don't even know if they've got it finalized. But, you know, I just
want to be part of the process so that -- and not just for the properties
in front of our properties, but for the property in front of their
hotel -- proposed hotel, because, you know if you put some high trees
there south of where we're at, then obviously, cars coming north
wouldn't be able to see our area.
And I know they've reduced it to just in front of their building,
but I know that they do subsequently want to go up to Ridge Drive, I
think it is, and all their improvements.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And you and I have spoke
about this regularly.
MR. BOWEIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Lloyd's my friend from an
eternity ago. And I was assured yesterday in a private meeting with
the developer and then on another happenstance meeting last week on
a ribbon cutting over on Davis and 41 that the accommodations
would be made so that there wouldn't be a degradation to the
visibility for the businesses along that -- along that stretch. Is that --
MR. BOWEIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, I don't really think
it's -- to me, Lloyd -- I don't mean to interrupt, but I'd rather not pull
the agenda item and actually have a whole big hearing on it.
MR. BOWEIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And if you're satisfied with
their representations to me -- it's all now a matter of record. Terri's
January 14, 2025
Page 19
writing down all my misspoken words, so...
MR. BOWEIN: Well, what exactly are you going to determine
today? In other words, that this goes forward and there has to be
more input, or what -- or is it to grant the right-of-way vacation?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
MR. BOWEIN: I mean, exactly what's going to happen at
the -- when this is brought up?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's correct. This is the
granting of the right-of-way vacation.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, Trinity can provide some
clarification on the landscaping piece of this, what happens next.
MS. SCOTT: For the record, Trinity Scott, Transportation
Management Services Department head.
Yes, today we are -- the hearing is to vacate the right-of-way
along the frontage of the parcel. It is not the entire Trail Boulevard.
There will be a subsequent board action for a landscape maintenance
agreement for the remainder of Trail Boulevard and what that will
look like, whether that's pavers and landscaping, et cetera. So we're
not vacating all of Trail Boulevard. The rest of that will come back
at a later date when those plans are finalized.
MR. BOWEIN: Well, wouldn't it make more sense to find out
what they're going to put there before they grant the vacation of the
right-of-way?
MS. SCOTT: So this is to allow them to move forward with
their site plan --
MR. BOWEIN: Okay.
MS. SCOTT: -- for what they're going to do there, and that will
go through an approval process as well. And as I said, the remainder
of Trail Boulevard is not contingent upon this, but that would be a
separate board action item.
MR. BOWEIN: Yeah, but the -- when you grant the vacation
January 14, 2025
Page 20
of the right-of-way, would it -- you know, now they've got the
vacation. So then it's just a matter they would have to be approved
for the size or the type of vegetation, or wouldn't it be better to have a
plan?
Right now you're just saying, okay, we vacated the right-of-way.
Now what do you want to do?
MS. SCOTT: We are retaining an easement over the property
at this point to allow them to move forward through their planning
process so that we can maintain that and still continue through our
development process and allow them to move forward. Otherwise,
it's very difficult for them to come up with plans. If the Board
wasn't in favor of doing the vacation, that would significantly alter
their plans.
MR. BOWEIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Will we have -- will the
Board have input on those plans with regard to the size of the plants
and current advertising and so on?
MS. SCOTT: The landscape maintenance agreement will come
back to the Board.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So we'll have -- we'll
have another poke at it.
MR. BOWEIN: It would sure help -- like you mentioned
earlier, you might be able to put it on the regular agenda, which
might give me some time to talk to them, and I wouldn't even need to
be here when it came up if -- if I have agreements with them, and
then we can go -- you can go forward with it. Right now I haven't
even had a chance to talk to them, because I didn't, you know, know
what he looked like.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Commissioner Kowal.
MR. BOWEIN: But that's totally up to you. I'm not --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
January 14, 2025
Page 21
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think, if I remember looking at
the topical graph that I was showed yesterday in my private meeting
with the organization -- or the people, that the easement comes in at
one portion, and then there's a section directly in front of the hotel
that I think is part of this easement decision today.
MR. BOWEIN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And then the rest, where your
business is and the other business is, they go north up Trail.
MR. BOWEIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: That's a second phase, and that
still has to be approved and planned in the future?
MR. BOWEIN: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So this is not -- just by what we
do today is not going to give them carte blanche to add landscaping
the rest of the way. So if I'm correct, wrong, or I don't know. But I
think that's the way it was. It's just a section right in front of where
their property is is that this will cover today. The rest, from their
edge of their property line going north, that's a separate meeting,
separate -- or a decision through planning.
MR. BOWEIN: Well, it also --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: That's when your answers will
be -- you know, be able to -- correct? You know, be able to direct
those and what you want, and we'll work together on it.
MR. BOWEIN: The property directly in front of their hotel, I
have no problem with.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, that's all --
CHAIRMAN HALL: That's all we're talking about.
MR. BOWEIN: Oh, no. You're also going the part that's west
of Trail Boulevard and east of 41. That's --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I don't believe so.
MR. BOWEIN: -- not part of -- yes, I'm sure of that.
January 14, 2025
Page 22
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I could ask staff, because I know
we --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Chairman?
CHAIRMAN HALL: Yes. I hate to interrupt, but we're
getting into the substance of this. Why don't we put this on the
agenda? Let him have his conversation with some folks, talk to staff
and --
MR. BOWEIN: Then if we agree with everything, I go away,
and then you'll pass it later?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah, it will pass the other --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, you can go away now.
MR. BOWEIN: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Mr. French.
MR. FRENCH: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, my name's Jamie French. I'm your department head for
Growth Management and Community Development.
Just one suggestion from staff, perhaps that our staff can meet
with this gentleman, walk through the plans -- they are available
online -- throughout this process, and throughout this planning
process, once they achieve approval, there is a 30-day period that if
there is an objection to that, then that objection, then, would come to
you as the Board of County Commissioners.
So perhaps that may be the best alternative for both the
community as well as the developer so that we start that conversation
between the parties, and they can actually see what substantive
changes that they'd be bringing forward for consideration.
MR. BOWEIN: That works for me.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great. So we'll keep it on the summary.
So I make a motion to accept the agenda and to pass the consent
and summary agenda.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
January 14, 2025
Page 23
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Good.
*****
SEE REVERSE SIDE
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
January 14, 2025
Add-on Item 10B: *** This item is to be heard at 11 AM. *** Recommendation to approve the Guaranteed
Maximum Price (“GMP”) First Amendment to Agreement No. 21-7919-ST, Construction Management at Risk
(“CMAR”), with DeAngelis Diamond Construction LLC, for construction services for the Collier County
Behavioral Health Center project (formerly the Mental Health Facility) in the amount of $49,856,251, authorize the
Chairman to sign the attached amendment, and approve the necessary Budget Amendment. (Fund 3018, Project
50239). (Commissioner Saunders Request)
Move Item16F4 to 11D: Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No. 24-8284, “Caxambas Hurricane
Ian Permanent Fuel Tank Installation” to Don Wood Inc., in the amount of $667,164.00, approve an Owners
Allowance of $123,504.00 for potential unforeseen conditions, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached
Agreement (Project No. 50280). (Commissioner McDaniel’s Request)
Move Item 16F6 to 11E: Recommendation to authorize expenditures for the sole source purchase of
Prolake/Keeton aerators and related materials from Keeton Industries, Inc., through a waiver from the competitive
process in the amount of $250,000 per fiscal year from Keeton Industries, Inc., through Fiscal Year 2029.
(Commissioner McDaniel’s Request)
Move Item 16A15 to 11F: Recommendation to approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase under the
Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Program with Cypress Cove Landkeepers Inc., f/k/a Cypress Cove
Conservancy, Inc., for a 10.00-acre parcel at a cost of $648,900, for a total cost not to exceed $653,570 inclusive of
closing costs. (Commissioner Saunders’ Request)
Notes: Item 16A14 the table should read $2,200,000 for the Estimated Value and $1,164,021 for the Estimated
Value per acre for the “Category C” property located at 1063 Shadowlawn. (Staff’s Request)
Items 9C and 9D are companions to Item 9B, not Item 9A.
TIME CERTAIN ITEMS:
Add on Item 10B: *** This item is to be heard at 11 AM. *** Central Receiving Facility Guaranteed Maximum
Price (GMP)
1/14/2025 3:53 PM
January 14, 2025
Page 24
Item #2B
BCC MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 10, 2024 – MOTION TO
APPROVE AS PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER HALL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, let's go ahead and, before
we change -- go to the changing of the Chair, we could take care of
our minutes from the December -- so Item 2A, December 10th, 2024,
BCC minutes, and then we'll go into the Chair changes.
CHAIRMAN HALL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great.
Added Item #2C
APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR –
MOTION APPOINTING COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS AS
CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER KOWAL AS VICE-
CHAIRMAN FOR 2025 BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Very good. That brings us to Item 2B.
January 14, 2025
Page 25
And also if you would like, Chair and Incoming Chair, will be the
ceremony for the changing of the Chair and the presentation of the
gavel.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Great.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, I guess -- let me start
off with I do have a plaque for Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Let's do that after we seat
you.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You can do that as the Chair,
and it's more official.
MS. PATTERSON: All right. Then, Commissioner Hall, if
you have comments as the outgoing Chair.
CHAIRMAN HALL: I have a few things. What a year as
a -- basically a new commissioner. You know, you say two years,
but you still feel new even though there's a lot that goes on and you
learn a lot.
As Chair, I was really thankful that I got -- I got opportunities
that I had no idea really that I would -- that I would get. It
would -- just for instance, speaking in public at different events, you
would get invitations that you normally don't get just because you're
the Chairman. Not because you're special, but just because you're in
the seat.
You get to meet a lot of people that you normally wouldn't meet,
people out of your districts, people in the community, business
leaders, influential people, and I was thankful for that, for the
opportunity as well.
One of the things that I enjoyed as the Chair was getting to
direct the flow of the meeting. I didn't really realize that you had
influence over that. And I was anxious to get to the business of the
January 14, 2025
Page 26
people while also acknowledging the community, you know, in
certain proclamations and acknowledging the art and businesses of
the month but just not as frequent, but I still wanted to do that.
It was an opportunity to be flexible but also to be firm. I don't
know that that's a play on words, but it's really true. Just this
morning is an example. You know, you make decisions, you know,
off the cuff that impact a lot of people, and nobody wakes
up -- Commissioner LoCastro said it before, nobody wakes up
wanting to do something stupid in our meetings.
And so you really do have to rely on your wisdom, and I rely on
divine intervention. I know that may not make sense to some and
make sense to some others, but without that, I don't think this would
be a very easy seat.
Setting the agenda priorities, not to dictate but to be influential
in it, was a privilege of the Chair, and I enjoyed that, and I will miss
that because it's -- like I said, for the direction of the flow of the
meetings, some of that takes place.
It was -- it was nice to allow all of the others to speak before me,
if I chose to, to hear their point of view, to hear their -- and not have
to worry about getting my input in, because as the Chair, you can
kind of speak when you want to speak. And I enjoyed listening first
and speaking last, and sometimes that worked, and sometimes it
didn't. Sometimes I'd get a little red in the face, but that's not
because I was mad. It's just because I'm red in the face.
Mainly -- mainly just getting to be me, not concerned about
messing up. You know, not trying to perform up here. There's no
performance. I didn't feel like there was. It was just -- you know, if
I messed up, I messed up. And I messed up a lot. Commissioner
McDaniel would always bring it up, and I appreciated that; kind of
bring me right back in.
You know, you've got to stay ahead of the airplane if you're
January 14, 2025
Page 27
going to be a good pilot, and as Chair, you've really got to stay ahead
of the meeting in your mind for the things that are coming up, and I
enjoyed that, but I'm also not going to miss that.
Just being effective. Making a difference. Trying to do a good
job. My colleagues were gracious. They were a pleasure to work
with. They were easy to agree with, easy to debate with, easy to
compromise with, and even easier to laugh with.
And with that, I'll be quiet.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right.
Mr. Chairman, I do have a few comments, and I was going to
read this plaque. But let me go ahead and read the plaque, and then
I've got a few comments I'd like to make about your service, and then
everybody on the Board will have an opportunity to chime in.
But this is a plaque from Collier County presented to Chris Hall,
Collier County Commissioner District 2, in grateful appreciation for
outstanding leadership as Chairman of the Board for 2024 presented
by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners January 14th,
2025.
And this talks about outstanding leadership, and I will tell you
that you've exercised that in the last year, and actually in the last two
years -- your goal was to get our budget under control. That was
your priority, I believe, as stated by you -- and you've done that.
You've been able to bring to Collier County ResourceX to help us
streamline our budgeting process. We have reduced the millage rate
with your leadership, and with Commissioner McDaniel's leadership
as well, over the last couple years.
And so I think you've accomplished a tremendous amount.
Looking forward to what your priorities are going to be in the next
two years. Hopefully it won't be continuing to cut the budget so
much, but I think you've already accomplished that. But thank you
for your service as well.
January 14, 2025
Page 28
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you.
I just have to say that, you know, me and Commissioner Hall
kind of developed the relationship because we were both running for
office at the same time. It was quite the adventure. I didn't know
what -- you know, the amount of work and the amount of stress and
amount of time that you have to put in, you know, being a County
Commissioner. And it was kind of eye-opening.
And then knowing and -- you know, we kind of concreted in
time our friendship while running for office and speaking at the same
events, you know, and seeing that we had kind of the same mindset
and strong conservative values. And then we found out that the way
the Chairman works and the way the commissioners have been
handling it up here, it goes by the district number. And we got in the
office, and like Commissioner LoCastro -- LoCastro was the Chair,
and then I'm like, whoop, Chris, you're next. And I'm thinking I
don't know if I could have done it. But you definitely impressed me,
my friend, and you did a great job, and, you know, I thank you for
your leadership this past year.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And look forward to serving a
couple more years with you up here.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you, Commissioner.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I'm going to be very,
very brief. You mentioned earlier when you're talking about being
Chair that you weren't anything special, and I would say you are
special, sir. You've done an amazing job. You've -- as my
colleagues have already expressed, you've demonstrated great
leadership, and I want to say it's an honor to have served with you.
January 14, 2025
Page 29
CHAIRMAN HALL: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I don't have anything good to
say. I'll pass.
CHAIRMAN HALL: It's a first.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No. You know what I'll
say -- you know what I'll say. In all honesty, think about the past
few years in our country and our nation, really across the world, you
know, some of the turmoil, the unprofessionalism of -- and I'm not
being partisan here, just how elected officials deal with each other,
things people say in the press, things that citizens say in social media,
this, that, or the other. You know, to me, especially being a military
officer who was really proud to serve my country, and now I'm proud
to serve my county.
At times it's been more disappointing watching what's going on
in our country and in our world, but in our little microcosm here of
Collier County, even when we agree to disagree, even when the
vote's 3-2, 4-1, 5-0, or what have you, it's always professional, you
know, in here, and I really appreciate that. And I think -- I think
that's really missed out in the -- out in the public. It's easy to throw
stones from the sidelines and, you know, say we're all stupid, and
we're doing a knee-jerk, and we're killing panthers, and we don't care
about the environment, and we're making decisions in 30 seconds.
Do you know the amount of hours that these gentlemen spend,
up here, with county staff behind the scenes? You know, this stuff
doesn't happen in a vacuum. And it's unfortunate that a lot of that is
lost, you know, at times in the press and social media and this and
that.
So I just want to say that I've been so impressed with the five
teammates -- the four teammates that, you know, I've gotten a chance
to serve with up here. I don't think it's always been, you know, this
January 14, 2025
Page 30
polished and professional. Really, Commissioner Saunders and
Commissioner McDaniel would be able to compare previous teams.
And not to throw anybody else under the bus, but we have five
people here that really care.
I've said before sometimes, you know, we make a vote and it's
the -- it's the thing we hate the least. But nobody -- nobody -- like
Commissioner Hall, you know, echoed -- and I've said this
before -- none of us wake up and -- figuring out how to destroy the
county.
And also our job is to separate rumor from fact. A lot of times
we get -- you know, especially when you're the Chair, you get
e-mails from people that say, you know, we elected you, and you
have to do the will of the people. You know, the one thing I've
learned in this job is our job's not to get elected and then be a puppet
of the people and take a poll every time we vote on something. Our
job is to serve with integrity, follow the law, and make the best
decisions possible, and have people elect us because they believe in
our experience, our qualifications, our integrity. And it doesn't mean
they're going to agree with every vote that we make. But we're not
up here to just say, okay, "How do you want us to vote on this one?"
And at times sometimes, you know, it's a tough pill to swallow
because, you know, you have citizens that maybe aren't following the
details the way we are, but they have a very passionate view about
something, and they don't waste time expressing it.
But, you know, just having said that, you know, Commissioner
Hall, I think -- you know, I don't think. I know. You know, you've
just done a great job here.
And as Commissioner Kowal said -- and I would say the same
thing -- being newly elected and then all of a sudden you get the
gavel, you know, that's -- that's a big responsibility. But I think you,
you know, definitely led us well.
January 14, 2025
Page 31
And we all get a chance to do this. It's not -- you know,
like -- Commissioner Hall said it perfectly. It's not that any of us are
something special when we got a chance. It's not -- it's not like in
D.C. where they're all electing the Speaker of the House. We all get
our chance to serve, and then you get a different inside perspective
not only running the meetings but spending time with the staff.
And, you know, regardless what the uninformed press say or
what social media says when people are venting from their couches,
I'm proud to serve with these four gentlemen. I'm proud at the
professional conversations we've had even when we've agreed to
disagree.
And we've done really, really great things for the county, and
we've done things that have been difficult decisions, but you have
to -- you know, sometimes a decision that not everyone agrees with is
better than no decision, and at times the can gets kicked enough in
this country.
So I just want to say I'm looking forward to the next four years,
the next two years with Commissioner Kowal and Commissioner
Hall, and then, depending what they decide to do -- and I'm proud to
be part of the five up here, and how we've conducted business up
here, I think, is something that has maybe been lost but not on the
five of us. So thank you very much.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And according to our
instructions, we need a motion to appoint the Chair and the Vice
Chair.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I would be honored, sir. I
would like to make a motion to nominate you as our Chair and
Commissioner Kowal as our Vice Chair for the upcoming year.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'd like to delay that for two
weeks.
January 14, 2025
Page 32
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm fine with that, too.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'm okay with that as well.
CHAIRMAN HALL: All right. All in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HALL: Opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: None.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Now I want to make the
presentation of the plaque to you down below for some photographs.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: When I left the chair, I got a
Waterford crystal vase and a Rolex watch. I don't know. It must be
budget cutbacks or something.
CHAIRMAN HALL: ResourceX.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN HALL: Now it is my honor and privilege and
entitlement to pass the gavel to Commissioner Saunders.
(Applause.)
(Commissioner Hall is absent from the meeting until further
noted when he will appear remotely.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: See that, peaceful transfer of
power. It's possible. It's possible, people. See? Look at that,
only in Collier County, right? Somebody make note of that. Get
that to the press, you know.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: There's a whole roomful of
people there in the back. They might be ready to go. Storming
the --
January 14, 2025
Page 33
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Now here come a
hundred -- a hundred executive orders from Commissioner Saunders.
Item #2C
RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD AUTHORIZE THE
NEW CHAIR FOR BOTH THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AND THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND TO EXECUTE ALL
DOCUMENTS APPROVED AT BOTH THIS MEETING AND
THOSE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED BUT ARE PENDING SIGNATURE - MOTION TO
APPOINT BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED (COMMISSIONER
HALL ABSENT)
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioner Saunders, that brings us to
Item 2B is a recommendation that the Board authorize the new Chair
for both the Board of County Commissioners and the Community
Redevelopment Agency and to execute all documents approved at
both this meeting and those documents which were previously
approved but are pending signature.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We need a motion?
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion for that.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second.
All in favor, signify by saying eye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
January 14, 2025
Page 34
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
Item #3A1
AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS – EMPLOYEE – 20 YEAR
ATTENDEES – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 3,
awards and recognitions. We do have several today. Let's start
with our 20-year attendees.
The first is Zamira Del Toro, Engineering and Project
Management, 20 years. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Paul Ducca, Information Technology, 20
years. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: My e-mail crashed this
morning. No, I'm just kidding.
MR. DUCCA: I'll help him out.
(Applause.)
Item #3A2
AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS – EMPLOYEE – 25 YEAR
ATTENDEES – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Moving along to 25-year attendees. First
January 14, 2025
Page 35
we have Tony Camps, Emergency Medical Services.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Alan Drescher, Emergency Medical
Services, 25 years. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You guys knew each other in
elementary school.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, pretty much. We rode
horse and buggies.
(Applause.)
MR. DRESCHER: Great seeing you all.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Jennifer Guida, Museums, 25 years.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Beth Yang, Operations and Regulatory
Management, 25 years. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
Item #3A3
AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS – EMPLOYEE – 30 YEAR
ATTENDEES – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Moving on to 30 years. Stephen
Chandler, Engineering and Project Management. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. PATTERSON: Don't run away. Wait, wait, wait. Wait
right there. Public Utilities, 30 years, come on up. Matt, I see you
there. Dr. George.
January 14, 2025
Page 36
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Dr. George, come on, please.
(Applause.)
Item #3A5
AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS – EMPLOYEE – 40 YEAR
ATTENDEES – PRESENTED
MS. PATTERSON: Last and definitely not least -- and we
hardly ever see these -- we have a 40-year attendee. So everybody
that's here, get ready to come up after we get Jeanine up here.
Jeanine McPherson, Parks and Rec. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Forty, 40, 40.
MS. McPHERSON: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How about that?
MS. McPHERSON: Hey, imagine that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I come give you a hug?
MS. McPHERSON: Yes, you betcha.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We'll do our picture, and then
I'll come give you a hug, because all those people --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You went to -- you guys went
to elementary school together?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, pretty much. I helped
raise her kid.
MS. PATTERSON: All right. Come on up.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Jeanine's boy and I grew up
together in Boy Scouts.
MS. McPHERSON: Yes, they did. Yes, they did.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: If any of her friends want to
come to the podium and say anything positive or negative, we're wide
January 14, 2025
Page 37
open to it.
MS. McPHERSON: Check's in the mail. Check's in the mail.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: While they're taking their seats,
one of the things that makes working in Collier County just really
wonderful is we've got a great staff from the top-level management
all the way down to folks that are providing services on the ground.
So, thank you for all of those folks that were recognized this morning
for many, many years of service.
Item #4A
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 20, 2025, AS A
DAY TO REMEMBER AND CELEBRATE REV. DR. MARTIN
LUTHER KING JR.’S DREAM. ACCEPTED BY DIANN KEEYS,
PARADE CHAIR – MOTION TO ADOPT BY COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL –
ADOPTED (COMMISSIONER HALL ABSENT)
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 4,
proclamations.
Item 4A is a proclamation designating January 2025 as a day to
tomorrow and celebrate Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s,
dream. To be accepted by Diane Keeys, parade chair.
Congratulations.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Patterson, can you put this on
the overhead.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you for all you do.
(Applause.)
MR. KEEYS: I promise not to be long.
January 14, 2025
Page 38
Mr. Chair, County Commissioners, and staff, it's good to be
back with you here again. I want to say -- start off first by thanking
you, number one, for your sponsorship -- we don't take it lightly, the
City of Naples and Collier County Government. So we really, really
appreciate it -- in support of the 28th annual Reverend Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr., parade and celebration, which will take place
Monday, January the 20th, and it will start off on Ninth Avenue
South and Third Street South and march through downtown. That
will begin at 11 a.m.
I want to personally invite the County Commissioners out and, if
at all, you can make it. And, of course, we'd like to personally invite
Ms. Amy Patterson out as well.
So, please, before I close, I do want to say, on behalf of the
outgoing Chair, that he has, from the public's point of view, done a
fantastic job, and so we want to thank the outgoing chairman.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 17, 2025, AS REV.
DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BREAKFAST DAY.
ACCEPTED BY BISHOP RIC L. NEAL AND WYNN WATKINS -
MOTION TO ADOPT BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL – ADOPTED
(COMMISSIONER HALL ABSENT)
MS. PATTERSON: Item 4B is a proclamation designating
January 17th, 2025, as Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Prayer
Breakfast Day. To be accepted by Wynn Watkins and distinguished
guests. Congratulations.
January 14, 2025
Page 39
(Applause.)
MR. WATKINS: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good morning.
MR. WATKINS: No one asked my opinion, but I'm going to
give it. We have one of the finest group of commissioners
anywhere.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: You know, that's one thing that I
think all five -- all four of us here, but I think that's one thing all five
of us would agree with.
MR. WATKINS: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So thank you.
MR. WATKINS: That's right. I appreciate the work that
you've done so much for this community, and I thank you for the
interaction that you do with your constituents.
But on behalf of the Trinity Life Foundation and you
acknowledging us on this special day, we want to remind everyone of
the purpose of the Dr. King celebration is that we celebrate a great
man who made a contribution to our country, but the funds from the
prayer breakfast go to serve the community of Collier County. We
have touched the lives of 170 youth who come out of the system from
juvenile justice. Someone has to care. We care. We thank you for
caring.
And so we appreciate so much the opportunity to give back to
these young people who need a second chance at no cost to them or
their parents. So it's a labor of love. We're renewing their identity,
motivating them, helping them to understand what it means to be
good citizens of the county which we all live.
So thank you so very much for this opportunity.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
January 14, 2025
Page 40
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JANUARY 2025 AS HUMAS
TRAFFICKING PREVENTION MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY.
ACCEPTED BY LINDA OBERHAUS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER OF THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMAN &
CHILDREN - MOTION TO ADOPT BY COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL –
ADOPTED (COMMISSIONER HALL ABSENT)
MS. PATTERSON: Item 4C is a proclamation designating
January 2025 as Human Trafficking Prevention Month in Collier
County. To be accepted by Linda Oberhaus, chief executive officer
of the Shelter for Abused Women and Children. Congratulations.
(Applause.)
MS. OBERHAUS: Okay. Good morning. Can you hear me
okay?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes.
MS. OBERHAUS: Great. For the record, I'm Linda
Oberhaus. I'm the CEO at the Shelter for Abused Women and
Children.
And I'd like to thank our new chair, Commissioner Saunders,
and our County Commissioners for acknowledging January as
national Human Trafficking Awareness Month.
As many of you know, human trafficking is a crime that happens
in every community across the country. The large majority of
victims are sold online and no longer sold on the streets.
According to the National Human Trafficking Hotline, Florida
ranks third in the nation for the number of reported human trafficking
cases, and Naples and Fort Myers ranks third highest for the number
of cases in Florida.
January 14, 2025
Page 41
Here locally, the shelter is partnering with the school district to
educate our children to prevent them from becoming a statistic and
partnering with the Sheriff's Office and the State Attorney's Office on
a holistic approach to end sex trafficking locally. This approach,
called the ISP model -- Identifies, support, and Prosecute -- involves
the Sheriff's Office identifying the victims and traffickers, the shelter
supporting those victims identified, and the State Attorney's Office
prosecuting the buyers and sellers of sex trafficking victims in our
community.
It's only through awareness and action that we will be successful
in keeping members of our community safe.
So I want to thank you again for helping us raise awareness
about human trafficking within -- here in Collier County. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Patterson, do we -- have we
recognized the Artist of the Month yet?
MS. PATTERSON: No. I'm going to do that next.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. It wasn't on the printed
agenda, so I wanted to make sure we didn't miss that.
MS. PATTERSON: I have it. If we could get a motion to
accept the proclamations, please.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and second.
Any objection?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Show that adopted unanimously.
Item #5A
January 14, 2025
Page 42
ARTIST OF THE MONTH – HILDA CHAMPION
MS. PATTERSON: The Artist of the Month. So let me turn
your attention to the back of the room for our Artist of the Month for
January. The January Artist of the Month is Hilda Champion, a
German-American artist living in Collier County since 2001. By
integrating elements of landscape, architecture, and abstraction, her
work transcends conventional photography by offering viewers a
transformative experience that bridges the tangible and the surreal.
Through her lens, familiar scenes are reimagined as complex
tapestries of texture, light, and color.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: How about that?
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
MS. PATTERSON: With that, we are to Item 7, which is
public comments on general topics not on the current or future
agenda.
MR. MILLER: We have one registered speaker, Bill
Schermerhorn.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning.
MR. SCHERMERHORN: Oh, good morning. My name is
Bill Schermerhorn. I'm a resident of Florida and a property owner of
Collier County for over 20 years.
I wish Commissioner Hall was here to hear this. I, too, was
appointed as a chair of a very important United States commission to
look into beach umbrella safety in 2021. I understand prophetically,
January 14, 2025
Page 43
for three years being the chair of that very important committee,
Consumer Product Safety Commission committee, the trials and
tribulations of setting agendas and navigating everything that a chair
has to navigate.
In -- 16 years ago, my wife and I were sitting on a beach and
witnessed a horrendous accident where a flyaway beach umbrella hit
a seven-year-old girl, cutting her face from her forehead to her chin
and knocking her teeth out. It was -- it was an unbelievable scene.
And as the day progressed, things settled down. I noticed people
were still wrestling with their beach umbrellas. And I said,
"Somebody needs to do something about this."
For the last 16 years, I have been the lead advocate for beach
umbrella safety in this country. In 2021, at the result of continuing
accidents that occur with regards to beach umbrellas, the United
States Senate, several concerned coastal senators on coastal states
commissioned the Consumer Product Safety Commission, along with
ASTM, to go ahead and form a committee to look into beach
umbrella safety.
I was asked to join this committee and, because of my advocacy
work over the last 16 years, I was voted in as the chair of this
committee. For three years I authorized the Consumer Product
Safety engineers that sat on this committee to go ahead and acquire
beach products, beach umbrellas, beach umbrella safety anchors.
They performed all the field testing, wind tunnel testing, lab testing.
And after three years, after rigorous debate, we finally passed
the first United States beach umbrella safety standard. It's a legacy
that I'm very proud of because I don't think anybody should have to
see what we saw 16 years ago.
Unfortunately, during the testing procedures, the Consumer
Product Safety Commission engineers discovered some very, very
serious flaws and some guidance that they had put forth years and
January 14, 2025
Page 44
years ago. I'll have this for you-all to look at in the future. But if I
may have just one or two more minutes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes. Why don't we -- if you
want, we can put that on the overhead so the audience can see what
you're talking about.
MR. SCHERMERHORN: Sure.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Patterson, can you put that on
there.
MR. SCHERMERHORN: What you're going to see is a
guidance sheet that was set forth years ago by the Consumer Product
Safety Commission, that it's been adhered to by commercial entities,
resorts, beach umbrella rental companies, and it simply -- it
simply -- it's undocumented, basically, as I found out through our
work on our commission -- on our committee. To set up a beach
umbrella properly, it says, "Spike the umbrella into the beach, rock it
back and forth to a depth of two feet, and tilt into the wind." This
exact procedure has caused thousands and thousands of documented
injuries. As the Consumer Product Safety Commission has actually
reported, there's over 3,000 that occur every single year in this
country.
This actual procedure right here is responsible for many serious
injuries and also responsible for the death of Lottie Belk and Tammy
Perreault in 2021.
When the engineers actually tested this procedure and this
guidance sheet, they were appalled at how dangerous this was. And
they said this should never be done again.
Last year, the very first F -- ASTM F3681-24 beach umbrella
safety standard passed. Municipalities throughout this country are
finalizing plans on how to implement the safety standard. The safety
standard is very simple. It says that an umbrella must remain secure
in winds up to 30 miles an hour. It must have 75 pounds of
January 14, 2025
Page 45
resistance attached to the bottom of the pole. There's two warning
labels that also -- or two labels that have been designed and crafted
by senior engineers to the Consumer Product Safety Commission that
have done this for decades. And basically it says that a beach
umbrella, in order to be compliant, it must have a compliant label.
The label sticker is within the standard. Also, the warning
label -- and I will give this one last -- the warning label,
unfortunately, was debated for over eight months during our
reconciliation and voting process.
Retailers, municipality leaders, resorts, they all said, "This
warning label that is to be posted at access points on beaches and also
on products themselves says it's too graphic. It's going to scare
people," because it's a pictorial showing actually happens with beach
umbrellas. This -- this particular warning label was worked on by a
senior representative from the Consumer Product Safety Commission
that spent 30 years coming up with warning labels for products
ranging from children's products to every type of product,
industrial/commercial products, you name it. She stood steadfast on
all the opposition and said, "This needs to be presented this way
because people are not paying attention to this very serious problem."
The very last one I've got right here, if I may -- and I was
not -- it's interesting. This picture -- these are just some very,
very -- a small snippet of products that are available commercially. I
wasn't allowed to bring some of these samples in here because these
are deemed as weapons, but yet we allow these to be on our beaches.
These products are made in China. They're made overseas with very
little disregard [sic] to functionality and to safety of U.S. citizens.
As we all go to the beach, I would find -- I would -- I venture to
say there's probably not a single person in this room that uses a beach
umbrella, if they use a beach umbrella, that's manufactured in this
country. They're overstated; they're overadvertised. These products
January 14, 2025
Page 46
are advertised that they'll hold an umbrella in a 50-mile-an-hour
wind. This is putting a javelin on the end of a pole with a sail on it,
and it needs to stop.
So I have other meetings with commissioners tomorrow and
with Naples. We have representatives all through the country that
are bringing this attention to municipalities and resorts and beach
umbrella rental companies throughout the entire country.
The U.S. Senate is currently working on greater legislation, and
the Consumer Product Safety Commission is actually considering
creating a rule to make this a firm regulation to prevent these
products from being imported to this country.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you very much. I really
appreciate you bringing this to our attention. Our beaches are
getting very crowded as the population grows and the popularity of
our area continues to grow.
And so I remember many, many years ago the County
Commission took some action to try to make people on the beaches a
little bit safer. Back in those days you had small -- those little
airplanes with -- that basically had the motorcycle engine on them
that you could fly without any kind of a license, and you had people
literally landing those on the beach. And the County Commission
back in those days prohibited that type of activity. And then we got
into issues dealing with boating traffic and how close you can come
to the beach with a -- with your motorboat.
So this is the type of thing we periodically should take a look at.
Perhaps you could leave your contact information with our staff.
And I understand you're -- from what you said, you're going to be
talking to some other commissioners, so let's -- let's take a look at
making sure that our beaches are safe.
MR. SCHERMERHORN: Thank you very much for your time
and consideration.
January 14, 2025
Page 47
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you for that.
MR. SCHERMERHORN: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: That was our only registered speaker for Item
7.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Ms. Patterson, do you
want to move on to the advertised public hearings?
Item #9A
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH PROVISIONS FOR
PERMANENT MOBILE FOOD DISPENSING VEHICLES. (FIRST
OF TWO HEARINGS) - MOTION TO APPROVE W/CHANGES
FOR SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED (COMMISSIONER
HALL ABSENT)
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. That brings us to Item 9A.
This is a recommendation to adopt an ordinance amending the Collier
County Land Development Code to establish provisions for
permanent mobile food dispensing vehicles. This is the first of two
hearings. And Mr. Mike Bosi, your director of Planning and Zoning,
is here to -- I always get your title wrong -- is here to present.
MR. BOSI: Good morning, Mike Bosi, Zoning -- Planning and
Zoning director, and we are here to talk about mobile food dispensing
vehicles, or food trucks.
And just to remind the Board, last February the 27th, the Board
of County Commissioners provided oversight -- provided directions
to staff to bring back an LDC amendment to bring back a process for
all food trucks requiring a conditional-use hearing in front of the
January 14, 2025
Page 48
HEX. They wanted better control of the location and the activities
around the food trucks, and that was the overriding -- arching
direction.
Also to allow for the -- you know, the temporary-use permits
that we allow for with the 14 days and extension up to 28 calendar
days for temporary events. Also to address a letter that was received
from the development community regarding compatibility analysis,
physical location of generators, proximity to residential dwelling
units, aesthetics related to multiple food trucks as well as the review
of the temporary-use process.
Address food trucks parking outside of a restaurant
establishment and its placement of commercially zoned vacant lots,
clarify when food trucks are an accessory use to a restaurant
establishment that permits food trucks, as well as the duration of
when they can operate, and to clarify how to control food trucks with
amplified sounds related to -- for when it's only a one night type of an
event.
What we're proposing today is establishment of a new section,
5.05.16, which is within your packet, for the permanent mobile food
dispensing vehicles or a food truck park, add definitions for a food
truck, mobile food dispensing vehicles, and permanent mobile food
dispensing vehicle.
If a mobile food dispensing vehicle is going to be permanently
placed, a conditional use or a Site Development Plan approval will be
required. It exempts food trucks from operating in connection with a
temporary-use permit or a temporary event, and establishes the
zoning districts and the requirement of standards for all permanent
mobile food dispensing vehicles.
As we're proposing today, as you can see, the approval process
and then the districts. By right, without alcohol sales and amplified
sound and outdoor entertainment, they would be a permitted use
January 14, 2025
Page 49
within the industrial, the public, and a PUD if it's listed as a permitted
uses within that -- within that PUD.
By conditional use, it would be with or without alcohol sales and
amplified sound and outdoor entertainment if it's in the C-3, a C-4, or
C-5 or a building permit, by conditional use, when you have alcohol
sales as well as amplified sound and outdoor entertainment within
your C-3, C-4, C-5 building -- or business park, public and industrial
zoning districts, and by conditional use as an accessory use to a
regional park.
That proposal was somewhat different than the direction that the
Board of County Commissioners provided to us. The direction you
provided last February is everything to be a conditional use. But in
our conversations with the County Attorney's, and the way that the
statutes provide for regulations related to jurisdictions for food
trucks, it was -- it was opined that we should permit these as a
permitted use in at least one zoning district, and we had chose the
industrial and the public use.
In our conversations, I know with Commissioner McDaniel
yesterday, he had taken objection to that, and I know he wanted to
have a discussion about -- that the -- modifying the proposed
regulations to require a conditional use in all zoning districts.
I had some brief conversation with the County Attorney's Office
related to that, so I think this would probably be an appropriate time
to pause within the presentation, have Commissioner McDaniel, I
think, reiterate the -- our conversation yesterday, and staff is prepared
to take whatever direction the Board would like to take in terms of
the proposals related to the food trucks.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Thank you, Chair.
I was fairly clear when we sent direction back to staff before. I
haven't, I have to admit, reviewed the statute that the County
January 14, 2025
Page 50
Attorney has -- or his office has opined on with regard to the
necessity for an allowance somewhere. I find it rather unique that
we would be overrided at a local level for trying to maintain some
kind of control over these facilities.
And so it would be my request that we move this forward, and
as was stipulated before, do it -- all of them by a conditional use.
I certainly have an enormous amount of respect for our County
Attorney and the opinions that come from our County Attorney's
Office, but I had a little incident happen a couple of days ago. There
was a nice lady that traveled in from Washington, D.C., and she was
a lawyer, a constitutional lawyer. And I asked her -- I said, "You put
10 lawyers in a room, and how many opinions are you going to get?"
And she said, "Well, at least 20."
And so all things aside, it would be my ask that we do, in fact,
put that in -- put all of them in as a conditional use. Each one of
these uses is such an individual circumstance based upon size, shape,
color, noise generation, what they do, what they don't do. I know
staff has tried to abide by that where the more intense uses, in fact,
are in the industrial public-use PUDs, so on and so forth, but they
need to be addressed individually.
There are people that live in proximity to industrial and public
use and PUDs and so ons and so forth that need to be able to have a
voice. And especially because of the comparable-use clause within
our LDC, it allows for staff -- somebody in staff to say, "Yeah, you're
okay because you're similar."
And so it would be -- it would be my vote that we not allow the
"by right" at all.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No one else is lit up to comment at
this point.
Mr. Klatzkow, do you have any advice for us here?
MR. KLATZKOW: I don't think that this is an issue, if you
January 14, 2025
Page 51
want to make everything conditional use. Conditional uses are
permitted uses, and this will just protect the surrounding
communities.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I certainly have no objection to
that process.
Any other commissioner?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: With that, I'll make a motion
for approval with that adjustment for the second reading.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second.
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Before we get to a vote, let's go to
registered speakers, unless you have some additional information,
Mr. Bosi.
MR. BOSI: Just to clarify that the 28 days for temporary-use
permits on -- as temporary, those are outside of the direction from the
conditional-use process, and that still will remain associated with
temporary -- temporary uses.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I didn't need to expand.
That was already part of it, but you're --
MR. BOSI: Yes.
MR. MILLER: We have no registered speakers for this item.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have no registered
speakers. We'll close the public hearing. Any discussion from the
Board?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If not, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
January 14, 2025
Page 52
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
Thank you, Mr. Bosi.
MR. BOSI: Thank you.
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, we are six minutes from a court
reporter break. Rather than starting our next land use, would you
like to take the court reporter break now and then come back?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So we'll come back at
20 minutes to 11; is that satisfactory?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He's giving us an extra four
minutes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We're in recess until 20 minutes to
11.
(A brief recess was had from 10:25 a.m. to 10:39 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ladies and gentlemen, we're going
to begin. If you'll take your seats, please.
We're going to go a little out of order. We have an 11 o'clock
time-certain with the David Lawrence Center, so we're going to take
up items on the agenda out of order until we get to 11 o'clock, and
then we'll take up David Lawrence Center and the other public
hearings right after that.
Ms. Patterson.
Item #10A
DISCUSS A RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF
January 14, 2025
Page 53
DIRECTORS OF AVE MARIA CIVIC ASSOCIATION OPPOSING
CERTAIN PROPOSED RELOCATION OPTIONS FOR THE
NAPLES AIRPORT NEAR THE AVE MARIA COMMUNITY -
MOTION TO ACCEPT BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KOWAL – ACCEPTED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, let's go to Item 10A.
And with this one, just for your information, we're also going to pull
up one of -- the staff project update relative to the Naples Airport.
So Item 10A is a recommendation to discuss a resolution adopted by
the board of directors of Ave Maria Civic Association opposing
certain proposed relocation options for the Naples Airport near the
Ave Maria community. And this is brought to the agenda by
Commissioner McDaniel.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you. Thank you,
Mr. Chair.
I don't really need to expend an enormous amount of time on
this. If you wish, I can read this resolution into the record. I don't
think that -- what?
MR. MILLER: I'm just -- we didn't do the motion for
Commissioner Hall to participate remotely --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, I'm sorry.
MR. MILLER: -- and in case he wants to give comment here, I
think we should stop and do that. My apologies.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah, let's do that. I apologize.
I meant to do that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's his first day.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall, are you
online?
(No response.)
January 14, 2025
Page 54
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make a motion to allow
him --
(Commissioner Hall is now attending the meeting virtually.)
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- to be online. He's there.
How's that?
MR. MILLER: He's there.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, he's there.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion. Is
there a second?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and second.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
Welcome back, Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you. Thanks for allowing
this.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No doubt, my friend. Glad
to have you back.
And so just to reiterate what I was saying, we've all read the
resolution. It's a matter of record. I don't think we need to expend
the time. Do we have any public speakers on this issue, on this item,
Troy?
MR. MILLER: This is 10A, correct?
January 14, 2025
Page 55
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That is correct.
MR. MILLER: No, I have no registered speakers for this item.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So with that, I'm going to
make a motion. The long and the short of it is is the newly created
civic association for Ave Maria's expressed dissatisfaction with the
options and some of the things that came forth from the consultants
from the Naples Airport Authority for the relocation of that airport,
and I'll just make a motion for acceptance of this.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
a second. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, all in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
Item #15C
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, along with this, as
Item 15C, we did receive a letter from the Naples Airport Authority
requesting staff and Board of County Commissioner assistance with
the relocation study. I'll put it on the visualizer.
January 14, 2025
Page 56
I believe this letter also went to each of you; however, at a past
board meeting, you-all had designated Commissioner Kowal as your
representative for communications with the city and the airport
authority.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: One second, Ms. Amy. Can
you fix the focus? Because my eyes are really good, and this is
blurry. There we go.
And remind Commissioner Hall to put it on mute while he's not
speaking so that we don't hear Mrs. Hall telling him what to do.
MS. PATTERSON: Essentially, the airport authority is asking
for expertise and collaboration from county staff and the Board of
County Commissioners and are respectfully requesting the county's
assistance with the Naples Airport Authority preparation of the site
selection study.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: What would that entail, just
curiosity, in terms of --
MS. PATTERSON: I'm assuming it's going to include a lot of
help from our Growth Management folks relative to environmental
and zoning. So they have some bullet points. Detailed evaluation
of various criteria for each of the four identified sites resulting in a
ranking and recommendation of the preferred site. Financial
analysis to determine whether the construction and operation of a
new airport's feasible, including project funding scenarios; that
wouldn't be us. Identification of alternatives for potential
governance models; also not us. Public outreach; not us.
So my expectation is that the lion's share of this would fall to
our regular regulatory folks relative to land use and other
requirements, because all of the sites, obviously, are outside of the
city, all within the unincorporated county.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, you're
lit up as --
January 14, 2025
Page 57
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I would like to make a
recommendation that we send them a polite "thank you, but no."
We've already -- we've already rendered an opinion on this. They
can certainly ask. We've already designated Commissioner Kowal
as our liaison as spokesperson for us, and I have no interest in
devoting time and energy and expense on --
All of these things that they're -- and to reiterate -- I don't mean
to interrupt, Mr. Chair. But to reiterate, all these things are asking
for -- if they, in fact, contract to buy a piece of property, they have to
come back and talk to us anyway. They have to hire their own
consultants to do their own environmental and their own studies as to
the efficacy of what it is that they're proposing. So I have no interest
in jumping in on the front end, especially when we've already
designated Commissioner Kowal to liaison on our behalf.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
Yes, you guys know in the past you kind of gave me the blessing
to carry our word on. And here, in the Sunshine in a full meeting
during the commissioner comments, I had brought this subject up to
the five -- the four other commissioners, and it was pretty -- a
consensus that no one here was interested in entertaining.
And in the study itself, I think in Phase 2 or Phase 3, even if
they acquired a piece of property, they have to come to us, and we'd
have to do the whole, you know, Land Development Code and
everything and convert the -- whatever properties would end up being
in their possession.
In reality, it wouldn't make a difference anyways because we'd
have -- it would be in the county, and it would probably end up being
the county's airport at the end of the day.
But I went to the two meetings, both NAA meetings, the Naples
Airport Authority meeting, and I expressed and I advised them of our
January 14, 2025
Page 58
position that we didn't want to entertain any more moving forward
with any portion of the study that brings us on board at this time.
So I don't know -- this letter came out after the fact. I don't
know if they didn't take me seriously, but I did express your guys'
feelings and what you felt and where we -- where our position was,
so...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you need a motion on
this?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I was just going to
echo -- ditto everything that Commissioner McDaniel said. My
short answer would be to the city and the folks that are taking a look
at the airport, if you have concerns where the airport is now, do your
own homework, pay for your own studies, hire your own experts.
Don't lean on the county. We're not partnering on this.
The suggestions of sites that have been made have not come
from the county. So they might be great things to say out loud in
a -- in a report, but it's nothing that the county has led.
So I maintain the same position that we've had. Not that we
don't care. We know that this is a hot topic, but it's more of a hot
topic for the City of Naples. And, you know, I wait for them to
come back to Commissioner Kowal with some homework
assignments, you know, for us or some -- some solutions or, you
know, some proposals or whatnot. But to share resources and use
county resources and task our county staff to do the heavy lifting for
them, when it's something that I don't think any or many of us
support doing a deep dive into.
I'm really good with the kind, proper, professional letter saying,
you know, "We'll continue to monitor your conversations, and our
January 14, 2025
Page 59
representative is Commissioner Kowal, and" -- but as far as tapping
into our staff and having them do some of the homework assignments
to march down this path I think would not be proper. So I wouldn't
support that at all. I'm sure they would love it, but it's not something
that I think we should be diving into.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I have Commissioner Hall online.
Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes. Thank you, Chairman.
I'm just going to echo the sentiments. I have no interest at all in
moving forward for the city in this. I think this is the trivial few
trying to represent the vital many, and until they get their stuff
figured out, I have zero interest in being a part of it, and
Commissioner LoCastro said it well.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. I'll -- if you want, I'll go
to their next meeting again, and I'll put -- you know, hammer it across
that, you know, we're still in the same position we were the last time.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah, we don't need a motion. I
think everybody has spoken as to what our position is. We've done
that before.
So, Commissioner Kowal, if you can let this airport authority
know what our feelings are in terms of moving forward.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: All right. I will.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Thank you.
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, I'd recommend we go to
Item 11B.
Troy, we have public speakers on 11B?
MR. MILLER: Eleven? Yes, ma'am.
Item #11B
January 14, 2025
Page 60
AN UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF BOARD-DIRECTED
NEGOTIATIONS WITH GARGIULO EDUCATION CENTER,
INC., FOR THE PURCHASE OF COLLIER COUNTY-OWNED
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16140 AND 16144 PERFORMANCE
WAY, NO LONGER NEEDED FOR AN EMS STATION,
INCLUDING INFORMATION ON GARGIULO'S
CONSIDERATION OF GRANT FUNDING FOR PROPERTY
ACQUISITION COSTS AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
CHILD EDUCATION CENTER - MOTION TO ACCEPT UPDATE
BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED; MOTION TO
ADVERTISE THE PROPERTY FOR SALE AND BRING BACK
NEW OFFERS FOR RECONSIDERATION TO THE BOARD AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Okay. Item 11B is a recommendation to
accept an update on the status of board-directed negotiations with
Gargiulo Education Center, Inc., for the purpose [sic] of Collier
County owned property located at 16140 and 16144 Performance
Way no longer needed for an EMS station, including information on
Gargiulo's consideration of grant funding for property acquisition
costs in the construction of a child education center.
Ms. Trinity Scott, your department head for Transportation
Management Services, is here to present.
MS. SCOTT: Good morning, Commissioners.
I just wanted to provide an update. At our last board meeting,
we had indicated that we would try to be back in January and, in full
transparency, wanted to get back in front of the Board to provide a
quick update.
As Ms. Patterson discussed, this is related to two parcels on
January 14, 2025
Page 61
Performance Way previously identified as an emergency -- an EMS
site. And since we will be collocating, the property is no longer
needed.
The Board did put out a request for proposal after we had
received some interest in the property. We came back in November.
Staff's recommendation was to award to Up in Smoke and sell the
property for $1.3 million. The Board gave direction to work on a
negotiated settlement -- or a negotiated agreement with Gargulio that
would protect the public, contain a reverter, and include a purchase
price more in line with our county's financial investment in the
property.
So our status is Gargulio is considering financing through the
county, but it's also pursuing alternative funding sources, including
federal assistance. Its board of directors is expected to decide how
to proceed and notify the county staff of their intentions.
Through this process, we've talked with some of our internal
folks who do grants. If Gargiulo applies for a federal grant award,
they will not be able to enter into a contract with the county until that
funding award is granted, and typically that would happen toward the
end of the year, so October-ish.
So as a result, the Board's consideration of that agreement would
be delayed if they opt to pursue forward with federal funding.
It's also important to note that if Gargiulo moves forward with
the federal grant application and receives funds, the funds could be
restricted to just the childcare center and may not allow for the North
Collier Fire District to be able to utilize the property, as was
originally intended, or at least discussed in the last Board meeting.
Alternatively, at any point until a contract is approved, the
Board may choose to select Up in Smoke as the cash buyer.
We did go back and, you know, check the couch cushions,
figure out exactly how much funding we have spent to date on the
January 14, 2025
Page 62
property. We're at about $1.3 million. The other costs include
design that we had pursued forward for an EMS station as well as our
community association fees. So the total out-of-pocket right now is
approximately $1.3 million.
So our recommendation today is accept the update, and barring
and further direction from the Board, we would be back perhaps later
this year with Gargulio with a contract for that.
I will note that we did notify both the representatives of
Gargiulo as well as Up in Smoke and let them know that this was
going to be an agenda item that we were providing an update to the
Board.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'd be willing to
withhold my comments until we have heard from the public, sir, if
you would --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- if you would be inclined.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I just had a question for
Ms. Scott. Explain to me again, why did the EMS piece fall out?
Did I misunderstand you? Because that was a big piece.
MS. SCOTT: So EMS -- EMS was the original intended user
of these two parcels.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Right.
MS. SCOTT: However, they are collocating with the fire
station that is in -- oh, I just forgot the PUD name.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Just make up one. We don't
know it either.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Tower 5.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's over there.
MS. SCOTT: Down closer to Wiggins Pass.
January 14, 2025
Page 63
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Tower 5.
MS. SCOTT: Cocohatchee.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. I gotcha.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Why don't we go to the registered
speakers, then, and then we'll --
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. We have four registered speakers,
two of whom are ceding time.
Your first speaker is Alan Ritchie. He's being ceded time by
Joseph F. Lachut? Lacute? Am I saying that right, sir? Yeah.
And also by Geoff Wilson. Mr. Wilson, are you -- yes.
So, Mr. Ritchie, you will have nine minutes, and Mr. Ritchie
will be followed by John Gray, if I'm saying this right. Mr. Ritchie.
MR. RITCHIE: Over there?
MR. MILLER: Over here, sir, please. Please begin by stating
your name for the record.
MR. RITCHIE: My name is Alan Ritchie. I'm a volunteer
board member for the Planned Unit Development that is responsible
for all of the property on Performance Way.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the ability to state our position on
this.
First of all, it's not a position that is related to the money issue.
The money issue is clear. It's not a question of "not in my backyard"
issue with the after-school center, learning center.
I'm not a politician, and I'm not a lawyer, so this ought to be
very gentle. The -- I want to emphasize that we have no problem at
all with the education center and what they do, and to provide
valuable services to their students. Their stated major program
activities from their 19 -- or their 2024 report to the state on their
401 -- 501(c)3 status -- and I'll read it. "The only and the primary
activity of the Gargulio Education Center is to provide a safe and
after-school facility that assists the students of the migrant families to
January 14, 2025
Page 64
provide tutoring, homework assistance, enrichment, enhancement of
the public school's curriculum." That's their mission, their sole
mission.
The North Naples Research and Technology Park is a Planned
Unit Development with a board of directors and a whole -- quite a
few covenants, and this is all of the rules and regulations in which
they have to operate. This was approved by the County Commission
back in 2003, and it was Ordinance No. 3-26. June of 2004 is when
it was approved. Essentially, the PUD is a master association for all
of the property owners on Performance Way.
The surplus county property deed recognizes that these
restrictions also would apply to the county in terms of permitted use.
And it is curious to me that they never permitted -- or never would
have permitted an EMS station, which is kind of an interesting
phenomena. They are talking about two lots that is just about an
acre. Assuming this is true, that the deed restrictions on the -- for
the county-owned -- or county-owned property specifically prohibit a
daycare center, the -- it's not a permitted use in the PUD, and
therefore it couldn't be an EMS without a change in the -- or -- and it
couldn't be a daycare center. This needs to be clarified through the
county staff with a review of the deeds and that type of thing.
From a board perspective, our biggest issue with a learning
center in -- on Performance Way is the safety issue of the children.
There's no reason for most of you to ever go up by Performance Way
because it's right on the edge of the county line, the Lee County line
on Old 41. Old 41, if -- I think the commissioners have been
involved over the last few years with trying to correct the traffic
problem on Old 41, and your work is cut out for you for trying to get
the state, Lee County, and Collier County to all agree on how to deal
with this.
Old 41 is a safety disaster in many ways. Basically, having
January 14, 2025
Page 65
most of the children that the learning center deals with living on the
other side of Old 41 and having -- being bussed across the street is
problematic, and it's a safety problem.
The road is dangerous from Bonita Beach Road all the way
down to 41. The housing area at Gargiulo is very hazardous to cross
that road on foot, and it's hazardous for both adults and children. It's
very hazardous for children. It's a very difficult exit for an
automobile or an 18-wheeler. It's impossible in rush hour, early
morning, and late afternoon to go either south in the morning or north
in the afternoon. There's a -- it's bumper to bumper for almost a mile
back from Old 41 -- or from Bonita Beach Road.
It's basically an industrial park. And the restricted and
permitted uses -- and the restrictions are here. I brought copies
for -- I mean, you've seen them. There are three or four pages of
them. And it doesn't even permit an EMS facility.
This safety issue is real. It's unsafe. And Old 41 at night, with
electric bikes and that kind of stuff, you're foolish to be even driving
on it at night; it's that unsafe. And one of our -- there's a person
there that has a little three-wheeled motorized bike, and he's tooling
up and down Old 41, and he's going to get hit one of these days soon.
This safety issue is very real. The learning center -- the
learning center is pretty efficient right now. Ninety-two percent of
their expenses are for programs and services, and that helps in raising
money. They have said that they have been searching for over three
years for property they need and that they need to expand. Their
current facilities on Rail Head Boulevard, which is right next to a -- I
wish I could say the name -- Garzillo (phonetic) -- but anyway, it's
next to the facility -- the business facility there.
The property on Rail Head Boulevard is an older building with
plenty of space to expand. There's a big sign out in front of it that
says that space is for lease in the building. It would be very easy to
January 14, 2025
Page 66
expand in their current facility. It's an older building, but it would
work.
The -- they have been negotiating since May of 2024, as was
mentioned just a minute ago. There's been no contact with the board
of the PUD. I don't know who they're negotiating with. Who are
they -- who are they talking to? Where are they getting their
information? I think Commissioner Hall has been the point person
on this. And as George W. Bush used to say, "I don't negotiate with
myself," okay.
And -- now, I'm not a politician, but optics are important in
political venue. Sound bites get done frequently. The leadership of
the learning center has said it's all about warehouses and man caves
over the needs of children. That is a sound bite. It has no basis in
fact. It's not all -- it's not all -- that at all. They are now saying they
need to raise $3 million for a larger facility that's six times as much
as they raise each year. They -- I think we're setting them up for
failure.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, Mr. Ritchie.
MR. RITCHIE: Is that --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: That's your time.
MR. RITCHIE: -- the first three minutes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No. That's nine.
MR. RITCHIE: Oh.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You're done.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. RITCHIE: Are there any questions? I mean, I've got --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, you're good.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is John Gray.
MR. GRAY: I concede [sic] my time.
MR. MILLER: You want to concede your time to him?
MR. GRAY: Yes.
January 14, 2025
Page 67
MR. MILLER: You have three more minutes, sir.
MR. RITCHIE: Okay. They are, I think, being set up for
failure by getting into this real estate business of buying a facility that
they can't really afford. They will be totally dependent on grants.
We're in an environment where government grants are tough to get
and getting tougher, probably. I think the Commission is -- or the
commissioners are possibly setting this organization up for failure.
At the -- I read the minutes from the November meeting of the
commissioners. Commissioner Saunders, you said when they didn't
reject -- or when they rejected the -- they didn't reject it, but when
they ignored the high bid in the -- in the bidding process, that this
would be a bit of an embarrassment if we ignored the high bid and
then went to -- chose the lower bid, and then they couldn't deliver on
the financing.
Commissioner LoCastro said, "The county doesn't own the
property. The taxpayers do." Okay. The bid that was received by
Mr. Gray covers all the cost, including the updated costs that have
been slightly updated from what they were a few weeks ago. And
we need to safeguard the taxpayers' money. That was Commissioner
Kowal.
This thing, I think -- and Commissioner Hall said this morning
that the last thing you want to do is something stupid. And this is
starting to look like there's -- there's some stupidity going on in terms
of killing the goose that is providing the services to the children now.
We think that this ought to be studied carefully. I mean, the
Transportation people have done that already, and I think it's a
nonstarter. It's putting the children more at risk.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: And that concludes our public speakers, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel, you're
January 14, 2025
Page 68
lit up.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Now I'm ready.
I am -- I mean, we're being called here to accept an update. I
don't care -- I mean, thank you for the update. I find it to be an
unsatisfactory update.
I do not believe we should pursue this adventure any longer.
I've done a little bit of outside research. I am not interested in doing
business with a not-for-profit that hasn't shown the financial
worthiness. When they made the offer to buy the property in the
first place, I made the poor obvious assumption that they had the
money. They don't have the money. That's been evidenced by their
efforts to come back and negotiate with us to fund it and so on.
So I think it's highly inappropriate -- I want to accept the update,
because that's what's being done, but I want to make a motion -- I can
make a motion for that, and then I have a second motion I'd like to
make, if I may.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Let's hear from
Commissioner Hall, and then we'll go back to you to make a motion.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When I -- I totally agree. I mean, all I wanted to do was give
them a chance. There was great public benefit in it. And they've
had since November. They don't have the money. They don't have
the wherewithal.
I asked them the question, "Do you have the wherewithal? Do
you have the cash flow to do this?"
And they said "yes."
Well, obviously they don't, and so I have no interest -- you
know, you give them a chance, and if they capitalize on that, great,
and if they don't, we can move forward. And so I agree with
Commissioner McDaniel. I say that we move forward.
January 14, 2025
Page 69
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So you want me to make the
first motion and accept what we're being called for here? And then
I'll make my second, if I may.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: The floor is yours.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. The first motion is to
accept the update, so staff has done their duty. So I'll make a motion
for the acceptance of that update.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Well, I'll second that.
And all in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. We've accepted the report.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then I would like to
make a motion that we go back out for a brief period of time,
advertise this piece of property for sale to them. If they have the
capacity -- anybody. I want everybody to have a shot -- an
opportunity to buy this piece of property, and then we bring the new
offers back for reconsideration at the earliest possible date. All
right.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
second. Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, I'll call for the vote.
January 14, 2025
Page 70
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall, did you
register a vote?
COMMISSIONER HALL: I did. I said "yes, sir."
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. It passes unanimously.
Item #10B
GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE (“GMP”) FIRST
AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT NO. 21-7919-ST,
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT RISK (“CMAR”), WITH
DEANGELIS DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION LLC, FOR
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER PROJECT (FORMERLY THE
MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY) IN THE AMOUNT OF
$49,856,251, AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE
ATTACHED AMENDMENT, AND APPROVE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER KOWAL – APPROVED (COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL AND COMMISSIONER HALL OPPOSED)
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to our 11
o'clock time-certain. This is add-on Item 10B. It is a
January 14, 2025
Page 71
recommendation to approve the guaranteed maximum price first
amendment to Agreement No. 21-7919-ST, Construction
Management at Risk, with DeAngelis Diamond Construction, LLC,
for a construction services for the Collier County Behavioral Health
Center project, formerly the mental health facility, in the amount of
$49,856,251, authorize the Chairman to sign the attached
amendment, and approve the necessary budget.
Mr. John Dunnuck, your executive director of Facilities and
CRAs, is here to present. Oh, this item is brought to the agenda by
Commissioner Saunders.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Right. I just want to thank the
Board for giving me the opportunity to have this presented today
instead of on January 28th, and I appreciate the staff really coming
together to dot all the I's and cross all the T's in reference to that
contract.
MR. DUNNUCK: Good morning, Commissioners. And that's
a great segue. You know, when we had the conversation early this
morning about putting this on the agenda, I had asked staff -- and
actually did this a couple days ago -- to ask staff how many times this
project has seen the Board of County Commissioners in its life, and
to our estimate this is the 17th time this project has been presented
over the past seven years. And so we're kind of approaching the
finish line from a facilities standpoint of finally negotiating the
guaranteed maximum price of a little over $49 million with
DeAngelis Diamond, and we're presenting the amendment to you
today.
Before I move forward, I do want to take a special thank you to
Brian DeLony, and to Scott Teach from the attorney's office, because
we received the guaranteed maximum price in late November, and
we then did the workshop in early December. I had requested that
they start working on it ASAP to lock and load this thing to be as
January 14, 2025
Page 72
close as possible and, basically, as a working template to have it
ready for potentially this agenda knowing that we were shooting for
the 28th originally. And because of their hard work in getting us to
this point, we were able to bring this item to the Board today.
As you've seen -- you've seen this slide before, and a lot of the
slides I'm not going to spend a lot of time on because you have seen
them exhaustively. This is the project team, between the county, the
Lawrence Center, prime consultant, healthcare consultants, and
construction at DeAngelis Diamond. It really takes a team effort to
get these projects done, and we've worked closely as we were
working through the design, the issues that pop up here and there, to
collaboratively have a regular standing meeting with the group to
ensure this project stayed on track.
Today's objective is to award the construction phase to the
Collier County Behavioral Health Center through an amendment to
the existing CMAR contract that was approved last year.
The Collier County Behavioral Health Center is an important
community project. It was endorsed by the voters in 2018. The
facility will function as a central receiving facility for those receiving
services under both the Baker and the Marchman Acts and will
greatly increase mental health crisis support in Collier County.
I think we've talked to you about it before. It's an 87-bed
increase to what's existing today, and we’ll provide additional
services for the community to come.
The proposed new facility will serve the mental health needs of
Collier County and expanding population moving forward.
The project location is located off Golden Gate Parkway east of
David Lawrence Center and the Corpus Christi Chappell. So I think
we've all seen exactly where the site is. It's an expansion, basically,
of the David Lawrence Center using -- utilizing five acres that exist
today.
January 14, 2025
Page 73
Just giving little considerations. On March 14th, 2023, the
county entered into the CMAR agreement with DeAngelis Diamond
for the preconstruction services. Obviously, the benefit of
preconstruction services in a CMAR is so that you're aligning up the
design and the construction together when you're from 60 percent
design on so that you can actually look at efficiencies as you move
forward.
March 12th, 2024, the Board received a project update, as
directed, to proceed with a design for the 87 beds with an estimated
construction cost of 49.9 million. So for the past year we've locked
in the pricing and exactly the scope of the project.
On November 22nd, 2024, we received the first draft of the
GMP, which was pretty much right on the number, a little under
$49.9 million, and then in December we provided you-all an update
in a workshop setting. And I think the Board had several questions
still about the operations, which I have Scott Burgess, who is the
executive officer for David Lawrence Center, as well as Ed Morton,
who is the chair of the David Lawrence Center board, here to speak
on these issues.
Funding is a total of $49.9 million that will come from the
infrastructure sales tax. That was approved in two kind of, you
know, tranches, so to speak, which is $25 million in 2021, and most
recently, in November, of another $31 million, which covers the total
cost of the project. So it goes up to $56 million, which is assuming
the additional costs beyond, obviously, the CM at risk.
The county is responsible for all necessary major public
systems, as a roof, HVAC/electrical equipment and facilities as these
capital projects come online. And we wanted to introduce this
concept to you as a board, which is as we add new facilities, we want
to make sure that you understand that if we're on the hook for the
capital and the long term, we need to start planning for that
January 14, 2025
Page 74
immediately when the building's new so that when the rainy day
comes, we've set aside funding.
And so we've estimated about $460,000 a year, which was what
we need to start setting aside once this building is completed, to be
able to handle those systems' requirements down the road.
The cost of the GMP amendment is 49.9 million, you know,
give or take a few dollars. The contractor overhead is 4.75 percent,
which in my experience -- and I've done several of these CMARs -- is
right in line with building standards and actually is a good negotiated
deal.
The liquidated damages is $8,000 a day if they don't meet the
deadline. It's, frankly, on the high side, is robust for the county. I
would say that was a good negotiation tactic on our side.
We have a total contingency of $2.5 million and a total value of
allowance of about 2.475 of regular -- I said contingency on one side,
allowance on the others. And I think we've talked about it before
what the differences are, but we'd be happy to discuss if you have any
questions.
The construction estimated time frame is about 22 months so
that you're talking about a project completion in the fourth quarter of
2026 when all is said and done. And should the Board approve this
agreement today, just so you know, logistically speaking, what will
happen next is we're awaiting the final part of the permits. Once the
permits are issued, we will go to closing of the acquisition of the
property. And as part of that trigger of the acquisition, it will -- it
will trigger the long-term lease agreement moving forward.
So -- and that is a 30-year agreement for the David Lawrence
Center to operate this facility.
With that, we're recommending approval.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Before we go to Scott
Burgess and Mr. Morton and other speakers, any comments from the
January 14, 2025
Page 75
Board before we hear from the --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'd like to -- no. I'd like to
hear --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's go ahead and hear from
David Lawrence Center then.
MR. DUNNUCK: Thank you.
MR. BURGESS: Good morning. I have a prepared statement
that I wanted to read to you, and then I have a very brief slide that I
wanted to go over, and then, obviously, happy to have our board
chair come up to share our full support and commitment of our board
and our staff for this project, and then answer any questions that you
might have.
For the record, again, Scott Burgess, the CEO of the David
Lawrence Centers for Behavioral Health. David Lawrence Center is
proud and excited to partner with Collier County to bring the Collier
County Behavioral Health Center into reality. We've been fully
committed to this project since day one and have been honored to
work with the county staff, our partners at RG Architects DeAngelis
Diamond, to design this much-needed center that addresses the urgent
needs of our community now and for the future.
We understand our responsibilities associated with effectively
operating this center, and we maintain a strong and steadfast
commitment to do all in our power to obtain the full operational
funding necessary to ensure every community member in our
community has access to life-changing and lifesaving care regardless
of their ability to pay.
We will lead the charge and will work tirelessly, just as we
successfully have for 56 years in our community, to pursue every
avenue of operational funding.
To that end, we've identified opportunities to expand existing
funding and sources of new funding. We've already met with county
January 14, 2025
Page 76
management team and discussed these new opportunities, and we are
actively and vigorously pursuing them.
We are confident that we have the right clinical management
and board teams to address any challenges that come our way in
advancement of this collective mission of care for our community.
We will be honored to enhance our decades-long collaboration with
the county to bring about the highest level of community health,
well-being, and safety through this vitally needed facility.
So to that end, I mentioned the funding sources, which I know
has been an item of question. And we were -- were made very clear
by the County Commission that we needed to seek all sources to
expand funding in order to expand these needed services for our
community. We have private philanthropy as a major source that we
are moving forward, including the naming rights. And just to be
clear, because we did have this conversation in December, the
naming rights -- philanthropic dollars that are secured for this facility
will go exclusively and solely for this facility, for the furniture,
fixtures, and equipment for the operations that we've talked about,
and for the maintenance of this facility.
We know that we have opportunities for expansion of state
funding through grants, through federal funding that are existing and
can be expanded, and we've identified two new opportunities for
increased funding, which we're already talking with the county staff
around, which would be an increase in the federal low-income pool
funds as well as new funding source for this facility because it would
be partially a hospital component in this building. We would qualify
for federal direct provider payment programs, which is exclusively
available for hospitals. In addition to that, local, state, and national
foundation grants and other sources of local funding, including local
businesses.
To that end, I'm happy to discuss any other questions,
January 14, 2025
Page 77
comments, or concerns that any of the commissioners may have, and
I'd like to invite our board chair, Ed Morton, to the podium so that he
can speak to the commitment of our board of directors.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Mr. Burgess, I do have one
question before Mr. Morton gets up. No other members are lit up
here yet, so I'm going to jump in.
On the first line, private philanthropy, naming rights used
exclusively for the facility FF&E, and then it has operations and
maintenance. The use of the word "operations" there is confusing to
me. The proposal in December was that that money would be used
for FF&E and for maintaining the building. With the word
"operations" in there, I don't know if that means the services you're
providing, but if it doesn't mean that, I think that word should be
deleted from that list. Would you clarify?
MR. BURGESS: Okay. It does mean for the services being
provided in that specific building.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So where would the
money come, then, from for maintaining the building itself, the
$460,000 a year?
MR. BURGESS: The maintenance of the building would come
from that fund as well. Those are -- we're going to be securing
additional funds for this building. Those three categories are all
listed within the dollars that need to be raised for the building.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And my concern is that, as was
pointed out by staff, we need to set aside about $460,000 a year to
maintain the building. And now the naming rights are projected to
generate around $10 million plus/minus. FF&E is going to be
somewhere near $5 million. So you're not -- there's not going to be a
huge fund available for maintaining this building. I want to make
sure we have that fund.
MR. BURGESS: Yeah. And what I would like to
January 14, 2025
Page 78
mention -- and we can have further discussion on this -- is what is
identified in the agreement that we have is that David Lawrence
Center will provide for the ongoing maintenance, the regular
maintenance of that facility. I think the number that was -- that was
just presented relates to replacement of major equipment across time.
So that would be HVAC system and things of that sort. And that
currently, under the agreement with the county, indicates that that's
county responsibility.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I understand what the current
agreement says, but -- so keep that in mind. That's one of the issues
that I had spoken to you about. And I don't know if that's going to
create a problem for me down the line here, but I want to make sure
we have sufficient funds to provide that $460,000 a year without the
taxpayers having to provide additional money for this. So that's one
of my concerns. Thank you.
MR. BURGESS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good morning.
MR. MORTON: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Good morning.
MR. MORTON: Hello. For those of you who -- my name is
Edward Morton. I'm the retired, after 35 years, CEO of NCH. I'm
now involved in the world of private equity and involved quite
heavily in healthcare throughout the country.
I'm chairman of David Lawrence, and for those of you here in
the room, as you drive by David Lawrence, you see a facility that is
56 years in its construction. That's changing, and the reason why it's
changing is because we live in a community that deserves the finest
mental health facility to bring dignity to the citizens of Collier
County as possible. That 56-year-old edifice that you see is going to
be torn down.
When you raise questions in your own mind about, "Can they do
January 14, 2025
Page 79
it?" "Do you believe they can do it?" "Can they raise this money?"
You should know that as I stand here today we have raised over
$30 million, setting all kinds of records for David Lawrence, because
we have painted a picture for those donors and the people involved
with David Lawrence of the need of new facilities in Collier County,
including the central receiving facility which all of us recognize takes
care of Baker Act, alcohol issues related to the Marchman Act,
amongst other mental illnesses that have to be addressed in a central
receiving facility.
So the answer about whether or not operational burden can be
borne by David Lawrence is answered, I think, by the tremendous
response of the public already this year in raising over $30 million in
a very short period of time.
None of us know what the future holds, and I would be foolish
to try to articulate what the future holds for any of us and anything at
all. But I can tell you that this board is 100 percent committed to
doing everything in our power to raise all of the funds necessary to
sustain and maintain the operations of not only this facility but of
David Lawrence itself.
The public demands nothing less from those of us charged with
the responsibility of caring for those in dire need of mental health.
And I would stand before you today as chair of that board advising
you of our abiding commitment to fill and fulfill that obligation.
Thank you very much for your time, and Scott will be happy to
answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Do we have any other registered
speakers?
MR. MILLER: We do, sir. We have three speakers, one of
whom has ceded time to another speaker.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any questions for Mr. Burgess?
(No response.)
January 14, 2025
Page 80
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Why don't we go ahead and hear
from the other speaker, and then we'll get back to Mr. Burgess.
MR. MILLER: Your first speaker is Penelope Hayes, who has
been ceded three additional minutes from Burt Hayes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Make sure Burt's here.
MR. MILLER: That must be Mr. Hayes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He didn't raise his hand.
MR. MILLER: I figured that one out, though, sir.
And she will be followed by John Meo, Jr.
MS. HAYES: Good morning, Commissioners, and Happy New
Year.
My name is Penelope Hayes. I am a resident from Painted Leaf
Lane in Naples. I am here today on behalf of my neighborhood.
Unfortunately, sufficient notice was not given to our community to
attend today or to prepare even the notes that I've brought forward.
This issue directly impacts our neighborhood and is a public
matter. Throughout this process, we have been -- we, our
neighborhood, have been actively involved, as you know from our
participation here at prior hearings.
Originally scheduled to be heard two weeks from now, the
hearing date was unexpectedly changed only yesterday to this
morning. I became aware of this change at 3 p.m. yesterday just by
pure chance and happenstance because I had a conversation with
someone who was in the know. At that time, the change was so
fresh that there was still no time certain for this agenda item.
When I checked the BCB [sic] meeting schedule on your
website at dinnertime last night, the date change had still not been
reflected for the public to view, and I don't know if it has been now.
I took my chances, changed my schedule, and was able to be here
now.
At prior meetings, our neighborhood demonstrated a significant
January 14, 2025
Page 81
interest and commitment with over 50 neighbors in attendance at
meetings and hundreds of petitions signed. We have followed the
evolution or devolution of this project closely, including reductions in
beds, levels, scope, and therefore, reach in service due to budgetary
challenges tied to the location, and for this reason we saw changes
that had us want to be here when this was heard.
As the owners of a construction business, my husband and I
have been perplexed from the start about how this project's budget
could be feasible given the challenges of the site. The parcel is
forested and un-serviced. From a construction perspective,
significant resources would be consumed simply by preparing the
land, including clearing, grading, and implementing water
management and infrastructure and drainage, then power, water
supply, sewer, parking, and the wall that was promised to our
community all due to location.
Since I last spoke to you in this room a month short of two years
ago, we have all waited and watched the project's financial viability
in this location dwindle to a genuine gamble. And still, we know
there were and are location options that ranked higher when
professionally studied with far greater financial efficiency. Financial
efficiency matters. Two years to try to make it work matters. At
that time -- and yet a lack of sufficient public notice for today's
hearing.
On 12 hours' notice, eight of those being sleeping hours, my
neighborhood could not be here this morning. On their behalf, I
strongly object to this item being heard today and respectfully request
that this item be returned to its original hearing date of January 28th.
The trajectory of this location is going in one direction, a
gamble. From the data in the original engineering site study
reporting three locations with better measurables to the new
information that has forced the bed count to narrow from 137 beds to
January 14, 2025
Page 82
87 beds, from two stories to one story, and time delays and so on, the
budget, as at today, is a gamble. And we just heard -- and I wrote
some notes. The quotes were opportunities for grants, promises
from big donors, and quote, "We are going to be getting additional
funds."
And another quote, "We do deserve the finest mental health
facility." Well, we do. That was the original plan. That doesn't
cut it for me, promises and maybes.
The data has been speaking for two years. The use of a GPS
analogy, let me just wrap it with that. When others cannot change
course due to their own perspectives, it is this board that recalculates.
Someone else said 17 times we've been before you over seven
years. This is budget insanity. The location doesn't work. A
shovel has not yet gone in the ground, and we have a trajectory here
that tells us that more factors will arise, and I know that.
The specifics of this location alone make this budget number a
gamble. I, as well as our neighbors, would have wanted to meet
with you privately and would still like to do so. I would like to
recommend a return to the original date for this hearing, and please
do not approve a budget amendment.
Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your final speaker on this item is John Meo, Jr.
I hope I'm saying that right, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You're not.
MR. MEO: Yes, you are, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Meo.
MR. MEO: Meo, yes. John Meo, 2925 Cocoa Lakes Drive.
Good morning, Commissioners.
I'm just a little bit behind the curve here, but I'm coming up
here -- and the previous speaker kind of touched on all the points.
As a taxpayer, as a representative of the Collier County
January 14, 2025
Page 83
Republican Executive Committee, I find it very -- kind of shaky
when I hear funding for such projects like the David Lawrence
Center are assured by donations, or the cost is going to be covered by
certain entities, and that really puts -- gives me concern because as
representing, you know, the people that I do represent in my position,
one of the major concerns is the cost of living in this county which,
of course, everywhere in the entire United States is going up
dramatically.
And just adding another -- and I have nothing negative to say
about mental health, but there's a lot of issues, and there's a lot of
people suffering in this county that are suffering from other things
besides mental health and don't have the ability or facility to cover
those costs.
So not to take too much of your time, because I only have a
couple of minutes in trying to bring you up to speed, when I hear
"funding will be provided," I'd like to see that in a contractual form.
I'd like to see that to assure the taxpayers that this county and these
taxpayers of this county are not on the hook to cover the cost of this
facility that hasn't been already described and detailed by you, the
commissioners.
So I appreciate you letting me speak, and thank you for your
work. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Mr. Burgess.
MR. BURGESS: Would you like me to speak to anything in
particular, or are you going --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I didn't know if you had anything
you wanted to add. We do have a couple lights lit up here. So,
Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
I didn't really have a question for Mr. Burgess, but I just wanted
to make a comment, or I just want to get clarity, I know, on
January 14, 2025
Page 84
something you had said, Chairman, in reference to the three particular
bullet points that their money coming in from their side will cover the
operation maintenance, FTE and stuff like that.
I mean, I know we had talked about this at the other meeting in
reference to the furniture purchase, stuff like that, and operational
costs or maintenance, but I think our staff was referring to 400- and
some -- $400,000 a year to keep aside for catastrophic issues that -- a
building that we own and we're building. And I think the
community -- or some of the citizens are a little confused.
The money to build the building, and that is for the people, is the
county's building. We're building that. We have the money to build
it. When they're talking about the funding and grants and stuff like
that, have nothing to do with the building of the building. It's about
their own end coming in as a provider to run the building and how
they're going to handle their providing that.
And that's the contract. I mean, that's a contract we have with
them. If they can't meet their end of their contract and provide the
service we require of them to run the building, we'll find somebody
else. We'll find somebody else willing to come in and run the
building.
But the building is ours. It's the county's building. It's the
county's mental receiving facility that we owe the county to build.
It's something that we need, we probably needed in the last 20 years.
So I don't want to get the confusion that we're -- we, as a county,
is looking for grants to build this building. I just don't want people
to understand -- I want people to understand that's not what's going
on here. So I just wanted to clarify that.
And -- but I know I've owned properties before, and people have
rented, and certain levels of being a renter, you're responsible for
certain levels of maintenance on a daily day basis, and -- but if my
HV or my plumbing fails on my building I own, that's usually on me
January 14, 2025
Page 85
to replace.
So I think that's what John is referring to, so we don't mix the
two of daily day maintenance versus 20, 30 years from now we have
to replace the HVAC system. Because it might not even be David
Lawrence in that building that day. There may be another provider
that may come in and got the contract to run our facility. I don't
know. I can't say one way or the other. But that's -- I just wanted to
shed some kind of eyes of that, and I think that's the way I'm
receiving it. But correct me if I'm wrong.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Ms. Hayes, I know you want to
say something. We don't generally do that, but go ahead and --
MS. HAYES: Just more to the point why I would have wanted
the chance to speak to you privately, to each of you privately. It's
beyond the maintenance of the property. We do know that this
budget has run over quite a bit, and we do know that the scope of the
project that would benefit this community has been minimized.
And so there are things that I would have wanted to, and our
neighborhood and our community, would have wanted to discuss
with you and have that opportunity, as we were aware of the original
date two weeks from now.
So I'm just going to go back to the original point that I was
making and maybe not to reference a few things that were said here
on topics of other types of budget. But just going back to that the
budget has gone over what taxpayers signed up for, and we would
like to talk about that more. That just does not sit well, and I think
that the reduction in the scope of this project is not what the
community signed up for.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, Ms. Hayes.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I'm going to -- and I
hope you'll -- I hope you'll forgive me for this. A lot of you folks are
January 14, 2025
Page 86
my friends. There's a lot of history here. There's a lot of history
here. As a -- and if you'll indulge me for a moment.
As a neophyte commissioner my first year in, March of '17, I
traveled to Washington, D.C., and orchestrated a meeting with HHS
in Washington, D.C., and the whole staff of HHS was in the room,
and the head of the United States -- Eastern United States for HHS
was on the conference table on a phone call.
And we're all suffering from the opioid pandemic that's been
amongst us for an eternity, far too long. And I'm going on and on
about it, and the nice lady from the Eastern United States "Well,
Commissioner McDaniel, what does Collier County's mental health
plan say about this, this, and this?" And I don't recall what the
question was.
And I said, "Well, ma'am. I'm not sure. I'll find out, and I'll
get you the answer."
And so a little later on in that hour-long meeting, she said,
"Well, Commissioner McDaniel, what does Collier County's mental
health plan say about that, that, and that?"
And I said, "Well, ma'am, I don't have the mental health plan
with me, but I'll be certain to find the answer and get back to you."
So I finished the meeting, came back from Washington, D.C.,
sat down with our county leadership at that particular time, and I
asked our county leadership, "What does our mental health plan say
about this, this, and this? What does our mental health plan say
about that, that, and that?"
"Well, sir, we don't have a mental health plan."
And I said, "How in the heck are we going to get any money,
especially from the federal government and/or the state money, if we
don't have a mental health plan?"
Well, right away Commissioner Solis grabbed on to it, a
stakeholder committee was devised, Mr. Burgess chaired that
January 14, 2025
Page 87
stakeholder committee, and 16, 18 months later, baboom, we have a
mental health plan. Wonderful. A portion of that mental health
plan was to hire/engage an outside third-party consultant to give
recommendations to us where this mental health facility should be
located.
This is a copy of that that was given in February of '21. And
the current location that we're discussing here with regard to
amendments for a contract for purchase -- or contract for construction
were 4 and 5 of the recommendations; 4 and 3 of the numbered
locations were No. 1, on this government facility. All of them, by
the way, went over in cost expenditures. Every single one of the
locations was more than the 25 million that we had allotted.
And so gyrations were done. It was originally proposed a
130-unit facility, 130-bed facility, then it got squashed back to 120.
Now it's currently 100 -- or 88, I think, is the existing facility, and the
cost to construct has continually gone up and up and up. There has
never been a reduction in the need. So this discussion today isn't
with regard to the need. This discussion today is with regard to
where this facility needs to be.
I even went back and brought the minutes from the site selection
meeting, and I was chided a little bit because I voted for this
particular site selection. But one of the things that a lot of folks
don't understand, if you're in the negative on a vote, do you get to
bring an item back? No. As a Board -- as a Board member, I lose
having that opportunity to come back. I supported this, but I also, in
reading of these minutes -- Commissioner Taylor brought up a very
important issue, and that had to do with an RFP for the operator for
this facility. And I haven't seen that we actually ever did do that.
Did we do that? Did we do an RFP for the operator of this facility?
Does anybody know?
MS. PATTERSON: Not that I'm aware of.
January 14, 2025
Page 88
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. And then -- and I'm
not -- and here again, this is no reflection on you, or you, or you,
Father Orsi, especially.
FATHER ORSI: I'll talk to you later.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, I understand. I know
I'm going to get a phone call after this is all done.
This is no reflection on David Lawrence. David Lawrence has
done an amazing amount of good. I have personally friends who
have benefited from family members who have been treated there and
are successful in the world. So please don't take what I'm saying as
disparaging against David Lawrence Center.
What I'm saying is, in these minutes I brought up the
then-estimated 2 to $3 million of operational O&M costs.
Commissioner Solis agreed with me during those periods of time.
Commissioner Taylor agreed with me, and we agreed to proceed
forward.
And we did, in fact, proceed forward with a recommendation
outside of the third-party consultant that the county hired to
recommend for the location of this facility on the guise that it was not
conducive to have a treatment facility in the shadow of the jail, for
less of a better term. And I don't necessarily disagree with that
rationale, but on the same token, it's better to have it somewhere than
not at all.
As it stands right now, David Lawrence Center's the only mental
health facility that our community has that can assist our Sheriff's
Office when they've arrested somebody who is suffering from a
mental illness or an overdose, because that's a place David Lawrence
has to take those folks -- our deputy can take them there and drop
them off and receive the necessary treatment from a detoxification
standpoint, so on and so forth, whether incarceration needed or not,
but they're still off site in the event that there is judicial needs
January 14, 2025
Page 89
and/or -- and/or incarceration. I haven't seen -- I haven't seen, other
than promises, the opportunity for support for this -- for this
operation to continue. I have seen and do know that on the sites that
were recommended as numbered 3, 4, and 5, not necessarily in order
of -- they were just numbered so that we could distinguish between
them all. In sites 3, 4, and 5, No. 4 was the number one
recommended facility by the consultant, and we went to number one
slash number two, the Board did, at that particular point in time.
I voted along with that on the proviso that we would be seeing
definitive operating and performance agreements with David
Lawrence Center. I voted for that so that I would have an
opportunity at some particular point in time to speak with regard to
that.
Candidly, Mr. Burgess, last month you terribly disappointed me.
Your PowerPoint presentation that you put up there had to do with
these operating expenses and funding sources, and the last statement
on the last slide that you put up squirreled it for me, because it
basically said, if you weren't successful in raising enough money, you
were going to cut services. So that's when I get to talk to Farther
Orsi about whether or not we continue to fund the operation if you're
not successful on doing that. And that's when I get to talk about the
need, and I don't want to have to talk about the need.
I want this facility. I want it to be here on campus. I happen to
know, from an expenditure of taxpayers' money, that we're already in
the process to remodel -- Building H or W?
MS. PATTERSON: Building H.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Building H. And if I read
the report properly, that was back even before, in November of '20.
Building H is close to 75,000 square feet, if I interpreted those things
correctly. Building H is 75,000 square feet in excess of the proposed
building that we're talking about building.
January 14, 2025
Page 90
I happen to know that we have to remodel that building anyway.
We're already down the path with that. And all we have to do is
relocate the county agencies that are located in that building. And I
happen to know that the cost of that today, for us to use it -- it
certainly isn't a facility that can take a person suffering from a mental
illness and detoxification currently, but I happen to know that the
costs -- estimated costs for that rehabilitation are $30 million, and it's
on land that we own. And we can hire you to come and be an
operator.
One of the things that I brought up multiple times two years ago,
three years ago when we were picking this site, was I know for a fact
there are multiple providers of mental health services in our
community and folks that are suffering from addiction, substance
abuse. I would prefer that we not go forward with this on a promise
to pay, to support, to raise enough money for it to be effective. I
would prefer that we stop doing this and go forward with the site
selection that was -- that was recommended by our consultant that is
within the government's purview that is within the expenditure and
control of Collier County and the Collier County taxpayers.
So there's an unload for you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We do have
Commissioner Hall online. Commissioner Hall?
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
While -- I had everything written down to say before I heard
Commissioner McDaniel, and first of all, just like he said, this has
nothing to do with -- what I'm about to say has nothing to do with
stalling or ignoring a mental health need in Collier County, but it has
everything to do about how we're going to go about to meet that
need.
In the last meeting that we had, I had -- a lot of this stuff start
rolling around, but I mean, I felt like we were too far down the road
January 14, 2025
Page 91
for me to really say what I was thinking and to be honest. But
whether we are or whether we aren't, I'm still going to be honest.
Number two, some may think that the train has already left the
station on this project, but I can -- you know, what if the bridge is out
down the tracks? And so while we can stop the train, I really want
to. And I don't want to just stop the train. I don't want to just put
the quahidas (phonetic) on this. Terri, I don't know how you spell
that.
But while -- you know, while we have a chance, I really think
that we need to take a strong look at doing something different,
something smarter. Number one, budget-wise; number two,
service-wise; number three, money-wise; and number four,
operational.
So it's been mentioned that services have been cut from 130
beds to 87. That's a 30 percent -- 33 percent reduction in the original
plan with, basically, a 50 percent increase in the budget. So we're
going backwards in one area and going in the wrong direction in the
other area.
It's almost $50 million to do this of surtax money.
Commissioner Kowal, sure, I mean, I agree with you, the
money's there. We can do that. We have it. But whether we
should or not still remains to be seen.
You know, if David Lawrence Center, which is an amazing,
amazing organization -- they've done great -- they've done an
amazing job. But I would also like to see, if we do something
different, just say in Building H, just for an example -- whether we do
Building H, whether we expand the jail, whether we look at other
options there around the campus, whatever we decide to do, if we do,
maybe we could co-operate. Instead of putting all the operational
burden on David Lawrence Center, maybe they could co-operate with
other faith-based organizations.
January 14, 2025
Page 92
You know, David Lawrence Center is spectacular at mental
health in the schizophrenia and the bipolar. In every mental health
issue, they're amazing. They do great work. But when it comes to
addiction, alcohol, drugs, maybe the faith-based businesses have a
better success rate with those.
So if we just -- if we did get to pause this for now, come back
and ask, you know, Naples Retreat organization or Matthew's House
or -- you know, I'm not familiar with all of the other faith-based
people, but we could -- they could all cooperate in meeting the
mental health and addiction needs of our people.
Operationally, if we did this, nothing would change for David
Lawrence Center. They would still have all of their funding avenues
and have all of the things that they've already identified to help them
with the operational -- with the operational needs.
What I don't want to do is put the cart before the horse. We just
had a discussion with Gargiulo. You know, they were coming forth
on a big what-if. I still feel like there's a what-if involved
operationally. And now we find out that it's county responsibility to
put half a million dollars back for capital improvements down the
road. But that's a financial commitment on the taxpayers every
month. Surtax funds are gone, but this will be on the taxpayers.
I think taking a look at the original plan to use county assets is a
smart thing to do. I, like Commissioner McDaniel, I don't want to be
the one to squash this or to put a pause on it, but I do want to do
something that's smart, and I do want to do something that I can sleep
well at night.
Yes, when I first came in, Commissioner Kowal mentioned we
started this in one of our first meetings. And Commissioner Solis
came to me when I transitioned into the seat, and he said, "This is a
big thing for me," and he had put a lot of work into it.
I want to see our mental health facilities, our mental health
January 14, 2025
Page 93
crisis, I want to see that met very well in Collier County, so I'm
not -- I'm not putting a halt on any of that. But while we can stop the
train, I think we should, and I will be willing to look at everything
and look at it soon. I don't want to be two years down the road still
not having a decision, still not having the construction cost. The
costs are greater than what is anticipated, but they're not twice. So
with that...
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Chairman.
I'm convinced this is the right location. I mean, some things
that are being missed, because it's two years later, is when we looked
at these five locations, one of the reasons why the locations that were
suggested fell out and we defaulted to the location where we are is
because we all had a conversation that there were some very specific
parameters that weren't taken into consideration.
And so I'll -- I won't get into big detail, but it wasn't just a guess
that we were like, wow, Location No. 1 is the best, but let's pick 5, or
vice versa. It wasn't that. It was a long conversation. We
painstakingly went down a list and said, "Okay. So we had a
construction company tell us what they thought the best location
was" -- and there were other positives and negatives of the different
locations, but it wasn't a guess.
And if I remember, maybe it wasn't unanimous, but I remember
it was a deep dive discussion. I wish we would have done this much
discussion on some of the other things that cost hundreds of millions
of dollars that we spend money on, like the sports complex, the
Marco Island Executive Airport, Great Wolf Lodge, and all these
other things that, you know, we sometimes vote on in 15 minutes.
We've been talking about this one for two years. And if you had the
Sheriff up here, he'd say one of our greatest needs is, you know,
January 14, 2025
Page 94
mental health support.
I'm not looking to go backwards. This is the location, okay.
And we painstakingly went through a great amount of detail to decide
why this was the location.
I actually think Commissioner Kowal said it best. We keep
throwing around the word "David Lawrence Center." This is the
county's, you know, building. And if David Lawrence Center
promises to step forward and can't and they totally drop the ball,
sorry, Scott, you're out of the pool. We're going to put out an RFP,
and one of your competitors is going to come in here and run the
facility. And what I care about is the delivery of the service to the
county, not who's writing the checks or, you know, has their name up
on the wall.
And I would think even your board would feel that same way,
that the number one responsibility is delivering this service -- these
services to the community.
And I think we're getting all caught up in location and who's
going to buy the furniture and all that. Like Commissioner Kowal
said, if in the end, you know, some of the things that you're hoping
happen don't happen, I think there's plenty of people that want to step
in and run a five-star facility here in Collier County, and maybe
collectively it's a group of people then that sort of do it.
But I'm not supportive of going back to Step Negative 1 and
talking about, "Oh, should we put it back at the jail?" We already
did all that. We already did all that. So if someone's got a better
mousetrap today, we needed to hear about that two years ago, and we
actually did.
And so I think this is just about the money and who's going to be
in charge and where the shortfalls might be. And like I said, you
know, my colleague, Commissioner Kowal, simplified it very easily
and just said, "Hey, if David Lawrence Center says they can step
January 14, 2025
Page 95
forward and then they can't, there's other people we can -- we can
entice to come in here and continue to move forward." So I'm not
looking to go back to square zero. I think we already have had all
those conversations.
The one thing that does concern me is when hearing from the
citizens. I mean, even though sometimes, like I say, we unfairly
catch stones that, you know, we're stifling citizens and everything,
that couldn't be further from the truth. And it does concern me when
any citizen comes to the podium and says, "I would be here with 20
more people who have concerns" -- and maybe they would all be
saying the same thing, but that's irrelevant. Your voice at the
podium is what this country guarantees.
And so we all found out about this yesterday. That doesn't
mean, you know -- you know, sometimes things, you know, happen
that way. But I do have some concerns that there might be some
things I would hear from your neighbors or that -- you said you
would have meetings with all of us. Maybe -- you know, I can't -- I
can't assume I know exactly what you would be saying, and I'm going
to make a decision without having heard any of that. So that's the
bigger thing that concerns me.
But this is the right location, whether it's David Lawrence
Center or somebody else. I don't think we're talking about a trillion
dollars, you know, worth of problem here.
And I think we need to figure out what we can do and not so
much of, well, this is difficult, this is difficult. We've done things
that are -- that were less tight in the county, and we've moved
forward. It seems like we can't get off of the dime on this one,
which is very disappointing, you know, very disappointing.
But, you know, I'll end it, in summary, saying, I understand
these five sites, but this was a meeting two years ago, and I remember
in grave detail why we did default to the location here, and it wasn't
January 14, 2025
Page 96
just a fluke. It was detailed conversation of certain parameters that
weren't taken into consideration and why the locations around here
popped up closer to the top but why that was a little bit faulty.
And I -- and I think Commissioner Solis agreed as well, but I'll
just speak for me. I've found that at the end, after we had deep
conversations, the right location was David Lawrence Center. Didn't
know at the time what it -- what it would look like, but that that
would be the spot.
And then whether it was DLC leading the charge or some other
vendor, okay, so be it, you know, we'll get there. But I think that's
the direction that, you know, we need to go.
I'm not for, you know, relooking at these sites, and I'm not for
looking at David Lawrence Center and saying, "You have to do it."
Like -- we talked the other day, and you said, "I can't guarantee
anything." So if some of those promises or some of those things that
you guys are ponying up to turn out to not be possible through no
fault of your own, then we do what Commissioner Kowal says. You
know, we look for another partner, you know, or we add a partner to
this group. That's what I would be for, to continue to move this
forward.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: At that -- I remember that hearing
very well in terms of the site selection. As a matter of fact, when I
went into that hearing, my preferred site was the museum site and,
obviously, we were persuaded with data and information that that
was not going to work.
We have three commissioners lit up. Commissioner McDaniel,
you have something else, or is this -- all right. Commissioner
Kowal, did you have anything else?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do wish to speak.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: If you want him to go
January 14, 2025
Page 97
first -- I don't know where we're at. I lit up.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: You're No. 1 on the list.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I just -- you know, I don't
want this to devolve [sic] into an argument amongst us. I
want -- we're not going back to minus one. We're not going back to
zero. We're actually addressing things that haven't been done,
haven't been -- they were asked for and talked about in the original
site selection hearing that haven't been accomplished. And we still
haven't yet received, I feel, satisfactory protection for the expenditure
of the taxpayers' money.
You said it in this meeting, in this -- in these minutes, "This isn't
our money. This is the taxpayers' money." And it's our job -- and
we can do what Commissioner Kowal has suggested with the facility
here on campus. We can do what's been suggested with less than the
$50 million that's been appropriated for this particular facility.
And we can then bring in multiple providers, including David
Lawrence Center, and have a say-so over the operational aspects and
the expenses that are associated. We can do all of those things and
keep that facility right here on campus where we have -- and one of
the rationales that I didn't agree with was the onus of being in
proximity to the jail.
Now, I do understand there are people who won't seek assistance
on their own because of the proximity to the jail. But on the other
side of the equation, what do we have here on site? A great big bus
transfer station, public transportation, health department, the judicial
system, because a lot of folks that are suffering from mental issues
and substance abuse oftentimes have judicial issues that need to be
attended, so they're right here. And the facilities -- there's more than
enough room in the building that we already own. The sales tax
money can be expended to rehab that particular building in order to
facilitate this and have it here on campus. Those things can, in fact,
January 14, 2025
Page 98
be done.
I don't concur, Commissioner LoCastro, that we're going
backwards. I actually think better protecting the sales -- the
taxpayers' money here by re-thinking what's, in fact, going on and
having a discussion about that.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman.
On the lines of what Commissioner McDaniel's talking about, I
can remember, too, a lot of conversation of these different locations.
And if I remember correctly, there was -- you know, some of the
things that popped was reference to funding from the state and some
other sources that -- you know, for different programs that may come
down the pipes from higher governments than us that they would not
entertain these type of grants if we had it on the facility here.
So there was some other layers that we looked at, I think, in why
we started moving the location and where the location ended up
being was -- it was more than just a numbers thing by a study done
by a contract -- basic contractor to sites to put this thing at. I didn't
know Building H was one of the options in the original -- it was?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Number 3.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Number 3, okay. You know,
that -- you know, I hate to say this. I hate to use clichés, but, you
know, Commissioner Hall's talking about the train on the track.
Anybody can stop the train. Anybody can pull that brake before you
go over that bridge. The hard part's getting it off that track and
getting it to Point A -- from Point A to Point B.
And, you know, I -- just like anybody else in this room keeps
saying, you know, these are -- these are promises, or this or that. I'm
just hearing a lot of promises of what we can do or can't do from this
point on. You know, we know where we're going. We're on this
train. We've been on this track for many years now, and we're
January 14, 2025
Page 99
moving. We're one day from making a vote today to having a
contractor ready to start breaking ground, pretty much.
It ends today. And if it doesn't happen today, it probably won't
happen till 2030. Even if we decided not to do it, it will probably
delay this for another four or five years trying to find a site to do it at.
And then we have to look at in that time period -- I'm going to
pull on the heartstrings, like Commissioner McDaniel likes to do
sometimes with the --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Never.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah, with his road maintenance
thing. But, you know, imagine the amount of lives that may have
been saved or that in a time period over four years or five years of
kicking this thing down the road again. It's a need. We all know it's
a need. We've needed it for a decade now, and it hasn't gotten done.
And we're one day from moving this thing forward today, and
we're sitting here arguing about it again. Not arguing, but we're
putting out our points.
But, you know, I just hate to be -- you know, I hate to say it, but
we are exactly what people say we are. We're government, and we
can't do anything fast. We can't do anything decise (phonetic). We
can't get anything done, you know. And we are exactly that
definition today if we keep this argument up.
And then I always look at motive. I look at motive why people
are here today or not here today. And, you know, I know this came
up on us pretty quick. A lot of us didn't get a lot of prewarning to
take a deeper dive, but I mean, it's almost the same thing verbiage
[sic] that we did a few weeks ago. We just now are rehearing it back
to us about the reference to the -- and if you look at John's
presentation, the same exact number, same exact max amount and all
that. It's just a few tweaks to what David Lawrence is willing to do
to get the additional fundings to move this thing forward.
January 14, 2025
Page 100
So this is not a mystery. This is not -- no new information at
all. This is almost verbatim what we already talked about in a
meeting four weeks ago.
But you look at motive of why people -- and I understand these
neighbors here were at the eight-hour marathon when we decided for
this site, and they have a vested interest. They have a motive; they
don't want it in their neighborhood, and that's their motive. And I
can probably guarantee you, if we gave them another two weeks,
they'd have 50 people here. But they're going to have the same exact
argument they had in that meeting we sat here for eight hours
discussing the location. That's not going to change.
They have motive, and they see now an opportunity, maybe
through some commissioners or maybe through their own device, that
they have an opportunity to stop this and get it out of their
neighborhood.
I bet they can get 60 people here two weeks from now, maybe
100, but that's not going to change what we've already done. We've
already heard that argument. They have a motive, I get it. But that
motive has nothing to do with -- we're talking about funding. We're
talking about the nuances of something we already started that we
need to come to fruition. It has to come to fruition eventually. And
I'm just saying I don't want to keep kicking this can down the road.
I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We're going -- yeah,
we're going to vote on this in just a minute, but we have two
commissioners lit up.
Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to make a comment about what Commissioner
LoCastro said. True, we've had great discussion over all this.
What's better, this place or that place? But we didn't have the great
January 14, 2025
Page 101
discussion based on twice the budget. It has nothing to do with
meeting our need, kicking the can down the road, putting a stop on
the train. All we've got to do is -- when a train is needed -- when
another train's coming at it, there's a switch. They pull the switch,
the train goes by, and the other one comes through. So we're not
talking about stopping the train, just hitting the switch and
changing -- changing tracks.
If we go forward with this today, I'm going to be fine. I'm
going to wish DLC the best. I hope they win. In my -- in my heart
of hearts, I hope everything is good. I just didn't want to see us
spend the money and do something that we already decided we were
going to do and maybe there's something smarter that we can do.
So, you know, if we -- Commissioner Kowal mentioned, if
David Lawrence Center doesn't wind up being the operation entity
down the road and we can get somebody else, we can. We have that
option. But we don't have to exercise that option by spending
$50 million of our surtax and taking a -- taking a gamble on -- not a
gamble, just an educated guess.
I really believe they can come through with the operational
monies, but we don't have that assurance right now. We have a plan,
but we don't have the execution of that plan.
So like I said, I don't think that we're stopping, going to negative
one, I don't think we're kicking the can down the road. Anybody
that wants to say that government can't do anything, they need to
come sit in our shoes. They need to run for office and see what there
is -- that we deal with. We could spend their money just
haphazardly and just willy-nilly just so we could say, "Yeah, we got
it done, and we got it done fast," but I'd rather get it done smart than
worry about getting it done fast.
We do have a need in Collier County. We want to -- I want to
meet the need. I want to be the best county in Florida for all of our
January 14, 2025
Page 102
mental health patients and addiction patients. That is my ultimate
goal. But I just wanted to bring up -- I wanted to have the discussion
and let you know where my heart was.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
Commissioner McDaniel, did you want to speak again?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, yeah. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Go ahead.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Well, you're next,
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Am I next?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: You're next.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Commissioner
Kowal, I want to assure you of something. I have no motive other
than protect the taxpayers' money for Collier County.
Have you looked at the budget analysis that our Clerk of Courts
did and gave yesterday? The cost and scope of this facility started at
130 units, dropped down to 120 units at a perceived expense of
271,000 per unit. Now we've dropped it down to 87 units, and the
cost has gone up, and we're now up to 644,000 per unit with this
location.
I have no motive here other than -- now, the neighbors, granted,
they have a motive, and if given enough time, could maybe come in
and have a -- have another bite at this apple.
My motive here is to protect the tax dollars of Collier County
residents, period, the end. My motive is not to stall this. Farther
Orsi and I, Ed Morton, Scott, we've all talked about the need. The
Sheriff started talking about the need again last month when the
conversation was brought up. There's no argument about the need.
And one point to make very, very clear, the Sheriff has always
been consistent on saying the necessity of the need, but he hasn't ever
specified the location. He hasn't ever weighed in on the actual
January 14, 2025
Page 103
location, and I don't know necessarily, you know, that we need him
to. But I just want to qualify the fact that he has never weighed in.
He's only weighed in on the need, and there is no argument that there
is, in fact, a need.
My argument, my motive is strictly to protect the taxpayers'
money and have a say-so how this all -- how this all, in fact, goes.
And I offer up an alternative. We already have facilities on campus
that we own that purportedly can be accomplished in an equivalent
period of time and potentially for less money. I haven't looked at the
actual budget numbers. I know that we're at 30 million for the
expense for the rehabilitation of Building H for our needs, so that
may adjust a little bit in between then and now.
But one of the things that's -- you know, one of the things that's
really distressed me all along is we have this -- and with this new
facility, there is a focus on the pipeline to the adult population.
There is an increase in David Lawrence's capacities to tend our
youth. But that could be the sole purpose of that facility over by
David Lawrence, strictly for the pipeline that feeds our adult
population. Because I truly believe in my heart if we get to that
bunch before they move into the adult population, before they're
moved into the judicial system as an adult, that that -- that David
Lawrence Centers could expand the treatment of that youth
population and help then, ultimately, reduce both the population that
we have to service in the jail and at the central receiving facility that
could be, in fact, on site.
And so I'm not -- I'm not looking to stall this. I haven't changed
my opinion since these budget numbers started to come forward. If
anything else, it's just fortified the necessity to not continue on with
this particular site selection, budget amounts. It's just -- it's -- as
Commissioner Hall said, it's time to redirect. It's past time to
redirect.
January 14, 2025
Page 104
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You know, how
disappointing we can build a $200 million sports complex, but we
can't sit here and figure out how to move forward after two years on
something so important to our county.
We're not here to debate site selection. We already did that, so
that would be going back to square one. I guess in order to try to
move this needle forward and see if there's an appetite for 10B, rather
than go back and forth about what we can do, what we can't do, I
actually do remember having conversations with the Sheriff
saying -- and I won't put words in his mouth, and I don't know what's
in the minutes, but I do recall saying something to the fact that it's not
advantageous to have a mental health facility right next to a jail.
So you can correct me if I'm wrong, Scott. You've probably
talked more with the Sheriff, you know, one-on-one. But there
were -- we had those conversations. That train has left the station,
okay. And shame on us that we're sitting here -- I do feel like we're
at Square Negative 1. It's not that it's not healthy conversation.
And I don't think, you know, any commissioner needs to keep
reiterating that they're trying to not waste taxpayer dollars. None of
us are trying to -- nobody wakes up here in the morning wondering
how -- trust me, we waste taxpayer dollars on things a lot less
important than this.
But this is the location. And, you know, to just see if there's an
appetite there, I make a motion to recommend to approve the
guaranteed maximum price as stated in Item 10B, and I'm looking for
a second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, I'll --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
a second to get that on the floor for a vote. We still have two
January 14, 2025
Page 105
commissioners lit up. Commissioner Kowal, did you have anything
else you wanted to add?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah, I just -- I wasn't directing
my comment directly to you, Commissioner McDaniel, about a
motive or vested interest. I referred more to the community that had
spoken in the past against that location.
Sure, they have a motive, and I don't have a problem with that.
I mean, I can understand their motive. You know, it is what it is.
But you can't sit here before me today and throw a number out
and say, "Ah, 30 million, we'll figure this or that for Building H."
And, I mean, the reality is this, that, you know, when we're
building a facility -- and I'll have to divert back to my prior career.
You know, this building is completely different because it's going to
have a secure sallyport for patrol cars that will pull in, that they're
safe to unload and load people that are suicidal or Baker Acted.
Some people that are already convicted of crimes, that you have to
have certain facilities designed a certain way to have this type of
drop-off and pickup where it's a secure location with a sallyport that
the doors close behind you and stuff like that. I don't know if we can
convert Building H to accommodate some of the things that's
designed into this building at -- which you're throwing out a number,
maybe 30 million or so. But we could probably -- if you want to
take a deep dive and look at it, I can probably guarantee it will be
closer to $49 million when it's said and done when you convert that
building to accommodate the type of facility that we're going to build
out on that site that's designed so we can safely transport people that
are Baker Acted and other people that are already convicted of crimes
that need mental health care.
So I get it. It looks of prima facie -- on face value, you can say,
"Well, that's a building. We have it. We own it, and we're going to
remodel it anyways," but that doesn't mean we're going to remodel it
January 14, 2025
Page 106
to the standard that it has to be at to facilitate this type of operation.
So these are just some little things I look at from outside looking in.
And, you know, I'd love to say, "Yeah, we've got a $20 million
building somewhere to facilitate and meet all our needs," but I don't
think we do, and I don't think we can have -- I think we'll be at the
same price tag, or it may be even more when it comes down to
spending our taxpayers' dollars on this particular project.
So I'm just -- I just want to get this moving in the right direction.
I think we all understand the need for it, you know.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Chairman, can I just add
some clarity to my motion, when you deem appropriate?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. Commissioner McDaniel,
did you have something else?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, yeah. Yes, I do.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Go ahead, Commissioner
LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No. I was just going to say I
think my motion isn't that we put shovels in the ground tomorrow. I
think that there's still a lot of homework assignments to do. There's
citizens to hear from. We still have some budget things that are
unresolved, but I don't think this is the day where we flick the switch,
and we switch tracks. I'm just not convinced that we're at that
emergent point right now.
I do agree with Commissioner Kowal that I think that it's great
to go back to, hey, how about this site, and how about that site? And
in the end, I thought we were trying to build a state-of-the-art facility
for Collier County that would stand the test of time. If we're trying
to do this thing on the cheap, let's find a conference room somewhere
here in this building, and we'll put 10 beds in it, and we'll call it a
day.
January 14, 2025
Page 107
We weren't trying to do that. We were trying to build
something that was as amazing as the sports complex, as proud as we
would be. And if that means we have to squeeze a few extra dollars,
if that means David Lawrence Center doesn't -- doesn't fully come to
the table with what they had hoped to get, and we have to go to a
third party or we have to do something unique, I thought we had five
smart people up here that were supposed to be able to do that so that
20 years from now we can say, "Wow, what an incredible resource
we brought to Collier County."
I feel like, you know, we're sitting here trying to shave the edges
off of something that's so critical to our community, and that's why I
think we continue to move forward and figure out where the
shortfalls are, where the concerns are. It doesn't mean we can't
shape the edges and round off the corners or whatnot. But I don't
think this is the time where we flip the switch and change tracks or
we have the train going backwards. So, you know -- I'm sorry?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You've already expressed
that.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. Well, I get to express
it again. I'm lit up. So that's my position, and I appreciate
Commissioner Kowal seconding my motion.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner
McDaniel -- Mr. Miller, don't light up any more commissioners on
this.
MR. MILLER: They're doing that themselves, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Last speaker.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I won't hit any more buttons,
I promise.
I'm really working hard to not take offense when you make
comparisons of shortcuts and short-balling and stalling and all that
sort of stuff, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't even allude to the fact
January 14, 2025
Page 108
that any --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Just say what you want to
say. I get to say --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Stop.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I get to say my words.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I am asking you --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Say what you want to say --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Gentlemen.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- to not interrupt me.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Hang on just a second.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You don't have to critique my
words.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro, please,
just a moment.
Commissioner McDaniel, you have the floor.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Thank you, sir.
From a -- from a conversation standpoint, Commissioner Kowal,
I am -- brought up the minutes from the site selection discussion. It
was recommended to us by our staff at that point in time that before
we enter into this -- Commissioner Solis concurred with it -- that we
have the prenup agreement, because we're about to marry an
organization.
We never went to bid for an RFP for operators of this facility.
And so far -- the prenup that I've seen so far is we're going to own
this building, we're going to care for the capital asset maintenance
just like you were talking about there, they're going to take care of it,
but so far the only thing I've seen is a promise from that particular
operator, nor have we had any responses from any other operators to
do that.
And it's not uneasy [sic] to marry -- unmarry somebody with this
facility in its proximity where it is. It could be really easy if it were
January 14, 2025
Page 109
here on campus on a site that we, in fact, already own. And I've
alleged that all along.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion to
approve the staff recommendation to accept the changes to the
guaranteed maximum price contract. If there are no other questions
or comments, I'll call for the vote. All in favor, signify by saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. It passes 3-2. Thank
you.
All right. Let's take a break for lunch. Let's come back
at -- would 1:20 be enough? It's a little less than -- a little less than
an hour, but 1:20.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sure.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We're going to be in
recess until 1:20.
(A luncheon recess was had from 12:24 p.m. to 1:20 p.m.)
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Where do you
recommend we go now? We have the two public hearings.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a
recommendation that we go to the next agenda item.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Let's do that. Let's
keep our friendly lawyer waiting another half hour or so.
Item #9B
January 14, 2025
Page 110
ORDINANCE 2025-01: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05,
AS AMENDED, OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAPS TO CHANGE THE
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM URBAN,
MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN COASTAL FRINGE
SUBDISTRICT TO URBAN COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, 5396
MYRTLE LANE COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW
THE DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 200,000 SQUARE FEET OF
GROSS FLOOR AREA OF INDOOR SELF-
STORAGE/WAREHOUSE AND UP TO 3,000 SQUARE FEET OF
GROSS FLOOR AREA OF OTHER COMMERCIAL USES, AND
FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE
ADOPTION AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 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 - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO –
ADOPTED
Item #9C
ORDINANCE 2025-02: 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
January 14, 2025
Page 111
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 - MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – ADOPTED
Item #9D
RESOLUTION 2025-020: 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. MOTION TO APPROVE BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED
January 14, 2025
Page 112
MS. PATTERSON: I did offer to put some more agenda items
in front of theirs, but I don't think he took me up on the offer.
So that does bring us to our companion items. We're back in
Item 9, advertised public hearings, Item 9B, 9C, and 9D. I will read
them all or in part into the record to get started.
Item 9B is a recommendation to approve an ordinance of the
Board of County Commissioners amending Ordinance 89-05, as
amended, of the Collier County Growth Management Plan
specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and maps to
change the land-use designation of the property from Urban
Mixed-Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to Urban
Commercial District, 5396 Myrtle Lane Commercial Subdistrict to
allow the development of up to 200,000 square feet of gross floor
area of indoor self-storage/warehouse and up to 3,000 square feet of
gross floor area of other commercial uses, and furthermore directing
transmittal of the adoption amendment to the Florida Department of
Commerce.
The subject property is 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
plus/minus acres.
Its companion item, C, Item 11C, requires that ex parte
disclosure be provided, and this is a recommendation to approve an
ordinance rezoning property from the Myrtle Woods Commercial
Planned Unit Development and RMF-6 zoning districts to a
Commercial Planned Unit Development zoning district for a project
to be known as 5396 Myrtle Lane Commercial Planned Unit
Development.
And finally, 9D is a recommendation to approve Petition
VAC-PL20240005670 to disclaim, renounce, and vacate the county
January 14, 2025
Page 113
and the public interest in the 20-foot drainage and utility easement
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, and that is it. I
am sorry. I've lost my place for a second. And grant the petitioner's
request to vacate a 15-foot-wide by 520-foot-long drainage easement
to replace the vacated drainage easement.
With that, Commissioners, ex parte.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yes. I have meetings, e-mails,
and calls.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Same thing; meetings,
e-mails, calls on 9 -- 9 -- I don't know. I think she read in three
agenda items, 9 --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: C, D and E.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: C, D and F. I'm there.
MS. PATTERSON: B, C, and D.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, that.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, that.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: B, C, and D.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. I have, on all of
those, meetings, correspondence, e-mails, and calls.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. And I have the same;
meetings, e-mails, and phone calls for both of those.
MS. PATTERSON: We need all participants to --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, we have Commissioner Hall
January 14, 2025
Page 114
online.
MS. PATTERSON: Oh, Commissioner Hall.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's confirm that Commissioner
Hall's online.
MR. MILLER: He is.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, I'm here, and I have all the
above for the items.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Thank you.
MS. PATTERSON: Now if all participants could stand and be
sworn in by the court reporter, please.
THE COURT REPORTER: If you're doing to speak, I need to
swear you in. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Good afternoon.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Good afternoon. For the record, Rich
Yovanovich on behalf of the applicant, which is Metropolitan Naples,
LLC.
With me today is Wayne Arnold, our professional planner; Mike
Delate, our civil engineer; Norm Trebilcock is our traffic consultant;
and Marco Espinar is our environmental consultant.
As the County Manager has read into the record, we have three
items in front of you. One is a small-scale Comprehensive Plan
amendment, one is a rezone to PUD, and finally, one is a -- actually,
it's a vacation of a drainage easement and replacement of that same
drainage easement to another portion of the property.
The property is approximately -- you can see it on the visualizer.
It's at the intersection of Myrtle Lane and Tamiami Trail. There is a
traffic signal approximately right here that would be activated on our
side of the property at the time this petition moves forward and
is -- gets a Site Development Plan and building permits to move
January 14, 2025
Page 115
forward.
The property right now has two zoning designations on it. One
is commercial PUD on a little over seven acres, and another portion
of the property is zoned RMF-6. And I'll show you an exhibit that
better outlines that.
So under the Growth Management Plan today, one of the uses
that would be allowed on the property would be 120 multifamily
dwelling units. This piece of property was deemed consistent by
policy under the Growth Management Plan when it was adopted in
1989. And as part of the county's Growth Management Plan, the
commercial can be converted at 16 units per acre without the
requirement to provide affordable housing.
Our request is to change the future land-use designation from
urban designation Urban Coastal Fringe to the 5396 Myrtle Lane
Commercial Subdistrict. That subdistrict would allow basically C-1
and C-3 uses as well as self-storage, and it results, ultimately, in a
significant reduction in allowable commercial uses on the property.
By going to the indoor self-storage, we're only going to allow 3,000
square feet of retail from the 58- -- we're eliminating 58,000 square
feet of commercial uses.
So the proposed project is a significant reduction in traffic
impacts that can occur under the existing zoning on the property, and
the existing zoning on the property allows some fairly intensive
commercial uses, including allowing for automobile dealerships on
the property.
The facility replaces the existing U-Haul that is already in the
East Naples area. It will look nothing like the existing U-Haul. It
will be replaced by modernized indoor self-storage on the property.
And as you can see from the existing site, there was no buffers
because of takings related to U.S. 41. As Wayne will take you
through the master plan, there are significant buffers along 41 as well
January 14, 2025
Page 116
as Myrtle Lane as part of this project.
We're not asking for any deviations related to this project. And
this is already in your packet, but this basically summarizes what I've
already said, the purpose of the Growth Management Plan
amendment is to allow for the 2,000 -- I'm sorry, 200,000 square feet
of indoor self-storage and 3,000 square feet of retail uses on the
property.
Wayne will go over the revisions we made as a result of the
Planning Commission hearing. There were some changes to
that -- to our submittal at that time.
As I discussed, the current zoning is CPD. That's the 7.4 acres
that I was talking about earlier. And this is the RMF-6 portion of the
property that exists today. That will both be subject to the new
Growth Management Plan subdistrict as well as the new PUD rezone.
Wayne will take you through our master plan and the actual
numerical reduction in traffic we are proposing as a result of this
project. But if you note, we are adjacent to an existing old format of
self-storage, not the more modernized office-looking building, more
the industrial type of zoning, and we've located the self-storage
building in a location to where it's near a similar type use.
One of the things I wanted to address before Wayne gets up here
is we spent a lot of time at the Planning Commission talking about
access and how troublesome access for Myrtle Lane currently is. If
you can see, Myrtle Lane intersects with the Tamiami Trail or 41
right about where that arrow is, and not too far away is that traffic
signal. So when people are leaving Myrtle Lane now, they have to
go directly to 41, and if they want to head -- I guess that's east. I
always get confused if that's east or north -- on the Trail back to
town, they -- I'm sorry. It's west. It's none of the above. Thank
you -- they have to either fight traffic to try to get to the traffic signal
and do a U-turn, or they've got to continue further along 41 to get the
January 14, 2025
Page 117
U-turn.
One of the benefits of our proposed project and as part of the
Site Development Plan process, we will be providing access through
the site to get access to the traffic signal. So it will be a safer means
of egress and ingress for those living on Myrtle Lane when this
project is constructed.
There have been discussions about relocating Myrtle Lane onto
our property. That, frankly, just doesn't work from a development
standpoint, and I don't think the county's interested in going through
the process of acquiring the property and reconstructing Myrtle Lane
to make that happen. We will be basically doing that for the
residents and for the county as part of this project.
That's a brief overview of what we're requesting, and Wayne
will now take you through the master plan. And we'll be available to
answer any questions you may have regarding the project, unless you
have some for me before Wayne gets up here.
(No response.)
MR. ARNOLD: Good afternoon. Wayne Arnold with Grady
Minor & Associates, a certified planner. And as Rich mentioned, I'll
talk to you a little bit about the project history and then take you
through the master plan.
This is a depiction of the current commercial master plan that
was adopted, and it allowed for 61,000 square feet of commercial
uses, a lot of C-3 uses, but it also allowed vehicle dealerships, as Rich
mentioned. And what we're proposing is a little bit different plan.
But as Rich mentioned, this also contemplated access through the site
over to Myrtle Lane. And there was a condition in the original
approval. We're retaining that original condition with some slightly
modified language that the County Attorney has approved to make it
more legally sufficient.
This is our proposed master plan. And as Rich mentioned,
January 14, 2025
Page 118
we're showing an access connection on U.S. 41 at the Broward Street
entrance which, as you all know, that's where the signalized access to
Lely High School is. We're showing a little bit more circuitous route
to get over to Myrtle on the property but also showing an access point
to Myrtle.
When we initially filed this application, we showed that as an
emergency access only, and as this evolved through neighborhood
information meetings and other discussions, some people wanted a
full access opportunity through the site, some wanted it closed to all
traffic. After we debated that at the Planning Commission, we all
concurred to go back to the original condition that was there which
would allow for, at the time of site plan approval, to find that route
that connects Myrtle Lane to U.S. 41.
But on the site, we have two primary buildings, and as Rich
mentioned, the primary use for the square footage of 200,000 square
feet will be an indoor self-storage facility, a full-service indoor
self-storage. U-Haul is in the business of doing those. This is
considered one of their mobility centers.
So it takes in self-storage. This building in the back, we've
considered it to also be a warehouse and storage. It's part of your
square footage. That is for their U-Box. We're familiar with
PODS. I'm sure most of you are familiar with POD or similar
products. U-Box is their version. So you can bring it to your home,
you can bring it here, and it will get stored in their warehouse
location while you're making your arrangements to move and locate
within or outside of Collier County.
So the area where we would have truck rental, it would be
dispersed through the site, and that's where we'll be arranging the
route from Myrtle Lane through the -- through the facility.
But again, the storage equates to about 200,000 square feet, and
the retail is only that associated with moving supplies that U-Haul
January 14, 2025
Page 119
currently sells and their propane sales.
So if you're familiar with the U-Haul operation, you can go
there. You can buy boxes as a member of the public. You can buy
blankets and other shipping supplies, tape, et cetera. I'm sure you're
all familiar with that concept.
One of the things I point out, the companion item that is the
vacation, there's an existing drainage easement that we're vacating,
and that's being relocated around the site on the western boundary,
and it will connect back into the drainage easement that the county
owns on the south side of our property. It just relocates the
discharge point to a different location. Your staff has supported that
as well.
One of the things I would point out on this plan -- while I'm
here, before I leave it -- we had a discussion at the Planning
Commission about buffers, and we had proposed an enhanced buffer
along Myrtle Lane and U.S. 41 which was essentially to upsize the
canopy trees and then put in palm tree clusters in between each of
those canopy trees, and after a discussion with the Planning
Commission, we were asked to put in a Type B buffer, and the
distinction between the Type D buffer we have on U.S. 41 with the
enhanced landscaping is the Type B buffer; that would be on Myrtle
Lane for the entirety of our frontage and along our western boundary
adjacent to the remainder of the residential, will be Type B. And
that requires the canopy trees as well, but it also requires opacity at
six feet in height, whether it be a berm, wall, vegetation, or
combination thereof.
So we've committed to putting in the Type B buffer along
Myrtle and along our western property boundary and then the
enhanced Type D buffer along our U.S. 41 frontage.
We made several changes after the Planning Commission
discussion, and one of those, there was concern from some of the
January 14, 2025
Page 120
neighbors about amplified sound, and U-Haul does not utilize any
type of amplification to deal with their trucks, et cetera. So we
added a condition that prohibits outdoor amplified sound on the site.
There was a concern who's going to pay for the traffic signal. The
cost of the traffic signal would be borne as a responsibility of the
owner of this PUD.
They've asked for signage on Myrtle Lane that would prohibit
trucks from making left exiting movements onto Myrtle Lane, so you
would be right only to get them back to U.S. 41. And then there was
a condition added that the whole issue of access on Myrtle would be
evaluated at the time of site plan by your Transportation staff to make
sure it's in the right location and the appropriate improvements are
constructed. And then I mentioned the buffering enhancements.
Here was a conceptual rendering we prepared. You see the two
buildings. The typical self-storage building's located on that
southeast corner and then the U-Box storage building to the rear.
And then they don't translate very well, but there are clusters of palm
trees shown along your U.S. 41 frontage as well as up-sized canopy
trees. And we haven't reflected any signage or anything because we
haven't asked for any signage deviations from your code. It will be
to code as well as the final design for the architecture of the building.
Permitted uses, so we asked for the permitted C-1 through C-3
uses, which gets us those incidental sales for them, for the U-Haul
facility. Then we've asked for the rental and leasing, outdoor
equipment rental, and then those are trailers and things that they
have. The indoor storage for cube storage. And so those are the
things that we've asked for as part of this revised PUD.
We have a long list of prohibited uses. Many of those were part
of the original approval, and that included homeless shelters and soup
kitchens and tattoo parlors and things, and this list was expanded with
some of the other lists that the Planning Commission has been asking
January 14, 2025
Page 121
of us to include in our proposals lately.
We have development standards. This allows for a 50-foot-tall
zoned height building, 60-foot actual height, and then it establishes
that we can have the maximum 200,000 square feet of storage and
3,000 square feet of the other uses.
Transportation, we have Norm Trebilcock here if you have
specific questions on transportation. But we've established a new
trip cap that we do as part of these PUDs, and it's 62 two-way p.m.
peak-hour trips, and that's compared to the 238 peak-hour trips that
the current zoning allows on the site. So the current zoning allows
for nearly 400 percent higher traffic generation than we're proposing.
Norm did the analysis. We don't have any significant impacts
on the road segments. And as we've said, we're coordinating with
FDOT to make that signalized intersection at Broward fully
functional so that you can have four-way access to it rather than the
access restriction that's there today.
So as Rich mentioned, this is designed to take the U-Haul
facility out of your Bayshore/Gateway redevelopment area and
relocate it. We've demonstrated a demand as part of this analysis.
U-Haul did a full market analysis to determine -- and they looked
specifically at other indoor self-storage facilities in the area. Yes,
there are a number of indoor self-storage facilities. I know there's
been a lot of debate, but there's still a huge demand for those. So
that's the analysis that they've performed and demonstrated that there
is a need for it.
Again, we enhanced the buffering that's on Myrtle Lane and
U.S. 41, and, you know, as I mentioned, we've provided for the
access between Myrtle and the signalized intersection and that -- you
know, we hope you can support our Comp Plan amendment and the
PUD and the vacation for the drainage easement.
So we're here to answer specific questions that you may have.
January 14, 2025
Page 122
We're happy to --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Any questions for the
petitioner?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not right now.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's go to the staff, staff report.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
This was heard by the Planning Commission in December, and
the Planning Commission had a couple modifications and staff is
in -- supporting of the additional conditions that were imposed at the
hearing as well as the data and analysis that's associated with the
Growth Management Plan. Staff felt that the application has met the
threshold to justify the proposed additional storage facility.
When the public spoke at the Planning Commission, an
overriding theme was transportation concerns. And based upon the
reduction of the proposed self-storage facility compared to the
existing uses within the PUD, staff felt that this was a change that
was going to lead to a better condition in terms of the number of trips
associated with this facility, and maintaining the access through the
site to be able to provide alignment with the signal that aligns with
Broward on the north side of 41 was an important consideration, and
that was being maintained, and staff is supportive of that as well.
So for those reasons, staff is in support of the petition and
welcome any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, two questions. Number
one, I just -- I think I already know the answer to this, but because
we're amending an existing PUD and raising uses that are equivalent
to C-3, this will not be subject ever in the future, without an
additional request, to the Live Local Act?
January 14, 2025
Page 123
MR. BOSI: Correct. As the Board has clarified, PUD zoning
is not eligible for the Live Local.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I thought I recall that, but I
do have selective memory issues, so I always want to ask.
And then, number two, briefly share with me what were -- what
are the existing uses and intensities that are allowed on this site
currently now? I know Rich briefed through that, but if you would
just reiterate, if you can.
MR. BOSI: The C-1 through C-3 is -- a community shopping
center would be a use that would be allowed for within that C-3
zoning. A grocery store, types of uses that are associated with
serving existing residential development, but those uses do have a
much higher trip generation than the use that's being proposed. So
it --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Did I hear there was a
residential component in there as well for --
MR. BOSI: Only the existing RSF -- or RSF-6 that is being
proposed to be rezoned.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And we're taking that out?
MR. BOSI: That is being rezoned to --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Did I hear there was 120
units on that RMF-6, plus/minus?
MR. BOSI: No. I think when he mentioned 120 units was
what they could get overall if they utilized -- if they utilized the
density that's associated with the RMF-6 as well as the conversion of
commercial to the 16 units per acre. The net results would have
been 120 residential units could be developed on this site.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: On the whole site. By
eliminating the commercial, they could go to a total of 120?
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Because I -- thank
January 14, 2025
Page 124
you. That's all my questions for now.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Troy, I assume we have
public comment.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, we do.
MR. MILLER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. So I look forward to
hearing that, but let me just set the table a little bit, and then I want to
get your comments.
We all got e-mails from handfuls of citizens, basically the same
e-mail cut and paste. And it's the same e-mail that -- almost word
for word that we got for Isles of Capri, Fiddler's Creek, Hacienda
Lakes, building of Costco. You know, it's all type of things that
nothing should be built on this property because it will increase the
flooding risk, increase traffic and safety concerns, huge
environmental impact, and it's an unsuitable location.
Listen, I'll be the first one to tell you I'm not cheering from the
mountaintops on putting a U-Haul on this spot, but I can think of 10
things that would be way worse and actually would create the kind of
problems that the citizens are concerned about.
So, Mr. Bosi, let's take these one at a time. This proposal for
this U-Haul project, would it increase the flooding risk of that area as
opposed to the other things you mentioned, like a big shopping mall,
120 units, you know, or this would actually be a positive, especially
the way that it's going to be designed?
MR. BOSI: What I would say to that, any of the uses that are
being proposed within the existing PUD or what's being proposed
within the PUD -- the rezoning to the new PUD would be an
improvement because currently, right now, there's no water
management for this facility. It's just natural grade, and it provides
for the attenuation for wherever the low spots are. But there's
January 14, 2025
Page 125
no -- there's no water management that's been designed for the -- for
the acreage associated with this.
Any time that you have development, you're going to have to
have a stormwater management plan that's associated with that Site
Development Plan, and that's going to have to be required to provide
water quality and water quantity for a specific period of time of being
able to hold the water and before it can be discharged on the larger
system. So of any development that moves forward is going to have
the benefit of a stormwater management plan that's going to be able
to -- specifically towards how they're going to meet the county
required components of water quality and water quality [sic].
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. And I don't want
citizens to misunderstand me. I'm not sitting here making the case
and cheering for this, but I'm trying to separate rumor from fact
because, you know, when we get X number of e-mails and it's "You
can't build this because of traffic and safety concerns," putting a
shopping mall on that footprint, which could happen easily in a
second, or a dozen other things are way worse traffic-wise.
So some of the -- you know, I hate to say this to some of the
citizens who sent us these e-mails, but some of the things you've
listed in here make the case for this U-Haul, you know, project. So
it doesn't help me shoot it down when you say, "The number one
reason why it shouldn't be built is traffic."
I will sit here and say -- this is our real estate expert. We've
met quite a few times. I'm sure he's met with the other
commissioners. This particular project does just the opposite. So
you've just made the case that if you're concerned about traffic and
safety concerns, it's going to redo the road, Myrtle Lane, and bring it
right out to the light, which some other projects maybe wouldn't
agree to that, correct? I mean, that's not a guarantee.
MR. BOSI: No, I would -- currently the PUD has the
January 14, 2025
Page 126
exist -- has the requirement that they provide access to the light. So
they are maintaining that.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: No matter what. No matter
what project?
MR. BOSI: No matter what. No matter what.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. That's fair.
MR. BOSI: No matter what would be developed, that access to
the light has always been a component of the existing PUD as well as
the proposed.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But with this particular
project, the traffic that would be using that new road would be less
than if it was Publix.
MR. BOSI: If -- and I think the applicant said, like, a
380 percent reduction in what potentially could be allowed based
upon its current zoning. And our Transportation folks have looked
at it and said this would be a significant decrease.
But another component that I think -- and the Planning
Commission focused upon that -- was the entrance, the apron to
Myrtle Lane off of U.S. 41. That will have to be brought up to the
specific standards of the Transportation Department to provide for
the adequate width for that turning radius to be able to make sure that
that is up to county code. At this time, we're not sure if it meets
100 percent of the width.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: That's a key component. I
answered most of these citizens back saying, "The things that you've
listed here have merit, but they haven't been analyzed yet." So
you're right, some of these things when they get analyzed could shoot
down an entire project, right? You don't have a complete Site
Development Plan right now in your hand, do you?
MR. BOSI: No. And we do not require that type of -- level of
specificity at the zoning stage.
January 14, 2025
Page 127
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But at the -- right, at that
point. But a lot of these things that have been listed by citizens as
showstoppers are things that have yet to be fully vetted, correct?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, that time will come.
And so I don't -- we don't have a crystal ball. I don't think you can
just say off the top of your head it's an unsuitable location,
environmental impact.
You know, something's going to go there, okay. It's not going
to be a dog park. It's not going to be a library. Something's going
to go there. This isn't a state park. The county doesn't own the
land. You know, when people buy land, they have the ability to
develop it. Our job is to see if the right thing is going there or if the
least crappy thing could go there.
I've said many times before, I vote for something because it's the
thing I hate the least, but something's going to go there. I mean, the
eyesore that we have right now where U-Haul is, I think our
responsibility is to, obviously, protect and oversee our districts but
also, as a body of five, it's also to look across the entire county.
And so where the U-Haul is now -- like Mr. Yovanovich said,
the new one's going to be nothing like the eyesore that should have
been torn down years and years ago. It has nothing to do with the
new building that's building there. That thing should have been gone
a long time ago.
I'm not sitting here as District 1 commissioner begging for it to
be in my district, but the bottom line is, there's only so many places
this can go. And if citizens don't want it, you know, I get that, but
we have to latch on to something that has some meat on the bone.
And saying traffic, environmental impact, unsuitable location,
flooding risk, those are things that have no meat on the bone. Some
of those things haven't even been vetted out yet.
January 14, 2025
Page 128
So I didn't know if you had any more comment on that. You
probably have seen similar -- I think I forwarded you a couple of
these e-mails, Mike, because I wanted your, you know, official
response. But I think a lot of the things that are on here, this
particular location would help improve. Am I wrong?
MR. BOSI: At the zoning stage and what we analyze at the
zoning stage, we feel that this could -- this would be an improvement
over currently what is -- what is allowed by the current PUD.
But there are some things that will be more specifically
addressed at the SDP stage, so that's a later -- a later part. But they
will have to meet the county's standards, and the County Attorney's
standards have been deemed appropriate by the adoption of --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: If they don't meet the county
standard, then they can't build it.
MR. BOSI: Correct.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah. And I think that
sometimes -- that citizens sometimes -- and it's not for lack of smarts
or whatever, you know. Their job's not to sit here and come to every
single meeting, but sometimes they do sort of put the cart before the
horse where they list things that definitely have merit, but these
things haven't been looked at yet. So you're right, all these things
are of concern, but it's not something that would allow us to, right
now, I think -- and I think the Planning Commission, you know,
thought the same thing -- to shoot it down prematurely when these
things haven't even been vetted out yet.
MR. BOSI: And I will say about the Planning Commission, it
was a 6-1 vote. The one opposition felt that this would not be an
asset to the residential neighborhood, and they thought that there was
a sufficient amount of storage facilities already in the area. But there
were six -- six of the Planning Commission --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, trust me, I agree with
January 14, 2025
Page 129
that commissioner. You know, I've already tried to bring a
moratorium on storage units and this and that, and it didn't play.
And it's, like, okay, well, I have to deal with the cards that I'm dealt.
But also, on the flip side, this part of District 1 is -- and, you
tend to use the words that are sort of, you know, more official, but it's
the commercial footprint. It's the commercial area epicenter, if you
would. I mean, it's where Lowe's is. It's where Home Depot might
be. It's where the Wawa gas station is. And what we're trying to do
as a county, whether as separate commissioners we love it or
not -- I've said before, sometimes you've got to eat the spinach.
We're trying to consolidate and have a little bit more of a cohesive
approach to Collier County rather than this willy-nilly, you know,
anything that can be on a street corner.
And I'd be concerned that -- if there was a big, giant apartment
complex, you know, put on this site, which there could be, or, like
you said, something -- I guess, what would be more realistic is
something -- a larger commercial entity with much more traffic.
That's when this list of things would definitely kick in as being a
concern.
But for, you know, this particular thing, I think it's the -- it's the
least of all the bad options, I guess, I could say.
I'll have more to say. I want to hear from the citizens. But I
just wanted to set the table that any citizen that's going to come to the
podium and say, "Please don't build this because of traffic, traffic,
traffic," you're making the case for the U-Haul owners, okay.
You've made the case. This is the thing that generates the least
amount of traffic.
We've had citizens before in here where I've asked them
point-blank, "What do you think generates more traffic, a residential
community or a commercial entity?" And a lot of times they guess
wrong, and say, "Oh, residential," and it's just the opposite.
January 14, 2025
Page 130
You know, if you build something that's commercial, it's -- you
know, or depending on what it is. And in this particular case this
doesn't generate -- this is a commercial entity that would generate
minimal traffic compared to other things that could go there, correct,
Mr. Bosi?
MR. BOSI: Correct.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's get to the public comment.
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. We have 10 registered speakers for
public comment on this item. I'm going to ask the speakers to use
both podiums and queue up and ask each speaker to start by stating
their name for the record.
Your first speaker is Falconer Jones. He will be followed by
Walter Roche. Falconer Jones has been ceded three additional
minutes from Lori Pearce.
(Raises hand.)
MR. MILLER: Lori, are you -- thank you, Lori.
I know Falconer's going to be at that podium as he has
something for the visualizer, County Manager.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Mr. Jones, can you pull down
your mic a little bit, too, as you're about to speak. Thank you, sir.
MR. JONES: My name is Falconer Jones. I represent our
family that has a property on Myrtle Lane.
You guys, early this morning, had a lot of really nice things
going on, people getting congratulated and plaques and everything,
and then you got into a real tough one after that, and we had a break.
And I just hate to -- this is another tough one. It's -- it's -- I look at
this, I've been a developer. I used to have my first developing
business -- not here, but before I was in Pennsylvania -- but back in
the '80s, and yeah, everything -- and LoCastro's absolutely right,
everything we ever developed made more traffic, and every house we
ever built, every storage facility we ever built, everything we built
January 14, 2025
Page 131
created more traffic. But I was always kind of the guy that was
looking for how do you do it the best way you can.
And I remember on the industrial park, when I was involved in
that, we did a -- we had to go in there and get water retention and
water lines, and people had to give up some right-of-ways to get the
right drainage and so forth, and I remember we put a bond issue
together in that case because people that had property a long time ago
and owned it, they were going to be assessed a certain amount of
dollars for each foot, and we did a -- we did a pretty interesting thing.
We did the bond issue. We made it so that it could be paid over a
few years. So it was a solution on how to get something that was
really tough approved and try to get the best for everybody, and that's
what I look on this project.
And I'm not against development, because just like we all say,
this property's going to get developed, and it will get developed on
something that can go on this property.
But I have some other thoughts that I wanted to mention this
morning, and it becomes -- as we get more and more traffic
going -- now the center of the county is, I think, 951, which we used
to think was in the middle of the Everglades. And a majority of the
traffic is on -- on one of these main arteries, which is 41 -- which is
41.
And, you know, getting into Myrtle now, coming from
the -- from downtown, we can get in there. And yeah, it doesn't
have the aprons and so forth.
But the one thing I wanted to bring everybody's attention to is
that the property, the 100 -- I think it's close to 200 acres. It's 120
lots that have already been developed that are over in this area right
now that's on the other side of the -- of the -- of this Southwest Water
Management District. And I'm just wondering, how are you going
to get those people to 41? I think you'd probably want to get them to
January 14, 2025
Page 132
41 with a traffic signal.
You know, it would be nice if we could get Myrtle to the traffic
signal. I understand that the county doesn't want to take eminent
domain and so forth. But having been a developer, I've been on both
sides of the desk. You know, we saved the trees. We've done some
things. We changed -- but every project that is sometimes brought to
a board, just because it was brought because somebody wanted to do
it might not be the right one. I don't know.
I just -- this is -- this is -- I think the county has to take a look at
this and say, this other property, as the commissioners were saying,
it's getting developed. I mean, it's going to be intense. I don't have
any problem if somebody wanted to develop something else on that
property as a car -- as a dealership. You can do that, and you can't
take the property rights away from somebody if they have them.
But I'm concerned that the county needs to take a really, really
hard look at this to see, is this -- is this really what we want to do?
I know the developer, one of the things they want to do so that
they can develop this site is to provide some access for the residents
on Myrtle Lane to get to the traffic light, and I think that's one of the
things that they have to have to get this approved.
In addition, this property over here is also zoned -- and I think
you can put on -- was that seven units per acre, or maybe on the
intensified it's even more than that. So if you could -- when you
start adding more residential to an area that is already hard to get out
to and then not considering or having a thought about how do you get
to this area that now is not developed -- and my understanding is you
can't use a Southwest Water Management easement to bring traffic to
41. I don't know if -- I guess I -- I don't have any more to bring to
that. I don't know the answer, okay. I really don't. And it's -- and
it's frustrating because I can see some -- I can see some problems that
are existing now. I always like to see if you can make something
January 14, 2025
Page 133
better, but it's not only our street that needs to be looked at, but also
this other piece of property over here, and that's going to get
developed.
You know, I think -- at this point, I'd just like -- does anybody
want to ask me a question? I'll be happy to answer if I can.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
Kowal -- I mean, Commissioner McDaniel, did you have a question?
I see you're lit up.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you own that other piece
of property that's on the north side of Myrtle?
MR. JONES: Do I own the piece of property on the other side
of -- on the other side of Myrtle?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: On the north side of Myrtle
from this site.
MR. JOHN: My understanding it's owned by the same
developer. It's under the same LLC, and that was as of the record, I
believe, two Fridays ago.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's owned by the -- it's
owned by the same developer that the petitioner is buying from to do
the rezone, but you don't own -- you don't own that site that's
delineated?
MR. JOHN: No, sir. My address is 5315, farther down
Myrtle. No, I do not.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We're good. I'm a stump
jumper, too, so...
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal, did you
have a question?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I was just curious, because he
had -- he had brought attention to a development, and he pointed his
arrow past our stormwater management, which I think he was
pointing at Treetops, which has been there for at least 40 years. I
January 14, 2025
Page 134
don't know what -- is there another development somewhere going
that we don't -- that I'm not familiar with on that? We can't see it in
this picture, but...
MS. SCOTT: There is a large ag acreage that is south of
Treetops.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Would that be west of Treetops,
then?
MS. SCOTT: Yes, and it's west of Trail Acres as well.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Let's move to the next
speaker.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Walter Roche, and he will
be followed by Joe Smith.
MR. ROCHE: This will be rather brief. My name's Walter
Roche. I live on Myrtle Lane.
Everything sounds so rosy, and, in reality, when you get down to
it and you try to get this project done, it might not end up being as
rosy. In fact, a lot of things have changed.
Some people, but mostly all the people on our street -- a lot of
them are working and can't get here -- don't want to drive through
somebody's parking lot to get to a traffic light. Myrtle Lane is a
lane. It's a very narrow lane.
I want to get to traffic. There's a difference in traffic between
cars and trucks. You could not get a U-Haul truck and a car down
Myrtle Lane without one having to drive off road.
And I don't know how you're going to work this, but I just think
this whole project benefits Metropolitan Naples. I don't think it's
good for Myrtle Lane. I don't think it's actually good for U-Haul. I
don't think this is the right spot for that type of facility.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Joe Smith. He'll be
January 14, 2025
Page 135
followed by Kathy Smith.
MR. SMITH: Hello. I'm Joe Smith, born and raised here in
Naples. Been here pretty much all my life except for my time in the
Navy. I retired from the Navy in '98. Moved home in 1999. Been
on Myrtle Lane since 1972, my family has.
Pretty nice neighborhood. Quiet, big lots, dead-end street.
Very little traffic unless somebody's selling a house that we have
traffic going up and down the street.
I know you don't want to hear about personal issues with this.
It doesn't fit our neighborhood. Yes, we can have something with
the higher-use traffic. I would enjoy having a restaurant at the end
of the street. I use the Discount Auto Parts down the street a little
ways. We take our golf cart there. Take our golf cart to the
restaurants down in Hitching Post trailer park. This is not going to
benefit the neighborhood. It's in a commercial neighborhood right
now. Why is it not being placed back in a commercial/industrial
type area?
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kathy Smith. She'll be
followed by Paula Bronco.
MS. SMITH: Good afternoon. My name is Kathy Smith. I
live at 5240 Myrtle Lane.
There's 37 homes on Myrtle Lane; five of those are currently
vacant. This is 54 signatures of this petition; 54 signatures of
residents that are opposing changing the zone to accommodate a
facility of this size.
We know that something commercial will go there. We know
that something's going to be built there. We don't expect a dog park.
It's just we are not wanting four stories, stackable PODS, large
propane tanks, noise from backup beepers all day long. And the
question still has not been answered about where the maintenance is
January 14, 2025
Page 136
going to be for these trucks. It really wasn't answered in the
planning meeting. So we want to know where the maintenance is
going to be.
There's going to be -- are they going to be doing oil changes?
Where are those going to be? That wasn't really discussed. It just
kind of was shoved under the rug.
Also, we are concerned about the one-acre lots that are, you
know, behind our neighborhood. It's between Myrtle Lane and
Southwest Boulevard. Are those lots going to be landlocked now?
Have those owners been notified about their property, that they won't
be able to get back there? And also, have any of you been to our
neighborhood?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Many times.
MS. SMITH: You've been down Myrtle Lane?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Many times.
MS. SMITH: Okay. So you know that it's a small
neighborhood. The road is narrow.
So when we talk about traffic, we're not talking about the
regular SUV or car. We're talking about, what is it,
30-something-foot U-Haul trucks back and forth.
I believe I e-mailed all of you this. Yes, I -- and thank you for
responding. That means a lot to be acknowledged, you know, that
you received the e-mail.
And I feel like a broken record saying this, because I said this in
the last meeting, but, you know, these gentlemen are being paid, paid
very well, you know, to sell you on this. They can -- they can check
off all the boxes that are required. They're getting paid to do that.
But, you know, when this is over, us, the residents have to live with
this type of facility.
I also e-mailed you about the corner of Raintree Lane and 41.
It's a small -- it's a small single-story building. It's new. They have
January 14, 2025
Page 137
massage, a bakery, outdoor kitchen sales. They have a gate that's
closed off to Raintree. It's for emergencies only. That is more
suitable for our neighborhood, something like that.
So thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Paula Bronco. She'll be
followed by Jose Contreras.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I believe Paula had to leave.
MR. MILLER: Paula has left.
Jose Contreras. I do not see him responding.
Claudia Fuller, who is right back there. She will be followed
by Steve Fuller.
MS. FULLER: Hi. Claudia Fuller, 5259 Myrtle Lane.
And I want to thank Kathy for your comments on the fleet
maintenance location, because that was a big discussion during the
Planning Commission, and we were assured by the representative
from Metropolitan Development that that definitely would not
happen there. We haven't seen a U-Haul representative at any of the
meetings. I think there were some gentlemen earlier from the local
U-Haul, but that's a very big concern.
And looking at this -- we all realize Metropolitan Development
is really not the applicant. They're -- they just want to get U-Haul
off their site so they can build another high-rise, and they want to
shove U-Haul down to our neighborhood because they thought we
might not pay attention to the situation.
A couple other unconsidered questions was in the Site
Development Plan it says that the warehouse building was going to
be one story. In the rendering, it definitely is much more than one
story. That's the building that they're going to have the PODS that
get delivered on a flatbed truck. I've seen them around town. I've
seen them in other cities. And those are used with a forklift.
January 14, 2025
Page 138
That kind of facility is not your typical self-storage where
somebody might go to it once a month. That's a pretty active
warehouse type of situation. And we keep calling this self-storage,
but this is a much bigger element.
I did a lot of research into their smart mobility. There aren't
many of them. They have one in Phoenix. They have one that
they're going to do in Tallahassee. They have the truck rentals.
They have the alternative fuels like propane. Some of them have car
rental and leasing. I haven't seen that in this, but is that part of their
plan? Because it is a new concept for U-Haul, the smart mobility
center.
Also, on the site plan there's no location for where the LP tanks
are. As you've heard, we're a residential street. They want to
convert RMF-6 to commercial. Adjacent to that RMF-6 is more
RMF-6, which could mean a lot of additional units. So that's
something that we would like answered.
I'm not sure -- Wayne was talking about a drainage easement
that wanted to be vacated. I'm pretty sure the strip of land he's
talking about is actually an active utility easement with power lines,
so we might want to check into that.
My final note is a couple years ago East Naples Civic
Association and the county pulled together the Comprehensive Plan.
And I know it can't be enacted because of restrictions due to some
state mandates, but that does not mean you have to grant less
restrictive zoning for storage and car washes, and that seems to be a
trend that we're seeing, unfortunately, on the East Trail, and I know
later we're going to have the same topic with the car washes.
Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Steve Fuller. He will be
followed by George Danz.
MR. FULLER: Hi. My name is Steve Fuller. I also live on
January 14, 2025
Page 139
Myrtle, with Claudia.
Thank you for not adding more to the agenda for our time. My
folks here had to go back to their jobs at 25 bucks an hour. They're
not sitting here making 150.
It is a big deal. There's quite a few changes in zoning.
They've taken RMF-6, which is 1.2 acres, and they're going to
convert it to -- they say C-3, but actually what they're trying to
propose is more of a light industrial with propane, with the semis
coming in with POD storage. They are going to convert several C-3
zoned sites to C, I think, 5. I don't know. I'm not a planner. But
they're converting a lot of land to heavy commercial.
I want to address a question about -- one of the commissioners
had about the parcel on the north side of Myrtle, because there was a,
gee, we don't want to realign Myrtle because it could eminent
domain. That parcel on the other side of Myrtle actually is owned
by the same landowner. So you could move Myrtle, readjust those
parcel sizes, and there is no eminent domain that occurs.
In addition to the complex being built -- and it's a complex.
We're not talking one story. We're talking a 50-foot-tall building
with an additional right to 10 feet of upper easement for signage.
You're going to leave the county with a glowing red U-Haul sign
visible for miles. It's not going to benefit anybody. It's not going to
benefit our neighborhood. It's not going to benefit the Manor across
the street, Treetops, or those 110 lots that haven't even been
discussed.
I think it's a shame that when you have two county schools at the
end of Brevard [sic] and you have one of the few intersections left on
the East Trail that could be a zone of commercial activity that
actually benefits the residents of all the communities I just
mentioned, we're going to take that away from them. You're going
to take that away from thousands of residents on the East Trail. And
January 14, 2025
Page 140
for who? It's not for U-Haul. I'm sorry, but it's for Metropolitan of
Naples. We all know why they want to kick the can down the road.
Traffic counts are one thing but the intensity and type of traffic
is another. In our last meeting, we were debuked [sic] by -- when
somebody said, "Oh, there's 30-foot trucks." And we were told,
"No, U-Haul has nothing over 26 feet." Well, that's the box on the
back of a 34-foot truck. You add a 24-foot car trailer, and now
you've got 60 foot of vehicle missing their turn. There's no
deceleration lanes. They're going down Myrtle, a 17-foot-wide road,
and it's going to be a mess. It's going to be a safety hazard.
I've been to the EMS and the fire department just a quarter mile
up the road, and I've asked them their opinion on this. I did this
about five months ago. This has been lingering. They hate that
intersection. They hate that intersection for already the deaths that
occurred in it, both pedestrian, bicycle, and cars.
MR. MILLER: Your final public speaker on this item is
George Danz.
MR. DANZ: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, my name is George
Danz, and I'm also secretary of the East Naples Civic and Commerce.
I want to speak in opposition to this project.
The civic and commerce organization has worked for the past
several years with your staff in developing a comprehensive master
plan for the U.S. 41 corridor, but still, in the meantime, we are getting
inundated with gas stations, storage facilities, and car washes. You
don't have to walk too far -- or drive too far down Tamiami Trail
East, and you can get a gas station, you can get a car wash, you can
get a storage area within a few blocks of wherever you're at. Do we
really need all those storage facilities, car washes, and gas stations?
Before long, we may have one on every corner.
I guess my proposal would be maybe we need to just have a
moratorium on those types of facilities until we figure out what we
January 14, 2025
Page 141
really do need.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Chair, I was in error, hard enough as that is
to believe. We have one more speaker, George -- or, excuse me,
Gregg Vile.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: There's a first time for everything,
Troy.
MR. MILLER: Actually, second time today, so I'm off to a bad
start.
MR. VILK: He did the name wrong, too.
MR. MILLER: Third one.
MR. VILK: The name's easy. It's Gregg, and the last name is
Vilk.
I've attended all the prior meetings, and I want to be really frank
and up front. I'm -- I support development. This property is going
to get developed at some point. I'm not against it. I do not believe
in violating the property owner's rights for any reason.
If this property and this project comply and they conform, stamp
it through. If it doesn't, don't give any courtesies.
I want to give you some information that really has been missed,
and it hasn't really been provided here or any other time. But if
you -- the map doesn't show it either. Just south, along the whole
length of Myrtle Lane, there's 186 acres back there, never been
developed. It's been landlocked from day one. All individual
one-acre parcels, basically. It's still landlocked today.
The subject properties are owned by an entity. There's also
another entity, and I think it's called the Naples Pawn or something
like that. Same principal, same owner, deceased; an estate is
handling it. They also own 50 of the 186 parcels there in the back.
So if this project goes through, those 186 landlocked parcels
remain landlocked. This is an opportunity to look at the big picture
January 14, 2025
Page 142
of what that land can be developed giving it the right access and also
the right use.
Staff called that land back there agricultural. It may be
classified as agricultural, but they're one-acre residential lots. Never
developed. And we know how precious land is for residential
homes. But these people are paying taxes, and they can't do
anything with it. There's many uses it can be.
So just look at the big picture of it. Understand, on the other
side of Myrtle Lane there's vacant land owned by one of the two
same entities that own this entire property. That property is going to
be developed, it's residential, and it's going to be multiuse. They've
already acquired a residential house down the street joining to it.
So Myrtle Lane is going to inherit that traffic no matter what,
and I don't think we should stop it. If it conforms, it conforms.
What the applicant is asking for is to take commercial property
that doesn't conform and to give them a higher use or higher grade,
then take some residential land and give them that same use, then
take the intersection that the county has already improved and
established for use to have a four-way intersection. They're trying to
basically muddy the water there and traffic Myrtle Lane through that.
Myrtle Lane residents can't go through a commercial property; 24/7
trucks moving through, service centers, storage facilities. And I
don't know the size of the propane tank, but it is a big part of the
business. It's been ignored.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We need you to go ahead and
wrap up.
MR. VILK: Oh, I haven't even -- I'm not even close. But I'll
stop it there. But if it doesn't conform, don't give it to them. Use
the right -- use the right property.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Mr. Yovanovich, do you
have any rebuttal that you want to --
January 14, 2025
Page 143
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah, I do. Can we go back to our
presentation?
I just want to correct a couple of statements that were made.
And I didn't write down the names of who made them, but it doesn't
matter. First of all, we've said on the record before, we'll say it
again, there are no backup beepers on any of these trucks. So the
representation about the backup beepers was made at the Planning
Commission. It's not true. There are no backup beepers.
We -- I believe we stated on the record at the Planning
Commission that -- where is the maintenance going to happen? It's
going to happen in this building right here. And we actually
included -- and it's in the PUD. It's on Page 2 of the PUD that -- and
we said this on the record at the Planning Commission that it will be
minor auto service and repair for the rental leased vehicles only.
"Vehicle maintenance for rented leased vehicles shall be limited to
minor maintenance and repairs, including but not limited to, vehicle
washing, battery replacement, tire changing, trailer hitch installation,
wiper blade replacement, and similar repairs."
So we're not talking about any heavy maintenance of any heavy
vehicles that's going to occur on this site. And it's within the
building. So we made that statement at the Planning Commission,
we committed to it, and it's on Page 2 of the PUD.
This is the building where the PODS will be delivering. On a
busy day, we have two deliveries, two deliveries. Right? Busy
day -- busy day is two deliveries. So it's not like it's in and out -- I'm
sorry -- with a lot of people bringing PODS to and from the site.
That building is a one-story building because you can stack the
PODS in this building. This is the four-story building.
The comment about 50-foot-tall buildings, that's the existing
height in the current PUD. So we're not asking for anything taller
than what's already allowed in the PUD. And in fact,
January 14, 2025
Page 144
probably -- because we could go up to 75 feet of actual height in the
existing PUD, so -- right? Okay, yeah. So we're at 50 feet in the
current PUD. We're staying at 50 feet in the new PUD.
There is a prohibition of trucks entering -- leaving our site and
going onto Myrtle Lane. They have to turn right. Now, most of us
who have ever leased one of their trucks are going to use the traffic
signal. I don't know why anybody would want to go on Myrtle Lane
anyway when you're leaving or coming back. You're going to want
to go to a traffic signal for your movement.
So the concern that someone's going to come flying down in a
truck because they're returning the truck and they're going to miss the
turn and they're going to go all the way down Myrtle Lane, I don't
think that that's a reality. And we made it very clear that any trucks
that are leaving are prohibited from turning left onto Myrtle Lane,
because that was a concern that was raised at the Planning
Commission. So that was addressed by the Planning Commission
and addressed within our PUD.
I'm just looking at my notes to make sure I covered everything
that I don't think was accurately reflected from what was within the
documents. This use is by far a less intense use on the property than
exists today. Indoor self-storage is not an intensification of a
commercial use. It's a less intense use. The old-fashioned self-
storage that you have right down here, that's the self-storage that's an
industrial classification. What we're proposing is not an
intensification of commercial uses of the property.
I don't -- I don't know what they're talking about with regard to
these other lots that may or may not get developed someday that are
currently landlocked. As we said at the Planning Commission, it's
not our responsibility to un-landlock someone else's property. I
think what they're referring to is this area here.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct.
January 14, 2025
Page 145
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, Treetops kind of ends right
around there. So they're not coming through our property anyway,
and we're, candidly, not going to invite them through our property to
get their access.
What happens on those parcels, I don't know, but that's not
what's in front of you today. And we can't speculate as to where
those properties will or will not obtain their access in the future.
What we are doing -- can I go back, Amy? Can you switch me
back? Thank you.
And Commissioner LoCastro was absolutely correct, we do not
have the Site Development Plan in front of staff yet. We are going
to provide safe access for people who are driving on Myrtle Lane to
get to that traffic signal. That will be reviewed by both Ms. Cook
and Ms. Scott's departments when we come through with the Site
Development Plan to make sure that that access is safe and will allow
people who live on Myrtle Lane to have better access than what they
have today. I don't think there's any question that what we're
proposing will make it easier for them to get in and out of Myrtle
Lane onto 41 at a safe traffic signal.
So we -- the Planning Commission saw the benefits of this
project, recommended approval 6-1. Your staff says we are
compatible and are recommending approval of this project. All of
the expert testimony to this point has been that we meet the
requirements of your code. We are compatible with the neighbors,
and we're requesting that you approve all three petitions. And we're
available to answer any questions that I may have not responded to.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. You responded -- and I
just want to repeat. Did I hear you say that the maintenance -- the
minor maintenance that's going to be performed will be inside the
building that's four stories?
January 14, 2025
Page 146
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's within the cavity of the building, if
you will.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I wanted you to repeat that.
Number two, and you did say the back building where the PODS
are going to go is a one-story facility?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It is. It is, yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Now, I didn't hear you say --
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's just tall.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do what?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's a taller building, but it's only one
story, yeah.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand. Where is the
LP tank, storage tank? I didn't hear that get addressed. That was a
question somebody had.
MR. ARNOLD: Wayne Arnold again.
We're working with U-Haul on their Site Development Plan and
the elements of it. We're not exactly sure where the propane tank is
going to be located. It's going to be located somewhere pretty
proximate to the warehouse storage building, the three- or four-story
building.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The four-story building
and --
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's going to be in this general vicinity
right in through here.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Out in front?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Closer to the road.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Closer to here?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right there.
Okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Because that was a question
that --
January 14, 2025
Page 147
MR. YOVANOVICH: Understood.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then as far -- and this
may be for staff. I don't mean to put you on the spot, but there was
a -- and I'm just looking at this site plan right now with the
utility -- or with the proposed adjustment in the drainage easement
that goes through this. It looks like the one that they're proposing is
smaller than the one that is existent. Has anybody done any
investigation there to talk about capacities? And I don't know if
that's Bosi or Wayne or somebody.
MR. ARNOLD: If I might, Commissioner. The easement in
question that we're vacating is located here. We haven't shown the
replacement easement -- it's to be finally located -- but it's going to be
the same width somewhere along our western boundary in here.
This is an existing easement that's going to remain, and that's a
pipeline easement.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's the pipe -- that's for
the -- okay.
MR. ARNOLD: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So your drainage easement
will be west of -- or west of that?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, whatever direction that is.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Got it.
And you answered the question with regard to the existing
height of the current zoning is 50 feet today, so we're not going in in
excess of that.
One last question. There was some discussion Wayne brought
up about the opacity on Myrtle and on the west side -- the west side
of our site. You talk about multiple things, but I didn't hear a
specific. It could be a wall. It could be a fence. It could be brush.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. It allows for landscaping to
January 14, 2025
Page 148
achieve the opacity, and it has to be at 6 foot in height.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. All right.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. I had a
lot of jotted notes down here, but a lot of them got answered
throughout the questioning here.
But I'm still a little hung up on the -- I know a couple of people
have made the comments about the large trucks traversing Myrtle
Lane. I just don't understand why -- why wouldn't U-Haul just say,
for safety reasons, you know, if you're renting a vehicle from this
project that, you know, it's in the contract that you use the
intersection with the lighted intersection to just make it safer.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I mean, I don't -- you know, that
would solve that in a minute.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No worries. We can --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: If somebody, accidently, their
GPS turns them early, I mean, that happens.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. We can -- we can require that
they come and go from --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: From the lighted intersection.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- the lighted intersection.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I mean, to me that makes the
most sense.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think they would do that out of
common sense, but I agree.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I think, too, but there's this
chance -- like I said, if your G -- you're returning a truck
from -- you've been driving, you know, and it turns you early on
Myrtle, and then you're on Myrtle.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You're right, you're right.
January 14, 2025
Page 149
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: But that's on -- you know, that's
not no fault of anybody's.
But, I mean, I don't know -- I think a young lady had mentioned
there's about 50 occupied homes on Myrtle right now. It's a
land -- it's a dead-end road. So I don't know how much even traffic
they have on a daily basis in and out of Myrtle with their own traffic,
because that should be the only traffic other than the mailman or UPS
or a school bus possibly that would traverse Myrtle at any time as it is
now. So you could probably eliminate that to just their traffic
anyways just by correcting that or making that possible adjustment.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Like you said, the four-story
building -- and I understand the D buffer where you're -- or B buffer,
I think that's what you were saying. You're increasing the buffer to a
higher standard.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct. We -- at the Planning
Commission, we increased the buffer at -- along Myrtle and here, and
this was already an enhanced -- an enhanced buffer along 41.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So the sides that have the
residential properties in these pictures I'm looking at, this already
looks like a pretty substantial land buffer already because there's
some lots that aren't developed.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And especially lots that are not
developed to the east/southeast corner. Even with that and the
building being four stories, let's say the 50 feet, which is the max,
from a sign -- from a human being just standing or sitting in a car,
you're more than likely not even going to see that building from the
community.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think you're right as you're
driving -- you're talking about driving from Myrtle?
January 14, 2025
Page 150
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I'm saying even in your home.
Like, if you look out to the -- to the north, which would be that
direction.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: You would -- from the distance,
the buffer, plus the buffer and the height of the building --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- just the angle of you, from
your point of view, you probably wouldn't even see the top of that
building.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think -- I think that's a fair
representation.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Because I'm -- do we know
approximate footage from the tallest building to where the
residential -- now you're including those dead -- I guess those spaced
lots, which are probably 75-foot frontages, at least. You're talking
150, '60 --
MR. YOVANOVICH: The thought is it's -- I think it's going to
be several hundred.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Several hundred feet, right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah, yeah.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. I'm not an angle guy or
anything, but I --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. But it's --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: If a 6-foot person's looking over
some trees at 700 feet --
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'd like to tell you I could tell you what
a 6-foot person will see, but...
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Yeah. I guess the other -- so
you answered the propane thing.
January 14, 2025
Page 151
I can only say I'm the District 4 commissioner so -- and I'm a
cochair of the CRA, and -- you know, and the whole idea of the CRA
is Community Redevelopment Association. And, you know, we
have -- and I can only say that this is a unique situation because this
is not a new storage facility.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It's not. We're just -- we're
moving one that already exists in a blighted, rundown building that's
been there for a long time in an area that the public, the community,
and the government has been wanting to put a Band-Aid on for a long
time, and that's why they developed the CRA and it exists is just for
those reasons.
So the customers that already utilize the building there are just
basically going to be relocated to this building here, and it will
probably increase because it's going to have a greater capacity than
the existing one. But this is not like we're putting a new storage unit
and 100 percent new customers coming and going. It's providing a
service to ones that already use the U-Haul, to a point.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. But in -- you know, it's more
than that. I mean, we're relocating an existing use, but we're
appropriately locating it on a much larger site where we can put the
buffers in.
And in fairness to U-Haul, they didn't do -- it was the
government that came in and expanded 41 that kind of took away the
buffers that used to be at that site. So everybody has in their mind
that it's very -- not attractive. We're not bringing an unattractive
project to this site. And yes, I agree with you, we are relocating a
use that already exists along 41.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It's not a -- it's not a -- we could
say it's a new storage facility, but in reality a percentage of it is just
customers that already use it in the county already --
January 14, 2025
Page 152
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right, correct.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: -- that aren't going to have the
ability to use it once it's torn down.
And, you know, I can only go on -- like, to me, in being the
CRA and being part of it, I'm like, awe, you know, this is a great
thing. We're going to, you know, get -- some of these blighted
buildings we've been concerned about for the last 30, 20 years, get
them removed, get better, nicer things put in.
And then I'm thinking, well, this site, I thought about it. You
know, just my familiarity of knowing Myrtle Lane, I know that area.
I know that there was an undeveloped, basically, woods there
that's -- you know, in the past, it just unmaintained. It retains water.
It probably has mosquitoes there in season.
And then at one point I remember there was even homeless
camps in that woods, in that area between the two streets, between
Treetop -- or the old storage facility, and they had trails going in and
out of there that were -- you know, so to me, I was thinking, wow,
this is probably a good thing. So they're going to beautify something
that's been kind of, like, neglected for a long time.
And I mean, this was kind of my initial mindset, and -- but then
more and more, you know, hearing about the project, you know, I
think -- I like it, and I don't have a problem with it.
So I think it's meeting -- you know, the standard I think we're
holding you and your clients to to get this done. So I mean, I just
have to say I'm in support of it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: There were a couple comments
made about signage. I think there was a comment about signage on
top of the building.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We're going to comply with the code.
We are not asking for any deviations from the sign code.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So what kind of sign will there be,
January 14, 2025
Page 153
then? I understand it's going to be consistent with the code, but
it's --
MR. ARNOLD: Commissioner, Wayne Arnold again.
So the signage package for this is being worked on.
There's -- as stated, your code does not permit signage on top of
roofs.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Right.
MR. ARNOLD: So it will be wall signage, and there will be
monument signage at the entrance.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. And then there was
another question concerning the smart mobility center. I don't know
what that is, but it sounded like it would be something that might be a
problem. What's the plan there?
MR. ARNOLD: So smart mobility is the concept that -- these
newer facilities where they've combined uses. So there are indoor
self-storage in a small capacity at the existing site. That's primarily
a vehicle rental.
So this site would have the storage for indoor self-storage, the
POD storage, it's going to have the vehicle rental, it's going to also
have electric charging stations for you and me to use if we chose to.
So that's kind of -- there's smart mobility. It responds to all types of
mobility that you and I and others may -- as we pick up and move
from here to somewhere else, we may need a variety of storage types.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Thank you.
Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, Mr. -- thank you,
Chairman.
I've checked off quite a few things here except for -- except for a
couple.
Remember when we approved the Baker Senior Center we had a
similar issue which people were concerned about cars coming out of
January 14, 2025
Page 154
the Senior Center and turning, you know, the wrong way down into
the neighborhood.
I wanted -- and you sort of alluded to it, and I appreciated
Commissioner Kowal's question.
I'd like to hear that -- if we did approve this, I'd like to hear
something very definitive that would make it impossible for trucks to
turn down Myrtle Lane. Not, "Well, we'll try to suggest to them."
And I realize, you know, somebody could always make a wrong turn.
But when we did the Baker Senior Center, it was, "Well, we'll make
sure nobody turns there," and then in the end we put actual signage,
and we did some very, very specific things. I would like to see that
verbiage in here if we did move forward with the project.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We have -- we have a requirement to
place a sign right here. It's "Do not turn left if you're leaving the
site." Initially we talked about even trying to construct it in a way
that you could not physically turn left, and then we realized we were
doing a disservice to the people who lived on Myrtle because they
were coming -- they were back -- you know, they're going to come
through here -- or through here, I'm sorry, and get to this point, and
we didn't want to stop them from actually going back home.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Home, yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So the collective wisdom was we'll
place a sign, "Rental trucks are prohibited from turning left." We'll
do the additional let them know up front as part of the contract you're
not -- you have to use -- you have to use the traffic signal. So I
think -- I think we're -- you know, short of someone using their GPS,
and if they do turn on, they're only going that far, so...
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You know, without a
definitive final Site Development Plan, some of the statements that
the citizens have made have definite merit, but that's what the Site
Development Plan's for. So, you know, that's sort of where we're
January 14, 2025
Page 155
putting the cart before the horse. So there will be things that shake
out of that, if this does go forward, that we may not be good with,
you know, we, the county.
What are the hours of that retail store? You know, it was made
[sic] by somebody saying 24/7 -- cars will be coming, trucks will be
coming 24/7, and -- I don't believe it's a 24/7 operation.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. The retail store, the office is 7 to
7.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. So renting trucks,
you rent trucks 7 to 7. Would the maintenance of the trucks also be
an hourly thing, or would that be a 24/7 operation in that building?
Hours, right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. We can put in there the
maintenance -- the hours of operation for renting and all that stuff
would be 7 to 7, and the maintenance would be 7 to 7.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So, I mean, the statement
where -- and I realize, you know, citizens are vocalizing their
concern.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But the statement of, you
know, 24/7 trucks will be running, 24/7 people will be changing oil,
24/7 there will be, you know, beepers backing up and things like that.
I mean, I'm just trying to wrap my arms around what reality actually
is.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Will there be 24/7 to the
self-storage that the gate will always be open to people that will have
a code or they'll have something similar to some of the other storage
units?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Actually, the access to this access point
to get there, that is 24/7. There's going to be no gating to prohibit
January 14, 2025
Page 156
residents from using that access point to get to the traffic signal.
And the answer to your other question is, you will have a code to get
into the building if you want to go to your storage unit.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'm still trying to understand,
if I lived on Myrtle Lane, how I'm cutting through this retail location
to get to the light for a safe way to get out to Tamiami Trail. Explain
to me with a little more detail -- it doesn't look like you have the
artist's renderings here. But, you know, the one citizen that sort of
said, "Hey, we're going to be sort of, you know, cutting through this
parking lot or whatnot," I agreed with them. That sounded very
sloppy, and maybe it's a safe way to get to the light. But it just -- it
doesn't -- to Mr., I think, Jones' point -- and he met with me in my
office yesterday where he was saying, "Hey, I'm not against this, but
there's got to be a smart way to do this." Give me a little more
detail. What am I missing? It sounds sloppy.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, that's exactly why we have to do
the Site Development Plan. That's when staff is going to ask us to
identify specifically how you're going to get from Point A to Point B.
Here's an example of how you would do that where you
wouldn't be going -- cutting through the site. You would have an
identified area, assuming it meets the right turning radiuses for
vehicles trying to get to the light. That's one option. But the Site
Development Plan will flesh out exactly how vehicles will drive
through the site to get to this traffic signal.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Because what you wouldn't
want is you're a resident trying to cut through here, and there's three
U-Haul trucks that are loading up in the middle of the road.
MR. YOVANOVICH: We don't want any resident to do that,
and we don't want that either because that just is not safe.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
January 14, 2025
Page 157
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I've got two questions
that got by my checklist. One is -- and I think you answered it -- this
site will not ever be gated.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So there will be 24-hour
access.
The last, I think my question is, then, for staff. And it's
been -- it was mentioned to me by one of my friends -- other friends
that lives on Myrtle about the relocation of Myrtle because it's the
same piece of property owner on both sides. It was alleged that we
could just wave a magic wand and move Myrtle and give that
other -- give the same guy a piece of property that used to be on
Myrtle. Has there been any kind of a cost analysis comparison done
on the condemnation necessitated for that?
MS. SCOTT: There has not, sir. There has not, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And maybe, Mr. Bosi, the
question has to do with can that be done without a burden on the
government from a taking with regard to the relocation of the exit of
Myrtle? I think -- or maybe the County Attorney. I don't know
who to ask that. It looks like a taking to me.
MR. BOSI: Whenever the -- whenever the government has to
acquire land, there has to be just compensation that's provided for.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
MR. BOSI: And it's -- I mean, that's just a simple principle
that -- but I don't know the specifics. If it's a land swap, I'm not sure
how that would -- how that would work and how that would factor
into the equation.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that's a question for you,
Rich. Was there -- Rich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Was there ever any
January 14, 2025
Page 158
discussion about that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: The concept of a land swap --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- is not something that's of interest of
my client. So the only way it would happen is through eminent
domain.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Your client is buying this
piece of property from the same owner that has the property to the
north?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So that -- the no
discussion --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. There was a -- the concept of
doing that swap is not of interest to my client. It just doesn't result
in -- it's not as simple as just moving the road. You don't have the
same type of parcel to really develop.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I understand. I understand.
Okay. That's all my questions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Let's get to -- we'll
close the public hearing, and we're now in discussion, and we'll see if
there's a motion. We can take the two items at the same time, I think
B and C, if you want to take that as one motion.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Is Commissioner Hall still on?
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes, I'm right here.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: As far as I know -- yep.
All right. So we don't have a motion to approve at this point.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I mean, I just was -- you were
saying take B and C together?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We don't have to take B and C
together. I was just saying we can. Let's just go with Item 9B first
and see if there's a motion on 9B. That's dealing with the
January 14, 2025
Page 159
Comprehensive Plan, Growth Management Plan. All right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make the motion. I'll
make the motion for approval.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Motion for approval on 9B?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I'd second that.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
a second. Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor of the motion, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall, were you able
to vote on that?
COMMISSIONER HALL: I was. I was affirmative.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Let's go to 9C, which is
the zoning issue.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: This is a companion, so I'll
make the motion on that as well.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, I'll second. It's a
companion item.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We have a motion and a second
on Item 9C. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, all in favor, signify
by saying aye.
January 14, 2025
Page 160
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. It passes unanimously.
Let's move to 9D. This is the easement vacation.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Well, we have to have that.
I'll make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
second. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If not, all in favor, signify by
saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And just for the record, that
includes all of the conditions that have been discussed?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. The hours of operation, we'll
add. And you want us to add a commitment -- or a condition that we
will put in our contracts that access is from the traffic signal.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Correct. And then there were
Planning Commission --
January 14, 2025
Page 161
MR. YOVANOVICH: Those are already in. We already had
those in there, but those are the new ones is the hours of store
operations, maintenance, and the condition of the contract.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: So similar to other things
we've approved, shovels don't go in the ground tomorrow. You've
got a lot of homework assignments --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: -- and we'll be looking at this
one closely.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's move on to --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And just as a -- Mr. Chair,
just the LP tank, the location of it. You pointed at the map of the LP
tank -- just to assure the folks, you pointed at the location --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- of where the LP tank's
going to be. That's added in here, too.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. We'll put a -- we'll put a note on
the master plan that it will be in this location.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. Let's move on.
MS. PATTERSON: Do you want to check in with the court
reporter?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: She still looks pretty good there.
I don't think she needs a break just yet. Let's go.
Item #9E
ORDINANCE 2025-03: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE
COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO
CREATE THE BAREFOOT WILLIAMS COMMERCIAL
SUBDISTRICT TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF 11,000
SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL
January 14, 2025
Page 162
USES, OF WHICH A CAR WASH MAY BE 5,000 SQUARE FEET
OF GROSS FLOOR AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST
(U.S. 41), APPROXIMATELY 350 FEET EAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF TAMIAMI TRAIL AND BAREFOOT
WILLIAMS ROAD, IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING
OF ±1.92 ACRES - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL –
ADOPTED (COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL OPPOSED)
Item #9F
ORDINANCE 2025-04: 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 - MOTION TO APPROVE
BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER HALL – ADOPTED (COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL OPPOSED)
January 14, 2025
Page 163
MS. PATTERSON: Take the next two companion items. That
moves us to 9E and 9F companion items. This is a recommendation
to approve an ordinance amending the Collier County Growth
Management Plan to create the Barefoot Williams commercial
subdistrict to allow the development of 11,000 square feet of gross
floor area of commercial uses of which a car wash may by 5,000
square feet of gross floor area.
The subject property is located on the south side of Tamiami
Trail East approximately 350 feet east of the intersection of Tamiami
Trail and Barefoot Williams Road in Section 33, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 1.92 plus/minus
acres.
Its companion item, 9F, is a recommendation to approve an
ordinance rezoning real property from an intermediate commercial
zoning district to a general commercial 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 car wash 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 plus/minus acres, and by providing an
effective date.
Commissioners, ex parte for these two items.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, yeah, yeah. You're
looking at the -- I have no disclosures on this one.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes. I have meetings,
correspondence, and e-mails.
January 14, 2025
Page 164
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I have no disclosures for this.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner Hall?
COMMISSIONER HALL: I do have e-mails.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I believe I have some
e-mails as well.
MS. PATTERSON: I need all participants that will be giving
testimony to stand and be sworn in with the court reporter.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. PATTERSON: Very good. We'll begin with the
applicant.
MR. BROOKER: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Congratulations on your chairmanship.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. BROOKER: And I wish you well for 2025.
My name is Clay Brooker. I'm with the law firm of Cheffy
Passidomo, 821 Fifth Avenue South. I represent 11760 Property,
LLC, the owner of the property at issue with respect to the two
companion items before you today, a small-scale Growth
Management Plan amendment and a rezone.
With me today are planners Ellen Summers and Bob Mulhere
with the Bowman firm and representative of the property owner, Rick
Scali.
I'd like to make some brief introductory comments and then turn
it over to Ms. Summers to present the details of the application.
Here is the subject property. It's just shy of two acres located
on the East Trail just east of the Barefoot Williams Road intersection.
If you're familiar with this area, this is directly across U.S. 41 from
January 14, 2025
Page 165
the Donna Fiala Eagle Lakes Community Park.
Mr. Scali is the owner, and -- Mr. Scali is the owner and
operator of several automated --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Remind Mr. Hall to go on
mute.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall, we can hear
you.
MR. MILLER: He's muted now.
MR. BROOKER: Mr. Scali is the owner and operator of
several automated car wash facilities in the nation, and he focused on
this subject property for a potential car wash due to the fact that it's
sandwiched between an existing RaceTrac gas station to the west and
the recently approved Home Depot to the east.
Moreover, the front of the property abutting U.S. 41 is burdened
with a 70-foot-wide vehicular easement that provides additional
access to both the RaceTrac gas station and the Home Depot site in
either direction. These circumstances limit the opportunities or
reasonable development options for this site; however, a car wash is
logical in light of the adjoining property uses.
As Ms. Summers will detail for you in a moment, the existing
zoning for the site is C-3, the commercial intermediate district. The
C-3 district does not permit car washes, but the C-4 general
commercial zoning district does. So generally speaking, the two
companion applications before you today seek the necessary
approvals from a development entitlement perspective to allow a car
wash on the property. These applications have been intentionally
limited to the very minimum necessary to allow a car wash. In other
words, we are not requesting approval for the full gamut of C-4
permitted uses on the property. Rather, if the applications are
granted, it will continue to allow all of the C-3 uses that are permitted
today with the addition of just one C-4 use, that of a car wash.
January 14, 2025
Page 166
These applications were filed over two years ago, back in 2022.
It has taken quite a bit of time to get to this point, but we have been
working closely with staff to hone the site plan and develop the
conditions of approval. Two neighborhood information meetings
have been held, one in July of 2023 and the second one was just this
last October of 2024. Both neighborhood information meetings
were sparsely attended with no opposition expressed at those
meetings.
In addition to the neighborhood information meetings, we
voluntarily reached out and met in person with the neighbors behind
the subject property, the Hitching Post recreational vehicle resort, and
the East Naples Civic and Commerce Association. It is our
understanding that neither of those groups objects to these
applications.
The neighbors expressed satisfaction with the proposed sound
attenuation wall, which Ms. Summers will explain to you in just a
moment. Frankly, those neighbors behind the subject property were
most concerned whether we would disrupt their horseshoe courts
immediately behind the subject property. We will not.
With regard to the East Naples Civic and Commerce
Association, that group was intimately involved with the East Naples
Community Development Plan, and the proposal before you today
voluntarily implements many of the concepts of that plan even
though it has not yet been formally adopted into the county's Land
Development Code. So the proposal before you today not only
meets code but exceeds it in many respects.
We appreciate staff's recommendation of approval as well as
that of the Planning Commission which, on November 7th of last
year, voted unanimously in favor of the project.
I'll now turn it over to Ms. Summers to give you the details of
the applications.
January 14, 2025
Page 167
MS. SUMMERS: Thank you.
Good afternoon. For the record, my name is Ellen Summers.
I'm a certified land-use planner and a lead planner with Bowman.
I know you-all have had a long day so far, so please bear with
me as I go through some of the details of the conditions in these two
applications.
As stated, we have two rezone -- or two requests here before you
today, the first being a small-scale Growth Management Plan
amendment. The site is currently within the Urban Coastal Fringe
Subdistrict, and we are currently zoned C-3.
Adjacent to this site, just to the east, is a Commercial Planned
Unit Development, and that was just recently approved back in 2024,
and that Commercial Planned Unit Development is intended for the
Home Depot, and that ordinance permits C-1 through C-3 uses, as
well as C-4 and C-5 uses.
To the rear, or just to the south of the site, is the existing RT
district where the Hitching Post community is located, and more
specifically, that -- directly to the rear of our property is their amenity
and clubhouse facility.
And then, again, that existing RaceTrac, which is just to
the -- excuse me -- to the west of this site is also within the C-3
zoning district.
As Clay previously mentioned, our site is sandwiched between
the existing RaceTrac and the future Home Depot development. We
are encumbered by an existing 70-foot ingress/egress easement, as
you can see from the aerial here where we have the existing driveway
that services the RaceTrac facility.
Our Barefoot Williams commercial subdistrict will establish the
development standards for a car wash. It will also provide a
maximum intensity of 11,000 square feet of floor area with a car
wash not to exceed 5,000 square feet. And then this subdistrict also
January 14, 2025
Page 168
includes specific site design conditions that have also been
incorporated into the rezone ordinance.
Again, that rezone request is permitting the C-3 commercial
district uses as currently allowed as well as the additional car wash
use, and that rezone request includes those conditions of approval
that establish development standards for the car wash and site design
standards for the entirety of the property.
Before I go into a little bit more of the detail of our conditions of
approval, I want to give you-all a little bit of context of where a lot of
these items were derived from, and they're mainly derived from the
East Naples Community Development Plan.
In 2007, the Board directed county staff to engage in the East
Naples community in a planning process to identify desired uses
within this general area.
Following this process, the Board directed staff to prepare a
community development plan for the East Naples community. In
October of 2020, the East Naples Community Development Plan was
accepted by the BCC, and this East Naples Community Development
Plan prioritized the development of a zoning overlay along the U.S.
41 East corridor.
As a result of that prioritization, a zoning overlay was drafted by
staff, and this is known as the U.S. 41 East Zoning Overlay. It's also
known as the U.S. 41 EZO. In 2023, staff started the review of this
zoning overlay; however, this draft overlay only made it to the
Development Services Advisory Committee.
As of July 1st, 2023, Senate Bill -- excuse me -- Senate Bill 250
became effective. And this bill, as amended, provides that local
governments in Collier County and other counties that were impacted
by Hurricane Ian or Hurricane Nicole, that they shall not propose or
adopt more burdensome or restrictive amendments to its
Comprehensive Plan or Land Development Code until October of
January 14, 2025
Page 169
2026.
And though the LDC amendment had to be put on pause, the
proposed rezone and the small-scale Growth Management Plan
before you today have included those standards that were considered
by those proposed amendments.
I do apologize. This may be a little bit difficult for you-all to
see. But before you I have the conceptual site plan that is
incorporated as part of the rezone ordinance. And along U.S. 41 we
have a type -- a 15-foot Type B landscape buffer. This is an
enhancement, as the current Land Development Code would require a
15-foot Type D landscape buffer.
And just beyond that landscape buffer, you have, again, that
existing ingress and egress easement. And just south of that we are
also including an additional 10-foot Type D buffer. So we'll have
landscaping on either side of that access drive that will have access to
the RaceTrac as well as to the Home Depot.
We are including a seven and a half foot Type A buffer along
both sides of the property, and to the rear we are including a
minimum 20-foot Type B landscape buffer, and that's going to be
adjacent to the Residential Tourist Zoning District. Typically,
within that area we would be required to include a 15-foot Type B
buffer. So we are providing a minimum of 5-foot enhancement of
that landscape buffer. And I'll detail a little bit further on the
specific enhancements within those buffers that we've included
within the ordinance.
I want to go through the specific proposed conditions that are
included within the ordinance as well as the small-scale Growth
Management Plan amendment. We are restricting the maximum
building height to 35 feet with an actual height of 42 feet, and this is
actually lower than the existing C-3 zoning allows for. The C-3
zoning district permits a zoned building height of 50 feet.
January 14, 2025
Page 170
We are requiring that the parking lots, the vehicular use areas,
and service function areas shall be located to the sides or rear of
buildings and shall be no closer to U.S. 41 than the principal building
except that a maximum of one double-loaded drive aisle of parking is
permitted within the front yard, and this is a standard that exceeds
today's Land Development Code standards and is drafted -- I'm
sorry -- is based off the draft U.S. 41 EZO standard.
Establishments with drive-through are allowed a maximum of
6,000 square feet of gross floor area within the principal structure.
Vehicular stacking lanes and drive-through lanes shall not be located
closer to the U.S. 41 right-of-way than the principal building.
Again, this is a standard that exceeds current Land Development
Code standards today, but it is modeled off the draft U.S. 41 EZO
standard.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I just ask you a quick
question? I've got the same drawing you have here. Do I have a
dated one? Because it says 5,000 square feet, not 6,000. Is this an
old one?
MS. SUMMERS: So the car wash is limited to 5,000 square
feet, and we have designed the site for a potential future development
where it could be retail, restaurant, some other use on the remainder
of the site, and that use would be limited to 6,000 square feet.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay.
MS. SUMMERS: As I just mentioned, the car wash is not to
exceed 5,000 square feet. We've incorporated hours of operation so
that the car wash may not operate between the hours of 10 p.m. and
7 a.m.
We are including that the minimum side yard, where adjacent to
a commercially zoned property, shall be 10 feet, and this is specific to
the car wash facility.
Vacuuming facilities may not be located in any required yard
January 14, 2025
Page 171
nor forward of the primary facade of the facility. And we are also
requiring that vehicular stacking lanes and drive-through lanes shall
not be located closer to the U.S. 41 right-of-way than the principal
building. Again, this is a condition included specific to the car wash,
and it's also included for drive-through facilities. And this is a
requirement that exceeds the current Land Development Code
requirements and is modeled off the draft U.S. 41 EZO.
Throughout this review process, it was determined that a sound
attenuation wall would be necessary based on a sound study that we
provided, and that was provided to ensure compliance with the
Collier County noise ordinance. And the Collier County noise
ordinance establishes a -- maximum permissible sound levels for
sound propagating to receiving properties.
Within this study, it indicated that a sound attenuation wall is
necessary, and it shall be a minimum height of two feet higher than
the entrance of the car wash tunnel, but it shall not exceed 12 feet in
height above grade. This sound attenuation wall will be provided
25 feet from the rear of the property line, and it shall remain the
width of the entire car wash facility, including the drive aisles that
serve the car wash.
Again, I touched on this very briefly with the required
landscaping. We are providing enhanced front yard landscape
buffering easements with a 15-foot Type B buffer, and this shall
require planting canopy shade trees spaced 25 feet on center. They
shall have a minimum average mature canopy spread of 20 feet and
an 8-foot vertical clearance for pedestrians.
And, of course, that is -- regarding the vertical clearance, that's
as applicable as determined by the County Manager or designee.
We're also requiring planting be only native vegetation, grass,
ground cover or other landscape treatments in accordance with LDC
Section 4.06.00.
January 14, 2025
Page 172
The 20-foot-wide Type B rear yard landscape buffer easement
shall be enhanced with a minimum of five canopy trees per 30 linear
feet, and this is also another standard that was modeled off the draft
U.S. 41 EZO, and that does go above and beyond what the current
Land Development Code requires, which would be a 15-foot-wide
Type B landscape buffer.
I wanted to provide you-all just with a conceptual architectural
rendering of the -- just to give you an idea of the look and feel of the
car wash facility. This, of course, does not currently depict how the
site will be laid out. When you have your drive aisle to go into the
car wash, we will have vacuuming facilities between the drive aisle
and the entrance of the car wash tunnel. But I wanted to give you an
idea of the look and feel of that architectural lane.
We do have Norm Trebilcock here, and Norm did the Traffic
Impact Statement which indicated that this project is not a significant
and adverse traffic generator for the roadway network specifically at
this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to
accommodate this development. And we have also included a
condition within the rezone that states that the maximum total daily
trip generation for the proposed rezone shall not exceed 127 two-way
p.m. peak hour net new trips.
As Clay stated earlier on, we have had two neighborhood
information meetings, the first of which was held in July of 2023 and
the second more recently in October of 2024. We had two members
of the public within both of these neighborhood information meetings
either via Zoom or there in person. I think our one question we had
at the NIM was related to what the -- what the remainder of the
property would be utilized for, and, of course, we don't have that
answer yet. We'll have to -- but there is the potential for the C-3
uses to be developed within the remainder of the site.
I think staff will account for this, too. We've worked with them
January 14, 2025
Page 173
for the past two years on this process to get this site designed to
where it is today, and we have received a recommendation of
approval from staff on both the Growth Management Plan
amendment as well as the rezone application.
We brought this -- these two applications before the Planning
Commission back in November of 2024 in which we received a
unanimous recommendation of approval.
And as I previously stated, we do have adequate traffic capacity
along U.S. 41 for this use.
We have also submitted a market study as part of the Growth
Management Plan amendment process that has demonstrated an
adequate number of vehicles within the market area to support this
additional car wash within this area.
That's all I have for you-all today. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Does that conclude the petitioner's
presentation?
MS. SUMMERS: Yes, it does. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Why don't we see if
there are any questions for the petitioner, and then we'll take a
10-minute break. Any questions for the petitioner?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I had a quick question.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: At the NIM, was the owner
of Dolphin Auto Spa part of the NIM?
MS. SUMMERS: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: All right.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I just -- I had just one question,
just a little clarity on the -- so you -- so the car wash itself would have
to be the C-4, the one particular use of the C-4 allowable. But you're
saying that the other piece of property that may end up there at some
January 14, 2025
Page 174
point will have to be at the C-3 category?
MS. SUMMERS: Yes, sir, that's correct, and that's what the
existing zoning is today.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay. Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was my question. You
jumped -- he jumped in front of me.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Let's take -- let's take a
10-minute break. We'll come back at 3:20.
(A brief recess was had from 3:10 p.m. to 3:20 p.m.)
MS. PATTERSON: Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. Let's go ahead and
proceed. We need to hear from our staff.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
As the applicant had pointed out, this was heard by the Planning
Commission on November 7th. It was recommended unanimously
for approval.
This was on your summary agenda, but prior to the publishing of
the agenda, we did receive an objection letter from two individual car
washes that asked for this to be placed upon the regular agenda.
From staff's perspective, we feel that they have met the demands
that -- related to the buffering requirements of the East Naples
Development Plan. And curiously, looking through the EZO
overlay, which we are on hold till October of 2026 before we could
contemplate adopting it, the separation requirement that's contained
within the East Naples Zoning Overlay has a 1,320-feet separation
requirement for new car washes from existing car washes.
So what it's saying, that if you were proposing a new car wash
on top of the buffering, which they've been able to -- which they are
providing for, it would have to be separate from another existing car
wash by at least a quarter of a mile. There are no other car washes
January 14, 2025
Page 175
within a quarter mile of this location, so it is satisfying the on-hold
East Naples Zoning Overlay as well.
Staff is prepared to answer any questions that you may have.
But like I said, it was -- they have been willing to work with staff to
meet the buffering requirements and the suggestions of the East
Naples Development Plan. They met within the spatial criteria
contained within there.
Within the Growth Management Plan, there is a market study
that staff analyzed, and staff did find that there was sufficient
justification for an additional car wash within the area. Based upon
all of those reasons, staff is recommending approval of the petitions
with the conditions that have been included with into the subdistrict
as well as to the PUD.
With that, any questions that you may have.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. And my question is
more just curious than anything. I mean, they regularly referred to
the piece further to the south and to the east as the new Home Depot
site. Isn't there already a Home Depot at the corner of 41 and 951?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: That's Lowe's. Two different
corporations.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Lowe's. They want to build
one right next to Lowe's.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's the other lumber store.
Okay.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Just -- just real quick, Mike.
When you said that the parameters are a quarter mile, do -- did the
owners of the Dolphin Car Wash not understand that, or did you have
any communications with them? Because their letter says, "Oh,
within a three-mile radius, there's X number of car washes," and that
January 14, 2025
Page 176
may be true or not true. But using the parameters you just said, this
is within the parameters, and their letter made it very specific that
within three miles you have five car washes which makes this, like, a
nonstarter. But, you know --
MR. BOSI: I think those are two separate things, two separate
things. One's like a market study, market area. And from the
market area, the market study that was supplied with the Growth
Management Plan, we felt there was justification for the additional
car wash.
What the East Naples Zoning Overlay is saying, we have
concerns about the proliferation of car washes. We would not like to
see car washes placed within a quarter mile of another car wash, just
to help regulate the proliferation of car washes.
So I think it's coming from two different perspectives. I think
the Dolphin car wash is two, two and a half miles from this location.
The other car wash they reference is two miles away or just under
two miles away, outside of what the overlay would have required
from a separation component.
I think what they're going to argue is that there's not sufficient
justification for the additional car wash from a market study, and that
will be their burden to prove. Staff felt that it has met that
requirement.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Okay. And then lastly -- this
is sort of a setup question, but I want to hear your expert rebuttal to it.
So the car wash use, for lack of a better term, currently is an
undesirable, you know, mission with current zoning. Why do you
think we should make an exception in this case? And you sort of
have answered it, but I'd just like to go on the record and say that,
you know, why are we going out of our way to add a car wash here?
And, I mean, you sort of said, "Well, we've done the analysis."
But just further elaborate why, you know, we're not -- we're not
January 14, 2025
Page 177
taking a giant leap, or are we?
MR. BOSI: No, I don't believe you are. And they have added
one additional use, a C-4 use, to the existing C-3 zoning that
currently is on the parcel. And they're proposing a car wash of 5,000
square feet. They are still -- they are still reserving portions of this
property for that C-3 -- C-1 through C-3 use, which are neighborhood
serving. So they are not giving up the -- they're not asking for a
foregoing of all the community-serving uses. They just asked for a
bifurcation of this lot to provide for up to 5,000 square feet of the car
wash.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: A portion.
MR. BOSI: And what I would say, when you looked at
the -- you looked at the aerial photo of the land uses, you've got a C-3
zoning with a RaceTrac, this proposed car wash, and then the
C-3 -- C-1 through C-3 uses on the other side, and then a Home
Depot, and then the TTRV. Now, that's a sea of commercial land
uses. Now, the TTRV is -- because it's RVs, you're more -- it's got a
more residential feel. But by our zoning categories, that's a
commercial use.
This use is set within that sea of commercial uses that are there.
And they've paid attention to the residential component of the TTRV
by the 20-foot landscape buffer that they're providing for on their
southwestern side to provide for -- also for noise attenuation.
So I think this developer was attentive to the surrounding land
uses, and the design of their -- of their facility reflects that attention
that they recognize they weren't operating within a vacuum, but they
tried to provide for, I guess, consistency with the land uses that are
surrounding by how they designed the site. And for all those reasons
is why staff is supporting the petition.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Let's go ahead and move to the
public comment.
January 14, 2025
Page 178
MR. MILLER: Your first public speaker is Jay Shehadeh, and
he will be followed by Ken Noble. I practiced that pronunciation;
I'm sorry I still got it wrong.
MR. SHEHADEH: You got it right this time, thank you.
THE COURT REPORTER: You didn't stand when I did the
swearing.
MR. SHEHADEH: I don't think so.
THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
MR. SHEHADEH: I do.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Jay Shehadeh.
I'm an attorney, but I'm also the owner of the Pump & Munch car
wash that's located on 9995 Tamiami Trail East.
And we're here to oppose the spot zoning being requested here
that will result in an oversaturating of the market and take away from
the aesthetics of Naples overall.
And, Commissioner Saunders, I do appreciate you trying to
accommodate me from a time perspective just because we have our
expert planner, Max Forgey, to --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Right. You'll have sufficient time
to make your case.
MR. SHEHADEH: Thank you, Commissioner.
I just want to quickly reference letters for purposes of it being in
the record. Our January 7th letter, the supplement dated January 9th.
We have a January 9th letter asking adversely affected party status,
the January 14th expert letter from Max Forgey, and the two staff
reports. There's a staff report that's 15 pages directed to the county
Planning Commission, and the eight-page report directed to the
Growth Management Department.
So first, for purposes of the Commission, I completely
January 14, 2025
Page 179
appreciate that the Commission is not going to be focused on trying
to stop competition generally, as it shouldn't be involved in that
business, but I do think we have a concern with oversaturation of the
market. And we have -- we put up a map that shows the locations
that are within the three-mile radius of the applicant's property. And
you don't need to take my word for it but references from the staff
report itself. If you look at the 15-page staff report on Page 8, it
raises concerns over having too many car washes in the vicinity, and
then if you go to the eight-page staff report on Page 5, it says that the
market will not support an additional car wash until 2033.
So making this exception here will inevitably, first, not serve the
community, but it will serve the local businesses that are already
serving the community. So we're approving one to inevitably cause
the failure of another.
There's been references to the East Naples Community
Development [sic], which does say that a car wash is an undesired
use, and it discourages the placement of additional car washes. It
should be noted that the property owner has plenty of commercial
uses that are available, under its current zoning. There's no need to
make this exception for it to be a profitable useful property for the
property owner.
And finally, from an aesthetics standpoint, Naples is not a
typical city in the state of Florida. We have a few cities that have
kind of the unique characteristics of a city like Naples. We have
Coral Gables. We have Boca Raton. Naples is unique. And with
the placement of these cookie cutter kind of standard car washes, the
entrance to Naples becomes littered with the same type of buildings
over and over again, which I don't think serves the aesthetics of the
city. But even more problematic is having large car washes that are
shut down and out of business on your entrance into Naples. And so
I'd like the Commission to take that into consideration.
January 14, 2025
Page 180
Ultimately, we're not asking the Commission to try to stop
competition. The competition is plentiful, and it's available on the
map, but it should be concerned with the oversaturation of the market
and these cookie cutter structures being littered all over the place.
And we do have our expert planner, Max Forgey, to give his
findings for purposes of the Commission, for the Commission to take
into consideration.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: In terms of the timing, let's
let -- don't start the three-minute clock. We'll let the experts provide
their testimony.
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir.
MR. FORGEY: And I promise to be brief. Commissioners,
Max Forgey, doing business as Forgey Planning, LLC, 236 Southeast
45th Street, Cape Coral. Thirty-two-year member in good standing
with the American Institute of Certified Planners. My résumé is on
file. I have been accepted as a witness in Collier County on eight or
10 or 12 times, I don't know.
I have proposed a series of findings of fact to justify denial. I'm
not going to read them all. But Finding No. 2, the subject property is
located within the C-3 zoning district. If the proposed zoning
district amendment is approved as proposed, it will create a spot
zoning situation.
Spot zoning is not illegal in Florida law, but it is generally
considered poor planning practice and should be rejected in the
absence of a compelling justification such as a clear public need.
Finding No. 3, the existing C-3 zoning district, which the
applicant enjoys, provides a bountiful entitlement which allows a
broad array of desirable commercial activities.
The staff report states, "The current zoning of C-3 is consistent
with the established zoning pattern for the area." That's on Page 8.
The East Naples Community Development Plan discourages car
January 14, 2025
Page 181
washes in this area. At a previous hearing earlier this afternoon,
Mr. Danz testified about that perceived saturation.
The staff report reinforces this concern by saying that, quote,
"This property is located in the pending U.S. 41 East Corridor Zoning
Overlay, and the East Naples Community Development Plan does not
allow the car wash use, as this was deemed an undesirable use. Staff
is concerned about the high proportion of car washes within a
one-mile radius of the subject property," end quote.
Finding No. 5, "The additional car wash will not be an aesthetic
enhancement." The area already hosts five car washes. Naples, as
I'm sure you-all think about every day, is one of the country's
premiere tourist and winter-resident destinations. It is, in fact, a
world-class resort, and it has cultivated its urban form carefully over
decades.
The gateways to Naples -- and my associate and I drove through
that this morning. It's always distinct. The gateways play a vital
role in providing a sense of arrival and a sense of departure,
reinforcing the area's rich history and unique aesthetic character.
Another car wash in this location would undermine these efforts.
Finding No. 8, "The current C-3 zoning permits viable, less
intensive commercial uses that are better aligned with the
surrounding area." The applicant has not demonstrated a compelling
need to rezone to C-4 for this very surgically small specific use.
Finding 10, "Noise operational hours and activity generated by a
car wash facility directly conflict with the adjacent residential
recreational uses, including the Hitching Post mobile home park.
Enhanced buffers and setbacks will not sufficiently mitigate these
impacts."
Based upon this information, I recommend denial. Are there
any questions?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Any questions?
January 14, 2025
Page 182
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you, sir. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next registered speaker is Ken Noble, and
he'll be followed by Jose Contreras.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We're going to be back to the
three-minute time limit as the other speakers come up.
MR. MILLER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: How many speakers do we have?
MR. MILLER: These are the last two, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. NOBLE: Good afternoon. How are you guys?
My name is Ken Noble. I'm the owner and CEO of Wash Link.
We are a car wash soap and cleaning supply company. We supply
car washes from Naples north to Orlando, Tampa, as far north as The
Villages.
I've been doing this for going on 20 years now, and I just wanted
to speak to a little bit of the state of the car wash industry. When I
first started supplying car washes, there was kind of an unspoken
code of honor between car wash owners where they wouldn't really
develop a site within five miles of an existing car wash. Were there
exceptions to that? Yes, of course. But that was kind of the thing at
the time for them to be successful.
Then about 10 years ago, along came private equity, and they
got involved in car washes. They identified car washes as, "Oh, this
is where we need to put our money."
And I heard time and time again, well, we don't have one
existing car wash, but we're going to have 100 a year from now.
And to me, as a business owner myself, I would like to perfect my
model before I duplicate it too many times because, you know, too
much of it, and nobody makes any money.
So now what's happened is they're building on top of each other.
January 14, 2025
Page 183
And they're not just doing it here. They're doing it across the state,
Cape Coral, New Port Richey, and other states as well. I mean, a
quick Google search of "too many car washes" will pull up a bunch
of articles all across the country about too many car washes being
built.
With that said, in this particular area, five car washes within a
three-mile radius, and you look at that radius, there's not a huge
amount of residential homes in that area. So you're dividing a pie
again and again and again, and the existing businesses are struggling
to survive, especially in the summer months when half the
population's gone back to their northern homes. That's kind of
unique to this part of Florida. Even -- well, Florida in general, but
this part even more so than areas to the north of here.
So I would just like to say, as you're looking at all the facts on
this, please take into consideration the existing businesses, the
number of people that are here. I know there's been studies done.
I've never heard the quarter-of-a-mile thing until today. That's new
on me. Everybody is still trying to stay at least two to three miles
away from each other, although if you've got deep pockets and you
can wait it out and you can put the guy across the street out of
business, then you'll go wherever you can go.
So please just consider that as you're considering all the facts in
this case. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next and final speaker on this item --
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Sir, sir, sir. I think you must
be the first car wash expert we've ever had in this room, at least since
I've been County Commissioner.
MR. NOBLE: Okay.
January 14, 2025
Page 184
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: But just let me ask you this.
You know, the true test of if there's oversaturation is these places are
going out of business. Two things I'm not in love with in Collier
County are storage units and car washes. I can't remember the last
time I saw one that said, "Going out of business." You know, the
other difference is -- and this is a different -- and I'm looking for
more of your perspective.
MR. NOBLE: Sure.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Naples is different than some
other places. You know, I've lived in some other places where
people wash their cars once a year in their driveway. Here you've
got people that run their cars through car washes three times a week.
They buy a membership. I go to Dolphin all the time. I'm waiting
in a long line there because people buy memberships. So it's a little
bit different here, but what I would say to you is if we had such an
oversaturation, why aren't these businesses going out of business?
MR. NOBLE: Well, within my territory, it is happening.
There are car washes going out of business. There's a place up in
Fort Myers called Spot On that went out of business not too long ago.
There's a couple others up in the Tampa area. It is putting some of
them out of business. There's even a company called Take Five who
you're probably familiar with the oil change, the quick oil change
stuff. Well, they got into the car wash business as well, and they
decided to pull the plug on it about probably two years ago now, and
many of the sites that they had even under construction were just left
sitting. Some of them have been bought up by other car wash
operators and are operating again, and some of them are still sitting
there empty.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Interesting. Thank you.
MR. NOBLE: Yep.
MR. MILLER: Your next and final speaker is Jose Contreras.
January 14, 2025
Page 185
MR. FORGEY: Can I request an additional 15 seconds?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. In a minute.
MR. CONTRERAS: Hello, everyone. My name is Jose
Contreras, and I've been in the car wash industry or -- not as an
owner, but as a manager for about 25 to 30 years.
I hear you guys talking a lot about planning and -- but not a
single person here can say how it feels to be inside of the operation.
And when Ken mentioned something about noise, I saw faces on
the other side, like, it's a lot of noise in the car wash. It smells. You
name it.
Anyhow, I manage this place -- I've been managing for the last,
I'll say, five years or so. And I have eight full employees under me
working as full-timers, which depend on this, right? Like everybody
says, it's a big cake. Yeah, but you guys cutting a slice, not the
whole cake. When it's the whole cake, it's fine.
Our business loses, like, I would say, 80 percent in the
summertime. With an extra car next door, I mean, I'm probably
going to have to sell my house or something like that.
So you have any questions? I mean --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. I don't see any
questions. Thank you.
Yeah, take another minute. State your name again for the
record.
MR. FORGEY: Max Forgey.
The staff report on Page 4 says, "The Home Depot commercial
subdistrict allows uses consistent with the heavy commercial District
C-5." I have a list of the permitted uses in the Home Depot district,
Exhibit A. The permitted uses are, in fact, not heavy industrial uses.
They're optical repair and picture framing and rug repair and sewing
machine repair. They are not that.
Thank you.
January 14, 2025
Page 186
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right, any other registered
speakers?
MR. MILLER: No.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. We'll close the public
hearing. See if there's any -- Commissioner Kowal.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. I don't
know, I'm just -- I'm one of them kind of -- I'm a realist. And I drive
around town. I drive a lot, and I don't think we have one RaceTrac
here that doesn't have a car wash next to it in Collier County, to be
honest with you. I thought they were pretty much a done deal. You
know, they have some kind of deal worked out with somebody to
come in and put a car wash right next to them.
And I'm a victim of, I go fill my tank. I'm like, you know what,
I'm going to go right next door and wash my car. There's not a
7-Eleven in this town that doesn't ask you if you want a car wash
when you're done putting your gas in your car either.
So I think they kind of go together. I mean, it's been around for
a long time. It's pretty much how they've been. It's a convenience
thing, I think, for a percentage of people.
And like Commissioner LoCastro said, you know, a lot of nice
cars in this town. People like to take care of them. I mean, I like to
run my car through a couple times a week. You know, that is what it
is. And I don't go to any specific ones. I go to wherever one I'm
getting gas usually, and that's how it works for me.
I don't think this is a stretch to allow this little extra usage to
something that's already a C-3 property. And there -- you know,
they're guaranteeing that anything else that goes on there is going to
fall within the parameters of the C-3.
So I kind of -- I don't agree with what a lot of people are saying.
I think washing your car -- and I'm familiar with the one car wash at
Broward. That's pretty much there's four bays there. You put the
January 14, 2025
Page 187
quarters in, you spray the car, and then they have one little booth that
you can drive through that -- it's, like, an automated. You run your
money through. It's not a real full car wash. It's a hand -- you
know, like, you spray your own car and mop it down and kind of do
one of those type deals. So that would be the one that's closest to
this, other than the Dolphin, which is down on a different road on
Collier Boulevard.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: I don't know. I just -- like I
said, I assumed that the RaceTrac was there. I was just figuring
sooner or later a car wash would be right next to it just like every
other RaceTrac we have in this town. So that's pretty much where
I'm at.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I -- you know, there
again, I'm conflicted because on person does a market study and
comes up with data, and another person does a market study and
comes up with data. And I'm by no means an expert in market data
regarding car washes. And all you have to do is go out and look at
my truck and see how often I frequent car washes. When it rains.
Only when it -- yeah, I haven't been -- that truck's two years old, and
I haven't been through a car wash yet.
So I have to say, personally, with the amount of car washes that
are within the three-mile ring of this proposed site, if this site were
already zoned C-4, we wouldn't be having this discussion. But I
think the bump up from C-3 to C-4 is a bit much of a concentration in
that area, and I'm not inclined to support -- although it's a very good
application, addressed all of the issues, I'm not inclined to support the
request.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman.
January 14, 2025
Page 188
I'm a proponent of capitalism and competition and free market.
I think what we're looking at here is really not that concerned with
the -- we're being asked to take, what is it, 11,000 square feet and
allow 5,000 square feet for the car wash, or the C-4? Is that --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, that's correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. So it's not the whole thing.
It reminds me of the small town that there was one barber, and
their haircuts were $10, and a new one came in and said, "We offer
$6 haircuts." So the first barber put a sign at the beginning of the
town coming in, and all the sign said was, "We fix $6 haircuts."
So I don't think that competition is a bad thing. Obviously, the
petitioner thinks that there's opportunity there to make a certain
return on his investment. If it requires the others to get a little
sharper and sharpen their pencil -- and there's been also talk about
taking a piece of pie. In this Collier County, the pie is growing. I
don't know if you-all have noticed that or not. But the pie is
growing immensely. You can take a bigger piece of the pie and still
wind up with a bigger piece of business than you had.
So I don't think it's a not-fair ask, but just to make my decision
based on somebody thinks that there's too many -- too many
drugstores or too many car washes or too many gas stations, I think
that's the risk that the petitioner is taking, so I'm going to be in favor.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: You know, the citizen when
we were talking about U-Haul that said they prefer a restaurant there,
I would, too, but the one thing we don't have at our disposal is we
can't make somebody build something there. We can't make
somebody put an Ocean Prime restaurant there instead of a U-Haul or
a car wash. We have to take a look at what the person who owns the
January 14, 2025
Page 189
property or wants to buy the property wants to do.
You know, I'm in agreement. I don't think it's a -- it's a gigantic
muscle movement. And like you said, the market will dictate if this
place makes money or not. I'll still go to Dolphin because I think it's
the best place in town. And so I don't say that as a public service.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Juan won't have to sell his
house.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yeah, yeah.
But having said that, I'll make a motion that we approve this
as-is and how it's stated in the agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
a second. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. It passes 4-1. And
that's on -- that was Item 9E. I guess we --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: 9F.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I guess that was both of them.
Item #11A
AN UPDATE FROM THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDS (TPL)
REGARDING THE SEMINOLE GULF RAIL LINE ACQUISITION
AND DIRECT THE COUNTY MANAGER OR THEIR DESIGNEE
January 14, 2025
Page 190
TO 1) PROVIDE $5,000 TO TPL FOR PREPARATION OF A
GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE
SEMINOLE GULF RAIL LINE; 2) PLEDGE UP TO $899,000
TOWARD THE LOCAL MATCH FOR THE GRANT; AND 3)
WORK WITH PARTNER MUNICIPALITIES ON A
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT TO FORMALIZE
COOPERATION OF THE ENTITIES - MOTION TO APPROVE AS
PRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED
BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to
Item 11A. This is recommendation that the Board receive an update
from the Trust for Public Lands regarding the Seminole Gulf Rail
Line acquisition and direct the County Attorney or their designee to,
one, provide $5,000 to TPL for preparation of a grant application for
the acquisition of the Seminole Gulf Rail Line; two, pledge up to
$899,000 toward the local match for the grant; and, three, work with
partner municipalities on a memorandum of agreement to formalize
cooperation of the entities.
And Ms. Trinity Scott, your department head for Transportation
Management Services, is here to present.
MS. SCOTT: Good afternoon. Today I'm also joined with
Doug Hattaway from the Trust for Public Lands. He'll come up and
speak in just a moment to provide that update.
Just a refresher for the Board members, the corridor that the
Trust for Public Lands is in contract to purchase goes from Alico
Road to -- almost to Wiggins Pass. It's 14.9 miles. They have it
under contract for $82 million and must purchase the property by
March of 2026.
The corridor is intended to be rail banked to preserve
opportunity for future rail use but would allow trail use during our
January 14, 2025
Page 191
time, while we would own the property if -- prior to a rail coming
forward.
Your items for today are to receive an update from
Mr. Hattaway seeking approval to provide $5,000 towards grant
application preparation to go towards the acquisition costs, pledge up
to $899,000 towards the local match of that grant, and authorize the
County Manager to work with our partner and municipalities on an
instrument to formalize cooperation.
The grant application that is currently the desired to be prepared
is a Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and
Equity, or a RAISE application. It is a highly competitive federal
grant. The applicant would be limited to Phase 1 of the project.
And Phase 1 of the project actually stops just at the north boundary of
the Village of Estero and would not go into the unincorporated Lee
County portion, and I'll let Mr. Hattaway get into the different phases
of the project.
The maximum request for the grant is $25 million, that's per the
federal guidelines, and the minimum match is 20 percent.
The City of Bonita Springs and/or the Village of Estero would
be the applicant. The reason Collier County would not be the
applicant is because we have an ongoing TIGER grant application,
and in prior debriefs where we have applied for this very -- this same
grant program, in our debrief with the federal agency, they said, as an
ongoing recipient of TIGER funds, that they would not look to
provide another RAISE grant while that grant was still open, and we
still have a few more months until TIGER is completed.
The total cost for the application preparation is $25,000, and the
Trust for Public Lands is seeking a $5,000 contribution from Collier
County.
In the executive summary, I provided a breakdown of the
corridor, the acquisition cost based on the percentage length and also
January 14, 2025
Page 192
the percentage of value because, as you can imagine, some of our
property values, the over-the-fence valuation in Collier County is
sometimes a little bit higher than that in Bonita and Estero.
So how I developed the match pledge calculation, full
disclosure, the max award is $25 million. Collier County's portion
of the grant award, based on the percentage of total value, was
17.98 percent. So our maximum amount that, if the full grant was
received, would be $4.495 million towards our acquisition costs. A
20 percent match of that would be $899,000. That way I can show
to this board that our funding would be staying within Collier
County.
A memorandum agreement has been discussed to formalize
cooperation of the intercounty acquisition and trail concept. And
this has really come about as we're talking with the legislative
delegation and grantor agencies, because this trail will traverse
multiple counties, and in Lee County, multiple municipalities. It's
just been something that's been discussed with us and a common
question that comes up. And so we would like authorization to work
on a memorandum of agreement with our partners.
And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Doug to give a very
brief update on BERT.
MR. HATTAWAY: Thank you, Ms. Scott.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's not with a U, by the way.
It's an E.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: No relationship.
MR. HATTAWAY: I missed that.
Can you hear me okay?
Good afternoon, Chairman Saunders, members of the Board.
Thank you, Ms. Scott and Ms. Patterson, for this agenda item and the
opportunity to give you-all an update.
I believe that the last time this board heard something from
January 14, 2025
Page 193
Trust for Public Land was sometime in the summertime from my
colleague, Charles Hines, if you recall that meeting.
Allow me to take a quick step back since I'm going to be giving,
as best I can and as very briefly as I can, an update as to the
acquisition work beyond the specifics that Ms. Scott had just
mentioned.
I do want to highlight that I did have Deb Orton, Friends of
BERT president, as well as Michelle Avola-Brown, the executive
director of Naples Pathways, who were in the audience earlier today,
but they had other commitments that had to pull them away due to
the length of this meeting. And God bless you-all for these long
meetings and giving public service, by the way.
Trust for Public Land is a national non-profit land conservation
organization formed in 1974 -- sorry -- 1972, and our second office
was opened in Tallahassee, Florida. And guess where our very first
project was in the state of Florida? It was the Cape Romano Park in
Collier County in 1975.
We've also done work in Collier County with the National Park
Service, state agencies, and other projects with this board and the
County of Collier including -- a little quiz here -- the Margood Resort
in 2005, Caribbean Gardens in 2005 and 2009, and Keewaydin
Island, property there. We've also done work with the state, for
example, such as CREW in 2015, more recently, and I just wanted to
share that with you.
I am in charge of these slides? Just arrow down probably.
Yeah. One slide on why we're doing this project.
The project is not just a recreational trail. This is not about
people in spandex shorts riding their bikes going 25 miles an hour
down the stretch. This is public investment for the betterment of the
community. And the fact that this is an urban trail provides a special
amplification to the benefits that trails generally have for the
January 14, 2025
Page 194
communities they're located in, and this slide captures them.
It is a destination trail once you reach a certain length, and the
fact that this corridor actually connects to other trails already in place
and those that are in plans will make this destination trail become
reality which draws more people, which actually is an important
interest of people that want to locate industries or businesses to an
area is to look at the public amenities that will service their
employees and also expanding facilities or businesses that are already
located there. It improves the health of your community. It reduces
the auto use and reduces congestion -- I heard even today several
people complaining about traffic -- and mitigates air pollution.
It's safer for the communities. Roads are deadly, and
particularly in Southwest Florida, which is one of the leading areas in
the United States of America for deaths for pedestrians and cyclists
interfering, if you will, with a vehicle getting in their way, or the
other way around.
And so it also provides equity issues. It's an alternative
transportation route for people who are less affluent, people that need
to get to their jobs where household expenses have transportation as
their second highest expense. And it does connect communities and
gives a sense of identity. It's a lot different meeting someone on a
trail on a bike or walking with your carriage with a baby as opposed
to driving down the road in the car.
So in this area that is continuing to grow in the future, these
issues will only be exacerbated, and this is a
once-in-a-lifetime -- once in a generational opportunity to have a
greenway corridor that's already built and already in existence in the
built environment.
All right. Let's go to the context, though. This is not an
isolated piece of rail -- former rail corridor. It actually fits into -- as
a priority trail within the Office of Greenways and Trails' priority
January 14, 2025
Page 195
trail network system throughout the state of Florida. The map on
your left is what is called the Florida Gulf Coast Trail. It is a
segment of that larger statewide network of a trail system. In fact,
Trust for Public Land has invested and created a program with our
organization to work with all seven counties to realize its
connections.
I think the orange colored are the ones that are gaps, and the
ones that are dark black or blackish are the trails that are already in
place, and we are committed to continuing to fill those gaps over
time. And this BERT corridor, or the Bonita Estero Rail Trail, is a
critical gap in that system.
The Florida Gulf Coast Trail, by the way, runs from Tampa/St.
Pete all the way down to Naples. It's about 420 miles.
The map in the middle is the subject property we're talking
about at this time, what we're focused on. It is 14.9 miles long, and
it is 130 feet wide. There's one short stretch that reduces down to
100 feet wide, but the essential bulk of this is 130 feet wide.
Within its service area of a 10-minute bike ride, you have
70,000 people, and 14,000 within a 10-minute walk of this corridor.
Thirty-seven percent of those people are seniors, that means over 64
years of age; 45 percent are low-income households, and 25 percent
are people of color.
It has 12 schools; 83 medical facilities; 32 places of worship; 16
daycare centers; 41 gyms, although the trail's a gym in itself, I
suppose; three shopping centers; 31 grocery stores, and countless
jobsites so people can get to their place of employment.
Rail trail projects are the most difficult kind of projects that we
take on in my organization because of their complexity. It is a linear
park crossing multiple jurisdictions, multiple types of land uses,
many neighborhoods. But they're also the most rewarding and the
most impactful of the type of work that we take on.
January 14, 2025
Page 196
All right. Status report. Based -- in March of 2023, Lee
County MPO completed a feasibility study. No, it did not include
the one and a half miles that falls within Collier County, in case
you're wondering how much is in the county. But it identified this
corridor as the primary place to be providing a recreational trail
greenway for the benefit of the community.
2023 October, Fort Myers endorses. Trust for Public Land,
there's a longer story here. I think Ms. Scott covered it in the agenda
item description about the history of trying to work with Seminole
Gulf and reach an agreement. There was off-and-on discussions
over time, and finally, February 1st, 2024, almost a year ago now, we
finally reached an agreement, and Trust for Public Land, indeed, does
hold that agreement to purchase the corridor, and that's in place until
March of 2026, at which point hopefully we'll be successful, knock
on wood.
There's been multiple MPO meetings. I know that you-all sit
on the Collier County MPO meeting, but there's also the Lee County
MPO. Thank you for your support in prioritizing this project in both
state and federal funding sources. That's a RAISE grant that
Ms. Scott had just raised for today's discussion as an example but
also as a priority in the SUN Trail, the state SUN Trail program
within DOT that is supposed to provide funding to realize these types
of projects with primarily construction but also acquisition dollars.
Estero -- the Village of Estero and Bonita have committed, as
seed funds, $5 million each that can be contributed towards the
acquisition of this property.
I mentioned Lee County. And then Collier BCCCC, the
champions of the County Commission -- sorry for the typo -- I
believe that's when Charles was here, Charles Hines, to present to
you the project and make sure we're moving in the right direction.
The Friends of BERT has actually reached a milestone, probably
January 14, 2025
Page 197
more recently. They have now 3,600 members, they have 27 formal
homeowners’ association endorsements, and representing 24,000
households, and that work continues in Lee and in Collier County.
We do have a SUN Trail funding request in again as recent as
this last month. It was a request for seeking funding and getting it
introduced to their tentative and then subsequently approved work
plan. That's a five-year plan that they work with. And today we're
talking about the RAISE grant application, which is due at the end of
this month. And we have been working very hard with our partners
to identify and coalesce around a consensus legislative strategy going
into this next session.
And I am just stopping there, because there's going to be a
whole lot of more steps to be taken altogether to get to the finish line.
So last slide. What can you do now? I would ask of you, if I
can be very particular, if you can -- I know that you-all had your
legislative delegation meeting just last week. I know that Deb Orton
was there to present this project to the delegation. I would ask of
you, if you support this project, have a good relationship with
specifically Representative Botano -- Botana, and then Senator
Passidomo, let them know going into this session. We are working
with them to sponsor legislation that will help secure some state
funding towards this project. I know that you-all love to have your
funds leveraged with outside funds, and that is one effective way to
do that. And so this is an opportunity for you to help reinforce that
message.
The other thing, second bullet there, that Ms. Scott had
mentioned, the MOA/MOU. I might suggest -- this is all up to you,
of course -- that as part of that MOA/MOU there would be the intent
to create an ad hoc type coordinating or steering group that would be
comprised of one designated elected liaison from the various
jurisdictions, as well as a lead staff person, as a minimum. And
January 14, 2025
Page 198
those other sub bullets there are self-explanatory.
And then, lastly, with the last -- related to the last bullet is not
just to send a letter of support for that RAISE grant, as well as your
representation for matching funds but also the contribution to hiring
Kimley-Horn, who is essentially doing this work right now to prepare
the application, is to consider -- and I don't know how this works in
your county, so maybe I'm asking something that's not possible and
not typical. But if you can make that 899,000 fungible, yes, it can be
applied as match funds towards the RAISE grant, but what if we don't
get that grant application? I'm always thinking ahead. If we can
make that fungible to apply to any type of opportunity to leverage
those funds, that would be more ideal, I think.
That is my, hopefully, decently brief summary. I'm happy to
answer any questions, please. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah. I do have one
question --
MR. HATTAWAY: Please.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- that is I haven't seen in
your presentation any language regarding rail banking, and I want
that to be a part of your slide going forward.
MR. HATTAWAY: Sure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's -- the rail has fallen out of
favor for a long time, but someday technology's going to come
around, and it's going to not be in such disfavor. So if you would,
please -- I am told that it is part of your repertoire and that the
coexistence of a rail system, in the event that the right-of-way is
taken for rails to trails, would provide for that, but just make -- if you
will, please, put it in your repertoire.
MR. HATTAWAY: I'm happy to do so, Commissioner.
Thank you.
January 14, 2025
Page 199
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And then my other question
was, as was brought up, I'm a little hesitant on fungibility for funding
because it ends up going away when something doesn't transpire that
we contemplated.
MS. SCOTT: Sir, I have been bringing each of these items to
the Board individually and not adopting the fungibility. Terri is
going to have so much fun typing that out multiple times, fungibility.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's, like, three times now.
MS. SCOTT: So I have been bringing these items individually
to the Board so that the Board understands the match and the
methodology about how the match is calculated for each of those
grant applications. I would leave to the Board on whether or not
they wanted to allow fungibility.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'm not going to go there. I
would prefer -- I'll make a motion for approval as-is, in fact,
presented.
I think the discussion with the F word would -- I won't say
fungibility again. Well, I am. But with regard to that, I think that it
can be assumed with our legislators that we all talk to them on a
regular basis. I'm on the MPOAC and the MPO itself. And the
support is, in fact, there in the event that the grant monies come
through.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: The motion, then, I would believe,
is to provide the $5,000 to TPL for the preparation of the grant
application and pledge up to $899,000 towards the acquisition, the
local match, and to work with partner municipalities on a
memorandum of agreement?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: So that's your motion?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's my motion.
MR. MILLER: Commissioner Hall.
January 14, 2025
Page 200
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Right. Let's get to Commissioner
Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Is there -- what is the significance with this pathway and getting
across the Veterans Memorial connection all the way to 41? I didn't
hear any talking about that.
MS. SCOTT: So, Commissioner, regardless of whether or not
the Trust for Public Lands acquires this -- rail banks this corridor, or
not, we will be -- if the property is rail banked, we would be in
control of that crossing; however, if the rail banking -- if the
$82 million didn't come to fruition, we could still go to the Seminole
Gulf Railway and negotiate a lease agreement with them for the
crossing. So in either event, we will be crossing this area.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Good. And then the grant is
$25 million max. So what is the plan to fill the other 57 million?
MS. SCOTT: So the -- we -- how do I put this? We've been
working with our legislative delegation. We have been working
through other grant applications, also through the Florida Department
of Transportation through their various funding sources, such as SUN
Trail funding, which is funding that's directly related to trail
opportunities in the state of Florida.
So essentially trying to cast the net wide and secure as many
discretionary dollars as we can to try to buy down that $82 million.
As to date, and full transparency, there have been no dollars provided
to the corridor at this time.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Okay. Great. Thanks, Trinity.
And my last question is, is fungible good or bad? I don't like
mushrooms on my pizza.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We'll move on. That's
a good question, though.
We have a motion -- I'll second the motion to get it on the floor.
January 14, 2025
Page 201
Any discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Do we have any registered
speakers?
MR. MILLER: I just want to note what the gentleman said.
Ms. Orton and Ms. Avola-Brown were here and had to leave, but
they wrote on their slips they were in full support.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Any discussion on the
motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: If not, I'll call for the question.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
MR. HATTAWAY: Thank you.
Item #11C
THE BOARD-DIRECTED COMPARISON OF VARIOUS
FLORIDA JURISDICTIONS' MULTIFAMILY PARKING
REQUIREMENTS AGAINST THOSE ADOPTED BY THE
COUNTY, PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING
POLICY ON PARKING DEVIATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE
PARKING REDUCTIONS FOR MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS, AND
ADJUST THE ADOPTED PARKING STANDARD THROUGH AN
January 14, 2025
Page 202
AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE -
MOTION TO DIRECT STAFF NOT TO ALLOW ANYMORE
APR’S (ADMINISTRATIVE PARKING REDUCTIONS) GOING
FORWARD AND DO STUDIES IN THE MEANTIME UNTIL THE
OCTOBER 1ST DATE BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL;
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HALL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to
Item 11C. This is a recommendation to review the Board-directed
comparison of various Florida jurisdictions' multifamily parking
requirements against those adopted by the county, provide direction
to staff regarding policy on parking deviations and administrative
parking reductions for multifamily products, and adjust the adopted
parking standard through an amendment to the Land Development
Code.
Mr. Michael Bosi, your division director of Planning and
Zoning, is here to present.
MR. BOSI: Good afternoon, again, Commissioner. Mike
Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
This -- the issue of multifamily parking and multifamily parking
spots was requested to be reviewed by the Board of County
Commissioners. It was part of our discussion about Ekos on Collier.
We started talking -- Commissioner McDaniel specifically raised a
point that he thought that we were under-parking our multifamily
because of some of -- I think some old [sic] information he has
related to existing multifamily facilities within the county.
So what we did is we compared Collier to 11 other jurisdictions
in Southwest Florida, and we ranked them in terms of what would be
the parking requirements for a multifamily facility for a 200-unit
apartment complex, 67 one-bedroom, 66 two-bedrooms, and 66
three-bedrooms.
January 14, 2025
Page 203
From the -- from the results, the most lenient was the City of
Venice. That 200-unit would only require 200 parking spaces. We
were the third least demanding in terms of parking requirements for
it, but we were 383 parking spaces. And that wasn't too far off.
The majority of the City of Bonita Springs, City of Fort Myers, it was
only about an 18-space addition. And then the most demanding was
Broward County was 477 spaces.
The range of the requirements, like I said, is 200 parking spaces
required for the City of Venice, 477 spaces required by Broward
County. The 200 spaces required by the City of Venice is almost a
50 percent reduction compared to what we would require.
Comparatively, Broward is almost -- is a 20 percent increase over
what Collier County requires.
Some additional considerations -- because it's not just the
standards that are contained within our LDC related to parking and
parking spaces demanded. We also have a process for within PUDs
for deviations, and it's routinely proposed that parking deviations are
provided for multifamily. For example, Mattson at Vanderbilt,
which was approved by Ordinance 24-45, had a reduction of parking
places for 1.6 spots for all dwelling units, where if -- the average is
1.5 for an efficiency, up to two spots for a two-bedroom. So it was a
net reduction.
As well as the administrative parking reduction, it's an APR.
It's something staff administers, you know, through a process that
doesn't go through a public-hearing process. And we normally have
a maximum. Nothing beyond 20 percent would be justified. The
applicants have to submit the conditions and why there is justification
for a reduction of the parking spots.
Good example, Haven in North Naples had a 19.7 reduction,
from 735 to 596 -- or 590 spaces, and that was done administratively
issued by county staff. Blue Coral, which is another facility up on
January 14, 2025
Page 204
Livingston Road and Immokalee, had a reduction of 472 to 396 that
was issued.
So there's additional considerations, but there's also
considerations of Senate Bill 250. I think we heard it as part of the
EZO. We can't adopt more restrictive. So even if we wanted to go
and increase the parking standards for the county by 10 percent, we
couldn't do that until October of 2026. But what we can do, if you
wanted to limit the -- limit some of the reductions that are being
received, is whenever we have a PUD that's seeking a deviation
below what our parking standards are, staff would promptly call that
out to the Board of County Commissioners and remind you of this
very discussion, as well as there could be a direction from the Board
of County Commissioners to limit any further APRs, administrative
parking reductions, to staff towards where we wouldn't issue
anymore until the October of 2026 time frame was provided.
When we were discussing this with the -- with the
commissioners during their commissioner's briefing, Commissioner
McDaniel had suggested -- and, again, I'm going to steal his thunder.
But he had suggested that in the meantime, before the October of
2026 time, have my staff go out, look at where we've had some of
these APRs issued, look at some of where these deviations have been
provided for. At the nighttime hearing [sic], at the 6 to -- 6 to 7 to
8 p.m. period to see what is the full capacity of these facilities, are
there deficiencies within there, and provide a report that the Board
could look at before that October 2026, and then you could give us
further direction as to whether we should make an adjustment to
our -- we should make an adjustment to our multifamily parking
standards.
I know that was kind of quick and condensed, but it was -- like I
said, we're -- out of the 12, we were the third most restrictive, but not
by a lot. About the 380 to about 420 was right about -- was right
January 14, 2025
Page 205
about the average of what was required, and we're right on the lower
side of the average.
So with that, any questions, comments, direction would be
greatly appreciated.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. Number one, thank
you very much. I've been asking for this for a while. I have really
only had anecdotal data to be able to actually look at. And you're
correct, we're kind of sort of in the middle. We're not real low.
We're not real restrictive. We're not -- we're not too permissive.
I would -- it would be my vote that we give direction to staff
to -- I would not offer any more APRs, the administrative reduction
approvals. It's counterintuitive to me that even an efficiency
apartment which can house a husband and wife only needs a
point-something of a car, or one car, as the case may be. There's two
people in the apartment. There's two cars.
And so I would -- for the period of time that we've got this
restriction on us by Senate Bill 250, that we not allow for any more
APRs going forward until such -- and -- and as I shared with Mike
yesterday, go look at some of these developments that we've already
approved, that the APR has been effectuated, and even not. I mean,
because the other side of this equation is people -- developers build a
villa, and the villa comes with a garage, and that's perceived as a
parking space. Well, it's not used as a parking space. It's either
additional living or storage because we don't have enough storage
units, Commissioner LoCastro.
So my -- number one, thank you for this -- for this review,
because this gives me something more than anecdotal data, number
one. Number two, I would like to make the recommendation that
until the October 1st date we go do some actual studies, just off
study. When you go home, drive through a subdivision that has
January 14, 2025
Page 206
these approvals already in place, and that we not issue any
administrative approval of reductions until such time as the mandate
of Senate Bill 250's lifted.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. Is that a motion that you're
making?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll make that a motion.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have
Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yes. Thank you, Chairman.
I'll second the motion, because the APRs that are enacted are in
properties that don't have anybody living in them yet. Blue Coral's
getting close, but we don't have any real data as to how that's going to
affect them. I've got a feeling it's going to.
So I'll second that motion. And just put the -- a freeze on
making any more of them until we get the restrictions lifted as well.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Mr. Miller, do we have
any public speakers?
MR. MILLER: We have one, Michael, is it Puchalla?
MR. PUCHALLA: You got it. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, Michael
Puchalla, CEO with the Housing Alliance and executive director with
Collier County Community Land Trust.
We've had the opportunity to be involved through the land trust
as the non-profit general partner in the recently completed Ekos. It's
actually going to be renamed Cadenza II. So it's two phases. Now
both are going to be Cadenza, 320 units total.
So we got a chance to work with McDowell Housing Partners,
who I know we referenced with Ekos Creekside, and -- but we've
engaged with a number of developers. We're trying to, obviously,
encourage from an affordability standpoint developers to look at
Collier County and come to us because we need some of that
January 14, 2025
Page 207
competition. We're doing a lot of great work through local
commitments.
The developments that you referenced, Blue Coral, which is
now Aspire Naples, the Haven, there has been a percentage of units
that have been committed to the 80 and 100 percent AMI, certainly
more in the workforce, but especially the developers that are into that
low-income housing tax credit type of development, especially now
as we're looking into redevelopment of commercial spaces to add
housing units that are closer in to the work centers.
The developers I've spoken with have strongly encouraged that
we maintain some flexibility to have the staff be able to do APR
because, obviously, speed is key to them as well, getting units to
market, but also there's a lot of precedent. They have a lot of data
and studies.
So I think that there's been -- we've heard strong endorsement to
try to maintain at least a carve-out, some flexibility. If the
development is going to be truly affordable or at least
has -- maintains a certain percentage of affordability, to allow staff to
have some flexibility on approving APRs.
So I wanted to share that because, obviously, it's becoming a
highly competitive space. We're doing some great things on the
affordability front, but there still is a strong demand and need for
those units that are down into the -- especially the lower income
thresholds, that 60 percent AMI, which is where your low-income
housing tax credit developments are income averaging.
So I just wanted to share what we've seen, what we're hearing
from the development community that we're speaking to. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. No other registered
speakers. We do have a motion and a second. Is there any further
consideration of that motion based on the testimony we just heard?
January 14, 2025
Page 208
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Mr. Chairman, I do have a
comment.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I know that the AHAC does not
like this because their fear is that it's going to affect the number of
affordable units with developers. All we're saying here is we want
to not do it administratively, that they can -- they can put that request
in their petition, and we can look at a -- add it on a case-by-case
basis. But I don't want to set us up to where we cut our nose off to
spite our face.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right.
COMMISSIONER HALL: And that's why I'm going to
support the motion, and that's it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. All right. We have a
motion and second. Any further discussion on the motion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
Item #11D
AWARD INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 24-8284,
“CAXAMBAS HURRICANE IAN PERMANENT FUEL TANK
INSTALLATION” TO DON WOOD INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF
January 14, 2025
Page 209
$667,164.00, APPROVE AN OWNER’S ALLOWANCE OF
$123,504.00 FOR POTENTIAL UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS,
AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
AGREEMENT - MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER
MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO –
APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to
Item 11D, formerly 16F4. This is a recommendation to award
Invitation to Bid No. 24-8284, Caxambas Hurricane Ian permanent
fuel tank installation, to Don Wood, Inc., in the amount of $667,164,
approve an owner's allowance of $123,504 for potential unforeseen
conditions, and authorize the Chairman to sign the attached
agreement. This item is brought to the regular agenda by
Commissioner McDaniel's request, and Mr. DeLony, your Facilities
Management director, is here to present or answer questions.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: And, Mr. DeLony, the allowance
seems to be a little bit high. Is there any particular reason for that?
MR. DeLONY: They're a little concerned because there is a
little bit of unknown here with it being underground work. So there
is -- it's a little higher than would be typical, but not much.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
McDaniel, I believe you brought this forward.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I did. And it really wasn't
arguably over the amount. I assume our staff has gone through the
necessary bids and procurement processes to come up with this.
My statement that I made yesterday -- and this has to do with all
of our facilities that are located within the Coastal High Hazard Area.
I want us to start giving credence to mobile above-ground storage
facilities so that in the event of the inevitable next hurricane, next
tidal surge, we can hook onto them and move them out of harm's
January 14, 2025
Page 210
way.
I -- in my other life, I had large storage tank facilities on my
mining operations, and they were on-road tractor-trailer. Now, the
ones I was using were double-lined and safe and everything along
those lines, but those units couldn't go on the road anymore. We
would have to actually have an on-road tractor-trailer or two to be
able to, depending on the demand. But we -- and I asked
yesterday -- and we don't have any real data, but we spend an
enormous amount of money fixing these fuel depots that are in the
Coastal High Hazard Area.
And so my thoughts are, let's have a -- the next time something
like this comes up, let's have a look at a mobile facility
that -- because I'm told that we really can't do anything with this
particular one because of permitting and so on and so forth.
MR. DeLONY: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So I'm not really going to
mess with -- I'm not going to do anything with this particular agenda
item. But I just want to bring forward a thought process of let's have
a look at tractor-trailers. When the next inevitable storm comes, we
can hook on to them depending on which way the storm's going and
drag them out of harm's way and not be burdened with extraordinary
expense.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Do we have any registered
speakers?
MR. MILLER: We do not.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So I'll make a motion for
approval on this one as it is recommended.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
January 14, 2025
Page 211
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, all in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
MR. DeLONY: Thank you.
Item #11E
EXPENDITURES FOR THE SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF
PROLAKE/KEETON AERATORS AND RELATED MATERIALS
FROM KEETON INDUSTRIES, INC., THROUGH A WAIVER
FROM THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$250,000 PER FISCAL YEAR FROM KEETON INDUSTRIES,
INC., THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2029 - MOTION TO APPROVE
BY COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Item 11E is formerly 16F6. This is a
recommendation to authorize expenditures for the sole-source
purchase of Prolake/Keeton aerators and related materials from
Keeton Industries, Inc., through a waiver from the competitive
process in the amount of $250,000 per fiscal year from Keeton
Industries, Inc., through Fiscal Year 2029. This item is brought to
the agenda by Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Again.
January 14, 2025
Page 212
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
How do you do? I just -- and there again, I wanted to bring
emphasis to normal conduct of business where we're entering into
multiyear contracts for large amounts of money, and I would like to
not do that as often. I understand that Pelican Bay's moved over to
this one particular manufacturer of equipment and such, but we're
actually approving a $1.25 million contract here for five years. And
it's just hard for me to believe that we're stuck in a sole-source
provider arrangement and entering into this kind of a contract.
So, again, I'm going to make an approval -- a motion for
approval, but it would be my -- I would like to see all of our
departments moving away from these long-term contracts, especially
on a sole-source basis.
So motion to approve.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Second.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. We have a motion and a
second. If there's no discussion, all in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thanks, Commissioners.
Item #11F
AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE UNDER THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM
January 14, 2025
Page 213
WITH CYPRESS COVE LANDKEEPERS INC., F/K/A CYPRESS
COVE CONSERVANCY, INC., FOR A 10.00-ACRE PARCEL AT A
COST OF $648,900, FOR A TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED
$653,570 INCLUSIVE OF CLOSING COSTS - MOTION TO
APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS; SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER MCDANIEL – APPROVED
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to
Item 11F, which is formerly 16A15. This is a recommendation to
approve an agreement for sale and purchase under the Conservation
Collier Land Acquisition Program with Cypress Cove Landkeepers,
Inc., formerly known as Cypress Cove Conservancy, Inc., for a
10-acre parcel at a cost of $648,900, for a total cost not to exceed
$653,570 inclusive of closing costs. This item was brought to the
regular agenda by Commissioner Saunders.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Thank you. This is -- this is a
good-news item, but there was -- there were some questions
concerning the county's purchase of this property from a
conservancy, though that conservancy is not a governmental
conservancy, and so I thought maybe an explanation would be
helpful, and also the Clerk had raised some questions concerning the
value of this property.
MS. COOK: Okay. Good afternoon, Commissioners. Jaime
Cook, your director of Development Review, for the record.
So the current property owner -- and the president of the
association, Shane Duff, is online if you do have questions for
him -- is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization. It is not a conservancy
group, and the property is not in an existing conservation easement.
They have simply been operating the property as a nature center
under an MOU with the Board of County Commissioners for the past
little over four years.
January 14, 2025
Page 214
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So the -- how does this
fit into the Gore property and our plans for that area?
MS. COOK: So I can bring up the presentation with the maps.
Thank you, Troy.
So this property is essentially what Commissioner Kowal has
previously referred to as the hole in the doughnut. This 10-acre
parcel is in the dead center of the Gore Preserve and is entirely
surrounded by Conservation Collier land. When Conservation
Collier staff started acquiring property in the Gore Preserve back in
2018, they acquired about 170 acres at that time. But due to the fact
that that was not during an acquisition period where Conservation
Collier was receiving annual referendum funding, the program didn't
have the money at that time to buy this property, as Dr. Gore's house
is on the property, so it is valued higher than other properties in the
area.
When Conservation Collier couldn't afford to buy it at that time,
the Cypress Cove Landkeepers organization assembled and bought
the property to kind of keep it in a, we'll say, preservation status
without any legal easements over it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Okay. So, theoretically -- this
property, if we didn't purchase it, theoretically, this could be sold as a
single-family lot in a very favorable area?
MS. COOK: Absolutely. It is zoned Estates and has a home
on it, so it could absolutely be sold on the market.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Are there any
questions? Any other comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Then I'll make a motion to
approve.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And I'll second it, as a
comment, and I do have a comment. I am remiss, because I received
January 14, 2025
Page 215
a really nice e-mail from a lady that I'll get to the County Manager to
distribute to all of you that actually supports this acquisition and our
utilization. This -- again, I know we have a lot of varied opinions
about Conservation Collier, but this piece of property has been used.
It was the home base of the Gore TPA that was established a
millennia ago. It has been used as a learning center, and I think if
we mind our Ps and Qs with our upkeep and maintenance and so on
and so forth, it can do nothing but enhance the public access for all of
the conservation lands that we're acquiring out there.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. We have a motion and
a second. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Seeing none, all in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HALL: (No verbal response.)
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: It passes unanimously.
MS. COOK: Thank you.
Item #15A
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA BY INDIVIDUALS NOT
ALREADY HEARD DURING PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENT
IN THIS MEETING – NONE
January 14, 2025
Page 216
MS. PATTERSON: Commissioners, that brings us to
Item 15A, public comments on general topics not on the current or
future agenda by individuals not already heard during previous public
comments in this meeting.
MR. MILLER: We have none at this time.
Item #15B
STAFF PROJECT UPDATES
Item #15C
STAFF AND COMMISSIONER GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
MS. PATTERSON: We have no staff project updates for
Item 15B, so that moves us to Item 15C, staff and commission
general communications.
We've already covered the Naples Airport Authority, and I have
nothing else.
County Attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: Nothing.
MS. PATTERSON: Chair?
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Kowal, anything
for the good of the order?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Thank you, Chairman. Yeah, I
have a couple things I want to touch on. I'm probably going to go
back to the Airport Authority letter just because there was more
things I wanted to talk about, but I didn't think it was the appropriate
time. But I'll get to that in one second.
I did get -- I got reached out by individuals that involves the -- I
guess the state funding for some grants for the arts programs here in
January 14, 2025
Page 217
Collier County, and they were asking for support letters from the
commissioners, if they were willing to -- and I know we're doing our
trip up there in February for our legislative breakout.
I don't know if anybody -- if any other commissioners have an
appetite to -- if we agree to support this. If they're going to go the
state and try to get money for theirselves, and, you know, we do it
ourselves here. When they come forward, we give them grants.
We give them money for these programs through our tourism tax.
I guess there's money up in the state level with the legislators
that they can obtain. If there's any appetite, if the Chairman's willing
to, you know, sign a letter on our behalf, I don't know if that's --
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Sure. If our staff can draft a
letter.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: They gave me an example of the
one, I guess, that they were going to use, so I'll share that with you.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. If you provide it to us, I'll work
with Mr. Mullins and Bridgette, and we can -- oh, thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Now, will I need to bring this back
to the Board, or does the Board approve my signing the letter without
bringing it back?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It seems okay to me. I
mean, I don't -- we're signing a letter of support, and then it has to
come back to us if they need extra money.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Yeah. The letter won't obligate
us to do anything. It will just be a support of their --
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: It's support of them going and
getting state grants.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So I'll sign the letter.
We don't need to put that on the agenda.
MS. PATTERSON: No, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALL: I'm good with it.
January 14, 2025
Page 218
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And second, like I said, I wanted
to revisit the airport. I'm going to put this out for the staff and my
fellow members up here on the Board. You know, there's a lot of
moving parts going on with the City Council and the mayor and the
NAA, the Naples Airport Authority, a lot of things going back and
forth. And I think the airport authority's writing these letters
reaching out to us in some way to -- I don't know if -- maybe to help
them with their argument to what's going on or what.
But, traditionally, I mean, the airport -- the city had annexed that
property, I guess, some time ago, and the city's always had control
over the airport. The City Council appoints the members to the
NAA. And in light of what's going on, and, you know, their push to
do something or move the airport -- I mean, I hope not shut it down.
But, you know, there's rumors that they're trying to put members on
the board that may be in line with their beliefs.
Well, through my little research and having a meeting at the
NAA the last time I was there, they were presenting some projects
that they want to do with the airport property. And lo and behold -- I
didn't realize it, but while I was there, they asked me -- they may
come to us because a part of the airport is actually in the county.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: And I guess maybe it was
overlooked. I don't know what it is. But you can actually -- if you
can put these on the telestrator (phonetic).
The one is the actual county boundaries, and the other is, like, an
actual picture in the -- so the red, you can see, is the county
jurisdiction. And then you've got the other one that's just -- that's,
like, our official map. We pulled that. So that's the line you saw
that actually goes across the taxiway and the runup area.
I guess the city at one -- or it's not the city, but the NAA, at one
point obtained that property from the county. And the only reason it
January 14, 2025
Page 219
came up is because they came to me and says they're thinking about
putting, like, a two-story little hotel at the end of their property down
there because they can't -- their pilots, when they're restricted, they
can't fly out at certain hours because of the new restrictions.
They go into town, and they're not budgeted to get a room in
Naples. And believe it or not, they're like, we have to go to county
because it's in your jurisdiction. And it's our property, but it's -- you
know, it's part of our boundary of the airport.
That being said -- so in reality, I don't know -- I mean, it's more
of a legal question. Do we -- are we a stakeholder in this airport, and
should we have a voice on that board?
MR. KLATZKOW: I do not believe so.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I didn't hear you. What?
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: He said no.
MR. KLATZKOW: No.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: All right. I'm just -- you know,
I don't know -- I thought this would be an opportunity for us to have
one body on the NAA, because the airport does have a portion of
that -- within their boundaries within the county, and we haven't been
represented on that board ever.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do you want to be on it?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, I can find somebody to
appoint to be on it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. I don't think it's a bad
idea for this board to have somebody on it just because they -- my
personal opinion of that airport authority is they're doing all kinds of
things in our county in a vacuum. I mean, there again, I don't want
to belabor the point. I think it's a good idea. If we're not obligated
to do it or we're not allowed to do it, that's a whole 'nother can of
worms. But I think it would be beneficial for us to have, minimum,
January 14, 2025
Page 220
an appointee on there.
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: So I would -- you know, I'm
putting it out there as a possibility. You know, I just kind of look at
other ways to, you know, skin a cat, if you want to say.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, perhaps we could ask the
County Attorney to take a look at the process we would have to go
through. Obviously, this would have to be approved by the City of
Naples in terms of the ordinances that govern the airport, or the
airport authority itself. So we can't mandate that, but we can
certainly look at what the process would be to become -- to have
someone from the county as a county representative.
MR. KLATZKOW: I'll look into it.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: I thought you were going to say
that.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Are you telling me, on the
map, just that little orange piece is the county -- is the county proper?
COMMISSIONER KOWAL: Well, it's actually the run-up
area and part of their new taxiway. You see the red. So that's in the
active actual taxi run-up area. And that's actually the run-up area a
lot of people complain about. That's the one they sit and they rev
their engines up before preflight. So it's actually within the county's
jurisdiction.
The green spot on the other side of North is where they were
talking about possibly putting some sort of structure along North
Road there.
The reason I think the airport had to obtain this, because the
FAA forced them to do it, to have that buffer, and it wasn't ever part
of the city. I don't know if it was something that happened after the
fact, the FAA came in and said, "You have to have a larger buffer by
standard," and they had to come in and purchase the property from
the county. The way I look at it, we're part of -- we're part of the
January 14, 2025
Page 221
airport right now, so...
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Whether we like it or not.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner
McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I really only have one
thing, and I was somewhat remiss in the last item. I neglected
to -- we need to secure the conditional use or the continuation of the
Gore house as a -- as a facility for study. And I don't know, do we
need to actually do a conditional use, or can we make that a portion
of our -- because I -- there's been an MOU between a separate
organization to use that home as a training and learning facility, and
now if we own it, do we have to do another conditional-use
application, or can we just continue on with that use?
MS. COOK: Again, Jaime Cook, for the record.
The MOU would expire upon our acquisition of the property.
If you want, we can bring something back to the Board closer to the
closing date requesting that we be able to continue that use as is. I
do know that is something that the organization Cypress Cove really
wants us to move forward with, as well as the school board, because
a lot of that educational is field trips for the school board.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Sure. And I apologize. I
forgot, you told me that yesterday, and I didn't have it in my notes.
But it would be -- it would be my recommendation that we do do that
and continue on with that use of that home.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. So that's something
that our staff can bring back to us. Once we own the property, make
a determination as to whether or not we need a conditional use to
continue the use and bring it back to us.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: But continue the use until we hear
it.
January 14, 2025
Page 222
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Right.
MS. COOK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner LoCastro.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Yes, sir. A few meetings
ago I had made a recommendation or just a reminder to, in the next
few meetings, maybe to bring ResourceX back here, see where
they've been digging, what they've been recommending, what they've
been accomplishing. You know, we've been referencing them
multiple times, but, you know, we have yet to sort of see a slide that
says, "Hey, here's the 10 things we've attacked." So it doesn't have
to be next time. I just wanted to just mention that out there again. I
don't know if we've got them scheduled.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. We have them for our March
workshop.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, good, okay.
Secondly, I wanted to just give you-all an update if you hadn't
seen some of the e-mails, but I think mainly it was just myself that
was on them and Mr. Klatzkow and a few others. But if you
remember I had what I called a junkyard house in Goodland, and we
broke some new ground by actually putting a lien on that house.
That previous homeowner owned a -- owed the county almost
$300,000 in fines that they were probably going to skip out on. And,
you know, the short version is I want to really give a thanks to
Mr. Klatzkow and his staff for really breaking new ground and
attacking that house with success. Jamie French and his team and
quite a few others who were running this thing from start to finish.
We did put a lien on the house. It did come up for auction. It
was sold. The almost $300,000 in fines were paid and came back to
the county and were put in the General Fund, and Code Enforcement
recently just told me that the house is about 90 percent cleaned up
and that the new owner is looking to totally gut and renovate the
January 14, 2025
Page 223
house.
And I had a team of Goodland leadership in my office yesterday
to talk about a plethora of things, and the first thing that was on their
list was just a huge thanks to the county for cleaning up a house that
was in a very visible part of Goodland for years and years and years
and, you know, the can was kicked. So, you know, Mr. Klatzkow, I
know you and your team really led that.
And, you know, maybe this will be a precedent for other houses
like this that we might find in the community that we think
sometimes our hands are tied, but they're really not. So thank you so
much for your effort.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well -- and thank you, by the
way. You led the charge on that. You kept us out of the real estate
business. I was kind of sort of okay with going in and buying it and
doing that sort of thing. And, you know, there again, we're over here
trying to get the government out of businesses that we prove we're
not good at, and you led the charge and effectuated what needed to be
done there, so thank you.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: Oh, I had one last thing.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Oh, I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: And this is really to -- this is
something between Ms. Patterson -- I'm going to set the table for her
for a second. We had a conversation yesterday about the LA fires,
and the reason being is for really the past year or two, I've been not
pleased with certain fire stations in my district. And not just me.
You know, these are -- this isn't throwing spears or anything. But
meeting with the fire commissioners, and we have several -- even
though we know our new fire stations are going to be built, we have
current ones that are -- that are the same size they were way back
January 14, 2025
Page 224
when, but the community has exponentially grown. If you heard the
LA fire chief speak, candidly, she brought up very similar things that
I think we need to take a look at, and we are taking a look at here in
the county.
So having said that, I just want to turn it over to Ms. Patterson.
She actually has led the charge and done quite a bit working with our
fire leadership. No, new stations aren't being built tomorrow, and
we're not gutting the old ones in a day. It does take time.
But as we were saying in the office, you've got to get off of
Step 0 at some point. It has to be part of the master plan. It has to
be part of, you know, the three-year, the five-year plan. It has to be
budgeted.
So just in short order, Amy, I just wanted to give you a chance
to vocalize, like, all you've been dong behind the scenes to make sure
that our fire stations are getting attention and some of the current
ones that we have that really need to be expanded or improved aren't
being ignoring.
MS. PATTERSON: Yes, sir. So on the new station front, just
because we are approaching the time of year when we experience
fires here, Station 74 is out on DeSoto and Golden Gate Boulevard.
That will become the forward command for wildfires. General
speaking, that area is where we experience fires, and that station has
been -- it's under construction now. It's budgeted on time for now,
knock on wood. And that station is being built to accommodate not
only Collier County EMS but also Greater Naples Fire, North Collier
Fire, and Forestry, and it also is capable of housing large numbers of
our first responders during any type of disaster.
So with that going in, that's a huge plus to that area, not only for
level -- just regular level of service, but also, again, being positioned
for that wildfire command.
Secondly, as you all know, Greater Naples voters did vote in a
January 14, 2025
Page 225
millage increase for Greater Naples Fire specially for capital. So
while Greater Naples is doing pretty well in the impact fee side of the
house for growth-related items, the building new stations at some
point in the future, where they have some difficulties is with their
existing stations. And there are some that are quite aged, and,
unfortunately, with the round of storms that we've had, are ones that
have experienced storm surge.
So with this capital, we'll be working with Greater Naples to
help prioritize our EMS needs as a collocated entity within those
stations and help -- help them along with anything that we can do for
planning for specifically Station 21, and there are a couple of other
ones. And actually, we're scheduling a meeting with Chief Wolfe.
That was the other thing is there's been a change in leadership.
Chief Sapp retired. We now have Chief Wolfe, who's been installed
as the new fire chief. We're setting up a meeting with him to discuss
Station 21 as well as the other stations and Station 63 out on the
Alley and our relationship.
Finally, on an operational side of the house, we are looking at
growing our fire paramedic program as we become closer to fully
staffed in EMS. It's something that we've had on and off over the
years where we actually swap folks off of fire apparatus onto
ambulances and off of ambulances onto fire apparatus. It's another
great way for us to work with the fire districts and create that
cross-training. We have a lot -- actually, a lot of our paramedics are
also certified firefighters, and so that gives the community an added
level of protection.
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: I'll just add, we don't have a
water pressure issue here, thanks to Dr. George and our team. So,
you know, these are questions that people are starting to ask as they
watch the news, and I just wanted, in a public forum, to assure people
and have our County Manager assure people that, you know, we're
January 14, 2025
Page 226
not sitting on our hands.
And, lastly, I'll just add, we get a lot of negative feedback
sometimes on controlled burns. You know, they happen for a
reason, and some of what happened out at LA -- I won't act like I'm
an expert. But there are more than a few people that say, you know,
"If you drop the ball on controlled burns, sometimes then that's why
these fires, you know, rage out of control."
I want to give a hats-off to our fire team, fire leadership, County
Manager, all the people that are involved in that. They can be
sometimes a nuisance with ash and smoke and this and that, but they
do serve a very important, you know, need here. So there are a lot of
proactive things happening in Collier County to make sure that we
don't have some sort of massive fire tragedy, and I appreciate our
County Manager, behind the scenes, leading that effort. I look
forward to the upgrades to Station 21 in my district.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right. Commissioner Hall.
COMMISSIONER HALL: Thank you, Chairman.
I've only got one simple request, and it's pretty simple. Next
Monday's Inauguration Day, and federal government has ordered the
flags at half-mast through that day, through the 28th. And that's
mandatory for federal buildings, but it is not mandatory for any state
or county buildings. So I am going to request that we fly our flag at
full mast all day Monday and be proud of the direction our country
has voted in.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: Well, I'm not so sure -- you know,
I, obviously, understand the rationale for that, but at the same time it
just seems odd that we may be the only government building flying
flags at full mast during the time period of when the country is flying
the flags at half-mast for Jimmy Carter.
So anybody on our staff have any knowledge of the rules that
apply? And I see Mr. Mullins is taking the bait here.
January 14, 2025
Page 227
COMMISSIONER LoCASTRO: He is a glutton for
punishment. Look at him run to the podium.
MR. MULLINS: You know, your timing couldn't have been
better. The governor just released a memorandum that said that the
state will order flags to be flown at full mast on Inauguration Day and
then lowered again to half-mast the day after. Literally, five minutes
ago.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: You know, with that
understanding, I certainly have no objection. I'll withdraw that
concern. So we'll fly the flags at full mast on Inauguration Day and
comply with the governor's order to reduce them to half-mast
subsequently.
Commissioner Hall, does that satisfy your desires there?
COMMISSIONER HALL: Yeah. Thank you, God.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: All right, perfect.
I don't have anything to add. So, gentlemen, thank you. Staff,
thank you. It's been a long day.
We had a lot of controversial things to deal with. I think we
made a lot of progress on a lot of fronts. So I just want to thank the
Board for your cooperation, and especially in terms of David
Lawrence Center in terms of hearing that early. I really appreciate
the Board doing that. Thank you.
MS. PATTERSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAUNDERS: We are adjourned.
*****
****Commissioner Hall moved, seconded by Commissioner
Saunders and carried that the following items under the consent and
summary agendas be approved and/or adopted****
January 14, 2025
Page 228
Item #16A1
TO RELEASE THE UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY
(UPS) IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,477.63 TO THE PROJECT
ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED AGENT FOR
JASPER FLATS, PL20230008506.
Item #16A2
TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF
$43,680, WHICH WAS POSTED AS A GUARANTY FOR
EXCAVATION PERMIT NUMBER PL20200000344 FOR WORK
ASSOCIATED WITH WATERCREST AT HACIENDA LAKES -
THE AS-BUILT LAKE CROSS-SECTIONS HAVE BEEN
RECEIVED, AND THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DIVISION
INSPECTED THE LAKE ON NOVEMBER 18, 2024
Item #16A3
TO RELEASE A PERFORMANCE BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF
$5,340 WHICH WAS POSTED AS A DEVELOPMENT
GUARANTEE FOR AN EARLY WORK AUTHORIZATION
(EWA) FOR WORK ASSOCIATED WITH VENTURE CHURCH,
PL20240004015
Item #16A4
RESOLUTION 2025-01: RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS, AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF AVE MARIA UNIT 9
January 14, 2025
Page 229
DEL WEBB AT AVE MARIA PARCELS 101, 103, 104 & 105,
APPLICATION NUMBER AR-9168 AND PL20110001810, AND
AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $282,532.56
Item #16A5
RESOLUTION 2025-02: RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF DEL WEBB
NAPLES PARCELS 107-108, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20160000906, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $170,953.21.
- BASED ON THE WORK PERFORMED AND COMPLETED
PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS DATED MAY 1, 2016, THE
ORIGINAL SECURITY, TOTALING $623,874.51, HAS BEEN
REDUCED TO THE CURRENT AMOUNT OF $170,953.21
Item #16A6
RESOLUTION 2025-03: RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF DEL WEBB
NAPLES PARCEL 109, APPLICATION NUMBER
PL20180000500, AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $460,461.04.
- BASED ON THE WORK PERFORMED AND COMPLETED
PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2018
January 14, 2025
Page 230
Item #16A7
RESOLUTION 2025-04: RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF INLAND VILLAGE,
APPLICATION NUMBER PL20170003955 (FP) AND
APPLICATION NUMBER PL20180002642 (SDPA), AND
AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,522.75
Item #16A8
RESOLUTION 2025-05: RESOLUTION FOR FINAL
ACCEPTANCE OF THE PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE
IMPROVEMENTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT
DEDICATIONS FOR THE FINAL PLAT OF ISLES OF COLLIER
PRESERVE PHASE 9, APPLICATION NUMBER PL20160001197,
AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE MAINTENANCE
SECURITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $262,678
Item #16A9
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR BONITA BAY NAPLES CLUBHOUSE, PL20240012690.
(2024-2243) - REVIEW AND INSPECTION FEES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $636.91 WERE PAID UNDER THE ORIGINAL
APPLICATION, SDP PL20220005522, AND DEPOSITED IN
PLANNING FUND (1014)
Item #16A10
January 14, 2025
Page 231
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF A
PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER FACILITIES FOR
DIAMOND CLASSIC PLUMBING, PL20240008815
Item #16A11
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
UTILITY FACILITIES AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF
THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES FOR
ESPLANADE BY THE ISLANDS - PHASE 3C, PL20240006571
Item #16A12
FINAL ACCEPTANCE AND ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF
THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY FACILITIES
FOR SEVEN SHORES PHASE 1B, 1C & 1D, PL20240001231
Item #16A13
AN EASEMENT USE AGREEMENT TO ALLOW A SCREENED
LANAI TO ENCROACH 1.7 FEET INTO A COUNTY LAKE
MAINTENANCE, DRAINAGE, AND ACCESS EASEMENT
LOCATED AT 1249 DIAMOND LAKE CIRCLE
Item #16A14
APPROVE THE PROPERTIES ON THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER ACTIVE ACQUISITION LIST (AAL) AND DIRECT
STAFF TO PURSUE THE PROJECTS RECOMMENDED WITHIN
January 14, 2025
Page 232
THE A-CATEGORY, FUNDED BY THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION FUND 1061 (The table should
read $2,200,000 for the Estimated Value and $1,164,021 for the
Estimated Value per acre for the “Category C” property located at
1063 Shadowlawn - Staff’s Request – Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16A15 - (Moved to Item #11F, During Agenda Changes, Per
Commissioner Saunders)
Item #16A16
AN AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE UNDER THE
CONSERVATION COLLIER LAND ACQUISITION PROGRAM
WITH 1) ERIK C. FERNANDEZ & TERRATRUST, LLC
(“FERNANDEZ”) FOR A 1.59-ACRE PARCEL AT A COST OF
$44,520; 2) JOL PROPERTY VENTURES LLC FOR A 1.14-ACRE
PARCEL AT A COST OF $36,480; AND 3) ABEL MARTINEZ
CHAVEZ FOR A 1.14-ACRE PARCEL AT A COST OF $36,480,
FOR A TOTAL COST NOT TO EXCEED $122,210 INCLUSIVE
OF CLOSING COSTS
Item #16A17
RESOLUTION 2025-06: RESOLUTION AND AN AFTER-THE-
FACT RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT AUTHORIZING THE
TEMPORARY CLOSING OF A PORTION OF CITY GATE BLVD
NORTH AND DETERMINING THAT THE CLOSURE IS
NECESSARY FOR THE MAGIC OF LIGHTS EVENT FROM
NOVEMBER 22, 2024 – JANUARY 4, 2025, IN AFFILIATION
WITH SPORTS FACILITIES AND THE PARADISE COAST
SPORTS COMPLEX, TO FULFILL THE COLLIER COUNTY’S
January 14, 2025
Page 233
RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENT FOR
ROAD CLOSURES
Item #16B1
RESOLUTION 2025-07: A RESOLUTION FOR THE REMOVAL
OF UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $435.00 FROM THE FINANCIAL RECORDS OF
THE CATT TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT FUND (4030) AND
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED FUND (4033) IN
ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION 2006-252 AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO EXECUTE THE ATTACHED
RESOLUTION
Item #16B2
AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PURCHASE OF RIGHT OF WAY
(PARCEL 1368FEE) REQUIRED FOR THE VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXT – PHASE 2 PROJECT (PROJECT NO.
60249). ESTIMATED FISCAL IMPACT: $54,300 - THE PARCEL
CONSISTS OF A STRIP TAKING ALONG THE REAR,
NORTHERLY BOUNDARY OF THE PARENT TRACT AND IS
APPROXIMATELY 0.17 ACRES IN EXTENT
Item #16B3
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
AGREEMENT WITH GULFSHORE PLAYHOUSE, INC., FOR
LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND BRICK PAVEMENT
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD, A
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
January 14, 2025
Page 234
Item #16B4
A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
("AGREEMENT") WITH VALEWOOD MAINTENANCE
ASSOCIATION, INC., FOR LANDSCAPE, IRRIGATION, AND
BRICK PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN VALEWOOD
DRIVE, A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY - THROUGH RESPONSIBLE
GOVERNANCE OBJECTIVES, THE ENHANCEMENTS AND
MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES PROPOSED IN THIS
AGREEMENT ENCOURAGED ACTIVE COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION
Item #16B5
RESOLUTION 2025-08: A RESOLUTION AND APPROVE A
LEASE AGREEMENT WITH STATE REPRESENTATIVE
YVETTE BENARROCH FOR USE OF COUNTY-OWNED
OFFICE SPACE
Item #16B6
RESOLUTION 2025-09: A RESOLUTION THAT ALIGNS WITH
THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
STANDARD FORM LONG-TERM LEASE (NOT FOR PROFIT)
WITH WARRIORS HOMES OF COLLIER, INC., FOR THE USE
OF TWO COUNTY-OWNED HOMES AT 1973 AND 2015 BAY
STREET, ENSURING RENT IS SET AT $1,000 PER HOME,
CONSISTENT WITH THE AGREEMENT WITH WARRIORS
AND AS WAS ORALLY PRESENTED IN AGENDA ITEM 11B
ON NOVEMBER 12, 2024
January 14, 2025
Page 235
Item #16B7
APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 UNDER AGREEMENT
NO. 23-8099 TO ADD SIXTY (60) ADDITIONAL DAYS FOR THE
VETERANS MEMORIAL BLVD. PHASE 1 – NOISE BARRIER
WALL PROJECT (PROJECT NO. 60198)
Item #16B8
RESOLUTION 2025-10: A RESOLUTION AGREEMENT WITH
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT)
REIMBURSING THE COUNTY UP TO $893,000 FOR THE
PURCHASE AND CONFIGURATION OF AN ADAPTIVE
TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM (ATCS) TO BE INSTALLED AT
THIRTEEN (13) INTERSECTIONS ON GOLDEN GATE
PARKWAY, SANTA BARBARA BLVD., AND RADIO ROAD,
EXECUTE A RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING THE BOARD’S
ACTION, AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENT FPN 446342-1-98-01. (PROJECT #33934, FUND
1841) - THE PURPOSE OF THIS SYSTEM IS TO IMPROVE
TRAVEL TIMES ALONG EACH ARTERIAL ROADWAY AND
REDUCE DELAY FOR ALL APPROACHES AT EACH
INTERSECTION
Item #16B9
RESOLUTION 2025-11: THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT TO THE LOCAL AGENCY
PROGRAM (LAP) AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (FDOT) TO INCREASE
January 14, 2025
Page 236
THE GRANT AWARD FROM $2,100,000 TO $2,220,000 FOR
ROAD WIDENING AND PAVED SHOULDER CONSTRUCTION
ON CORKSCREW RD BETWEEN THE COLLIER COUNTY
CURVE AND LEE COUNTY CURVE, TO ADOPT THE
ACCOMPANYING RESOLUTION FORMALLY APPROVING
AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME,
AND TO AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENDMENTS, FPN 446323-2-58-01 (PROJECT #60233, FUND
1841)
Item #16B10
APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 3, ADDING A TOTAL OF
SIXTY-SEVEN (67) DAYS, CORRECTING AN ERROR ON
CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 ADJUSTING THE CONTRACT
AMOUNT TO $22,886,658.04 UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 20-7811
WITH QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC., FOR THE
“DESIGN-BUILD OF THE IMMOKALEE AREA
IMPROVEMENTS – TIGER GRANT” PROJECT, AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
CHANGE ORDER. (PROJECT NO. 33563) (2024-2328) - THIS
RECOMMENDATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LONG-
RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND OBJECTIVE 1 OF THE
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN TO MAINTAIN THE MAJOR
ROADWAY SYSTEM AT AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF
SERVICE
Item #16C1
AWARD INVITATION TO BID NO. 23-8095R, “MAINTENANCE
January 14, 2025
Page 237
AND REPAIR OF BALERS, COMPACTORS & ROLL-OFF
EQUIPMENT,” TO ABG FABRICATION, LLC, AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT.
(2024-2046) - THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT PROVIDES FOR A
THREE-YEAR TERM WITH TWO ADDITIONAL RENEWAL
TERMS AVAILABLE
Item #16C2
AWARD REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES NO. 24-
8211 FOR “DESIGN SERVICES FOR SOUTH COUNTY WATER
RECLAMATION FACILITY ELECTRICAL SERVICE #1
UPGRADES” TO JOHNSON ENGINEERING, LLC, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $501,897, AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT (PROJECT #70288)
Item #16C3
RATIFY ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED CHANGE ORDER
NO. 2 AND CHANGE ORDER NO. 3, PROVIDING FOR A TIME
EXTENSION AND USE OF THE OWNER’S ALLOWANCE
UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 22-7992R, WITH HASKINS INC.,
FOR THE PALM RIVER AREAS 1 AND 2 PUBLIC UTILITIES
RENEWAL PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE ITS CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDERS. (PROJECT NO.
70257)
Item #16C4
AWARD INVITATION FOR QUALIFICATIONS (“IFQ”) NO. 22-
8056, “HIGH/MEDIUM VOLTAGE ELECTRICAL SERVICES” TO
January 14, 2025
Page 238
MP PREDICTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC., ELECTRICAL
ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES INC., SIMMONDS ELECTRICAL
OF NAPLES, INC., AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
SIGN THE ATTACHED AGREEMENTS - THE ESTIMATED
ANNUAL EXPENDITURE IS $2,000,000
Item #16D1
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A MEMORANDUM OF
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DIVISION OF
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND COLLIER COUNTY TO
ACCEPT THE TRANSFER OF A TIGER DAM FLOOD BARRIER
SYSTEM. (2024-2041) - THE EOC WILL WORK WITH COUNTY
DIVISIONS AND DEPARTMENTS, MUNICIPALITIES, AND
OTHER KEY PARTNERS TO UTILIZE THESE RESOURCES
FOR FUTURE STORM SURGE-RELATED PROTECTIVE
ACTIONS
Item #16D2
APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DIVISION
OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TO INSTALL A LOW-
POWER GAP RADAR STATION FOR LOCAL REAL-TIME
WEATHER DATA - FDEM WILL MANAGE ALL OPERATING
AND MAINTENANCE COSTS FOR THREE YEARS AFTER
INSTALLATION
Item #16D3
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
January 14, 2025
Page 239
SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY
AND COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY (IMMOKALEE) TO AMEND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AGREEMENT #CD24-02 TO
ALLOW FOR PHASE I ACTIVITIES - THE U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM FUNDS LOCALLY DEFINED REQUESTS FOR
PROGRAM SPECIFIC NEEDS IN THE COMMUNITY AND
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
Item #16D4
A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE CARRY-FORWARD
INTEREST EARNED, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,057.09, FOR
SEPTEMBER 2024 ON ADVANCED LIBRARY FUNDING
RECEIVED FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO
SUPPORT LIBRARY SERVICES FOR THE USE OF COLLIER
COUNTY RESIDENTS. (PUBLIC SERVICE MATCH FUND
1840). (2024-2248) - NEW INTEREST EARNED, FOR
SEPTEMBER 2024, REQUIRES RECOGNITION OF CARRY-
FORWARD INTEREST EARNINGS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$1,057.09
Item #16D5
RESOLUTION 2025-12: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
APPROVAL OF A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO COLLIER
COUNTY'S U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD) ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR
PROGRAM YEAR 2023-2024 AND PROGRAM YEAR 2024-2025,
January 14, 2025
Page 240
TO REALLOCATE $1,000,000 FROM PROGRAM YEAR 2023
CDBG TO PROGRAM YEAR 2024 CDBG ACTIVITY TO
PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILIES
THROUGH COUNSELING AND HOUSING SERVICES
IMPACTED BY RECENT HURRICANES, AND AUTHORIZE
SUBMISSION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO HUD
Item #16D6
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN A LANDLORD PAYMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND
SANGAREDI LLC., ALLOWING THE COMMUNITY AND
HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION (CHS) TO ADMINISTER THE
RAPID RE-HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION
PROGRAM THROUGH THE EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS AND
RAPID UNSHELTERED SURVIVOR HOUSING (RUSH) GRANT
PROGRAMS. (2024-2286) - THESE FUNDS MAY INCLUDE
PAYMENT FOR RENTAL APPLICATION FEES, SECURITY
DEPOSITS, UTILITY DEPOSITS OR PAYMENTS, LAST
MONTH’S RENT, AS WELL AS SHORT- OR MEDIUM-TERM
RENTAL ASSISTANCE
Item #16D7
AN AFTER-THE-FACT THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE FY24
OLDER AMERICANS ACT TITLE III AGREEMENT # OAA
203.24.03 BETWEEN THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, INC., AND COLLIER COUNTY IN
THE AMOUNT OF ($5,000.00) BRINGING THE TOTAL AWARD
TO $3,004,265.41 (HUMAN SERVICES GRANT FUND 1837)
January 14, 2025
Page 241
Item #16D8
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN TWO STATE HOUSING INITIATIVE
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AMENDMENTS BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND (A) HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
AMENDMENT #2 TO INCREASE THE PER UNIT AMOUNT
AND (B) COLLIER COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY
AMENDMENT #1 TO CLARIFY LANGUAGE AND RESOLVE A
SCRIVENER ERROR (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D9
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THIRTY (30) MORTGAGE
SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$145,000.00 (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053)
Item #16D10
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THIRTY (30) MORTGAGE
SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF
$220,479.10 AND TO AUTHORIZE THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENT TO APPROPRIATE REPAYMENT AMOUNT
TOTALING $3,000.00. (SHIP GRANT FUND 1053) - IF ALL
CONDITIONS OF THE LOAN ARE MET, ONE-THIRD OF THE
LOAN WILL BE FORGIVEN IN FIVE-YEAR INCREMENTS SO
THAT AT THE END OF THE FIFTEENTH (15) YEAR THE LOAN
IS FULLY FORGIVEN
Item #16D11
January 14, 2025
Page 242
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN (43) RELEASES OF LIEN IN THE
AMOUNT OF $565,449.14 FOR PROPERTIES THAT HAVE
REMAINED AFFORDABLE FOR THE REQUIRED 15-YEAR
PERIOD SET FORTH IN THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) IMPACT FEE PROGRAM DEFERRAL
AGREEMENTS
Item #16D12
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN (39) RELEASES OF LIEN IN THE
AMOUNT OF $512,849.22 FOR PROPERTIES THAT HAVE
REMAINED AFFORDABLE FOR THE REQUIRED 15-YEAR
PERIOD SET FORTH IN THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES
PARTNERSHIP (SHIP) IMPACT FEE PROGRAM DEFERRAL
AGREEMENTS - THE DWELLING UNIT IS TO BE UTILIZED
FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR A 15-YEAR PERIOD
AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY
Item #16E1
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT
ASSIGNING ALL RIGHTS, DUTIES, BENEFITS, AND
OBLIGATIONS TO BOWMAN GULF COAST LLC D/B/A
ROBAU, A BOWMAN COMPANY, CONCERNING AGREEMENT
#18-7432-CE, “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LIBRARY CIVIL
ENGINEERING CATEGORY”
Item #16F1
January 14, 2025
Page 243
TO RATIFY AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENTS RELATED TO
WORK PERFORMED BY SUBCONTRACTOR CLADDING
SYSTEMS, INC., THAT OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE
OF PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BOND BEING IN PLACE
BETWEEN CLADDING SYSTEMS, INC., AND O-A-
K/FLORIDA, INC., D/B/A OWEN-AMES-KIMBALL COMPANY,
FOR THE MAIN CAMPUS UPGRADES UNDER AGREEMENT
NO. 21-7883-ST (FUND 3018) (PROJECT #50214)
Item #16F2
AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND NORTH COLLIER FIRE
CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT FOR THE
USE OF MOBILITY VPNS - THIS IS A ONE-TIME COST AND
NO RECURRING COSTS ARE ANTICIPATED
Item #16F3
AWARD CONSTRUCTION INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 24-
8278, “HURRICANE IAN REPAIRS – CLAM PASS PARKING
LOT WALL,” TO CAPITAL CONTRACTORS, LLC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $129,750, APPROVE AN OWNER’S ALLOWANCE
OF $5,200 FOR POTENTIAL UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS, AND
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED
AGREEMENT
Item #16F4 - (Moved to Item #11D, Per Agenda Change Sheet)
Item #16F5
January 14, 2025
Page 244
RESOLUTION 2025-13: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS,
CONTRIBUTIONS, OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 ADOPTED BUDGET. (THE BUDGET
AMENDMENTS IN THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION HAVE
BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VIA SEPARATE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARIES)
Item #16F6 – (Moved to Item 11E, Per Agenda Change Sheet)
EXPENDITURES FOR THE SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF
PROLAKE/KEETON AERATORS AND RELATED MATERIALS
FROM KEETON INDUSTRIES, INC., THROUGH A WAIVER
FROM THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$250,000 PER FISCAL YEAR FROM KEETON INDUSTRIES,
INC., THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2029 - SUFFICIENT FUNDING
IS AVAILABLE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY BEAUTIFICATION
OPERATING FUND (1007) FOR ANNUAL MAINTENANCE
Item #16G1
TO RATIFY ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED CHANGE
ORDER NO. 1, ADDING 8 DAYS TO THE CONTRACT TIME
AND TO USE $9,582.30 FROM THE OWNER'S ALLOWANCE
FOR WORK DIRECTIVE #1 UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 23-8120
(PURCHASE ORDER 4500229417) WITH DEC CONTRACTING
GROUP, INC., FOR THE “BULK AIRCRAFT HANGAR AT
MARCO ISLAND EXECUTIVE AIRPORT,” AND AUTHORIZE
THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THE ATTACHED CHANGE ORDER.
(PROJECT NO. 33822)
January 14, 2025
Page 245
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
January 14, 2025
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS
DIRECTED:
A. DISTRICTS:
1) Big Cypress Stewardship District:
FY 2024-2025 Annual Meeting Schedule
2) Heritage Bay Community Development District:
09/05/2024 Agency Memo, Signed Minutes, & Agency Mailing
3) Quarry Community Development District:
10/14/2024 Agency Memo, Signed Minutes, & Agency Mailing
4) Cedar Hammock Community Development District:
10/17/2024 Agency Memo, Signed Minutes, & Agency Mailing
Page 5771 of 6405
January 14, 2025
Page 246
Item #16J1
TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $26,886,642.17 WERE DRAWN FOR THE
PERIODS BETWEEN NOVEMBER 28, 2024, AND DECEMBER
11, 2024, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06
Item #16J2
APPROVE AND DETERMINE VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE
FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND PURCHASING CARD
TRANSACTIONS AS OF DECEMBER 18, 2024
Item #16J3
TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $101,216,963.78 WERE DRAWN FOR THE
PERIODS BETWEEN DECEMBER 12, 2024, AND JANUARY 1,
2025, PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06
Item #16J4
REQUEST THAT THE BOARD APPROVE AND DETERMINE
VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES PAYABLE AND
PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF JANUARY 8,
January 14, 2025
Page 247
2025
Item #16J5
DESIGNATE THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT
AND POINT OF CONTACT FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS, BUREAU OF
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) FY ‘24 LOCAL
STANDARD GRANT. AUTHORIZE THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE
GRANT WHEN AWARDED, APPROVE ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENTS, AND APPROVE THE COLLIER COUNTY
SHERIFF’S OFFICE TO RECEIVE AND EXPEND 2024 JAG
STANDARD GRANT FUNDS
Item #16J6
AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR $100,000 UNDER FUND 1071 (LAW ENFORCEMENT
TRUST) FOR ADDITIONAL TRAINING EXPENSES
Item #16J7
AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT
TO REALIGN CURRENT FUNDING WITHIN COLLIER
COUNTY CAPITAL PROJECT FUND (3001) IN THE AMOUNT
OF $635,000 TO ALLOW FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT OF
FUNDING TO THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE
FOR THE UPGRADE AND EXPANSION OF THE TELEPHONE
SYSTEM FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT (PROJECT NO. 50322) IN
YEAR ONE OF THE PROJECT TO ACCOMMODATE THE
January 14, 2025
Page 248
TIMING OF BUILDING PREPARATIONS REQUIRED FOR THE
PROJECT
Item #16K1
RESOLUTION 2025-14: APPOINT KEVIN JOHNSON TO THE
CONTRACTORS LICENSING BOARD – FOR A THREE-YEAR
TERM EXPIRING ON JUNE 30, 2028
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2025-15: REAPPOINT LARRY HOLLOWAY TO
THE OCHOPEE FIRE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE –
FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM EXPIRING ON DECEMBER 31, 2026
Item #16K3
RESOLUTION 2025-16: APPOINT THREE MEMBERS TO THE
BLACK AFFAIRS ADVISORY BOARD – APPOINTING JENNY
CARLS TOOLS TONALD JOSEPH AND JIMMY BAYES
FILLING A VACANT TERM EXPIRING ON JUNE 25, 2027, AND
APPOINTING BESSIE BROWN TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM
EXPIRING ON JUNE 25, 2029
Item #17A
RESOLUTION 2025-17: 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
January 14, 2025
Page 249
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
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2025-18: 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
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2025-19: A RESOLUTION APPROVING
AMENDMENTS (APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD,
TRANSFERS, AND SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE
FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 ADOPTED BUDGET. (THE BUDGET
AMENDMENTS IN THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION HAVE
January 14, 2025
Page 250
BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS VIA SEPARATE EXECUTIVE
SUMMARIES)
Item #17D - Continued to the January 28, 2025, BCC Meeting (Per
Agenda Change Sheet)
RECOMMENDATION TO REPEAL AND REPLACE
PROCUREMENT ORDINANCE NO. 2013-69, AS AMENDED,
WITH THE ATTACHED UPDATED PROCUREMENT
ORDINANCE
*****
January 1 9 2025
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:52 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
BURT SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
CRYSTALLk.. INZEL, CLERK
Attest as to Chaim-
' $
sig iat a n'a`
These minutes approved by the Board on 'J-uaK II'4.25
as presented ✓ or as corrected
J
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL COURT REPORTER, FPR-C, AND NOTARY
PUBLIC.
Page 251