BCC Minutes 05/11/2004 R
May 11,2004
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF MAY 11, 2004
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida, May 11, 2004
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the
Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:02 a.m. in REGULAR
SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples,
Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Donna Fiala
Tom Henning
Jim Coletta
Fred Coyle
Frank Halas
ALSO PRESENT: Jim Mudd, County Administrator
David C. Weigel, County Attorney
Page 1
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
tì'^"'"
"'.
É
\
' --=~
AGENDA
May 11,2004
9:00 A.M.
Donna Fiala, Chairman, District 1
Fred W. Coyle, Vice-Chairman, District 4
Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2
Tom Henning, Commissioner, District 3
Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM
MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER
WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENT A TION OF
THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53, AS AMENDED REQUIRES
THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING
ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK
TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS
DEPARTMENT.
REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT
ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH
EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR
TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC
PETITIONS."
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
Page 1 of 14
'^ --^-------
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 RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5)
MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO P ARTICIP ATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF
CERT AIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMP AIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1 :00 P.M.
1.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2.
AGENDA AND MINUTES
A.
B.
C.
D.
3.
4.
Approval of to day's regular, consent and summary agenda as
amended. (Ex Parte Disclosure provided by Commission members for
summary agenda.)
April 13, 2004 - BCC Regular Meeting.
April 19, 2004 - Orangetree/Waterways Neighborhood Meeting hosted by
Commissioner Coletta.
April 20, 2004 - BCC/CCPC-EAR Workshop
SERVICE AWARDS
PROCLAMATIONS
A.
Proclamation to recognize May 2004, as Mental Health Month. To be
accepted by Petra M. Jones, Executive Director of The Mental Health
Association.
B.
Proclamation to recognize Cody Anderson for his selfless service and
dedication to the people of the State of Florida. To be accepted by Cody
Anderson.
Page 2 of 14
C.
D.
E.
Proclamation to recognize the month of May as Internal Auditor Awareness
Month. To be accepted by Patrick Blaney, CFE, CPA, Internal Audit
Director for Collier County Clerk of Circuit Court.
Proclamation to designate the Week of May l6-22, 2004 as Emergency
Medical Services Week. To be accepted by John Dunnuck, Public Services
Administrator for Collier County.
Proclamation proclaiming the week of May lO - l6, 2004 as Oceans For
Youth Foundation Week.
5.
PRESENT A TI 0 NS
A.
B.
This item to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Presentation by the Big Cypress Basin of
the South Florida Water Management District on the Basin's and District's
Fiscal Year 2004-05 Proposed Budgets.
To Edward J. Kant for his outstanding service to Collier County.
6.
PUBLIC PETITIONS
7.
8.
A.
Public Petition request by Mr. Matt Johnson to discuss Firefighters Fund
Raising for the Muscular Dystrophy Association.
B.
Public Petition request by Ms. Kathy Herrmann to discuss a formal
funding request for The Shelter for Abused Women and Children.
C.
Public Petition Request by Ms. Tammie Nemecek to seek direction of the
BCC for a fiscal stability study for Collier County.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2003-AR-4390 Immokalee
Senior Housing, Ltd. represented by Rick J. Joudrey, P.E., of Davidson
Engineering, Inc., requesting: 1) Rezoning from the (RMF -6) Residential
Multi-family zoning district to RPUD to allow development of a maximum
Page 3 of 14
B.
of l19 multi-family dwelling units, limited to rental units within an
"independent living residence facility" for the elderly for a project to be
known as the Immokalee Senior Housing PUD; and 2) Consideration and
approval of an Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement authorizing
the developer to utilize Affordable Housing Bonus Density units (in the
amount of 59.52 units at 8 bonus density units per acre) in the development
of the project. Property is located on the east side of II th Street North just
south of Lake Trafford Road and Highland Elementary School in Section
33, Township 46 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting
of 7.44::1:: acres.
This item to be heard at lO:OO a.m. Consideration of an ordinance
adopting a recodification and revision of the County's Land
Development Code, to become effective on August 30, 2004.
c.
This item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. This item was continued from the April
13,2004 BCC Meeting. This item requires that all participants be sworn in
and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. PUDZ-2003-
AR-3584, Robert Duane of Hole Montes Inc., of Naples, representing
Collier County Public Schools, requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for
the purpose of amending the Orangetree PUD text, (Ordinance number 9l-
43) to include "Public Educational Plants and Ancillary Plants" as a
permitted use to the "Agriculture" (AG) district of the PUD.
D.
Adopt an updated Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance, adopt
accompanying Collier County Water-Sewer District Utilities Standards
Manual and repeal Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance No. 200l-
57.
E.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure
be provided by Commission members. Petition PUDZ-03-AR-4674, Collier
HMA, Inc., A subsidiary of Health Management Associates, Inc.,
represented by Margaret Perry of Wilson Miller, Inc., and R. Bruce
Anderson, of Roetzel & Andress, requesting a rezone from "A" Rural
Agricultural and "TTRVC" Travel Trailer Recreational Vehicle
Campground to "PUD" Planned Unit Development to be known as Collier
Regional Medical Center PUD for a Maximum of 260,000 square feet of
hospital and related uses and 80,000 square feet of medical office and
related uses. The property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard
(CR-951), and approximately 3 miles north of the Tamiami Trail (U.S. 41)
Page 4 of 14
in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
9.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A.
B.
C.
Appointment of member to the Water and Wastewater Authority.
Appointment of member to the Community Character/Smart Growth
Advisory Committee.
Appointment of members to the Collier County Coastal Advisory
Committee.
10.
COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A.
11.
12.
13.
14.
To approve Master Agreement # 03-3500 "Land Use and Permitting
Acquisition Software Application" with Hansen Information Technologies,
Inc. in the amount of $1 ,54l ,338.00. (Joseph K. Schmitt, Administrator,
Community Development and Environmental Services.)
B.
This item to be heard at 1 :30 p.m. Approve a Resolution authorizing the
submission of a low-interest State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan Application
to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for the
construction of reclaimed water main and force main and pump station
upgrade in the amount of$7,35l,000; and to adopt the document called
'Collier County North County Wastewater Reclamation Facility (NCWRF)
Expansion Facilities Plan Update, May, 2004' to allow the County to avail
itself of low-interest SRF funds. (Jim DeLony, Administrator, Public
Utilities.) ^
C.
Recommendation to Develop a Request for Proposal to Increase Park
Impact Fees for Beach and Boat Access Based on the Master Plan. (John
Dunnuck, Administrator, Public Services)
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS
COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Page 5 of 14
15.
ST AFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT AGENDA - All matters listed under this item are considered to be
routine and action will be taken by one motion without separate discussion 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.
16.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Final Acceptance Of Water Utility Facilities For Seacrest School.
Final Acceptance of Water and Sewer Facilities for Aston Gardens.
Final Acceptance of water utility facilities for Brittany Bay
Apartments.
Final Acceptance of water & sewer utility facilities for Flamingo
Fairways.
Approval of one (1) impact fee reimbursement, totaling $4l ,600.05,
due to building permit cancellation - Amy Patterson, Impact Fee
Manager.
6)
Final Acceptance Of Water Utility Facilities For St. John the
Evangelist Catholic Church.
7)
Final Acceptance Of Water Utility Facilities For Golf Club of the
Everglades.
8)
Final Acceptance Of Water Utility Facilities For Naples Lake Country
Club, Tract Three.
9)
Grant a waiver of formal competition for the construction of an
artificial reef with a total cost not to exceed $50,000.
10)
Recommendation to approve a Commercial Excavation Permit (AR
3853) for "Mirasol Flowway and Water Management Lakes ", located
Page 6 of 14
-^'-----
11)
12)
B.
in section 10,15, &22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East: bounded
on the north by Lee County (Residential), on the west by Parklands
PUD, Terrafina POD, and land zoned Agricultural, on the south by
Immokalee Road and the Cocohatchee Canal, and on the east by land
zoned Agricultural and by the Heritage Bay PUD.
Quarterly Report to the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners on the activities related to the Job Creation
Investment Program and the Advanced Broadband Infrastructure
Investment Program.
The Board of County Commissioners sitting as the Community
Redevelopment Agency. Recommendation by the Community
Redevelopment Agency that the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, to amend the Immokalee Redevelopment
Area Plan as necessary to allow for additional residential and
economic incentive programs.
13)
The Board of County Commissioners sitting as the Community
Redevelopment Agency. Recommendation by the Community
Redevelopment Agency that the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, expand the boundaries of the Immokalee
Community Redevelopment Area.
14)
Board of County Commissioner's termination of Contract # 02-33l7
with Henderson, Young and Company for the Correctional Facilities
Impact Fee Update Study.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
1)
To adopt a standard for bus shelters for the public transportation
program.
2)
Approve three work orders and one supplemental Work Order for the
Forest Lakes Roadway and Drainage MSTU to Quality Enterprises
USA, Inc., to Mitchell and Stark Construction, to Kyle Construction
Inc, in the total project amount of $667,470.00.
3)
A Resolution of the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) authorizing the filing of the Trip and Equipment Grant
Page 7 of 14
4)
5)
6)
C.
Application with the Florida Commission for the Transportation
Disadvantaged (CTD).
To accept the conveyance of Deeds for the right of way required for
the construction of a loop road around the Mission Hills POD. (Fiscal
Impact: $40)
Approve two purchase agreements for the acquisition of right of way
required for the construction of a six-lane section of Collier Boulevard
(CR-951) and intersection improvements at Vanderbilt Beach Road
(Project Nos. 63051 and No. 65061). Estimated fiscal impact:
$660,500.
Recommendation that the Board terminate Contract # 03-3558 "Lely
Golf Estates M.S.T. U. Roadway Grounds Maintenance."
7)
Request that the Board authorize the Chairman to submit a request for
a five-year annual donation from Florida Power & Light for the
Greenway project along the transmission corridor (Rattlesnake
Hammock-Radio Road) for $25,000 each year.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
1)
Approve award of bid 04-3646 in the amount of $3,872,929 to
Mitchell and Stark Construction Company Inc., subject to Florida
Department of Environmental Protection approval for the construction
of the force main and the reclaimed water main along Goodlette Frank
Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road Project 74077 and 72002.
2)
Approve an amendment to Work Order JEI-FT-03-04-A for the
Construction Engineering Inspection Services to inspect the
construction of the force main and the reclaimed water main on
Goodlette Frank Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road in the amount of
$l60,700, Project 72002 and Project 74077.
3)
Cancel Hideaway Beach Access Improvements, Project 90511, and
approve a budget amendment to transfer $375,055 to the Reserves.
4)
Approve a Work Order Amendment, under Contract #Ol-327l, Fixed
Term Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone
Page 8 of 14
D.
Management Projects, with Humiston & Moore Engineers for
Hideaway Beach Renourishment Permitting, Project 90502, in the
amount of $50,000.
PUBLIC SERVICES
1)
2)
Approval of attached Certification of Application by the Board of
County Commissioners, and the signature of the Chairman, permitting
the Collier County Public Library to apply for a State Construction
Grant to enlarge the Golden Gate Branch Library.
Approval of a Lease Agreement with the City of Naples for use of
Station 1 for the EMS Department at an annual cost of$25,800.
3)
Approval of a Sovereign Submerged Lands Lease Renewal with the
Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State
of Florida for continued use of the boat ramp and docking facilities at
Caxambas Park at a first year cost of$549.96.
4)
Approve a First Amendment to Lease Agreement with New York
NewCo Subsidiary, Inc. for a communication tower at Veterans Park.
5)
Approve a Budget Amendment appropriating $67,987 from the
Emergency Medical Services Fund 490 Reserves to reimburse Fund
490-144610 for attorney fees and court reporting costs associated with
contract negotiations.
6)
This item was previously continued from April 13, 2004 agenda. This
is a Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners
discussion of amending Collier County COPCN Ordinance 2004-l2
be continued until the June 22, 2004 BCC meeting.
7)
Approve an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Naples for
reciprocal beach parking at an approximate annual expense of
$400,000.
8)
Request the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget
amendment recognizing and appropriating a $6,000 donation from the
American Heart Association in the Emergency Medical Services Fund
(490).
Page 9 of 14
---------^"-------
E.
9)
10)
Request the Board of County Commissioners approve a budget
amendment recognizing and appropriating a private donation of
$6,980 in the Emergency Medical Services Fund (490).
Terminate contract #96-2489 "Pelican Bay Tennis Facility
Concession Agreement" with Lewis Tennis, Inc. for cause.
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
1)
F.
Approval of a Lease Agreement with the Empowerment Alliance of
Southwest Florida Community Development Corporation for use of
office space in the satellite government building in Immokalee for
revenue of$500 annually.
2)
Approve the termination of Contract No. 02-3377, "North Naples
Government Services Center", with Brooks and Freund, LLC for
construction of the North Naples Government Services Center.
3)
Report and ratify staff-approved change orders and changes to work
orders to Board -approved contracts.
4)
Recommendation to approve additions to the 2004 Fiscal Year Pay
and Classification Plan made from April 7, 2004 through April 30,
2004.
5)
Approve Extension of Contract 01-3204 "Real Estate Appraisal
Services" .
6)
That the Board of County Commissioners award Bid No. 04-3570 for
Fertilization Services and Pest Control to: Personalized Pest Control,
Inc. and Trugreen Chemlawn.
7)
Confirm and consent to the re-assignment of BID No. 00-3154,
"Household Hazardous Waste Disposal Contractor" from US Liquids,
Inc. to EQ Florida, Inc.
COUNTY MANAGER
1)
Approval of a Lease Agreement with Gulf Shore Associates, Limited
Page 10 of 14
-----------
2)
3)
4)
Partnership, for continued use of a Pelican Bay Services Division
rooftop mounted antenna and equipment room space at the Sun Bank
building in Pelican Bay.
Board of County Commissioners to authorize the transfer of
($2,93l.13) donated by Collier County hotels in FY 03 for the
Meeting Professionals International (MPI) events from Fund 194
Reserves to the operating account line in Fund 194 to be used for
advertising and promotional expenses for the 2004 MPI event and to
approve a Budget Amendment for $2,931.13.
Approval of Budget Amendment Report - BA #04-243 - $20,000.
Approve a Third Amendment to Lease Agreement with Gulf Shore
Associates, Limited Partnership, for the continued use of office space
by the Pelican Bay Services Division at an annual rental of $19,566,
plus a CPI increase.
G.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
H.
I.
J.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1)
Commissioner Henning request for Board approval for payment to
attend function serving a valid public purpose. Ed Perico's retirement
party; $35.00 to be paid from Commissioner Henning's travel budget.
2)
Commissioner Fiala requests Board approval for reimbursement to
attend a function serving a valid public purpose - Leadership Collier
Class of 2004 graduation ceremonies on May l3, 2004 in the amount
of $50.00. Funds to be reimbursed from Commissioner's travel funds.
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1)
Miscellaneous Items to File for Record with Action as Directed.
OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1)
Recommend that the Board of County Commissioners serve as the
Local Coordinating Unit of Government in the Florida Department of
Law Enforcement's Anti-Drug Abuse Act Formula Grant Program.
Page 11 of 14
2)
That the Board of County Commissioners make a determination of
whether the purchases of goods and services documented in the
Detailed Report of Open Purchase Orders serve a valid purpose and
authorize the expenditure of County funds to satisfy said purchases. A
copy of the Detailed Report is on display in the County Manager's
Office, Collier County Government Center, 3301 East Tamiami Trail,
W. Harmon Turner Building, 2nd Floor, Naples.
K.
COUNTY ATTORNEY
1)
Approve Agreed Order and Authorize Payment of Appraisal Fees and
Planning Fees for Parcels l02 and 702 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier
County v. Faith Bible Church of Naples, Inc., et. al., Case No. 99-
2165-CA (Immokalee Road Project #69101).
2)
Approve Agreed Order and Authorize Payment of Planning Fees and
Appraisal Fees for Parcel 115B in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County
v. Diane P. Haaga, et. al., Case No. 03-0518-CA (Immokalee Road
Project #60018).
3)
Approve Agreed Order and Authorize Payment of Planning Fees and
Appraisal Fees for Parcels 113, 713A and 713B in the Lawsuit Styled
Collier County v. North Naples United Methodist Church, Inc., et. al.,
Case No. 02-1742-CA (Goodlette-Frank Road Project #60134).
4)
Approve Agreed Order and Authorize Payment of Expert Fees and
Costs for Parcelll2 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Norma E.
Banas, et. al., Case No. 02-5137-CA (Immokalee Road Project
#600 l8).
5)
Approve Agreed Order and Authorize Payment of Expert Fees and
Costs for Parcel 120 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Calusa
Pines Golf Club LLC, et. al., Case No. 02-5140-CA (Immokalee Road
Project #60018).
6)
Approve Agreed Order and Authorize Payment of Appraisal Fees and
Contractor's Cost Estimate Fees for Parcels 117, 133, 717A, 717B and
733 in the Lawsuit Styled Collier County v. Calusa Bay Master
Association, Inc., et. al., Case No. 02-2040-CA (Goodlette-Frank
Page 12 of 14
17.
Road Project #60134).
7)
Request by the Collier County Industrial Development Authority for
approval of a resolution authorizing the Authority to issue revenue
bonds to be used to finance educational facilities for Community
School of Naples, Inc.
SUMMARY AGENDA - THIS SECTION IS FOR ADVERTISED PUBLIC
HEARINGS AND MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: 1) A
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM STAFF; 2) UNANIMOUS
RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE COLLIER COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION OR OTHER AUTHORIZING AGENCIES OF
ALL MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING; 3) NO WRITTEN OR ORAL
OBJECTIONS TO THE ITEM RECEIVED BY STAFF, THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, OTHER AUTHORIZING
AGENCIES OR THE BOARD, PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF
THE BCC MEETING ON WHICH THE ITEMS ARE SCHEDULED TO BE
HEARD; AND 4) NO INDIVIDUALS ARE REGISTERED TO SPEAK IN
OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM. FOR THOSE ITEMS, WHICH ARE
QUASIJUDICIAL IN NATURE, ALL P ARTICIP ANTS MUST BE SWORN
IN.
A.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. CU-2003-AR-39l4, Ann Phillips Pre-
School, represented by Terrance L. Kepple,PE, of Kepple Engineering, Inc.,
requests Conditional Use #3 of the RMF-6 district for an addition to an
existing Child Care Center. The property to be considered for the
Conditional Use is located at 860 102nd Avenue North, in the Naples Park
Subdivision, in Section 28, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, Florida and consists of 0.46 acres.
B.
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by Commission members. DRI-03-AR-4987, Richard Bennett,
represented by Donald Pickworth, P. A., requesting to abandon the "Twelve
Lakes" Development of Regional Impact (DRI) because the project no
longer meets the requirements to qualify as a DRI in Collier County. The
subject site is located on the north side of Davis Boulevard (SR-84) and the
south side of Radio Road (CR-856) in Section 4, Township 50 South, Range
26 East, Collier County, Florida.
Page 13 of 14
-----
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
Page 14 of 14
------^
May 11, 2004
Item #2A
REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA - APPROVED
CHAIRMAN FIALA: BCC meeting of May 11 th, Board of
County Commissioners will come to order.
All rise, please, and say the pledge of allegiance with me.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And our reverend today will be pastor Jim
Mudd, who will give us the invocation.
MR. MUDD: Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioners, let us pray.
Our Heavenly Father, we ask Your blessings on these
proceedings and all who are gathered here. We ask a special blessing
on this Board of County Commissioners. Guide them in their
deliberations, grant them the wisdom and vision to meet the trials of
this day and the days to come. Bless us now as we undertake the
business of Collier County and its citizens, that our actions will serve
the greater good of all citizens and be acceptable in your sight. Your
will be done. Amen.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
And now, Mr. Weigel, do you have any comments on today's
agenda?
MR. WEIGEL: No comments. I think Mr. Mudd will catch
everything that we want to bring forward. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. And Mr. Mudd?
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, Commissioners. Agenda changes,
the Board of County Commissioners meeting, May 11th, 2004.
First item is a correction to Item 8(A). The Growth Management
Plan, GMP, impact for this item is incorrect as submitted, and a
replacement page has been provided to all the commissioners. And I
have a copy here that I will put into the record. It's a two-page -- it
Page 2
May 11, 2004
was a two-page addendum that we gave to --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What was wrong with that, by the way? I
tried to find the error --
MR. MUDD: Well, what was wrong with it, the first thing, it
says impact and was talking about Immokalee and it said the Golden
Gate master plan, okay, and it kind of made -- whoa, somebody made
a mistake on that one. And that was the first catch that Commissioner
Coletta picked up on. And after that we started to dig in it and said,
man, we missed that one, okay, it should have been two pages instead
of just one paragraph.
The next item is add Item 9(D), Commissioner Coletta's request
for the board approval for payment to add functions serving a valid
public purpose, to attend Sky truck signing of the memorandum of
cooperation partnership between the EDC, Enterprise Florida and the
Republic of Poland in the State of Washington on May 20th. I really
believe that's Washington D.C., okay? Last time I looked, it wasn't a
state. But, okay, so there's a correction, it's Washington D.C. on May
20th. Approximate cost is $650 plus per diem. Expense to be
reimbursed from the commissioners' travel funds, and that's at
Commissioner Coletta's request.
Next item is add Item 10(E), and that's a recommendation to
approve an agreement for sale and purchase of seven residential lots
east of county's Bayview Park, at a cost not to exceed $1,129,400.
And Mr. John Dunnuck, Public Services Administrator, asked to have
this item added, and he will also present that item.
The next item is -- and this is a note, Item 16( A)( 12) and
16(A)(13). The Board of County Commissioners for those two items
will be sitting as the Community Redevelopment Agency.
Next item is move Item 16(D)(7) to Item 10(D), and that's to
approve an interlocal agreement with the City of Naples for reciprocal
beach parking at an approximate annual expense of $400,000. And
that's at Commissioner Coletta's request.
Page 3
May 11, 2004
And then Commissioners, you have a series of four time certain
items today. First item is Item 7(A) to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. And
that's a presentation by the Big --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 5(A)? Is that 5(A), not 7(A).
MR. MUDD: That's 5(A), ma'am. I stand corrected.
Item 5(A) to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. And that's a presentation by
the Big Cypress Basin Board of the South Florida Water Management
District on the basin's and district's Fiscal Year 2004-2005 proposed
budget.
The next item is Item 8(C), to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. this
morning. And that's PUDZ-2003-AR-3584, Robert Duane of Hole
Montes, Inc. of Naples, representing Collier County Public Schools,
requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD for the purpose of amending
the Orangetree PUD text, Ordinance No. 91-43, to include public
educational plants and ancillary plants as a permitted use to the
agricultural, AG, district of the rUDe
Next item is Item 8(B) to be heard at 10:00 a.m. this morning.
And it's consideration of an ordinance adopting a recodification and
revision of the county's Land Development Code to become effective
on August 30th, 2004.
The last item is Item 10(B) to be heard at 1 :30 p.m., and that's to
approve a resolution authorizing the submission of a low interest State
Revolving Fund, SRF, loan application to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection for the construction of reclaimed water main
and force main and pump station upgrades in the amount of
$7,351,000, and to adopt a document called Collier County North
County Wastewater Reclamation Facility Expansion Facilities Plan
Update, May 2004, to allow the county to avail itself of a low interest
State Revolving Fund loan.
That's all I have, Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Excuse me.
Commissioners, do you have any comments or questions or
Page 4
May 11, 2004
additions to today's consent, or any ex parte to disclose?
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I don't have any additions or
corrections to the agenda. I do have some ex parte. That is -- on Item
8(A), I have no disclosures. And Item 8(C), I have e-mails. And on
Item 8(E) I also have meetings, correspondence and e-mails, and I've
talked with staff on that. And on the summary agenda, 17, I have no
ex partes on any of those items. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta, any additions,
corrections or changes and ex parte on the summary agenda?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, ma'am. I have no additions,
corrections and I have nothing to declare under the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have no changes to today's
agenda, and I did speak to some neighbors on 17(B), Twelve Lakes, in
that neighborhood. And also did talk to the petitioner.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
And Commissioners Hal -- what is your name -- Commissioner
Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Fred will do.
I have no changes and no disclosures on the summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. I have no changes or
corrections, but I do have -- I do have a lot of ex parte on Twelve
Lakes. This is 17(B). And it's all here in my packet for viewing by
the public.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Make a motion that we approve
today's agenda as amended.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
Page 5
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Page 6
AGENDA CHANGES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
May 11.2004
Correction to Item 8A: The Growth Management Plan (GMP) Impact for this item
is incorrect as submitted, and a replacement page has been provided.
Add Item 9D: Commissioner Coletta's request for Board approval for payment to
attend function serving a valid public purpose. Attend Sky truck's signing of the
Memorandum of Corporation Partnership between the EDC, Enterprise Florida and
the Republic of Poland in the State of Washington on May 20th. Approximate cost
$650.00 plus per diem. Expense to be reimbursed from Commissioner's travel
funds. (Commissioner Coletta request.)
Add Item 10E: Recommendation to approve an agreement for sale and purchase
for seven residential lots east of the County's Bayview Park at a cost not to
exceed $1,129,400. (John Dunnuck, Public Services Administrator.)
Items 16A12 and 16A13: The Board of County Commissioners sitting as the
Community Redevelopment Agency.
Move Item 16(D)7 to 10D: Approve an Interlocal Agreement with the City of
Naples for reciprocal beach parking at an approximate annual expense of
$400,000. (Commissioner Coletta request.)
Time Certain Items:
Item 5A to be heard at 1 :00 p.m. Presentation by the Big Cypress Basin of the
South Florida Water Management District on the Basin's and District's Fiscal Year
2004-05 Proposed Budgets.
Item 8C to be heard at 11 :00 a.m. PUDZ-2003-AR-3584, Robert Duane of Hole
Montes Inc., of Naples, representing Collier County Public Schools, requesting a
rezone from PUD to PUD for the purpose of amending the Orangetree PUD text,
(Ordinance number 91-43) to include "Public Educational Plants and Ancillary
Plants" as a permitted use to the "Agriculture" (AG) district of the PUD.
Item 8B to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Consideration of an ordinance adopting a
recodification and revision of the County's Land Development Code, to become
effective on August 30, 2004.
Item 10B to be heard at 1:30 p.m. Approve a Resolution authorizing the
submission of a low-interest State Revolving Fund (SRF) Loan Application to the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for the construction of
Reclaimed Water Main and Force Main and Pump Station Upgrade in the amount
of $7,351,000; and to Adopt the document called 'Collier County North County
Wastewater Reclamation Facility (NCWRF) Expansion Facilities Plan Update, May,
2004' to allow the County to avail itself of low-interest SRF funds.
May 11, 2004
Item #2B, #2C, #2D
MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 2004 BCC REGULAR MEETING, APRIL
19, 2004 ORANGETREE/W A TER WAYS NEIGHBORHOOD
MEETING AND APRIL 20, 2004 BCC/CCPC-EAR WORKSHOP-
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I make a motion that we
approve April 13th, '04 BCC regular meeting and April 20th, '04
BCC/CCPC/ERA workshop.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Do I have a second?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: A second by Commissioner Halas.
MS. FILSON: Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
MS. FILSON: I'm sorry, I had speakers on the consent agenda.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, my goodness. And you told me that,
too. And I'm so sorry.
Do we open that back up or something; is that how we do it?
MR. WEIGEL: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MS. FILSON: 16(A)(10), I have three speakers.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Three speakers, 16(A)(10). Okay. I'm
sorry, I must open the consent agenda back up.
MS. FILSON: Okay, the first speaker is Nicole Ryan. She will
be followed by Charles Mann.
MS. RYAN: Good morning. For the record, Nicole Ryan, here
on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What is the number, Nicole, that you're --
MS. RYAN: It is Item 16(A)(10), approval of a commercial
excavation permit for the Mirasol flow-way and water management
lakes.
Page 7
May 11, 2004
And the Conservancy is asking this item be pulled off the consent
agenda for discussion, because we believe approval of this item is
inconsistent with the Land Development Code.
On your executive summary, the objective states: To issue an
excavation permit to Mirasol Development, LLC, Communities.
However, your Land Development Code, 3.5.7.10.12 states: Any
excavation in an area containing Southwest Florida Water
Management District, Department of Environmental Protection
Zoning District, or United States Army Corps of Engineers
jurisdictional vegetation must obtain a permit from the applicable
agency prior to issuance of the excavation permit. The Army Corps of
Engineers permit has not yet been issued. Therefore, this is
inconsistent with the Land Development Code.
Also, the executive summary is unclear. Paragraph three states:
This proj ect is being brought to the board as a commercial excavation
with no off-site hauling to allow the developer to begin clearing and
other necessary site preparations.
Paragraph five then states: Engineering staff has no objection to
the issuance of the permit, with the stipulation that the Corps permit
must be in hand prior to commencement of clearing. This is
inconsistent, and even if there is a stipulation attached to that
excavation permit, there isn't anything that I found in the Land
Development Code that allows issuance of the permit with the
stipulation. The code says the Corps permit must be in hand.
Also in the Land Development Code, 3.5.5.2.2, talking about the
issuance of commercial excavation permits, states: Application for
commercial excavation permits shall be reviewed by the Community
Development and Environmental Services Administrator or his
designee and by the Environmental Advisory Council for
recommendation and approval by the board. When did this go to
EAC? What was their recommendation? I personally don't recall it
going to EAC.
Page 8
May 11, 2004
3.5.5.3 of the LDC states: Notice of meeting. The Development
Services Director shall give prior written notice of the Environmental
Advisory Council meeting by first class mail, as noted in Section
3.5.6.1.3.4, to all adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the
property line or within 500 feet of the excavation itself as determined
by reference to the latest official tax roll. Was this done?
LDC 3.5.5.4, excavation permit criteria. Approval by the site
development review director and the board shall be granted only upon
competent and substantial evidence by the applicant that the
excavation will not interfere with the natural function of any sanitary,
storm or drainage system or natural flow-way, whether public or
private, so as to create flooding or public health hazard or jeopardize
the functions of the natural resources and environment of Collier
County. The excavation will not adversely affect ground water levels,
water quality, hydroperiod or surface water flow-ways. Flow of water
within and through preserved wetlands shall not be impeded. Have
these qualifications been met? Where is the supporting data? Has
CREW weighed in, because CREW does have adjacent wetlands.
3.5.5.5, other permits required. All appropriate state and federal
permits or approvals for work in jurisdictional areas shall be provided
to the Development Services Director prior to issuance of an
excavation permit. The Conservancy does not believe these criteria
have been met and we also believe that approval of such a permit prior
to the issuance of a Corps permit is premature, putting the cart before
the horse. Even though the executive summary states that the Corps
permit might be issued in 45 to 90 days, it may also be denied in 45 to
90 days. Why do you need a county permit prior to this Corps permit
being issued? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I try to help move this
along. As always, whenever we have -- well, almost always when we
Page 9
May 11, 2004
have concerns from any member of the public concerning a particular
agenda item on the consent agenda, I'm going to recommend that we
pull it for future -- for discussion during the meeting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'll second that.
Okay, fine. Commissioners, any comments? I know we have two
more speakers. Go ahead.
MS. FILSON: Do you want to speak -- do you want to reserve
that until it comes up on the regular agenda?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I would prefer to do that. Thank you. So
the other speakers will be reserved until it comes up on the regular
agenda item.
And Jim, can you tell us when that will be?
MR. MUDD: That will be 10(F).
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, Commissioners, all those in favor of
putting this on 10(F) later in the meeting, please say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. That is assigned to
Item No. 10(F) and that's 16(A)(10).
Thank you, Nicole, for bringing this to our attention.
Now, do I need to do anything?
MR. WEIGEL: Well, I'll just make, for the record, this note, and
that is that the consent agenda, as approved by the Board of County
Commissioners, had a notice ahead of time of speakers for 16(A)(10),
that the board has in fact by their actions approved the consent agenda,
with the exception of 16(A)(10), which has been moved to the regular
agenda. I think that just makes it clear on the record.
Page 10
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
And Sue, thank you for telling me there were speakers. Next
time make me write it down right away, please. I'm sorry.
Okay, now, let's see, we have approved the consent and all the
minutes from the meetings. We move on to proclamations.
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, it's an honor. And in the
audience --
MS. FILSON: I don't think we actually approved the minutes.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I don't think you approved minutes, the
agenda minutes. I think you got the consent and summary agenda, but
you didn't get down to 2 -- 2(B), (C), or (D).
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Commissioner Henning voted to
approve the meetings.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I seconded.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas seconded that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And Commissioner Henning also
recommended approval of those three items.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. And Commissioner Halas seconded
that.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Item #4A
Page 11
May 11, 2004
PROCLAMA TI ON TO RECOGNIZE MAY 2004, AS MENTAL
Proclamations. Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, would Petra M. Jones,
Executive Director of the Mental Health Association, please come
forward. And if you have anyone else with you, bring them forward,
too. Good morning.
WHEREAS, mental health is essential to everyone's overall
physical health and emotional well-being; and,
WHEREAS, mental health (sic) will strike one in five adults and
children in a given year, regardless of age, gender, race, ethnic,
religion or economic status; and,
WHEREAS, people who have mental illnesses can recover and
lead full, productive lives; and,
WHEREAS, an estimated two-thirds of adults and young people
who have mental health disorders are not receiving the help they need;
and,
WHEREAS, the cost of untreated and mistreated mental illness
and addictive disorders to American businesses, government and
family has grown to $133 billion annually; and,
WHEREAS, community-based services that respond to
individual and family needs are cost-efficient and beneficial to
consumers and the community; and,
WHEREAS, the Mental Health Association and the Mental
Health Association of Collier County and its national partners observe
Mental Health Month every May to raise awareness and
understanding of mental health and illnesses.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of Collier
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, the month of May,
2004 be designated as Mental Health Month in Collier County,
Florida, and call upon the citizens, government agencies, public and
Page 12
May 11,2004
private institutions, businesses and schools in Collier County, Florida
to recommit our community to increasing awareness and
understanding of mental health and the need for appropriate and
accessible service for all people with mental illnesses.
DONE AND ORDERED THIS day, the 11th of May, 2004,
Donna Fiala, Chairperson.
And I make a motion for approval.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
from Commissioner Coletta, second from Commissioner Fiala.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Would you like to
say a few words after our picture?
MS. JONES: I think the proclamation said it all.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And hold the proclamation out.
Thank you. Would you like to say a couple words?
MS. JONES: I think the proclamation said it all. Thank you
very much.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Anybody else? Okay. Thank you.
Item #4B
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE CODY ANDERSON FOR HIS
Page 13
May 11, 2004
SELFLESS SERVICE AND DEDICATION TO THE PEOPLE OF
Commissioner Henning, would you read the next proclamation,
please?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We call up Cody Anderson.
And I understand he has a few guests today, if you would join us up at
the dais.
Thank you. Good morning. Just turn around for us, please.
Come right up front here.
WHEREAS, Cody Anderson has worked tirelessly in many
charitable causes, devoting his time, energy and unique character to
each event; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson has been creative in his approach of
bringing recognition to his cause; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Anderson in 1979 created a Walk for Life as he
walked 4,800 miles across the United States pulling a 200-pound
covered wagon for the American Heart Association; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Cody Anderson in 1989 continued his work by
pedaling seven hundred and -- 7,200 miles across the United States in
his home-made miniature space shuttle honoring Christina (sic)
McAuliffe and the crew of the Challenger to benefit care, calling it
Pedaling for Life; and,
WHEREAS, Cody Anderson in May, 2001, in his distinctive
sty Ie, created the Flight for Life where he parasailed from Marco
Island, Florida to St. Petersburg, Florida to benefit the American
Cancer Society.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that Cody Anderson be
recognized for his selflessness (sic) service and dedication to the
people of the State of Florida.
DONE AND THIS ORDER (sic), 11th day of May, 2004, signed
Page 14
May 11, 2004
by the Chairman of the Board of Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, Donna Fiala.
Madam Chair, I make a motion we approve this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second by Commissioner Coyle.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Wait a just a minute, Mr. Anderson. Wait till you take a picture,
then go over, if you would, to the podium and put it on the record for
us, okay? Thank you for being here.
MR. ANDERSON: I'd like to thank the Board of Collier County
Commissioners for all the good that they do. They may not walk
across the United States, as I have done, or pedaled miniature space
shuttles, as I have done, or even parasailed. But the work that they do
is indeed greatly important to everyone in Collier County. And I've
watched you guys on TV. I think you do a great job. So I applaud
you and all the good that you do as well.
The next effort that I'm working on is the Grand Pierre Center.
And these are the founders of the Grand Pierre Center. I'm trying to
stretch an arm out of the United States with all the years that I've been
working for charities in the United States. And this Grand Pierre
Center benefits Haiti. They've already established a school, a cafeteria
and a health center. And I'm going to be doing some fundraising,
which you'll hear about in the near future, to help this wonderful
Page 15
May 11, 2004
organization. And of course I will continue my work within the
borders of America. Thank you all. God bless you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Item #4C
PROCLAMATION TO RECOGNIZE THE MONTH OF MAY AS
Commissioner Halas, will you read the next proclamation,
please.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, is Patrick Blaney in the
audience this morning? I'd like to bestow this proclamation on
Patrick.
WHEREAS, the internal auditors help their organizations meet
their -- I'll wait here for a few minutes. I'm sorry, I'll have you step
right in the center here and face the audience.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: He's just so anxious to honor you, that's
what it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm sorry.
WHEREAS, the internal auditors help their organizations meet
their objectives by monitoring risks and ensuring controls in place are
adequate to mitigate those risks; and,
WHEREAS, internal auditors are a governance cornerstone and
help their organizations comply with new regulations -- legislations
and regulations for enhanced governance; and,
WHEREAS, the Institute of Internal Auditors, IIA, has
approximately 90,000 members in more than 150 countries. The
Institute is the acknowledged leader in certification, education,
research, technological guidance for the professionals worldwide; and,
WHEREAS, counties of Lee, Collier, Charlotte, Hendry, and
Glades have 67 IIA members in the Southwest Florida chapter; and,
Page 16
May 11, 2004
WHEREAS, the Institute of Internal Auditors established the
certified internal auditor program in August of 1974, a recognized
professional group, to enhance the recognition of internal auditing and
further their professional development and advancement; and,
WHEREAS, the Institute is celebrating International Internal
Audit Awareness Month in May, in the year 2004.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County Florida, they proclaim the month of
Mayas Internal Audit Awareness Month, and invite the citizens of
Collier County to join me in recognizing professional internal auditors
for their contribution.
DONE ON THE ORDER OF THIS 11th day of May, 2004,
Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, Donna Fiala, Chair.
And I move we accept --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Halas, and a second by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much.
Item #4D
PROCLAMATION TO DESIGNATE THE WEEK OF MAY 16-22,
Page 1 7
May 11, 2004
And now Commissioner Coyle, will you read the next
proclamation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes. Will John Dunnuck come
forward to accept this proclamation? And Fay Biles. Thank you.
Welcome.
WHEREAS, emergency medical service teams are ready to
provide life-saving care to those in need 24 hours a day, seven days a
week; and,
WHEREAS, emergency medical teams consist of emergency
medical technicians, paramedics, firefighters, emergency physicians,
emergency nurses, educators, first responders, administrators and
others; and,
WHEREAS, those emergency medical service teams serve our
country with bravery and heroism and defend the country when called
upon; and,
WHEREAS, the access to quality emergency care dramatically
improves the survival and recovery rate of those who experience
sudden illness and injury; and,
WHEREAS, providers of emergency medical services have
traditionally served as a safety net of America's health care system;
and,
WHEREAS, the numbers of emergency medical service teams,
whether career or volunteer, undergo thousands of hours of specialized
training and continuing education to enhance their life-saving skills;
and,
WHEREAS, Americans benefit daily from the knowledge and
skills of these highly trained individuals; and,
WHEREAS, injury, prevention and the appropriate use of the
emergency medical services system will help reduce health care cost
and save lives.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that May 16th through the
Page 18
May 11, 2004
22nd, 2004 be observed as Emergency Medical Services Week, and
encourage everyone to extend their greetings and best wishes to the
emergency medical services teams.
DONE AND ORDERED THIS 11th day of May, 2004, Board of
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Donna Fiala,
Chairman.
Madam Chair, I move the acceptance of this proclamation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I second that.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. John, thank you very much.
MR. DUNNUCK: Commissioners, I'll be really brief, since I
know we have a long day ahead of us, but I wanted to say that the
reason they stuck me up here is because they have so many good
things going on and so many proclamations coming up in the next
couple of weeks that they decided to throw me a bone and put me up
here.
But what I can tell you is that over the last year and a half it's
been a privilege to work with this department. They are doing some
outstanding things and something you should all be very, very proud
of.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks, John.
Item #4 E
PROCLAMATION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF MAY 10-16,
Page 19
-----'-
May 11, 2004
2004 AS OCEANS FOR YOUTH FOUNDATION WEEK -
ADOEIED
And now will Wayne Hasson please come forward? The
foundation's founding father. I hope I pronounced your name
correctly. Thank you.
WHEREAS, the Oceans for Youth Foundation was formed in
Collier County in 1998 and incorporated in 1999 to educate young
people about the wonders of our world's oceans; and,
WHEREAS, the mission of Oceans for Youth is to promote
awareness, understanding, leadership and appreciation for the marine
environment through the development, promotion and distribution of
educational materials, programs and other media directly to youth;
and,
WHEREAS, through education, youth and their families will
learn to appreciate the need to respect and conserve our water
resources; and,
WHEREAS, the primary goal is to interest and prepare youth for
the joy and excitement of exploring and protecting the underwater
world, utilizing educational institutions, teachers, parents and
volunteers; and,
WHEREAS, funding for Oceans for Youth Foundation is funded
through grants, donations, special fundraising events and income
associated with royalties and licensing agreements for supplied air
snorkeling for youth, that's S-A-S- Y, and adults, S-A-S-A.
NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida that the week of May 10th
through the 16th, 2004 be designated as Oceans for Youth Foundation
Week, and encourage everyone to participate in the festival of
underwater films at Gulf Coast High School on Saturday evening,
May 15th.
DONE AND ORDERED THIS 11th day of May, 2004, Board of
Page 20
.--"---",,^"-"'
May 11, 2004
County Commissioners, Collier County, Florida, Donna Fiala
Chairman.
Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve and a second
by Commissioner Halas.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, sir.
If you'd like to take a picture and then if you have a couple of
comments afterwards, that would be great.
MR. HASSON: I'd like to thank the Commissioners for such an
honor to receive this award and this proclamation.
The goal of Oceans for Youth I think has been spelled out pretty
clearly. I'd like for you to know and realize that we have a very
dedicated board of directors which includes Jean-Michel Cousteau, the
son of Jacques Cousteau, Leslie Nielson, the actor. And these
gentlemen do come to Collier County to help us make presentations.
In fact, we're making school presentations this Thursday and Friday
throughout Collier County. And then Saturday night we'll have our
big affair, which is at Gulf High School (sic).
Our goal, as you said, is to promote education through -- about
the marine environment. In fact, we provide education materials, not
only to youth but to teachers and to parents, and we do this basically
free. And they're in the format of the DVD that I just presented to you.
Again, review that, thank you very much for this, and we will
Page 21
^---"-
May 11,2004
continue through on our journey and in our work. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What an exciting thing for the youth of
our community. Thank you.
Item #5B
CERTIFICATE PRESENTED TO EDWARD J. KANT FOR HIS
N ow it is my privilege to honor Ed Kant. Ed Kant, one of our
very own, for his outstanding service to Collier County. I'm sorry to
embarrass you this way, Ed. But I wrote you a letter, maybe I should
read it out loud, I don't know. Do you think that would be
appropriate? It's okay? All right, fine.
On behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, county
administration and your many colleagues and friends, I wish to
express my appreciation for your dedicated, outstanding service to the
citizens of our community. You have played a vital role in the
planning, construction and operation of our county's expanding
transportation system during a period of unprecedented growth. Your
professionalism, technical expertise and steady leadership have been a
great asset to our county. You can look back on your many
accomplishments with tremendous pride and satisfaction. And Ed, we
will truly miss you.
Again, thank you for all these contributions. But I want to tell
everybody a little bit about you before you leave. On a personal note,
he's been there every time I've called him, and I've been working with
Ed long before I ever thought of sitting in this chair. And I've called
him and he's come riding in on a white horse with a white hat and
solved our problems, and I just thank him tremendously for that.
He began his career at Collier County government as a senior
engineer in the Transportation Services Division in 1991 after a stint
Page 22
May 11,2004
at Lee County as Transportation Capital Projects Manager. He was
named Transportation Services Director in 1997 when the
transportation department was merged into the public works division.
His most recent assignment has been as the Transportation
Operations Director in the Transportation Services Division. He has
been a member of the Collier County Transportation Services Division
staff for over 13 years, and is a 25-year Collier County resident. Boy,
that's a long time.
Prior to joining Collier County government, Kant was in private
practice and also served in other public service senior management
positions.
In addition, he is the author of more than a dozen technical
papers and articles.
But all that does not begin to tell the story about Ed, nor does it
even begin to suggest the value he has brought to Collier County. His
peers across the state from the Florida section of the Institute of
Transportation Engineers recognized his unique talents and abilities in
2002 by naming him Transportation Professional of the Year.
In addition to this honor, the Southwest Florida branch of the
American Society of Civil Engineers named him Government
Engineer of the Year 2000.
Kant has over 40 years of experience in all phases of civil and
transportation engineering. Many of those 40 years have been
devoted to making Collier County a better place to live. His many
friends in Collier County government will miss his professionalism
and expertise.
Ed, it's with sadness that we're going to see you go. Thank you.
MR. KANT: Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, I am
touched and honored by your action today, and I will not forget any
one of you or the others that I've had the privilege of working with
over the past 13 years in Collier County government.
I appreciate having had the opportunity to try to make a
Page 23
May 11, 2004
difference in people's lives in both the public and private sector in my
professional career. One of the things my parents taught me to do is
that whatever direction life takes you, do your best, do what's right
and not what -- necessarily what's popular. In framing my career, I
believe I followed that tenet.
Thank you for your recognition, and I urge you to continue to
move forward in the best interest of our community, regardless of
whether or not those decisions are always popular. Thank you again
very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Ed.
Item #6A
REQUEST BY MR. MATT JOHNSON TO DISCUSS
FIREFIGHTERS FUND RAISING FOR THE MUSCULAR
DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION - TO BE PUT ON A REGULAR
And now we come to the public petitions portion of our agenda.
Our first public petition request is by Mr. Matt Johnson to discuss
firefighters fundraising for the Muscular Dystrophy Association.
Matt?
MR. JOHNSON: Good morning. My name is Matt Johnson, I
represent Lcal 2396 of the International Association of Firefighters
with the East Naples Fire Department.
With me I have Matt Zaleznik, the International Association
representative for Local 3182, and Melissa Pheifa, (phonetic) from the
MDA, Muscular Dystrophy Association, of Southwest Florida.
We come before the board seeking a variance of the ordinance
prohibiting solicitation and/or fundraising on public roadways.
The International Association of Firefighters has a longstanding
relationship with MDA. The tradition started in 1952 when a father in
Page 24
^'---
May 11, 2004
desperate need ran to International Association firefighter member
George Grandy's (phonetic) fire station, Company One in South
Boston. That Lcal 718 immediately rounded up 20 firefighters and set
in motion a door-to-door canister drive that raised $5,000.
In 1953 Grandy launched a citywide fundraising campaign with
the help of Boston firefighters and made appeals across Massachusetts
on behalf of children with muscular dystrophy.
Since then, firefighters have taken this vision and made it their
mission, raising funds in thousands of ways: By placing collection
jars in stores and restaurants, sponsoring charity softball games and
running auctions.
These days, their signature fundraising activity for MDA is the
Fill the Boot Drive. The International Association has emerged as the
single largest sponsor of MDA, contributing over $180 million since
1954.
So we seek the following dates to coincide with the national
telethon hosted by Jerry Lewis: Those dates being August 20th, 27th
and September the 3rd to raise funds with the Fill the Boot Drive on
the public roadways in Collier County. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioners, do you have any
comments?
Yes, Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: This is a, you know, national
thing that the firefighters do, and we miss it -- that in Collier County.
So I'd like to either see it on a future agenda as an item requesting the
variance, or just making it happen, really. It's, yeah --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I agree.
Commissioners, any other comments?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do believe we need to discuss
it, because I'm very much supportive of what they're trying to do, to a
point. However, if we grant a variance for this, I think we're obligated
to do the same for any other charity out there that wants to do the
Page 25
,----^
May 11, 2004
same thing. And I would like to be able to, at that time we hear about
it as an agenda item, hear from our MPO coordinator and possibly
Norm Feder as to the possible ramifications of doing this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So then, Commissioners?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion we bring it back,
put it on the agenda for discussion.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle motioned to
bring it back to put it on a regular agenda, and Commissioner Coletta
seconded that. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That passes with a 5-0. And thank you,
Matt.
MR. JOHNSON: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now we have the --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, we'll bring that back two meetings
hence.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Two meetings hence?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, Matt, got that?
MR. JOHNSON: Yes, ma'am, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Fine. Our County Manager will
probably be in touch with you to set that up; is that correct, Mr.
Mudd?
Page 26
-__--,__n- ---
May 11, 2004
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. And we're also going to have to get
an attorney's opinion on that one, because it's an ordinance. I'm not
too sure you can take a variance to one, so --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you. And we would
certainly like to see this happen for the benefit of all our community.
Item #6B
REQUEST BY MS. KATHY HERRMANN TO DISCUSS A
FORMAL FUNDING REQUEST FOR THE SHELTER FOR
ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN - TO BE BROUGHT BACK
AS A REGULAR AGENDA ITEM ON JUNE 8, 2004 -
Next public petition request is by Kathy Herrmann to discuss a
formal funding request for the Shelter for Abused Women and
Children.
MS. HERRMANN: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen,
Commissioners, Mr. Mudd. I'm Kathy Herrmann, the CEO of the
Shelter for Abused Women. It's been my privilege to have that job for
the last 10 years.
I'm here today with dozens of supporters. This is a sea of purple
there. I think we've been referred to as the grapes. But the supporters
to petition you to grant our request for a contract with the county to
provide emergency shelter to our citizens.
In the past two weeks just a few of our volunteers have worked to
get some petitions signs, and I have over 1,000 signatures here from
citizens in our community.
What's interesting is that not one person we asked to sign this, not
one person, said no. Everyone signed the petition.
For the past 15 years, the shelter has been providing services to
our county, to the citizens and taxpayers of our county, and we now
Page 27
May 11, 2004
serve more than 5,000 people every year.
Thirty-one percent of the most serious crimes in Collier County
-- murders, sexual assaults and aggravated assaults -- are domestic
violence crimes. Interestingly, in Lee County, that number is 26
percent. So we have a larger number of our crimes in Collier County
are domestic violence crimes. One in four women will be abused at
some time in their life. And the children who live in violent homes
are almost always abused as well.
I have a diagram to show you. This is all the counties. Wherever
there's a word, those are the counties where there is a shelter. There
are, in some cases, two shelters in some counties.
And here is another diagram of all the counties in Florida that
fund their domestic violence centers with a contract. All but Collier
County. Collier County is the only county government where there is
a domestic violence center that does not have a contract with their
domestic violence centers.
I make, and our volunteers and staff make about 200
presentations every year to about 5,000 citizens. They always -- we
tell them this information and they always ask us, why not? And they
have told us to come to you to ask you to change that, to give us a
contract to provide the services that they desperately need.
County employees bring women and children to our doors almost
every day. Our county has a domestic animal services program for
abused animals, but we don't -- the county is not funding the program
for abused women and children.
Weare here before you to ask for a contract to provide the vital
services -- shelter, food, case management and counseling -- to Collier
County citizens. The Shelter for Abused Women is not only a service
to taxpayers and citizens, we actually save the county money. We
protect citizens from becoming murder victims. And in that event, we
save the county a lot of money in investigation, apprehension,
prosecution, defense, incarceration of the perpetrator. We help adult
Page 28
May 11, 2004
victims get back on their feet and become contributing, taxpaying
citizens in our community.
We prevent children from being abused, and those same children
from becoming juvenile delinquents and becoming juvenile offenders.
We provide shelter and counseling to county employees who are
themselves victims of domestic violence. All of those activities save
the county money.
You are charged with the fiscal oversight of taxpayer dollars, and
it's an awesome responsibility. You make decisions on a nearly $1
billion budget and how it's spent. I've just told you that the Shelter for
Abused Women and Children is an organization that saves the county
hundreds of thousands of dollars, but obviously it's about more than
money. It's about the quality of our life. It's about the goodness of a
community. All that came before me spoke to the goodness of this
community.
And so we have been sent here today by the citizens of our
community to ask you to provide a contract to the Shelter for Abused
Women and Children so that we can provide those vital and necessary
servIces.
Weare asking you for an agreement to provide emergency
shelter, food, case management and counseling for 60 Collier County
citizens for 42 days each at an annual -- at a rate of $40 a day or
$100,000. That's our request.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Madam Chair, I am hard pressed to
understand why we do devote money for domestic animals support
and we don't do it for abused women and children. But since today is
not the day to debate the issue, I will make a motion that we bring this
back as a full agenda item in the future.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, I have a motion on the floor from
Commissioner Halas -- I mean from Commissioner Coyle and a
Page 29
---
May 11,2004
second from Commissioner Henning to bring this back.
I have Commissioner Coletta and Commissioner Halas waiting to
speak.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you very much.
This is something that I can support, but I'll tell you, I think we're
just a little bit short. I'd like to see you maybe consider doing a
workshop. Because there are some pressing needs out there that go
way past just the shelter itself. Although the shelter is the first one to
come forward, we have the Friendship House in Immokalee who runs
very short on funds on a continuous basis and has to turn people away
on occasion. And that's something that's a vital need for this county.
We have food banks that go empty at different times. We do
support the David C. Lawrence Center with funds every year, and so
this wouldn't set a precedence.
But I think we need to open it up enough so we can have a real
deep discussion on it. I have no problems with looking at it as an
agenda item, but I think we also need to approach this on a broader
scale to be able to understand what the limits and responsibility of
county government is when it comes to the -- I wouldn't say private
sector, because actually these organizations are doing government
services in lieu of the government.
But that's a suggestion I would hope that we'll carry on and move
forward, because this is something that needs some further looking
into for sure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, can you tell me what your
annual budget is presently?
MS. HERRMANN: Yes, sir, it's $2.7 million a year.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And how do you obtain these
funds?
MS. HERRMANN: We do a lot offundraising, we operate a
thrift store, and some federal and state funds.
Page 30
"'-^'
May 11,2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And so you get a lot from
the private sector --
MS. HERRMANN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- from people that just donate to
this cause?
MS. HERRMANN: Yes, sir. We're working very hard to make
sure that we do that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what -- on these fundraising
can you tell me about -- without getting involved in how much the
government obtains or helps you assist in this matter, what is the
budget? What percentage of your budget is on fundraising?
MS. HERRMANN: The amount of money that we spend to fund
raise or the amount --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The amount of money that you
obtain through --
MS. HERRMANN: Obtain?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- from fundraising.
MS. HERRMANN: It's -- roughly two-thirds of our funds are
generated from either the thrift shop, which is a fundraising entity or
organization, or our events and direct mail and so forth. It's
two-thirds.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, just a final note. I will
support the motion to bring it back as an agenda item. Also, after this
is over, I'd like to make a motion that we have a workshop in
September to be able to look into the needs of our Social Service
agencies as far as the general need of the whole community, and to be
able to come to a better grips and understanding of it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, I have a motion on the floor to
bring this back for a regular agenda item by Commissioner Coyle, and
a second by Commissioner Henning. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
Page 31
----
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's a 5-0, and we'll see you at a future
meeting.
MS. HERRMANN: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: First meeting in June, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: First meeting in June.
And while we're at it, Commissioner Coletta has requested that
we have a workshop in the fall to discuss funding for other service
agencies as well; is that correct?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So do we have any discussion by other
commissioners?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I don't -- I only see one request
for us today. Why do we want to open this up?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: This request does open it up. Because as
soon as everybody hears, they're going to be asking for the same
dollars.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, you have to hear this on the first meeting
in June. That's what the board voted on. You have a budget that you
have to look at at the end part of June, okay, to see where dollars are.
I would suggest that as that starts to layout, you have an idea.
I will also tell you that our assessed values are going down,
they're not going up over the last couple of years. So I don't want to
put a damper on it, but I will tell you, I think we've got some things to
take a look at. If you had a workshop in September, you've already set
Page 32
May 11, 2004
your budget, so, you know, you don't waste -- you're not going to be
able to waste anything for the next year--
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's why I suggested
September. Because I know that -- I wouldn't want to impact the
budget that takes place October 1 st.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Maybe what we should do is to
plan a workshop as part of the next budgeting cycle. Because if we
had a workshop in September, as Commissioner Coletta has indicated,
it wouldn't impact our budget for the next fiscal year, so maybe we
should do it as part of the budgeting cycle for the next fiscal year.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. And I would recommend that you have it
prior to your budget guidance. Your budget guidance is quite clear.
Basically says that the ad valorem dollars will not be used for these
particular items. So you need to have the workshop to tell the staff
how you want us to set that budget guidance for the future. I think it's
before that, so it'd probably be the January-February time period for
that kind of workshop.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Could we fall within that period
so that we might be able to make a logical decision?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I don't see why not.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have a problem having a
workshop. You know, lots of things come up during our budget
negotiations, budget discussions, so, you know, that's one other item
that we can consider. I don't have a problem with it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Any other comments from
Commissioners?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, you have some direction there, Mr.
Mudd.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good, we'll see--
Page 33
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just hope we don't open this thing
up and end up where it's opening up a Pandora's box here in regards to
-- there's going to be an awful lot of people that are going to be
banging on the door.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it's not a question of
opening a Pandora's box.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We already opened the door for
it, and I guarantee you that with putting this on the agenda, we're
going to have those requests coming forward. By making it a
workshop in the future, we put a control on the whole thing.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: We've had a control on it, and I
think that we need to make sure that we would look at this very
carefully.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I agree with you. But then
again, too, each organization will come to you asking for it to be put
on as an agenda item, and that's going to slow down the process
dealing with each one of them individually. So I think a workshop
sometime in the future would be advantageous for all parties
concerned.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm just concerned about tax
do llars.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Of course, I am too,
Commissioner Halas.
MS. HERRMANN: Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Kathy. We'll see you in June.
Thank you.
Item #6C
REQUEST BY MS. TAMMIE NEMECEK TO SEEK DIRECTION
OF THE BCC FOR A FISCAL STABILITY STUDY FOR COLLIER
Page 34
May 11, 2004
COUNTY - TO BE BROUGHT BACK AS A REGULAR AGENDA
Our next petition request is by Tammie Nemecek to seek
direction of the BCC for a fiscal stability study for Collier County .
MS. NEMECEK: Good morning, Chainnan, County
Commissioners. The opportunity for Collier County in today's public
petition request is to detennine our ability to create an economy that
will continue to perfonn in a sustainable fashion into the future.
The Collier County economy, as you know, continues to be
dependent upon construction, tourism and service related industries,
that three-legged stool that I always reference to, which are overly
cyclical in nature and susceptible to downturns in the economy.
Through our public-private partnership between the Board of
County Commissioners and the EDC, we have grown strong, and we
continue to be a driving force in the diversification of Collier County.
As the next step, I am before you today to request direction from
Board of County Commissioners to authorize the EDC to provide an
indepen -- as an independent resource a fiscal stability study. The
study will take into account each of the sources of revenue afforded
statutorily to Collier County and provide a detailed analysis of how
increases or decreases in these funding sources impact the people who
live in the community, as well as the businesses that we are working
to grow and attract.
The study will fully evaluate all the funding sources and offer a
cause and effect analysis of how each of these sources can be used by
our community.
Through the public-private partnership the EDC will develop the
scope of the study, detennine costs associated with the study, and
recommend a nationally renowned economist to implement the study
and provide recommendations back to the board.
The study we propose to take place during the summer months
Page 35
May 11, 2004
and be completed prior to the budget hearings to provide you and the
public with the data you need as a reference to determine the
appropriate direction for funding all the various needs of our
community .
It is important to understand, as we move forward in our efforts
to diversify the economy, attract higher wage jobs and be an effective
force in improving the quality of life for the residents of Collier
County, how we can best fund the needed services and infrastructure
associated with maintaining that quality of life.
Again, what we are proposing is the opportunity to study the
facts and provide to you the data. These data will give you the
understanding of the proper balance of funding opportunities and the
cause and effect from increasing or decreasing each of these funding
sources.
The economist who performed this study will be one with
experience in this type of study, looking at areas that have gone
through our similar challenges we face now, and use these areas as a
reference where we can learn.
What we seek from the board today requests direction to the
county staff to move forward with the fiscal stability study by the
county through the public-private partnership. At the direction of the
board, the EDC will return to you on June 22nd with a
recommendation of a consultant to perform the study, with the
associated costs with that study, as well as determine the scope of the
study at that point in time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Comments from Commissioners?
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, Tammie, can you tell me who
is to pick this unbiased person? Because I would hope that would be
an unbiased person that would be involved in -- could be a professor
in a college or whatever that's involved in work in regards to looking
at how fees affect the local economy. So do you have someone in
Page 36
~----'-^"
May 11, 2004
mind, or is this going to be done between the EDC and the staff
picking this person?
MS. NEMECEK: It can be done as a task force of the EDC, that
we would put together experts in the area to help determine the
economist and the scope of the study and ensure working with staff
that that scope is adhered to.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Because I think the most
important thing is that it's an unbiased person so that we get a very
broad picture of exactly how funding and impact fees or anything else
affects our whole total economy. And basically I think you're looking
at this as how it associates with small businesses and businesses that
are coming into the Collier County region; is that exactly right?
MS. NEMECEK: It's going to address both the business side and
resident side of the community. I think that those sources of funding
impact both.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Once again, I'll-- I'll make a
recommendation that this be brought back for consideration on an
official agenda.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, I have a motion on the floor from
Commissioner Coy Ie to bring this back on a regular agenda.
MR. MUDD: June 22nd, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: For June 22nd. And a second by
Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 37
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MS. NEMECEK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's with a 5-0 that it passes.
And now we move on to our --
MR. MUDD: 10:00 time certain, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, I know. Except I'm wondering is it
okay if we're two minutes early legally? Is it okay to do that?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure it is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All right.
Item #8B
CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A
RECODIFICATION AND REVISION OF THE COUNTY'S LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, TO BECOME EFFECTIVE ON AUGUST
MR. MUDD: This item is Number 10 -- excuse me, Number
8(B). This item to be heard at 10:00 a.m., consideration of an
ordinance adopting recodification and revision of the county's Land
Development Code, to become effective on August 30th, 2004. And
who's presenting? Is it Patrick White?
MR. WHITE: Good morning, Madam Chair and
Commissioners, Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney.
I'm going to open up with a determination that the affidavit of
publication for today's meeting is legally sufficient. I've reviewed it
and found that it's appropriate. I'm turning it over to our minutes
Page 38
May 11,2004
keeper for recordkeeping purposes.
At this point what we'd like to do is to go into a power point
presentation that's slightly abbreviated from what we presented to the
CCPC, and it will be made by the consultant that the county hired for
this project.
Your executive summary lays out that we've been in this process
for almost two years now, and have expended $90,000 of the citizens'
money to bring forward essentially a revised structure for our Land
Development Code that for discussion purposes, until August,
assuming we adopt it later this month, we'll be calling the UDC, the
Unified Land Development Code, to distinguish it from the Land
Development Code we presently are using.
Since 1991 when that Land Development Code was adopted,
we've made 18 supplements to it, comprising 38 separate ordinances.
And in that 13 years, obviously, things in terms of the development
process have changed, both in the market and in the county. And what
we're looking to do today in this process is to have you give us your
initial consideration of what we've brought to you as the UDC.
We're not asking for a final vote today. We do need a motion
before we wrap up to continue this to a date certain, May 25th, and if
you'd like to make it a time certain as well, that's your pleasure and
discretion. It's not necessary, however.
And I think the other thing that I need to tell you is that as far as
the effective date goes, we're not looking to make this effective until
the end of August. It's precisely stated in the adoption ordinance as
12:01 a.m. on August 30th, which is a Monday. That contemplates
allowing time not only for Municipal Code Corporation to go ahead
and publish this in hard copy, but also time for staff to be trained and
where all the pieces are in existing code and can be found in the UDC,
as well as to allow the public and the users a chance to become
familiar with it.
We anticipate that there will be glitches. We found many of them
Page 39
,^,,-_O_' ,
May 11, 2004
at the level of typos, formatting and numbering, and are making those
changes as we speak and are posting those files to the web for those
folks who are interested in following us in our footsteps as we've gone
through this process, that I can tell you is very detailed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Patrick, as long as you want to continue
this to the 25th, and I see you have a presentation and people here, but
wouldn't that be better to just hold off till the 25th where we get the
full boat then?
MR. WHITE: Well, what I believe is, one, we've flown in our
consultant today at an additional expense, so I'd like to have the
benefit of her presentation and give you the opportunity to ask any
questions you may have of her, as well as anyone in the audience who
has an interest.
What I was anticipating was that there would be more of a pro
forma vote on the 25th, once we have the CCPC's final
recommendation from their meeting on the 20th. And this unfortunate
delay, or perhaps it is fortunate that we've had an extra couple of
weeks to get folks comfortable with this. It gives us a chance to allow
everyone who has found some glitches to develop a comfort level.
That's really what this is about. We're bringing it to you in an effort to
assure that the folks that are in the regulated industry, as well as the
public, as well as this board have a degree of comfort with this
process.
So although we could do it then, I think we've anticipated
bringing it to you today in the hopes that we could get, in boardspeak,
at least four nods, if not five, and move on to the 25th in hopefully a
fairly kind of simple fashion.
I see that we've solved our technical problem at this point, and I
would like to introduce to you a highly regarded planning professional
in the State of Florida and the nation as well, Ms. Gail Easley. Her
firm was selected to do this consultant work. And I guess without
further ado, I'll turn it over to Gail for her presentation about the UDC.
Page 40
May 11, 2004
Thank you.
MS. EASLEY: Thank you. Good morning, Chairman,
Commissioners. My name is Gail Easley, and I want to give you an
overview about the Land Development Code. I know you're familiar
with the way it is today and I think you've had a briefing earlier on
some of the changes, but just to go through those changes, I'd like to
cover five points: One, to layout the purpose of this project; when it
was originally conceived; to give you just a few words about the
background, about why it was necessary; to describe to you a little bit
about the format and structure of the new code; and then Patrick will
come back to you and talk to you about the adoption procedure and
answer any questions that you may have.
Simply stated, we had five purposes that we were trying to
accomplish in this particular project. One, and I think one of the most
important, was to simplify the format of the code. Today your
regulations are scattered among a number of articles, and they are not
necessarily well coordinated within the individual articles and
divisions. And so certainly we wanted to simplify the format and
make it easier for everyone, the public, the development community
and the staff.
In doing so, we wanted to eliminate duplications. Over the years
there have been additional procedures and standards adopted in your
regulations, and that has resulted in some duplicating language, and so
we have eliminated those as we've gone along.
There were also some internal inconsistencies. Things that were
stated more than once weren't always stated precisely the same. And
so in the process of addressing the duplications, we've been able to
eliminate the inconsistencies in the language.
Finally, we've also -- not finally, fourthly, we've been able to
relocate or recommend relocating matters that are now in your land
development regulations that are not, strictly speaking, land
development matters. And so you'll be seeing in the future some
Page 41
---"^'-----
May 11, 2004
ordinances to readopt those as part of your county code of ordinances.
And then finally, a significant piece of work was to consolidate
all of the definitions, and in doing so, to look at them and update them.
And they are now in a glossary so that all definitions that appear -- of
words that appear throughout the entire set of land development
regulations are in a single location.
Just a bit of background. Thirteen years ago the current code was
adopted, and since then I'm told there have been 36 ordinances to
amend that Land Development Code, resulting in 18 supplements.
That's not an unusual amount of activity, but as you might imagine,
that piece-at-a-time type of amendment activity results in the very
things I was talking about, some internal inconsistencies, the conflict
in some of the defined terms, the definitions, and has just made the
document somewhat cumbersome to use, as I think any of you who
have tried to find things will attest.
In the format there are some rules. The staff has found that to be
somewhat amusing that I have a set of rules, but in fact I do have a set
of rules about how this will be organized. One of those is that every
single section that's in your code has a unique citation. And I do that
through a numbering system that is a little simplified from what you
are familiar with today, where by looking at the citation you know the
chapter, the main heading, the sub-heading and then in an outline style
information below that.
A second convention that we've used throughout this code is that
every term that is defined in the glossary appears in bold capital
letters. At some later date, when you are able to put this in an
interactive form on the web, it will be possible for your technology
folks to make it -- to make a menu pop up by putting your cursor on
that word, for example, or even to jump to the regulation that it
pertains to. So we've set that up as a thing that you can do in the
future.
The chapters, I'm going to go through those quickly, but the
Page 42
May 11, 2004
chapters flow in what I think is a logical order, that the development
process has to answer questions.
And then the final point that I want to make is that some things in
the LDC, your Land Development Code, that are not in this proposed
unified code will be moved to your code of laws and ordinances or to
an administrative code. So those are some items that you will see in
the coming weeks and months.
Just to outline the order of appearance, chapter one is general
provisions; that is, sets forth the authority, the applicability, who's
responsible for interpretation and how that occurs, and that glossary of
definitions that I mentioned.
The next chapter deals with use; that is, what are the zoning
districts and what uses are allowable in those districts, and are there
any overlay districts that pertain to how a piece of land is used and
developed.
The third chapter deals with all of the kinds of resource
protection issues that might in some way limit how a piece of land is
used, or at least how it's designed. And that's where you will find
floodplain, coastal zone and other natural resource protection matters,
all contained in an environmental chapter.
We then proceed to all of the site design issues. This is when
most people get excited about what's going to happen, how is it going
to look, where will the buildings be located, how much parking, and
all of those kinds of site design issues that are dimensional, that deal
with laying out subdivisions, providing parking, providing
landscaping or buffering between uses. And that's all contained in
chapter four.
I might also point out that we have moved a lot of the material
from text narrative into tables so that it is easier to use and you can get
a snapshot of how the zoning districts relate to each other and what the
dimensional standards are in each of those districts.
You also have a number of special situations, whether it's
Page 43
---^----
--<---
May 11,2004
accessory uses, temporary uses, home occupations, or individual uses
that are unique and require a set of standards for the use itself, rather
than for the entire zoning district. All of those situations are gathered
together in chapter five, which deals with all of those kinds of special
situations. Signs are included there, because typically they are an
accessory structure. Although in some instances they can be
freestanding, but we put them in that location for that reason.
Then the next thing that is of concern is the infrastructure that
supports development on a site. This is where your adequate public
facilities ordinance is located, as well as all of the design requirements
related to water, sewer and other kinds of infrastructure.
My favorite chapter is chapter seven. Those who have been
reviewing this have lined up to take responsibility for reviewing
chapter seven because it's so involved, actually. It is a reserves
chapter. It's my practice to recommend that such a chapter be
provided after all of the substantive chapters, use, and design and
infrastructure, and before those chapters that deal with procedural
matters.
Some day in the future something may come up that needs
regulation that we cannot envision and it doesn't fit neatly into one of
the chapters we've already provided. And so rather than have it tacked
on to the end, I provide a spot in the middle, so to speak, to
accommodate that in the future.
The remaining three chapters deal with all of the administrative
and procedural matters. Chapter eight is all of the boards and
decision-making bodies and their membership and responsibilities.
Chapter nine deals with those situations where someone requests
approval or already deviates in some way from the requirements of the
code, either use or design. This is where vested rights are addressed,
where the nonconforming situations are addressed and where the
opportunity to request a variance is placed. And so those are all
together in a single location.
Page 44
May 11, 2004
And then finally the last chapter, which you'll be seeing a lot
more about in coming weeks and months, deals with the
administrative procedures: How do you make an application, how is it
reviewed, how is notice given, how is it processed. Once a decision is
made, if someone wishes to appeal that decision, how does that occur.
And then the enforcement process. That's all collected together in
chapter 10.
So as I described to you in describing the purpose -- I see a letter
just vanished from bullet number four in putting this up on the screen.
That's amendment process at the end.
Benefits of this structure are that we have eliminated duplication
and inconsistency in doing so. In reorganizing it, we've made it easier
to use and easier to amend. And the amendment process is something
that Patrick will be talking about, I think, in talking about the adoption
process.
So I'm going to turn it over to, when he returns to the podium,
Patrick White, who will answer any questions and talk to you about
recommendations that have been received up to this point as it's been
reconsidered. Thank you.
MR. WHITE: That can you, Gail. And I'd like to mention that it
wasn't just Gail and myself that are involved in this process. Susan
Murray and her staff and a team of folks from the county, as well as
people in the regulated industry and the public were all part of this
process over the past couple of years.
But for the thick amendments that we brought you in
supplements 18 and 17 in the past year or so, we probably would have
bridged this gap sooner, but we thought we'd give everyone a break.
Even though there's a very thick document here, believe it or not, it's
actually thinner than we already have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Patrick, did you want to answer
questions? I'm sorry to interrupt you.
MR. WHITE: Sure. I know you're trying to get us through this,
Page 45
,-"----
May 11, 2004
and believe me, I'd love to conclude.
The DSAC has approved, at this point, unanimously 10-0, subject
to some conditions that we put on your summary sheet in your packet.
And similarly, the CCPC has preliminarily agreed with the
recommendation of the DSAC, but as I've indicated, will not have
their final recommendation and finding of consistency with the Compo
Plan until May 20th.
And at this point, if there are any specific questions, I think I'd be
happy to answer them for you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have some great concerns to
make sure that the citizens here can be assured that the language or
definitions of the Land Development Code have not changed with
additions or deletions of words that may completely change the
meaning of the sentence. I understand, you know, this is like rewriting
the Bible. And you can -- the author can basically change the
meaning of a complete sentence by the deletion or the addition of any
corrections. I understand that there are some provisions put in place
so that if there are any scrivener errors, that they will be addressed; is
that correct?
MR. WHITE: That is correct, Commissioner. And although I'd
like to think we were as divinely inspired as the writers of the Bible,
I'm not sure we can take that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, this is what this is, basically
MR. WHITE: I agree. Understand and agree.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- it's our Bible here in the land
development codes of Collier County.
MR. WHITE: Absolutely agree. And it's understood that when
you adjust the building blocks, the definitions of any set of regulatory
fabric, that those things that you have concerns about can happen.
And it's for that reason that we are, even as of today, posting
Page 46
~._-"
May 11,2004
underlined strike-through versions of those definitions on our website.
We probably would have done it sooner, but we had some technical
problems.
What we've assured everyone who's in this process, that's chosen
to walk in our footsteps and do a double check of what we've triple
checked, is that we want to have their help. And we're looking over
the next two weeks to find those things. They're going to come up
over the next two weeks, and we're going to address them each as they
arise in a manner that's appropriate. And if there are some definitional
issues, we will resolve them.
Our intent is to not change the intent of any aspect of the existing
provisions. We're coming forward to you telling you that if you were
to look at this document, other than the definitions themselves, which
had to be harmonized to eliminate internal inconsistencies, that you
would essentially see only strike-throughs, and that those would
largely be portions of the existing LDC that are being moved either
into the code of laws and ordinances, or into the to be newly created
administrative code, or, as some of the other provisions that I've
mentioned to you in our individual meetings, are needed to be brought
forward, or we're going to bring them back to you in cycle two. And
that is specifically is with regards to vested rights.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The other question is how much of
this document have you condensed volume-wise?
MR. WHITE: I haven't done a character analysis in order to tell
you how many fewer keystrokes we have here, or how many fewer
pounds of paper, but I can tell you that our expectation is that it's
probably about 20 percent in terms of what we're cutting down by the
weight. But as I said before, we're not intending to change the
meaning at this point.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is most of the condensing of this
document a lot of redundancy? Is that what we're trying to eliminate?
MR. WHITE: Yes, I think Gail will assure you and my
Page 47
,"'--
May 11, 2004
experience in working with it is that it is intended to reduce those
redundancies. In a lot of places what you'll see, as Gail had
mentioned before about hyperlinks, are that there are internal
connections built into this UDC that reference you to a different
provision where the actual substantive text is, rather than restating it
repeatedly throughout. So that's one of the techniques and one of the
rules that we've been following.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My last question is, do you have
some type after a jury whereby they're going to take the old document
and in place then have the new document in front of them and find out
how fast they can reference different areas to see if there's -- how the
continuity of the whole new program flows together?
MR. WHITE: I think that that's what we're going to go through
in the training process as we grow with this document. As I
mentioned before, it's not going to become effective until the end of
August, and what we're going to use as a road map in that process is
the newly created Appendix H, which is a set of comparative tables
that take you from today's existing LDC chapters and sections and
sub-sections to the appropriate site in the UDC.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And at that point in time we should
be able to determine if there's any scrivener errors that are glaring at
us; is that correct?
MR. WHITE: As we have done already and as we have fixed
and I'm sure we will continue to do over the next two weeks and
thereafter, before it becomes effective, one of the provisions in the
ordinance that we're proposing allows for any errors that are
essentially scriveners in terms of typos, formatting, numbering, et
cetera, to be adjusted prior to publication. So up until we get the final
proofs with Municipal Code sometime in the summer, we can make
those changes. Otherwise, if we need to change text, we'll have to
look at the situation. For example, if it's a PUD document that's in for
review and something was in the LDC and it seems to be missing, we
Page 48
,,-,--
May 11,2004
have the opportunity, as part of the PUD, because the PUD's
themselves are amendments to the Land Development Code, to bring
those kinds of changes in through the PUD document, and then catch
them in cycle two later this year.
Cycle two, of course, is another backstop, depending upon how
folks are moving through the development cycle with their project.
We can catch them then.
And then thirdly, we anticipate that there's always the use of a
scrivener's ordinance change that we could make once the board is
back in session after the summer, after this becomes effective.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Do we have any public
speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have no public speakers, and so at
this time I will close the public hearing.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Patrick, I think we all understand
this was an enormous task, trying to clean up a document that has
evolved over many, many years and eliminate inconsistencies and
make it easier to use.
One of the things I know we're all concerned about is that in that
process we don't want to make a substantive change in the Land
Development Code that we might not understand or be aware of.
So my question to you is, is essentially this: If when it gets to the
point for us to approve this, can we approve it as a document which
anticipates no substantive change to our Land Development Code? So
that if we find an unintended consequence that might occur as a result
of some word changes, we can consider that a scrivener's error and not
be locked into an unintended consequence of a change in the Land
Development Code. Can we do that?
MR. WHITE: Yes, you absolutely can. And you can do it in any
of the ways that I mentioned before. Certainly if there's some, quote,
Page 49
--","----
May 11, 2004
unintended consequence, end quote, we can go back to and restate
expressly what this board's intent is so that there is no doubt, and so
that what we have is the most clear document that staff can readily
apply, that the users can be able to work their applications through the
process without the need for interpretations. That's what our goal
ultimately is, is to make this thing as easy to wear as a piece of
regulatory fabric that anyone can fashion. And that is something, and
hopefully based upon its structure, is something that will be easy to
use.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I recognize there's no way
this document can be perfect. Just simply cannot be perfect, it's too
complex --
MR. WHITE: It's a human creation.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- so we're going to find some
errors.
When it comes time to vote and approve this, I would hope we
would do so in the context I just described. So -- and also, I would
encourage staff to bring to our attention immediately any circumstance
where there appears to be an opportunity to interpret this code
differently than we had intended. And I don't want to get locked into
having someone come to us with a development project and use an
omission in this process to get something that they otherwise might
not have been entitled to get.
And so if there's an understanding that this is an administrative
cleanup of the code document itself and it was not intended to
generate any substantive change to our land development codes and
regulations, I would feel very comfortable with going forward with it.
MR. WHITE: It's our absolute intention to not create any
substantive additions to this code. And I think that's about as ironclad
as anyone of your employees can make it for you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did you want to make a motion then?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I will make a motion then that we
Page 50
May 11, 2004
delay this until May the 25th, which will give you more time actually
to solicit input and other things.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: At which time we will then
consider the motion to approve this ordinance.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Coyle to continue this till May 25th, and a second by
Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just want to chime in here and say
that my concerns are on the same line. I think that Commissioner
Coy Ie and myself are on the same page, and that we want to make
sure that the citizens of Collier County are protected so that if there
are any particular errors that are glaring, that it isn't an opportunity for
someone for take advantage of it. And that was my concerns.
And I hope that's what I was trying to convey as we were going
through the questioning, exactly what was involved in this document
and how much material was taken out of this document so that we
could clean it all up. And I think all of us understand that there are
going to be errors, but we want to make sure that it's not an open
loophole that gives any particular group any particular advantage. So
it's -- everybody's on the same playing field at all times.
MR. WHITE: Understood.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor of the motion --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Does that include Exhibit A into
the motion?
MR. WHITE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. That includes Exhibit A. Okay,
very good.
Page 51
May 11, 2004
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It's a 5-0 to continue.
Now, what I'm going to do is I'm going to call for a 10-minute
break for our court reporter, and then when we come back, because we
-- I've checked with Sue Filson, we have quite a number of speakers
out there for HMA, and the rest of the speakers are for the 11: 00 time
certain.
When we come back in 10 minutes we will hear HMA first and
then we'll be prepared to do our 11 :00 time certain, hopefully on time.
MR. MUDD: So the HMA item, Madam Chair, is Item 8(E).
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you very much. Item 8(E). Thank
you. See you in 10 minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have a hot mic. Ladies and
gentlemen, if you'd please take your seats and we'll start again, please.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. We will be moving up to
Item 10(E).
MR. MUDD: No, ma'am, it's 8(E).
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 8(E)? I'm sorry.
Item #8E
ORDINANCE 2004-28 RE: PETITION PUDZ-03-AR-4674,
COLLIER HMA, INC., A SUBSIDIARY OF HEALTH
MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES, INC., REPRESENTED BY
Page 52
"..,---
May 11, 2004
MARGARET PERRY OF WILSON MILLER, INC., AND R.
BRUCE ANDERSON, OF ROETZEL & ANDRESS, REQUESTING
A REZONE FOR "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL AND "TTRVC"
TRAVEL TRAILER RECREATIONAL VEHICLE CAMPGROUND
TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN
AS COLLIER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER PUD FOR A
MAXIMUM OF 260,000 SQUARE FEET OF HOSPITAL AND
RELATED USES AND 80,000 SQUARE FEET OF MEDICAL
OFFICE AND RELATED USES. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED
ON THE EAST SIDE OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR-951), AND
APPROXIMATELY 3 MILES NORTH OF THE T AMIAMI TRAIL
(U.S. 41) IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26
MR. MUDD: Advertised public hearings, 8(E). This item
requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be
provided by commission members.
Petition PUDZ-03-AR-4674, Collier HMA, Inc., a subsidiary of
Health Management Associates, Inc., represented by Margaret Perry
of Wilson Miller, Inc. and Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and Andress,
requesting a rezone from A Rural Agricultural and TTRVC, travel
trailer recreational vehicle campground to PUD, planned unit
development to be known as Collier Regional Medical Center PUD,
for a maximum of 260,000 square feet of hospital and related uses,
and 80,000 square feet of medical office and related uses.
The property is located on THE east side of Collier Boulevard,
County Road 951, and approximately THREE miles north of the
Tamiami Trail, U.S. 41, in Section 23, Township 50 south, Range 26
east, Collier County, Florida.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioners, do you have
any disclosures?
Commissioner Halas?
Page 53
May 11,2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I do. I have e-mail and
meetings and correspondence and also discussion with staff on this.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I have a whole folder on it.
It includes many meetings, phone calls, site visits. I've talked to the --
TO both sides. I've talked to Mr. Akin, Richard Akin. I've talked to
numerous individuals on it. In any case, it's all together in my file.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I have received several phone
calls, e-mail correspondence, written correspondence, and as of last
night, the Golden Gate Area Civic Association supports this proj ect.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you, Commissioner--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: So they wanted me to bring that
message.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you very much for doing
that.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have had meetings, I've received
correspondence, e-mails, telephone calls from people on both sides of
this issue. All of that information is contained in the file.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I have had meetings and
e-mails and phone calls, and I've attended meetings where HMA has
been a featured speaker. I've sat on the board of East Naples civic --
or sat in with the board of the East Naples Civic Association and heard
their comments. I've had people call me and I've made investigative
calls as well. So, speaker.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have to swear people in.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. For all of those who wish to
speak on this subj ect, will you please stand and be sworn in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: I believe that Ms. Perry and Mr. Anderson are
Page 54
--------------,,----
May 11, 2004
going to present.
MR. ANDERSON: Good morning, Madam Chairman, members
of the commission. My name is Bruce Anderson, on behalf of the
applicant, Health Management Associates, Inc.
At the outset, I would note that this is an economic development
council Fast Track project. The application was filed August 28th,
2003, about eight months ago. There has been no opposition to this
rezoning. Unanimous recommendations of approval from the
environmental advisory council and the planning commission. And
my client is in agreement with the EAC and planning commission
stipulations. Staff recommends approval.
This is a 60-acre site partially in the activity center, 10 acres of it,
and the remainder in the urban fringe.
I would like to submit and make a part of the record a letter of
support addressed to the county commission from Collier Health
Services, Inc., and also a copy of a letter from HMA to Collier Health
Services, Inc., which states in pertinent part, quote, we have
considered your invitation to enroll the Collier Medical Center into the
Collier We Care program. I am pleased to report that we will
enthusiastically participate in conjunction with active members of our
medical staff. Hopefully our participation will serve as a catalyst for
other hospital provider participation. End of quote.
I'll ask Ms. Perry to come and highlight the features of the master
plan, including interconnections with abutting properties.
MS. PERRY: Good morning. Margaret Perry from
WilsonMiller. Very briefly, I'll give you some highlights of the PUD
master plan.
The 60-acre parcel is located on the east side of Collier
Boulevard, approximately three miles north of U.S. 41. Lands to the
north and east are currently zoned agricultural and are vacant. Lands
to the south are zoned TTRVC and agricultural and contain the
existing Country Camp and RV Resort, single-family homes and
Page 55
May 11, 2004
vacant property. To the west, across Collier Boulevard, there are PUD
zoned properties, including Lely Resort, Sierra Meadows and Edison
Village PUDs.
The main access to the facility will be at the signalized
intersection of Lely Cultural Boulevard and Collier Boulevard -- I'm
sorry, Lely Cultural Parkway and Collier Boulevard.
A secondary access is proposed north of the main entrance, the
exact location and configuration to be coordinated with the
transportation department at the time of SDP approval.
You can also note these on the PUD master plan future
interconnection to properties to the north and east. This is in keeping
with the future land use element requirement for mixed use activity
centers.
Since submittal of the original application, several changes have
been made to the PUD master plan. Briefly, these include the location
of three separate utility easements for county well locations. These
were added per the request of the utilities department.
The master plan has also been modified to provide increased
buffering to properties to the north. The LDC requires a type A
buffer, but the applicant has agreed per staff request to provide a
20- foot wide type B buffer with double hedgerow along the northern
property line to the Florida Power and Light easement. The remainder
of the northern property will have a buffer, a type D, 15 feet wide.
The LDC also requires the installation of a masonry wall or fence
when residentially zoned properties are located next to non-residential
development. This is the case with the southern boundary next to the
Country Camp and R V Resort.
Representatives from HMA and WilsonMiller met with the
owner of Country Camp Inn in December to go over different
buffering options, what his preference would be. He would prefer,
instead of a concrete wall, increased buffering and berm, per his letter
to Ray Bellows in December. So the master plan indicates a buffer
Page 56
May 11, 2004
similar to what we have in the northern property, that being a 20- foot
wide type B buffer with double hedgerow.
The PUD master plan and PUD document have been revised to
incorporate stipulations from the EAC and the planning commission,
and to our knowledge there are no outstanding planning issues. And
our team is here if you have any questions.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. Do we have speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am, we have eight speakers. Tammy
Nemecek. She will be followed by Dr. Adam Fueredi.
MS. NEMECEK: Good morning again. Tammy Nemecek,
Executive Director for the Economic Development Council. And I'd
like to predicate my comments by the fact that the EDC does remain
neutral as far as land use decisions, certificate of need decisions, but
what we do advocate for is the creation of high wage jobs in Collier
County, and that's what I'm here to support.
HMA has an approved Fast Track application based on the jobs
that they're going to create as a result of this project, and I'd just like to
give you a couple of numbers to -- as far as what -- that's been proved
on the application.
The company, as a result of this, will create 300 new jobs with an
average wage of $43,000. That job creation will result in about $13
million in employee wages within this community.
In addition to that, their capital investment in the building and
land will equate to about $75 million, for a direct economic impact to
the community of $88 million, which is a significant impact to this
community .
And I think in looking at all the projects that the EDC is working
with currently, this is the largest of the proj ects that we have available
in the system. And so I would support the creation of these jobs
through the HMA projects.
And in addition to that, I would like to note that their corporate
headquarters has been located here in Collier County and has been a
Page 57
May 11, 2004
supporter and a contributor to the community itself. And corporate
headquarters is one of the targeted industries that we are working to
grow, and particularly in western Collier County, and attract here. So
I would advocate for that company as well, as far as supporting the
proj ect. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your next speaker is Dr. Adam Fueredi. He will
be followed by Ken Drum.
DR. FUEREDI: Good morning. I am Dr. Fueredi, and I've been
a practicing physician here in Naples for 24 years.
I strongly support the proposed medical facility in our part of our
county. And it has absolutely no reflection on the medical services
provided by the existing facilities. However, I think the area is in dire
need, and I mean dire need, of our facility -- of the facility proposed.
I also want to emphasize that I am not an employee of HMA, nor
do I get paid by HMA to come to support this project. So I am totally
unbiased except that I care very deeply for the part of the community
that this medical facility is proposed to do. So much so that after I
practiced here for many years and retired for four months from the
Naples Community Hospital, came back to open up a practice in the
east part of Naples, which is right here on 41. Why? Because I think
there is a dire need for medical facilities to be opened up. There are at
least 70,000 people south of Davis Boulevard, and all of you know,
I'm sure, that there is a need for it. And I strongly support -- again,
urge you to kind of remove some of the roadblocks that these poor
people have to kind of go through and expedite their approval. Thank
you.
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Ken Drum. He will be followed
by Laura DePamphilis.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Let me ask, is there anybody that wants to
speak in opposition of HMA?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Then -- and I hate to cut you off, Ken --
Page 58
-,,--
---------- "
May 11, 2004
MR. DRUM: I'll pass.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- but I don't see that there's a problem
with this zoning, and so I, for one, would like to make a motion,
although we have to close the public hearing but -- I know we have to
do that, but I would want to move forward with the motion to approve
if --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Commissioner, I'll support you
with a second on it.
MR. WEIGEL: Time out.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So would the speakers then have
any objection to passing?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nobody would have -- okay, everybody's
got their thumbs up --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if we could do this real quick. If
Sue Filson could read the name and just have that person say pass or
I'm in favor of, and then we can just move on.
MS. FILSON: Laura DePamphilis?
MS. DEPAMPHILIS: Pass.
MS. FILSON: Dr. Sam Durso?
DR. DURSO: In favor of.
MS. FILSON: Heyward Boyce?
MR. BOYCE: In favor of.
MS. FILSON: Dick Botthof?
MR. BOTTHOF: In favor of.
MS. FILSON: And the final one, Bob Murray?
MR. MURRAY: In favor of.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And Ken Drum?
MR. DRUM: In favor of.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Very good.
So with that, we will close the public hearing, and I make a
motion that we approve this rezoning.
Page 59
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Fiala, a second by Commissioner Halas. Any further
discussion?
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I just want to say congratulation
to the Chairperson on this new facility in East Naples.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Thank you. We'll all enjoy it
together. Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Absolutely no opposition to the
rezoning. I'd just like to make sure that there is an understanding this
is a rezoning only, and it doesn't involve the approval of this particular
site plan. Because I've raised had a couple of questions with the HMA
representatives, and it has to do with the FPL easement. The FPL
easement goes right through there. And I'm uncertain as to whether or
not there is an agreement to permit the building of buildings in the
FPL easement. But that's a discussion we can have later on.
And I'd also like to emphasize that we have talked about access
roads to the property along the FPL easement. And we need to take
those things into consideration when we get to that point.
But the rezone I'm very much in favor of.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks for putting that information on the
record. I appreciate that.
Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, I just wanted to say that I
realize it doesn't have part to do with this rezoning, but my only
objection to this in the past was the involvement of the HMA as far as
the community goes for the public health needs of the low income
people. And yesterday we had a meeting with Richard Akin from
Collier Health Care, Incorporated, and I can tell you, all those
reservations I had have been totally removed. I believe that HMA is
Page 60
May 11, 2004
going to be a wonderful partner within this community and I embrace
this endeavor.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's great. I'm so glad to hear we have
a unanimous consensus here.
And so all those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And that passes with a 5-0.
Congratulations on your rezone.
Now we're going to move back to Item 8(A). We still have 10
minutes before our time certain.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, Item 8(A) is this item requires that
all participants -- ladies and gentlemen, as you exit the room, if you
could do it quietly, and those people that are coming into the room, if
you could do the same.
Item #8A
ORDINANCE 2004-29 RE: PUDZ-2003-AR-4390 IMMOKALEE
SENIOR HOUSING, LTD. REPRESENTED BY RICK J.
JOUDREY, P.E., OF DAVIDSON ENGINEERING, INC.,
REQUESTING: 1) REZONING FROM THE (RMF -6)
RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT TO RPUD
TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF A MAXIMUM OF 119 MULTI-
F AMIL Y DWELLING UNITS, LIMITED TO RENTAL UNITS
WITHIN AN "INDEPENDENT LIVING RESIDENCE FACILITY"
FOR THE ELDERLY FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE
Page 61
---------
May 11, 2004
IMMOKALEE SENIOR HOUSING PUD; AND 2)
CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF AN AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT AUTHORIZING
THE DEVELOPER TO UTILIZE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
BONUS DENSITY UNITS (IN THE AMOUNT OF 59.52 UNITS
AT 8 BONUS DENSITY UNITS PER ACRE) IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT. PROPERTY IS LOCATED
ON THE EAST SIDE OF 11TH STREET NORTH JUST SOUTH OF
LAKE TRAFFORD ROAD AND HIGHLAND ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL IN SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 46 SOUTH, RANGE 29
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 7.44 +/-
ACRES - ADOPTED W /CCPC RECOMMENDATIONS -
AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT -
AE£RillŒD
This brings us to Item 8(A). This item requires that all
participants be sworn in and be ex parte disclosure be provided by
commission members. PUDZ-2003-AR-4390, Immokalee Senior
Housing, Limited, represented by Rick J. Joudrey, PE, of Davidson
Engineering, Inc., requesting: 1, rezoning from the RMF-6 residential
multi-family zoning district to RPUD, to allow development of a
maximum of 119 multi-family dwelling units, limited to rental units
within an independent living residence facility for the elderly for a
proj ect to be known as the Immokalee Senior Housing PUD.
And 2, consideration and approval of an affordable housing
density bonus agreement, authorizing the developer to utilize
affordable housing bonus density units in the amount of 59.52 units at
eight bonus density units per acre in the development of the project.
Property is located on the east side of 11 th Street North, just
south of Lake Trafford Road, and Highland Elementary School, in
Section 33, Township 46 south, Range 29 east, Collier County,
Florida, consisting of7.44 plus or minus acres.
Page 62
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Those wishing to present are
all standing. Would you please swear them in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. And ex parte by the
commISSIoners.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They're all here in my file. I've
received many of e-mails and written correspondence on this issue.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have no disclosures for this item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I have no disclosures on this item.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, on this particular item, I
have talked to staff, I've received e-mails, phone calls and other
correspondence. I have met with the petitioner, and I also on my own
without being invited by the petitioner had gone to the site of this
projected project and personally walked the grounds. Also visited
another facility in Immokalee run by the petitioner and talked to the
residents that live in that particular building.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. And my disclosure is I've
received some e-mails on this subject.
Now, who will be presenting?
MR. MUDD: Mr. Rick Joudrey of Davidson Engineering.
MR. JOUDREY: Rick Joudrey, Davidson Engineering,
representing United Church Homes, a 501(C) nonprofit corporation,
and in support of the application that we processed, which is the
RPUD as discussed.
There was a planning hearing last week on this, at which point
the planning commission made some recommendations for the staff
PUD to be modified. Weare in pretty much agreement with that,
Page 63
May 11, 2004
except for one issue which we don't feel is appropriate for this
particular proj ect and does cause quite a financial burden on this type
of development, which happens to be for seniors who are 62 and
above who make less than 50 percent of the median income. So there
are some financial constraints to see that this project gets built.
And basically it's the landscaping buffer requirement, which we
would like to propose be a type A buffer, where we have zoning that is
adjacent to us that is a Baptist church, a cemetery, duplex housing,
mobile homes, okay? We would like to see a type D at the
right-of-way, which is a standard buffer for the right-of-way. And we
would be willing to go up to a type B where the project is adjacent to
the single-family residentially used property. Please note that all the
property is RMF-6 that's adjacent to our site except for the mobile
home site.
So what I'd like to do is have Ms. Wickersham who represents
United Church Homes tell you a little bit about them, and then we'll
have our landscape architect describe those suggestions to you in more
detail. Thank you.
MS. WICKERSHAM: Hi, I'm Cheryl Wickersham. I'm Vice
President of Housing Services for United Church Homes. We are
located in Marion, Ohio.
And first I'd like to thank you for putting us on the agenda today.
United Church Homes is a sponsor of affordable housing
communities in 12 states. We came to Immokalee several years ago
when a past chair of our board was volunteering for Habitat for
Humanity, and he said there's a tremendous need for what you do
down here, you need to come down.
So we submitted an application to HUD. We were successful. It
took us a little while to get everything through zoning and everything,
but in 1997 Cypress Run opened. It's 40 units for persons 62 years of
age and older. The average resident earns less than $8,000 a year. The
majority of our residents are Haitian.
Page 64
May 11, 2004
We -- I typically take board members to visit our facilities every
now and then, and the last board visit that we had to Cypress Run, I
had asked one of the residents to offer a prayer before our meeting,
hoping that he would pray in Creole for the board. Well, he prayed
for the board, okay, he prayed for 10 minutes, please bring us more
housing, we need more housing. So that's why we're here today, is the
tremendous need for affordable housing, especially for the seniors in
Immokalee. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Do we have any -- oh, I'm
sorry .
MR. ANDREA: Good morning. My name is Christian Andrea
with Architectural Land Design, landscape architect for the project. I
brought along two graphics. Can I put them on the teleprompter or put
them on the board over there; would that be helpful?
MR. MUDD: If you just wait a minute, I'll get the cameras
switched.
MR. ANDREA: The issues that we wanted to address were the
buffers around the property. Typically on a property of this nature, if it
were in Naples, it's a two-story residential looking building, whatnot.
We feel a -- along the right-of-way what's called a type D buffer,
which is quite normal in every project, which are trees every 30 feet
on-center and a double hedge. And that's fine. We think that's
appropriate.
We're being asked to put a type C buffer there, which is a five to
six-foot tall hedge and trees that are double rows of spacing of 30 feet
on-center, which ends up being 15 feet on-center on average, which
we think is very dense. And if you're in a residential neighborhood
looking at a buffer like that around a property, we think that feels out
of character with a residential neighborhood.
Type C buffers are typically reserved for industrial properties,
commercial car repair facilities, very industrial uses. Very dense.
Trees are literally 15 feet on-center, which we think are far too close
Page 65
May 11, 2004
and will ultimately become a long-term maintenance problem and
totally block out any residential feeling.
The two plans I've brought here as well, these are kind of an
enlargement, showing -- what we were hoping to in our ideal scenario,
is we do agree shrubs need to wrap the property, we need to have
some form of buffering from a shrub level. We also agree that we do
need to have trees. The buffer for a B, it requires one tree per 25 feet
on-center, which we think is acceptable.
We'd like to propose, instead of putting a B hedge in, which is a
five foot tall hedge going in an installation, we'd like to propose
putting a three-gallon hedge, which is about a two and a half foot tall
hedge, and within a two to three-year period we'd be getting to that
five to six-foot height.
These are ways that we can still achieve the intent of the code,
yet still help accommodate some cost issues on the property as well.
If you'd like, I can put these where you can view them.
We've done a comparison there showing the difference between
what a Band C is, and we feel that at about a five to seven-year
window a B buffer will look as dense as a C buffer. Consequently, that
same time period, that C buffer is going to be very dense. We're
planting oak trees and things that typically have a spread of 50 feet
and we're putting them 15 feet on-center, so we think that becomes a
long-term maintenance problem. So from our vantage point, planting
trees that tight is not a healthy thing for the long-term survival of these
buffers.
As Rick mentioned earlier, around the cemetery and some of the
areas where we don't have, you know, intense uses going on, we'd like
to consider what's called a type A buffer, which is one tree per 30 feet.
If we need to, we could consider putting a three-gallon hedge there as
well, with the long-term intent of trying to let that material mature to a
five to six-foot height, or what a B buffer would have required.
So the example that's on the board there, that's what's called a
Page 66
May 11, 2004
type B buffer. The top view is a plan showing the trees 25 feet
on-center at a 10-gallon hedge. The middle section there shows trees
25 feet on-center, I think, in the one to three-year period. And then
the bottom shows what we think it will look like five to seven years
down the road.
And the next exhibit will show the same outlay but with a type C
buffer. You can see how much more densely planted it is. And it's
very successful at the three to five-year, but at the five to seven-year
it's extremely dense and full. And in a residential neighborhood, if I
look at most of our neighborhoods here, in Pelican Bay or throughout
any of our high-rise developments, we don't put a C buffer on those
projects. We still would sustain a B buffer there. So I would think a
modified type B would be an appropriate buffer for this use. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. And we have a speaker?
MS. FILSON: We have one speaker, Fred Thomas.
MR. THOMAS: Good morning. Thank you for --
Commissioners, thank you for the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is that on, Fred?
MR. THOMAS: Is that is better? Thank you very much.
My name is Fred Thomas, for the record, the retired executive
director of your local housing authority. And I want you to
understand that I live -- I live right here, less than two blocks from this
property, okay? You need to know that there's an elementary school
here, a cemetery there, a church here, there's a single-family residence
that the church has bought for expansion of the church there. There's
some duplex apartments here, and there's some module -- very
modular trailers and structures there that we really would like to see
come out of that particular neck of the woods, okay?
Right on this corner is the Eckerd's drugstore. Across the street
from over to here, right on this corner here, this is just right behind 29
coming up, the Eckerd drugstore sits here, the bank's here and the
Page 67
"'-
------"
May 11, 2004
Winn Dixie Plaza's here. Within eight blocks of this location you've
got four churches. So it's a nice inclusion in our residential
community.
We very much support this and we think that it would be very
overwhelming to deal with anything other than what the developer has
brought to you. And I'm not part of the development team in any
stretch of the imagination, but we're trying to do something very
positive in here. We need more of this kind of housing going. And I
wish all of you could have had an opportunity to join Commissioner
Coletta to see the kind of operation they're running in Cypress Run,
which is down in Collier Village. A very nice project for the elderly,
including exercise rooms and what have you.
And they want to make it an environment where they can
integrate with the surrounding community, mix and mingle, and
maybe even provide some support service like babysitting for some of
the working families that are around that particular thing. We don't
want to make them an island in the middle of a residential community.
If I can answer any questions, I'll answer. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have a staff presentation?
MS. DESELEM: Yes. Good morning. For the record, my name
is Kay Deselem. I'm a principal planner with the Zoning and Land
Development Review department. And you have received the staff
report and you have received an executive summary, and just more
recently you've received an update of the executive summary.
As you're aware, this particular petition was heard by the Collier
County Planning Commission just last Thursday, so we've been trying
to get the information to you as quickly as we could.
And in the update, you saw where the recommendation of the
CCPC has stated several changes, and it appears in conversations with
the petitioner we're in agreement on all the issues with the exception
of the buffer. And the buffer was what was discussed this morning.
First, I need to go on record that the things that were proposed
Page 68
May 11, 2004
today are new to staff. We have not had the opportunity to review
these. I heard about it briefly in the hallway earlier, and I told the
petitioner that not only did we not support the deviation that they had
requested, which was to provide something less than what the LDC
required, we cannot provide -- we cannot support this because it
appears to, as well, be less than what the LDC would require.
The CCPC in their recommendation had recommended that you
approve the buffer that staff is proposing, and I just wanted to go over
a couple of the things that were stated earlier today.
There was some discussion about the buffers that were being
proposed by staff being too close and too dense. These buffers, it is
typically a C buffer. This is a buffer that's used throughout Collier
County, and to my understanding there's been no problem with the
buffer. It is used to separate different uses, and in this case, as staff
has noted in the staff report and gone to some length to explain, this
project is an affordable housing project that offers density well above
what's proposed -- or what's existing in the area.
And staff understands the need for that affordable housing, and
we want to support this petition and we are supporting the petition.
However, there's a balance that has to be met between the density
that's proposed in this project and what exists in the neighborhood.
You have anything from one unit per acre or less to eight units per
acre in the mobile home scenario.
This project, like I said, is proposing 16 units per acre.
Understanding the importance of the affordable housing aspect of this
project, staff has looked to other ways to address the compatibility
Issue.
In the analysis by comprehensive planning, there are several
scenarios that are provided, as you probably have known throughout
the years, as far as building orientation, building location and setbacks
and buffering.
In this case we had some setback issues that were increased,
Page 69
May 11, 2004
based on the site plan proposed by the petitioner, and in addition, we
were asking that the buffers be augmented.
And staff believes firmly that that is an appropriate way to
address the compatibility, other than reducing the density, which isn't
an appropriate thing for this particular project because of that
affordable housing aspect. But it's important to understand that that's
one way to address it.
And there was some misstatement on the part or
misunderstanding on the part of the petitioner as far as what the
deviation -- or what the buffer requirement of staff actually is. And if
I may, I'm going to actually read to you what it says in staffs PUD
document. It's found on Page 18 of that document. It says the
developer must augment the buffer areas. To stop and explain, they're
supposed to preserve what's there as far as existing vegetation.
So they only have to augment it to come up to the standard we're
proposing. So, like I said, if necessary, to provide minimum C width
planting type and size buffers, as that buffer is described in the LDC,
where this project abuts a duplex or single-family use. So we're only
requiring that additional buffering in certain circumstances.
If I can go back to the aerial photograph. Along this portion is
duplexes. Right here is a single-family home site. Right here is a
single- family home site. Those are the areas where the additional
buffering would be required. That is the C buffer.
Togo on, the buffer width may be reduced at the proj ect' s
entrance only to the minimum amount to allow safe access that will
align with Santa Rosa Avenue. To explain that way, the project
entrance is right here. There's a single-family home right here. We're
saying that they can reduce that buffer along this area of the
single- family home site so that their entrance can align with Santa
Rosa, which is a street that's right across from them on Immokalee
Drive.
Where the adjacent use is a street, church or cemetery, a type B
Page 70
<---", ",.".---'"
May 11,2004
must be provided. So we're not asking for the enhanced buffer in
every location; we're asking for it in specific areas where we've
targeted the largest degree of difference between this project's density
and the surrounding area.
The applicants in their presentation referenced Pelican Landing --
or Pelican projects in general, I don't remember specifically which
proj ect it was -- stating that they don't use a C buffer. Contrary, might
I add, I think unilaterally every Pelican project in Collier County has a
much denser buffer, much wider buffer than anything required in our
code. So, I mean, that would be great if they want to put in the buffers
that Pelican projects do. That's far in excess of what we're proposing.
But like I said, I don't know what it is they're proposing today
because we haven't reviewed it. All I know is that we reviewed the
proposal for their deviation, asking for a modification of the required
buffer. We did not support that during the process of the CCPC or the
review prior to that, and we're still not supporting it. We still firmly
believe, like the Collier County Planning Commission understood
perfectly, it went through a great deal of discussion, and it was
discussed at a great deal in the staff report as well, and we believe that
that is the appropriate buffer.
I also have with me Mike Sawyer, who is a landscape reviewer
with Collier County. If you have more specific questions, to the
extent that we, you know, haven't looked at what they're proposing
today, I'm sure he would be happy to address any questions you may
have, as am I.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have no other speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. With that I will close the public
hearing.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Deselem, is this in the --
this proj ect in the Immokalee overlay district?
Page 71
May 11, 2004
MS. DESELEM: It's in the Immokalee area master plan. It's not
in an overlay district, per see It's in a high density area, which
encourages the high density.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I thought maybe that was just
one way to address this landscaping issue.
MS. DESELEM: I don't know that I follow your question.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, if there's an overlay, the
overlay might have some language about landscaping. But--
MS. DESELEM: No.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- this is not in the overlay?
MS. DESELEM: No, it is not. We just have to basically address
it through the Growth Management Plan, Policy 5.4, which requires
staff to make a thorough and complete analysis of the compatibility of
the proposed use versus the existing use. And that's what staff has
done.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: If they don't want to use the
landscaping on this proj ect, why don't we ask them to use the
landscaping in the Orangetree school board project, where I
understand there's a need for buffering.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. And I also I forgot
to mention, I watched the planning commission meeting on this
particular item.
I can tell you for a fact, I was out there, and I think the buffer,
you know, to go with the wall and the full buffer all the way around
this property is totally uncalled for. It will isolate that piece of
property from the rest of the neighborhood, and this is going to be a
little bit of a showcase compared to some of the things that are out
there.
The property that exists right now is dilapidated, buildings on it
that are way past due for being removed. This thing is going to be a
tremendous bonus.
Page 72
",---"---
May 11, 2004
We have to be cognizant of the fact that Immokalee is
considerably different than the coastal part of Collier County, and that
if we try to hold everything to the same standards that we do in coastal
Collier County, we're going to have things that just aren't going to
work in Immokalee. You've got to remember, the medium income
there is considerably less, you got, depending on the time of the year,
as much as 17 percent unemployment. There's all sorts of factors that
enter into this.
Now, I also want to mention right off the bat that our staff has
gone way out of their way to move this thing forward. It came to
them late, the petitioner needed quite a bit of help, and they were
compassionate enough to realize this and move it forward to a large
degree.
And I would like to make a motion for approval. But however,
I'm not too sure how to word it on the buffer. I'd like to get some
discussion going back and forth to be able to come up with something.
But I'd like to do something different than the buffer the staff is
recommending at this time for the very reasons that I stated.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Did you make a motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I made a motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Is there is a second on that motion?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I can only support -- I'll give them
a second only if we'll go along with the recommendations of the
planning board. I think it's too late in the game to start changing the
buffer requirements, and if that doesn't work, then I suggest that we
continue this. But as it stands right now, I know it's important to get
this thing through, and my second is only in regards to if we can
support what the planning commission has put forth here. I don't think
it's anything --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, let me approach this
slightly differently, if I may, Madam Chair. When I visited the
existing facility there and I talked to the residents, most of them were
Page 73
May 11,2004
receiving Social Security or some sort of supplement. I doubt if
there's any other housing in Collier County that would ever be able to
take them in to a point where they could actually afford it.
This is a very needed commodity, and some adjustments have to
be made along the way. I realize that there's a tremendous expense
with these buffers. And the buffers should serve a real useful purpose.
They shouldn't be there just because they appear in the LDC. We
have some latitude within the PUD to be able to make some changes
to be able to meet the needs that are out there.
I think we can come up with a compromise where we come up
with a buffer that's quite full but we do away with any requirements
for walls, get us to the point that it's a little more realistic and easier to
manage, and not only affordable to put in, but affordable to be
maintained in the future.
I would hope that you would reconsider your second in that
particular direction. I don't know how a second could work in this
particular case when the motion is specifically different than the
second.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I withdraw my second.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, that's a better way to do
it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Commissioner Coletta, are you
saying you're making a motion to approve and just removing the wall
requirements from the planning commission?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Removing the wall from the
buffer -- and actually, I'd like to do away with the double planting,
which is a what type of buffer, please? Help me with that --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, there is no wall, okay? And what
you basically have here is more strict landscaping requirements where
this business abuts single-family type residences.
And if you're making a motion, then I would -- I'm putting words
Page 74
May 11, 2004
in your mouth, I think, a little bit, but let me help you just a little, that
you're basically saying that the PUD should have a type B buffer
around it and then don't take the special care around the single-family
residences. So you've lessened the buffer requirement on that
particular building. And if you say it's a type B so that we're not
doing a C and a B, at least the staff has a measurable way of going out
there to make sure that that buffer got put in. But the --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Is the B more restrictive than
the C?
MR. MUDD: No, it's less restrictive.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay, then I would go for a B
buffer. And I got to remind you also that we don't have any of the
neighbors here protesting this in any way, shape or form. And the
same was true in the planning commission. There was no one that got
up negative from the neighborhood there because they see this as a
very big positive, removing some very dilapidated units in there to put
in something that will meet the needs of the community.
But still I don't have a second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So right now the motion dies for lack of
second.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah, I would like to address the
issue of the buffer very briefly. The staff has already made the
observation that this development is far more dense than would
normally be permitted because of the adjacent communities -- or
adjacent properties. And the staff has spent a lot of time trying to find
ways to permit them to have this density so that they can achieve the
affordability they need by applying buffers in only selected places, not
all the way around the property.
The decision with respect to buffering should not be made on the
basis of the adjacent homes or trailer parks that currently exist. The
decision should be based upon what you ultimately want that place to
Page 75
---
May 11,2004
look like. Because one day something different is going to be built
there and I think you're going to want to have decent buffering there.
I do not see the buffering requirement, as staff has specified it, to
be economically overwhelming to this project. I believe that if the
petitioner approaches the buffering requirement in the manner in
which the staff has intended it, it will have a relatively minor impact
on the whole process.
Now, to the last point. The Collier County Planning Commission
endorsed the staffs position on the buffering, and there was no one
there to oppose that endorsement of the buffering. So that must mean
that the people accepted that recommendation of the planning
commission to endorse the staffs recommendation for buffering.
So I really think that perhaps the buffering issue is being blown
out of proportion. And I don't think that this is a life or death
situation. I believe that the buffering can be accommodated by the
petitioner and they can provide a reasonable affordable housing
development because they are getting a very, very high density bonus
for this particular property.
So I would -- this is Commissioner Coletta's district and I'm not
going to jump in and tell him what he should do, but I will second a
motion that approves this project, if we accept the stipulations of the
Collier County Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I have a motion on the floor as such?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I don't see where I have
any choice, because I'm definitely not going to sink the project
because of the buffer -- the buffering that's going to be around it. So
I'll make that motion.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. So your motion states that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That we accept the findings of
the planning commission.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That you -- that we accept the findings?
Page 76
,^,,-
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the determination, the
recommendati ons.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The recommendations of the
planning commission.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That we approve this agenda item with
the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission by
Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Margie?
MS. STUDENT: For the record, Marjorie Student, Assistant
County Attorney.
Does your motion also include Item 2, which would be the
approval of the affordable housing agreement?
MR. MUDD: Margie, we'll do -- we'll do both. We'll do them in
separate motions. You're going to do the PUD rezone and then the
density bonus.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, fine. So I have a motion on the
floor and a second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, 5-0.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you need another motion for -- to
the approval of the density bonus.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll make that motion.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You have a motion to approve the density
bonus as requested by Commissioner Coletta and a second by
Page 77
May 11, 2004
Commissioner Halas. Any discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I do apologize to the people from
Orangetree that you've had to wait.
Item #8C
ORDINANCE 2004-30 RE: PUDZ-AR-3584 ROBERT DUANE OF
HOLE MONTES INC., OF NAPLES, REPRESENTING COLLIER
COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM
PUD TO PUD FOR THE PURPOSE OF AMENDING THE
ORANGETREE PUD TEXT, (ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-43) TO
INCLUDE "PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL PLANTS AND
ANCILLARY PLANTS" AS A PERMITTED USE TO THE
"AGRICUL TURE" (AG) DISTRICT OF THE PUD - ADOPTED
WITH CONDITIONS ( TO APPROVE THE PUD W / THE
EXCEPTION THAT THE "ANCILLARY PLANT" PORTION OF
THE PUD BE BROUGHT BACK AT A FUTURE MEETING AS A
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, this brings us to Item 8(C). This
item to be heard at 11 :00 a.m., and we're close. This item was
continued from April 13th, 2004 BCC meeting. This item requires
that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Page 78
May 11, 2004
commission members.
It's PUDZ-2003-AR-3584, Robert Duane of Hole Montes, Inc. of
Naples, representing Collier County Public Schools, requesting a
rezone from PUD to PUD for the purpose of amending the Orangetree
PUD text, which is Ordinance No. 91-43, to include public
educational plants and ancillary plants as a permitted use to the
agricultural, AG, district of the PUD.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, we need to swear all of the people
who would want to present on this item. Would you swear them in,
please. Please stand.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, ex parte declarations by the county
commissioners, starting with you, Commissioner Halas.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, I've had a multitude of e-mails
and I believe I have a couple of phone calls on this item also. And I've
also talked with staff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I have quite a folder full of
e-mails, phone calls, meetings. I've been out to the site a couple of
times. I held a community meeting at one point that was addressing
other issues of that area and they brought that up several times. And
of course I met with staff.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good. I too have had much
correspondence, many e-mails. I have them in my folder, which I will
file for public viewing. And I met with no one. Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I have received correspondence
and e-mails, I have met with staff concerning this issue, I have
received one telephone call supporting this rezone, and all of that
information is contained in my file.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: They're right here, e-mails and
Page 79
----------
May 11, 2004
letters. And I received one phone call, talked to one school board
member.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, yes, so did 1. Thank you very much
for saying that. I'd like to add that to my ex parte declaration, that I
spoke to a school board member. Thank you very much.
And now for our presentation.
MR. HARDY: Good morning. My name is Alva Hardy, I'm the
Executive Director for Planning and Construction for Collier County
Public Schools.
Before you for your consideration is the school district's request
to amend the Orangetree PUD to allow public educational and
ancillary facilities within the agricultural designation of the
Orangetree PUD.
At the April 13th county commission meeting, this board
requested that Collier County public school staff facilitate a
community meeting and present information regarding the proposed
transportation facility. A community meeting was held on April 29th
at Corkscrew Middle School.
At that meeting school district staff presented information related
to the nature and size of the proposed facility. We discussed specific
operational issues. We presented a schematic site plan with accurately
scaled representations of all of the facility's components.
The first location that we proposed to the community was on the
southern edge of the southwest side of our property, adjacent to the
existing Orangetree utilities plant. This location was as far away from
the community as we could place it, given the original site layout for
the entire site, which we have from the previous application.
The residents expressed their concerns that this location, or any
location adjacent to their community was too close.
The original site layout for the entire site also proposed an
exceptional student education facility that was to be located adjacent
to and immediately behind the high school.
Page 80
May 11, 2004
The question was raised at the community meeting if the school
could be relocated and the transportation facility located in its place.
At the time of the community meeting, we weren't authorized to make
that determination.
Following the community meeting, district staff presented all of
the issues, concerns and comments from the community meeting to
our senior administration. We were instructed to consider the effects
and impacts of locating the proposed transportation facility behind the
high school.
Bob Duane is here today with us; our consultants are here to
describe the changes that we can make in our original proposal to
maximize the separation between the proposed transportation facility
and minimize the impact of this facility on the Waterways' quality of
life.
MR. DUANE: Good morning. For the record, Robert Duane. I
have with me on my consultant team today Terry Cole from my firm,
the project manager involved in some of the engineering issues of the
site. I have Rob Price from the Metro Transportation Group. I have
Amy Taylor from the school board today. So they'll be helping me
answer your questions. I'm sure you'll have some today.
Let me begin with why we're here, and that's because you
adopted or entered into an agreement in 2003 with the Collier County
School Board that set forth the process that we're presently moving
forward on, and that is to try to amend the Orangetree PUD that was
required by that 2003 interlocal agreement. And that's why we are
here today.
Let me give you a little historical perspective. We originally,
when we had our neighborhood meeting now several years ago, had
the facility placed at this location. Admittedly we had minimal
attendance at our neighborhood meeting several years ago. When we
were back before you last month, we had made an effort to locate the
facility adjacent to the utility, and that meant we had no support for
Page 81
-_.~
May 11, 2004
that at our second neighborhood meeting that we had the week before
last.
The proposal that's addressed in your executive summary today is
an effort from the school board to make, frankly, one of the few
compromises that are left on this site.
We have relocated the transportation facility 900 feet away from
the edge of the Waterways development. Any ancillary plants would
require a conditional use if they are any closer than 900 feet, and of
course the permitted use will remain for a location for an educational
plant, which is likely to be another school on this 30-acre tract here.
In relation to some of the concerns that we had at the meeting, we
also have modified our buffer proposal to include now a 1,600-foot
buffer along the northern edge of the property. The PUD document
currently notes 350 feet. We initially contemplated just constructing it
to the edge of the existing lake, but we now have moved that 50-foot
buffer on -- which is a type B buffer, on top of a five-foot berm along
the northern portion of the property. And that 50-foot berm will begin
just south of the RV park, which is located along this edge of the
Waterways estates.
The line of sight or the distance -- frankly, this is going to be a
one-story structure. I will tell you today that -- it's a one-story
structure. This is the berm located on the 50-foot -- on the adjacent
side to Waterway Estates. And I will tell you that these plantings,
which are 10 feet in height at the time of installation, which may
mature to 40 feet of height or more, that you will not see this facility.
The trees are 40, the shrubs are 10 to 12 feet at maturity, but we've got
a good buffer here. The line of sight's not a problem.
We have not designed this facility yet, but we're of course
making commitments as we proceed through this hearing today. The
bus barn facility, which is approximately 20,000 square feet in area
would be located adjacent to this lake. That is between 13 and 1,400
feet from the edge of Waterways. And then of course we have our bus
Page 82
May 11, 2004
parking and we have our faculty and staff parking area here.
So there's really not practically anywhere else to relocate this
facility, unless we move the athletic fields. And frankly, the little
additional separation that you would get by doing that, in my opinion,
doesn't particularly make -- doesn't particularly enhance the proposal,
. . .
In my opInIon.
And that in a nutshell is what -- the proposal that we're bringing
before you. I think it's consistent with the 2003 agreement with the
school board. We have support of your planning commission
unanimously. We have support of your county staff. We've listened
to the residents. We've made compromises. And now we're here to
let everyone weigh in on this particular facility.
And I'd be happy to answer any questions, myself or other
members of my team.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, if I may, this particular
proposal that you have here now, was this given to the residents of
Waterway for their -- for a chance for them to take a look at it and
review it and be able to see what they thought of it?
MR. DUANE: Friday afternoon I couriered to Mr. Sullivan, the
representative of the homeowners association, I gave him copies of
that exhibit without the cutouts. But we gave him the executive
summary, the 900- foot demarcation line, we gave him the buffer -- the
enhanced buffer details. In fact, Michael Clark and Amy Taylor and I
discussed that with him on Friday afternoon, and we got those
documents over to him late in the afternoon because we understood he
had a meeting with some of his residents on Saturday. So we made
those available for his weekend meeting.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And this particular document
you got over was the map we have in front of us now?
MR. DUANE: That is correct.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. If that's what they were
Page 83
.--------- .
May 11, 2004
talking about, I guess it wasn't met with that much enthusiasm on the
part of the residents, judging from a couple of e-mails that I received.
I couldn't be too sure what they were talking about because I wasn't
made privy to all this taking place. There's still concerns out there.
Let me ask you this: You're looking for an approval not just of
the bus barn itself, but of the whole high school and the grounds itself?
You're looking for a total approval; is that correct?
MR. DUANE: That's correct. The PUD amendment covers the
entire 120-acre site. It also covers the Corkscrew Middle School,
which is presently a nonconforming use, and -- a nonconforming use.
It was subject to the 1996 agreement.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you have to forgive me, my
concern is the lateness of the hour that this is coming forward and how
it's going to be contemplated by the neighborhood. And I don't know
if we have everyone in the neighborhood here at this point in time, if
they would truly interact with it. And I would hate to come to the
point where I would suggest continuing this to another time.
Would there be a possibility, if at the end of the day we cannot
come to a -- what we call a convenient understanding on this, that we
could separate this facility from there, approve the high school as is
and then you could come back for a conditional use later for the bus
barn?
Because I really feel uncomfortable moving forward with it with
directions that have been brought up on Friday afternoon to the
residents of Orangetree. Here we're at Tuesday before a meeting. I
haven't had a chance to assess the situation, and doing it in this room
at this time gives me great concern. Of course I'll be listening to the
people from Waterways and Orangetree today to see what their
opinion is on this.
MR. DUANE: Well, the answer to your question is we'll
certainly consider that.
Frankly, I don't have anywhere else to put this parking lot and
Page 84
May 11, 2004
this facility but in that location. And I hope if in your wisdom you
decide that we continue this that we don't end up in the same place a
year from now. In all due respect to the residents, there just isn't any
support for this facility that I could gauge at our meeting last night. I
don't think that's going to change today or next year, but I hope I'm
wrong.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, I'm not saying that it
would change. And they certainly have a right to their opinion and
they have a right to protect their properties as they see fit.
Now, you also mentioned that the ball fields and the football
fields and all that are something that could be moved at this time.
From what I seen when I was out there, there's nothing but bare
ground out there.
MR. DUANE: Those facilities, they're under construction
currently, the athletic facilities.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Are they that far along that you
couldn't give that any consideration?
MR. HARDY: This school opens in August of this year, and the
answer is yes, they are that far along. I've not been authorized to
move presently built fields to move the transportation facility that
much farther.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: So the final decision is, is do we
accept this as whole, the way it's being presented, do we accept it in
part and have you bring back the other elements some other time.
MR. HARDY: We stand at the board. Whatever you decide is
where we go.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'd like to hear from the
residents.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas, would you
wait until after the speakers?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Page 85
May 11, 2004
MS. FILSON: The first speaker is Jake Sullivan. He will be
followed by Diane Kenzie.
MS. FILSON: Diane, if you'd like to come up.
MR. SULLIV AN: Good morning. We had an order of
presentation. Would it be possible to switch this around?
MS. FILSON: Sure. Who do you want to go fIrst?
MR. SULLIVAN: Diane Kenzie.
MS. FILSON: Sure.
MS. KENZlE: Good morning. I'm Diane Kenzie and I'm a
resident of Waterways of Naples. And I'm here to ask that you not
approve Collier County school district's plan to construct a bus garage
adjacent to the Waterways property.
After having worked for 31 years in education in Ohio, we spent
our life savings on a retirement dream home in what we think is the
most beautiful place in the continental United States, Collier County,
Florida. We thoroughly researched the area and decided on
Waterways, because we value space and peace and tranquility.
We knew that we would enjoy being close to the schools and we
eagerly looked forward to opening ofthe new high school and to the
opportunities for volunteering and for cheering for the home team.
Nowhere, however, in any public information which we
researched was it outlined that a bus transportation center was part of
the proposed construction plan. In Ohio an ancillary plant might be a
place where we keep the snow plows.
During my years as a school superintendent, I became all too
familiar with the many problems posed by buses. There are no
barriers that would protect our community from the flashing lights,
backup beeping, horns, air brakes and other pollutants connected with
buses.
Although we were told at the meeting a few weeks ago that this
facility would operate from 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., I know that buses
are used for sporting events, competitions, field trips, and other things
Page 86
------
--------------
May 11, 2004
that occur on the weekends. I also know that school buses don't break
down on schedule and that many times it's necessary to work on
repairs through the night to get them up and running for the morning.
These facilities can have activity 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
It is unjust and unnecessary to locate the bus garage adjacent to our
already established tranquil community of over 400 single-family
homes.
We respectfully request that you not approve the rezone for the
bus garage and that the school district be instructed to locate it to
available acreage elsewhere. For all the same reasons that you would
not personally build your dream home next to a school bus garage, we
urge you to not approve the rezone so that our dream does not become
our nightmare. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Jake Sullivan. He will be followed by Ken
Lynch. No -- oh, you want him next? You want to go last? Okay.
Mr. Lynch will be followed by Robert Buck.
MR. LYNCH: Good morning, Commissioners. My name is Ken
Lynch and I live in Waterways on Grand Rapids Boulevard. My
street borders the site plan there we're planning on putting the new bus
facility.
I'm here to express my opposition to this construction. I've lived
in Waterways for approximately three years now, and it's a beautiful,
quiet and tranquil place for me to live. That's why I chose Waterways
as my retirement home.
As the board is well aware, we had a meeting on April 29th with
the school. At that meeting there was a number of questions I thought
went unanswered. Like one, the number of buses that will be staged,
was it 50 or 130? What is the business hours of the garage? How
disturbing will the lights be? How about the noise levels, answered
with trust me, and we'll try to be good neighbors. We were also told
to come down and review the bus facility over at Barron Collier
school.
Page 87
May 11, 2004
I became very skeptical of the information given to me with
respects to the noise, and decided to go down to the bus facility
myself. I made two trips down to the facility. One on April 30th. I
was given a tour of the complex and we discussed the garage hours,
which were from 5:00 a.m. till 10:00 p.m. I was told that most of the
time the garage doors are open during their working hours. We
looked at the bus schedule and saw that over 100 buses of the 300
buses staged there leave for their routes between 5:45 and 6:30 a.m.
A neighbor and I returned to the school facility on May 4th at
4:45 in the morning with a video camera and a sound meter. To us,
we wanted to record the noise that we'd see with the bus activity. We
set up the camera and the sound meter in a location that simulated the
distance that was proposed for the site at our place, which is about 300
plus feet at that time.
Between 4:45 and 5: 10 the facility was very quiet, with little
activity. The sound levels were in the 60 to 62 decibel range. At 5:30
the activity increased. Bus drivers began to start their buses, make
their required tests of lights, horns, brakes and backup signals. The
sound level began to increase to 75 to 78 dBA. By 6:00, there was a
number of buses running in the staging area, about 20 to count. The
sound level had really intensified. The sound readings were 83 to 88
decibel levels.
Blinking strobe lights, flashing red signal lights lit up the sky.
Headlights illuminated the parking lot. The flashing lights and noise
lasted for a period of 40 minutes and it became very annoying.
To put noise levels in perspective, normal conversation is 60
decibels. Lawnmowers and motorcycles are 90 decibels. Garbage
trucks, 100 decibels.
I'd like to point out also that when you look at decibel scales it's a
logarithmic scale. In layman terms it means that a small increase in
decibels represents a large increase in sound energy. So an increase of
just three decibels doubles the sound intensity. The increase of 10
Page 88
---...
May 11, 2004
decibels increases it tenfold.
Now, we witnessed levels from 60 to 88 decibels. This is a 28
decibel increase in sound level from what we're used to hearing in
Waterways.
This will be a tremendous effect on the quality of life of the
residents of Waterways. We'll be subjected to this noise level for five
days a week, and maybe even more, from 5:00 in the morning till
10:00 at night throughout the whole school season.
I feel the board -- school board was not fair and honest when they
presented their information to us. I also feel that the school board's
new proposal by moving the garage and the staging area no closer
than 900 feet and erecting a five-foot berm along the border of
Waterways will not suffice for reducing the noise pollution to the 60
decibel level that we see today.
Therefore, I'm asking the board to exclude the bus facility from
the rezoning, and perhaps request the school board to look at
alternative locations. Thank you.
I also have a tape here, so if anybody feels like they want to have
a little concert of music at 5 :30 in the morning, you're welcome to use
it.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could I ask you a question? Was
that A-weighted or linear scale? And what was the distance that you
set the sound meter up from?
MR. LYNCH: We set the zone meter up about 325 feet. That
was what was actually proposed from our first meeting on the 29th.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And was it A-weighted or linear
scale?
MR. LYNCH: It was A-weighted. What it was was an average
-- excuse me, it'd be -- the sound decibels are measured in averages.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: No, you got a different -- you've
got different scales. It is a logarithmic scale, but you have a linear
scale which is flat all the way across the spectrum. The A-weighted
Page 89
-------
May 11,2004
scale is the scale that basically by any government measurements is
used. That's the one that most closely fits the contour of the human
ear. So that's very important.
MR. LYNCH: To answer the question, I can come back and tell
you it was an A-weighted scale, because when I went and rented the
sound meter, it's the same type of sound meter that they use in
concerts and everything else to project the noise levels.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, you can set the scale for
linear, A-weighted or C-weighted scale on most of those scales. So
that's important, because I'm appalled that if you measured 300 feet
away that you were getting 88 decibels, because the criteria for most
trucks, I believe, is about 76 dB or 78 dB. And that's 50 feet away.
MR. LYNCH: In my past life I was -- I am a retired engineer for
General Motors.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm brand X, Ford, down the road.
MR. LYNCH: And I used to do noise passby when I had exhaust
responsibility many years back.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So was I years ago.
MR. LYNCH: And 80 dBA was the maximum at that time,
which -- I think it's still the federal laws, I think.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But I'm surprised. And that's an
acceleration run. So I'm really surprised that 300 feet away that you're
getting those kind of sound levels.
MR. LYNCH: Well, keep in mind, when we took this
observation, it wasn't just all the buses just sitting there idling, there
was buses also leaving the facility that was also picked up in that total
average.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But when you do a passby test, as
you know, it's -- you do an acceleration run --
MR. LYNCH: And then a coast down.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And then in second gear or third
gear -- exactly. And you've got accelerations and coast downs, and
Page 90
May 11, 2004
you measure it 50 feet away from the target.
MR. LYNCH: Yes. I -- again, like I say, I'll stand behind my
readings. They were awful loud.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes. If I may, before you go,
we're talking about -- obviously you two people are very in tuned to
the subj ect matter at hand. You have in your possession a tape --
MR. LYNCH: Yes, I do.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- that I'm sure that if this
Commission would like to hear, we could take it over to our IT
department and they could plug it in and we could get a run on it.
MR. LYNCH: The tape is about 23 minutes long. There will be
some -- a lot of boring parts in there, so you might want to fast
forward through it, but I will give you the tape today, you're --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Possibly what we might be able
to do -- because I mean, decisions are going to be made at this meeting
and I want to make sure that the Commission has a true understanding
of what the problem is and the depth of it.
I -- possibly, now that you're through speaking, you might be
able to be escorted over to our video room and they might be able to
separate that part out for later if we need to play it before this
particular item is finished.
MR. LYNCH: I'd be glad to do that.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right behind you. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Robert Buck. He will be
followed by Daniel Stoffel.
MR. BUCK: Good morning. I too would like to thank you for
the opportunity to speak on this subject. My specific segment of it
will deal with the environmental concerns that the residents of
Waterway have with the placement of this transportation facility so
close to our homes.
The presence of a variety of materials which are noxious, if not
Page 91
May 11,2004
toxic, is of great concern to us. While no specific information has
been provided by the school district planning staff, it's obvious that a
fairly large storage facility will be needed for diesel fuel, lubricants,
coolants, cleaning solutions and whatever other liquids we have.
Our concern is not that the storage facility will not meet
requirements, but rather that the normal use and handling of these
liquids in the quantities generated by a facility of this type, over time
there's going to be some spillage. You can't fill 75 buses twice a day
without spilling something. And with the right wind direction and the
accumulation, that's likely to produce undesirable sights and smells in
our neighborhood.
Since diesel buses are not required to install catalytic converters
like our cars are, their normal operation in such large numbers, again,
in a concentrated space, will generate exhaust smells and particulates
that will be near our development or over it. When the wind is in the
east, if there is no wind, heavy humidity, thermal inversions, whatever
the weather conditions are, again, under the right circumstances, it
may not pose a direct health threat but it would certainly would be an
annoyance.
Whatever other exposures and risks come with the storage of
things like lead acid batteries and spare parts and asbestos brake
linings and whatever add to the problem.
Now, we've seen nothing in the way of a traffic study. We did
ask at the meeting on the 29th and we were told that these buses
would be picking up and delivering students in the estate anyway, so
there would be no impact.
Well, I beg to differ with that. The buses currently are spread
throughout the Estates, serving five schools. And the only portion of
them that we see are the ones that go directly by Naples or Waterways
of Naples or into our development. With the center right there, we
will see and hear and share the roads with every one of them.
Oil Well and Immokalee Roads are already congested with the
Page 92
----'
----
May 11, 2004
heavy traffic of trucks coming to and from the nearby quarries and
farms. With another source of large, noisy vehicles on our roads for
most of the day, that will certainly have an undesirable effect.
We feel like in all likelihood we will not be faced with a massive
spill or a Haz-Mat incident or anything of that order; however, we
certainly do have noises and smells and traffic that we don't have
today that were not present or known to us when we decided to buy in
Waterways.
We feel like we are fortunate to have the growth in that area that
we do. Apparently many others feel the same way we do about being
out a little bit away from the problems found in the more densely
populated areas of the county.
With that growth we see more welcomed amenities and
conveniences and increased property value. It does not need to come
with the problems that we moved out there to avoid, and the adverse
effect of ill-advised growth and the imposition of unwelcomed or
intrusive installations that are much better placed away from large
preexisting developments where they will pose much less of a
negative impact. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Daniel Stoffel. He'll be
followed by Patricia, C-I-C-O-G-N-A.
MR. STOFFEL: Hello. I would like to thank you, the County
Commissioners, for this opportunity to present to you my concerns.
I'm Daniel Stoffel, I'm a retired plant superintendent from the State of
New York Office of Mental Health, with 37 years of construction,
operations and maintenance experience. This includes the fleets that
are larger than 300 vehicles from buses, trucks, to passenger vehicles.
I reside at 952 Chesapeake Bay Court in the Waterways. I
purchased this property in September of 2002. There was a meeting
held on April 29th for which I attended. A bus transportation hub for
the area was to be discussed.
And what we found was a dog and pony show trying to explain
Page 93
May 11,2004
why they had to put it there. When questions were asked about other
sites that were considered, none was offered. When asked about
alternative site locations -- site locations on this current school site,
they said they already had made improvements and they weren't going
to make any changes.
Whose fault is that? My question is, why have a meeting if all
they're going to do is come and give out information about what
they're going to do and not take any real input, then all they have to do
is put the information in local newspapers. In this case, you've already
spent our tax dollars and now you want to talk about it after the fact.
Some of us in Waterways chose to move here, investing our
money, and for some of them, everything they have, to have the
tranquility and quietness it provided, just to find out that over the last
couple of months that between Collier County and the school system
we are being placed between two major industrial facilities: The
sewage treatment plant -- but that's another topic for another day --
and this bus transportation hub.
The bus depot they proposed at the meeting was 300 feet, now
it's up to 300 yards from the community. They say we won't hear it.
I'm 1,000 yards from Immokalee Road now and I hear the
construction noises. But that's a temporary issue. And we have berms
and bushes and trees now, okay. N ow picture this bus operation
running between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. And when they're backing
up with reverse beepers you can't miss them. Do you think for one
minute this is not going to impact my lifestyle when I get awakened --
when I get awakened in the morning?
Additionally to normal movement, the law requires that every
bus must check reverse beepers, horns and air brakes before leaving
the yard, even if it's multiple times a day. It's the law they have to
follow. Look at your own policies for dump trucks restrictions during
off hours because of the noise, and now you're considering letting
them do this to us permanently for five days a week, 16 hours a day.
Page 94
--
May 11, 2004
What we really need is a change, and it's a change in the laws,
especially for public projects. Is it that hearings concerned--
especially hearings that are concerning permitting, easements and
other land use changes should be done before the land is acquired,
truly giving the community a fighting chance to say what's needed to
be said, especially when it affects the surrounding areas.
This project, the bus depot, not the school, should be stopped and
relocated. We have thousands of unused acres that could easily be
used in this corner of Golden Gate that just needs -- you have to
rezone those areas, areas that are not along anybody's community.
Think about it, all we see in our future now is in this community
we have a sewage plant on one side and a bus depot on another side,
and every day it's going to remind us by going through the nonnal
testing procedure that they're there. Okay?
Please just force the school authority to find a new location. I
know you can. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Patricia Cicogna. She will be followed by
Wendell Grevillius.
MS. CICOGNA: My name is Patricia Cigogna and I am a
resident of Waterways.
First, I'd like to begin by the gentleman who gave the
presentation said bordering an RV park. We are not an RV park, we
are residential homes, so I'd like to make that correction.
My husband Louis and I own a home at 3277 Sturgeon Bay
Court in the Waterways of Naples community. We have lived in this
home since 2000, three years before this proposed depot ancillary use.
I am a retired New York State and New York City government
employee where I worked for the New York State Assembly for the
chair ofthe judiciary, and I worked for the Attorney General of New
York State as a community liaison and in charge of public
information, so I'm glad to be here and to have this opportunity that
you've given us to speak.
Page 95
The Orangetree PUD, which they would like to change the
agricultural use to include ancil1ary plants as a pennitted use, is
something that seems quite bizarre to go from agricultural to ancillary,
which in this case could be considered industrial since it is a place
where repairs will be made like a tire shop or a Midas or Tire
Kingdom, whatever you have down here. So it's not that it's
agricultural for educational purposes, it's agricultural for industrial
purposes in this regard.
I want to apologize in advance for my cynicism, because at
previous meetings with the petitioners, we were told that this area was
going to be one, a park, and then it was going to be a bus garage for 50
buses, and then it was going to be a bus garage for 75 buses, and then
130 buses. So there is some cynicism that we cannot avoid because
the trust me, which is what they want, hasn't come true. They have
changed their plans several times, so how can we trust them?
We are -- the majority of people who live in Waterways of
Naples are families. Lots of children. Children who go to school,
families who go to work. To have buses operate trom 5:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m. is defmiteIy going to affect sleep patterns, children's
education, children doing homework.
In addition to the three schools that are there and want to open,
how do those children learn during the day when this facility is going
in and out, the buses are going in and out, tires, pneumatic tools, all
the things that make noise?
They have proposed a special education center to be adjacent to
this facility. Why? Why would you put children of special needs in an
area where buses are going to be coming in and out of this particular
area? What pwpose does that serve? The children in our community
are not bussed, they live in walking distance, except if they have
special needs. So these buses are not for our children. This serves
very little or no purpose to the community that I live in.
Now, the environmental issues that Mr. Buck has addressed I will
May 11, 2004
Page 96
----..,
May 11,2004
not repeat because you don't need to hear them again, but there are
concerns and there has not been, according to the documents, an
environmental study. I don't know why. They say that it wasn't
necessary. And that also this petition did not go before the
Environmental Advisory Council. It does not say why. Perhaps there
-- that could be looked into.
And that's about what I have to say. I'm sorry that it has -- you
know, we seem to be so passionate about it. But if you think about it,
who would want to live so many feet from this kind of a development
from -- why would you put that kind of a structure? And why aren't
they asking just for educational plants? Why do they need ancillary?
Why don't -- to vote on ancillary issues would not help this whole
educational park that they have proposed. What should be allowed is
no ancillary plants, just educational plants. That would be part of
what this whole scheme is about. So I thank you for your time.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Wendell Grevillius. He will
be followed with your final speaker, Jake Sullivan.
MR. GREVILLIUS: Hello, my name is Wendell Grevillius.
Thank you for allowing me to voice my concerns and opposition this
mornIng.
I'm a retired banker. I spent 38 years in the banking industry. I
managed banks. And in that capacity, I was very, very active in the
communities that I served in. One that I served on, one committee
was the economic development committee. And this is kind of
reminding me of past experiences.
I have concerns regarding the public -- the building of a school
bus maintenance facility and the location of upwards to 135 school
buses located at the new Palmetto Ridge High School, which in turn is
adjacent to the Waterways of Naples community of which I am a
resident.
I have concerns regarding EP A issues such as noise levels,
storage of hazardous waste materials, quality of life issues and
Page 97
May 11, 2004
possible legal issues.
Noise. Recently I was awakened in the early morning hours by a
loud beep, beep noise. On the third day of this annoyance, I got out of
bed, drove over to where that was coming from. It was located at the
new high school. And what I found was one front end loader loading
dirt into a truck. Every time it backed up, beep beep beep. That was
one front end loader that woke me up. I live at about the middle of
Waterways.
Please be mindful that our community has several orange groves
between the high school property and our community. Those orange
groves will be down, as I understand it, taken down. Can you imagine
five days a week on a permanent basis hearing the testing of the
backup warning signals, horns and air brakes of each of the 75 plus
buses in the early morning hours? There will be maintenance of the
school buses in the proposed new building. This would involve
hazardous waste materials such as oil, gas, et cetera. The building
should be in an industrial commercial zoned area, in my opinion.
There will be an issue of traffic problems with all the buses on
Oil Well Road. We will have dozens and dozens of vehicles driven by
students to the high school each and every day. Now we add the buses
to that.
The communities near the new high school on Oil Well Road
have been besieged of late with negative issues: The proposed water
and treatment plant; FEMA; a 53 percent increase in -- by
Orangetree's utilities, they service our area; the Immokalee Road
proj ect, now in the court system. And then we add to that the school
bus facility issue to be located in our backyard, so to speak. These
issues could have a negative impact on our value of our homes and
quality of life.
I attended a meeting on April 19th of this year. Representatives
of the Collier County school district and residents near the high school
were in attendance. We were given some information regarding the
Page 98
--"----'
May 11, 2004
buses and proposed facility. Many of the residents were very upset
and very vocal at what they were hearing. We heard many times from
the school board representatives the words "trust me". Well, in today's
world, that "trust me", it kind of raises a red flag.
I attended a meeting March 4th when representatives from the
Collier County School District appeared before the Collier County
Planning Commission requesting an amendment to the Orangetree
POD. The purpose for the change, to add public educational plants on
a permitted use in the Orangetree POD and to allow construction of
the new high school.
Some members of the planning commission seemed quite
agitated because the school district was requesting the POD change
after the school was in process of being finished, due to open in
August. One member of the commission said, what are we supposed
to do, bulldoze a school? Another member of the planning
commission said, I did not know there was a new high school going
out there until I read it in the paper.
Well, I did not think this made any sense. Was the school board
coming through the back door, so to speak, to get this approved?
In an economy of rapid growth, those in charge must do careful
planning to get it right. As in most cases, there is only one chance. If
this is not done, our so-called paradise will be no more.
Please do not put the school buses and building facility in our
backyard. We do not want it in our area. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Your final speaker is Jake Sullivan.
MR. SULLIVAN: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm not
going to take a lot of time. I think my friends said it all. I think the
best thing for you to do on this is to, of course, approve the property --
the zoning change, the POD change, whatever we want to call it; it's
been called several things since we started on this venture -- for
educational purposes only.
I mean, the order of business for the school board, for the school
Page 99
""-'-
May 11, 2004
district, should be education, not building a transportation facility in
the middle of a community or adj acent to a community.
You're all aware of the reasoning behind the near completion of
the Palmetto Ridge High School before the proper language was
amended in the current PUD is because you, the county commission,
in the best interests of the citizens of Collier County acted on an
emergency request from the school district to permit the school district
to start construction of the school prior to the PUD change.
Everybody saw that school going up; nobody had a problem with
it. What we have a problem with is that word bus garage, which they
hid in the form of calling it an ancillary facility. A bus garage is a bus
garage. And they should have come right out flat and told us what it
was going to be.
I just -- in just looking through the definitions and whatnot in the
Land Development Code of the PUD, I've seen things like:
Development within a PUD district should be compatible with
established or planned uses of surrounding neighborhoods and
property. I can't in any way see how we can possibly say that a bus
garage in such close proximity to our community is compatible with
our community, as you well heard.
We also believe that the school district's meager attempts to
shield our community from the noise and other problems generated by
such an ancillary facility don't fall within the provisions outlined in
the aforementioned section of the LDC, which states in part, the
residents should be protected from undesirable views, lighting, noise
and other adverse offsite influences.
This plan, which we got Friday afternoon and were only allowed
to show to our residents Saturday, Sunday and Monday night -- which
by the way we did have a considerable amount of people come by to
look at it because this is a big concern, as evidenced by these petitions,
which we also circulated in a very short period of time, which contain
upwards of 300 names of people in opposition to this project.
Page 100
----
May 11, 2004
They're still trying to jam this down our throats. We've asked
them for alternatives, we've received no response yet as to what
alternatives would be possible. Actually, what we have understood is
that this is no sweat off of their brow. If you approve this or you don't
approve it, they're not going to lose any sleep over it.
So my suggestion to you would be, if they're not going to get
fired or lose their jobs over this, don't approve it. Simply approve it
for educational purposes. That's what we want to see. And we're a
good neighbor now with the two schools that we have. We have a lot
of people in this community that volunteer at those schools on a
regular basis, and to injure this relationship which we have now with
the school district by allowing the construction of this garage would
be detrimental to the school district.
So I would ask you to consider, listening to everything that we've
put forward here, asking the school district to go find someplace else
to put the school garage. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have a presentation by staff?
MR. DeRUNTZ: Hi. My name is Mike DeRuntz, I'm the
principal planner with the Zoning and Land Development Review
department.
We did have that meeting at the Corkscrew Middle School, as
requested by yourselves. The meeting was well attended. There was
approximately 100 homeowners, residents in attendance. There was a
lot of unhappy persons there with some of the comments that was
discussed this morning.
This issue started back in -- with the 1996 interlocal agreement
that was in effect initially. And under that agreement, this area was
pennitted as for both educational and ancillary plants, and as such, the
school district did purchase the property to build those facilities in this
location to serve the community of Collier County in that area.
The -- since the acquisition of the property, the state amended the
statutes in regards to the interlocal agreement and this board adopted
Page 101
'---,---
"---""
May 11, 2004
the 2003 interlocal agreement, which identified the -- what was
permitted in conditional and not permitted as to the educational plants
and ancillary plants throughout the county, and identified those in
each of the zoning districts. It identified terms, the definitions of --
that applied to the different uses in the school district. And ancillary
plants is a term that came down from the state for bus barns, and that's
why that name was put out there. It could have been explained in
more detail, possibly.
But we were required to adopt this interlocal agreement per the
state requirements. It's my understanding that there was several years
of discussion with the staff and both the county and the school district
to come into that agreement. And in that agreement, the -- this
location was -- even though the property was acquired to be developed
under the '96 interlocal agreement, they were proceeding with this and
had submitted plans and started construction.
It was in this interlocal agreement that the -- this process of
amending the Orangetree PUD was required. And this is the process,
what we're going through right now, to identify the educational and
ancillary plants as a permitted or conditional use in that PUD.
The school district has initially proposed that ancillary plants
would be a permitted use in the PUD district, as was the educational
plants in the agricultural district in that PUD.
They have -- since the meeting that was held on the 29th, that --
they've amended the request to have the educational plants as a
permitted use, but the ancillary plants to be both a permitted use and a
conditional use per the discussion that we heard earlier. Anything
that's -- that is further away than 900 feet from Waterways to the east
would be a permitted use as an ancillary plant. Anything closer, 900
feet, 900 feet to the property line towards Waterways, would be a
conditional use for an ancillary plant. That 900- foot area, that could
have educational plants in there as a permitted use, which this
amendment would allow.
Page 102
May 11,2004
They have shown the variations for the buffering, providing a
five-foot berm and type B buffer. This was something that was not
really discussed at the meeting on the 29th. They were just talking
about the 50-foot wide buffer area. Now they are identifying a type --
more of the design for that buffer area.
If this is approved by the board, this doesn't mean that it's the end
of the process, that the ancillary plant would have to come to the
county for -- under the SBR or school board review process, and this
would be something that our staff would look at the application and
review it for compatibility. The buffering requirements that would be
incorporated into this PUD document change would be a part of that
review process, or any additional requirements that this board may
want to incorporate or that the staff may feel that may be necessary for
the buffering process.
But this -- by approving it, if that happens, that's not the last step
and if -- for an ancillary plant approval.
The -- I know that Marjorie Student has looked over the proposed
PUD, and I think she has some comments that she wanted to bring
forward. There may be some minor changes in some of the wording
in the POD document.
MS. STUDENT: Just a couple points. For the record, Marjorie
Student, Assistant County Attorney. And I was given the revisions on
Friday afternoon, so that's why I need to bring them to you now.
But in any event, the reference to the LDC would also include
language or successor ordinance to account for the fact that we are
coming up with a new Land Development Code, and that is in the
portion that deals with ancillary plants as permitted uses, that they
would follow the conditional use pro.cedures outlined in the LDC, if
they were beyond a certain amount of feet or if they were in a certain
amount of feet from the residential area.
Also, in the conditional use provision of the POD, the language
titles it permitted conditional uses. It should just say conditional uses.
Page 103
May 11, 2004
And again, the use of the word "wil1!' is there, that they will require
conditional use, that should be "shall".
And again, that reference to 274, which deals with conditional
uses of the Land Development Code should say or successor
ordinance.
And additionally, there's also a Paragraph E dealing with
development standards, and it references the interlocal agreement that
the board adopted last year at this time, and it states as it may be
amended. Well, that makes the PUD self amending. So I would
prefer to just reference the interlocal agreement and state as it's set
forth in the Land Development Code or successor provision, because
the terms of that interlocal agreement are found in our Land
Development Code now.
So those are my changes. If there's any questions about any
restructuring of the PUD because of any changes the board might
have, I'll be glad to answer those.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, a question, Marjorie,
while I've got you right there. What's wrong with a motion to approve
the PUD with the transportation satellite facility removed? Is there
anything wrong with that motion or illegal about that motion?
MS. STUDENT: I don't see anything illegal if it's removed,
because the interlocal agreement contemplates a public hearing
process to consider these. It's not a fait accompli under the interlocal.
So it would be my opinion that you could remove it from there or
you could have it totally as a conditional use. But that would have to
be placed in the PUD, requiring that the ancillary plant or bus barn be
a conditional use, and then that would come back to the board in the
same procedures as any conditional use set forth in any other PUD or
our Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If this was removed totally, in
other words, we said okay, we're going to approve it without the
Page 104
,.--
May 11, 2004
transportation element, the back part, would the school board still have
the right to bring it back under conditional?
MS. STUDENT: It would have to state conditional use in the
PUD document. If it were removed totally, they might want to bring
back another amendment to the PUD document to put conditional use
in there, but I don't see that they would be -- because this is its own
zoning district, so if it's going to be a conditional use, it needs to say it
in here.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, I understand what you're
saying there. But the problem is it's the 11th hour we're seeing all this.
And everybody's trying to react to it, the studies they did and
everything they went through was based upon "X" number of feet
away from the facility. Here we are, we're trying to move this thing
forward -- and I agree with the residents out there, this has been done
in an expedient manner that's sort of put public -- the right of the
public to one side. They haven't been heard -- duly heard to the point
where they can interreact with this.
I'm going to make a motion -- we've got to close the public
hearing, though.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- before we do that. But when
it comes time, I'd like to make a motion, and I'm going to make the
motion to the fact that we approve it without this transportation
satellite facility in the PUD.
MS. STUDENT: And one further comment, Commissioner.
When you make the motion, I would suggest that you set forth a
reason, whether it's compatibility, but there are lists --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, I'll state the reasons.
MS. STUDENT: -- there are a list of criteria that are in the Land
Development Code for the approval --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll state the reasons with this
particular example.
Page 105
---------"
May 11, 2004
MS. STUDENT: -- for the approval or denial of a PUD. So I
would suggest that you consult those. They're in your staff report.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm not -- I'm not asking for
denial of the PUD. I'm asking for approval of the PUD --
MS. STUDENT: I understand.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- with the removal of that
element.
MS. STUDENT: But that would go with that use that you would
ask to be remo -- state the reason for the removal.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Then I'll be happy to do it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, so we've had a presentation by the
petitioner, a presentation by staff. And we've heard all of the public
speakers. I now close the public hearing.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This is for the school board. I have
some questions in regards to what problems have you encountered at
other bus barns? And I guess where I'm focusing this on is have you
had any real problems at the bus barn that's presently at the Barron
Collier High School?
MS. TAYLOR: As you may be aware, Barron Collier High
School has our main transportation facility. It is -- has Fountain View
Apartments to the north and Tall Pines, a single-family subdivision, to
the west.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And how close is this to the bus
barn?
MS. T A YLO R: It is -- it has a 20- foot buffer setback.
The transportation facility was there first and Tall Pines
single-family residential located there and then the Fountain View, I
think in that order.
In all the time that we've been there, and I'm just speaking from
our conversations with our transportation director, there was one
incident reported, and that was when we had a stop sign that -- there's
Page 106
-' '-
-,""
May 11,2004
an access road that's along the perimeter of the transportation facility,
and we had a stop sign there, and the Tall Pines residents heard the
brakes and the acceleration, and that stop sign was removed and we've
had no complaints since.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: This proposed bus barn that's out
there, how many square miles will this encompass? And what do you
think is the maximum amount of vehicles that will be at that location?
I know probably that's going to be a hard answer because of the
population, but what is the square mile area that that's going to
encompass?
MR. HARDY: Obviously it covers the Estates. Right now
they're running 18 miles each direction to get out to where they run
their routes. The proposal for the facility is 70 -- start-up 70 on the
road buses. The reason for 130 spaces is that it keeps 40 buses for
reserves so that if buses break down they have them ready to go at all
times and also for field trips, because field trips are sometimes during
school hours.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Where are these buses presently
staged at?
MR. HARDY: Barron Collier.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So you're saying that we're running
additional buses miles -- bus miles just to pick up students in the
Estates area; is that correct?
MR. HARDY: That's correct. To make their routes in that part
of the county they start at Airport-Pulling and basically Pine Ridge.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So we've got some real concerns
here about transportation costs, as they're escalating, as everybody
knows.
MR. HARDY: We estimate 300,000 the first year, and 400,000
and then 100,000 increments every year after that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: What's your total capacity, do you
think, that you're going to be -- in a bus barn out in this particular area,
Page 107
"-"'---
May 11, 2004
what do you think your total capacity is going to be for the school
population?
MR. HARDY: Given the size of the building that we've -- the
20,000 square foot building, the 130 might enlarge, but because of the
size of the building, there will be a diminution of -- we'll have to go
find another site eventually. Within that 900-foot piece that's behind
the admin. we could see more than 130, but it can't be as large as this
one, because the building won't support that kind of maintenance.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Is there a possibility that you could
purchase land within the couple of miles of the high school to build
this bus barn?
MR. HARDY: It's my understanding that we have the same
problem that the board has, there simply isn't land available in the
Estates, given the residential zoning of the Estates proper and the rural
lands or rural fringe lands not accepting that kind of use. I'm sure you
have the same problem with fire houses.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Are you saying that we don't have
any agricultural land out there that we can obtain?
MR. HARDY: All of that land, I believe, is under a couple of
owners and we negotiate with them like you do to try and get them to
give us some of their land. But we have been unsuccessful so far.
MS. FILSON: Sir, could you state your name for the record,
please?
MR. HARDY: Alva Hardy.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. Has there been any attempt
by the school board at this point in time to see if they can acquire land
in the agricultural area to address this issue?
MR. HARDY: We are always in fuHland acquisition mode, but
the problem with zoning that I've just described, to my knowledge, is
what we've found in searching for properties. This property was a
single large piece of property that could accommodate multiple uses at
the time that we purchased it.
Page 108
--'-'
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Was the intent at the time that you
purchased this property, was their intent at the time to build an
ancillary building such as a bus barn?
MR. HARDY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: At the time that the property was
built?
MS. T AYLOR: I have -- I wasn't at the school district at the time
that the property was purchased, but in preparation for the Orangetree
PUD amendment, I researched the documents in site feasibility study,
which is -- we do prior to purchasing property. We had identified on
this site a transportation facility. These documents are submitted, and
actually we get input from the county to prepare the site feasibility
plan. So -- and this was, I believe, in 2000, 2001 that we purchased
the property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And you purchased the property in
2001? Is that when the first school was built there?
MS. TAYLOR: No. Actually, the Orangetree -- I mean, I'm
sorry, the Corkscrew Elementary School has been part of the PUD for
quite some time. I don't know when it was opened. Corkscrew
Middle, there was built later. During -- as part of the old interlocal
agreement, the '96 agreement, it says in that agreement that we are a
permitted use within any zoning district.
As a courtesy to this whole process, when we amended the
interlocal agreement, the county provided us a courtesy to amend the
PUD so that land that we already owned would then be found
consistent with the PUD.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: My question, I guess --let me see
if I can rephrase this. At the time that the elementary school was built,
did you own the adjoining land where the high school is located
presently?
MS. TAYLOR: No, we did not.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And what year did you
Page 109
May 11, 2004
purchase the land for the high school?
MS. TAYLOR: I believe it was 2001.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And at that time was the
ancillary building proposed on that particular site?
MS. TAYLOR: Yes, it was.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Co I etta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, thank you. I think we got
to get our perspectives right on this. One, it's not going to be a loss to
the school board if the school barn can't be put there. They're
eventually going to be able to build the necessary schools they're
going to need in the future. This gives them a little bit of an edge of it.
This is going to be the hub of a fairly populated center. Sure, the
population will be spread out, but still it's going to be the hub. And
Golden Gate's got a long ways to grow out there, the Estates area.
There is other land out there that can be used. Someone
mentioned the fact about three to $400,000 savings in transportation a
year. I would like to remind you that one house in Waterways far
exceeds that price, anyone of those houses. And the value is going to
be diminished.
So, I mean, we're not talking about an unbelievable savings.
That's based upon moving them from inside the city all the way out
there to the far reaches of Orangetree and the far Estates.
If another place was found, and I'm sure it could be. I mean, as
much as we say that the land out there is difficult to purchase, it's not
impossible. There's too many orange groves right now. The orange
farmers are the first ones to admit it. They'd love to be able to get a
good deal on their land, and I'm sure we could find a place for it.
But in any case, I mean, we haven't been to the present bus barn,
we haven't heard the noise that exists and that the neighbors have to
tolerate in those neighborhoods. I was wondering if we could take a
minute to play just a brief, brief segment of that particular tape.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I just wanted to make a comment. He
Page 110
May 11, 2004
said he made this tape at 300 feet, but they said it's going to be 1,600
feet, so it doesn't -- it's not even relevant.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, no, no. It's going to be 900,
isn't it? 900 feet.
MR. DUANE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: 900 feet?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. But once again, this is
the 11 th hour this is coming back. If we refuse to grant permission to
be part of the PUD at this time, they can bring it back as a conditional
use after they've met with the neighborhoods and worked out all the
details.
Here we're at the 11 th hour. I wouldn't feel comfortable if I was
sitting out in the audience. I've been to that meeting that they're
talking about, I believe it was on the 29th, and the meeting did not go
well. It was one of the meanest meetings I've ever seen. And for good
reason. The way it was presented, it was -- I don't know, I don't want
to degrade the school staff, they're very good people. But it was like a
used car sales, you know, trust me and we'll -- we're going to do this
right, you know? If I ever learned a lesson, I'll never use those words
"trust me". But I'm from the government, I'm here to help you.
Could we possibly take about five minutes just to listen to that
tape and maybe firsthand experience what we're talking about?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now, understand--
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Why don't we take a lunch
break and you can listen to it?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You want to do that?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We're almost done with this.
I'm ready to make a motion. But I thought I might need the tape along
to -- if anyone -- you know, if the motion passes, there's no problem.
If it doesn't, I'd like to play the tape.
So I'll make a motion at this particular time that we accept this
PUD with the exception of the transportation facility that sits on it
Page 111
---""-
May 11, 2004
noW. And the reason being is the fact that it's incompatible with the
existing neighborhood.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, do I have a second on that?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The motion dies for lack of a second.
Okay, commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think all my questions have been
answered.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Now you wanted to hear that--
I'm going to give you that --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I do -- I would like to hear that
tape.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Not all 23 minutes?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Oh, no, no --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I mean, we're talking two minutes, three
minutes, right?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- I don't think anybody wants
to listen to that noise for 29 minutes, no way.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Can we take a lunch while
Commissioner Coletta listens to the tape?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, it wasn't for me, just for
me.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I'd like to move this along, get this
subject put to bed before we leave for lunch. And then that -- because
we have a 1 :30 time certain to come back to. I've got a lot of people
here, so --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How about if I throw a motion
out?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve with --
except for the ancillary transportation facility, and that would have to
come back as a conditional use.
Page 112
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Good motion. I have a motion on
the floor from Commissioner Henning to approve this PUD except for
the ancillary plant, which will come back to us as a conditional use; is
that correct, Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's correct.
MS. STUDENT: Just a clarification. So that then would be
listed in the conditional use section of the PUD document.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Correct.
MS. STUDENT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And a second by Commissioner Halas.
Commissioner Henning, did you have any further discussion on
that?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, any further discussion by board
members?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No, I'll go along with it. I was
just hoping I could try to avoid bringing it back.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, that -- it's a great motion.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Now can we listen to the tape?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And now we will break for lunch. We'll
be back here at 1 :30.
(Recess was taken.)
Page 113
--------
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We're back in order. And we're on the
mikes, right?
Item #5A
PRESENTATION BY THE BIG CYPRESS BASIN OF THE
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ON THE
BASIN'S AND DISTRICT'S FISCAL YEAR 2004-05 PROPOSED
BIIDGET S - I1ŒSENIED
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. You've got a hot mike. And that
brings us to a time certain. It's item 5(A), and that's to be heard at one
p.m. -- we went 30 minutes later on a previous item -- and that's a
presentation by the Big Cypress for the South Florida Water
Management District on the Basin's and the District's Fiscal Year
2004-2005 proposed budgets, and Mr. Clarence Tears will present.
MR. TEARS: Good afternoon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Sorry. We're a little late, Clarence.
MR. TEARS: That's all right. For the record, Clarence Tears,
director of the Big Cypress Basin, South Florida Water Management
District.
My voice is a little rough today, and hopefully I can get through
this.
First thing I have here is something to wake you up after lunch,
and it says, I gave a presentation today, but I only pretended to know
what I'm talking about. Fortunately my audience was only pretending
to listen, so --
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to talk about the budget
forum at the district. We're in the process of developing the FY -'05
budget and want to take this opportunity to bring to you items that we
hope to fund next year in your region and to hear from you, each one
of you, you know, what your needs and issues are for next year.
Page 114
~----"
------
May 11, 2004
I think it's important to give you the opportunity to let the district
know, you know, what's needed locally, and they want to hear. The
District Governing Board is sincere. And if you look at all the
resources that are being focused on the west coast, they really
sincerely want to help and make a different on the west coast of
Florida.
Before we go over the actual proj ects and the proj ected amounts,
let me commit to you that the local government and local communities
are valued in our organization, that we will strive to have a greater
presence and be productive partners in our mutual efforts to preserve
and protect our quality of life in Southwest Florida.
With that, I'd like to introduce our governing board member,
Trudi Williams.
MS. WILLIAMS: I don't need to say anything. Go ahead.
MR. TEARS: No? But she's on the west coast, and she really is
here representing the west coast well. In addition, she's chairman ex
officio of the Big Cypress Basin Board. So she actually has a dual
role over here, and she makes sure the District Governing Board
knows there's a need.
In addition, we have Jackie Repp, Lower West Cost Service
Center, and we work together in the region to try to do what's best for
the whole region. She does all the permitting out of her office. She
has additional staff helping us with Naples Bay. She's dealing with
Estero Bay, Caloosahatchee River. So she's a great asset and resource,
and I'm hoping that you'll get to see her more often, and she'll work
closer with, you know, our local Collier County.
In addition, I have Sally McPherson, which -- she's a shared
position between the Fort Myers office and the Naples office, and
she's an additional contact for you. If you have a need, she'll find a
way to get you the answers or the person to help you with that. And
I'll be counting on her a lot while I'm away from the office for the next
month. And -- but if there's any needs at all, I'll make sure you get
Page 115
May 11, 2004
one of her cards before she leaves. Make sure you utilize that
resource.
Very briefly, this year the district has streamlined and approved
our organizational structure and our budgetary process. Both are built
on a 10-year strategic plan. The district board met at a retreat, and
they created a 10-year strategic plan, the direction the District
Governing Board wants to go.
And what they also did at the same time was created 10
programs. In the past, we had numerous amount of programs, but
what they did is they looked at the fundamentals of each program and
created 10 programs that deal with everything that the district needs to
accomplish. And it's just an easier, better structure to get the job done.
In the organization Southwest Florida has some pretty important
representatives and leadership roles. Carol Wehle was the Lower
West Coast Service director, and now she's the assistant executive
director of the district.
Chip Merriam, who used to be the Lower West Coast Service
Center director, is deputy executive director of water resources.
In addition, we have Pam Mac'Kie, who's a deputy executive
director of land resources in the greater west coast. And Tom Olliff,
which you're all familiar with, is the deputy executive director of
corporate resources for the district.
These individuals understand the west coast needs, and there are
other resources we've had on the east coast looking out for west coast
Issues.
The priorities set by the governing board are, on one end,
bringing the old central and southern flood control system into the
21 st century by refurbishing and upgrading the infrastructure, water
supply, concentrating on how to meet the current and future needs in a
cost-effective manner.
The five-year update to the lower west coast water supply plan is
this year. Our lower west coast water supply plan is in the works and
Page 116
May 11, 2004
being updated, and we'll need the local community to get involved in
that. And Jim DeLony, I introduced him to some of the staff, and
thank you.
But that's a really important -- lower west coast water supply plan
looks out 20 years and looks at the local needs for the resource, and
we'll need the city and the county to be a part of that process to ensure
that we address your issues in the updated plan.
Kissimmee River Restoration. One of the truly successful
restoration efforts has key land acquisition deadlines and priorities that
need to be met this year.
Okeechobee Protection Plan and Restoration is another project.
Public/private partnerships. This is -- greatly affects our region. We
have three sur projects, reservoir projects, that have been expedited by
the district. This is another priority. And the C-43 in Hendry County
is one of those projects, and it will improve Lee estuarine's waters.
And, you know, these are the waters that lead right into the Gulf.
This is an extremely important project to the region.
The Everglades Forever Act in 1994, design and build water
treatment facilities, is almost complete. And the science and research
that obtained the final phosphorous levels is the upcoming challenge.
And the other priority the district has is to recognize employees,
because they're an important resource to accomplish all the goals.
Two important teams that the district board has implemented is
the District Leadership Team. It provides stable, collaborative
leadership to ensure intrigated -- integrated decisions for today and
visions for tomorrow.
The DOT makes policy decisions based on its own examination
and/or by recommendation made by the Management Action Team.
The Management Action Team is senior managers. They provide a
collaborative forum to discuss and resolve key issues and formulate
recommendations. They implement policies as directed by the District
Leadership Team, examine issues assigned by the District Leadership
Page 11 7
------- - ~---
-.--»--
May 11,2004
Team, examine issues raised by the team members, and provide
recommendations to the District Leadership Team on examined issues.
The handout I just provided you -- page one has a fax about the
budget and the process. I won't go over that in detail, but that's
provided to you just to understand the budget process. And I will
leave some copies out for the general public before I leave.
In addition, two and three -- page two and three show local
initiatives, and you can see you have the Caloosahatchee River,
Charlotte Harbor, Estero Bay, a Naples Bay initiative, and also the Big
Cypress Basin initiative. These are initiatives in this fiscal year's
budget.
Next year we actually receive $2,090,000 for Naples Bay, and an
additional $500,000 for the Big Cypress initiative through the state
legislation. So that's additional money being put forth to Collier
County to deal with local issues.
Next one I have is a list of the Comprehensive Everglades
Restoration Plan projects in our area. One important one here is Lake
Trafford. Lake Trafford actually went out for bid. It went out for -- it
went out on bid Monday, and we're hoping to bring to the District
Governing Board in June the lowest responsible bidder.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, good.
MR. TEARS: So that project's moving forward. In addition, the
Tamiami Trail culvert project should start next month in July, and
that's State Road 29 to -- I think it's state road -- I want to 92, or 82.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Ninety-two, yeah.
MR. TEARS: Ninety-two. It will include resurfacing, in
addition, adding additional box culverts under the trail to just make it
a little more invisible and allow the water to move freely.
Last thing on this one I have is alternative water supply grants for
FY -'04. As you can see, this region received a 10t of money for local
projects. In addition, I listed for you some of the proposed Big
Cypress Basin projects for next year, some of the major projects. One
Page 118
---- "
May 11, 2004
item not listed is Lake Trafford, but that will move forward. And we
did receive an additional $2 million from the state for that restoration
effort this year.
All other functions, such as permitting, planning, community
outreach and education, mission support, are not broken out but are
significant percentages in the budget process, and it's extremely
important to the District Governing Board that they are in the budget.
Permitting. This is the second fastest growing region in the
country, and that's why the Fort Myers service center, our Lower West
Coast Service Center, as it is called today, is really focused on
meeting the permitting needs of this region. And it is challenging at
the rate that we're growing.
Planning. It is time to update the lower west coast water supply
plan, as I stated earlier, and it's extremely important that your staff is
involved in that process.
Then you've got community outreach and education. The new
organization that the district has provides us a greater presence in the
local community to make sure that your issues are addressed. And
that's the commitment of the District Governing Board to this area, is
they want to make sure your issues are heard and addressed.
And with that, I'd like to open it up to the commissioners and
make sure that, if there's any additional issues or concerns that you
have, that we make sure that the District Governing Board knows
about that through the budget process. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We have Commissioner Henning.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Mr. Tears asked what the Board
of Commissioners' priorities are. I'd like to lead off by, water quality
in our bays ties with stormwater drainage in the coastal area. Not only
do we have Naples Bay, but we have the Wiggins Pass area, the
Moorings area, and places down in East Naples.
I think we -- our priority should be -- accomplish both of those, is
stormwater protection, and by doing -- stormwater enhancement and
Page 119
May 11, 2004
protection. And by doing that, you know, tying it into projects around
the coastal region. We could get that water quality within our bays and
estuaries. -
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes. That's really important. And you
can mark that down. Is that what you're going to do when we do this?
MR. TEARS: Yes. We'll actually create minutes for this
meeting, condensed minutes, and they will be provided to the district.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Naples Park has that continuing
problem up there, too, which affects the bay up there, Wiggins Pass.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, the whole water -- the whole
estuary system up in that area and all through --
MR. TEARS: Your commitment through the Fleischmann
property purchase really will help us to deal with some of the water
quality issues before they do go into the bay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's good.
MR. TEARS: I think that was a major significant purchase for
this area, and I'm glad you-all had the foresight to move forward with
that, and I thank you for that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: How would you like to participate
in another such purchase that could have even greater impacts, the
other Fleischmann property south of Golden Gate? Can you -- can
you participate with us in evaluating the possibility of doing that?
MR. TEARS: I think -- yes, we can.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. TEARS: We can be part of that process to evaluate it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Good.
MR. TEARS: And I still have another $10 million I owe Collier
County over the next 20 years.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. TEARS: So there may be an opportunity.
Page 120
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I know, but we deserve it.
MR. TEARS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: What impact will the installation of
the culverts along 41 east have on traffic?
MR. TEARS: It will have an impact on traffic, because it will be
certain times that you'll only have one lane. Mr. Mudd had a great
idea to make sure we get through that -- I think it was an FDOT alert,
make sure we announce it through that paper.
In addition, our effort is to try to minimize the impacts, but there
will be impacts, because when you add the box culverts under the
trail, you have to close off one lane, and when you resurface the trail,
they'll do one lane at a time, so they will be inconvenienced. The idea
is if we inform the public ahead of time, the possibility they can
always utilize 29 to 75 and maybe come back around 951 to reduce
the impacts of the travel.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's going to have an impact not
only just on traffic but EMS services, so I think --
MR. TEARS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- we should plan for some
alternatives. I presume the helicopter will be available for any
emergencIes --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- down that way, but -- how long
is the construction period?
MR. TEARS: We're estimating about a year for the total
construction.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So it will actually go through the
peak season, huh?
MR. TEARS: Well, until next year -- until next month, until we
get the contractors scheduled, we won't know exactly how long it will
take him, but we provided him, based on our best guess estimate,
about a year to complete the project. And maybe that --
Page 121
May 11, 2004
MR. MUDD: Will you tell the commissioners how many
culverts you're going to install?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Forty-seven, I think.
MR. TEARS: Well, there's 67 total culverts, but it's a two-phase
project. The first phase, roughly about 29 culverts.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. And the 29 will not take a
full year, right?
MR. TEARS: No.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The entire number will take a full
year?
MR. TEARS: That's corr -- well, no. The phase one is roughly
about a year, but that includes the resurfacing, getting the road ready
for resurfacing. But we're estimating about a year proj ect.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Regarding those box culverts, I
understand that there's no plans right now to widen U.S. 41 from 951
out, all the way to 29, but there's a lot of development that's proposed
for that area, some of it beginning right now. And I think the state is
taking a look at widening that road. Will you be taking that into
consideration when you build these box culverts, or is that not a
problem?
MR. TEARS: Well, probably -- they're actually concrete pipes.
They're not really box culverts. I probably spoke incorrectly.
At this point what we're trying to do is stay within the DOT
right-of-way to minimize the wetland impact. So what we're trying to
do is just add additional culverts, and as part of that process in
working with Florida Department of Transportation, we worked with
them to add the resurfacing component.
But no, we're not considering at this time -- you know, there will
be some just resurfacing of the existing roadway, not widening from --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, if I could--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, I didn't mean you widening it, but I
Page 122
May 11, 2004
know the state is considering --
MR. TEARS: They may be looking at it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- it, and I just wondered if the pipes that
you put in will have to be taken back out because they won't then
accommodate the wider road.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the area that he's talking about is
basically to allow the south Golden Gate Estates area that they just
purchased, that big area right there, to continue to sheet flow past 41.
And the areas that are being developed -- I labeled them D-l, D-2 --
they're further to the west than this area that they're talking about, the
box culvert. But -- and I'll be looking at the plans again with
Clarence, with transportation to see if any of them are impacting the
receiving area at all.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah, I just thought, you know, you
might want a heads up before you spend all that money and then need
to dig them back up again,
And also, a couple others, the storm management -- I wish I
would have said this like Commissioner Henning. He just gave a
really good overview of the whole county. I'm being rather selfish in
saying, I was wondering if you were looking at the triangle, at the -- at
Royal Woods and at County Barn Road. I know that they all have
tremendous flooding problems.
MR. TEARS: Yes. Actually, in next year, Gateway triangle is in
the budget list, and we actually have funds from the state. So we are
working with your staff to move that project forward.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And have you been looking at
Royal Woods and County Barn Road as well, or is that --
MR. TEARS: No, but as part of your Lely stormwater
improvements, we actually, in our 10-year strategic plan for the basin,
the outlying year, I think we've set aside $27 million for stormwater
projects in Collier County.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you.
Page 123
May 11, 2004
Commissioner --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Halas.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- Halas first. Okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I've had my questions answered.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Clarence?
MR. TEARS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I wanted to ask you about the
drainage canals throughout the estates from the agricultural land. I
know that we are talking about them being rated as one in 10-year
storm for the maximum. Is there any future plans to look at deepening
these canals, widening these canals, or doing something as far as
structures go that will increase the capacity to be able to take care of
something more than a one in 10-year event?
MR. TEARS: At this point what we're trying to do is, through
our efforts, is try to equalize surface flows on connects. We have like
the C-l connector, trying to connect the Miller Canal to the Golden
Gate main system to reduce the peaks, but we're really focused on the
rural areas on the 10-year storm event, and this is based on Collier
County's Compo Plan. So we're trying to meet your Compo Plan.
Your Compo Plan currently states a one in 25-year storm event for the
urban area, and a one in 10- year storm event for the rural area.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think you've got to rethink that
in the near future.
MR. TEARS: So the county addressed that plan, and there's a
possibility we might have to look at increasing that. But at this point,
we're trying to at least get a one in 10-year storm event protection.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We don't have that capacity in
some places out there? Sometime when you get a chance, maybe you
could give me a more in-depth answer on that.
MR. TEARS: I'll make sure I meet with you, Commissioner.
Page 124
,--"----'""
- ------~--
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Well--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Maybe that's where we need to
look at the stormwater authority for addressing some of those issues.
MR. TEARS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MR. TEARS: It would help. Just realize it's -- you know, there's
only so much money in our budget and your budget. And it is a
limiting factor on how much we can accomplish.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Now, we don't need a vote on this, right?
MR. TEARS: Nope.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So all -- are there any other questions
from the board members?
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I'd like to just say one thing. And
we're working with Clarence and with the Southwest Florida Water
Management District to talk about future water needs in Collier
County as we proceed and develop.
We've started to broach the condition where we want to go to a
50/50 freshwater reverse osmosis issue instead of going 80 percent
reverse osmosis and 20 percent freshwater.
We basically looked at the math on that. The math looks ugly, as
far as we'll have the highest water rates in all of the State of Florida if
we go to that 80/20 issue. So we've started a healthy dialogue with
them to talk to them about ways to get that accomplished, and in the
same -- and in the same topic, talk about ways for ASR and issues to
store reclaimed water, to store potable water for the dry season or high
season for us, to help us along with those proj ects. They've been
doing well.
I will tell you that SRP takes a healthy chunk of the South
Florida Water Management District's budget. You know, if you
looked at the first page, their budget's around $763 million. And that--
SRP takes a big chunk of that.
Page 125
May 11, 2004
As that project starts to take hold and go through the process,
then I think they can help us with issues with potable water for
residents. I will say that the -- at least the Southwest Florida Water
Management District does a really healthy job with ASRs and things
likes that for Pinellas, Hillsborough, and Manatee Counties.
And in the future, after we get the Everglades restoration thing
pretty much on track, I think we'd ask them to start pushing a little bit
more into those particular areas with us to help us financially as we do
the ASR storage issues.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Clarence.
MR. TEARS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Appreciate it.
Item #10B
RESOLUTION 2004-170 AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF
A LOW-INTEREST ST ATE REVOLVING FUND (SRF) LOAN
APPLICATION TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (FDEP) FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF RECLAIMED WATER MAIN AND FORCE
MAIN AND PUMP STATION UPGRADE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$7,351,000; AND TO ADOPT THE DOCUMENT CALLED
'COLLIER COUNTY NORTH COUNTY WASTEWATER
RECLAMATION FACILITY (NCWRF) EXPANSION FACILITIES
PLAN UPD ATE, MAY, 2004' TO ALLOW THE COUNTY TO
Weare going on to --
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- our 1:30 time certain.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. That is a -- that is a presentation. It's
item number 10(B). It's at 1 :30, and that item pertains -- requesting
Page 126
May 11, 2004
approval of a resolution authorizing submission of a low interest state
revolving fund loan application to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection.
Public utilities has successfully applied for these types of loans in
the past and expects to be successful in obtaining this approximate
$7.4 million loan for the construction of a reclaimed water main, a
force main, and two master pump stations in the area of
Goodlette- Frank Road and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The current rate
on these low interest loans is 2.7 percent.
As part of the loan application process, the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection requires a public hearing presentation. To
that end, Mr. Mark Brewer, from Angie Brewer and Associates, our
loan administrator, has just a few words to share with you this
afternoon.
As he finishes, we request that you approve the resolution
authorizing the submission of the loan application. Mr. Brewer?
MR. BREWER: Thank you. For the record, my name is, Mark
Brewer with Angie Brewer and Associates. We are helping to
administer the SRF loan program relative to these projects.
There was a facilities plan developed and reviewed by staff and
is before you that identifies alternatives that were looked at to find the
lowest cost alternative that is environmentally sound, technically
feasible, and meets the state requirements for this type of project.
This is the first step in the process for identifying the needs of
this proj ect and getting on the list to take care of getting the funds in
place so that when the proj ect needs to go forward here in the next
couple months, that those funds will be in place at that time.
This does allow you to access -- the current interest rate is 2.71
percent, and your current rate structure is sufficient for the repayment
of the loan that would result from this effort.
And that's what I actually had to say for the record. If there are
any questions, I'll be glad to take those.
Page 127
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And we have no speakers on this
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- subj ect?
Anything from staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nothing? Oh, Commissioner Coyle.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Coyle, a second by Commissioner Henning.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Madam chair, can we hear the
item 10(D), the Mirasol flow-way?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You know what -- 10(D), did you say?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I think it was, yeah.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I was going to finish up -- I was just
going up to 8(D). It should be pretty quick. It's a Jim DeLony thing,
being that it tied in with this, and I -- and then I'd be happy to go there.
Would that be all right with you?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's fine.
Item #8D
Page 128
May 11, 2004
ORDINANCE 2004-31 ADOPTING AN UPDATED UTILITIES
STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES ORDINANCE, ADOPT
ACCOMPANYING COLLIER COUNTY WATER-SEWER
DISTRICT UTILITIES STANDARDS MANUAL AND REPEAL
UTILITIES STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES ORDINANCE NO.
2OOJ - ~ 7 - A OOEIED
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, great. 8(D).
MR. KW A: For the record, I'm Paul Kwa from -- a project
manager for the Public Utilities Engineering Department. And I'm
going to be presenting the updating of the utilities standards and
standard procedures ordinance and the utilities standard manual.
Let me tell you a little about the ordinance and standards manual.
The ordinance, the county Utilities Standards and Procedures
Ordinance outlines county procedures and guidelines for the design
and construction of utility systems. The utilities standards manual
provides technical details on utility systems for engineers and
contractors to use to construct utility systems.
This is a photograph of some workers installing some
underground pipe next to a street.
The purpose of the proj ect was to update the ordinance and
standards manual to facilitate the operation and maintenance of the
county water, wastewater, and reclaimed systems and also to facilitate
handling of paperwork between community development and
engineering services and the developer, and also increase the integrity
of the county's water, wastewater, and reclaimed systems utilities
piping and other systems. It is consistent with the most recent water
and wastewater master plans and capital budgets.
The project was a collaborative effort. The Public Utilities
Division worked with the Development Services Advisory Committee
and also the DSAC utilities subcommittee, and the other various
Page 129
--
May 11, 2004
groups listed there, the County Attorney's Office, the Engineering
Review Services Department of Community Development, and the
Water Operations/Wastewater Operations Departments, as well as the
administration department of Public Utilities.
Some of the most significant changes to the ordinance and
standards manual include the following: We improved the quality of
pipe laying and backfilling material, which will minimize future pipe
breaks, we updated some technical specifications, which will facilitate
for easier maintenance and operation of utility systems, and we also
added some construction inspection requirements requiring county
presence.
We also added nonpotable water irrigation system requirements,
which will help the county conserve potable water by using more
reclaimed reuse water, and we also updated the standard conveyance
documents checklist, which is an interface between developers and
community development. And we are also requiring that the
electronic files be in Florida state claim accordance.
The project duration was approximately one year. We've been
collaborating with the aforementioned parties for about the past year.
So it is staffs recommendation that we -- that we update the
standards and procedures ordinance and standards manual.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion to approve by
Commissioner Henning, a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any discussion from board members?
MS. FILSON: Close the public hearing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Pardon me?
MR. MUDD: Close the public hearing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. And now we will close the public
hearing. I forgot we're back over there. Thank you.
Sue, you keep me straight, don't you?
Page 130
---.--,
May 11, 2004
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, Paul K wa's brand new to our
organization, okay? It's his first time up in front of the Board of
County Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: He did a good job, didn't he?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: And that's the kind of caliber of folks we're getting
in, okay? We're bringing some young folks in, and they're energetic,
trying to get stuff done. He's worked really hard on this program to
make it happen as it came to you today.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Welcome to the family.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Welcome aboard.
MR. KW A: Thanks.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Trying to compensate for some of
these old guys.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I noticed he said young very loudly.
MR. KW A: I'm older than I look.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Take the rest of the day off.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you
Item # 1 OF
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE A COMMERCIAL
EXCAVATION PERMIT (AR 3853) FOR "MIRASOL FLOWW A Y
Page 131
.-,-..,-
--.-,---
----.-.-..,
--
May 11, 2004
AND WATER MANAGEMENT LAKES", LOCATED IN
SECTIONS 10, 15, & 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST: BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY LEE COUNTY
(RESIDENTIAL), ON THE WEST BY P ARKLANDS POD,
TERRAFINA POD, AND LAND ZONED AGRICULTURAL, ON
THE SOUTH BY IMMOKALEE ROAD AND THE
COCOHA TCHEE CANAL, AND THE EAST BY LAND ZONED
AGRICULTURAL AND THE HERITAGE BAYPUD-
And Commissioner Henning requested that we go to item 10(F),
which is number 16(A) 1 0, the Mirasol project.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir. That's -- it's a recommendation to
approve a commercial excavation pennit, AR-3853, for Mirasol
Flow-way and Water Management Lakes, located in Section 10, 15,
and 22, Township 48 south, Range 26 east, bounded on the north by
Lee County residential, on the west by Parkland's POD, Terrafina
POD, and land zoned agricultural, on the south by Immokalee Road
and the Cocohatchee Canal, and on the east by land zoned
agricultural, and by the Heritage Bay PUD.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I thought we were going to get this
done before Nicole came back.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: We weren't quick enough.
MR. MUDD: Stan Chrzanowski will present.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My
name is Stan Chrzanowski, and I'm an engineer with the Community
Development Department.
This proj ect, my understanding is that the Conservancy has an
objection, and the objection is basically fonn over function, so I don't
intend going into function at all. I know that the developer brought
along his engineer who's probably prepared to do a 45-minute
presentation on function, but that's been done here before on this
Page 132
'--"
-----c-----c<-
May 11,2004
proj ect.
A little background. We have a fairly complicated excavation
ordinance. We have what they call a development excavation permit.
And if you're a development with a site development plan or a
subdivision, you apply for this type of permit. It doesn't require any
board hearing at all because it's already been approved as part of a
PUD or another review.
We also have a way to permit stand-alone excavations, and it's
called a commercial excavation permit. Stand alone meaning it's not
accompanied by a subdivision or a site development plan.
And if you read the commercial excavation portion of the
ordinance, it says that you have to have -- that it's basically for off-site
hauling of fill, and the off-site hauling of fill triggers a few things, it
triggers Collier County Planning Commission review because your
hauling -- generally your hauling is going to affect the neighbors.
Then we run across the occasional process where it just doesn't seem
to fit.
February 23rd of 2003, they -- this project, the Mirasol flow-way
excavation permit application was submitted to our department.
That's well over a year ago. The application request number is 3853.
I believe we're probably up almost to 6,000 by now. So it's quite a
while ago that it's been sitting in the system.
And when it came in, we at first were going to issue just a simple
development excavation permit for the flow-way itself, but we had
some questions, and we got them in for a few meetings and ironed
them out.
The first flow-way permit, since there are -- the neighbors are all
involved in this, Old Cypress, Mirasol, the Parklands. I think part of it
maybe even sits in Heritage Bay. The neighbors are all part of this
flow-way, and the PUD for Mirasol, the last few pages of it actually
has the flow-way excavation agreement in it.
We -- we tried to figure out how we're going to do this. Of
Page 133
May 11, 2004
course, the flow-way should kind of be done all at once. But, you
know, even though we have an agreement, nobody's going first and
whatever.
So we finally -- after about a year of negotiating with them, my
understanding is about February we came to an agreement they are
going to do. They're going to permit it as a commercial excavation
permit, and that's why we're a commercial excavation. There is no
off-site hauling. And we've decided that the lakes that are connected
to this flow-way, since it's all drainage infrastructure, should probably
be done with the flow-way.
Now, in the past -- and there's been quite a few projects like this
-- we have brought in projects with no off-site hauling with
commercial excavation just to get the developer a start on the
stormwater infrastructure. Well, this stormwater infrastructure is,
apparently, some type of system-wide improvement that even the
water management district thinks should happen.
When we -- well, I handed you out some correspondence. We
had heard that there was a lot of objection to this. If you go to the
second to the last page, after some initial correspondence -- second to
the last page -- the first line of that page is on the page before, only
one line long.
On Tuesday, 11 May at 9 a.m., regular meeting of the BCC, we
have an item titled Mirasol flow-way excavation. Consent agenda
means the item will be approved without discussion unless it is pulled
off the consent agenda and added to the regular agenda.
I'm not a psychic, but -- I'm attaching a copy of the executive
summary, and the execu -- and this went out to EPA, DEP, water
management district, the Corps of Engineers -- no, not DEP. They're
not involved.
I'm attaching a copy of this executive summary. The executive
summary is short because the flow-way has been the topic of much
public discussion already. Forgive me for being blunt, but water
Page 134
--'----
May 11, 2004
management district has accepted the engineers' calculations. They've
issued a permit.
The Corps hangup about issuing the permit seems to be EP A.
While EP A is not an agency that Collier County deals with directly,
EP A's review seems to carry some weight with the Corps.
When you read the executive summary, pay attention to the
stipulations regarding construction commencement. Weare requiring
that the developer bring their Corps permit to the preconstruction
meetings.
Stipulation number one. We assume this will satisfy all parties in
that if the Corps ever issues their permit, the flow-way will -- never
issues their permit, the flow-way will never be built. Does anyone
have a strenuous objection to that proposed course of action? Does
anyone have an objection to the item being left on the consent agenda?
Does anyone intend (sic) showing up at the hearing to talk about the
item? Does anyone have an alternate suggested wording to the one
stipulation?
We kind of thought that covered it with all the agencies. Now,
I'm hearing that I can't issue the permit until the Corps says it's okay.
But a quick reminder, just because you approve me issuing a permit,
doesn't mean I go back and issue it.
In point of fact, most of the permits you tell me that we can issue,
we're months before we issue a permit because there's a lot of T's to be
crossed, a lot of I's to be dotted, bonding, generally other permits to be
obtained.
J esse Hardy, his permit -- and you're all familiar with that -- was
many months after you told me we could issue -- you told us we could
issue the permit, many months before he got it, because there's a lot of
things that have to be done.
We're on a computer -- computerized permit approval process. I
can't issue a permit without -- right now without the environmental
department signing off on it. They received this budget February
Page 135
May 11, 2004
24th. They have certain problems with tree removal. That's for them
to iron out. I don't have a problem with the excavation itself.
All I'm looking for is permission from the Board of
Commissioners -- because it's been in our system so long, the
developer came in and said, the board is going on vacation soon, we
would like to go through the board to get approval for staff to issue
this in case the board is on vacation. Skip Bergmann with the Corps
tells me that they are, he thinks, 30 to 45 days away from issuing the
permit, and it's probably as much as 90 days, but that throws us into
wet season.
Forgive me, but the commission is not around a whole lot during
that period of time. So if we get permission to do this, we want to be
able to issue them the permit as soon as the Corps issues their permit.
And if you approve this, I'm in a position to do that. If you don't
approve this, then when I see the Corps permit, I have to start
scheduling board hearings again.
Now, I heard some comment about how I didn't notify any of the
adjacent property owners. Well, the adjacent property owners are
mostly people that are digging the same flow-way and have a vested
interest in seeing -- you know, you've got Mirasol -- on one side of it
you've Old Cypress, on the other side you've got -- on one side you've
got the Parklands, on the other side you've got Heritage Bay.
This thing has been looked at by all the neighbors over and over.
It's been in our system for many years. The board approved the
project once. We just want the board's permission to issue an
excavation permit if and when we get a Corps permit.
I'd prefer to issue the permit with the stipulation that they can't
start digging until we get a Corps permit. But worse comes to worse,
as long as I don't have to come back here again, I'd be happy.
That's my presentation. Did I do five minutes?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is that just for the near future or
forever?
Page 136
-- - ---- -- - -..
-"-"^"-
May 11, 2004
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Just for this one item, sir.
Any questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Marj ori e?
MS. STUDENT: There was also an allegation made about this
permit having to go back to the EAC, and I want to clear that up. I've
talked to Ms. Ryan about it. I opine, because this is really a
development permit that -- and that's what it really is, by definition in
our code, that it wouldn't have to go to the EAC, because the purpose
of that is that they've already seen all this when they saw the PUD or
whatever development approval it was that came through that had it in
it.
So it's kind of a form over substance argument, because they're
calling it an excavation permit so they can go a little early and get the
infrastructure done, and I understand from CFS why they're calling it
that, when in point of fact, it's really a development permit, and that is
what my -- it's sort of really a hybridy situation. But that was what my
opinion was predicated upon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So Stan, to sum up everything, you
can't release that permit until the Corps of Engineers okays it, okays
their permit; is that correct?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Well, I suppose if you let me, I could
write the permit with the stipulation that they're waiting on the Corps'
approval, or I could wait until the Corps issues theirs, and then just
turn around and issue ours right away.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Do we have speakers?
MS. FILSON: Yes. We have three speakers.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Would you call the speakers.
MS. FILSON: Nicole Ryan. She will be followed by Charles
Mann.
MS. RYAN: Good afternoon. For the record, Nicole Ryan here
Page 137
--"--------'
May 11,2004
on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
I would like to thank you for pulling this item off the consent
agenda. I do believe that it is important to discuss and get these
concerns out.
I did have a couple of questions concerning the extent to which
this excavation permit would go. Is this for just the Mirasol property
or for the Mirasol flow-way, which includes Terrafina, Parklands, and
Old Cypress? And that also brings in the fact, do all of those projects
have their Corps permits? Which I don't believe they do. But is it
going to be for all of those properties or just the Mirasol?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: This one is just for the Mirasol
property.
MS. RYAN: Just for the Mirasol property, okay. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Terrafina and Parklands doesn't
have their permit yet.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: I don't know. I forget where they are in
the system.
MS. RYAN: I don't believe they do, but -- okay. So this is just
for the Mirasol proj ect. Thank you.
Well, I go back to my initial concern that the Land Development
Code -- and I don't think that's being disputed that you have to have all
of your permits, including the Corps permit, in place before any
excavation permit can be issued.
Beyond that, on the executive summary it does admit that the
Corps still has questions about the flow-way and that these questions
are focused on the potential hydrologic calculations and potential
hydrologic impacts.
I know that the district has issued their permit but the Corps
hasn't, and that's the reason why this permit has been in the works in
the county for so long, because the Corps does have questions and the
Corps has not issued their permit.
Mirasol itself is expected to impact a large quantity of wetlands.
Page 138
-------
---
'---
May 11, 2004
In addition to the direct wetland impact, I believe, it's somewhere
around 660 acres, you also have wetland impacts from the surrounding
areas, and some calculations judge that it could impact up to 1,000
additional acres of wetlands, and we're talking about CREW,
Corkscrew Sanctuary, the Corkscrew Marsh area, so it's very, very
important.
And when we talk about flow-ways and where does this empty
into, we're talking about the Cocohatchee River and the Cocohatchee
Canal, which was listed as impaired waters, and also into the Wiggins
Pass outstanding Florida water. So these are some of the issues that
the Corps is looking into and why this permit has been held up.
We don't know that the Corps permit is going to be issued. I
prefer to think of it as if the permit is issued, not when. And so the
Conservancy believes that it's premature to go ahead and issue a
county permit when we don't even know if the Corps permit is going
to be issued.
So we would like for this to wait until, or if the Corps permit has
been issued. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Ms. Ryan, I think what we're
saying here is we're not going to give the permit until they get the
Corps permit.
MS. RYAN: Well, it's a bit confusing in the executive summary,
because twice in here it says, to issue the excavation permit. And I'm
not -- I don't see in the Land Development Code where it distinguishes
between approval of an excavation permit and issuance of an
excavation permit. I'm not really sure what the difference is for that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, it's just coming before the
board for approval, and they're not going to get the permit until they
get the Corps permit.
MS. RYAN: And we would like for the county's approval to be
based on all of the information including if the Corps permit --
actually issues their permit.
Page 139
May 11,2004
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It sounds like you know a lot
about this land. Let me ask you the quality of the wetlands in there.
Would you rank it A, B, C, D, or one through 10?
MS. RYAN: I'm not a wetlands biologist, so I don't feel I'm
qualified to rank the land. I will say that the Cocohatchee flow-way
historically was something like 20 miles wide, and because of
development, it's been further and further restricted.
Currently I believe that the base of the Cocohatchee Canal, this
flow-way's about 2,000 feet wide. And with all of this additional
development, it's going to be further restricted to about 200 feet wide.
So we're taking something that historically was a very wide
sweeping flow-way and further and further constricting it, and that's
one of the concerns that we have about the flow-way in general. But
to this issue, it's one of the concerns we have about the county issuing
the permit prior to the Corps.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: And I agree with that statement.
But do you know the quality of the flow-way in the Mirasol property?
MS. RYAN: Like I said, I'm not a wetlands biologist. I know
that there are exotics there, but we're looking at -- there's a natural
function to that property. And when we're looking at putting a
flow-way it is -- putting a flow-way in is actually putting in a form of
a water management drainage ditch canal. It's more shallow, more
crooked.
And, you know, I'm not going to speak to the specifics, because I
am not an ecologist or a wetlands engineer. But it is manipulating the
natural ecological system. And, yes, it's invaded with some exotics,
but it does still perform a function with the exotics.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Growing exotics? That's its
function right now?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Next speaker?
MS. FILSON: Next speaker is Charles Mann. Mr. Mann? Okay.
And following Mr. Mann will be Brad Cornell. I don't see Brad
Page 140
May 11, 2004
either.
MR. MANN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is
Charles Mann with Pavese Law Firm, And I'm here on behalf of
Mirasol Development.
I'd like to, just very briefly, touch upon a couple of the issues that
were already brought forward.
To begin with, you heard staff discuss the kind of process we've
got here and whether this is a commercial excavation permit or
development excavation permit. And I think if we look back at the
PUD document, we can clarify that a little.
Now, I don't fault the way this was brought forward, but I think
the PUD gives some guidance as to the -- which of the criteria and
requirements in the excavation ordinance are applicable here, and 6.16
of the Mirasol PUD states that the excavation of earth and material in
a stockpiling in preparation of water management facilities or other
water bodies is hereby permitted.
It goes on to say that excavation activities shall comply with the
definition of a development excavation pursuant to division 3.5. Many
of the provisions that were cited earlier when this was pulled from the
consent agenda only apply to commercial excavation permits.
And as you heard staff explain, many of those requirements don't
really apply here because of the way this was brought forward and
because there was no off-site hauling and because all of the
neighboring property owners were very heavily involved in the PUD
process.
The only other issue I think that we need to discuss now is, again,
this distinction between the approval you give right now and the
issuance. And I will agree with Ms. Ryan that it is a little bit
ambiguous in here; however, there is some language at the end of 3.5
that clarifies this with respect to the performance obligation
requirements in 3.5.
Let's see. As soon as I can locate that -- right here. Performance
Page 141
--------'
May 11, 2004
guarantee requirements. Upon approval of any commercial or
development excavation permit but prior to the issuance thereof, the
applicant shall provide the different performance guarantees.
I think we're in the same stage here. The board is going to
approve the issuance, but as requested by staff, there will be a
condition that the permit will not be issued until the Corps permit has
been provided; therefore, we believe that, consistent with the
executive summary, this board can give the approval, and we are
entirely consistent and in compliance with the provisions of division
3.5 of the code.
And unless you have any questions, that's all I have.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nope. Thank you. Thank you.
MS. FILSON: Is Brad Cornell here?
(No response.)
MS. FILSON: That's it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Fine. We don't have a public
hearing this time, right, so I don't have to close anything?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: This is a little confusing. I
continue to get confused about the role of other agencies in issuing
permits, and they keep telling us they're -- it's our responsibility, but
they really have a role in the process.
I'd just like to sort through it, Stan, to make sure I understand
here.
Your email to the Corps of Engineers was answered by Skip
Bergmann. How can we object? It's your permit.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The developer needs to understand
that the issuance of a county permit will not have any influence on the
Corps' evaluation and that the developer may need to come back and
modify your excavation permit.
Page 142
---
----",,-
"---"
May 11, 2004
Now, while that -- while they're saying it's our permit and they
can't object, they have their own permitting process, and if they want
to attach conditions or, in fact, disapprove of it, this excavation cannot
take place even though we have granted a permit. Is that essentially
true; do I have this right?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Now, my recollection when
the Mirasol project, the PUD came before the board, was that the
flow-way was a desirable thing, that it was something that was
discussed at that point, and it was -- it was essentially necessary, a
necessary part of that PUD.
But I think there's a way we can solve this problem with respect
to the ambiguities, and that is, we can approve the issuance of the
permit only upon the availability of the Corps of Engineers' approval
and permit, and that guarantees that not only do the developers have to
meet all of the requirements of the Corps of Engineers, but they will
have to meet our requirements, too.
And in that way we can satisfÿ the requirement to assure that
nothing happens here until such time as the Corps permit is received
along with any stipulations that it might have. Does that make sense?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Yes, sir, it does.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Does that mean you don't want to hear
Clarence Tears' pleasantly brief presentation on why this is necessary?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, I think --
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, I think we need --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- yeah. I think we'd be -- because
I remember that it was necessary, that we were told at the time that
this was sort of essential for flow control or something, Clarence.
MR. TEARS: Yes. Clarence Tears, director of the Big Cypress
Basin in South Florida Water Management District.
We did come before the commission and stated the district issued
Page 143
May 11,2004
the pennit because of the constrictions in that region.
The water is getting to the channel right now, but it's a rush of
velocities. We actually had to harden the bank at that location to keep
it from eroding.
It's been detennined by our modeling efforts that the system can
handle roughly right around 500, 550 cfs. I think this project, 530 or
-- it's right around 530 cfs. And this channel will allow us to actually
operate and maintain that system, and ensure the flows gets through.
What's happening right now because of all the past development,
we've created a barrier, and we're actually impacting other people by
not allowing the water to pass through there. By allowing this to go
through there, where we can reduce the peaks during the wet season in
the area. The idea of the control structures is to ensure that we don't
degrade the area during the dry season.
Last month at the Big Cypress Basin board meeting, the board
passed a resolution to -- with the intent to make the Mirasol flow-way
in the future, once it's completed, a works of the basin. So we'll
operate and maintain the flow-way to ensure that it's maintained
correctly.
And ours was based on, we wanted the flow-way to be completed
and reviewed by our engineering staff before we take it over and
operate and maintain it.
But I've looked at the region, and there's very little opportunity to
get the water to move to the south because of all the past development.
In addition to this flow-way, we're actually looking at one further
east out by the rock pits, about 200 cfs or less, to ensure that we allow
the water to move to the south. It is right. It is a manmade solution to
the existing problem, but we've created some of the problems and
we're trying to address them the best we can.
And the flow-way is created in such a manner that it is a channel,
yet through some of the pennitting process, there's littoral zones. And
the whole idea is it's supposed to function as much as possible like a
Page 144
-'--'-
"----"
May 11, 2004
wetland. And -- thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Clarence, can you give me a little
insight into this Mirasol? Is it going to have a chain of lakes in there?
And is it set up so that we'll have as little as possible water flowing
into the Immokalee Canal, which then eventually goes into the
Cocohatchee?
MR. TEARS: Well, during the peak season, as I stated earlier,
there will be about 500 cfs or more flowing into the channel. But
currently we believe there's that much from that area flowing into the
channel. The only thing we're doing is channelizing the flow of that
water and having structures at that point to manipulate those flows.
I don't think it will reduce the flows into the Cocohatchee
channel, but I don't think it will increase the flows that are currently
getting to the channel.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But there is a leak system that's
being developed within that PUD, do you know, or maybe --
MR. TEARS: Mr. Barber should be able to talk to you about that
exactly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. BARBER: For the record, Rick Barber, Agnoli, Barber and
Brundage.
Yes, there is a system of lakes within the Mirasol proj ect itself.
There are two lakes within the flow-way, two deep water lakes that are
within the flow-way. They're interconnected and controlled by
control structures to hold the water at a certain elevation.
As Clarence states, the reason for the flow-way is that the area's
been constricted down so that, yes, we still get the same -- almost the
same amount of water, but the stage or the hedge that's created
upstream in this area is much greater than it used to be. That's part of
the reason that we have wetlands on the site now is that it's -- some of
it was pine and palmetto area that, because of these constrictions, it's
Page 145
May 11, 2004
wetter now than it's ever been.
So -- but the idea of the flow-way, which was a regional benefit
-- and it was mandated by the water management district to be done as
a private/public partnership when the projects were constructed. And
I can guarantee you, if these projects don't build it, some entity of the
government will be building it in the near future, because it will cause
that much problem upstream.
The watershed that we're working with here is 315 square miles.
It stretches from the north branch of the Estero River, all the way
down to Camp Keais Strand. So it's one huge watershed.
When we have a summer like we had in '95, all the outfalls need
to operate at their historic capacities or we'd have people that weren't
flooded historically getting flooded. Well, that's the reason that the
regional flow-way is there today.
Did I answer your question, Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, sir.
MR. BARBER: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes, you did.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, in '95 there were a
number of the working folks in Bonita Springs, fann workers, that
were flooded out of their homes, I mean water up to their windowsills,
and this is just one of the fixes for what has happened in the past as the
flow-way has definitely been narrowed down from development, but
development -- not only the recent past of the '90s, but even back in
the '60s when they started excavating -- Florida Rock started
excavating that site, so it's a good thing.
MR. BARBER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'm going to make a motion to
approve on the caveat not --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'll second it.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- to -- for the devel -- the
Page 146
May 11, 2004
applicant not to receive the permit until they have a permit from the
Corps.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's got a second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor by
Commissioner Henning to approve with the caveat that it will not be
permitted until we receive the permit from the Army Corps of
Engineers, and I have a second by Commissioner Coletta.
I have two speakers on deck, Commissioner Coy Ie and
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Does that mean I'm first?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Just another clarification on
something.
There are within this PUD roughly 50 interconnected lakes for
water retention, and then there is the off site flow-way. Now, is this
permit for the excavation -- for all the excavation that is to occur in the
PUD, or is it only for the off-site flow-way?
MR. BARBER: It's for both.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. So you'll be digging -- I
guess some of them exist already partly at least -- roughly 50 lakes or
ponds of varying sizes that will hold and retain water, and then there
will be the off-site flow-way that actually permits water to flow
through the development. Do I have that right?
MR. BARBER: Actually the flow-way itself is external to the
development.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. But it's on the property?
MR. BARBER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: It's on the property you own. It
cuts through the corner of the property you own at least, right?
MR. BARBER: It's the northern border of it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. But this particular
excavation permit is for any excavation that appears on -- that occurs
Page 147
---
May 11, 2004
on your property; is that what we're saying?
MR. BARBER: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Whether it is located in otherwise
wet areas or not; is that --
MR. BARBER: Correct.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- true? Okay. I think I've got it
straight now.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I think we've been down this
road at least once before on this flow-way. And if I remember
correctly, didn't this receive the endorsement of the Corkscrew
Sanctuary at that time?
MR. BARBER: The CREW Trust folks have entered into an
agreement to take the preserve areas, and the CREW people have
agreed with the flow-way.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Okay. And I remember we had
all the different environmental groups here at that time. And if I
remember correctly, we had all sorts of accolades for the flow-way the
way it was planned.
Now, has something been drastically changed since the first
meetings some months ago?
MR. BARBER: Just new people moving into Collier County that
are not up to speed, sir.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: In other words, all the facts
remain the same as when we put this through before and heard all the
testimony? And we had quite a few people at that time, I remember,
that questioned the validity of what was happening. And for the most
part, I remember the environmental community came out quite strong
in favor of it and seem to be moving it forward.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And, you know, I remember that so
clearly because I was really totally against the whole Mirasol project.
And when -- Nancy Payton was one of them that came up, and then
Page 148
----,,---
May 11, 2004
there was a second, and I don't remember who it was -- and with their
-- with their agreement to this -- with their approval of this, I changed
my thoughts and voted for it rather than against it. So I remember that
happening.
MR. BARBER: I have the same recollection.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, I see Brad Cornell has walked in.
I'm -- did you --
MS. FILSON: Would you like to speak, Brad?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: If you ask Brad if he wants to
speak, it will be yes.
MR. CORNELL: Are you asking me if I may?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You'd have to come to the microphone
though.
MR. CORNELL: Thank you for the invitation.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: We've already got a motion on the floor
and a second, Brad, so I must tell you that.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We're sorry you wasn't (sic)
here for the discussion.
MR. CORNELL: I understand. I was here this morning. I'm
sorry I had to go home and I had -- not home, back to the office, and I
had a bunch of phone calls that, unfortunately, took me longer than I
thought it was going to.
I wanted to clarify one thing that Mr. Barber said, and that was
that the CREW Trust does not endorse this proj ect. They have written
a letter saying that they would accept the mitigation. They do not,
emphatically do not, endorse the proj ect. They're saying, if this
proj ect goes forward, which is a big if, then they would take the
mitigation that goes along with it. That's a far cry from actual
endorsement.
And they recently sent a letter to that effect signed by Ellen
Lindblad.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Ed Carlson.
Page 149
~-------
May 11, 2004
MR. CORNELL: Yeah, I think Ed Carlson was chair by that
point, so it was quite recently, in the last month or so.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right.
MR. CORNELL: So I think that's an important distinction.
I also think that, you know, since this board had approved that
proj ect in 2001, that more information has come to light that has
caught the attention of the environmental community, to say the least,
and has raised concerns that I don't think were addressed or discussed
at the time of the approval of the project on the county level, and we
see those concerns expressed from the Corps and the U. S. EP A in the
hydrologic assessments that they're asking the Mirasol folks to go
through again, because they see this project as not being able to assure
that there won't be negative wetland impacts off site, even so far as to
affect Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary.
F or that reason, we're -- Audubon is very, very concerned that
this proj ect is a potential negative impact on the watershed in
Corkscrew, and also the water quality impacts downstream. So we
believe that those concerns need to be addressed before we go any
further down the road.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Will you be working with the Army
Corps on that?
MR. CORNELL: Oh, we've been in communication with them
quite a bit and -- as well as with U.S. EPA, and we've provided input
from our perspective. And we don't, unfortunately, have a hydrologist
on our staff, but our staff has -- Audubon of Florida staff have been in
touch with the hydrologist both for the U.S. EPA and for the Army
Corps of Engineers up in Jacksonville to find out what their concerns
were and to express what our views were, and they understand that
there are some are very important concerns that have not been
addressed.
The modeling that the Mirasol folks have put forward isn't
sufficient to assure the Corps or the EP A that there won't be negative
Page 150
May 11,2004
impacts that are unacceptable.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Has Corkscrew or CREW also been
following your lead in doing the same thing?
MR. CORNELL: Yes, yes. CREW and Corkscrew Swamp
Sanctuary, Audubon of Florida that runs that as well as Collier County
Audubon Society, have been following the issue quite closely, and we
are assessing how this reevaluation goes forward.
And it's not just a -- we have other concerns as well. But for this
-- the issue of off-site wetland impacts and the listed -- associated
listed species impacts -- we're talking mainly about wood storks --
we're obviously very much in touch with those folks, and we're
watching this process quite closely.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, and I'll be fairly brief.
Brad, this is disturbing, because, you know, when this came to us
in 2001, we were hearing everything so positive, and all of a sudden
there seems to be a turn-around going the other way now. Ifwe wait
long enough, I think we'll be able to change our minds on everything
eventually.
I, for one, am going forward. You haven't heard Commissioner
Henning's motion, but it was to approve it after they receive the Corps
permit. At that point in time, I think if there's any other new concerns,
that they'll be able to address them, and you'll be able to ride it right to
the very end to see if there's something that we missed in the
beginning.
I really don't like mixed messages. In 2001, everything's a
beautiful project and we see these wonderful ponds that are going to
evaporate at a point that's going to allow for food for the wood storks.
Now we're coming back and we're hearing that this wasn't a good
idea, that what you told us in the beginning was wrong and flawed,
and that everything else we got since then is wrong and flawed.
So excuse me if I have doubts with this process. I'd just as soon
Page 151
May 11, 2004
leave it up to the Anny Corps of Engineers to decide who's right in
this case.
MR. CORNELL: Well, if I could point out that it was really the
Anny Corps of Engineers, the U.S. EP A, hydrologists and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service that have brought these concerns forward
that were not there before, and they're pointing to the inadequacies of
the modeling -- hydrologic modeling that the Mirasol folks have
submitted. So with that inadequacy, I think we were all sort of a little
bit in the dark.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And I understand what you're
saying and I appreciate the fact you're following this through. But
once again, too, we're going to rely on the Anny Corps of Engineers
to make the final say on it. And after they get through with their
approval, if they do get through with approval, then our pennit would
be granted. At least that's, I believe, what your motion was,
Commissioner Henning.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, right.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to
disturb you.
MR. CORNELL: I understand. Okay. I guess I would just ask
you to consider waiting until we've heard from the Anny Corps to
hear that we have protected Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary and the
estuaries downstream on the Cocohatchee River. I think that those are
such important resources. We don't want to be out ahead of the -- we
don't want to be facilitating something that may not be in our interest.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Well, the point was that we're going to be
going on summer vacation, and they don't expect the pennits to come
in in the next 45 days. But if it comes in in the summer when we're
gone, they want it to move forward. And we're getting into rainy
season, and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Rainy season.
Page 152
---
----
----
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- that's why they were asking us to
approve this, and Commissioner Henning's motion said, but only
approve the permit once we have the permit from the Army Corps,
and not to even address it until that time.
MR. CORNELL: And was this -- it wasn't clear from this, but
perhaps your discussion clarified that. Was this for the entire
flow-way or just the portion on Mirasol?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, Mirasol -- Nicole brought this up. I
notice that it said in one of these things that the flow-way is all of the
properties there, and Nicole wanted that to be defined. And Rick
Barber stated that it was just for the Mirasol flow-way.
MR. CORNELL: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: In Mirasol, right? In Mirasol, right.
MR. CORNELL: Well, thank you for listening to my
perspectums ( sic).
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. Now, we've reached some
of the conclusions about opposing the flow-way, but we've done so
without the benefit of a hydrologist.
Clarence, do you have hydrologists on your staff? The South
Florida Water Management District has hydrologists on their staff?
And you are recommending this project based upon the
recommendations of your hydrologists? And would your hydrologists
do anything that would damage any of the other environmentally
sensitive areas?
MR. TEARS: Well--
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Name, for the record.
MR. TEARS: For the record, Clarence Tears, director of Big
Cypress Basin, South Florida Water Management District.
District engineers, the hydrologists, engineers, water resource
engineers have reviewed this proj ect and issued a permit. We also
have environmentalists as part of our review process that review the
Page 153
---
May 11, 2004
permit.
To say that there is no damage whatsoever, I personally can't go
on the record and state that. But if you look at what's taken place in
the past and the water resource issues that we're dealing with, this is
one way to solve some of the problems that we currently have. And
that was a recommendation of the district, is to move forward with a
flow-way to deal with the movement of surface water.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: So the hydrologists, my
understanding is that the Corps is in the process of basically going
over the same tracks that you're doing -- you have already done?
MR. TEARS: Yes.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And that's what the Corps is
presently doing to --
MR. TEARS: In my understanding, the Corps' major concern
was they felt this project may backup water even more, not let out too
much water. I think they were more concerned with head loss.
And the whole idea of this proj ect was to try to reduce the peaks
during the wet season. But with the control structures, our concern --
that's why we're taking it over to operate it is -- we want to make sure
it doesn't have impacts during the dry season. The wet season
impacts, you know, reducing those peak levels during the wet season,
you know, benefits that area.
We at the basin had more concerns on the dry season impacts.
That's why you have control structures in there. And I think the basin
board, through their resolution, said they would move forward with
the intent to take over the system to operate and maintain it, because
they wanted to make sure it was operated and maintained correctly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: How about the wet season? How
did you address that so that you --
MR. TEARS: Well, our modelers looked at the modeling that
Page 154
---.
-.--""""
'---
May 11, 2004
Rick Barber and his staff produced. In addition, we -- they took the
modeling outside of the area. We looked at that, you know, the
inflows. They calculated a lot of that. And I think we even put it into
some of our models to ensure that it was operating correctly.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MR. TEARS: And, you know, our concern wasn't in the wet
season impacts. It was more the dry season impacts, ensuring that we
don't, you know, reduce ground water levels in the dry season.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Stan?
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Commissioner, Stan Chrzanowski with
engineering review again. If it would make anybody happier, I'll copy
a bunch of people on my emails for EP A and the Corps and whatever
else I've been sending them, lidar pictures and stuff that I thought they
probably should have had already, but I guess EP A isn't -- I'm used to
dealing with federal agencies and lidar. But I'll copy anybody on
anything that they want.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I think that's a great idea, get public input.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Just tell me who they are.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I'm one, so you can copy me. Not that I'll
understand everything, but at least I'll be able to refer to something.
MR. CHRZANOWSKI: Okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I'm sure that if anybody else here
would like to be copied, they will contact Stan as well.
Okay. We have a motion on the floor and a second. Does
anybody want the motion repeated?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
Page 155
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very well, thank you.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: We beat that one enough, didn't
we?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
Item #9A
RESOLUTION 2004-171 RE-APPOINTING JERRY P. MORGAN
TO THE WATER AND WASTEWATER AUTHORITY -
AnOEIED
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to item 9(A), which
is appointment of a member to the water and wastewater authority.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve.
MS. FILSON: Which one do you -- the recommendation?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Oh, I don't know.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Jerry Morgan?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Let me get to the page.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The reappointment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: The reappointment, Mr. Jerry Morgan, is
that --
MS. FILSON: Yeah. Actually he hasn't served an entire term
yet, and he is eligible for reappointment.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I'm sure that's who Commissioner
Henning meant.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah, that's right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes, and I'll second that.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
Page 156
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Item #9B
RESOLUTION 2004-172 APPOINTING BRENT MOORE A
MEMBER TO THE COMMUNITY CHARACTER/SMART
MR. MUDD: Next item is appoint -- is 9(B), which is
appointment of a member to the Community Character/Smart Growth
Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Move to approve Brent Moore.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Item #9C
RESOLUTION 2004-173 APPOINTING MURRAY HENDEL TO
THE COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE -
Page 157
May 11,2004
MR. MUDD: Next item is 9(C), is appointment of members to
the Collier County Coastal Advisory Committee.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I would like to have this
readvertised.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: I'll second that.
MS. FILSON: If I may, Collier County's appointment, and then
the City of Naples has submitted their name for confirmation, and
Marco Island also has an appointment, but they weren't going to know
who that was until today, so I'm going to put that on for the 25th.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay.
MS. FILSON: So you're asking that we readvertise Collier
County's appointment?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes.
MS. FILSON: And then we're going to confirm the other one?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yep.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: That's part of my motion.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: So in other words, what you're saying is,
that we're approving Murray Hendel --
MS. FILSON: Murray Hendel.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Hendel.
MS. FILSON: Yes, and then we're going to re --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And also the one the Marco Island is
recommending as of the 25th of May; is that it?
MS. FILSON: Yes. I'll bring that back on the 25th.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Those -- is that what you were
saying, Commissioner Halas, is approve those two --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The one for Collier County.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But not the other one, Mr. Roellig?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Would be -- yes, that would be to
put that out for readvertisement and see if we have any interest,
because we didn't seem to have any other interest, and I'd like to see if
there's any other interest from other people out there in District 2.
Page 158
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do I have a second on that motion?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Second.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a second from
Commissioner Coletta to accept Murray Hendel as the nominee from
the City of Naples, and the person to be announced by the City of
Marco, and to go out for rebid --
MS. FILSON: Readvertise.
MR. MUDD: Readvertise.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- readvertising for the position from
Collier County.
MS. FILSON: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I have a motion on the floor from
Commissioner Halas, a second by Commissioner Coletta.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
Item #10A
TO APPROVE MASTER AGREEMENT #03-3500 "LAND USE
AND PERMITTING ACQUISITION SOFTWARE APPLICATION"
WITH HANSEN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. IN THE
MR. MUDD: That brings us to item number 1 O(A), and that's to
approve a master agreement, 03-3500, Land Use and Permitting
Page 159
May 11,2004
Acquisition Software Application with Hansen Information
Technologies, Inc., in the amount of $1,541,338.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: How much?
MR. MUDD: One million, five hundred forty-one thousand,
three hundred thirty-eight dollars.
Mr. Joe Schmitt, the administrator for Community
Development's Environmental Services will present.
MR. SCHMITT: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the
record, I'm Joe Schmitt, Community Development Environmental
Services administrator.
With me today is Bleu Wallace. He's my CDS operations
director, but he's my project director for this project, and Gary Muller,
who works -- financial operations manager, and he's here to talk to any
specifics in regards to funding for this proj ect.
Now, we're here today to have the board approve the master
agreement with Hansen Information Technology, Incorporated, to
replace our Community Development and Environmental Services
outdated business information system.
The Hansen Information software system we're seeking to
purchase will enhance significantly staffs ability to manage and
control all aspects of the land use petition, building review and
permitting process within Collier County.
Just to highlight, the board, as part of its FY -'03 budget, approved
$2.3 million towards funding for this business software replacement
system. Following that, on March 25th, 2003, you subsequently
approved the borrowing of the approved funds. Following that
approval, an RFP was issued on March 28th, 2003.
Fifty- five notices were sent out; 41 firms responded. And the
selection committee convened, and actually a member of the
Development Services Advisory Council actually participated in that
selection process. And based on that, two firms were selected, Hansen
Information Technologies and Excel Incorporated to present their final
Page 160
May 11, 2004
pitches to the selection panel. That was done on July 18th, 2003.
And we've been negotiating with Hansen Information
Technology. They were selected in December, and actually the
contract was finally approved April 27th, 2003 (sic).
We have a projected budget of$3,652,700. That includes
everything, to include even personnel who will be involved in this so
that those charges for the personnel as we field this, train, and actually
implement it, that they will not be charged actually to the bill paying
customer, meaning the permittee who comes in the door, but those
will be charged to Fund 113, all our aspects of the building permitting
department enterprise fund.
So this is a -- funded by permit applicants and land review
applicants as part of that process. This is not general fund money.
This is actually Development Service fees that are paying for this.
This is a multi-year contract with the Hansen Information
Technologies for the software implementation. It will be used also in
public utilities as a portion in regards to the review process and
transportation.
So with that, we are asking that the board approve the contract
that was negotiated with Hansen Information Technology, a contract
which will allow Community Development to replace the current
business system with the Hansen Information Technology Software
application. And in doing so, this board will then authorize the
chairman to sign the county attorney-approved contract.
Subj ect to your questions, that concludes my briefing.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No questions so far from the
commISSIoners.
I checked with Jim Mitchell from the clerk's office, and he said
this is the most reasonable figure. And he said, these thing are very
expensive. I just wanted to see how he -- you know, how he
considered them, and he said this is a good figure negotiated out well,
and it could have been a lot higher, so -- yes, sir,
Page 161
'-----
May 11,2004
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I have one question, and I think --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're not going to get sued then,
right?
MR. MUDD: I have one question for Joe, just so we put an item
on the record, okay, and the issue is, the replacement for the software
as far as not exactly Hansen, but the replacement for CD Plus was
discussed with DSAC; am I correct?
MR. SCHMITT: That's correct. Though this was negotiated--
or been discussed thoroughly since we developed the FY-'03 budget,
and it's been coordinated with the Development Services Advisory
Council. And in fact, as I mentioned, a member of the council
participated in the selection committee. So this is truly supported by
the industry because -- to put it figuratively, our CD Plus, we're
feeding it intravenously every day just to keep it alive.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I make a motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
MR. SCHMITT: And that's how bad the system is.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a motion on the floor
from Commissioner Fiala, a second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any speakers?
MS. FILSON: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nothing from the commissioners?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Page 162
May 11, 2004
Item #9 D
COMMISSIONER COLETTA'S REQUEST FOR BOARD
APPROVAL FOR PAYMENT TO ATTEND A FUNCTION
SERVING A VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE BY ATTENDING
SKYTRUCK'S SIGNING OF THE MEMORANDUM OF
CORPORATION PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE EDC,
ENTERPRISE FLORIDA AND THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND IN
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ON MAY 20TH. APPROXIMATE
COST IS $650.00 PLUS PER DIEM. EXPENSE TO BE
REIMBURSED FROM COMMISSIONER'S TRAVEL FUNDS -
A£ERillŒD
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I'm sorry, I overstepped one item,
and that was the add item for 9(D), and that was Commissioner
Coletta's request for board approval for payment to attend functions
serving a valid public purpose, and that's to attend Sky truck signing of
the Memorandum of Cooperation Partnership between the EDC
Enterprise of Florida and the Republic of Poland in Washington, DC,
on May 20th. The approximate cost was $650 plus per diem, expense
to be reimbursed from Commissioners' Travel Fund. That's
Commissioner Coletta's request.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Why don't we send him to Poland
for the signature?
MR. MUDD: Sir, I think you're going to have--
COMMISSIONER HALAS: For the same price.
MR. MUDD: Sir, I think you're going to have that opportunity
probably in October, and you'll probably have to vote on that, too.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I move for approval.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Move for approval by Commissioner
Halas.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Is there a one-way ticket?
Page 163
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Second from Commissioner Fiala.
Any discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(N 0 response.)
Item #1 DC
RECOMMENDATION TO DEVELOP A REQUEST FOR
PROPOSAL TO INCREASE PARK IMPACT FEES FOR BEACH
AND BOAT ACCESS BASED ON THE MASTER PLAN -
~
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, that brings us to item 10(C), and that's a
recommendation to develop a request for proposal to increase park
impact fees for beach and boat access based on the master plan. And
Mr. John Dunnuck, the administrator for Public Services, will present.
MR. DUNNUCK: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, John Dunnuck, Public Services administrator.
I'm bringing this item before you, but first I want to kind of give
you a reason why we're bringing it back. Last May, the Board of
County Commissioners passed the beach and boat access master plan,
at which time we had indicated that there were several funding sources
that would be needed to help fund this plan, and one of those funds
were park impact fee increases that would address on-site, close to the
coast, beach access and boat ramp purchases.
Page 164
May 11, 2004
And from that standpoint, we moved forward. And the first thing
the board recommended to do was to work it through the TDC process
and see where there is going to be policy changes. You have
subsequently done that.
The next was that we work through the Revenue Commission
where the board appointed an advisory commission. An advisory
board was brought forth, and they discussed this item along with
stormwater and some of the other issues, and they came forward with
a recommendation that we should, in fact, look at impact fees for
parks and where the increases could be to keep up with growth and
beach access for the next 20 years.
This is just a study in this point in time to see what that fee
increase would be, but we're recommending approval of that to go
forward and study it and to see what those increases to the park impact
fee would be.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do we have any speakers?
MS. FILSON: We have two speakers. David Ellis. He will be
followed by Janet Vasey.
MR. ELLIS: Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name's David
Ellis, and I'm with the Collier Building Industry Association.
Before I speak on this, thank you for your approval of the new
system for development services. It has been worked on a long time,
and it's going to be very, very helpful to you and to those of us in the
industry .
My only concern is, is we'd hoped that this would move forward
a lot quicker. And I know the staff is anxious to move that forward
and we'll be working with them to make sure it gets implemented
correctly, or quickly.
I'm here today on behalf of the over 1,300 member companies
with the Collier Building Industry Association. And certainly as
another aside, we found out last week that CBIA is now the largest
local builders association in the State of Florida. Something we're
Page 165
-----
'---
May 11, 2004
very proud of and hope you will be as well.
We're corr -- one of the things John's correct in stating, we need
to make sure we have appropriate funding sources for beach and boat
access. Goes without saying. Those of us in the real estate industry,
we sell it every day. We know that it's important. We need to have it.
Our big concern, as you could well imagine, is how we're going
to fund it and what revenue sources we're going to pursue.
There's a couple things that the Revenue Commission said in
their recommendation that I wanted to talk about for a minute that
were concerns to us.
First of all, in one of the recommendations they said we could
have these impact fees, and they could be bonded, that they could be
bonded. We've never had much success in bonding impact fees, to
leverage them to do things that are well into the future. That's a
concern and something I just wanted to point out. It's not an essential
element to this.
But once again, to remind you that impact fees aren't a very
useful resource to catch up to go into the future. As a matter of fact,
you can't legally use them to catch up. But if we wanted to do things
now to help into the future, impact fees aren't a very good source to
help us.
Secondly, the thing about the fees that we have more of a
concern over is their use -- their recommendation to be used is that
we're focusing on the wrong things. Beach and boat access for us
really should be more related to user fees, as a user item.
It's different than water and sewer or roads or those things that
are really essential services in our community that the impact fees can,
I think, be more directly assigned to. But when you talk about each
beach and boat access, we're really talking about users.
And, you know, in essence, we're asking those of us that don't
own boats to subsidize those that do have boats for their recreational
activities. It really isn't -- doesn't come off as a fair use of impact fees.
Page 166
'^'--^"^
May 11, 2004
The other thing I wanted to mention and really bring to your
attention is a beach and boat type access impact fee is unprecedented
in the State of Florida.
And again, I can't speak authoritatively because I don't even
know how to find this. But I don't know of any place, certainly in
Florida, maybe in the country, that has fees like this. If they exist, I'm
not aware of them.
And I think that speaks to a couple things. First of all, I think it
speaks to the potential legality of it. If it was useful and it was out
there, I think other people would be finding it.
Secondly, the other -- it also speaks to the difficulty in
establishing a nexus. We always talk about this rational nexus thing in
relation to the developing impact fee. That particular nexus for the
use here in Collier County, I think it also speaks to how difficult that's
going to be.
And lastly, I think it also speaks to how other communities
evaluate its fairness and why it really isn't an equitable way to raise
revenue for this use in Collier County.
Certainly you guys also know about my particular concerns as
relates to affordability and also for our ability to diversify our
economy in Collier County, how it's restricted by use of impact fees.
And anything we use to go down that road, I think, once again, is a
deterrent for those very, very important things for our economic
development.
When we look at this, even with that in mind today, you guys
actually approved a study by the EDC to come back -- and actually
you approved them to come back to you with a recommendation for a
study to look at -- and I wrote it down -- the fiscal -- the fiscal stability
study, to look at our funding sources, to look at where we're going to
draw money from now and in the future.
And I think in the light of that, that's one reason why I'd caution
you and even ask you not to move forward with this study today.
Page 167
May 11, 2004
Let's wait and see what they come back with. Let's wait and see what
they see is that proper balance for our community for the long run.
We're -- I think we're all in this for the long run, in developing
appropriate and proper funding sources that will work for us long into
the future. And I would ask you today, on behalf of CBIA, to not
move on this. We have a great deal of concern about, once again, the
ongoing effect it's going to have on our economy and where we're
goIng.
Thank you, Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: David, I just wanted to make a couple
comments, if you don't mind.
MR. ELLIS: No, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I appreciate your presentation. You
mentioned user fees and you also mentioned later on in your
presentation about affordability. And I want to say on the record that I
think that the beach is one of the very few places left in this entire
county that a person who is strapped for cash can go absolutely free of
charge, and that's a wonderful thing.
I mean, they can't even go to a park anymore really without
having some kind of a fee involved with, you know, playing baseball
or whatever, to put the lights on. So I don't think -- I don't think we
ought to take that -- that joy of having a free beach to our people
away.
And you mentioned something about nobody else does it, but I
kind of like being a leader, and I think that that's a great thing. We
can show them this is the way to plan for their future and for our
future generations, and we must do that. We must do that before all
the -- the access is gone.
Anyway, that's just my own opinion, and I --
MR. ELLIS: I didn't know if you wanted me to say something
back. But, again, Commissioner, I don't disagree that these aren't
difficult decisions and how we're going to fund this. And I realize that
Page 168
~'--"
May 11, 2004
when you're talking about free beach access and those types of things,
I don't -- I have not done any personal analysis about what a $10 fee to
get your sticker would be for a year. I mean, those are the kind of
things we can talk about later.
But I think one of the things we're really asking today is, with --
what's happening now with this EDC study and the things that are
coming, let's wait and see and let's make a good informed decision.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I'll wait until after all the speakers
have spoken.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay, okay.
MS. FILSON: The next speaker is Janet Vasey.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Because I know I'll have to rebut
Janet Vasey.
MS. FILSON: And she's also--
MS. VASEY: You always like to take a shot at me.
MS. FILSON: -- your final speaker.
MS. VASEY: Good afternoon, Madam Chair and
Commissioners. Janet Vasey, for the record.
Why should you fund this study right now to determine if impact
fees should be used for beach and boat access? Well, I've got six
reasons why I think you should do that.
You have a $134 million program for the next 10 years for beach
and boat access that's largely unfunded. You've got a little bit of TDC
money coming in, but it's certainly not going to take care of it.
Second, the identified beach and boat access proj ects are mostly
needed for the future. When we looked at that in the Revenue
Commission, we couldn't tell exactly, but a study like this will tell you
exactly what is related to future development and what is a current
deficiency that would need to have other sources of funding than an
impact fee, so -- and it's classic. As most of it is for growth, that's
Page 169
May 11, 2004
classic for impact fees.
And third, the Revenue Commission, made up of a broad base
group of people from civics -- I think four civic associations, City of
Naples, City of Marco, Chamber of Commerce, all kinds of
organizations participated in this, and they unanimously recommended
using impact fees to pay for growth-related beach and boat access
projects.
Fourth, doing the impact fee will tell you, as I said, exactly how
much -- I guess I got ahead of myself -- exactly how much TDC
money is really needed, because it could be more or less than you've
currently allocated for this. And when you do the study, you'll know.
Fifth, there have been complaints, with all due respect to David
Ellis, that beach and boat access impact fees will make workforce
housing unaffordable, and I don't think that's true. And I'm going to
give you an example.
If the beach and boat access impact fee turns out to be $350, that
for -- and that's probably too unreasonable. I was looking at it as
maybe 350 to 500 is probably the expected range that this would corne
in for a home of maybe 2,000 square feet. And that --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Do you want to put it on the overhead,
Janet?
MS. VASEY: No, not yet. That's the next one.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay.
MS. VASEY: And that would turn out to be $24 per year or $2
per month on a 30-year mortgage at 5.5 percent. That's $2 per month
if it's $350 for this fee, or if it's 500, it comes out at a little less than $3
a month.
So adding this one fee, if it's in that range, is not going to break
anybody. So I didn't want you to be fearful going forward that, you
know, it would be a huge amount of money, because all of these
impact fees are rolled into mortgages, and -- most of them, unless
somebody pays total dollars down.
Page 1 70
May 11, 2004
But it's rolled into a mortgage, and it's spread over 30 years.
Thirty years, 5.5 percent, that's what you get, 2 or $3 on a 350 or $500
impact fee.
So I would suggest that you go ahead and do the study, see what
the fees are, and then you can decide.
Would you pass those out?
After the study, if you approve the impact fees, that funding
stream could be bonded. Now, I heard David say that bonding is not
recommended, and I know you haven't done it, but you can do it. You
honestly can do it. The rates can be a little higher.
I've talked to Jim Mitchell in the clerk's office. Bonding is a --
can be done on impact fees. So I think, you know, it's a way to get
moving on something now, start collecting the money, and then you
can bond it, and buy the property you need now while it's cheaper.
Now, on the visualizer, I'd like you -- and I've handed out copies
-- to look at an analysis that your community development people
have been working on, Amy Patterson and Paula Fleishman, that make
some comparisons between Collier and Lee County and provide some
very interesting information. I've been working on it with them.
And for a 2,000 foot square -- 2,000 square foot home with a
value of $200,000 that is on county water and sewer, because they're
different rates if you don't have it on county water and sewer -- the
impact fee in Collier would be 15,551, in Lee County, 9,345, and the
difference is $6,205.
Well, assuming the mortgage on a house is 30 years, 5.5 percent,
the higher impact fee in Collier adds $420 to the annual cost of the
mortgage, or $35 a month.
Now, that's kind of the price of dinner out for two people or a
movie and popcorn and soda for a family of four. So that's not a lot of
money, and that's the difference for what we currently have right now.
Could I finish?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yes.
Page 171
" - -,
May 11, 2004
MS. VASEY: There's not much more.
If impact fees -- but impact fees are not the total picture. And I'd
like to draw your attention to the bottom half of this chart.
It shows that this same house, when you look at millage rates for
Collier and Lee, in Collier it's 3,000 in property taxes, in Lee it's
4,029. So we're cheaper by about $1,000.
And if you take the impact fee amount that we're over annually
on a person's mortgage, that difference is about $600 in our favor at
this price range house. So it's not -- you know, if you want to go out
and build our community or talk about the costs in Collier County,
you shouldn't talk about impact fees being so much higher.
You should talk about the total of impact fees and property taxes,
because they're the flip side of the same coin. It's the same
infrastructure. It's just how you choose to break the costs. And we're
going to be cheaper.
Are there any questions?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
MS. VASEY: All right. Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Janet, would you -- would you
suggest that the impact fee be a flat amount regardless of the number
of square feet, or are you assuming it will be graduated based upon the
size of the house?
MS. VASEY: I guess I'd like to see what the study
recommendation comes in with, because sometimes it's one way and
sometimes it's another. When I was trying to eyeball what it might be,
I was looking at the library ones, which had some of the same
amounts, and this only applies to houses. It doesn't apply to
businesses. And this, I wouldn't think, would either.
So I don't know. I think you'd have to kind of look at it. Larger
houses could have more people in it. I don't know. I'd like to see
what the study comes up with.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: The chances are that smaller
Page 1 72
--_.,"---,-
'--,",
May 11, 2004
houses would have more people since the younger people would be
buying them. They would have children.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: But they probably wouldn't have boats.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: A lot of -- no, but they'd go to the
beach, and that's what -- one of the things we're talking about.
Now, we were talking about a figure earlier about $2 a month.
Now, what I still find difficult to get straight is it's okay to charge
people $2 a month on their mortgage through an impact fee, but it's
not okay to charge them $10 for two years for a parking sticker.
Parking sticker's cheaper, and that's a user fee, and you're getting
the people who use the parking spaces at the beach to help pay for
some of the maintenance of beach access rather than just tacking it on
to everybody's house and mortgage.
It seems to me that the user fee is a really smart way to go with
this process, particularly when it comes to boat launch facilities. And
to attach an impact fee for boat launching or beach access to
somebody's mortgage when in some cases, many cases, those people
don't even have a boat to launch.
I just think we're missing the nexus here. And I would like to see
us broaden our horizons as far as revenue sources are concerned on
that issue rather than just dealing only with the impact fees, because I
really do have a serious problem with trying to figure out how a
65-year-old couple who comes to Collier Côunty and buys a house in
Golden Gate Estates, how that impacts the number of boat ramps
we've got to have and the number of parking spaces we've got to have
at the beach. I just don't think that nexus is very clear.
But, now, if we get to the broader issue of getting more beach
access and trying to find more boat access, I'm onboard with that. I'm
only concerned with the way we go about raising the money for it, and
I'd like to broaden our horizons a bit and look at other things other
than just impacts fees.
MS. VASEY: But one comment on looking at it as a user fee,
Page 173
May 11, 2004
the people that live here right now then are paying for it, whereas,
these -- most of these requirements have been identified for the future.
It's for people that are coming in in the future, and they should -- they
can pay for that through the impact fees in the future. And not
everybody uses everything that there's an impact fee for.
I've never used EMS. Some people don't use libraries, but yet
they pay for those things through impact fees anyway. So it's sort of a
-- it's an infrastructure thing that goes with the property. So -- but you
can always look at other ways to do it, too. But I was just
recommending that you do the study and see how much it is and if it
really is a hardship.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd like to have a study. I think we
need to go into a study, but I think that we also need to look at -- I
don't want to see the impact fees on businesses at -- this particular
impact fee on a business --
MS. VASEY: No.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: -- it should only be on a house or
household.
To answer Commissioner Coyle's question there, of couples that
are 65 years old, it's amazing if you walk down the beach at night and
how many of the couples are out there holding hands and having their
favorite libation, it might be iced tea or it might be a martini, but --
and if you look at demographics of the county -- that's the other thing I
think that we need to look at, and I think we're seeing that we're
having more and more young people coming to this community. And
of course, there's an awful lot of young people that are trying to get to
the beaches.
So I really think that we need to look at this study. As I said
earlier though, I'd like to make sure that we don't have this impact fee
on businesses. We've got enough of those on businesses. But I think
that the people moving into this area are going to demand that they
Page 174
'--"'~-
May 11, 2004
have access to our beaches and waterways.
And I think it's -- it's our responsibility to make sure that we
address those issues as our population grows. And I'm sure it's going
to get a lot younger.
MS. VASEY: And just one item of clarification. If would never
apply to businesses. Like the library fee, that's only for residential
houses. And the beach and boat would only be residential, too.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: It only makes sense. So I make a motion
that we approve --
COMMISSIONER HALAS: The study?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: -- the request for an impact fee study.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: And I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion on the floor from
Commissioner Fiala -- I almost pronounced (sic) my own name -- and
a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
Opposed, like sign.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
MR. MUDD: Wait a minute. Are we --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Two opposed.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Two opposed, and that was
Commissioner Coyle and Commissioner Henning, right?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Yeah. Let me just say, further,
on the -- there are, by the way, some 65-year-olds in Golden Gate
Estates --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I know.
Page 175
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER HENNING: -- that get in their boats and get
around. Some of them have jet skis.
MR. MUDD: I think Commissioner Halas was talking about
Commissioner Fiala and Commissioner Coyle when he was talking
about those people walking at the beach.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Oh, you picked up on that, didn't
you?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. We don't walk on the beach
and hold hands.
MR. MUDD: I wasn't talking about with each other.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Oh, okay. All right.
MR. MUDD: I was talking about with your mates.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that
for my wife.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: The need -- how we came about
the need for the future use is based on state averages, and I kind of
question those numbers. But I really believe on the boat access issue
that we need to get more competitive with the private industry that
offer that services (sic), and we're not doing that.
And also it was mentioned that you've got a lot of boats that is
(sic) parked in the right-of-way, and that -- boats and trailers, that
when they launch, they don't need a sticker to park in the
right-of-way. So maybe something like a trailer annual sticker, that
might -- annual sticker fee might kind of get at that.
It is something that we need to enhance in the future. But I think
that this economic feasibility analysis might give us more tools
besides impact fees. And even though that -- we can still keep that in
the mix, I'd hate to spend 40 or $50,000 for studying an impact fee of
beach and boat when there might be some other alternatives. That's
all. That's the reason.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And I know we're near the end of
Page 176
May 11, 2004
our agenda, but we need to give our court reporter a 10-minute break.
Thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, you have a hot mike.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Okay. Moving on to -
Item #10D
APPROVE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY
OF NAPLES FOR RECIPROCAL BEACH PARKING AT AN
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, that brings us to 10(D), which is 16(D)7, which
is move -- approve an interlocal agreement with the City of Naples for
reconciliation -- no, excuse me -- for reciprocal beach parking at an
approximate annual expense of $400,000, and it was pulled at
Commissioner Coletta's request.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah. And if I could, I could
probably save everybody a lot of time.
First off I want to say the City of Naples has been a wonderful
partner, and they provided great beach access. The only problem I
have with this is that, the wording that's -- how it reads. The -- under --
in page -- page one of five, the summary agenda, presently reads, the
payment amount for the term of this agreement has been determined to
be 82 percent of the city's net loss for the city's beaches and the beach
-- in the parking program.
I'd really just like the language changed where it says, city's net
loss for the beaches that lie within the city limits, the public beaches
that lie within the city limits. That's the only change I want to make to
this so that we recognize the fact that they are public beaches.
And if they'll make -- if you'll make those changes, I'll make a
motion for approval.
Page 1 77
, --,-'-~^"--
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me make sure, you're asking
for a change to the executive summary and --
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's all.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Not to the -- not to the agreement
itself?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, the agreement itself really
didn't say the same thing.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, yeah, it does.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Well, and if it does, I'll change
that also, if I may. I just want recognition for the fact that we're
talking about the public's beaches --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: -- that lie within the City of
Naples.
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, the only place that that says it is on
paragraph five of the interlocal agreement.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, actually it says it on
paragraph one, it says it on paragraph three, it says it on some other
paragraphs. But you have to understand the distinction here.
MR. MUDD: No. Sir, in those particular paragraphs, it says, the
city beach parking location.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's right.
MR. MUDD: And it is their parking location that -- what
Commissioner Coletta is saying, he's talking about city beaches, and
he's just drawing the distinctions to say, they're not city beaches,
they're public beaches within the city.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay.
MR. MUDD: And the only place that that verbiage shows up is
in paragraph five where it says, the county shall remit an annual
payment to the city to fund its fair share of the city's beach and beach
parking program. And that's the only place I can see it and where you
Page 1 78
---
May 11, 2004
could even draw the correlation.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And that's the only -- that's all I
need.
MR. MUDD: I really think it's in the executive summary, sir. It
says, the only place that makes --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No. It's in the agreement, in
paragraph five in the agreement.
MR. DUNNUCK: Could I make -- could I make one
clarification?
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yeah, that's where I need to go.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Let me -- let me -- I know there's
sensitivity in this issue, but maybe I should follow up with a motion
that what we do is change the name of the Immokalee Airport to the
county airport or to the Lely Beach.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: How about Immokalee Regional
Airport? We'll go for that.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think we're nit-picking here. But
nevertheless, the thing we have to make sure of is that when you make
reference to city beach parks, Lowdermilk is a city beach park.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I realize that. But the beach
that's in front of it is my public beach and your public beach.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: So is Immokalee Airport, but it's
called Immokalee Airport.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: And you can come there
anytime you want and go wading and sunbathing as much as you
want.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Gentlemen, I just think this is
frivolous.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yes, it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It's frivolous.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It is frivolous, but it's important
to me that we recognize the fact that those beaches are public beaches.
Page 1 79
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We all know that. I make a motion
that we approve the agreement as it is.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll second that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
MS. FILSON: We already had a motion on the floor.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Any discussion on that? Any speakers on
that, excuse me?
MS. FILSON: No.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Can I speak? I'm just kidding.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You're done.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: I'm done.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor say, aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. We have a 4-2 (sic) with that,
Commissioner Henning and Commissioner Coletta.
MR. MUDD: You have a 3-2.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: 3-2.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Did I say 4?
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's okay.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. I'm seeing double, 3-2.
Item #10E
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR
SALE AND PURCHASE FOR SEVEN RESIDENTIAL LOTS EAST
OF THE COUNTY'S BA YVIEW PARK AT A COST NOT TO
Page 180
----"."".. ,
May 11, 2004
MR. MUDD: Okay. The next item -- the other -- the next item
and last item, thank goodness, is item 10(E), and that's a
recommendation to approve an agreement for sale and purchase for
seven residential lots east of the county's Bayview Park at the cost not
to exceed $1,129,400. And Mr. John Dunnuck will present.
MR. D UNNU CK: Commissioners, good afternoon. For the
record, John Dunnuck, Public Services administrator.
I've provided a map for you to see exactly which parcels we're
looking at purchasing. And as you can recall, in part of our master
plan and subsequently a month ago we brought forward an executive
summary to begin land purchases around the Bayview Park area for
additional beach access and boat launch parking.
We have had discussions with the Rookery Bay group to work on
a boat access to the Island of Keewaydin. They have additional access
points, but we felt that it is very important that we jump on these
opportunities as soon as we possibly could.
We have what I would call a nervous seller who wanted us to
accelerate this as quickly as possible, because frankly he is building
spec homes right now and had people knocking on his door to buy
those spec homes, so we want to get those before they're actually
completed and done.
What you have before you is an agreement to do that. The
agreement outlines the sale and purchase price of those two homes
that will be certified for occupancy that we will have in our inventory.
Additionally, what the agreement calls for is that we have the
estimated purchase price of the other five lots plus what the consumer
or what the developer would have had as a revenue source, what he
would have gotten from building the other spec homes.
So we're recommending that we jump on this opportunity to
purchase as quickly as we possibly can.
Page 181
May 11,2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Are those homes already built; did you
say?
MR. DUNNUCK: Two of those homes are about 90 percent
completed and will be completed very soon.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: What are we going to do with those?
MR. DUNNUCK: What we've provided for you -- and we can
give you a menu of options, but we could look at leasing those,
because this is going to be a long-tenn acquisition program. You
would have some ability, that if the board wanted to consider doing it
for employees who we're looking to bring into this county as a, kind of
a buffering area for home ownership in the meantime.
You could turn one of them into a bait store, frankly, for the boat
ramp if you wanted to. But it gives you a menu of items that we'll do.
We anticipate that we're going to own more homes before this thing is
over. And as we accumulate the properties in that area, it will have us
-- give us that menu of items to work with.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you.
Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Could you show us, John, exactly
where the location of these homes are?
MR. MUDD: Yes. I've got it.
MR. DUNNUCK: Sure.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Sure.
MR. DUNNUCK: Two homes are actually more towards the
other end. Right, that area.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. And this would basically
just be for parking of trailers and tow vehicles?
MR. DUNNUCK: Well, what this will do is -- what we're
looking to do -- and Jim, if you can circle the whole area -- we're
looking to actually purchase the whole two city blocks, the whole two
streets of all these homes there. And this will give you a great deal of
flexibility.
Page 182
----
May 11, 2004
We'll have the land, and it will give you for the future, if you
wanted to do dry storage, if you want to do parking garage for beach
access to Keewaydin Island, you will be able to do all of it. But we
didn't want to lose that opportunity because we knew this was going to
be a heavy redevelopment area and people were catching on. So we've
been trying to be very aggressive.
And your whole property staff has been excellent in helping us in
that cause to start acquiring those properties.
You can also see on the maps -- I don't know if it's highlighted
very well -- but there's some additional light blue properties that we
already have some interested sellers on as well. And what we
anticipate is that some of those will start to fall into place as we
acquire more property.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: You should be commended for
being out there and being aggressive and out front of the curve here.
Appreciate that.
MR. DUNNUCK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: This is great.
Yes, Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: John, what opportunities for more
direct access to the boat ramp would we have with this property? Are
we going to have to go all the way around the block to get to the -- to
the launch area, or is there a more direct route we could follow?
Could we extend that road, that street south of this property and send
it -- extend it west? Yeah, west.
MR. DUNNUCK: Well, what you're going to have is, from the
standpoint of Hamilton Harbor, you know, it's going to be tucked in
right in that little pocket --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah.
MR. DUNNUCK: -- right in between the area. And they're
looking at building a commercial access point on the other side of the
canal where our boat launch is.
Page 183
May 11, 2004
But what this could potentially do when they expand that canal
area, is allow us to add additional boat ramps to that facility, because
it's fairly narrow right now. I don't know if you've been out there
recently. We've done some renovations and it looks nice.
But from a standpoint of, yes, it's going to be a little walk up the
street. But presently there's only about 17 boat spaces in our park.
And what has happened over time is that road that you see between
the development of houses and where Hamilton Harbor is going to go,
people have parked alongside the road there. We're going to lose one
side of that when Hamilton Harbor is developed. So they're walking
anyway. And so from the standpoint of convenience, it's not that long
of a walk, and we anticipate it.
Now, one of the things we can possibly do is build a loop road
between these two streets. That will enhance the access point. But as
I said, there's going to be a great deal of flexibility as future boards,
most likely, will have this for consideration.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Thank you. Good job.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Motion to approve by Commissioner
Henning, second by Commissioner Coyle.
Any further discussion?
(N 0 response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: That's a 5-0. Thank you.
Item #IIA
Page 184
May 11, 2004
KENNETH THOMPSON REGARDING WASTE MANAGEMENT
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, that brings us to public comment
on general topics.
MS. FILSON: I have one speaker for public comment. Kenneth
Thompson.
MR. THOMPSON: I want to apologize to you for a minute. My
name's Kenneth Thompson. I want to apologize to you for, you know,
kind of letting Joe Schmitt had (sic) it, but I kind of meant it anyway.
But I got a real problem there. Waste Management, them cones
-- I had a cone around this Sprint box for approximately 13 years, and
Tony Lazaro, is all I know how to say his name, he's -- he's got a --
you know, he's got it in for me.
And one day they dumped some popcorn out there on the
sidewalk. And if you put the garbage in the can and get it out the
road, it belongs to Waste Management. They need to put it in the
truck.
Well, he dumped it all over the ground, and I called him to come
clean it up, Teresa (sic). Well, when he got over there, he didn't clean
it up. He come in the yard and started, you know, arguing and
fighting with me. So I just told him -- I went and called his boss. So
they made him clean it up, and that made him even madder.
So 13th of April, or was it the 12th of April, it was the coldest
rain I believe I ever felt. And it was -- the wind was blowing hard that
night.
And I give my wife -- 30 years ago I gave her an orchid tree, and
it just twisted it right off, and it was about that big (indicating). And I
was out there cleaning it up on our lawn, and he couldn't wait for me
to tie it up.
So I took my lawn mower and can pull it -- I pulled it out, and I
was chopping it up and putting it in piles, and he was just sneaking
Page 185
"------
May 11, 2004
around, hiding in his truck. And he don't know it, but I got his
pictures. Everything he was doing, I was taking his pictures.
But I didn't have the string, and I sent my wife to the hardware to
get the string. And, meantime, while he's doing that, it wasn't enough
writing me up for the -- the trash. That was on a Monday. He's not
supposed to come out there until it's red-tagged on Tuesday. So he got
mad at me.
The cones have been there 13 years. And he wrote me up for the
cone. He told me if I didn't pay it off right quick, he was going to
charge me $250 dollars a day or I could give him $5,000. And I told
him, well, I been here long time. I ain't giving nobody $5,000.
So he just come back every day hiding in his truck, sneaking
along the mangrove bushes, you know, and taking pictures of me, this,
that, and the other.
So I -- I kind of am sick of him. And that box got hit one time. It
cost the Sprint people 25 -- $28,000 and a light pole for -- a woman
cut it down with a continental Lincoln. And she was so drunk she
couldn't even get moving.
But I thought, you know, I was doing the right thing. And then I
talked to Teresa, and she said, as long as the thing is 15 feet from the
edge of the road over here, you okay. And that's just right where it
was, behind the pole.
And -- well, it kind of got out of hand somehow or another, and I
come and talked to a friend of mine and -- well, I come talk to
somebody. And it got closed out.
But somehow or another, you can't get no paper from these
people. When they close something out, you should give me proof
that you did it.
But anyway, it don't really bother me. I'm glad they took the
cones. But now every day -- every day -- I've been here for so long.
And then I heard you talking about the Corps of Army Engineers.
I had somebody -- I have -- Chesapeake Bay, there's a tunnel
Page 186
------- - --,,-,-
May 11,2004
from Kiki peak (sic), Virginia, all the way up to Maryland, or
Connecticut.
I called John Adams in Jacksonville, and -- about this boathouse.
And I said, well, he says he's got a permit. And says, he didn't care if
he had a permit or not. He don't have a Corps of Army engine (sic)
permit, you know, to be (sic) it over the pump -- over the water.
So he called me back two days later and he told me to talk to Lisa
Hollander, and that was the 2nd -- the 20th of '04. So she told me that
I'd have to talk to Skip, that fellow you-all were talking about a while
ago.
So I give him the diagrams and everything, right where that thing
was. And they're not supposed to have that boathouse there. Like I
said, he said he built it in '65. Now, how can you build something in
'65 when you didn't get here till '72? But I have never had -- I'd like to
really say out loud, well, what is in this place?
They've had some people over there this week rebuilding the
boathouse at night, and I'm trying to get Mrs. Arnold to stop it. And I
understand when something is that old, you can't rebuild it. And the
floor keeps falling out, and the people going and swimming on their
matches (sic) in that dirty water. It's really kind of -- going to live
there (sic).
But the people that they got coming there, you should have seen
it last night. They had blacks and whites up there, and he's a beating
on her and this, that, and the other. And it's just kind of -- you're
going to have to help me get this boathouse under control. Somebody
going to have to stop. And they -- Dale Steinberg don't care what he
does.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Have you
called the sheriffs department?
MR. THOMPSON: Yeah. That fellow that come -- I asked him
to come and -- over to the -- you know, when he was here? I asked
him if he would come out there. And I apologized so many times to
Page 187
-"-----,---- -
May 11,2004
him, you know. And that's -- I do things and then I'm sorry that I did
it.
But when you -- Joe Schmitt, you know, I went and got papers
here, and he's wrong really. He's really wrong. But you letting him
build these apartments. Because when he sells them, the people that --
he's not going to be around here, the people that build them. The
people that is going to buy them is the people that's going to be hurt.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Thompson.
MR. MUDD: Madam Chair, I've asked the sheriff, and the
sheriff has concurred. The deputy that was here the last time that
heard the comments basically went back, and they have increased the
patrols upon that particular establishment, home, whatever you want
to call it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah.
MR. MUDD: And it could be a little bit of everything going on,
and they're working on that process. They've increased their presence
in that neighborhood.
And as far as the cones are concerned, they were put there to
protect the Sprint box because somebody had come around the curve a
couple of years ago and wiped that particular box out in front of Mr.
Thompson's property.
And I've asked Mr. Thompson to get out of this debate between
his cones and whatever. Just get me something from Sprint that says,
hey, they need some kind of warning device in front of that box in
order to prevent it, and we'll work out a solution that makes that Sprint
box and his particular property safe from drivers that can't stay on the
road.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. I heard that there's some real
problems with some of these things though. Thank you very much.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am.
MR. THOMPSON: I just want to say one thing to you, and I'm
not coming back here no more.
Page 188
------
---,--'-
---,,-,
May 11, 2004
Somebody one day, we'd come home from the hospital-- my
wife is real sick now. She's got sugar real bad. But what happened is,
somebody drove up at the gates out there, and I think he's going to buy
it. I finally talked my wife into, listen, let's just move. And it's a good
sum of money, and maybe it will work out.
But I'm sick and tired of moving for other people's problems.
And I paid for everything out there on that right-of-way. The rock, I
paid for everything out of my pocket.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Tell your wife we hope she's feeling
better. Thank you.
County Attorney?
MR. THOMPSON: I don't have no attorney.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no. It's his turn on the agenda.
MR. WEIGEL: No, nothing, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nothing?
MR. WEIGEL: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And County Manager?
Oh, first let me ask you if Jay Cross from the clerk's office has
anything to say.
MR. CROSS: No, ma'am, we don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You've had a stimulating day, haven't
you?
MR. CROSS: Exciting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Go ahead.
,......
Item # 15
-...-'
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, the legislative session is over. We've got
some issues that came back. You saw the issues on juvenile justice
where we were going to have about a million four additional as far as
Page 189
----.-.
May 11, 2004
Somebody one day, we'd come home from the hospital-- my
wife is real sick now. She's got sugar real bad. But what happened is,
somebody drove up at the gates out there, and I think he's going to buy
it. I finally talked my wife into, listen, let's just move. And it's a good
sum of money, and maybe it will work out.
But I'm sick and tired of moving for other people's problems.
And I paid for everything out there on that right-of-way. The rock, I
paid for everything out of my pocket.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Tell your wife we hope she's feeling
better. Thank you.
County Attorney?
MR. THOMPSON: I don't have no attorney.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: No, no. It's his turn on the agenda.
MR. WEIGEL: No, nothing, thank you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Nothing?
MR. WEIGEL: No.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. And County Manager?
Oh, first let me ask you if Jay Cross from the clerk's office has
anything to say.
MR. CROSS: No, ma'am, we don't.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: You've had a stimulating day, haven't
you?
MR. CROSS: Exciting.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thank you. Go ahead.
Item #15
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, the legislative session is over. We've got
some issues that came back. You saw the issues on juvenile justice
where we were going to have about a million four additional as far as
Page 189
May 11, 2004
less revenues coming in in order to pay the county's share of that
particular issue.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: It should be on the sheriffs
budget.
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Should be.
MR. MUDD: Mr. Cross and my staff and myself will start
working on ordinances so that we can start getting those dollars based
on the Article V legislation that's been put in.
There's additional -- let me for lack of better word -- call them
surcharges, okay, the different fines and whatnot that we're going to
have to be able to put on there, because in the Article V legislation,
the stuff that was discretionary as far as like teen court and whatever
are now mandatory programs. And unless you have the surcharges,
you have no mechanism, no revenues coming in in order to pay that.
So it's gone through about 25 reiterations. I mean, I've seen 25
different things on this bill. We finally got -- the smoke is starting to
clear from that particular item, and we're going to have to start
working on ordinances to be put into effect so that we can start
collecting those surcharges 1 July when it takes effect so that we can
get those revenues.
Now, those revenues will have a delay time as far as when they're
collected and when they finally get done. I mean, sometimes -- and
Jay was iterating to me how a lot of people are on payment plans, that
they pay $10 to the fine and they come next month to pay $10, and in
this legislation it says, well, 43 percent. You know, 43 percent of
what? And you figure out, am I transferring 43 cents to you every
month? And I said, no, no. I think we're going to do this on an annual
basis, have like a turn back on that as we get ready for the budget so
we know what that revenue is going to be.
And we'll work out those details. But understand, we're going to
have to start doing some work pretty quick in order to get those into
Page 190
May 11, 2004
effect before 1 July.
The next item I'd like to talk about is, I want to remind
everybody, including Mr. Schmitt, that Mr. Halas will not be here on
May 25th for the board meeting, so those things that require a super
majority vote have got issues. So hopefully Mr. Schmitt has let the
petitioners know that if anybody's out there looking for a conditional
use or a rezone, that those people have been notified there will only be
four commissioners on the dais that day.
The next item I'd like to talk about is with Mr. -- where's Mr.
Veit at? Ifhe'd come forward.
Ma'am, Commissioners, they need to -- he needs to talk about the
military support for the 4th of July. He's having some issues with
bands corning for that particular day. You had -- you had specified a
day when dollars could be used as far as from the county coffers for
the 4th of July ceremony, and he just asked for a couple of minutes to
kind of give you an update where -- what's going on right now with
that particular event. John?
MR. VEIT: Thank you, Mr. Mudd.
For the record, my name's John Veit, parks superintendent for the
park system.
After the third -- March 9th, after you approved the county
sponsorship with the U.S. Military appearance during the July 2nd
through the 5th, 2004, we went to work to solidify the confirmations
with the military.
At that time the 283rd had had a change of command, and the
commanding general put out a policy that they would have no longer
-- no long distance travel for the band, so they had to cancel that.
With the validity of what's happening on the other side of the world,
it's understandable.
The military -- the United States Military Academy at Westpoint
accepted another invitation, as they could no longer wait for final
confirmation from us.
Page 191
~-----~
May 11, 2004
The United States Special Operations Command Parachute Team
is a solid confirmation, and they are willing to accommodate as many
jumps as we need.
Due to the events that happened, we contacted the operations
sergeant, Tom Strayer (phonetic), who we had developed a
relationship when he was with the 283rd, Fort Benning, and he is
presently with the U.S. Army Signal Band, a/k/a 434 U.S. Army Band
at Fort Gordon, Georgia.
We made attempts to bring them in there for the 2nd and 3rd.
They had a commitment on the 4th, so they had to be back on post at
six p.m. on the 3rd.
We looked to get military transport. It was unavailable. We did
a look at commercial transportation. It's 40-member band with all
their instruments, and felt that was very cost prohibitive.
We're recommending that, if it's possible, we could extend the
dates to bring the U.S. Army Signal Band the week prior to the 4th of
July weekend, which they are available.
They can come by ground transport, and it could be a
combination of a pre-Independence Day, a Wodd War II memorial
dedication, and the 60th anniversary of the Normandy Invasion, all in
one.
It would be also recommended to invite the representative of the
United States Military Academy Band at Westpoint now so that he has
the opportunity to meet the powers to be, so we could have them
committed for next year on the 4th, and continue our plans for the
weekend of the 4th. I felt it important to bring that to you.
With the situation in the military and with the Middle East,
everything is volatile. We keep trying to plan, and things change. It's
been a very learning experience for me, and I just wanted to bring you
all up to speed in where we're at and give you some recommendations
as to make this at least a -- viable and have music.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coyle?
Page 192
'---'-'
May 11, 2004
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I just want to point out something.
The parachute team is the only one that is a firm commitment?
MR. VEIT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That just proves that special
operations people will never let you down.
MR. VEIT: Yes, sir
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Must we make a decision -- make a
-- what do you need, guidance?
MR. MUDD: Are we chairborne or airborne at this point?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: We're airborne. You guys are
chairborne.
MR. MUDD: We need some --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Guidance.
MR. MUDD: What he needs to get is some delegation or some
authority so that he can use those dollars that were set aside for the 4th
of July to be used the weekend prior for that band event.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Let's do it.
MR. VEIT: Yes, sir. And also to bring the representative of the
Westpoint Military Band down at this time to have the opportunity to
meet the people in the community, meet the powers to be, so that we
can get a firm date on them --
COMMISSIONER COYLE: For next year.
MR. VEIT: -- for next year, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: That's a good move, I think.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I have a motion to approve from
Commissioner Coletta, and a second by Commissioner Halas.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN FIALA: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye.
Page 193
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Aye.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Good work, John.
MR. VEIT: Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Did you get that motion?
MR. MUDD: That's all I have, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Very good.
Commissioner Henning?
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What's -- the Haldeman Creek
dredge, where are we at with that?
MR. MUDD: Commissioner, what we're doing right now is,
we're finalizing agreement with Mr. Antaramian so we can use his
property for a spoil site, so we can deposit the spoil there. Once we've
got that agreement and we can put that into our permit -- because you
can't submit a permit without the spoil site and having that agreement
with him.
By having that agreement with him, you'll save almost a year as
far as the proj ect is concerned as far as execution. You'll also save
about $500,000 of the total project cost.
Weare -- and I haven't had an update here since last week. We
hadn't had the agreement yet completed. I expect that to be done
within the next several days. As soon as we have that done, we'll get
the permit in, and our plan is to go to construction on that project so
that -- and bid it out, award the contract by the end of this FY so that
we can start dredging by 1 November and be finished before the next
wet season.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: What about the creation of the
MS TU? When we were talking -- budgeting during the budget
process, Commissioner Coyle, you promised that the residents were
Page 194
May 11, 2004
going to create an MSTU. Where are we at with that?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I think the county manager can --
MR. MUDD: What we had, sir, as far as the permit was
concerned, if we were going to do the proj ect, they had to have the
funding in place in order to go forward with that.
I will tell you there is -- there's a difference of opinion as far as
the employee -- the employees, excuse me -- as far as the residents
that live in that area, was the dredge spoil that's in the canals right now
-- and I think we heard some of that, Commissioner Fiala, when we
talked to the subcommittee for the CRA on the triangle -- that that
spoil was there because of construction, previous construction.
My recommendation to the board would be that we get the
dredging done on this particular property, as soon as it's done, that the
board comes back and makes a mandatory MSTU so that any
dredging in the future would be done based on that taxing unit, and at
that juncture, you no longer have a dialogue of what's there came from
somebody else. It was clean, it was there, the construction issue,
except for the Antaramian property that's done, that's sitting right
there, and he'll be part of that MSTU, is their responsibility in the
future.
And my recommendation to the board is, as we get done with
these title basins -- you'll remember we had a briefing of 11 of them in
Collier County. Once we get the cost share between the county, the
Big Cypress Basin, and get the project done, that we establish that
MSTU and every one of those title basins with those folks that are
there so that we've got a way to start fresh, let that MSTU provide
dollars to that particular basin.
Now, if it's subsidized sometime in the future by Big Cypress
Basin or Collier County, so be it. But there's a taxing mechanism for
those people that benefit from it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: May I jump in as long as you've brought
that subject up? And two other questions. When I was at one of the
Page 195
May 11, 2004
meetings, the people had said that years ago they had filled out the
forms -- I think it was long before you guys were here -- anyway, that
Harry Huber sent out, and they had asked how deep they wanted them
and how much it would cost, is what it was.
And they had filled it out. And they were wondering how deep is
the county going to dredge it? And they asked me. I said, I don't
know.
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, I have the plan up in my office, and I have
the specifics. But it won't be any deeper than five foot, and there's
some areas that it will be two and a half feet, depending how far you
go up into that canal.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh. I think their choices were four feet,
six feet, and eight feet, right?
MR. MUDD: What ma'am?
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Originally when they sent that out -- well,
we'll check back.
MR. MUDD: I can tell you -- I can tell you what the permit is
for, and the deepest it's going is five feet as far as the -- as far as the
dredge issue. And when you get farther back toward 41 and whatnot,
they're talking about two and a half feet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, I see. When I come to look at that
stuff, could I also see what the old questionnaire looked like so that I
have something to compare with? I'm sure that's in your file.
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. I don't have the old questionnaire,
but I'll see if Mr. Huber still has it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Great. Okay. That's the first question.
Second question is --
MR. MUDD: Ma'am, if you go that deep, you're going to have
serious problems with the permit, I can tell you that right now. You
will have serious problems with that permit, because there's an area
that's down as it comes into the bay that's there that there's some
environmental concerns as far as the Corps of Engineers is concerned,
Page 196
May 11, 2004
and you're talking about increasing the cost of that dredge project
three- fold.
And so it gets to the point in time that -- it's beyond -- it's $1.3
million right now. You're talking about something that's going to
exceed five or six, and it's not budgeted for that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And I wanted to ask also.
Do you want to say something on this one?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. What I would encourage is
that -- is that we deal with what we've got. We've got a pennit.
MR. MUDD: We have a study.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Okay. But you're --
MR. MUDD: We'll use that -- we will use that study to get a
pennit.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And you feel very comfortable you
can get the study with the parameters -- get the pennit with the
parameters of the study --
MR. MUDD: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: -- as it is right now?
If residents want to do something afterwards with respect to
depths, then they can fonn an MSTU, and then they can start talking
about pennits; is that right?
MR. MUDD: Sir, they can set up their own MSTU, work their
own pennits, and pay for it.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And so the important thing is that
we get this done under the current parameters or else we're going to
delay it for a long time and maybe not ever get the study.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I just wanted to see what the figures were.
I don't even -- you know, I haven't heard at all how deep we were
going to be dredging it. We've talked about dredging all along. We've
also talked about the spoils and we've also talked about, Jack
Antaramian in the beginning wanted to jump start this thing and really
pour some steam on it and offered a wonderful carrot if we would get
Page 197
May 11, 2004
it done, I think, by February.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: And we didn't do that.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: And we didn't do that. And I was just
wondering if he's still offering something on the plate.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Yeah. He's offering something that
saves us $500,000. He's offering us a place to put the spoil. But the
arrangement where he would give us some money to jump start it if
we would get it done early didn't happen. We didn't get it done early,
and that was based largely upon his interest cost, the carrying cost on
the property.
He was paying quite a lot of money per month on the property.
So what his -- what he was trying to do is get us to do it earlier so he
wouldn't pay as much money on interest for carrying the property.
And when we didn't get it done, he no longer saved the money.
So he didn't have -- he wasn't interested in paying that money
since we didn't meet our deadlines. And so what we do have,
however, as the county manager has pointed out, is an arrangement
where we have that land for placing the spoil, and that's going to save
us about half a million dollars, as I understand it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Thanks for bringing the subject up.
Okay. Commissioner Coyle?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: I don't have anything.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. Commissioner Halas?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'd just like to reiterate a little bit
on these impact fees for beach and boat access. I think it should be
also a combination of a user fee and access fee. So I think when we
go forward with the study, I think it ought to be a combination of
those two.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Access fee or impact fee?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Combination of user fee and
impact fees.
MR. MUDD: Sir, we've got to do the study, okay? I've watched
Page 198
"'~-~~ -<- ---_u_--,-,,--,",-",' '
May 11, 2004
everybody on the dais today. With all due respect, you're doing the
study before you're getting it, okay? And you're basically telling me
what the outcome of the study's going to be.
I believe that the study might tell you that you can't do an impact
fee for boat access because it's particular to a person's hobby. Just like
I can't do an impact fee for golf courses because boaters don't golf,
and I don't boat. So people might have a problem with paying an
impact fee for that.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: But you have beach access --
MR. MUDD: You might find that's there's a rational nexus to
everybody in Collier County using a beach, okay, because everybody
goes there sometime.
I would really like to get the study back. And then once we get
the study, I've got to make sure I can get a law firm to sign up on it
that says that it's a rational nexus, okay, and that it's legally defensible,
and then to bring that back to the Board of County Commissioners.
This study might tell us we can't get there from here.
So before we spend a lot of energy trying to decide how we want
to do that, let's see what the study has to say. Let's see if we have that
legally defensible option, and then bring it back to the board, and we
might find out it's not going to give us enough revenues in order to
pay for that $134 million program, and there might be lots of
combinations of things that we can do in order to make that program
work so that we have the beach access and the boat access for the
beaches.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Commissioner Coletta?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'm not done yet.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, okay.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think today is a great day to
recognize our chairperson for the completion of her course to be a
certified commissioner through Florida Association of Counties.
COMMISSIONER HENNING: Well, good for you.
Page 199
May 11, 2004
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Yeah. How did you know that?
COMMISSIONER HALAS: Hey, I get around. So
congratulations on you taking all the courses and all the other things
that you've done to achieve that certification. Congratulations.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Oh, thank you. Thank you. Now that
means I'm certified, right?
COMMISSIONER COYLE: You're certified, all right.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: I leave it wide on open for that one.
Thank you, Commissioner Halas.
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you. Just one question.
I was wondering what Commissioner Coyle's final time survey
was.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: Well, you won again,
Commissioner Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: A little bit concerned maybe I
was falling behind.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: But, boy, it was tight this time.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER HALAS: It had to be between Coyle and
Coletta.
COMMISSIONER COYLE: No, no. Between Halas and
Coletta. But I'll tell you what. I was only about four minutes behind.
So it was pretty tight.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Thank you for putting all this
time and effort into it.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay.
COMMISSIONER COLETTA: It's up to you.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Okay. I just had one little comment, and I
just was going to ask the county manager to take a look at it. When
we were on item 8(A), on the top of page three, it was just saying
something about -- and they were talking about grants and so forth,
Page 200
,----""",
May 11, 2004
zoning approval grants.
And it said, the actual use determination is not provided to
county staff until much later in the development process. And they
were saying that it was very difficult for them to deal with this
particular thing.
This was the affordable housing density bonus on the Immokalee
senior housing PUD. Because they said the actual determination of the
use of the property isn't provided to staff till later. And I thought I
would -- until later in the development process. And they -- I guess
that's a stumbling block, and I wanted to just look into that a little bit,
if you would, not at this moment, please, you know, but --
MR. MUDD: Yes, ma'am. But this was a PUD. It was a zoning
document. We don't get the site development plan until much later in
the process.
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. Is that something that then is a
hangup for staff because they don't know where they're going?
MR. MUDD: Well, we don't exactly know the particulars of the
proj ect, you know. You don't --
CHAIRMAN FIALA: Right. That's just kind of like that Super
W al- Mart that we thought was going to be a Target, right? And we
didn't know it was going to be open all night long, 24 hours a day.
And so I'm thinking, you know, there might be something that we
need to look in on here as we try and protect these neighborhoods as
we -- as growth takes place. And I just thought, maybe that would be
something we could work on, okay?
And with that, Commissioners, meeting adjourned.
* * * * *Commissioner Henning moved, seconded by Commissioner
Coyle and carried unanimously, that the following items under the
Consent and Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted: *****
Page 201
",~,^,^"_._._,-
May 11, 2004
Item #16Al
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
SEACREST SCHOOL, AND RELEASE OF THE UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) TO THE PROJECT
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES
FOR ASTON GARDENS, AND RELEASE OF THE UPS TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S DESIGNATED
AGENT
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
BRITTANY BAY APARTMENTS, AND RELEASE OF THE UPS
TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S
DESlGNA.IED A G EN]'
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER AND SEWER UTILITY
FACILITIES FOR FLAMINGO FAIRWAYS, AND RELEASE OF
THE UPS TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE
Item #16A5
AN IMPACT FEE REIMBURSEMENT, IN AN AMOUNT
TOTALING $41,600.05, DUE TO THE CANCELLATION OF A
Page 202
--------'
--------'-
May 11,2004
BUILDING PERMIT BY KRAFT CONSTRUCTION FOR A NEW
OEEICRBIlILIllNfÌ
Item # 16A6
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST CATHOLIC CHURCH, AND
RELEASE OF THE UPS TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE
Item #16A7
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
GOLF CLUB OF THE EVERGLADES, AND RELEASE OF THE
UPS TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER'S
DESIGNAIED A G EN}'
Item # 16A8
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WATER UTILITY FACILITIES FOR
NAPLES LAKE COUNTRY CLUB TRACT THREE, AND
RELEASE OF THE UPS TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE
Item #16A9
WAIVE FORMAL COMPETITION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF AN ARTIFICIAL REEF (WITH A TOTAL COST NOT TO
EXCEED $50,000) AND AWARD CONTRACT TO KELLY
BROTHERS, INC.- AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMAR y
Page 203
May 11, 2004
Item #16AI0- Moved to Item #10F
Item #16All
A QUARTERLY REPORT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON THE ACTIVITIES
RELATED TO THE JOB CREATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM
AND THE ADVANCED BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENT PROGRAM FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER
Item #16A12
RECOMMENDATION BY THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AMEND THE IMMOKALEE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN AS NECESSARY TO ALLOW
FOR ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL AND ECONOMIC
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SllMMAR Y
Item #16A13
RECOMMENDATION BY THE CRA THAT THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES OF
THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA-
Item #16A14
TERMINATION OF CONTRACT #02-3317 WITH HENDERSON,
YOUNG, AND COMPANY FOR THE CORRECTIONAL
Page 204
May 11, 2004
FACILITIES IMP ACT FEE UPDATE STUDY - AS DETAILED IN
Item #16Bl
STANDARD OF GUIDELINES FOR THE PLACEMENT OF BUS
SHEL TERS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF - WAY FOR THE
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM - AS DETAILED IN
Item #16B2
WORK ORDERS WITH QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC.,
MITCHELL AND STARK CONSTRUCTION, AND KYLE
CONSTRUCTION INC., FOR STORM WATER RELATED
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN FOREST LAKES
ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE MSTU UNDER THE "ANNUAL
CONTRACT FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITIES CONTRACTING
Item # 16B3
RESOLUTION 2004-165: AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED TRUST FUND GRANT
APPLICATION WITH THE FLORIDA COMMISSION FOR THE
Item #16B4
CONVEYANCE OF DEEDS FOR THE RIGHT -OF - WAY
REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LOOP ROAD
AROUND THE MISSION HILLS PUD, CONNECTING
Page 205
May 11, 2004
V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD WITH COLLIER BOULEVARD,
~
Item #16B5
TWO PURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF
RIGHT OF WAY REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
SIX-LANE SECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) AND
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD (PROJECT NOS. 63051 AND NO. 65061) ESTIMATED
Item #16B6
TERMINATE CONTRACT WITH GREEN HERON LANDSCAPE,
INC., CONTRACT #03-3558 "LEL Y GOLF ESTATES
BEAUTIFICATION M.S.T.U. ROADWAY GROUNDS
MAINTENANCE - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SllMMAR y
Item #16B7
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO SUBMIT A REQUEST FOR A
FIVE- YEAR, $25,000 EACH YEAR, DONATION FROM
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT FOR THE GREENWAY PROJECT
ALONG THE FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT TRANSMISSION
Item #16Cl
AWARD BID 04-3646 IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,872,929 TO
MITCHELL AND STARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.,
Page 206
May 11, 2004
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FORCE MAIN AND THE
RECLAIMED WATER MAIN ALONG GOODLETTE FRANK
ROAD AND VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD, PROJECT NOS.
14.0 7 7 A NIl.12.OD 2
Item # 16C2
AN AMENDMENT TO WORK ORDER JEI-FT -03-04-A FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING INSPECTION SERVICES TO
INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE FORCE MAIN AND
THE RECLAIMED WATER MAIN ON GOODLETTE FRANK
ROAD AND V ANDERBIL T BEACH ROAD IN THE AMOUNT OF
Item #16C3
CANCEL A WORK ORDER WITH HUMISTON & MOORE
ENGINEERS FOR THE HIDEAWAY BEACH ACCESS
IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NO. 90511) AND APPROVING A
BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER $375,055.00 TO THE
TOURIST TAX RESERVES - AS DETAILED IN THE
Item # 16C4
A WORK ORDER AMENDMENT, UNDER CONTRACT #01-
3271, WITH HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS FOR PHASE
TWO OF THE ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO
PERMITTING THE HIDEAWAY BEACH RENOURISHMENT
(PROJECT NO. 90502) IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000.00 - AS
Page 207
"'--"^' ,
May 11, 2004
Item #16Dl
CERTIFICATION OF APPLICATION BY THE BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AND THE CHAIRMAN'S
SIGNATURE, PERMITTING THE COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC
LIBRARY TO APPLY FOR A STATE CONSTRUCTION GRANT
Item #16D2
A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF NAPLES FOR THE
EMS DEPARTMENT'S USE OF STATION 1, LOCATED WITHIN
THE CITY HALL COMPLEX 801 8TH AVENUE SOUTH, AT AN
Item #16D3
A SOVEREIGN SUBMERGED LANDS LEASE RENEWAL WITH
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL
IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOR CONTINUED USE OF THE BOAT RAMP AND DOCKING
FACILITIES AT CAXAMBAS PARK AT A (FIRST YEAR) COST
Item #16D4
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH NEW
YORK NEWCO SUBSIDIARY, INC., FOR A
COMMUNICATIONS TOWER AT VETERAN'S PARK -AS
Item #16D5
Page 208
May 11, 2004
BUDGET AMENDMENT APPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM EMS
RESER YES TO COVER A TTO RNEY FEES AND COURT
REPORTING COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CONTRACT
NEGOTIATIONS - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMAR y
Item # 16D6
DISCUSSION OF AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY COPCN
ORDINANCE 2004-12 BE CONTINUED TO THE JUNE 22, 2004
,
Item # 16D7 - Moved to Item # 1 OD
Item #16D8
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING A DONATION OF
$6,000.00 FROM THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION FOR
THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PURCHASING AUTOMATED
Item #16D9
BUDGET AMENDMENT RECOGNIZING THE DONATION OF
$6980.00 FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PURCHASING ONE
MAC500 (AUDIO CORE) UNIT FOR THE AMBULANCE
Item #16DI0
TERMINATE CONTRACT #96-2489 "PELICAN BAY TENNIS
Page 209
May 11, 2004
FACILITY CONCESSION AGREEMENT" WITH LEWIS TENNIS,
Item #16El
RESOLUTION 2004-166: A LEASE AGREEMENT TO RUN MAY
1, 2004 THROUGH APRIL 30, 2009 BETWEEN COLLIER
COUNTY AND THE EMPOWERMENT ALLIANCE OF
SOUTHWEST FLORIDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION FOR USE OF OFFICE SPACE IN THE
SATELLITE GOVERNMENT BUILDING IN IMMOKALEE FOR
Item # 16E2
TERMINATE CONTRACT NO. 02-3377 "NORTH NAPLES
GOVERNMENT SERVICES CENTER" WITH BROOKS AND
FREUND, LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTH NAPLES
GO VERNMENT SER VICES CENTER, AND A UTH 0 RIZIN G THE
PAYMENT OF PRE-CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES IN THE
AMOUNT OF $5,015.75 TO BROOKS AND FREUND, LLC. - AS
Item #16E3
REPORT AND RATIFY STAFF-APPROVED CHANGE ORDERS
AND CHANGES TO WORK ORDERS TO BOARD APPROVED
CONTRACTS FOR THE PERIOD OF MARCH 31, 2004
IHROI.IG:H...AE 1 2 7, 2 QO4
Item # 16E4
Page 210
May 11,2004
ADDITIONS TO THE 2004 FISCAL YEAR PAY AND
CLASSIFICATION PLAN FROM APRIL 7, 2004 THROUGH
~
Item # 16E5
EXTENSION OF CONTRACT #01-3204 "REAL ESTATE
APPRAISAL SERVICES" UNTIL DECEMBER 12, 2004 OR
Item #16E6
AWARD BID NO. 04-3570 "FERTILIZATION SERVICES AND
PEST CONTROL" TO PEST CONTROL, INC., AND TO
TRUGREEN CHEMLA WN - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SUMMAR y
Item #16E7
RE-ASSIGNMENT OF BID NO. 00-3154, "HOUSEHOLD
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL CONTRACT" FROM US
LIQUIDS, INC., TO EQ FLORIDA, INC., THEREFORE
RELEASING US LIQUIDS, INC. FROM LIABILITY, FROM AND
Item #16Fl
A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GULF SHORE ASSOCIATES,
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, FOR CONTINUED USE OF A
PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION ROOFTOP MOUNTED
ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT ROOM SPACE AT THE SUN
BANK BUILDING IN PELICAN BAY, LEASE TO RUN UNTIL
Page 211
May 11, 2004
FEBRUARY 28, 2006 - AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE
SllMMAR y
Item #16F2
TRANSFER UNUSED FUNDS DONATED BY COLLIER
COUNTY HOTELS IN FY 03 FOR MPI (MEETING
PROFESSIONALS INTERNATIONAL) EVENTS BE RETURNED
FROM RESERVES TO THE OPERATING ACCOUNT, USED FOR
ADVERTISING AND PROMOTIONAL EXPENSES FOR THE
2004 MPI EVENT, AND APPROVING A NECESSARY BUDGET
AMENllMENT
Item # 16F3
BUDGET AMENDMENT #04-243 NEEDED FOR THE PUBLIC
EMERGENCY OF PALM REMOVAL, AND INOCULATIONS
FOR LETHAL YELLOWING OUTBREAK IN ACCORDANCE
Item #16F4
THIRD AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GULF
SHORE ASSOCIATES, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, FOR THE
CONTINUED USE OF OFFICE SPACE BY THE PELICAN BAY
SERVICES DIVISION AT AN ANNUAL RENTAL OF $19,566.00
PLUS A CONSUMER PRICE INDEX INCREASE - AS DETAILED
Item #16Hl
PAYMENT FOR COMMISSIONER HENNING'S REQUEST TO
Page 212
May 11, 2004
ATTEND A RETIREMENT P ARTY FOR ED PERI CO, COLLIER
COUNTY BUILDING DIRECTOR, AT THE ITALIAN
AMERICAN CLUB ON JUNE 5, 2004 AT A COST OF $35.00 TO
,
Item #16H2
PAYMENT FOR COMMISSIONER FIALA'S REQUEST TO
ATTEND THE LEADERSHIP COLLIER CLASS OF 2004
GRADUATION CEREMONIES AT THE NAPLES BEACH HOTEL
AND GOLF CLUB ON MAY 13,2004 AT A COST OF $50.00 TO
,
Item #1611
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE- FILED AND/OR
REEERRED -
The following miscellaneous correspondence, as presented by the
Board of County Commissioners, has been directed to the various
departments as indicated:
Page 213
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
May 11,2004
FOR BOARD ACTION:
A. Minutes:
1. The Ochopee Fire Control District - Minutes of March 9,2004.
2. Radio Road Beautification M.S.T.U. - Agenda for April 20, 2004;
Minutes of March 16,2004.
3. Collier County Contractor's Licensing Board - Agenda for April 21, 2004.
4. Development Services Advisory Board - Agenda for March 3, 2004;
Minutes of March 3, 2004. Budget & Operations Sub-Committee-
Agenda for March 10,2004; Minutes of March 10,2004.
5. Historical & Archeological Preservation Board - Agenda for April 21,
2004; Minutes of March 17,2004.
6. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board - Agenda for April 21, 2004;
Minutes of February 18,2004.
7. Coastal Advisory Committee - Minutes of March 11,2004.
8. Collier County Planning Commission - Agenda for April 15, 2004;
Minutes of March 4,2004.
9. Pelican Bay Services Division - Agenda for April 21, 2004; Minutes of
April 7, 2004. Budget Sub-Committee - Agenda for April 21, 2004;
Minutes of March 17,2004.
H:Data/Format
May 11,2004
Item #16J1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S SERVE AS THE
LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF GOVERNMENT IN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT'S ANTI-
DRUG ABUSE ACT FORMULA GRANT PROGRAM - AS
Item #16J2
DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE PURCHASE OF GOODS
AND SERVICES DOCUMENTED IN THE DETAILED REPORT
OF OPEN PURCHASE ORDERS SERVE A VALID PUBLIC
PURPOSE AND AUTHORIZED THE EXPENDITURE OF
COUNTY FUNDS TO SATISFY SAID PURCHASES FROM
Item #16K1
AGREED ORDER AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF
APPRAISAL FEES AND PLANNING FEES FOR PARCELS 102
AND 702 IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V
FAITH BIBLE CHURCH OF NAPLES, INC., ET.AL., CASE NO. 99-
2156-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #69101) - $14,700.00
Item #16K2
AGREED ORDER AND AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF
PLANNING FEES AND APPRAISAL FEES FOR PARCEL 115B
IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V DIANE P.
HAAGA, ET. AL., CASE NO. 03-0518-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD
Page 214
May 11,2004
PROJECT #60018) - $12,137.50 TO THE ROETZEL AND
ANDRESS TRUST ACCOUNT
Item #16K3
AGREED ORDER AND AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF
PLANNING FEES AND APPRAISAL FEES FOR PARCELS 113,
713A AND 713B IN THE LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY
V NORTH NAPLES UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, INC., ET.
AL., CASE NO. 02-1742-CA (GOODLETTE- FRANK ROAD
PROJECT #60134) - $15,875 TO THE ROETZEL AND ANDRESS
IRIlS.T ACCOUNT
Item #16K4
AGREED ORDER AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF EXPERT
FEES AND COSTS FOR PARCEL 112 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V NORMA E. BANAS, ET. AL., CASE
NO. 02-5137-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT #60018)-
$22,556.80 TO THE GAYLORD MERLIN LUDOVICI DIAZ AND
BAThLIR.IlST ACCOUNT
Item #16K5
AGREED ORDER AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF EXPERT
FEES AND COSTS FOR PARCEL 120 IN THE LAWSUIT
STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V CALUSA PINES GOLF CLUB LLC,
ET. AL., CASE NO. 02-5140-CA (IMMOKALEE ROAD PROJECT
#60018) - $27,800.00 TO THE GAYLORD MERLIN LUDOVICI
Item #16K6
Page 215
May 11,2004
AGREED ORDER AND AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF
APPRAISAL FEES AND CONTRACTOR'S COST ESTIMATE
FEES FOR PARCELS 117,133,717A, 717B AND 733 IN THE
LAWSUIT STYLED COLLIER COUNTY V CALUSA BAY MASTER
ASSOCIATION, INC., ET. AL., CASE NO. 02-2040-CA
(GOODLETTE-FRANK ROAD PROJECT #60134) - $29,717.50 TO
Item #16K7
RESOLUTION 2004-167: AUTHORIZING THE COLLIER
COUNTY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO
ISSUE REVENUE BONDS, IN AN AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING
$10,000,000.00, TO BE USED TO FINANCE EDUCATIONAL
Item # 1 7 A
RESOLUTION 2004-168: RE: CU-2003-AR-3914, ANN PHILLIPS
PRE-SCHOOL, REPRESENTED BY TERRANCE L. KEPPLE, PE,
OF KEPPLE ENGINEERING, INC., REQUESTED CONDITIONAL
USE NO.3 OF THE RMF-6 DISTRICT FOR A CHILD CARE
CENTER, LOCATED AT 860 102ND AVENUE NORTH, IN THE
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 2004-169: RE: DRI-03-AR-4987, RICHARD
BENNETT, REPRESENTED BY DONALD PICKWORTH, P.A.,
REQUESTED TO ABANDON THE "TWELVE LAKES"
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) BECAUSE THE
Page 216
May 11, 2004
PROJECT NO LONGER MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS TO
QUALIFY AS A DRI IN COLLIER COUNTY, LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF DAVIS BOULEVARD (SR-84) AND THE
SOUTH SIDE OF RADIO ROAD (CR-856) IN SECTION 4,
TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
EL.ORlD A
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 4:08 p.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
~~~-
DONNA IALA, Chairman
ATTEST' ,,,1;.... "'.
...;.....ì .r.fJ' '''''A "'//t
DWIGtI~*::¡;ítÖ€'K, CLERK
. t;/ ';~.I:;:¡:·~:~l· ,-,,~:":
: ~ ('" / ~'~:.. .\G.e.
Atte~;,:.. '; t 's
Thes~I!/11M~d,l;-åFProved by the Board on 1fJAA.-e ~ ðOO±, as
presented ~ or as corrected .
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF GREGORY COURT
REPORTING SERVICES, INC. BY CHERIE NOTTINGHAM AND
TERRI LEWIS.
Page 217
--.-..-..- ._"-'---~^"'-"