Loading...
CCPC Minutes 10/02/2008 R October 2, 2008 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida October 2, 2008 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Karen Homiak Donna Reed-Caron Tor Kolflat Paul Midney Bob Murray Brad Schiffer Robert Vigliotti David J. Wolfley (absent) ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Joseph Schmitt, CDES Administrator Ray Bellows, Zoning & Land Development Review Thomas Eastman, Director of Real Property for CCSD Page 1 AGENDA Revised COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 AM., TIIDRSDA Y, OCTOBER 2, 2008, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAYBE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBA TIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 21, 2008, REGULAR MEETING 6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS - SEPTEMBER 9-10,2008, REGULAR MEETING 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS A Petition: CU-2007-AR-12357, First Congregational Church of Naples, represented by D. Wayne Arnold of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A, requesting a Conditional Use to pennit The First Congregational Church of Naples to construct a 300 seat facility. This site is zoned Estates (E) and is located within the Estates Designation on the Future Land Use Map of Collier County Growth Management Plan. Pursuant to Section 2.04.03 of the Land Development Code, churches and places of worship are pennitted conditional uses in the E, Estate zoning district. Currently the property is utilized as a single family residence. The subject property is 2.6 +/- acres located at 6225 Autumn Oaks Lane, Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Melissa Zone) B. Petition: NUA-2007-AR-12575, Hitching Post Co-op, Inc., represented by Tim Hancock, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, is requesting a non-confonning use alteration approval, to enable unit owners to replace existing non-confonning structures, in confonnance with the Fire Code and so as not to increase the existing non-confonnities. The subject 44.46 ::I: acre property is located in the Hitching Post Co-op subdivision, along the west side of Barefoot Williams Road, approximately 200 feet south of the intersection of Barefoot Williams Road and Tamiami Trail East, in Section 33, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP) 1 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A Petition: PUDZ-2007-AR-12097, The Covenant Presbyterian Church of Naples, Inc. and Mission Possible Ministries, Inc., represented by Michael R. Fernandez, AICP of Planning Development, Inc., are requesting a rezone from the Residential Single-family (RSF-l) Zoning District to the Community Facilities Planned Unit Development (CFPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as Heavenly CFPUD, which would memorialize the existing church uses and would pennit redevelopment consistent with a master site plan to a maximum of 100,000 square feet of houses of worship, children and adult day cares, a Pre-K through 3rd grade school, and various accessory uses; and an additional 20,000 square feet of children and adult day cares, Pre-K through 3rd grade school and accessory uses contingent upon Conditional Use approval. The 15.93-acre subject property is located at 6926 Trail Boulevard, and comprises the entire block bounded by Ridge Drive, West Street, Myrtle Road and Trail Boulevard in Section 3, Township 49, Range 25 East of Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: John-David Moss, AICP) CONTINUED TO 10/16/08 B. Petition: SV-2008-AR-13374, Naples Grande Beach Resort, represented by Hunter Hansen, requesting seven variances. The first six Variances are from the Land Development Code (LDC) Section 5.06.04 C.!., which requires a minimum separation of 1,000 lineal feet between signs, to allow a sign separation of 66::1: feet, 40::1: feet, 156::1: feet, 66::1: feet,7l::i: feet, and 96::1: feet. The seventh Variance is from LDC Section 5.06.04 C.l., which pennits a maximum of two pole signs per street frontage, to pennit a maximum of four signs along a street frontage. The subject property is located at 475 Seagate Drive, in Section 9, Township 49, Range 25, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: John-David Moss, AICP) C. Petition: CU-2007-AR-12619, K.O.V.A.C Enterprises, LLC, represented by Tim Hancock, AICP, of Davidson Engineering, is requesting a Conditional Use for a refuse system in the Industrial (I) zoning district, as specified per the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 2.03.04.c.16. The +/- 3.73- acre subject property is located at 1995 Elsa Street, Section 11, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: John-David Moss, AICP) CONTINUED TO 10/16/08 10. OLD BUSINESS 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN 10/2/08 CCPC Agenda/RB/sp 2 October 2, 2008 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, we on there, Ray? Hello, hello, testing. Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the October 2nd Collier County Planning Commission meeting. I understand we're on emergency power, so if the lights start flickering or something like that, it doesn't mean that the Wall Street's having a crash, it just simply means our generator is switching back over. And before we even get up and pledge, I want to welcome our newest member, Karen Homiak, to the Planning Commission today. Karen, welcome. This will be a very enlightening day . We're going to be here till 5:00. So, lucky you. With that, if you'll all rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) Item #2 ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, Secretary please do the roll call. COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Kolflat? COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Here. COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm here. COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Midney is not here. Ms. Caron is here. Mr. Strain? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here. COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Vigliotti? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Present. COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Here. COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Wolfley is absent. Page 2 October 2,2008 And Ms. Homiak. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Here. Item #3 ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, addenda to the agenda. We have several issues going on today. Under the -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Eastman. MR. EASTMAN: Thank you. COMMISSIONER CARON: I'm sorry. I do that all the time. I should start with you from now on. Then I won't forget. Sorry, Tom. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under the advertised public hearings, we had three items scheduled for today. There is only one remaining going to be heard, and that is the Naples Grande Beach Resort. And it's for a series of variances concerning their signs. The two items that are being continued is the Covenant Presbyterian Church of Naples, Inc. and Mission Possible Ministries, also known as Heavenly PUD. That is continued, this says, until October 16th. But I'm not sure if that date's even good anymore. MR. BELLOWS: That's correct, it has changed. The new date is November 6th. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: November 6th, okay. And then the KOVAC Enterprises, LLC has also been continued to 10/16. Under our other agenda items, as an item of new business, we need to elect officers for the upcoming year, Chairman, Vice-chairman and Secretary. So we'll add that to the new. And as an update as to where we're going, this meeting today, being as it's one item, I don't think we'll spend all day on it. But when it is over, we're going to go into the LDC hearings that we've continued from various times in the past. Page 3 October 2, 2008 Ray, do you have a listing of Catherine's summation sheet for the LDC? MR. BELLOWS: I do not. She should be here soon. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, because I have it. The only reason I'm bringing it up is trying to give people plenty of notice who want to attend. And when this meeting is over, when our regular hearing is over, we'll go right into the environmental issues that left off on at last meeting. And that one starts with the listed plants, goes into the preserve standards, EIS thresholds, preservation standards, and then criteria for removal of protected vegetation. Once those are done, we'll go back to the beginning of our rewrites. And the first one up will be the utilities. I honestly don't expect us to get done with the environmental this morning, so I would suggest that those looking to -- for matters on the rest of the agenda, especially staff, who unfortunately have to wait around when we don't get to the items, they might want to consider coming after lunch. We usually take lunch at 11 :45 and come back at 12:45. Then at 3: 00 today, wherever we're at with the LDC agenda, we'll kind of reassess where we're going and how far we can finish. There are some items on the agenda for the LDC that are rewrites that hopefully will go fast. We'll switch over at 3:00 if we haven't already started those, move into those so we can produce something that the BCC can then discuss on their November date that they're going to hear LDC amendments. That way they have something to chew on and get them partially through the process while they wait on us for the rest of it. Anyway, that will get us to the balance of today. I don't think we'll finish the LDC. I know we won't, in fact, because there's a lot of rewrite. The date to come back would be the 7th, next week. So we'll continue to that date, assuming that by later today we can get a quorum. Page 4 October 2,2008 Also in the month of October, besides our next regular meeting, which is two weeks from today, we have the AUIR meeting jointly with the productivity committee. All of you just now received a binder from Mike Bosi. That was the AUIR binder to review this year. That meeting we will be held over at CDES on Horseshoe Drive in Room 609, and it will be jointly held with the productivity committee. We've been doing this procedure now for several years with them, and it's turned out to be pretty productive. So that's the addenda to the agenda. It's all the items I can think of. Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: What -- where are we starting at 3:00? What are the time certains at 3:00? (Commissioner Midney is now present.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, at 3:00, if we haven't got to the utilities, Phil Gramatges, and then we'll go right back from number -- Page 1 and work through that page on those that have been rewritten and are back to us for rewrites. COMMISSIONER CARON: Understood. But you said you had a time certain at 3: 00. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, no, at 3:00, what I'd like to do is whenever we -- if we haven't gotten to those rewrites by that time -- COMMISSIONER CARON: Oh, all right. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- I want to make sure we leave at least a couple hours in today's agenda to get to those so we can produce something for the BCC to review, because those ought to move a little faster. Item #4 PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES Page 5 October 2, 2008 Okay, planning commission absences. Is anybody planning to miss our next regular meeting two weeks from today? (No response.) Item #5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES - AUGUST 21, 2008, REGULAR MEETING CHAIRMAN STRAIN: By the way, the record will reflect Mr. Midney has arrived. Are there approval of the minutes from the August 21st regular meeting? Motion -- COMMISSIONER CARON: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron made a motion to approve. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Page 6 October 2, 2008 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Recaps. Anything to-- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- you want to add, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, on September 23rd, the Board of County Commissioners approved the rezone for the Immokalee LLC rezone. That was approved on the summary agendas. And that was subject to planning commission recommendations. They also approved on the regular agenda the ABC Fine Wine and Spirits conditional use. And that was approved 5-0, subject to the CCPC conditions. And I believe they had a slight modification to one of them. I didn't add that. I'll have that e-mailed to you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Would you mind? In this way if we missed something, it would be nice to know what they were thinking so we can probably, hopefully do better next time. Chairman's report. I just want to mention to you the series of binders, books and papers we've received, not only this meeting but the last one. Last meeting everybody -- and Karen, if you didn't get one, I hope staff, Mike Bosi is listening, or someone on staff makes sure you do. There was distributed a book called the Horizon Study book. That has actually been remanded back to us by the BCC for discussion. So that book will have to -- needs to be read by everyone. But the date for the meeting has not been set. It will be most likely sometime in November. So kind of hang on to the book and as we get closer to reading -- or meeting, it needs to be read. You also received a packet of loose-leaf, three-hole punched packets today. It's a pretty thick one. Those are the amendments that have been previously adopted for the LDC. And the pages are to be inserted into your LDC book, which is a career in itself. But Ray has volunteered Sharon's -- or Sharon has volunteered her services, so if you would like her to insert the pages for you, bring the pages back with the book and turn them in to staff, or bring them Page 7 October 2,2008 to the next meeting and they'll get that done for you. And the last thing of course you received the AUIR binder today. And that again will be for the meeting starting on the 22nd over at CDES. Item #8A PETITION: CU-2007-AR-12357, FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF NAPLES Okay, consent agenda items. There are two items on consent. The first one is 8(A), it's Petition CU-2007-AR-12357, the First Congregational Church of Naples, at 6225 Autumn Oaks Lane. If you recall, this one was heard last time we met. I know there are some changes needed. Melissa I believe has got some -- you want to come up and provide us with the information needed, Melissa, so -- then we'll see if there's any other needs from the committee? MS. ZONE: Good morning. Melissa Zone, principal planner with the department of zoning and land development. I haven't had a chance to meet with my manager to know the exact changes that were discussed, but it was to add -- the conditions of approval that were provided to you did not put in the provision to not -- to allow day cares as part of the conditions of approval. That will become number twelve. And we will word it to what the language was from this hearing two weeks ago. So that will be condition of approval number twelve, no day cares except for during services, because that was agreed to. And I know that there was another thing, but again, I wasn't there during the discussion and -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It was a memorandum of agreement. But I believe you've incorporated into the standard stipulations -- Page 8 October 2, 2008 MS. ZONE: Correct. Those are going to be part of the resolution itself. Incorporated. It won't look like this hard copy that was provided to you. And the applicant's agent does want to bring something up on item five. Transportation staff reviewed and discussed it with the applicant, and we're going to discuss it now. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. ARNOLD: If I might. Good morning, Wayne Arnold-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm sorry, we probably should swear in even those on this consent agenda since someone is offering testimony. Which normally doesn't happen but why don't you -- thank you, Cherie. (Speakers were duly sworn.) MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. I just wanted to bring your attention to -- it was staffs item number five on Exhibit C, the one that referenced the ownership and the purchase of the proposed right-of-way. There are a couple of typographical errors that probably need to be corrected. One is in the first line. It's the word -- it's says the owner of its successor. It should be or. That's an easy one. And in the last line, it says the dedication shall occur with 90 days. It should be within. And then I would offer one change. I don't think it changes anything of great substance, it can probably stay as is, but it just seems awkward to have a blank dollar sign with the phrase per acre which. And I would -- that sentence to me sounds better to just say the value of the credit shall be calculated at the actual cost per acre in which the applicant has paid for the property. And strike the dollar sign, the blank per acre, which represents. I can show you that -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, I think we can see it. It does make it cleaner. Does anybody have any concerns? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's fine. Page 9 October 2, 2008 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I tend to agree. Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, I don't have any concern with taking it out, I'm just curious as to why we don't have that figure already. I mean, it should be a pretty simple figure to get. If they own the property, there's a record of it and we ought to be able to call and find out and do the math, what they paid per acre. MR. ARNOLD: I agree with you. I think we can. I think it's awkward to have that value in the conditional use since the county will be acquiring the property. I think that it's -- to me it's better left as a part of the county's contract to purchase, as opposed to putting an actual dollar amount in the conditional use application. COMMISSIONER CARON: And I'm not disagreeing with you, Wayne, I think it probably is. But that blank has been in there right along. And what happens when you leave a blank like that is it makes it seem like we don't have information that we should have. And I'm just curious as to, you know, why we don't have that figure already. It seemed to be a simple and easy figure to have. MR. ARNOLD: And I think it is. I honestly don't know exactly what the church paid for the property when they acquired it a few years ago. The reverend's here and I'm sure he can tell you exactly what they paid for it, but -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just want to make sure that when it says the actual cost per acre which the applicant has paid for the property, you're referring only to the cost that the applicant paid to the previous owner, not the legal fees, not the add-ons for maintaining it to date, not the taxes to date, not all that other garbage that goes onto cost per acre under a lot of scenarios. You're strictly looking -- and for the record I'd like acknowledgment that this is purely the cost per acre actually paid by the applicant to the previous property owner. MR. ARNOLD: Yes, that's my understanding. Page 10 October 2,2008 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions or concerns about that consent item? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a motion to recommend approval of the consent item Petition CU-2007-AR-12357? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: So moved. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion made by Mr. Schiffer, seconded by Mr. Murray. Discussion? (N 0 response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. All opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Thank you. Item #8B PETITION: NUA-2007-AR-12575. HITCHING POST CO-OP. INC. The next one is the petition NUA-2007-AR-12575, the Hitching Post Co-op, Inc. It's a consent item from our last meeting as well. Page 11 October 2, 2008 I know Mr. Schiffer, you had a recommendation and a stipulation. I believe it got into the language. Is there anything else that anybody on the commission noticed about that consent item? Nancy, did you have any add-on condition? MS. GUNDLACH: Yes. Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner with Zoning and Land Development Review. And there is one word missing from condition number three, and it's the very last word. It should say: the number of units shall not be increased. The site is limited to 368 units and leased sites. Sites is the missing word that is now in the resolution. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you repeat that, I just pulled to the page, sorry. MS. GUNDLACH: Let's go to Page 2 of 3 of the resolution. And towards the bottom there are three items. It's the third item that was missing, the very last word. And that last word is sites. So the sentence will read number -- item three: The number of units shall not be increased. The site is limited to 368 units and leased sites. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any other? Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Nancy, question on -- is the principal structures all subject to NFPA 501.A? I don't remember just the accessory uses. MS. GUNDLACH: It's just the accessory structures that are subject to NFPA 501A. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions, comments? Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Hancock is here, if you want that confirmed. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: No. I don't have my paperwork, so I'd have to -- I guess he could -- Nancy, do you have a copy of the Page 12 October 2, 2008 full file? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Cherie', you're going to swear him in agaIn. (Speaker was duly sworn.) MR. HANCOCK: For the record, Tim Hancock with Davidson Engineering, agent for the applicant. Mr. Schiffer, my recollection is that the principal structures do meet 501A. The reason it wasn't stated in there is that the replacement of a principal structure on mobile home still has to go through the fire. review process. It still has to comply with NFP A. The question really came in whether or not the accessory structures met that. In other words, there was never any ambiguity about the principal structures. That's why I think the resolution reads the way that it does. In other words, to go get a building permit to replace a mobile home, you have to meet fire code. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But first of all, 501A isn't -- I don't think it's part of the fire prevention code. So I think it would be a good idea to note that the principal structures still have to meet that. That way they could be replaced and -- MR. HANCOCK: I don't have an objection to that -- COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- if you went onto the market today under the word fire code, I don't think you'd be happy. MR. HANCOCK: No. And I'll be honest with you. Finding NFP A, a publicly accessible version ofNFP A is rather difficult. You need to go to the library. And even then sometimes they don't have it, it's not something that's easy to wade through. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just be thankful it's not on Municode. MR. HANCOCK: Well, at least it would be there, it would just be sorely out of date. MR. KLATZKOW: And would contain errors. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would be a mess. Page 13 October 2,2008 MR. HANCOCK: But other than that -- no, I have no objection to including principal structures in 501 -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, wouldn't we be better off just dropping the word accessory? MR. HANCOCK: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And say all structures? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: That's good. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, we made two changes to the consent item. Are there any other requests by the commissioners? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, is there a motion to recommend approval for Item NUA-2007-AR-12575. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Kolflat made the motion. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti made the second. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) Page 14 October 2,2008 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Item #9B PETITION: SV-2008-AR-13374, NAPLES GRANDE BEACH RESORT CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, now we get into our regular items, which is the only one left, which is item 9(B). It's petition SV-2008-AR-13374, the Naples Grande Beach Resort, requesting seven variances. And they're at 475 Seagate Drive. All those wishing to offer testimony on behalf of this issue, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Speakers were duly sworn.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Are there any disclosures on the part of planning commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, hearing none, it's the applicant's presentation. MR. HANSEN: For the record, my name is Hunter Hansen. I'm the managing director of the Naples Grande Beach Resort, formerly known as the Registry Resort and Club. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the board, thank you very much for allowing me to speak with you today. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You need to -- by the way, we have a court reporter here, so you have to talk a little -- slow down so she can type as fast as you talk. MR. HANSEN: Okay. All right, thanks. I think this petition is divided into two different sections. The first as stated on the cover sheet, we are applying for six variances and then a seventh variance. The sixth variance has to do with two placard signs that we've Page 15 October 2, 2008 installed on the columns entering into the resort. And may I start by saying that when the Registry Resort was built, I think it was around 1996, 1997, something like that, there were two R letters that were the logo of the Registry Resort placed on these columns forms. And in one of your packets, I think it's the sign variance petition packet, the page is not numbered, but you'll see there is an old photograph and a new photograph, the old photograph showing the R logos and the new photograph showing the N logo. So we simply, when we changed our name, we changed that R logo to an N logo, not even knowing that we were in violation of a sign ordinance, because those -- our logos had been there some 20 years. If you turn back in that packet, which is your sign variance petition packet one page, you'll see the N logo, a more detail of that N logo itself. So you can see that it's not a very obtrusive, obtrusive logo. It's just the letter N. Specifically that N measures nine inches in square. So it's not very large. Much, much smaller than the original R was when it was the Registry Logo. I don't have that R letter any longer, otherwise I could tell you exactly how large that R was. So that is our request for the first six variances, to allow us to replace the R logo, if you will, to an N logo. One on each column. We didn't realize a logo is considered a sign. We just thought it was a simple logo. Up on the screen now is the overall photograph, the overall site plan of where these signs are located. Sign A is what we're calling a monument sign. And there is a larger photograph of that again in the sign variance petition folder, one of the pages. It simply says Naples Grande Beach Resort, and it's a low monument sign that is visible right when guests drive into the main entrance. We felt that was important to have that sign there. That does not replace any sign, I might add that. There was not a Registry sign Page 16 October 2, 2008 located in that location. However, there was a large Registry sign a little further back from that current location that we've simply removed. But because the resort is not visible as people drive down Seagate Drive, when they get to those columns, that's why the Registry had those R's there. And that's why we'd like to have the N's there, so that there's some sort of visible means when cars are driving down Seagate Drive. They technically don't see the monument sign until they make the right-hand turn going into the entrance of the resort. So the reason of the six variances, it has to do with the -- I think it's a hundred-foot separation from sign A to B and A to C and B to C and that sort of thing relative to the distance between those two N columns that we're installing. Are there any questions about this first part of the variance request? We should separate the two, because the second one is a little bit more complex. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The second one being the Strip House sign? MR. HANSEN: That's correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, well then let's -- I have no problem talking about them separately, just for the sake of clarity. The variance is the first few -- other than the Strip House sign, the new sign that would be requested out front. Does anybody have any questions about the specific variances? (No response.) . CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. HANSEN: If I may move on to the Strip House sign. The Strip House is the name of the restaurant that is located within the Naples Grande Beach Resort. I'd like to clearly point out that the Strip House restaurant is not owned nor managed by the Naples Grande Beach Resort. We lease Page 17 October 2, 2008 that space to a third party. It is a restauranteur out of New York. The restauranteur is called the Glazier Group. They own and manage about 10 Strip House restaurants all across the country. They own the Monkey Bar in New York City, and Michael Jordan's restaurant in N ew York City a very successful restauranteur out of Manhattan. Because it is a -- not because, I'm sorry. It is typical that a specialty restaurant in a hotel generates about 70 percent of their business from the outside, 30 percent from hotel guests. And in my 35 years of experience in the hotel business, it is very typical for a specialty restaurant to have that sort of sales mix. It is not uncommon in a hotel of the size of the Naples Grande Beach Resort to have a lost leader restaurant in their facility. That is, a particular restaurant will, if it were a standalone, it could lose money on the profit-and-loss statement. Hotels allow that to happen because they have some restaurants that make more money than others, and they're willing to lose money in one restaurant versus another. Without outside clientele coming into a restaurant like this, and this is very common, whether it's a Ritz-Carlton hotel or whether it's a F our Seasons or any other upscaled resort, a restaurant like this without outside clientele, and in this case up to 70 percent of its business, could clearly go out of business, because it's not supported by the rest of the facilities in the resort, because again, it's a standalone operation. So there is -- without any visibility from the street of this restaurant, it would be very, very plausible for this restauranteur to not make money and go out to business. What would that mean to the county and to the town? It would mean we'd have one less steak restaurant, which probably doesn't kill anybody. But it would mean a loss of up to 40 jobs that we employ-- or they employ, I'm sorry. And they would just simply go out of business. We would -- it would be a tremendous hardship to them. That's the reason that we are applying -- I'm applying on their Page 18 October 2, 2008 behalf, actually, to allow this sign to be built on the street side. Again, it's very low, it's not a large sign. I think the dimensions are in one of the packets, we could turn to it. But it is not an obtrusive looking sign. It is low. That is their logo. It is red in color. The signage would be red. And again, that's their logo colored. But the visibility of their restaurant as one is driving down Seagate Drive, in order to see that that restaurant exists, because 70 percent of their business comes from the public, we think, we feel very strongly, that their livelihood will depend on that visibility to the public. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Questions on the second new sign that's been requested? Mr. Kolflat, then Mr. Schiffer. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Could you put that overhead back on, please? MR. BELLOWS: This one? COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Now, could you trace with a pencil or some indication the line between A and B, the distance from the A sign to the B sign? MR. HANSEN: Sign A is the monument sign. Sign B is a column sign. Sign C is a column sign. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Now, that distance in the report is listed as 66 feet on Page 4 of the staff report. Now would you draw a line from sign A to sign D, as in dog. You can notice that's only about 10 feet farther. But the distance in the report says it's 156 feet. So what we have here is one dimension from sign A to sign D that says 156 feet, but yet the distance from A to B is 66 feet. Obviously it's not to scale -- MR. HANSEN: Not to scale. COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Yet the drawing shows it is a scaled drawing there with the graphic scale below. And the same indication as far as if you go from sign B to sign Page 19 October 2,2008 C. Would you draw a line from there so we can see where that is, John? MR. MOSS: I'm sorry, Commissioner, which two? COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: From C -- B to C. B to C. That's indicated as being 40 feet in the report. And yet if you draw a line from B to D -- why don't you draw that, you'll see the difference -- B to D -- no that's-- , MR. MOSS: That's B to D. Do you mean C to D? COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Excuse me, C to D. That distance is 96 feet. So there you've got twice the distance from C to D of 96 feet, compared to the 40 feet that goes from C to B. I mean, the whole drawing's askew here is knowing where this sign is located. I don't see how we can intelligently discuss the issue without knowing where the sign that's in question is to be located. MR. HANSEN : Well, my -- that's a great point, and I'm glad you pointed that out. That was an oversight on my part. Presumably sign D, if the measurements in the report are correct, is not in the exact location. Sign D may likely be pushed a little bit to the right, which would make it a further distance from sign B and from sign C. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Well, when you say pushed a little to the right, that would be from 156 -- no, 66 feet to 156 feet. That's over twice the distance. If you follow those dimensions, you almost have the sign out in the road. MR. HANSEN: Well, the property line does curl around to the right. So I could go out again and take more accurate measurements and actually put a placard down and take a little bit more accurate measurement. But in principal, I think you get the gist of what we're trying to do here. COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: But I still don't know where sign D is to be located. Page 20 October 2,2008 MR. HANSEN: Again, it will be located in that area. And perhaps the measurement is not correct. But the sign D by intent is to be located somewhere in that grassy knoll area where it's located now. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Would you agree that the sign D is 10 feet from sign B? MR. HANSEN: No, sign D I think would be a little further away than 10 feet. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: The drawing shows it to be 10 feet. MR. HANSEN: Yes, sir, I agree. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Klatzkow, did you have something that -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, the resolution specifically puts these variances within feet, all right, so that we need to know what these feet are before you all can vote on this. And if there's a discrepancy or if there's some sort of misunderstanding here, this needs to come back. Because otherwise we'll be giving a variance for the wrong amount of footage. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's a good point. I think the way that you might have done this better is to actually show dimensional lines between the signs with the numbers on them that you're seeking for a variance. And if it doesn't fit on this site plan, make a bigger site plan MR. HANSEN: I'll enlarge the plan, sure. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So that we actually can see where you're trying to go. Mr. Kolflat's point is well made. Mr. Kolflat? COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: You might want to also add to that, if you look at your graphic scale down there, that graphic scale is incorrect in that if you look at the graphic scale and you trace the license from the zero to five to the right where it shows there zero to five, that equals five feet. Yet if you go one step further and draw the Page 21 October 2, 2008 distance from zero to 10 feet, that really is 15 feet if you look at the scale. And then if you take from zero to 20 feet, that really is 25 feet. In other words, the whole drawing is misleading as far as I'm concerned. The graphic scale is in error and the dimensions do not JIve. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, might as well get as much input as you can before I would suggest you ask for a continuance. Mr. -- MR. MOSS: Well, if I may, Commissioners. John David Moss, Zoning and Land Development Review. The applicant submitted this magnified site plan, so it's definitely not to scale. But the measurements were taken for each of the variances. So the dimensions are correct, but this is just more an exhibit. And in the variance you can see if we included this exhibit with the ordinance -- or excuse me, with the resolution, Mr. Klatzkow, that there are no distances listed on this. This was just a graphic depiction. The variance we could include the actual feet. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: JD, this board needs to see scaled drawings. I don't know how you assessed this project, but if you assessed it off of these plans, that is not the right way to do it. You should have seen scaled drawings so we all can see equally that we're comfortable with it. So I have no hesitation supporting Mr. Klatzkow's position. He's right on this. Mr. Kolflat, go right ahead. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Mark, even though the dimensions are not shown, it is a scaled drawing, by virtue of having a graphic scale on it to indicate it's a scaled drawing. So a scaled drawing can be drawn without dimensions listed per se but you reference in the graphic scale for the distance. Page 22 October 2,2008 MR. HANSEN: All right, sir, point well taken. I will thoroughly , go back. I mean, I personally made these measurements myself with the scroll. But I will go back, I think it's a point well taken, and come up with a very accurate scale drawing. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's see what other comments we have so when you come back it can be as comprehensive -- MR. HANSEN: That would be great. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer, Ms. Caron, then Mr. Murray. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I mean, on this thing you said 10- foot plus or minus that the Strip House sign is from your monolith sign. But that's not true, it's like 80 feet plus or minus, correct? MR. HANSEN: Again, I would have to go back and make those measurements. I did this a couple of months ago so I'm working from recall. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: The concern I have is the roads into Naples, since this is a residential thing. What traffic are you trying to capture? Because I think isn't Crayton the only road that connects to Seagate? There's nothing west of that that comes out of that residential neighborhood, correct? MR. HANSEN: Well, that's -- I think that's almost correct. There's that residential area that has the one little road going into -- is it called Seacrest or something like that. I don't remember the name of that residential area. That comes out and makes a turn to the east that goes to Crayton. What we're really trying to capture visibility from people coming down Seagate Drive. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. And the sign really is much towards Seagate? John David, do you have an aerial that you could put on? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Brad, you might bring your speaker a little closer to you, if you could. Page 23 October 2, 2008 MR. MOSS: There is an aerial in the staff report. Let me see if I have a better one in the application package. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Brad, in addition you have the entrance to the beach right there, so you have one road and the beach access. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: That goes past it, okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, there's a -- see, the park is there. The county -- MR. MOSS: No, the only aerial I have is on Page 4 of the staff report. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: This is where you're running around with your trailer, Mark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, this is where they're going to get me one of these days. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And I guess, you know, the comment is I really wasn't upset with this thing 10 feet away. Tor's thing is -- those are really good points, that the information I'm looking at isn't even scaled accurate. And this sign, the other question I really had is that the lighting of this sign, there's no variance you're requesting at all for that. In other words, this is our code sign lit exactly per code. Even though you do discuss in detail how the thing's going to be lit, nothing from that could ever give the illusion you could deviate from the code; is that right? MR. MOSS: I'm sorry, Commissioner, which sign are you referring to, the Naples Grande sign or the proposed Strip House? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Strip House. MR. MOSS: No, Would it meet code? It would be required to meet code. But it would give them excessive square footage. The maximum square footage that they're permitted is the one that's on the Naples Grande Beach Resort sign that's located beyond the two columns flanking the entrance. Page 24 October 2, 2008 And as you can see, there's a picture of it in your application package. It's a really large sign. It's the maximum size that is permitted and it's lit also. And in staffs opinion, there was sufficient room to put the Strip House sign on the same sign. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But my point is that since the Strip House sign does have a lot of detail on how it's lit and how it's -- you know. In other words, if that's not per code, there's nothing in what we're doing here that would allow deviation from the lighting, correct? MR. MOSS: That's right. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, a comment first. I think if you put a sign out in front of your establishment that simply states Strip House, you may have problems with code enforcement on another issue. But at any rate -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Your speakers are off, I believe. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Actually, they finally came on. COMMISSIONER CARON: The point I want to make, takes off on the point that you made, that 70 percent of their business is from some sort of street activity. But that's what advertising is for. And they are -- you are perfectly capable of putting Strip House on your sign that you've already got and is approved and is the maximum that is allowed -- and should be including it in whatever advertising you do for the resort, and they should be including it in giving their location in whatever advertising they do for the Strip House. Having an off-site sign like this is -- I just think is totally unnecessary . MR. HANSEN: If I may comment on that remark? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. MR. HANSEN: Advertising is certainly a vehicle to generate Page 25 October 2, 2008 business, as is direct mail or e-marketing or public relations or a number of vehicles that businesses use to generate sales volume. But in any of those vehicles to generate sales volume an address is normally listed or a location is listed so that people will know where to go. Without -- when people drive down Seagate Drive, there's no visible sign that says this is 475 Seagate Drive. You really don't see 475 Seagate. You don't see 475 until you actually make the right-hand turn. So the proposal is just simply to connect -- with all due respect, Commissioner, I'mjust stating my thoughts here. The proposal is to just connect the advertising that will take place with when people are driving down Seagate Drive, oh, am I in the right location or am I in the wrong location? So that's the only purpose of that. COMMISSIONER CARON: And the only thing that I will say to you that in no advertising that anyone will do for this restaurant will they say 475 Seagate, they will say the Strip House at the Naples Grande Resort. And everybody will know exactly where to go. That's -- and vice versa, I would think you would be doing the same sort of cross-purpose advertising. That only makes good solid advertising sense. MR. HANSEN: Commissioner, with all due respect, I wish everyone would know where to go. We've seen a tremendous -- not tremendous, but the Registry Resort was an icon in this community for 20 years. When we made the name change, six of 10 people I talked to didn't even know the Naples Grande Beach Resort. Now shame on us for changing a name of an icon that was so well known here. But it's not as known of a commodity as it was in the past because of the name change, therefore our thought of this additional communicative signage. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Good morning, Mr. Hansen. Page 26 October 2,2008 MR. HANSEN: Good morning, Mr. Murray. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Just a thought. It seemed from your presentation that you may not have realized that some of this has to be fairly precise because of the way you pointed out that there's a curve to the property and it will be located somewhere by. Just as a thought to add to it, you have to be careful of your setback and your distance from any street area. So where you may have contemplated it may absolutely be wrong. I just offer that, because you are going to go back to look at this, I'm quite sure. MR. HANSEN: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Thank you. MR. HANSEN: Thank you for that comment. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other comments? Mr. Kolflat? COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: I had a question. I don't know if this is for our attorney or staff. But if the medallion is removed from these pillars, these 14-foot tall pillars, is it still a sign, or does that vacate the problem of it being a sign? MR. MOSS: For the record, John-David Moss. It would not be considered a sign. It's the fact that those logos have the N on them, which is the logo for the Naples Grande Resort, that they're considered signage. So if we took them off the columns, the columns in and of themselves, no, they would not be problematic. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Well then I find it difficult to justify the rationale for having logos there in the first place, because as stated in the staff report, the hotel is clearly visible from the roadway, and additional signage is not necessary for guest directional purposes. And to follow up on Ms. Caron's information there, although the restaurant is not visible from the roadway, the existing sign at the hotel main entrance is permitted a 60 square foot area, which is sufficient to advertise both the hotel and on-site steakhouse. Page 27 October 2, 2008 MR. MOSS: You're absolutely right. And we just looked at them more like architectural embellishments to those columns. And we thought the columns would look a little bit silly without any logo on them. But you're absolutely right, they're not indispensable. People could still find the hotel if those logos were not on those columns. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: As far as the appearance of those columns, that they would be unsightly and unattractive if they remained without this emblem, the logo on it, really the solution to that is take the pillars down -- MR. MOSS: That's definitely an option-- COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: -- and then you eliminate the unattractive feature. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any there any other comments? MR. HANSEN: May I please comment, Commissioner? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. I have mine yet, but after you. MR. HANSEN: Thank you. Prior to me being here, I've seen pictures of the Registry Resort with a big R letter up on the side of the building which faces east. That R clearly designated the location, what that tall building was, or is. That R is no longer there. So now we have a tall building, and strangers to the area, of which a large majority of our customers are, see a tall building, but they don't know what it is. There is no R, there is no N. There's nothing that tells what that building is until someone's literally driving down Seagate Drive. You can see those N's only because they're nine inches in square, only from about 50 yards from the entrance. You can see there's something on that column, but you don't know it's an N until you're about 50 yards from the entrance. So unless you are a citizen of Naples or maybe Collier County, you may know what that building is through time, but many, many, many of our guests, as you can imagine, are visitors for the first time Page 28 October 2, 2008 coming from different parts of the state and different parts of the country. And we have no visual connection between a tall building and what that building is. I'd also like to point out that the Ritz-Carlton Beach Resort, also when you drive into their entrance, they clearly have an RC logo and then another RC logo to the right of their entrance and to the left of their entrance, and then a Ritz-Carlton sign. So there's some precedent here that there's a very similar design feature, not only with our resort but with other resorts in town. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN:' Sir, in the beginning I thought I heard you say that you needed to identify the location of 475 Seagate Drive. That seemed to be something I heard mentioned. Weren't the words Strip House -- there's no other indication on there that it's 475 Seagate Drive? MR. HANSEN: I mentioned 475 Seagate Drive, just because when normally you place an ad in the newspaper you would state the Strip House restaurant at 475 Seagate Drive, or the Naples Grande Beach Resort at 475 Seagate Drive. That was my reference to the address comment. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because this sign wouldn't help anybody find the address of 475 -- MR. HANSEN: No, yes, that's -- I agree with you, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Strip House is an unusual name. When I first read it I thought oh, my God, we're look -- we're going to be Orlando. Then my wife said they make meat. I guess people who eat meat know that strip is a steak of some kind. So I was a little shocked. I didn't know that. MR. HANSEN: It's a double entendre, I think is the play on words there that they're using. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I thought I heard you also say that this is Page 29 October 2, 2008 needed because when you come down Seagate Drive you can't see that this new facility may be there, the signage had to be up front. But by the plan that's on the overhead and where Seagate Drive is shown on the bottom, it looks like there's a straight visible shot all the way up to where that sign A is. Is that not a true statement? MR. HANSEN: No, sir, it's not. I think when I come back and I give a more accurate scaled drawing, you'll see that a person coming down Seagate, as you're driving down Seagate, you look straight into the public parking lot, the Collier County parking lot. And until you literally make a right-hand turn, you really cannot see. There's a better drawing. Thanks, John-David. You literally cannot see what you're driving up to. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I drive by there every weekend, and I've never looked up that driveway. I guess I'll do that this weekend just to be sure. Because I just don't recall even looking for a sign. That's the only comments I had. Is there any public speakers, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: No one has registered. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And sir, I would suggest that you request a continuance so you can come back with further information. MR. HANSEN: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if that's your request, does staffhave any comment before we vote on that? MR. HANSEN: It is my request I could come back. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. MR. HANSEN: Thank you. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Just a comment for John-David. John, were the neighbors in Naples notified of this hearing? MR. MOSS: Yes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, there's been a motion request for a continuance -- there's been a request. Is there a motion for a Page 30 October 2, 2008 continuance? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'll make that motion. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: (Indicating.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray made the motion to allow a continuance, Mr. Schiffer made the second. I guess we won't peg a date certain on it. Whatever the date is, if it needs readvertising, staff will have to do that. If they'll come in and get reviewed and get here when it can. Any other discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: In all those in favor of the motion of continuance signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Thank you. That gets us through our consent agenda items, our advertised public hearings. Item #10 OLD BUSINESS Old business. We have nothing listed. Page 31 October 2, 2008 Item #11 NEW BUSINESS Under new business, I've asked to have added to new business the election of officers for this upcoming year. We need -- and we'll elect them separately. We need a chairman, vice-chairman and. secretary . Does anybody have a motion for chairman? Ms. Caron? COMMISSIONER CARON: I suggest that we keep Commissioner Strain as our chairman. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, Mr. Schiffer? COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'll second that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN : Well, thank you. Anybody? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion's been made and seconded for myself as chairman. Comment? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those wishing to approve, signify by saYIng aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? Page 32 October 2, 2008 (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 8-0. Thank you all very much. I appreciate that. I'll continue on. Then vice-chairman or -- yeah, vice-chairman it would be. Is there a motion for vice-chairman? I would suggest that Ms. Caron, who's been a very capable and patient secretary all these years should certainly have the ability to move up to vice-chairman when it's open, and it has been. So I would make that motion myself. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Mr. Vigliotti. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Opposed. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Caries -- opposed? Motion still caries 7-1. And now we're looking for secretary. Is there a motion for secretary? Well, Mr. Vigliotti, you're my first suggestion. If no one else has a suggestion, I would recommend Mr. Vigliotti. Does anybody want to second that? Page 33 October 2, 2008 COMMISSIONER CARON: I second that. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron seconded. Discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, all in favor, signify by saYIng aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 8-0. Thank you all. That's a fine slate. We'll move forward with a whole nother year and hopefully have a lot more fun as we're going into right now. With that, is there a motion to adjourn the first meeting for today? COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti made the motion. Is there a second? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Somebody second, please. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Oh, I'll second. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Homiak, your first motion of the day. Ms. Homiak made the motion to second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. Page 34 October 2, 2008 COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye. COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Aye. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We are adjourned. ***** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:20 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARK P. STRAIN, Chairman These minutes approved by the Board on as presented or as corrected , TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. BY CHERIE' NOTTINGHAM (The CCPC- LDC meeting followed immediately after the regularly scheduled meeting) Page 35