BCC Minutes 05/25/2021 RMay 25, 2021
Page 1
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Naples, Florida May 25, 2021
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County
Commissioners, in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as
the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board(s) of such
special districts as have been created according to law and having
conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in
REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex,
East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
Chairman: Penny Taylor
William L. McDaniel, Jr.
Burt L. Saunders
Andy Solis
Rick LoCastro (Excused)
ALSO PRESENT:
Mark Isackson, County Manager
Sean Callahan, Deputy County Manager
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller
Troy Miller, Communications & Customer Relations
Page 1
May 25, 2021
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Community Redevelopment Agency Board (CRAB)
Airport Authority
AGENDA
Board of County Commission Chambers
Collier County Government Center
3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor
Naples, FL 34112
May 25, 2021
9:00 AM
Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 - Chair – CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner William L. McDaniel, Jr., District 5 - Vice Chair - CRAB Co-Chair
Commissioner Rick LoCastro, District 1
Commissioner Andy Solis, District 2
Commissioner Burt Saunders, District 3
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS MUST
REGISTER PRIOR TO PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE
ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE
(3) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
REQUESTS TO PETITION 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.”
PUBLIC PETITIONS ARE LIMITED TO THE PRESENTER, WITH A
MAXIMUM TIME OF TEN MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD
Page 2
May 25, 2021
WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,
AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD
OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE
TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2003-53 AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE 2004-05 AND 2007-24, 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.
IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY
ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING,
YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN
ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT DIVISION LOCATED AT 3335 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL,
SUITE 1, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380; ASSISTED
LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN
THE FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DIVISION.
LUNCH RECESS SCHEDULED FOR 12:00 NOON TO 1:00 P.M.
1. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
A. Invocation by Reverend Sheila Zellers of Motivated by Love Ministries
2. AGENDA AND MINUTES
A. Approval of today's regular, consent and summary agenda as amended (ex
parte disclosure provided by commission members for consent agenda.)
B. April 27, 2021 BCC Meeting Minutes
3. AWARDS AND RECOGNITIONS
A. EMPLOYEE
B. ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS
Page 3
May 25, 2021
C. RETIREES
D. EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
4. PROCLAMATIONS
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Recommendation to accept the COVID-19 Status Report. (Kimberly
Kossler, Administrator, Health Department) (All Districts)
B. Presentation by Melissa McKinlay, President, Florida Association of
Counties, on the 2021 Regular Session of the State Legislature. (All
Districts)
6. PUBLIC PETITIONS
7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE CURRENT
OR FUTURE AGENDA
8. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS - NOTE: DUE TO COMMON
QUESTIONS OF LAW AND FACT, ITEMS #9A, #9B, #11A, #11B, #11C,
#11D, #11E, AND #11F WILL ALL BE HEARD AS PART OF A SINGLE
PUBLIC HEARING NO SOONER THAN 1:00 P.M.
A. This Item to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m. This item requires that
ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a
hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Recommendation to approve a Resolution designating 999.81 acres within
the Rural Lands Stewardship Area zoning overlay district as a Stewardship
Receiving Area, to be known as the Longwater Village Stewardship
Receiving Area, which will allow development of a maximum of 2,600
residential dwelling units, of which a minimum of 10% will be multi-family
dwelling units, 10% will be single family detached and 10% will be single
family attached or villa; an aggregate minimum of 65,000 square feet and an
aggregate maximum of 80,000 square feet of neighborhood -scale
commercial and office in the village center context zone and neighborhood
commercial context zone; a minimum of 26,000 square feet of civic,
Page 4
May 25, 2021
governmental and institutional uses; senior housing including adult living
facilities and continuing care retirement communities and limited to 300
units if located in the neighborhood general context zone; and 18.01 acres of
amenity center site; all subject to a maximum pm peak hour trip cap; and
approving the Stewardship Receiving Area credit agreement for Longwater
Village Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing that 6697.76
stewardship credits are being utilized by the designation of the Longwater
Village Stewardship Receiving Area. The subject property is located east of
Desoto Boulevard, south of Oil Well Road and west of the intersection of
Oil Well Grade Road and Oil Well Road, in Sections 22, 23, 26, 27, 34 And
35, Township 48 South, Range 28 East, Collier County, Florida. (This is a
Companion Item to #11A, #11B, #11C, #11D and #11E) [PL20190001836]
(Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner, Zoning Division)
(District 5)
B. This Item to be heard no sooner than 1:00 p.m. This item requires ex
parte disclosure be provided by the Commission members. Should a
hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn
in. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Collier County Board of
County Commissioners designating 999.74 acres within the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a Stewardship Receiving Area,
to be known as the Bellmar Village Stewardship Receiving Area, which will
allow development of a maximum of 2,750 residential dwelling units, of
which a minimum of 10% will be multi-family dwelling units, 10% will be
single family detached and 10% will be single family attached or villa; a
minimum of 68,750 and maximum of 85,000 square feet of commercial
development in the village center context zone; a minimum of 27,500 square
feet of civic, governmental and institutional uses in the village center
context zone; senior housing including adult living facilities and continuing
care retirement communities limited to 300 units and no commercial uses in
the neighborhood general context zone; and 14.86 acres of amenity center
site; all subject to a maximum pm peak hour trip cap; and approving the
Stewardship Receiving Area credit agreement for Bellmar Village
Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing that 6742 Stewardship Credits
are being utilized by the designation of the Bellmar Village Stewardship
Receiving Area. The subject property is located approximately 4 miles south
of Oil Well Road, east of Desoto Boulevard between 4th Avenue NE and 8th
Avenue SE in Sections 2, 3, 10 and 11, Township 49 South, Range 28 East,
Collier County, Florida. (This is a Companion Item to #11A and #11F)
[PL20190001837] (James Sabo, AICP Comprehensive Planning Manager)
Page 5
May 25, 2021
(District 5)
10. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
11. COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT
A. Recommendation to approve a Town Agreement related to the creation of an
SRA Town by amending the Longwater Village SRA to add 515.1 acres to
form a Town SRA, of which Town will also address impacts from the
Rivergrass Village SRA and the Bellmar Village SRA. The subject
properties are generally located east of DeSoto Boulevard, north and south
of Oil Well Road, and east of the intersection of Oil Well Road, in Sections
10, 14, 15, 22, 23, 26, 27, 34, and 35, Township 48 South, Range 28 East,
and Sections 2, 3, 10 and 11, Township 49 South, Range 28 East, Collier
County, Florida. (This is a Companion Item to #9A, #9B, #11B, #11C,
#11D, #11E, and #11F) (Trinity Scott, Deputy Department Head, Growth
Management) (District 5)
B. Recommendation to adopt a resolution amending Resolution 2008 -331 for
Stewardship Sending Area 14 (“CLH SSA 14”) within the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Overlay District (RLSA) by way of a first amendment to
the amended and restated Escrow Agreement for CLH SSA 14; and
approving the first amendment to the amended and restated Escrow
Agreement for CLH SSA 14. The subject property is located in Sections 13,
14, 23 and 24, Township 47 South, Range 28 East, Collier County. (This is a
Companion Item to #9A, #11A, #11C, #11D, and #11E) (Jaime Cook,
Principal Environmental Specialist, Development Review Division)
(District 5)
C. Recommendation to adopt a resolution amending Resolution 2008 -329 for
Stewardship Sending Area 15 (“CLH & CDC SSA 15”) within the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Overlay District (RLSA) by way of a first
amendment to the amended and restated Escrow Agreement for CLH &
CDC SSA 15; and approving the first amendment to the amended and
restated Escrow Agreement for CLH & CDC SSA 15. The subject property
is located in Sections 25, 26 and 35, Township 47 South, Range 28 East and
Sections 1, 2, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35 and 36, Township 48 South,
Range 28 East, Collier County. (This is a Companion Item to #9A, #11A,
#11B, #11D, and #11E) (Jaime Cook, Principal Environmental Specialist,
Development Review Division) (District 5)
Page 6
May 25, 2021
D. Recommendation to adopt a resolution amending Resolution 2021 -083 for
Stewardship Sending Area 17 (“CLH & CDC SSA 17”) within the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area Overlay District (RLSA) by amending and restating
the Escrow Agreement for CLH & CDC SSA 17; and approving an amended
and restated Escrow Agreement for CLH & CDC SSA 17. The subject
property is located in Sections 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 22, 23, 26, 27, 34 and 35,
Township 47 South, Range 28 East and Sections 1, 2, and 3, Township 49
South, Range 28 East, Collier County. (This is a Companion Item to #9A,
#11A, #11B, #11C, and #11E) (Jaime Cook, Principal Environmental
Specialist, Development Review Division) (District 5)
E. Recommendation to approve an agreement to allow the Collier County
Water- Sewer District to provide potable water, wastewater and irrigation
water utility services to the Longwater Village in the Big Cypress
Stewardship District. (This is a Companion Item to #9A, #11A, #11B, #11C,
and #11D) (Joe Bellone, Utilities Finance Division Director) (All Districts)
F. Recommendation to approve an agreement to allow the Collier County
Water-Sewer District to provide potable water and wastewater utility
services to the Bellmar Village in the Big Cypress Stewardship District.
(This is a companion Item to #9B and #11A) (Joe Bellone, Utilities Finance
Division Director) (All Districts)
G. Recommendation to approve the East of CR951 Bridge Reevaluation Study,
direct staff to design and construct the five (5) recommended bridges and
continue public engagement with the impacted residents through the design
and construction process. (Lorraine Lantz, Principal Planner, Capital Project
Planning) (District 5)
H. Recommendation to conduct the Conservation Collier Annual Public
Meeting to provide an update on the program’s past activities, to solicit
proposals and applications, and to approve the 10th Cycle Target Protection
Areas (TPA) mailing strategy. (Summer Araque Brown, Principal
Environmental Specialist, Conservation Collier Program) (All Districts)
I. Recommendation to authorize budget amendments transferring and
recognizing funds in the amount of $2,950,000 from Mandatory Trash
Collection Fund Reserves to the Solid Waste Disposal Fund to cover
additional expenses incurred as a result of increased waste disposal due to
Page 7
May 25, 2021
COVID 19, and place the remaining balance in reserves. (Kari Hodgson,
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Division Director) (All Districts)
J. Recommendation to approve an agreement to operate and lease the Collier
County Mental Health Facility with the David Lawrence Mental Health
Center, Inc., approve a purchase and sale agreement for the land the facility
will be located on, and authorize staff to move forward with a Request for
Proposals to design the facility (Sean Callahan, Deputy County Manager).
(All Districts)
K. This Item to be heard at 10:00 a.m. Recommendation to approve a Long-
Term Lease And Operating Agreement with CC BSG Naples, LLC
(“BigShots”) to operate and manage a twelve-hole public golf course on the
former Golden Gate Golf Course property, to lease land for the construction
and operation of a BigShots golf/entertainment facility on the property to
benefit the residents of Collier County, support the overall redevelopment
plan for the property, and to approve all necessary budget amendments.
(Geoff Willig, Senior Operations Analyst in the County Manager’s Office)
(All Districts)
12. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
13. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
14. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AND/OR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
A. AIRPORT
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
15. STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
A. Future Workshop Schedule (All Districts)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 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.
Page 8
May 25, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve a Resolution for final acceptance of the
private roadway and drainage improvements, and acceptance of the
plat dedications, for the final plat of Sereno Grove, Application
Number PL20160001884; and authorize the release of the
maintenance security. (District 2)
2) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer facilities for ProScan – AmSouth, PL20190002564, accept the
conveyance of a portion of the potable water facilities, and authorize
the County Manager, or his designee, to release the Utilities
Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation Bond in the total
amount of $6,178.28 to the Project Engineer or the Developer’s
designated agent. (District 1)
3) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer facilities for Creative World School Naples, PL20200000173,
accept the conveyance of a portion of the potable water and sewer
facilities, and authorize the County Manager, or his designee, to
release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and Final Obligation
Bond in the total amount of $10,671.35 to the Project Engineer or the
Developer’s designated agent. (District 2)
4) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer utility facilities for Ritz-Carlton Naples Golf Resort - Pool
Expansion, PL20210000646. (District 2)
5) Recommendation to approve the release of a code enforcement lien
with an accrued value of $74,473.45, for payment of $723.45 in the
code enforcement action titled Board of County Commissioners v.
Naples Marina Holdings, LLC, relating to property located at 1949
Davis Blvd, Collier County, Florida. (District 4)
6) Recommendation to approve the release of two (2) code enforcement
liens, with an accrued value of $744,456.68 for payment of $756.68,
in the code enforcement action titled Board of County Commissioners
v. Bradley Goodson and Leigha Wilson, Code Enforcement Board
Page 9
May 25, 2021
Case Nos. CELU20140025168 and CEAU20150003344, relating to
property located at 2432 Florida Ave., Collier County, Florida.
(District 4)
7) Recommendation to approve the release of two (2) code enforcement
liens, with an accrued value of $651,356.68 for payment of $756.68,
in the code enforcement action titled Board of County Commissioners
v. Bradley Goodson and Leigha Wilson, Code Enforcement Board
Case Nos. CELU20140025432 and CEAU20150003345, relating to
property located at 2448 Florida Ave., Collier County, Florida.
(District 4)
8) Recommendation to approve the release of two code enforcement
liens with an accrued value of $95,397.40 for payment of $4,000 in the
code enforcement actions titled Board of County Commissioners v.
Deri Clark in Special Magistrate Case Nos. CENA20180002815 and
CENA20180002818 relating to property located at 15081 Oak Tree
Drive, Collier County, Florida. (District 1)
9) Recommendation to approve a Resolution prohibiting the operations
of trucks and other commercial vehicles having a rated load-carrying
capacity in excess of five (5) tons from through movements on Logan
Boulevard Extension from Immokalee Road to the Lee County Line.
(All Districts)
10) Recommendation to approve a resolution prohibiting the operation of
trucks and other commercial vehicles having a rated load-carrying
capacity in excess of one (1) ton from through movements on Massey
Street. (District 5)
11) Recommendation that the Board approves and authorizes the
Chairman to sign Collier County Landscape Maintenance Agreement
between Collier County and Enbrook Homeowners’ Association, Inc.
for landscape and irrigation improvements within the Manatee Road
public right-of-way. (District 1, All Districts)
12) Recommendation to approve an Assignment and Assumption of a
License Agreement from Creekside West, Inc. to CC Addison, LLC
for the purpose of the installation of two ground signs within County
right- of-way. (District 3)
Page 10
May 25, 2021
13) Recommendation to approve an extension for completion of required
subdivision improvements associated with Sierra Meadows (AR-
2340) subdivision pursuant to Section 10.02.05 C.2 of the Collier
County Land Development Code (LDC). (District 1)
14) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid No. 21-7867, “Dune
Vegetation Restoration Project – Grant Funded,” to Cardno, Inc. in
the amount of $106,472.00, authorize the Chair to sign the attached
agreement, and make a finding that this item promotes tourism.
(Project #195-50154) (All Districts)
15) Recommendation to approve a Work Order with CSA Ocean
Sciences, Inc. to continue the required post-construction hardbottom
monitoring for the Collier County Beach Nourishment Project in
summer 2021 with CSA Ocean Sciences, Inc. for Time and Material
not to exceed $169,959.21 under Contract No. 17-7188, authorize the
Chairman to execute the work order for the proposed services, and
make a finding that this item promotes tourism. (All Districts)
16) Recommendation to award Invitation to Bid (“ITB”) No. 21 -7861,
“Concrete: Sidewalks, Curbs & Gutters, and Related Items.” to
primary and secondary vendors, and authorize the Chair to sign the
attached agreements. (All Districts)
17) Recommendation to approve final acceptance of the potable water and
sewer facilities for Pampered Pet Resorts (fka: All American Pet
Resort), PL20200000519, accept the conveyance of a portion of the
potable water facilities, and authorize the County Manager, or his
designee, to release the Utilities Performance Security (UPS) and
Final Obligation Bond in the total amount of $6,289.20 to the Project
Engineer or the Developer’s designated agent. (District 5)
18) Recommendation that the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) accept Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds in the amount of $389,085 for the Peters Avenue
Sidewalk project, and authorize necessary budgets amendments.
(Project No. 33712) (District 4)
19) Recommendation to accept the information and findings of the
Page 11
May 25, 2021
County Manager’s review of the Coastal Advisory Committee’s
proposed approach to addressing coastal water quality issues and
direct staff to work towards implementing the Coastal Advisory
Committee’s recommendations. (All Districts)
B. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
C. PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to approve an exemption from the competitive
process and enter into General Services Agreement (Non-Solicitation)
No. 21-001-NS for Utility Billing & Customer Service Integrated
Software Services with N. Harris Computer Corporation (“Harris”)
for maintenance, licensing, and technical services for the Impresa
software used by Utility Billing. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve a Work Order in the amount of
$475,000, pursuant to a Request for Quotation under Agreement No.
14-6213 to Quality Enterprises USA, Inc., for the Isle of Capri Pump
Station Surge Control System (Project No. 71067). (District 1)
3) Recommendation to approve Request for Quotation #20-8110,
“Immokalee Health and Library Parking Lot,” under Agreement No.
16-6663, Annual Agreement for Roadway Contractors to Bonness,
Inc., authorize a budget amendment and the issuance of a purchase
order in the amount of $267,623. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to provide, after-the-fact approval for the submittal
of a Hazard Mitigation Program grant application for FEMA FM-
5309-FL “Essential Facility Retrofit” to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) through the Florida Division of
Emergency Management in the amount of $250,000.00. (All Districts)
D. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) mortgage satisfactions for the State Housing Initiatives Partnership
loan program in the amount of $43,200 and the associated Budget
Amendment. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to appoint Daniel Rodriguez, Public Services
Page 12
May 25, 2021
Department Head, to execute the Federal Transit Administration’s
annual certifications and assurances for Board approved grants and
grant applications through the FTA’s Transit Award Management
System and authorize the Chair to sign the Designation of Signature
Authority form. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve the award of Request for Proposal #21-
7836, “Barefoot Beach Concession Services,” to SSG Recreation,
Inc., and authorize the Chair to sign the attached agreement.
(District 2)
4) Recommendation to approve a Resolution and authorize the Chairman
to execute upon arrival the FY2021/22 Transportation Disadvantaged
Trust Fund Trip/Equipment Grant Agreement with the Florida
Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged in the amount of
$782,438 with a local match of $86,937 to assist with system
operating expenses and authorize the necessary Budget Amendments.
(All Districts)
5) Recommendation to accept a revision to the Notice of Grant Award
for the FTA 5310 FY20-21 Program through the Florida Department
of Transportation, approve a new FY20-21 Public Transportation
Grant Agreement in the amount of $23,700, and approve an associated
Resolution to provide for Federal funding to purchase Mobile Radios
and Tablets. (All Districts)
E. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
1) Recommendation to accept Staff’s report for the sale of 44 items and
disbursement of funds in the total amount of $198,150 associated with
the County surplus auction held on April 10, 2021. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve the administrative report prepared by the
Procurement Services Division for disposal of property and
notification of revenue disbursement. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to approve the administrative reports prepared by
the Procurement Services Division for change orders and other
contractual modifications requiring Board approval. (All Districts)
Page 13
May 25, 2021
4) Recommendation to approve Amendment No. 16 to the Agreement
with Collier County District School Board for the Dori Slosberg
Driver Education Program (All Districts)
5) Recommendation to authorize an increase of allowable expenditures
utilizing NEOGOV software products under Agreement No. 10-5451-
NS for the County’s talent acquisition processes in an amount not to
exceed $100,000 per fiscal year. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve an Assumption Agreement assigning all
rights, duties and benefits, and obligations to KOVA Appraisal &
Consulting Services, LLC d/b/a Carlson, Norris & Associates for
Agreement #18-7482 “Real Estate Appraisal and Consulting
Services.” (All Districts)
F. COUNTY MANAGER OPERATIONS
1) Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating grants, donations, contributions or insurance proceeds)
to the FY20-21 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
2) Recommendation to approve the selection committee’s ranking and
authorize staff to begin contract negotiations with the top ranked firm,
Tindale Oliver & Associates Inc., concerning Request for Professional
Services (“RPS”) No. 21-7868 Impact Fee Studies & Fiscal Analysis,
so a proposed agreement can be brought back for the Board’s
consideration at a future meeting. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners terminate
Agreement No. 18-7404, “Collier County Sports Complex Marketing
and Support,” with Sports Fields, Inc, for convenience, and send
notice to the Contractor. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to recognize Tania Santos, Public Services
Department, Domestic Animal Services (DAS) as the May 2021
Employee of the Month.
G. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
1) Recommendation to approve and authorize the Chairman to execute
Page 14
May 25, 2021
the attached Resolution authorizing the County Manager's execution of
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Coronavirus
Response Grant Program (ACRGP) Agreements in the amount of
$23,000 for the Marco Island Executive Airport (MKY) and $13,000
for the Immokalee Regional Airport (IMM) for eligible operating
expenses and authorize all necessary budget amendments. (District 1,
District 5)
H. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
1) Proclamation designating May 2021, as National Drug Court Month
in Collier County. The proclamation will be delivered to The
Honorable Janeice Martin, Presiding Judge of the Collier County
Drug Court. (Commissioner Taylor's request)
2) Proclamation recognizing the leadership, staff, and volunteers of the
Naples Senior Center for helping thousands of local seniors obtain
COVID-19 vaccine appointments during this global pandemic. To be
accepted by Dr. Jaclynn Faffer. (Commissioner Taylor's request)
3) Proclamation designating May 2021, as Mental Health Awareness
Month in Collier County. The proclamation will be mailed to
Michelle McLeod, Collier Coalition for Healthy Minds.
(Commissioner Solis' request)
I. MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
1) Miscellaneous Correspondence (All Districts)
J. OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS
1) Recommendation that the Board of County Commissioners serve as
the local coordinating unit of government for the Florida Department
of Law Enforcement’s Federal Fiscal Year 2020 Edward Byrne
Memorial, Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Countywide Program and
(1) authorize the Chairman to execute the Certification of
Participation; (2) designate the Sheriff as the official applicant and the
Sheriff’s office staff as grant financial and program managers; (3)
authorize the acceptance of the grant if and when awarded; and (4)
approve associated budget amendments and approve the Collier
Page 15
May 25, 2021
County Sheriff’s Office to receive and expend the grant funds. (All
Districts)
2) Report to the Board regarding the investment of County funds as of
the quarter ended March 31, 2021. (All Districts)
3) To record in the minutes of the Board of County Commissioners, the
check number (or other payment method), amount, payee, and purpose
for which the referenced disbursements were drawn for the periods
between April 29, 2021 and May 12, 2021 pursuant to Florida Statute
136.06. (All Districts)
4) Request that the Board approve and determine valid public purpose
for invoices payable and purchasing card transactions as of May 19,
2021. (All Districts)
K. COUNTY ATTORNEY
1) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Haldeman Creek
Dredging Maintenance Advisory Committee. (District 4)
2) Recommendation to reappoint a member to the Coastal Advisory
Committee. (All Districts)
3) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Emergency Medical
Authority. (All Districts)
4) Recommendation to appoint a member to the Radio Road
Beautification Advisory Committee. (District 4)
5) Recommendation to appoint two members to the Affordable Housing
Advisory Committee. (All Districts)
6) Recommendation to approve a First Amendment to Agreement No.
18-7343-WV for Court Reporting with U.S. Legal Support, Inc., to
adjust the fee schedule for rates during the remaining two one-year
renewal terms of the Agreement. (All Districts)
7) Recommendation to approve and authorize payment of statutory
attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Section 73.092, Fla. Stat.
Page 16
May 25, 2021
incurred by the property owner in defending Collier County’s
Eminent Domain action in the total amount of $8,467.25 for the
proposed taking of Parcel 280RDUE for the Vanderbilt Beach Road
Extension. (Project No. 60168) (All Districts)
8) Recommendation to approve a Joint Motion for Stipulated Order of
Taking and Stipulated Final Judgment in the total amount of
$312,013.55 including statutory attorneys’ fees and costs, for the
taking of five parcels: 1199FEE, 1201FEE, 1203FEE1, 1203FEE2,
and 1205FEE required for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension
Project. (Project No., 60168) (All Districts)
9) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the
amount of $105,000.00, plus statutory attorneys’ fees and costs in the
amount of $18,887.25, for the total amount of $123,887.25 for the
taking of Parcel 324RDUE/TDRE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach
Road Expansion Project. (Project No., 60168) (All Districts)
10) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Final Judgment in the total
amount of $103,000.00 including statutory attorneys’ fees and costs,
for the taking of Parcel 211FEE, required for the Vanderbilt Beach
Road Extension Project. (Project No., 60168) (All Districts)
11) Recommendation to approve a Stipulated Order of Taking and Final
Judgment in the total amount of $42,500.00 including statutory
attorneys’ fees and costs, for the taking of Parcel 189FEE, required
for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension Project. (Project No., 60168)
(All Districts)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 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 quasi-judicial in nature, all
participants must be sworn in.
Page 17
May 25, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Section 130-3 of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, relating to prohibiting the
operation of trucks and other commercial vehicles with a rated load -carrying
capacity in excess of five (5) tons from through movements on designated
public roads and streets in Collier County. (All Districts)
B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are
required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-
PL20210000230, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public
interest in a portion of the Blanket Access and Drainage Easement located on
Tract “I” of Hacienda Lakes of Naples, as recorded in Plat Book 55, Page 10
of the public records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 23, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (District 1)
C. Recommendation to adopt a resolution approving amendments
(appropriating carry forward, transfers and supplemental revenue) to the
FY20-21 Adopted Budget. (All Districts)
D. Recommendation to approve a Resolution amending Ordinance No. 89-05,
as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the
unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the
Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master
Plan and the Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map and Map
Series to create the Immokalee Road/4th Street N.E. Mixed Use Subdistrict
by changing the designation of the property from the Estates-Mixed Use
District, Residential Estates Subdistrict to the Estates-Mixed Use District,
Immokalee Road/4th Street N.E. Mixed Use Subdistrict, to allow uses
permitted by right and conditional use in the General Commercial (C- 4)
zoning district with a total maximum intensity of up to 150,000 square feet
of gross floor area of development, and a maximum of 400 residential
dwelling units, and furthermore directing transmittal of the amendment to
the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. The subject property is
located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Immokalee Road and
4th street NE in Section 22, Township 48 North, Range 27 East, consisting
of 50.18± acres. [PL20190002355] [Transmittal Hearing] (District 5)
E. Recommendation to approve a Resolution amending Ordinance 89-05, as
Page 18
May 25, 2021
amended, specifically amending the Estates Shopping Center Subdistrict of
the Estates Commercial-District of the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub -
Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Future Land Use Maps to
add Commercial, Public, Civic and Institutional uses; add up to 50
residential dwelling units; reduce Commercial square footage from 190,000
to 50,000; remove outdoor music prohibition; remove single commercial use
and building size limitations; reduce setbacks and landscape buffer widths;
and remove phasing and developer commitments; and furthermore directing
transmittal of the amendment to the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity. The subject property is 41± acres and located at the northwest
quadrant of Golden Gate Boulevard and Wilson Boulevard, in Section 4,
Township 49 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida.
[PL20190002353] [Transmittal Hearing] (District 5)
18. ADJOURN
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD’S AGENDA SHOULD
BE MADE TO THE COUNTY MANAGER’S OFFICE AT 252-8383.
May 25, 2021
Page 2
MR. ISACKSON: Good morning, Commissioners. You have
a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Good
morning. It's a beautiful morning in Collier County. The weather is
extraordinary for May, and I think we're all blessed.
I would like to invite Pastor Randall Holdman to the podium,
please. He's from Parkway Life Church. And he is going to give us
our invocation, and then I'd like Senator Passidomo to lead us in the
pledge, please.
All rise.
Item #1A
INVOCATION GIVEN BY PASTOR RANDALL HOLDMAN
FROM PARKWAY LIFE CHURCH
PASTOR HOLDMAN: Good morning, Commissioners.
Again, thank you for this privilege to lead this invocation.
Let's pray: First, Lord, we give you thanks, for it's in you that
we live and move and have our being. And, Lord, we first want to
take this moment to lift up our community families who have
experienced adversity through these recent fires and maybe those
whose homes might still be in harm's way.
Lord, it has been so refreshing to see our community step up to
lend and to encourage one another, especially those families who
have been displaced and face loss, and to see true concern without the
pressures of politics and policies and pandemic protection
preferences or any other issues that seem to divide our hearts.
So be with our families, our first responders, and our
firefighters. And even what may seem as an unusual request, Lord:
Send us some rain. So ask that you continue to be with our business
May 25, 2021
Page 3
owners who are still recovering from the past hardships brought on
by the challenges of this pandemic, and we thank you that each day
we're seeing greater indicators of better days ahead that continue to
restore the health of those who have suffered and become ill.
Now, Lord, I pray for this meeting, every item on this agenda.
We thank you for our commissioners. You have called them, and
you've placed this -- placed them in this role to serve and to lead.
So, Lord, give them courage to make tough decisions, give them
compassion and care to understand the hurts and the needs that need
to be addressed, give them clarity to see past the moment and into
what our future should look like, and give them confidence to know
that you are the one who's given them this chair of honor to represent
our community and not be afraid to make the tough decisions, give
them conviction not to waiver from what is the correct course of
action to be taken for the well -being of our citizens, and, finally, give
them creativity to come up with solutions to whatever challenges that
are given to them to address. We ask that the spiri t of this meeting
possess the fruit and the attitude of Christ: Kindness, gentleness,
meekness, goodness, self-control, and peace. Be with every speaker
and every presenter.
And now may I pray the words of the Psalms -- David in Psalms
19 when he said, let the words of our mouth and the meditation of our
hearts be acceptable in your sight. Oh, Lord, our strength and our
redeemer, we ask this in your name, amen.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you, Pastor. That was quite
beautiful.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
Item #1B
EXCUSING COMMISSIONER LOCASTRO – APPROVED
May 25, 2021
Page 4
MR. ISACKSON: Again, good morning, Commissioners.
You notice that Commissioner LoCastro is absent at a family
emergency. I briefed each of you individually yesterday. And I'm
wondering if it would be appropriate for a motion to provide for an
excused absence.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So moved.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Motion on the floor and a second.
All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you.
Item #2A
TODAY’S REGULAR, CONSENT AND SUMMARY AGENDA
AS AMENDED (EX PARTE DISCLOSURE PROVIDED BY
COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR CONSENT AGENDA.) –
APPROVED AND/OR ADOPTED W/CHANGES
Item #2B
APRIL 27, 2021 BCC MEETING MINUTES – APPROVED AS
PRESENTED
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Commissioners. Changes on
the agenda for the 25th of May 2021. We have an add -on
May 25, 2021
Page 5
Item 16H4, which is a proclamation designating June 4th as National
Gun Violence Awareness Day in Collier County. A proclamation
will be delivered to the Southwest Florida group, Moms Demand
Action for Gun Sense in America, and that was sponsored by
Commissioner Taylor.
Two time-certain items today, Commissioners. Item 11K to be
heard at 10 a.m. That is the BigShots golf course update.
Items 9A and 9B to be heard no sooner than 1:00. It's the
Longwater and Bellmar items with the companion items. And I
think a note is in order here with regard to that particular time -certain
item. Pursuant to Rule 1.270 of the Florida Rules of Civil
Procedure, when actions involving a common question of law or fact
are pending before the Court, the Court may order the consolidation
of the actions into a single case. The decision to consolidate matters
is within the sound discretion of the trial court; therefore, due to the
common questions of law and fact, the following items can be
consolidated into one public hearing, and they are Items 9A, 9B and
Companion Items 11A, 11B, 11C, 11D, 11E, and 11F. And at the
Board's discretion, when items are presented for action, if we get to
that point, these eight items will be voted on separately,
Commissioners.
Mr. Klatzkow also sent out a procedural memo in regard to that.
So when we get to those time-certain items at 1:00, those procedures
can be discussed and introduced.
Court Reporter breaks at 10:30, 2:50, and beyond that, we'll wait
and see what happens.
Just a note for public speakers, including our remote speakers,
they must register to speak prior to the start of the hearing on their
specific items of interest.
That's all I have right now, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. So we have
May 25, 2021
Page 6
No. 2 on the agenda for the approval of today's regular, consent, and
summary agenda as amended, and at the same time, let's do some ex
parte. Certainly not on what we're hearing this afternoon, but what
is before us this morning.
I'll start with Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, good morning. I have
no changes to the agenda. One declaration on 17B on the summary
with regard to e-mails.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I have no changes and no
disclosures.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No changes and no discl osures.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No changes, no disclosures, a ex
parte for e-mails on the summary agenda, 17B. Thank you.
Do I hear a motion to approve the agenda and minutes as stated?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So moved.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those who say -- all those saying
aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those approved, say aye -- those
opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
Proposed Agenda Changes
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
May 25,2021
Add on item 16H4: Proclamation designating June 4, 2021,as National Gun Violence Awareness
Day in Collier County. The proclamation will be delivered to the Southwest Florida group, Moms
Demand Action for Gun Sense in America. (Commissioner Taylor request)
Time Certain Items:
Item 11K to be heard at 10:00am—BigShots update
Item 9A & 9B to be heard no sooner than 1:00pm-Longwater and Belmar items with companion
items
Note: Pursuant to Rule 1.270 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure,when actions involving a common
question of law or fact are pending before the court,the court may order the consolidation of the actions into
a single case. The decision to consolidate matters is within the sound discretion of the trial court. Therefore,
due to the common questions of law and fact,the following items can be consolidated into one public hearing:
9A,9B, 11A, 11B, 11C, 1ID, 11E & 11F
6/9/2021 8:53 AM
May 25, 2021
Page 7
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. I'll get there.
I'll get there.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Is this your first meeting?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, it is.
What's on my mind is one thing. We have, I think, 25, 26
speakers for 9A, 9B.
MR. MILLER: Yes, registered at this point.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Online. What is very important for
folks to understand is they will each have -- unless they belong to an
organization, those organizations have 30 minutes to come before us
and testify or put their remarks on the record. If they do not belong
to an organization, they will have three minutes. And it's not three
minutes per item. It's three minutes on the cumulative amount of
what we're doing, and that's, I guess, nine agenda items. So please
understand, you cannot speak three minutes on Longwater, then three
minutes on Bellmar, then three minutes on the town. It's three
minutes total. And I'm going to say it again as we begin this in the
afternoon.
So thank you very much.
County Manager?
Item #3D
RECOGNIZING TANIA SANTOS, PUBLIC SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES (DAS) AS
THE MAY 2021 EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH – ITEM #16F4
READ IN TO THE RECORD
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 3 on
your agenda, which are awards and recognitions. I'd like to read a
little bit of information on our Employee of the Month for May 2021,
May 25, 2021
Page 8
Tania Santos of our Public Services Department, Domestic Animal
Service.
Tania is -- I don't believe Tania's in the audience. Thanks, Dan.
Tania encounters a large variety of customers and never fails to
treat each other -- each one with ultimate dignity, courtesy, respect,
and kindness. She maintains a level head and shows compassion
and respect to all individuals.
Tania remembers customers and their animals years after they
have visited the facility, always asking about the animal's well -being.
Recently a family came to DAS where their dog "Puppy" which
they adopted in 2007 had, unfortunately, passed away. Tania
immediately recognized the family and asked how the Puppy was
doing, which Tania's good-natured concern and remembrance of
sweet Puppy helped ease and comfort the family.
Tania also recently took a lost-dog call from a missing Yorkie
and advised the customer to go online to a specific community page
where the caller recognized her missing dog. The owner was
reunited with her, and thanks to Tania being proactive, the owner
didn't have a need to go to DAS, which ultimately saved DAS and the
owner money.
In the last month, Tania has been the recipient of three separate
county VIP awards nominated by her coworkers for quality service
and respect. In addition, her excellent customer service is frequentl y
mentioned in DAS's customer satisfaction surveys.
Every day before the shelter opens Tania looks at her coworkers
and says, today is going to be the best day ever. I think I said that
when I woke up this morning also. And her coworkers say this
sparks -- inspires productivity, and then starting their day with a
wonderful smile. She displays a value of respect in everything she
does and with everyone she interacts with.
Commissioners, let me introduce Tania Santos, the Public
May 25, 2021
Page 9
Services Department. She's the May 2021 Employee of the Month,
and her rewards will be provided to her off-line.
(Applause.)
Item #4
PROCLAMATIONS ITEMS – #16H1, #16H2, #16H3 AND #16H4
READ INTO THE RECORD
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that takes us to our
proclamations. We have three of those today in addition to the
add-on item.
Let me just simply indicate that Commissioners Solis and Taylor
will be reading some of the proclamations, but let me start by saying
16H1, which is a proclamation recognizing the leadership staff and
volunteers of the Naples Senior Center for helping thousands of local
seniors obtain COVID-19 vaccine appointments during their global
pandemic. That's to be accepted by Dr. Jaclynn Faffer, and that's to
be read by Commissioner Taylor.
Proclamation 16H2 is designating May 2021 as National Drug
Court Month in Collier County. The proclamation will be delivered
to the Honorable Janeice Martin, presiding Judge of the Collier
County Drug Court. I believe Judge Martin is in attendance and has
asked to say a few words after her proclamation is read.
And 16H3 is a proclamation designating May 2021 as National
Mental Health Awareness Month in Collier County, and that
proclamation will be mailed to Michelle McLeod, the Collier
Coalition for Healthy Naples. That proclamation will be read by
Commissioner Solis.
So 16H1, the Naples Senior Center proclamation, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Would you ladies stand
May 25, 2021
Page 10
up over here, please. Come on, Senator. But you can be, like, over
here. You can be facing everybody.
Whereas, in January 2021 -- you don't have to look at me; you
can look at everybody else. But if you feel comfortable...
Whereas, in January 2021 Naples Senior Center president and
CEO Dr. Jaclynn Faffer met with Commissioner Penny Taylor and
explained that seniors were having a tremendous challenge accessing
the COVID-19 vaccine in our community. Dr. Faffer shared that
seniors, particularly those 80 years old and older, had difficulty with
technology needed to secure an appointment with the Florida
Department of Health. And, furthermore, discussions among
Commissioner Taylor; Senator Kathleen Passidomo; Dr. Faffer; and
Kimberly Kossler, administrator and health officer, mind you
brand-new administrator and health officer, Department of Health,
Collier, led to the establishment of a pilot program whereby the
Naples Senior Center would be given a link to register 100 seniors for
the vaccine. The pilot program was a success, and the Naples Senior
Center continued the partnership with FDOH until April the 16th,
2021, when saturation was reached; and,
Whereas, once it became known that the Naples Senior Center
was securing vaccine appointments for seniors, gated communities
and civic groups, local hospitals began referring seniors to the Naples
Senior Center. When the number of incoming calls exceeded
capacity, additional phone lines were added. The Naples Senior
Center staff and volunteers worked evenings and weekends to answer
calls. Everyone who called and left a message received a return call
from an individual who not only registered him or her for the vaccine
but provided words of support and encouragement; and,
Whereas, the Naples Senior Center contracted with Home
Healthcare Company to provide transportation for more than 100
seniors who could not otherwise get to the vaccination site. And
May 25, 2021
Page 11
through the diligent efforts of staff and volunteers at the Naples
Senior Center, 7,400 seniors obtained a vaccine appointment,
including six seniors over the age of 100, and more than 700
veterans.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida, recognizes and expresses deep appreciation
for the tireless efforts of the leadership, staff, and volunteers of the
Naples Senior Center who exceeded expectations, demonstrated
efficiency and compassion, and assisted thousands of local seniors in
obtaining the COVID-19 vaccine appointments through this global
pandemic.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I placed a call to Kathleen
Passidomo, and it was in that January, and she was sitting on the
dock of her bay recovering from COVID. She said, I'm sitting here.
I'd be in Tallahassee. I said, look, I just got this call. She said, I'll
help.
If it hadn't been for these two ladies, these people probably still
would be having -- either not been vaccinated or struggling to get
vaccinated. So you are to be commended. It was definitely a
partnership. Senator Passidomo, you took great risks. You said,
yes, it could be done, and it was done, and so much appreciation for
you both.
Would you like to speak? Both.
DR. FAFFER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, yes.
DR. FAFFER: Thank you so much for this vote of support,
vote of confidence.
On December 8th I stood before you and promised that Naples
Senior Center would always be here to support the seniors in our
community. I never thought I would have the opportunity to prove it
May 25, 2021
Page 12
so quickly. This was truly an example of a public/private
partnership that worked and will continue to work as long as Naples
Senior Center is here in the county.
Thank you all for your support.
(Applause.)
SENATOR PASSIDOMO: I just wanted to say a few words.
First of all, thank you for inviting me to participate because I think
the world of Jackie and her team. And it is so good to be home, and
it is wonderful to be back visiting the county. And you guys care so
much. And I looked at your agenda today. So many things that you
all are doing to make our community better, and I'm so proud of the
work that you do. And whatever I can do in Tallahassee to support
the initiatives of the County Commission, because you guys rock.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, yeah. Thank you.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Photo op.
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, 16H2 is a proclamation
designating May 2021 as National Drug Court Month in Collier
County. The proclamation is going to be accepted by Presiding
Judge Janeice Martin of our Collier County drug court.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Would you come up. You know, I
go back to probably, what, four years ago, Commissioner Solis,
maybe five years ago when you started the mental health initiative,
and I remember -- I remember you, ma'am -- oh, great, they're here.
Oh, this is great.
JUDGE MARTIN: Do you guys want to come on up? Come
on up.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I remember you talking about how
you believed in this program. We can let us do a picture now, and
then we'll read -- then I'll read the proclamation.
May 25, 2021
Page 13
JUDGE MARTIN: We can stay off to the side.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no. With you.
JUDGE MARTIN: Come on up, guys.
(Applause.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I'll just read this:
Whereas, drug addiction is a community-wide problem requiring
a community-wide response; and,
Whereas, drug-related crime causes thousands and hundreds of
thousands of dollars of losses each year to Collier County residences,
businesses, and government; and,
Whereas, drug courts focus on reducing crime and saving money
through a program of intensive intervention and treatment for
addicted persons in the criminal justice system; and,
Whereas, drug courts achieve these goals by emphasizing
accountability, honesty, and personal responsibility on the part of the
addicted person. Drug courts aim to help these individuals find a
lasting recovery that allows them to repair their relationshi ps, make
their -- make whole their victims, and become contributing members
of society; and,
Whereas, drug courts facilitate community-wide partnerships
bringing together public safety and public health professionals in the
fight against drug addiction, criminal behavior, and recidivism; and,
Whereas, Collier County is committed to reducing crime,
supporting recovery from addiction, and saving community
resources.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May 2021 be
designated as National Drug Court Month in Collier County.
Congratulations, Judge.
(Applause.)
JUDGE MARTIN: Commissioners, thank you so much for this
May 25, 2021
Page 14
honor and for this opportunity. I know you have a long day, so I'll
be very brief.
I just -- this is the highlight of my year each year. We missed
you last year, but drug court soldiered on. These folks have been
working incredibly hard. They're so courageous. I'm always
humbled and honored to stand with them and to show, them off if
you'll let me, because even with the pandemic and the move to Zoom
and all of these things, these folks have worked so hard.
And, really -- and kudos to Mr. Burgess and his team at David
Lawrence Center; they pivoted overnight. You know, the best
medicine for addiction is connection, and that became very hard in
the pandemic. And David Lawrence and the Sheriff and drug court
got creative, and these folks are doing great in our program as a result
of that.
Your expression of support is very powerful. I'm old enough to
remember when it was much more controversial that we would
support programs like this, and I'm so proud that as a community
we've come to really embrace this, and your full-throated support is
much appreciated. So, humbly, we accept this, and we thank you for
your continued support.
(Applause.)
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, 16H3 is a proclamation
designating May 2021 as National Mental Health Awareness Month
in Collier County. And the proclamation will be accepted by
Michelle McLeod of the Collier Coalition for Healthy Naples.
That's to be read by Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Thank you. And they're actually
here. So why don't you all come up. Yeah, this is the coalition.
The coalition, it's really a testament to how dedicated these folks are
to addressing mental health and how we deal with it in Collier
County. Many of the coalition members served on the ad hoc
May 25, 2021
Page 15
committee that we've formed to develop the strategic plan and then
wouldn't give up. And once the ad hoc committee had sunsetted and
was no more, they came together again and created the Collier
Coalition for Healthy Minds, which is continuing to educate the
community on mental health issues and how we're going to try to
address it in a different way. So let me read the proclamation.
Whereas, nearly one in five Americans lives with a mental
health condition, and our family friends, classmates, neighbors, and
coworkers are among them, and,
Whereas, in 2020, the Collier Coalition for Healthy Minds was
established as a community response to the mental health and
addiction crisis. Coalition board members, volunteers, and partners
work to raise awareness about the local and national crisis and how
our community is working together to save lives; and,
Whereas, stigma and fear of discrimination keep many from
seeking help; therefore, only about half of the people with serious
mental illnesses seek treatment; and,
Whereas, research shows that the most effective way to reduce
stigma is through personal contact with someone about a mental
illness; and,
Whereas, great public awareness about mental illnesses can be
changed and improve negative attitudes and behaviors toward people
with mental health illnesses.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, that May be designated
mental health awareness month in Collier County.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: May is a big month.
MR. BURGESS: I guess I'm the designated speaker, very
quickly. And I know you have a busy agenda today, so to be very,
very brief.
May 25, 2021
Page 16
And thank you, Commissioner Solis, for expressing through the
proclamation, and the Commissioners, the importance of Mental
Health Awareness Month. And we thank you so much for your
support in helping us advance the cause of mental health and
assistance for addiction treatment.
We could not do what we're doing as a community without you
and your leadership. We know that we were fighting two major
epidemics before this pandemic. The first epidemic in our country
and here locally was the epidemic of suicide, and we are still losing
two Americans to every one homicide for suicide. We're losing two
suicide victims to every homicide victim in our country. So the
magnitude of the suicide epidemic is huge. And we know that we
lost close to 90,000 Americans just in the last 12 months to overdose.
So this is a -- these are major issues that we're fighting. And
the pandemic certainly has not helped the situation and the trend line.
We know that there's been a tremendous psychological toll to what's
been happening with the COVID pandemic and that we are going to
continue to see these challenges as we continue in our recovery
phase. And a lot of people are saying that the big second wave is the
mental health and addiction wave that we're going to fight in the
pandemic.
So we thank you. May was -- for the first time May 20th was
recognized as Mental Health Action Day, and it was a national call
for us all to raise awareness and raise advocacy to address these
issues, and I am very thankful that as a community here that we have
Mental Health Action Day every day through your leadership and
through the work that's being done in our partnership.
So we thank you very much.
(Applause.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And thank you to all the coalition
members over there. Wow, it just -- after all the work on the
May 25, 2021
Page 17
strategic plan to commit to continuing that work is just -- it's what
makes Collier County such a great place.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
Item #5A
COVID-19 STATUS REPORT – PRESENTED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 5 on
your agenda, presentations. 5A is a recommendation to accept the
COVID-19 status report. Kimberly Kossler, your Administrator for
the Health Department, will present.
MS. KOSSLER: Good morning.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning.
MS. KOSSLER: So just to give an update on our emergency
room data for influenza-like illness. Over the past two weeks we are
trending down, and then looking at the averages from the beginning
of the year, you see an overall increasing trend there. We are seeing
similar trends with our COVID-like illness as well in the emergency
rooms.
Positivity rates have been decreasing over the past two weeks.
We are at around 5.4 percent. Our hospital capacity beds for
COVID -- of COVID-filled beds is lower as well.
For trends for average hospitalization due to COVID, you can
see that we've had some increases, but we are trending down now.
For COVID testing, COVID testing is still being provided by the
Department of Health as well as other locations throughout the
county. We're still averaging 7,000 a week, and that's been for quite
a few months now. And there's over 206,000 tests that have been
reported to date.
May 25, 2021
Page 18
As far as vaccination efforts, over 363,000 doses have been
administered, over 207,000 people have been vaccinated, and that's a
little over 172,000 completed series. Our percentage for 65-plus
population is at 87 percent for one or more doses, and for 12 years
old and -- for the 12-plus population with Pfizer edition, we're at
59 percent.
For the completed series for 65-plus, our state Department of
Health has instituted some new goals that they'd like to see
80 percent completed by December, and I have -- I have faith that
we're going to meet that because we've been exceeding that since.
We have seen a decline in the demand of vaccination with the
supply increasing. The availability and access has definitely
increased throughout our partners and private providers and
pharmacies. We have resources posted on our website as well as the
Florida Department of Health's website and Centers for Disease
Control to help with outreach education, vaccination hesitancy
messaging, fact sheets, and toolkits.
Our vaccination distribution site at the North Collier Park is
going to be transitioning pretty much after this week. So we're
going to be back at the Health Department clinics for the Naples site
and the Immokalee site, and then we're also going to be co ntinuing
mobile missions and outreach in the community.
Appointments are still available at our call center, the 252-6220.
That's Monday through Friday 9:00 to 5:00. We have our e-mail
still dedicated to COVID, covid19collier@flhealth.gov, and we're
also accepting walk-ins.
Eligibility for vaccination, if you don't know already, is 12 years
and up for the Pfizer. Vaccinationfinder.org searches are still adding
more and more locations as more sites come on board with vaccine
private providers, including pediatricians and others. And, again, the
call center number and e-mail.
May 25, 2021
Page 19
And just a quick update. The CDC had updated guidance for
fully vaccinated people related to masks. That guidance can be
found on their website as it relates to physical distancing, traveling,
and quarantine.
Any questions before I pass it along?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you.
MS. KOSSLER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: As she's going away, I just
want to say, you're doing an amazing job. Thank you for all you do.
MR. MULLENS: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, John Mullens, director of Communications, Government, and
Public Affairs, and that title's going to take a little getting used to.
I'm here today with a follow-up to Commissioner McDaniel's
charts on positivity, hospitalizations, and fatalities for South Florida
and various populous counties. A lot of what we're about to hear
mirrors a lot of what the Department of Health just provided you.
Positivity rate in Southwest Florida, currently what we're seeing
is a downward trend. This is also reflected in the positivity rates in
various populous counties.
Hospitalizations overall are down with a slight uptick in
Charlotte County, and there's a similar story in the various counties
with the exception of Pinellas, which has seen a spike in the last
month.
With the exception of Collier, deaths in South Florida are
slightly higher over the previous month, and then in the various
counties the fatalities are trending downward with the exception,
again, being Pinellas, which has slightly started to rise.
And with that, I am happy to answer any questions you may
have or revert back to any slide that you would like to see again.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No comments.
May 25, 2021
Page 20
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No comment.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Thank you for bringing that
forward. It's just -- that's a considerably longer dataset basically
from the beginning of when we started tracking all this information,
and I find it very valuable. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Ms. Kossler, if you could come back up, I do have a question for
you.
So did Christine Hollingsworth have a little girl or little boy?
MS. KOSSLER: She did.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: A little girl.
MS. KOSSLER: Very healthy, very happy. Both of them are
doing great.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Send her our congratulations. That's
great.
MS. KOSSLER: Thank you.
Item #5B
PRESENTATION BY MELISSA MCKINLAY, PRESIDENT,
FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, ON THE 2021
REGULAR SESSION OF THE STATE LEGISLATURE –
PRESENTED
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, that moves
us to 5B, a presentation by Melissa McKinlay, the President of the
Florida Association of Counties, on the 2021 regular session of the
state legislature.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good morning, Commissioner.
MS. McKINLAY: Good morning. Actually, I'll keep my
presentation even shorter than that and leave that type of presentation
May 25, 2021
Page 21
to Mr. Mullens.
It's an honor to be here before you this morning. I'm Melissa
McKinlay, Palm Beach County Commissioner. It's nice to see my
data trending downward, so thank you for that update today.
A little surprised. I love -- I saw Judge Martin this morning.
We served on the Supreme Court Task Force on mental health and
substance abuse disorders in the court system, and then former
Councilwoman McLeod is the sister of one of my best friends, so a
little bit of a homecoming here today.
Naples, Collier County, holds a special place in my heart for two
reasons. My first pregnancy, the first time I ever felt a baby kick
inside of me I was sitting on the beach on Marco Island, and then my
grandparents retired here in the late '70s. And so I spent my
childhood on your beaches visiting Collier County, as I'm sure most
people have similar stories.
But I grew up just up the road in Sarasota County, so the West
Coast is my home even though I live on the East Coast now.
It's been an honor to serve as the president of your association
this year. I've got about another month. It was one of my goals to
visit as many commissions as I could. COVID put a little bit of a
hiccup in that, and most things turned virtual, as you know we're all
experiencing. And so I'm trying to get in as many county
commission visits just to say thank you. I'm leaving here and
heading to Arcadia to visit DeSoto County this afternoon.
But it's been a tough year for all of us, and I appreciate
everything that you've done so stay involved with the association.
Certainly, your leadership and your voice has led to funding efforts
from the state mostly for those counties that were under 500,000 that
had to go to the state to receive funding under the first CARES Act,
and then making sure that your voice was heard when Washington
was considering how they were going to help local government.
May 25, 2021
Page 22
I was with your congressman yesterday, Congressman Donalds,
on a tour of Lake Okeechobee, and he made a joke about Biden
bucks. And I have to laugh. That kind of sounded funny to me.
But we will all be receiving those dollars from the federal
government. And if we -- we have a huge responsibility, and I know
it's something the association will be having long con versations
about, that when we spend those dollars, if we're going to burden our
future generations with paying back that debt, we need to make wise
decisions and make sure that those investments are well worth it.
So it was very nice to see your State Representative Lauren
Melo and Congressman Donalds as part of that tour yesterday
learning how to fix Lake Okeechobee and make this whole system
work for all of us. That's certainly an initiative that the association
has taken on in conversations at ad hoc committee on water policy
that has now turned into a permanent policy committee.
Chairwoman Taylor, you and I discussed that yesterday.
So we're all here to work together to be that voice in Tallahassee
and in Washington that represents home rule. Senator Saunders,
you're certainly familiar with our visits back in your day in the
Capitol. But I also just want to let you know that -- use us as a
resource. Not only the state association, but use the national
association as a resource to supplement what you're doing in-house,
what Mr. Mullens and your team -- you know, we have a whole
lobby team in Tallahassee that can also provide extra voices for you,
and it's a very diverse group of employees, very talented group.
We had about 27 preemption bills that were filed this legislative
session. Some passed, some didn't. And we'll be working through
that to see exactly how they're going to impact us. But, certainly, we
all believe that the best decisions are made at the local level. We
seem to be the most well-liked body of government when they do
polling. Who do you like best; Tallahassee, Washington, or local?
May 25, 2021
Page 23
And they tend to like us best. So they should let us make a lot of
these decisions.
But one of my initiatives has been to reach out to other
associations and find those areas where we disagree and to see how
we can come to a compromise and to find those areas that we agree
on that we can work together.
A really good example of that this year was with the Florida
Homebuilders Association. The impact fee legislation that we saw
pass this year was a compromise. It was 10 years in the making that
we've been butting heads with the Homebuilders Association over
how to handle impact fees. It wasn't perfect, but we found a middle
ground. And we have an unwritten gentlemen's agreement that they
won't try anything on us for at least five years. So hopefully we
have a little bit of wiggle room there to not get beat up by the
Homebuilders Association.
But the other thing I just want to say -- and this is really wearing
my hat as a Palm Beach County Commissioner. I represent the
western side of Palm Beach County, so I've got the EAA and the
largest agricultural county east of the Mississippi. We shared some
unfortunate statistics with your county last year. Belle Glade was a
COVID hotspot, and Immokalee was a COVID hotspot. And
working together to make sure that our farm working communities
were well represented and had a voice led to efforts that brought
testing not only into those two areas, but directly to the farms, and
that same voice led to efforts that brought vaccines right into those
farmworkers.
A majority of our farmworkers, at least in my county, and I'm
sure it's similar in your county, were H-2A visa workers, so they
were only here temporarily. What we didn't want to do is send our
problem to another state. Many of these farmworkers leave here;
they go to Georgia, North Carolina, New York, and Michigan, and it
May 25, 2021
Page 24
would have been irresponsible to send them there unvaccinated.
So we worked closely, and I know your team worked very
closely with Jared Moscowitz. He was able to get those mobile
vaccine units right onto the farms and get those farmworkers
vaccinated.
So I want to say thank you for working with me on those efforts
and look forward to making sure -- you know, we should work
together to make sure that when they come back in the fall we've got
a plan to make sure that they're vaccinated before they arrive in our
community or immediately upon arriving, and I hope we can have
that conversation.
But I just wanted to tell you, FAC, the Florida Association of
Counties, is your home away from home. If you're in Tallahassee,
use our offices, use our staff to help set up appointments.
I would be remiss if I didn't tell you there may be an adult
beverage or two, if you've had a long day, at the capitol in the
conference room on the second floor. But, really, it's to say thank
you for staying involved during a really hard year, for being willing
to be flexible and try new technologies, and make sure that we all
remain a team, and I hope I see you all in Orlando next month for our
annual conference.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. McKINLAY: If you have any questions, I'm happy to take
them.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any questions?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I was --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- just going to say --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- thank you for what you've done
in Palm Beach in terms of the mental health initiatives and things.
May 25, 2021
Page 25
And I just remembered that right before COVID hit, I was trying to
arrange a road trip to Palm Beach County to see if I could meet with
you and see what was going on and what you were doing in Palm
Beach County in terms of the mental health, and -- because we're
kind of in the process of doing it, as you know; coming up with a
different way of dealing with those issues.
And so hopefully I can still do that in the near future and see
what's been done in Palm Beach County.
MS. McKINLAY: Commissioner, I would love to take you
around. When the legislation passed out loud for an extension or
expansion of the syringe exchange program, we were the first county
on board, and we were able to work out all those details during
COVID and just did the ribbon cutting on that facility, that program
about a month ago. We just opened up last week what's called a
hub. This is a place where those in active recovery, or maybe they're
seeking recovery and it's a first step -- but it's a place where they can
go during the day. You know, there will be a clothing closet there
for outfits for job interviews, computers, workforce personnel to help
connect them with job training, all that.
And we also opened up an addiction stabilization unit, and so
that is an emergency room dedicated just to those coming in. Fire
rescue, if they don't have any other pending -- you know, crisis
issues, they will transport them to this facility. That is the way that
this needs to be done. It is a public/private partnership.
In our county, we have a publicly financed healthcare district.
It's its own board. But we also partnered with them and with HCA
Hospital. So it was HCA that lent a portion of one of their
emergency rooms to help us create this, and then the county, we put
aside about a million dollars a year to make sure that that hospital got
paid. If they had something that came in that didn't have any other
way to pay, we would cover those costs so the hospital wasn't left
May 25, 2021
Page 26
holding the bag.
So wonderful program. All sorts of great protocols we've put in
place with fire rescue, and I'd love to show it off. That was a very
personal issue for me.
Your famous resident here and our former governor, Governor
Scott, heard a lot from me back in 2017, being the first official to ask
for a public health crisis proclamation from him. It took us three
months, and we got it, but that really started to open the doors to let
us be creative with funding, and I'd love to show off what we're
doing. So just reach out to my office; we'll make that happen.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I will make sure that we schedule
that shortly.
MS. McKINLAY: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: As soon as possible.
MS. McKINLAY: Yes. We'd love to have you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much,
Commissioner.
MS. McKINLAY: Thank you, Commissioner. Nice to see
you again.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Nice to see you, too.
Item #7
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON GENERAL TOPICS NOT ON THE
CURRENT OR FUTURE AGENDA
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, Item 7 is public comments
on general topics not on the current or future agenda.
Troy, I think we've got three?
May 25, 2021
Page 27
MR. MILLER: Well, yes, Mark. We have three here in
person. We have one registered online. Your first speake r is
Jacqalene Keay. She'll be followed by Garrett Beyrent.
Garrett, if you could go ahead and queue up at the other podium,
that would be great.
Ms. Keay, you have three minutes.
MS. KEAY: Thank you.
Good morning. In a recent diversity discussion, Lourdus
Zapata said, we should fall in love with the problem, not the solution.
Most of us have fallen in love with the solution of providing
affordable housing to sustain our community. This solution will
never be accomplished because we are ignoring and neglecting to
address a major problem, which is racism and segregation, which
continually increase the poverty levels in our community.
Racism is a topic that evokes a lot of passion, yet we must have
civil discourse about how it negatively impacts our residents in our
community. No one in this community is immune from the harmful
effects.
Racism is on a continuum. Biases on the low end, prejudice
and discrimination in the middle, and white supremacy on the high
end. Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another.
It also means prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed
against other people because they are of a different race or ethnicity.
Here are some examples of racism -- racial attitudes and
behaviors. The "not in our backyard" mentality. Saying I'm
colorblind; I don't see color. Blaming the victim. Espousing the
equal playing field theory. I'm not racists; I have black friends
silenced you to guilt or fear of speaking out. Talking about race
divides us. Or depriving people of color of housing and economic
opportunities.
2020 was like a mirror being held up to our souls to show us the
May 25, 2021
Page 28
truth of our hearts. For some of us, we did not like what we saw.
For others, what they saw emboldened them and increased their hate.
In a recent meeting with other professionals, we discussed our
wish for a collaborative effort between the city, county, and other
agencies to purchase the Gordon River/River Park housing to
revitalize it as a diverse and inclusive affordable housing community.
This is where I lived growing up and where blacks were corralled and
denied better housing and economic opportunities due to antiblack
racism and segregation. Enlisting in the Army was my only way out
of the projects.
It would be prudent to review Chicago's affordable housing
example because it would provide a system of addressing racial
inequalities.
Here's an important truth. This community is unsustainable
without addressing the issues of racism and segregation. We must
not be afraid to speak truth to power. This is our right and our civic
duty. And as you can see, this discussion is still very emotional for
me, so thank you all for taking the time to listen. I appreciate it.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Garrett Beyrent. He will
be followed by Rae Ann Burton, and then Joseph Kidder.
MR. BEYRENT: For the record, Garrett F.X. Beyrent.
I was doing pretty good today until Judge Martin snuck up
behind me. She does that to me all the time. She knows I'm
paranoid.
So long and short is that I was one of her success stories. I
managed to stay sober right up until today, and that's only 12 years
now, and I credit her with the -- she brings people in here, and she
makes these people stay sober for at least a year, or you don't get to
be part of her crew to come in. And the trick is is that I had to get on
May 25, 2021
Page 29
a bus every -- every month I had to get on a bus and ride the bus from
North Naples to Judge Martin's court, and I stood in front of her, and
she'd ask me a few questions, and she'd say, is your life boring? I
said, yes, it is.
And she would respond, that's very good for you. Your life
should be boring.
And as a result I did that for 10 years. And I went and saw my
probation officer, and I gave her my $55 and I thought, boy, this
program is really tough to actually succeed in. But Judge Martin is
an exceptional person. She actually used to be my attorney many
years ago. Virtually every -- every judge -- this is no kidding.
Every judge was my attorney at one time or another, and I learned a
lot from that. Just -- if you stay in one place for 50 years, you can be
a judge if you're a lawyer. That's not always true, however. Burt
can tell you that; right, Burt? He never wanted to be a judge. Get a
motorcycle, you don't got to be a judge.
And that's -- basically, what I wanted to get across was that I did
give you all your homework. That was a video for you to watch. It
was a video it's called "Unsane," and it's a video about a woman who
accidently walks into a facility like DLC, David Lawrence Center,
and she doesn't get to go out because they restrained her.
And long and short is it turned out to be facilities are used as
insurance scams, and I was worried about that because I had seen that
myself several times being incarcerated in different places. But it
kind of hit me because it was, once again, another movie that was not
meant to be marketed to the general public. It was actually a
documentary.
And I know -- you only got a copy of it. I think nobody did see
it, because I only gave you each a copy of the movie yesterday, and I
thought, well, I'll put them on the spot, see how many people actually
watch movies at night that might enlighten them as to the situation
May 25, 2021
Page 30
we're facing now, which is mental health related to the drugs and
alcohol. Driving your car and watching a video when you're
supposed to be driving your car. Long and short, watch the video
because I've only got one second left. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Rae Ann Burton, and she
will be followed by Joseph Kidder online.
MS. BURTON: Good morning, Commissioners.
I've been coming to county meetings since the S Curve was
threatening to be built in my backyard. This is not what I planned to
do when I retired. I do it because I've seen what overgrowth,
unregulated development can do to the environment.
Dense, compact developments create heavy congested traffic,
more life-threatening car accidents, more loss of life. I've seen more
wildlife dead on roads than in my backyard. The birds I see most are
vultures.
Since the growth, there's been numerous panther/bear deaths
caused by cars. I moved to the Estates over 11 years ago. There
was a sign warning of panther crossing at the corner of Immokalee
Road and Oil Well Road that was removed when development
started. It seems there's no concern for the destruction of wildlife,
panther, and bear environment.
The trees that stood since the beginning of time survived
Hurricane Irma are destroyed in a heartbeat by the developers. They
bulldoze the land, disturbing whatever's in the soil that was buried
until now. They build up the high end higher than the property near
by, change water flow, dig deep into the aquifer, dumping gushing
water into the canals of adjacent property, then they use the aquifer to
supply their lakes, ponds, and water golf courses.
I moved here to enjoy what God created. Hope to enjoy
wildlife in my backyard, but since development, the drive to
shopping is no longer a pleasure. I have to instantly watch out for
May 25, 2021
Page 31
speeding dump trucks, heavy equipment on extra long trailers that
take as many as three lanes to turn as they speed by or cut into my
lane.
My neighbors are fencing their property where none were
fenced before. There's fear to take a walk on one -way, so far, streets
because of wildlife encounters.
Likely [sic] it seems that the whims of the developers are not
only heard but approved. Even when it's said the project's poorly
laid out, the voices, some angry, of the residents that are living in the
Estates are ignored and even have been questioned -- the validity of
their protest.
For every right given, someone loses one. The Estates are
giving up too many rights: The right to safe place to live, right to
enjoy peace and quiet of nature, right to develop their property for
animals, the right to enjoy a cup of coffee on their lanai without
congested traffic noise and pollution from construction.
As I've said it once, I've said it a million times, growth is only
good when it benefits all, not just the developers. I have the feeling
that rights and concerns of the residents of the Estates are not
considered or even heard. Does the Board really work for the
well-being of the environment and the Collier taxpayer or the
developers? Am I wasting my time, gasoline, and loss of sleep to
come and voice my concerns? Am I speaking to deaf ears?
I thought COVID was bad, but allowing mass, dense
development by bending the intent, plain language of pol icies to be
changed to fulfill developers' desires is a willingness of elected
officials whose job is to oversee and guide development to benefit all.
The Board's decisions impact the residents of the Estates long after
the developers are gone.
Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your final public speaker for this item is
May 25, 2021
Page 32
online, Joseph Kidder.
Mr. Kidder, you're being prompted -- there you go. You have
three minutes, sir.
MR. KIDDER: Hello. Everybody hear me?
MR. MILLER: Yes, sir. You have three minutes.
MR. KIDDER: Yes. I'm Joseph Kidder with the Radon and
Indoor Air Program of the Department of Health. I'm here to talk
about radon.
So radon is a colorless, odorless, tasteless, naturally occurring
radioactive gas. It accumulates in all types of buildings and is the
main cause of lung cancer for nonsmokers. An estimated 21,000
Americans die from radon-induced lung cancer every year, which
costs about $6.8 million.
The U.S. Surgeon General and the Florida Department of Health
recommend that every home be tested for radon gas.
In Collier County, about one in four homes tested have been
found to have indoor radon gas concentrations above the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's action level of 4 picocuries per
liter as compared to one in 15 homes in the U.S. and about one in five
homes in Florida in general.
Radon gas is in the air around us all the time, but in some
buildings it is so high that it needs to be addressed. Any building
with elevated radon gas concentrations can be mitigated to bring th e
radon gas concentration down to an acceptable level. There are
certified radon mitigation businesses which are able to install radon
mitigation systems to accomplish radon reduction in a building.
The Florida Building Code contains appendices which address
mitigation of elevated radon in existing buildings as well as methods
to prevent elevated radon in new buildings, which is called
radon-resistant new construction. It is less expensive to install a
radon-resistent system during construction. In an existing
May 25, 2021
Page 33
home -- it's about $500 to put it in when you build it versus 5,000 to
put it in afterwards at the high end. It is a lot less costly than cancer
treatment, certainly.
So Collier County has not adopted these appendices, and we are
not aware of any other county in Florida which has not adopted these
appendices to the building code. This has caused difficulties for
radon mitigation businesses in the county, as they are not able to
obtain permits for radon mitigation systems if they indicate in the
permit application that the system is to address radon. What they
have to do instead to get their system -- their permit approved is to
call it a fresh air system, and many mitigators don't feel that's honest.
So the Radon and Indoor Air Program of the Florida Department
of Health is always available for questions regarding radon gas. It
self-detects mitigation techniques.
I did e-mail you just this morning a map that shows Collier
County and Naples and just the radon measurement results. There
are symbols on there that are white that show results below 2
picocuries per liter, yellow between 2 and 4, and red is above four.
I'd also say that radon testing and awareness is actually a lot
higher in Collier County than any other part of Florida.
Twenty-one percent of all the tests done in Florida in the past 10
years were done in Collier County, which has about 2 percent of
Florida's population. So there's a lot of awareness around Florida,
around radon.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you very much.
Your time is up. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: And that's all our public speakers, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's it?
MR. MILLER: For public comment, yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
May 25, 2021
Page 34
Item #11K
A LONG-TERM LEASE AND OPERATING AGREEMENT WITH
CC BSG NAPLES, LLC (“BIGSHOTS”) TO OPERATE AND
MANAGE A TWELVE-HOLE PUBLIC GOLF COURSE ON THE
FORMER GOLDEN GATE GOLF COURSE PROPERTY, TO
LEASE LAND FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
OF A BIGSHOTS GOLF/ENTERTAINMENT FACILITY ON
THE PROPERTY TO BENEFIT THE RESIDENTS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, SUPPORT THE OVERALL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE PROPERTY, AND TO APPROVE ALL NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENT – MOTION TO APPROVE THE
AGREEMENT W/CLARIFICATIONS – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us to our
time-certain item at 10:00. It's a recommendation to approve a
long-term lease and operating agreement with CC BSG Naples, LLC,
(BigShots) to operate and manage a 12-hole public golf course on the
former Golden Gate Golf Course property, to lease land for the
construction and operation of a BigShots golf/entertainment facility
on the property to benefit the residents of Collier County, support the
overall redevelopment plan of the property, and to approve all
necessary budget amendments.
Mr. Geoff Willig, your Senior Operations Analyst in the County
Commissioner's office, will start the presentation.
MR. WILLIG: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, Geoff Willig, Operations Analyst in the County Manager's
Office. I'm trying to pull up a presentation real quick.
All right. So, Commissioners, a few weeks ago at the end of
last month, we brought to you the results of the intent to -- an
invitation to negotiate, and you guys authorized staff to go ahead and
May 25, 2021
Page 35
begin negotiations with BigShots to start that negotiation process
with Commissioner Saunders and the County Attorney's Office.
As listed in the executive summary, we started the negotiations
with five business points. I've got those listed here on the screen,
and I'll go through 2, 3 -- and 2, 3, 4, and 5 real quickly with a little
bit more detail. I think one's fairly self-explanatory, that the
condition of the lease would be based on operation of both the golf
course and the BigShots facility.
For Business Point 2, it talks about the percentage of sales tax
that would be paid to the county in terms of a payment for the lease
of the land. And as we alluded -- or as we mentioned in the
executive summary, it's going to be on a sliding scale. So BigShots
will have to file sales tax with the Florida Department of Revenue,
and then the county would receive a quarterly amount based on that
filing with the state. And you can see on the right hand of your
screen there, it's in the exhibit for the lease, Exhibit D, which shows
the sliding scale.
So for the first few years, there would be a 0 percentage of that
sales tax coming back to the county, but in year three, it would go to
1 percent; year two, 2 percent -- or I'm sorry. Year four, 1 percent;
year five, 2 percent; and year six and beyond would be at 3 percent of
that reported amount.
In terms of the course redevelopment, this is Business Points 3
and 4.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Let me interrupt for a
second.
MR. WILLIG: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Because I think that was a
little misleading. The county is not going to be receiving 3 percent
of the sales tax that's paid. Collier County's going to be receiving
3 percent of the gross revenue, which is a substantially larger
May 25, 2021
Page 36
number, and I think you may have just misspoken there. But it's
3 percent of the gross revenue, which is estimated to be -- that
3 percent is estimated to be somewhere around 300,000 to $400,000 a
year. And it doesn't start until year three, but the first year and a half
or almost two years of that is construction period, so that's why
there's a zero, zero, zero for those first three years. So I just wanted
to clarify that.
MR. WILLIG: Thank you, Commissioner. I did misspeak. I
was all in a mindset of sales tax and reporting to the state. So that is
correct. Thank you for that clarification.
In terms of the course redevelopment, these are Business Points
3 and 4. We had discussed with BigShots that the county would take
on the redevelopment and construction of the golf course. And we
would provide up to $7 million to design and construct that course.
Anything above that $7 million amount would be the responsibility of
BigShots to cover that cost.
In terms of going out and doing that redevelopment and
construction, obviously, the county would have to solicit for a golf
course architect and design firm, and we would have BigShots -- and
they've agreed in the lease agreement to work with the county to be
an advisor and help the county as we go through that process of
solicitation and also the design of the course, as they would be the
final operator of the course.
Also, BigShots would be responsible for developing the
BigShots facility, and that would be on their own -- on their own
cost, and they would be in charge of that construction period.
They also indicated in the lease agreement that they have an
agreement with the First Tee, and they would plan to provide access
to the BigShots facility, as well as they had indicated last time they
were here, part of the grounds would be developed by the First Tee to
house their operations.
May 25, 2021
Page 37
And, finally, Business Point 5 refers to the resident discount. In
the lease agreement, it lays out that county residents would receive a
40 percent discount on the golf course posted greens fees, and this is
also -- they would have to provide positive identification of
residency, and that typically would be a driver's license or proof of
county real property ownership.
Those tee times would be made five days in advance, an d tee
times would also be subject to course availability and hours of course
operation.
So that's basically the gist of the lease agreement, and thanks to
the County Attorney's Office and Commissioner Saunders working
with us to -- and BigShots to get this lease agreement put together
pretty quickly.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, if I could ask
just for one clarification on the resident discount because, to me, that
was a very important issue.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, I know.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: This discount will be a
40 percent discount on the published rates, and the tee times that are
available, the public, the county residents, will have equal access to
those tee times. So it's not going to be a situation where the
higher-paying customers, the visitors, get to set tee times 10 days in
advance and Collier residents only get to set tee times five days in
advance. They're all being treated equally. So I wanted to make
sure that that was clear for the Commission.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, that was my question, because
I was thinking, I can just imagine that a resident -- do we need
a -- that's exactly what I'm concerned about, is how do we ensure
that -- I mean, and I'm jumping around here. But in the off-season I
can see, perhaps, there would be more availability. In the season,
I'm concerned that folks are going to be -- you know, it's just going to
May 25, 2021
Page 38
be filled up. There's going to be a marked less activity by the
residents as versus maybe visitors during the high season, so that is a
concern.
MR. WILLIG: Madam Chair, we have David Pillsbury.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. PILLSBURY: Thanks, Geoffrey.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
So booking windows -- this is very common practice, and you're
right to be concerned, because if the nonresidents had a booking
window of seven days and the residents were five days, that means
the nonresidents have two more days to book all the tee times up, so
then when the resident calls, the moment the resident window opens,
there may not be any tee times left. So that's --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: That's your concern, and you're right to be
concerned about that. The way we have leveled that playing field is
we are not giving an advantage to the nonresident for booking. It's
the same. It's five days. And so the resident will be able to call up
and book their tee time at the same window a nonresident's able to
book their tee time, and they get the discount. So they're protected.
MR. KLATZKOW: Are you okay if we document that?
MR. PILLSBURY: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. So, Mr. Teach, you can make that
change, please.
MR. PILLSBURY: Yep.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's great, thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Madam Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I ask my question
because -- before we move on to something else.
I'm looking at Exhibit D, and I'm still not understanding how
May 25, 2021
Page 39
this is going to be paid, because it says two different things in -- with
second asterisk. It says, percentage rent to be paid by lessee shall be
calculated by multiplying, A, the gross receipts as shown on the
statement of gross receipts by the percentage set forth in D, but then
the next sentence it says, percentage rents shall be ba sed upon the
monthly Florida State sales tax paid by the lessee.
MR. KLATZKOW: Maybe we should change to "gross
receipts shall be based."
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I mean --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Could we --
MR. KLATZKOW: Gross receipts --
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Is that what it's supposed to -- I
mean, I don't know what -- if that's what it's supposed to mean, okay,
that would make more sense. It just -- it says, that the percentage
rent's going to be calculated two different ways.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The clarification has to
be -- and this was the agreement, and that's been acknowledged by
ClubCorp and BigShots -- that the county's percentage is based on the
gross revenue of the -- all of the operations. That gross revenue is
determined by looking at the sales tax, so there can't be any playing
around with that number.
MR. KLATZKOW: So the same gross revenue that the sales
tax is based on will be the same gross revenue that the percentage
rate is based on.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Correct.
MR. PILLSBURY: So there's no leakage. There's no leakage
of rent.
MR. KLATZKOW: We'll make that clarification.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I had thought that that
was already clarified in the agreement. But that clarification is very
May 25, 2021
Page 40
important.
MR. TEACH: Scott Teach. One other thing that BigShots'
attorney and I had conversations on -- and I see there's a conflict in
here -- is the amount is payable, in one section it says 60 days after
the quarter, but we agreed that it would be 20 days aft er the end of
each quarter. So we'll make that consistent as well when we make
the other change.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The advantage of using that
sales tax calculation is obvious.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There will be no need to
audit expenses and that sort of thing. It's just purely --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right, right. No, no. I
understand. I mean -- right, okay. So if in that second sentence it
says, the gross receipts shall be based upon the monthly, then I get it.
MR. KLATZKOW: No. That's a good catch.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's the advantage of having
attorneys on the Board. No, it's true. It's true. This is -- this is
important. No slight against our County Attorney, of course.
MR. KLATZKOW: It's an imperfect world.
MR. WILLIG: That's all I have for you this morning,
Commissioners. And, obviously, we've got representatives from
BigShots here that can answer any further questions you may have.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think I'm going to start off by
saying it's clear the public wants this; they want a golf course. I
mean, there's no doubt about it. I don't know -- I'm sure we've all
been receiving those e-mails.
And to have First Tee involved, it's a win-win. It's a win-win
for youth. It's really a win-win for the future of golf within our
community. So I think this -- I like the way this has evolved. I'm
May 25, 2021
Page 41
assuming this is something that you're agreeing to. So if we
approve, you will sign?
MR. PILLSBURY: Yes, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No more negotiation?
MR. PILLSBURY: No more negotiations. I mean, it's been a
long journey. The county team has done a great job. This is a
complicated deal. You know, we think -- I mean, I don't know how
many of you watched the PGA championship on Sunday, but what a
milestone moment to remind us of the popularity of the sport to see
the old guys win one. With Mickelson taking home the Wanamaker
trophy, and watching the crowds, you know, envelope the final
group, the ratings are record-breaking ratings.
And I was reminded as I was driving through Naples today as I
passed private club after private club after private club, that public
golf needs to be preserved, and it's tough because the economics of
public golf are difficult. We all recognize that. And we have a
model here that provides parkland. Thanks to Commissioner Solis,
his idea, we think, is a great one. We think it provides high-quality
public golf at affordable prices.
We are very excited creating something special as it relates to
the golf course, obviously, with collaboration with the county.
We're going to have world-class putting. We're going to have, of
course, BigShots and all that BigShots holds, and we're going to have
youth development programs with the First Tee, which are the best in
the world. I mean, they're fantastic, as you point out, Madam
Commissioner.
And so to say we're enthusiastic about this being a model for the
rest of the country would be an understatement. We think this is an
example of a great public/private partnership. And you -all, clearly,
have taken the leadership position to make the investments in public
assets. I mean, look what you've done with the sports complex and
May 25, 2021
Page 42
with tennis and hosting the national pickleball championship. I
mean, it's really incredible what Naples has done. And this is an
opportunity to preserve and protect public golf, high-quality public
golf along similar lines. And so we're very excited at the prospect of
being your partner. We don't think you could pick a better partner,
and we think it's going to be a long and very fruitful relationship.
And I would say, by the way, that the rent calculations on the
3 percent are based on conservative projections. Those are
projections that we make as an enterprise. We're very careful about
projections we make. It could be higher, significantly higher. You
know, we hope it is, and we hope this is a nice revenue stream for the
county.
So as opposed to this being a drain on county resources, this is
going to be an asset that will produce income and a fantastic
community amenity for everyone in the community, not just the
golfers, but nongolfers alike at BigShots, and certainly kids that
might not otherwise have the opportunity to experience this great
sport.
So thank you for your comments, Madam Commissioner.
We're very excited about the prospect of potentially moving forward
with your support.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to go over a couple of things. Quite frankly, I personally
believe there should be a 4-0 vote to move forward with this today.
Now, I'm a realist. I don't really expect that, but I think it would be
the right thing. And I know, Commissioner Taylor, you've
expressed support as recently as this morning, and so I'm really kind
of talking to Commissioner Solis and Commissioner McDaniel. I
know, Commissioner McDaniel, you've got some other thoughts
May 25, 2021
Page 43
about this.
But Collier County residents have been asking for
municipal-type golf for 30 years, and all of us, with the exception of
Commissioner Fiala when she was on the Board, basically said, we're
not going to dig a hole where we're going to have municipal golf and
we're going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, up to a half a
million dollars a year, to subsidize public golf. We're just not going
to do it.
So we came up with a concept that eliminates that problem.
We're not going to be digging a hole that's going to cost the county
residents a half a million dollars a year to maintain public golf. The
county residents are going to get public golf if there's a 3-1 vote or
4-0 vote today. They're going to get public golf, and the county's
going to get a subsidy of 3- to $400,000 a year for the life of that
project.
We have probably the best golf course operating company in the
world looking to do this in Collier County, and we're looking at
having a signature Jack Nicklaus golf course that will be really a
prime golf course for the public.
Our executive summary says -- and we have a very stingy
manager who was our stingy finance person, squeezes every nickel
until he can get a dime out of it, and he said that this is funded. It's
not only funded, but staff's making a recommendation for approval.
And, Commissioner Solis, Commissioner Taylor and I voted for
the one-cent sales tax increase. We put that on the ballot. That's
funding the mental health facility. If we didn't have that on the
ballot, there would be no mental health facility to even talk about.
But what that tax did is it gave us some flexibility. We have the
flexibility to do this. This is not a financial problem for the county
to do this. We invest millions of dollars in our park program, and
this is just another investment in our park program.
May 25, 2021
Page 44
The alternative for this property, there's some discussion of a
passive park. Well, the way this is set up, there actually can be a
passive park there. There's about 10 or 12 acres of land. It's about
300 feet wide, about a thousand feet long. That is set aside for the
county. We can develop a passive park there. So we can
have -- we can have all of that.
We have the flexibility to do this. Now, I want to kind of
emphasize a couple of the issues that were very important to
Commissioner Solis when we first started talking about this. One
was the single-use building aspect. What if ClubCorp walks on this
project, and we have a single-use building there. Well, it's not really
a single-use building. Obviously, there would have to be an
enclosure if ClubCorp worked, but that building could be used for
other purposes. They're going to pay for that building. We own it.
It's on our property.
The -- ClubCorp can't walk from one part of the project -- can't
walk from the golf course, for example, and maintain the BigShots.
It's all one project. ClubCorp has been in existent now, what, for 70
years, back in the '50s?
MR. PILLSBURY: Since 1957; we're 64.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Sixty-four years. How
many projects have you walked from in those 64 years?
MR. PILLSBURY: We have one lease at a city club didn't
work out with the owner the building, and we are in a dispute with
them on an exit, and that's the only -- and that's in Dayton, Ohio.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's a city --
MR. PILLSBURY: That's a city club. It's a dining club in an
office building. That's the only situation where we've gotten in a
dispute with our landlord in the history of the company.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: So, Commissioner Solis,
almost 70 years. No problems with this organization.
May 25, 2021
Page 45
Another important aspect was how much money the county
would invest in this. We're at $7 million. That's a large amount of
money, obviously, but in terms of our park program, it's really not.
The pickleball, which was pointed out in the executive summary,
we've spent almost $7 million on pickleball. It's not unusual. We're
paying, what, $100 million for our regional parks.
So these are investments that we can afford, and they're
investments in our youth. And I would hope to get four votes today
on this project, Commissioner McDaniel.
The other thing that we do as commissioners is we frequently
listen to the commissioner from the district in which something is
being developed. We do that not because we feel bound to vote with
a commissioner for a project in the commissioner's district, but we
tend to believe, and I think correctly, that the commissioner in the
district has a little bit more knowledge of what's going on in the
district than the rest of us might have.
I can tell you that my goal from the day that I got elected was to
do things for the Golden Gate City community to help improve the
quality of life of the 29,000 people that live there. We bought this
golf course with that in mind. We set up the taxing district with that
in mind. We changed the zoning with that in mind. We purchased
the water and sewer system with that in mind.
This is a very important step in completing the efforts to
improve that community. This will be a steppingstone for a lot of
improvements.
I'll give you one example of what happened just last week.
We're all familiar with the two-story white vacant building on Golden
Gate Parkway. It's been vacant for decades. The owner of that
building approached me. Turns out that I know him from past
experience. And they've offered to donate that to the county. Now,
that may be a building that we ultimately tear down, or it may be a
May 25, 2021
Page 46
building that we rehab. It was completely gutted, new electricity,
new roof, new air conditioning. Everything was fixed in that, new
plumbing. Maybe we can use that building, maybe we can't, but we
certainly can use the land. It's adjacent to our existing land that we
acquired, and it gives us the absolute legal right to use about 200
parking spaces there. There are parking easements there, and we
have the absolute right to use about 200 of those parking spaces.
Just another example of what's happening in that community, we
had a business owner who came forward, came to me and said, with
the new zoning, they're going to start looking at a multiuse structure,
something that will be nice to jump start the redevelopment of the
economic area on Golden Gate Parkway.
And so I'm asking the Board to place a little confidence in me in
terms of the commissioner from that district, place a little confidence
in our staff. They determined that this is -- we have the money to do
this. And I'd like to make a motion that we approve this contract as
amended with the clarifications. And I know we have public
comment that we need to listen to, but I'm going to make that motion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And do I hear a second? I will
second it to continue the discussion.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes, you're not going to get
your 4-0 vote, and I want you to hear from me. It has nothing to do
with disrespect, especially for you or for other people that are
involved with this transaction or the commissioner of the district. I
have the utmost confidence in what you're doing. I have the utmost
amount of support for the majority of what we have done as a board
to work with the community in Golden Gate City.
Monumentous -- monumental strides have been made to enhance the
quality of life over there.
This transaction doesn't sit well with me. I have a different
May 25, 2021
Page 47
idea. I don't think -- I think it's been mentioned before, I've said it
before, I'll say it again. I think it's jamming 20 pounds in a 10-pound
sack. I don't like the location of BigShots. I think it's going to have
a negative impact on the quality of life to people that live across the
east side of 951.
I don't like the concept of 12 holes. Never have. Not since the
beginning of time. Now, Jack Nicklaus, all rise. Who can argue
with that? Be that as it may, I don't -- I don't think it's a wise
investment of our taxpayers' money to construct this golf course. I
think that there are other things that can be done with this piece of
property that would be beneficial to the community from a zoning
perspective. I think there is other lands that the county owns that a
real golf course, necessarily, can be built in public/private partnership
on land that we already own.
I think there's another location for BigShots that would be far
more conducive for the community and a greater benefit for
everybody else. It's not that I -- again, I'm just not in concert with
how that transaction is going.
We spoke yesterday -- I spoke yesterday with staff. I've done a
lot in my real estate business with regard to percentage rents, and I
knew what the intent was and just made sure that the physical
documents with regard to the lease were straight. I knew the
executive summary was, at best, confusing.
I will support the efforts. In fact, if the Board chooses to go
forth and persevere with this, I'm not -- this isn't a sword. I'm just
expressing my reservations, is probably the best way to say it. I
think there are other things that we can do that would be of a much
larger benefit over a long period of time and not have this kind of an
investment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner Solis, will you allow me to say something before
May 25, 2021
Page 48
you speak?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You're the chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You get to say whenever you want.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: What better place to put First Tee?
What better place to nurture the youth? The future of our
community is the youth. It's not us. It's those children we have.
It's those kids on the street. It's those kids in the skate parks. It's
those kids getting in trouble down the corner. That's what the future
is. We can't put this out in nowhere where parents -- parents?
They're absent. They're not going to transport their kids. First Tee,
this is -- this is a perfect urban renewal program, perfect.
And on the flip side of it, it has the bonus of catering to people
who want to come and play with their families. I mean, this is a
win-win for this community, and the community wants it. We have
noise ordinances. We're dealing with that on Bayshore. We have
noise ordinances. We have -- look, we're growing. We're growing
as a community, and it's infill. Instead of moving out, now we're
looking at changing within. And with that comes the push and the
pull and the strain of growth.
But if we don't give this community this shot, this wonderful
shot in the arm to rise up and nurture their youth to become
something else, we've failed.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Were you addressing me with
regard to that?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I was.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: You were looking at me.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I was.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Can I respond?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
May 25, 2021
Page 49
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't think any of us on this
board actually have no care or concern for our youth. This
discussion today is -- I haven't gone into depth in an argument as to
why I don't necessarily care for this transaction, but I can and will if
you want me to.
I don't want it to be insinuated at all that I'm in opposition of this
and then in some form or fashion a deficit for residents and the youth
of our community by any stretch. I have an entirely different set of
plans that would really, really work and work well.
So I -- you know, there are discussions with First Tee with
regard to the availability, but nothing concrete, nothing in stone. Is
there anything in stone guaranteed for the folks at First Tee to have
utilization of this?
MR. PILLSBURY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: That's part of our -- a very important part
of our arrangement.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If you could elaborate a little
bit on that, because I think that's --
MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. So Cindy Darland's here with the
First Tee, and she's been the executive director for many, many years.
First Tee's been around for about 25 years, I think. I was the
keynote speaker at the 10-year anniversary a long time ago. I'm a
believer in the First Tee. Now there are graduates of the First Tee
from when it started that are doctors and lawyers.
And oftentimes I think the First Tee is misunderstood. A lot of
people think it's a golf program. It's not. It's a youth development
program. It's about core values, healthy habits for living. And if we
had a couple of First Tee kids talking to you today, not about this
project but about the importance of the First Tee and the persons of
access.
May 25, 2021
Page 50
And, Chairwoman Taylor, you brought up a very important
point, and I think Cindy would affirm this, and she might do this in
her public comment. One of the biggest issues we have with
disadvantaged youth is transportation. So the location in an infill
site for First Tee is very, very important. It's something that Cindy
deals with on a daily basis is getting kids to and from the First Tee
programming.
We started a program which we won't have here in Naples, but
we started -- we're in Atlanta, Dallas, Fort Worth, and Houston called
the First Tee Club Life Gateway Program. And this just tells you
how much we believe in the First Tee.
We run private country clubs, like the ones I passed driving into
Naples with gates on them, which is great for the people who are
inside the gates. We started a program called Gateway. Why
Gateway? Because I was told by one of our African-American
executives that when she was a little girl in Southern California, she
would walk by a private club with her mom, and she would say,
Mommy, what's on the other side of that gate?
And her mom would say, well, honey, don't worry about it
because it's not anything you're ever going to need to be bothered
with. And so we named this Gateway program after the story she
told me about her childhood.
And what is the Gateway program? We take two First Tee
boys and two First Tee girls in every market where we have a private
club and there's a First Tee, and we have a scholarship program. So
when you've achieved eagle or double eagle status, which means
you've graduated, you've matriculated through their program, you've
demonstrated your ability to exercise the life skills and you live the
core values and understand the basic tenets of golf, which is about
honor and following the rules and self-policing and all those core
values that are so important.
May 25, 2021
Page 51
We say to those kids, guess what, you are now a member of our
private club. We have parents literally weep on the phone when we
tell them that their child is now a member of our club.
Eight-hundred-dollar-a-month dues waived; $30,000 initiation fee
waived. How long does the membership last? We tell the kid, it is
until you graduate from college.
So we will have kids -- we're in our first year of the program.
We will have kids that will pick where they go to college based on
where ClubCorp has a club so they can continue to utilize the club
and play golf.
Now, why do we do that with the First Tee? Because the First
Tee is the real deal. They change lives. And I'll tell you, it's not
because of companies like ClubCorp. It's because of people like
Cindy Darland that work for almost nothing, and they have a passion
for impacting kids' lives. And she's been looking for a home. It has
not been easy. And, you know, she wanted us to build her a
building. We said, we can't afford to build you a building, but we'll
help you raise the money to build a building. We're going to give
you access not only to the golf course, but also to BigShots, the tee
line, the golf balls, all the things that we can provide, the putting
course.
So we want this to be a model First Tee facility for the country,
and so we're totally committed to the First Tee at this location. And,
again, it's -- the reason why this location's so good is because it's an
infill site, and land values are such that it's very difficult to get First
Tee chapters at infill sites. It's just the nature of development, but
that's where the kids are, and that's where it's needed.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis, I don't mean to
ignore you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: So I have a lot of questions,
and -- but what I didn't hear was an answer to what Commissioner
May 25, 2021
Page 52
Saunders had asked, and that is what is the deal with First Tee.
MR. PILLSBURY: We have assured them by contract that
they have a site, and they've got preferential access to golf and all the
amenities at the location.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Can I hear from Cindy
Darland with regard to that? She's here.
MR. PILLSBURY: It's an exhibit in the lease, actually. But,
yeah, Cindy can certainly comment on that as well.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It's an exhibit to the lease?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Can you put that on the
screen.
MR. WILLIG: There's three pages. It's Exhibit E in the lease
that was attached to the Board's agenda item. This is the first page.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: It indicates that this is
nonbinding.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Nonbinding means nonbinding.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Correct.
MR. PILLSBURY: I mean, look --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It begs the question.
MR. PILLSBURY: I'll stand on my record with the First Tee.
I mean, we're happy to make it binding if that's important to the
Board, but this is what we intend to do.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: When I asked that question
earlier, do you have a guarantee with First Tee, you said yes, and then
when I was reading this, I'm not seeing a guarantee. And, again, this
is hard for me, because it's making me look not so happy. And I
don't want to be disrespectful. I have an enormous amount of
respect for what ClubCorp does, what First Tee does, all of the
fundamentals that First Tee, in fact, does. But this isn't a guarantee.
This is a promise to be nice. This is a promise to accommodate.
And I don't want to on the fly have to talk about that. If that's the
May 25, 2021
Page 53
representation, then make it the representation.
MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. Commissioner, it's a fair point.
It's my oversight. I apologize. I didn't realize it wasn't a guarantee.
I knew it was an exhibit in the lease.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I got chastised for not
upholding the youth of our community. I got chastised for not really
caring about the youth of our community.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Could you let him answer
the question? He's explaining.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. I appreciate your point, and you
make a fair point, and I mischaracterized the nature of the exhibit,
and I apologize for that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Me, too, by the way. Me,
too.
MR. PILLSBURY: No, no, I understand. I understand. This
is a very important topic. And I think -- and this isn't an excuse, but
it is to say that this is not our first rodeo with the First Tee. The
reason I told you the story about ClubCorp is we are partnered with
the First Tee at the highest of levels. I don't think there's -- you
know, I've said to the industry, hey -- every other club, they like to
write checks to the First Tee, but how about letting the First Tee kids
come into their club. No, no, we don't want those kids here. We'll
just -- I'll write a check. We've said, okay, here's our playbook,
guys. We're doing it, you do it, because that's how we change the
landscape. That's how you change it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right.
MR. PILLSBURY: It's one person at a time.
So my point is this: We intend to do this. I am, obviously,
passionate about the First Tee. And we think we have a tremendous
opportunity here in Naples. We think there's an enormous need.
May 25, 2021
Page 54
Cindy will confirm that, I'm sure, in her comments, and we will
happily make this binding in the agreement. I thought it was. I was
mistaken. And we can make that change with our -- with the county
and make sure that is in place.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think you just eliminate the
word "nonbinding" throughout the document, and that probably will
do it. Will that satisfy your concerns, Commissioner Solis? Then
it's a contract.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I think it's throughout the
agreement, but if you're saying that this -- these are the terms
that -- and I guess we'd need to hear from the First Tee. If these are
the terms that they're -- they would agree to, then I'll accept that. I
mean, but it says nonbinding throughout the thing, but if that's the
representation, I feel good with that.
MR. KLATZKOW: We need to hear from First Tee.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Would you please come up,
Ms. Darland.
MS. DARLAND: Thank you very much. Thank you, David.
I have a few comments that I would like to read and then answer
any questions that you may have with the First Tee.
But I do appreciate your thoughts, Mr. Solis, Commissioner, that
we do need it guaranteed, and I'll go ahead and read my statement.
The First Tee is excited, to say the least, to be included in
ClubCorp's proposal of the 12-hole golf course and BigShots facility.
We support ClubCorp and BigShots with the understanding of
receiving a written agreement stating we have guaranteed golf course
access and hitting bay access year-round during our specific hours of
operation.
Receiving this written guarantee would fulfill the county's
requirements, which you listed in the original bid documents, which
we are very grateful for, that you mentioned First Tee.
May 25, 2021
Page 55
In addition to the guaranteed golf access, we have the
understanding that First Tee Naples Collier will be guaranteed land
on this property where we can build an approximate 30,0 00 [sic]
square foot learning center.
In closing, as I was reading the Naples Daily Newspaper this
morning, I came across the article regarding another historic golf
resort that is being renovated. Their governing body was promised
public access; however, they did not get that as a written guarantee,
and to this day they are regretting this decision.
So, again, I thank you for your time. I thank you for clarifying
this and putting it on the table as far as -- First Tee does need access,
you're absolutely right. And we -- over the years -- I've been the
executive director for now 14 years. I brought it to this area, and
you know I've been in front of you before. And I appreciate all of
your time in working with the youth and having them in your mind
because we do -- like David said, we do change lives with First Tee
along with golf.
But right now I worry that if we don't have it guaranteed, that
there will be -- and nothing -- I totally respect you guys so much, and
I -- but I worry that, you know, the dollar will come into play, and if
First Tee is not -- the only times we need are from 4:00 to 6:00
Monday through Friday. We don't hold classes on the weekend.
But I worry that, you know, if someone has a tournament or
somebody comes in that wants to pay for that tee time, that First Tee
will be bumped, and that's my only concern is that we're not bumped
because we can -- we need to plan our programs months out, years
out. And if we have 20 to 25 children or youth that come to our
program and they're like, sorry, you know, it was canceled today, you
know, it puts us in a real bind. It doesn't show responsibility on our
part, which is what we're trying to convey to our youth is
responsibility and respect.
May 25, 2021
Page 56
So those are my concerns.
MR. PILLSBURY: Well, Cindy, let me just say this: I don't
get to do -- I get a lot of challenging things as a CEO, but I also get to
make quick decisions. It's guaranteed.
MS. DARLAND: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: And it was my understanding that it was
guaranteed. It wasn't in the written language of the lease. We're
going to fix that.
MS. DARLAND: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: And I just want to say one more thing
about you. We celebrate our teachers as our real heroes, and they're
the people that work behind the scenes never looking for a thank you.
They're certainly not doing it for money. They're doing it because
they really want to see people's lives change and, Cindy, that's what
you do. And we celebrate that, and we are proud to memorialize
your access to this property to the extent the Board approves this
going forward, and we look forward to great things working with you
and the First Tee of Naples.
MS. DARLAND: Well, thank you very much, and it takes a
team to make it happen. So First Tee wouldn't be successful without
everyone here today, so thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: If you would stay here. County
Attorney.
MR. KLATZKOW: There's a 60-day financing contingency. I
would propose that there also be a 60-day contingency that these two
get into a binding agreement.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're going to get a binding
agreement right now, okay. We have the document in the package
that has the tee times and the guarantees in it. I'm going to ask the
second to the motion to accept an amendment to my motion, which is
to add to that motion that this become a guarantee of ClubCorp for
May 25, 2021
Page 57
First Tee; that the document there be -- whatever changes are
necessary to make sure that it's a binding document as long as
ClubCorp is involved with the golf course.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I'm happy to second it but with
one question. You were very specific about what you needed on a
day-to-day basis. Does that include weekends and the summertime
also?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I make a suggestion? I'm
sorry. Can I make a suggestion? We are overdue for a court
reporter break. What if we took our court reporter break and maybe,
instead of forcing this on the fly, there can be a conversation and
maybe some of these things could be hammered out --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's a very wise comment.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- and give some clarity.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Good idea.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's a great idea. So I think at this
point we will take a court reporter break and be back at -- 15 minutes;
11:00. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had from 10:44 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
I believe we are talking with Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I mean, I was trying to
provide some space for ClubCorp and First Tee to work out some
details so that there's a little more certainty on what's going on,
because that makes a difference, for me anyway.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So I guess we need to hear
from Ms. Darland. Are you comfortable with the binding agreement
as written?
MS. DARLAND: As long as it's guaranteed access and it's in
writing, I think that is -- that is into our favor, for sure. I still worry
May 25, 2021
Page 58
about -- you know, Mondays now are set aside for tournaments, so
you know what is there going to be set aside in months to come that
won't let us have access agreement, but -- and David's assured me
that I can come to him or come to ClubCorp, which I -- you know, I
totally appreciate. And our conversation has -- it always has been
open. We've had an open dialogue, and I feel comfortable with that.
So I'm just saying, you know, that's where I'm coming from, so...
MR. PILLSBURY: And just to be clear, though, there's no
set-aside date for outings. An outing will happen when an outing
happens. You guys know how outings work. People book outings
a year in advance. Typically they're charitable. Usually outings are
looking for 18-hole golf courses, to Commissioner McDaniel's point,
so I don't expect we'd be doing a large number of outings. But there
will be days when the golf course will be used for outings, for sure.
The good news is is Cindy has visibility in her schedule far in
advance, and outings are booked far in advance, so you can plan for
that, right. So you can actually get out in front of it and plan an
alternative time or make sure the kids have access to BigShots. And,
you know -- and if somewhere down the road there's another 18-hole
golf course built that's public, great, that's terrific. But for now the
kids will have what they need in a good location.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. My other question was -- I
heard a reference to a 30,000-square-foot --
MS. DARLAND: Three.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Three thousand.
MS. DARLAND: I misspoke if I said 30-.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, I heard 30-, too.
MS. DARLAND: I'm sorry.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
MS. DARLAND: It's going to be bigger than BigShots. No.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's why my eyebrows went up
May 25, 2021
Page 59
and I went, well, wait a minute, where's that going to go.
MS. DARLAND: Three. Three for the maximum.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. But is this part of what
you-all have talked about?
MR. PILLSBURY: Oh, yeah. There's a spot designated the
back of the parking lot. It's already been designated on the parcel
map. Absolutely.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Okay. Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: And it will be a sublease. That's all
accounted for in the agreement.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: And that's been approved by county staff
that that -- now, they would, obviously, have an approval right on the
sublease as well, and we would work that out with Cindy and her
team once they figure out exactly what they want to build, and we
would go through the normal entitlement process, and we would do
the sublease and then, obviously, we have the binding agreement for
access and --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Yeah. I see that it's -- the
provision there. It's on the visualizer. Okay.
MS. DARLAND: And I know another area where we had
communicated about a facility, a learning facility, which we would
call our building, would be back where the old maintenance building
was. You know, they had a separate road, which I understand that
road now is going to be no longer. But it would be, I think, over by
number -- your 8 and 9, something in that vicinity, away from
BigShots, because at some point our board at the First Tee was
concerned about the entertainment center having alcohol, and it may
not be conducive to the youth, so on and so forth. But if we were
away from it, that might be a better scenario for kids and First Tee.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. That all confused me, but
May 25, 2021
Page 60
okay.
MS. DARLAND: No, no. Ask me what, you know --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I thought we were just
talking about a 3,000-square-foot facility over by the --
MR. PILLSBURY: It's the back of the parking, so it's a
separation between --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. So you're talking about the
same place, or you're talking about a different place?
MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah.
MS. DARLAND: A different place. There were two
alternatives. We had one in the parking lot by BigShots. The other
option that was on the table was over by the --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: But you're okay with the one that's
over -- that we just talked about --
MS. DARLAND: We'd have to -- I'd have to look at it and get
it -- depending upon the distance from the BigShots, because of the
liquor and the entertainment with our youth.
MR. PILLSBURY: Well, my understanding was --
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
MR. PILLSBURY: -- where we were putting the First Tee.
Do you want to address that, Randall? And pull up the map, and
we'll show you --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, we need a map.
MR. PILLSBURY: The other location that Cindy's mentioning
was problematic for a number of reasons, but --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: You know, and I'm not -- I'm not
trying to create issues, but, you know, I'm just -- I want to know with
some certainty that -- because in weighing -- in weighing this in my
mind, okay, if -- obviously, what First Tee does is a value to the
community, and that's a value, and that goes into my calculations in
my own head. But those calculations have to have some certainty to
May 25, 2021
Page 61
it, or it's not worth that much.
So the tee times, I think, or the access has been resolved t o your
satisfaction?
MS. DARLAND: (Nods head.)
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And the facility issue that says that
First Tee will be responsible for 100 percent of the costs related to
any improvements, that's been resolved to First Tee's --
MS. DARLAND: Right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It has been?
MS. DARLAND: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes, okay. We don't need to talk
about another location then, right?
MS. DARLAND: He's going to pull that up, and I want to -- it
was given to First Tee as an alternative, so we had two choices. So
if it's off the table, I wanted to know.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh, okay. Again, I'm not -- I'm
not trying to --
MS. DARLAND: No, that's good.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Either one is good for you?
MS. DARLAND: Yes.
MR. PILLSBURY: I think the second location, Commissioner
Solis, is the one that is going to be the park area now, so it was
actually taken off the table in our last conversations as a site --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: -- option, which defaults back to the
second site. And we're sensitive to the issues that Cindy raises,
which is why I think the back of the parking lot provides sufficient
distance between the First Tee location and the BigShots facility
itself.
MS. DARLAND: But how will you organize Tee Box No. 1 if
First Tee facility is there?
May 25, 2021
Page 62
MR. PILLSBURY: Well, look, I mean, this is probably not the
right forum to make the sausage.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
MR. PILLSBURY: I think the commitment here is that you're
going to get a piece of land commensurate with the building you need
to build and the location that works for the First Tee. The
placeholder that we have is the back of the parking lot. You know,
so we obviously have some work to do in that regard, and maybe that
moves around a little bit, which will all be part of the process.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: As far away as it can be?
MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. I mean, we'll have to figure out
exactly what that looks like, and there's a lot of work that needs to be
done, yet, around sausage making as it relates to permits and --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: -- all of the necessary entitlements to get
this stuff done. And also the timing of which, you know, when
Cindy will actually be ready to actually build the structure.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Sure. Again, I'm just trying to
make sure I understand that the issues are nailed down to everybody's
satisfaction at this point. The details of where -- what part of the
parking lot, I'm not concerned with that.
So my other questions are -- and so the pro formas and things
that all of the terms were based upon aren't in here, and I just have
some questions. I mean, I heard Commissioner Saunders reference a
$400,000 number. Three hundred thousand?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Three hundred thousand to
400,000 is probably going to be the 3 percent of the gross.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Of the gross. So the gross -- the
gross projections are 12, 13 million?
MR. PILLSBURY: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
May 25, 2021
Page 63
MR. PILLSBURY: Yeah. I mean, just to -- you all know this,
but just to remind the Board, I mean, we're spending $16 million to
build the BigShots. And, frankly, our revenue projections we think
are somewhat conservative --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
MR. PILLSBURY: -- hopefully, because we're putting a big
investment into your property. It's your asset at the end of the day.
So we hope we're right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. Well, you know, from the
very beginning I've had my reservations about getting into -- the
county getting into the golf business. This doesn't put us in the golf
business, but it commits us to being in the golf business potentially,
you know, in the future. Occupational hazard of having to look at
the worst-case scenario; it's just an occupational hazard for me.
But -- and I will just say, I'm not sure what the sales tax and the
mental health facility had to do with this but, you know, if the motion
was amended to say that this wasn't a nonbinding agreement, and I'm
hearing that the issues have been resolved with First Tee, I think
that's going to be of great value to the community, and I'll support the
motion, reluctantly, but I'll support it --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Maybe this would be a good
time to call for the vote.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- because -- but, you know -- and I
will say that I'm going to support it a lot of because I know that
Commissioner Saunders has looked at this. He's spent a lot of time
on it, a lot more time than I have, and he's -- you know, this is near
and dear to his heart. So I'm going to -- I'm going to support his
motion, and I'm going to hope for the best.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: And I hope it works out. So I'll
support the motion.
May 25, 2021
Page 64
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Great.
MR. PILLSBURY: Thank you, Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So I think now we're going to go to
public comment. And, Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chairman, I have, I'll say, six. We
had two online, but I think one might have gone. But we have six
registered speakers here. Your first speaker will be Gary Hodgson
followed by David Marren.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Can I -- a suggestion.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Since I've already said that I'm
going to support the motion, I just wonder if those that are going to
speak in favor of it want to just defer.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Or --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- just come up and give your name
and say whether you support the title and what you support. You
don't have to -- unless you want to talk us out of it --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: This is going to pass --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Don't screw it up. But I do
welcome others that -- if there's anybody that's opposed to it, I would
like to hear that --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- because -- I want to hear that.
MR. HODGSON: Well, thank you very much, Commissioners.
Thank you for having us have a chance to talk before your vote.
And I've prepared a three-page two-minute-and-45-second
presentation, which I would really love to give, but I was taught in
the sales mode, don't ever take yes for a no. We've got a yes. Let
me just say my most important point is, I think that this yes vote
May 25, 2021
Page 65
gives Golden Gate a chance to evolve from a -- from a pass-through
town to a destination city. It's a great place for us to be.
Thank you very much for your yes vote.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're welcome. Thank you for
your remarks.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is David Marren. He'll be
followed by Kaydee Tuff.
MR. MARREN: Good morning. I would like to thank the
commissioners and, especially the staff, for all the hard work that
they've put into this to make this golf course at Golden Gate a reality.
Thank you very much. Certainly appreciate all your efforts.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MARREN: And I'm sure the community does as well.
Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kaydee Tuff, and I'm
going to struggle with handwriting here. I think this is Cece Zenti.
MS. TUFF: I, too, would like to say thank you, and most
especially thank you for giving all of Collier County a chance to say,
let's go to Golden Gate.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: I hope got I've got this right, Cece Zenti.
MS. ZENTI: Zenti, correct, yes.
Thank you all very much for your time, staff, all that you've
done. We appreciate it very much. We're very much looking
forward to this going forward.
And I serve the community center there in Golden Gate along
with Kaydee, and these kids are very important to us, and now they
can walk and ride their bike. So it's wonderful.
Thank you very kindly.
MR. MILLER: Finally, Madam Chair, I have one registered
speaker online for this item, Craig Wobrock.
May 25, 2021
Page 66
Mr. Wobrock, you should be getting a prompt to unmute
yourself, if you can do that. There you are, Mr. Wobrock. You
have three minutes or less.
MR. WOBROCK: Good morning. I'd like to thank you all for
taking this call. I really support this motion, and I appreciate the
approval, and I think it will put Golden Gate on the map, and it will
make it a destination location, whereas a passive park would not. I
thank you for this time.
MR. MILLER: That was our final registered speaker, Madam
Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So any discussion? There's a motion
on the floor and a second to approve it as stated. Do we need to read
that motion back or restate it? Commissioner Saunders?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I don't think so. It was to
approve the agreements with -- there were a couple changes. One
was to make it clear that the three percent was -- maybe that was
already clear. Make sure that the 3 percent was on the gross
revenue. We did that. And then the other was to make sure that
that stated nonbinding agreement was binding. So I think that was
all that we needed to clarify, so --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Did you want to make some remarks
before we vote?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I want to thank staff. They
worked, really, overtime to get this agreement done, and I really
appreciate that. They don't usually get thanked for their hard work,
and they did spent a lot of time on this. And I spent a small amount
of time with them, but they spent a lot of time on that, so I want to
thank the entire staff that was involved in this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. There's a motion on the
floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
May 25, 2021
Page 67
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries 3-1.
MR. WILLIG: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11G
THE EAST OF CR951 BRIDGE REEVALUATION STUDY,
DIRECT STAFF TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT THE FIVE (5)
RECOMMENDED BRIDGES AND CONTINUE PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT WITH THE IMPACTED RESIDENTS
THROUGH THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PROCESS –
MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE INCLUSION OF
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS MADE PRIOR TO BRIDGE
COMPLETION – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, that brings us to Item 11G
on your agenda. It's a recommendation to approve the east of
County Route 951 bridge reevaluation study, direct staff to design
and construct the five recommended bridges and continue public
engagement with the impacted residents through the design and
construction process.
Ms. Lorraine Lantz, your Principal Planner in Capital Project
Planning, will present.
MS. LANTZ: Sorry. Hi. Lorraine Lantz, Transportation
Planning. I think Geoff's trying to just finish out his presentation.
I just wanted to get started by saying that we've come to you
before. This item was continued back in -- back in February,
so -- you're good.
May 25, 2021
Page 68
MR. WILLIG: Good, sorry.
MS. LANTZ: Just so -- the background, like I said, the item
was continued but it has a long history of projects, recommendations,
studies, et cetera.
Back in February, we came to you with our recommendation for
five bridge locations out of the 10 that were remaining, and you had
asked us to do some additional analysis. The traffic analysis, which
was in your executive summary, shows some of the traffic on these
bridge -- at these bridge crossing locations. This shows the existing
traffic as well as what would happen if no bridge was built, but the
existing traffic at buildout, and then the existing -- or excuse
me -- the traffic with the bridge as it is today, and then the bridge
traffic with buildout.
I did want to just explain that, after we did some additional
analysis with the project timing and phasing and coordination of the
projects, some of the analysis that we may have spoken to you
previously about has gone down specifically on the bridge at the
crossing location on 47th. So the timing of the projects did impact
that particular location. It decreased some of the traffic.
And as I said, the project schedules, one of the concerns was that
the bridges that we would recommend would not move forward
without some of the coordination of the other Estates projects. So
we are committing to this timeline so that we would not be moving
forward with those bridges until some of the projects, specifically the
construction of Vanderbilt Beach Road extension from 16th to
Everglades, until that bridge -- that project is constructed.
One of the questions we received during our previous
presentation was about gating. At this point, it's kind of a nonstarter.
There are significant issues with gating as well as the safety -- legal
issues as well as the safety issues, so we would not be looking for
gates at this time.
May 25, 2021
Page 69
And then another question was the response -- the reduction in
response times of the first responders. If you look at some of the
response times, we were told at the previous presentation that the
four-minute window is really the critical time frame, and so none of
the bridges that we are recommending, none of those locations were
within that without the bridge. And now with the bridges, most, if
not all, have a response-time reduction, a significant response-time
reduction. The minutes saved specifically on, like, 13th, fire is
75 percent, and that goes down to almost two-and-a-half-minute
response times. So these are significant response reductions for your
first responders.
Some of the health, safety, and welfare benefits are received not
just from those who are directly impacted. So we understand that
some of those neighbors who abut the existing properties are
impacted; however, there's thousands of people that are now
benefiting from these bridges once they are constructed. And so this
graphic just shows you all of the benefits to the community as a
whole for the greater good.
And then we are supported by our first responder team. We
coordinated this project with all of them. And so they are here to
speak on some of the issues that they've been facing recently with
some of the wildfires.
And our next steps -- and I apologize. I had them adjusted a
little bit differently.
We are recommending that five bridge locations move forward
at this time. These are the locations of those crossings. We are also
recommending that the five bridges in the study that we are not
recommending continue and are reevaluated as projects progre ss in
the future. So we're not saying to eliminate them. We're just saying
not to pursue them at this time.
And, again, we are asking for you to commit or understand that
May 25, 2021
Page 70
we are committing to the schedule of projects based off of the time
frames that were in your executive summary.
And I'm here, like I said, with our consultant, Jeff Perry, who's
here for any of the traffic analysis, if you have any questions, as well
as all of the first responders that contributed to this study.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Thank you.
Could you -- yeah, you named it in your presentation, the first
responders, you talked about them, so that's -- but just put it on the
record. The first responders, the area that they represent. Fire --
MS. LANTZ: So we have Chief Butcher here for Emergency
Medical Services, EMS, and we have the Greater Naples Fire Chief
Sapp, as well as the Deputy Chief Angelo.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. I was waiting for you,
sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It popped up No. 2.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It didn't pop up. There you go.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I want one other commitment
on here, and that is that the intersection improvements were these
bridges, any of them are contemplated, the intersection improvements
are funded and constructed prior to the opening of the bridge. I don't
want the debacle that we're going through with the folks on 8th right
now to ever, ever happen again.
MS. LANTZ: We are prepared to make that commitment. We
are -- the design would include the road, the crossing, as well as the
major intersections on either side.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Wilson's already an improved
intersection. We've got a light there, so that's really not that -- and,
you know, that bridge has predominantly been contemplated since
time immemorial.
But if you folks aren't watching, I'm struggling. I'm struggling
with these bridges. These are -- this is a rural area of our
May 25, 2021
Page 71
community. We as a community, the residents in Golden Gate
Estates, have demanded that the rural characteristics of the
community be maintained, and these are large intrusions.
You'll recall I opposed staff when Vanderbilt went out through,
because there was a really nifty idea to interconnect a whole bunch of
dead-end streets and into Vanderbilt at the time, and we were
successful in not allowing that to transpire.
Again, I was part of the original study the staff continually talks
about that was done back in 2006 and '8. There's no argument.
And this is the -- this is what's balancing this for me, just so you
know, especially -- especially now that I'm moving up in the age
bracket. There's no difference -- there's a huge difference in time
when you're the fellow there not being able to catch your breath and
the ambulance can get to you two-and-a-half, three minutes quicker.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That's the predominant -- you
see me clenching my fists. That's the predominant message that I
have to say. That's where I -- that's where I'm drawing the line in the
sand and saying, some of these things need to happen in order to
better facilitate that response for our community.
So with that commitment on the intersection in advance before
the bridge, I'll make a motion for moving it forward, or approving it,
whatever your -- I didn't even read what you're actually looking for.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: To approve --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Move to approve.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- the construction of five priority
locations.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: For that timeline.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's a motion on the floor. Do I
hear a second?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
May 25, 2021
Page 72
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. There's a motion and second.
Any discussion?
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I do have one public comment.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ooh, I beg your pardon.
MR. MILLER: That's quite all right. Hugo Alpire.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Excuse me, Mr. Alpire. Excuse me.
I didn't mean to ignore you.
MR. ALPIRE: That's all right.
Yeah. On behalf of the neighbors on 35th Avenue Northwest,
we need another bridge. If I have a big wallet, I wouldn't be here. I
would just pay for that bridge.
There is the need on north of Wilson, north of Immokalee Road
on Wilson. There is a narrow bridge that we need there. It
just -- even if -- I can jump over that little canal that we have.
Now, every day when you drive going home or coming from
home, going to work, you can see, you know, the neighborhood, but
you have to go all the way around Oil Well. It's about almost two
miles. So you have to go all the way around. And that's not only
the only problem. The problem is on Immokalee Road from three
lanes turn to two right at 35th, and then there's a big problem,
accidents all the time there, because they merge. People are flying
there, and then there's the merge to go into my neighborhood on 35th.
Another problem, with the people coming from Immokalee
going to Naples -- coming to Naples, the speed, they coming at 65,
usually; 55, 65, that's normal. And it's just ready for an accident all
the time there.
And what is that -- the other thing that -- the reason that we need
another bridge, I know you approved for five, and I was asking
Ms. Lorraine if there is a chance -- our bridge is the number sixth in
the schedule. If we can just bring back to one of the five take ou t of
there and put ours there because it's -- and also one more thing.
May 25, 2021
Page 73
There is first responder that live in that area, Porous -- no, Morrow.
Do you know him? They are first responder. They told me also
that when 911 call -- a unit is called for emergency they prefer to go
just right over there. You know, if they have a bridge, it will be like,
I don't know, one minute to respond, not five minutes, and then go
with the traffic with all that.
So that's the reason I'm here to -- if the responsibility that we
can -- or if we have the money, just make six instead of five or
just -- hopefully you understand my language.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So you're suggesting 18th Avenue
Northeast between Wilson Avenue and 8th Street North?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, no.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's No. 6.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: He's talking about Wilson
straight up.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's not even on here then.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's not on these five. And
what I was going to suggest, that you know, you and I work off-line
with regard to this. I have monthly meetings at the IFAS center.
We'll bring our traffic department out, we'll have a discussion about
the balance of the bridges and where we, in fact, move forward, and
as funding comes available from a lot of different sources, as I think
it was quoted, somebody squeezes a nickel to get a dime. Is that
what -- somebody said that. So I think we'll be able to have these
discussions and work with what your proposition is. I'd be happy to
do that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. That makes sense.
MR. ALPIRE: Can I say one more word? And there's
already -- we have a light signal, traffic light there, so there is no
addition, no extra, you know, study or -- just inside the
neighborhood -- and, well, that's my motion today, and I appreciate
May 25, 2021
Page 74
you listening to me.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Thank you for your
comment.
MS. LANTZ: I just wanted to address, I think Commissioner
McDaniel stated it, but this was one of the bridges that we did look
at. It's one that we are not recommending at this time, but it is to
remain on the list for future consideration. It is the bridge -- if you
can see my -- it's this location right here.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And just as a point of
clarification for my -- for my neighbor out there, the reason that these
bridges were recommended by staff was the paramount increase or
decrease in time for our first responders.
The Wilson Boulevard north bridge for the fixed station
responders, the firehouse and the ambulance, aren't enhanced at all
with that bridge. And an enormous amount of public benefit for you
to get from A to B but that -- there's also not an enormous amount of
public negative -- potentially negative impact in additional traffic for
the folks that are on Wilson. So that was the rationale behind it all.
So I'm not going to belabor the point any further for now, but we'll
talk about it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And just a -- just a very brief
comment. The City of Naples was platted similar, I think, to Golden
Gate Estates in terms of the squareness, the cross, kind of like Naples
Park. And the mobility within the City of Naples to keep people off
major streets is phenomenal, and it works. And it's back, what,
1888, 1899. Town planning. And the possibilities of doing this in
your neighborhood without disrupting folks, it's great. I understand
there's a lot of trepidation, but it really is -- it really makes the -- to
facilitate folks staying off of major arteries and being able to go on
the neighbor streets is critical. So well done, and we'll stay tuned.
May 25, 2021
Page 75
Thank you.
Motion on the floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you.
MS. LANTZ: Thank you very much.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, Commissioners.
Item #11H
RESOLUTION 2021-111: CONDUCTING THE CONSERVATION
COLLIER ANNUAL PUBLIC MEETING TO PROVIDE AN
UPDATE ON THE PROGRAM’S PAST ACTIVITIES, TO
SOLICIT PROPOSALS AND APPLICATIONS, AND TO
APPROVE THE 10TH CYCLE TARGET PROTECTION AREAS
(TPA) MAILING STRATEGY – ADOPTED
11H is a recommendation to conduct Conservation Collier
annual public meeting to provide an update on the program's past
activities, to solicit proposals and applications, and to approve the
Tenth Cycle Target Protection Areas, TPAs, mailing strategy.
Summer Araque, your principal environmental specialist for the
Conservation Collier program, will present. And, Commissioners, I
have listed four speakers so far for this item so far.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. ARAQUE: Good morning, Commissioners. For the
record, my name is Summer Araque, Coordinator for your
May 25, 2021
Page 76
Conservation Collier program.
We had a unanimous vote from the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee for the items you are here to review
and approve today, and I'm prepared to give you a presentation if
you'd like.
The objectives that we have are to update to you on the
program's past, current, and planned activities as outlined in the
annual report that was in your packet. Second, to inform the public
that we are actively accepting applications for the Acquisition Cycle
10 and, most importantly, to obtain approval for the Cycle 10 Target
Protection Area mailing strategy.
And this is a brief overview of the program's milestones.
Conservation Collier was created in 2002 as a result of a referendum.
In 2006, 82 percent of voters approved the referendum confirming
the funding of the program for 10 years. The ad valorem tax that
was collected during that 10-year program is what we operate on
today.
To date, the Conservation Collier Program has acquired 21
different preserves at over 4,300 acres of land that is owned and
managed through this county program. Your Conservation Collier
staff will continue to manage the existing and new preserves and
work to provide public access when practicable.
The following items were outlined in the annual report, which is
available online for the public. During the years of 2003 to 2020,
again, we obtained 21 preserves acquired since program inception,
and 13 are open to the public.
Staff is currently working on installing trails at your most recent
acquisition, the Rattlesnake Hammock Preserve, to provide public
access in Fiscal Year '22. This was one of the preserves that was
acquired in Cycle 9 that you see at the bottom of the screen out of
that 237 acres. That is a 37-acre preserve right in the heart of town
May 25, 2021
Page 77
at Rattlesnake Hammock and Santa Barbara.
These are where the 21 preserves are located throughout the
county. The darker red dots are preserves with public access, and
the lighter red are the protection areas. For an interactive map, we
would like to let the public know they can go to
conservationcollier.com if you would like information about the
location of the preserves.
The three land managers that we have with our program are
working daily on the various management activities, including trail
maintenance, removal of exotic vegetation, and many other
management activities. We provide various public uses at the
preserves. Again, if you would like to go to conservationcollier.com
it provides specifics on which uses are at which preserves. We have
mountain biking at preserves such as Pepper Ranch. Bird watching,
of course, at most all of our preserves, and then we do have historical
preserves, and all of our preserves open to the public have
interpretive signage.
And we would like to thank our volunteers. We had a few less
this year, but we look to grow more next year. And we also would
like to thank our Eagle Scouts who provide kiosks and benches and
other types of amenities for the public.
I will now move on to presenting the Acquisition Cycle 10
timeline and proposed target areas. There are three ways that the
property can come to Conservation Collier for consideration. First is
the program mailing to target protection areas, which you will be
reviewing today. Second is nomination, which we have received a
few, and the third is owner application, and we have also received
owner applications as well.
During the acquisition cycle, the Conservation Collier Land
Acquisition Advisory Committee proposes target acquisition areas.
These areas are reviewed by the Board and approved by resolution
May 25, 2021
Page 78
with the land areas to target. Letters are sent to those areas, to the
property owners, and to solicit willing sellers. Again, as you all
know, this is a willing-seller program.
When applications are received from willing sellers, the
properties are ranked by the advisory committee for the review and
final decision to acquire as made by the Board. This final ranking
list traditionally, in your Cycles 1 through 8, came before the Board
in January of each year, and that is our plan, to bring a list to you in
January of 2022.
So I wanted to go over that process, because many of you were
not here during those Cycles 1 through 8. Moving onto the target
mailing areas that we're looking at in Cycle 10, this is a list of the
areas. Eleven of the 13 areas are adjacent or near to existing
Conservation Collier preserves. The areas selected include 606
parcels over 4,700 acres. All of these areas were reviewed and
discussed at our subcommittee meeting, the full committee, and then
for your review today.
I'm not going to bring up all of the 13 maps that were in your
packet; however, if you would like, I can bring up one if you'd prefer.
This is an overview of all the areas and how they're distributed
throughout the county.
Okay. This was not in your packet. This was -- a stakeholder
contacted me about the Horse Pen Strand area, which we have a
preserve in the Horse Pen Strand called Panther Walk, and you can
see on the maps where -- the darker green is where the preserve is, so
that's the -- at the bottom of your screen is where the Panther Walk
Preserve is. And we were made aware that there are actually several
permits that have been issued just in the last year. So we're working
with Growth Management to make sure that we have the most
up-to-date data. The aerials just, as you all probably know, came out
for 2021 recently, and we'd already done our evaluation to send to
May 25, 2021
Page 79
our advisory committee. So we will make sure that we have the
most up-to-date information.
But I wanted you to be aware, you can see the pink Xs on the
screen. Those are permits that have been issued on lots that we were
going to target that are in the perimeter of the area.
And then one minor revision that was also brought to our
attention is just changing the term "conservation easement" to "area."
There are some areas in the county that may not necessarily have an
easement recorded because they were a project that came in before
the requirement, but they're shown on the site plan as a conservation
area or a preserve. And that's just for clarity, but I wanted to make
you aware of that.
And this is our recommendation, that you accept the annual
report as presented and approve the Tenth Cycle Target Protection
Area mailing strategy. And, again, I do have those maps if you have
any specific questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't think we have any questions at
this time. I think we'll go to public comment.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, I was handed two additional
slips right as this item began, for a total of six. Your first speaker is
Gordon Brumwell. He's been ceded three additional minutes from
Lenore Meurer. I don't know that there was room here in the room
for Lenore Meurer, but we do know she's present. You'll have a
total of six minutes. And he will be followed by Suzette Johnson.
MR. BRUMWELL: Thank you for hearing us. First, I'm
going to -- my name is Gordon Brumwell. Well, I'm going to read a
letter from Tom Robustelli of Lely Country Club who couldn't be
here.
Dear Commissioners, I'm writing in support of Conservation
Collier's proposal to purchase and preserve undeveloped land in
Collier County specifically in support of Areas 4 and 6 in or around
May 25, 2021
Page 80
East Naples.
The East Naples Community Development Plan has a midterm
goal of creating additional public green space to enhance the quality
of life of our residents and improve access to parks, recreation areas,
and green spaces by pedestrians, bicyclists, et cetera.
Areas 4 and 6 fit nicely with this goal. Although I'm
writing -- this is Tom, remember -- as a private citizen, please know
that I serve as president of the Lely Country Club Property Owners
Association representing 709 residents living along St. Andrews and
Augusta Boulevards. I plan to bring this matter to the attention of
our board at our next public meeting and will recommend we vote to
endorse the county's acquisitions, specifically of Areas 4 and 6.
Assuming we vote our support, we will announce our vote and the
potential for this acquisition in our next newsletter.
I've spoken with many residents in our neighborhoods who
desire walking and bicycle trails that connect our community with
recreational and open spaces such as the Gordon River Greenway,
Baker Park, Picayune Strand, Eagle Lakes Park, Serenity Walk, and
so on, a network. The idea would be greenways that buffer
nonmotorized travelers from the busy and hazardous roadways.
Thank you.
Now, I'm no longer Tom. I'm me, Gordon Brumwell.
Can we do these on the visualizer? Numbered 1, 2, and 3. I'm
not Tom. I'm Gordon Brumwell from Crown Pointe. I hope you
sent letters to all 13 parcels -- I mean, I'm sorry -- all 13 areas of
interest and all parcels, but if you feel you must reduce the
mailing -- and we don't know that coming into this -- of course
prioritize any areas with endangered species, but beyond that, please
include Areas 4 and 6.
Green dots -- if we can zoom out a bit. Thank you. The green
dots are public boat launches, beaches, parks, and preserves. Purple
May 25, 2021
Page 81
is the perimeter from which it would take 20 minutes to walk to those
west of Collier Boulevard and north of where it meets 41. That's
where this purple analysis was done.
Around much of central Greater Naples, there are so many green
dots that the perimeters bleed together. People can walk to multiple
amenities within 20 minutes.
Now, these two, that and that (indicating), are only about one
acre each. So in order to see the trend, we invoke the statistical idea
of outliers, and we forget about those.
Next, please. And if we could show the whole space from
north to south, that would be great.
When we zoom out to 40-, 50,000 feet, we note that we have,
essentially, 40,000 acres with no public green space in the central
area of Greater Naples. This is an equity problem.
Up north -- while I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure they're built
out. But this is the south half of this green-space desert, this is
where 4 and 6 come. Areas 4 and 6 work on multiple levels.
Thank you. And if we could go to the last one.
If one or two parcels in 4 and 6 become their own little
preserves, that's great, but if over time adjacent parcels are obtained,
then you have the makings of a greenway or greenways, plural.
Area 4 could connect County Barn to Collier Boulevard, maybe even
stretch down toward Rattlesnake. Some of the parcels in Area 6
could function the same way. You could envision a multiuse path
coming from 41 through the light yellow area, and then popping back
up on Collier Boulevard to 41. Areas 4 and 6 reduce -- they don't
solve, but they reduce an equity problem, and they allow connectivity
options.
Please include them if you feel you must cull this list. Thank
you.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, your next speaker is Suzette
May 25, 2021
Page 82
Johnson. She'll be followed by Margaret Murray.
MS. JOHNSON: Good morning. I would like to stress the
importance of parks. I lived in downtown Naples for over 20 years.
And during that time, there were quite a few parks that we
participated in as a neighborhood to encourage more building and
things that we would want in the parks.
The park that I would like to highlight today is the one -- Naples
Landing. It's downtown 9th Street South between 10th Avenue and
Broad -- excuse me -- and Broad.
Naples Landing at one time -- I don't know how long all of you
have been here, but at one time Naples Landing was just a place
where people would take their boats and put them into Gordon River,
and the cars would park and wait for the owners to come and pick
them up. It was nothing but an area of sand, dirt, and stone.
The neighborhood started petitioning for a change. We wanted
something more than that. It took a while, and it took quite a few of
the adjacent hotels and restaurants to agree with us, and eventually
we did get the park.
Today, the park is the very jewel of downtown Naples. We
have picnics, benches with covered -- that are covered during the
summertime. We have benches sitting and looking out over the
water. It was a big difference for all of us, and the change that it
gave to our community was huge.
But as Naples grew, noise pollution, airlines going overhead,
and concrete buildings being built within the 10-foot border of the lot
lines, it became crowded.
I moved to East Naples, and I was shocked when I got there,
because there aren't any parks within walking distance for me.
There's nothing there that I can go and actually enjoy within a short
walking distance.
I'm asking for you-all to think about the parks, think about East
May 25, 2021
Page 83
Naples and how much we need that area. Right now there's still
quite a few areas that are not built up. Don't allow it to become
another downtown. We don't want and we don't need more
development. We need more parks. Especially during the
pandemic --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MS. JOHNSON: -- a lot of people were using it. Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Margaret Murray. She'll
be followed by Donald Schrotenboer.
MS. MURRAY: Good morning. I'm Margaret Murray.
As a nurse and Blue Zones participant and East Naples resident,
I'm here to advocate on behalf of Conservation Collier's plan to
acquire land for preservation.
As you are probably all well aware, Naples was named the
healthiest city in America for the second year in large part because of
our stellar weather and outdoor activities. The Blue Zone project of
Southwest Florida encourages changes within our community to
provide healthier options to help Collier County residents lead
healthier, happier lives.
Research shows that green spaces are important for public
health. Green spaces encourage exercise, provide spaces for
socializing, support mental health and wellness, and decrease noise
and air pollution.
Acquisitions of land in the proposed Areas 4 and 6 of
Conservation Collier's targeted mailing list would help in the creation
of an East Naples greenway and multiuse outdoor path separate from
county roadways that could link together Rich Green -- Rich King
Path, Serenity Park, Picayune Forest, the Rookery Bay area, and
Donna Fiala Park.
The creation of this greenway would provide residents families'
and children's active living opportunities to raise health levels.
May 25, 2021
Page 84
Health benefits from natural spaces include avoidance and
prevention of chronic disease such as diabetes, heart and respiratory
disease, improve general mood and attitude, reduce stress, and
promote better mental health and functioning.
So I would encourage the Board to authorize Conservation
Collier's plan to begin to -- begin the land acquisition process with
the mailing of the letters.
I'd like to thank the commissioners for the time and opportunity
to speak.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is -- and I hope I'm saying
this right -- Donald Schrotenboer.
MR. SCHROTENBOER: You are saying it correctly, and I'll
forego my time.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Thank you.
Then your final speaker will be Meredith Budd, and I know
Meredith is here. I just -- there she is. Right on queue.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
MS. BUDD: Good morning, Commissioners. Meredith Budd
on behalf of the Florida Wildlife Federation.
Thank you, the Board, for your continued support of the
Conservation Collier Program. The Federation is very excited for
the new acquisition cycle, and we look forward to engaging with staff
and the CCLAC, the advisory committee, to provide expertise as
needed or requested.
The Federation worked with the CCLAC and the subcommittees
to help develop the target protection areas, and we are very, very
pleased with their comprehensive and detailed target protection area.
So we just are here to offer our support for staff's
recommendation, and we're pleased to see the Conservation Collier
Program move forward to secure purchases that will help with our
May 25, 2021
Page 85
water resources, our wildlife, and every single resident here in Collier
County. So thank you so very much.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: And that was our final -- we do have Bill
Poteet from the Conservation Collier Committee here to answer
questions if needed.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't see too many questions.
Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, I do have a question,
William. I'm not going to let you go without --
MR. POTEET: I was hoping I could be quiet.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- getting you on camera.
We've been in the real estate -- how much approximate cost of the
mailings that we do; do you recall?
MR. POTEET: I'm going to have to have staff answer that,
because all the board does is make a recommendation to staff, and
then staff implements it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. Do you remember,
Miss Summer? I couldn't find it in the data in here.
MS. ARAQUE: It's in the resolution, and we worked with
procurement to figure that out. It's approximately $500.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: TPC? Total?
MS. ARAQUE: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Oh, okay. That's fine. I
just -- in our real estate days, William, the mailing success rate has a
very, very low percentage rate; 1, 2 percent on our response basis.
Do you have recollection of our prior venture with this as far as
responses and consummation?
MR. POTEET: It is not the best approach, I admit that. Being
in real estate, just like yourself, we like a better return on our
investment sometimes; however, it's one of the few vehicles we can
May 25, 2021
Page 86
use to have people participate in it, and we do get responses, and we
do get responses from properties that are quality properties that we
have purchased in the past. So, yes, it has worked, but it's not as
effective as I'd like to say.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: In a perfect world, what
might be a more effective approach?
MR. POTEET: That's a whole different discussion for a
different day, and I'd be happy to sit down with you and try to
speculate what we could do to make it more efficient.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No further questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Good. Thank you very
much. I think we're here to accept the annual report and the
suggested Cycle 10 properties; is that correct?
MR. POTEET: Absolutely. It was approved by the entire
CCLAC committee.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll move for approval if it's
appropriate.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll second it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. There's a motion on the
floor and a second. All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
MS. ARAQUE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you for your work. We look
forward to the fall.
May 25, 2021
Page 87
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, we have two
items that I think we can get through fairly quickly before lunch, if
that's your preference.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. Lunch will be abbreviated
today.
Item #11I
AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMENDMENTS TRANSFERRING
AND RECOGNIZING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,950,000
FROM MANDATORY TRASH COLLECTION FUND RESERVES
TO THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FUND TO COVER
ADDITIONAL EXPENSES INCURRED AS A RESULT OF
INCREASED WASTE DISPOSAL DUE TO COVID 19, AND
PLACE THE REMAINING BALANCE IN RESERVES –
APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: 11I is a recommendation to authorize
budget amendments transferring or recognizing funds in the amount
of $2,950,000 from the Mandatory Trash Collection Fund Reserves
to the Solid Waste Disposal Fund to cover additional expenses
incurred as a result of your increased waste disposal during the
pandemic and place some remaining amounts in reserves.
Here's -- Kari Hodgson, your Solid and Hazardous Waste
Management Division director, will present or answer questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I just have a -- go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, I was just going to move for
approval.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And there's a second?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And just a question. You
May 25, 2021
Page 88
are expecting monies -- because it is COVID related, so you are
expecting monies to come into it from the federal government,
correct?
MS. HODGSON: We're going to be working with staff to see
if there is any availability for that, yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, thank you.
All right. There's a motion on the floor and second. If there's
no other discussion, all those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously. Thank you.
Item #11J
AN AGREEMENT TO OPERATE AND LEASE THE COLLIER
COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH FACILITY WITH THE DAVID
LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER, INC., APPROVE A
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR THE LAND THE
FACILITY WILL BE LOCATED ON, AND AUTHORIZE STAFF
TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
TO DESIGN THE FACILITY – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, 11J is a recommendation to
approval an agreement to operate and lease the Collier County
Mental Health Facility with the David Lawrence Center and approve
a purchase and sale agreement for the land the facility will be located
on and authorize staff to move forward with a request for proposal to
May 25, 2021
Page 89
design the facility.
Deputy County Manager Callahan will present.
MR. CALLAHAN: Good morning. One minute left.
Commissioners, for the record, Sean Callahan, Deputy County
Manager.
Just real briefly, a timeline of how we got here. I think it's good
to put on the record, I'll be brief.
In 2016 we started an informal health work group to discuss
behavioral health challenges. Had a number of community
workshops and strategic planning sessions. Ended up forming a
rather large ad hoc committee in December of 2018.
December of 2019 resulted in the adoption of a five -year
strategic plan for mental health services within Collier County. That
group you actually recognized this morning through a proclamation.
They continue to meet informally as the Collier Coalition for Healthy
Minds.
And in February 2021 we came to you with an item that had
several different sites that were evaluated for the siting of the Collier
County Mental Health Facility, which is a $25 million infrastructure
and sales tax project that was approved by referendum a couple years
ago.
So out of that strategic plan, the first priority and the most
important one as they were ranked was to build and operate a centra l
receiving facility and system to serve persons experiencing an acute
mental health or substance abuse crisis. Out of the sites that were
presented to the Board, the Board directed staff to move forward with
negotiating an operating agreement on a five -acre parcel that was
adjacent to the existing David Lawrence Center. Within those site
evaluations, the order-of-magnitude cost estimate was a little over
$30 million.
It's on vacant uncleared land. Utilities are available on Golden
May 25, 2021
Page 90
Gate Parkway. To the right you'll see a master planning concept
with the existing facility that the David Lawrence Center has worked
with folks to construct to show the usage of that five-acre parcel.
Throughout this process, staff had concerns about some legal
issues that have since been cleared up. There was a voluntary
dismissal of any appeal on that five-acre land back in February.
David Lawrence has the quitclaim deed to that land.
County staff, we've worked to negotiate a lease and operating
agreement. The highlights of that, which was included in your
packet, David Lawrence Center will convey that land to the county at
no cost and, in return, accept a fully net lease for an initial term of 30
years. Following the conclusion of the lease, there's a purchase
option for David Lawrence to either purchase that building at either
the fair market value or the investment of the sales tax money from
the county, whichever's greater, or it reverts back to the county.
Throughout the design process, we've agreed to consult with the
David Lawrence Center on the design of that building. It's important
to point out that the county will have the final say on all design. The
David Lawrence Center will serve in an advisory capacity per our
agreement, and all reasonable efforts will be made to commence
construction within 18 months of the signing of this agreement.
Financial considerations, as I mentioned earlier, $25 million is
allocated in the infrastructure surtax. The operations of this facility
will cost 2 to $3 million annually. We want to employee, following
its construction, a comprehensive strategy -- probably during its
construction to leverage federal, state, and local funding. I think it's
important to point out here that local funding doesn't mean just
county General Fund funding. It can be private philanthropic as
well.
Throughout the different legislative sessions, a lot of
nonrecurring general revenue requests are approved, ranging
May 25, 2021
Page 91
anywhere from 100,000 to several million dollars each year for
operations that are similar to the ones that we're trying to construct
here.
And, again, cost avoidance. Metrics that we're going to be
tracking is the county should be employed in any financial
considerations along the way. I'll give the example of Pinellas
County, who's implemented a central receiving facility and system
like that. They did a pilot program where they tracked those costs
on their highest users in the first two years; saved about $1.3 million
in hard costs through their criminal justice system and elsewhere that
they could track.
The county is in the process of implementing a data
collaborative as part of that strategic plan that was approved. We
envision that coming forward in the next year and being in place with
users by the time this facility is constructed so that we can track some
of those same metrics.
Next steps. We have to go the Infrastructure Surtax Oversight
Committee. Their next scheduled meeting is actually not until
September. We will be contacting those members to try to schedule
one in June if this item's approved today. You're looking at
solicitation for design to be completed this summer, the design
process to largely be completed fall/winter of this coming year,
solicitation for construction by next spring, and then the construction
of the facility to be completed about 18 months from then.
And with that, I think Scott Burgess from David Lawrence is
here if you have any questions directly for him, or staff will be
prepared to answer questions as well.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner McDaniel.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I'll go first. When you're
talking about the net lease, is David Lawrence going to rent the
facility back after we construct it?
May 25, 2021
Page 92
MR. CALLAHAN: They're renting it back for $1 a year for 30
years.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Okay. So we're going to
build them. They're going to operate it.
MR. CALLAHAN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And that leads into my
question -- I have two other questions. One actually has to do with
the actual capital expenditure. You had a quick note in one of the
previous slides that said we've got 25 million up and all costs
estimates are in excess of that 35 million.
MR. CALLAHAN: They were at every site that we evaluated,
Commissioner, and through the design process, we're going to
evaluate --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Including this site? The cost
estimates are in excess of the 25 million that we have afforded for a
mental facility?
MR. CALLAHAN: Correct.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Estimated how much more
and where's that money coming from?
MR. CALLAHAN: They ranged anywhere from --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not this -- on this site. This
is the one we're approving today. That's the one I'm asking you --
MR. CALLAHAN: So on this site it was about $30.7 million
was the --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So about five million over
and above that.
MR. CALLAHAN: Correct, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And the proposition -- or the
expectation of that money's going to come from a --
MR. CALLAHAN: Through value engineering through the
design process. We're going to -- ultimately, we have $25 million
May 25, 2021
Page 93
budgeted. That's how much this facility's going to cost and, you
know, we have people that are a lot smarter than me that figure out
how to get it to that cost.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: All right. Just so you
know -- there, again, this wasn't one of the proposed sites that I was
all happy with when the selection process was going. I want to
ensure -- because the other side of the balance of that slide was you
were -- there was a -- there was an estimation of somewhere between
2 and 3 million a year in operating expenses. Is that going to
become the responsibility of Collier County?
MR. CALLAHAN: It's not our intent to make it the
responsibility of Collier County. As I said previously -- I don't want
to sound like we'll build it now and tell you later we're going to find
that money. But throughout the annual legislative process in both
federal and state government, there is funding available for the
operation of central receiving facilities. I think there's also the
ability to raise that money philanthropically to continue.
So just to step back, David Lawrence's annual budget is a
combination of a state contract for substance use and mental health
services that are provided, a contribution and match, which we
exceed every year with our General Fund monies, and then the rest of
that is made up through private remittances and donations. David
Lawrence's budget's about $24 million, I believe, annually.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: And with that in mind -- and
that's just the -- I appreciate that. That was a really good answer. I
would like -- if, in fact, we're going to be involved in these
operations, I want to make sure that we have measurables and
milestones in place that are trackable.
One of the things that I learned early on when I became a
commissioner was the jail population, and we all know it's about
$150 a day to support the residents at the Collier County Jail system.
May 25, 2021
Page 94
And if we can actually have some kind of a matrix along the
way -- because, you know, that's four-and-a-half, five million dollars
a year plus that we put over there into that facility with little to no
rehabilitation. It's just not really physically possible there.
If we can actually help substantiate some additional investments
as we go forward with that population reduction, that's one of the
matrix -- the metrices that I'd like to see in that calculation of the
measurables and milestones.
Certainly, Mr. Burgess and I have talked about the rate of
recidivism and so on and so forth there. So I would like to make
sure that we have this in place as we're having future -- I'm assuming
we're going to have future discussions with regard to the operational
aspects and those expenses.
MR. CALLAHAN: Absolutely. And, Commissioner, as I
mentioned, number one, I think, through a data collaborative that's
been implemented, you're going to be able to track those costs that
you're talking about, the rates of recidivism. Any community that's
done this has shown a large return on investment for monies to build
a central receiving facility like this.
I hope he doesn't mind me sharing this, but Commissioner Solis
and I were just talking about this yesterday, that there needs to be
some neutral evaluation of our system. And when I say "neutral," as
much as Scott and everybody else that served on this committee has
contributed to this, we need somebody that helps us from the outside
evaluate how effective this is, and we're currently looking at ways to
do that as well.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I like that idea, too.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I have to get back to where I had a
question.
Well, just to add that in terms of the funding, you know, I'm
May 25, 2021
Page 95
continuing my efforts with the municipalities, and hopefully here
shortly we'll be able to go to the municipalities, be on an agenda and
present, you know, some assistance, because this is going to be their
facility as well, right, and they're receiving some of the surtax funds
as well, so -- and also -- oh, and also to say that I did have a brief
conversation with Lisa Hurley, our legislative lobbyist in Tallahassee,
and she was very upbeat about this being something that is going to,
you know, get some interest in Tallahassee.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: The governor's wife is very
involved in the mental health efforts statewide, so, yeah. That's all.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: This is a big -- I mean, I'm
assuming that there will be four votes, but this is a huge day, I think,
for Collier County, so -- big day.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I was just going to second
Commissioner Solis' motion if he would make it.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'll make a motion to approve the
agreements as presented.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And I'll second that.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Third.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. A motion on the floor and
second. Any other discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
May 25, 2021
Page 96
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously.
Congratulations.
MR. CALLAHAN: Thank you, Commissioners.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Great job working out the details.
Thank you, Scott, and everybody that worked on this. This is a
milestone.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So it's 12:11, and we'll return at 1:00.
(A luncheon recess was had from 12:11 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, good
afternoon. You have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. We're here
this afternoon. County Manager, would you like to read the agenda
item, please, and then we'll have some housekeeping items to bring
forward.
Item #9A
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING 999.81 ACRES WITHIN THE
RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING OVERLAY
DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA, TO BE
KNOWN AS THE LONGWATER VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP
RECEIVING AREA, WHICH WILL ALLOW DEVELOPMENT
OF A MAXIMUM OF 2,600 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS,
OF WHICH A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE MULTI-FAMILY
DWELLING UNITS, 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY
DETACHED AND 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED
OR VILLA; AN AGGREGATE MINIMUM OF 65,000 SQUARE
FEET AND AN AGGREGATE MAXIMUM OF 80,000 SQUARE
FEET OF NEIGHBORHOOD-SCALE COMMERCIAL AND
May 25, 2021
Page 97
OFFICE IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE AND
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CONTEXT ZONE; A
MINIMUM OF 26,000 SQUARE FEET OF CIVIC,
GOVERNMENTAL AND INSTITUTIONAL USES; SENIOR
HOUSING INCLUDING ADULT LIVING FACILITIES AND
CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES AND
LIMITED TO 300 UNITS IF LOCATED IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL CONTEXT ZONE; AND 18.01
ACRES OF AMENITY CENTER SITE; ALL SUBJECT TO A
MAXIMUM PM PEAK HOUR TRIP CAP; AND APPROVING
THE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA CREDIT
AGREEMENT FOR LONGWATER VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP
RECEIVING AREA AND ESTABLISHING THAT 6697.76
STEWARDSHIP CREDITS ARE BEING UTILIZED BY THE
DESIGNATION OF THE LONGWATER VILLAGE
STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS LOCATED EAST OF DESOTO BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF OIL
WELL ROAD AND WEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF OIL
WELL GRADE ROAD AND OIL WELL ROAD, IN SECTIONS
22, 23, 26, 27, 34 AND 35, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 28
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING RESUMING
W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
Item #9B
A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DESIGNATING 999.74 ACRES
WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA ZONING
OVERLAY DISTRICT AS A STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA,
TO BE KNOWN AS THE BELLMAR VILLAGE STEWARDSHIP
May 25, 2021
Page 98
RECEIVING AREA, WHICH WILL ALLOW DEVELOPMENT
OF A MAXIMUM OF 2,750 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS,
OF WHICH A MINIMUM OF 10% WILL BE MULTI-FAMILY
DWELLING UNITS, 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY
DETACHED AND 10% WILL BE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED
OR VILLA; A MINIMUM OF 68,750 AND MAXIMUM OF 85,000
SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE
VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT ZONE; A MINIMUM OF 27,500
SQUARE FEET OF CIVIC, GOVERNMENTAL AND
INSTITUTIONAL USES IN THE VILLAGE CENTER CONTEXT
ZONE; SENIOR HOUSING INCLUDING ADULT LIVING
FACILITIES AND CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT
COMMUNITIES LIMITED TO 300 UNITS AND NO
COMMERCIAL USES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL
CONTEXT ZONE; AND 14.86 ACRES OF AMENITY CENTER
SITE; ALL SUBJECT TO A MAXIMUM PM PEAK HOUR TRIP
CAP; AND APPROVING THE STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING
AREA CREDIT AGREEMENT FOR BELLMAR VILLAGE
STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA AND ESTABLISHING
THAT 6742 STEWARDSHIP CREDITS ARE BEING UTILIZED
BY THE DESIGNATION OF THE BELLMAR VILLAGE
STEWARDSHIP RECEIVING AREA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 4 MILES SOUTH OF OIL
WELL ROAD, EAST OF DESOTO BOULEVARD BETWEEN
4TH AVENUE NE AND 8TH AVENUE SE IN SECTIONS 2, 3, 10
AND 11, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA – MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT
BCC MEETING RESUMING W/CLOSING COMMENTS –
APPROVED
Item #11A
May 25, 2021
Page 99
A TOWN AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE CREATION OF AN
SRA TOWN BY AMENDING THE LONGWATER VILLAGE
SRA TO ADD 515.1 ACRES TO FORM A TOWN SRA, OF
WHICH TOWN WILL ALSO ADDRESS IMPACTS FROM THE
RIVERGRASS VILLAGE SRA AND THE BELLMAR VILLAGE
SRA. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE GENERALLY
LOCATED EAST OF DESOTO BOULEVARD, NORTH AND
SOUTH OF OIL WELL ROAD, AND EAST OF THE
INTERSECTION OF OIL WELL ROAD, IN SECTIONS 10, 14, 15,
22, 23, 26, 27, 34, AND 35, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 28
EAST, AND SECTIONS 2, 3, 10 AND 11, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA – MOTION
TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING RESUMING
W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
Item #11B
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2008-331 FOR
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA 14 (“CLH SSA 14”) WITHIN
THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA OVERLAY
DISTRICT (RLSA) BY WAY OF A FIRST AMENDMENT TO
THE AMENDED AND RESTATED ESCROW AGREEMENT
FOR CLH SSA 14; AND APPROVING THE FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED ESCROW
AGREEMENT FOR CLH SSA 14. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS
LOCATED IN SECTIONS 13, 14, 23 AND 24, TOWNSHIP 47
SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY – MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING RESUMING
W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
May 25, 2021
Page 100
Item #11C
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2008-329 FOR
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA 15 (“CLH & CDC SSA 15”)
WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA
OVERLAY DISTRICT (RLSA) BY WAY OF A FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED ESCROW
AGREEMENT FOR CLH & CDC SSA 15; AND APPROVING THE
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED
ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR CLH & CDC SSA 15. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN SECTIONS 25, 26 AND
35, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 28 EAST AND SECTIONS 1,
2, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35 AND 36, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,
RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY – MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING RESUMING
W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
Item #11D
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2021-083 FOR
STEWARDSHIP SENDING AREA 17 (“CLH & CDC SSA 17”)
WITHIN THE RURAL LANDS STEWARDSHIP AREA
OVERLAY DISTRICT (RLSA) BY AMENDING AND
RESTATING THE ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR CLH & CDC
SSA 17; AND APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED
ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR CLH & CDC SSA 17. THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN SECTIONS 10, 11, 12, 14,
15, 22, 23, 26, 27, 34 AND 35, TOWNSHIP 47 SOUTH, RANGE 28
EAST AND SECTIONS 1, 2, AND 3, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,
RANGE 28 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY – MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING RESUMING
May 25, 2021
Page 101
W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
Item #11E
AN AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER-SEWER DISTRICT TO PROVIDE POTABLE WATER,
WASTEWATER AND IRRIGATION WATER UTILITY
SERVICES TO THE LONGWATER VILLAGE IN THE BIG
CYPRESS STEWARDSHIP DISTRICT – MOTION TO
CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING RESUMING
W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
Item #11F
AN AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THE COLLIER COUNTY
WATER- SEWER DISTRICT TO PROVIDE POTABLE WATER
AND WASTEWATER UTILITY SERVICES TO THE BELLMAR
VILLAGE IN THE BIG CYPRESS STEWARDSHIP DISTRICT –
MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT BCC MEETING
RESUMING W/CLOSING COMMENTS – APPROVED
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, if I can, let me just repeat
the note that I mentioned this morning that due to the common
questions of law and fact, the following items can be consolidated
into one public hearing. Those are 9A and B, 11A, 11B, 11C, 11D,
11E, and 11F.
And let me read 9A and 9B, if I can. I'll paraphrase. 9A is,
obviously, to be heard no sooner than 1:00. The item requires that
ex parte disclosure be provided by commission members. Should a
hearing be held on the item, all participants are required to be sworn
in.
May 25, 2021
Page 102
It's a recommendation to approve a resolution designating
999.81 acres within the Rural Lands Stewardship Areas Zoning
Overlay District as a Stewardship Receiving Area to be known as the
Longwater Village Stewardship Receiving Area, which will allow
development of a maximum of 2,600 residential dwelling units of a
maximum [sic] of 10 percent will be multiple-family units,
10 percent will be single-family attached [sic], and 10 percent will be
single-family attached or villa; an aggregate minimum of 65,000
square feet and an aggregate minimum [sic] of 80,000 square feet of
neighborhood-scale commercial and office in the village center
context zone and neighborhood commercial zoning context zone; a
minimum of 26,000 square feet of civic, governmental and
institutional uses; senior housing including adult living facilities and
continuing care retirement communities and limited to 300 units if
located in the neighborhood general context zone; and 18.01 acres of
amenity center site all subject to a maximum p.m. peak hour trip cap;
and approving the Stewardship Receiving Area credit for Longwater
Village Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing 6,697.76
stewardship credits are being utilized by the designation of the
Longwater Village Stewardship Receiving Area.
The property is located east of DeSoto Boulevard, south of Oil
Well Road and west of the intersection of Oil Well Grade Road and
Oil Well Road.
On 9B, the item requires ex parte disclosures be provided by
commission members. Should a hearing be held on the item, all
participants are required to be sworn in.
It's a recommendation to approve a resolution of the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners designating 999.74 acres
within a Rural Lands Stewardship Area Zoning Overlay District as a
Stewardship Receiving Area to be known as the Bellmar Village
Stewardship Receiving Area, which will allow development of a
May 25, 2021
Page 103
maximum of 2,750 residential dwelling units of which a minimum of
10 percent will be multiple-family dwelling units, 10 percent will be
single-family detached, and 10 percent will be single-family attached
or villa; a minimum of 68,750 and a maximum of 85,000 square feet
of commercial development in the village center context zone; a
minimum of 27,500 square feet of civic, governmental, and
institutional uses in the village center context zone; senior housing
including adult living facilities and continuing care retirement
communities limited to 300, and no commercial uses in the
neighborhood general context zone; and 14.86 acres of amenity
center site all subject to a maximum p.m. peak hour trip cap; and
approving the Stewardship Receiving Area credit agreement for
Bellmar Village Stewardship Receiving Area and establishing that
6,742 stewardship credits are being utilized by the designation of the
Bellmar Village Stewardship Receiving Area.
The subject property is located approximately four miles south
of Oil Well Road, east of DeSoto Boulevard between Fourth Avenue
Northeast and Eighth Avenue Southeast.
Commissioners, just as a reminder, on 9A, the companion items
to 9A are 11A, 11B, 11C, 11D, and 11E, and the companion items for
9B are 11A and 11F.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much, and they will
be -- we will be -- they will be heard concurrently. One thing
that -- some housekeeping items we are going to address. After 1:30
today we are not going to take any more speakers. So if you know
folks that want to speak, they need to call in, or they need to come
and fill out a slip. After 1:30, it is our customary -- it's customary
and we are enforcing it today, usually at the start of an agenda item
no one can sign up. Today we're going to allow that to go to 1:30.
The other issue is the procedure. This is a very important
hearing. We're going to do it hopefully in a very orderly way. The
May 25, 2021
Page 104
petitioner will have two hours to present, and he will go first; the
applicant will go first. The testimony will be on the first eight items.
And at that point, he can have any expert witness. The expert
witness can speak as to multiple items at once.
The zoning director or designee may question the applicant at
this point after two hours or when they're done, and that time for that
questioning is 20 minutes.
After that, the staff will make their presentation. Again, the
same procedure. They will have two hours, and the witnesses can
also speak during that -- their expert witnesses can speak to any item
or multiple items at the same time. Then the applicant may question,
and their time frame is 20 minutes for questioning.
We have organizations that are here that have more than five
members, and they will be allotted 30 minutes each. The speakers
will have to identify themselves as being part of that organization.
And they will -- they will be able -- the questions -- certainly
questions at the time of their speaking would be 10 minutes. So the
zoning director or designee may question the representatives of these
organizations, and I would assume that there would be someone
appointed to answer those questions. Not everyone would answer
the question.
So we would have -- zoning director would have 10 minutes,
and the applicant would have 10 minutes.
We as a board would be able to answer those question -- ask
questions at any time, and we will.
And then after that, the public can speak. Each public speaker
will have three minutes. That is three minutes on all of the eight
additional and the two items. It's not three minutes per village. So
please be aware. And you can speak within those three minutes, and
you can reference what you talk -- you want to speak on. And that's
one thing that's important that we've been asked by the applicant.
May 25, 2021
Page 105
When you are speaking on a certain village, please identify it. That
is critical to the testimony here. We need to make it very clear what
you're referencing.
And I would think in this -- in this particular hearing, County
Manager, I would think it would be Bellmar, Longwater, or the town
plan. I believe those are the three. Now, you may want to check it
with your staff, but I think those are the three areas that you need to
identify. I want to talk about the town plan, and then you'd go into
it, and in the same three minutes you could talk about Bellwater [sic]
or Longwater, but definitely emphasize it, and I think that's about it
for the housekeeping.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, quick question. You said two
organizations have 30-minute blocks.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, I think there's probably more,
and I think they need to be identified. But we do have the League of
Women Voters. We have the Conservancy. Florida Wildlife are
here. They are certainly an organization over five, so they would
have 30 minutes. I'm not sure Audubon is represented here. Oh,
he's coming in by Zoom. So he would have 30 minutes.
MR. MILLER: Okay. So it's not a matter of five members
here. It's a matter of membership, okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Correct. Membership, according to
what I'm reading.
MR. MILLER: I just want to be able to parse through speakers
slips. Like, I've got several speakers slips from the League of
Women Voters. I'm not going to count them as individuals because
they'll have their 30 minutes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's correct. That's correct.
MR. MILLER: All right. Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And we are going to be as strict as
possible on the time. This is 1:00. You can do your addition. At
May 25, 2021
Page 106
5:00 we're going to get to the public coming in. So we need to be
very clear.
We have a court reporter break at 2:30, and that will be a
15-minute break, and then we'll come back after that. We are g oing
to break for dinner this evening. Dinner will be at 5:00, and then
we'll come back, if that's okay with my board. Okay. And I think
we'll try to take, depending on -- it's going to be a half-hour dinner or
an hour of dinner.
And I think at this point, that's all I have unless there's any other
comments and, Commissioner Saunders, I think you want to say
something.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I do have one, and I'm going
to ask the County Attorney and the commissioners to kind of bear
with me on this, because this is going to sound very, very strange.
When it became obvious that Commissioner LoCastro would not
be able to participate because of the family emergency in this
meeting either in person or virtually, a question came up as to
whether or not -- and this is from the petitioner -- whether or not all
of these petitions should be continued until there's a full board
because, if you recall, Commissioner Taylor and I both voted no on
the first village.
And, of course, I don't tell anybody how I'm going to vote, and I
know no one else does as well. But the petitioner was faced with
you've got four commissioners, two no votes on the first village,
should this be -- should this be continued until there's a full board.
I suggested the following to Mr. Yovanovich, and this is where I
need the concurrence from the County Attorney and from
Mr. Yovanovich. I don't know how I'm going to vote on any of
these things; I won't know until the end of the hearing.
What I suggested is because we have so many hearings coming
up over the next two meetings that to delay all of these hearings
May 25, 2021
Page 107
would really put us in a real bind, and I wanted to see if we could get
through the public hearing on all these petitions today. But I
suggested to Mr. Yovanovich, at the end of all of that, if I don't feel
comfortable voting in the affirmative for these things, I would ask the
Board to continue this until the next meeting. All of the public
hearings and everything would be completed. We would ask
Commissioner LoCastro to review the record so he would be fully up
to speed and be able to participate in the next meeting if it's
continued, but no more public testimony, no more anything other
than just questions from the Board and then a vote. So that was my
effort to get us through this public hearing process, because there are
a lot of people that were traveling for this and planning on having this
today.
Mr. Yovanovich, I think you indicated that you're okay with
Commissioner LoCastro participating if he's able to go through the
record, if it comes to that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: If it -- yes. For the record, Rich
Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner on all of these petitions.
If it comes to the need to continue this till the next board
meeting for further discussion by the Board and participation by
Mr. LoCastro, we're comfortable with him reviewing the record and
then participating in the deliberations at that time.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Mr. Klatzkow, I assume you
have no issue with that as long as he doesn't.
MR. KLATZKOW: I have no issue, but I'd just make sure that
the Conservancy also has no issue on this. We've been in litigation,
and I expect additional litigation.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well -- okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: My thought is, they're not a party.
MR. KLATZKOW: I understand that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: They can raise whatever issues they
May 25, 2021
Page 108
were going to raise if they're going to raise some.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I would like Ms. Johnson to come to
the podium, please.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And if the answer is no, they
do not agree to that --
MR. KLATZKOW: We can still proceed.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: No. We're not going to
proceed, because I made the commitment that if I'm not able to vote
yes for this at the end of the hearing when I hear everything, that I
would ask for it to be continued. If that's the case, then I'm going to
ask Mr. Yovanovich to continue everything today, so -- because that's
the only thing that would be fair to the petitioners based on what I
represented to them.
MR. JOHNSON: For the record, Nicole Johnson here on
behalf of the Conservancy.
It's kind of an out-of-left-field question, I guess, for us. We
also were wondering, if you had a split vote, what would happen and
why the petitioner would want to go forward today, but they chose to.
I'm not an attorney, so I can't say legally whether or not this, from our
perspective, is a good way to go or not.
I would be concerned that the public hearing is closed and yet
the petitioner, the Conservancy, the public could be then lobb ying
you for, what, two, three weeks before you come back and take your
vote. I'm not quite sure how that -- how that works. So I don't
know what to say; I really don't.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, Mr. Klatzkow, you
kind of put us into an awkward position here, because I don't want to
proceed --
MR. KLATZKOW: At the end of the day, the real party in
interest is the petitioner. If the petitioner's fine taking the chance,
I'm okay with it.
May 25, 2021
Page 109
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And then let me make one
comment to Ms. Johnson's comments. We frequently hear public
comment in hearings and delay final votes for -- till the next meeting.
That happens quite frequently. So to indicate that perhaps we would
change our positions based on lobbying just really isn't appropriate.
Everybody understands that we base our decisions on what we
hear at the meeting.
So, again, that's kind of what I would like to do, if the Board is
okay with that and, if not, then Mr. Yovanovich can decide whether
he wants to continue everything.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I just may add one thing.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That if the concern is, you know,
post-hearing lobbying, we just disclose if that happened, like we did
at the beginning.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm perfectly fine with committing that
we'll have no discussions with anybody on the Board between now
and the final vote, if the Conservancy will do the same. I don't know
why we couldn't agree to all just let the record be the record and
leave you all alone for the two weeks that it may be before we come
back.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Quite frankly, the four of us
can simply say we're not going to talk to anybody between now and
the final vote, and that should cover it.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Nobody?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, nobody in terms of
these petitions. But that's kind of the situation. I just didn't want to
delay the public hearing because we have such a busy schedule for
the next -- literally, for the next three meetings we have a lot of
land-use issues coming up.
So will that work?
May 25, 2021
Page 110
MR. YOVANOVICH: We're fine with moving forward.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: County Attorney?
MR. KLATZKOW: They're the ones at risk, so I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. I'm fine with moving
forward.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: My light's lit up, Madam
Chair.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Pardon me?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I've been lit up there, I think.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have a question on the
30-minute per group. I don't recall us doing that. And how do we
delineate who is qualified for that other than a member of five? I
don't recall this as a procedural thing where we afforded -- I know we
have in the past afforded certain organizations additional time. I
know Commissioner Saunders did it last year, I think, for the
Conservancy, as a matter of fact. I'm just wondering about this
30-minute-per-group discussion. Where did that come from?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: On May 21st, we received an
inner-office memorandum from the County Attorney, and it's
outlined there. And so I've talked to -- I've certainly talked to the
League and the Conservancy that their speakers will identify
themselves as part of that organization. The Conservancy has two
expert witnesses, and then the other one, the League will -- they are
coordinating.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So when we go to the public
hearing, then, people from those organizations will not be allowed to
then participate in the three-minute time section or -- this is the -- this
is the question, and I --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: -- you know --
May 25, 2021
Page 111
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ideally they would have coordinated
in advance, and the League will be represented by the speakers. If
they identify themselves as part of the League of Women Voters or
an organization, then I think it will be my discretion whether they can
speak or not, and I'm inclined at this point, because it is almost 1:30,
to say no.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's certainly your discretion.
I'm just -- that was a -- that was new for me, and I wanted an
explanation, so thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You're welcome.
Okay. I think we're ready to begin, and I think all those giving
testimony need to rise and raise their right hand. And how do we
handle the folks at home?
MR. MILLER: When they register online, there is a form that
they swear to attest that the information they give -- it's kind of like
a --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good.
MR. MILLER: It's kind of like an online version of this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Yovanovich.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We've got to do our ex parte.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, yeah. I guess we need to do ex
parte here. I'm sorry. Forgive me.
Commissioner McDaniel?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yes. I fill all the boxes.
See the file: Meetings, correspondence, e-mails, and calls on all
agenda items listed.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Same here.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I fill all the boxes, and I actually
May 25, 2021
Page 112
had a site tour with the developer and the developer's attorney in
2015.
Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Same here as well; calls and
e-mails, e-mails with the League of Women Voters, the Conservancy,
meetings with petitioner, and I, as well, did a site tour a couple years
ago, yeah.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we're finished that part, sir.
And the floor is yours.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I assume the first 20 minutes isn't
counting against my presentation time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It depends on what you say.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. Good afternoon. For the
record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioners -- or the
petitioner.
The way we're going to do our presentation, so we have a good,
clean record, is to present Longwater all the way through, Bellmar all
the way through, then talk about the town agreement, and then we'll
be done. We will talk about the utility agreements as part of our
presentations on the respective villages.
And on the SSAs I'm just going to do some brief comments right
now, but if you have questions regarding the changes to the SSA 14,
15, and 17 escrow agreements, feel free to ask them. But,
essentially, what we're proposing to do with the SSA escrow
agreements is SSA 14, which was an amendment to SSA 14, was
reviewed and approved by the Board of County Commissioners a few
meetings back. For whatever reasons, the Department of Agriculture
has not signed off on the amended easement agreement. I'm happy
to share what I'm hearing about why, but I don't plan on doing that
right now. And, likewise, SSA 17, which was new, was approved by
the Board of County Commissioners. It, likewise, is being held up
May 25, 2021
Page 113
by the Department of Agriculture for signing off on the standard form
easement agreement.
So, accordingly, they're in limbo, so we're going to use SSA 15
for the credits for both Longwater and Bellmar Villages. Initially we
had planned on using SSAs 14 and 17 for Longwater. So that's all
I'm going to say about those three escrow agreements, but if you have
more questions later, feel free to ask those questions.
The presentation that we'll be doing will -- same order of
presentation for both villages. I'll introduce the team of the project.
Mr. Mulhere will go through how the SRA complies with both the
Growth Management Plan and the Land Development Code from a
professional planning perspective. He is, as you all know, a fellow
with the AICP, so he is a certified planner which, as you know, the
code requires that a certified planner, together with licensed engineer
or licensed architect or a licensed environmental consultant, prepare
all of the documents. So he has the requisite credentials to testify as
to the planning aspects of this petition.
Heather Samborski with Passarella will go through the
environmental suitability criteria that is part of the required
application, Norm Trebilcock will address the transportation, and
Lucy Gallo will address the fiscal neutrality aspects of each
individual petition.
Patrick Utter, senior vice president for real estate with Collier
Enterprises Management, is here on behalf of the petitioner and can
assist in answering any questions; Christian Spilker is the president;
and Valerie Pike is the director of real estate. They are part of our
team and available to answer questions.
Also with me today is Dominic Amico, who is the professional
engineer, who can answer questions that you may have regarding
engineering aspects. He is not part of the initial presentation, but he
is here if you have questions of him, and he participated in preparing
May 25, 2021
Page 114
the master plan and the SRA documents that are before you today for
both Longwater Village and Bellmar.
As you can see on your screen, Longwater Village is in the
purple color. Rivergrass is -- I think that's orange -- is the orange
color. You've already heard that petition, and that petition recently
went to trial, and the Court ruled that Rivergrass met the
Comprehensive Plan requirements. And then down in the reddish
color is Bellmar that we'll discuss separately and in greater detail.
As you know, the RLSA program is a voluntary program. The
underlying base zoning is one unit per five acres, and we are
proposing to have a compact form of development, and Mr. Mulhere
will get into greater detail as to how we meet all of the criteria for an
innovative impact village pursuant to the RLSA program.
We're proposing a village on 999.81 acres, and that's what you're
here to consider today, designating the Longwater Village. As you
all know, it is different than rezoning property. The zoning is
already in place. When we meet the criteria that's in the Growth
Management Plan as well as the Land Development Code, you
designate this as a village, so it is different than a land-use petition
when you're considering a PUD or a straight rezone.
As your County Manager introduced, we are proposing 2,600
homes, 2.6 units per gross acre. A minimum of 10 percent of those
units will be your typical multifamily which is three or more units in
a building with a minimum of 40 of those multifamily units being
located within the village center, which is a context zone that is
identified right here on our SRA master plan.
Within that village center, we will have the minimum 65,000
square feet of office and retail use and a maximum of 80,000 square
feet. We will also have the 26,000 square feet of civic.
We also have a smaller area up on Oil Well Road that will be a
smaller area where neighborhood level retail and office uses will be
May 25, 2021
Page 115
provided to those living within Longwater Village.
In addition to the multifamily homes that we're required to do,
we also have a commitment to do at least 10 percent single-family
attached, which is basically a villa product, and 10 percent of those
units as single-family detached, which is, you know, your customary
single-family home.
Bob will get into greater detail regarding the office and
commercial uses, but we are required to have at least eight different
uses within the village center to assure we provide for what the
residents in Longwater Village may desire, which would include
office, restaurants, a hardware store, a pharmacy, government offices,
and the like are all eligible to be in the village center.
When we went to the Planning Commission, staff had required
us to make several revisions to the SRA document to assure
compliance with the Growth Management Plan and Land
Development Code.
As your staff report indicates, every one of those conditions was
included in the SRA document and is before you today. I'll highlight
a few of those. One was that we had done a traffic an alysis for
potential impacts to intersections, and that traffic
analysis -- Mr. Trebilcock will get into greater detail -- resulted in a
payment of $622,000 to address our impacts to intersections.
We're required to improve 18th Avenue Northeast, which is a
two-lane road that will provide access to a portion of Longwater
Village. We're to bring it up to the required standards consistent
with the FDOT green book.
We are committing to providing two school sites. Staff wanted
to make it clear that those school sites have to be individually
evaluated for their transportation impacts if and when the school
system actually moves forward with schools on those properties.
We will do all the required species management plans when we
May 25, 2021
Page 116
do our site plans and plats. You have as part of your agenda an
agreement between the property owner, the special district, and
Collier County Water/Sewer District a utility agreement that has to be
approved concurrently with this document. And we have also
agreed, with regard to affordability, to either 10 percent of the units
being sold at purchase prices near moderate or gap affordability
ranges or, as an alternative, we will provide land to the county to
fulfill those obligations. That really came from your proposed
RLSA amendments that you'll be considering later on. But we've
agreed to incorporate that type of a commitment into our village,
although it doesn't exist today under the Growth Management Plan or
LDC.
Bob will take you through in greater detail the Growth
Management Plan requirements for villages. As you know, villages
have to be between 100 acres and 1,000 acres. Density has to be
between one and four dwelling units per acre. And in this green
area, it highlights what the objective criteria are for review and
approval of villages in your Growth Management Plan, and Bob will
take you through in greater detail.
Your Land Development Code also has some list of uses that are
required to be included in the SRA village. Bob, again, will take
you through in detail how our SRA development document meets all
of the required LDC criteria.
One of the things I wanted to talk about, when you look at this
slide, the pink area is the open area. The open area is where
development is supposed to occur under the RLSA program. And
where we are today is you have three approved SRAs: You have the
Town of Ave Maria, you have Rivergrass Village, and you have
Hyde Park Village all located within this pink open area. Before you
today are Longwater and Bellmar Villages, both of which are within
the pink area and meet the open criteria for approval.
May 25, 2021
Page 117
To date you have the approval of SSAs totaling almost
50,500 acres with total development, assuming we get approved
today, roughly 8,700 acres. I can't do that in my head, but it's
probably pretty close to a 6-1 ratio of SSA acres to SRA acres, and
that's -- maybe it's a little over 5-1.
That was the intent of the original program back in 2002, put the
more environmentally sensitive areas in SSAs, take the credits, move
them over to the SRAs.
The program before you today we are 100 percent consistent
with. There was a tremendous amount of testimony at the Planning
Commission about a program that a certain group -- and I'm sure
you'll hear from them today -- would like to see be the program, but
that's not the program to review us under today. So what we're
going to show you is how the RLSA program that exists today is
consistent with what we're requesting.
The program has been, I think, a very good program, and as Bob
will point out, there's been a tremendous amount of property placed
into SSAs at no cost to the residents of Collier County versus the
Conservation Collier program that has been at the cost of taxpayers
of Collier County.
And with that we're going to ask you to -- we're going to go
through our presentation. Hopefully we'll answer all your questions
through our presentation but, of course, you can always interrupt us
at any time.
But with that, I'll turn it over to Bob to take you through the
planning aspects, and then we'll answer any questions you have.
MR. MULHERE: Good afternoon. For the record, Bob
Mulhere with Hole Montes here on behalf of the applicant.
Rich mentioned a few things that are also in my presentation.
I'll try not to be repetitive. I know it's going to be a busy afternoon.
So how the program works, it is an overlay, you have the
May 25, 2021
Page 118
baseline existing agricultural uses, and then you have a voluntary
program that landowners can take advantage of. The base density is
one per five acres. That remains in place until a different approval is
approved, such as an SSA or an SRA.
This system has been based on scientific data and, again, it uses
incentives to entice developers to take advantage of the program, or
landowners to take advantage of the program, not regulations.
Environmental lands are preserved and maintained at zero cost to
taxpayers. And stewardship credits are the currency. That's how
you entitle the land.
There's a very complicated multilayered GIS database. Heather
will -- Heather Samborski will talk a little bit about that, but that is
how you calculate the number of credits that you can generate from a
piece of land in a sending SSA.
The SRAs, by definition in your Comprehensive Plan, are
compact forms of development. That's already been established.
Your Comprehensive Plan says SRAs are compact forms of
development.
So any increase in the SRA density and intensity requires these
credits to be used. Presently they're redeemed at eight credits per
acre. That's what you need, and that math is pretty easy.
Longwater requires 6,697.76 TDR credits, and we are
consuming those credits from SSA 15. On your visualizer in the
map, you can see the outline or highlighted area where Longwater is
located, and you can see that the pink area, which is open and which
allows development, that we have followed that boundary very
closely in permitting -- or requesting approval of this SRA.
The proposed Longwater Village is just under 1,000 acres;
998.81. There are four acres within the village that do score greater
than 1.2 on the Natural Resource Index. Those will be preserved, as
is required, in their natural state.
May 25, 2021
Page 119
There are zero acres of area of critical state concern overlay,
zero acres of FSAs or HSAs within the proposed villa ge, and zero
acres of WRAs, which are Water Retention Areas. I apologize. We
use acronyms. I should try to spell them out.
The land to the north, east, and south is presently zoned ag with
a mobile home overlay, has the RLSA overlay, and much of it is in
proposed SRA 17.
Land to the west abuts the future Big Cypress Parkway, right
here, and also proposed SSA 17. All of the lands that are within the
village have been in active agricultural production for many years, as
you can see from the aerial.
So just some general information about a village, the village
form of SRA. There are two context zones required. That's
neighborhood general and the village center, which we have. Within
the neighborhood general, you are permitted to have neighborhood
commercial uses and, as Rich pointed out, there is a small three-acre
parcel right up here along Immokalee Road that will be slated for
neighborhood commercial as well as the village center right here.
The villages have to be between one unit and four units per acre.
This is requesting a density of 2.6 units per acre, 2,600 total units.
We've agreed that a minimum of 260 units will be multifamily which,
pursuant to your definition in the LDC, is three or more units
attached.
A minimum of 40 units will be located within the village center
context zone, because that is required to be mixed use. We include a
variety of housing types, styles, and lot sizes, including single-family
detached, of which there will be a minimum of 260; single-family
attached, of which there will be a minimum of 260; and, as I said,
multifamily, of which there will be a minimum of 260, complying
with the requirements in the Comp Plan and the LDC.
The village center will be the focal point of the community's
May 25, 2021
Page 120
goods and services and, using formulas that are required, will provide
a minimum of 65,000 and a maximum of 80,000. The minimum is
required. The maximum is a range that allows us to provide more if
the market is appropriate for that.
And we're required to provide 26,000 square feet of civic,
governmental, and institutional uses. Again, there's that small
three-acre parcel, which will provide additional neighborhood goods
and services on Oil Well Road.
As Rich said, the utilities will be provided by -- through an
agreement with Collier County Water and Sewer District, which is a
companion item here.
One unique aspect of the villages is that they require 35 percent
in open space compared to 25 percent typically required in urban
developments. So that in and of itself increases the compact nature
of a village. We are providing -- that would mean 349.93 acres must
be provided in open space. We're providing 512.52 acres, or
51.2 percent of the village.
You're required -- we are required under the village standards to
provide a minimum of 1 percent in the form of parks, and we are
providing that minimum at least, and those are located on the master
plan.
Let's see. There is a -- and we've used this before, and it is an
innovative system of providing a deterrent for wildlife, which is a
lake system which runs -- excuse me -- along the perimeter of the
SRA, which is an innovative element to dissuade wildlife from
entering into the SRA.
We have a trip cap, 2,078 weekday p.m. peak hour trips. Our
fiscal neutrality analysis has been deemed to be neutral using the
methodology verified by county staff as well as a third-party
reviewer.
And there is this trigger. The staff wished to have this inserted
May 25, 2021
Page 121
into the document so that there would be some commercial developed
to accommodate the residential development at a certain point, and so
30,000 square feet of neighborhood retail/office and a minimum of
20 multifamily units will be developed in the village center prior to
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the 1,820th dwellin g unit,
and that allows for trip capture.
So this -- in addition to the entire RLSA, and I should say
award-winning RLSA program, which is innovative in and of itself,
there are some elements that are specific to Longwater that are also
very innovative as I mentioned. If you think about the compact
development requirement, you would have to consume 13,000 acres
under the baseline standards for the same size development -- excuse
me -- for the same density of development.
We are providing those goods and services in the two
commercial areas, which will have a trip capture and reduce vehicle
travels miled -- vehicle miles traveled as well for the surrounding
community.
We have a spine road, which is unloaded. That is, there are no
residential dwelling units accessing that spine road directly. It has
bike lanes on both sides and a 10-foot-wide multiuse path on one
side, which will function as a linear park providing access to various
attractions, amenity centers, parks, and so on and so forth.
The highest intensity in the -- will be within the village context
zone, and reduced density will be provided along the edge of the
village consistent with the Comp Plan and the LDC.
I mentioned that 40 multifamily units at a minimum would be
built in the village center, but in addition, all multifamily will be
required to be developed within a mile of the village center -- excuse
me -- a half mile, sorry, of the village center or the neighborhood
commercial, which is up along Oil Well Road.
I mentioned the next two.
May 25, 2021
Page 122
We are also providing education for residents regarding living
with wildlife and the potential use of prescribed burns for
conservation and management purposes in close proximity to the
village. This will significantly reduce water -- potable water use as
compared to the agricultural utilization.
Central water and sewer in Rural Eastern Collier County is
being provided, and as we said, this is a mixed-use project providing
commercial, civic, and a diversity of housing.
So this has been a topic of conversation previously. This slide
demonstrates connectivity, bikeability, and walkability. You have
the yellow circles which identify pedestrian connections and the red
circles, which identify roadway connections. And we've designed
this village as it's required in your Comp Plan, to encourage
pedestrian and bicycle circulation through an interconnected system
of streets, bike paths along the spine road, and a network of sidewalks
on all roads.
So all of the village's connected with sidewalks and bike lanes
or -- and to connect to these various attractions, whether they be
amenity centers or a village center or the commercial up on Oil Well
Road.
Even the cul-de-sacs that have been provided have pedestrian
connections to that spine road, making it -- facilitating access. All
amenity centers are accessed from the spine road as well.
So this -- and continuing the theme of connectivity, bikeability,
walkability, these concentric circles that are shown on this exhibit,
these red circles, show that all residents are -- all dwelling units are
located within a half mile to a park, an amenity center, or to the
commercial centers. And so this drives connectivity, and the
connectivity drives walkability and bikeability.
Just looking at the SSA, SSA 15, for example, this exhibit shows
you various -- the various SRAs, 14, 15, 17, 18. It shows you
May 25, 2021
Page 123
Longwater and Bellmar located there. And the condition of SSA 15
in terms of the credits that are being consumed by Rivergrass,
Longwater, and Bellmar which is 19,000 in total; 19,638 credits.
Longwater will use 6,698. So there is sufficient credits within 15 to
accommodate this.
The RLSA program and in particular today, at this moment,
discussing Longwater Village are good for the environment. SSA 15
will preserve 5,253 acres at no cost to taxpayers. By comparison,
Conservation Collier has spent over 104 million to preserve
4,400 acres.
If you look at the exhibit, it shows Camp Keais Strand, which is
a critical flowway in Eastern Collier. And you can see that SSAs a re
located such that they enhance and expand the function of Camp
Keais Strand, and it's incentivized within the program to do that.
And it also creates and preserves a wildlife corridor, which is a
lot more effective than having five-, 10-, 15-, 20-acre protection areas
that are dislocated, disjointed from one another.
In addition, approximately $870,000 of funding will be
generated to protect panthers and enhance wildlife habitat through the
Florida Panther Protection Program known as the Marinelli Fund.
And, again, I just mentioned preservation of these historic flowways;
in this case, the Camp Keais Strand.
So in summary, this is a checklist that shows the RLSA village
requirements from Attachment C, which is adopted in your
Comprehensive Plan, and the Longwater Village SRA. We're
consistent with the size requirement. We're consistent with the
density requirement. We provide a diversity of single and
multifamily housing types, styles, and lot sizes.
We are subject to your floor area ratio for retail and office of .5,
and .6 for civic, governmental, and institutional uses. We are
providing the minimum amount of both neighborhood commercial
May 25, 2021
Page 124
and civic, governmental, and institutional uses.
As I mentioned, there's an agreement with Collier County to
provide water and sewer. We're meeting or exceeding the parks and
public green space requirement within neighborhoods, we exceed the
open-space requirement, and we have an interconnected system of
collector and local roads with connections and an interconnected
sidewalk and pathway system. We haven't asked for any deviations
from these. We're consistent with all of those.
Oh, this just shows the 1.86-mile right-of-way commitment for
future Big Cypress Parkway. It's shown in purple, right here, which
is attached to the Longwater SRA.
There was a -- there is connectivity between Rivergrass and
Longwater, which is also shown right here on this exhibit, and so
residents of Longwater and Rivergrass are interconnected.
At this point, I would like to ask Heather Samborski to come up.
I need to pull up her PowerPoint. It will just take a minute.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Bob, would you go back to that other
slide and cover that for me real quickly?
MR. MULHERE: Sure. Just give me a minute, Heather. I've
got to go back. I apologize. I thought we had covered this.
So this is the agreement between Collier County and the
applicant to provide potable water, sewer, and irrigation services.
The Big Cypress Stewardship District will construct water and
wastewater and irrigation lines between Longwater and Rivergrass.
The district agrees to reimburse landowners for the cost of upsizing
lines within Rivergrass to serve Longwater. The landowner will
require developers to install the IQ irrigation systems in residential
units in the village center. The landowner will prepay water and
sewer impact fees for 350 ERCs, equivalent residential connections.
The landowner will convey a five-acre utility site for impact fee
credits if requested by the Collier County Water and Sewer District.
May 25, 2021
Page 125
That utility site replaces the former Rivergrass utility site, because
there was one up there as well.
And the landowner shall build all water, sewer, and irrigation
facilities within Longwater at the owner's expense and then turn them
over to the Collier County Water and Sewer District.
So those are the salient points of the interlocal agreement. And
I apologize, I should have went over those.
MS. SAMBORSKI: Good afternoon. For the re cord, Heather
Samborski, Senior Ecologist with Passarella & Associates. And for
my presentation I'm going to give a brief overview of the Natural
Resource Index Assessment that was prepared in support of the
Longwater SRA application.
So within the Rural Lands Stewardship Area, as you already
heard, there are areas that are designated as FSA, which are Flowway
Stewardship Areas. Those areas are shown on the darker blue color
in the map here. These are generally wetland areas that are located
either within Camp Keais Strand or the Okaloacoochee Slough.
There are also Habitat Stewardship Areas, or HSAs. Those are the
areas shown on the darker green color, and those are areas that have
features that have been identified to support listed species.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Could you please point to that.
MS. SAMBORSKI: The Habitat Stewardship Areas?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, please. Yeah.
MS. SAMBORSKI: Those are the areas shown here in green
color that kind of come around and also down here as well.
There are also Water Retention Areas. Those are light blue
areas. Those are -- you can see those here as well as over here as
well. Those WRA areas are areas that have been permitted by the
Water Management District to serve agricultural uses, and then
outside of those areas are the areas that are designated as open, and
you heard Bob speak on those. And in this map those are the beige
May 25, 2021
Page 126
areas. And those are the locations where development is intended to
occur in the form of Stewardship Receiving Areas, or SRAs. And
the Stewardship Sending Area, or SSAs, are intended to be focused
around the FSA, HSA, and WRA areas.
Now, applications for both SRAs and SSAs require a Natural
Resource Index Assessment or NRI Assessment. And these NRI
Assessments include documentation that refines the NRI values that
were assigned during the original Collier County Rural Lands
Stewardship Area assessment study when the program was adopted.
The assessment is a Geographic Information System, or GIS,
analysis where the resource values are calculated on an acre-by-acre
basis in the study area using what is known as a Raster model, and
this Raster model puts one-acre grid cells across the area that is being
reviewed and scored -- each one-acre cell is scored based on the
values at the center of those one-acre cells based on each of the six
Natural Resource Index factors.
And for lands greater than one acre with an NRI score greater
than 1.2, they shall be retained in a natural state within SRAs. And
this methodology has already been used to establish the Stewardship
Receiving Area for Ave Maria as well as 17 Stewardship Sending
Areas.
And this slide here shows the stewardship credit worksheet.
This gives a complete overview of how credits are generated for
SSAs, but within this green box, it shows the Natural Resource Index
factor component and provides kind of like a rubric, if you will, for
each of these Natural Resource Index factors and how they are
scored.
So the first one is the stewardship overlay designation. The
data source that is used for this layer of the model is the Collier
County Stewardship Area's Overlay. That is the FSA, HSA, WRA
areas. For areas that include FSAs, a score of .7 is generated; HSAs
May 25, 2021
Page 127
and WRAs receive a score .6; areas of critical state concern receive a
score of .4; and areas with none of the above receive a score of 0.
Within Longwater, there are no areas that have FSA, HSA,
WRA, or areas of critical state concern. So for this layer of the
model, the entire site received a score of 0.
For the proximity indexes, this looks at each of those one-acre
cells and determines if they are enclosed by an FSA, HSA, or WRA,
or within 300 feet of an FSA, HSA, or public or private preserve
land.
The majority of the site is not enclosed or within 300 feet of
these areas, so those areas received a score of 0, as you can see on
this rubric here. There were some cells that were located on the
northeast edge of the project boundary that are within 300 feet of an
FSA, and those locations did receive a score of .3.
For the listed species habitat indice, there are multiple data
sources that are used for this, and we provided updated data for this
layer of the model. We included updated and field-verified habitat
mapping that was done by Passarella in 2019. This -- we used
what's called FLUCFCS mapping, or Florida Land Use Cover and
Forms Classification System Mapping, and we also used the results
of the listed species surveys that we have conducted on the site
multiple times over many years, including 2007, 2014, 2016, and
2019, as well as the results of our species-specific surveys that we
have done on the site for species such as the Red-cockaded
woodpecker, caracara, Everglades mink, and Southeastern American
kestrel.
We also incorporate data from the Florida Wildlife Conservation
Commission and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and this includes
panther telemetry data, which we included updated panther telemetry
we obtained in 2019.
And you can see the way that this scores out is for
May 25, 2021
Page 128
panther-occupied habitat plus the observation of another listed
species, a score of .8 is generated; just panther-occupied habitat is a
.5; other documented listed species is a .4; and none of the above is a
0.
And the LDC has specific language that defines what "occupied
habitat" means, and that's defined as the intersect of documented and
verifiable observations of listed species within land cover identified
as preferred or tolerated habitat for that speci es. This means that just
the observation of that species on the site in not enough to generate a
score. It also has to be within a habitat type deemed preferred or
tolerated.
The LDC also has definitions of which habitat types are
considered to be preferred or tolerated for the Florida panther, and
those codes are the only codes that were used for this assessment.
So within Longwater, we have the majority of the site receiving
a score of 0. Most of the land on the site is designated as row crops
and, therefore, is not considered to be preferred or tolerated for most
species. But we did have some locations where a .4 was generated
due to the observation of sandhill cranes in preferred or tolerated
habitat, and there were also four cells that generated a score of .8 due
to having panther-occupied habitat plus the observation of another
listed species.
The next index factor is the soils and surface water index. For
this we used the U.S. Department of Agricultural Natural Resource
Conservation Service, or NRCS, soils data, and scores range from .4
to 0 for this with open water and muck depression soils receiving the
highest score followed by sand depression soils, then flats or
transitional soils, and non-hydric soils.
For Longwater, we had a mix of sand depression soils, flats
transitional soils, and non-hydric soils, so scores ranged from .3 to 0.
The next index factor is restoration potential. The LDC states
May 25, 2021
Page 129
that restoration potential index assigned during the SSA designation
process, if appropriate, and credit adjustments are made at that time.
Since this assessment was for an SRA, no credit adjustments or
scores were generated for this layer of the model.
And the final Natural Resource Index factor is the land use/land
cover indice. This has four different groups assigned. Group 1
FLUCFCS codes generally consist of native wetlands and receive a
score of .4; Group 2 are native upland habitats receiving a score of .3;
a Group 3 FLUCFCS codes are generally agricultural codes and
receive a score of .2; and then Group 4 are all other codes, and they
receive a score of 0.
Again, the LDC specifics which FLUCFCS codes fall within
each of these groups. Any codes not specifically designated fall
under that Group 4, other category, and receive a score of 0 .
So for Longwater, the majority of the site is consisting of ag and
receives a score of .2. The scores on the site did range from a 0 to
.4.
So this map here shows the final model output for the NRI
Assessment. The final score is determined by summing the scores
for each of these one-acre cells for each of the six Natural Resource
Index factors. As you can see, the majority of the sites scored
between a .2 and a .6. I've included some labels on here since those
blue colors can be a little bit hard to distinguish from one another.
But there are four cells down in that area here that did generate a
score above a 1.2.
And here is the NRI scores in a table format so you can see the
.2 values comprise 38 percent; .4, 36 percent; and .6, 20 percent; and
we have four acres that are above a 1.2. And these four cells are
located within a remnant cypress wetland on the site that's
surrounded by pasture land.
These cells generated scores for three of the six Natural
May 25, 2021
Page 130
Resource Index factors including land use/land cover has a
FLUCFCS code of 621, which is cypress, and generated a score of .4.
For soils, we had a mix of both transitional and depressional soils.
So the cell here that generated a 1.4 had transitional soils, and the
other three cells had a score of .3 for depressional soils. And all four
of those received a score of .8 under the listed species habitat index
due to being in panther-occupied habitat with the observation of
another listed species.
So in accordance with the LDC, lands within an SRA greater
than 1 with index values greater than 1.2 shall be retained as open
space and maintained in a predominantly natural vegetated state.
And as Bob had indicated, that is the intention for this area here, and
that concludes my presentation.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Good afternoon. For the record, my
name is Norman Trebilcock. I'm a Professional Engineer and
Certified Planner with over 30 years' experience here in Collier
County. My firm prepared the traffic studies for the project. We've
prepared hundreds of traffic studies as well.
So we'll just review the studies, the traffic analysis overview.
You all have received a more in-depth product and the exciting
reading we have in the couple of sections that we've prepared for the
traffic studies for the link analysis. The intersections that we've
prepared as well, everything per Collier County standards, and then
I'll just kind of run through those items, overview them, intersection
operational analysis, our planning for the future in support of Collier
County, and conclusions as well.
So the Traffic Impact Statement was developed in accordance
with Collier County standards. Let me get that arrow out of the way
there. Using the -- established the trip distribution, the trip
generation, looking at the ITE, or the Institute of Transportation
Engineer's land-use codes. All of this was per coordination with
May 25, 2021
Page 131
your staff using the methodology, meeting coordination back in 2019,
using the 2019 AUIR, and staff has also done a reevaluation of the
2020, which they prepared in their staff report as well.
In the ITE, Institute of Transportation Engineers, we used the
latest edition of that manual. Background traffic is county -supplied
data for that. Also we developed the background growth based on
historical data and also using the county minimum standards
2 percent growth, and looking at trip bank data as well.
The network is based on the AUIR information as well. We
look at the future network that will be contemporaneous with the
2030 planning horizon for the project, so we look at that network and
the improvements that would be in place that are anticipated based on
the Long-Range Transportation Plan, cost feasible, the county's
traffic capital improvement program as well to be there as well.
We also look at any other improvements that would be placed
based on the one-cent sales tax, and then -- so we evaluate the links
and intersections based on adding our traffic, our trip-generated
traffic off the project onto the individual roadway network in the
future condition based on the future traffic background growth.
The traffic analysis, the result is a trip generation using the ITE
for the mixed-use development, the single-family to multifamily,
office park, the civic use, shopping center. We look at some internal
capture also following standards agreed to with staff, and then also
look at pass-by traffic where we're going to capture some of the
traffic out there that would be heading into town that we would be
able to capture as well.
With the net external traffic, that becomes trip traffic for the
county in the lower right-hand corner there. The 2,078 vehicles per
hour p.m. peak hour, because that's your peak hour trip generation for
the development that we look at.
In looking at the distribution, we look at the percentage of traffic
May 25, 2021
Page 132
in terms of working with staff on that. We -- also, there was some
questioning of the trips, some significance west of I-75, so we did
confirm with staff a couple of links and identified the fact that they
are not insignificant, so it would be less than the 3 percent level of
service. So there's no significance beyond I-75, so that's where the
analysis stops per county standards.
And so these percentages then translate into p.m. peak hour trips
that then we apply to the grown traffic on those CIE -- or the AUIR,
Annual Update and Inventory Report analysis links.
In looking at the impacts for roadway segments, so the 2030 is
the horizon year for the project, and so we created an adverse impact
on Randall Boulevard from Everglades to DeSoto, and with -- our
fair-share construction cost to that is $0.7 million, and the roadway
impact fees to be collected from the project is $17.7 million. So the
impact fees well cover the impacts of the project in terms of the
mitigation of impact, which would be paid at certificate of occupancy
as they're issued for the project.
This is a consistency review, and so the project is still subject to
concurrency as plats and Site Development Plans are issued. So as
development occurs, we still are subject to concurrency for the
project as well.
In terms of accesses for the project, looking at the north end, we
tie into Oil Well Road. As Bob had mentioned, there's an
interconnect to the Rivergrass project, and then down at the
southwest corner is a connection to where Vanderbilt Beach Road
will be, there as well (indicating), and then the future Big Cypress
Parkway is along the west side.
We prepared an intersection operational analysis, and this was
identified while we were in our methodology with staff, so we
identified the intersections to be analyzed for the project, and you can
see a number of the intersections were identified here. And we then
May 25, 2021
Page 133
also looked at different conditions. We did actual counts, turning
movement counts back in 2019, and then we looked at the future
growth of the traffic out there, conditions without the project and then
conditions without the project but with some background
improvements -- committed improvement in place as identified and
agreed to with staff, and then we looked at conditions with
non-project improvements in place but with the project in place to see
if there's any further improvements we need to look at, and then
finally what we looked at is improvements, our project, and then
improvements we need to further make in order to make these areas
functionally sufficient.
And so looking at the intersections, there's future committed
improvements. Randall and Immokalee, major at-grade
improvements Collier County is initiating, and then widening
improvements along Randall as well that are underway.
Also at Oil well and DeSoto, intersection improvements there,
and then Randall and Everglades.
So we looked at the improvements we need to contribute to
make these work with the background as well, and that was some
signalization that we need to look at at Oil Well and DeSoto, Randall
and Everglades signalization improvements as well; and then 18th
and DeSoto signalization turn lane additions and on DeSoto as well.
So in terms of the improvements, we call these operational
improvements, operational mitigation, and this is -- I believe Rich
had mentioned that $622,000 would be our fair share for those
improvements for these intersections.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Recognizing the time, we're going to
stop the transportation here, unless you have further questions, then
we'll move into fiscal neutrality.
The second village will go much quicker because we've covered
a lot of the preliminary data or analysis through this. But we're
May 25, 2021
Page 134
going to move on to fiscal neutrality unless you have questions of
Mr. Trebilcock at this point. But if we can move on to Lucy, that
would be great.
MS. GALLO: Good afternoon. Lucy Gallo. I'm a partner
with Development Planning and Financing Group. We're a national
real estate consulting firm. I prepare fiscal and economic studies in
Florida as well as across the country, and my clients include
both-public sector and private-sector clients.
I thought it would be helpful initially to just go over the
requirements for which the fiscal neutrality study was subject. The
first is the policy in the GMP. It states the study will be planned to
perform to be fiscally neutral at the horizon year. The second
requirement in the LDC is we are under 1B, the preparation of an
alternate fiscal model since the county does not have a model of its
own. But I did want to also emphasize that each SRA must
demonstrate the development as a whole will be fiscally neutral or
positive to the Collier County tax base.
The economic assessment approach is designed to be both
collaborative and transparent, a county-approved methodology, a
rigorous county third-party peer review, as well as a rigorous county
review.
The conclusions of the economic assessment, both the county
staff and the county's third-party peer reviewer, affirmed all of the
following conclusions regarding fiscal neutrality in the report.
I thought it might be beneficial to talk just a minute about the
economic assessment methodology. The snapshot approach is a
standard -- industry standard fiscal methodology which has been
applied in the alternate model that has been designed and adopted by
the county, again, industry approach.
Methodology meetings are held prior to the start of any
assignment with county staff, and in those methodology meetings all
May 25, 2021
Page 135
of the data sources are approved, all of the assumptions are approved,
and part of the process from the beginning has been designed that
there's standardization of the approach, so if any applicant had
another consultant that came in to prepare an economic assessment,
that there would be consistency across all the economic assessments
that were submitted. So the county really does have a control over
the data sources that are used in those options.
Because the methodology and data sources incorporate impact
fees, I thought it might be helpful just to talk about the impact fees
for the county just a minute. Impact fees are updated on a regular
basis. They're based on legally defensible methodologies,
assumptions, and data sources, and are adopted by the county. There
are certain impact fees of the county that are based on American
Community Survey population estimates, which that's a program in
the U.S. Census. Those are listed as follows. Again, every time an
impact fee study is updated, all of the population factors are updated
as well.
The county's most significant fees, though, are based on demand
factors other than population. In schools, student generation rates
are determined by custom design GIS linkage between Collier
County public school student addresses and parcels in the database,
transportation involves its own set of demand factors, and water and
sewer based on gallons per day per equivalent residential connection.
So none of those impact fee studies involve population, although all
of the demand factors are updated every time an impact fee study is
updated.
Longwater Village and Bellmar will be charged impact fees at
rates enacted at the time that the impact fee rates are assessed. So,
naturally, over buildout, I would expect impact fees to be updated a
number of times, and they will be -- they will pay rates at rates in
effect at that time.
May 25, 2021
Page 136
There's been a lot of discussion about persons per housing unit
in the adopted methodology. The most current impact fee study
available for which the population factors were used was the 2016
EMS study. The reason it's important to use those factors
incorporated in the impact fee studies is because they're based on
legally defensible methodology. That's extremely important for an
impact fee study as well as how that carries over into an economic
assessment.
The impact fee consultant as well as the county has determined
for each of the residential land use types as well as this is just a small
subset of the commercial land use types, what is the most appropriate
factor to use for each of those land uses.
Just a distinction here on this slide between persons per
household and persons per housing unit. Persons per household
would assume that all households are occupied 365 days a year,
which is not the case. That's why your impact fee consultant has
based your impact fee studies that involve population on person per
housing unit because that considers the entire housing stock. Once
again, your impact fee updates incorporate all relevant changes in
population housing counts, housing types, vacancy rates, including
seasonality, for each residential land use type every time your impact
fees are updated.
This slide -- I tried to cram a lot on this slide to explain to you
how your impact fee consultant actually determines the factors used
in the impact fee studies. So they're based on -- you'll see the
columns across the top of the screen. I'm not sure if that works or
not. Yep. So the base estimates come from the American
Community Survey to calculate the persons per housing unit to which
a Collier County seasonality factor is applied. That is a factor that is
determined by the county, not by DPFG, to result in what
each -- persons per housing unit for each residential product type.
May 25, 2021
Page 137
The product types that are applicable to the two villages are
villas and coach homes, which fall into the two categories that are
highlighted to your right. So down at the bottom of the screen you'll
see that the peak seasonal person -- the peak season persons per unit
factors were used for over 85 percent of the allocable general fund
operating expenditures, and that's according to the county's impact
fee approved -- I'm sorry -- the approved economic assessment
methodology.
A couple of things in some recent comments. There's a
comparison of this countywide vacancy rate which, keep in mind,
vacancy rate consists of a few -- a number of factors, one is which
homes that are for rent, for sale that are just not occupied for any
number of reasons and also a seasonality factor. All of that goes into
determine whether homes are occupied or unoccupied for U.S.
Census purpose.
I'm not sure the purpose of this comparison. I wouldn't ever
expect to compare the real estate markets between Immokalee Road
and Golden Gate with an SRA village.
Your impact fee consultant has not considered it inappropriate to
use countywide factors in determining the persons per housing unit,
and the vast majority of the population and housing units are in
unincorporated Collier County, as demonstrated on this slide, so they
are not -- they are not skewed by the population of Naples.
The LRTP vacancy rates, those are broad-range estimates.
Again, we're looking at 2045, a long range into the future. The
impact fee studies that are adopted by the county are based on much
more recent data updated on a regular basis. And the SRA villages,
the economic assessments are based on a specific development
program with specific housing product types, all of which carry
different population factors according to your impact fee consultant.
So a villa is a product in these projects -- in the SRA village for
May 25, 2021
Page 138
both Bellmar and Longwater. The LRTP is not going to get drilled
down so specifically to determine how many village -- how many
villas would be in a particular village for the purpose of determining
this map. These are just broad-range estimates and would not be
expected to be applied to a specific development program.
The entire economic assessment process is very collaborative
with staff including all of the key service providers down to the point
where we are looking at exactly where the communities will be
served. An example is the determination of the new fire and EMS
facilities, where they will be located and how they will be funded.
Water and wastewater, as pointed out a few minutes ago, that
the LDC requirement is for fiscal neutrality to be determined based
on fiscally neutral or positive to the Collier County tax base. As
mentioned earlier, potable water and wastewater will be provided by
the Collier County Water and Sewer District. The District is an
independent special district with the Board of County Commissioners
serving as the governing board. The Board approved services rates
and impact fees charged by the District. The District is
self-supporting Enterprise Fund. It does not receive property taxes
or other financial support from the county's General Fund.
The District service area was expanded in September of 2018,
and the first bonds to support Phase 1 expansion were issued in
April 2019, and all of those are -- do not involve any sort of
involvement at all from support from the county's General Fund.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'll go ahead and wind up Longwater,
then it would be probably close to what your normal breaktime would
be, if that is acceptable before we move into Bellmar.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah, that's fine. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: In addition to all the requirements that
we've met through your Growth Management Plan and -- Growth
Management Plan and Land Development Code, we did agree to
May 25, 2021
Page 139
some additional environmental protections, some of which are in the
SRA and some of which are in the town plan. We have agreed to
provide bear-proof trash cans in all residential and commercial areas.
We have agreed to Dark Skies provisions for lighting. In the town
plan, I'll get into a little bit greater detail, we did agree to increase the
credits from eight credits per acre to 10 credits per acre when we
come back with the town.
And we have agreed to, as part of the town plan, which I'll get
into in greater detail, some panther crossings that I just kind of want
to highlight right now that you can see on the screen.
We have a panther crossing under Oil Well Road, another one
under the interconnection road between Longwater and Bellmar, and
then finally another one under our internal road through the village.
So we've agreed to additional environmental commitments as part of
the overall village and town plan.
You've seen this slide already. These are the commitments that
staff requested be in the SRA. They are in your SRA document.
And both -- your staff found us consistent with the Growth
Management Plan, your staff found us consistent with your Land
Development Code. We've agreed to all of the conditions of both
the staff and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission
recommended approval 5-1 for the Longwater Village SRA.
And with that, that concludes our presentation for Longwater
Village. We'll get into Bellmar and then the town plan next. We
spent some time explaining the process for the environmental review
and the Traffic Impact Statement. We're not going to get into that
level of detail. We'll go right to the conclusions for those two
presentations, but with that we're --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Open for questions.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- open for questions. If you want to
talk about Longwater, or if you want to wait until we do Bellmar next
May 25, 2021
Page 140
and the town plan, however you want to do it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner McDaniel, is it
specific to Longwater, or is this something that is more of an
overarching?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It has to do with the credit
generation in the SSAs. It's just a quick question.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The fact that you've switched
away from, I think it was, SSA 14 and 17 to 15 is because the
agricultural department had not signed off on the recognition of an
easement?
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's a standard form easement that is
required to be recorded when you get an SSA approved. The
county's a grantee, and either the Department of Agriculture or the
South Florida Water Management District or a land trust can be a
grantee. Historically, the Department of Ag has agreed to be the
grantee of the easement and, in fact, they previously signed off on the
SSA 14. We don't know why we're having -- they're a little slow in
agreeing to be the grantee for the amended SSA 14 and the new SSA
17. So we are at this point using credits from SSA 15 for these two
villages. You still have approved those two SSAs, and we will use
those for the town.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was where I was going.
Those SSAs are -- that protection -- that environmental protection
will actually be established and utilized and, just because of a holdup
over here, we're not losing that environmental.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You're not losing that from our
perspective. We plan on using those for the town.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: That was all for me.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
May 25, 2021
Page 141
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No other questions? No questions
from staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. We will reconvene at
2:40.
(A brief recess was had from 2:30 p.m. to 2:43 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Commissioners, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Madam Chairman -- there he is. We
are going to fast forward to the meat and potatoes, if you will, of
Bellmar, and I'm going to bring up Mr. Mulhere to take you through
the details of Bellmar from the planning perspective, and then you'll
hear from the same speakers specific to Bellmar, and then we'll talk
about the town plan and then open it up for questions or turn it over
to staff.
So, Mr. Mulhere.
MR. MULHERE: Hi. Bob Mulhere, for the record again. I
apologize. I was answering a question.
So, again, I'll try to be -- you know, not touch on the things that
we've already discussed that apply to both.
We did talk about how the program works, that it's incentive
based, that the base density is one unit per five. It says Bellmar
requires 6,697.76 credits at the bottom of this slide, which are coming
from SSA 15. The SRA document actually says 7,742 credits. I
will verify that number. So the correct number is 6,742 even, just
for the record. So this slide is wrong, but I wanted to make sure that
was corrected, and the SRA document is correct, and I'll thank staff
for pointing that out to me.
Bellmar is 999.74 acres in size. It has zero acres that score
higher than 1.2 to the Natural Resource Index. It has zero acres that
May 25, 2021
Page 142
are within the area of critical state concern. It has zero acres that
are -- that contain or are adjacent to FSA or HSA, and zero acres
designated as a water retention, WRA.
To the north of the Bellmar Village, lands are zoned -- to the
north, east, and south lands are zoned ag with a mobile home overlay
and the proposed SSA 17. To the west, again, is Big Cypress
Parkway, which is, obviously, right here. And this property, as was
in the case with Longwater, has been in active agricultural use for
many years. And you can see simply by looking at the aerial that
these lands are and have been in active agricultural use.
Again, two context zones are required. Two are provided. The
village center context zone, which is right here, and the remainder is
neighborhood general. Villages are primarily residential
communities. We are asking for a maximum of 2,750 dwelling
units, which is 2.75 units per acre, which is within the range that's
allowed of 1 to 4.
There will be, again -- oh, a minimum of 275 units will be
multifamily -- again, as defined by your code. That's three or more
dwelling units that are attached -- with a minimum of 40 units in the
village center, as they are required to be mixed use. All m ultifamily
will be developed within a half mile of the village center.
There will be a variety of housing types, styles, and lot sizes.
And, again, there are minimum requirements for the provision related
to single-family detached which is 275 units, single-family attached,
275 units and, as I said previously, multifamily, a minimum of 275
units.
The village center will serve as the focal point for the
community's goods and services and will provide a minimum, based
on the formulas in the LDC, of 68,750 square feet and a maximum of
85,000 square feet of neighborhood-scale retail and office uses. We
are also required to provide a minimum of 27,500 of civic,
May 25, 2021
Page 143
governmental, and institutional uses.
Master utilities will be served by Collier County Water an d
Sewer District. In Bellmar, the 35 percent minimum required open
space would equate to 349.91 acres, and 506.9 are provided, which is
50.7 percent of the village.
We are required to provide a minimum of 1 percent in the form
of neighborhood parks, and we are -- we are committed to that
requirement. It's depicted on the master plan.
Along the eastern boundary, there is a WRA combined with an
innovative perimeter lake system, again, which has stormwater
management benefits but also acts as a deterrent to wildlife.
Our trip cap for Bellmar is 2,189 weekday p.m. peak hour
two-way trips. The fiscal analysis was reviewed by the county and
an independent third-party reviewer; deemed to be fiscally neutral.
We have a similar trigger that was asked for in Longwater, and
that is the 30,000 square feet of neighborhood retail, office uses, and
a minimum of 20 multifamily units be developed within the village
center prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the
1,925th residential dwelling unit.
As I said before, in addition to the overall program being
innovative and compact, there are some innovative elements that are
specific to Bellmar. As we indicated, similar to Longwater, if you
were to try to develop 2,750 dwelling units under the baseline of one
unit per five acres, that would consume 13,750 acres. There would
be a lot of less beneficial aspects to that type of development from
habitat protection and public facilities, the provision of public
facilities. So this is a much more compact development.
SRAs are unique village -- in this case the village form of
SRA -- because they do provide these neighborhood commercial
goods and services as well as civic, governmental, institutional uses.
That is not a requirement in other more urban PUDs. So this is a
May 25, 2021
Page 144
unique and innovative element to villages.
The highest intensity will be located in the village context zone
with the reduced density along the edge of the village along the
unique perimeter water buffer, which will discourage wildlife from
entering the residential areas.
I mentioned that we're providing the -- at a minimum of
1 percent in parks, but we also have this 51 percent of open space
which includes miles of pedestrian-friendly sidewalks, includes bike
lanes.
We are providing the same educational information to residents
regarding living with wildlife and the potential use of prescribed
burns for the nearby conservation land management areas.
Significant reduction in water use as compared to the agricultural
operations. Providing central water and sewer extended into rural
Collier County and to serve the village. And as we said before, this
is a mixed-use project which includes commercial, civic, and a
diversity of housing types.
This village is -- we're talking about now connectivity,
bikeability, and walkability. And similar to the other villages, this
village is designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle circulation
through an interconnected system of streets, bike paths on the spine
road, and a network of sidewalks on all roads. So you have bike
paths here and sidewalks on all roads.
The spine road also has this 10-foot multiuse path on one side
and a six-foot sidewalk on the other, which provides for a pleasant
walking or bicycling experience and connection to the various types
of activity areas within the project. All the amenity centers are
accessed from the spine road directly.
This is similar to the previously shown exhibit that has the
concentric circles. The blue stars indicate a park and amenity center
or the commercial area, the village center, and then the concentric
May 25, 2021
Page 145
circles show that all residents are within one-half mile to a park and
amenity center or commercial center. The thick black line, which is
a little hard to see on this, but indicates a sidewalk or pathway.
Again, I won't spend much time on this, because we went over it
previously. But if you look at the SSA 15 credits consumed, it
shows all three of the villages and the total credits consumed. And if
you look at the top, there are 20,653 credits available and 19,638
consumed in total.
And I did -- I think that's the next slide. I did point out, again,
the benefit of having these sending land areas, SSAs, located where
they are, which is enhancing and improving not only a wildlife
corridor but the significant flowway corridor for the Camp Keais
Strand.
So I mentioned this before, but SSA 15 preserves 5,253 acres at
zero cost to the taxpayers, and there is an additional contribution
estimated at 870,000 through the Marinelli Fund, and the significant
benefits to the environment of reducing water use and preservation at
this historic flowway.
This is a checklist that we use. It's all of the requirements that
are found in Attachment C. And on the left -- and then in the center
column is the Bellmar SRA and how it complies with those
requirements. And as you can see with the green checkmarks,
Bellmar complies with each of those: The size; the density, which is
a range of one to four; the diversity of single and multifamily housing
types, styles, and lot sizes; compliance or consistency with the
maximum floor area ratio for retail and office, and for civic,
governmental, and institutional; provision of village center
neighborhood goods and services at a minimum of 25 square feet per
dwelling unit; same thing with the civic and governmental and
institutional uses at 10 square feet per dwelling unit; utilities provided
by Collier County; a minimum of 1 percent of parks and public green
May 25, 2021
Page 146
space within neighborhoods; and an interconnected system of
collector and local roadways, which is an incentive for pedestri an and
bicycle activity.
I went over the Longwater. This one is just slightly different,
so I want to spend a minute going over it. The interlocal agreement
with Collier County Water and Sewer District, the District will
provide potable water, sewer, and irrigation services at an
agreed-upon delivery point. The landowner will require all
developers to install the IQ systems in their residential units --
MR. YOVANOVICH: No irrigation.
MR. MULHERE: Oh, just water and sewer. Okay, thanks.
Collier County is not responsible for providing irrigation services.
Just water and sewer.
The third paragraph there is the landowner will prepay water
capacity for 650 ERCs and wastewater capacity for 350 ERCs. And
the landowner will be responsible to build all water, sewer, and
irrigation facilities and will turn over the water and sewer to Collier
County Water and Sewer District.
Just -- this slide, we follow the same format. This slide shows
you the 2.3 miles of right-of-way for extending Big Cypress
Parkway.
And with that, Heather's on her way up.
MS. SAMBORSKI: Again, Heather Samborski with Passarella
& Associates.
All right. Since I just gave you an overview of the complete
NRI Assessment methodology, we're not going to go through that
again. I'm just going to skip right ahead to the final model output for
Bellmar.
Okay. So what you're looking at here is the final NRI
Assessment output that was produced for Bellmar. As you can see,
the majority of the site scores between a .2 and a .5, and there are no
May 25, 2021
Page 147
areas within the SRA boundary that receive a score above a 1.2.
The areas that -- the NRI factors that did generate scores include
the species index for documented occurrences of caracara and an
alligator nest within preferred or tolerated habitat. Under the soils
index, we had sand depressions and transitional soils which generated
scores of .2 and .3 in some locations, and then under the land use/land
cover index, again, much like Longwater, the majority of the site is
comprised of ag and received a score of .2. There were a range of
scores under this index, though, ranging from 0 to .4.
And these are the NRI values in table format. Again, you can
see right here, the NRI score of .2 comprises 38.8 percent, and the
NRI score of .4 is 48.3 percent, and there is no acre within the SRA
boundary that receives a score above a 1.2.
And that's it for me.
MR. TREBILCOCK: Good afternoon, again. For the record,
Norman Trebilcock. I'll just kind of go through, really, changes.
2,189 is the trip cap. The distribution, we did expand that
distribution as well to identify that there's no significance west of
I-75.
Impacted segments, we identified fair-share construction costs
of those segments is $3.9 million. The projected impact fees from
the project is $18.8 million. So the mitigation impact, impact fees
cover that. Again, the project is subject to concurrency at plat and
plans as they're approved for the project.
Intersection operational analysis, inconsistent. We identified
those. What we did in -- we did identify our mitigation impact for
that was 2.9 million for operational impacts or the intersections there.
In planning for the future, planning for Big Cypress Parkway as
identified, establishing a long segment of roadway from Golden Gate
Boulevard up to Immokalee Road gets established right -of-way,
13-mile -- or 12 miles -- or actually over 13 miles, which a
May 25, 2021
Page 148
comparable for yourself to think of, it would be like a Livingston
Road from Radio Road to the county line is about 12 miles. So this
is significant what you're establishing.
Conclusions: Again, same type of conclusions. The project is
a significant traffic generator for the roadway network. We looked
at the adversely impacted settings. The mitigation is covered
through the impact fees for the project. The county has
improvement plans. Our analysis is consistent with the horizon year
roadway network that the county will have at the time. We have a
trip cap. Intersection improvements, $2.9 million of mitigation that
we'd propose.
And we've had right-of-way and management for Big Cypress
Parkway, which is a road we do not need for the project. It is not
part of the analysis for the project as well. And impact fees will be
paid as certificates of occupancy are approved, and that's at a level of
$18.8 million for this project.
And then to fiscal neutrality, Lucy Gallo.
MS. GALLO: Lucy Gallo, Development Planning and
Financing Group.
Again, the requirements for economic assessment are included
in the GMP and LDC. We prepared the alternative fiscal impact
model that was -- and using a methodology approved by Collier
County.
The staff and the third-party peer reviewer affirmed the
conclusions on operations and all of the capital services included on
the slide. And, again, a review of the specific geographically
sensitive fire and EMS services, how services will be provided and
the location.
That's it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That was faster than I thought we
could. I will expand a little bit, and Lucy can correct me if I'm
May 25, 2021
Page 149
wrong. In both fiscal neutrality analyses she did, she did meet with
and discuss utilities with your staff to confirm that there are no ad
valorem tax dollars utilized to fund your utility systems and that they
are also fiscally neutral because they are -- they basically, between
impact fees and user fees, fully fund the cost of utilities, and we do
not have a negative fiscal impact on utilities. Did I get that right,
Lucy?
Do you want to come up and -- you went a little quick on that.
MS. GALLO: Sorry. Sorry about that. Yes, I intended for
my slide that I included for the Collier County Water and Sewer
District that I went over in Longwater is applicable to Bellmar as
well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So in summary, since I didn't go over
this slide this time, we are -- your staff required and we did
incorporate into the SRA documents similar conditions in Bellmar
that were required or implemented in Longwater, and those
conditions dealt with, you know, listed species management plans
will be addressed at SDP and plat. We have a similar utility
agreement. We have the requirement to provide at least 10 percent
of the residential units to be sold at moderate or gap affordable prices
or, in the alternative, provide a site for affordable housing.
As Mr. Trebilcock went over, within 90 days of approval of our
first development order, we will pay $2,221,800 to address the
intersection operation impacts related to our Bellmar Village. We
will be required to improve both Golden Gate Boulevard and Sixth
Avenue South from DeSoto to our project to the FDOT green book
construction standards at our expense at no impact fee credits. Same
school site condition that was in the previous SRA development
document.
And your staff found us consistent with the Growth
Management Plan and the Land Development Code. And for
May 25, 2021
Page 150
Bellmar, the Planning Commission recommended approval 5-0 of
this petition and, based upon your staff report, staff is recommending
approval of Bellmar Village.
Before I go into the town plan, I wanted to highlight for the
Board some testimony that occurred at the trial that we had a couple
of weeks ago that I think is pertinent to both Longwater and Bellmar
today. Charlie Gauthier was the Conservancy's planning expert at
the trial and he -- some of you may know Charlie. Mr. Gauthier was
actually at the Department of Community Affairs when the
moratorium went into place to come up with the RLSA program and
the Rural Fringe Mixed-Use District program. And Mr. Gauthier
was, in fact, involved in approving the RLSA program that is in your
Growth Management Plan that we're going through and actually
implementing through Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar.
And Mr. Gauthier testified. He testified to a lot of things. If
he had his wish in the planning world, he would have designed
Rivergrass differently. And that's fine. You know, planners have
different opinions. Ultimately, the judge agreed that we met all of
the criteria for Rivergrass.
But I think one thing that Mr. Gauthier testified to that I think is
uniform to Rivergrass, Longwater, and Bellmar is that all three
projects are flat open sites that do not include natural resources such
as wetland systems or valuable forested areas. So Mr. Gauthier
testified -- you saw Rivergrass. Rivergrass is row crops. You saw
Longwater; it's row crops. You saw Bellmar; it's row crops.
Mr. Gauthier, the expert planner for the Conservancy, testified
that there are no natural resources associated with those projects, and
you heard Heather Samborski testify likewise with regard to
Longwater and Bellmar. And I'm sure you'll hear from your staff the
same, that we met all of the suitability criteria from an environmental
perspective with regard to Longwater and Bellmar. We've met all
May 25, 2021
Page 151
the traffic requirements for Longwater and Bellmar. We've met all
the Growth Management Plan requirements for Longwater and
Bellmar as testified to by Mr. Mulhere.
So we're going to ask -- we ask that you follow your Planning
Commission's recommendation of approval and your staff's
recommendation of approval with regard to Longwater and Bellma r.
I want to jump in next to the town petition.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: May I ask --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Any time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- a couple questions before we go
into the town?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We heard from the Florida Fish and
Wildlife that came to this chamber to talk about an agreement that
they were hoping that could be created between Collier Enterprises
and Florida Fish and Wildlife understanding that prescribed burns are
a necessary maintenance of this land, and there's a lot of land that
will not be developed on.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Have you signed, sealed, and
delivered that agreement?
MR. YOVANOVICH: We have agreed to provide a required
document that every purchaser must sign. It's a one -page
document -- it's not hidden in a bunch of other documents -- that puts
them on notice about the panther refuge and the prescribed burns that
are going to occur there, as well as the proximity to our own SSAs
and the prescribed burns that go there. So we have, in fact, included
a requirement that every purchaser is going to sign a document
acknowledging that they are aware of those prescribed burns.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. And then the Natural
Resource Index, it was curious to me the caveat that becau se an
May 25, 2021
Page 152
animal or a species might use certain land as a roadway, that they -- it
is not considered environmentally sensitive because they haven't
made a nest or lair there. Whose rules are those?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yours.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's what I thought.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Those are in your Land Development
Code, and they are your rules applicable to the RLSA program.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And then with -- and that
specifically is overall. But Bellmar, I know you indicated
that -- well, Bellmar and Longwater, and I'll be very specific about
that -- within half a mile of the village center, everyone has access,
but that's not quite accurate. It's within half a mile of the village
center or a park or a community center.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And we never said everybody who lives
in the village is within a half a mile of the village center. What
Mr. Mulhere testified to -- and I can bring him back up here -- is that
everybody who lives in those villages are within a half a mile of I'll
us the word "attractor." It would be a neighborhood park, an
amenity center, the village center. And in Longwater, we also have
the neighborhood general retail. But everybody who lives within
either village will be within a half a mile of a park, an amenity center,
or the village center.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay, good. And then, finally, you
were including bike lanes and sidewalks as open space?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm going to bring Mr. Mulhere up for
that, but -- come on up, Bob.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I may have misheard you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm going to let Mr. Mulhere answer
that.
MR. MULHERE: I may have not been clear. But, no, not the
bike lanes in the roadways. Those are within the right-of-way
May 25, 2021
Page 153
corridors. But there are landscape buffers, and they function as a
linear park. That's not counted towards our -- we haven't
used -- calculated that. All green space, all lakes, all parks, those
counts towards open space.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Lakes and parks, but not necessarily
the medians --
MR. MULHERE: Not the sidewalk or the roadway, no.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Or the medians that are
green?
MR. MULHERE: No.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you. That's it.
That's all my questions. Does anyone have questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No. All right. Thank you.
On to the town.
MR. YOVANOVICH: On to the town. I never like to look
backwards, but a little over a year ago, maybe a year and a half ago,
there was -- there was discussion about the fact that what had been
the Town of Rural Lands West went away for -- just went away and
became three villages, and there was a concern about the fact that we
went through a process that we're legally entitled to do under the
Growth Management Plan, but there was clearly some desire, I
believe, on the county's behalf as well as the landowner's behalf to
see if we could -- we could come back to a concept for a town in this
area.
So we were approached by staff to talk about is there a way to
convert these villages into a town. And as your Growth
Management Plan recognized, it can take several villages to support
the level of retail and office and civic that is associated with a town.
So we had several meetings with your staff to talk about what
could be the next step after Bellmar and Longwater are appr oved,
May 25, 2021
Page 154
assuming they get approved. And we worked with staff to put
together a plan to where Longwater Village would have 515 acres
added to it to form the new Town of Big Cypress.
So we've been working for probably close to a year with staff to
come up with a conceptual plan of what the town would look like and
the process to go through to ultimately have a town approved in this
area, not quite as large as the Town of Rural Lands West, but very
similar to the Town of Rural Lands West with providing for business
opportunities, retail, and office to ultimately hopefully change the
traffic patterns that would occur. Instead of people going west to the
urban area, they'd stay where they are and, candidly, people who live
in Golden Gate Estates wouldn't have to travel west either. They
could travel east to the Town of Big Cypress as well as the Town of
Ave Maria.
So we worked with your staff, and what you have on one of your
agenda items is the town agreement. And in doing that -- I'm just
going to go through some of the highlights of what's related to the
town. But, essentially, we would agree that within a year from
hopefully today we would submit a town SRA application for your
staff to review and consider and ultimately bring forward to the
Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners for
consideration.
We also agreed that there would be no COs issued in Bellmar
Village until the application is scheduled for a BCC hearing. Right
now it says a public hearing, but we meant BCC, not Planning
Commission hearing. So we will clarify in the agreement that the
public hearing is the BCC hearing, before we can get any COs in
Bellmar.
We agreed that the town would comply with the proposed RLSA
amendments that you're scheduled to hear June 8th. And when you
look through this, you'll see how we addressed the affordable housing
May 25, 2021
Page 155
requirements, the community park requirements, the additional
commercial and retail square footage that you're talking about doing,
as well as the civic.
So the town itself would provide an additional 1,310,000 square
feet of commercial in addition to what -- the villages that we're
discussing today. Those would be -- we envision that that
would -- it would happen up in this area as well as -- I'm having
trouble seeing colors. The town core is here, and then we also have,
like, a business park in that area right there.
So we anticipate having employment centers and the additional
commercial and retail and civic to address not only the needs of the
three villages but hopefully those living in the eastern part of Golden
Gate Estates.
We agreed to provide a community park, which is this green
area right there. And going through the process, we met with staff,
and since staff really is the people who best know what the needs for
community parks are, we've agreed to give the land to the -- or sell
the land to the county at a discounted price of $22,500 per acre.
That's based on the appraisal that was done a year and a half ago for
Rivergrass. I'm sure that land has gone up a little bit in value since
that agreed-upon price.
We would get impact fee credits based upon the land value.
And county staff would be in charge and control what amenities
would be in the community park.
We would provide two affordable housing sites as part of this
project that would total 88 acres, and as you know under your new
rules, we'd have to make sure they were entitled at 10 units per acre,
so that would be 880 units associated with affordable housing under
your new rules.
We've agreed to increase the SSA credit requirements from the
current eight that we're going through today to 10, so we would
May 25, 2021
Page 156
actually utilize more credits than we're legally required to under
today's rules and regulations. We've addressed the two school sites
would be provided to Collier County School District.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: With all due respect, where are the
school sites here?
MR. YOVANOVICH: It's up that way.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Just north of Rivergrass.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So we would provide the two school
sites to Collier County School District. We have agreed that the
fiscal neutrality analysis that we would be doing would include all
three villages plus the additional lands for the town. So it would be
a comprehensive fiscal neutrality analysis and, likewise, so would the
traffic analysis. It would be all three villages and the new lands
being added.
I highlighted for you some of the other commitments that we
made regarding the wildlife crossings, and I went through those as
part of the town plan; the bear-proof trash cans, the Dark Skies
requirements for Bellmar. It's also in the Longwater SRA. The
prescribed burn issue that Commissioner Taylor brought up is part of
the town plan.
And we believe that, you know, the benefits to the county
include the economic diversification that the county originally
wanted with towns out in this area; employment opportunities. We
are certain that it will reduce trips to the west, and in the affordable
housing sites, it's a mixed-use development as required under the
town plan or your town provisions. The school sites, the community
park, and the town core and business park and goods and services
provided are benefits to not only people who live in the town but as
well as Collier County as a whole.
The plan -- this town Growth Management Plan was presented
May 25, 2021
Page 157
to your Planning Commission as an informational item. They chose
to make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners,
and their recommendation was for approval of the town agreement as
proposed. We're looking forward to hopefully Phase 2 of this and
bringing forward the town. Obviously, it's going to take some time
to do the traffic analysis and the fiscal neutrality analysis, so we think
a year to get in is a reasonable period of time to do those detailed
analyses, and holding back all the COs in Bellmar, I think, shows you
a commitment that we're serious about moving forward with the
town -- a proposed town out in this area.
With that, that's our summary of the town agreement.
Available to answer any questions you may have regarding the town
agreement. That's a summary of all of our petitions. And we're six
minutes early.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I do have a couple of questions about
the school sites. Did you pick those school sites, or did you work
with the schools?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, the school system. We worked
with Mr. Eastman.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: School system. And so if you look
at the one that's off the map, there is no road there, correct, that
serves it?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Fifty-six.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Fifty-six. So it's a neighborhood
road. It's not a Big Cypress or anything like that, because the
improvement for Big Cypress is at the bottom, correct?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Ultimately, Big Cypress goes from
Golden Gate Boulevard all the way to Immokalee Road.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Right. Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that -- and you've -- and that's in
the original landowner agreement that was approved as part of
May 25, 2021
Page 158
Rivergrass, and assuming Bellmar and Longwater get approved,
you'll have the ability to get the right-of-way all the way to Oil
Well -- I'm sorry -- Immokalee Road.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And how many stoplights are there
on Oil Well Road based on this? I know that -- I think there's two or
three for Rivergrass.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, no, there's one for Rivergrass in
this location, and I'm going to be approximate.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Approximately right there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm going to assume, based upon all of
my years as a transportation consultant, that you're probably going to
have one here as well --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yep.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- when and if Big Cypress Parkway is
ever constructed.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And then what about going, I'm not
sure what direction, east?
MR. YOVANOVICH: This way?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. Would there -- there's got to be
one there, right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we anticipating one there?
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Could be.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No guarantees, but I wouldn't be
surprised if warrants were met to put another traffic signal there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Anything else?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No one else has any questions that I
see. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: All righty. Well, I think staff's up
May 25, 2021
Page 159
next.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Staff is up next.
MS. SCOTT: Good afternoon. For the record, Trinity Scott,
Deputy Department Head, Growth Management Department.
I liked how we started there where we just were going to start
with "thank you," and we could sit down and cut off a lot of time,
right?
We have a staff presentation that takes a little bit different
approach than how Mr. Yovanovich went through his presentation.
How we have structured our presentation is for the items that are the
same for both petitions, we will address those as each subject matter
expert comes forward, and then if there are different items, that same
subject matter expert will stay up, will talk about Longwater, then
Bellmar, and then we'll proceed onto the next party.
So we have multiple folks with us today who will be addressing
you with regard to Comprehensive Planning. And, actually, we had
a game-day decision. James Sabo is here, so he will be here as well
as Ray Bellows for Comprehensive Planning. And then we have
multiple folks who will be in front of you to address you.
And with that, I'm going to turn it over for planning an d the
planning consistency review.
Oh, wow. They're all lined up.
MR. SABO: Good afternoon. James Sabo, Comprehensive
Planning manager for the county.
Again, as Ms. Scott mentioned, these are for both projects,
Bellmar and Longwater.
Planning consistency review: Projects are consistent with
the -- oh, yes, I'm sorry. I was not here to get sworn in. Would you
please swear me in.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. SABO: Yes, I do. Pardon me. Thank you.
May 25, 2021
Page 160
Okay. Back to it. The projects are consistent with the RLSA
overlay and the objective requirements. The RLSA uses Attachment
C, and as Mr. Mulhere had mentioned, it is consistent with
Attachment C, which is what we use. It's consistent with the relative
Group 4 policies as well. And as I mentioned there are -- let's see.
Policy 4.7 from the RLSA, there's four specific forms of SRA
development type. It is one of those. It is a village, or both are
villages, excuse me.
4.7.2, they're 1,000 acres or less. Diversity of housing types, a
village center has a focal point, parks and rec, public green spaces,
pedestrian and bike-friendly development, and interconnectivity. It's
compact development directing it away from wetlands and critical
habitat, and the perimeter is from higher density to lower density.
And with that, I would like to introduce Nancy Gundlach.
MS. GUNDLACH: Thank you, James, and good afternoon,
Commissioners.
Longwater and Bellmar SRAs, they are consistent with the Land
Development Code, Section 4.08, and they demonstrate an
urban-to-rural continuum in that they have diversification and
intensification of uses in the village centers.
And if you see that little tan area, that is your village center on
Bellmar, and the tan area along Big Cypress Parkway is located
along -- excuse me -- in Longwater as well. And as James had
mentioned, it is walkable, and they have sidewalks on both sides of
the streets. And they are also --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't think so.
MS. GUNDLACH: They do.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: On one side of the street, I heard.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Both.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: On both sides? Okay, good. Thank
you.
May 25, 2021
Page 161
MS. GUNDLACH: You're welcome.
And those are our circles demonstrating our continuums. And
also both of these villages provide the minimum code-required
buffering, which is your Type D buffer along Big Cypress Parkway,
and adjacent to the agricultural lands they provide a Type A buffer.
And with that we have with us today Cormac Giblin to talk
about housing affordability.
MR. GIBLIN: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Cormac Giblin, your Planning Manager in Development
Review.
I've reviewed both these petitions in terms of housing
affordability and housing diversity. And on the screen you have the
Policy 4.7.2 from your Growth Management Plan which delineates
the review standard is that villages are primarily residential
communities with a diversity of housing types and mixes of
appropriate scale and character to the particular village.
And then also from your Land Development Code, Policy
4.08.07, which states that villages should offer a range of housing
types and price levels to accommodate diverse ages and incomes.
In my review of both these villages, they both have the same
clause included in the proposed resolution that at least 10 percent of
all the residential units, which would be 260 in Longwater and 275 in
Bellmar, will be sold at purchase prices in the moderate or gap
affordability range or, as an alternative, they will designate
2.5 percent of the gross acreage of the SRA for use for affordable
housing. These -- this commitment is substantially similar to the
proposed RLSA amendments that you're scheduled to hear next
month and also with those that are included in the proposed town
plan.
With that, I'll introduce Ms. Jaime Cook for environmental.
MS. COOK: Good afternoon, Jaime Cook, principal
May 25, 2021
Page 162
environmental specialist with Development Review.
The environmental review consists of two phases, the first of
which is the document review, which includes the Natural Resource
Index Assessment. The NRI scoring is an attempt to reflect the
environmental value of the landscape and to incentivize the
protection of the most valuable resources. It's not solely for listed
species protection.
Supplemental information that's included within the NRI
Assessment includes the vegetation inventory of the current
landscape, a soils map, and listed species surveys. Listed species
surveys must be conducted in accordance with current LDC
regulations as well as guidance and protocols from Florida Fish and
Wildlife Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Environmental staff works with county GIS staff to ensure that
the GIS data that has been submitted is consistent with the documents
and that the NRI values provided by the applicant are correct.
Staff also conducts on-site field verification to ensure that the
vegetation, soils, and listed species surveys are accurate with the
current field conditions. Staff conducted multiple site visits both to
the Longwater and Bellmar SRAs during the review of these projects.
The Natural Resource Index Assessment consists of six factors
including the stewardship designation proximity, soils and surface
water, listed species, restoration potential, and land cover, which
refers to the vegetation.
These factors are scored on an acre-by-acre basis, and during the
document review, staff determines if any acres of land have received
a total NRI score above 1.2. All lands within a proposed SRA that
have an index value of equal to or less than 1.2 are eligible for
development. Any lands that score over a 1.2 must be retained as
open space per the Land Development Code.
With respect to Longwater, the GIS output results on the
May 25, 2021
Page 163
left-hand side of your screen show the total NRI score for each acre
of land. There are four acres within the SRA boundary that scored
above a 1.2 NRI score, and those are shown circled in red towards the
bottom of the proposed village.
If you also look at the applicant's master plan, you can see that
this area is proposed to be retained as a park preserve, and the
applicant is also retaining another isolated wetland in the central
portion of the village even though that area did not score above a 1.2
on the NRI Assessment.
With respect to Bellmar, the GIS output results for the final NRI
scores are shown on the left. There were zero acres of land within
the boundary that scored above a 1.2 NRI value. And if you look at
their master plan, you can see that there is an isolated wetland in the
northeastern portion of the village that is being retained as a park
preserve even though it did not score above a 1.2 NRI score.
Both villages are utilizing credits from SSA 15 for their
entitlement. SSA 15 is 5,253 acres located north and south of Oil
Well Road as part of the Camp Keais wetland flowway system. An
amendment to the SSA was approved by the Board in January 2020
which awarded 31,367 credits to the SSA.
Early-entry credits were generated for SSAs that were
established prior to January of 2009 and were calculated as a credit
earned for every acre of Habitat Stewardship Area within that SSA.
The base credits is a calculation of the NRI score multiplied by the
base credit score for land-use layers removed, multiplied by acres of
land use.
The R1 restoration credits for the designation of restoration are
available to the applicant for use; however, the R2 credits are not yet
available, as the restoration work has not been completed; therefore,
SSA 15 has 20,653 credits available; 6,198 credits were already used
to entitle the Rivergrass Village SRA, so the remaining balance of
May 25, 2021
Page 164
14,452.92 credits exceeds the number of credits need ed to entitle both
Longwater and Bellmar Villages with a balance of 1,015 credits.
The graphic on the right shows the NRI scores for SSA 15. It's
important to note that the scale for this one is slightly different for the
scales on the Longwater and Bellmar NRI outputs. So in this
graphic, everything that is in bright green, turquoise, and blue scored
above a 1.2 NRI score. Of the 5,253 acres, 4,715 scored above a 1.2,
which is 89 percent of the SSA.
With regards to your agenda, you also have three
recommendations from staff to approve amendments for the escrow
agreements for SSAs 14, 15, and 17 to reconcile the source of
stewardship credits for Longwater and Bellmar Villages to utilize
credits from SSA 15. Staff supports this request, as there are enough
credits available within 15. Unless you have any questions, I'll turn
it over to Eric Fey to discuss utilities.
MR. FEY: Thank you. For the record, Eric Fey, principal
project manager with Public Utilities. I will be brief, as the
applicant's presentation covered most of the aspects of utilities
services that I wanted to cover.
I will give you a brief update on the northeast service area utility
extension project. The graphic here on this slide shows an overview
of that project. The orange oval here is the northeast utility facility
site, the green lines mark the pipeline corridors that are under
construction now, and then the various villages that are proposed are
shown in the various colors.
The segments necessary to provide water, potable water ,
wastewater, and irrigation-quality water services to the Big Cypress
stewardship district are complete. So we are ready to serve
development when it comes. The interim wastewater treatment plant
that is proposed at the northeast utility site will be complete this
December.
May 25, 2021
Page 165
One thing I wanted to cover that the applicant's presentation
didn't address was the Collier County Water/Sewer District's
responsibility under the interlocal agreements that are companion
items to these SRAs. Under the Longwater Village agreement, we
will be reimbursing the Big Cypress Stewardship District
$2.7 million for their cost in establishing service to Longwater
Village, and we'll construct the transmission mains between
Longwater Village and Bellmar Village by the end of Fiscal Year '24
per the Bellmar agreement.
As noted on the slide, the Bellmar Village interlocal agreement
does rely on services being established to Longwater Village so, as a
matter of course, the agreements need to be approved together or the
Bellmar Village agreement -- it's reliant upon the Longwater Village
agreement.
With that, if you have any questions on utilities, I'd be happy to
answer them; otherwise, I will yield to our new department head,
Trinity Scott, to talk about transportation planning.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I have one quick question, if
I can.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: The expansion of the
northeast -- the boundary for the northeast system allowed for
property owners to put the infrastructure in for wastewater a nd water
but to the county standards; is that -- do I remember that correctly?
MR. FEY: Yes, that is correct. And then under our interlocal
agreement, all utilities internal to the SRAs will follow our standards.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Gotcha. Okay, thank you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Quick question.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Did I understand you saying that
the improvements for the capacity that's needed, the additional
May 25, 2021
Page 166
capacity's already completed or will be completed by the end of the
year? Did I hear something to that effect?
MR. FEY: Yeah. I mentioned the one-and-a-half million
gallons per day interim wastewater treatment plant, which is an initial
phase of our northeast utilities project, that will be completed in
December.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: This December?
MR. FEY: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, we're doing it. It's
being done now.
MR. FEY: And if you go out there now, you'll see the work in
progress with their tanks. Very good.
MS. SCOTT: Good afternoon again. Trinity Scott.
With me today I have Michael Sawyer, the project manager with
Transportation Planning, as well as Greg Root from Aim
Engineering, who assisted with a third-party peer review for the
transportation impact statement.
We're going to start today by a little way-back machine for us.
Going back to 2015 -- not too far back -- the county embarked on the
Oil Well Road/Randall Boulevard study which was an extensive
planning study that looked at corridor alternatives to accommodate
existing and future growth in Eastern Collier County. The study
identified the network Alternative 2-plus, which was adopted by the
Board in 2019. This network was adopted by the Board because it
was best for enhancing the future roadway network, it relieved
intersections along Immokalee Road, connects to future north/south
Big Cypress Parkway and, ultimately, was provided grid connections
that maintain the context sensitivity to the residents of Golden Gate
Estates.
By adopting this network, what we were very fortunate to be
able to do was to maintain four-lane roadways for a majority of
May 25, 2021
Page 167
Golden Gate Estates instead of going to six-lane facilities. So we
have additional network in the area.
This network was incorporated into the 2045 Collier
Metropolitan Planning Organization Long-Range Transportation Plan
which, as you are aware, the MPO is mandated by federal and state
law to plan for existing residents and anticipated growth and develop
a long-range plan with a 20-year planning horizon.
The MPO's Long-Range Transportation Plan fully funds for
construction Everglades Boulevard from Vanderbilt Beach Road to
Randall Boulevard and Randall Boulevard from Eighth Street to
Everglades Boulevard and Everglades Boulevard from Randall
Boulevard to Oil Well Road. These are either directly impacted
segments, parallel relievers to other roadways but were ultimately
identified during the county's planning study to set the stage for what
the transportation network should look like in the future.
So those are the roadways that are anticipated between 2026
through 2045, but what that doesn't take into consideration are the
roadways that are identified in our Capital Improvement Element for
Eastern Collier County.
As you can see, in the next five years we're making great strides
in adding additional network and additional facilities in Golden Gate
Estates and the surrounding area to provide for the anticipated growth
within the area.
You're going to hear testimony later today that the roadways are
not fiscally neutral, that they will be a drain on Collier County
taxpayers, and through your adopted Long-Range Transportation
Plan process that you, when you put on your MPO board hat,
adopted, we must look at reasonably anticipated revenues. And for
capacity improvements, the reasonably anticipated revenues for the
2045 Long-Range Transportation Plan are fuel taxes and impact fees.
We do not, based on the Long-Range Transportation Plan, anticipate
May 25, 2021
Page 168
the use of ad valorem taxes for capacity-adding projects. That is a
policy decision by the Board of County Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So it's on our shoulders.
MS. SCOTT: No, that's not what I -- that's not what I stated.
What I stated was, if the Board opts to utilize other funding sources,
that is a policy decision based on the Board. We are very
conservative in our Long-Range Transportation Plan, and we only
build -- we only anticipate building what we can afford with our
anticipated fuel taxes and our anticipated impact fees.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And have you factored in the fact that
FDOT has said that these gas taxes are already going down, and
they're going to continue to depreciate?
MS. SCOTT: Absolutely. What we looked at with our impact
fees is vehicle miles traveled do go up, so we held them very, very,
very conservative with our revenues in the Long-Range
Transportation Plan.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. SCOTT: So when we are looking at what an applicant's
responsibility is, we must also look at what is allowable based on
Florida Statutes. Florida Statute 163.3180 -- it skipped a slide,
sorry -- states that when we're determining an applicant's fair share,
facilities that are determined to be deficient with existing, committed,
and vested trips, plus projected background traffic from any source
other than the development shall be removed from the
proportionate-share calculation. That improvement necessary to
correct that deficiency is the funding responsibility for the
maintaining agency.
We must be willing to enter into a binding agreement with the
applicant to pay or construct their proportionate share if it is deemed
that they should.
When we're calculating that proportionate share, the applicant
May 25, 2021
Page 169
must receive a credit for their anticipated road impact fees. So, in
essence, the applicant is required to pay the higher of either the
proportionate share based on Florida Statutes required calculation
methodology, or their road impact fees. This will be very important
when we get later in the presentation.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Trinity, can you just go back one
slide. I just want to make sure that it's clear what this -- what that
means. That means that if there's already a road that's failing, that's
failing because of prior issues or growth or whatever, that that is not
the responsibility of the new landowner that's coming in. They have
to be responsible for their growth, not --
MS. SCOTT: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. Okay. So that's -- and
that's fair. If that's already failing, then we can't expect somebody to
fix something that they didn't cause the failure of.
MS. SCOTT: Exactly.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And this -- and this statute, this is
recent law; is that correct?
MS. SCOTT: I believe it was adopted in 2015'ish.
So we worked with the applicant because -- as we were
progressing through with the villages, we worked with the applicant
to actually do a cumulative analysis of all three villages not with a
town, just the three villages of what would the traffic impacts be, and
we asked them to look at what their proportionate share would be
compared to their impact fees.
So when you look at the roadways that Longwater and Bellmar
would impact, there are -- these roadways that are noted on this slide
are deficient without them based on background traffic; however,
these are the same roadways. We have planned or committed
improvements to address those deficiencies.
May 25, 2021
Page 170
So this slide shows what is deficient due to the village traffic
without the planned improvement. So we show Longwater on its
own, Bellmar, and then if you looked cumulatively at Rivergrass,
Longwater, and Bellmar Villages, these are the roadways that would
be deficient due to village traffic without planned improvements.
Because many of these roadways are constrained, such as
Golden Gate Boulevard from Wilson to Everglades Boulevard and
Oil Well Road from Immokalee Road to Everglades, it's necessary
that we look at parallel roadways to determine if sufficient capacity is
available based on those planned and commitment improvements.
And once we look at the parallel roadway network, you see that there
would be -- the remaining roadways that could be eligible to pay a
proportionate share.
So we calculated the proportionate share based on those
remaining roadways. And I remind you that they are -- when we
calculate a proportionate share, there is a credit for impact fees
anticipated. So the impact fees anticipated are roughly $54 million
between the three villages.
The impact fees are significantly higher than what the
proportionate share would be. So the applicant, based on the
cumulative analysis that was prepared and included as part of their
Traffic Impact Statement that we had requested that they do, showed
that they would pay the higher of the two, which are their road impact
fees.
So getting into specifics of the villages at hand today. Per
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element -- I'm sorry. Per the
Capital Improvement Element, projects that are identified in Years 3,
4, and 5 of our Capital Improvement Element of the Growth
Management Plan are considered for consistency purposes when
reviewing our land-use petitions. As I noted earlier, we've
significant improvements in the next five years in that area.
May 25, 2021
Page 171
Going back, just a reminder about Florida Statutes that the
applicant's not required to pay for anything that would be deficient
based on background traffic alone.
For the Longwater petition, there are three roadways identified
on the top that are deficient without the project traffic. There are
four roadways on the bottom that are anticipated once you add the
project traffic. So the applicant would be required to look at the last
roadway on that list, which is Randall Boulevard from Everglades
Boulevard to DeSoto Boulevard and, as Norm discussed earlier, they
calculated the proportionate share. And I'll get to that in an
upcoming slide.
We also had them do the same for Bellmar. For Bellmar you
note on the bottom three roadway segments where a
proportionate-share calculation would be necessary. Those three
roadway segments would be deficient based on the project traffic for
Bellmar.
So the proportionate share for capacity improvements for
Longwater would be $700,000. Their roadway impact fees credits
will greatly exceed that. They're upwards of 16 or $17 million.
For Bellmar the proportionate share was $4 million. And, once
again, the impact fees will greatly exceed that amount of that
proportionate share. So the applicant will be required to pay the
higher of those two amounts, which will be their road impact fees.
I'm sorry. Longwater was 17.7 million anticipated roadway, and
Bellmar's 18.7.
With regard to the villages, we go one step further and also look
at operational mitigation for intersections. Florida Statute 70.45,
which was enacted in 2015, prohibits an exaction. So we are not
able to require a developer to do anything that lacks an essential
nexus to a legitimate public purpose that's not roughly proportionate
to the impacts of their proposed use. So we calculated their
May 25, 2021
Page 172
fair-share mitigation operational improvements for both villages.
For Longwater it is $622,000, and for Bellmar it is $2.2 million.
The applicant will pay this within a specified time frame that is
identified within the resolution. I believe it's within 30 days of the
first development order.
Operational improvements are not eligible for impact fee credits,
so that will just be a check that the developer writes that we will
utilize to offset those roadway operational impacts.
And with that, I'm going to turn it over to our Deputy County
Manager, Amy Patterson, who will discuss fiscal neutrality, and I'll
be back up in a minute to talk about the town.
You have a question?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Again, I'm just trying to make sure
it's clear. So based upon the analysis staff has to do in Chapter 163,
if we looked at the proportionate share and how that's calculated,
what the applicant's going to pay in terms of their impact fees is more
than that proportionate-share calculation?
MS. SCOTT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Six times.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. A lot more?
MS. SCOTT: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. They're paying more than
their fair share based --
MS. SCOTT: Well, they're --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: -- upon the calculation of what the
fair share would be?
MS. SCOTT: Based on the Florida Statute; however, we --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right.
MS. SCOTT: -- have adopted road impact fees, and they will
pay those road impact fees.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Right. I'm saying that the impact
May 25, 2021
Page 173
fees exceed what their fair share would be based upon how you have
to calculate what the fair share is under the statute.
MS. SCOTT: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But on the other hand, understanding
that that's a relatively new law, and all that started changing. Under
the DCA this would never have happened. There would have been
very different numbers. When they gutted the DCA, things started
to change, and we are directed from the state how we're treating
development.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I mean, it's what we have to --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It is the law.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Whether we like it or not, right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: That's right. It is the law.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: That's the law, okay.
MS. PATTERSON: Good afternoon. Amy Patterson, Deputy
County Manager, for the record, and I'm here to talk about the most
exciting portion of this presentations, which is the fiscal neutrality
and economic assessment.
I'm going to try to go through this a little bit more quickly.
There's a lot of detail here. You all have heard this a few times and
probably have seen some of our testimony in front of the Planning
Commission. I'm also going to be co-presenting with Joe Bellone,
so some of our presentation's going to overlap a little bit because of
the utility.
So there's a lot of questions about how we pay for growth, so I'm
going to talk about things in four sections -- actually in three, and
Joe's going to talk about one. That's the economic assessment that's
required, fiscal neutrality, which arises out of the economic
assessment, and how the staff approaches that review, and then Joe is
going to drill in deeper to the issues that pertain specifically to the
May 25, 2021
Page 174
water/sewer district.
So the economic assessment is required by the Land
Development Code, and it's used to demonstrate the fiscal neutrality
or to identify deficiencies. The current model being used for these
villages is a static model. The county is required to agree to that
methodology. So when the applicants come in, we sit down and we
talk about how they want to do this assessment, and we come to an
agreement on that methodology.
This is an interactive process with the facility managers. I can't
emphasize enough how important this is. This process is not done in
a vacuum nor is it just done by your financial staff. The folks that
do the economic assessment for the applicants actually meet with
those people that manage these facilities. That's the people that are
in fire, EMS, parks, libraries. All of those facilities that make up this
economic assessment, they have a seat at the table, and they're telling
the applicant about their real-time needs both related to growth as
well as operational issues.
The process does rely on adopted data. We'll talk about that,
the impact fee methodology, as well as millage rates and all of the
other underpinnings of your financial system. And in this case, this
doesn't just rely on your staff to do this analysis or even your subject
matter experts or your facility managers, but we brought in a
third-party peer reviewer. Each one of us approached this in a
slightly different fashion, but we all arrived at the same conclusion,
which we'll get to at the end of my presentation.
So fiscal neutrality is required to demonstrate that the
development is fiscally neutral or positive to the tax base. The
assumptions should be consistent with county fiscal policy, so it's
going to rely, again, on our adopted impact fee rates, millage rates,
and any other funding sources that come into play to fund these
various capital improvements as well as the operations of these
May 25, 2021
Page 175
facilities.
It integrates analysis of funding sources as well as level of
service, where things get pretty complicated. Level of service is
very detailed and very specific to the various facilities that we're
analyzing.
There are strategies that are identified to address deficiencies if
the proposed development actually does create its own deficiencies.
And it cannot require development to cure existing deficiencies.
So, again, we have a number of facilities right now for various
reasons that have -- that are operating in a deficiency in the capital
programs, and there's reasons for that. Capital programs oftentimes
have deficiencies before we come in and do capital improvements to
get that level of service back to functioning, but we cannot put that on
the backs of new development. They're only required to pay for that
demand that they create.
So we hear the term "growth pays for growth," and what does
that really mean? Well, growth can only pay for growth as it's
allowed by law, and that's something that we consider in the impact
fees every time we review the impact fees. We're required to look at
all other funding sources that are used for the same purpose as an
impact fee, and they actually are then factored into the methodology
as a credit. Most recently we looked at this as part of the one-cent
sales tax and the impact of those dollars coming into the capital
program for things like transportation and parks. So that funding
source actually served as a credit against the impact fees.
Developers cannot be required to pay impact fees above and
beyond the cost reasonably attributed to the demand that they create.
So we can't just say they're going to pay more because it seems like it
would be more fair or it seems like they create a different type of
demand. You actually have to be able to prove that, and it has to be
a factor of the methodology.
May 25, 2021
Page 176
So some limiting factors on impact fees are credits and offsets,
as discussed, when you have other funding sources, and a lot of these
impact fees categories do utilize other funding sources. We'll talk
about the utility a little bit later and being a very separate and distinct
facility in its use of -- its two funding sources.
Policy decisions, that is not something that happens a lot here in
Collier, but other places board of County Commissioners or other
governing bodies make decisions about those fees, to implement
them at a lower level than the maximum legal limit, and
that's -- there's nothing wrong with that. It just means it's
supplemented by another funding source.
Level of service impacts your ability to implement your fees. If
you have a level of service that's exceeding your adopted, that
actually brings your impact fees down. The prohibition on
exactions, which Trinity discussed, does not allow us to come in an d
overcharge a developer. And the amount of growth is directly tied to
how much revenue you get in. As we experienced during the
recession, there was no growth. There were no impact fees. So it's
pretty self-limiting.
So what goes into a review of an economic assessment and a
finding of fiscal neutrality? A lot of things. We have a detailed
review of the funding sources and calculations, detailed knowledge of
level-of-service standards, and an understanding of existing
level-of-service deficiencies.
So when we're looking at these developments and we're
reviewing their fiscal neutrality and their economic assessment, we
first have to understand if we already have existing deficiencies. As
Trinity explained about transportation, as well as our other categories
of public facilities, we can't assume that we can pass that cost off
onto the developer. They're only responsible for the demand that
they're creating and any deficiencies they create that are tied
May 25, 2021
Page 177
specifically to their development.
We have to have working knowledge of the difference between
exactions, contributions, and other financial tools that are used to
fund infrastructure and the limitations on those tools. We have
applicable case law. Trinity described this well.
Population projections and datasets is another favorite, as
Ms. Gallo touched on, understanding how population comes into
play, and the different datasets. Even that simple difference between
persons per household and per housing unit has to be understood and
correctly applied in order to not skew the outcome of the economic
assessment.
Impact fee methodology or other methodologies used in these
funding sources, and then also the planning process -- Joe's going to
talk about this a little bit in the utility -- the planning process versus
how capital projects actually get executed and constructed.
So we'll talk a little about common misconceptions regarding
capital projects and capital project infrastructure funding. Applying
a straight-line fiscal analysis to an engineering issue, this is more
specifically to the utility, can cause issues particularly when we have
things like phasing involved. This is, again, the utility where we
have increments of infrastructure that are being developed. You
cannot take the cost and try to load that all onto the first users into the
system. We'll talk about that more about the utility as Joe gets up
here.
Again, overestimation of costs that are attributable to new
development; you cannot require new development to pay more than
their fair share.
Vacancy rates, as Ms. Gallo touched on, is incredibly important
when we're looking at this to not overestimate population or
underestimate population. The vacancy rates or seasonal population
are just a couple of different examples, and that consistency
May 25, 2021
Page 178
throughout the analysis is very important.
Same thing with trying to skew those numbers or making sure
that you're not by mixing those datasets because it can greatly affect
the outcome of the analysis. And utilizing data for a purpose other
than its intended use or basis can, again, skew the analysis.
So specific to the utility, there are a few things to be considered.
Specifically there are business decisions involved like the expansion
of the utility. It was a decision of this Board of County
Commissioners to expand out into the eastern lands and no longer
allow the construction of private utilities. That was a decision that
was made by this board and a sound business decision for the utility
because we have to consider things like the cost to acquire and
retrofit private utilities in the future versus the initial cost of
expanding the utility to accommodate future and current growth.
As Trinity touched on already, is exactions are not authorized
under Florida law without equal credit being granted. We can ask
for things, but if it's an impact -fee-eligible cost, credit has to be
given. That was a specific example Mr. Fey brought up about the
$2.7 million cost for the pipe and upsizing, which is not a cost
assignable to the developer. It's a cost that's assignable to the utility
and, therefore, a credit or payment has to be given to the developer
for that cost.
So specifically, even though this is a greater issue than impact
fees -- and I guess I can't stress that enough that the economic
assessment is reliant on impact fees in part because impact fees are so
critical to our infrastructure funding here in Collier, but it is
not -- this is not an argument about the impact fees or the level of our
impact fees or the appropriateness of impact fees but rather just that
the impact fees are one of the tools in the basket of revenues that
we're using to fund these capital improvements.
So Collier has 12 individual impact fees that are regularly
May 25, 2021
Page 179
updated. Utilities impact fees and transportation impac t fees were
updated in 2020 and will be updated on a regular schedule in
accordance with the local and state requirements to most accurately
reflect the growth-eligible costs throughout the utility and throughout
the transportation network as well as the other impact fee funds.
There have been multiple inconsistencies that have been
identified in the various outside analysis that's been provided to this
point. It does generate a perception that certain developments will
have a negative impact on the tax base, but that has not been
supported by the economic assessment, the staff analysis, or the
outside peer review.
And with that, unless you have questions for me specifically,
we're going to turn it over to Joe Bellone to talk about the Collier
County Water/Sewer District and some of the specific fiscal issues
there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I don't see anything right now,
Ms. Patterson.
MR. BELLONE: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the
record, Joe Bellone, Utilities Finance Director.
I think it's important to put on the record at the beginning -- you
may have heard some of this before, but it's important to put on the
record that the water/sewer district is a special district created by the
Florida Legislature. It's got to follow certain rules and regulations.
And one of those in Section 3 says that the BCC is given overall
responsibility for provision of water and sewer services to prevent the
proliferation of package treatment plants. So that suggests
that -- developers provide their own systems really is contrary to that
stipulation in the special act. Section 6 says that rates shall be just,
meaning there's a rational nexus to that fee, and it has to be uniform
for users of the same class. So any suggestions that developers of
either Longwater or Bellmar should pay more for a capacity
May 25, 2021
Page 180
reservation, that's an ERC, than anyone else anywhere else in the
regional system just doesn't hold any water in this instance.
Timeline. Way back -- I think the utility is obviously a
long-range planning operation, and back in 2003, the utility
recognized that capacity expansion was going to become necessary
given the growth that was going on at that time. And the utility
found a great site, 216 acres, it happened to be in the northeast, just
east of the fairgrounds, and that was decided that that would be the
site for the expansion.
As we move along in 2004, we started design of the regional
plants on that site, and in 2008, as Immokalee Road was being
widened, we knew that this would be a regional system
interconnected, and so the transmission mains and collection mains
were installed as Immokalee Road's being widened along Immokalee
Road all the way up to 39th Avenue so that the systems could be
interconnected.
Of course, we all know what happened at that point. The Great
Recession put a hold on any expansion plans, and concurrently we
had an impact fee rate study that reduced impact fees, at least on the
water and wastewater side, by 30 percent.
The end of the recession, growth began again, and we
reactivated the design contract in response to that.
Let's continue to more recently. As was mentioned before, the
decision was to expand the utility service area into the northeast area
of the county. The design contracts were built and, as Eric
mentioned, the wastewater -- interim wastewater treatment plant and
the storage tanks are nearing completion. We had to borrow money
currently. We borrowed some money to do that. These facilities
have to be built and constructed and completed in advance of any
demand. And as Amy mentioned, the more recent water and sewer
impact fees were adopted in 2019, they went into effect in March of
May 25, 2021
Page 181
2020, and they increased impact fees 27.2 percent. So they were not
quite where they were back in 2008, but close.
We mentioned before many times that the utility is an enterprise
fund. There's absolutely no general tax funding, and I'm sure our
County Manager will nod his head up and down that that will never
happen.
We mentioned that we actually, from our engineers, we are
building in the northeast in phases. Some of the underground
structure has to be in place, of course, but then phasing of the
treatment plants will be based on demand. It's a function of demand.
And just as a sidenote, we are almost completing our master plans,
and those will be -- those expansion plans will be addressed in more
detail in the AUIR that you'll see this fall.
I think it's also important here to note before I move on to any
more detail about Longwater and Bellmar, that a growing utility is a
good thing. It guarantees a future user-fee revenue stream, and that
can be used not only to operate and maintain the utility system on a
day-to-day basis, but to rehabilitate aging infrastructure anywhere in
the service area. And as we know, we have lots of AC pipe, pump
stations, clay wastewater pipes, cast iron pipes that will need
replacement. So a future revenue stream that will be provided by
these new customers will be very welcome.
Eric mentioned the expansion of the service area, and you can
see -- let me see if I can point here. Okay. We've got the villages
that we're talking about here, Hyde Park, Immokalee Road Rural
Village, et cetera, and the site is kind of right there.
Okay. Let's talk a little bit about Longwater. What I'm trying
to do is I'm trying to look at the demand that this particular village
will create. And based on the number of residential
connections -- we know what the impact fee rates are today, so we
know what -- at buildout what we will generate in impact fee
May 25, 2021
Page 182
revenues. Between water and wastewater, you add those up, it's
about close to $17.8 million. We know what our FY '19 and FY '21
actual costs are. The costs, as we move out to further phases of the
expansion are estimates, but they're most-recent estimates. They're
not exactly the estimates that were used to create the impact fee rate
study. So you have a little bit of a mix of apples and oranges. The
costs a little higher than we thought. We know what happened to
construction costs over the last year.
And so if you look at what DEP will require us to build in terms
of water capacity and wastewater capacity, those costs will total
17.7 million, so we're pretty even. We will have another bite at the
apple next year when we come back with an updated impact fee rate
study.
The utility, in the interlocal agreement that you'll look at as 11E
today, developer agrees to advance water and sewer impact fees to
the utility to the tune of 350 ERCs for both water and wastewater,
and those total $2,343,600, and that is to offset some of the debt
service that we'll be incurring as we issue these new bonds to create
the infrastructure we need.
We move on to Bellmar. I did a similar example. Same
assumptions apply. We have a little bit more commercial in
Bellmar. And, again, capacity reservation for commercial is difficult
to forecast. You don't know what they're going to build, how
intensive the capacity needs are going to be. We made an estimate,
and we can estimate those impact fee revenues to be $19.7 million
combined for water and wastewater.
Our costs -- our estimated costs, as we know them today, total
about 19.6 million. So, again, we're right about on par, and we've
extracted some advanced impact fees as well from Bellmar. A little
bit more for water, 650 ERCs. We need to build -- because it's
further away, we need to build a repump station much like the one we
May 25, 2021
Page 183
have at Carica or Manatee or Isles of Capri. So we'll get 650 ERCs
of water and 350 advanced ERCs for wastewater, for a total of
2,358,200. You add these two villages together, we'll get advanced
payment of $5,701,800. Those, again, will be -- go toward the debt
service that we'll be incurring as the bonds are issued.
And with that, I'll answer any questions you have.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a couple questions.
MR. BELLONE: Sure.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The debt service on the bonds right
now, because we borrowed a significant amount of money, who's
paying that?
MR. BELLONE: That's coming out of impact fees right now.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Impact fees.
MR. BELLONE: Water and sewer impact fees. They are
sufficient today to pay those.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. And then the wells.
There's some wells out there, correct, some freshwater wells?
MR. BELLONE: There are some freshwater wells, but what
we'll be building on this site will be RO treatment, which will require
deeper wells, and when I come to you next month with the next bond
series, you'll see that in that is a request to build the deeper wells that
we'll need as a brackish water supply for that treatment process.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And so any new development out
there is going to have RO, meaning --
MR. BELLONE: Water -- I mean, this being a regional system,
we have different treatment processes right now. Our north plant
and our south plant have four different processes. We're intending to
start with RO on the northeast.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
MR. BELLONE: But again, water flows where water flows.
You create a demand, and the water goes there unless, of course, you
May 25, 2021
Page 184
valve it off. So I can't tell you it's 100 percent RO. That's what
we'll build on the northeast at the beginning, yes.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. BELLONE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No other questions? No. Thank
you very much.
MR. BELLONE: Thank you.
MR. ISACKSON: Ma'am, I'm looking at the court reporter,
Terri. She looks like she's struggling here a little bit. Possibly a
break.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We can break. You're done.
THE COURT REPORTER: Ten minutes.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: We're almost at two hours.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah. So why don't we -- how
much time do you need; 10 minutes? That's fine.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We're working pretty hard. Ten
minutes. Thank you.
(A brief recess was had from 4:22 p.m. to 4:32 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, you have a live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Okay.
MS. GUNDLACH: Good afternoon, again, Commissioners.
For the record, Nancy Gundlach.
And before we get into the town plan, I just wanted to state for
the record that staff is recommending approval of the Longwater
Village SRA, and we wanted you also to know that the testimony that
was presented by the petitioner, we are in agreement with it, and it is
consistent with the GMP, the Land Development Code, and also with
what was presented at the Planning Commission.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. GUNDLACH: Bellmar. Come on, Bellmar.
May 25, 2021
Page 185
MR. SABO: Hi. James Sabo, for the record.
What Ms. Gundlach said -- well, let's see. I can -- goes for
Bellmar as well. Staff concurs with the recommendation of the
Planning Commission to approve the petition subject to the
companion items for your agenda today. We reviewed the
applicant's petition, and we have no questions for them and agree
with their proposal and their presentation today, and we'll entertain
any questions. But at this point I would like to turn it over to our
deputy department head, Trinity Scott, to review the town plan.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. SCOTT: I'm still Trinity Scott. Aren't you guys tired of
seeing me?
And I'm going to go very quickly through the town plan because
Rich already went through it in detail. So my presentation gets hung
up here every time. I'll go all the way to the end.
I'm going to note that Mr. Yovanovich during his presentation
indicated that No. 3 of the agreement would be more explicit to
indicate that Bellmar Village would not be eligible for any
certificates of occupancy until the town SRA was scheduled for
public hearing at the Board of County Commissioners, so we would
make the modification to the agreement, No. 3, for that.
And my final thoughts just about the town plan is this
application will go through the same process that any other town
would go through. It has -- they will be required to show
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. There are no shortcuts.
They will still be heard in front of the Planning Commission. They
will provide a recommendation to you. "They" meaning the
Planning Commission. And the Board of County Commissioners
will be able to determine whether or not they wish to approve that
town plan or not.
And with that, with the 10-minute break, I think I was done in
May 25, 2021
Page 186
an hour.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. I do have a question.
Did staff verify the sizes of the villages, the two, Longmar [sic] and
Bellmar -- Longwater.
MS. SCOTT: Jaime Cook will address that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. COOK: Good afternoon. Jaime Cook, Principal
Environmental Specialist, again.
Yes, with every submittal, the county's surveyor reviewed the
legal descriptions and verified the sizes of both villages.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. COOK: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I just have
one.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, Commissioner Saunders.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: One question for Ms. Trinity
Scott. So the application is made for the town, and as soon as it's
advertised for a public hearing in front of the County Commission,
then the COs can be issued for, was it Bellmar? What if the
developer never builds anything associated with a town?
MS. SCOTT: There are no -- in the town agreement there are
no requirements for timing of the town; however, there are provisions
in the town agreement that states that they can't come in and take
what would have been commercial property and convert that to
residential. So we did ask them to commit to that, so that is part of
the town agreement.
The intent is to allow the town core to come forward as the
market demands, and as we've all dealt with things in Eastern Golden
Gate Estates, there has to be some magical number of rooftops
that -- the folks who do this on a daily basis that they need to be able
to support that, and so that was the way the town plan was structured.
May 25, 2021
Page 187
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Ms. Scott, do you find that -- does
staff find -- why does staff find that Longwater and Bellmar are
walkable when you've got them -- when you've got a spine road
going through Longwater that's three -- over three miles? I'm not so
sure I know anybody that would be walking three miles from one side
of Longwater to the other.
MS. SCOTT: So with that, I'm going to bring our
Comprehensive Planning staff up, because they review -- and our
Planning and Zoning. They review the SRAs with rega rd to that
specificity and with regard to our Land Development Code
requirements.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. SABO: For the record, James Sabo, Comprehensive
Planning Manager.
We did review both petitions, Bellmar and Longwater, for
walkability/bikeability. Yes, the village center is on one side of each
of the projects, but it is still interconnected. It is still walkable.
Yes, it is a longer way, but it is still walkable, and it does meet the
LDC and the Comprehensive Plan.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think the distance -- and I might be
wrong. But I think the distance at Longwater would be walking
from the City of Naples to Naples Park. Do you know too many
people who do that?
MR. SABO: I cannot comment. I don't -- I don't really -- I
can't really comment to that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you.
MS. GUNDLACH: I'm going to help James. An important
thing to note is the block perimeter prescribed by the Land
Development Code is 2,500 linear feet around a block, and that is the
prescribed distance for the village center, and the prescribed distance
May 25, 2021
Page 188
for the neighborhood general is 3,500 linear feet, and these projects
are consistent with that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The distance around them?
MS. GUNDLACH: For the block perimeters.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The block perimeters.
MS. GUNDLACH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So if the distance -- with the
spine road in Longwater, from one end of the spine road to the other,
is three -- over three miles?
MS. GUNDLACH: It's probably about two-and-a-half to three
miles for Longwater. It's a really strange configuration. That's the
land that they have to work with.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yeah.
MS. GUNDLACH: And there's nothing in the Land
Development Code that prohibits that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, it doesn't prohibit it. But
it's -- I'm not so sure it's the spirit of the RLSA and what we
expected.
Do we know how many cuts are on the road based on the
Villages of Longwater? How many on Oil Well Road? How many
cuts on the road of traffic entering into Oil Well Road from the
Village of Longwater?
MS. GUNDLACH: Well, there is one point of ingress and
egress from Longwater onto Oil Well Road.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: At this point, right? No more?
MS. GUNDLACH: No more.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Thank you.
Yes, Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. One question, and maybe
Trinity can -- we had talked recently -- and thanks for reminding me
with your question -- about bicycle lanes, and maybe the -- since
May 25, 2021
Page 189
these are going to be completely new roads and new facilities,
whether or not we can start looking at things like the -- instead of just
a bike lane, something a little more enhanced, because it is -- it's
two-and-a-half miles is the Parkway from Oil Well to --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Three.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Three-and-a-half miles? How is
it -- from Oil Well all the way down to Bellmar is?
MS. SCOTT: It's a significant distance.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: It's a long way, right? But it's
going to be great for the people -- the serious cyclists.
MS. SCOTT: So what Commissioner Solis is talking about,
we've been -- in another conversation, not as part of these villages,
we've been discussing a bike boulevard concept and perhaps trying to
incorporate that into some of our capital projects. And for those of
you who don't know what a bike boulevard is, kind of taking the bike
lane and separating it from the travel lane with its own curbed
section, if you will. So they would have a curb on either side. It is
a newer concept for us here, so we are working on -- actually we're
going to do some constructability review to see if it's possible to
incorporate that into some other projects.
The applicant is working within the cross-sections that are
adopted within the Land Development Code -- and our Land
Development Code is not that progressive yet -- to have that type of
facility in there. So the applicant would actually have to ask for a
deviation from our Land Development Code in order to be able to
provide that concept because they are working within what our
parameters allow them to work with them.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Well, okay. So that's not even
contemplated by the -- okay. So maybe the first step is we need to
look at that.
MS. SCOTT: Maybe be a little bit more progressive with items
May 25, 2021
Page 190
within our Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yes. Okay. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I ask a couple quick questions?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And, Ms. Scott, I think you're the right
person to ask this to but, if not, you saw the exhibit that Mr. Mulhere
walked through where every resident within the village is within a
half a mile of either the village center or a neighborhood park or an
amenity, correct?
MS. SCOTT: Yes, sir, I saw that exhibit.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And you would agree that being within
a half a mile of those services is, in fact, walkable?
MS. SCOTT: I would defer to our Planning and Zoning staff
who look at walkability so we'll --
MR. YOVANOVICH: If you're not the right person, it could
be -- it could be Mr. -- James.
MR. SABO: Yeah. James Sabo, Comprehensive Planning
Manager.
I would have to confirm that each one of those -- I would first
confirm that each one of those residents is within a half a mile and
each person would have their own level of comfort with walkability.
Some people can walk a tenth of a mile, some people can walk two
miles. That's the best way to answer that. I can't answer you
directly.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. But you agree -- Mr. Gauthier,
for the Conservancy, testified that a half a mile is not an unreasonable
distance to walk. Do you have any reason to disagree with
Mr. Gauthier?
MR. SABO: Again, I can't comment as to what Mr. Gauthier
thinks.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
May 25, 2021
Page 191
MR. SABO: And that concludes staff's presentation.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Then we're going to go to
public comment. And we will start with the Conservancy, if you are
ready.
MS. OLSON: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, can I ask the
County Attorney a quick question?
The testimony that's about to be given from the Conservancy, is
that considered competent substantial evidence if we want to consider
that as part of the basis of any decision we make?
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay. Thank you.
MS. OLSON: Okay. Good afternoon, Commissioners. April
Olson here on behalf of the Conservancy of Southwest Florida.
And today I'd like to talk about Longwater, Bellmar, and the
town agreement. And first I'd like to tell you about the Conservancy
and why we are here today.
The Conservancy has invested considerable resources and time
to protecting and preserving water, land, and wildlife of the RLSA in
Eastern Collier County. We have been involved in the RLSA
process at every stage, and we've devoted thousands of staff hours
towards educating the public about the RLSA through presentations,
workshops, and drafting or other otherwise supporting various
technical analyses and public education materials. In addition, the
Conservancy funds and operates the only wildlife hospital in Collier
County, the von Arx Wildlife Hospital. The hospital has six
full-time staff members as well as numerous interns and volunteers
and treats over 4,200 animals a year.
May 25, 2021
Page 192
The addition of a new sprawling residential development in
Longwater and Bellmar is expected to increase the rate of wildlife
injury and mortality in the surrounding area. This, in turn, will
increase the demands for services provided by the hospital and
require the Conservancy to expend more resources to ensure Eastern
Collier County's native wildlife receive medical care.
Finally, we want to note that the Conservancy has more than
6,400 supporting families; many of them whom on reside in Collier
County, and a substantial number of these members regularly use
resources and infrastructure in the area that will be impacted by
Longwater and Bellmar Villages. If the Board approves these
villages today, the Conservancy and its members will suffer adverse
effects to interests protected or furthered by the RLSA and GMP.
Now, last week we e-mailed you a 15-page document providing
numerous reasons why we oppose plans for Longwater and Bellmar,
and we hope that report was helpful to you, and we ask that that is
included in the record.
But for today's discussion, we will limit our time to these three
issues, and following my comments, we have two experts here
virtually, and I will introduce them to you later.
But first, you may wonder why we and our experts have
determined that Longwater and Bellmar fail to be fiscally neutral
when staff and the applicant are stating the opposite. The
disagreement all boils down to how RLSA's rules are applied. We
apply a strict reading of the rules which require that villages
demonstrate they're fiscally neutral or positive as a whole to Collier
County and to the tax base. This fiscal neutrality rule is unique only
to development in the RLSA because of the region's remote location,
which makes cost for roads, pipes, and services more expensive than
that of PUDs within the existing urban boundary.
Because of this unique rule, Longwater and Bellmar must be
May 25, 2021
Page 193
treated differently than PUDs when assessing the project's fiscal
impacts; however, during the Planning Commission hearings, staff
stated that they are using an existing framework for assessing SRAs,
and you heard Ms. Gallo state the same thing today.
So let me give you an example of how staff is misapplying an
existing framework. The RLSA's fiscal neutrality rules require the
applicant to provide a fiscal impact assessment for water and
wastewater. The policies are black and white. There is no gray
area. The applicant's consultant claimed in their applicant
assessment for Longwater and Bellmar that they shouldn't have to
prepare this fiscal impact analysis because water and sewer are
self-supporting utilities and because it is not typical to provide such
an analysis.
But the bottom line is that the RLSA requires the applicant to
provide this analysis, so staff should not have allowed them to bend
the rules.
The county is building a new treatment plant at the cost of
$156 million just for Phase 1, according to the AUIR, plus tens of
millions of additional dollars for an interim plan. And the demand
just from the applicant's three villages would consume over
65 percent of the capacity of just that phase. And for Longwater and
Bellmar, it's over 40 percent.
Based on the limited information provided at the Planning
Commission hearings, it is clear that Longwater and Bellmar's impact
fees will not cover the project's fair share of costs to build the plant
per the maximum capacity. And we even saw in the slides that you
just saw today that Bellmar's cost for water will be 11.2 million, but
the revenue will be only 9.9 million. Longwater's cost for water
would be 10.1 million, and the revenue would be 8.9 million. That
was based on the slides you just saw today. And so this shortfall
will ultimately result in higher rates for users, and those users are also
May 25, 2021
Page 194
taxpayers. They have to be fiscally neutral.
The most significant costs that will be passed on to the taxpayers
are costs related to traffic impacts. Our traffic expert, Norm
Marshall, will show you that Longwater and Bellmar will have an
economic shortfall of 92.2 million for planned road projects. Staff
argued that the developer should not be charged for those road
projects because they are already being planned and committed in the
LRTP and AUIR process.
Staff stated that they're anticipating general population growth
within Eastern Collier County, but when you review this statement
from the 2045 LRTP, a very different story emerges. It is crystal
clear that the county has been planning for population increases in the
RLSA because of Collier Enterprises' developments. In other words,
the growth and traffic from the villages is the reason why some of the
roads will become deficient and why the county's planning on paying
tens of millions of dollars in road improvements. Again, SRAs must
be held to higher standard of fiscal neutrality, and the applicant must
pay for these costs; otherwise the projects must be denied. The
fiscal neutrality rule cannot be ignored.
And this $92.2 million for road impacts is just the tip of the
iceberg. ECPO, which includes Collier Enterprises, is hoping that
taxpayers will pay for 200 miles of new and expanded roads in the
RLSA to serve their 45,000-acre mega-development plan. These
costs will be in the billions of dollars. Fiscal neutrality must start
with Longwater and Bellmar even if it means that county staff has to
assess SRA impacts using a new framework.
One other glaring issue worth mentioning pertains to the town
agreement. The agreement is meant to fix serious traffic issues that
will be caused by the villages by creating a town core and keeping
residents local; however, the agreement is essentially worthless, as
there's no timing or phasing mechanism. This means that the
May 25, 2021
Page 195
developer is not required to even build one square foot of retail,
office, or an employment ever. No other stipulations fix this issue,
not even Paragraph 3 which says that no COs will be issued until
Bellmar has their -- until the town SRA agreement has their hearing,
but they can just check off that box and still not build any
homes -- I'm sorry -- build any commercial or retail.
The agreement is one-sided where the developer gets all the
perks, including a new multi-million dollar parkway at the taxpayers'
expense while Collier County is guaranteeing nothing.
As I mentioned to you earlier, we have our experts here today to
explain some of the issues that we just summarized. I'd like to take a
moment to introduce them.
Our traffic expert is Norm Marshall, and Mr. Marshall is a
travel-demand modeler with over 30 years' experience. He currently
acts as president of Smart Mobility, Inc., and has worked across the
country on planning projects related to regional transportation
modeling, municipal planning, and road corridor planning.
Mr. Marshall received his Bachelor of Science in mathematics from
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and his Master's of Science in
engineering from Dartmouth College.
And our economic expert is Joe Minicozzi. Mr. Minicozzi is an
AICP-certified urban planner and the principal of Urban3, a planning
firm focused on land-value economics, property and retail tax
analysis, and community design. He received his Bachelor's of
Architecture from the University of Miami and his Master's in
Architecture and Design from Harvard University.
In 2017, Mr. Minicozzi was recognized as one of the most 100
influential urbanists of all time. And we will start with Mr. Marshall
followed by Mr. Minicozzi.
MR. MILLER: All right. I will need to coordinate this.
Oscar, if you'll go ahead and queue Mr. Marshall to unmute.
May 25, 2021
Page 196
Mr. Marshall is now on with us.
MR. MARSHALL: Hello. Can you hear me?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MS. OLSON: Yes.
MR. MARSHALL: Great. And April wants to show some
slides.
MS. OLSON: Yeah. I have the first one up, Norm.
MR. MARSHALL: Oh, you can see it there. Good. All
right. You'll just have to keep me synced, then, because I just see
the room. Wonderful.
So this is a summary of the cost allocation I did looking at the
proportionate share of each of the three villages based on how much
of the traffic would be used. Now I can see it. And right now I'm
just going to look at the bottom line here where you can see the
48 million for Longwater and the 43 million for Bellmar, and then
I'm going to come back to this in a few minutes. Because I have
limited time, I'm going to explain a little bit more where this came
from.
So next slide, please.
Growth does not pay for growth, and we know this because this
was the justification for the one-cent sales tax. This is a statement
that's still up on the website. The current impact fee collections are
not keeping pace with the need, and do not cover the costs of these
roadway projects which have an approximate total shortfall of
$114 million at that time, and then they talk about 9.5 years to cover
the shortfall with impact fees.
And this impact fee -- I mean, the one-cent sales tax is being
used for projects that support development in the eastern part of the
county, including the Vanderbilt Beach Road extension.
And the budget, as was questioned earlier, does include a lot of
fuel tax revenue. And although Ms. Scott said that that was looked
May 25, 2021
Page 197
at when the long-range plan was done in terms of maybe it being
decreased, if so, that was not discussed in the LRTP. And it's in
there in many ways. It's in there as fuel tax. The road budget
borrows against fuel tax. There's a lot of state and federal money
that's also right now based on fuel tax, so I think that is a level of
certainty that really needs to be considered.
Next slide.
Some of the -- so why don't the impact fees pay for growth?
Well, we need to clarify some confusion about where terms kind of
get mixed up where they shouldn't be. Earlier we were talking about
existing deficiencies, but for the most part, these so-called existing
deficiencies are deficiencies that are forecast to become deficient
sometime over the next 10 years or more because of what's called
background traffic. And as April said, this background traffic isn't
just something that's happening. There's no immaculate traffic road.
The background traffic -- the traffic is growing because there's more
people living in the eastern part of the county.
And so if we could just magically stop any new structures from
being built, traffic would stop growing, and most of thes e so-called
deficiencies in the plan wouldn't be deficient. They'd be perfectly
okay as the two-lane roads they are today.
So when we talk about the need, we are talking about the need
because people are assumed to be moving there. And when we look
at the LRTP, as April showed that reference to Rural Lands West,
which was I think actually the 2018 amendment but is continued in
the current document -- so I looked at the model files there. We
have all of Rivergrass, Longwater, half of Bellmar, and a reall y big
commercial center, which would be equivalent to NCH Baker
Hospital plus two-thirds of the Coastland Center. So that was
modeled in the LRTP to determine the need.
And then we have the transportation impact fees that are the
May 25, 2021
Page 198
same for development in the RLSA as in the rest of the county, even
though it's much more expensive to serve people out there. And I
think that was alluded to through the discussion of the town is that
one reason why the county staff are interested in trying to get
employment out there is it actually would reduce traffic over just
approving the three villages. But as April showed, there's nothing in
the town agreement that would mean that any of that commercial
would ever necessarily be built.
Now, one option that you have that wouldn't be affected by state
statute is you could divide your impact fees into separate
districts -- other Florida counties do that -- and charge higher impact
fees where there are higher costs in providing the service, and that
would be completely defensible and something that I think you really
ought to take a hard look at.
Next slide, please.
So then we're back to this table again. So as you see, I add up
all these charges for different road segments. Most of these
Ms. Scott crossed out because -- you know, because it's one of these
roads where it would be deficient based on the background traffic,
which is immaculate traffic growth that comes from nowhere and,
therefore, nobody's responsible for it. But if you leave those in and
just take the allocations, the shares that these projects would produce,
it's a big share.
The other big difference is, of course, I have -- in the middle
there, I have Big Cypress Parkway and charge that all to the villages,
because as one of your past staffer people, I think, said, is it's
basically a village road. I mean, it's a road for these developments.
And I think -- I mean, it's hard to look at all these maps that we're
shown today, you know, including the town where all this is lined up
along the Big Cypress Parkway without thinking that's really a
development road. And when I ran the regional model, I found -- I
May 25, 2021
Page 199
forget the number. I think it's in April's comments. It's something,
like, 87 percent of the traffic had at least one end in one of the
villages. So I assigned all that to the development --
MS. OLSON: It's 86 percent.
MR. MARSHALL: If they didn't put that in, they would have
to widen DeSoto Boulevard, which is not in the plan. I'm sorry.
MS. OLSON: Oh. I said 86 percent is what you had in your
report.
MR. MARSHALL: Eighty-six, okay.
And then I actually -- I prepared this slide for the -- several
weeks ago for the earlier hearings, and I actually gave some credit
and said that -- you know, I subtract out both the mitigation fees and
the impact fees but, in fact, that they're only going to pay the impact
fees. They're not going to pay the mitigation fees. So the number
would be slightly even higher, because they're going to get a credit
for that.
Next slide.
And when I first started looking at this -- these villages with
Rivergrass several months ago, I was really concerned about
Immokalee Road because in -- as transportation planners -- and I
work a lot for governments, too. The biggest kind of problems we
have to solve are, what can we do when a major arterial becomes
overloaded?
And I know Ms. Scott was talking about trying to build parallel
capacity and so forth, but this is -- these are the deficiencies that are
left over in the 2045 plan, LRTP, after all the improvements. And
the improvements that you can see that are in the plan are all these
blue lines that are serving, in many cases, the eastern part of the
county. But, meanwhile, Immokalee Road is getting worse, and
there's not really a good solution for that. It's being st udied now and,
again, this is, you know -- the county will say this is somehow
May 25, 2021
Page 200
background traffic that's doing this, but what is background traffic?
What is it? It's nothing. It's traffic that's coming from development.
And I think I'm done.
MS. OLSON: Should I go to the next --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I do have a question.
Yes, do you -- have you -- have you heard that -- this is the first
time I ever heard about background traffic. Is this the common term
used in traffic planning?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes, it is. And it's always been -- it's
always been part of traffic impact studies, and it was always intended
to be conservative about making the developer make sure they're
analyzing the worst case.
So they add in growth from other, you know -- because, I mean,
over the history of the -- say, since World War II, traffic has grown a
lot. It's been kind of leveling off per person. So it was always
conservative. And then they'd make you make sure you made
it -- added that plus what you were doing and made sure it would still
work. But at this point, as you were talking about the changes in
state statute, now they've codified that you put the background traffic
in for concurrency. So that's basically something I think they did for
the benefit of the developers, I'd have to say.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: The State of Florida?
MR. MARSHALL: Yeah. So now, basically, when you do
this concurrency thing and you come up and they come up -- in this
case they came up with .6 million for Longwater and 2.2 million for
Bellmar. It's almost just going through an exercise. That's never
going to be as big as the impact fees.
So I think what you need to do is not worry about that. What
you need to do is make sure you try and get your impact fees right,
because that's defensible and legal. You need to create a separate
transportation (unintelligible).
May 25, 2021
Page 201
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No other questions. Thank you very
much. Oh, yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: May I?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course. This is a good time.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't know if it's the right time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no. It's appropriate.
MS. OLSON: The clock's been running, by the way.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, no, no.
MR. MILLER: No. Yeah, I stopped the clock. I stop the
clock for questions and answers.
MS. OLSON: Oh, yeah. This one was going.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I wrote it down. You started at 4:45,
so you're only 20 minutes in.
Mr. Marshall, are you there? Can you hear me all right?
MR. MARSHALL: I hear you, yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Did you look at the town plan that has a
road that is actually parallel to Big Cypress Parkway?
MR. MARSHALL: The town plan -- the proposed Big Cypress
town?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah, the Town of Big Cypress. Did
you see the road --
MR. MARSHALL: No, I haven't (unintelligible) at that plan.
I saw the agreement, but I didn't study it very carefully.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So you're assigning 100 percent of the
Town of Big -- the Big Cypress Parkway is based upon the fact that
you didn't look at the town plan that actually has a road that the
developer will build to serve the three villages and the town; is that
correct?
May 25, 2021
Page 202
MR. MARSHALL: I've actually only analyzed the three
villages, really. I did look at that one agreement. And we are
looking at a case where if today -- well, Longwater and Bellmar were
approved and the town plan was -- the town was approved, which
requires nothing to be built, then we still don't have that road, and we
still maybe have Big Cypress. So I don't think the point is really that
germane.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Actually, let me ask you a question.
What's the word "minimum" mean?
MR. MARSHALL: What does minimum mean?
MR. YOVANOVICH: What does minimum mean?
MR. MARSHALL: The minimum is the least of something.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. So when the Growth
Management Plan requires us to build a minimum of X square feet of
retail, we have to build a minimum of X square feet of retail, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. So it's the question of timing,
not whether we're going to build it, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: In the villages you have to build it after
there's triggers for a certain number of units. So you could build a
lot of units without doing it. Then the town -- the town doesn't have
a trigger the way I read it. There's no trigger.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But it still requires that it be built,
correct? Because the word "minimum" is a minimum, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: I don't think so. I mean, I'm not -- I mean,
I think you're asking me a legal question. But if the trigger is
1,900 -- I think one of them had a trigger at 1,900 units -- and you
build 1,700 units and there's no market, how does it get built? You
tell me. You're the lawyer.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I will tell you. I'll tell you that
we're required to build it, and we will go out and build it because it's
May 25, 2021
Page 203
a legal requirement that we build it. So we will build it.
MR. MARSHALL: Okay. You build 1,700 units, and you just
stop; what requires you to go out there and build it?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I'm glad that you're
cross-examining me, but what requires me to build it is t he SRA
development, because the SRA development document says I shall
build a minimum of those square feet. I cannot stop and not build
those square feet. You're proposing a scenario that is legally not
justified. So since I'm asking the questions, I'd like to move on.
MR. MARSHALL: Well, you were asking me about the
minimum. I wasn't reviewing the law. You're asking me basically
a question of law, so I'm engaging with you. But I don't understand
how it works. I mean, I don't understand how it gets built.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. Well, I can tell you, you pull
the building permit, you build the square footage, you lease out the
space, and someone occupies it. That's how it's done.
But let me ask you -- because I know Ms. Scott has got some
questions for you, and she's truly -- you would agree that Ms. Scott's
truly the expert in the county's transportation plan, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: Truly the expert? She's very, very
familiar with the county process, yes. She's involved in every detail,
yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Do you remember testifying at the
Planning Commission that Trinity Scott is, in fact, the true expert in
the county's transportation planning?
MR. MARSHALL: I guess I answered your question yes when
you said "true expert." You have it written down there, I suppose.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I do. I just want to make sure
that we can confirm that Ms. Scott, who previously testified, is the
true expert for the Collier County's transportation planning, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: Sure.
May 25, 2021
Page 204
MR. YOVANOVICH: And you did previously testify that we
should listen to Ms. Scott and not you on transportation and planning,
correct?
MR. MARSHALL: I don't recall saying it like that, no.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But you did say, but Ms. Scott -- you
remember this question: But you would agree that Trinity Scott's the
real expert in this category, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: I don't recall saying that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, your answer was "sure." Do you
recall that now?
MR. MARSHALL: Well, I just said "sure" now because you
keep wanting me to say "true expert," "true expert." I don't
remember -- I don't think I've ever called anybody a true expert in
anything. I mean, that's sort of a funny phrase.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Let me read your testimony from the
March 4th Planning Commission.
MR. MARSHALL: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Yovanovich asked the following
question: "But you would agree that Trinity Scott's the real expert in
this category, correct?"
Mr. Marshall, you, responded "sure." Do you recall that?
MR. MARSHALL: Well, the same way I just did now. You
know, when I'm badgered into saying "true expert." Like I said, it's
not a phrase I'd use. Are you the true expert on whatever?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Me? Sure, I am.
MR. MARSHALL: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I am. I'm going to -- I know
Ms. Scott's got a lot of questions for you on your testimony, so I'm
going to get out of the way and let her ask you some questions.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Before we continue, I would remind
us that we are ladies and gentlemen listening to ladies and gentlemen.
May 25, 2021
Page 205
And even though we like applause and laughter, I would appreciate
civility. I would appreciate seriousness. And let's get this hearing
in that vein, thank you.
MS. SCOTT: Good afternoon, Mr. Marshall. How are you?
MR. MARSHALL: Doing well. Thank you.
MS. SCOTT: I just want to get a few things that we actually
covered during Planning Commission on the record.
But you agree that the fee formula, the road impact fee formula
with regard to trip length is a policy decision by the Board of County
Commissioners?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: And you're aware that we provide -- staff
provides to the Board with each road impact fee adoption, that the
Board approves that as a policy decision each time the road impact
fee is presented to them?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes. As I said, though, I'm suggesting
you consider districts.
MS. SCOTT: And would you agree that the methodology that
you're advocating and insinuating that the villages are not paying
their fair share, wouldn't road impact fees be significantly increased
in new homes built in Golden Gate City and Immokalee based on
their trip lengths and their lack of use of state roads and interstates,
and that it wouldn't just be the villages?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: Are you familiar with metropolitan planning
organizations and their state and federal requirements?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: Are MPOs required to utilize funding sources
that are to be reasonably available?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: And did you review the Collier MPO
May 25, 2021
Page 206
Long-Range Transportation Plan, the 2045?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: And would you agree that the capacity
improvements noted for the cost feasibility plan are limited to
utilizing gas tax and road impact fees?
MR. MARSHALL: And the state and federal grants, yes.
MS. SCOTT: Correct. You are correct. So for local projects,
that would not be federalized. The local funds were limited to gas
tax and road impact fees?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: And can you just confirm that in your example
that came up with your $92.2 million, that you included roadways
that were deficient based on background traffic as defined by the
Florida Statute?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: And that -- I think we established this during the
Planning Commission, but you're familiar with FDOT's report titled
"Proportionate Share Calculation Report" dated December 15th,
2011?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: And that report states in there that when there's a
deficiency and the maintaining entity is responsible for curing this
deficiency, that this effectively precludes local governments from
charging developers for new trips added to deficient fac ilities and
pulling contributions from multiple developments impacting the
deficient facility to help finance the needed transportation
improvements.
MR. MARSHALL: Yes. As I was saying earlier, I think that
change in statute is basically made -- you have to rely on the impact
fees, as you are, in these projects. You're not -- you know, that
whole other process isn't really resulting in any real money coming
May 25, 2021
Page 207
out of it.
MS. SCOTT: And you discussed background traffic and trips.
Are you aware that we have multiple unbuilt units, including Golden
Gate Estates, that will create future demand?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes. I didn't get into the other part of
that. In that process it's both background traffic plus the trip bank,
and the trip bank, as I understand it, is supposed to account for the
entitled units. So that's an additive. That's not part of the
background traffic. That's in addition, as I understand it.
MS. SCOTT: And are you aware with regard to Immokalee
Road -- actually the slide that's up right now that shows the traffic
model, are you aware that the traffic model that's used, CUBE
Voyager, did not take into consideration major interchange
improvements at both Immokalee/I-75 and Golden Gate Parkway and
I-75 as well as planned major intersection improvements which may
include overpasses at Livingston and those two roadways?
MR. MARSHALL: I understand that those are being studied,
but I also understand the costs of those projects are not in LRTP.
MS. SCOTT: I would disagree with you. They're in the 2026
through 2030 time frame.
That's all my questions.
MR. MARSHALL: I don't think they're the level of
improvements you're talking about just there with the overpasses. I
didn't see that kind of money in there.
MS. SCOTT: That's all my questions. Thank you.
MS. OLSON: Oh, I have a -- can I have a follow-up question?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Yes.
MS. OLSON: Just from Trinity.
Norm, it's April. Are you aware that the RLSA requires that
SRAs are fiscally neutral to Collier County and their tax base?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes, and I think that's rather different than
May 25, 2021
Page 208
the concurrency statute.
MS. OLSON: Okay. And isn't that what your assessment was
showing, that these projects are not fiscally neutral to Collier County
and their tax base; is that correct?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MS. OLSON: Okay. And is Collier County using an existing
framework to determine whether or not these SRAs are fiscally
neutral or not? Let me ask you -- let me ask you this: Do you think
that these projects -- you had mentioned that they're not fiscally
neutral; is that correct?
MR. MARSHALL: That's right.
MS. OLSON: That's correct, okay. So they're not meeting the
rules of the RLSA program?
MR. MARSHALL: Yeah. I think they're mostly focused on
concurrency, and I don't think that's the same thing.
MS. OLSON: Okay. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I have just two follow-ups.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course, of course.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Marshall, you heard Ms. Scott say
that the county doesn't use any ad valorem tax dollars --
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: -- for the road program, correct?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So if you're not using any tax dollars to
address road issues, the road issues are not affecting the tax base,
correct?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I have a question. I have a question
of our County Manager. It's my understanding that on a regular
basis ad valorem tax dollars are being loaned to the impact fee
May 25, 2021
Page 209
budget; is that correct?
MR. ISACKSON: No, it has nothing to do with the road
program, ma'am. Those are general governmental impact fees.
Things like corrections and law enforcement, general governmental
buildings, the jail, that's what we talk about when we say that we've
loaned 100 million-plus dollars from the General Fund to help offset
those impact fees.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: But nothing to do with the roads?
MR. ISACKSON: No.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
I have a question for Ms. Scott. Thank you. How much does
it cost Collier County to build a lane mile right now?
MS. SCOTT: I don't have my Annual Update and Inventory
Report.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: About.
MS. SCOTT: I think it's $6 million a lane mile, give or take.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: So it's $12 million a mile both ways?
MS. SCOTT: Correct, based on our impact fees.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I guess, when are we doing the
AUIR again? In the fall, right? That's when we --
MS. SCOTT: Correct.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. And in your
knowledge -- and I'm not asking you to be an expert -- but your
experience in this, how much have prices increased over the last year
in roads?
MS. SCOTT: We've received some information from the
Florida Department of Transportation that they're experiencing some
increases 10 to 20 percent on some of their bids.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. OLSON: Okay. Should I go to Joe? Let me find his
presentation. Just give me one second.
May 25, 2021
Page 210
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We're not timing the Conservancy.
MS. OLSON: It's going.
MR. MILLER: I stopped it.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: You have 30 seconds left.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Tick, tock, tick, tock.
MS. OLSON: Uh-oh. Panic.
Mr. Minicozzi, are you here?
MR. MILLER: Let me make sure my Zoom people are
prompting Mr. Minicozzi to unmute himself.
Oscar or Lisa, can you --
He's being prompted. He's with us now.
MS. OLSON: We hear you, Joe. Okay, go ahead. This is
Mr. Minicozzi from Urban3.
MR. MINICOZZI: Good afternoon, Commissioners.
This -- I'm just going to walk through a couple of design issues from
the innovation and also walkability and a disconnect with the
interpretation of the LDC.
So we'll just start with, the first paragraph is the general
description of the neighborhood general.
And just if you could just jump down to the third one. No, no.
Stay on that slide, sorry. Yeah, it's hard because the number's so
long, but 40807C2J2D3F4. The second one up from the bottom
there.
It says the maximum square footage per use, and this is for
nonresidential uses. So anything that's not residential. If you don't
live in it, it is restricted to this dimension of 3,000 square feet
or -- and per location, 15,000 square feet.
So we'll just take the 15,000 because it's larger. If you go
down, you can see a little square that I made -- to the left, sorry. I
can see your cursor. There you go.
That red square is 15,000-square-foot square with the red box.
May 25, 2021
Page 211
The blue box inside that is a 3,000-square-foot box. So just taking
the larger of the two, that would be the limit of a la ke, of an amenity
center, of anything not residential.
And I just went ahead and dropped them in on the block so you
could see how big those lakes are as well as the amenity center.
They well exceed the 15,000-square-foot limits, thus driving the
blocks to be bigger sizes, which makes it unwalkable from a distance
standpoint. So by design, even though you can drop a bunch circles
on it, those circles don't show you the path of walking. And this is a
typical suburban sprawl type of design that the RLSA was intending
to discourage.
So that's one. If you go -- so you can see pretty much every
lake fails here. If you go to the next slide, this is the same with
Longwater. Same rules apply. Same failures in the lakes and also
the amenity centers. So they're essentially too large.
Now, if you go back to the text on the left, they also have
location requirements that those nonresidential uses should be at
street bends and not permitted mid-block. And many of the lakes,
actually a great in majority of the lakes, are exactly mid-block in the
middle blocks thus, again, violating the terms of the LDC here.
So this is where, just at a large level, how this fails from an
innovation, creative planning, walkability. It all comes down to the
size of blocks and the structure of the blocks and the way that they're
oriented.
Next slide, please.
This is where your table lists lakes as a nonresidential use. So
this is the table -- the use table for villages here. So if you go to the
top circle, it says "required uses," and then on the left column, it lists
them by category. So you have residential, goods and services,
water/wastewater, and open space and recreation, and lakes are listed
as a use inside the open space and recreation. So you can do lakes.
May 25, 2021
Page 212
They're just limited in size inside the neighborhood general.
If you're to go out to an edge district, you can do larger lakes.
They're not limited. Only in the neighborhood general areas are
these nonresidential uses restricted. And as a certified planner, I am
telling you that a lake is not a residential use, is my expert opinion
that a lake isn't residential, unless this is for the Creature of the Black
Lagoon or something. But it's -- as residents, as humans, we don't
live in lakes.
Next slide.
This is a table from the LRTP listing the Big Cypress Parkway,
and it's -- I highlighted the Big Cypress Parkway there. Across that
slide, I think the one, two, three, four, five, sixth column over from
the left, it lists the actual price -- estimated price of Big Cypress
Parkway at $37 million. It also cites that this project isn't expected
within -- not at least until 2036 to 2045 to start going into the design
and pre-engineering.
So it's clear that these two projects are driving the construction
of this road system. We have a price. So go to the next slide.
The segment length is from Oil Well Road to the Vanderbilt
expansion area. So I measured that. That's about 3.17 miles. So if
you divide -- go to the next slide. Sorry -- 37.31 million from the
LRTP, divided by 3.17 equals an estimated 11.8 per mile.
Now, as we just discussed and Trinity just brought up, you
know, you-all estimated somewhere around 12 million, which is
pretty close to this; it's a little bit more. But I just used this number
because it's in your document.
So go to the next slide.
So the four miles of Bellmar and Longwater, so going from
Rivergrass southward, that's about a four-mile string times
11.8 million. That means the cost of this project is about
$47.1 million will be the cost of the Big Cypress Parkway for the two
May 25, 2021
Page 213
new villages.
Next slide.
So when you build a road, the road comes with stuff.
So next slide.
The first thing that it comes with is about a hundred dollars a
mile of ongoing maintenance every single year for the life of that
road. As long as you own it, you've got to keep it up.
Next slide.
The other things that people fail to acknowledge in roads is they
have rehabilitation that happens every 10-year cycles. Now, your
AUIR, your engineer suggests a six-year cycle, but 10 years is
reasonable, and you do that -- every 10 years you scrape off the top
and re-mill it. Think of it as painting your house over and over and
over again until you get to the fifth cycle, and then you have to do a
rehabilitation, and that's more expensive. That's where you have to
actually get into the structure of the asphalt, and that's going to be a
considerable charge to do that.
So up to the reconstruction, that's generally known as the life
cycle of a road, and then you repeat the cycle over again and go
through the milling. But this is -- as long as a road is in your
ownership, for the life of that road you have this liability of about a
million dollars a mile. That's your maintenance.
So next slide.
So just to kind of make it graphic and simple, on the left at the
top is what's paid in impact fees, which is about -- I can't read this
from here, but let's say about 38.3 -- or 38 million.
MS. OLSON: Correct.
MR. MINICOZZI: That's impact fees plus the fair-share
contributions total for both those villages. Now, to build the project
is going to cost you about 47 million, which immediately puts you at
a deficit of $8.7 million. So you're immediately in the red as soon as
May 25, 2021
Page 214
you pay for the road. Now you own it. And going through those
cycles of rehabilitation to the first reconstruction on the bottom, you
can see those dips that you take along the way. And it's also -- your
ongoing maintenance is in that as well, but ultimately your net deficit
is about $24 million, and this is just for this one road and putting
100 percent of the impact fees onto this one road.
Now, just to bear in mind, inflation of the road costs, you're
seeing 10 to 20 percent. DOT has tracked -- on average, over the
last 20 years, it's been about a 7 percent increase. And as you well
know from a tax base standpoint in Florida, you have tax caps. So
your CPI -- your housing can only grow at 3 percent or CPI, which is
ever lower of the two.
So, you know, CPI last year was 1.8 percent. So this is the
growth of your revenue stream. It's never going to catch up to the
cost of inflation and the ongoing maintenance. So this is the deficit
for the road.
Next slide.
This is showing it as a chart. On the left is the total impact fees
and fair-share contributions of 38 million. On the right is the cost of
the road, and you can see the immediate deficit of $8 million, and
then when you add the 15 million -- let's call it $16 million of
maintenance for the life cycle, that puts you at a net deficit of $24.5
million, which is not fiscally neutral. And that's it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Mr. Yovanovich?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Minicozzi, Rich Yovanovich. I
think I talked to you last a couple of weeks ago during the
Conservancy trial. So I want to ask you a couple of questions. Do
you recall testifying at the trial that the term "use" was a confusing
term to you?
MR. MINICOZZI: I recall testifying that the term was
confusing because you were using a state statute definition of use in
May 25, 2021
Page 215
the context of the county term of use, which is not defined in the
county's LDC. So in the context of how the question was asked, I
was seeing it as a review of the county, and I wasn't aware that you
were using state statutes. So I filed an affidavit clarifying that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: When I asked you -- when I asked you
a question on cross-examination how the Collier County Growth
Management Plan defines the term "use," I believe you testified that
it doesn't define the term "use"; is that correct?
MR. MINICOZZI: Inside the definition section of the Growth
Management Plan, there is not a definition -- a dictionary definition
of the word "use." You had -- in that same cross-examination you
showed me a table, and the table, you were selecting tabular data and
confusing that with a definition of use. Tabular information is not a
definition under the practice of zoning the way that I practice zoning
as a certified planner.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. And if I remember
correctly -- first of all, didn't you just use a table to define the term
"use" and define the term "lake," a use based upon a table?
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, and that table has a definition of uses,
and it's a tabular definition of what is determined or deemed uses. It
is not a definitions section of the zoning code as would be applied in
the definitions section.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And correct --
MR. MINICOZZI: We can go back to the table if you want.
We can pull it up.
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
MR. MINICOZZI: You can walk me through it, if you'd like.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct me if I'm wrong, I think you're
testifying that no lake in a neighborhood general portion of a village
can exceed 3,000 square feet; is that correct?
MR. MINICOZZI: No, no, that is not correct. I testified -- if
May 25, 2021
Page 216
we want to go back to the -- pull up the section.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct me. Correct me.
MR. MINICOZZI: No, seriously, I'm correcting you. There it
is. It says on the -- right there that a nonresidential use shall be -- I
can't read -- your screen is fuzzy. Let me pull it up here.
Okay. The maximum square footage shall be 3,000 square feet,
and per location shall be 15,000 square feet, and this is for
nonresidential uses in the neighborhood general.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, maybe I misunderstood. The red
boxes that you have in the middle of the lake, are you not saying that
all of those lakes are too large?
MR. MINICOZZI: I am saying all of those lakes are too large.
That's exactly my point.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Do you have any idea what the
minimum size requirement is for a lake for the South Florida Water
Management District?
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, the South Florida Water Management
District is not being applied here in the administration of the
adherence of the master plan. You could have larger lakes. You
could put those at the neighborhood edge. You can have them as a
boundary. But if you're going to have a lake and if the zoning code
is in conflict with the South Florida Water Management District, the
zoning code, you'd adhere to that for the master plan.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Let's talk a little bit about your
experience in Florida. Do you recall testifying that you have
actually never applied a Growth Management Plan in the state of
Florida?
MR. MINICOZZI: That's not correct. I was zoning
administrator in the City of West Palm Beach for five years, and part
of the master plan was -- it was bundled with our comprehensive
elements of our comprehensive plan. We had to adhere to the
May 25, 2021
Page 217
TCEA. We had to adhere to all of the state laws. Bert Harris Act.
You name it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that was in 2003 you left the state
of Florida?
MR. MINICOZZI: I was administrator from 1998 to 2003, yes,
sir.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So it's fair to say since 2003 you've
never applied a Growth Management Plan in the state of Florida?
MR. MINICOZZI: That wouldn't be a totally accurate
statement. We currently do a lot of -- and I believe I answered you
in the same cross-examination that we do a series of economic
models all over the state of Florida. We just did one in Escambia.
And all of that work has to be within the realm of their
comprehensive elements and their zoning codes. We can't just
operate willy-nilly with our clients.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I just want to separate the difference in
your testimony. I don't think the size of a lake is an economic
model; would you agree?
MR. MINICOZZI: Sir. If you look at the top of the slide and
if you look at the -- if we're going back to my cross-examination, I
was qualified as an expert in city planning as someone who
understands innovation and creative planning. I also work within the
field of economic analysis and economic development, and we do
economic models of cities. But I am -- and if we want to pull up my
CV, my credentials start with my education, which is I have a
Bachelor of Architecture and a Master's of Architecture in urban
design with a concentration in real esta te development. So I have
design background and training as well as practice.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And do you recall testifying that you
have never actually been the principal planner on any projects?
MR. MINICOZZI: (No response.)
May 25, 2021
Page 218
MR. YOVANOVICH: Do you remember testifying that you've
never been a principal planner on any projects? It's a yes or no
question.
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, I don't remember the context of the
question. And it's -- and I think -- I believe I answered, I've been on
planning teams and in various roles, and I've worked on planning
teams that were the principal planners. I've worked as staff on teams
that have been principal planners, and it's -- yeah. So I guess the
answer would be yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So you've never actually been Bob
Mulhere as a principal planner for a project, correct? You've been
part of a team.
MR. MINICOZZI: I am not Bob Mulhere, correct.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. I'm glad we've got that correct.
Mr. Minicozzi, if I may, I just have one more -- one more
statement to correct your statement. You were never actually
qualified as an expert in planning during the Conservancy trial. You
were tendered but never qualified as an expert, correct?
MR. MINICOZZI: Mr. Yovanovich, I was qualified as an
expert in handling matters of innovation and design. My
background is in urban design with planning. I have served as a
professional planner, and I have an AICP-certified planning
certificate. As a professional, I practice planning as well as I
practice design.
In this case, I am reading a black-and-white law and making a
certified planning statement that this is black and white, and the
nonresidential uses are allowed to be no greater than 15,000 square
feet.
So if you want to bring a certified planner to cross-examine me
and say that I'm reading this wrong, have at it. Otherwise, you're an
attorney, and you're entitled to your opinion. You're not entitled to
May 25, 2021
Page 219
the facts of the way that I interpret this code.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And if I recall correctly, you made
many of these same arguments in the trial, and those arguments were
rejected by the Court, correct?
MR. MINICOZZI: Which "same arguments" are you talking
about?
MR. YOVANOVICH: On innovation.
MS. OLSON: Aren't we talking about Longwater and Bellmar
here, not Rivergrass?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm entitled to question his credibility,
and that's my last question.
Your testimony --
MR. MINICOZZI: I don't recall what you're talking about.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Your testimony was rejected by the
Court, correct?
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, Mr. Yovanovich, if you'd like to
bring that testimony forward and present it so that I can see what
you're talking about, I'd gladly answer that question. That's a pretty
open-ended question.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. Well, I do know who prevailed
in the court case, so I'll move on.
MS. OLSON: Can I ask a question, a follow-up?
Joe, did you -- didn't you do some work for Collier County a
couple years back?
MR. MINICOZZI: Yeah. 2019 the county hired our firm to
do an economic model of the countywide as well as within the RLSA
and the RFMUD areas.
MS. OLSON: So you reviewed RLSA growth management
policies and Land Development Code policies; is that correct?
MR. MINICOZZI: That's correct.
MS. OLSON: Okay. So you definitely have experience here
May 25, 2021
Page 220
in Collier County reviewing the RLSA policies in addition to your
AICP experience?
MR. MINICOZZI: Yes.
MS. OLSON: Okay. Thank you.
MS. SCOTT: Mr. Minicozzi, this is Trinity Scott, the deputy
department head for Growth Management. How are you?
MR. MINICOZZI: Great. And you?
MS. SCOTT: Pretty good.
In your analysis about blocks, is the applicant seeking any
deviations from the Land Development Code as it relates to block
lengths?
MR. MINICOZZI: Not that I recall. Could you pull that up, if
there is one, so I could take a look it.
MS. SCOTT: There actually aren't any. Did the --
MR. MINICOZZI: Okay.
MS. SCOTT: Do you know if the applicant sought any
deviations to the road cross-sections that have been adopted to
implement walkability for either of the villages?
MR. MINICOZZI: Yes. They've deviated -- the street
sections that were submitted were actually a deviation of the edge
district, and what they're missing are two of the required street
sections -- the street section -- they have to pick one of the, I believe,
four from the village center and also one from the neighborhood
general. Instead the applicant is deviating from one of these edge
district street conditions.
So I would -- you know, it's just that should be clear that the
deviation is pretty far off the mark when it comes to the required
street sections.
MS. SCOTT: Do all of the street sections provide facilities for
bicyclists and pedestrians?
MR. MINICOZZI: No, they don't. In fact, there's a deviation
May 25, 2021
Page 221
that allows for the sidewalks to end wherever there's a nonresidential
use, and there's no articulation for what happens to that pedestrian
when the sidewalk ends. There's no definition of a crosswalk. I
don't know if there's a catapult that shoots the pedestrian over to the
other side, but there's no pedestrian network connectivity from one
side of the street to the other when the sidewalk ends.
MS. SCOTT: Would you agree that the applicant -- that this
SRA, the applicant will have to come in for a plats and plans or a Site
Development Plan where those type of issues would be addressed as
far as the proper crossing should the cross-section be modified at a
mid block?
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, I was reviewing the master plan for
the master plan meeting, the terms and requirements of the GMP and
the LDC. And if they don't meet those requirements, then you either
catch that at deviation -- you state it or articulate the deviation or
variance from the required context, but I certainly wouldn't approve
the plan as being sufficient as a master plan for having connectivity if
the connections don't exist.
MS. SCOTT: Your analysis is based on Big Cypress Parkway,
a roadway that's not contemplated within the Long-Range
Transportation Plan. Does the applicant utilize this roadway for
their traffic distribution for the villages?
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, yes, to connect North Road up
to -- up to Oil Well Road and handle the majority of the traffic
running north/south.
MS. SCOTT: Actually, if you review the applicant's Traffic
Impact Statement, it does not contemplate that roadway. It utilizes
other existing roadways.
Have you completed an independent traffic analysis regarding
the proposed town, or have you received a traffic analysis related to
the town plan from the applicant?
May 25, 2021
Page 222
MR. MINICOZZI: I am not a traffic analysis expert.
MS. SCOTT: So the statements as it relates to Big Cypress
Parkway are assumptions since the construction is not included in the
Long-Range Transportation Plan and was not utilized in the
applicant's analysis for the two independent villages?
MR. MINICOZZI: They're drawn on the master plan as a -- as
a system of road network running north/south with the dedication for
that connectivity running north/south.
So in the case of -- I mean, actually, if you look at Bellmar, it's
even worse if you don't have Big Cypress Parkway, because the
neighborhood to the south would never be able to get to the village
center without having to go all the way into the village to come all
the way out or cross all the way over into the Glades and come back
out. So Big Cypress is the only way for the south side of Bellmar to
get to the village center.
So if you don't have Big Cypress, it's even worse for t he
communities because people can't get to their groceries.
MS. SCOTT: Are you looking at the master plan --
MR. MINICOZZI: Yeah, that's it.
MS. SCOTT: -- that's up there?
MR. MINICOZZI: Yes.
MS. SCOTT: Do you see in the center --
(Simultaneous crosstalk.)
MR. MINICOZZI: See the big red -- see the big yellow -- or
yellow arrow? The cursor that's on the screen.
MS. SCOTT: Yes.
MR. MINICOZZI: If I live in that -- if you live in that
neighborhood, how would you get the village center for a bottle of
milk if Big Cypress Parkway didn't exist? Would you just hack your
way through the hammock? I mean, how do you get there?
So Big Cypress is a critical connection for the village center to
May 25, 2021
Page 223
the whole south pod down there. If you don't have Big Cypress
Parkway, this is an epic fail from a connectivity standpoint. So
either Big Cypress is happening, to which you can actually consider it
somewhat connected, or if Big Cypress doesn't happen, then that
entire south village becomes unwalkable to the village center.
MS. SCOTT: I'm just asking, if you're looking at the master
plan that's in front of us that's on your slide, do you not see in the
center of that village that there is another connection, not that
someone has to go all the way around the village, that there is a
vehicular connection in the center, presumably it would also
accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians, that will connect the
southern pod to the northern pod?
MR. MINICOZZI: And that distance to go
approximately -- what's the key say here? That's about 500 feet. So
you could take somebody from the south pod, and they may be
maybe a quarter mile away from the village center, but now they're
going to have to travel close to a mile and a half to get to the village
center when they're only literally a quarter mile away. So if you're
traveling -- that's discouraging pedestrian traffic, because you are,
what's that, septupling the length of the travel trip. So an individual
will not walk that path. They will get in their car, drive all the way
east, take that vehicular connection, and drive all the way west to get
that gallon of milk. So either -- you know, it would actually be in
a -- in your favor to have Big Cypress Parkway built to increase that
connectivity. So to not have it actually makes it more disconnected,
period.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Can I show something?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: In your turn.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Oh, I'm sorry. Were you done?
MS. SCOTT: I would -- do you also see that there's also
pedestrian interconnection that's closer to that additional pod that you
May 25, 2021
Page 224
were discussing as a boardwalk?
MR. MINICOZZI: Yeah, that says "potential boardwalk." It
doesn't say that the boardwalk exists.
MS. SCOTT: Well, as of today nothing exists, but thank you
very much.
MR. MINICOZZI: I could potentially have a full head of hair,
but I don't.
MS. OLSON: Can I ask a follow-up question from what
Trinity mentioned?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MS. OLSON: Hi, Joe. It's April. I'm not sure if you saw
Norm Marshall's presentation, but he said that he modeled the traffic
on Big Cypress Parkway, and 86 percent of the trips will be from the
villages. Do you think it's reasonable that these village residents
would not use Big Cypress Parkway, or do you think they're going to
be using Big Cypress Parkway?
MR. MINICOZZI: They're going to be using Big Cypress
Parkway, period.
MS. OLSON: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Could we go to the visualizer, please.
Now, April, do you mind if I use this podium?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, not at all. Just -- let's make sure
Mr. Minicozzi can see.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Minicozzi, I don't know if you can
see what I just put up on the visualizer. It's the actual master plan.
And I circled an area that is -- I circled, actually, two areas. I circled
the first area, which is a sidewalk that goes from the pod you just
described to another sidewalk that's adjacent to, I guess, the lake
that -- I'm sorry -- that's adjacent to what is going to be SSA 18,
right? That you can actually walk from that pod al ong that walkway
that I circled and then along adjacent to SSA 18 right to the village
May 25, 2021
Page 225
center. Did you review that part of the master plan when you were
doing your analysis of walkability?
MR. MINICOZZI: Mr. Yancovik [sic], could you zoom in for
me better? It's hard to see on this screen from here.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Mr. Yovanovich, maybe you could
use a pen and mark what you're --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Let me do it this way. I think I learned
how to do this earlier today.
MR. MINICOZZI: No, this is good. You're doing it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You see that pathway, that walkway
right there?
MR. MINICOZZI: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
MR. MINICOZZI: And I see how it stops, too.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But go right here, because there's a
dashed line that refers to a sidewalk that will then let you -- and I'm
going to try to do this -- walk across to the village center. Do you
see that on the pathway plan that's attached as one of the documents
to the master plan?
MR. MINICOZZI: Mr. Yancovik, the way that we read master
plans is by a key and not by a dashed line, because if you'll note to
the left, there is a dashed line that represents a property line. So a
dashed line does not necessarily represent sidewalk. If I'm looking
at the color-coded version of this, the color-coded version, that
sidewalk is colored gray, and it literally stops. So I don't see a
connection -- I don't see the connection that you're seeing. If you
can pull a key and show me how a dashed line equals a sid ewalk,
then we're talking. But I can't see on that drawing how a dashed
single line is a sidewalk. Typically, sidewalks have two lines, two
boundaries, not one dashed line.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to
May 25, 2021
Page 226
disagree since the document does show that interconnection.
MR. MINICOZZI: Well, in this case -- in this case I'm a
planner, and you are not. So I would say that that is not -- a dashed
line is not a sidewalk.
MS. OLSON: Mr. Minicozzi, on a scale of 1 to 10, how would
you rate Bellmar and Longwater's walkability from an experienced
AICP with many years in the field?
MR. MINICOZZI: Again, it would -- I would say 0, because
it's -- the blocks don't -- the blocks aren't sufficient. They're too
large. The lakes are too big. They can have ponds inside the lakes
that are 15,000 square feet. You can't -- inside the blocks. You
can't have blocks that large and still make it be walkable.
The general concentration -- I mean, heck, there's moats
between the village centers and the residential. It is not designed
with the intent and spirit of walkability with a pedestrian focus by
design in the community, so I would give it a 0.
MS. OLSON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Will that be
all from the Conservancy?
MS. OLSON: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. Okay. So it's 5:51.
My colleagues, what -- shall we come back at 6:30? What's your
sense? Do you want a full hour?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Oh, definitely not an hour.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Let's come back, then, at 6:30. All
right. We'll continue this hearing at 6:30.
(A dinner recess was had from 5:51 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
So we left off where I think the Conservancy has finished and
May 25, 2021
Page 227
the question and answer with the Conservancy finished, and so now
we'll move to the League of Women Voters.
And please identify yourself.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We all know who she is.
MS. NYCKLEMOE: Thank you. Good evening. Good
evening, Commissioners. My name is Charlette Nycklemoe. I'm
here on behalf of the Collier County League of Women Voters as a
member, as a past president, and as a member of the environmental
committee, and also as a member of the Florida League of Women
Voters board of directors.
We endorse quality development that simultaneously preserves
critical lands, wildlife, and water quality to benefit current and future
generations. To accomplish this, best practices need to be used by
the county in the analysis of the latest scientific data, county
demographics, and budgetary data. If done properly, the result will
be a fair balance of the burden of growth between the citizens, the
environment, and the developers.
We believe a fair balance currently does not exist with
Longwater and Bellmar. The numbers don't add up, putting too
much of the burden on the residents of Collier County not only in
increased taxes but more traffic and a diminished quality of life.
There are also major inconsistencies with the goals of the RLSA.
These problems need to be addressed this evening.
I would like to remind you, League members have been very
involved in the RLSA program for many, many years. Some from
the initiation of the RLSA program through the five-year review and
through the recent two-year review process. As concerned citizens,
they will be discussing in detail the following five topics.
Number 1, fiscal neutrality will not be achieved when the
economic assessment uses unrealistically low population estimates.
Number 2, the water and sewer infrastructure is far from fiscally
May 25, 2021
Page 228
neutral.
Number 3, building Bellmar and Longwater on 2,000 acres of
habitat essential to survival of the panther is not consistent with the
RLSA's requirement that development be directed away from listed
species.
Number 4, the town agreement. The county has asked to sign
off on a conceptual town plan that is not a formal application for a
town. This is an attempt to sidestep fundamental procedures and
would set a terrible precedent for future development in the RLSA.
The town envisioned in the town agreement is fragmented into
noncontiguous sections and is nothing more than a sprawling
development all along Big Cypress Parkway, exactly con trary to the
goals of the RLSA to avoid sprawl.
And the fifth issue is developers must commit to building village
centers up front; otherwise, the county will pay the cost of increased
pressure on existing infrastructure.
And I'm going to conclude this part with this: As everybody
here is aware, this meeting is being televised for all the citizens, all
your constituents, to see and to hear. They are anxious to hear the
pros and cons of these developments and the decision you, as a board,
will be making on the future of Collier County next year and every
year for the rest of their lives, their children, and their
grandchildren's.
We are witnessing just the beginning of development within the
RLSA region. Commissioners, you must ensure that new
developments in this region, like those before you today, conform to
the intent and policies of the RLSA program and do not set
precedence we will regret.
Southwest Florida remains susceptible to sprawl and our water
to pollution and overuse. The Florida panther remains endangered.
The RLSA overlay has never been more relevant and/or necessary.
May 25, 2021
Page 229
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. MARTIN: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Lynn
Martin, and I'm also a member of the League of Women Voters.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Move your mic closer to your mouth.
Thank you. Thank you.
MS. MARTIN: In looking at the economic assessments for
Longwater and Bellmar, I question whether these new developments
will actually be fiscally neutral to the tax base of the county as
required.
The SRA application shows a commitment of 90 percent
single-family homes and 10 percent multifamily while the economic
assessment shows 58 percent single-family and 42 percent
multifamily. The multifamily homes assume 1.05 permanent
residents while the single-family homes assume 2.21 permanent
residents. If the applicant builds 90 percent single-family homes
instead of 58 percent, there will be over 1,000 additional permanent
residents.
The persons per household is inconsistent with the Collier
County average of 2.45 person per household used in the impact fee
studies, which is the BEBR 2017 estimate. The Florida impact fee
statute requires the use of the most recent and localized data. The
2045 Long-Range Transportation Plan, which uses recent and audited
TAZ data, estimates between 3.00 and 3.75 persons per household
specifically in the RLSA. Even with the 38 percent vacancy rate
used by DPFG, the numbers don't work. By assuming a greater
percentage of multifamily homes and not using recent and localized
data, the total number of residents and the number of children is
undercounted in the economic assessment.
Six hundred sixty-nine students in a community of 2,750 homes
in Eastern Collier doesn't make sense. This understatement will
May 25, 2021
Page 230
impact the cost of providing all the services required to support the
community. Water, wastewater, schools, law enforcement, fire,
EMS, library materials, and traffic would be understated with more
cars on the road per household.
With more people than planned, additional costs will be incurred
to add infrastructure to maintain the required county level of services.
The villages will use more of the capacity of the new water and
wastewater treatment plant than projected.
The level of service for water was lowered by the county in
2020 to increase the capacity of the current system and move the
capital expenditures for the new facilities beyond the 10-year horizon
of the study. Will it have to be lowered again?
And while Collier Enterprises should be paying a higher impact
fee since Longwater and Bellmar aren't included in the impact fee
study, instead, the county will be paying Collier Enterprises up to 2.7
millions to upsize the pipes in Rivergrass to serve a conduit to
Longwater. And shouldn't the economic assessment for Longwater
and Bellmar at least use the same level of service as was used for
Rivergrass?
The economic assessment must use the most recent localized
population data to make sure the developer is paying their fair share
of the costs of growth from these villages. With a discrepancy in
population, these villages will not achieve fiscal neutrality as required
without an additional assessment.
I ask you to please consider this.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. HUSHON: Good evening. I'm Judy Hushon, and I'm a
member of the League of Women Voters. I also served as the chair
and -- a member of the EAC and the chair of the EAC through the
review of the first whole round of the RLSA. So that was through
2010. It was, like, 2004 to 2010. I'm the chairman of the natural
May 25, 2021
Page 231
resources for the state League also.
As you know, Bellmar, Longwater, and Rivergrass together
make up the Big Cypress Stewardship District. That's an important
term. One of only two privately owned special stewardship districts
authorized by the State of Florida. They were to -- and they were
formed in Collier County. The other is the Ave Maria Stewardship
District.
Big Cypress Stewardship District has distinct purposes and
requirements. It is, one, to provide the landowner, Collier
Enterprises, with the ability to fund basic infrastructure and services
required for developments within the district through, for example,
the issuance of revenue bonds repaid solely by the land property
owners in the district to ensure that Collier County -- and, two, to
ensure that Collier County and its general taxpayers are not burdened
with the infrastructure costs and services of those private
developments.
It was required of Barron Collier in the development of Ave
Maria, in their stewardship district, that Collier Enterprises should
also pay for all infrastructure with its Big Cypress Stewardship
District without expecting one cent from Collier County or its
taxpayers.
When Barron Collier developed Ave Maria, it independently
arranged for the funding, maintenance, and operation of all
infrastructure, including public roadways, water, wastewater,
facilities, parks, schools, et cetera, with an estimated cost of over
$650 million through the issuance of revenue bonds, which did not in
any way impact Collier County or its general taxpayers.
In fact, the only aspect of the development of Ave Maria which
impacted county taxpayers for which the county's impact fee
methodology was employed was in connection with a widening of a
regional road, Oil Well Road. The cost to the county was 20 million
May 25, 2021
Page 232
which, over the past 20 years, Ave Maria Stewardship District has
repaid seven million through impact fees payable to the county as
homes are occupied in Ave Maria.
The landowner infrastructure funding requirement that applied
to the Ave Maria Stewardship District and, frankly, to all other
privately owned and managed stewardship districts in the state of
Florida should also apply to Collier Enterprises and its development
of Bellmar as well as all of its developments within the Big
Cypress -- Bellmar, Longwater, Rivergrass, and its developments
within the Big Cypress Stewardship District.
In 2004, Big Cypress sought and was granted permission at its
sole cost and expense to install and oversee the infrastructure for
water, wastewater, stormwater within its borders.
Until August of 2018, plans were underway to install wells, et
cetera. Then, as a result of negotiations between Collier Enterprises
and the Collier County Water and Sewer District, things changed.
The county expanded its service territory into the rural undeveloped
areas of the county to construct an approximately $76 million
Northeast Utility Facility, NUF, required to serve the new customer
growth in the new villages.
We need to keep things in focus. Ave Maria also has a
state-approved stewardship district. The landowners, at their sole
cost and expense, installed wells, treatment plants, piping, and
internal roads, and they floated us $651 million in Ave Maria bonds.
Neither Collier Enterprises nor the commissioners have a right
to ignore the requirements of state law and burden the county and its
taxpayers with Collier Enterprises' infrastructure funding obligations
within the boundaries of its own stewardship district. Collier
Enterprises should have a similar debt obligation for the
developments to those of Ave Maria.
The county is relying on impact fees to pay back the county's
May 25, 2021
Page 233
utility investments. Mark Isackson, sitting over here, stated at a
February 24th public meeting that impact fees do not and are not
intended to pay for growth. The General Fund must loan the impact
fee fund hundreds of millions to cover the impact fee fund debt,
unquote. This is especially true for development in rural areas, not
for infill.
For the NUF, for example, 66 percent of the water will go to the
three enterprises -- Collier Enterprises villages, but the amount paid
in impact fees falls short of the cost by 43 million.
There are other expenses associated with piping from the NUF
to the developments, which the developer is not picking up. The
county's impact fee formulas are not and never were intended to be
applicable to rural areas where there is no existing infrastructure.
The county should not be relying on impact fees to cover
development in areas without any existing infrastructure. There are
three de novo -- these are three de novo communities.
Lucy Gallo of DPFG, the creator of Collier Enterprises' own
economic impacts assessments for Bellmar, Longwater, and
Rivergrass, was part of an impact fee assessment team in Sarasota,
Florida. She -- that team concluded -- she stated that impact fees do
not cover development in rural areas and there are two -- should be
two different types of impact fee calculations that are required when
determining the true impact of development in urban infill versus
rural areas. And that's something that's very important. I hope you
take that forward, because I think as we come up to doing impact fees
in the future, we need to consider infill impact fees and rural impact
fees.
Per RLSA rules, Collier Enterprises is required to build to
provide a fiscal analysis of Longwater and Bellmar's impacts on the
Collier water/sewer district; however, that analysis was never
provided by the developer.
May 25, 2021
Page 234
There is a way to keep the taxpayers of Collier County whole.
The GMP Section 4.08.07.L.2 states that if a negative fiscal impact of
a project to a unit of local government is identified, the landowner
will accede to a special assessment on his property to offset such a
shortfall or, in the alternative, to make a lump sum payment to the
unit of local government equal to the present value of the estimated
shortfall. This is a way around the fact that we don't right now have
rural impact fees.
The rules of the county are clear and say that when there's a
shortfall, the developer is responsible for paying the difference. In
this case, the county Planning Commission should request the BCC
to request this payment. You should also request the
BCC -- well -- and they did not do that. We should -- I'm also
asking the BCC to require a more open and verifiable model for
calculating fiscal neutrality with separate options for infill and rural
development.
In addition to the impact fees not covering development, the
impact fee calculations are based on the low side for population and
transportation, which benefits the developer. The rural development
tends to have higher population numbers. They tend to be working
populations. They tend not to be seasonal populations like we have
nearer the coast and, therefore, using countywide numbers is not a
reasonable alternative.
This all means that a developer's contribution of at least
180 million is required in addition to impact fees for these
developments. This is 60 million for each of the three
developments. That developer's contribution needs to be calculated
and assessed before construction and must consider the NUF and the
fact that development is not fiscally neutral. Taxpayers should not
be required to cover this, or ratepayers.
As commissioners, it is your obligation to see that county
May 25, 2021
Page 235
taxpayers not overburdened or the ratepayers who happen to be in
that district.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. VASATURO: Good afternoon, Commissioners. Gaylene
Vasaturo, member of the League of Women Voters, Collier County.
Bellmar Village will be just a mile and a quarter from the
panther refuge. Bellmar and Longwater will be built directly on
habitat identified as essential for the survival of the p anther. How
can this be considered consistent with the RLSA requirement that
development be directed away from listed species habitat?
Collier Enterprises concluded, in essence, that the sites for
Longwater and Bellmar have little to no value as panther habitat.
That's because Collier Enterprises ignores the best available science
on panther habitat, such as the 2006 Kautz study.
An applicant is required to update the natural resource scoring
for its proposed SRA. Collier Enterprises updated its own panther
surveys and telemetry data but refuses to consider the panther studies
that specifically delineate Primary Panther Habitat. Collier
Enterprises says that it does not need to consider these studies
because their sites are not listed as preferred panther habitat in the
2002 Land Development Code; however, panther scientists now
consider more land-cover types than those listed in the 2002 Land
Development Code to be preferred panther habitat located in
Longwater and especially Bellmar in these areas will adversely
impact the long-term survival of panthers.
Second, in return for three villages and a town, Collier
Enterprises says the county is getting restoration of Camp Keais
Strand Flow-way and 12,300 acres land preserved; however, Collier
Enterprises removed the wetlands restoration from its plan that is
critical to restoring the Camp Keais Flow-way.
May 25, 2021
Page 236
Two months ago, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service panther refuge
manager Kevin Godsea wrote the Planning Commission explaining
how important restoration of this flow-way is for downstream
conservation lands and -- such as the panther refuge, and asked the
county to require hydrological restoration of Camp Keais Strand.
Mr. Godsea pointed out that two farm fields in SSA 15 restrict
the flow-way to a narrow point and that restoring these farm fields to
wetlands is necessary to restore the flow-way. He noted that the
SSA restoration plan had included restoring these farm fields, but
then Collier Enterprises removed this from its plan. The letter
concludes, quote, we believe that this wetlands restoration should be
included as it was clearly the intent when the RLSA was established.
Before making your decisions on this -- these villages, please ask
Collier Enterprises to put restoration of these farm fields back in its
plan, its restoration plan.
Also, Collier Enterprises is not really giving up rights to develop
12,300 acres because the RLSA program already prohibits residential
development on almost all these acres. You can't put one house per
five acres in most of the areas set aside as SSAs because they are
nearly all FSAs, HSAs, and WRAs. The RLSA program prohibits
development, mining, and recreation in these areas.
More importantly, while Collier Enterprises is setting aside
environmentally sensitive land, it will be fragmenting this land by
constructing roads to the Water Retention Area, that is SSA 17 and
18, and surrounding large portions of this Water Retention Area with
houses, roads, people, and light.
Scientific studies show that fragmentation -- such fragmentation
and disturbances will constrain wildlife movement and seriously
degrade the WRA.
Finally, how can you conclude that Longwater and
Bellwater -- Bellmar meet the RLSA requirement to be fiscally
May 25, 2021
Page 237
neutral when county staff acknowledges that impact fees will not
cover the cost of the infrastructure necessary to support these
villages, and staff relies on other funding such as gas taxes, grants,
sales tax, bonds to make up the shortfall.
That's the -- I'm going to stop there, because something came up
earlier, and I wanted to cover that in my short time, and that's
prescribed burning. Oh, if I can find it. I am concerned about
residents, especially residents with respiratory issues, getting
adequate notice about the prescribed burning. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service asked the applicant to put an acknowledgment that it
be included in the deeds. The applicant has decided to put a notice
about prescribed burning as one of the many closing documents that a
homebuyer must sign.
At the Planning Commission, Planning Commissioner Klucik
said that he does many real estate closings, and he can tell us that
people don't read the many notices they have to sign during closing.
So with that, I thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. CALKINS: I'm Susan Calkins, also a League member,
and I'm speaking to the town agreement that is -- you're being asked
to approve.
It is an agreement, not a town application. It's a promise to
make an application. There's been no substantive -- sorry, it's
late -- staff analysis of consistency with the RLSAO, and this town,
as it's depicted in Collier Enterprises' advertisements for the Big
Cypress, the Town of Big Cypress, is fragmented into noncontiguous
sections. It's really nothing more than a sprawling development of
gated villages strung out along Big Cypress Parkway.
Villages, which, in the words of county staff, their own
consistency memorandum, once upon a time, said, are, essentially,
it's a suburban development plan placed in the RLSA and contrary to
May 25, 2021
Page 238
what is intended in the RLSAO.
This proposed town does not avoid sprawl. It is sprawl. And
it certainly doesn't discourage automobile trips. It necessitates them,
as we've heard.
Additionally, this agreement shifts some of the costs of the
possible future town to the county. Again, contrary to RLSA
policies. In this agreement, the county pays for the community park
despite the fact that RLSA requires the applicant to provide the
community park. Similarly, county's paying some of the permitting
fees normally paid by the applicant. So I hope this agreement is not
giving away other requirements of the RLSAO for towns.
Furthermore, this agreement makes no promises. The 550 acres
added to the town agreement will be primarily a commercial town
core spread out, again, along Big Cypress Parkway; however, the
town agreement states, quote, there shall be no timing conditions
placed on the development of the town core, which will be developed
based on market conditions.
Timing on building a town core or commercial area is key to the
self-sufficiency of towns, as intended in the RLSAO, yet Collier
Enterprises may not build the proposed town core for decades, or
maybe market conditions will never support such a proposal.
So, as I said, Collier Enterprises has not yet submitted a town
plan or application, I should say, but rather a promise to submit one
that under -- I would say under certain conditions is favorable to
Collier Enterprises.
It seems to me that, in effect, this proposal tends to make a
mockery of the whole RLSA program by sort of sidestepping some
fundamental procedures, setting a poor precedent for the future
36,000 acres remaining to be developed in the RLSAO.
As was stated earlier on, we're at the beginning of the
development in this region, and I don't think it's a time to be sloppy.
May 25, 2021
Page 239
It's not a time to bend the rules or bend the intent of the RLSA. It's
time to get it right. We know what towns look like. We think Ave
Maria, Babcock Ranch. And this proposal surely won't create one of
those.
Thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. NYCKLEMOE: Madam Chair, I have a question before I
begin.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MS. NYCKLEMOE: I would like to do the three-minute
presentation for the last one that I issued -- the last issue, and then
there is one more three-minute one. Do we have the time or not?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We really don't have the time.
MS. NYCKLEMOE: Okay. Then I'm going to turn it over to
Bonnie Michaels. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. I hope you understand.
Unless we want to be here till very, very late, I have to be very strict
on the time.
MS. NYCKLEMOE: Maybe I should flamenco instead of
speak.
MS. MICHAELS: Hello. I'm Bonnie Michaels. I'm with the
League.
I've been a taxpayer in Collier for over 20 years, and I have a
strong interest in where I live. I've attended all the RLSA meetings,
and I look like it. I'm getting old.
I have only one important message. Be sure you have
absolutely no doubt with all the information that's been presented by
the staff and Collier Enterprise that it's 100 percent accurate.
Remember the concerns of those who spoke before me. You
have such a monumental decision, and it's about details and crucial
issues that have been disputed. If you have any doubt about the cost
May 25, 2021
Page 240
of traffic, how much traffic; about the fragmenting of flow-ways; the
impact fees; fiscal neutrality; development, is it too close to the
panthers, or is it okay? Do we really have walkable neighb orhoods?
And then there's the town. It just feels like it's the cart before the
horse, and when?
Everyone loves the conservation perk but, you know, some of
that land couldn't have been developed anyway. And then we have
panther corridors. They're great. And restoration. Guess what?
Do you know how long it's going to take for that to happen? Fifteen,
20 years. What's going to happen to the panthers in the meantime?
They'll be roaming all the neighborhoods looking for shelter and
food.
Landowners are already publicizing the town with sleek
brochures before approval and pushing to move too quickly. What
difference is a day, a week, a month? Get it right.
I've seen commissioners come and go with their opinions and
their knowledge, and I saw -- I was there with that agreement where
we had that surprise announcement of an increase of 16,000 acres to
45-. It makes me wary, not to be trustful until everything is really
vetted.
Staff has changed, too, along with their opinions. Kris van
Lengen is gone, along with a lot of his white paper suggestions.
Staff says today they're using up-to-date science for panthers. What
does that mean? There's so many differences of opinion. Details,
details.
Well, before they dig up the earth and displace those cute little
tortoises' homes and birds' nests and foraging for bears, deer, and
panthers, be sure you have absolutely no doubt that all the
information is 100 percent accurate. Have courage to make the
decision that makes Collier a good model for growth, not a disaster.
Our quality of life and your legacy is on the line.
May 25, 2021
Page 241
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Now we'll
hear from Ms. Budd representing the Florida -- help me with it now.
MS. BUDD: Wildlife Federation.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Federation, yeah. Wildlife
Federation. Thank you. And I know you have more than five
members, so you do have up to 30 minutes.
MS. BUDD: I appreciate that, Madam Chair. Good evening.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good evening.
MS. BUDD: Commissioners, Meredith Budd on behalf of the
Florida Wildlife Federation.
The Federation is an environmental conservation organization
and, true to our mission, that's what I'm here to speak about today,
environmental outcomes that the RLSA has and that come from the
entitlement of villages as a part of this program.
My office here in Naples opened in 1994 with a goal of
protecting the Western Everglades from sprawling growth,
particularly to stop what we see happening in Golden Gate Estates
from happening in the further parts of Eastern Collier County.
We were a part of the litigation against the county. We joined
in with the Department of Community Affairs and Audubon Collier,
now Audubon Western Everglades, that led to the creation of
landmark growth plans, including this Rural Lands Stewardship Area
program.
Collier County is not immune to population growth, and we all
know that. And the Federation understands that landowners have
vested rights across the entire county, and that includes the eastern
portion of this county.
And we all know the Florida panther utilizes this area. It also
utilizes Golden Gate Estates, or it did before it functionally no longer
functioned as panther habitat.
May 25, 2021
Page 242
And public lands in the Rural Lands Stewardship District area
are not sufficient to support their growing population. There is a
well-known need to work with private landowners in the region to
help not only protect the panther currently but to aid in their recovery
of the species.
The RLSA does that. It provides an alternative to the sprawling
development that we see in Golden Gate Estates, and we hear over
and over that land being set aside in the Rural Lands Stewardship
Area is already protected, but we know that's not true. We have a
national policy on no net loss of wetlands, and we see permits don't
achieve this. We see the Estates continually being drained day after
day in a sprawling growth pattern of single-family homes. And if
you see how rapidly Golden Gate Estates is building out, I think it's
naive to think that we won't see that pattern persist in the eastern
portion of the county.
Just like Golden Gate Estates, there are significant areas
designated as primary habitat for panthers in the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area, and that includes these development footprints and
portions of them.
Primary Panther Habitat references a model from a 2006 study,
peer-reviewed article by Randy Kautz, very, very well respected,
very, very great article that shows a high-level view and a guide for
landscape conservation. But the concluding section of this article
outlines the need for functional habitat, and this includes the panthers'
use of the area as a home range, breeding access, resting and denning
sites, stalking cover, and the support of the land for a prey base.
These are all essential aspects of a functioning landscape for panthers
embedded in that article.
With repeated site visits over the last 20-some-odd years by
biologists, including county staff -- I've been out there myself as
well -- it's determined that those village footprints are not functioning
May 25, 2021
Page 243
panther habitat.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recovery plan does note the
need to protect lands labeled as Primary Panther Habitat, but if you
read on, it also talks about what secondary habitat looks like and
what secondary habitats characteristics are, and they say that that
looks like high-intensity agriculture. That's what these footprints of
these villages are.
And according to the restoration plan, these high-intensity
agriculture locations -- and I quote -- for restoration or for
functionality, restoration would need to occur in order to allow the
area to meaningfully contribute to panther recovery. That doesn't
mean farm fields aren't important. I don't want to say that. I don't
want to say that they're not important at all. They, of course, are.
And in fact, the Federation enthusiastically supports the amendments
to the Rural Lands Stewardship Area to retain farmlands through a
credit generation, but cleared farmlands do have a lesser
environmental value than a forested natural uplands site, or a natural
uplands site, or natural area, excuse me. So even if the farm fields
are labeled as primary habitat by a model, they are simply not
functioning as panther habitat without restoration, and they're not
serving the intent of the primary zone as articulated in that article.
So Longwater Village, part of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area
program, it's a receiving area. It is a footprint that is an impacted
farm field that has been farmed for over 50 years. In exchange for
the development footprint of about 1,000 acres, the applicant is
preserving 4,800 acres. That's part of SSA 14 and SSA 17.
The northern part of Camp Keais Strand is located within the
boundary of SSA 14, and the State of Florida has long targeted this
land as essential lands remaining in the Florida Forever project
boundary for the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed. This
has been a long-standing target, and this entitlement of this village
May 25, 2021
Page 244
gets that in preservation.
SSA 17, it's comprised of primarily shaggy cypress swamp, and
it's part of a critical flow-way. These lands, unless the landowner
opts into the program, do not get perpetual easements placed on
them. If we want perpetual easements placed on these lands to
ensure protection through that mechanism, they have to be entitled
through the RLSA program. It's the only way it happens. But even
with all that preservation, the Federation was still concerned about
wildlife movement through the footprint of these villages.
And so the applicant met with us. They met with Audubon;
they met with Defenders of Wildlife as a group. And we have
since -- they have since presented plans to widen the remaining
linkage that goes through the development footprint. They removed
portions of the retention ponds that are in between the two portions of
Longwater, and that helped widen the corridor, the linkage there.
They also are committing to three wildlife crossings; one on Oil
Well Road and one on each of the interior roadways.
These modifications are going to help wildlife move safely
through the preservation area, and that's a direct result of
conversations, productive conversations between our environmental
groups and the applicant.
The village footprint for Bellmar is located only about a mile
north of the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. Thi s is a
27,000-acre conservation area, and the Federation has consistently
expressed to the applicant, to the federal agencies, and to the county,
for that matter, that this SRA designation is really not the best spot
for development as compared to the othe r areas in the RLSA and the
other villages that we've seen come through this program.
But this concern was also noted throughout the creation of the
Rural Lands Stewardship Area program, and it was largely due to this
concern and other concerns regarding the lack of some upland buffers
May 25, 2021
Page 245
in Camp Keais Strand, that buffers and Habitat Stewardship Areas
were added to the program. And this seems to be missed, because it
kind of just rolled into the current map we see today, but those farm
fields adjacent to Bellmar to the east, those were added in creation of
the RLSA program to accommodate these concerns about it being too
close to the refuge, and that also includes some of the upland buffers
in Camp Keais Strand. So these buffers helped to add some areas in
between that can help limit some of the wildlife issues that we had
concerns about.
Does that eliminate the concern? No. The location is not
ideal. And, quite frankly, it's not preferred from the Federation's
perspective, but it's a part of the program, and the Federation is
supportive of the program because it effectuates landscape -scale
conservation for our county and for the region.
So as a part of the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program,
Bellmar, I know you saw today, is being entitled, what looks like on
paper, SSA 15, but your staff have reviewed, and it's in process, for
SSA 18 to entitle Bellmar. I know it doesn't look like that today, but
that is a commitment from the landowner, and I know your county
staff have already reviewed that SSA. It's in, I think, legal review
now, and so that is what is going to be entitled Bellmar.
SSA 18 sets aside 2,200 acres west of Camp Keais Strand and
north of their panther refuge. This SSA is removing all land-use
layers from nearly 2,000 of those acres, and the remaining 200 will
retain some additional land-use layers, but the most intense land-use
layers are coming off those acres.
Through negotiations between the Federation, Audubon, and
Defenders of Wildlife and, of course, the applicant, we have come to
the agreement on additional measures that the applicant will be doing
to ease some of our remaining concerns in terms of wildlife conflict
and compatibility with our neighboring Florida Panther Natural
May 25, 2021
Page 246
Wildlife Refuge that is coming through as part of the town
agreement.
The applicant has agreed to include Dark Skies. The panther
refuge is going through the process now to become an International
Dark Sky, and so the applicant has committed to being compatible
and implementing Dark Skies in this village and, from what I heard
today, also in Longwater Village, to be compatible with their
neighbor, the refuge and, of course, surrounding SSAs.
The applicant has also agreed to incorporate smoke easements.
That will be part of the closing documents for the sale of any sort of
development in Bellmar Village, and hopefully it can be something
throughout the Rural Lands Stewardship Area program.
Now, I just bought a house in August. I read every document,
because that is a lot of money, and it was a big c ommitment. And if
you don't read your closing documents, that's your own failing. So
it's important for you to read your closing documents.
This is going to help ensure that burning management protocol's
being done on the refuge and on adjacent conservation lands, like
other SSAs in the program can be maintained and done properly. It's
critical. I'm glad that issue was brought up, and I'm glad that it's
been resolved through these smoke easements.
Another commitment is the bear-proof trash cans. Bear-proof
trash cans is not a requirement here in Collier County. It is not
something that the developer has to do. It's not something that
residents need to do. But this is something this applicant has
committed to implementing throughout all residential a nd all
commercial development throughout the entire town. This is a big
deal. This is going to help limit wildlife-human conflict at the onset.
And this is something I know, if you were to talk to our state agency,
the people who work very closely with the bear calls, will be very
happy to hear these protocols are being implemented in this town.
May 25, 2021
Page 247
On top of that, the applicant has committed to using that
10-credit-per-acre ratio. That is not a part of the current program.
That is a part of what has been sent to the state and coming back for
your approval, I think, in the next week or so. Right now it's eight
credits per acre. They have every right to use that
eight-credit-per-acre ratio. Our groups, our conservation groups,
after discussions with them, requested that they move forward
with -- in the spirit of the program and in the spirit of the
amendments that are moving forward, to use that 10-credit-per-acre
ratio, and they are doing that, and if they -- when they do that, they
will require that additional SSA designation of Bellmar because, as
you heard, if there's only about 1,000 credits left in SSA 15, they're
going to need more credits to entitle that -- these developments, and
they are. They have SSA 18 in the works.
So the increased credit consumption, combined with the
proposed RLSA cap, that can help alleviate concerns about the excess
credits being generated up front. And while the ratio between
development and preservation area in the long term is, in fact, more
modest than what we're seeing here today, that's what we wanted in
the beginning. Our organizations, we wanted the land that is most
environmentally sensitive to be preserved in perpetuity up front, get
those land uses off of those lands so that will be preserved forever,
and that's what this is doing; it's preserving land up front in the most
environmentally sensitive areas providing those linkages in
perpetuity.
The RLSA, these villages, the town proposal which altogether
preserves, I think, just over 12,000 acres of land through the program,
in addition to all of the other commitments the landowner has made,
provides the greatest landscape conservation benefit not only upfront
but in the long term for this county and for the region.
So for that reason, for all of those reasons, the Federation is
May 25, 2021
Page 248
supportive of the conservation benefit that we get out of this program
and that we get out of these village applications and the proposed
town conversion as well.
And I will be happy to answer any questions if you have any.
So thank you for the extra time.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No questions, and no one else for
your organization?
MS. BUDD: No. Just me, ma'am. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Michael Dalby, please.
MR. DALBY: Michael Dalby, the President and CEO of the
Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce.
We pride ourselves on giving voice to the economy, to giving
voice oftentimes to the employers and the employees who oftentimes
can't be at these meetings. We represent over 1,000 businesses,
enterprises employing some 30,000 individuals.
We -- for the following reasons, we support the applicant's
development.
First off, the economic impact. This is providing new centers
for office, commercial, and even light industrial space. We need
these spaces in Collier County. We need the places that we can
create more higher-skill, higher-wage jobs, and these locations will
allow that to happen.
Secondly, the Chamber has long championed the development
of housing that is attainable, particularly to serve the employed
citizens of our county. We have a supply-and-demand challenge
here right now, and this creates supply; single-family, multifamily
housing. If you talk about the future of children and grandchildren,
we need jobs and housing.
We have a concern over something that we've been seeing more
and more in this -- the concept of no growth which is presented as
May 25, 2021
Page 249
essentially a fiscal or an environmental concern. The concept kind
of works like this. It's where someone who currently lives here, in a
home, in a development, believes that the land that their house sits on
or their home is okay, that site development fine, even if it was done
maybe less than 10 years ago because even though the fact that it's
lower density, it is gated, is non-walkable, is probably a perfect
example of sprawl, it's fine, but any new development is going to be
absolutely devastating to the environment. And it's just another
version of I'm here, shut the gate behind me, and don't let anyone else
in, and that really doesn't work as you're trying to build a community.
The RLSA plan has been envisioned for over 20 years. It's a
way to create a second city, a self-contained second community and
inland where not everyone has to come to the coastal Collier for all
employment, shopping, and services.
Lastly, if you think about this, sometimes we talk about in terms
of smart growth, and there's all kinds of definitions about that, and
we've argued over some of that terminology. But the alternative is
dumb growth, not planned, not on central water or sewer, not
inclusive of job creators or diverse housing options. It just doesn't
work. It's a continuation of what has brought us to where we are
today.
People talk as if we're not -- there's not already many people
moving to Collier County. We know the numbers. There are many
people moving here. And much of the work that's been done by the
county has been to accommodate and try to do what they can to work
on roads, to work through the sales tax and other things to provide the
services to those individuals irrespective of that development. But
this development allows us to take this next step into the second city
concept, and we would encourage your approval of the applicant's
request.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Dalby. Anyone else
May 25, 2021
Page 250
in the Chamber who would like to speak?
MR. DALBY: No, ma'am. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. DALBY: Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I believe, Mr. Miller, we have
Audubon on the line.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. Let me get back here.
I do have Brad Cornell on the line.
If the Zoom people will go ahead and prompt Brad Cornell to
unmute.
Give me just a second here, ma'am. I'm watching for that.
Brad got his prompt, and he's unmuted.
Mr. Cornell, 30 minutes.
MR. CORNELL: Thank you. Good evening, Madam Chair
and Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Good evening.
MR. CORNELL: I appreciate the opportunity to address you
tonight. It has been a long day. I will be as brief as I can. I won't
need 30 minutes.
I'm representing, as the staff for Audubon Florida and Audubon
Western Everglades, their perspectives on this issue.
Audubon has over 20 years of staff experience reviewing Rural
Lands Stewardship Area preservation, restoration, and development
policies and proposals.
We find that the siting of these SSAs, 14, 15, and 17 and the
pending 18, plus the villages and expected town conversion, to be
appropriate to both wetland and listed species habitat preservation
and restoration and for development of the villages and a town with
the exception of Bellmar Village.
Audubon's main concern has been Bellmar Village being sited
too near the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. Audubon has
May 25, 2021
Page 251
spent over a year with our conservation colleagues at Florida Wildlife
Federation and Defenders of Wildlife negotiating with Collier
Enterprises to reduce the impacts of this village's siting.
We have received several very important commitments from
Collier Enterprises on conservation improvements, as you have heard
Meredith Budd from Florida Wildlife Federation report. Those
include, most importantly, a commitment of 12,300 acres of
preservation in the Camp Keais Strand portion of the CREW Florida
Forever project with 2,600 acres of wetland and panther habitat
restoration up front. And, by the way, those restoration acres
include over 2,000 acres of hydrologic restoration of the Camp Keais
Strand by removal of the road and the corresponding rehydration of
wetlands downstream through the slough.
These are all contained in SSAs 14, 15, 17 and the pending 18.
These are significantly more than needed for credits on these villages,
but they're early protection of vital ecological parts of this restoration,
and that's exactly the kind of strategy that we have supported in the
Rural Lands Stewardship Area, upfront conservation well before
development.
In addition, as Meredith Budd also recounted, we're getting
other commitments on the three villages: Restoring and protecting
the movement linkage with the three crossings, the coexistence plan
with bear-proof trash cans. And, by the way, this is a requirement
that should be in every bear area of the county, including the Rural
Fringe Mixed-Use District, Golden Gate Estates, and other areas that
have bears as potential conflicts.
The International Dark Skies lighting requirements and the
stewardship credit consumption rate being increased voluntarily to 10
units per acre, and the prescribed burning allowed legally for the
regional issues and for the panther refuge, those are all really, really
important commitments.
May 25, 2021
Page 252
Audubon also wants to address the recent criticism that these
villages and the town that is expected are sited on Primary Panther
Habitat. While technically true, these cleared -- these cleared farm
fields are not the same value of primary zone as forested habitats in
Camp Keais Strand. This is corroborated by two Florida Wildlife
Commission studies in 2008 and 2011 by Unorato (phonetic), et al,
and Land, et al, which looked at GPS 24-hour panther location data.
The results confirmed cleared farm fields are very low value, little
used panther habitat. The Rural Lands Stewardship Area has
mapped almost all panther habitats for protection, and so the siting of
these villages and the town are in areas that are not used as preferred
habitat for panthers.
And my final point that I'd like to make is from Audubon's big
picture, the conservation perspective of the Rural Lands Stewardship
Area is the -- it is the strongest land-use planning tool that we have
here in Southwest Florida for permanently protecting and restoring
the kind of regional-scale acreage; 134,000 acres of imperiled Florida
panther and wood stork habitats and farms and wetlands. These are
not patches, but they are connected regional-scale Stewardship
Sending Area preserves. These 3,500 acres of three villages and
their town conversion will be entitled by permanent protection and
restoration of 12,300 acres of vital habitats in Camp Keais Strand.
This is an outstanding conservation outcome, and that is why
Audubon Florida and Audubon Western Everglades believes that
these SSA conservation achievements, in addition to the conservation
commitments on these SRA villages, far outweigh the negative
impacts of Bellmar's proximity to the Florida Panther National
Wildlife Refuge.
We urge the Commission to approve these SSA and SRA
proposals in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area. Thanks very much,
and that concludes my remarks.
May 25, 2021
Page 253
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
Mr. Miller, any more groups?
MR. MILLER: I just have people registered at this point
individually.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think this gentleman --
MR. MILLER: I just don't have anything to substantiate his
group. I don't know that you do, ma'am. And he's not first on my
list. I don't know if you want to go there. I have Dr. Karen Dwyer.
I do believe she represents an organization. I just -- I don't know
how you want to proceed.
MR. SCHWARTZ: I have the same problem that
Commissioner McDaniel did, which I didn't know about this new
change groups were giving [sic] extra time, so I brought it up before
the meeting.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. I don't remember your
name.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Matthew Schwartz.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And you represent?
MR. SCHWARTZ: I represent South Florida Wildlands
Association. I've spoken at this commission many, many times over
the last 15 years.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes. I'll allow it.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Not 30 minutes.
MR. SCHWARTZ: I'm not going to take 30 minutes. I was
not prepared for 30 minutes. I was prepared for three, but when I
was told that I could get a little bit of extra time, I put together a
quick slide show. Not a PowerPoint, but I will go through the se.
And by way of background, so Matthew Schwartz. I'm
executive director of the South Florida Wildlands Association. We
were established in March of 2010 with a very narrow focus, to
May 25, 2021
Page 254
protect wildlife and habitat in the greater Everglades. I'm involved
in numerous, numerous campaigns, battles, fights, whatever you want
to call them, here in this area, management plans in the Big Cypress,
now in the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. I was -- I
fought the oil well in the Golden Gate Estates, the battle of the
Golden Gate way back when. Represented myself as my own
attorney. And even though Abraham Lincoln says anybody who has
himself as an attorney, or vice versus, is a fool, I won, because the
Dan Hughes company quit in the middle of the trial.
At any rate, I'm also on the management advisory group of
numerous FWC wildlife management areas and very active in this
area.
So what I'm going to do, I guess, I was going to speak, but let
me just do a little slide show to give a little background of where I'm
going with this and why I think that this is a very, very poor idea to
let these -- let this project go forward.
So the first slide is just an aside, because this question of fiscal
neutrality keeps coming up. So take a look at t his. This is from the
American Farmland Trust. These studies, they're called cost of
community services studies. They're done over and over and over
again. Now, this is not unique to Collier County. But when you
look at this, this is a medium. Let's compare agriculture to
residential, because that's where we're going. We're going from
agricultural to residential.
Agricultural land -- and that's a ratio. For every dollar that they
pay in, they spend 37 cents. That's the ratio of taxes collected to
taxes spent. Thirty-seven cents spent to taxes coming in. It's a big
profit for the county.
Go to residential. This is the average; $1.16. For every dollar
in taxes that get taken in, the county spends or the municipality
spends a buck 16, and that makes sense, because what possible
May 25, 2021
Page 255
services does agricultural land use?
In fact, I asked the question to the staff: Could you give me an
answer, how much does the county spend on this area? They didn't
give me anything. I think the answer is nothing. I think the answer
is absolutely nothing.
Let me move over to the next slides in this -- can I do this? Can
I -- oh, here we go. Okay. So what I did, I went to Google Maps
Pro, and I drew a line around not just the property -- we see here, we
have Longwater, Rivergrass, Bellmar down here. We all know this
already. But we haven't seen this landscape from afar. We've been
looking at it close in, even when the environmental or the wildlife
consultant was speaking, down to the level of the acre.
Now we're looking at big landscape picture of what this area
looks like. It's about 10 miles on the side, 63,000 -- about
64,000 acres, and I'm going to describe it to you. On here, the right
side, that's State Road 29. Up here -- and you guys all know this
landscape. This is State Road 29 over here. This is Oil Well Road
in the north. This is the Golden Gate not -- I didn't go all the way
over to DeSoto because there's some houses that are east of DeSoto,
but this is kind of the edge of Golden Gate, and down here is I-75.
What's the first thing you see when you look at that map?
What's the population of this area, 64,000 acres? It's zero, zero.
Nobody lives here. Absolutely nobody. How much does the
county spend on services in here? Nothing. That's my guess.
Nothing.
So you're going from a vacant area of 64,000 areas -- acres
completely roadless to dense, dense development. What are we
going to have? Like, 20, 25 -- 7,500, 8,000 homes? How many
residents per home? All the services they're going to be using, and
you're going to say it's fiscally neutral. No, it's not going to be
fiscally neutral. It's going to probably be -- most probably it's going
May 25, 2021
Page 256
to be a loss for your county.
But let's talk about the issues that I know a little bit more about.
Let's talk about why this is primary habitat. And let me go to the
next slide.
So here we're looking at completely roadless area. Down here
we're looking at the panther refuge. Here where you're seeing these
patches of agricultural land surrounded by natural land. And when
you look at the telemetry, which I was not able to pull up right now,
the telemetry of panthers show partners all over this area, all over it.
We know that the telemetry is taken during the day, by the way,
when panthers are at rest. They rest in the forested areas. They're
throughout this area.
And not only are they throughout this area, but when you look at
this area, it's not homogenous. That's what panthers like. That's
what this research shows, that panther habitat is a mosaic of habitat
types: Forested, wetland, pasture, agricultural.
When you drive along a country road and you drive on the
highway in the country, where do you see deer? They're on the edge
of the highway. Why are they there? Why are they on the edge if
there's a highway? They're grazing on those leafy green things that
grow on the edges of the highway. It's planted stuff. They're also
on the edges of these forests -- of these ag lands. That's where
panthers are stalking them, and it works. This is really good panther
habitat. In fact, I would go so far to say this is the best of the best
that you're developing.
Let's look at the next slide, which is basically the same thing,
showing Primary Panther Habitat. The red -- I had to kind of tint it a
little bit. The red -- and this comes from the Fish and Wildlife
Service. The red is primary. The green is secondary. Except for
this little smudge in the northwest corner and a little smudge over
here, this entire habitat is primary habitat.
May 25, 2021
Page 257
So what is primary habitat? Primary Panther Habitat is the
habitat where a panther can live out its entire life. It has food. It
has denning. It has resting. It has everything. This is Shangri-La
for panthers. That's what this area is.
Let's look at it a little bit more. This is a bigger view. Now
we're looking at Bellmar, Longwater, Rivergrass, and look at the
other developments coming into this area. Now, you guys have a
commitment to protect wildlife in your area. You guys are stewards
for the Florida panther, the only big cat left in the eastern United
States. The only one left in the eastern United States. World
famous.
Baseball teams, football teams all over -- you know, hockey
team. Everything's named after the Florida panther. Why? And
we're treating it like vacant land for another subdivision?
But look what's coming in, Bellmar, Longwater, Rivergrass.
Look at -- this is the Immokalee Road Rural Village Overlay. That's
right next to the -- we'll see that in another slide coming up. We'll
see how this figures into even a bigger picture.
But this is the amount of habitat -- a lot of this stuff has already
been permitted by you folks. We're trying to stop it. We're trying
to draw the line and say, don't go into the best.
Let's go back a little bit. This is the map we've been looking at,
the three -- the three town -- three villages being turned into the town.
We know this map already. We don't have to look at this too much.
But look at it again. I didn't have a chanc e to mark this one up, so
I'll use the cursor. Bellmar, Longwater, Rivergrass right in here.
Now we're taking a really wide angle. Big Cypress, the Florida
Panther National Wildlife Refuge, the Fakahatchee, the Picayune.
Here's our development.
Going over here, Bird Rookery Swamp, CREW Flint Pen
Strand, CREW wildlife environmental area, Corkscrew Audubon
May 25, 2021
Page 258
Swamp. And by the way, this is where Immokalee Road Rural
Village is coming in, and just east of it, there's another one in the
works which some of you might know about, Hogan Island.
Somebody's shaking their head. Another big one coming in. That's
north of Immokalee.
So you guys have a goal in the RLSA to direct and to protect the
wildlife. Direct development outside of the areas that are cruci al to
wildlife. You're bringing it right to the core, right into the heart of it.
This is a known corridor. When I looked at the corridor that
was presented in the -- I had to chuckle. There was this little line
going up. This is what panthers -- you ever heard the expression
herding cats? We're going to herd cats through this little, tiny
corridor?
Right now -- look at that block again. Look at that block.
They could move all through here, and they do. Oh, I left one off.
The other day the county authorized the purchase of 1,000 acres north
of the refuge for a horticultural waste dump and an off -road vehicle
park and a county fair, so that gets added into the mix as well.
So, you know, what you have here is something that's of
immense, immense value to the county, to Collier County. I've been
coming -- I've been living in Collier County on and off and coming
out to Collier County ever since I first got here in 1996. My first trip
to Collier County was the Big Cypress National Preserve, and I was
lucky enough to see a Florida panther on my first trip there, and that's
what got me into this work. That's how I've been doing this work.
Five years with the Sierra Club; 11 years with South Florida
Wildlands Association.
This is world famous. This is -- you know, this is not
something to degrade, and believe me, what you're doing is going to
degrade, because these lands that are being set aside, we keep
hearing, oh, they're going to protect all this land. That land is
May 25, 2021
Page 259
already occupied panther habitat. Anything viable that can be
occupied is occupied, and it's a full house. All the panther scientists
will tell you that. That's one of the concerns. What are we going to
do if the panthers start having genetic problems again?
The last time they brought in female panthers from -- female
cougars from Texas. And people said, well, now it's a hybrid
panther. I was just going to say for a second, it's not a hybrid
panther. The southeast -- the panthers that live in Southeast Florida
are cougars that got stuck here, like many of us. We just got stuck in
Florida.
There's no longer a viable pathway. So the panthers were here,
and all the habitat in between the general population where they live
out west -- and there is no shortage of cougars -- pumas out west, but
they can no longer connect. So we ended up with an isolated
sub -- basically we call it a subspecies. There's a lot of controversy.
Is the panther a subspecies, or is it just a distinct populat ion segment?
But guess what? It gets endangered species status either way.
Either way it gets endangered species status, whether it's distinct
population segment or the other.
Okay. Let me move on and finish up.
Mr. McDaniel would like me to move on.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, I was agreeing with you.
MR. SCHWARTZ: You're agreeing with me. Okay. But
either way -- okay, you are. So, okay. So, clearly, let's never -- I
never want to hear any more -- any more controversy, is the panther
an endangered species? It is.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Of course.
MR. SCHWARTZ: It is, so let's get that straight.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Some of them -- just so you know,
some of us didn't get stuck here. We were born here. I'm just
saying.
May 25, 2021
Page 260
MR. SCHWARTZ: Were your parents born here? Were your
parents born here?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No, they weren't.
MR. SCHWARTZ: They weren't, all right.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: But I was.
MR. SCHWARTZ: So you're a native, but your parents
weren't. So who has more a right to talk about this, you or parents?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Probably me.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Probably you.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Your parents should go back to where they
came from. I'm sorry. I shouldn't really get into that.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: No, that's not funny.
MR. SCHWARTZ: I could tell you that was a really bad
argument to make, by the way. I'm from Brooklyn. This is my
home right now. This is my home. Okay. Let's keep going. Let
me finish.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Move on.
MR. SCHWARTZ: Okay. Move on.
This is the habitat map that Fish and Wildlife Service did come
up with. These are the zones, right? We have the primary zone, the
secondary zone, dispersal zone. But guess what? This isn't -- most
of this is no longer viable panther habitat. Most of this is gone.
Look at Everglades National Park. Do you think there's
panthers living in Everglades National Park today? Practically
nothing. Practically nothing. The southern part of the Big Cypress,
practically nothing.
When you look at the map of panthers, it's called an inverted L.
It goes along north of along I-75, it goes into the panther refuge,
drops down into the Fakahatchee and Picayune. That's pretty much
it, and the ranches surrounding these areas, and these lands.
May 25, 2021
Page 261
So this is the heart of panther. We're talking about the Florida
panther. It's the Collier County, Hendry County, Lee County
panther, and that's it. It's not a Florida animal.
And on occasion, on occasion, young males looking for
territory -- because a young male cannot live in the territory where
it's from, because daddy will kill him.
So panthers could stay with their mom up until maybe two years
of age, then they have to disperse and find a new territory. And
those are the ones we're finding on occasional, rarely, north of the
Caloosahatchee River. This is the breeding population right here in
Southwest Florida.
When you lose this and when you degrade it with this level of
development, this level of road building and, of course, this -- this
project is the beginning. Somebody said it, one of the other
speakers. This is going to be a new center for Collier County. It's
not just this. All of this stuff begets more growth.
So you're going to have a new center in Eastern Collier County
rivaling downtown Naples. All the other properties around it are
going to become more valuable as they grow, and that's going to
happen. Growth begets growth. So you're basically turning Eastern
Collier County into a new population center for Collier County, and
you're essentially -- I heard it in the Planning Commission, this was
discussed. They said, we need to move the panthers east into lands
that are more appropriate. Where are they going to move them to?
Those lands are already occupied.
This is the most appropriate habitat you can find. It's right
there in the core of it between all those public lands to the south, all
those public lands to the north. So this area in the south here, forget
about it. It's gone. It's gone. There's nothing there that supports
panther.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think we need to wrap up now.
May 25, 2021
Page 262
MR. SCHWARTZ: I'm going to wrap up. That's what we're
here for. This is a picture taken recently at the Florida Panther
National Wildlife Refuge, one of the first times they actually got a
trail cam to pick up a female panther moving a kitten, and that's what
we're doing here.
So you decide whether this is more important or the Town of
Big Cypress is more important, because that's really the choice.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you. All right. I'm going to
turn it over to you, Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: All right. We'll go with our speakers in the
room first. I have four here and 14 online. Rae Ann Burton will be
followed by Dr. Karen Dwyer, and then -- I hope I'm reading
this -- Monica Fish? I hope I'm getting that right.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Your time will be three minutes, and
please use both podiums.
MS. BURTON: Good evening. My name's Rae Ann Burton.
I've listened to all the comments today, and I've had to change my
speech several times.
I'm talking about 9, the combination on 9. You lumped it into
one basket, making it a single hearing giving the developers the
advantage of all or nothing.
Three villages, the town plan, there was no public notification or
comments. It's a ploy of the developer to resurrect Rural Lands
West to get even a bigger town without paying the price of a town
and no guaranteed timeline for building it. Another rural lands
pullout?
When the developers pulled Rural Lands West, were these
villages and town plan already on the drawing board? A way to get
a town without the cost? It's already being advertised online as a
done deal. They're calling it the big -- the Town of Big Cypress.
May 25, 2021
Page 263
Two villages and a town plan have yet to be approved, so how can
they advertise something that's not even approved? Something isn't
right.
The county needs to find a better way to grow without panther
wildlife habitat destruction or inundation to residents by this
resurrected Rural Lands West. These poorly constructed
developments are more sprawl than the homes in Golden Gate
Estates. If approved, it will create more dangerous congested traffic,
deadly car accidents, and loss of wildlife with the access roads when
the developments are built.
Developer impact fees will not cover the infrastructure until
buildout. Developments are impacting wildlife, pushing animals
into Golden Gate Estates, creating dangerous encounters with human
and pet and farm animals.
Dense compact communities are a source of pandemics, fires,
crime, and just what we moved to the Estates to get away, the issues
that will impact our lives for eternity long after developers are gone.
Audubon and Wildlife Federation are part of the RLSA, and
they always approve all the development of the Collier Enterprises
projects. Don't let eight landowners designate how the residents of
the Estates live, and let us rule our own lives. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Dr. Karen Dwyer. She'll
be followed by I believe this is Monica Fish, and then online Annette
Kniola.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Dr. Dwyer, one moment.
Terri, how we doing? Do you want a break after Ms. Dywer, or
do you want to do it at 8:00? You tell me.
THE COURT REPORTER: Eight's fine.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Eight's fine.
DR. DWYER: The number one goal of the RLSA is to protect
May 25, 2021
Page 264
agriculture, yet 97 percent of Longwater and 98 percent of Bellmar
are croplands and row crops. Each are 1,000 acres. Both convert
nearly all of their 1,000 acres of tilled fields to development.
Do the real math. If farm fields are converted at an average rate
of 97.5 percent per village, how long will it take to wipe out
croplands in Eastern Collier and put the farmworkers out of work, as
well as the growers, the packers, the USF Agricultural Research
Center, Jack and Ann's farm store and, really, just about everything in
Immokalee?
We must not forget that the RLSA was founded to stop
premature conversion because agriculture fuels Florida's economy
and feeds the world. Immokalee is the tomato capital of America.
It is home to Lipman Farms and the internationally recognized
coalition of Immokalee workers and their fair food program that 14
corporate giants have signed onto, including McDonald's,
Wholefoods, and Walmart.
The program is implemented on 90 percent of the state's tomato
farms affecting 30,000 acres of production and tens of thousands of
workers. My point, the CIW and its global supply chain is a major
stakeholder, and this is a textbook case of economic injustice and
insolvent growth. These and future developments jeopardize
farmworkers, farmlands, and food security. How much? We need
the answers. We need you to protect croplands. That's why the
RLSA was founded. The 12,000-acre preserve is not a useful
tradeoff since 86 percent is already protected because they're flow-
ways, et cetera.
I find the economic assessments alarming. It seems taxpayers
will be left paying part of the bill for water, sewers, roads, law
enforcement, EMS, parks, and other services. This is not fiscal
neutrality. And according to the law firm Arnold and Porter, this is
not legally permissible under the Growth Management Plan. If the
May 25, 2021
Page 265
developer wants to take this risk, he should have to pay the shortfalls.
I'm asking this board to look for some way to codify in their
agreement that existing taxpayers and ratepayers will bear no
increase in costs for public services and infrastructure to these new
developments.
Please vote no. We can't afford a mega-development rising to
the east costing us tens of millions, jeopardizing farmworkers and
panthers, clogging roads and beaches, and diminishing our quality of
life.
Thank you for protecting our future from insolvent and
destructive growth by voting no.
MR. MILLER: All right. I'm having a little handwriting issue
here. If this is either Myrica or Monica Fish. I don't see her
present. I'm going to give her a chance to come in, but let's move to
our Zoom speakers. Annette Kniola will be followed by Carol Pratt
and then Greg Root.
Annette, you should be getting a prompt to unmute yourself.
There you are. You have three minutes.
MR. KIONLA: I'm here. Good evening, everyone. I'm
simply going to read my post with some tweaks that I added. I wrote
this back in February when the Town of Big Cypress was
reintroduced. And now today Longwater, Bellmar, and the town are
on the agenda as a whole, thankfully. That worked out quite well.
All right. So it reads. I am very happy about the town concept
being back on the table, yet understand many foresee t oo much
growth and no infrastructure here in the Estates, but I truly wish they
could see the big picture and see how wonderful this will be and the
prosperous future it will hold. I've actually met with Valerie and Pat
at Collier Enterprises to discuss exactly this. I really wanted to see
how this town comes into play if all three villages were approved.
Now that this town has come back into the picture, I personally
May 25, 2021
Page 266
want to thank Collier County staff working with Collier Enterprises
to make this work. The team at Collier Enterprises have done
nothing but work hard at giving you and myself every ounce of
transparency, and I commend them for that. I have lived in the
Estates for over 15 years, and I feel we would continue to enjoy our
peace and tranquility, but many have to understand this type of
growth is the inevitable, and Collier Enterprises will be doing their
fair share of impact fees, adding roads and panther crossings, offering
areas to schools and parks, simply working hard at getting things
done and done right.
From the details set forth with the addition of Longwater and
Bellmar villages to make it a town, I know we will prosper. Not
only from the town itself, but the amenities that come with it; the
commercial space, the affordable housing, parks, schools, walking
trails, wildlife corridors, and approximately 6,000 jobs.
Most know our backyard is not going to be wiped out. All the
trees are not going to be cut down. The watershed will continue to
flow, tomato fields will continue to exist, and so on. Golden Gate
Estates' peace and tranquility will still hold true. And think about it,
instead of heading west into town, wouldn't it be nice to actually head
east this time?
Please vote to approve both Longwater and Bellmar Villages
and the town itself. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, inconceivably, I've made an
error. I missed an in-person speaker, Marcela Zurita. And we will
follow her up with Carol Pratt online, and then Karen Holland.
MS. ZURITA: Thank you. Good afternoon, Commissioners.
My name is Marcela Zurita, and I'm a resident of Golden Gate
Estates. I'm here to urge you to vote no to the villages. These areas
are important to the survival of Florida panthers.
May 25, 2021
Page 267
I understand private-property rights, but we must take into
consideration the impact that their development will have on others:
Our natural resources, water, air quality, and endangered species like
the Florida panther. These villages will further isolate the panthers;
diseases. We see what it can to do us; our economy.
Back in 2001, a panther ate someone's pet cat that was infected
with feline leukemia. The diseases spread to other panthers. Five
of them died. It's a miracle biologists were able to contain the
outbreak.
We're putting people and their pets right next to the refugee
[sic]. Can any of you guarantee that this is not going to happen
again? I don't think so.
Another thing, it will increase more road kills. Their website
states that I-75 interchanges at State Road 29 and Immokalee Road
will serve the transportationists [sic] of the Big Cypress community.
This will be a catastrophe for the panthers, as you will be sending
more cars toward the Florida panther refugee and around it, corralling
the panther. This is a direct and permanent loss of habitat and will
put the Florida panther in jeopardy of extinction.
Agricultural lands do allow them to forage and travel outside the
refuge. That fact we choose to ignore because it's not in the books.
Just a few days ago, a three-year-old female was killed east of
Immokalee, the latest out of the 15 total deaths this year.
Understand, there is only one Florida panther population, a very
fragile one which -- that anything can wipe out the whole population
here in Southwest Florida. The Florida panther lives in no other
place in the world but here. There is no backup Florida panther
population. There is no new territory for panthers. And all we are
doing is saying yes to wiping out more and more of the original
territory.
We should protect all remaining panther habitat corridors, not
May 25, 2021
Page 268
converting to suburban cities. Collier voters last year sent out a clear
message overwhelming by voting to protect threatened wildlife and
their habitat. Don't we live under democracy?
Why will you not listen to your constituents? Stop bending the
rules to accommodate Florida developers' desire to build in panther
habitat. Respect the spirit of the RLSA.
With all the resources we leave -- this isn't what our state and
county's becoming. What are we leaving to our childrens?
Grandchildrens? My generations? Future generations?
Contaminated waters? This is -- look at our waterway waters.
Look at the manatees. That is sickening seeing their own
environment is deteriorating in front of our eyes. If we continue this
path, we're leaving nothing of worth to future generations. There is
no conservation if you're paving the way to extinction.
Please vote no to the villages. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: We'll go back to our Zoom speakers. Next up
is Carol Pratt. She'll be followed by Karen Holland, and then
Kathleen Curatolo.
Mrs. Pratt, you're being prompted to unmute. And there you
are. You have three minutes, ma'am.
MS. PRATT: Okay. Thank you.
My name is Carol Pratt. I've lived in Collier County for more
than 50 years.
It's incredibly disheartening to learn of the areas that have
already been approved for development in Eastern Collier County.
Now you're considering approval of Longwater and Bellmar, and
there's plans to build a road, Big Cypress Parkway, through
wilderness to clearly accommodate these new developments even
though it is said that that's not the case. The Parkway is definitely
for these communities and forthcoming development.
May 25, 2021
Page 269
As Florida history shows, once a road is put in, development
follows all along it. When that happens, then we have certainly lost
the distinctive character of our county and have established the
trajectory towards being just like Miami-Dade. In fact, this area
looks more and more like Miami-Dade every day. The Big Cypress
Parkway will promote sprawling development, and this road is a huge
concern to me.
As far as Florida panthers go, it seems like a cruel joke for the
government at one time to have a bounty on panthers, then decide
that's not right, neither morally, ethically, for the balance of nature or
the preservation of the whole of Florida, so millions of dollars are
invested to save the cat, people devote their careers towards this
endeavor, citizens embrace the panther, and now you are faced with a
decision which, if wrong, will most certainly cause the demise of the
Florida panther by a slow death.
I've heard both sides today. You carry a heavy burden to
protect the panther and other species that consider Collier County
their home as well. Protection of the eastern part of the county is
essential for the continued existence of our Florida species.
I do not know much about governing except that I know it's
complicated. Maybe you have limited choices in what you can do,
but I urge you to do all you can to stop urban sprawl. I have huge
reservations about Longwater and Bellmar, and you should, too,
especially after what I've heard and witnessed today from the
representatives for the developers.
On the practical side, further development to the east greatly
increasing urban sprawl is counter to anything that provides a healthy
environment. Natural land is needed for clean air and water. It also
combats climate change. Nature is what makes Collier County
beautiful and unique. There's no place like this on earth.
Thank you.
May 25, 2021
Page 270
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker will be Karen Holland.
She'll be followed by Kathy Curatolo, and then Kim Heise.
Ms. Holland, you're being prompted to unmute, and you are
there.
MS. HOLLAND: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: You have three minutes, ma'am.
MS. HOLLAND: Thank you. Good evening. Kat Holland
representing the River of Grass, UU Congregation, SSJGT member
of Davie, Florida. I'm here to express my heartfelt opinion and
feelings. The facts have all been stated. I don't think I need to
reiterate any of that.
The River of Grass has 250-plus members, as well -- as well, I'm
involved with other environmental groups.
I do not envy the position you're all in, but I'm grateful for this
opportunity to speak on behalf of all those who are unable or can't
speak.
I'm against, I oppose the development, the destruction of any
and all Florida wildlands, especially the wildlands in Collier County.
I'm surprised and dismayed of what is being done and what is being
allowed to be done. It's disgusting, disheartening, and should be
disallowed.
The buying and selling of land where -- where's Jesus to turn the
tables? What would he do? That's what I ask myself to think about.
This is all about the money. This is all about the land grab. This is
development. You talk about benefits, you talk about stewardship,
and improvements and development. I don't think so. I disagree.
I think maybe Jesus will forgive you, but I don't think so, and I
don't think any of your children or grandchildren will either, because
we all love panthers. We all love the wildlife that's here and should
remain here.
So I'm against the development, the encroachment. It takes the
May 25, 2021
Page 271
land away not only from the animals who've lived here all their lives
but from hunters who are interested in preserving the lands
responsibly and sustainably. The goal between hunters and
environmentalists should be mutual, and we should join forces to
combat the government takeover of land bequeathed to the people for
use -- perpetual use.
Through the national registry, the land belongs to all of us and
not the few. You, the government of Collier County and Florida,
have stolen it, taken our pursuit of happiness by selling out to the
developers. I blame you for the demise of our health and welfare. I
hold you accountable for any future extinction of animals; the
panther, the black bear, the scrub jay, the gopher tortoise, the sandhill
cranes, which I absolutely love. They walk slowly across the roads
and get hit every time at least once a year. I'm against the
development of the past and that which is present. I lobby to get the
three tollbooths --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. Your time is
up. And now we're going to take a break. Ten minutes. Let's get
back here at 8:10. Oh, my goodness, 8:10.
(A brief recess was had from 7:57 p.m. to 8:10 p.m.)
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, Commissioners, you have a
live mic.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Yes. Madam Chair, your next speaker is
Kathleen Curatolo. She'll be followed by Kim Heise. I hope I'm
saying your last name right. And then Laura Woodside.
Ms. Curatolo, there you are. You have three minutes.
MS. CURATOLO: Thank you very much.
Good evening, Commissioners. I am Kathy Curatolo,
consulting legislative liaison for the Collier Building Industry
May 25, 2021
Page 272
Association.
Thank you, albeit late, for providing me the opportunity to speak
to you on behalf of the 450 companies represented by our association
in support of the Longwater and Bellmar Village. I would also like
to note that our members represent Collier County citizens who live,
work, and contribute to our community.
The Rural Lands Stewardship Area program was established
under the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan.
As such, the objective was to create an incentive-based land-use
overlay system based on the principles of rural lands stewardship
found in the Florida Statutes with a focus on environmental
preservation, agricultural preservation, and smart growth
development. To this end, Collier Enterprises has developed
Longwater and Bellmar Villages to be permitted in accordance with
this award-winning and nationally recognized program in their design
which includes: One, protection of wildlife habitat; two,
encouragement for retention of agricultural activities; three,
diversification of the rural economy; and, four, provisions for
clustered development with a variety of housing options, including
affordable housing for essential workers.
In addition, Longwater and Bellmar Villages are slated to add
6,000 jobs to Eastern Collier County and contribute millions in
impact fees and local taxes to help boost our continuing objective
toward economic sustainability. A win-win in my opinion and the
opinion of our members for all citizens of Collier County.
Based upon these critical smart growth factors, the members of
CBIA believe Collier Enterprises to be an exceptional steward both
of our environment and our economic sustainability in the creation of
these villages. We agree wholeheartedly with the recommendations
which Longwater and Bellmar Villages have received both from the
Collier County Planning Commission and full vetting by our county
May 25, 2021
Page 273
staff.
Your vote today in support of Longwater and Bellmar Villages
will solidify the substantial benefits they will offer both to our
community and our economy. I appreciate your consideration and
look forward to your vote.
Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Kim Heise followed by
Laura Woodside and then Lisa Hamilton.
Kim, I hope I'm pronouncing your last name right. You have
three minutes, ma'am.
MS. HEISE: Hi, thank you. My name is Kim Heise, and I live
on the East Coast, Delray Beach, and I want to say that I understand
that you guys have, you know, a plan for the county, but these plans
were made during a time where people were not really thinking this
period of time.
If you want an example of what will happen if you, you know,
just say, oh, well, this is just the way it is, and, you know, just go
along with it like that, it's going to turn into the East Coast. And if
you've lived there, you know it's just asphalt next to asphalt, and
people are, you know, building to meet minimum requirements, and
it just doesn't have the soul and culture that people want and expect,
people who -- you know, my age who are younger -- I'm 30 -- who
are growing up and who are looking to themselves like, I want to live
in a place where environmental stewardship is not something that we
think about in a scarcity mindset.
So to the people who say that we have to build these because
they're going to preserve habitat or we can't just shut the door behind
us, that's a scarcity mindset. That's going to create a scarcity culture,
and that's what is going to be created. It's not going to be this great
and wonderful place. It's going to be a place that has met minimum
requirements. It's going to be a place that people built because it
May 25, 2021
Page 274
makes them money, not because it's good for the community.
You're the people who create that kind of culture.
And the culture that I think a lot of people want is environmental
stewardship, and finding a way to -- there's many, many ways to
create economic growth, sustainable economic growth and to invite
more people into your community. And I ask you to be creative and
curious about ways to do that, because the only way we're going to
do that is if we have an imagination.
The people who have commented in favor have a small
imagination. We can have the Florida panther and economic growth
and beautiful communities. We don't -- it doesn't have to be
either/or.
This sets a precedent. The more you build a road and then you
build a farm and then, oh, well, the farm's not primary habitat
anymore, so we've got to build development here. Oh, then we need
facilities. And then, oh, well, other people want to live here, so we
can't shut the door to them. So it just creates a precedent.
So you can say stop. You can say no, and that's fine. Like,
there's -- like, that's what you guys have the power to do. I wish I
had the power to just say no, you know, to things that don't
completely align with my community.
And I just want you guys to have a little faith in your
communities and in your county that you can have it all. You can
have Florida panthers, and you can have strong economic growth and
exciting places to go and exciting places to live. So, yeah, I also
want to say --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, I'm sorry. Your time is up and
thank you for your comments.
MS. HEISE: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Laura Woodside. She'll
be followed by Lisa Hamilton, and then Rhonda Roth.
May 25, 2021
Page 275
Ms. Woodside, you're being prompt to unmute. Laura
Woodside, you should be being prompted to unmute right. We'll
call your name one more time. Laura Woodside.
All right. Oscar, let's move on to Lisa Hamilton, followed by
Rhonda Roth, and then Susan Caruso.
Ms. Hamilton, you're being prompted to unmute yourself at this
time. Lisa Hamilton.
Uh-oh, we're hitting a dry spell. Let's try to move on, Oscar. I
hope I'm not moving too quick for you here.
Let's try Rhonda Roth. Rhonda Roth, you're being prompted to
unmute yourself right now, Ms. Roth. Oh, there you are, Rhonda.
Ms. Roth, yes, you're with us now. You have three minutes.
MS. ROTH: Okay. Well, I have requested of the moderator to
please give me one or two extra minutes since I am representing the
Sierra Club Calusa group, which has approximately 2,000 members.
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am. You'll have five minutes.
MS. ROTH: Okay. Wonderful. All right.
My name is Rhonda Roth, and I will be commenting today on
behalf of the 2,000 or so Southwest Florida members of the Calusa
Group of the Sierra Club of South Florida, including our almost 700
members in Collier County.
The Sierra Club opposes the proposed developments for
Longwater and Bellmar as they are not aligned with the original
intent of the RLSA program, will cause more traffic congestion
within our county, and will put taxpayers of Collier County on the
hook for tens of millions of dollars.
Let's be clear about what the villages being considered today
really are. They are taxpayer subsidized communities that are
fraught with muddled land-use planning. If the County
Commissioners move forward with these two villages, it will also
create a requirement for new and expanded roadways.
May 25, 2021
Page 276
Some estimates show that Longwater and Bellmar will result in
more than $90 million deficit traffic impacts. Already Collier
County has significant traffic congestion, and Longwater and Bellmar
will cause significant traffic impacts in the already stranded [sic]
Immokalee Road. Collier County already has several failing
roadways and moving forward with these projects with further
deteriorate the county's existing infrastructure.
Having to create more roadways will only strain the county's
budget for years to come, adding traffic congestions to the re gion and
killing wildlife such as the Florida panther and the Florida black bear
with additional road collisions.
Furthermore, the proposed developments of Longwater and
Bellmar will result in the destruction of over 2,000 acres of Primary
Panther Habitat. It is quite simple: The fiscal costs to taxpayers
and environmental costs of these developments far exceed any of the
perceived economic benefits.
Now, taking a longer view, a wider view, something like
Matthew Schwartz was trying to convey earlier, there are a couple of
new things that have happened since the RLSA and since the
proposed villages. One of them are -- one of them is climate
concerns, including forced migration from the coast, for which we
need additional housing. We understand that.
Secondly, there are new pressures on listed species including
other new development in panther and bear habitat, expanded use in
Big Cypress National Preserve, and recently a new proposed visitor
service plan in the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refu ge.
Now, with all of those pressures on these listed species,
simultaneously and serendipitously, perhaps, Florida voters passed a
couple of years ago the land and water conservation amendment
whose money was somewhat improperly spent, but thanks to our now
famous Carlton Ward National Geographic photographer and
May 25, 2021
Page 277
Governor DeSantis, $300 million are going to be targeted toward
protecting wildlife corridors including agricultural land and all of its
heritage.
Another bill Governor DeSantis recently signed will allocate
$200 million for resiliency planning mainly to protect people and
property from sea level rise and increasingly intense storms.
Governor DeSantis recently authorized the buyout of
20,000 acres in western Broward County, which was owned by the
Cantor family, to avert their proposal to explore and possibly drill or
frack for oil and gas.
So Collier County needs the revenue, Collier Enterprises wants
to sell the land, and society has a collected need to preserve what is
left of the wildlands for the myriad benefits they afford all of us
collectively. Housing to accommodate our burgeoning population
must be planned much more smartly, clustered in less sensitive
habitat, preferably by infill development.
Can you see that all of this is possible using a better paradigm?
Similar to what the woman from Delray was just saying, we need to
be inventive, and we can have it a lot better.
In closing, the Sierra Club respectfully urges you not to move
forward with approving the villages of Longwater and Bellmar.
Doing so will only create more sprawling, low-density developments
within Collier County that are antithetical to smart growth principles.
Instead, we invite you to be on the right side of history and protect
the remaining working and wildlands of rural Collier for the benefit
of future generations.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Susan Caruso. She'll be
followed by Adriene Barmann, and then Beth Finn.
Ms. Caruso, I see you're there. You have three minutes, ma'am.
May 25, 2021
Page 278
MS. CARUSO: Thank you.
Commissioners, I so appreciate that you've had such a long day.
I was a teacher, so I feel like I'm in the last 10 minutes of my fourth
period class with you poor people, so I'll try to state just t he things I
haven't really felt have been said before.
Even though I live in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, I do feel like I
have a dog in the fight. The ecological services of the RLSA lands
affect even us over on the East Coast. And then just as a Floridian
and actually really just as a human being, the plight of our iconic
panther, it's just so hard to ignore.
But also I think it would be obviously -- obvious that the
building -- the building organization and the -- sorry, I'm going
through my notes -- Chamber of Commerce would be in support of
this measure, but you can build jobs. You can build structures in
many places. There's still growth potential in Collier County beyond
the RLSA. But you can't just put a panther anywhere. You can't
just have forests and farmland anywhere. Once you've made it a
development, you just can't get it back.
And even though one speaker said, well, you're still going to
have trees, you're still going to have tomatoes, you won't have as
much. And contiguous space is critical for success. So you
won't -- certainly won't have that.
Also, at the risk of disputing other environmental groups, the
concessions that they say are being offered like bear-proof garbage
containers, that certainly isn't going to reduce contact when you're
increasing all these people in areas right near panther habitat. You're
going to only increase human/wildlife interactions.
And you can't put enough crossings to protect the species.
They are crossings along Alligator Alley, and yet road deaths are still
the greatest cause of panther decline. So you can't have enough
crossings.
May 25, 2021
Page 279
And the land that they say they're going to set aside for all these
other purposes, I can give you plenty of examples of mitigation land
that is now being used for development because down the road
somewhere you said, well, that was a good idea at the time, but we
really need this land now. So I wouldn't trust that -- those
concessions farther than I could throw them.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MS. CARUSO: So in reality --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I'm sorry. Your time is up. Thank
you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Adriene Barmann. She'll
be followed by Beth Finn, and then Tiffany Grantham.
Ms. Barmann, I see you're with us. You have three minutes,
ma'am.
MS. BARMANN: Hi. Could you hear me?
MR. MILLER: Yes, ma'am.
MS. BARMANN: Okay. Thank you.
Okay. So you know my name. I'm from the Broward Sierra
Club. I want to say good evening, Commissioners. I know it's been
a long day for all of you, but I want to thank you for your time for
continuing to sit to listen to all of us.
Before I begin, I want to thank Matt Schwartz from the Florida
Wildlands for his accurate presentation about how much damage
these developments will do to the Florida panthers and to bears and to
the birds and the remainder of the wildlife.
As a member of the Broward Sierra Club, also a Florida native,
born here in South Florida in 1960, I joined the Sierra Club because I
believe in conservation and the preservation of Florida's native
species of animals, plants, and ecosystems. I have witnessed the
demise of South Florida's natural areas; their springs, their pristine
waterways. I have -- I've witnessed fish die-offs, disastrous toxic
May 25, 2021
Page 280
algae blooms, more manatee deaths this year, and why? Due to
starvation from no seagrasses. More this year than ever before. I
believe last count was 728 manatees due to mostly starvation, and,
then again, the reef die-offs. I'm a diver since I'm in my 20s, and
reefs don't look like what they used to look like in the '80s.
Keep in mind -- I haven't heard much talk today about
fertilizers, because everybody's going to have their nice, pristine
lawns, and they're going to want to put fertilizers on them to keep
their grass green. Well, guess what? Those fertilizers, they drain
off the lawns, and then they drain into the watershed, and that causes
havoc on the plant life and wildlife. Like in South Florida where I'm
from, that's what's killing the seagrass. Most of our seagrass is go ne.
And development continues. And I don't know, nature is
sending alarms, and no one's listening. With all the algae blooms
and the polluted waters and the death of the seagrasses and the reefs
dying, what will it take?
Collier County is a pristine, beautiful, natural place,
non-fragmented, pristine, uninhabited wilderness lands. I've been
going to Corkscrew Swamp for 20 years. And I see when I drive
through there, I know there's a lot of growth going on, but there's still
some beautiful spots, and especially where Matt has shown us on the
map. It's prime panther territory. So -- and Big Cypress now, the
preserve is being attacked. This whole area's being attacked by
developers.
And with the planned developments of Longwater and Bellmar
Villages, the Florida panthers are doomed to be roadkill by being
forced to live in a fragmented land, and their habitat will be dense
homes with small backyards.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Beth Finn. She'll be
followed by Tiffany Grantham, and then Joanne Mizerak.
May 25, 2021
Page 281
Ms. Finn, there you are. You have three minutes.
MS. FINN: Thank you.
My name is Beth Finn, and I am a member of the public, a
native local Neapolitan who was born and raised here in Naples,
Florida. Thank you for taking the time to hear my comments.
I speak to those in agreement with villages and the town. As
was stated earlier in this meeting regarding a different topic, yet well
related, we need to keep the changes to our city within. Planning for
the development of our city is not about economic impact. It is
about environmental impact.
These villages are not what our city needs. What we need is to
protect our fragile ecosystem so that our future can enjoy what we
have here. I speak for my two young children and all of our future
inhabitants. At the rate that this city is growing and changing and
taking away important land that is essential for the survival of local
animals and plants, including ourselves as human beings, my
children's children, our future, will not know Southwest Florida.
They will know that there used to be a Florida panther. They will
know of the animals and plants that used to inhabit this area, and they
will know those as extinct.
In case you have forgotten, the endangered Florida panther is
our state animal and a symbol of Florida, not dollar signs.
Longwater and Bellmar would result in the destruction of 2,000 acres
of Primary Panther Habitat. The Florida panther is already lacking
habitat. Those in support of this growth need to stop thinking about
your wants. It's not about us. It's about our future's needs. You
need to think about our future.
Florida will be no more and your money will mean nothing
when there is no natural environment. Concrete may stand up to
water, but it doesn't sustain life. Human beings, our local native
plants and animals, our safe drinking water, our clean air all depend
May 25, 2021
Page 282
on the actions we make now. Bringing more people, more traffic,
more concrete, more pollution while taking away the natural habitat
of our local animals and plants will do no benefit other than fill the
developers' pockets with more money. Now, go look into the eyes
of my children and all inhabitants of our future and ask: Does that
make sense?
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Tiffany Grantham. She'll
be followed by Joanne Mizerak and then Elise Bennett.
Let's see. Ms. Grantham, I see you're there. You have three
minutes, ma'am.
MS. GRANTHAM: Yes. Hi. Thank you. I'm a Florida
resident for about the last 50 years. I'm in Broward, so I know about
sprawl, and friends do not let friend’s sprawl. I don't think it's going
to be good for the cities that you plan out west -- out east. It's not
going to be a good thing for the panther at all. So I stand with the
panther.
I also worry terribly about the water. You know, we either
have too much or we have too little or it's toxic lately. It could be
flooding. It could be a drought. And I'm wondering, if you're going
to go down deep for your drinking water, I hope you're not going to
go to the boulder zone, because by the time it gets all t he way down
into Collier County, you know, there's a lot of treated sewage, there's
a lot of radioactive water. I mean, it's -- I don't know. I don't know.
Drinking water is going to be a huge issue, and I don't think you're
going to make money on this deal.
So I stand, and I thank all the people with the South Florida
Wildland Association, the League of Women Voters, the Sierra Club
and so many other people who are standing with our panther and
begging you to not let this thing go through. So thank y ou so much.
May 25, 2021
Page 283
MR. MILLER: Your next speaker is Joanne Mizerak, followed
by Elise Bennett.
Ms. Mizerak, you're being prompted to unmute yourself.
MS. MIZERAK: Hi. My name, as you said, is Joanne
Mizerak.
You know, my husband and I got married and bought a house
from a lady that retired and moved to West Palm Beach. Over the
years, we were in touch with her, and she always told us, because she
knew we wanted to retire in Florida, never to come down here
because of the water issues, as everyone else was saying, pollution
and, you know, just total chaos.
But we bought our first home in Florida in 1996 in Spring Hill,
our second, we owned a house by Lake Okeechobee, and 11 years
ago we bought this house that we live in now in Golden Gate Estates.
I retired from the county in Poughkeepsie, New York, my
husband retired, we moved here December 3rd. Our daughter lives
in Tampa. She went to school, got married, never came back. So
we have grandchildren here in Florida. And we love Florida. I've
kayaked all over the place. I hike in Bird Rookery Swamp and
Corkscrew Swamp and the Picayune Forest. And I'm a concerned
Collier County resident now, and I have to speak up for the numerous
wildlife that live here in our county. I am a voice for our state
animal, the Florida panther, and I consider it now my state animal. I
must speak up for the Florida bear, the songbirds, and other wildlife
that reside on these undeveloped lands.
Just this year, 15 Florida panthers were killed on the roads, and
that's just in 2021. Gopher tortoises are constantly being buried
alive. It sickens me.
I'm asking you as the commissioners, as a county worker from
New York, please vote no on these proposed villages of Bellmar and
Longwater. As we've heard prior, 2,000 acres will be destroyed,
May 25, 2021
Page 284
ripping away the homes of all these wonderful creatures that make
life in Collier County worth living.
And as the last speaker said, the reefs are dying, everything is
dying, the manatees are dying. Stop fertilizing. We don't fertilize.
I was a gardener in New York. My husband and I had perennial
gardens for years up there, and we were written up. We were well
renowned around the county as the gardeners.
So I just want to say it is all about the money. What about the
sandhill cranes? What about the wood stork, the scrub jay, the
Florida gopher tortoise, the bear -- Florida bear, the panther, the
songbirds? All the songbirds. It's just -- it's awful. How can you
rip their homes away from them? That's what you're doing. So you
want people to live there.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, other than the one lady who did
not join earlier when prompted, I have one last speaker, and that is
Elise Bennett.
Ms. Bennett, you're being prompted to unmute. And there you
are. Ms. Bennett, you have three minutes.
MS. BENNETT: Good evening, Madam Chair,
Commissioners. My name is Elise Bennett, and I'm a staff attorney
speaking on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity and its
more than 84,000 members.
As a representative of such as organization, I respectfully
request the grace of an additional minute or so to complete my
comments.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, that's fine. Thank you.
MS. BENNETT: Thank you. The Center is a national
non-profit organization that specializes in protecting endangered
species, and I work out of our Florida office focusing on the
conservation of Florida's wildlife, including the iconic and
May 25, 2021
Page 285
endangered Florida panther.
The Center opposes the resolutions that would allow the Bellmar
and Longwater developments to proceed because they will have
unacceptable impacts on endangered species and the natural
landscape in Collier County. The Conservancy, League of Women
Voters, South Florida Wildlands, and Sierra Club have already
provided compelling testimony regarding environmental impacts.
The Center's comments serve to put a finer point on endangered
species impact.
Commissioners, I'm going to be direct. If you approve this
resolution, you will have a hand in pushing the Florida panther even
closer to the brink of extinction. That's really hard to hear and hard
to say, but it's true. The species is already clinging to survival in less
than 5 percent of its historic range, which is a mere fragment of the
magnificent Florida landscape it once roamed.
This last fragment of wild and rural lands is key breeding
habitat, and panther biologists have concluded that it's essential to the
survival and recoveries of the species warning that all of it must be
protected.
The Bellmar and Longwater proposals are located within an area
prioritized as Panther Primary Zone Habitat, and development would
permanently destroy large swaths of it.
Panther biologists have explained that any further loss of this
habitat is likely to reduce the prospects of survival for the species,
putting it at greater risk of extinction. This is because the mosaic of
natural and rural lands collectively support panther behaviors that are
essential for survival. While forested lands provide panthers place s
to rest and den, agricultural lands provide key landscape connections
that allow the cats to move around within their range, and urban
development destroys and fragments this delicate mosaic of habitat,
preventing panthers from moving into new areas to f eed, breed, take
May 25, 2021
Page 286
shelter, and it also increases the risk of vehicle strike deaths.
The applicant and staff have woefully underestimated the value
of this last interconnected unfragmented habitat for a species that's
hovering on the brink of extinction, and attempts to downplay the
importance of these agricultural lands by those who claim to support
conservation are disingenuous and contrary to the best available
panther science, which you can find in studies such at Kautz, et al,
2006, and Frakes, et al, 2015. It's just common sense.
It's just common sense. Replacing agricultural lands with urban
development is simply not panther conservation. It's net loss of
sorely needed habitat. The experts have said what they said; these
areas are Primary Panther Habitat and must be protected.
In short, allowing Bellmar and Longwater to proceed will
undoubtedly change the wild and rustic character of Collier County,
pushing the Florida panther closer to extinction and tarnishing the
county's wild heritage for current and future generations.
The fate of the county and its beautiful natural resources is up to
you, and we hope that you make the right decision.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you.
MR. MILLER: Madam Chair, we have a bit of a quandary
here. We have someone who's called in with a phone number, but it
very clearly says in registration you must register your name with
your phone number. That has not happened here. So I have
someone online. I have no idea who it is.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No.
MR. MILLER: Okay. Then that is all the speakers we have,
ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much. And the
public comment period is closed unless Mr. Yovanovich wants to
question anyone.
May 25, 2021
Page 287
MR. YOVANOVICH: No.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Now, sir, it's yours. The
floor is yours.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: As I mentioned at the
beginning of this hearing, I thought it was very important that we
conduct the public hearing, because things are going to be very busy
at our next couple meetings. And I had made the recommendation to
Mr. Yovanovich, as I said, that if I was not prepared to vote yes on
these petitions, I would ask that our decision be put off until the next
meeting.
I'm not prepared to vote for these petitions tonight for a couple
reasons. One, quite frankly, is that this is probably the most
important decision -- I've said this before -- that we're going to be
making as a commission. A couple weeks for us to think about the
impacts of this is not going to hurt anybody. But, more significantly,
I think we need a full board to make that decision.
So I'm going to ask that we continue this, have Commissioner
LoCastro -- hopefully, he'll have the ability to take a look at the
record. We've already got an agreement that that's not going to be a
problem for the petitioner to have that review and then have this
decision made at the next meeting. But I would urge that there be no
more public comment; that it would simply be an opportunity for the
Board to ask questions and then take a vote.
MR. YOVANOVICH: May I -- I don't have an objection to
that. My only question is, would I still be allowed at the next
meeting to do my close/rebuttal and then answer any questions that
you may have at that point?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And likewise, staff I'm assuming, if
May 25, 2021
Page 288
they have some closing remarks --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: I think that's --
MR. YOVANOVICH: If that's what the intention is to be, to
allow that to occur, that would be great with me.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: There's also a little bit of a
conundrum, and not with you, sir. But we have -- considering that
Commissioner LoCastro may have missed the appointment with
Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Utter as well as the Conservancy who came
to us the week before this meeting -- and we did talk about not being
involved in any conversations with anyone for two weeks. I would
assume that's going to be having -- Commissioner LoCastro will be
excepted from that. Is that correct, County Attorney? I'm putting
this -- a lot on you right now.
MR. KLATZKOW: You're not putting it on me. If
Mr. LoCastro wants to speak to them, he'll speak with them, but that's
up to him. We can't bind him.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I mean, in all sincerity, why
wouldn't any of us be allowed to speak to anybody?
MR. KLATZKOW: You can. You've continued items before.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Right.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: So we're not prohibited from
gathering further information if we learn something. I wouldn't
think we should be prohibited from doing that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. That's not what I heard
earlier in the meeting, so --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Well, it wasn't what we
talked about earlier, but I've been sitting here stewing on it. And I'm
wondering why that prohibition would actually be party -- or be part
of this.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chairman?
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes, of course.
May 25, 2021
Page 289
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I think the concern was just
avoiding any kind of appearance -- that was raised by the
Conservancy, and I think incorrectly. But it was just to avoid any
appearance of any influence from other outside parties during the two
weeks. But I have no problem, and I assume, Mr. Yovanovich, you
have no problem with us reviewing the record and --
MR. YOVANOVICH: If you have ex parte communication,
you're obligated to disclose it, and I trust that you all will.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Okay.
MR. KLATZKOW: And if you disclose it, somebody will have
the opportunity to question you on that.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's fine. So I don't have
any problem with that at all. I think --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- especially with
Commissioner LoCastro. Hopefully he's -- that family emergency is
taken care of and he can review the record and participate. But I
really do think that this is so important we need a full board to deal
with it.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Yeah. I was just going to -- we
were talking about the next meeting, and I'm just concerned -- this is
going to be a long transcript, right, and a long video. Is it going to
be ready in time for, then, Commissioner LoCastro to actually watch
it all and prepare whatever questions he's going to want of staff?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Well, he's going to have the
staff report that we all had, and the video will be available.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: The video's available now, right?
MR. MILLER: Yeah. The video will be available shortly
after we stop recording.
May 25, 2021
Page 290
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: He'll have access to the same
things we had.
MR. KLATZKOW: The public hearing's been closed, so I'm
not concerned about advertising. You can put it on for next meeting.
If Commissioner LoCastro's not prepared, then he can be asked [sic]
to --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Continue.
MR. KLATZKOW: -- do it at a later meeting.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Okay. I just want to make sure we
were giving him enough time to do whatever he needed to do.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: No, and I think it's very important
that we talk about it now and get the ground -- you know, the
foundation pretty clear for all of us going forward at eith er the next
meeting or the meeting after that and, frankly, it will be in
Commissioner LoCastro's hands what we do.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: All right. Then I'll make a
motion to continue -- I assume we're going to continue all the items
that were associated.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: -- till our next meeting for
the sole purpose of having Mr. Yovanovich, if he's got closing
remarks and questions, from the Commission.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Perfect.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Would we be -- would we
have -- would we be first up on the 8th, or will it be a time-certain?
I mean, I don't know.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We'll have a time-certain, and you
would be first up.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Or close to it. There's
another time-certain request coming you don't know about yet.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Well, but that's -- I mean, you're
May 25, 2021
Page 291
going to have --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Whatever. We'll have a time-certain --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- a time-certain, and we are --
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's all I'm asking.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: -- going to continue where we left
off, which is you coming up to the podium to make your closing
remarks.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Thank you very much, everyone, for
staying with us.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We've got to vote on this --
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Vote on the --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: We've got to vote on the --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Oh, we do, yes, we do. I'm sorry.
Okay. So do I hear a motion?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It's been made.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. Second?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Second.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I don't want to second, but I
will. I will, yeah.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor, say aye.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously to be
continued at the next -- at the meeting as determined by
Commissioner LoCastro.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, tentatively for June 8th.
May 25, 2021
Page 292
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Tentatively for June 8th.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Madam Chair, I know we're
getting ready to adjourn, but I do have one other council
communications things. I hate to do it quarter to 9:00, but –
Item #15
STAFF AND COMMISSION GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: You've got to be quick.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I will be quick.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I've got nothing else to do.
Go.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Oh, okay. All right. I have
ridden by the construction site on Santa Barbara and Davis
Boulevard, most recently last night. And the little fence that's
supposed to keep water from flowing off the property, that
whole -- that fence is down in several spots. It's been that way for
two months, three months.
I asked Mr. Cadenhead to make that site look a little bit better.
He's not done it. So I'm advising the Board that I filed a code
enforcement complaint to get Code Enforcement on him, and I've
asked the County Attorney to look at even pulling the -- issuing a
Stop Work Order. I'm trying to get Mr. Cadenhead's attention,
because that site looks awful. And it's -- there's no excuse for it. So
I just wanted to advise the Board that we're not finished with that.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All right. Mr. McDaniel,
Commissioner McDaniel, any comments?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: No, ma'am. I'm --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Commissioner Solis.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: I'd just -- to end on a happy
May 25, 2021
Page 293
note -- and I'll bring the specifics to the next meeting. The report
from the TDC is that our tourism industry is coming roaring back.
We've actually -- depending on what piece of the information you
want to look at, we're anywhere from 1 percent to, like, 5 percent
down from the same period in 2019, which was the record -breaking
year of all time. So it is great news.
The hoteliers are doing really well. The group business is
starting to come back a little bit. So I think -- and I had a video that
was put together by the staff just showing where we were, COVID,
where it went. And I will say that the data is very clear that the
change in the marketing campaign made an incredible difference.
And we had some of our research partners say that other than the
Florida Keys, we are the only market that has bounced back and is
really back to where we almost were in 2019.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Collier Cares.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Collier Cares. The decision to
continue to advertise, you know, that whole campaign of "when
you're ready, come back here, it's safe," was absolutely a home run,
because it kept us out there. It kept Collier County as the place to
be. And most of the other areas just -- they quit advertising and they
quit marketing, you know. Everything was shut down. They just
weren't going to spend any money. So it was a really good decision
on their part.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Just something that, actually,
I thought was kind of funny. Lee County actually spent, I think it
was, $350,000 advertising for people not to come to Lee County.
And I thought, well, that's an incredibly interesting expenditure of
tourist tax dollars, but that's what they did.
RESOLUTION 2021-112: IMPOSING A 30-DAY BURN BAN –
ADOPTED
May 25, 2021
Page 294
MR. ISACKSON: Madam Chair, before you gavel the meeting
closed, if you indulge me for a minute. I received a memo at 5:30
this afternoon from our EMS director, EM director, excuse me, Dan
Summers, requesting that we institute a burning ban requested by the
Collier County fire chiefs for a period of 30 days. Typically that's
done through myself through the Chair, but as long as the Board's in
standing right now, I'd rather just get a couple nods from everybody
to authorize the Chair --
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Why don't we just do a
motion to --
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I was going to say, so moved,
if I can.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Second.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: All those in favor?
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Aye.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Aye.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Those opposed, like sign.
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: It carries unanimously, sir.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: I do have a comment when
you're done. I thought of that now. I looked at my --
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: Okay. So now you're on a timer.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Who is? We've got to finish
up with your happy stuff.
COMMISSIONER SOLIS: Oh, no. That's all. It's great news
from the TDC.
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: It was a quick "thank you" to
our first responders and the folks that helped. I think we actually
May 25, 2021
Page 295
totaled up -- not that losing anything is good, but we lost two homes
for sure that were impacted by that, and our sheriff's department with
that helicopter was amazing, again, getting out in front and helping
contain that fire. And, again, the banning burn, from what I'm
told -- and it's under investigation. But there was a -- it was a
resident burning yard debris, so...
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There was no lightning or
anything?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Do what?
COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There was no lightning or
anything?
COMMISSIONER McDANIEL: Yeah, no, no, no. It was
actually -- there's video out there with somebody burning yard debris.
So don't do that for another couple weeks, please.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: And I'd like to say something at the
end. I'd like to thank our County Manager and I'd like to thank his
staff, his senior staff, for conducting yourself professionally and
thoroughly. It was a pleasure. Well done.
MR. ISACKSON: Thank you, ma'am.
CHAIRMAN TAYLOR: We are adjourned.
**** Commissioner McDaniel moved, seconded by Commissioner
Solis and carried that the following items under the Consent and
Summary Agendas be approved and/or adopted ****
Item #16A1
RESOLUTION 2021-95: FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE
PRIVATE ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS,
AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLAT DEDICATIONS, FOR THE
FINAL PLAT OF SERENO GROVE, APPLICATION NUMBER
May 25, 2021
Page 296
PL20160001884; AND AUTHORIZE THE RELEASE OF THE
MAINTENANCE SECURITY
Item #16A2
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
FACILITIES FOR PROSCAN – AMSOUTH, PL20190002564,
ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE
POTABLE WATER FACILITIES, AND AUTHORIZE THE
COUNTY MANAGER, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE
UTILITIES PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL
OBLIGATION BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $6,178.28
TO THE PROJECT ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER’S
DESIGNATED AGENT
Item #16A3
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER FACILITIES FOR CREATIVE WORLD SCHOOL
NAPLES, PL20200000173, ACCEPT THE CONVEYANCE OF A
PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
FACILITIES, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR
HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL OBLIGATION
BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $10,671.35 TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED
AGENT
Item #16A4
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF POTABLE WATER AND SEWER
May 25, 2021
Page 297
UTILITY FACILITIES FOR RITZ-CARLTON NAPLES GOLF
RESORT - POOL EXPANSION, PL20210000646
Item #16A5
RELEASE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $74,473.45, FOR PAYMENT OF $723.45
IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. NAPLES MARINA HOLDINGS,
LLC, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1949 DAVIS
BLVD, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A6
RELEASE OF TWO (2) CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS, WITH
AN ACCRUED VALUE OF $744,456.68 FOR PAYMENT OF
$756.68, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. BRADLEY
GOODSON AND LEIGHA WILSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT
BOARD CASE NOS. CELU20140025168 AND
CEAU20150003344, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
2432 FLORIDA AVE., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A7
RELEASE OF TWO (2) CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS, WITH
AN ACCRUED VALUE OF $651,356.68 FOR PAYMENT OF
$756.68, IN THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TITLED
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. BRADLEY
GOODSON AND LEIGHA WILSON, CODE ENFORCEMENT
BOARD CASE NOS. CELU20140025432 AND
May 25, 2021
Page 298
CEAU20150003345, RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
2448 FLORIDA AVE., COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A8
RELEASE OF TWO CODE ENFORCEMENT LIENS WITH AN
ACCRUED VALUE OF $95,397.40 FOR PAYMENT OF $4,000 IN
THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS TITLED BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS V. DERI CLARK IN SPECIAL
MAGISTRATE CASE NOS. CENA20180002815 AND
CENA20180002818 RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT
15081 OAK TREE DRIVE, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #16A9
RESOLUTION 2021-96: PROHIBITING THE OPERATIONS OF
TRUCKS AND OTHER COMMERCIAL VEHICLES HAVING A
RATED LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF FIVE (5)
TONS FROM THROUGH MOVEMENTS ON LOGAN
BOULEVARD EXTENSION FROM IMMOKALEE ROAD TO
THE LEE COUNTY LINE
Item #16A10
RESOLUTION 2021-97: PROHIBITING THE OPERATION OF
TRUCKS AND OTHER COMMERCIAL VEHICLES HAVING A
RATED LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF ONE (1)
TON FROM THROUGH MOVEMENTS ON MASSEY STREET
Item #16A11
May 25, 2021
Page 299
A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
COLLIER COUNTY AND ENBROOK HOMEOWNERS’
ASSOCIATION, INC. FOR LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE MANATEE ROAD PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY
Item #16A12
AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF A LICENSE
AGREEMENT FROM CREEKSIDE WEST, INC. TO CC
ADDISON, LLC FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE INSTALLATION
OF TWO GROUND SIGNS WITHIN COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY
Item #16A13
AN EXTENSION FOR COMPLETION OF REQUIRED
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH SIERRA
MEADOWS (AR-2340) SUBDIVISION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 10.02.05 C.2 OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE (LDC)
Item #16A14
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID NO. 21-7867, “DUNE
VEGETATION RESTORATION PROJECT – GRANT FUNDED,”
TO CARDNO, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $106,472.00,
AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT, AND
MAKE A FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM
Item #16A15
May 25, 2021
Page 300
WORK ORDER WITH CSA OCEAN SCIENCES, INC. TO
CONTINUE THE REQUIRED POST-CONSTRUCTION
HARDBOTTOM MONITORING FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY
BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT IN SUMMER 2021 WITH
CSA OCEAN SCIENCES, INC. FOR TIME AND MATERIAL
NOT TO EXCEED $169,959.21 UNDER CONTRACT NO. 17-
7188, AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE THE WORK
ORDER FOR THE PROPOSED SERVICES, AND MAKE A
FINDING THAT THIS ITEM PROMOTES TOURISM
Item #16A16
AWARDING INVITATION TO BID (“ITB”) NO. 21-7861,
“CONCRETE: SIDEWALKS, CURBS & GUTTERS, AND
RELATED ITEMS.” TO PRIMARY AND SECONDARY
VENDORS AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN THE
AGREEMENTS
Item #16A17
FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE POTABLE WATER AND
SEWER FACILITIES FOR PAMPERED PET RESORTS (F/K/A
ALL AMERICAN PET RESORT), PL20200000519, ACCEPT THE
CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE POTABLE WATER
FACILITIES, AND AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY MANAGER, OR
HIS DESIGNEE, TO RELEASE THE UTILITIES
PERFORMANCE SECURITY (UPS) AND FINAL OBLIGATION
BOND IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $6,289.20 TO THE
PROJECT ENGINEER OR DEVELOPER’S DESIGNATED
AGENT
May 25, 2021
Page 301
Item #16A18
ACCEPTING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $389,085 FOR THE
PETERS AVENUE SIDEWALK PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZE
NECESSARY BUDGETS AMENDMENTS
Item #16A19
ACCEPTING THE INFORMATION AND FINDINGS OF THE
COUNTY MANAGER’S REVIEW OF THE COASTAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE’S PROPOSED APPROACH TO
ADDRESSING COASTAL WATER QUALITY ISSUES AND
DIRECT STAFF TO WORK TOWARDS IMPLEMENTING THE
COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATIONS
Item #16C1
AN EXEMPTION FROM THE COMPETITIVE PROCESS AND
ENTER INTO GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (NON-
SOLICITATION) NO. 21-001-NS FOR UTILITY BILLING &
CUSTOMER SERVICE INTEGRATED SOFTWARE SERVICES
WITH N. HARRIS COMPUTER CORPORATION (“HARRIS”)
FOR MAINTENANCE, LICENSING, AND TECHNICAL
SERVICES FOR THE IMPRESA SOFTWARE USED BY
UTILITY BILLING
Item #16C2
A WORK ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $475,000, PURSUANT
TO A REQUEST FOR QUOTATION UNDER AGREEMENT NO.
May 25, 2021
Page 302
14-6213 TO QUALITY ENTERPRISES USA, INC., FOR THE
ISLE OF CAPRI PUMP STATION SURGE CONTROL SYSTEM
Item #16C3
REQUEST FOR QUOTATION #20-8110, “IMMOKALEE
HEALTH AND LIBRARY PARKING LOT,” UNDER
AGREEMENT NO. 16-6663, ANNUAL AGREEMENT FOR
ROADWAY CONTRACTORS TO BONNESS, INC.,
AUTHORIZING A BUDGET AMENDMENT AND ISSUANCE OF
A PURCHASE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $267,623
Item #16C4
AFTER-THE-FACT APPROVAL FOR SUBMITTAL OF A
HAZARD MITIGATION PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION
FOR FEMA FM-5309-FL “ESSENTIAL FACILITY RETROFIT”
TO THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
(FEMA) THROUGH FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $250,000.00
Item #16D1
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN THREE (3)
MORTGAGE SATISFACTIONS FOR THE STATE HOUSING
INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP LOAN PROGRAM IN THE
AMOUNT OF $43,200 AND THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET
AMENDMENT
Item #16D2
May 25, 2021
Page 303
DANIEL RODRIGUEZ, PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT
HEAD, TO EXECUTE FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION’S ANNUAL CERTIFICATIONS AND
ASSURANCES FOR BOARD APPROVED GRANTS AND
GRANT APPLICATIONS THROUGH THE FTA’S TRANSIT
AWARD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND AUTHORIZE THE
CHAIR TO SIGN THE DESIGNATION OF SIGNATURE
AUTHORITY FORM
Item #16D3
AWARDING REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL #21-7836,
“BAREFOOT BEACH CONCESSION SERVICES,” TO SSG
RECREATION, INC., AND AUTHORIZE THE CHAIR TO SIGN
THE AGREEMENT
Item #16D4
RESOLUTION 2021-98: AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE UPON ARRIVAL THE FY2021/22
TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED TRUST FUND
TRIP/EQUIPMENT GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA
COMMISSION FOR THE TRANSPORTATION
DISADVANTAGED IN THE AMOUNT OF $782,438 WITH A
LOCAL MATCH OF $86,937 TO ASSIST WITH SYSTEM
OPERATING EXPENSES AND AUTHORIZE THE NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16D5
RESOLUTION 2021-99: ACCEPTING A REVISION TO THE
May 25, 2021
Page 304
NOTICE OF GRANT AWARD FOR THE FTA 5310 FY20-21
PROGRAM THROUGH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, APPROVE A NEW FY20-21 PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION GRANT AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT
OF $23,700, AND APPROVE AN ASSOCIATED RESOLUTION
TO PROVIDE FOR FEDERAL FUNDING TO PURCHASE
MOBILE RADIOS AND TABLETS
Item #16E1
ACCEPTING STAFF’S REPORT FOR THE SALE OF 44 ITEMS
AND DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $198,150 ASSOCIATED WITH THE COUNTY SURPLUS
AUCTION HELD ON APRIL 10, 2021
Item #16E2
AN ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR DISPOSAL OF
PROPERTY AND NOTIFICATION OF REVENUE
DISBURSEMENT
Item #16E3
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PREPARED BY THE
PROCUREMENT SERVICES DIVISION FOR CHANGE ORDERS
AND OTHER CONTRACTUAL MODIFICATIONS REQUIRING
BOARD APPROVAL
Item #16E4
May 25, 2021
Page 305
AMENDMENT NO. 16 TO THE AGREEMENT WITH COLLIER
COUNTY DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD FOR THE DORI
SLOSBERG DRIVER EDUCATION PROGRAM
Item #16E5
AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE OF ALLOWABLE
EXPENDITURES UTILIZING NEOGOV SOFTWARE
PRODUCTS UNDER AGREEMENT NO. 10-5451-NS FOR THE
COUNTY’S TALENT ACQUISITION PROCESSES IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $100,000 PER FISCAL YEAR
Item #16E6
AN ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT ASSIGNING ALL RIGHTS,
DUTIES AND BENEFITS, AND OBLIGATIONS TO KOVA
APPRAISAL & CONSULTING SERVICES, LLC D/B/A
CARLSON, NORRIS & ASSOCIATES FOR AGREEMENT #18-
7482 “REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL AND CONSULTING
SERVICES”
Item #16F1
RESOLUTION 2021-100: AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING GRANTS, DONATIONS, CONTRIBUTIONS
OR INSURANCE PROCEEDS) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #16F2
May 25, 2021
Page 306
SELECTION COMMITTEE’S RANKING AND AUTHORIZE
STAFF TO BEGIN CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE
TOP RANKED FIRM, TINDALE OLIVER & ASSOCIATES INC.,
CONCERNING REQUEST FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
(“RPS”) NO. 21-7868 IMPACT FEE STUDIES & FISCAL
ANALYSIS, SO A PROPOSED AGREEMENT CAN BE
BROUGHT BACK FOR THE BOARD’S CONSIDERATION AT A
FUTURE MEETING
Item #16F3
TERMINATING AGREEMENT NO. 18-7404, “COLLIER
COUNTY SPORTS COMPLEX MARKETING AND SUPPORT,”
WITH SPORTS FIELDS, INC, FOR CONVENIENCE, AND SEND
NOTICE TO THE CONTRACTOR
Item #16F4
RECOGNIZING TANIA SANTOS, PUBLIC SERVICES
DEPARTMENT, DOMESTIC ANIMAL SERVICES (DAS) AS
THE MAY 2021 EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH
Item #16G1
RESOLUTION 2021-101: AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY
MANAGER'S EXECUTION OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION (FAA) AIRPORT CORONAVIRUS
RESPONSE GRANT PROGRAM (ACRGP) AGREEMENTS IN
THE AMOUNT OF $23,000 FOR THE MARCO ISLAND
EXECUTIVE AIRPORT (MKY) AND $13,000 FOR THE
IMMOKALEE REGIONAL AIRPORT (IMM) FOR ELIGIBLE
May 25, 2021
Page 307
OPERATING EXPENSES AND AUTHORIZE ALL NECESSARY
BUDGET AMENDMENTS
Item #16H1
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 2021, AS NATIONAL
DRUG COURT MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. THE
PROCLAMATION WILL BE DELIVERED TO HONORABLE
JANEICE MARTIN, PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE COLLIER
COUNTY DRUG COURT
Item #16H2
PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING THE LEADERSHIP, STAFF,
AND VOLUNTEERS OF THE NAPLES SENIOR CENTER FOR
HELPING THOUSANDS OF LOCAL SENIORS OBTAIN COVID-
19 VACCINE APPOINTMENTS DURING THIS GLOBAL
PANDEMIC. ACCEPTED BY DR. JACLYNN FAFFER
Item #16H3
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING MAY 2021, AS MENTAL
HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH IN COLLIER COUNTY. THE
PROCLAMATION WILL BE MAILED TO MICHELLE MCLEOD,
COLLIER COALITION FOR HEALTHY MINDS
Item #16H4 – Added (Per Agenda Change Sheet)
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING JUNE 4, 2021, AS
NATIONAL GUN VIOLENCE AWARENESS DAY IN COLLIER
COUNTY. THE PROCLAMATION WILL BE DELIVERED TO
May 25, 2021
Page 308
THE SOUTHWEST FLORIDA GROUP, MOMS DEMAND
ACTION FOR GUN SENSE IN AMERICA
Item #16I1
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MISCELLANEOUS CORRESPONDENCE
May 25, 2021
1. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO FILE FOR RECORD WITH ACTION AS DIRECTED:
A. DISTRICTS:
1) Verona Walk Community Development District:
Proposed FY2021/2022 Budget (Oct. 1, 2021 – Sept. 30, 2022)
2) Winding Cypress Community Development District:
Proposed FY2021/2022 Budget (Oct. 1, 2021 – Sept. 30, 2022)
B. OTHER:
1) Collier County Sheriff’s Office:
FY2022 Budget Certification
2) Immokalee Fire Control District
District Audit FY Ended 09/30/2020
May 25, 2021
Page 309
Item #16J1
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SERVE AS THE
LOCAL COORDINATING UNIT OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT’S
FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2020 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL,
JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT (JAG) COUNTYWIDE
PROGRAM AND (1) AUTHORIZE THE CHAIRMAN TO
EXECUTE THE CERTIFICATION OF PARTICIPATION; (2)
DESIGNATE THE SHERIFF AS THE OFFICIAL APPLICANT
AND THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE STAFF AS GRANT FINANCIAL
AND PROGRAM MANAGERS; (3) AUTHORIZE THE
ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT IF AND WHEN AWARDED;
AND (4) APPROVE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS
AND APPROVE THE COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE
TO RECEIVE AND EXPEND THE GRANT FUND
Item #16J2
REPORT TO THE BOARD REGARDING THE INVESTMENT OF
COUNTY FUNDS AS OF THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31,
2021 – AS DETAILED IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item #16J3
TO RECORD IN THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, THE CHECK NUMBER (OR OTHER
PAYMENT METHOD), AMOUNT, PAYEE, AND PURPOSE FOR
WHICH THE REFERENCED DISBURSEMENTS WERE DRAWN
FOR THE PERIODS BETWEEN APRIL 29, 2021 AND MAY 12,
2021 PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 136.06
May 25, 2021
Page 310
Item #16J4
DETERMINING VALID PUBLIC PURPOSE FOR INVOICES
PAYABLE AND PURCHASING CARD TRANSACTIONS AS OF
MAY 19, 2021
Item #16K1
RESOLUTION 2021-102: APPOINTING ROBERT WOPPERER
TO THE HALDEMAN CREEK DREDGING MAINTENANCE
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Item #16K2
RESOLUTION 2021-103: RE-APPOINTING ROBERT
RAYMOND TO THE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Item #16K3
RESOLUTION 2021-104: APPOINTING DANIEL JOHNSON TO
THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL AUTHORITY
Item #16K4
RESOLUTION 2021-105: APPOINTING WILLIAM GURNEE TO
THE RADIO ROAD BEAUTIFICATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
Item #16K5
RESOLUTION 2021-106: APPOINTING JOSEPH
May 25, 2021
Page 311
TRACHTENBERG AND BERNARDO BARNHART TO THE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Item #16K6
AMENDMENT #1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 18-7343-WV FOR
COURT REPORTING WITH U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., TO
ADJUST THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR RATES DURING THE
REMAINING TWO ONE-YEAR RENEWAL TERMS OF THE
AGREEMENT
Item #16K7
AUTHORIZING PAYMENT OF STATUTORY ATTORNEY’S
FEES AND COSTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 73.092, FLA.
STAT. INCURRED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER IN
DEFENDING COLLIER COUNTY’S EMINENT DOMAIN
ACTION IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $8,467.25 FOR THE
PROPOSED TAKING OF PARCEL 280RDUE FOR
VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO.
60168
Item #16K8
A JOINT MOTION FOR STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING
AND STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $312,013.55 INCLUDING STATUTORY
ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE TAKING OF FIVE
PARCELS: 1199FEE, 1201FEE, 1203FEE1, 1203FEE2, AND
1205FEE REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD
EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
May 25, 2021
Page 312
Item #16K9
A STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$105,000.00, PLUS STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND
COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,887.25, FOR THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $123,887.25 FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL
324RDUE/TDRE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH
ROAD EXPANSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K10
STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT
OF $103,000.00 INCLUDING STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES
AND COSTS, FOR THE TAKING OF PARCEL 211FEE,
REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION
PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #16K11
STIPULATED ORDER OF TAKING AND FINAL JUDGMENT IN
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $42,500.00 INCLUDING
STATUTORY ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS, FOR THE
TAKING OF PARCEL 189FEE, REQUIRED FOR VANDERBILT
BEACH ROAD EXTENSION PROJECT NO. 60168
Item #17A
ORDINANCE 2021-21: AMENDING SECTION 130-3 OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES,
RELATING TO PROHIBITING THE OPERATION OF TRUCKS
AND OTHER COMMERCIAL VEHICLES WITH A RATED
May 25, 2021
Page 313
LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY IN EXCESS OF FIVE (5) TONS
FROM THROUGH MOVEMENTS ON DESIGNATED PUBLIC
ROADS AND STREETS IN COLLIER COUNTY
Item #17B
RESOLUTION 21-107: PETITION VAC-PL20210000230, TO
DISCLAIM, RENOUNCE AND VACATE THE COUNTY AND
THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN A PORTION OF THE BLANKET
ACCESS AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED ON TRACT
“I” OF HACIENDA LAKES OF NAPLES, AS RECORDED IN
PLAT BOOK 55, PAGE 10 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50
SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Item #17C
RESOLUTION 2021-108: APPROVING AMENDMENTS
(APPROPRIATING CARRY FORWARD, TRANSFERS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL REVENUE) TO THE FY20-21 ADOPTED
BUDGET
Item #17D
RESOLUTION 2021-109: AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 89-05,
AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY
AMENDING THE RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES SUB-
ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN
AND THE RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES FUTURE LAND
May 25, 2021
Page 314
USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CREATE THE IMMOKALEE
ROAD/4TH STREET N.E. MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT BY
CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY FROM
THE ESTATES-MIXED USE DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL
ESTATES SUBDISTRICT TO THE ESTATES-MIXED USE
DISTRICT, IMMOKALEE ROAD/4TH STREET N.E. MIXED USE
SUBDISTRICT, TO ALLOW USES PERMITTED BY RIGHT
AND CONDITIONAL USE IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL
(C-4) ZONING DISTRICT WITH A TOTAL MAXIMUM
INTENSITY OF UP TO 150,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS
FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT, AND A MAXIMUM OF 400
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, AND FURTHERMORE
DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF IMMOKALEE ROAD
AND 4TH STREET NE IN SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 NORTH,
RANGE 27 EAST, CONSISTING OF 50.18± ACRES.
[PL20190002355]
Item #17E
RESOLUTION 2021-110: AMENDING ORDINANCE 89-05, AS
AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE ESTATES
SHOPPING CENTER SUBDISTRICT OF THE ESTATES
COMMERCIAL-DISTRICT OF THE RURAL GOLDEN GATE
ESTATES SUB-ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA
MASTER PLAN AND FUTURE LAND USE MAPS TO ADD
COMMERCIAL, PUBLIC, CIVIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES;
ADD UP TO 50 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; REDUCE
COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE FROM 190,000 TO 50,000;
May 25, 2021
Page 315
REMOVE OUTDOOR MUSIC PROHIBITION; REMOVE SINGLE
COMMERCIAL USE AND BUILDING SIZE LIMITATIONS;
REDUCE SETBACKS AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER WIDTHS;
AND REMOVE PHASING AND DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS;
AND FURTHERMORE DIRECTING TRANSMITTAL OF THE
AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 41±
ACRES AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT
OF GOLDEN GATE BOULEVARD AND WILSON
BOULEVARD, IN SECTION 4, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE
27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20190002353]
[TRANSMITTAL HEARING]
*****
There being no further business for the good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 8:53 p.m.
May 25, 2021
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EX
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL
?PI L3114-
PENNY TAYLOR, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
CRYST. LI€,KINZEL, CLERK
�
t,
u ,t,c. o c,
Astiwi7
ignature only.
These minutes approved by the Board on j 22,�1 , as
presented Y or as corrected
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS
COURT REPORTING BY TERRI LEWIS, FPR, COURT
REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page 316