Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
BCC Minutes 03/08/1994 R
Naples, Florida, March 8, 1994 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in R~GIFLAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the :i .following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE-CHAIRMAN: Timothy J. Constantine Betrye J. Matthews John C. Norris Michael J. Volps Burr L. Saunders ALSO PRESENT: Sue Barblrettl, Marilyn Fernlay, Charlene Metz, Recording Secretaries; Nell Dorrtll, County Manager; Jennifer Edwards, Assistant to the County Manager; Ken Cu¥1er, County Attorney; Richard Yovanovtch, Dave Wetgel, Martha Howell, and Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorneys; George Archibald, Transportation Services Administrator; Russ Muller, Transportation Engineer; Dick Clark, Co~u~unity Development Services Administrator; Tom Olliff, Public Services Admtntstrator~ Bill Lorenz, Environmental Services Administrator; John Boldt, Water Management Director; Ron Cook, Utilities Finance Director; Ann Marls Saylot, Utilities Administrative Assistant; Wayne Arnold, Acting Planning and Engineering Chief; Robert Nulhere, Acting Current Planning Director; Greg Mthallc, Affordable Housing Director; Ray Bellows, Ron Nlno, and Sam Saadeh, Planners; Sue Fllson, Administrative Assistant to the Board; and Deputy Rosa Rernandsz White, Shsrlff's Office. Page 1 Tape #X (0S8) Tier #2 AGKII1~-- APPR~ Ifi:TH CHAXGIS March 8, 2994 CoBLtOoIoner Volpe moved, aaconded h~ Conalaetoner Matthewo and carrieduriah/Bodily, to appr~e the a~nda w/th the c~o ao ~tail~ n ~he A~nda Ch~ Sh~t, ~d ~he foll~/ng addit/o~l /tom: 1. Item ~8H2 - DiscussLo~ regarding the potent/el I~okalee Empowerment Zone - Added. Page 2 (2 2) Hatch 8, 1994 The motion for approval of the consent agenda ls noted under Item 1994, AM1) SPECIAL Commissioner Norris moved, seconded by Coulaaloner Mmtthw~m and carried unanlmoumly, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of February IS, 1994, and Epmclal Me~ting of Febr~Lury 16, 1994. ltmm#4B ?':.BA~~, ~~CY SKRVXCES DIVISION, ~NPLO~I OF TIEEMOMTH FOR MARC~, 1994 -RECOGNIZED Commissioner Constantine congratulated and presented Barbara Brown, Emergency Services Division, as employee of the month for March, 1994. Commissioner Constantine moved, macended by Co~laelonmr Matthews [;.'.'~ a~d car~led unanimously, ' of th~ ~onth. (s4s) ..ltmmeiC that Barbara Brown be recognized am elq~lay~e PROCLAMATZOM D~SXGMATXNG TIFE WKKK OF I~,RC~ 6-12, 1994, AS KMOM YOUR COUMTY~MtEE - ADOFTKD Upon reading and presenting the proclamation to Ruthim HcCulley of Lely High School and Elizabeth Noble of Immokalee High School, ' Commlmmio~ Marrim moved, meconded by Coulesioner Saunders mnd //;' oartied m~tm~lmoumly, that the Proclarion designating the week o~ ? Mm~ch 6-12, 1994 u Know Yo~m* County Government Meek be adopted. "~ Ms. McCulle¥ and Mo. Noble expreaaed their appreciation to the Board of County Coulssioners. Page 3 March 8, 1994 Zteu Co~nteeloner Volp~ ~oved, seconded by Commissioner Xorrit and carried unanieousl¥, to adopt Budget inendaents 94-226/22T and Commissioner Constantine noted that this Item will be discussed with Item #8B2 which was moved from the Consent Agenda, Item #16A10. Transportation Services Administrator Archibald stated that both items Involve the replat of Tract 7 within the Nyndemere ':~ Development. He described the location of the tract and explained that the intention is to take the seven acre tract and plat it into eight large tracts for single family use. He said that the require- ments for platting do Involve the recognition and vacation of two drainage eaeements. He stated that Staff had received no letters of ,., objection. Mr. Archibald reported that Staff recommends that the vacation be approved, that the Chairman be authorized to execute the quit claim . deed and that the replat of Tract 7 be approved. Mr. Viggiant, as agent for owner, stated that he is available to answer any questions. CoralSeisner Volpe moved, seconded by CannAseisner Norris and carriedunaniuousl¥, to approve Petition Av-g&-001. Page 4 March 8, 1994 lte~ ~'~B2 94-14T RE RECORDING OF T~ FINAL PLAT OF "TI[E E~T&TES AT ADOPTED IUBJ~CT TO 8TIPU~,ATIO~ This Item was heard In conjunction with Item Cc~leeloner Yelps ~ed, seconded by Caniseisner Norris and carr~edl~uts~u~ly, that the recording of the final plat o~ g~tate. at ~re" ~ a~r~, there~ adopt~ng Realurban 94-147, · ubJect to the stipulations as listed An the Executive March 8, 1994 2~/~O~'~1'/C)11' 9&-l&l/C14~ 94-2/ HNS 9&-I/GM 94-1 - ADOP'2~D #Z'I'~ C1LILWG~B~ !t/~SO~UTIOX 9&-149/MNS 94-2 ARD R~S0~ZOR 94-1S0/CWS 94-3 R,~ HAADSHXP PROGRAM fOR MATER AND BEk*ERASSESSMEIFFS - ADOPTKD Ann Marie Saylot, Administrative Assistant, Utilities Division, reported that Staff studied both the programs from Manares and Lee Counties. She explained that Manares County has a program that has an annual application but no deferral program. She stated that their i~'-Social Services Department handles the program and their tax base ?!~:~covere the actual assessment. Me. Saylot revealed that Lee County has a deferrel program with a one time application and the deferral is done at that time. Me. Saylot orated that Lee County is averaging approximately 7~ of the applicants and Mamatee County has approximately 10~ of the appli- cants. Me. Saylot announced that she hopes to extend thio program prior to the issuance of the actual tax bill es that applications for the 1994 programs can be taken from the present time until June 1, 1994, therefore, the defertel will occur before the tax bill or special assessment bill. She reported that 1993 will present a different problem because the tax bills have already been issued in October, 1993, and are due March 31, 1994. She said that people could be assisted by bidding on the tax certificates or getting involved in the foreclosure notices. Me. Saylot reported that if approved, this program will provide the time necessary to work with the property owner. Me. Saylot stated that there are 7,000 properties with a water or . sewer assessment, taking into consideration that 50X of those are -.Homesteaded and eligible under the Federal guidelines. She stated that she believes that the worst fiscal impact could be 20~ of the remainder which would total $245,000.00. Mr. Saylot reported that the program has been discussed with Bond Counsel. She ~t~lted that the County Attorney's Office has con~irmed Page 6 ; Narch 8, lgg4 )i; that Narco Phase Two will qualify. .ii.:, ,.~ as. Saylot Indicated that she and a Customer Service !': Representative would administer the program. She pointed out that if ~" there are more applications than expected, it say be necessary to hire two part-time people for approximately three months. In response to Commissioner Constantine, Ns. Saylot replied that she is expecting 150 applicants, however, if the number increases to 300, it will be necessary to hire part-time help. In answer to Coalseisner Norris, Ns. Saylot replied that the poverty guidelines that are detailed In the Executive Suuary will be :used and the applicants will be required to present their tax forms to '~vertf¥ income. In response to Caniseisner Volpe, Ns. Saylot replied that the the Clerk's Date Processing Department does the assessment rolls. She stated that they will create a deferral column on the tax bills. In response to Commissioner Volpe, Ns. Saylot confirmed that the property o~ners could make a partial payment at any given time. Commissioner Volpe asked If there to an interest rate being .charged for the amount being deferred? Ns. Sa¥1or responded that the interest for that annual year will apply. Ran Cook, Utilities Finance Director, clarified that the progra~ will calculate interest on the entire assessment balance. He said that each year 1/19-1/20 of the principal balance plus the accrued interest for that year will be Incorporated into an annual . installBent. He explained that the annual Installment is what will be used for the Hardship Program. He said that a qualified applicant can have I portion of the Installment deferred until that property changes hands. He reported that It will bs similar to a 0~ Interest loan which will go into a serbrate account In the asealament program and re~aln there without accumulating any Interest. ' In response to Co~uelsoloner Volpe, Nr. Cook stated that a Budget Amendment will b~ prepared that will move the estimated 8245,000.00 3:1: Page 7 Hatch 8, 1994 fr~ one contingency fund to a different account In the Utilities Reserves. Re said that it will re.aim there In order to meet the debt ~servIcs payments If necessary. In answer to CoulaeLonar Natthews, Nr. Cook replied that the pro- party owner would have to reapply each year. Comiaaloner Nat thews expressed concern regarding the fact that no Interest will be accrued on the money deferred even though the pro- party owner's income may have increased substantially ~nd they may choose not to repay the deferred amount. I~. Saylot confirmed that if property la Inherited by children, · the children would have to qualify for the program. ~', ComeAss/olaf Natthews pointed out that once deferral has occurred, ~[qu&lAflcstion An subsequent years will not require the deferred :'['a~unts to be repaid. Copiesislet Volpe concurred. Cou/saloner Constantine agreed that he is concerned that there ::no trigger mechanism to encourage repayment unless the property is Commissioner Natthews suggested that in the year that a homeowner ;' falls to qualify, Interest would begin on previously deferred amounts. Ns. Saylot stated that this requirement could be incorporated into 'the program. · Co~isaloner Natthews recommended that If the property is Inherited by children. the inheritor's must qualify. She said If they fall to qualify, Interest accumulation would begin. : Ns. Saylot agreed to Incorporate this reco~endation Into the )lic&tion/&greeasnt or Resolution. ,,~:'; Coolseisner Natthew9 pointed out that nany residents have ~;:~ ~ultipls eourc== of income that ere not reflected on tax returns. She race.ended that a separate statement be included in the application ?:.listing all revenue sources. ': No. Saylot agreed to Include the language. Co~aissioner ~orrls asked how many Resolutions are included In Page 8 ~tea? Ns. Saylot reported that one Resolution le included in the ':'Executive Summary. She revealed that the Bond Issue will be brought (before the Board in two weeks, [~:i' Conusiesioner Norris stated that he would like to include in the ,):aeries that Anterest on the deferrals will begin to be accrued once the applicant fails to qualify at the current Impact Fee financing Assistant County Attorney Yovanovich reported that Mr. McNees, .~, Acting Utilities Director, has pointed out that the interest rate ~'~-should be tied to the interest rate for that particular district. C~loeloner Norris Bored to approve the Resolution with the uodi- fAcetlone discu~sed, seconded b~ CameLseisner Saunders. In response to Conmiesioner Natthews, Commissioner Norris con- firmed that the motion includes the language for disclosure of full revenue sources, Commissioner Saunders modified his second to the motion. Upon call for the quest/on, the notion carried unaninoual¥, :: thereb~ e~opting Recolution 9&-148/C~3 94-2/ K 94-1/~-94-2 with : Assistant County Attorney Yovanovich announced that he is pre- ,senting two draft resolutions that affect East/South Naples Bond Issue and the Narco Bond Issue. Co~ai. ione~ Norris saved, seconde~ by Connieeisner Saunders an~ carried~mani~ouely, to approve the two draft resolutions, thereby adoptinglteoolutLon 94-149/1~8 94-2 and Resolution 94-150/CN~ 94-3. Page 9 March S, 1994 3ohm Boldt, Stormwater Management Director, briefly described the three options contained In the Executive Su~u~ary. He stated that the Board'a decision to proceed with improvements to County Barn Road will make today's decision easier. Mr. Boldt explained that Option No. 1 would enclose only the ~':[i"North/South segment and described the location using the map included "in the Executive Sunary. He stated that this option would cost approximately 8136,000.00. He pointed out that there are 17 bens- fitting lots on that stretch which would work out to approximately 88,000.00 per lot. Mr. Boldt explained that Option No. 2 would also enclose the North/South segment. He said that assuming that the improvements to County Barn Ro&d would be completed but no Lely Branch Canal Improve- [: .Rents, Staff would refer back to a report made by Johnson Engineering ?']'requiring pipe sizes from 24n to 36", and the cost would be approxtma- rely 885,000.00. Re pointed out that the 17 benefitting lots would work out to approximately 85,000.00 per lot. Mr. Boldt stated that Option No. 3 proposes to enclose both the North/South and East/Heat segments assuming that both Improvements are .completed along County Barn Road and the Lely Branch Canal and that the full Implementation of the ~ohnoon Engineering report would be done. He reported that the total cost would be approximately 8376,000.00. He said that the cost per lot for the East/Heat segment encompasses 30 lots at 89,700.00 per lot and the North/South s~ga~ent encompasses 17 lots at 85,000.00 per lot. Mr. Boldt recalled that the residents filed a petition to enclose these ditches with a 85,000.00 per lot limit. Mr. Boldt stated that it Is starfie recommendation to proceed with 'the North/South enclosure. He indicated that a Special Assessment Page 10 March 8, 1994 )lstrict would have to be created along with hiring an outside firm to !parlors the land survey. Commissioner Constantine asked if this recommendation will correct the problem? Mr. Boldt replied that this is a program to enclose the ditch in :hat area. Canalsstoner Volpe asked where this program will fit Into the overall solution for the drainage in the Lely Basin area? He asked If the pipes will be required to be removed and replaced? Mr. Boldt responded that the 24" and 36" pipe sizes are deet~ned for the future condition which will fit Into the final solution to the drainage problems in that area. Commissioner Natthews expressed concern regarding the citizens that live along Cynthia Way and Wendy Lane. She Indicated that enclosing this ditch may exacerbate their problem. In response to Commissioner Natthews, Nr. Boldt reiterated that Staff recommends proceeding with the enclosure, recognizing that there is a minimum amount of risk and noted without the diversion along County Barn Road there could be some impact. In answer to Commissioner Natthews, Nr. Boldt confirmed that the culverts will be in place before the ditches will be enclosed. The following people spoke on the subject: Frank Rose George Keller In response to comments made by Mr. Ross, Commissioner Norris .~.stated that the residents in the area have requested the enclosure on Many occasions. He stated that it is necessary to have 9 of the 17 homeowners officially state their request. Commissioner Saunders suggested that staff pursue the recommen- dation made by Nr. Ross to continue to monitor and not proceed with the establishment of the district to fill in the ditches. C~laelona~ S~undmra ~ovad that Staff be directed to continue PaGe 11 ,- ~ c8~3 for the ~estion th~ ~tion c~rled ~: sos R~oo~ 10~30 ~ - Rocon~n~ 10t4~ ~ At this tim Recording ~,~: ~t~ ~1~ replaced Recording Secreta~ STI~ ~ OI ~O~SED O0~X RI~ ~SlON CL~ O~ PRO~CT - ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~0~ ~ ~UI~Y AS ~SSlBL~ ~ ~OCESS ~O~ZA~ ~ ~S John BoldS, Stormwater Management Director, stated that this clean out project was initiated In the Fall of 1992 by representatives of all the golf courses located along the Gordon River Extension, idincluding Wilderness, quail Run, Nole-ln-the-~all, High Point, Royal Painclans and County Club of Naples. Mr. Bolds stated that this project will be a hand clearing project which to 3/4 miles long and will cost approximately $50,000 of which ?/., the country clubs previously agreed to pay 40 percent or $20,000. Mr. Bolds explained that temporary drainage easements have been obtained in the area for clearing in preparation of the survey which is needed to establish property lines In relationship to flow way and to obtain permanent drainage easements, Mr. Bolds stated that after .;months of negotiations, Staff has the assurance of the representatives of the Grey Oaks and Fleischmann's properties that they will issue couultments to provide the County permanent easements. He explained that the Wilderness County Club has already provided a letter of "caniSmenS. Mr. Bolds stated that Grey Oaks has requested In their revised draft for permanent drainage easement dedication that the County clean another ditch that ts connected to the main ditch and provide drainage relief to the northern part of Grey Oaks and the Painclans Subdivision. He explained that the County historically has maintained 'the ditch but with great difficulty due to lack of easements in the area end the saturated conditions which prohibit full maintenance to Page i 2 Hatch 8, 1994 end. Hr. Boldt stated that Staff Is having to Investigate how this can b~ accomplished. Mr. Boldt stated that the commitments for permanent easements will be obtained prior to initiation of the ~ork on the project. He i'polnted out that other actions that will need to be accomplished .to the start of the project are a waiver from the Florida Department · of Environmental Protection on the requirement to haul chipped brush materials off site, negotiating funding agreements with the country clubs for escrowlag their portion of the costs, preparation of specl- ,,,.~fications and bidding documents to solicit bids from private contrac- tors to p~rfora tha clearing operation and completing the bid and contract signing processes and Issue a Notice to Proceeds. Nr. Boldt explained that the initial reaction to chipping the brush ~atsrlals out onto the spoil area was that It would be con- sidered as filling a wetland. He stated that relief from this Item '~y be granted If a letter is submitted to the proper agencies explaining the difficulty of and damage that will be created to the area b~ hauling tn heav~ equipment to complete the task. ;' ' ~. Boldt stated that the funding agreements must be worked out with the County Attorney's Office for approval by the Board of County ~...~ Mr. Boldt explained that time is of the essence because of the :")four to six (4-~} months it will take to accomplish the ~ork required ' to b~gln the project before the wet season starts which will ~e the ' work in this wetland area impossible to perform. Mr. Boldt requested that the Board of County ~ authorize Staff to, proceed on the assumption that the per.anent ease- ' ~nta will be secured, to prepare funding agreements and secure funds, to prefers specifications and bidding documents and to award the · contract. ~r. Boldt requested that Staff &leo be authorized to pro- cema b~dget mendmeats ~nvolvlng an tetrafund transfer of funds to ~ cover the Count¥'s estimated cost of this clean out project. Page March 8, 1994 Co~lssionsr Constantine stated that the residents In the area are extrsuely anxious to start and complete this project. In response to Cowaiesioner Matthews, Mr. Boldt explained that alasst all the underbrush to be cleared are Brazilian Pepper Exotic trees and the chipping will not encourage regrowth because by this time of the year its seeding period le over. Be stated that March through October te the best time of the year for chipping the Pepper [~iitrees without impact and the stumps will be treated with herbicides to prevent regrowth. Ccmmiwioner Norriamove~, eacon~dbyComaissionarhtthew~ and c~l~~t~ly, t~ Staff ~ directed to proceed with the pro- ~Xtem~G$ -Continued to March 1S, 3904 Meeting Xte~8~4 - Continued to ~ch ~5, 2994 Meeting Xt~HX Mike Smykowski, Acting Budget Director, stated that at the November 1, 1993 Tourist Development Council (TDC) meeting, & general concept for making revisions to the Administrative Guidelines governing the Tourism Grant program and the Beach Renouriahment (:program was approved. Mr. Smykowski explained that County Staff administers the Tourist Development Council programs and drafted revisions which were reviewed i":on February 3, 1994 by a eubco~mittee of the TDC. He reported that final changes were made and submitted for review and approval by the i:;~DC on February ~.0 1994. Mr. S~ykowskl stated that the changes were establishing a single step application process for the Grant program due on November I ba~ed "on the previou~ year'~ collections, clarification of grantee matching re~Arements, establishment of a TDC ~bco~lttee to approve proma- raerial ~aterlal~, e~tabl~shment of a ten percent (10~) set aside for Page 14 Harch 8, 1994 purposes In Category B and C and simplification of the grant application document. In response to Conuntooloner Constantine, Mr. Smykoweki explained that the make-up of the TDC subcommittee to approve promotional !i~ materials i8 three (3) hotelters, one (1) attorney and one (1) lnde- business person. Mr, $uykowskt explained that the ten percent (10~) set aside for euergsncy purposes was established because of the funds expended by Lee County after Hurricane Andrew to advertise that It was not devastated by the hurricane and was operating normally despite ~hat ~wa~ reported on the national news. In response to Co~ss~oner Volpe, Hr. Smykowekl explained that the ~en percent (10~) set as/de would be on an annual basis without a Commissioner Volpe stated that a cap on the set aside should be /' Commissioner Constantine explained that $200,000 to $500,000 will not buy very much advertising In an emergency situation. ~/ ~ Conlseloner Constantine etated that the five (5) person subcom- includes three (3) hotellets to approve promotional and this may present & problem in that advertisement could be slanted !~.~i:.~more toward hotels. ' Mr. Smykowsk! stated that the make-up of the subcommittee is not i/ fixed &nd can be changed should a problem arise. '"'; Commissioner b4atthewo moved, seconded by OsiRisstoner Yelps and curriedunanimously, that the revisions to thm Tourism Grant Progr~u Commissioner Saunders stated that a Lee County advertising euency has been selected for expendtng advertising funds and requeste~ that the mechanism utilized in the selection process be supplied to ,Justify why a Collier County agency 18 not being used. :\~ii' Commissioner Constantine responded that his opinion Is that the ?lgency ~as melected because they work with a majority of the Page 15 March 8, 1994 hot·liars. He stated that there should be a process followed in selecting an advertising agency to assure that Collier County Is pro- '·oted and obtains the best service at the best price. DISCU~BX01~ It~OARDXNO POTENTIAL X!~IO~ALEE ~ Z0~ - CKAXRN~N TO BXGN L~TT~R OF XNTErf ~ REQUEST FOR NAXVER County Manager Dorrill stated that he is requesting authorization for the Chairman to sign a Latter of Intent and a Request for Haiver to apply for the necessary funding for the Innskales Empowerment Zone. He explained that the Empowerment Zone project provides up to 840 million to eligible cormunities for what was the Community Block 0rant :'Program and will he administered by two (2) Federal agencies: '~Dspartment of Housing and Urban Development and the United States Department of Agriculture. Mr. Dorrlll explained that Ismskales will be required to apply i undar an urban designation because It ts Included as part of the ~'Stand·rd Metropolitan Statistical Are· (SMSA). the Naples area and that Is why a Request for Waiver ts required. Mr. Dorrill stated that c~artftcation is being requested on a rule because an indian reservation exists within Innskales and it is required to be exempted from the area the applicant wishes to have designated as an Empowerment Zone. He Indicated that a census track district is prohibited from being split. Mr. Dorrlll explained that the requirement to submit the Initial Latter of Intent Is within seven to ten (?-10) days and he does not want the County to be in technical default of the application process. Mr. Dorrill ·rated that he has requested Staff to prepare · pro- posed work progral budget that will run from the present time through 3use because the Federal deadline for submitting applications is the close of business on June 30, Plgl 16 Mlrch 8, 199& IB6M~setmont Zone. i~ ,.; ~:ln respahoe to Coniaaloner Volpe, ComaIsotoner Constantine ' e~lalned that the Board of Catty Couloslonero will have the oppor- ?'~?~ ~l~ to r~i~ ~d approve the actual Grant Application prior to oubutaalon. :" Mr. DOFFIll etated that the Board'a vote today resetyea Collier Countyes right to apply under the Federal guidelines only. Page 17 Hatch 8, 1994 ~:I:~)LUT~ 94-181 CRE&T:Z~ T~ COLLIER COUNTY PRZVATZZ&TZOI PLU~ TASK County Attorney Cuyler etated t'aat the proposed resolution Incor- porates all the relevant Issues fg*om the proposed ordinance presented the Board on March 1, 1994. Mr. Cuyler stated that Page 2. Paragraph C., Jn part reads "No member of the Task Force shall, after appointment, contract with or otherwise provide services to the Board of County Coulmmloners In '!::'i'excems of · value to be pa:id by the Board of $15,000 annually." Mr. '"C'ayler explained that the ~orde 'during the term of ~uch member" need ::: to be added to the end of the sentence. Ck~mllll#lol~r )lottie Bored, leco~ded by Comlleeloner Ratthefts and thereby adopting Resolution 94-151. Page 18 Administrative &eelstanS to the Board Fileon stated that the Board needs to appoint three (3) members to serve two {2) year terme expiring on Februar~ 4, 1996, and one (1) member to fulfill the remainder of a vacant term expiring on February 4, 1995 to the County ~ Government Productivity Committee. ,~..,,. Commissioner Constantine stated that he would like to nominate !~[]'~,$cott Lepers to serve on the Productivity Com~aittee. < Commissioner Matthews stated that she would like to nominate .,, Edgardo Tenfelts. jil,].. ~ Commissioner Volpe stated that he would like to nominate Jack HcXenna. Co~lssioner Sanders stated that he would lake to nominate C. ~ay ~:. Keys. -, ~~l~e~ Vol~ ~d to appr~ the f~ nonA~t~ applAc~te. '" "~ ~ C~iool~er C~ot~tine. U~n call for the ~eoti~, the ::' ~tin fall. 2/S {C~lssio~rs Norris, Sanders ~d htt~ Co~ismtoner Norris ~oved and seconded b7 Commissioner Volpe to substitute Kenneth Fmirchlld for Scott Lapore to serve ~ the l~o~ucttvlt~Cm~.ittee. NorrAm mnded his motion to appoint Idga~do Jack NcKenna and to reappoint C. Jay bye and David ~ ~ctivity CaniStee. Caniseisner Vol~ mnded ~ call for the ~ootion, the ~tion c~rlod Page 19 (mTm) : OOGII'~A~'TOI~XE'Y'S O1'1~~~~ DEVELOP A PROGX.&NTO A IZARZI~ ~,.AXZIrEXAX~ZLI;~X'T BACK IX TOOX (4) 14Z]~Z~ LIi'D TQI~'T'ZllG 01'14&.lKC]E 22, 2994 Cosuaiseloner Saunders stated that the time has come for an lade- pendent hearing examiner for land use matters and the establishment of ~m J ~ independent water and sewer authority. Co.~leeloner Saunders etated that due to recent case law emanating ~' "from the Ylorlda Supreme Court, it is evident that the County :.~ ~[:Conaission must change the way it does business In reference to 'minor' rexones, variances, conditional uses and other #minor~ land use decisions. He explained that the County Attorney's Office can develop a program similar to the program In Lee County. Couissioner Saunders pointed out that the Board of County Co-~lselonere sets broad policies relating to land use matter and when an application is submitted, the Staff review8 and evaluates the peri- tierim and more often than not will recosmend approval based upon those broad standards. He etated that the Board then has the burden of · proof to establish that the application should be rejected and cannot ~ .base m rejection on public outcry and objections. Cootseisner ~Saunders stated that establishing an independent hearing examiner will i';.:mlso create more free time for the Board of County Cosmtssioners to ~'~ dedicate to long ~angs strategic planning. ComAseisner Saunders stated that the Board needs to find a way to ,,::create more free time to dedicate to the water resource issue and ~other MJor ilsuel affecting the coounity because three or four ~. itrateglc planning sessions a year are not ~fficAent. ~lHiOner 8sundare ~ that the County AttomeT be directed ~ , to ~lop ~ ~rt ~ck to t~ ~d of C~ CmiHi~er~ a theboy. policies. Page 20 Narch 8, 1994 Comiseloner Saunders stated that Issues relating to large rezo- ~-:;i. nee, ten (10) acres or larger, should be retained by the Board of County Comissioners. He explained that a complication may be the (.[).? special act by the legislature that relates to zoning in Collier "County that sets up a super majority requirement, so Attorney Cuyler will have to ferret out how this can be accomplished. Commissioner Constantine stated that a seven Inch (?#) variance on a home that had been built in 1976 came before the Board recently and could have been handled efficiently by a hearing examiner. He pointed i:.'~: out that the parameter of 'minor" needs to be clearly defined and an appeal process smst be established. Com. issioner Saunders etated that the Lee County program provides for an appeal process wherein the hearing officer hears the case, develops a record that is presented to the County Commission for ,:. rev~. He e~la~ned that the Co.lesion ~s constrained to review the , case based on the record ~hat Is ~ade before the hearing examiner and ~f co~pe~ent substantial evidence Is presented, ~ ~ust be at tha~ ~':9 Co~issioner Sanders pointed out that ~hen a petition of large proportion is made to Staff, the Board of County Commissioners needs !"to hear the issue because it is in a better position to require the developer to meet certain conditions. Commissioner ~atthews stated that the Development Services g Division can re~arch records to ascertain at what acreage level the Comalesion is able to request certain conditions from the developer · land what is considered a large enough parcel to warrant a more · thorough exa~ination by the Board of County Commissioners. ;.. Co~tssioner Constantine pointed out that it ~a¥ Involve situations rather than the number of acres. Commissioner Volpe stated that the concept Is good but there is -legislation pending before the Florida Legislature that will amend the Snyder decision. · Mr. Cu¥1er stated that the process will be a long one but his Page 21 ~'offlce is watching the Issue closely, March 8, 1994 Saunders stated that the proposed a~end~ent simply :.: provides that County Commissioners and City Council Members can discuss those quasi-Judicial types of land use decisions that are now prohibited from discussion and will not affect the shifting of the burden of proof to the local government. Commissioner Volpe stated that this Board must keep in mind that /.:'the Legislature has seen fit to remove the barrier between the public and their elected officials which had existed to allow the consti- tuents to talk about this type of Issue. Commissioner Volpe questioned If the hearing officer would hear and report as opposed to hear and decide. Commissioner Saunders stated that two options are before the Board: in Lee County the hearing officer makes a recommendation that ultimately presented to the County Commission but In other com- lunitles the hearing officer makes the final decision and the appeal to the Circuit Court. In response to Commissioner Volpe, Commissioner Saunders stated that he prefers that the hearing examiner make the final decision with he appeal through the circuit court, but the accomplished needs can be decided. Commissioner Volpe stated that opportunities exist for utilizing a [~,hearlng officer but the scope of authority should have some restric- ittona. He polntid out that the Lee County program for Independent .hearing officers carries with it a $250,000 budget. ".~ Commissioner Volpe questioned who would represent Staff before the ij~.~lndependent hearing officer? ~ Mr. Cuyler Informed that In Lee County the Staff may not be repre- sented but noted he understands that the Attorney*s Office Is present the hearings. C.':,Commlssloner Volpe stated that If Collier County adopts an tnde- hearing officer program, it needs to'be represented by competent legal counsel Just as the petitioner does to assure that Page 22 March 8, 1994 the County'e proof Is contained in the record. Co~alssioner Saunders pointed out that It te requested that the Cocoaisaiah consider the establishsent of a hearing exaniner procedure for all ainor land use issues, the cost of which would be borne by the applicants for the land use changes. He explained that there will be costa associated with setting up the procedures but the actual cost of the hearing will be borne by the applicants. Co~misaloner Volpe pointed out that Lee County has two (2) full i!:':,tiae hearing offlcera~ the Board needs to aa~&bllsh whether tt will 'utilize a local volunteer program with members of the bar or If It la i. going to hire a hearing officer at 860,000 a year. Martha Nebelalek, Assistant County Attorney, stated that the Chief .' Hearing Officer is paid a base salary of 865,000 and the Deputy Hearing Officer is paid $58,500 In Lee County. He. Nebalsiek explained that a Court Report la supplied for the hearings ae part of the budget but they do not provide transcripts to the public. She pointed out that this year the budget for the hearing officers la [[8437,800, ;'"' Caniseisner Xorril ItSted that he is in favor of the Board of County Cosualealonsra operating sore efficiently and the hearing offi- cer ~uggemtion has merit but voiced concern that land use Iteaa are ~ one of the ~oat Important issues handled by the Board even If some are trivial and tLae consmatng. He explained that he I8 reluctant to delegate that authority to i hearing officer carte blanche unless it is arranged as that the Board can revie~ the issues on the consent &gsnda and remove them if desired. He pointed out that strict guide- ,.;~Ine8 ~ust be established. Caniseisner Saunders explained that he is not in favor of ridding ;, the Co, lesion of land use decisions that might have a significant ;~pact on the co~unit¥ but because of the change in the law, the f~ Board ~mat react to that change. He stated that the Board eeta the standards by which land use decisions are reviewed, Staff &ppliem theme mtandards to the applications and presents mama to the Page 23 Narch S, 1994 Board. at which time the Board has no choice but to approve or deny the petition based on the recouendation by Staff which is based on the broad standards set by the Board. Coumtssioner Saunders explained that the question then becomes "How do we best meet the needs of the public in terms of reviewing these applications without having to go to court on minor land use decisions over and over again?" Conniestoner Saunders stated that the Board must be more diligent in developing the broad policies and general guidelines by which Staff Is -directed to evaluate the petitions. Coauaissloner Constantine stated that the appeal process should be through the Board of County Counlsslonere and not through the Circuit Courts. Re explained that he is not sure that placing the land use lss~es on the consent agenda is Idea1 either. /;.:i: Mr. Cuyler stated that the hearing officer In Lee County Bakes a ~-.:' reco~aendatton to the Board on rezones but the Board still hears the In response to Commissioner Constantine, ~r. Cuyler explained that the Board of Lee County Commissioners, after hearing the issues, must comply with the reco~aendatlon of the hearing officer unless tt has ©ompetent substantial evidence to overturn the reco~mendation. Connieeisner Constantine questioned the purpose of having a $400,000 budget to accomplish something that In effect does nothing lore than add another step to the process? Commissioner Constantine ' stated that the idea of a hearing officer is appealing In that it :.lakes the process lore streamline and efficient but adding another .:step does not accomplish that. He. Nebelstsk explained that the hearing officers in Lee County hea~DRl's, PUD rszones, straight rezones and amendments to rezonee PUD's~ Staff then makes a presentation as does the applicant and ~' ' the hearing officers make a recommendation to the Board. She etated if[ that the Board then conducts a zoning board hearing where they peruse · the record, allo~ time for public co~aent, but they do not hear the ,: testtlony. Ns. Nebelslek stated that the Board can question Staff or Page 24 March 8, 1994 ~hs applica~t at this time and the Board becomes the fine! arbitrator, explained that the time savings is realized by not hearing all the ~testtmony upon which the hearing officer bases his reco~endation. Co~iealoner Constantine questioned if time is really saved under that format, especially when time is allowed for public comment. Me. Nebelsiek stated that the public cosant portion before the Board is to allow the applicant to indicate that the records are 'incorrect and not for them to make a presentation. Co~iesioner Constantine pointed out that the Board ca~ot ~'~ b~ the public from saying whatever they w~t during the co~ent .port,on. Co~ss~oner Norr~ pointed out that ~t sounds l~ke the Co~ty Plying Co~s~on (CCPC) ~s being described and ~est~oned there exists an opport~lt2 to formalAze the P~annAng Co~Asston ~.'~:'th.. hearlng body? :'.~ ~. ~yler stated that not ~der the current process, bu~ the w~11 be reviewed by S~aff. Co~lss~one~ Volpe .~ated tha~ the CCPC presently makes f~ntl decisions on boa~ dock variances ~o ~here mus~ be a way, even under :)::.the S~c~al Act, to delegate some authority for decisions on m~nor : Co~tss~oner Sanders stated that there are a lot of ~o~s the ~bJect It this point but nothing w~11 be formalized until the Co~ty Atkorney's Office has researched and reviewed all the ~ssues ~ there'needs to be a way to deal ~ith the conflict that the Board ;. ~ faced w~th when Staff makes a reco~endat~on and the Board ca~ot ., go against that recouendatlon. Co--lsstoner Saunders suggested that the County &ttorney~s Office :':,~ be directed to bring back a program ~n order to create more time for '.~=~:,the Board by el~mtnating the necessity of reviewing minor issues and J :.~(to assist the Board ~n dealing w~th the change ~n the law ~hat places on the ability to reJec~ Stale reco~endat~ons. March 8, 1994 Attorney's Office should address are the definition of "mlnor," ) establish that the hearing officer or the CCPC make final decisions but make available an appeal process through the Board, and to ,,,inveattgate the abilities the CCPC has to handle rezone, variance, '!'._etc. Ms. Nebelslek stated that the Special Act regarding the CCPO can amended to allow them to hear variances. Commissioner Norris etated that the problem of not being able to ~ /refuse a Staff recommendation can be eliminated by not having Staff i;~:~:.laaks a recommendation to the Board but Just present the evidence. Commissioner Saunders stated that the Staff recommendation is not "..as critical as who presents the competent substantial evidence needed in order to object to a petition. Commissioner Volpe stated that It le the findings made by the CCPC ithat the Board Is atruggltng with. ~,, Mr. Cuyler explained that Staff Is discussing presenting both 'eldes of the Issues but they will still make a recommendation. Commissioner Matthews remarked that the Board must look at =oning variances and conditional uses more objectively but the quality st "life Issues as presented by the public must be considered and the !',~uidelines adjusted. .~: The following people spoke on this Item. George Keller .Frances Barsh ~'-' ¢oamlsslonsr Constantine clarified the sotton to direct the County :'AttorneyUs Office to clarify "minor,' establish that the hearing i':i.'offlcsre or the ¢¢PC make final decisions but make available an appeal .-process through the Board, to Investigate the CCPC~e ability to par- '.tlcipate in the process by amending the current act, and provide the impact the program will have to the taxpayers and If the fees 'wll! offse~ that impact. ~i!":¥' Coamiestoner Saundera etated that four (4} weeks should be euf- '~lclent time for Staff to present the preliminary assessment on the ~: program and the Board can then decide If Staff should forma~lze plane. Page 26 ~&rch 8. 199¢ :.. Oemal~lo~e~ Volp~ seconded th~ ~otton. " CouPlelOner Volpe stated that the Catty Attorney*e Office needs ~to ~l~e s~t razenee, conditional uses and variances to Indicate what ltea~ are coming before the Board ~n large ~antlt~e~ and this will also leolet In defining "minor." Nr. ~yler re~ested that the ~velop~ent Services Division ~rk '-closely elth his Office to develop the Infersetlon necessa~ to develop the program. ~ all f~ t~ ~tl~, the Co~lssioner Saunders stated that In 1986 the Idea of considering an lnde~ndent ~ater and se~er authority ~as presented to the Board of .C~ty Co~lssioners. He e~l~tned that control of the day to day o~ratlo~ of the ~ater ~d se~r systems can ~ sanaged effectively ~ the vol~taU contribution of expertise fro~ the co,unity. Co~lssloner Saunders e~lalned that the Issue that needs diseasing Is ~hat Jurisdiction, if ~y, ~111 the Board of Catty ~:~.'Co~lssloners retain? Re stated that the Board should retain the abi- lity to stt r~tes and charges because It Is a ~aJor ~11cy ls~e ~nd .to select the location ~d control the expansion of the pl~ts. Co~lssloner Constantine lnfor~ed the ~ard that the Econosic -' .i~valopaent Council (BOC) Is ~orktng on a draft ordinance covering the s~blect of an Independent utility authority and It should be complete~ ~l~ ~t~ly, t~t this lt~ ~ contl~ for :( ~ J It ~ atiq of ~ch 2~, 1994}. Commissioner Saunders stated that a "Council of Economic Advisors" ..(C~Jt) le needed, structured pursuant to County ordinance, and cosposed volunteer business leaders such as a member of the Naples Area Chamber of Conarcs, the Economic Development Council, the Collier OO0,,,, G? Page 27 Hatch 8. ~994 Building Industry Association, the Hotel/Hotel Association, N~rco Isllnd Chl~ber of Couerce, the Golden Gate Chamber of Couerce, i'J,'banklng professionals, and other Interested and qualified citizens. ~a explained that the CE& ~ould serve to advise the Board of County "i'CommlSltonsrs on ways that the County can prosore business and take of the econosic opportunities presented by the establishsent of Florida's Tenth University. Commissioner Saunders stated the the CEA would assist in the developsent of an econosic element to the County~s Comprehensive Plan and advise the Commission on all Issues associated with economic planning, incentives and efficient regulatory ijrefors. Commissioner Constantine stated that the idea has serif but the Board ~ust be careful that local governsent funding does not becose antangled with the functions of the CEA. '"!' The following people spoke on this item. 3usryrim Ford Bill Heron Cm~isstm~e~ Saunders~mved, ~econdedbyCo-~lasioner Volpe :and clrrt~~i~oull¥, that the County Attorney's Office prepare a Ikel·to~(rr~in~nce establishing · Council of Economic Jbtvisorl for revimeh~ th~ Board of County Co~aiesloners at its ~estlng of April ~:,:!,{. Commissioner Volpe stated that a letter was received from the :Marco Island Civic Association (HICA} dated March T, 1994 Informing :'::;"' MICA is prepared to negotiate an amicable mettlesent with the ,'. County and the d~veloper. Commissioner Volpe stated that additional ./nfor~tion and dis~ssion is re, ired and he would like to report back to the Board on the setter at the March 15, 1994 ~eettng. '--~ In restnee to Coaissioner Norris, Co~lsstoner Volpe stated ~hat Page 28 March 8, 1994 ~tton No. 1 Is that approximately 70 parking spaces, or 1/2 of the parking lot, will be under the Jurisdiction of MICA and the parcel to ,"the south will have 70 parking spaces for the public st large. Co~J~issioner Volpe explained that the area outside the two parking lots will be passive recreational for use by Marco Xsland residents. County Attorney Cuyler stated that approximately ?3 spaces will be for use by Marco Xeland residents and the remainder will be passive. J[,::' Coniseloner Volpe explained that there Ie also a requirement that · : the County improve the parking lot that will be for public use with an · :esti~ated cost of $150,000 to 8200,000. .Ta~e ~ -~' Cosmtsetoner Matthews pointed out that /ten #4 In the letter '~:\requests payment of the legal fees and court costs incurred by MICA. !', Hr. Cu¥1er stated that he will obtain a figure for the legal fees :and court costs but it should not be too great because the attorney !;~:,has not been heavily involved. · Co~Issioner Volpe pointed out that Florida Power & Light and utilities are Involved in the law suit beside MICA and !:developer. #10F FOR RECONSlD~RATIOR OF P~TITIOR CU-93-23 BY ABBBY ~CON~T!~OCTXOI, It~F!t~S~TING NCl~S90R MATER PRODUCTS, FOR & #AT~RSTOP K~O~IFL~FEII~T![~RZDGEPORTPLAZA PARI[ZRG LOT -APPROVED County Attotracy Cuyler ateted that the mot/on should be made by one of the Co~laaioners who voted for the petition. .~i/~ Co~m/~to~ Io~tl mov~ no~ to reconsider Petltlon CU-99-29, .:Vt~sly ~t ~s w~ll~ng to reconsider the ~s.ue ~f the pet~tioner has 1 ~nfor~at~on to present. h~ 29 N~rcb 8~ xgg4 .cu-ga-2$ be pl~ced on a future agenda for reconsiderarian by the Board ~'eee Recessed 12:20 P,M, - Reconvened 1:45 P.M, It ~d~Lch tLme Recording Secretary Metz replaced Recording Secretary rernley see ~.' Xt~ ~12BX · ORDi']EA..R~ 94-11 RgF!t~fl~8 GUXJ'COAST DESIGN ~S~ZA~S, INC., ~Q~STZNG A ~Z0~ ~~ ~ PX~ ~ ~ L~D ~ ~D ~ ~R ~OP~ L~A~D ON ~ SO~ SIDE OF ~XO RO~ Legal notice having been published Ln the Naples Daily News on 'February 16, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with '.the Clerk, public hearing was opened. ;~;~::,. Ray Bellows, Project Planner, commun/cated that the Petitioner proposes to develop 207 three (3) bedroom single family dwellings, of whlch 20~ (42 units) will be owner-occupied affordable houatn~ units. He explained that the affordable housing units will be sold to * qualified low income families at & discounted price of approximately 20~ lower than market rate and the remaining 165 units will be sold at the market rate. ;:::...... Mr. Bellows reported that the Collier County Planning Commission ~(CCPC) reviewed thle petit/on and recommends approval subject to ::Staff*o ottpul&ttone, and the added ~ttpulatlon that & fence be dave- .. loped around th~ project. He disclosed that Staff recommends approval ': ~. of Petition PUD-93-10 and the Affordable Housing Agreement, subject to ~. the CCPCte recommendation. Mr. Bellows pointed out that the current zoning for multl-fas11¥ dw~llingunite Is consistent with the Growth Management Plan, and the of four (4) units per acre 1~ consistent with the Growth ..[~!;Management Plan without the Affordable Housing Agreement. , Coulsstoner Norris cited the Growth Management Plan Housing Element Policy 7.4.2, which states that Affordable Housing shall be ;~11!'dAstrAbuted equitably throughout the County, and noted that there are Page 30 Hatch 8, 1994 y three {3) Affordable Housing Projects within a 1/4 to 1/2 nile proxtnlty of the proposed project. Nr. Greg Hlhallc, Affordable Housing Director, reported that this project Ie different free the referenced Affordable Housing Projects, ~',. pointing out that this project Is for a Single F&nlly Hone O~nershtp ;~!:ProJect, and le not a rental project. Responding to Cosineloner ConstantInane inquiry, Hr. Hlhallc revealed that the narket price of the hones will range fro· 106,000 to $111,000, and that 42 of the unite are reduced approxlnatel¥ :::i[J 822,000 to lake then affordable to low incone fanllles. He reported that the reduced price Is between $84,000 and 88,000. -i Coemissioner Volpe pointed out that the prlnary stockholders and · officers of the corporation requesting the petition are not listed on the application and requested that the infernation be provided to the (~-Board. ~'- In response to Couiseloner Volpe'a couenta0 Mr. Bello~e afflrned ~ that under the current zoning, 136 dwelling units are allowed on the 34 mcrae, and that the nunbar of d~elling units allowed will be ):]~creaeed to 207 with the approval of this petition. He noted that the Increase in dwelling unite is requested for the 20~ of Affordable Houelng Unite. ~r. Bellow~ pointed out that the project quailflee to receive 4 unite per acre, however, the petitioner Is requesting only 2 units per acre. He further stated that If the request was for a nultl-f~ally ~/developlent° the project ~ould be qualified to receive 8 to 9 units ~IF acre. Regarding the density In the area, Hr. Bellows revealed that Saxon ~:,'lltnor ~ele recently approved for 12 unite per acre. He pointed out ? that the developnent has 6.1 units per acre. ~ro Bellows quoted fro· a letter received fron the ~o~ F~re Community Association, stating 'Thank you for your letter received on Febz'u~ry 21, 19940 Inforuing ue that you Intend to have · six foot {6~) chain link fence around your entire property. That will be ·set Page .,' I~rch 8, 1994 '~atllfactory to Fox Fire, and we therefore have no objection to the development of the Leawood Lakes Project". Hr. Kevin HcVlcker, representing Gulfcoast Design Associates, Inc. :i[ described the proposed development, lakes, landscaping, and amenities. Hr. HcVlcker addressed Commissioner Norris' concern regarding the relationship between other affordable projects, stating that he i . believes that the Intent of the Growth Nanagement Plan te to eliminate '!.the "Projects" type of areas in Naples. He pointed out that these ~ V~itl will be spread throughout the development, with no difference be~en the unite that are sold at market rate, and those sold at the i~. discounted rate. Hr. HcVtcker remarked that thio lea unique develop- amnt of single owner unite. -.In re~ponan to ConniesiGner Norris, Hr. NcVlcker confiraed that :the developer will build the hones on any lot the prospective buyer chooses, with the sane amenities and floor plane. re disclosed that · no co~ners will be cut on those homes that are designated for · ' affordable housing. H~. HcVlcker disclosed that the affordable housing units can be [!'cold at anytime after purchase at the market rate, however, if the ;~owner hal mpplted for lmpact Fee Waivers, he will be required to repay those fees at closing. · :?,, Coemtseloner Norrta voiced his concern that the Density Bonus ,$yeteam used to increase the 136 market rate units to 165 market rate units, and asked if the petitioner is willing to res, in at 136 ~rket units, with an additional 42 units for affordable housing? Hr. HcVicker replied that the developer states that he in loosing on the affordable housing units, and does not believe he is to reduce the ntmber of units to 136 unite as opposed to 165. ..:i' Responding to Coemtssioner Norris' question regarding whether this · project la in violation of the Growth Hanagement Plan, Hr. Mlhallc stated that it Is him understanding of the Growth Hanagemant Policy, that thin type of project would be encouraged in this area, noting ?,,that there in no ownership affordable housing in the area. Msrch 8, 1994 ¢o-ntsstoner Norris pointed out that the Orowth Management Plan ~doee not address rentals versus ownership, and there are approvals for affordable housing In the ares, therefore, when those units are built, :' there will be a concentration of affordable housing tn one area. Mr. Mihallc pointed out thst the affordable housing units will have lower ownership costs then the market rate units, however, they [~fare no different in terms of development stsndards than the market ::i rate units, and they will have no negative effect on the area. Commissioner Constantine verified that the lowest price for the Affordable Housing Unite is $8&,000. Mr. MihalIc explained that In the Affordable Housing Agreement, the people who purchase the affordable housing units are limited to a !~[f. laxlmum profit of 5~ per year, and If they sell the home within the 15 year period at a price higher than 5~ per year, they are required to split the profit with the County, and the money will go back Into ~'~the Affordable Housing Fund. Connieeisner Norris stated that he is in favor of the affordable ~housing efforts going toward ownership as opposed to rental complexes, .. however, he is still concerned with the increase of 136 market rate .units to 165 units. ' Mr. MihalAc explained that the developer's concept ts that for the ,Densit~ Bonus the additional units will be split, one-half for affordable housing and the other half will be sold st market rate to recoup his coet~ for the loses on the affordable housing units. Regarding density, Mr. Mihalic pointed out that under the Density Plan the developer could have 2?6 owner-occupied condominiums with the current multi-family zoning. The following person spoke regarding the issue. 'Mr. Doyle Kopp Connieeisner Constantine asked what size lots are in the ~::::Countr~side Development, for Comparison, noting that those homes seem together. Mr. Robert ~ulhsre, Acting Current Planning Manager, replied that Page 33 Hatch 8, 1994 ::the typical mingle family lots in Countryside vary from 55' to 80' x , with & 7.5' setback. [~,.,,,. Co~Issloner Volpe inquired regarding when the project will begin "development, if It Is approved by the Board? '~i Hr. McV~cker replied the project will begin shortly after appearing before the Planning Co~uaiselon on April 6, 1994, for plat · He further stated that all financing is in place and the act is ready to go. Chairman Constantine closed the Public ~earing. ',%'~';. Co~issio~er Saunderm moved, seconded by Co~tssionsr Yelps, to ente~ lnt~ Ordt~ce Book No. 65, ~bJect to the Plying :~[O~l~*s r~lre~nt conceding the fencing, ~d all Staff Cowlesloner Constantine pointed out that this project t~ an ff) ex~ple of what the County is trying achieve. He disclosed that when ~)~)[,driving do~ the street, If the market rate units cannot be from the affordable housing units, the neighborhood ;~i~:;j(on, where no one iS .tt~attzed, ~d people .tll have pride of "~er ship. : Nr. N~halic declared tha~ th~s is the first ~ersh~p Affordable Housing P~oJect that he has been able to negotiate, and Is pleased that this will be the ~odel for ~any more tn the future. [,:'::. Co~lssAoner Norris asked if the petitioner will agree not to re- 'purchase ~y of the ~Ate for a period of f~ve (5) years? :/~..Nr. NcVicker responded that the seller has no desire to re- the ~lta, and suggested that ~his condition be ~ltten Into [the Affordable Housing Agreement. / tA~ A~ t~ Affordhie H~eing A~nt. Co~Aea~oner Vol~ con- ~ wl~ the Upon call for the question, the motion carrlsdunani~ou~ly. County Attorney Cu¥1er requested that the Board make a separate Page 34 March 8, 1994 to approve the Affordable Housing Agreement. c~l~~l~ly, to a~r~e the Affordable ~lng A~ee~nt with the stipulation that the Petitioner wll! agree not to re-purchase any [',:.of. the ~ttm for · period of fiv~ (5) years. ':~ P~r~o~01 94-153 RB FETZTIOR AV 03-016, TO VACAT~ A 30 FOOT ACCESS :~' ~JI~31T ~ DEBCRIBED OE TKE PLAT OF EAGLE ACRES - ADOPTED ~Til Legal notice having been published tn the Naples Daily News on February 20 and 27, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with the Clerk, public hearing was opened. Russell Nuller, of the Transportation Services Division reported that this petition ts a request for the vacation of a 30 foot access '):.easement as described on the plat of Eagle Acres. He stated that the :'.access easement is no longer needed. He stated that the petitioner, · as o~ner of the lake and several adjacent lots In Sunset Homes, - desires to control access and landscape the access easement. He ipointed out that Letters of No Objection have been received from Project Review, Eater Management and the Herrington Sound Home O~ners !t ,. ;. Association, who ~ould have maintenance responsibilities. He revealed ~.' 'that the petitioner is offering a 20' lake maintenance easement and a 30' x 75" connect. ion drainage easement between the lake and the Sunset Homes 40t drainage easement. Hr. Nuller disclosed that Staff received two {2) calls of Inquiry, :,complaint, and objection. Hr. Ituller revealed that while some of the ~lalnts are valid, they do not relate to the vacation, nor do they outlmIgh the public benefit derived from the drainage easement conmac- ~'[tion between the canal and the lake and the eventual outfall into i-'Naples Bay. Hr. Muller stated that Staff has revised the resolution In the <. agenda packet to include Statutory Authorization of Chapters 33609 and 33610, Vacation of Roadways, and listed the particulars of public ,o0, 000,,,, 75 Page 35 March 8, lgg4 benefit. Mr. ~uller communicated that Staff racenumade approval of :~the vacation of the access easement and acceptance of the replacement ';l~ke u~lntenanca easement. Commissioner Constantine and Coulosioner Matthews revealed that they ales received letters of objection. Coa~leoloner Voipe Indicated that he wants to Insure that granting the requested vacation will not Interfere with the access of property ,'~.. Mr, Don Ross, representing the Petitioner, confirmed that no pro- .~.,.perty will be denied access, The following people spoke on the sublect. Panels Johnson Nolan Butler Eleanor Billups ': !Responding to comments ~ada by Me. Johnson, Conicsloner Volpa inquired whether the access easement Is a private or public easement that will allow access to Me. Johnsonst property. Mr. Nullar revealed that there Is some question regarding whetAer the easement te public or private, and caution is being used In the vacation terminology, which states that It Is assumed to be public, He Indicated that It Is an easement that may have been a private ease- 'Bent and a driveway originally, however, since It Is not noted In the on on the plat of Eagle Acres, Staff assumes It Is a public easement, which to why the vacation Is being requested. Responding to Com-lsaloner Norris, Mr. Muller replied that tha reason for the vacation Is so the petitioner can control access to the lake and landscape the easterly ten feet (10') against the fence Mr, $aadeh, Project Planner responded to a question raised by Billups, and advised that the Land Development Code states that regarding the Fear yard of a waterfront lot that is one acre OF lass, the fence cannot be more than four feet (4') high. Chairman Constantine closed the public hearing. CouuissIoner Constantine revealed his concern over public benefit derived from the easement vacation. He commented that he is not sure Page 36 Narch 8, 1994 the public benefit Is that outweighs the objections. Commissioner Norris pointed out that the Resolution states that 'granting the vacation will not adversely affect the ownership or the right of convenient access of other property owners. He advised that although Ms. Johnson Is able to access her property from Pine Street, it ts not aa convenient. loved to deny the vacation. Chairman Constantine re-opened the public hearing. Mr. Don Ross, representing the petitioner declared that he Is not aware of the Ordinance limiting the height of the fence. He announced that the petitioner applied for, and was granted a permit to build the fence, however, If there Is an Ordinance that limits the height of the · fence, the petitioner will comply with It. Regarding Ms. Johnson's i.::~ right of access, he stated that the petitioner le willing to eliminate the southern 3?2.6? feet of the vacation easement, allowing Ma. L ' Johnson access, Commissioner Constantine Inquired agatn regarding the public bene- il~" fit to be derived from the vacation of this easement7 Mr. Huller replied the replacement drainage easement. Hr. Ross noted that in addition to the replacement drainage ease- ment, there tea lake maintenance easement with Windstar Hastar He f~,Assoctatton which assumes responsibility for maintaining the area. out that currently the area Is not maintained and is unattrac- ~ t lye. ': Comm/ss/oner Volpe mentioned that since the County ia not · currently maintaining the easement, the vacation of this easement will ~not relieve the County's taxpayers of any maintenance responsibility. !'~ Mr. Muller Indicated that if the easement ts vacated, It will relieve the County'a liability if someone ie Injured. Commissioner Saunders asked if the vacation request, as modified by the petitioner, solves Ms. Johnson's problem. .i~..J Hr. Ross affirmed that Me. Johnson will retain access through the Page 37 Harch 8, 1994 ': Co=~alasloner Volpe pointed out that the portion of the easement ~.,:. ~?lndicated by the petitioner will not be vacated, and It is a public easelent as opposed to a private easement, Chairman Constantine closed the public hearing, Co~alu~n~ Norris wtthdre~e the ~t~on on the ~~t~ Norrio ~ed to ~cate only t~t ~rtion of the Co~AssAoner Constantine clarified the ~otion atatAn~ that each home~er ~ill not have their area vacated. Co~immioner Constantine etated that he ~s going ~o vote against lotion because he cannot lee the public benefit resulting froa ¥:the vacation, ~~11 f~ t~ ~8t~on, the ~t~on carried 4/1 Page 38 March 8, lgg4 RB:~OLITTXOO 04°184 RR PrTXTX011 AV 94-O0:1, R. SCOTT PRXGE AS JIGKilT lAST 0OU11D REALTY, ZJrC:. RICl~:JI~STZWO VACATZOII 0/' A ~ FOOT ~ LOCATID O11 A PORTXO!I Off LOTS 17 i X80W THE PLAT OIP IAlUt33~ m - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on Fsbruar~ 20 and 27, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with the Clerk, public hearing was opened. Mr. Muller declared that this request Is for the vacation of a lO' · utility easesent between lots 17 and 28 in Herrington Sound. He !~.. explained that the potential owner wants to build one house on two 2ors. He stated that he has received Letters of No Objection free .,.Collier County Utilities, the City of Haplee, and all the pertinent '~tlllty cospanles. He declared th&t Staff recotuends approval o~ the There were no public speakers. ChairBan Constantine closed the public hearing. ~Z'A'Ae~ nnmnlmouly, to approve PetAtAo~ AV-04-002, th4re1~/ ~topti~g ~t~e~l~atAm O4-184. ,= 000- , '70 Page 39 ~g&l notice having been published in the Naples Daily Ne~ on Feb~a~ 20, 1994, ae evidenced by Affidavit of ~blicatlon filed with thm Clerk, ~blic hearing was opened. Tom Conracode, Director of the Office of Capital Projects, advised ..the ~&rd that the ~titloner is retesting consent to exercise addi- tional l;~erm am met forth in the St&tutem, specifically the authority to plan, establish, aceire, conerect or reconst~ct, enlarge oz' extend, equip, o~rate and ~lntatn Parke and Indoor/Outdoor Recreational Facilities, and Se~rlty facilities. Co~lemioner Vol~ clarified that the additional po~er re,sited ~Ancludem ~ltur&l and educational uasm. He asked if the Co~lty ~velopment Dlstric~ could they provide their own echoelm, if '?equested po~r is granted? Rich Yovanovlch, Assistant County Attorney, replied that the peti- tioner would have to coordinate ~lth the School Board, and the School Board would have to consent to the construction of a school. Co~iesioner Volpe co~aented that currently the develop=ent ',. working Its way through the planning process, and the parks and recreational a~enitiem available lm unknown at this time. He pointed ~? .'out t~t ~rrently there Am no zoning An place, and Indicated that the ;;* r~emt Am premature An the planning process. ;." ~thony Ptres, Jr., representing the petitioner, addressed Co~l~toner Volpe'~ concern. He contended that It t~ appropriate at ' 'thl~ tl~ ~cause It provtdes the district, the developer, an~ the J~*. c~lty flexibility in retesting certain acttons by the dlstr~ct (:[.~:.~.~ regarding Parks and Recreational Facilities ~lthtn the Pelican Harsh ~l~ Conet~tlne closed the public hearing. ffmgm 4O Hatch 8 · lgg& t-~ ~ th~ ~mot of t~ ~lic~ ~oh C~iW :' Di~t~, ~~ ~opt/ng leoolut/~ 94-154A. .... Co~iosione~ Conot~tine stated that he is not in favor of Con.unity Development Distrlcta as they are currently created. Upo~ c~l! £o~ the quaetlon, the ~otion carried 4/1 (Co~alasione~ ',;:, Oousm:s,,ti~ opposed). Page 41 March 8, 1994 Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on January 2?, 1994, aa evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clark, public hearing was continued from March I, 1994. Couulasioner Saunders recalled that the current status of this Stem is that a notion was Bade and tabled at the March 1, 1994 meeting 'to approvw the Ordinance aa presented, with the changes suggested at ~:'.that meeting. Ha disclosed that the one issue remaining ia the defi- nition of gross revenues. Commissioner Saunders noted that the application fee la currently 'it & m~ximum of 810,000. He revealed that Staff intended that the ]:.. 'appl~cation fee could go h~gher th~ $10,000, If proof c~ be provided .that the ex~nees are higher than the initial $10,000 charge. Co~lesioner Volpe recalled that the renewal fee is 85,000, with a ,/,:cap of $10,000, He aeked Co~lssioner Sanders If he intended to ':~an~:~vw tha cap. ' Couulamtonsr Saunders verified that Stmff's original intent la that no cap be placed on either the original application fee or the renewal fee. Commissioner ~tth~a clarified that the new application fee is a tltinlufi2R Of $10,000 and the renewal fee is a miniBun of 85,000 with no "'; Heidi As!~tcA, Assistant County Attorney reported that Staff , has · definition of gross revenues which Is different free the defini- ~,tion In the memorandum dated March ?, 1994. Ms. Ashton recalled that [':~:laet week the motion was made to use the definition from the existing '?'Settlement Agreement aa the definition of gross revenues. Me. Ashton explained that the definition in the proposed ordinance .:.lm · definition prepared by Miller Halbrook, the County'a consultant i'(ln Washington D.C., using the current gross revenue definition in the .~' Page 42 March 8, 1994 ordinance combined with the settlement agreement terms. She remarked that the proposed definition also Includes five (5) additional Items (~recoumendod by the Cable CoBalttee, which include late payuent ~'bad check fees; tower end dish feeos payment for personal con- munications services; computer access chargesl competitive access pro- vider charges; and charges to Inter Late carriers. Ms. Ashton read a portion of the recommendation made by the con- ?,i;(irultant, Miller Holbrook, outlined In the h~dout defining Gross Revenues. Co, Isotoner Constantine asked why the consultant race,ended the e~ded version of gross revenues. Me. Ashton e~lained ~hat the Cable Act refers to gross revenues, ~h~ever, it does not defAne gross revenues. ComAseisner Volpe in,ired as to where the funds generated by the fr~ch~oe fees w~ll be d~rected. Mo. Kd~Fdo d~oclooed that these revenues are budgeted ~nto the :~ ~TD General ~d, ~d some o~ the uses are for the operation of the C~ A~rt, Parks and Recreation operations for Everglades City "~d I~okalee, however, they are not restricted In the way they are ~8ed. ;. Regarding the exp~ded version of GreBe Revenues, County Attorney ~yler e~la~ned that the con~ltant outlined everything that legally permissible for the Boardto evaluation. Responding to Con,so,one= Sanders, Mo. Ashton d~scloeed that the ~ost recent definition has been d~ocuosed w~th the existing cable operators, and ~hey do have objections to some of the ~tems. Co~ios{oner Volpe asked for clarification of what Is mean~ by the ~ .t~r ~d dish fees referred ~o {n the hand-out. Re~n~{ng to Co~{ss{oner Yelps, Brad Estes, representing the ~reater Naples Civic Association, revealed that cable operator~ can rent their towers to other users for their antennas, and the dish fees ~ ~. are for providing a program to a specialized user. Co~es{oner Constantine advised tha~ the ma~n ~ntent of ~der- t~{ng ~rk with the cable companies {s to lower prices and obtain Page 43 :better service. He voiced concern that maximizing the fees collected fro, the cabl, cornpenis. may result In the cable cospany charging the , customer more, to make up the difference. to cap.re future technologie~, which will be a new revenue source. Co~lesAoner Norris agreed with Co~lssAoner Constantine, noting that ultimately the fees comes from the cable subscribers. The following people spoke on the Issue. Rich Ounter Xen Fuchs Brad Estes Responding to couents made by Mr. Fuchs. Commissioner Volps asked what are the disagreements with the expanded recommendation and ,[.;,,,the existing definition tn the Settlement Agreement. Nr. Fuchs cited credits to property, the sale and exchange of : ::'cable service by the franchises within the county; fees, payments, and other considerations received from programmers for carriage of programming on the system, the tower and dish fee, and personal con- smnication services. Hr. Fuchs reconnended that the Board consider the language that is in the 1991 Settlement Agreement and adopt those as the definition of i~;.~.i gross revenues. . In response ~o Commissioner Saunders, Mr. Estes recommended that !the ~ard adopt the existing definition under the Settlement ~[.([.A~eenent, hoover, include l~age An the current Ordin~ce that will all~ ~h~ definition to be expanded to address new technolo~ upon frochime renewals. The tabled ~otion from the Narch l, 1994 meeting Am as fellowes Saunders ~oved, seconded by Couaisaloner Natthews to o~lmce ~nding Collier Co~ty Ordin~ce 88-90, foll~ c~ the fr~chA~e fee wall ~ a ~~ of ~10,000 a ~ ~l~catl~ ~d $5,000 for a renal w~th ~tho~zation for to ~t ~ additio~l *5,000 to c~er ac~2 for a~axI~u~p~rlod of 10 ,~,'~are{ mmd the def~nition of =gross revenues' in Section 2.16 will be the defini- tioucoutainedwithin the Colony, Palmer, Collier County SettleBent, .~/: ]rrovAdlng ther~ are no problm created by doing Commimtone~ SA-~ders amended the motion to reflect that the gross revenues will be that contained in the SettleBent liltsasset, ~ there will be a line item in the ordinance etating that An time event that there are revenues generated from new tschnolc~y, th~ laird of County Commissioners will have the abllit~ to rl~l~.~lne gross ~ to include those, CoBolseisner Itatthews acc~t~ tb Responding to Commissioner Constantine, Mo. Ashton revealed that the County is operating under the definition outlined in the 1967 .' Settlement Agreement, which pays gross service charges based upon ,~.:~': payments that are made by subscribers only, for services such as basic :cable and premium channels, and does not Include anything other than DXSTRI~FO~ A CHTLD CARE CKITI~LOCATED OR THE ~ C0RIFElq OF 49 ITRIIT~AID~RADOAVEXUE- ADOPTED Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on ~anUaL~ 23, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with the Clerk, public hearing was opened. Bob Mulhere, Acting Current Planning Manager requested that this Petition be heard in conjunction with Petition V-93-32. ~ lit. Nulhere related that both Petitions are requesting a relaxa- .tiaa £roa the parking required to support the 160 dwelling unit, ,oo, 000,,,, O0 Page 45 !i'i:~Oakhaven, which la an Affordable Housing Project In Iamokalee. He ~. disclosed the r~es~ed reduction tn ~rking spaces Is fron 2.O ~r ~it to 1.5 spaces pe~ unit. He revealed that Staff and the ,.' Plying COOill Joe recouend approval of the Petitions. Mr. ~lhere explained thee the Petition for Conditional Use le for the conerection of a Child Care Center to accooodate 250 children, 'on the O~aven pro~rty, which will operate Independently. Relenting to Couimeloner Norrll, Hr. ~lhere etated that the r~llt ~t ~t~vated by a lack of need for the ~pacel, and a concern over the additional costs Involved In providing extra parking spaces for the Child Care Center, as well as the reduction ~n green spaces. Co~$to$oner Hatthewo ~lnted out that the priory aode of .tr~e~rt~tion ~n the I~okalee area ~s ~alking and bl~cling, there- . n .d r r c · r ~,,,cantly ', :: 'o::::'.::::::: :',: I~::j~: ~11 II the O~aven residents. He further etated that ~cltJonal facility for a lnall ~rcentage of developaentally h~- · ~ca~ children. Hr. ~lhere e~cto a considerable n~r of C~lr~ Conet~tlne closed the public hearing. i:': calftied ImmJ~ly, to approve Petition CU-93-21, thez~l~ adopting Page 46 ~TXOMFROMTHI R~QUXRKMr!~ OF TMO PAREIX0 SPACES PER DMKLLXMO UMIT, FOR TH~OAI3t&V~NAFFORDABLE HOUSZWG PROd'ECT, BY RADUCXMG THE OVERALL P&RKXM~ IqlQUI~ OF 320 SPACES TO 240 SPACES, OR 1,6 ~PACES F~qDWKLL~.~IUMIT, FORPROPKRTYLOCATKD IN XPE'IOEAY.,EE -ADOPTED the Clerk, public hearing was opened. I;~'~, Th~e item wee heard in conjunction with :]:tee #13A1. See above. Chairman Constantine cloeed the public hearing. Coumi#ioue~ Matthews Bored, seconded by CoBs/es/oriel, Volpe, to Leg~.l notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on January 23, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with PetitAm V-93-32, thereby adopting ReBelerAse 05-156. for the chLld care center ~ In compliance wAth the code retirements. Page 47 ~,[,.::, see &t thio tim Recording Secretary Barbiretti replaced Recording ..~-. ' '. Secret ir~ 141~ see ~,,~' - ]W:80X,~[01 J4-187 ItS FITXTXON co-g3-20, DONALD A. PICEle0RTH RIPt~Y~ITXI~ ISL&ID MARINA, IRC., FOR IEXPAWSION OF AN ![XISTIJ~3 MARINA BY M&T OF A COIDXTI01AL U~E PURSUAHT TO SlCTI01 2.2.8.3 OF THE DISTRICT FOR ZSLAWDmIMA, ZMC. -&D OPTeD Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily Newa on February 20, 1994 as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened. Planner Ron Nine described the location of the property. Nr. Nine explained that in order to overcome that problem this Hr. Nine remarked that Island Marina was approved several years "~(T . .ago an 80 slip marina. He said that due to the depth of the water ,:.'~. · ~ ~!~/~:~:.adJacent to the seawall that was in place at the time of conditional ::~"i'::?"u.. approval, the petitioner was unable to maximize the use of ,11 the !~//i:::i"::: petition proposes to lease from the State an additional 30,000 square I~]~[::i~:: .feet of submerged land, He stated that the lease would permit the I.~.!j':~f:.Ieland Narina ~o replace the el~pe that ~ere lomt and ~n ~he process, I.:~'~-: extend the depth of the eliDo b~ approximately 40 feet. Plier Nine revealed that the Collier County Planning Con/aston i'~:. conm~mtent ~th all the retirements of the Gro~kh ~agement Plan, . ~j.. I~:~::.' He 'rated that '11 th' Jur/.dictAonal a,encA-. that r,v'e-ed th,- I'~?f:. petition are satisfied that this project Is consistent with all the ~ [~.';. els.ants with the ~rowth Nanagement Plan. Planner Nine stated that from a land use point of view this pett- :.flsa clearly has no land use relationship. Mr. Nine remarked that the CCPC considered the possibility that a public policy may be established as a result of deliberations by the #lgglna Pass Inlet Nanagement Plan. He stated that the Planning !~ . Coeualeeton cue to the conclusion that it is unlikely that there will any i---edtate determination of policy. ,oo, Page 48 Harch S, 1994 In re~4~nee to Co~uaissioner Yelps, Mr. Nine stated that the dif- ference, ~n slips 55 thru 66 ~e that those el~pl w~11 acco~odake boats ~n ixcem~ of 40 feet but lees than 50 feet. Planer N~no confirmed that the additional land lease area will facilitate extending the current length of f~nger p~ers up to 40 feet. In ~ewer to Co~se~oner Norris, Planner Ntno stated that there ~ no chugs ~n the number Donald Ptc~rth, representing Island NatIns, Inc., clar,f,ed that there will be no physical extension of any finger piers. Nr. PJc~orth stated that all the env~ronaental peralto have been 0f Florida allow~ the S~ate to charge for the s~are footage being are~ that are not being leased. Hr. Plc~rth verified that no re.eat As being made to va~ from ~y of the conditions of the original approval. Mr. P~c~orth explained that the ~iggins Paso Inlet Management Plan does not propose to deal with the length of boats. He ~aid that the Inlet Managedlent Plan addresses dredging. He stated that It Is an I , engineering plan. ~:~.'~i',.'":; Hr. PIck~or~h presented documents to the Board addressing the pre- Board has already made a finding and it is consistent with a number of previous considerations on the same Issue. Hr. Plck~orth pointed out by a show of hands that there is a large nmaber of people in the audience who support this petition. In response to Commissioner Saunders, Mr. PAckworth replied that based on the evidence of ~upport, if the Board desires more evidence to Justify a vote of approval, he requests the opportunity to come [i".back before the Board. ". In response to Co--lssIoner Matthews, County Hanager Derrill atated that consideration by the Florida Outstanding ~aterm has been Page 49 Narch 8, 1994 tabled, In response to Commissioner Volpe, County Attorney Cuylsr ~eplied that At Is unnecessary that he review the records presented by Hr. Ptck~orth because they are County documents. The following people spoke on the subject: Nilliam B, Campbell David Addison Capt. Victor Taylor Planner Nine a~o~ced that the ordinance contained ~n the ~e~t~ve ~a~ ~s an ~ncorreck document. He presented the Board w~th a resolution ~n place of the ordinance. Ch~r~ Constantine closed the public hearing. C~~e~ 5~dere ~ed to approve Pet~tton CU-93-20, to t~ ~taff ~d CC~ reco~endat~on~. Seconded ~ Co~one~ Vol~. In response to Co~ss~oner Volpe, Nr. P~c~orth confirmed that At As necessary to have local approval before applying for the ~erged l~d lease from the State. Nr. Plc~orth verified that both local approval and the lease from .the State are necessa~ An order to proceed with th~m project. O~m c~l! £o~ the que~tion, the ~otion carri~ unanimously, thereb~ ~dopt~n~ lte~olution 94-157. ,oo 000,', ;i07 Page 50 Hatch 8, 1994 '"'~" I~OLUTXOM g4-188 lt~ PETITION V-e4-1~ ~ V. R~ 0f ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ZA~, P.A., ~ AO~ ~ ~0~0 ~0 (~0~8 PX~ ~ ZT~ ~~) ~q~STXMQ ~ ~DXTXO~ 2.23 ~ V~~ ~ A ~IO~LT ~~D V~Z~CE OF 8.67 ~ - ~D Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on February 20, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened. Planner Wtno reported that this petition results from an error on Chairman Constantine closed the public hearing. ~~Aoner Worria aoved, seconded by ComIssIone~ Saunders and c~l~i~ou~ly, to epprov~ P~tition V-94-1, thereby ~a~opting the part of the petitioner In the amount of a variance granted by the Board two months previously. He explained that the petitioner thought that he had 10 feet of concrete ramp In the rear of the building, but the rup is actually larger which results In the request for an addl- J//~f ::' - ~. Wlno Itited that the CCPC recouends approval with the same ;~;~:;~':' ' ltl~lltlOnl that applied In the original petition. tOOK 000mli Page ~anuary 23, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk. public hearing was opened. Planner Saadeh explained that approval of this conditional use will allow the petitioner to construct a 1,200 square foot ticket office. a 1,200 square foot exhibit building, a 300 square foot future bo&t dock facility and to use the existing barn end mobile home for 2'. aterage and a caretaker's residence. Mr. $aadeh described the location of the property and surrounding land uses. He explained this petition ts consistent with the Growth Managenent Plan. He etated that the CCPC and all reviewing agencies ~eco~end approval subJec~ ~o the stipulations ~n the A~ee~ent Sheet. ConIsotoner Yelps remarked that o~nce a similar re~eo~ was recently granted In the area he Is concerned with d~oturbance of the ~?;~ ~-- N~. 8aadeh n~a~d ~ha~ the pe~X~one~ wou~d fo~ow a certain ~oute Co~ty M~ager Derrill revealed that the other site was on leased l~d free Collier Enterprises. In response to Co~losloner Volpe, ~r. Saadeh conf~rmed that the petitioner pl~e to use some sub-surface on the parking area. In an~r to Co~]ooloner Volpe, ~r. Saadeh verified that there Is ~ existing septic system on the site that will have to be nodtried to i~'~?: ' Tl~thy H~cock, representing the petitioner, explained that the ~d the remainder of the site will be used to transport passengers Page 52 March 8, 1094 down an existing dirt road where the proposed dock facility will be constructed. He said that the airboat route was chosen to avoid Impacts to grass beds and wildlife areas. In response to Connieeisner Volpe, Mr. Hancock advised that four six p~seenger boats are planned to be used He Indicated that the parking is In excess of what is required for the proposed operation. Xn answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Hancock confirmed that no public &cceee will be allowed from this property. Chairman Constantine closed the public hearing. case of a safety hazard and modiff¥ the current plan. In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Hancock ateted that there is the potential for a small food concession. Mr. Saadeh confirmed that a food concession would be permitted aa an accessory use to the principle use. In response to Commissioner Matthews~ Mr. Saadeh verified that the Traffic Department reviewed the petition and recommends approval. He ateted that the Resolution states that this Issue can be revisited in Norris moved, seconded by Commissioner Saunders to Couissioner Volpe stated that he is still concerned with the number of boats proposed for the operation. He stated that this is an .environmentally sensitive area and there are no restrictions on the Mr. Hancock announced that there have been no letters of objection 'regarding the operation. Mr. Saadeh Indicated that the Board may wish to impose a restric- if f. :;,tion on t~, number o~ boats allowed. constrained by the physical characteristics of this property. ~ call for the ~estlon. the ~tton c~rted .. Page 53 March 8, 1994 Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on February 20, 1994, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened. Wayne Arnold, Acttng Chief of Planning, stated that this petition ia & request for relief from the section of the Land Development Code (LDC) which requires that where single family homes are concerned, all prohibited exotic vegetation must be removed prior to the Issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.). He explained that Hr. Hunt has a *~';?-i,,?home that ts ready for CO but has not received final Inspection due to the failure to remove Australian Pines on the site. In response to Commissioner Constantine, County Attorney Cuyler *explained that after the public petition was denied, he advised Attorney Neale that he would reserve the right to argue that all the · a~halnlstratlve remedies were not pursued in the event that the case is ::.. taken to court. He stated that Mr. Neale then chose to pursue the ~i~, i': appeal process. :~:~', Mr. Neals explained that has client owns property where Australian ~/:'~:':Pinem exist. He stated that he is unsure as to whether the County has ~? made a finding of fact that these trees are a nuisance which would ',i':'require removal. He said that there is not a great deal of logic in requiring these removals from single and two family lots while there !~. arm a nmaber of sites where removal is required on a newly developed ~. mite while the neighboring site may have the vegetation already ,:, existing. He questioned the language of the existing ordinance regarding maintenance and enforcement. .!!: Hr. Neale requested that his client be able to obtain the C.O "?--'with the exotics in place or that the C.O. be granted with a bond :,; posted by the petitioner which would take care of the removal of the .? ,oo, OO0 Page 54 Hatch 8, ~994 trees subject to a Court'e determination of the validity of the · ~" Ordinance. Mr. Neale presented the Board with a proposed amendment to the Ordinance and Information on Australian Pine, Brazilian Pepper and Nangoes. County Attorney Cuyler suggested that Mr. Neale approach the Court and ask the Court to restrict the County from enforcement and post bond with the Court. ' In response to Connieeisner Saunders, Mr. Neale confirmed that his i.,~!'~:"proposed lawsuit will contest the validity of the Ordinance and the interpretation of same. Conunlesioner Volpe recalled that during the adoption process sose concern was expressed regarding the difference between improved and ~?Imimproved properties. '~ County Attorney Cuyler consented that there Is currently a lawsuit pending on the ~xotlcs Removal Ordinance which lm separate ~ron the L~C. Cosuelseloner Volpe asked If the outcome of that lawsuit could set precedence aa l~ relates to the LDC? . County Attorney Cuyler stated that he believes It would not. Commissioner Saunders remarked that If a bond Is posted ~t would give no Incentive to move the ltglttgatlon forward as quickly as / possible. [ ~?~'::,.~' Nr. Wells stated that his client desires to resolve this Issue i?::~,'as rapidly .. pos.lbl.. two family homes have exotics removed. Coeuaiseloner Volpe recalled that instances where the Board allowed the exotics to remain because residents requested It. He stated that he would like to see the problem resolved but noted that the peri- rionet knew that the law requires the removal. Xn response to Commissioner Saunders, Mr. Neale replied that the trees are not in a location that could damage other properties. ,0o, 080,,,.:127 Page 55 Dick Clark. Cosmmnity Development Administrator, revealed that the "i:'!~ninutaa from the prior hearing Indicate that a neighbor testified that he had experienced eerieus damage due to the subject trees. Ken Hunt polnted out the trees that overhang the property An question show no Indication that any branches have broken off. He revealed that the gentleman ales signed a petition stating that he wo~ld like the trees left Intact. elena ef the Lead Development Code which red. Ire the re~l of exo- tics including Australian Pines prior to the tenance of a Certificate Of ~ fo'r · mingle family reli~mnce. The following people spoke on the subject: Mettle Phillips Diana Jerome Co~lae/oner WolFe stated that he does not believe that this the proper for~ to address some of the issues that are being ~ diacuaeed. Comicstoner Saunders announced that he te not in favor of the ·otlon. He asked the petitioner If he would be willing to Indemnify the County for any damages that could be caused by the trees. . Mr. Reals stated that him client ~ould agree to inde~nify the County. Hr. leale agreed to prepare the appropriate lnde~lflcatlon/hold harmless a~reeeent. Coolseisner Hafthews asked l~ the Co~ty ~uld be properly pro- .~tected If the ~ard accepts the bond and lnde~ification for the dura- tion Of the legal process? C~W Attorney ~yler replied that he does not see the process ~er Khe C~e to all~ that. He eu~geete~ KhaK Khe a~Joln~n~ pro- ~rKy ~er an~ the Co~t? ~ Ande~ifie~ and a~ree to remove the trees to properly protect the County. Co-~leeloner Volpe elated that the proper forum to challenge the Ordinance I. the 3udicial forum. Narch 8. 1994 Chairman Constantine closed the public hearing. I~g~11 foz' the quemtlonon the floor, theistion c~le4 ; ~ Off COUITT COI~/SSXON~RS~ COI~UNXCA~XORS Coralseisner Volpe announced that he will add an Item to the agenda of Narch 15, 1994, regarding the East ~aplee Branch of the 'Collier County Library. Coeualesioner Constantine etated that he has discussed security measures for the Board Office with the Sheriff. He Indicated that potential layout changes to the floor plan are being developed. Commissioner Volpe remarked that security measures ~ust be con- sidered for the entire Administration Building. Commissioner Constantine agreed to review measures for the entire building. e.. C~t~o~e~ Volpe ~ed, seconded by Coltselone~ ~tt~ ~l~~t~l~, t~t the foll~lng tte~ ~de~ the c~t I~OT, OTIOII 94-138 AC~(MT, EDGING TR~ P~$UBDTVI$ION OF TItACT 19 A I"<~TTOI OF A Ft~:~/~OUSLY R~CORDED FLAT ]OION~ AS GOLDEN G&T~ ~:~TAT~ ~OLUTION 94-139 AC~lqO~LED~ZRG THE RESUBDZVZSZON O, TRACT 88 A PORT~ON OF & FRNVIOU~L~ RECORDED PLAT UNIT NO. 9S SeePages ~t~,~OLO"rlO~ 94-140 ACI[NO#'LEDGI;RG ~ RESUBDZVTBTOIq OF TRACT 40 A PORTlOll OF A PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PLAT IOlOWR AS GOLDEN GAT~ ESTATE~ Page 57 Item #16A~ See Pagea ~arch 8, 1994 RESOLUTXON 94-142 ACKNOWLEDGING THE RESUBDXVXSXON OF TRACT 60 A PORTXON OF A PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PLAT KNOWN AS GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO. 76 xram #16A6 See Pages RESOLUTION 94-1&3 RE LOT LZNE AD3USTt~NT OF LOTS 54, 55, and 56, BLOCK B A PORTION OF A PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PLAT KNOWR AS BER~IHXR~ LA~ES, UNIT ONE Xtel #16A7 see Pages / ,~- /~Z RESOLUTION 94-144 ACKNOWLEDGING THE RESUBDXVZSION OF TRACT 162 A PORTION OF A PREVIOUSLY RECORDED PLAT KNOW]~ AS GOLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT NO, 13 Sac P.ge. Item #36A8 AUTHORIZATION FOR RECORDING OP THE FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN MARSH UNIT FIVE" Item #16AO AUT~0RXZATXON RE RECORDING T~ (A~ENDED) FINAL PLAT OF "PELICAN )t~RSH GOLF COURSE' - WITH STIPULATIONS AS LISTED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUmmARY Item #16A10 loved to be heard with Item #8B1 Itel #36C1 RESOLUTION 94-146 AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF COUNTY FUNDS NOT TO · XCEED ON~HUNDREDDOLLA~S TO PURCHASE A PLAQUE TO RECOGNIZE OUT~TANDINQ VOLUNTEER SERVICES OF THE CALUSA GARDEN CIVIC GROUP See Pages L 'I - Item #X6C2 XNTKRLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES TO PROVIDE FREE BEACH PAREXNO STICKERS FOR COUNTY RESIDENTS AT CITY OF NAPLES BEACH LOCATIONS See Pages . .LIMITED USE LICENSE AGREEMENT WXT~ THE EAST NAPLES CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC., AUT~0RIZING THE USE OF COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY FOR T~E MANATEE FESTIVAL Page 58 March 8, 1994 BID S~94-215& ANARDED TO PACE MEDICAL ELECTRONICS, INC. FOR ~ ~ OF S~ KQUZ~, IN ~ ~ OF 830,883.00 C~RTIFZCAT~S OF COP. P~CTION TO THE 1991 SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SPECIAL ASSESS~rfROLLANDAUTHORIZATION OF REFUNDS AS APPROPRIATE Iten #lSE1 SUPPLEMENTAL AGItE~MZNT NO. 6 TO ~ CONS~TING ~SC~E ~Z~ 8~lCZS A~ Nl~ MCQKH ~ ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR ~ L~Y GOLF KSTA~8 ~IFICATION M.S.T.U. - NOT TO ~CEKD 8850.00 Iten #16H2 MORE ORDER UNDER TH~ CURRENT ANNUAL HOLE, MONT~S & ASSOCIATES, INC. PROFESSZONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN, PE~MITTIN~ A~D COITSTRUCTION CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION FOR MOVING THE VANDERBILT DRIV~ BOOSTER STATION ,i Iten #16E3 CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT NO. 93-2098, TIGERTAIL PARK PARKING LOT IMPROV~M~NT~ - IW T~ AMOUNT OF $33,095.50 NOTE: DOCUMNMT NOT RECEIVED AS Of MAT 9t IS9& See Pages COITI'RACT FOR BID NO. 94-2153 FOR IRRIGATION IMPROVZSqXNTS IN PHASE IZZ OF THE L~LY GOLF ESTATES MHDIAN BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT - AWARDED TO &QUA-FFICIENT POROUS PIPE, INC. EFFICIENT POROUS PIPE, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,799.00 CONTRACT FOR BID NO. 94-2151 FOR LANDSCAPE IlqFROVEM~NTS IN P~ASE II! OF THE LELY GOLF ESTATES MEDIAN B~AUTIFZCATION FROSZCT - AWARDED TO HANNULA LANDSCAPING, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF 019,943.63 BXD~94-2149 FOR 'COLLIER COUF~f LANDPILL CLOSURE CONTRACT - NAPLES LAXDFZZ~: C~LLS 93 & #4 - II~OEALEE LANDFILL ~2~ CELL ~1u - ANTED TO ~C ~ CO~ZNG S~ICKS, INC., IN ~ ~ OF 02,20T,073,7~ ~ A~ORZ~TZON FOR ~Z ~CESS~Y ~S Page 59 March 8, 1994 ~I~BXaEIIB/rgTL~BSBYAVALO!IKIKJXIKIRZ!IG, ZIC. FO!ETHICOLLZI:R Z!~llO~ll~JTO, d~'BPIK)JKCTIO. O~l - ZlITHIANOq21FrOF$SI,470.OOAIID FOR THI GRAIIT A43R.KIMB31T ~ THI STA~ AIID ~DXTZOBEAL FUBIDXBIB!q3RTHIKITRA~TASK~THAT ARII~KCKSSARY~~ TII~GGnlBPASII1LIT~PLA~ The falltoeing mLacellaneoua correspondence was flied and/or referred ~ preBented by the Board off County ComaJasloners: Page 60 March 8, 1994 ~JkTX~F&CT~ON~ OF LX~RFOR Sg~VIC~S OF TH~ PUBLIC D~F~ND~R AUT~O~ZZ&TZON TO U~E CONfISCATeD TRUST FUNDS TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR DRUG &BU~ EDUCATION AND PRX~r~RTION EDUCATION AT ~ 3UNION D~XWf/D.A.R.E. CAMPO~T There being no further business for the Good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: 5:40 P.M. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS Page 61