Loading...
BCC Minutes 08/21/1991 S .~;~ '- Naples, Florida, August 21, 1991 ;':"'~' ....LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, end also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals end as the governing board(s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business hereAn, met on this date at 6:40 P.M. in $PICIAL SiSSION In Building ',F# Of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the members present: ALSO PRESENT: CHAIRMAN: VICE-CHAIRMAN: Patricia Anne Goodnight Michael 3, Volpe Richard S. Shanaham Max A. Hasms, Jr. Burr b. Saunders Annette Guevln and Wanda Arrtghi, Deputy Clerks; Nell Dotrill, County Manager; Jennifer Pike, Assistant to the County 'N~negsr; Ken Cuyler, County Attorney; Richard Manalioh and Thomas ,Palmer, Assistant County Attorneys; Frank Brutt, Community Development .< Services Administrator; Jay Reardon, Emergency Services Administrator; Een Beginski, Planning Services Manager; Bryan Milk, Eric Young and Waylie Arnold, Planners; Sheriff Don Hunter and Deputy Kevin Nelson. Page August 21, 1991 "j'O~DINAI[~ 91-82 ~ PFTITION Z0-91-5, GLKN SIMPSON Of #IL~KISON & · .ASSO~T. ATES, RRPRKSH:NTIN0 COLLieR K~gRPR~SKS, ~Q~STING ~ ~~ TO ~ COLLI~ CO~ CO~H~SI~ ZONING O~IN~CK 82-2, TO ~OM ~ ~NING AS A ~OVISION~ USE IN ~K A-1 ZONING DISTRICT - ~O~ED Legal notice having been published in the Naples Dally News on August 15, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition ZO-91-5. filed by Glen Simpson of Wilktoon & Associates, representing Collier ~nterprises, requesting an amendment to the Collier County Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance 82-2, to allow earth mining as a · Provisional Use in the A-1 Zoning District. Planner Eric Young advised this is the second public hearing to consider Petition Z0-91-5. ~e said the request is to amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow earth mining as a Provisional Use (PU) in the A-1 Zoning District. He advised currently earth mining is only allowed as .... a PU in the A-2 Zoning District, however, with the massive movement of the citrus Industry Into Collier County, it has become apparent that some earth mining activities associated with agriculture in the A-1 district are necessary. In order to maintain the traditional concept the A-1 district as an area for the preservation and conservation '.of the County's natural resources, he said, Staff has included con- 4ttions to the PU in addition to the regular PU process. He explained conditions would ensure that the traditional perception of the A-1 district to not breached. He advised the PU must be incidental to the agricultural development of the property and the excavated area · 11St be within an area permitted for agricultural use by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). He noted In order to iobt&in a permit from the SFWMD, an extensive environmental research presentation must be provided to convince them that environmental issues In the area will not be negatively Impacted. He concluded with m reooma~endatton of approval by Staff as well as the CCPC. "; . ~o~isaloner Volpe recalled the new Unified Land Development Code >.ii:.' (Uf.,DC) will no longer contain both A-1 and A-2 agricultural districts. Page 2 August 21, 1991 questioned how this ordinance wt.ll be Incorporated into the ULDC regard to the criteria being included specifying the A-1 Planner Young stated the question of whether to include the addi- S%tonal stipulations must come about during the ULDC adoption process ~'when it le decided what the Intent of this one agricultural zouing district will be. At this point In time, he said, because there are two zoning districts with two different intents, this amendment must address the intent of the A-1 Zoning District. Olen Simpson, representing Collier Enterprises, indicated that because of the structure of County ordinances, a rock pit which is 'necessary in agricultural operations, must be called a commercial pit '.'even though the intent is not to be in the pit business. He said his concern is providing a vehicle that will prevent an avenue to ctrcum- ).vent the Intent of the traditional mining operation, while allowing normal agricultural operations. He recommended the two additional · .,stipulations be included in the overall agricultural area. Commissioner aoodnight remarked .if the ULDC proposal to combine r~((ikhe A-1 and A-2 Zoning Districts Into one agricultural district means i~development will be allowed at one unit per five acres in all agrt- · c~ltural areas, that was never her intent. She Indicated she does not want to ever see the preservation areas, especially those of critical be developed into housing. Frank Brutt, Community Development Services Administrator, stated one dwelling un'it per five acres will be allowed by combining the two a~rtcultural districts into one. Commissioner Goodnight commented, in her opinion, that issue will ~ of great concern to the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Volpe communicated final adoption of the ULDC is October 16th. }[e stated he has no problem with the proposed ordinance or with the intent of Staff and the petlttoner, however, hts concern te with the Board accepting these types of petitions while In the pro- :'cees of changing the ULDC regulations. 000,,o 04 Page 3 August 21, 1991 Attorney Guylet advised the Board has never instructed to place a moratorium on chan~les to the Zoning Ordinance while i~0rktng on the ULDC changes. Co~dutoner Saunders moved, seconded by Comtestoner Shmnahan and ..~xT~ed~z~mni~ou~ly, to close the public hearing. ~:' COll~latonm~ Shl~lhxn loved, seconded by Commissioner Saunders and C~XTled ~tmnt~olasly, to approve Petition Z0-91-5, thereby adopting the .~:i. Oz~ln~nce u ~bered and titled below, and entered Into Ordinance Book NO. 46: ORDINANCE 91-82 AN 0~DINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 82-2, THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY BY AMENDING SECTION ?.8, A-! - AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT, SUBSECTION 3, PERMITTED PROVISIONAL USES AND STRUCTURES, BY ADDING SUBSECTION 3(e), EARTH MINING AND RELATED PROCESSING AND PRODUCTION; BY PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ei-as m INe S UA LY OaIm D Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on :"'.:August 2, ~991, and August 15, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavits of ~.P~bltcation filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to con- !el4e~ the Collier County Sexually Oftented Businesses Location and on Ordinance. Assistant County Attorney Manalich indicated this is the second .. ~. '- ptlbllc hearing to consider the Collier County Sexually Oriented Location and Regulation Ordinance. He recalled at the hearing, the Board was presented with a series of studies, ;rems Court and other Court cases as well as testimony regarding l~s ordinance. He said Staff is attempting to strike a balance bet- ween First Amendment rights and the legal rights of local government to. regulate sexually oriented businesses in order to preserve the of life in the community. He stated the Board has been pro- the latest draft of the ordinance which incorporates requested .changes. Page 4 ' August 21, 1991 &ttorney Manaltch called attention to a request at the last for him to investigate a distance separation requirement bet- ween patrons and employees at establishments featuring dancing. He referred to a provision Inserted on page 50 of the ordinance which ,:~'i,.-.&ccommodatee that concern. He explained an amendment on page 15 ~:!. regarding the definition of sexually oriented stores, which specifies '.~ iS a business deriving 25~ or more of its gross monthly revenues from · ' the sale or rental of sexually oriented materials. He informed the ., Board of the pros and cons of specifying a percentage, however; It ~i provides more clarity in an uncertain area. Attorney Manaltch referred to Section Twenty-Two, Hours of Operation, on page 48. He said the ordinance as written, states bust- neesee are not allowed to be open between 1:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. He ';~'smld although the Board may exercise Its legislative Judgment and extend the hours back to midnight, the ordinances he has researched usually prohibited operation from 2:00 A.M. forward. Commissioner Saunders suggested Collier County tie its ordinance Into State re~alattons for the sale of alcoholic beverages rather than single out this type of business to be treated differently. Attorney Manalich agreed that the safest route will be closure at 2:00 A.M. J"' Attorney Manalich mentioned a suggestion of one of the speakers at %he first public hearing was to impose prohibitions affecting %~ployess, tn addition to the operators and permitess, with regard to record keeping that Involves employees. He advised page 51, sub- paragraph a, includes provisions against employees who know or should that the business is not properly permitted. He directed atten- tton to additional language on page 45, Section Nineteen, which impo- ses regulations pertaining to employee records. ~' Attorney Manalich referenced;additional language on pages 21, 39 !?'amt ~4 d~altng with municipalities within Collier County to ensure $~i>the Involvement of the City of Naples and Everglades City. He noted the annual non-refundable $250 application fee in the unincorporated Page 5 August 21, 1991 of Collier County is increased to $300 for businesses in either City of Naples ~r Everglades City, and one-half of the fee is remitted to the applicable municipality. He stated the annual non- ;refundable permit fee is $250 in the unincorporated part of Collier County and $350 in either the City of Naples or Everglades City of which $200 ie remitted to the applicable municipality. Attorney Manalich commented language was added on page 46 which for businesses offering for sale or rental a tangible inventory 'Of material, ~,ome of which is characterized as sexually oriented, there shall be no violation if the materials that are sexually /iloriented are kept inaccessible and out of the view of minors who enter ~ the business premises. He said page 9.3 has additional language requiring the applicant to state the type of business for which the permit is being sought, to what degree he engages in that business, ~d page 24 requires a sketch or diagram to designate any portion of ~the premises in which patrons will not be permitted. In response to Commissioner Vo]pe, Attorney Manalich stated any businesses currently operating on the effective date of this ordinance will be given ~65 ds:rs to come into compliance with its regulations, Ind that time period may be extended up to another 365 days for hardship cases where the owns: can prove he is unable to recoup his .'in~tial capital inve~tment in the business. Commissioner Saunders questioned if the ordinance is required to 17j:.~ontatn a variance p~'ocedure, to which County Attorney Cuyler indi- cated in the negatiw:. Richard Wood, a ~'esident of Naples Park, suggested the Board iii lncrease the distance requirement from 500 feet in residential areas tO 1,500 feet, which would be equal to the distance separation from ~hurchee and schools. Attorney Manal~ch .-.ommented the analysis done in preparation for ordinance found that because of the widespread residential areas Collier County, the land available for these types of businesses is '!'only 4.8~ of the urban commercial area. ?? Page 6 August 21, 1991 Cotulty Attorney Cu¥1er added if the distance separation in reel- areas is increased to 1,500 feet, these establishments would regttlated out of business, and the ordinance would be successfully challenged. .:;~?: see Delmt~ Clerk Fartie replaced ~puty Clerk QuavAn at this Thomas Naloney endorsed the Ordinance before the Board of Count%, ~o~tsstoners as well as ~he Idea of past convictions being a reaso- ?~a~le ~eans of limiting permits. He agreed that record keeping of ~(?:'e~ployees as a requiremen~ is a good Idea. C~ei~r Sanders ~ved, seconded ~ Co~issioner Sh~ ~d ~~ ~A~ely, to close the ~blic hearing. County Attorney Cuyler questioned whether a later effective date desirable, to which Commissioner Saunders stated he has no problem :'with the later effective date. In answer to Commissioner Hasse questioning the effective date of .',~:lle Ordinance, County Attorney Cuy]er stated that it is effective upon receipt of notice from the Secretary of State that it has been filed. C~imIonar Saundera moved, seconded by Coniceisner Shanahan and -;..' c~ted unanimously, that the proposed Ordinance as numbered and titled belo~ be adopted and entered Into Ordinance Book No. 46: ORDINANCE NO. 91-83 AN ORDINANCE TO ~E ENTITLED THE "COLLIER COUNTY SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES LOCATION AND REGULATION ORDINANCE"; SAID ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR PD~OSE AND INTENT; PROVIDING FOR APPLICABILITY TO TR~ INCORPORATED AND UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF COLLIER COUNTY, F~ORIDA; PROVIDI~ FOR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR CLASSIFICATION OF SEXUALLY ORIEntED BOSINESSES; PROVIDING FOR THE REQUIREMENT OF A PERMIT FOR OPEraTING S~XUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES; PROVIDING FOR INVESTIGATION OF APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR RESTRICTIONS ON ~]FE LOCATION OF SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES NITRIM COLLIER COUNTY; PROVIDING PROCEDURES FOR THE ISSUANCE OR DB~IAL OF PERMITS;; PROVIDING FOR AN ANNUAL PERMIT FEE; PROVIDING POR INGPBCTION OF THE PREMISES OF SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES; P!tOVIDING FOR EXPIRATION OF PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR SUSPENSION OF P~l~llT~; PROVIDING FOR REVOCATION OF PERMITS; PROVIDING FOR JUDICIAL R~VI~W OF PERMIT DENIAL, SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION; P~OV~D~NG FOR RES;THICTIONS REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF PERMITS; P~OV~DING FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS FOR ADULT MOT~LS~HOTELS; PltOVIDING FOR REG,~-~ATIONS PERTAINING TO EXHIBITION OF S~XUALLY · ]~PT~IClT FILM~ 0~: VIDEOS; PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO ~ R~CORDS; PROVIDING FOR PROHIBITIONS REGARDING MINORS AND $EI[UAE~Y ORI~]Tr~£, BUSINESSES; PROVIDING FOR ADVERTISING RE~ULATION$~ PROVIDING FOR HOURS OF OPERATION; PROHIBITING NUDITY AT SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES AND ANY COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS August 21, 199! : ~ ~/~OL~C Br~KRAGZS AR~ OFFXRED FOR S~E ~R CONS~ION ON ~ ~~; DECKING ~ AT S~LY ORI~ BUS~SSES NOT O~ ~R 8~E ~COHOL~C B~GES TO BE S~CT TO PROHIBITION ~~ TO SE~ION 800.03, ~ORIDA STATUTES, ~ THE U.S. ~ CO~T DECISION ~N ~S V. GLEN ~~ INC.; ~IBITIN~ 'S~DLE D~CING" ~ OTHER S~ ACTIVITIES AT ~~ O~I~D BUSI~SSES= PROVIDING FOR ~DITION~ CRIMINAL ~IBITIONS~ ~0VIDING ~DITION~ OPE~TION~ ~0VISIONS FOR ~~T O~I~D B~I~SSES~ PROVIDING FOR ~IONS; PROVIDING ~R ~N~ ~TIKS ~ ~DITION~ LEGS, ~QUIT~LE ~ IN~~ ~LIEF; PROVIDING FOR CONSE~ BY PErigEES T0 ~E ~ISIO~ OF ~IS ORDIN~CE ~ T0 CO~, ~DE~L, STA~ ~ ~CIP~ ~TIONS; ~OVIDING FOR I~I~ ~OM ~OSEC~ION; ~DI~ ~R NOTICE ~QUI~S ~ER THIS O~IN~C~; PROVIDING ~ ~~ ~ 8~ILI~; ~ PROVIDING FOR ~ E~CTI~ Rece~m: 8:10 P.M. - Reconvened: 8:20 P.M. ~~~Z~)-9~-4, COMITY D~"gELOPMENT DIVISION R~QUESTING ~'~-~ ~F ~ O~INANCE 82-2, ~ CO~I~ ZONING ~~ ~ ~ ~INC0~~D ~ OF COLLI~ CO~ BY ~ING ~~ 8, ~~T~ DIS~I~ REG~TIONS BY ~DING S~SECTION 8.10A, C~ICATION T~RS - SECOND H~ING TO BE HELD SE~ER Legal notice having been published in the Naples Dally News on .Allgust 13, 1991, as ..~v~denced by AffidavJt of Publication filed w~th the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition ZO-91-4. Plallner Mllk pro,,lded a brief history of th~s Petition and reckted ~nfol'matlon contained on the Executive Summary dated August 21, . l~e relayed that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) ~'eco~ended approval of the Ordinance on August 1, 1991 by a vote of 4 :'];to 2. He reported receipt of numerous documents during the past week ;rom GTE as well as personnel in the public and private entities. He p~oposed one recommendation to the Ordinance to allow communication w~th a maximum height of 150 feet, Including antennas affixed ~.'thereto, ~n the Estates Zoning Districts, and limited in design to construction,. He reported that GTE has information for 's meeting; that Mr. Gens Wayne, Director of Division of , submitted a letter; that Deena Quinn of Real Property ~llbm~tted some suggestions; and Mr. R. L. Brill submitted a :~ter~& he thought pertinent for mod~ficatlon and inclusion in the Ordinance. ooo,, o9 Page 8 August 21, 1991 Dr. Frank Van Essen, Director of the Collier Mosquito Control stated thai: the Board of County Commissioners should be in of & one pag~ memo dated Au!~ust 12, 1991, summarizing their position, copy not provided for the record. He confirmed that his department's pz. imary method for controlling mosquitos is night flying &t 300' altitudes and, therefore, any tower over 200' in height could be & potential hazard. He displayed a map outlining their flight paths as well as existing towers. He reiterated the suggestions lasted in his memo alluded to previously, i.e. strict control for pla- cement of towers to prevent exclusion of areas from receiving mosquito control; nttmber of towers over 200' should be limited; and towers and ~ranea over ~00' should be lit. :' Robert A. Kersteen, of GTE Mobilnet, referred to a handout, co~plete w~th cover l~tter as well as a quote from Dr. Lee, copy not j[i~'~' provided for'the reco~'d. He expressed a need for towers up to 150' in the remaining umban a~'eas of Collier County as well as in the E~D~stricts, as propo~:ed by staff. He inferred that vegetation such ~%;~[..&s Australian pines and grape plants interfere with the transmission of si~zlals. He referred to page 6, lines 1 through 10 of Sub A of the handout alluded to previously. He expounded a scenario thereby ':i': alleging that leasing out tower space is not cost effective. He '~,~j';/'l'sferred to three handout~, one of which is a green covered book, )laced before the Board of County Commissioners earlier, copies not ~:':.~prov~ded for the record. He read from one of the handouts, whereby it ~lggested admissions from cellular transmission facilities do not pose '~/:.~xl¥ threat to the health of the general population, and is borne out ~ji'.b~ letters from Dr. Balzono (phonetic). He referred to a blue han- domt, copy not provided the recorder, addressing the degradation of pFopert~ val~es stating that it is a myth that his facilities degrade property values. He provided the locations where his organization In mnswer to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Kersteen stated that there is '~e case An Lee Co~ty where a study was performed showing that a August 21, 1991 site does not promote degradation of a neighborhood. In response to Commissioner Shanaban questioning whether staff had reviewed the changes suggested by Mr. Kersteen, Planner Milk answered '~'tn the affirmative. iRegardtng the issue of reservation of space for ):ldditional antennas, ihe stated that the Ordinance does an adequate Job Bing this. He :referred to page 6 of the Ordinance, which is 14 of the Executive Summary, titled "Reservation of Capacity", and read a portion of same. He reflected that this section gives !.staff the abillty to ~xamtne the Just~fication for prolonging the reservation of towers,. etc. Steve Mathues, Attorney representing the Department of General Services in Tallahassee, referred to a letter dated August 14th from Maine (phonetic) Director of the Division of Communications, not provided for the record. H,~ acknowledged their belief that can live within the Ordinance and fulfill their mission. Paul Rodinsky submitted photographs to the Board of County Co~missloners which were not presented to the Clerk for the record, alleged to be photographs of a tower with its pedestals beloW the .~'w~ter llne as well as ptcture~ where an attempt is being made to fill iln and hide the pedestals of the tower. He reported that a cellular . b~l~ldlng was built nex't to the tower with its pedestal underwater ~'[;:..after the meeting wher,~ standards were set by the Board of County Oo~lssloners to prohibit construction of additional towers. [s%ated that the wAdth of the towers :Is not currently addressed :' Pat Rodtne~ read a prepared statement, copy not provided for the record, wherein it ts implied that the Ordinance prepared for approval : ~ the Board of County Commissioners outlines standards for tower erection throughout Collier County based on standards submitted by and ~n'~lf of co~unicatton companies from other counties in other sta- rorally unlike Collier County. She stated the towers, monopoles ~ microcells planned to be erected will have a detrimental impact on ~.,~one. She raised questions regarding the health and safety issues ..'im radiation emissions, the potential of ~tghtntng being dra~ to Page 10 August 21, 1991 <the cone areas of towers and, especially, the tower sitting underwater ~.1ocated behind her backyard, and visual pollution caused by the :r~k'~":towers. She requested that single family A-2 zoned property con- raining less than 20 ~cres be added to the protective arm of the new Ordinance. She stated that she has submitted many documents, pho- i'.'/ tographs and petttion~ against the toilers and, specifically, the one sitting In her backyard, to every commission and every staff reqltesttng that they stop the proliferation of same in Collier County. Planner Milk stated that in the Southern Building Code there is no maximtu~ height limit above the crown level of the road or the natural igt'~ade for the actual foundation of the tower leg, and the County engt- i: ~eers do not have a p~'oblem with that fact. He stated that the stan- "~ dm~ds implied tn the Ordinance were taken f~om a multitude of different Ordinances and modified to apply to the uniqueness of Collier County. He stated that, as long as a tower structure Is built within the development standards for setbacks, etc. there are no limi- tations on the width of the t, wers or the type of platform utilized. Leroy Pate, Profe~;slonal Engineer specializing in tower design ~" ~d analysis referred to page 5 of the Ordinance, paragraph (c)3(d) '.]~f. i~dicattng that this statement poses a problem. He stated that · paragraph (c) above a]',ludes to standards in accordance with EIA/TIA 222-E which is the industry standard for design of steel com- ~lcations towers. He reflected that it is unfair to the tower industry and designerf: to state what the failure characteristics of a J','tower might be when an engineer designing a building such as Building "F' is not required to give a report or definition for characteristics Of failure of this building. He concurred that the Board of County Commissioners has a right to require that a tower or any structure be designed and constructed in accordance with whatever standard is in ';place, but questioned whether the Board of County Commissioners has the need to know or ability to understand the failure characteristics. '.~..' . In answer to Commissioner Shanahan, Planner Milk stated that staff looking for to~er failure characteristics, i.e. how a tower might 77 Page 11 August 21 1991 'collapse. He remarked that the standards for EIA/TIA are subject to ~'steel towers only. I~e ,added that should he recommend modification to ~i";~tem (d) #Failure characteristics of the Tower", he would include any other towers not under the EIA/TIA 222-E standards. Community Development Services Administrator Brutt reflected that staff ts seeking answers to such questions as when a 500' tower breaks apart will it fall within the arc of 500', will it break apart and be carried by the wind or will it collapse in pieces? Mr. Pate stated there are numerous ways of failure which will be different, depending upon what the event is which causes the failure. In reply to Commissioner Hasse, Mr. Pate agreed that he can give ,Mr. Milk some generalized failure characteristics. He added, however, !:~.that he feels that item (d) should be taken out. He referred to ."paragraph 6 stating that, if properly designed, the tower wail not fail and, therefore, this is an unusual and unnecessary requirement. 'Re reflected that separation of towers will require much more land in i.!~,,, the tower area and will somewhat defeat the purpose of shared sites. l~eferr~ng to page lO, paragraph ll, he commented that EIA 222-E has an ~.!'!'/extensive ~nspection ..;ection and suggests three year inspections for ~u~de towers and five year inspections for self-supporting towers. He ¥!corlf~r~ed his agreement with this with the exception that for existing itswets in place, they should be given one year after enactment of the !'Ol, d~narlce to have an initial inspec'tfon and, thereafter, be inspected · at e~ther thre~: year or five year intervals, depending on the type of Planner Milk agreed that three and five years is appropriate for 'owers in most areas, but added tha~ Collier County is a unique ~icoastal habitat area and recommended two and four year inspections. In answer to Commissioner Shanaban, Planner Milk reported that the reference to annual Inspections contained in the Ordinance refers to 'an annual inspection for every tower for certain items, but the items take an engineer to analyze he still recommends the two and four ~ear inspect ior, s. He stated that there are presently towers that are Page ~2 August 21, 1991 .::?(~erloaded not only by antennas and equipment, but are not technically It to support what was placed on them initially. Mr. Pate ~tated 'that what is being suggested is a physical tnspec- .~.. tton of the tower and will not do anything as far as the antenna or wind overloading of same. He verified that he can make an analysis regarding the design of the tower, but questioned whether the owner will pay for the analysis and do anything about it should the report identify problems. Commissioner Voll)e questioned the need to amend the Ordinance to include further insp~ctton with respect to old towers. s~ ~ Clerk Ituevin replaced Deputy Clerk Ferris '*' Attorney Bruce Anderson, representing Cellular One Colller/Hendry, stated many of his c2ient's towers are not yet constructed and if this ordinance Is adopted as proposed, it will severely cripple the cellu- lar communication bu~tness. He said Cellular One represents a $50-mlllton investment in the future of Collier County. He indicated ~the ordinance puts all its emphasis on aesthetics to the detriment of public safety considerations. He reported communication towers are defined in the current Zoning Ordinance as an essential public service and are permitted as a Provisional Use in every zoning district in the County. He said with the proposed ordinance, communication towers will no longer be pe:~mitted as a principle use in the industrial district and will be prohibited in many zoning districts. He further stated that the height restrictions will result in many more towers built, yet one of the purposes of the proposed ordinance Is to prevent a proliferation of towers. In response to Commissioner Shanahan, Mr. Anderson suggested that com~u~tcatton towers continue to be allowed as Provisional Uses in all zoning districts. He also recommended an incentive for the tower ~i.i'shartng requirements in the ordinance so If a company is willing to build & bigger tower In order to accommodate potential other users, there be some way to speed up the approval process. He noted there -should also be crtte:."ta established within the ordinance to allow Page 13 August 21, 1991 .~t0w~ra as principal '~tses in some zoning districts, i.e., in an agri- cultural district with locatiohal restrictions concerning distances from residential nei!]hborhoods. Jay Miller, 6eneral Manager of Cellular One, indicated he fields q~lestions on a daily basis from citizens of the County wanting to know i~]~hen the commtlnications network will be complete, primarily from those in the eastern part of the County who must drive into Naples to do their busines~. Mark r. amoureux submitted a packet of material to the Board of ~Collnt~ Commissioners. (Copy not provided to the Clerk to the Board.) '~He commented that the.· County and the c~tizens in general do not recognize communication towers as an essential service. He no~ed Zonin~ News, a publication put out by the American Planning Association, states '~hat in many communities, cellular sites are classified ae public utility distribution systems or as ~ublic utility 'stations, not as /and u~e issues. He saJ. d many zoning codes allow t~ere to be built by right in almost every zone and without public hearing. He read a letter from the East Naples Fire Department in support of a cellula:~ telephone network that provides complete coverage to Collier County. Frank Heaton with Cellular One, indicated his intention is to g high quality, low cost alternative form of communication service to the comm~nity. He said if an ordinance is passed which causes an ~ase in the number of broadcas~ sites, substantial additional '~¢osts will be incurred which will have to be paid by the rate payers of the system. In responi;e to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Heaton said at 150 feet, a mi~ of five addi~tonal towers would be needed to supplement what has currently proposed in order to attain the same coverage. Mr. Heaton stated in his opinion the entire tower sharing provi- · iO~ should be stricken from the ordinance, however, if left in place should include gu:[deltnes in which to do that sharing and a govern- Page 14 August 21, 199! "~sntal body should be In place to referee disputed intended uses. see l~y Clerrk Parris replaced D~puty Clerk ~evtn at this tt~ Robert Carothers, representing Palmer Communications, Inc., C'e~reseed concern over the Intent and Purpose Section of the Tower Ordinance. He proposed amending the Ordinance in such a way as to allow upgrading of the towers to comply with possible future EIA spe- cification changes without penalty under the new Ordinance, but with ';~'normal permitting procedures, if required, still applying. i~:~.: Chief Vince Doerr of Ochopee Fire Control predicted that for fire service there will be more and more calls coming in on 911 through the ~se of cellular phones in rural areas. He stated that most of the · fire chiefs are looking forward to use of the cellular phones and hope ';~;that some towers are allowed for the rural areas. In response to Commissioner Shanahan regarding the challenge that the proposed Ordinance is in conflict with the Growth Management Plan, !~L.;'Planner Ntlk stated that he and Assistant County Attorney Palmer will look Into the ~atter. He summarized the manner in which staff pro- ceeded to comply with the Board of County Commissioners' directire to "prepare the proposed Ordinance, adding that he fails to see how the proposed Ordinance will require Mr. Heaton of Cellular One to provide ~more towers than he had planned for originally. He pointed out there is a potential need for redesign and reincation of the towers, He reported that on March 96, 1991 there were two site deve- lopment plans at the County, one for the Shirley Street tower and one the site near Mr. and Mrs Rodinsky on Trinity Place, the latter v;~;-incurrtng platting problems and probably never being built. He [reflected that Mr. Heaton has since :submitted six applications for ~towere, all with the full know/edge 'that staff had been directed to prepare a new tower Ordinance. He ~laranteed that in review of each Of the six plan!~ it was pointed out 'that staff was in the process of a new tower Ordinance, and that the potential of conflict the site in lieu of the new Ordinance existed. He confirmed that ~he Corkscrew site, at the time of review, was considered an August 21, 1991 ~op~iate location for a tower of 290 feet as there were no height ions in the Estate Zoning District at that time. He indi- however, that staff has since decided there should be a height restriction of 1§0 f~:et in the Estates Zoning District. He suggested that Mr. Heston has looked at potential sites for location of towers i]itlein~ different crite~ria than that utilized by staff in complying with districts, etc. He reiterated that when staff was directed to look at towers there was not a single public hearing Provisional Use 'filed and six have since been filed. In reply to Commissioner Volpe questioning whether consideration '~'has been given to the possibility of a variance being granted, Planner ~?!~,Milk stated he does not have a problem with that scenario at all. In answer to Commissioner Shanahan, Planner Milk relayed his feelings that the sha:.~ed use aspects of the proposed Ordinance wail work for the industry. In response to Commissioner Shanahan's comments regarding the con- cerns of Mosquito Control, Planner Milk provided the current FCC and requirements regarding towers 200 feet or more in height. He that ~osquito Control attend Provisional Use hearings and their concerns ~tth towers that pose a potential hazard to their ~rations. Commissioner. Volpe requested staff to provide incentives to allow tower sharing. Planner Milk countered that once a shared use plan has been pro- arid the Provisional Use process has been followed through, one approved for more antennas, more towers, etc. as long as the regu- ions of the Ordinance are met. Commissioner Volpe pointed out that engineers have addressed the 'of tower failures, and he suggested the need for clarification ,;~ ~ ~ed, ~e~onded b~ Co~issioner S~ ~d · -i~l,rle~/e, te ciasa the public hearing. County Attorney Cu'?ler pointed out the need to announce the date Page 16 August 21, 1991 time for the next public hearing on this item. Following discussion regarding the date for the next hearing, ~"":'~Commissioner Goodnight acknowledged t:hat ~his is the first of two ~n~bli¢ hearings and reported that the next hearing w~ll be held 9, 1991 at 5:05 P.M. ~ ,;i* '~. ~.. There being no further business for the Good of the County the · : :meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: · ATTEST: JAMES C. GILES, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMM.~.~.SIONERS . BOARD OF ZONING APPF2~Z~S/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING Bd~D(S)OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS CONTROL ~ ., · ".~ ¢.~, · . .:. '"_, _... :" PAtrICIA AN~E ~00DNIGH~ CHAIRMAN de minutes appr/~ed by the Board on presented or as corrected " Page 17