Loading...
Agenda 10/14/1997 R COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA' October 14, t997 9:00 A.M. NOTICE: ALL I~ERSONS WISHinG TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR REQUESTS TO ADDRE~ THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICll ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY ADMINIS'rRATOR AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO TIlE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS*. ANY PERSON WllO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD O1; TIlE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY blEED TO ENSURE TIIAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO FIVE (S) blINUTES UNLESS PERMISSION FOR ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED BY TltE CKAIRMAN. ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING I~PAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M. 2. 3. 4. INVOCATION -Rev. Les Rengstorfr, Sou-Rise Christian Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES September 23, 1997 - Regular meeting. September 24, 1997 - Value Adjustment Board. PROCLAMATIONS AND SERVICE AWARDS PROCLAMATIONS SERVICE AWARDS 1 October 14. 1997 6. 10. 11. 1) Kelth Magero - Water Bepartmcnt 951 - I0 years 2) Tarcisio Menjivar - Pelican Bay Service Division * 5 years 3) l~lafluel Nieto - Pelican Bay Service Division - 5 years 4) Leone1 Ramlrez - Pelican Bay Service Division - 5 years PRESENTATIONS APPROVAL OF CLERK'S REPORT A. ANALYSIS OF CHANG~ TO RESERVES FOR CONTINGENCIF~. PUBLIC PETITIONS A. Michael J. Volpe, Trelser, Kobza & Volpe requesting land use designation for property located at the Intersection of County Road 951 and White Blvd. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT A. CO,MMUN1TY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES B. PUBLIC WORKS 1) Approve speed limit reduction from forty-five miles per hour (45 MI'H) to thirty- five miles per hour (35 M~PH) on C.R. 846 (Immokalee Road) Westbound from Exst of the Collier's Reserve access road to S.P.. 45 (U.S. 41) and median channellzatlou. 2) Review Hearing for Alternative Water and Wastewater System Impact Fee Calculation for Carlisle of Naples. C. PUBLIC SERVICES D. SUPPORT SERVICES E. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR F. AIRPORT AUTHORITY COUNTY ATTORNr¥'S REPORT A. Recommendation for the Board to consider a proposed Settlement Agreement regarding the Lely Barefoot Beach Guardhouse litigation. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS A. Appointment of member(s) to the Affordable Housing Commi~slon. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS 2 Oclobcr 14, 1997 PUBLIC COMMENT ON GENERAL TOPICS PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HEARD IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING STAFF ITEMS 12, 13. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS - BCC COIV[PREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS 1) Petition CP-97-3, George L. Var··doe of Young vanAssenderp and Varnadoe, P.A., requesting a Growth Management Plan text amendment of the Future Land Use Element to provide for the reallocation of residential dwelling units from portions of The Fiddler's Creek PUD/DRX located in the urban coastal fringe and urban residential fringe design·ted areas to specified lands located in the agricultural/rural designated area of the Future Land Use Map. ZONING AMENDMENTS 1) Petition PUD-97-9, John P. Asher, P.E., of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., representing The Club Estates, L.C., for a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural to "PUD" Planned Unlt Dex~lopment for a project titled The Club Estates PUD containing · dexTIopment strategy consisting of twenty-eight (28) single family detached housing lots and homes on a total site area of 155.8 acres, located on the west side of C.R. 951 immediately contiguous to the property known as Naples National Golf and Country Club in Sec. I0, T50S, R26E. 2) Petition PUD-85-29(I), R. Bruce Anderson of Young, vanAxsenderp & Var··doe, P.A., representing Jim Colosimo, Trustee, requesting a PUD to PUD which will have the effect of bringing the Naples Gateway PUD and PUD Master Plan into compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) and the sunsettlng requirements set forth in Section 2,7.3.4 of the LDC for property located in the northwest quadrant of the Pine Ridge Road (C.R. 896) and 1-75 Interchange Activity Center, located on Tracts 29, 44, and 45, Golden Gate Estates, Unit 35, Section 7, T49S, R26E. OTHER 1) Adoption of an Ordinance ·mending Ordinance No. 80-47 called the Collier County Parking Ordinance, raising parking fines, and other substantial amendments BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 1) Petition CU-97-16, Bruce E. Tyson, ASL. A, AICP, of M/liMn, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., representing The Willow Run Trust requesting Conditional Use "1" of the "A" Rural Agricultural Zonlng District having 3 Oc~cbcr 14, 1997 14. 15. the effect of expanding The Willow r~n quarry earth mining operations on property located in Sections I1, 12, 13 and 14, T$0S, R~GE, conslstlng of 200 acres, more or less. Petition A-97-9, Susan Middlebrook and Cindy Miller requesting an appeal of a Collier Coupty Planning Commission's approval of a boat dock cz'tension approved on August 21,199'/, for property located on Lots ~4 and 85, Isles of Capri, Unit 1. B. OTHER I) Relating to Petition CU-96-17 for fhe first extension of · Conditional Use for a church and related facilities and child care center in the SE'* Estates Zoning District for property described in Resolution 96-581 adopted on December 12, 1996, pursuant to S~etlon 2.7.4 (Conditional use Procedures) of the LDC. 2) Relating to Petition CU-96-16 for the first eztens;on of a Conditional Use for a church in the "E" Estates Zoning District for property described in Resolution 96-$13 adopted on No,amber 12, 1996, pursuant to Section 2.7.4 (Conditional Use Procedures) of the LDC. STAFF'S COMMUNICATIONS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' COMMUNICATIONS 16. CONSENT AGENDA - Ali matters listed under thi~ item are considered to be routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discuss;on of each item. If discussion is desired by a member of the Board, that item(s) will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered separately. Be COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVZRONMENTAL SERVXCKS I) Request to approve the final plat of "Waterways of Naples, Unit Two". 2) Approval of an agreement with W~lkerson & Associates, Inc., for engineering services for Infrastructure improvement~ to Shellabarger Park in lmmokalee. This is a Community Development Block Grant, total contract will not exceed $92,500, RFP~ 96-2607, and is for Infrastructure to Shellabarger Park in lmmokalee. (Continued from the meting of 9/23/97) Approval and execution of the Transportation Disadvantaged Funding Agreement between Collier County and Good W~eets, Inc. PUBLIC WORKS 1) Recommendation to award Annual Bid ~9'/-2711 - Traffic Signal Components. 3) 4 October 14. 1997 17. 2) Approve aA lnteragency Atreement between Collier County and the State of Florida Department of Corrections, Hendry Correctional Institution, for continued use of Inmate labor in road maintenance activities. 3) Award Bid ~97-2718 for annual chemicals. 4) Award Bid ~9'/-2689 for jack and bore operatlons, S) Award Bid ~t9'/-2698 for underg~'ound utilltle~ suppllet. C. PUBLIC SERVICES D. SUPPORT SERVICES F,. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR F. BOA~ OF COUSTY CO~tSS~OS£~ ~flSCZLt.~ZOUS COR~ESPOND~-SCZ MI$CZLLAt~Z0I~$ rrzM$ TO ~n.£ FOR m~C0RD wrm ^s m~zcrtt~. n. o~£R COSSTrrUT~OSAL OFFIC£RS COUST¥ ATtORNeY J. AIRPORT AUTHORITY ADJOURN ][NOUTRW~ CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY ADMINI~TRATQR'S OFFICE AT ?748383, $ October 14. 1997 AGENDA CHANGES COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING OCTOBER 14.1997 ADD: ITEM S(A) - Proclamation designating October, 1997 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month. (BCC request). ADD: ITEM 5(C) - Presentation of a check to the Board of County Commissioners by the Collier County Tax Collector. (Tax Collector's request). ADD: ITEM 8 (C)I - Approve request to utilize reserve funds for ramps at the East Naples Skate Park Facility and daser boards at Veterans Community Park. (Staff's Request). CONTINUE: ITEM 12(BX1) TO 10/21D7 MEETING: Petition PUD 97-9, The Club Estates, L.C. for a rezone from "A' agricultural to PUD-Planned Unit Development for a project rifled The Club ~ PUD located on the we~t side of C.R. 951 immediately contiguotl$ to ~C property known as Naples National Golf and Country Club. (Staff's request). COLLIER COUNTY AD TOR'S OFFICE 3301 E. TAMIAMI TR. NAPL~, FL 34112 · (941)774-8383 FAX (941) 774-4010 , .? '-:'.:.~" ; 4~I T~i¢ T~! N~ State 330 ' ~: ~ Cot ~blic P~idon - ~d U~ ~si~ntion offS' Road 951 ~d ~itc Boulcv~d. D~ Mr. Vol~:  PI~ ~ ~ ~ you ~ ~h~ul~ to ap~ ~fom ~e ~llier ~ B~ of ~i~on~s at ~e m~g of ~m~r.~ 1997 ~g~ding ad~ ~ ~ B~ ~!1 ~e no ~fion on your ~tion at ~s m~ng. H~, yo~ ~ ~fion ~y ~ P~ on a ~ ~ for ~i~ion at ~e Bond's di~o~ ~fo~, ' yo~ ~ to ~e ~ ~o~d ~ to M~ ~ of yo~ ~n~ ~e Bo~ at a ~ m~ng. ~j [' . A~i~on B~lding ~l&ng"~ of~ gov~mt ~mpl~. PI~ ~'~ ,: If you ~ ~Y ~ i~o~tion or ~i~ pl~ do not h~im~ to ~n~t ~is o~. ~: Cous~y ~ V'mce~ A. CauIero, Community Development & Envinmmentnl Scrviccs TREISER~ KOBZA & VOLPE, C,Tn. [nternet Address: www.tkvnaples.com September 8, 1997 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Thc Northcrn Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail Nanh Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941 ) 649-4900 Fax (94 !) 649-0823 Mr. Robert F. Fernandez Collier County Administrator Collier County Courthouse, Adm. Bldg. P.O. Box 413044 Naples, FL 34101-3044 RE: Request for Public Petition VIA TELEFAX & MAIL 774-4010 Dear Mr. Fernandez: This Public Petition Request is being submitted by myself as the attorney and George Bother of Vanasse, Daylor & Bother, LLP. as Land Planner for Hy A. Bershad and Anita R. Bershad, his wife, and All American Homes of Southwest Florida, Inc. The Bershads are the owners of a 2.5 acre tract of land located at the Northeast comer of the Intersection of Country Road 951 and White Boulevard and All American Homes of Southwest Florida, Inc. is the owner of a 2.5 acre tract of land located at the Southeast'comer of the .same intersection. Both of these parcels as well as parcels abutting them to the North, East and South currently are designated as "E" Estates on the Golden Gate Area Master Plan which is a part of Collier County's Growth Management Plan. The corresponding parcels of land at the Northwest and Southwest comers of the same intersection are also designated aa "Estates" but they are included within the "Neighborhood Center Subdistriet". The Neighborhood Center Subdistriet permits low intensity transitional commercial uses that are compatible with both residential and commercial uses. The Neighborhood Center Subdistrict on the West side of CR 951 contains a total of thirty (30) acres; ten (10) of which are set aside for commercial usage and twenty (20) acres of which are .set aside for conditional uses. We are advised that, consistent with the Golden Gate Master Plan, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners already has granted a Petition to rezone 3.7 acres of land located at the North' ,est comer of the subject intersection for convenience and commercial uses. At the time the Neighborhood Center node at the CR 951/Pine Ridge Road/White Boulevard intersection was designated on the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map, Neighborhood Centers Nodes also were designated at the intersection of Wilson Boulevard and Golden Crate Boulevard; EvcTglades Boulevard and Golden Gate Boulevard; Oil Well Road and Everglades Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard and County Road 846. All of these later Neighborhood Centers now have be~n eliminated from the Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map. Apart from the CR 951/Pine Ridge Road/White Boulevard node, the only remaining Neighborhood Center node is located East of CR 951 with the "Estates" designation are located at the Northeast comer of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard. A analysis of the commercial land use requirem, ents for the Estates area reveals that withi areas East of 951, ther~ is a deficiency of approximately twenty (20) the population beyond th~ y~ar 2000. 0 C T Collier County Administrator September 8, 1997 Page 2 Pursuant to the Golden Gate Master plan, the location of thc Neighborhood Center nodes within the Estates designation are based on intersections of major roads and spacing criteria. The intersection of Country Road 95 I/White Boulevard/Pine Ridge Road is a major intersection. According to the Golden Gate Area Master Plan, the only reason why the Neighborhood Center at County Road 951 and Pine Ridge Road/White Boulevard is located on the West side of the intersection and not on the East side of the in~$ec:tion is due to the presence of a fifty (50') foot canal and the contemplated expansion of County Road 951 which might significantly reduce the amount of developable land directly East of 951. Recently, the Bershads and representatives of All American Homes of Southwest Florida requested our law firm and Mr. BOther to explore the. L?.'bility of having the ~ortheast and Southeast quadrants of the CR 9$1/Pine Ridge Road/White .Boulev.ard intersection included within, the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict. After reviewing this matter, we met with representatives of the Comprehensive Planning Section within the Community Development and Enviwnmental Services Division and, at the conclusion of our meeting, we proposed the inclusion of the Northeast and Southeast quadrants within the Neighborhood Center without any increase in the total number of acres within the reconfigured Neighborhood Center but with the existinE acreage being redistributed equally amonE all four of the quadrants. This would result in approximately 3.$ acres of commercial and 5 acres for conditional uses being designated in each one of these four (4) quadrants. The existence of the canal on the East side of CR 951 did not appear to be a barrier to the development of the Northeast or Southeast quadrants. Indeed, both the County's staff and Mr. Bother felt that from a planning perspective, it would be better if the Estates residents who are to be serviced by this Neighborhood Center did not have to cross a major highway to reach a neighborhood center. Since the County already had submitted amendments to its Growth Management Plan to the Department of Community Affairs and had in fact received that Department's response, the question arose as to whether this extension and reallocation constituted a substantial change or rather was merely a minor modification to the County's plan as submitted to the DCA. The staff seemed to indicate it considered this proposal to be an insubstantial change. We would like to have the opportunity to discuss this matter with the members of the Board of County Commissioners under the Public Petition portion of the Board's Agenda as soon as possible. Since the Public Heating on the amendments to the County's Growth Management Plan is scheduled for the first part of October, we would like to be able to address the Board on September 23, September 30 or October 7. Thank you. Very truly yours, MJV:mjw cc: George Bother Hy Bershad TREISER, KOBZA & · ,,. 'N, ~ ', ,'; I Michael -.INVolr~ VOLPE, Chtd. TREISER, KOBZA & VOLPE, · Interne, Address: www. tkvnaples.cmn ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Northern Trust Building 4001 Tamiami Trail North Suite 330 Naples, Florida 34103 Telephone (941} 649.4900 Fax (94 !) 649-0823 September 23, 1997 ~f Ce.md · 511izm L Robert F. Fernandez County Administrator, Collier County 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34112 RE: Request for Public Petition- Land Use Designation for property located at intersection of County Road 951 and White Boulevard - Bet'shad and All American Homes of Southwest Florida. · Aho adn~ hi loll , Bored cemfied T'~ Aflora~ Dear Mr. Fernandez: Thank you for )'our letter of September 15, 1997, advising me that my clients' request for a Public Petition will be placed on the Agenda for the October 7, 1997 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners. Regr.cttably, I am scheduled to be in New York on that day and, therefore, respectfully request this item be continued to the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board to be held on October 14'. If for some reason it is not possible for this item to be on the Board's October 14' Agenda, I would appreciate it if you would let me know the first date thereafter ',,,'hen this matter may be placed on the Commission's Agenda. Thank you for your courtesy and prompt attention to this matter. Very truly ),ours, ..-,,.:. Michael J.'--V. blpe VOLPF_., Chtd. CC: George Bother Hy Bershad OCT' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY APPROVE SPEED LIIVHT REDUCTION FROM FORTY-FIVE MILES PER HOUR (45 MPH) TO THIR~-~ MILES PER HOUR (35 MPH) ON C.R. 846 (IMMO~EE ROAD) WESTBOUND FROM EAST OF THE COLLIER'S RES~VE ACCF~S ROAD TO S.R. 45 (U.S. 41) AND MEDIAN CUT CHANNELIZATION. ~: To obtain Board of County Commissioners approval of the attached Resolution to lower the speed limit from forty-five miles per hour (45 mph) to thirty five miles pea' hour (35 mph) on C.R. 846 (Immokalee Road) westbound from east of Collier's Reserve to S.R. 45 (U.S. 4!). CONSIDERATIONS: At'er reviewing accident experience and approach speeds at the River Chase Mall ingress/egress on C.R. 846 (Imrnokalee Road), it has been determined that a reduction of the speed limit on C.R. 846 westbound from the vicinity of the Collier's Reserve access westerly to S.R. 45 (U.S. 41) would be appropriate. An analysis of speeds on C.R. 846 westbound within the subject area reveals that 85% of the traffic is traveling at or below fifty five miles per hour (55 mph). Traffic exiting the River Chase Mall has been recorded at 2,079 vehicles within a 24-hour pc-riM, and traffic on C.R. 846 westbound has been recorded at 14,198 vehicles for the same 24-hour period. A review of accident experience for this location revealed that 12 accidents have occurred within a 12 month period, the majority of which could be considered attributable to the elevated approach speeds on C.R. 846 and the lack of sufficient gap comprehension by vehicles exiting the River Chase Mall. A major portion of the existing River Chase Mall traffic is crossing the C.R. 846 westbound traffic lanes to a median cut to gain access to the C.R. 846 eastbound roadway. This unprotected crossing is approximately 620 feet east of the S.R. 45 intersection. Additionally, traffic crossing to the median cut is stacking within the median cut therein obscuring sight lines, and at times, blocking the entry of eastbound C.R. 846 traffic desiring access to the River Chase Mall. The Transportation Services Department performed this engineering study to determine the desirability of lowering the speed limit within the subject segment of westbound C.R. 846 in concert with providing an improvement in the charmelization of traffic utilizing the median cut at tho River Chase Mall. These improvements will provide for a safer environment for crossing Waffle at this location and should result in a decrease in vehicular crashes. This action will result in the expenditure of approximately $475.00 for signage and channelizing devices and will be installed during routine work within the area. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the Road & Bridge account. · Fund No. 101 (Road & Bridge) · Cost CenterNo. 163630 (Traffic Operations). Executive Summary: Speed limit Feductions from 4S mph to 35 mph on C.P~ 846 (Immokalee Road) westbound Page 2 GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None _RECOMM~lqI~ATION: That the Board of County Commissioners approv~ the reduction of 'the'exiSting speed limit on C.R. 846 0mmokalee Road) westbound to thirty five tm'les per bom' (35 mph) from approximately east of Collier's Reserve access westerly to the vicinity of S.R. 45 (U.S. 41) by adopting a resolution stating as such and that the Board of County C..onnni~oners npprove the chnnnelization of the median cut on C.R. 846 (Immokalee Road) nt the River Chase 'Mall access. PREPARED BY: DATE:~ Davio~_F. ~ob~'ck, Interim Transpoflati~n Director REVIEWED B~ DATE: ~ ~~_Z F_.d Ilschn~, Public Works Administrator R~3097/ES sp ln~ reducxioc RESOLUTION NO. 97-~ I 2 3 A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A SPEED LIMIT 4 REDUCTION TO THIRTY FIVE MILES PER HOUR (35 5 MPH) ON C.R. $46 (IMMOKALEE ROAD) WESTBOUNI) 6 FROM TIIE VICINITY OF COLLIER RESERVE · 1 ~Y TO S.R. 45 (ROUTE U.S. 41). 9 WHEREAS, ~ :316, Florida Ststu~es, permits the BoL'~d of County ConTmissioners 10 to alter or establish speed limits on mods uMer Its jurJodiction; and It WHEREAS, C.R. 846 0mmokalee Road) fails under the jurisdiaion of the Board of 12 Coun~ Commissioners; and 13 WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 316, Florida Statutes, the Board of County 14 Commissioners ma~ alter such existing spccd limits ss m~ be tppmpriste upon the basis of an ts efl~ineefinS and traffic investigation; and 16 WEEREAS, the rcsults of' such e~gineefin,~ and traffic investigations dctewnlne that the 17 rcducod speed limit is rcas~uble and safer under the conditions found to exist and in conformity to ! 8 criteria promulsatcd by the County. 19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 20 COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNT~, FLORIDA, that thc Board of. Coonty Commissioners 21 does h,;~¢by establish a thirty five miles pc~ hour (35 mph) speed limit on C.R. 846 Ommokalee 22 ROM') w~-~tbound from thc vicinity of' approximately 480 fcc~ west of. the Collier Re-,eryc access road 23 wcs~y to S.R. 45 (Rou:c U.S. 41), a distance of' approximately 2.350 f'cct, and dc, cs hereby d~rec~ 2~t the County Transpertation Services Department to erect appropriate advance warning **REDLK~E 25 SP££D ^HEAD" si~s and speed limit si~s 8ivin8 notice 0~crcof'. 26 BE IT FURTH£R RESOLYED, th.~t a copy of' this RcsoJu:ion be f'orwardcd 1o the 27 Collier County SharifT's Of'rice for proper cnf'orcemcm of' the established speed limit for C.R. 846 28 0mmokalce Road) wcst~ond within the designated scgmcnC 29 This resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote favoring same this 30 dayof ..... 1997. 3! 32 34 36 37 39 40 42 43 46 47 4~ 49 ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk By~ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIOA By: TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, Chairmm Approved as to form and · legal su~ciency: Thomas C. l~almcr Assistant Count)' Attorney RC./un/O92597/Re-o Rcduc Spd [.mt 846.doc C.R. 888 PROJECT SITE ~';~--:, ,, IMMOKALEE ROAD 'VANDERBILT ,BE.ACH 0 %:) I I-- {3.. PINE RIDGE RO.t~ (C.E. ~^~ ,aKw^Y (c.E. 88s) L OCA TION MAP (C.R. 846) : I' O~T 1~ 1~5~7 Ic.n +79.4G 66.96 LT EXECUTIVE sUMMARY REVIEW HEARING FOR ALTERNATIVE WATER AND WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPACT FEE CALCULATION FOP,. CARLISLE OF NAPLES Q[]:~,.~/~: In accordance with Ordinance No. 90-86, as amended, and Ordinance No. 90-$7, as amer. ded, to have the Board of County Commissioners Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, conduct an alternate impact fee review hearing for the HealthTrust, Inc., Carlisle of Naples assisted care living facility. CONSIDERATIONS: HealthTrust, Inc. is proposing to construct an assisted care living facility to be cai;ed Carlisle of Naples. This facility will be located at the intersection of Airport-Pulling Road and Orange Blossom Drive. On September I1, 1997, HealthTmst, Inc. requested an Alternative Water and Wastewater System Impact Fee calculation and review hearing. The calculation proposed an alternative water and wastewater system impact fee based on a study of similar institutional facilities. The proposed facility is to be constructed in phases and has been approved for a total of 390 units. The first phase will consist of 219 units (249 beds) ,Mth a mixture of assisted living units and supportive living units. The facility will also contain a central kitchen, a dining room, and central laundry facility. The Collier County Water-Sewer District currently requires a water impact fee of $900 and a wastewater impact fee of $1,340 for an Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU). According to Ordinance 90-86 and 90-87, an EDU means a building or a portion of a building designed for or whose primary purpose is for residential occupancy, and xvhich consists of one or more rooms which are arranged, designed or used as living quarters for one or more persons. As written, Ordinances 90-86 and 9047 require each unit in an assisted care lixqng facility to be assessed a water impact fee of $900 per unit and a wastewater impact fee of $1,340 per unit. The total fee under this approach would be $490,560. Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., representing HealthTmst, Inc., has researched the demand characteristics of assisted living facilities. The research included six facilities connected to the Collier County Water-Sewer District system. The research supports a per bed usage below the Collier County Water-Sewer average single family home usage of 350 GPD. g:~tt~rmfiv~ ~mp~ct fee~ex~: snmm - phfl-e..adhle of rapids shermfl~ imps~ fee.doe OCT ~ ~ !~t e Executive Summary HealthTrust, Inc. Alternative Impact Fees Page 2 The data compiled by Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., indicates that the usage of the sampled assisted living facilities range from 56.15 gallons/bed/day to 113.5 gallons/bed/day. Based on this data, HealthTrust, Inc. is requesting a pro rated impact fee based on 115 gallons/bed/day versus the CCWSD avexage single family home usage of 350 GPD. This would result in a per bed fee 33% of the standard per EDU impact fee. The HealthTrust, Inc. proposed fee per bed would be $295.71 for water and $440.29 for wastewater. The total fee under this approach would be $183,264. e Staff has reviewed the proposed alternative water system and wastewater system impact fee calculation. Staff has reviewed historical usage patterns of similar facilities, as well as the standards contained in Florida Administrative Code 10D-6 which provides standard flow characteristics for various institutional users including nursing/congregate living facilities. Based on these reviews and the study submitted by Wilson, Miller, Barton, and Peek, Inc., staffhas concluded that an average per day usage of 115 gallons/bed/day is a reasonable level of expected usage by adult congregate/nursing home facilities. On June 24, 1997, the Board accepted an alternative fee calculation using the same approach for the CareMatrix Corp., Chancellor Park, assisted care living facility, basing the fee on a usage level of 115 gal/bed/day. If the Board considers granting the alternative fee then staff would recommend that a two year full occupancy monitoring period be established wherein actual consumption for the Carlisle of Naples facility will be reviewed. If actual per month usage during the monitoring period is found to exceed the per bed basis established for the alternative fee calculation, then the County will have the right tO recalculate the fee and assess the owner/developer for the difference. According to the Engineer of Record, all landscaping, except for the building's courtyard's, will be irrigated from non-potable water sources. The courtyard will have a separate irrigation meter for irrigation purposes. The irrigation meter impact fee will be based on meter size in accordance with Ordinance 90-86 as amended. 11. The impact fee for this project was originally calculated incorrectly and $201,600 was collected. The correct amount should have been $490,560 as described in paragraph 4. Therefore, if the Alternative fee is approved, the amount to be refunded will be $18,336. If disapproved, an additional $288,960 will be collected. g:~Isern~Ye impact f~s~xcc summ- ~il-czrlisle of r~ples Executive Summary HealthTrust Inc. Alternative Impact Fees Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT: Ordinance No. 90-86, as amended, provides for a water impact fee (Fund 411) of $900 per EDU. Ordinance No. 90-87, as amended, provides for a wa~ewater impac~ fee (Fund 413) of $1,340 per EDU generating $490,560.00. If the Board accepts the proposed alternative approach and staff's recommended minimum per bed u~age level of 115 gallons/bed/day, the water impact fee would be $295.71 per bed, and the wastewater impact fee would be $440.29 per bed, $183,264 would be generated. If the alternate fee is accepted, the petitioner will receive a refund of $18,336. If it is not approved, the petitioner will be required to pay an additional $288,960. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Water and Wastewater Impact Fees are the designated source of funding to support growth driven expansion of the County's Water and Wastewater Systems. The basis for the water and wastewater impact fees is a planned level of capital expansion designed to maintain the County's level of service standards. The capacity reserved for each EDU drives the service standard and thus the need for facility expansion. Accordingly, there are no growth impacts as long as reduced revenue is off-set by reduced capital expansion needs. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District consider the proposed alternative impact fee calculation for Carlisle of Naples. If the Board grants an alternative water and wastewater impact fee, staff would recommend basing the fee on a usage level of no less than 115 galJbed/day. The total fee under this approach would be $183,264. Additionally, staff recommends the implementation of a v, vo year monitoring period under the conditions described in consideration paragraph 9 above. PREPARED BY: '~Ov~ ~, (,.J~ ~ ~Su~an M~~enior Accountant REVIEWEDBY:~ ,~J ~ ~ ~ (.~Edwa~d N. ,F~m~~, Public Works Operations Director APPROVED BY~ _ Ed Ilschn~, P.E~, Public Works Adminimator g:~ah~mative impact fee~x~ mmm - phil-carli%ie of naples alternativ~ hnpac% fee.do~ July 3, 1997 Mr. Robert F; Fernandez N~les, FL 34112 RE: The Carlisle at Naples Proposed Impact Fee Dear Mr. Fernandez: Carlisle at Naples LTD 2121 Ponce de Leon Blvd. Coral Gables, FL 33134 The Carlisle at Naples is submitting a check in the amount of $500,474.17 for the Collier County calculated impact fee and is doing so under "Protest". This is pursuant to County Ordinance No. 90-86, Section 2.04. Alternative Fee Calculation. The protest is allowed under paragraph .l of this section. The protest is aimed at the water and sewer component since consumption for the ALF is substantially less than for a "normal" residential structure. Additionally, only a small portion of the site (building courtyards) will be irrigated by County water. Sincerely, HARVEY P. RAFOFSKY President Mr. Ed Ilschner, Public Works Administrator 3301 Tamiami Trail E. Health Services Building, 3,~ Floor Naples, FL 34112 September 11, 1997 Mr. Edward Finn, Director Collier County Utilities Opeations Public Worh Division 3301 E. Tmniami Tm'l Naple~ FL ~4112 Re:. C'.adide dNaples Altem.'~tix~ Impact Fee Calc. slalion In ~xx)rdanc~ with Ordinance 90.-86, u aneaded, and Ordinance 90-87, as an'ended, It~ ktter is to request ~ eltcmate impact fe~ rcvi~v hearing tot th~ HealthTrust, Inc., Carlidc of Naples t~isted livinS tteal~fiTrust, lac., is constructing thc C~rlisle of Naples, u usisted living facility, ~ tb~ intersection of Airport-Pul]ins Road and Orange Blossom Ddvc. The project is being consm~ed in plma ~xf bas been approved fora total of 390 units. Thc first phase will consist of 219 units and 249 beds with ~ mixture of assisted living units and supportive living units. Thc facility ~ill also contain a central kitchen, dining room and central laundry facility. All ~hc la.~dscaping, except for thc building's courtym~ ~ill bo irrigated from the stormwa~r management lakes. To get the best poss~ie information for tie next phase, a separate meter will be used and monitored for the courtyard irrigation. The attached data rcpregnts demand characteristics of similar facilities connected to the Collier Count)' Water-Sewer District ~m. The research supports a per unit usage belmv the Collier County Wmr- Sos~r average single family home usage of 350 GPD. Ba.~l on thc provided data, Florida Administrativc Code IOD-6 a~l the Board of County Comndssb~er's action regarding a similar hearing on July 28, 1997, wc request a pm rated impact fee based on 115 gallons/bed/day. Plea~ feel fr~ to call if you have any questions. Sino.~ly, WILSON, MILLER, BARTON & PEEK. INC. Planning Team Leader fLUt 4LC,~mIW 3200 Bailey Lane. Suite 2t."O, Naples. Fkwida .34105-8507 * Ph 94 !-649-4~4~ Fx 94 !-64}-S716 ~ ~': t. '!' I t. k ~/ ~/'eb Site: ~'ww.~'dk~mill~.com E-mad: .%'.,,4,', F,~n My,'r, 5.~r.,,. :. ilr.,~.',,m / ';.._,,~'--.=--?~.~ 1 ALF Water Consumption Csntebury House at the Vlneyards, 101 Vineyards Bird 72 beds ! Gals. Month Consumed Jul-971 134,000 . Jun-97 159,000 i Peak month = 159,000 May-97 113,000 i ,~159.000131 = 5,129 Apr-97 109,000 !5,129/72 = 71.2 Mar-g7 114,000 Feb-97 104,000 171.2 - gal/bed/day Jan-97 111,000 I " Dec-96 125,000 I Nov-96 137,000 Oct-96 124,000 Sep-96 121,000 ^ug-961 125,000 Jul-96 147,000 Total 1 ,~2~,000 , : , summer House, 101 Cypress Way E. 65 beds Gals. Month Consumed Aug-97 151.000 Jul-97 187,000 IPeak month = 187,000 Jun-97 167,000 i187,000/30 = 6,233.3 May-97 156,000. 16,233.3/65 = 95.9 Apr-97 le0,000 I Mar-97 144,000 95.9 · gal/bed/day Feb-97 139,000 Jan-97 152,000 ! Dec-96 149,000 I Nov-96 121,000 0ct-96 105,000 Sep-96 105,000 Aug-96 134.C)00 Total 1,870,000 ALF Water Consumption Premier Place at the Glenvlew, 100 Glenvlew Place 3S beds .' I Month Consumed I Jan-96 "9i,000 Feb-96 85,000 ,, iPeik month · 122,000 Mar-96 92,000 :122,000/31 · 3,935.5 Apr-96 113,000 ~3,935.5/35 · 112.4 May-ge 10 ,000 ' I Jun-96 92,G00 112.4 · gal/bed/day Ju1-96 93,000 L. Aug-96 100,000 , Sep-68 97,000 Oct-96 122.0001 Nov-g6 94.000' Dec-g6 54,000 Total 1.137.000 I I , I Arbor Glen, 1000 Arbor Lake Dr 40 beds I ' , Gals' Month Consumed Jan-96 64,085 Feb-96 65,623 ! ~.Peak rno~t~ = 69,630 Mar-96 56,818 I 169.630/31 = 2,246.1 Apr-96 58,176 i 12,246.1/40 = 56.15 May-96 59,756 Jun-96 61,119 I S6.15 = ~al/bed/day Jul-g6 62,382 ' i I Aug-96 63,814 Sep-g6 65,408 ,. Oct-96 66,717 Nov-96 68,223 Dec-96 69,630 Total 761,751 I 2 ALF Water Consumption Aristocret of Naplea, 10949 Pamu St. Gals. Month Consumed Jan-96 297,000 Feb-96 215,000 Peak month ,. 327,000 Mar-g6 231,0001 327,000/30., 10,900, A1~-96 220,000 10,900/96 = 113.5 May-Ce 240,000 Jun-g6 .... 233,000 113.5 · galroed/day Jul-96 210,000 Aug-ge 271,000 Oct-96 246,000 Nov-96 327,000 Total 2,996,000 Had)oreide Healthcare, 2900 12th St. N. , ,, 120 beds Gals. Month Con.umed t July/Aug 97 713,000 June/May 9 591,000 t Peak 60 days = 748,000 Mar/Apr 97 571,000 ! 748,000/60 = 12,466.7 Jan/Feb 97 586,000 I 12,466.7/120 = 103.9 Nov/Dec 96 748,000 Sept/Oct 96 729,000I 103.9 · gal/bed/day July/Aug 96 713,000 Total 4,651,000 . APPROVE A P. EOUEST TO UTILIZE RESERVE FUNDS FOR RAMPS AT THE EAST NAPLES SKATE PARK FACILITY AND THE DASHER BOARDS / LIGHTS AT VETERANS COMbfUNITY PARK. .O.l~.e..~I~ That the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget amendment request to utilize reserve funds to expedite payment for the ramps at the East Naples skate park facility and the dasher boards / lights at Veterans Community Park. CONSIDERATION: The Board previously approved funding of the two said projects: North Naples Roller Hockey dasher boards / lights and the East Naples Skate Park facility ramps; however purchase orders encumbering the funds for both projects were not requisitioned before the end of FY97. Additionally the money was not immediately appropriated for the project in FY98. Therefore, the money previously appropriated f~r each project fell into the fund reserve accounts. ~ Upon the Board's previous approval of the vendor selection and funding resources for each project, the two contracted vendors, Spawn Ranch and Surety Construction, began work on their respective I~ojects in good faith without a written hard copy purchase order, due in part, to the time sensitive nature established by the County to complete said projects. Currently, each vendor has neared or has completed their respective project and have submitted invoices for payment. Staff requests that available reserve funds be re-appropriated into each project fund as previously designated in order to pay the vendors in a timely manner. FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available in the Naples & Urban Collier Community Park Impact Fee, Capital Outlay Reserves (368-919010-993000) in the amount of $50,000 to be transferred into the Naples and Urban Collier County Community Parks, East Naples Skate Park project (368-I 16360-763100-80087). Funds are available in the Naples & Urban Collier Community Park Impact Fee, Capital Outlay Reserves (368- 919010-993000) in the amount of $76,297 to be transferred into the Naples & Urban Collier Community Park Impact Fee, North Naples Basketball Court project lie. Roll~r Hockey Facility] (368-I 16360-763100-80016). Additional funds arc available in Park Improvements, Reserve for Contingencies (306-919010-991000) in the amount of $29,592 to be transferred into the Park Improvements, North Naples Basketball Court project [ie. Roller Hockey Facility](306-116360-763100-80016). .GROWTH MANAGEMENT: None ...RECOMMENDATION. projects. That the Board approve Prepared b~ Department of Parks ~n~._d)/ecreation Reviewed and~ Approved by: Thomas W. Olliff, A~ol'nistrato~- Division of Public Services the budget amendments approving funding for said ! 0 Cl 1 t, 1997 BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST FUND TITLE Naples & Urban Collier County . Community Parks Impact Fee D~ p;~ared: BCC Agenda date ifpreviously approved. For Budg~Flnance Usc Only BAI~_ FUND NO. $68 Attach Executive Summary ItemNo. Parks Capital Projects Cost Center Title EXPENSE BUDGET DETAIL [116360 {Cost Center No. East Naples Skate Park Project Title [Project No. 'Expenditure Expenditure Increase Current Revised Object Code Title (Decrease) Budget Budget 763100 Improvments $50,000 0 $50,000 General TOTAL $$0,000 Projects [Cost Center No. ]Basketball Court [Project No. Cost Center Title ]Project Title " ' 763100 IGenerallimpr°vements Iis 76,297 10. Ils 76~297 TOTAL $76,297 Capital Outlay Reserves 'Cost Center Title 1919010 [Cost Center No. [None . [Project Title Expenditure Object Code 993000 Expenditure Title Reserves for Capital Outlay Increase Current (Decrease) Budget (S 126,297) S 2,152,600 TOTAL (S126,297) None Project No. Revised $ 2,026,303 1997 EXPLANATION Why are funds needed? Funds are re-appropriated into the East Naples Skate Park project and the North Naples Roller Hockey facility project so vendors may be paid for completing said projects in good faith. Where are fun ds available? Funds are available in Fund 368 Reserves and Fnnd 306 Reserves REVIEW PROCESS Cost Center Director: Division Administrator: Budget Department: Agency Manager: Fin ance Department: Clerk of Board Admin.: Input by: B.A. No.: DATE OCT 1 BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUEST For Budgct/Financ~ U~ Only AJ'.Ho Ds~ ...................... ~Park lmprovmements FUND~O. 306 [ rate prepared: ' . ] BCC Agenda date . Attach Executive Summni'y [ ~previously approved. Item No, EXPENSE BUDGET DETAIL Projects [Cost Center No. [Basketba.ll Court [Project NO. Cost Center Title [Project T~tle Rx_penditure Expenditure Increase Current Revised Object Code Title (Decr_~e) Budget Budget 763100 Improvements- $ 29,592 0 $ 29,592 General Reserves Cost Center Title Expenditure Object Code 991000 J ~919010 Cost Center No. Expenditure Title 'Reserve for - Contigencies Project Title Project No. I_nerease Current 1~ "1 ($ 29,592) $ 270,708 TOTAL ($ 29,592) OC! ! ~, 99'/ ~ter Title Revenue Object Code Revenue Title Increase ~"=~--="--~--'-- Current (Decrease) TOTAL Budget Budget EXPHANATION Why are funds needed? Funds are re-appropriated into the North Naples Roller Hockey facility project so the vendor may be paid for completing said project in good faith. Where are funds available? Funds are available in Fund 306 reserves REVIEW PROCESS Cost Center Director: Division Administrator: Budget Department: Agency Manager: Finance Department: Clerk of Board Admin.: Input by: B.A. No.: DATE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING THE LELY BAREFOOT BEACH GUARDHOUSE LITIGATION OBa'E~: For the Board to consider a proposed Settlement Agreement to re~olve litigation concerning the existence of a guardhouse on Lely Beach Boulevard which ~erve~ u the entry point to a State Preserve, Lely Barefoot Beach County Park and Lely Barefoot Beach subdi~on. CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners previously voted to designate Comm/~on Chairman Timothy L. Hancock to pursue discussions with representafive~ of the Lely Bard'oot Beach Property Owners Association, Inc. and the Lely Barefoot Beach Master Association, Inc., (hareinaflcr referred to as "Homeowners"), regarding a posrible settlement of Htigation involving thc County and these two (2) associations stemming from the existence of a guardhouse on Lely Beach Boulevard. Those discussions have resulted in the attached proposed Settlement Agreement (Exhibit I). The proposed Settlement Agreement a~empts to strike a balance between the competing considerations of unimpeded public acce~ to the State Preserve and Lely Barefoot Beach County Park along Lely Beach Boulevard and the property owner~' need for security, especially at nighifim~ The significant provisions of thc proposed Settlement Agreement are ~ follows: The Homeowner~ recognize the right of vr~!nq)eded public acc~ through the guardhouse and along Lely Beach Boule-yard to the Park' )hcilities dur/ng t~gular park operating houri, each md every day of the year. The Coumy agrees to waive, dizmiz~ m~l/or release any pres(~ or future clain~ chall¢.~ging the current guardhouse location. Further, the County does not, and shall not in the future, object to or contest the righ~ of the Homeowners to occupy, operate, hnpmve sad maint~ the gusntlxn~ ss set forth in file agreement. Ttw Coumy may reasonably monitor the operation of the guardhou~ during daylight hou~ when the Park facilitie~ are open and the Homeowners may dmult~neously maintain their own personnel in the guardhouse. Section Four of the Agreement sets forth the essential t~.~ of operation. Of primary importance in this section is thed~. the gates at the guardhouse shah be in tae "up" position OCT ! Il 1997 hours; the Master Association shall pay a fee to the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department equal to the amount of the average cost of one- half(I/2) ora Ranger each year, the Ranger will serve to inform the public of access and availability of the Park facilities and to provide traffic information; the Property Owners, in their sole discretion, may close the gates across the road after official Park operating hours. Thc Parties agree that the current number of parking spaces at the Preserve are at the maximum number allowed by the current Land Management Plan between thc County and thc State of Florida. Thc County recognizes that, under the current Land Management Plan, there exists an additional one hundred (100) spaces in excess under the current formula. County, in this proposed Agreement, agrees that it shall not add any parking spaces beyond the present amount unless and until the State of Florida and Collier County, through required publicly advertised and open public meetings, amend the formula used for carrying capacity at the Preserve. The Homeowners agree to unconditionally and completely release the County from the provisions of a prior Use/Access Agreement (Exlu'bit 2 attached) regarding limiting the number of vehicles accessing the property to the number of actual parking spaces located on the Preserve property. Thc Parties agree to work together to install informational signage, compatible with thc character of the subdivision, to inform/advise thc public of the Park locations, parking fees and parking space availability. The Parties agree to file a joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice thc Circuit Court case seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the County with respect to the guardhouse location and the number ofparking spaces. Thc County also agrees to dismiss with prejudice its appeal against thc properly owners resulting from proceedings held before the Collier County Code Enforcement Board. Both Parties agree not to seek costs, expenses and attorney's fees against each other, resulting from the actions which have been filed. The Parties will request that the Circuit Court retain juri~iction for purposes of enforcement of the Agreement. If the Board were to choose to not approve this Settlement Agreement, then it is anticipated that litigation will continue with regard to the appeal of the Code Enforcement Board case by the County, and the County wiil also need to continue to defend the Circuit Court action by the Property Owners. This proposed Agreement has been provided to the office of the Attorney General of the State of Florida. The County Attorney's Office will inform the Board as to the Attorney General in regard to the proposed Agreement. AGENDA No. 2 OCT FISCAL XMPACT: If the Agreement is approved, it is estimated that the fiscal impact upon County staff will be $3,000.00 for signage. Funds would have to be transferred fi'om General Fund (001) reserves for that purpose. If the Agr~ent is not approved by the Board, litigation costs for the trial and appeal of both the Code Enforcement action and the Circuit Court action are estimated to be approximately $50,000.00 or more for the County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Comm/ssioners condder approval of the attnched F,~ed Settlement Agreement in order to resolve the legnl and politicnl controversy which has raged for approximately ten (10) years with regard to thc existence and location of thc guardhouse on Lely Beach Boulevard at the entrance to the Lely Barefoot Beach mbdivision, the State Prese~.~,e and the Collier County Lely Barefoot Beach Park. If the Board approves the proposed Agreement, that the Board further authorize the Chairman to sign said Settlement Agreement on behalf of the Board, authorize the County Attorney to file the necessary dismissal documents in the litigation cases involving the guardhouse and approve a budget amendment of $3,000.00 from General Fund reserves to the Parks and Recreation Department. If the Board chooses not to approve the proposed Settlement Agreement, that the Board direct the County Attorney's Office to continue to conclusion the Code Enforcement Board appeal and the defense of the Circuit Court action. Prepared B *~~~~Date: Chief Assistant County Attorney Thomas W. Olliff ~.~ Administrator; Public Services AGENO~ ~ SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THIS SETTLEMENT AG.I~EMENT, ("Agreement"), is cntcr~ into this day of · 1997, by and Ix-tv,,ccn thc Board of County Commissioacrs of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the Stat~ of Florida, ("~, and Lely Bar~oot Beach Protgny Owmrs' A.ssociafi~ Inc., a Florida corporation, (~Prope~ Owners'), and Lely Barefoot Beach Master Association, Inc., a Florida corporation, ("~ Association~), (collectively, the Propo~ (Amc-rs ~d Master Association may be referred to as ~-Iomeowners~) (and all thc parties to this agreement may be referred to as the 'Parties"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, thc Propcw,.' Oxs~¢rs and Ma~er Association arc homeoxmcrs associations representing residents of the Lely Barefoot Beach subdivision (the "Subdivision") located in Collier Count', Florida; and WHEREAS, there is a certain meandering north-south road nmning through the subdixi$ion commonly knm&~ as Lely Beach Boulevard (the "Road"); and WHEREAS, Property Oxx~ers ox~r~ the follmx/ng described real propew,.' comprising the northern most section ofthc Road: Tract R of Lely Barefoot Beach, Unit One, according to the map or plat thereof on file and recorded ia the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County, Florida, in Pht Book 12, Pages 3437, inclusive, more commonly kno~r~ as Lely Beach Boulevard ("Tract R"); WHEREAS, Master Association owns that portion of the Road beginning at the southern most point owned by Prolg~ Owners and continuing south to the Road's southern termin~; and 219gSl-l.do~ of 10/97 WHEREAS, the Property Owners and or the Master Association arc the successors in interest of Lely Development Corporation as to that certain Usc/Access Agreement dated November 10, 1997 b,mveen rig County and Lely D~¢lopment Corporation; and WHEREAS, the County owns outfight certain land lying at tI~ soutlzm t~minus of the Road, and it controls by virtue of a lease from the State of Florida land upon which it operates Bagfoot Beach Pr~s~v~ County Park (the "Park"); and WHEREAS, the Road leading into the Park is a privately-owned road and is the sole land-use access to Lely Barefoot Beach subdivision, a community of privately-<~'ned homes, as v,~ll as the sole land-use access to the Park and State Preserve at the southern end of the Road; and WHEREAS, the County and the State of Florida have easement access rights which include the Road for the public to reach the Park and the State Preserve (collectively, the "Preserve"); and WHEREAS, Homeo~ers use the Road to access their homes and operate a Guardhouse located in the middle of the Road, appro.'~nately 252.1 feet south of'the pavement line of Bonita Beach Road; and WHEP,,EAS, a controversy has developed between the Panics regarding each other's rights ~ith respect to the location of the Guardhouse, the use of the Road by members of the general public to access the Park, the operation of the Guardhouse, and the validity and enforceability of various contracts; and WHEREAS, Homeo~,ners have sued the County in tl~ pending Circuit Court Case, No. 95-0073- CAd)l, in the 20th Sudicial Circuit in and for Collier CounV,.', Florida, seeking declaratory relief ~sith respect to the Guardhouse location on the Road and certain documents, of public record, xsttich establish and/or impact the public's permanent easement rights on the Road to access the public Padc lands and/or to the Preserve to thc south; and WHEREAS, in the pending Circuit Court Case, No. 95-0073-CA-01, in the 20th ludicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, Homeowners also seek injunctive relief with respec~ to a County Code Enforcement Board ("CEB') enforcement proc___~ling, wherein the County seeks to &clam the Guardhouse location in violation ofthe controlling PUD Ordinance and thereby, to obtain the ultimate reme~.', a CEB Order directing the immediate removal of the Guardhouse from the Road in Tract consequence~ ofimposifious of frees, liens and ultimate foreclosur~ p _roce~__~; and 219551-1.doc of 10/~7 Pf~2otiO WHE~, in CEB Case No. 96-012, Coun~ cited Homemakers t'or certain violations of* the Collier Coun~ L~d Development Code ("LDC") (Ordnance No. 91-102, as amended), and of* PUD Ordinance No. 85-83, and noticed thc matter for hearing before thc CEB; and WHEREAS, in Circuit Court Case No. 95-0073-CA-01 and CEB Ca.sc No. 96-012, the Homcmx~crs maintain that thc Guardhouse location in thc middle of Road in Tract R, approximately 252.1 fegt south of the pavement linc of Bonita Beach Road, i.l properly permitted by County pursuant to Building Permit No. 88-734, and therefore, is lawfully located in thc Lely Barefoot Beach PUD, in compliance xx-ith Collier County PUD Ordinance Ho. 85-83; and WHEREAS, in Circuit Court Case No. 95-0073-CA-01 and in CEB Case No. 96-012, Count).' maintains that: thc Guardhouse location violates PUD Ordinance ]~o. 85-83, xvhich permits an ent~- gate facility to be located in Tract A, not Tract R, although portions of the gatehouse/guardhousc facili~' complex ma). extend over and into thc road; that PUD Ordinance No. 85-83 prohibits ann' modification to Tract R that xvould interfere xvith access to the public Park lands to the south; and finally, that the Guardhouse sxas constructed in Tract R pursuant to a building permit issued in error and that therefore the Guardhouse location constitutes an impediment to public access to thc Park lands to the south, also a violation of PUD Ordinance No. 8:5-83; and WHEREAS, a multiple day hearing xx~.s held by thc C£B in this matter, in xvhich thc Parties xx:rc represented by counsel, presented evidence, examined thc xvimesses and presented their oral arguments: and ' thcreaRcr, the CEB deliberated in the Sunshine, and made their oral findings of fact and conclusions of law, xvhich subsequently ~x:rc reduced to a final xxxittcn order, dated February. 27, 1997; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEB Final Order, dated February 27, 1997, thc CEB determined that thc present Guardhouse location does not impede public access to the Park lands to thc south and further, is not in violation of thc LDC, and so, dismissed the charges; and WHEREAS, presently pending in thc Appellate Division of the 20th Judicial Circuit is Count).~s Appeal of the CEB Final Order, pursuant to its timely-filed Notice otAppeal; and WH~S, the Parties agree that it is in the public's be. st interests, as w~l] as of the residents of Lely Barefoot Beach, that there bc an cad to further litigation amo~ Settlement ~t 219~I-I,do~ of 10/97 l'~3oflO OCT 1 amicable resolution of Circuit Court Case No. 95.0073-CA.01 and of Appellate proc__~,~ings of CEB Case No. 96-012 without the need for further court or administrativ~ proceedings; and WHE~, the Parties agree that PUD Ordinance 8.5-83, as ~I1 as prt~zling PUD Ordinances affecting Lely Barrfoot Beach, recog;Rize and pr~erv~ the right of the residents of Lely Barefoot Beach subdivision to security against Road entry by unauthorized persons or vehicles, as well as the public's fight to unimpeded beach access along the Road to the Park lands to the .south; and WI~REAS, the Parties are desirous of entering into this S~'tXlement Agreement which preserves and protects the respective rights and best interests of the Parties and those they represent upon the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE JOINT AND MUTUAL COVENANTS CONT,MNED HEREIN, AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL BENEFITS TO FLOW FROM ONE TO TI-IE OTHER, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERbIS AND CONDITIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN. 1. Authority. The undersigned, executing for and on behalf ofthe respective Parties, are the dul), authorized representatives of the respective Parties to this Seulement Agreement xx~th full authorib' and power to execute and deliver this Settlement Agreement and to bind the Parties to the terms and conditions as set forth herein. 2. public Access Ri.ohts. Homeox~ers do not and shall not in the future contest or object to the rights of access of Park visitors who do not reside in the Subdivision to use the Road for ingress to and egress from the Park from g:00 a.m. until sunset, each and e~ry day of the )'ear. /n addition, the Count).. has the right to conduct sea turtle v,~tches during nesting .season outside the normal Park operating hours and use the Road for ingress to and egress from such ~-atches. The County also has the right to infrequently conduct similar outdoor nature programs outside the normal Park operating hours and use the Road for ingress to and egress from such programs. Notice of such ,~atches and progrmm shall be provided to the Ma.,,'ter Association at least forty-eight (48) hours in advance by telephone and contemporaneous mailing ora letter. Scttlcngnt ~ 2~gssz-z.doc o~ zo~J7 3. Guardhouse Location. County agrees to ~aive, dismiss and/or release any present or future ch/ms challenging the current Gu~dhouse loc~fiort, approximately 252.1 feet south of'the pavement line of Bonita ~ Road, in the middle of the Roa~ in Tract R. County does not. and shall not in the future, object to or com~ the rights of Homeowna~ to occupy, ogerate, /reprove, and maintain the ~ as ~t forth in th/$ Agreement. If required by hw, the Home~m~ers ~'ll obtain the appropriate County permit for improvcme~ to ~ Cmardhouse, whic~ will not be unreasmably withheld by the County. In conskler~on of the foregoing, Com~ may reasor~ly monitor the operati~ of the Guardhouse during tl~ daylight hours when the Pa~k fitcslities to the s~th are open, in order to assure ~ the ~ operation facilitates and assists public beach access and therefore fimctions as a benefit to public beach access, rather than impeding public beach access. Not~vithstanding, the Homenx~=ers may simultaneously maintain their own personnel in the Guardhouse during open P~k hours to assist, to direct, or other~s~se to guard the residents of Lely Barefoot Beach and their guests, licensees, ~I/or invitees. 4. Guardhouse Operation. The Parties ~ that at all times during open Park hours, currently 8:00 a.m. to sunset, the Guardhouse 8ares shall at all times be in the "up" position in order to allow unimpeded public access to the Park lands to the south of Tract R. At no time during the Park operating hours shall any Property Owner's personnel and/or Master Association's personnel prohibit public access to the Park facilities to the south, nor be obligated in any f'ashiou or form to assist ~xt/or guide the public to the Park facilities to the south. Rather, Co~n~' personnel shall bear fifll and exclusis~ responsibility to assist the public in accessin8 the Park facilities to the south during Park operating hours. At no time shall County personnel be required to assist Lely Barefoot Beach residcnts, their guests, their invitees/licensees in accessing an), priv~ property owned and/or m,~n~ed by th~ resides of' Lely Barefoot Beach. The Master Association a~ees to make payment of a fee to Collier Count). P~k~ ~d Recreation Depamnent equal to tbe amount of thc avera~ cost of or~q~al[ (1/'2) of a Ran~r each )~ar. The payment shall be made by October I of each year, with aa in/thl payment of fourte~ fl~u~and me hundred and ~/xty-/iv~ doila~ ($I,1,165.00) paid by No',~mbet I, 1997. Each yea~ fl~ ~afler bv 1u[v AGENDA ITeM upcoming ),ear and the 50% average cost ora Ranger ~ch ~11 be used to calculate such tee. The Count'). agrees that a Ranger will be available at the Guardhouse to assist the public ~ the Preserve parking lot is full or near capacity betxx~en October through April of each year and the holidays ami v,~ekends of /Vlemotial Day, IMepmtence Day (July 4th) and Labor Day. The Ranger will re'ye to inform the public of ac, c~s and availability of the Park facilities and to provide traflSc ini'ormafion to th~ beach going public. Beach ~ ~h~l! use the ~x~a:rn mo~ lane away from the Cmarflhouse. This lane rdmll be Clearly ma,qc~ by signage as a lane for beach going tra~c. The Parties agree that it is not an impediment to public access to the Park facilities xxahen chivers voluntarily ~top their vehicles at the Guardhouse to discuss matters x~th personnel stationed at the Guardhouse. The drivers will not be encouraged to activeIy seek stops at the Guardhouse that impede the flow oftmflSc. In the event Homeoxcners install an exit gate at the Guardhouse, such exit gate shall be in the 'up' position at all times during open Park hours and remain in the 'up" position until approximately one-half hour after sunset. Homeoxx~ers, in their sole discretion, may close gates across the Road to control ingress to and egress from the Subdisqsion aRer official Park operating hours, ~xhich are currently bet~en sunset each day and $:00 a.m. the follo~xing day. The County shall lock the gate at the entrance to the Park after Park operating hours in accordance with its standard operating procedure at all Count. Park facilities. During turtle nesting season (May I through October 31 of' each )~ar) Count. shall not be required to lock the gate at any times that would interfere with County sea turtle nesting monitoring and protection activities. The County will request (by IcRer), for the safety of pedestrians and Park visitors, that the Collier County Sberiffperform patrols along the road. 5. r~ ..~.~.~. The Parties agree that the parking spaces within the Preserve xxill be calculated at a rate of 0.42 spaces per person within the Prese~, such number of persons for such calculation not to exceed the carrying capacity of the Preserve. The total number of persons that can be accommodated within the Preserve, for purposes of such calculation, will be based upon the maximum canying capacity of the total number of facilities within the Preserve as ~ by i For purpor~ of ~ calculation, canying capacity is defu~cl pursuant to the Land 219851-l.~e of 10/97 Page 6of 10 Barefoot Beach Preserve County Park ('Land Management Plan'~ previously adopted by the County on July 20, 1993 (section V(A), Re'source Assessment, Canying Capacity}. As set forth therein, carr}~ng capacity is based upon the square footage needs of thc beach user, and such needs wcrc dctcrn~ncd to be 1350 square feet for low density use which included 60 square feet of ~nttcr, 90 square feet of beach and 1200 square fe~'t of back up and buffer areas. Thc total carrying capacity for the State and County mxaed portions of ~c Preser~ is five hundred and eighty-seven (587} people at any point in time. Accordingly, this caladation yields nvo hundred and fifty-six (256) parking spaces. The County will not expand the parking spaces beyond the current parking spaces which number tlvee hundred and fifty-six (356), ~%~ich includes an additional one hundred (100) spaces, unless and until the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of thc State of Florida and Collier Count; through required publicly advertised and open public meetings and other requirements, amend the formula used in the Land Managcrnent Plan for determining carrying capacity of the Preserve. In the event that the £ormula used in the Land Management Plan is recalculated and thereby increases the number of pa 'rking spaces, the Parties agree that thc existing additional 100 spaces in excess under thc current formula will not be carried for~x~rd but will be counted towards the n~,v number of spaces. The Homem%~crs agree to dismiss their pending cause of action to reduce the current number of parking spaces. 6. Use/Access AEreement. Homeo~x~ers hereby unconditionally and completely release County from those certain provisions in that certain Use/Access Agreement dated November 10, 1987, entered into bct~en County and Lely Developmeat Corporation, predecessor in title to the real prope~- interest in Homeowners, with respect to paragraph 3 wtgch provides: informational signs, compatible with thc character of thc Subdivision, bctx,,~n Bonita 219851-I.doc of 10/97 l~eTofl0 Board agrees that standard operating procedu~ of ~onal activities occurring on Property tvill includ~ limiting the number of vehicles accessing thc Property to the number of actual parking spaces located on the Property. If parking becomc~ full at a,ry time, access to Property will temporarily be closed at thc intersection of Bonita Beach Road at the entrance to I.cly Barefoot Beach subdivision until such time as parking spaces become av',u'lable. Seller, or its assigns, shall have the right to stop access to Property when parking lot is full. ~ Within 180 days ofthc effective 6~_-- of this Agreement, thc County shall install OCT 1 1997 ~s¢ xx~ich shall be visible to ~c public, and which shall provide information regarding access to thc Lely Barefoot Beach Park ~cilities. The costs of said sign,age shall be borne by the County. The intent of such iz~ormational signage is to advise the public of the Preserve locations, tl~ parking fees, and parking space availabiEty. There shall also bc informational sil?~ regarding th~ separate parking lot for Lely Bar,eot Beach at the neC, hem end of thc Road, as distinsuished from the pa.,qcing for the Preserve at the southern terminus of the Road. County agrees that in dcsignin$ such infommional signage County shall confer with and obtain the consent of the Homeowners to ensure that such signage is of similar character as is presently installed near thc entrance to Lely Baref~ Beach subdivision, which consent shall not be ~bly withheld. It shall not be required that any of the signs be lighted. Thc precise language, location and design of thc signs shall be determined by the Parties to this Agreement xxithin 60 da.x~ foIlmving the date of execution of this Agreement by thc Parties. Whenever thc Prer, erve parking lot is full or near capacity as determined by County Park Sta~ the Count3' shaIl utilia: the sign to ach~e the public of thc status of parking spaces at the Preserve. On those occasions betxx~en Octobo' through ~ of each }~ar and thc holida)~ and weekends of Memorial Day, Ind~ Da..,' (Iuly 4th) and Labor D~.- the parking lot is full or near capaci .ty, the County shall station an cmpl~ or agent in the Gaarclxxtse as the sole contact with persons utilizing thc Road to access the Pr~,~'~. The tack ofa~-aflable parking at the Preserve shall have no effect on thc public's right to access the Park ~a th~ Raad ~ Park operating hours. $. Sudicisl Aporoval of Settlement ~grcemenL The Parties agree that, upon full execution of this Sc-ttlement Agreement, the Parties shall file a joint motion in Circuit Court Case No. 95-0073-CA- 01 (the "Action"), whereby the Parties shall jointly request the Court to enter a final order incorpo~ and approving this Settlement Agreement and dismissing the Action with prejudice as a full and complete resolution of all issues between the Parties, and to request the Court to retain jurisdiction for enforcement purposes only. 9. Dismissals With .Preiudiee, The Couz~ agrees to dismiss with prejudice its appeal ~ve (~) days of the entry of a fu~d order incorporatin8 and approving this 21~l-l.do~ of 10/~7 No. 95-0073-CA-01. The Parties agree not to seek costs, expenses and attorney's fee~ against each other ofat~, natur~ ~n~atsoever related to the Action or Appeal. 10. ~ This Agreement will bec. omc effective on the dat~ on wb. lch the Court enta-s a Final Order incorporating and approving it. 11. .Dcfault/Br~ach. In the ~.'nt that any Party to this Settlement Agreement commits an act of d~ault/breach of this Settlement Agreextm~ and such act of default/brrach is wah,-ed Io' the non- defaulting/non-breaching Party, such v, ai~,~ shall not operate, nor be ~ as a ~,ai-,~ of later. similar or dissimilar default.qbreaches. Upon ~ of this Settlemmt Agreement Io' any Pa~.; a non-defaulting/non-breaching Part). shall hax~ th~ option to exerci~ ali a~-,u, lable remedies at law and/or in equity (including, but not limited to, claim~ for injuncti~ re. lief and/or damages), in the Circuit Court to enforce the terms of this Agreement entered as a Final Order. Said remedies at law and/or in equit), shall be sought before the Circuit Court that rtaaitm~ jurisdiction over the Settlement Agreement for enforcement purposes only. 12. _A.t~ornev's Fees and Costs~ The Parties agree that in thc event any Part). to this Settlement Agreement applies to the Circuit Court, pursuant to a motion or action for enforcement of this Settlement Agreement resulting from a default/breach of'this Settlement Agreement by the other Part}.', the prevailing Part).' in such proceed~g shall be a~-axded its reasonable and necessary attorney, s fees and costs, including appellate attorn~"s fees and costs, incurred in such proceeding(s). In the event Count3.' is the prevailing Party, County's a~ard of reasonable and necessary attorney's fees and costs shall be computed pursuant to the fair mark~ value of the attorney(s) time and services involved (as governed by applicable rules of The Florida Bar and case law) and not on the basis of the annual salary of the attorney(s) paid by th~ governmental entity. 13. Entire A~r,."ement.. This Settlement Agreement. consisting of ten (10) consecutively numbered pages, constitutes the entire agreement be~en the Parties. Any amendment, modifications, and/or extension of this Settlement Agreement, to be effective and enforceable, shall be in writing and officially and duly executed by the authorized legal representatives of the respective Par - ies. AGEND_.A.J~EM ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK Approved ss to tonn and legal sufficiency £or th~ ¢OUN'I'Y: By: Ramiro Maflalich ~,.~ Chief Assistant County Attorney Witness Signature Printed Nan~ Witness Signature Printed Nar~ Approved as to form and legal sufficiency for thc HOMEOWNERS: CUMMINGS & I.,OCKWOOD · ~ for Lely Barcfoot Beach Property Owners Associalion, Inc. and Lely Barefoot By:. Jason H. Kom, Esq. 21gg$1-1xloc of 10/97 Pa~e lOoflO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Timothy L. Hancock, as Chairman LELY BAREFOOT BEACH PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC. By:. Barry. DeNicola, as President LELY BAREFOOT BEACH MASTER ASSOCIATION, 1NC. By:. lames R)art, as President · rHZS A~F~ is nada this a~ o~ ~ove~ber, 191~, by~ . as 'SeX,e:' ~4 ~o BO~ OF CO~ ~SS20~ OF COAXER foz~ ~e ~e~s. arid coOl,ions (o~ ~e ~se amd developmefl~ o~ a '~rope~', desc~e~ ~ ~i~ 'A' an~ sh~ on Exhibl~ both e~lts atlache~ he~e~ anl~de a pazt hezeol. ~HE~, Seller and ~e Board en~e~6 ln~ an Ag~e~n~ ~a~t~ ~une 23=4, 1987, vhece~n Seller g~&n~ed C6 the Boar~ exclusive option to purchase certain real proper~y more par~l-.~ cula~ly ~escribei lu said Agree~fl~ {he~e/na~er ~eterred to as '~e Option Agre~en~'); and · ~ · ~S, Se~[iom S o~ ~e Op~lom Ag~eemen~ provides ~ha~ closin~ SeXle~ ~ BokF4 ~[~1 e~e= i.~o a ~se/Access Agweemea~ which lmco~a~s ~hose conditions se~ ~o=[h ~ $ec[lom S Option A~eementl and · WKEP. F.~S, the Board has exercised its option pursuant to ~he ~e=ns o~ the O~tion Agreement; Xn consid;ration o£ ~he payment o~ ~L'g ($10.001 Dollars bM Board to Seller, ~eceipt ol vhlch is hereby acknovledge~, and ~ur~er~consit~ratLon o~ ~e mutual covenants se~ ~orth belo~ o~he~ S~o~ an6 valuable considera~ion~ ~a parties ~ee as .. 2. ~e P~ope~ty shll only be used rec~ea~onil puUoses ant al~ uses ~easonably' directly associa~ea vith ~he.beacb an~ ~ecrea~loflal purposes (e.~. caretaker ~esitence, :esea~cher housing, ~ec~ea~ion/~ela~et housing). 2. Selle~ ~a~a~ees to Boazd pe~anen~ unrestricted legal access ~o P=ope=~y, including ~e o= he~ea~te= cons~c~ei vithin said caseinS. ExsrmlT 2 OCT 1 'a97 '.he genar&l p~bllc a~lS sha2~, not'. be restricted ~n ~n~ BOacd may Crans~r Jvch access r~gh~s to any o~her transferees, successors o~ ss~fls~.o~ ~ Board..Ao ~he Board deeas appropriate. 4~ ~e~le~ sht~l ~ le~e COAS~C~On of i paved road accordance ~ Co~le= C~M cons~c~Aon sundards for the ~uXl leng~ o~ ~e eas~en~ g~an~ed ~o the Board~ as desc~lbe~ Exh~ "C" b2 ~vne 4~, ~98~. ~he sov~he~ te~nus of ~e road shal~ be ~e no:~e~ ~da~ ~e o~ Pro~y ~ ~ ~ easing. SeXXer ~s roXX~ed o~. X~s obX~ga~ ~ns~c~ a ~ot~ o~ ?ropert~f as le~ ~or~ Xn Beckon 1E.2. Cc} o~. ~~ .o. 1S-21, a~ any ob~a~on ~ ~ls res~c~ v~XX · he obZSgl~on o~ ~e S. Se~lr does no~ obJec~ to Boar4 C~in9 ~n~ supply 6~ va~er, and ~n~ ~e severe d~s~sll, elec~ca~ Beach, OnL~ 1, a~ s~ ~n ~a~ a~k 12, ~ages 24 th~ 37 agrees to teasonab~.~ s~tt ~tl ~nel to Icc~a~e reasonable Board coflnec~/ons a~ coma future d&te. Seller also ~raflcs Board the :~gh~ to lay u~l~y ~nes ilong ~he road shoulders ~he ea~ent. AI~ ut~lL~os mus~ be underground and any de, ge caused as a result o~ installation of ~e ~oard ~aC~ll~lll ihall~bl ~l res~ns~b~l~y of ~0 Board, or subcompacts. procedures £or parks an~ recreational fac~lL~l~s. 7. Board agrees ko 1~Ltt thS ~ n~ o~ pa~g . spaces to be cons~cted ~or ~. general public on Props=ay consistent with current County cofls~ct~on and design codes and s~a~ards. 8. ~oard ~grees ~at s~andard ope~a~6g procedure of X~t~g ~e n~er of ve~cles' access~n~ the Pro~=ty to the parking becoses ~u~ 8~ an~ ~, ~ccess ~o ?~ope~ ~u~. design s~ec~cx~o~s as =e~=e~ o~ o~e~ s~gns~oca~e~ 8c ~e ' a~enc~es or depa~n~s puzc~se o~ participate Ln ~he purchase o~ ~e r=opec~M ~n~ ~ee ~Ltle ~o ~e r=oper~ Is the=eaSter coflveMe~ ~o ~he ~a~e o~ Florida or [n~ o~ Ars a~eflcAes or .~epa~e~s, ~e ~se p:ovkskoas ee~ forth in parag~a2~s 6~ ? I shaX~ become n~.~X~ ~ ~ ~a~o=?abXe a~s~ ~ ~d ~ht event ~e~ ~. S~te o~ rXor~dl ~.~uses to i~e ~ suc~ co~o~[s) o~fGsei ~o*l~X~ B~I~ ~o ~e~e ~o such cond~- ~konts) ~s i =equ~=e~n~ o~ ~. SU~'s ~c~ise o~ the Boi~d's subs~quenV ~s,e~ con~ro~ ~: Mnag~en~ o~ ~e F~ope~V. The agrees, h~ever, ~a~ paza~ap~ 4 sha~X a~ &~.~es be en~orce- able ~ Se~ler ~d hereby con~k~ ~t~ Seller s~X~ be released ~ ~s ?UD obX~gztion to cons~c~ a roadway ~=ough the " ~o~y ~ased ~ Boa~ regar~ess o~ ~e s~sequen~ purchase o~ pe~Lc~on by ~e S~&~e o~ FXo~ldz. L~s agencies o~ · depa~en~. OCT I q 1997 ./.. the£r h~nds ~nd seals th~s/__~ay of Novefl~er, lei?. duly au~horized in ~he Stat~ ~nd C~un~y Iasc aforesatd::to ~ake &ckno~ledgemen~s, pereonaJ~y a~ared ~ L. ~, veil ~n ~ me ~ be ~ President of ~Y D~~ ~O~TXON, n~d as SeXier ~e forego~g'~s~nc, and he ac~ovledged before me ~at he ~e~8 ~e same off hhllf Of ~e sa~d co~ration ~or ~ ~ses ~e~ s~ted. ~I~£SS my hi~ an~ official seal Lu the County and State ffk · ~1~?-- · ·, t t~~.- ~ .. ......... ~ · HyCommIsiAon Explreez .. ' 4 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, ("Agra-merit'), is entcred into this day of ,1997, by and lx~'¢cn tbe Board of County Commission~ of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of tho State of Fiodda, ("County"), and Lely Bardoot Beach Property Owners' Association, Inc., a Florida corporation, ("Prolx'~ Owns"), and Lely Bar~oot B~ch Mast~ Association, Inc., a Florida corporation, ("Master Association"), (collexiiv¢ly, the Property (h~ers and Master Association ma)' be referred to as "Homco~x~ers') (and all the panics to this agreement ma)' be referred to as the "Parties"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, thc Propcrt)' Oxxners and Mas~er Association are homeoxxr~ers associations representing residents of thc Lely Barefoot Beach suMivision (the "Subdivision") located in Collier Count)', Florida; and WHEREAS, there is a certain meandering north-south road running through the subdivision commonly knoxxr~ as Lely Beach Boulevard (thc "Road"); and WHEREAS, Propen3' Oxw~ers own the folloxx~ng described real property comprising the northern most section of the Road: Tract R of Lely Barefoot Beach, Unit One, according to the map or plat thereof on file and recorded in the Office of th~ Clerk of th~ Circuit Court of Collier Count)', Florida, in Plat Book 12, Pages 34-37, inclusive, more commonly known as Lely Beach Boulevard ("Tract R"); WHEREAS, Master Association oxxx~s that portion of th: Road beginning at tl~ southern most point ms~xl by Prol~ny 0~vners and continuing south to the Road's southern tenn~im_~s; and 219g$ ! -1 .doc of 10/97 Pq~l olio WHEREAS, thc Property O~ncrs and or thc Master Association arc thc successors in interest of Lely Development Corporation as to that certain UsdAcccss Agrtcmcnt dated November 10, 1987 bct~cn WHEREAS, thc County owns outright certain land lying ~ thg soud~n terminus of thc Road, end it controls by virtue of a lease from thc State of Florida land upon which it operates Barefoot Beach Preserve County Park (the "Park"); and WHE~, thc Road leading into thc Park is a privatcly-ovmcd road and is thc sole land-usc a~.$ to Lely Barefoot Bcac. h subdi¥ision, a community of privatcly-o~vncd horacs, as xx~ll as thc sole land-usc access to thc Park and State Preserve at thc southern md of the Road; and WHEREAS, thc County and thc State of Florida have casement access rights which include thc Road for thc public to reach thc Park and thc State Preserve (collccti~,~ly, thc "Preserve"); and WHEREAS, HomcmxT~crs usc thc Road to access their homes and operate a Guardhouse located in thc middle of thc Road, approximately 252. I fcct south of thc pavement line of Bonita Beach Road; and ~VHEREAS, a controversy ~ developed bct~x~n thc Parties regarding each other's rights xx~th respect to thc location of thc Guardhouse, the usc of thc Road by members of thc general public to access thc Park, thc operation of the (3uardhousc, and the validi~' and enforceability of various contracts; and ~ATIEREAS, Homemakers have sued thc County in thc pending Circuit Court Case, No. 95-0073- CA-01, in thc 20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, sec'king dcclarato~* relief xxith respect to thc Guardhouse location on thc Road and certain documents, of public record, xx~ich establish and/or impact the public's i)crmancnt casement rights on thc Road to access the public Park lands and/or to the Preserve to thc south; and WHEREAS, in thc pending Circuit Court Case, No. 95-0073-CA-01, in thc 20th Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, Florida, Homcox, mcrs also scck injunctive relief ~-~th respect to a County Code Enforcement Board ("CEB") enforcement proc. ceding ~crcin thc County seeks to doclarc thc Cmard~ location in violation of the controlling PUD Ordinance and thereby, to obtain thc ultimate remedy, a CEB Order directing thc immediate removal of thc Guardhouse from thc Road in Tract R, or suffer thc legal consequences of impositions of fmcs, liens and ultimate foreclosure proceedings; and Settlement Aarecmcnt 219~$1-1.dcc of 10/9'7 pMe2 or'lO WHEREAS, in CEB Case No. 96-012, County cited Homeo~ers for certain violations of thc Collier County Land Dcvclopmcnt Codc CLDC") (Ordinance No. 91-I02, as amended), and of PUD Ordinance No. g5-~3, and noticed the matter for hearing b~ore the CEB; and WHEREAS, in Circuit Court ~ No. 95-0073-CA-01 and CEB Case No. 96-012, th~ Homeo~ maintain that th~ Guardlxmse location in tl~ middle of Road in Tract R, approximately 252.1 feel south of th~ pavement line of Bonita Beach Road, is properly permitt~ by County pursuant to Building Pmnit No. $$-734, and therefore, is lawfully located in tho Lely Barefoot Beth PUD, in compliance ~ith Collier County PUD Ordinance No. $$-g3; and WHEREAS, in Circuit Court Case No. 95-0073-CA-01 and in CEB Case No. 96-012, County maintains that: the Guardhouse location violates PUD Ordinance No. g5-$3, which permits an entry gate faciliv,., to be located in Tract A, not Tract R, although portions of the gatehousedguardhouse facili~' complex may ex'tend over and into thc road; that PUD Ordinance No. 85-$3 prohibits an)' modification to Tract K that would interfere xxith access to the public Park lands to the south; and finally, that the G-uardhous~ v, as constructed in Tract R pursuant to a building permit issued in error and that therefore the Guardhouse location constitutes an impediment to public access to the Parl; lands to the south, also a violation of PUD Ordinance No. $5-$3; and WHEREAS, a multiple day hearing xxas held by the CEB in this matter, in which the Parties xx~r~ represented by counsel, presented evidence, examined the wimesses and presented their oral arguments, and thereafter, the CEB deliberated in the Sunshine, and made their oral findings of fact and conclusions of law, which subsequently were reduced to a final written order, dated February 27, 1997; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEB Final Order, dated February 27, 1997, the CEB dc'~rmined that the present Guardhouse location docs not impede public access to the Park lands to the south and further, is not in violation of the LDC, and so, dismissed the charges; and WHE~, presently pending in the Appellate Division of the 20th Judicial Circuit is County's Appeal of the CEB Final Order, pursuant to its timely-filed Notice of Appeal; and WHE~, the Parties agree that it is in the public's best interests, as ~11 as in the best interests of tim residonts of Lely Bar,foot Beach, that there b~ an end to further litigation among the Parties by an Semement,agreement 219~$1-1.goc of I0/97 amicable resolution of Circuit Court Case No. 95-0073-CA-01 and of Appellate proceedings of CEB Case No. 96012 ~thout the necd for further court or administrative proceedings; and WHEREAS, the Parties agrce that PUD Ordinance g5-83, as well o.s preceding PUD Ordinances affecting Lely Barefoot Beach, recognize and preserve th~ right of the residents of Lely Barefoot Beach subdivision to security against Road entry by unauthorized persons or vehicles, as well as the public's right to unimpeded beach access along the Road to the Park lands to the south; and WHEREAS, the Parties are desirous of entering into this Settlement Agreement xxtfich preserves and protects the respective fights and best interests of the Parties and those they represent upon the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE JOINT AND MUTUAL COVENANTS CONTAINED HEREIN, AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL BENEFITS TO FLOW FROM ONE TO THE OTHER, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN. 1. .Auth0ri~. Thc undersigned, executing for and on behalf of the respective Parties, are the duly authorized representatives of the respective Parties to this Settlement Agreement xxith full authorit), and power to execute and deliver this Settlement Agreement and to bind the Parties to the terms and conditions as set £orth herein. 2. ,Public Access RiRhts. Homeoxx~ers do not and shall not in the future contest or object to thc rights of access of Park x4sitors xxt~o do not reside in the Subdivision to use the Road for ingress to and egress from the Park from 8:00 a.m. until sunset, each and every day of the 5mr. In addition, the Count), has the right to conduct sea turtle watches during nesting season outside the normal Park operating hours and use the Road for ingress to and egress from such x~atches. The Count), also has the right to infrequently conduct similar outdoor nature programs outside the normal Park operating hours and use the Road for ingress to and egress from such programs. Notice of such x~ttcbes and programs shall be provided to the Master Association at least forty-eight (48) hours in advance by telephone and contemporaneous mailing of a letter. Settlement Agreement 219g$1-I.doc of 10/97 Page4 ofi0 3. Gulrdho~Jse Loc~tlon. Coun~ ;grc~ to ~Jv¢, cl]smJss and/or r~leas¢ ~' p~t or ~ c~ c~ll~g~g ~ ~t Guar~ou~ l~ti~ a~r~ly 252.1 f~ ~ of~e ~~ I~ of ~ ~h ~ in ~e middle of ~e R~ ~ T~ R. C~W d~ n~ ~d s~ n~ h ~ ~, ~j~ to or wnt~ ~e figh~ of Hom~ to ~PY, ~mte, ~pro~, ~d ~ ~e ~~ ~ ~ fo~ ~ ~is A~t. If ~ui~ by law, ~e Hom~ x~ill obm~ ~ app~pfiate ~ ~t for ~pr~~ to ~e Guar~, ~ch will not ~ u~o~bly x~Id by ~e C~W. ~ ~idc~tion of ~c forego~ C~W ~Y r~bly mo~r ~c o~fi~ of ~ ~~ dung ~c ~yli~t hours xs%~ ~c Pa~ facili6~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~, ~ o~er to ~sug ~t ~ ~~sc o~ti~ facili~tcs ~d assi~ public ~ch ac~s ~d ~ercfo~ ~io~ ~ a ~efit to public b~ch access, ~cr t~ imping public ~ch a~ss. No~x~d~g, ~c Hom~xx~ ~Y s~ul~sly ~ ~eir o~ ~rso~cl ~ ~c Guar~ousc dung o~ Pa~ hou~ to ~si~ to dir~ or o~e~s~ to ~ard ~c r~idcn~ of ~ly Baref~t B~ch ~d ~eir ~c~, li~, ~or ~t~. 4. Guardhouse Operafioq. ~c PaRics agr~ ~at at all times during o~ Park hours, cu~tly 8:00 a.m. to suns~, ~e Guar~ousc gates s~ll at all tim~ ~ ~ ~e "up" position ~ order to ~lmv u~m~ public access to ~c Park I~& to ~e sou~ of T~ R. At no t~e dung ~e Park o~mt~g hours s~ll ~y Propc~y Oxx~cr's pe~o~ct ~or M~cr ~s~iation's perso~el pro,bit public access to ~c Pa~ faciliti~ to thc sou~, nor ~ obli~ ~ ~y f~ or fo~ to ~sist ~or ~idc ~ public to ~c Park facilities to ~c sou~. ~cr, Co~' ~o~el s~ll b~r ~1 ~d cxclusix~ r~ibiliw to ~sist ~e public in ac~s~g ~c P~k facil~ ~ ~c sou~ dung Pa& o~mt~g hour. At no t~e s~ll Coun~ pcrso~el be r~ui~ to ~si~ ~ly Barcf~t B~ch rcsid~, ~eir ~, ~eir ~i~ ~ a~sing ~y pfi~tc pro~ o~M ~or ~~ by ~c ~id~ of ~ly Barefoot Beach. The Master Association agrees to make payment of a fee to Collier County Parks and Recreation Department equal to thc amount of the average cost of one-half (1/'2) of a Ranger each )'ear. The full payment shall be made by October I of each year, with an initial payment of fourteen thousand hundrtxl and sixty-fiv~ dollars (I;14,165.00) paid by November 1, 1997. Each )~ar thereaRer by ~July 31, rig County will provid~ to the Master Association an invoice that will indicate the Ranger costs for the 219551-1.doc of I0/97 upcoming )Tar and the 50% average cost ora Ranger which will be used to calculate such fcc. Thc County agrees that a Ranger ~ill tx: available at the Guardhouse to assist thc public wben the Preserve parking lot is full or near capacity b~ October through April of each year and il~ holidays and ~ekends of Memorial Day, ~ Day (~July 4th) and Labor Day. The Ranger will serv~ to inform the public of access and availability of th~ Park facilities and to provid~ traffic information to the beach going public. Beach traffic shall usc thc ~'rn most lane away from thc Guardhouse. This lane shall be clearly marked ~y signage ax a l~nc for beach going traffic. The Parties ~rcc that it is not ~n imped~ent to public a~.ess to the Park f,'tcilities ~cn drivers voluntarily stop their vehicles at the Guerdhouse to ~iscuss r~t~crs with personnel stationed at the Guardhouse. Thc drivers will not be encouraged to ec~ivcly scci< stops et the Guardhouse t~t impede the flow of tr'~fic. In the event l-lomco~ers inst~ll nn exit gate et the Guardhouse, such exit gate sl~l be in the "up" position et ell times during ol~m Pari< hours and rennin in thc "up" position until approximately one-l~lf hour after sun~t, l-lomco~crs, in their sole discretion, rrt~y close gates across the Ro~d to control ingress to and egress fi.om the Subdivision aRer o~cial Park operating hours, which are currently between sunset c~¢h d~y and $:00 a.m. the £ollm~ng day. The Count~' s~ll loci< the gate at the cntrnnce to the Park after Park ol~r~ting hours in eccordancc ~th its st~d operating procedure at all County Park f'~tcilities. Daring turtle n~sting scaxon (~y 1 through October 31 o£ e~ch year) County sl~l not be required to loci< the gate et any times tl~t would interfere ~th County sca turtle nesting monitoring and protection activities. The County ~vill request Coy l~c0, for the s~fcty o£ pedestrians and Park visitors, tl~t the Collier County Sheriff' perform petrols aloug the ro~l. 5. P r~n~. Thc Perties n~rcc tl~t tl~ perking speccs within the Preserve will be calculated at a r',tte o£ 0.42 spaces per person v,~thin the Presets, such number of persons for such calcul~tion not to ~tcccd the carrying capacity of the Preserve. The total number of persons tl~t cnn be a~ommod~ within the Preserve, for purposes of such calculation, will be based upon the ~um carrying ca, city of'the total number of facilities ~tMn tl~ Prescr~ ns determined by the State of Florida. For purposes of ti.is calculation, carrying capacity is defined pursuant to the Land ~an~,~nt Plan for Settlement A~anent 21g~5l-l.doc of 10/97 t~sse~of~o Barefoot Beach Preserve County Park ("Land Management Plan") previously adopted by the Count)' on July 20, 1993 (section V(A), Resource Assessment, Carr)~ng Capacit)'). As sa forth therein, can)ting capacity is based upon the square footage needs of the beach user, and such needs were determined to be 1350 squar~ feet for Iow density use which included 60 square feel ofwater, 90 square feet of beach and 1200 squar~ feei of back up and buffer areas. TI~ ~ carry~ capacity for the Stat~ and Count)' o~xned portions ofth~ Preserve is five hundred and eighty-sev~n (587) people at ~ny point in time. Accordingly, this calculation }ielcls t~x) hundr~ and fifty-six (256) parking spaces. Thc County v-ill not expand tl~ parking spaces beyond thc current parking spaces x~ch number three hundred and flft~.-six (356), ~ich includes an additional one hundred (100) spaces, unless and until the Board of Trustees of thc Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of' Florida and Collier Count)', through required publicly advertised and open public meetings and other requirements, amend the formula used in the Land Management Plan for determining carrying capacity of'the Preserve. In the c~'ent that the formula used in the Land Management Plan is recalculated and thereby increases the number of' parking spaces, the Panics agree that the existing additional 100 spaces in excess under the current formula will not be carried forward but x~ll be counted towards the new number of spaces. The Homeowners agree to dismiss their pending cause of'action to reduce the current number of parking spaces. 6. Use/Access Agreement. Homco~ers hereby unconditionally and completely release Count), from those certain provisions in that certain Use/Access Agreement dated November I0, 1987, cnt~xi into bct~-n County and Lely Development Corporation, predecessor in title to the real property interest in Home~vners, ,,~th respect to paragraph $ ~ttich provides: Board agrees that standard operating procedure of' recreational activities occurring on Property will include limiting thc number of vehicles accessing the Property to the number of' actual parking spaces located on the Property. It' parking becomes full at any time, access to Property will temporarily be closed at the intersection of' Bonita Beach Road at the cnirance to Lely Barct'oot Beach subdivision until such time as parking spaces become available. Seller, or its assigns, shall have the right to stop access to Property when parking lot is full. 7. ~ Within 150 days of'the effective date of'this Agreement, the County shall install informational signs, compatible with the character of' the Subdivision, between Bonita Beach Road and the Settlement Agreement 219gSl-l.doc of 10/97 1~7~I0 Ouar~se x~ich shall be visiblc to thc public, ~ which shall providc information rcgarding necks to the Lely Barefoot Beach Park facilitics. Thc costs of sa;d signagc shall be Ix)mc by thc County. The intent of such iat'ormational signagc is to advise thc public of the Presc'rve locations, thc parking fees, and parking ~ace availability. There shall also be informational signs regarding the separate parking lot for Lely Barefoot Beach at the northern end of the Road, as distinguished from the parking for the Preserve at the ~zrdz'm minima of the Road. County agrees that in designing each informational signag¢ County shall' confer with and obtain the consent ofthe Homeo~ to ensure that such signag¢ is of similar character as is presently installed near the entrance to Lely Barefoot Beach subdivision, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. It shall not be required that any of the signs be lighted. The precise language, location and design of the signs shall be determined by the Parties to this Agreement x,.ithin 60 follmving the date of execution of this Agreement by the Parties. Whenever the Preserve parking lot is full or near capacity as determined by Count)' Park Staff, the Count)' shall utilize the sign to advise the public ofthe status of parking spaces at the Preserve. On those occasions betxveen October through April ofeach )'ear and the holida)'s and weekends of Memorial Da)', Independence Da)' (July 4th) and Labor Da)' the parking lot is full or near capacity, the Count)' shall station an employee or agent in the Guardhouse as the sole contact with persons utilizing the Road to access the Presen'e. The lack of available parking at the Preserve shall have no effect on the public's right to access the Park via the Road during Park operating hours. $. ~ludlclal At~rowl of Settlcmgnt Azreement. The Parties agree that, upon full execution oft/tis Settlement Agreement, the Parties shall file a joint motion in Circuit Court Case No. 95-0073-CA- 01 (the "Action"), whereby the Parties shall jointly request the Court to enter a final order incorporating and approving this Settlement Agreement and dismissing the Action x~th prejudice as a full and complete resolution of all issues between the Parties, and to request the Court to retain jurisdiction for enforeenm~ purpos~ only. 9. Dismissals With Preludice~ The County agre~ to dismiss xvith prejudice its appeal against the Homeov.~ in CEB Case No. 96-012, Appellate Case No. 97-1055-CA (th~ "Appeal"), within five (5) day~ of the entry of a final order incorporating and approving this Settlement Agreemmt in Case II 9~51-1ala: of IO~97 No. 95-0073-CA-01. The Parties agre: not to seek costs, expenses and attom~"s fe~s against ~ach other of any nature xx~atsoever related to the Action or Aplgal. 10. ~ This Agreement will become effective on the date on which the Court enters a Final Order incorporating and approving it. 11. D~fsult/Bresch. In the event that any Party to this S~rdcrn~nt Agreement commits an act of default/breach of this Scttl~ment Agreement, and such act of d~fault/breach is waived by the non- defaulting/non-breaching Party, such ~ivcr shall not operate, nor be construed, as a ~iver of later, similar or dissimilar defaults/breaches. Upon default/breach of this Settlement Agreement by an)' Part,.', a non-defaulting/non-breaching Part)' shall have the option to exercise all available remedies at law and/or in equity (including, but not limited to, claims for injunctive relief and/or damages), in the Circuit Court to mforce the terms of this Agre. emcnt entered as a Final Order. Said remedies at law and/or in equi~' shall be sought bd'ore the Circuit Court that retained jurisdiction over the Senlcrnent Agr~ngnt for enforcement purpo~s only. 12. Attorney'S F~ and Costs. The Parties agrg that in the event an)' Pan3' to this Scttl~-nt Agrecment applies to thc Circuit Court, pursuant to a motion or action for enforcerrent of this Scttlement Agreement resulting from a default/breach of this Settlement Agreement by the otlgr Part)', the prevailing Part}' in such p~__~_.Jng shall be a~sm'ded its reasonable and necessary attomt3~s fees and costs, including appellate attorneys f~s and costs, incurred in such pr~__eeding(s). In the event Count.- is the prevailing Party, County's m~ard of reasonable and nec~saO' atton~s f~-s and costs shall be computed pursuant to the fair rnarkct value of the attomt3(s) time and services involved (as gox~.'rned by applicable roles o£The Florida Bar and case law) and not on the basis o£tlg annual salary of the attorney(s) paid by the gov~nmental entity. 13. Entlr~ Atreement. This S~tlcngnt Agreement, consisting of' ten (10) consecutively numbered pages, constitutes the entire agreement bet~ the Parties. Any amendme~ modifications, and/or extension of this Scttl~rnent Agr~ma~nt, to be ¢ff'~.-'tive and eni'orceabl¢, shall be in writing and officially and duly ~ecuted by the authorized legal repre~ntatives ofthe respective Parties. 21~$1.1.doc of lOtg7 l,~9orlO ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK the COUNTY: By:. Chief Assistant County Attorney Wimcss Signature Print~ Name Witness Signature Printed Name Approved es to form and Ic~l sufficiency rot thc HOMEOWNERS: CUMMINGS & LOCKWOOD Attorneys for Lely Barefoot Beach Property Owners Association, Inc. and Lely Barefoot Bench ~ Association, Inc. By:. 219~l-l.doc o/' I0/97 ~ lO of ~0 BOARD OF COUNTY COI~SSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Timothy L. Hancock, ~ Chairman LELY BAREFOOT BEACH PROPERTY OWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC. By:. Ban')' DcNicola, as President LELY BAREFOOT BEACH MASTER ASSOCIATION, INC. By: James Rs~n, as Prcsident ,7. ~e..~.: To appoint 2 members to serve 3 year terms expiring on October I, 2000, on the Affordable Housing Commission. CONSIDERATIONS: This 9 member committee was created by Ordinance 91-6:5 to monitor the implementation of the Affordable Housing Task Force's recommendations, and the goals, objectives, and policies of the Housing Elements of the County's Growth Management Plan and the City's Comprehensive Plan; investigate the feasibility of tax increment financing for infrastructure for site development of affordable housing for low income households; develop means or mechanisms to encourage a voluntary program in which Realtors, and other holding deposits such as escrow accounts of earnest money deposits or security for rentals would deposit these in a selected bank where such bank would contribute to the Housing Trust Fund a/iR calculated on the average collected balance for the month; investigate a plan for any linkage and inclusionary zoning recommendations; review and determine the effect of proposed ordinances bfaffordable housing and make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners and the Naples City Council; and investigate any other relevant areas so directed by the Board of County Commissioners. Five members are appointed by the County and 4 appointed by the City. After initial appointments, terms are 3 years. A list of the current membership is included in the backup. A press release was issued and resumes were received from the following 4 interested citizens: APPLICANT DISTRICT ELECTOR W. Jeffrey Cecil (Atty.-Affordable Housing De) 2 Sam Goodman (BS in Education) 3 Carl M. Femstrom (BA in Science & MBA) 2 Margaret M. Pereida (construction service in County & 3 participant in SHIP) yes yes yes yes COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: w. Jeffrey Ceca Margaret M. Pereida FISCAL IMPACT: NONE GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: NONE RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commi-~sioners consider the recommendation for appointment; appoint 2 membe~ to serve 3 year terms expiring on October l, 2000; and, direct the County Attorney to prepare a resolution confirming ~he appointments. Prepared By: Agenda Dnte: Sue Filson, Administrative As$~ Board of County Commissioners October 14, 1997 0el 1 1997 P~ o~ ~hone (94D 403-2330 F,,I~X (94i) HOUSING AND URBAN IMPROVEMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: I~.OM: SUBJECT: Sept~nber 24, 1997 Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners Greg Mihalic, Director ...' ~~//ff Housing and Urban Improvement Affordable Housing Commission The Affordable Housing Commissioners have reviewed each of the applicants' resumes for the Afl'ordal~le Housing Commission vacancies. The Affordable Housing Commission held a meeting on September 15, 1997. However, a quorum was not present at the Affordable Housing Commission meeting. The Affordable Housing Commissioners that attended the meeting recommended that the following candidates be appointed: 1. W. Jeffrey Cecil - Appointment 3 year term October 1, 1997 through September 30, 2000 Mr. Cecil is a Naples attorney who specializes in affordable housing development representing lenders, real estate devclopers and developer operators of low income housing. Re Margaret M. Pcrcida- Appointment 3 year term October I, 1997 through Scptcmber 30, 2000 Ms. Pereida has experience in the conslruction service industry in Collier County and has been a participant under the SHIP Down Payment/Closing Cost Assistance Program in acquiring her first home. If you need any additional information, please call me. GMjd AGEND~,,.~Z~ OCT t997 Pg. BIP-23-B? liSoeS, FRC)M,C01~HIgNGJAL. L. OAN 1rD'IB41421STEB'~ PAGE AIrFO~~LE HOUSING COMMISSION 33~1 Tamlami Trail ~ N~ Pl~d, 34112 AGENDA..~TEJ~ No o....~ OCT ! ~ t997 MEMORANDUM DAT~: TO: FROM: August 25, 1997 Vinell Hills, Elections Office ~~( , Sue Filson, Admlnistr~ve Assl Board of County Commi~ioner~ VoI~' Re~ralion - Advisory Board Appointments The Board of Cou~Br Commissioners will soon consider the followi-E individuals for appohltment to one of the county's advisory commiuees. Please let me know if those listed below ar~ tzgist~ voters in Collier County. Also, pleas~ list the commission district in which each applicant resides. AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMISSION COMMISSION DISTRICT W..leffi-ey Cecil 1954 Mission Drive Naples, FL 34109 Sam Goodman 260 Monterey Drive Naples, FL 34119 Carl M. Fernstrom 221 9th Street, South, #200 Naples, FL 34102 Margaret M. Pereida 1470 Green Valley Circle, #304 Naples, FL 34104 ..% Thank you for your help. Affordable Housing Commission Name Vanessa Fitz 2460 t4th St~ North Napks, FL 34103 D~: 4 C~ego~: Ci~ ~ ~k Arum S~ ~05 ~ W~ C~le, N~I~ ~ 341~ D~: 5 C~e~: Co~ ~ ~~o~ ~ ~ ~ S.W. ~a~, ~ 34~ ~6 D~: 3 C~: Co~~tor 4214 ~ ~v~u~, S.W. ~a?~, ~ 34] ]6 D~: 3 ~o~ee, ~ ~4142 D~: 5 C~: Co~/~ozdab~ fio~g ~50 ~ ~~d ~v~ ~~ 34~08 D~: 2 ~ ~ ~03 D~ 4 R/orh Phone Appt'd Exp. Date Term Home Phone DateRe-appt 2ndExpDate 2nd Term 643-4955 04/01/96 I0/01/98 3 Years 261-0275 I/9/96 10101/98 3 Years 594-2122 10/03/95 10/01/98 262-4333 05/17/94 10/01/95 10/3/95 10/01/98 262-8739 09/27/94 I0/01/97 455-9287 657-364g 10/01/91 10/01/94 9/27/94 10/01/97 434-5800 12/03/96 10/01/99 11/04/96 11/03/99 3 Years I Year 3 Years 3 Years ,./ 3 Yeazs 3 Yeazs / 3Ye~ 3Ye~ No.~ OC! 1 1997 Affordable Housing Commission $oan Cmst 482 13th Avenue, S. Naples, FL 34102 District: 4 C, ztegor,/: Ciw/Developer Palm C~le, W. Naples, FL 34102 DtsO'ld: 4 C~.gory: City/P..~tor 262-U~ 10/18/95 I0~)5R6 1 Y~ar 262-2281 11/4/96 11/03R9 3 262-0073 10/05F)4 434-6744 This 9 member commission was created on July 23, 1991, by Om'lMnce No. gl-65, to moaitor the impleme~a~on of I~e Affordable Housing Task Force's Raco~ and lhe objectives, and policies of tt~e Housing Elements of the County's Grow~ Management Plan and the City's Comprehensive Plan. Terms ara 3 yea~ 5 membem appointed by lite County and 4 rnembem appointed by I~e City. Tara A. Norman, City Clerk 434.4701 $[aff: Greg Mihar~c, HUI Director:. 643-8330 MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: August 25, 1997 G-reg MthaH¢, HUI Director Affordable Housing Commission As you know, we currently have 2 vacancies on the above-referenced advisory committee. A press release was issued requesting citizens interested in serving on this committee to submit a resume for consideration. I have attached the resumes received for your review as follows: W. Jeffrey Cecil 1954 Mission Drive Naples, FL 34109 Sam Goodman 260 Monterey Drive Naples, FL 34119 Carl M. Fernstrom 221 9th Street, South, #200 Naples, FL 34102 Margaret M. Pereida 1470 Green Valley Circle, #304 Naples, FL 34104 Please let me know, in writing, the recommendation of the advisory committee for appointment and I will prepare an executive summary for the Board's consideration. Please cnte~orize the appHcnnts in areas of expertise. If you have any questions, please call me at 774-8097. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SF Attachments No Board of County Commissioners C/O Mrs. Sue Filson 3301 Tamlami Trail East Naples, Florida 34112 PRESTIGE GROUP:, INC. BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS 260 MONTEREY DRIVE NAPLES. FLORIDA 33999 (941] 775-1570 · FAX (941) 352-0788 Oe,~r Mrs. Filson, It would be an honor to serve on 'The Affordable Housing Commission' committee. I have lived in South West Florida for more than 12 years, 8 yem's on Marco Island, and 4 years in Naples. Vineyards VaJley Oaks. I am 57 yea~ old, and lived and raised my family in Grand Rapids, Michigan. I owned my own business. 'Goodman Saies'. representing Childrens Clothing Manufactures for 21 years. Started new career in Florida as a Realtor and BuYer. I hold a Florida State Broke~ Ilcanse tl~K~71, and a Florida State Contractors license ~1~CBC,057446. At present I am the President of Prestige Custom Home Builders Inc.. and Co-Broker of Impedai Realty of Naples, Inc. The following people may be contacted for personnel references: 1. Michel Saadeh. President Vineyards Development 353-1551 2. William G Roth 336 Seabreeze Dr. Marco Island, Fl. 34145 642-6451 3. Fred D Herzog Naples, FL 34119 455-6715 4. Douglas Allemong. CPA 197 Edgemere Way S Naples, FI. 34105 OFFICE: (941] 774-7297 * FAX: (941] 774-2578 2287 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL · NAPLES, FLORIDA 33962 UC PORTER, WRIGHT, MORRIS & ARTHUR August 22, 1997 4~I T~'~_' Tr'~ ~ N'ad,~n,~b= ~.-,~'~2 VIA FACSIM]I.F. 774-360~ Mrs. Su~ lqison Adminir, rafive Assistant Board o£County Commissioners 330 ! Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34112 Re: .Mfordable Housing Commission Dear Mrs. Filson: I would appreciar: the consideration ofg'a: Commissioners for appointment to the Affordable Housing Commission. Currently, I am serving as Chair of the Housing Committee oF the Chamber/EDC Coalition. My legal career started in 1979 with the Columbus, Ohio law firm of Alexander, Eblngcr, Holschuh, Fisher &: McAlis~ in the Business, Rcal Estate and Probate Department. [ became a Partner with the larivr (250-. attorneys) Porter. Wright, Morris & Arthur firm in Deccrabcr of 1986, after the April merger of Alexander, Ebing~' with Porter, Wright. In June of 1993, I was named Parmer in Charge of the Naples Office of Porter, Wright. Most ofmy time is spent in the areas of estate planning, esme and tru~ administration and real estate, tepresentin$ ler~ters' real estate developers, and developer/operators o£ Iow incomc housing, and gaining extensive experience in title insurance ~ real estate-based financing issues, including low income family and senior housing ami historic tax credit, letter of credit-enhanced bonds, and HUD housing programs. My work wkh local and national nonprofit housing groups has included federal ~.x cr~it, Commmfigr Development Block Grant and Home Loan projects in Toledo, Columbus, Euclid, and Mansfid~ Ohio, Shrev~ I,ouisisoa, and Parkenbu~ West V'u'ginia; bond ~ancingps in Columbus, Wsverly, CuyahOll~ Falls, Oahaaaa arid Dayton, Ohio, and Term {!.aut~., Indhu~ and Hill) 202 projects in Ohio, West Virginia, Missouri, Pcamsylvania and Florida. I am a membct ofthe Real PmpenT, Probate and Trtm Law Sections of the (I 994-presen0, Ohio S~ae (1979-present), Rorida (I 993-present) and Amctlc~ (1979.-pmeeut), ~ tho ABA. Affo~klc Houai~ Forum (1994-Mc=cra). 1997 AUG"?,:Z"t! 13:31 Frm: T-fig P.O]/O] Job-lO2 Mrs. Sue Filson Board of County Commiss~oncrs August 22, Page 2 My un~e~,,taduate alma mater is OKio Northern UnivetsiF (B.A., ~ hi~ ~ t 9~; ~ ~w ~i ~ ~ U~v~ity of~c~ ~w S~l (~.D., ~ ~ 1979). I ~ ~mi~ to p~i~ in ~ 0~o ~ }~ I believe that my intzre~ baclqlround, training and experien~ could prove Claim useful to the Commission, and I would very much enjoy serving the interests of our community. Please call me if you ~ve any question~. WJC:jh Divers'died Real Estate Group, Inc. August ! 5.1997 Mrs. Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners 3301 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34112 Dear Mrs. Fiison. I am interested in applying for advisory committee positions for the Affordable Housing Commission and the Environmental Advisory Board. I am a resident and an elector of Collier County. I have included a brief resume for vour re~,iew as required. As a long-term resident of' Collier County and a member of tl~e business community. I believe that my experience will add depth to the Board. Sincerely, Carl M. Femstrom CMl::cme Attachment CORPORATE RESUME Carl M. Fems~m has a comprehensive Mstory in real estate sales, ~,r, ngement and inv~lmenc He graduated from ~he University of $outh Florida in 1974 wi~h s Bachelor of Arts D~gr~z in Science, I-~ complet~t ~ragu~ work in buslr~s ~ t ~ University of Florida in Oainesville in 1976. Mr. Femsl~m has been active in real estate development and construction in Southwest Florida for over twenty years. He is a licensed mortgage broker, a licensed real estate broker and holds several sec'rides licenses. In addition, Carl is a Certified Hotel Administrator and is an advisor to the City Council as a member of the steering committee of the Downtown Redevelopment District. Mr. Femsu'om has been involved as principal in over a dozen successful projects in the area including the renovation of the Olde Towne Professional Building, Fifth Avenue North Retail Center, the Midtowne Centre, the Howard Johnson Resort Hotel and the development of the Plantation Subdivision. Pg. Margaret M. Pereida 1470 Green Valley Circle, #304 Naples, FL 341O4 (941) 261-4696 ,or (941) 262_6661 August 15, 1997 Ms. Sue Filson, Administrative Assistant Board of County Commissioners 3301 Tamiami Tra~ East Naples FL 34112 Dear Ms. Filson, As promised, here is my letter introducing myself and a brief resume as you requested. I am submitting these documents as an applicant for the Affordable Housing Commission. A resident of Collier County for 33 years, I have acquired a knowledge of the needs and opportunities for afforclable housing in our community. I am a successful applicant through the S.H.I.P. program and enjoy residency in the first condominium granted under this program and thus have a first-hand understanding of the Affordable Housing Commission and its accomplishments. You will see from my brief work history r~sum~ that my experience throughout Collier County has put me in contact with a broad range of our population. In additk:m, I come to you with some knowledge of construction as a punch inspector and office manager for a construction company. For several years I have worked with Gulf Coast Furnishings and have a practical understarxfing of furx:~onal rnral:~ in housing. Housing studies already on record within the County and the City should provide the foundation for action in our community. As a results-o~ professional with a commitment to follow-through, I feel confident that I would serve well and be of value to the N-lC. Margaret M. Perelda AGEND& ,3~TF.J~ No.~ OCT 1 ~1 lg97 :~..Margaret M. Pereida . ~'~ Guff C.,~t Fumishlr,3s. Inc., Naples, Ronda ' ,,,~ lg~~~ Fumi~re sa~ a~ ~e d~n "~' ' 1~1-1993 Ed Jan~n's Furniture. Nap~, Fl~da :~' - Furniture sales a~ ~a~e design ~:' 198~1~1 ~ manager a~ p~ ~ns~? as ~ as ~mpa~ lia~on ~ ',~~;'' 198~1989 ~!~ s ~pa~e~ Store. lnG., Reno, Nevada .~ Fu~e sal~. 1977-t987 Education: Airport Mini-Bu~ ,~>ervice, Inq., Naples, Florida Vice President, co-founder and operations developer. In the creation and development of lids company, I was responsible for even/aspect of the business. Edison Community College James L. Walker Vo.-Tech AGEND. A~T~T~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .'/~ON NO. ~-97-~, GEORGE L. V~~ OF YO~O Vm ASS~~ ~ V~~ P~, ~Q~~G A GRO~ ~AG~ P~ ~ ~~ OF ~ ~ ~ ~E ~ TO PRO~E FOR ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~GE D~I~A~ ~ TO S~ ~ ~ L~ USE ~. 0~~: To have the Bo~d of Co~ Com~ion~ m~id~ ~e ~i~ of a ~ M~ag~mt PI~ m~t w~ch would ~o~ ~ ~1~ of dwell~g ~ ~m U~ ~io~ of ~e Fiddl~'~ C~k ~~ to 1~ mtly d~i~t~ A~culmV Rml. U.S. 41 ~ ~pm~mately 2 ~ mil~ ~ ofS~ ~ 951. ~c ~ ~.~ c~ pwj~t ~~ ~d ~nsis~ of 1~85 ~.. ~ ~g PUD/D~ 2~79 ~, 6,~ ~v~ dwell~ ~d a ~j~ d~ of ~55 d~ mf~ of dwelling ~ ~m ~ ~e U~ ~ m 1~ o~de ~e U~ ~ wo~ ~lt in a ~u~°n of~e oval Fiddle's C~ pwj~ ~ty to 1.6 d~. ~is ~fion ~ to ~d ~c Fu~ ~d U~ El~t ~) m ~ow ,a C~~ Sh~ ~~ I~ ~ ~e U~ d~:~ ~ mm ~ I~ to be ~ to ~e P~~, 1~ ~ ~e A~m~ ~ ~e ~ t~ c~ge is to ~e A~I~~ ~fion, A~~~ - ~ Ug A~l~~id~fi~ Subdi~c~ P~h ~1., page LU-I-39. At ~e Pl~g ~mmi~on h~g, ~ and ~ ~fi~ p~'~ ~e C~C ~ ~~ ~ w~ch m~ ~fi~lly pm~d~ f~ a ~ d~ fi~ o~ 1.6 dwelHng 29, T~p 51 Sou~ R~ge 27 ~ ~I1 ~t ~ ~y ~wellmg ~. -the ~~ t~ ~ ~v~ by ~c Pl~g Co~i~, is ~ foll~: ,~./~ 1997 Agricultural/Rural-MixeA Use District 1. AgriculturaFResidential Subdistrict- The purpose of this subdistrict is to protect and encourage agricultural activities while providing for low density residential use in outlying ~as. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum density of I unit per 5 gross ~ ~ved for the Fiddler's C.r~,k DRI may be r~allocated to thos~ rafts of ~ections 18 and 19. Townshi_~ 51 South. R~ge 27 ~ added Io Fiddler's (~r~k DRI to~ether with t~rt of Section 29. Townshi~ 51 So~th. Range 27 ~-~'t, at a density zreatcr than I unit ~ $ m'oss acres m-ovided that no new units are added to thc 6,000 m. cviouslv _ _am~yved traits, which results in a s~ross densiw of !.6 units ~er acr~ for the Fiddler's Creek DRI: ~nd timber _~vidcd that no residential units s__h,~l be l~at~ on that ~ of Section 29 within thc Fiddler's Creek DRI: and further orovidcd that South Florida Wat~ Management District iurisdictional wetlands jrlrmacted by the DR!.. in said Sections do not exceed 10 acres. In reviewing the proposed amendment, staff considered the potential impacts to the environment, effect on high range population projections, impact to public facilities and whether the amendment would constitute urban "sprawl" as defined by the Department of Community Affairs. The subject site is an active agricultural site, which does include some wetlands. Based on the amended text language, a maximum of 10 acres of jurisdictional wetlands may be impacted by development in this area. The amendment does not increase the number of dwelling units and, in fact, eliminates a total of 277 dwellings outside the Urban boundary, thereby reducing potential population in the County. Public facilities are not impacted by the amendmcnt for several reasons including: 1. No new access points are created to serve the project and therefore it has no impact on the level of service for external roadways. 2. The site is within the Collier County water and sewer district bound,vy, and 3. There are no impacts to any other facility having LOS standards. With respect to "sprawl", staffhas analyzed the applicant's responses to the indicators of sprawl used by the Department of Community Affairs and has determined that the amendment does not constitute urban sprawl as water and sewer service is present, adjacent developments east and north of the site are developed at hi.',,her intensifies and densities than the Fiddler's Creek project, open spaces are increasing, and thc amendment does not increase the costs of providing other services. It is staff's opinion that the text amendment will not set a precedent for similar plan amendments as staff cannot identify any other development which is simit with respect to the Urban boundary. OOT 14 Thc petitioner has requested that the County not request an Objection, Recommendation md Commera (ORC) report from the Department of Community Affairs. Th~ petilioner has stated thai they will assume full responsibility for dcfens~ of the amendment in the event that ther~ is any legal or administrative proceeding filed as a r~sult of this FISCAL IMPACT: None. ~ I ! ~~IcvelofserwCe~ ' ~ ~'.:.~G COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Thc Collier County ~on heard this petition on October 2, 1997, and unanimously (7 to 0) reco~nended this petition be transmitted to the Florida Department of,Community noted above which prolgbits dwellings from being located in portions of S~:tion 29, Township 51 South, Range 27 East. No persons spoke for or against this petition at the Planning Commission's public hearing and no con'espondence has been received. Prepared by: DONALD W. ARNOLD, AICP, DIRF..C~OR PLA.NNIlqG SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATE VINCENT A. CAUTERO, AICP, ADMINIST-RATO~, DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 16, 1997 PETITION NO. CP-97-3, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE FIDDLER'S CREEK PORTION OF MARCO SHORES PUD/DRI(TRANSMITTAL HEARING) AG'ENT/APPLICANT: Agent: George L. Varnadoe Young, van Assenderp and Varnadoe, P.A. P.O. Box 7907 Naples, FL 34101-7907 Petitioner: D Y Associates Joint Venture (Contract 4001 North Tamiami Trail, Suite 350 Purchaser) Naples, F1 34103 Owner: Gargiulo P.R., Inc. 15000 Old US-41 Naples, FL 34110 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: south side of US-41 East, the east side of the Fie PUD/DRI (F/K/A Marco ~.ho~ Planning Community. ,P1, page.) This petition seeks to: Amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to allow an unspecified number of Fiddler's Creek/Marco Urban Residential Fr~.i added to the PUD/DRI, The subject property, containing 1,385 acres, is located on the 2~ miles east of SR-951. The site abuts Fiddler's Creek portion of the Marco Shores Shores Unit 30) and is in the Royal Fakapalm (Please see location map on the following a reallocation of dwelling units in the existing approved Shores PUD/DRI, located in the Urban and Fringe designated areas, into certain lands to be located in the Agricultural/Rural area. The proposed text change is to the Agricultural/Rural D~ Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District, Agricultural/ Subdistrict, Paragraph A.I., page LU-I-39, as follows: Il 'OCT 1 ~. 1997' A. Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District 1. Agricultural/Residential Subdistrict The purpose of this Subdistrict is to protect and encourage agricultural activities while providing for low density residential use in outlying areas. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum density of I unit per 5 gross acres. Existing units approved for the Fiddler's Creek DR! may be reallocated to those parts of Sections 18~ 19 and 29f Township 51 Southt Range 27 Eastf added to Fiddler's Creek PUD at a density greater than i unit per 5 gross acres provided that no new units are added to the DR! and South Florida Water Manaqement District ~urisdictional wetland~ impacted by the DRI in said Sections do not exceed 10 acres. PURPO~{DES~IONOF~~: Based upon this petition and the submitted rezone and DRI Development Order amendment petitions, the petitioner proposes to incorporate the subject 1,385 acres into the existing Fiddler's Creek/Marco Shores PUD/DRI to develop a residential-golf course community. An unspecified number of dwelling units will be reallocated from the existing approved Fiddler's Creek/Marco Shores PUD/DRI to the added acreage; however, no additional dwelling units will be added to the overall PUD/DRI. SURRO_UND_ING LAND USEr ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Site: The site contains active farm fields and undeveloped lands, including wetlands, and is zoned A, Rural Agricultural. The property is designated Agricultural/Rural (Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District, Agricultural/Residential Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map. Surrounding Lands: North - Across US-41 East, farm fields zoned A, Rural Agricultural; concrete plant zoned I, Industrial; undeveloped land zoned TTRVC, Travel Trailer Recreational Vehicle Campground, C-4, General Commercial, and C-5, Heavy Commercial. Abutting in Section 20, sparse single family dwellings around a golf course zoned RSF-3, Residential Single Family and GC, Golf Course; undeveloped land zoned A, Rural Agricultural. All designated Agricultural/Rural, Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District, Agricultural/Residential Subdistrict. East - Mobile home park zoned VR, Village Residential; undeveloped designated land zoned A, Rural Agricultural. Ail Agricultural/Rural, Agricultural/Rural - District, Agricultural/Residential Subdistrict. OCT 1 1997 South - Excavation pit zoned A, Rural Agricultural with a conditional use; undeveloped land (wetlands) zoned A, Rural Agricultural. Ail designated Agricultural/Rural, Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District, Agricultural/Residential Subdistrict. West - Active and fallow farm fields zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development (Fiddler's Creek/Marco Shores, permits +34 acres of commercial uses; 6,000 dwelling units at a density of 2.55 DU/A; golf course; preserve areas; parks; school site; associated utilities, lakes, etc.). Designated Urban, Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. Environmental Impacts: The site presently contains active agricultural fields and a variety of habitats, including some wetland areas totaling some 375~ acres. Environmentally sensitive habitats on site will be preserved and enhanced through site design and dedicated preserve areas. The wetland areas are subject to USACOE and DEP Jurisdictional determinations and regulations. The EIS indicates the presence of some listed plant and animal species, including Bald Eagle and Gopher Tortoise. The site is not in close proximity to any wellfields or cones of influence. Effect on High Range Population Projections: Pursuant to CIE Policy 1.1.2, a significant impact in population is defined as a potential increase in county-wide population by more than 5% of the BEBR (Bureau of Economic and Business Research) high range projections. This petition does not increase the number of dwelling units. Therefore, population in the County is not increasing. The amendment eliminates 277 potential new dwelling units (1,385 acres/1 DU per 5 acres = 277 DUs). However, this petition does result in a redistribution of population from the Urban designated area into the Agricultural/Rural designated area. Public Facilities Impacts: Because this petition will not increase the number of dwelling units to be built in the Fiddler's Creek/Marco Shores PUD as a whole, and no new access points are proposed onto external roads, there should be no increased impacts upon LOS standards for any of the following public facilities: potable water, sanitary sewer, drainage, solid waste, arterial and collector roads, or parks and recreation. The subject acreage is within the Collier County water/sewer service area. OCT 1 7 APPROPRIATENESS OF CHANGE/ISSUES: in Exhibit 'J" of the application, the petitioner states the proposal to add 1,385 acres to the subject PUD/DRI is 'in order to reduce the density of the project and to provide additional recreational amenities for the residents of this community." This can be accomplished without an amendment to the GMP. The 1,385 acres can be added to the PUD/DRI, thereby reducing density, and a golf course can be approved as it is an allowed use in the Agricultural/Rural designated area. At one dwelling unit per five gross acres, the site would yield 277 dwelling units. When combined with the existing PUD, the project would actually result in not only a density reduction, but the elimination of 277 dwellings which could otherwise be constructed on the subject parcel. The petitioner references the rezone petition approved last year which added 690 acres to this same PUD, without addition of any dwelling units. Said added lands are designated Urban, Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. That rezone was deemed consistent with the FLUE based upon staff interpretation GP-50-I, rendered in May 1996. In deliberating and rendering that interpretation, staff considered the following: 1) that both the transferring and receiving properties were in the Urban designated area, even if in the Fringe areas; and, that the transfer site was believed to be unique such that application of the interpretation would not/could not be repeated (though the Marco Shores PUD was not identified in the interpretation application, this was deduced by staff). The subject amendment has been filed because staff disagreed that, and would not interpret that, the proposed reallocation of units into the Rural area was consistent with the FLUE. Rule 9J-5.006(5), F.A.C., includes guidelines to determine if a GMP amendment discourages urban sprawl. It contains a list of the primary indicators of urban sprawl, and provides the methodology to determine if they exist and to what extent. The petitioner provided a response to each of these indicators in Exhibit "J" of the application. It is staff's opinion that the primary indicators of sprawl are not present in this application, most notably due to the presence of County water and sewer facilities, adjacent developments east and north of the subject site developed at greater densities and intensities of uses than the Fiddler's Creek project, open spaces are increased, and the project will not result in any increased costs of providing roads, water, sewer, stormwater management, or other services. The Florida Department of Community Affairs is responsible for the final determination as to whether a Plan amendment encourages is in land us "sprawl". The FLUE indicates the Urban designated area accommodate higher densities and intensities of 4 ' associated urban support facilities and services as well as the ~aJority of population growth and new intensive land uses. Generally, allowable residential densities vary from 1.5-16 dwelling units per acre (DU/A), depending upon project location, type, etc. The Agricultural/Rural area is intended for low intensity land uses. Residential development is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres. Urbanization is not promoted. The subject request is not a reallocation of DUs within the Urban area - it is a reallocation from the Urban area to the Agricultural/Rural area. This transfer of dwelling units (and population) from the Urban area to the Rural area could be perceived to blur the distinction between the Urban and Rural designated areas. However, properties further to the east are ~developed at greater project densities than the Fiddler's Creek project (i.e. Boyne South at 3 dwellings per acre). Failure to provide a clear separation between rural and urban uses is an indicator of urban sprawl. The subject site is within a corridor in which there is no clear distinction indicating a transition from urban to rural designated lands given the existing zoning and development patterns. Although staff typically expresses concerns relative to precedent, staff finds no comparable PUD adjacent the Urban Boundary which might attempt to make a similar argument. The proposed PUD rezone/amendment petition, dependent upon this GMP amendment, will add the subject 1,385 acres to the existing 2,379 acre Fiddler's Creek/Marco Shores PUD, a 58% expansion in land area. The resulting density change is from 2.55 DU/A to 1.6 DU/A. This proposed text amendment is restrictive enough that a reallocation of dwelling units from the Tlrban area to the Rural area is limited to the Fiddler's Creek/Marco Shores PUD only. In summaYy, it is staff's opinion that the .subject amendment does not promote urban sprawl nor set a precedent for similar plan amendments. Staff has also completed a comprehensive review of the proposed amendment and determined that no level of service impacts will result from the amendment and that regional drainage will be enhanced through project development. Additionally, the existing development and zoning pattern along U.S. 41 in the vicinity of the project is indicative that the Urban boundary once encompassed this area, as development at true urban densities exist to the east and north of the subject parcel. The parcel is also within the Collier County water and sewer service district boundaries and is therefore not remote from urban services. 5 '" AG£1~DA ,iTEM NO. ~ lOOT 1,1 1997 That the CCPC forward Petition CP-97-3 to the BCC with a recommendation to transmit this Petition to the Florida Deparf_ment of Community Affairs and Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council. Donald W. Arnold, , Planning Services Department Director APPROVED BY: ~"~/~- ~-- DATE: V'i~cen~ ~. Cautero, AICP, Administrator ,Community Development & Environmental Services Div. Petition Number: CP-97-3 Staff Report for October 2, 1997 CCPC meeting. NOTE: This petition has been advertised for the October 14, BCC meeting. 1997 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING ~.ISSION: MICHAEL A. DAVIS, CHAIRMAN 6 '1997 APPLICATION FOR A REOUEST TO AMEND ~T~E COLLIER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Application Number Due Date Date Received Application Fee Pre-Application Conference Date Date Sufficient This Application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Office, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. (Fax #941/643-6968) The Application must be found to be sufficient for formal review within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. If insufficient, a meeting will be held between staff and the applicant, after which the Application will be returned to the applicant for completion within 30 days. For additional information on the processing of the Application see Resolution 91-521 (attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Growth Management Office, (941) 403-2300. SUBMISSION REOUIREMENTS ~ENERAL INFORMATION Name of Applicant D Y Associates Joint Ve~ture Company Parcel D Development. Inc, and Parcel Y Development. Inc. d/b/a D Y Associates Joint Venture Address 9001 Tamiami Trail. North, Suite 350 City ~aDles State ~lorida Zip 34103 Telephone Number (941)434-2030 Fax Number Be Name of Agent *~GeQrae L. Varnadoe Company Youna. van Ass.nd.rD & Varnadoe. P.A. Address ~01 Laurel Oak Drive. Suite 300 City NaDles State Florida Zip 34108 Telephone Number (941)597-2814 Fax Number (941)597-1060 Ce Name of Owner(s) of Record Gar~iulo P.R.. Inc.. a Delaware corporation Address 15000 Old U.S. 41 North City Naples State Telephone Number Florida Zip 34110 Fax Number Name, address and qualifications of additional architects, engineers, environmental consultants professionals providing information contained application. See Attachment - ConsultmnCs planners, and other in this ~ This will be the person contacted for all business relative to the application. OCT 1 ,t 1997 II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Ae LEGAL DESCRIPTION Additional Property: All of Section 18. lyina South and West of U.S. 41 and all of Section 19 and the ~orth 1/2 of Section 29, Township 51 South, Range 27 East. Collier County Florida. Existina Pro4e¢~: Sections 11. 13, 14. 15, 21, 22, 23. 24. 26 & 33. Township 51 South, Range 27 East, Sections 13. 14, 15. 21. 22, 23. 2~, 27 & 28, Township 51 South. Rands 26 East. OENERALLOCATIONThe additional property is immediately east of the existin= aDDroved..Fiddler'S Creek PUD/DRI. south of U.S. 41. and west and south of Borne South. C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Roval FakaDalm De SIZE IN ACRES Additional Property-1385 acres= Existing Project- 2379 acres. SURROUNDING LANDUSE PATTERN South - Preserve Lands= East - GC and residential, minor commercial~ North - U.S. 41. residential, a~ricult~ral, commercial= West - PUD. F. ZONING A~ricultural as to Additional Property Ge FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION Rural/A, ricultural as tp Additiona~ Property, III. TYPE OF REOUEST GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT(S) TO BE AMENDED Future Land U~ Element (text only) ~LU~ AMEND PAGE (S) LU- I - 39 OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AS FOLLOWS (Use cross throu~hs to identify language to be deleted; Use ~ to identify language to be added): A. Agricultural/Rural - Mixed Use District 1. Agricultural/Residential Subdistrict - The purpose of this subdistrict is to protect and encourage agricultural activities while providing for low density residential use in outlying area. Residential land uses maybe allowed at a maximum density of I unit per 5 gross acres. Existing units approved for the Fiddler's Cr~k DRI may be reallocated to those Darts of Section- 18. 19 and 29. Township 51 South. Rants 27 East added to Fiddler's Creek PUD a~ density ~reater than I unit Der 5 ~ross acres provided that n~ ~w units are added to the DRI and South Florida Water Management District 9urisdictional wetlands impacted bv the DRI in said Sections do not exceed 10 acres. C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM -2- lA TO N/;% OCT 1 DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N/A AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) N/A IV. ~EOUIRED INFORMATION Provide general developments (PUD, property outlined. location map showing surrounding DRI's, existing zoning) with subject ~whibit "A" - General L~cationMap Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. F=hibit "B" - Aerial Provide a map of existing land use and zoning within a radius of three hundred (300) feet from boundaries of subject property. Exhibit "C" - Land Use and Zoning Map Provide summary table of approximate acreage of land use and zoning within a radius of three hundred (300) feet from subject property. Exhibit "D" - Stunmary Table FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION Provide map of existing Future Land Use designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands· Exhibit "E" - Map of~ Futura Land Usa Delignltionl If subject property has more than one land use designation, provide acreage totals for each land use designation. A~ditional Property~ 1,385 acres designated Agricultural/Rural. Existing ProJect~ 2,379 acres designated Urban. ENVIRONMENTAL Identify native habitats and soils occurring on site and their boundaries on an aerial photograph (a scale of 1" = 200' no smaller than 1" = 400')· Habitat identification must be consistent with the Florida Department of Transportation - FloridaLand Use and Forms Classification ~ A summary table of acreage per habitat must accompany the aerial. Sea atta~hedEnv£ronmental Impact Statement Provide a summary table of Federal (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species knownto occur -3- on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site'(e.g, panther, black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.). See nttached Environmental Impact Statement Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. Not applicable, see atta~ed Exhibit · F" - Areas of Historical/Archaeological ProbabilityPlan GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT Reference 9J-11.006. F.A.C. and Collier County's Capital l~Drovement Element (CIE Policy 1.1.2) (CoDies attached)· Insert a "Y" for Yes or an "N" for No in response to the following questions. a. [ N ] Is the proposed amendment located in an area of critical state concern? (Reference 9J-II.006(1)(&)2, F.A.C.) b. [ N ] Does the proposed amendment apply to the Weikva River Protection Act? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)3, F.A.C,) c. [Y] Does the proposed amendment meet one of the exemptions to the twice per calendar year limitation on the adoption of comprehensive plan amendments? If yes, which of the following? d. [ Y ] Directly related to a proposed DeveloPment of Regional Impact, pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S.? (Reference 9J-11.006(1) (&)4.&, F.A.C.) e. IN] Directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity, pursuant to Subsection 163.3187(1) (c), F.S. (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)4.b, F.A.C.) f. [NJ An Emeraencv, as defined in Subsection 163.3187(1) (a), F.S., which must accompany a statement setting forth the facts and circumstances justifying the emergency? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)4.c, F.A.C.) Is the amendment proposed under a Joint planning agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3171, F.S.? If yes, list local governments included in the agreement. NO (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(m)5, F.A.C.) Document the effect the proposed amendment will have on BEBR high range population projections as identified in -4- IE U date and indicate mitigation measures the current C P ...... ~ ~. ~vonosed amendment. being proposed in con~unc=xon t i act in population is defined as a A significan mp. _ . ~- ~-lation by more than antis1 increase Bl~%tof BEBR high range population pro]et=Ions. No i~crease in population is proposed. (Reference CIE Policy 1.1.2) Describe the proposed land use and indicate if it is an increase to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district (commercial, individual, etc.) or i a~ion or district identified on the a new land use des g~_ _ anal sis to support Future Land Use Map% ~ro¥~d~ta~d ~rol~o~sed use, and the suitability o£ lanu ~ ~ compatibility of use with surrounding concerns protection of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural reservations. The proposed land use of PUD is merely a shifting of existing approved density to n~ lends, r~su}~%ng in_~n it reduction because no ne~e awe~ng units overall dens y ...... ~-~n of new lands. The new will be generates Dy =ne auu,~*- - ~ eviouelv approved lands are only a receiving area dwelling units. ~UBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) andO document the impact proposed change will have on the LOS for the following public facilities: ional roperty lays wi=hin ~he eervic? are~ The addit P .... ~ ...... ~-*---~ewer District and boundaries of t~. ~ol~er_~.u~'~.~'~r-ovidere currently Rookery Bay Utility ~~' ;~n[ty ol ~e s~ect le~e l~ds in ~e ~ediate , proper=Y. I= is preferred ~ha~ =he C~Y · Wa~er-S~er Di~tric~ provide ~er ~d s~er ee~ices ~o ~e ~Jec~ property. a. Potable Water - b. Sanitar~ Sewer c. Arterial and Collector Roads - d. Drainage e. solid Waste - f. Parks and Recreation - g. Mass Transit - li!te P ...... ~ of ~his Collier C~unty Growth units proposes Management plan Amandmen~. -5- If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density or intensity for com~ercial and/or industrial development that would cause the Level of Service for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. No auch~ncreaee is proposed. (Reference CIE Policy 1.1.5) Provide a map showing location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e., water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services). Exhibit "G" - Map o£ Existing Services and Utilities Document proposed method of service, identify provider, and describe the effect proposed change will have on schools, fire protection, and emergency medical service. SERVICE Education ' Fire Protection Emergency Medical Services PROVIDER Collier County Public Schools East Naples Fire Control District Collier County Emergency Medical Services FACILITY School Fire EMS F. OTMER Identify flood zone based upon Flood Insurance Rate Map data. Exhibit "H" - Flood Zone Map Identify location of wellfields and cones of influence in relation to subject property. (Identified on the Collier County Zoning Maps). Exhibit "I" - Wellfields and Cones Location Map 3. Identify areas of the property that are applicable to: be An area of critical state concern, pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S.; N/A Traffic Congestion Boundary; N/A and Coastal Management Boundary, all are delineated on the Future Land Use Map. All of proposed A~dition. -6- OCT 1 If applicable, identify areas of the property within high noise contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). N/A SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION A non refundable filing fee in the amount of $2,100 for language changes in the Plan is due at the time of Application submittal. An additional fee of $30 per acre in this Application. is required for each affected acre A check for the total amount due should be made payable to the Board o~ County Commissioners. A~dit~onal $30.00 fee not applicable. 2. Proof of ownership (copy of deed). See attache~ .Option A~reement". 3. Letter of Authorization. If the Agent is not the Owner(s) of Record, a Notarized Letter of Authorization must be provided by the Owner(s). See atta=he~ .Consent Authorization". 4. Submit one original, signed, complete Application with all attachments, plus 25 copies of the complete Application. 5. Submit 25 copies of each map. Each map shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways, and shall be at a I to 400' foot scale or at a scale asO determined during the pre-application meeting. DISCUSSION OF NECESSITY FOR AMENDMENT AND URBAN SPRAWL Please refer to the attached Exhibit "J" Fiddler's Creek Growth Management Plan Amendment Discussion. -7- OCT '1 7 FIDDLER'S CREEK GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT DISCUSSION 951 Land Holdings Joint Venture, developer of Fiddler's Creek, (F/K/A Marco Shores Unit 30), a Development of Regional Impact 951 and south of U.S. 41 is proposing ated east of S.R. (DRI), loc ..... -~--,o Creek in order to reduce_ to add 1,385 acres o: lanu to. =.~_~_~ ~ .... ~m in the number o£ the density of the project ~w~:n no ~,,~-~- its and to proviae additional recreational a~nities approved ~._ ) .... =~ .... ,,4~=. ~is additional pro~Y ~s ~or tAe resxaen=s o: un~y ~,,-,,-T-~= __ ---~-.,~*,,~- /Rural on the zoned Agricultural and desx~a=eo as ~=~ ...... 1. Future Land Use Map. dment is being filed simultaneously wx=n a =u~ -~,. ~= Plan Amen -- -~ ...... ~-ent may or may no: ~e amendment and DRI NO ....... ~---~-- -~ m--sitv on the additional 1,385 acres, ~oca~ed immediately adjacent to PP Creek DRI, at its eastern boundary. The developer proposes to shift a portion of Fiddler's Creek's existing approved density to the additional property, but does no~ request any new or additional density that it would otherwise be eligible for because of the additional property. With approval of the additional property, the density of Fiddler's Creek would be reduced from 2.5 units per acre to 1.6 units per acre. Similar PUD and DRI Amendments for Fiddler's Creek were approved in November, 1996, when 690 acres, zoned Agricultural and designated as Urban Residential Fringe on the Future Land Use Map, were added to the development. These amendments were accomplished without the necessity of a Growth Managemenu Plan Amendment, based upon a formal interpretation of the Plan. This interpretation, Interpretation GP-50-1, found that although the Plan limits density in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to 1.5 units per acre, existing approval density in excess of 1.5 units per acre could be transferred from Urban area lands to lands within the Subdistric~ if no new units were generated by the newly added lands. The clarity and logic of Interpretation GP-50-1 are equally applicable to the current development proposal, to transfer existing approved density from Urban and Urban Residential Fringe to Agricultural/Rural lands at a density greater than Plan lands limitation of i unit per 5 acres for Agricultural/Rural lands. Like the previous PUD and DRI Amendments, the property being added is generating no dwelling units and instead is merely a receiving area for previously approved density. The Planning Services staff is unwilling =o extend the application of Interpretation GP-50-1 to the present PUD and DRI Amendments to add Agricultural/Rural lands, and has requested that a Plan Amendment be filed to accomplish the density transfer. The developer of Fiddler's Creek has acceded to staffs' request by filing this Plan Amendment, however, the developer does not waive and expressly reserves the right to present argument at public hearings that =his Plan Amendment is no= necessary, and that the transfer of existing 1 acres is consistent with Plan based upon Interpretation GP-50-1. Planning Services staff requested that the applicant address whether, the plan amendment would induce or encourage 'ur~ sprawl. Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, lists thirt~ (13) primary indicators that a Plan Amendment does not discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. This Plan Amendment does not give rise to any of the indicators contained in this Rule of the Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Therefore, the Fiddler's Creek Plan Amendment is not an example of, nor does it encourage the proliferation of, urban sprawl. The thirteen primary indicators of urban sprawl, as identified in DCA's Rule, are listed below along with soma of the reasons why this Plan Amendment does not cause them. ~: Promotes, allows or designs=es for development substantial areas of the Jurisdiction to develo~ as low- intensity, low-density, or single-use development or uses in excess of demonstrated need· THIS PLAN development Shores Unit accommodate portion of AMENDMENT: Fiddler's Creek is an approved of regional impact which is part of the Marco 30 DRI that was approved initially, in 1984, to more than 9,000 units. The Fiddler's Creek Unit 30 is a planned, integrated community consisting of residential, recreational, social, and commercial uses, along with impressive amounts of wpreserve' and open space areas. There are commercial, recreational and social amenities on-site to address the daily needs of ~ residents of this community. It is no= a single- development. The amendment at issue does not increase number of residential units above the 6,000 units that are currently approved. The area affected by the plan amendment will be incorporated in the Fiddler's Creek Master Plan and does not "promote, allow or designate" an area in Collier County for a single use in excess of demons=rated need. The plan amendment is necessary to implement a specific Master Plan for Fiddler's Creek which has been reviewed and approved by Collier County pursuant to the DRI process and will be subject to additional DRI NOPC review to approve the land that is being added. There is a demonstrated need for the spreader ~wale and surface water management system that will be aided by =his amendment and is being incorporated as part of the Fiddler's Creek DRI/PUD. This water management system will provide a substantial benefit to Collier County in its effort to solve the drainage problems from the north of and adjacent to U.S. 41 that have existed in this area for years. ~: Promotes, allows or designates significate amounts of urban development to occur in rural areas a= subs=an=iai distances from existing urban areas while leaping over undeveloped lands which are available development. 2 amendment is immediately east Fiddler's Creek project. The current project is within the area and, :herefore, the proposed addition will not 'urban" _ _ cons:itute leapfrog devel°pmenc' This land will be part of an approved DRI/PUD master plan consisting of residential, The amendment does no: leap reational and commercial uses. development. T .... =- ~-.. -~ ~--~s and the various es alon U.S. 41. Further, property to :ne eaa~ a,- land us g · ~--- ,~ - ~eater distance from the urban area} are zoned anu ~,.u ...... ~ uses. .~J.P.,~l~: Promotes, allows or designates urban developmen~ in radial, strip, isolated or ribbon patterns generally emanating from existing urban developments. THIS PLANAMENDMENT: As can be seen from the proposed Master Fiddler's Creek is a logical an the proposed addition to -and will constitute an integral part cterized as either .radial, strip, isolated or ribbon chars ...... =---~ ~^-o not .~romote, allow W~'' ..... V-.~ .-- ........ ~-~ ~f%~ or ot~er or designate" ln~ustrla£, comm=~u~, ........ uses along the portion of U.S. 41 that forms the northern the .rs err ; nor is the proposed plan amendment border of P P Y . -=- ~er's Creek er uses. ~-= ~rea. ~art of the de=eloping apies- arco potable water than the current agricultural operation permitted to consume annually. This amendment preserves wetlands and open ~ ~ace and £ncreas~ OCT 1 A 1997 3 Island .growth area. ~: As a result of premature or poorly planned conversion of rural land to other uses, fails adequately to protect and conserve natural resources, such as wetlands, floodplains, native vegetation, environmentally sensitive areas, natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas, lakes, rivers, shorelines, beaches, bays, estuarine systems, and other significant natural systems. THIS PLAN AMENDMENT: The majority of the land comprising the Growth Management Plan Amendment is cleared and has been used for decades as farmland for the production of row crops. Virtually all of the land to be actively developed has been previously cleared for agricultural purposes. This land will be incorporated as part of the Master Plan to Fiddler's Creek DRI. The Master Plan calls for the creation of a creek (Fiddler's Creek) and spreader swale system that should protect and enhance the state owned wetlands to the south. In addition, the developer has agreed to provide an easement so that run-off from north of U.S. 41 can be accommodated in the spreader swale system which will assist the County in its efforts to reduce existing drainage problems in the area. Once approved the Fiddler's Creek DRI will consume less , is recreational uses without adding any residentialunits to the number previously approved for the Fiddler's Creek project. A system of lakes will be created on the land and all natural wetland areas will be preserved as shown on the DRI Plan. Fiddler's Creek's cooperation with Collier County result in a reduction of overall residential density Fiddler's Creek and a significant benefit to the area's drainage system affecting state owned wetlands and estuarine systems to the south and west of the Fiddler's Creek project. The existence of any listed native vegetative species and environmentally sensitive areas has been determined, and, as appropriate, are protected by the attach, dM aster Plan. .L~LC.A~: Fails adequately to protect adjacent agricultural areas and activities, including silviculture, and including active agricultural and silvicultural activities as well as passive agricultural activities and dormant, unique, and prime farmlands and soils. THIS PLAN AMENDMENT: Although the land in question has been cleared and used for agricultural production of row crops for years, the land is only marginally productive, which is one reason that the agricultural operations on this parcel are being abandoned. The agricultural characteristics of the land in questions are neither "unique" nor "prime". There are no "existing adjacent agricultural areas and activities" to the south or east of the subject plan amendment acreage. To the north is U.S. 41 and to the west, the existing Fiddler's Creek project. Therefore, there are no adjacent agricultural areas which need to be "protected", or which are affected by amendment. ~~T_Q~: Fails to maximize use of existing public facilities and services. (See response to No. 7, below.) /k~_L~.Q~: Fails to maximiz~ use of future public facilities and services. ~ AMENDMENT: The are~ under consideration will be incorporated within the Fiddler's Creek DRI/PUD. Since this amendment will not change the number of approved residential units in Fiddler's Creek, the previously approved utilization of public facilities and services will not change. The Fiddler's Creek DRI will utilize existing centralized water and sewer facilities and services. The property which is the subject of this GMP amendment is within the existing Collier County Water-Sewer District and Rookery Bay Utility Company "service areas boundaries." The approved transportation access points for Fiddler's Creek are on S.R. 951 and U.S. 41., and will not be changed or increased by this amendment. The Fiddler's Creek project provided fill for the widening of S.R. 951, pursuant to the DRI Development Order. The Fiddler's Creek development constitutes urban infill development within the developing Nap~d corridor. The Fiddler's Creek DRI, as appro~ed,_~~imi~ the use of both existing and future publLc facili=£es /~3_~T~: Allows for land use patterns or timing which disproportionately increase the cost in time, money and energy of providing and maintaining facilities and services, including roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, management, law enforcement, education, health care, fire and emergency response and general government. T~IS PLAN AMENDMENT= The proposed growth management plan amendment will result in the addition of 1,385 acres Fiddler's Creek, without any increase in =he number of approved residential units within the DRI/PUD. Since there will be no increase in the number of approved units, =here will be no increase in the population of Fiddler's Creek. There will be no change in =he impacts resulting from the development of Fiddler's Creek, as previously reviewed and approved in the PUD\DRI processes. This plan amendment will not cause any increase in the impacts or the costs of providing facilities and services listed in =he above sprawl indicator. ~: Fails to provide a clear separation between rural and urban uses. ~T~IS PLAN AMENDMENT: Given the location of this growth management plan amendment, this factor is not applicable. The existing Fiddler's Creek development is immediately west of the plan amendment area; state owned wetlands and preserve areas are to the south of the land; U.S. 41 forms the northern boundary and there is additional residential/golf course use to the east. 10. ~]/DJ~T_Q~: Discourages or inhibits infill development or =he redevelopment of existing neighborhoods and communities. TI{IS PLAN AMENDMENT: The area of this growth management plan amendment is immediately east of the Fiddler's Creek development, and west of a residential/golf course community. Therefore, the uses proposed for the plan amendment area are characteristic of "infill" development. The amendment is a logical extension of the Fiddler's Creek project, within which it will be absorbed. It will not have any negative effect on any neighborhoods or communities. Further, since it is utilizing existing density, it cannot be discouraging infill or redevelopment activities. 11. /~: Fails to encourage an attractive and functional mix of uses. 12. THIS PLAN AMENDMENT: The Fiddler's Creek project is a master planned community which is an attractive and functional mix of uses. In the larger context, Fiddler's Creek is a part of the Naples/Marco Island/U.S. 41 area which is experiencing rapid growth and where there are many land uses. ~: Results in poor accessibility related land uses. 5 OCTI . 1997 13. THIS PLAN AMENDMENT: The Fiddler's Creek DRI road network will incorporate, and be internally linked with the area comprising the Growth Management Plan Amendment. Fiddler's Creek, including this area, is also accessible to U.S. 41 and S.R. 951. ,II:/l~I.~l)~J~: Results in the loss of significant amounts W functional open space. THIS PLAN AMENDMENT: The addition of this land to Fiddler's Creek will change the existing land use for agricultural row crops to low-density residential with significant increases in areas for lakes, golf courses, preserves, parks and other open space. The incorporation of the land into Fiddler's Creek will increase the functions and quality of the open space (plowed fields) currently on this site. Existing wetland areas on-site will be preserved. As can be determined based on the above, this Growth Management Plan Amendment will not result in the presence of any of the primary indicators of urban sprawl specified in DCA's Rule 9J- 5.006(5) (g), Florida Administrative Code. l'£1ddlers\l~lnasm~d (disc), ppr 6 OCT '1997 JUI 18 997 pUBLIC WO1U(S DIVISION June 12, 1997 George L. Vamadoe, Atiorney Young, Vanassende~p & Varnadoe, P.A. 801 Lam~l OskDrive Naples, FI 3410g 3~01 E. TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPIF. S, FL ~4112 (941) 732-257~ FAX (941) 7~2-2~26 I tmderstand that Gulf Bay Contmurdties now has plans to expand the Fiddlers Creek Development into the eastern portions of the South Coast Vegetable Farm. I've had plans for years to construct a U.S.. 41 OuIf~ Swale No. 2 along the south side of US-41 and thence south alon~ the east side ofthis tract to provide flood reliefand drainage outlets for those properties north U$-41. The shallow swale alon~ ~ east side of the project will have an approximate top width of 85 feet plus an appropriate maintemmce travelway. This proposed stormwater outfall system would eventually tie into Fiddler's Creek Ion~ spreader canal which will allow for the r~storation of hbtori~ shee~ow into the adjacent jurisdictioml I was pleased to learn of your clients willingness to cooperate in routin~ the stormwate~ runoffthat flows throu~ the several culverts under US-41 around the Fiddlers Creek project. It should be a win/win situation for all parties involved. Very Iruly yours, John H. Boldt, P.E., P.S.M. S~ Msm~emen~ Director JHB/mts cc: Ed Itschna., Public Works Administrator Mark Strain, Gulf Bay Commtmities Steve Means, P.E., Wdson/Miller Robert C. Wiley, P.E., Project Mannger III, O.C.P.M. T'tm Richnrd~n, Real Property Management NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED by ~ Boml of CourW ~ of 27 28 29 31 39 41 42 43 44 4.5 46 47 48 49 51 52 57 THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after mot~'L s~.,ond and rt~ vote day of ., 1997. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK. Ciera BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, ChaPman .*,,o~oved is to focm and legal sufrcie~'y: MARJORIE M. STUDENT County Attorney 00T 14 1997 f t ~ EXHIBIT 'A" 14 IIXJlII<I m ~r4 ,"~'~,,,~,,' .-' '~" - . . - ~ -..,.--= ~.,..-~-,...~,.~ ~~1. ~ L~, 15 ~~~~~~~~ ....... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITJON NO. PUD-9?-9, ~lOl:lN p. A~;H£R, P.E., OF COASTAL ENGINEER/NG CONSULTANTS. INC., REPRESENTING THE CLUB ESTATES. L.C.. FOR A REZONF, FROM ~A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT ])]~VELOPMENT FOR A PRO,CT TITLED THE CLUB ESTATES PUD CONTAINING A DEVELOPMEN[ STRATEGY CONSISTING OF TWNETY-I~IGHT (28) SINGLE FAMILY O~,-~ACtIi~D ~:[OUSING LOTS AND HOM"ES ON A TO'IAL SITE AREA QF 155.8 ACRES. LOCA-i'~:D ON ~ W~_-ST SIDE OF C.R. 951 (ISLES OF CAPRI ROAD~ IMMEDIA'IELY CONIIGUOU:) TQ ~ PROPERTY KNOWN AS NAPLES NATIQNAL GOLF AND COUNTRY ClUB IN SECTION 10. TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST~ COLLIER (~OUNTY~ FLORID~ OBJECTIVE: This pelition seeks to rezone certain property as hereinafter described from its current zoning classification of"A" 'Rural Agricultural to "PUD" Planned Unit Development. CONSIDERATIONS: The property consisting of approximately 156 acres is located on the west side of CR-95 ] immediately south of the Naples National Golf and Country Club. Further, the property lies within the urban residentially designated area on the FLUE and the density rating system authorizes up to three dwelling units per acre. The PUD is designed to achieve a total of twenty-eight (28) single-family home sites for a density of 0.18 dwelling units per acre. Staff' with juristictional responsibilities relative to elements of the GMP and divisions of the LDC reviewed the petition. This review advises that this petition, if approved, would not be inconsistent with any applicable elements of the GMP. Development commitments contained within the PUD are responsive to requirements for consistency with divisions of the LDC The Transportation Circulation Element of the GM~ trafficway maps which establish right-of-way alignments for planned major roads advises that an east-west fight-of-way reservation be applied to the south side of the subject property. The PUD Master Plan and development commitments se~ion of the PUD do not make provision for the right-of-way and its dedication. The Planning Commission debated this provision and ultimately recommended approval of the PUD with the condition that appropriate amendments be made to provide a sixty (60) foot right-of-way along the south side of the property. The CCPC further advised that the trafficway maps be reevaluated to determine whether or not this east/west corridor is needed and the likelihood of its permitting success in view of environmental conditions in this general area. AGENDA,ITEM No. ~ OCT ! 4 1997 The EAB recommended approval of this petition subject to conditions which are needed to address environmental conditions of the site and to ensure that its development is consistent with natural resources protection regulations. Similarly, the surface water management system was reviewed by the EAB and appropriate stipulations are included in the PUD. The CCPC heard ~ petition on September 18, 1~97, They recommended approval with the condition that the PUD be amended to provide for a t~ture east-west road along the south side of the property. No person spOke or otbe~se communicated any opposition to this petition. The property owner to the south indicated that they favored the provision oran east/west road corridor between their property and the subject property. FISCAL IMI~ACT: This petition by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this amendment achieves its objective, the land will be developed. The mere fact that new development has been approved will result in a future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help off-set the impact of each new development on public fadlhies. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee colleaions are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. GROWTIt MANAGEMENT I~IPACT: As described above, the land use, density and intensity of development of the subject property were deemed to be consistent with the FLUE to the GMP. Other related consistency reviews were also found to be consistent by virtue of the way in which development conditions were addressed, and the strategy devised for regulating the manner of development. In view of the consistency findings, staff' finds that there is no negative or other adverse impact to the GMP resulting from the adoption of this petition. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance No. 90-24 at the earliest or next to occur of either final SDP approval, final plat approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this development. I~ISTORIC/ARCHAEOIA3GICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and trcbeeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. 2 OCT 14 lgg? · ' RNh~a,I~.fI~IARY/PUD 97.9 3 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: CO CC A~. PETITION NO: OWNER/AGEI~: COMMISSION SERVICES DMSION PUD-97.9 THE CLUB ESTATES Agent: MR. JOHN P. ASHER, P.E. COASTAL ENGINEERING CONgULT~, INC. 2800 S. HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 THE CLUB ESTATES, LC. 4141 ISLE OF CAPRI ROAD NAPLES, FLORIDA 34112 (Charles V. B~nton, Ph.D, Principal) Contrac~ Pur~ REOUESTED ACTION; 'l'Ms petition seeks to have certain prope~y ns herein described rezoned from its cra'rent zoning classification of"A" Rural Agricultural to "PUD" Planned Unit Development. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The property fronts upon the west side of CR-951 and ties im_m__ediately contiguous the south side of the Naples National Golf Club in the South ½ of Section I0, Township 48 South, Range 25 East (See Ioc~on map following page). FURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PRO,fECT~ This petition espouses a Planned Un/t Development sWategy for approx/mately 156 acres of land that would attthorize twenty-eight (28) single family homes. Lakes and Conservation areas occupy 93.8 acres or 6(P,4 ofthe project area. EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing: The property is currently vacant which includes a ~ of upland and wetland f majority o.f th, sit~ watsi~ =oti~ The dominant exotic specie is |_. Sun'ounding: eastern portion of the site supports pine flatwoods while the western portion tttplx~ cypress growth. The property is zoned "A" Rural To the north the land is developed in part by an eighteen-hole golf course. However, the great majority of the land that is part of the ~olf Development in which the use is limited to a golf coursc and ancillary and accessory golf East - To the east lies CR-951, while opposite the subject property the land is vacant and zoned Rura A~icu~tum. South - To the south the land is vacant but zoned "PUD" Planned Unit Development (Casa del Sol) for a residential development of small lots anticipating affordable housing. The Casa del Sol PUD was recently reviewed under the County's PUD sunsetting provision. A two (2) year extension was given to the PUD. West- To the west the land abuts the Nsples Heritage PUD, a mixed use residential/goffcourse comm~ty which is actively under development. GROWTH MANAGE~ PLAN CONSISTENCY: The property is located within the Urban-Mixed Use-Urban Residential desi~,,t,-d area on the FLUE to the FLUE Map. This is a policy directive which essentially acknowledges that residential rezoning of Agriculturally zoned land, given its timing in relationship to i,~frasuvctttre availability, would be an appropriaIe course of action. A consistency analysis with applicable elements of the GMI' is as follows: FLUE and DensiW - By virtue of its location in the urban residential designated area, a zoning action estab~g an urban residential development as proposed is consistent with the FLUE. The proposed number of dwelling units is twenty-eight (28) for a density of one dwelling unit for each 5.57 acres of land. The density otherwise allowed by the FLUE density rating ~ is three (3) dwelling units per acre. Thc proposed density is dramatically less than otherwise n~ty be allowed. Traffic Circulation Element - Site generated traffic will not exceed the significance percent of the LOS "C" design volume) on CR-951. In addition, the project trips level of service below any adopted LOS "D" stand"rd withln the pr°ject" radius If d~'"~°l~iP~'2 influence (P,.DI). Therefore, the project is consistent with Policy $.1 and $.2 of the Traffic Circulation Element (TCE). The TCB lists CR-951 in the pwject area as a four-lane ane.'~al wad fronting the project. The ~t traffic count for this road is 16,915 which results in LOS "B" operation. No roadway improvement for CR-951 will be required for to satisfy level of r, ervice ard conc~u'macy requirements for future development. The proposed subdivision will not create or excessively increase traffic congestion Within the project's RDI and complies with policies 1.3, 5.1, taxi 7.3 ofthe TCE. Conserv~on and _O0en S_oace - Acreage qualifying as jurisdictional preser"es and open sp~ce totals 94.5 acres which constitutes more than sixty (60) perccn! of thc land area exclusive of land th~ will be devoted to open space in connection With each homesite. Native vegetation preservation or re- vegetation requirements of thc LDC Will be achieved by the design for preservation acres, therefore, the Conservation and Open Space clement of the GMP is achieved by the PUD development strategy. Utilities and Manaeement - Development of the land will proceed on the basis of connection to the County's sewer and water distribution system. Once these utility lines are completed in acx. ordan~ with County standards, they will be deeded to the Collier County Water-Sewer District as prescn~ by County Ordinances. Water management .facilities will be constructed to meet County Ordinance requirements. These will be reviewed and approved as a function of obtaining subsequent development order approvals. The above prescribed course of action makes this petition consistent with this element of the GMP. ~ISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outsi:le an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the course of site clearing, excavation or other construction activity an historic or archaeological artifact is found, all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Depar~ent contacted. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAl-_ TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE: The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate statTresponsiblc for oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This primarily includes a review by thc Community Development Environmental and Engine,'ring staff, and thc Transportation Department. The petition was reviewed by the EAB on August 6, 1997 and they recommended ~proval subject to certain revisions to the PUD which have been included in the PUD document. Jurisdictional staff also made recommendation for modification of PUD provisions to ensure compliance with LDC requirements and these are also included in the PUD regulations. Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land u~e petition and the ~teria~~ ,~ comprehensive overview of the impact of the proposed land use change, be it positix'e or negative, cutting in a staff recommendation based on that comprehensive overview. The lis:ed criteria are specificaI1y noted in Section 2.?.2.$ and Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff' evaluation and comment, and shall be used as the basis for a recommendation of' the approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners. Each of' the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review arc listed under each of the criterion noted and are categorized as either pro or con, whichever the case may be, in the opinion of the staff. Staff review of each of the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. These evaluations are completed as separate documents and are attached to thc staff report. Appropriate evaluation of petitions for re'zoning should establish a factual basis for supportive action by appointed smi elected decision makers. The evaluation by professional staff should typically include an analysis of the petition's relationship to the community's future land use plan, and whether or not a re'zoning action would be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan in all of its related elements. Other evaluation considerations should include an assessment of adequacy of transportation infrastructure, other infi-astmcture, and compatibility with adjacent land uses., a consideration usually dealt with as a facet of analyzing the relationship of the rezoning action to the long range plan for futura land uses. Notwithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants for adequate findings to support a rezoning action advise as follows: Relationship to Future and Existinl Land L .~es . A discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal l-~'s for land use planning, refers to the relationship of the proposed zoning action to the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. As reported above the Future Land Use Plan acknowledges the entir~ area as an m'~ where urban residential development is expected to occur. The Master Plan illustrates a development at far less density than otherwise could have been requested. Regarding the matter of timing, it should be appreciated that urban residential development is under development on the adjacent Naples Heritage PUD. After considering the availability of community infrastruc~ and services it is clear that the development of the subject property is timely and consistent with the FLUE to the GMP. The development strategy is limited to single family detached housing on lot areas ofnot less than 20,000 square feet. Environmental characteristics of the site sre such that a relatively small portion of the land can be developed and therefore the project, based on a gross density relationship projects a density that is consistent with the agricultural district. The development ~ governing the placement of sins!: family homes are unique in the sense that no lot will share a common boundary with another lot. The effect of this development regulation is that yard requirements will be most s~ilar to those of the agricultural district. It is noteworthy that the minimum floor area for residences will be 3,000 square feet. With respect to the matter of compatibility, this is an evaluation whose primary focus is similarity of land use and not density as so often misctmsmied. In the c~se at hand, and ~ upon the Future Land Use Plan we have an expectation that the land will be used for urban residential purposes, and in fact the prop,my is i .roll-'ted by residential development on its west side and sa approved but as yet undeveloped residential PUD lies south of the subject property. Clearly this is expcct~! to be pan of a larger residential district smd any form of compatrole with development objectives for the area. 00'1' 14 1997 ~ ...... t.., ~,,--,.,,,,,.~, ,.,.v ~,,~, pctmon W~ll not exceed 5 percent ofthe LOS "C" design capacity within the project's RDI. Furthermore, the site generated trips will not create a concurrency problem because the project trips don't lower the overall road capacity below any adopted LOS "D" standard. No roadway improvement for CR-951 will be required for to satisfy level ofservice and concurrency requirements for futm'e development. The proposed subdivision will not create or excessively increase traffic congestion within the project's RD! and complies with policies 1.3, 5.1, $.2 and 7.3 of the TCE. Therefore, no road improvement or project phasing schedule for this subdivision is required. Based on the above, the rezoning of this property is consistent with the County's plan for transportation relationships. ~ - The Collier County sewer and water system will be extended into the property and provide these services to each residential lot. System improvements are required to comply with provision of the County's utility ordinance wi,ich requires conveying the improvement to the County upon their acceptance. All development must comply with surface water management requirements invoked at the time of subdividing as the case will be for development of this land. Any excavation required to vacillate the project's surface water management plan will be required to obtain an excavation permit and comply with the rules of the S~. Community Infrastructl!re__ia.{l_~=~t~ - The subject property is readily accessible to a range of community infrastmc~e and services which is enhanced by its location on CR-951, a four-lane divided County arterial road. Shopping centers and various'types ofpersonal services are available a short driving distance. The Edison Community College and K through 12 school facilities are located in the Lely Resort community approximately one and on-half' miles to the south. The property lies within the Golden Gate Fire District. Provision of the GMP Public Facilities Map advises that a fire station be located near the intersection of Davis Boulevard and CR-951. CAtrrently, the nearest fire station is at CR-951 and Golden Gate Parkway. Colli~ County library nad emergency medical services are located on U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail E.). PUD Document and Master Plan - PUD Document - The Club Estates is obviously intended to be a small exclusive single family residential development and the PUD document is designed to reflect that objective. The development sh~ndards are most si_milm, to those of the agricultural district regarding setbacks and space between houses. The PUD contains all of the recomm___endations of reviewing staff'and the EAB. ~ - The l~.,iaster Plan provides one point of interconnection with CR-951 which provides access to a single looped street system around the most easterly perimeter of the property. There are no interconnections with adjacent property. This type of design response is developments in Collier County and these developments have not posed any relative to access and emergency service responses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Staff r~ommends tlut the Collier County P!anning Commission (CCPC) recommend approval of Petition PUD-97-9 The Club F.,~tes u provided by the PUD Document and Master Plan that will become an exhibit to the Ordinance of Adoption. DATE ' DATE . .? ' · CA~3TERO, AD]V[tNISTRATOR ]~ATE COMMUN'IT~ DEV. AND ENVIRO~AL SVCS. Petition Number PUD-97-9 Staff Report for September 18, 1997 CCPC meeting. Note: This petition has been advertised for the September 18, 1997 BCC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY P~COMMISSION: MICHAEL A. DAVIS, RN/denSTAFF REPORT/PLfD.97-9 Staff'Report 6 OCT 14 1997 FINDINGS FOR PUD PUD-97-9 Section 2.7.3.2.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the following The suitabmty of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed In relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traflle and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. fro.. O) Intensifying land development patterns produces economics of scale relative to public utilities, facilities and scrvi~ which ar~ currently available in this (ii) The ext~t that location choice is erthanced for rcsidential environments witt~ the urban area reduces the push on urban sprawl. (iii) The subject property is served by a network of arterial roads, all of which are well within the urbanized area providing e~t3t acce~ to a host of community services and facilities. (iv) Comprehensive multi-disciplined analysis supports the suitability of the land /'or the uses proposed. Con.' (i) As with all actions that intensify urban development pauems there is some loss to travel time for users of the same arterial wad system. Summary Findlnv; Jurisdictional reviews by Cotmty staff' support the manner and pattern of development proposed for the subject property. Development conditions contained in the PUD document give assurance that all in~vasu-uctm~ will be developed and be consistent with County r~uhtions. Any inadequ~es which require supplementing the PUD document will be recommended to the Board of County will assure compliance with Level of Scrvice relationships as prescn'bed by the Grom~ Management Plan. Adequacy of evidence of unlned control and mftablHty of any prolmsed agreements, ~n~ra~ ct, or other Instruments, or for amendments In those proposed, particularly ey may rmate to arrangements or provblons to be made for th~ operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are aotfo maintained at pnbHe expense, 3. r OCT 1 / o ~ Evahtation not applicable. Summary Finding; Documents submitted with thc application provide evidence of unified control. Thc PUD document makes appropriate provisions for continuing operation and maintenance of common areas. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. Pro: (i) The development strategy for thc subject property is entirely consistent with thc soals, objectives and policics of the Growth Management Plan. ~ (i) None. Summary Find!agi The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, obj~ives ~nd policies of thc Growth Management Plan. A more detailed description of this conformity is addressed in the Staff Report. Additional Finding: Thc subject property is designated U"ban-Mixed-Use - Urban Residential on the FLUE to the GMP. As such it authorizes zoning actions aimed at allowing the land to be used for urban residential purposes at the density proposed. This petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff for compliance with the applicable elements of the Growth Management Plan, and was found to be consistent with all applicable elements. Future Land Usc Element - Consistency with FLUE requirements is further described as follows: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requfrements. Evaluation not av/flicable. Summary Flndln~ The PUD Master Plan has bee~ designed to optimize internal land use relationship throu~ the usc of various forms of open space sepsratign. External relationships are automatically regulated by the Land Development Code to assure harmonious relationships between projects. 2 OCT ! 4 1997 The adequacy of usable open space arens in existence and as proposed to serve the development. ~ Evalu~t/on not applicable. Summary Finding_: The amount of open space set aside by this project is greater than the provisions of the Land Development Code. e The [Jrn!ng or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available Improvements and facilities, both public and private. Evaluation not applicable. Summarv Flndfn~_: Timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency roquirements is not a sigrfificant problem. See finding No. 1, also applicable for this finding. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Pro/Cop: Evaluation not applicable. Snmmarv Finding; Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastmc~ such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, is supportive of conditions emanating bom urban development. This assessment is described at length in the staff report adopted by the CCPC. Relative to this petition, development of the subject property is timely, because supporting infrastructure is available. Confortnlty with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations In the particular case, based on detsrmination that such modifications are Justified ns meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to Hteral application of such regulations. ~ Eval.~tion not applicable. Summary Finding; This finding essentially requir~ an evaluation of the extent to which development standards proposed for this PUD depart fi'om development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning dis~'ict. The development standards in this PUD ar~ similar to thOSe St~ ttS~ for particular housing stmctur~ and associated area requirements. FINDI~TGS FOR PUD-97-9/md AG£lq, DA~f.M · OCT 1 i 1991 ] REZONE FINDINGS PETITION PUD-97-9 Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and pollcle~ and Futur~ Land Use map and the elemenU of the Gromlt Mantgomeut Plan. Evaluation not applicable. Summary Finding; The proposed development is in compliance with the Ftmn-e hnd Us~ Element of the Growth Management Plan for Collier County end ~11 otha- clements, their objectives and policies. The urban residential FLUE designation, applicable to the property, antic/pates a zoning action to any residential zoning district inclusive of PUD's so long as the an~orized density is co~sistent with the density rating system to the FLUE. Companion PUD Findings evaluation as well as the adopted CCPC staff r~por~ addresses this same finding. The existing land use pattern; Evaluation not applicable. Existing: The property is currently vacant which includes a mixture of upland and wetland forested land. The majority of the site contains exotic plant species. The dominant exotic specie is malaleuca. The eastern portion of the site supports pine flatwoods while the western portion supports cypress growth. The property is zoned 'A' Rural Agricultural. Surrounding: North To the north the land is developed in part by an eighteen-hole golf course. However, the of the land that is golf course remains in ~n e zoned PUD Planned Unit Development in which the use is limited to a golf course and ancillary and accessory golf course recreational u~es. To the east lies C~-951, while opposite the subject proper~y the land is vacant and zoned "A" R~ral Agricultural. South To the south the land is vacant but zoned 'PUD' Planned Unit Development (Casa del Sol) for a residential development of small lots anticipating affordable housing. The Casa del Sol PUD was recently reviewed under the County's PUD sunsetting provision. A two (2) year extension was given to the PUD. West - The possible creation of an districts; To the west the land abuts the Naples Heritage PUD, a mixed use residential/golf course co~.unity which is actively under development. Isolated dh~ct unrelated to adjacent and nearby Evaluation not applicable. Summary Ffndfne_s; The parcel is ora sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts b~cause development ofthe land simply implements a part of the GMP FLUE Urban Designation, an action which is expected given that ti~!.g is · Avai.lahilily of adequ~e h~rac~., nearby urban der. el ..o~t support, the '.ti~.' g rela~onship and justify the co~....ersion l:n'ocess of agncumnsl to tm urban re~dential zoning district, erocit tMs petition seeks a density more consistent with agricultural zoning. Whether existing distrfct boundaries are fllogJcally drawn in relation to exfsthg conditions on the property proposed for change. ~ Ev~ua~on not applicable. Ssntmary. F[ndtn_ts; The district boulxlaries a'e Jo~ically dllwn. ~ purposes this action will result in expandint '.he botmdm.ie~ o+',4,-;~-- [~~ o Whether cbtnged or chsnglng conditions make the passage of the pFo~ amendment necessary. Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable. Summary Finding; The proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the existing conditions of the property and because its relationship to the FLUE (Futu~ Land Use Element of the GMP) is a positive one. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; Pro: (i) The County's land use policy as reflected by the FLUE supports an action to allow urban residential development. Currently there are contiguous existing or planned residenti~ developments. Con: (i) Urban Mixed-Use development may not coincide with resident's desir~ to maintain a existing natural environment. Summary Ffndfn_~s; The proposed change will not ndversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood bccause the recommended development standards and othcr conditions for approval have been promulgated and designed to ensure the least amount of adverse impact on adjacent and nearby developments. A large pm of the site will remain in a nztural enhanced condition adjacent currently developed residential Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed fncompatible with surrouudhg land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular tramc, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. Pro: (i) Development of the subject property is consistent with provisions of the Traffic Element of the GMP, therefore, tra~c inte~'ity should not adversely affect the comfort and safety of existing users on adjacent public roads (i.e.C.R. 951). (ii) C.R. 951 is currently operating at a LOS "B'. Development of twenty- eight (28) homes should have negligible impact on this LOS. (iii) Urban intensification is cost effective. Con.' (i) As urban intensification increases, there is some loss of comfort and ease of travel to the motoring public. However, by discomfort is regulated by concurrency requirements. 3 o e 10. Summary Findings: Evaluation of this project took into account the Feq~ent for consistency with Policy $. 1 of the Traffic Element of the GM? and was found consistent, by utilizing a phased development program, a statement advising that this project when developed will not excessively increase artec congestion. Additionally certain tra~c management system improvements arc required as a condition of approval (i.e. turn lanes, traffic signals, dedications, etc.). In the final analysis all projects are subject to the Concurrency Management system. Approval of this extremely Iow density project will negligibly impact C.R. 951. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem; Pro: (i) Road improvements precipitated by this development and water management improvements to accommodate site development are designed to accommodate the normal drainage requirement. Con: (i) Urban intensification potentially can heighten the occasion for area-wide flooding under the more severe rainfall event. ~;ummarv Findints: Every project approved in Collier County involving the utilization of land for some land use activity is scrutinized and required to mitigate all sub-surface dra/nage generated by developmental activities as a condition of approval. This project is designed to preserve and enhance a large part of the site which will take some of surface water runoff fi.om developed areas. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce Hght and air to adjacent areas; Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable. Summary Findints: All projects in Collier County are subject to the development standards that are unique to the zoning district in which it is located. These development standards and others apply generally and equally to all zoning districts (i.e. open space requirement, corridor management provisions, etc.) were designed to enmn~ that light peneu-ation and circulation of air does not adversely affect adjacent areas. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; Pro: (i) Urban intensification typically increases the value of adjacent or underutilized land. Con: None. Summary Flndinns: 'l~s is a subjective determination baseduponaffect~~) which may be internal or external to the subject property tim can Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning, ho~vever ZOn~/d~ itself may or may not affect values, since value determination by law is ~lri~ ~~ / 11. 12. 13. 14. IS. value. The mere fact that a prop~L~ is given a new zor~g designation may or may not affect value. However, this project is obviously d~rected it an upsclle single family mm'ket which should benefit adjacent properS. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; Evaluation not a~licable. Summary Ffndfnts: The basic premise underling all of the devcloFment standards in the zor~ing division of thc Land Development Code is that their sound application when combined with the administrative site development plan at~rov~ process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in a deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an Individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; Pro/Con: Evaluation not applicable. Summary Flndin_~s: The proposed development complies with the Growth management Plan, a public policy s~atement supporting Zoning actions whea they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; Pro/Con; Evaluation not applicable. Summary Findings; The subject property is zoned "A" Rural Agricultural. To deny this petition would deprive the owner of any reasonable use of the property consistent with the GMP. whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County: Evaluation not applicable. whether is it tmpossFole to f'md other adequate sites in the County use in districts already permitting such use. Summary Flndlnns; The proposed development complies with the Growth Management Plan, a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and intens/ty of land uses deemed to be acceptable for th/s site. 16, 17, ~ Evaluation not ~plicable. Summary Findinfl: This site is zoned 'A" Rural Agricultural. Wheth~ OF not there other similarly zoned residential ercu is irrelevant. The physical characteristics of the property nd the degree of site tlterztfon which would be required to make the property usable for ny of the renie of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification, Pro/Con.' Evaluation not applicable. Summa_Fy Findings; The site will be altered to the ancient necessm'y to exmute the d~velopm~t stretch,. The Impact of development on the avtfhbllity or adequate public hcilitfes and services consistent with the levels of' service adopted in the Collier County Growth Mentlement Phn end ts defined end implemented thFough the Comer County Adequate Public Facilities OFdinance, ts tmendecL ~ £veluetion not applicable. Summery Flndines: Stafl'rcvicws for adequacy of public services and levels of'service dctenTfined that required infraslnzcture meets with GMP established rdationships. NOTE: GMP as used herein means thc Collier County Grow~ Management Plan. FLUE means the Future Land Usc Element ofthe GMP. REZONE FIND~GS PUD-97-9/md OCT ! 4 1997 PETITION NO. COORDINATING PLANNER: APPLICATION ~0~ ~/."~ ~ /J, a: c DATE RECEIVED :.., ~I~ N~ (AG~):~ ~~~ ~~ONE= 643-2324 ~PLI~ ~D~SS= 3106 S. ~~ ~i~r ~ples~ FI~ 34104 PROP~ O~ (P~ITIO~) N~ ~ ~D~SS*= ~ ~ ~~ L.C. ,4141 Isle of ~i ~t ~plesr FI~ 34112 _PHO~=., 775-3468 D~AIL~ ~G~ DESk.ION OF S~~ PROP~TY= ' SE~ION: 10 TO. SHIP= 50 ~ ~GE=, 26 ~ 25 East less and except the e~_st 125.00 feet. SIZE OF PROPERTY= 1378 PROPERTY I. D. 4900 GENERAL LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: ~attlesnakeF~.~_kt~ed. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE FT. ACRES: 155.77 ' West side of CR-951 c~e mile zx~rth of ZONING ;~/ricultural EXISTING ZONING= AcFricultural PROPOSED LAND USE OR RANGE OF USES LAND USE Golf Ck~rse CR-951 REQUESTED ZONING:. ~ (OPTION]iL): Single fam//y h~zes -1- OCT ! & 1997 DOES PROPERTY OWNER OWN CONTT;UOUS PROPERTY TO THE 8UB, TECT PROPERTY? ~F ~O~ GIVE COMP~ LEGAL DESCRIPTZON OF ENTIRE CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY~ and name or o~her indicate If petitioner is a land trust, so indicate beneficiaries. If petitioner i~oa partnership, limited partnership business entity, indicate and name principals. If petitioner is a lessee, attache copy of lease, and actual owners if not indicated on the lease. If petitioner is a contract purchaser, attache copy of contract, and indicate actual owners name and address. . STAND REZONE APP/md/14864 -2- '; '. h~a~ing can ~ adv.~ls~d. ~ ~~ p~i~,~ ~..,~~' ~* (AG~' S ~) :.:.:~ ~o ac~ as ny representative in any natt~s r~arding ~is ~l~ton. -1- OCT 14 ~97 ~i ..... '. ~//'~GNATURE OF AGENT .., Cowry of Collier ..~.,,:~,j .. ~a foraging A~eemen~ Shee~ was a~led~ .~fore ~%~'"' ' ~rs?9~ly.~ ~o~e ~.w~ has ~;.... : ~aen=~x~=Lon aha who did (did no~) ~ake ~?'.:~'~ ¥. ~ ~~ c--' --' - - ~" ' I OF~CIAL ~'orAqY -2- OCT 1 ~. 1997 ,'~ LANDTRUST5385 BENEFICIALINTEEEST l~chael J. Frye Chadee Dicker, Trustee David B. BraZen, Trustee Dorothy S. Brackeu, Trustee Donhy S. Corson Thonm H. Corson J~ M.~rg Cecil J. Home Jolm Vand~Me~den, Ir., Trustee Rob~r~ H. Schu~ Stallard Fam~ Limited Partnership Erie R. Wolf Isidor Wolf $.00 9.00 ~.00 ~.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 1.00 .50 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 .50 .50 .50 ORDINANCE NO. 97- AR ORDINANCE A~DING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-102 ~E COLLIER COUNTY LF~D DEVELOPMENT CODE ~ICH INCLUDES THE C~PREHENS[~ ZONING ~TIONS THE UNINCORPO~TED A~ or COLLIER CO~, BY ~NDING THE OFFICI~ ZONING A~ ~P ~ - 060910~ BY C~GING THE ZONING C~SSI~TI~ OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED R~ PROPER~ ~ 'A' RU~ AGRICULTU~ TO 'PUD' P~NED ~IT D~~ ~O~ AS THE CLUB ESTATES PUD CONTAINING A DE~ENT ST~TEGY CONSISTING OF ~NTY-EIGHT (28) SINGLE ~ILY D~ACHED HOUSING L~TED ON THE ~ST SIDE OF C.R. 951 (ISLE OF ~PRI ROAD) I~DIATELY CONTIGUOUS TO THE PROPER~ ~O~ AS NAPLES NAT~ON~ GOLF ~D CO.TRY ~UB, IN SECTION 10, T~S~IP 50 SO.H, ~GE 26 ~T, COLLIER COUNTY, ~RIDA, CONSISTING OF 155.8 ACRES~ AND BY PROVIDING AN EF~I~ WHEREAS, John P. Asher, P.E., of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., representing The Clu~ Estates, L.C., petitioned =he Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of =he herein described real property located in Section 10, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is =hanged from "A" Rural Agricultural co "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the Club £s=ates PUD Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A# and incorporated by reference herein. The Official Zoning Atlas Nap Nun~er 060910, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102, the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. -1- PASSED AND DULY ADOPT~-D by the Board of County C~issioners of Collier County, Florida, ~h~s day of ,, 1997. ~D OF ~ ~SSI~ CO~IER C~, ~RI~ ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BY: TIMOTHY L. HARCOCK, Chairman Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency NarJo~le M. Student Assistant County Attorney -2- OCT 14 1997 THE CLUB ESTATES A PLANNED ~ DEVELOPMENT REOULATIONS AND SUPPORTINO MASTER PLAN OOVERlqlNO THE CLUB ESTAIY. S A ~ UNIT DEVELOP~ PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PREPARED FOP.: THE CLUB ESTATES, L.C. 4141 ISLE OF CAPRI ROAD NAPLES, FLORIDA 34114 PREPARED BY: COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC, 2800 SOUTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDa. 34104 CEC FILE NO. 96.032 SEPTEMBER 11, 1997 DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC DATE APPROVED BY BCC ORDINANCE NUMBER AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL TABLE OF CONTENT~ LIST OF EXI-IIBITS AND TABLE STA~ OF COMPLIANCE SECTION SECTION SECTION SF. UIION SECTION SECTION I PROPERTY O~HIP AND DESCRIPTION II PRO~ECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT~ LOW DENS~ RESIDENTIAL AREA PLAN COMMONS AREA PLAN V ~ONSERVATION/PRESERVE AREA PLAN VI DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS OCT 1 4 1997 · LIST OF ~ITS AND TAB~.~tq Exllmrr A EXI-ImlT B EXi-imrr c PUD ~ Pl~ OCT 1 4 1997 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately 155.8 acres of property in Collier County, as a Planned Unit Development to be known as THE CLUB ESTATES will be in compliance with the goals, objectives and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Mana/~ Plan. The residential and recreational facilities of THE CLUB ESTATES will be consistent with the growth poHcles, land development re/ulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives of each of the elements of the Growth Management Plan for the following reasons: Residential PFolect The subject property is within the Urban Residential Land Use Designation as identified on the Futme Lnnd Use Map as required in Objective 1, Policy 5.1 and Policy 5.3 of the Future Land Use Element. The subjeci property's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services permits the development's residentiul density as required in Objective 2 of the Furore Land Use Element. The project development is compatible and complementary to existin~ and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Futm'e Land Use Element. o Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable forthcoming land development regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element. The projec~ development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Policies 3.1.H and L of the Future Land Use Element. e The project development is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as may be required in forthcoming regulations required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. The Planned Unit Development includes open spnces and natural features which are preserved from future development in order to enhance their natural functions and to serve as project amenities. The projected density of 0.18 d.u. per acr~ is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of Growth Management Plan based on the following rdationships to required criteria: Base density: 28 d.u. Project area: 155.8 Acr~ 28 d.u./155.8 Ac - 0.179 d.u./Ac. Density allowed - 3 d.u./Ac. ii OCT 1 4 1997 SECTION I 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION The ptnlx~ of this Section is to set forth the locagon and ownership of ~ ~, and to descn~ the existi,,.~ conditions of the property proposed to be developed under tbe project name of THE CLUB ESTATES. LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject prope~ being 155.8 acres, is described as: The South onc half of the South one half of Section 10, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, LESS AND EXCEPT the ~ 125.00 feel for County r!ght- of-way and/or Utility Easements, as appear in those certain deeds and insmnnems recorded at O.R. Book 1952, Page 2219. pROPERTY OWNERSHI1) The subject property is currently under the ownership of Richard K. Bennett, as Successor Trustee of Land Trust $385. GENERAL DF.,SCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA The project site is located in the South 1/4 of Section 10, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. Generally, the project is located on the west side of CR-951 appro~ one milo north of Rattlemake Hammock Road. The zoning classification of the subject ~ prior to the date of this approved PUD Document was Rural Agricultural. I~HYSICAL DESCRIPTION The undeveloped property is south of Naples National Golf Course devel~ east of the Naples Heritage Golf Course community, northeast of the Wing Park South subdivision, north of undeveloped land and west of CR-951. The project is locsted in the C-4 Canal Drainage Ba.~in. The average existing elevation is 9.5 NGVD with specific spot elevations ranging from 8.3 to 10.4 NGVD. The depths to bedrock in the area varies from some four (4) feet to more tlum twelve (12) feel All oftbe site is in Flood Zone X according to Firm Maps 120067 0605E and 120067 0415D. I-1 A~ri~ (Soil Co--on Service) in Ma~ 19~. 'l'be eozn~l~ tn'oj~-t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of~ ~~ 1~ I-2 SECTION II PRO,IECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 2.2 The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the ~c, ti~ land uses of the Iracts included in the project, as well as other project relationships. Regulations for development of THE CLUB ESTATES shall be in ~x:ordsm~ with the contents of this document, PUD-Planned Unit Developmenx District sad other ~q~p§cable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code sad Growth Management Plan in effect at the ~me of building permit application. Where the~ regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in thc County Land Development Code shall apply. Unless othe~ise noted, the def'mitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. Ail conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting r~-trictions for the development of THE CLUB ESTATES shall become part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the PUD site may be developed. Unless modified, waived or excepted by this PUD, the provisions of any other sections of the Land Development Code, where applicable, remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land which comprises this PUD. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.1 $ Adequate Public Facilities at the earliest or next to occur of either final SDP approval, final plat approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this development. ])~_CRIPTION OF PROJECT PLA~ AND PROPOSED LAND USES The project Master Plan, including layout of streets and use of land for the various tracts, is illustrated graphically by Exhibit 'A', PUD Master Development Plan. There shall be approximately six (6) land use tracts, plus necessary water management lakes and street rights-of-way, the general configuration of which is also illustrated by Exhibit 'A'. ~'RAL-t' I DEVELOPMENT TYPE UNITS/S. AREA L SINGLE FAM]LY LOTS 28 47.6 AC T COMMON ARE~E~IS CENTER 4,000 S.F. 0.7 AC CA CONSERVATION AREA ' N/A 67.4 AC O LAK.ES AND CONSERVATION AREA N/A 26.4 AC R ROADS/RIGHT-OF-WAY N/A 13.6 AC Ti. TUEN-LANE N/A 0.1 AC TOTAL 155.8 AC: I 2,4, Areas illustrated as lakes by Exhibit 'A' shall be constructed as lakes or, upon approval, parts thereof may be cons~cted as shallow, ~termittent wa and dry depressions for water retention purposes. Such areas, lakes and intermittent wa and dry ~ shall be in the same general configuration and contain the same general acreage as shown by Exhibit 'A'. Minor modification to all tracts, lakes or other boundary may be permitted at the time of Preliminary Subdivision Plat or Site Development Plan approval, subject to the provisions of Sections 3.2.6.3.5 and 2.7.3.5 respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code or az otherwise permitted by this PUD document. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown'in Exhibit "A", such easements as necessar~ (utility, private, semi-public, etc.) shall be established within or along the various Tracts as may be nccess~. DF-SCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USE A maximum of 28 single family residential dwelling units, shall be co~ngt~ in the total project area. The gross project area is 155.8 acres. The gross project density, therefore, will be a maximum of O. 1 $ units per acre. 2.$. ]~ELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REOUIREMENTS Prior to the recording of a Subdivision Plat, for all or part of the PUD, final plans of all required improvements shall receive approval of the appropriate Collier County governmental agency to insure compliance with the PUD Master Plan, the Collier County Subdivision Code and the platting laws of the State of Florida. II-2 [ 1997 2.6 Be Exhibit "A", PUD Mas~ Plan, constitut~ tbe required PUD Dt'v~lopment PI~. .S. ubsequen! to or concurr~! with PUD ~oproval, a Prel~ Subdivision Plat if applicable shall be submi~ for the emim ar~ covered by the PUD ld~zr Plan. Any division of property and the development of the l~d shall be in compliance with Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Develolma~ Code, sad the platting laws of the State of Florida. The provisions of Division 3.3 of the Collier County Lind IX-velopm~ Code when applicable shall apply to the development of ~11 phtted ~ or psrc~ of land as provided in said Division prior to the issuance of · buildi~ penm~ or other development order. The development of any t~act or parcel approve3 for residenthl developnent contemplating fee simple ownership of land for each ~ unit shall tx: required to submit and receive approval of a Prdiminary Subdivision Plai in conformance with requirements of Division 3.2 of the Collier ~ ~ Development Code prior to the submittal ofconstmction plans and a final plat for any portion of the tract or parcel. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of inf'rasmactural improvements regarding any dedications and methods for providin~ perpetual maintenance of common facilities. MODEL HOMES AND SALES FACILITIES ~ Model homes/model home centers including a sales center shall be permitted in conjunction with the promotion of the development subject to the folJowing: One "wet" and one "dry" model may be constructed prior to recording of · plat Location is limited to future, platted single family lots. Permits for all models must be applied for by project owner. The models permitted as "dry models" must obtain a conditional certificate of occupancy for model purposes only. The "wet" model may not be occupied until a permanent certificate of occupancy is issued. The model Cwet model") utilized as "sales offices" must obtain approval by and through the Site Development Plan process. Prior to recorded plats, metes and bounds legal descriptions shall be provided tx) and accepted by Collier County as sufficient for buildin/permit issuance. Said metes and bounds legal descriptions must meet proposed plat confi~ons and all models constructed pursuant hereto shall conform to applicable minimtm~ square footages, setbacks, and the like as set forth herein. II-3 £. Acc~.~ ~hall be provided to each "dry" model .f~..m the "w~t" model. Access !~ for pedestrim ~raffic only, no paved road will be glowed. Access ~o th~ model shall be provided by a paved ro~l or temporary driveway ~ad shall a supporting parking lot. Sales, marketing, and administrative functions are permitt~ to occur in designaled "w~" model homes within the project only as provided herein. The "wet" model may be served by a temporary utility system with ultlm~n connection w the central system, lntcrlor fire protection facilities in sccor~_snce with NFPA requiremenis are required unless a permanent waIer system is available. A water management plan must be provided wxich accommodaIes the runoff from the model home, parking, access road/driveway and otlzr ~ous surfaces. The system shall be designed and co~ so thai it is integrated with the master system for the entire development 2.6. AbtENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER PLAN Amendments may be made to the PUD as provid~l in the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 2.7.3.5. 2.7 ASSOCIATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Whenever the developer elects to create land area and/or recreation amenities whose ownership and maintenance responsibility is a common interest to all of the subsequent purchasers of property witMn said development in which the common inter~st is located, that developer entity shall provide appropriate legal insmm~ents for the establishment of a Property Owners Association whose function shall include provisions for the perpetual care and maintenance of all common facilities and open ~pace rabject further ~o the provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 2.2.20.3.8. II-4 OCT 14 1997 3.2. SECFION HI LOW DENSITY RF. SIDENTIAL AREA PLAN ~ purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards fo~ ar~s designated on Exhibit "A" as Tract "L", Low Density Residential. M.OOMUM DWELLING ~ For the purpose of this section low density r~sidential is defined as 4 or less units per acre on the tracl(s) nlloca',zd to this purpose. The maximum numbs' of low density dw~g units allowed within the PUD shall be as follows: Total 28 USE~ PERMITTED ':!ii~ in whole or part, for other than the following:O A. Principal Uses: 1. Single Family Dwelling Unit 2. On-site sewage treatment plant/facilities (see Section 3.5) Accessory Uses: 2. 3. 4. Customary acce.~ry uses and ~ includina private garage~ Common recreation amenities. Detached Guest Houses Commercial Excavations III-1 DEV~LOP~Fr STA~ARDS B. MINIMUM LOT AREA: 20,000 square feet. C. M]I',IIMUM LOT WIDTH: Th~ m{n{mlwn lot width m~surem~ shall start st:~xo~ly f~0 f~'t b~ck from tbe g~:~t-of-way and shall not includ~ th~ yarrow drivew~ portion of the lot. 1. Com~ Lots - 100 2. Interior Lots - 100 feet D. MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE: 1. 30 fe~ measured at the right-of-way llne. E. MINIMUM YARDS: It is anticipa~.d that the residential lots will be uniquely shap~ ~d that no lots will shar~ a common lot line. Each lot will be separaI~ by · Common Ar~a buffer avc-raf, ing 80 f~-i in width. Therefore, th~ minimum side snd r~ar yard of zero (0') f~t is justified. Pl~as~ s~ ~ Typical Lot Plan, Exhibit 'B". 1. Front Yard: 50 feet from Right-of-Way. 2. Side Yard: 0 fe~ 3. 'Rear Yard: 0 4. Front yard setbacks shall be mca.tared a.s follows: (a) If a lot or parcel is s~rved by · public or private right-of-way, setback is measured from the adjacen! right-of-way line, even ii'the lot or parcel is "T" or ~ shaped. (b)If a lot or parcel is sc-fred by a non-platl~ privaIe driv~ is me~a.sured from the back of curb or ~dge of pavement. (c) If a lot or parcel is served by · plaited private drive, setbaclc is measured from the road ~.sement or prop~-ny line. III-2 00T 14 1997 M1]qlMUM FLOOR AREA: 1. 3,000 square feet ~ DISTANCE BETWEEN PRINCIPAL AND ACCESSORY STRUCI1,q~S: 1. 10 feet OFF-STREET PAEKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS As required by Division 2.3 of the Collier County Land Develolxne~ Code in effect at the time of buildin$ pe~nit npplic~ion. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 1. Principal Structure - 50 feet and 3 stories above the minimum base flood elevation 2. Accessory Strucm~ - 35 feet and 2 stories above the ,~n~om base flood elcvation 3~ ~EClAL USE A portion of Tract "L" may be used as the temporary location of a sewage tteamm~ plant and oxidation/evaporation pond if a the County treatment and collection system is not available to serve the project. At such time as thc treatm~ plant is di~comlnued, all of Tract "L" shall be utilized for single family development as provided for by this Set, on. Ae DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS MINIMUM YARDS: Structure -.Fifty (50) feet from sewage ~ plant parcel boundm3,. Ponds - 20 feet from sewage treatment plant lxm:el LANDSCAPED BUFFER REQUIREMENTS: Twenty (20) feet landscaped buffer p~suant to the planting and opacity requirements of Division 2.4 of the Land Development Code. 3. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: Thirty (30) fe~.. III-3 OCT 1 1997 . 4.1 4.2 SEC~ON IV COMMONS AREA PLAN Ti~ putpo~ of this Section is to set forth tl~ devel~ plan and d~ stan/srds for Ibc steals) designed as Tracts "O" and "I", Commom An~Comervstlon Area on tl~ PUD Mast= Devel~ Plan, Exh"vlt "A". TI~ primm~ fmotim snd accessory use areas, ail natural trees and other vegetation as practicable shall be protected USES PERMFIq~D No buildins or structure, or part ~¢reof', shall be ~ altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Lakes 2. Open Spaces/Nam~ Preserves (Conserv~on Area) Pedestrian and bicycle paths or other similar facilities constructed for purpeses of access to or passage through the commons areas. e Small docks, pien or other such facilities co~ for purposes of lake recreation for residents of the project. Tennis courts, shuffle board courts, swimmin~ poo .Is, and other types of facilities intended for outdoor recreation. 6. Commercial Excavations B. Accessory Uses: Clubhouse and other customary accessory uses for tennis f. ncilifies, or olher recreational facilities. Small enclosures or other stmctm~ constructed 'for ~ of maintenance, storage, re,.-reation or shelter with appropriate screening sad landscaping. IV-1 OOT 14 199/ DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 4.4 Overall site design shall be harmonious in t~'ms of laMscap~, enclosur~ of smlcmres, location of access streets and location and treatment of buffer ~ Buildings shall be setback s minimum of ihiny (30) feet nbutfi~ r~sideniial districts md s lmd~.~ ~l msin~ buff= shall be pro~ There shall be no setback r~tuir~ments for Tract "T" (tenais center) d~ to the isolated nature of the tract. Structures shall comply with th~ SFWMD ~ ACOE Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner which will pwtect roadways and neighboring properties from direct glare or other interf~. Ee A site development plan meeting all of the Development Regulations shall be required in accordance with Section 2.5 of this PLrD document. F. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 1. Principal Structure: 30 feet. 2. Accessory Slructure: 30 feet. G. MINIMUM OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING No off-street parking is required for Tract "T" (tennis cent). Access to the ~ facilities will be by pedestrian, bicycle or golf cart, ali of which will ~ a raised boardwalk for i~gress-egress. No automobile traffic is anticipated. OFF-SIT~ REMOVAL OF EARTHEN MATERIAL The excavation of earthen material and its stock piling in preparation of water management facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is ha~by permitted. After consideration of fill activities on those buildable portions of the project site there will be a surplus of earthen material. Therefore, its off-site disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions: Commercial excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "commercial excavation" pursuant to Division 3.5 of the Land Development Code. A Commercial Excavation Permit pursuant to Division 3.5 of the Land Development Code must be obtained. B. Ail other provisions of said Division 3.5 are applicable. IV-2 5.2 SECTION V CONSERVATION~RF, SERVE AREA PLAN 1. Open Spaces/Nacre Preserves. 2. Lakes as shown on the PUD master plan. 3. Smell docks, piers or other ~uch facilities co~ for ~ of lake recreation for residents of the pwject, subject ~o appwpdste sppmvsls by penning agencies. 4. Boardwalks subject to appropriate approvals by permittin~ a~encies. 5. Perimetcr security fences or walls. 6. Native vegetation landscaping. 7. 'Permitted mitigation activities. V-! OCT 14 6.1 6.4, SECTION VI DEVELOPMENT COMMFFMENTS The propose of this Sec~on i~ to ~'~ forth ~e developm~ ~ for assigns shall be responm'ble for the comm~ents outlined in this document. The d~eloper, his successor or assignee, shall a/tee to follow the MasIer Plan sad lhe regulations of the PUD as adolxed, mxl my oiher condi~ or modificaliom ss amy be agreed to in the rezoning of the prope~. In sdd~ion, m~y sm:cessor or ~.ssi~ee ia ~itle is also subject to any commitm~ts within this agreement Exhibit A, PUD Master Plan, illustrates the proposed developmem fred is ~ ia '? nature. Pwposed tra~, lot or laml use boundaries or special Imxl ~ ~~ ~ ~ be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent ~pproval pluue as may be executed at the time of final platting or site developm~t plan zpplication. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Land Development Code, amendme~ may be made fi'om time to time. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be grlnted to iasum t~ continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all common areas ia the project. SCI:~.nUI.F. OF DEVF. I.OPMI~.N'r/MONITORING REPORT AND SUNSET Ae lafllkS/t~l;il~ It is the developer's intent to consUuct the first phase of infrastruc~ for the single family lots within two (2) years from the date of approval of the PUD Ordinance. 6.6. Be Ce ~creational Facilities; By tbe time building permits for $0% of the resldeafial units are issued, the developer ~rees to have co~ the two (2) te~n;_, courts in the location shown on the PUD Master Development Plan. No faciliti~ ~ be dedicated to Collier County. Any Mditional recreational facilities, as may be needed by the future residents of this project, shall be funded through a system of revenues collected by the Homeowner:s Assudation. The Homeowner's Association By-Laws shall includ~ a provision tim tl~ creifion of a ~tal Improvement Fund is mandatory, taxi every property owner in the development shall become a member of the Hom~w~r's Associ~on. Monitodna Revortl An asmual monitor~,,~ relxnt shsll be submitted lmrstm~t to Section 2.7.3.6 of the Collier County ~ Development Code. De Sunset Provision_,. All PUD's shall be subject to the Sunset Provisions of Section 2.7.3.4 of the Land Development Code. _VARIANCE AND EXCEPTIONS TO SUBDMSION REGULATION," - Variances and exceptions to Division 3.3 of the Land Development Code shall be made part of a concurrent application for Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval. TRANSPORTATION The development of this PUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: ae Co Access from CR 951 shall be consistent with the County's Access Management Policy, Resolution 92-422, as amended. Turn lanes in accordance with Ordinance 93-64, as amended, shall be required as a component of the construction plan/final plat approval for the first development phase..They must be completed prior to prellmlnsry acceptsxlce of the Phase One subdivision improvements. Nothing in any zoning approval shall operate to vest any right to a median opening in this project. The developer shall be responsible for the installation of arterial level street lighting at all project entrance as a component of the construction plan/final plat approval for the lb-st development phase. They must be completed prior to preliminary acceptance of the Phase One subdivision improvements. OCT 14 1~7 Substantial competent evidence sh~ll be provided by the develop~ to the effect that the ~ojoct is designed to provide capscity and trestment for histori~ roadway runoff. In addition, site drainage shall not be pennitt~ to dis~ directly into ~y roadway drainage system. and shall be paid at the time building permits are issued unless otherwise approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Road improvements required for this project, both site specific and ~ capacity, shall be in place prior to the issuance of -.ny Certificates of Occupancy for the development. Compensafin~ Risht-of-Way for turn lanes and median ar~s shall be dedicated by the develop~ to reimburse the County for the use of e~Jstlag Right-of-Way at the time said turn lanes are required by Collier County. Such dedication shall be considered site related and there shall be no road impact fee credit lo the developer. 6.7. WATER MANAGEME~FJ[' The development of this PUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: A. The SFWMD ERP Permit for the project. B. The ACOE Dredge-Fill Permit for the project. Co An excavation perm/t will be requir~ 'for the proposed lakes in accordance with Division 3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code and the SFW2vfl) rules. The development of this PUD Master Plan shall be subject m and governed by the following conditions: Water dislribution, sewage collection and Uan.mg~on and interim water taxi/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project ar~ to be designed, eonsm~'ted, conveyed, owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 97-17, as arnr.~ded, and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. Water Facilities Looping and Stubs: Ce ,a-szte water distribution system to serve the project must be co~ to the ~hstrict's water main on CR951 consistent with the main ~izing requirem~ ~:g~ified in the County's Water Master Plan and extended throughout the project. During design of these facilities, the following f~.a-c'~ ~ be i~ into the distribution system: De. ad-end mains shall be eliminated by looping the internal pipeline network. 2. Stubs for future system interconnection with adjacent properti~ ~ be provided to the prol:~'ty lines of the project, or the limit ofj~ctional wetlands, at locations to be mutually agreed to by the County ~xl th~ developer during the design phase of the project. Connection to the County Central Sewer System or a Master Pump Station: The ,.~tiliry construction documents for the project's ~e ~ys~-'m ~ be prepared so that all sewage flowing to the County's master pump gation i~ transmitted by one (1) main on-site pump station. Due to the design and configuration of the master pump station, flow by gravity into the station will not be possible. The developer's engineer shall meet with County staff prior to commencing preparation of construct/on drawings, so that all aspects of the sewerage system design can be coordinated with the County's ~ mater plan. Off-site Utilities Improvements: Water - The existing off-site water facilities of the district must be evaluated for hydraulic capacity to serve this proje~-t and reinforced as required, if necessary, consistent with the' County's water master plan to insure that the district's water system can hydraulically provide a ~fticient quantity of water to meet the anticipated demands of the project and the district's existing committed capacity. Sewer. The existing off-site sewage transmission facilities of the district must be evaluated for hydraulic capacity to serve this project and improved as required outside the project's boundary to provid~ ad~luat~ capacity to transport the additional wastewater generated without adverse impact to the existing transmission facilities. VI-4 OCT ! 4 1 37 6.9. 6.10. ENGINEEI~NG Th~ development of this PUD lVlaster Plan shall be subject to md governed by ~ ~ following conditions: Cn'assed slopes of 3H:IV may be used for berm heights ~o 4 feet throughom the project based on the co--on plans approved as part of the SFWMD ERP sad ACOE Dredge-Fill Permits. Berms greater that 4 feet in height shall use slopes no greater than 4H:IV. Be The typical road cross-section as del'reed in Exhibit "C' shall be used throughout the project. The road section may vary ~o allow the travel path to meander inside of the right-of-way. Work within Collier County right-of-way shall meet the requirements of Collier County Right-of-Way Ordinance No. 93-64. The development of this PUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: Permits or letters of exemption from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) shall be present~ prior to final plat/construction plan approval. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Review Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. All conservation areas shall be desig, s~_~ as conservation/~on tracts or easements on all co~on plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florid~ Statutes. In the event this project does nm require plauing, ~11 consereafion areas ~ be recorded as conservation/preservation tra~ or easements dedicaIed to ~n approved entity or to Collier County with no r~:nmsibility for maintenance and subject to the uses and limitations similar w or as per Florida Statutes Section 704.06. 6.11. 6.12. 6.13. De Buffers shall be provided around wetlands, extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and ~weraging twenty. five (215) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where mtural buffer~ are not possible, stmctwal buffers shall be provided in accordance with the StaIe of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Staff. Aa exotic vegetation removal, monitor[ag, and maiat~ce (exotic free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conserv~on/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Plam~g Environmental Staff for r~*view and approval prior to tirol site plan/construction plan approval. Petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and r~c, ommendalions ofthe U.S. Fish and W'ddlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Oame and Fresh Water Fish Commi-~sion (I:OFI~VFC) regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species. Where protected species are observed on site, a Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/co--on plan. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Accessory struc~es shall be constructed simultaneously with or following the construction of the principal structure except for a construction site office and model SIGNS Ail signs shall be in accordance with Division 2.5 of the Land Development Code. LANDSCAPING FOR OFF-STREET PARKING AREAS Ail landscaping for off-street parking areas shall be in accordance with the Division 2.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. VI-6 OCT 14 1997 t I % i I I t t I I I ! ! OCT ! ~ 'M'O'~ 'M'O~ 'M'O '~ OOT It 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION NO. PUD-85-29(I), R. BRUCE ANDIRON OF YOUNG, VANASSENDERP & VARNADOE, P.A., REP~,SENTING ,rim COLOSUVlO, TRUSTEE, REQUESTING A PUD TO PUD, 'WI'HCH WK,L HAVE TI~ EFFECT OF BRINGING THE NAPLES GAT~AY PUD PUD MASTER PLAN INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC) AND THE SUNSE'I~G REQU~,ElvIENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 2.7.3.4 OF THE IDC, FOR PROPERTY' LOCATED IN ~ NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE PI~ RIDGE ROAD (CR-896) A.~ 1-75 INTERCH~GE CENTER, IJ3CATED ON TRACTS 29, 44 AND 45, COLDEN GATE ESTATES UNIT 35, SECHON 7, TOWNS}UP 49 SOUTH., RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLOR.IDA. :"0 This petition seeks ~ have certain property u herein defined rezoned from PUD to PUD. CONSIDERATIONS: The ~ for repealing the current PUD (Planned Unit Development District) and replacing it with a new PUD will have the effect of bringing the Naples Gateway PUD and PUD Master Plan into compliance with the Collier County La'ad Development Code (LDC) and the stmsetting requirements of Section 2.7.3.4 of the LDC. In doing so, the petitioner has re-fommtted the original PUD into a style presently utilized by all new PUD's which incorporates current LDC requirements, development regulations, arehitectu~ and design guidelines, landse~ing and infra.~n~cture improvements into the new PUD and Master Plan. Additionally, the amendment re-visits the approved land uses, development commitments and vehicular inter-connects with adjacent properties. The existing Naples Gateway PUD provides for hotels/moteis, restaurants, retail establishments, professional offices, banks, convenience stores and gasoline ~rvice stations. The amendment proposes additional professional, medical and business offices including retail uses and l=~vide~ a level of specificity for each of these commercial uses as identified by the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987). Also the amendment brings about development standards which are cons/stent with the Collier County Land Development Code as it relates to setbacks, ~g, signage, water management, open apace and architectural design guidelines. Also provided is a 20 foot wide Type "D" landscape buffer wherein an eight foot tall architecturally finished opaque masonry wall is pmlx~sed along Livingston Woods Lane. The PUD Master Plan is basically unchanged between the curr~t PUD Master Plan and that proposed by the replacement PUD Master Plan. Thc. re are two ingress/egress points gong Pine Ridge Road and a shared access is provided with property to the east, also located within the Interchan~ Activity Center. The PUD Master Plan also provides landscape buffers, lakes, water managem~ open apace per the Land Development Code. The PUD prohibits fast food restauran~ ~ r~ect to the matter of compatibility, we have an expectation that the Ired will be developed for those uses ~otized for Interc~e Activity Cemm, ~xl further providi~ a ~ of commm~ The petitioner and the CCPC were opposed to this rcco~on, because a stipulation in the proposed PUD Document. provides for a 20 foot wide landscape buffer with extensive land~ and an $ foot tall masonry wall adjacent to Livingston Woods Lane. The petitioner desires flexa'bflity in order to provide vehicular parking, loading, and driveways up to the proposed 20 foot landscape buffer while maintaining a building setback of 50 feet. The petitioner also maintains that if the 50 foot setback was implemented as propos~ by staff, the requirements per Division 2.8 of the LDC (Architecatml and Site Design Standards) would further increase the building setback from Livingston 'Woods Lane. However, this is only Irue for buildings 20,000 square feet in size or gnmter, la other word~ a building could be setback 50 feet from Livingston Woods Lane if it were less than 20,000 square fe~t in size. If the building is greater than 20,000 square feet, regulations per Division 2.8 of the LDC would r~luire the site development plan to incottmrate vehicular pazidng and circulation mxn=~ the entire building, therefore a building setback greater than 50 feet from Livingston Woods Lane would The Plan~ Commission mcommendatior~ ahu'~'.~ :.he petitioner to utilize the 50 foot rear yard setback for vehicular parking and drive','._,.~ .. ',,,~ :~ the 20 foot landscape buffer, contrary to staffs This petition by and of itserf will have no fiscal impact on the County. ~, if this mmmdment ·chieves its objective, the land will be developed. The mer~ fi~ct that new develolmm~ has been fees prior to the is.~mnce of building permits to help off-set the impact of e~ch new d~el~ on public faciUties. Thesc impact fees are used to fund projects in the C.~ital ~[ needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public f~:ilities. In the OCTI, 'F397 collections ar~ inadequate to maintain adopted leveLs of service, the Coumy must provide supplnnemal funds from ottgr revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. GROWTI! MANAGEMENT IMPACt: The subjec~ site is located within the Urban Designated Area as identified on the Futur~ Land Use Map, within the northw~ quadrant of the Pine Ridge Road/Inm~ 75 Interchange Activity Center. The function of the Interchange Activity Center provides for a mix of commercial uses (ex: hotels/motels, restmn'ants, gasoline services stations, business services, retail uses, and convenience commercial uses) for the traveling and passer-by public. In 1983, the subject property was designated as a commercial node as indicated on the Collier Comprehensive Plan and Map. La 1989, its designation changed to Interchange Activity Center. The designation change in 1989 specifically idemified the subject property within the Pine Riddle Rolld/ Interstate 75 Interchange Act. ivity Center, consequently earmarking th_is pwperty for com~ use. In staffs opinion, the subject site has been desiiputted as a commercial node for over 13 years, and the amendment to bring the PUD up to chtte with current r~gulations and Section 2.7.3.4 of the ~ is deemed ~t with the criteria set forth in the Futu~ Land Use Element and G~o~th Plan. Staff has reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has made the following conm~ents: Since no additional commercial area is proposed, there will not be any additional traffic generated by this amendment over the amount anrenfly appwved for the PUD. Therefore, this amendment will not exceed 5% of the LOS "C" design capacity on Pine Ridge Road within the pwject's radius of development influence CRDI). In addition, this petition is cousistem with Policy 5.1 and 5.2 of the Traffic Circulation Element (TCE). The Traffic Circulation Element lists Pine Ridge Road as a 4 lane arterial road fro~_ 'ag the project. The current traffic count for this seL2?r~ent is 38,224 AADT and is operating xt LOS "C". Xt should be ~ that the level of ~fice on this segzmmt is projov~l to ~ below its ~ I OS ~E' gamlard by 1999. However, the planned improvement to 6 lane this segn~nt is scheduled for completion by 2001 to meet concurrency requirements. Therefore., this petition complies with Policy 1.3 ofthe TCE. OOT 14 1997 ltlSTORIC./ARCtlAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is locatcd outside an area of historical end archneolo~cal probability u rcfcrcnced on thc oflicial Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Pursuant ~o Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Lead Dev¢l~ Code, if~ during, the course of site clearing, acavation or other construction activity an historic or azr. baeological mtifact is found, all devclopment PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Collier County Planning Commission rcconnncnds approval of Petition PUD-g5-29(1), a petition to rezone certain property from PUD to PUD pursuant to the Ordinance of Adoption and Exlu'bit "A", Naples Gateway PUD Document and Master Plan. PREPARED BY BRYAN gt4~LK -- PRINCIPAL PLANNER REVIEWED BY: ~NT ~LANNING MANAGER DONALD W. ARNOLD, AXCP ~G SER~CES D ARTMENT DIRECTOR VINCENT A. CAUTERO, ADMI~TRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. PUD-85-29(I) EX ~Y/md 4 DA'I~ DATE OCT 1 4 1997 TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION DATE: FcILY 22, 1997 PETITION NO: PUD-85-29(1) OWNER/AGENT: R. Bruce Anderson Young, vanAssen~, & Vamadoe, P.A. 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34108 .lira Colo~imo, Trustee 4099 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 30.5 Naples, Florida 34103 REOUESTED ACTION; This petition when approv~ will have the effect of repealing the current PUD (Planned Unit Development District) and replacing it with a new PUD ('Planned Unit Developmem District). Revisions to the current PUD will have the effect of bringing the PUD and PUD Master Plan into compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) purstm~ to criteria t~t forth in Section 2.7.3.4. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIO~ The subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of the Pine Ridge Road (CR-896) and 1-75 Interchange Activity Center, located on Tracts 29, 44 and 45, Golden Gate Estates Unit 35, Section 7, Townsh/p 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (see location rasp on following page). PURPOSE~~ON OF PROJECT: Lomm~.. ~m~e on ,gram P.UD.m~ a style, pre~..y ~ by aH new .PI~. ', which ~ all vuns tn~ spprov~ reno uses, development ~tments and vehicular infm~eonn~ ~ 00T14 1997 I Il Il I_ I LAKE B2[ IN 'ri,IS PMCE]. '1~ F'KA~ F~ 114S p,~CZ]. IIQNI~ & EXHIBIT A PUD MA8TER PLAN I The Naples C, atcway PUD encompasses a land area of approximately 13.45 acres, and is located within the northwest quadr~t of the 1-75/Pine Ridge Road ~nterchangc Activity Center. The uses provided for in the PUD include an assortment of business services for professional and medical operations, convenience and service businesses for the traveling and passerby traffic sad retail establishments ~d restaurants for the local community. The PUD is of such size that it lends itself to be diversified and designed srchitecturally as one center. The master plan slso provides internal and perimeter landscape buffers, water management facilities, open space, controlled ingress/egress and water and sewer facilities. The mas~er plan also reveals two vehicular inter-coxmects with Pine Ridge Road and a shared access way with the adjacent property to the ,.,asr. The PUD stipulates fast food restsum~ convenience stores and gasoline service stations shall be setback a minimum of 300 feet from Livingston Wood~ Lane. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing: The prop~ is presently vacant, was historically cleared and is infested with exotic vegetation. The property is zoned PUD and provides for a variety of commercial, business and professional land uses. Surrounding: North - To the north is Livingston Woods Lane right-of-way and property zoned Estates. Presently, two single family residence's exists directly north of the subject site. Thc remainder of the area to the north is also zoned Bstates and is intermittently developed with single family houses on approximately 2.25 acre lots. East - To the east is an undeveloped 5.0 acre parcel zoned Estates located within the Interchange Activity Center. East of that parcel is the Angileri PUD which provides for hotels/mo~ls, restaurants and related commercial uses for the traveling and passerby traffic. To the south is Pine Ridge Road (CR-g96) right-of- way. Further south is Pine Ridge Center PUD and Pine Ridge Center West PUD, also located within the Interchange Activity Center. These PUD's are presently undeveloped, however permitted uses include gasoline service stations, hotel/motel, re~_-_~ts and commercial related uses. To the west is undeveloped Estates property. This prop~ is not located within the Interclumge Activity Center end therefore is not elil~'ble for cominco'iai development. South - West - GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY: The entirety of the Naples Gateway PUD is located within the Urban Designatq~"~h~~ Activity Center on the Future Land Use Map to the FLUE to the GlViP. The subject PUD for commercial related land uses and is presently undeveloped. 2 A review of consistency relationships with elements of the GMP is as follows: Fvttlre Laud Use Element - This petition proposes an amendment in order to brinE the PUD into compliance with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and Section 2.7.3.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. In doing so, the petitioner has re-formatted the original PUD and incorporated all current LDC requirements including development regulations, m'ch~t~ and design guidelines and landscape buffers into the new PUD and Master Plan. The subject site is located within the Urban Designated Area as identified on the Future Land Use Map, within the northwest quadrant of the pine Ridge Road/Inter~tate 75 Interchange Activity Center. The function of the Interchange Activity Center provides for a mixture of commercial uses (ex: hotels/motels, restaurants, gasoline service stations, business services, retail uses, and convenience commercial uses) for the traveling and passer-by public. In 1983, the subje~ property was designated as a commercial node as indicated on the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and Map. In 1989, its design,~ttion changed to Interchange Activity Center. The designation change in 1989 specifically identified the subject property within the Pine Ridge Road/ Interstate 75 Intercl~nge Activity Center, consequently earmarking this propc'~y for commercial use. In staffs opinion, the subject site has been designated as a commercial node for over 13 years, and the amendment to brin'g' the PUD up to dare with current regulations is deemed consistent with the criteria setforth in the Future Land Use Element and Growth Management Plan. Traffic: Circulation Element - Staff has reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has made the following comments: Since no additional commercial area is proposed, there will not be any additional traffic generated by ibis amendment over the amount currently approved for the PUD. Therefore, this amendment will not exceed $% of the LOS "C" design capacity on Pine Ridge Road within the project's radius of development influence (P,,DI). In addition, this petition is consistent with Policy 5.1 and 5.2 of thc Traffic Circulation Element (TCE). The Traffic Circulation Element lists Pine Ridge Road as a 4 lane arterial road fronting the project. The current traffic count for this segment is 38,224 AADT and is operating at LOS "C". It should be noted that the level of service on this segment is projected to fall below its adopted LOS "E" standard by 1999. However, the planned improvement to 6 lane this segment is scheduled for completion by 2001 to meet concurrency requirements. Therefore, this petition complies with Policy 1.3 of the TCE. Oven St)ace Element - The total open space (4.0 acres), and the open space that each individual development p~rcel sets aside as a function of complying with setbacks, water management and design features exceeds the thirty (30) percent required by the LDC. Staff is confident that this projeci as des/gned is consistent with the open space clement. Other Atmlicable ElementCs) - These include utilities and water management. Development of the land will proceed on the bases of connection to the County's sewer and water distn'butico s'3~'tem. Once these utility lines are completed in accordance with County standards, they will be deeded to the Collier County Water-Sewer District as required by County Ordinances. OCT 14 1997 Water management f~ilities will be cons~ct~ to meet CounW Ordimmces md the~ will reviewed and approved as a sanction ofobtairdng subsequent development order ~q~'~vals. Staff's review indicates that this pctition has been designed to account for the necessary relationships dictated by the GMP. Where appropriate, stipulations have been generated to ensure consistency with the GMP during the permitting process. Therefore, this petition has been deemed to be consistmi with the Grovnh Management Plan. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the pctitionees property is located outside ~n ~r~ of historical end archaeological probability as refercnced on thc official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Histor/ca~Archacological Survey md ~ent is required. Pursuant to Section 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code, if, during the cour~ of si~e cle~rin~ cxcavation or othcr ccns~ction activity an historic or archaeological ~ifsa h found, ~11 development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immcdiately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcemcnt D~anment contacted. EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL. TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURe-_'- The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staff responsible for oversight related ~o the above referenced areas of critical concern. Th/s primarily includes a rev/ew by the Community Development Environmental and Engineering staff, and the Transportation Department staff. The Environmental Impact Statement was reviewed by the Enviwnmental Advisory Board (gAB) on February 5, 1997 and they recommended approval aubject to the ~pulations contained in the PUD Document. The Transportation Department has stipulated that the developer provide up to 30 feet of right-of-way along the north side of Pine Ridge Road for future road widening. In addition the developer shall be responsible for the installation of turn lanes. Attcrial level street lighting already exists along the frontage of this property. A PUD amendment is not a rezoning in the sense that the action rezones property from one zoning district classification to another, each with different land use and/or den.sity/'mtensity agendas. This amendment rather re-formats the original PUD Document and Master Plan to comply with current development ~ndards and elements of the Collier County Land Development Code ,nd Growth Management Plan. Because this change is internal to the PUD Development ~trategy we conclude the action is that ofan amendment as opposed to one establishing a new zoning district. When we use a rezoning process to accomplish a PUD amendment we do so to achieve a level of administrative convenience because it avoids the requirement to tract amendments and their relationship to the or/~nal document in order to understand the totality of the regulations ~ they apply to the PUD zoning district. For this reason, staff'is of the opinion that the required findings for standard and PUD rezones does not apply in recognition of the fact that initially rezoned the decision to approve the Naples Gateway PUD was based W of evidence and conditions which supported the required findings for both standam ano rt~l., rezoning actions. Notwithstanding the above, staff in reviewing the determinants for adequate findings to support a rezoning action advise as follows: The existing Naples Gateway PUD provides for hotels/motels, restaurants, retail establishments, professional offices, banks, convenience stores and gasoline service stations. Thc amendment proposes additional professional, medical and business offices includir, g retail uses and provides a level of specilicity for each of these commercial uses as identified by the Standard Industrial Classification Manual (1987). Also the amendment bri'.gs about development standards which are consistent with thc Collier Comity Land Development Code as it relatts to setbacks, landscaping, sig~ge, water management, open space and architectu~l., design guidelines. The amendment also establishes a new PUD Master Plan which provides a vehicular shared access point with the adjacent property to the east and two connections with Pine Ridge road. Also provided is a 20 foot wide Type "D" landscape buffer wherein an eight foot tall architecturally fugshed opaque masonry wall is proposed along Livingston Woods Lane. For all intent and purposes the only substantive changes to the Development Regulations are as follows: ¢~rrent PUD Ord. No. 85-29 _ Pro~sed PUD Amendment 1. Maximum building height 3 stories above parking 3 stories or 35 feet. 2. Exterior boundary setback from Livingston Woods Lane 30 feet 1 story structures 50 feet. Two and three stories ninety feet. 3. Landscape buffer contiguous to Livingston Woods Lane. 30 feet 20 feet with 8 foot tall masonry wall. Based on the above information, staff is of the opinion that the pwposed amendment is more restrictive, with the exception being the rear yard landscape buffer is reduced from 30 feet to 20 feet, wherein an architecturally designed eight foot tall masonry wall is proposed. Recently, the Board of County Commissioners approved the Angileri PUD (5 acres) east of thc subject site. The Angileri PUD is very similar in nalure to the proposed amendment, in that it is located in the same Interchange Activity Center quadrant; it provides transitional commercial uses front io back; similar landscape buffers are provided; architectm'al design guidelines are slmil~ snd shared access to adiazent properties are provided. The only major difference is, the Angileri PUD provides a ninety foot building, parking and driveway setback from Livingston maximum building heights are limited to 30 feet, and hotels and motels are limited 1997 // and a ninety foot' s~back for'2 and J gory buildings from Livingston Wood~ Lane. Staff' is of' the opinion, the proposed 50 foot s~tback sha~ll be r~scrved only for water manag~t, landsca~ buffers and open space. Parking, driveways and accessory structurc~ shall not be permitted w~th|q the ~0 foot s~b~k similar to the Angil~ PUD. PUD Nfaster Plan - The PUD Master Plan is basically unchanged between the curr~t PUD and that proposed by the replacement PUD document and master plan. There are two ingresrdegress points along Pine Ridge Road and a shared access is provided with property to the east, also I~ within the Interchange Activity Center. The PUD Master Plan also provides landscat~ buffers, lakes, water managem~t facilities and open space per thc Land Development Code. The amended PUD prohibits fast food restaur~ts, conveni~ce stores and gasoline service stations within thr~ hundrod (300) feet of Livingston Woods lane. Loud speak~s and public address systems ar~ also pmh,'bited. The purpose of thi., r~-triction is to transition passive and high intensity comm~'cial uses from Livingston Woods Lane to Pine Ridge Road. Therefore, with rcrpc~ to the matter of comp~'bility, we have an ~pectalion tha the land will be dev¢Iop~ for those land uses authorized for Interchange Activity Cenlers, arid further providing a transition of uses throughout the PUD, restricting development regulations, and providing architectural design guidelines, staff is of the opinion that the amended PUD Master Plan and Document is compatible with surrounding property. In the opinion of staffno public interest is jeopardized or individual interest resulting from a reliance on the current regulations. I,ltilitv InfrasWucture - Both public sanitary sewers and municipal water supplies are available to the property and will be extended as a consequence of future platting to each 1o! or tract as they ~re platted. All development must comply with surface water management requirements invoked al the time of subdividing as the case will be for development of this land. The water management system to serve the project will corsist of an interconnected lake system. Runoff from the development areas will be conveyed to the lakes by shectflow, catch basins, and culvert systems. Additionally, the project falls within the jurisdiction of the SFWMD, and is, therefore subject to all of their permitting requirements. Traffic Circulation and Imoact - Staff has identified the fact that the amendment will not create additional lraffic over the amount currently appwved for the PUD. Therefore, the amendment will not exceed 5% of the LOS "C" design capacity on Pine Ridge Road within the project's rail/us of development influence (PI)I). The Traffic Circulahon Element lists Pine Ridge Road as a 4 lane arterial road operating at LOS "C". The planned improvement to 6 lane this segment is scheduled for completion by 2001. Community Infrastructure and Services - The subject property is readily accessible to a whole range of conu~unity infrastructure wh/ch is enlumced by its front~e on Pine Ridge Road. Shopping centers, business offices and medical offices of various specialties ~re all within a short driving distance. Urban development is underway in all directions from this PUD which is an site for development. indicalo~ i. ,,-a I STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission r~commend approval of Petition PUD-85-29(I) having tho effect ofr~ealing the curr~t Naples ~y Ordinance No. 85-29, and adoptin~ a new Naples ~ PUD Docmnen! and Master Plan with the condition tim the following d~ commitment be added to Section $.6.3.c. Dimensional S~: A landscaped fii~ foot (503 building, p~ng and driveway setback shall be maintained from Livingston Woods L~e. This area shall be reserved for wa~ management, landscape buffc-~ and open space. PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: ~, A~CP CURRENT P~G MANAGER DONAL~ W. ARNOLD, AICP VINCENT A. CAUTERO, ADMYNISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. Petition Number:. PUD-85-29(1) Staff'Report for August 21, 1997 CC'PC meeting. ¢ot.t.t . P/~G COMMISSION: MICHAEL A. DAVIS, CHAIRMAN PUD-gS-29(1) STAFF RI~ORT/md OCT 1 · ._.i DATE APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING REZONE AND CONDITIONAL USE REOUESTS ~LANNED UNIT DEVF-LOPMENT REOUESTS CGH24UNIT¥ DEVELOPMENT DIVISION CURR~T PLANNING Name of Applicant(s) Jim Colosi~o Applicant's Mailing Adc~'ess &099 T.~t.~4 Applicant's Telephone Number: Res.: Bus. 2G ~he applicant ~he o~er of the subJec~ x Yes No ~-- (a) If applicant is a beneficiaries below. 34103 (g&],) 262=303& land trust, so indicate and name (b) If applicant is corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and name officers and major stockholders below. (c) If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership ' or other business entity, so indicate and name principals below. (d) If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other owners, if any. (e) If applicant is a lessee, at=ach copy of leaze, ~nd indicate actual owners if not indicat&d on the lease. (f) If applicant is a con~racU purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate actual owner(s) name and ad~ree~ below. (If space is 2. Agents Mailing Address City .... Naples , Telephone Number: Res.: inadequate, attach on separate page. ) Name of Agent E. Bruce An~e~son Firm Young, VazAssen~e~pt a~d Varaadoe, ~ 801 Laurel Oak. D~ive, SCa. 300 State Florida 3. Zip 34108 , · D LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY COVETt~) BY THE DETAILZ .... ·- ---= .... -- -+tach on ss~erate page. su~ey (1" to 400' scale). ~Z ~LI~T IS ~SPONSIBLE FOR S~PLYING ~E CO~ L~ DES~ZON- IF QUE~ONS ~SE ~HC~ING ~ I~ DES~PTION, ~ ~G~'S C~2FI~TION S~ BE SE~ION 7 __ ~SHIP __ ~95 , ~GE __ 26E Tracts 29, ~ ~ &5 Golden Gate EstatiI"U~c No. 35 Size of property 900 ft. X 600 ..ft. Address 6r' location of subject property No:th side of Pine Ridse Road - East of Livingston Road Existing land elevation ±10 ,. County Flood Criteria Elevation . x _ a. Date subject proper=¥ a=~uira~ ~) or leasa~ ( ): day o~ , Term of lease ~s./mos. Acres 13.&~ If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate da=e of and date option termina~os: --- option: · N~A Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject property? If GO, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on A. REZONIN¢: PRESENT ZONING ----"-- FOR Retail Center and Miscellsnoue B. CONDITIONAL USE N/A OF separate page)· ~el " Trac~s 12, 13' and 28, Golden Gate EBta. tes, Ul%i~ No. 35, according tot he pla~thereof recorded inPlat Book 7, a~ Page 85, of the Public Records of Collier Count-y, Florida. (also described as Parcel B). . THIS APPLICATION IS INTENDED TO COVER: (Check which type of petition your are requesting): PUD ~t~UESTED ZONING PUD ZONING FOR 2 OCT 1 A 1997 11. 12. 13 · 14. R~ASON WHY APPLICATION S~OULD BE APPROYEU ~A~%iu- e~,.,.,.,...- ..... ~heets if ~ecessary): - IS PROPOSED US~: PROHIBITED BY DEED RESTRICTIONS? Yes % No ~S. PROVIDE COPY OF THE DEED RESTICTIONS. IF S0~ TO IS THIS REqUZST A RESULT OF A VIOLATION? No _ ~OMWAS T~E NOTICE SZRVED? ' HAS A PUBLIC HEARING BEEN HELD ON THIS PROPERTY WITHIN THE L~T YETi? IF SO, IN WHOSE NT~4E? _ No ARE TH~RE ~XISTING STRUCTURES ON T~E PROPERTY? CBS , FRAME , MOBILE HO~E _, OT~ - herein a~ vhich is the subject matter of the propose~ heari~g~ in this applicatio~, a/~ all that all the answers to the sketches, aata, an~ ocher supplementarY matter attache~ to ~a~e a part of this application, of our k~ovl~ge an~ belief. I un~erstan~ =his be complete~ and accurate before a hearing can be a~ve=tise~. ~ur=her pe~i~ the undersigned ~o act as our representative ~I~ATUR~ OF OWNER · S~GNATURE OF OWN~ : ~IGNATURE OF AGENT State of Florida County of Collier -'.The foregoi~g Anplication was acknowle~e~ before me -- - - as identifica~lon a~a ~no ~u~ take an oath. ' /'~ I ~~~ ' &me o~ NoCar . * ~ (~r~n~ ~ Y/ ~ZO~/~ ~p~2~TlO~/~d/?/27/92 ~ i:~ Statement of Unified Control It is the htnz of J'tm Colosimo to emb~ a Plznned Unh Ezve~olznetzt on 13.45 ac~s in SeCtion ?, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Coil/er Comty, Florida. The subject lZoperty is tm~ uz:Ried ownmbip for the purpose of ob,.;~;~_* PT.R) zoning. Dev~opux~ of this Planzxxi ~nit Development will occur in nccordaza~ with the STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER da~ of OOT i 1 1997 N.~I)Z~:S GATEI~! Z3LI~ '~T,TST BENEFICIARY Goodman 1993 Family Trust dtd 1/13/93 Acme Investment Co. U/A Dated 5/2/89 M/B Edward S. Blackburn ~BO Edward S. Blackburn Ruth M. Campbell and Cleveland L. ua/dated 12/21/79, M/B Ruth M. James A. Cunningham and Jill A. Cunningham $. M. Gleason & Co. Charles Gozd~r John A. Groetsch, Jr. Cecily Kohler Walter E. Lakoff : William Joseph Mobley Trust Angels M. Monahan Renee Virginia Moss Education Fund Elizabeth Patton: Moss Educe%ion Fund Catherine Moss Loop Education Fund Eddie E. Neese Ameta Sue Pratt The Patton Corp. G. Robert Richards and Jean R. Richards Jointly With Right Of Survivorship William D. Seiffert Betty E. Skonnord Waterford Mortgage Corp. Burdette R. Weaver Bartlett B. Wick Campbell, Campbell CITY, STATE Naples, FL Cedar Rapids, IA Bonita Springs, FL Naples, FL Naples, FL Bradford, PA Palos Park, IL Sinibel, FL Centreville, VA Riclm~nd, IN Naples, FL Naples, FL Ann Arbor, MI Ann Arbbr, MI Ann Arbor, MI Fort ~ers, FL Nevport, AK Ann Arbor, MI Ann Arbor, MI Bonita Springs, FL Naples, FL Naples, FL I. AIG~ ~ .4/e IUFI~R ZXII~ (ILEX IPACIE: '- VJdlE~ LAKE: CROSS SE:CllON OCT 1 & 1997 & EXHIBIT B · .,,q,.,,,.w--,v.,M)m.,,r, MANAGEliNT PLAN ORDZNANCE 97- , e) 2 4 A~ ORDIN~C~ AP, EI~ZNG OPJ:)INANCE I4'0M~R_0:I.-~02, 7 ~ O~I~ ZONING A~ ~ ~~ ~E01 10 ~OP~ ~T~ ON ~ N~ SIDE OF PINE ~ 21 OF L~NG~N RO~, IN S~ON 7, ~P 49 12 ~~ ~ ~RIDA, ~SI~ING O~ 13.45 13 ~ OF O~IN~CE ~ 15-29, ~ ~, 14 GAT~Y P~ ~ BY P~IDING ~ E~I~ DA~. .o 15 16 WHE~tEAS, R. Bruce Anderson of Young, van Aliendecp and 17 P.A., representing Sin Colosiuo, Trustee, petitioa~ the ~ 0£ 18 county conissioners to change the zoning classification 0£ t~e herein 19 described real property; O~ 20 NOW THEREFORE BE IT eRDA/NED BY THE DOARD OF O0OFI~ COI~ISSI 21 OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; 22 23 The zoning Classification of the herein described real prope~cy 24 located in Section ?, Township 4.9 South, Range 2& East:, Collilr 25 County, Florida, is changed from 'PUD" to 'PUD" Plann~ Developaent in &¢cordaaci vtth iht PUD Doc~ment, itl~aM ~eto 27 Exhibit "l", which ii incorporated herein and by rlferenoe Badl 28 hereof. The Official Zoning Atlas ](ap nuabered GGZ01, is *described 29 Ordinance Nu=ber 91-102, the Collier County Land Developuent Code, 30 hereby anended accordingly. 32 Ordinance Number 85-29~ &e mnded~ known el the laplei 33 PUD, idopted on Ju~e 1l~ 1985 by tho Board of CmmtF Colmif~lo~ez~ 34 Collier County, ii hereby repelled in its PAGE OCT l i 1997 ~£C'1'ION TI~R£E: This Ordinance shall become effective upofl filing vita the Departmemt of Sta~e. PASSF~ AHD DULY A~OPTED J~ ~e Soard ot ~y Co~issAon~s of Collier County, Florida, ~hls ... day o~ , xgo?. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF C0~Y CO~MISSXONE~-~ C0~LZE~ CO[~FA"Z, FLORIDA BY: TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, CHAX~N 1 2 4 S $ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND 15 LEGAL SUFFICIENCY 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 MARJORIE M. STUDENT ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY PUD-85-19(1) O~DXNANCE/XgX22 PAGE2 OCT 1 A 1997 NAPLES GATEWAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Prepared for: The Naples Gateway Land Trust Prepared by: Hole, Montes & Associates, Inc. 715 Tenth Street South Naples, FL 34102 Young, VanAssenderp & Vamadoe 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Ste. 300 Naples, FL 34108 HM File No. 96.63 Revised 6/30/97 December 23, 1996 Date Filed: Date Review by CCPC: Date Approved by BCC: Ordinance No: TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SECTION I - Statement of Compliance · SECTION II - Property Ownership, Legal Description and Short Title SECTION III - Statement of Intent and Project Description SECTION IV - General D~elopment Regulations SECTION V - Permitted Us~s & Dimensional Standards SECTION VI - Transportation Requirements SECTION VII - Utility and Engin¢cring Requirements SECTION VIII - Water Management Requirements SECTION IX - Environmen~l Requirements EXHIBITS B. PUD Master Plan Masonry Wall Detail 3 4 5 6 I1 14 15 16 17 AGE SECTION I STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of 13.45 acres of property in Section 7, Townslfip 49 South, Range 26 East, a~ a Planned Unit Development to be known as the NAPLES GATEWAY PUD will b~ in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the following reasons: 1.I Tl~ ~ubjeet In'Otm'ty is located in an Interchange Activity Center as designated in the Futu~ Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. 1.2 Activity Centers are the preferrext locations for the coneenU'ation of commercial uses and permit the full array of such uses. 1.3 Improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable land development regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the Futur~ Land U~e Element. 1.4 The project will be served by a full range of .~-,rviee~, including sewer and water by the County resulting in an efficient and economical expansion of facilities as required in Policies 3.1H and 3.1L of the Future Land Use Element. 1.5 The project contains a mix of commercial uses combined with architectural controls and extensive screening and buffering that are designed to make the project compatible with and complementary to both nearby planned commercial and residential land uses, as required by Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. , 1.6 All final local Development Orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Concurrency Management System as implemented by the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. 2.1 SECTION II PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SHORT TITLE PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The irroperty is owned by the Naples O,neway Land Trust. 2.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Tracts 29, 44 and 45 Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 35 as recorded in Plat Book ?, Page 85 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida LESS road Right-of-Way described in OR 866, Pages 1663 & 1664 and OR 901, Pages 304 & 305 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, containing 13.45 net acres more or less. 2.3 SHORT TITLE This ordinance shall be known and cited as the "NAPLES GATEWAY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT". 3.1 3.2' 3.3 3.4 SECTION III STATEMENT OF INTENT AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION INTRODUCTION The developer's intent is to establish a Planned Unit Development meeting or exceeding the applicable standards of the Collier County Land Development Code. It is the purpose of this document to set forth guidelines for future development of the project that meet accepted planning principles and practices, and to implement the Collier County Growth Management Plan. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project is comprised of 13.45 acres, more or less, and is located on the north side of Pine Ridge Road, approximately one half mile to the east of Livingston Road. LAND USE PLAN The project permits a range of commercial uses to meet neighborhood shopping needs as well as the motoring public traveling to and from 1-75. The PUD Master Plan depicts a wetland preserve area, internal circulation, open spaces, landscape buffer areas, and external access points. The PUD Master Plan is designed to be flexible in~__~nueh as the size and configuration of commercial areas will not be finally determined until subdivision approval is obtained. PROJECT PHASING The anticipated time for build-out of the entire project is six (6) years or by December 31,2003. 4.1 4.2 4.3 PURPOSE SECTION IV GENERAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, and the r~'pective land rises. GENERAL Regulations for development of the NAPLES GATEWAY PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this document, PUD-Planned Unit Developmen! District and other applicable sections and p,a'ts of the Collier County Land Development Code and the Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorizes the construction of improvements, such as but not limited to Final Subdivision Plat, Final Site Development Plan Approval, Excavation Permit and Preliminary Work Authorization. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the County Land Development Code shall apply. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of building permit application. Ail conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the NAPLES GATEWAY PUD shall become part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the PUD site may be developed. Do Unless modified, waived or excepted by this PUD, other provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code, where applicable, remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land which comprises this PUD. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a Concurrency review under the provisions of Div. 3.15 of the Collier County Land Development Code at the earliest or next to occur of either Final Site Development Plan Approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this development. si'rE CLEARING AND DRAINAGE Clearing, grading and earthwork shall be in accordance with Sectio~ Collier County Land Development Code, and site drainage work shal: with Section 3.2.8.3.7 of the Collier County Land DevelOpment Code. 4.4 4.5 4.6 EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES Easements, where required, shall be provided for water management areas, conservation areas, utilities and other purposes as may be required by Collier County and other permitting agencies. All necessary easements, dedications or other instruments shall be granted to ensure continued operation and maintenance of all services and utilities, in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are requested. AMENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN The Master Plan is designed to be flexible with regard to the placement of buildings, the configuration of lots, the location of the internal circulation system, and water management facilities, as long as the final design complies with all the applicable portions of the PUD ordinance and the building heights and setbacks are the same as depicted on the PUD Master Plan for the proposed planned commercial development. The Planning Services Director shall be authorized to approve minor changes and refinements to the NAPLES GATEWAY Master Plan upon written request of the developer based on the above and the following, in addition to the standards l;rovided in Article 2, Division 2.7, Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code. To reconfigure lakes, wetland preserve areas, ponds, or other water management facilities where such changes are consistent with the criteria of the South Florida Water Management District and Collier County. 2. Internal realignment of rights-of-way. e Reconfiguration of the development envelopes where there is no encroachment into buffer areas and ali pertinent setback requirements provided for in'this ordinance are met. PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS Exhibit "A" of the PUD Master Plan, constitutes the required PUD Development Plan. Subsequent to PUD approval, a Preliminary Subdivision Plat shall be submitted for the entire area covered by the PUD Master Plan pursuant to the requirements of Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The Site Development Plan for individual tracts shall be submitted and reviewed in accordance with all provisions of Div. 3.3, Site Development Plans of the Collier County Land Development Code, unless otherwise provided for within this PUD, and prior to the issuance of a building permit or other required development orders. 7 OOT 1 1997' 4.7 PROVISION FOR OFF-SITE REMOVAL OF EARTHEN MATERIAL 4.8 4.9 The excavation of earthen material and its stockpiling in preparation of water management facilities or to otherwise develop water bodies is hereby permitted. If, after consideration of fill activities on those buildable portions of the project site are such that there is a surplus of earthen material, then its off-site disposal is also hereby permitted subject to the following conditions: Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a "Development Excavation" pursuant to Sec. 3.5.5.1.3, Land Development Code, whereby off-site removal shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total volume excavated up to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards. A timetable to facilitate said removal shall be submitted 1o the Planning Services Director for approval. Said timetable shall include the length of time it will take to complete said removal, hours of operation and haul routes. C. All provisions of Sec. 3.5, Land Development Code are applicable. SUNSET AND MONITORING PROVISIONS The NAPLES GATEWAY PUD shall be subject to Sec. 2.7.3.4, of the Collier County Land Development Code. Time Limits for Approved PUD Master Plans and See. 2.7.3.6, Monitoring Requirements. POLLING PLACES 4.10 4.11 Any community recreation/public building/public room located within the NAPLES GATEWAY PUD may be used for a polling place, if determined necessary by' the Supervisor of Elections, in accordance with Sec. 2.6.30 of the Collier County Land Development Code. NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS The project shall preserve native habitat, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.9.5, Vegetation Removal, Protection, and Preservation Standards, of the Collier County Land Development Code. COMMON AREA MA/NTENANCE Common area maintenance, including the maintenance of common facilities, open spaces, preservation areas, and the water management facilities shall be the responsibility of a property owners association. AGENDA ITEU. -- OCT 14 1997 4.12 4.13 (i) (2) (3) (4) ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS All buildings, lighting, signage, landscaping and visible architecture infrastructure shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified. Said unified architecm.,'al theme shall include: a similar architectural design and use of similar materials and colors throughout all of the buildings, signs, and walls to be erected on the site. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the si~e. All buildings shall be primarily finished in light colors with stucco except for decorative trim. All roofs mus~ be tile or metal and shall be peaked. Decorative paral~ walls shall Ix: constructed above the roof lines on flat roofs, where tile or metal roofs are not feasible. A conceptual design master plan shall be submir,~! concurrent with the fu's~ ,,pplicafion for Sit~ Development Plan approval demonstrating compliance with thes~ standards, including any applicable requirements of Division 2.8 of the Collier County Land Development Code pertaining to architectural and site design guidelines that may be in effect. LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING Landscaping and buffering shall be in accordance with Division 2.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code, including the following requirements: A twenty (20) foot wide Type "D" Buffer shall be provided along Pine Ridge Road with the landscaping as required in Section 2.4.7.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. A ten (10) foot wide Type "A" Buffer shall be provided along the eastern/western PUD boundaries with the landscaping as required in Section 2.4.7.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. A twenty (20) foot wide TyI~ "D" Buffer shall be provided along Livingston Woods Lane with more stringent screening than required in Section 2.4.7.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Trees shall be spaced a minimum of fiReen (15) feet on-center and a single row of shrubs shall be spaced a minimum of thr~ (3) feet on-center, with both trees and shrubs located on the northern side of an eight (8) feet tall architecturally finished opaque masonry wall. Such wall shall have a common architectural theme with the other buildings and signage within the PUD, as described in Section 4.12 of this PUD Document, and be installed and maintained with the finished side out towards Livingston Woods Lane. Such trees and shrubs shall meet the requirements of Section 2.4.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. This buffer shall be installed as a required improvement for the fa-st Sit~ Development Plan within the subject PUD. Additionally, along the southern side of the wall, there shall be planted at least forty-five (45) Red Maple tr~s, or similar specie, that are at least eight (Ii) feet tall. A five (5) foot wide buffer along both sides of the internalandroadw2~ with trees spaced a minimum of twenty (20) feet on-center a (5) (6) 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 spaced a minimum of three (3) feet on-center. Such tr~'s and shrubs shall meet the requirements of Section 2.4.4 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Buffering between other internal parcels shall include a five (5) foot wide buffer along each parcel to b~ d~veloped, with trees spaced a minimum of twenty (20) feet on-center and a single row of shrubs spaced a minimum of three (3) feet on-center. Such trees and shrubs shall meet the requirements of Section 2.4.4 of the Collier County Land D~velopment Code. Required landscaping shall be maintained and, when it dies, such landscaping shall be replaced within ninety (90) days. SOLID WASTE Trash receptacles shall be screened on three (3) sides by a seven (7) foot high opaque masonry wall with an opaque gate on the remaining side for access. Such masonry wall shall also meet the architectural standards furfl~er described in Section 4.12 of this PUD Document. LIGHTING Pole lighting shall be prohibited. Axchitecmrally finished lampposts not exceeding a height of twenty (20) feet shall be permitted on all lots fronting on Pine Ridge Road. Lampposts not exceeding a height of twelve (12) feet shall be permitted on lots abutting Livingston Woods Road. Lighting shall meet the architectural standards further described in Section 4.12 of this PUD Document. Lighting shall be designed so that glar~ does not extend off-site onto residential properties, SIGNS Signs shall be permitt~ as de. scribed in Section 2.5 of the Collier County I. and Development Code except pole signs, as described in Section 2.5.5.2.3.1 shall not be permitted. Ground signs, as described in Section 2.5.5.2.3.1, shall be permitted but slmll not exceed a maximum height of eight (8) feet Signage shall also meet the architectural standards fin'ther described in Section 4.12 of this PUD document. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Such resources shall be subject to the requircments of Section 2.2.25 of thc Collier County Land Dcvclopment Code. 1o SECTION V PERMITTED USES AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted commercial uses and development standards for areas within the NAPLES GATEWAY PUD designated on Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan. 5.2 OENERAL DESCRIPTION The land usc acreage tabulations for the Naples Gateway arc depicted on the PUD Master Plan. This acreage is based on conceptual designs and is subject to further refinement. Actual acreages for developmental and open space areas will be provided at the time of approval of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat. 5.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure, or pasx thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: 1. Amusements and recreation services, indoor (groups 7911 except discotheques, 7929, 7991). Apparel and accessory stores (groups 5611-5699). Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations (groups 5511,5531, 5541) with services and repairs as described in Section 2.6.28 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Automotive repair, services, parking, car washes (groups 7514, 7515, 7542 except track and bus washing, 7521 except tow-in parking lots). 5. Drinking Places (group 5813) only in conjunction with eating places. 6. Drug Stores and proprietary stores ( group 5912). 7. Eating establishments (group 5812). $. Food stores (groups 5411 including supermarkets, 5421, 5431 except roadside sales -5499). 9. General merchandise stores (groups 5311-5399). 10. Health services (groups 8011-8049, 8082). 11 OCT li 1997 11. Home furniture, furnishing, and equipment stores (groups 5712-5736). 12. Hotels and motels (group 7011). 13. Depository and Nondepository credit institutions. (groups 6011-6099) 14. Professional offices, Medical offices, and Management Consulting Services (groups 8011, 8741-8748) 15. Personal services (groups 7215, 7217, 7219-7261 except crematories, 7291). 16. ~al estate (,group 6531). 17. Any other convenience commercial use which is compatible in nature with the foregoing uses, including buildings for retail, service and office purposes consistent with the intent and purpose of this PUD. 5.4 5.5 5.6 USES ACCESSORY TO PERMITTED COMMERCIAL USES 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the uses permitted as of right in the Naples Gateway PUD. DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS, CONVENIENCE STORES AND GASOLINE STATIONS Fast food restaurants, convenience stores, and gasoline service stations are prohibited within three hundred (300) feet of Livingston Woods Lane. Loud speakers and ptibli¢ address systems are also prohibited. DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS The following development standards shall apply to permitted commercial uses in the Naples Gateway PUD. 1. Minimum Lot Area: Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred (17,500) Square Feet. 2. Minimum Lot Width: One Hundred (100) feet. 3. Minimum Yard Requirements: a. Front Yard: Twenty Five (25) feet. b. Side Yard: Fifteen (15) feet. 12 OCT 1 4 1997' Rear Yard: Fifteen (15) feet, however, one (I) story structures adjacent to Livingston Woods Lane are required to be s ~ back a minimum of: fifty (50) feet. Two (2) and three (3) story structures are required to be set back ninety (90) feet from Livingston Woods Lane. For one (I) story structures in excess of fifteen (15 feet in height, use of the fifty (50) foot setback area shall be reserved for water management, landscape buffers and open space. Maximum Height: Three (3) stories not to exceed 35 feet. Minimum Floor Area of Structures: One Thousand (1000) square feet of gross floor area. Maximum Density: Twenty-six (26) units per acre for motels and hotels. Minimum off-street parking and off-street loading: As required in Division 2.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Distance between structures: The distance between any two principal structures shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet or a distance equal to one-half the sum of their heights, whichever is greater. Merchandise storage and display. There shall be no outside storage or display of merchandise. 13 OCT 4 1997 SECTION VI TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this Section is to set forth the transportation commitments of the Project Developer. 6.1 The access points shown on the PUD Master Plan should be considered to be conceptual with respect to location along the project's frontage. The final location of any access shall be determined at the Sit~ Development Plan s'~ge and shall be consistent with all County Ordinances and regulations then in effect. 6.2 Any median opening or traffic signal, existing or proposed, shall be subject to the requirements of Collier County Resolution 92-422, the Access Management Policy. 6.3 The developer shall provide arterial level street lighting at each project entrance onto Pine Ridge Road. Said improvement shall be in place prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. 6.4 The internal roadway design shall not permit traffic flow from the commercial area onto Livingston Woods Lane. 6.5 The petitioner shall provide a future vehicular cross-access easement to the abutting parcel to the east, prior to Final Site Development Plan Approval. This roadway easement shall be maintained and operated by the developer or his designee. 6.6 Each access point shall have a separate westbound right turn lane if it is to function as an entrance point. An exit-only will not require a turn lane. A continuous right turn lane along the property frontage will not be permitted. 6.7 When requested by the County, and subject to the approval of a Developler's Contribution Agreement for road impact fee credits for the fair market value of the dedication, pursuant to Ordinance 92-22, as amended, the developer shall dedicate up to twenty (20) feet of fight-of-way along the north side of Pine Ridge Road for futura roadway, bike path and drainage improvements. Such dedication shall not be deducted fxom the PUD property for purposes of deletmining yards, lot area or lot dimensions as provided in Section 2.2.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code. This dedication shall occur at the earlier of either the developer's convenience or within one hundred and twenty (120) days of when requested by the County. 6.8 Pedestrian access shall be provided between all parcels and uses in the development, at the time of Final Site Development Plan approval for each individual tract. 6.9 Substantial competent evidence shall be provided by the developer to the effect that the project is designed to provide capacity and treatment for historical road~ addition, site drainage shall not be penni~ to discharge ~y into 00114 1997 14 SECTION VII UTILITY AND ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS TI~ purpose of this Section is to set forth the utilities and engineering commitments of the l~jec~ I~veloper. 7.1 UTILITIES Potable water will be supplied by thc County Water service system through m exi~ng 12 inch main running east and west on the north side of Pine Ridge Road. All construction plans and technical specificafons for the proposed project shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department, Engineering Review Services prior to commencement of construction. On site water mains shall be installed by the developer at no cog to the Coun~r and shall be Master Metered. All on site water mains shall be owned and maintained by the developer, his assigns or heirs. Be Connection to the County sewer system shall be to the County force main located on the south side of Pine Ridge Road, at no cost to the County. Sewage shall be pumped by an on-site station to thc County system. All co--on plans and technical specifications shall be approved by thc Planning Department, Engineering Review Service, prior to construction. All on-site sewer including pump station and force main up to the tie in point shall be owned and maintained by the developer, his assigns or heirs. 7.2 ENGINEERING Be Detailed paving, grading, site drainage and utility plans shall be submitted to' the Planning Services Director for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless and until approval of the proposed co~on in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by the Planning Services Director. Design and cortstruction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with all applicable provisions of thc Collier County Land Development Code, including those setforth in Division Three (3). Ce Thc developer, and all successors in intere~'t to the developer, are he.by placed on notice tl~ they shall be requix~ to satisfy the requitemems of all County development ordinances or codes in effect prior to or conament with any subsequent development order relating to this site, including Site Development Plans and any other application that will result in the issuance ora final or local development order. 15 SECTION VIII WATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS The Imrpose of this Section is to set forth the water management commitments of the Project Developer. 8.1 IX-iailed paving, grading end site drainage plans shall be submitted to thc Development Services Director for review. No construction permits shall be issued unless and until spproval of the proposed construction in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by Planning Services Dir~oar. 8.2 Design and con,vuucfion of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with tbe appropriate provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code.. 8,3 Landscaping shall not be placed within the water management ar~as unless specifically permitted by the Collier County Land Dcvelopmer, t Code. 8.4 An excavation permit shall be required for the proposed lake in accordance with Div. 3.5 of the Land Development Code and South Florida Water Management District Rules. 8.5 The subject property is currently under common ownership with the adjacent property to the west. Under this circumstance, a water management system may be shared with property to the west and the cypress area within this system as generally depicted on the PUD Master Plan, shall be preserved and enhanced. Alternatively, water management areas may be configured along the northern edge of the planned development. 16 OCT 14 1997 SECTION IX ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS The purpose of this section is to set forth the environmental requirements of thc project developer. 9.1 The project shall meet all pertinent 14 environmental related requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, including the Coastal Zone and Conservation Management Element, in effect at the time that requests are made for Site Development Plan approval. 9.2 A wetland preserve area is depicted on the PUD Master Plan. This wetland is under common ownership with the adjacen' property to the west. The project's plan for development is to preserve this wetland area in its entirety and to enhance it with shared water management between the two properties. 9.3 Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the state of Florida Environmental Resource Permit rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning Environmental Review Staff. Removal of exotic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitigation for impacts to Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. 9.4 All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statutes. In the event the project does not require platting, all conservation areas shall be recorded as conservation/preservation tracts or easements dedicated to an approved entity or to Collier County with no responsibility for maintenance and subject to the uses and limitations similar to or as per Florida Statutes Section 704.06. 9.5 An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-flee) plan for the site, with emphasis on the conservation/preservation areas, shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Review Staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/construction plan approval. 9.6 Proof of ownership for the adjoining property to the west shall be provided to Curt'eat Planning Review Staffprior to Final Site Plan Approval. 17 OBT 14 1997 mm LAK[ ~ IN TH~ PG TO ~ FOR ll.m~ ImARCE). WATIDt UAN~ ~ WAY m~ LOGATEX) IN ~ EXHIBIT PUD MASTER PLAN AGE~ OCT 1 A 1997 .OCT J. 4:1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDiNG ORDiNANCE NO. 80..47 CALLED THE COLLIER COUNTY PARKING ORDINANCE, RAISING PARKING FINES AND OTHER SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS. OBJECIIVE: That the Board of County C.,om,~oners consider adoption of an Ordinance that will amend Ordinance No. 80-47 a~ amended, by ameodh~ Section Four to authorize vehicle tow away zones; amending Section Seven to establish a ~ penalty of two hundred and fifty dollars for uncontested handicapped parking violations; also increasing the cml penalties for all other vehicle violations for parking, stopping, and standing from ten dollars to thirty dollars; specifying how penalties and late payment fees are to be distributed; amending Section Nine to eliminate the requirement of notice by registered mail and to amend other procedures. CONSIDERATIONS: The attached Ordinance will amend Ordinance 80-47, as amended. The substantive changes are as follows: 1) The penalty for uncontested handicapped parking violations will be increased to $250.00. Section 316.008(4) Florida Statute, authorizes Collier County to set a fixed fine up to $250.00 for these uncontested violations. Penalties for contested handicapped parking violations must be determined by the trial judge in each case. 2) Authorizes designation of vehicle parking violation "tow-away" zones. 3) Non-handicapped parking stopping, and standing fines are now $10.00 except for fire lane violations, which are $25.00. All such fines including fire lane fines are being increased to $30.00. 4) The proposed Ordinance authorized the Clerk of Courts to send notice of such violations by regular mail. Certified mail will no longer be required. FISCAL IMPACT: The increase in revenues to be generated by the new Ordinance is approximately $65,200, it is also anticipated that the Clerk's anmial postage cost will dccrease by approximately $2,000.00. The additional revenue vould be distributed as follovs: _Depar tmen t Parks & Recreation Couxt Firms &Forteimres Clerk of Circuit Operations Hone. Fund Hame Fund Ho. Cost Center General 001 156362 General 001 431510 Clerk of 010 321210 Courts ,ILl~OUnC $32,600 $21,700 $10,900 Parking Ordinance Executive Summary Page Two RECOMMENDATION: That the Board consider adoption of the attached Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 80-47, as amended, authorizing e~blishment of tow away zone~, r.f~ablishing that the handicapped parking fines, in ur,xontested e.~e~ r, hall b~ $250.00, increasing non handicapped parking fines, fines from $10.00 to $30.00 and authorizing the Clerk of Cour*,s :o utilize regular US mail for notification to cited vehicle owners. PREPARED BY: - ~ip Camp, CFM, Director The Department Of Facilities Management REVIEWED BY: ~oma~ C. P~lmer A~i~tant Coun~ ~ t~D~' //' DATE: Leo E: Ocha, ~r., Administrator Suppo~ Se~ic~ Di~ion DATE: 2 3 4 7 11 12 13 14 I? 18 19 20 21 24 25 27 29 30 34 ~7 40 41 42 43 44 45 4~ 47 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 80-47, AS AMENDED, TIlE COLLIER COUNTY PARK/NG ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING SECTION FOUR TO AUTHOR/ZE VEHICLE TOW AWAY ZONES; AMENDING SECTION SEVEN TO ESTABLISH A CIVIl, PENALTY OF TWO HUNDRED AND FIFFY DOLLARS FOR UNCONTESTED HANDICAPPED P.'~OJ~NG VIOLATIONS; ALSO IN~ING ~ CIVIL PENALTIES FOR ALL OTHER VEHICLE VIOLATIONS FOR PARKING, STOPPING, AND STANDING FROM TEN DOLLARS TO THIRTY DOLLARS; SPECIFYING HOW PENALTTES AND LATE PAYMENT FEES ARE TO BE DISTRIBUTED; AMENDING SECTION NINE TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT OF NOTICE BY REGISTERED ?,fAIL AND TO AMEND OTHER PROCEDURES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN'IO THE COUNTY'S CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier Counv/, Florida, h~s adopted Ordinance No. 80-47, as ~'nended, called the Collier County Parking Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Board hereby authorizes designation of vehicle parking violation tow. away zones, which authorization is not provided for in Ordinance No. 80-47; md WHEREAS, a judicial decision styled City of Wezt Palm Beach v. Lovely, 3 Fla. Law Weekly, Supp. 617,'holds that the specific amount of thc penalty for uncontested handicapped parking violations may be fixed by Ordinance, but that penalties for contested handicapped parking violations must be established by thc ~aljudg¢; and WHEREAS, Section 316.008, Florida Statutes, in conjunction with Section 318.18, Florida Statute. r, authorizes Collier County to set a fixed fine o£up to $250.00 for uncontested handicapped parking violations; and a fine o£ $250.00/'or such uncontested violations is now esublished in ~s Ordinance; ~nd W~P,.EAS, Ordinance No. 80-47, as n"ncndcd, provides t.~t ~11 non-h,xnctic~ped p~'king, ~opping and standing fines ~ $I0.00 except the fie for a fir~ lane violation, wh/ch is $25.00; ~ WHE~S, the Bo~l of County Commissioners, on June ! I, 199~, determined that ~he non-h~dicapped pzrl'Jng, stopping md stand/rig ve. Mcle viol~on fines now established by Collier County Ordiru~ce No. 8047, ss tmcaded, ~r~ not sufficicm de~erreat Io dissu~e the parking, st-riding, and/or stopping violations, arid tJ~ conddemticm should I~ give~ to rdsing all such fines to $30.00. NOW, ~OR.E, BE IT ORDAINED BY TH~ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIO~ OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ~ 1997 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 36 37 38 SECrlON ONE: Section Four of Collier County Ordinance No. 80-47, ts amended, entitled "Placement of Official Parldng Signs" is hereby amended by adding a new subsection ('I() to authorize designation of vehicle tow-away zones, ts follows: SECTION FOUR: Placement Of Official Pa. king Signs. I. The Tr'znzportation Services Adminiztr~or and/or the County Manager or his designee, shall investigate and m~ke rrcomme~._s_~ons to the Board of Cotmty Commissioners concerning p~king re~'iclions to be pl~ce, d upon stro~ ~d hlghway~ in the unincorpor~_!~ m of Collier County. These r~'.ormnendations shah be in ~ccordance w/th the terms of this Ordinanc~ in an effort to clearly inform the public a~ well as to aid in the implementation of the conditions set forth in this Ordinance. Such r~.omrnendafions shall include, but are not limited to the folIowlng: A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. I. lC all night parking; angle parking; parking on the Ici side on one way stretts or highways; parking on one way str~'U; parking in hazardous places; curb loading z, oncs; bus stops, taxi stmds, etc.; prohibited parking; limited pa~rking; dct~n'nined and d~ignated meter parking zone.s; and tow-aWay ZOTI¢S. 2. Upon the advice of the Trms~rtation S~a'vices A~ninistrator md/or County Manager or his d~ign~, the Board of County Commissioners may, by resolution, designate ccrlain areas along County roads and other ~ owneddleased by Collier County as being areas in which parking slanding, or stopping is rrztricted or prohibited. It shall not be necetsary for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt · r~olution whe~ cfim-ia for re. ring or prohibiting standing, stopping and parldng have boom ~'tablished in this Ordina.,~c~ or by s~y previou~ r~zolution or policy establishing restri~on$ or pmhibitior~ 3. Upon the Board of County Cornmlssio~rs macring a r~olution either r~'tricting or prohibiting parking, standing, or stopping in cemin ar~s tlong County rogh, such roads shall be posted with signs sp~rying the r~'tricIions or prohibitions of parking, standing, or stopping, as enacted by the Board of County Commissioners. SECTION TWO: S~'tion Seven of Collier Coumy Ordinm~ No. 80-47, mtitl~ "Penalty for Violations" is herr.,by ~un=_',4~___ ts follows:. Words ~ ~m ~kl~l; words I SECTHON SEVEN: Pemity for Viol~om. 2 A. Pt~r~um! to §318.1~, ~o~ ~, 3 Fiv~ ~ Six of~is ~i~ sh~l ~ d~ to ~ 4 shall be m~4 a ci~l ~ ~g ~ ~ foll~g ~ulc: S (1) Tv:~V/..~"-.. ~c~....._~~.~.~-'-- 7 ~ntmt~ violali~ of g~fi~n Six of ~ ~din~ hu~ ~ fifty ($250.~) doll~ for ~~ ~o~ of 11 ~: ~e ~on commlttln~ ~e violation ~d ~ valid ~~ 13 ~rd wi~ subs~ion 31E. 1 g(~. ~7od~ x~at,,t~. ~ 14 ~e fin~ ~!1~ for ~ol~g ~on 15 ~ shall be us~ in the following m~ 17 ~) Two-~i~ to ~ ~ I g and ~ual oppon~ity to qu~li fi~ physi~lly di~l~ 19 ~o conduc~ public aw~en~s pro~s in ~e ~un~ ~n~ing physically di~l~ 20 (2) ~..,, ~-.~,-~e~ ~ .~.-.~-"-- ~ f$30.~_ 21 ~ ~ provis~ of S~Hon Five of 22 penalty for violado~ of S~6on Five ~f ~is ~dln~ 23 (a~ S I 0.~: Co~ P~in~ Fin~ 27 B. Each day ~y violation ~ or ~nfinu~ ~1 ~ a ~t~ off, se. For 28 parking in exc~ of ~ tim~ au~o~ ~ ~ public p~g ~ ~ ~cc~ing ~ tim~ 29 pe6~ b~yond ~at au~ofi~ ~ ~e m~ fim~ ~ for ~d ~g p~ ~I ~t~ 30 a s~le 32 ($5.~) doll~ if pa~t i~ ~t ~v~ by ~ ~ 33 regist~ o~ ~ p~t to Sub,on 34 35 36 37 SECTION THREE: Section N~nc of Collier County Ordinmc. e No. 80-47, u ~mended. entitled "Payment of Civil Penalt/~s snd Procedures to Enforce Payment for Violations" is hereby amended to read ~s follow~: ?.a?..mt otCivil Pc~ltics end procaines to ~ p~a~nt for 39 SECTION NINE: 40 v~o[a~ao~z.. ~ ~ 4 (30) days afl~ ~e ~e ofi~ of~e ci~ 5 (I) Pm~t of ~e ~n~l~ i~ on 6 clerk, pu~mt to ~e di~Uo~ on ~ 7 (2) A h~ng may ~ ~u~ by 8 cit~ vehicle's Re~st~ ~ for ~e 9 conc~ing a p~ing violation. ~y p~n ~u~ng I 0 fo~ pr~ by ~e co~ty attom~ indicting hi, ~ h~ ~ll~m ~ ~ at ~ h~ng 11 at a dam ~d place s~ifi~ ~n. ~y ~n w~ ~u~ m h~ng ~ ~ ~t ~ in 12 ac~rd~e with said statist ~hall 13 penalties ~ ~c ~un may, in i~ dig~ion, ~ ~ ~uig ~li~ ~ ~1 ~i~ 14 B. Pursuit to the pm~sion~ of S~ion 316.1967, Eod~ S~mt~, mn el~on to 15 rcqu~t a hearing ~nstimtcs a w~v~ of ~e fight w pay ~e ~1~ indi~ on ~e p~ng 16 citation, ~d a couc~ judge zfl~ ~id h~ng may 17 (S 1 ~.~) ~II~, plus ~ corn for ~h p~ng ~ol~iom How~=, 18 being p~ining to a h~dicap p~ing violation 19 p~aIty indicat~ on ~e p~king citation, ~d 20 hundred fifty (S250.~) doll~ fine, pl~ ~ ~s~ p~ ~ol~om 21 C. U~n ~eipt of a ~mpl~ p~ng ci~tion ~bmi~ by m ~w Enfog~t 22 O~cer, pu~u~t t~ S~tion Ei~t of this ~din~, ~e ~ s~i no~ ~e ~gist~ o~ 23 ~nt list~ on such ci~tion of i~ is~ce if ~ hu ~ ~ ~ to ~e ci~Hon p~t to 24 Subsection A of ~is s~tion. Such notice s~l be ~t by ~ ~ ~1 ~d $~II ~fo~ 25 said rcgist~ o~ coning ~e na~ r - ~mt ......... ~ ..... a or p~sio~ of S~Hon 316.1967, Hofi~ fine not to exc~ ~e H~ (S 1~.~) ~llm, pl~ ~ ~m, ~t for ~i~ p~g 38 violation, for which a ~e ~ ~ ~o H~ Fi~ ($~0.~) ~I~ ~y 39 ~. ~y ~n ~n ~ ~ ~ ob~ 4 6 7 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 at a he.~fing ~ dir~ by thc ~ ~ d'~! b~ ~ubjec~ to contempt im:ceedin~ or to ~ueh other permltie, u the Court rr~y, in ia diser~on, impo,~ to roquir= complimx:~ with t,~id SECTION FOUR: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY In the ~vent this Ordir~nce conflicts with ~ny other ordinsace of Collier Cowry or otlgr applicable law, the mor~ re.tic, jvc shtll ~pply. If my phrtu~ or portion ofthis Ordinzac~ i~ lgld invalid or unconstitutior~l by any cou.~ of comp~tmt jm'isdiction, such portion sh~ll b~ dsoemed · teparate, di~nct. ~:1 ir. depend~nt provision and ~ch holding d~ll not afro· th~ v~idity of~ remaining potion. . SECTION FIVE: INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES. Thc provisions of this Ordinance shall become and !~ tr~le · ~ ofthe C, ode of L~vs ~d Ordinances ot' Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may !~ r~numbemt or r¢lettered to accomplish such, and the v:ord "ordinance" may be changed to "section," or any other appropriate word. SECTION SIX: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the D~a.,'tment o£State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commission~ o£ Collier County, Florida, this day of ,1997. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By:. DEPUTY CLERK Approved as to form and su~cic~c~, T~omu C. P~mer Asslstan~ County A~m~y BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLII~. COUNTY, FLORIDA By:. 'm~ortrr L HANCOC~ ~ $ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION NO. CU-97-16 BRUCE E. TYSON, ASLA, AICP OF WILSON, MILLER, BARTON & PEEK, INC. REPRESENTING THE WILLOW RUN TRUST REQUESTING CONDITIONAL USE "1" OF THE "A" RUKAL AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT HAVING THE EFFECT OF EXPANDING THE WILLOW RUN QUARRY EARTH MINING OPERATIONS ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS I1, 12, 13 & 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 200 ACRES MORE OR LESS. OBJECTIVE: Thi.~ petition seeks approval of a conditional use of property zoned "A" Rural Agricultural for commercial earth mining. Said property and earth mining conditional use petition constitutes an expansion of an existing earth mining activity. CONSIDERATIONS: The properties on which earth mining activities are contemplated lie three-quarters (~) to one and one- quarter (1 ¼) miles east of CR-951. The petition is intended to establish a commercial earth mining operation on land contiguous to an existing earth mining operation. The properties lie north and south of the land from which the existing earth mining operations are performed. The north site is 120 acres, while the south site is 80 acres. There will be a total of 200 acres added to an existing site area of 330 acres. The land to the north, east, south and west is all vacant and zoned "A" Rural Agricultural, except for a portion along the north parcel which is contiguous to an undeveloped (mobile home) PUD. ~ No residences will be affected by the line haul route from the mining activities to CR-951. The record advises that there is no residential neighborhood within a substantial distance of the areas to be earth mined. The nearest residence is approximately 1,100 feet to the northeast of the most northern property included in this petition. Small acreage parcels have been created in a small ranehettes fashion along LeBulTs Road, Benfield Drive and Newman Drive northeast of the most northerly property, however, most of the parcels are undeveloped and lie some appreciable distance from the most northerly property and are accessed from the most eastern extension of Davis Boulevard. The EAB reviewed this petition and the3' recommended approval subject to stipulations which have been included in the draft resolution for approval. Their recommendation is tantamount to attesting to requirements of the GMP and LDC relative to environmental and water management requirements. 1 OgT 1 4 1997 The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition and they unanimously (7 to 0) recommended approval. No person spoke or otherwise communicated any level of objection to this petition. Conditional uses require a findings of fact. Both staff and planning commission analysis of those findings support a decision to approve the conditional use. FISCAL IMPACT: This amendment by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on the County. However, if this amendment achieves its objective, the land will be developed. The mere fact that new development has been approved will result in a future fiscal impact on County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help off-set the impact of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects in the Capital Improvement Element needed to maintain adopted levels of service for public facilities. In the event that impact fee collections are inadequate to maintain adopted levels of service, the County must provide supplemental funds from other revenue sources in order to build needed facilities. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Petitions deemed to be consistent with all provisions of the Growth Management Plan can not have an impazt on the Collier County Growth Management Plan. This petition was reviewed for consistency and was found to be consistent with all provisions of the Growth Management Plan. In view of the consistency findings, staff finds that there is no negative or other adverse impact resulting from the adoption of this petition. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance No. 90-24 at the earliest or next to occur of either final SDP approval, final plat approval, or building permit issuance applicable to this development. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staff's analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outs;de an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Sm'vey and Assessment is required. PLAaNNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: That petition CU-97-16, being a conditional use for certain property as herein described for commercial earth mining operations on land zoned "A" Rural Agricultural, be approved mabiect to the terms and conditions included in the draft Resolution for Adoption and Exhibits theret¢ ,~{I£~IS,,/T~II, 2 OCT 1 4 1997 CItl EF PLANNER REVIEWED BY: ~ROI~RT J.' M-O LHERF.,, AICI' CU~EI~Yr PLANNING M.~NAGE~ DATIg DOI~ALD W. ARNOLD, A!CP DATE PLANN~. G SERVICES DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR VINCENT A. CAUTERO, ADMINISTRATOR DATE COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. KNld,'n/EX SUMMARY/CU-97-16 OCT 1 4 199'~,: EMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: IULY 23, 1997 RE: PETITION NO: OWNER/AGENT: INING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DMSION CU-97-16, WILLOW RUN TRUST Agent: Brace E. Tyson, ASLA, AICP Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, Florida 34105 Owner: Willow Run Trust 5590 Shirley Street Naples, Florida 34109 Clyde C. Quinby, Trustee Joseph D. Bonness Jr. Contract Purchaser .REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks approval of a Conditional Use for "Commercial Earthmining" in the "A" P~ural Agricultural zoning district. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The property is located three quarters (3/4) of one (I) mile east of C.lL 951 in Sections 11, 12, 13 and 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. (See location map following page). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petition is intended to establish a commercial earthmining operation on land contiguous to an existing earth mining operation. The properties lie north and south of the land from wMch the existing earth mining operations are performed. The north site is 120 acres, while the south site is 80 acres. There will be a total of 200 acres added to an existing site area of 330 acres No. OOT 1 4 1991 , SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONIN(~: Existing: The property being added to the cturmat area wher~ earth mining is conducteA is vacant and zoned "A" Rural Agricultural Sm~rounding: The land to the north, east, south and west is all vacant and zoned "A" Rural Agricultural, except for a portion along the north parcel which is contiguous an undeveloped (mobile home) PUD. .GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONS!STENt; The subject property is located in the Urban Residential Fringe and Agricultm'al/Residential areas as shown oh the FLUE Map to the G~v~. The property is zoned "A" Rural Agricultural. The policy description of' intended land uses within the Agricultural/Residential areas provides for certain conditional uses which may include commercial earth mining. Consequently, this petition if approved would be consistent with ',he FLUE to the GMP. Other applicable elements of the GMP for which a consistency review was made are as follows: Transportation Element_ - Ingress and egress to the site will be over the existing drive from CR-951. Mining operations extended to the added land area will not affect access to and from the aggregated Analysis for consistency with TCE policies advises that this petition will not significantly impact CR- 951 nor does it denigrate any LOS relationships within its radius of development influence. Review of this petition by jurisdictional staff advises that this petition if approved will be consistent with the TCE to the GIMP. Conservation Elemenl - This petition was reviewed by the EAB on July 2, 1997. The EAB recommends approval based on incorporating certain conditions into any adopting development order. An Environmental Impact Analysis was done for the property which wts reviewed by the County's environmental staff and the EAB. By incorporating these conditions within_ the Resolution for Adoption this approval will be consistent with the Conservation element and LDC code requirements. Relative to other applicable elements of the GMP their goals, objectives and policies these can be achieved throu~ the inclusion of appropriate stipulations for approval which will direct permitting actions and future monitoring for compliance. HISTOR/C/ARCHAEOLOGICAI, IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner's property is located outside an area of historical and archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Therefore, no Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment is required. OCT 14 1997' .EVALUATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL, TRANSPORTATION AND INI"RASTRUCIURE The subject petition has been reviewed by the appropriate staffre~onsible for oversight related to the above referenced areas of critical concern. This primarily includes a review by the Community Development environmental and engineering staff, and the Transportation Services Department staff, and Natural Resources. This petition ,,,,,as reviewed by the EAB on Jaly 2, 1997. The EAB recommended approval subject to the inclusion of certain conditions of approval which are included in the Resolution for Adoption. .,CRITERIA EVALUATION: The Current Planning Staff has coordinated a comprehensive evaluation of this land u~e petition and the criteria on which a favorable determination must be based. This evaluation is intended to provide an objective, comprehensive overview of the impact~ of the proposed land use change, be they positive or negative, culminating in a staff recommendation based on that comprehensive overview. The below listed criteria are specifically noted in Section 2.7.4.4 of the Land Development Code thus requiring staff evaluation and comment, and shall be used as the bm;is for a recommendation of approval or denial by the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners. Each of the potential impacts or considerations identified during the staff review are listed under each of the criterion noted below, and are categorized as either pro or cons whichever the case may be, in the opinion of staff. Staff review of each of the criterion is followed by a summary conclusion culminating in a determination of compliance, non-compliance, or compliance with mitigation. a. Consistency with this code and Growth Management Plan. .Pro: A development order approval that is consistent with applicable elements ofthe GMP and provisions of the LDC, must be considered on the positive side of conditional use evaluative criteria. ...Con: _ Not applicable in view of its consistency evaluation with the GIMP and LDC. Summary Conclu~;ion ITindimzs): The proposed use is authorized in the Agrieultural/R~ designated areas and in zoning districts that subsequently provide for the use, either as a permitted or conditionally permitted use. In this case earth mining is authorized ax a "conditional use." The underlying hypothesis for conditional uses can best be described by the "but for" analogy, meaning but for certain characteristics of the conditional use it would generally be considered compatible with the underlying zoning district. Other related goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan and Land Development Code regulations can be applied to subsequently required development order approvals. OOT 1 4 1997 p,~o_ ~'~ be Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe, ~ i) Access to the property is via a private road which solely serves the properties from which mining activities arc conducted, thereby affording direct access to C.R. 951 a four lane median divided highway. 951. ii) No other had use is affected by vehiculaz movements from the project site to C.IL None. Summary Conclusion fFindin~s~: Aeee~s to the site including the two parcels which are the subject of this petition affor~irect access to C.R. 951 via a private roadway and has no impact on properties not a part of the earth mining operation. The effect the conditional use would have on neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects; Pro: i) Neighboring properties are undeveloped, therefore, there is no existing land use ora residential nature that can be impacted by mindng activities. The nearest residence is about 1,100 feet removed from the property. Con: None. Summary Conclusion (Findings): Given the nature of this land use there should be no glare or odor effects associated with its operation. The actual area of mining lies some distance from the near~ residence while one would assume that the mining activity is limited to daylight hours and therefore there should be no use of electrical yard lights or illuminations from moving vehicles. No offensive odors are associated with earth mining. The potential for an earth mining operation to have some detrimental noise and/or economic effect on neighboring property depen~ on the ctmracter of ~e neighborhood and the characteristics of the earth mining operation (i.e. casual operation as opposed to intensive operation blasting, stockpiling, etc. The record advises that there is no res/dential neighborhood w/thin_ a substant/al distance of the areas to be earth mined. The nearest residence is approx/maIely 1,100 feet to the northeast of the most northern propc,:ty included in this petition. Small acreage parc, eh have been created in a small ranchettes fashion along LeBufl's Road, Ben.field Drive and Newman Drive northeast of the most northerly property, however, most of the parcels are some appreciable distance from the most northerly pmper~ and are eastern extension of Davis Boulevard. ' 4 IOCT 14 1991 · The undeveloped PUD to the north ora portion of'the most northern parcel may eventually be impacted by noise and occasional blasting, however the timing of ils development is uncertain. d. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. Pro: The undeveloped nature of adjacent properties advises that an extension of earth mining to the added properties is not incompatible wiO~ adjacent land useage in view of their undeveloped status. ~on: None. Summar3/Conclusion fFindings): In view of the undeveloped namr~ of adjacent land then: can be a finding of incompatibility, particulazly in view of its Future Land Use designation as non-urban and agricultural. The function of the FAB and reviewing personnel is to advise if the water resotm:es and natural resources of Collier County will be degraded, or if approval can be structured to guarantee consistency with requirements. The EAB recommended approval of this petition subject to certain conditions of approval. This recommendation supports a conclusion that water and natural resources will not be impaired and therefore affect adjacent properties. GENERAL COMMENT: Earth mining as a land use activity is a use of land that should not be introduced into an extensively urbanized environment for obvious reasons of compatibility, however beyond the urbanized boundary the relationship of compatibility changes dramatically if one takes into account the potential nuisances that exists for residential properties from intensive agricultural practi~, and for economic reasons that support aggregate as an essential building block, and therefore critic, al to the land development industry. These relationships are important to any consideralion of earth mining beyond the urban botmdary, but nonetheless sufficiently clo~e to the urbanized area to off-ret excessive tramport~oa costs and wear and tear on punic highways. The more compelling considerations that ought to determine when an earth mining activity is authorized beyond the urban botmdary should focus on the following criteria: (i) (ii) (iii) Effect upon ground water resources Effect upon nattual resourc~ Visual impact following depletion of resource Collier County Ordinances address the above concerns while gencnally stipulatioqg"i~~l~ recommended for inclusion in any authorized Development Order to as.mm that tl[e~e o~ ~[I be met. " $ STAFF ,RECOMMENDATION; That the Coil/er County Planrdng Commission (CCPC) rccommcnd approval of Petition CU-97-16 as conditioned by the draft Resolution of Adoption. CHIEF PLANNER REVIEWED BY: ~OBERT J. MULHERE, AICP ~ CURRENT PLANNING MANAGER DOI~.ARNOLI~, AIcp - -- ' >.~RVIC~.S D~P,~~ Dm~oR VINCENT A. CAUTERO, ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNITY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. Petition Number: CU-97-16 StaffRq~ort for S~ternber 4, 1997 CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: MICHAEL A. DAVIS, CHALRMAN CU-97-I6 STAFF REPORT/md DATE DATE OCT 1 4 1997 Date APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONE AND CONDITIONAL USE ~"'" ? ~'" ' ' PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE COLLIER COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DMSION PLANNING SERVICES 1. Name of Applicant(s): Willow Run Trust Applicant's Mailing Address: 5590 Shirley Street u.,',.' 28 I~,.q7 City: Naples State: FL Zip: 34109 Applicant's Telephone Number: 941-597-2181 Is the Applicant the owner of the subject property? i'-'] Yes [~ No a) b) c) d) e) X If applicant is a land trust, so indicate and name beneficiaries below. If applicam is a corporation other than a public corporation, so indicate and name officers and major stockholders below. If applicant is a partnership, limited partnership or other business entity, so indicate and name principals below. If applicant is an owner, indicate exactly as recorded, and list all other owners, if any. If applicant is a lessee, attach copy of lease, and indicate actual owners if not indicated on the lease. If applicant is a contract purchaser, attach copy of contract, and indicate actual owner(s) name and address below. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) Name of Agent: Bruce E. Tyson, ASLA Firm: Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc. Agents Mailing Address: City: Naples Agent's Telephone Number: 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 State: Florida (941) 649-4040 Page 1 of 4 Zip: 34105 OCT 1 ,~ 1997 ,,,. /! DETAILED LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THE APPLICATION ('If space is inadequate, attach on separate page. If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description f~,,property involved in each district. If property is odd-shaped, submit copies of survey to 400' scale). THE APPLICANT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUPPLYING THE CORRECT LEGAL DESCRIPTION. IF QUESTIONS ARISE CONCERNING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, AN ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION SHALL BE REQUIRED. SECTION: 11,12,13,14 TOWNSHIP: 50 8 RANGE: 26E Refer to attachment 3 for legal description and Ezhiblt A for boundary dimensions. 4. S.ize of Property: varies fi. x varies ft. 5.' Address or location of subject property: 4300 County Road 951, Naples, Florida 34114 6. Existing Land Elevation: 9.5-11.0 7a. Date subject property acquired ~ , 19 7b. County Flood Criteria Elevation: or leased day of If Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option: and date option terminates: Does property owner own contiguous property to the subject property? If so, giv, e complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) Yes - See Attachment 3 This application is intended to cover: (Check which type of petition you are requesting): ~ A. Rezoning: Present Zoning: Requested Zoning: for: Conditional U~: 1 Zoning for: Commercial Earthmining P~g¢ 2 of 4 of.' a Rural Agricultrual O¢.,T 1 4 1997 10. (Attach additional sheets if necessary.): Reason why application should be approved. See Attachment 5 11. Is proposed use prohibited by deed restrictions? If yes, provide copy of the deed restrictions. Yes [~ No 12. 13. Is this request a result of a violation? If so, to whom was the notice served? Yes [~ No Ha~ a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? No Ifso, in whose nme7 14. Are there existing structures on the property? No rrm c~s [--1, FP,~u~ UI, ~omL~..O~E 1-], oT~E~ U1 I, o_.~/.~. ~. _~/.~,-~-~5~ ~-_]e. being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the contract purchaser of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, and all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I understand this application must be complete and accurate before a hearing can be advertised. "I further permit the undersigned to act as my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. ture of C-ofitr~ct Purchaser STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The fo~going Application was acknowledged befom me thh o~.].gr- dayof ~/~./' -,199~..~_, who is personally known to me .as-~.., ~d who did (~}d-'m:r0 take an oath. ,,,<.,,~ '~?.._-ft~.~c ....~v,~l~ OCT ! 4. 1997 . _ si'iff~ of~' -[ Bruce E. Ty~n STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing Application wu acknowledged before me thi~ ~ d~y of ['~t'l~_ -, 199..~.., by ~ ~ co. ~. "~'~-.~_ar'~ , who is ~-'rsonallv known to me m .....a...~ t..m r./,~.~_,2:,~ o~ i_'J~_..t;.E?_t_'_-~., znd who did (did not) t~ke an oath. (Signature of Notary Public) OCT 1 4 1997 AFFIDAVIT I, CIy~ C. Quinby, b~{ ~.~ duly sworn, ~ ~es In S~o~ I1, I~ 13 ~ ~, ~ ~ los. D. Bo~ Ir., T~ STATE OF FLORIDA COU1~FFY OF COLLIER Q7 ')1~) -ld-~ -_%-I/~1. '~,~ as id~tlflli~tioa md who did (dM no0 ~ ~. ~ OCT 1 i 1997 ,,,. TWP. 50S.'RNG. 26E. N~RTHEAST QUADRANT RA~ RD. '~ ~'~ iii:'~' ~----~-- O riTE ~ ~ I - ' ~0 ~ - 10 ~'~ .... --"X~ONDiTiONA~ ~' :F T USE APPLICATi ::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ~ EXISTING S! E Ig · PRC~[II~;i'II CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION . . t ATTACHMENT 2 -~.'~ ~'~ SALES CONTRACT (NOT FOR CONDOMINIUMS) 1. (c) ~ ~ ~. I &~. J~ Par ~ a~oJ~le~ J~ Pat ~d)] ..................................................................................... ~~ ~ ~S~E~SI~ DATE: C~T~ ~E~Y ~E: ~'s ~.~ a ~ ~. ~~~~~~~~at~a~ e ,~ ~ee f~ ~. I ~1 ~,it~ ~ I~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~N ~ ~ a~ ~. ~ s~ ~ ~e ~ any 9 PRORAT ~S AND ~ date. access If ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ c~ a~ ~ ~ ~(s) r~ ~ ~. I~ ~N~ ~flACT ~0 PA~TIE~ A~SEO TO GEEK ~[OAL ~S~L: ~ P~TIE~ A~E ~T R~E~ TO ~ A~Y PAR. T~ FO~M OF C~TRACT. TERM~ ~O ~TION~ ~D B~ N~OOTIATED BASED UPON ~E ~E~PECT~E INTE~TS. ~GTIVE~ ~ B~M~ ~T~S OF ~ ~RESTED P~TIES. ~P~ OF ~IS FO~ BY ~E C~UE~ ~ BAR C~T S~O BE A~EPTED BY A P~ ~ A P~ T~G~. ~S IS A ~G~Y B~ ~RACT FOR~ EACH PA~/~K~E~ES ~T Pfl~ TO 51G~ ~ ~T ~E ~ ~PE~ES ~ BE~ EX~D ~ THAT PAR~ H~ 8[EN ~$ED BY THE R~ ESTATE 8~ER OR AGE~ TO SEEK LEG~ C~NSEL ~0 ~E ~SUR~E TO PROTECT T~T P~S ~EPEST ~ ~EC~ ~ ~E ~ STA~ ~ ~1~ ~ ~lS T~TI~. B~ER ~O SEL~fl ARE AD~SEO TO ~T ~ ~PRG~IATE P~FES5~ FOR ~ T~ P~ER~ C~DITION, E~R~E~ ~D OTHER SPECiAUZED AD.CE. I~ ~< ~. ~ ~ may e~ 24. PERt~ ~ ~FER ~ EF~ DATE: ,M,aM C~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t~ ~le ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Efl~ Date. A I~ ~al ~ ~ to 26 OTHER TERMS ~D C~S: 27 AND TVtO OF THiS CONTRACT. BEFORE S~GNING. THE PARTIES HAVE REVIEWED THE ADOITIONAL TERMS AND CONOITIONS NUMBERED 1.18 ON PAGES ONE ./ T,I, I D g Olio PRINT NAM~ 2 BUYER Tax I O · Date PRINT NAME ~ -/~'.' ° ? c.. SELLER Tax I Ds Dill . PRINT NAME hz ID.a Date PRI~ ~E (S~ll~r) (9uye~) t~mby raj*cra t~ offer DC co~e~ffe~. circle o~e (~nlflala) AC kmov.~<~geer'.e~ O~ Real E.~le B~:)keea.j~The .Se~' acknowae<~ t~at ~ ' ', ..... ~okef. TheBu',fl~'lclu~h%lt ~ --~'' - /r-~ ..... 4~ /t' '4' istl~llelti~graales,.ltet:x'oke.r. / AGE~ID.~A/J~E~, OCT 1.4 1997 FI~T ADDENDUM TO BALES CONT~L~CT SELLER: B~YER: Clyde C. Quinby, Trustee 3800 Airport-Pull:.ng Road, Naples, Florida JoB. D. Sonness, Jr., Trustee S$90 Shirley Street, Naples, Florida 33942 33~42 This is the First Addendum :o that certain Sales entered into between the Seller and Buyer referred to above for the real property described aa 200 acres */- in Section 11, 12, 13 & 14, Township SO South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, more particularly descr£b~d on attached Exhibit A. The parties hereby include the following terms and conditions: 26a. The parties acknowledge the: it is Buyer's intention :o use :he property for the ex:ava:ion of rock and fill products. Accordingly, the oblige:ions of Buyer to close under this are con:insert: upon Buyer obtaining clearing and excavation permits for a minimum off:res of the Property from Collier County, the Stare of Florida, :he Army Corps of Engineers, South Florida Wa:er Management District and all other necessary governments! agencies. Seller agrees to execute any and all applications or other documentation, required by Buyer so that Buyer may obtain and such obtained by _~ ~ , ,~-- :hen Buyer,.~t_ ..p terminate :his Contrac:~ in which case all aeposl:s re:urned to Buyer. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer may waive :his contingency and close notwithstanding the fact :ha: all permits have not been obtained. 26b. The parries acknowledge that :he payment schedule for :he Promissory Note is se: out on Exhibit B and that :he release schedule for partial releases of :he Mortgage is se: out on Exhibit C. Such release schedule antic )ares the first release closing with the payment a: closing of [nd then seven (7) annual payments, for which parcels rd. However,. in :he even: Buyer desires :o accelerate the releasing of such parcels, :hen Buyer may make prepayments under the Mortgage in the required principal amount plus accrued interest, :o obtain :he parcels released in :he order set out on the release schedule. At ~ closing0 acres will no: .~e~a&u~nbe__~e~L_bY the Purchase Money L on the attached Exhibit C. ~rchase Money Mortgage shall further se= out that mortgagor shall no: conduct excavation opera:ions on property which has no: been released from this Mortgage. However, Mortgagor may make improvements on the unreleased parcels, including water management, clearing, cultivation including tree planting, fencing or any other improvements required :o maintain :he permits obtained by the Buyer. 26c. The Mortgage shall further provided that in the even: :he Mortgagee acquires title to the encumbered property by foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure, that there will axis: an easement over such released properties for ingress and egress to the properties that have not been released. Such easement will be over roads that have been constructed, and in the even: no road or roads have been constructed, then such easement shall be sixty fee: (60') in width and shall be located so that Mortgagee access :o any properties that are landlocked. Fur~ Mortgagee shall have access to the encumbered inspection a: all reasonable times. T~ta 60~ t~ ~ot~ch eec:to~ line of Sec 11, Twa ~,~e.~ Page 1 of 2 to the OCT i 1 1997 F~RST ADDZ17DUM ~0 S~,,ES CONTRACT BUYEI~: Clyde C. Quinby, Trustee 3800 Airport-Pulling Road, Naples, Florida 33942 Joa. D. Bonness, Jr., ?rustee $590 Shirley Street, Naples, Florida 33942 26d. Buyer acknowledges that Seller is the trustee for all of the real property being sold hereunder and Seller hereby ¢onfir~.s to Buyer thac Seller has authority to convey all parcels and has full power and authority Co execute this Contract. 27. All other ter~s and provisions of this Sales Contract nsc inconsistent with this First Addendum are hereby ratified and confirmed. , 1996 : Jos. D. Bonnesa,~r., Trustee Seller: Clyde C. 'Qu%~by, Trustee Attachments: Exhibit A: Exhibit B: Exhibit C: Legal D~scription Payment Schedule under Promissory Note Release Schedule OCT 14 1997 ATTA{.;HMt::N I ~ LE~3~L DESCR'rpT~ON Tot&l 40 ± ac. 40 ± ac. 40 ~ ac. 40 ± ac. 40 ± ac. 200 ± ac. OOT 1 A 1997 P~. ~ _ RESOLUTION 97- A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF EXPANDING THE WILLOW RUN QUA~Y EARTHMINING BUSINESS CONDITIONAL USE '1" XN THE 'A" AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2.2.3 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LJ~D DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTIONS 11, 12, 13 & 14, TOWNSHIP 59 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIE~ COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHERBAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 67-1246, Laws of Florida, and Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on Collier County the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection cf the public: and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which includes a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance establishing regulations for the zoning of particula- 7~oqraphic divisions of the County, among which~ is the granting of _ ~u.~i~n~l Uses; and WHEREAS, .:..~ ~..:e: - :nty Planning Co..-~nission, being the duly appointed ana- n~:~%~'=c ~.aaning board for the area hereby affected, has h~'z a public hearing after no=ice as in said regulations mad~ and prn'.':2ed, and has considered the advisability of Conditional Use "I" e^~raction or earthm, ining, and related processing and production not incidental to the agricultural development of the property, of Section 2.2.2.3 in an 'A" Agricultural zone for expanding the Willow Run Quarry earthmining business on the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact (Exhibit "A") that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection 2.7.4.4 of the L~nd Develo$~nent Code for the Collier County Planning Conunission; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in a public meeting asse~led and ~he Board having considered all matters presented. -1- NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS of Collier County, Florida that: The petition filed by Bruce E. Tyson, ASLA of Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., representing Willow Run Trust with respect to the property hereinafter described as: SE h of NE h 11-50-26 40 + ac. NE h of NE h 11-50-26 40 ~ ac. SW h of NW ~ 12-50-26 40 + ac. NW h of NW h 13-50-26 40 + ac. NE h of NE h 14-50-26 40 + ac. Total 200 + ac. be and the same is hereby approved for Conditional Use '1", extraction or earthmining and related processing and production not incidental to the agricultural development of the property, of Section 2.2.2.3 of the "A" zoning district for expanding the Willow Run Quarry earthmining business in accordance with the Conceptual Master Plan (Exhibit "B") and subject to the following conditions: The Planning & Technical Services Manager may approve minor changes in the location, siting, or height of buildings, structures, and improvements authorized by the conditional use. Expansion of the uses identified and approved within this conditional use application, or major changes to the site plan submitted as part of this application, shall require the submittal of a new conditional use application, and shall comply with all applicable County ordinances in effect at the time of submittal, including Division 3.3, Site Development Plan Review and Approval, of the Collier County Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102). bo Prior to issuance of the Excavation Permit, applicant shall submit a Geological Report with borings showing depth of confining layer, if su:h a layer exists. Conclusions in the report will be verified by County Staff. Lake depth will be limited to 50' or to the confining layer, whichever is shallower. Co The Petitioner will obtain the necessary permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, the South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Prior to issuance of the excavation permit, or by September 1, 1997, whichever comes first, the applicant shall submit a water quality monitoring plan for salinity. The plan shall be in effect until it has been decided by County Staff that no adverse impacts are occurring. The Petitioner shall retain fifteen percen~ existing native vegetation on site pursuan~ 3.9.5.5.4., LDC. -2- OCT 1 1997 f. Environmental permitting shall be in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Curren= Planning Environmental Review Staff. Removal of exo=ic vegetation shall not be counted towards mitiqation for impacts :o Collier County jurisdictional wetlands. g. Buffers shall be provided around the wetlands, extending at leas: fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetland preserves in all places and averaging twenty-five(25) feet from the landward edge of the wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible, structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resource Pezlnit Rules and be subject to review and approval by Current Planning and Environmental Staff. h. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic free) plan for the site, with emphasis on the areas of preservation, shall be submitted to Current Planning and Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to issuance of an Agricultural Clearing Permit. i. Petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FG~FC} regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species. Where protected species are observed on site, a Habitat Management Plan for those protected species shall be submitted to Current Planning Environmental Staff for review and approval prior to issuance of an Agricultural Clearing Permit. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of , 1997. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BY: TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, Chairman Approv~:d as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Marj(~rie M. St6dent Assistant County Attorney -3- OCT 1 A 1997 : FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COL%FIef PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-97-1~ The following facts are found: Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. o Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the ~nd Development Code and Growth Management Plan: ~/ Yes No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case/of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingresS& egress Yes ~No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic pr odor effects: ,,. No ~ffect or Affect mitigated by %-' Affect can--~-~ be mitigated Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district/ Yes No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (should not) be recommended for approval F/CU-97-16 FINDING OF FACT CHAIRMAN/ OCT 1 4 1997 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUN/"f PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-97-1~ The following facts are found: Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management P~n: Yes No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes ~/ No __ C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects: / No affect or __ Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibili~ t with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible use/ithin district Yes ~/ No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (should.~ be/r~commended for/~ approval f/CU-97-16 FINDIN~ OF FACT M~MBER/ 1997 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUN"rY PLANNING COM34ISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-97-1~ The following facts are found: Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the Land Development Code authorized the ccnditional use. o Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management~lan: Yes-- No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingres~x& egress Yes %J No C. %ffects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare,~conomic or odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated Dm Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the~district: Compatible Re within district Yes No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (should not) be reco~l,,~ended for approval ~ f/CU-97-16 FINDING OF FACT OOT 1 1991 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLAN%~ING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-97-1 ~ The following facts are found: Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Manage: ~_~._/' No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ing_~?~~-~ess ~iare~ffects nei~~~~~i~ties in relation to noise, ~~fect or AZfect mitigated by ~'-~-----'-Affect ca--~-~be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the d~_~T~ict: Compatib_~'~use~thin district Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, wiah stipulations, (copy. attached) (should not) be reco,~u,ended for approval /~/~//~ . DATE: 9/4/97 MEMBER: f/CU-97-16 FINDING OF FACT OCT 1 1997 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-97-1~ The following facts are found: Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management Pr~ Yes No B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes w~ No C. Affect. neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare,.~-'6nomic or odor effects. F No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated ~ Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the distric~ Compatible u~e/wfthin district Yes P' No Based on the above findings, this conditional use should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (s~ be re~g-~Dended for DATEapproval~ 7~/~ 7 . : //~ MEMB f/CU-97-16 FINDING OF FACT OCT ! 1997 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR CU-97-1~ The following facts are found: 1. Section 2.2.2.3.1 of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management P~ Yes o B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress &.e~ess Yes ~'No C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, econ~'ic or odor effects: [ /No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect cannot be mitigated De Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: Compatible us~j~ithin district Yes ~/No Based on the above findings, stipulations,,. (copy attached) approval /~- ~ f/CU-9?-l~ FI~D~ Or FACT ~J this conditional use should, with ecouauended for OOT 1 4/997.7.7 il CONDITIONAL USE APPUC&TION' Pmlmrmi for:. WiUow Run Trust. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PETITION A-97-9, SUSAN MIDDLEBROOK AND CII'4DY MILLER REQUESTING AN APPEAL OF A COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A BOAT DOCK EXTENSION APPROVED ON AUGUST 21 , 1997, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON LOTS 84 AND 85, ISLES OF CAPRI UNIT 1. ~ The objecth/e of this administrative appeal is to determine whether the Collier County Land Development Code Section 2.6.21 was properiy applied in the subject case. ~:ONSlDERATIONS: On August 21, 1997 the Collier County Planning Commission heard and approved a boat dock extension petition (BD-96-18) applied for by Mr. Richard Yovanovich representing Mr. and Mrs. Hughes. Collier County Land Development Code allows boat docks/boat combination with a maximum protrusion into the waterway of 20 feet for waterways measuring more than 100 foot in width. The subject lots are located on Pompano Bay, which is a wide body of water. However, because of the peculiar shape of the bay, which contains a very sharp angle, sand and silt deposits separated these lots from the water. The owners, in order to gain access to the waterway, have purchased a portion of the sand deposit area in the rear of their property from the State. The waterway in this area is very shallow. The adequate water depth of 3 feet at mean Iow water can be reached at 179 feet from the newly acquired land from the State, and 359 feet from the platted lots. The Collier County Planning Commission reviewed this petition on August 21, 1997 and by a vote of 5-4 approved the request. Attached to this report is a copy of the verbatim minutes of the ';CPC meeting. FISCAL IMPACT: There is a $200 application fee for this appeal which is deposited in Revenues in Fund 113, Cost Center 138900 (Co~un~.ty Development., Developmenl: Serv~.ces). GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. STAFF RECOMMENDJ~,TION: That the Board of Zoning Appeals review and determine whether the Collier County Planning Commission properly applied the provisions of Section 2.6.21 of the Collier County Land Development Code in this case. BY: CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP SENIOR PLANNER DATE ~EVIEWED BY: 15,oBE'RT J. MULHERE, AICP, MANAGER CURRENT PLANNING DONALD W. ARNOLD, AICP, DIRECTOR VINCENT A."'CAUTERO, INISTRATOR DATE. ~/ · . DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES OCT 1 ~ 1997 To: From: Mr. Vincent Cautero Administrator of Community and Environmental Development Service 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 33942 Cindy Miller Susan Middlebrook 31 B W. Pelican Street Naples, Florida 34113 97-7 August 27, 1997 Re: Petition BD-96-18 Dear Mr. Cautero: On August 21, 1997, the Collier County Planning Commission approved Petition BD-96-18 by a 5 to 4 vote. The Collier County Planning staff recommended against approval of this Petition inasmuch as the Petition was deemed to be contrary to the Collier County Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances. The Planning Commission approval authorizes construction of a dock more than ten times longer than that permitted by existing Collier County zoning regulations. Not only will this very long dock obstruct our views to the bay, this dock will prevent .some property owners from acquiring their access to the water, and it will present a considerable navigational h,7,_rd. As presented at the Planning Commission, there me alternatives to the construction of this very Ioflg residential dock, including dredging. For the above reasons, we respectfully request that this matter be appealed to the Collier County Commission as provided by Collier County ordinances. Very truly yours, Cindy Mjl~er - · e. nc. Appeal Fee AUG g 7 1997 OCT 1 i 1997 f August 21, 1997 MR. MULHERE: -- we've purchased a number of admissions for as well and not everybody will be able to attend. Some wil~ be at the Planning Commission, some people will have other so, we' of juggling those around as well. And I think, if -- you show up and you want to attend a session, if yot ust stop by ~t booth, we'll -- we'll work something out. DAVIS: Okay. We'll use the staff's booth as the central and get as much mileage out of the conferel as we possibly -- and certainly congratulations are i order for the -- MR. Thank you. CHAIRMAN -- for the award because you your staff and a lot of people the public that all worked s, ~ard on our new architectural ~ . That's wonderful that county is going to be recognized for MR. MULHERE: But 11 -- once we get award, we'll bring it forward and -- and t with you. And it was -- and the packet that we submitted :ognized a of organizations and individuals in the entire beca% that -- in the eight years that I've worked for the ', there' ever been anything that was -- I've never worked on more of a unilateral effort than -- than that. And I -- it shows in the product. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I need to tell you congratulations although -- even though I seem to the one dinosaur as it relates to those architectural standards. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: The rest us led you along, correct? All right. With that, more of business at -- I've asked our Assistant County Attorn Miss ~ at our next meeting to talk'to us a little bit beginning :he meeting about the Sunshine Law ex parte co~ ~nication, gifts, cetera. COMMISSIONER ?~y can't we wait :il the meeting after that because a lot of CHAIRMAN DAVIS meeting in Septemb~ One, two -- CHAIRMAN rS: are not going to be How many are going to be And the second meeting, I Only one. Just you, Mr. Wrage? at the next meeting? ~ing the first COMMISS] WRAGE: That's all. DAVIS: Well, you can read the minutes '. Miss ;udent, can we do that at our second meeting in .ember? MS : That's fine. DAVIS: That's -- that's a good point because we as many as possible. · STUDENT: Right. That works out better for me, too. RMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I need to figure out what this ex parte ~ans. . A/With that, let's begin our advertised public hearings, the first being Petition BD-96-~. Page 6 OOT 1 4. 1997 August 21, 1997 Mr. Badamtchian. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Swear him. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: And I would ask all those present here today who are going to testify on this petition to please stand, raise your right hand so the court reporter may swear you in. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Let them all get up here. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER THO~S: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. Okay. (The speakers were sworn.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I'd like to make a declaration. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Declaration, Mr. Thomas. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I would like to declare that I've talked to Rocky Scofield about this on two occasions. COmmISSIONER BRUET: Mr. Chairman, I also spoke with counsel about this issue. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Mr. Nelson. COMMISSIONER NELSON: And I visited the site and also one of the owners that lives -- well, we can point it out later -- lives along Pelican, which is the main drive coming up to that, called me, Mr. Hodgkinson, and also sent me a letter but I believe he also sent the department a letter, too. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Anyone else? All right. Thank you. Mr. Badamtchian. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Good morning, commissioners. Chahram Badamtchian from Platting Services. -Mr. Richard Yovanovich, representing Mr. -- Mr. and Mrs. Hughes, is requesting a 159 foot boatdock extension from the required 20 feet to 179 feet, a boatdock and boat lifting facility. This boatdock, as measured from the platted, single-family lot will be 359 feet. However, there's a sand deposit in front of the house. And the petitioners, they have purchased that sand deposit from the state. That's why we are measuring it from the edge of that sand deposit which makes it 179 feet. Staff reviewed this petition and believes that approval of this boatdock and construction of this boat docks will interfere with the other neighboring properties who have similar boat docks and it also will be an eyesore. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny this petition. Staff believes that either a dredge in the area or having a boatdock to be used by everybody in the area is a better solution than having a -- such a large boatdock for just one single-family house. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Thomas. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I have to ask a couple of questions. You said they bought the sandbar. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: There's a sand deposit. It was never properly dredged. COMM'/SSIO~R THOMAS: Okay. Let me ask you a question. There's Page 7 I~0. ~ OCT 1 1997 August 21, 1997 a line on this drawing that runs -- here MR. BADAMTCHIAN: That's this sand deposit line. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: That's a sand deposit. Now, who o~s that sand deposit? MR. BADAMTCHI~N: State of Florida owns it but they have purchased the portion of that sand deposit from the state. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Oh, a portion of it. Just the portion that comes down off their property -- MR. BA~AMTCHIAN: Correct. Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER THOI~JIS: -- within the riparian lines? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. COMMISSIONER THO14AS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Any other questions of staff? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Staff has received the four letters against and three letters in favor of this petition. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Bruet. · MR. BRUET: The letters against all deal with View or they deal with environmental issues? What are the issues? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: They -- basically with environmental issues, the view and interference with navigation and basically seeing that a boatdock that big in the area, it's going to be an eyesore and it's going to interfere with navigation. COI~ISSIONER BRUET: Are there any other docks similar to this in size within that community? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Not that large. We have a 135 foot boatdock, I believe, approved not long ago. MR. MULHERE: But there's -- there are several. It's very shallow. There are several boatdocks on Isles of Capri that do extend 140 ~nd I think maybe there are some that are existing that extend out even further than that. So, the length really is not unusual for that area. It's the unusual configuration of the lots in that corner there and in our opinion the -- the impacts that this dock might have on somebody. else's ability to build a dock and be able to navigate there. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Thomas. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: A question. Will somebody explain to me how the riparian lines are done? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: That was done by DEP. It's not a county riparian line. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute. Are you telling me that the State Department of Environmental Protection developed these riparian lines? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Basically, they go to the center of the channel. They find the point and they draw lines going to the property lines. It's not the extension of the property lines itself. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: And I can tell it's not the extension of the property. That's why I'm asking the question. But the reason why I'm ~skin~ the question this way is if we use the normal riparian line scenario, there would be no way that you can build a dock here. But the State DEP developed these riparian lines. Page OCT 1 4 1997 ,,,._ August 21, 1997 MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. COMMISSIONER THO~%S: And what was their rationale for doing that? MR. BAD~%MTCHIAN: I don't know what was the rationale. Probably they tried to give some water frontage for everybody. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Have they approved this petition for a boatdock? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Yes. The DEP has approved it. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Oh, DEP has approved it. MR. BADAMTCHI~: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Any other questions of staff? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I have a -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Presentation -- MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Did you have something else? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I have a letter from the DEP supporting this boatdock extension request. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Say again? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I have a letter from the DEP supporting this request. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay· CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Out of curiosity, are you familiar with the criteria under which the DEP evaluates the request? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: No, I'm not. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Is -- is -- either one of these letters deal with that? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: That -- yeah. That's -- that's the one that I was ~alking to you about. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Would the petitioner like to make a presentation? MR. SCOFIELD: Yes. Good morning. Miles Scofield for -- representing Jim and Ellie Hughes. I -- I'd like -- I'll start out by showing you the location of where the dock is and then I want to give you a brief history of -- of this case· It's a little bit unusual. Is this on? CHAI~4AN DAVIS: Yes. MR. SCOFIELD: This -- this is the -- of course, the aerial map of Isles of Capri. This is Pompano Bay right here and you can see the red line here. That represents the proposed dock and how far it will entend out into Pompano Bay. There is a dock that was approved, I believe, a year ago or whenever -- in that time frame. It's right here. It's 130 feet out. The staff did recommend approval on that one. They didn't on ours. I'm not exactly sure why but this is the other one that was approved within a year. This is the area here, Pelican Street. This shows you the Pompano Bay area in relationship to the streets here and how far out AGE -- Page No.~ OCT 1 4 1997 · I~._ '7 August 21, 1997 it extends. This is a blowup of it and you'll see this line here. This represents the mangrove line that's there. This land, and you'll see in your handout, is accreted land. Originally this was supposed to have been dredged. The property lines here were supposed to have been seawalled. They weren't. This land has accreted out. The Hughes -- the Hughes own these two lots here. They have acquired title to the land out to the mean high waterline. They pay taxes on that. That is their property now out to this line here. Actually, the mean high waterline, which is just inside of this mangrove line. The -- the letter from the state, that it was handed -- we received -- that was sent out August 15th, explains briefly about this area and I think you all have copies of that letter dated August 15th from the DEP? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: From a James Hughes? MR. SCOFIELD: That's correct. The second paragraph explains a little bit of the history right there so I'm not going to spend time reading through that but it tells that the extreme low tides go out to 130 feet. It tells you a little bit about the shoaling, that the area was supposed to have been dredged originally and was not. On Page 2 of that letter, I just wanted to read one thing here. If, they say -- it says, your project at its current permitted location is at its minimum distance from the shoreline allowable to meet the water depth requirements and at its maximum distance allowable waterward to meet the consent of use -- that's by the DEP -- the following is a brief summary. And you have that there. - This meaning the dock is at its -- is at its minimum point to reach the required depths, it's still at extreme low tides, we have a problem there getting on and off, but the configuration that we have will allow them to utilize this dock and boat lift most of the time. It's a boat 'ift on the end of the dock. The boat lift actually ends -- the dock unds ten feet -- 12, 12 -- eight feet from the boat lift. They have a deck boat. The boat will be Dulled in, bow towards the shoreline. They will step off of the bow onto a little two-foot T dock on the end. So, the dock is only four feet wide, very minimum requirements. That's also required by the state. They only have a four-foot dock and little two-foot wide T dock on the end of this. So, the only way on and off of that is by their boat. The -- the Hughes have beer% going through this since about 1991 trying to get a dock onto their property. We've run up against a lot of problems along the way. Obviously, Corps and DEP took awhile to permit. The Hughes approached me, I believe, maybe a couple of years ago to look at this. They had a petition in that was to be heard November of last year. That petition was not heard. We -- I requested it be withdrawn because of the opposition at the time. I came onto the case and I wanted to address the concerns of the t AGEN DA,,D'EM Page 11 No./~~ OCT 1 1997 August 21, 1997 letters and the people in Isles of Capri that were against it. So, that process went on -- actually, it started way before the hearing and I -- we were talking with the people in Isles of Capri. And I'm sure you'll hear from some of those people today. Originally, the Hughes wanted to put in a dock there. It was -- a lot of people neighboring there did not want that, so the ideas were brought up when I met with some of the people on Isles of Capri to put a co~=~unal -- a common docking facility there, meaning that we could have a single walkway going out for all these people in this corner and maybe seven or eight boat slips on this dock. It's a good idea. I thought this -- we thought maybe the state would buy it, too, because it was a minimal impact on the sea grass beds and the shallow areas going out. The -- so, I pursued this a little bit with the state. The state was not too willing to hear this. They said it would take a literal act of Congress to grant this from the governor and the cabinet. This being single-family lots and putting in a common docking facility such as a condominium, which is commercial property, would take a lot of changes at the state level and the -- ultimately, approval from the governor and the cabinet. They said, you know, you're looking at a long process obviously with engineering firms and lawyers. It would take a lot of money to do that, too. That scenario for lack of interest of the people in Isles of Capri died out because it would take a lot of money and a lot of time. So, the next go around was -- and I was particularly talking to -- with -- with Mr. Huegel, who I know represented some of the homeowners down there around this lot. -And Ed -- Ed came up with the idea, which, you know, these are both great ideas, and I think they're -- you know, they -- they would work, but in today's environment they don't, and that was to dredge a canal back through that, originally where it was supposed to be, along the original platted lines, riprap the sides, people could have their docks right by their -- by their homes, which would be nice. Well, if you're at all familiar with dredging and state lands, this is a thing that's almost taboo today. These are state lands. They weren't dredged. They belong to the state. And environment has accreted out there. You have shallow areas, you have grasses, you have mangroves in front of here. It would be almost impossible to get a dredging permit to go in there and do that at this time. Twenty years ago, 25 years ago, it could have been done. Impossible these days. And that would also be probably -- you might have a four-to-five-year fight at the state level and not even win to do something like that, again costing a lot of money. Interest for that died out. People weren't willing to, from what I saw, come to the table, put up money and spend that time. So, now we came full circle back to why we're here today and that is to put in the Hu~hes' dock as is proposed here. Basically, the Hughes have spent a lot of time in trving to do AGENDA,~EM. Page 1: N0.~ OCT 1 1997 ... q August 21, 1997 the right thing on the property. We've -- we've come -- well, we've come this far and we're requesting that you approve this dock as it is. The riparian lines, as you can Now, they have two lots there. see, these were -- I must state they're within their riparian lines. They own two lots there. The state has -- excuse me. Staff has said it's -- may interfere This dock is not going to interfere with other people building docks. with anybody building other docks there, that their riparian lines may interfere with them being able to build a dock, getting it out far enough. COMMISSIONER THO~S: Are you suggesting that if you only own one lot in that particular corner, there's no way to get a riparian line that's going to be wide enough, far enough out to put a dock in? MR. SCOFIELD: It may on -- where the sand -- where the sandbar comes back in on this side, you may be able to get far enough out one, maybe on where 79 is, but it's very questionable- It's very shallow and they're probably -- probably not in that scenario with a single lot. It -- it would be very questionable. But each case -- 80 81 and COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Definitely not for 80 and 81 -- , 82. Probably would not have enough MR. SCOFIELD: That's correct. water depth to be within the riparian lines there. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: How about 86 and 87? MR. SCOFIELD: However -- pardon me? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: How about 86 and 87? MR. SCOFIELD: That's questionable. - COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay. MR. SCOFIELD: It's -- it's -- it's right on the edge. The -- the state grants consent of uses to use state lands and that's what they've gone through. Another argument that did come up when we're going through all this was, well -- some people said, well, if we're -- if we're a~sured we can build a boatdock there, then we won't object to this one. There's no assurance. The state -- everybody individually has to apply to the state, therefore, shooing the communal docking system out. Each case has to be taken by the state and Corps of Engineers individually, so there's no assurance to that. They can with rights of neighbors and some -- some maneuvering there with the state and county, there possibly could -- you know, fudge on the over -- your riparian lines with consent of neighbors through the state. So, that's a possibility. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: The other question I have, between that -- you call it a mangrove line, you -- you -- you call it a mangrove line. How much water depth do I have between the mangrove line and the end of the -- and the end of the dock? MR. SCOFIELD: How far out? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: How much water depth do I have out there? How -- how does the water drop off? PagI AG£ ------- 1 4. 1997' August 21, 1997 MR. SCOFIELD: Do you have the profile in your packet? COMMISSIONER YOP~K: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yes, we do. MR. SCOFIELD: At low tides, you go out almost a hundred feet before you get into some water. CO~MISSIONER THOMAS: Okay. MR. SCOFIELD: Is that showing up clearly? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Yeah, I see it. MR. SCOFIELD: Is that showing on there? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I see it. MR. SCOFIELD: And we' re -- and we' re at very minimal depths there where the -- at the end of the dock. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: You go -- it looks like you're going about 128 feet out of solid dirt during low tide. , MR. SCOFIELD: Well, yeah. Those -- those are tide -- that s a tidal area. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Yeah. Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Question by Mr. York, and then Mr. Nelson. COMMISSIONER YORK: Mr. Scofield, on the -- on the land that has accreted, you know the -- where the -- the state that that's -- that's grown with grasses and mangroves, approximately how high is the vegetation in there? MR. SCOFIELD: The mangroves -- COMMISSIONER YORK: Yes. -- six MR. SCOFIELD: -- in that area? What is the mangroves to --UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Six to eight feet. MR. SCOFIELD: six to eight -- six to eight feet. COMMISSIONER YORK: Another question. From looking at the -- at the plat for the lots there and the riparian lines, from Lot 79, could you see Lot 87? MR. SCOFIELD: Can you see across to it? COMMISSIONER YORK: could you see -- MR. SCOFIELD: No~ -- not with a lot of thc vegetation that' is there. There is uplan vegetation behind the mangroves which consist of cabbage palms and -- and other things, too. COMMISSIONER YORK: There -- you -- from Lot 79, you can't really look at Lot 87. , MR. SCOFIELD: with the vegetation that s grown up in the back there, can you see a clear shot across -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: What they're asking, is from here across to here, can you see that line? MR. SCOFIELD: You can see across there. It's in back of the mangroves. There is vegetation further inland from that that extends up higher, but I guess in the area -- some areas you can see across. COMMISSIONER YORK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Nelson. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: But that's behind the mangroves. MR. SCOFIELD: That' s behind the mangroves. COMMISSIONER NELSON: I only wanted since I was -- I was there Page 11 OOT 1 1997 .,. il August 21, 1997 and looked, to clarify or clear some letters of this. Do you see this spot that's white right here? That's the part that sticks out at low tide but at high tide that's all water. The water goes all the way back to the vegetation at high tide. At low tide it's going to be over, you know, dry dock but at high tide, it's going to be -- it's going to look like -- MR. SCOFIELD: But it's also going to look like it just bends out into Pompano Bay and those other houses you see right around, look behind you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: All right. MR. SCOFIELD: Let me -- I -- I wanted to -- I did want to address the environmental issues because, basically, most of these petitions does come down to -- to, you know, blocking someone's view. That's -- you know, in my experience, that's what 99 percent of these things are. -- The environmental issues have all been answered by the the environmental staff of the county has recommended approval of this project. It meets all the requirements lined out in the county. It also meets the manatee protection plans of the state, the DEP, preserving the grass beds, the elevated walkway, so, all those concerns and the Army Corps of Engineers has been met. So, we -- we come down to, you know, blocking a view. Now, we do have a map, if you'd like to see it, that the owner drew out showing the adjacent docks around this area in relationship to this proposed dock, if you care to see that map. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: We would. MR. SCOFIELD: The -- okay. As you -- as you can see here, here's our proposed dock. Now, this dotted line here is the sandbar. The-sandbar extends out and it comes back in to this area right back in here. Lot 78 has a dock into this area, this little cove where the sandbar comes back in. I believe -- well, he -- this is encroaching over. I'm not sure exactly how that dock was -- was built, constructed on that parcel. I don't know if they have permission from 79 or not but it extends over a little bit. But this is a cove back in here. These are the other docks in the area. The sandbar, as you can see the dotted line, comes back out and these docks extend beyond there. And these are the docks on the opposite side of Pompano Bay and the docks over here. So, is when you're asking about the view from this lot over here, of course they're going to see the dock. I mean, the dock is only four feet wide. It's on -- it's being built on a -- on single piles on the walkway going out. So it's not -- it's a very minimal structure. If there's any other questions, I'd -- I'll answer them at this time and -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Any other questions of Mr. Scofield? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I want to ask a question of staff. This photograph here was taken from what perspective? MR. BADA14TCHIAN: One of the neighbor -- one of the neighbors Page L4 No.~ OOT 14 1997 i . ,,,. August 21, 1997 send this to me. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: It looks like it was taken from like 79 to 78 or 80. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: It's 76. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Seventy-six- That's way up here. Okay. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: You can see the sandbar. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Chairman, if I may, I'd just like to make a couple of brief con~nents and then -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Your name for the record. MR. YOVANOVICH: Oh, for the record, Richard Yovanovich with the law firm of Roetzel and Andress representing Jim and Ellie Hughes. I just want to make a few brief comments and then I'd like to reserve my comments for after all the other public speakers. I just want to make sure that all -- everything that's been talked about has entered into the record and is -- is part of the record at this time. And we'd like to also enter into the record a petition signed by surrounding property owners along with a map color coded to show you who has approved or consented to this boatdock petition and who hasn't. The red is the letters of objection that we have heard about from county staff. The green is people who have been contacted and signed the petition or sent letters of support in favor of the petition, so I'd like to enter these into the record at this point. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I'd like to see that. MR. YOVANOVICH: Now, obviously there are less names on the petition than are on the -- than are on the map, so the letters of -- of qo.objection have been given to staff. And I -- do you have a copy of the petition? MR. BADAMTCHIAN: I have three letters. No, I don't have a petition. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. I'll give -- we have a copy for you, Chahram. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Yovanovich, as -- as -- as you and I know, the -- how many people's names are on a petition -- MR. YOVANOVICH: No. I know. I just want to -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: No, no. Wait a minute. Not -- are not part of the criteria. Would you -- Right. Would you be expressing that this would relate MR. YOVANOVICH: CHAIRMAn{ DAVIS: to the view issue -- MR. YOVANOVICH: CHAIRMAN DAVIS: MR. YOVANOVICH: CHAIRMAN DAVIS: A view issue. -- and people's concern of it? Absolutely. Okay. That people are not concerned about the view. An~ it's not a popularity contest. I understand that. It's just ~ur&~er evidence that they're not concerned about the view. CHAIKMAN DAVIS: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: And, finally, for the -- r~cor6~£~ s I for the / {~"'~ Page T OCT 14 /3 August 21, 1997 a copy of their most recent proposed tax bill showing that they do own and pay taxes to the mean high water line. So, they are waterfront because that was an issue raised by some people. CHAIKMAN DAVIS: F~{. YOVANOVICH: CHAIRMAN DAVIS: reporter. MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. If I could -- If you could, just give it to the court That's all I have for -- for right now. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. This is a public hearing and anyone else that would like to speak on this petition, please come forward to the microphone, and, if you would, state your name for the record, and if -- if you could tell us where you are, what lot you're on in conjunction with the petition? MS. MILLER: My name is Cindy Miller. I'm on Lot 77. I jumped up to speak first because I have pictures. Mr. -- Mr. and Mrs. Hughes does have their boat in the water at the mangroves and I understand with the state giving them their patennial (sic) rights, that -- that all these lots back here -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Ma'am, there's a microphone to your left there that you can pick up and use. That way everyone will be able to hear you. home. here. lot. All these people back here that have purchased off of -- why say that's Perch Avenue, that's Dolphin Circle. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Pelican Street? MS. MILLER: This is Dolphin Circle. MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes, it is. MS. MILLER: I live right here. I have neighbors here with a There's an empty lot here. There's a kome here and a home Next to mine is another empty lot, another home, another empty they~ MS. MILLER: Okay. Ail these -- we -- we, as waterfront owners, if -- if they could get their state rights to the water, we certainly would want them to get to the water on their bc~ts. And as far as I'm concerned, the state has issued that to them and the state should find a way for them to keep their boats there and use them 24 hours a day. As far as the county zoning giving any kind of an extension that would run almost a pier out into the corner of our bay is just beside myself. I'll give you some pictures that you can see. We purchased our lot. My sister and I own a duplex on that lot and we purchased it several years ago and we purchased it with the idea of having a nice place to retire in some day and look out in our beautiful bay and the view. And I am going to express view. I have these pictures in order. I have them labeled. I have spoken to several people on our street. Several of them have sent letters in. We're very, very, very serious about our property values. We've all purchased there for a reason. We like the sandbar. It's a natural, beautiful thing. AG£ND& August 21, 1997 We all have sand problems. As you can see at my dock, I have a sand problem. The next door dock has a sand problem. All the way down the bay on Pelican Street has sand problems. In the Civic Association Isles of Capri, they have talked about getting together to do some dredging or excavating or whatever you want to call it. It's the moving of sand. I just really think that the state, putting them to the water off of that other road, that they should take the responsibility of getting -- allowing them to dredge through the water, which there's a channel right in front of my dock that ends at Mr. Hufnagel's dock on the left of me, and I think that they should go ahead and allow them the permits to move that sand to allow for docks along the outside of those mangroves. And I really have nothing else to say. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you for coming. MS. MILLER: I just hope that you represent us on Pelican Street on Pompano Bay in the best order. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you, ma'am. Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Oh, can I ask her a question? Ma'am, can you come back up a minute? I need to ask you a question. This is the Hughes' boat over here, this pontoon boat? MS. MILLER: Yes. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Sir, if I could remind you to state your name for the record and spell.your last name. MR. HUEGEL: My name is Ed Huegel, H-u-e-g-e-1. I own Lot 87. Eventually I'm going to build a home on it. I now live on Isles of Capri and my daughter and my son also live on Isles of Capri. My son lives on Lot Number 81 that I've purchased from Ellie's brother. And my daughter lives on Lot 80. And I feel as if the Hughes want a dock, I don't have an objection to it, but if you're going to issue a dock permit to them for this particular thing, then I think everybody on the bay should be allowed to have one, you know, in a -- in a situation that you guys say, okay, you can have it. But then my son has a boat. My daughter has a boat. I probably won't have one. I've had enough of them and I'm finished with it. But I object to the form in which this is being presented and I've spoken to Rocky about this. And my proposal is to say possibly if we could get the county government, our commissioners, to get behind us with the help of you folks and go to the state and say we have a unique situation which, as you can see, I've got a few of these if you'd like. It's the same as what Rocky has and what the Hughes have. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Yes, sir. We have a copy of that. MR. HUEGEL: Okay. I would propose that if we went to the county government and just said, gentlemen, we'd like to try to get an excavation. Let's not dredge it. Let's excavate it. ~n~ qe~ it Page 17 OOT 1 1997 Augus~ 21, 1997 behind the island, leave the island there, everybody then on -- on Pelican and everybody on Dolphin Circle would have the advantage of this particular channel that would be put in there. The water would freshen up. Cindy wouldn't have as much problem with sand in her -- in her backyard. The water would flow and flush out and be cleaner for everybody. And just as another proposal -- I don't know if this would fly -- but could there be a bond issue by the county? They do it for sewer. They do it for water. They do it for things, et cetera. Could a bond issue be floated that would take care of that ditch for the ten -- I think there's ten lots that are there and I -- I think a very strong possibility is that the people that live there would go along with something like that rather than the -- the dock that Ellie and Jim have proposed. I.object to the dock, the way it's proposed, because, as I said, I'm going to build on that lot. Do I have the right to put a dock out there? If I put a dock out there, we're going to end up with a pressure treated lumber yard in the backyard if all these other folks decide to build docks, too, and they should have the right as well as -- as Ellie and Jim. And I really don't have anything else to say. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Huegel. MR. HUEGEL: Thank you. CF~IRMAN DAVIS: Yes, sir. Whoever would like to come up next, please do. If -- if the next speaker would like to maybe get on up around the podium, that should save us some time. -Yes, sir. MR. SEDLMEIR: My name is Alexander Sedlmeir. My -- I spell my last name; S-e-d-l-m-e-i-r. I own Lot Number 89 and I'm against it. They're near neighbors and it's hard to talk against them but I think if they get the permit for building with such a big structure in bad area and where's -- where's the danger of more people building a similar dockage, it looks like. It looks awful. This is a really nice nature zone where it's mangroves. We keep it like in six feet height. We may cut it down. And there's a lot of fish where -- there's a really laid back area. It would change the whole feature of Wet Bay. And I'm talking about against it. There's a lot of bad blood in -- in that neighborhood. Some people told me this morning it wouldn't be wise to talk against it because my dock might be not have a permit but are required or I have cut down some mangroves. And I find it quite offensive to put -- put pressure on me not talking about against it, so I still object to it with -- with whole thing because I think it's -- it's quite a huge object. I mean, look at how big our lots are and how far with whole dockage goes out into Wet Bay. I mean it's -- it's almost double the size of the land, that property they own. It's -- it h~~ Page I August 21, 1997 huge impact on this whole area. I bought the property. I like the area and this thing is what going to change it to a very negative. I mean, it's -- it's a nice area and I try to keep it that way. Thank you. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you, sir. Yes, ma'am. MS. MIDDLEBROOK: Hi. My name is Susan Middlebrook and I'm the other half of my sister there that has the duplex on Lot 77. I'd like to say, first of all, that I'm very thankful and grateful for Ellie and Jim trying to do this dock out into the bay because it has brought forth an issue that's been a problem on Isles of Capri since the very beginning of time. We have shallow areas and it's true we are part of Rookery Bay, but I see this as a chance for all of us to pull together as a community and in a community spirit approach the state and try and get maintenance dredging on the island which is needed over the entire island except for like on Pelican Street. And some parts of Pelican Street have bay problems, too. So, I see this rather as a problem where it pulls everyone apart. It's an opportunity for us all to pull together as a community and work to solve this problem for everyone's benefit instead of for the benefit of a few or one and to the disgruntle of many. So, I look forward to working with them and working in the future and trying to do this as a cor~munity. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Next. For -- as we're getting through the discussion here, I would just ask that you not be repetitive in your remarks to the previous speakers. Thank you. MR. ZINSER: Hello. My name is Troy Zinser. I live at 58 Dolphin Circle. COM/4ISSIONER THOMAS: What lot number is that? UNIDENTIFIED SPEARKER: Ninety-two. MR. ZINSER: z-i-n-s-e-r. I've been here in front of this exact commission twice myself. I built a dock there. I had to go through all this. I built a house on Keewaydin Island. Same thing. It's very, very difficult to get these permits from everybody, including five hearings you have to go through the county in my case. All the people that have come up here and spoke so far, if you've noticed, they keep saying, well, my dock, my dock. They've all got their dock. I've got a dock. I know the Hughes. They're not really that close to me as far as where they live, but I feel for them because of where they're at in building this dock. Every person that stood up here has said, well, I've got sand at my dock. I can' t get out from my dock. Well, that's the problem. They've got their dock. The Hughes don't have a dock. They have wate_rfro~t property. I have waterfront property. They pay taxes on it. Page 19 OCT 1 1997 ,.,,.17 August 21, 1997 The actual visual part of this dock, the way I see it, that you're going to. see from any view from these people we're talking about, because the mangroves are going to hide half of it, the dock is only going to be about 65, 70 feet long that they can see. That's a little longer than.this room. That's really not a big dock. Itts not. even.going to. be four feet wide because the county wiIl not'a~low ~hem to, .... or the state will not allow them to build a walkway ~o~e than four feet. Mine, they let me build four feet wide. I guess they told them 39 inches. Thirty-nine inches. It's this wide. That's all it is. It's just a walkway out. This isn't a big pier as these guys keep saying. It's not a pier. It's a little walkway to a dock. I get aggravated because these people have their dock and they're just -- they've got theirs. They don't want to let anybody have theirs. Square feet wise, there are much bigger docks in that bay, probably mine, compared to what theirs is going to be. The dock that they're proposing to build, they're -- they're not proposing to build a dock that large because they want one. It's because they have to. That's very expensive to do that. The square footage of dock that they're actually going to have is -- is a lot -- the dock part that they need is much smaller than anybody else that they have on that bay. I mean, the state will not let them do it that way. I guess -- I guess what I'm saying is, if you -- if you tell these guys no, that they can't have their dock, they're never going to have a dock there. I mean, they're trying to do it with what the state's telling them to do. They're trying to do it within the guich~lines to make it obviously useable to them but yet feasible to everybody to look at and deal with. I realize these other people have docks, but nobody stepped forward. I mean, everybody else that comes in there can -- can do the same thing. The state's not ever going to let them dredge that out. They're not going to let them excavate it. They're not going to do anything. I mean, the state won't let you do anything with that property. I know that. I've been dealing with those people for seven years. It's not going to happen. These people are -- if they have to build a dock this way, they're never going to have a dock. Now, somebody that comes in after them wants to build a dock, too, is going to have to go through the same thing and they're going to have to change the configuration to their dock to match ~:at the state wants. By you guys saying no, these guys will never have a dock. And I just don't think that's right. And as far as these people up here complaining, they've already got their dock. That's all I have to say. Thanks. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Yes, ma ' am. ES. ~.~SORE: I'm Joanne Moore. I live in Lot 58 and directly opposite the dock that you're talking about. I live right here. Page 00T '1997 August 21, 1997 As you can see, this dock is going to absolutely cover my entire home. I will have nothing but lights, white, everything that that -- that dock has I'm going to have to look at. I came to Isles of Capri in 1957 and it was a beautiful, beautiful bay, and those people put in -- we all have problems with sand, with silting. It's natural. It's part of the waterfront. But those who came in put in seawalls and those seawalls slowed down the silting. Nothing was done over in front of that area and you'll see that it has built up into an island and it has created a problem. I understand that. But I object to a dock that length going out almost one-third into the bay and blocking so many homes. The configuration of the lots there was poor planning in the first place and created this problem, but on the other hand, those people who have lived here and have -- have enjoyed the bay in its quiet peaceful manner shouldn't have to now conduct their lives looking at some man-made structure. Second, I want to say that DEP wanted -- we went to them and talked to them when they were providing the -- the consent for this area. They are using it as an experiment to overcome this original problem of poor design in lots. Second, the boat lift with the T is what is now being planned but once it's there, it could be made into more dockage and a communal dock should not be owned by one person. I think that's creating more problems of control of -- there may be a monetary interest in -- in all of this. If Hughes has wasted a lot of his time and money, so have the other people on this bay. The mangroves that stand behind the island, the silted over area, wer~ all cut about two to three years ago. The county allowed them to cut it down to a certain height and then they took that away from them, but those were all filled in with mangroves. The letter of support shown by the lawyer here with green, if you will note, a majority of them were inland lots that don't have water access and they would be prone to accept something like this because in the future they, too, might be able to share waterfront property -- not property, waterfront access. I believe that this board should think about the people who -- who have bought lots who have used their property in one specific area'I don't -- I don't disagree that the man shouldn't be allowed his waterfront rights, but I disagree with him taking out his rights to the detriment of others. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Yes, sir. MR. COHAN: Good morning. My name is Steven Cohan. I live at 50 Dolphin Circle. That is at this point here. Since it's not marked, it would be Lot 95, I believe. I'm sorry. I don't -- I haven't looked at my tax records recently. HR. SCOFIELD: It's on the low map right there, the long one. MR. COHAN: I see. August 21, 1997 I just came forward to -- I thought it was right that I should come and stand forward for Jim Hughes at this time around. The last time this issue came up and they never got this far. I have to admit I was swayed by rumor and innuendo about how this communal dock that was given to you in the historg before was supposed to be used. And some of the rumor and innuendo I heard quite honestly upset me, that it would be used commercially, that some of the ~eo~le who were going to be using it had a commercial marine business and I could see a large problem coming. But I've known Jim for awhile now and I find him to be a man of fine character. And he assures me that he is not going to be allowing someone else to use this dock for slippage or something else that, quite honestly, a four-foot wide dock, single piling, T'd at the end, I don't see how you could rent it to some -- how you're going to bridge something else off. I just want to come forward for him and say at this time that I find no objections at all to it and I really think that since there's no way in hell that I could see you're ever going to get the state to allow us to dredge that area. And I have a large problem with silting myself and have got a large beach building up on my side. I already know the state's never going to give me permission to -- you know, to even blow that out of there at all. We're part of Rookery Bay estuary. There's nothing we can do about that and, therefore, I think you should grant him his petition, you know, to build this dock. And that's all I have to say. Good morning, gentlemen. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you, sir. - Is there anyone else from the public to speak? Would the petitioner like to add anything in closing? HR. YOVANOVICH: Just real briefly. Basically, we're here because we've gotten all of our state permits. We've done all we can. We've talked to the co~unity.. We tried the communal dock approach first. We couldn't get DEP to go along with that. We're -- we're still willing to go along with that concept in the future if -- if the state will allow that, but at this point, we've done all we can. We have our -- our client has -- COMMISSIONER THOMAS: You're talking about a co~=~unal dock? HR. YOVANOVICH: No. Ours is not a communal dock right now. COmmISSIONER THOMAS: I'm trying to figure out where you're going. You said if the state changes their mind later on. Is that on the communal dock? HR. YOVANOVICH: Yes. If they -- COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Okay. HR. YOVANOVICH: If they change their mind on a co~unal dock or change their mind on dredging, we are willing to allow others to -- we will consent to this dock becoming a, quote, a communal dock if the state will go along with that, provided everybody pays their proportionate share of the construction costs that Mr. and Mrs. Hughes 1997 August 21, 1997 put into that. So, we're -- we're willing to do that, but right now we don't have any hope for that to occur, but if that does occur, we're willing to go along with that. The dock is the minimum necessarY to get to deep water. It has no environmental impacts. Both the state and county staff have said there's no environmental impact. There's absolutely no impact on navigation, so there's no safety issues. All this talk about property value impact is, you know, purely speculative. Who knows what's going to happen to property values? would propose that if other people would go to the state and get the accreted land, that their property values would increase. Staff recommendation on the community dock obviously can't occur. We've -- we've tried that. It's -- it's not going to work. The same people complaining today complained about the community dock so I'm sure we're going to be back in the same position on the community dock issue. The people who originally wanted the community dock no longer want the community dock. They're not here advocating a community dock. I think that's important, that they basically have said we don't want the community dock and the people most likely to be impacted in that cove have consented to this dock as not impacting their view and have no objection to it. Everybody recognizes that they do have riparian rights. They have the right to use the water. This is the minimum impact necessary to get to water that they can use. And as a final note, Mrs. Moore was talking about this is somehow going to be a community dock after it's permitted. Keep in mind that t~efe's only one -- you can't tie it to the side of this dock because there's no water to the side of this dock. There's only one place a boat can go and that's at the end of the dock. We would -- we request that you approve this dock petition because it's -- it's in keeping with the rights of the property owner not impacting other people. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. I'll close the public hearing. Mr. Thomas, you have a question. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Just one question. I'd like to know about how far is it from the point where I.ot 95 is that gentleman spoke and across the water from him, the mouth of that bay. Anybody have any idea? MR. MULHERE: There's a scale right there. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Oh, that aerial over there? MR. SCOFIELD: What's the question? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: About how wide is the mouth of that bay right there? MR. SCOFIELD: That's a 200 scale. MR. BADAMTCHIAN: Four to -- MR. SCOFIELD: Four to 500. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Four to 500 feet. Page 23 OCT 1 1997 ,,. August 21, 1997 CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. Any other questions? Mr. NelsoD. COM~ISSIONER NELSON: Yeah. I -- I think this is a complicated one and what bothers me is that I hate to see us do the wrong thing because we've heard that the right thing can't be done. When Mrs. Miller got up and indicated that if we could simply dredge an area around in front of all those properties, everybody would have what they want. We wouldn't have to have boatdocks sticking w~y ou~. __=,A -his factor, you know, in ~e_rms of_ ut t~ere ls a reasonam~=, ~V ..... ~ ~nd posited tO an B re the nay= ,,~ ___._ these people have property wne= .=A~ ~wm~ tv. but 1f it were -- unreasonable extent in front o= u~=,~ ~_=er ~. COMMISSIONER THO.MAS: It is to be deposited. COMMISSIONER NELSON: -- but if it were going to be out there anothe~ hundred feet, if they simply were that unlucky, would we allow them to build the dock out 220 feet or 30 feet in order to get to water? There's no question they need to build it out this far to get to water, but is it reasonable to let people build a dock of any length necessary to get to water? It doesn't seem so to me, especially when they could -- when somehow, maybe with our help, get sand cleared out in front of all of those corner Properties and not destroy the whole bay which is the -- my last point. If in fact we approve this, everyone in that whole corner is going to want at some.point to get out to the water also. And then we're going to have a bay with just nothing but finger piers sticking out the whole end and I don't -- I don't think that's -- I don't think t~a%'s a step forward. That's a step back. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Okay. We're going to need a motion on this. Mr. Thomas. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: I make a motion that we approve the dock as presented. COMMISSIONER OATES: Second. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: A motion by Mr. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Oates. Is there a discussion on the motion? (No response.) I'm not going to support the motion. I tend to agree with what Mr. Nelson had to say. It's -- it's my opinion that staff recommended denial in their expert opinion because of conflicts with criteria seven and nine, and I have to say I've heard no testimony today to refute either one of those. Any other discussion? COMMISSIONER YORK: I just have a comment. My -- my concern is that, number one, it goes out a long way; number two, that -- that -- that in addition to the pier being out there, there's going to be that boat sticking up out of the water, so I can't support the motion. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I think we probably better do a -- I'm sorry. Mr. Thomas. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: The reason why I support this petition is very simple. DEP, Corps of Engineers, our own environmental staff Page 24 August 21, 1997 have looked at this thing, okay? We have a situation where you've got sand building up and sand building up and the pictures that some of the people brought up show that, you know there's a boat sitting high and ~ on the water. , s/tuation, you don't If you're concerned about an environmental and want that boat being dragged up on -- on the grass beds and -- that kind of issue.. ..... a' not it's hard for me to call it we're talking a~.u~ a.wa~w.~l_ .~ ~lings going out with a -- - dock when you've got a.~ngl*_~t~1 ~t~to it just to give ~=ss than a four-foot walkWaY, ~;~ ~in- anything else up 1n ~cess to a pontoon boat. ~ou c-~ ~ -- ha other than, at that particular location, than a pontoon boat- entally friendly way to give access Y ink it's the most environm d urchased the land or . I_~ .~o ~etitioners are going o~ .a~..p~h v can -- to even -- to ppo~x~i~,~[" land from the state so ~ .... e¥ eveloped the somehow w~ ....... w~p, has d through begin even to think about this, the state, riparian lines which is different than any I've ever seen come allowing bere'And I just don't -- I have a real heartburn with us not this, especially when you understand what -- the other docks that are around that -- that area. It just doesn't make sense to me why we would deny this. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Mr. Bruet. COMMISSIONER BRUET: Mr. Chairman, I agree with Commissioner Thomas. The petitioner seems to have done everything he can possibly do. He's still willing to talk about a community dock should there be one developed in the future. He's still willing to -- to make that offpr. He's satisfied all of the state and Federal permitting requirements. And I believe he has a right to build the dock. Because the sand is there and the state w~n't address the issue, I don't think he should be penalized for that. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Any other comments'7 (No response.) CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Let's take a roll call vote on this. Mr. Nelson? COMMISSIONE~ NELSON: Opposed. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: You're in favor of the motion. COMMISSIONER NELSON: No. I'm opposed to it. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I'm sorry. The motion. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: It'S my motion. COMMISSIONER NELSON: I'm opposed to the motion to -- to approve. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank you. Mr. Budd. COMMISSIONER BUDD: No. COMMISSIONER BRUET: I'm in favor. COMMISSIONER THOMAS: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: No. COMMISSIONER YORK: No. COMMISSIOI~ER OATES: Yes. COMMISSIONER PEDONE: Yes. Page ... 500T 1 4. 1997' August 21, 1997 COMMISSIONER WRAGE: Yes. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: The vote was ~ive to four so the motion passes- KR. MU~: Mr. chairman, you might want to Just let the public~ know that they have 30 days -- CHAIRMAN DAVIS: I'd advise the applicant that you should be aware that this dock petition may be appealed bY an affected property owner within 14 days of this hearing and, therefore, the adp1icant proceed with any construction at their own risk during t. his period. Once again, I would ask all those present to stand, raise your ght hand so that the court reporter may swear you in. COMMISSIONER T~OMAS: Wave your hand if you're going to speak ,etition. Thank you. One, two, three, four, five. speakers were sworn.) [RMAN DAVIS: Mr. Nino, this -- this seems to be and ~forward. M~. D: It certainly is. DAVIS: I say -- I say that in great hopes brevity, brevity is that you have a purpose a PDI is to MR. NINO: . a large -- of a PUD to~, .g Lize that roperty of ..... : ..... o~tv~u~d one that is perhaps there is ~t e~r' . this consistent with all ~ changes that a~ effe?ted.by And staff has that th .... lAW the cr/terla that are plan bring -- bring a consistency wl~n a%~ ~..~_-- _ precedent to your ap~ a -- a redesign a master plan zor and we recommend your CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Thank so much. -Questions of staff? COMMISSIONER THOMAS: None. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: Does the er have anything to say? (No response.) Anyone else to speak on this on? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Motion? COMMISSIONER YORK: Mr- ~irman, I we forward PDI-97-5 that we approve it. CHAIRMAN DAVIS: approve it. COMMISSIONER YORK: ,. I move for Second. COMMISSIONER · CHAIRMAN DAVIS: ~tion by Mr. York, seconded Mr. Thomas Discussion on motion? (No response aye. CHAIRMAN : All those in favor, signify by Opposed? (No DAVIS: That carries unanimously- V-97-6. Mr. Bellows. All ose -- I once again ask all those present here today are go] to speak on this petition to please stand, AGENDA ITEH 7-A MEMORANDUM TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION DATE: July 28, 1997 RE: BD 96-18 AGENT/APPLICANT: Agent: Richard Yovanovich Roetzel & Andress, P.A. 850 Park Shore Drive Naples, FL. 34103 Owner: James Hughes 94 Dolphin Circle Naples, FL. 34113 p, EQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting a 159 foot boat dock extension from the required 20 feet for waterways more than 100 foot in width, to 179 feet for a boat dock and boat llft facility. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property Is located at 94 Dolphin Circle in Isles of Capri and is further described as lots 84 & 85 Isles Capri, Unit one. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject lots are located on Pompano Bay, which is a wide body of water. However. because of the peculiar shape of the bay, which contains a very sharp angle, sand and silt deposits separated these lots from the water. The owners, in order to gain access to the waterway, have purchased a portion of the sand deposit area in the rear of their property from the State. The waterway in this area is very shallow. The adequate water depth of 3 feet at mean Iow water can be reached at 179 feet from the newly acquired land from the State, and 359 feet from the platted lots. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Existing: Single famity residence, zoned RSF-4 Surrounding: North East South West -Single family residence, zeroed RSF-4 -Pompano bay -Single family residence, zoned RSF-4 -Single family residence, zoned RSF-4 OCT 1 A 1997 EVALUATION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE: ENVIRONMENTAL. TRANSPORTATION AND The environmental staff of Planning Services has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the granting of this request. According to Section 2.6.22. of the Collier County Manatee Protection Ordinance, this boat docking facility will be considered a 'Moderate Development Site', which allows up to 10 boat slips for every 100 feet of shore line. Therefore, the proposed boat dock and boat house are consistent with th~ Collier County Manatee Protection Ordinance. Staff Comments; Staff has reviewed this petition in accordance with Section 2.6.21 of the Collier County Land Development Code and finds the following: 1. Whether or not the number of dock facilities or sllpe to be located on the subject property is appropriate In relation to the length of waterfront property available for the location of the proposed dock facilities. The site will contain one boat docking facility. The property at the platted property line has 130 feet of water frontage. 2. Whether or not the water depth where the proposed dock facility la to be located is sufficient to allow for safe mooring of the vessel, thereby necessitating the extension request. According to the information submitted by the petitioner, the water depth at the proposed dock location will be 2.8 feet. The channel is not marked. 3. Whether or not the proposed dock facillty and moored vessel(a) in combination may have an adverse Impact to navigation within an adjacent navigable channel. This waterway is a wide body of water. This dod< should not have a negative effect on safety of users of this waterway. 4. Whether or not the proposed dock design and moored vessel protrude greater than 25 percent of the width of the navigable canal or greater than 20 feet for boathouses, and whether or not a minimum of 50 percent of the platted canal width between dock structures/moored vessel(s) on the oppoaite side of the canal Is maintained in order to ensure reasonable waterway width for navigability. This waterway is an expansive body of water. This boat docking facility will not protrude greater than 25 percent of the width of the navigable canal, 2 OCT [ 4 1997 5. Whether or not there are special conditions related to the subject property or waterway which Justify the proposed dlmenslons and location of the subject dock. The waterway in this area is very shallow. The adequate water depth of 3 feet at mean Iow water can be reached at 179 feet from the newly acquired land from the State, and 359 feet from the platted lots. 6. Whether or not the proposed dock Is of ~llnimal dlmenalons necessary In order to adequately secure the moored vel~el while providing reasonable access to the boat for routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area. The deck area of the proposed dock is kept to the minimum necessary to adequately secure the moored vessels and to provide reasonable access to the boats for loading/unloading and routine maintenance. 7. Whether or not the proposed structure la of minimal dimensions to minimize the Impact of the view of the waterway by surrounding property owners. Due to the size and the location of this proposed docking facility the view of several waterfront property owners will be impacted. 8. Whether or not the moored vessel la In excess of fifty (50) percent of the length of the water frontage such that the addition of a dock structure will Increase the Impact on or negatively Impact the view of the waterway by surrounding property owners, This Boat dock is designed for a 24 foot pleasure vessel. This property contains 130 feet of water frontage. 9. Whether or not the proposed location and design of the dock Ivesael combination is auch that It may Infringe upon the use of neighboring properties, including any existing dock atructures. This site is located at the mid point of a curve on the bay. A boat dock with a 359 feet length as measured from the platted lot and 179 feet as measured from the accreted land, will negatively impact the ability of neighbors to build similar boat docks. 10. Regarding existing benthic organisms In the vicinity of the proposed extenaion: (a) Whether or not seagrasses are located wIthin 200 feet of the proposed dock: The environmental staff of Planning Services has review and has no objection to the granting of this request. 3 OCT 14 1997 (b) Whether or not the proposed dock is subject to the manatee protection requirements of this code(Sec. 2.6.22). According to Section 2.6.22. of the Collier County Manatee Protection Ordinance, this boat docking facility will be considered a "Moderate Development Site", which allows up to 10 boat slips for every 100 feet of shore line. Therefore, the proposed boat dock and boat house are consistent with the Collier County Manatee Protection Ordinance. Staff Recommendation: This boat docking facility witl negatively impact the view of the neighbors on Pelican Street as well as Dolphin Circle. AdditionallY, this boat dock, due' to it's size, location and configuration, may interfere with the ability of other neighbors to build boat docks. Staff is of the opinion that a community boat docking facility, serving the surrounding waterfront properties, is more appropriate for this location. Therefore, staff recommends the Collier County Planning Commission deny petition BD-96-18. 4 PREPARED BY: CHAHRAM BADAMTCHIAN, Ph.D., AICP SENIOR PLANNER DATE REVIEWED BY: I~OBER'I' J. MULHERE, AICP, MANAGER CURRENT PLANNING SERVICES DATE DATE SERVICES VINCENT A. CAUTERO,~:)Iv~NISTRATO DATE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Petition Number. BD-96-18 Staff Report for August 21, 1997 for CCPC meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLA~CO~MISSION: MICHAEL A. DAVIS, CHAIRMAN 5 OCT 14 1997 CCPC RESOLUTION NO. 97- RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-96-18 FOR AN EXTENSION OF A BOAT DOCK ON PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such busin%ss regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public~ and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (Ordinance 91-102) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which ~s the ~ranting of variances; and WHEREAS, =he Collier County Planning Co~ission, being the duly elected and cons=itu=ed Planning Commission for the area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a 179-foot extension of a boat dock f=om the permitted 20 feet to allow for a 179-foo% boat dock facility in the RSF-4 and A-ST zones for ~he property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fac: =hat satisfaczory provision and arrangement have been made concerninq all appilcaDle ma=tars required by said regulations and in accordance with Sect:on 2.6.21. of =he Collier County Land Developmen% Code; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given the opportunity to be heard by this Corm'aission in public meeting assembled, and the Commission having considered all matters presented; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the ~ollier County Planning Commission of Collier County, Florida, that: The petition filed by Naples Dock and Marine Services, representing James Hughes, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lots 84 and BS, Isles of Capri, Unit 1, as reco~~~% Book 3, Page 41, of the Public Records of qolliel~.C~ Florida. / I 00Tl11997 be and the same ~s hereby approved for a 159-foot extension of a boat dock from the permitted 20 feet to allow for a 179-foot boat docking facility in =he R$~-4 and A-ST zoning distric~s wherein said proper~ is lots=ed, subJec= =o =he following condi~ions: 1. ~ll docks, o: mooring pilings, uhichever pro~['~des the greater into the water, regardless of Zeng~h shalZ have reflectors and house m.~ra four (4) inches atinimu~ size installed a~ ~he ou~e~s~ end on both sides. 2. In order ~o add~ess the protection of ~na~eea~ one "Hana~ee Alert" si~ shall ~ ~nen~ly affixed ~o the pilings and shall be visible f=~ the waCe~ay. 3. Pemi[s or le[~ers of exemption f=~ [he U.S. A~y Co~s of Engineers and ~he Florida ~pa=[men= of Enviro~an=al Projection shall be presented prior =o issuance of a building BE iT F1~RTHER RESOLVED =ha= =his Resolution relating ~o Peri=ion Number ~D-96-!= be :eccrded in =he minuses of this Cc~ission and filed wish [he County Clerk's Office. This Resoiu=ion adopted al[er mo=ion, second and majority vote. Done ~his day of , 1997. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMHISS]~ COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: MICHAEL A. DAVIS, Chaxrman VINCENT A. CAUTERO Executive Secretary Community Developmen~ and Environmental Services Adminis~ra=or Approved as =o Form and Legal Sufficiency: Naz3c~ie M. Student Assis=an~ Coun=y A~orney -2- OCT 14 1997 B D' 9 6-1 8 D~s p~I~Z0N ~EcEr~D PETITION NO. (ABOVE TO BE FILLED IN BY STAFF) SF..P g 6 ~998 PETITIONER'S MA.ME JAMES KUGHE$ AGENT' SNAKE NAPLES DOCK AND MARINE S£RVICE$ AGENT' S ADDP~SS 4701 RADIO ROAD NAPLES, FLORIDA TELEPHON~41 434-0249 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROP~--RTY: LOT(S~4, 85 BLOCK(S) ~SLES OF CAPRI ~ SUBDIVISION UNIT 1 SECTION 31 TWP. 51 S R/tNGE~ (If the legal description is lengthy, i.e. a metes and bounds iescription, please attach a separate page providing that legal description) CURRENT ZONING OF SUBJECT PROPERTY RESIDENTAL RESIDENTAL CURRENT I~ USE ON SUBJECT PROP~--~.TY ADJACENT ZONING & LA/qD USE ~;ONING N RE S IDZS"~AL EXISTING ~OAT pOCK & LENGT~ RESIDENTAL RESIDENTAL RESID£NTAL E W List any additional BOAT DOCK FACILITIES in close proximity to the subject property and the TOTAL PROTRUSION into the waterway of each. NO DOCKS ARE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. --1-- ' .o.~ OCT 1 4:1997 E×plain fully what you are requesting via this petition. will be constructed? A PIER THAT IS 153' FROM THE HIGH WATER MARK TO THE DOCKING PLATFORM THAT WILL BE 10' WIDE AND 12' LONG WITH ENTRY FROM THE FRONT. A WALKWAY WILL BE PROVIDED UPLAND FROM THE HIGH WATER MARK. The below listed criteria, pursuant to Section 2.6.21 of the Collier County Land Development Code, shall be used as a guide by staff in determining its recommendation to the Collier County Planning Commission and by the Collier County Planning Commission in its decision to approve or deny a particular Boat Dock Extension request. Please provide any information you wish in response to items (a-i) listed below. Attach additional pages if necessary. a) Number of boat houses or docks to be located on subject property in relation to the length of waterfront property available for the location of the dock facilities. (If multiple slips are intended, indicate the total number.) ONE BOAT DOCK FOR LOT 84 & 85. b) Water depth where boat dock facility is to be located and distance to the location of navigable channel. (Indicate water depth at mean low tide.) DEPTH AT LOW TIDE IS 2.78'. BEYOND THIS THE DEPTH RAPIDLY DROPS OFF INTO THE BAY. c) The nature and speed of water currents in the navigable channel. (NOTE: All salt water bodies, natural or man made, are tidal in nature. This qfuestion refers to the nature and speed of water currents in the navigable channel; are they swift, are they fairly constant, often changing, etc?) -2- AND EXIT IN THE NORTH WEST CORNER. WE ARE IN TEE ~Ou'~n WEST CORNER. THE WATER GOES UP AND DOWN WITH THE TXD£. The land contour (bottom profile) of the property on which the dock facility is to be located. (Does it slope gradually toward the channel; are there high and low spots; does it slope gradually then drop off steeply; etc.?) THE LAND SLOPES GRADUALLY _ T~E ZNTIRE DISTANCE FROM the structure (home) to the lo~ %~de mark. e) The effect the dock facility will have on the safety of the users of the navigable channels and adjacent waterways': NONEs.THIS IS A WIDE BODY BAY. f) The location, length/protrusion and design of dock facilities on adjacent properties. Lot 86 , adjacent to t__~_~subject property's N__(N,S,E,W) property line does/~s r~hawe a boat dock facility. Location, protrusi~sign of boat.dock. OCT 14 1997 ~-,~,~,-j W~p~=y a~ne .9_~_ .~aYe a.~oa= dock facility. Location, protru~Lo~--a=~-~esign of Boat Dock. g) The impact the extension will have upon the view of the waterway by adjacent wate=f=ont l~OP~rty owners. h) The distance to adequate water depth.(three feet at mean ~aters) as compared to the requested ex~ension distance. ~ust beyond the dock~n~ area approximately 6 f~. i) The size of the vessel(s) in~ended to be moored at the dock facility. 24' - PETIT~I 'NER OR AGENT SIGNATU-~ OF -4- OCT 1 4 1997 'LOT LOT-S6 .OT 85'~ i ' · 88 . )ELICAN ~T. OCT 14 1997 --.? il I~-&TING TO PETITION NO. CU-96-17, FOP. THE FIRST EXTENSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A CHURCH AND RELATED FACILITIES AND ~ CARE ~-l-~ IN THE 'E' ESTATES ZONING DIS'FRICT FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION 96-551 ADOPTED ON DECEMBER 12, 19<~ PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.7.4 (CONDITIONAL USE PROCEDtmES) OF THE LDC. OILTECT~'E: This petigon seeks to extend the date by which a conditional use was first approved for & church in an "E" Estates zoning district located ts ilhistrated in the aforementioned Resolution. This is the first extension request. The Collier County Land Develo~ Code provides for a maximum of three (3) one year extensions to condilional uses. CONSIDERATIONS: The property is located on the west side of Courny Barn Road approximately one mile south of Davis Boulevard. The approved developm,,-rn onter Reso~fion 96-581 remains consistent with ali elements ofthe GMP and in ptrticular the Future ]Land Use Element which provides for churches and child car~ centers as members of the church are actively pursuing the steps essential to ~ construction of't~e church, GROWTII MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Historical/Archaeological Survey and Asses~ is required. 1 COMMISSION RECO~~A~ON: Th~ ~ first extension I:e lp'~nted to Petition No. CU-96..17 in ~wrd~me wiIh fl~ ~ ~ DATE CU-96-17 EX 2 OCT 14 1997 lWlaytlower Congregational United Church of Christ September 26,1997 Collier County Government Community Development Services Division Att. Ronald F. Nino AIC~ R.E. Petition CU-96-17 [Exten~ion) RECErY D c Pleaba refer bo your lette: of Sepbember 10,1997 to Mr. Hoover. We own 9.7 acres of land directly across from the Coun%y Barn on County Barn ROad and are in the final stages of the Permitting Process. We expect app}oval from the County on our Site Development Plans by November 15,1997. Final approval from the South Florida Water Hanagement District (West Palm Beach) by October 10,1997. If all goes as planned, we should be clearing the Site in the month of November 1997 with construction commencing in December 1997. Our conditional use expires December 10.1997, and because of unforeseen delays, we believe it would be prudent for us to request an extension of our Conditional Use. Attached is our check ~1046 for $175.00 to cover the extension. If you need additional information, please give me a call at 793-5078. Thank you for your help. W.M.Walters · Chrm-Building Comm. cc- Bldg. Comm. Brooke Swanson 2106 Tama Circle lpt~201 - Naples,F1. 34112 OCT 14 1997 , RESOLUTION 97- RELATING TO P£TITION NO. CU-96-17 FOR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE OF PROPERTY HER£INAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, =he Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all Counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations aa are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted & Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes co~4~rehensive zoning regulations for the zoning of particular divisions of the County, among which is the granting and extending the time period cf Conditional Uses; and WHEREAS, on December 26, !996, the Board of Zoning Apl)eals enacted Resolution No. 96-582, attached hereto and incorporated herein, w~ich granted a condi=ionai use pursuant to Ordinance No. 91-102, for a church, on the below described ~rcperty; and WHEREAS, Subsectlcn 2.7.4.5 sf the Land Development Code prcvidO =h~t =he Board of ~oning A~pea!s may extend the one (1) year time perlo= for a conditional use which has not been commenced; NOW, THEREFORE BE 'T RESOLVED, by the Board cf Zoning Appeals ~f C:!iler Coun='y, Florida that: The writ=eh request of W. M. Walters, representing the Mayf!=wer S ~ of the N ~ of the SW W of the SW ~ less right-cf-way :n Sect:c~ ~, Township ~0 South, Range 26 East, Toll:er County, Ficrlda. Is here~y a~r:ve= ~ursuant to Subsection i.7.4.5 of the Land Development Code rOr=lnance No. 9i-I02), and the expiration d~te for Resolution No. 96-5EI, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibi% "A", and all c:n~ltlons applicable thereto, is hereby extended -1- for one addlt~cnal year until AGEN 'OCT B£ IT FURTM£R RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded tn the ntnutes of this Board and tn the records of the Petition for which the extension is granted. Th£s Resolution &dopted after notion, second and majority vote. Done this day o~ , 1997. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: DWIGHT £. BROCK, Clerk BY: TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, Chair~n Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Mar~orie M. Student Assistant County Attorney -2- A{~[ D I OCT 14. 1997 RESOLUTION A P, ESOLUTZON PP. OVIDZNG FOR THE F.~TABLX~lfMENT OF A CHURCH WXTH P~LAT~D FACZLZTZES AND CHZLD ~ ¢1~'1~3t CONDZTZONAL USF. S #In AND "3" ZN TH~ #~# F,~TATF~ ZONZNG DZ~I'P. ICT ~ TO SICTZOll 2 · 2.3 · 3. OF ~ COLLIIE:X CC)~r2'Y ~ Drv~~ CODM ~ iqtOPEKTY LO~,ATED ZN IT, CTZON I~ 'q~ot414~P SO SOU'~ WGB 26 ~JLSTt ¢OLL21~ ~, TI~.ZDA. enforce zoninq and such bus,ness re.lagOons as are necessa~ for ~he project,on of ~e public; a~ ~s, ~he County pursuant thereto has adopted a ~nd Developmen~ Code (Ordinance No. 91-~02) which ~ncludes a C~rehenaivo Zoning Ordinance e~tabl~shing re.lagOons for ~he zoning of ~lar geographic div~sions of ~he County, among which ~a ~he ~an=ing of Condi=io~al Uses~ and ~ V ~ER~S, ~he Collier Coum=y Planning Co~ission, being Chi duly appointed and cons~i~u=ed planning board for ~he area hereby affected, has held a public hearing after no=ice as in said regula~ions made and provided, and has considered ~he advisablli=y of Condl~ional Usaa "1" and "3" of Sec=ion 2.2.3.9. In an "E" Es=aCes zone for a church rich rile=ed facill=ies and child care cen~er on ~he pro~y hereinafCer descried, and has found as a ma~er of fac= (~lblC "An) ~ha= satisfac=ory provision and arrangemen~ have ~en ~ade conceding all applicable ma=tars re~ired by said re. la=ions and in accordance with Subsec=io~ 2.7.4.4 of =h. ~nd Dev. lo~en= C~e for ~e Collier County Planning Co~ission; and ~S, all in~er~s~ed pi~ies have ~en given ~uni~y ~o ~ considered NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF Collier Court=y, Florida GOT 1 1997 The petition filed by William L. Hoover, AZCP of Hoover Planning Shoppe and Beau lCeene, P.E. of Xeene Engineering repreaenting~ayfl~ver Congregational United Church of Christ with respect to the propez~cy hereinafter described as: S 1/2 of the N 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 leas right-of- way in Section a, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. be and the same is hereby approved for Conditional Uses 'l" and "3' of Section 2.2.3.3. of the 'E' Estates zoning district for a church wl~h related facilities and child care center in accordance ~l~h the Conceptual Heater Plan (Exhibit 'B") and subject to the following conditions: ae The Planning & Technical Services Hanager ~a¥ approve ~lnor changes in the location, siting, or height of buildings, structures, and inprovementa authorized by the conditional uses. Expansion of the usam identified and approved within this conditional uae application, or major changes to the site plan subnitted as pat~c of this application, shall require the submittal o£ a new conditional use application, and shall conply with all applicable County ordinances in effect at t. he tine of submittal. b. A six (6)' foot high concrete fence, finished in a tan or light to ~ediu~ brown color, shall ~e constx-ucted along the north and south property lines adjacent to automobile parking areas. Such concrete fence shall be timed for construction with the establishment of the automobile parking areas. c. Ail elevated lighting fixture specifications shall provide for directing illumination to the surface of the parkin~ lot only with ahieldin~ to ensure that there no horizontal illumination on the ad,scent proper~y. d. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at the project's entrance at the ~ime said entrance is constructed. If the project ie built after the four-laninq of County Barn Road, this requirement shall be waived. The church may defer providing a southbound right-turn lane and northbound left-turn lane along County Barn Road into the site until County Barn Road is 4-1seed if the following are met by the church: 1. The child care facility shall not be operated du~lng the weekdays until much turn lanes are provided. 2. ~o regularly scheduled church activiitee shall occur during the Weekday A.~. Peak Hours (?:00 - · :00 A.H.) and p.H. Peak Hours ~4:00 - ~:00 P.H.~ until such turn lanes are provided. 3. ~ei~her the ~haae 1-B amd/or Phale 2 expanelonn shall be comsCructed until such turn lanes are provided. If requested b~ Collier County, an of~~ ...... ~erl~f'e Deputy ~hall be hired 5. .The ~hurch avrses Co provide such turn lanes concern requires one or bo~h turn lanes to be provided. f. Under the four-lane condition, Chi County nalntenanca complex may be served by a ~ull ~d/sn opening. The church say op~ to have access ~o deslqn necessary to ecconaodat~ the church shall be at Chi Church,s expense. Xoth~ Ln any approval for the church shall operate to vest any right Ln · reserves the right ~o ~cdify the italian, including closure, as deterained hy operatin~ end safety conditions. Turn lane deeLqne, under two-lane or four-lane conditions, shall be bated on I SO speed. ~n addition co~penea~nq right-o£-vay shall be provided. The turn lines shall be located ~uch that the left turn lane ia confined to the of the devalopzant. The church shall be required to pay road fats in accordance wi~h ~he schedule set forl:h in Ordinance 92-22, aa amended. Said ilp&cC feet shall be paid at the ti~a of issuance of · building h. The petitioner shall provide substantial evidence that ~he project will acco~odate sheet flow runoff tn the project's wa~er Banaqenent Riffle-of-way for the wtdentnq of County Barn Road shall ba provided tn accordance wi~h the requireaents shown on the roadway construction plans when requested by Collier County. The value of the riqht-of-way shkll ba determined at fair narket value as of the data of approval and shall be paid tn ~he for~ of road i~pact fee credits. J. Per~lts or letters of exanption fron the U.S. Corps of Engineers (ACO£) and the South Florida ~atar Hanaqanan~ Distric~ (SFI~D) shall be presented prior to Final Site Devalopnan2 Plan Approval. k. £nvironnental par~itCinq shall ba tn accordance wi~h the State of Florida £nvironnental Resource Per, it Pules and be subJec~ to review and approval by Current Planninq £nvlronnantal Review Renewal of exotic veqatation shall not be counted towards ~itiqa~ion for Impacts to Collier County Jurisdictional wetlands. 1. An appropriate portion of the native veqatation shall be retained on site as required tn Section 3.9.5.5.4, CCLOC, as a~ended. · . All conservation areas shall be recorded aa conservation/preservation trac~s or dedicated to an approved entity or to Collier County wi~ no responeib~lity for uaintenanca and aa per Florida S~atu~es Section 704.01. .hall be mrovided ~Ve o~ veCla~a, aC the Cl~ o~ Plan ..r~l. ~n exotic vsgs~ation removal, moni~oring, and maintenance (exotic-frae) pl&n for the site, vi~h anphasia on the conaa~vat£on/prasa~vation &teas, sh~ll ba su~mi~sd to Curren~ Planning Envlromn~l R~vi~ cons~c~on plan approval. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVL~) ~ha~ this Resolution minutas of this Board. Commissioner Cons:shrine offered ~he foraqoinq Resolution and moved for its adoption, seconded by Comalsatoner ~ancock and upon roll call, thm vote was~ AYES: Commissoner Constantina, commissioner Hancock, Commissioner Mac'Kl~ Commissioner Berry and Commissioner Norris NAYS: ABSENT AND NOT VOTING: ABSTENTION: Dona this loth day of ~, 1996. DWIGHT £. BROCK, CLERK .APP~Og~D AS" TO .,i~ORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: MA~(L~IE M. STUDENT ASSIST~ CO~TY A~O~EY ~-96-17 RESOL~ION/18347 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA -4- 'OCT FOR FOR ! The follovirq fac~s are found: ~' Sec~ct°n ?' ~' ~/' ~[ of the Land Devlopuent Coda au~orLz~ ~e ~o~XtXo~l ~e. 2. Granting ~e co~i~o~l ~e vi~l ~ ~ly a~r~ ~e ~lXc ~eres~ ~ wXll A. ~.t2.~ v:tth_~e Land t~.~,.Xopu.nt Code and ~ Aanagmn~plan: Yea __~No n. l_nqress and e~ress to proper~:y and DroDosed _--~y"'~? -~ ~aestr~an safety a~ co~ieflc., ?e~., ~ ~o ccapat£bility vi~h adjacent Properties and o~her proper~¥ An ~ha ~is~ric~c: Coapetible ~ within d£sl~rict ~es ~ Ifs _ · ased on the above f.~Jdir~n, ~his conditional use ~ld, rec~~ for approval FINDING OF FACT BY I 0.. cl... Ae De Consts~en~ wi~h me ~an~ ~evelopuen~ Code amd l~iflageuen~ Plan: Yes ~ ~o . sX~r~e~s~ and..egx'eae to. propert~ and proposed ~.F. es ~A?reon v,tth particular reference ~o ~uco_.m?r. xv_? ~ .Pedes~rXan safe~¥ and convenXence, ~..raz~xc ~l.ov ?ne .control, and access in case o~ z~rs or cacas~o~ne: / ~cibilicy vi~ ~a~ ~les a~ ~C~le ~ vi~n dis~i~ Based on ~Ae above f:Lndln~,s, ~.hia congJ, tJ. onal m tshoq~ld, rscoanendod ~or approval ~ lrzI'FDXI, rG OF FACT OCT 1 A The £cllov£nq £ac~ are pro~y or ~s ~ ~e ot: Ae Consistency vl~h '.he Land l:Mvelopmen~ Code and Yes ~I~oPlan: Ce De Ingress and ogress ~o prop4r~ and proposed s~ruc~ures ~h~raon vi~h pe~cicular ra£erence to au~oBo~lve and pedestrian nre~ L~ convenience, ·raffic flow and con~roX, a'~d access In case o£ fire or catastrophe: Cc~a~ib£1i~¥ vith adJacen~ preper~ies and other pro~er~y in the d~tric~: Cc~a~ible u~v£thin di~t. rAct Yes ~ .o .,, with a~ipula2ions, (copy a~c~od) .~h~uo~) be recommended for approval FINDING OF FACT OOT 1 A 1 97 I I The ~olloving £ac~8 ars ~e ~lic ~ter~ pro~y or uses ~ ~e ~cause o~ = Ce Connistency vl~C~e Z4nd Development Code a~d ~anageue~Plan: Yes ,.,1~' eo., Xm~ress and egress to proper~y and proposed structures ~hereon vl~A particular rs£erence to u~o~oCive amd pedestrian .afe~¥ and convenience, ra£fic £1~w and con~rol, amd access in case of firs or catastrophe: Adequate lragres~4~'e~ress F'~Iq'D ~NG OF · OCTl&lg97 FO~ The follovinq facts &re found: ~. Section ~,. ~t. l/.~ of the L~nd Devlopmmt Code autho=lzed the conditional use. pr~y or ~ ~ ~e ~ d/s~ or nei~~ Co consistency vith/~he Lo~d l:Mvelcrpuent Code Orov~A XAnigtue)~ Plan: Yes ~' J(o Affects nelgtd~orl~Iprop4z~eein relation noise, gltre, econoui: o)~odor ef£ect8: No affec~ or F/~£e~nitl~a~ad A~fec~ cannot be Conpa~ibllity vith adjacent properties and o~er proper~y in the/~ls~.ric~: Conpetlble ~ge within disl=ric~ Yes ~ No OCT 1 A COLLIER C~UliTY ~e fo11~ fa~s ~e 1. Se~Lon _~. ~. ~ of au~orized ~e CO.iChOr1 2. Grant~ ~e co~L~Lonal ~e w~ll ~ I~ely affe~ pro~y or uses ~n A. Cons~sten~ w~.~e ~ ~el~nc C~e and Gr~h hnagm~ ~lan: B. Z~ess ~d ~els to pro~ f~re or catastrophe: Ads.ate Co~atLb~lLty wi~h adjacent properties and o~har proper=y ~n ~ha dLstrLc~: ¢OBIM~ble~a vL~hLA dLstrLct FZNDING OF FACT FXh*D~G OF FACT BY COLLXER COUh'L~ IFLA]4~Fi~G COI~SSZON FOR A COHDZTZO~AL USE PETXTXOX FOR ! The ~ollowing ~ac~s are 2. Gr~l~ ~e co~i~lo~l use vill n~ a~ly ~e ~blic interest ~ vail pro~y or uses ~ ~l sm dia~l~ oF neig~rh~ ~cause o~: A. ~onsis~en~ wl~ ~e ~nd ~vel~n~ C~e a~ Gro~h Hanavmnc Plan: Yes ~ No stuccoes ~ereon vi~ p~tl~la= reference to automotive a~ pedestrian safety a~ ~enience. ~ra~lc ~1~ an~ ~flCFol. ~i~e or catastrophe: Ade~aCa in. ess ~ ~esa Yes ~ No noise, glare, econ~c oz ~or V' ,o ar~e~ or ~r~ nit~va~ ~ , ,,, ~ ~o~ De Compa=ibA1A~y wi~h adJacen~ properties and ocher proper~¥ in ~he dis~Ac~: within die,riSc No Based on the m fl~dJmqs, this conditional tree ~uld, FINDING OF FACT OCT 1 A 1997 2. Gra~tlr~ ~he conditional use viii not a _d_vtrlely a£fac~ ~e ~l~c ~nter~t ~ rill a~a~x~ or ''~ ~g~nC Plan: Yes ~ No traffic fl~ ;~._~n U~t~y I~ ~onvenlence, Yes ~ No ~ ,ir RELATING TO PETITION NO. CU-96-.16, FOR THE FIRST EXTENSION OF A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A CHURCH IN THE "E" ESTATES ZONING DISTRICT FOR PROFER~ DESCRIBED IN RESOLUTION 96-513 ADOFI'ED ON NOVEMBER 12, 1996 PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.7.4 (CONDITIONAL USE PROCEDURES) OF THE LDC. This petition seeks to extend the date by which a conditional use was first approved for a church in an "E" Estates zoning district located as illustrated in the aforementioned Resohrdon. This is the first extension request. The Collier County Land Development Code provide~ for a nmximum of three (3) one year extensions to conditional uses. CONSIDERATIONS: The property is located on the east side of San Marcos Boulevard approximately one mile north of Radio Road. The approved development order Resolution 96-.513 remains consistent with ali dements of the GMP and in particular the Future Land U~e Element which provides for churches as conditional uses in all residemial zoning districts. Correspondence from the owners agent advises that members of the church are actively pursuing the steps esstafial to initiating construction of the chun:h, as represented by correspondence from the agent for this church, a copy of whicl, is included with this executive summary. FISCAL IMPACT: None. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Staffs analysis indicates that the petitioner', s property is located outside ~n ~rea of Igstorical ~ archaeological probability as referenced on the official Collier County Probability Map. Tlm~ no Historical/Archaeological Survey and A~sessment is required. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOM2HENDATION: That a f~t extension be granted to Petition No. CU-96-16 in accordance with and Exhibits thereto. ! RONALD F. NINO, AICT Cml~.F PI,ANNER REVIEWED BY: VINCENT A. CAU~ERO, ADMINISTRATOR DA ~ COMMiFN1TY DEV. AND ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS. CU.96-16 ~X SUMMARY /I~d 2 3a50 27t~ Avvn~ $.W. FLORIDA 2~)0 Norih Honclhoc I)rivc Nq~ l;'brida 34104 URBAN INSTITUTE, INC. Dr. Nlno J. $pagna. AICP. Tel. (813~ 455-2158 Re: CU' g6'l 6 B ~ ~?c. tifion Numb~ ~1~, Apoltoac ~ oflh~ Fai~ of Christ l:~m I mn ~ thia iettcr in bchalf of thc ~l~c A~-mbly of I~ Faith in C]z~ Ie~u~ to mquc~ a (mc yea~ cxtc~on of thc above Cond~tion,d Usc which coq3ire~ on November 1:2., IF)'/. Thc ~o~ of'thc pmpo~ charch laa ~ dcla7~l dac to thc fac~ lh~ thc ~ ofl~ Conditional O.~ f~ a chumh ~ thc ~ of C(xm~ ~ wa~ challca~ I~ .an~ oftbe Thank you for yom' con~lcr~on of thia mqucet. Ncno $. Spa~n For thc Peri.ncr Pastor Alvlm Aidana P.O. Box 963g Napk,, Florkla 33941-g63g Coca~ M, mi~ ~ Tochnic~ $175.00 chock # 560 for ~ing fo~. Till'liter O! D~vllOOmln! ~ntS I~'D~, · Deve,o:mems c' Reo,ona, IITIDi:~ ~1~ OCT 1 ~. lgg7 RESOLUTION 97- RELATING TO PETITION NO. CU-96-16 FOR EXTENSION OF CONDITIONAL USE OF PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED XN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all Counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHERF_kS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code [Ordinance No. 91-102) which establishes comprehensive zoning regulations for the zoning of particular divisions of the County, among which is the granting and extending the ti le period of Conditional Uses; and ' WHERE3%S, on November 12, 1996, the Board of Zoning Appeals enacted Resolution No. 96-513, attached hereto and incorporated herein, which granted a conditional use pursuant to Ordinance No. 91-102, for a church and church related facilities, on the below described property; and WHEREA~, Subsec~¢n 2.7.4.5 of the Land Development Code provides %hat ~he Board of Zoning Appeals may extend the one (1) year time perlcd for a conditional use which has not been co~:~enced; NOW, THEREFORE 5E IT RESOL~-D, by the Board of Zoning Appeals cf Collier County, Florida that: The written request of Dr. Neno J. Spagna, of the Florida Urban Ins:ltu:e, Inc., representing Apostolic Asse,~%bly of Faith in Christ Jesus for the first of three (3) permitted one (1) year extensions, in interest of the following described property: The North h of th, Southeast h of the Southwest ~ of the Northeast ~ of Section 31, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, less the west 30' reserved for right-of-way and utilities, Collier County, Florida. is hereby approved pursuant to Subsection 2.7.4.5 of the Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102), and the expiration date for Resolution No. 96-5i3, at%ached hereto and incorporated herein as -1- OCT 1 A 1997 Exhibit "A", and all conditions applicable thereto, is hereby extended for one additional year until BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board and in the records of the Petition for which the extension is granted. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote. Done this day of , 1997. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BY: TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, Chairman Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency: Marj~rie M. Studen~ Assistant County Attorney -2- 1997 RESOLUTION 96- 513 respect to the property hereinafter described A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CHURCH AND CHURCH RELATED CONDXTIONAL USE "1# IN ~IE "E# ZONING DX~IqtZCT PURSUART TO SECTION 2.2.3.3. COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODEFOR PROPErtY LOCATED IN SECTION 31, TOWNIHIP 49 IOUT~, JtANOE 21 EAIT, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WIlE]tEAl, th· Leglll&ture of the State of Florid· in C~·pCer 67-1246, L~ws of Florid·, ·nd Ch&peer 125, Florid& St·tut··, conferred on Collier County the power to eet&bll·h, coordinate end PrOtection of the public; end WNI~EAS, the County pursuant thereto has ·dopted · Land Development Code (Ordinance No. 91-102) which includes · Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance establishing regulations for the zoning of particullr geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of Conditional Uses; ~nd ~EREAS. =he Collier Count7 Planning Commission. being the duly appointed a~d cons=itu=ed planning board for =he area hereby has held a public ~earing after no=~ce as in said r·gula=ions made and provided, and has considered the advisability of Conditional Uae "1" of Section 2.2.3.3. in an "£- zone for a church and church related facilities on the property hereinafter described, tad has found as · matter o~ fact ~£xhibit "A") ~ha~ satisfactory provision and arrangement hay· been made concerning all applicable ~atter· required by said regulations and in accordance with Subsection ~.?.4.4 of the ~and Deveiopmen~ Code for the Collier County Planning Com~iseion~ and ~£REAS, all interested pa~tiee have been given opPortunity to b~ heard by this Board in · public meeting assembled and the Board having NO~, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL3 of The petition f£~ed by Or. ~eno Sps~na of Florida Urban Institute0 representing Apoloatic Assembly of the Faith in C~ilt i -1- OCT 1,1 1997 The North 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the $ou~hvllt 1/4 o! Ealt, llll thl Wilt 30' cIiirYed for right-of-ray and utilities, Collier CouncT, Florida. bi and ~hl lame Is hereby approved fo~ Cond~tiona! Usl "l" ot Section 2.2.3.3. of the -£- zoning dlltrict for a church and church rllitid flclltttll in accordance vl~h ~he Conceptual ~aste~ Plan (~xhibit ~C") and subject to the follovtng conditions= a. The Planning & Technical Services Hanaqer ~ey approve ~inor changes In the location, siting, or hetqh~ buildings, structures, and l~prova~ents authorized by the condit~onal uss. Expansion of the uael ~den~i~ted and approved within this conditional use application, or ~aJor changes Co the site plan submitted ae par~ ut this application, shall require cbs submittal o£ & ney conditional ~se application, and shall co~ply vi~:h all applicable County ordinances In effect aC the tt~e of I~b~tttal, Including Division ~.~, Site Development Plan Review and Approval, of the Collier Counc~ Land Devalop~n~ Code (Ordinance No. 91-102). b. Prior to~an~ approval of a Site Development Plan, the East Naples Fire Control and Rescue District shall convey their approval of fire suppression ~ethods. c. Subsequent required development approvals shall be subject Co all applicable Land Develop~en~ Code requirements. d. Whenever Collier County decides to install traffic liqnale ac the l~cersectlon ~f San ~arcos Boulevard v~th Radio Road, the church s~all be responsible for Its fair share of the prorated costs of the traffic signals. e. The maximum number of seats to be allowed in the "Sanctuary,, shall hoc exceed three hundred (300) lists. B£ IT FURTHZR R£SOLV£D that this Resolution be recorded in the ~inuCes o~ Chis Board. Commisl~oner .. Constantine offered the toreqoing ~esoluCion and moved for its adoption, seconded b~ Commissioner ~,x{. and upon roll call, ~he vote vas: · ¥~S: CommieJ~cnsc Conscan~nl, CommiaJ~onl~ ~ec'Kle, Comm~esione~ ~A¥S: Commissioner ~ancock ABSENT AND NOT VOTING: ABSTENTION~ -2- 14 1997 BOARD OP' $ONZNO APPEALS · . · ~,.. . .": . -3- FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ! FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR PETITION NO. CU-96-16 The following facts are found: 1. Section 2.2.3.3.1. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. e Granting ~he conditional use will no= adversely affect the publ£c interest and will no= adversely affect other property Ur uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: ae Ce Consistency with the Land Development Coda and Growth Management Yes _~__No Ingress and egreei to property and prOpOled structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Adequate ingress & ~reas Yes J~No Affects neighboring properties in relation to no~, glare, economic or. odor effects: No affect or Affect mitigated by Affect c~nnot be mitigated Compatibility with adJacen~ properties and other property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes No Based on the above findings, this conditiona~,~A~e should, with stipulations, (copy attached) (should ~t))be recommended for approval . ! / FINDING OF FACT MEMBER/18171 AGENDA ITEM OCT 1 A 1997 FINDIN~ OF FACT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR PETITION NO. CU-96-16 The following~facts are found: I Section 2.2.3.3.1. of the Land Develop=ant Code authorized the conditional use. Granting!the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property:or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: A. Consistency with the Land Development Code and , Growth Management Pla/n: Yes ~ No _ B. Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and accuss in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & egress Yes No _/ C. Affects neighboring properties in relation to noi~e, glare, economic or odor effects: __~___ No affect or Affect mitigated by . Affect c~nnot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and property in the district: Compatible use within district Yes--..__NO Based on ~he above findings, this condit with stipulations, lco~ -*---. ..... }~nal uae should - · ~ ~..;."zl~) (1~0~ no recommended £or approval _ . t) be '~ FINDI~ OF FAC'i' ~f~B~/18l?l / ' OCT 1,1 1997 FINDING OF FAC"P BY COLLIER COUNty P~ING COHHISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR P~ITION NO. CU-96-16 The following 1. ® Ifacts are found: I Section 2.2.3.3.1. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. Granting'the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property~or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: ae Ce De Baaed on ~he above findings, this con~+~---, ,,.. -~&l~ recommended for approval FINDING OF FACT MEMBER/18171 Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Manag~:No _ _ Ingress and ogroou to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ing~  ress Affects neighboring properties in relation to n~J~~.e, economic or odor effec~.s: ~No ~fect or Affect miti a ~ - - g ted by _____ Affect cannot be mitigated - Compatibility with adjacent propertie~ and 9ther property in the district: Compatible use Yes ~rict AGE~J~_A_IT£M No. ~ OCT 14 1997 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMHISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR PETITION NO. CU-96-16 The followinglfacta are found: 1. Section 2.2.3.3.1. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Grantinq'~he conditional use will not adversely affect the public interes= and will not adversely affe~ o~her property:or uses in the same district or naiqhborho~ because of= Ae Consistenc7 with the Land Development Code and Growth Hanagement p~/~j~ Yes No ~ngrosa and ogroaa to £)roport7 and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe: Adequate ingress & ~gr. jmss Yes ~-' No C. Af:fect~ neighboring properties in relation to noi$~4/glare, economic or odor effects: w No affect or Affect mitigated by . Affect cannot be mitigated D. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district: ' Compatible use within d~a~ct Yes . No ,, Based on the above findings, this conditional use I~m,~, recommende~ for approval . DATE / MEMB FINDING OF FA~ M~/18171 AGE ~N,~ ~A ~T FiM, ~ OCT ]. 1997 FINDING OF FACT BY COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PETITION FOR PETITION NO. CU-96-16 The followingt facts are found: I 1. Section 2.2.3.3.1. of the Land Development Code authorized the conditional use. 2. Granting'the conditional use will no2 adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect other property:or uses in the same district or neighborhood because of: Consistency with the Land Development Code and Growth Management~Plan: Yes~ No Ingress end egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fare or catastrophe: Adequate ingress ~egress Yes-- No Ce Affects neighboring properties in relation to noise, glare, economic or odor effects:  o affect or Affect mitigated by . Affect cannot be mitigated Compatibility with adjacent properties proper~y in the district; Compatible use with~district Yes. No ~ and 9ther Based on r.l~e above findings, this' conditional use should, with stipulations, (cop.y attache~) (should no~) be recommended for ~ ~~_ .~ OCT 1 1997 -,,. I~EQUEST TO APPROVE TKE FINAL PLAT OF 'WATERMATS OF XAPL~8 ~ TWO" To approve the final plat of 'Waterways of Naples Unit Two', a subdivision of lands located in Section 14, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. CONS~DERATIONt Engineering Review Section has completed the review of the construction drawings, specifications, and final plat of 'Waterways of Naples Unit Two'. These documents are in com~liance with the County Land Development Code and Florida State Statute No. 177. All fees have been paid. It is the ~ntent of the developer to construct the improvements for this project prior to recording of the plat or to furnish the required amount of approved security for recording purposes at a later date. This procedure would be in conformance with Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code. Engineering Review Section recommends that the final plat of "Waterways of Naples Unit Two" be approved with the stipulation that the final plat not be recorded until the required improvements have been constructed and accepted or until the approved security is received to guarantee completion of the required improvements. FI S CAL I~PAC~, The fiscal impact to the County is none. The project cost is $281,518.90 to be borne by the developer. The cost breakdown is as follows: a) Water & Sewer b) Drainage, ~Paving & Grading - $75,412.00 - $206,106.90 The County will realize revenues as follows: Fund: 113 Agency: County Manager Cost Center: 138900 - Development Services Revenue generated by this project: Total: $5,665.30 Fees are based on a construction estima' $281,518.90 and were paid in June, 1997 OCT 1 'F397 Executive Summary Waterways of Naples Unit Two Page 2 The breakdown is as follows= a) Plat Review Fee ($425.00 + $4./ac) -$ 653.24 b) Construction Drawing Review Fee Water & Sewer (.50% const, est.) - $ 377.06 Drainage (.50% const, est.) Paving, Grading (.425% const, est.)- $ 875.96 c) Construction Inspection Fee Water & Sewer (1.5% const, est.) - $1,131.18 Drainage, Paving & Grading (1.275% const, est- $2,627.86 The Concurrency Waiver and Release relating to conditional approval has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office for the project. P~ECOMMENDATION= That the Board of County Commissioners approve the final plat of "Waterways of Naples Unit Two" with the following stipulations: 1) That the final plat not be recorded until the required improvements have been constructed and accepted or until approved security is received for the uncompleted improvements and that construction shall be completed within 36 months of the date of this approval. 2) Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Construction and Maintenance Agreement. 3) That no building permits be issued until the final plat is recorded. OCT 1997 Executive Summary Waterways of Na91es Unit Two Page ) ~Ohn R. N(~uldswofth, Senior Rngineer Eng~neeri~g Review Engineering Review Manager VinCent A. Cautero, ~inis~ra~or Cou, f,~ity ~velopment & Environmental Se~ices Co~,~ity Dev. and Environmental Svcs. DIVISION JR}{: ew Date Date Date -.=.~h PINE ,.., ' ~'~ RIDGE ~_ GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD ~ ROAD ,~ ..-.,, .....A GATE ~~, CZT~' '-' 1~''!997! ~'"'~. · ALLIGATOR "XL'LEY .I I~i~E~§=i'ATE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGKEEMENT FOP. SUBDIVISION IMPRO~ PRIOR TO RECORDING OF PLAT THIS CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENTS PKIOR TO RECORDING OF PLAT AGKEEMENT erected into this day of , 19 between Waterways ~oint Venture hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and thc Boazd of C.~x~ty Commissioner~ of Collier Cou=ty, Floridz, herei~fler refen-~d to a~ the "Botrd." 1. Developer has, simultaneonsly with the delivery of this Agreement, applied for the approval by the Board of a ceftin plat of a subdivision to be known as: Water~ys of Naples, Unit 2. 2. Division 3.2 of the Collier County Land Development Code allows the Developer to construct thc improvements required by said su~xlivision regulations prior to recording the final plat. NOW, TH~R.EFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises znd mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, Developer a~d the Board do hereby convenant and agree as follows: I. Developer will cause to be construcled: Water, Sewer, Roads, Drainage, and Lighting within 10 mont~ from the date of approval of said subdivision plat, said improvements hereinafter refer~ed to as the required improvements. 2. Developer herewith agrees to consm:ct said improvements prior t~ }ecording said subdivision plat and the Board of Cotmty Commissioners shall not approve the plat for recording until said improvements have been completed. 3. Upon completion of said improvements, the Developer shall tender its subdivision performance security in the amotmt of $29,353.$9 which represents ten percent of the total contract cost to complete construction. Upon receipt of said subdivision performance security by the Development services DLrector, the Developer may request the Boazd of County Commissioners to approve the subdivision plat for recording and g't'a=t preli,~;n,ry approval of said plat. The required improvement shall not be considered complete until a statement of substantial completion be Developer's engineer along ~-ith the final project recor~ have ~een f~rnished to be reviewed and approved by the Development Services Director for compliance with the Collier County Land D~velopment Code. The Development Services Dh-ector shall, within sixty (60) days of receipt of the mtement of substantial completion, either: a) notify the Developer in WTiting ofhi~ prcliminzry ztpproval of the improvements; or b) notify the Developer in writing of his refusal to spprove the im;m:rvements, therewith specifying those conditions which the developer nmst fulfin in order to obtain the Director's approval of the improvements. However, in no event shah the Development Services Director refuse prelimim~ ~proval of the improvements if they a~ in fact conslza~ and submitted for approval in accordance with the requirements of this Agreement. The Developer shall mainuin all required improvements for a ,~i,-~m period of one ~ after prelimin.a~ approval by the Development Services Director. After the one yeaz maintenance period by the Developer has termi~nted, the Developer shall petition the Development Services Director to inspect the required improvements. The Development Service~ Direetor or his designee shall inspect the improvements and, if fotmd to be still in compliance with the Colli~MM perccn! subdivision pcrforraancc security. The Dcv¢lol~r's respons~ility for maintea~ce of the required improvements shall continue unless or until the Board accepts maia~ce rtrpom~illty for the County. In thc cvcnt thc Dcvclopcr s~ll fail or neEle~ to fulfill its obligsticrn u~ler ~ A~ ~ c~fica~on of ~ch fe~e, ~e ~ A~;~;~t~ ~y ~ ~ ~e ~~ ~~e ~ ~ acc~t of~e fail~ of~e ~el~ m fi!fi~ ~ of~e ~o-~ of~ A~ 8. All of thc terns, covenants and conditions ho'rein contained ~re and shall be biod~ upon the Devcloper and the respective s~ccessots and usigns of the Developer. Witness to Waterways $oint Venture Waterways Joint Vtmture By:. Waterways of Naples, Ltd., as General Partner By: Wate~.~ By: IL A. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Tim Hencock, Chairmau Approved as to form a legal sufficiency: .,. Da~,~id C. Weigel County Attorney (Ord. No. 92-73, &2; Ord. No. 94-$8, &3, 10-21-94; Ord. No. 96-21, &3) OOT li 1° 7 AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) SS.: COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) BEFORE Iv~, the undersigned authority, personally appenr~IEdward H. Gilbert (the "Affiant'), who, upon being duly sworn, deposes and says as follows: !. Affi~t is an anomey, duly licensed to practice law in the State of Florida. 2. Affiant has reviewed certain constituent docm'nents of Wat~ays Joint Ventu~, · Florida parmership ('Waterways"), Waterways of Naples, Ltd., a Florlda limited psr~e~ip ("Naples"), Waterways Development, Inc., a Florida corporation ('Development"), and Tribris, Inc., a Florida corporation ('Tfibris"); certificates of public officials; and certificates and oral and written s~atemen~s of Waterways, Naples, Development and Tribr~s. Based upon such review, Affiant is of the opinion that: (a) Waterways is a general partnership organized under the laws of the State of Florida; (c) The only partners of Waterways are TriBris and Naples. The general partner of Naples is Development. (d) (e) FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. Richard Davenport is President of Development is an authorized signatory for Waterway. Robert Miller is President of TriBris and is an authorized signatory for Waterways. Edward H. Gilbert The foregoing instrument was acknoxvledged before me this 10th da,.' of September. 1997, by Edward H. Gilbert, who (did) (did not) take an oath. ' ~ Personally knox~m. IZI Produced ID: My commission expires: NOTAI~Y PUBLIC, State of Florida 201~.002/10671.2 14:16 No. OCT 1 t 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARy, APPROVAL OF AN AGREEMENT WITH WILKISON & ASSOCIATES, INC, FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVMENTS TO SHELLABARGER PARK IN IMMOKALEE. THIS IS A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT. TOTAL CONTRACT WILL NOT EXCEED $92~00. REFERENCE RFi~96-2607 - ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR INFRASTRUCTURE TO SHELLABARGER PARK IN IMMOKALEE. QBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Count5' Commissioners approve an Agreement between Board of County Commissioners and Wilkison & Associates, Inc. for engineenng services. This contract is in reference to RFP#9(>-2607 - Engineering Services for Infrastructure Improvements to Shellabarger Park in Immokalee. CONSIDE .R, ATION: In December, 1995, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 95-592, to authorize the submissioz~ of an application to the Florida Depa.rt~ent of Community Affairs (DCA) for a Small Cities Communits' Development Block Grant under th~ Neighborhood Revitalization category. Since that time negotiations have taken place between staff, DCA, and the engineers to facilitate this agreement. This project ,will improve the sanitation of the Shellabaxger Park by removing, the use of septic tan.ks and replacing them with a more modem disposal system; the project will improve drainage conditions, which presently threaten the health and safety of the residents of Shellabarger Park, b)' installing .'m adequate roadway with improved drainage system. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal year 9'7/98 operating budget provides for this expenditure. Revenue is provided by the Community Development Block Grant (97DB-3K-09-21-01-N03). These funds s~re pr~_'c~__ in the ttrban Improv,,,,~t Grant ~ (~2~). GROWTH .MANAGEMENT IMPA~T: The subject propen3' is located in the lmmokalee area where an expansion of urban services are permitted, pursuant to Objective 111.2 of the Immokalee Area Master Plan. This Agreemen is consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan. xAGENDA ITEI~i OCT P~' RECOtHMENDATION: That the Board of Cotmty Commissioners approve the Agrcemc'nt between the County and Wilkison & Associates, Inc. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGP~EMENT is made and entered into this, day of :~__, by and between the Board of County Commissioners for Collier County. Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida and Department of Housing & Urban Improvement (hereinafter referred to as the "~NER") and Wilkison & Associates. Inc., authorized to do business in the State of Florida, whose business address is 3506 Exchange A~enue, Naples, Florida 34104 (hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT"). W I TN E S S E TH. WHEREAS. the OWNER desires to obtain the professional engineering & surveying service-: cf the CONSULTANT concerning certain design services for ~?=~-2{07 - Engineerigg Services for Infrastructure Improvements to 3nellabarger Park in Immokalee [hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). said services being more fully described in Schedui9 A. "Scope of Services". which is attached hereto and incorporated herein' and WHEREAS. the CONSULTANT has submitted a proposal for provision of those services, and WHEREAS the CONSULTANT represents that it has the type of professional services that will be require Project. / OCT ! NOW. THEREFORE. in consideration of the mutual covenants and provisions contained herein, the parties hereto agree as ARTICLE ONE CONSULTANT'S RESPONSIBILITY 1.l. CONSULTANT shall provide to O~t~TER professional engineering & surveying services in al! phases of the Project to which this Agreement applies. 1.2. The Basic Services to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder are set forth in the Scope of Services described in detail in Schedule A. ,The total compensation to be paid CONSULTANT by the OWNER for all Basic Services is set forth in Article Five and Schedule B. "Basis of Compensation". which is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 1.3 The CONSULTANT agrees to obtain and maintain throughout the period of this Agreement all such licenses as are required to do business in the State of Florida and in Collier County. Florida. including, but not limited to. all licenses required by the respective state boards and other governmental agencies responsible for regulating and licensing the professional services to be provided and performed by the CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement. 1.4. The CONSULTANT agrees that. when the services to b hereunder relate to a professional service which, under Statutes. requires a license, certificate of authorizati pr~y: 'lo~'al 4 ~g~ n other form of legal entitlement to practice such services, it shall employ and/or retain only qualified personnel to provide such services. 1.5. CONSUT. TANT agrees to employ and designate, in writing. within five (5) calendar days after receiving its Notice to Proceed. a qualified licensed professional to serve as :he CONSULTANT's project manager (hereinafter referred to as the "Project Manager"), The Project Manager shall be authorized and responsible to act on behalf of the CONSULTANT with respect to directing, coordinating and administering all aspects of the services to be provided and p~rformed under this Agreement. Within five (5)'calendar days from the Notice to Proceed issued by the OWNER to the CONSULTAnt. the CONSULTANT shall deliver to the ~NER a written statement, executed by the proper officers of the CONSULTANT. acknowledging that the Project Manager shall have full authority to bind and obligate the CONSULTANT on all matters arising out of or relating to this Agreement. The CONSULTANT agrees that the Project Manager shall devote whatever time is required to satisfactorily manage the services to be provided and performed by the CONSULTANT hereunder The person selected by the CONSULTANT to serve as the Project Manager shall be subject to the prior approval and acceptance of the OWNER. 1.6. CONSULTANT agrees, within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of a written request from the C~{ER. to promptly remove and replace the Project' Manager. or any other personn~ em~E~ OCT 1 4. 1997 or retained by the CONSULTANT, or any subconsultants or subcontractors or any personnel of any such subconsultants or subcontractors engaged by the CONSULTANT to provide and perform services or work pursuant to the requirements of this Agreement. whom the OWNER shall request in writing to be removed, which request may be made by the OWNER with or without cause. 1.7. Tke C©HSb%TANT has represented to the O~;ER that it has expertise in the type of professional services that will be required for the Project. ~he CONSULTANT agrees that all services to be provided by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to the On~qER's review and approval and shall be in accordance with the generally acdepted standards of professional practice in the State of Florida, as well as in accordance with all published laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules. regulations and requirements of any governmental agencies which regulate or have jurisdiction over the Project or the services to be provided and performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. In the event of any conflicts in these requirements, the CONSULTANT shall notify the OWNER of such conflict and utilize its best professional judgment to advise OWNER regarding resolution of the conflict. 1.8. CONSULTANT agrees not to divulge, furnish or make available to any third person, firm or organization, without OWNER's prior written consent, or unless incident to the proper performance of the CONSULTANT's obligations hereunder, or in the cour: e o~£~~"~'-'- OCT 1 4 1997 judicial or legislative proceedings where such information has been properly subpoenaed, any non-public information concerning the services to be rendered by CONSULTANT hereunder, and CONSULTANT shall require all of its employees, agents, subconsultants and subcontractors to comply with the provisions of this paragraph. 1.9 CONSULT~2~T agrees to certify all estimates of construction costs and ,Project completion dates prepared by the CONSULTANT. Said certifications shall be in a form approved by the OWNER. 1.10. Evaluations of the OWNER'S Project budget, preliminary estimates of construction cost and ~etailed estimates of construction cost prepared by the CONSULTANT represent the CONSULTANT'S best judgment as a design professional 'familiar with the construction industry. The CONSULTANT cannot and does not guarantee that bids or negotiated prices will nog vary from any estimate of construction cost or evaluation prepared or agreed to by the CONSULTANT. Notwithstanding anything above to the contrary, CONSULTANT shall revise and modify Construction Documents and assist in the rebidding of the Work at no additional cost to OWNER, if all responsive and responsible bids exceed the estimates of construction costs prepared by CONSULTANT. 1.11. CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construct[cn sele~~. contractors or the safety precautions and ~rograms incidLnt ~lt~ work of contractors. ~ '0CT 14 ,~'.," ARTICLE TWO ADDITIONAL SERVICES OF CONSULTANT If authorized in writing by OWNER, CONSULTANT shall furnish or obtain from others Additional Services of the types listed in Article Two herein. These services will be paid for by ~.~IER as indicated in Article Five and Schedule B. AttWchment B. The following services, if not otherwise specified in Schedule A as part of Basic Services. shall be Additional Services: 2.1. Preparation of applications and supporting documents (except those already to be furnished under this Agreement) for private or governmental grants, loans, bond issues or advances'in connection with the Project. 2.2. Services resulting from significant cha~ges in the general scope, extent or character of the Project or its design including, b~t not limited to. changes in size. complexity, OWNER's schedule or character of construction; and revising previously accepted studies, reports, design documents or Contract Documents when such revisions are required by changes in laws. rules, regulations. ordinances, codes or orders enacted subsequent to and not reasonably anticipated prior to the preparation of such studies, reports or documents, or are due to any other causes beyond CONSULTANT's control. OCT ]. 2.3 Preparation and submission of information to and necessary consultations with the Collier County Transportation Department. Florida'Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Transportation, South Florida Water Management District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or other appropriate regulatory agencies. in order to obtain necessary permits or approvals for construction of :h~ Project, unless such permits are expressly included in Basic Services to be performed by CONSULTanT hereunder as set forth in the Schedule A Scope of Services~ 2.4 Providing renderings or models for OWNER's use. 2.5. Investigations and studies involving detailed c~nsideration of operations,.maintenance and overhead expenses: the preparation of feasibility studies, cash fl~w and economic evaluations, rate schedules and appraisals: and evaluating processes available for licensing and assisting OWNER in obtaining process licensing. 2.6. Furnishing services of independent professional associates and consultants for other than the contract services to be provided by CONSULTANT hereunder. 2.7 Services during out-of-town travel required of CONSULTANT and directed by OWneR. other than visits to the Project site or OWNER's office. · Pm. ? 2.8. Assistance in connection with bid protests, rebidding or renegotiating contracts for construction, materials, equipment or services, except as otherwise provided for herein. 2.?. Providing any type of property surveys, aerial photography or related engineering services needed for the transfer of interests in real property and field surveys for design purposes ' and engineering surveys and staking to enable contractors to proceed with their work and providing other special field surveys. 2.10. Preparation of operating, maintenance and staffing manuals, except as otherwise provided for herein. 2.11. Preparing to serve or serving as a CONSULTANT or witness for OWNER in any litigation, or other legal or administrative proceeding, involving the Project [except for assistance in ~ consultations which are included as part of the Basic Services to be provided herein). 2.12. Additional services rendered by CONSULTANTS in connection with the Project. not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or not customarily furnished in accordance with generally accepted engineering and surveying practice. OCT 1997 ARTICLE THR.~E OWNER' S R~$PONSXBILITIES 3.1. The Owner shall designate in writing a project coordinator to act as OWNER's representative with respect to the services to be rendered under this Agreemer, t (hereinafter referred to as the "Project Coordinator"). The Project Coordinator shall have authority to transmit in~'tructions, receive information, interpret and define'~a~R's policies and decisions with respect to CONSULTANT's services for. the Project. However; the Project Coordinator is not authorized to issue any verbal or written orders or instructions to the CONSULTANT that would have the effect, or be interpreted to have the effect, of modifying or changing in any way whatever' ' (a) The scope of services to be provided and performed by the CONSULTANT hereunder. (b] The time the CONSULTANT is obligated to commence and complete all such services' or (c) The amount of compensation the OWNER is obligated or committed to pay the CONSULTANT. 3.2. The Project Coordinator shall' (a) Review and make appropriate recommendations on all requests submitted by the CONSULT~.NT for payment for services and work provided and performed in accordance with this Agreement' (}(IT I t 199 ' ,,,. II _.j (b) Provide all criteria and information requested by CONSULTANT as to OWNER's requirements for the Project, including design objectives and constraints, space, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expandability, and any budgetary limitations: (c) Upon request from CONSULT~4T, assist CONSULTANT by placing at CONSbTTA~rr's disposal all available information in the UWNER'S possession pertinent to the Project, including existing drawings, specifications, shop drawings, product literature, previous reports and any other data relative to design or construction of the Projec~ (d) Arrange for access to an~ make all provisions for CONSULTANT to enter the.Project site to perform the services to be provided by CONSULTANT under this Agreement~ and (e) Provide notice to CONSULTANT of any deficiencies or defects discovered by the OWNER'with respect to the services to be rendered by CONSULTANT hereunder. 3,3o CONSULTANT acknowledges that access to the Project Site. to be arranged by OWNER for CONSULTANT, may be provided during times that are not the normal business hours of the CONSULTANT. 3.4 ~WNER shall be responsible for the acquisition of all easements, property sites, rights-of-way, or other property rights required for the Project and for the costs thereof, inc] costs of any required land surveys in connection with' acquisition. ch OOT 1 4:19910 ~TICLE DgDLZR TIHE 4.1. Services to be rendered by CONSULTANT shall be commenced subsequent to the execution of this Agreement upon written Notice to Proceed from OWNER for all or any designated portion of the Project and shall be performed and completed in accordance with the Project Schedule attached hereto and made a~par~ hereof as Schedule C. Time is of the essence with respect to the performance of this Agreement. 4.2. Should CONSULTANT be obstructed or de,ayed in the prosecution or completion of its services as a result of unforeseeable causes beyond the control of CONSULTANT, and not due to its own fault or neglect, including but not restricted to acts of God or of public enemy, acts of government or of the OWNER, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine regulations, strikes or lock-outs, then CONSULT~_NT shall notify OWNER in writing within fiv~ (5) working days after commencement of such delay, stating the cause or causes thereof, or be deemed to have waived any right which CONSULTANT may have had to request a time extension. 4.3. No interruption, interference, inefficiency, suspension or delay in the commencement or progress of CONSULTANT's services from any cause whatsoever, including those for which O~{ER may be responsible in whole or in part. shall relieve CONSULTANT of its duty to perform or give rise to any right to damages compensation from OWNER. CONSULTANT's sole remedy ag !i will be the right to seek an extension of time to its schedule. This paragraph shall expressly apply to claims for early completion, as well as claims based on late completion. Provided. however, if through no fault or neglect of the CONSb'LTAIrT. the services to be provided hereunder have not been completed within twenty-four {24] months of the date hereof, the CONSULTANT's ,:,:.mpensa'tion may be ~qu;tably adjusted, with respect to those services that have not y~t been performed, to reflect the incremental increase in costs experienced by CONSULTANT after expiratibn of said twenty-four (24) month period. 4 4 Should the CONSULTANT fail to commence, provide, perform or complete any ~f the services to be provided hereunder in'a timely and reasonable manner, in addition to any other rights or remedies available to the OWNER hereunder, the OWNER at its sole discretion and option may withhold any and all payments due and owing to the CONSULTANT until such t:me as the CONSULTANT resumes performance of its obligations hereunder in such a manner so as to reasonab[y establish to the ~,2{ER's satisfaction that the CONSULTANT's performance is or will shortly be back on schedule. ARTICLE FIVE COMI~ENSATION 5.1. Compensation and the manner of payment of such compensation by the OWNER for services rendered hereunder by CONSULTANT shall be as prescribed in Schedule B. entitled "Basis of Compensation" which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. Comp~ nsa~~ authorized additional services will be made to the an hourly basis per the hourly rates set forth tn Schedule B, Attachment B. 'OCT 1 ~ :1997 ARTICLE SiX OWNERSHIP OF DOCUME~S 6.1. U~on completion or termination of this Agreement. all records, documents, tracings, plans, specifications, maps. evaluations, reports, computer assisted design or drafting disks and other technical data. other than working paD-rs. _. . prepared or develoF, ed by CONSULTanT under thi~ Agreement shall be delivered to and become the property of OWIgER. CONSULTAJ~FI'. at its own expense. may retain copies for its files and internal use. OWNER agrees to indemnify and hold harmless CONSULTANT with respect to any claim. loss or damage, including attorneys fees incurred by CONSULTANT due to the OWNER's use of said records, documents, tracings. plans, specifications, maps. evaluations, reports, computer disks and other technical data on some other project unless such use is authorized by CONSULTANT. 6.2. With respect to and in consideration for the indemnification provided by O~NER in paragraphs 6.1. above. CONSULTANT agrees to pay to OWNER $10.00. the sufficiency and receipt of which is acknowledged through the signing of this Agreement. ARTICLE SEVEN MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS 7.1. CONSULTANT will keep adequate records and supporting documentation which concern or reflect its services hereunder. The records and documentation will be retained by CONS! minimum of five (5) years from the date of termination Agreement or the date the Project is completed, whiche~ er't3 . 1_ 1997 14 later, OWNER, the Florida Department of Corr~unity Affairs, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Comptroller General 'of the United States, or any duly authorized agents or representatives of OWNER, shall have the right to audit, inspect and copy all such records and aocumentation as often as they deem necessary during the period of this Agreement and during the five (5) year period n~ted a~ove: provided, however, such activity shall be conducted only during normal business hours. ARTICLE EIGHT INDEMNIFICATION 8.1. The CONSULT~Cr in consideration of $10.00, the sufficiency 9nd receipt of which is acknowledged through the signing of this Agreement shall indemnify and hold OWNER and its officers, or employees harmless from and against losses, penalties, damages, professional fees, including reasonable attorney fees and reasonable costs of litigation and judgments arising out of any negligent act, error or omission of the CONSULTkNT, its Subconsultants, Subcontractors, officers, directors, or employees. arising out of or incidental to the performance of this Agreement or work performed thereunder. The consideration exchanged and the provisions of this paragraph shall also pertain to any claims brought against the OWNER its officers or employees by any employee of the named CONSULTANT, or any Subconsultant or Subcontractor. or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them. The CONSULT~4T'S obligation under this paragrap~ be limited in any way by the agreed upon contract ~ric in this Agreement or the CONSULTANT'S limit of, or lac~ sufficient insurance protection. 8.2. CONSULTANT acknowledges that the general conditions of any construction contract shall include language, satisfactory to the OWNER's attorney, in which the contractor agrees to hold harmless and to defend OWNER. and CONSULTANT. its agents and employees from all suits and actions, including attorney's fees. and all costs of litigation and judgments of any name and description arising out of or [nc;dental to the performance of the construction contract or work performed thereunder. ARTICLE NINE INSURANCE 9.1. CONSULTANT shall obtain and carry,, at all times during its performance under the Contract Document~. insurance of the types and in the amounts set forth in SCHEDULE D to this Agreement. ARTICLE TEN SERVICES BY CONSULT~fT'S OWN STAFF 10.1. The services to be performed hereunder shall be performed by CONS~TAN/'s own staff, unless otherwise authorized in writing by the OWNER The emplo~ent of. contract with. or use of the services of any other person or firm by CONSULT~. as independent consultant or otherwise, shall be subject to the prior written approval of the OWNER. No provision of this Agreement shall. however, be construed as constituting an agreement between the OWNER and any such other person cr firm. Nor shall anything contained herein be deemed to give any such party or any third party any claim or right of action against the ~,4¢ER ~~ i It OCT " Agreeme ~ 4 1997 as may otherwise exist without regard to this 16 ARTICLE ELEVEN WAIVER OF CLAIMS 11.1. CiDNSULTANT's acceptance of final payment shall constitute a full waiver of any and all claims, except for insurance company subrogation claims, by it against OWNER arising out of this Agreement or otherwise related to the Project, except those previously mad~ in ~riting and identified by C~SULTA~T as unsettled at the :ime of the final payment. Neither the acceptance of CONSULTANT's services nor payment by OWNER shall be deemed to be a-waiver of any of OWNER's rights against CONSULTANT. ARTICLE TWELVE TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION 12.1. CONSULTANT shall be considered in material default of this Agreement and such default will be considered cause for OWNER to terminate this Agreement. in whole or in part. as further set forth in this section, for any of the following reasons: (a) failure to begin work under the Agreement within the times specified under the Notice(s) to Proceed, or (b) failure to properly and timely perform the services to be provided hereunder or as directed by C~4ER, or (c) the bankruptcy or insolvency or a general assignment for the benefit of creditors by CONSULT~qT or by any of CONSULTer's principals, officers or directors, or failure to obey laws. ordinances, regulations or other codes of conduct, or (e) failure to perform or abide by the terms or of this Agreemen:. or (f) for any other just cause. The OWNER may so terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, CONSULTANT seven (7) calendar days written notice. 12.2. Zf. after notice of termination of this Agreement as provided for in paragraph 12.1 above, it is determined for any reason that CONSULTAN-f was not in default, or that its default was e×cusable, or tha': ~A otherwise was not entitled to the remedy against CONSULTANT provided for in paragraph 12.1, then the notice of termination given pursuant to paragraph 12.1 shall be deemed to be the no~z,:e of termination ~r,?~ided for in paragraph 12.3 below and CON£ULTANT's remedies against ~*~.~R shall be the same as and limited to those afforded CONSL~TANT under paragraph 12.3 below. 12.3. OWNER shall have the right to terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, ~ithout cause upon seven (7) calendar days written notice to CONSLfLTANT. In the event of such termination for convenience, CONSULTANT's recovery against. OWNER shall be limited to that portion of the fee earned through the date of termination, together with any retainage withheld and any costs reasonably incurred by CONSULTANT that are directly attributable to the termination, but CONSULTANT shall not be entitled to any other or further recovery against OWNER, including, but not limited to, anticipated fees or profits on work not required to be performed. 12.4. Upon termination, the CONSULTANT shall deliver to the OWNER all original papers, records, documents, drawings, models, and other material set forth and described in this Agreement. 'OCT [ m7 12.5. The OWNER shall have :he power to suspend all or any portions of the services to be provided by CONSULTANT hereunder upon giving CONSULTANT two (2] calendar days prior written notice of such suspension. If all or any portion of the services to be rendered hereunder are so suspended, the CONSULTANT's sole and exclusive remedy shall be to seek an extension of time to its schedule in accordance with the prbcedures set forth in Article Four herein. ARTICLE TH~ RTEEN TRUTH IN NEGOTIATION: REPRESENTATIONS 13.1. CONSULTANT warrants that CONSULTANT has not employgd or retained any company or person, other th, an a bona fide employee working solely for CONSULTANT. to solicit or secure this Agreement and that CONSULTANT has mot paid or agreed to pay any person. company, corporation. Zndividual or firm. other than a bona fide employee working solely for CONSULT~JqT. any fee. commission. percentage, gift or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement. 13.2. In accordance with provisions of Section 287.055. Florida Statutes. the CONSULTANT agrees to execute the required Truth-In-Negotiation Certificate. attached hereto and incorporated herein as Schedule E. stating that wage rates and other factual unit costs supporting the compensation are accurate, complete and current at the time of the Agreement. The CONSULTANT ~----- the original Agreement price and any additions thereto adjusted to exclude any significant sums by which the determines the Agreement price was increased due to in~~~--. incomplete, or non-current wage rates and other factual unit costs, All such adjustments shall be made within one {1] year following the end of this Agreement. ARTICLE FOURTEEN CONFLICT OF INTEREST 14,1 CONSL~TANT represents that it presently has no Interest and shall acquire no interest, either direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner with the performance of services required hereunder. CONSULTANT further represents that no persons having any such interest shall be employed to perform those services. ARTICLE FIFTEEN MODIFICATION 15.1, No modification or change in this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the parties unless in writing and executed by the party or parties intended to be bound by it. ARTICLE SIXTEEN NOTICES AND ADDRESS OF RECORD 16.1. All notices required or made pursuant to this Agreement to be given by the CONSULTANT to the ~WNER shall be in writing and shall be delivered by hand or by United States Postal Service Department. first class ma~l service, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the following OW~TER's address of record. Board of Ceunty Commissioners. Collier County Florida c/o Department of Housing and Urban Improv~ 2800 No Horseshoe Drive [ 4 1997 N~le~o FI. 34104 16.2. All notices required or made pursuant to this Agreement to be given by the OWNER to the CONSULTANT shall be made in writing and shall be delivered by hand or by the United States Postal Service Department, first class mail service, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the following CONSULTANT's address of record' Wilkison & Associates, Inc. 3506 Exchange Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 16.3 Either p~rty may change its address of record by written notice to the other party given in accordance with requirements of this Article. ARTICLE SEVENTEEN MISCELLANEOUS 17.1'. CONSULTANT, in representing OWNER, shall promote the best interest of OWNER and assume towards OWNER a duty of the highest trust, confidence, and fair dealing. 17.2. No modification, waiver, suspension or termination of the Agreement or of any terms thereof shall impair the rights or liabilities of either party. 17.3. This Agreement is not assignable, in whole or in part, by CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of 17.4 Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any otb and shall not be construed to be a modification of the this Agreement. Waiver by either party of a breach of any provision of this ~r b~ · :ez l T 4. 1997t '22 17.5. The headings of the Articles. Schedules. Parts and Attachments as contained in this Agreement are for the purpose of convenience only and shall not be deemed to expand, limit or change the provisions in such Articles. Schedules. Parts and Attachments. ARTICLE EIGHTEEN APPLICAF:LE LAW ~8.1. Unless otherwise specified, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws rules, and regulaticns of the State of Florida, and by the laws, rules and regulations of the United States when providing services funded by the United States government. Any suit or action brought by .either party to this Agreement against the other party relating to or arising out of this Agreement must be brought in the appropriate Florida state court in Collier County. Florida 18.2 This Acreement, initially censisting of continuously numbered pages including the referenced Schedules and Attachments hereto, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto and shall supersede, rep]ace and nullify any and all prior agreements or understandings, written or oral, relating to the matter set forth herein, and any such prior agreements or understanding shall have no force or effect whatever on this Agreement. 'OCT ! 4 1997 IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the -.arties hereto have executed this Professional Services Agr~,_~en: for engineering & surveying services the day and year first wri:ten above. ATTEST' ~ight =. Brock. Clerk BOARD OPCOUNTY COP~ISSIONERS FOR COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA. APOLITICAL SUBDIVISI~4 OFT HE STATE OFFLORiDA By' Date. By: Timothy J. Hancock, Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency' Assistant Co{Jnty Atto'~ne'~'C. By: ( CORPO~:~.I'E SZ~_i_ ) OCT1A Schedule A SCOPE OF SERVICES A.! GEOTECHNICAL AND SURVEYL\'G SERVICES A.2.1 Research existing lot layout, existing in~ess/e~ess, drainage and utiiitv easements w/thin Shel]abarger Mobile Home Park. A.2.2 Prepare survey of ex/sting features within the construct/on areas including existing utilities, driveways, culverts, road sigas, fire hydrants, septic tanks, and other relevant features. A.2.3 Prepare survey to locate and section existing lake near slorm sewer connection point. A.2.4 Prepare a topographic survey of the stormwatcr outfall route to existing swale on lmmokalee Drive. A.2.5 Prepare drainage and utility, easement descriptions' and sketches, if required. A.2.6 Conduct pre-design geotechnical services, if required (not to exceed $2,000 in semices). A.3 PREL~ILNARY ENGLNEERL\'G DESIGN SERVICES A.3.1 Prepare Desiga Report and Pre-des/ga Opinion of Probable Construction Costs for a single design ahemative A.3. I.l Meet w/th Collier Count), Transportation Services to examine option of&sign of roadv,'ay per Collier County standards and prepare meeting minutes. A.3.1.2 Coordinate x~4th Immokalee Water & Sewer District (IWSD) for design and connection options of the Sanitary Sewer System to the existing IWSD facilities. A.3.1.3 Prepare and submit five copies of the pre-design repons summarizing results orA.2.1.1 through A.2.1.3 and survey location work. Prepare a Prelim/nary Engineer's Opinion of'P~ Construction Costs for single design alternative. & A.4 FINAL ENGINEE~G DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND BIDDLNG A.4.1 Final Engineering Desi~ A.4.1.1 Based on the comments from Coun~ staffand IWSD on design report review, prepare final plan and profile construction drawings of roadway paving, stormwater improvements, and sani',ary sewer system including residential hook-up, and aban ~onment of septic tanks. A.4.1.2 Prepare and ,ubmit plans for Count' staffand IWSD review.' A.4.1.3 Based on County staff and IWSD approval of final construction drawings, prepare final bid quantities. A.4.1.4 Assist the Collier Couns' Department of Housing and Urbar~ Improvement i HUI) staff in preparation of Lypical County contract documents including bid form proposal and CounS, technical specifications. Also~ assist HUI in obtaining appropriate federal forms and requirements to be inserted in the bidding documents. A.4.2 Permitting A.4.2.1 Meet with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and :'or Collier Coun~ to obtain, review agency input prior to desig'n of the proposed surface water ..- managemen~'stormxvaler drainage system. Prepare meeting minutes. A.4.2.2 Prepare lXrm, applications for South Florida Water Management District (if required) and the Florida l~panment of Environmental Protection for was~e~ter collection system and provide plans to the Coll/er County. Transportation Department and Immokalee Water & Sewer District for review. Provide responses to review comments during the review process. Ali p~rmit application fees are to b~ paid by the Count3'/Owner directly to the appropriate pertaining agency. A.4.3 Services During Bidding A.4.3. I Assist HUI in preparation of advertisement, proposal, prepare addenda, if required, and answer contractor questions a: insure accurate bid responses. A.4.3.2 Atlend and coordinate pre-bid meeting and prepare meedn~ minutes. ~4.3.3 Prepare one master copy and distr/bute five copies of bid ~ets to County and plan rooms. Issue copies of bid sets to prospective bidders from Consultant's office. A reasonable fee may be charged to prospective bidders to 'cover Consultant's cost for this service. A.4.3.4 Prepare and issue addendums as requested by the Count'. A.4.3.5 Assist in bid analysis and contractor selection as required by Collier County. A.5 SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION a.5.1 Attenc~ and coordinate pre-consxrucdon meeting and prepare meeting minutes. A.5.2 Attend maximum of four (4) progress meetings w/th Collier County., IWSD and Contractor to provide technical support as required to assure compliance wi'th contract documents and timely completion of construct/on. Prepare minutes for each meeting. A.5.3 Perform site v/sits, including observation of performance testing, dur/ng construction as required to provide construction completion certification. A.5.4 Re,,'iex~ shop drawings and pay requests. A.5.5 Prepare and issue change orders requested by the County. Review, advise Couns. and conduct cost analysis of change orders requested by Contractor. A.5.6 Review density tests as prov/ded by Contractor's testing laboratory prior to submittal to County. A.5.7 Notify. Contractor of failed tests and need for retest, if required. A.5.8 Observe sanitary sewer system testing and pump station start-up A.5.9 Conduct final project walk through and prepare punch-list of deficient items. A.5.10 Coordinate with Contractor to rectl~, outstanding punch-l/st ite~ final pay reques~,'retainage release. OCT 14 1997 A.5.11 A. 5.12 A.5.13 Prepare detailed record drawings based on Contractor provided information to document cons~ructcd product. Furnish record drawings to approi:n'fate pcrm{tting agencies and HUI. Obta{n final placement-in-service amhorization from appropriale review agencies. NOTE: Technical Specifications will require Con~rac~or Io immediately notify Engineer of'any dcviation from specifications or plans and lo maintain accurate record drawings and i'umish them to Engineer at compl¢lion ot'.cons~ruction. Schedule B - AHachment A SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR BASIC SERVICES A.2 Geo~echnical and Surveying Services FEE $ 20,000.00(FF) A.3 Preliminary Enuineerino Dcsi,,n S 13.925.00{FF) A.4 Final Engineering Desi~: Permitting, and Bidding $ 39,800.00(FF) A.5 Services During Construction ..S. 18,775.00(FF) TOTAL CONTRa. CT AMOIINT NOT TO EXCEED $ 92,500.00{FF) CFF) Fixed Fee per aHached Labor & Expense Est/mate NOTE: All permit application fees are to be paid by the County/Owner and are not included in the above schedule of fees. OCT 1907 SCHEDULE B BASIS OF COMPENS'ATION B. I.I. As consideration for providing Basic ~n'ices as set £onh herein in Pan.,: A.2. A.3. A.4 and A.5 o£5chcdule A, OWNER agrees to pa>', and CONSULTANT agrccs to accept, the lump sum fees as shown on Altachmcnl A entitled 'Schedule Fccs for Basic Sen-ices". B.I.2. Payment l'or Bu:~c Sen'ices under Pans A 2. A 3. A.4, and A.5 of.qchedule A shall be paid on a percentage of'completion ha'sis not 1o exceed 100% ot'd~e fixed lee for each task. (a) (c) (d) Payment For Task A.2, Geotechnical & Surv%,ing Services, Consultant shall be paid a Lump Sum o£S20,000.00 upon completion olr field sun'ev and S2.000.00 upon completion o£geolechnical services, if'required Payment for Task A.3. !, Design Report & Pre-Design Opinion of' Probable Construction Costs, Consultant shall be paid a Lump Sum of $13,925.00 no sooner than 30 days after submittal of Design Report and Pre-Design Opinion of'Probable Construction Costs to County. Payrnenl for Task A.4. Final Design, Permitting, and Bidding shall be on a percentage of completion basis not to exceed S 39,800.00. Payments shall commence no sooner than 30 days after, receiving County approval Io prepare final construction plans and shall occur no more often than monthly Paymem for Task A.5, Sen'ices During Construction, shall be made on a percentage of completion basis not to exceed S 18,775.00. Payments shall commence no sooner than 30 days after award of bid to contractor and occur no more often ~han monlhh. OCT1a. 1997 SHEDUL£ B - ATTACHMENT B WILKISON & ASSOCIATES, INC. STANDARD HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE (Effective through Contract Termination/Completion) Principal/Professional Engineer Principal/Registered Land Surveyor Permirting,R egulator), Specialist Senior Scientist Senior Biologist Senior Professional Engineer Registered Land Surveyor Professional Engineer CAD Technician Designer Field Representative Project Administrator CAD Draftsman Administrative Assistant Clerical Assistant 2 Man Survey Crew 3 Man Sun, ey Crew Computer Plot Mylar/Vellum Plots Bond Plots Photo Copies Mileage Swamp Buggy/Boa',/ATV $102.50/hr S 82.50/hr S 87.50/N' S 87.50/hr S 82.50/hr S 77.50/hr S 67.50/hr S 67.50/!u' S 52.50/hr S 52.50/hr 'S 47.50/hr S 42.50/hr S 37.50/hr $ 32.50/hr S 80.00/hr $ 92.50/hr · S 50.O0/hr $ 1.75/sf $ 0.50/sf $ 0.20/ca $ 0.45/mi 1-Iourly/Daily Services for Expert Testimony w/Il be provided at two times the Standard Hourly Rate no,ed above w/th a minimum charge of 1/2 hour. ' Preparation time and support services provided by any employee for work in relation to the expert testimony will be provided at 1.5 times the Standard Hourly Rate holed above. . {)CT 1 4 1997 S~~ED INSURANCE COVERAGE (1) The amounts and types of insurance coverage shall conform to *~ following minimum requirements with the uze of Insurance Services Office [I£O] forms and endorsements or their equivalents. (2) The insurance=required by this Agreement shall be written for not less.than the limits specified herein or required by law. whichever i~ greater. (3) Coverages shall be maintained without interruption from the date of commencement of the work until the date of completion and acceptance of the Project by the Owner or as specified in this Agreement, whichever is longer. (4) Certificates of insurance (3 copies) acceptable to the Owner shall be filed with the Owner within ten (10) calendar days after Notice of Award is received by Consultant Professional. Such certificates shall contain a provision that coverages afforded under the policies will not be canceled or allowed to expire until at least thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the Owner. OCT [ & 1997 [5] All insurance coverages of the Consultant/Professional shall be primary to any insurance or self insurance program carried by the Owner applicable to this Project. (6) The acceptance by Owner of any Certificate of Insurance does not constitute approval or agreement by the Owner that the insurance requirements have been satisfied or that the insurance policy shown on the Certificate of Insurance is in compliance with the requirements of this Agreement. (7] Consultant/Professional shall require each of its subcontractors to procure and maintain, until the completion of the subcontractor's ,work. insurance of the types and to the limits specified in this Section unless such insurance requirements for the subcontractor are expressly waived in writing by the Owner. (8) Should at any time the Consultant/Professional not maintain the insurance coverages required herein, the Owner may terminate the Agreement or at its sole discretion shall be authorized to purchase such coverages and charge the Consultant for such coverages purchased. Thc Owner shall be under no obligation to purchase such insurance, nor shall it be responsible for the coverages purchased or the insurance company or companies used. The decision of the Owner to purchase such insurance coverages shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of any of its rights under the Contract Documents. OCT 14 1997 [9) If the initial, or any subsequently issued Certificate of Insurance expires prior to the completion of the Work or termination of the Agreement, the Consultant/Professional shall furnish to th~ County, in triplicate, renewal or replacement Certificate(s] of Insurance not later than thirty (30) calendar days prior to the date of their expiration. Failure of the Consultant to provide the County with such renewal certificate(sD sba'l! be considered justification for %he County to terminate the Agreement. WORKERS' COHPENSATION AND EMPLOY~ERS' LIABILITY Required by this Agreement? (check one) Yes No (1) Workers' Compensation and Employers' Liability Insurance shall be maintained by the Consultant/ Professional during the term of this Agreement for all employees engaged~in the work under this Agreement in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. The amounts of such insurance shall not be less than' Worker's Compensation - Florida Statutory Requirements AGE:~I~ IT~¥*~ 'OCT 14:1997 b. Employers' Liability (check one] $100.000 Each Accident $500.000 Disease Aggregate $100.000 Disease Each Employee ./ Si.000.000 Each Accident Si,000.000 Disease Aggregate $1,000.000 Disease Each Employee (2) The insurance company shall waive its Rights of Subrogation against the Owner and the policy shall be so endorsed. (3) United States Longshoreman's and Harborworker,s Act coverage shall be maintained where applicable to the completion of th9 work. (check one] Applicable JNotApplicable [4] Maritime Coverage (Jones Act) shall be maintained where applicable to the completion of the work. (check one) Applicable Not Applicable · OCT ]. 1997 COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY Required by this Agreement? (check one) Yes No (1) Commercial General Liability Insurance shall be maintained by the Consultant/Professional. Coverage will include, but not be limited to. Bodily Injury, Property Damage, Personal Injury. Contractual Liability for this Agreement, Independent Contractors. Broad Form Property Damage including Completed Operations and Products and Completed Operations Coverage. Products and Completed operations coverage shall be maintained for a period of not less than five (5) years following the completion and adceptance by %he Owner of the work under this Agreement. Limits of Liability shall ' not be less than the following: (check one) S300,000 S300,000 $300.000 S300,000 General Aggregate Products/Completed Operations Aggregate Personal and Advertising Injury Each Occurrence Fire Damage $ 50,000 General Aggregate $500 000 Products/Completed Operations Aggregate S500 000 Personal and Advertising Injury $500.000 Each Occurrence Fire Damage $ 50 00( OCT 14 1997 General Aggregate Products/Completed Operations Aggregate Per'sonal and Advertising Injury Each Occurrence Fire Damage $1,000,000 $1.000,000 $1,000,000 SI.000,000 $ 50,000 (2) The General Aggregate Limit ska!! e~p!'/ separately to thjz Project and the po!~cy~.,:,:~=-ll, be endorsed uzing the following endorsement wording. "This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following' C~mmercial General Liability Coverage Part. The General Aggregate Limit under LIMITS OF INSURANCE applies sepalrately'to each of your projects away from premises owned by or rented to you." (3) If the General Liability insurance required herein is issued or renewed on a~"claims made" basis, as opposed to the "occurrence" form, the retroactive date for coverage shall be no later than the commencement date of the Project and shall provide that in the event of cancellation or non-renewal the Extended Reporting Period (Discovery Period) for claims shall be no less than three (3) years. (4) The Owner shall be named as an Additional Insured and tke policy shall be endorsed that such coverage shall be primary to any similar coverage carried by the Owner. (5) Coverage shall be included for explosion, collapse or underground property damage claims. (6) Watercraft Liability coverage shall be carried at the limits shown above if applicable to the completion of the work under this Agreement. (check one) Applicable Not Applicable (7) Aircraft Liability coverage shall be carried at limits of $2,000,000 each occurrence if applicable to the completion of the work under this Agreement. (check one) Applicable __ Not Applicable PROPERTY INSURANCE - BUILDERS RISK [1) Property Insurance - Builde{-s Risk coverage shall be carried by the Owner if applicable. (check one} Applicable Not Applicable 'OCT 1 (2) The Owner shall purchase and maintain in a company or companies lawfully authorized to do business in the State of Florida and in Collier County, property insurance in the amount of the initial Contract Sum as well as subsequent modifications thereto for the entire Work at the site on a replacement cost basis without voluntary deductibles. Such property insurance shall be maintained. unless otherwise prcvided in the Contract Documents or other~ise agreed in writing ky ali persons and entitles who are beneficiaries of such insurance, until final payment has been made or until no · person or entity other than the Owner has in insurable interest in the property required to be covered, whichever is earlier. This insurance shall include interests of the Owner, the Contractor. Subcontractors, Sub-subcontractors and Material ~uppliers in the Work. (3) Property insurance shall be on a~ all-risk policy form and shall insure against the perils of fire and extended coverage and physical loss or damage including, without duplication of coverage. theft, wind and hail, vandalism, malicious mischief, collapse. falsework, temporary buildings and debris removal including demolition occasioned by enforcement of any applicable legal requirements, and, at the Owner's option, shall cover reasonable compensation for Consultant/Professional's services and expenses required as a result of such insured loss. At the Owner's option. flood insurance will also be purchased. OOT ]. 4: lgg'r (4) The property insurance provided by the Owner requires minimum deductibles and the Consultant shall pay costs not covered by the deductibles. The responsibility of the Consultant for any deductible associated with the all-risk policy described above shall be limited to a maximum of $1,000 for each occurrence unless higher deductibles are identified in Exhib£t C of the Contract Documents. The re~pomsibil£ty of the Contractor for any deductible asso¢ia:ed with the flood insurance identified herein, if purchased by :he Owner, shall be limited to a .maximum of $1,000 for each occurrence unless~higher deductibles are identified in Exhibit C of the Contract Documents. (5) THis property insurance shall cover portions of the Work stored off the site after written approval of the Owner at the value established in the approval, and also portions of the Work in transi$. (6} Boiler and Machinery Insurance. The Owner shall have the option of purchasing and maintaining boiler and machinery insurance required by the Contract Documents or by law, which shall specifically cover such insured objects during installation and until final acceptance by the Owner. If purchased this insurance shall include interests of the Owner, Consultant, Contractor. Subcontractors and Sub-subcontrators in the Work. (7) Waivers of Subrogation. The Owner and Consultant waive all rights against (1) each other and any of their subcontractors. sub-subtontractors, agents and employees, each of the other, and the Professional. Professional's consultants, for damages caused by fire or other perils to the extent covered by property insurance obtained pursuant to this or other property insurance applicable to the Work. except such rights as they have to proceeds of such insurance held by the ~ner as fiduciary. The policies shall provide waivers of subrogation by endorsement or otherwise. (8) A loss insured under Owner's property insurance shall be adjusted by the Owner as fiduciary and made payable tO the Owner as fiduciary for %he insureds, as their interests may appear. {9) If Builders Risk coverage is applicable the Contractor shall be responsible for the following maximum deductibles per occurrence per paragraph (3) above. (check one) All Risk Policy - $1.000 maximum deductible Ail Risk Policy - Maximum deductible of $,, Flood Policy - $1.000 maximum deductible Flood Policy - Maximum deductible of $, ^GEPI rff. "1 OCT 1997 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY INSURANCE Required by this Agreement? (check one) Yes No (1) Automobile Liability Insurance shall be maintained by the Consultant/Professional for the ownership, maintenance or use of any cwnedo non-owned or hired'vehicle with limits of not le~s than: (check one) (2} the policy. Bodily injury &'-'Property Damage - $ 500°000 Bodi'ly Injury & Property Damage - $1.000o000 The Owner shall be named as an Additional Insured under UMBRELLA LIABILITY (1) Umbrella Liability may be maintained as part of the liability insurance of the Consultant/ProfeSsional and. if so. such policy shall be excess of the Employer~' Liability. Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability coverages required herein and shall include all coverages on a "following form" basis. OCT 1 & 19cJ'/' (2) The policy shall contain wording to the effect that. in the event of the exhaustion of any underlying limit due to the payment'of claims, the Umbrella policy will "drop down" to apply as primary insurance. (3) The General Aggregate limit, if applicable, shall apply separately to this project and the policy shall be so endorsed. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE Required by-this Agreement? (check one) Yes No (1) Professional LiaBility insurance shall be maintained by the Consultant/Professional to insure its legal liability for claims arising out of the performance of professional services under this Agreement. Such insurance shall have limits of not less than: (C~ECK ONE) $ 500,000 each claim and in the aggregate '~/ $1,000,000 each claim and in the aggregate S2.000,000 each claim and in the aggregate each claim and in the aggregate AG~JO~Tf~ _ 'OCT 1 & '1991 (2) Any deductible applicable to any claim shall be the sole responsibility of the Consultant/Professional and shall not be greater'than $50°000 each claim. [3) The Consultant/Professional shall continue this coverage for this Project for a period of not less than five (5) years following completicn and acceptance of tke Project by the Owner. END OF SCHEDULE D. SCHEDULE TRUTH IN NEGOTIATION CERTIFICATE In compliance with the Consultants~ Competitive Negotiation Act. Section 287.055. Florida Statutes. Wilkison & Associates. Inc. hereby certifies that wages, rates and other factual unit costs supporting the compensation for the engineering and surveying servi.ces of the CONSULTANT to be provided under the Professional Services Agreement. concerning Engineering Services for Infrastructure Improvements to Shellabarger Park in Immokalee are accurate, complet~ and current as of the time of contracting. President Wilkison & Associates. Inc. BY: ~ David S. Wilkison. P.E.-- OCT f 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMEtlDATION TO APPROVE AND EXECLrrE THE TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED FUND~G AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND GOOD WHEELS, IblC. QBIE~TFI'VE; To consider approving the agreement between Good Wheels, Inc. and the Board of County Commissioners concerning the granting of supplemental funds for the delivery of transportation services and performance monitoring. Considerations: On June 10, 1997, the Board approved the appropriation of $100,000 in FY 1998 from the General Fund to the Collier County Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC) for the support and delivery of transportation services to the disadvantaged. The provider of these services will be Good Wheels, Inc. In addition, there is $90,000 in grant funds now available from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to develop a Five Year Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan/Transit Development Plan (TDSP~TDP). The federal/state grant funds require a $10,000 local match which can be funded by the existing Transportation Disadvantaged budget. .Fiscal Impact; There is $100,000 budgeted in MPO Fund 126, Transportation Disadvantaged Program - Cost Center 138330 to fund transportation services with Good Wheels, Inc. In addition, there will be I;90,000 in new grant funds to be recognized and appropriated to contract for transit and marketing studies and the purchase of' transit software support for scheduling and performance monitoring. The Center for Urban Transportation (CUTR) will assist in the development of the Five Year Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan/Transit Development Plan (TDSP/TDP). The PASS software is jointly owned by the Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged and the Naples.. Collier MPO. .Grgwth Manaeement Impact; "Consistent" The Collier County Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, the Naples-Collier Metropolitan Transportation Phn and the Collier County Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan all promote s multimodal Uansportation system. Transportation improvement pwgrams and transit system enhancements are designed to establish a more balanced and efficient mobility approach to growth management concerns. Para transit services integrated with, and supported by alternative transit options, can help shift the emphasis from single occupancy vehicles and support mobility needs of the transportation disadvantaged and transit dependent. EXECUTIVE S~RY cont'd. Wayne ~rnold, AICP, Planning Service~ Director / Vincent A. Cautero, Community Devdopmeat & Environmental Services Ad--or Date:, THIS AGREEMENT entered into this 30t~ day of September, 1997, at Naples, Collier County, Florida by and between the Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, hereinafter referred to as the · proli~ co~ra~ion, ~0075 Bavaria Road S.E., Fo~ ~er,, Florida hereina~er re~e~ed to a, '~D,'~.' WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the ~ is desirous of aiding in providing transportation services to the transportation disadvantaged and has deemed it to be in the public interest to do so; and WHEREAS, GOOD"WHEEr~ has been designated Co,~m~nity Transportation Coordinator (CTC) by the State of Florida, Transportation Disadvantaged Commission, pursuant to Chapter 427, F.S.. and has developed a model plan to implement the most cost effective transportation disadvantaged system possible for the Collier COUNTY; and WHEREAS, the Collier'County CTC has received a grant of $381.950 from the State of Florida. Transportation Disadvantaged Commission, to provide transportation services to the disadvantaged, for the period of July 1, 1997 through June 30, 199S; and whereas this grant requires a $42,439 match, which is to be obtained from fare box revenues; and WHEREAS, the Co_l~_~e.___r~~Cl~has determ/nedthat due to an ever increasing demand for services, an additio~al $100,000 in local funds will be needed during the periodOc~ober 1, 1997 through September 30, 1998. NOW. THEREFOP. E, in consideration of the mutual agreements hereinafter set forl:h, the ~ as follows= 1. GOOD WHEELS shall= A. provide transportation to the transportation · disadvantaged in accordance with the Memorandum o£ Agreement entered into b~ C~OD'.~,~ and the State of Florida, Transpor~ation Disadvantaged Com~Lssion for the period July 1, 1997 through June 30° 1998, a col~ of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit 'A'' B. possess, ~aintain and keep current all necessar~ license(s), including, but not limited to, driver's licenses, license pla=es and occuDa=ional licenses; C. maintain all financial records and reports relating =o funds paid under this Agreement in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles a= the time in effect; D. maintain books, records, documents and other evidence and accounting procedures and practices which fully and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs of any nature expended in the performance of this Agreementf E. ~aintain adequate fiscal accounting procedures~ F. allow inspection, review or audit of all financial records, reports, books, documents and other evidence relating to this Agreement by COUNTY personnel, upon request by the COUNTY; G. collect statistical data of a fiscal and operational nature on a regular basis and to make fiscal, statistical and operational reports on a quar~erlybasis to the Naples (Collier County) Metropolitan Planniflg Organization Coordinator. OCT 14 1997 H. include these aforementioned audit and record keeping requirements in all approved sub-contracts and assignments; I. retain all books, records and other documents relative to this Agreement for three(3) years after final payment; J. submit to the Naples (Collier County) Metropolitan Planning Organization each year, a copy of its annual report of financial and operational endeavors; K. shall submit a copy of the documentation submitted to the State of Florida, Transportation Disadvantaged Commission for reimbursement along with a service summary to the COUNTY on a monthly basis in order that the disbursement of COUNTY funds to reimburse GOOD WHEELS may be in accordance with the pre-auditing and accounting procedures of the Circuit Court Clerk and the Board of County Commissioners as mandated by Section 129.08 and 129.09, Florida Statutes. 2. The COUNTY shall: A. Reimburse GOOD.WHEEI~ on a monthly basis for the billable miles of non-sponsored trips that exceed the reimbursement coverage of the Transportation Disadvantaged Commission's Trip Equipment Grant. Reimbursement shall be at the $2.05 per mile rate established in GOO~-'WHEEL~ .! Memorandum of Agreement with the Florida Transportation Disadvantaged Co~m~esion, for a maximum of 48,780 billable miles over and above the miles billed to the Trip Equipment Grant, the reimbursement not =o exceed $8.S00 per month plus any available carry.~ previous months. B. Shall support GO0..~'.~, and =he Naples-Collier Metropolitan~ Organization's project planning efforts to improve and monitor the performance of community transportation in the form of a local cash match in the amount of $10,000.00 to be used in conjunction with PTA Section 5103 Funds. 3. ~c,<:~...~ and ~..~...O'~.~!__,~_,~utua~l~ agree~ A. The term of this Agreement is from October 1, 1997 to September 30, 1998. B. This Agreement may be terminated without cause by either party upon thirty (30) days prior notice in writing to the other party. C. The entire obligation of the COUNTY under this agreement shall not exceed $100,000. D. There will be no discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religious background or national origin in performance of this Agreement in regard to provision of service or in regard to employment. 4. NO PARTNERSHIP Nothing herein contained shall create or be construed as creating a partnership between the CO..U~.. and GOOD.WHEEhS or to constitute GOOD"WHEELS as an agent of the COUN~f_. 5. INDEMNIFICATION GOOD WHEELS in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00}, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged through the signing of this document, shall protect, defend, inde~mify and hold ~ and its officers, employees and agents harmless from and against any and all losses, penalties, damages, professional fees. including attorney fees and~ e litigation and Judgments arising out of or in performance of this contract or work performed thereunder, including, but not limited to, any claim(s) brought against the CO._U3~.. its officers, employees or agents by any employee of GOOD WHEELS, and subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them. The first Ten ($10.00) of money received on the contract price is considered as payment of this obligation by the COUNTY. NOTICES Ail notices from served if mailed at the following Ail notices from served if mailed to: the CO~ to C~O..D_,,~ shall be deemed duly by registered or certified Mil to address: ~D 10075 Bavaria Road S.E. Ft. Myers, Florida ~391~ ~D. ~S ~o CO~ shall be dee~d duly by registered or certified ~il Board of County Commissioners 3301 Tamiami Trail East . Naples, Florida 34112 The Cg..U~_~and G99_.~'..~ may change the above mailing addresses at a time upon giving the other party written notification. All notices under this agreement must be in writing. 7. No modification, amendments or alterations to the terms of conditions contained herein shall be effective unless contained in a written document executed with the formality or of equal dignity herewith. 8..C~D._~~ shall not transfer or assign the performance of serwices called for in the A~reement without ¢ ~-~, Transportation Disadvantaged Coordtnatin~ Boa~ 1. No OCT 14 1997 9. CONFLICT AND S£RVERABILITY Should any provisions of the Agreement be de=erminedb~ a court to be unenforceable, such a determination shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other section or part thereof. IN WIT~TESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals the day and year first above written. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk BOARD OF COUN~ COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA TIMOTHY L. HANCOCK, Chairman WITNESS: GOOD WHEELS, INC. DELORIS J. SHERIDAN, President Approved as to form and legal sufficienc~ HEIDI ASHTON Assistant County Attorney MPO AGREEMENT GOODWHEELS DOC./KH/mk\c: mpo coordinator OCT 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION TO AWARD ANNUAL BID ~)7-2711 - TRAFFIC SIGNAL To obtain Board of Courtly Commizzionem approval for the award of Ama~l Bid #97-2711 - Traffic Signal Components; June 18, 1997, formal bid invitationz wem.p°~ted in the iobbY:of the General Service~ Building and dWm'lmted to 41 firm~ that provide'the~. servic~z. On July 16, 1997, bids were received and opened fi-om four (4) fitmz. A tabulation sheet is attached to this summary. Staffhas r~ricwed the bids received and is recommending that the bid b~ awarded to the lowest responsive bidder on an itern-by-itern basis. Should an item not I~ available from the low bidder, thc second low bidder may bc utilized for the purcha~. The recommended bidders meet all legal and purchasing requirements. FISCAL IMPACT: For Fiscal Year 97/98, funds have been budgeted in Road and Bridge Fund (101) Traffic Operations Cost Center (163630) in the amount of S22,700 and in Road Construction-Gas Tax Fund (313) Cost Center (163673), Project Number 60172 in the amount of $500,000. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Not applicable. ~'~'~l~./ RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioner~ award Bid 2711 for traffic signal components as stated in this Executive Summary and the attached · ,.~:'::' PREPARED BY: DATE: :,~: gm Technicmn ~.~" REVIEWED BY: DATE: / ~'-~- Capp Br~.xlc~ T~affi¢ O~ons Supervisor ?. P. EVIEWED BY: ~L'~q~,Vl ~. ~ DATE: q Steph Y. c en, Transtmrtation Director e REVIEWED BY: ~ DATE ..... - Public Ed llsehner, Woflm Admlni~'alor I~~'' [09 Tal~da~m im ~,1 ~.ZTi ! IPtS I ICO~T ~1' I I r-T~x~lc PAXTS INC'I~-~Ns- COK~ S: emr'm~.e £n~"m~ Iremgs s r~.~q s s. I~i.~ s. ,. ~LO , ,,?lO. OCT ! ~ 15~1 lmPe E~ (1 1M' P~x Tap avU) Prim , io qq s s s s s s. s, s s S, OCT I ~. 1~7 S, S S S S~ S, S S ~ I cost ~ I ~ ~T~ s ~ s s s m~s-~ LMD systsm. TW C~xw~ Unk ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ,~PROVE AN INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, HENDRY CORRECTIONAL INSTrI1J'~ON, FOR CONTINUED USE OF INMATE LABOR IN ROAD MAINTENANCE AC'q'IVI~ES. ~: To obtain Board approval of an Int~agen~ Agreement between Collier County and the State of Florida Department of Corrextions for the un of inmates from the Hendry Correctional Institution for public works projecta in Collier County. _CONglDERATIONS: The Board, meeting in regular ~sion on July 23, 1996, approve;! an Interagen~t Agreement betwo~ Collier county and the State of Florida Depaxtment of Corre~on$ for tl~ un of inmat~ from the Hendry correctional Institution for public works projects in Collier Cotmty in ae~ndan~e with Chapter 946, Florida Statutes, and Rules of the Depa~ent of Corr~fions, Chapter 33-3.003 ~td 33-3.017. The Hendr), Correctional Institution has provided this service to Collier County for approximately six year~. Thc County provides minor roadway safety equipment and tools (c.g., safety vests, signs, etc.), and the cost per year is approximately 5500.00. The work performed by thc inmates usually exceeds 10,000 man-hours per year in right-of-way clearing, litter pick-up, and maintenance of drainage facilities. Thc County Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the Interagency Agreement. FISCAL lb{PACT: Funds are available in thc amount of S$00.00 in: Fund No. 101 (Road and Bridge) Cost Center No. 163620 (Road Maintenance Supervision) _GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Not applicable. IIECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County commissioners approve the Interagency Agreement between Collier County and the State of Florida Department of Corrections, Hendry Correctional Institution, and authorize the Chairman to sign same. DATE: 97. PREPARED BY: - Marqu~LKing~i~ Seeretar.~ ~ ) Ed IYscl~er, l~tblic Works ' mk/092597/ES Hendry Correct lns'.-doc Updated 1996 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS I NTERAGENCY/PUBLIC WORKS AGREEMENT This agreement made and entered into this tst _ day of JULY.. 19 9_.7, b~ and betwee~ the State of Flodda Department of Corrections' institution/facility, tl~-~o~Y c. ~. _, hereinafter ~eferred to as Corrections, and ~.hereinafter referred to as the Agency, is done so in accordance with Chapter s. 946.40 F.S., and Rules of the Department of Corrections, Chapter s. 33-3.003, F.A.C., Inmate Work Program and s. 33-3.017, F.A.C., Use of Inmates in Public Works _'i'he ~uration of this agreement is from n7/n~ / q ? to ~_/'~c~! (~. : ~o/dy/yr ~ COLL,[ER COUNTY ROAD AND 1'lA,INT. DEPT. Work performed under this local agreement is determined to be value added or cost t-avings as defined in the Community Work Squad Manual. Value Added xx .. Cost Savings Corrections agrees to provide for thos~ items so indicated with a check (,/) to the Iz,ff of each appropriate number. All other items are to be marked "N/A" to the left of the number. x. 1. Screen the inmates for the work to be performed to provide a reasonab[a basis to believe that none present a danger to property or persons. X 2. Provide up to 6-8 inmates each workday for the -- Medium custody ¢ ~: minimum custody {' ~: both x 3. Provide ! _ vehicles and_ 3. CorrectionaIOfficers each workday tc transport .... inmates ass. igned to the Agency and to provide supervision as agreed herein. . X= Provide food and drinks for inmate lunches. Be responsible for the apprehension of an escapee and handling of problem inmates. Provide transportation from the work site to the correctional facility for inmates who refuse to work, become unable to work, or cause a disrul:';;ion in the work schedule. Be responsible for administering all disciplinary action taken against anlinmate for infractions committed while under the supervision of the Agency. Provide for medical treatment for ill or inj[Jred inmates and transportation of such inmates. 24 Updated 1996 Inmate Labor Agreement t4A 8. NA 9. X 11. 12. Page 2 Conduct a background check, which includes a criminal history check, and obtain approval by the institution/facility Superintendent or designee prior to authorizing Non. Corrections personnel to participate in training to supervise inmates. Provide orientation and training to non-Corrections personnel approved to supervise inmates prior to their assuming supervisory responsibility of an Inmate squad. Training will be in accordance with Corrections' guidelines for non-. corrections personnel supervising offenders. Provide refresher trair{ing each successive training year. Notify the Agency in the event one of their employees fails to provide proper supervision of ir,mates. Provide inmates with all personal items of clothing appropriate for the season of the year. Provide inmates for transportation/work at the appropriate times regardless of temperature or inclement weather, unless notified by the Agency of suspended work operations, or the Department determines that a squad should not check out. X 13. Other (attached additional page if necessary). il. The Agency agrees to provide for those items so indicated with a check to the ler~ of each appropriate number. All other items are to be marked "N/A" to the left of the number. X 1. Provide Corrections with a schedule of hours which inmates will be worked 'in' accordance with the established workday for the Agency and the transportation time required. Any deviation from the established schedule must be reported to an agreed to by Corrections. N~ 2. Provide supervision of inmates in accord with Department of Corrections Rules and Regulations. Non-Corrections personnel may supervise minimum and medium custody inmates. Each such person must have a backgroum:l check, which includes criminal history check, and be approved by the institution/facility Superintendent or designee and complete required orientation/training in the supervision of inmates. 3. Provide transportation of inmates to and from work if such is not provided by Corrections as agreed to in Section I of this Agreement. NA 4. Provide all tools, equipment, materials and personal items such as gloves, rubber boots, hard hats, etc., necessary and appropriate to perform the require~ work. .25 Updated 1996 Inmate Labor Agreement Page 3 Ensure that licensing or permits are obtained if required for the work to be performed. Provide necessary supervision and guidance for projects which require a permit which require technical assistance to complete the proJecL Immediately notify Corrections in the event of an escape wh~e the inmate is under supervision of the Agency. Report any inappropriate behavior displayed by inmates or any inmate who fails to perform his tasks in an acceptable manner. o Record daily the number of hours w;)rked by inmates using forms provided by Corrections and submit the form on a weekly basis to Corrections. X o Report all inmate injuries, regardless of how minor in nature, to corrections as soon as possible. Medically related complaints made by an inmate shall be reported to corrections as soon as practical. In cases of emergency, first aid, within the scope of the supervisor's medical training, shall be provided, request emergency health care assistance, and assistance rendered to corrections. Provide inmates with a fifteen minute rest break in the morning and afternoon. Lunch breaks shall normally be0in at 12 Noon and last at least thirty. (30_1 minutes.' Ensure inmates are su0ervised during rest and lunch breaks. 10. 11. 12. 13. Provide an employee of the same sex as the medium custody inmate(s) to be immediately available to render assistance in cases where the squad supervisor is of the opposite sex as the inmate. Require each non-Correction person approved to supervise inmates and other appropriate staff members to attend orientation/training in the supervision.of inmates pn~or to a~suming supervision of inmates, _and to affend annual refresher itraining in the sue)ervision of inmates. Orientation/training to be provided by the Departrr;ent. Agency hereby agrees to be liable for, and shall indemnify, defend and hold Corrections harmless from all claims, suits, judgments or damages inclOding court costs and attorney's fees arising out of intentional acts, negligence or orr~sions by the Agency in its supervision of inmates pursuant to this Agreement. If agency is an agency or subdivision of the State of Florida, this paragraph sha~ not be interpreted as altering the state's waiver of Immunity in tort pursuant to Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, or to otherwise Impose liability on Agency for which it would not otherwise by law be responsible. Ensure that all work assignments/0ro_iects util'~_ing inmates are authorized _oro_iects of the municiDalit¥- city_, county_, governmental agency_ or non-_omfff om_anizafion and that orivate c~3ntractors em_oloyed by_ your a_oenc~_ do not use inmates es any_ part of th-_ir labor force. 26 Updated 1996 Inmate Labor Agreement Page 4 x 14. Other special considerations re_oardina activities of the work souad that may be based on work location, etc. (Affach additional ~aoe(sl ff aoolicable). III. The Department or the Agency may suspend this agreement or terminate this agreement with immediate notice, in whole or in part, when the interests of the Department or Agency requires such termination. Agreed to and signed this . . Flori~ofyrrections ]-die: ~ Name: Title: / 7 day of..~, COLLI£R COUNTY ROAD & HAINT. DEPT. (Name of Agency Receiving Services) COLLIE[ COUNTY BOA[D OF COUNTY COF.~ISSIONEES Name: TINOTH¥ L. tlANCOGK Title: CHAIRI~N Name: Title: .27 OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commi~ionex% Ex-Officio, the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award Bid//97-2718 for' annual water and wastewater treatment chemicals. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The County's Public Works Division operates water and wastewater facilities neceraary to serve the customers of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. 2. These treatment facilities utilize certain chemicals as part of the water and wastewater treatment process. 3. Bid ~97-2718 for the annual chemical bid was posted on August 4, 1997..%venrpseven inquires were sent to vendors and nine responses were received. 4. Staff has reviewed the bids and is recommcnding the lowest bidders mM ing Specifications. The recommended award will go to 4 vendors providing the lowest bid for each chemical. GROWTH MANAGEME~ IMPACT: None FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated annual expenditure for the chemical~ covered by Bid #97-2718 is estimated to be$374,000. Funds are budgeted in Water and Wastewater Cost Centers 408-253221, 408-253211(water plants), 408-233352, 408-233312, and 405-233313 (sewer plants). Actual expenditures under this Bid may vary depending on quantity of water and wastewater treated. . RECOMMENDATION. The Public Works Administrator recommends that the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, the Governing B.oard of the County Water-Sewer District, award Bid ~/97-2718 to the following vendors. Jones Chemical, Inc. Sodium HTpochlorlte Biscayne Chemical Calcium Hypochlorite Sulfuric Acid Trading Company Sulfuric Acid Leathern, Indunr?~..,. ~...-..--.~Dewatering Polymer Dry PREPARED BY: Edward N. Finn, Operations Director ( { ' Steve C. arnell, Pti~mg Director APPROVED BY~ ~. Ed Ilschner, ~llc l~rorks Admmist~or _ _l . _ OCT i ~1 1997 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AWARD BID ff97-2689 FOR JACK AND BORE OPERATIONS OBJECTIVE: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board o{ the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award Bid ff97-2659 for iack and bore operations to Cabana Construction, Inc. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The County's Public Works Division operates water ~d wastewater facilities necessary to serve the customers of the County Water/Sewer District. 2.'The j~ck and bore servicea is contracted to ouuid~ vendors when a r~uired jack and bore is out of the range of the equipment currently owned by the Collier County Water-sewer D~fict. 3. As such, the Public Works Division solicits bids annually to provide the necesm'y jack and bore service~. 4. Bid//974659 wa~ posted on June 30, 1997. Sixty-nine inquires were sent to vendors and one bidder responded. 5. Staff has reviewed the bid received and award is recommended to Cabana Construction, InC. FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated annual Water and Wastewater Department expenditure on this service is approximately $10,000. Actual expenditure~ will be dependent on required sT~a~m work. Funds are budgeted and approved in Waxer Distribution cost center 408-253212 and Wastewater Collections cost center 408-233351 and Marco Island Sewer District cost center 431-234Ill. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioner, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County W~ter-sewer D~rict, award Bid//97-2689 for jack and bore operations to Cabby, Inc. Edward N. Finn, Operations Director REVIEWED BY: APPROVED S~.-v~ Can~ll, iSurch~ing Director :~.~ I~%d~L/U'I 1 ¥1g bU~Y AWARD BID #9%2698 FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUPPLIES OBJE~: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio the Governing Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award Bid #97-2698 for annual underground utilities supplies to the various vendors listed in Exhibit 1. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The County's Public Works Division operates water and wnstcweter facilities to serve the cus'~mcrs ofthe County Water/Scwcr District. This bid provides for the purchase of various undergronr~l utilities supplies for the Water and Wastewater Departments. These supplies are required for new customers and wutinc system maintenance programs. 3. Bid #97-2698 for underground utilities supplies was posted on July 28, 1997. Seventy-three inquiries were sent to %ndors and six bidders responded. Staffhas reviewed the bids received. Awards are recommended on an item-by- item basis and are based on the lowest bidder meeting the required specifications. Exhibit A, attached, outlines the 5 specific parts where the Iow bid was not acceptable. Each non- acceptable low bid was rejected because the bidder failed to meet specifications as set fourth in the bid package. The recommended bid award provides for a primary and secondary vendor. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated annual expenditures for the supplies covered by Bid #9%2683 is estimated to be $500,000. Funds are budgeted in various Water and Wastewater Department cost centers 408-253211,408-253221, 408-253215 and 441-256110,0Yater Department), 408-233312, 408- 233313 408-233351,408-233352, 431-234111, (Wastewater Department). Actual expenditures under this bid may vary depending on required system repairs. Funds are budgeted and approved in the Water and Wastewater Cost Centers. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners, Ex-Officio, thc Cmveming Board of the Collier County Water-Sewer District, award Bid ~)7-2698 for Underground Utilities supplies to the attached list of vendors - Exhibit B. Prepared B (-~wd~ N. Film, 4~r~ns Director Reviewed By: ~~t 6/t~/ ~'~/~ Approved By~ ~ ~ ~ I1~ ~%lfc Wo~ Ad~i~r Consent Agenda October 14, 1997 Memorandum To: Purchasing Department From: Paul Bitz Fiscal Clerk II Water Distribution 800 Teryl Road Date: September 16, 1997 Re: Bid #97-2698 Underground Utilities Supplies Recommendations Upon reviewing the Bid Tabulation Sheets the following guidelines were used. Ail Bid Items highlighted in Yellow will be recommended to be the Primary Vendor and Bid Items highlighted in Blue will be used as the Secondary Vendor. Bid Items highlighted in Red were rejected because of Bid Specifications not being followed. The following Bid items have been rejected. They are listed by Bid Tabulation Page, Vendor, Item and Reason. Page 12,13,14 15, Semsco's Bid of 90' and 45' Elbows are rejected because the price does not include accessory kits for these fitting. Bid Specifications (Page 15) requires all DI Fittings to have accessory kits with Ductile Dura Bolts included. Page 17,18, Sunstate's Bid of 2'-16" Gate Valves are rejected ~ tl~ valves do not meet the specifications set forth in the Bid. Bid Spedflcations (Page 13) requires all bolts to be Hex-Head ste~i and to meet Utilities Standards and Procedure Ordinance 97-17. Valves quoted have countersunk head bolts. Page 23 Sunstate's Bid of.lumbo Meter Boxes is rejected because the box does not meet Bid Specifications (Page 10) both in Size and Minimum Density. ~eptember i~. Page 31,32,33 Hughes's Bid of Ductilc, Double Strap Saddles are rejected beca,aise the Saddles do not meet Bid Specification (Page 11). Bid Specification (Page 11) require saddles to have one set ofopen cantered ears for quick access of securing straps. Hughes bid do not have opened cantered ears. Page 36,37 Semsco's Bid of 2"-24' Solid Sleeves are r~ected because the price does not include accessory kits for these fitting. Bid Specifications (Page 15) requires all DI Hi'tings to have accessory kits with Ductile Dura Bolts included. EXHIBIT UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUPPLIES FOR WASTEWATER COLLECTIONS BID # 97-2683 RECOMMENDATIONS FR- FERGUSON UNDERGROUND HU- HUGHES SUPPLY SE- SEMSCO-SOU'I'HEASTERN SS- SUNSTATE METER US- US FILTER DAVIS rr~M OI~SCI~rPT[ON; Adapter 4" PVC Sch 40 (male) Adapter 6" PVC Sch40 (male) Adapter 8" PVC SCh40 (male) Adapter 4" PVC Sch40 (female) Adapter 6" PVC Sch40 (female) Adapter 8" PVC Sch40 (female) FR 2.39 FR 6.26 FR 28.48 FR 2.51 FR 9.26 FR 17.27 Adapter 4" HUB SDR-35 Adapter 6" HUB SDR-35 Adapter $" HUB SDR-35 US .77 US 4.14 HU 12.95 Air Hose 10ft. Long for Test Balls Air Hose 20ff. Long for Test Balls Air Hose 30ft. Long for Test Balls Air Release 2" Valve Val Matic FM48SB Air Release 2" Valve Empire 929 Air Release l"Combo ARV ItU US US US US US 47.00 6.80 9.00 338.54 204.66 150.00 SE(~QNDARY SE 2.43 SE 6.35 SE 28.78 SE 2.55 SE 9.35 SE 17.65 HU 2.49 HU 5.43 FR 12.00 HU 19.88 HU 28.13 HU 342.10 FR 244.00 FR 178.00 Bends 4" 22.5 De~'ee SDR-35 BXB 6' 22.5 Degree SDR-25 BX~ $. 22.5 Desree SDR-35 BXB Bushings 4 x 6 (Reducers)PVC Schedule 40SXS 8 x 6 (Reducers)PVC Schedule 40SXS US 1.80 SE !.97 US 3.58 SE 3.88 FR ! ! .60 US ! ] .65 ' SE 6.72 19.28 Butterfly Valves 12" 125# M/J Accessory Kit 16' 125# M/J Accessory Kit 18"125# lvEI Accessory Kit 20"125# M/J Accessory Kit 24"i25# M/J Accessory Kit 539.24 974.00 1286.02 1442.00 2095.00 Caps 4"PVC SDR-35 SLIP 6"PVC SDR-35 SLIP g"PVC SDR-35 SLIP US US FR 1.27 2.43 6.59 US Check Valves 4" 125# Flanged & Levered 6" 125# Flanged & Lever~! ~' 125# Flansed & ~ 12" 125# Flanged & ~ 18" 128# Ranged&Levered US US US US US 371.75 500.05 757.73 1748~5 471g.23 6.75 22.97 536.25 100030 13~0.00 1483.12 2107.28 1.29 2.44 6.60 379.50 510A0 7'/3.5O 17~4.50 _ 20" 125# Flanged & Levered 24" 125# Flanged & Levered Check Valves 3" 125# IPS Bronz~ 4" 125# IPS Bronze Clean out 3" PVC Sch40 90 Degree 4" PVC Sch40 90 Degree Couplings 3" PVC Sch40 slip x slip 4" PVC Sch40 slip x slip 6" PVC Sch40 slip x slip 8" PVC Sch40 slip x slip Couplings 4"PVC SDR-35 BXB 6" PVC SDR-35 BXB 8" PVC SDR-35 BXB Couplings 4" PVC SDR-35 slip x slip 6" PVC SDR-35 slip x slip 8" PVC SDR-35 slip x slip Elbows 4" PVC Sch40 22.5 Degree 6" PVC Sch40 22.5 Degree 8' PVC Sch40 22.5 Degree Elbows 4"M J/Accessory kit 22.5 degree 6"MJ/Accessory kit 22.5 degree 8"M$/Accessory kit 22.5 degree 10"M J/Accessory kit 22.5 degree 12"M J/Accessory kit 22.5 degree Elbows 4'PVC SDR-35 45 degree bxb 6"PVC SDR-35 45 degree bxb 8"PVC SDR-35 45 degree bxb Elbows 4"PVC SDR-35 45 degree bxs 6"PVC SDR-35 45 degree bxs $"PVC SDR-35 45 degree bxs Elbows 4"PVC ScM0 45 degree 6'PVC Sch40 45 degree 8"PVC Sch40 45 degree Elbows 4"PVC ScM0 90 degree sweep 6'PVC Sch40 90 degree sweep g"PVC Sch40 90 degree sweep Elbows 4"PVC SDR-35 90 degree BXB 6"PVC SDR-35 90 degr~ BXB g"PVC SDR-35 90 degree BXB Elbows 4"PVC SDR-35 90 degr~ BXSlip 6"PVC SDR-35 90 degree BXSIip 8"PVC SDR-35 90 degree BXSI~p US US SE SE US US US US US US SE US US US SE SE US US US US US US US US US US 5563.11 7722.68 42.18 62.62 9.00 15.00 !.32 !.91 6.02 ! !.24 2.48 4.56 gAS 2.51 5.02 8.50 9.17 16.35 27.90 30.97 44.89 65.55 69.30 94.50 1.84 3.68 1 !.38 ! .76 3.46 10.gl 5.40 13.35 32.11 4.43 14.08 36.24 2..54 4.67 12.89 2.29 4.41 12.62 FR SE FR SE FR FR FR US US SE SE SE US 5676.00 7882.00 49.00 78.00 !.40 2.03 6.43 1 !.87 2.49 4.99 g.46 5.00 9.00 15.00 9.26 16.50 28a20 31.05 45.00 65.70 88.84 !14.93 !.98 3.94 !!.46 t !.80 3.57 10.93 14.25 33.92 4.47 14.24 36.66 2.54 4.67 12.91 2.33 Flange 4 x 3 Threaded Companion 6 x 3 Tlu-cade~ Companion Gukets 4"M J/Transition 6"M J/Transition 8"MJ/l'ransition I 0"MJ/Tramition 12"MS/Transition Gaskets 4"MJ 6"1~I 8'MJ 10"MI 12'MJ 14"MI 16"MJ ! 8"MI 20"MJ 24"M$ 30"MI 36"MJ Kamlock 3"Alumin. Male Adapter 3"Alumin. Female Adapter Kamlock 4"Alumin. Male Adapter 4"Alumin. Female Adapter Kamlock 2" Cap for Male Adapter 2" Cap for Female Adapter 3" Cap for Male Adapter 4" Cap t'or Male Adapter Kamlock 3" Brass Male Adapter 3" Brass Female Adapter 4" Brass Male Adapter 4" Brass Female Adapter Inereaser 4 x 6 SDR-35 BXS 6 x 8 SDR-35 BXS Marker 1258 Mid-Range Ma~er 1435 Near Surface Pipe 3"PVC ScM0 4"PVC Sch40 6'TVC Sch40 rin/C ScM0 10'TYC ScM0 Pipe 4"FVC 6'TVC rPVC Sewer Pipe SDR-35 Sewer Pipe SDR-35 Sewer Pipe SDR-35 US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US FR FR SE US US US US FR FR FR US US US US US US US 8.41 12.34 .89 lag 1.66 ZOO 2.42 .71 .83 1.09 1.68 1.78 2.57 2.85 3.10 3.78 4.40 12.00 13.50 7.91 11.91 16.36 17.46 5.75 3.89 8.92 13,00 17.06 20.50 32.11 35.77 3.62 10.83 7.60 6.55 .'/5 1.07 1.85 2.86 4.10 .63 1.34 2.35 SE SE FR FR FR FR FR FR FR FR FR FR HU HU US FR FR FR SE US US SE FR SE FR US US US US US US US 13.89 28.85 i .06 1.28 1.93 2.32 2.80 .76 .87 1.15 1.70 1.81 2.'/0 3.00 3.30 4.00 4.60 14.30 15.40 8.53 12.42 17.48 19.07 6.30 4.49 9.52 13.48 19.71 37.47 46.86 62.23 3.81 l !.66 8.27 7.60 .78 1.12 !.94 3.01 4.31 .65 1.42 Pipelo'PVC Sewer Pipe SDR-3$ 12"PVC Sewer Pipe SDR-3$ I 5"PVC Sewer Pipe SDR-35 Plugs 4"PVC SDR-35 Threaded 6"PVC SDR-35 Threaded Plugs 3" Sewer Pipe Wing Nut 4" 6" $- lo' 12' 14" 16" Plug Valves 4" 125# 3 way flanged 6" 125# 3 way flanged g' 125# 3 way flanged Plug Valves 4" 6" $- 10" 12" 16" Ill" 20" 24" 125# Flanged Plug Valves 4" 6" lo' 12" 16" 18" 2O' 24" 30" 36" 125# M J/Accessory kit Rubber Coup 3 x 3 PVC Sch40 4 x 4 PVC S ch40 6 x 4 FVC Sch40 6 x 6 PVC Sch40 S x 6 FVC Sch40 g x $ PVC Sch40 10 x g PVC Sch40 10x 10 PVC Sch40 12x 12 PVC Sch40 15 x 15 PVC SDR-3$ SE US US US US US US US US US US US US US FR US US US US US US US US US US SE US US SE SE SE US HU HU 3.77 5.39 $.04 .96 1.74 3.26 4.31 6.45 14.47 23.91 49.41 8837 11 $.02 162.10 g4 l.g3 1275.5 I 1723.46 232.00 398.97 562.24 91734 1147.95 2013.26 2654.08 3594.69 7659.1 $ 223.43 370.59 665.00 959.9g ! 18536 2306.00 3022.00 4092.00 8151.95 11906.91 17120.63 1.49 l.r/ 435 4.00 6.~ 6.15 937 8.56 9.9s IS.45 US US US US US FR SE HU SE SE SE HU ELI HU FR FR SE SE I-fU HU ItU SE SE SE 3.96 5.67 8.46 .97 1.90 3.48 4.64 6.95 15.60 25.79 52.70 95.40 127.20 173.00 859.00 1300.00 1750.00 236.73 401.40 565.00 936.46 ! ! 61.00 2055.00 2709.00 365935 78 ! 8.75 25938 453.20 667.40 1022.00 , 1292.00 2373.01 3149.94 4225.80 8300.00 I 1 ~3.00 16500.00 !.50 l.r/ 4~3 6~93 6.2O 9.45 1.63 10.07 17.12 Rublx'r Coup 4 x 4 FVC Sch40 x CLAY 6x4 6x6 8x6 $x8 6x4 FVC4 x6Clay Sock~ Flange 3" PVC Sc. hZ0 4" 6" T-Bolts 5/8 x 3 !/2" w/nuts Ductile Dura Bolts x 4" w/nuts Ductile Dm'a Bolts x 41/2"w/nuts Ductile Dura Bolts Tees 4"PVC Sch40 "6"PVC Sch40 $"PVC Sch40 Tees/Wyes 4"PVC Sch40 Tees/Wyes 4 x 4 PVC SDR-35 BXBXB 6x4 6x6 $x6 8x8 Test Balls 4" (plugs) Pneumatic 6" 8" 10' 12' 16" 18" Wye/Doubl¢ 6 x 4 PVC SDR-35 BXBXBXB 6x6 8x6 Wy¢s 4"PVC Sch40 6" 8" Wye/Tee 6 x 4 PVC $DR-35 BXBXB 8x6 Wyes 4 x 4 45 degree SDR-35 BXBXB 6 x 4 45 degree SDR-35 BXBXB 6x6 8x6 8x8 10x6 Hooks, M~hole Rod 4" fiberglass probe rod HU i.87 HU 435 tfU 4.00 ITU 6.88 HU 6.15 FlU 6.52 ItU 825 HU 12.98 .71 .74 .78 HU 523 HU 20.73 ~ 48.07 FR 20.12 US 3.89 US 7.86 FR 9.80 FR 12.25 SE 24.09 HU 20.63 FlU 50.83 HU 81.26 ItU 123.76 HU 166.26 HU 283 33 HU 412.50 FR 9.91 US 17.14 SE 23.29 FR 20.12 FR 42.56 FR 161.70 US 7.86 FR 1225 HU 3.33 HU 6.99 HU 7.93 HU 12.46 HU 21.69 US 29.60 SE i i.83 10.66 HU US US US US HU SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE US HU FR US US US HU HU SE FR FR FR FR SE US US 1.87 4.38 4.03 6.93 620 4.45 7.00 8.85 ! 3.94 6.64 22.37 51.88 3.89 8.78 10.05 12.26 29.66 21.10 5 ! .99 83.10 126.56 170.04 289.77 421.88 10.03 · 18.47 23.80 55.43 1 ! 7.27 336.64 8.18 12.26 3.39 7.06 7.~) 12.56 21.89 32.10 13.68 t ,;,__.[ Flags Sewer Ig' x 3" x 3' Reuse Water 18' x 3" x 3" Red Electrical ! $" x 3" x 3" Tape 3" Sewer Main (Green Magnetic) FR US .65 .65 .65 17.36 US US US .07 .07 .07 17.80 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUPPLIES FOR WATER OPERATION BID # 97-2653 RECOMMENDATIONS: FR- Ferguson Underground HU- Hughes Supply SE- Semsco- Southeastern SS- Sunstate Me, er US- US Filter Davis ITEM DE$(~RIPTION: Adapter 2" Br. Thread X PJ Adapter I ½" Br. Thread X PJ Adapter 1" Br. Thread X PS Adapter 1" x %" #24 Adapter %" x %" #23 Adapter (PVC) %" C87-33 Adapter (PVC) 1" C87-44 Adapter (PVC) I ½" C87-66 Adapter (PVC) 2" C87-77 Ball Valve. Curbstop Meter Nut Ball, Brass Ball Valve- Curbstop Meter Nut Ball, Brass Ball Valve- Curbstop Meter Nut Ball, Brass Ball Valve- Curbstop Female Ball Valve* Curb~top Female IPT Bali Valve- Curbstop 2" Female II:'T :A" PJ x ~" l"PJx%" 1" PJ x 1" 1½"PJxl½" 2'PJx2" 2" Female IPT X Ball Valve- Ctu'bstop %" REUSE Ball Valve- Curbstop 1" REUSE Ball Valve- Cud~op I ½" REUSE Ball Valve- Curb~op 2" REUSE Bushing I" x %" Bushing I ~" x %" Bushing I 7." x I" Bushing 1 ½" x %" Bushing 1 ½"x 1" B~t~hing 2" x I 'A" Bushing 2"x 1 ½" BI'a_~ Brass Brass Bmss Bra~ Brass Brass pRIMARY, ~ HU-FR 14.57 US 14.67 HU 9.88 FR 9.93 I-~-FR 3.99 US 4.02 HU 2.94 FR. 2.95 US 2.40 SE 2.42 HU 4.45 FR. 4.54 HD' 6.95 FR. 7.15 HU 12.48 FK 12.85 HU 18.13 FR 18.70 HU 10.32 FR 10.40 hU-FR 16.28 US 16.89 HU-FR 18.30 US 23.09 HU 40.00 FR. 40.02 HU 54.90 US 55.27 ' SE 50.63 SS 50.84 US 10.73 HU 10.81 HU 18.79 FR. 15.95 US 40.39 HU 40.53 US 55.78 HU 55.~ US .81 SS 1.25 US 1.37 HU 2.71 US 1.37 SS 2.38 US 2.14 HU 2.59 US 1.75 HU 3.85 US 2.59 HU 2.65 US 2.59 SS 4.40 Butterfly Valve Butterlly Valve Butterfly Valve Butterfly Valve 14" MJ/ACC Kit 16" lvff/ACC Kit 18" M J/ACC Kit 20" IvUI ACC Kit CheckValve (Single) ~" _Che~____V~ (Single) 1" Check Valve (Single) 1 Check Valve (Single) 2" Check Valve (Dual) Check Valve (Dual) Clamp 4" x 15" FC Clamp 4" x 15" Sch 40 Clamp 4" x 15" DI Clamp 6" x 15" Sch 40 Clamp 6"x 15"DI Clamp 6" x 15" AC Clamp $" x 15" Sch 40 Clamp ii" x 15" DI Clamp $" x 15" AC Clamp 10" x 15" DI Clamp I0" x 15' AC Clamp 12" x 15" DI Clamp 12" x 15" AC Clamp 14" x 20" DI Clamp 16" x 20" DI Clamp 18" x 20" DI Clamp 20" x 20" DI Clamp 24" x 24" DI Clamp 30" x 36" DI Clamp 36" x 36" DI Corp Stop (Ball Corp) 'A" CC x PJ Corp Stop (Ball Corp) 1" L°T x FT FB.1700 Corp Stop (Ball Corp) 1" CC x PJ FB-1000 Corp Stop (Ball Corp) 1 '~" IPT x PJ I=B-I I00 Co~ Stop (Ball Corp) I ½" 11=T x FlVi [PT FB-1700 Corp Stop (Ball Corp) 2" IPT x PJ FB-1100 Corp Stop (Ball Coq~) 2" ~ x FlVi [PT 113-1700 Coupling (Tranm) Coupling (Trans) Coupling (Trans) Coupling ('Frans) Coupling ('Frans) 4" AC 439O0 ACC Kit 6" AC 439O0 ACC Kit $" AC 43900 ACC Kit 10" AC 43900 ACC Kit 12" AC 43900 ACC Coupling - ~ ~" PI x PI Coupling- Repair 1" PI x PI Coupling - Repair 1%"" PI x PJ Coupling - Repair 2" PI x PI Coupling- Comp~on Coupling- Compression US 765.00 HU 912.03 HU 1258.95 Fro 1315.79 US 7.16 US 8.88 HU 23.44 l-nj 35.50 HU 12.08 US 15.87 SE US US US SE-SS SE US US US SE $33.00 994.50 1326.00 1402.50 7.23 g.98 31.64 39.99 14.59 16.04 US 44.55 HU 45.21 US 44.55 ~ 46.00 US 44.55 FR 46.00 US 46.27 MR. 47.50 US 46.27 FR 47.50 US 46.27 FR 47.50 US 51.28 SE 51.84 US $1.29 SE 51.84 US 51.29 SE 51.84 US 58.40 SS 61.27 US 58.40 SS 61.27 US 61.34 SS 64.35 US 61.34 SS 64.35 US 137.71 SS 145.81 US 141.90 SS 149.85 US 190.37 SS 205.30 US 205.27 SS 221.38 US 335.79 SS 362.13 US 642.03 HU 1030.93 US 680.27 HU 1185.57 HU 10.62 US 12.13 HU 13.97 HU 28.62 HU 27.67 HU 47.33 HU 44.77 US 10.72 SE 12.26 · US 14.10 US 28.89 FR 28.38 US 47.79 US 46.22 US 23.63 FR 24.65 US 29.75 SS 31.21 US 39.98 FR 47.50 US 54.70 FR 60.90 US 74.55 FR 77.86 US 4.14 SE 4.18 US 4.74 SE 4.79 US 14.47 SE 14.62 US 19.54 SE 19.25 US 1.06 SS US 1.43 SS 1.10 1.48 Coupling- Compression Coupling- Coml:n'~ssion Coul:ltng- Compression Coup:inS- Compr~on Co~ltng- Compression Cot~HnS- Compr~on l"x4 4" I 4"X5 4" 2" x6" 3" X9" 4" X 10" 4" Coupling - Meter ~" 2 Piece Co,piing- t,~tcr 1" 2 Piece Coupling-Meter 1 4" 3 Piece Coupting- fritter 2" 3 Piece Tnilp[ec~ Reduce Bush 2" x I 4" Tailpiece P,~duceBush T'x 2 ½" Elbow-90 3" I~LI/ACC F. IT ERx~v-90 4" M.T/ACC KIT Elbow-90 6" M J/ACC KIT Elbow-90 8" ]~L?/ACC ~ £1bow-90 10" ]~T/ACC KIT ER~ow-90 12" ~LT/ACC KIT Elbow-90 14" MJ/ACC KIT Elbow-90 16" 1VLI/ACC KIT Elbo~v-90 I$" MJ/ACC MIT Elbow-90 20" ]~/ACC KIT Elbow-90 24" I~/ACC KIT EIb<~v-90 30" M.T/ACC KIT Elbow.~0 36" I~LI/ACC ~ Ellx)w-4$ 3" ~LT/ACC KIT Elbow-45 4" I~/ACC KIT ?'-lbow-45 6" MT/ACC MIT ER~v-4$ 8" MI/ACC MIT Elbow-45 I0" M J/ACC KIT Elbow-45 12" MT/ACC MIT Elbow-45 14" ~LT/ACC KIT Elbow-45 16" MJ/ACC KIT Elbow-45 15" MT/ACC KIT Elbow-4$ 20" M,T/ACC MIT Elbow=45 24" MI/ACC KI'T ERx~v..45 30" MT/ACC KIT ER~v-45 36' MT/ACC MIT W' Meter Rubber (Thin-Medittm-Tl~ck) 1" Meter Rubber (Thin-Medium-Tkick) I 4" Meter Rubber (Tl~.Medium-Thick) 2" Meter Rubber (Thin-Medium-Thick) ~" Meter Fiber I" Me~-r Fiber I 4" Meter Fiber 2" Me~er Fiber CThin-Medium-Tlfick) CThin-Mediura-Thick) (Thin-Medium-Thick) Crnin-Med~um-Thick) US 1.S6 SS 1.92 US 2.9~ SS 3.04 US 3.85 SS 3.95 US 9.47 SS 9.72 US 15.58 SS 15.~9 US 15.58 SS 15.99 SE 1.22 US 1.24 US 1.99 SE 2.32 US 8.29 SE 8.62 SE 10.85 US ! 1.01 SE 3.31 SS 3.90 SE 3.99 SS 4.60 US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US US 29.62 32.31 48.91 70.91 10~.$1 133.29 306.53 350.06 669.16 760.26 1118.85 3524.87 5133.37 28.27 30.96 44.01 64.62 87.96 113.99 244.59 283.64 527.78 621.13 860.79 2915.85 4307.13 FR 29.90 FR 32.65 FIT 49.40 FR 71.65 FR 107.90 FIT 134.69 FIT 309.80 FR 353.80 FR 676.25 FR. 768.20 FR 1130.80 FIT 3562.60 FR 5242.40 FIT 28.6O FIT 31.30 FIT 44.20 FIT 64.98 FIT 88.90 FR 115.10 FR 247.25 FR 287.00 FR 539.00 FR 630.00 FR 870.00 FR 3010.00 US-SS .06 NON BID US .06 SS .15 US .18 SS 35 US .27 SS .40 US .08 SS .0~ US .Il SS .18 US .41 SS .85 US .44 SS .95 Ga~ Valve Ga~¢ Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Val~ Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Valve Gate Vah'e Glands 4" Glands 6" Glands 8" Glands 10" Glands 12" Ghnds 14" Glands 16" Glands Glands Glands 24" Glands 30" Glands 36" Inserts Mega Lug Mega Lug Mega Lug Mega Lug Mega Lug Me'ga Lug Mega Lug Mega Lug Mega lug Meg~ Lug Mega lug Mega Lug Mega Lug Mega l.,ug Mega Lag Mega Lug Mega Lag 1" 1½" 2" Thread x ~ Operator Nut 3" Thread x Tlu~ad Operator Nm 4" IVU! ACC KIT 6" M J/ACC KIT 8" IVU/ACC KIT I0" IVU/ACC ~ 12" MJ/ACC K.iT 14" MJ! ACC ~ 16" fyi.{7 ACC ~ 18" ~VLI/ACC MIT 20" MI/ACC KIT DUSet Scrc~v Heavy T)~e DI/Set Scre~v Heavy Type DI/Set Scre~v Heavy Type DI/Set Screw Heavy Type DUSet Scru~v Heavy T)'De DI/Set Screw Heavy Type Dl/Set Screw Heavy T)~e DZ/Set Sct~v Heavy Type DI/Set Scr~v Heavy Type DI/Set Screw Heavy Type Dl/Set Screw Heavy Type DI/S~t Screw Hea~.'v Type g" Stainless Steel 1" Stainless Steel I ½" Stainless Steel 2" Stainless Steel 3" C900 4" C9O0 6" C'900 8" C9O0 10" C9O0 12" C~30 14" 16' C900 18" C900 20" C~00 24" C9O0 4" DI 6" DI 8" DI 10" DI 12" DI 16" DI HU 2.82 FR. 3.05 FR 3.70 HU 3.73 FR 6.47 HU 6.90 HU 10.51 FR 10.64 US 96.00 I:R 99.50 US 142.O0 FR 147.O0 HU 160.31 HU 204.21 HU 325.21 HU 506.95 HU 641.74 HU 1609.47 HU 2160.O0 HU 3520.O0 HU 4313.68 HU 10.97 HU 15.03 HU 17.19 HU 34.00 HU 44.50 HU 58.00 HU 82.50 HU 114.20 HU 140.80 HU 152.50 NON-BID NON-BID US US US US US US US US US 169.00 218.00 340.00 529.00 658.50 2069.00 2240.00 3697.00 4415.00 NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID NON-BID HU .54 FR-US HU .f,6 FR HU .76 FR HU .81 US FR FR FR FR FR FR SE FR SE FR FR SE 14.84 SE 16.00 SE 19.40 SE 28.68 SE 54.24 SE 57.O0 I-EJ 79.O0 HU 122.O0 HU 1O0.O0 SE 187.60 SE 216.$2 .56 .82 14.85 16.02 19.45 28.70 54.25 :57.05 90.80 123.O0 151.32 187.62 216.60 SE 13.04 FR. 13.10 SE 15.20 FR 15.25 SE 23.40 FR. 23.4:5 SE 34.64 FR 34.70 SE 50.38 FR 50.40 SE 91.88 FR. 92.00 OCT 1 Ivi~c'r Boxes- Standard Black M~ter Boxes- Jumbo Black M~er Box Lids- Standard Black M~ter Box Lids- Jumbo Black Meter Boxc~ Standard Purplc Meter Boxc~- Iumbo Purplc Nipples "A" x Clos~ Brass Nipples 1" x Cio~eBrass Nipples 1 ½"x Clo~ Brass Nipples 2" x Close Brass Nipples 2"x 6" Brass Nipples 2' x 9" Brass Nipples 2" x 12" Brass Ni.pples 3"x 9" Brass Pipe 4" C900 DRI8 Pipe 6" C900 DRI8 Pipe 8" C900 DRI8 Pipe 10" C900 DR18 Pipe 12" C900 DRI$ Pipe 14" C905 DRI8 Pipe 16" C905 DR18 Pipe 18" C905 DRI8 Pipe 20" C905 DRI8 Pipe 24" C905 DR25 Pipe 4" DI Class 51 Pipe 6" D1 Class 51 Pipe 8" DI Class 51 Pipe I0" DI Class 51 Pipe 12" DI Class 51 Pipe 14" DI Cla. s 51 Pipe 16" DI Class 51 Pipe 18" DI Class 51 Pipe 20" DI Class 51 Pipe 24" DI Class 51 Pipe 30" DI Class 51 Pipe 36" DI Class 51 Riser Riser Riser 5/8' x ~" x Riser 3/4" x ~' x Riser 3/4' x ~' x Riser 5/~"x~"x 12' P. iscr ~"x ~" x 12' Eiser ~'x~" x 18" ~ l"x 1" x 12" Eisc~ l"x l" x w/check valve wlchcck valve w/check valve w/check valve w/check valvc US US SE US US US US US US US US US US HU FR FR FR FR FR IR.US IR.US IR IR IR FR-SE IR-SE HU FR-HU FR-HU SE IR-SE FR-SE IR. SE FR.SE US US US US US US US US US US US US US 6.77 16.SA 2.57 5.67 6.77 16.84 .56 .82 1.57 2.41 5.75 8.59 11.33 25.03 1.56 3.12 5.37 8.26 i 1.48 15.72 20.12 25.28 22.86 33.15 5.44 6.36 8.58 i 1 14.64 18.81 22.10 25.47 28.97 36.69 50.29 68.43 29.63 29.89 34.61 39.79 34.56 22.82 26.82 27.53 31.97 44.15 52 US US US US US HU HU US US US HU HU FR-SE SE SE FR HU EU HU US IR-SE SE SE SS SS SS SS SS SE SE SE FR IR 6.85 17.02 2.67 5.73 6.85 17.00 .58 1.62 2.57 5.96 II.T4 25.5O 1.$7 3.13 5.38 8.27 11.49 17.47 22.36 25.29 22.87 33.20 5.54 6.38 8.75 I 1.55 14.64 18.84 22.14 '. 25.53 30.02 38.50 50.45 69.06 29.93 30.18 34.94 40.17 34.89 23.O4 27.10 27.81 32.34 46.05 53.86 Rod 5/8" x 6 fi. Tlu~ded -Stainless (6') Rod ~" x 6 ft. Tlu~d~ -Stainless (6') Plugs ½" Brass Plugs ~" Brass Plugs 1" Brass Plugs 1½" Bras Pings 2" Brass DUCTILE - DOUBLE STRAP STYLE SADDLE Saddle 2"x 1' Saddle 3"x 1½" Saddle 3"x 2" Saddle 4"x 1½" Sadd/e 4'x 2" Saddle 6' x I '/~" Saddle 6" x 2" Saddle 8"x 1½" Saddle 8" x 2" Saddle 10"x I ½" Sadd]e 10"x 2' Saddle 12"x S~dd]e 12'x 2" Sadd/e 14"x 2" Saddle 16"x 2" Saddle l$"x 2" Saddle 20" x 2" Brass - DOUBLE STRAP STYLE SADDLE Saddle 2" x 1" Sadie 4"x 1½" Saddle 4"x 2" Saddle 6"x 1½" Saddle 6" x 2" Saddle $' x 1 ½' Saddle 8"x 2" ~_~c~___e10"x 1½" Saddle 10'x 2" Saddle 12'x 1½" Saddle 12'x 2' Brnss - 4"-~' Hinge Style 10"-12' 3 Piece Style S~ldle 2" x =_~__ · 4"x 1½" Saddle 4"x 2" Saddle 6'x 1½' Saddle 6"x 2" Saddle 8' x I ½" Sadd/e 8" x 2" Saddle 10"x 1½" Saddle lO"x 2" Saddle 12"x 1½" US SE 7.50 13.38 .95 SE 24.84 US 19.20 NON-BID US .51 I-rU ,53 US .55 HU .60 US .76 HU .'/8 US 1.44 I-nj 1.48 US 2.28 HU 2.35 US 8.12 FR 8.22 US 13.13 FR 13.50 US 13.13 FR 13.50 US 14.52 FR. 14.98 US 14.52 FR 14.98 US 17.07 SS 17.34 US 17.29 SS 17_34 US 19.11 SS 19.44 US 19.11 SS 19.44 SE 24.36 US 24.85 SE 24.46 US 30.09 FR 31.00 US 30.09 FR 31.00 US 36.87 FR 38.00 US 52.23 FR gg.70 US 57.45 FR 90.40 US 89.77 FR 92.60 SS 6.50 FR 7.50 HU 30.87 US 31.22 HU 33.60 US 33.98 HU 35.64 US 36.06 HU 39.16 US 39.62 HU 40.61 US 41.09 HU 44.22 US 44.73 HU 52.49 US 53. ! I HU 52.48 US 57.03 HU 63.08 US 63.83 HU 64.23 US 64.98 6.17 25.60 25.60 27.00 27.00 28.89 28.89 52.94 52.94 .57.03 US HU HU US US HU HU HU HU HU SE US US FR SS US US US US US 26.20 26.20 21.~0 27.39 30.82 30.82 54.12 Saddle 12" x 2" Sleeve Sleeve Sleeve Sleev~ Sleeve Sleeve Slem'e Sleeve Sleeve Slem'e Slem'e 3" Long Pattern Solid 4' Long ?attem Solid 6" Long Pattern Solid 8" Long Pattern Solid I0" Long Pattern Solid 12" Long Pattern Solid 14" Long Pattern Solid 16" Long Pattern Solid 18" Long Pattern Solid 20" Long Pattern Solid 24' Long Pattern Solid HU $7.03 US 58.30 ~ ACC KIT US 32.32 FR 32.50 MJ ACC KIT US 33.22 FR 33.37 IvLT ACC KIT US 47.14 FR 47.35 MJ ACC KIT US 60.61 FR 60.88 MJ ACC KIT US 78.12 FR 78.47 IvU ACC KIT US 94.28 FR 94.75 MJ ACC KIT US 207.87 FR 208.90 NLI ACC KIT US 242.44 FR 243.65 IvU ACC KIT US 501.06 FR 503.53 MJ ACC KIT US 513.63 FR 516.20 ~ ACC ~ US 677.06 FR 680.40 T-Bolts ¥," x 3 i/,- w/nuts Dura Bolts T-Bolts M" x 4' w/nuts Dura Bolts T-Bolts :A' x 4 V:" w/nuts Dura Bolts 24" 36" Lids 1" Ex'tension Rings Telescopic Valve Box Telescopic Vah'e Box Telescopic Valve Box Telescopic Valve Box Black Black Black Black Tubing V," Pol)' Tubing 1" Poly Tubing 1 ½" Poly Tubing 2" Poly Tubing M" Poly Tubing I" Poly Tubing I '/:" Poly Tubing 2" Poly Uniflange 4" 400C Uniflange 6" 400C Uniflange 8" 400C Uniflang¢ 10" 400C Uniflang¢ 12" 400C Uniflange 14" 400C Uniflang¢ 16" 400C Unitlange 20" 400C Purple Purple Purple Purple Uniflange 4" 900C Uniflange 6" 900C Unitlange 8" 900C Unitlange I0" 900C Uniflnng¢ 12" 900C US .46 Fl{ US .48 FR .53 US .55 FR .58 US 12.19 FR. 12.80 US 17.85 FR 19.00 US 3.82 FR 4.40 US 3.06 FR 3.45 US .11 HU .!1 ~ .15 FR .16 ~ .39 US .40 ~ .64 US .65 US .11 HU .11 ~ .15 FR .16 HU .39 US .40 M-nj .64 US .65 US 23.34 US 28.28 US 35.75 US 64.03 US 75.48 US 118.76 US 148.95 US 203.60 US 25.26 US 32.02 US 43.25 US 66.89 US 86.78 HU 8.46 I-flJ 18.72 US 16.60 Brass Brass Multi-Service Brass FR FR FR FR FR SE SE SE SE Wye~ 1" x %" Wye~ 1%. x 1" Wye~ 2"x 4" x 1" 23.80 28.90: 36.65 65.64 77.45 122.51 153.6& 209.47 25.80 32.75 44.60 69.00 89.50 9.20 20.15 16.77 Accessory Kits 3" bO For Ductile Iron Accessory Kits 4" bO For Ductile Iron A__~____~ory Kits 6" bO For Ductile Iron Accessory Kits 8" bO For Ductile Iron Aeee~ory Kits 10' bO For Ductile Iron Acce~ory Kits 12'' bO For Ductile Iron Acces.~ry Kit~ 14" bO For Ductile Iron A__oce~___~-y Kits 16" bO For Ductile Iron Accessory Kits 4' Stainless Steel Flanged A___~__ ~ Kits 6' Stainless Steel Hanged A__ee~____e,x,y Kits 8" Stainless Steel Flanged Elbow-45 4" Hanged Ductile Iron Elbow- 45 6" Flanged Ductile Iron Ell~v- 45 8" Flanged Ductile Iron Elbow- 45 10" Flanged Ductile Iron Eib<nv- 90 4" Flanged Ductile Iron Elbow- 90 6" Flanged Ductile Iron Ell~v- 90 8" Flanged Ductile Iron Ellx~v- 90 I0'' Flanged Ductile Iron Elbow- 90 12" Flanged Ductile Iron Gasket 4" MJ Rubber Gasket 6" bo Rubber Gasket 8" MJ Rubber Gasket 10" bO Rubber Gasket 12" MJ Rubber Gasket 14" MJ Rubber Gasket 16" MJ Rubber Gasket 18" MJ Rubber Gasket 20" bo Rubber Gasket 24" MJ Rubber Gasket 30" MI Rubber Gasket 36" MJ Rubber Ga.~ets 4" Gaskets 6" Red Rubber Gnske~ 8" Red~r ~ I0" Red~r ~ 12" RedRubtnx Gaskets 16" RedRub~r Kamlock 2" Aluminum l~,~nloc~ 2" Aluminum Knnflock 2" Aluminum Kamlock 2" Aluminum FR. 5.75 US 6.02 FR. 5.75 US 6.02 FR, 7.48 US 7.87 FR. 9.25 ·US 9.72 FR. 12.35 US 12.96 Fl[ 13.65 US 14.35 FR 27.75 US 29.17 FR 31.70 US 33.3 ! Pipe 3" PVC Sc.M40 Pipe 4" PVC Schd40 Pipe 6" PVC Schd40 Pipe $" PVC Schd40 Pipe 10" PVC Schd40 5E 7.50 US 10.68 SE 12.25 US 16.78 SE 12.65 US 17.88 US 36.36 US 52.53 US 78.12 US 145.02 SE SE SE SE 37.50 54.17 80.56 149.55 US 35.91 SE 37.04 US 54.32 SE 56.02 US 85.75 SE 88.43 US 158.04 SE 162.98 US 226.28 SE 233.35 FR-SE FR FR FR FR FR FR FR FR-SE FR HU HU US .71 US .83 US 1.09 US 1.68 US 1.78 US 2.57 US 2.85 US 3.10 US 3.78 US 4.40 FR 12.00 FR 13.50 .76 .87 1.15 1.70 !.81 2.70 3.00 3.30 4.00 4.60 14.30 ~ 15.40 US .72 FR .75 US 1.02 FR 1.05 US 1.31 FR 1.36 FR l.gO US 2.05 US 2.78 FR 2.85 US 5.05 FR 5.20 Male Adapter US 9.45 FR 10.80 Cap for Male Adapter Feranle Adal:~'r FR 11.19 SE 12.93 Cap for Female AdalXer FR .75 US FR 1.07 US FR. 1 .RS US FR 2.g6 US FR 4.10 US !.i2 1.87 3.01 4.31 e .9- Reducer 6" x 4" {vil ACC. Kit lm~duc~r 8" x 6" MI ACC. Kit Reducer 6" x 4' Flange x Flange Reducer $" x 6" Flange x Flange Tees 4" MI ACC. Tees 6" lVD ACC. Kit Tees 8" MJ ACC. Tees 10" MJACC. Tees 12' MI ACC. ICi~ Teem 14" ]vi{ ACC. Tee~ 4' Flanged Tees 6" Flanged Tees 8" Flanged Tees 10" Flansed Tees 12" Hanged US US US US US US US US US US US US US US SE 36.36 52.97 72.73 94.28 48.93 68.69 98.77 143.22 185.87 456.16 57.91 81.71 140.97 185.g7 345.86 36.74 53.52 $1.00 105.00 49.45 69.46 99.88 144.83 187.95 461.25 59.73 ~4.26 145.38 230.57 456.16 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE OCTOBER 14, 199'/ FOR BOARD ACTION: 1. _MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED: OCT,