Loading...
HEX Minutes 06/10/2021June 10, 2021 Page 1 of 13 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER Naples, Florida June 10, 2021 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Hearing Examiner, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Room 609/610, Naples, Florida, with the following people present: HEARING EXAMINER ANDREW DICKMAN ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager John Kelly, Senior Planner June 10, 2021 Page 2 of 13 HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Good morning, everyone. We're going to get started. This is the Hearing Examiner Meeting of June 10th, 2021. My name is Andrew Dickman. I am the Hearing Examiner for Collier County. Practicing attorney in good standing with the Florida Bar. I've been retained by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. I'm not a County employee. I'm here to decide applications that are designated in the code that should be heard by the Hearing Examiner. So we have an Agenda in front of us, so I'm going to get started with the Pledge of Allegiance. Stand, please. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, great. Why don't we, let me -- let's just go over the Agenda real quick. Do we have any changes to the Agenda? MR. KELLY: Yes, we do. Agenda Item 3A, that's the boat dock extension with the Petition No. BDE-PL20190000674. Due to an advertising issue this item has been continued, been requested and agreed to by the applicant to be continued to a July 8th HEX meeting. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. So I need to get that on the record. I appreciate you telling me that, but I do need the applicant to put that on the record and we'll get some of the dates set up for that. As far as that, anything else on the Agenda that needs to be changed? MR. KELLY: No other changes. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Just as far as some ground rules here, I want to explain how we're going to do this. First of all, we do have a court reporter on the Zoom part. This is a hybrid meeting, which means we have people in person and then we have folks that are attending by the Internet. So since we have a court reporter, everyone needs to speak clearly into the microphone, including me. Try not to answer questions or make head nods and things of that matter. That can't be captured on the court reporter's transcripts. We are going to swear in everyone that is going to speak and provide testimony here, and I'll like to go ahead and do that collectively for anyone that's here to speak on any item that's on the Agenda. Why don't I go ahead and administer that since the court reporter is not here present. So I'll go ahead and do that right now if everyone's going to speak. Anyone that's going to speak go ahead and stand up and raise your right hand. All right. Under penalty of perjury, do you swear to tell the truth here today? (The speakers all indicated in the affirmative.) HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: All right, great. Got that out of the way. So the way we're going to handle this is we have two podiums. One podium is brown over here on my left, more or less. The other one is gray in the front. I'm going to have the applicant speak over here on the brown one. The County and the public can use the middle one, which is the gray one. And anybody on the Internet can speak wherever they want and wherever they are. That's the beauty of the Internet, as long as they speak clearly. Why don't we take up, since we have that continuance of -- why don't we take up the first one. Mr. Rogers, are you here? You are here. Okay, you're not out in the saltwater somewhere drilling the, putting pilings down? MR. ROGERS: Not today. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Not yet? MR. ROGERS: Not yet, still early. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: So I understand there was a glitch in the mail outs; is that right? MR. ROGERS: That's my understanding as well, yes. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: And so your client wants to take a continuance. MR. ROGERS: I mean, that was the recommendation and per my conversations with Ray yesterday evening, yes. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: So just, this is super important. I'm a very big believer in due process. This would be a major catastrophe if you, if we put your client through this whole process, somebody wasn't notified by mail, which in fact, is probably the best notice that someone would June 10, 2021 Page 3 of 13 get. And that's an easy appeal and then it would just come back to me and it would be a huge waste of money for everybody. So I understand that this is going to delay things somewhat, but it's in the best interest of everybody involved. Ray, do we have a date so I can -- I know it's been -- I know we've got a board on the property right, or a sign on the property? MR. BELLOWS: We have a sign on the property. We'll revise the sign with the new hearing date, but we will mail, do a new mailing, or we'll do the mailing and with the correct date and location. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, and then as far as like the newspaper, we're going to just -- if I do a date certain continuance here, that's okay. MR. BELLOWS: That's okay. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. So what date are we looking at in case -- MR. BELLOWS: July 8th. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, July 8th. And that Agenda is, we have time on that Agenda, I guess? MR. BELLOWS: We do. Well, we do have a large item on that Agenda, but it will be held at the -- it is advertised for the CCPC chambers. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, so we're going to move there. They have vending machines and I hear the water fountain's safe to drink out of nowadays, so we're good, right? Plenty of room. So I'm going to say that this is going to be continued to the July, the July 8th Hearing Examiner Hearing and we'll go ahead and put out those mail outs as soon as possible and get the sign, date changed on that and we'll go forward with that. Thanks for your cooperation on it. MR. ROGERS: No problem. Thank you, guys. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, no problem. All right. Got that one out of the way. What's the distance on that mail out? MR. BELLOWS: It's 500 feet. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Wow, yeah. I noticed that would have picked up a lot of properties. Okay. This one is 3B, right? So the way that I like to do this, to me it's a lot more helpful to have the County present the item and then give their recommendation, and then have the Applicant come up and then really do the substantive presentation. Then we'll have the public speak and I'll give Applicant an opportunity to rebut anything if necessary, and we'll go ahead and start talking about that. So who's going to handle this one, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: Mr. Kelly. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: All right, Mr. Kelly. How are you? MR. KELLY: Morning, Mr. Dickman. John Kelly for the record. Senior Planner with the County. Before you is going to be Item 3B. It's Petition VA-PL20200001291 for 41 Pelican Street West, legally described as Lot 82, Isles of Capri No. 1. And this is to have you consider an after-the-fact variance from Section 4.02.01.A, Table 2.1 of the Land Development Code to reduce the minimum side yard setback from -- I'm sorry. Yes, the side yard setback from 7.5 feet to 7.35 feet for a single family dwelling to reduce the minimum front yard from 25 feet to 21.69 feet, for the attached covered entrance and to 19.69 feet for the roof overhang for the benefit of the subject property. Staff is constrained from recommending an approval, that we're unable to establish a related hardship. However, we do not recommend denial either, as the applicant has presented several letters of support from neighbors and believe that the offending structure is actually an improvement to the neighborhood. So for the side yard variance, it's pretty much de minimus. It's not a required variance. The LDC allows us to overlook that variance and declares it not to be in violation, but we are making it a part of this request. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: On that issue, am I -- so that's one of the things that I wanted to ask you. There are de minimus variances that the administration can handle. This seems to be one of those, but you're including it here for me to make a decision on, or is it just informational? June 10, 2021 Page 4 of 13 MR. KELLY: To make a decision on if you go through with the front yard setback. We would just like to get everything on record for clear title. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, great. And so then the front yard. And notices were handled in such a way as? MR. KELLY: Sorry. Notice requirements for a variance are contained in Section 10.03.06.F, as in Frank, 2. Agent letter was sent by the applicant. A sign was posted by me on the property and the property owner notification and newspaper ad for this hearing did run at their time specific dates. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Couple other questions. This is one of those things where, I'm glad you have a de minimus procedure that you can follow. We've had a couple of these cases where it's after-the-fact, and I'm not sure whose fault this is, but it seems like, okay, you have a lot that's clearly 70 by, 70 by 115, evenly. The surveyor I guess goes out and flags it. Someone does something, contractor, architect and then somewhere down the line, it's found that the house is a little crooked. And I see that they're -- based on the survey that I'm looking at -- if you've got, for example, on the side yard and the back measurement of the building is 7.5, the front part is 7.35, that's going to affect the inside of the building eventually when you start laying carpet or tile. So I'm just kind of, it's kind of surprising to me that these things happen. I feel for the property owner for the, whoever's involved here. But these things make me want to go out and measure my house to make sure it was done correctly. MR. KELLY: Done twice. One of them might be right. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah. So here's the thing. Does the County have any other -- you know, I know a lot of local governments are starting to structure their variances a little differently so that you have those extreme variances that are real, meet hardship, et cetera. Then you have practical difficulties which you have to go to a hearing, but there's a different standard. Then you have the de minimus ones which are handled administratively. Is there any discussion about that? MR. KELLY: We do have an administrative variance process for the minor encroachments. So there is a process in place for the minor. MR. BELLOWS: For the record Ray Bellows. And I'd also like to point out, those three types -- there are three types of variances dealing with if a building permit was just issued, one when it wasn't issued, one that was done by previous owner. And then there's some that are listed, if there's just three or four inches off, it's more like a zoning verification letter to address. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. The reason, I mean, the reason I ask this is because I'm being saddled with a variance that, you know, obviously I have to fit into a hole that, you know, I would typically evaluate as a true variance. But I see this as, you know, kind of a unfortunate mistake that occurred at no -- I guess it's at no fault to the property owner -- but there are some people out there that, you know, probably need to take ownership of this. But at any rate, I understand your recommendation. I appreciate your recommendation. I see all of the no objection letters. In fact, some of the no objection letters, actually people took the time to write some complimentary notes regarding this. So that's not lost on me and I see that this was advertised. Everyone has due process, so I will go forward with this and deal with it as best I can. But again, you know, it's kind of a shame that I have to apply the typical variance standard -- and you all do too -- to something of this nature. MR. KELLY: Just to add a comment. The spot surveys unfortunately weren't required by the County until 1982, so this is a somewhat not uncommon problem with the older homes. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: And I recognize that. I'm laying blame on anybody, but you know, I've seen, we've seen a couple of these situations where it's kind of like they come in after the fact for something innocently, and then it's hey, guess what, you've got this problem that's been in place for 20 years and you didn't know about it. Now you've got to spend all this money to come talk to Andrew Dickman, and I'm sure that's not what they want to do. So let's get started with this. I appreciate your introduction. I got your recommendation. I have your staff report. I have the survey that's been here, the letters of no opposition, and so why don't we go ahead and bring the applicant up and do that. I presume this is Mr. Cox, but we'll see. June 10, 2021 Page 5 of 13 MR. KELLY: There are two photos that are loaded into the system for today's hearing. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Can you bring that up, Mr. Youngblood? How are you today, sir? MR. COX: Good, how are you? HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: I'm fine, thank you. Thank you for being here. MR. COX: Thank you for having me here. I feel a little under dressed. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: No, no, no. Trust me. If, yeah. You look proper and perfect for Naples. Your name and address? MR. COX: Me? HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Your name and address? MR. COX: My name is Brian Cox, owner of 41 Pelican Street West, Naples. And try to give you a little brief -- on my nature of petition, I actually wrote in the wrong date of the portico in question, porch overhang being built in March, 2017. That actually should have been 2018. This was after Hurricane Irma and my property got ripped up pretty good, damaged. Pretty much roof structures and holes inside the house. After the fact of knowing that I needed to get it buttoned up to where no water could come in the house, which would have been primarily the roof, I had actually hired an architect to do this porch overhang, as opening the front door I'd get drenched with water just trying to get into the house during a thunderstorm. So I had a licensed architect draw a little patio cover over. Never having anything done in previous homes I've owned to the exterior of the home as far as a structure being built, I guess I was at a little bit of a disadvantage. Hired a licensed contractor, Florida state licensed contractor to go through and give me a bid on this. Things were very busy at the time as far as roofing goes. I did pull out my own roofing permit to speed up the process when I didn't find a contractor. But as going through it, knowing that if I just had the house reroofed they were going to have to cut back into it for me to build this structure and I felt that I needed to get it done. So during the process of hiring the contractor, we went through the situation and I specifically asked him verbally if he felt we needed permits on this. And he said let's just see how it goes. That was his remark. Learning this after the fact, learning my faults in this was me actually -- let me go back just a little bit. Code enforcement had come over to check on progress or just check on what was going on at the property. The structure was already built. As he went through the house, you know, he put a CO hold on it and then I got involved, and then started working with the County building department in getting permits. As this came about, the process was the structure was brought to my attention as I went through the permitting process by Lisa Blackridge -- which she was in zoning at the time -- that I was over the setbacks, which I had no clue what my setbacks were. Which, I felt the architect and maybe the contractor should have known that. But I learned this after the fact of my mistakes in the situation. So proceeding with this, I had actually had the architect draw up an alternative method to hold the structure up, which would have been not visibly, wouldn't have looked very good at all. This would've included me tearing down the columns, coming in off the foundations -- this is what I submitted to get my building permit -- coming in off the foundations with angled posts, diagonal posts coming up to that, where those posts are and then cutting back two foot off the structure on the front side. After going through this and receiving my permits five months later, because I had not enough information on two denials, the third go-around with me submitting that, the building permits were approved. And as progress was going on on different things inside the house and a lot of inspections being done, I proceeded to have all the inspections done on that and started looking at it and started searching into the variance process. Looking at what it would have looked like on my alternative method that was approved, I just didn't think it was very eye pleasing to the neighborhood. So that's why I went after the variance. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: All right. I appreciate that filling in the dots, connecting the dots for me. I do understand. I was here for Hurricane Irma, I went through the same process. I know it was difficult to sort of put things back together. Yeah, this is just again, a very unfortunate -- I see you stipulate that you have, you did have an architect. You had a contractor. You June 10, 2021 Page 6 of 13 seemed to have tried to do the best you could with staying within the boundaries by making some other changes and determining that, you know, as far as like compatibility with your house design and neighborhood, you made that decision that this would be -- and by the way, there are two photographs that are here in the record that are very helpful that I've looked at. So I understand why you're here and I will -- I don't really have any other questions because I understand that your neigh -- you have quite a few neighbors submitting no objection letters. And let's see, just checking to see if I have any other questions on here. Yeah, I looked at your survey and it does seem like the footprint of your, at least the dimensions, the footprint on the interior of your house seem to be a little bit off, which would make sense if you have a perfectly rectangular lot, and then they put a home on it and that's not perfectly in line with the side yard. It happens, and I guess you'll handle it privately, however you have to handle it. So I don't have any other questions. Let's see if there's anybody in the public here to speak. And why don't you sit tight for a minute. John, you have anything else you want to add? MR. KELLY: No, I've received no public comment to the contrary on this project, just the letters of support. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Nobody in opposition to this? MR. KELLY: No. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. Mr. Youngblood, anybody here to speak on this item? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Dickman, we have no public speakers on this item. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Online or in person? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Neither. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, all right. So it seems like everyone's okay with this. Any last words? MR. COX: Just the fact that what I've learned through this whole process that I happened to buy the house closest to any, the closest house to the street than anybody in the neighborhood. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Buyer beware, I guess. It is a learning process for you, right? MR. COX: No doubt. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Now you know all about setbacks and everything. So all right, I don't have any other questions. And it doesn't seem like there's any other information. John, you just seem like you want to say something. MR. KELLY: I'm just waiting for the other two projects. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, all right. I have everything I need here. I will have up to 30 days to get a decision out. I'll do this as fast as I can, sir. MR. COX: I might have to go down to building to extend my permit, building permit because I believe it comes up like July 27th. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Ray, is there any issue with that? I know that you guys are kind of separated, building and planning. But is he going to have a problem with that because I have a pending decision? MR. BELLOWS: It's possible. I think we can coordinate with them and see what can be done up to the point, but at a certain point you can't get a CO until -- HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. If you can just let them know that I have a decision coming out which ultimately affects the building permit, and I don't want to drag this on as much as possible. MR. BELLOWS: We can process everything up to what is covered by this variance request. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: If you just convey that. I know that you don't, or I assume you don't have the -- MR. BELLOWS: We'll coordinate with that. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, coordinate with that department. I appreciate it, but okay. MR. COX: Thank you for hearing me. June 10, 2021 Page 7 of 13 HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Thanks for being here, Mr. Cox. Appreciate it. I guess you have all of these items? MR. KELLY: Yeah. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: You're busy today. All right. Okay. All right, so we're moving on to 3C. Go ahead and introduce this item, please, Ray -- or not Ray, but John. MR. KELLY: Okay. This is your Item 3C. It's PDI or PL20200001952 for the Hammock Park Commerce Center MPUD. Petitioner is requesting you approve an insubstantial amendment to the Hammock Park Commerce Center Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, Ordinance No. 04-68, as amended, to allow a temporary off-premises directional sign up to ten feet in height, 64 square feet in area, and 1,320 feet plus or minus from the McMullen MPUD, where the Watercrest Assisted Living Facility is located. The sign is to provide them some visibility from Collier Boulevard and to approve deviations increasing the permissible height, size and distance of the sign, and to update the PUD and CPUD references that are located within the MPUD document. The geographic location of this property, it's 19.19 acres located on the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. And again, Staff is in the position where we're constrained from recommending approval as to the County, the size of the sign is not consistent with other off-premise directional signs that have been previously approved at this location. However, should you decide to consider this petition, we do have several recommended conditions. Those are contained within the staff report. The Applicant, I believe, has a substantial presentation to go through that will point out what the County's concerns are as well as their responses. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. So let's talk about the notice too. I want to get that on the record. MR. KELLY: Notice requirements for a PDA are contained in LDC Section 10.03.06.H, as in Henry. A NIM is required unless waived by the Hearing Examiner, first went to Section 10.03.06.H2A. Such a waiver was issued conditionally on January 27th. Mailed notice of the hearing and the newspaper ad ran or were requested on May 21st, 2021 and the public hearing sign was posted by the Applicant on or about May 17, 2021. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, thank you. So I do, to the point about the neighborhood information meeting. So the code does allow for a request of a waiver of a NIM, which is Neighborhood Information Meeting. That request did come to me. Staff recommended, I think they were not opposed to that. They have no objections to it. I did grant it with the caveat that if any opposition to your application occurs between the granting of this waiver and the public hearing, I reserve the right to reschedule the hearing and require the holding of a NIM. This was from me on January 27th, 2021. And so I need to ask the question, is anyone here or online in opposition to this? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: We don't have any public speakers, either present or online for this item. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. I see a young lady in the back raising her hands. MS. D'AMICO: I'm not sure what the procedure is. I'm here for some information. It seems like -- HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Ma'am, okay. So -- time out. So let me handle that one first. If you could come up and give your name. This is someone from the public. I guess they didn't fill out a card, but that's okay. I want to give everybody an opportunity to speak. Name and address and let's hear what you've got to say. MS. D'AMICO: Mary Lou D'Amico, 8471 Volaro Way. I live in Hacienda Lakes and I'm here. I'm sorry, I didn't follow procedures. I saw your sign and everything is being developed in the area and everything is being asked for variations. As homeowners, we would like to know what the County's procedure is in changing everything that we bought our homes -- understanding what was going to be developed there. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. So right now I want to make a decision about the neighborhood information meeting. There wasn't a neighborhood information meeting. You're telling me that -- are you speaking on behalf of other homeowners? June 10, 2021 Page 8 of 13 MS. D'AMICO: No, personally. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Just your own. Okay. So I'm, you know, had there been a neighborhood information meeting, John, how would that have been -- how would that information have gone out? MR. KELLY: There would've been a newspaper ad and a letter going to the property owners advising of the neighborhood information meeting at a certain time and place. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: And at that meeting they describe what they're doing, the neighbors have an opportunity to talk to the applicant to find out exactly what's happening in the process. MR. KELLY: Correct. I should add that there are simultaneous projects going on with this PUD. The County did deem this project to be insubstantial and upon receipt of the NIM waiver request, did find that to be appropriate given the type of petition this is, and what the petitioner is asking for. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: I'm going to go ahead and make this decision right now. What alarms me is that there's only one person here, okay, which tells me that perhaps people didn't know so much about this or didn't really have enough information. And that's partly the reason for the NIM, to be able to clear up some of these misunderstandings and not really have to bring their concerns here as the young lady's asking me to explain, you know, procedures and the folks would've known about that. So I am going to require that this go back and have a neighborhood information meeting. I have made it clear to County Staff that I'm not granting any more neighborhood information meetings, just because of this situation. And I found ourselves in an awkward situation. Some people say well, there's just one person here. Well, that kind of tells me that, you know, that's a problem because maybe there would be other people here if they had a neighborhood information meeting. So let's -- I'm going to go ahead and have this continued to a date certain. Ray, can we -- MR. BELLOWS: For the record Ray Bellows. I don't believe we will have a date where the NIM can be scheduled in time within five weeks to ensure that we don't have to readvertise. So it makes sense -- unless the Applicant has the ability to schedule prior to the next meeting or within five weeks. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: So ma'am, you don't have to ask anything. I don't want to talk about any substantive issues here today. I'm going to ask the Applicant to have a neighborhood information meeting and you'll get notice of that. Do you live within the area? MS. D'AMICO: Within Hacienda Lakes and the only notice that I saw was the sign on the lot trying to find out what information is happening. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. I understand, okay. Thank you for being here. How are you? MS. CRESPO: Thank you. Alexis Crespo with Waldrop Engineering representing the applicant. We'd love to schedule this for a July Hearing Examiner and get a date confirmed today if possible. I think we would go back to the office and get them coordinated today. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, let's work this out right now. Let's get the date. Let's all pull up our calendars. We've got time to do this. You know, they're going to do the NIM so what are we, what's the -- what is the fastest way -- how's the fastest way for them to get a neighborhood information meeting going? MR. KELLY: The hurdle for most of the Applicants is finding a location to hold their NIM and unfortunately, the COVID issue has made distancing difficult for the Applicants to handle. I think those regulations have been relaxed, so I don't know if it will be as difficult as it has been. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, let's talk about that. Do you have any suggested sites? I mean, even if you put up a tent and, you know, you go to Party City or wherever and they rent out these gigantic tents and set it up on site. Let's get this done so people understand what's going on. What do you have in mind? MS. CRESPO: Since we're going into rainy season I probably would not go with the tent option, but Fairway Bible Church is on Lord's Way and they've been a very gracious host for neighborhood meetings in this area. So I believe we can conduct that meeting the week of June 28th and appear before you at the July 8th Hearing Examiner meeting. June 10, 2021 Page 9 of 13 HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. And so the mail out notices, do we have time for the mail out notices? MS. CRESPO: If we got them out by the 14th of June, which would be Monday, I think. There's -- because of the radius of notification, I don't know that Hacienda Lakes or Esplanade will receive notification of this since the property is a distance away from that, but we can certainly work with this lady here to make sure they're notified. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Really, I mean, do they have an association at Hacienda? MS. CRESPO: Yes. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Why don't one of you give them a courtesy notice to the association and maybe they'll be able to put that up on however they do it. But let's go ahead and do it at the church, if they'll let you do it. Let's get the notices out. Again, this is one of those procedural issues that are really easy targets in the courts if somebody were to appeal your project. And, you know, there's -- obviously I have the ability to waive NIM's, but the court says guess what, you didn't offer due process, it's going to cost your client a lot of money, attorney fees, be back here and have to do the whole thing again. So Ray, I know that that Agenda is building up. I really don't care. I'll spend all day there, frankly, if I had the -- do we have the chambers all day? MR. BELLOWS: I believe we have it long enough to get through the items. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. You don't mind do you? We've got vending machines, we've got all kinds of stuff there. Yes, sir? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: We have the chambers until noon. We have to be out promptly at noon. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Well, how many items does that make? We just moved Jeff to that meeting. MR. BELLOWS: There should be time to get through that. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, I mean, I can be fast when I want to. So let's do that. Let's get them to that July 8th meeting. Please jump on that NIM as fast as possible, and let's get that done. I don't want to -- I'm not approving any more NIMS for this reason. I feel very uncomfortable and there's a provision in the code, I think, we're going to try to get that out of there, okay. And I appreciate your cooperation. Hold on, Ray's got something. MR. BELLOWS: I did check and it's only one item at present. So Chuck Rogers would make two and this would make three. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: We'll be done by noon, no doubt about it. Thanks for being here. All right. This is turning out to be a short Agenda. Last, but not least, Item 3D. And you're the man today, John. MR. KELLY: For the record, John Kelly, Senior Planner. This is going to be Item 3 as in David, D, as in David, PCUD PL20210000192, the Naples Daily News Business Park Planned Unit Development and Naples Community Healthcare System. The requested action is that you consider the proposed use of hospital administration and allied services limited to business offices, management, accounting, records retention and blood banking as being comparable in nature with the permitted uses in Section 3.3.A of the Naples Daily News Business Park Planned Unit Development, Ordinance No. 06-49, as amended, within Parcel A. The Applicant -- well, Staff reviewed the criteria per LDC Section 10.02.06.K. The Applicant also provided a transportation impact statement and with respect to current land use applications, there was also an administrative parking reduction, APR-PL202100000638, which has been approved to reduce the quantity of required parking at the location based upon the proposed use of hospital administration as previously mentioned. Staff recommends that you determine the use of hospital administration and allied services. Again, limited to business offices, management, accounting, record retention and blood banking is comparable and compatible with the business park Tract A permitted uses contained within Section 3.3.A of the Naples News Business Park Planned Unit Development. June 10, 2021 Page 10 of 13 As far as advertising requirements, they're found in LDC Section 10.03.06.O, as in ocean. The newspaper ad ran on May 21, 2021. There is no requirement for a neighborhood information meeting, agent letter, property owner notification letter or sign for this type of project. That concludes Staff's presentation. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. Thank you very much. So this again is one of those interesting anomalies in the planning profession, is that when writing zoning code, they try to come up with -- everyone tries to come up with a list of permitted uses, prohibited uses and conditional uses. And as we all know, time marches on and new things happen, new things come along and we've got to kind of figure out which one -- how do we do this without changing the ordinance to allow for such and such. So I see that Paula McMichael is here. How are you Paula? Oh, you're not even going to give her a shot at this? Come on. MR. MULHERE: She deferred to me. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Really? Okay. You got to give her some experience once in a while. MR. MULHERE: Oh, she's got a lot of experience. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Oh, I know that but her name's on the list here, not yours. MR. MULHERE: I'm right up there. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay, that's true. All right. MR. MULHERE: For the record I should state that my name is Bob Mulhere with Hole Montes here on behalf of NCH Healthcare System. And with me as you mentioned is Paula McMichael, also with Hole Montes. And Jack Ullrich is here. He's with NCH Healthcare Systems. If necessary, he can speak to anything that perhaps we can't. Also with me, not on that list, but as a abundance of caution is Ciprian Manolescu who is with Trebilcock and Associates, who prepared the supporting information for this request as well as for the APR. So I have a brief presentation. Next slide, please. This is the subject site where the requested uses will occur. As we all know, that's the former Naples Daily News site. This is the Naples Daily News Business Park PUD. The PUD's actually larger, which I'll show you in just a moment. And there was a separate tract -- may I step up to that to point it out? HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Absolutely. Okay. So he's pointing to a tract that's south of the property just below Creekside Boulevard. MR. MULHERE: And that property was acquired by Arthrex and used in conjunction with Arthrex's facility. So I just wanted to point that out. So next slide, please. So in yellow is the subject site, but if you follow the red boundary you see that the business park PUD kind of snakes along to the south. There was, I think, some storm water improvements on the far south portion of that that's kind of oddly shaped. Have a little tomahawk at the bottom. So that was kind of an odd shaped PUD. The whole PUD is 35 acres. Next slide. That is the PUD master plan. Next slide. So as you pointed out, there are often these situations and several years ago, probably ten or 15 years ago, the process was refined and established for seeking out comparable use determinations and they can either be done in the, what I used to call straight zoning, but traditional zoning in districts as long as that language appears in that district and they can also be done in PUD's. And the Staff looks at a number of elements when looking at a comparable use determination. One is compatibility which includes operational hours and generation of noise or glare, those kinds of things. They also look at trip impacts or traffic impacts. Those are really the two major issues, you know, is the use comparable with other uses, is it compatible to the surrounding neighborhood and will it generate significantly greater public facility impacts, primarily traffic. And because the uses we're requesting are really very similar to the uses that we're already in the building, though not expressly stated -- if you look at the PUD, there's kind of a very -- as you said, a very specific list of uses that related to the publishing industry. But there's a lot of, I think, other good reasons to support this request. Number one, it is June 10, 2021 Page 11 of 13 compatible. Number two, the uses are very similar. Number three, the trip generation is actually a little bit less. But also, this building, because of the changes in print journalism, the publishing industry, really prior to COVID and now further exacerbated -- maybe that's not the correct word -- but the idea that an awful lot of work in that industry is done remotely today. The Naples Daily News didn't really have a need for this building, which that is a really attractive building and very expensive. It's about 186,000 square feet in the building. So the Naples Community Hospital will be able to relocate some warehousing and office uses that will free up their facilities here for other types of uses, primarily medical related uses. So this, at least in our view, makes sense. We're happy that Staff did concur. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, I do have a couple of questions, actually. I want to get these on the record. So in general, this is really, I mean obviously the criteria that I have to look at and apply and make my decision on is in here, but if you look at it wholistically, it's a question about whether or not the comparable uses, whether this is an intensification of the area and then also as you said, look at the compatibility of the area around it, right? MR. MULHERE: Yes. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: So the area, I think you've already testified that this is a less or equal or less intense use. I'm familiar with -- MR. MULHERE: Slightly fewer trips. I shouldn't say slightly, but if you were to look at the p.m. peak hours based on the traffic analysis, it generates 38 fewer trips which, you know, is less but it's certainly not greater or more intense in that respect. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Do you know if they were actually manufacturing or producing the paper print there? MR. MULHERE: Yes, they were. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: They were. So that was very intense and they, the traffic comes and goes at strange hours to get that out, so I would imagine that your hours of operation there are going to change a little bit. MR. MULHERE: More normal, seven to five. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Right. And so I know that this area, you mentioned that Arthrex is there which is a medical manufacturing facility. I believe NCH is very close by, right? I believe it's across the street from -- so it's nearby. Makes sense for them to have this nearby as opposed to across the street. And as you said, I think Naples Daily News abandoned this area and went downtown; is that right? Where did they go? MR. MULHERE: No, they're still -- HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: No, they did the opposite. They built this lovely facility and now -- MR. MULHERE: They are still occupying 10,000 square feet within the building, which presumably will continue. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: They are, okay. MR. MULHERE: That whole -- I've been in this building over the years when the Naples Daily News was fully functioning there. The whole -- I call it the second floor. You went up a stairway and that whole second floor, from my recollection, was office space. Predominantly an open floor plan. But they did have the printing press there, so they had those activities going on as well. So you know, I just wanted to mention, you mentioned Arthrex. They have a significant presence in this area as you know, and so really they function as a corporate headquarters business park type use. So really, that's kind of the whole neighborhood. Of course there are residential uses across Goodlette, Collier's Reserve. They were active at the time that the Naples Daily News in the process and engaged in the process. I'm sure that most people would concur that occupying and utilizing this building is better than having it sit there. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: If I recall right, just north of Airport is also maybe an adult living facility or another medical related use. I mean, I really -- June 10, 2021 Page 12 of 13 MR. MULHERE: And there's some medical facilities on that side across -- HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, there's urgent care there. So this is really becoming kind of a healthcare hub, if you will. And I've also noticed there's a -- when I go by there to get gasoline at the gas station -- interesting, I guess that Arthrex gives out bicycles and golf carts for their people to move around. So that's less traffic on the road. And I'm sure that the Naples Daily News and the blood bank go perfectly together. Small joke. I read the Daily News every day, so I like those guys. MR. MULHERE: Online? HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Online, that's right, exactly. Nobody buys those papers anymore. You do though, right? MR. MULHERE: Oh, no. I read it online. I pay for my online access. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Yeah, me too. Everybody does. All right. So I have read the Staff report. I appreciate the information that you're providing. Do you have anything else here that you want to put up there. MR. MULHERE: I don't. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Okay. Then why don't we go ahead and open it up to the public. Is anybody signed up, Mr. Youngblood? MR. YOUNGBLOOD: Mr. Dickman, I do not have any registered public speakers, either present or online. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: I have become basically unpopular. MR. MULHERE: Don't worry. I'm sure there'll be a day, it's coming. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Sooner or later. Okay. I just have one last question for you. Do you know if there's any place in the county where I could put a drive-in theater? MR. MULHERE: They're coming back. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: No, they're not. That's my point exactly. There's some really strange things that were permitted back 20, 30 years ago that I've seen over the years. I have to actually look it up to find out what it is. MR. MULHERE: When I first moved here, there was a drive-in on Davis, drive-in theater. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: And it's gone, fortunately. So John, anything else you want to say? All the jokes are left to me though. MR. KELLY: No, other than I got my start being the guy that drove one of those step-vans that picked up the newspapers from the plant. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: You were a paperboy, right, come on. MR. KELLY: No, I ran the paperboys. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: Oh, you managed the paperboys. MR. KELLY: So this is a less intense use. HEARING EXAMINER DICKMAN: So my apologies to all those paperboys out there that cut their teeth in the world of business. All right. So unless we have anything else, anybody online, nobody in present. Anybody here that didn't sign up, raise your hand if you want to say something. Okay. I don't see anybody. I'll get this out as soon as I possibly can. Thanks for being here and appreciate all your work on this. Thanks John, thanks Ray. With any new business, anything else that we need to talk about on the Agenda? No, nothing? Okay. So we're going to be moving over to the County building on the 8th. All right, great. Next meeting, so in two meetings, all right. So this meeting's adjourned. Appreciate it. Have a nice day everybody. June 10, 2021 Page 13 of 13 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Hearing Examiner at 9:58 a.m. ********** COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER ______________________________________ ANDREW DICKMAN, HEARING EXAMINER These minutes approved by the Hearing Examiner on _________, as presented ________ or as corrected ______. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY REBECCA GREEN, REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC 7/7/21 4