Agenda 01/09/2018 Item #10B01/09/2018
From: FialaDonna
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 10:36 AM
To: OchsLeo <Leo.Ochs@colliercountyfl.gov <mailto:Leo.Ochs@colliercountyfl.gov>>; KlatzkowJeff
<Jeff.Klatzkow@colliercountyfl.gov <mailto:Jeff.Klatzkow@colliercountyfl.gov>>
Cc: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov
<mailto:Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov>>
Subject: Reconsider
Leo & Jeff:
As I mentioned previously, I had to go back to the agenda and read over a few of
the subjects. One of them is the two parcels of county owned land. Once I really
looked at it, I realized THAT THIS LAND IS COMPLETELY OWNED BY THE
COUNTY AND TOTALLY UNEMCUMBERED! That has been the problem,
according to our housing department, as to why they consistently build low income
that qualifies, instead of the medium income that is needed so badly. John
Schmeiding expressed it perfectly in his speech about how we could help Arthrex
and other companies participating, such as the Sheriff’s Office, Teachers, Hospital
workers, Government Employees, etc. Here is the perfect opportunity to build
housing for that middle class entirely! We would be wasting our precious
UNENCOMBERED land that has no restrictions, to instead build the low income
housing which we are already building.
I want to bring this back to the commissioners to fill in the blanks from
yesterday’s meeting and get their opinion on this perfect land to build the housing
that is needed that we don’t seem to be able to build on HUD or SHIP funding.
Even tho it says in the power point backup on the agenda, “very low, low and
moderate”, which it says on housing we are already building with HUD and SHIP
funds, we do not see that moderate housing being built, and that moderate does not
take in medium-priced housing. I would like to bring this item back at the next
meeting to discuss this point that was not made at our BCC meeting, but John
Schmeiding presented perfectly.
Donna Fiala
Donna Fiala
Collier County Commissioner, District 1
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #303
Naples, FL 34112
P: (239) 252-8601
F: (239) 252-6578
10.B
Packet Pg. 49
01/09/2018
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Item 11H December 12 2017 BCC Meeting (RTF)
2. Reconsideration of matters (PDF)
10.B
Packet Pg. 50
01/09/2018
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 10.B
Doc ID: 4403
Item Summary: Request to reconsider Item 11H, from the December 12, 2017 BCC Meeting
which reads: Recommendation to direct staff to initiate a Request for Information (RFI) process for two
County-owned properties that are suitable for the development of housing that is affordable in accordance
with the Community Housing Plan. (Commissioner Fiala)
Meeting Date: 01/09/2018
Prepared by:
Title: Executive Secretary to County Manager – County Manager's Office
Name: MaryJo Brock
12/19/2017 7:42 AM
Submitted by:
Title: County Manager – County Manager's Office
Name: Leo E. Ochs
12/19/2017 7:42 AM
Approved By:
Review:
Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 12/19/2017 7:56 AM
County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 12/19/2017 8:11 AM
Budget and Management Office Mark Isackson Additional Reviewer Completed 12/19/2017 11:44 AM
County Manager's Office Nick Casalanguida Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 01/01/2018 9:52 AM
Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 01/09/2018 9:00 AM
10.B
Packet Pg. 51
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to direct staff to initiate a Request for Information (RFI) process for two County-
owned properties that are suitable for the development of housing that is affordable in accordance
with the Community Housing Plan.
OBJECTIVE: To provide housing that is affordable in Collier County and to further the goals set forth
in the Housing Element of the Growth Management Plan.
CONSIDERATIONS: On June 27, 2017, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) reviewed a list of
County-owned properties that may be suitable for the development of housing that is affordable. At that
meeting, the BCC directed staff continue to review the properties and to explore public/private
partnerships on some of those sites for the future development or inclusion of housing that is affordable.
Staff has reviewed the properties and recommends moving forward with a Request for Information (RFI)
process on the following two sites:
Committee
Recommendation
Property Folio#Acreage Zoning Location Significant
Restrictions
Impact
Designate for
Housing
Bembridge PUD 00400246406 5.11 Yes Excellent No Medium
Include Housing in
Development Plan
Manatee Site 00736520003 59.3 No Excellent No High
Two additional sites were also researched by staff as directed, the 47 acre Randal Curve site and the 21
acre Livingston/Grey Oaks site. Staff does not recommend moving forward with either of those sites at
this time. Future development of the Randal Curve site may become integral to the Golden Gate Estates
District, and it is recommend that ongoing restudies of the surrounding areas continue before making a
decision on that site’s potential uses. The Livingston/Grey Oaks site is encumbered by an FPL easement
that prohibits the construction of any structures at this time.
An RFI is used to collect comments and obtain input from the market place. In this case the process will
be used to solicit information from potential developers as to the interest and potential for the
development of housing that is affordable on each of the two sites.
Housing that is affordable includes households in Collier County with incomes ranging from 0% to 140%
of median income. Recent studies identify priority needs for rental housing and senior housing, both at
the 80% or less of median income in Collier County.
The RFI will allow the market to describe their best approaches to meeting the County’s need for housing
that is affordable whether it be through an affordable rental development, a senior housing project, entry-
level owner-occupied units, the co-location of housing and other County or public uses, or a combination
of the above. Each of the sites may have different approaches and outcomes.
FISCAL IMPACT: Any potential fiscal impact will be determined on a property-by-property basis
based on BCC direction. Reimbursement of original costs may be required if properties were acquired
using impact fees.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved for form and legality and requires a majority vote
for Board approval. - JAB
10.B.1
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Item 11H December 12 2017 BCC Meeting (4403 : Commissioner Fiala Request for Reconsideration)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Use of County-owned parcels for the development of housing
that is affordable furthers the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Growth Management Plan and
specifically the Housing Element.
RECOMMENDATION: To direct staff to initiate a Request for Information (RFI) process for two
County-owned properties that are suitable for the development of housing that is affordable.
Prepared by: Cormac Giblin, Manager, Grant and Housing Development, Community and Human
Services
10.B.1
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Item 11H December 12 2017 BCC Meeting (4403 : Commissioner Fiala Request for Reconsideration)
The County Sheriff, or his deputy, shall be the sergea nt-at-arms at meetings of the Board of
County Commissioners and shall carry out all orders of the Chairman to maintain order and
decorum.
(Ord. No.75-16,91(3); Ord. No.07-50, S 1)
Sec. 2-39. - Action to be taken by resolution, ordinance or motion.
Each action of the Board of County Commissioners shall be taken by resolution, ordinance or
legally binding document approved as to form by the County Attorney, except approval of
administrative matters may be by motion adopted and recorded in the minutes.
(Ord. No.75-16, S 1(4); Ord. No.07-50, S 1)
Sec. 2-4O. - Adjournment,
A motion to adjourn shall always be in order and decided without debate.
(ord. No.75-16, S 1(5); Ord. No.07-50, S 1)
sec. 2-41. - Reconsideration of mafters generally.
(a) Except for contracts, any matter which has been voted upon by the Board of County
Commissioners may be reconsidered as follows:
(1) By a motion to reconsider made by a member who voted with the majority if such
motion is made prior to the adjournment of the meeting at which the matter was
voted upon. If there were no public speakers on the item, or if all of the public
speakers for the item are still present in the boardroom following a successful motion
to reconsider, the Board may elect to rehear the matter during that meeting, or direct
the County lYanager to place the item on the agenda for a future meeting as set forth
in subsection (aX2). If there were public speakers for the item, and not all of the
public speakers are still present in the boardroom following a successful motion to
reconsider, the County Manager will place the item on the agenda for a future meeting
as set forth in subsection (a)(2).
(2) By a motion to reconsider made by a member who voted with the majority if such
motion is made at a regular meeting following the meeting at which the matter was
voted upon, but only in accordance with the following:
(i) Where a member who voted with the majority wishes the Board to reconsider a
matter after the adjournment of the meeting at which it was voted on, the
member shall deliver to the County Manager a written memorandum stating that
the member intends to introduce a motion to reconsider. The memorandum shall
state the date of the regular meeting at which the member intends to introduce
such motion, and shall be delivered to the County Manager at least six days prior
to such meeting. The purpose of this requirement is to allow the staff to advise
the Board of the legal or other ramifications of reconsideration.
(ii) No motion to reconsider shall be made any later than the second regular Board
meeting following the Board's vote on the matter sought to be reconsidered.
(iii) Upon adoption of a motion to reconsider, the county Manager shall place the item
on an agenda not later than the second regular Commission meeting following the
meeting at which the motion for reconsideration was adopted.
(iv) All parties who participated by speaking. submitting registration forms or written
materials at the first hearing, shall be notifled by the County lvlanager of the date
of reconsideration.
(v) Contracts may only be reconsidered by motion made prior to the adjournment of
the meeting at which the matter was voted upon. For purposes of this subsection,
a contract is defined as an agreement which is legally binding and enforceable in a
court of law.
10.B.2
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Reconsideration of matters (4403 : Commissioner Fiala Request for Reconsideration)
(b) This section shall apply to any matters which may lawfully be reconsidered except those
matters which are covered by Paragraph 7 below.
(Ord. No. 81-54, 5 1; Ord. No.07-50,9 2; Ord. No.2009-52,51; Ord. No.2015-53,91)
Sec.2-42, - Reconsideration of land use matters.
(a) Applicability. Any matter in which the Board of County Commissioners or Board of zoning
Appeals, as the case may be, has denied a request to change the land use designation of a
parcel of land, a request for site specific rezone initiated by a petitioner or his or her
agent, variance, conditional use, license, permit or other land use-related request.
(b) Reguest for Reconsideration by Petitioner. A request for reconsideration may be made only
by the petitioner. The petitioner may request reconsideration of a petition in writing to the
County lvlanager no later than 15 days from the date of the Board's action denying the
original petition. Except as provided below, this request shall be jurisdictional, and no
motion for reconsideration may be made by any member of the Board where such a
request was untimely. If State or Federal submission and/or approval schedules pertaining
to the petition are extended within 6 months following the denial of the original petition,
upon Public Petition initiated by the petitioner, the Board may extend petitioner's request
for reconsideration by majority vote, and on a second motion made by any Commissioner,
place the issue of reconsideration for a date certain on which the action or petition will be
reconsidered, but in no event shall such reconsideration take place less than 14 days nor
more than 45 days from the date the motion to reconsider is adopted.
(c)Motion for reconsideration by a Board member who voted in the majority. Any member of
the Board who voted with the majority (or in the case of a rezoning or change in land use
designation. voted against) on the original action or petition may move for a
reconsideration of the action or petition at any regular meeting of the Board within 15
days of the date of the request for reconsideration. If no regular meeting of the Board
occurs within 15 days of the request for reconsideration, the Board member may move for
a reconsideration of the action or petition no later than the first meeting of the Board that
follows the County Manager's receipt of the request for consideration. This motion shall be
made during that portion of the Board's agenda entitled "Board of County Commissioners."
If no motion for reconsideration is made during this time period, the request shall be
deemed denied. The motion may specify a date certain on which the action or petition will
be reconsidered, but in no event shall such reconsideration take place less than 14 days
nor more than 45 days from the date the motion to reconsider is adopted.
Action on motion for reconsideration. The Board shall either act on the motion for
reconsideration at the meeting at which such motion is made or may table the motion for
no longer than the next regular meeting of the Board. If the motion is not finally acted
upon by the adjournment of the next regular meeting of the Board after the motion has
been made, it shall be deemed to have been denied.
Scheduling of petition for reconsideration. If the motion for reconsideration is granted, the
County Manager shall schedule the petition on the agenda for the regular Board meeting
which was specifled in the motion for reconsideration, or if no date is specified then on the
second regular Board meeting following the meeting at which the motion is granted.
No hearing or debate on motion for reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration shall not
require public hearing, and neither the petitioner nor any other person shall have the right
to address the Board considering the merits of such a motion. However, the Board may
request information of the petitioner, the staff or any other person in order to better
inform itself prior to acting upon the motion. The purpose of this provision is to prevent
either the petitioner or any other person from debating the merits of the petition prior to
its full consideration at a regularly scheduled Board meeting where the petition is
reconsidered.
[Procedures outlined.] The procedures outlined herein shall not constitute an
administrative remedy. and the defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies shall
(d)
(e)
(g)
10.B.2
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Reconsideration of matters (4403 : Commissioner Fiala Request for Reconsideration)
not be raised if a petitioner declines to utilize these procedures and instead elects to
pursue judicial remedies following the denial of the petition. The time period for seeking
judicial relief following denial of those matters contemplated by subsection (a)(2) of this
section shall run from the time the Board votes on such matter, and a motion hereunder
shall not alter such time period.
(h) [Initial vote./ Where the initial vote was made after an advertised public hearing, any
reconsideration of such vote shall comply with all advertisement and notice provisions that
were legally required for the initial public hearing.
(Ord. No.81-54, S 2; Ord. No. 88-41, 5 1; Ord. No.07-50,5 2; Ord. No.2012-15, 1)
Land Development Code reference - Zoning amendments, 5 2.7.2.
State Law reference - Adoption of rezoning ordinances, F.S. I 125.66(5).
Secs. 2-43-2-65. - Reserved.
10.B.2
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Reconsideration of matters (4403 : Commissioner Fiala Request for Reconsideration)