BCC Minutes 10/14/1992 S Naples, Florida, October 14, 1992
LET IT BB 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 5:05 P.M. in SPECIAL SESSION in Butldtng
#F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
ABSENT:
Michael J. Volpe
Richard S. Shanahan
Patrtcia A. Goodntght
Max A. Hesse, Jr.
Burr L. Saundere
ALSO PRESENT: Kathy Meyers and Debby Farris, Deputy Clerks;
Jennifer Edwards, Assistant to the County Manager; Ken Cuyler, County
Attorney; Martha Howell and MarJorte Student, Assistant County
Attorneys; David Pettrow, Development Services Director; Dick Clark,
Code Enforcement Supervisor; John Mada3ewskt, Project Review Services
Manager; Ken Bagtnskt, Planning Services Manager; Joe Delete,
Landscape Planner; Bryan Milk, Ron Nino and Wayne Arnold, Planners;
and Deputy Byron Tomllnson, Sheriff's Office.
Page I
October 14, 1992
Tap~ #1
(lo2)
AJ~Nl~l~rf OF TH~ ADEQU&~ PUBLIC F&CILITIES ORDINANCE NO. 90-24,
SUBS~"TIO]I 8.3.4.I ~TI~ TO ~PLICATION ~3 ~R C~TZFICAT~S OF
~LZC FACILI~ ~QUA~ - CO~I~D TO 10/21/92 ~ING
Commissioner Shanahan moved, seconded by Coutaaloner Hilee and
carried 4/0, to continue this public hearing to the meeting of October
21, 1992 at 5:05 P.N.
(200)
Ztn #3B
ORDIIZMJCE 92-?3 ~OV~NG ~~S TO ~E ~ D~~ CODE -
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
October 8, 1992, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened.
Bill Hoover, with Butler Engineering, discussed minimum building
size for commercial zoning districts, page 236, Section 2.2.12.4.5.
He suggested it be changed to 700 square feet.
Commissioner Volpe proposed to amend the minimum floor area of
structures in C-3, C-4 and C-5 zoning districts to 700 square feet,
and the Board concurred.
Betsy Bitner discussed Section 2.2.14, regarding the Commercial
Intermediate District (C-3). She acknowledged that her group, Marco
Players Inc., has been presenting community theater on Marco Island
for several years but has had to access several facilities in order to
provide this entertainment. She suggested that her group be allowed
to utilize the soon-to-be unoccupied fire station on South Barfield
Drive, Marco Island, to which they are currently prohibited by zoning
regulations from using as a community theater.
Ms. Bitner recommended that community theaters and motion picture
theaters be permitted in the C-3 zoning district as Conditional Uses,
which would allow for public input as well as require the Board's
approval.
AO0- 03
Page 2
October 14, 1992
Co~Asmioner Sh~ ~ovad, seconded b~ Co~mtastomer Hawse
c~r~ 4/0, to ~nd Section 2.2.14 to ~d co~ty theaters ~d
~ti~ ~tct~e theaterm am Conditional uses to the Coarcta[
InteState District (C-3).
Per~ Peep]es spoke on behalf of the Smokehouse Bay Club con-
cerning Section 2.2.15.2.1 regardlng the destgna~ion of carwashes
the C-4 zoning distr~ct as a PermAtted Uae.
Assistant County Attorney Howell noted that another sidesheet has
~en prov/ded ~hich ]tats carwashes An the C-4 zoning distract as a
CondttAona1 Use and ts the Board's decision to decide ~h~ch of the two
to dead,ate.
Planer Nilk reviewed ~ha~ carwashes have been an ~ssue for
several of the last hearlnge and noted that the P[annlng
re~eated that they be addressed aa a ps'mAtted use by rlght.
In response to CommAsstoner Volpe, Hr. Peeples indicated that a
carwash should be a Cond~tlona] Use rather than a Permltted Use due
the tntenstty of use and the nuisance o~ a carwash.
Commissioner Shanahan recalled that previous discussion resulted
An the d~rec~1on of Staff to analyze thts situation and determine how
many sltuatlons exlst ~here C-4 zoning abuts residential property, and
to propose that carwashes be readdressed as a permitted use with added
crtterAa.
Nr. Peep[es stipulated that he ~1~ mee~ ~tth Hr. N~k and revAe~
the last of criteria, and dlscussed that he would s~lll request a car-
wash to be designated a Conditional Use rather than a Permitted Use tn
the C-4 Zoning DAstrlc~ when ~he property abuts residentially zoned
property.
~i~t~er S~~ ~d, seconded ~ Co~teeloner ~Aght
~ c~t~ t/O, to desists cmhes u a Pe~1tted O~ ,tibia the
O-I Mt~ DistrAct ~bJect to the nine en~erated criteria ~ggeat~
~ Staff ~d t~t these restrictions are also to apply to the
ZonAng District, ~ere these zonlng districts a~t residential.
Regarding Section 2.4, Landscaping and Buffering, ~1ght
Page 3
October 14, 1992
Richardson spoke to this Section.
Joseph Delete, Landscape Planner with Planning Services, commented
that criteria has been added to alleviate concerns regarding native
and drought tolerant plants and restrictions have been lessened for
plants and shrubs east and north of U.S. 41.
SCOtt Franks spoke to this Section.
Nancy Payton spoke to this Issue, and requested that the word
'Southern' be reinserted where It has been stricken. Mr. De/ate noted
that the elimination of the word 'Southern' was accidental and can be
retnserted.
Martin Ptnckney spoke concerning Landscaping Requirements.
The following people spoke to this Section:
Oarrett Beyrent
Michael Fernandez
Regarding landscape berms, John MadaJewski advised the Board that
the County Manager's office has received many complaints concerning
berms. Me noted that berms have no detail within the Code, are not
considered a structure and have no controls, resulting tn i to 1, and
2 to 1 slopes that are unstable and cause many problems. He reviewed
that Pelican Bay's standard is a 4 to I slope on their berms. He
recommended a slope no steeper than 3 to 1.
Referring to page 2-136, Mr. Fernandez requested that within the
last sentence, after 'rights-of-way', the phrase 'exterior to the pro-
Ject' be added.
$o$ Recessed at ?:10 P.M. - Reconvened at ~:20 P.M. ese
Discussion regardln~ Landscaping Requirements continued and the
following people spoke to this Item:
Reed Jarv~
S ~dney Showa 1 ter
Oene
Oeorge
~ohn Douglas questioned ~he rationale o~ Section 2.4.4.X. as
re~lec~ed on green sade shee~ 2-x27, aha Eandscape P~anner Dela~e
Page 4
October 14, 1992
proceeded to explain staff's position regarding same.
Assistant County Attorney Howell reported receipt of a suggestion
from Mr. Showalter for a citizen oriented landscaping inspector
program. She revealed the position of staff ts that, while such a
program would be helpful tn Collier County, it should be addressed
with a separate Ordinance as it ts enforcement oriented.
Following brief discussion, Commissioner Goodntght suggested
staff further Investigate the possibility of such a program and report
back at a future meeting of the Board of County Commissioners, and it
was the consensus that staff do so.
Commissioner Goodnlght reported receipt of a list from Mr.
Showalter and delivered same to staff (Copy not provided to the
Clerk).
Landscape Planner Delate reported staff proposes to add three
trees to the prohibited species list tn response to Hurricane Andrew
a/~d, upon commissioner Volpe questioning whether the trees to be pro-
hibited include Rosewood, Eucalyptus and Silk Oak, answered tn the
affirmative.
Referring to green s~de sheets 2-132 and 2-133, Landscape Planner
Delate advised that staff has prepared Alternate I and Alternate II,
and proceeded to explain the differences between the two.
Planning Services Manager Bagtnski advised that staff is recom-
mending Alternate I.
Commissioner Volpe concluded that the only item regarding
Article 2.4 currently outstanding is the issue of percentages, i.e.
the proposed 35~ versus the previous 50~.
Following brief discussion during which Commissioner Goodntght
voiced concerns, it was the consensus to leave the percentage at the
currently proposed 35~, as reflected on the green side sheet.
In review of the changes incorporated ~n the green side sheets,
Commissioner Shanahan questioned whether it had been agreed to change
the sloping to 4-to-1 on the grass slopes and 3-to-! on the other, and
staff answered in the affirmative.
Page
October 14, 1992
and Assistant County Attorney Student advised that great care must be
utilized in the regulation of same.
Doug Ranktn acknowledged he nor any of his clients have any
problems with the entire package of side sheets bearing today's date.
Referring to the white side sheets marked Staff Side Sheets,
dated 10/14/92, beginning with 6-20 and stapled together, Assistant
County Attorney Student explained that the language merely reflects
the Florida Administrative Code staffing requirements as it is her
position staff ts preempted from placing limitations on the staffing.
Planning Services Manager Bagtnskt explained the Intent of
Section 2.2.14.4.3, as reflected on the white side sheet 2-41, without
eliciting public comment.
Assistant County Attorney Howell explained the intent of white
olde sheet 2-78, Sections 2.2.24 and 2.2.24.2.3. She explained that,
although there are duplicates of green side sheet 2-94, Section
2.2.25.5.2, only one set of this particular side sheet ts being
adopted.
While explaining the Intent of white side sheet 2-161, Section
2.6.7.1.1, Planning Services Manager Baglnski pointed out that to the
definition for "Major Recreational Equipment" the following sentence
should be added, "Said vehicles or equipment must be maintained In an
operational condition."
Referring to green side sheet 2-166, Section 2.6.11.3, Assistant
County Attorney Howell explained the word "fencing" should be added to
the last full sentence so that it reads, "....subject to the same
fencing provisions..."
Referring to green side sheet 2-183, Section 2.6.28.17, Item #5,
Assistant County Attorney Howell stated that, rather than striking the
Page 6
October 34, [992
last three sentences, the present language will be kept with additional
language added so that the sentence reads, " .... provision does not
allow car washes except tn those districts where a car wash is a
Permitted Uae.". Following brief discussion, she concluded the direc-
tion Is to add, "subject to criteria as specif~ed in the pertinent
sections".
Regarding page 2-286 which addresses "Temporary Sales", Assistant
County Attorney Howe1! clarified there is both a white side sheet and
a green side sheet, and Planning Services Manager Baginskt explained
the last sentence had previously read, "...structures, merchandise, or
placement or parking of vehicles..."
Assistant County Attorney Howell referred tO white side sheet
2-189, Section 2.6.35.6.2, without eliciting public comment.
Referring to green side sheet 2-211, Section 2.7.4.5, Assistant
County Attorney Howell further clarified that the language will be
amended to add the words, "an approved conditional use" instead of
" .... a conditional use .... ".
Barbara Prynosk2 of Project Review Services explained that green
side sheet 2-85, Section 2.2.24.8, deals with the area of critical
state concern and special treatment overlay, and disclosed it Js the
opinion of the County Attorney's Office that the language "w~th the
exception of exotic vegetation removal" should be deleted, and
Assistant County Attorney Student confirmed that is indeed the recom-
mendation.
Assistant County Attorney Howell advised that staff and Attorney
Tony Plres have been successful tn working out compromise language
In addition to that proposed on green side sheet 1-24, Section 1.?.10,
arid proceeded to read into the record the modifications proposed for
adoption, following which Attorney Ptres confirmed the proposed
language ~s Indeed acceptable to him.
County Attorney Cuyler advised that the Board of County
Commissioners can take a final motion on Article 2 at this time but
that such action will prohibit further public input. He pointed out
Page ?
October 14, 1992
that a motion at this time will not be an actual adoption but merely a
final motion saying that all the changes which have been made are the
final changes which will be adopted later.
Coa~ismioner Shanahan ~oved, seconded by Commissioner Goodnight
and carried 4/0, to approve the A~end~ents, changes, correctio~, etc.
in Section 2, that this will he the final hearing tn~ofar a~ Section 2
le c~cwrned, and will be subject to final adoption of the overall
Onified Le~d Development Code at the conclusion of the second public
County Attorney Cuyler interjected there will be no further
public or staff Input.
Commissioner Volpe questioned whether anyone present wished to
speak on Articles 1, 4 or 5 and, upon receiving no response, requested
a motion reflecting all the changes discussed In said Articles upon
which a consensus has been reached, subject to final adoption.
Co~/uloner Shanahan ~ved, seconded by Coulaelonar Goodnlght
and c~ied 4/0, that Articles 10 i, and 5 of the Unified Land
D~v~lop~ent Coda b~ approved.
Referring to green side sheet 3-23, Section 3.R.8.2.3, which
resulted from the discussion by the Board of County Commissioners on
the Berkshire Lakes drainage issue, Project Review Services Manager
MadaJewskt explained that clarifying language has been provided on the
requirements for a complete lot grading plan with final grading slava-
tlons to come with the subdivision drawings and to be Implemented
through the Building Permitting process.
Discussion ensued regarding side sheet 3-137 and 3-138, Section
3.13.?.1.3 during which the following persons spoke:
Nancy Payton John Douglas
=Pam Mclte Attorney Tony Ptres
=Included in her comments was the suggestion that the numbering
ia wrong for this section. ,
Further discussion revealed the consensus is that notice should
be required prior to granting of an exemption by requiring the appli-
cant to publish the notice of exemption once a week for two con-
oo, fiOO,, 09
Page 8
October 14, 1992
8ecutlve weeks tn a newspaper of general circulation to allow for
couent, and the appeal process should be through the EAB (Environ-
mental Advisory Board).
Project Review Services Manager Mada~ewski confirmed there are
some white side sheets for "Appendix A" of the Land Development Code,
and proceeded to briefly outline the changes.
Assistant County Attorney Howell advised that, at the direction
of the Board of County Commissioners, staff has negotiated language
satisfactory to Mr. Griffith providing for administrative approval of
preliminary work authorization, and that a Resolution will be pre-
sented next week authorizing either the Chairman or County Manager to
sign these agreements.
Pointing out that 3.8 does not mention agricultural, Commissioner
Goodntght questioned whether an environmental impact statement (EIB)
will be required to clear necessary property to allow a fence to be
built for livestock, and Pro~ect Review Services Manager Mada]ewski
stated that, although the Land Development Code is not clear as to the
exemption on agricuZture, to-date staff has not been requir~ng an
(Environmental Impact Statement). He indicated the matter will be
addressed tonight and, based on the conclusions from the agricultural
clearing, the recommendation will probably be to put a specific exemp-
tion in the EIB (Environmental Impact Statement) provision of the Land
Development Code (Division 3.8) and reference it back to the agri-
cultural clearing provision.
Project Review Services Manager MadaJewskt briefly summarized the
events and sources which resulted tn the proposals reflected on the
green sheets regarding agricultural.
David Land distributed a handout which included proposed language
for various subsections of Section 3.9.6.5.1, and lengthy discussion
ensued regarding his proposal for Subsection 7, which resulted in the
recommendation that the following language be added at the end of
Section 3.9.6.5.1, Subsection 7, "If the clearing ie expected to occur
over a period greater than two years, this will be stated in the
Page 9
October 14, 1992
application and may be addressed as a condition tn the Agricultural
Clearing Permit, if determined to be appropriate by staff."
Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Land's proposed language for
Section 3.9.6.5.4 reflected tn the heretnabove referred to handout as
well as staff's proposed language reflected on green side sheet 3-128.
Tape #&
Commissioner Ooodnight suggested that, regarding Section
3.9.6.5.3, language be added that allows twenty days for staff's
review and, should staff request additional Information from the
applicant and it ts not forthcoming or should the applicant request
additional time, staff has the discretion to deny the'application or
grant an extension.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Land indicated he does not
wish to address Item I of his heretnabove mentioned handout.
Bruce Anderson spoke to the issue of side sheet 3-128, Section
3.9.6.5.6, and discussion ensued.
John Douglas spoke to the issue of Section 3.9.6.4.2, and Project
Review Services Manager MadaJewski confirmed staff has no problem with
one acre Instead of ]~ acres.
Stewart Swanson spoke to the Issue of Section 3.8, and Project
Review Services Manager Mada3ewski recommended a provision be placed
in 3.8, the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) requirements, that,
if the pro~ect goes through the proper agricultural clearing permit,
in division 3.9 there ts no requirement for an environmental Impact
statement (EIS).
Assistant County Attorney Howell stated there are two white
sheets on Article 6, one providing definitions on variances and the
other on major recreational equipment.
Commissioner Hasee moved, seconded by Co~-isetoner Shanahan and
CazT~ed 4/0, to close the public hemming.
Assistant County Attorney Howell explained there are two minor
changes required tn the adoption Ordinance, one being that the actual
Ordinance has October 14th in the Whereas clauses and one of the
Page 10
ATTEST:
SAMES C. 8ILES, CLERK
October 14, 1992
zoning atlas haps in Section 3 was deleted as tt has been dealt with
es m ecrtvener's error. She advised the motion needs to Include that
Exhibit A, which ts all the side sheets, includes all the green and
white sheets before the Board of County Commissioners, any items that
the Board of County Oommissioners has reached consensus on, and
changes that the Board of County Gommtssioners has directed to staff
on those green and white sheets, She explained that those items
together will comprise the adopted Ordinance.
Co~mt~loner llasae moved, seconded by Coutsmtoner Goodntght ~nd
CmXTted 4/0, to mdopt Ordinance 92-?3, which includes mll the
~v~ l'mfmrr~*i to c~gem amd dtrection~ to mtmff, ~ entered Into
Ordtnamcm Book
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Assistant County Attorney
Howell stated the new changes will become effective upon notice from
the Secretary of State that same has been approved.
There being no further business for the Good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: 10:10 P.M.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS"-
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/,I.~.,k~ *//49/o
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD[~].'OI~
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UND~ IT~,' ".
.,
CONTROL ~ .' <. ',
.~.
MICHAEL ~VOLPE,
ae preeented / or ss corrected
Page 11