BCC Minutes 10/08/1991 R Naples, Florida, October 8, 1991
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 D, resent:
ALSO PRESENT:
CHAIRMAN:
VICE-CHAIRMAN:
Patricia Anne Goodnight
Michael J. Volpe
Richard S. Shanahan
Max A. Hasse, Jr.
Burr L. Saunders
James C. Giles, Clerk; John Yonkosky, Finance
Director; Ellte Hoffman, Debby Farrts and Wanda Arrlght, Deputy
Clerks; Neil Dorrtll, County Manager; Tom Olliff and Jennifer Pike,
Assistants to the County Manager; Ken Guylet, County Attorney; MaJorie
Student, Assistant County Attorney; George Archibald, Transportation
Services Administrator; Frank Brutt, Community Development Services
Administrator; Bob Blanchard, Growth Planning Director; Bob Mulhere,
Bob Lord, and Sam Saadeh, Planners; William Lorenz, Environmental
Services Administrator; Fred Reischl and Kimberly Polen, Environmental
Specialists; Leo Ochs, Admini,3trative Services Administrator; Fred
Bloetscher, Assistant Utiliti,~s Administrator; Tom Conrecode, Office
of Oapttal Projects Managemen'~ Director; Mike McNees, Budget DirecTor;
and Deputy Byron Tomlinson, Sheriff's Office.
Page 1
October 8, 1991
#1
s~
~A - APPROVED
Commissioner Shanahah no~ad, ascended by Connieeisner Hasaa and
carrt~ unantnously, that th.e agenda be approved ~ubJact to the
following:
Item #10C Added - Discussion regarding redistricting -
Decision made to continue this item to 10/15/91 at 10:00 A.M.
CONS~NT AGB~I1A - APPROVED A~O./OR ADOPTED
The motion for approval of the Consent Agenda is noted under Item
#16.
~MPLOY~N SERVICE AWARDS - P~gS~qTED
Commissioner Shanahmn presented service awards to the following
Collier County employees:
Francisco R. L]orca, Road & Bridge/Dist. 2
Scott B. Fuller, Utilities/Wastewater Oper.
- 10 years
- 5 years
Item 95B1
PROCLAMATION DESI(tNATINQ OCTOBER 8, 1991, AS NAPLES QUE~NS AND NAPLES
~tAVES SOFTBALL REC0(tNITION DAY - ADOPTED
Manager Connie Ledbetter read the list of names Identifying the
Naples Little Leagu~ Queens team members. Manager Robert Iamurri read
: the list of names Identifying the Senior League Braves.
Following reading and presentation of the Proclamation,
Commissioner Hasse presented plaques to both ball teams. He
acknowledged that McDonald's Restaurant provided each team member with
a letter for a complimentary "Combo Meal".
Co~aiastoner Sh~mah~n moved, seconded by Co~leeloner Hamme and
carried unaatmly, that the Proclasseton Designating October
1991, am Naples Qume, ns and Naples Braves Softball Recognition Day be
Page 2
October 8, 1991
PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING TH~ WEEK OF OCTOBER 19-26'I'II, 1991, AS
p~TXW~ST $~s S~TV WEEK - ~.DO~'rED
Upon reading and presentation to Sandy Sanders, President of the
Sunset Optimist Club, Commissioner Saunders moved, seconded by
Commtllloner Volp~ and carried unantloull¥, that the Pro,:l~tton
Designating the week of October 19-26th, 1991, ae Optimist Bike Safety
Week be ~dopted.
October 8, 1991
! PROCL,M~TZON D~SIGRATTNG OCTOB,~R 11, 12 ~ 13, 1991, AS COLEUS ~Y
Upon reading and presentation to Mr. Joe C=tss, Chal=man of the
Naples-Italian American Club, Co~leetoner Vo1~ move~, .econde~ ~
Co~/..toner S&undera and carried m~antmoumly, that the ProclamatJon
Deetgnattng October 11, 12 ~.d 13, 1991, as Col~bus Day Weekend he
~dopted.
Page 4
October 8, 1991
~ ~:SUDGKT AMIFDMKNT$ 91-405/407,; 91-409/413; AND, 91-415/416 - ADOPTED
Coatestoner H&see moved, seconded by Co~tsetoner Shanahen ~d
c~rrted unanimously, to adop': Budget Amendments 91-405/~07;
91-409/413; and 91-415/416.
FETITI~N P~-91-T, MARK LAMO~UX REPRESENTING FLORIDA CELLULAR RSA,
LTD. PA~. REQ~STING A FROVI~IONAL USE 'b" OF SECTION 8.10 OF A-2
ZONIN~ DISTRICT TO ALLOW A C(H~NICATION TOWER FOR PROPI:RTY LOCAT]~D
EAST OF U.S. 41 (TAMIAMI TRA:£L) W~ST OF AND ADJACENT TO SEABOARD
COASTLINE RAILROAD AND NORTH OF WIGGINS PASS ROAD IN SEC. 1§, T48~;,
~25E, CONSISTING OF 4.56 AC~S - CONTINUED TO 10/22~91
Anthony Ptres of the Law Firm of Woodward, Plres & Anderson, P.A.,
appeared representing the NA Realty Trust, owners of the property com-
monly known as "Imperial Lakes". He acknowledged having faxed a l~tter
to the County Manager's Offt~:e protesting continuance of this ite~
from today's date to October 22nd (copy not provided for the reco]'d).
He requested that the Board of County Commissioners hear this tten at
today's meeting.
In response to Commissioner Hesse, County Manager Dotrill ver:~fted
that the Petitioner is not p~:esent today but is being represented by
i ' Mr. Bruce Anderson. He expl~tined that the Petitioner's letter
/~i~::.* requesting continuance of this item was received in time that it
shown as being continued on the published agenda. He related the
procedure ha~ been that when a request is received, it is forward~d to
the Board of County Commissioners. He stated that in the immediale
tn$tance the agenda was approved without acknowledging or changin~I the
request that was made.
In response to Commissioner Saunders' inquiry of whether or net it
will be a hardship to continue this item until 10/22/91, Mr. Ptres~
~eiterated they would like to have it heard today, but added it will
not be a hardship other than the fact they are present today and ready
&Dd able to proceed.
County Attorney Cuyl.: pointed out that item 13B1 has, in fact,
been continued and in or,der to hear the item today it would be
Page 5
October 8, 199!
l~eceseary to reopen and amend the motion in order to get it back
today' e agenda.
Commissioner Saunders su~gested the Petitioner should be lnfo]'med
that he As to be ready for this item to be heard on October 22, 1991,
as there will be no opportun:ity to again continue it.
It was the consensus tha~: the Motion will stand.
Xte~ #~
JAVI~ C~T~O, ~S~INO WINSCO BUILDERS, ~ C~E TO P~ ~(~
AS ~ ~ OL~ - STA~ DX~CTED TO ~EDITE ~I~ OF P~
Javter Castano of Winsco Builders distributed a copy of the l~:tter
dated October 7, 1991 from Harvey Strauss, P.E., President of Alpha
Engineering of Lee County, Inc. He explained that his firm, unde]3
contract to develop the prop,~rty, has applied for and been granted an
application from HUD for a multi-family affordable housing comple:~.
He confirmed that the Board of County Commissioners is being asked to
allow the PUD document to change the 123 one-bedroom apartments and
the 123 two-bedroom apartmen'~s to read "246 dwelling units". He
referred to page 9 of the PUD, stating they want to delete the maximum
floor areas for the one and 'two bedroom apartments and add,
iJ?ill bedroom units with a maximum floor area of 1,000 sq. ft." He po:inted
~'~ .".~ out their application reflec'ts that both their one-bedroom and th;.~ee
· - bedroom apartment~ exceed the maximum floor area currently shown :In
· ' the PUD.
~' In response to Commissioner Saunders, Mr. Castano reiterated that
i'.ifi. his request Is for the Board of County Commissioners to direct staff
3:" to expedite the matter as qu:[ckly as possible in order that they night
proceed with the project.
Co~temioner Saunders ~oved, seconded by Coa~issioner Volpe, 1:o
direct staff to e~.~edtte the review of this PUD.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Frank Brutt, Community
~ De::'~.lopmsnt Services Administrator, confirmed that staff is of
..:..' opinion there are no problems, r~.lating to the project and only mArtor
b' chsnges need to be made to the PUD document.
!; 181 15
Page 6
October 8, 199!
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Brutt reported that the
biggest difficulty regarding this matter is the required advertising
dates, legal review, etc., and staff has already identified what needs
to be done.
"' Upon c&11 fo~- the question, motLon carried umanimously.
Item
~ ': ~RT ~ ~ ~T - ~ ACQUISITION ~ING ~~ - ACCE~D/
~ D~~ TO ~RT IN NO~ WI~ ~LL~-~
This item was discussed in conjunction with Item #8G1.
Valerie Boyd introduced Eric Draper of The Nature Conservancy,
stating that he has successfully managed five similar land acquisi-
tion programs throughout the state.
Eric Draper, Director of Government Relations for The Nature
Conservancy, distributed a folder entitled "The Nature Conservancy"
which included several brochures. He discussed the organization of a
referendum election for land preservation, citing successful campaigns
in fourteen other county elections, a number of which his organization
was actively involved with. He reported that Dads County has appmoved
within the last year or so a $90,000,000 program based upon a 3/4 mill
t~u( increase; that Brevard County approved a $55,000,000 program based
u~;on a 1/4 mill tax increase; that Hillsboro approved a $100,000,000
~. <. p~-ogram based upon a 1/4 mill tax increase; and Seminole County
> a~proved a $20,000,000 program based upon a ~/4 mil. tax increase. He
confirmed that in each instance, the Nature Conservancy was involved
early in the process helping the County organization to identify the
environmentally endangered lands which needed to be purchased in order
t(, get those lands listed on state land acquisition lists such as CARL
and Save Our Rivers, and then guiding the actual referendum proce,~s
~:self. He added that, in some cases, his organization provided ~alue
added services by helpin~ the counties to do the land acquisition
itself. He explained th~,t the importance of the program Is due to the
inability to regulate or purchase all the environmentally endangeFed
land. He related ftnd!n9s that voters will not approve taxes to
Page 7
October 8 1991
purchase environmentally endangered land unless a very specific 1.[st
of lands proposed for purcha~3e is available, adding that Collier
County is currently in the p~ocess of compiling such a list. He
requested that the Board of County Commissioners allow the voters
to decide whether preserving environmentally endangered lands is
high enough priority that they are willing to vote a marginal Inch'ease
in ad valorem taxes to fund a bonding program. He stated he is px'e-
$ently working on the questionnaire for Collier County. He reported
that Collier County has a strong history of voter support for tax
· low as 40~ and as high as 94~.
Increases and referendums when they are placed on the ballot. He con-
firmed there is a lot of public support for the environment in Collier
County, and that its demogra~,htcs closely match those seen in Pal~
Beach and Martin Counties.
Discussion ensued regarding the percentage of land in Collier
County that is held in public ownership, with percentages ranging as
In response to Commissioner Saunders, William Lorenz, Environ-
mental Services Administrator, confirmed that EPTAB (Environmental
Policy Technical Advisory Board) has been developing a set of lands
tire data for each.
Commissioner Saunders pointed out that the cost of the land which
worthy of acquisition. He stated expectations are to be able to
approach the Board of County Commissioners in mid-November regarding a
ballot question, after first completing a report listing the total
lands in Collier County that are potential acquisition sites and rela-
ta to be acquired Is the determining factor regarding bond and tax
issues.
In response to Commisston~r Volpe, County Manager Dotrill con-
fir,~ed that bonded Indebtedness will need to be part of ~he analysis
~. ~ to be made. He stated that, to his knowledge, the only general oblt-
9atl¢.n debt of Collier Co%unty is the $5,000,000 original Community
Park Program.
Mr. Lorenz pro9osed that 'the CREW Trust lands be given up to
17
Page 8
October 8, 199!
$300000,000, depending upon the final number of the program, or, up to
25~. He suggested that perhaps this commitment should be incorpcrated
into the ballot issue. He confirmed the intent to bring to the ~.oard
of County Commissioners in the latter part of November or early
December a Land Acquisition Ordinance which will identify a number of
components which include: a selection committee to prioritize and
rank the sites for acquisition based upon a number of environmental
objectives and criteria which will be listed in the Ordinance;
provision to acquire the land through either fee simple purchase,
exchange, donation, conservation easement or transfer of development
rights; allow the use of nonprofit organizations for negotiations;
procedures for selecting, ranking and adding new sites as well as the
negotiations, appraisals and actual purchase of the lands selected.
He stated that all costs associated with acquisition, including any
future land management costs and loss to the tax rolls should be iden-
tified when presented to the Board of County Commissioners. He
requested that the Board of County Commissioners accept the status
report on the Development of an Environmental Lands Acquisition
Program, direct staff to continue with program development consistent
with the considerations identified in the Executive Summary and
~nvolve the County Attorney in drafting the required Ordinances and
Resolutions.
In response to Commissioner Hasse, Mr. Lorenz stated the current
· thinking is that a referendum might be possible in March of 1992·
Bill Branan f]'om The Conservancy voiced support for the proposal,
adding that this particular tax will save taxes in the long run He
pointed out the need for avoiding development of areas that clearly
should not be developed in order to prevent the additional infrastruc-
tur.~ burden for same.
Gary Beardsley stated he does not want to come out against th~-
referendum, but added he is teetering on that edge. He expressed con-
cern that the County i~; behind in implementing its Comprehensive Land
Plan due to inadequate staff, money and resources, and is considering
Page 9
October 8, 1991
undertaking an acquisition program. He suggested the Board of County
/Conuntsstoners cons/der the [,ubltc funding, proper staff, proper f/nan-
and resources to impleme,nt the Comprehensive Land Plan.
George Keller, President of Collier County Civic Federation,
stated there are agencies on the federal, state and county levels to
insure that land use is not destroyed. He expressed his opinion that
the Board of County Commissioners is wrong if they think the voters
will approve another 5% increase in taxes. He suggested the law
should be left as is and the taxpayers money should not be spent
."chasing rainbows".
Glenn Simpson, Chairman of EPTAB (Environmental Policy Techni.~al
Advisory Board) provided background on what his organization is pre-
sently doing and how it fits into the overall scheme. He explain.sd
the purpose of EPTAB, Utilizing a satellite map of the entire county,
'he identified the ~,reas influencing the environmentally sensitive
areas. He stated there are lands that are protected whose values are
low and, therefore, as these lands are encumbered through either fee
simple purchase or purchase and development rights, it is necessa~ry to
be very prudent in the expenditure of dollars. He stated it is the
intent to further identify these lands and have a specific list
that when presented to the voters, they will see before them a c]~ar
concise mechanism and in turn be able to decide whethe~ they want to
invest their money to protect: these lands.
Frances Barsh, speaking for TAG (Taxpayers Action Group of Collier
County), questioned whether the Board of County Commissioners has read
the book "Everglades River of Grass" She stated that tax money Is
already being spent on preservation programs at various governmen~
levels. She questioned why it is necessary to go to the ballot and
ask people to come up with $]0,000,000 to preserve more land. She
commented that another consideration is the cost of putting an item on
the ballot.
Fred Tarrant, speaking for TAG (Taxpayers Action Group of Collier
Page 10
~ ;~ October 8, 199!
~.~ F}, concurred with the 2~emarks made by George Keller and Frances
Barsh. He agreed this item ~s an important issue and deserves loltg
: and careful consideration.
After referring to early remarks made by Mr. Keller regarding
buying a piece of land somewhere that cannot ever be developed as well
as remarks by Me. Barsh, Conu~lssioner Saunders remarked that he feels
the Taxpayer Action Group ce~'tainl¥ plays a significant role.
Co~m~Lesioner Saunders mo~d, seconded by Commissioner Hesse, t:o
accept the report regarding 1:he status on the Development of an
. Znvlronaental Lands Acquisition Progrnu and to direct staff to return
.~:..-.:. ~n November for fo~low-up.
Conunt$sioner Saunders em~,hasized that comments made by Ms. Barsh
regarding investigation of other funding sources and by M~. Keller
regarding assurance that lands to be purchased are not properties
which could never, under any circumstances, be developed anyway are
important considerations.
Commissioner Volpe stated he is troubled by the priorities tha.t
-:~.-. have been established here and the commitments made regarding the
Growth Management Plan. He s;tated lie would like to see the infor-
mation regarding whether the~.e will be an overlap between properties
~,.:'. on the CARL list and other similar acquisition programs. He
'?...):i requested, as part of the final presentation, to see how some of these
other Ordinances may suppleme.nt compliment or interrelat~ with the
" lands being considered for ad[dition to an acquisition list.
Upon call for the questic.n, the motion carried unant~u81¥
STATUS IllPORT ON DKVELOPMKNT OF KNVIRONMKNTAL LANDS ACQUISITION
· __P~RO(]R~M - ACCEPTED AND STAFF TO RETURN IN NOVKMBKR WITH FOLLOW-UP
This item was discuss,?d ]n conjunction with Item #7A.
CoBn~sotoner Saunders moved, seconded by Commissioner Hasse 8~d
¢arT~od unanimously, to a,.'ce~.t the report regarding the s~atus on the
D~/oplJent of an Enviror~uental Lands Acquisition Pro,ram and to
d~Foct staff to return in November for follow-up.
It~ #8111
Page
: October 8, 199!
(~0NTIt.&CT FOR BID 110. 91-1765, N/GGXRS PASS !,I&TIIT~N&RCE DR~DGI*NG'
Thomas E. Condecode, Office of Capital Projects Management
Director, conf/rmt~d that staff's reco~endation is to award the
contract for the r~alntenance dredginG of Wiggins Pass to the low
bidder, Florida Dl'ed~e a Dock, Inc. in the amount of $187,040.00 .and
that the Board of County Commissioners approve the Budget Amendme.~ts
as well as any other action which Js necessary as a result of thJ:~
action, JncludJn~ authorization for the Chairman to execute the
In response to Co~ss~oner Hasse, Mr. Conracode conf~rmed that
h~s staff will supervise Coastal Engineering Consultants, who in ':urn
will .be supervising all acti~/ities during construction.
In reply to Commissioner Shanahan Mr. Conracode verified tha~: the
contribution from the Wlggtm~ Pass Conservancy in the amount of
$~05,O00 is conditioned on a successful completion of the project
Co~tss~oner Shanahah stated that, although he is in favor of the
pro,act, he is concerned about The Conse~vancy,s contingency to e~crow
money until successful compilation of a very difficult Sob. He
expressed a desire to see The Conservancy 3otn with Collier County
instead of withholding the money in hopes that the County can success-
fully complete the proSect.
County Attorney Cuyle~ ca,uttoned the Board of County Commissioners
they should keep in mind that this situation might be the subject of
lit/gat/on with the prior contractor.
ee D~I~At~ Clerk Arright replaced Deputy Clerk Farrls at thte time ,s
Dr. Michael Stevens, Executive Vice President of Coastal
Engineering Consultants and the Senior Scientist for Coastal
Englneertllg, outlined a bJ.~lef history and design of the project as
well as the credentials of Coastal Engineering Consultants and him-
self. He reported that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers produced a
datafled project report In 1979 on improvements for small boats at
WiGGins Pass. He noted that this report proposed three alternatives
Page 12
October 8, 1991
for the Wiggins Pass channel alignment which were essentially the
same. He explained that the major problem with the Corps' proposal
was the size of the outer channel and second the dredging of the
interior channel at Water Tu:ckey Bay. He emphasized that the proposal
caused problems environmentally which resulted in the report, The
Wiggins Pass Navigational Dr~dgtng and Beach Nourishment Project, by
the Coastal Engineer Consultants dated December 1, 1982. He pointed
out that both of the aforementioned documents define essentially the
same channel alignment throu~lh the outer shoals of the Gulf of Me):ico
which Is based on a large volume of technical information and results
in shoaling of sand Into the inlet channel of 18,000 cubic yards of
sand annually at Wiggins Pass. He advised that the Corps requires
maintenance dredging every four to five years and the Coastal Engineer
Oonsultants require dredging every two years because the opening l~
somewhat smaller. He asserte.~ that the pass will always; need to b.~
dredged periodically for main'tenance purposes.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Stevens advised that a ~pe-
clfic monitoring program is required by the DNR permits. He provided
to the Board surw~y profiles of the Pass for 1984, 1985, 1987 and
1989. He cited that there is nothing unique about the pass compar!~d
to others. He referred to ae]'lal photos of Wiggins Pass from 1952,
the 1960's, and 1989 which show a similar alignment to the Gulf,
however, the maintenance dredging will make the pass consistent. ]n
quoting from the Department of Resources, Dr. Stevens noted, "the ~ro-
posed pro~ect is not expected to have an adverse Impact on the beach
and dune system; the proposed project is not expected to Interfere
with public beach access; the Inlet channel is appropriately designed
-_.:;~. as a navigation project at a coastal barrier inlet; and the beach fill
Is appropriately designed as beach renourtshment and to :gerve as mitt-
gatto~ for potential shor,.~line erosion Impact to adjacent property."
Zn referring to photus south of the Inlet, Dr. Stevens pointed out
that the photos reveal hard bottom material.
Dr Stevens emphasized that the proposed alignment of the Wiggins
CC, O 22
Page 13
October 8, 199!
?~.Pass dredging is the same as that of the 1983 alignment which was
'idredged in approximate 60 da~s and completed March 26, 1984. He pro-
vtded to the Board graphs documenting the 1984 dredging and noted the
Importance of dredging in th.~ same location. He stated that it tf~ not
inappropriate to expect the dredging at Wiggins Pass to be comple':ed
in two months based on the dl:edgtng records of a pass completed In
Charlotte County.
Dr. Stevens conferred theft in examination of Florida Dredge and
Dock, Inc., their past exper.ience provides that they can complete the
project as stated. He empha~lized that the design as proposed is
feasible and pointed out tha~: maintenance will be required in the
future which will require a Ilanagement plan to the Individual State
agencies. He reported that he has available to the Board should they
wish to obtain a copy, a full[ chronology of meetings and discussions
starting in 1989 with the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commt~ston
and the U.S. Interior Fish a~d Wildlife Commission regarding the
environmental concerns and the protection of the wildlife in reference
to the subject pa~s. He related that all the required permits are
being complied with.
Dr. Stevens concluded that the proposed channel is designed to
meet the needs of the existing boat traffic, to be consistent and
responsive to the environmental constraints, and functional and
hydrologically effective and efficient. He recommended that the E.oard
of County Commissioners proceed expeditiously with the Wiggins Pass
dredging proposal.
~:': Commissioner -~;hanahan questioned how important the turbidity mont-
~:~' toting will be to this project. D=. Stevens responded that at the
,,,'~ location of the pass into the gulf the turbidity monitoring is not as
~!~:. important as it would be if the dredging were taking place in the
i'~ · interior channels. He noted that if turbidity does take place, it is
a ~gnal to stop ~he dredging and added that this monitoring is a
~ recFairement of the dredging process.
..'..~ ,' .:
':'::" George Keller, President of the Collier County Civic Federation,
Page 14
October 8, 1991
expressed his concern regarding the $130,000 monitoring of the first
/tdredging which was not complete and asked if the same people will
monitor the proposed pro~ect? He commented that since it is a
safety issue for boaters, a competent monitoring staff should be
secured.
Dick Lydon suggested that the Board of County Commissioners either
vote to lower the tax appraisal of property effected by not dredging
Wiggins Pass or vote for the dredging and provide to the property
owners some of what they are paying for.
Terry Glosser, Commodore of the Boat Club at Wiggins Bay, empha-
sized the safety and welfare of the boater at Wiggins pass and noted
urged the Board to proceed with the dredging.
Don Pickworth spoke in support of the proposed dredging empha-
sizing the safety necessity for boaters. He pointed out that the
Comprehensive Plan for the County provides for these needs.
Roy Evans, resident of Bonita Springs, explained the importance
of the flushing action provided by the pass to the residences and the
fish living inland of the pass. He urged the Board to proceed with
the dredging.
Emily Maggto related her concerns regarding the funding of the
the unsafe conditions of the said pass using specific examples. He
proposed pro~ect in that she feels it is flawed and the taxpayer
should not be required to continue to fund this pro3ect. She claimed
that there are no statistics which support that the dredging of
Wiggins Pass will contribute to boating safety. She disclosed the
volume of pro3ects permitted which have turned into environmental
fiasCOeS. She quoted from a internal letter from the Dept. of Natural
Resources which implies that the proposed action of dredging Wiggins
!i.~' Paa~ is little more than a short term measure and withholds support of
!~/~; ~he ~roposed action. She: inferred that the dredging of Wiggins Pass
~i;i~ wil~ destroy the Conse~'~ancy's estuary as well as the natural plan of
;~.'i/ nature. In referring to a Southw(~st Regional report, Mrs. Maggio
noted that the channel that already exists should be improved and
i.
Page 15
navigational aides should be provided there.
October 8, 1991
She questioned whether
the post monitoring of the first dredging was ever accomplished. She
concluded that the pass which exists should be continued and there ts
no reason to change it. She provided to the Board a package of
material regarding the dredging issue.
Tai~e ~
Keith Sowers, resident of Vanderbilt and past President of Wiggins
Conaervanc¥ stated that the residents of Vanderbilt have done all
that has been required of them including obtaining the money to
proceed with this dredging. He questioned why this project is not
being allowed to move forward.
Art Jacob, resident of Vanderbilt Beach, stated that with a total
of 1500 boat accommodations available in the Wiggins pass area the
Importance of completing the dredging of Wiggins Pass is of high
priority for the safety of the boaters and for the environment. He
admitted that the dredging over the past year failed for many reasons
and asserted that in proceeding with a new contract the credentials of
the bidders should be carefully reviewed and monitoring should be done
on a regular basis.
Paul Harvey, resident of Wiggins Pass, rebutted some of the com-
ments and suggestions of Mrs. Maggie.
He pointed out the shallowness
of the pass and the difficulty of navigating it even for boaters that
are knowledgeable of Wiggins pass. He noted that the 1984 dredging of
Wtggins pass did not fall, however, the lack of monitoring and main-
Tenance has resulted in the requirement to redredge the pass.
Commissioner Hasse concurred that Wiggins Pass should be dredged.
}:e mdded though that the :$187,000 should not be used for this purpose
unless there is proper monitoring of the project and follow-up matn-
'tenalice.
mr. Harvey provided the background of the last dredging project at
Wl~:(ns Pass and the inadequacy of the contractor. He emphasized that
the design is fea=~lble for this pass.
In response to Commissioner Hasse, Mr. Harvey indicated that
000 25
Page 16
October 8, 1991
staff, Coastal Engineering, The Conservancy, and he will be
monitoring the proposed dredging project at Wiggins Pass
Pat Pitcher, representing the Local Cypress Chapter of the Issac
Walton League of America, stated that they are in opposition to the
dredging of Wiggins Pass. She noted that the pass is constantly
changing depending on the time of year, the tides, the winds, etc.
which is something that will not change. She commented that the
County taxpayer should not have to pay for this dredging.
Dr. Stevens interjected at this time to clarify the selecting of
'the contractor for the proposed dredging and the responsibility of the
monitoring of the procedure which is part of the contract.
Mr. Conrecode advised that he will be on the site monitoring the
progress of the project to ensure that payment is made on what has
been completed as well as to ensure that the project will be completed
Ed Buckler, resident of Vanderbilt and acting President of Wiggins
Pass Conservancy, c~ted tha~ W~gg~ns Pass ~s a valuable asset for
Collier County in a whole. He .arffued on that with the number of pro-
~ects allowed by the County in the Vanderbilt area, it is the County's
and navigable.
Commissioner Shanahan commented that the questions by the Couat¥
are to assure that the right design is proposed, the right contractor
~s selected, the r~ght monitoring and maintenance ~ystem ~s provi,~ed,
a~d the right financing program te in place. He related that if the
Conservancy is convinced tha': all these issues have been satisfied
then it should release tt'~; money and proceed with the dredging.
After the comment by Mr. Buckler that the Wiggins Pass
Conservancy's contract with ':he County provides that the monies f~.'om
the Conservancy will be released after successful completion of the
d~:e.J~;ing of Wiggins Pass, commissioner Volpe questioned if there £s a
possibility to renegottate this contract to provide the funding
rl:qutred? Mr. Buckler afflr~ed that this possibility does exist, but
Page 1 ~
,:'the dredginG should not be held up for this.
October 8, 1991
Ken Humtston, representing Conkiln Point Development Corpora':lon,
urged the Commissioners to approve the dredging project for Wiggins
Pass. He concurred that a :regularly scheduled maintenance progr;~m is
Pequired in order to have a successful continually dredged pass.
Frances C. Barsh, repre~enting the Taxpayer Action Group, ar!~ued
that the taxpayers of Colli~:r County should not be involved in f~ndtng
a project that will benefit a selected area. She recommended th~:~t the
burden of the cost for the dredging be placed on the boaters and the
benefactors of this project.
Charlotte Westman, representing herself on this subject, sta~ed
her opposition in proceeding[ with this project and concurred wit[. the
statements made by Mrs. Maggto.
Betty Gatttell, restdeni of Vanderbilt Beach, pointed out theft
this will be an on-going project because of the constant shifting'
Conciseloner Volpe indicated th~ the issues of concern regarding
the subject project have been satisfactorily answered except for the
financing.
Mr. Conrecode indicated that there remains $57,242 in boater
~'egistratton fees for this p:roJect as well as the $105,000 in esc::ow
from the Oonservancy.
:~,,i, In response ~o Commissioner Saunders, Oounty Manager Dotrill
affirmed that wt=h the autho::izatton of the Board of County
Commissioners additional boa~:er registration fees can be used for the
proposed project.
Commissioner Saunders ad~tsed that he prefers to use the boat~:r
,,registration fees for fur,dini; rather than use the Capital Improve,:~ent
Com.-tsstoner Saunder~ stated that he is willing to proceed wtlh
the .'~ropossd project, howevex', is not willing to commit to a long term
project to keep the pass open. unless a feasible maintenance plan ]s
derslopped.
Page 18
October 8, 1991
: Mr. Harvey commented that his understanding is that $3§0,000 ~f
the Tourist Development Tax :aoney is to be allocat~:d for the main-
tenance of the County's passes.
c~ ~~ly, to a~3 B~d No. 9~-1765, W~g~ns Paee
~int~ ~gt~, to Florida Dredge & ~ck, Inc., with the
~~ t~t there Is .approxi~tely $57,O00 ~vailable fro~ the
~ ~ietratl~ f~ for f~ding of this project; that Staff '~
d~ed to ~ with the Wt.~tns Pass Co~e~ to dishes the
p~s~Btll~ of ~le~ng e~rly from eecr~ the $10~,000 for ~dl~g of
Clerk Noffnan replaced DeputF Clerk Arri[~hi at thlm time'''
~ ~ ~SD WI~ ~INfl OF SUB-S~RIES 2, 3 ~ 4 OF
~-~ DIS~I~ ~O~CT
Mr. Marc Samet, Financial Advisor, reported that the Commission
previously authorized staff to proceed with the new money issue of the
water/sewer bonds of approxi~ately $31 million to fund various water
lad wastewater i,provement projects He noted thai: this issue will be
priced in the ~tddle of October.
Mr. Samet stated that t~ exempt rates have improved during
past month, and noted that h,~ and the finance committee have been
~ooking at refunding posstbi.[ittes of existing water-sewer debt, :~pe-
cificall¥, three series of tile County's Bi-Modal project bonds, Series
and 4. He indicated that these series mature in 2016 and ha,~e
interest rates of ? 80X ar, d V.90~ He recommended that the Count,.~
'
F, roceud to combine a refumdt~g these three series of bonds with the
~ew money issued that wtl% b~ priced and presented to the Commtss:{on
· .t the meeting of October 22, 1991.
Mr. Eamet explained that the purpose of this item t~ to revie~ the
financing and that staff, financing team, Including bond counsel and
himself be authorized to work to combine the refunding Issue, as
Page
October 8, 1991
with the new money issue. He reported that if money rates
· of interest remain the same, the net present value savings to the
County will be approximately $1 million. He indicated the additional
cost savings, by combining the refunding issue with the new money
issue, will be approximately $35,000 - $50,000.
Mr. Samet indicated that if the market rates of interest go away,
he would not be coming back to the Commission with a refunding propo-
ffal.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Finance Director Yonkosky
advised that the finance comnittee in conjunction with the Financial
Advisor monitors all the other bond issues He reported that he does
· g~Tle~ ~i~ously, that the C~tty~e ftn~ctng te~ ~m authorized ~o
not belleve that it would be advantageous to refund the other bond
issues.
~t~toner Shanaban ~o~d, seconded by Cow-lesion,st Hasse sad
proceed with refunding of Sub-series 2, 3 and · of the ~ater-Sewer
District Project ~onds u part of the County's Watur-S~r District,
0~DINA][CI[ 91-95, R~ PETITION PUD-91-1, ROBERT L. DUANE OF HOLE, MONTES
AND A~OCIAT~$, I~C., REPRESK1TTIN(I EARL AND SHIRLEY FR~I, REQUESTIN~ A
FLANI~D UNIT D~V~OPMKNT APPROVAL FOR RADIO SQUARE PUD I~OCATED AT THE
I~CTION OF RLDIO ROAD A~D DO~A STREET (COMPANION TO PETITI0~
$NP-91-10) - ADOPI~ED SUBJECT TO STIPULATIONS AS AMENDED
Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News ca
September 19, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication ftlei
with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider an Ordtnanc-~
.' , -~'mend.ing Ordinance 82-2, by changing the zoning classification from
.~ - A-2 ~o "PUD" Planned Unit Development known as Radio Square PUD,
"'' located at the intersectic.n of Radio Road and Donna Street.
',!f'~ Plalmer Saadeh presen~ed Petition PUD-91-1 and Companion Petition
iiii[?!'.· SI.~P-~l-10. He advised that the petitioner desires to rezone a 9.¢
%/: acr~ parcel from A-2 to an Industrial PUD to be subdivided into 12
tracts: 10 tracts for an industrial business park with a mix of
office, storage, %~arehcuse, light manufacturing and wholesale uses;
Page 29
October 8, 1991
;ions tract for wat~:r detentten, water management and buffer zone;
~!"/and one tract for right-of-way.
Mr. Saadeh explained that the subject property is located within
-'.~;i an urban area adjacent to light industrial zoning, noting that Naples
' Lumber Is located to the west, and Corporate Square Street Is across
the street and to the north. He reported that the Future Land Use
Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan allow:~ for new industrial
land uses outside the designated industrial district if certain cri-
teria is met. He Indicated that the Petitioner ha~ met the criteria
identified in the FLUE, and therefore, the petitloll is consistent with
the Growth Manage=.ent Plan.
Planner Saadeh stated that the subject property is adequately
served by public utilities, water and sewer. He r~:ported that all
reviewing agencies have recommended approval of the: two companion
petitions, subject to the stipulations incorporated into the PUD tocu-
~ent,
Mr. Saadeh announced that staff has received no correspondenc,~,
either for or against the two petitions. He noted that the Planning
Commission reviewed the peti'tions on September 19, 1991, and by a vote
of 5/0 recommend conditional approval of same, subject to the stipula-
tions incorporated Into the PUD document.
Commissioner Hesse quest.[oned whether there will be any tmpac': on
the residential area, to which Mr. Saadeh advised that this PUD
have little impact on the re~identtal area. He indicated that the
language in the PUD takes ca:re of the needs of the neighboring proper-
ties.
Mr. Robert Duane, repres,~nttng the petitioners, related that ~:he
~ub]ect property has fxont:ag,~ on Radio Road In addition to frorite:is
onto Donna Street. He disclosed that there Is a single family ar,~a
]n:~;.'.ed immediately to the e~st.
Mr. Duane read a letter into the record from Mr. Frank Cooper.
representing the Coconut Cre,~k neighborhood. He noted that Mr.
Hooper's letter Indicates sul)port of the proposed project and all.irma
Page 2 ;1
that the petitioner has made: changes to the plans to meet the radii-
dents desires that Radio Sql~are be complimentary to the neighborhood.
Mr. Duane stated that access has been limited to right in and
right out from Radio Road= ~trchitectural standards have been included
in Tracts 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10 to provide a better interface with the
neighborhood; limitations h~tve been placed on the hours of operation,
loading and unloading; locations of burglar alarm and air conditioning
systems and numerous other requirements.
There were no speakers.
~aleelo~er ~mndere ~, second~ ~ Coatestoner S~ ~d
Commissioner Volpe quesiioned whether there is a sufficient amount
of right-of-way for the four-laninG of Radio Road in the area of this
willing to provide same for the four-lan~ng of Radio Road.
project.
Transportation Services Administrator Archibald replied that the
roadway alignment In the subject area is being redesigned to reduce
the right-of-way requirements. He indicated that a construction ease-
ment may be required and questioned whether the petitioner would be
He noted
that this easement would be approximately 10' - 15' in width and would
be for construction purposes only.
Mr. Duane stated that hia client is amenable to Mr. Archibald's
request, noting that he has already offered that contribution to :Real
Property Management.
C~d~Aoner ~mndere ~ed, seconded by Co---issioner Volpe ~ad
car~'ig un~ni~ouel$~, to approve Petition PUD-91-I, ~ubJect to the sti-
lml&tl~ tncorporl~ted into 'the PUD document and the additional s'~tpu-
l&ttm~ ~tth respec~ to the conetruction easement, and that the
~' :i' Or~t/~.~'e ~ nu~be].ed ano ti'=le bel~ ~ adopted ~d entered Into
OI~IN~CE 91-95
AN ORDINANCE A~IENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 82-2 THE COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP NUMBER 050111; BY
CHANGING THE ZONING CLAS:;IFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED RE~IL
PROPERTY FROM $.-2 TO "PUI)" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS RADIO
Page
October 8, 399!
ROAD SQUARE PUD FOR A BUSINESS PARK FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT ~HE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF RADIO ROAD (C.R. 856) AND
DONNA STREET, LOCATED Il! SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 25
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.4 ACRES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
R~OLUT/~ 91-698, R~ P~'fZTXON SMP-91-10, ROBERT L. DU~K O~ HOL]~,
~q~~ A ~I~SlOR ~$~R P~ ~OV~ ~R ~OP~ L~A~D AT
~ ~~~ CO~ OF ~ I~S~IOR OF ~DIO RO~ ~ ~A
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News
September 22, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication fth~d
with ~he Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Pet/t/on
SMP-91-10, filed by Hole, Montes ~ Associates, Inc., representing Earl
~d Shirley Frye, retesting Subdivision Master Plan approval fo~
Radio S~are, located at the intersection of Radio Road and Donna
Street.
This item was heard in conjunction with Petition PUD-91-1, a~
discussed above.
~sst~r Sanders m~d, seconded ~ Co~tmmtone~ S~~
c~1~ ~t~1~, that the ~bltc heartn~ ~ closed.
C~t~t~r S~ere m~, seconded ~ Co~tsstone:r S~~ ~d
c~t~ ~t~1F, t~t Petition S~-91-10 ~ appr~ed, thereof
~t~ ~letto~ 91-69~.
000 32
October 8, 1991
*,tin e~.~B2
!'!"?* ' IqE~OL~:~ 91-699, ~ ~ITION ~-91-11, G~ORG~ L. V~&~ OF YO~iG,
FI~ ~~ ~ ~Z~ DISTRI~, I~Q~STING A PRO'7~SION~ US~ FOR A
Plainnet Mu]here advised that th~s item is a request for a provi-
sional use pursuant to Section 8.10.b (Essential Services) within the
R:SF-3 2oning district for a fire station to be located at the inter-
s,~.ction. of Vanderbilt Drive and Ninth Street East. He indicated that
the petitioner wishes to construct a 8,400 square foot fire station
w.ith a possible future expansion of approxtma'tel¥ 2,O00 square feet.
H~.· related that the fire station as proposed, would cons:[st of living
~arters for up to 12 people, including kitchen and sanitary facilt-
t:[es, storage space and truck bays.
Mr. Mulhere stated that all reviewing agencies have reviewed this
petition and reco~,end approval, subject to the stipulations as con-
t~tned in the Agreement Sheet.
Mr. Mulhere remarked that on September 19, 1991, the Planning
Commission heard this petition, and with a vote of 4/1, recommended
{~' County ~,cquirtng same at some future point in time
35
approval of same, subject to staff's stipulations as noted Jn the
A~:reement Sheet. He reported that the CCPC deleted one stipulation
tk~at was included in the Agr,~ement Sheet relating to the dedication of
2~.' of =lght-of-way along Vanderbilt Drive.
Co=missioner Volpe quest;~oned whether the right-of-way is required
a~ part of the contemplated four-lantng of Vanderbilt DrJve.
T~lsportation Services Administrator Archibald replied that this
pro~ect has a sideyard that is adjacent to the expansion of the
Vand~rb~[lt Drive alignment. He stated that currently there is 100' of
right-of-way and t~lcally, :!5' from each side of the roadway is
~egutre¢[ to obtain 150'. He reported that the fire station has made
some provision for reserving 25' for future right-of-way dedication.
~e sugg~!sted that it may be appropriate to tie this condition to the
Page 24
October 8, 1991
Co.~utssioner Volpe questioned whether there has been a con-
i' ti~mplat,~d arrangement between EMS and the North Naples Fire Dtstrtc~
with re:Jpect to space for an ambulance.
Attorney George Varnadoe replied that he understands that an EMS
vehicle will be housed at the: facility at no charge.
Plsuner Mulhere noted that the housing of an EMS vehicle ts not
included in the stipulations, but noted that this can be ·included as
an addit:tonal stipulation.
Comttsstoner Volpe stated that he appreciates the offer of making
the epa¢:e available for an EMS vehicle and suggested that perhaps In
the futt~re staff could explore an Interlocal agreement with the North
Nipples l~tre District, similar to what has been done with Marco Island
and the East NaI.,les Fire Dlstrlct.
Oom~lsstoner Volpe questioned whether there are any long term
,plans fc,r locating a Shertff's Substation in the subject area, to
which County Manager Dorrt/1 replied that there currently are substa-
rt. one withtn each Commission District which coincide with the opera-
tl, onal district approach used, by the Sheriff for road patrol. He
announced that the North Naples Emergency Services Complex will be
provldet[ and located in Pelican Bay but there is no need to add
another Sheriff's facility further north toward the County line.
With regard to ~he 25' right-of-way for the future four-lantng of
Viaderbtlt Drive, A:tornel! George Varnadoe explained that this is
~'e,served. for the County's acquisition at the Petitioner's cost of the
i?,!!:," ll.nd. ~e noted tha~ he believes there is a constitutional Issue
~'' re, lattn~ to dedicatt..g that property since the money for fire protec-
[';: tlon is raised throttgh taxes and for that Issue alone. He noted that
'-'. ~,:-.
~'~?~i if that money is us~:d for building roads or other things there will be
;,-'111:' a r~al problem. He indicated that there is no rational nexus required
~' ~he courts relating to the Fire Dtstrtct's impact on the road
system and the dedication of right-of-way since there Is no direct
connection to Vanderbilt Drive. He announced that there will be a 10
Page 25
October 8, 199!
crew working 24 hour shifts and it is anticipated that there will
only be 3 emergenc,! calls pe2' each 24 hour shift, resulting in a very
low impact on the traffic situation.
In ]~esponse to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Archibald reported that
when th~ Road Impact Fee Ordinance was revised last year, a provision
was included to waive impact fees for certain governmental activities.
He remarked that typically, s~taff would look at the value of the
r.ight-of-way dedication and determine whether there is some kind of
c~-edit a~d come to an agreement. He indicated that since impact fees
would nct apply to this use, staff's concerns are twofold: if the use
.i~ apprcved, the value of the property on a unit price basis may
change; and if the County has to acquire that prope. ty at a later
t~me, it will pay a larger amount to merely go through the mechanics
of same. ~e suggested that perhaps the petitioner could commit to a
pl, ice if he is willing to sell the property at the price that was
incurred at the time of the purchase.
Attorney George Varnadoe advised that his client is willing to
sell the property to the County at exactly the squa]-e foot basis that
was paid to purchase same.
~,? -
:~,.', Mr. Paul Lapham, Bonita/Hickory Shores Civic Association,
President, cited support of the fire station and noted that the Bonita
Shores area is in need of fire protection.
Mrs ~tly MaggJo stated 'Zha~ the subject location is in a cornmet-
V?: ct~l zone and the ~ropose,l ft::e statlon would assure the respons~ tt~e
~'?~:' that ts needed in the Bonita/Hickory Shores community.
Co~missioner Saund~rz mowed, seconded by Commissioner Haaae and
¢a:~r~e~ ~nI~K~U~i¥, tO appro~,e Pet~tlon PU-9~-ll, subject to the sti-
~.imt~o~u! me limted in the Ag2~eement Sheet and additional conditions
r~l&t~ve to the facility houa~lng an EMS vehicle, and if the 25' right-
of-~l.¥ Aim tO be mc,~uired in the future, it would be sold to the County
aC tbe e3mct p~er ~uare foot basis that the land was purchased by the
Page 26
O¢:tobt:r 8, 1991
RECOb[W~IIDiTI'OR THAT ~E I~PRKTATION OF THK GRO~'H ~AG~ P~
BE ~D ~ ~E ~5ION O'.F ACTIVI~ CE~ER USES B~O~ THE ACT~VI~
C~ ~~Y IN ~E ~ ~ USE ELE~ - I~E~ IS NOT TO
~I~IILY INC~SE ACTIVIT/ CE~ERS BY 25~; CO~ ATTO~Y TO
W~ ~AGE TO REJECT
Con~nuntty Development Se::vtces Administrator Brutt requested that
the Corunlseton support the G::owth Management Planning staff's
tnterprt~tatton of an issue relative to the size of Activity Centers.
He advtl3ed that a decision was rendered by Staff and an appeal was
submitted on August 14, 1991.. by Agnoli, Barber and Brundage, relative
to the fact that staff did not feel that Activity Centers should be
allowed to expand to a great extent.
Mr. Brutt explained that the Future Land Use Element states: "If
any proilect is 75% within an Activity Center, the entire pro3ect shall
be: considered to be within the Activity Center." He indicated that
this provision of the Plan is known as the "75" Rule. He reported
that the* Growth Planning Department's Interpretation of this language
is that this provision sk~uld: only be applied when parcels proposed
for development represent a n,tnor expansion of the Activity Center
Boundary. He noted that the language was included in the Plan because
It was recognized that Activity Center boundaries do not always
correspond to property lines.
Mr. Brutt announced that it was never anticipated that the 75~
· , ~,',: r~31e would be used to allow wholesale increases in 'the size of
'ii.. Activity Centers. He remarked to allow the appllcation of this provt-
sion to any project which develops on a parcel of land that happens to
Growth Planning Director ~Slanchard explained that staff has
Interpreted the language in tile Plan to be that the provision should
be applied only when parcels of property proposed for Activity Center
ex~end beyond an Activity Center may possibly allow up to as much as a
increase in the 40 acres square which was discussed ~everal years
when this plan was being developed. He requestt~d that the
Cor~i~sion approve the Growth Management Plan's interpretation of this
Page 27
October 8, lggl
~i'types of development represent a minor expansion of Activity Center
boundaries. He affirmed that the language was included in the Plan
z~tnce it was recognized that the boundaries do not always correspond
with property lines.
Mr. Blanchard pointed out that with the exception of three
Interst.ate Activity Centers, the Growth Management Plan specifically
defines what an Activity Center should be: "All of the same con-
figuration and size - square, 1/2 mile on a side, measured from the
center point of the tntersec'lton, totaling 160 acres." In addltlon,
i!~iA he revealed that the Plan provides language that "If any project is
located 75~ within an Acttvti:y Center, the entire project shall be
i[~.:..: considered to be within that Activity Center."
,. ', Mr. Blanchard stated tha~: It was never anticipated that the 75%
';[~', rule would be used to allow a wholesale Increase of size of Activity
['-" Centers. He indicated that to permit any project which develops on a
:~/[.;:,]parcel that happens to extend beyond an Activity Center's boundary,
~::[]'~l.'.regardless of how far thv, t parcel extends outside the Activity Center,
~<[:i ~[- could conceivably result in a 25% increase to any or all Activity
Centers in the County. He di~lged that instead of being 160 acres in
size, the potential is to have Activity Centers that are 200 acres in
s.~ze. He noted that it is clear that the intent of the language is to
limit the size of Activity Centers.
Mr, Blanchard referred to two displayed maps, depicting examples
of: a single parcel whose property boundaries go well beyond the
A¢:ttvtt~' Center Boundary and another showing two fezones that made use
of the 7'5% rule and did so a~,proprtately.
Mr. Blanchard advised that the Activity Center concept was lnt~o-
'.?, du.ced in. an effort to reallocate the existing commercial pattern from
!:i i)i: the ;inear pattern, and the large amount of PUD commercial that
-~t!(...
c~u.rrently exists to concentrating commercial types of development/high
Intensity development at the major Intersections throughout the
i~ii'. be 100~ commercial, they will be commercial in nature.
County. He explained that while Activity Centers are not: designed to
He noted that
Page 28
October 8, 1991
::.the reallocation was based on the anticipated rezonlng of vacant par-
~'~:' eels that were inconsistent with the Future Land Use Map and was to be
~' done through the zoning teevaluation program. He Indicated that out
of 3,300 acres of vacant commercial property only 746 acres were 13ub-
~ect to zoning teevaluation as a result of the ordinance, as adopted.
J~/ lie revealed that there are approximately 350 acres that are still eli-
gible fo~ rezonlng and will be presented to the Commission later in
the yea~.
~"~: M~. Blanchard announced that w~th~n the Activity Centers as
desi~ated on the map, staff has estimated that there are app~oxina-
~ . rely ~,000 ac~es that could be ~ezoned commercial om Activity Center
'.":'.;:level of uses. He remarked that it is clear from these figures and
~.-- the definition of an Act]vital Center that the expansion of same should
not be allowed. He Fecom;,~en,~ed that the Commtsslon uphold the
~?'?: ~nte~p~etat~on of the Growth Management Plan Jnd]ca. ting that the 75~
· .~ ~le should only be applied ~+hen parcels that are proposed for
:",, Activttlr Center types of development represent a minor expansion of
~:?'~;Jthe Act.tvtty Center boundary. In addition, he recommended that based
upon a Plan Amendment which was transmitted to DCA, that direction be
given to staff to clarify the lan~age pertaining to the 75~ rule.
~: .'. Mr. Michael Fernandez, of Agnolt, Barber ~ Brundage, Inc., replied
that he does believe that sta~ff's response is consistent to his
interpretration of the Land Use Element which reads: " If any pro-
~ect is ~5~ within an Activity Center, the entire project shall be
considered to be within the lcttvtty Center." He noted that he sees
no stlpu, lattons or any other comments relative to that stn~lar state-
M~. Fernandez p~esented ~a~ous examples relative to th~s issue
~ {(:~p~ nc,t p~ovided to the Cle~k's Office). He ~efe:~red to fou~
~ad~ants, totaling ~60 ac~es. He indicated that included ~n the fou~
pat~cels fs p~opemty which is not developable but has right-of-way,
~_; not~ng that each of these has an intersection of major highway which
'~' do detract substantial acreage from these Centers. He noted that when
Page 2 9
October 8, 1991
these intersections are developed to the maximum extent they will
eventually evolve and they do approach 2§~ of that entire Activity
· Center.
Mr. Fernandez pointed oul: that an amendment to the Comp Plan
~i provtde~ that if an owner owens an entire parcel under the Master Plan
Activity! concept, he can recover that area which was lost in the
right-of-way areas. He expl(ttned that the 25% rule does not apply to
the ent:[re 40 acres, but it does apply to the portion that the owner
: OWTIS.
Mr. Fernandez spoke to the Issue of a single land owner falling
%~nder the ?§% rule. He Indicated that the provision in the Plan
allows ~ 25~ increase, and suggested that if the intent is something
other tkan 25%, the rule should be changed.
Mr. Fernandez gave an example of three individual land owners
coming in at different times. He announced that each of these land
o ers could apply ru . and it wou d ne,mi ab e aan,w
each of these o~ers the 25~ ~ule but not extend sane to an individual
Mr. ?ernandez reminded the Commission that 25~ of the 40 acres
disappea:rs with the roadways. He indicated that the, re is a provision
~nder the Master Plan concept which allows a project to recoup that
area.
Call:tng attention to amendment CP-91-2 which is being forwarded to
DCA Mr Fernandez explained that projects that do not meet the 75~
rule are allowed to be within activity centers.
Commissioner Volpe stated that he does not believe that the Intent
was e~er to allow for the recoupment of property that may be acquired
for right-of-way. He indicated that the intent is to allow a project
to develop out in an orderly w~y to accommodate slight deviations in
the plan for the parcel.
Mr. Fernandez advised that the project that he is involved with
would need the Increased density that is allowed within an activity
center in order to result In a successful project and one that would
Page 30
October 8, 199!
.~rk wil~htn the bounds of a nixed used development. He noted that
miter the right-of-way delet][ons, 32 acres remains in this project.
Mr. Blanchard reported that when the activity centers were origi-
nally dt~fined in the Plan, It was clear that they were measured from
the cenl:er point of the intel'section, which included any potential or
extstin~! right-of-way within the 160 acres square.
Mr. Fernandez remarked that if there is unwritten verbiage, i.e.
10~, 12~$ or 15%, the consultants in the market need to be made aware
of same.
County Attorney Cuyler replied that in these types of cases, the
County has to look at more than a provision and the intent of same.
~e rema]rked that he believes it is appropriate for the Commission to
direct staff to clarify the language in order for Mr. Fernandez to
i..i~ receive the type of clarification he is looking for.
" Mr. George Keller, President, Collier County Civic Federation,
revealed that he feels that staff's verbiage is too loose. He
suggested that the language ,.~tate that "the property may not be
increased more than 10%."
Attorney Charles Lehman explained that he is representing a pro-
perry o~mer who will be affected by staff's interpretation. He noted
that if the language is to be interpreted, it can only be done in
favor of the property owner. He indicated that if staff's position is
to approve, he believes the procedure that is being used is
Incorrect. Me reported that the Rule clearly states: "If any project
is 75% within an Activity Center, the entire project shall be con-
sidlered to be within the Activity Center." He remarked that the
language in the "Rule" has gc,ne through the public ihearlng process and
h~s been discussed at great length.
Commissioner Saunders revealed that it appears that a reasonable
interpretation would be that the 25% Rule applies as it relates to
p]roperts' lines in existence ¢,n the date of adoption of th~ Activity
Center (:oncept which would prohibit a person owning land inside an
activits, center from going ou.t today and buying 25% more land outside
Page 31
October 8, 1991
the acttvlt¥ center to expand his project.
Mr. Lehman replied that he does not concur with Commissioner
Saundel.s' interpretation of the language. He expressed that he does
not believe there is anything prohibiting a property owner from
acquiring additional property outside the Activity Center. He noted
that the rule is in derogatlcn of private property rightly. He
revealed that the case law Is very clear, in that, the language must
be construed in a manner which Is favorable to the propeltry owner. He
reported that the Commission Is not making an lnte]rpretatton by sup-
porting staff's position, but instead, an amendment is being made and
there is a specific procedure for amending the Comp Plan.
In answer to Commtssione~ Saunders, County Attorney Cuyler advised
that th.~ Commission could ch.~nge the ordinance to be effective
retroactively. He disclosed that the Commission has the right to
interpret the document and suggested that after an interpretation has
~.i"';:; been made, that staff be tns':ructed to clarify the provision.
<: Attorney George Varnadoe suggested that the 0o~ntsston look at
this ts~ue on a project by p~oJect basis rather than looking at hypo-
tethicals to test the boundairy rules. He stated that the language
needs to be clarified but should not effect projects that are already
in the pipeline.
Mr. Varnadoe remarked thitt if one persons owns the entire 40 acre
qtladran1: he is allowed to move the boundaries around as long as he
:i'{,'.~... do~s not exceed the other criteria. He noted that an additional way
to approach this Is adding ¢c.mmerctal uses beyond what was con-
templat~d at the time of adoption. He indicated that minor Increases
c¢~ld be, added in the activity centers but the 75% Rule would be
a~x~d as a mathematical formula but not to allow 'the amount of
commercial to increase in activity center quadrant.
Mr. Blanchard replied that Mr. Varnadoe's sugge~tton may be a good
idea, but cited concerns as to whether this would make an assumption
that everything within the activity center boundary may be commercial.
He noted that the real test on a case by case basis is whether it
Page 32
October 8, 1991
':should be co~nerctal at all.
Attorney George Varnadoe, remarked that he is not sug~jesttng that
· here be a full 40 acres of commercial in each quadrant, but anything
outside. the activity center Itself would not be allowed to be commer-
cial unless the other 40 acres would be comprised of other uses.
Mr. Alan Reynolds of Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek, Inc., pointed
out that squares do not necessarily make sense when they are applied
to real world conditions. He Indicated'that at the time the concept
of activity centers was discussed, an arbitrary boundary of 160 acres
s:quare was agreed upon and the 25~ rule was Included to all some
discretion when the Commission Is considering land use petitions. He
noted since that time, two additional flex provisions have been added.
He concurfred that the langua!;e as written is very clear, however, it
is only the admission to com~: before the Commission and request a land
use change through the zontn.([ process. He indicated that each of
these petitions have to come before the Board and is evaluated on its
~rn merits. He suggested theft the language remain as written.
Oommissioner Saunders recalled that several years ago there was a
case in which the Court ruled. that in certain cases the word "shall"
m,.~ans "nay" and the word "may" means "shall". He called attention to
the language "...the entire project shall be consid,~-red to be within
the activity center apply the 75% rule" and noted that if the word
"~hall" means "may" it provides flexibility for a case by case review
and does not mean that someone may go out and aroit]:arlly buy 25~6 more
l~nd and make the argument that they have to be per~itted to be within
the mc~tvlty center. He lndt.-ated that based on the equities involved
in ~he revlew by staff, they :nay be considered to be part of the actt-
v~ t'.{' :enter.
Co~i~slone~ Volpe stated that if the language is Interpreted tn
the mann,~ that staff tnte~pr,~ts same, an amendment to the Growth
Ma~nagement Plan would not be necessary.
that ~ Jnt~t of the 75~ ~le l~age is that the ~rd "shall" to
Page 33
October 8, 1991
· .lntende~ to ~ean 'lay" and that staff ~e directed to en~age in a
revie~e ~a~ed on all the facts aeaociated with each particular project
u p~t~ to the~; ~d ~t the Co~t~ A~torne~ ~end the
Mr. Blanchard advised that the appeal ~s based on the term
"project" versus the term "~,arcel"
Commissioner Saunders remarked that he has always felt that the
~¢ord "project" really refers to the parcel of land. He indicated that
staff and the property owners have been given flexibility. He
explained if a property owner assembles a parcel and is not pleased
with the outcome of the application of the 75% Rule he has a remedy in
court.
HFE~LADES CITY AIRPORT ~AYO~T PLAN AS PREPARED BY
NMJ/~"F.~2~'gD-JOHN$ON ENGINEERS, INC. AND STATUS RBPORT ¢)N THE FUTURE
P~AN~ FOR TH~ AIRPORT PROPERI'Y - PLAN APPROVED AS PRESENTED
Transportation Services .Administrator Archibald explained that the
subject Airport occupies approximately 29 acres An Everglades City.
He indicated that the airport currently does not have any zoning but
does h~ve a 2,400 foot runway! which was built with grant funds tn
1968.
Mr. Archibald noted that the information provided as part of the
report from the consultants indicates that the Everglades Airport
should ]:ematn an airport since it provides for a basic utility airport
service. In addition, he re~Lated that the report addresses a series
of ~.as~{~r planning functions. He affirmed that the airport is adja-
c,~nt to ~he National Parks Service which is in the process of a large
e:cl~:~sion and this facility would become an asset to them.
Mr. Archibald explained that the report as submitted, provides a
good guide for the master use. of the site long term: T-Hangers,
industrial related use, and laxiways to improve service.
With respect to the issue of financing, Mr. Arclhibald stated that
the County currently spends approximately $4,500 annually for the
Page 34
October 8, lggl
system, operations of the rotating beacon, and keeping a
phone £n service. He announced that the only real revenue is derived
from the rental of apron spence and T-Hangers which amounts to a few
hundre{[ dollars per year. He revealed that staff has received appro-
val of the report and the airport layout plan from FDOT.
Mr. Archibald revealed that staff is in the process of working
with the City of Everglades to develop a long term lease, noting that
the master plan will be an important element of th~ same.
Mr. Archibald recommended that the Commission approve the airport
layout plan which would alleN the County or a subsequent lessee to
work through the County in obtaining Federal and State funds for
improvements at the airport. He disclosed that it would be advan-
tageous to have another entity operate the facility.
In response to Commissioner Hasse, Mr. Archibald replied that the
City of Everglades has expre,;sed an interest in leasing the site from
.the Comity.
Conualssioner Volpe stated that the opportunity for growth in the
future .in the Everglades area is limited, noting that he does not see
:,%
the demand for this facility, nor the economic advantage of same. He
~ndIcat~d that there is a private airstrip at the Port-of-the-Islands.
Mr. Archibald advised that staff pursued the grant to have the
~tudy dcne for the following reasons: determine if the property
~:; should he utilized for something else: have a maste:r plan that could
.i'./- be used as a yardstick to measure what is going on and control a
~eusee through this report: and without an approved airport layout
plan, federal and state grants could not be applied for.
Commissioner Shanaban ~o~d, seconded by Co~mts~ioner ~asee and
c~ .&/~ (Co~ssioner Vol]~e opposed), to accept and approve the
A~po~t ;r~yout Plan, as preeemted.
~$~ !be~SS: 4:00 P.M. - Rscollvened: 4:10 P.M. at which time Deputy
CI~]~ Fartie replaced I~lt¥ Clerk Hoffman see
~~~K OF A ~I~O~ CRO~;SIN~ AT PANELS RO~ - ~ A~I~S
October 8, 1991
This item was discussed in conjunction with Consent Agenda Item
#16A2.
George Archibald, Transportation Services Administrator, reported
that ~ollier County has built and operates a small railroad spur for
the purposes of delivering goods, adjacent to which is the crossing
called "Pagels Road and Railroad crossing". He explatne{~ that a
developer is in the process, as part of companion Item #16A2, of
completing all the planning for the development of an industrial park
on the east side of the rail:road. He stated that the railroad is
.~'~' requiring that, as part of the development, payment is due for the
;' Installation of a railroad s.[gnal system as well as utility line
~,~ ' as maintenance of same.
installations underneath the railroad embankment. He explained that
the Agrl;ement of Undertaking provides for the developer and property
owner of the properties on tile east side of the railroad and/or the
u:ltlmat~: Homeowners Associat.~Lon to be responsible to Collier County
mid the railroad for the installation of the signal improvements and
mllintenance of same. He stated the developer has agreed to pay for
the cost of the signal systems being required by the railroad as well
He stated there is an Escrow Agreement where
funds halve been placed in an account in an amount which exceeds
al~proxtmately 110% of all allowed costs, and an Amendment Agreement
between the railroad and Collier County undertaking the permits that
will as provisions for other utilities in the future.
Mr. Archibald reiterated that staff is requesting approval of the
Agreement of Undertaking and the License Agreement, authorization for
'thl Chairman to execute same, and approval of the plat (Companion
Item 'O16A2), which includes the Escrow Agreement.
Perr'y Peep/es of Hatter :~ecrest & Emery confirmed that the
en,,]ine~r on the project is present today as well as one of the owners
'of the pmo.Ject. He referred '~o the Agreement of Undertaking, pointing
~ouT the last and next to the last paragraphs of same wherein the Owner
and Owners' Association assum~s and agrees to perform all the obltga-
Page 36
October 8, lg91
tions ¢,f the County as provided in the License Agreement and Amendment
thereto and provides for an Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit to be
furnished. He pointed out the provision in the Ag:~eement of
Undertaking whereby the County will be absolved of all l~ab~l~ty upon
the termination of the Agreement.
CormiNfonet Shanahmn ~oved, mecondedb¥ Co-~ilm~oner Volpe and
c~d ~n~n~ou~ly, ~o mpp~e ~he two A~eemen~ relative ~o lmpro-
Page 37
October 8, 1991
~;Xl"K,I~"J.~:~ Jl~:~lX~l~XOl~ - D:K~CU$S~rD _ COUIII~ )~kI~G~R ~Z~, CO~
cos
~ County Manager Dotrill confirmed that staff's basic analysls and
reco~endation has been that the acquisition of the Golden Gate Avatar
.: o~ed facfltty can easily be incorporated within the ext:sttng customer
~ base for the County Regional Utility System. He reported that the
~*~ item relat/n~ to Marco does not appear able to be incorporated and the
"~.';:~ COSt /dent/fled for same appears to point to the fact the system needs
to be both owned and operated as a subdistrict to the County Regional
Utility System and that, at frome point in time, the rate impact needs
to be identified.
He reiterated his previous recommendation that a
town hall or public hearing workshop be conducted on Marco with the
residents and current customers of the system to determine the consen-
sus fee].lng prior to the County proceeding further.
Assistant Utilities Administrator Bloetscher briefly summarized
the history of the proposals relating to both the Golden Gate facility
and the }{arco facility. He confirmed that the Marco facility is a
much larger utility with significant needs, some immediate and some in
the future, regarding water supply and wastewater provision. He
/:~:L;'. stated the options facing the Board of County Commissioners include
doing nothing and trying to acquire the system in one of various ways,
!~i,:~..?~ includin!; negotiation and condemnation.
In r,.~ply to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Bloetscher s;tated that at the
~i meetl'.,~g of June 4th, the Board of County Commissioners requested the
County Manager and the County Attorney's Office provide information
deTalltnii what the options wel'e and what the necessary steps would be.
~f'~, He stated the redested information was provided to the Board of
. County 0o~ts8toners in the form of a memorandum from the County
~. Attorney's Office, copy not provided for the record.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Codnty Manager Dotrill
f;;;~.jsuggesteft[ that ~he Marco Island utility should not be incorporated
[~. T' Into the rate base and capital improvement plan for the regional wa~er
Page 38
October 8, 199!
~nd s~wer system, but instead should be operated, owned and developed
separately as a subdistrict.
Mr. Bloetscher stated on,: of the concerns considered for the June
4th study was whether an adverse impact would be created on all the
other customers.
Comat$sioner Saunders expressed concern regarding the acquisition
of the Marco Island utilitie~. He referred to page 6 of the agenda
package stating he feels its:Is 2 through § under "Advantages of Public
~nershtp" are nonexistent. He contradicted Item § saying there may,
in fact, be a si~nificant increase to the Ratepayers due to the
acquisition.
Co-,itsstoner Shanahah st~ted he can see benefits to the acqulsi-
tion of the Marco Island Utilities.
Stul,py Harris, an attorney with a law firm in Orlando, suggested
that the. Board of County Comn.issioners should become well informed
before venturing out into the area of eminent domain. He stated the
7-..;: .standard is very much in favor of the property owner due to the system
':i' being built on a free enterprise system. Utilizing posters, he tden-
t~fted his client as the largest free enterprise privately owned sewer
,i;: end water utility operator In the State of Florida. He reported that
::' free enterprise does a better Job than government in areat~ customartly
run by free enterprise. He s',,ggested it will be ill advised for any
county commission to opt to condemn property prior to finding out if
the legitimate needs and goal~ can be met in the public sense by
Inter local type agreements with his company. He expressed a
willingness to come to the ne!lottatlng table in good faith to work
with the Board of County Commissioners to do things which cannot be
i". done by ~tther entity individually. He suggested that, prior to
public hearings or Incurring any major expenses, the process be
allowed 1:o take place for a couple of months. He discussed the poten-
tial costs associated with the County's condemnation of property on
Marco Island and, utilizing a chart reflecting the breakdown of said
costs, el~timated costs of aoq~tisttton via eminent domain .law could run
Page 39
October 8, 1991
e~ high as $150,000,000. He stated his organization is willing to
enter into agreements providing for the sharing of aquifer storage
with the Oounty as well as c,~ete and operations, and to be a customer
of the County for water, etc. He suggested that the County explore
the possibility of reaching agreements as opposed to condemnation.
Assistant Utilities Administrator Bloetscher pointed out that the
Board o[ County Coulsstoner:3 is not being asked to make a decision
today r,egardtng the acquisition of the Marco Island Utilities through
condemnation.
Geo:~ge F. Keller, Prestd,:nt of Collier County Civic Federation,
stated ~hat private enterprince is the answer, adding that the history
of the country is that most ~untctpallttes do run their own water and
a.~we r s,~stems.
Comatsstoner Saunders hypothesized that the Marco Island Utiltty
System could be acquired and the impact would be $5.00 per month
lncreas~ to the ratepayers and questioned whether Mr. Keller would be
willing to pay that $5.00 per' month increase, to which Mr. Keller
a~swered in the affirmative.
Mr. Keller stated he has been contacted in the last couple of
weeks b%, people in the North Naples area unhappy with the utility
bills they have been receiving, some running as high as $120.00 per
month fc:r water and sewer. lie stated that, if he was getting water
and s~w~:r, he would want the Public Service Commission monitoring the
~mo'~utt he could be charged.
~.,ttorney George L. Varna~.oe suggested that the Board of County
Commissioners should decide today whether to condemn the Marco pro-
Commissioner Shanahan stated he agrees with some of the remarks
made by Stumpy Harris, but disagrees with the numbe:~s he presented.
He stated the intent is to consider the regional plan of the County
and to consider the possibility of acquiring utilit.[es which may, in
fact, enhance the service ability and rate structur~ of the County.
He stated there are a variety of ways to determine public opinion
Page 40
,.- · :'. October 8, 1991
¥~nd suggested the Board of County Commissioners is obligated to deter-
mine the water and wastewater needs of the community.
Commissioner Hasse concurred with Commissioner Shanahan~s remarks.
He requ,~sted more verification of the fibres presented.
Go~lssioner Volpe stated he is supportive of assembling a team
provided it can be done with.In the existing County Government.
Comity Attorney Cuyler r,~commended that the Board of County
Commissioners not direct county staff to negotiate this matter.
Comaisaloner Volpe cammen,ted that what comes to mind regarding
assembling a tea· is a batte~.y of attorneys, engineers, etc. which he
cannot ~[ustify at this point in the process.
Coulit¥ Attorney Cuyler interjected that the reason Commissioner
Volpe thinks of these types of experts is because they are the very
ones necessary to evaluate the type of system in question and identify
the basis upon which negotiations should be founded.
Co~m~tsatoner Saunders voiced agreement with Commissioner Volpe,
stating he is not prepared t¢, spend money on experts. He recommended
it is a~,propriate to let staff know that the Board of County
Commissioners is interested Jn accomplishing certain objectives and,
in turn, solicit from staff the ultimate goals to b,e considered in
te=~ns of the utility systems individually.
Co~lsstoner Volpe raised the Issue of what the team being con-
te~plated will be comprised of.
Stunpy Harris stated his organization will not negotiate on
acqn'.,lsttion. He explained that what is being offered is an interlocal
optnioa.
Commissioner Hasse pointed out that each utility syt~tem is to be
.
-looked at as separate entities.
what neither can do alone.
Conditioner Shanahah hayed, seconded by Cosatsmtom~r Hasaa, to
continue dt·logue with Southern States Utilities, ~saeg~le the fra-
~e~k of · fact ftndin~ tea= without expense and a~scarCatn public
Page 41
October 8, 1991
Commissioner Shanahan concurred with Commissioner Kasse, stating
he takes exception to the idea that Marco Island is driving the
'discussion.
In response to Commlssio:aer Hasse, Commissioner Shanahah verified
that his motion does not include a mandate regarding assembling a
team, but merely suggests consideration of the framework of a fact
finding team without expenditure.
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Commissioner Shanahah clarified
that his recommendation is for Fred Bluetschef, Assistant Utilities
Direcrum, Ken Cuyler, County Attorney, and County Manager Dotrill to
return ~ith suggestions regal'ding the framework of what an acquisition
team should look like and wha,t the potential costs of acquisition
might be,.
After further discussion regarding whether or not the Intent is to
assemble an acquisition team at this point, Commissioner Saunders
stated that Commissioner Shanahan has interpreted his motion ade-
quately, I.e. that there will be a framework of a team, which is a
fact finding team and not an acquisition team.
Upon cmll for the qu~mtloa, the ~otton carried ~unantmousl¥.
Zt~m#~Dl
'2'I:~~ co!ls'r~c'rxoN ~,A,s~rr As PART OF ~ U.S. 42 ]fORTS WATER
ff:~-Iiir ~'~ - (:x)lrrI~O TO 10/22/91
Fred Bluetschef, lsststan'~ Utilities Administrator, explained that
staff is seeking acceptance by the Board of County Commissioners of a
tempol..ary construction easement agreement granted by Germsin
Properties of Columbus, Inc. for a water main on U.S. 41 North. He
stated the easement is scheduled to expire on January 1, 1992.
In response to Commissioner Goodnight, Mr. Bluetschef confirmed
that there are eagles in the l,ubJect area which could pose a potential
problem.
In response to Commissioner Saunders Mr. Bloetscher reported that
th,e Germa~ins resisted giving lhe County an easement beyond the January
~992 date.
Page 42
October 8, 1991
Ken Cobb, General Counsel for Getmain Corporation, stated his
client is willing to coopera're with the County. He explained the
reason for the time limitati(m is a desire to avoid having to redo
landscaping which is current:[y taking place and would probably have to
be redone should it be neces~,ary for the Jack and bore work to take
place at a later time due to the situation manifested by the eagles
locatfni! in the area.
In response to Commissioners Hasse and Shanahan, Mr. Bloetscher
stated staff feels the site for the Jack and bore work is located out-
side the 1500 ft. requirement relative to the environmental situation
and is ;,ursuing verification.
Environmental Specialist Kimberly Po]en reported a meeting is
i~:.:: . indeed scheduled for Thursday to consider the wildlife concerns.
5? · '!'
)'i: (~uill:io~er Saunders ~d, ~eco~ ~ Co~i.s~one, r Vol~ ~d
?!'." ~t~ ~l~lF, to continue this tte~ ~ttl the ~ttng of
.... t -22, 1991.
:.--~ ...
~.: ~ ~ - .
~'jf:.. RE~011.01-7OO, I~ BOARD P,~Y ~ CLASSIFICATION PLAN FOR FISCAL
: ..- pa~.f incr,:ases awarded on employee anniversary dates and based on Job
pel, fc'.'mance. He reported tha~: the total cost of these adjustments,
}[-.
lncludtnl; fringe benefits, is approximately $170,OO0. He reflected
th~%t 3.51S of the §~ appropriated in 1992 will be used to continue the
:~"% pay-for-performance system and employee merit program, adding that
'~..'j employeei~ will be eligible fo~' Increases ranging from 0-8%. He estl-
:a:. : mated the total cost for 1992 to be $1,184,000. He relayed staff's
~:"'~-recommendation for Board approval of a Senior Environmental Specialist
po~ltton to be added to the class titles at pay range 118.
In response to Commissioner Volpe regarding the number of posi-
· 105
Leo Ochs, Administrative :Service Administrator, explained that the
Board of County Commissioners has appropriated 5% of personal services
in its 1992 budget to fund a comb/nation of mandated state retirement
increases, pay plan market adjustments, as well as individual merit
Page 43
October 8, 1991
Which will be subject 'to the maintenance adjustment, Mr. Ochs
:i-[answered that 35 position tt'tles will be affected and that 83
employe,~e occupy those posit.lon titles.
In :response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Ochs stated that the
average increase is $2,038 and includes the fringe benefit factor of
'. 30~.
Fred Tarrant referred to the unemployment rate In Collier County
;and voiced opposition to going forward ~tth Increases for the County
eaployeus,
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Budget Director HcNees verified
that tht: $300,000 In additional personnel and related salary cuts was
not dele, ted from the budget.
~t~ 4/1 (~tesi~er Vol~ o~sed), to a~rove the ~y ~d
clsift~tt~ pl~ for flscll ye~ 1991/92, there~ a~pttng
~l~tla
Page 44
October 8, 1991
HIRING FItL'~ZE AND BUDGET SAVINGS RE]PORT - ACCK~
This item was discussed ;in conjunction with Item #10B.
Co~3ty Manager Dotrill r~ported that, as a result of the hiring
freeze, total year end sayin,is were $1,523,585; $461,8S4 of which was
~n the (:ounty General Fund a~l it relates to ad valorem property taxes.
He explained that throughout the year the hiring freeze has ranged
from a ~ow of 55 employees to a high of 70 employees, and presently is
at 69. He reflected that from the 1987/88 fiscal year to-date there
has been a population increa~:e in Collier Gounty of 26.8% and, during
that same period, the number of County employees attributable to the
Board of County Commissioners increased 23.?~. He added, however,
that the? employees covered by the General Fund increased by only 15%,
mild the total number considered management employees increased by
He stated that, on a per capita basis, in 1988 there was one employee
for every 178 c~t~zens in Collier County and that this year there is
one employee for every 184 citizens. He pointed out that Collier
County has created as well as inherited various new service divisions
d%~ring that time. He reported that it has been budgeted for the
/ 'h~r~ng freeze to continue through the first quarter of the year
~::!i resulting in an estimated savings of $285,000 in additional employee
;, ,?
~larles.
I,~ r,~sponse to Commisslon,:r Hasse, County Manager Dorrtll
.~ explained there was an employ,.,e that resigned from a Chie~
Envtronm,.~ntal Specialist post'~ion with the vacancy being :included in
the hiring freeze, but also b,:ing downgraded to a lower position.
In r,~ply to Commissioner ][asse, County Manager Dotrill
in the h:[rtng freeze as well as resignations and new community centers
118
Page 45
'.~ acknowledged that the three departments which are most affected at
!i?[~.i,' this tlm~: are the library pos:[ttons, as a new library is being opened
· with few~:r employees today th~m in 1987; Parks and Recreation
Department, as currently 10~ ¢~f all positions are vacant and included
October 8, 1991
being constructed; and Code Enforcement.
Commissioner Volpe questioned whether statistics were available
relating to the number of managerial employees per population, to
which Co~mty Manager Dotrill suggested caution should be used in com-
paring counties as all counties may not have the same needs and there-
fore the same departments an,~ division of employee's positions. He
!~tated h~ will be happy to have staff pursue determination of what a
normal ratio might be.
Comsissioner Saunders st,~ted that some of the comments being made
are verF relevant to Item #lOB. He commented that comparing Collier
County to other counties which might be overstaffed is a :fruitless
exercise. He added that it is more important to evaluate the
employment structure, look~n!; at all upper level staff positions, and
determine whether it is possible ~nd feasible to consol/date the func-
tions of upper level staff, with the aim of overtime eliminating some
of those positions. He cited the example of the Public Services
Administrator position which has been vacant since January 11, 1991.
He explained a Department Head has been serving as the Division
Administrator for over eight months without a noticeable reduction in
service from that department.
Comm~ssioner Saunders ex, pressed concern that the Board of County
Commi~sioners is looking at the overall picture and asking the County
Manager to reduce budgets and freeze positions, which he is success-
fully accomplishing, without considering the long term effect in terms
of 2moklng at the overall pe~sonnel structure. He referred to the
memorandum included in the agenda package and identified as Item #lOB,
stating that same ~nc]udes s~lggestions he feels appropriate for the
Board of County Commissioner:~ to consider. He expressed a desire to
be able to assure the public that the Board of County Commissioners is
/00king at its management po~itions, saving taxpayer dollars wherever
possible, consolidating func::ions wherever possible, and fine tuning
~overnm~ntal operations.
Co~L'~,ox~r Smunda~-a ~o~, seconded by Co.,~sa~oner Volpe, to
Page 46
October 8, 1991
d11~l~ Cmmty Mm~ger Dotrill to p~tde t~ ~d of
C~l.~ wl~ tnfo~tt,=n a~te to all~ then, ~tng etrate-
gtc pl~, to ~l~te all u~r 1~1 etaff ~tt~om~ wtth the aim
of ~ B~ of C~ty Co~t,sstoners dete~intng where,
c~11.~tt~ of ~ctto~ might oc~r ~d ~rhaps altering
ex~tng ~ml st~c~re.
It was the consensus that there should be an evaluation of all
co~ty Jobs by the County ~anager.
Count~ H~ager Dotrill voiced concern with the mot/on, as for-
mulated, stating he objects to the Board of County Commt~stoners eva-
luattng ~d deciding what the organizational structure of the
exe~ttve branch ~ill be. He agreed the Board of County Commissioners
ts entitled to Information relating to what the functJons~ oF lndlvtdual
positions are, that it can revest him to evaluate a potential for con-
solldatton from a check and balance standpoint.
Zn response to Commissioner Saunders, County Attorne~ Cutler
stated he t5 prepared to look at the County Hanager Ordinance and
render an optnton regarding the right of the Board of Count~
Commis~toners to e~fect or invoke organizational change~.
Co~n~y Hanager Dotrill v'otced concern relating to the concept o~
~e~o-ba~sed budgeting. He stated that zero-based budgeting a~ the
local level, as defined and contained in avallable literature, as been
a dtsma~l failure tn this co~.ntry. He proposed that an alternative
Prt?:lt:y Program Budgeting, which allows identification o~ costs asso-
ciated with each government~tl program.
Cosmlsstoner Saunders confirmed there ts need to prioritize the
county programs to determtn~ which are Important. He reiterated that
~he re~est is ~or the Count:~ Hanager to identify a method oF doing
Just that.
Commissioner Saunders e~:pre~sed concern over the continual loss
of sta]~f ~n departments wht~:h dtrectlU service the citizens o~ Collier
Co~ty while not expertenct~g a simultaneous reduction tr~ the upper
level ~taff positions.
Page 47
October 8,
~m ~ll for the qu~et~on, ~otion failed 2/3 (Cents,stoners
Zt~
I)Z~~ Or V~Z~B B~' ~O~S~S - CO~ ~AOER DI~D TO
~,~ ~ ~~, ~R ~OB CONSOLIDATION
This l~em was discussed in conjunction with Item ~8H2.
Hasme moved, leconded by Commissioner Shanaban and
that the County Manager provide the requelted
tnfor~mtion reg~rding Priority Progrm~ Budgeting and concerns iden-
tifie~ In the ~a~orandum from Commissioner Saunders dated September
25, 1991 ~d Identified as Item #lOB on today's agenda, ~nd that the
~mty,&ttorn~y render an opinion regarding the Jurisdiction of the
~3ard of County Commissioner, s over Job consolidation.
~tlsoloner Shanahen ~,ed, seconded by Conicstoner Hesse and
ciu-rle~ umaalao~sl¥, to aCCelPt the County Manager's Report and place
e,,e ~~: 6:10 P.M. - ]~con~n~: 6:20 P.M. at which time
~m~ Clerk ~rlghi rel~lac~ ~W Clerk Ferris
Co~lsstoner Goodnight as,ted at this time if there were any peti-
tioners present who would like to defer their petition until October
15, 1991, and if so they shou. ld see Assistant to the County Manager
'Pike.
!tlr~A~T ~ ~/DERATIOll OF PETITION POD-SO-/(/) FOR OSPRKY'S
Bruce Anderson of Young, van Assenderp, Varnadoe & Benton, P.A.
stated that the reason for the request for reconstderatton of the sub-
Ject petition Is due to the a~parent misunderstanding of the traffic
impact posed by the subject project.
In response to Commtssion.~r Hasse, County Attorney Cu¥1er informed
~:).' that Co=mtsstoners Volpe, Shanahen or Hasse can make the motion for a
rehearin~ of this item.
Mr. Anderson advised that although County staff has found the
petition to be in non-compliance, the petitioner has agreed to a
Page 48
October 8, ~991
schedule outlined in the correspondence provided to County
Manager Dotrill, dated Septelaber 25, 1991, regarding the four-laning
of Davis Boulevard. He read a statement from the Comprehensive Plan
Density Rating System which provides for affordable housing.
Geo~:ge Keller, President of Collier County Civic Federation, noted
that the petition was not denied because of a traffic concern but
rather because of the incompatibility with the surrounding projects in
the area. He recommended theft the subject petition not be reheard.
Bil'~[ Holley, representing the homeowners at Moon Lake, reminded
the Com,ltsstoners of the number of people who were present in opposi-
tion to the subject petition when it was originally heard and added
that they would all have been here tonight had they known this was
being requested to be reheard. He urged the Commissioners not to
r~hear l:his item.
No mction was taken on th. ts item.
(~DII~A~ 91-9~, I~TITION PU~87-48(1), ALAN REYNOLD~ OF NILSON,
NI~, BAItTON ~ ~, INC., ~S~ING SO~N D~O~
~., ~~~ A ~ZO~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ AS SOn--ON
DI~~ AT N~ES ~R ~ ~SE OF ~P~ING ~ ~ ~
~~' ~ ~ P~ ~ TO A~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~S~
P~ ~ ~C~S~ ~ R~ISlONS TO ~K ~ISTING ~C~ -
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
S~ptember 19, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed
with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition
PUD-87-48(l), requesting a rezone from PUD to PUD known as Southampton
Development at Naples for the purpose of repealing the current PUD
document and Master Plan (Ordinance No. 88-53) and to adopt a new PUD
document and master plan made necessary by revisions to the existing
documents.
Planner Lord indicated the subject petition is a companion to Item
#12C5, Petition SMP-91-8. He stated that Alan Reynolds representing
Southampton Development Corporation is requesting a fezone from PUD to
PUD as well as a subdivision master plan for the Southampton
Development located behind the Greentree Shopping Center at the
Page 49
October 8, 1991
"Southwemt corner of Inunokalee Road and Airport Road. He Informed that
the ~ubJect site is currently vacant with an existing PUD zoning for
the Southampton Development. He related that to the north and across
Immokalee Road there is a mix of RSF-3, RMF-12, C-1, and RMF-16; to
the east and across Airport Road is vacant C-4 property, developed
RSF-2 and RSF-3; to the sout]~ is RSF-3, single family homes; and to
the west is the North Naples community park zoned RO and a developed
industrial parcel.
Mr. Lord noted that the ,:hanges reflect the new configuration for
the golf course and a redistmibution of housing types while holding
constant the total number of dwelling units first approved. He indi-
cated that other admintstrat:[ve changes to the PUD document were the
addition of the sunset claus(~, monitoring, polling places and other
appropriate references to platting, site development plans and rela-
tionships to timing of permitting and applicable standards.
Mr. Lord advised that th~ proposed project has a density of 2.55
units ~or acre and is consistent with the Future Land Use element of
the Growth Management Plan. He reported that the changes are in the
best interest of the pro~ect and the surrounding uses. He pointed out
that the golf course has been changed to act as a buffer between the
commercial shopping area and the adjacent multi-family units.
Mr. Lord commented that Jf the companion SMP is approved it will
j,% allow the property owner to ~;ubdivide the property into 178 lots and
· ~' othec tracts for residential development.
::~,:~; Mr. Lord advised that Sou.thampton at Naples is a 313 acre planned
.~ ur~it development. He noted *hat the subject site design is structured
by several existing conditions which include the location of 3urtsdic-
i"i;~ tional wetlands and the need to separate the residential units from
'.'11~ilthe Gree~ntree Shopping Center. He disclosed that the proposed pro3ect
~ will be a gated development from the Immokalee Road and Airport Road
';',L' entranc~.s. He affirmed that the subject property has adequate public
.~' facilit~es and services to support the proposed residential density.
;jl. He added. that it is compatible and complimentary to the surrounding
Page 50
land uses.
October 8, 1991
He related that ~:he proposed 2.5 density per acre Is less
that allowed under the Futurl~ Land Use element.
Mr. Lord noted that the concerns and st~pulations of all relevant
agenttel3 have been listed in the revised PUD document. H,e reported
that staff is of the belief that the proposed changes will not change
the int~nt of the original PUD document. He advised that the CCPG
fo~arded both subject petltlons to the Board of County Commissioners
with the reco~endatlon of approval with a unanimous vote, subject to
staff~s stlpulattons. He added that no correspondence has been
received in opposition to the subject petitions.
Commissioner Volpe ~est]oned whether the change in the mix of
dwellln~; ~tts will impact the traffic? Mr. Lord revealed that the
proposed change will effect ]ess trips.
Ca=Tie4 ~tmou~l¥, tO cloea the public hearing.
Saunders moved, seconded by Cow-issioner Hmsse ~nd
that the Ordinance as numbered and titled
be ~ted and entered into Ordinance Book No. 48:
ORDINANCE 91-96
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 82-2, THE COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS MAP(S) NUMBERED
8§26N AND 8526S; BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE
HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM "PUD" TO "PUD", PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS SOUTi~AMPTON AT NAPLES, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF NAPL:ZS-IMMOKALEE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY ~/4
F~iLE WEST OF AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD, AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF
AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 1/4 MILE SOUTH OF
NAPLES-IMMOKALEE ROAD, IN SECTION 26, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 313.5 ACRES; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
~:)i~ !~,lFfXt~191-701, R~ FrfITl0l! SMP-91-8, ALAN REYNOLD~ OF WILSON,
MTfE,~,--IM~TO~ & FE~X, INC., ]LEPRESENTING SO~fH&MPTON D~,OP~KNT
C~P., ~~/4~ &PI=RO~AL OF SUBDIVI~ION M&ST~R PLAN FOR ~O~CHAMPTON
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
September 22, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed
with the Clerk, public hearin~ was opened to consider Petition
SMP-9I-8, filed by Alan Reynolds of Wilson, Miller, Barton & Peek,
Page 51
October 8, 1991
Inc. 0 representing Southampton Development Corp., requesting approval
of subdivision for Southampton.
This item was heard in conjunction with the above Item #12B2.
~~l~r S~unders ~, ~econd~ ~ Co~i~1one~ Vol~ ~d
~t~ ~~ly, to close the ~bltc hearing.
~iel~r Vol~ ~, second~ ~ Coatsstoner ~as~ ~d
~i~ ~i~ly, that ~titton ~-91-8 ~ a~rov~, there~
g~t~ ~lutta 91-701.
Page 5 2
October 8, ]99!
91-702, F~TXTXON CCEL-91-3, TODD HNRBST OF COOL
CO~'~XO~, XNC., I~FR~$~NT£NG COLLIER CO~ C~!ISSXOI~,
~~ON OF A D~CK, A~I]~G, ~ S~ ENCLOS~ AT ~E TIG~TAIL
~5I~ ~, ~CO B~CH - ~O~D
Leg.a/ notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
September 22, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed
· .- with th~ Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition
]~.~! CCSL-91--3, filed by Collier county Commissioners, upon the request of
!j!',: its Tlg~rtail Beach Park Facility Concessionaire, Todd Herbst of Cool
Concessions, Inc., requestinf! a Coastal Construction Setback Line
variance, as required by Ordinance 75-19, as amended, to allow 1) an
extstln{[ concession stand, 2] construction of wooden decking, and 3)
construction of a screen enclosure around the concession stand at
Tigertail Beach County Park, located in Section 7, Township 52
South, Eange 26 East, Marco Island.
Environmental Specialist Retschl stated that the petitioner is
requesting a variance from tke Coastal Construction setback line for
decking and screen enclosure around the existing concession stand at
Tigertail Beach. He informed. that staff recommends approval, subject
to staff stipulations as listed in the executive summary.
Doug Herbst, the petitioner, cited that he is requesting a waiver
of number 3. of staff's stipulations because the Australian pines will
provide a much needed shade for the concession area.
D{r. Herbst agreed with the suggestion by Commis,~ioner Goodnight to
leave the existing trees, but remove any seedlings in the future.
"' Commissioner Shanahan pointed out that by ordinance people are
'%'~::' being required to remove their Australian pines from their' lots.
i ". In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Herbst explained that the
, ' decking is to provide access to the concession stand for the han-
<':'~ dicapped and to improve it in general for the public. He provided
"'' photographs of the existing concession stand.
Mr. Reischl responded to Commissioner Shanahah by recommending
that the exotic ordinance be upheld which provides for a three year
Page 53
October 8, 1991
program.
~l~olone~ Shanahah ~ed, ~econded by Coam~e~oner Saunder~
c~i~! ~tnly, t~t the ~bltc he~tn~ ~ cloe~.
~~i~r ~ders ~, ~econded ~ Co~teelone= ~tght
f~l~ 2/3 (~les~onez~ Sh~, Vol~ and
~t~tim ~L-91-3 ~ a~r~wd, ~bJec~ to n~rs 1. ~d 2. of
stl~lati~, ~t deleting the r~re~n~ of
3. ~~ the re~val of the Austral~ p~nee.
~ui~loner Vol~ ~v~, eecond~ ~ Coolse~oner
~i~ly, to a~r0n ~t~t~on CCSL-91-3, ~bJecT to the
i! ooo
Page 54
October 8, 1991
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
September 22, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed
with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition
CCSL-91-6, filed by Bayshores of Vanderbilt Beach Condominium, repre-
sented by Ervin J. Kidd, Jr., Kidd Construction, Inc., requesting a
variance from the Coastal Construction Setback Line, as required by
Ordinance 75-19, as amended, to allow construction of a chtckee and
the ret.atnment of a deck addition which has been constructed on the
propert'F of Bayshores of Vanderbilt Beach Condominium, further
described as Lots 44, 45 and 46, Block A, Replat of Unit 1, Conners
Vanderbilt Beach Estates, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25
East.
Environmental Specialist Polen explained that the existing deck on
thl'ough Petition CCSL-84-110. She advised that the retainment of the
existtnl; deck and the propos(:d construction of the chtckee is con-
aletent with the variance conditions in the ordinance as well as
objective 11.4 of the Colliel' County Growth Management Plan,
CEm~.~...~rvi~,tton Coastal Management Element; therefore, staff recommends
al)prova:l of the subject petit/on, sub3ect to stipulation~ 1. through
5. as 1.~sted In the executivE: summary.
In ]~esponse to Commissioners Hasse and Volpe, Ms. Polen advised
that thE: proposed chickee and deck will not Interfere with public
access 1:o the beach.
Ervin J. Kidd, Jr., the t,ettttoner, clarified that the proposed
construction is to the side ~nd will not protrude onto the beach.
Mr. Kidd responded to Con~tssloner Volpe by informing that to the
South of the proposed constr~ctton is a single family house and a
beach access from a condominium complex.
Page 55
¸4,
October 8, 1991
Colatssloner Volpe potnt,.-d out that at least one obJ,.~ctton has
been re,=etved regarding the ,3ubJect petition becaus'-e of the closeness
of the proposed construction to the single family residence. Mr. Kidd
revealed that he dtd not kno~ that there was any oppostt:[on to this
petition and that he had beeu in contact with the adjoin:[rig property
O~Hler.
Mr. Kidd indicated that ~:here Is a row of trees blocking the
chtckee from the residence. Ms. Polen pointed out that the trees are
Austral:[an Pines which are rl:qutred to be removed as stated In one of
the stipulations included by staff. She noted that the ~'eplantlng of
native dulls vegetation is al!~o stipulated, however, will not provide
the same: height buffering as the Australian Pines.
Ms. Polen etated in answ~:r to Commissioner Volpe that an addi-
tional t~ttpulatton can be added stipulating the exact type of tree to
be p/anted for buffering. Ml~. Polen affirmed that if the: variance is
not grailted the Australian P~nes will not be required to be removed if
they were present prior to 1980.
Co~lt~lonex- Volpe moved, seconded b~ Coutseloner Ilssee ~nd
c~-mied m~ani~ou~ly, to clos~ the public hearing.
Co~i~stoner Volpe ~oved, seconded by Co~tsstoner Hi~se ~nd
c~Tled S/2 (Commissioners SI~nal~n and Sanders op~s~), to deny
P.l., [~~I~ PA~ICIA [~ILLI~, ~U~I, ~QUESTIN(t ~OV~ OF
~ ~ OF ~S NAY ~ST, ~OXI~LY 1/2 MILE NOR~ OF ~
I~~ OF ~KS-I~EE ROAD ~ AI~RT-P~LIN~ ROAD -
Legltl notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
Septemb~r 22, 1991, as evtdel~ced by Affidavit of Publication filed
with thl~ Clerk, public heartItS was opened to consider Petition
SMP-19-G flied by William C. McAnly and Associates, representing
Patrlcit~ Williams, Trustee, ~:e~esttng Subdivision Mas~er Plan appro-
val for Falcon Pointe, locat~d on the East side of Cypress Way East,
Page 56
October 8, 1991
..'approxli~ately 1/2 mlle north of the intersection of Naples-Immokalee
Road and Airport-Pulling Road{, consisting of 22.43 acres.
PlaJ~er Saadeh informed that the petitioner is proposing to sub-
divide m 22.43 acre parcel in,to 35 single-family residential lots. He
advised that the subject petition is consistent with the Growth
Management Plan, and all reviewing agencies have given their approval
subject to their stipulations listed in the agreement sheet. He noted
that the subject project is served by public services and facilities
such as roads, water, sewer and utilities. He reported that staff has
that the Collier County Planning Commission reviewed the subject peti-
tion on September 19, 1991 and voted 5/0 to forward the petition to
the Board of County Commissioners with the recommendation of approval
:'~'.' received no letters of objection to the proposed project. He cited
;: i s~abJect to staff's stipulations
In response to Commissioner Volpe, Mr. Saadeh affirmed that access
~.~.i,!.. to the proposed subdivision is from Cypress Way East.
Mr. Murphey council for the petitioner, pointed out on a display
· map an existing ditch along the boundary which is not used for
drainage by the project. He explained that staff has imposed as part
of the approval process to have this existing ditch dedicated as an
em~ement. He noted that the petitioner's position is that there is no
rational nexus between the dedication of this drainage easement and
the development of the subdivision. He advised that the petitioner is
agreeable to providing the easement, but requests that the County
a~sist in making the ditch more pleasing aesthetically to the resi-
dents of the planned subdivision by paying for the tubes to be placed
in the ditch so the petitioner can cover it.
County Manager Dotrill Indicated that it would be in the County's
".. ' best interest to remove the stipulation for the dedicated easement and
": leave the ditch as is.
Mr. Saadeh affirmed that he was unaware that the petitioner was
~. reguesting compensation for the easement as stipulated in the
agreement sheet.
Page 57
October 8, lg9!
County Manager Dotrill suggested that if the petitioner Is not
willing to concur with the a~Ireement sheet as submitted, the subject
pe~tition be continued for two weeks to clarify the issue with staff.
Mr. Nadeau, representing th'e o~er, noted that continuance to a
d~te ce=~taln would be prefer]~ed.
~~~ Vol~ ~v~,. ~cond~ ~ Co~ss~oner Sm~derm and
~~ ~l~y, to cont:~nue Petition ~-9~-~ ~til Octo~r 22,
1S~1 at 0~30 A.M.
01--97, ClOtTING T~HII MAFT~KS FROD~CTION PAIq~ S~t~T LIGHTING
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
Septemhart 17, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed
with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider an ordinance
creating the Naples Production Park Street Lighting Municipal Service
Ts~tng Unit.
Office of Capital Projects Management Director Conrecode stated
that on December 19, 1990, at a meeting of the Naples Production Park
Property Owners Association, an interest was expressed to create a
te~tng district to provide and maintain street lighting improvements
in and along those streets w~thtn Section 36, Townshlp 49 South, Range
25 East. He advised that on March 1, 1991, a petition was sent to all
the p~o;,erty owners involved as to their preference, and resulted in
7~.Y percent of the property owners being in favor of the proposed
ox'dtnance. Mr. Conrecode informed that with the acceptance of the
said petition by the Board of County Commissioners on July 23, 1991,
the subject ordinance was properly advertised for adoption.
Mr. Conrecode cited that based upon the initial installation of
>i t~nty-seven lights with an additional installation of seventeen
lights over a five year period. it is estimated that the annual cost
of providing and maintaining such an installation would be approxima-
tely $6.00 per $100,000.00 taxable property valuation. He reported
· that staff recommends approval of the subject ordinance.
000 i36
Page 58
October 8, I991
~dssto~r ~asme moved, s~cond~t by Co-~teetoner Saundere ~d
~t~ ~~ly, to clo~ t~ ~bltc hearing.
~1~ ~lnly, t~t the
be ~g ~ ~tered Into CTdin~ce ~k No. 48:
O[~I~CE 91-97
AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE NAPLES PRODUCTION PARK STREET LIGHTING
MUNICIPAL SERVICE TAXING UNIT; PROVIDING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
UNIT; DESIGNATING THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE UNIT; PROVIDING FOR
PURPOSE AND POWERS; PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL ESTIMATES OF EXPENSES AND
TAXATION RATE; PROVIDING FOR TAX ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION;
PROVIDING FOR CONSTRUCTION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Tape
Item
F~TITIOI! &-91-7, ROBERT E. B(IN~ OF R/IMPHREY & KNOTT, P.A.,
R~P~II[8 SOUTRI~RT ON ~i ~Y, ~Q~STIRG ~ ~MINIf~Tl~ ~P~
OF ~ I~I~/ZO~NG DIggeR'S DECISION ~T ~CKS ~8T BE IN
CO~I~ ~ i USE ID~IiFIED ~ ~E LKLY ~KF~T B,~CH ~D AS A
P~~ ~I~IP~ USE ~ ~T ~ ~O~SED ~AT ~CKS WILL REQUI~
0~-~ P~ING AS ~OVID]~D ~R BY ~ COLLIER CO~ ZONING
O~~ ~T P~ING IN ~ RIG~-OF-WAY WILL NOT BE P~I~ED -
P~ ~ BK ~~KD IN RXG~-OF-WAY A~
Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on
September 22, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication filed
with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition A-91-7,
filed l~! Robert Bone of Humphrey & Knott representing Southport on the
Bay, requesting an Administrative Appeal of the Planning/Zoning
Director's decision that docks must be in conjunction with a use Iden-
tified by the Lely Barefoot ~Beach PUD as a permitted principal use and
that th,s proposed boat docks will require off-street parking as pro-
vfded for by the Collier County Zoning Ordinance; that parking in the
right-of-way will not be permitted, for property located on the
following described property: Lot 56, 58 and 59 of Southport on the
Bay and Southport Cove Drive ad3acent, in Southpor~: on zhe Bay.
In response to Community Development Services Administrator Brutt,
Commissioner Goodnight informed that the petitioner will present his
case first.
Mike Raider, Director of Planning with Humphrey & Knott in Ft.
Myers, advised that approxi~ately three years ago Lely Barefoot Beach
137
Page 59
October 8, 1991
initiated a permitting process to construct docks for the benefit of
single-family home owners who did not have direct access to the water.
He noted that the permitting' process has only recently been completed
which has provided a Corps cf Engineers' permit granted December 12,
1991, a DER exemption granted on October 19, lg89, and a DNR letter of
consent granted April 17, 1991. Upon receiving the said required per-
mits, Mr. Raider informed that the petitioner submitted an application
for a dock extension to construct nine boat docks.
ee~ I~ty Clerk Fartie replaced Deputy Clerk Arrighi at thim tim
Michael Roeder presented a copy of his letter to the Board of
County Co~uaissioners dated October ?, 1991 summarizing their position
on this issue. He pointed out that the PUP documents for Southport on
the Bay, specifically the 66 acres contained in Tract H, states that
principal uses will be basically single-family or multi-family resi-
dential, and accessory uses will be docks, either individual or com-
mon. He argued that the original PUD documents anticipated this
common dock situation. He reflected that the lake easement is as good
a piece of common property as can be found in the subdivision for that
v~ry purpose. He explained that, even though the docks are primarily
for the benefit of people without water access, everybody in the sub-
division has the right to use the docks and, therefore, they are
clearly an accessory use to the entire subdivision. He reported there
are ~Iready fifteen houses in the subdivision, which constitutes the
p;~inclpal use being in place even though the primary beneficiaries of
the dcc'k are not there yet. Regarding the issue of parking, he con-
f~rmed ~heir position is that, as accessory uses, there is no parking
reqxxirement for these docks. He added, however, that should staff
m~ndate that parking will be provided and his client is willing to
provide that parking, then they should be able to provide parking in
the right-of-way of The private drive adjacent to Lot #$6, which is
approxi~ately 150 feet from the easement to the dock. He reported
that the Property Owners Association supports the propo~ed solution
for parking in the right-of-way.
Page 60
October 8, 199!
< ~.- · In :response to Commissioner Saunders, County Manager Derrill
verified that parking is re~lired for the common areas in subdivisions
where there are amenities pu::ely for use by the subdivisions them-
selves.
Ken Beginski, Planning S~rvices Manager, explained that the last
adopted Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance afforded specific provi-
sions for accessory or recreational facilities within developments.
Frmtk Brutt, Community Development Services Administrator,
reported that the Zoning Ordinance does not allow parking on the
right-of-way.
Mr. Roeder interjected that the Ordinance prohibits required
parking being placed in the right-of-way.
In l.eply to Commissioner Saunders' question regarding parking in
the right-of-way, County Attorney Cuyler stated that the right-of-way
is still a travelled right-of-way even if it is private.
In l'esponse to County Manager Derrill, Jim Davis of Coasta~
Engfneez'ing stated that the issue at hand is in no way affiliated with
the Lely Barefoot Beach Club.
Mr. Roeder stated there s~re already approximately twenty docks on
Barefoot Boulevard attached to the parkway and have no parking
:? h provide~l for them.
~d~iemer ~unders ~owwd, seconded by Co~alasioner Voll~e,
To ~i~ ~ki~ as this As, a recreatio~l ~e ~t all~ ~ld
~kAr~, to ~ pr~Aded in the, rA~ht-off-~y.
In z'esponse to Mr. Roeder's inquiry regarding whether this
addresses the issue in dispute related to accessory uses, Mr. Brutt
reitera*ed that staff's interpretation is that there is a need to pro-
vide a c'o~mon recreational area with a replat or amend th(: PDA to
cover the issue
Conmdssioner Saunders questioned whether it is possib./e to permit
con~truction of the docks and parking but direct petitioner to amend
any documentation which should be amended, to which Mr. Brutt answered
in the affirmative.
0oo. :139
Page
October 8, ~991
C~m~lon~r S&-~dere ~ended ham ~tion to reflect t~t the
t~ ~t~ ac~mo~ ~em ~ ~n remol~ in light of the fact
t~t m l~ ~t of the rmmldmntlml co--try to
County Attorney Cuyler stated that Collier County does not intend
docks, ~less set out ~n the PUD, to be part of the conservation ease-
ment.
In response to 0o~tssloner Volpe, ~ounty Attorney Cuyler
reflected that most conservation easements are dedicated to Collier
Co~ty w~th the maintenance obllgatton running to the homeowners asso-
clarion.
Mr. Roeder stated that ts what has been done in the ~edtate
lnst~ce.
~m ~11 fo~ the ~stton, ~tton cmr~l~ ~t~ly.
~. ~&R., ~~Z~G A FROVISZO~ U~ ~b~ OF S~10R 8.10 (~SSE~IAL
~~) OF ~ &-2 ZONING
F~ ~~ ~&~ ~ST OF U.S. 41 (T~I~I ~IL) ~OXI~TELY 350
FE~ ~ OF ~ I~SE~IO~ OF ~~ ~LLZ~ RO~ A~ ~ICE
S~ - ~I~ ~ 9:30 A.N. OR 10/15/91
~e~ ~me ~ed, seconded ~ Co~tsetoner Sh~ ~d
~~ ~t~ly, to continue this tte~ to the ~ettng of Octo~
Commissioner Volpe reported being contacted by a number of indivi-
duals dimsatisfied with the 'utility rate increases. He suggested
directing staff to look into the issue of 1-1/4" meter on single
family residences as a number of persons have called reporting that
their bills have gone from alpproximately $30 per month to $190 per
month.
County Manager Dotrill confirmed he will report via interoffice
mail or at the Board of Gounty Commissioners meeting what has been
Page 62
October 8, I991
Commissioner Goodnight ,expressed there is a need for direction in
reference to the Hispanic a:ad Black Advisory Committees. She related
that requests made by the committees include copies of tile EE04's,
complaints. regarding employ,~es over the last three years, a list of
all projects and programs receiving federal and state fullds, copies of
all Co%lnty Affirmative Action, information to assist them in eva-
luating the effort by Collier County relating to equal opportunity
· employment, list of Collier County capital improvement projects to-
date according to whether federally funded, state funded, type of
i.~./~.:.;'~ neighborhoods, etc.
It was the consensus that there are limitations In time and
available staff to comply with these requests.
In response to Commissioner Shanahan, County Manager Dotrill con-
flrmed that the only allowance made for travel Is when same is deter-
mined to be relevant and previously approved by the Board of County
Commissioners and approved for reimbursement by the County Manager.
County Manager Dorrtll suggei~ted that the Information which is
r~adtly available be provide,! to the advisory boards.
*** Commissioner Shahahem ~rved, seconded by Co--tastoner
~ ~tg mtmly, that the foll~lng tte~ ~der the con-
~ ~ ~ a~r~ed lmd/or adopted:
i'111~ FINA~ P~T OF "EMBASSY NOOD$ GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB AT BR~TONNE PAR~,
1. ,: That the final plat not be recorded until the required tmpro-
· vements have been constructed and accepted or until approved
security is received for the incompleted improvements and
.i that construction shall be completed within 36 months of the
date of this approval.
2.~..:.', Authorize the Chairman to execute the attached Construction
~'i! and Maintenance Agreement, and Holdback Agreement.
3.:i~'J That no building permits be Issued until the final plat is
;~.~ recorded.
4. ~ Prior to the Board of County Commissioners granting prelimi-
nary acceptance of Phase Three, the emergency access road
shall be constructed and by separate document, appropriate
easement granted for said access, unless a Planned
Development Amendment is approved by the Board of County
Commissioners to delete the requirement fox' emergency access.
See Pages /~: ~ /~
Page 63
October 8, 1991
PLAT OF 'RAILHEAD %NDU~,STRIAL PARK' - WITH STI. PTILATIOI~3
Accept the Construction, Maintenance and Escrow Agreement as
security to guarant,me completion of the subdivision
improvements.
2o
Authorize the recording of the Final Plat of "Railhead
Industrial Park".
Authorize the Chairnan to execute the attached Construction,
Maintenance and Esc~:ow Agreement.
4e
That no Certificatel~ of Occupancy be granted until the
required improvements have received preliminary acceptance.
See Pages . /5,~.~--"" /~/
Ite~
Fc~SOL~T]:~ 91-698 PROVIDING ]~)R TH~ TERMINATION OF C~RTAZ]~ SURFACE
D~AIN~: wm~EM~NT~ (S.D.E. eS) AS RECORDED ON THE BRIARWOOD UNIT ONE
PLATt FI.~T BOOK 18r PAGE 40; PUBLIC RKCORDS OF COLLIKR C.0UNTYr FLORIDA
See Pages /~
Item ~'lld.4
'. R~~0~ 91-696 PROVIDING IOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ROADWAY, DRAINAGE,
;':' W~TK3~ AID SEWER IMI~R(YVEMENTS IN eGLNNVIEW PLACE AT PELICgJ! BAY"
See Pages
&C;GEPTAICE OF ZRRZVOCABLE STANDBY LKTTK~ OF CREDIT UP TO AN AGGREGATE
OF $~,8~0.00 I~R 13~AVATION PKI~(IT NO. 59.424 "WILS]~IRE
~ATI~ IN SECTION Sl, TC~mSBIP 48r SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST .
The water facilities to serve the project cannot be placed
into service and no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued
until the Florida Department of Environmental Re(julation
furnishes a letter authorizing the placement of the sewer
system into service and approving the water distribution
system for service; and,
Bacteriological testlng has met the County's requirements;
and,
The Fire Flow requirements of the project have been
satisfied, and the Fire District furnishes a letter accepting
the fire hydrant for ownership and maintenance; and,
Receipt of payment of water usage from Utilities for bac-
teriological testing.
77.' Xt~ eli&7
,' RECOILED IN OR BOOK 1716 PAGES 1959 - 1968
mel 000 ;,-.? 142
Page 64
October 8, 1991
~, ACClPTAIII~ OF ~IJIKV~CABLK STUIDBT LETTER OF CREDIT UP TO All AGGREGATE
'..~ ': OF 010,160-.00 FOR EXCAVATEOH FKlqg~T NO. 59.433 m]l~ MATERFORD",
LOCATIO, 13l SB~I~OBI 32r TOWNS. HIP 49 $OUTHr RANGE 25 EAST
COIITll~IdIClOTRIVIKM PHASK 07 BIDS FOR IMMOKALKK AIRI~ORT T-HANGARS,
BID JO. 90-1657, PB3FDING OUT~0MK OF KIP~RO~AL PKRMITTIN~
It~a ~IZC1
&pPLTCAI'Z~ FOR GZbtzrf THROUGE GAKRETT COtI~URITIE$ FUND FOR PARKS AND
It~"~TXO~ ~ R~CREATIOR PROGRA~ TO BE H'ELD AT GOLDEJ~ GATE
A.tqlvf~'~011 FOIt ~ T'~ROU~! COt!HI:~TT'FOURDATION OF COLLIER COUNTY
~ffJ~&IID!~"q~IkTION SUI~Q~t R,~CREJtTION PROGRJU~! TO BE H~.,D AT
AGII]I~IT FOIl LI~IAL SKRVICKS ASSOCI&TKD M~TII CONDK~D~ATIOI! OF KAS~q~IITS
FOR T~I =~OLDEII GATK WKLL7~D KXFAIIS~ON, PHASE III' FROJKCT - NOT TO
See Pages
&IQt!11~ ~F BXD ~91-1761 TO G~NI~UtL C&RBON CORPOR&TION OF PAT~SON, N~
_3l~S_ KY, .X!I ~ JIJEOIFIIT OF 1152,~800.00
~Yl~l' 07 SIX (6) H~NDH~LD RADIOS ~ 7IELD CAS~S ~' '. F.
~:.' IE!~O:Z~T]I:I~I 01-697 FIIOVZDXNG ]~OR 7~I~ !?,~SZOII OF PKRSONNKL RULKS AND
See Pages
LIbel Jt4~ B~ B~J~ VIDe, ~XR~ C~I~ ~ COLLX~R
~, A ~XTXC~ ~DXVX~]:O~ OF ~ ~A~ OF ~ORIDA, ~ICH
~XD~I ~ ~ ~~ ~DXC~ S~ICE S~STATION ~A~D AT 8901
~ T~I ~IL - ~500 P~R
BI 000, , ,:143 P,,ge
October 8, 1991
Off ~ MEDICAL $KRVXCKS COLLECTION A~ C~SSlON
$T,14~.~ ~ PA~ 0F ~OX~Y 811,500.00
L.IC~ &GRE~N'I' BETWEEN COLLIER COUNTY AND CO~qERCIAL
· ~tI~, INC., I~LO~IN~ FOR CO~9~RCIAL CLEAN UP
X~. 'S U~K OF C()UNTY-O~IggD FROPERTY FOR TH~ PKrRPOSK OF
FOR SOLID WAST~ COLLKOTION - MONTHLY RENTAL OF $91.43
See Pages /~3-- /~_~
Itm ,1631
1989 TAX ROLL
No. Date
9125/91
:t990 TAX ROLL
No.
284/288
;2
tltlW ~ ~ ZNMATK NOS. 68279t 36524 AND 74023
Date
9/25-26/9!
· ]~I~:I~C'~T,~k.!I,~13!~ COKI~PONDENCE - FILED AND/OR RKYKRRKD
The following miscellaneous correspondence was flied and/or
rofe~re¢! to the various depaFtments as indicated below:
Memorandum to James C. Giles, Clerk of Courts from Ken B.
Cuyler, County Atto]~ney, dated 8/26/91 re Legal Ads in
Spanish. Copies to Board of County Commissioners and filed.
Notification of Ful:[ Committee Meeting October 7, 1:30 P.M.,
Room 214, Capitol, ]:e Community Affairs 1992 Legislative
Initiatives. Copie, to Neil Dotrill, Frank Brut:t, Board of
County Commtssioner~ and flied.
Letter w/enclosure 1:o "Elected and Appointed Officials and
Interested Citizens" dated 9/24/91 from William E. Sadowski,
Secretary, State of Florida Department of Community Affairs,
re Rule of the Depal~tment of Community Affairs Division of
Resource Planning and Management Chapter 9J-31 Local
Government Land Dev~lopment Regulation Assistance Program
(1991-92). Copies 1;o Neil Dotrill, Frank Brutt, Board of
County Commissioner%~, Bob Blanchard, Stan Litsinger and
filed.
Notice of Proposed ]lulemaktng'dated 9/20/91 from Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation re Rule Chapter Nos.
17-767~ 17-660= 17-302~ 17-2; and 17-312. Copies to Neil
Dorrill, Frank Brutt,. Bill Lorenz and filed.
Page 66
October 8, 1991
Letter from Jon M. Xglehart, Environmental Specialist,
Florida Dept. of En~ironmental Re~ulation, dated 9/23/91 to
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners, re Collier County -
W%~R, File No. 112025815. Copies to N. Dotrill, Harry Huber
and filed.
Letter from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coastal
Engineering and Re~llation, Florida Dept. of Natural
Resources, to John F. Barber of Agnoli, Barber & Brundage,
Inc., dated 9/18/91 re Modification Permit Number: CO-280
M1, Permittee: Westinghouse Communities of Naples, Inc.,
with enclosure of Final Order Administratively Approving
Modification of a Permit for Construction or other Activities
Pursuant to Section 161..053, F.S. Copies to Neil Dotrill,
Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Letter from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coastal
Engineering and Regulation, Florida Dept. of Natural
Resources, to Patricia I. Donoghue of Classic Design Pavers,
Inc., dated 9/18/91 re Permit Number: CO-342 ATF, Permittee:
Louise C. Curtis, el: al., with enclosure of Final Order
Administratively Ap~roving Permit for Construction or other
Activities Pursuant to Section 161.053, F.S. Copies to Neil
Dotrill, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
10.
Letter from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coastal
Engineering and Reg~lation, Florida Dept. of Natural
Resources, to Scott A. Ford, Assistant Branch Manager of
Anchor/American Engineering Company, dated 9/24/91 re Notice
to Proceed, Permit Number: C0-328; Permittee Name: Marco
Beach Hotel, Inc., with enclosure of Final Order
Administratively Approving Permit for Construction or other
Activities Pursuant to Section 161.053 F.S. Copies to Neil
Dotrill, Frank Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
Letter from Tony D. McNeal, Engineer, Bureau of Coastal
Engineering and Re~[lation, Florida Dept. of Natural
Resources, to Jeffrey A. Nunner of Hole, Montes and
Associates, Inc., dated 9/20/9! re Notice to Proceed Withheld
Approval of Governox' and Cabinet Permit: C0-322; Permtttee's
Name: Julius Fiske, Trustee. Copies to Nell Dotrill, Frank
Brutt, Bill Lorenz amd filed.
Notification of Approved Permit Pursuant to Section 161.053
OR 161.052, Florida Statutes, from Florida Dept. of Natural
Resources, dated 9/~!0/91 for Permit Number: 03252 CO;
Applicant: Russell K. Danset. Copies to Neil Dotrill, Frank
Brutt, Bill Lorenz and filed.
11.
Notification of Appx'oved Permit Pursuant to Section 161.053
OR 161.052, Florida Statutes, from Florida Dept. of Natural
Resources, dated 9/]8/91 for Permit Number: 02846 CO;
Applicant: Andrew R. Plumb. Copies to Nell Do,'rtll, Frank
Brutt, Bill Lorenz ~md filed.
12.
Letter from Darrell W. Smith, Administrator, Planning and
Budgeting, State of Florida Department of Revenue, dated
9/19/91 addressed to Abe Skinner, Colller County Property
Appraiser, re final calculation of 1991-92 salary. Copy to
Board of County Commissioners and filed.
13.
Financial StatementE~ for Big Corkscrew Island Fire Control
and Rescue District dated 9/30/90 from W~ntzel, Berry, Swope,
Hendricks & Alvafez, P.A. Copy to Board of County
Commissioners and filed.
14.
Notification of regularly scheduled monthly meetlngs, Special
District Reporting, Budget Summary for Fiscal Year 19901-91,
Page 67
October 8, 1991
16.
17.
18.
Bond Service, Rebuttal Letter, and Budget Summary for Fiscal
Year 1991-92 for BIg Corkscrew Island Fire Control and Rescue
District. Copies to Board of County Commissioners and filed.
Letter from Donald R. Peterson, Fire Chief of Golden Gate
Fire Control & Rescue District dated 9/25/91 to Division of
Ad Valorem Tax, "TRIM" Compliance, with accompanying
Resolution and Certificate of Budget Adoption and Tax Levy.
Copies to Neil Dotrill, Jay Reardon and filed.
Memorandum from Catherine M. Rtehm to Sue Buck dated 10/1/91
re Miscellaneous Correspondence - BCC Agenda with accom-
panying Fiscal Year 1991/92 meeting dates and outstanding
bond status for Golden Gate Fire Control & Rescue District.
Filed.
Letter to Board of County Commissioners from Thomas P.
McKimm, President of Florida State Underground, Inc., dated
9/23/91 re certification of completion of sewer system
located within Lake San Marino. Copies to Nell Dotrill, Mike
Arnold and filed.
Letter from Guy L. Carlton, Tax Collector of Collier County
to P. Anne Goodnlght, Chairman of Board of County
Commissioners, date~ 9/38/91 re "Errors and Insolvencies"
List for the Tax Year 1990. Filed.
19. Minutes Received and Filed:
20.
21.
A. Environmental Policy Technical Advisory Board of 9/9/91.
B. Marco Island Beautification Advisory Committee of 9/3/91.
C. Collier County ]?arks and Recreation Advisory Board Agenda
of 9/25/91 and Minutes of 8/28/91.
D. CCPC Agenda for 10/3/91.
Notice to Owner dated 9/20/91, to Collier County from Thomas
P. McKimm, President of Florida State Underground, Inc. for
Drainage for the Radio Road Widening Phase I under an Order
given by Harper Eros,, Inc. Copies to Neil Dotrill, Steve
Camell, John Yonkos~ky and filed.
Notice to Owner dated 9/26/91 to Collier County from Francine
Wilenins, Agent for Linder Industrial Machinery Co. for
various rental equipment for Radio Road Widening Phase I
under an Order given by Florida State Underground, inc.
Copies to Nell Dotrill, Steve Camell, John Yonkosky and
filed.
22.
23.
24.
Notice to Owner dated 9/13/91 to Collier County from Quality
Industries Inc. & Irrigation for the complete irrigation
system at N. Naples Community Park, New Phase, under an Order
given by Cornerstone General Contractors. Copies to Netl
Dotrill, Steve Camell, John Yonkosky and filed.
Notice to Owner dated 9/20/91 to Collier County from R.
Waterfield, Agent for M. M. Systems Corporation, for steel SS
panels for Collier County Library on Central Avenue, under an
Order given by Crowther, Inc. Copies to Nell Dotrill, Steve
Camell, John Yonkos]¢y and filed.
Notice to Owner dated 9/24/91 to Collier County from Francine
Wilenins, Agent for ]~1ortda Irrigation Supply, Inc., for
pipe, fittings, cont]~ollers, heads and valves for the North
Naples Community Park on Immokalee Road under an Order given
Page 68
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
October 8, 1991
by Quality Industries & Irrigation. Copies to Nell Dorrtll,
Steve Camell, John Yonkosky and flied.
Notice of Nonpayment "Revised" dated 9/24/91 to Collier
County from Gary A. P/as, Credit Manager of Ajax Paving
Industries, Inc. for asphalt materials, equipment, labor and
trucking for the Collier Village-Infrastructure at Immokalee.
Copies to Nell Dotrill, Steve Camell, John Yonkosky and
filed.
Notice to Owner dated 9/20/91 to Collier County from Patricia
Shields, Credit Manager of Krehltng Industries, Inc., for
concrete and/or all other related bulldinE materials for pro-
perty at N. Horseshoe Drive. Copies to Nell Dotrill, Steve
Carnell, John Yonko~k¥ and filed.
Letter dated 9/11/9:t from Gary L. Moyer, Manager of Port of
the Islands, to John A. Yonkosky, Nell Dotrill & Sonia
Crockett re Fiscal %fear 1992 meetings of Board of Supervisors
of the Port of the Island Community Improvement District.
Filed.
Letter dated 9/20/91. to John Yonkosky from Sheriff Don Hunter
re interest earningt. for Payroll Operating, Shertff's
Operating, State Boi~rd of Administration and Investment of
September Appropriation in the aggregate amount of
$400,146.23. Filed.
Revised budget for the operation of the Collier County
Shertff's Office for' fiscal year beginning 10/1/91 and ending
September 30, 1992 ~ubmttted by Sheriff Don Hunter to the
Board of County Co~misstoners and dated 9/25/91. Filed.
Letter dated 9/27/91 to Patricia Anne Goodnight, Chairperson
of Board of County Commissioners, from Timer Powers, Interim
Executive Director of South Florida Water Management
District, with accompanying Certificate Tax Levy South
Florida Water Management District and South Florida Water
Management District Resolution No. 91-37. Copies to Nell
Dotrill Abe Skinner, Board of County Commissioners and filed.
Memorandum to Sue Buck from Catherine M. Reihm dated 9/30/91
as well as letter fr9m E. Barrett Atwood, St., Deputy
Department Director-Finance, Department of Finance &
Administration, Souti~ Florida Water Management District dated
9/26/91 to 3ohn A. Yonkosky re placement on BoaI'd of County
Commissioners agenda of: South Florida Water Management
District: Annual Financial Report - FY 1990, (s. 189.418) -
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Units of Local
Government Report; Management Letter with Rebuttal - FY 1990;
Registered Office and Agent (s. 189.416); Schedule of Regular
Meetings - FY 1992 (i;. 189.417); Description of Outstanding
Bonds - FY 1990 and FY 1991 (s. 189.418) - Series 1985
Official Statement and Series 1986 Official Statement. Filed
Page 69
October 8, 1991
There being no further ~Dus~ness for the Good of the County, the
meeting was adjourned by Order of the Chair - Time: ?:46 P.M.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS/EM
OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF
SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS
CONTROL
'~ :: ~6se.mlnutes~pproved by the Board on
..:.as pres~nt~p:'~ or as corrected
Page 70