The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 05/09/2000 R COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA Tuesday, May 9, 2000 9:00 a.m. NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON 'THIS AGENDA' MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL 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 1S TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. 1F YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (941) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. 1. INVOCATION- Father Tim Navin, St. Peter the Apostle Catholic Church. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDAS A. APPROVAL OFCONSENTAGENDA. B. APPROVAL OFSUMMARY AGENDA. C. APPROVAL OFREGULARAGENDA. 1 May 9, 2000 APPROVAL OF MINUTES PROCLAMATIONS AND SERVICE AWARDS A. PROCLAMATIONS 1) Proclamation proclaiming the week of May 13-20, 2000 as Rotary International Group Study Exchange Week. To be accepted by Mr. George Drobinski, Chairman, Group Study Exchange, Rotary District 6960, Naples, FL 2) Proclamation proclaiming the week of May 6-12, 2000 as Nurses Week. To be accepted by Mr. Jim Cato, Vice President and Chief Nurse Executive, Naples Community Hospital; Ms. Carol McConn, Chief Nurse Executive, Cleveland Clinic; Ms. Patti Butler, School Health Nurse, NCH School Health; Ms. Terri Harder, Sr. Community Health Nurse, Health Department, Collier County; Dr. Joyce Thornton, President, Florida Nurses Association, District 29; Ms. Pam Behrens, Director of Nursing, Manor Care and Mr. Roger Evans, OMC Manager, Collier County Health Department 3) Proclamation proclaiming the week of May 14-20, 2000 as Emergency Medical Services Week. To be accepted by Chief Diane Flagg, Collier County Emergency Medical Services Department 4) Proclamation proclaiming the week of May 7-13, 2000 as National Tourism Week. To be accepted by Mr. Joseph Dinunzio, Chairman of Tourism Alliance, Collier County 5) Proclamation regarding teen pregnancy. B. SERVICE AWARDS 1) 2) 3) 4) Pedro Pineiro-Ortiz, Parks & Recreation - 5 years Shelly Goldie, Road and Bridge - 5 years Keith Larson, GG Community Center - 5 years Peggy Jarre!l, Planning Services - 10 years C. PRESENTATIONS 1) 2) Recommendation to recognize Sherry Long, Planning Tech II, Planning Services Department, as Employee of the Month for May 2000. A pi'esentation by Sam Gorgoglione of the Collier County Senior Men's Softball League to the Board of County Commissioners and Parks and Recreation Maintenance crews at Vineyards and Veterans Community Parks for their dedication and hard work. 2 May 9, 2000 APPROVAL OF CLERK'S REPORT A. ANALYSIS OF CHANGES TO RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES. B. Presentation by Dwight Brock regarding Impact Fees. 7o PUBLIC PETITIONS A. Doug Schroeder, executive Director of the Cocohatchee Nature Center regarding revisions to the Management Plan. o COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1) Presentation of the Environmental Advisory Council's Annual Report. B. PUBLIC WORKS 1) Reappropriation of Tourist Development Tax funding for the Clam Pass Inlet Management Project. C. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) A report to the Board on the Recreation/Open Space Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. 3 May 9, 2000 SUPPORT SERVICES COUNTY MANAGER 1) Recommendation to approve Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer to the position of Support Services Administrator. ' Fo AIRPORT AUTHORITY EMERGENCY SERVICES 1) A settlement agreement and mutual release between the Board of County Commissioners and Naples Community Hospital. ~ COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A. Brief overview by City of Naples Airport Authority regarding improvement project along Airport Road. (Commissioner Constantine) B. Appointment of a County Commissioner or a delegate to the Naples Airport Authority Noise Compatibility Committee. 11. OTHER ITEMS 4 May 9, 2000 A. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS B. PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HEARD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING STAFF ITEMS 12. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS - BCC A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 1) Repeal Ordinance CPR-99-1, an Ordinance to rescind and repeal in its entirety Collier County Ordinance No. 99-63, which had the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based objectives and policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). 2) Rescission Ordinance, an Ordinance having the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based objectives and policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC. 99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM), more specifically portions of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element (Ord. No. 97-56), Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge (Ord. 97-59) and Drainage (Ord. No. 97-61) Sub-elements of the Public Facilities Element, Housing Element (Ord. No. 97-63), Golden Gate Area Master Plan (Ord. No. 97-64), Conservation and Coastal Management Element (Ord. No. 97-66), and the Future Land Use Element (Ord. No. 97-67) and the Future Land Use Map (Ord. No. 97-67); and readopting Policy 2.2.3. of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. 3) Remedial Amendment CPR-99-3, adopting Remedial Amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, as directed by the Administration Commission in its June 22, 1999 Final Order in Case No. ACC 99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM) to the following elements: Future Land Use, Public Facilities/Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub- Element, Public Facilities Element/Drainage Sub-Element, Housing, Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Conservation & Coastal Management; to vest certain properties rezoned in Activity Centers; and to correct scrivener's errors and map references in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. 4) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners adopt a resolution to approve the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map to establish the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. 5) Adoption Public Hearing for the 1999 Growth Management Plan Amendments: 5 May 9, 2000 c) CP-99-01, James O'Gara - request to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Golden Gate Office Commercial Subdistrict by adding retail uses, increasing building heights to 35 feet and providing vehicular access from a residential street. CP-99-02, John D. Jassey - request to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by re-naming the "CR - 951 Commercial In-Fill Designation" to "Golden Gate Commercial In-Fill Designation"; changing the subject site from Residential Estates Subdistrict to Golden Gate Commercial In-Fill Designation; and modifying this Commercial In-Fill provision to allow certain commercial uses on the subject site and to provide development standards specific to this site. CP-99-03, Centrefund Development Corporation - request to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by expanding the Neighborhood Center at the Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevard intersection, and including additional acreage in the southeast quadrant of the same intersection, and to allow five acres of commercial or conditional use development within the southeast quadrant. CP-99-04, John A. Pulling, Jr. and Lucy Go Finch - request to amend the Future Land Use Element by adding a new Subdistrict to be known as the "Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict" for specified lands located at the intersection of Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. CP-99-06, Capital Improvement Element - staff request to correct, update, modify certain costs, revenue sources, supporting policies, and the dates of construction of facilities enumerated in the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Capital Improvement Element for capital projects in fiscal years 1999/2000 through 2002/2003. CP-99-07, Transportation Element- staff request to amend Table V, the Collier County Transportation data base, and various transportation maps; update lists and tables where appropriate; incorporate by reference the Corridor Management Plan for the Tamiami Trail Scenic Highway; incorporate by reference the Public Transportation Development Plan; change the minimum standard level of service on state facilities in rural areas from C to D; and modify the definition of "significant impact". CP-99-08, Bonita Bay Properties - request to amend the plan text for Activity Center #9 and amend the map entitled Activity Center #9. B. ZONING AMENDMENTS C. OTHER 6 May 9,2000 1) Adopt an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-48, simplifying and reducing water and sewer utility rates. 13. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS A. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 1) THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE APRIL 11, 2000 MEETING. Petition A-99- 04, Richard D. Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, PA, representing Kensington Park Master Association and the Yorktown Neighborhood Association, requesting an appeal of the determination of the Collier County Planning Commission on November 21, 1999 that the changes to the Carillon PUD Master Plan by adding new commercial building footprints were insubstantial. 2) THIS 1TEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO THE MAY 23~ 2000 MEETING. Petition CU- 2000-01, Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson, PA, representing Barbara and Wilbur CrutchIcy requesting a conditional use for a boat dock as a permitted principal use in the "RSF-4" residential single family zoning district for a property located on the west side of West Avenue and is further described as part of Lot 1, Block "E", Little Hickory Shores Unit//2, in Bonita Springs. 3) THIS 1TEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO THE MAY 23, 2000 MEETING. Petition CU- 2000-03, George L. Varnadoe, 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 described as the Lots 25 through 30, inclusive, Block A, Unit No. 1, and Lots 24 through 28, inclusive, Block B, Unit No. !, Conher's Vanderbilt Beach Estates, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. 4) THIS 1TEM HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO THE MAY 23, 2000 MEETING. Petition V- 2000-09, George L. Varnadoe, Esquire, of Young, Van Assenderp, Varnadoe and Anderson, P.A., representing La Playa, LLC, for a variance to the separation between building requirement from forty-nine (49) feet to thirty-five (35) feet for property located at 9891 Gulfshore Drive. B. OTHER 14. STAFF'S COMMUNICATIONS 7 May 9, 2000 15. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COMMUNICATIONS 16. CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1) Second Amendment to the 1999 Tourism Agreement between Collier County and the Tourism Alliance of Collier County regarding advertising and promotion of the Collier County Airport Authority. 2) Request to approve for recording the final plat of"Quail West Phase III, Unit Two", and approval of the Standard Form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the Performance Security. 8 May 9, 2000 B. PUBLIC WORKS 1) Award Bid No. 00-3055 for the painting of aerial water, wastewater and effluent lines. 2) Approve Change Order No. I (D) (Final) to Contract No. 97-2771, Removal of Non- Specification Material from the Naples Beach. 3) Approve Amendment No. I to the Professional Services Agreement with WilsonMiller, Inc. for the Santa Barbara Extension Alignment Study, Project #60091. 4) Approve the Notice for Recordation which stipulates that Collier County has no maintenance responsibility for the existing sidewalk and landscape improvements located on property south of Vanderbilt Beach Road at the Market Place at Pelican Bay Plaza. 5) This item has been deleted. 6) This item has been deleted. 7) Request Board of County Commissioners' confirmation of staff recommendation not to install a "multi-way stop" at Glades Boulevard and Lakewood Boulevard. 8) Request that the Board of County Commissioners reduce the Exotic Vegetation Removal Requirement in Resolution 99-168 and Vegetation Removal Permit VRP-99-5 to limit the removal of exotics to the construction area which would limit the requirement as it relates to the removal of nine Australian Pines along the Pelican Bay Beach. C. PUBLIC SERVICES 1) A request for a permit to conduct three separate carnivals hosted by the Parks and Recreation Department. 2) Approve budget amendment to recognize revenue. 3) This item has been deleted. 4) Approve and execute an agreement to provide the Parks and Recreation Department $50,000 from the GAC Land Trust to purchase fitness equipment for the new community center at Max A. Hasse Community Park. 5) Approve an agreement for sale and purchase to allow for a neighborhood park within the residential community known as Livingston Woods. 6) Authorize staff to conduct a teen concert not previously budgeted and approve the necessary budget amendments. 7) Approval of an agreement with performers for the Summer Fest Rock and Ride Night. 9 May 9, 2000 SUPPORT SERVICES 1) This item has been deleted. 2) Approve Contract Amendment Number One for RFP 97-2675 "Pre-Employment Physicals and Drug Testing." Approval of a Budget Amendment for emergency and unanticipated expenditures for building maintenance. 3) E. COUNTY MANAGER 1) Approval of Budget Amendment Report- Budget Amendment #00-224; #00-227. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EMERGENCY SERVICES 1) Award construction contract, Bid #00-3056, to F & D Construction Inc., for the new EMS-17 Facility located in Golden Gate Estates. 2) Approve a budget amendment to transfer funds from General Fund Reserves Helicopter Engine Reserve Fund for an engine overhaul. 3) Agreement approval and adoption of resolution authorizing the acceptance of said agreement between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs and Collier County, Florida for funds to be used for the retrofitting of storm shelters. 10 May 9, 2000 H. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE 1) Miscellaneous items to file for record with action as directed. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 1) Request transfer of $820,300 from reserves for contingencies to the SherifFs Office Operating Fund. J. COUNTY ATTORNEY 1) Recommendation to approve a Consultant Services Agreement with George Archibald as technical engineer to assist the County relating to County's property acquisition interests including eminent domain proceedings for pending and future road projects. 2) Recommendation to approve a budget amendment in the amount of $50,000 for outside counsel and professional services for pursuit of County's claims, rights relating to the 1995- 96 beach restoration project. K. AIRPORT AUTHORITY 17. SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL OBJECTIONS TO THE 1TEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. A. To Adopt a Resolution Approving Amendments to the Fiscal Year 1999-00 Adopted Budget. 11 May9,2000 ao Petition VAC 98-008 to vacate a portion of Highland Drive as shown on the Plat of Pineland-On- The-Trail as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 60, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida and to accept a County utility easement over existing County facilities. Co Petition ¥-2000-03, Miles L. Scofield, representing George C. Kellogg, requesting a 5-foot variance to the required 7.5-foot west side yard setback to 2.5 feet for property located at 242 Barefoot Beach, further described as Lot 10, Bayfront Gardens, in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. 18. ADJOURN INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383. 12 May 9, 2000 AGENDA CHANGES BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING MAY 9~ 2000 ADD: ITEM 8(G)(2) - FUND TRANSFER FROM RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES FOR INITIAL PAYMENT OF MERRIT BOULEVARD WILDFIRE OPERATING EXPENSES. (STAFF'S REQUEST). ADD: ITEM 8 (B) 2 - DISCUSSION REGARDING FLORIDA STATE TRANSPORTATION MEETING TO BE HELD MAY 11, 2000. MOVE: ITEM 6(B) TO 11(A) - PRESENTATION BY DWIGHT BROCK REGARDING IMPACT FEES. (MR. BROCK'S REQUEST). CONTINUE: ITEM 13 (A) 1 FROM MAY 9~ 2000 MEETING TO MAY 23~ 2000 - PETITION A-99-04, REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF THE DETERMINATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 21, 1999. (PETITIONER'S REQUEST) CONTINUE: ITEM 8 (G) 1 FROM MAY 9~ 2000 MEETING TO MAY 23~ 2000 - A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL RELEASE BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND NAPLES COMMUNITY HOSPITAL. (NAPLES COMMUNITY HOSPITAL REQUEST) PROCLAtI4A TI'ON WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, we welcome the Rotary Znternational ~roup Study Exchanje Team from Rotary J;nternational District ] 720, France to Collier County; Florida,' an~, the Rotary ?ou~Eation of Rotary Zntennational ~-oup Study includ!~ the Rotarian Team Leaden who a~ viMti~ Co/lien Coun~ ~o ~fu~ our i~fi~tio~ a~ way of life; a~, the team members will also observe the practice of their own professions and exchanEe idea~; and, WHEREAS, the team/s lifestyles as the), County and 9/yen WHEREAS, supported by the o£ '; ZO, ~000 be DONE AND WEEK COUNTY CO/JAE55£ONER5 ~0~ FLOP~DA 7~OT/-P/ cT.'~ONSTAN7-fNE, CfIA_TIZ4fAN HAY 09 2000 pg. I __ ~VHEREA$, ~I/HERE~$, PROd£A44A TION all Regi#erod Nuret~ undertjo rigorous ~d~tion, dini~W ~ri~nc~, ~d nomp~h~nsJ~ ~omimotion in p~po~tion for ddive~ of pmfe~ional hospital ~ursing compris~ the lar~.~t n~l~r of nurses which provide sendee within an emotionally, mentally and technologically d~mandin9 care environment; and Commonity Health Nurses utilize o holistic, mWtidisciplina~/ team approach in provision of preventive and curative core services to indiWdoob and £amilJ~, there£ore, improWn9 the overall health o£ the coremunify; and Public Health Nurses are cornmiffed to healthy prenatal dtvelo~mant, excdle~t o~rtcomes £or mothers and babies and optimum childhood development throutjh the Commonfly Healthy Start Pro. am; and Commonfly Registered Nurees with Public Health Registered Nurses provide commonity service~ dudn9 events which thioten the Collier Co~,' and health conditions and related barriers to and to those the person to be and of Iife-sustoinimj need for preventive w/I/ NOW THEREFORE, County, of Collier be designated as and that the Commonity recognizes the many confdbutions to the health and' we/fore of Ws/tore and res/dents of Collier County. DONE AND ORDERED THIS 9n~ Day of A~ay, ZOO0. BOARD OP COUNTY C044~0NE1~5 COLLTER COUNTY, FLORIDA A T7~$ T: BROCK, CLERK TI/ OTHY ,T. CONSTANTZNE, CHA£R/&4N A ENDA ITEM MAY 09 2000 pgo V/HERE, S, V/HEREA$, V/HEREA$, P R O.C L A IA A T.TON Collier County Emeegency A~edical ~rvices Department Paramedics provide medical care to victims of sudden Ii£e- threatening injuries and illnesses, often under stress£ul conditions and in high-risk situations to save the lives of others; and Emet~2~ncy tAedical Services professionels must rapidly assess, mana9~, and effectively provide care t~ unpredictable situations requiring life and death dud9ments; and Emem2~ncy A4edical Services professionals are often the first contact many residents and visitors to Naples/Collier County with the health care system, a~ these p~fessJ~als p~vtde educaHon, a~e~men~, ~evenHon, a~ ~/erra/ ~e~ice~ /n a~dH/on ~o ~he/r eme~ncy acHviHe~; and I/VHEREA$, the res/dents the County benefit daily from V/HEREA$, it of, understand and edical services V/HEREA$, professionals and of -20, 2000 DONE AND ORDERED ATTEST: BOARD OI=?~L~L~OIAAq_T~ONER5 COl ! r~ cOUNTy' FLOR2rD_A T~AROTi4Y uT. CONSTANTINE, CHAIRAllAN BROCK, CLERK AGENDA ITEM No. _ MAY 0 9 2000 Pg. PROCLAt~A TZON the travel and tourism industry supports the v/to/interests of Collier County. contributing to our employment, economic prosper/ly. peace, understanding. and goodwill,' and WHEREAS, travel and tourism ranl~ as one of Collier Coun~y ~ largest industries/n terms o£ revenues generated.' and WHEREAS, approximately 2, 000,000 ~ravelers v/ddng Collier Coun~/ contributed approximate/), 27. §$~ o£ the annual taxable sams and $72I mill/on dollars/n direct and indirect expenditures to the economy; and WHEREAS, those travelers provided jobs for approximately 22,000 citizens with a labor impact~of ~28~-mil!ion dollars in Collier Counly.' and WHEREAS, WHEREAS, y- provides employment given"~hese laudable contributions to ~he economic, social, and .~u :~ well-being of.the citizens. of Col/let Cotinly, it/s £/~/n9 !i ~hat/~ve recognize the importance o£ travel.arnd tour/sin. NOW THEREt~O~ ~.:6e t¥1prodaimed by the Board of County Commissioners of d~ated as COl~~ ~'OUNT¥ ':: T~5/l~ WEEK DONE AND ORDERED TH2r$ 9th Day of t~ay, 2000. BOARD OF COUNTY COA~Adl'$$IONER$ CO_/!TER COUNTY, FLORIDA A TTE$ T: TI;IOTHY ~T. CONSTANTINE, CHAIRA~AN Dw-rGt~i' E. BROCK, C£ERK AGENDA ITEM No._.S-~4- HAY I] 9 2000 Pg. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO RECOGNIZE SHERRY LONG, PLANNING TECH II, PLANNING SERVICES, AS EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH FOR MAY 2000. OBJECTIVE: The "Employee of the Month" Program is designed to recognize exceptional performance plus uniquely identifiable contributions which produce significant results for the County. CONSIDERATIONS: Sherry Long has been employed with Collier County since 1985. As a Planning Tech II for the Planning Services Department, Sherry has always taken the initiative to provide significant accomplishments beyond her normal work responsibilities. She makes herself available to staff and the public at a moments notice to provide status and approval of projects. Sherry continues to provide exemplary customer service to developers, engineers, architects and builders as is evidenced by the positive feed-back received by these parties. Over the past several years, Sherry's workload has doubled. During this period, Sherry has risen to the occasion and through her long hours of work and her dedication to Collier County has managed to keep abreast of the workload. Through her job knowledge and skills, coupled with her dependable and consistent performance, Sherry Long has been chosen as Employee of the Month for May. FISCAL IMPACT: "Employee of the Month" selectees receive a $50.00 cash award. Funds for this award are available in the Department Budget Cost Center. RECOMMENDATION: That Sherry Long, Planning Tech II, Planning Services Department, be recognized as the "Employee of the Month" for May 2000. Mary-,Jo' B~od_.k, Adm'inistr:ative Secretary to the A'ssisttant County Manager APPROVED BY: DATE: Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager AGEND~ ITEM No. %Ct _ HA'¥ 0 9 2000 COLLIER COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE Apdl 18, 2000 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (941) 774-8383 FAX (941) 774-4010 Mr. Doug Schroeder .Executive Director Cocohatchee Nature Center 823 Tanbark Drive Suite 201 Naples, Flodda 34108-8560 Re: Request for Public Petition - Revisions to Management Plan Dear Mr. Schroeder: Please be advised that you are scheduled to appear before the Collier County Board of Commissioners at the meeting of May 9, 2000 regarding the above referenced subject. Your petition to the Board of County Commissioners will be limited to ten minutes. Please be advised that the Board will take no action on your petition at this meeting. However, your petition may be placed on a future agenda for consideration at the Boarifs discretion. Therefore, your petition to the Board should be to advise them of your concern and the need for action by the Board at a future meeting. The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. in the Board's Chambers on the Third Floor of the Administration Building (Building "F") of the government complex. Please arrange to be present at this meeting and to respond to inquiries by Board members. If you require any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Thomas W. Olli..~f~,~~ County Administrator TWO/bp cc: County Attorney Public Services Division Community Development Division AGENDA I T,,E M No.- MAY O 2000 ,- / ~pr- 3 ~-00 10:54A Cocohatchee Nature Center 0375 April 12 ,2000 Via Ihx 941-774-4010 Mr. Tom Olliff County Manager Admin. Building 3301 Talniami Trail E. Naples, FL 341 I2 RE: Agenda - May 2, 2000 - Rearlsions to Management Plan. Deai' Mr. Olliff: I would likc to have an opportunity to speak at the above-referenced hearing to address the issue of acc. elerating the revision to the Management Plan which provides for construction of a boardwalk at Barethor Beach Preserve (the boardwalk will provide pedestrian access between the park concession area and the waters of the back bay, for boat-passenger drop off and pickup]. The Cocohatchee Nature. Center (and possibly ~vo ncarby boating facilities) i~ planning to provide shuttle service to Barefoot Beach and would like to participate in the approval/construction process for the boardwalk. The boardwalk wil! result in a substantial increase in the availability of beach Shotlid you have any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to contact rile. Sincerely, Doug Schroeder Execu rive Director AGENDAJ~EM No, ,? MAY 0 p.s. Jim C~trter suggested I work with you on how best [o do a budget iunendment to cover tile cost of onc-h~'d£ 0£ a pedestr/an-accc.~,'~ ~idewa/k under the Cocohatchce R/vet l:tridge at US 41. This would be under tt public/pmvatc. partnership bctxvcen the nature center and Collier Count. 823 Tanbark Drive, Suite 201, Naples, Florida 34108-8560 (941) 592-1282 piqone (941) 513-0375 fax Cacohalchee Nature Cente~ is ,, m=nproftl founaation SUpl~ftea by grants ~'~0 indNidu~J donalion~. AclcllUonal informalion i~ available ul:~n requesl. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PRESENTATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL'S ANNUAL REPORT OBJECTIVE: To hear the Environmental Advisory Council's annual report regarding its prior year activities. CONSIDERATION: Division 5.13 of the Collier County's Land Development requires the Environmental Advisory Council to provide an annual report to the County Commission in May of each year. On April 5, 2000, the EAC voted unanimously to forward the attached report to the BCC and to have the chairman present its contents. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The EAC functions as the technical advisory committee to advise and assist the County in the development and implementation of the County's environmental resources management program as required in Policy 1.1.1 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. RECOMMENDATION: That the BCC hear and accept the Environmental Advisory Council's first annual report. ddO/[lliam D. Lorent~, Jr., P.E., ~ '--- Natural Resources Director REVIEWED BY: IJob~P Date: lanning Services Director APPROVED BY: (,~--~'~_-~____C--~_ Date: ~qincer~t A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services MAY o 9 2ooo Memorandum To: From: Date: Subject: EAC Members William D. Lorenz, Jr., P.E., Director April 11,2000 Annual Report to the County Commission At your April meeting the EAC voted to forward the attached Annual Report to the Board of County Commissioners. For your convenience, I have enclosed the report with the Executive Summary that places it on the BCC's May 2, 2000 meeting. If you have any questions, please call me at 732-2505. WDL/gmm Enclosure cc: Vincent A. Cautero, Administrator, Community Development & Environmental Services EAC File MAY 0 9 2000 Natural Resources Department Community Development & Environmental Services Division ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ANNUAL REPORT TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I May ,2000 I. INTRODUCTION In January, 1999, the Collier County Commission consolidated the functions of the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) and the Environmental Policy and Technical Advisory Board (EPTAB) into one advisory body, the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC). Ihe Commission subsequently appointed the required nine members to the EAC. The Council, as now constituted, began deliberations in April, 1999. The current membership is documented in Exhibit A. This report is submitted to the County Commission in compliance with provisions of the enabling legislation, see Exhibit B. included are activities of the Council in 1999 as well as environmental concerns of the Council, and considerations for activities during the current year. n. P_UKP_O_S The EAC acts in an advisory capacity to the County Commission in: A. matters dealing with the regulation, control, management, use or exploitation of any or all natural resources within the County, B. the review and evaluation of specific zoning and development petitions and their impact on those resources. As evident in Exhibit B, the scope of the Council's charge is broad, and judged to be both pro-active as well as reactive. With this understanding, the enclose~. report is structured. No. ~ MAY 0 9 2000 2/3 III. COUNCIL ACTIVITIES, 1999 A. Land Use Petitions See Staff summary. B. Growth Management Plan See Staff summary. C. Several Mini-Workshops on Environmentally related issues IV. COUNCIL CONCERNS, 1999 In carrying out the charges of the Council, several major concerns surfaced, particularly during the review phase of development plans brought before the Council. A. NRtA Boundaries B. Wetland Impacts C. Wetland Mitigation Procedures D. Listed Species Protection E. Traffic Generation problems F. Time Interval Allowed Council in Review Process G. Methodology for generating and utilizing public participation IV. FUTURE PLANS AND MISSIONS Based partly on the many concerns surfacing in 1999, the Council plans a menu of items to be addressed in the near future, through briefings, workshops, etc. mo Through the mechanism of the Growth management Sub-committee, a role in the "Assessment process" might be identified and pursued. Although neither the EAC nor the sub-committee has a formal role, it has been suggested that we devise a contribution to the process through several forms of public involvement, possibly even public education. This would be in line with mandated Powers/Duties//8. B. Address extensively, the wetland impact and mitigation process, through GMP amendments or separate ordinance. C. Address the possibility of putting more teeth in the Habitat and Species Protection portions of the various codes. 3/3 D. Request analysis of existing sewage systems, particularly lift and pump stations, regarding interrupted operation and associated problems. E. Investigate the nature and extent of"Individual Property Rights" with respect to land use and development. A ticklish problem, but one that must be pursued and one that the EAC needs to understand. F. Visit the Review Process with a view to increasing EAC efficiency. G. Visit the question of potable water supply relative to such items as availability, aquifer conditions, well field "security". H. Request information regarding condition and effectiveness of"canal" system. I. Become involved to some degree in the Public Land Acquisition(s) program. J. Be briefed early on regarding such private/public agreements that have bearing on development activities; e.g. Deltona K. Establish a closer relationship with the South Florida Water Management District. NO. ~ EXHIBIT A EAC MEMBERSHIP (As of 4/11/00) Ed Carlson National Audubon Society 375 Sanctuary Road West Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary Naples, FL 34120 375 Sanctuary Road West April 30, 2003 phone: 348-9143 Naples, FL 34120 e-mail: ECarlsonf~Audubomom Michael G. Coe.,' Prudential Securities, Inc. Lieutemmt Colonel 1170 Third Street South, Suite B200 4552 Eagle Key Circle Naples, FL 34102 April 30, 2001 Naples, Florida 34112 phone: 262-1818 e-mail: Mickey644~nindspring.com fax: 262-1855 e-mail: mich~l_eoeC~ rusec.eom Mi Keen Cornell 686 Lismore lane Naples, Florida 34108 April 30, 2003 phone: 592-7254 fax: 594-8742 e-mail: MKComell~aol.com John P. Di Nunzio 1276 29t~ Street SW Naples, FL 34117 April 30, 2003 phone: 455-9438 e-mail: JPDiNunzio~earthlimk.net William W. Hill 3655 Amberly Circle A102 April 30, 2001 Naples, Florida 34112 phone: 774 4412 e-mail: BillHill~l.eom Jack Baxter Baxter Technologies Inc. 980 Cape Marco Drive 1083 North Collier Blvd. #248 Marco Island, Florida 34145 Marco Island, FL 34145 April 30, 2002 phone: 642-8225 phone: 269-5001 e-mail: BaxTecht~worldnet. att.net fax: 394-5691 James L. McVey James L. McVey Gates McVey Builders, Inc. e-mail: McVey@GMBuild. com 5405 Park central Court April 30, 2000 Naples, FL 34109 phone: 593-3777 fax: 593-3477 www.gmbuild. com Thomas W. Sansbury Thomas W. Sansbur~ 840 River Point Drive, Unit 840 Grey Oaks Development Corp. Naples, Florida 34102 2600 Golden Gate Parkway April 30, 2000 phone: 417-2053 Naples, Florida 34105 phone: 403-6800 fax: 403-6808 e-mail: TomGator~aol.eom J. Richard Smith J. Richard Smith Law Offices 380 Frangipani Avenue 21 Golden Gate Boulevard East Naples, FL 34117 Naples, FL 34120 -npri~ .~~1 e-mail: SmithLaw~NetNaples.com phone: 455-5020 fax: 455-1971 ' MAY 0 9 l DEC~ION-MAKINGANDADMIlhq~TIL%/~57EBODIES DIVISION 5.12. I~.~qERVED* § 5.13.2.2 DIVISION ~.lS. ENVIl:t~~ ADVISO]I'f COUNCILS- 5.13.1~. (Oral. No. 99-6, Sec. 5.13.2. Authority, functions, powers and duties. 5.I3~.I. The EAC ob~i-~ its jurisdi~ powers, and limits of authority from the board of county commissioners, hel-~n-P~ar referled to as the board, and purs,,-nt to this code, shall act in an advisory capacity to the board in matters de-fins with the regulation, control, m~-,~o~.ment, use or e-ploitation of any or all natural resources of or within the county and the review and evaluation of specific zn-~-g and development petitions and their impact on those resources. 5.13.2~. The EAC will function to: (1) Advise on the preservation, conservation, protection, m-n-Eement and beneficial use of the physical aud biological natural resources (-rmospher- ic, terrestrial, aquatic and hydrologic) of the county in regard to the safety, health and general well-b~i-g of the public; (2) Advise and assist the county staff and board toward developing the purpose, intent and criteria of all county ordinances, policies, progr~m.~ and other initiatives de~lln~ with natural resources. (3) Provide written and oral reports ddxectty to the board regara~g recom- mendations on m~tters de~lln~ with the protection of natural resources. *Editor's note-Former div. 5.12, which pertained to the housing and urban improvement department, was repealed by Or& No. 96-66, § 3.O, adopted OcL 30, 1996. $Editor's note--4)rd. No. 99-6, § 3.K, ad~pted Jan. 27, 1999, amended § 5.13.1--5.13.9 in their entirety to read as herein set ouL Formerly, said sections pertained to ~imil~r l:natelq. a/ See the Code Comparative Table. Code refe~_~ces---Boards, commitohs, coraroll;tees and authorities, § 2-816 et seq.; Supp. No. 9 iDCS:15 MAY 0 9 7000 §5.13&2 5.132.3. Sul~ No. 9 COI.LrER COUNTY LAND DEVELO~ CODE (4) Review and recommend siipulations addressing the preservation, conser- vatlon, ioioiection, mnnngoment s__nd_ beneficial use of the county's phys- ical and biological natural resources (ai~n~pheri~ ~ and hydrologic)-for petitions _n_~d/or plans-for ~z~lected development impact. provisional uses, subdivision m~ster plans and .ni~np~l unit development amendments that are d/rected to the EAC by county The powers end duties of the EAC are as follow~ (1) Identify, study, eva]irate, and provide t~e_hnlcal recommendations m the board rm programs necessary for the conservation, m~rm~m~m~ and protection of air, land, and water resources and environmental quality in the county. (2) Advise the board ill establishlnE goals and objectives for the com~s envirmamental conservation and rn.nn~ement progrnm~[ Advi~ the board in developing and revising, as appropriate, laca] rules, ordi,~-nees, regulations, programs and other initiatives addr~-~ing the u~e, conservation and preservation of the county's natural resources. Advise the board in the implementation and development of the growth mnnn~l:!lellr plan regard!n~ environmental and oatural resource issues. Advise the board in identifyi~ and recommeuainfl solutions to existi~ and future environmental issues. Serve as the te~l~.ica] advisory committee to advise and assist the county in the activities involved in the development and implementation of the county environmeatal resources m~na~ement proi~-am as stated in policy 1.1.1 of the conservation and coastal ~ant element of the growth Implement the water policy purs_n~_nt to e~pter 90, article II of this code. Provide an opportunity for public comment on environmental issues, ordinances and prog~rn.~. Implement the provisions of the conservation and coastal mnnn~m~ment element of the count3Ps comprehensive plan durin~ the review process for development petitions and/or plnn~. (10j Participate in the review and recomm~mdation process for excavations over 500,000 C.Y., as provided for in division 3.5. (11) Assist in the implementation of any new programs, or~l_ !.n_n~-~ and/or policies adopted by the board which deal with the conservation, ment and protection of air, land, water and natural resources and environmental quality in Coillet ~ounty. (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) LDC5:16 No, ~' [/~ I 1 MAY o 9 ?000 DECISION-M~KING AND AD~I~EATIVE BODIES § 5.13.3~5.3 (14) (Ord. No. 99-6, See. 5.132~ 5.13.3.1. 5.13.3~. 5.13.3.3. 5.13.3.4. 5.13.3.5. 5.13.3.5.1. 5.13.3.5.2. 5.13.3.5.3. Supp. No. 9 (12) Provide an appellate forum and process to hear disputes between ~nty staff and applicants concerning land development projects and r~com- mend propa~d st/pulat/ons for project approval or grounds f~r project denial for beard consideratiox~ (13) Function as an environmental impact ~catement C]~.TR) review board pur~nt to d/visie~ 3.8. The ~.C eh~11 pl~se~t an ~nn~al 1~ to the ~ at a r~gnl=~ board meeeln ~/n May of each year. T~ae report ~hsll 1/st the F_,AC's achi~,~,,~t~s § 3.K, 1-27-99) Nine m~mhers af the EAC ~hnll be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the board_ Appointment to the EAC ~hn]l be by r~olutien of the board and sh~11 set forth the date of appointment and the term of office. Vacancies on the EAC sho11 be publicized in a publicat/on of general c/rcnlation within the county, and vacancy notices ~h~11 be posted in the county h'brar/es and county courthouse. M~mhers shall be permanent residents and electore of Collier Cennt~ and should be reputable and active in comm~111i/27 f~-'vico. The prlm~ry cansiderat/on in appointing EAC members sh~11 be to provide the beard with ~h-ical expertise and other viewpoints that are n _ec~_~ry to effecthrely accamplish the EAC's purpose. In appainting m~mhers, the board should cendder a membership guideline of s/x teehni~ maml~_A~ ~n~] ~ non-tee-hnlcal member~. Technical m~mhers shall demozlstrate evidez~e of expertise in one or more of the followh~ areas related to etlT~mmen~l protect/on and ~atural resources m~na_oe. ment: a/r qnsdity, b/ology (inrJvdlnE any of the -~ubclisdplines such as botany, ecology, zoology, etc.), coa~al processes, estuarine processes, hazardous waste, hydrogeology, hydrology, hydraulics, land use law, land use pl~nnlng, pollution control, solid waste, stormwater management, water resources, wildlife m~r~%~e. ment, ~r other representative areas deemed appropriate by the board. The inithfi terms of office of the members of the EAC ~h~11 be as follows: Two members will serve for a term of one year. Two m~mhers-win serve for a term of two y~ars. TWo members wfil serve for a term of three years. LDCS:17 § 5.13.3.5.4 colJ.r~R COUNTY LAND DEVELOP~ CODE 5.13.3.5.4. Three members will serve for a t~m of four years. ~ the initial t~rm of appointment~ e~eh appointment or reappointment shall be far a term of four years. Terms shall be staggered so that no more th~n a ml-on.'ty of such m~mhers' appointments will expire in any one year. 5.13.3.6. Any member of the EAC may be removed from of 6x2 by a majority vote of the board of county commi~ioners. 5.13.3.7. Except where otherwise set forth her~n~ the pravimans of Ordi,~ No. 86-41, as azn~_nded, sh~l] apply. (Ord. No. 99~, § 3-IC 1-27-99) See. 5.13.4. 5.13.4.1. 5.13.4.2 5.13.4.3. (Ord. No. 99-6, Officers and support staff. The officers of the EAC nhn11 be a o_hnlrm~n and a vice~hnlrrnnn Officers' terms .~h~ll be for one year, with eli~h'dity for reelectiota The oh~irm~, and vice-~h~irm.n _~h.11 be elected by a majority vot~ at the org~-i-a~ional meeth~ and thereafter at the first reg,,1-- meeting of the EAC in October of o~eh year. The ehnirrnnn sh~l] preside at all meetings of the EAC. The vice-~h~irrn~n shall perform the duties of the eh~irmnn in the absence or incapacity of the chairman. In case of removal, resignation or death of the cha~xmn.. the vice-chn~rmnn shnll pez~orm such duties as are inxposed oD the chnirrn~n such time as the EAC shall elect a new ehni~n~n Shotlid the affices of eh~irm~. and/ar ~~n become vacant, the EAC shall elect a succeesar fxam its membership at the nezt regular meetln~. Such election shall be for the unezpired term of said office. Professional support staff for the EAC sh~11 be provided by the cnmmu~ity development and envLronmental services division and such other county staff ~/'om elsewhel-e wjt~hln the county government as may, from time ~a time, be requested by the EAC and deemed necessary by the county adrn~nL~ra~ar. § 3.Y~ 1-27-~9) Sec. 5.13.5. 5.13.5.1. 5.13.5.2. Meetings, quorum and rules of procedure. Regular meetln~ of the EAC shnll be held on the first Wednesday of each month at 9:00 ~ m. or otherwise as determined by the COmmllllity development and environmental sereices administrator, in the commi~ioller's meeting room, third float, building 'F," Collier County Government Complex, Naples, Collier County, Florida. Special meetings of the EAC may be called by the chairman or by a majority of the membership. A simple majority of the appointed membe~ of the EAC shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of conduc~'ng business. An st~,~xative vote of five or more members shall be necessary in order to take official action, regardless of whether five or more members of the EAC are present at a meeting. Supp. No. 9 LDC5:18 0 9 2000 DECISION-MAKING AND ADMINISTIL~E BODIES § 5.13.6 5.13.5.3. The EAC shall, by majority vote of the entire membership, adopt rules of procedure for the transaction of b,,~iness And sh~ll keep a recc~ of meeting, resolutions, 6hainEs and determlnntions. The following ~.Andln~ b'llb~11111~ tees comprised solely of its m~mhership shall ~ist to a~ranm the duties and respomsihqifies of the EAC: ' (1) Growth m~,s~oement. The EAC may establish other suber~m~ the sllb~ mmli;tees shsll conf~ to the sallie public notice requirements as that of the EAC. 5.13.5.4. At the reg~lsr meeiings of the EAC, the following sh,ll be the ~cler ~f business: 5.13.5.4.1 Roll call 5.13.5.47. Approval ofthe minutes of previous meetinE. 5.13.5.4.3. Old b--~ness. 5.13.5.4.4. New bu_~iness. 5.13.5.4.5. Public comments. 5.13.5.4.6. Adjournment. Items sh~11 come before the EAC as scheduled on the support staff prepared agenda unless a specific request arises whlch justifies deviation by the EAC. (Ord. No. 99-6, § 3.K. 1-27-99) Sec. 5.13.6. Scope of land development project reviews. The EAC shall review all land development petitions which require the following:. an environmental impact statement (ELS) per section 3.8 of the LDC; all developments of regional impact (DRI); lands with special treat~nent (ST) or area of critical state concem/spedal treatment (ACSC_2ST) zonin~ ovp~L~y~; or ~ny petitien fo~ whioh ~l~r/ro~mentl,1 i~sne5 ~nnot be resolved between the applican~ and staff and which is requested by either party to be heard by the EAC. The EAC .~h~ll also review ally petition which requi_r~ approval of the CoLlier County p]AnnlnE Commi-~aion (CCPC) or the board of coullty commi-~-~ioners (BCC) where staff receives a request from the ~h~irm~n Of the E~C, CCI~C or the BCC for that l:~tition to b~ reviewed by the EAC. Any petitioner may request a waiver to the EAC hearing requirement, when the fallowing considerations are met~ 1) no protected species or wetland impacts are identified on the site; 2) an ElS waiver has ~ sdmlni.~ri;rativo21y grailted; 3) ~T z~nln~ is. ~ and an arlmlnlstrative approval hl~ ~ grant~ or 4) a~ l~.l.~ was previously coinpleted and reviewed by staff and heard by a predecessor environmental board,' and that ElS is les~ than five years old (or ffolder than five years, has been updated wi~hln six months ofsubmitZal) and the master plan f~r the site does not show greater impacts to the previously d~i~sted preservation areas. Supp. No. 9 LDCS:19 §5.13.6 COI,T,rk~ COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMRNT CODE The surfaco water m~*n.~o~_me!lt a~ of ally petition, that is or will be reviewed and permitted by South Florida Water l~--%~ement District (SFWMD), are exempt from ,=,~ew by the EAC. (OrcL No. 996, § 3.K, 1-27-99) Any person aggrieved by the decision of the county sdministramr, or his des/gnee r~garding ally section Of division 5.13 may Rle a written request for appeal, not later ~hun ten duys after said decis/on, with the EAC. The EAC will notify the aggrieved person and the county aeimlni-~rata~r, or his rl~ui~o~aee of the date, time une'l place that such appeal shall be heard; sllch notifical~n will be given 21 day~ prior to the hearing unless all parties waive titis requirement. The appeal wffi be heard by the EAC within 60 da~ Of the submi~on Of the appeal. Ten daya prior to the hearing, the aggrieved per~n shall submit to the EAC _unrl to the COunty admlni.,~'t;l'ator, or his d~o~., copi~ ofth~ dllta and information he intends So use in his appeal Upon conclusion of the hearing the EAC will submit to the board Of county commissioners its fact~, 6ndin~ and recommendations. The board of comity commi~ione~'s, ill regular s~sion, will mAk~ the 6n~l decision to Affirm, overrule or modify the d~.~io- Of the county admlni-~lxlr, or his designee, t~ng into account of the recommendations of the EAC. (Ord. No. 996, § 3.K, 1-27-99) Sec. 5.13.1L Reimbursement of expenses. Members Of the EAC uhull serve withOUt compensation, but shnll be elltitled to receive reimbursement for expenses reason-hly incurred in the performance of their duties upon prior approval of the board of county c~mmi~si0ners. (Ord. No. 99-6, § 3.K, 1-27-99) Sec. 5.13.~. Review process. This EAC shall be reviewed for major accompliuhments and whether it is serving the purpose for which it was created once every four years cOmmellclng with 2003 in accord~nco with the procedures contained in Collier County Ordinance No. 86-41, as amended. [Code eh 2, art. VIII, div. 2]. (Ord. No. 9943, § 3_K, 1-27-99) DIVISION 5.14. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL PRESERVATION BOARD* See. 5.14.1. Creation, There is hereby created an histm~archaeological preservation board, her~-inAfi;er referred to as the "preservation board,' as an advisory beard to the board of county commi-~ioners for Collier County, Florida. *Code referenee---Boardsl COmmissions, comrnil13tees and authorities, § 2-816 et seq. No. 9 LDCS'~) AGEN~IIF~ MAY 0 9 2000 Exhibit C. Staff Summary Land Use Petitions The following petitions were presented to the EAC from May 1999 through the April 2000 meeting. PUD's 19 presented 19 approved Excavation 1 presented 1 approved SDP 1 presented 1 approved CU's 5 presented 2 approved ST 1 presented 0 approved The 4 applications that were denied by the EAC were: 1. CU-99-17 "Section 25 Conditional Use" for a 36 hole Golf Course 2. CU-99-8 "Sabal Palm Golf Course" 3. CU-99-27 "Little Palm Island" 4. ST-99-3 "Little Palm Island" Growth Management Plan The EAC provided the County Commission with several recommendations for the County's Growth Management Plan: 1. On August 24, 1999, the EAC Growth Management Subcommittee conducted a workshop to receive public input on the boundaries of Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) required by the Final Order from the Governor and Cabinet. 2. On September 1, 1999, the full EAC received public input and provided the County Commission with recommended boundaries for NRPAs. 3. On November 3, 1999, the EAC reviewed staff's proposal for the Remedial Amendments and recommended their adoption to the County Commission. The EAC's Growth Management Subcommittee has been reviewing work products generated by staff and other advisory committees to complete the Agricultural and Rural Assessment required by the Final Order. MAY o 9 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REAPPROPRIATION OF TOURIST DEVELOPMENT TAX FUNDING FOR THE CLAM PASS INLET MANAGEMENT PROJECT. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval for reappropriation ofunobligated funds in Fund 195 during FY 98/99 for use in FY 99/00. CONSIDERATIONS: Funds in the amount of $25,000.00 were appropriated in FY 98/99 for professional engineering services related to the dredging of Clam Pass. Such funds ~vere unencumbered and unexpended during FY 98/99 but are necessary during FY 99/00 for services rendered as evidenced by the attached invoice. Therefore, approval for reappropriation of those funds for use in FY 99/00 is requested. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds for this requested reappropriation are the additional carry forward resulting from the unexpended appropriation during FY 98/99. A budget amendment isnecessary for this action whereby such funds will be transferred from the reserves of Fund 195 to the appropriate expenditure category. Funds are available in Fund 195, Tourist Development (60%). The source of funds is the Tourist Development Tax. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this item. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Approve the reappropriation of Tourist Development Tax funding for the Clam Pass Inlet Management Project. 2. Approve the necessary budget amendment. SUBMITTED BY: Harold E. Huber, Project Manager III Public Works Engineering Department REVIEWED BY: /-,,,, ,, .-w .' '.,', ', ./ ,,///Jeff Bibby, P.E., Director (-/ Public Works Engineering Department ,-:~ ..,~Award4Xl. P~nn, Interwn Admm,strator & "" Public Works Division Attachments HEH.lh. Clam Pass Inlet Project C: Beach Renourishment/Maintenance Committee Jane Eichhorn, TDC Coordinator DATE: ~, Z~-'. 07:2 DATE: TO: INVOICE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLUER COUNTY COURTHOUSE COMPMD( NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 No. 32634 Date:__Nov~mher 5. 1999 .. Public Works - Engineering Attn' Harold F.. Huber Collier County Government Appik:. PQ No.: Department: Pe] Jr. an Ray Phone: 597-1749 (,]ex~n gmit.tL) DUE AND PAYABLE- UPON RECEIPT [BOARD DEPARTMENI~ ONLY CHARGE~ FXPEN.,'5~D UPON R£CEIPI OF YELLOW COPY IN FINANCF] Fees DESCRIPTION :'or Proje.r;:L #2,_~,f_..#_~4___~air_] ~ _=_P. eFcentaq? = 24.06% TOfAL AMOUN f /UVIOUNT $__ 25. OOO_ oo $ F,&AK[ CH[C, Kt-; PAYA.~,..~ ,',(; COl [_IER COUNTY B()AHD OF COUN f Y (-;OMMISSIONEI{.'5 DETACH AND MAIL THIS PORTION WITH YOUR CHECK TO: FINANCE DEPARTMENT BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE COMPLEX NAPtF.q. FLORIDA 341 12 No. 3263 Amt. Encl.:_ PFIOJEC f 80222 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT CATEGORY APPLICATIONS FOR BEACH MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS. "A". FUNDING'' AND INLET OBJECTIVE: projects: To obtain approval of funding applications for the following Clam Pass Dredging - $118,025.00 * Post-construction monitoring for the Collier County Beach Restoration Project - $284,427.00 * Construction of T-Groins associated with the Gord(~n Pass Inlet Management Plan - ,$6..32,500.00 * Engineering services for project design and permitting associated with the Gordon Pass Inlet Management Plan - ,$!.29,375.00 * Beach Maintenance Activities during FY 98/99 - $243,700.00 * Project Management 'Fees for services provided by the Public Works Engineering Department during FY 98/99 - $72,480.00 * Interim Mechanical Dredging and Maintenance of Aids to Navigation at Wiggins Pass during FY 98/99 - $62,500.00 CONSIDERATION: On January 25, 1999, the Tourist Development Council considered the above noted applications for Category "A" funding. All applications were reviewed by the Beach Renourishment/Maintenance Committee on January 7, 1999 and were forwarded to the Tourist Development Council with unanimous recommendations for approval. The Tourist Development Council unanimously recommended approval of these 'applications except as follows: 1. Clam Pass Dredging was recommended for approval with a vote of 5 to 2 in favor. Project Management Fees for services provided by the Public Works Engineering Department was recommended for denial with a vote of 5 to 2 in favor. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost: $1,543,007.00; to be obligated in the budget for FY 98/99. Fund: (195) Tourist Development - 60%. Cost Center: (110406) Beach Renourishment - Category A. Project Numbers: (80218) Marco Beach Maintenance- $3,100.00 (80221) Capri/Big Marco Inlet Management - $900.00 (80222) Clam Pass Inlet Management - $118,985.00 (80223) Caxambas Pass Inlet Management -$580.00 (80224) Gordon Pass Inlet Management - $761,875.00 (80225) Collier County Beach Restoration - $590,527.00 Collier County Tourist Development Council Grant Application Page 5 PROJECT BUDGET M.-kI.N CHA_NNEL CUT g4 DREDGING CUT 4A SERV/CES ITE.~ I D ESCR/PTI ON .A.MO UNT I. Alobilization & Demobilization $10,825.00' 2. Dredging Cost for Cut 4A S78,250.00'* 3. Tilling and Final Grading $1925.00' 4. Payment and Performance Bond $2,025.00* 5. Engineering $25,000.00* Total SI 18,025.00 * Based on 24*/, of the total costs for dredging .",lain Channel Cut ~:4, the cubic yards estimated from the Clam Pass portion of the dredging is 24% of the total .Main Channel Cut g4 Dredging. ** Based on lump sum line item of Bid for the Clam Pass section EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A REPORT TO THE BOARD ON THE RECREATION/OPEN SPACE ELEMENT OF THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. OBJECTIVE: To provide the Board with a comprehensive update on the Recreation/Open Space Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. In particular, the intent of this report is to identify the major Goals and Policy Objectives of the Element, and to analyze the continued appropriateness of these goals and objectives, and measures thereof. Where the Element prescribes specific action on the part of the County, or sets forth minimum levels of service (LOS) standards, this report provides a status update and staff recommendations with respect to outstanding policies, objectives, or LOS concerns. BACKGROUND: The Recreation/Open space Element has one goal: GOAL: Provide Sufficient Parks, Recreation Facilities and Open Space Areas to Meet the Needs of Residents and Visitors of Collier County. Progress Report: There are six objectives in the Recreation/Open Space Element: OBJECTIVE 1.1: Continue to ensure that a comprehensive system of parks and recreation facilities is available from among facilities provided by the County, other governmental bodies and the private sector. The following level of standards for facilities and land owned by the County or availble to the general public as adopted: A. 1.2882 acres of community park land/1000 population B. 2.9412 acres of regional park land / 1000 population C. Recreational facilities in place which have a value of at least $179.00 per capita of population. The County currently meets or exceeds these levels of service standards as outlined in the Recreation/Open Space Element of the Growth Management Plan. To ensure adequate measure to meet these levels of service standards in the future, the County amended the Impact Fee Ordinance on February 25, 1999. This amendment combined Community Park and Regional Park impact fees for County residents resulting in a better funding option. The County is projected to meet the minimum LOS for many years due to the inclusion of State Lands, much of which is inaccessible. If the State lands were backed out of the park inventory, the County would be below the LOS for Regional Parks by 2004. Staff does not believe that the minimum LOS will meet the expectations of the community. By the opening of the North Naples Regional Park in 2003 staff projects that the next lands for a regional park and possibly an additional community park will need to be purchased to keep up with community demand for fields, facilities, and passive activities. We have been working closely with the consultants and community for the Community Character Study, in developing a proactive approach to open/green space. In addition to the construction of new parks, the County continues to encourage the expanded use of public schools and other public facilities to maximize the benefit to the general public. The County continues to use joint facilities at Avalon, Big Cypress, and Naples Park elementary schools, as well as Immokalee High School through agreements with the Collier County Public School Board. In an effort to expand this program, the Parks and Recreation Department and CCPS are currently working on a joint project at Corkscrew' Middle School, giving county residents a lighted softball, baseball, and soccer field in this area. The Parks and Recreation Department continues to ensure that economically disadvantage are not restricted from any participation using the Children's and Families sliding fee scale, ~vhich has been approved by the Board in the adopted fee policy. Continuous effort is given to acquire suitable parklands in areas where major population growth is expected. Recently the County has purchase 208 acres in North Naples for a regional park, and an additional seven acres in Golden Gate next to the Community Center. Through a five-year refurbishment plan the department corrects and improves existing parks and facilities in order to meet the level of service standards. The County shall continue to establish and implement a program with appropriate criteria to designate or acquire open space areas and natural reservations. The County has a program to designate Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs), as set forth in Objective 1.3 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. The first NRPA designated was the Clam Bay NRPA within Pelican Bay PUD. Additional NRPAs have recently been designated with the approval of remedial comprehensive plan amendment petition CPR-99-2, adopted pursuant to the June 22, 1999 Final Order No. AC-99-002. Also, the LDC contains requirements, implemented on a case by case review of land use petitions, to preserve a certain percentage of viable functioning native habitats on-site, and to retain or create a certain percentage of open space on-site. 2 OBJECTIVE 1.2: Protect designated recreation sites and open space from incompatible land uses through development of appropriate design criteria and !and use regulations. This Policy is being implemented. The LDC contains reviexv criteria for land use petitions (rezones, conditional uses, etc.) to insure compatibility with all surrounding properties, including recreation and open space uses on those surrounding properties. The LDC contains development standards for each zoning district, including setback requirements and height restrictions, as well as landscaping and buffering requirements between land uses, sign regulations, and architectural and site design guidelines for commercial buildings and uses - all to aid in insuring compatibility between land uses. Additionally, the LDC requires buffer zones around preservation areas (typically wetlands) within development projects. The Planning Department continues to update land development regulations applying to recreation and open space land provisions. Adequate Public Facilities, of the LDC, includes a definition of: capital park facilities; and, LOS for capital park facilities. Division 6.3, Definitions, of the LDC, includes a definition for: conservation area; LOS for capital park facilities; open space; open space, common; open space, usable; preserve area; site alteration; vegetation map; and, vegetation removal. Regarding standards, Div. 3.8 requires submittal of an EIS for properties above a certain threshold; Div. 3.9, Vegetation Removal, Protection and Preservation, contains regulations pertaining to site clearing; and, Sec. 2.2.24, the Special Treatment Overlay District (ST), provides standards for development of properties within this overlay. Sec. 2.6.32, Open Space Requirements in All Zoning Districts, contains open space requirements for all zoning districts above certain size thresholds. The MH and TTRVC zoning districts each contain specific requirements for provision of recreation areas. The PUD district contains usable open space requirements, including the requirement that active and passive recreation areas be included. Also, through the PUD rezoning process, the BCC can require area for a park(s) be set aside, improved and/or dedicated for public Use. The Planning Department continues to ensure that all County owned recreation sites and open spaces are appropriately zoned. There are five zoning districts that permit freestanding, active recreation park sites: A-Agriculture with a conditional use; P-Public Use; CF-Community Facility; CON-Conservation; and, PUD-Planned Unit Development. Additionally, small neighborhood parks are allowed in residential zoning districts. Also, Sec. 2.6.9, Essential Services, of the LDC, permits park and recreational service facilities in commercial and agricultural districts, and in residential districts with a conditional use. All 36 of the County park sites identified in the FLUE Support Document are zoned appropriately (6 rely upon the Sec. 2.6.9 provision). 3 OBJECTIVE 1.3: Continue to ensure that all public developed recreational facilities, open spaces and beaches and public water bodies are accessible to the general public. The Department continually strives to improve pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile access to our facilities. Recent construction of bike/walking paths at Golden Gate Community Park and Eagle Lakes Community Park, as well as ongoing efforts to acquire rights-of- ways for a path from Golden Gate Community Park to Collier Boulevard (951) are aimed at improving access. In addition the Department is planning and designing expansion of parking facilities at our most heavily used parks and facilities. Efforts are being made to continue to ensure access to beaches, shores and public water ways. Staff has recently completed a canoe launch at Barefoot Beach is currently working on designs for increased parking at this facility. Construction of a parking garage at Vanderbilt Beach is being .recommended. Conner Park is being designed to allo~v for additional parking for beach access. Staff is currently researching the availability of water front land for a new boat ramp and park facility using boater improvement funds as well as the possible expansion of the 95 l boat ramp. OBJECTIVE 1.4: Continue formal mechanism to improve and coordinate efforts among levels of government and the private sector in order to provide recreational opportunities. The Department continues to develop public/private partnerships to provide recreational opportunities such as the Larry Lewis Tennis School at Pelican Bay Park, The Edge Skate Park at East Naples Community Park, and Concessions at many of our boating and beach access facilities. Additional public/private cooperative projects include the Marco Island South Beach Access refurbishment with Cape Marco, Clam Pass renovations with the Registry, and Conner Park design and possible construction with Signature Communities. Through intergovernmental agreements the County works with the City of Naples, City of Everglades City and the Collier County School Board to provide additional recreational benefits. OBJECTIVE 1.5: Continue to operate existing program commitments. for enforcing existing future developer This policy is partially being implemented. The Planning Services Department tracks all development commitments through the PUD Monitoring Report process, whereby each PUD owner/ developer submits an annual report detailing all development-related 1 activity (dwelling units constructed, development commitments met, etc.). Other County departments are included during this process, as may be necessary to determine compliance. The Real Property Management Department also tracks commitments to dedicate land to Collier County, including those for park sites. Such park site dedication commitments are rare, and are for large projects (DRIs), e.g. Pelican Bay. It should be noted that PUDs do not typically commit to provide a specific recreational amenity - except for golf course. Instead, the typical PUD identifies a recreation tract and provides a list of allowable uses, such as swimming pool, tennis courts, children's playground; and may include some non-recreation uses, e.g. administrative offices. Therefore. enforcement is limited to insuring that the recreation tract is developed with one or more uses allowed on that tract, not with insuring that a particular recreation amenity(s) is developed on the tract. Verification of compliance with open space requirements contained in the LDC occurs at the rezone stage for PUDs, and as part of the site development plan review process and/or preliminary subdivision plat process for all zoning districts. This Policy is partial17 being implemented. The Planning Services Department tracks all recreational facilities commitments through the PUD Monitoring Report process. The Real Property Management Department tracks commitments to dedicate land to Collier County, such as for a park site. The PUD List, prepared by the Planning Services Department and updated monthly, identifies each PUD approved for a golf course. And, the Demographic and Economic Profile of Collier County, prepared by the Planning Services Department and usually updated annually, contains a list of approved golf courses - built and not built. However, there is no actual inventory, no comprehensive list, of committed recreation facilities or sites. To determine what recreational facilities commitments are approved, and which commitments have been met or are unmet, would require reviexv of all residential PUDs and the annual Monitoring Report for each. It should be noted that it is not uncommon for a PUD to exceed its recreational facility" commitment (to develop a designated recreation tract). This occurs when individual residential projects ~vithin the PUD also provide their own recreation area. Similarly, a PUD may not have a designated recreation tract, yet individual residential projects within the PUD may provide their oxvn recreation area. The commitment for recreational facilities is accomplished through implementation of the PUD Monitoring Report process. As noted above, the enforcement consists of insuring that a designated recreation area is developed with allowable uses, not with insuring a particular recreation amenity is developed. Also, the preliminary subdivision plat review and/or site development plan review process verifies open space requirements are being met and preservation areas are protected. 5 2000 OBJECTIVE 1.6: Whenever possible and practical, utilize County owned property for recreational uses. The Department continues to coordinate inventory of properties with appropriate County and State agencies for recreation uses. Eagle Lakes Community Park currently utilizes portions of Public Works land for pathways. Staff is currently working with Public Works to use portions of the rights-of-way along state road 92 for a possible canoe launch site near Goodland. FISCAL IMPACT: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This report generates .no Growth Management Impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners accepts this report on the Recreation/Open Space Element of the Growth Management Plan of Collier County. () ' .~-, ,~E / PREPARED BY: JaNes K. Fitzek, Operations Manager Department of Parks and Recreation REVIEWED BY: Marla ~amse~, Direc~;r Depa~ment of Parks and Recreation APPROVED BY7 ~ed;~ilf~ ~~ dmini s trat °r 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE JO-ANNE VARCOE-LEAMER TO THE POSITION OF SUPPORT SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners accept the recommendation of Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer to the position of Support Services Administrator. CONSIDERATION: Ordinance 93-72 as amended, requires that the Board confirm the County Manager's appointment of Division Administrators. Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer has been recommended for the Support Services Administrator position beginning May 22, 2000. This position supervises the following operations: Facilities Management, Information Technology, Human Resources, Office of Public Information, Purchasing, Real Property, Risk Management of the Department of Revenue. Ms. Learner has been with Collier County Government since 1992 and served as Controller with the Clerk of Court's Finance Department and as Finance Manager for the Collier County Airport Authority. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted and available for this position in the general fund. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve Jo-Anne Varcoe-Leamer to the position of Support Services Administrator. Prepared by: Barbara Pedone, Executive Secretary to the County Manager Reviewed and approved ~y: Lh~. ~1 ~ Tf~n~as W~-Ollif-'~-,'-,'~o~y Manager Date AGENDA IT£M SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR JO-ANNE VARCOE - LEAMER, CPA, CM 3423 Fuchsia Court Naples, Florida 34112 (941) 417-4838 2000 BRIEF SUMMARY Accounting professional with $ years of progressively responsible experience in public administration. Outstanding reputation as a resourceful, enthusiastic and detail oriented manager. Strong analytical, problem solving, communication and presentation skills. Formerly employed by the Collier County Clerk of Court's Finance Department as Controller. Responsible for overseeing a $400 million budget; 25 debt issues totaling $200 million; 100 federal and stal~ grants; 150 governmental, proprietm-y and fiduciary funds. Managed 11 professional, technical and clerical staff and exercised indirect supervision over 13 other staff. Currently, Finance Manager for Collier County Airport Authority, a component unit of Collier County with a $6.5 million operating and capital budget. Responsible for all aspects of financial planning, management and control; preparation and monitoring of annual budget and business plan; coordination of activities with a variety of County Departments, Federal and State Agencies, contractors and consultants; formal presentations before the Airport Authority Board, Board of County Commissioners, Tourist Development Council and other large groups of people; and numerous special projects that have included development of an employee incentive program and creation of a public/private parmership for marketing Collier County and the County's airports. Bachelor of Science in Accounting from Barry University. Additional graduate level, governmental accounting courses taken at Nova University. Anticipate acceptance into Master of Public Administration program at Florida Gulf Coast University with course work to commence May 2000. Certified Public Accountant (CPA). Certified Member of American Association of Airport Executives (CM). Currently enrolled in AAAE Accreditation Program to become an Accredited Airport Executive. Member of the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) Special Review Committee for the Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting Program. Member of Collier County Economic Development Council Business Retention and Business Recruitment Committees. Proficient with computers and a number of software packages including Excel, Word, Access, Power Point, Moore Governmental Systems (accounting, purchasing and budget modules). Recommended and participated in the implementation of several modifications to the accounting and purchasing modules of Moore Governmental Systems. AGEND,~ ITEM No, Pg 2000 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION WORK Collier County Airport Anthortty, June 1997 to Proeat · Mana~ all financial activities of Departmeat, including gewzral accounting, cash ~ent, debt structure, contracts, capital improvement program, tax management, leases, gram acquisition and administration, internal controls, accounting information systems and fumacial ~g. · Oversee fiscal clerical and customer service staff, including selection, training, motivation, evaluation and term/nation of employees. · Prepare 10 year Business Plan and analyze ~t performance in relationship to projections. Develop, administer and monitor annual opmating and capital budgets, including goals and beachmarks. · Coordinat~ daily operations, capital improvements and special projects with a variety of County Departments, Con~iutional Officers, Federal and Sram Agencies, consultants and conmwtors. · Make formal presentations at national conferences and to a variety of public bodie. s, including the Airport Authority Board, Board of County Commissioners and Tourist Development Council. · Participate on a variety of selection, business and economic development committees. · Develop and prepare a varify of internal and external management reports. Controller, Deputy Clerk and Staff Accountant (variom levels) Clerk of Courts Firerace Department, June 1992 to November 1996 · Managed, direct~ and organized activities of the Department including general accounting, accoun~ payable, cashiering, payroll, fixed assets, assessments, cash managemeat, budget, financial analysis, grant and financial reporting. · Supervised 24 professional, technical and clerical staff including selection, training, discipline and termination of employees. · Established Departmeat goals and objectives. · Assisted with the issuance of various debt instmmeats such as bonds, notes and tax-exempt com~ial pap~. Included participation on County's Finmw. e Committee. · Planned and directed preparation of Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) which included coordination with County Departmeats, Constitutional Officers, Internal Audit and external audit firm. · Prepared annual budgets for Finance Department, all Debt Service Funds and several other Board Interpreanl and implemented GASB pronouncements, Florida Statutes and other applicable Developed, documented and implemented internal controls and accounting policies and pr~ auth~~ u 2000 Pg. ~ EDUCA~ON PAST HISTORY Batl~elor of ~J~.nce~ Accounting Barry University, Miami, Florida Graduated Sumnut Cum Lande Mas~er of Public Aeeounting Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida Variety of graduate level classes completed in governmental accounting. Government Finanee OIT~cers Asnocin~ Seminars Advanced Financial Reporting for Governments Debt Management Practices Florida Institnte of ~vern~ent Ciasaes Several manngement and writing classes including Interviewing, Managing the Problem Employee, Motivating Winners and Delegntion / Employee Empowerment. Mas~r of Pabli¢ Administration Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, Florida Applied to School of Public Administration, anticipate commencement of classes May 2000 ag EN D~A_IT!~IV No, . ~(~, 2000 SIGNIFICANT A~VEMENTS Certified Public Accountant (CPA), State of Montana Certified Member of the American Association of Airport Executives (CM) Certifw. ate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Retxx. Xing for 1995 CAFR C~ificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for 1994 CAFR American Lung Association Trans America Bicycle Trek Fund Raiser ($2.5 million raised for charity) MEMBERSmi~ AND ~TIONS Government Finance Officers Associntion (GFOA) Florida Government Finance Officers Association (FGFOA) American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Florida Institute of Certified Public Accountants (FICPA) American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE) ~_Collier County Economic Development Council (EDC) PROH, SSIONAL COMMITTEE EXPERIENCE Collier County Economic Development Council Business Retention Committee Collier County Economic Development Council Business-Recruitment Committee GFOA Special Review Committee for Certificate of Excellence in Financial Reporting Program Collier County Finance Committ~ Construction M~nagement a~ Risk Selection Committ~ Motorsports Complex Selection Committee Airport Consultant Selection Committee No- _ NAY 0 9 2000 SUMMARY FUND TRANSFER FROM RESERVES FOR CONTInGENCIeS FOR INI'I'IAL PAYMENT OF MERRITT BOULEVARD WILDFIRE OPERATING EXFENSES ~ To pay commercial vendors for services rendered to Collier County as the result ofthe devnstating wildfire that occurred in the Golden Gate Estates area from April 8 through April 15, 2000. CON~IDERATIO,,N: The wildfire that was accidentally started on Saturday evening, April 8, 2000, burned over 15,600 acres before it was brought under control on April 14, 2000. Although nine structures were damaged or destroyed, 42 structures were saved through the efforts of the more than 200 firefighters that responded to the wildfire. The Emergency Management Dcpartmnnt is working with the State Division of Emergency Management to gather personnel and equipmant costs from tim mutual aid responders. These costs have not yet been determined. In the interim, we have been receiving invoices ~om fuel companies, ice companies, hotels and other vendors who provided equipment at the fire scene. We are requesting thnt these companies be paid as ~oon as possible. A subsequent request for additional funds £or personnel and equipment costs will be submitted as soon as this information can be collected. ~ISCA[, IMPACT: Transfer funds in the amount of$100,000 fom Reserves for Contingencies to the General Fund Cost Centea, Golden Gate Fire April 2000, created specifically for this incident. ~G.ROWTII MANAGEMENT IMP. ACT; Nonc. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Budget Amendment for the transfer ors100,000 firore Reserves into the General Fund Cost Cemer, Golden Gate Fire April 2000, to pay for fuel, lodging, services and other supplies purchased as a result of the Golden Gate Wildfire of April 8'" through April 15, 2000. enn~ SUBMITTED ' a.,.-. Date: ~ Manag~nedt Pineau, Emergency Director Michael Smykows10, Management & Budget Director Thomas Storrar, Emergency Services Administrator J EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND MUTUAL RELEASE BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND NAPLES COMMUNTIY HOSPITAL. OBJECTIVE: To execute a settlement agreement and mutual release between the Board of County Commissioners and Naples Community Hospital. CONSIDERATION: The County provided EMS services to patients of Naples Community Hospital (NCH) with dates of service from July 1, 1997 to December 31, 1999. The Department of Revenue (DOR) billed NCH in the amount of $1,018,918. for these patient transports. A disagreement between NCH and DOR arose as to who the responsible party for the transport was. The County and NCH desire to resolve the dispute and settle the outstanding billings. A copy of the final agreement will be circulated prior to the meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: NCH will submit to the County payment for Medicare Part A transports in the amount of $461,826. After the County bills and attempts to collect non- Medicare transports, NCH will pay a portion of the uncollected transports in an amount not to exceed $164,970. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioner approve the settlement agreement and mutual release between Collier County and Naples Community Hospital. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Date: Diane B. Flagg, Chief, Emergency Services Department Date: Thomas Storrar, Emergency Services Administrator Date: Thomas Storrar, Emergency Services Admini ~GENJ~A ITFM-- ;trat~/o._ Y ~'.~ ~"~") 0 pg._ J OBJECTIVE: To appoint a Collier County Commissioner or a delegate to serve on the Naples Airport Authority Noise Compatibility Committee. CONSIDERATIONS: The purpose of this Committee is to make recommendations to the Naples Airport Authority (the "Authority") for noise compatibility procedures and for monitoring the implementation of the Naples Airport Federal Aviation Regulation (F.A.R.) Part 150 Noise Compatibility.. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners appoint a County Commissioner or a delegate, and direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution confin-ming the appointment. Prepared By: Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners Agenda Date: MAY 9, 2000 t4A¥ 0 ""~ 2S00 CITY OF NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY AVIATION DRIVE NORTH · NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104.3568 ADMINISTRATION (9~1) (~%0733/FAX lf43-4084 OPERATIONS ~43-9404~AX b~-1791, E-MAIL mimi~i~lion@fly~mptes~eom 24 April 2000 Honorable Tim Constantine, Chairman Board of County Commissioners 3301 East Tamlanai Trail Naples, FL 34112 Re: Naples Airport Ambork'y Dear C N~:Committee We were disappointed to learn of your decision to resign from the City of Naples Airport Authority Noise Compatibility Committee. You have been a very ilnporta~ part of this Committee and although we will miss your participation, we wish you well with your future endeavors. As a result of your resignation, and in a~cordanee with the Committee's By-Law (enclosed) we ask that you appoint a Member of the County Commission or a delegate, to se~we on the Noise Compatibility Committee in a voting capacity. Each Committee member plays an importont role in assisting the Board in its continuing commitment to the commullity. We thank you for your support of our Committee. Sincerely, C: City of Naples Airport Authority Commlusioners NAPLES MUNICIPAL A _!RPORT Adopted by the Naples Abport Authority 7anua~ 22, 199'7 NAPLF~ AIRPORT A UTHORITY NOI,~ COMPATIBILIYT CO.,1,0gllW~£ ART1C~F~ I NAME The name of the Committee shall be "NAPLES AIRPORT A UTItORITY NOLV£ COII4PA T~B~ COMMI'ITEE" (the "Committee '~). ARTICLE H The purpose of this Committee is to make recommertci_ m'ions to the Naples Airport Authority (the ".4uthority'~) for noise compatibility procedures and for monitoring the implementation of the Naples ~4irport Federal.4viation Regulation (F..4.R.) Part 150 Noise CompaVbility Study. ARTICZE HI A. Com~o.siaon The Committee shall be comprised as follows: Voting Members: · One resident from the East Bay area · ' One resident from the West Bay · One resident from the ~ quadrant of the airport, L~, Coquina Sands, Lake Parg Moorings, Park Shore · One resident living in the north quadrant of the airport, Le~, Bears Paw, Grey Oaks ~PR-26-2000 08:3~ N~ 941 ~4~ 40~4 P.0~/07 One retired co--pilot One ~__~v.'e gmera~ m,iation pilot · One resident from the southeast quadrant of the airport, in Collier County · One resident from tire northeast qttadrant of the airport, in Collier County · One member of Naples (Ttty Co,~¢!! or its delegate · One member of Collier County Commi~on or its delegate Non- Voting: · One sttrffmemberfrotn the City ofNaple~ Pganning Depmnt · One staffmember from tke Collier County Planning Departdent · One s~Or~~m the Naples AirportAir Traffic Control Tower One staffmember~m the FederalAviation Administration (FA,4) · One staff member from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDO~ The initial appointments of voting members shall be staggered terms as follows: 1. Three (3) appointments shall be for an initial term of two (2) years. 2. Three (3) appointments shah be for an initial term of three (3) years. 3. Four (4} appointments shall be for an initial term of four (4) years. Terms shall be assigned based on a by-chance lottery upon conftrmation of all appointments by the Authority. Subsequent appointments (after the initial appointments) shall all be for four ('4) year tern~ All appointments shall serve until his or her successor has been du~ nominated and t~oointea~ Any member may succeedhimself or herself for one (1) ndclitional four (4) C Vacancies In the event of an. v vacancy occurring in the Committee, the AuthoriO~ shall appoint a successor to fill such vacancy, such successor to be of the same category as the person ~ho previous~ filled such vacant positiorr .4 member appointed to fill a vacancy shall fill the unexpired term of his or her predecessor on this Committee. Applications for appointment shall be submitted to the duthority in writing within thirty (30} days of receipt of written notice of a vacancy. Page 2 of 6 APR-26-2000 08:36 NAA 941 643 4084 P.04x07 .4 member shall cease to serve on this Committee upon his or her removal from office by the Authority. A member may be removed from ~is Committee by the Authority, if it determines that such member has had three (3) or more consecutive unexcused absences or is otherwise disqualified from continuing to represent the member category for which he or she was appointea~ The Committee may write a letter to the Authority to recommend removal of a member. If a member had had three O} consecutive unexcused absences from duly noticed meetings of this Committee, the Chairsnan of the Committee shall notify the Chairman of the Authority so that the ~uthority may take such action as it deems necessary. absence shall be excused if the member gave prior notice of the absence and an acceptable reason to the Chairman of the Committee or the Recording Secretary. A. OtNcers There shall be a Chairman and F'tce-Chairman, who shall be elected annually as the first order of business at the October meeting each year and shall take office upon election. Such officer shall hoM office for a period of one (1) year and until a sucaessor has been &t~, elected and taken office. Such officer may be re-elected to the same office for one (1) additional term. Additional o~cers may be elected from time to time as deemed nec~ by this Committee. Hny officer elected by this Committee may be removed by this Committee whenever, in its judgment, the best interests of the Committee would be serve& A vacancy in any o2Ttce beextuse of death, resignation, removal, disqualification or otherwise of any officer elected by this Committee, may be filled by this Committee for the unexpired portion of the term of tin vacant office. B. Reco_nh'n~, $e~retar~ An airport staff member shall serve as Recording Secretary to the Committee. Page 3 of 6 C ~taitsofOt~u:ers The Chairman shall preside at all meetings of this Committee. The Chairman shall appoint members to all subcommittees and designate the Chairman of any such subcommittee. The Vice-Chairman shall assume the duties and responsibilities of the Chairman in the absence of the Chairmt~ The Recording Secretary shall l~eep a correct record of the procee~ngs of Committee meetings. The Recording Secretary shall prepare the..4ge~a and minutes of each meeting and shall be responsible for the distribution of both to the members of this Committee and to the Authority. The Recording Secretary is also responsible for transmitting recommendations to the Authority, advertising the meetings and other such duties as are cu~tomarily performed by a Recording Secretary. ARTICLE COMMITTEE FUNCTION Duties of the Committee The Committee shall consider potential noise compatibility methods and recommevded programs and resolution of complaints to the Authority. The Committee shall place emphasis upon obtaining input from the public as to the extent of the noise problem at the Naples Airport and make recommendations for possible mitigation actions. B. Ru_ !es of the Committee The Committee shall adopt Rules of Procedure and shall establish a regular meeting schedule, and shall provide for such other meetings as are necessary to carry out the .fimctions of the Committee, A meeting shall be held not less than once quarterly during each calendar year, and the October meeting, when a Chairman takes of. rice and the election of the other o. fftcers occur, shall be considered a mandatory meeting. ~411 meetings of the Committee shall be open to the Public. ~ Sl~ecial Meetines Special meeting~ may be called by the Chairman on such dates and at such times and places as may be designated by the Chairman. Page 4 of 6 APR-~G-~000 08:~? NAA 9~1 6~ ~08~ P.OGxO? Notice To Members Notice of any r~gular or special meeting shall be given to the members by the Chairman or the Recording Secretary, either personally, by facsimile, or in writing, not less than frye (5) days in advatw~ of such meetings. Every written notice shall be deemed duly given when the same has been deposited in the United States mail, with postage prepaia~ ad~ssevl to a member. Such notice for a meeting may be waived by any member by written commum'c__n~tt_ 'on either before or during such meeting. Attendance by a member at a meeting shall constitute an automatic waiver of arty required notice to such member of the meeting. Notice To l~blic Notice to the public of every Regular or Special meeting of this Committee shall comply with the laws of the State of Florida: A quorum for the conduct of business of this Commatee shall consist oft majority of voting members. Voting and (~o~ /!etlon Each voting member present at a meeting, including the Chairman, shah be entitled to one (1) vote on each matter submitted to a vote. tt. Amendment_, These By-Laws may be amended by a majority vote of the Authority, upon notice duly given and accomtxmied by the proposed changes. L Effecgi These By-lxms shall take effect immediately upon ~ and adoption by the Naples Airport Authority. The provisions of these By-Laws shall supersede any and all previously adopted By-Law~; Any statutory provisions in conflict with these By-Laws sJ~all prevall to the extent of such conflict. Page $ of 6 f4AY 0 '; 2000 APR-26-2000 08:~? NAA 941 643 4084 P.07x07 APPROFF__.D AND ADOP~ by the Naplex Airt~ort Authority on th~ 22'a day of Alvrii 1998. TOTAL P.O? Executive Summary REPEAL ORDINANCE CPR-99-1, AN ORDINANCE TO RESCIND AND REPEAL IN ITS ENTIRETY COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-63, WHICH HAD THE EFFECT OF RESCINDING CERTAIN EAR-BASED OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AT ISSUE IN ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION CASE NO. ACC-99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM) OBJECTIVE: To adopt an ordinance to rescind and repeal in its entirety Collier County Ordinance No. 99-63, which had the effect of rescinding certain EAR-based Objectives and Policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC.-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). BACKGROUND: On April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and on November 14, 1997 adbpted the EAR-based amendments to its Comprehensive Plan, On December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued a notice of intent to find portions of the plan "not in compliance". Intervenors entered the process: Collier County Audubon Society, Inc., and Florida Wildlife Federation in conjunction with the DCA and Collier County School Board in conjunction with the County. A formal administrative hearing was held in May, 1998 and the administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999 finding the challenged amendments not "in compliance". The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) on June 22, 1999 that required the County to rescind the EAR-based amendments that were not "in compliance" by September 14, 1999. On September 14, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 99-63, which readqpted the EAR-based amendments first adopted on October 27, 1997, but with the provisions found not in compliance shown as rescinded. On October 21, 1999, the DCA, in its Notice of Intent, found this plan amendment to be in compliance. On November 10, 1999, the Florida Wildlife Federation and the Collier County Audubon Society filed their Petition for Hearing with the DCA. Said Petition was forwarded by the DCA to the Division of Administrative Hearings. The Petition challenged the EAR-based amendments that were originally adopted on October 27, 1997, and were merely readopted on September 14, 1999. As a result of this challenge, together with DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM the County is operating under a Growth Management Plan, significant parts of which are eleven years old. On March 16, 2000 the DCA issued a letter stating that portions of the 1997 EAR-based amendments that were not specifically at issue in DOAH Case No. 98- 0324GM became legally effective when the Final Order was rendered. 1 CONSIDERATIONS: County staff and counsel are of the opinion that the adoption of this Ordinance will render moot the legal challenge initiated by the environmental groups and allow the County to operate under the EAR-based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, less those portions that were found "not in compliance" or at issue in the Administration Commission Case No. ACC.-99-02 as originally intended by the Final Order. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. GROVVTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Adoption of this Ordinance by the Board of County Commissioners will make effective the EAR-based Amendments not at issue in the June 22, 1999 Final Order and allow the County to operate under these Amendments rather than operate under a Growth Management Plan, significant portions of which are eleven years old. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Collier County Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation at the public hearing on April 20, 2000 to the Board of County Commissioners for the approval of this Ordinance to rescind and repeal Ordinance 99-63 in its entirety. 'Michele R. Mosca, Senior Planner Comprehensive'Planning Section St&n Litsinger, AICP, Manager Comprehensive Planning Section Approved By: Rob6rt ~1. Mulhere, AICP, Director Planning Services De.p~artment Approved B~inc~r~t A. Cautero, AICP', Administrator Date: Community Development & Environmental Services Division Date: //~ ~/~ 2 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- AN ORDINANCE RESCINDING AND REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-63, WHICH HAD THE EFFECT OF RESCINDING CERTAIN EAR-BASED OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AT ISSUE IN ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION CASE NO. ACC-99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM); BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RESCISSION AND REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 99-63; AND SECTION T~VO, EFFECTIVE DATE, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 1633161 et .wq., Florida Statutes, the 15 Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act 16 (hereinafter "the Act") is required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and 17 WHEREAS, Section 163.3194(1)(g), Florida Statutes, requires that all land development 18 regulations enacted or amended by Collier County shall be consistent with the adopted 19 comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and 20 WHEREAS, on January 10, 1989, Collier County adopted the Collier County Growth 21 Management Plan or "GMP" as its comprehensive plan pursuant to the requirements of Section 22 163.3161 et seq., Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5 of the Florida Administrative Code; and 23 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 163.319I, 1.7or~da Statutes, local governments are 24 required to prepare and adopt the first periodic Evaluation and Appraisal Report (hereinafter 25 "EAR") within seven years of the adoption of their respective comprehensive plans; and 26 WHEREAS, on October 27, 1997, Collier County adopted the EAR-based amendments to 27 its GMP which amendments were sent to the DCA for its review to determine compliance with 28 the Act and Rule 9J-5; and 29 WHEREAS, on December 24, 1997, the DCA issued its Notice of Intent finding certain of 30 the EAR-based amendments not in compliance; and 31 WHEREAS, the EAR-based amendments found not in compliance were: the Future Land 32 Use Element including the Future Land Use Map; the Drainage and Natural Groundwater" 33 Aquifer Recharge Sub-elements of the Public Facilities Element; the Intergovernmental 34 Coordination Element; the Conservation and Coastal Management Element; the Housing 35 Element; and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element; and 36 WHEREAS, on March 19, 1999, the administrative law judge issued a recommended order 37 finding that all of the referenced EAR-based amendments found not in compliance by the DCA 38 were not in compliance; and 39 WHEREAS, on June 22, 1999, the Administration Commission, pursuant to Section 40 163.3184(11), Florida Statutes, issued its Final Order finding the referenced EAR-based 41 amendments not in compliance and ordering that they be rescinded by September 14, 1999; and 42 WHEREAS, specifically, those amendments are: Policy 1.2.6. of the Intergovernmental 43 Coordination Element (Ordinance No. 97-56); Objective 1.2 and Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.4 of 44 the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-element of the Public Facilities Element ....... 1 (Ordinance No. 97-59)', Policy 1.1.2 of the Drainage Sub-element of the Public Facilities 2 Element (Ordinance No. 97-63); the Housing Element ((Ordinance No. 97-63); Policies 2.1.4. 3 and 2.2.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (Ordinance No. 97-64); Objectives I. I, 1.3, 12.1, 4 6.3, 7.3, 9.4, 9.5 and 11.6, and Policies 1.I.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.3.1, 12.1.2, and 12.2.5 of the 5 Conservation and Coastal Management Element; and Policy 3.1.d. of the Future Land Use 6 Element, together with the Future Land Use Map depiction of the coastal high hazard area; and 7 WHEREAS, on September 14, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners readopted the 8 EAR-based amendments first adopted on October 27, 1997, but with the provisions found not in 9 compliance shown as rescinded. No other changes were made to the 1997 EAR-based 10 amendments; and 11 WHEREAS, on October 21, 1999, the DCA, in its Notice of Intent, found this plan 12 amendment to be in compliance; and 13 WHEREAS, on November 10, 1999, the Florida Wildlife Federation and the Collier 14 County Audubon Society flied their Petition for Hearing challenging the September 14, 1999 15 readopted amendments. Said Petition was forwarded by the DCA to' the Division of 16 Administrative Hearings; and 17 WHEREAS, the Petition challenges EAR-based amendments that were originally adopted 18 on October 27, 1997, and were merely readopted by the County on September 14, 1999; and 19 WHEREAS, the filing of said Petition, together with DOAH Case No. 98-032GM, has 20 delayed the County's ability to implement EAR-based amendments; and 21 WHEREAS, the consequence of the County's inability to implement its EAR-based 22 amendments results in the County operating under a Growth Management Plan, significant parts 23 of which are eleven (11) years old; and 24 WHEREAS, upon request from the County, the DCA issued a letter confirming that the 25 portions of the 1997 EAR-based amendments that were not specifically at issue in DOAH Case 26 No. 98-032GM became legally effective when the Final Order was rendered~ and 27 WHEREAS, the readoption of the 1997 EAR-based amendments was thus unnecessary; 28 and 29 WHEREAS, the County, therefore, seeks to rescind Ordinance No. 99-63 in its entirety 30 and, in its place, immediately adopt a separate ordinance which merely deletes the provisions of 31 the 1997 EAR-based amendments that were found not in compliance. 32 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 33 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 34 SECTION ONE: Rescission and Repeal of Ordinance No. 99-63. 35 Collier County Ordinance No. 99-63, adopted on September 14, 1999, is hereby rescinded 36 and repealed in its entirety. 37 SECTION TWO: Effective Date. 38 This Ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Department of State. 39 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: M~ M. Studeht ~O..J.d,,t~z~ Assistant County Attorney 3 AGENDA ITEM 7-F Memorandum PETITION #: ELEMENTS: PREPARED BY: DATE: CPR~99-01 - REPEAL ORDINANCE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT PUBLIC FACILITIES/NATURAL GROUNDWATER ACQUIFER RECHARGE SUBELEMENT PUBLIC FACILITIES/DRAINAGE SUBELEMENT HOUSING GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT FUTURE LAND USE Michele R. Mosca, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Plannin§ Section April 11, 2000 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: On April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and on November 14, 1997 adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Comprehensive Plan. On December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued a notice of intent to find portions of the plan "not in compliance". Intervenors entered the process: Collier County Audubon Society, Inc., and Florida Wildlife Federation in conjunction with the DCA and Collier County School Board in conjunction with the County. A formal administrative hearing was held in May, 1998 and the administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999 finding the challenged amendments not "in compliance". The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) on June 22, 1999 that required the County to rescind the EAR-based amendments that were not "in compliance" by September 14, 1999. On September 14, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 99-63, which readopted the EAR-based amendments first adopted on October 27, 1997, but with the provisions found not in compliance shown as rescinded. On October 21, 1999, the DCA, in its Notice of Intent, found this plan amendment to be in compliance. On November 10, 1999, the Florida Wildlife Federation and the Collier County Audubon Society filed their Petition for Hearing with the DCA. Said Petition was forwarded by the DCA to the Division of Administrative Hearings. The Petition challenged the EAR-based amendments that were originally adopted on October 27, 1997, and were merely readopted on September 14, 1999. As a result of this challenge, together with DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM the County is operating under a Growth Management Plan, significant parts of which are eleven years old. On March 16, 2000 the DCA issued a letter stating that portions of the 1997 EAR- based amendments that were not specifically at issue in DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM became legally effective when the Final Order was rendered. Therefore, the County is seeking to rescind and repeal Ordinance 99-63 in its entirety and is electing to adopt a second ordinance to rescind the EAR-based amendments at issue in D©AH Case No. 98-0324GM II, REPEAL ORDINANCE: The attached Ordinance repeals Ordinance 99-63 in its entirety and is not an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. III. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to adopt this Repeal Ordinance. Prepared By: ..,/'~:~ .//'~ ....._Bate: ~le R. Mosca, S,~J~lanner ~"Co top,hewn sive Plan n._ i.~ S,ection Reviewed By: ..~O..,-,-~ ~,,A~ Date: Start Litsinger, AIC__,~ Managei¢ Comprehensive Planning Section ~ Date: Approved By: R~e-'7~CP, Director Pla/~ni~ Servi~ces Depa/~r~t ~ Approved By: ~:/- ~Date: Vincent A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development and Environmental Services Division CARLTON FIELDS ATTORN~:Y~ AT LAW 2;$ SOUTH MONROE TI'I~/~'. $UIT~[ 500 TAL[J~H~$1U/. FkOI~,IDA 32301-1S~6 TEL 1/~5.0) 224,-15~5FAX [11,!f01 127.-0398 POST February 15, 2000 Shaw Stiller, Esquire Assistant General Coumel Depamnent of Community Aft'airs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 VIA FACSIMILE 488-3309 and HAND-DELIVERY Re: Collier County Comprehensive Plan and Plan AmendmenU Dear Shaw: As we b~come more familiar with the litigation history of the Collier County EAR-based plan amendments and the mandates of the Administration Commissions' Final Order AC-99-001 ("the Final Order"), we have become increasingly concerned that the County is caught up in unnecessary litigation. Further, simply because of the manner in which an amendment adoption was structured, the County is now reduced to governing with a 1989 comprehensive plan which doesn't necessarily reflect the vision of the community 11 years later. As a consequence, we're writing this letter to seek DCA's concurtahoe in correcting the situation. Our intent is to: 1) fully comply with the Final Order'a mandates; 2) eliminate unnecessary litigation; and 3) darif-y that what is currently in eftcot is a plan document which includ~ those provisions of the EAR-based amendments which were found in compliance. In I989, the County adopted i~s initial comprehenaive plan, which is referenced to as Ordinance 89-05 or the 1989 Plan. In 1997, the County adopted EAl!.-based to amendments to the 1989 Plan through a number of ordinasw~. These were challenged and resulted in the Final Order. The Final Order dearly identified the speoifi¢ EAR-based amendments that were found not "in compliance." It mandated that. the County rescind thos~ amendm~nts d~termined not "in compliance" no later than S~pt~inb~r 14, 1999. CA!~LTON. 1:,/2 r~r^ After consultation with your agency, and p~rhaps in an overabundance of caution, the Count3, chose to completely re-adopt anew,,itnhe 1997 EAR-based amendments, show. ing-strike- througtm to delete that language found not compliance" in the Final Order. This re-ad0pt~ FIELDS. WAP. D, EMMANUEL, SMITH & CUTLER., ~ (l~Ij NOID'crOD NST~:20 00~-"~'Et3~ Shaw Stiller, General Counsel February 15, 2000 Page 2 language, referred to as CP 99-1, was challenged administratively, with the result that language first adopted in 1997, never previously challenged and already found in compliance twice, is currently the subject of litigation. Not only is this an expensive process that directs needed County resources away from the three-year assessment of the rural areas, it has al's'o given rise to much corffusion over which version of the County's comprehensive plan is in effect. After reviewing all of the documems, we do not believe that a complete re-adoption of all of the 1997 EAR-based plan amendments found to be in compliance was necessary. Each of the 1997 amemlments contained severability clauses and effective date language which indieatext they would not go into effect until fotrnd "in compliance." .The Final Order found only certain provisions to be not "in compliance" and, therefore, the remaining provisions became effective on the date the Final Order was rendered - lune 22, 1999. Since there was no appeal or challenge to the Final Order, those compliant amendments remain in effect today. Accordingly, a complete ro-adoption of the 1997 amendments wa~ not nec~sary and -- because it raises a question regarding the version of the comprehensive plan that is currently applicable and it drew an administrative eha!lenge to issues which should have been raised (if at all) in 1997 - proved counter productive. Additionally, k clouds the r,~tus of both CP 99-2 (the Interim Amendments) and CP 99-3 (the Remedial Amendments) sinre both are premised upon the effectivehen of the 1997 amendments to the comprehensive plan. In short, the County is in the unfortunate position of having to operate under the 1989 Plan. The 1989 Plan not only does not necessarily reflect the current vision of the County but it creates anomalies which are in the public interest to rectify. For example, we have been advised there ~re Activity Centers in the 1989 Plan which were shrunk by the EAR-based amendments in 1997. Arguably, many of the 1997 amendmen~ even though found in compliance, may not be in effect becm~e the 1999 re-adoption is under challenge. Tlma, individuals can and are seeking changes consistent with the larger Activity Cemars in the 1989 Plan." Our discussions with Coumy staff lead us to believe thai the following steps should be taken to clarify the status of the County's comprehensive plan and amendments to it: 1. Advertise and rescind CP 99-1 by ordinance as being unnecessary to effectuate those portions of the EAR-based amendments found in compliance by the Final Orde~ :and not timely challenged following its lune 22, 1999 issuance; and 2. Advertise and adopt a comprehensive plan amendment that rescinds (for clarifieal/on pursuant to the Final Order) t. bose portions of the EAR-based amendments found not "in compliance" in the Final Order when it adopts CP 99-3; and 3, Upon regission of CP 99-1 ~t the same tires, the County would file with tho Administrative Law ludge in the CP 99-1 litigation a Request for Official Recognitidn Shaw Stiller, Gerieral Counsel February 15, 2000 Page 3 Count7's action rescinding CP 99-1. Then DCA, the Interveners, and the County would jointly move to dismiss the administrative challenges to CP 99-1; and Upon tranamittal of the adopted language, DCA would expedite iih' r~eiew of the comprehensive plan amendment rescinding the EAR-based amendmeres determined not "in compliance" in the Final Order. In short, if the County Commission approves this plan, it will make clear that those EAR- based ame~ldments found "in compliance" on June 22, 1999, are currently in effect. The County will rescind CP 99-1 to clean up the record but will, at the same time, rescind those EAR-based amendments found not "in compliance" in the Final Order. We will have the CP 99-1 litigation dismissed. We still have the administrative litigation in CP 99-2 and we will have adopted CI~ 99-3, the Remedial Amendments. In the meantime, however, there will be less confusion and a fa-mer, and more current, basis on which the Coumy .can review and take action on land use ~pplications. We are asking your agency's concurrence because of DCA's initial involvement in discussions with the County on how to accomplish the original rescission. Wc arc sure that everyone at that time was moving very cautiously so as to avoid any litigation, including the potential for some concerning the effective date of the "in compliance" language. However, we now have even more litigation than wc anticipated and that is getting in the way of moving forward on the assessment, Sincerely, Marjorie Studera, Esquire G~,org~ Vamadoe, Esquire Brace Anderson, Esquire Ernie Cox, Esquire Carl Roth, Esquire GTATE O'F I;LORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS "DeOicateci to making Flor/de a better place to call home" :~,~rC~16,2000 Cuttan Fields, ~ ~t L~w 215 South Morn'De Suite 5OO Tifial~l~ F!oricl~ 32301-1866 Florida ~rt~ F~razton, ,/no., et al. v. Cailler County, ,t ed., DOAH ~ No. 99.491oGM T'~ letter is in response to your l~r~r dated Fabruary 15, 20~, ~ w~ch ~u s~ t~ D~~'s ~ ~ a pro~ ~ ~on m ~ a p~on oft~ ~y. P~ ~~ p~ ~~. ~ ~ f~h b~ow, t~ ~ ~s ~h t~ At the corn ofthi~ sittuition is tile 1999, Fi~ ~ on ~ Col~ Co~ ~ pro~o~ ~ ~ ~ of~ 1997 u~e pm~d~ ~o~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~t ~ took ~ ~~ ~~ ~ d~ m For tl~ r~mn$ e. xmtait~ m your Febru~ 15'~ imam-, tim Depanat~ din'es yam' opinion that t~~s ado!~ u part ~ftl~ 1;97 plan ulxtme md nm ~'eviom~ ~Nenm~ became ~ on June 22, 1 ~9, upon omz7 of the lrmal Order. Tbofa m',mdmems superseded -. ,,fbe~ by idemJ~ text - in S~ i S~9 when tim Coumy obose to AccordingJy, ~ tb~ Com~ re~;iad t~ o~s) by ~ ',Jse r~-adoplio~ 2S$4 $HUMARD OAK DOULBVARO · ¥ALLAHASIIE, FLORIDA l~3sm-1100:~ ~hone: S~0.401,14Wfllun~om 278.8418 ~AX: I~O.S~1.O?11/luncom interfief ladrome: htlp://WWW.aol. Otitm.fl.ul ~50-~22-2~79 F'DCA/LE. GaL P~GE e3 ~3/i612B00 ' ~:,~5 N~cy G, ~ .Esq. Marell 16, 2OOO. Page Two Sl~w P. Sfilbr Executive Summary RESCISSION ORDINANCE, AN ORDINANCE HAVING THE EFFECT OF RESCINDING CERTAIN EAR-BASED OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AT ISSUE IN ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION CASE NO. ACC. 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98- 0324GM), MORE SPECIFICALLY PORTIONS OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-56), NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE (ORD. NO. 97-59) AND DRAINAGE (ORD. NO. 97-61) SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT, HOUSING ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-63), GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN (ORD. NO. 97-64), CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-66), AND THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-67) AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP (ORD. NO. 97-67); AND READOPTING POLICY 2.2.3. OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN. OBJECTIVE: To adopt an ordinance to rescind certain EAR-based Objectives and Policies at issue in Administration Commission Case No. ACC.99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM); and readopt Policy 2.2.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan. BACKGROUND: On April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and on November 14, 1997 adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Comprehensive Plan. On December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued a notice of intent to find portions of the plan "not in compliance". Intervenors entered the process: Collier County Audubon Society, Inc., and Florida Wildlife Federation in conjunction with the DCA and Collier County School Board in conjunction with the County. A formal administrative hearing was held in May, 1998 and the administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999 finding the challenged amendments not "in compliance". The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) on June 22, 1999 that required the County to rescind the EAR-based amendments that were not "in compliance" by September 14, 1999. Collier County adopted Ordinance No. 99-63 which rescinded the EAR-based Amendments found not "in compliance" by the Administration Commission, readopted portions of the EAR-based Elements and Sub- elements not at issue and readopted the immediate predecessor language of the Growth Management Plan for the Elements and Sub-elements at issue. On March 16, 2000 the DCA made a determination that the EAR-based Elements and Sub-elements not at issue in Administration Case No. ACC.-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM) became effective on June 22, 1999 upon entry of the Final Order. Whereas, Collier County was not required by the Final Order to readopt those portions of the EAR-based Elements and Sub-elements not at issue, the County has elected to repeal Ordinance 99-63 in its entirety and rescind those portions of the EAR-based Amendments at issue in Administration Case No. ACC.-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). 1 AGE. N~A ITEM CONSIDERATIONS: AMENDED OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The following objectives and policies as well as the depiction of the High Hazard Area on the Future Land Use map are being rescinded in accordance with the Final Order of June 22, 1999: 1. Intergovemmental Coordination Element, Policy 1.2.6 2. Public Facilities/Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-element, Objective 1.2 and Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.4 3. Public Facilities Element/Drainage Sub-element, Policy 1.1.2 4. Housing Element, Policy 2.13 5. Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Policies 2.1.4 and 2.2.3 6. Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Objectives 1.1 and 1.3, and Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.3.1; Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2; Policy 12.2.5; Objective 6.3; Objective 7.3; Objective 9.4; Objective 9.5; and Objective 11.6. 7. Future Land Use Element, Policy 3.1d and the Future Land Use Map depiction of the Coastal High Hazard Area. The proposed amendments, in Exhibit A (1-7) and identified by the stricken through language denote the objectives and policies that were required by the Final Order to be rescinded and Exhibit A (5) readopts Policy 2.2.3 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and is identified by the underlined language. GROVVTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The proposed amendments were required by the Final Order issued by the Governor and Cabinet on June 22, 1999. FISCAL IMPACT: Collier County must rescind the above-listed plan amendments to avoid sanctions being imposed by the Administration Commission (Governor and Cabinet) and no sanctions shall be imposed for the determination of non-compliance. The Administration Commission (Governor and Cabinet), retains jurisdiction to impose sanctions if Collier County fails to rescind these amendments and instead elects to make them effective, or fails to adopt Amendments as identified in the Final Order. The following are the potential sanctions to be imposed: 1. All state agencies will be directed not to provide funds to increase the capacity of roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems. 2. Collier County will not be eligible for grants administered under the following programs: a. Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program b. Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program c. Revenue sharing pursuant to 206.60, 210.20, and 218.61 and Chapter 212, Florida Statutes, to the extent not pledged to pay back bonds. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Collier County Planning Commission made a unanimous recommendation at the public hearing on April 20, 2000 to the Board of County Commissioners for approval of the Ordinance to rescind the EAR based amendments as identified in the Final Order. 2 200O ~"-Mi'chele R, Mosca,~Se~:~5'r Planner Comprehensive Planning Section Reviewed By: _~ ~ ~-~~ Date: Stan Litsinger, A~P, Man~er Comprehensive Planning Section Approved By: ,~ _..~ Date: Robe~ J~ulhere, AICP, Director Pla~i~~ices Depa~nt Approved By: '~~~' ~~ Date'. Vincent A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Se~ices Division 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ~4 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8g-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN HAVING THE EFFECT OF: RESCINDING CERTAIN EAR-BASED OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AT ISSUE IN ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION CASE NO. ACC. 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98~0324GM), MORE SPECIFICALLY PORTIONS OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-56), NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE (ORD. NO. 97-59) AND DRAINAGE (ORD. NO. 97-61) SUBELEMENTS OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT, HOUSING ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-63), GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN (ORD. NO. 97-64), CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-66), AND THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (ORD. NO. 97-67) AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP (ORD. NO. 97-67); AND READOPTING POLICY 2.2.3. OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, on April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for its Growth Management Plan (GMP) as re(~uired by Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 1997, Collier County adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, on December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued its Notice and Statement of Intent to find the County's EAR-based amendments not in compliance as defined by Section 163.3184(1 )(b), Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, on December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued its Notice and Statement of Intent to find certain EAR-based Objectives and Policies to the Growth Management Plan not in compliance; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(10)(a), Florida Statutes, the DCA petitioned for a formal administrative hearing to review the EAR based amendments found in non- compliance; and WHEREAS, the petition was for'warded to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH), an Administrative Law Judge was assigned and a five-day formal administrative hearing took place in May 1998; and WHEREAS, the Administrative Law Judge issued a Recommended Order on March 19, 1999, finding the EAR-based amendments at issue in non-compliance; and WHEREAS, the matter was considered by the Governor and Cabinet sitting as the . Administration Commission on June 22, 1999 pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(10)(b), Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(11), Florida Statutes, Commission is authorized to take final agency action regarding whether or plan amendments are in compliance; and 1 WHEREAS, the Administration Commission, upon rewew of the Record of the 2 administrative hearing, the Recommended Order including the Findings of Fact and Conclusions 3 of Law contained therein also found the EAR-based objections and policies at issue not in 4 compliance; and 5 WHEREAS, the Administration Commission on June 22, 1999 entered a Final Order 6 directing Collier County to rescind the EAR-based amendments found not in compliance by 7 September 14, 1999; and 8 WHEREAS, these amendments include objectives and policies of the Drainage and 9 Natural Groundwater Acquirer Recharge Subelements of the Public Facilities Element; the Future 10 Land Use Element; the Future Land Use Map; the Golden Gate Master Plan; the Conservation 11 and Coastal Management Element; the Housing Element and the Intergovernmental Coordination 12 Element of the County's Growth Management Plan; 13 WHEREAS, on September 14, 1999, Collier County adopted Ordinance No. 99-63, which 14 rescinded the EAR-based amendments found not in compliance by the Administration 15 Commission, readopted portions of the EAR-based Elements and Subelements not at issue, and 16 reedopted the immediate predecessor language of the 1989 Growth Management Plan for the 17 Elements and Subelements at issue; 18 WHEREAS, a determination was made by the Department of Community Affairs, that the 19 EAR-based Elements and Subelements not as issue in Administration Commission Case No. 20 ACC. 99-02 (DQAH Case No. 98-0324 GM), became effective on June 22, 1999 upon entry of the 21 Final Order; 22 WHEREAS, Collier County was not required by the Final Order to readopt those portions 23 of the EAR-based Elements and Subelements not at issue, and therefore has elected to repeal 24 Ordinance 99-63 in its entirety and rescind those portions of the EAR-based Amendments at issue 25 in Administration Commission Case No. ACC. 99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324 GM); and 26 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission has considered the proposed 27 rescission of the EAR-based amendments referenced above pursuant to the Final Order of the 28 Administration Commission and has recommended rescinding those portions of the above- 29 referenced Elements to the Board of County Commissioners: 30 SECTION ONE: RESCISSlON OF EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS AT ISSUE 31 IN DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324 GM 32 33 The stricken through portions of the composite Exhibit A and any maps relating thereto 34 attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference are hereby repealed and rescinded in their 35 entirety. SECTION TWO: READOPTION OF POLICY 2.2.3 OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN The underlined portions of the composite Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated 5 herein by reference are hereby readopted. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 45 46 47 SECTION THREE: SEVERABILITY If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE The effective date of this amendment shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding this amendment in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3~ Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE Chairman ~t~rjorie~. Student ' - Assistant County Attorney AGENDA ITEM 7-G Memorandum PETITION #: ELEMENTS: PREPARED BY: DATE: RESCISSION ORDINANCE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT PUBLIC FACILITIES/NATURAL GROUNDWATER ACQUIFER RECHARGE SUBELEMENT PUBLIC FACILITIES/DRAINAGE SUBELEMENT HOUSING GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT FUTURE LAND USE Michele R. Mosca, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section April 11,2000 II. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: On April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and on November 14, 1997 adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Comprehensive Plan. On December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued a notice of intent to find portions of the plan "not in compliance". Intervenors entered the process: Collier County Audubon Society, Inc., and Florida Wildlife Federation in conjunction with the DCA and Collier County School Board in conjunction with the County. A formal administrative hearing was held in May, 1998 and the administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999 finding the challenged amendments not "in compliance". The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) on June 22, 1999 that required the County to rescind the EAR-based amendments that were not "in compliance" by September 14, 1999. Collier County adopted Ordinance No. 99-63 which rescinded the EAR-based Amendments found not "in compliance" by the Administration Commission, readopted portions of the EAR-based Elements and Sub-elements not at issue and readopted the immediate predecessor language of the Growth Management Plan for the Elements and Sub-elements at issue. On March 16, 2000 the DCA made a determination that the EAR-based Elements and Sub-elements not at issue in Administration Case No. ACC.-99-02 {DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM) became effective on June 22, 1999 upon entry of the Final Order. Whereas, Collier County was not required by the Final Order to readopt those portions of the EAR-based Elements and Sub- elements not at issue, the County has elected to repeal Ordinance 99-63 in its entirety and rescind those portions of the EAR-based Amendments at issue in Administration Case No. ACC.-99-02 (DOAH Case No. 98-0324GM). AMENDED OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The following objectives and policies as well as the Future Land Use Map have been amended in accordance with the Final Order of June 22, 1999: Intergovernmental Coordination Element, Policy 1.2.6. Public Facilities/Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-element, Objective 1.2 and Policies 1.2.1 through 1.2.4. Public Facilities Element/Drainage Sub-element: Policy 1.1.2. Housing Element, Policy 2.13. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element, Policies 2.1.4 and 2.2.3. .¢ Conservation and Coastal Management Element, Objectives 1.1 and 1.3, and Policies 1.1.1, 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.3.1; Objective 12.1 and Policy 12.1.2; Policy 12.2.5; Objective 6.3; Objective 7.3; Objective 9.4; Objective 9.5; and Objective 11.6. Future Land Use Element- Policy 3.1d an¢ the Future Land Use Map Depiction of the Coastal High Hazard Area. The proposed amendments, identified in Exhibit A (1-7) denote the objectives and policies that were required by the Final Order to be rescinded. III. RECOMMENDATIONS: that the Collier County Planning Commission forward to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to adopt of these amendments via this Rescission Ordinance. Prepared By: Reviewed By: Approved By: Approved By: Mo~;/, Senior Planner Date: Cor~rehensive Pl~.nin,.g Section ~ .f'~--~"-~ Date: StUn Litsinger, ~.'ICP Mar~r Comprehensive Planning Section R~A;C~'i Dir;ctor Date: Plann~es Depa~ Date: Vi~cent~,. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development and Environmental Services Division Exhibit A-1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN Symbol INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT Date Amended Ordinance No. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT WILL BE UPDATED AS CURRENT INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. IV. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Policy 1.2.6: 1 Words ~'*"'"u ,~, ..... ~' are deletions Exhibit A-2 COLLIER COUNTY GROVVTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-element Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OCTOBER, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE SUB-ELEMENT Symbol Date Amended Ordinance No. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT WILL BE UPDATED AS CURRENT INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OBJECTIVE 1.2: Imnl--r~-~ ~k~ ~ll;~r ('~, ,nh, ~, ~ tAl~*~ Dr~;~n ~r~;~ ~+ ;n~l, ,~- Policy 1.2.2: Policy 1.2.3: Policy 1.2.4: 1 Words :tr_'~_~. thrcugh are deletions Exhibit A-3 Symbol COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT Drainage Sub-element Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OCTOBER, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT DRAINAGE SUB-ELEMENT Date Amended Ordinance No. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT WILL BE UPDATED AS CURRENT INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. ! V. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Policy 1.1.2: !mp!ement prccc~dure~ ';.'~thln +~'" Ccunty's Land Dcvc!cpmcnt r,,~,~ ,.-,,~ ~, ........,~ ..... 2 Words -*" ,..u ~h .....~' are deletions Exhibit A-4 COLLIER COUNTY/CITY OF NAPLES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS & NAPLES CITY COUNCIL October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROW'FH MANAGEMENT PLAN/ CITY OF NAPLES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Symbol Date Amended Ordinance No. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT WILL BE UPDATED AS CURRENT INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. Flor .... Exhibit A-5 GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Adopted October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN Symbol Date Amended Ordinance No. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS Words "*'-'"~' *~' .....r. are deletions, Words underlined are additions Policy 2.2.3: Immediately upon adoption.of this policy, implement a system for reviewinq applications for development in SGGE which will include the following two step procedure: Step I: Pre-aDDlication Procedure: A. Notice to DNR, Bureau of Land Acquisition, of the application within 5 days of receipt; , B. Notice to the applicant of DNR's acquisition program, the lack of public infrastructure and the proposed restoration program for SGGE; Go Within the notice of DNR's acquisition program, the applicant shall be encouraged to contact DNR, Bureau of Land Acquisit- ion to determine and negotiate whether DNR intends to purchase applicant's property at fair market value; Prior to the processing of an application for development approval (Step II) the applicant shall provide to the County proof of coordination with DNR. Upon execution of a contract for sale, the pre-application shall be placed in abeyance pending completion of the purchase by DNR: Step I1: E. Application Review Procedure: The County shall review the environmental impacts of the application in order to minimize said impact; The County shall apply Section 2.2.24.3.2, Development Standards and Regulations for ACSC-ST of the County's Unified Land Development Code or Chapter 28-25, Flodda Administrative Code, "Boundary and Regulations for the Biq Cypress Area of Cdtical State Concern", whichever is stricter; and, The County shall provide a minimum review and processing time of 180 days from the date of commencement of the pre-application procedure before any development permits are issued. 2 Words -*'"'"~' *~' .....~' are deletions, Words underlined are additions Symbol Exhibit A-6 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Prepared for COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OCTOBER, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Date Amended Ordinance No. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT WILL BE UPDATED AS CURRENT INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OBJECTIVE 1.1: Policy 1.1.3: OBJECTIVE 1.3: 1 Words underlined are additions, words :tr.:"..k ~.hrc'--?,h are deletions, words deu4i~-~.lr, e~ are d; from the 1989, as amended, Comprehensive Plan. letiods Policy 1.3.1: ~i~ ~li~+i~. r~r~ ~r mi~i~ kl~O~ ~lr~d. ~r~. ph, Objective 6.3: OBJECTIVE 7.3: OBJECTIVE 9.4: · ,,v vv~,,,$ ~,,~,, ,,,,W,,~.,.~,,, ,,,~ ~'"~'"'~t '~' ~,v,~::~ ,~ .... w,,,r..,,~.,~ W,,~::~,~.,, ,v grcund '~-" "' '"~ .......* ......'"~' ~"'"' '":"" "~*'~" ....." .....'~ :"~"'""'"~"" + .... OBJECTIVE 9.5: requ~r=m=nt: ~ *~ ~";~' ~ ....~' ~ .....~ ~a,~,~. ~.~,~,~. ~.~; .........,~,;~ ,~ ...... OBJECTIVE ~ 10.6: .... Words underlined are additions, words ct,-.:'ck through are deletions, words ~ are d tio~S, .' from the 1989. as amended, Comprehensive Plan. OBJECTIVE ". 2.'I: Policy -1.,~,-1~: Words underlined are additions, words st".:'cP. th;cugh are deletions, words G~)~Me-Gt,~(&q are dletion~s ~. from the 1989, as amended, Comprehensive Plan. , ' ~ Exhibit A-7 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Prepared By Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section Planning Services Department October, 1997 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Symbol Date Amended Ordinance No. NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT WILL BE UPDATED AS CURRENT INFORMATIOI~ BECOMES AVAILABLE. *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTIONS /~ ......* Policy 3.1: d. The EAR-based Coastal High Hazard line as depicted on the Future Land Use Map is hereby rescinded. 1 Words struch thrcugh are deletions EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REMEDIAL AMENDMENT CPR-99-3, ADOPTING REMEDIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, AS DIRECTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION IN ITS JUNE 22, 1999 FINAL ORDER IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM) TO THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS: FUTURE LAND USE, PUBLIC FACILITIES/NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE SUB-ELEMENT, PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT/DRAINAGE SUB- ELEMENT, HOUSING, GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN AND CONSERVATION & COASTAL MANAGEMENT; TO VEST CERTAIN PROPERTIES REZONED IN ACTIVITY CENTERS; AND TO CORRECT SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND MAP REFERENCES IN THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt remedial amendments to the Growth Management Plan as directed by the Administration Commission in its June 22, 1999 Final Order in Case No. ACC. 99-02; to vest certain properties rezoned in Activity Centers; and to correct scrivener's errors and. map references in the.Golden Gate Area Master Plan. BACKGROUND: On April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and on November 14, 1997 adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Comprehensive Plan. On December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued a notice of intent to find portions of the plan "not in compliance". Intervenors entered the process: Collier County Audubon Society, Inc., and Florida Wildlife Federation in conjunction with the DCA and Collier County School Board in conjunction with the County. A formal administrative hearing was held in May, 1998 and the administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999 finding the challenged amendments not "in compliance". The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) on June 22, 1999 that required the County to prepare remedial amendments by November 30, 1999. The County prepared and transmitted remedial amendments pursuant to the Final Order on November 23, 1999 and submitted the amendments to the Department of Community Affairs. The DCA reviewed the Remedial Amendments and made written objections to these amendments and transmitted the same in writing on January 3, 2000. Collier County must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the amendments to' the Comprehensive Plan. CONSIDERATIONS: The following objectives and policies as well as the Future Land Use Map have been amended as follows: 1. Future Land Use Element- Policy 3.1d and the Future Land Use Map depiction of the Coastal High Hazard Area, school siting guidelines and Wellhead Protection Areas. 2. Public Facilities/Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-element, add Policy 1.1.5, Replace Objective 1.2 and Policies 1.2.1-1.2.5; delete Goal 2 Objective 2.1 and subsequent policies. 3. Public Facilities Element/Drainage Sub-element: add new Objective 1.6 and Policies 1.6.1,1.6.2, 1.6.3. 4. Housing Element, add new policies 4.6 and 4.7 and a new Objective 8 and subsequent policies regarding farmworker housing and special needs. 5. Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Policy 2.2.3 and school siting guidelines. 6. Conservation and Coastal Management Element -add new Objective 3.1 and Policy 3.1.1; delete Objective 3.3 and Policies 3.3.1 through3.3.5 amen~ b / o Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Policy 2.2.3 and school siting guidelines. Conservation and Coastal Management Element-add new Objective 3.1 and Policy 3.1.1; delete Objective 3.3 and Policies 3.3.1 through3.3.5 amend Objective 9.4, Polices 9.4.2 and add a new Policy 9.4.3; delete Objective 9.5 and policies 9.5.1; amend Objective 10.6, add new Policy 10.6.1, amend 10.6.2 and 10.6.3; amend Objective 12.1 and add new Policies 12.1.8 - 12.1.14 and amend Policy 12.2.5. The proposed amendments, identified in Exhibit A (1 - 6), include the document that was submitted to the DCA as the EAR-based amendments and the language that has been underlined are additions in response to the Final Order items A-K. The objectives and policies that are italicized and underlined in the Future Land Use Element and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan are those that were prepared as Remedial Amendment CPR-99o2 which has been found in compliance by the DCA. Finally, the language that has been double underlined or double stricken through is in response to the ORC report by the DCA. Exhibit B of the Ordinance provides for a vesting policy for those properties that had been rezoned within certain Activity Centers based on the boundaries in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan, as amended during the interim period when the 1997 EAR-based amendments to the Comprehensive Plan were adopted but not effective due to the Notice of Intent and Administrative Hearing. RECOMMENDATIONS:The Collier County Planning Commission held their public hearing on April 20, 2000 and unanimously recommended that the Board of County Commissioners adopt these remedial amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. ,MIE~ele R. I~1osca, Sc~ior~lann~r Comprehensive Planning Section Reviewed By: ..~'~-~ v". :..~ ..... ,.¢-- Date: Stan Utsinger, AICP, Manager Comprehensive Planning Section Approved Approved By: ~ H~ Date: Robert ~,,Mulhere, AICP, D~rector Plan~n~ .g'~ Services Departm~3/t By: /~L~.~..~ ~//(,_ ~'~'/7~-~ Date: VinCent A. ~3autero, AICP,~,dmm' ~'~istrator Community Development & Environmental Services Division DEPA IEB BUSH Governor STATE OF FLORIO^ RTMENT OF COMMUNITY 'Dedicated to making Florida a better place to ca// home" STEVENM. SEIBERT Se<:retary December 30. 1999 The Honorable Pamela S. Mac'Kie Collier County. 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples. Florida 34104 Dear Chairwoman Mac'K/e: The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Collier County. (DCA No. 00-R1), which was received on December 3. 1999. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their review, and their comments are enclosed. We thank Collier County for its continued efforts to work with citizens and interested parties to implement the Administration Commission's Final Order ACC-99-002. Your staff has been in regular contact with us, and we understand how much effort has been put into these amendments. By law, however, we are required to respond to your proposed ?anendments in an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. I am enclosing the Department's ORC Report; issued pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) and the State Administration Commission's Final Order ACC-99-002. We have raised two objections regarding farmworker housing and hurricane evacuation. We respectfully ask that you provide the requested additional information regarding these areas. By doing so, the County. may well be able to alleviate our concerns. My staff has committed to me that they will work with the County,, its citizens, and interested parties to resolve our questions, and I trust they can be easily resolved. As required by law, within ten working days of the date of adoption, Collier County. must submit the following to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendments; A copy of the adoption ordinance; A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed; 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD · TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-210(~ Phone: 850.488.8466/Suncorn 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.0781/Suncom 291 .0781 Internet address: httl:)://www.dca.state.fl.us Fled, ida 33050-2227 ~ SWAMP ~l ~ Critical S4aie Con~m FWid O~ce 205 Ea~a Main .S~I~ S~II 104 8aJ~W. Florida 33830-4641 The Honorable Pamela S. Mac'Kie December 30, 1999 Page Two A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, xvhich were not included in the ordinance: and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's ORC Report. The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review. make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to Rule 9J-11.011(5), F.A.C.. please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Southwest Florida Regional P!anning Council. Please contact. Bob Cambric, AICP, Growth Management Administrator, at bob.cambric~dca.state.fi.us or (850) 487-4545 if we can~b..e.5~sistance as you formulate .your SMS/bcp Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report Review Agency Comments cc' Mr. Robert 1Mulhere, Director, Collier County Community. Development Mr. Wayne E. Daltry, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Ms. Nancy Payton, Florida Wildlife Federation Mr. David Guggenheim, The Conservancy of Southwest Florida · Ms. Nancy Linnan Mr. Ernie Cox Ms. Teresa Tinker, Executive Office of the Governor DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS. RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR COLLIER COUNTY Amendment 00-R1 December 30, 1999 Division of Community Planning Bureau of Local Planrang This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-I 1.010 INTRODUCTION The following objections. recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's review of the Collier County proposed 00-1 amendment to its comprehensive plan pursuant to Section 163.3184. Florida Statutes (F.S.). Objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Codes (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, 'the Department's objection would take precedence. The local government should address each of these objections when the amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items which the local government considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2). F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed. The comments which follow the objections and recommendations are advisory in nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning principles, methodology or logic. as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension. Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the "Objections" heading in this report. OBJECTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT O0-R1 COLLIER COUNTY I. CONSISTENCY WITH RULE 9J-5., F.A.C., & CHAPTER 163., F.S. Collier County has proposed several amendments to the Future Land Use Element, Future Land Use Map series. Public Facilities Element; Housing Element. and Conservation and Coastal Management Element, pursuant to the requirements of the Final Order of June 22, 1999. The Department has identified the following objections to the proposed Amendments. Housing Element: The proposed amendment does not include 1ocational guidelines to ensure that the location of farmworker housing best suits the needs of farmworkers in the county in terms of proximity to such things as employment locations, transportation opportunities, shopping opportunities, health care facilities, and the like. Chapter 163.3177(6)(a)(f), Florida Statutes (F.S.), Rule 9J-5.010(1) & (2), (2)(b) & (f), (3)(b)l., & 3, and (3)(c)1., & 5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Recommendation: Include, in the plan, a policy or policies specifying the locational criteria that will be utilized by the County in selecting suitable sites for the location of farmworker housing so as to ensure that housing for this population group best suits their needs in terms of proximity to such things as employment locations, transportation opportunities, shopping opportunities, health care facilities, and the like. According to the proposed Objective 8, Housing Element, the County will increase the supply of housing for farmworkers by 50 units per year, and add a 300-bed facility for unaccompanied agribusiness workers in the Irranokalee area. However, based on the data and analysis (Farmworkers in Southwest Florida: Final Report, September 30, 1998), this will not provide adequate measures to correct the current farmworker housing deficit, within the forceable future. Chapter 163.3177(6)(a)(f), F.S., and Rule 9Jo5.010(1) & (2), (2)(b) & (f), (3)(b)l., & 3, and (3)(c)1., & 5., F.A.C. Recommendation: Revise the plan to include adequate measures that will help alleviate the current farmworker housing deficit in the County. The Department's staff will assist you in formulating additional measures to address the issue. Conservation and Coastal Management Element: According to the Final Order, the County is to revise Objective 12.1 to provide for the maintenance or reduction in hurricane evacuation time and adopt policies with .specific programs to accomplish this Objective. While Objective 12. I was revised, additional policies that will help accomplish Objective 12.1 have not been proposed. The only additional policy proposed is Policy t2.1.8 which defers to the Local Hazard Mitigation Strategy the implementation of local ha7ard mitigation projects. However, the goals established in the County's Hazard Mitigation Strategy do not address reduction in hurricane evacuation time. Chapter 163.3177 (2)(d), (6)(a), (g) & (j); and 3178(1), & (2)(h), F.S.; Rule 9J-5.006(2)(e), (3)(b)5., & 6.; 9J-5.010(3)(c)10.; 9J-5.012(2)(e)., (3)(b)5., 6., & 7.. (3)(c)4., 5, 7., & 8.: 9J-5.016(3)(b)2.; and 9J-5.019(2)(a)l 1., F.A.C. Recommendation: Revise the plan to include additional policies that will help accomplish the objective of reducing humcane evacuation time in the County. The Department's staff will assist you in tbrrnulating additional measures to address this issue. II. CONSISTENCY WITH STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The proposed amendments do not adequately address and further the State Comprehensive Plan including the foliowing goais and policies (Chapter 163.3177(9), F.S.): Housing Goal (5)(a) and Policies (b)(3)., & 4., regarding increase in the supply of safe and affordable housing; Public Safety. Goal (7)(a) and Policies (b)21., 24., & 25., regarding safety. of live and - property.; Coastal and Marine Resources Goal (9)(a) and Policy (b)3.. regarding avoidance of expenditure of state funds that subsidizes development in high-hazard coastal areas; Land Use Goal (16)(a) and Policy (b)3., regarding a functional mix of living, working, shopping, and etc; Transportation Goal (20)(a) and Policy (b)12., regarding avoidance of transportation improvements which encourage or subsidize development in coastal high hazard area. Recommendation: Revise the amendments as indicated earlier so as to be consistent with the above cited goals and policies for the State Comprehensive Plan. AGENDA ITEM 7-H Memorandum PETITION #: ELEMENTS: PREPARED BY: DATE: REMEDIAL 99-03 FUTURE LAND USE PUBLIC FACILITIES/NATURAL GROUNDWATER ACQUIFER RECHARGE SUBELEMENT PUBLIC FACILITIES/DRAINAGE SUBELEMENT HOUSING GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT Michele R. Mosca, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section April 11,2000 II. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: On April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) and on November 14, 1997 adopted the EAR-based amendments to its Comprehensive Plan. On December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued a notice of intent to find portions of the plan "not in compliance". Intervenors entered the process: Collier County Audubon Society, Inc., and Florida Wildlife Federation in conjunction with the DCA and Collier County School Board in conjunction with the County. A formal administrative hearing was held in May, 1998 and the administrative Law Judge issued a recommended order on March 19, 1999 finding the challenged amendments not "in compliance". The Governor and Cabinet sitting as the Administration Commission issued the Final Order (AC-99-002) on June 22, 1999 that required the County to prepare remedial amendments by November 30, 1999. The County prepared and adopted remedial amendments pursuant to the Final Order on November 23, 1999 and submitted the amendments to the Department of Community Affairs. The DCA reviewed the Remedial Amendments and made written objections to these amendments and transmitted the same in writing on January 3, 2000. Collier County must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. AMENDED OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The following objectives and policies as well as the Future Land Use Map have been amended: 1. Future Land Use Element - Policy 3.1.d. and the Future Land Use Map Depiction of the Coastal High Hazard Area, school siting guidelines and Wellhead Protection Areas. 2. Public Facilities/Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Subelement, add Policy 1.1.5, Replace Objective 1.2 and Policies 1.2.1-1.2.5; delete Goal 2, Objective 2.1 and subsequent policies. 3. Public Facilities Element/Drainage Subelement: add new Objective 1.6 and Policies 1.6.1,1.6.2,1.6.3. 4. Housing Element, add new Objective 8 and subsequent policies regarding farmworker housing and special needs housing. 5. Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element, Policy 2.2.3 and school siting guidelines. 6. Conservation and Coastal Management Element, add new Objective 3.1 and Objective 9.4, Policies 9.4.2 and add a new Policy 9.4.3; delete Objective 9.5'"and III. Policy 9.5.1; amend Objective 10.6. add a new Policy 12.~1.8 and amend Policy 12.2.5. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS (ORC): DCA Obiection: Housing Element The proposed amendment does not include Iocational guidelines to ensure that the location of farmworker housing best suits the needs of farmworkers in the county in terms of proximity to such things as employment locations, transportation opportunities, shopping opportunities, health care facilities, and the like. Chapter 163.3177(6)(a)(f), Florida Statutes (F.S.), Rule 9J-5.010(1)& (2), (2)(b) (f), (3)(b)1., & (3)(c)1., & 5., Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) DCA Recommendation: Include, in the plan, a policy or policies specifying the Iocational criteria that will be utilized by the County in selecting suitable sites for the location of farmworker housing so as to ensure that housing for this population group best suits their needs in terms of proximity to such things as employment locations, transportation opportunities, shopping opportunities, health care facilities, and the like. Staff Response: Policy 8.4 has been added to the Housing Element to address DCA's objection relative to Iocational criteria for farmworker housing. DCA Objection: Housing Element According to the proposed Objective 8, Housing Element, the County will increase the supply of housing for farmworkers by 50 units per year, and add a 300-bed facility for unaccompanied agribusiness workers in the Immokalee area. However, based on the data and analysis (Farmworkers in Southwest Florida: Final Report, September 30, 1998), this will not provide adequate measures to correct the current farmworker housing deficit, within the foreseeable future. Chapter 163.3177(6)(a)(f), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.010(1) & (2), (2)(b) & (f), (3)(b) 1., & 3, and (3)(c)1., & 5., F.A.C. DCA Recommendation: Revise the plan to include adequate measures that will help alleviate the current farmworker housing deficit in the County. The Department's staff will assist you in formulating additional measures to address the issue. Staff Response: Policies 4.6, 4.7, 8.5, and 8.6, have been added to the Housing Element to address DCA's objection relative to housing unit deficits for the farmworker population. DCA Objection: Conservation and Coastal Management Element According to the Final Order, the County is to revise Objective 12.1 to provide for the maintenance or reduction in hurricane evacuation time and adopt policies with specific programs to accomplish this Objective. While Objective 12.1 was revised, additional policies that will help accomplish Objective 12.1 have not been proposed. The only additional policy proposed is Policy 12.1.8 which defers to the Local Hazard Mitigation Strategy the implementation of local hazard mitigation projects. However, the goals established in the County's Hazard Mitigation Strategy do not address reduction in hurricane evacuation time. Chapter 163.3177 (2)(d), (6)(a), (g) & (j); and 3178(1), & (2)(h), F.S.; Rule 9J- 5.006(2)(e), (3)(b)5., & 6.; 9J-5.010(3)(c) 10.; 9J-5.012(2)(e)., (3)(b)5., 6., & 7., (3)(c)4., 5., 7., & 8.; 9J-5.016(3)(b)2.; and 9J-5.019(2)(a)11., F.A.C. DCA Recommendation: Revise the plan to include additional policies that will help accomplish the objective of reducing hurricane evacuation time in the County. The Department's staff will assist you in formulating additional measures to address this issue. Staff Response: Policies 12.1.9, 12.1.10, 12.1.11, 12.1.12, 12.1.13, 12.1.14, have been added to the Conservation and Coastal Management Element to address DCA's objection relative to providing for the maintenance or reduction in hurricane evacuation times and the need to adopt additional policies or programs aimed at achieving this objective. The amendments identified in Exhibit A (1-6), include the strike through and underline document that was submitted to the DCA as the EAR-based amendments. The objectives and policies that are italicized and underlined in the Future Land Use Element and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan are those that were prepared for Remedial Amendment R-99-2, and a Notice of Intent to find. the plan amendments in compliance has been issued by the DCA. The double strike through and double underline language indicates staff's response to the objections made by the DCA in the ORC report dated January 3, 2000. Exhibit B of the Ordinance provides for a vesting policy for those properties that had been rezoned within certain Activity Centers based on the boundaries in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan, as amended, during the interim period when the 1997 EAR-based amendments to the Comprehensive Plan were adopted but not effective due to the Notice of Intent and Administrative Hearings. Exhibit C of the Ordinance identifies scrivener's errors and map re-numbering in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element. Exhibit D is the Final Order, which identifies the Remedial Amendments required by November 30, 1999 on pages 3-9 of the Order. IV. RECOMMENDATIONS: that the Collier County Planning Commission forward to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to adopt the Remedial Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Prepared By: ~ ~,~::~,~ _ Date: ~__A/ti~hele I~,. Mosca,~r Planner Comprehensive Pl~-nrjing Section Reviewed By: ~ Date: Stan Litsinger, Comprehensive Planning Section Approved By: //~~ ~ Date: F(oberCJ./Mulhere, AICP, Dir/%ctor PI~ Services Depart. p~t Approved By: ~./~/- ~Date: riffcent A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development and Environmental Services Division 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05 AS AMENDED THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN BY ADOPTING REMEDIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, AS DIRECTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION COMMISSION IN ITS JUNE 22, 1999 FINAL ORDER IN CASE NO. ACC 99-02 (DOAH CASE NO. 98-0324GM) TO THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS: THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO PROTECT POTABLE WATER WELLFIELDS, AND PROVIDE FOR SCHOOL SITING; TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES; TO THE NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE SUBELEMENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT TO ESTABLISH GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER RESOURCES; TO THE DRAINAGE SUBELEMENT OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT TO PROTECT THE FUNCTIONS OF NATURAL DRAINAGE FEATURES; TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT TO ADOPT PROVISIONS REGARDING FARMWORKER HOUSING BASED UPON BEST AVAILABLE DATA AS WELL AS CRITERIA FOR THE LOCATION OF SUCH HOUSING; TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN ELEMENT AND RELATED MAPS TO PROVIDE FOR SCHOOL SITING; AND TO THE CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF GROUNDWATER RESOURCES, REGULATION OF STORAGE TANKS, THE PROTECTION OF HABITATS, SPECIES, NATURAL SHORELINE AND DUNE SYSTEMS IN THE COASTAL ZONE, MAINTENANCE OR REDUCTION OF HURRICANE EVACUATION TIMES AND DEFINITION OF THE COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA; ADDING A VESTING POLICY TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED IN CERTAIN ACTIVITY CENTERS THAT WERE REZONED CONSISTENT THEREWITH DURING THE INTERIM PERIOD BETWEEN ADOPTION OF THE EAR AMENDMENTS AND LEGAL EFFECTIVE DATE OF SAID AMENDMENTS; AND CORRECTING SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND CERTAIN MAP REFERENCES tN THE GOLDEN GATE MASTER PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, on April 6, 1996, Collier County adopted an Evaluation and Appraisal Report 47 (EAR) for its Growth Management Plan (GMP) as required by Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes; 48 and ,49 WHEREAS, on November 14, 1997, Collier County adopted the EAR-based amendments 50 to its Growth Management Plan; and 51 WHEREAS, on December 24, 1997, the Depadment of Community Affairs (DCA) issued 52 its Notice and Statement of Intent to find the County's EAR-based amendments not in compliance 53 as defined by Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes; and 54 WHEREAS, on December 24, 1997, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issued 55 its Notice and Statement of Intent to fined certain of the EAR-based Objectives and Policies to the 59 56 Growth Management Plan not in compliance; and 57 WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(10)(a), Florida Statutes, the DCA la_etitioned 58 for a formal administrative hearing to review the EAR-based amendments found compliance; and 1 WHEREAS, the petition was for,,varded to the Division of Administrative Hearings 2 (DOAH), an Administrative Law Judge was assigned and a five-day formal administrative hearing 3 took place in May 1998; and 4 WHEREAS, the Administrative Law Judge issued a Recommended Order on March 19, 5 1999, finding the EAR-based amendments at issue in non-compliance; and 6 WHEREAS, the matter was considered by the Governor and Cabinet sitting as the 7 Administration Commission on June 22, 1999 pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(10)(b), Florida 8 Statutes; and 9 WHEREAS, pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(11), Florida Statutes, the Administration 10 Commission is authorized to take final agency action regarding whether or not comprehensive 11 plan amendments are in compliance; and 12 WHEREAS, the Administration Commission, upon review of the Record of the 13 administrative hearing, the Recommended Order including the Findings of Fact and Conclusions 14 of Law contained therein also found the EAR-based objections and policies at issue not in 15 compliance; and 16 WHEREAS, the Administration Commission on June 22, 1999 entered a Final Order 17 directing Collier County to adopt Remedial Amendments to the Growth Management Plan by 18 November 30, 1999; and 19 WHEREAS, Collier County prepared and the Collier County Planning Commission 20 considered the proposed Remedial Amendments to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the 21 authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, Florida Statutes, and recommended approval of said 22 Remedial Amendments to the Board of County Commissioners; and 23 WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners reviewed the. Remedial 24 Amendments on November 23, 1999 and transmitted the same to the DCA; and 25 WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Remedial Amendments, the DCA 26 reviewed the Remedial Amendments as set forth in Section 163,3184, Florida Statutes; and 27 WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs made written objections to these 28 Remedial Amendments to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted the same in writing to 29 Collier County within the time provided by law; and 30 WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the written objections from the 31 Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed 32 amendments to the Growth Management Plan; and 33 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the 34 manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concerning the adoption of these Remedial 35 Amendments, including the following: the Collier County staff report; and other documents,.~..~'.'~ 36 testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meeting of th~ C(~11i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF THE REMEDIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts these Remedial Amendments in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The amendments as well as scrivener's error correction are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION 'DA/O: ADOPTION OF VESTING PROVISION TO FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FOR ACTIVITY CENTER PROPERTIES REZONED AFTER ADOPTION OF EAR-BASED AMENDMENTS. Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein is hereby adopted in its entirety. SECTION THREE: SEVERABILITY If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE The effective date of these amendments to the Growth Management Plan shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Amendments in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on these amendments may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order or noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, these amendments may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of ',.ocal Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3r~ Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 $2 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Marj0~ie ..1~.- Student Assistant County Attorney BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman EXECUTWE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO ESTABLISH THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners transmit the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Growth Management Plan Amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review and comment. BACKGROUND: A professional services contract was signed with Landers-Atkins Planners, Inc. of Jacksonville, Florida on September 1998 to prepare a redevelopment plan for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area. The Plan was presented to the Board in November 1999. The Board approved the plan and directed staff to begin implementation. During the planning process a dialogue with landowners, developers, and investors on potential opportunities within the redevelopment area began. Recognizing that there were some limitations imposed by the current Growth Management Plan for this targeted redevelopment area, the Board on November 23, 1999 directed staff to initiate a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to address the redevelopment efforts. The Board directed staff to utilize the additional cycle of amendments (as authorized in Collier County Resolution 97-43) in 2000 in order to process a Comprehensive Plan amendment that would support the redevelopment efforts underway in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. On January 11, 2000 the Board of County Commissioners approved the work plan and budget which included preparing a Growth Management Plan amendment for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment area and other projects necessary to implement the redevelopment study. On March 14, 2000 the Board of County Commission voted unanimously to establish The Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency; adopted the "Findings of Necessity" for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area; and approved the boundaries of the study area. On May 18, 2000 the CRA Plan will be presented to the CCPC to determine its consistency with the Growth Management Plan and on June 13, 2000, the Plan is scheduled to be presented to the CRA Board and Board of County Commissioners for final adoption. CONSIDERATIONS: The intent of this amendment is to allow for more flexibility in uses and higher densities in the designated redevelopment area. The provisions included in this overlay should be an incentive for private developers to invest in this older community that has been recognized by the Board of County Commissioners as an area in need of redevelopment. The amendment allows additional neighborhood commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of property or joint ventures between property owners, while providing interconnections between commercial properties and neighborhoods. The amendment provides some specific development standards and allows for additional standards to be created through the zoning overlay process. The intent is to allow for more intense development in an urban area where services are provided. In order to maintain the community character that is being proposed for the redevelopment area, one or more zoning overlays will be adopt -1- into the Land Development Code that will assist in implementation of the provisions outlined in this overlay. Chapter 163, F.S. provides for an amendment process for the adopted Growth Management Plan. Collier County Resolution 97-431 establishes a policy to utilize an annual cycle for Growth Management Plan Amendments and allows the Board of County Commissioners to initiate a second cycle of amendments that shall comply with the same procedures. With the adoption of the transmittal resolution, the proposed amendment will be transmitted to the Departanent of Community Affairs for their review pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. FISCAL IMPACT: None GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of this amendment by the Board of County Commissioners for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs will commence the Department's ninety (90) day review process and ultimately return this amendment to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners for a final adoption hearing. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC held their public hearing on May 4, 2000. A copy of the Staff Report to the Collier County Planning Commission is attached (Attachment A). The recommendations of the CCPC will be presented at the May 9, 2000 BCC meeting. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners review the Growth Management Plan Amendment and consider adopting the resolution approving this amendment for transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. -2- M;,Y o 9 2000 PREPARED BY: DEBRAH PRESTON, AICP CHIEF PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION April 25, 2000 DATE REVIEWED BY: STAN LITSINGER, AICP ~ COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER DATE REVIEWED BY: PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR DATE APPROVED B~ VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE -3- 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2000- 2 3 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPOSED GROWTH 4 MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE 5 LAND USE ELEMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO 6 ESTABLISH THE BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE 7 REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY FOR TRANSMI"~i'AL TO 8, THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS 9 10 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section !g3.3161, et. seQ., Florida Statutes, the 11 Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Lancl Development Regulation Act, was 12 required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan: and 13 WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopteel the Collier 14 County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and 15 WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning ancl Land Development 16 Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective 17 comprehenswe plans and outlines certain procedures to amend actopte~ comprehensive plans 18 pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes: and 19 WHEREAS, Collier County Resolution 97-431 establishes a policy to utilize an annual 20 cycle for Growth Management Plan Amendments and allows the Board of County Commissioners 21 to initiate a second cycle of amendments that shall comply with the same procedures; and 22 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners on November 23, 1999 directed staff to 23 initiate the additional cycle of amendments in 2000 in recognition of the redevelopment efforts 24 underway in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment area; and 25 WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan 26 Amendment. various State agencies and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) have ninety 27 (90) days to review the proposed Amendment and DCA must transmit, in writing to Collier County, 28 its comments along with any obiections and any recommendations for modification, within said 29 ninety (90) days pursuant to Section 163,3184, Florida Statutes: and 30 WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DOA must adopt, 31 adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment. within sixty 32 (60) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes; and 33 WHEREAS, the DCA, within forty-five (45) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted 34 Growth Management Plan Amendment, must review and determine if the Plan Amendment is in 35 compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Act of 36 1985; the State Comprehensive Plan; the appropnate Regional Policy Plan and Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. NOW THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 37 38 39 4O 41 BOARD OF COUNTY The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed ~rowtl~o ._Y_.~'..(~/'.~r- i Management Plan Amendment, a~tached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reyrenc~ 0 2000 Words underlineal are additions; Words ,"t."_'ck thr~_u"~h are deletions ! _ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 !9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Commumty Affairs thereby ~nitiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendments prior to final adoption and State determination of compliance with the Local Government Comprehensive Ptanning and Land Development Regutation Act of 1989 and Rule 9J5. Florida Administrative Code, Miramum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Determination of Compliance. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion; second and majority vote this day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Marjorie ~. Student Assistant County Attorney BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Words underlined are additions, Words ............ ,.. are deletions ATTACHMENT A AGENDA ITEM 7-P MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: AGENT: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION April 18, 2000 PETITION NO. CP-2000-1, BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY STAFF INITIATED - BCC DIRECTED BACKGROUND: In September 1998, the Board of County Commissioners entered into an agreement with Landers-Atkins Planners, Inc. to develop a Redevelopment Study for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle area. The study was completed and presented to the Board in November 1999. The Board approved the study and directed staff to begin implementation. The redevelopment planning process opened a dialogue with landowners, developers, and investors on potential opportunities within the redevelopment area. Recognizing that there were some limitations imposed by the current Growth Management Plan for this targeted redevelopment area, the Board on November 23, 1999 directed staff to initiate a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to address the redevelopment efforts. The Board directed staff to utilize the additional cycle of amendments (as authorized in Collier County Resolution 97-43) in 2000 in order to process a Comprehensive Plan amendment that would support the redevelopment efforts underway in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area. The Board of County Commissioners is continuing the process to implement the redevelopment study for this area. On March 14, 2000 the Board of County Commission voted unanimously to establish The Collier County Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA); adopted the "Findings of Necessity' for the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area; and approved the boundaries of the study area. On May 18, 2000 the CRA Plan will be presented to the CCPC to determine its consistency with the Growth Management Plan. On June 13, 2000, the Plan is scheduled to be presented to the CRA Board and Board of County Commissioners for final adoption. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area consists of approximately 1,739 acres. It's western boundary is located on the southeastern edge of the City of Naples and its eastern boundary extends to just east of Airport Road. Attachment A displays the boundary map of the Redevelopment Study Area. The subject site is located in the East Naples Planning · ............... Community. 1 · AGENDA ITEM 7-P REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the existing Future Land Use Element and Map of the Collier County Growth Management Plan to create a new overlay known as the "Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay" to the Ovedays and Special Features outlined in Section V of the Future Land Use Element for the specified lands located within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area (approximately 1,739 acres). The proposed text change is shown below. V. Overlays and Special Features D. Bayshore/Gateway Tdangle Redevelopment Oveday The Bayshore/Gateway Tdangle Redevelopment Oveday, depicted on the Future Land Use Map. is consistent with the boundaries of the Baysh0re/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area adopted by the Board of County. Commissioners on March 14, 2000..The intent of the redevelopment program is to encourage the revitalization of the Bayshore/Gatewsy Triangle Redevelopment Area by [~roviding incentives that will encourage the private sector to invest in this urban area. This Oveday allows for additional neighborhood commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of property_. or joint ventures between property_ owners. while providing interconnections between properties and neighborhoods. The intent of this Overlay is to allow for more intense development in an urban area where urban services are available. One or more zoning overlays will be adopted into the Collier County_ Land Development Code to aid in the implementation of this Overlay. The following provisions and restrictions apply to this Overlay: Commercial uses allowed within this Oveday are those contained in the C-1 through C-3 zoning districts of the Collier County. Land Development Code. and hotels/motels. except as commercial uses may be limited by a zoning oveday. Mixed residential and commercial uses are .Dermiffed. For such mixed uses. commercial uses are permitted on the first two stories only. Commercial and mixed use pro!ects should be pedestrian oriented and are encouraged to provide access (vehicular. pedestrian. bicycle) to nearby residential areas. The intent is to encourage pedestriar~ use of the commercial area and to provide opportunity_ for nearby residents to access these commercial uses without traveling onto major roadways. Parking is encouraged to be located in the rear of the buildings with the buildings oriented clo~er to the m~jor roadway to promote traditional urban development. Residential uses are allowed within this Oveday. Permitted density_ shall be as determined through application of the Density_ Rating $y~;tem. and applicable FLUE Policies. except as provided below and except as may be limited by a zoning overlay. Non-residential/non-commercial uses allowed within this Overlay include essential services: parks. recreation and open space uses: water-dependent and water-related uses: child care centers: community_ facility_ uses; safety_ service facilities: and. utility. and communication facilities. *words underlined are added; words st,-.'~u.-thrcugh are deleted 2 £,,0~ AGENDA ITEM 7-P Properties with access to US-41 East are allowed a maximum density. of 12 residential units per acre, The project must be integrated into a mixed-use development with access to existing neighborhoods and adjoining commercial properties in order to be eligible for this higher density_. Any eligible density_ bonuses. as provided in the Density_ Rating System. would be in addition to the eligible density_ provided herein, The maximum density_ allowed is that specified under Density_ Conditions in the Density Rating System. If said residential properties do not provide access to neighborhoods and commercial sites. then density_ is limited to that allowed by the Density_ Rating System and applicable FLUE Policies. except as may be limited by a future zoning oveday. Properties with access to Bayshore Drive. as identified in the Bayshore Zoning Overlay District. are allowed a maximum density_ of 12 residential units per acre provided the property. meets the specific development standards that will apply to commercial and mixed-use development along the Bayshore Drive corridor. The Bayshore Drive Zoning Overlay will be developed and adopted into the Land Development Code in the next available amendment cycle. Expansion of existing commercial zoning boundaries along Bayshore Drive will not be allowed until the zoning overlay is in place. Properties within the Bayshore Drive Zoning Overlay may be eligible for in-fill low-intensity commercial development pro¥ided they meet the criteria listed below: a. If one parcel in the proposed project abuts commercial zoning on one side. the commercial zoning may be applied for the entire pro!ect site. Interconnectivity. of parcels. shared parking agreements. and complementary, design features are all b, The depth of a parcel for which commercial zoning is sought may exceed the depth of the abutting commercial zoned property_. Adeo_uate buffers must be provided between the commercial uses and non-commercial uses and non-commercial zoning. c. The project must be compatible with existing land uses and permitted future land uses on surrounding properties. Parcels currently within the boundaries of Mixed Use Activity. Center ¢¢16 will continue to be govemed by the Mixed Use Activity_ Center Subdistrict. A zoning overlay may be developed for these properties within the Mixed Use Activity. Center to provide specific development standards. Existing zoning districts for some properties within the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay allow uses. densities and development standards that are inconsistent with the uses, densities and development standards allowed within this Oveday. These properties are allowed to develop and redevelop in accordance with their existing zoning until such time as a zoning overlay is adopted which may limit such uses. densities and development standards, Buildings containing only commercial uses are limited to a maximum height of three ~;todes. *words underlined are added; words st."Jck-thrcugh are deleted Buildings containing only residential uses are limited to a maximum height of three stodes 3 M,t,Y .;.,. %30 AGENDA ITEM 7-P 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Buildings containing mixed use (residential uses over commercial uses) are limited to a maximum height of four stories. For purposes of this Overlay. each 14 feet of building height shall be considered one story_. Hotels/motels will be limited to a maximum floor are~ ri~tio of 0.45 and a maximum height of four stories. Buildings containing commercial uses. or mixed use. are limited to a maximum building footprint of 20.000 s0uare feet. Zoning overlays may provide for increased building height~ @rid/or building size by conditional use e.Dproval. Building footprint size and/or height may be further limited in a zoning overlay. The following changes are needed to clarify the intent of the overlay in other sections of the Future Land Use Element. Page 10 Policy 1.5: Overlays and Special Features shall include: A. Area of Critical State Concern Overlay B. Areas of Environmental Concern Overlay C. Airport Noise Area Overlay D. Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay Page 17 and 18 I. URBAN DESIGNATION Urban Designated Areas will accommodate the following uses: ao Residential Uses including single family, multi-family, duplex and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts,_~p.d Subdistricts and Overlays that follow. Non-residential uses including: 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, and in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict and Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict and in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Oveday. 15. Hotels/motels consistent by Policy 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11, or as permitted in the Immokalee Area, Golden Gate Area and Marco Island Master Plans, and as permitted in the Bayshore/Gateway Tdangte Redevelopment Oveday. *words underlined are added; words struck-through are deleted 4 AGENDA ITEM 7-P Page 19 2. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict In order to facilitate hurricane evacuation and to protect the adjacent environmentally sensitive Conservation Designated Area, residential densities shall be limited to a maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre, except as allowed in the Density Rating System to exceed 4 units per acre through provision of Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights. and except as provided in the Bayshore/Gateway Tdangle Redevelopment Oveday. Page 22 DENSITY RATING SYSTEM The Density Rating System is applicable to the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. Page 24 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict The Mixed Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Additionally, some commercial development is allowed outside Mixed Use Activity Centers in the PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Traditional Neighborhood Design Subdistrict, the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay and by Policies 4.7, 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11 of the Future Land Use Element. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The intent of this amendment is to allow for more flexibility in uses and higher densities in the designated redevelopment area. The provisions included in this overlay should be an incentive for private developers to invest in this older community that has been recognized by the Board of County Commissioners as an area in need of redevelopment. The amendment allows additional neighborhood commercial uses and higher residential densities that will promote the assembly of property or joint ventures between property owners, while providing interconnections between commercial properties and neighborhoods. The amendment provides some specific development standards and allows for additional standards to be created through the zoning overlay process. The intent is to allow for more intense development in an urban area where services are provided. In order to maintain the community character that is being proposed for the redevelopment area, one or more zoning overlays will be adopted into the Land Development Code that will assist in implementation of the provisions outlined in this overlay. *words underlined are added; words st,-'_'c.~. thrc'.'~h are deleted AGENDA ITEM 7-P SURROUNDING LAND U$1~, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Existing Conditions: The proposed area consists of two communities: Bayshore and the Gateway Triangle. The Bayshore area extends south of U.S. 41 along Bayshore Drive to south of Thomasson Drive. The area contains approximately 1,448 acres. It is currently designated on the Future Land Use Map as Urban - Mixed Use District/Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. Under this subdistrict, residential densities are limited to a maximum of 4 dwelling units (du) per acre in order to facilitate hurricane evacuation, except as allowed in the Density Rating System to exceed 4 units per acre through provision of Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights. The area bordered by US 41, Davis Boulevard, and Airport Road defines the Gateway Triangle community. The area also includes the Collier County Government Complex and Courthouse Shadows commercial center. The area contains approximately 291 acres. It is currently designated on the Future Land Use Map as Urban - Mixed Use District/Urban Residential Subdistrict. The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities. Maximum eligible residential density is determined through application of the Density Rating System but cannot exceed 16 dwelling units per acre, except in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the Land Development Code. A portion of the commercial property located along US41 is designated as a Mixed Use Activity Center (Activity Center #16). The Mixed Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. STAFF ANALYSIS: Environmental Im_Dacts: Since the majority of land within the proposed overlay is already developed there should not be any negative environmental impacts with the proposed amendment. There may be some positive environmental impacts as older commercial properties are redeveloped and rid of any environmental hazards. Effects on Hi_~h Range Pooulation Projections: The intent of this amendment is to develop mixed-use developments that would allow any increase in population to work and shop close to where they live. Based on the proposed projects outlined in the redevelopment plan, approximately 231 acres could utilize the increased density allowed with this amendment. Taking into account the 156 acres the Botanical Gardens have purchased, the net maximum increase in density would be 1512 dwelling units. The population derived from the number of additional dwelling units likely to be developed will not have a "significant impact" on the population projections as defined in the Capital Improvement Element (5% of the popu_lat!~,~on); 6 AGENDA ITEM 7-P Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Analysis: US41 is classified as a Principal Arterial in the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, The segment of US41 located within the study area is being widened to a six-lane facility with improved turning capacity at the Bayshore Drive/Shawdowlawn Drive intersection. The projected Level of Service after completion is C. The improvements will be completed in 2000 and provide additional capacity for hurricane evacuation. Bayshore Drive is a classified as a collector with a level of service C. It is a curbed four-lane facility to Thomasson Drive. Compatibility/Commercial Demand Analysis This amendment will provide an incentive to redevelop parcels with a mix of neighborhood commercial and residential uses. The intent is to encourage interconnections between parcels and reduce the number of vehicle tdps on major arterials, The Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Area is an established urban community. It is strategically located to govemmental services, employment services, the City of Naples, and tourist attractions (beaches). The majodty of infrastructure is in place, although improvements may be required, especially in the area of drainage. The proposed increase in density, when developed in a mixed-use environment, is consistent with the goals of the redevelopment and compatible to the surrounding areas. FINDING~ AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The Overlay provides an opportunity for higher densities on properties that have access to US41. The expansion of this roadway will be completed in 2000 and will provide additional capacity for hurricane evacuation. It is estimated that the maximum number of additional dwelling units in the area as a result of this overlay would be 1512. This increase in dwelling units should not have a significant impact on hurricane evacuation. 2. The higher density recommended will help to establish a focus for the area by creating a sense of an urban neighborhood where people can live, work, and shop. Higher densities can reduce auto dependency and enhance the feasibility of other transportation nodes, such as transit and walking. 3. The amendment provides some development standards, e.g. size limitation of building foot print and height to assure that projects maintain a neighborhood character. The adoption of zoning overlays with additional standards is also encouraged. 4. In a recent Department of Community Affairs Survey, there was broad support for changing Florida's Growth Management system to include incentives for urban redevelopment. The Department has also established the Urban Infill and Redevelopment Assistance Grant Program to provide planning and implementation grants to local governments to implement projects that are consistent with an urban infill and redevelopment plan. In conclusion, this amendment is consistent with the goals of redevelopment and compatible with the projects outlined in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Study. ~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ~ ecommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition CP. the ~oard of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation to transmit this amendmE Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). 7 AGENDA ITEM 7-P PREPARED BY: DEBRAH PRESTON, AICP CHIEF PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION April 24. 2000 DATE REVIEWED BY: S~'AN LITSIN(3'ER, AICP/;/ COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING MANAGER /-.-[ -.2 -oC DATE ROBERT J. MULHERE, AICP PJ~N,N~G SERVICES DEPA/~ TMENT DIRECTOR VINCEI~T A. CAUTERO, AICP ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE DATE Petition No.' CP-2000-1 NOTE: This Petition will be advertised for the May 9,2000 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: RUSSELL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN ATTACHMENT A 8A YSHORE / $A TEWA Y 7'RIA~ PROPOSED COMMUIIIIl'Y REDEVELOPiI/IENT STUDY AREA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPTION PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE 1999 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to review the 1999 Amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan and consider adopting, adopting with changes or not adopt said Amendments. CONSIDERATIONS: · Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for the adopted County Growth Management Plan. · Resolution 97-431 provides for a public petition process to amend the Plan. · The CCPC held their transmittal headngs on September 16 and October 7, 1999. · The BCC held their transmittal hearings on October 26, 1999. · The Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report (ORC Report) was received from the Department of Community Affairs on January 10, 2000. · The CCPC held their adoption hearings on April 20 and May 4, 2000. · This adoption hearing considers amendments to the following Elements of the Plan: Transportation Element Capital Improvement Element Golden Gate Area Master Plan Future Land Use Element FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This is a final adoption hearing, which will amend the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) has 45 days to find the plan amendments in compliance with State legislation. If found in compliance a "Notice of Intent" will be filed by the DCA and the plan amendments will become effective. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Collier County Planning Commission held their public hearing on April 20 and May 4, 2000. Their recommendations are as follows: PETITION CP-99-01, James O'Gara, requesting to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Golden Gate Office Commercial Subdistrict by adding retail uses, increasing building heights to 35 feet and providing vehicular access from a residential street. Unanimous recommendation to adopt as submitted by the petitioner. PETITION CP-99-02, John D. Jassy, requesting to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by re-naming the "CR- 951 Commercial In-fill Designation" to "Golden Gate Commercial In-fill Designation", changing the subject site from Residential Estates Subdistrict to Golden Gate Commercial In-fill Designation and modi~ing ~'h:,; MAY 0 9 2000 Commercial In-fill provision so as to allow certain commercial uses on the subject site. and to provide development standards specific to this site: Unanimous recommendation to adopt as submitted by the petitioner. 1. Letters/speakers in favor/opposition: a. Staff received 7 letters in opposition, including 1 from the Golden Gate Civic Association. b. There was 1 speaker in opposition of this petition. 2. Summary of Opposition: a. No need for additional commercial. b. Traffic impact on abutting roads/traffic safety concern. c. Commercial Incompatible with nearby residential. d. Site allows viable use under current zoning {single family dwelling)/current zoning is sufficient at this time. e. Developer wants to make money at public's expense. PETITION CP-99-03, Centrefund Development Corporation, requesting to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by expanding the Neighborhood Center at the Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevard intersection, and including additional acreage in the southeast quadrant of the same intersection, and by allowing 5.00 acres of commercial or conditional use development within this southeast quadrant: Vote was 4/2 in favor of recommending adoption as submitted by the petitioner. 1. Letters/Speakers in favor/opposition: a. Staff received 1 e-mail in opposition of this petition. b. There were 3 speakers in opposition of this petition. 2. Summary of Opposition: a. Survey should be invalid due to an individual calling Estates' residents to solicit responses in favor of the project. b. Disturb peaceful setting of the Estates. c. Commercial should be concentrated further east where it is needed most/commercial not needed at this intersection. d. Roadway should be widened prior to building commencement. PETITION CP-99-04, John A. Pulling, Jr. and Lucy G. Finch, requesting to amend the Future Land Use Element, by adding a new Subdistrict to be known as the "Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict" for specified lands located at the intersection of Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive: Unanimous recommendation to adopt as submitted by the petitioner. 5. CP-99-06, TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT: Unanimous recommendation to adopt as submitted by staff. 6. CP-99-07, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT: Unanimous recommendation to adopt as submitted by staff. CP-99-08, Bonita Bay Properties requesting to amend the text for Activity Center #9 and amend the map entitled Activity Center #9: The CCPC held their public hearing on May 4, 2000. A copy of the staff report to the Collier County Planning Commission is attached. The recommendations of the CCPC will be presented at the May 9, 2000 BCC meeting. MAY 0 9 Z000 RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners review the Growth Management Amendments, and adopt, adopt with changes or deny the proposed amendments. Prepared B '~~-~-: ,-~-~--~ .~ ~-~--- Date: qVl~chele R. Mosca, Sp,,r~'or P"--I~nner Comprehensive Plannin~g Se_ction Reviewed By: ~ ."~ Date: Sta'~ Litsinger, AICP, Manager'" Comprehensive Planning Section Approved By: Robe/rt ,J~ ~Vlulhere, AICP, Director PIaL~.~.. Services Dep/~r~ent Approved By: ~~ Vin'cent~.. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services Division Date: Date: -- AGENDA ITEM 0 9 zooo D IEB BUSH E STATE OF F LORID-~ OF COMMU PARTMENT NITY AF "Dedicated to making Florida a better place to cail home FAIRS STEVEN M. SEIBERT January 7. 2000 The Honorable Pamela S. Mac'Kie. Chairwoman Collier Coun~ 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples. Florida 34104 Dear Chairwoman Mac'Kie: The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Collier County (DCA No. 00-1), which was received on November 3. 1999. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state. regional and local agencies for their reviews. The Department has reviewed the proposed amendment for consistency with Rule 9J-5. F.A.C.. Chapter 163, Part fl, Florida Statues (F.S.), and the adopted Collier County Comprehensive Plan. The Department raises no objection to the proposed amendment and this leuer serves as the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. This letter and the enclosed external agency comments are being issued pursuant to Rule 9J- 11.010. F.A.C. Upon receipt of this letter. Collier County has 60 days in which to adopt. adopt ~ith changes. oi' determine not to adopt the proposed amendment. The process of adoption of local comprehensive plan amendlnents is outlined in Section 163.3184. F.S.. and Rule 9J-I 1.011. F.A.C. Within ten working days of the date of adoption. Collier Countx must submit the folloxving to the Department: Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendment: A copy of the adoption ordinance: A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed: A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance: and A statement indicating the relationship of the additional chan~es to the Department's Objections. Recommendations and Comments Report. 2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD · TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399- Phone: 8'~i0.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921 0781/Suncorn 291.07 Internet address: http://www.dca.state./t.us FLORIDA KEYS area of Critical Still CoI~'~'~ Field Office Area OI Criticill Sl~tl~ 27~'f~ Ov~ff,~as H~Iy, Suite 212 205 E~sl AGEI',~A i TF...M i DO~:~~ 1 2300 GREEN SWAMP ,~ mcem~ld Office The Honorable Pamela S. Mac'Kie January 7. 2000 Page Two The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent. In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendment. and pursuant to Rule 9J- 11.0 l 1 (5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive Director of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Please contact Bernard O. Piawah. Planning Manager, at (850) 487-4545. if you need additional assistance. Sincerely, ~ Bob Cambric, AICP Growth Management Administrator BC/bp Mr. Robert Mulhere, Director, Collier County Community Development Mr. Wayne E. Daltry, Executive Director, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council j~ Depar:ment of Environmental Protection r'laqory Stoneman C)ougtas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, Flor,da 32399-3000 David Seeretry Mr. D. Ray Eubanks Department of Community Affairs Bureau of Local Planning 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 December 10, 1999 Re: Proposed Amendment to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan, DCA 00-1 Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Department of EnvLronmentai Protection has reviewed the above-referenced amendment under the required provisions of Chapter 163, Part Florida Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5 and 9J-I 1, Florida Administrative Code. Our comments and recommendations are provided to assist your agency in developing the state's response. Please call me at (850) 487-2231 if you have any questions about this response. Sincerely, Office of Intergovernmental Programs ARachment "Pro~ect, Conserve anO Manage FIc:~a ~ ~tr, qronment and Natural Resources" ~n~. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRO~NTAL PROTECTION RESPONSE TO PROPOSED AMENDMENT DCA 00-1 OF TH~ COLLIER COUNTY COMYREHENSIVE PLAN Comments: 1. CP 99-01: No Comment 2. CP 99-02: No Comment 3. CP 99-03: Since this property will be served by both septic tanks and well water, it is recommended that the Collier County Health Department, or the applicant's professional engineer, test the soil to determine if it is suitable for ohsitc sewage disposal at the intended level of service and that it will protect the groundwater supplies fxom which residents will be drawing their drinking water. The applicant has not provided an analysis of soil suitability for onsite sewage disposal as required by Chapter 93-5.011, F.A.C.. 4. CP 99-04: No Comment. 5. CP 99-05: It is not clear why the County is increasing the residential base densities to 2 units per acre within lands classified as Agricultural. If the land truly is Agricultural in both nature and purpose, then why would residential densities need to be increased? Further, it was not clear that infrastructure will be required in these areas, or that so'ds will be suitable for on-site sewage disposal in order to prevent groundwater contamination from septic tank effluent. The county has not provided the information required by Chapter 9I-5.011, F.A.C. to demonstrate that both septic tanks and ground water will be suitable for residents in these areas of proposed increased densities. 6. CP 99-06: No Comment. 7. CP 0(3-07: Applicant is proposing the development of unlimited acreage within braxed Use Activity Centers that are in the form of Planned Unit Developments. One of the determinants for qualification is "Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads;" It is recommended that the emphasis on provision of adequate infi'astructure capacity also include sanitary sewers and an adequate supply of potable water. Further, with developmere of unlimited acres and an emphasis on adequate road capacity, it is also recommended that a stormwater management plan be developed and implemented in consultation with the South Florida Water Management District. Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Drive, 4th Floor, N. Ft. blyers, FL 33917-8009 (9~tl) 6Eff3-7720 December 9, 1999 Mr. D. Ray Eubanks, Community Program Bureau of State Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shurnard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 E0.~34,55, N. Ft. Myers. YL 33918-845S SLXNCOM 749-7720 FAX 941-656-7724 Dear Mr. Eubanks: Collier County/DCA 00-1 The staff of the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council has reviewed seven proposed amendments (CP-99-01, CP-99-02, CP-99-03, CP-99-04, CP-99-06, CP-99- 07and CP-99-08) to the 1999 Growth Management Plan of Collier County. That review was performed according to the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. Additionally, staff has reviewecl the proposed amendments for regionally unique issues (Attachment III). Staff found that one amendment was consistent with regional goals in the adopted Strategic Regional Policy Plan, and that the other amendments were not regionally significant. A copy of the SWFRPC staff recommendations is attached. This matter will be reviewed by Council as part of agenda item (3) at its meeting on December 16, 1999. If Council action is different from the staff recommendation, you will be notified. Sincerely, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council ~E :::~i vE~ DD ~rlet ~0 r WED/JR Attachments c: Vince Cautero, Administrator, Collier County Community Development & Environmental Services Agenda Item 3(f) LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS COLLIER COUNTY The Council staff has reviewed seven amendments to the 1999 Collier County Growth Management Plan. These amendments were developed under the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. (A synopsis of the requirements of the Act and Council responsibilities is provided as Attachment I.) Comments are provided in Attachment II. Staff review of the proposed amendments was based on whether they were likely to be of regional concern. This was determined through assessment of the following factors: 1. Location--in or near a regional resource or regional activity center; on or within two miles of a county boundary; generally applied to sites of five acres or more; size alone is not necessarily a determinant of regional significance; 2. Magnitude-equal to or greater than 80% of the county threshold for a development of regional impact of the same type (a DRI-related amendment is considered regionally significant); and 3. Character--of a unique type or use, directly identified as a use of regional significance, or a change ~n the local comprehensive plan that could be apptied throughout the local jurisdiction. The following table summarizes the review: Proposed Amendment Factors of Regional Significance Location Magnitude Character Consistent CP-99-01 no no no CP-99-02 no no no CP-99-03 no no no CP-99-04 no no no CP-99-06 no no no CP-99-07 yes yes yes CP-99-08 no no no not regionally significant not regionally significant not regionally significant not regionally significant not regionally significant yes not regionally significant RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve staff comments. Authorize staff to forward comments to the Department of Community Affairs and Collier County. Agenda Item 3{f) ] Attachment II SWFRPC COMMENTS Collier County Comprehensive Plan Amendments Proposed Amendment CP-99-01 This proposed text amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan adds associated small-scale retail to generally low density offices and institutions in the Urban Commercial Districts/Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistnct. Regional Significance Proposed Amendment CP-99-01 is not regional!y significant in location, magnitude or character. Proposed Amendment CP.99-02 This proposed text and map amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan provides up to 36,000 s.f. mixed commercial and residential use in the CR-951 Commercial Infill Subdistnct, with buffers and transition standards wt~ere adjacent to single-family residences. Regional Significance Proposed Amendment CC-99-02 is not regionally significant in location, magnitude or character. Proposed Amendment CP-99-03 This proposed text and map amendment to the Estates Mixed Use District/Neighborhood Centers Subd~strict of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan clarifies single-family development on a legal non-conforming lot of record and provides up to 17.15 acres of commercial development. Regional Significance Proposed Amendment CP-99-03 is not regionally significant in location, magnitude or character. Attachment II, Page Agenda Item 3(f) Atlachment II Proposed Amendment CP-99-04 This proposed text and map amendment prescribes the location and development critena for small scale mixed residential and business use in the "Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Sub-District" on Airport-Pulling Road between Pine Ridge Road and Vanderbilt Beach Boulevard. Retail uses would be capped at 5,000 s.f. and offices uses at 7,000 s.f. Regional Significance Proposed Amendment CP-99-44 is not regionally significant in location, magnitude or character. Proposed Amendment CP-99.06 This proposed text amendment updates the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. It corrects, updates, and modifies certain costs, revenue sources. supporting policies, and the dates of construction of facilities enumerated for capital projects in fiscal years 1999/2000 through 2002/2003. Regional Significance Proposed Amendment CP-99-06 is not regionally significant in location, magnitude, or character. Proposed Amendment CP-99-07 These proposed text and maps amendments to the Transportation Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan would: update year 2010 & 2020 traffic circulation maps consistent with upcoming Long Range Plan Amendment by the Collier County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO): · update lists and tables where appropnate; incorporate a build-out network for nght of way preservation guidance: incorporate by reference the Corridor Management Plan for the Tamiami Trail Scenic Highway; ~ncorporate by reference the Public Transportation Development Plan: comply with direction g~ven by the Board of County Commissioners dunng a rewew of the Transportation Element at their May 25, 1999 meeting; · change the minimum standard level of services on State facilities in rural areas from C to D; and modify the definition of "significant impact". Agenda Item 3(d) Attachment III Regional Significance The proposed amendments are regionally significant because they would help implement the following Goals of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan, August 1995: E.5. Transportation Goal V-l: Road construction and prioritization programs, and alternative modes analysis, shall ensure that evacuation times in coastal regions will decline with no evacuation times in the Region exceeding 18 hours by 2010. Goal V-5: By 2000, 5% of work tnps will be met through transit, carpooling, or other high-occupancy vehicle mode of transportation. Goal V-14: Local governments and Metropolitan Planning Organizations will ensure through their planning programs that future road networks will accommodate travel demand across junsdictional .boundaries. Proposed Amendment CP-99-08 This proposed text amendment adds specific factors to consider during review of a rezone petition, summarized as follows: · Encourage Planned Unit Development in Mixed Use Activity Centers. · The amount, type and location of existing zoned and developed commercial land within and around a two road mile area of the Mixed Use Activity Center; · Market demand and service area as feasibility guides to proposed commercial uses; · Existing land use patterns within and around two miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center; · Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads; · Compatibility and buffering regarding adjoining properties; · Natural or man-made constraints; · Land Development Code rezoning critena, access management plans, and architectural design standards; · Coordinated Traffic Flow, on-site and off-site, as demonstrated by various sources. Pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle interconnections with adjacent existing or future projects; · Conformance of Interchange Activity Center ~ with the development of an Interchange Master Plan as outlined by a future visioning process including County planning staff and property owners. Regional Significance While not regionally significant in location, magnitude or character, Amendment CP-99-08 provides an excellent general guideline for any local government rezoning petition review process. ECDSYSYSTEM hi3'lT. Jeb Bush Governor Environmental Protection Mar~o~7 Stoneman Oou#as Buildin~ Ta~h~ Ror~a 32399-3~ December 10, 1999 Attachmere Conserve and Mature Fiork~'s EnHranmen~ ond Na~rat Resources" DIVISIONS OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATe FLORIDA DEPAI~'MENT OF STATE Katherine Harris Secretm-v of State DIVISION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES Mr. Ray Eubanks Decembe~l Depar~nent of Community Affairs Bureau of State Planning ~~ I a [~Eg - ?- I~c~ 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Re: Historic; Preservation Review of the Collier County (00-1) Comprehensive Plan~lITLqi'~nent Request MEMBER OF THE FLORIDA CABINET Dear Mr. Eubanks: According to this agency's responsibilities under sections 163 3177 and 163.3178, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Cede, we have reviewed the above document to decide if data regarding justonc resources have been given sufficient considerataon m the request to amend the Collier County Comprehensive Plan. Proposed cha~ges to the Future Land Use Maps and tex~ amendments to the Transportation, Capital Improvement and Future Land Use Elements and the Golden Cra~ Area Master Plan were reviewed to consider the potermal effects of these ac~ons on historic resources. While our cursory rewew susgests that the proposed cha~ges may have no adverse ei~-cts on h~storic resources, rt is the county's responsibility to ensure that the proposed revtsions wall not have an adverse effect on signi6can~ archaeological or historic resources m Collier County. Changes revolving increased density or mtens~y of existin8 land uses of tracts should be checked to see if any known or potemml historic resources, both archaeological sites or historic structures, would be affected by these actions. Fu~hermore, by increasing the number of lanes of certain roads, the county should take into account the effect such actaohs would have on known and potential historic resouroes~both structures and archaeological sites. If these concerns are addressed and appropriate actaons are taken bythe city to protect these resources, then any resulting changes should be accaq~ble. In sum, n is our opinion that the amended comprehensive plan meets (although known and potential !ustonc resources need to be oare~ully considered m the plannm8 phases of proposed land use changes) the state of Fionda's requirements as promulgated m sections 163.3177 and 163.3178, FS., and Chapter 9I-5, F.A.C, regarding the identification of k~own historical resources within their specified area of jurisdiction, and for the establishment of policies, goals and objectives for addressre.8 known and potentally sngmficant htstoncal resources m Colher County If you have any questruns regarding our comments, please feel flee to contact Susan M. Harp or Laura Karometer of the Div~sion's Compliance Rewew sinfiat (850) 487-2333. 3 Historic Pensacola I"msetvation Boant {85~) 595-5~5 · FAX: Sincerely, James J. Miller, Acting Director Division of H~toncai Resources R.A. Gray Building · 500 South Bronough Street · Tallahassee, Flora 32399-0250 · http://www.flhentage.com :3 Director's Office :3 Archaeological Research Jr I-~tstonc Preservation ~ Historical Museums (8.~1 488-1480 * FAX: 4~-33.55 fSS0) 4&7-2299 · FAX; 414.-~ {8.q0) 4~'-23~ · FAX: 922-Oi96 (8~)) 488-14&4 · FAX: 921-2503 ~ Palm Beach Reglol'~l ~ ~ ,~. AuguslL'ne Regio~J Otirk-"e ~ Tampa Regional Office (5611 ~ 147~ · FAX: 2',',',',',',',',',~-1476 {904) 8~.-5045 · FAX: 825,-.5044 ($131 272-3843 * FAX: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2000 - 2 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA 4 MASTER PLAN ELEMENT Of ORDINANCE 89-05, AS 5 AMENDED. THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT 6 PLAN, FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER 7 COUNTY, FLORIDA; TO AMEND THE GOLDEN GATE AREA 8 MASTER PLAN BY AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE GOLDEN 9 GATE PARKWAY PROFESSIONAL OFFICE COMMERCIAL 10 SUBDISTRICT SO AS TO ALLOW RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ON 11 APPROXIMATELY 7 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN THIS SAME 12 SUBDISTRICT AND BY MODIFYING DEVELOPMENT 13 STANDARDS TO INCLUDE ACCESS FROM A RESIDENTIAL 14 STREET AND INCREASE BUILDING HEIGHTS TO 35 FEET; 15 PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN 16 EFFECTIVE DATE. 17 18 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the 19 Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was 20 required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and 21 WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier 22 County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and 23 WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development 24 Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective 25 comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans 26 pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and 27 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Services Department has submitted an 28 amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to amend the Golden Gate Professional Office 29 Subdistrict; 30 WHEREAS, Collier County did suPmir this Growth Management Plan amendment to the 31 Department of Community Affairs for preliminary review on October 29, 2000; and 32 WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and made no written 33 objections to this Golden Gate Area Master Plan amendment to the Growth Management Plan 34 and transmitted the same in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and 35 WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the Objections, Recommendations 36 and Comments Report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes 37 or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and 38 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the 39 manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concerning the adoption of this Golden 40 Gate Area Master Plan amendment to the Growth Management Plan on May 9, 2000; and 41 WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and 42 analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, including 43 the following: the Collier County staff report; the Notice of Proposed Change application; the 44 document entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (CP-99-01) and the other 45 documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of 46 the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of 47 County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and 48 WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; 49 and 5O 51 52 53 1 Words underlined are additions; Words st,"~ck through are deletions 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23- 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5O SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Land Use Designation Description Section of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3r° Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: MAI~J(~IE M. STUDENT Assistant County Attorney CP-99-01 Adoption Ordinance Words underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletion4 Petition CP-90-01 Amending the Golden Gate .Area Master Plan - Urban Commercial Dismcts, Golden Gate Parkway Professional Off-ice Commercial Subdismct. Exhibit A Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict The provisions of this district l see Map 6'} are intended to provide Golden Gate City with a viable Professional Office Commercial District with associated small-scale retail as identified under item 5.A. below. The Professional Office Commercial District has two purposes: · to serve as a bona-fide entry way into Golden Gate City; · to provide a commumty focal point and sense of place. The uses penrotted within this district are generally low intensity, office development, associated retail and institutional type uses, such as churches, which will minimize vehicular traffic, provide suitable landscaping, control ingress and egress, and ensure compatibility with abutting residential disWicts. For proiects contained wholly within the ongmal Professional office District with a miramum depth of 150 feet as measured from the property line adjacent and parallel with Golden Gate Parkway, the following small-scale retail uses are permitted: . 1. Apparel and accessory stores 2. Auto and home supply stores {Auto accessory dealers-retail, antomobfie parts dealers-retail and speed shops-retail only. I 3. Eating places {except carry-out establishments, drive-through only estabhshments, commissary restaurants, concession stands, contract feedrow food service-institutional, hamburger stands, hot-dog stands, ice cream stands, industrial feeding, refreshment stands, snack shops, soft drink stands and tea rooms. I 4. Food stores (except Convenience food stores-retail, grocery stores and superrrmrkcts. } 5. General m~chandise stores 6. Home furniture, fummhing, and equipment stores ?. Libraries §. Miscellaneous repair services (no electronic repam except computer repair only m coniunction with sales. ) 9. Miscellaneous retail 10. Paint, glass, and wall paper stores 1 I. Personal services {except corn operated laundries, beauty shops and barbershops. ) 12. United States Postal Service Propernes that qualify under item 5.A. will be subject to the following: All uses listed wfil be in accordance with the Standard Industrial Classification Codes within the C-2 zoning district as identified in the Collier County Land Development Code with the exceptions noted above. Item 5.A.2.will be consistent with the Land Development Code uses listed in the C-3 zoning district with the exceptions noted above. Fast food restaurants shah shield from view from Golden Gate Parkway all ordermR devices and/or windows where orders are to be taken. Vehicular access through adjacent properties to 53'~ Street SW may by allowed at the time of fezone upon completion of appropriate cross access easements. Any property line of,the subiect parcel that is immediately adiacent to single family residential must provide a minimum Type 'C" landscape buffer as~indicate~-~'~ in the Collier County Land Development Code. 1 Words underlined are additions, Words :-"--'ok t~..-m:'g~ are deleted Petition CP-99-01 Amending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan - Urban Commerc:al Dismcts/Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdismct. Buildflags utilizing second story office retail may request up to 35' in height, subiect to architectural design elements mcorporated through the rezone process. Buildings will be limited to two stories m height with no parking under the building. All buildings shall provide a common theme mcorporating architecture and proiect signage. 2 Words traderlined are additions, Words :-.~.::k ?~..-c'~.:'7,~' are deleted 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2000 - 2 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA 4 MASTER PLAN ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE 89-05, AS 5 AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT 6 PLAN, FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER 7 COUNTY, FLORIDA; TO AMEND THE GOLDEN GATE AREA 8 MASTER PLAN BY RENAMING THE "CR-951 COMMERCIAL 9 IN-FILL SUBDISTRICT" TO THE "GOLDEN GATE 10 COMMERCIAL IN-FILL SUBDISTRICT"; AMENDING POLICY 11 1.1 TO REFLECT THE RENAMING OF SAID SUBDISTRICT; 12 ADDING 6.83 ACRES TO THE SUBDISTRICT; MODIFYING 13 THIS SUBDISTRICT BY PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT 14 STANDARDS AND ALLOWING COMMERCIAL USES ON THE 15 ADDITIONAL ACREAGE; AMENDING MAP 4 IN THE GOLDEN 16 GATE AREA MASTER PLAN TO DELINEATE BOUNDARY 17 CHANGES TO THE COMMERCIAL IN-FILL SUBDISTRICT; 18 AND BY AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER 19 PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO REFLECT SAID 20 SUBDISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND 21 PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 22 23 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the 24 Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was 25 required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; an0 26 WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier 27 County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and 28 WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development 29 Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective 30 - comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans 31 pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and 32 WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Services Department has submitted an 33 amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by amending the CR-951 Commercial In-fill 34 Subdistrict; 35 WHEREAS, Collier County did submit this Growth Management Plan amendment to the 36 Department of Community Affairs for preliminary rewew on October 29, 2000; and 37 WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and made no written 38 objections to this Golden Gate Area Master Plan amendment to the Growth Management Plan 39 and transmitted the same in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and 40 WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the Objections, Comments and 41 Recommendations Report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with 42 changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and 43 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the 44 manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concerning the adoption of this Golden 45 Gate Area Master Plan amendment to the Growth Management Plan on May 9, 2000; and 46 WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and 47 analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, including 48 the following: the Collier County staff report; the Notice of Proposed Change application; the 49 document entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (CP-99-02) and the ether 50 documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of 51 the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of 52 County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and 53 WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; 54 and Words underlined are additions, Words c,t,"-'ck thrc"Gh are deletions ~, :1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3o 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4o 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 5o 51 52 53 55 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the amendment to the Land Use Designation Description Section of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and the amended Map 4 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan are attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and "C", respectively, all of which are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance ~s issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution af"rlrming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3r" Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: MARJO~flE M. ~TUDEI~I~' Assistant County Attorney CP-99-02 Adoption Ordinance 2 Words underlined are additions, Words ............. ~.. are deletions Exhibit A Policy 1.1.1' The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT Urban Residential Subdistrict High Density Residential Subdistrict URBAN - COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS Activity Center Subdistrict ~ Golden Gate Commercial In-fill Subdistrict Commercial Under Cdteria Interstate Activity Center Subdistrict Santa Barbara Commercial Subdistrict Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict 2) ~ Golden Gate Commercial In-fill Subdistrict Due to the existing zoning and land use pattern in the Commercial In-fill Subdistrict (see Map 4) and the need to ensure adequate development standards to buffer adjacent land uses, commercial uses shall be permitted under the following criteria: a) Commercial uses shall be limited to: · Low intensity transitional commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and commercial, to provide for small scale shopping and personal needs, · Intermediate commercial to provide for a wider variety of goods and services in areas that have a higher degree of automobile traffic. These uses shall be similar to C-1, C-2, or C-3 zoning districts outlined in the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102) adopted October 30, 1991 ). b) Rezones shall be encouraged in the form of a Planned Unit Development (there shall be no minimum acreage requirement for PUD rezones except for the requirement that all requests for rezoning must be at least forty thousand (40,000) square feet in area unless the proposed rezone is an extension of an existing zoning district consistent with the Golden Gate Area Master Plan); c) Projects within the in-fill area shall be encouraged to make provisions for shared parking arrangements with adjoining commercial developments when applicable; d) Driveways and curb cuts for projects within the Commercial In-fill area shall be consolidated with adjoining commercial developments; and e) Access to projects shall not be permitted from CR-951=; and Words underlined are additions, Words ~ are deletions Any proiect located within the in-fill area at the northwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard, less and except an easement for the Santa Barbara Boulevard right-of-way, shall be subiect to the additional development restrictions listed below. The western 25% of the site shall be limited to eiqht thousand (8,000) square feet of building area and limited to land uses as containea in the Collier County Land Development Code, as listed in the Permitted Uses Section of the Commercial Professional Zoning Distdct (C-1). The eastern 75% of the site shall be limited to twenty-eight thousand (28,000) square feet of buildinq area and limited to the followinq land uses: Permitted Uses listed within the Commercial Professional Distdct (C-1); hardware stores (exclusive of any outdoor display of merchandise); secudty and commodity brokers and dealers; general merchandise stores; banks; and, home furniture, furnishings and equipment stores. Drug stores shall also be permitted, but only within the eastern 60% of the site. Provide a minimum setback of seventy-five (75) feet from abuttinq Estates zoned property for principal structures. A twenty-five (25) foot wide landscaped strip shall be provided between the abutting road rights-of way or road easements and all vehicular use areas. A minimum buffer of thirty-five (35) feet in width shall be provided where the project is adjacent to single-family home sites. This buffer shall be increased to fifty (50) feet in width where this buffer is located within fifty (50) feet of any portion of a single-family structure. All of these buffers provided adjacent to single-family home sites shall be supplemented with Oak or Mahogany trees planted a maximum of twenty (20) feet apart in a stac~c~ered manner; and, a hedge that will, within two (2) years of planting, .qrow to a minimum height of seven (7) feet and be a minimum of ninety-five (95) percent opaque." All buildings shall have tile or metal roofs,.or decorative parapet walls above the roof line, and buildin.qs shall be finished in light, subdued colors except for decorative tdm. Building heights shall be limited to one (1) story and a maximum of thirty-five {35) feet on the western 25% of the site, and two (2} stodes and a maximum of thirty-five (35) feet on the eastern 75% of the site. All lighting shall be architecturally-designed, limited to a maximum height of twenty- five (25) feet, and shielded from neighboring residential land uses. 2 Words underlined are additions, Words "*-"'~' *~' .....~' are deletions EXHIBIT B MAP 4 PETITION CP-99.-02 GOLDEN GATE COMMERCIAL INFILL SUBDISTRICT COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA I 11 Jl J I~ SUBJECT 81TE ~ FOR PROPOSED COMMERCIAL INFII.~ EXHIBIT c ~('~u~ L.,':'ousz ~.,~ ~T-TT-~U T ~"D USE LEGEND ~ 2~ ~ ~.-' _. - - --~ PROPOSED ~MENDMENT cP-99-02 I---~/ ~ , --. ~1 ~11 I I----/ L-'~. II : : !.11 I I / I / 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- 2 3 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE GOLDEN GATE AREA 4 MASTER PLAN ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, 5 THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, BY 6 AMENDING SECTION B.2.A.2 "ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 7 CENTERS" OF THE ESTATES MIXED-USE DESIGNATION 8 SECTION OF THE ESTATES DESIGNATION SECTION OF THE 9 LAND USE DESCRIPTION SECTION BY INCREASING THE 10 ACREAGE REQUIREMENT ALLOWED FOR THE 11 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER AT WILSON AND GOLDEN GATE 12 BOULEVARDS; BY AMENDING MAP 7, ENTITLED GOLDEN 13 GATE ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS, OF THE GOLDEN 14 GATE AREA MASTER PLAN; AND BY AMENDING THE FUTURE 15 LAND USE MAP OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN 16 TO REFLECT THE INCREASE IN ACREAGE FOR THIS 17 SUBDISTRICT; BY PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND BY 18 PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 19 20 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the 21 Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was 22 required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and 23 WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier 24 County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; anct 25 WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development 26 Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective 27 comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans 28 pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and 29 WHEREAS, William L. Hoover, AICP, of Hoover Planning, representing Warren Raymond, 30' Development Officer, of Centrefund Development Corporation has submitted an application to the 31 Collier County Planning Services Department to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by 32 allowing an increase in acreage to the neighborhood center located at the intersection of Wilson 33 Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard to allow commercial development or conditional uses. 34 WHEREAS, Collier County did submit this Growth Management Plan amendment to the 35 Department of Community Affairs for preliminary rewew on October 29, 2000; and 36 WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and made no written 37 objections to this Golden Gate Area Master Plan amendment to the Growth Management Plan 38 and transmitted the same m writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and 39 WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the Objections, Recommendations 40 and Comments Report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes 41 or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and 42 WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the 43 manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concaming the adoption of this Future 44 Land Use Element amendment to the Growth Management Plan on May 9, 2000; and 45 WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and 46 analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, including 47 the following: the Collier County staff report; the Notice of Proposed Change application; the 48 document entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (CP-99-03) and the other 49 documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of 50 the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of 51 County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and 52 53 1 Words underlined are additions, Words ............u~,, are deletions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 49 5o 51 WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the amendment to the Land Use Designation Description Section of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, Section B.2.A.2. in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and the amended Map 7 of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Future Land Use Map of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan are attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and "C", respectively, all of which are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the vatidity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3'" Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: MARJOI~E M STUDENT Assistant County Attomey CP-99-03 Adoption Ordinance 2 Words underlined are additions; Words st,"--'c,k thre',;';h are deletio The proposed map amendments are to "Golden Gate Estates Neighborhood Centers" and the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The proposed text amendment is to the Neighborhood Centers Subdistrict, as follows: Exhibit A a. Estates-Mixed Use District 1) Residential Estates Subdistrict - Single-family residential development may be allowed within the Estates Mixed Use Subdistrict at a maximum density of one unit per 2% gross acres unless the lot is considered a legalnon-conforming lot of record. 2) Neighborhood Centers Subdistrict - Recognizing the need to provide basic goods and services to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. a) Location The locations are based on intersections of major roads and spacing criteria (See Map 7). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development. The node at the NE and SE quadrants of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately ,~ 12.15 acres in size and consists of Tract 1, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development or Conditional Uses, as permitted in the Estates zonin.q district, and allocates 2.15 acres to proiect buffering and ri.qht-of-way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The node at CR-951 and Pine Ridge Road is located on both sides of the intersection. Tracts 109-112 and the N1/2 of Tract 113, Unit 26, Golden Gate Estates are included in this node as eligible for commercial development. The Sl/2 of Tract 113 and the E1/2 of Tract 107, Unit 26 are also included within this node but are only to be used for buffer, water management and open space. 1 Words underlined are additions, Words r.~-'-ck ~hrct:gk are deletions EXHIBIT B PROPOSED AMENDMENT CP-99-03 GOLDEN GATE ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS Collier County, FIorido C.R. 846 GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD C.R. 858 WHITE BLVD. SUBJECT SITE IN~RSTATE- 75 PREPARED BY: GRAPHICS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT SECTION COMMUNITY DE'v[LOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIMSION FILE: NC-CP-99-O3.DWG DATE: 1/2000 C.R. 846 G~ GATE ESTATES N~B(~HO(X:) CE3q'/~RS LEGEND I NEI~B~ ~S 1 MI 2 al , E~H[BIT C GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP LEGEND NAPLES IMMOKALEE ROAD DAYIS BLVD. EXT. $.R,-&4 GOLDEN (]ATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE 1IAP PROPOSED ~MENDMENT CP-99-03 ~APLES IMMOY[ALEE ROAD RA~DAI-I i OIL WELL ROAD SUBJECT SITE R27E I GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AREA CIVIC ASSOCIATION SURVEY REQUEST SURVEY YES ! NO ' WINN DIXIE ;ALBERTSON°Si WINNS OTHER 1. Are you In favor of a grocery store/shopping center on the 7.5 acre southeast quadrant of Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevards? 127 ! 39 2. Are you only In favor if the retailer meets with your approval? 08 85 3. Which of the followfng grocery stores would you consider for this location? 4. In the event that a grocery store would not be located at this site would you favor another anchor store such as a hardware store, drug store, professional offices, etc. What kind of store? ! 1 - Kash & Karry ................ ~ 1 - Foodlion ...................... ! 1 - Home Depot ................. 35 i I - Walgreens .................... 177- Hardware or Drug Store.. ;4 - Professional .................. 13 - K-Mart .......................... 11 - General Merchandise,.. i 1 ~ Office Building ............. ~2 - Post Office ................... i3 - Dairy Queen ................. 13 - Restaurant ................... 1 - Hair Salon ................... I - Bank ............................ 5 - Any type of service ........ 4 - Walmart .......................... 1 - Fast Food ........................... ! 1 - Liquor ................................ ; 1 - Target ............................... Other comments: 1. Need signal. [ Publix I~ 951 & Immokalee is enoug~h. 3. Put in a park. 4. Sooner or later the property will be zoned comercial. 5. Be careful not to hodgepodge. 5. Grocery store would reduce traffic. 7. We don't like ddving 20 miles to get food. B. A~y business should have a rural, rusfic appearance.. No s~p malls. 10. What about a shedff substation 11.7.5 acres too much; 5 acres - yes. 12. Plaza will eliminate traffic. 13. Only a grocery store. 14. G's General's pdces are too high. 15. Help traffic problem ~ widen road. 16. Put in grocery store & much more (FI is a toudst state). 17. Widening road won't be enough to handle traffic. 18. No Food Lion 19. Stores - not offices. 20. No Bars or Billards. 21. Leave platted estates all residential. 22. Survey unfair, everyone in estates should vote. 123. Keep estates rural nad commercJal free. i~. Immokalee Road & Randall area would also be a good location. 25. It is not necessary 1o be isolated to be rural. 26. Bigger, full-size grocery store, 27. Small grocery store - ano~er G's General - high pdces. r 28. Sewices, Bank, Medical, offce - please. ~-~-~r 29. Orange Tree area better, 30. ~. No Seven Elevens, Community Center - park and pool. No Winn Dixie - stores go down hill (Golden Gate City) Class action suit, against Publix - they only cater to the wealthy. 34. Grocery store needed. I 35. Widen roads before store. 36. Store will reduce traffic. 37. Hum/up and make decision. 38. Some place besides Golden Gate Boulevard. TOTAL SURVEYS RECEIVED 173 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 49 51 52 53 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; BY ADDING A NEW SUBDISTRICT ENTITLED THE ORANGE BLOSSOM MIXED-USE SUBDISTRICT; ADDING A NEW MAP ENTITLED ORANGE BLOSSOM MIXED-USE SUBDISTRICT; AND AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO SHOW SAID DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Karen Bishop, representing John A. Pulling Jr. and Lucy G. Finch, has submitted an application to the Collier County Planning Services Department to amend the Future Land Use Element by adding a new subdistrict entitled the "Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict" located on the northeast corner of Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive and on the southeast comer of Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. WHEREAS, Collier County did submit this Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Community Affairs for preliminary review on October 29, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and did not make written objections to this Future Land Use Element amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted the same in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concerning the adoption of this Future Land Use Element amendment to the Growth Management Plan on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Future Land Use Element, including the following: the Collier County staff report; the Notice of Proposed Change application; the document entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (CP-98--04) and the other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Of COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: '~'~'). 1 Words underlined are additions, Words =t,'-_'c~. thrc:;~,.h are deletions ~....~..~ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Future Land Use Element and the amendment to the Land Use Designation Description Section of the Future Land Use Element in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and the additional map of Future Land Use Element and amended Future Land Use Map of the Future Land Use Element are attached hereto as Exhibits "B" and "C", respectively, all of which are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Future Land Use Element shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3"° Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this __ day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: MARYOglE M sT01~ENT Assistant County Attorney BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman CP-99-04 Adoption Ordinance 2 ~ Words underlined are additions, Words :t."-'~~. through are deletions~ Petition CP-99-04 Amending the Future Land Use Element - Urban Mixed Use District and amending the Future Land Use Map to reflect Orange Blossom Mixed - Use Sub-District 1) EXHIBIT "A" Amend the existing Future Land Use Element. The proposed text additions are to Pages 10, 18, 22, and 24: Page 10 Policy 1.1: The URBAN Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: A. URBAN - MIXED USE DISTRICT 1. Urban Residential Subdistrict 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict 3. Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict 4. Business Park Subdistrict 5. Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict 6. PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict 7. Traditional Neighborhood Design Subdistrict 8. Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict 8.9 Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict Page 18 I. URBAN DESIGNATION 12. Commercial uses subject to criteria identified in the Urban - Mixed Use District, PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Traditional Neighborhood Design Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict, Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict and in the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict and Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict. Words underlined are additions, Words g~-'.ck tkrcugh are deletions. Petition CP-99-04 Amending the Future Land Use Element - Urban Mixed Use District and amending the Future Land Use Map to reflect Orange Blossom Mixed - Use Sub-District Page 22 8. Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict The intent of this district is to allow for limited small-scale retail, office and residential uses while requiring that the project result in a true mixed-use development. The Activi .ty Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this subdistrict will promote small scale mixed-use development with a pedestrian orientation to serve the homes both existing and future in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended to be a prototype for future mixed-use nodes, providing residents with pedestrian scale development while also reducing existing trip lengths for small-scale commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those allowed in the C-l, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts except as noted below. The development of this subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development with a common architectural theme which has shared parking and cross access agreements will be developed. c. Retail uses will be capped at a maximum of 5,000 sq. ft. per acre for the total project. d. Office uses will be capped at a maximum of 7,000 sq. ft. per acre for the total project. e. Residential development will be subject to the density rating system. f. Maximrim lot coverage for buildings is capped at 17.5% for the total project. g. No more than 25% of the total built square footage will be devoted to single story buildings. h. Primary entrances to all retail and commercial uses shall be designed for access from the interior of the site. Buildings fronting on Airport Road and Orange Blossom Road will provide secondary accesses facing those streets. i. All four sides of each building must be finished in a common architectural theme. j. A residential component equal to at least 25% of the allowable maximum base densi .ty under the density rating system must be constructed before the subdistrict completes an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet retail of office uses. k.Residential units may be located both on the North and South side of Orange Blossom Drive. 1. Integration of residential and office or retail uses in the same building is encouraged. m. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties where feasible and desired by adjoining property owners. n. No building footprint will exceed 5,000 square feet. Common stairs, breezeways or elevators may join individual buildings. o. No building shall exceed three stories with no allowance for under building parking. p. Drive-through establishments will be limited to banks with no more than 3 lanes architecturally integrated into the main building: q. No gasoline service stations will be permitted. · Words underlined are additions, Words :m:ck t.U. rc'.:gk are deletions. Petition CP-99-04 Amending the Future Land Use Element - Urban Mixed Use District and amending the Future Land Use Map to reflect Orange Blossom Mixed - Use Sub-District r. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. s. Twenty. foot wide landscape Type D buffers along Orange Blossom Drive and Airport-Pulling Road and a 20 foot wide Type C buffer along all other perimeter proper .ty lines will be required. t. Parking areas will be screened from Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. u. The Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict provision is not applicable to any properties adjacent to this Subdistrict. Paoe 24 Mixed Use Activi _ty Center Subdistrict The Mixed-Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can read'fly be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Additionally, some commercial development is allowed outside of Mixed Use Activity Centers in the PUD Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict, Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict, Traditioanl Neighborhood Design Subdistrict, Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict, Goodlette/Pine Ridge Commercial Infill Subdistrict, and by Policies 4.7, 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11 of the Future Land Use Element. Words underlined are additions, Words s~ack t.uzcug~ are deletions. PROPOSED AMENDMENT (CP-g9-04) PUD ~ ACTIVITY CENTER PUD BOUNDARY ¥ANOER~LT ~A~ RO~ EXT, ~ VA~LT BEA~ PUD PUD ~ ~s ~ ' PUD _; -'" ' ' - - PUD ./ PUD ~ A ~. SITE ~ i - :: ' -:: C-4 --~ : ACTI~TY CENTER ~ I '' ~ . ' ~ ~ . . BO~DARY - ! ~~ R~F-3 C-1 PUD A ~ C-S CF ~ ~ RO~ P~ ~ ROAD T ~,~ $ T 47 $ EXIIIBIT C T ~*~ $ T 50 S T 51S T 62 S T 63 S S 6t' ,L $Lt,i $ t'~ .I. 'S 6~ .L $ 06 I Metzc° 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 49 5O 51 52 53 ORDINANCE NO. 2000 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; BY CORRECTING, UPDATING, AND MODIFYING CERTAIN COSTS, REVENUE SOURCES, SUPPORTING POLICIES, AND THE DATES OF CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES ENUMERATED IN THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT FOR CAPITAL PROJECTS IN FISCAL YEARS 1999/2000 THROUGH 2002/2003; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County did submit this Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Community Affairs for preliminary review on October 29, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and did not make written objections to this Capital Improvement Element amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted the same in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the Objections, Comments, and Recommendations report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concerning the adoption of this Capital Improvement Element amendment to the Growth Management Plan on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Capital Improvements Element, including the following: the Collier County staff report; and the other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Capital Improvement Element in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated by reference herein. ! Words underlined are additions; Words =t,"--'c~ thrc:~.~h are deletions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 47 48 49 5o 51 52 53 55 56 57 58 SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. if any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Capital Improvement Element shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs eadier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3"" Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this day of ,2000. A'I-rEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: MA~J(~E U. STt. JI~EI~T Assistant County Attorney CIE Adoption Ordinance 2 Words underlined are additions; Words st."--'c~ thrc~h are deletioni~ EXHIBIT A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT Ninth Annual Update & Amendment COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN Prepared by Comprehensive Planning Section 1999 AMENDMENTS TO COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT *INDICATES ADOPTED PORTION NOTE: THE SUPPORT DOCUMENT IS UPDATED PERIODICLY AS NEW DATA AND INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE. Words underlined are additions; Words st~ack are deletions III. * IV. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS: Roads Projects Drainage Projects EMS Projects Jail Projects Library Buildings Projects Library Collection Government Buildings Projects Parks Projects Water Projects Sewer Projects Landfill Projects COST AND REVENUES PROGRAMS TO ENSURE IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS (Support Documents) Public Facility Requirements Capital Improvements Projects Capital Improvement Financing Capacity Collier County School Board Capital Improvement Program Timing & Location of Capital Improvements: Current Local Practices Financing Plan Collier County Fifth Annual Update & Inventory Report (AUIR) on Public Facilities Indicates portions to be adopted by Ordinance Paqe CIE - 1 CIE - 2 CIE - 17 CIE - 26 CIE - 27 CIE - 29 CIE - 30 CIE -31 CIE - 32 CIE - 33 CIE - 36 CIE - 42 CIE - 46 CIE - 47 CIE - 49 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G ~L INTRODUCTION .., 1985 and 1986 the Florida Legislature significantly strengthened the requirements for county and city comprehensive plans. One of the provisions of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act is the requirement that the comprehensive plan must contain a Capital Improvement Element to "... consider the needs for and location of public facilities ..." (Section 163.3177(3), Florida Statutes). The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) must identify public facilities that will be required during the next five years, including the cost of the facilities, and the sources of revenue that will be used to fund the facilities. One of the specific requirements of the legislation states that the public facilities that are contained in the CIE must be based on "standards to ensure the availability of public facilities and the adequacy of those facilities including acceptable levels of service." The administrative regulation that implements the statutes defines the phrase "level of service" as "... an indicator of the extent or degree of service provided by ... a facility based on and related to the operational characteristics of the facility. Level of service shall indicate the capacity per unit of demand for each public facility." (Section 9J-5.003 (41), Florida Administrative Code). CIE- 1 Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT GOALS~ OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL 1' TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES CONCURRENT WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE AND MAINTAIN OR EXCEED ADOPTED STANDARDS FOR LEVELS OF SERVICE. OBJECTIVE 1.1: Identify and define types of public facilities for which the County is responsible, establish standards for levels of service for each such public facility, and determine what quantity of additional public facilities are needed in order to achieve and maintain the standards. Policy 1.1.1: The County shall establish standards for levels of service for three categories of public facilities, as follows: Category A public facilities are facilities which appear in other elements of this comprehensive plan, including arterial and collector roads, surface water management systems, potable water systems, sanitary sewer systems, solid waste disposal facilities, and parks and recreation facilities. The standards for levels of service of Category A County provided public facilities shall apply to development orders issued by the County and to the County's annual budget, and to the appropriate individual element of this Comprehensive Plan. The standards for levels of service of Category A facilities which are not County provided shall apply to development orders issued by the County and to the appropriate individual element of this Comprehensive Plan, but shall not apply to the County's adnual budget. Category B public facilities are facilities for the County's library, jail, emergency medical service, other government buildings, and dependent fire districts. The standards for levels of service of Category B public facilities shall apply to the County's annual budget, but not apply to development orders issued by the County. Category C includes those facilities operated by Federal, State, and municipal governments, independent districts, and private organizations. The standards for levels of service of Category C facilities shall be advisory only, and shall not apply to the development orders issued by the County or the County's annual budget. Public facilities shall include land, structures, the initial furnishings and equipment (including ambulances, fire apparatus, and library collection materials), design, permitting, and construction costs. Other "capital" costs, such as motor vehicles and motorized equipment, computers and office equipment, office furnishings, and small tools are considered in the County's annual budget, but such items are not "public facilities" for the purposes of the Growth Management Plan, or the issuance of development orders. CIE- 2 Words underlined are additions; Words r,t~:~s,v~t,~a~ are deletions .~Policy 1.1.2: ~. quantity of public facilities that is needed to eliminate existing deficiencies and to meet the needs iuture growth shall be determined for each public facility by the following calculation: Q = (S x D)- I. Where Q is the quantity of public facility needed, S is the standard for level of service, D is the demand, such as the population, and I is the inventory of existing facilities. The calculation will be used for existing demand in order to determine existing deficiencies. The calculation will be used for projected demand in order to determine needs of future growth. The estimates of projected demand will account for demand that is likely to occur from previously issued development orders as well as future growth. The County Commission will review all rezone requests and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall County-W~de density or intensity of permissible development with consideration of their impact on both the variable "D" in the formula Q = (S x D) - I, and the overall roadway system. The County Commission shall not approve any such rezone request or FLUE amendment that significantly impacts either: (1) a roadway segment already operating and/or projected to operate within one year at an unacceptable Level of Service or; (2) the BEBR high range growth rate population projections through the year 2000, and then the BEBR medium ranme .arowth rate thereafter, for the variable "D", unless one or more of the following simultaneously occur: Specific mitigating stipulations are approved in conjunction with the rezone to restore or maintain the Level of Service on the impacted roadway segment; The adopted population standard/~c~c~ high ........ i,,,.,~,,,~ used for ~. · , ~, ,,~v t"' vjv~,~, ,/ calculation of "Q" in the formula Q = (S x D) - I is amended based on appropriate data and analysis; o The Schedule of Capital Improvements is updated to include any necessary projects that would support the additional public facility demand(s) created by the rezone or amendment to the Future Land Use Element. Significant impact is hereby defined for Section B of this Policy as generating potential for increased County-Wide population greater than 5% of the BEBR high range population projections for Parks, Solid Waste, Water, Sewer and Drainage facilities, or as generating a volume of traffic equal to or greater than 5% of the Level of Service C peak hour volume of an impacted roadway. CIE- 3 Words underlined are additions; Words st;uc~ thrcugh are deletions There are three circumstances in which the standards for levels of service are not the exclusive determinant of need for a public facility: 1. Calculated needs for public facilities in coastal high hazard areas are subject to all limits and conditions in the Conservation and Coastal Management and Future Land Use Elements of this Growth Management Plan. Replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities, and repair, remodeling and renovation, will be determined by the Board of County Commissioners upon the recommendation of the County ~ Administrator. Public facilities that provide levels of service in excess of the standards adopted in this Growth Management Plan may be constructed or acquired at any time as long as the following conditions are met: the facility does not make financially unfeasible any public facility of the same type that is needed to achieve or maintain the standards for levels of service adopted in this Growth Management Plan, and the facility does not contradict, limit or substantially change the goals, objectives and policies of any element of this Growth Management Plan. Any public facility that is determined to be needed as a result of any of the factors listed in Section B and D of this Policy shall be included in the regular Schedule of Capital Improvements contained in this Capital Improvement Element, All capital improvement projects for such public facilities shall be approved in the same manner as the projects that are identified according to the quantitative analysis described in Section A of this policy. Policy 1.1.3: The determination of location of improvements to expand public facilities will take into consideration the projected growth patterns as identified in the County's annual population projections. Where applicable, public facility improvements will be coordinated with the capital facility plans of any other governmental entity providing public facilities within Collier County. Policy 1.1.4: Public facility improvements within a category are to be considered in the following order or priority: Replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities, including repair, remodeling and renovation of facilities that contribute to achieving or maintaining levels of service. B. New facilities that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies in levels of service. New facilities that provide the adopted levels of service for new growth dudng the next five fiscal years, as updated by the annual review of the Capital Improvement Element. In the event that the planned capacity of public facilities is insufficient to serve all applicants for development orders, the capital improvements will be scheduled in the following priodty order to serve: 1. previously approved orders permitting redevelopment, 2. previously approved orders permitting new development, 3. new orders permitting redevelopment, and 4. new orders permitting new developments, CIE- 4 Words underlined are additions; Words str'--'ck thrcu2=,h are deletions Improvements to existing facilities, and new facilities that significantly reduce the operating cost of providing a service or facility. New facilities that exceed the adopted levels of service for new growth during the next five fiscal years by either: 1. providing excess public facility capacity that may be needed by future growth beyond the next five fiscal years, or providing higher quality public facilities than are contemplated in the County's normal design criteria for such facilities. Policy 1.1.5: The standards for levels of service of public facilities shall be as follows: Cate.qory A Public Facilities A1 County Roads: A1.1 County arterials and collector roads: Level of Service as indicated "_" below on the basis of peak hour, peak season traffic volume: Level of Service "E" on the following designated roads: Golden Gate Parkway Goodlette-Frank Road Goodlette-Frank Road Pine Ridge Road Roads From - To Airport-Pulling RoadPine Ridge Road to Golden Gate Parkway Airport-Pulling Road to Santa Barbara Boulevard Pine Ridge Road to Golden Gate Parkway Golden Gate Parkway to US 41 Airport-Pulling Road to 1-75 The County has declared as "constrained" the following seRment: Vanderbilt Beach Road US 41 to Gulfshore Ddve A1.2 Level of Service "D" peak hour, peak season on all other County arterial and collector roads, however any section of road may operate at Level of Service "E" for a period not to exceed two fiscal years following the determination of Level of Service "E" in order to provide the County with time to restore Level of Service "D" by making appropriate improvements. Development orders may be issued during the two year period to the extent their issuance is consistent with Policies 1.5.3 and 1.5.4 of this Element. A2 State and Federal Roads: EXISTING RURAL AREA 1-75 B US 41 C SR-84 C SR-951 - SR-29 C SR-82 C TRANSITIONING URBANIZED AREA URBANIZED AREA c c D D D D D D CIE- 5 Words underlined are additions; Words ct."Jck thrcuGh are deletions A3 County Surface Water Management Systems: A3.1 A3.2 Future "private" developments - water quantity and quality standards as specified in Collier County Ordinances 74-50 and 90-10. Existing "private" developments and existing or future public drainage facilities - those existing levels of service identified (by design storm return frequency event) by the completed portions of the Water Management Master Plan as listed in the Drainage/Water Management Subelement of the Public Facilities Element. A4 A4.1 A4.2 A4.3 County Potable Water Systems: County systems County Water District ~ 185 gallons per capita per day Goodland Water District - 163 gallons per capita per day City of Naples = 163 gallons per capita per day City of Everglades - 163 gallons per capita per day in incorporated service area Private potable water systems: Sewage flow design standards as identified in Policy 1.3.1 of the Potable Water Subelement of this Growth Management Plan. A5 A5.1 A5.2 A5.3 County Sanitary Sewer Systems: County systems: North Sewer Service Area = 145 gallons per capita per day South Sewer Service Area = 121 gallons per capita per day City of Naples = 121 gallons per capita per day Private sanitary sewer systems: Sewage flow design standards as identified in Policy 1.2.1 of the Sanitary Sewer Subelement of this Growth Management Plan. A6 County Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: A6.2-1 Two years of ~""'~'" I;"'~ """ dispcsa! ..... ;*" "* pt:sent ~'" -"*"" constructed lined cell capacity at the average disposal rate for the previous five (5) years A6.3 2 Ten years of landfill ..... '""~ ..... i,,, .., p ..... , r,..,.,,.~ permittable capacity at the average disposal rate for the previous five (5) years. A7 County Parks and Recreation Facilities: A7.1 A7.2 A7.3 Category B B1 B2 B3 B4 Regional Park land Community Park land Recreation facilities Public Facilities: County Library Buildings County Library Collection = 2.9412 acres per 1,000/pop. = 1.2882 acres per 1,000/pop. = $179.00 capital investment per capita (at current cost) · 0.33 square feet per capita · 1.39 5 books per capita County Jail : 0.0024 beds per capita County Emergency Medical : .000068 EMS units per Service capita CIE- 6 Words underlined are additions; Words -..tr'~ck thrcu~h are deletions County other Government ' 2.58 square feet per capita Buildings County Dependent fire districts: B6.1 Isle of Capri District B6.2 Ochopee District Category C Public Facilities: C1 Municipal Streets: C1.1 City of Naples C2 C4 = 0.00097 apparatus and stations per capita C5 = 0.00057 apparatus and stations per capita C6 C1.2 Everglades City = not to exceed annual average capacity of "C" for all streets = annual average of"A" for all collectors C7 C2.1 Federal and State Lands Surface Water Management: Federal Lands Surface Water Management = to protect Natural Resources, development allowed will be designed so drainage will have no adverse impact on resources. (No measurable standard) C2.2 State Lands Surface Water Management = leased lands for agriculture to have best management practices per clean water act. (No measurable standard) C3.1 C3.2 Municipal Surface Water Management: City of Naples = maintain existing level of service. New development to conform with County surface water Everglades City = 10 year - 24 hour storm event C4.1 Municipal Potable Water Systems: Everglades City = 135 gallons per capita per day, plus 21% for non-residential C5.1 Municipal Sanitary Sewer Systems: Everglades City = 100 gallons per capita per day plus 21% for non-residential C6.1 C6.2 Private Solid Waste Disposal Facilities: City of Naples : 1.55 tons per capita. Everglades City -- 1.55 tons per capita C7.1 Federal and State Parks: Federal Parks: Everglades National Park, Big Cypress Preserve - to protect environmentally sensitive lands. Boundaries set by legislation. (No measurable standard) C7.2 State Park: C7.3 State Recreation Area: Policy is not to develop more than 20%. (No measurable standard) CIE- 7 Words underlined are additions; Words stru",,,~, thrcugh are deletions Standard is of no particular size, physical limited to no more than 50% of land area. C8 C7.4 C7.5 C7.6 C8.1 C8.2 State Preserves: To maintain exceptional objects to conditions. Physical development limited to no more than 5% of land area. (No measurable standard) State Museum: No standard for size State Ornamental Garden: No standard for size Municipal Parks and Recreation Facilities: City of Naples: a. Community Parks Neighborhood Parks Beaches d. Recreation Facilities Level of Service Standards: 1. Basketball Courts 2. Baseball Fields 3. Beach Access Points 4. Boat Ramps 5. Bike Trails 6. Community Centers 7. Football Fields 8. Horseshoe Pits 9. Meeting Rooms 10. Pavilions 11. Picnic Areas 12. Play Areas 13. Racquetball Courts 14. Shuffleboard Courts 15. Swimming Pools 16. Tennis Courts 17. Volleyball Courts 2 acres/1,000 population I acre / 1,000 population I mile ~25,000 population 1I 5,000 population 1/5,000 population 1/1,000 population 1/6,000 population 1/1,500 population 1/8,000 population 1/10,000 population 1/2,500 population 1/6,000 population 1/5,000 population 1/5,000 population 1/6,000 population 1/2,500 population 1/2,500 population 1/25,000 population 1/2,000 population 1/4,000 population Everglades City: Community Parks Recreation Facilities: = 1.25 acres/534 population 1. Basketball Courts= 1/534 population 2. Baseball Fields = 1/534 population 3. Bike Trails = 1/534 population 4. Community Centers= 1/534 population 5. Football Fields = 1/534 population 6. Pavilions = 1/534 population 7. Picnic Areas = 1/534 population 8. Play Areas = 1/534 population 9. Tennis Courts = 1/534 population CIE- 8 Words underlined are additions; Words -+ .... ~- *~' ..... ~' are deletions C9 C10 Cll Private Recreation Facilities: a. No standard in industry b. Collier County Usable Open Space Requirement Ordinance ¢182-2 Sec. 7.27 1. Planned Residential Developments = 60% of gross area shall be devoted to usable open space 2. Commercial, Industrial, & Mixed Purpose Development = at least 30% of gross area shall be devoted to open space 3. Dedication of usable open space = Maximum of 8% of gross project site Public Schools: a. K - 5 Elementary School = b. 6 - 8 Middle School = c. 9 - 12 High School = 832 students/building 1100 students/building 2200 students/building Public Health Facilities: County Government Buildings standard of 2.58 sq. ft. per capita includes the County's public health facilities. CIE- 9 Words underlined are additions; Words ctruck thrcu~h are deletions FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ,.'3JECTIVE 1.2: Provide public facilities in order to maintain adopted level of service standards that are within the ability of the County to fund, or within the County's authority to require others to provide. Existing facility deficiencies measured against the adopted level of service standards will be eliminated with revenues generated by ad valorem taxes and intergovernmental revenues received based on economic activity. Future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements necessitated by growth. Future development's payments may take the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary contributions for the benefit of any public facility, impact fees, dedications of land, provision of public facilities, and future payments of user fees, special assessments and taxes. Policy 1.2.1: The estimated capital expenditures for all needed public facilities shall not exceed conservative estimates of revenues from sources that are available to the County pursuant to current law, and which have not been rejected by referendum, if a referendum is required to enact a source of revenue. Policy 1.2.2: Existing and future development shall both pay for the costs of needed public facilities. Existing development shall pay for some or all facilities that reduce or eliminate existing deficiencies, some or all of the replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities, and may pay a portion of the cost of facilities needed by future development. Both existing and future development may have part of their costs paid by grants, entitlements or public facilities from other levels of government and independent districts. --'"olicy 1.2.3: ]blic facilities financed by County enterprise funds (i.e., potable water, sanitary sewer and solid waste) may be financed by debt to be repaid by user fees and charges for enterprise services, or the facilities may be financed from current assets (i.e., reserves, surpluses and current revenue). Policy 1.2.4: Public facilities financed by non-enterprise funds (i.e., roads, surface water management, parks, library, emergency medical service, jail, other government buildings, and dependent fire districts) shall be financed from current assets (pay-as-you-go financing) except as otherwise provided in this policy. Public facilities financed by non-enterprise funds shall not be financed by debt unless such borrowing is the only financing technique available that wilt enable the County to provide facility capacity sufficient to meet standards for levels of service concurrent with new development. Debt financing shall not be used to provide excess capacity in non-enterprise public facilities unless the excess capacity is an unavoidable result of a capital improvement that is needed to achieve or maintain standards for levels of service. Notwithstanding other provisions of this policy, general obligation bonds approved by referendum may be used for any public facilities to acquire capacity needed within the five year capital improvements plan or for excess capacity. Policy 1.2.5: The County shall not provide a public facility, nor shall it accept the provision of a public facility by others, if the County is unable to pay for the subsequent annual operating and maintenance costs of the facility. ClE- 10 Words underlined are additions; Words ~t.--_'ck thrcu~h are deletions Policy 1.2.6: The County shall continue to collect Road Impact Fees for road facilities requiring the same level of service standard as adopted in Policy 1,1,5 of this element in order to assess new development a pro rata share of the costs required to finance transportation improvements necessitated by such development. Policy 1.2,7: The County shall continue to collect impact fees for Parks and Recreation, EMS and Library facilities requiring the same level of service standard as adopted in Policy 1,1.5 of this element in order to assess new development a pro rata share of the costs required to finance Parks and Recreation, EMS and Library improvements necessitated by such development. Policy 1.2.8: If, for any reason, the County cannot provide revenue sources identified as needed funding for specific projects within the adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements, the Growth Management Plan shall be amended based on one or more of the following actions: Remove through a plan amendment facility improvements or new facilities from the adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements that exceed the adopted levels of service for the growth during the next five (5) fiscal years; Remove from the adopted Schedule of Capital Improvements through a plan amendment facility improvements or new facilities that reduce the operating cost of providing a service or facility but do not provide additional facility capacity; VVhere feasible, transfer funds from a funded Non-Capital Improvement Element capital project in order to fund an identified deficient Capital Improvement Element public facility. The resulting revisions shall be reflected in the required annual update. Lower the adopted level of service standard through a plan amendment for the facility for which funding cannot be obtained. Do not issue development orders that would continue to cause a deficiency based on the facility's adopted level of service standard. Policy 1.2.9: Collier County will not exceed a maximum ratio of total general governmental debt service to bondable revenues from current sources of 13%. Whereas Florida Statutes place no limitation on the application of revenues to debt service by local taxing authorities, prudent fiscal management dictates a self-imposed level of constraint. Current bondable revenues are ad valorem taxes and State-shared revenues, specifically gas taxes and the half-cent sales tax. The Enterprise Funds operate under revenue bonding ratios set by the financial markets and are, therefore, excluded from this debt policy. ClE - 11 Words underlined are additions; Words -* .... ~' +~'",',,'"~' are deletions PUBLIC EXPENDITURES: COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA BJECTIVE 1.3: Effective with plan implementation public expenditures in the coastal high hazard area shall be limited to those facilities needed to support new development to the extent permitted in the Future Land Use Element. In addition, public expenditures shall include the following categories: A. Maintenance of existing public facilities; B. Beach, shore and waterway access; C. Beach renourishment. Policy 1.3.1: The County shall continue to expend funds within the coastal high hazard area for the replacement and maintenance of public facilities identified in the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Policy 1.3.2: The calculated needs for public facilities will be based on the adopted level of service standards and future growth projections within the coastal high hazard area. The Future Land Use Element limits new residential development (thus obligations for infrastructure expenditures) to a maximum of four dwelling units per gross acre within portions of the coastal high hazard area. Policy 1.3.3: -~The County shall continue to insure that access to beaches, shores and waterways remain available to ,e public and will develop a program to expand the availability of such including funding options for acquisition within one year of adoption of the Seventh Annual CIE Update and Amendment. CIE- 12 Words underlined are additions; Words =tr'Jck th:cu;h are deletions PROVIDE NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS OBJECTIVE 1.4: The County shall coordinate its land use planning and decisions with its plans for public facility capital improvements by providing needed capital improvements for replacement of obsolete or worn out facilities, eliminating existing deficiencies, and future development and redevelopment caused by previously issued and new development orders. Policy 1.4.1: The County shall provide, or arrange for others to provide, the public facilities listed in the Schedule of Capital Improvements in the "Requirements for Capital Improvements Implementation" section of this Capital Improvement Element. The Schedule of Capital Improvements may be modified as follows: A. The Schedule of Capital Improvements shall be updated annually. Pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187, the Schedule of Capital Improvements may be amended two times during any calendar year, and as allowed for emergencies, developments of regional impact, and certain small scale development activities. Pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3177, the Schedule of Capital Improvements may be adjusted by ordinance not deemed to be an amendment to the Growth Management Plan for corrections, updates, and modifications concerning costs; revenue sources; or acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications which are consistent with the plan. Policy 1.4.2: All Category A public facility capital improvements shall be consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the appropriate individual element of this Growth Management Plan. Policy 1.4.3: The County shall include in the capital appropriations of its annual budget all the public facility projects listed in the Schedule of Capital Improvements for expenditures during the appropriate fiscal year. Projects for which appropriations have been made in the annual budget will not be removed once they have been relied upon for the issuance of a building permit. The County may also include in the capital appropriations of its annual budget additional public facility projects that conform to Policy 1.1.2 (B.3) and Policy 1.1.4(C) and (E). Policy 1.4.4: The County shall determine, prior to the issuance of building permits, whether or not there is sufficient capacity of Category A public facilities to met the standards for levels of service for existing population and the proposed development. No building permit shall be issued unless the levels of service for the resulting development will achieve the standards in Policy 1.1.5, Category A, and the requirements for Concurrency Management as outlined in the policies within Objective 1.5 of this element are met. Policy 1.4.5: Public facilities and services provided by Collier County with public funds in accordance with the 5-year Schedule of Capital Improvements will be limited to Service Areas established within the boundaries designated on Map PW-1 titled, "Collier County's Three (3) Water and/ or Sewer Districts Boundaries", appearing in the Public Facilities Element for water and sewer. Roads improvements will be provided as designated on Map TR-4W titled, "5-year Capital Impro · · Element Map", appearing in the Traffic Circulation Element. All other public facilities and ,ervlt~ce'. '~~ will be provided on a County-Wide availability basis. _ . ClE- 13 Words underlined are additions; Words struck thrcuGh are deletions CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT )BJECTIVE '1.5: 1'o ensure that public facilities and services needed to support development are available concurrent with the impacts of'such development, the County's Concurrency Management System shall be consistent with Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes and Rule 9J-5.0055, Florida Administrative Code The County shall establish a regulatory and monitoring program to ensure the scheduling, funding and timely construction of Category A public facilities concurrent with, or prior to, the issuance of a building permit to achieve and maintain adopted level of service standards. Policy 1.5.1: The concurrency requirement for the Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, Drainage and Solid Waste Level of Service Standards of this Growth Management Plan will be achieved or maintained if any one of the following standards of the Concurrency Management System are met: The necessary facilities and services are in place at the time a building permit is issued; or The necessary facilities and services are under construction at the time a building permit is issued; or The necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement that includes the provisions of paragraphs A and B of this policy. An enforceable development agreement may include, but is not limited to, development agreements pursuant to Section 163.3220, Florida Statutes, or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. The agreement must guarantee that the necessary facilities will be in place when the impacts of the development occur. Policy 1.5.2: The concurrency requirement for the Recreation and Open Space Level of Service Standards of this Growth Management Plan will be achieved or maintained if any one of the following standards of the Concurrency Management System are met: Compliance with any one of the standards set forth in Policy 1.5.1 A, B and C is met; or At the time the building permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are the subject of a binding executed contract which provides for commencement of actual construct- ion of the required facilities within one year of the issuance of the building permit; or Go The necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement which requires the commencement of the actual construction of the facilities within one year of the issuance of the applicable building permit. An enforceable development agreement may include, but is not limited to, development agreements pursuant to Section 163.3220, Florida Statutes, or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. CIE - 14 Words underlined are additions; Words ctruck thrcu~h are deletions Policy 1.5.3: The concurrency requirement of the Traffic Circulation Level of Service Standards of this Growth Management Plan will be achieved or maintained if any one of the following standards of the Concurrency Management System are met: A. Compliance with any one of the standards set forth in Policies 1.5.1 A, B, and C and 1.5.2 B and C is met; or B. In areas in which Collier County has committed to provide the necessary public facilities and services in accordance with its five-year schedule of capital improvements, the concurrency requirement of the Traffic Circulation Level of Service Standards would be achieved or maintained if all of the following standards of the Concurrency Management System, based upon an Adequate Capital Improvements Program and adequate implementing regulations are met: A Capital Improvement Element and a five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements which, in addition to meeting all of the other statutory and rule requirements, must be financially feasible. The Capital Improvement Element and Schedule of Capital Improvements may recognize and include transportation projects included in the first three years of the applicable, adopted Florida Department of Transportation five-year work program. A five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements which must include both necessary facilities to maintain the adopted level of service standards to serve the new development proposed to be permitted and the necessary facilities required to eliminate those portions of existing deficiencies which are a priority to be eliminated during the five-year period under the Schedule of Capital Improvements. A realistic, financially feasible funding system based on currently available revenue sources which must be adequate to fund the public facilities required to serve the development authorized by the building permit and which public facilities are included in the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements. A five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements which must include the estimated date of commencement of actual construction and the estimated date of project completion. A five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements which must demonstrate that all actual construction of the road facilities and the provision of services is scheduled to commence in or before the third year of the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements. A plan amendment is required to eliminate, defer or delay construction of any road project which is needed to maintain the adopted level of service standard and which ks listed in the five-year Schedule of Improvements. Policy 1.5.4: The County shall continue to implement, a Concurrency Management System,_as identified in the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance No. 96-53, codified in Division 3.15 of the Collier County Land Development Code, which shall include a regulatory program and monitoring system consistent with this Growth Management Plan and consistent specifically with the policies under Objective 1.5 of this Capital Improvement Element. The monitoring system shall enable the County to determine whether it is adhering to the adopted Level of Service Standards and its Schedule of Capital Iraproven c~'.c.~, .~ Words underlined are additions; Words =t,'uc~ thrcu~h are deletions REQUIREMENTS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The Schedule of Capital Improvements on the following pages will eliminate existing deficiencies, replace obsolete or worn out facilities, and make available adequate facilities for future growth. Each project is numbered and named, and its cost during each of the next five fiscal years is shown in thousands of dollars (000). The month and year for actual commencement of construction and the month and year each project will be completed (in service) is indicated. Each project in Category A is consistent with the level of service standards as identified within this element and the appropriate individual element of this Growth Management Plan. Each project in Category B is consistent with the level of service standards as identified within this element. Optional elements were not developed for Category B facilities. CIE - 16 Words underlined are additions; Words ~tru~k thrcuGh are deletions o o ~ 0 c < u,/ >" o o ~. . (:3 0 0 z o uJ c) w w ~J u.I w ~ LI, J LU LU UJ UJ ::3 UJ .,.I ..,I ..,.[ ,--I ..~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 z u,,I z o o ~4 0 0 ~J o~ o I- z ::3 o z z o o o z o 0 m o i- z -t LM I-- Z UJ LU 0 -I h- UJ Z 0 LIJ 0 o zn o o o z ~J z [~. 0 '~ n m 0 (J z z o _J 0 o o i-- z o ~ o o o o o z LU U~ Z U.I ,...I UJ Z ,-i o r,.o O4 m z uJ _J LU I-- Z ~U ~U .J Z LU -J o o o o 0 0 0 0 I~.1 Lu ~,1 z 1.1.1 z u.i n" 0 0 0 0 0 0 D~ ud 0 z uJ uJ LU Z uJ LU 0 UJ Z .-I .,,J 0 z uJ ILl ...I UJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o I.- z > 0 "~ ' w.I ._1 o o o~ o o o o ~ w .~' = + e ~ '- '~ ~ 2 '- ~ .- ~ ~ . - = ~ ~ '-~ ~o o o o o o z LU uJ o uJ >. z 0 uJ _J o LU tu 0 I- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 uJ o u.i 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ~ o '13 0 0 .~t ~3 0 I-- z uJ _J I-- o z '0 0 o I-. z uJ I-. u.J o _J _1 _J ..i .J ..J I~ rv. _1 0 0 0 0 0 0 u. u. 0 o COSTS & REVENUES BY TYPE OF PUBLIC FACILITY (Xll) In the table below, the left column itemizes the types of public facilities and the sources of revenue. The center column contains the 5-year (FY99-03) amounts of restricted revenues. The right column is a calculation of the deficit for each type of public facility. All deficits are accumulated as a subtotal. Below t~ subtotal deficit is the source of additional revenue that will be used by the County to pay for the deficit in order to maintain the standards for levels of service listed in ClE Policy 1.1.5. COUNTY ARTERIAL & COLLECTOR ROADS LESS Available Revenues: Gas Taxes Road Impact Fees Carry Forward Miscellaneous State Reimbursements ~ $62,763,000 ~ 33,290,000 .~..)~ nnn 34 741 000 .~ 3,010,000 o7c nnn 575 000 DRAINAGE PLANS AND PROJECTS Less MSTU Bonds Developer Contributions SFVVMD DEP Naples 13,058,000 1,288,000 5,725,000 1,126,000 1,002,000 WATER & SEWER SYSTEMS LESS System Development Fees/User Fees SOLID WASTE/LANDFILL $100.552,000 1341387,000 Surplus* ~ 331827,000 __.:!=.-.ce 0 27,785,000 22,199,000 Deficit (5,586,000) 51,887,000 77,483,000 51,887,000 77,483,000 Balance 0 Balance 0 PARKS & RECREATION LESS Available Revenues: Park Impact Fees -1~ 14,900,000 Boating Improvement Funds 55v3,000 750,000 Bond/Loan Proceeds 14,100,000 Words underlined are additions; 29,750,000 29,750,000 Deficit /~ ~nm 0 CIE- 47 1 Words with struck through are deletions I EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE LESS EMS Impact Fees JAIL Less Bond/Loan Proceeds LIBRARY Buildings Collection Total Library Costs 4 619 100 3,565,700 8,184,800 LESS Library Impact Fees GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS FIRE DISTRICT Isle of Capri Ochopee Deficit Balance Deficit Balance Deficit Balance ~ ~ nnn 2 244 000 ~ 2,000,000 (! ')?~ ~nm (244,000) e,75e,OO9 14,641,o0o o o o o Subtotal Deficit of Restricted Revenue vs. Costs** ADD Unrestricted Revenues: Ad Valorem Taxes Balance (9,958,800) 9,958,800 0 Notes: * Funding for non-CIE transportation projects and reserve for future CIE projects. · * Excludes transportation restricted surplus. CIE- 48 Words underlined are additions; Words with struck through PROGRAMS TO ENSURE IMPLEMENTATION Through continued implementation of adopted land development regulations the following programs have been implemented to ensure that the goals, objectives and policies established in the Capital Improvement Element will be achieved or exceeded. 1. Buildinq Permit Review As part of the review of all applications for building permits, the County will determine whether or not there will be sufficient capacity of Category A public facilities to meet the standards for levels of service for the existing population and for the proposed development in accordance with the requirements of the Concurrency Management System. 2. Development Order Review As part of the review of requests for all development orders having negative impacts on Category A Public Facilities other than building permits, the County will determine whether or not sufficient capacity of Category A public facilities is planned for completion concurrent with the impacts on levels of service that will be created by the proposed development during the next five fiscal years. 3. Impact Fees Impact Fee Ordinances will require the same standard for the level of service as is required by Policy 1.1.5. 4. Annual Budget The annual budget will include in its capital appropriations all projects in the Schedule of Capital Improvements that are planned for expenditures during the next fiscal year. 5. Semiannual Report The mandatory semiannual report to the Department of Community Affairs concerning amendments to the comprehensive plan due to emergencies, developments of regional impact and selected small developments will report on changes, if any, to adopted goals, objectives and policies in the Capital Improvement Element. 6. Update of Capital Improvement Element The monitoring of and adjustment to the Capital Improvement Element to meet the changing conditions must be an ongoing process. Beginning in August of each year, the element will be updated in conjunction with the County's budget process and the release of the official BEBR population estimates and projections. The update will include: 1. Revision of population projections; 2. Updates of facility inventory; 3. Update of unit costs; Update of facilities requirements analysis to project 10 year needs (by fiscal year) in order to program projects to meet the service standards. Update of revenue forecasts in order to evaluate financial feasibility and the County's. ability to finance capital improvements needed to meet the service standards 6. Revise and develop capital improvement projects for the next five years. The fi~ schedule of projects will be incorporated into the County's budget effective Octo CIE 49 Words undeHined are additions; Words =tru~~. thrcu,Oh are deletions 7. Update of the public school and health facilities analysis. Concurrency Management System The County has established a Concurrency Management System by adoption of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The system consists of the following components: Annual monitoring report on the capacity and levels of service of public facilities compared to the standards for levels of service adopted in Policy 1.1.5. of this Element. The report summarizes the actual capacity of existing public facilities and forecast the capacity of existing and planned public facilities for each of the five succeeding fiscal years. For the purposes of long range capital facility planning, a ten year forecast of projected needed capacity is also done. These forecasts are based on the most recently updated Schedule of Capital Improvements in this Capital Improvement Element. This annual report constitutes evidence of the capacity and levels of service of public facilities for the purpose of issuing development orders during the 12 months following completion of the annual report. This report is the Annual Update and Inventory Report on Public Facilities (AUIR). Public facility capacity review. The County shall use the procedures specified in Implementation Programs 1 and 2 to enforce the requirements of Policies 1.5.1, 1.5.2 and 1.5.3 of this Element. Review of changes in planned capacity of public facilities. The County shall review each amendment to this Capital Improvement Element in particular any changes in standards for levels of service and changes in the Schedule of Capital Improvements in order to enforce the policies of this Element. Concurrency Management Implementation Strategies. The County shall annually review the Concurrency Management Implementation Strategies that are incorporated in this Capital Improvement Element: Standards for levels of service are applied within appropriate geographical areas of the County. Standards for County-Wide public facilities are applied to development orders based on levels of service throughout the County. Standards for public facilities that serve less than the entire County are applied to development orders on the basis of levels of service within assigned areas. Levels of service are compared to adopted standards on an annual basis. Annual monitoring is used, rather than case-by-case monitoring, for the following reasons: annual monitoring corresponds to annual expenditures for capital improvements during the County's fiscal year; and b. annual monitoring covers seasonal variations in levels of service. CIE 5O Words underlined are additions; Words ctruc~ through are deletions 8. Second 5-year Evaluation and Appraisal Report The required Second 5-year evaluation and appraisal report will address the implementation of the goals, objectives and policies of the Capital Improvement Element. The monitoring procedures necessary to enable the completion of the 5-year evaluation include: a. Review of annual reports of the Concurrency Management System; Review of semiannual reports to DCA concerning amendments to the Comprehensive Plan; and Review of annual updates of this Capital Improvement Element, including updated supporting documents. CIE 51 Words underlined are additions; Words :t."c~k thrcugh are deletions 1 2 3 ,4 5 6 7 8 9 1o 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 4,4 45 46 47 ,48 49 50 51 52 53 55 56 57 ORDINANCE NO. 2000 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; BY UPDATING TABLE V, COLLIER COUN'rY TRANSPORTATION DATA BASE, DELETING AND UPDATING VARIOUS TRANSPORTATION MAPS, AMENDING CERTAIN OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES AS THEY RELATE TO LEVELS OF SERVICE, AMENDING CERTAIN POLICIES TO REMOVE AND REPLACE INCONSISTENT LANGUAGE, CREATING POLICY 10.3 INCORPORATING BY REFERENCE THE CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE TAMIAMI TRAIL SCENIC HIGHWAY, CREATING POLICY 12.10 INCORPORATING BY REFERENCE THE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDING POLICY 1.4 BY CHANGING THE MINIMUM STANDARD LEVEL OF SERVICE ON STATE FACILITIES IN RURAL AREAS FROM C TO D, AND AMENDING POLICY 5.2 BY MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County (Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, Collier County did submit this Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Community Affairs for preliminary review on October 29, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and had no objections to this Transportation Element amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and transmitted the same in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days from receipt of the letter of no objection from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concerning the adoption of this Transportation Element amendment to the Comprehensive Plan on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Transportation Element, including the following: the Collier County staff report; and the other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: 1 Words underlined are additions, Words ¢t,"_'~ thrc:;;h are deletions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 ,~6 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 55 56 SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Transportation Element in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated by reference herein, SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Transportation Element shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Local Planning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3~ Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-210Q PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: MARJO~E M. STUDENT Assistant Count7 Attorney Transportation Adoption Ordinance Words undedinf~cl are additions, Words =t.'-_'c,~. t,hrc~.h are deletions Exhibit "A" D. FUTURE SYSTEM NEEDS 4. Future Traffic Circulation Map - Year 2000 The roadways included in Table 5 are funded in the proposed 1997-9 -20043_ Capital Improvement Element. Map TR-4 (W & E) identifies the projects included in the ClE. Map Series TR-5 is similar to the Existing Traffic Circulation Map Sedes as it depicts the lane requirements and facility type and evacuation routes in the year 2000. Map TR-5AW, the Number of Lanes map for the year 2000, is reproduced unaltered from the Long Range Plan Update, and is the financially feasible network for that year. E. INTERMODAL & MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION 3. Mass Transit a. Purpose Collier County currently has no publicly sponsored fixed route bus system. Pdvate services offered in the County are fixed route "trolleys" which operate during the winter season in Naples and on Marco Island, and a network of para-transit providers that offer transportation services to the disadvantaged ,~,Icc, The Transportation Disadvantaged (TD) program is coordinated by Td Ccunty Senior Collier County, which has been designated as the Coordinated Provider by the Naples Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The TD services ~-' prcv~cd .... ~ ...... ; .... '~ offers home pick-up and delivery transportation for the elderly, handicapped, and economically disadvantaged in the County. The "trolley" systems mentioned above are run primarily for the toudst segment of the population and have fixed routes that visit the major shopping, beach and hotel interest points. b. Future System Needs Words underlined are additions; words e~ are c~sletions On August 31 1999 the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Public Transportation Development Plan (PTDP}, and a.qreed to become the Governing A.qency for Transit in Collier County. The PTDP contains estimates of un-met need in Collier County, both for the existing TD services, and for qeneral public transportation. It contains planninq level discussions on demand centers, route locations, vehicle sizes and types of services. The PTDP recommends, as the backbone of the public transportation system, deviated fixed route service, in which buses would follow a fixed route, with the ability to deviate from that route to pick up disabled passengers curbside at their residence. This service could be provided by a private agency under contract to the county. Other services proposed in the start up public transportation system are a vanpool proqram, circulator service in Immokalee, an Immokalee to Naples shuttle service, and a Commuter Assistance Proqram. Although the PTPD final report suggested the need for numerous public transportation services in Collier County, the scale and. growth rate of the initial system was such that no local fundin.q contribution was predicted to be required until fiscal year 2006. This situation is the result of gradual changes in the requirements for local matching funds that accompany state and federal grant funds. Collier County is already spending funds on public transportation that meet the match requirements. Words underlined are additionl; words ~ are d®letionl F'~._ ~"' Goals, Objective & Policies OBJECTIVE 1: The County will n'{aintain the major roadway system (excluding State highways) at an acceptable Level of Service by implementing improvements to restore acceptable level of service to the following roadways that have been identified as operating below !=re! cf cc,'-;~c= "D" their minimum standard level of service. CIE ~ Roadway From 3! -,....~,.. ,',....,.r, =,...,~~^' cf ~,...,,~...~,~l, r~.~,,,. 41 Pine Ridqe Rd. . Airport Rd. Airport Road Golden Gate Parkway T~o 1-75 Radio Rd. 62 Golden Gate Boulevard CR951 Wilson Blvd. 71 Immokalee Road CR951 Wilson Blvd. Policy 1.3: County arterial and collector roads shall be maintained at Level of Service "D" or better on the basis of the peak season peak hour traffic volume. Level of Service "E" or better shall be maintained on the following designated roadways. Roadway Airport-Pulling Road Golden Gate Parkway Goodlette-Frank Road Goodlette-Frank Road Pine Ridge Road Tamiami Trail East From Pine Ridge Road Airport-Pulling Road Pine Ridge Road US 41 Airport-Pulling Road Four Corners To Golden Gate Parkway Santa Barbara Blvd. Golden Gate Parkway Golden Gate Parkway 1-75 Goodlette Frank Rd. Tamiami Trail North Pine Ridge Rd. Solana Rd. The County has declared as "constrained" the following segments: ROADWAY From T__qo Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Gulfshore Dr. U.S. 41 Level of Service "D" or better shall be maintained on all other artedal and collector roads, however, any section of road may operate at Level of Service "E" for a pedod not to exceed two (2) fiscal years following the determination of Level of Service "E" in order to provide the County with time to restore Level of Service "D" by making appropriate improvements, The ~ (.Collier County.) MPO shall determine the optimum LOS for each county road segment. This will be done by more accurately identifying the traffic volumes that correspond to the different LOS thresholds on county roads, and more accurately quantifying the peaking characteristics of traffic on county roads. The first component of this is to update the LOS tables in the Transportation Element to best reflect current conditions on county roads. The second component is to begin installing, as funds permit, permanent traffic count stations, to better identify the peaking characteristics of traffic on county roads. The third component will ~ to amend the Capital Improvements Element to implement findings. i Words undsHined are additions; words ~ are deletions Policy 1.4: For the purpose of regulating development orders, Collier County has adopted the following level of service standards for state maintained roads: Rural Area I- 75 B US-41 SR- 84 SR-951 - SR- 29 GD SR- 82 GD Existing Urbanized Area Transitioning Urbanized Area C C D* D D D D D* The segmen! of US 41 from A~n~3rt-Pulling Roaci (CR-31) I0 RattlesnaKe-HammoO( Road (CR-864) and the segment of SR-951 (Isle of Capri Roa¢l) from New Yo~ D~ve to Ule Marc~ Bridge ~a~ been (Je~gnal~ as 'bac~logged' roa0ways by ~ Flon~ De0artment of Trafisoort,aOon. Rect~,~ruc~o~ along these segll~ents writ be ex!3ed~ted by FDOT. It should be noted that FDOT has different LOS standards for state roads. The County-) Metropolitan Planning Organization shall conduct a study to research the implications of these different LOS Standards that FDOT has established for state roads by area type. Establishing unreasonably high LOS standards in the fdnge "transitioning urban area" may require the diversion of revenues from more congested areas with lower levels of service standards, in order to maintain the high standards established in the outlying areas. Policy 2.2: The County shall annually appropriate the funds necessary to implement those projects shown in the annual element (first year) of the Secendcr; R-'.,=~d Prcgr=m Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR). Policy 3.3: By June 1998, Collier County's Transportation Department, "'~"'"- --~ '"'"'"'~*~' Prcjcct: ~A ........ * Public Works Engineering Department and the .Ncp~:c {.Collier County-) Metropolitan Planning Organization will develop standards, cdteda and implementation guidelines for right-of- way acquisition. Provision for landscaping shall be consistent with Collier County corridor management planning policies (see Future Land Use Element Policy 4.2 and Transportation Element Policy 7.4). The County shall acquire sufficient amount of fight-of-way to facilitate no less than a cross section of (6) traffic lanes, appropriate turn lanes, medians, bicycle and pedestrian features, drainage canals, and shoulder sufficient for pull offs and landscaping areas. Exceptions to the right-of-way standard may be considered when it can be demonstrated, through a traffic capacity analysis, that the maximum number of lanes at build-out will be less than the standard. Policy 4.2: The County shall provide for support services, resources and staff within the N:p!c: (-Collier County-) Metropolitan Planning Organization to coordinate the Bicycle/Pedestrian Program. Policy 4.3: The County shall provide an interconnected and continuous bicycle and pedestrian system_b.v_._ making the improvements identified on the 2020 Pathway Facilities Map sedes. The County's pathway construction pro,qram should be consistent with the Comprehensive Pathway Plan. The Pathway Advisory Committee should provide recommendations on th ch(~ii;~ Words underlined are additions; wordI ~ are deletionl of proiects to be included in the pathway construction pro,qram, and the order in which they are constructed. Policy 5.2: Significant Impact is hereby defined as generating a volume of traffic equal to or greater than 5% of the Lcv=! cf __.c.":icc.~ C minimum standard level of service peak hour volume of an impacted roadway. Policy 6.1: The Transportation Element shall incorporate to the greatest degree possible, the long range plans of the NcT-.!c= (Collier County.) Metropolitan Planning Organization. Policy 6.5 The NcpJcc (Collier County.)MPO's 1995 & 20!0 pin.".: h:':c adopted Long Range Plan has identified a need for an interchange at 1-75 and Golden Gate Parkway. An Interchange Justification Report shall be prepared by the Florida Department of Transportation and submitted to the Federal Highway Administration by October 1, -1-9;~_9.. Policy 10.$ The County shall incorporate herein by reference the Corridor Management Plan for the Tamiami Trail Scenic Hiqhway, which formed part of the application for Scenic Highway designation authorized by the Board of County Commissioners on November 3, 1998. Policy 12.1: The Na~eles-(Collier County.) Metropolitan Planning Organization, through the Transportation Disadvantaged Program shall assist the local community transportation coordinator in the implementation of the most efficient and effective level of service possible for the transportation disadvantaged. Policy 12.2: The County shall coordinate the development and maintenance of any return transit development plans with the h.~cT. Jcc (Collier County.) Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Flodda Department of Transportation. Policy 12,3 The Hcp~=c (Collier County.) Metropolitan Planning Organization shall monitor the need and desirability of implementing a transit system and will coordinate the development of any transit development plans. Policy 12.5: The County shall participate in the MPO planning process through an intedocal agreement with the City of Naples and the City of Marco Island, and in a Joint Participation Agreement with the FDOT. Policy 12.10 The County shall incorporate herein by reference the Public Transportation Development Plan adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on Auqust 3, 1999, Words underlined are additions; words ~ are deletions 5 LEE CO. COt. UER CO. YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT' ELEMENT MAP WE:STERN COLLIER COUNTY S.R. 84 I - 75 C.R. 846 HENDRY CO. COLLIER CO. COLLIER COUNTY. IrLORIDA 2(~ c~ m~,.Ec'r m.,mm~r of- ~.,t,/c0 42 7R-6AW J Countyvide Permanent Population 348.100 MAP TR-60W FACILITY TYPE - YEAR ~STERN COUJER COUNTY 2010 LEE CO. COLLIER CO. HENDRY CO. · '-"' COLUER CO. COLLIER CO~/NTY, FLORIDA 0 ~e.V/Co 53 YEAR MAP TR-6CW 2010 LEVELS OF SERVICE WESTERN COLLIER COUNTY HENDRY CO. C(~tJER COUNTY, FLORIDA T~,-6D ~v~t:Lon 2010 'J ties ./ COLLIER COUNTY LO4~ Pt.aal UPOATE MAP TR-7BW FACILITY TYPE - YEAR WESTERN COLIJER COUNTY 2020 HENDRY CO. COLLIER CO. COLUER C(XJNTY, FLORIDA SC, M.t '~E'k,/C0 6O YEAR MAP TR-7CW 2020 LEVELS OF SERVICE WESTERN COLLIER COUN'I'Y HENDRY CO. 62 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MEMORANDUM DATE: Decembc-r 17, 1998 TO: Susan King Di.m~ct One Scenic Highways Coordinator n~o .~u~dy Cunm (~ ~'State Scenic Highways Administrator CC: DIST. ONE PLANNING J FDOT. BARTOW Seeinc Highways Advisory Committee, C. Leroy Irwin, Lynne Marie Wh~ly ~ fixnn tt~ sc,~c I-Ii~away Advi.$o~ Cornmince the Tamiami Trail Designation Applicazion Comment with the recommendations of the Scenic Highways Advisory ComrrtiRee (SHAC) dllrixlg their review of the Tamiami Trail Designation Application, the following Program elemea~ should be addms.seal during the next year and their compliance recordcd in the first Annual Report for the The Program elements which must be attdrcza~ over the next year are: 1) Incorporation into the local government comprehensive plan of CoQicr County the following 2) th~ Cm'ridor Vision stalinnero, and 3) the Goals, Objecuves and $trar,.c~es specifically r~lated to Collier Coumy. 2) A Siltned Corridor Management Entity Alon~ with this,, the SHAC r~.ommemt~ ~ the Con-idor Advocacy Omut~Comdor ~ Enmy consid~ tl~ following su~es~cm: 1) consideration of warn. hydrotogy movement to support adjoimag natural Consider vegetative management planning along the comdor for exotic plato removal and promo~g native species. establish a ~ type of informational signnge that is easy to recognize and ~ especially for intorational tourms. 4) W<~k with local government for a mo~ positive e.~nmitm~t on the conrail of outdoor signs. Pmt~c~ a~cheological si~es along the corridor fi'om ~on by not identif-yi~ ~ exact location- Provide educational oppommities for these site~ rather than direct ~ Comdor ~ Group demo~m-~s tim ~ ~ with ~ goals ea~ ~ wondeffM th/x~ and improve the quality of life in Florida. Those of us involved in the Sc~ic .Highways Program look forward to the continued success of the Tamiami Trail. Your achievements will certainly serve as a model for other corridors lo follow. G :UO BS'~95X95R03 ~ l~Two-3 3k~sam~emo.wpd TRAN - 41 Words Underlined are additions: Words ~1~ are deletions. ~.4J~ 1~--4W YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT MAP W~SI'D~N C~J.JL~R Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. YAP 7R-6AW Number of Lar, es { _ CO~ER COU~ I~M Y~ N~P~ tco~ co~) W~ ~NG-~NGK P~ UPDA~ FIN~Y-~ P~ Words Underlined are additions; Words c,~ are deletions. MAP TR-6BW :"ACILITY TYPE - YEAR 2010 WES~RN COLLIER COUNTY Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. ~IAP ~:~-6CW '"EAR 2010 LEVELS OF SERVICE ~ESTE~ C~:X.UER COUNTY -LNC~Y 7. C .? Words Underlined are additions; Words ~i~ are deletions. Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. ~ TR- 7 A3~' Numoe r of 2020 .~estern CoL' ier Ccun~'; .~;'~.; ~ ~ ......................................... co~ co~ ~ (~ ~ ~ ~NG-~Gt P~ ~ ~AY ~0~ ~A~ - 58 Words Underlined are additions; Words s~ are deletions. ~AP --AC'~LiT'7 TYPE - YEAR 2020 W~STERN C OL.LIF. R Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. '"EAR ~,IAP "R- 7CW 2.,320 LEVELS CF SERVICE ,~ST~N COUJ~R Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. '~ear !g20 TRAN - 64 Words Underlined are additions; Words ~,~ are deletions. MAP MT-tW --:~-:JRE '~ASS TRANS;T MAP -~' AN $',T '~ ~ ~ '~'-' ..,E.,~AND CENTERS ~ TRANSIT ~,~R~DORS Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. FUTURE MASS TRANSIT MAP =RANSIT DEMAND CENTERS &: TRANSIT CORRIDORS EAS"~N COLLIER CO~JNTY JOLUE~ CO. 76 Words Underlined are additions; Words ~ are deletions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2o 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4o 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; BY AMENDING THE TEXT FOR ACTIVITY CENTER NUMBER NINE; AMENDING MAP ENTITLED ACTIVITY CENTER ~:3; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163,3161, et. seq.~, Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans pursuant to Sections 163.3184 and 163.3187, Florida Statutes; and WHEREAS, R. Bruce Anderson, representing Bonita Bay Properties and Frank X. Homan, has submitted an application to the Colliei County Planning Services Department io amend the Future Land Use Element by changing the text and map of Activity Center Nine, located at the northwest corner 1-75 and Collier Boulevard, formerly known as County Road 951. WHEREAS, Collier County did submit this Growth Management Plan amendment to the Department of Community Affairs for preliminary review on October 29, 1999; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Affairs did review and did not make written objections to this Future Land Use Element amendment to the Growth Management Plan and transmitted the same in writing to Collier County within the time provided by law; and WHEREAS, Collier County has 60 days ,[rom receipt of the Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report from the Department of Community Affairs to adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County did take action in the manner prescribed by law and did hold public hearings concermng the adoption of this Future Land Use Etement amendment to the Growth Management Plan on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, Collier County has gathered and considered additional information, data and analysis supporting adoption of this amendment to the Future Land Use Element, including the following: the Collier County staff report; the Notice of Proposed Change application; the document entitled Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (CP-98-08) and the other documents, testimony and information presented and made a part of the record at the meetings of the Collier County Planning Commission held April 20, 2000, and the Collier County Board of County Commissioners held on May 9, 2000; and WHEREAS, all applicable substantive and procedural requirements of law have been met; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. ~. ...__/~. 1 Words underlined are additions, Words ~-,~' ~*' .....~' ' ............ ~,, are deletions 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 $4 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 ,43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts this amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Future Land Use Element and the amendment'to the Land Use Designation Description Section of the Future Land Use Element in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. The text of the amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and the Activity Center # 9 map of the Future Land Use Element is attached hereto as Exhibits "B", both of which are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION TWO: SEVERABILITY. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining podi0n. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. The effective date of this amendment to the Future Land Use Element shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the Element in compliance in accordance with Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a Resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which Resolution shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau'of Local Pranning, 2555 Shumard Oaks Blvd., 3rd Floor, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County this day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J, CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: ~,F~J~)~'I~ M. STUDENT Assistanf'County Attorney CP-99-04 Adoption Ordinance 2 Words underlined are additions, Words (:t,"'Jc,u, through are deletions CP 99-08 EXHIBIT "A" The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition are as follows: - Rezones within Mixed Use Activity Centers are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. There shall be no minimum acreage limitation for such Planned Unit Developments except all requests for rezoning must meet the requirements for rezoning in the Land Development Code. The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two road miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center; Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses; Existing patterns of land use within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two radial miles; Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads; - Compatibility of the proposed development with, and adequacy of buffering for, adjoining properties; Natural or man-made constraints; Rezoning criteria identified in the Land Development Code; Conformance with Access Management Plans for Mixed Use Activity Centers contained in the Land Development Code; Coordinated traffic flow on-site and off-site, as may be demonstrated by a Traffic Impact Analysis, and a site plan/master plan indicatine on-site traffic movements, access point locations and type, median opening locations and type on the abutting roadway(s), location of traffic signals on the abutfine roadway(s), and internal and external vehicular and pedestrian interconnections; Interconnection(s) for pedestrians, bicycles and motor vehicles xvith existing and future adjacent proiects~ Conformance with the architectural desien standards as identified in the Land Development Code. Interchange Activity Center # 9 shall be subject to the requirerrent of the development of an Interchance Master Plan (IMP). The IMP is intended to create an enhanced "gateway" to Naples. The IMP process shall be initiated by the property owners and/or their representatives by meeting with the County planning staff within 60 days of the adoption of this Growth Management Plan amendment and a finding of compliance from the Department of Community Affairs. The purpose of the meeting will be to establish a mutually acceptable vision statement for Activity Center # 9. The Interchange Master Plan shall be adopted by Resolution by the Board of County Commissioners. All fezones thereafter shall meet the intent of the vision statement. Subsequent to the development of the vision' statement, new projects within Activity Center # 9are encouraged to have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development. The mixture of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center # 9 shall include the full array of commercial uses; residential and non-residential uses; institutional uses; Business Park; hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Development Code; industrial uses in the northeast, southwest and southeast quadrants. The mix and intensity of land uses shall meet the intent of the vision statement and be defined during the rezoning process. The entire Interchange Activity Center is eligible for up to 100% of the entire acreage to be developed for any of the uses referenced above, except the maximum amount of commercial acreage shall not exceed 55% of the total acreage (632.5 ac.) of Interchange Activity Center # 9. The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition shall be in compliance with the vision statement and those included for the Mixed Use Activity Center. For residential development, if a project is within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdisthct and not within the Estates Demgnatmn, Words underlined are additions, words smack ~'eugh are deletions. CP 99-08 up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. This density may be distributed throughout the project, including any portion located outside of the boundary of the Activity Center. Words underlined are additions, words :~.-'ck '~augh are deletions. EXHIBIT "B" Memorandum AGENDA ITEM 7-I PETITION #: ELEMENTS: PREPARED BY: DATE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS, CP-99-01, CP-99-02, CP-99-03, CP-99-04, CP-99-06 AND CP-99-07 FUTURE LAND USE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRANSPORTATION Michele R. Mosca, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section April 11, 2000 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: A. Petition CPo99-01, James O'Gara, requesting to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan Element, Golden Gate Professional Office Commercial Sub-district by adding retail uses, increasing building heights to 35 feet and providing vehicular access from a residential street. Amendment as transmitted to the DCA on October 29~ 1999: 5)Golden Gate Parkway Professional Office Commercial Subdistrict The provisions of this district (see Map 6) arc intended to provide Golden Gate City with a viable Professional Office Commercial District with associated small-scale retail as identified under item 5.A. below. The Professional Office Commercial District has two purposes: · to serve as a bona-fide entry way into Golden Gate City; · to provide a community focal point and sense of place. The uses permitted within this district are generally low intensity, office development, associated retail and institutional type uses, such as churches, which will minimize vehicular traffic, provide suitable landscaping, control ingress and egress, and ensure compatibility with abutting residential districts. A.For projects contained wholly within the original Professional Office District with a minimum .depth of 150 feet as measured from the property line adiacent and parallel with Golden Gate Parkway, the following small-scale retail uses are permitted: 1. Apparel and accessory stores 2. Auto and home supply stores (Auto accessory dealers-retail, Automobile parts dealers-retail and Speed shops-retail only.) 3. Eating places (except carry-out establishments, drive-through only establishments, commissary restaurants, concession stands, contract feeding, .food service-institutional, h.a. mburger stands, hot-dog stands, Ice cream stands, In.dustrial feeding, refreshment stands, snack shops, soft drink stands and tea rooms.) 4. Food stores (except Convenience Food stores-retail, grocery stores and supermarkets.) 5. General merchandise stores 6. Home furniture, furnishing, and equipment stores 7. Libraries 8. Miscellaneous repair services (no electronic repair, except computer repair only in conjunction with sales.) 9. Miscellaneous retail 10. Paint, glass, and wall paper stores 11. Personal services (except coin operated laundries, beauty shops and barbershops.) 12. United States Postal Service Properties that qualify under item 5.A. will be subject to the following: All uses listed will be in accordance with the Standard Industrial Classification Codes within the C-2 zoning district as identified in the Collier County Land Development Code with the exception noted above. Item 5.A.2.will be consistent with the LDC uses listed in tehh C-3 zoning district with the exceptions noted above. Fast Food restaurants shall shield from view from Golden Gate Parkway all ordering devices and/or windows where orders are to be taken. Vehicular access through adjacent properties to 53~a Street SW may by allowed at time of fezone upon completion of appropriate cross access easements. Any property line of the subiect parcel that is immediately adiacent to single family residential must provide a minimum Type "C" landscape buffer as indicated in the Collier County Land Development Code. Buildings utilizing second story office retail may request up to 35' in heights subject to architectural design elements incorporated through the rezone process. Buildings will be limited to two stories with no parking under the building, All buildings shall provide a common theme incorporating architecture and project signage. Petition CP-99-02, John D. Jassey, requesting to amend the Golden Gate Area master Plan Element by re-naming the "CR-951 Commercial In-fill Designation" to "Golden Gate Commercial In-fill Designation and modifying this Commercial In-fill provision so as to allow certain commercial uses on the subject site, and by providing development standards specific to this site. Amendment has changed subsequent to the transmittal to the DCA on October 29, 1999 as follows: · :'On western 25% of site: Eliminate E-Estates conditional uses; replace with C-I zoning district permitted uses. °l'On eastern 75% of site: Add the following uses: home furniture, furnishings and equipment stores; general merchandise stores; hardware stores - with no outdoor display of merchandise; security and commodity brokers and dealers, · l' On eastern 75% of site: Allow two-story buildings [maximum height still 35']. · ;'On entire site: Allow option of decorative parapet walls on all buildings instead of tile or metal roofs. Staff has recommended two changes subsequent to the T~ansmittal hearings; the petitioner has agreed to both. First, re_write/re-format the :ext in paragraphs "f)" and without changing the intent or meaning. Second, add requirement for a 25' wide landscaped strip between vehicul'ax use areas and abutting roads - to reflect f:;¢ Cm*; ~ior Management Overlay District along Golden Gate Parkway m,d to soften tb impact ~,f commercial development. Because all of these changes are proposed subsequent to DCA's initial review of th~ petition after the Transmittal hearings, DCA will be left with two options only - f'm4 the amendment "in compliance" or "not in Compliance." Therefore, the BCC and petiticner should be aware there is some risk in proposing substane;ve changes to a petition after Transmittal to DCA when such changes are net in response to issues raised in the ORC Report, and the changes will increase the use intensity. Amendment with changes incorporated into text: f) Any project located within the in-fill area at the northwest comer of Golden Gate Parkway and Santa Barbara Boulevard, less and except an easement for Santa Barbara Boulevard right-of-way, shall be subiect to the additional development restrictions listed below__.~_: 1. The western 25% of the site shall be limited to eight thousand (8,000) square feet of building area and limited to land uses as contained in the Collier County Land Development Code, as listed in the Permitted Uses Section of the Commercial Professional zoning district (C-1). 2. The eastern 75% of the site shall be limited to twentT-ei.eht thousand (28,000). ~tuare feet of building area and limited to the followinc land uses: Permitted Uses listed within the Commercial Professional District (C-1); hardware stores (exclusive ')f any outdoor display of merchandise)', securiW and commodiw brokers and dealers; merchandise stores~ banksl and, home furniture, fbmishings and equipment stores. Drug stores shall also be permitted, but only within the eastern 60% of the site. 3. Provide a minimum setback of seventy-five (75) feet from abutting Eat-~tes zot~ed property for principal structures. 4. A twenty-five (25) _feet wide landscaped strip shall be provided between the abutting road rights~of way or road easements and all vehicular use areas. 5. A minimum buffer of thirty-five (35) feet in width shall be provided where the project is adjacent to sinvle-tamily home sites. This buffer shall be increased to fifty (50) feet in width where this buffer is located within fifty (50) feet of any pertion of a si::,21e- family structure. All of these buffers provided adjacent to single-family home sites shall be supple_mented with Oak or Mahogany trees planted a maximum of t;venW (20) feet apart in a stagger2d manner; and. a hedge that will, within two (2) y_e~.rs of planting, grow to a minimum height of seven (7) feet and be a minimum of ninety-five (95) percent opaque." 6. All buildings shal_l have tile or metal roofs, or decorati~,e parapet walls above the roof line.~a_and buildings shall be finished in light subdued colors except for decorative trim. 7. Building heights shall be li~nited to one (1) story and a maximum of thirty-five 135) feet on the western 25% of t_____?e site, and~txyo (2) stories and a maximum of thirty-five 3~3~). feet on the eastern 75% of tke site. Go Do All lighting shall be architecturally-designed, limited to a maximum height of twenty-five (25) feet, and shielded from neighboring residential land uses. Petition CP-99-03, Centrefund Development Corporation requesting to amend the Golden Gate Area Master Plan by expanding the Neighborhood Center at the Golden Gate and Wilson Boulevard Intersection, by increasing the acreage in the southeast quadrant of the same intersection, and by allowing 5.00 acres of commercial or conditional use development within this southeast quadrant. Amendment as transmitted to the DCA on October 29, 1999: 2)Neighborhood Centers Subdistrict - Recognizing the need to provide basic goods and services to Estates residents, Neighborhood Centers have been designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. The Neighborhood Center designation does not guarantee that commercial zoning will be granted. The designation only provides the opportunity to request commercial zoning. a)Location The locations are based on intersections of major roads and spacing criteria' (See Map 7). The centers are designed to concentrate all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can be readily accommodated and to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development. The node at the NE and SE quadrants of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is approximately ~ 12.15 acres in size and consists of Tract 1, Unit 14, Tract 17, Unit 13 and the western half of Tract 18, Unit 13 Golden Gate Estates. The SE quadrant of Wilson and Golden Gate Boulevards is 7.15 acres, allows 5.00 acres of commercial development or Conditional Uses, as permitted in the Estates zoning district, and allocates 2.15 acres to proiect buffering and right-of-way for Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. The node at CR-951 and Pine Ridge Road is located on both sides of the intersection. Tracts 109-112 and the NI/2 of Tract 113, Unit 26, Golden Gate Estates are included in this node as eligible for commercial development. The S 1/2 of Tract 113 and the El/2 of Tract 107, Unit 26 are also included within this node but are only to be used for buffer, water management and open space. Petition CP-99-04, John A. Pulling, Jr. and Lucy G. Finch, requesting to amend the Future Land Use Element, by adding a new Sub-district to be known as the "Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Sub-district" for specified lands located at the intersection of Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. Amendment as transmitted to the DCA on October 29, 1999: 8. Orange Blossom Mixed-Use Subdistrict The intent of this district is to allow for limited small-scale retail, office and residential uses while requiring that the proiect result in a true mixed-use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large-scale commercial uses, while this subdistrict will promote small scale mixed-use with a pedestrian orientation to serve the homes both existing and future in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended to be a prototype for future mixed-use nodes, providing residents with pedestrian scale development while also reducing existing trip lengths for small-scale commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those allowed in the C- 1, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts except as noted below. The development of this subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: _ Ill. a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development with a common architectural theme which has shared parking and cross access agreements will be developed. c. Retail uses will be capped at a maximum of 5,000 sq. ft. per acre for the total proiect. d. Office uses will be capped at a maximum of 7,000 sq. ft. per acre for the total proiect. e. Residential development will be subiect to the density rating system. f. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 17.5% for the total proiect. g. No more than 25% of the total built square footage will be devoted to single story buildings. h. Primary entrances to all retail and commercial uses shall be designed for access from the interior of the site. Buildings fronting on Airport Road and Orange Blossom Road will provide secondary accesses facing those streets. i. All four sides of each building must be finished in a common architectural theme. j. A residential c.omponent equal to at least 25% of the allowable maximum base density under the density rating system must be constructed before the sub-district completes an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet retail of office uses. k. Residential units may be located both on the North and South side of Orange Blossom Drive. 1. Integration of residential and office or retail uses in the same building is encouraged. m. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties where feasible and desired by adjoining property owners. n. No building footprint will exceed 5,000 square feet. Common stairs, breezeways or elevators may ioin individual buildings. o. No building shall exceed three stories with no allowance for under building parking. p. Drive-thin establishments will be limited to banks with no more than 3 lanes architecturally integrated into the main building. q. No gasoline service stations will be permitted. r. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. s. Twenty foot wide landscape Type D buffers along Orange Blossom and Airport-Pulling Road and a 20 foot wide Type C buffer along all other perimeter property lines will be required. t. Parking areas will b~ screened from Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. u. The Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict provision would not be applicable to any properties adjacent to this district. Petition CP-99-06, Amend and update the CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT. Amendment as transmitted to the DCA on October 29~ 1999: Petition CP-99-07, Amend and update the TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT. Amendment has changed subsequent to the transmittal to the DCA on October 29~ 1999 as follows: · :-Remove all text reference for build-out network for right of way preservation guidance. · :. Remove Map TR-8W- Number of Lanes - Build-Out - Western Collier County · :- Remove Map TR-8E - Number of Lanes - Build-Out- Eastern Collier County DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS (ORC): No objections, recommendations or comments were raised by the DCA relative to the Comprehensive Plan Amendments transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs on October 29, 1999. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to adopt, not adopt or adopt with changes these amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Prepared By: ~'~~¢--- ,~f~--.----- Date: ~..,Mi'chele R. Mo~'/Senior Planner Comprehensive Planning Section Stan Litsinger%AICP Man~er Comprehensive Planning Section Approved By: Approved By: p~~ Date: Mulhere, AICP/~ctor - L/'~ Date: ~'/~n"centZ"A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development and Environmental Services Division TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION, PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION DATE: September 7, 1999 RE: PETITION NO. CP-99-08, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AGENT/APPLICANT: Applicant: Bonita Bay Properties 3451 Bonita Bay Boulevard Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Agent: R, Bruce Anderson Young, Van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Anderson 801 Laurel Oak, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34108 Owner: Bonita Bay Properties 3451 Bonita Bay Boulevard Bonita Springs, FL 34134 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, containing 146 acres more or less, is located on the northwest corner of CR 951 and 1-75. The parcels lie within the Golden Gate Planning Community and are immediately adjacent to Activity Center No. 9 (See attached location map) REQUESTED ACTION: The map and text changes requested by the petitioner represent and are consistent with previously approved EAR based amendments. The amendment seeks to ensure the addition of 146 acres to Activity Center No. 9 by submitting this application to amend the text and map of Activity Center # 9 of the Future Land Use Element. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner proposes to change the land use designation of the site consistent with previously approved EAR based amendments, so as to allow for uses permitted in the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict designation. In addition, the petitioner has added language to distinguish this amendment from 1997 Growth Management by adding "in" in front of compliance, as shown in the second to last line of the second to last paragraph of the amendment. The change proposed by the applicant is underlined as follows: PETITIONER'S PROPOSED CHANGES words underlined are text changes added by the petitioner 1997 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT LANGUAGE u,'~marked language is based on previously approved 1997 EAR based amendments The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition are as follows: Rezones within Mixed Use Activity Centers are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. There shall be no minimum acreage limitation for such Planned Unit Developments except all requests for rezoning must meet the requirements for rezoning in the Land Development Code. The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two road miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center; Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses; Existing patterns of land use within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two radial miles; Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads; Compatibility of the proposed development with, and adequacy of buffering for, adjoining properties; Natural or man-made constraints; Rezoning criteria identified in the Land Development Code; Conformance with Access Management Plans for Mixed Use Activity Centers contained in the Land Development Code; Coordinated traffic flow on-site and off-site, as may be demonstrated by a Traffic Impact Analysis, and a site plan/master plan indicating on-site traffic movements, access point locations and type, median opening locations and type on the abutting roadway(s), location of traffic signals on the abutting roadway(s), and internal and external vehicular and pedestrian interconnections; Interconnection(s) for pedestrians, bicycles and motor vehicles with existing and future adjacent projects; Conformance with the architectural design standards as identified in the Land Development Code. Interchange Activity Center # 9 shall be subject to the requirement of the development of an Interchange Master Plan (IMP). The IMP is intended to create an enhanced "gateway" to Naples. The IMP process shall be initiated by the property owners and/or their representatives by meeting with the County planning staff within 60 days of the adoption of this Growth Management Plan amendment and a finding of compliance from the Department of Community Affairs. The purpose of the meeting will be to establish a mutually acceptable vision statement for Activity Center # 9. The Interchange Master Plan shall be adopted by Resolution by the Board of County Commissioners. All rezones thereafter shall meet the intent of the vision statement. Subsequent to the development of the vision statement, new projects within Activity Center # 9 are encouraged to have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development. The mixture of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center # 9 shall include the full array of commercial uses; residential and non-residential uses; institutional uses; Business Park; hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Development Code; industrial uses in the northeast, southwest and southeast quadrants. The mix and intensity of land uses shall meet the intent of the vision statement and be defined during the rezoning process. The entire Interchange Activity Center is eligible for up to 100% of the entire acreage to be developed for any of the uses referenced above, except the maximum amount of commercial acreage shall not exceed 55% of the total acreage (632.5 ac.) of PETITIONER'S PROPOSED CHANGES words underlined are text changes added by the petitioner 1997 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT LANGUAGE unmarked language is based on previously approved 1997 EAR based amendments Interchange Activity Center # 9. The factors to consider during review of a fezone petition shall be in__compliance with the vision statement and those included for the Mixed Use Activity Center. For residential development, if a project is within the boundaries of an Interchange Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and not within the Estates Designation, up to 16 residential units per gross acre may be permitted. This density may be distributed throughout the project, including any portion located outside of the boundary of the Activity Center. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Existing Conditions: 'Seventy-six acres of the 146 acre site is zoned PUD. The uses permitted are single and multi-family residences, and a 100 bed hospital and associated medical offices and facilities. The remaining acres are zoned Agricultural. The entire 146 acre site is vacant and designated Urban Mixed Use District/Urban Residential Subdistrict Surroundin.q Land Use: North: Developed single-family homes zoned RSF-3 and designated Urban Mixed Use District/Urban Residential Subdistrict. West: Vacant and zoned A (Agricultural). Designated Urban Mixed Use District/Urban Residential Subdistrict. East: Vacant zoned PUD and allowing Industrial and Commercial uses. Designated Urban Mixed Use District/Interstate Activity Center Subdistrict. South: Zoned PUD allowing up to 145,000 square feet of commercial development of which 5800 square feet has been developed. Designated Urban Mixed Use District/Interstate Activity Center Subdistrict. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff analysis of this change was provided and Board of County Commissioners approved inclusion of the subject site within Interchange Activity Center #9 as part of the EAR based Growth Management Plan amendments adopted in 1997. Additional properties are included on the EAR based Activity Center # 9 Map. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: This amendment is being submitted to initiate a previously approved EAR amendment that has been delayed as a result of the compliance settlement agreement process. During the EAR PETITIONER'S PROPOSED CHANGES words underlined are text changes added by the petitioner 1997 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT LANGUAGE unmarked language is based on previously approved 1997 EAR based amendments Growth Management Plan amendments, the Board of County Commissioners revised Interchange Activity Center #9 boundaries to include the subject site as well as other properties totaling 632.5 acres. The EAR based text as noted above requires the development of an Interchange Master Plan (IMP) and the IMP process is to be initiated within 60 days after a finding of compliance by DCA. The purpose of this amendment is to insure there be no further delay of the IMP process. There were no objections from the DCA relative to this petition. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the CCPC forward Petition CP-99-08, with the 1997 EAR based Activity Center # 9 map with the adjusted boundaries, to the BCC with a recommendation to adopt. PETITIONER'S PROPOSED CHANGES words underlined are text changes added by the petitioner 1997 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT LANGUAGE unmarked language is based on previously approved 1997 EAR based amendments PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Amy K.' T~or, AIC~ /___.) Princi a/~.~anner..~ Comprehensive Planning Manager ~ DATE: Ro ICP Vincent A. Cautero, AICP Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator NOTE: This petition has been advertised for the May 9, 1999 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: , BCC Meeting. RUSSEL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN PETITIONER'S PROPOSED CHANGES words underlined are text changes added by the petitioner 1997 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT LANGUAGE unmarked Language is based on previously approved 1997 EAR based amendments EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 97-48, SIMPLIFYING AND REDUCING WATER AND SEWER UTILITY RATES. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners the Governing Board of Collier County, and as Ex- Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD), review and approve the recommendations for a reduction in water and sewer revenues along with a simplification of water and sewer rates and approve an amendment to the Utility Operating, Procedures and Billing Schedule Ordinance No. 97-48 to reflect these recommendations. CONSIDERATIONS: The Collier County Water-Sewer District's monthly user fee rates for water and sewer were adopted in late 1997. These rates were based on a rate study performed by John A. Mayer Associates. John A. Mayer Associates was retained to review the current level of revenues versus expenditures and recommend water and sewer utility rates. Mr. Mayer's analysis found that growth in the customer base has been much greater than was projected in early 1997. At the same time the increase in operating expenses has been less than anticipated. The combination of greater revenue growth and lower expense growth has resulted in more retained earnings than expected. Mr. Mayer is recommending an overall reduction in annual water and sewer user fee revenue of $4,033,000 or 9.5%. This reduction will be accomplished through a simplification of the Multi-Family fee structure and minor reductions in the overall volumetric rate for water and sewer service. Mr. Mayer's letter report on his findings and recommendations are attached as Exhibit B. RATE STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS Water Utility Recommendation For the water utility, it is recommended that all single family residential, multifamily and the commercial customers be combined into one new rate. This change affects customer classes differently. It will slightly reduce the water bill for all single family residential customers. In the aggregate residential revenues will decrease about 0.65%. For commercial customers, most customers will also experience a slight decrease with the exception of customers using more than 3.3 times the threshold volume amount. Namely, those who use a very large quantity of water in relation to their meter size, and the proposed rate is designed to encourage a more conservative posture toward water consumption. In the aggregate this change will have little effect on commercial revenues. A decrease of 2¢ per 1,000 gallons is recommended for irrigation customers which affects a very small number of customers and will reduce revenues by about $3,000 per year. -1- AGENDA ITEM No. /.~ (a~ r/) HAY - 9 2000 pg. / The group that this change in rate format does affect significantly is multi-family customers. As a group they would have an aggregate decrease of approximately 21.9%. Their current rate format is not based on meter size, but on the number of dwelling units. There are too many possible variations in meter size and number of refits to predict how this change will affect customers other than to state that the results will be varied, with the aggregate effect being a significant decrease. An attachment to Mr. Mayer's letter report (Exhibit C) reiterates the reasons from his March 1997 report why continuation of the current rate format for multi-family customers is no longer justified or supportable. This change in water rate format would reduce total water revenues by an estimated 8.5% or about $1,661,000 per year. Sewer Utility Recommendation The present sewer rates for single family residential and commercial customers are essentially the same. Currently the monthly sewer usage for single family residential customers is capped at 10,000 gallons. That will not change. It is recommended that the same rate as used for commercial customers be used for multi-family customers. This would change multi-family from a cap of 10,000 gallons "per dwelling unit basis" to a "meter size" basis just like all other sewer customers. In addition, it is recommended that a 2¢ per 1,000 gallons reduction be implemented in the volume charge for all sewer customers. While the revenue or bill change for single family residential and commercial customers is relatively minor, the annual revenue generated by multi-family customers would decrease by 23.1%. This change in sewer rate format would reduce sewer revenues by an estimated 10.25% or about $2,372,000 per year. Develo[}ment of LarRe Meter Availabili _ty CharRes Our current water and sewer fee structure does not provide for 10- and 12-inch metered connections. Over the last two years we have had a number of these connections installed. In response to our need to have an appropriate fee, the consultant has developed service availability charges for 10- and 12-inch water and sewer services. The consultant has also developed availability charges for 6-, 8-, 10-, and 12-inch effluent irrigation meters. These charges are shown in Exhibit A. FISCAL IMPACT: The change in rate format should reduce water revenues by about $1,661,000 and would reduce sewer revenues by $2,372,000. In the aggregate, combined revenues would be reduced $4,033,000 which will bring revenues in line with expenses, and restore the balance between revenues and expenses. The proposed rate changes will maintain an appropriate balance between water and sewer revenues and expenses. Total water, sewer, and reuse revenues under -2- AGENDA ITEM HAY - 9 2000 the current rates are $42.6 million while revenues under the revised rate format are predicted to be $38.5 million. This equates to a combined reduction of 9.5% in overall revenues. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The recommended user fee rates will provide adequate funding to maintain operational, capital renewal and replacement and debt service expenditures at current planned levels. Growth related capital requirements are funded by impact fees and long term borrowing which are not affected by these proposed user fee changes. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, the Governing Board of Collier County, and, as Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District: 1. Review and approve the April 5, 2000 letter report and rate recommendations by John A. Mayer Associates. 2. Adopt the water-sewer utility rates recommended by John Mayer Associates. 3. Adopt the attached Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-48 the Collier County Utility Operating, Procedures and Billing Schedule Ordinance as attached hereto and approve the new rates to become effective July 1, 2000. -Sus~ Usher, Senior Ac~ntant ~PROVED ~"~ ~dward~ Fi~~ublic W~s Administrator Attachments: Exhibit A - Ordinance 97-48 Amendment DATE/-,,,)f-~, cO Exhibit B - Letter Report from John A. Mayer Associated dated April 5, 2000 Exhibit C - Present and Proposed Water and Sewer Rates -3- MAY 0 9 2000 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1o ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ORDINANCE NO. 2000- AN ORDINANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIf)A, AMENDING SUBPARAGRAPHS 3.2.A. 1. and 3.2.A.2 OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 97-48, TO REVISE THE RATES, FEES AND CHARGES WITHIN THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT; ALSO AMENDING SUBPARAGRAPH 3.3.D. REGARDING EFFLUENT IRRIGATION USAGE CHARGES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES OF COLLIER COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NEW RATES: SUBPARAGRAPHS 3.2.A. 1. and 3.2.A. 2. Water (a) Service Availability Charge for Individually Metered Residential, Non-Residential, Multi-Family Residential and Irrigation: 5/8 and $/4 inch meter $ 12.00 per month I inch meter $ 24.00 per month I 1/4 inch meter $ 36.00 per month 1 1/2 inch meter $ 44,00 per month 2 inch meter $ 69,00 per month 3 inch meter $ 134.00 per month 4 inch meter $ 207.00 per month 6 inch meter $ 411.00 per month 8 inch meter $ 737.00 per month 10 inch meter $1,200.00 per month 12 inch meter $1,700.00 per month (b) Volume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons: (i) Individually Metered Residential, Non-Residential, and Multi-Family Residential (no separate meter for irrigation): Base Usage Amount $1.44 Usage greater than Base Usage Amount $180 Usage greater than 2 times the Base Usage Amount $2.25 Base Usage Threshold (per month): Meter Size Base Usage Two times Base Usage 5/8 and % inch meter I0,000 gallons 20,000 gallons 1 inch meter 25,000 gallons 50,000 gallons 1 V4 inch meter 40,000 gallons 80,000 gallons I I/2 inch meter 50,000 gallons 100,000 gallons 2 inch meter 80,000 gallons 160,000 gallons 3 inch meter 160,000 gallons 320,000 gallons 4 inch meter 250,000 gallons 500,000 gallons 6 inch meter 500,000 gallons 1,000,000 gallons 8 inch meter 900,000 gallons 1,800,000 gallons I 0 inch meter 1,450,000 gallons 2,900,000 gallons 12 inch meter 2,150,000 gallons 4,300,000 gallons (ii) Residential or Non-Residential Irrigation (separately metered): All usage $2.03 Underlined text is added, e ....u ,u .....~ ............ t,, text is deleted 1 HAY 0 9 2000 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 Sewer (a) Service Availability Charge for Individually Metered Residential, Non-Residential, Multi-Family Residential and Irrigation: 5/8 and 3/4 inch meter $ 17.00 per month 1 inch meter $ 35.00 per month 1 ¼ inch meter $ 53.00 per month 1 V2 inch meter $ 65.00 per month 2 inch meter $ 101.00 per month 3 inch meter $ 197.00 per month 4 inch meter $ 305.00 per month 6 inch meter $ 606.00 per month 8 inch meter $1,087.00 per month 10 inch meter $1,750.00 per month 12 inch meter $2,600.00 per month (b) Volume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons: (i) Metered Usage $1.94 (ii) Individually Metered Residential Maximum: The maximum volumetric charge for individually metered residential property shall be 10,000 gallons per month. SUBPARAGRAPH 3.3.D. - EFFLUENT IRRIGATION USAGE CHARGE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, THE MARCO WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT, AND THE GOODLAND WATER DISTRICT: 1. Effluent irrigation usage in each District shall be at the following schedule: (a) Service Availability charge: (i) Individually Metered Irrigation: 5/8 and 3/4 inch meter $ 4.35 per month I inch meter $ 10.90 per month 1 I/2 inch meter $ 21.75 per month 2 inch meter $ 43.50 per month 3 inch meter $ 87~00 per month 4 inch meter $ 174.00 per month 6 inch meter $ 330.00 per month 8 inch meter $ 600.00 per month 10 inch meter $ 960.00 per month 12 inch meter $1,430.00 per month WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida is the Ex- Officio Governing Board of the Collier county Water-Sewer District; and WHEREAS, staff, following recommendations in the April 2000, Rate Review, has recommended to the Board that specified water and sewer monthly rates, fees, and charges be decreased and simplified as to eliminate the three distinct rate formats for residential, multi-family and commercial classes and replace it with one rate format for all customers; and has recommended meter sizes up to 12 inch meters for all service availability charges; and WHEREAS, the Board agrees with and affirms the Rate Study and staffs recommendations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE MARCO WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT, AND THE GOODLAND WATER SEWER DISTRICT that: Underlined text is added, Struck through text is deleted 2 ' AC.~ NDA I T E.~q HAY 0 9 2000 PG. ~ SECTION ONE. AMENDMENTS TO SUBSECTIONS 3.2.A.1. AND 3.2.A.2. OF SECTION THREE OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 97-48. Subsection 3.2.A. 1. (a)(i) & (ii), and (b)(i),(ii) & (iii); and 3.2.A.2. (a)(i) & (ii), and (b)(i) & (ii), all in Section THREE of Ordinance No. 97-48, are hereby mended to read as follows: 3.2. Monthly Rates, Fees and Charges. A. Monthly user fees for the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Residential and non-residential properties within the boundaries of the Collier County Water-Sewer District shall pay the following rates, fees and charges for service provided by the Collier County Water-Sewer Districts: 1. Water (a) Service Availability Charge for Individually Metered Residential, Non- Residential, Multi-Family Residential and Irrigation: 5/8 and V~ inch meter $ 12.00 per month I inch meter $ 24.00 per month I ~A inch meter $ 36.00 per month I ~/5 inch meter $ 44.00 per month 2 inch meter $ 69.00 per month 3 inch meter $ 134.00 per month 4 inch meter $ 207.00 per month 6 inch meter $ 411.00 per month 8 inch meter $ 737.00 per month 10 inch meter $1,200.00 per month 12 inch meter $1,700. O0 per month r:'~+ ~:,'e!!Lng Unit · ~, nn Each a~itiona! &yelling '~n!t $ ~.20 (b) Volume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons: I 1O,OOO ga!lans $!.45 10.000 29,000 ""~-~ e~ ~. A~a;'e 20,000 gallonr, $2.28 O-i-) (i) Individually Metered Residential, Non-Residential, and Multi -Family Residential ( no separate meter for irrigation): Fir:t bla~lc Base Usage Amount e~ ~ $1.44 Usag0 greater than the Base Usage Amount $1.80 Usage greater than 2 times the Base Usage Amount $2.25 Underlined text is .aa,~a ~2~.-,.~1. ~-I-. ....U text is deleted 3 .o. HAY 0 9 2000 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 '14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 SECTION TWO. Non residential First Elzck Base Usage Threshold (,per month): Meter Size Base Usage Two times Base Usage 5/8 and 3/4 inch meter10,000 gallons 20,000 gallons I inch meter 25,000 gallons 50,000 gallons 1 1/4 inch meter 40,000 gallons 80,000 gallons 1 I/2 inch meter 50,000 gallons 100,000 gallons 2 inch meter 80,000 gallons 160,000 gallons 3 inch meter 160,000 gallons 320,000 gallons 4 inch meter 250,000 gallons 500,000 gallons 6 inch meter 500,000 gallons 1,000,000 gallons 8 inch meter 900,000 gallons 1,800,000 gallons 10 inch meter 1,450,000 gallon 2,900,000 gallons 12 inch meter 2,150,000 gallon 4,300,000 gallons (iii-) f3) Residential or Non-Residential Irrigation (separately metered): All usage $2.05 $2,03 Sewer (a) Service Availability Charge for Individually Metered Residential, Non- Residential, Multi-Family Residential and Irrigation: 5/8 and 3/4 inch meter $ 17.00 per month 1 inch meter $ 35.00 per month 1 ]A inch meter $ 53.00 per month I 1/2 inch meter $ 65.00 per month 2 inch meter $ 101.00 per month 3 inch meter $ 197.00 per month 4 inch meter $ 305.00 per month 6 inch meter $ 606.00 per month 8 inch meter $1,087.00 per month 10 inch meter $.1,750.00 per month 12 inch meter $2,600.00 per month t;;~ ~n,,,; family ( .....metered) Eae~ additiv. na! dwe!ling $!2.00 per menth (b) Volume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons: (i) Metered Usage $!.95 $1.94 (ii) Individually Metered Residential Maximum: The maximum volumetric charge for individually metered residential property shall be 10,000 gallons per .n month ......... AMENDMENTS TO SUBSECTION 3,3.D. IN SECTION THREE OF COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 97-48. Subsection 3.3. D. (a)(i), in Section THREE of Ordinance No. 97-48, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 3.3. District Rates, Fees and Charges other than Monthly User Fees. D. Effluent irrigation usage in each District shall be at the following schedule: Underlined text is added, Struck t~r~,ug~ text is deleted 4 '7 .-_ I 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 By: 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 (a) Service Availability charge: (i) Individually Metered Irrigation: 5/8 and 5/4 inch meter $ 4.35 1 inch meter $ 10.90 1 I/2 inch meter $ 21.75 2 inch meter $ 43.50 3 inch meter $ 87.00 4 inch meter $ 174.00 6 inch meter $ 330.00 8 inch meter $ 600.00 10inch meter $ 960.00 12 inch meter $1,430.00 per month per month per month per month per month per month per month per month per month per month SECTION TItREE. CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Ordinance shall be liberally construed to effectively carry out its purposes in the interest of public health, safety, welfare, and convenience. If any section, phrase, sentence or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. SECTION FOUR. INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. Sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section", "article", or any other appropriate word. SECTION FIVE. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective July 1, 2000, upon being filed with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY adopted by the Board of County Commissioners this day of ,2000. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE MARCO WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT AND THE GOODLAND WATER DISTRICT: Deputy Clerk BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Thomas C. Palmer Assistant County Attorney Underlined text is added, cotpack thrc, ugh text is deleted 5 i A G(NOA ITEM_ 0.1 I'.IAY 0 9 20O0 JOHN A. MAYER ASSOCIATES UTILITY RATE CONSULTANTS 8585 N. REGENT ROAD MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN 53217-2360 (414) 352-9026 · FAX (414) 352-9046 Wednesday, April 05, 2000 Mr. Edward N. Finn Director of Operations COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER Public Works Bldg. "H" - 3Td Floor 3301 East Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Re: Letter Report on Water & Sewer Rate Recommendations Dear Ed: The reason for this rate review is that the utility's cash reserves have been increasing significantly over the past couple years. This generated concern by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) that the water and/or sewer rates might be generating more revenue than needed. The task I was assigned was to review the adequacy of the current water and sewer rates, find out ~vhy the cash reserves have been increasing, and if warranted consider a reduction in water and/or sewer rates. I have completed my desk review analysis of Collier County's Water and Sewer rates. In brief, the staff's concern that the present level of utility revenues might be too large is correct. Growth in revenues has been much faster than was projected 4-years ago, and expenses have been slightly lower than anticipated. Essentially revenues are out-of-balance with expenses and a correction in both water and sewer rates is indicated. Specifically here is what my analysis has shown. Reason For The Cash Surplus I compiled the revenues for the 12-months ending December 1999 from the Utility Billing report for water and sewer, and compared those revenues to the projected revenue for FY 1996/97 (which is the basis for the current rates). I also compared the Utility Billing revenues to the revenue requirement for FY 1998/99 as we had projected it in August 1997. Basis f/Rates Projected Actual 12-mo. Revenues FY 1996/97 FY 1998/99 End 12/31/99 Water $15,519,099 $16,902,910 $19,446,531 Sewer $18,810,697 $20,362,827 $23,145,763 Total $34,329,796 $37,265,737 $42,592,294 At the time of the last rate study in 1996/97 we had assumed that the growth in customers would equal or exceed the growth in expenses. Implicitly we anticipated a growth in revenues of about had projected the 2-year compounded growth rate for.-y_~_ter 4% - 41/2%. Consequently we . ^~.~T~ . 4.36%, and the growth rate for sewer at 4.04%. Based on the actual revenues from tie ! HAY 0 9 2000 Mr. Edward N. Finn Wednesday, April 05, 2000 Page 2 of 4 Billing report, water revenues have grown at 9.63% annual rate, and sewer revenues have grown at a 9.11% annual rate. On the expense side of the equation, the information you provided me also indicates that expenses were have been quite a bit less than anticipated for FY 1996/97 and FY 1997/98, and only slightly less than anticipated for FY 1998/99. The combination of growth in revenues faster than anticipated, coupled with expenses increasing slower than estimated have caused the surplus in the utility's cash balances. The table below summarizes the estimate versus actual for the indicated fiscal year: Est. Wtr & Swr Exp. (Net of Misc. Rev.) Actual Net Water & Sewer Exp. Actual Expense Over / (Under) Est. FY 1996/97 FY 1997/98 FY 1998/99. 20,465,446 21,779,184 23,294,716 17,592,571 17,210,545 21,801,500 (2,872,875)(4,568,639)(1,493,216) Est. Net Capital Requirement Actual Capital Expenditures Actual Expenditure Over / (Under) Est. 12,147,861 12,123,169 12,107,735 12,300,928 17,333,581 12,011,613 153,067 5,210,412 (96,122) Est. Water & Sewer Rev. Reqmt. Actual Water & Sewer Rev. Reqmt. Actual Rev. Reqmt. Over / (Under) Est. 32,613,306 33,902,353 35,402,451 29,893,499 34,544,125 33,813,113 (2,719,807)641,772 (1,589,338) Revenues more than expected coupled with expenses less than expected is the reason that cash reserves have been increasing. The capital expenditures are pretty much as estimated other the bubble in FY 1997/98. The amended FY 1999/00 Budget indicates a water and sewer revenue requirement of $35,643,336. [Net expenses of $23,401,949 plus net capital requirement of $12,241,388.] Suggested Solution For Consideration As you are well aware, for the past 10-years I have been trying to simplify Collier's water and sewer rates. Back in 1987 and 1990 I tried to change the rates from an EDU (equivalent dwelling unit) based charge to a fixed monthly meter charge plus a usage-based volume charge. In 1996/97 I proposed to eliminate the three distinct rate formats for residential, multi-family, and commercial classes and replace it with one rate format for all customers. The reasons are: 1) lack of significant justification for continuing the current rate format, and 2) the desire to simplify the rates. [Attached to this letter is a modified portion of the March 1997 report that explained the rationale and rate concepts for the need to change rate format.] In 1996/97 I think that everyone who read my explanation of why the rates structure should be changed was more than convinced that it was conceptually a good idea. The problem at the time was that it involved lowering some customers' bills that caused other customers' bill to increase in order to preserve the current level of revenue. What I see now is a very unique opportunity to implement the desired rate change and to bring revenues back into alignment with cash requirements. This kind of opportunity comes rarely, if ever, for most utilities. ^Ca,~DA ~T~M~ 0 9 2000 I0 Mr. Edward N. Finn Wednesday, April 05, 2000 Page 3 of 4 Water Utility_ Recommendation For the water utility, I am proposing that the current rate for commercial customers be modified slightly to include the addition of a 3rd rate step, and that this new rate be charged for all customers regardless of class. This change affects the customer classes differently. It will slightly reduce the water bill for all residential customers. In the aggregate residential revenues will decrease about 0.65%. For commercial customers, most customers will also experience a slight decrease with the exception of customers using more than 3.3 times the threshold volume amount. These customers are those who are using a very large quantity of water for the given meter size, and the proposed rate is designed to encourage a more conservative posture toward water consumption. In the aggregate it has little effect on commercial revenues. The rate for irrigation customers is recommended to decrease 2¢ per 1,000 gallons which affects a very small number of customers, but which will reduce revenues by about $3,000. The group that this change in rate format does affect significantly is multi-family customers. As a group they would have an aggregate decrease of approximately 21.9%. Their current rate format is not based on meter size, but on number of dwelling units. For all the reasons listed in my March 1997 report [and shown in the attachment to this letter], the continuation of that rate format is simply not justified or supportable. There are too many possible variations in meter size and number of units to say how it will affect customers in that class in general, but the results will be varied with the aggregate effect being a significant decrease. The combined change in water rate format for all customer classes would reduce water revenues by an estimated 8.5% or by about $1,661,000 per year. Sewer Utility Recommendation The present sewer rates for residential and commercial customers is essentially the same with the only difference being that for residential customers their monthly sewer usage is capped at 10 units. This provision for residential customers will continue. I am proposing that the same rate as used for commercial customers be used for multi-family customers as well. This would change multi-family from a "per dwelling unit basis" to a "meter size" basis just like all other sewer customers. In addition I am recommending a 2¢ per 1,000 gallon reduction in the volume charge for all sewer customers. While the revenue or bill change for residential and commercial customers is relatively minor, the annual revenue generated by multi-family customers would decrease by 23.1%. This change in sewer rate format would reduce sewer revenues by an estimated 10.25% or by about $2,372,000 per year. Revenue Adequacy or "Balance" vs. Amended Budget for FY 1999/2000 The combined effect of these rate format changes for water and sewer is a reduction in annual revenues of an estimated $4,033,000 or about 9.5%. The obvious question is how do these "new revenue" levels for water and sewer compare to the current level of cash requirements. The current Amended Budget for FY 2000 was obtained, and was analyzed using the same methodology as was used for our March 1997 rate report. The budget level revenues and expenses were separated and/or allocated between water, sewer, and reuse utilities. T~_ Schedule REV-1 is the same format as in the March 1997 report, and shows th~all~c~¢~ I 092000 / Mr. Edward N. Finn Wednesday, April 05, 2000 Page 4 of 4 between the respective utilities. The level of dollars raised through user charge rates to fund capital projects was kept at the same level as was used for the March 1997 study. Schedule REV-4 is the determination of the amount of revenues required to be generated from utility user charges. Toward the bottom of page 2 the bold line shows the revenue needed to be generated from user charges. Comparing revenue needed to revenues produced by the present rates shows a reduction of $1,510,000 or 7.8% for water and $3,563,000 or 15.4% for sewer is possible. The proposed change in rate format would reduce water revenues by $1,661,000 which is very close to the reduction indicated. The change in rate format for sewer would reduce revenues by $2,372,000 which is about $1,191,000 short of the indicated reduction for sewer. While some of these rate reductions will have minimal effect on an individual customer's bill, the overall reduction in revenues as a result of these changes in rate format are significant. I recommend that the change in rate format be implemented now, and that rates be reviewed on an annual basis to see if further reductions can be implemented in the near future. Summary Changing the water and sewer rate format achieves rate simplification, rate equity, and it reduces overall water and sewer revenues by about 9.5%. I strongly recommend this change. It would accomplish staff's desired goal of trimming future increases in the utilities cash position by putting revenues more in line with expenses. From a practical administrative perspective, representatives from the Department of Revenue are confident that implementation of these changes would not present any problem, and they also feel it would permit the restoration of bill proration for customers with partial month service. Currently the rates are too complex for the billing system to handle such a task. Please give this proposal your consideration, and give me a call once you have reviewed it. JAM/sbc Sincerely, e. John A. Mayer President MAY 0 9 2000 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WATER & SEWER RATES "Rate Concepts from the March 1997 Rate Study Report" Change in Water Rate Format The proposed rates retain the three same customers classes, but renames the commercial class to non-residential since that is a more broad description and more appropriate for a class which includes industrial and public authority customers. ~ The major change in rate format is that the proposed rates consist of a single rate format that is applied to all customer classes. The proposed rate is essentially identical to the existing commercial rate. There is a fixed monthly charge that varies by meter size for all customers. A commercial building with a 2" meter will be billed the same as a small multi-family apartment complex with a 2" meter. The threshold volume amount by meter size under the present commercial rate is referred to as the base usage volume amount under the proposed rates. All customers pay at base rate $/Mgal for usage equal to or less than the base usage volume quantity. which varies by meter size. The proposed rates are shown below. Service A vailabilitt, Charge: Base Usage Meter Size (Gals) S/Month 5,/8 or 3/4 10,000 $12.00 1" 25,000 24.00 ItA" 40,000 36.00 11/:,, 50,000 44.00 2" 80,000 69.00 o 160,000 134.00 4" 250,000 207.00 6" 500,000 411.00 8" 900,000 737.00 Volume Charge: Base Usage Amount Usage greater than Base Usage Amount $/Mgal $1.45 2.05 Irrigation Usage (separately metered) 2.05 1 DeJDtitiott: Each meter is considered a separate account or customer. Single Family Residential means an individually metered residential dwelling unit. Multi-Family Residential means a master meter that registers the combined usage of two or more residential dwelling units. Non-Residential means all customers who are not either single family or multi-family residential customers. I....AC~N0* ~T£n_ -l- HAY 0 9 2000 Reasons For The Change In Rate Format There are two reasons: I) lack of significant justification for continuing the current rate format, and 2) rate simplification. Actually these two reasons are somewhat related. Rates should be the same unless titere is a reason for them to be different. For instance, gasoline is a product that is treated, refined, and delivered to a destination for usage by customers. The price for gasoline is the same whether you are filing a 2-passenger sub-compact car or a 9-passenger luxury limousine. Similarly, water is a product which is filtered / treated and pumped to a delivery point. Unless there is a reason, caused by the customer, which influences the cost of getting that product to that delivery point, or the conditions of service under which the customer receives service (i.e., peak demand), then there should be no difference in price. The present single family residential and commercial rates are very similar with the differences being that: 1) the single family class has a base usage level which assumes that all customers have a 3/4" meter, and 2) they have a 3-step inverted rate while the commercial class has a 2-step inverted rate. The rate structure of multi-family is dramatically different insofar as meter size is not considered, only number of dwelling units. Observing the revenue effect of a rate structure based on number of dwelling units rather than meter size, the present rates must have been based on the assumption that multi-family customers are more expensive to serve than single family residential customers? The facts, however, fail to confirm that assumption. Average multi-family usage per unit is 50% of the single-family average usage per equivalent 3/4" meter. This is consistent with the data obtained by this consultant in 1989 while performing a similar study where the calculated usage per EDU (equivalent dwelling unit) for apartments/condos was 44% of single family residential customers. The assumption that due to the "seasonality" of multi-family customers that the usage pattern is peakier, and thus cause more system capacity to be constructed to service their needs than single family customers also is not supported by the facts. Average usage per equivalent 3/4" meter3, by month, for the 12-months ending June 1996 was computed for residential, multi- family, and commercial classes. The ratio of largest monthly usage per equivalent to the average monthly usage per equivalent is a measure of the peak demand placed on the system. The single family peak month was 136% [range 60%-136%] of the average, and multi-family was 135% [range 69%-135%] of average. There is no material difference in peaking factor between single family and multi-family customers~ and consequently there is no cost-based reason that they should be charged any differently. same: 1. There are other reasons that suggest that it simply makes sense to treat all customers the The purpose of a system development charge is to generate up-front capital to pay for system capacity and/or expansion cause by additional customers so that effectively growth pays for growth. In essence, customers buy-in to the system and pay for the ' Billing multi-family customers based on meter size, not number of customers, will reduce revenues by approximately 21.5% versus the present number of dwelling units method. 3 Different size meters have different flow capacities. The ratios used in the previous rate study in 1991 were based on generally accepted American Water Works Association (AWWA) ratios. These ratios were used for this study and are: 3/4" - 1.0; 1" - 2.5; 1%" - 4.0; 1 I/2" - 5.0; 2" - 8.0; 3" - 16.0; 4" - 25.0; 6" - 50.0; 8" - 90.0. Given an inventory of the number of meters by size, one can easily compute the total number of equivalent 3/4" meters. - 2- MAY 0 9 2000 PG. capacity that is or will be constructed in the future. Having paid, up front, for the majority of the capital cost portion of the system, user charge rates should only need to recover the cost to operate the system.4 If customers have paid for capacity costs up front, and if there are no differences in the operating cost to provide the product to the end user, then there is no reason for any difference in rate structure. Since a significant portion of the costs relating to peak demand are already included in the monthly Service Availability Charge, if there ar.~e any differences in the peak demands or seasonal usage patterns between customer classes, these peaking costs have already been recovered regardless of usage. Change in Sewer Rate Format The proposed rates retain the three same customers classes: residential single family, residential multi-family, and non-residential [currently commercla~ l, but there are several changes in rate format and the conditions of service: 1. The major change in rate format is that multi-family customers are billed based on meter size, not on the number of dwelling units. o Multi-family customers will no longer have a maximum billed usage limit. All metered potable water usage is assumed to be discharged into the sanitary sewer system. Customers with significant lawn irrigation requirements will need to have a separate metered service for irrigation usage that would only be billed water.6 The proposed sewer rates are shown below. Service A vailability Charge: Meter Size S/Month 5/8 or 3/4 $17.00 1" 35.00 11/4" 53.00 1 ½" 65.00 2" 101.00 _~ 197.00 4 Mostly true, however rates also need to pay the carrying costs (i.e. debt service) on that portion system capacity which was built for ultimate use by new customers and which will be paid for, some day, by the impact fee from new customers. ~ Definition: Each meter is considered a separate account or customer. Single Family Residential means an individually metered residential dwelling unit. Multi-Family Residential means a master meter that registers the combined usage of two or more residential dwelling units. Non-Residential means all customers who are not either single family or multi-family residential customers. 6 Multi-family customers will enjoy a significant benefit on both their water and sewer bills resulting from a change to a meter size based rate as opposed to a number of dwelling units based rate. In order to simply the rate structure this change is considered necessary. Due to the high volume maximum of 10,000 gallons times the number of dwelling units, very few multi-family customers, if any, exceed the maximum limit, hence very few will be affected by this change. Customers in this category, who have significant irrigation requirements, may find it desirable to make the changes necessary to establish separate irrigation service. - 3- 0 9 2000 Service Availabili_tF Charge: Meter Size S/Month 4" 305.00 6" 606.00 8" 1,087.00 Volume Charge: $/Mgal Metered Usage $1.96 Reasons For the Change in Rate Format Similar to the reason discussed for the water utility, the reasons for the change in the sewer rate format are: 1) lack of support for current rate format, and 2) rate simplification. Rates should be the same unless there is a reason for them to be different. Sanitary sewer treatment is a service that reduces and/or eliminates the undesirable components of sewage permitting the effluent to be returned to the environment in a minimally harmful manner. The cost to treat wastewater is dependent on the average daily flows received at the treatment plant over a more extended period of time, like a week, and is also dependent on the strength of the pollutants contained in that flow. Wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) are far less dependent on peak daily flows, and virtually insensitive to peak hourly flows as compared to a water utility. The rate structure for multi-family customers is different from single family customers insofar as meter size is not considered, only number of dwelling units. Observing the revenue effect of a rate structure based on number qf dwelling units rather than meter size, the present rates must have been based on the assumption that multi-family customers are more expensive to serve than single family residential customers.7 Again, the facts fail to confirm that assumption. From the water usage analysis discussed above it was stated that multi-family usage per unit is about 50% of the single family average usage per meter, and that this was consistent with the data obtained while performing studies. These percentages were calculated using meter water usage. Using billed sewer volume, multi-family usage per unit is about 78% of the single- family usage per meter. This change in percentage is due to the threshold maximum of 10 Mgals per month for single family customers. Due to lack of billable sewer usage data by month, it was impossible to calculate the "seasonality" of either single family, multi-family or non-residential customers. Since water and wastewater usage do correlate quite closely, there is no reason to suspect that if the information were available that it would indicate any different results than was shown by the water usage data. The impact fee generation of up-front capital to pay for system capacity and/or expansion cause by additional customers coupled with the recovery of the majority of demand and/or seasonal usage variations between customers classes in the monthly Service Availability Charge, assures that there is no material reason for any difference in rate structure. 7 Billing multi4hmily customers based on meter size, not number of dwelling units, will reduce revenues by approximately 22.7¢/0 versus the present number qfdwelling units method. A~I~A~ IT£M . NO.'~ -4- 1"4AY 0 9 2000 Schedule W-l, Page 1 PRESENT WATER RATES Service Availabilty. Charge: Individually Metered & Irrigation: Meter Size 5/8 & 3/4 1 1'/, 2 3 4 6 8 Multi-Family (Master Metered): First dwetiing unit Each additional dwetling unit S/Month $12.00 $24.00 $36.00 $44.00 $69.00 $134.00 $207.00 $411.00 $737.00 $12.00 $8.2O V__olume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons_; Residential & Multi-Family: '~ - 10,000 gallons per dwelling unit 10,000 - 20,000 gallons per dwelling unit Above 20,000 gallons per dwelling unit Commercial: First Block in excess of first block Irrigation (separately metered) : AF, Usage $1.45 $1.82 $2.28 $1.45 $2.05 $2.05 M e~;¢~r Size 5/8 & 3/4 1 2 3 4 6 8 First Block Ussge Thce__$_h_p_~ 10,000 gats. 25,000 gaJs. 40,000 gals. 50,000 gals. 80,000 gals. 160,000 gals. 250,000 gals. 500,000 gals. 900,000 gals. 02/02/2000 02;58 PM WTR_RATE.WK4 ~' COLLIER COUNTY, FL- WATER UTILITY HAY 0 9 2000 .G 1'1 Schedule W-l, Page 2 PROPOSED WATER RATES ,~ervice Availabilty Charge: All Customer Classes: Meter Base Usage Amount Size._. In 1,000 gals (MgaJ) S/Month 5/8 & 3/4 10 Mgal $12.00 1 25 Mgal $24.00 1~¼ 40 Mgal $36.00 1Y2 50 Mgal $44.00 2 80 Mgal $69.00 3 160 Mgal $134.00 4 250 Mgal $207.00 6 500 Mgal $411.00 8 900 Mgal $737.00 10 1,450 Mgal $1,200.00 12 2,150 Mgal $1,700.00 Volume Charge Per 1.000 Gallons:.' All Customer Classes Except Irrigation: Base Usage Amount Usage greater than Base Usage Amount Greater than 2 times base usage volume Irrigation (separately metered): All Usage $1Mgal $1.44 $1.8o $2.25 $2.03 04/12_.r2000 12:30 PM WTR_RATE.WK4 "' COLLIER COUNTY, FL- WATER UTILITY HAY 0 9 2000 Schedule S-1, Page 1 PRESENT SEWER RATES ServiceAvailabilty Charg~ All Customer Classes: Meter 5/8 & 3/4 1 1% 1% 2 3 8 Multi-Family (Master Metered) : First dwelling unit Each additional dwelling unit $[Month $17.00 $35.00 $53.00 $65.00 $101.00 $197.00 $305.00 $606.O0 $1,087.00 $17.00 $12.00 ~Lolume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons: Residential & Multi. Family: Billing threshold maximum (per individual unit) is 10,000 gallons $1.96 02]02./"2000 03:09 PM $WR_RATE.WK4 ~ COLLIER COUNTY, FL - SEWER UTILTIY 2000 Schedule S-1, Page 2 PROPOSED SEWER RATES Service Availabilty Charge: All Customer Classes: Meter _ Size 5/8 & 3/4 1 1% 2 3 4 6 8 10 12 _ S/Month $17.00 $35.00 $53.00 $65.00 $101.00 $197.00 $305.00 $606.00 $1,087.OO $1,750.OO $2,6O0.OO Volume Charge Per 1,000 Gallons: $1.94 Single Family Residential Customers: Billing maximum usage is 10,000 gallons per month. Multi-Family and all other Non-Residential Customers: All metered usage will be assumed to be charged into the sanitary sewer system. Definitions: Each meter is considered a separate account or customer. Single_Family Residential means an individually metered residential dwelling unit. Multi-Family Residential means a master meter which registers the combined usage of two or more residential dwelling units. Non-Residential means all customers who are not either single family or muilti-family residential customers. 04/13/2000 10,33 AM SWR_RATE,WK4 *" COLLIER COUNTY, FL- SEWER UTILTIY 2000 Schedule R-3 PRESENT & PROPOSED REUSE EFFLUENT IRRIGATION RATES Serv~ailabilty_Charge: Meter Present Proposed Size $ / Month $ / Month 5/8 & 3/4 $4.35 $4,35 I $10.90 $10,90 1 ~/2 $21.75 $21,75 2 $43.50 $43,50 3 $87.00 $87.00 4 $174.00 $174.00 6 $330.00 8 $600.00 10 $960.00 12 $1,430.00 ~oJume Charge Per 1.000 Gallons ($/Mgal~;.' Full Service Reuse $0.13 / Mgal Proposed _ $0.13 / Mgal FlAY 0 9 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION Ao99-04, RICHARD D. YOVANOVICH OF GOODLETTE, COLEMAN AND JOHNSON, PA. REPRESENTING KENSINGTON PARK MASTER ASSOCIATION AND THE YORKTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF THE DETERMINATION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON NOVEMBER 21, 1999 THAT THE CHANGES TO THE CARILLON PUD MASTER PLAN BY ADDING NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING FOOTPRINTS WERE INSUBSTANTIAL. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this administrative appeal is to determine whether the Collier County Planning Commission properly applied the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Land Development Code (LDC) jn their determination that the changes to the Carillon PUD Master Plan were insubstantial, and further, based their decision on substantial competent evidence. CONSIDERATIONS: Section 2.7.3.5.2 of the Land Development Code allows the Collier County Planning Commission to approve minor changes to the PUD Master Plan. The LDC contains eleven specific criteria that would qualify a PUD amendment substantial. The Planning Commission must determine that none of the eleven criteria applies to the requested amendment in order to make an insubstantial determination. The property owner's agent filed an insubstantial change application with the County to expand the commercial area to the east of the existing buildings along Pine Ridge Road. The PUD Document allows up to 319,000 square feet of commercial building. The existing commercial buildings occupy 282,413 square feet in area. The Carillon PUD Master Plan does not clearly delineate areas zoned for different uses, such as commercial'and 'residential uses. The PUD Document indicates that 24.01 acres must be used for commercial uses for a maximum building area of 319,000 square feet. The Document also indicates that 6.23 acres must be used for residential uses for a maximum of 180 dwelling units. In addition certain acreages are allotted to water management facilities and buffer areas. For purposes of density a portion of the. water management area is assigned to the residential tract to justify the number of units originally approved. During the application submission process staff were lead to believe that the gross acreage that was legally attributable to the residential tract would not be affected by the extension of commercial development. Based on this information staff recommended to the CCPC that this petition met the criteria for an insubstantial amendment. Subsequent to the approval by the CCPC, it was brought to staff's attention that there were some discrepancies and additional facts not considered by the staff and CCPC. These facts contradict, to a degree, statements made on the record by the applicant's representative. The property owners, and thus their representative were in a position to have knowledge of these facts. The land use and area calculations provided to staff to prove that the request is consistent with the intent of the PUD Document were acceptable; however, the applicant failed to indicate on the application or on any other occasion that they no longer control the entire parcel. In order for the new acreage calculations to be consistent with the PUD Document some land use changes were necessary in areas that the applicant no longer owns. Furthermore, in the Planning Commission hearings the applicant's agent testified that the area proposed for commercial was never intended for residential uses. This testimony contradicts the Plat back-up plans that show multi-family buildings and is labeled as "Residential" tract. The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed petition PDI-99-05 on November 21, 1999 and by a vote of 8-0 approved the request. Attached to this report is a copy of the verbatim minutes of the CCPC meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: There is a $200 application fee for this appeal which is deposited in Revenues in Fund 113, Cost Center 138900. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is staffs recommendation that the Board of Zoning Appeals remand this petition back to the CCPC for reconsideration given the conflicting and additional facts. 2 PREPARED BY: CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP SENIOR PLANNER DATE RE'v~ EWE,DtiY: CURRENT PLANNING DATE ROBERT J. MULHERE, AICP, DIRECTOR PLANNING SERVICES DATE APPROVED'BY: VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP, ADMINISTRATOR DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 3 FROM :GooDLETTE, COLEMAN 941 45~ 1218 2~,~1-10 14:19 -----~' Ncx.~nber 4, i999 ,~1046 P. 02/25 EXCERPT TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, November 4, 1999 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: ACTING C~LAIRMAN: Michael Pedone Michael J. Bruet Russell A. Priddy Michael Pedone Karen Urbanik Gary Wrage Ken Abernathy Joyceanne Rautio NOT PRESENT: Russell A. Budd Ron Nino, Current Planning Manager Marjorie M. Student, AsSistant County Attorney Page 1 FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN ~41 4~5 1218 N~,_~mber 4, 1999 ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: And I don't have anything to report, because I'm not really the chairman. So let's go on to advertised public hearings, to number C, which would be Petition PDI-99-05, Carillon. MR. BADAMTCHIA/~: Good morning, commissioners, Chahram Badamtchian from planning services staff. Mr. -- ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Chahram? Anyone who wishes to speak on this petition, would please stand and be sworn in. (All speakers were duly sworn.) ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: All right, Chahram. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Good morning. Mr. Michael Fernandez, representing Wallace L. Lewis, Jr., Trustee, is requesting the approval of an insubstantial change to the Carillon DUD master plan. The Carillon PUP is located at the corner of Airport Road and Pine Ridge Road. And the old master plan -- this is the master plan that was approved with that POD. It's upside down. MEMBER OF AUDIENCE: We can't hear what you're saying. CO~4ISSIONER /%BERNATHY: I don't believe your microphone is working. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: It's not working? COF~4ISSIONER A]BERNATHY: Well, you're not standing close enough to it, then. MR. BADAMTCKIAN: He's fixing it. The old master -- the old master plan showed commercial along Airport Road, and there is residential in the back. And the old master plan showed the footprint of a large building with five -- with five out-parcels. The petitioner is requesting to amend this master plan to show two additional buildings on the east side of the property. This PUD was approved with 319,000 square feet of commercial; however, they have built 282,000 square feet; therefore, they have 36,000 square feet more that they can build. The PUP was approved for 180 dwelling units, and the POD document says t80 dwelling units and 6.23 acres of land.' And the request is just to add more buildings on the east side. And they're also eliminating one lake, which was shown on the original master plan. And basically that is the extent of the request. Staff reviewed this petition. It complies with their requirements of our code, even though it is a little bit on the borderline of being an amendment to the SDP -- P UD, sorry. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this petition. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Mr. Chairman? ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Yes. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Chahram, a queshion. What constitutes really the difference between substantial and insubstantial as it relates to land uses? MR. BADAMTCHIAI~: For one thing, they are not changing any Page 2 FROM :GoODLETTE, COLEMAN 2~), ~)1- 10 14: 2~ N~_~mber 4, 1999 ~04~ P.04/2S language in the Pun document. It's Just the map change. And they are -- this change will not increase the traffic. This one was approved for 319,000 square feet of commercial. Therefore, adding more building is not going to change the approved traffic there. The board reviewed this petition, approved it for 319,000 square feet of commercial, and they are not going to increase that. A number of residential dwellings are not increasing, it's just where the buildings are going to be built. That's the only change. COMMISSIONER BRUET: So you weigh the impacts of changes more than the change in land use itself? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Correct. The master plan that was approved doesn't really show the boundaries between the commercial and residential tracts. Everybody assumed that the tract in the back is for residential uses and the front tract is for commercial. But that's not how the Pun document reads. COMMISSIONER BRUET: I guess looking at the original submitted and approved Pun and looking at what's in front of us today, and trying to understand why this is not a substantial deviation, when I see areas that indicate multi-family tract now has a commercial parcel, then I look south and I see a second commercial parcel, and I look at the master plan, of course ! only see five, and now we're up to seven. I realize the square footage hasn't changed, but to me those are different land uses. I see a lake that's gone. I'm Just trying to sort this out, because I've been through this process before and I have not been this fortunate. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: As I said, this borders -~ this line project, that's almost a Pun amendment. Eowever, the Pun was approved for 180 units on 6.23 acres. And they will have 6.23 acres for residential uses. It was approved with 12. -- i have it somewhere. 12. I believe 9. MR. NINO: 12.9. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: 12.9 acres of open space, landscaping and lakes and water management. They will have that. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Yeah, but not to the current standards for buffering and the like, right? We're not opening -- MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Nothing is done, but -- COMMISSIONER BRUET: -- the whole Pun. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: We are not opening the Pun for review. COMMISSIONER BRUET: All right. Well, obviously I'm going -- I . have a.little problem with this, and I guess because I've been through the process before and not been this fortunate. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEnONE: Anyone else have any questions for staff? Being none, we'll hear from Mr. Fernandez. MR. FERNANDEZ: Good morning, commissioners. Michael Fernandez for the petitioner. I hope I can shed some light on the issues and satisfy Mr. Bruet's concern. To start with, I'd like to provide you with a hand-out, if I may, that I'll be referencing. Page 3 FROM :GooDLETTE, COLEMAN 941 4~ 1218 2000,01-10 14:20 N~._~mber 4, 1999 ~46 P.OS/2S COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I'll just pass them down. MR. FER/~ANDEZ: The first page of the hand-out that you'll been receiving has been highlighted, and it's an excerpt from the PUP document that was approved. And it states that site design changes shall be permitted subject to Collier County staff administrative approval where such changes are consistent with the intent of the PUP document and do not cause significant impact to surrounding abutting -- properties abutting Carillon. We, when we originally approached that, suggested to them that we thought that this was actually an administrative change and not an insubstantial. The document -- or the code basically has criteria that outlines whether there's technical requirements to be an insubstantial change. We provided staff with a item-by-item delineation of what those -- how we address those items, including there is no change to the access points to this petition. The access points remain exactly as they were in the original petition. The buffers remain the same. The square footage of approved commercial remains the same. The area, the acreage of residential, the acreage versus the commercial remain the same. The PUD document itself didn't define those areas definitively where residential and where commercial is to be located. If you'll turn to your second page of your doc -- of the hand-out, I think this will shed the light that you're looking for. The PUP document basically listed commercial for 24.01 acres, residential for 6.23. The balance of 2.97 to be utilized for open space and green space that could be located anywhere within the PUP. And the master plan shows little arrows. Well, here's a green space here, there's a green space there. The basis for that is there is a requirement of 30 percent open space for the commercial and 30 percent for the residential within this PUP. As you can see, that equates to where the commercial tract -- for the commercial tract, a total of 10.295 acres of open space for a total acreage of 34.305. The residential tract was limited to 2.23 acres, plus its 30 percent component of 2.675 for a total of 8.9.05 acres. A~d as you can see by the tabulation, these add up to the totals that are shown, both within the PUD document and within the master plan. Currently our client, who is the original developer of Carillon, still retains three tracts that total 12.56 acres. If you subtract that residential component out of 8.905, he's left with 3.655 acres of commercial, which includes its 30 percent requirement of open space. Therefore, of the remaining area it's impossible -- we're not allowed to use the entire parcel as residential. And in fact, if you'll look at the graphic over here to my left, you'll see that what we've done within that area is shown in green that area that adds up tO the 6.23 acres. This area. And then the area that's also green that is hatched provides the open space component. So between these two elements, we have a total of 8.905 acres, therefore, satisfying that acreage requirement or maximization within Page 4 FRO~I :5oODLETTE, COLEMAN the PUD. It was never intended that this whole area be commercial -- or be residential. In fact, we would suggest to you that to place residential development on Pine Ridge Road at the entry to the shopping center is not a viable use. I mean, you've got traffic on both sides, and you're totally hemmed in. It's not desirable. The commercial is supposed to be a transitory use to the residential, which was always intended to be in the southeast quadrant of the project. Always behind the commercial. And that's the key. It's always behind the commercial. So that it's impossible for -- to use that acreage anything but for residential -- or for commercial that fronts on Pine Ridge Road. All we're asking is that we have the ability to put the buildings there. And as I read to you in that first page, we -- the site plan was always given that flexibility so that they could have adjustments to it. Otherwise, right now what we could do with that commercial piece is simply pave it and put our appropriate landscaping and put the light poles that would be put in the shopping center. And we could have, for instance, a -- we could have an auto dealership there or something similar to that. We Just couldn't put the buildings on there. Although we have told -- we have suggested to staff we really believe that we have that ability. But that is commercial acreage. It has always been commercial acreage. This is a very straightforward, technical adjustment to the master plan. It is not a substantial change. One thing that we have -- we would also tell you that hopefully will give you some level of comfort is that the PUD also requ!res -- and it was one of the first to do so, and this was before the architectural design standards were established -- that all buildings within the development be architecturally integrated. And we're (sic) certainly have always understood that. And the new building or buildings will comply with that. It will be similar materials and design to the existing structures that are already within the shopping center. In addition to that, we have made a commitment to our neighbors, and we've had a couple meetings with some of our neighbors, that the light fixtures -- and if you look at the poles out on Carillon, they're very tall, and they create somewhat of a light cloud at that intersection. We've committed to them that we will maintain -- put the new ones in at no higher than 20 feet so that the light is closer to the ground 'level and won't disturb their development. Between Carillon and Kensington there is an additional tract of property. That tract is an agriculturally zoned piece of property. It currently has located on it the fruit shop out front, the little chickee building. It's B0 feet wide, where this commercial tract is supposed to be. It lessons to 60 feet width further on. And between it and Kensington, or the residential units in ..... ii~?~fr?~]i?)~,-~ ~ Page 5 FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 2~,~1-1~ 14:21 N~mber 4, 1999 ~O46 Kensington, you have our buffer, then you have their buffer, which is fairly mature and on a berm. You then have a 60-foot right-of-way that has a road. And then you have a setback of 25 feet to the residences. We've calculated the setbacks. The closest our buildin9 would be to one of their residential structures is 195 feet. That's a considerable distance. We don't see that we are doing -- we are not having any greater impact with putting a building there than we would have with a parking lot with its associated light fixtures. We see this as a very technical modification. And as I've said, we've gone through item per item, as staff has done, and shown tha~ it is not a substantial change. Mr. Passidomo is our legal counsel and he's here in case any additional questions arise. If you have any questions of me, I'd be more than happy to address them now. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Yeah. Mr. Fernandez, what will the height of the building be? MR. FERNANDEZ: We've made a commitment that it won't be any higher than the existing buildings there. So again, what we'll do is just keep the shopping center ongoing. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Anyone else? COMMISSIONER BRUET: Yes. How does that compare with the heights that are there today, Michael? The existing PUD heights, building heights. MR. FEPd~ANDEZ: The PUD actually allows for 50 feet of height, or five stories. Approximately five stories. $o obviously by the existing building there's probably somewhere around 30, 35 feet. So we're look -- which is the same height that the residential structures are permitted to be adjacent Kensington. And again, we're looking at about 195 feet difference between the two. The concern that I've really heard from the residents so much that they're looking to maybe address is the residential aspect of our project, which really is not subject of what we're trying to do here. And if you look at our PUD master plan amendment, you'll see that the only area that'2 highlighted in yellow is that area that deals wish the commercial aspects. We're not modifying the residential portion at all. COMMISSIONER BRUET: May I, Mr. Chairman? ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDOATE: Yes. COS~MISSIONER BRUET.- Michael, the buffering requirements from commercial to residential, you've kind of escaped those by going through this process. Are you willing to bring a buffer up to -- MR. FER/~ANDEZ: Current standards -- COMMISSIONER BRUET: -- current buffering standards? MR. FERNANDEZ: We have no problem doing that whatsoever. We would commit to in fact go beyond that. For instance, tree requirements are eight and 10-foot trees. I have no problem committing to landscaping that includes trees to !6 feet 'minimum for shade trees. Dud any hedge along that -- along our east side~ which would be Page 6 FROM :GOODbETTE, COLEMqN 2~D,~1-~O 14:21 NL~mber 4, 1999 next to Kensington, installing it at five feet, add installation and allowing it to grow higher along with a fence integrated into it, we don't have a problem doing that. We're looking for a quality project. And since the shopping center has already been there for awhile and their trees are somewhat mature, by ours coming in there at that same height, it will -- it will kind of bring us back up to the shopping center. We don't want to 10ok like we 're a second cousin to it. We want to integrate. We'll do so with materials, colors and design. COM~ISSIONER BRUET: Thank you. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: ~yone else? C0~ISSIONER PRIDDY: I have just a question. It'~ probably one no one can answer. But this agricultural tract that's in between, do we have anythin9 in the mill that's 9oin~ Zo be going on there? Is that -- what do we foresee ~akin9 place on that piece of property? MR. B~T~I~: Last.. hearing, Mr. Fernandez was proposin~ a new P~ called Banyon, I believe. ~. FE~EZ: Yeah, the B~yon Woods P~. Tha~ tract is scheduled to become a roadway that would access the residential component south of here. So there'll be an additional roadway. ~d if you'll recall, there's an additional buffer there that was committed to 5hat's ve~ substantial, that was worked out with the residents, that's also on a be~ and will be integrated into a much larger co~ination buffer between Kensington and that tract. So in addition to all these, we'll have a series of several different landscape buffers between us and the Kensington -- CO~ISSiO~R PRIDDY: So we're not ~oin9 to see a building out front where the fruit stand is now in the ~uture, that's probably proposed for roadway? ~. FE~EZ: That's correct. Even if it was -- even if it -- right now there's a setback retirement of 50 feet from residential tract an~ay, so it would be pushed back substantially. C0~ISS IONER PRIDDY: Okay. CO~ISSiO~R BRAT: Russell, I believe that's that alternate access point -- ACTING C0~ISSIONER PEDONE: Yeah. C0~ISSIONER BRAT: -- from P~ that we went through at the last meeting, so-- CO~ISSIONER ~I0: I would Just like t0 disclose that I had a meetin~ with Mr. Fernandez last month, and this was only talked about indirectly. We were discussin~ .tke whole Whippoorwill Road area and Livingston Road area, but we did discuss some of the minor details involved in this, so I wanted to disclose that. ACTING CO~ISSIO~R PEDONE: ~yone else? ~ythin9 further from the petitioner? MR. FE~EZ: Well, .certainly if ~estions arise a~ter the public speaks, I'd like to have an opportunity to address that. ACTING COEISSIO~R PEDONE: Mr. Nino, do we have any speakers? MR. NINO: Yes, we do indeed. Dr. Charles Zinn, Alton Bale, Dr. FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 941 4~S 1218 ~046 P.0~/25 2~, ~D1- 10 14:22 N~lber 4, 1999 Frank Pinto. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Excuse me, if you would step up in the order that you would like to speak, this way we can facilitate the time. MR. NINO: Dottie Groose, Warren White. Dr. Carl Sheusi, Richard Conover, Dextor Groose, Richard Henderlong, Joe Barry. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I would like to announce at this time that we have a lot of speakers and we would rather you didn't be redundant and repeat the same thing, that only if you have something new to add that would be -- facilitate the movement here this morning. MR. ZINN: Good morning. I'm Dr. Charles Zinn. I live at 5170 Kensington High Street, adjacent to this proposed piece of property change. We're -- we have a couple of concerns. One is in order to get 180 units into that piece of property, the original lake that was planned on the original plan supposedly is being filled in or never dredged. We're concerned about water runoff, wildlife, et cetera. In order to get 180 units into this piece of property, it would seem to me that the height would be such that it would impact us in the Kensington area, regardless of a 50-foot buffer. It would seem to me that they would have to go up to a seven-story building, six stories over parking, and this would not be neighborly to the Kensington area. If you recall, not t.oo long ago Kensington had to reopen their PUD when they were redoing the area next to Grey Oaks, and that we had to make substantial changes in our PUD in order to get it okayed to satisfy Grey Oaks' needs or requirements. We are requesting that this is a substantial change in the PUD, and we would like to see the PUD reopened for evaluation to some way eliminate some of the 180 unitz that are proposed to go into this small residential area. Thank you. MS. GROOSE: I'm Dottie Groose. I live in Kensington. I lived in Miami for 30 years. And when I first lived there, it was beautiful, it was peaceful, it was a nice place to raise a family, and the quality of life was very good. Over the years there were many changes. The development, it was over-developed, over populated, the streets became very congested, crime moved in, and the quality of llfe completely changed. My husband and I were very impressed when we came to ~aples. To us, Naples was paradise in comparison to Miami. But now we're very fearful that our quality of life may change. We were so impressed with all of the different developments, one-story buildings or two-story condos. It was just beautiful. ~md now if this developer is allowed to build a seven-story building right near our property, it will be overlooking our property. It will change our way of life, it will change our security. I'm concerned about our security and our privacy. People on these balconies will be able to see us every time we come in and out of our houses, they'll see us on our patios and in our swimming pools. Our privacy will be gone. And also, it could affect our security. A Page 8 FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 941 4~S 1218 2~SO~1-10 14:22 Nt~%ber 4, 1999 criminal element could move into these condos. They would know every time we go in and out of our homes. I'm very concerned about that. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Mr. Chairman, can we stop and 9~t a clarification? Because I don't know that .I've ever heard of a seven-story building being proposed. Mr. Fernandez or staff, can -- what are we talking about here? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: The PUP document allows six stories over garage in the residential area. What I believe people are proposing is to not approve this so they have to go through a PUP amendment and then they have to reduce -- they can request a reduction in the number of dwelling units, maximum height. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Let me understand. If the developer was not looking to change the footprint of the commercial, they could have already built a six-story building? MR. BD23AMTCKIAN: Today they can go ahead and build a six-story building. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: And they still can, without coming here before us. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Correct. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Okay, thank you. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Next. MR. PINTO: Mi. My name is Frank Pinto. i,m at 5114 Kensington High Street. My concern is similar in the sense that tall buildings in an area that have no tall buildings really don't make -- doesn't make sense to me. I'm not a professional, I just live there. We moved into Kensington from up north. This is OUr permanent residence. And quise honestly, I didn't do due diligence. I didn't go looking throughout all the records of what's allowed, what's going to be built, what may be built. None of us has. And I ~uess that means we trust you people. We trust you as professionals, we trust you as administrators to do what's right. We're going to live there. And we ask that you consider us in this project because we're the ones who are going to have to live with your decisions. And please, don't look at this in an isolated sense. There are other tracts that are going to be developed just below this. There's going to be another 350, 60 residential units. 180 units on six acres, that's an impact. And while the PUP was approved, I understand it was approved in '9!, a lot has developed since then. The area has taken on a certain character. And maybe you ought to look at that today and say to yourself, well, maybe there was a mistake in '91. Maybe we shouldn't have allowed this. And kind of look at it in today's light. And if there is one lake difference, maybe it doesn't seem significant. But with the runoff, maybe you need that other lake. That may be significant enough for you to reopen this PUD and give you an opportunity maybe to correct what obviously to me is a mistake, or was a mistake; give you an opportunity to correct that. Thank you very much. FR,3~I :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 941 455 1218 2~O,~1-1~ 14:22 N~_eraber 4, 1999 MR. WHITE: My name is Warren White. I live in Kensington. And really, I don't have a whole lot to add except that I realize that this is not a residential question at the moment. But if you continue to reduce this -- the impact of the commercial area around the area that's left, what happens is everything goes up. And I've lived in Kensington now for three years, and in the Pelican Bay and other areas for some period of time before that. And other than the high-rises that are along the beach, I don't think there are other seven-story high residential units anywhere in that area. I recognize it was granted in 1991, but conditions have changed. And you have permitted apartments and everything else to be built around Kensington, but they're not of that size. And so I think the substantial change that is occurring here now is going to have implications for the future when this developer comes in with his plans for the residential area. The lake that is going to.be taken away is a small area. But I believe on the plans, as I've looked at them, that the other one also becomes reduced. So as I say, everythin9 squeezes, and all of a sudden what's left is a residential for future development, and it goes up. Thank you. MR. BALE: I'm Walton Bale at 5234 Kensington High Street. would be directly affected by any buildings that would be over the 35 feet ~hat the Carillon representative suggested. If you were to go out and look at this particular area, you'll find that there is no other building that is probably over about 35 feet. No seven-story buildings in the vicinity within sight. I really think that this should be reopened so that the height of the buildings can be limited, as the Carillon representative said, down to 35 feet. Thank you. MR. BARRY: I'm Joe Barry, Kensington High Street. I'll be brief. I'm sorry if I'm redundant. My main concern, other than aesthetics of the tall building, is crime and privacy. I think it may sound ridiculous for me to say this, but I think that a building six -- we have a big problem with crime in our neighborhood. The so-called supper -- dinner burglars. And I think a seven-foot (sic) building would give a great advantage point for surveying our property. And also, privacy. I think a seven-foot building -- or seven-story building would encroach on our privacy. Thank you. MR. SHEUSI: I'm Dr. Carl Sheusi. I live at 5198 Kensington. Approximately a year ago, Kensington went before the county board requesting rezoning of property facing Grey Oaks. The residents of Grey Oaks were opposed to the rezoning for three reasons: They were afraid to see our lights; the buildinNs would be too tall; and the residents of the condos would be able to look into our homes. If Carillon planned -- had plans for 180 ttnits on 11 acres and now they want to compress 180 units on five to six acres, this will necessitate buildings of higher than two or three stories, maybe five, six or seven. Page 10 FR~]M :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 2~O,~1-10 14:23 NLember 4, 1999 ~04~ P. 12/2S And this is our objection, that the buildf. ng~ would obstruct our view with an extreme amount of lights and noise; there would be no berms high enough to buffer the noise of lights from a seven-story building, if it goes that high; and that would be approximately an 80-foot buildin9. This is our objection. MR. GROOSE: Good morning. My name is Dexter Groose. I'm a value engineering consultant, and I'm speaking as secretary of the Yorktown Villas Association of Kensington. First of all, I want to take my hat off to this Planning Commission, because you're the reason I moved here. You're the reason after a five-year search of the East Coast I realized I was looking on the wrong side. And we finally discovered Collier County, my wife and I, and this is heaven. This is the place to be. And it's because of the hard work and the tough decisions you people have made over the years that have made this place look special. The request before you today is a substantial change to the PUP, and it's also a flawed plan.' And here's why. It's a substantial change because it now includes eight out-parcels instead of six that were shown in the original PUD. Eight is four more than anywhere else on that Airport Road/Pine Ridge intersection. It leaves us with one lake instead of two, which will have an impact on wildlife. And it will eliminate a residential buffer. Now, before I bought in Kensington, I was very concerned with everything around. Concerned about the two-story units on the north side of Pine Ridge. I asked a lot of questions, I did a lot of research. This is a map of what was in the POD. As you can see, this 11-acre Tract A that was in the original PUP shows a lot of roads through there. For multi-family tract, it says right up there in the upper right-hand corner. Right north of where the fruit stand is. Calls it multi-family tract. That's an 11-acre tract. And I realized it was approved in 1991 and I couldn't do anything about it. It was 180 units. But at least it was a buffer. It was a residential buffer. Now, I've prepared something here I'd like you to take a look at. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I'll hand all of them down. MR. GROOSE: This is a substantial change to the PUD because it doubles the PUP density from 16 units per acre to 29 units per acre. We don't have anything near 16 units per acre in the greater Carillon community, including all of the other communities that I've listed there in addition to Kensington. Those four communities average two and a half units per acre. The Carillon PUD originally allowed 16. But the way they want to change it, it will take it to 29 units per acre. That's over !0 times the existing community's density. That's why it's a flawed plan. That's why it's a substantial change. When you go from 16 units to 29 units, that's a substantial change. I also say this plan is flawed because it exceeds the footprint limits of the Carillon Shopping Center. Sure they had -- they were authorized 319,000 square feet. But they chose to build it all on one Page 11 ~ROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 20~,~1-1~ 14:25 N~r~ber ~, 1999 level. They could have 9one to two stories on their commericial. This is a flawed plan because there's inadequate perimeter landscaping. It,s a flawed plan because it eliminates something that was explicitly described in the original PUP to allow for three-story residential buildings, as well as seven. So in the original plan, you could have a mix of three-story and seven-story. If they build this additional commercial on that Tract A, it's going to reduce it, the residential acreage, down to six. Now you're building 180 units on six acres. And it's ~oin9 to have to be seven stories, what the original POD would permit. Tkat's unacceptable. The Carillon PUP needs to be reviewed, brought into current standards -- pardon me, the Carillon POD needs to be reopened, brought up to current standards and then reviewed, once all of our winter residents have a chance to comment on it. Right now fewer than half of our residents in Kensington, Yorktown, the ones that are directly impacted by this, are here. They're not back yet. So we'd like for them to have a chance to review it, too. And lastly, I know it may not be a requirement to be notified of this, but my notice from Collier County of this meeting was sent out on October 18th. It went to my previous address in Dade County. Dade returned it postmarked November 1st. I Just got it yesterday. So there might be a lot of other people in the same boat as me, okay, and weren't aware of this meeting. Lastly, somebody brought up the point about the Banyon Road's alternate access issue, alternate access road for Banyon Point. That's that little buffer road that's between the Carillon and Kensington. We were not at this last meeting you had a couple of weeks ago to discuss Banyon Woods, because there was a great misunderstanding between the consultant, Mr. Fernandez, and Kensington. We were told that they would only build that road if the county required it. Well, we learned later after the hearin9 that the county never required it. But they did say if you want to build that road on your own, we'll allow you a-higher density. We plan to appeal that decision to the County Commissioners next week. So that is a very sore point with us, and we expect to appeal it. I want to thank you for your attention and all the good work you've done in ~he past. MR. ~ENDERLONG: Good morning, commissioners. My name is Rich Henderlong. I'm with Kensington Park master association and Kensington Park Development. I'm a director of the master association; vice president, specifically. I'm also a professional planner, land planner, havin~ worked for the county, Wilson-Miller at times, and I spent 10, ii years with Collier Enterprises, their plannin~ director. I did have a conversation with Mr. Bruet regarding this petition. And I'd like to beginning with handing you out an exhibit. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: That's my job to pass them down. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Be's our official passer. Page i2 FROM :GOO~ETTE, COLEMAN ~41 45S 121~ N~mber 4, 1999 MR. ~ENDERLONG: The exhibit you're about to receive is a copy from Collier County's tax maps. What you have is a serious flaw in what you're being represented for the truth, the facts today. And as you look at those maps up there, you see, as Chahram pointed out, five out-parcels. And in fact and indeed you'll see an area highlighted in blue shows six out-parcels existing today. drove by the center this morning. There are six buildings sitting on those out-parcels. So you don't have the facts. You don't have the correct facts. Secondly, the area highlighted in orange is the tract map. Mr. Fernandez, by his own admission, said that the owner has sold off part of the shopping center, only holds about 12 acres. I submit for a legal question to be researched later whether that constitutes a requirement for a two-lot subdivision, whether it has to be platted. So you should be looking at a plat, you should not be looking at a concept masterplan. You should be looking and viewing today a site development plan, not a concept master plan. That, folks, is a substantial change. Secondly -- or in addition to that, they're having you believe I'm going to pass out another map. It's basically that upper right-hand corner of both plans, '91, '98 plan. On the top you'll see highlighted in yellow, this is the area that everybody is debating, okay, on my exhibit that you have. Kigh!ighted in blue is the lake. As Mr. Groose pointed out, i~ reads at the top, pedestrian circulation for multi-family tract. The debate is this unlettered area does not have the letter The area to the west has the letter C. There's no question, when you do a land use plan, you identify your parcels, okay? What the applicant wants you to believe is that you've got a floating zone here, folks. And that's not what we're dealing with. A floating zone is a zone that says we have special uses here. They're trying to argue that these are special uses that they're entitled to. What they did submit and had was a cap for 319,000 square feet of retail. ! submit and technically go on the record saying today that seven or eight out-parcels, if there are eight, is intensification. I know that for a fact. In 1989 when we stood before this -- the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners with River Chase Shopping Center, we had seven out-parcels out there. We were shot down on that issue alone. We only ended up with four. This, in my · opinion, violates community standards. It's not good planning, folks. In conjunction with that, if you'll look at 1999's master use land plan, you'll see the area highlighted in orange. It moves from yellow, residential, to commercial. That area I calculated about 2.75 acres in area. The applicant could have developed his shopping center a different way. He could have put some office buildings in the front. The real -- let's call it what it is. It really is a measure here to add some additional out-parcels. You've got an agricultural strip of Page 13 FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 941 4S5 1218 2~,~1-1~ 14:24 NLember 4, 1999 land. It's a nonconforming strip. I don't know how that happened. That's interesting, I find. Agriculture, you've got to have a 150-foot front lot. It's an 80-foot 10t. How do you sit there and argue that that agricultural road isn't going to have an impact? There's no warranties about interconnection between that out-parcel and that other road. So when they tell you, which Mr. Fernandez submitted earlier, that there's no additional accesses, thaS's not true, okay? There will be an interconnection. It's good business sense. Turning movements need to be looked at very carefully at that intersection. Residents -- and I've heard over the last two years, being on the Kensington Park Master Association, the traffic problems on Pine Ridge Road. You approve that and you allow that out-parcel, you're going to be looking at additional difficulties in making movements and slowing down traffic. That could be another Wendy's. It could be a motion picture theatre. You don't know what it's going to be. I called the planning staff and asked them, did the applicant submit any traffic impact statements to substantiate that this proposed change, as submitted here today, warrants, and you heard Mr. Fernandez testify, that there's no increased traffic? That is not a true representation, and here's why. The reason why it's not a true representation is because shopping centers, community shopping centers, have a certain traffic value. When you begin to add these out-parcels in, those captures -- recapture rates significantly jump, okay? So you're not comparing an apple with an apple here. You're looking at an orange and an apple. That in itself constitutes a substantial change. I would submit that when they talk about if you buy into their logic that this area was supposed to be commercial, it wasn't residential, and they sold the land, then I would submit that the 40 percent rule for open space for residential might be applicable here. I'm not an attorney. That's worth taking a look at. There are some serious questions about this proposal today. It is substantial. I also submit for the record that when I met with planning staff in Kensington .Park -- and I'll give you my las~ exhibit before I explain that to you. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I'm going to get overtime. MR. HENDERLONG: We need to be consistent in our principles of planning and good urban design. This exhibit you're looking at shows you the south end of Kensington Park abutting Grey Oaks. Grey Oaks highlighted in yellow, Kensington Park in green. A year and a half ago, we approached staff about making a change within the PUD. Economics and market as we know drives a product and a PUD. And that's the beautiful flexibility of a PUD, it allows you to make changes with economic marketing conditions, and then they have to be measured in the community's best interest. Is it in the community's best interest? Is this proposal in the community's best interest? That's your challenge, that's your test. We sumbit a similar issue for determination, whether it was Page 14 ~RC~I :GOODLETTE, COlEMaN 941 4~ 121~ 2000,01-10 14:24 L.e ber i999 substantial or insubstantial. Staff, lookin9 at it, said well, all right, you' re goin9 to move this road and you're going to add a buffer. Tha~ road was located 150 feet to the north. The abutting land to the south were single-family residential. We had a PUD for 570 residential units, and we believed and thought it was insubstantial. Staff concluded it was not. I do not see, when we talk about that orange area commercial versus the floating zone area, whether it's residential, recreational. They could have argued it's recreational open space. They could have argued that. That's the problem with that concept plan. They told us very seriously, the staff, that we were substantial, all right? So what tha~ does is that triggers the applicants trying to avoid that process, because it triggers a reopenin9 of the PUD. They don't want to do that. That's really what's happening here. And the community standards, in my opinion, should not be compromised here. They need to be told it's a substantial deviation. They need to be told to come back, amend your PUD, resubmit, go through the technical issues point by point, get into those analyses, and as Kensington Park was treated, we had to submit architectural drawings, we had to submit -- not come to the hearing and say hey, we're going to drop our lights 20 feet, hey, we're going to drop this. We're going to make these changes. Nail it down, folks. This is really a site development plan you're talking about. The bulk of that shopping center is developed. We're talking about what's left there. And it warrants good planning analysis, good planning consideration. And the applicant should be standing here with you with a contract for something more definitive than what they're submitting here today. So based upon all those comments earlier, when we technically go through the comments on B where the staff says is there a proposed increase in the proposed number of dwelling units under B with intensity of land use, I already submit it, it is an intensity of land You're dealing with a shopping center out-parcel. You're not dealin9 with an additional box to the existing main center. Big difference in traffic generations. That could be another bank with turning movements to go out there. That needs to be looked at. Maybe it might make ~ood planning sense to have one returning movement out, which happened to River Reach Shopping Center. We had to go through that. That's warranted through -- it says you've got to do a traffic impact study evaluation. Let's take a look at D. D says is there a proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential to commercial? We submit there is. Unequivocal, not debatable. That unlettered area that is white, we submit, is residential or recreation open space, not what the applicant would lead you to believe. E, is there a substantial increase and impact to the development which may include but not be limited to increase in traffic generation, changes in traffic circulations or impac.ts on other public FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMRN 941 43S 121S 2~O,~1-1~ 14:25 ember 4, !999 facilities? That needs to be correctly evaluated. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Excuse me, but I think you've overdone your !0 minutes. MR. HENDERLONG: Okay. With that, I would just urge you to continue to find that it's a substantial deviation. Thank you. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Mr. Chairman, I have some some questions I'd like to propound to our attorney at this point. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Yes. Go right ahead, Mr. Abernathy. MS. STUDENT: And I'll try -- Commissioner ~bernathy, I'll try to help. This is -- I am not -- was not made aware by anyone of some of the concerns, but I'll be more than happy to try to help. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: These are general questions. MS. STUDENT: Okay. COMMISSIONER ARERNATEY: The first one is to whom do we look to for guidance on whether something is a substantial change? To the lawyers or to the planners? The second one, do we have the power to declare this a substantial change? Third, what consequences flow from that? And four, could the petitioner withdraw and moot this whole question of the residential area if we were to try to declare it a substantial change? MS. STUDENT: Okay, I'll try to -- if I forget one of them, you'll refresh my memory, right? COMMISSIONER ABERNAT}IY: Okay. The first one is to whom do we look for guidance? MS. STUDENT: The criteria are set forth in the Land Development Code. It is not the County Attorney's Office to make the commission decision or even to make a recommendation on that, because that's where the facts come in. And the Planning Department assesses the facts and applies those facts to the criteria and presents it to the Planning Commission. You have opposition here today who may try to rebut some of the facts presented by staff, and it's up to the Planning Commission as the decision-maker to weigh the evidence that is presented before it and make a determination as to whether or not, you know, it meets the criteria. Okay, now -- COMMISSIONER ABERNATBY: Okay, once -- do we have the power to declare that it's a substantial change? And I gather from what you just said we do. And if so, what consequences flow from that? MS. STUDENT: That would -- I don't know that it really amounts to a power of declaring it that. You can deny the petition. And -- COMMISSIONER D~ERNATHY: On that basis. MS. STUDENT: That it doesn't meet some of the criteria. And those criteria that you feel it does not meet needs to be spelled out in the motion. So I suppose one could say -- we've never called it declaring it a substantial change, but inherent in the idea of a denial there may be that. But we don't call it that. Pa9e 16 FROM :GoODLETTE, COLEMAN ~41 45S 1~1~ 2~(D~D, ~1-1~ 14: 2S Nl,e~ber 4, 1999 COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Okay. MS. STUDENT: And the conditions that flow from that, I believe there's been some code changes. I believe that the petitioner may have the opportunity to appeal this to the board, and if not, they could go into court. And I don't want to, you know, set up how to sue -- you're my client. But thsy could take whatever -- the appropriate avenue in court. So that either avenue is open to them. I don't have my code down here, I don't know if Mr. Nino has it, but we have broadened up the appeal procedures, so it's very likely it would go to the board before it would go to court. COMMISSIONER ABERNATHY: Then my last question was, if they didn't really want this change badly enough to open the matter of the height of the residential, could they just withdraw this? MS. STUDENT: A petitioner is free to withdraw a petition any time, if they so choose. COMMISSIONER ABERNATB-Y: So they could weigh those two things and just walk away from this? MS. STUDENT: It would be up to the petitioner to weigh all of what's been presented today. ACTING COF~ISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Priddy? COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I have two questions. Would you all -- the petitioner answer, what is your density per acre yesterday, and what would it be tomorrow if this change were approved? The density per acre, not -- MR. PASSIDOMO: Mr. Priddy and Mr. Chairman, with your indulgence, John Passidomo on behalf of the petitioner. We'd like to make a few points in rebuttal, and we'll address that point, Mr. Priddy. COMMISSIOAIER PRIDDY: And then I have one other question. MR. PASSIDOMO: Fra~Lkly, we don't believe there's any change at all. The concerns that were expressed about impacts on the residential tract obviously are not the issue that is in front of you today. But the basic predicate for that concern is that there's some 11 acres that are dedicated to residential use, and that number of acres will be reduced from 11 to 6.23. And then based upon that predicate, we've heard that the density of that tract will increase from 16 units an acre to 29 units an acre. Frankly, we challenge that basic predicate. And we make that challenge based upon the land use summary that's attached as Exhibit A to the planned unit development document. It says, clearly says, that the residential tract is 6.23 acres in size, and only 6.23 acres in size. The residential tract isn't being impacted at all. Density isn't being impacted at all. It was 16 before, it is 16 now. And frankly, what we're simply trying to do is reconcile the text of the planned unit development document, all the impacts that were accommodated by the Board of County Commissioners when they addressed this project and this planned unit development document originally with the master plan. And we think that there is a technical problem with the master plan. The master plan does not designate specific tracts for Page 17 FEOPl :GOODLETTE~ COLEMAN 941 43S 1218 2~,~1-1~ 14:26 ~l.-ember 4, 1999 ~046 P. 18/25 residential or commercial uses. But if you look at this Exhibit A which says a residential tract is 6.23 acres, add on a 30 percent component for open space, and you look at the designation of commercial acres of 24.01, add on a 30 per. cent component for open space, what you get is what you see now. You could -- you couldn't possibly have derived that result from the existing master plan if it was interpreted that this property on Pine Ridge Road was intended for residential purposes. And I think that you can imagine and we can imagine that in 1991 no one would have anticipated that the property on Pine Ridge Road would have been designated for residential purposes. What we're simply suggesting is that the planned unit development document always anticipated, Exhibit A to it, that there be 24.0! acres of the commercial, 6.23 acres of residential. What you see in your planned unit development document is simply what is now iljustrated on the master plan. We're reconciling a technical deficiency in a master plan that simply didn't specifically designate residential and commercial areas. Finally, what we'd like to do is what we think was proposed that you do do, and that is look at the criteria for compliance with -- for an insubstantial change. We think that if you look at that, you'll agree with staff that there are no changes to intensification, no changes to land uses. Land use is exactly as they're always intended to be. No o~her changes that would make this anything more than the insubstantial change that your staff is telling you that it is. And finally, to alleviate what we readily acknowledge are legitimate concerns by our neighbors, we propose three stipulations: The first is that there's a 20-foot height limitation on the lights, a benefit that is currently not enjoyed; the second is that the height of the buildings in this area will be no higher than the existing height of the buildings in the Carillon Shopping Center. Right now we could otherwise have buildings that are 50 feet high. And frankly, if we listen to the argument carefully and the concern about seven-story buildings, we could !lave seven-story buildings in this area. And what we're proposing is not only to have seven-story -- not have seven-story buildings by designated commercial, but to reduce that height down to whatever the existing height is at Carillon. We think it's about 35 feet. And coincidentally, 35 feet is the height at Kensington. So we're certainly not going to go beyond what the height of our neighboring properties might be, what we propose for it to be. No higher than ~he commercial structures at Carillon. And finally, as a third stipulation, that the current buffering standards in your codes would be adhered to and we respectfully submit will be exceeded. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Mr. Priddy? COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Follow-up on my question. In the original PUD document, how many out-parcels were proposed or shown? MR. PASSIDOMO: Michael? Page 18 F~;OP1 :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN ~41 4~5 121S 2~,¢1-1~ 14:25 ~/ember 4, 1999 MR. FER/qA/~DEZ: I think what you have before you is -- you have a copy of the original and you have a copy of the proposed. So it's readily evident that what you're seeing right now is that there are four independent structures that in this case my understanding is they were all sold as out-parcels. In regard to that, we're not here as a platting issue. We may be here for plattin~ in the future, and so you'll have an opportunity to see that, if we desire to do so. But we can commit to -- if it's a significant issue, we can remove any concern about an out-parcel by removing that little box that's shown in front of the larger box and just say what basically we're going to have, you know, a shopping center extension there. IZ's going to be -- in their words, we don't have to sell that under separate ownership. MR. PASSIDOM0: And Mr. Priddy, we don't think that there are any limitations in the planned unit development document on number of outqparcels. We simply think that there's a master plan which is an iljustration of where these uses might go, and the master plan, as originally drawn, is inaccurate because it leads you to believe, as cur neighbors do believe, that there's 11. something acres of residential. The planned unit development doesn't say 11. something acres of residential. There's ~.23 acres of residential. ! don't believe, and i'll be -- I stand ~o be corrected by staff -- that there are any --- number -- any limitation on the number of out-parcels or that it is even addressed in the text of the planned unit development document. And we're certainly not proposing that any text in the planned uni~ development document be revised. MR. FERNANDEZ: In addition to that, the comments about traffic generation, we're still proposing the exact same square footage. We're not changing the uses at all. Therefore, there is no intensification at all on this site. There is none. We're also not proposing, as Mr. Henderlong said, to have any additional access points. We're not showing any on our master plan, we're not eligible for any otherwise. All those were misstatements. Everything that we' have said is shown on that document. The only_ changes are readily evidenced. And also, the text, if you look at the original PUD, the text on the top right corner, it says circulation from multi-family to that area. There's an arrow there. It says from multi-family. It's -- the implication is that's not multi-family, because circulation is coming to it. In other words, pedestrians can access it from the residential property in the front. It was never intended to be anything other than that. I think our 9raphie shows that very clearly, our map is very precise, there's no disagreement there with staff, and I think that your standards for evaluating this are enumerated. And staff has 9one through them one by one. We've also done the exact same thing, and it meets the criteria. And so we'd ask you to approve it with the stipulations that Mr. Passldomo said. Pa~e 19 FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMRN 941 4~ 121S 2000,01-10 14:26 ~.xe~er 4, 1999 ~046 P.21/2~ And just to clarify the height issue, we'd say 35 feet so it's a measurable height so there's no more discrepancies. ~d 35 feet, like I said, is the same height as the residents have across the way. And again, I'd reiterate that we have 195 feet between the two -- between the buildings, is a close proximity. That would be the closest proximity between their structures and the structures that would occur on these parcels. So between that and the buffers and the limitation of height, we certainly have minimized any impacts. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Wrage? COMMISSIOR-ER WRAGE: Ron, could -- site plan development changes are done administratively, right? MR. NINO: That's correct. COMMISSIONER WRAGE: What triggered to come before this board? I mean, what caused this to come before this board? MR. NINO: We viewed it as a change in the master plan. The master plan wasn't clear that the intent of the master plan was to use' that property for commercial purposes. The insubstantial change process offers us all an opportunity to review the scope of that decision. MR. PASSIDOMO: Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, if I could make one final remark. The reason why we think it is a technical reconciliation is the only way you can implement the land use acreage stipulated in the planned unit development document and create 24.01 acres of commercial is to extend it beyond what the master plan would have otherwise suggested it could be. There's no change whatsoever to PUD document. It's simply a reconciliation to implement what everybody has always believed, that there be 24.01 acres of commercial. To get 24.01 acres of commercial, the master plan has to be drawn in a way similar to this. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Rautio? COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Following up on Commissioner Abernathy's comments and the attorney's comments, you're telling us that indeed if we meet the 11 items in the Land Development Code that is the criSeria for the insubstantial amendments, which are clearly identified on here, that we really don't have much choice? If you met the -- MS. STUDENT: The commission -- COMMISSIONER P~AUTI0: -- criteria, we'd have to identify those criteria. MS. STUDENT: The commission is the trier of facts and it is up to the commission to weigh the evidence presented by both staf~ and the petitioner and to reach a conclusion. And you're guided by that criteria. I cannot make the decision for the Planning Commission. You are the trier of fact. COMMISSIONER RAIITIO: Right. But we would have to go through and of the 11 items here actually identify those that do not -- we'd have to specify those in our motion that their criteria are not met? MS. STUDENT: Yes, for purposes of making a record. COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Well, ! will say that I'm very sympathetic to what the residents of Kensington have said. Mr. Henderlong has Page 20 FKOhl : GEiODLETTE, COLF'i"1i~N 941 4~ 1218 2~OO,O1-10 14:27 A~.¢e~ber 4, 1999 ~84G P.22/2S some real valid points, in my opinion. But I'm sitting here as a relatively new Planning Commissioner, and these ll points are spelled out very clearly. MS. STUDENT: What I also must advise the Plannit9 Commission -- and some of the me~%bers that have been on 'for awhile know thi~ -- but quasi judicial boards, as you are sittin9 in that capacity right now, are guided by criteria. A~d the case law in the State of Florida is that just residents' pure opposition is not sufficient. However, that if ~he residents present facts tha~ go to the criteria that is competent, substantial evidence, you may consider that. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Commissioner Priddy? COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Mr. Nino, followin~ up on Mr. Wrage's question -- and I readily see that there was some confusion on what that tract of land was supposed to be used for. But what's in the PUp document that Mr. Passidomo has that was spelled out how many units of this and how many acres of this was supposed to be there, I guess we could assume that that six acres of residential was supposed to be up on Pine Ridge, and that the bac~ part of that property then would be commercial? I mean, if you -- MR. NZNO: No, let me 90 through those numbers with you. First of all, if staff had approved -- had recommended more than 16 units per acre on the net area available for residential purposes, we would have made a mistake in 1991, The 6.3 acres is complemented by five acres of the -- in other words, of the 12 acres of open space, in '91 we made a subjective conclusion that five acres of that open space was part of the multi-family project; ergo, we really base our density on 11.3, which is 16 units per acre. The problem here is to what extent is the property neares~ Pine Ridge Road a part of the open space that was allocated to achieve the 16 units per acre. Chahram says in several places in his staff report that this issue is rather cloudy. It's not all that clear. And consequently, we indicated to you that we also had a problem, but we felt that the greater weight was on the fact that they had met the criteria. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Well, I think it's -- you know, it's clear to me, as to others, that it was probably never intended for residential to be right up on Pine Ridge. So that leaves us then to either commercial or open space associated either with t~e commercial or with the residential -- MR. NINO: You're right. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: -- that was to go there. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I have a ~uestion, Mr. Nino. It says pedestrian circulation from a multi-family tract. Could they, accordin9 to the PUP the way it stands today, pave it and put in a car lot with 3E-foot lights, or would they be in violation of the PUD? MR. NINO: I don't think we would approve a site plan that would provide that without them first obtaining this determination. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: I have a question. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Yes, Commissioner Urbanik? COMMISSIONER URBANIK: This question is for staff. Just a Page 21 FROM :GOODLETTE, COLEMAN 2~0,~-~ 14:27 ~.[~ember 4, 1999 ~04~ P.2~/2S clarification. The original 1991 document has a lake in it. And it's been my experience that when lakes are present, they're usually part of a drainage system of a development. The petitioner,s plan is to remove that lake. How does -- first I guess my question is basically since it's filed in the original PUD, do they have the righ~ now to remove it? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: This is an engineering question, and we checked with our water management engineers, and they made some calculations, and they said that lake is not necessary for the water management purposes. MR. NINO: But lakes are traditionally considered both water management and serve to meet the open space requirement. What Chahram is saying is back in '91 they provided more lake space than was required for their water management purposes, so we have to assume that it was more recreational in function than water management. COMMISSIONER URBANIK: And then they have the right to remove that? I mean, we have nothing to say about that, that's the petitioner's prerogative? MR. BADAMTC~IAN: The PUD document says they have to have 12.97 acres of open space lake and water management. And they have that without the lake. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I have another question. At this time right now, if nothing is granted to them for the commercial area, they have the right, according to their PUD, to come in and build seven-story buildings or six over garage, or as many as they can fit into this parcel with the density? MR. BADkMTCHIAN: Yes. The PUD allows six stories over garage. And if it is determined that the front parcel is residential, yes, they can have six-story over garage. COMMISSIONER BRUET: I've ~ot one more question. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Go right ahead. COMMISSIONER BRUET: The building height issue again, you're talking 35 feet for the commercial building only. The residential to the south, tha~ building height would remain six stories over parking? MR. PASSIDOMO: That's not an issue on the table today. The.only issue~on the table today is to amend the master plan. to be consistent with the PUD document. And we will voluntarily agree to provide that there will be no commercial building in that area in excess of 35 feet in height. COMMISSIONER RAUTI0: No commercial. MR. PASSIDOM0: And if you like, we will agree never to put a residential building in that parcel at all at any height. MR. FERNANDEZ: ! think what's really important, too, is that we did add one other thing to that master plan. You'll see there's some texts along with it that we worked out with staff, and it basically says, you know, when we do the SDP we have to show where that open space is. In other words, 'we have to provide 12.97 acres of open space, whether it's lake or it's green space or it's buffers or what have you. And we have to show that. We don't have any problem doing that. It will be shown. Page 22 FROM :GoO2LETTE, COLEMAN 2~O,~1-1~ 1~:2S L.L/ember 4, 1999 :1::;04~ F', 24.,/2G ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Anyone else? If there's no further comment, I'll close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Mr. Chairman, while I am terribly sympathetic to the -- what was approved in .91 with six stories over parking, it appears, as Ms. Rautio has pointed out, that that's not before us, and we don't have any control over that. I'm the last person that wants to see a seven-story building coming down Air]port or Pine Ridge myself. But I quite honestly don't see that that's part of what our decision is here today. .And I for one am not finding anything in staff's report to refute than. So -- ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Any other discussion? There being none, I'll call for a motion. Thank you. I fill in and I get this, huh? There being no motion, what happens? MS. STUDENT: Well, there needs to be some action taken by the Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: Okay, I'm usually the unpopular guy up here. I will do it. Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward Petition PDI-99-5 to the Board of County Commissioners for the recommendation -- MR. BADAMTCHiAN: It's approved here. It does not go to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: I move that we approve Petition PDI-99-5 with a recommendation of'approval, based on the fact that I canno~ find anything in staff's report -- anything to refute staff's report that would constitute this as anything other than an insubstantial change. CO~ISSIONER URBAI~IK: May we add the criteria added by the attorney? COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: knd I would place in that the criteria of lights being lowered to 20 feet, height of the commercial building being 35 feet, with the enhanced landscape that was being offered by the petitioner. COMMISSIONER P_AUTIO: And what about no residential in that one parcel? COMMISSIONER %rRBANIK: It mentions that -- COMMISSIONER PRIDDY: And that there will be no residential on the commercial parcel. COMMISSIOATER WR3%GE: I'll second that. COMMISSIONER SAADEH: One more thing if you could add to your motion, Mr. Priddy, is the 195 feet minimum distance between what the petitioner is proposing to the closest structure in Kensington. I think they made that statement, and we want to hold them to it. MR. PASSIDOMO: We'll do it to the extent that we can control that. Obviously a lot of that setback is on the Kensington property. And we can't control what happens on Kensington's property. But we will represent to you that we will do nothing to infringe upon the 195-foot setback. COMMISSIOATER PRIDDY: Yeah, if Kensington wanted to build a building, yeah, that's fine. Page 23 ~C~P1 :GCIODLETTE, COLEMAN 941 4~S 121~ 2~O,SI-I~ 14:2S 1,teembet 4, 1999 ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: We have a motion. Do we have a second? COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Second. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: I have a second by Commissioner wrage. Any other further discussion? COMMISSIONER PJ%UTI0: When I make -- when I say yes or no, can I make a statement with it? ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Okay, I call for the vote. aye. Yes, you can. Everyone in favor, signify by saying (Unanimous vote of ayes.) COMMISSIONER RAUTIO: Aye. However, I -- ACTING COM~4ISSIONER PEDONE: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER RAUTI0: Okay, technically I think the criteria has been met here. And I apparently have to vote yes. But we have a master plan that was approved in 1991 that I have some real concerns witk. My subjective approach would be that I would vote no. But, however, Mr. Henderlong made some various valid points, in my opinion. But I can't see anything, as Commissioner Priddy says, to change my vote. And I feel a responsibility, if petitioner has met criteria that's outlined here, that I have to vote yes. ACTING COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Okay. We have a unanimous vote yes. MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you, commissioners. Somethin9 else I'd just like to add. We've had very 9ood discussions with Dex Groose and his group. WE'll work with them to address those issues of the residential here in the near term. (Conclusion of Excerpt.) COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS MICHAEL PED0~E, ACTING CHAIP~W~%N TP~{SCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC., BY CHERIE' R. LEONE, NOTARY PUBLIC Page 24 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION CU-2000-01, RICHARD D. YOVANOVICH, ESQ. OF GOODLETTE, COLMAN & JOHNSON, PA. REPRESENTING BARBARA AND WILBUR CRUTCHLEY REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A BOAT DOCK AS A PERMITTED PRINCIPAL USE IN THE "RSF-4" RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF WEST AVENUE AND IS FURTHER DESCRIBED AS PART OF LOT 1, BLOCK "E", LITTLE HICKORY SHORES UNIT # 2, IN BONITA SPRINGS. OBJECTIVE: The applicant is requesting Conditional Use "1" of RSF-4 Residential zoning district for a boat dock. CONSIDERATIONS: The Collier County Land Development Code prohibits boat docks as a permitted principal use on vacant lots, unless a conditional use is approved for this purpose. The property in question which measures 1200 square feet (30'X40') was subdivided from the platted Lot # 1 in 1970. Since this lot was created prior to the adoption of Collier County Zoning Ordinance (September 14, 1974), it is considered a legal non- conforming lot. This lot contains an old "L" shaped boat dock protruding 20 feet into the waterway. Over the years, because of sand deposit at the end of the canal close to 50 percent of the dock is over the water, the rest of it is over dry land. Staff could not find a Building Permit for this dock and the applicant who purchased the property in 1994, could not produce one. The application states that the dock was built in 1969, after a site visit and a close examination of the dock, it is staff's opinion that the date appears accurate. The intent behind this request is to have a conditional use approved for this boat dock which will remove any question about the legality of this dock in the future. Surrounding properties contain small docks parallel to the shores protruding five feet into the waterway. The Collier County Planning Commission heard this petition on January 6, 2000 and by a vote of 9-0 recommended approval. One person spoke against this petition at the CCPC hearing. Staff has received 16 letters in support of this request. ITEM MAY 0 9 2000 FISCAL IMPACT: None. The intent behind this petition is not to build anything new, but rather remove any doubt about the legal status of the existing dock. GROVVTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is located in the Urban Residential area as shown on the FLUE map of the GMP. The property is zoned "RSF-4" Residential Single-Family. This district allows for certain conditional uses such as non-commercial boat launching facilities and boat docks. Therefore, this request is consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE CCPC: Staff recommendation to the CCPC was to forward this petition to the Board of Zoning Appeals with a recommendation for conditional approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed CU-2000-01 and by a vote of 9-0 recommended that the Board of Zoning appeals approve this petition. MAY PREPARED BY: CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE RE~ IEWED BY: /' R( ,NALD ~ ~INO, AICP, MANAGER CURRENT PLANNING SECTION 0 ROBERT J. MULHERE, AICP, DIRECTOR PLANNING SERVICES DATE VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP, ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION D,~E AGEI~'DAITE~7-E MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE: March 17, 2000 RE: PETITION NO: CU-2000-01 OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Barbara and Wilbur Crutchley 191 Sixth Street Bonita Spdngs, FL. 34134 Agent: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Colman & Johnson, PA 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL. 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant requesting the approval of a conditional use for a boat dock as a permitted principal use in the "RSF-4" residential single family zoning district. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located on the west side of West Avenue and is further described as part of Lot 1, Block "E", Little Hickory Shores Unit # 2, Collier County, Flodda. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Collier County Land Development Code prohibits boat docks as a permitted principal use on vacant lots, unless a conditional use is approved for this purpose. The property in question which measures 1200 square feet (30'X40') was subdivided from the platted Lot # 1 in 1970. Since this lot was created prior to the adoption of Collier County Zoning Ordinance (September 14, 1974), it is considered a legal non- 2000 conforming lot. This lot contains an old "L" shaped boat dock protruding 20 feet into the waterway. Over the years, because of sand deposit at the end of the canal close to 50 percent of the dock is over the water, the rest of it is over dry land. Staff could not find a Building Permit for this dock and the applicant who purchased the property in 1994, could not produce one. The application states that the dock was built in 1969, after a site visit and a close examination of the dock, it is staffs opinion that the date appears accurate. The intent behind this request is to have a conditional use approved for this boat dock which will remove any question about the legality of this dock in the future. Surrounding properties contain small docks parallel to the shores protruding five feet into the waterway. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing: Surrounding: - Vacant and vacant with a boat dock, zoned RSF-4 North - Single family residence with a boat dock, zoned RSF-4 East - Single family residence, zoned RSF-4 South - Single family residence with a boat dock, zoned RSF-4 West - Canal STAFF ANALYSIS a. Consistency with this code and Growth Management Plan. Pro: The site in question is zoned "RSF-4". Boat docks are permitted as accessory uses or conditional uses within the RSF-4 district. The subject property is designated Residential which allows accessory uses such as boat docks. Con: None. Summary_ Conclusion (Findings): The use in question is permitted within the Urban Residential District. This district allows residential uses and uses accessory to the principal uses, which includes Boat docks. This request is deemed to be consistent with the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Pro: The lot in question is large enough to contain one or two parking spaces; however, the owner of this property lives across the street and the dock is intended for his exclusive use. 2000 Con: None. Summary Conclusion (Findings): Since the owner of this property lives across the street, no vehicular traffic is expected to be generated because of this lot and the boat dock it contains. The effect the conditional use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects. Pro: This is a residential neighborhood with waterfront properties. Most, if not all, of the residences in the area have boat docks. This area is basically a boating community. The approval of a conditional use for a boat dock, which existed for almost three decades should have no impact on the neighborhood. Con: None 'Summary conclusion (Findings): This petition, if approved, will have no negative impact on the neighborhood. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. Pro: Most, if not all, waterfront properties surrounding this lot have boat docks; therefore, in the opinion of the reviewing staff, this conditional use is compatible with adjacent properties. Con: None. Summary Conclusion (Findings): The proposed use is compatible with surrounding properties. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition CU-2000-01 to the BCC with a recommendation for conditional approval subject to all stipulations contained in the Resolution of Approval. HAY 0 9 2000 PREPARED BY: CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE RC~ALD F. NINO, '/~,I'CP, MANAGER CURRENT PLANING SERVICES DATE RO~EF~ J. MULHERE, AICP, DIRECTOR PLANNING SERVICES DATE VINCENT CAUTERO, AICP, ADMINISTRATOR DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Petition Number: CU-2000-01 Staff Report for April 6, 2000 CCPC meeting. NOTE: This Petition has been advertised for the Apdl 25, 2000 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MICHAEL A. BUDD, CHAIRMAN MAY 0 9 2000 Pg. ~ __ RESOLb-rION 2000- A RESOLL-FION PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NON-COMMERCIAL BOAT DOCK FACILITY CONDITIONAL USE "1" 1N THE "RSF" ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2.4.3 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 5. TOWNSHIP48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida ~n Chapter 67-1246, Laws of Florida, and Chapter 125. Florida Statutes. has conferred on Collier County. the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zomng and such business regulations as are necessary. for the protection of the pubhc: and WHEREAS. the Counw pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 01-102) wia~ch mcmcies a Com~)renens~ve Zomng Ordinance establishing reguialaons for the zoning of particular geograpimc divisions of the County, among which i$ the grantlag of Condiuonal Uses; and WHEREAS. the Collier County Planning Cormm~ion, I~ing the duly appointed and constituted planrang board for the area hereby affected. has held a public h~rmg ~ notic~ as m ~a~d regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of Conditional Use "1" of S~ction 2.2.4.3 in an "RSF-I" zone for a non-commercial boat dock facility on the property hemixuffier described, and has found as a matter of fact (Exhibit "A"~ that satisfactory, provision and arrangement have been made concermng all applicable mattms reqmred by sa,d regulations and mar, cordance w~th Subsecnon 2.7.4,4 of the Land Development Code for the Collier County. Planning Cormm,~ion: and 'WHEREAS, all ~nterestea ~arues have been gwen o~portunlry to be heard by this Board in a public meeting assembled and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS of Collier County.. Florida that: 'I'he pet~tmn filed by Richard D. Yovanovlch, Esq., of Goodietie. Coleman & Johnson, PA represenung Barbara and Wilbur Crutchley, with respect to the property. hereinafter described as: Exhibit "B" which is artached hereto and incorporated by reference hereto be and the same ts hereby approved for Conditional Use "1" of Sectson 2.2.4.3 of the "RSF-I" Zoning District for non-comanercial boat dock facility in accordance with the Conceptual Master Plan (Exhibit "C") and subject to the following conditions: Exhibit "D" which is attached hereto and incorporated by refe.'ence herein. BE IT FLIRTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes -2- MAY 0 9 2000 This Resolution adopted a~et mouon. second and ma]onry vote. Done thts day of .2000. BO,~J~J3 OF ZONI'NG A. PPEALS COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK. CLERK BY: TI]',4OTHY J. CONSTA]qT~. CHALRMAN ~)~rovea as to Form ana Legal Sufficiency: Marni M. Scuden. Assistant County, Anoney g ,m:lnmwCL'-20OO.O I' REfiOL b'TION.tCI~l~ 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The following facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Ao Consistency with ~he Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes / No B o Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingre~ & egress Yes ~ No Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glad, economic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use wit~n district Yes ~' No Based on the stipulationS, ~ !.c~py attached) approval ( ~.~f~0~ ,,/ . DATE: 4/~/~ this conditional use should, with (should not) be recommended for EXI-iIBIT "A" Wadnan/FINDING OF FACT CHAIRMAN/CU-2000-01/CB/im .o. I<AY o 9 20O0 // FIArDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION POR CU-2000-01 The following facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Ao ionsistency with che Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes f/ No So Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes ~No Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, giare,/economic or odor effects: ~/No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect rannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes U/ No Based on the above findings, this~ditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached (s~~be recommended for approval . DATE ~o MEMBER: ~ . ' _~~ Fd~dmawFINDING OF FACT MEMBER/CU-20(}O-0 I/CB/irn MAT 0 9 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY 2CLLiER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The foi!owing facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. o Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and wlil not adversely affect other property or uses in 5he same district or neighborhood because of: Ao icnsls5ency with 5he Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes % No Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & ~gress Yes % No Co Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: · . No affect or Affect mitigated by Affec~ cannot be mitigated D ~ Compatibility wlth adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes % No Based on the above findings, stipulations, /copy attached) approval this conditional use should, with (should" not) be recommended for g/~ln~rvFrNDING OF FACT MEMBER/CU-20004)I/CINim MAY 0 9 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY EOLLiER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR iU-2000-01 The following facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. o Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in The same distr!ct or neighborhood because of: Tonsistency wiuh zhe Land Development Code and Growth Management P/No Yes B o Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & ew~ss Yes No Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare,~/economic or odor effects: ~' No affect or Affect mitigated by A~fec~ rannot be mitigated Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use w_~-h~n district Yes ~ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should,/~h stipulations (copy attached) ( ..... :: .t reco approval '--~ ~~/_/~~//.~_____ DATE: 0 MEMBER. // g/~dmm/FINDFNG OF FACT MEMBER/CU-20OO~!/CB/im AC-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-~ A ITEM o 2ooo FIN-DING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The foilowing facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and wlil not adversely affect other property or uses in The same disurict or neighborhood because of: Consistency wzth nhe Land Development Code and Growth Management P~n: Yes No Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & e/gress Yes ~/x No C o Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, gla~ economic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect marmot be mitigated D o Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes / No Based on the above findings, th~--c~ditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (~oul~ not) be recommended for approval g/mdrmn/FINDING OF FACT MEMBER/CU-2000-O1/CB/im MAY 0 9 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PT~A/qNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The following facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. o Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: 3onsistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes ~/ No B o Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & ~ress Yes ~ No C o Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, g~, economic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated m 0 Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use~within district Yes ~ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with st'~ns, (copy atta.ched) Wadman/FINDING OF FACT MEMBER,/CU-2000-O 1/CB/im (should not) be recommended for MAY 0 9 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The foi!owing facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use w11! not adversely affect the public interest and wlil not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Sonsis5ency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes ~ No Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress ~egress Yes % No C o Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: "~ No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated Compatibility wlth adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within distrlct Yes ~ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulatio~~p)~/~ttached) (should r%Qt) be reco~%ded for approval /~]V~R~__-- . __~~.. ' ~ DATE: ~~G OF FACT M AC~J~DA ITEM 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY i$LLiER COUNTY PLA/TNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The following facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. .Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in -he same district or neighborhood because of: ionsisuency wi5h uhe Land Development Code and Growuh Management P/: Yes No C o Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, gl~economic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect canno~ be mitigated Compatibility wlth adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use w~thin district Yes / No Based on the above findings, s~~ons, (copy attached) DATE: ~--&--&?~/ g/adrmn/FINDING OF FACT MEMBER/CU-2000-OI/CIFim this conditional use should, with (should not) be recommended for MAY 0 9 2000 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-2000-01 The following facts are found: Section 2.2.4.3. of the Land Development Code authorized ~he conditional use. o Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same distrlct or neigb_borhood because of: Consissency wi~h 5he Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan: Yes .~ No Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes ~ No Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes ~ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (should not) be recommended for approval DATE: ~t' ~ / ~o c ~ MEMBER: g~drmrvFINDrNG OF FACT MEMBER/CU-2000-01/CBAm MAY 0 2000 I,EGAL DESCRIPTION . BEING APART OF LOT I []F BLOCK 'E' IN LIIILE HICKORY SIllIRES l lNl f NO.2, ACCORDING TO THE Pt A f THEREOF RECORDED IN Pl A f BOOK 3,PAGE 79, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDI~ BEING MORE PAR TICUL ARL Y DESCRIBED AS FllL L COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT li THENCE YES T ALONG THE NOR TH LINE OF SAID LOT I FOR 30 FEE T AS SHORN :IN PLAT; THENCE SOUTH PARALLEL ~ZlTH TIlE EAST LINE OF SAID ACCORDING TO SAID PLAT FOR 40 FEETj THENCE EAST PARALLEL ,dTH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT ACCORDING TO THE SAID PLAT -OR 30 FEET/ THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT FOR tO FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXHIBIT "B" MAT 0 9 2300 ,VOT FOR NOT FOR 5K£TCIt oF CONSTRUCTIOA' DESIGN £ow _cUR =DH LCr .' £L i72 k :'fro 5/8' 6746 lr[~ 5/8' NO ID BLOCK ._r'. ,',18a 40 ~- · ~E~'f4 INDE~ L £' T BL OC Y ' ~ ' ?7,m 5/8' lEGAl. DESCRIPTION ?C/N6 A PARr Or' LOT / [IF ~L[TCk '£' IN t,';;~[ ?OOK 2 PAGE '9 PUBLIE REEOR$~ ~Elm6 ~E PA~TICULA~L ~ D[~E~IBED A~ FOLLOW5 J~l~ Ar rm[ ~r~n~r /IN PlAL I~N[[ 50UIH PARALLEZ ' ACCEDING rO SAIP PLAF FOR 4fi FEEL ;~NC[ EASF PARALL[? roe 30 FEET, T~NC[ ~TH 4LONG T~[ EAS' LINE Zr SAID LOT FOR ~D FEEt rO f~r POINT OF BROILING EXHIBIT "C" ('ERTIFICATION "---30' SCALE l' = lO' O 2 ~ I0 EO GRAPHIC S£ I r A~EN~A ITF. M NAY ~ 9 2go[ ?-0179[ ~ ..~a. IN DESIGNAIED FLOOD HA2 ~&D /,:~ ~ta ~ FLOOD ZONE 4E i CC)~MUNIT ~ OANEL 12006 DA'T~D ' _~- 16' (FLOOD ZOhl£ "B'."C'."D", CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CU-2000-01 This approval is conditioned upon the following stipulations requested by the Collier County Planning Commission in their public heanng on Apdl 6, 2000. ao The Current Planning Manager may approve minor changes in the location, siting, or height of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by the conditional use. Expansion of the uses identified and approved within this conditional use application, or major changes to the site plan submitted as part of this application, shall require the submittal of a new conditional use application, and shall comply with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the time of submittal, including Division 3.3, Site Development Plan Review and approval, of the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance (91-102). EXHIBIT "D" AGENDA ITEM MAY 0 9 2C00 Petition No.: APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR: CONDITIO Date Petition Received: Pl~er Assi~e~q~?~* Commission District: ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF 1. General Information Name of Applicant(s) Barbara Crutchley and Wilbur Crotchicy Applicant's Mailing Address 191 Sixth Street, City Bonita Springs Applicant's Telephone # 992-2324 State FL Zip 34134 Fax # Name of Agent Richard D. Yovanovich. Esq. Agent's Mailing Address 4001 Tamiami Trail North: Suite 300 City Naples State FL Agent's Telephone # 941-435-3535 Firm Goodlette= Coleman & Johnson, PA Zip 34103 Fax # 941-435-1218 COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING SERVICES/CURRENT PLANNING ' 2800 N. HORSESHOE DRIVE - NAPLES, FL 34104 PHONE (941) 403-2400/FAX (941) 643-6968 APPl.ICATION FOR PI~BLIC liKARING FOR CONI'}!TIONAI~ PAG~ AGENDA ITFJVl M),Y 0 2000 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. (Provide additional sheets if necessary) Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name o fHomeowner Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name o fHomeowner Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Name of Master Association: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip NameofCivicAssociation: Mailing Address City State ~ Zip Disclosure of Interest Information: If the property is owned fee simply by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Wilbur H_ and Barbara A. Crotchicy as tenants by the entirety. Percentage of Ownership lOO APPLICATION FOR PUli!.IC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. IlgE . 6/98 PAG] bo If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name, Address and Office Percentage of Stock If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee or a Parmership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership APPLICATION FOR Pl !!iI.lC REARING FOR CONDITIONAl. lI.q£ -5/98 PAGI A~A ITF_.M 30F 15 MA7 0 ~ 2000 P~. ,:,o,.5'" If any contingency clause or contract term involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, parmership, or trust. Name andAddress g. Date subject property acquired ( ) leased (x):7/15/94 Term of lease ~ yr./mos. Ifi Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: terminates: , or anticipated closing date and date option Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Detailed legal description of the property. covered by the application' (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section: 5 Township: 48S Range: 25E Lot: 1 Block: E Subdivision: Little Hickory. Shores Plat Book 3 Page #: 79 Property I.D.#: 55900440003 Metes & Bounds Description: See attached Exhibit "A" Size of property.: 30ft. X 40 ft. = Total Sq.Ft. 120Acres .0028 ~ Address/general location of subject property.: Comer of Sixth Street West and West Avenue, Bonita Springs APPLICATION FOR PU!!LIC' HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. USE -6/9? I PAGEI 6. Adjacent zonin~ and !and use: Zoning N RSF-4 S RSF-4 E RSF - 4 WRSF -4 Land use Residential Homes - Little Hickory Shores Residential Homes - Little Hickory. Shores Residential Homes - Bonita Shores Residential Homes - Little Hickory Shores Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page). Section: Township: Range: Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #: Property I.D.#: Metes & Bounds Description: Type of Conditional Use: This application is requesting conditional use # ~of the RSF district for (TYP£ OF USE) Boat Dock Present Use of the Property: Boat dock since1969 Evaluation Criteria: Provide a narrative statement describing this request for conditional use. NOTE: Pursuant to Section 2.7.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staWs recommendation to the Planning Commission and the Planning commission's recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals shall be based upon a finding that the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and that the specific requirements governing the individual conditional use, if any,'have been met, and that further, satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning the following matters, where applicable. Please provide detailed response to each of the criterion listed below. Specify how and why the request is consistent with each. (Attach additional pages as may be necessary). APPLICATION FOR PI!RI~IC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl, USE -6/911 PAGE oF 0 2, 00 Describe how the project is consistent with the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan (include information on how the request is consistent with the applicable section or portions of the future land use element): RSF zoning districts include accessory, including uses for boat docks. The boat dock has existed since 1969. The lot on which it was constructed was created in 1970. Thus the lot is a legal lot as defined by the County's intern. retatipno of its ordinances. This conditional uses is consistent with present zoning requirements. Describe the existing or planned means of ingress and egress to the property and proposed structure thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe:The property. is easily accessed by West Avenue. No additional in,ess, e~ess or additional structures are necessary.. The boat dock has been in existence since 1969. It is owned and serves the residence located across the street. There will be no effect on traffic in the area. Describe the effect the conditional use will have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic impact and odor: This conditional use will have nO measurable effect on neighboring properties. The prev/ous owner of the property. tO the south of the boat dock actually sold a portion of the property. to the property. owner from whom the Crutchley's acquired the boat dock. The neighboring property. owner orionally consented to the boat dock and assisted in its being able to be constructed by selling the property. in the first place. The property. has been used as a boat dock for nearly 30 years and most other properties in the area have boat 'docks Describe the site's and the proposed use's compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district: The vast majority. of other properties in the area are also have boat docks. This existing boat dock does not interfere with the adjacent property's use and eQoyrnent of the water and their boat docks. APP!.!C'ATION FOR PU!ll~lf" HI~ARIN~ ~'OR C?ON!)!TIONA[ !YS£ . 6/qg PAGE 6 0 9 2000 )F 15 Please provide any additional information which you may feel is relevant to this request: The Petitioner does not own property. contiguous with the subject property.: but does own property. directly across West Avenue in Bonita Shores at 191 Sixth Street: Bonita Springs. The current property. owner adjacent to the boat dock purchased the property. with full knowledge of the boat dock's existence. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, may communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. 10. Previous land use petitions on the subject property.: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? No. 11. Additional Submittal requirements: In addition to this completed application, the following must be submitted in order for your application to be deemed sufficient, unless otherwise waived during the preapplication meeting. a. A copy of the pre-application meeting notes; Eleven (11) copies of a 24" x 36" conceptual site plan [and one reduced 8V:" x 11" copy of the site plan], drawn to a maximum scale of 1 inch equals 400 feet, depicting the following [Additional copies of the plan may be requested upon completion of staff evaluation for distribution to the Board and various advisory boards such as the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB), or CCPC]; · all existing and proposed structures and the dimensions thereoff provisions for existing and/or proposed ingress and egress (including pedestrian ingress and egress to the site and the structure(s) on site), all existing and/or proposed parking and loading areas [include matrix indicating required and provided parking and loading, including required parking for the disabled], locations of solid waste (refuse) containers and service functions areas, required yards, open space and preserve areas, proposed locations for utilities (as .well as location of existing utility services to the site, proposed and/or existing landscaping and buffering as may be required PAGE APPLICATION FOR PI t!~l.IC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. ,v 0 2000 ~F 15 County, · location of all signs and lighting including a narrative statements as to the type, character, and dimensions (such as height, area, etc.); An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), as required by Section 3.85 of the Land Development Code (LDC). Whether or not an EIS is required, two copies of a recent aerial photograph, (taken within the previous twelve months), minimum scale of one inch equals 400 feet, shall be submitted. Said aerial shall identify plant and/or wildlife habitats and their boundaries. Such identification shall be consistent with Florida Department of Transportation Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System. Statement of utility provisions (with all required attachments and sketches); A Traffic Impact Statement (TIS), unless waived at the pre-application meeting; A historical and archeological survey or waiver application if property is located within an area of historical or archaeological probability (as identified at pre- application meeting); Any additional requirements as may be applicable to specific conditional uses and identified during the pre-application meeting, including but not limited to any required state or federal permits. APPIJCATION FOR PI~R!.!C HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. PAGE A ~ ~,.~-1'4g, A IT~,,~ 0 9 ...,.,,'30 OF 15 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT (TIS): A TIS is required unless waived at the pre-application meeting. The TIS required may be either a major or minor as determined at the pre-application meeting. Please note the following with regard to TIS submittals: MIiSDJ?,_TJ~ Generally required for conditional use (and rezone) requests for property less than 10 acres in size, although based on the intensity or unique character oft petition, a major TIS may be required for petition of ten acres or less. Required for all other conditional use (an rezone) requests. A minor TIS shall include the following: Trip Generation: Annual Average Daily Traffic (at buildout)Peak Hour (AADT) Peak Season Daily Traffic Peak Hour (PSDT) 2. Trip Assignment: Within Radius of Development Influence (RDI) Existing Traffic: Within RDI AADT Volumes PSDT Volumes Level of Service (LOS) Impact of the proposed use on affected major thoroughfares, including any anticipated changes in level of service(LOS). Any proposed improvements (to the site or the external right-of-way) such as providing or eliminating an ingress/egress point, or providing turn or decel lanes or other improvements. Describe any proposal to mitigate the negative impacts on the transportation system. For Rezones Only: State how this request is consistent with the applicable policies of the Traffic Circulation Element (TCE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), including policies (1.3, 1.4, 4.4, 5.1, 5.2, 7.2 and 7.3. A Major TIS shall address all of the items listed above for a Minor TIS, and shall also include an analysis of the following: 1. Intersection Analysis 2. Background Traffic 3. Future Traffic Through Traffic Planned/Proposed Roadway Improvements Proposed Schedule (Phasing) of Development APPI.IfTATION FOR PURI.IC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. II.{IE -6/~ PAGE 9 ~GEN~A IT~J~ ~AY 0 ~ 2~00 )F 15 ~,a.. TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT .OTIS) STANDARDS: The following standards shall be used in preparing a TIS for submittal in conjunction with a conditional use or rezone petition: Trip Generation: Provide the total traffic generated by the project for each link within the project's Radius of Development Influence (RDI) in conformance with the acceptable traffic engineering principles. The rates published in the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Report shall be used unless documentation by the petitioner or the County justifies the use of alternative rates. Trip Assignment: Provide a map depicting the assignment to the network, of those trips generated by the proposed project. The assignment shall be made to all links within the RDI. Both annual average and peak seasonal traffic should be depicted. t Existing Traffic: Provide a map depicting the current traffic conditions on all links within the RDI. The AADT, PSDT, and LOS shall be depicted for all links with the RDI. Level of Service .(LOS): The LOS of a roadway shall be expressed in terms of the applicable Collier County Generalized Daily Service Volumes as set forth in the TCE of the GMP. Radius of Development Influence .(RDI}: The TIS shall cover the least of the following two areas: a) b) an area as set forth below; or the area in which traffic assignments from the proposed project on the major thoroughfares exceeds one percent of the LOS "C". Residential 5 Miles or a required by DRI Other (commercial industrial, institutional, etc.) 0 - 49,999 Sq. Ft. 2 Miles 50,000 - 99,999 Sq. Ft. 3 Miles 100,000 - 199,999 Sq. Ft. 4 Miles 200,000 - 399,999 Sq. Ft. 5 Miles 400,000 & up 5 Miles In describing the RDI the TIS shall provide the measurement in road miles from the proposed project rather than a geometric radius. m Intersection Analysis: An intersection analysis is required for all intersections within the RDI where the sum of the peak-hour critical lane volume is projected to exceed 1,200 Vehicles Per Hour (VPH). APP[IC'ATION FOR PURl. I(~ HEARING FOR (~I~NDITICINAI. USE -6/911 PAGE 10 Ol MAY 0 9 2000 15 e Background Traffic: The effects previously approved but undeveloped or partially developed project which may affect major thoroughfares within the RDI of the proposed project shall be provided. This information shall be depicted on a map or, alternatively, in a listing of hose projects and their respective characteristics. ~: An estimate of the effects of traditional increases in traffic resulting from potential development shall be provided. Potential development is that which may be developed maximally under the effective Future Land use Element (FLUE) and the Collier County Land Development Code. This estimate shall be for the project development areas within the projects RDI. A map or list of such lands with potential traffic impact calculations shall be provided. Through Traffic: At a minimum, increases in through traffic shall be addressed through the year 2015. The methodology used to derive the estimates shall be provided. It may be desirable to include any additional documentation and backup data to support the estimation as well. 10. Planned/Proposed Roadway Improvements: All proposed or planned roadway improvement located within the RDI should be identified. A description of the funding commitments shall be included. 11. Project Phasing: When a project phasing schedule is dependent upon proposed roadway improvements, a phasing schedule may be included as part of the TIS. If the traffic impacts of a project are mitigated through a phasing schedule, such a phasing schedule may be made a condition of any approval. TIS FORM RVB/IUM 10/17/97 APP!.!CATION FOR PIYRI JC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. ! ~.~E -6/98 PAGE I A '~'T~w MAY 0 OF 15 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST NAME OF APPLICANT: MAILING ADDRESS: CITY ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (IF AVAILABLE): ZIP Section: Lot: Plat Book LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Township: Block: Subdivision: Page #: ~ Property I.D. #: Metes & Bounds Description: Range: TYPE a. b. ¢. TYPE a. b. ¢. OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED (Check applicable system): COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM CITY UTILITY SYSTEM FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM PROVIDE NAME PACKAGE TREATMENT SYSTEM (GPD capacity) SEPTIC SYSTEM [] [] OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED: COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM CITY UTILITY SYSTEM FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM PROVIDE NAME PRIVATE SYSTEM (WELL) [] [] [] APP!_ICATION FOR PII!!I.IC HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. !!~E -6/9a PAGE [2 OF 15 0 10. 11. 12. TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED: PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS: A. WATER-PEAK AVERAGE DAILY B. SEWER-PEAK AVERAGE DAILY IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED: NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as specific statement regarding the method of effluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located within the services boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating that there is adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. UtiliD' Provision Statement RJM 10/17/97 APP!.ICATION FOR PI !!~I.!C HEARING FOR CONDITIONAl. ! ~;E -6/98 A~£NDA IT~J~I I.';/,':' 9 .,q 2000 PAGE! 13 OF 15 Executive Summary SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE 1999 TOURISM AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE TOURISM ALLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY REGARDING ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners accept the second amendment to the 1999 Tourism Development agreement between Collier County and the Tourism Alliance of Collier County. ' CONSIDERATION: At the February Tourism Alliance Board meeting the Airport Authority requested that the $77,855 that was approved by the Board of County Commissioners for Advertising and Promotion be transferred to the Tourism Alliance budget. The Airport Authority would like to utilize the Tourism Alliance for their Advertising and Promotion. The Tourism Alliance agreement will be amended from $1,418,000.00 to $1,495,855.00 xvhich will include the $77,855 for the Airport Authority. FISCAL IMPACT: The $1,418,000 contract with the Tourism Alliance xvas included in the FY2000 budget. The $77,855 required for the Airport Authority xvill be transferred from the Airport Authority's budget into the Tourism Alliance budget fund 194. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Board of County Commissioners accept the second amendment to the 1999 Tourism Development agreement between Collier County and the Tourism Alliance of Collier County, approve the associated budget amendment and authorize the Chairman to sign the agreement. APPROVED BY: Jane ~. :i~mTTDC Coordinator'- Housing and Urban Improvement REVIEWED BY: .//~ '~-'-, ~;~ '~?': /' Greg Mi~alic(Director ~.." ~ ........ Housing and Urban Improvement Vincent A. Cautero, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Se~ices Date Date Date SECOND AMENDMENT TO 1999 TOURISM AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE TOURISM ALLLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY REGARDING ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHOR i TY THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO 1999 TOURISM AGREEMENT, is made and entered into this day of ,2000, by and between the Tourism Alliance of Collier County, hereinafter collectively referred to as "GRANTEE" and Collier County, a political 'subdivision of the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY." RECITALS WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the GRANTEE entered into a 1999 Tourism Agreement dated June 22, 1999 in the amount of One Million, Three Hundred Fifty Thousand No/100 Dollars ($1,350,000); and WHEREAS, the COUNTY and the GRANTEE entered into a 1999 (FY99/00) amended Tourism Agreement dated October 12, 1999 in the amount of One Million, Four Hundred Eighteen Thousand No/100 ($1,418,000.00); and WHEREAS, GRANTEE and County now desire that Grantee's budget be amended to include funding for advertising and promotion of the Airport Authority. WITNESSETH: NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE MUTUAL COVENANTS HEREIN AND OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDEtL~TION, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Section 2 of the Agreement, as amended, shall be deleted in its entirely and replaced with the following language: PAYMENT: The amount to be paid under this Agreement shall be One Million, Four Hundred Ninety Five Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Five No/100 Dollars ($1,495,855). The GRANTEE shall be paid in accordance with fiscal procedures of the County for expenditures incurred for the promotion and advertising expenses as described i~ Se~ti6n 1.~ ! I.':,:., t .... upon submittal of an invoice and upon verification that the services described in the invoice are completed or that goods have been received. GRANTEE shall determine that the goods and services have been properly provided, and shall submit invoices to the County Administrator or his designee. The County Administrator or his designee shall determine that the invoice payments are authorized and the goods or services covered by such invoice have been provided or performed in accordance with such authorization. The line item budget attached as Exhibit "A" shall constitute authorization of the expenditure described in the invoices provided that such expenditure is made in accordance with this Agreement. Each invoice submitted by GRANTEE shall be itemized in sufficient detail for audit thereof and shall be supported by copies of corresponding vendor invoices and proof of receipt of goods or performance of the services invoiced. GRANTEE shall certify in writing that all subcontractors and vendors have been paid for work and materials from previous payments received prior to receipt of any further payments. The COUNTY shall not pay GRANTEE until the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners pre-audits payment invoices in accordance with the law. GRANTEE shall be paid for its actual cost not to exceed the total amount for various line items and up to the maximum amount budgeted pursuant to the Attached Exhibit "A". The amounts applicable to the various line items of Exhibit "A", subject to the maximum total amount, may be increased or decreased by up to ten percent (10%) at the discretion of GRANTEE. Adjustment in excess of ten percent (10%) of any line item must be authorized by the County Administrator or his designee. 2. Exhibit "A" to the First Amendment to the 1999 Tourism Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with Exhibit "A" attached to this Second Amendment to the o 1999 Tourism Agreement. Except as set forth herein, all of the terms and provisions of the 1999 Tourism Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTEE and COUNTY have each respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date and year first above written. DATED: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman WITNESSES: (2) Printed~Typed Name Printed/Typed Name GRANTEE TOURISM ALLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY Printed/Typed NaXlne Printed/Typed Title Approved as to form and legal sufficiency David C. Weigel County Attorney EXHIBIT "A" TOURISM ALLIANCE OF COLLIER COUNTY BUDGET Advertising Public Relations Travel Industry Liaison Fulfillment Administration Film Office Airport Authority $ 820,000 $ 240,00O $ 35,OOO $ lB0,000 $ 75,000 $ 68,OO0 $ 77,855 TOTAL $1,495,855 AIRPo/i2. COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY 2003 Mainsail Drive Naples, Florida 34114 (941 ) 642°7878 Fax (941) 394-3515 www. collierairports.com March 17, 2000 Mr. Tammie Mathews, President Tourist Alliance of Collier County 1400 Gulfshore Blvd. N Suite 123A Naples, Florida 34102 RE: AIRPORT AU'I'ItORITY PART'NERSI tlP Dear Ms. Mathews: The Collier County Airport Authority voted at its March 13, 2000, Board meeting to transfer tile $77,000 TI)C marketing dollars to tile Alliance with an understanding that tile Authority will coordinate marketing initiatives tbr tile county airports with the Alliance. It was understood that the following would occur: Greg Mihalic's office will prepare the necessary TDC and BCC resolutions to transfer tile timds. '- · The Authority would submit marketing initiatives to tile Alliance approval. Tile Aliimice would provide $25,000 in direct costs lbr aviation trade magiinc advertisements. The Alliance would handle fulfillment and tracking the efCectiveness the aviation trade magazine advertisements. TIle Authority and Alliance web site would be linked. The Alliance would assist the Authority with marketing initiatives include those initiatives in the Alliance's program. Letter to Tammie Mathews March 17, 2000 Page 2 At the end of this marketing year the Alliance would evaluate the value of the county airport marketing initiatives and make recommendations for next year's marketing plans. If the above meets your expectations of our coordinated efforts please so advise and I will execute the necessary. budget an~endments to transfer the funds. By copy of this letter to Mr. Mihalic I run requesting that his office begin the TDC and BCC resolution submittals. I look forward to xvorking xvith you, your staff and the Alliance. Jo-Anne Learner, my Director of Finance. will be coordinating the details of this program with your office. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions. inc ely, ,,/ff ,/ // John H. Drt~ry. A.A.E. Executive Director JHD:gg BCC TDC Greg Mihalic Jo-Anne Leamer 11:3 17.0()TMathe~s A,.\ParIncrship EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST TO APPROVE FOR RECORDING THE FINAL PLAT OF "QUAIL WEST PHASE III, UNIT TWO", AND APPROVAL OF THE STANDARD FORM CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF THE AMOUNT OF THE PERFORMANCE SECURITY OBJECTIVE: To approve for recording the final plat of "Quail West Phase III, Unit Two", a subdivision of lands located in Section 8, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, following the alternative procedure for approval of subdivision plats. CONSIDERATION: Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of "Quail West Phase III, Unit Two" These documents are in compliance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. All ~. fees have been paid. Security in the amount of 10% of the total cost of the required improvements, and 100% of the cost of any remaining improvements, together with a Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, shall be provided and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorneys office prior to the recording of the final plat. This would be in conformance with the County Land Development Code Division 3.2.9. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Quail West Phase III, Unit Two" be approved for recording. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact to the County is as follows. The project cost is $388,444.25 (estimated) to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a) b) Water & Sewer Drainage, Paving, Grading - $ 95,249.00 - $293,195.25 The Security amount, equal to 110% of the project cost, is $427,288.68 MAY Executive Summary Quail West Phase III, Unit Two Page 2 The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: Community Development Fund 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $7406.82 Fees are based on a construction estimate of $388,444.25 and were paid in April, 2000. The breakdown is as follows: a) Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac)- $ 467.52 b) c) Paving, Grading (1.3% const. est.) ~-- GROWTh{ MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Construction Drawing Review Fee Water & Sewer (.50% const. est.) - $ 476.25 Drainage, Paving, Grading (.42% const. est.)- $1231.42 Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer (1.5% const. est.) - $1428.74 Drainage, - $3802.89 The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Final Plat of "Quail West Phase III, Unit Two" for recording with the following stipulations: Approve the amount of $427,288.68 as performance security for the required improvements. 2. Approve the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and a. That no Certificates of Occupancy be granted until the required improvements have received preliminary acceptance. b. That the plat not be recorded until suitable security and an appropriate Construction and Maintenance Agreement is approved and accepted by the Planning Services Director and the County Attorney's office. Executive Summary Quail West Phase III, Unit Two Page 3 PREPARED BY: John R. Houl~swort~, Senior Engineer Engineering Review REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. Engineering Review Manager Rober~ Mul~ere, AICP Planning Services Department Director APPR~V,EI) BY: ..~ Vincent A. Cautero, AICP, Administrator Community Development & Environmental Services Date Date Date Date j rh ~A¥ ~ ~ 2000 LOCATION MAP APPROVA:~-S ...................... COUNTY LAND SURVEYOR THIS PLAT REVIEWED BY THIS DAY O' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD BID NO. 00-3055 FOR PAINTING OF AERIAL WATER, WASTEWATER AND EFFLUENT LINES OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award Bid No. 00-3055 for the painting of aerial water, wastewater and effluent lines to Scarer Painting Corporation. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection Sections are responsible for the maintenance of aerial utility piping throughout the Collier County Water-Sewer District. 2. The piping is in need of cleaning and painting, due to age and wear from the elements. 3. The Water Department has received several requests from Homeowners Associations, where these crossings are located to have the piping painted. 4. Bid No. 00-3055 was sent to twenty-four vendors, with four bidders responding. 5. Staff has reviewed the bids received and recommends award to the second low bidder, Seacot Painting Corporation 6. The low bidder William T. Decker has decided that the work required is beyond the scope that their Corporation is capable of performing. A letter from William T. Decker Painting, Inc. is attached as Exhibit A. e-'ISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of this purchase is in the amount of $44,220. Funds are available in the Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection Cost Centers. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award Bid No. 00-3055, for the painting of aerial water, wastewater and effluent lines to Seacot Painting Corporation. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: Consent Agenda Supervisor Paul Mattausch, Water Director ~ EdwdN Finn, ~blic/Works Administrator ~4/25/2000 08:38 94~-275-@647 tON T DECKER PTG INC PAGE 01 WILLIAM T~ DECKER PAINTING, INC. William T. Deeker 1919 Courtnc*y Dr. ~,.' #~ President Fm My~ ~ ~I ~7-' -~ ~.- .. -~"L~ - --- % .... ' ....:~ - =- ' -. ~:'.' .....~ - ~ --.-. .... --'- -~, ~ ......... ~ ~ . ~ '. ~ .' ~,, .~ ~_'~ DATE: ~17~ S~~ED TO: ~L~R ~U~ ~~NT. N~LES, ~~A. .TEL : (941)775-2007 FAX: (941) 7~S-3310 ATTEN TY. FROM. BILL DECKER AT THIS TIME WE WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW OUR PROPOSAL FOR PAINTING AERIAL WATER 1 WASTEWATER / EFFLUENT LINES. PLEASE CALL IF.YOU 1tA VE ANY QUESTIONS. SlNCERLY .~ / WILL~ T'D~CKER ! PRL$1DENT. NAY 0 9 .~000. MAY 0 9 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. I (D) (FINAL) TO CONTRACT NO. 97-2771, REMOVAL OF NON-SPECIFICATION MATERIAL FROM THE NAPLES BEACH. OBJECTIVE: To obtain approval of the final change order to enable close-out of Contract No. 97-2771. CONSIDERATION: On February 24, 1998, the Board of County Commissioners awarded a contract for Bid No. 97-2771, Removal of Non-Specification Material from the Naples Beach to C.B.E. Trucking Company, Inc. in the amount of $99,982.00. This original scope of work involved the screening of an estimated 23,850 c.y. of material together with 3,050 c.y. of rock removal and sand replacement along approximately 2,100 l.f. of the Naples Beach. Subsequently, on April 7, 1998, the Board, based upon a request from the City of Naples, authorized an increase in the scope of work in an amount not to exceed $350,000.00. This equated to 103,025 c.y. of material to be screened and 6,950 c.y. of rock removal along approximately 5,100 l.f. of the Naples Beach. During the performance of this work, additional testing revealed the need to expand the limits of work for an additional 60 feet offshore. Such resulted in a total quantity of 138,366 c.y. of material screened and 10,880 c.y. of rock removed. During the process of negotiating costs associated with this additional work, on November 23, 1999 [Agenda Item 8(B)(2)], the Board approved an interim change order in the amount of $166,398.79 to enable payment to the contractor pending resolution of a final change order to close out the contract. The attached change order is the result of requests from the contractor relative to changes in the work as directed by the Owner. The summary of recommendations included with the change order outlines items of additional work together with the requested and recommended amount for each. These recommendations were the result of extensive and prolonged negotiations between the staff and the contractor and are considered by the staff to be a fair and masonable adjustment to the contract amount for the additional work performed. As a result of this change order, the total amount of Contract No. 97-2771 will be $731,644.27. Based upon the quantity of material processed, this total amount equates to a unit cost of $5.29/cubic yard. For comparison purposes, the unit cost for similar work performed under Contract No. 99-2995 with D.N. Higgins was $11.13/cubic yard. considered to be completed and therefore authorization to close our C¢ is requested. In summary, it is recommended that Change Order No. 1 (D) (Final) to Contract No. 97- 2771 be approved in the amount of $115,263.48 together with a time extension of 79 calendar days. Along with approval of this final change order, work under this contract is atract No. 97-2771 HAY o 9 2000 Pg. Executive Summary May 3, 2000 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended amount of this change order exceeds the amount included in the current budget for this project. Therefore, approval of a budget amendment is requested whereby funds in the amount of $115,263.48 will be transferred from the reserves of Fund 195 to the appropriate expenditure category for this obligation. Funds in the amount of $2,629,245.00 are available in the reserves of Fund 195. Funds are available in Fund 195, Tourist Development - 60%. The source of funds is the Tourist Development Tax. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this action. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: Approve Change Order No. 1 (D) (Final) to Contact No. 97-2771 and authorize closeout of the contract. 2. Approve the necessary budget amendment for this obligation. 3. Authorize the PWED Director to execute the change order. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: ~/~~r,...,~ Date: Harold E. Huber, Project Manager III Public Works Engineering Department /~/'Jeff ~!ibby, P.E., Di re c~or PaVement ~~ ~ ~ / Date: ~ d ~~~Intefim ~mifflstrator Public Works Division HEH/sc/es4beachco Attachments C: Jon C. Staiger, Ph.D., Natural Resources Manager, City of Naples Beach Renourishment/Maintenance Committee C.B.E. Trucking Company, Inc. Jane Eichhom, TDC Coordinator AGEN D/~oITEM-- No.... HAY o 9 2000 pg .... CONTRACT NO. 97-2771 FINAL CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS B. C. D. E. F. G. H. L J. K. M. N. Basic Services Excavation ~ Dune/Design Grade Changes (Phase 1) Additional Testing Increased Work Limits South of the Pier Stockpiling Sand, Station 36+00 to Station 40+00 Increased Work Limits North of the Pier Equipment Repair due to High Saltwater Exposure Excavation ~ Dune/Design Grade Changes (Phase I1) Stockpiling Sand, Station 14+00 to Station 35+00 Environmental Window Extension Salvage Value of Material Reimbursement to City of Naples Lost Time and Attorney Fees Equitable Adjustment SUMMARY OF REQUESTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ITEM REQUESTED RECOMMENDED REMARKS AMOUNT AMOUNT A ..$9.8~247.12 $108,552.80 Change Order No. 1(C) B 25,962.40 16,395.55 Final Change Order C 9,738.20 9,738.20 Change Order No. I(C) D 4,434.00 4,041.10 Final Change Order E 13,600.00 6,800.00 Final Change Order F 55,967.58 48,107.79 Change Order No. I(C) G 24,842.00 0.00 Final Change Order H 29,975.21 21,088.01 Final Change Order I 27,200.00 13,600.00 Final Change Order ..... J 14,452.50 14,452.50 Final Change Order K 86,580.00 9,620.00 Final Change Order L 0.00 ($6,915.68) Final Change Order M 34,065.00 0.00 Final Change Order N 36,182.00 36,1'82.00 Final Change Order TOTA. LS $461,246.0! $281,662.27 Final Change Order = Total - Change Order No. 1 (c) = $281,662.27 - $166,398.79 = $115,263.48 1,4AY 0 9 2000 TO: C. B. E. Truddng Company, Inc. 3994 Mercantile Avenue Nap .lqa, FL 34104 CHANG!e OROER FROM: Collier Cc~_~y_ Government Public Works ~%~__.rin$ Deparmzat 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Bldg. H Naples, Florida 34112 Project Name: Removal of Non-Specification Material from the Naples Beach Coastruction Agreement Dated: February 24, 1998Bid No.: 972771 Change Order No.: 1 (D) Date: March 2g~ 2000 Clumge Order Description: The purpose of this C~n~ Order is to provide appropriate ~on for additional work as directed by the Owner and performed by the Cuuizactor on the subject project. Such sbal/be as contained in tl~ Sm-.u~'y of~~,dn_-_'ons a~hcd h~--.~o. Slim of prg~ou8 c~axlge orders arnotint ................................................... ReWsed Agreement Amount .....................................................................$ 99,982.00 5.16,398.79 115.263.48 731,644.27 Substantial Original contract tittin in ealendar days ..........................................40 Adjusted number of calendar days due to previous change orders434 This change order adjusted time is 79 Revised Contract Time m calendar days ........................................513 45 439 79 518 Original Notice to Proc(~ date ......................................................... Completion date based on original cxratract time ................................. Revised completion date ................................................................... March 16, 1998 April 30, 1998 May 20, 1999 Your acceptance of thin change or~r shall constitute a modifica~on to our Agrccmc~ and will be performed subject to all th~ same U:rms and conditions as como__incd in our Agrccmcllt indicat~ above, as fully as if th~ san~ were repeated in this acceptance. The adju~ if any, to this Agreement shall constitute a full and final settlement of any and all claims of the Contractor arising out of, or related to, the change set forth herein, including claims for impact and delay costs. PWED Project Mauagcr m Rw.?,omm~mded by: Michael T. P0ff, P.E. ' Co t, , Accepted b _ _ _ _~__ C.B.E Truddng Company, Inc.. Approved b~ HAY 0 § 2000 BUDGET AME~MENT REQUEST For Budg~t/Financ~ Use Only BAg ............................... BARit .............................. A.P.H. Date ....................... FUND TI'I1,E Tourist Development - 60% FUND NO. 195 Date prepared: 3/29/00 Attach Executive Summary Approved by BCC on ~/'~[~o Item No. EXPENSE BUDGET DETAIl. Beach Renourishment- Category "A" Cost Center Title 110406 Cost Center No. iCollier County Beach Restoration Project Title } 80225 [Project No. Expenditure "Expenditure Increase Current Revised Object Code Title (Decrease) Budget Budget 634999 Other $115,264 $689,147 $804,411 Contractual Services TOTAL $115,264 Reserves t 1919010 Cost Center Title Cost Center No. Project Title Project No. Expenditure Object Code 991000 Expenditure Budget l$2,513,981 Title Reserves for Contingencies IIncrease (Decrease) ($115,264) Current Budget $2,629,245 TOTAL ($115,264) Cost Center Title REVENUE BUDGET DETAIl, I Cost Center No. Project Title I Project No. Revenue Revenue Title' Increase Current Revised Object Code (Decrease) Budget Budget TOTAL EXPLANATION Why are funds needed? To provide sufficient funds in the appropriate expenditure category for the obligation associated with the approval of Change Order No. 1 (D) to Contract No. 97-2771. YVhere are funds available? Reserves of Fund No. 195. REVIEW PROCESS Cost Center Director: Division Administrator: Budget Department: Agency Manager: Finance Department: Clerk of Board Admin.: Input by: B.A. No.: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILSONMILLER, INC. FOR THE SANTA BARBARA EXTENSION ALIGNMENT STUDY, PROJECT # 60091. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners approve Amendment No. 1 to the subject Agreement to provide for additional engineering, surveying, and environmental services in the amount of $224,123 to complete the required alignment study. CONSIDERATIONS: On October 1, 1996 the Board approved the Professional Services Agreement with WilsonMiller, Inc. for the Alignment Study of Santa Barbara Extension from Davis Boulevard to Rattlesnake Hammock Road and a connector corridor from County Barn Road to CR 951. On February 9, 1999 WilsonMiller presented the findings of their preliminary alignment study which resulted in the BCC directing staff to further analyze traffic service in the study area. Tidale Oliver and Associates was hired to perform these services. At the September 28, 1999 BCC meeting, Tindale Oliver staff presented their findings which recommended proceeding with finalizing WilsonMiller's contract, concentrating on three separate alignments: Santa Barbara Blvd.(Alt. C), E/W Connector(Alt. C), and Polly Ave. Ext.(a two lane local roadway, Alt A). This recommendation was approved by the BCC. Amendment No. 1 covers all the costs associated with the aforementioned change of scope, including updating the consultant's rate schedule since the original agreement ~vas executed. This amendment will bring the total cost of the study by WilsonMiller to $680,736. The consultant will complete the project in ten months from the date of Notice to Proceed. At the conclusion of WilsonMiller's study, we will know the exact footprint of the proposed corridor and the required Right of Way. This information is extremely important in identifying the properties which are adversely impacted by the proposed Santa Barbara Extension. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $224,123 will come from the District 2 Impact Fee supported Transportation Capital Fund. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This project is consistent with the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, approve Amendment No. 1 to the subject agreement to proceed with completing Santa Barbara Extension Alignment Study Project. SUBMITTED BY: ////.' ///.~./,,/.~:.~z,.---...' ~ ~ Mitch Momtaz, P.E., Project Manager Public Works Engineering Department AGE NDA.L~F_nM % No._ !co ) Pg._ I 1 REVIEWED BY: .~je~f~ ~ ~. JeffBibby, P.E., Director Public Works Engineering Department/ Edward ~. Kant, ~.~, ~ra~s~o~tatio~ $¢~. ~.'~s Directar / / Edwarc~/N. FinrfT',Inte~m Administrator ~ Public Works Division DATE: DATE'5/.~~ SANTA BARBARA ALIGNMENT STUDY AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT This Amendrnent No. 1 to the Agreement dated October 1, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "AGREEMENT") is made and entered into this day of ., 2900, by and between the Board of County Commissioners for Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "OWNER") and WilsonMiller, Inc., authorized to do business in the State of Florida, xvhose business address is 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200, Naples, Florida, 34105-8507 (hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Ox3,~rNER and CONSULTANT currently have a valid professional services agreement for the provision of professional services for the Santa Barbara Alignment Study (from Davis Boulevard to Rattlesnake Hammock Road), and the East- West connector (from County Barn Road to County Road 951), hereinafter referred to as the "PROJECT", said services more fully described in said AGREEMENT; and WHEREAS, OWNER and CONSULTANT agree due to a different approach to the project, change in the scope AGREEMENT are necessary; and of services being contemplated under said WHEREAS, CONSULTANT represents that he has the expertise and the type of professional services that will be required for completion of the project. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and provisions contained herein, parties agree as follows: ARTICLE ONE 1.1 CONSULTANT shall provide to OWNER professional Engineering, Surveying, and Environmental services in all phases of the project to which this Amendment applies. 1.2 CONSULTANT shall provide professional services in lieu of those as outlined in said AGREEMENT as noted in Exhibit A of this Amendment; as attached hereto. ARTICLE TWO 2.1 OWNER agrees to compensate CONSULTANT for services rendered hereunder as prescribed in Schedule B, entitled "Modified Exhibit B - Fee Summary" For Basic Services and Consultant's Estimate of Additional Services, as outlined in said AGREEMENT with the modifications to Exhibit A to said AGREEMENT which are attached hereto and made a part hereof. ARTICLE THREE 3.1 The PROJECT will be completed within ten months from the date of Notice to Proceed issued by the County to the Consultant. NAY 0 9 2000 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment to Professional Services Agreement for the Santa Barbara Ali=m-tment Study the day and year first written above. ATTEST: (As to Chairperson) BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA By: Dwight E. Brock, Clerk By: Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Assistant County Attorney ~ Witn4'~s WilsomMiller, Inc. Y: Q.~ ~L-~:) ,: ~..-:*. ~ ~' Alan D. Re~, President (CORPORATE SEAL) A o MAY 0 § 2000 SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD PHASE I - PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RFP #91-1688 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT MODIFICATIONS TO SCHEDULE A "SCOPE OF SERVICES" PHASE I- PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING.AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ISECTION 1.0 OVERVIEW On October 1, 1996, the Board of County Commissioners for Collier County (BCC) entered into a Professional Services Agreement (AGREEMENT) with WilsonMiller, Inc. (CONSULTANT) to conduct the Santa Barbara Boulevard Phase I Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Assessment (PROJECT). Schedule A of this original AGREEMENT set forth the Basic Services (Scope of Services) to be performed by the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT essentially completed Tasks 1.00 and 2.00, as described in Section 6.00 of Schedule A, and also provided additional services requested by the COUNTY. As part of the work completed, the CONSULTANT developed and analyzed 3 preliminary alignment alternatives for Santa Barbara Boulevard (plus a fourth alignment that was only partially assessed), 3 preliminary alignment alternatives for the East-West Connector, and 2 preliminary alignment alternatives for a Hybrid Roadway. On September 28, 1999, following several meetings regarding these alternatives, the BCC designated Santa Barbara Alternative C and East-West Connector Alternative C as the preferred alignments and directed COUNTY staff and the CONSULTANT to discontinue analysis of the other alternatives. The BCC also directed COUNTY staff and the CONSULTANT to expand the PROJECT to include development and analysis of a 2-lane alignment for the Polly Avenue Extension. The CONSULTANT's initiation of services for Tasks 3.00 and 4.00 of the PROJECT (see Schedule A, Section 6.00 of the original AGREEMENT) was temporarily suspended by the COUNTY on February 9, 1999 pending the results of a final traffic study prepared by others. The COUNTY has now asked the CONSULTANT to complete the PROJECT (e.g., conduct Tasks 3.00 and 4.00) in accordance with the BCC's directives. These directives require altering the Basic Services as set forth in Tasks 3.00 and 4.00 of the original AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT's modifications to these Basic Services are presented in Section 4.0 below, wherein the former Tasks 3.00 and 4.00 have been combined into a single Task 3.0, Final Alignment Analysis. Due to changes in the scope of these Basic Services and adjustments to the CONSULTANT's hourly rate schedule, the CONSULTANT's fees for Task 3.0 (Tasks 3.00 and 4.00 in the original AGREEMENT) have been revised in keeping with Article Two, Sections 2.2 and 2.12, and Schedule A, Phase I, Section 2.0 Of the original AGREEMENT. The revised fees for Task 3.0 and fees for additional services previously rendered are summarized in Schedule B, Attachment A which is attached. The revised fees for Task 3.0 alone are itemized in Schedule B, Attachment B, "Consultant's Employee Hourly Rate Schedule for Modified Task 3.0" which is attached. The revised schedule for completion of the PROJECT is attached as Schedule C. ,0._//. MAY O 9 2000 Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page 2 I SECTION 2.0 TERMS, ASSUMPTIONS, AND UNDERSTANDINGS 2.1 The following provides a definition of various terms used herein: · COUNTY- The Collier County Public Works and Engineering Division. · BCC - The Board of County Commissioners for Collier County, Florida. Referred to in the original AGREEMENT as the OWNER. · Original AGREEMENT - The Professional Services Agreement entered into by the COUNTY/OWNER and CONSULTANT on October 1, 1996. · Preliminary alignment alternatives - The alternative roadway alignments developed under Tasks 1.00 and 2.00 of the original AGREEMENT. Exhibit 1, attached, indicates the 4 alternatives developed for the Santa Barbara Boulevard extension (e.g., Santa Barbara Alternatives A, B, C, and D), the 3 alternatives developed for the new East-West Connector roadway (e.g., East-West Connector Alternatives A, B, and C). Exhibit 2, attached, indicates the 2 alternatives developed for the "Hybrid Roadway" (e.g., Hybrid Road Alternatives 1 and 2) which simply combined northern portions of the preliminary alignment alternatives for Santa Barbara Boulevard with eastern portions of the preliminary alignment alternatives for the East-West Connector, thereby forming a hybrid of these alternatives. · Santa Barbara Alternative C - The alignment alternative for a 6-lane extension of Santa Barbara Boulevard from its existing intersection with Davis Boulevard (SR 84) to the current intersection of Parkers Hammock Road with Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864), as indicated in Exhibit 3 attached. · East-West Connector Alternative C - The alignment alternative for a new 4-lane roadway extending from the current intersection of Whitaker Road with County Barn Road to Collier Boulevard (CR 951), as indicated in Exhibit 3. · Preferred alignments - A term collectively referring to Santa Barbara Alternative C and East-West Connector Alternative C. . · Polly Avenue Extension - The proposed improvement and extension of Polly Avenue from its existing intersection with Rattlesnake Hammock Road to its future intersection with Santa Barbara Alternative C, as indicated in Exhibit 3. This is proposed as a 2-lane local road. · Study Area - Portions of Sections 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, and 17, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, as shown in Exhibit 1. · PEEA - Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Assessment. 2.2 This document shall serve as a modification to the original AGREEMENT pursuant to Sections 2.2 and 2.12 of Article Two, Article Fifteen, and Section 2.00 of Phase 1of Schedule A as found in said AGREEMENT. As such, this document supercedes the following portions of the original AREEMENT: (1) (2) NbO22-001-000-EPSA-19265 Schedule A, Phase I, Section 6.0, Tasks 3.00 and 4.00 along with Exhibit Ill. Schedule B, Attachment B, CONSULTANT's Employee Hourly Rate Schedules for: Task 3.01.A to E; Task 3.02.A to C; Tasks 3.03.A to F; Tasks 3.04.A and B; Task 3.05.; Task 3.06.A and B; Task 3.07; Task 4.01.A and B; Task 4.02.A to D; Task 4.03, and; Task 4.04.A to D .o. HAY o 9 2000 P6. ~/ '! Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services (3) Schedule B, Attachment A, Exhibit B (4) Schedule C. Page 3 [SECTION 3.0 NOTICE TO PROCEED MEETING Prior to beginning work specified herein under Task 3.0, the CONSULTANT shall meet with the COUNTY. The purpose of this meeting is to address the following: · The COUNTY will establish any ground rules upon which the remaining PEEA process will be conducted. · The COUNTY will explain the financial administration of the AGREEMENT. · The COUNTY will render the official Notice to Proceed letter. · The CONSULTANT will advise COUNTY of any initial questions or concerns regarding PROJECT specifics and of any initial assistance needed from the COUNTY SECTION 4.0 BASIC SERVICES TASKS TASK INDEX TASK 1.00 TASK 2.00 TASK 3.00 DATA COLLECTION (completed, see original AGREEMENT for details) PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS (98% complete, see original AGREEMENT for details) FINAL ALIGNMENT ANALYSIS (revised scope of services presented herein) TASK 3.0 FINAL ALIGNMENT ANALYSIS The CONSULTANT shall make additional modifications to the preferred alignment for Santa Barbara Boulevard (e.g., Santa Barbara Alternative C) and to the preferred alignment for the East- West Connector (e.g., East-West Connector Alternative C), based on additional information gathered through the environmental field reconnaissance and mapping efforts, input provided by the BCC, changes in Study Area conditions, and further engineering studies. The CONSULTANT shall also develop design criteria and an alignment for Polly Avenue Extension. For each roadway alignment, proposed typical sections and right-of-way widths (corridors) will also be developed along with a conceptual stormwater management plan. After the COUNTY has reviewed and approved these plans, they will be utilized as the basis for all final alignment analyses. The modified preferred alignments, the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension, the corridors associated with these alignments, and the conceptual stormwater management systems are collectively referred to as the PROJECT. 2q4~10-71764 Vet Ol!-CCan~h¢ N6022-001-000-EPSA-19265 Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page 4 This activity involves a detailed analysis of the preferred alignments and of the Polly Avenue Extension. The CONSULTANT will meet with appropriate agencies to solicit opinions on the these alignments and the overall PROJECT. The CONSULTANT will also meet with utility owners to solicit opinions on these alignments. The CONSULTANT will then conduct additional analyses as necessary and prepare a Draft Design Report (See Exhibit 4 for Outline). Once the Draft Design Report has been reviewed and approved by the COUNTY, public meetings will be held to describe the PROJECT and solicit opinions on the PROJECT. The Draft Design Report will also be submitted to various governmental agencies for their review and comments on the PROJECT. Input obtained from the public meetings and agency review process will be evaluated. The Draft 'Design Report will then be revised to incorporate a discussion of this input and to reflect modifications deemed necessary by the COUNTY, culminating in the Final Design Report. The CONSULTANT will also prepare Roadway Corridor Maps for the PROJECT adequate for the County to initiate planning of right-of-way acquisition. 3.1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND SURVEY TASKS The CONSULTANT shall obtain the following controlled aerial photography and raster images to be used for the PROJECT. A. 1"= 200' scale black and white photo mylars and raster images for the Study Area. B. 1"= 600' scale black and white photo mylars and raster images for the Study Area. C. 1"= 50' scale black and white photo mylars and raster images for the preferred alignments and the Polly Avenue Extension. D. Establish aerial photographic ground control for the above photography. Control to be set at intervals necessary to achieve rectification using aerial triangulation methods. E. Additional Surveying Services (CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICE): 1. Stake out the centerline of the preferred alignment for Santa Barbara Boulevard at 100' intervals with lath only, and/or; 2. Stake out the centerline of the preferred alignment for East-West Connector at 100' intervals with lath only, and/or; 3. Stake out the centerline of the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension at 100' intervals with lath only. N~J022-001.000-EPSA- 19265 AG O 1 MAY 0 9 2000 PG.,~ ~ - Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A: Scope of Services Page 5 3.2 ENGINEERING TASKS A. Data Collection 1. Research, collect (as necessary), and review data specified in Tasks 1.01. A., B, C, and D of the original AGREEMENT, in order to update database for the PROJECT. 2. Revise PROJECT database and exhibits as necessary based on the results of the activities described above. B. Alignment Modifications for Santa Barbara Alternative C and East-West Connector Alternative C. Based on directives from the BCC, updates to PROJECT database, and othe. r engineering and environmental considerations, develop a modified alignment for Santa Barbara Alternative C and for East-West Connector Alternative C. Based on these modified alignments, design conceptual intersection treatments for: Santa Barbara Alternative C's intersection with Davis Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road; East-West Connector Alternative C's intersection with County Barn Road and CR 951, and; the intersection of the two preferred alignments. C. Design Criteria and Alignment Development for Polly Avenue Extension 1. Develop appropriate design criteria for Polly Avenue Extension. Review criteria with COUNTY and modify as requested by COUNTY. Based on design criteria approved by COUNTY, develop one (1) alignment for the Polly Avenue Extension including conceptual intersection treatments for this roadway'-s intersections with the existing local road system and with the two preferred alignments. Review alignment and intersection treatments with COUNTY and make revisions to same as requested by COUNTY. Such revisions exclude making significant modifications to the alignment (e.g., development of alternative alignment). D. Alignments Analysis, Stormwater Design, and Utility Coordination Conduct a detailed analysis of the preferred alignments and for Polly Avenue Extension. The analysis will evaluate typical sections, intersection concepts, signal requirements, access management requirements, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, safety, conceptual stormwater management requirements, special features, alignment criteria, right-of-way needs, property impacts, utility impacts, maintenance of traf'fic, and associated costs. COUNTY will provide method of calculating right-of-way acquisition costs assuming condemnation is required. N6022-00 [-000-EPSA- 19265 Develop a conceptual stormwater management plan for each of the preferred alignments and for Polly Avenue Extension LP6. Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page 6 The CONSULTANT shall coordinate with major utility owners to identify existing and proposed facilities along the preferred alignments and along Polly Avenue Extension. Utility owners will provide appropriate utility cost impacts associated with the preferred alignments and Polly Avenue Extension. 3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL TASKS A. Data Collection 1. Research, collect (as necessary), and review data specified in Tasks 1.02. C, D, and E of the original AGREEMENT, in order to update database for the PROJECT. 2. Revise PROJECT database and exhibits as necessary based on the results of the activities described above. B. Environmental Field Reconnaissance and Mapping Conduct an intensive field reconnaissance along and in the immediate vicinity of the preferred alignments and the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension. The purpose of this reconnaissance will be to survey for listed species and indications of potential contamination sites, to characterize existing vegetation associations and land uses, and to estimate the boundaries of potential jurisdictional wetlands and surface waters. Photographs of representative wetland communities will be taken. Photographs of potential contamination sites will also be taken. Utilizing the new aerial photography and information gained from the field reconnaissance and other sources, refine mapping of the estimated extent of wetlands located along and in the immediate vicinity of the preferred alignments and the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension. Rank each wetland as either "high", "moderate", or "low" quality based on revised es;dmates of their existing 'functional values and degree of disturbance. Map and classify dominant existing vegetation associations located along and in the immediate vicinity of the preferred alignments and the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension as well those present in lands within the Study Area targeted as potential mitigation sites. Classification of vegetation associations will be generally based on the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS). Rank the habitats as having either a "high", "moderate", or "low" potential for being presently utilized by listed species, relative to one another. C. Listed Species Location (CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICE) N6022-001-000-EPSA- ] 9265 Should the CONSULTANT's environmental field reconnaissance result in sightings or strong indications of listed species in or immediately adjacent to the preferred alignments or the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension, additional field .0. HAY 0 9 2000 Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page 7 reconnaissance shall be performed by the CONSULTANT. This reconnaissance will focus on specific areas where listed species are sighted or there are strong indications of the potential presence of such species. The CONSULTANT shall determine, using standard surveying methods or GPS, the approximate location of nesting sites, denning sites, or critical (in the opinion of the CONSULTANT) habitat of listed species encountered during the above field reconnaissance if such dens, nests, or habitats may influence PROJECT design and permitting. D. Environmental Impact Assessment Calculate the approximate extent (acreage) of direct wetland impacts for each of the preferred alignments and for Polly Avenue Extension. Evaluate potential direct and secondary effects of PROJECT upon wetland systems. 2. Evaluate feasibility and prudence of measures which could be employed to minimize PROJECT wetland impacts. Calculate the approximate extent (acreage) of PROJECT impacts to dominant vegetation associations. Evaluate the potential effects of the PROJECT on vegetation associations and the wildlife habitat they provide. 4. Evaluate potential PROJECT impacts to listed species. Assess both direct impacts to individuals and their habitat and secondary impacts. Evaluate any necessary and feasible measures to minimize impacts to listed species. Evaluate potential mitigation which may be required for impacts to listed species (note - this evaluation excludes estimating listed species mitigation costs). 5. Evaluate potential PROJECT impacts to recorded historical or archaeological sites, parks and recreation facilities, other cultural features and community services buildings, wildlife refuges and conservation areas, and existing and proposed land uses. Evaluate environmental permitting requirements of each of the preferred alternative alignments and for Polly Avenue Extension. This evaluation will focus on permits which may be required by the Corps, SFWMD, FWC, and FWS. It will address permits which may be required and will indicate the CONSULTANT's opinion of permitting difficulty and time frames. E. Wetland Mitigation Analysis N6022-001-000-EPSA- 19265 Evaluate the suitability of lands within the Study Area for mitigation of PROJECT wetland impacts. This evaluation will focus on undeveloped lands in the Study Area which do not have existing zoning approval for development or applications for development being processed. Based on this evaluation, identify an area that may be acceptable to regulatory agencies for use as on-site mitigation. AGF.~A MAY 0 9 2000 p~. Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page 8 Lt t I/m1-73'764 Vet {) 1 ~-CCarxthe N6022-001-000-EPSA- 19265 For each of the preferred alignments and for Polly Avenue Extension, estimate the mitigation that may be required by SFWMD and the Corps to compensate for direct wetland impacts. Mitigation requirements will be evaluated based on three scenarios: 1) mitigation conducted solely within the Study Area; (2) mitigation using a permitted mitigation bank; (3) mitigation involving the purchase and enhancement of lands in the Rookery Bay area of Collier County or through donation and enhancement of lands already owned by the COUNTY. For each of the mitigation scenarios evaluated, prepare an opinion of probable cost of wetland mitigation for each of the preferred alignments and for Polly Avenue Extension. These cost opinions will likely address a range of potential costs since regulatory agency mitigation ratios may vary over a certain range. F. Contamination Screening Evaluation Report The purpose of the Contamination Screening Evaluation is to assess the contamination potential on lands within the PROJECT or from adjacent lands which could affect the PROJECT via migration of contaminants onto proposed PROJECT lands. The CONSULTANT shall conduct investigations and prepare a Contamination Screening Evaluation Report documenting the CONSULTANT's investigations, assessments, and conclusions and recommendations. This report will be an Appendix in the Draft and Final Design Reports and will include the following: Description of the physical setting of the Study Area and a description of the proposed PROJECT roadway corridors including a description of current usage of properties within and adjacent to these corridors. A summary of the Study Area history as obtained through review of historical aerial photographs, other records, and interviews with property owners or others knowledgeable about the Study Area. Documentation of findings from the regulatory database search including the name and address of owner(s) of suspected contamination or hazardous material sites and the status of any regulatory enforcement or voluntary remediation efforts for known contamination sites. A description and evaluation of observed site conditions and operations (including building structure, waste management practices, photo documentation, and discussion of observed suspect conditions such as ASTs/USTs, hazardous materials, landfill activities, wastewater discharges, spills or releases of chemicals, soil, ground or surface water contamination, etc.).. A listing of properties within or adjacent to the PROJECT together with the current property owner's name and address as well as a rating of the potential for there being significant contamination on each property. The contamination potential ratings used will be "no", "low", "medium", or "high". ,o. /¢_, Y 3,) MAY O 9 2000 ~. Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A: Scope of Services Page 9 A discussion of the nature and probability of significant contamination which could affect the PROJECT and the relationship of suspected or known contamination sites and sources to the PROJECT. G. Noise Impact Analysis And Report (CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICE) Evaluate traffic demand and capacity information to provide refined traffic data for use in conducting.a worst case noise analysis for each of the preferred alignments (LOS D or demand, whichever is less). 2. Organize and code relevant traffic and site information for computerized analysis. 3. Calculate existing noise levels using traffic counts obtained as in FHWA-DP-45-1R, "Sound Procedures for Measuring Highway Noise: Final Report", August 1981. 4. Using a computer model approved by the COUNTY, compute "build" and "no-action" values for the present year and the design year 2024. 5. Compute data required to construct noise isopleths indicating at what distance 65 dBA level is expected to be found in the design year. Determine noise sensitive sites that are predicted to approach FHWA criteria for noise abatement and determine significance of other noise level increases using FHWA guidelines (ESIM 49 and Traffic Noise Impact/Mitigation Criteria). 7. Evaluate the need and feasibility of utilizing noise abatement measures. Prepare a noise impact report, in general accordance with Part 2, Chapter 17 of the FDOT PD&E Guidelines Manual. This report will include: a land use map and noise sensitive site map; all data used in the analyses; the results of all analyses; discussion of County noise ordinances; and a discussion of conclusions reached.' 3.4 AGENCY MEETINGS (SFWMD, COE, GFC, FWS, FDOT) Following the modifications to the preferred alignments, development of the alignment for Polly Avenue Extension, and development of stormwater management concepts, the CONSULTANT will arrange for and conduct meetings with various regulatory agencies as described below. The preferred alignments and Polly Avenue Extension will be presented and the rationale for selecting the preferred alignments will be discussed. The purpose of these meetings will be to solicit input from agency personnel regarding the alignments, permitting requirements, mitigation requirements, and other agency concerns. The following meetings will be conducted: 2/t 4/(Y0-73764 Vet; (31 ' -CC4riuhe N6022-001-000-EPSA- [9265 .0. HAY 0 9 2000 Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page10 Meetings with each of the following agencies; SFWMD, Corps, FWC, FWS, and FDOT. Joint agency meetings will be conducted if feasible, however separate agency meetings have been assumed. A field meeting at the PROJECT site to which representatives from SFWMD, Corps, FWC, and FWS will be invited. The purpose of this meeting will be to show agency personnel representative site conditions as regards environmental features (wetlands, uplands, habitats, etc.). 3.5 DRAFT DESIGN REPORT A. Prepare a detailed report (Outline to be provided at the Notice to Proceed meeting) for the PROJECT. The report will include, but may not be limited to: · Data documenting existing conditions. · A discussion of the need for the PROJECT including existing and future traffic conditions which warrant the need for improvements. · Description of the rationale and design criteria used in developing the initial preliminary alignment alternatives for Santa Barbara Boulevard and the East-West Connector. · Description of the rationale and design criteria used in developing the final alignments for Santa Barbara Alternative C, East-West Connector Alternative C, and Polly Avenue Extension. · A comparison of the major advantages and disadvantages associated with each of the preliminary alignment alternatives evaluated, including the Hybrid Road. Topics addressed in this comparison will include, but may not be limited to, environmental impacts (wetlands, listed species, cultural resources, land use, potentially contaminated sites), relative magnitude of construction costs, right-of-way acquisition, traffic patterns, drainage and surface water management, and permitting difficulty. It will focus on the evaluation matrix prepared to qualitatively compare the various alternatives. · Agency and public input' received concerning the preliminary alignment alternatives evaluated and concerning the preferred alignments and Polly Avenue Extension. · A discussion of the selection of the preferred alignments and Polly Avenue Extension. · A full analysis (engineering and environmental) of the preferred alignments and Polly Avenue Extension including a conceptual opinion of cost for each roadway. · Appendices, Figures, and Exhibits deemed appropriate by the CONSULTANT. B. Five (5) copies of the draft report will be submitted to the COUNTY for review and comments. 3.6 SOLICITATION AND REVIEW OF AGENCY COMMENTS N6022-001-000-EPSA-19265 Following COUNTY approval of the Draft Design Report, the CONSULTANT shall submit copies of this report to SFWMD, Corps, FWC, FWS, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (RPC), and Collier County Development Services Department. HAY 0 9 2000 Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A: Scope of Services Page 11 Opinions of Probable Project Ccsts will be excluded from report copies provided to these agencies. The CONSULTANT shall request that each agency review the report and provide written comments about the PROJECT based on this report. The agencies will be asked to provide input concerning such matters as specific permits required, significance of environmental impacts, required mitigation, and any other specific concerns about the PROJECT, its assessment, or its impacts. Review and assess all written comments received from the regulatory agencies. As deemed necessary by the CONSULTANT, conduct telephone interviews with appropriate agency personnel in an 'effort to clarify any comments or issues raised by the agencies in their responses. Go Meet with the COUNTY to discuss agency comments and determine appropriate responses to the comments and issues raised by these agencies including potential PROJECT modifications. 3.7 PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETINGS Following the COUNTY's approval of the Draft Design Report, public information meetings will be conducted jointly by the CONSULTANT and COUNTY to relay the findings of this report. These meetings will include: A. TAC, PAC, CAC, and MPO Meetings Meetings will be held with the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Pathway Advisory Committee (PAC), Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC), and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). B. Public Worshop (CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICE) A public workshop will be held to solicit the public's comments concerning the PROJECT as addressed in the Draft Design Report. The CONSULTANT shall prepare graphics and other materials to be used in the public workshop. These materials may include renderings, aerial photographs, displays showing alignment alternatives, typical sections, report copies, informational handouts, statement forms to be used by the public for written comments, and related items. The COUNTY shall be responsible for issuing public notices and preparing and mailing direct notices for the meeting. Following the public workshop, the CONSULTANT shall meet with the COUNTY to identify significant issues raised at the meeting, based on meeting minutes taken by the CONSULTANT, and develop responses to these issues if warranted. N602~.-001-000-EPSA- 19265 .o._//.;4):4;...i Santa Barbara Boulevard - Phase 1 PEEA Modified Schedule A · Scope of Services Page12 C, BCC Presentation and Meetings (CONTINGENT ADDITIONAL SERVICE) Conduct a presentation to the BCC of the key points documented in the Draft Design Report. The CONSULTANT shall prepare graphics and other materials to be used in this presentation. The COUNTY shall be responsible for scheduling the presentation and preparing official documents submitted to the BCC as part of this presentation. 2. Prepare information for and conduct meetings with individual Commissioners of the BCC as requested by the COUNTY. 3.8 FINAL DESIGN REPORT Revise the Draft Design Report as appropriate to address agency comments, utlility coordination issues, input received from the public information meetings, and COUNTY review comments. Five (5) copies of the Final Design Report will be submitted to the COUNTY. 3.9 ROADWAY CORRIDOR MAPS Prepare roadway corridor (right-of-way) maps for the preferred alignments and for the Polly Avenue Extension. These maps will depict the following: Existing right-of-way by deed, dedication, maintenance, etc., clearly labeled. R.Subdivisions, together with name, recording data, street names and boundaries. C.Section, Township, and Range. D. Owner identification number (tax folio number) and property lines as shown on the Collier County Property Appraiser's Map. E. Proposed right-of-way impact on parcels, PROJECT centerline, and PROJECT stations. F. CONSULTANT will submit five (5) blueline copies of the Roadway Corridor Maps to the COUNTY along with one (1) mylar copy of these maps. N6022-001-000-EPSA-19265 LEGEND PRElIMINARY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS FOR SANTA BARBARA BOULEVARD [] PRELJMINARY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS FOR EAST-WEST CONNECTOR "~_~ PROJECT STUDY AREA RADIO RD (CR 856) DAVIS BLVD (SR 84) z <~ STANDRE'¢~ RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD (CR 846) iRAND LELY DR (FUTURE) EXHIBIT 1 PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNM U ~ ~UUU LEGEND Q PRELIMINARY ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS FOR HYBRID ROADWAY Z o DAVIS BLVD (SR 84) RADIO RD (CR 856) COPE LN COUNTRY RD WHITAKER RD AD~NS POLLY EVERETT PARKER HAMMOCK RD HANSEN __~[ ST ANDREWS BLVD'5) (x~%rLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD (CR 846) GP~ND LELY DR (FUTURE) EXHIBIT 2 HYBRID ROADWAY ALTERNATIVES ~;;AY O ,9 2Ouu LEGEND PREFERRED ALIGNMENT FOR SANTA ~ BARBARA BOULEVARD (ALTERNATIVE C) PREFERRED ALIGNMENT FOR EAST-WEST (~ CONNECTOR (ALTERNATIVE C) ALIGNMENT FOR POLLY AVENUE EXTENSION (PRELIMINARY) NOTE: ALIGNMENTS INDICATED DO NOT REFLECT MODIFICATION ANTICITPATED AS PART OF PROJECT TASK 3. RADIO RD (CR 856) DAVIS BLVD (SR 84) COPE LN COUNTRYRD WHITAKER RD ADKJNS POLLY EVERETT ST ANDREWS BLVD~ PARKER HAMMOCK RD HANSEN _ PREFERRED ALIGNMENTS AND POLLY AVENUE EXTENSION SCHEDULE B - ATTACHMENT A SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR BASIC SERVICES MODIFIED EXHIBIT B: FEE SUMMARY FEES TASKS ORIGINAL MODIFIED ADDITIONAL (Modified - Original) 1.00 DATA COLLECTION $ $63,270 $100,672 + $ 37,402 2.00 PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS $ 85,014 $132,982 + $ 47,968 Subtotal: $ 148,284 $ 233,654 + $ 85,370 3.0 FINAL ALIGNMENT ANALYSIS $ 286,840 $ 419,545 + $132,705 (original Tasks 3.00 & 4.00) REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $ 21,489 $ 27,537 + $ 6,048 TOTAL $ 456,613 $ 680,736 + $ 224,123 Notes: Fees indicated as "original" represent those authorized by the original AGREEMENT. Fees indicated as "modified" represent PROJECT fees as now proposed including the supplemental agreement fees for Tasks 1.00 and 2.00 and the modified fee for Task 3.0, as itemized in Schedule B - Attachment B provided herein. Fees indicated as "additional" merely reflect the fee increase currently proposed compared to the original fees. .iX o I r',, 0 0 ~o o z z o o 0 9 2ooo o o i _J o o _J z z o I.I. = ~' i II : ~ ~ i : ~ = ~ : I : ~ ~.~:~E~ E:=~ D~ ~o~ ~i~'~ 0 0 ~ r~ > >,> > ~io o'~ HAY 0 9 2000 uJ ~ LU W '1- ~ W c/~ uJ r.- o -o LU 0 o u_ LLJ W -J Z o <~ Z z o 0 '0 ~MAY o 9 2000 o o rn u. z ~ , mO 0 I- ._1 (/3 Z 0 MAY o 9 2000 o o ~o o 7 o ~ uJ r'n o o~ U3 LD ~'o -J z Oz rm 0 z ~ MAY 0 9 2000 p~._.~'7 SCHEDULE C MODIFIED PROJECT SCHEDULE TASK 1.00 DATA COLLECTION (COMPLETED) TASK 2.00 PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS (98% COMPLETED) TASK 3.0 FINAL ALIGNMENT ANALYSIS (10 MONTHS) N6022-001-000-EP SA- 19265 MAY 0 § 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE THE NOTICE FOR RECORDATION WHICH STIPULATES THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS NO MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE EXISTING SIDEWALK AND LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS LOCATED ON PROPERTY SOUTH OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD AT THE MARKET PLACE AT PELICAN BAY PLAZA. OBJECTIVE: Board approval to record a notice in the public records stipulating that Collier County shall relinquish maintenance responsibility for the existing sidewalk and landscape improvements located on property at the Market Place At Pelican Bay Plaza south of Vanderbilt Beach Road. CONSIDERATION: As part of the Vanderbilt Beach Road four farting project, the Board agreed on October 17, 1995 (Agenda Item 16[B]6) to construct sidewalk and landscape improvements along Vanderbilt Beach Road between Hammock Oak Drive and US-41 (Tamiami Trail North). Through the efforts of Collier Naplescape 90's, property owners along this commercial frontage did participate cooperatively with the County in the roadside landscape beautification improvements beyond those that were originally included in the median for the four-laning project. The property owners verbally agreed to assist with the design of the sidewalk and landscape improvements and to donate the required easements for the project. The County in turn agreed to include the new design into its four-laning project instead of making the improvements a separate project. The Public Works Engineering Department completed the project in 1997. Prior to conveying the required easement to Collier County and after the sidewalk and landscape improvements where completed on their parcel, one of the participating property owners, North Bay Associates, Ltd. (The Market Place At Pelican Bay) sold its property to a Trust administered by Benedict P. Miralia. The Trust, which was not a participant in the cooperative effort between the County and the original commercial property owners, is not willing to convey the required easement that has already been acquired from all other affected property owners. County staff has had lengthy ongoing negotiations with the Trust, but the final draft of the unexecuted easement document included revisions requested by the Trust that the Collier County Attorney's Office advised was not in the best interest of the County. One such request was to restrict the easement to a 10-year duration with no option to renew the easement. It is in the opinion of the County Attorney's Office, that the County would have no legal rights to the area needed upon the termination of the easement, and thus HAY 2000 ,'G. may be forced to renegotiate with different owners for the same easement. The County Attorney's Office has offered three possible courses of action. 1) Record the easement with those revisions requested by the Trust allowing for only a 1 O-year duration with no renewal provisions. 2) Record a notice stating that Collier County ha~ no maintenance responsibility for the sidewalk and landscape improvements because it is unable to secure an appropriate easement from the current property owner; recognizing, however, that Collier County had verbal permission from the previous property owner when the sidewalk and landscape improvements were being constructed. 3) Acquire the easement through condemnation. County staff believes the best course of action at this time would be to record the notice of no maintenance responsibility in Collier County Public Records. FISCAL IMPACT: The recording fee will come from the gas tax supported .,~Transportation Capital fund. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the recording of a Notice in the public records that Collier County has no maintenance responsibility for the existing sidewalk and landscape improvements located on that property south of Vanderbilt Beach Road at the Market Place At Pelican Bay Plaza, owned by a Trust administered by Benedict P. Miralia, and authorize staff to record the Notice at a later date upon final review and approval by the Office of the County Attorney. SUBMITTED BY: Richard J. Hellriegel, P.E., Sr. Project Manager, PWE]~ JeffBibby, P.E., D' ~or,~'WED - ~ LEdward J. Kant, P.E., Di..~rector, Transj~zn'raJion Services Dept. x// / PROVED BY: /~~ / DATE: /~///~,,~ Edward N. Finn~'ft?e~ri-m I~ubiic Works~Administrator, Public WorksI~ngin~ring Dept. IAY 0 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CONFIRMATION OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION NOT TO INSTALL A "MULTI-WAY STOP" AT GLADES BOULEVARD AND LAKEWOOD BOULEVARD. OBJECTIVE: To seek Board confirmation of staff recommendation that a "Multi-way Stop" is not a traffic control design issue. CONSIDERATIONS: During the plan development phase of the Lakewood Boulevard traffic calming project, a "Multi-way Stop" at Glades Boulevard and Lakewood Boulevard was discussed as pan of the overall strategy (Attachment 1). The signs were not installed as "Multi-way Stop" conditions are not considered a part of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP). Acting upon resident concerns that the project is not complete without the discussed "Multi-way Stop" installation, staff contracted with an independent traffic engineering firm to perform a "Multi-way Stop" study. The results of the study indicate there is no justification for installation of a "Multi-way Stop" at this location (Attachment 2). Staff and the independent consultant concur that subsequent vehicle delay incurred by this strategy would increase driver impatience and rear-end collisions would result. Additionally, them is no evidence that the safety factor for pedestrian or golf cans would be improved. As there is no history of pedestrian accidents at this location to date, the installation of a "Multi-way Stop" could change a perceived problem into a factual one. "Multi-way Stop signs" are a traffic control device as set forth in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). This manual has been adopted by the State of Florida and by Collier County for determining when "Multi-way Stop signs" are to be installed on State and local highways. As such, traffic control devices like stop signs are a separate issue from traffic calming devices. FISCAL IMPACT: None. A typical "Multi-way Stop" installation costs approximately $2,400.00. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board confirm staff recommendation not to install a "Multi-way Stop" at the intersection of Glades Boulevard and Lakewood Boulevard. SUBMITTED B Y: Gerald Morris, l~roject Manager, NTMP Dale A. Bathon, P.E., Traffic Operations Manager APPROVED BY: ~. F~inn. I E~ward n¢ffri~rl%blic Work~d~nistrator Attachment I - Site Map Attachment 2 - Multi-way-stop Analysis Letter DATE: 4/..~/oo , ? DATE:/~/~ NO. 0 9 2000 o o ROUND /KEY C/RCLE 'RI-1 REQUESTED BLOC',,,', J CD w LAKEWOOD BLVD INTERSECT WITH GLADES MEDIAN TYPICAL DESIGN DATE: 04-14-00 330~ Tamiami Troll East, Bldg "O" _~.ALE: NTS Naples, Florida 34112(941) 774-8494 BLVD 14rdsOnMiiler New Directions In Planning, Design & Engineedng ' '10 F'H 3:22 March 9, 2000 Mr. Dale Bathon, P.E. Collier County Transportation Services 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 ATTACHMENT NO. PAGE \ OF_ Subject: Multi-Way Stop Analysis for Lakewood Blvd. and Glades Blvd. Dear Mr. Bathon: WilsonMiller has completed an evaluation of a proposed multi-way stop condition at the intersection of Lakewood Boulevard and Glades Boulevard in Collier County, Florida. Our analysis included measuring the average delay per vehicle entering the intersection during the peak hour traffic and careful consideration of traffic engineering principles as presented in the Federal Highway Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). The average vehicle delay during the peak hour is measured to be approximately 60 seconds. This condition combined with the peak hour traffic volumes provided demonstrates that the subject intersection exceeds the minimum conditions for when a multi-way STOP sign may be warranted. However, Section 2B-6 of the MUTCD describes multi-way stop installations as being useful as a safety measure or as an effective means of control where the traffic volumes on intersecting roads are approximately equal. Based on the available crash data and traffic volumes for this location, there is neither a safety problem, nor are the traffic volumes balanced for a majority of the day. In our professional judgment, installation of a multi-way stop condition will increase total daily intersection delay and may also result in higher incidence of rear-end crashes on Lakewood Boulevard. Based on the above analysis, we do not recommend the installation of a multi-way stop as an effective means of control for this intersection. Sincerely, WilsonMiller, Inc. Wayne P. Hartt, P.E. Traffic Engineer Enclosures: Backup data and worksheets Naples Fort Myers Sarasota Bradenton Tampa 3200 Bai/ey Lane, Suite 200 Nap/es, Ronda 34105-8507 941-649-4040 ~ 941-643-5716 v,q, vw. wilsonmiller. corn WiIsonM~lter, lnc -- FL L/c · LC-COOOf70 /NO· ~XT MAY 0 9 2000 .J EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REDUCE THE EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL REQUIREMENT IN RESOLUTION 99-168 AND VEGETATION REMOVAL PERMIT VRP-99-5 TO LIMIT THE REMOVAL OF EXOTICS TO THE CONSTRUCTION AREA WHICH WOULD LIMIT THE REQUIREMENT AS IT RELATES TO THE REMOVAL OF NINE AUSTRALIAN PINES ALONG THE PELICAN BAY BEACH. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve a request to reduce the exotic vegetation removal requirement in Resolution 99-168 and Vegetation Removal Permit VRP-99-5 to limit the removal of exotics to the construction area which would limit the requirement as it relates to the removal of nine Australian Pines along the Pelican Bay Beach. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. On March 9, 1999 the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 99-168 requesting a variance to the Coastal Construction Setback Line to allow the dredging and related construction activities for the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. Vegetation Removal Permit VRP-99-5 was issued on March 10,1999. This vegetation removal permit was issued for clearing of vegetation allowing construction of m~o disposal areas along the beach dune north of Clam Pass for the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan. 2_ Within the conditions of Resolution 99-168 and Vegetation Removal Permit VRP-99- 5 is a requirement that exotic vegetation shall be removed from within fifty (50) feet of the project area. Within this identified area are nine (9) Australian Pines that would be required to be removed. 3_ Residents within Pelican Bay have expressed concerns about the removal of these pines and based on this the Pelican Bay MSTBU Advisory Committee has recommended in the past not to remove these trees. Based on the community's interest it is therefore requested that the Board of County Commissioners limit the requirement contained in Resolution 99-168 and Vegetation Removal Permit VRP- 99-5 to the construction area allowing these nine (9) trees to remain. 4_. As required by the approved CCSL Variance and the Vegetation Removal Permit, the petitioner has already removed all exotic vegetation within fifty feet of the work area, with exception of the identified Australian pines, and has committed to annual maintenance thereof. 5_ The Board of County Commissioners may make a policy decision, to allow the Australian pines to remain, due to the strong interest of the residents of Pelican Bay to preserve them. It would be suggested that any new pines sprouting in the immediate vicinity be removed. FISCAL IMPACT: None MAY 0 9 2000 P6o / -- GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The Collier County Growth Management Plan, Conservation and Coastal Management Element sets forth Objectives and Policies regarding both undeveloped shorelines and exotic vegetation removal requirements. The purpose of these policies is to stop the proliferation of invasive exotic species on coastal dunes, which inhibits native dune vegetation from growing in the near vicinity. Additionally, Australian pines have a very shallow root system that allows them to be easily undercut on coastal properties and often results in collapsed trees, which is a health and safety concern, and can cause increased erosional shoreline problems. Policy 11.5.13 - "For all beach front land development related projects, require dune stabilization and restoration improvements, the removal of exotic vegetation, and replacement with native vegetation, as appropriate." However, it should be noted this project is not land development but a project related to the Clam Bay restoration. Policy 11.3.9 - "Native vegetation on undeveloped coastal barhers should be preserved. To the extent that native vegetation is lost during land development activities and the remaining native vegetation can be supplemented without damaging or degrading its natural function, any native vegetation lost during construction shall be replaced by supplementing with compatible native vegetation on site. All exotic vegetation shall be removed and replaced with native vegetation where appropriate." RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve a request to reduce the exotic vegetation removal requirement in Resolution 99-168 and Vegetation Removal Permit VRP-99-5 to limit the removal of exotics to the construction area which would limit the requirement as it relates to the removal of nine Australian Pines along the Pelican Bay Beach. : .;":~ _~_, , DATE: c~ PREPARED B-~ / ~_./ James P. Ward, Department Director ,/' Pelican Bay Services APPROVED BY: /'<'7~/~~-'~'~-"---~- Rober~/J. Mulhere, AICP REVIEWED NO. ~~ MAY 0 9 000 PG. ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A REQUEST FOR A PERMIT TO CONDUCT THREE (3) SEPARATE CARNIVALS HOSTED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. Objective: That the Board of County Commissioners approve permits to conduct three (3) carnivals for Collier County special events on County property, and that the Board waive associated application and surety bond fees. Consideration: The Board has previously approved and budgeted funds in FY00 for a Summerfest youth carnival, Country Jamboric and Snowlest event in December. A carnival is one of the main and integral attractions to the overall success of these events, as it offers fun to families of all ages. Below is list of the three (3) events and the associated dates for permit approval. Event Location Dates 1. Summerlest 2.~ Country Jamboric 3. Snowfest Sugden Vineyards Community Park Golden Gate Community Park June 15-17, 2000 September 15-16, 2000 December 9, 2000 Parks and Recreation has met all the requirements of the carnival permit procedures other than the requests to waive the application fee and the surety bond. Since the County is hosting the events, a surety bond fee will not be necessary, as staff will be responsible for the clean-up fee. Application fee waivers from the Parks and Recreation have been granted in previous years. Growth Management: None Fiscal Impact: Revenues for the Community Development Enterprise Fund are generated from fees established in the Schedule of Development Review and Building Permit Fees. It is a Board policy that requests for waiver of such fees are granted only by the Board. The waiver will save the general fund, recreation program budget $600. Recommendation: and waive the application fee and surety bond for the three aforementioned special events. That the Board of County Commissioners approve the carnival permits Date: q/~- ~/0 ~ Date: _ Prepared by:,~L~' "3 Debbie Roberts, Operations Coordinator Department of Parks and Recreation Review and .' 7"" ':[? ',/(-/~' Approved by: . ~['~ ' Marla Ramsey, Director nment of Parks and Recreation Review' and l J [~ . ~.. Approved by: V. ~~. HAY 0 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT TO RECOGNIZE REVENUE Objective: To obtain Board approval of a budget amendment to recognize a revenue increase from a $2,000 donation. Consideration: A one time $2,000 donation was received for the purchase of a memorial bench at Vanderbilt Beach Park which was deposited in a General Fund account. The attached budget amendment recognizes the donation as an increase in revenue and appropriates it into the proper account so that Staff may utilize the funds for Beach and Waters Operation at Vanderbilt Park. Fiscal lmpact: Recognize revenue and appropriate it into General Fund: 001-156363 for Beach and Waters Operations. Growth Management: None Recommendation: amendment. That the Board of County Commissioners approve the necessary budget Prepared by: ,~.~2~]~,4~ Debbie Roberts, Operations Manager Parks and Recreation Department Reviewed by: / /."~'~ ~.t[,,," ..,K[; ,. ,~C¢'/ Date: Marla Rmsey, Director ' Parks and Recreation Dep~ment Appr°ved bY"~~ Pete Kra ey, ' ~nistrator Public Services Divisio'rf Agend MAY o $ 20OO EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AND EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE THE PARKS AND RECREATION "~EPARTMENT $50,000, FROM THE GAC LAND TRUST, TO PURCHASE FITNESS EQUIPMENT FOR THE ,EW COMMUNITY CENTER AT MAX A. HASSE COMMUNITY PARK OBJECTIVE: Recommendation to approve and execute an Agreement between Collier County, a political · subdivision of the State of Florida, by its Board of County Commissioners, acting in their capacity as Trustee of the GAC Land Trust ("Trustee") and Collier County, a political subdivision of the State of Flodda for and on behalf of the parks and Recreation Department ("County") which provides for a maximum expenditure of Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000.00) from the GAC Land Trust to purchase fitness equipment to be located at the new Community Center at Max A. Hasse Community Park in Golden Gate Estates. CONSIDERATION: (Brief History): On November 15, 1983, Avatar Properties Inc. and Collier County entered into an Agreement (1983 Agreement) to convey 1,061.5 acres of property in Golden Gate Estates in five (5) geographical phases to Collier County. According to the 1983 Agreement, the property dedicated to Collier County would be used to provide facilities for such things as recreation, utility and community service for the existing and future residents and visitors of Collier County, and to provide a source of revenue to fund improvements within the area known as "Golden Gate Estates" and to provide for the acquisition of other lands, equipment, and materials for the future construction of improvements. The 1983 Agreement also required that the lands deeded to the County are to be used only to provide governmental facilities for existing and future residents of Collier County, with all capital improvements to be physically located within the geographical boundary of the area known as "Golden Gate Estates." In addition, any proceeds from the sale of dedicated lands are to be utilized for capital ,ojects, to be located within the area known as "Golden Gate Estates". The governmental facilities which can ~e constructed upon said property or with the proceeds of the sale of the property include fire protection facilities, police facilities, public schools, libraries and recreational facilities as well as equipment necessary for the operation thereof. (Issue): On September 23, 1999 and again on March 27, 2000, representatives from the Parks and Recreation Department presented to the members of the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee a request to assist the Parks and Recreation Department in purchasing fitness equipment for its new fitness center to be located within the new Community Center at Max A. Hasse Community Park. The fitness center would be available for use by the general public. A list of desired fitness equipment, at a total cost not to exceed $50,000, was presented to the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee members. At the March 27, 2000 meeting, the Golden Gate Estates Land Trust Committee recommended 4/0 that a maximum allocation of Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($50,00~00) be approved to allow for the purchase of that fitness equipment listed in Exhibit "A" of the Agreement. An Agreement has been prepared 'by the Real Property Management Department and reviewed by the County Attorney's Office. A "Letter of No Objection" to the Agreement, dated April 14, 2000, has been received from Avatar Properties Inc. acknowledging the allocation of $50,000 for the purchase of miscellaneous fitness equipment. The "Letter of No Objection" is attached for review. Pursuant to the attached Agreement, the Parks and Recreation Department shall have eighteen (18) months ..from the execution of the Agreement to purchase the fitness equipment and expend the allocated funds. · -ISCAL IMPACT: A total allocation of $50,000 shall be withdrawn from Fund 605 Reserves and deposited into the appropriate Fund 605 operating account(s). Agerid& ].~.e~ _ HAY 0 9 2006 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. ..ECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners: (1) approve the attached Agreement providing for a maximum expenditure of Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000.00) for the purchase of miscellaneous fitness equipment for the new Community Center to be located at the Max A. Hasse Community Park in Golden Gate Estates in order to benefit the residents of Collier County; (2) authorize its Chairman to execute the attached Agreement; and (3) approve the necessary budget amendment. PREPARED BY: ~ .l~¥t~ ,~ ,.--., ' DATE: '" ~" _ SANDRA I. R REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR REVIEWED BY: DATE: ---M~LA.P, AMSEY, PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR PETER KRAEEY, INTER~ PUBLIC SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR DATE: HAY 0 9 2000 THIS AGREEMENT made this day of ,2000 between COLLIER COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS TRUSTEE OF THE GAC LAND TRUST, (hereinafter referred to as "Trustee"), whose mailing address is 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Flodda 34112, and COLLIER COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF COLLIER COUNTY, (hereinafter referred to as the "County"), whose mailing address is 3300 Santa Barbara Boulevard, Naples, Florida 34116. WHEREAS, Trustee has acquired 1,061.5 acres located in Collier County, Flodda (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), from Avatar Properties Inc. f/k/aJ GAC Properties, Inc. in accordance with the November 15, 1983 Agreement between Avatar Properties Inc. and Collier County, (hereinafter referred to as the "1983 Agreement"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the 1983 Agreement, the Property deeded to Trustee and/or the monetary proceeds acquired from the subsequent sale of said Property are to be used to provide governmental facilities within and for the geographical area known as "Golden Gate Estates"; and WHEREAS, Trustee currently has funds derived from the use and/or sale of a portion of the above-described Property; and WHEREAS, Trustee has determined that a disbursement of a portion of said funds to the County's Parks and Recreation Department is in accordance with the intent of the provisions of the 1983 Agreement and accomplishes the purposes of said 1983 Agreement by providing "Fitness Equipment" at the Max A. Hasse Community Park Fitness Center for the residents of Collier County, FIodda; ~WHEREAS, Avatar Properties Inc. has provided a "Letter of No Objection", dated April 14, 2000, approving the use of funds derived from the sale of Property to fund the purchase of "Fitness Equipment" to be located at the Max A. Hasse Community Park Center located within Golden Gate Estates. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises which are incorporated within and made part of this Agreement, and in further consideration of the mutual covenants set forth below, and other good and valuable consideration, acknowledged by the parties to be sufficient, just and adequate, the parties hereto do agree as follows: 1. Trustee hereby agrees to contdbdte a maximum of Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000.00) of the total funds to be expended by the County for purposes hereinafter stated, (hereinafter referred to as the "Funds"), in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, provided said Funds to be used solely for the purchase of fitness equipment which shall include but shall not be limited to those items listed in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, (hereinafter referred to as "Equipment"). 2. The County agrees and warrants tha!t.the Funds will be used solely for said Equipment needed to provide a fitness center for use by the public. Said Equipment shall be located solely at the Max A. Hasse Community Park, which is within the geographical area commonly known as "Golden Gate Estates". 3. The County hereby agrees that the purchase of the Equipment has been or shall be in accordance with all applicable bidding or other requirements for the procurement of property and services as set forth in Chapter 287, Flodda Statutes, and such other statutory provisions as may be applicable. The County hereby agrees that the purchase of the Equipment shall be conducted in a manner consistent with the Board of County Commissioner's purchasing policy and in proper coordination with the County's Purchasing Department prior to the ordering or receiving of any goods or services purchased under this Agreement. with the following procedure: Payment of the Funds to the County for the Equipment shall be in accordance A. Payment of Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000) shall be made available upon request by the County but only following approval by the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County of this Agreement. B. Said payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of appropriate verification (invoices) by the Trustee, with copy to the Real Property Management Director, of said documentation. Payment shaft then be prepared and made payable to the appropriate vendor via County Warrant. In no way shall the total amount to be paid exceed Fifty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($50,000). C. Within thirty (30) days after final payment, the County shall provide to the Real Property Management Director, documentation which evidence the expenditures by the County of the payments received from the Trustee. Said documentation shall clearly state the purpose of said expenditure. D. Within thirty (30) days after final payment by Trustee, County, or its designee, shall: (a) provide the Real Property Management Director a statement certifying that all Equipment has been purchased and all payments have been utilized in accordance with this Agreement; and (b) refund to Trustee any and all Funds, or any portion thereof, not utilized for said purpose which shaft be deposited directly into the GAC Land Trust Fund 605. E. The Equipment shall be purchased by the County within eighteen (18) months of the execution of the Agreement by both parties. In the event that the Equipment is not purchased by the County within eighteen (18) months from the execution of this Agreement, it is understood and agreed by the parties that the County shall refund and repay to Trustee, within thirty (30) days, any and all Funds which have been provided to the County pursuant to the provisions of the 1983 Agreement. F. The County covenants and agrees that upon the payment of all or any portion from the Funds in accordance with the obligation contained in this Agreement it shall be the further obligation of the County to pay any remaining balance required to provide any other necessary fitness equipment at the park facility. 5. The County agrees to obtain and maintain insurance coverage in an amount suffmient to provide for full repair and/or replacement of the Equipment in the event the Equipr~ent is damaged or destroyed. 6. County agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold the Trustee harmless from any and all claims, actions, causes of action or liabilities including attorney's fees and costs arising from or in any way connected with the use of the Funds or the selection, purchase, delivery or installation or use of the Equipment by the County, its agents, employees, or in any way related to the Equipment by the County, its agents, employees or any third party, 7. The County understands and agrees that the Funds to be provided to Collier County in accordance with the terms of this Agreement have been dedved from and are being provided solely for the sale and/or use of a portion of the Property conveyed to Collier County pursuant to the 1983 Agreement administered and managed by the County for the GAC Land Trust and that such Funds are currently in Fund 605-122390 (The GAC Trust Land Sales Fund). 8. This Agreement is governed and construed Jn accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. 9. Any notice required by this Agreement_shall be addressed to the parties at the address set forth below: IF TO THE COUNTY: Collier County c/o Parks and Recreation Department 3300 Santa Barbara Boulevard Naples, Flodda 34116 IF TO THE TRUSTEE: Collier County cJo Real Property Management Department Administration Building 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Flodda 34112 MAY 0 9 2000 10. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between the parties, and no promise, representation, warranty or covenant not included in this Agreement or any such referenced agreements has been or is being relied upon by either party. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless made in writing and executed and dated by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Trustee and County have caused this Agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first above written. AS TO TRUSTEE: DATED: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, BY ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS TRUSTEE OF THE GAC LAND TRUST DEPUTY CLERK BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman AS TO COUNTY: DATED: AT-TEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OF COLLIER COUNTY DEPUTY CLERK BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency/: Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney HAY 0 9 2000 Exhibit "A" Page 1 of 2 CYBEX S!tOULDER P~ CYBEX TRICEP EXTENSION CYBEX BACK EXTENSION DISCOUNT COST SHIPPING 1~.00 CYBEX ?00T T~.4DMHJ, - 2 CYBEX RECUMBENT BI]CF~ - 2 SUB TOTAL $37,99'L50 $14,220.~ CYBEX 2~TA~ON MODULAR CYBEX SMITH MAC3nNE ~ OLYMPIC BENCH PRE~ CYBEX OLYMPIC IN ~r3JNE BENCH FLAT TO 80% BENCTi~S - 2 CY~F~ L~G lcaz~,~iP s.% msco ,rr SUB TOTAL $47,1169.7~ 495,110 59'3J~ -442.?5 Exhibit "A" Page 2 of 2 SUB TOTAL $47,069.7~ WEIGHT PLATE TREE 7' OLYMPIC BAR- 2 5' OLYMPIC CUBL BAR OLYMPIC EZ CURL BAR CLUB PRO AB CRUNCH SPRING COLLARS - 4 5WIV~L STBAIGHT BAR BLACK NYLON ROPE WEIGHT SC,~I~g, SUB TOTAL S48,2~75 YORK DUMBELL~ 2-t~, 2o~, 2so, ~ $.~, 4~, MAXICAM 15 PAIR DUMBFJ~L RACK SUaTOTAL $49~9.?$ 190.00 2~0.00 79.00 45.00 275.0~ 32.00 18.00 2/.OO 25O.0O $1,~4.00 | MAY 09 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE TO ALLOW FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY KNOWN AS LIVINGSTON WOODS OBJECTIVE: To approve an Agreement for Sale and Purchase (Agreement) with Mr. Robert.C. Otteman, for the purchase of 2.73 +/- acres of land (West 180 feet of Tract 114) within the residential community of Livingston Woods, also known as Golden Gate Estates, Unit 35, for the purpose of providing a neighborhood park. CONSIDERATION: The Board of County Commissioners, at their October 12, 1999 meeting (Item 8Cl) approved a revised Neighborhood Park policy allowing for neighborhood parks within communities in order to offer families and children a safe opportunity to play within walking and biking distance of the residential community. The policy approved by the Board addressed location eligibility and basic level of service standards for construction and maintenance. Based upon a point system for each standard, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PARAB) would select one neighborhood park per year that would' be recommended for construction in the up-coming fiscal year. An application would be submitted by interested communities for review by PARAB. Even though several community associations have expressed an interest in submitting an Application for Neighborhood Park only one application was received prior to the FY 00/01 deadline of December 1999. That application was submitted by Miss Jessica Taylor, a resident of Livingston Woods. On January 26, 2000 the Application for Neighborhood Park was presented to PARAB. PARAB discussed each criteria and the relative point system to determine an overall score. The criteria discussed included the following: 1. Location/Accessible by walking and biking/number of children in the area35 2. Size of property 10 3. Input from surrounding neighborhood 15 4. Cost 15 5. Zoning requirements and permits 10 6. Impact on neighborhoods 1.__~5 Total 100 Based upon the above criteria and point system, PARAB unanimously approved the recommendation to acquire the necessary property and construct a neighborhood park within the community known as Livingston Woods. Prior to the Board's directlye on providing neighborhood parks, Miss Taylor contacted the residents of Livingston Woods to obtain whereto they would support such a park facility. As Miss Taylor indicated a total of two hundred six (206) surveys were initially mailed on April 20, 1999. A total of sixty-eight (68) MAY U 9 2000 responses were received. Of those responses, fifty-two (52) were in favor of a neighborhood park and sixteen (16) were not. According to Miss Taylor, the main reason for the negative responses was due to the costs to the residents. With the current policy established to provide neighborhood parks to communities such as Livingston Woods, no costs shall be incurred by the residents unless during the design of the facility, wherein the residents will be asked to participate, they wish to include other park amenities beyond those currently considered standard for a neighborhood park. Standards for construction consists of open area, neighborhood playground equipment, landscape to code (Xeriscape), walkways if needed, fence for safety concerns if needed, picnic tables and benches, bike racks and other amenities if dictated for safety. The cost of for these amenities would be approximately $95,000o Land costs would be additional but were estimated at approximately $80,000. A 2.73 +/- acre site has been located that is central to the Livingston Woods community yet would not be considered a hindrance due to its proximity to 1-75. The site's proximity to 1-75 also limits its development potential for a single family home. The owner of the property, Mr. Robert C. Otteman, has agreed to sell the site, if closed by May 15, 2000, for' $96,881.41. The purchase price represents $95,000 for land and all the owner's expenses. An in-house market analysis has been performed on the site and its value has been determined to exceed the total agreement amount. Based upon the price of the property, staff is requesting the appraisal process be waived pursuant to Florida Statute 125.355(b). The property owner has executed the attached Agreement for Sale and Purchase (Agreement). In accordance with the terms of the standard Agreement for Sale and Purchase, the County has ninety days (90) days from the execution of the Agreement to obtain a report from the County's Natural Resources Department and the County's Pollution Control Department advising of any environmental concerns in order to determine whether the site can be utilized for its intended purpose. If for any reason whatsoever, the County is not satisfied with the results of any environmental report, the County may terminate the Agreement given proper notice. If the County has not terminated the Agreement pursuant to any other provision in the Agreement and decides, prior to closing, to terminate the Agreement, it may do so; however; the County shall incur a one-time cost of one percent (1%) of the purchase price. Even though funds are not currently budgeted for a neighborhood park this calendar year, it is being recommended that the property be acquired to secure the site. Funds to construct the neighborhood park shall be specifically budgeted during the FY 00/01 budget process. If approved, the neighborhood park will be constructed soon after October 2000. FISCAL IMPACT.: Total costs of the property shall not exceed $97,000. The funds shall be withdrawn from General Fund Reserves since Impact Fees can not be utilized for the purchase of land. The costs to construct the neighborhood park, estimated to be $95,000, shall be requested during FY 00/01 budget process, if approved the necessary funds shall be withdrawn from Impact Fees. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The neighborhood park site acreage would be added to the Collier County Park inventory. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending the Board of County Commissioners: 1. Approve the attached Agreement for Sale and Purchase; 2. Authorize its Chairman to execute the attached Agreement; 3. Waive the requirement for an appraisal pursuant to Florida Statute 125.355(b); 4. Direct staff to proceed to acquire the site and follow all appropriate closing procedures; 5. Accept for recording in the Public Records a Warranty Deed, and any documents necessary to clear title, once approved by the County Attorney's Office; and lastly, 6. Approve any and all necessary Budget Amendments to fund said purchase and related expenses. SUBMITTED BY: TONI MOTT, REAL PROPERTY SUPERVISOR DATE: 6- [ -C-':'~'? PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: DATE: MARL~A ~AMSEY/FPARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR PETER KRALEY, IN(~./ERIM PUBLIO SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR AGREEMENT FOR SALE AND PURCHASE THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between ROBERT C. OTTEMAN, A SINGLE MAN, whose mailing address is 19572 Love Creek Drive, Ft, Myers, Florida 33912, (hereinafter referred to as "Seller"), AND COLLIER COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, whose address is 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida 34112, (hereinafter referred to as "Purchaser"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of that certain parcel of real property (hereinafter referred to as "Property"), located in Collier County, State of Florida, and being more particularly described as follows: The West 180 feet of Tract 114, Golden Gate Estates, Unit No. 35, according to the plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 85, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida and as recorded in Official Record Book 1564, Page 2382. WHEREAS, Purchaser is desirous of purchasing the Property, subject to the conditions and other agreements hereinafter set forth, and Seller is agreeable to such sale and to such conditions and agreements. NOW, THEREFORE, and for and in consideration of the premises and the respective undertakings of the parties hereinafter set forth and the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed as follows: I. AGREEMENT 1.01 In consideration of the purchase price and upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, Seller shall sell to Purchaser and Purchaser shall purchase from Seller the Property, described above. II. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE 2.01 The purchase price (the "Purchase Price") for the Property shall be NINETY SIX THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED EIGHTY-ONE AND 41/100 DOLLARS ($96,881.41), (U.S. Currency) payable at time of closing. III. CLOSING 3.01 The Closing (THE "CLOSING DATE", "DATE OF CLOSING", OR "CLOSING") of the transaction shall be held on or before ninety (90) days following execution of this Agreement by the Purchaser unless extended by mutual written agreement of the parties hereto. The Closing shall be held at the Collier County Attorney's Office, Administration Building, 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. The procedure to be followed by the parties in connection with the Closing shall be as follows: 3.011 Seller shall convey a marketable title free of any liens, encumbrances, exceptions, or qualifications. Marketable title shall be determined according to applicable title standards adopted by the Florida Bar and in accordance with law. Prior to Closing, the Seller shall cause to be delivered to the Purchaser the items specified herein and the following documents and instruments duly executed and acknowledged, in recordable form: 3.0111 Warranty Deed in favor of Purchaser conveying title to the Properly, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than: (a) The lien for current taxes and assessments. lb) Such other easements, restrictions or conditions of record. 3.0112 Combined Purchaser-Seller closing statement. o IL2 (_J "' · HAY 0 9 2000 3.0113 A "Gap," Tax Proration, Owner's and Non-Foreign Affidavit," as required by Section 1445 of the Internal Revenue Code and as required by the title insurance underwriter in order to insure the "gap" and issue the policy contemplated by the title insurance commitment. 3.0114 A W-9 Form, "Request for Taxpayer Identification and Certification" as required by the Intemal Revenue Service. 3.012 At the Closing, the Purchaser, or its assignee, shall cause to be delivered to the Seller the following: 3.0121 A negotiable instrument (County Warrant) in an amount equal to the Purchase Price. No funds shall be disbursed to Seller until the Title Company verifies that the state of the title to the Property has not changed adversely since the date of the last endorsement to the commitment, referenced in Section 4.011 thereto, and the Title Company is irrevocably committed to pay the Purchase Price to Seller and to issue the Owner's title policy to Purchaser in accordance with the commitment immediately after the recording of the deed. 3.0122 Funds payable to the Seller representing the cash payment due at Closing in accordance with Article III hereof, shall be subject to adjustment for prorations as hereinafter set forth. 3.02 Each party shall be responsible for payment of its own attorney's fees. ~,~,"~'~;¢'~,, ~ at its sole cost and expense, shall pay at Closing all documentary stamp taxes du; relating to the recording of the Warranty Deed, in accordance with Chapter 201.01, ~_- Florida Statutes, and the cost of recording any instruments necessary to clear Se[ler's title to the Property. The cost of the Owner's Form B Title Policy, issued pursuant to the Commitment provided for in Section 4.011 below, shall be paid by Purchaser. The cost of the title commitment shall be paid by Purchaser. 3.03 Purchaser shall pay for the cost of recording the Warranty Deed. Real Property taxes shall be prorated based on the current year's tax with due allowance made for maximum allq~jable discount, homestead and any other applicable exemptions and paid by~.,-~fE'Closing occurs at a date which the-"!~""~,. current year's millage is .not fixe/d, taxes ~ill beprorated base?upon such pr'~or~ .~. IV. REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS 4.01 Upon execution of this Agreement by both parties or at such other time as specified within this Article, Purchaser and/or Seller, as the case may be, shall perform the following within the times stated, which shall be conditions precedent to the Closing; 4.011 Within fifteen (15) days after the date hereof, Purchaser shall obtain as evidence of title an ALTA Commitment for an Owner's Title Insurance Policy (ALTA Form B-1970) covering the Property, issued by Attorneys' Title Insurance Fund, Inc. or Chicago Title, together with hard copies of all exceptions shown thereon. Purchaser shall have thirty (30) days, following receipt of the title insurance commitment, to notify Seller in writing of any objection to title other than liens evidencing monetary obligations, if any, which obligations shall be paid at closing. If the title commitment contains exceptions that make the title unmarketable, Purchaser shall deliver to the Seller wdtten notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. 4.012 If Purchaser shall fail to advise the Seller in writing of any such objections in Seller's title in the manner herein required by this Agreement, the title shall be deemed acceptable. Upon notification of Purchaser's objection to title, Seller shall have thirty (30) days to remedy any defects in order to convey good and marketable title, except for liens or monetary obligations which will be satisfied at Closing. Seller, at its sole expense, shall use its best efforts to AGENDA ITEM No. ~0 ("~ HAY o 9 211oo Pcj. ~ make such title good and marketable. In the event Seller is unable to cure said objections within said time period, Purchaser, by providing written notice to Seller within seven (7) days after expiration of said thirty (30) day period, may accept title as it then is, waiving any objection; or Purchaser may terminate the Agreement. A failure by Purchaser to give such written notice of termination within the time period provided herein shall be deemed an election by Purchaser to accept the exceptions to title as shown in the title commitment. 4.013 Purchaser shall have the option, at its own expense, to .obtain a current survey of the Property prepared by a surveyor licensed. by the State of Florida. Seller agrees to furnish any existing surveys of the Property, if any, to Purchaser within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement. V. INSPECTION PERIOD 5.01 Purchaser shall have ninety (90) days from the date of this Agreement, ("inspection Period"), to determine through appropriate investigation that: 1. Soil tests and engineering studies indicate that the Property can be developed without any abnormal demucking, soil stabilization or foundations. 2. There are no abnormal drainage or environmental requirements to the development of the Property. 3. The Property is in compliance with all applicable State and Federal environmental laws and the Property is free from any pollution or contamination. 4. The Property can be utilized for its intended purpose. 5.02 If Purchaser is not satisfied, for any reason whatsoever, with the results of any investigation, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller pdor to the expiration of the Inspection Period, written notice of its intention to waive the applicable contingencies or to terminate this Agreement. If Purchaser fails to notify the Seller in writing of its specific objections as provided herein within the Inspection Period, it shall be deemed that the Purchaser is satisfied with the results of its investigations and the contingencies of this Article VI shall be deemed waived. In the event Purchaser elects to terminate this Agreement because of the right of inspection, Purchaser shall deliver to Seller copies of all engineering reports and environmental and soil testing results commissioned by Purchaser with respect to the Properly. 5.03 Purchaser and its agents, employees and servants shall, at their own risk and expense, have the right to go upon the Property for the purpose of surveying and conducting site analyses, soil borings and all other necessary investigation. Purchaser shall, in performing such tests, use due care and shall indemnify Seller on account of any loss or damages occasioned thereby and against any claim made against Seller as a result of Purchaser's entry. Seller shall be notified by Purchaser no less than twenty four (24) hours prior to said inspection of the Property. INSPECTION 6.01 Seller acknowledges that the Purchaser, or its authorized agents, shall have the right to inspect the Property at any time prior to the Closing. VII..pOSSESSION 7.01 Purchaser shall be entitled to full possession of the Property at Closing. VIII. PRORATIONS 8.01 Ad valorem taxes next due and payable, after closing on the Property, shall be prorated at Closing b,~sed upon the gross amount of 1999 taxes, and shall be IX. TERMINATION AND REMEDIES 9.01 if Seller shall have failed to perform any of the covenants and/or agreements contained herein which are to be performed by Seller, within ten (10) days of written notification of such failure, Purchaser may, at its option, terminate this Agreement by giving written notice of termination to Seller. Purchaser shall have the right to seek and enforce all rights and remedies available at law or in equity to a contract yendee, including the right to seek specific performance of this Agreement. 9.02 If the Purchaser has not terminated this Agreement pursuant to any of the provisions authorizing such termination, and Purchaser fails to close the transaction contemplated hereby or otherwise fails to perform any of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement as required on the part of Purchaser to be performed, provided Seller is not in default, then as Sollet's sole remedy, Seller shall have the right to terminate and cancel this Agreement by giving wdtten notice thereof to Purchasei', whereupon one percent (1%) of the purchase price shall be paid to Seller as liquidated damages which shall be Seller's sole and exclusive remedy, and neither party shall have any further liability or obligation to the other except as set forth in paragraph 12.01 hereof. The parties acknowledge and agree that SeHer's actual damages in the event of Purchaser's default are uncertain in amount and difficult to ascertain, and that said amount of liquidated damages was reasonably determined by mutual agreement between the parties, and said sum was not intended to be a penalty in nature. 9.03 Should any litigation or other action be commenced between the parties concerning the Property or this Agreement, the party prevailing in such litigation or other action shall be entitled, in addition to such relief as may be granted, to a reasonable sum for its attorney's fees, paralegal charges and all fees and costs for appellate proceedings in such litigation or other action; which sum may be determined by the court or in a separate action brought for that purpose. 9.04 The parties acknowledge that the remedies described herein and in the other provisions of this Agreement provide mutually satisfactory and sufficient remedies to each of the parties, and take into account the peculiar dsks and expenses of each of the parties. X. SELLER'S AND PURCHASER'S REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES 10.01 Seller and Purchaser represent and warrant the following: 10.011 Seller and Purchaser have full right and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement and to undertake all actions and to perform all tasks required of each hereunder. Seller is not presently the subject of a pending, threatened or contemplated bankruptcy proceeding. 10.012 Seller has full right, power, and authority to own and operate the Property, and to execute, deliver, and perform its obligations under this Agreement and the instruments executed in connection herewith, and to consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. All necessary authorizations and approvals have been obtained authorizing Seller and Purchaser to execute and consummate the transaction contemplated hereby. At Closing, certified copies of such approvals shall be delivered to Purchaser and/or Seller, if necessary. ~10.013 The warranties set forth in this paragraph shall be true on the date of this Agreement and as of the date of Closing. Purchaser's acceptance of a deed to the said Property shall not be deemed to be full performance and discharge of every agreement and obligation on the part of the Seller to be performed pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 10.014 Seller represents that it has no knowledge of any actions, suits, claims, proceedings, litigation or investigations pending or threatened against Seller, at law, equity or in arbitration before or by any federal, state, municipal or AGENDA ITJSM '~ No. ]Lr (' % _ pg other governmental instrumentality that relate to this agreement or any other property that could, if continued, adversely affect Seller's ability to sell the Property to Purchaser according to the terms of this Agreement. 10.015 No party or person other than Purchaser has any right or option to acquire the Property or any portion thereof. 10.016 Until the date fixed for Closing, so long as this Agreement remains in force and effect, Seller shall not encumber or convey any portion of the Property or any rights therein, nor enter into any agreements granting any person or entity any rights with respect to the Property or any part thereof, without first obtaining the written consent of Purchaser to' such conveyance, encumbrance, or agreement which consent may be withheld by Purchaser for any reason whatsoever. ~'~ccpc~!~¢7, the. Pr~ste, !f an,;, !s d!sch"rGcd ;~,u ~ IJuu~u ~,=, ~sew4~-.sy.s.te.~z~-Selier represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that any pollutants are or have been discharged into any body of water. Seller represent,~t]'it~ the production, handling, storage, trans0ortation, manufacture or disposal of hazardous or toxic substances or wastes, as such terms are defined in applicable laws and regulations, or any other activity that would have toxic results, and no such hazardous or toxic substances are currently used in connection with the operation of the Property, and there is no proceeding or inquiry by any authority with respect thereto. Seller represents that they have (it has) no knowledge that there is ground water contamination on the Property or potential of ground water contamination from neighboring properties. ..................... --;?_=.~]u~ ~,~,~ W~f~ located ? *~ ~r~, ~t ~ny t!mc ~dng qr pr!c~e!~e~c'z.'r~rch~ 10.018 Seller has no knowledge that the Property and Seller's operations concerning the Property are in violation of any applicable Federal, State or local statute, law or regulation, or of any notice from any governmental body has been served upon Seller claiming any violation of any law, ordinance, code or regulation or requiring or calling attention to the need for any work, repairs, construction, alterations or installation on or in connection with lhe Property in order to comply with any laws, ordinances, codes or regulation with which Seller has not complied. 10.019 There are no unrecorded restrictions, easements or rights of way (other than existing zoning regulations) that restrict or affect the use of the Property, and there are no maintenance, construction, advertising, management, leasing, employment, service or other contracts affecting the Property. 10.020 Seller has no knowledge that there are any suits, actions or arbitration, bond issuances or proposals therefor, proposals for public improvement assessments, pay-back agreements, paving agreements, road expansion or improvement agreements, utility moratoriums, use moratoriums, improvement moratoriums, administrative or other proceedings or governmental investigations or requirements, formal or informal, existing or pending or threatened which affects the Property or which adversely affects Seller's ability to perform hereunder; nor is there any other charge or expense upon or related to the Property which has not been disclosed to Purchaser in writing prior to the effective date of this Agreement. 10.021 Seller acknowledges and agrees that Purchaser is entering into this Agreement based upon Seller's representations stated above and on the understanding that Seller will not cause the zoning or physical condition of the Property to change from its existing state on the effective date of this Agreement up to and including the Date of Closing. Therefore, Seller agrees AGENDA iTEM No. tc. - not to enter into any contracts or agreements pertaining to or affecting the Property and not to do any act or omit to perform any act which would change the zoning or physical condition of the Property or the governmental ordinances or laws governing same. Seller also agrees to notify Purchaser promptly of any change in the facts contained in the foregoing representations and of any notice or proposed change in the zoning, or any other action or notice, that may be proposed or promulgated by any third parties or any governmental authorities having jurisdiction of the development of the property which may restrict or change any other condition of the Property. 10.022 At the Closing, Seller shall deliver to Purchaser a statement (hereinafter called the "Closing Representative Statement") reasserting the foregoing representations as of the Date of Closing, which provisions shall survive the Closing. -,--~ .............................~, ees) tin tnnnlh~n-~n~-*~--~the" ' ' '' ' '" ~''~~ , - ..... ~ ......... ~ . ~nn~ ~b but not U~ed to, .~ Comprehens~w ~n'.,!ronmen*~l ~!ty Act of I~U~. ~ --- ~"~:~r~ ~"~'m,--~,~ ,,,S;~h ~s ~m~nded and ,m-r~d .,,~,~,,~ ~, , ~,~,,~~,, ,,~,~,~,, ~ ........... ~ ...... ~ ....... ,, 10.024 Any loss and/or damage to the Property between the date of this Agreement and the date of Closing shall be Seller's sole risk and expense. XI. NOTICES 11.01 Any notice, request, demand, instruction or other communication to be given to either party hereunder shall be in writing, sent by registered, or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: If to Purchaser: Real Property Management Department Administration Building 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 With a copy to: Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney Office of the County Attorney Administration Building 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 if to Seller: Mr. Robert C. Otteman 19572 Love Creek Drive Ft. Myers, Florida 33912 11.02 The addressees and addresses for the purpose of this Article may be changed by either party by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided herein. For the purpose of changing such addresses or addressees only, unless and until such written notice is received, the last addressee and respective address stated herein shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes. ' , -- 12/~.~1 Any a~d' ~/~brokerage com' i~s4~,ee, shall be the sole responsibility of the~. Seller shall indemni~ Purchaser and hold Purchaser harmless from AGENDA ITEM' No., ,L~'~ ... 0 9 2P 00 and against any claim or liability for commission or fees to any broker or any other person or party claiming to have been engaged by Seller as a real estate broker, salesman or representative, in connection with this Agreement. Seller agrees to pay any and all commissions or fees at closing pursuant to the terms of a separate agreement, if any. Xlll. MISCELLANEOUS 13.01 This Agreement may be executed in any manner of counterpads which together shall constitute the agreement of the parties. ~ 13.02 This Agreement and the terms and provisions hereof shall be effective as of the date this Agreement is executed by both parties and shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, personal representatives, successors, successor trustee, and assignees whenever the context so requires or admits. 13.03 Any amendment to this Agreement shall not bind any of the parties hereof unless such amendment is in writing and executed and dated by Purchaser and Setler. Any amendment to this Agreement shall be binding upon Purchaser and Seller as soon as it has been executed by both padies. 13.04 Captions and section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience and reference only; in no way do they define, describe, extend or limit the scope or intent of this Agreement or any provisions hereof. 13.05 All terms and words used in this Agreement, regardless of the number and gender in which used, shall be deemed to include any other gender or number as the context or the use thereof may require. 13.06 No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless it is in writing signed by the party against whom it is asserted, and any waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be applicable only to the specific instance to which it is related and shall not be deemed to be a continuing or future waiver as to such provision or a waiver as to any other provision. 13.07 if any date specified in this Agreement falls on a Saturday, Sunday or regal holiday, then the date to which such reference is made shall be extended to the next succeeding business day. 13.08 Seller is aware of and understands that the "offer" to purchase represented by this Agreement is subject to acceptance and approval by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. 13.09 If the Seller holds the Property in the form of a partnership, limited partnership, corporation, trust or any form of representative capacity whatsoever for others, Seller shall make a written public disclosure, according to Chapter 286, Florida Statutes, under oath, of the name and address of every person having a beneficial interest in the Property before Property held in such capacity is conveyed to Collier County. (If the corporation is registered with the Federal Securities Exchange Commission or registered pursuant to Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, whose stock is for sale to the general public, it is hereby exempt from the provisions of Chapter 286, Florida Statutes.) 13.10 This Agreement is governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. AGENDA I_TEM No. '% pg.,. Xllll. ENTIRE AGREEMENT 14.01 This Agreement and the exhibits attached hereto contain the entire agreement between the parties, and no promise, representation, warranty or covenant not included in this Agreement or any such referenced agreements has been or is being relied upon by either party. No modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be of any force or effect unless made in writing and executed and dated by both Purchaser and Seller. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto set forth their hands seals. Dated Project/Acquisition Approved by BCC: ASTO PURCHASER: DATED: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA , Deputy Clerk AS TO SELLER: DATED: h~) "4 t0'b (P~nted I~m,e) (Printed Name) Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Assistant County Attorney BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman · ' -) ,,"T /ROBERT C. OTT~I~A'N - ' AGEMDA ITEM No. /u~ ,(- '-., EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CONDUCT A TEEN CONCERT NOT PREVIOUSLY BUDGETED AND APPROVE THE NECESSARRY BUDGET AMENDMENTS Objective: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to conduct a teen concert, in cooperation with the Anti-Tobacco Coalition on June 15, 2000 and approve the necessary budget amendment. Consideration: The Anti-Tobacco Coalition, in cooperation with S.W.A.T.(Students Working Against Tobacco)and the Sheriff Department, have asked the Parks and Recreation Department to Co-sponsor a Teen Concert, called "Rock and Ride Night"to be held during the annual Parks and Recreation's Summer Fest. The Concert is contingent upon the Parl~s and Recreation Department receiving a $10,000 grant from the State Anti-Tobacco Coalition. An additional $2,000 has been pledged by First National Bank of Naples for this event. This concert would be offered in conjunction with our annual Summer Fest, Thursday Teen Night, which allow teenagers to have free rides all night at the carnival. To offer a nationally known act for entertainment during this night, staff estimates it will cost an additional $22,000 over the funds currently budgeted for the Summer Fest. The State Anti- Tobacco grant ($10,000) and the First National Bank sponsorship ($2000) would offset part of the $22,000 needed. Leaving a balance of $10,000 needed to produce the event. Staff is proposing to sell tickets at $5.00 each, to this Teenagers only event, which would be used to offset the $10,000 needed from reserves. However, if the Board wishes, this event could be offered for $1.00 (for ticket control purposes), with minimum revenues offsetting the expenses. 'owth Management: None. Fiscal lmpact: Funds are available in MSTU/General Fund Reserves. A budget amendment will transfer funds, in the amount of $10,000 to MSTU/General Fund, Parks and Recreation. In addition, the recognition of $12,000 in revenue from the Grant and Sponsorship will increase the MSTU/General Fund, Parks and Recreation budget. Recommendation: That the Board; (1)- authorize staff to produce the Summer Fest Teen Concert, (2) - direct staff as to their wishes to charge $5.00 for the event or to offer it for $1.00, (3) - approve the accompanying budget amendment, and (4) - pre-authorize the recognition of revenue from the Anti-Tobacco Coalition Grant and First National Sponsorship. (~/James Fitzek, Oper-ati~s l~anager Department of Parks and Recreation Reviewed and ~.~? ,~ - t ~: "' Approved by: Mafia Ramsey, Director/ Department of Parks and Recreation Reviewed and ---~. Approved by: --.. Peter Kraley, Interim - Aj;~inistrator Division of Public Servid~ Date: Date: Date: Agend . MAY 0,9 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH PERFORMERS FOR THE SUMMER FEST ROCK AND RIDE NIGHT. Objective: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize staff to select an entertainer/entertainers, negotiate the associated contracts, and authorize the Chairman to execute those contracts once approved by staff and the County Attorney. Consideration: The Anti-Tobacco Coalition, in cooperation with S.W.A.T.(Students Working Against Tobacco)and the Sheriff Department, have asked the Parks and Recreation Department to Co-sponsor a Teen Concert to be held during the annual Parks and Recreation's Summer Fest. The Concert is contingent upon the Parks and Recreation Department receiving a $10,000 grant from the State Anti-Tobacco Coalition.An additional $2,000 has been pledged by First National Bank of Naples for this event. To take advantage of this opportunity and to ensure adequate time is available for advertisement, staff is requesting that the Board pre-approve the selection of entertainer/entertainers, the subsequent contracts, and authorize the Chairman to execute those contracts once they are produced. The contracts for the entertainers will not exceed $15,000. Growth Management: None Fiscal Impact: The necessary funds will be available in the Parks and Recreation Budget if the Board approves the companion agenda item and its accompanying budget amendments. Recommendation: That the Board of County Commissioners authorize the Chairman to execute said agreements, once approved by staff and the County Attorney, in the amount not to exceed $15,000. Prepared by: (~ o,~.' ,//James Fitzek, Ope~'ations Manager Department of Parks and Recreation Reviewed and ?'~ Approved by: 'Mm-la Ramsey, Director / Department of Parks and Recreation Reviewed and¢--~ ! Approved by: T. Peter Kraley, Interim ~][ministrator Division of Public Ser~gces Date: Date: MAY 0 S 2000 P'g o___./_~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. ONE FOR RFP 97-2675, "PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS AND DRUG TESTING" OBJECTIVE: To approve Amendment No. 1 97-2765 with Community Health Partners. CONSIDERATION: At time of contract renewal, Community Health Partners requested changes to their current contract. Staff met with Community Health Partners to review the proposed changes and have negotiated the attached amendment. FISCAL IMPACT: Fiscal Impact in FY99 was approximately $28,900. Current FY to date impact is approximately $19,065. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the Contract Amendment No. One to RFP 97-2765 as addressed in this summary and authorize the Chairman to sign the Amendment after review by the __.County Attorney's office. Ja~l~ K~oble- analic~ FIR StJpe~isor- HLt'rnan Res/oU..~es~Depa rt me nt REVIEWED BY-: .....~-~"~,,~/~-~;?.,)~,,f~ ~)£¢~]Date: /~.., JenMfer EdWards, Dire~tolL ' ~ ~ i I~r~an Resources Department REVIEWED 13~': Date: Stephen Y. Carnell, Director Purchasing/General Services Leo E. Ochs, Admir~tr..ator Support Services I~ion APPROVED BY: Date: AGE I~OA. ITEH HAY - 9 2000 Pg ......... /, - Contract Amendment No. 1 - 97-2675 "Pre-Employment Physicals and Drug Testing" This amendment dated ,2000 to the referenced Agreement shall be by and between the parties to the original agreement, Community Health Partners (to be referred to as "Contractor") and Collier County, Florida (to be referred to as "Owner"). Statement of Understanding RE: Contract No. 97-2675 "Pre-Employment Physicals and Drug Testing" The parties named above have agreed upon the following changes to the above-mentioned contract: Invoicing (page 12) - Change first sentence to: Each participating provider shall submit an invoice to the Owner within forty-five (45) days of service being rendered to an individual. Contract Renewal (page 12) - All prices at the time of the renewal may be adjusted on the anniversary date of the Agreement based on the annual change to the following CPI as published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics using the latest release available preceding the notice of intent to renew the Agreement. Area: U.S. City Average Item: Medical Care Proposer's Qualification Form (page 15) - Under Officers/Partners or Owners and Experience: Delete Affiliated Providers. Individual participating providers will be responsible for laboratory work. Under Firm Name and Address, change to: (a) Firm Name: Community Health partners (b) Address: 408 Goodlette Road, Naples FL 34102 Pricing (page 22) - Delete current pricing and replace with the following: Pre-Placement Employment Physical A basic occupational and medical history is reviewed with a brief occupational physical exam. The medical determination of ability to work is assessed. A vision exam will be conducted with this physical at no charge. Ancillary tests to determine medical clearance (i.e., drug testing, blood alcohol, CBC, lipid panel, spirometry) are reimbursed per fee schedule. $ 48.00 AG, I[NOA/ ["T[I~I No. / ~,-.,/~ .~;_. HAY 9'2000 Contract Amendment No. 1 - 97-2675 "Pre-Employment Physicals and Drug Testing" Essential Functions Evaluation A respiratory medical history is reviewed by a physician. The physical examination with interpretation of spirometry and ancillary tests will assess the ability to work. A vision exam will be included a no charge. Spirometry testing is included. Ancillary tests at the published fee schedule can augment this physical assessment. $115.00 Laboratory Work All three of the following tests are to be provided for the above fee: · Comprehensive Metabolic Panel. · Complete Blood Count (CBC) w/Platelet, Auto Diff. · Urinalysis Chemistry. $ 23.00 PPD Testing w/Reading Audiological Screening Test (pure tone air only) Spirometry Drug Screen; HRS 5 panel w/Mro Alcohol, Breath Test Hepatitis B Vaccination (3 series, all inclusive fee) Consists of a series of three (3) injections over a six (6) month period. HIV 1 & 2 Antibody Rabies Vaccinations Consists of a series of three (3)injections. In includes injections, the rabies titer and shipping costs. EKG w/12 leads Health Risk Assessments $ 8.00 $ 10.00 $ 8.oo $ 35.oo $ 25.oo $150.00 $ 25.00 $213.00 $ 6O.0O $ 2o.oo Additional services and associated fees may be added upon mutual agreement. Exhibit 1 - Network Facilities - change to: Community Health Partners (CliP) will maintain a list of participating providers and facilities that the Centralized Exam Scheduling area will refer to. Upon two (2) business days from acceptance of the Amendment, CHP will send communications to all of its facility and physician members, requesting their decision whether or not to participate in the County's Pre- employment program as specified in the RFP and this amendment. A complete listing will then be presented to the County for final approval. If the list of providers is acceptable to the County, the contract will continue as amended. If it is not, the County can opt to terminate the contract with a thirty (30) day written notice. _ All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in force. HAY - 9 2000 pgo .._7 Contract Amendment No. 1 - 97-2675 "Pre-Employment Physicals and Drug Testing" IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the Owner have each, respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the date(s) indicated below. ATTEST: CONTRACTOR: Corporate Secretary/Witness By: Dated' Community Health Partners By: Title: Dated' CORPORATE SEAL ATTEST: Dwight E. Brock, Clerk Approved as to form and Legal sufficiency: OWNER: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Timothy J. Constantine, Chairman David C. Weigel County Attorney HAY - 9 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVAL OF A BUDGET AMENDMENT AND UNANTICIPATED EXPENDITURES MAINTENANCE FOR EMERGENCY FOR BUILDING OBJECTIVE: To reimburse the Department of Facilities Management for emergency and unanticipated expenses incurred in the first two quarters of fiscal year 1999-00. CONSIDERATIONS: The Facilities Management Department is responsible for maintaining the County's 555 facilities and structures. Annually, the Department budgets operational expenses for air-conditioning, plumbing, electrical and structural repairs based on previous years' expenses. Unanticipated expenses incurred during the first half of fiscal year 1999-00 have reduced the operating budget, requiring additional funding to continue operations for the remainder of this fiscal year. An itemized breakdown of unanticipated expenses is attached for your review. Expenditures have included major air-conditioning repairs at the main campus chiller plant and several off campus buildings. This work included the replacement of chiller seals, air-handlers, motors, auxiliary pumps, compressors and valves totaling approx. $90,004. All of these systems are considered critical in providing air-conditioning, heating and fresh air to our County facilities. Extensive plumbing repairs and parts have also contributed to increased operational expenses. Several clogged/broken sewer lines at the Naples Jail required cleaning and/or replacement. In addition, a clogged septic system at the Parks and Recreation Administration building required cleaning and minor repairs. These unanticipated plumbing expenses totaled $8,409. Electrical system repairs and maintenance were high due in part because of electrical panel replacements at County Barn Fleet, a transformer replacement in Building W (General Services) and UPS battery replacement at the Supervisor of Elections Building. Immediate action was needed to restore normal operating power. Unanticipated electrical maintenance repairs totaled $42,660. Other unanticipated expenses included $9,534 spent on structural repairs for overhead doors in the Naples Jail and regular doors on the main campus buildings. Building materials and supplies totaled $40,500, which included light fixtures/bulbs, paint, air- conditioning pans, and miscellaneous building hardware and fixtures. HAY - 9 : ,Pg. / - Executive Summary Unanticipated Expenses Page Two Unanticipated Expenditures by Trade Trade Total Electrical $39,100 Air-conditioning $97,400 Rurrbing $8,400 Structural $9,500 Building Supplies $151~ Misc. Supplies $25,500 Total Unanficipated Repairs $194,900 As these expenses have been unanticipated, funds are needed to continue operations for the rest of the fiscal year. These funds would be transferred from reserves and placed in the Building Maintenance cost center. FISCAL IMPACT: Total unanticipated expenses are $194,900. Funds would be transferred from General Fund Reserves to Building Maintenance. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no effect on the Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of Collier County Commissioners approve the necessary budget amendments as addressed within this summary. Prepared By: ~_~ ~-'P'z~;.'~" ~ ...... ,%. ~' Daniel R. Rodriguez,.~'d~(es Manager The Department of Facilities Management Date Reviewed By: Skip Camp, CFM, Director The Department of Facilities Management Date: Approved By: Leo E. Ochs, Jr., Adm:mist}~ator Support Services Div[sio, F/ Date: .g ........ J Department of Facilities Management Unanticipated Repairs First Two Quarters FY 1999 - 2000 Trade I Date I Building I Work J Cost I Total IElectrical10/11/1999 County Buildings Replace parking lot lights with private lift truck $ 3,025.00 ,Electrical10/14/1999 Building W General Services Replace transformer in electrical room $ 3,978.20 ~Electrical10/19/1999 Building F Administration Replace elevator motor $ 5,475.00 Electrical 10/26/1999 Building W General Services Upgrade electrical pane. I $ 4,163.86 Electrical 11/15/1999 Sheriri°s CDi Building Horseshoe Dr.SherifFs relocation to rented space $ 1,453.17 Electrical 11/29/1999 Main Campus Install lights at main entrances $ 2,595.62 Electrical 12/11/1999 County Barn Facility Fleet Replace panel wiring $ 3,650.74 Electrical 12/16/1999 County Barn Facility Fleet Replace burned out electrical lines and panel $ 8,600.00 Electrical 01/22/2000 Building F Administration Replace wiring to the sixth floor $ 3,617.25 Electrical 03/21/2000 Building B Elections Replace batteries in UPS system $ 2,495.00 $ 39,053.84 HVAC 01/13/1930 Building D PWED Test and balance study of air-conditioning system $ 2,641.80 HVAC 10/05/1999 Marco Tax Collector Replace 5 ton air-conditioning unit $ 3,990.00 HVAC 10/15/1999 Building K Chiller Operations Two Weeks of Labor $ 3,605.80 HVAC 10/19/1999 Immokalee Community Park Replace Lennox compressor $ 4,717.60 HVAC 10/28/1999 Building K Chiller Plant Service main chiller plant $ 3,605.80 HVAC 10/29/1999 Golden Gate Community Park Replace 3.0 Ton A/C system $ 3,995.00 HVAC 11/03/1999 Main Campus Repair chiller seat on # 1 chiller (major overhaul) $ 16,061.03 HVAC 11/11/1999 Immokalee Health Dept. Replacement 20 ton air-cond!tioning Unit $ 13,664.86 HVAC 12/16/1999 Building D PWED Replace exhaust grills and tie into exhaust $ 1,458.14 HVAC 12/17/1999 Naples Jail Replace cooling tower Aurora pump $ 1,435.00 '~-'"'"" 01/20/2000 Building K Chiller Plant Repair Chiller 20 hp pump $ 1,045.53 01/21/2000Veterans Community Park Move air-conditioning equipment $ 2,293.75 t-, ,,~C 01/31/2000Building K Cooling Tower Repair manual and automatic controls $ 1,300.12 HVAC 01/31/2000Building K Chiller Plant Water Flow Study of chilled water pumps $ 2,641.80 HVAC 02/02/2000Golden Gate SherifFs Sub station Replace Trane air handler & repair air-conditioning $ 2,741.56 HVAC 02/24/2000Building K Chillier Plant Replace Arcnet Card - Energy Management $ 528.09 HVAC 02/24/2000~Development Services Building Test and balance RTU - 4 unit $ 1,478.22 HVAC 02/25/2000Building H Health Department Replace humidity controls / parts $ 1,340.93 HvAC 03/13/2000Main Campus Repair damage duct in storage area $ 671.50 HVAC 03/13/2000Building D PWED Evaluate chilled water system $ 1,651.25 HVAC 03/22/2000Immokalee Health Clinic Replace 20 ton air-conditioning unit $ 14,225.00 HVAC 03/30/2000'lmmokalee Jail ,Replace duct work in kitchen and relocate $ 98~.00 HVAO 03/31/2000Vanderbilt Water Plant IReplace condensing unit on HVAC.system $ 7,530.00 ,HVAC 04/'13/2000!lmmokalee Land Fill Replace two Liebert air-handlers $ 3,778.00 $ 97,387.78 Plumbing 01/03/2000!Building G Transportation install wash tub for janitors $ 1,854.75 ,Plumbing 02/01/2000Naples Jail !Replace stainless steel water line and jet all Drains$ 2,456.90 !Plumbing 02/02/2000!Golden Gate Administration Jet/Clean out septic lines $ 1,145.00 Plumbing 02/23/2000Golden Gate Estates Library Replace old piping in well system/new slab $ 2,952.24 $ 8,4O8.89 Structural 10/15/1999Naples Jail Replace broken rolling door in Booking $ 5,167.00 Structural 11/15/1999Main Campus Replace awning $ 1,400.00 Structural 04/06/2000Building K Chiller Plant Replace both doors - rusted through $ 2,967.00 $ 9,534.00 Supplies Electrical Electrical switches, wiring and fixtures $ 3,506J'.00 Supplies Painting Paint and painting materials $ 5,000'.00 Supplies Other Operating Supplies Building materials, hardware and specialized fixtures$ 15,000.00 J "--"" Temporaw Labor . Temp employee for CADD work and building inventory $ 4,000.00 ~s Air-conditioning Air-conditioning equipment and supplies $ 5,000.00 ~Su~plies Light Fixtures Light fixtures, bulbs and lamps _ $ 8,000.00 AE~i;f~A_ x'rlH, l $ 40,500.00 mo.,/L¢¢/.~ ~,,hTntal $194,864.51 Total Unanticipated Building Maintenance Expenses MAV _ i3 ~NN0 ~ $ 194,885 APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENTS BCC Agenda of May 9, 2000 Road and Bridge (Fund 101) Budget Amendment S00-224 Capital Office Equipment $9,000 Reserves Reserves for Contingency (9,000) Total: -0- Explanation: Funds are needed to purchase a large plan copy machine. Due to the relocation of the Transportation Services Department, PWED's copy machine will no longer be available. The Transportation Services Department maintains the archival files for roadway and traffic signal projects, and the public often requests copies of these plans. General (Fund 001) Emergency Services Administration Budget Amendment g00-227 Capital Autos & Trucks Communications Equipment Personal Services Regular Salaries Total: Explanation: Funds are needed to purchase a Administrator. vehicle and a $25,700 2,700 (28,400) -0- radio for the Emergency Services AGENDA ITEM No. /,~~..~ HAY - 9 2000 Pg.,. / EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT, BID #00-3056, TO F & D CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE NEW EMS-17 FACILITY LOCATED IN GOLDEN GATE ESTATES. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board award the EMS-17 construction contract to F & D Construction, Inc. and to authorize the Chairman to sign the standard County approved construction contract. CONSIDERATION: There were 144 inquiries for information received by the Purchasing Department in response to the bid advertisement for the EMS-17 project. Six (6) completed bid packages were received and opened on April 19, 2000 at 2:30 PM with the following results: 1. F & D Construction, Inc. 2. Vanderbilt Bay Construction, Inc. 3. The M. J. Simpson Corporation 4. Hunt Construction Co., Inc. 5. The Fowler Company 6. Hickory Construction Company, Inc. $593,903.00 $679,342.00 $724,995.00 $742,282.00 $753,626.00 $799,787.00 The references for F & D Construction, Inc. were confirmed by staff as satisfactory and F & D was found to be the lowest responsive bidder. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in fund number 350 EMS impact fees; cost center 140470 general improvements. Total project costs are estimated $678,000 which include $593,903.00 for construction costs only, $25,000 for furnishings and $59,097.00 for impact fees, and permit costs. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: This request is consistent with the County's growth management plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners award the EMS-17 construction contract to F & D Construction, Inc. and authorize the Chairman to sign the standard County approved contract after review and approval by the County Attorneys office. SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: Bob Pierce, Project Manager Facilities Management Department Date: /~j.ra6,k Crogn ale, ;jjec~t ~M~n~ger Date: "lXacilities Management Department AGENDA IFEM PlAY 0 9 Pg .... ~ Page 2 of 2 Executive Summary EMS-17, Golden Gate Estates REVIEWED BY: Skip Camp, Director Facilities Management Department D ate: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED BY: APPROVED BY: ' 2 '"~ Date: Steve t~amell, Director Purchasing Department Diane Flagg,~ Chief Emergency Medical Services Department Date: 1V~i ke McNees Assistant County Manager AGENDAJTEM No.- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES HELICOPTER ENGINE RESERVE FUND FOR AN ENGINE OVERHAUL OBJECTIVE: To approve a budget amendment to transfer funds from General Fund reserves to Helicopter Operations for the helicopter engine module overhaul. CONSIDERATION: On March 20, 2000, $52,144.74 was paid to Turbomeca Engine Corporation for the helicopter engine module and fuel control overhaul. Funds were appropriated from the Helicopter Operations Cost Center FISCAL IMPACT: $80,000 was budgeted for FY00 in the Engine Overhaul Reserve Fund of which $52,144 would be appropriated for this expenditure. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget amendment of $52,144 from General Fund Reserves to the Helicopter Operations operating budget (001-144510-646860. SUBMITTED BY: Date: ,.~-7o 7o,-o REVIEWED BY: ~: ~'X Date: ~/,:-/~ :~? ,~ piahe B. Flagg, Chief, Emergency S~i~s Department ~ Mike McNees, Assistant County ~~ AGENDA ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGREEMENT APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF SAID AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA FOR FUNDS TO BE USED FOR THE RETROFITTING OF STORM SHELTERS OBJECTIVE: To gain Board of County Commissioners accept and approve Agreement # 00-EO-C9-13-00-22-018 between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs and Collier County for funds to retrofit two storm shelters within Collier County and to adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution and acceptance of said Agreement. CONSIDERATION: The State of Florida, including Collier County, have demonstrated a profound shelter deficit for our residents. Each year, the Collier County Emergency Management Department provides information to the Department of Community Affairs on our sheltering capabilities. This data, including those from the other 66 counties, are summarized into an annual "Shelter Retrofit Report" that is presented to the Florida Legislature. This year, Collier County has been offered funds to provide window protection at Pine Ridge Middle School in the amount of $19,500. Funds in the amount of $7,000 will be used for a similar project at Village Oaks Elementary School in Immokalee. Funding up to $26,500 will be provided by the Department of Community Affairs on a reimbursable basis. All work shall be completed by June 30, 2000. If the Agreement is approved, the Emergency Management Department will serve as project managers to insure that all work is completed prior to contract termination. FISCAL IMPACT: Increase of $26,500 in the Emergency Management Grant Fund GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Policy 12.1.3, Conservation and Coastal Management Element requires that the County continue to identify shelter space that complies with American Red Cross shelter standards. AGENDA ITEM MAY o 9 2ooo pg. ! liECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Agreement # 00-EO-C9-13-00-22-018 for the installation of window protection at Pine Ridge Middle and Village Elementary Schools, adopt the Resolution authorizing the execution and acceptance of said Agreement, and approve the necessary Budget Amendment that increases the~ EF~y~nagement Grant Fund by $26,500. K n~h_~F. Pineau, Emergency Management Director APPROVED BY: Michael A. McNees, Interim Emergency Services Administrator AGENDA ITEM Agreement Number: 00-EO-C9-13-00-22- 0~[ ~ AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is ~ntered into by and between the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs, with headquarters in Tallahassee, Florida (hereinafter referred to as the "Department"), and Collier County (hereinafter referred to as the "Recipient"). THIS AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FACTS: WHEREAS, the Department is authorized, pursuant to the General Appropriations Act, Specific Appropriation 1118A, to grant funds to eligible recipients to provide reinforcement and upgrade of existing windows in public schools designated as hurricane shelters; and WHEREAS, the Recipient has been awarded funds under the above-referenced authorities for public school window protection projects included, scored and ranked in the September 1, 1999 "Shelter Retrofit Report"; and WHEREAS, Recipient agrees to comply with all the requirements applicable to said award, as supplemented by the terms and conditions in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the Department and the Recipient do mutually agree as Follows: SCOPE OF WORK AND FUNDING The Recipient shall undertake and fully perform the Scope of Work included as Attachment A of this Agreement. Funding up to $26,500 shall be provided on a reimbursement basis, in accordance with the project costs identified in the September 1, 1999 Shelter Retrofit Report. The Department and the Recipient shall take into consideratio~ window barriers which provide security and energy efficiencies. II. INCORPORATION OF LAWS. RULES. REGULATIONS AND POLICIES III. Both the Recipient and the Department shall be governed by applicable State and Federal laws, rules zind regulations, including, but not limited to, those identified in Attachment B of this Agreement. PERIOD OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall begin upon execution by both parties and shall end June 30, 2000, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of Paragraphs VII. or IX. or XIV. of this Agreement. Final requests for reimbursement shall be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the termination date of the Agreement. Any requests received AGENDA ITEM No~ !./,' (':~ :~'~ NAY 0 9 2000 pg., -~ IV. VI. VII. after August 15, 2000, may, in the discretion of the Department, not be reimbursed from this Agreement. Reimbursement requests shall not be submitted by facsimile transmission. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT Either party may. request modification of the provisions of this Agreement. Changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be valid only when reduced to writing, duly signed by each of the parties hereto, and attached to the original of this Agreement. MONITORING The Recipient shall constantly monitor its performance under this Agreement to ensure that time schedules are being met, the Budget and Scope of Work are being accomplished within specified time periods, and other performance goals are being achieved. Such review shall be made for each function; or activity set forth in Attachment A to this Agreement, and shall be reported in accordance with the reporting requirements of Attachment D. LIABILITY Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (B) below, the Recipient shall be solely responsible to parties with whom it shall deal in carrying out the terms of this Agreement, and shall save the Department harmless against all claims of whatever nature by third parties arising out of the performance of work under this Agreement. For purposes of this agreement, Recipient agrees that it is not an employee or agent of the Department, but is an independent contractor. Any Recipient who is a state agency or subdivision, as defined in Section 768.28, Florida. Statutes, agrees to be fully responsible for its negligent acts or omissions or tortious acts which result in claims or suits against the Department, and agrees to be liable for any damages proximately caused by said acts or omissions. Nothing herein is intended to serve as a waiver of sovereign immunity by any Recipient to which sovereign immunity applies. Nothing herein shall be construed as consent by a state agency or subdivision of the State of Florida to be sued by third parties in any matter arising out of any contract. NONCOMPLIANCE, REMEDIES, AND TERMINATION A. If the Recipient fails to comply with any term applicable to an award under this Agreement, the Department may take one or more of the following actions, as indicated by the attendant circumstances: AGEND~ IT~E,M =, _ temporarily withhold cash payments, pending correction of the deficiency, or more severe enforcement action; 2. 'disallow all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance; 3. suspend'o~' terminate the award; disallow future participation in the program or funding provided by the Department; and 5. recover all funds provided under the current award. Costs of the Recipient resulting from obligations incurred by the Recipient during suspension or after termination of an award are not allowable unless the Department expressly authorizes them in the notice of suspension or termination, or subsequently authorizes them in writing. Other Recipient costs during suspension or after termination which are necessary and not reasonably avoidable may be allowable if: the costs result from obligations which were properly incurred by the Recipient before the effective date of the suspension or termination, are not in anticipation of the suspension or termination, and, in the case of termination, are not cancelable, and the costs would be allowable if the award were not suspended or expired normally at the end of the period in which the termination occurs. Recipient of terminated funds shall remain obligated to provide all required closeout information. In the event that any audit determines that costs reimbursed or otherwt~se funded under this Agreement should be disallowed, then the Recipient shall return {hose disallowed funds to the Department. In the alternative, the Department may offset the disallowed amount against any current or future awards to the Recipient. Actions taken for noncompliance constitute final Department action under Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, as amended. Notification of such actions shall include notice of administrative hearing rights and time frames. The Recipient shall return funds to the Department if found in non-compliance with laws, rules, and regulations governing the use of the funds or this Agreement. This Agreement may be terminated by the written mutual consent of the parties. AGENDA ITEM VIII.NOTICE AND CONTACT IX. All notices provided under or pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing, either by hand delivery, or first class, certified mail, return receipt requested, to the representative identified below at the address set forth below and said notification attached to the of this Agreement. ~ The Department designates Dorann P. Loehr, Division of Emergency Management as the Department's Contract Manager. All communications, written or oral, relating to this Agreement shall be directed to her at the following address and telephone number: Department of Community Affairs Division of Emergency Management 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 (850) 413-9972 The technical contact for the Agreement is Danny Kilcollins. He can be reached at the address above or by telephoning (850) 413-9859. For the Recipient, all communications, written or oral, relating to this Agreement shall be directed to the following: Recipient's Contract Manager's Name and Address: Ken Pineau, Director Attn: James yon Rinteln Collier County Emergency Management 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 .- In the event that different representatives are designated by either party after execution of this Agreement, notice of the name, title and address of the new representative will be rendered as provided in Paragraph VIII. A and B above. OTHER PROVISIONS The validity of this Agreement is subject to the truth and accuracy of all the information, representations, and materials submitted or provided by the Recipient, in this Agreement, in any subsequent submission or response to Department request, or in any submission or response to fulfill the requirements of this Agreement, and such information, representations, and materials are incorporated by reference. The lack of accuracy thereof or any material changes shall, at the option of the Department and with thirty (30) days written notice to AGENDA ITEM pg. /'d the Recipient, cause the termination of this Agreement and the release of the Department from all its obligations to the Recipient. This Agreement shall be construed under the laws of the State of Florida, and venue for any actions arising out of this Agreement shall lie in Leon County. If any provision herebf is in conflict with any applicable statute or rule, or is otherwise unenforceable, then such provision shall be deemed null and void to the extent of such conflict or unenforceability, and shall be deemed severable, but shall not invalidate any other provision of this Agreement. No waiver by the Department of any right or remedy granted hereunder or failure to insist on strict performance by the Recipient shall affect or extend or act as a waiver of any other right or remedy of the Department hereunder, or affect the subsequent exercise of the same right or remedy by the Department for any further or subsequent default by the Recipient. Any power of approval or disapproval granted to the Department under the terms of this Agreement shail survive the' terms and life of this Agreement as a whole. More than one copy of this Agreement may be executed. Any copy with original signatures may be considered an original. AUDIT REQUIREMENTS The Recipient agrees to maintain financial procedures and support documents, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, to account for the receipt and expenditure of funds under this Agreement. These records shall be available at all reasonable times for inspection, review, or audit by state personnel and other personnel duly authorized by the Department. "Reasonable" shall be construed according to circumstances, but ordinarily shall mean normal business hoLtrs of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local time, Monday through Friday. Recipient shall also provide the Department with the records, reports or financial statements upon request for the purposes of auditing and monitoring the funds awarded under this Agreement. The Recipient shall provide the Department with an annual financial audit report which meets the requirements of Sections 11.45 and 216.349, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 10.550 and 10.600, Rules of the Auditor General, for the purposes of auditing and monitoring the funds awarded under this Agreement. AGENDA ITEIvl pg._ - XI. The annual financial audit report shall include all management letters and the Recipient's response to all findings, including corrective actions to be taken. The annual financial audit report shall include a schedule of financial assistance specifically identifying all Agreement and revenue by sponsoring Department and Agreement number. The complete financial audit report, including all items specified in Paragraph X. D. 1. and 2. above, shall be sent directly to: Department of Community Affairs Office of Inspector General 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 mo In the event the audit shows that the entire funds, or any portion thereof, were not spent in accordance with the conditions of this Agreement, the Recipient shall be held liable for reimbursement to the Department of all funds not spent in accordance with these applicable regulations and Agreement provisions within thirty (30) days after the Department has notified the Recipient of such non- compliance. The Recipient shall retain all financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and any other documents pertinent to this Agreement for a period of three years after the date of submission of the final expenditures report. However, if litigation or an audit has been initiated prior to the expiration of the three-year period, the records shall be retained until the litigation or audit findings have been resolved. The Recipient shall have all audits completed by an Independent Certified Public Accountant (ICPA) who shall either be a certified public accountant or a public accountant licensed under Chapter 473, Florida Statutes. The ICPA shall state that the audit complied with the applicable provisions noted above. H. The audit is due seven months after the expiration of the Agreement. SUBCONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT If the Recipient subcontracts any or all of the work required under this Agreement, the Recipient agrees to include in the subcontract that the subcontractor is bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement with the Department. AGENDA ITEM No. Bo The Recipient agrees to include in the subcontract that the subcontractor shall hold the Department and Recipient harmless against all claims of whatever nature arising out of the subcontractor's performance of work under this Agreement, to the extent allowed and required by law. See Attachmen~E for any additional terms and conditions pertaining to subcontracts. XII. TER~MS AND CONDITIONS XIII. XIV, The Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties. ATTACHMENTS All attachments to this Agreement are incorporated as if set out fully herein. In the event of any inconsistencies or conflict between the language of this Agreement and the attachments hereto, the language of such attachments shall be controlling, but only to the extent of such conflict or inconsistency. STANDARD CONDITIONS The Recipient agrees to be bound by the following standard conditions: The State of Florida's performance and obligation to pay under this Agreement is contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature, and subject to any modification in accordance with Chapter 216, Florida Statutes. Go If otherwise allowed under this Agreement, extension of an Agreement for contractual services shall be in writing for a period n,ot to exceed six (6) months and shall be subject to the same terms and conditions set forth in the initial Agreement. There shall be only one extension of the Agreement unless the failure to meet the criteria set forth in the Agreement for completion of the Agreement is due to events beyond the control of the Recipient. All bills for fees or other compensation for services 6r expenses shall be submitted in detail sufficient for a proper preaudit and postaudit thereof. If otherwise'allowed under this Agreement, all bills for any travel expenses shall be submitted in accordance with s. 112.061, Florida Statutes. The Department reserves the right to unilaterally cancel this Agreement for refusal the Recipient to allow public access to all documents, papers, letters or other AGENDA ITEM No~ ~,' (5 ?~ XV. material subject to the provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and made or received by the Recipient in conjunction with the Agreement. The State of Florida will not intentionally award publicly-funded contracts to any contractor who _kn9wingly employs unauthorized alien workers, constituting a violation of the employment provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. Section 1324a(e) [Section 274A(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA")]. The Department shall consider the employment by any contractor of unauthorized aliens a violation of Section 274A(e) of the INA. Such violation by the Recipient of the employment provisions contained in Section 274A(e) of the INA shall be grounds for unilateral cancellation of this Agreement by the Department. A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for a public entity crime may not submit a bid on a contract to provide any goods or services to a public entity, may not submit a bid on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or a public work, may not submit bids on leases of real property to a public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with a public entity, and may not transact business with any public entity in excess of Category Two for a period of 3 6 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list. STATE LOBBYING PROHIBITION XVI. XVII. No funds or other resources received from the Department in connection with this Agreement may be used directly or indirectly to influence legislation or any other official action by the Florida Legislature or any state Department. LEGAL AUTHORIZATION The Recipient certifies with respect to this Agreement that it possesses the legal authority to receive the funds to be provided under this Agreement and that, if applicable, its governing body has authorized, by resolution or otherwise, the execution and acceptance of this Agreement with all covenants and assurances contained herein. The Recipient also certifies that the undersigned possesses the authority to legally execute and bind Recipient to 'the terms of this Agreement. EQUIPMENT AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT If the Scope of Work contemplates the acquisition of equipment, then Recipient agrees to use said equipment for emergency management purposes only, and to properly maintain and repair said equipment. Recipient shall establish adequate maintenance procedures to keep the equipment in proper working condition. Recipient shall establish a control system to insure adequate safeguards to prevent loss, damage or theft of the equipment. AGENDA ITEM No. :'2 ' ,";.:'.50 Recipient shall promptly advise the Department of any loss, damage or theft affecting said equipment. Recipient shall not sell, lease, rent, lend, encumber or dispose of said equipment without the written permission of the Department. XVIII. COPYRIGHT, PATENT AND TRADEMARK If the Recipient brings to the performance of this Agreement a pre-existing patent or copyright, the Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to that pre-existing patent or copyright unless the Agreement provides otherwise. go If any discovery or invention arises or is developed in the course of or as a result of work or services performed under this Agreement, or in any way connected herewith, the Recipient shall refer the discovery or invention to the Department for a determination whether patent protection ~vill be sought in the name of the State of Florida. Any and all patent rights accruing under or in connection with the performance of this Agreement are hereby reserved to the State of Florida. In the event that any books, manuals, films, or other copyrightable material are produced, the Recipient shall notify the Department. Any and all copyrights accruing under or in connection with the performance under this Agreement are hereby reserved to the State of Florida. Go Within thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, the Recipient shall disclose all intellectual properties relevant to the performance of this Agreement which he or she 'knows or should know could give rise to a patent or copyright. The Recipient shall retain all rights and entitlements to any pre-existing intellectual property which is so disclosed. Failure to disclose will indicate that no such property exists. The Department shall then, under Paragraph B., have the right to all patents and copyrights which occur during performance of the Agreement. Recipient shall be granted a royalty-free nonexclusive license to use patented or copyrighted material for research or educational purposes. XIX. PUBLICATIONS AND PUBLICITY Recipient shall, in publicizing, advertising, or describing the project, state: "Sponsored by the State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs." If the project is referenced in written material, the words "State of Florida, Department of Community Affairs" shall appear in the same size letters or type as the name of the Recipient. AGENDA ITEM No. !e (:~,% 70 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their undersigned duly authorized officials. BOARD OF' COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA: STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS: BY: BY: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, CHAIRMAN Federal Employer I.D. 59-6000558 Dated: ATTEST: As to Chairman Constantine's Signature only. Joseph F. Myers, Director DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: Deputy Clerk Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Thomas C. Palme~r, Assistant County Attorney 10 AGENDA ITEM No,.-.{~' c~, :~ Attachment A SCOPE OF WORK Within thirty days of the .date of execution of this Agreement, Recipient shall supply a document which includes an adtivities time line, a list of deliverables, and a budget by category, for the approval of the Department. This document shall address, with particularity and appropriate discussion, each task necessary to complete the project. Failure to supply the above-referenced document, or disapproval of this document by the Department, shall result in the denial of funding. If the Recipient succeeds in acquiring products or services for less than the budgeted amount, then it shall notify the Department and request authorization to apply the unexpended funds to the project, identifying the proposed use for the unexpended funds. If the unexpended funds can be applied to enhance the project through acquisition of additional equipment or services which will provide the same benefit as the approved project, then the Department may approve the use of the unexpended funds. The Recipient shall use the funds provided in this agreement to enhance window protection for the public school(s) used as shelters as indicated below. Prior to utilization of the funds provided in this agreement, the Recipient shall demonstrate that upon the completion of this project, the public school facility xvill comply with the guidelines established in the American Red Cross supplement, Guidelines for Hurricane Evacuation Shelter Selection (ARC 4496, July 1992). Failure to supply this documentation and disapproval of this item by the Agency, shall result in the forfeiture of funding. School Name Funds Provided Report Ranking Village Oaks Immokalee Pine Ridge Middle School $7,000 .~_1 $19,~00 290 Recipient shall demonstrate that all building opening protective systems and products purchased and installed as a part, or in whole, of this Agreement have been tested and certified to meet or exceed the minimum performance standards of the Southern Building Code Congress International (SBCCI) Standard SSTD 12-97 (or a m6re recent edition). As an alternative to SBCCI Standard SSTD 12-97, building opening protective systems and products that have been tested and certified to meet or exceed the minimum performance standards of the Dade County version of the South Florida Building Code for wind resistance structural loads, windborne debris impact, and cyclical loading (Protocols PA 201-94, PA 202-94, PA 203-94, or more recent editions) are acceptable. "Building openings" means windows, skylights, doors, overhead doors, louvers, vents and other assemblages or features that penetrate the exterior shell of the building. Failure to supply this documentation, and disapproval of this item by the Agency, shall result in the denial or forfeiture of funding. ?_1 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~'" (; '~-~ Attachment B PROGRAM STATUTES AND REGULATIONS o 2. 3. 4. Chapter 252, Florida Statutes Chapter 287, Florida Statutes Chapter 119, Florida Statutes Chapter 60A-1, Florida Administrative Code (The bottom portion of this page intentionally left blank.) !2 mo Attachment C RECORD KEEPING All original records pertin. ent to this Agreement shall be retained by the Recipient for three years following the date of termination of this Agreement or of submission of the final close-out report, whichever is later, with the following exceptions: If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the three year period and extends beyond the three year period, the records will be maintained until all litigation, claims or audit findings involving the records have been resolved. Records for the disposition of non-expendable personal property valued at $1,000 or more at the time of acquisition shall be retained for three years after final disposition. o Records relating to real property acquisition shall be retained for three years after closing of title. All records, including supporting documentation of all program costs, shall be sufficient to determine compliance with the requirements and objectives of the Scope of Work, Attachment A, and all other applicable laws and regulations. "['he Recipient, its employees or agents, including all subcontractors or consultants to be paid from funds provided under this Agreement, shall allow access to its records at reasonable times to the Department, its employees, and agents. "Reasonable" shall be construed according to the circumstances but ordinarily shall mean during normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local time, on Monday through Friday. "Agents" shall include, but not be limited to, auditors retained by the Department. (The bottom portion of this page intentionally left blank.) 13 AGEND~A ITEM No. t~'r "'i ':"5 - pg.__( ~ Attactunent D mo REPORTS At a minimum, the Recip. ient shall provide the Department with two Financial Report/Reimbursement Requests, two Summary Project Progress Reports and final Close-out Reports. The Recipient shall utilize the report formats provided by the Department. Periodic reports are due to be received by the Department no later than fifteen (15) days after the end of each period outlined below and shall continue to be submitted until submission of the administrative close-out report. The ending dates for each period and the report due dates are as follows: Reporting Period Ending Date Reports Due 1 January 30, 2000 February 15, 2000 2 April 30, 2000 May 15, 2000 3 July 30, 2000 August 15, 2000 4 October 30, 2000 November 15, 2000 The final close-out report is due forty-five (45) days after termination of this Agreement or upon completion of the activities contained in this Agreement. If all required reports and copies prescribed above are not sent to the Department or are not completed in a manner acceptable to the Department, the Department may withhold further payments until they are completed or may take such other action as set forth in Paragraphs VII. and IX. "Acceptable to the Department" means that the work product was completed in accordance with generally accepted principles and applicable law, and is consistent with the Scope of Work, as determined by the Department in its sole discretion. Upon reasonable notice, the Recipient shall provide such additional program updates or information as may be requested by the Department. The Department shall be permitted to inspect and monitor the records and facilities of funded projects and award recipients. Such inspections may occur without notice at any reasonable time, which shall be presumed to be normal business hours on Monday through Friday. 14 AGENDA ITEM No. }t'C~°',_ Attachment E PROCUREMENT. SUBCONTRACTS AND SUBGtL&NTS Subcontracts entered into. by a Recipient in connection with any portion of the proposed project Shall contain all terms of the Recipient's Agreement with the Department. The Recipient shall send a copy of any subcontracts entered into in connection with implementing the proposed project to the Department within 30 days after their effective date. Recipient shall not award subgrants using funds awarded pursuant to this Agreement without prior approval by the Department. Recipient shall comply with all applicable procurement rules and regulations in securing goods and services to implement a proposed project. Wherever required by law or otherwise permitted, Recipient shall utilize competitive procurement practices. (The bottom portion of this page intentionally left blank.) 1_5 Attachment F FUNDING/CONSIDERATION mo This is a' cost-reimburs~'rnent Agreement. The Recipient shall be reimbursed for costs incurred in the satisfactory performance of work hereunder in an amount not to exceed S26,500, subject to the availability of funds. The amount of funds available pursuant to this agreement may be adjusted proportionally if required by an action of the Legislature. The Recipient shall establish a separate account code in an interest bearing account'for tracking all deposits, expenditures and interest pertaining to an award. A separate account code shall be established for each award received. The interest earned on said account(s) shall be remitted promptly to the Department, but no later than ninety (90) days after the completion of the Agreement. Twenty (20) percent of the award amount may be provided upon submission and Department approval of the time line, list of deliverables and project budget submitted under Attachment A, Scope of Work. Payment of reimbursable expenditures may be requested thereafter, at the end of each reporting period.. After the initial twenty (20) percent payment, if any, payments may be made for all reimbursable expenses incurred as of the end of each reporting period. The Recipient agrees to expend funds in accordance with the Scope of Work, Attachment A of this Agreement. Funds disbursed to the Recipient by the Department that are not expended in implementing the project shall be returned to the Department, along with interest earned on the funds, within ninety (90) days of the expiration of the award agreement. Recipient shall comply with all applicable procurement rules and regulations in securing goods and services to implement a proposed project. (The bottom portion of this page intentionally left blank.) AGENDA ITEM No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12' 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3o 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 RESOLUTION NO. 2000 - RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OFD COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND COLLIER COUNTY FOR STATE FUNDS TO BE USED FOR THE SPECIFIED SHELTER RETROFITTING. WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs has made funds available for the installation of window protection at designated shelters throughout the State of Florida; and WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs has identified Pine Ridge Middle School and Village Oaks Elementary School as qualifying for funding from the subject Shelter Retrofit funding; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Emergency Management Department has agreed to serve as project manager for the completion of this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board hereby approves and accepts Agreement # 0'0-EC-C9-13- 00-22-018 between the Florida Department of Community Affairs and Collier County for acceptance of funds not to exceed $26,500 for the installation of window protection at the two (2) subject shelters. 2. The Board hereby authorizes its Chairman to sign the subject Agreement on behalf of this Board. This Resolution adopted this day of May 2000, after motion, second and majority vote in favor of adoption. ATTEST: Dwight E. Brock, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: By: Deputy Clerk Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Thomas C. Palmer, Assistant County Attorney Timothy J. Constantine, Chairman BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE MAY 9, 2000 FOR BOARD ACTION: 1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: Districts: A. Naples Heritage Community Development District - Minutes of meeting held December 1, 1999 by the Board of Supervisors and Financial Statements - Unaudited for 10/31/99 H:Data/Format AGENDAITEM No. /&/-/ MAY 0 9 2000 pg. /' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST TRANSFER OF $820,300 FROM RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIES TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE OPERATING FUND. OBJECTIVE: To transfer the amount of $820,300 from Reserves for Contingencies to the Sheriff's Office operating fund. CONSIDERATIONS: On April 11, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners approved a pay plan for all county agencies for FY 2001 and FY 2002. The Board also approved early implementation in June, 2000 for the Sheriff's Office wage adjustment. The Office of Management and Budget has calculated the early implementation costs into the FY 2001 budget picture which was presented on April 11, 2000. FISCAL IMPACT: Implementation of this pay plan adjustment will require funding from General Fund Reserves for Contingencies. GROWTH IMPACT: Funding will be required in following years. The Sheriffs' Office will include the amount as part of their FY 2001 budget request per the approval by the Board of County Commissioners on April 11, 2000. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners transfer $820,300 from reserve for contingencies to the Sheriff Office operating fund and approve related budget amendment. REQUESTED BY: I1 ~ ' ,,_Carol L. Golightly, Assistant.FiNance Director APPROVED BY: . , Don Hunter, DATE: April 28, 2000 5.1a-exsum\exresrv3.00/dv AGENDA ITEM NAY 0 9 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH GEORGE ARCHIBALD AS TECHNICAL ENGINEER TO ASSIST THE COUNTY RELATING TO COUNTY'S PROPERTY ACQUISITION INTERESTS INCLUDING EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS FOR PENDING AND FUTURE ROAD PROJECTS. B~ That the Board of County Commissioners approve the attached Consultant Services Agreement with George Archibald as technical engineer to assist the County relating to County's property acquisition interests, including eminent domain proceedings for pending and future road projects. CONSIDERATIONS: The Public Works Engineering Department has a need to expedite right-of-way acquisition activities to meet the County's transportation needs. The use of George Archibald will better ensure that the construction schedule is not delayed. George Arch/bald has a knowledge of Collier County road proj'e~d. ating back twenty years. He has extensive experience in eminent domain, and he has been a key participant in resolving damage issues in the Airport Road, Radio Road and Livingston Road Projects. The County Attorney has reviewed this approach/selection with professional staff, and has also received the support and concurrence from both the Public Works Administrator and the Public Works Engineering Director. FISCAL IMPACT: Requested periodic services, as may be authorized by the County Attorney and/or the Director of the Public Works Engineering Department, will be compensated unto George Archibald at a discounted rate of $85.00 per hour for all non-trial work and $125.00 per hour for trial work. Funding will be available under the appropriate project account, as needed. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The roads under acquisition are included in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County transportation plan, and as such, the recommendations herein are consistent with the County's Growth Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approve the attached Consultant Services Agreement with George Archibald and authorize the Chairman to execute same. SUBMITTED BY: He'~dfF..~shion ' Assistant County Attorney 1 Date: MAY 0 9 2000 pg. ~, REVIEWED BY: ~ '--"/(? eff Bibby, P.E. PWED Director Date: Administrator Date: APPROVED BY: David C. Weigel ~ - County Attorney Date: h :GBX~Ex S um2000-G Archibald 2 CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS ~ONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT made and entered into this __ day of ,2000, by and between the Board of County Commissioners, (hereinafter referred to as the "Board" and/or "County"), and George Archibald, P.E., 214 Palmetto Dunes Circle, Naples, Florida 32301, (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant"). WITNESSETH: The parties hereto, in consideration of the premises and the covenants contained herein, mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant is hereby retained by the Board to represent and assist the County relating to County's property acquisition interests including eminent domain proceedings for the various road projects. 2. Consultant is to perform the services requested by the County Attorney or the Director of the Public Works Engineering Department which may include all or some of the services described in Exhibit "A". 3. The Board, through its Public Works Engineering Department, hereby agrees to pay Consultant as compensation for services at Consultant's discounted rate of $85.00 per hour for non-trial work and $125.00 per hour for all trial work. 4. The Board hereby agrees to reimburse Consultant for actual costs incurred including costs of mailing, copies, facsimiles, telephone expense and document transmittal expenses (e.g., "Federal Express", etc.) incurred pursuant to this Agreement, provided that such costs are supported by appropriate documentation submitted with the invoice or statement for consulting services to the County Attorney or the Director of the Public Wor~z z:..;,,~,~,4,,. Page 1 of 4 blA'( 0 °o 2000 Pg. ~ Department. Consultant's travel expenses are expressly excluded from this Agreement unless approved in advance by the County Attorney or the Director of the Public Works Engineering Department. 5. A statement or invoice for services and direct costs incurred by Consultant shall be billed to the County Attorney or the Director of the Public Works Engineering Department on a monthly or quarterly basis at the discretion of Consultant. All invoices shall contain, as a minimum, the following information: 1) The proper name of the payee as it appears in the Agreement; 2) The date of the invoice; and 3) The description of services and the time period in which billable services were rendered. All payments and the resolution of any disputes regarding such are subject to and shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 218, Part VII, Florida Statutes, otherwise known as "The Florida Prompt Payment Act." The County shall pay all invoices submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 128.74, Florida Statutes. If the County fails to pay any invoice for consulting services within the time period specified in Section 218.74, Florida Statutes, Consultant shall have the right to invoice for interest on the unpaid invoice at the rate of one percent (1%) per month compounded monthly commencing thirty (30) days after the due date. 6. Consultant shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Board and its officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all losses, penalties, damages, professional fees, including attorney fees, and all costs of litigation and judgments arising out of any willful or intentional misconduct, negligent acts or error or omission of Consultant, its subconsultants, subcontractors, agents or employees, arising out of or incidental to the performance of this Agreement or work performed thereunder, including any claim(s) brought against the County, its officers, employees or agents by any employee of Consultant, any AOENDA ITEM no. Page 2 of 4 MAY 0 S 2000 pg. subconsultants, subcontractors, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them. Consultant's obligation under this provision shall not be limited in any way by the agreed-upon total contract fee specified in this Agreement or the Consultant's limit of, or lack of, sufficient insurance protection. The parties agree that one percent (1%) of the total compensation to Consultant for performance of services authorized by this Agreement is specific consideration for Consultant's indemnification of the County. 7. Consultant agrees to obtain and pay for all permits and licenses necessary for the conduct of its business and agrees to comply with all laws governing the responsibility of an employer with respect to persons employed by Consultant. Consultant shall also be solely responsible for payment of any and all taxes levied on Consultant. In addition, Consultant shall comply with all rules, regulations and laws of Collier County, the State of Florida, or the U.S. Government now in force or hereafter adopted. 8. It is mutually agreed between the parties that all authorization for services shall originate with the County Attorney or the Director of the Public Works Engineering Department. 9. Either party may terminate this Agreement for convenience with a minimum of thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. The parties shall deal with each other in good faith during the thirty (30) day period after any notice of intent to terminate for convenience has been given. The County reserves the right to terminate this Agreement immediately, for cause, upon written notice to Consultant. 10. This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by the Board and Consultant. 11. Unless terminated pursuant to Section 9, this Agreement shall be for a term of four (4) years. This Agreement may be renewed for an additional four (4) year term upon written notice by County to Consultant prior to expiration of this Agreement. Page 3 of 4 AOI~NC)A ITEM. NO. m, r,-r)r~) MAY 0 9 2000 Pa. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Consultant and the Board have each respectively, by an authorized person or agent, hereunder set their hands and seals on the day and year first above written. DATED: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman WITNESSES: Signature GEORGE ARCHIBALD, P.E. Printed/Typed Name By: George Archibald, P.E. (2) Signature Printed/Typed Name Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: David C. Weigel County Attorney Approved by: Page 4 of 4 Jeff Bibby, Director, Public Works Engineering Department AGIDqDA ITEM. NO._ io, Mt ¥ o 9 2000 p~. GEoRge F. ARCHIBALD, P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER CONSULTING SERVICES--TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING OUTLINE OF TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AVAILABLE TO COLLIER COUNTY March 2000 GENTRAL AREAS OF LITIGATION SUPPORT EXPERTISE: Transportation Ptarming,%and Planninow%and Use Activities and Locations. Transportation Elements of Comprehensive Plan and Growth Management Plan. Roadway Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance. Traffic Operations and Traffic Control Devices/Systems. Roadf Bridge/Drainage System/Signal Systern/Intermodal Facility Design. Environmental Permitting for Roadway Improvements. Right-of-Way Acquisition Programs. Road ConstructionfReconstruction/Certifi cation. Transportation Financing, ,Assessments, Taxing Districts & Grant Prog-rams. TRANSPORTATION REPORTDIG AND ACTIVITIES: Evaluation of criteria and standards for roadway operation, maintenance, planning, design, Right-of-Way acquisition and construction. Quality assurance evaluation of programs, activities and proposals for roadway operations, maintenance, design, R/W acquisition and construction. Forensic analysis of road corridor prog-rams and parcels to include research, investigation, site analysis, specific studies, preparation of exhibits and management- administration of specific activities. Participation in various open and closed forums to present, debate, negotiate and/or defend various facts, policies, actions, processes with regard to areas of expertise. EXPERT WITNESS ACTIVITIES: Preparation of 'Fact' reports/analysis/evaluations with regard to areas of expertise for negotiations, depositions, court hearings, mediation and trials. Prepare other experts and staff for depositions, court hearings and trials. Preparation of reports/exhibits/visuals for depositions, hearings, mediation and trials. Provide expert testimony on activities/parcels/projects/processes with regard to areas of expertise. TEIEPHO.'": 941'774-7392- FaX: 941'774'3358 M/~Y 0 9 2000 214 PALMETTO DUNES CIRCLE -- NAPLES, FLORIDA 34113 PJJ--- GEORGE F. ARCHIBALD~ P.E. CONSULTING ENGiNEeR CONSULTING SERVICES--TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING March 26, 2000 Collier County Attorneys Office Attn: Ms. Heidi Ashton, Assistant County Attorney County Government Center 3301 E Tarniami Trail Naples, Florida 34112 Subject: Professional Engineering Services and Contract Service Rates Dear Ms. Ashton: In regard to your inquiry subject as above and my prior commitment to your office, I will remain available to provide professional engineering services to Collier County on an as-needed basis. A~n outline of typical services as may be required is attached per Exhibit #1. The rates applicable to such services are outlined as follows: Professional En~neering Services ......................................$ 85.00/Hour Expert Testimony Services ..............................................$125.00/Hour It is recognized that County directives to perform such en~neering services are on an infrequent basis subject to County needs and requirements. Payment of such services shall be based on actual time records of performance submitted to and approved by the County. In considering the above information and attachments, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate in contacting me via the telephone number or fax number listed below. Sincerely, George F. Archibald, P.E. AGENDA ITEM .' MAY 0 9 2000 _ TELEPHONE: 941-774-7392--FAX: 941-774-3358 214 PALMETTO DUNES CIRCLE -- NAPLES, FLORIDA 341 1 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 1999-00 ADOPTED BUDGET. OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners adopt the attached resolution and the related amendments which amend the Fiscal Year 1999-00 adopted budget in accordance with Section 129.06, Florida Statutes. CONSIDERATIONS: Section 129.06, Florida Statutes defines how an annual budget, as adopted by the Board, can be amended. Budget amendments that increase the total appropriations of a fund over the adopted annual budget may be approved by resolution of the Board of County Commissioners after an advertised public hearing. Budget amendments requiring such approval include the appropriation of carry forward, interfund transfers, and supplemental revenue. This is a public hearing to amend the budget for Fiscal Year 1999-00. Each of these budget amendments has been reviewed and approved by the Board of County Commissioners via separate Executive Summaries. The attached resolution and the summary of the resolution have been advertised and have been available for public review and inspection with the related budget amendments and executive summary at the Office of Management and Budget. The amendments and summary are included herein by reference in the resolution. FISCAL IMPACT: The amendments and executive summaries which were previously considered and approved by the Board contained their respective fiscal impact statements. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board adopt the attached resolution amending the Fiscal Year 1999-00 adopted budget. Michael Smykowski, OMB Director Date: Approved By: Thomas W. Olliff, County Manager Date: AGENDA ITEM No, [""l P~ HAY o 20oo COUNTY OF COLLIER NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROPOSES TO AMEND ITS FISCAL YEAR 1999-00 ADOPTED BUDGET All interested parties are invited to attend a public hearing on this matter to be held on May 9, 2000 at 9:00 AM or soon thereafter, in the County Commissioner's Boardroom, 3rd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building, Collier County Government Center, 3301 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, Florida. A copy of the proposed Budget Amendment Resolutions and background material will be available for public inspection on weekdays between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM at the Office of Management and Budget, 2nd Floor, W. Harmon Turner Building. A final decision on the amendments will be made at this meeting. Listed below are the amendments to be considered and their purpose. Dwight E. Brock, Clerk Board of County Commissioners Collier County Florida Chairman Budget Amend. Fund No. No. Fund Title Change Amount Fund Total 00-113 123 00-114 123 00-115 123 00-118 126 Services For Seniors PURPOSE: To appropriate grant proceeds to fund the cost of in-home case management, chore and homemaking services. $151,907 $445,900 Services For Seniors PURPOSE: To appropriate grant proceeds to fund congregate meals, nutrition education and outreach. $23,628 $469,528 Services For Seniors PURPOSE: To appropriate grant proceeds to fund home delivered meals, nutrition education and outreach. $24,902 $494,430 MPO Planning $581,400 PURPOSE: To appropriate funds from the Federal Transit Administration to establish Public Transportation service in Collier County. AGEND&ITEM No, MAY 0 ,,q 2000 $1,601,120 Budget Amend. Fund No. No. Fund Title Change Fund Amount Total 00-119 301 00-132 681 00-133 681 00-153 104 00-173 490 00-174 00! County-wide Capital Improvement Plan PURPOSE:To appropriate loan proceeds to purchase a replacement helicopter. State Court Administration PURPOSE: To appropriate proceeds from the State Court Grant for Article V cOStS. State Court Administration PURPOSE: To appropriate Civil Traffic Heating Officer grant funds for contractual Civil Traffic Infraction Hearing Officers. Road Construction District 3 PURPOSE: To appropriate fund reserves and private reimbursement funds to pay 7 months of landscape maintenance costs for newly landscaped median on Collier Boulevard. EMS PURPOSE: To appropriate donations for the purchase of Automatic External Defibrillators. General Fund PURPOSE: To appropriate increase in grant funds to be used for State & Local Assistance Grant. $2,700,000 $18,823,400 $49,204 $3,608,503 $12,095 $3,620,598 $21,600 $2,912,100 $15,280 $11,094,680 $461 $138,854,843 AG E,~ D~, ITEM No~_~ I ~r MAY 0 9 2000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 35 36 37 38 39 41 42 RESOLUTION NO. 00-BAR- A RF~OLUTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 129.06(2), FLORIDA STATUTES, TO AMEND THE BUDGET FOR THE 1999/00 FISCAL YEAR. WHEREAS, Section 129.06(2). Florida Statutes, provides that the Board of County Comnussioners (hereinafter also referred to a~ "Board") at any time within a fiscal year may amend a budget for that year, and provides the procedures therefor; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Comtmssioners of Collier County, Florida, has received copies of budget amendments which provide for but are not limited to: anticipated carry forward, unanticipated revenue, and/or receipts of a nature from a source not anticipated in the budget and received for a particular purpose; appropriations for expenditures in pamcular funds that should be decreased and other appropriations in the same fund that should be correspondingly increased; appropriations from the reserve for contingencies; appropriations from the reserve for future construction and improvements; and increased receipts for enterprise or proprietary funds received for a particular purpose; and WHEREAS. the Board has determined that it is appropriate to amend the Budget for Fiscal Year 1999/00 by resolution pursuant to Section 129.06, Florida Statutes. NOW, TIt~EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THIE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the budget amendments to the 1999/00 FY Budget described below are approved and hereby adoprod and the 1999/00 FY' Budget is so amended. INCREASE (DECREASE) CARRY FORWARD INCREASE BUDGET OR INCREASE INCREASE INCREASE (DECREASE) AMENDMENT IIWI'ER. FUND (DECREASE) (DECREASE) (DECREASE) INTERFUND NUMBERS TRANSFERS RECEIPT EXPENDITURE RESERVES TRANSFERS 123 00-I 13 $151,907 123 00-114 23.628 123 00-115 24,902 126 00-118 581.400 301 00-119 2,700,000 681 00-132 49,204 681 00-133 12,095 104 00-153 43.200 490 00-173 15,280 001 GO-174 461 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk is hereby ordered and minutes of this meeting for permanent record in his office. - 3. - 151,907 23,628 24,902 581,400 2,700,000 49,204 12,095 21,600 (2 ~ ,600) 15,280 461 0 S 2000 mong the 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ~8 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 41 42 43 45 46 47 1 This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. 2 3 DATED: ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By:~ By: Deputy Clerk Timothy J. Constantine, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Chief Assistant County Attorney AGENDA ITEM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 FOR OUTSIDE COUNSEL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR PURSUIT OF COUNTY'S CLAIMS, RIGHTS RELATING TO THE 1995-96 BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT. OBJECTIVE: For the Board to approve a budget amendment for outside counsel and professional services relating to the 1995-96 Beach Restoration Project. (20NSH)ERATIONS; At its May 2, 2000 meeting the Board, as a result of hearing the findings and recommendations of the County's coastal and ocean engineering expert and legal counsel, directed that the County Attorney, assisted by outside counsel and other necessary professional services, pursue the County's claims and rights relating to the 1995-96 Beach Restoration Project. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated fiscal impact is $50,000 at this time to proceed. Funds are available in general funds reserves. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget amendment in the amount of $50,000 to allow the County Attorney's Office, in conjunction with outside counsel and other professional services, to pursue the County's claims and rights relating to the 1995 - 96 Beach Restoration Project. Respectfully submitted by: David C. Weigel, County Att~;rley H:dd~/ex~t/ve ~mn~r/~2000/be.~ch re~or~oo ~ ~ Date: ~'-'--- ~~ NO. _-L(.,R..( ~-.-,~.-~-J MAY 0 9 2000 pg._ ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION VAC 98-008 TO VACATE A PORTION OF HIGHLAND DRIVE AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT OF PINELAND-ON-THE-TRAIL AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 60, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AND TO ACCEPT A COUNTY UTILITY EASEMENT OVER EXISTING COUNTY FACILITIES OBJECTIVE: To approve Petition VAC 98-008 to vacate a portion of Highland Drive to allow the developer to develop the site without the right-of-way bisecting the property. And, to accept a County Utility Easement (C.U.E.) over an existing sewer lateral within the right-of-way. CONSIDEP~ATIONS: Petition VAC 98-008 has been received by Planning Services from Robert Duane of Hole, Montes & Associates, Inc., as agent for the owner, Phillip N. ' Keyes requesting the vacation of a portion of Highland Drive as shown on the attached maps. The subject right-of-way is approximately 160 feet south of Avalon Drive on U.S. 41, and the vacation will eliminate an unsafe condition in favor of better controlled access at the intersection of Avalon Drive and U.S. 41. The developer intends to develop the adjacent Tract and incorporate the vacated right-of-way into a site plan. The public benefit includes eliminating an unsafe traffic condition. FISCAL IMPACT: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMI~ENDATIONS: 1. That the Board of County Commissioners approve the Resolution for Petition VAC 98-008 to vacate a portion of the Highland Drive right-of-way, and to accept the C.U.E. from the developer. 2. Authorize the Chairman to execute the Resolution. 3. Direct the Clerk to the Board to record a certified copy of the Resolution and County Utility Easement in the Official Records and to make proper notation of this vacation on the recorded plat as referenced above. AG£~DA ITEM 2000 Executive Summary VAC 98-008 Page 2 PREPARED BY: JOHNq~. HOULDSWORTH SENIOR ENGINEER DATE REVIEWED BY: Thomas E. Kuck, P.E. ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER ROBERT J. MULHERE, AICP DATE DATE PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR APPROVED/BY:_~-~ VI~CE~ A. CAUTERO, AIC~,-~DMINISTI:~TOR ~ "~ CO~U"XIT¥ DEr. ~',~D ENVIRON~ENTA~ SVCS. 2000 RESOLUTION NO. 2000- 3 RESOLUTION FOR PETITION VAC 98-008 TO VACATE A PORTION OF 4 HIGHLAND DRIVE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF PINELAND-ON-THE- 5 TRAIL, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 60, PUBLIC RECORDS OF 6 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ANT) TO ACCEPT A COUNTY UTILITY 7 EASEMENT OVER EXISTING FACILITIES WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY 8 9 WHEREAS. pursuant to Section 177.101, Florida Statutes and 336.10, Florida Statutes, Robert 10 Duane of Hole. Montes & Associates. as Agent does hereby request the vacation of a portton of Highland 11 Drive: and 12 WHEREAS. the Board has this day held a public hearing to consider vacating said right-of-way as 13 more fully' described below, and notice of said public heanng to vacate was given as required by law: and 14 WHEREAS, the granting of the vacation will not adversely affect the ovmership or right of 15 convenient access of other property. owners: and 16 WHEREAS. the pemioner is requesting the vacation of a certain portion of Highland Drive in order 1 7 to develop the site under a unified development plan. The public benefits are to release the Count)., tkom any 18 liability and maintenance of the property, and to have the propert>., added to the tax rolls. 19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUN~ COMMISSIONERS OF 20 COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA, that the following be and is hereby vacated: 21 See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 22 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER 23 COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the County, Utility Easement, more particularly described in Exhibit "B" 24 attached hereto and incorporated herelm is hereby accepted as the replacement easement for the 25 public right-of-way vacated herein. 26 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk to the Board is hereby directed to record a certified 27 copy of this Resolution and the County, Utility, Easement individually in the Public Records of Collier 28 29 30 31 32 33 County', Florida. and to make proper notation of this vacation on the recorded plat as referenced above. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same. DATED: ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 34 BY: 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Assistant County Attorney ~o r~ m :i .v,? This Instrument Prepared By: William Schwei 'khardt Attorney at Law 900 Sixth Avenue, South, Suite 203 Naples, FL 33940 The Tax folio Number is THE ABOVE SPACE FOR RECORDING iNFORMATION UTILITY EASEMENT THIS UTILITY EASEMENT, made and entered into this~,~_T day of March, 2000, by PHILIP N. KEYES, Individually and as Successor Trustee, whose post office address is 3030 64th St. S.W., Naples, FL 34105, as Grantor, to the BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, and as Ex- Officio the Governing Board of the COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, its successors and assigns, whose mailing address is 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34116 (Whenever used herein the terms "Grantor" and "Grantee" include all the parties to this instrument and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns.) WITNESSETH: Grantor, for and in consideration of TEN DOLLARS (10.00) and other valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, hereby conveys, grants, bargains and sells unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual, non-exclusive easement, license and privilege for constructing and maintaining utility facilities on the lands located in Collier County, Florida, as described upon the attached Exhibit "A" which exhibit in incorporated herein by reference. Subject to easements, restrictions and reservations of record. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS UNq3dPROVED NON-HOMESTEAD PROPERTY. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the Grantee, together with the right to enter upon said land, excavate, place and remove materials including, but not limited to sewer lines and pipes, appurtenant thereto or thereunder for the purpose of constructing and maintaining utility facilities thereon. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor executed these presents on the day and year first above written. Signed, Sealed and Delivered heq~resence of: i OtD N. K~'5'ES, Individually a~ as Successor Trustee ~ -~' : -'=' ', ' ' PHILIP Witness Name: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of March, 2000 by PHILIP N. KEYES, Individually and as Successor Trustee, who produced a Florida driver license as identification and did not take an oath. DEANE JOHNSON MvC.:>mm ~p. 4/20/2002 /.on No C~ 716366 ~!~ Notary Public AGENDA ITF_.M [:iAYO 9 2000 o [;3 RECEIVEDFROM ADDRESS ?.O. DATE 4/6/ DESCRIPTION COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY NAPLES, FLORIDA 33962 Peter Francini Box 497 CITY Derby, CT .1998 CHECK NO 122 & 123 Petitton AV 98-008 INVOICE NO. FUND COST CENTER OBJ,'BS ! PROJECT CA CK AMOUNT 101 163610. 1329100 00000 x 500 101 163610 329100 00000 x 500.00 1000.00 BY Terri Meyer CUSTOMER COPY 1 0 6 0 7 0 PETER J. FRANClNI P.O. BOX 497 "'~ f,O~ 51-7218/22111 DERBY, CT 06418-0497 ~. people§ bank C 0 NI~£ C TIC [JT D~ ~'-' ATTACHMENT A - ~ETiTION FORM FOR VACATION OF ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAYS Date Received:..._~ - ~ / 'J~ f~ Petitioner: Phil Keyes Address: 505!-Cas~e~!~ D~ ., City/State:_~ap~.~_~Q~ida Agent: Robert Duane Telephone:__[9_~9-0870 Zip Code: 34103 Address: 715 Tenth Street South City/State:_ Naples. ~!or~da Road Name: U.S. 41 and Highland Drive Location: Section .... 13 Township 50 S Legal Description: See Attached Plat Book 3 Page(s) Telephone:. (q&]) 262-4617 zip Code:_ Range 25 E 60 Reason for Request: Current Zoning: C-3 See Cover Letter Does this affect density? No I Hereby Authorize Agent Above to Represent Me for this Petition: Yes X No Date Trustee '(Title) Please see "Policy and Procedure of Vacation and Annulment" for the list of supportive matmria!s which must accompany this petition, and deliver or mail to: Transportation Services Collier County Government Complex Naples, FL 33962 Telephone: (941) 774-8494 *(1) If a~p!icant is a land trust, indicate the name of beneficiaries. (2) If applicant is a corporation other than a public corporation, indicate the name of offigers and major stockholders. (~) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, indicate the name of principals. (4) List m!! other owners. Pmqe 4 of 4 FRM '_[~..~. DOC.--i~ . THIS INDEN/URE, made this 14 TRUST COMPANY, N. A., as lrustee TRUST£E'S DEED day of October , 19 88 by BARNETT BANKS hereinafter called the "Grantor", to Philip N. Keyes, as Successor Trustee hereinafter called the "Grantee", with full power and authority to protect, conserve,L-= sell, lease or encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property hereinafter described. The post office address of the Grantee is: 3030 64th Street, ~. W. Naples, Florida 33999 ~ WI/~ESSETH, that Grantor, in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00) ~d other good and valuable considerations in hand paid, does hereby grant, sell and convey unto Grantee, the ioilowlng described reul ptop~rt>, situate. lying and bein~ in Collier County, Florida, together with the tenements and appurtenances thereunto belongzng, to-wit: Lots 1 and 87, PINELAND ON THE TRAIL, according to Plat in Plat Book $, Page 60, of the Current Public Records of Collier County, Florida. __ -'- Received $ _ ,~ DocumentarT Stared 1 ,'--,~ Recer~.ed $ //~ Class "C" Intangible -- c= /V Personal Property Tax ~ r_- COLL'E~_~F, Ty CLE~,)CF COURTS c-~. 25 BY ~.~ ~ TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same in fee simple and to the prope~ use and benefit forever of said Grantee, This Deed is made subject to the lien of every mortgage of record in said County given to secure the payment of money and remaining unreleased at the date of delivery hereof, and to real estate taxes; zoning and use restrictions imposed by governments autnorzcy; res~r~cc~ou~ d~d =dse~en~ action to th~ su~i':isio.~: a~d out~t?~S~ng gas and mineral interests of record, if any. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused its corporate seal to be hereto affixed, and has caused its name to be signed to these presents by one uf its Vice Presidents and attested by one of its Trust Officers, the day and year first above written. ATTEST: Trust BARNE~'~ BAN~S TRUS'? COMPANY, N. A. as Trustee ','ice President '~ ' ~ot~ z~n~3 ~z Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: STATE OF FLORIDA COUNY'~' C,F COLLIER /he foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~4 day of October , 19 88 . by Charles N. Strauqhams Vice President of BARNET'r BANKS TRUST COMFANY, N. A., on behalf of the corporation, as Trustee and by Gary Pilcher as Trust Officer of BARNETT BANKS TRUST COMPANY, N. A. BARNETT BANKS TRUST COMPANY, N. A. 797 Fifth Avenue, South Nap[es, Florida 33940 PHILIP N. KEYF.8 Prepared by: Notar~ Public - State o£ Florida t,l¥ COta~iSSION EXPIRES: OCT ' J~BLE 262,~281 .76711 i .5620 ~ 1.6821 0535 15.2152 52.98 13 003 '4640202! 4,876.55 50 25 THAT 1.05 AC PARCEL LYING W OF TAMIAMI TR, S OF AVALON DR & NWLY OF HIGHLAND RD DESC IN OR 1666 PG 1892 &93 679.69 sCHOOL. ~OC~L C~TY 2 0 1. 3 1 DEPENDENT ~ 4 7 . ~ 8 WATER MG'r. ~f 4 1. L~ 3 INDEP. SPECIAL 14 . O 4 VOTER APPR. DEB,r. 3,992.89 II NO~ V~OREM ~E~ ROADS 883.66 WAtER,~EWER ESI GARBAGE COMBINED TOTAL~ lJ NAPLt~S, FLORIDA 34112-4997 2~! MILL CO. ] ~ ESCROW CODE 3[RICHMAN JR TR., KENNETH 31 2640 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 20 20INAPLES FL 34105-3203 PAID - 97/tl/21 4,681. 4507.05 GUY L. CARLTON - TAW COLLECT 0000000394640202 0000487655 0000000000 00000 ~E;E~S2 ~,3E =~3~ FURTHER iNFORMATION THiS AREA FCR T,~X COLleCTORS GFEiCE USE ONLY DUPLICATE 1997 COLLIER COUNTY NOTICE OF AD VALOREM TAXES AND NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS IN FEB i0% IN I ZSCOUNT EARNED xMOUNT DUE &SESSED 147 ? 685 ~47~ 685 4% IN NOV i 3% IN DEC 2% 2~933.081~o~m~ 2,963.63 ~mp ~ 670~80040007 i 3,055..~9 ~..m~c,: ~ INELAND ON THE TRAIL LOT i OR 1387 PG 2146 3. 72651 550.35 COUNTY S 83qol 86t. 59 SCHOOL-STATE 2 5900! 382 · ~0 SCHOOL-LOCAL ii CITY .7671I 113.29 DEPENDENT 2~ 56201 83.00 WATER MGT. i 6 8 2 1( 2 4 8. 4 2 INDEP. SPECIAl. ~ 0 5 3 5 7 . 9 0 VO,TER A. PP~. DEBT. 15 2152 2-,247.05 20 ' 1 ~,~ ::~' PER NON-AO VALOREM A~ ROADS 52.98 FII~ 808.24 WATER/SEWER ES COMM. IMPROVE. GARBAGE COMBINED TOTAL 3~02~ .74 3~0! COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR COURTHOUSE COMPLEX- BUILDING C-1 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112-4997 mu. ceoe I 81 I KEYES TR, PHILIP N 3030 64TH ST SW NAPLES FL 34105-7330 PAID 97/11/25 2,933.[ REC~ 5543.06 GUY L. CARLTON - TAX COLLECT~ 0000067080040007 0000305529 0000000000 00000 :~:,~:~ ~E ;'~: :':;E~ !NFCRMATION 'N!S AREA F?~ T~X C?L ~2-:~ S CF::CE ~SE CNLv DUPLICATE 1997 COLLIER COUNTY NOTICE OF AD VALOREM TAXES AND NON-AD VALOREM ASSESSMENTS £SCOUNT EARNED I 4% IN NOV i 3% IN DEC i 2% IN ~OUNT vD~UE 1,044.6 1~ 055.40I SBESSED 37, 637~ 3 · 7265[ 140, 25 COU,W / 5. 8340[ 219 57 SCHOOL-STATE 2.S~GG~ ~? ~8 SCHOOL-LO~ .7671 5620 1.6821 0535 15 2152 52.98 FI · '~i~::':/ 670811600'09 1. 088.14 '~'~J'i~PINELAND ON THE TRAIL LOT 87 OR 1387 PG 2146 CITY 28.87 DEPENDENT 2 i. 15 WATER MGT. 6 3 . 3 1 I#OEP. SPECIAL 2.01 VOTER APPfi, DU,r. 572.64 ROAD$ 515.50 WATEFI~EW~R COMM. IMP~0VE. GARBAGE 2 ES COMBINED TOTAL JAN I 1%IN FEB 10% IN r 066.38 1,077.261 L, 0/ COLLIER COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR COURTHOUSE COMPLEX- BUILDING C-1 NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112-4997 KEYES TR, PHILIP 3030 64TH ST SW NAPLES FL 34105-7 PAID 97/11/25 AC~[NDA ITF~ 30 HAY 0 9 200 RECe 5544.06 GUY L' CARLTON - TAX COLLECT( 0000067081160009 0000108814 0000000000 00000 COLLIER COU, rl'Y GOVERNmeNT( TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT 3301 E. T.M'~IlA~MI TRAIL NAPLES. FL. 34112 (941) 774-8494 FAX (941) 774-5375 A CERTIFIED BLUE CHIP COSL~iL.'~N'IT¥ January 22, 1999 Robert L. Duane, AICP, Planning Director Hole Montes and Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1586 Naples, FL 34106 Re.' Vacation of Ri~nt-oF-Way Highland Drive (adjacent to US 41 East) Dear Mr. Duane: Thank you for your letter of January 20, 1999. In your letter you requested a letter of no objection from this Department with respect to the subject vacation. The Transportation Services Department offers no objection to the proposed vacation subject to a sidewalk easement over the vacated property ten feet in width along the US 41 East frontage. If there are any questions or if you seek additional information, please contact me at 774-8494. Very truly yours, Edxvard J. K.~ TransportatiO,~ :rvices Director co: Rick Grigg, P.L.S., County Surveyor / Tom Kuck, P.E., Engineering Review Manager File: Highland Drive Vacation HOLE. MONTES & ASSOCIATES. INC. ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS Febmarvll. 1998 COUNTY ~ Flonda's ~ual, ty of life since 1966 98 FEBI2 ?M 2:42 Mr. John Boldt Stormwater Management Director C~11ier County Government Complex 3 ¢ 01 F. ast Tami ,a~n,,i Trail Naples, Florida Re: Vacation of Right-of-Way HMA. File No. 93.27 Dear .Mr. Boldt: I am making an application to Collier County to vacate a public right-of-way for property. located on the south side of U.S. 41. in Section 13. Township 50 South. Range 25 East for a street known as Highland Drive and located to the east of Ted's Sheds. (See attached legal descriptions.) Highland Drive is presently located approximately 160 feet from the signalized intersection of Avalon Drive and U.S. 41. wh/ch provides an alternate means of access for nearby and adjacent properties for both east and west turning movements onto U.S. 41. Because of Highland Drive's close proximity to the intersection of U.S. 41 and Avalon Drive and Lakewood Blvd. on the north side of U.S. ~1. there is the potential for conflicting left-hand tartan, movements. from Lakewood onto U.S 41 with right hand turmng movement traveling east on U.S. 41 from Highland Drive. Vacating Highland Drive will eliminate this unsafe condition in favor of better controlled access at the intersection of Avalon Drive and U.S. 41. The public benefit of the request is, therefore, to improve public safety, by abandoning this roadway, and incorporating it into the adjacent property. to the east. The right-of-way currently has no public utilities located within it and we are unaware of any plans at the present time for the future need of this fight-of-way. In order for the vacation to occur, we are required to obtain a letter of no objection to the petition from Collier Countw. If you have no objection to this petition, we ask you to issue a letter of no BOX !586 ~APLEE =L~,RIDA 34196 94 i-2£2-4617 mAX 94 1-262-3074 Mr. John Boldt Vacation of Right-of-Way HMA File No. 93.27 February. 11, 1998 Page 2 objection. If you do object or have questions regarding this vacation. please contact me at vour earliest convemence. Very. truly yours, HOLE. MONTES AND ASSOCIATES. . Robert L. Duane. A.I.C.P. Plannin~ Director RLD/dj Attachment MediaOne" This is Broadband. This is the way. 301 Tower Road Naples, FL 34113 Telephone: 941-732-3801 FAX: 941-992-1289 RECEIVED FEB 2 6 H~E N~NTES & ASSOC. INC. February 28, 1998 Robert L. Duane Hole, Montes & Associates. Inc. 715 10tn St S PO Box 1586 Naples, FL 34106 Vacation of Right-of-Way, South Side of US 41, Section 13, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, For a street known as Highland Drive and located to the east of Ted's Sheds Dear Mr. Duane: MediaOne® has no objection to the vacation of the right-of-way at the above referenced location. Please call me if you should have any questions. Sincerely, Construction Manager SWH/jdr ITEms4 2300 COLLIER COL%'TY GOVERNq NT 866 6 t 83d G_-qAI O U COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .~\'D ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION ?LANNiNG SERVICES Feuruarv 13, 1998 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104 Mr. Roberr Duane Hole, Monnes Amd Ass~cianes, inc. 715 Tenth Street Sounh P ~ Box 1586 Naples, FL 34106 Vacation Of Hichiand Drive Right-of-Wav on the South Side of U.S. z~, ~ Secnion 13, Township ~0 c ,,~e ...... o ..... Rance 25 East. This lerner is in response -s ':'our request for a staff determination of no ~b4ecnlon ~o a proposal to vacate a ~ublic 60 foot richt-of-way as referenced in your letter s~ February '' ' 998 ~ie~se ~ ~= that this review is from a Dlanninc snandpoint only. From %he information prcvldel, in appears 5ha% Highland Road is apprcximane!y i60 feen from nhe signalized intersection of Avalon Drive and U.S. 41, which provides an aiterna5ive means of access for nearby and a~jacenn properhies. Based on s~aff's analysis, ~he proposed vacanion will non adversely ampacn zrafflc circulanion or building senbacks. Vacating Highland Drive should improve zraffic movements at zhis intersection which will improve traffic safety. As noted above, ~~~=~ -~ ~he aajasen~ ~rccer~es can be pr3vided by Avalon 2rive. Therefore, nhe S'arren~ ~lanning Staff has no objection _~ =he above referenced vacation ~ ~he mubiic 60 f~o~ rich,-of-way for Highland 2 rl ve. P. esearched and Prepared By: Ray~e!!ows Pr!nc'-Da± Planner zc: D'onald W. Arnold John Hou!dsworBh Russell Muller Bu:iding Revtew& Permitting Code Enforcement Housing & Urban Improvement {941, 403-2400 k941) 403-2440 ;941, 403-2330 Reviewed By: Curren~ Planning Manager Natural Resources Planning Services Pollution Control COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION December 10, 1999 3301 E. TAMIAMI TRIAL NAPLES. FLORIDA 34112 941) 732-2575 FAX: '941)732-2526 Mr. Derek Puller Hole, Montes & Associates, Inc. 715 Tenth Street South PO. Box 1586 Naples. FL 34106 Re~ Highland Drive Vacation of Road Right-of-Way Dear Mr. Puller. This office has reviewed the request to vacate the above-referenced project on several previous occasions. I am attaching our previous letters for your rexdew. As stated in our previous correspondence, we have no objection to the vacation of the Highland Drive road right-of-way providing that a fifteen (15) foot Collier County Utility Easement (CUE) is provided and accepted by the Board of Collier County Commissioners and recorded in the official records. It appears that vour drawing, =B-2693-1. dated 10/99. meets that requirement. Mr. Grigg should verify same. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ...... ~ '' ' 'p ati ENT:bao Attachments: Drawing B-~,69~- 1 Letters (4) Cc: Joe Cheatham, Wastewater Director Rick Grigg, Land Surveyor, Community Development COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PLAN~'ING SERVICES Januarw 22. 1999 Planrang Services Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples. Florida 34104 Mr. Robert L. Duane. AICP Hole. Montes & Associates -I 5 Tenth street South Naples. Florida 34102 Re: Vacation of Right-of-Way, Highland Drive Dear Xlr. Duane: This is in response to your xwitten request for a letter of no objection to the proposed vacation of Highland Drive between U.S. 41 and Outer Drive. We have reviewed the request and have no objection subject to the Transportation Departments approval and with the condition that the 15' utility easement and the 10' FP&L easement are recorded prior to filing of this proposed vacation. If' you should have any questions. please advise. Sincereiv. Thomas E. Kuck. P.E. Engineering Review Manager 1-EKJmab HIGttLAND DRiVE cc: Ronald F. Nino. AICP. Current Planning Manager Rick Grigg wv~w.co.coilie r. fi%us ~ Phone {941) 463-2400 Fax (941) 643-6968 (]rattt ]?ate C(,t.~Tructio~t Supervisor TIFIE WARNER RECEIVED FEB 1 § HOLE MONTES & ASSOC. JNC. February13.1998 Robert L. Duane. A.I.C.P. Hole. Montes & Associates. Inc. 715 Tenth Street South Naples. Florida 34106 RE: Vacation of Right-of-Way Portion of Highland Drive ~ Section 13, Township 50 South, Range 25 East Your File No. 93.27 Dear Mr. Duane: In response to your letter dated February t l. 1998, Time Warner Cable (TWC), with franchise authorit), in Collier County, and Florida Cablevision Management Corp.. its operating entity, having no interest and/or involvement in the above-described right-of- way. give their permission for vacating the right-of-way. Should you require anv additional informatiom please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank vou. Sincerely. TIME WARNER CABLE Construction Supervisor GP:Ir I~10 40Th TERRACE SW ,~!^PLES, FLORIDA 34116 TELEPHONE 941 -455-2363 FAX 941 -455-2187 D F E ~ Z '~ lgg8 HOLE. MO~T£$ 4105 15th Avenue S.W. Naples, FL. 34116 FAX 353-6082 February 23. 1998 Robert L. Duane, A.I.C.P C/O Hole, Montes and Associates P.O. Box 1586 Naples, FL. 34106 Re: Vacation of Right-of-Way Letter dated 2/11/98 Dear. Mr. Duane: Florida Power & Light Company has no objection to the vacation of Highland Ddve right- of-way with the following understanding: Should the need arise, your client agrees to bear the cost to relocate the existing FPL facilities that may be located within the Highland Drive right-of-way and grant the necessary easement. You also agree to not record the new legal description for the vacated right-of-way until the above issue with FPL's existing facilities has been resolved. " you have any questions. please do not hesitate to contact me at 353-6001. Sincerely, E. T. Howard Construction Services an FPL Group Company Sprim Rober~ i. Duane, A.Z.C.?. 71- : xg =nn= Director Hole, }4onEes & Associazes, inc. Pose Office Box Nan!es, FL 341,}6 Petition to Vacate Public Right-of-Way SEC 13, T~P 50S, RNG 25E, Collier County Ser~nz-F!crada, '-~ haG no ec vv ';o,'~ m~ ~n ~o vacate ~he ~ubiic ~ ' - __cnu-,s~f-way as iescribed zn ',,'our _e .... i=led Februar'/ __, '998. -~ we caE ~e of = .... ........ er ~sslsuance, please conlatz me aE Sincerely, .k ..... ~.. Zawacky NeEwork Engineer ii - E&C AZ6Z:zu Chron File ~ = Goddard EAST NAPLES FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT 4798 Davis Blvd. Naples, FL 34104 Telephone (941) 774-7111 Fax (941) 774-1782 RECEIVED FEB Z ~ l~ Feb~uary£O. 1998 HOLE, MONTES & ASS4~. INC. Robert L. Duane, A.I.C.P. Planning Director Hole, Montes & Associates, Inc. 715 Tenth Street South P.O. Box 1586 Naples. Florida 34106 Dear Mr. Duane: In response to your letter dated February 11, 1998, the East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District has no objections to the petition to vacate the publlc right-of-way for property located on the south side of U.S. 41, Section 13, Township 50 South, Range 25 East for the street Highland Drive. If I can be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to contact my office. Robert Schank Fire Chief Rp! P~ Fm UT UL FCI~2I OCITR] IDI53278881886][88394248888][ FOLIO STRAP 181258 A ORB/P[ 8]/! 8] SALE DATE I 8118888] ACRES [ 4.88] NAPLES TRS->15811251113] LEG~L-t LAKE AVALON PROFESSIONAL -2 -3 -4 i532780018861 OWNER> RICHMAN JR TR, KENNETH W LAND TR #688249-C 2648 GOLDEN GATE P~WY STE 286 CENTER TRACT "A" HILL-CODE I 811 MiLL-RATE [15,21521 -1997- CURRENT-EX-AMT HMSTD-X ~ [ 8 CIU-X $ I 8 UET-X ~ I 8 DLD-X ~ I 8 WID-X ~ [ 8 AG-X $ I B ~H-X $ [ 8 02t05/1998 03:05 PM -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 34185 3283 AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-9?-UAL I 181LND 51 1275432] [ 1275432] L-USE IHP 51 6537531 I 6469441 HKT 51 19291851 { 19223761 ASD~AGADJ $[ 19291851 [ 19223761 TAXABLE $[ 1929185l [ 19223761 CNTY $1 7163.73] HSTU ~i 1474,65] S-SL ~[ 11215.14] WHB $1 1888.37] S-LB 5[ 4978,95] ISD ~1 3233,62] CITY $[ .88] UAOP ~1 182.851 [1997 TAXES] TOTAL $[ -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NA TAHIAMI TRLE 42881 29249.31I RES477 Rp] Pt3 Fm UT UL FC[~,2I OC[NR] ID153278882885][88394248888][ FOLIO STRAP 181258 R ORB/P] 8l/I 81 SALE DATE [ 8118888] $ ANT [ 8l ACRES [ ,081 NAPLES TRS->[50112611131 LEGAL-1 LAKE AVALON PROFESSIONAL -2 CENTER TRACT "R" -3 -4 153278882885] ODNER> RICHMAN JR TR, KENNETH D 15813 LAND TR X688249-C 5881 PELICAN BAY BLUD STE 48S CURRENT-EX-AMT HMSTD-X $ [ 8] 188X-X $ l CIU-X $ [ 81 VET-X $ I 8 ! BLD-X $ I 8 ] WID-X $ I AG-X $ [ ~H-X ~ i -1997 TAX ROLL- HILL-CODE [ 81] FL 34188 2734 AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-97-UAL [ 88l LND$1 288] ! 288] L-USE IMP $1 81 [ 81 HKT $1 2881 [ 2881 ASD+AGADJ S1 2881 I 2881 TAXABLE $[ 2881 [ 2881 HILL-RATE [15.21521 -1997- (1997 TAXES) TOTAL $[ -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NA TAHIAMI TRL E 1812581 CNTY $[ ,75] HSTU $[ ,15] S-SL $[ 1.17] ~MB $[ ,121 S-LB $1 .52] ISD $I .34] CITY $[ .88] VADP ~[ ,811 3.861 RES477 02/05/1998 03:05 PM Rpl Po Fn UT UL FC['~2] OCITR] IDl88394648282]186830728888]l FOLIO STRAP 582513 856,0885A13 ORB/PI 1666]/[1899] SALE DATE [ 8][1191] $ AHT [ ACRES [ 1.88] NAPLES TRS->[50][25][13] LEGAL-1 t3 58 25 THAT 1,85 RC PARCEL -2 LYING U OF TRHIRH! TR, S OF RUALON DR & NWLY OF HIGHLAND -4 RD.DESC iN OR 1666 PG 1892 CURRENT-EX-RHT HHSTD-X S [ 188X-X $ [ CIU-X UET-X BLD-X WID-X AG-X $ [ ~H-X $ [ [88394648282] OWNER> RICHHRN dR TR, KENNETH W 2648 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 286 -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 34185 3283 AREA CW CERT-96-URL CERT-97-URL [ 18l LND$[ 262428] [ 262428] L-USE IHP $[ 0]"[ HKT ¢[ 262428] [ 262428] ASD+AGADJ $[ 262q28] [ 262428l TAXABLE $[ 262428] [ 262428] 0] HILL-CODE B] [ B1] CNTY $[ 977.94] HSTU ¢[ 281,31] $ ( 0] S-SL ~[ 1531,88] WHB $[ 147,48] $ [ B] HILL-RATE S-LB $[ 679.69] ISD $[ 441,43] $ [ 0] [15,2152] CITY $[ .88] UADP $[ 14,84] $ [ 8] -1997- 8] 8] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL ¢[ -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NA TAHIAHI TRLE 4298] 3992,89] RES477 Rpl PQ Fn UT UL FCIC2] OC[TRi ID[G?881128887][88888888888][ FOLIO STRAP 128088 815A13 ORB/P[ 2372]/! 6421 SALE DATE i171112971 $ AHT [ 6758881 ACRES [ 1.83] NAPLES TRS->[58112511131 LEGAL-1 PINELAND ON THE TRAIL LOTS -2 81-86 -3 -4 [67881128887] OWNER> FUEREDI, ADAN 1857 GALLEON DR CURRENT-EX-AHT HHSTD-X ¢ [ 81 1BB;!-X $ [ CIU-X ~ [ UET-X $ [ BLD-X $ [ 81 WID-X ~ [ 01 AG-X $ [ Bl ~H-X ~ [ 8] HILL-CODE [ 81! HILL-RATE [15.21521 -1997- LOCATION [NA -1997 TAX ROLL- AREA CW CERT-97-VAL ] [' 188888] ] [ 01 I [ 1888881 ! [ 188888] 1 [ 188888l FL 34182 7761 CERT-96-UAL [ 10l LND¢[ 188888 L-USE IMP $[ 8 HRT $1 188888 ASD+AGADJ ~1 188888 TAXABLE $[ 188888 CNTY S-SL S-LB CITY (1997 TAXES] TOTAL $[ -CERTIFIED- 1288881 82.851 60.691 181.G71 5.781 1643,24l RES477 02/05/1998 02:42 PM Rpl P~ Fn UT UL FCIC2] OC[TR] ID[678888888891188888888888][ [G78888888891 OWNER> FUEREDI, ADAM 25A13 1857 GALLEON DR FOLIO STRAP 128888 ORB/P[ 2372]/I SALE DATE [1.7111.297] ~ AMT [675888 ACRES [ 1.451 NAPLES TRS->I58]i251t131 LEGAL-1 PINELAND ON THE TRAIL LOTS -2 2-7 -3 CURRENT-EX-AHT HHSTD-X ¢ [ 8 188'4-X $ [ 8 CIV-X ¢ I 8 VET-X ¢ I 8 BLD-X $ I 8 I~ID-X ¢ I 8 AG-X $ [ 8 UH-X ~ [ 81 HILL-CODE [ 811 HILL-RATE [15,21521 -1.997- LOCATION [NA -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 34182 77£1 AREA CU CERT-%-UAL CERT-97-UAL ! 1.01 LNO ¢[ 2835881 [ 2835881 L-USE IMP HKT ¢[ 2835881 I 2835881 ASD+AGADJ ~1 2835881 [ 2835881 TAXABLE ~l 283588] [ 2835881 CNTY ¢[ 1856.461NSTU ¢[ 217.471 S-SL $1 1653.941 WMB ¢[ 159,321 S-LB 3[ 734,27] ISD ¢[ 476,88] CITY ¢[ ,88] UADP ~[ 15,17] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL ¢[ 431.3.511 -CERTIFIED- 1288881 RES477 ,32/0511998 02:44 PM R~! Pg F~ UT UL FCIC2] OC[TR] IO[49488288883][238782488883[ FOLIO STRAP 093?88 ORB/P[ 15371/11231] SALE DATE [181I06981 $ AHT [ !18880] ACRES [ .391 TRS->[50][251113] [49488288883] OWNER> UIA, LARRY E 85A13 4~82 OUTER DR NAPLES -1997 TAX ROLL- LEGAL-1 -2 -3 -4 HHSTD-X ~.8B,.-X CIU-X UEl-X BLD-X WID-X AG-X WH-X 12!03t! 997 09.29 AM HEIGHLAND UILLA LOT 8 + E 15FT OF LOT ? OR 1537 PG 1231 CURRENT-EX-AHT $ [ B] HILL-CODE $ [ o] [ 811 $ [ B] $ [ 81 HILL-RATE $ { 8l [15,2152] ¢ t 01 -1997- $ [ 81 $ [ 81 FL 34112 6784AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-97-UAL [ 811LND $[ 14278] I 19977] L-USE IHP 5[ 188881] [ 183648] HAT 5[ 114351] [ 123625] RSD+AGADJ $[ 114351] I 123625] TAXABLE $[ 114351] [ 123625] CNTY $[ 468.69] MSTU $[ 94.84] S-SL $[ 721.23] WMB 5[ 69.48] S-LB 5[ 328.191 ISD $[ 287.95] CITY 5[ ,88] UADP 51 6,61] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL $[ 1888.99] -CERTIFIED- DR 4182] RES47? LOCATION [NA OUTER Rpl Pg Fm UT UL FCIC2) OC[NR] ]DI49488320882]I238?B24888BI[ FOLIO STRAP 893788 95A13 3628 OUTER DR ORB/P[ 1908]/[ 457] SALE DATE [26][8194] $ AMT [ 145080] ACRES [ ,381 NAPLES TRS->[58][25][13] LEGAL-1 HE]GHLAN§ UILLA LOT 9 OR 1908 -2 PG 45? -3 -4 [49488320882] OWNER> KARBA INUESTHENT CORP CURRENT-EX-AMT HHSTD-X $ [ 188%-X $ [ cIu-x $ [ UET-X $ I 0 ] BLD-X $ [ o ] WID-X $ [ AG-X $ [ WH-X $ [ B) -1997 TAX ROLL- 2/03/i 9~c7 0.°:33 AM FL 34112 6788 AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-97-UAL [ BBi LND$J 2823B] J 28322] L-USE IHP $[ 84266) [ 87214I HKT $[ IB4496] [ 115536] ASD+AGAOd $[ 1B4496] [ 115536] TAXABLE St 18449G] I 1155361 HILL-CODE [ 81] CNTY $[ 438.54] HSTU S-SL $! 674.B41 WMB HILL-RATE S-LB $[ 299.24] ISD $[ [15,2152] CITY $[ ,88] UADP $[ -1997- (1997 TAXES) TOTAL $l -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NA OUTER DR 4482] 88.63! 64,931 194.34 ] 6.18! 1757,9B1 RES477 KAY 0 9 2C g3 Rpl Pg Fm UT UL FCIC2] OC[NR! ID[4948836888411238782480881[ FOLIO STRAP 093700 185R13 1655 MULLET CT ORB/P[ 1471]/! 814] SALE DATE [22][8989] $ AMT [ 98888] ACRES [ .37] NAPLES TRS->{SB][25][13] LEGAL-1 HEIGHLAND UILLR LOT 18 OR 1471 [49488368884] OWNER> SANDERS, W GARY=& CASSANDRA R -2 PD 814 -3 MILL-CODE I 811 HILL-RATE [15.21521 -1997- -1997 Tflx ROLL- FL 34182 1526 RRER CW CERT-96-URL CERT-97-URL [ 81] LNO$[ 14848] [ 287761 L-USE IMP $[ 639511 [ 66388] HKT $[ 787911 [ 87876] ASD+AGRDd $[ 78791] [ TAXABLE $[ 78791] [ 878761 CNTY 5[ 324,49] HSTU $[ 66.881 S-SL $! 5B8,BB] WHB $[ 48,94] S-LB 5[ 225.53] ISO ~[ 146.471 CITY $[ .80] UADP $[ 4,GG] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL $[ 1324.89] -CERTIFIED- DR 4418] RES4?7 CURRENT-EX-RHT HMSTD-X $ [ B] 1BBX-X $ [ CIU-X S [ UET-X ~ [ BLD-X $ I B] ~ID-X $ [ o] RG-X $ [ 8] WH-X ~ [ B] LOCATION [NA OUTER ' 2/~,3/i 997 '~c ':~ Ak4 Rp! P~ Fm UT UL FCIC2! OCITR! IDI494BB488883][B683B72BBBBIl FOLIO [49488488883] OWNER> LEFEURE, JOHN A STRAP 893?88 115A13 4115 DALE RUE ORB/P[ 2B05]/[2256] SALE DATE [291[1194] $ AHT [ 94400] ACRES [ ,32] NAPLES TRS->[50][25][13] LEGAL-1 -2 -3 -4 HMSTD-X CIU-X UET-X BLD-X WID-X AG-X WH-X HEIGHLAND UILLA LOT 11 OR 2BB5 PG 2256 HILL-CODE [ 81] HILL-RATE [15.2152] -1997- LOCATION [NA DALE -1997 TAX ROLL- 12/03/1997 10:11 AM FL 34112 6735 AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-97-UAL [ BB] LND~[ 18143] [ 25481] L-USE IMP $[ 58578] [ 68774] HAT ~[ 76721] [ 86175] ASD+AGADJ $[ 767211 [ 861751 TAXABLE ~[ 767211 [ 861751 CNTY 5[ 321.141 HSTU 5[ 66,1B! S-SL 5[ 5B2.74! ~MB 5[ 48,431 S-LB ~I 223.191 ISD 5[ 144,95] CITY 5[ .BB] VADP ~! 4,61] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL 5{ 1311.16] -CERTIFIED- AVE 41151 RES4?? ',! Rpl Pg Fm UT UL 8__ ~: FCIC2) OC[NR1 ID[494884408851123870248888][ FOLIO [494884488851 OWNER> STRESEN-REUTER, TIHOTHY JOHN ' STRAP 893788 !25A13 1414 ADAHS ST ORB/P[ 15331/[1655] SALE DATE [ 51[06981 $ AHT [ 51BOOT ACRES i ,171 HOLLYDOOD TRS->I50112511131 LEGAL-1 HEIGHLAND VILLA LOT 12 OR 1533 -2 PG 1655 -3 -4 CURRENT-EX-AHT HHSTD-X $ [ 0 ] 1BBX-X $ [ 0 ] CIU-X S t o] UET-X s [ o ] BLD-X s [ B ] UID-X s i o1 AG-X s [ B ] HILL-CODE [ 81] HILL-RATE I15,2152] -1997- -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 33820 6133 AREA CW CERT-96-VAL CERT-9?-UAL [ BB! LND$[ 97651 [ 195381 L-USE IMP $[ 364841 'I 37751] H~T 5[ 462491 [ 572811 ASD+AGADJ $l 46249] [ 572811 TAXABLE $[ 46249] I 57281] CNTY $[ 213,46] HSTU $l 43,94! S-SL $l 334.181 gHB $[ 32.19] S-LB $[ 148.36] ISD ~l 96,351 CITY ~[ .801 UADP $[ 3.861 LOCATION [NA DALE (1997 TAXES3 TOTAL $[ 871.541 -CERTIFIED- AVE 41111 RES47? ,,2/g3/lg97 09:.51 AM Rpl P;l Fn UT UL FC[',~2] OC[NR] ID[q948848888?][23878248BB8][ FOLIO [49488488887] OWNER> CIUIL, ESPERANDIEU STRAP 093?88 135A13 ORB/P[ 2321]/[ 839] SALE DATE $ AHT [ 87888] ACRES I .17] NAPLES TRS->i501125][13] LEGAL-1 HEI6HLAND UILLA LOT 13 -2 -3 -4 CURRENT-EX-AHT HHSTD-X $ [ 25888 180',:- X $ [ 8 CIU-X $ [ 81 UET-X $ [ 8 BLD-X $ [ 8 WID-X $ [ 8] AG-X $ [ 8 WH-X $ [ 0] 12/03/1997 0.o:31 AM ST FLEUR, HULCAR 4189 DALE AUE HILL-CODE [ B1] HILL-RATE [15.2152] -1997- -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 34112 6735AREA CW CERT-96-URL CERT-97-UAL [ 811LND $[ 9765] [ 19530] L-USE IHP 5[ 48623] [ 42811] HKT 5[ 50388] [ 61541] ASD+AGABJ $[ 58388] [ 51988] TAXABLE 5[ 25388] [ 26980] CNTY $[ 188.25] HSTU $i 28.64] S-SL 5[ 156,93] WHB $[ 15,12] S-LB $[ 69,671 ISD $[ 45,25] CITY 5[ .88l UADP $[ 1.44] LOCATION [NA DALE (1997 TAXES) TOTAL 5[ 489.38] -CERTIFIED- AVE 4189] RES477 Rpl Pg Fm UT UL FCi.mu2] OCINR] ID[494BBS20BD6][B6B3B72BBOBI[ FOLIO I494BBS2BBB6] OONER> TEARONES, JOHN S--& SUSAN L STRAP B9370B 145A13 41B7 DALE AUE ORB/P] 14351/]19491 SALE DATE [26][04891 $ AHT [ 51BOB] ACRES [ .17] NAPLES FL TRS->[SB][25]I13] LEGAL-1 HEIGHLRND UILLR LOT 14 OR 1435 -2 PG 1949 -3 -4 CURRENT-EX-AHT HHSTD-X $ IBO~.-X CIU-X :UET-X BLD-X WID-X : AG-X :~ WH-X i~031!g97 10:11 HILL-CODE [ 81] HILL-RATE [15.2152] -1997- -1997 TAX ROLL- 34112 6?35 AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-9?-URL [ B1] LND $[ 97651 ] 195301 L-USE IHP $[ 22297] I 233741 HAT 5i 32062] [ 42984] ASD+AGADJ 5[ 32862] [ 33824] TAXABLE 5[ 7B621 [ BB24] CNTY $l 29.901 HSIU $l 6.15] S-SL 5[ 46.81] WHO $I 4.511 S-LB 5[ 28.781 ISg $[ 13.581 CITV 5[ .DO] URDP $[ ,431 (1997 TAXES) TOTAL -CERTIFIED- RUE 41B?l LOCATION [NR DALE 122.08] RES477 MAY 0 9 2000 Rpl ?g Fm UT UL FC[~2] OCITR] ID[537582408821123878248088]! FOLIO STRAP 182288 C ORB/P[ 2182]/[1811] SALE BATE [14]18596] $ AHT [ 1380888] ACRES I 2.39] TRS->158][25][13] LEGAL-1 -2 -3 -4 I53758248802] ODNER> LAKEWOOD PLAZA CORP 15A13 CHI 1258 TAHIAHI TRL N STE 381 NAPLES LAKEWOOD UNIT i THAT PORTION BLK C DESC AS: COH HOST ULY CNR 8LK C, N 58DEG E 1GSFT TO POB, CONT N 58DEG E 142,87FT, CURRENT-EX-AHT HHSTD-X $ [ !88X-X $ [ CIU-X $ l UET-X $ [ BLD-X $ f WID-X $ [ AG-X $ [ WH-X $ [ ~2/03/1997 09:40 AM B] HILL-CODE [ liB] 8] 8] HILL-RATE 8] [15,3868] 8] -1997- 8] 0] -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 34182 526? AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-97-UAL [ 16] LND$[ 625314] [ 625314] L-USE IHP $[ 688822] I 672822] HKT $[ 1386146] [ 1298136] ASD+AGADJ $[ 1386146] [ 1298136] TAXABLE $[ 1306146] [ 1298136] CNTY $[ 4837.511 HSTU $[ 1217,52] S-SL $[ 7573.33] WHB $[ 729,55] S-LB ~[ 3362.17] ISD $[ 2183.59l CITY ¢[ .BOl UADP $[ 69.45] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NA TAMIAMI TRL E 4289l 19973.12] RES4?? Rpl Po F. UT UL FC[ij.,2) OCITR] ]D1537583288831123878246088][ FOLIO STRAP 102288 C ORB/P[ 173311[ 1631 SALE DATE [ 6118792] $ AHT l ACRES [ ,57l TAMPA TRS->[50][25][13] LEGAL-1 LAKEWOOD UNIT i BLK C, BEG -2 HOST ULY CNR UNDIU BLK C, NSB -3 DEG E RLG SLY R/W LI- -4 LAKEWOOD BLUD 16SFT, S39 DEG CURRENT-EX-AMT [53758328883] OWNER> NCNB NATL BK OF FLORIDA 35A13 RKA NATIONS BANK ;~EASLEY HC CALEB STALLINGS LTD PO BOX 173858 HHSTO-X $ [ 8] HILL-CODE 1BB%-X $ [ B] [ 118] CIU-X $ [ 8] UET-X $ [ 0] HILL-RATE BLD-X $ [ 8) [15.38601 WID-X $ [ 8) -1997- AG-X $ [ 8 ] UH-X $ [ 81 -1997 TAX ROLL- FL 33672 1858 AREA CW CERT-9G-UAL CERT-97-UAL [ 231LND $[ 198888] [ 198888] L-USE IHP $[ 1792181 [ 177182] HKT ¢[ 377218] [ 375182] RSD+AGADJ $[ 377218] [ 375182] TAXABLE $I 377218] [ 375182] CNTY $[ 1397.811 MSTU $[ 351.81] S-SL $[ 2188.35] WMB $[ 218.81] S-LB Sl 971.51] ISD $[ 638.961 CITY $[ .881 UADP $[ 28.87] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL $[ -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NR TAMIAMI TRL E 42811 5771.32] RES477 997 09:39 AM NiA'; 0 9 27J3;J Rp! Pq Fm UT UL FCIC2] OC[TR] ID[86394248686)[8839424888811 FOLIO STRAP 582513 844.8885A13 ORB/P[ Z654l/[1333] SALE DATE [16111891] $ AMT I 12B88~01 ACRES [ .92] TRS->[581125][13] [88394248808] BNNER> HESS REALTY CORP X AMERADA HESS CORP ATTN: TAX DEPT 89363 I HESS PLZ UOODBRIDGE LEGAL-1 13 58 25 COMM SE CNR SEC 13, -2 N1DEG U149.?2FT, N39 DEG -3 U2868.45FT, POB N 39 OEG -4 W2BBFT, N58DEG E288FT S39OEG CURRENT-EX-AHT HMSTO-X $ [ 81 HILL-CODE 100X-X $ [ 81 [ 1181 CIU-X $ I 81 UET-X ~ ! 8] HILL-RATE BLD-X $ [ 81 [15.38G8] WID-X $ [ 81 -1997- AG-X $ ! UH-X ~ [ 8i -1997 Tflx ROLL- 87895 1229 AREA CW CERT-96-UAL CERT-gT-UAL [ 11] LND 8i 288888] [ 288888] L-USE IHP 8! 169886] [' ~67948] HKT ~[ 457886] I 455948] ASD+AGADJ 8[ 45788Gi [ 455948l TAXABLE 8[ 45788G] [ 455948] CXTY 8[ 1699.86] HSTU 8[ 427.62l S-SL $[ 2659.95] WHB 81 256.24] S-LB 81 1188.881 ISD 8[ 766.94] CITY $[ .88] UADP 8[ 24.39] (1997 TAXES) TOTAL -CERTIFIED- LOCATION [NA TAMlAX] TRL E 4161] 7815.88i RES477 02/05/1998 03:03 PM " " : ,: 4 ,/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION V-2000-03, MILES L. SCOFIELD, REPRESENTING GEORGE C. KELLOGG, REQUESTING A 5-FOOT VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED ?.5-FOOT WEST SIDE YARD SETBACK TO 2.5 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 242 BAREFOOT BEACH, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS LOT 10, BAYFRONT GARDENS, IN SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. OBJECTIVE: The petitioner requests a variance of 5 feet from the required 7.5 foot west side yard setback to 2.5 feet to allow the construction of a boat dock and boat lift on the subject property. CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property is located at Bayfront Gardens. 242 Barefoot Beach, legally described as Lot 10, The petitioner wishes to construct a boat dock and boat lift on the subject property. In order to do so, a 20-foot boat dock extension would be necessary in addition to this variance. The extension, petition BD 2000-02 was applied for and approved by unanimous vote of the Collier County Planning Commision on 20 April 2000. The proposed variance would have no adverse impact on the neighboring properties or use of the waterway, and construction of a viable dock would not be possible without the approval of both the extension and the variance. No objections to this project have been received. The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition on February 20, 1997, and unanimously recommended approval. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this petition would have no fiscal impact on the County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The proposed variance is consistent with applicable provisions of the Growth Management Plan. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: None. No Historic/Archaeological Survey and Assessment or waiver is required. PLANNING SERVICES STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this variance. There would be no adverse impact on the community, and construction of a viable dock on the property would not be )ossible without approval of the variance. - A~'T~-~ MAY 0 § ?.00 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission forwarded Petition V-2000-03 to the Board of Zoning Appeals with a recommendation of approval. PREPARED BY: CHENAUR, PLANNER II CURRENT PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: RONALD F. NllqO, AICP, MANAGER CURRENT PLANNING SECTION ~ATE / DATE ///E~ ---~-- ROB r J. MULHERE, AICP, DIRECTOR PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP, ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE executive summaryN-2000-03 0 9 2000 p~.~" _ AGENDA ITEM 7-C MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE: 2 March 2000 RE: PETITION V-2000-03 AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: Miles L. Scofield Scofield Madne Consulting 3584-B Exchange Avenue Naples, FL 34104 Owner: George C. Kellogg 242 Barefoot Beach Blvd. Bonita Springs, FL 34134 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests a variance of 5 feet from the required 7.5-foot west side setback for docking facilities on property having less than 60 feet of waterfrontage in order to construct a dock and boat lift protruding a total of 40 feet into the waterway. To accommodate the lift, the structure would have to encroach into the west side setback. This variance is a companion petition to Boat Dock Extension BD 2000-02 and approval of the extension without approval of this vadance would not allow construction of a viable dock. ~JUU Upper: View fxom center of subject lot looking north along waterway Lower: View fi'om north property line looking southeast across waterway GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located at 242 Barefoot Beach Boulevard in Lely Barefoot Beach, legally described as Lot 10, Bayfront Gardens. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner wishes to construct a boat dock with boat lift protruding a total of 40 feet into the waterway. In order to accommodate the lift (or a typical vessel), the facility would have to encroach 5 feet into the required 7.5-foot west side setback due to the narrow waterfrontage and configuration of the shoreline. The boat dock extension has been requested in companion petition BD 2000-02, and approval of both that extension and this variance would be required in order to construct the facility. Staff has recommended approval of the extension. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing: Surrounding: North - South - East - West - Single-family residence, zoned PUD Single-family residence, zoned PUD Bayfront Ddve roadway Little Hickory Bay Barefoot Beach Boulevard roadway HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Not applicable: docking facilities are not included in areas of historic/archaeological probability. EVALUATION FOR IMPACTS TO TRANSPORTATION, INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT: Approval of this variance request will have no effect on infrastructure, transportation or the environment. 2 2000 ANALYSIS: Section 2.7.5 of the Land Development Code grants the authority to the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. The Planning Commission is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Subsection 4(a) through (h) which are general guidelines to be used to assist the Commission in making a determination. Responses to items (a) through (h) of Subsection 11.1 4) are as follows: Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved? The property has a relatively small amount of waterfrontage (53 feet) and is located at the dead end of a waterway. The water is also too shallow at the site to allow construction of a viable dock without the requested vadance and extension. Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request? The conditions existing on the property do not result from any action of the applicant. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Land Development Code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant? No. The ability to construct a dock and boat lift is not necessarily guaranteed to the purchaser of waterfront property; however, such accessory uses are typically associated with waterfront property, and most property owners reasonably expect to be able to exercise the option to construct a viable docking facility. dm Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety and welfare? Yes. The variance requested is the minimum needed to construct a viable docking facility. 3 Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes. Other waterfront property owners are obliged to construct docks within the limits allowed by the LDC, or apply for extensions as provided by the LDC. f= Will granting the variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? Yes. Approval of this variance would not affect the view from either abutting property, or impede the use of the existing dock on adjacent Lot 11, or impede use of a conventional dock if constructed on adjacent Lot 9. g= Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.? Yes. Mangrove growth along the shoreline already obstructs the waterfront view at ground level, to the point where the visual impact of this variance, and the companion extension, would be virtually nil. Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan. Approval of this plan will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: In a strict sense, there is no land-related hardship: the property owner should have been aware that the narrow width and configuration of the waterfrontage would pose problems for the construction of a dock. Still, the property owner could reasonably expect to be able to construct a viable docking facility similar to others in the neighborhood. Many similar extensions have been approved on this waterway. The main difference between those facilities and this facility is the requested side setback encroachment. In conjunction with the extension, for which staff recommends approval, the encroachment requested is minimal, and would have no adverse impact on the neighboring properties or the environment. The waterfront situation is unusual, if not unique, and approval would not set an unwanted precedent. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of V 2000-03. PREPARED BY: ROSS G~C~IENAUR, PLANNER II CURRENT PLANNING REVlE ED BY:~ , ROI~I~,LD f.'~,/~,1~!~, CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER D.~'TE · DATE PLANNING SERVICES DIRECTOR VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP, ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DATE DATE Petition Number: V 2000-03 Staff report for the 20 April 2000 CCPC meeting. This Petition has tentatively been scheduled for the 9 May 2000 BZA Public Hearing. Collier County Planning Commission: RUSSEL A. BUDD , CHAIRMAN 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 RESOLUTION NO. 2000- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER V-2000- 03, FOR A VARIANCE 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 enfome 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 No. 91-I 02) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County,, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of 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 5-foot variance from the required west side setback of 7.5 feet to 2.5 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", 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 concermng all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 2.7.5 of the Zomng Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given oppommity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS of Collier County, Florida. that: The Petition V-2000-03 filed by Miles L. Scofield, of Scofield Marine Consulting representing Mr. George C. Kellogg, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 10, Bayfront Gardens, in Section 6, Township 48 South, Range 25 East as described in Plat Book 14, Pages 114-I 17, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. be and the same hereby is approved for a 5-foot variance from the required west side setback of 7.5 feet to 2.5 feet as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", of the "PUD" Zoning District wherein said property is located. BE IT RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number V-2000-03 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. ~.. ~. ~-,~~__ ~[ This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. . -1- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Done this day of ,2000· ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: MARNI M. SCUDERI ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY G:/V-2000-03 RESOLUTION/RG/ts BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TIMOTHY J. CONSTANTINE, CHAIRMAN -2-