The URL can be used to link to this page

CCPC Backup 07/19/2012 R & LDCccpc MEETING i ' o DOCUMENTS JULY .199 2012 AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., THURSDAY, JULY 19, 2012, IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, THIRD FLOOR, 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA: NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY 3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 7, 2012, June 19, 2012 CCPC /LDC, June 21, 2012 6. BCC REPORT - RECAPS 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. BDE- PL20110002669: Toler Boat Dock Extension - A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL20 1 1 0002669 for a 53 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 73 feet for the benefit of property located in Lely Barefoot Beach PUD in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Senior Planner] B. VA- PL20110002627: Donald Gray Variance- A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to Petition Number VA- PL2011 -2627, for a variance from Land Development Code Sections 4.02.03 and 5.03.06.E.5 to permit a reduced side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet on property located on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] C. BDE- PL20110000940: Donald Gray Boat Dock Extension- A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL2011 -940 for a 30.3 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06.E of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 50.3 feet to replace an existing dock with a finger dock and two boat lifts on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] 10. OLD BUSINESS A. LDC Amendments 2012 Cycle 1 [Coordinator: Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner] 11. NEW BUSINESS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA 14. ADJOURN CCPC Agenda/Ray Bellows /jmp N 7-19-12 BDE— PL20110002669 LELY BAREFOOT Ann P. Jennejohn BEACH PUD From: ReischlFred <FredReischI @colliergov.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 3:54 PM To: Minutes and Records Cc: Bellows, Ray; Bosi, Michael; Patricia L. Morgan; Neet, Virginia; Rodriguez, Wanda; Kendall, Marcia Subject: Ad Request BDE- PL20110002669 Attachments: Ad Request - RTF.rtf, Map NDN (2x3).pdf Please process the attached and acknowledge receipt at your earliest convenience. Also please send confirmation for approval prior to processing. Thanks - Fred Fred Reischl, AICP Senior Planner Collier County Growth Management Division Phone: 239 - 252 -4211 Fax: 239 - 252 -2834 kl€„ e, r or4Ja laov, r r laH add. esses a e a }tVic €ecor_ s, if you do not Asa:', YoU e -r w ., ad%dmss fewe �;ed imn to a public re'gUe st, dko :lot send c:tr0n r; m a 0 to Vl .s entity. '}sf rad, oom a c 1, tbis o'h'ce by talc pt w,, €,e car in ,vr it ii rg. June 20, 2012 Collier County Planning Commission Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on June 29, 2012, and furnish proof of publication to the attention of Fred Reischl, Senior Planner in the Planning & Zoning Department, Zoning Services Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. The advertisement must be two columns wide x 10 inches long in standard size, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: Planning & Zoning Zoning Review Section FUND & COST CENTER: 131 - 138326- 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500131207 Account Number: 068779 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners meeting room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples FL., to consider: A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL20110002669 for a 53 foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 foot limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 73 feet for the benefit of property located in Lely Barefoot Beach PUD in Collier County, Florida [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Senior Planner] (insert map) All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman LEE COUNTY BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R. 865) PROJECT LELY BAREFOOT BEACH LO C AT I 0 N CONDO LITTLE HICKORY BAY LELY 6 BONITA SHORES D BAREFOOT 5 c BEACH D � AUDUBON `J COUNTRY r+ CLUB 0 S ERLING AUDUBON OAKS COUNTRY NAPOLI o CLUB VILLAGE BAY 8 FOREST 9 TWO THE LAKES WATERGLADES RETREAT PLAZA GLEN EDEN ON THE BAY ARBOR TRACE VILLAGE PLACE Acct #068779 June 20, 2012 Attn: Legals Naples News Media 1100 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 Re: BDE- PL20110002669, Lely Barefoot Beach PUD (Display Ad w/Map) Dear Legals: Please advertise the above referenced notice (w/Map) on Friday, June 29, 2012 and send the Affidavit of Publication, in Duplicate, to this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Ann Jennej ohn, Deputy Clerk P.O. #4500131207 June 20, 2012 Collier County Planning Commission Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on June 29, 2012, and furnish proof of publication in Duplicate, to the Board Minutes and Records Department, 3299 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, FL 34112. The advertisement must be two columns wide x 10 inches long in standard size, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: Planning and Zoning Zoning Review Section PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500131207 Account Number: 068779 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL, to consider: A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BDE- PL20110002669 for a 53 foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 foot limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 73 feet for the benefit of property located in Lely Barefoot Beach PUD in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Senior Planner] (insert map) All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman LEE COUNTY BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R. 865) PROJECT LELY BAREFOOT BEACH LO C AT I 0 N CONDO LITTLE HICKORY BAY LELY 6 BONITA SHORES BAREFOOT 5 c BEACH _ -P AUDUBON COUNTRY r CLUB 0 S ERLING tzl AUDUBON OAKS COUNTRY NAPOLI o CLUB VILLAGE BAY 8 FOREST 9 TWO THE LAKES WATERGLADES RETREAT PLAZA GLEN EDEN ON THE BAY ARBOR TRACE VILLAGE PLACE Ann P. Jennejohn To: legals @naplesnews.com Subject: BDE- PL20110002669 Attachments: BDE- PL20110002669.doc; BDE- PL20110002669.doc; BDE- PL20110002669.pdf Hi again, Please advertise the attached Display Notice w /Map on Friday, June 29, 2012. Thank you @ Ann Jenne john, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239 - 252 -8406 239 - 252 -8408 (Fax) Ann P. Jennejohn From: Green, Amy <AGreen @Naplesnews.com> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 8:57 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: BDE- PL20110002669 IR Amv Green L,e�:al advertisements Naples Daily News Maid Office: 239 -263 -4710 Direct Fax: 239 -325 -1251 Email: leaals@naplesnews.com www.ngplesnews.com From: Ann P. Jennejohn fmailto: Ann .3ennejohn(acollierclerk.com1 Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 5:03 PM To: Legals NDN Subject: BDE- PL20110002669 Hi again, Please advertise the attached Display Notice w /Map on Friday, June 29, 2012. Thank you O Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239 - 252 -8406 239 - 252 -8408 (Fax) Please visit us on the web at www.colliercierk.com This electronic communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Clerk's Office by emailing helpdesk@collierclerk.com quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. The Collier County Clerk's Office accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the CollierClerk.com domain. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Ann P. Jennejohn From: Green, Amy <AGreen @Naplesnews.com> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:39 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: proof Attachments: N DN240192910[1].PDF Ann, Please provide approval ASAP for publication. The total for your ad is $912, to print on June 29th. Thank You, Naples News Legals (239) 263 -4710 PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Com- missioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL, to consider: A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BDE- PL20110002669 for a 53 foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 foot limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 73 feet for the benefit of prop- erty located in Lely Barefoot Beach PUD in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Senior Planner] LEE COUNTY LELY BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R. W5) PROJECT BAREFOOT LO C AT I 0 N BEACH LITRE CONGO HiCRORY BAY BWITA IELY 6 SHORES ~ _ BAREFOOT 5 3 BEACH AUDUBON p C COUNTRY CLUB S LING m � AUDUBON OAKS COUNTRY NAPOLI o CLUB PILLAGE BAY 6 FOREST 9 TAD HE LAKES WATERGLADES RETREAT PLAZA GLEN EDEN ON HE BPY ARBOR TRACE VILLAGE PLACE All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Per- sons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials includ- ed in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hear- ing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hear- ing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accom- modation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assis- tance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Manage- ment Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman No. 240192910 June 29. 2012 Ann P. Jennejohn From: RodriguezWanda <WandaRodriguez @colliergov.net> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:52 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Cc: Reischl, Fred Subject: RE: proof This ad looks fine. 111andfa Rod' ig'uez, -ACP 1c:�irancc?t }Cer t fiecf l'czrc�tt'gal, �7ho ie?: i239) 2 2-8400 fa.X: (239) 252-63oo New address as of November 1. 2010: Collier County Office of the County Attorney, 3299 Tamiami Tr. E., Suite 800, Naples, FL 34112 -5749 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Ann P. Jennejohn fmailto:Ann.Jenne-iohn @ collierclerk.com Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:49 AM To: ReischlFred Cc: RodriguezWanda; NeetVirginia Subject: FW: proof Attached is the proof for Petition BDE- PL201100002669 (Lely Barefoot Beach PUD) for the July 19 CCPC, that is running in the paper tomorrow. (I just received it 5 minutes ago) Please review a.s.a.p. and send me your approval (only if it looks alright of course) Thank you (and thanks for your patience Fred) Ann - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Green, Amy fmailto:AGreen @Naplesnews.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:39 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: proof Ann, Please provide approval ASAP for publication. The total for your ad is $912, to print on June 29th. Thank You, Naples News Legals (239) 263 -4710 Please visit us on the web at www.collierclerk.com This electronic communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for 1 Ann P. Jennejohn From: ReischlFred <FredReischl @colliergov.net> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:45 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Cc: Rodriguez, Wanda; Neet, Virginia Subject: RE: proof Looks good, thanks! - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Ann P. Jennejohn [ mai Ito: Ann.Jennejohn @coIIierclerk.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:49 AM To: ReischlFred Cc: RodriguezWanda; NeetVirginia Subject: FW: proof Attached is the proof for Petition BDE- PL201100002669 (Lely Barefoot Beach PUD) for the July 19 CCPC, that is running in the paper tomorrow. (I just received it 5 minutes ago) Please review a.s.a.p. and send me your approval (only if it looks alright of course) Thank you (and thanks for your patience Fred) Ann - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Green, Amy Imai Ito: AGreen @ Nap lesnews.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:39 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: proof Ann, Please provide approval ASAP for publication. The total for your ad is $912, to print on June 29th. Thank You, Naples News Legals (239) 263 -4710 Please visit us on the web at www.collierclerk.com This electronic communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Barbara Boyer, who on oath says that she serves as the Sales Coordinator of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on June 29th, 2012 Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of t year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant firrther says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for pub!jp4ion in the said n5vt9aper. Signature of affiant L Sworn to and subscribed before me This 2nd day of July, 2012 CRYSTAL G. JONES MY COMMISSION # DD 881614 EXPIRES: June 27, 2013 Bonded Thru Notary Public Underwriters PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Com- missioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL, to consider: A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BDE- PL20110002669 for a 53 foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 foot limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code fora total protrusion of 73 feet for the benefit of prop- erty located in Lely Barefoot Beach PUD in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Senior Planner] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Per- sons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials includ- ed in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hear- ing., Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hear- ing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accom- modation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assis- tance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Manage- ment Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman No. 240192910 June 29. 2012 PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE N A P L E S DA I LY N E WS a Friday, June 29, 2012 (( 15A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Com- missioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL, to consider: A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BDE- PL20110002669 for a 53 foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 foot limit in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 73 feet for the benefit of prop- erty located in Lely Barefoot Beach PUD in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: Fred Reischl, AICP, Senior Planner] LEE COUNTY BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R.B&R) PROJECT BEACHOOT LO C AT I O N LITTLE BEACH GDNDO HI -Y BAY BONITA y LELY B 5 SHORES 3 BAREFOOT y BEACH AUDUBON COUNTRY CLUB ERLINC OAKS C \, AUDUBON COUNTRY NAPOLL a CLUB ILLAG BAT B FOREST 9 Two HE LAKES WATEROLADES RETREAT PLAZA GLEN EOEN ON THE BAY ARFOR IN— —AGE PLACE All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Per- sons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials includ- ed in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hear- ing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hear- ing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. . If you are a person with a disability who needs any accom- modation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assis- tance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Manage- ment Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Com- missioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman No 240192910 June 29. 2012 CCPC 7 -19 -12 VA— PL2011 -2267 & BDE— PL2011000940 Ann P. Jennejohn T.nT A TtT.n('x (, T.TrPTT.P NT('VnT?V A From: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer @colliergov.net> *qCO Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2012 2:02 PM To: Minutes and Records Cc: Bellows, Ray; Lorenz, William; Bosi, Michael; MorganTrish; Neet, Virginia; Rodriguez, Wanda; Kendall, Marcia Subject: NDN Add Attachments: CCPC Naples Daily Ad for Variance and BDE.rtf, 2x3 Map from graphics.pdf Please process the attached and acknowledge receipt at your earliest convenience. Also please send confirmation for approval prior to processing. Mike Sawyer Project Manager, Zoning Services Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl 34104 Tel: (239)252 -2926 ,...:" o, ida Low, ev mai. addressor are t)ub:ic mE)ords. If you do not w ni voUr e; 'na.i add mss released in mss nsse to a pub to ecords request. do '- of ;yew! rr A to th.s eighty. nstead, contact this office by telephone o: In v oiling. 1 June 19, 2012 Collier County Planning Commission Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on June 29, 2011, and furnish proof of publication to the attention of Michael Sawyer, Project Manager, Zoning Services in the Land Development Services Department, Zoning Services Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. The advertisement must be two columns wide x 10 inches long in standard size, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Zoning Review Section FUND & COST CENTER: 131 - 138326- 649100 -00000 PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500131207 Account Number: 068779 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M., Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners meeting room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples FL., to consider: VA- PL20110002627: Donald Gray Variance- A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to Petition Number VA- PL2011 -2627, for a variance from Land Development Code Sections 4.02.03 and 5.03.06.E.5 to permit a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet on the west side of the subject property and a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 1.55 feet on the east side of the subject property located on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] And BDE- PL20110000940: Donald Gray Boat Dock Extension- A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL2011 -940 for a 30.3 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06.E of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 50.3 feet to replace an existing dock with a finger dock and two boat lifts on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] (insert map) All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman LEE COUNTY LELY �\�, BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R.865) BAREFOOT IN BEACH CONDO LELY 6 BAREFOOT BEACH 9 AUDUBON COUNTRY CLUB BONITA SHORES ll� n O a') J � Fn U w � Q BAY 8 FOREST WATERGLADES GLEN EDEN ON THE BAY PROJECT LOCATION AUDUBON COUNTRY CLUB THE RETREAT D � C OAK NAPOLI VILLAGE TWO - LAKES PLAZA Acct #068779 June 20, 2012 Attn: Legals Naples News Media 1100 Immokalee Road Naples, FL 34110 Re: VA- PL20110002627 & BDE- PL20110000940 Little Hickory Shores (Display Ad w/Map) Dear Legals: Please advertise the above referenced notice (w/Map) on Friday, June 29, 2012 and send the Affidavit of Publication, in Duplicate, to this office. Thank you. Sincerely, Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk P.O. #4500131207 June 20, 2012 Collier County Planning Commission Public Hearing Advertising Requirements Please publish the following Advertisement and Map on June 29, 2012, and furnish proof of publication in Duplicate, to the Board Minutes and Records Department, 3299 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, FL 34112. The advertisement must be two columns wide x 10 inches long in standard size, and the headline in the advertisement must be in a type no smaller than 18 point. The advertisement must not be placed in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear. Please reference the following on ALL Invoices: DEPARTMENT: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Zoning Review Section PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: 4500131207 Account Number: 068779 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M. Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL., to consider: VA- PL20110002627: Donald Gray Variance- A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to Petition Number VA- PL2011 -2627, for a variance from Land Development Code Sections 4.02.03 and 5.03.06.E.5 to permit a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet on the west side of the subject property and a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 1.55 feet on the east side of the subject property located on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] And BDE- PL20110000940: Donald Gray Boat Dock Extension- A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL2011 -940 for a 30.3 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06.E of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 50.3 feet to replace an existing dock with a finger dock and two boat lifts on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] (insert map) All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been authorized to represent a group or organization should limit their presentation to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic material included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land Development Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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, at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman LEE COUNTY BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R. 865) P R 0 J E CT PROJECT LELY BAREFOOT BEACH HIC E LO C AT I 0 N CONDO Y LELY 6 BONITA SHORES > BAREFOOT 5 c BEACH AUDUBON COUNTRY CLUB m U w Q ERL N > OAK AUDUBON COUNTRY CLUB NAPOLI BAY VILLAGE 8 FOREST 9 TWO THE LAKES WATERGLADES RETREAT PLAZA GLEN EDEN ON THE BAY Ann P. Jennejohn From: Green, Amy <AGreen @Naplesnews.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 1:56 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: RE: VA- PL20112627 & BDE- PL2011940 KR Amv Green Legal Advertisements Naples Daily News Main Office: 239 - 263 -4710 Direct Fax: 239 -325 -1251 Email: le;;alsAnaplesnews.com www.naplesnews.com From: Ann P. Jennejohn [ mai Ito: Ann.Jennejohn @colIierclerk.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 1:43 PM To: Legals NDN Subject: VA- PL20112627 & BDE- PL2011940 Hi again, Please advertise the attached Display Notice w /Map on Friday, June 29, 2012. Thank you. Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk Clerk of the Circuit Court Clerk of the Value Adjustment Board Collier County Minutes & Records Dept. 239 - 252 -8406 239 - 252 -8408 (Fax) Please visit us on the web at www.colliercierk.com This electronic communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Clerk's Office by emailing helodesk@collierclerk.com quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. The Collier County Clerk's Office accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the CollierClerk.com domain. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M. Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL., to consider: VA- PL20110002627: Donald Gray Variance- A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to Petition Num- ber VA- PL2011 -2627, for a variance from Land Development Code Sections 4.02.03 and 5.03.06.E.5 to permit a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet on the west side of the subject property and a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 1.55 feet on the east side of the subject property located on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Town- ship 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] And BDE- PL20110000940: Donald Gray Boat Dock Extension- A Resolu- tion of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL2011 -940 for a 30.3 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06.E of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 50.3 feet to replace an existing dock with a finger dock and two boat lifts on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] LEE COUNTY LELY BONITA BEACH ROAD (C.R. 865) PROJECT BEACH DT LOCATION CONDO Y LELY 6 ONI TA BAREFOOT 5 SNORES BEACH AUDUBON 8, TRY a C UN CLUB Q RLN OAK AUDU= BON UN O CLUB NAp OLI BAY LLAG g FOREST 9 iw0 THE A- WATERCLADES RETREAT PLAZA N D N HE BAY All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been autho- rized to represent a group or organization should limit their presenta- tion to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic mate- rial included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land De- velopment Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier Coun- ty Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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 Col- lier County Facilities Management Department, at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman No. 240192911 June 29. 2012 Ann P. Jennejohn From: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer @colliergov.net> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:18 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Cc: Neet, Virginia; Rodriguez, Wanda Subject: RE: proof Ad is correct /OK. Thanks, Mike Sawyer Project Manager, Zoning Services Land Development Services Department Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Fl 34104 Tel: (239)252 -2926 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Ann P. Jennejohn [ mai Ito: Ann.Jennejohn @collierclerk.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:06 AM To: SawyerMichael Cc: NeetVirginia; RodriguezWanda Subject: FW: proof Attached is the proof (I just received) for Petition VA- PL20110002627 /BDE- PL201100000940; Lot 6, Block G, Little Hickory Shores for the July 19 CCPC Meeting, that will run in NDN tomorrow. Please review and send me an "O.K." a.s.a.p. Thank you (and thanks for your patience Mike) Ann - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Green, Amy Imai Ito; AGreen @Naplesnews.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:57 AM To: Ann P. Jenne john Subject: proof Ann, Ann P. Jennejohn From: RodriguezWanda <Wanda Rod riguez @colIiergov.net> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:50 PM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Cc: Sawyer, Michael Subject: RE: proof '1,Vcvnafa Tkocirrguez, -ACP .AdVanc:ed- Cei,t0ecCParczCegaC T)hone: (2_q) 2,52-8400 fax: (239) 2$2 -63oo New address as of November 1, 2010: Collier County Office of the County Attorney, 3299 Tamiami Tr. E., Suite 800, Naples, FL 34112 -5749 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Ann P. Jennejohn rmailto: Ann.Jennelohn @collierclerk.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:06 AM To: SawyerMichael Cc: NeetVirginia; RodriguezWanda Subject: FW: proof Attached is the proof (I just received) for Petition VA- PL20110002627 /BDE- PL201100000940; Lot 6, Block G, Little Hickory Shores for the July 19 CCPC Meeting, that will run in NDN tomorrow. Please review and send me an "O.K." a.s.a.p. Thank you (and thanks for your patience Mike) Ann - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Green, Amy jmailto:AGreen(@Naplesnews.coml Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:57 AM To: Ann P. Jennejohn Subject: proof Ann, Please provide approval ASAP for publication. The total for this ad is $912, and it runs on June 29th. Thank You, Naples News Legals Please visit us on the web at www.collierclerk.com NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Barbara Boyer, who on oath says that she serves as the Sales Coordinator of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on June 29th, 2012 Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, fine or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publiq%jon in the said newspapq. ( Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This 2nd day of July, 2012 A (Signatu e of notary publ' CRYSTALGAONES *. MY COMMISSION # DD 881614 H: :a EXPIRES: June 27 2013 of Fyn' Bonded Thru Notery Public Underwriters PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M. Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL., to consider: VA- PL20110002627: Donald Gray Variance- A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to Petition Num- ber VA- PL2011 -2627, for a variance from Land Development Code Sections 4.02.03 and 5.03.06.E.5 to permit a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet on the west side of the subject property and a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 1.55 feet on the east side of the subject property located on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Town- ship 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] And BDE- PL20110000940: Donald Gray Boat Dock Extension- A Resolu- tion of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD-PL201 1 -940 for a 30.3 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06.E of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 50.3 feet to replace an existing dock with a finger dock and two boat lifts on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] _ LEE COUNTY LELV oHirw BencH Ro (C.R. PROJECT acncND`T LO C AT I O N CONDO L '6 L'Ly 6 BO11TA BAREEDOT 5 SHORES BEACH M ^ a p y CLUB yAL A.DUBON y CLUB BA, A B FOREST O B rnE LADES ` LADES RLAIA OR TER HE BAY All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been autho- rized to represent a group or organization should limit their presenta- tion to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic mate- rial included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land De- velopment Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier Coun- ty Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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 Col- lier County Facilities Management Department, at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman No. 240192911 June 29, 2012 NAPLES DAILY NEWS (( Friday, June 29,2012 (( 15A PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M. Thursday, July 19, 2012 in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL., to consider: VA- PL20110002627: Donald Gray Variance- A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, relating to Petition Num- ber VA- PL2011 -2627, for a variance from Land Development Code Sections 4.02.03 and 5.03.06.E.5 to permit a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 0 feet on the west side of the subject property and a reduced riparian side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 1.55 feet on the east side of the subject property located on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores Subdivision in Section 5, Town- ship 48 South, Range 25 East in Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] And BDE- PL20110000940: Donald Gray Boat Dock Extension- A Resolu- tion of the Collier County Planning Commission relating to Petition Number BD- PL2011 -940 for a 30.3 -foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 -foot limit in Section 5.03.06.E of the Collier County Land Development Code for a total protrusion of 50.3 feet to replace an existing dock with a finger dock and two boat lifts on Lot 6, Block G of the Little Hickory Shores subdivision in Section 5, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator Michael Sawyer, Project Manager] LEE COUNTY 50- CH aono (0.R. Bes)) PROJECT BAREFOOT LOCATION ADH DO 8 'BAFEFDDT 5 3EACI BD" 9 D �L y \ a DAR" CLUB Y A1D G 6 FOPEBT L 9 Two HE ATERGLADES RETREAT A GL N EDEN All interested parties are invited to appearAand be heard. Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Expert witnesses shall be limited to 10 minutes each. Persons who have been autho- rized to represent a group or organization should limit their presenta- tion to ten minutes. Persons wishing to have written or graphic mate- rial included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. Written comments must be filed with the Department of Zoning and Land De- velopment Review prior to Thursday, July 19, 2012, in order to be considered at the public hearing. All materials used in presentation before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners, if applicable. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier Coun- ty Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If 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 Col- lier County Facilities Management Department, at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. Collier County Planning Commission Collier County, Florida Mark Strain, Chairman No 240192911 June 29. 2012 AGENDA ITEM 10 -A cofFir C014ftty Growth Management Division Planning & Regulation Land Development Services To: Planning Commission Members From: Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner, Land Development Services Date: July 11, 2012 Subject: LDC Amendment review on July 19, 2012 The following documents are enclosed in your LDC Amendment packet. 1) LDC Amendment sub - agenda 2) Revised amendments. Revisions are highlighted in yellow. a. 5.03.07 Portable Storage Container i. Please see supporting Memo and supplemental materials b. 5.03.06 Dock Facilities i. For ease of reading a clean version of the proposed text is provided prior to the strikethrough underline draft. 3) Update on Board of County Commissioner's Meeting on July 24, 2012 a. 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Design LDC Amendment b. 6.02.01 Generally and 6.02.03 Transportation Level of Service GoA Wroprent Divan • Planning d Regulation - 2800 North Horseshoe Drive - Naples, Plonda 33164.234-252-2400 • www.00niergov net I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revision s \CCPC \CCPC 2012 -7 -19 \Memo for 071912 packet.docx 7/11 /2012 11:24 AM LDC AMENDMENT SUB - AGENDA FOR THURSDAY, JULY 19, 2012 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 1. LDC Amendment Review # Notes Subsection Description Date Author 1 Re- review 1.08.02 Definitions- Portable Storage 7/11/12 Ray from 4/13/12 Container (new definition) Bellows New Draft 5.03.07 Personal Storage Containers Provided. (allowable accessory structure) 10.02.03 Submittal Requirements for Site Develo ment Plans 2 Tabled from 5.03.06 Dock Facilities (new administrative 7/11/12 Ray 6/21/12. process) Bellows New Draft Provided. 2. Discussion a) 5.05.08Architectural and Site Design LDC Amendment b) 6.02.01 Generally and 6.02.03 Transportation Level of Service I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \CCPC\CCPC 2012- 7- 19 \CCPC Sub - Agenda July 19, 2012.docx7/11/2012 11:23 AM LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Board Directed Text underlined is new text to be added. Te.h StFiketh FGUgh as eurpent te.h to be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term AUTHOR: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager, Land Development Services DEPARTMENT: Land Development Services AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2012 Cycle 1 LDC SECTION(S): 1.08.02 Definitions — Portable Storage Container 5.03.07 Portable Storage Containers [new section] 10.02.03 Submittal Requirements for Site Development Plans CHANGE: Section 5.03.07 Portable Storage Containers is a proposed section to the Accessory Uses and Structures section of the LDC. The proposed amendment provides supplementary standards and regulations to allow for portable storage containers to be permitted as an accessory structure in the Rural Agricultural, Estate, Commercial, and Industrial zoning districts. The provision outlines setback and number requirements as well as limitations on use, size, and screening standards for the commercial and industrial zoning districts. To ensure that portable storage containers are regulated uniformly, a definition is needed. The proposed amendment includes a definition for these structures. It is proposed that additional language is added to Section 10.02.03 Submittal Requirements for Site Development Plans, which outlines what types of development require a site development plan. This amendment proposes to add a provision to allow accessory structures that are less than 400 square feet, in aggregate, to submit a survey or plan that demonstrates zoning compliance in place of a site development plan. Accessory structures greater than 400 square feet or accessory structures that result in over 400 square feet in aggregate must submit a site development plan. REASON: On Tuesday, September 27, 2011 the Board of County Commissioners discussed several proposed LDC amendments presented by Code Enforcement, including one for portable storage containers. The Board directed Staff to prepare and publically vet an amendment to allow for Portable Storage Containers to be an accessory structure in the Rural Agricultural and Estate Districts. In conjunction with the amendment, a stay on enforcement was approved by the Board for containers in the Estate district (9/27/11 BCC Meeting Minutes, pg. 200). As stated in the September 27th Executive Summary, this amendment proposes to eliminate confusion regarding portable storage containers, and other similar product names, on properties zoned Rural Agricultural, Estate, Commercial, and Industrial. Due to the need of many property owners to store their agricultural and lawn maintenance equipment in a cost effective manner, there is a need to provide low cost alternatives for storage. In the past, the County has at times permitted Portable storage containers on some Rural Agricultural and Estate properties while at other times prohibiting them. Those that were permitted were reviewed and approved by the Building Department for compliance with Florida 1 I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1 \Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Text ..tFikethm gh is GUFFeRt te.et to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term Building Code and by the Zoning Services Department for setback standards. The containers were permitted as a permanent structure designed by a licensed structural engineer or architect and met the criteria outlined for an Accessory Structure, Florida Building Code and section 4.02.01 of the Code. The purpose of this amendment is to allow for Portable storage containers to be permitted as an accessory structure and to provide standards to ensure compatibility with the community and adjacent property owners. Therefore, depending on the zoning district, containers shall be limited in number only with the aim of preventing the over utilization of containers that could change the character of the zoning districts. Furthermore, in order to improve compatibility with the adjacent properties, it is proposed that storage containers be restricted to the rear yard and required to meet the setbacks for principal structures. For properties zoned residential as defined in the Land Development Code (LDC), these containers shall continue to be treated as outlined in the October 2, 2003 memorandum from the Zoning Director. The 2003 memorandum acknowledged personal storage containers in residential zoning districts to be used on a temporary basis. Section 10.02.03 Submittal Requirements for Site Development Plans ensures compliance with the appropriate land development regulations and growth management plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Subsection 10.02.03 A.2 provides 'a list of development types which do not necessitate a site plan or site improvement plan. The amendment proposes to add accessory structures which are less than 400 square feet in aggregate to this list. Those over 400 feet shall be required to submit a site plan pursuant to the section. Detailed in the proposed language is a list of items that shall be included in the required survey or plan which demonstrates zoning compliance. The public vetting of this amendment began on November, 14, 2011 with approval from the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) Land Development Review (LDR) subcommittee. The LDR provided comments and approved an early draft of the amendment. Following approval by DSAC on January 4, 2012, the amendment was discussed at the January 30, 2012 Land Development Code (LDC) In Focus Meeting. A series of In Focus meetings have been organized for community members to provide input and ask questions. At the January 301h meeting Mr. Ramsey, with the Golden Gate Area Civic Association, presented a letter outlining recommendations for portable storage containers in the Rural Agriculture and Estate Districts. The letter was signed by Mr. Gaddy, President of the Golden Gate Area Civic Association. On Friday, April 13, 2012 the amendment was approved unanimously by the Planning Commission during a LDC Amendment Special Session meeting. On Thursday, May 10, 2012 the fourth LDC Amendment In Focus meeting was held and additional public comments were made regarding the proposed amendment. On Thursday, May 17, 2012 this amendment was requested to be re- reviewed by Mr. Gaddy, stating "in the best interest of the public ... a Public Information Meeting on this amendment" be held (Letter to Commissioner Strain from Mr. Gaddy dated May 16, 2012). Mr. Gaddy also 2 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment RevisionsWuthor Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Text stFikethrn gh is ent text to he .Deleted Bold text indicates a defined term "requested that the Planning Commission accept public comment in a reconsideration of its previous action [of approval]. The Planning Commission accepted this request. A community meeting for Estates District residents was held on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 from 6:00 p.m.- 7:30 p.m. at the University of Florida IFAS Extension Center. Twenty -seven community members attended the meeting. County Staff from Land Development Services, the Building Department, and Code Enforcement attended the meeting to answer questions. The event entailed a brief power point presentation regarding the purpose and intent of the amendment as well as feedback that had been provided to Staff by the Golden Gate Area Civic Association and the Homeowner Association of Golden Gate Estates. Following the presentation, attendees were welcome to ask Staff questions and provide comments which were compiled on a large easel pads. Discussion lasted for over an hour. Support and opposition has been expressed regarding this amendment. The attached supplemental materials and meeting minutes provide insight into the comments collected. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: The fiscal impacts are limited to the cost of a tie - down permit including review and inspection. Providing an SDP exemption for accessory structures less than 400 square feet, including Portable storage containers, will reduce the number of SDPI and SIM applications and minimize costs for applicants. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC Ordinance No. 06 -07, § 3.F; Ord. No. 07 -67, § 3.J; Ord. No. 08 -63, § 3.J) il!Il�ll�llilio,. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: N/A OTHER NOTES/VERSION DATE: Prepared by Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager, Growth Management Division on October 21, 2011; Edited February 14, 2012, June 28, 2012, July 5, 2012 Amend the LDC as follows: Revised 07/11/12 1 1.08.02 Definitions 2 3 Portable Storage Container — A standardized transportable structure designed for the shipping 4 of cargo via ship, railroad, or transport vehicle and constructed of steel and some wood. The re- 5 sealable structure may be used for the storage or shipment of items, including but not limited to, 6 household goods, building materials, equipment, or merchandise. This shall include shipping 7 containers and portable on- demand storage (PODS). This shall exclude structures such as 8 storage sheds that are assembled on site or pre- manufactured, roll off trash bins, trucks, 9 trailers, or rail cars. 10 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 11 12 5.03.07 Portable Storage Containers 13 14 A. Intent. These supplementary standards regulate the placement of portable storage 15 container units in order to promote the health and safety of the residents of the County 16 and to preserve the aesthetic value of its residential neighborhoods and non - residential 3 I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM 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 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Text underlined is new text to be added. Te..t str'Lethm ,eh 'c GUFFeRt text to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term districts. These standards apply to all portable storage containers and other similar products to be used as an accessory structure. Permittina procedures are provided in the Administrative Code and LDC subsection 10.02.03 A.2.i. B. Zoning Limitations. Portable Storage Containers may be permitted on lots that meet the minimum lot size and lot width requirements, provided in section 4.02.01, in the following zoning districts: 1. Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district. Limit of one (1) container per lot or parcel. a) Lots twenty (20) acres or larger are limited to one (1) container per ten (10) acres, not to exceed a total of five (5) containers. b) Containers used in conjunction with a bona fide agricultural use shall not be limited in number. 2. Estate (E) zoning district. Limit to one (1) container per lot. 3. Commercial and Industrial zoning districts. Number shall be limited to site constraints. 4. Portable storage containers are prohibited in residential zoning districts, but may be permitted as a temporary structure per Section 5.04.00. C. Setbacks. Containers shall be placed in the rear of the principal structure and meet the required setbacks for a principal structure. Containers on corner lots of record shall be placed to the side of the principal `structure and meet the required setbacks for a principal structure. Structures shall comply with the minimum separation requirements as outlined in the Florida Fire Prevention Code and the Florida Building Code. D. Limitations on Use. 1. Portable storage containers permitted under this section shall be used solely for A. Generally. 1. Purpose. The intent of this section is to ensure compliance with the appropriate land development regulations prior to the issuance of a building permit. This section is further intended to ensure that the proposed development complies with fundamental planning and design principles such as: consistency with the county's growth management plan; the layout, arrangement of buildings, architectural design and open spaces; the configuration of the traffic circulation system, including driveways, traffic calming devices, parking areas and emergency access; the availability and capacity of drainage and utility facilities; 4 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM 2. Containers shall not be used for human occupancy and shall not be connected to any utilities, including electric. E. Size. 1. Maximum floor area: 480 square feet per container. 2. Maximum height: Eight (8) feet. Vertical stacking of containers is prohibited. F. Additional requirements for commercial and industrial zoning districts. 1 . Location. Containers shall not be located in required landscape areas, open space,`stormwater management facilities, drive aisles, required parking spaces, fire lanes, loading zones, or any other locations that may cause hazardous conditions, constitute a threat to the public safety, or create a condition detrimental to surrounding land uses and developments. 2. Screening. All containers shall be screened from view of adjacent property owners and streets. Screening may consist of a fence, wall, landscaping, or combination thereof. Containers in industrial zoning districts that are located more than 200 feet from a property line are not required to provide screening. 10.02.03 Submittal Requirements for Site Development Plans * * * * * * * * * * * * * A. Generally. 1. Purpose. The intent of this section is to ensure compliance with the appropriate land development regulations prior to the issuance of a building permit. This section is further intended to ensure that the proposed development complies with fundamental planning and design principles such as: consistency with the county's growth management plan; the layout, arrangement of buildings, architectural design and open spaces; the configuration of the traffic circulation system, including driveways, traffic calming devices, parking areas and emergency access; the availability and capacity of drainage and utility facilities; 4 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM 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 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Text underlined is new text to be added. Text stFoketh Fa gh is surrent text 4e be deleted Bold text indicates a defined term and, overall compatibility with adjacent development within the jurisdiction of Collier County and consideration of natural resources and proposed impacts thereon. 2. Applicability. All development, except as otherwise provided herein, is subject to the provisions of this section. The provisions of this section shall not apply to the following land use activities and represents the sole exceptions there from: a. Single- family detached and two - family housing structure(s) on a lot(s) of record except as otherwise provided at section 4.02.02 (cluster development). b. Townhouses developed on fee simple lots under individual ownership, provided that a fee simple townhouse plat is approved in accordance with the provisions of section 10.02.04.13.4. C. Underground construction; utilities, communications and similar underground construction type activities. d. Accessory and ancillary facilities for a golf course such as restrooms, irrigation systems, pump- houses where a preliminary work authorization has been entered into with the county except where a site alteration permit is required by this Code. e. Construction trailers and storage of equipment and materials following issuance of a building permit for the use to which said activities are a function of, except as otherwise provided by section 5.04.03 E. Model homes and sales centers, except as otherwise provided by section 5.04.04 f. Project entryway signs, walls, gates and guardhouses. g. Signage proposed for the project in conformity with section 5.06.00, the Collier County Sign Code, for the site development or site improvement plan h. Neighborhood parks, subject to the approval of a conceptual site plan, depicting, on a 24" by 36" sheet, all site clearing; improvements, including fences and walls, playground equipment, walkways, picnic areas, and play areas; and minimum Code landscaping (irrigation will not be required). For the purposes of review fees only, this plan shall be treated as a conceptual site development plan, and the applicable review fee shall apply. Minimum landscape buffering. Under certain circumstances with neighborhood parks,' there may be underlying health, safety and welfare concerns that necessitate deviation from the buffering required in section 4.06.02. The County Manager or his designee will determine, on a case - by -case basis, whether such deviation is necessary. This determination will be made upon a request for determination from the applicant, which must include all reasons that would justify the deviation. The County Manager or his designee will use factors including, but not limited to, the following when making a determination for deviation: a) The geographic location of the neighborhood park b) The effects that a lack of buffering will have on neighboring uses; and C) The need to ensure that the public safety is maintained by providing law enforcement and other policing entities clear view of the activities occurring on the park premises. While the above land use activities shall be exempt from the provisions of section 10.02.03, these land use activities are subject to all other provisions of the Land Development Code such as but not limited to 5 I:TDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Text underlined is new text to be added. Text ctr'Lethrn gh is nt text to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term landscaping (with the exception of g., as listed above), tree removal, development standards and the submission requirements attendant to obtaining temporary use and building permits. 3. Accessory Structures that are less than 400 square feet in aggregate shall be subject to approval of a survey or plan that demonstrates zoning compliance. The survey or plan shall be drawn to scale and delineate the dimensions and shape of the lot, existing improvements, public easements, the location and size of the proposed accessory structure(s), the distance of the proposed accessory structures from the adjacent property lines and structures, and any required screening. Accessory structures over 400 square feet, or additional accessory structures that result in over 400 square feet in aggregate, even if requested under separate applications, shall require Site Development Plan approval pursuant to 10.02.03. # # # # # # # # # # # # # 6 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 07 Portable Storage Containers 071012.docx 7/11/2012 10:04:45 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Text StFiketh FGUgh in GUFFent text to he deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation AUTHOR: Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager DEPARTMENT: Land Development Services AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2012 Cycle 1 LDC SECTION(S): 5.03.06 Dock Facilities CHANGE: Section 5.03.06 of the Code provides waterfront property owners can apply for a Coun meets the outlined criteria and that protrudes n protrusion includes the vessels and the dock facil the Building Department for compliance with Flo] Department for setback requirements and natural 'r Certain situations may be considered apl allows for additional protrusion of a do facility extensions can be for new dock: new dock constructed) or an extension of Currently, all boat dock extensions are To approve a boat dock extension, the criteria are met and that 4 of 6 secondary •ovisions for boat dock facilities. In general, building permit to build a boat dock which more than 20 ! feet into the waterway. The The building permit is reviewed by the by a Building Code and by the Zoning Services for a boat dock facility extension. This process vessel beyond the standard 20 feet. Boat dock ,ement docks (the old dock is torn down and a ting permitted dock. i by the Collier County Planning Commission. ig Commission must find that 4 of 5 primary are met (LDC subsection 5.03.06 H). The proposed amendment would provide an administrative approval process limited to single - family residential boat dock extensions. To be considered for an administrative approval process, an applicant must meet all of the primary and secondary criteria. Criteria that is not applicable for a single family residential applicant will be considered a criterion that is met. Multi- family boat dock extensions will remain under the Planning Commission's review. The subsection identifies two new concepts to the boat dock extension application. First, the section clarifies boat dock extension length is determined by the farthest protrusion of the facility into the waterway, including both the dock and the vessel(s). This is distinct from the definition of dock and dock facility, noted below. Second, applicants shall identify the envelope of the boat dock facility and provide the square footage of the facility. All of the criteria have been revised for clarity to make the section more user - friendly. Criteria that examined the same issues, such as site conditions, were combined to create a more streamlined process. The criteria were also written create a less subjective process. For example, reasonable deck width shall be considered up to 6 feet. Criteria that are addressed by other standards or regulations have been removed. 1 I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7111/2012 11:43:11 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Bold text indicates a defined term If an applicant is not eligible for the administrative approval process, the applicant may take their request to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission would utilize the same criteria and applicants will need to meet four of the five Primary Criteria and four of the five Secondary Criteria. The administrative approval process includes a public notice procedure. Applicants will be required to provide property owners within 500 feet of the property information on the boat dock facility, including: the address of the applicant's property, the total protrusion of the facility, a brief narrative justifying the extension, a copy of the site plan (in 11 by 17 inch or 8.5 by 11 inch format); and advise property owners of their right to submit a written objection letter within 30 days of the public notice letter. The list of property owners would come from the latest tax rolls. Property owners who received the boat dock exter may appeal the administrative approval process to the approval. Applicants may also appeal the appro dock facility extension within 30 days of th+ Commission. Decisions of the Planning Commis Zoning Appeals within 30 days of the Planning Cox' For reference, the definition of a dock and dock Dock: Any structure constructed in boat or other watercraft. Dock facility: Incl REASON: Many single - family residentia criteria. Analysis by the Planning Commis not necessary for applicants who do mf extension process will likely reduce the thereby reducing the fees incurred by the seeks to provide a shorter time frame for aj in notice or any other aggrieved individual e Planning Commission within 30 days of 1, approval with conditions, or denial of the administrative decision to the Planning ►n can then be appealed to the Board of follows: primary purpose of mooring a pilings associated with the dock. extension requests meet all of the current Iditional Staff and consultant time which is he criteria. The administrative boat dock mitments of consultants and the County, The administrative boat dock process also FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: The fee for an administrative boat dock extension process would be modified to appropriately reflect the procedure. Currently, the boat dock extension fee is $1,500 (plus legal advertising fees). It is proposed that the administrative fee is similar to an administrative parking variance fee. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Florida Building Code, Florida DEP GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTESIVERSION DATE: Prepared by Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner, Land Development Services, October 14, 2011; Edited Friday Nov. 4, 2011; Nov. 7, 2011; Edited December 7, Chris Scott, Senior Planner, Land Development Services; Edited December 20, Caroline Cilek; Edited December 29, Caroline 2 I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities—new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:43:11 AM 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 Text underlined is new text to be added. Te.h 6tFikethre. ugh is Rt text to he deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term Cilek; Edited January 23, Caroline Cilek; Edited February 23, Caroline Cilek; Edited February 28, 2012, Caroline Cilek, May 9,2012, June 13, 2012, June 20, 2012, July 11, 2012 Amend the LDC as follows: Revised 7/11/12 A'Strikethrough /Underline version follows the clean copy below, 5.03.06 Dock Facilities * * * * * * * * * * * * * H. Dock facility extension. Additional protrusion of a dock facility into any waterway beyond the limits established in subsection 5.03.06 E of this Code may be considered appropriate under certain circumstances. For the of this section, the dock facility shall include the farthest protrusion of both the dock and vessel(s). This section establishes the process and criteria for approving dock facility extensions. 1. Plan Requirements: Requests for boat dock facility extensions shall include a plan that illustrates the facility and the conceptual dock layout. The facility envelope shall identify the maximum square footage of the dock area. 2. Approval Process: All boat dock facility extensions shall meet the procedures established in subsection 5.03.06 I, and shall be approved as follows: a. Dock facility extensions for single - family residential uses that satisfy all Primary and Secondary criteria, as identified in subsection 5.03.06 H.3, may be approved by the Zoning Department provided the extension does not protrude more than 40 additional feet (60 feet in total length) into the waterway and provided a written objection is not received as provided in subsection 5.03.06 H.5. b. Dock facility extensions for single- family residential uses that cannot be approved administratively, and for multi. - family residential uses, may be approved by the Planning Commission, provided four (4) of the five (5) Primary Criteria and four (4) of the five (5) Secondary Criteria are 3. Criteria vfor vreview of boat dock facility extensions: The following criteria are established to ensure that extensions will not adversely impact surrounding properties, navigation, . or environmental systems. Criteria that are not applicable to a specific request shall be deemed satisfied. a. Primary Criteria: i. No more than 2 slips for single - family use shall be administratively approved. Slips for multi - family use shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and are not subject to the administrative boat' dock extension process. ii. The water depth at the proposed site, established by a survey, is too shallow that a vessel of general length, type, and draft is unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). iii. The presence of one or more site conditions, including shoreline reinforcement, mangrove growth, seagrass beds, site configuration or property /riparian lines shall justify the proposed dimensions and location of the proposed boat dock facility. iv. The proposed boat dock facility shall not protrude more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway. There shall be a minimum of 50 percent of the width of the waterway maintained for navigability between dock facilities on either side of the waterway. V. The facility shall not obstruct the use of neighboring docks. 3 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1 \Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities—new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:43:11 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Text stFikethrn eh is ent text to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term 1 2 b. Secondary Criteria: 3 i. The proposed dock facility shall be limited to the minimum dock 4 area and allow for reasonable and safe access to the vessel for 5 loading and /or unloading and routine maintenance. Reasonable 6 deck width shall be considered up to 6 feet. 7 ii. The width of single - family dock facilities (vessel(s) and dock) 8 measured parallel to the shoreline shall not exceed 50 percent of 9 the subject property's linear waterfront footage. 10 iii. A single - family dock facility that protrudes more than 40 feet into 11 the waterway shall have an increased setback from the riparian 12 line of one (1) foot for every additional foot off shore the dock 13 facility protrudes. 14 iv. The petitioner shall demonstrate compliance with subsection 15 5.03.06 J. if seagrass beds are present within 200 feet of the 16 proposed boat dock facility. 17 V. The petitioner shall demonstrate compliance with subsection 18 5.03.06 E.11 if the proposed boat dock facility is subject to the 19 manatee protection requirements. 20 4. Conditions of Approval: If deemed necessary based upon review of the criteria 21 identified in subsection 5.03.06 H.3, above, the Planning Commission may 22 impose conditions necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Code and 23 protect the safety and welfare of the public. Such conditions may include, but 24 shall not be limited to, greater side setback(s), and provisions of lights(s), 25 additional reflectors, or reflectors larger than four (4) inches. 26 5. Public Notice Requirements: Applicants of the Administrative Boat Dock 27 Extension shall notify property owners within 500 feet the property lines of the 28 property for which the request is sought. If the land for which the approval is 29 sought is part of, or adjacent to, land owned by the same person, the 500 foot 30 distance shall be measured from the boundaries for the entire ownership or PUD. 31 However, notices do not need to be mailed to any property owner located more 32 than a half mile from the subject property. The names and addresses of the 33 property owners shall be those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County 34 and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the County 35 to be notified. The notice shall be sent within 30 days of the date of submittal of 36 the application. The notice shall include: (1) the address of the facility; (2) the 37 total protrusion of the facility; (3) a copy of the site plan (in 11 by 17 inch or 8.5 by 38 11 inch format); (4) a brief narrative and justification for such extension; and (5) 39 advise property owners of their right to submit a written objection within 30 days 40 of the date of the letter. 41 a. If a notified property owner submits a written objection to Collier County 42 within 30 days of the date of the public notice required above, the matter 43 shall be scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission, 44 unless the letter of objection is withdrawn. The time and place of the 45 public hearing shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in 46 the county at least 15 days prior to the public hearings and shall 47 specifically note the location of the property and the requested boat dock 48 extension. 49 6. Appeals. 50 a. Applicants or any aggrieved person may appeal an administrative 51 decision to the Planning Commission within 30 days of the approval, 4 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities—new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:43:11 AM 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 46 47 48 49 50 Text underlined is new text to be added. Text stFikethrn e.h is ent text to he deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term approval with conditions, or denial of the Administrative Boat Dock extension, in accordance with section 250 -58 of the Code of Laws and Ordinances. If the applicant appeals the conditions, the Planning Commission shall determine whether the condition(s) are reasonable and necessary in light of the criteria set forth in this section. b. All decisions of the Planning Commission rendered under this section may be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals within 30 days of the date of the Planning Commission's decision. I. Procedures for approval of docks, dock facilities, and boathouses. 1. Procedures for the issuance of permits for docks, dock facilities, and boathouses are provided in the Administrative Code. 2. All dock facilities are subject to, and shall_ comply with, all federal and state requirements and permits, including, but not limited, to the requirements and permits of the DEP, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 3. Nonresidential dock facilities shall be subject to all of the provisions of section 5.03.06 of this LDC, nonresidential dock facilities beyond the specified limits shall be determined administratively by the County Manager or designee at the time of site development plan review, based on subsection 5.03.06(G) of this LDC. 5.03.06 Dock Facilities Strikethrough /Underline version H Dock facility extension. Additional protrusion of a dock facility into any waterway beyond the limits established in subsection 5.03.06 E of this Code may be considered appropriate under certain circumstances. For the purposes of this section, the dock facility shall include the farthest protrusion of both the dock and vessel(s). This section establishes the process and criteria for'approvinq dock facility extensions. I-eFder -fey 1 Plan Reauirements: Reauests for boat dock facilitv extensions shall include a plan that illustrates the facility and the conceptual dock layout. The facility envelope shall identify the maximum square footage of the dock area. 2. Approval Process: All boat dock facility extensions shall meet the procedures established in subsection 5.03.06 I, and shall be approved as follows: a. Dock facility extensions for single - family residential uses that satisfy all Primary and Secondary criteria, as identified in subsection 5.03.06 H.3, may be approved by the Zoning Department provided the extension does not protrude more than 40 additional feet (60 feet in total length) into the waterway and provided a written objection is not received as provided in subsection 5.03.06 H.S. b. Dock facility extensions for single - family residential uses that cannot be approved administratively, and for multi - family residential uses, may be approved by the Planning Commission, provided four (4) of the five (5) Primary Criteria and four (4) of the five (5) Secondary Criteria are satisfied. 3. Criteria for review of boat dock facility extensions: The following criteria are established to ensure that extensions will not adversely impact surrounding 5 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1 \Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities—new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:43:11 AM 1 2 3 4 5 6 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 47 48 49 50 Text underlined is new text to be added. Test otFikethm ,gh is eRt text to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term roperties. naviaation. or environmental systems. Criteria that are not applicable to a specific request shall be deemed satisfied. a. Primary TCriteriai. : yher the faGilities j slips nrepesed shall bets appropriate in rela +inn to the waterfront length lGGatinn upland land use and Lnning of the subject prnneFty h rri lands .rh �yess c re the primary means f pc,,,�e�— FcJnxr�vT— QV,�er{. ac�JE'lar-- crr.- --crn, "'''ec`l„v�� transpertatieR to and from the p ep� (The , i� r sheld be �TpffG , No more than 2 slips for single - family use sheuld be shall be administratively approved. na more th ^^ Slips; typinal Slips for multi - family use shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and are not subject to the administrative boat dock extension process. should be 1 slip per dwelling unit in the oase of „nhridged harrier island desks additional slips rpnY be apnrnpriate\ h Whether the ��rnter depth n+ the e� site so hallow II. ,�— �v,�ccrrc�-- crrc- avcrccrcre� ^a �rrc- i��„urrovr t a vessel of the g I length, type d draft as that mat —a—� enerepp�a�a --�t petitioner's e_ibed an the meer at -mean leer tide (IVI T -). (Thee p inneF'S apnpnr-natinQ ?UFPeY 6he„Id establish that the water depth is tan shallow to alle�r laun�nhinn and mnnring of the vessel(s) described withe, it an ext T The water depth at the proposed site, established by a survey, is too shallow that a vessel of general length, type, and draft is unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). iii. The presence of one or more site conditions, including shoreline reinforcement;' mangrove growth, seagrass beds, site configuration or °'property /riparian lines shall justify the proposed dimensions and location of the proposed boat dock facility. G. the proposed desk facility may have an adverse impact navigation within an adjacent marked nr charted navigable � III I Il�jll } 8�� I .�anRei�(T-hefTCfGilitY should REA intrude ante any marked er �) I Gh ted navigable E;h,aR el pediRg vessel trnffin ,n the thus nhcaR el). ivi+. d. Whether —tThe proposed boat dock facility shall not protrudes -rye more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway.; lllll��Ill, and whether There shall be a minimum of 50% percent of the width of the waterway width maintained for navigability between dock facilities on either side of the waterway_ is maintained fer PII�II 'nernentanesy }'^ iv. e. Whether t�prepesed IGGaatio and design of the desk faGilit+ y is SUGh t,^+, th he facility shall would not obstruct , tet#ere with--the use of neighboring docks. (The faGilil, „ sh ^ „Id pat interfere with the use of legally o mitted neighboring /'tasks\ b. Secondary eCriteria: n Wh��yrthere pre spenial nditiens net involving water depth cr-- �.— ar��pccruTEerramvr,�, cl-- crcper,-, �e the s„bi v. nr ��rat era y which stif�r the � �v �Tr �JUVreEt-- �A�2Fty--- c7r— vYUCeirvAy � wrnvr�rj-a��Ty --mc (There must he at least 1 s e al ^ nditien related to the preperty; , 6 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities—new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:43:11 AM 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 46 47 48 49 50 51 Text underlined is new text to be added. Te)d alike +h.eugh 'c GUFFeRt teXt to he .Deleted Bold text indicates a defined term these may innit tale tine �herelin .a rcpinfArr- emeR t, sivrcrmc i. b. Whether the The proposed dock facility shall be limited to the minimum dock area and would allow for reasonable and,- safe access to the vessel for loading and /or unloading and routine maintenance. Reasonable deck width shall be considered up to 6 feet. w4het tt the use of evoessive deGk area not directly related to these ft tnstions (The faoility should nnf t ise evoessiye deGk area) ii. per The width of single - family dock facilities whetheF the leRgth --of the—(vessel(s) and dock) measured parallel to the shoreline vessel, - o,- vessels in 6eiblRatiGR, deSGFin'hed by the der shall not exceeds 50 percent of the subject property's linear waterfront footage_ (The appliGahle mavimt tn^ peFGentage should he Fnaintained) iii. A single - family dock facility that protrudes more than 40 feet into line facili iv. e. The petitioner shall demonstrate Whether seagFass beds- ore to + t�iithir� Inn feet 'nf the n �e F. i +�i /If a,1�vc -azed ,Z�0 feet -of thc- pr{3pese��o6k facility. -err seanrass harts are preset,+ compliance with subsection 5.03.06 J V. fWhether the pFeposed dGG C faGility is s1u'bjeGt to the mannt r Ae�, n rpa 'r +s of st t sea +in rrrurruc c 9rrr"`1urreri�erir� The petitioner shall demonstrate compliance with subsection 5.03.06' E.11 if the proposed boat dock facility is subiect to the manatee protection requirements. must be demonstrate4) 4. Conditions of Approval: If deemed necessary based upon review of the above criteria identified in subsection 5.03.06 H.3, above, the Planning Commission may impose conditions t irr n the approval of an extension request that it .teems necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Code and protect the safety and welfare of the public. Such conditions may include, but shall not be limited to, greater side setback(s), and provisions of lights(s), additional reflectors, or reflectors larger than four (4) inches. 5. Public Notice Requirements: Applicants of the Administrative Boat Dock Extension shall notify property owners within 500 feet the property lines of the Property for which the request is sought. If the land for which the approval is sought is part of, or adjacent to, land owned by the same person, the 500 foot distance shall be measured from the boundaries for the entire ownership or PUD. However, notices do not need to be mailed to any property owner located more than a half mile from the subject property. The names and addresses of the Property owners shall be those appearing on the latest tax rolls of Collier County and any other persons or entities who have made a formal request of the County to be notified. The notice shall be sent within 30 days of the date of submittal of the application. The notice shall include: (1) the address of the facility; (2) the 7 I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11 /2012 11:43:11 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. r'Leth.., nh is V text V be deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 total protrusion of the facility: (3) a copy of the site plan (in 11 by 17 inch or 8.5 by 2 11 inch format): (4) a brief narrative and iustification for such extension; and (5) 3 advise property owners of their right to submit a written objection within 30 days 4 of the date of the letter. 5 a. If a notified property owner submits a written objection to Collier Countv 6 within 30 days of the date of the public notice required above the matter 7 shall be scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission 8 unless the letter of objection is withdrawn. The time and place of the 9 public hearing shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in 10 the county at least 15 days prior to the public hearings and shall 11 specifically note the location of the property and the requested boat dock 12 extension. 13 6. Appeals. 14 a. Applicants or any aggrieved person' - may appeal an administrative 15 decision to the Planning Commission within 30 days of the approval 16 approval with conditions, or denial of the - Administrative Boat Dock 17 extension, in accordance' with section 250-58 of the Code of Laws and 18 Ordinances. If the applicant appeals the conditions the Planning 19 Commission shall determine whether the condition(s) are reasonable and 20 necessary in light of the criteria set forth in this section. 21 b. All decisions of the Planning' Commission rendered under this section 22 may be appealed to the Board of Zoning Appeals within °' 30 days of the 23 date of the Planning Commission's' decision. 24 I. Procedures for approval of docks, dock' facilities, and boathouses. 25 1. Procedures for the issuance of permits for docks, dock facilities, and 26 boathouses are provided in the Administrative Code. Chapter 10 of this L DG 27 2. All dock facilities are subject to, and shall comply with, all federal and state 28 requirements and permits, including,' but not limited, to the requirements and 29 permits of the DEP, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. 30 Environmental Protection Agency. 31 3. Nonresidential dock facilities shall be subject to all of the provisions of section 32 5.03.06 of this LDC, nonresidential dock facilities beyond the specified limits 33 shall be determined administratively by the County Manager or designee at the 34 time of site development plan review, based on aR eval atieR of the nri +ori- 35 subsection 5.03.06(G) of this LDC. 36 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 8 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 03 06 Dock Facilities—new admin process 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:43:11 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Text Str'Leth FG 9h is ent text to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Collier Building Industry Association AUTHOR: Carolina Valera, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning DEPARTMENT: Growth Management Division AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2012 Cycle 1 LDC SECTION(S): 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Design Standards CHANGE: To amend subsection 5.05.08 C.9 to allow outparcels and freestanding buildings within a Planned Unit Development (PUD) or within a common ownership development an exception to the primary fagade requirements for the "back" of the building. To amend subsection 5.05.08 F, which outlines the Deviations and Alternate Compliance process, to include buildings within a PUD. The process is currently limited to buildings that are not located within a PUD. REASON: The proposed amendment to subsection 5.05.08 C.9 is designed to make the fagade requirements for secondary facades, considered the "back" of the building, more functional and less burdensome for developers and architects. Currently, all sides of a building are required to meet the primary fagade requirements, which include detailing such as windows, covered entryways, covered walkways, and trellises. The proposed change will allow outparcels and freestanding buildings to have a functional "back" service area which will face the interior of the development. This amendment will provide for the practical design of a building's service area and alleviate a point of contention and frustration for many developers. Currently, new buildings constructed within a PUD do not have a means to seek an architectural deviation from the LDC. The County's Architectural Deviations and Alternate Compliance process provides a method for a unique architectural design while still meeting the intent of the LDC. The proposed change to subsection 5.05.08 F will allow new buildings in PUDs the same design flexibility as buildings in other zoning districts. The proposed amendment is not likely to conflict with a PUD Master Plan because Master Plans generally provide the site standards, but do not specify the specific, design details for buildings. FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: The amendments will provide fiscal benefits to developers. The secondary facade may cost less than the current requirements. The extension of the Architectural Deviations and Alternate Compliance process will provide a larger number of buildings the opportunity to apply for an alternative design which may assist developers with new projects. County Staff does not anticipate any fiscal or operational impacts to the County. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None. 1 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards Deviations 070512.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Tnv4 64: Lethr.. ..h is ..4 text 4 be deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None. OTHER NOTESNERSION DATE: This amendment and an additional recommendation from the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) were presented to the Planning Commission on May 3, 2012. The Planning Commission inquired if this amendment and recommendation had been reviewed by the 2004 Architectural Review Committee. Staff replied that the Review Committee had not met to review or discuss the proposed amendments. The Planning Commission Chairman directed Staff to have the Architectural Review Committee reconvene and review the amendments. The Commission did not discuss or vote on the proposed amendments. As a follow up to this discussion, Staff requested the direction and support of the Planning Commission to review section 5.05.08 in its entirety. Staff noted that the same request would be asked of the Board of County Commissioners. The Planning Commission supported Staff's request. Due to the level of involvement and interest DSAC members had established with the proposed amendment and recommendation, they were updated as to the status of the amendment on June 6, 2012. Following discussion, they recommended that the amendment, as written, and their recommendation regarding spandrel windows be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for their consideration and direction to Staff. Prepared by Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner on March 12, 2012; March 19, 2012, March 27, 2012, June 26, 2012, July 5, 2012 Amend the LDC as follows: 1 5.05.08 Architectural and Site Design Standards 2 3 C. Building design standards. 4 5 9. Outparcels and freestanding buildings within a PUD and common ownership 6 developments. 7 a. Purpose and intent. To provide unified architectural design and site planning for 8 all on -site structures, and to provide for safe and convenient vehicular and 9 pedestrian access and movement within the site. 10 b. Facades standards. All facades must meet the requirements of 5.05.08.C.5, 11 Project standards'. 12 i. Primary facades. All exterior facades of freestanding structures, including 13 structures located on outparcels, are considered primary facades, and 14 must meet the requirements of this Section with respect to the 15 architectural design treatment for primary facades - Section 5.05.08 C.2. 16 Primary facade standards, except for those facades considered 17 secondary facades. 18 ii. Secondary facades. One facade of a freestanding structure including 19 structures located on outparcels that is internal to the site and that does 20 not abut or face the streets on the periphery of the development 21 Outparcels and freestanding buildings are allowed one secondary facade 2 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards Deviations 070512.docx 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 46 47 48 49 50 51 F Text underlined is new text to be added. Text f 'L- Ih h is ent text to be deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term C. Design standards. The design for freestanding buildings must employ architectural, site and landscaping design elements integrated with, and common to those used on the primary structure and its site. These common design elements must include colors, building materials, and landscaping associated with the main structure. All freestanding buildings must provide for vehicular and pedestrian inter - connection between adjacent outparcels or freestanding sites and the primary structure. d. Primary facade standards. The following design features are in addition to the list of requirement options to meet Section 5.05.08 C.2. Primary facade standards: i. Walls expanding the design features of the building, not less than 7 feet high, creating a courtyard not less than 12 feet from the building and length of no less than 60% of the length of the associated facade. The courtyard may be gated and able to be secured from exterior public access. Grilled openings are allowed if courtyard is landscaped. Opening depths or wall terminations must be a minimum of 12 inches deep. If the courtyard contains service or utility equipment, the height and design must prevent view from the exterior. Courtyard walls are not to be considered fences. ii. Trellis or latticework used as a support for climbing plants may count as window area equal to the plant coverage area. Deviations and Alternate Compliance. The following alternative compliance process is established to allow deviations from the requirements of this Section as approved by the County Manager or his designee. 1. Review and approval procedure. Upon request by the applicant, the County Manager or his designee may administratively approve a Site and Development Plan application that includes an alternative architectural design and site development plan that may be substituted in whole or in part for a plan meeting the standards of Section 5.05.08. Approved deviations are allowed only as to the specific design and plan reviewed. Any modification to an approved design shall necessitate re- review and approval by the County Manager or his designee. 2. Review criteria. In approving an alternative plan, the County Manager or his designee must find that the proposed alternative plan accomplishes the purpose and intent of this Section in the same manner as the provisions would. If the plan is approved through this provision, the Site Development Plan approval letter shall specifically note the deviations and the basis for their approval. 3. Submittal requirements. In addition to the base submittal requirements, applicants must provide the following: a. Architectural design plan and /or site development plan clearly labeled as an "Alternative Architectural Design Standards Plan ". This plan must identify the section numbers from this Section from which the deviation is being requested. b. A narrative statement that specifically identifies all standards of Section 5.05.08 from which the deviations are requested, and the justification for the request. This statement must include a description of how the alternative plan accomplishes the purpose and intent of this Section, without specifically complying with those standards identified. 4. Applicability. a. The following types of buildings and uses qualify for an administrative determination of deviations from Section 5.05.08. development standards: i. Assembly, 3 L\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards Deviations 070512.docx Text underlined is new text to be added TeA ctrikethrn gh ' t text to he rJ 11 Bold text indicates a defined term 1 ii. Educational, 2 iii. Institutional, 3 iv. Mixed use buildings (such as commercial /residential /office), and 4 V. Any other non - commercial building, or use, that is not listed under 5 Section 5.05.08 D. Design standards for specific building types of 6 this Section, and due to its function, has specific requirements 7 making meeting Section 5.05.08. standards unfeasible. 8 vi. Buildings located on property with a commercial zoning 9 designation when submitted for Site Development Plan review on 10 or after November 10 2GO , except for the following: 11 12 attached multiple GF individual) buildiRgs IGGated en 13 14 15 plan (G ieh as a Shepp *Rg center) 16 a1b) Buildings with a gross building area of 10,000 square feet 17 or more on the ground floor. 18 b e-) Multi - story buildings with a total gross building area of 19 20,000 square feet or more. 20 c1d) Project sites with more than one building where the 21 aggregate gross" building area is 20,000 square feet or 22 more. Individual buildings within a project site that have 23 been previously granted deviations where additional 24 development causes an aggregation of building area 25 20,000 square feet or greater, must bring existing buildings 26 up to the requirements of 5.05.08. 27 b. The deviation process is also applicable to the specific requirements 28 listed under the following sections: 29 i. Section 5.05.08 B.3. Renovations and redevelopment. 30 ii. Section 5.05.08 B.4., Abandonment or discontinuance of use. 31 iii. Sections 5.05.08 D.2.d. for Self- storage buildings. 32 # # # # # # # # # # # # # 4 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \5 05 08 Architectural and Site Design Standards Deviations 070512.docx Text underlined is new text to be added. Text striketh F9 gh in GUFFeAt text to he deleted Bold text indicates a defined term LDC Amendment Request ORIGIN: Collier Building Industry Association AUTHOR: Nick Casalanguida, Administrator, Growth Management Division DEPARTMENT: Transportation Planning, Growth Management Division AMENDMENT CYCLE: 2012 Cycle 1 LDC SECTION(S): 6.02.01 Generally 6.02.03 Transportation Level of CHANGE: Subsection 6.02.01 D.12 of the LDC r all development plans. The proposed amendment i development projects including: Site Development Site Improvement Plans, Insubstantial changes anc Subsection 6.02.03 DA of the LDC requires that a second year of a work schedule for the Florida Del work program and the Collier County Schedule of amendment would add "or third" year to both of tY Subsection 6.02.03 E standard applied and s a "real time" concurrency system for limit that reauirement to site Plans, Site Development Plan Amendments, Plat and Plan projects. pital improvements are included in the first or artment of Transportation (FDOT) 5 year �apitai Improvements. The proposed no longer the current Subsection 6.02.03 G regarding the determination of adequate public facilities in or out of a designated ASI is no longer the current standard applied and the proposed amendment eliminates the subsection. REASON: In subsection 6.02.01 D.12, the "real time" concurrency system currently allocates trips when a development project is approved. The proposed language spells out that the concurrency system is not to be applied to Zoning and Land Rights actions (which are, instead, subject to a Growth Management Plan consistency review). The proposed amendment to subsection 6.02.03 DA would increase the time frame for scheduled road and intersection improvements to be considered committed improvements for development review purposes. A three -year time period for a committed improvement is consistent with State DRI regulations and most local jurisdiction development review regulations found elsewhere outside of Collier County. This change would benefit the local development community and remove any competitive advantage that other jurisdictions would have for development projects, based on the status of committed improvements. Subsection 6.02.03 E is outdated and is no longer utilized. The Minimum Level of Service (LOS) requirements are established in Policy 1.3 and 1.4 of the Growth Management Plan's Transportation Element provides the current standards. They are enforced by application of the TIS Guidelines. I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \6 02 01 Generally and 6 02 03 Transportation Level of Service Reqs 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:31:41 AM Text underlined is new text to be added 'Lv{h FO ugh is t t -h 4 be rl 14 .d a Bold text indicates a defined term 1. Section E.1: This subsection is redundant to Section 9 of the TIS Guidelines in purpose and intent. 2. Section E.2: This subsection fails to comply with Objective 2 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. 3. Section E.3: This subsection conflicts with section 12 of the TIS Guidelines, which determine how growth is to be applied and how potential failures are identified. 4. Section E.4: This subsection conflicts with policies 1.3 and 1.4 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Further, it could potentially be contrary to the established engineering methodology for determining minimum LOS. It is currently designed as more of a Transportation Element Policy rather than as an enforceable LDC requirement. Section 6.02.03 G is outdated and is no longer util Section 8 of the TIS Guidelines which establishes further defined by the 2 % -2 % -3% analysis methoi FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: are not limited to, the following: Section 6.02.01, regarding the Transport development orders, listed in the propos apply to comprehensive plan amendmen zoning. Rather, comprehensive plan ame with the Growth Management Plan. The impact to Collier County. Subsection 6.02.03 DA improvement. Allowing "existing" for roadway ( This the three as opposed to the current thre result in an inability to adjust would include the possibility for improvements within thre methodology is identified in ificant Influence' which is to,examine traffic distribution. y's fiscal and operational impacts include, but rency Management System pertains to The Concurrency Management System does not titions, or Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning petitions are reviewed for consistency rification will have no fiscal or operational ieframe for the construction of the required capital in the Capital Improvement Element to be considered as )urposes during the three year planning window is not -s, and would require "revision of the document (currently ng window would allow roadway projects that are planned for r window to be counted as available capacity, and could allow ithout actual capacity being made available for up to three years Id of two years. Potential fiscal impacts to the County could ital expenditures within the third year. Operational impacts increased congestion for one year on a roadway that is planned gars, instead of current two years. There are no fiscal or operational impacts to the County if subsection 6.02.03.E or 6.02.03.G is removed. Concurrency guidelines are utilized in place of the outdated method. RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: Florida Statutes, Florida Administrative Code, Right -of -Way Permitting and Inspection Handbook, The changes to subsection 6.02.03 DA are not consistent with the current timeframe identified in the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines and Procedures and would require revision of the document. 2 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions\Author Revisions \6 02 01 Generally and 6 02 03 Transportation Level of Service Reqs 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:31:41 AM 11 Text underlined is new text to be added. Text stFikethwugh is ent text to he .Deleted Bold text indicates a defined term GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: All of the proposed changes are consistent with the GMP. OTHER NOTESNERSION DATE: The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this amendment on Thursday, May 17, 2012 and discussed the amendment to subsection 6.02.03 DA which originated from the Collier Building Industry Association. Currently, the section provides a two year time frame for scheduled road and intersection improvements to be considered committed improvements for development review purposes. The proposed change would be to extend the commitment to three years. During the discussion, Staff relayed that the proposed three year time period for a committed improvement would be consistent with the State Development of Regional Impact regulations and other local jurisdictions. However, the County has maintained a two year policy for several years. The Commissioners discussed, among other issues that it would be unlikely that the proposed change would have a large impact since many of the roadways in the urban area have been expanded or will not be expanded further. Further, the discussion conveyed that the current system is not broken and this would keep the roadways "palatable." There were two votes of recommendation. The first was to support the proposed change to a 3 year time frame, with a vote of 2 -6. The second vote was 8 -1 to remove 6.02.03 DA from the amendment. Prepared by Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner, Land Development Services on October 13, 2011; Edited December 7, 2011; Edited December 20, 2011; Edited January 3, 2012; Edited January 5, 2012; Edited February 29,.2012; March 2, 2012, June 26, 2012 Amend the LDC as follows: 1 6.02.01 Generally 2 3 D. For the purposes of this section only, the following terms are defined as follows: 4 5 12. Transportation Concurrency Management System means a "real time" 6 concurrency system that tracks and allocates the available roadway 7 capacity on a continuous basis with quarterly status reports to the Board. 8 Trips generated from proposed developments will be added to the trips 9 approved to date and the existing background traffic counts to determine 10 if there is available capacity for each new development to be approved, 11 in whole or part, as proposed development plans are submitted. 12 Application of this system is limited to the followinq final local 13 development orders: site development plan, site development plan 14 amendment, site improvement plan, and subdivision plat and plan 15 application. 16 # # # # # # # # # # # # 17 6.02.03 Transportation Level of Service Requirements 18 19 D. In assessing the capacity of a County road segment, a state road segment or TCMA for 20 the purpose of determining whether it is operating below the adopted LOS, or would 21 based on the traffic impacts identified in an approved TIS submitted as part of an 22 application for a final local developments order, the County shall consider: 3 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revision s \Author Revisions \6 02 01 Generally and 6 02 03 Transportation Level of Service Reqs 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:31:41 AM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 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 47 48 49 50 51 Text underlined is new text to be added. Text stFikethFo eh is ent text 4 be deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term 4. Construction of the required capital improvement is included in the first three or seeend years of either the Florida DOT 5 year work program or the first three of seGGRd years of the Collier County Schedule of Capital Improvements adopted as part of the Annual Update and Amendment of the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) and Collier County Annual Budget that follows approval of the AUIR. # # # # # # # # # # # # 6.02.03 Transportation Level of Service Requirements IIC II r-_..- - -- .--..� r,. ,........ ... �... .. � r..�......� � �� ... r..v .�� y • �vv � New. vawvr- o peak hour, based OR the AI IR - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IIC II r-_..- - -- .--..� r,. ,........ ... �... .. � r..�......� � �� ... r..v .�� y • �vv � New. vawvr- o peak hour, based OR the AI IR 6.02.03 Transportation Level of Service Requirements 4 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \6 02 01 Generally and 6 02 03 Transportation Level of Service Reqs 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:31:41 AM - - - - - - - 6.02.03 Transportation Level of Service Requirements 4 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \6 02 01 Generally and 6 02 03 Transportation Level of Service Reqs 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:31:41 AM Text underlined is new text to be added. Text str'Lethrn gh is eat text to he deleted. Bold text indicates a defined term 1 where the rnnnsed development Will oreate a eJ f'aient read seg nt n ..�... .��.. N�.. L.....�...a ...v vl.e��e�� rnr vit.uat. , 2 3 elnl\/ for that nertinn of the development that doe not oreate the edefioient rn eel 4 segment. Cnr development ithin a designated AS' GEWerinn a def'n'e t read =o..._.._. _r... a designated 5 segment the Fead oomPonent shall be approved onl far that nertinn of the 6 development that deer net *RGrevuse the net trips nn the eJ fident read se meat 7 and does V � net further degraede the LOS of the definient read segment T 8 9 # # I1 IrzI Irz' 'III 4 II # # II 5 I: \LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \Author Revisions \6 02 01 Generally and 6 02 03 Transportation Level of Service Reqs 071112.docx Caroline Cilek 7/11/2012 11:31:41 AM (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) Agenda Item # MEETING DATE % / ., aka Z- (Circle Meeting Type) Regular Special Workshop Budget AGENDA ITEM TITLE NAME �dt( C' Lp YtAAAt`I ADDRESS Representing/ Petitioner: S �i .5L&& Other: Ii COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -24, 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. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PRIOR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) Agenda Item # MEETING DATE!' `� 2- (Circle Meeting Type) Regular Special Workshop Budget AGENDA ITEM TITLE e'-1-'1 NAME ';7C,�, ADDRESS Representing/ Petitioner: Other: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -05 AND 2007 -24, 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. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PRIOR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD cofF),r r County Growth Management Division Planning & Regulation Land Development Services To: Planning Commission Members From: Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner, Land Development Services Date: July 11, 2012 Subject: Reconsideration of LDC Amendment 5.03.07 Portable Storage Container Dear Planning Commissioners, Additions to LDC amendment 5.03.07 Portable Storage Container LDC Amendment have been made to the Reason and Change sections to include background information and a timeline of events. Changes to the amendment text include proposing a definition for portable storage containers in LDC section 1.08.00. This definition was developed by examining a variety of definitions from other municipalities. Small text changes to clarify existing language were also made. In addition to the revised amendment, several supplemental materials are included in your packet. These materials include: 1.) Meeting minutes from the June 13th Estates Community Meeting 2.) Attendee and Comments Data Base from the June 13th Estates Community Meeting 3.) PowerPoint Presentation for the June 13th Estates Community Meeting 4.) Meeting minutes from the May 10th In Focus Meeting 5.) Meeting minutes from the January 301h In Focus Meeting 6.) The letter Mr. Ramsey presented at the January 30th In Focus Meeting Qw&ManapTvtDiv6m - Pianning $ Reguiatiors • 2800 North Horseshoe Drive • Naples, Flonda 34104.239- 252 -2400 • www cottiergov net I:\LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1\Amendment Revisions \CCPC \CCPC 2012 -7 -19 \Memo for 5.03.07 Portable Storage Container LDC Amendment.docx 7/11/2012 12:01 PM DISCUSSION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT: 5.03.07 PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINERS C1er County Growth Management Division Planning & Regulation Lam Development Seni- Hosted by: Collier County Growth Management Staff, Golden Gate Area Civic Association and the Homeowners Association of Golden Gate Estates Background on LDC Amendment ❑ Background on LDC amendment o Directed by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners • September 27, 2012 • Land Development Code Amendment to allow containers as a permanent and County permitted accessory structure o Presented to BCC in September 2012 Services Current Feedback from Community ❑ Discussion of the following criteria: o Screening, such as landscaping or fencing or a combination there of, for containers in the Estates (i.e. containers shall be screened from view of adjacent property owners and the public right of way). a Prohibit the storage of "hazardous materials or flammable or combustible liquids" 13 No internal motors (for refrigeration) o Storage container shall be maintained with no rust, operational doors, no holes, roof leaks, and stable floors, screening maintained �t o Locked, to prevent an attractive nuisanceC,.*'►" CaatNty Growth Management 0n4sim Planning & Regulation Land Development S—l- 7/11/2012 Tonight's Meeting ❑ Goal of meeting — to gather input from Estates Community • Background • Handout with Information on the Amendment ❑ Community Input Segment Informational Handout ❑ Information o Purpose oZoning 13 Permitting process o FEMA Ter Coumy Growth Managemerrt DNsiat Planning & Regulation Lard Deaelopinent Services ter County Growth Management Divisim Planning & Regulation and Development Se— Community Input Segment ❑ Comments and Questions o State your name, o Speak one at a time, e Succinct 00ter C014"ty Growth Management Dviaw Planning & Regulation Land Develw—t Servlcea 1 Timeline of Events regarding 5.03.07 Portable Storage Container LDC Amendment 11/14/2011 Development Services Approved an earlier draft of the amendment. Advisory Committee (DSAC) - Land Development Review (LDR) Subcommittee Meeting 1/30/2012 DSAC Approved an earlier draft of the amendment. 1/31/2012 LDC Amendment In In Focus Meeting. Mr. Ramsey presented a letter, from the Golden Gate Focus Meeting Area Civic Association (GGACA) proposing recommendations on Portable Storage Containers. the Letter was signed by Mr. Gaddy, President of the GGACA. 4/13/2012 Collier County LDC Amendment was presented and approved. Planning Commission - Special Meeting 5/10/2012 LDC Amendment In In Focus Meeting. Ms. Kathy Raimondi presented her comments regarding Focus Meeting Portable Storage Containers 5/17/2012 Collier County Mr. Gaddy requested that the Estates Community be given more time to Planning Commission discuss the proposed amendment. A community meeting is needed and a re- review by the Planning Commission. 6/13/2012 Community Meeting Estates Residents discussed the amendment. Public notice included: a for Estates Residents brief information article in the Naples Daily News, 3 electronic message board signs on Golden Gate Parkway, Immokalee Rd., 951; standard public notice, email to LDC Amendment distribution list. 7/19/2012 Collier County Reconsideration of the LDC amendment. Planning Commission Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Comments during Discussion 1) Layout of the homes makes "backyard" requirement not necessary protection 2) Landscaping requirement is lacking 3) How to regulate what is stored? - Concerned 4) Encouraging low income residents 5) Visually unappealing 6) Does not enhance GGE 7) [GGE] Not treated like the rest of the county 8) [The amendment] Does not address healthy, safety, & welfare. Remove from LDC amendment 9) Police Issues? - Had the grow house issue - Can't inspect all without warrant 10) Don't see them as a positive 11) Code Enforcement can't go in backyard to inspect 12) Fence screening- concerned with chain link with plastic 13) Use traditional shed 14) Not enough public input 15) Build a shed; not in favor. - Concerned of illegal activity - living in them - "grow" house 16) Leave out of Estates - C K for Ag. 17) Decline in property values 18) Concern that BCC won't listen to opposition 19) Home Values 20) County requirements won't make this a low -cost storage alternative 21) Appraiser's office opinion that affect would be similar to poor kept yard or highway next door. Would need a study 22) "Too many Laws" Moved to Estates because of privacy. 23) Wants less Code Enforcement 24) Large lots- wouldn't be seen by neighbors 25) No "industrial flotsam & jetsam" - too much junk in yards currently 26) Likes rural aspect of GGE 27) Wants better vetting for amendments during season 28) [Containers are an] alternative to trailer 29) Keep Maintained. Prefers storage containers to semi - trailers. Safer in a hurricane Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Attendees and Comment Form Information ** 27 Attendees ** Name Address Phone Email Affiliation Comment P.O. Box 990637 Naples, FL 34116 - Ruth Macrides 6000 Feral4ever @aol.com 2890 47th Ave NE Christina Fuentes Naples, FL 34120 253 -6187 1830 16th St. NE Jerry Blocker Naples, FL 34120 229 -0366 280 22nd Ave. NE Jim Flanagan 34120 Rene & Yolanda Gonzales RGG319 @vahoo.com N/A Naples, FL 34120 4260 15th Ave. SW Randy Johns Naples, FL 34116 451 -0040 140 Wilson Blvd. S. Mark Teaters Naples, FL 34117 HOAGGE Thomas Gundeck Naples, FL 34117 455 -1875 LEAVE US THE HELL ALONE Golden Gate Estates Resident and Homeowner since 1985; 1 can't belive this cheap and easy alternative to a shed. 1) These cheap and easy alternatives to sheds will be used for grow houses- already have one on record 2) 530 Third St. SW HOAGGE- Illegal rental units 3) illegal bunkers 4) declining property Kim Ellis Naples, FL 34117 269 -7025 KimEllis @iohnrwood.com Pres. values; Cheap and Easy is Rarely good! 155127th St. SW Joshua P. Caraker Naples FL, 34117 Kathy Raimondi Naples, FL 34120 kcadc @vahoo.com Rod & Bev Foytik Naples, Fl 34117 441 20th Ave. NW Pat Humphries Naples, 34120 455 -3761 pathuml3 @aol.com Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Arthur & Yanara Feria feria239 @gmail.com Moore 354 -8090 These storage containers are better than semi trailers 761 17th St SW and utility trailers that are permitted and can fly in a Doug Rankin Naples, FL 34117 455 -1682 hurricane where these will not. 441 24th Ave. NE Karen Acquard Naples, FL 34120 455 -8318 kmacquard @comcast.net I think the idea of allowing these "shipping" containers on any residential lot other than as a temporary need is terrible. * I do realize that in the Estates, a homeowner should be allowed to do "almost" anything on their property as long as it does not intrude on their neighbors. * Seems fair as long as they are completely out of sight! I still cannot understand the need for such containers when a shed would do the same. * As far as not allowing flammables, if someone has one of these containers on their lot to store their lawn equipment, where are they supposed to store the gas? in their homes? I would much rather see these types of containers outlawed or strictly enforced. As you know, someone already has used one as a grow house! More cons than pros about these containers. I VOTE NO! Can 630 23rd St. SW you imagine if everyone put one of these in their yard ?H Donna Sadler Naples, FL 34117 455 -4391 pschuck @centurvlink.net Build a concrete shed. 1100 Immokalee Road Naples, FL Naples Daily Kate Albers 34110 263 -4764 kalbers(a@naplesnews.com News Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Revise the amendment as follows: Take the Estates off of the amendment altogether. That's it! The Estates should not be catergorized into the agriculture and industrial. 133122nd Ave. NE GGEACA/ What does that say to me? It says we will end up like Annette Kniola Naples, FL 34120 353 -3311 annettekniola @aol.com HOAGGE white trash. PLEASE NO! Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Comments Collected Via Email Name Email Date Comment Response I live in the GG Estates & I do not want shipping Provided information on upcoming toesmoml @aol.com 6/14/2012 containers allowed. meetings. Added to Distribution List I'm a resident in the Golden States and I will like Forwarding materials at the meeting. to know the outcome of the meeting. I was not Provided information on upcoming Catalina Carreras catalina0320 @me.com 6/14/2012 able to attend. Thank you, Catalina C. meetings. This is a step in the wrong direction. This also may lead to lowering property value in the estates Kenneth Geiger dalegeiger40 @gmail.com 6/14/2012 which is already an issue. Dear Caroline: Thanks for all of the effort you put forth which resulted in a very successful meeting Peter Gaddy petergaddy @gmail.com 6/14/2012 last night. [Response to Mr. Gaddy's Email, above] Good morning, I agree. The discussion was good, and the give and take between community members was healthy. People were respectful. Staff and other departments were quick to respond and gave straight answers. This is the kind of meeting people expect, I haven't seen one like it in a while. Mark Teaters mteaters @aol.com 6/14/2012 Everyone did a great job! [Response to Mr. Teater's Email, above] It's a shame it has been so long since a proper public Responded to chain of emails Peter Gaddy petergaddy @gmall.com 6/14/2012 meeting has been conducted. regarding upcoming meetings. Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Arnaldo Soto Jr. yanie.feria(gmail.com 6/14/2012 I was at the meeting last night in regards to the storage containers. I would like to know when the next meeting will be. Thanks. Provided information on upcoming meetings. Added to Distribution List As an Estates resident I am writing to urge you to not allow shipping containers to become lawful on a long term basis in the Golden Gate Estates area. Due to the large lot sizes the Estates has already been unsuccessfully trying to deal with unsightly storage on properties as well as illegal operation of trucking and manufacturing businesses. Allowing the containers would just add to the decline in property values and enjoyment of the natural aesthetics offered in the area for neighbors who have the containers for a view. Please carefully consider this matter because once this permission is in place it will be very difficult to oversee how the containers are being used. Thank you for your attention to this Provided information on upcoming Kathy Adams kathya()conservancy.org 6/20/2012 issue. meetings. Added to Distribution List Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center Permitting /allowing these type of ugly, often rusty sealed containers would degrade the aesthetics and property values of the neighborhoods where we Estates residents live. Obviously, this misguided idea would not even be considered in other platted residential areas of Collier County and Naples. It has been mentioned in LDC section 5.03.07 that allowing these containers would make it possible for homeowners to have a cheaper, more affordable alternative to the regular storage sheds. A 10 X 12 storage shed can be purchased from Home Depot, Lowe's for around 500.00. Properly anchored down this is adequate for storage of lawn mowers, equipment etc. Also a shed of this type can be placed on most properties out of sight of your neighbor. PODS in my opinion should not be allowed in estates residential neighborhoods. We are not an industrial park. While PODS would be a storage benefit to some due to their size, they would be an eyesore .Once they are in place I have concerns as to whether they would be monitored on a regular basis as to their use and compliance. As a resident of Golden Gate Estates I strongly oppose allowing these containers to be allowed. Please share my concerns with members of the Planning Commission. Sincerely, Franklin B. Adams Provided information on upcoming Franklin B. Adams captrankadams @aol.com 6/24/2012 meetings. Added to Distribution List Community Meeting to discuss Portable Storage Containers in the Estates District Wednesday, June 13, 2012 6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m. - IFAS Center I am a resident of the Golden Gate Estates and I do not wish for it to change in any way. The beauty of living out here is that it is clean and wholesome to raise a family. I sincerely wish for it to remain the same for my future grandchildren, therefore, I wish you would reconsider and keep the Estates out of your proposed amendment altogether and leave the industrial, commercial, and agricultural as is. So that we could continue Provided information on upcoming N/A ieeppe(@aol.com 6/23/2012 to enjoy the beauty of it all. Concerned Resident meetings. Added to Distribution List The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, Inc. P.O. Box 990596, Naples, FL 34116 -6002 %v viv.estotes- civic.org 30 January 2012 Growth Management Division Planning and Regulation Collier County Government 2800 Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Recommendation to proposed changes in Land Zoning and Enforcement for "Intermodal Metal Cargo Containers," LDC Amendment 2012 Cycle 1 The Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association (GGEACA) has reviewed the initial draft documents in regards to proposed changes to the Land Zoning and Code Enforcement guidelines for Collier County Government, GGEACA submits the following recommendations to offer on the proposed changes to the Land Zoning and Code Enforcement issues in regards to Intermodal Metal Cargo Containers: 1. The official name of these storage units should be listed as intenmodal Metal Cargo Containers (IMCC). It was noted in the initial drafts that the containers were referred to as "PODS." "PODS', is a trade name and should not be used in zoning or code enforcement guidelines. 2. IMCC's typically are built in 20 and 40 foot lengths that are 8 foot wide and 8 foot high. Other sizes that are utilized are 48 and 53 feet long. Heights are taller at 9 foot 6 inches or 10 feet 6 inches, and widths are approximately 8 feet wide. 3. The IMCC's that are most available to die public are the 20 and 40 foot units that are 8 foot tall and 8 foot wide. However, the other 48 and 53 foot units with the taller heights are also available to the public for purchase. 4. Typical 20 x 8 x 8 IMCC weighs 2.7 tons empty, typical 40 x 8 x 8 foot IMCC weighs 3.75 tons. 5. Zoning and code enforcement should be based on the largest IMCC available to the public which would be the 53 foot long, 8 foot wide and 10 foot 6 inches tall. Total square footage would equal 424 square feet for l unit. Page I Growth Management Division 2012 LDC Amendment Cycle Y GGEACA Recommendations: Intemtodal Metal Cargo Containers 30 January 2012 Page 2 6. Agricultural zoning with active agriculture of 20 acres or more should be allowed to utilize as many IMCC's as needed as an accessory structure without permitting, which is currently allowed. Guidelines: a_ No stacking b. Maximum 2 units per 5 acres, c. Follow set back rules for property lines in relation to different property owner d. Not utilized for human occupancy / dwelling. 7. Agricultural zoning with or without active agriculture under 20 acres should require permitting by Growth Management Division. Minimum requirements for permitting should be: a. No stacking b. Following set back rules for property lines in relation to a different property owner c. Maximum2 units per 5 acre, or i. Any combination of 20, 40 or 53 foot IMCC's that do not exceed 1000 square feet d. Must be elevated off soil e. Not utilized for human occupancy / dwelling £ Classified as an accessory structure g. Can be below 100 year flood plain elevation i. if so must be anchored, if not no anchors required 8. Estates zoning should require permitting by Growth Management Division. Guidelines should be: a. No stacking b. Following set back rules for property lines in relation to a different property owner c. Maximuln 2 units per 5 acres or less. i. Any combination of 20, 40 or 53 foot IMCC's that do not exceed 1000 square feet ii. Non conforming lots not to exceed a maximum of 4 IMCC's units. d. Must be elevated off soil e. Not utilized for human occupancy / dwelling. £ Classified as an accessory structure g. Can be below 100 year flood plain elevation i. if so must be anchored, if not no anchors required h. IMCC's may be in the front or back yards. The GGEACA appreciates the opportunity to provide input on this process. If there are any questions please contact us. Sincerely Peter Gaddy President January 30, 2012 "IN FOCUS" COMMUNITY MEETING MINUTES FOR THE 2012 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS - CYCLE 1 Naples, Florida January 30, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that a PUBLIC MEETING was held on behalf of the 2012 Land Development Code Amendments — Cycle 1, on this date at 5:00 PM in Conference Room #610 at the Growth Management Division/Planning & Regulation Office, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida. STAFF PRESENT: Bill Lorenz, Director — Land Development Services Caroline Cilek, M.C.R.P., Senior Planner — Land Development Code Coordinator Ray Bellows, Manager — Zoning Division Fred Reischl, Senior Planner — Land Development Services Chris Scott, Senior Planner — Land Development Services Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist s January 30, 2012 I. CALL TO ORDER: Caroline Cilek opened the "In Focus" Community Meeting at 5:10 PM. II. INTRODUCTIONS: Caroline Cilek introduced Staff. III. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 2012 — CYCLE 1 (a) Overview: • Amendment Cycle began during the summer of 2011 at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners • Deadline to submit Amendments to the Land Development Code: October • Drafts were formatted • Amendment Drafts have been posted on the County's website • Categories: • Board- directed • Privately sponsored • County departments • November and December, 2011: Amendments were reviewed by the Land Development Regulations Subcommittee ( "LDR ") on behalf of the Development Services Advisory Committee ( "DSAC ") o Membership: Engineers, Contractors, Architects, a Biologist, and an Attorney • DSAC members sat on the LDR Subcommittee, reviewed each of the proposed Amendments, provided comments /suggestions • The Subcommittee's recommendations were presented to the full DSAC in January, 2012 • The Amendments with environmental components will be reviewed by the Environmental Advisory Council (` EAC ") • The Collier County Planning Commission ( "CCPC ") will also review the Amendments • A presentation of the Amendments and Committees' recommendations will be made to the Board of County Commissioners • Additionally, Staff has also reviewed the documents (b) Timeline: • Several Community meetings will be held in February and March • Final review of the documents will be completed by the DSAC and the EAC in March, 2012 • The CCPC will conducts its reviews in April and May • Presentations will be made to the Board of County Commissioners during June, July, and September, 2012 Ms. Cilek noted the various County departments had submitted Amendments: • Growth Management Division —14 • Parks and Recreation — 1 2 January 30, 2012 • Pollution Control — several relating to the wellfields • Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Community Redevelopment Agency — 1 Private Sector Amendments: • Collier Building Industry Association ( "CBIA ") — 11 Amendment: 1. Section 4.02.03 — Specific Standards for Location of Accessory Buildings and Structures Author: Ray Bellows, Planning Manager — Land Development Services Purpose: To eliminate confusion and allow the use of personal storage containers on properties zoned "Rural Agricultural" and "Estates" Caroline Cilek stated the Amendment was not in final form. Public Speaker: Michael R. Ramsey, representing the Golden Gate Estates Area Civic Association, submitted the Association's letter which was signed by Peter Gaddy, as President. Comments: • Refer to the storage containers as Intermodal Metal Cargo Containers ( "IMCC ") o "PODS" is a trade name and should not be utilized • IMCC sizes: Length Height Width 20' 8` 8` 40' 8' 8' 48' 9' &3 8' 53' 10' 6" 8' • Zoning and Code Enforcement should be based on the largest IMCC available to the public Agricultural zoning — 20 or more acres: • Maximum units: 2 per five acres • No stacking • Categorize as an "accessory structure" • Follow set -back rules for property lines • A permit will not be required • Agricultural zoning — less than 20 acres: o Maximum units: 2 per five acres ■ in any combination that does not exceed 1,000 square feet (i.e., 53 x 8 unit = 424 sq. ft.) January 30, 2012+ • Units are to be elevated above soil • No stacking • Follow set -back rules for property lines • A permit will be required • Estates zoning should require permitting. o Maximum units: 2 per five acres • in any combination that does not exceed 1,000 square feet (i.e., 53 x 8' unit = 424 sq. ft.) • non - conforming lots are not to exceed a maximum of 4 IMCC units • Units are to be elevated above soil • No stacking • Follow set -back rules for property lines • Categorize as an "accessory structure" • Not to be utilized for human occupancy or as a dwelling • If located below the FEMA 100 -year floodplain elevation, the accessory structures must be anchored • If located above the FEMA 100 -year floodplain elevation, anchoring is not necessary It was recommended to use the dimensions of the largest container as the benchmark (424 square feet) for configuration. Mr. Ramsey concluded his comments. Ms. Cilek noted spreadsheets containing a brief description for each Amendment on the agenda were available to the public. Ray Bellows, Manager — Zoning Division • Some components noted in the Association's letter made sense and will be incorporated into the Amendment • Do not want to create an "industrial" feel or change character of the Estates • There is a limitation (percentage) for accessory structures • Will contact the Building Department regarding restrictions on storage structures • Landscaping component to be discussed There were no additional comments or public speakers on the record. Conversation continued among attendees and Staff. There being no further business, the Public Meeting was concluded at 5:30 PM 4 May10, 2012 "IN FOCUS" MEETING MINUTES FOR THE 2012 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS - CYCLE 1 Naples, Florida May 10, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that a PUBLIC MEETING — "In Focus" — was held on behalf of the 2012 Land Development Code Amendments — Cycle 1, on this date at 5:00 PM in Conference Room #610 at the Growth Management Division — Planning and Regulation Office, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida. STAFF PRESENT: Caroline Cilek, M.S., Senior Planner — Land Development Code Coordinator Ray Bellows, Manager — Zoning Division Reed Jarvi, Manager — Transportation Planning i May10, 2012 I. CALL TO ORDER/ INTRODUCTIONS: Caroline Cilek opened the "In Focus" Meeting at 5:12 PM. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 2012 — CYCLE 1 II. Review and Discussion of the following Amendments: a. Section 4.02.03 — Specific Standards for Location of Accessory Buildings and Structures Author: Ray Bellows, Planning Manager — Land Development Services Purpose: To eliminate confusion and allow the use of personal storage containers on properties zoned "Rural Agricultural" and "Estates" Public Speaker. Kathy Raimondi: • Is a resident of Golden Gate Estates and has lived in the Estates for the past seven years • Feels it would be "very unfortunate" if the Ordinance permitting permanent storage containers on properties in the Golden Gate Estates is approved • The Estates has very specific problems and the storage containers will only add to them • "In no way is this going to embellish or present anything positive for the Estates" • Issue concerning the Estates: there have been multiple violations by property owners concerning the erection of structures without obtaining a permit • In her specific situation, both of her neighbors converted 75% of their homes into illegal "grow houses" [to grow "pot" J o She has been threatened, terrorized, harassed, and someone shot at her husband • Four dump trucks were parked on one side of her property — only one of the trucks was owned by the neighboring property owner • A tire business was being run from one of the locations, in addition to the "drug stuff," • The other neighbor kept more animals per species than legally allowed • Apparently a Code Enforcement Investigator was told the intention was to run Mrs. Raimondi and her family off their property • Her family has lived in "pure blight" conditions — she produced a series of pictures to show to County Staff to illustrate the living conditions — "it has been absolutely horrifying" • Hate signs were raised facing her property • When she contacted Code Enforcement, she was informed her neighbors were allowed to erect signs on their property • The last thing we want is for someone to put a shipping container next door to our house — we finally have nice neighbors who care about their property 2 May 10, 2012 o "This is a downward trend and doesn't speak very highly of Collier County" o Caroline Cilek's notes: "The authors do not understand the consequences of the actions of this Ordinance" o In the Ordinance, landscaping is required to conceal the storage containers — you cannot conceal these containers because the homes in the Estates are built high up on a berm so that they don't flood. o Even with a six -foot high fence installed, you could easily see everything on a neighbor's property from my house o The other consequences that you're not planning for — if I'm not mistaken — the Ordinance says that they [the containers] should be restricted to the "rear yard" o This is where I don't think the authors understand — Golden Gate Estates is not like a gated community — it is haphazard — some houses are near the street, some houses are far back — if my neighbors were to put these [containers] in their back yard, that would be my front view. o If you want to try to sell your home, one of the most important things is curb -side appeal. No one wants to live next door to a bunch of shipping containers. o This Ordinance is going to devalue our homes. They need to take out the verbiage that they are restricted to the rear yard. o Can you imagine living in a gated community and to look out your back yard and see a shipping container? You would never think of it. o None of the Commissioners would want a shipping container next door to their house or in the front yard. o I am here by myself to object to what you are doing — people do not understand what it happening. o Some of the things going through in this Ordinance should not be put in — they should be taken out. o For example, you have verbiage that "the cost to provide structures to house lawn maintenance equipment is costly." That wording is great but it does not say that people will keep their lawn maintenance stuff in there. o The verbiage has to say that these are being allowed for the sole purpose and only purpose — to keep lawn maintenance in there. o The Ordinance should say that if people have them that they should be involuntarily be subjected to inspections by the authorities — the Sheriff's Department and Code Enforcement — if necessary to validate the use intended. o The reason is obvious — you can have a meth lab with chemicals sitting in those containers and you have no access to going in there in a rear yard and seeing in it unless you specifically put it in the Ordinance. They must involuntarily agree to have it inspected because they can easily put up a sign in the front yard that says, "No Trespassing," and not even the Sheriff s Department can go back there and look. It would take a court order. May 10, 2012 • It really does devalue your home's value and they should not be restricted to a rear yard which could be somebody else's front view. • It's a hap - hazard area and you need to take that into consideration. • It you're going to put an Ordinance through like this which, in my opinion, is completely ridiculous in an area where people are being allowed to build homes — they're not quite as close as the gated communities — but not everybody who moves out there wants to have animals. Not everybody out there wants to grow marijuana — not everybody out there wants to have a farm — a lot of people are just ordinary people like the people who live in the gated communities - -- o I'm here because I do think there are a lot of errors in the new Ordinance and I think that you're making a really stupid new Ordinance that's going to come back to have a lot of serious consequences if you don't change the language before it goes before the Commissioners. • I spoke earlier about "remove the language pertaining to health, safety and welfare. " This Amendment does not address any health, safety and welfare issues. • Going back to the landscaping issue: most of the people in Golden Gate Estate haven't got a clue what "landscaping" is — they really don't. How can you say that they [the containers] have to be landscaped? Caroline Cilek thanked the speaker for her comments. She noted the speaker's comments are on record and will be brought to the Board of County Commissioners. Jeremy Frantz, Conservancy of SW Florida: Q: Regarding Section 6.02.01(D) — in the beginning is a list of applicability — have any changes been made? A: (Caroline Cilek) It outlines exactly what is applicable. Q. The "Open Space" definition has changed (Section 1.08.02). I know that for a time, it was changed to mirror the GMP. I saw today that there were a few new additions. A. Instead of mirroring the Rural Fringe, which is not a coastal area of the County, we're including what is currently in the definition for usable space because it takes in all of the County .... If we make a change, we model the change off what is currently in the Definition Section, so all of those are currently in Definition Section — they were struck be consistent with the Definition Section in the GMP but since that is only applicable to a certain region in the County, it was not a good application. [Tennis Courts, beach frontage, lagoons, floor plains were added to active /passive recreation areas.] May 10, 2012 Q. For the Administrative Adjustment (Section 9/04/08), I wanted to verify that the language in B. 1(b) is adequate for keeping it to the intent for specific parcels. A. "Reductions greater than 12 inches are not allowed unless the preserve setback for the parcel or lot is irregular." The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the language. Q. It's not what we were asking for originally, but I think it's a good compromise. Jeremy Frantz: "We have worked a lot together on all of these and I think we haven't really recognized the Staff that has helped the Conservancy go through all of these and listen to our comments and requests — you have done a really good job." b. Section 4.06.02 — Buffer Requirements Caroline Cilek stated the revisions were made clear — especially concerning the application — the design for parcels that were smaller so that, together, they would not create giant parcels. Kevin Mangan, Landscape Architect — WilsonMiller, Stantec: • The only question I have concerning the draft is at 7(c). (see Page 6, Line 48) Suggestion: Add "within the joint proposed project" following the word "reallocated" Or add "of the proposed joint project" to the end of the sentence (Line 49). Ms. Cilek stated she would bring the suggestion to the attention of the other Planners and the County Attorney's Office. Caroline Cilek thanked the participants for their input. There being no further business, the Public Meeting was concluded at 5:35 AM. June 13, 2012 MINUTES ESTATES COMMUNITY MEETING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 5.03.07 - PORTABLE STORAGE CONTAINERS Naples, Florida Wednesday, June 13, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that an ESTATES COMMUNITY MEETING was held on behalf of the 2012 Land Development Code Amendment — "Portable Storage Containers" — on this date at 6:00 PM, in PUBLIC MEETING FORMAT, at the University of Florida/ Institute of Food and Agricultural Services ( "UF /IFAC ") Extension Office, located at 14700 Immokalee Road, Naples, Florida 34120. STAFF PRESENT: Jamie French, Director — Operations & Regulatory Management Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner — Land Development Code Coordinator Ray Bellows, Manager — Zoning Services Chris Scott, Principal Planner — Business Center Tatiana Gust, Manager — Plan Review & Inspections John Walsh, Senior Engineer — Plan Review & Inspections Myron Jacobs, Chief Structural Engineer, Plan Review & Inspections Bill Lorenz, Director — Land Development Services Jeff Letourneau, Senior Supervisor — Code Enforcement Cristina Perez, Investigative Supervisor — Code Enforcement 1 June 13, 2012 I. CALL TO ORDER: Caroline Cilek opened the Estates Community Public Meeting at 6:15 PM. II. INTRODUCTIONS: Peter Gaddy, President — Golden Gates Estates Area Civic Association: • He became aware that the Ordinance had progressed further than anticipated and it had been presented to the Planning Commission • He attended a public meeting where Diane Flagg, Director of Code Enforcement, was also present • A number of questions were asked concerning the Storage Containers • He appeared before the Planning Commission and asked the Commissioners to reconsider the Ordinance • After the current Public Meeting, the issue will be presented again to the Planning Commission o Public comments /objections regarding the Amendment will be heard by the Planning Commission at that meeting LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 2012 — CYCLE 1 III. Discussion of the following proposed Amendment: Caroline Cilek began her PowerPoint presentation and stated the meeting was held to encourage discussion of the proposed Amendment to the Land Development Code which would allow portable storage containers as an accessory structure in the Estates District. She recognized and thanked Mr. Gaddy and Mark Teeters for their assistance in co- hosting the public meeting with the County's Growth Management Division. She provided background information: • The Land Development Code ( "LDC ") is a tool to guide County development; • It is adopted and amended by the Board of County Commissioners; • It is one of several tools that the State of Florida mandates that Counties create and follow; • Last summer, the Board of County Commissioners approved an LDC Cycle • Changes are proposed to the LDC • There is a public vetting process • The Portable Storage Container Amendment is Board directed • It was presented to the various County Advisory Boards such as the Planning Commission or the Development Services Advisory Board — changes may be suggested and the Amendment revised • The final version of the Amendment will be presented: o July: to the Planning Commission, 2 June 13, 2012 o September: to the Board of County Commissioners for their review and decision She explained the various hand -outs available. She noted the comment slips could be completed during the meeting or emailed to her and that all comments would be brought to the Planning Commission as well as the Board of County Commissioners. She stated the goal of the meeting was to obtain input from the Estates community concerning the Amendment and gave a brief PowerPoint presentation. Discussion of the following proposed Amendment: a. Section 5.03.07 — Portable Storage Containers (New Section) Section 10.02.03 — Submittal Requirements for Site Development Plans Caroline Cilek explained Mr. Teeters and Mr. Gaddy relayed feedback from the Estates community concerning the Ordinance. Suggestions: • Require "screening," i.e., fencing, or landscaping, or a combination of both; • Prohibit the storage of hazardous materials /flammable /combustible liquids; • Prohibit outfitting the container with internal motors for refrigeration units; • Maintenance requirements (no rust, leaking roofs, holes); and • Require containers to be securely locked when not in use. IV. Public Speakers: 1. Douglas Rankin, Esq.: • Has been a resident of the Estates for 6 years and a resident of Collier County for 30 years; • Is a past President of both Estates associations and was a member of the Master Plan Committee; • Currently, in the Estates, it is legal to have a semi - trailer or a utility trailer in a back yard, as long as there is a current tag on the vehicle; • The semi - trailer and the utility trailer are not required to be tied down and would "fly" during a hurricane; • Storage containers can withstand typhoon -type winds; • If storage containers are tied down to the ground and properly screened from view, he would not object to their use; • Storage containers are affordable and provide a good alternative — even small conventionally -built buildings are too expensive; • He appreciated the suggested revisions to the Amendment and supported the requirement for maintenance. 2. Kim Ellis: • Has lived in the Estates since 1985 and has been a resident of Collier County since 1973; 3 June 13, 2012 • Is the current President of the Golden Gate Estates Homeowners Association; • Is a Real Estate agent who works primarily in Golden Gate Estates, as well as a homeowner in the Estates; • The turnout would have been much larger if enough notice had been given; • If your home is used to run your business, there are better alternatives — more professional and better looking than the containers — rent office space or buy a shed; • Many neighborhoods allow commercial vehicles but not storage containers; • She cited a recent news story about an individual who buried a storage container so he could grow "pot" in his backyard; • It is possible a person could live in a storage container — especially if it had electric service and water — the next generation of flop houses; • Suggestion: Remove the Estates from the Ordinance and allow containers only in agricultural areas where there are horses and cows; • How are storage containers a consideration for a residential area — the Estates is a residential area; • Who will regulate these containers after they are installed? • The containers will contribute to declining property values; • She mentioned showing a $500,000 property on Pine Ridge Road — the potential buyers loved the property until they were in the back yard and saw the next door neighbor had a storage container — then they were no longer interested; • She noted the property has been for sale for over a year; • Last year, she sold and closed on 15 properties; • She could not believe the discussion — who's idea was this? How was it even considered? Why didn't anyone hear about this Amendment before? • She strongly objected to the use of storage containers. Ray Bellows, Manager — Zoning Services: • The Amendment was drafted at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners; • Code Enforcement received complaints about the storage containers and asked the Board of County Commissioners for direction; • Staff was asked to create the Amendment. From the Audience: Q. Is it true that the County was actually permitted these containers years ago and then stopped? A. (Ray Bellows) Some type of tie -down permits had been issued by the previous Zoning Director, but the practice was stopped. The purpose of the Amendment is to either legalize the use or make it clear that the community does not want it. Q. Did the County Commissioners take a stand on this? If so, who was for it and who was against it? 11 June 13, 2012 A. (Jeff Letourneau, Code Enforcement) That is why we're here. The Building Department was directed to look into the matter and the County is now in the process of bringing it to the public. Caroline Cilek confirmed the meeting was part of the public vetting process and that meetings had been — and will be held — on this Amendment and others over the next few months. She stated the Planning Commission will be updated next week but the full Amendment will not be brought before the Commission until next month. Q. How many public meetings are going to be scheduled? How will they be advertised and when will they be scheduled? A. (Caroline Cilek) All of the Planning Commission's meetings are public meetings and are noticed through a news release. Q. Is there a regular date for the meetings? A. The Planning Commission meets monthly. • This Amendment will go before the Planning Commission during the 3rd week of July. • During the meeting, public speakers are welcome to comment on Agenda topics. • The Planning Commission will make recommendations to approve or deny or make changes to the Amendment. • The Planning Commission's recommendation will be sent to the Board of County Commissioners in September. Q. Are any of the Commissioners here? (No member of the Board of County Commissioners attended the meeting.) Q. Do any of the Commissioners own storage containers? (Caroline Cilek) Yes. Public Sneakers: 3. Kathy Raimondi: • Has been a resident of Golden Gate Estates for the past seven years; • Has attended each meeting regarding portable storage containers; • Agrees completely with Kim Ellis; • This is a very complex issue; • In her specific situation, her neighbors converted their homes into illegal "grow houses" [ "pot "]; • She and her family lived in fear for six months and said nothing until they finally contacted Code Enforcement; • The neighbors tried to run her off her property; • The Board of County Commissioners will never listen to you — they will thank you for speaking and ignore your comments — they will vote against everything requested; June 13, 2012 • The residents of Golden Gate Estates must stick together; • A "good old boys club" exists in the County — the County does not operate for the good of the majority of the residents of Collier County; • She thanked Caroline Cilek for being very gracious and for notifying her of the meeting dates; • She stated the "Amendment came out of no- where;" • If the Amendment is passed, the Estates will become the `land of storage containers'; • To sell a house, the most important thing is curb -side appearance; • The Golden Gate Estates is very hap - hazard — my backyard could face your front yard — Who wants to look at storage containers? • The Ordinance is not specific and does not clearly define what is acceptable "landscaping." • The authors of the Ordinance do not understand the consequences of the Ordinance; • If a "No Trespass" sign is installed on a property, no one can inspect it without a Court order; • She stated the Ordinance encourages "steering" of low income residents to the Golden Gate Estates; • Why doesn't the Board of County Commissioners do something to enhance the Estates area and combat its negative reputation? • Home values in the Estates have dropped by 75% without storage containers. • The Amendment does nothing to address "health/safety /public welfare" issues — the language is misleading. • She is adamantly opposed to the Ordinance. Peter Gaddy asked if the Collier County Sheriff's Office had any experience with the storage containers. Deputy Sheriff Tim Pratt stated only the "grow house" container that was mentioned earlier. Others are suspected but since the properties were posted with "No Trespassing" signs, they cannot be inspected. 4. Karen Acquard: • Has been a resident of the Estates since July, 1991, and a resident of Collier County since 1963; • Is a founding member of the Golden Gate Estates Homeowners Association and a past President of the Civic Association; • Where is the support for the containers — they are not viewed as something positive for the area; • How will they be maintained if they cannot be inspected by either Code Enforcement or the Sheriff's Department? Re -write it to give the Sheriff s Office and Code Enforcement the authority to enter "posted" properties to inspect these containers; 31 June 13, 2012 • She and her husband applied for a permit; bought a Ted's Shed TM that was properly installed and anchored — it houses lawn equipment, pool equipment, golf clubs, and is not unsightly in their yard. Why can't the Ordinance support commercial storage units instead of these containers? • The County should have done more advertising of these meetings — why are they trying to "sneak" this Ordinance through at the end of "Season" without proper notification? More public meetings are needed before the Planning Commission and the Board of Public make any decisions. • She does not support the Ordinance. 5. Mark Teeters: • He also was surprised to learn the Amendment had advanced to the point of being presented to the Planning Commission. • Many residents have questions but cannot attend the Planning Commission meeting because they work during the day. • Members of the Planning Commission, (Mark Strain — Chairman) and of the Board of County Commissioners can receive emails from the public via the County's website; • He does not own a storage container — he owns a steel building; • The Ordinance was originally designed to promote a low -cost alternative to storage sheds (need a building permit; shed must be built on a slab); • FEMA requires holes to be cut into the sides of the containers to prevent floating in a flood and the holes must be covered with screens; • The storage containers are "accessory structures" and will not be inspected by Code Enforcement; • He spoke with Cindy Carroll — an experienced appraiser — concerning real estate values. She stated she would conduct an official study to quantify results if authorized by the County. (Cost: approximately $2,000.); • If residents have a storage container on their property, they must apply for an after - the -fact permit (Fee: $160); • If the Ordinance is approved and a container has not been permitted, the property owner can be cited by Code Enforcement. If found guilty of a violation, the cost is twice the normal fee. Caroline Cilek stated she will relay the information concerning the possibility of real estate values study to the various Boards. 6. Thomas Gundick: • Has been an Estates resident since 1975; • Not everyone who owns a storage container is a druggie; • He owns 7+ acres and wants the County to stop "sticking its nose in everyone's business;" • The Estates is "different" and he wants it to remain that way; • Does not own a container and does not want one; 7 June 13, 2012 • Does not want the County or the Sheriff's Office to have access to his property at any time. 7. Kim Ellis: • Does not want storage containers allowed in either front or back yards; • Does not want the Ordinance to "be" in any form; • If you cannot afford a storage shed, you can't afford storage • If you cannot afford to live in the Estates, move somewhere else — Golden Gates Estates should not become the "affordable alternative" where anyone can do anything they want; • Most residents want a better environment than "anything goes" • Want to maintain a lifestyle. 8. Rodney Fo eck: • Moved to the Estates in 2002; • Questions: • Are storage sheds inspected by the County? • What is the life span of a storage shed? ( "Ted's Sheds TM" is out of business) • Does not have a storage shed; does not want a storage container; • He moved to the Estates because he didn't want interference from noisy neighbors; • He has 2 '/2 acres — you couldn't see a shed or a container if it was on his property; • There are too many laws in Collier County — wants less government interference. 9. Patricia Humphries: • Has lived in the Estates for the past 20 years; • Is the current Secretary of the Homeowners' Association of Golden Gate Estates; • The Estates does not need anymore industrial "flotsam and jetsam;" • Already have dump trucks; 18- wheelers; oil slicks; junked cars; and "junk" in yards; • The Estates is a residential area — keep it that way. 10. Peter Gaddy: • Maximum container size (per Ordinance) is 484 square feet • Provision in Ordinance: If a container is over 400 square feet, a formal Site Development Plan is required • Why is a Site Development Plan required? • What is the difference between a 400 - square foot container and a 484 - Square foot container besides too much government regulation? • Does not think a Site Plan is necessary at all. June 13, 2012 Jamie French stated it was a determination made by County Engineers and it has been an internal policy instituted years ago for exterior buildings that are not located on a concrete pad. FEMA requires holes to be cut on two sides of the container. What size is required? o Jamie French stated: • 1 square inch per square foot on each side • Venting system must be approved (engineered flood vents) • Shop drawings by an engineer or architect are required 11. Jim Flanagan: • Has been an Estates resident for the past 10 years; • This has been a very divisive issue; • Two schools of thought: • The "Gated Community" perspective — wants a neighborhood • The "Rural Community" viewpoint — your "rights" are your rights and a homeowner can do what his wants on his own land • Must respect both points of view; • He has a number of toys (rowboat, ATV, canoe, swamp buggy) that need to be stored and protected; • A storage container provides the room he needs; • One of the benefits of living in the Estates was t there was less restriction concerning what you could do on your property; o You could purchase land at a reasonable price • The residents of the Estates have been the "victims" of various Ordinances over the years; • The County should take this Ordinance "on the road" — to the residents — and should take a year to hold public hearings throughout the Estates — listen to the public's concerns and perspective. Additional Comments: • Code Enforcement is "complaint driven" — access to the property is not necessary — "plain view" — can see violation from a neighbor's yard (especially if the neighbor is the complaining party). • County employees are allowed a certain right of "trespass" per State Statute — o There is an exception in the "Trespass Statute." • Nothing will prevent a utility trailer or a semi - trailer from being parked in someone's back yard. • The Storage Containers can withstand hurricane or tornado -force winds o Some areas of the country use storage containers as tornado shelters. • Let's give residents some alternatives so they don't do something dangerous. • There are restrictions in the Estates — this area is not a "free for all:" • Restrictions on how much land you can clear; • Restrictions on how many pets you can own; o Restrictions on the number of buildings on one plot of land; W June 13, 2012 o Restrictions on fences (height, style, etc.) Caroline Cilek thanked the speakers for their input. She noted their comments were on record and would be brought to the attention of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. She encouraged the residents to contact her via email and to complete the comment sheet. There being no further business, the Public Meeting was concluded at 7:35 PM. 10 (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) DATE AGENDA ITEM TITLE MEETING Agenda Item # ZO A -- (Circle Meeting Type) Regular Special ADDRESS -S S��o Workshop Budget (:�, NAME Other: Representing/ Petitioner: COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003 -53, AS AM DED BY ORDINANCE 2004 -24, REQUIRES THE BOARD OB COUNTY SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NO T LIMITED T COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. YOU ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES FOR YOU COMMENTS AND ARE TO ADDRESS ONLY THE CHAIR PLACE COMPLETED FORM ON THE TABLE LEFT OF THE DIAS IN THE BOARD ROOM PRIOR TO THE SUBJECT BEING HEARD