BCC Minutes 10/20/1993 S (Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance) Naples, Florida, October 20, 1993
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners In
and for the County of Collier, and also acting am the Board of Zoning
Appeals and as the governing board{s) of such special districts as
have been crested according to law and having conducted business
herein, met on this date at 5:05 P.M. in SPECIAL SESSION in Building
'F' of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the
following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Burr L. Saundere
VICE-CHAIRmAN: Timothy J. Constantine
John C. Norris
Michael J.
Betrye J.. Matthews
ALSO PRESENT: Ellis Hoffman, Deputy Clerk and Annette Iluevtn,
Recording Secretary~ William Hargett, Assistant County Nanagx~r~ Ken
Cuyler, County Attorney~ NarJorie Student and Natthe Howell, Assistant
County Attorneys; David Pertrow, Long Range Planning Director; Tom
Conrecode, Office of Capital Projects Management Director; Stan
Litsinger, Growth Management Chief; Dick Clark, Code Enforcesent
Supervisor; Jeff Perry, Chief Transportation Planner~ Margret Bowles
and Diane Rolling, Planners; and Lieutenant Byron Tomlinson, of the
Sheriff's Office.
Page, 1
October 20° ~993
i.' Tape
.-~
COI2IDII~TIOI OF Idl ORDII~I!ICE TO BI ~ ~ ~ CO~LI~ CO~
~1~1~ ~IC FICILITIIS O~IN~CI, ~OVIDIN8 FOR ~ ~ OF
0~I~
P.~.
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Dally Nl~ws on
October 12, 1993, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened.
Growth Management Chief Litsinger advised that this is the first
of two public hearings for the Board~s consideration of the Adequate
Public Facilities Ordinance which will repeal and replace the current
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance 90-24.
Mr. Litsinger detailed the changes of the Ordinance which had
substantive changes as the result of the re-write.
Mr. Litsinger called attention to the Ordinance, the top of Page 8
and pointed out that the Road Level of Service Standards for
Interstate and State Highways is Incorrect. He stated that correc-
tions will be made prior to the second hearing.
A discussion ensued with regard to 7.4.2 "Standards in
Establishing Area of Significant Influence (ASI). Mr. Lttstnfer
explained that the ordinance contains standards for drawing the boun-
daries of any proposed ASI. He noted that "accepted transportation
planning practices" was previously referred to. He indicated that
criteria is being used which is consistent with the Statutes, Plan,
and practice throughout the State of Florida.
Commissioner Saunders questioned whether the new Standards would
be more Inclusive. Mr. Litsinger reported that standard planning
practices put no boundaries on a particular ASI and depending on the
analytical technique, could be very expansive or narrowly defined.
Mr. Litsinger revealed that staff believes this places som~ cer-
tainty in the concurrency process relative to the community looking at
tts oknl property and how any ASI should affect same, should one! be
considered. In addition, he remarked that the original definition was
.00, 03
Page 2
October 20, ~993
too va~ue and gave no specific criteria.
Commissioner Saunders noted that the language says these standards
"shall ~uide' the development of the areas. He questioned whether
there ts any ~lexibtlity to reduce the scope of the ASI when it is
known that the A$I should not ~nclude that expansive o~ an a.rea. Hr.
titsinger remarked that the language could be changed from "shall' to
"will consider the following criteria'. Conuntss~oner Saundere
suggested that Justification he provided before the second hearing.
Mr. Litsinger called attention to Page 18, 8.3.1.1. He revealed
that reference to waivers and releases which were previously permitted
prior to a final plat or site development plan have been stricken from
the ordinance. He explained that staff will present a f~rm recommen-
dation at the second public hearing, after evaluating the requirements
of Rule 93-5.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Nr. Litsinger explained that
all f~nal plats approved subject to waiver and release and $DP's
contain language stamped on them stating that notice needs to be g~ven
to subsequent purchasers o~ property within the subd~vision advistn~;
that concurrency requirements have not been met for the property.
Commissioner Volpe remarked that there is nothing in the ordinance
requiring that that notification he Included in the actual contract of
sale. He cited that most people will not look at the plat that is
recorded In public records.
County Attorney Guylet reported that the language was de~eloped
pursuant to earlier discussions initiated by the Board and title com-
panies or whom.vet will have access to the publtc records shl~uld be
put on notice that the ordinance exists.
Commtss~oner Norris remarked that tt would be appropr~at,e to coor-
dinate with the Board o~ Realtors and have them ~nclude the language
in their standard contract. County Attorney Cuyler stated t:~at ~n
the Interim two weeks, staff will contact the Board of Realt.~rs for
their Input In this regard.
Commissioner Volpe questioned whether notification ks gtven v~a
P:age 3
October 20, 1993
certified mall for Certificates of Adequate Public Facilltt.es.
Litsinger replied that generally, a telephone call is made.
Commissioner Matthews recalled previous discussions witl~ regard to
building permits that have not been picked up after a speci:ried amount
of time and the suggestion was made that an applicant should then be
notified via certified mall. She proposed that the same procedure be
~ollowed In this regard.
Mr. Litsinger stated that staff will discuss this matter and
report back at the next hearing.
Commissioner Volpe voiced concern with regard to Pine Ridge Road
between Airport Road and 1-75 operating at Level of Service "E" which
is · deficient road segment and the possibility of this becoming a
State Road.
Chief Transportation Planner Perry advised that a study has been
submitted by the Center of Urban Transportation Research to the
Florida Transportation Commission which recommends some tran~J~er of
roads, the majority or which are State Roads coming to local govern-
ments. He reported that the only project affected in Collier County
is Pine Ridge Road from U.S. 41 to 1-75, as an Interstate connector
between two principal arterials. He explained that the proposal is to
go from a County to a State facility. He indicated if this ~,roposal
marches on through the legislature, that road would in fact become a
State facility and would be granted whatever state standard applies to
State Highways, noting that a portion would be 'D" and some may be
in the tr·nsitioning areas.
With regard to Section 4.33.3, Commissioner Saunders stated that
he understands Hr. Corkran has indicated some disagreement in this
regard and questioned staff's belief in terms of the language being
sustainable. Mr. Litsinger replied that staff added deftnitl,~ns for
the purposes of clarification relative to the methodology for the
calculation of Level or Service and road counts in addition
defintng the term "peak season, peak hour" trarfic count as ixsple-
mented in Collier County in determining the current condition~s of each
Page 4
October 20, 1993
segment on which decisions are based for capital improvements. He
advised that he believes the methodology is sound transportation
planning practice.
Mr. Sewell Corkran spoke in this regard and presented a hand out
(copy not provided to the Clerk's Office).
There were no other speakers.
C~msissioner 2aunders advised that the public hearing is closed.
Cosmissioner 2sunders announced that the second public heraring
with regard to the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance will be held
on II;~ :.s~wy, November 3, 1993 at 5:05 P.N. In the Boardts Clabers.
O~D~ 93-77, AMENDING THE COLLIER COUNTY NOISE CONTROL O~DZNANCg,
NO. 90-17 -
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Dally News on
October 14, 1993, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with
the Clerk, public hearing was opened.
Commissioner Saunders announced that this ts the second pxxbltc
hearing relating to the Noise Ordinance.
Commissioner Constantine provided a synopsis of the evente~ leading
to the proposed amendments to the ordinance. He noted that an ad hoc
committee met and determined that there were problems in three
distinct areas: level of sound; hours that amplified sound Is allowed;
and enforcement.
Commissioner Constantine advised that At was determined that 60
decibels (dba) would be measured at the complainant's property. He
remarked that amplified music would be allowed between the hours of
9:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M. He explained that a permitting procedure
would be in effect for enforcement, and noted that 95~ of the busi-
nesses do not cause a problem. He cited that the previous ordinance
did not really provide for enforcement. He stated that enforcement
would be handled through the Code Compliance Department.
Assistant County Attorney Howell highlighted the changes to the
Pag~ 5
October 20, 1993
ordinance that have been made since the first public hearing. She
called attention to Page 4, Section FIve "W", which provides a better
definition of property boundary In terms of where the sound will be
measured when somebody complains.
Assistant County Attorney Howell reported that Page 6, modifies
the time frame for the measurement period from lO minutes to not less
than 30 seconds.
Ms. Howell pointed out that Changes to Table I occur on Page
which clarifies that the word "adjoining" means within l,O00 feet of
residential use occupancy or zone.
Assistant County Attorney Howell referred to Pages 8 and 9 con-
taining all new language relating to non-amplified music. She
remarked that this does not change the current restriction on that
music, which is 65 dba until i0:00 P.H. and 55 dba after 10:00 P.M.
She noted that businesses providing non-amplified music are alamo
required to obtain a permit and if they continue to violate those dba
levels, their permit will be revoked.
Commissioner Constantine cited that it would be more sensible to
have levels consistent at 60 dba for amplified and non-ampli~ied
music.
County Attorney Cuyler advised that the opinion of staf~ is that
amplified music should be treated as a special category because there
is the ability to do so, however, the concern is that non-amplified
music will be regarded as sound.
Commissioner Constantine indicated that two different measuring
levels make it more difficult for the business owner and more dif-
ficult for Code Enforcement or the Shertff's Office to enforce.
Commissioner Norris concurred with Commissioner Constantine's com-
ments that there should be consistency.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Assistant County Attorney[
Howell divulged that there is currently a regulation for sound tehich
states 65 dba ~rom 7:00 A. H. to 10:O0 P.H. or 55 dba from lO:O0
to 6:59 A.H. She noted that she felt comZortable regulating non-
Page 6
October 20, 1993
amplified music in the same manner all sound is regulated.
Commissioner Saunders questioned whether all sound could be
treated equally from a legal standpoint. Ms. Howell replied in the
affirmative.
Commissioner Matthews concurred that 55 dba is the same whether it
Is amplified or non-amplified.
It was the consensus of the Board that up until lO:O0 P.M- 60 dba
would be allowed for amplified and non-amplified music, however, after
10:00 P.M. there will be no amplified music~ non-amplified music would
be allowed at 55 dba.
Ms. Howell pointed out that Subparagraph 6 will be modified to
reflect the Board's direction.
Assistant County Attorney Howell called attention to Page 16,
Section Ten, which Is an existing waiver provision but noted that Code
Enforcement requested that Subparagraph 1 be added to coincide with
the proposed language.
Ms. Howell reported that Page 17, Subparagraph C, Includes the
addition of "employee" which clarifies anyone in possession of the
establishment at the time.
Assistant County Attorney Howell referred to Page 18, Subparagraph
E contains language for the enforcement of the annual permit. She
reported that the permit will be Issued by the Community Development
Services Department.
Commissioner Volpe questioned whether the issuance of the permit
could be tied in with the Issuance of Occupational Licenses.
Code Enforcement Supervisor Clark advised that Occupational
Licenses are Issued by Guy Carlton's office. He noted that he has no
objection to that office Issuing these permits but suggested illat this
be discussed with Mr. Carlton.
County Attorney Cuyler advised that Occupational License Files are
regulated and noted he is uncertain as to whether Mr. Carlton tfould
want to add on this additional process. He revealed that theeel appli-
cations would still need to be submitted to Development Ssrvlclss to
October 20, 1993
verify whether they are within 1,O00 feet of residential. In addi-
tion, he noted that the permit will be revoked by Community
Development Services Administrator Brutt.
The following persons spoke with regard to this Item:
3ohn Hall
~erome Brunette
Valerie Farino
Grady Ntnor
Charlie McCormick
W. C. Mitchell (Tape
Stan Oober
~erry White
Randy Goodell
Geri Wakelet (w/2 proposals - not provided to Clerk to Board)
A discussion ensued with regard to the measure of sound over a
specific amount of time. Mr. Clark remarked that the 3 seconds is not
a long period of time and noted that the peak sound would be measured
at 3 seconds consecutively.
Commissioner Constantine pointed out that there is equipm, ent
available which measures the sound over a specific period of time,
giving the highs, lows and averages. He expressed that he does not
believe 3 continuous seconds is workable and suggested that a longer
measurement period be used but non-continuously.
In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Clark explained that the
number of permits at $40.00 each would buy the decibel meter. He
remarked that his staff is scheduled without incurring overtime.
County Attorney Cuyler advised if a community event is different
from that which is covered under an annual permit, the applicant would
need to apply for a community event permit.
County Attorney Cuyler addressed concerns relative to the waiver
request and the issue of allowing amplified music to continue beyond
the specified time frame on special dates, i.e. New Year's Eve. He
reported that there is currently no exception in the ordinance, noted
that language could be added in this regard, if the Board so desires.
Xt was the consensus of the Board that additional language be
provided within regard to the time constraints.
see leecording Secretary Guevin replaced Deputy Clerk Hoffaan
at this time. ease
Commissioner Saunders closed the public hearing.
Responding to Commissioner Norris, Assistant County Attorney
October 20, 1993
Howell replied non-amplified music may be played at 55 dBA from 10:00
P.M. until 8:59 X.M.
Commissioner Norris indicated he did not think the intent was to
allow music to be played outdoors all night. He questioned ~y
amplified music Is not allowed for the same time period?
Commissioner Constantine explained frequency and dectbels are
measured differently, and bass will not necessarily be picked up by a
declbel meter unless much more complicated equipment is made available
that will set frequency levels as opposed to declbel levels and thotr
ratio together.
Commissioner Saunders commented he has been pursuaded by the
problems that will be experienced by the merchants. He suggested a
middle ground be found and If that does not work, more strict regula-
tions can be put In place. He proposed that amplified music at 55 dBA
be allowed after lO:00 P.N. and wait to see if any complaints are
received.
Commissioner Volpe asked how can the proposed restrictions be
enforced, and how can a person insure his own compliance?
Nr. Clark explained most of the enforcement Job is providing edu-
cational opportunities rather than to penalize people. He said he
would not be adverse to his Staff assisting people to establish what
~5 dBA sounds like. .
Commissioner Saunders noted one of the public speakers requested
special consideration be given to Friday and Saturday nights and other
special occasions throughout the year, such as Halloween, New Yearns
Eve and St. Patrick's Day. He said perhaps a good approach would be
to permit amplified music until 11:59 P.N. on Friday and Saturday, and
that it only be allowed until 10:00 P.N. during the rest of the week
with the exception of special occasions the Board can specify.
Commissioner Constantine stated he concurs that there may be spe-
cial nights during the year for which exceptions could be made, but
disagreed with allowing amplified music past 10:00 P.~. every Friday
and Saturday. He stated there are residents in the coamunity who
"o. 000- , 10
Pa,~e 9
October 20, 1993
retire at 10:00 P.N. on Fridays and Saturdays.
Responding to Commissioner Volpe, County Attorney Cuyler advised
with regard to amplified sound versus amplified music, the cases he
has read talk about sound as a class, the annoyance factor, and the
ability to regulate sound as opposed to regulating music. He indi-
cated the basic principle is, a resident in a residential district has
the right not to have amplified sound in the adjoining district.
Commissioner Constantine moved, to approve the following changes
to Ordinance 90-17: that sound levels will not exceed 60 dli& from
9:00 &.N. to 10:00 P.N., and will not exceed 55 dBA after 10:00 P.N.;
amplified sound is not allowed after 10z00 P.N.; and community events
may take place art private as well a· public property.
The following person spoke at this time:
J.C. Gutterez (phonetic)
Commissioner Constantine amended the motion to include tibet sound
will be measured for · total of l0 percent of 60 seconds.
Cc~mtseloner Constantine amended the motion, seconded by
Cosxtmelonsr Norris, that amplified music will be allowed until 11:00
P.M. on FTtday~ and Saturdays at 55 dBA~ and that exceptions will be
made to allow amplified music on HallMen, New Yeares Eva,
Patrickto Day and the Fourth of July.
Commissioner Volpe commented he is unsure there is a valid
distinction between amplified and non-amplified music after 10:00 P.M.
He said If 55 dBA of any kind of sound is allowed after 10:00 P.M.,
whether or not it is amplified, the sound must be Just as offensive.
Commissioner Saunders agreed and stated he cannot suppor~ the
motion.
Upon call for the question, the motion failed 2/3 (Comminetoners
Volpe, It·tthewl and 281mders opposed).
CoMmissioner Volpe moved, seconded by Commissioner Conetamtine and
carried-mvRtveusly, to amend the ordinance with all the chsxxges con-
rained in Commissioner Constantinees motion with the mmcepticm that
there will be no distinction made between amplified and non-susplified
Octobe~ 20, ~gg3
momnd m~ter 10:00 P.M.; and that Ordinance g3-77 be adopted and
anttx~d into Ordinance ~ook No. 63.
County Attorney Guylet advised the public that the permit require-
meat begins on November 30, 1993.
There being no further busJneas for the Good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - T~me: 7:45 P.M.
am prm&ented-
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
BURT L. SAUNDERS, CHAIRMAN
by the Board on
_j/or as corrected
Page 11