Loading...
CCPC Minutes 04/06/2000 RApril 6, 2000 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 2000 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: ALSO PRESENT: CHAIRPERSON: Russell A. Budd Russell A. Priddy Kenneth L. Abernathy Karen Urbanik Michael Pedone Gary Wrage Michael J. Bruet Sam M. Saadeh Joyceanna J. Rautio Ron Nino, Planning Services Marni Scuderi, Assistant County Attorney Page I AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, APRIL 6, 2000 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING. COUN'I~ GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST. NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIM1TED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED I0 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 3 WEEKS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC I-tEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITrEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITrED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUN'I~ COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF TIlE CCPC W'ILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. ROLL CALL BY CLERK 2. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 20, 2000: February 3, 2000; February 17, 2000; and March 2, 2000 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES: 5. BCC REPORT 6. CHAInMAN'S REPORT 7. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. BD-99-29, Arthur C. Quinnell, representing Barrett M. Morns, requesting a 25-foot boat dock extension to allow for a 45-foot boat dock for property located at 360 Smallwood Drive, Chokoloskee, Florida, further described as Chokoloske¢, Lots 81 and 108, in Section 31, Township 53 South, Range 30 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Ross Gochneaur) BD-2000-01, Miles L. Scofield. of Scofield Marine Consulting, representing Michael A. McCare, requesting an 18-foot extension from the permitted 20 feet to create a boat dock facility protruding a total of 38 feet into the waterway for property located at 78 Southport Cove, further described as Lot 11, Unit 1, Southport on the Bay. (Coordinator: Ross Gochenaur) V-2000-09, George L. Varnadoe. Esq., of Young, van Assenderp, Vamadoe and Anderson, representing La Playa, LLC, for a variance to the rear yard setback requirement of thirty (30) feet to fifteen (15) feet, the front yard setback of thirty (30) feet to twenty-six and one-half (26 1/2) feet and separation between building requirement from forty-nine (49) feet to thirty-five (35) feet for property located at 989l Gulfshore Drive. (Continued to 4/20) (Companion to CU-2000-03) (Coordinator: Ron Nino) CU-2000-03, George L. Vamadoe, Esq., of Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A., representing La Playa, LLC, requesting Conditional Use "5" of the "RT" Resort Tourist zoning district for a private club per Section 2.2.8.3 for property known as the La Playa Hotel and Beach Club, located on Gulfshore Boulevard, further desm'ibed as Lots 25 through 30, inclusive, Block A., Unit No. 1, and Lots 24 through 28, inclusive, Block B, Unit No. 1, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (Continued to 4/20) (Companion to V-2000-09) (Coordinator: Ron Nino) CU-2000-01, Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., representing Barbara and Wilbur Crutchley, requesting Conditional Use "1" of the "RSF" zoning district for a non-commercial boat dock facility for property located at the comer of Sixth Street West and West Avenue, further described as Lot I, Block E, Little Hickory Shores No. 2, in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Bonita Springs, Florida. (Coordinator: Chaharam Badamtchian) 8. OLD BUSINESS 9..NEW BUSINESS 10. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 11. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 12. ADJOURN 4/6/00 AGEND/KN/im 2 April 6, 2000 COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I'll call to order the April 6th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. We would ask, individual speakers will be limited to five minutes on any item. I'll start with the roll call, starting at my right. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Here. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner--all right, listen, I wasn't prepared this morning. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Limit the chairman to following the agenda. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Abernathy. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Here. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Urbanik. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: Here. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Pedone here. Commissioner Wrage. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Here. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Bruet. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Here, present. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Saadeh. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: Here. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Rautio. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Present. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Good. Let the record show that the chairman is missing so far. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: And what is his name? Is it Mr. Russell -- COMMISSIONER PEDONE: His name is Russell Budd. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: -- or Mr. Budd? COMMISSIONER PEDONE: All right, listen, I only had one cup of coffee. Any addenda to the agenda? MR. NINO: No, there isn't. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Okay. Any -- can I get approval of the minutes? I do have a question on the minutes of February 3rd, Page 13. Page 2 April 6, 2000 I would like to know MR. NINO: Page what? COMMISSIONER PEDONE: COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: COMMISSIONER PEDONE: who Commissioner Russell is. Commissioner Russell. Page 13. Page 13. We have a Russell Priddy, and we have a Russell Budd, but I don't know of Commissioner Russell, so MR. NINO.' Well, I suggest that the yeah, Fred, gives that one away. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I would -- I would own up to that. COMMISSIONER PEDONE.' Okay. I just want to clear that up. Let the record show that our pristine chairman has arrived and will now take over the meeting. We are at -- entertaining motions for approval of the minutes. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: So moved. CHAIRMAN BUDD: We have a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY.' Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve the minutes of January 20th, February 3rd, February 17th and March 2nd. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Second. CHAIRMAN BUDD: A motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER PEDONE.' If I may, I just wanted to bring that up so that you all know I did look at the minutes. THE COURT REPORTER: I need to know who the second was, CHAIRMAN BUDD: Motion by Commissioner Priddy; second by Commissioner Abernathy. Moving on with our agenda. Any absences in the coming weeks? There are none. Board of county commissioners' report, Ron? MR. NINO: I don't have any. COMMISSIONER BRUET.' The individual with the variance has not come before the board yet? MR. NINO: No. There's nothing exciting to report about the board meeting relative to the handling of petitions. Page 3 April 6, 2000 CHAIRMAN BUDD: Okay. There's no chairman's report. We'll move to advertised public hearings. BD-99-29, any disclosures on this item? All those that wish to testify on this item before the planning commission, please stand, raise your right hand and be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were sworn). MR. GOCHENAUR: Good morning, commissioners. record, Ross Gochenaur, planning services. For the COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Do we have anybody for the petitioner?. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: But you're not going to testify? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, sir. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Go ahead, Ross. MR. GOCHENAUR: The petitioner is requesting a 25 foot extension to create a docking facility protruding a total of 45 feet into the one mile wide waterway. The property is located at 360 Smallwood Drive on Goodland. It contains about 430 feet of water frontage; a big lot and a lot of water frontage. The project consists of an "L" shaped dock and mooring pilings to accommodate two vessels. There were no objections to this project. It meets all criteria, and staff recommends approval. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Ross, isn't this on Chokoloskee? MR. GOCHENAUR: I beg your pardon, Chokoloskee. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any questions for staff? Is there anyone from the public to address this item? If not, we will close the public hearing. Do we have a motion? COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we approve BD-99-29. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Second. CHAIRMAN BUDD: We have a motion and second; any discussion? All those in favor, say aye. Page 4 April 6, 2000 The motion carries. Next item, BD-2000-01, any disclosures on this item? Anyone who wishes to testify, please stand, raise your right hand and be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were sworn). MR. GOCHENAUR: For the record, Ross Gochenaur, planning services. The petitioner is requesting an 18 foot extension to create a docking facility protruding a total of 38 feet into the 250 foot wide waterway. The property is located at 78 Southport Cove in Lely Barefoot Beach, it really is Lely Barefoot Beach, and contains about 80 feet of water frontage. The project consists of the addition of a boat lift to an existing "L" shaped dock. No objections to the project have been received. It meets all criteria, and staff recommends approval. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any questions for staff? Does the petitioner wish to present any information? Is there anyone from the public that wishes to address this item? There being none, we close the public hearing. Do we have a motion? COMMISSIONER SAADEH: COMMISSIONER WRAGE: we approve BD-2000-1. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: CHAIRMAN BUDD: We I'll make a motion -- Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion Second. have a motion by Commissioner Wrage, second by Commissioner Pedone. Any discussion? All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed? (No response). CHAIRMAN BUDD: Motion carries. Excellent presentation, Mr. Scofield. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: As always. CHAIRMAN BUDD: The next item has been continued to April 20th. The next item continued to -- is companion. Page 5 April 6, 2000 Moving on to Item E, that is CU-2000-01. Any disclosures? All those wishing to present testimony, please stand, raise your right hand and be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were sworn}. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Good morning, commissioners. Chaharam Badamtchian, from planning services staff. Mr. Richard Yovanovich representing Mr. and Mrs. Crutchley is requesting a conditional use for a boat dock as a permitted use in this RSF-4 residential single family zoning district. This -- this is one of those shoulder lots that, as you can see on this picture, this corner of it was sold in 1970, which predates our zoning ordinance, and the boat dock was built according to what we could gather in 1969 or '68. This is the existing -- is that clear on your monitor?. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: No. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: No. CHAIRMAN BUDD: It was for a second but not anymore. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: It's not getting any better. Past it. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: There it is. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: This is the part in question, as you can see, protruding, according to the survey, 15.8 feet into the waterway. However, as you can see on the same survey, the edge of the water is way past the property line. I have received 16 letters from neighbors, all in support of this dock. Two of the letters were from people who knew the original owner. One is actually the daughter of the original owner; find that the dock was built in 1968 or '69, and the other one was a family friend who actually helped to build it, and that person also said in 19, late '60s. So, this dock predates our code, and today we wouldn't allow such a thing. However, it's an existing dock that has been there for the past 30 years. I have had one neighbor who came to complain about this. Actually, he started a court case on this, and they are the property next door, this one here. They purchased the house last year or two years ago. This is the house, and that's why we are here today. Page 6 April 6, 2000 Staff reviewed this and recommends approval. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any questions? COMMISSIONER BRUET: So the issue came about because -- MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Because the neighbor-- COMMISSIONER BRUET: -- of a complaint from a neighbor. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: -- who purchased the house next door complained. COMMISSIONER BRUET: They don't plan to improve it or anything like that; it's just to allow it to remain? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Just allow them to keep the dock the way it is. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any other questions for staff? Can we hear from the petitioner, please? MR. YOVANOVICH: Just briefly, for the record, Rich Yovanovich, representing the applicant. The whole -- I want to give you a brief history about the property. What basically happened is, the Crutchleys bought their property along with that little parcel from -- I always get this backwards -- Kingsbury Shaw, I always want to say Shaw Kingsbury, but Kingsbury Shaw recently, but he was the one who had the property and built the dock. He actually bought a sliver from the predecessor in title to the person who is complaining today. So, it was the -- the person who's complaining today's predecessor that conveyed this piece to Mr. Shaw. So, I find it a little ironic, to say the least, that the person that's complaining actually knew, had full knowledge of what was out there. This was built in 1968, '69. We believe a permit was pulled, but the records are not the best. I can't prove a permit was pulled, so the burden is on me to come through and clean everything up. The zoning district allows boat docks as a conditional use. You don't have to have a residence. It is, under the County's laws, a legal, non-conforming lot, so I think today it could be built, even though, you know -- it's -- it's a legal use of the property at this point. I don't want anybody to think what we are trying to do is get away with something we are not allowed to do, and so that's where we are. That's how we got here. It was a code Page 7 April 6, 2000 enforcement complaint. We're trying to -- it's been there forever. We are not looking to make it any bigger than it already is. We're just trying to clean up some paperwork that I can't prove existed, but we believe it did, and that's why we are here today. Hopefully this will be a relatively easy decision. We request that you recommend a recommendation of approval to the board of county commissioners. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any questions for the petitioner?. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Just a quick question, Rich, and I thought Mike asked that question. In other words, we are not doing anything to the dock? We are not improving or building on it or -- MR. BADAMTCHIAN: We are not doing anything to the dock, correct. We just cannot find any permit for it from 1968, '69, and that's why we are here. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any other questions? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: We didn't keep good records in the 1960s. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Okay. If we could hear from anyone else from the public that wishes to address this item. Yes, sir. Were you sworn in, sir?. MR. FITZSIMONS: Yes, I was. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Okay. Come forward and state your name for the record. MR. FITZSIMONS: Hi. My name is Peter Fitzsimons. I'm the person who lives next door to this piece of property. Mr. Yakovich (sic)-- MR. YOVANOVICH: Yovanovich. MR. FITZSIMONS: -- Yovanovich, my predecessor who lived in the home before me only bought the home in 1979. My home was only built in '79. So, for him to have sold the property to the Crutchleys on the other side of West Street, that means the property couldn't have been sold then until '79 because my property wasn't bought until '79. The house wasn't built until '79. The part that -- when I first bought the house, which is about two years ago, the lawyer who represented me in the purchase of the home told me at the time the dock was illegal, and if I wanted Page 8 April 6, 2000 to remove it, I would just have to make the proper complaints. At the time, I didn't want to cause anybody any hardship or anything, so I said I'll sit back and look and see what the situation is like, and as time went by, I realized, as you can see from the picture, Mr. and Mrs. Crutchley own a piece of land that was cut from my lot back -- against the restricted covenants. These were in effect at the time. The new laws were based on the old covenants, but the only thing in record now, which even disallowed the cutting of this piece of land from the main lot, is this, and it wasn't allowed at the time to even take place, but it did take place. The problem is that this whole street, Sixth Street West has all corner lots. I don't have -- I have a picture of it here, but it runs corner lots. The only lot -- there it is, great. Thank you. This is the only lot on the whole street that has been subdivided, if you noticed. It runs along the whole street. It's the only one that's been subdivided in such a way to allow a person from across the street to have a boat dock built across the way. The 30, 40 foot lot in itself is far enough back from my land not to interfere too much with my privacy in my backyard, but their dock goes from where the 30 foot -- the 30 by 40 foot lot stops, out 27 feet from that into the waterway across some land that was dedicated by the -- dedicated to the County by the original builders, and over that land the dock extends way into the water. It brings it right up on -- near my affinal line, right onto the affinal line. It's even -- you would even need a variance today to go that far out into the water, it's that far out. And the other thing is in Collier County, if a man wanted to sell a piece of property, you can sell a piece of property a foot, two feet from what he owns, it doesn't matter. If Mr. and Mrs. Crutchley wish to sell this land after this hearing and granted a permit -- which there never was a permit granted for this because it was never allowed. When I did bring it to code enforcement, code enforcement sent them letters telling them to remove the dock because they realized the problem. The problem being, if they sold this piece of land -- you see, how that land is taxed that runs alongside the road, it's very low, that side, because the land is -- it's useless Page 9 April 6, 2000 really to be used, so the tax base for that part of the land is very, very low, unless there's something like a dock on it, and if you take one of the streets -- see that big, long, finger street that sticks way out there, that's all docks, the whole street except for the end where the houses are. Those lots with docks go for between 75, maybe a thousand to more because they have docks in them. That's how much they are worth. I could end up in my backyard with a fishing camp or something, if they sold that piece of land, which would be worth $75,000 or so, with a dock on it. If there's no dock on it, it would be just like all the rest of the lots that run along the street. It would be only there to protect the view so people walking by could see. It would keep the view open up the canal, which is nice, which I like about the property, but being that the property gets a value that exceeds what was thought to be by the planners at the beginning, it exceeds what the land should be worth, and if sold by itself-- COMMISSIONER BRUET: Sir. MR. FITZSIMONS: Yes. COMMISSIONER BRUET:We are here to discuss land development code issues. MR. FITZSIMONS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER BRUET: I'm trying -- I don't understand your point about values and all that. We are here, and our authority is to act within the code. I'm kind of missing your point. MR. FITZSIMONS: I'll give it to you. CHAIRMAN BUDD: And more importantly, it's not relevant. MR. FITZSIMONS: It is if you'll listen for a second. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Well, we need to make land use development determinations. MR. FITZSIMONS: The land was useless before to sell it to somebody, right? It was useless before. Now it's not. With a dock, it's not useless. It could be sold to any individual, and so now I could get a fishing camp in my backyard. There is nowhere to park cars if that piece of land is sold. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: I'm sorry, could staff clarify how you could get a fishing camp in his backyard? Page 10 April 6, 2000 MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I don't know what he means by a fishing camp. You cannot live on the lot. You cannot have a tent. You cannot have a trailer. You cannot have a house. It's just a dock. MR. FITZSIMONS: But it could be sold as a dock. Where are they going to park the cars, and if someone -- if someone buys a houseboat, buys that piece of land and puts a houseboat in my backyard, what am I supposed to do? COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Did you notice that there was a dock there when you bought the house? MR. FITZSIMONS.' Yeah, and I was told by my lawyer that it was illegal, and that's why it went to code enforcement, and they told them to remove it. COMMISSIONER PEDONE:Have you ever heard of the phrase, let the buyer beware? MR. FITZSIMONS.' I know the phrase. COMMISSIONER PEDONE.' I guess you didn't beware. MR. FITZSIMONS.' Oh, I was aware of it. That's why I made the code enforcement -- the complaint, and they told them to remove it. COMMISSIONER PEDONE.' Code enforcement doesn't always do everything perfectly right either, so -- COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BUDD.' Sir, if you would -- rather than get into a dialogue with us at this time, and we're also asking questions of you, if you could just present your issues, and then we'll ask specific questions rather than -- we are getting sidetracked here into a dialogue, and that doesn't work well. Is there any other facts that you wish to bring before us? We understand what you said to date. Is there any new facts, new information you would like to present on this case? MR. FITZSIMONS: No, just that the restricted covenants disallowed this from the beginning because of this problem. It doesn't happen anywhere else on the whole street except for where I am right now. Buyer beware, I understood, but I was told at the time I bought the home that it was illegal and it could be removed. I didn't see it as a big -- Page 11 April 6, 2000 CHAIRMAN BUDD: Thank you, sir. Are there any questions for this gentleman? Yes, Ms. Rautio. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: I have a question. Has some type of legal action been taken to remove the dock? MR. YOVANOVICH: If I could respond to that. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Mr. Yovanovich, yes, please. MR. YOVANOVICH: The code enforcement, as they typically do, give a notice of violation, and then they give you two options, remove it or get it properly permitted. We have chosen the option of getting it properly permitted. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Thank you. That clarifies that point. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any other questions for the petitioner or for the other gentleman? Is there anyone else from the public that wishes to address this item? There being none, we will close the public hearing. Do we have a motion? COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I'll make a motion that we forward Petition CU-2000-01 to the BCC with a recommendation for approval subject to all stipulations contained in the resolution of approval. COMMISSIONER BRUET: I'll second. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: So, we have approval? COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Yes, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN BUDD: We have a motion by a conditional Commissioner Pedone, and was that Commissioner Bruet? Commissioner Bruet made the second. Any discussion? Being none, all those in favor, say aye. Those opposed? (No response). CHAIRMAN BUDD: Motion carries. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Mr. Chairman, I -- by not answering earlier gave you a wrong answer. Our next planning commission meeting is in direct conflict with spring break, and I will not be Page 12 April 6, 2000 able to be here. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Okay. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Lauderdale? COMMISSIONER SAADEH: COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: where I'm going. Are you going to Fort COMMISSIONER going? COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: am going somewhere. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: CHAIRMAN BUDD: Any old business? Any new business? MR. NINO: Yes. CHAIRMAN BUDD: You're going on spring break? I'm going somewhere. I'm not sure SAADEH: You're not sure where you're I'm not sure where I'm going, but I I'm not surprised. That's not -- That concludes our agenda. Yes, sir, MR. NINO: I assume, keeping with tradition, you're not going to meet the first Thursday in July? CHAIRMAN BUDD: It's an excellent tradition. MR. NINO: Okay. Confirmed. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: Does that conflict with Mr. Russell Priddy's spring plans too? MR. NINO: Of course you know, the board is off most of -- well, all of July and a good part of August, so there shouldn't be that many things that we would be bringing to you anyway. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: Mr. Nino, do you have a date of that meeting in July so we can write it down, please? MR. NINO: I don't know what it is. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: The first Thursday. CHAIRMAN BUDD: That would be July 6th we will not have a meeting. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: July 6th. CHAIRMAN BUDD: We will meet on the 20th of July. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: Thank you. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I don't know if it's too far in advance, but I will be gone on May 18th. Page13 April 6, 2000 CHAIRMAN BUDD: Okay. Mr. Pedone will be absent on May 18th. We'll make a note of that on the record. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Also, so will I. CHAIRMAN BUDD: Okay. Mr. Wrage on the same date. Any other calendar comments? No public comment, I assume. We will adjourn the meeting. Thank you. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 9:53 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RUSSELL A. BUDD, CHAIRPERSON TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING BY: Dawn Breehne Page 14 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION May31.2000 Planning Services Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples. Florida 34104 Mr. Miles L. Scofield Scofield Marine Consulting 3584-B Exchange Ave Naples, Florida 34104 REFERENCE: BD-2000-01, Michael A. McCain Dear Mr. Scofield On Thursday, April 6, 2000, the Collier County Planning Commission heard and approved Petition No. BD-2000-01. A copy of CCPC Resolution No. 2000-15 is enclosed approving this use. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very/~your~ Ross Gochenaur Planner II g/admin/BD-2000-01/RG/im Enclosure cc: Mr. Michael A. McCain 78 Southport Cove Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Land Dept. Property Appraiser M. Ocheltree, Graphics Minutes & Records (BD, PSP & PDI) File Phone (941) 403-2400 Fax (941~ 643-6968 www. co.collier. fi.us CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- 15 RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-2000-01 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, being the duly elected and constituted Planning Commission for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 18-foot extension of a boat dock from the permitted 20 feet to allow for a 38-foot boat dock facility in a PUD zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.6.21. of the Collier County Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given the opportunity to be heard by this Commission in public meeting assembled, and the Commission having considered all matters presented; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Collier County Planning Commission of Collier County, Florida, that: The petition filed by Miles L. Scofield, of Scofield Marine Consulting, representing Michael A. McCain, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 11,Unit 1, Southport on the Bay, as described in Plat Book 15, Pages 51-53, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. be and the same is hereby approved for a 18-foot extension of a boat dock from the permitted 20 feet to allow for a 38-foot boat docking facility in the PUD zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: All docks, or mooring pilings, whichever protrudes the greater into the water, regardless of length shall have reflectors and house numbers four (4) inches minimum size installed at the outermost end on both sides. In order to address the protection of manatees, one (1) "Manatee Alert" sign shall be permanently affixed to the pilings and shall be visible from the waterway. -3.- Permits or letters of exemption from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection shall be presented prior to issuance of a building permit. All exotic vegetation as defined in Section 3.9.6.4.1 of the Land Development Code shall be removed from the site and the property shall be maintained exotic-free in perpetuity. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number BD-2000-01 be recorded in the minutes of this Commission and filed with the County Clerk's Office. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this 6th day of April ,2000. ATTEST: VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP Executive Secretary Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RUSSELL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN Mami M. Scuderi Assistant County Attorney g:/admin/B D-2000-01/RG/ts -2- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION May 31, 2000 Planning Services Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples. Florida 34104 Mr. Arthur C. Quinnell, P.E., PSM P.O. Box 524 Marco Island, FL 34146-0524 REFERENCE: BD-99-29, Barrett M. Morris Dear Mr. Quinnell: On Thursday, April 6, 2000, the Collier County Planning Commission heard and approved Petition No. BD-99-29. A copy of CCPC Resolution No. 2000-14 is enclosed approving this use. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Ross Gochenaur Planner II g:/admin/BD-99-29/RG/im Enclosure cc: Barrett M. Morris 360 Smallwood Drive, Box 99 Chokoloskee, FL 34138 Land Dept. Property Appraiser M. Ocheltree, Graphics Minutes & Records (BD, PSP & PDI) File Phone ~941 ) 403-2400 Fax ~ 941 / 643-6968 ww~v. co.collier. fi.us CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 2000- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-99-29 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED 1N COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission, being the duly elected and constituted Planning Commission for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 25-foot extension of a boat dock from the permitted 20 feet to allow for a 45-foot boat dock facility in a VR zone for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.6.21. of the Collier County Land Development Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given the oppommity to be heard by this Commission in public meeting assembled, and the Commission having considered all matters presented; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Collier County Planning Commission of Collier County, Florida, that: The petition filed by Arthur C. Quinnell, representing Barrett M. Morris, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Chokoloskee, Lots 81 and 108 (unplatted), Collier County, Florida. be and the same is hereby approved for a 25-foot extension of a boat dock from the permitted 20 feet to allow for a 45-foot boat docking facility in the VR zoning district wherein said property is located, subject to the following conditions: o All docks, or mooring pilings, whichever protrudes the greater into the water, regardless of length shall have reflectors and house numbers four (4) inches minimum size installed at the outermost end on both sides. In order to address the protection of manatees, one (1) "Manatee Alert" sign shall be permanently affixed to the pilings and shall be visible from the waterway. Permits or letters of exemption from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection shall be presented prior to issuance of a building permit. All exotic vegetation as defined in Section 3.9.6.4.1 of the Land Development Code shall be removed from the site and the property shall be maintained exotic-free in perpetuity. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number BD-99-29 be recorded in the minutes of this Commission and filed with the County Clerk's Office. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this 6th day of Apr±l ,2000. VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP Executive Secretary Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA RUSSELL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN M a~-ni- Scuderi Assistant County Attorney g/admin/BD-99-29/RG/im -2-