Loading...
BCC Minutes 05/22/1991 SNaples, Florida, May 22, 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 6:30 P.M. ~n 8PZCXAL SISSION Ln Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present ALSO PRESENT: CHAIRMAN: Patricia Anne Goodnight (Arrived Late) VICE-CHAIRMAN: Michael J. Volpe Richard S. Shanahan Max A. Hasse, Jr. Burr L. Saunders Annette Guevin, Deputy Clerk; Netl Dotrill, County Manager; Ron McLemore, Assistant County Managers Tom Olltff, Assistant to the County Manager; Jennifer Pike, Assistant to the County Manager; Ken Cuyler, County Attorney; Marjorie Student and Dennis Cronin, Assistant County Attorneys; Frank Brutt, Community Development Services Administrator; Bob Blanchard, Growth Planning Director; Murdo Smith, Parks and Recreation Manager; Martha Skinner, Social Services Director; Barbara Catchtone, Michelle Edwards, Sam Saadeh and Dave Weeks, Planners; Sue Fileon, Administrative Assistant to the Board; and Dep~lty Scott Barnett, Shertff's Office. Page .~ ~ . May 22, 1991 ·.. ,. ~l~toner Volp~ chaired the ~i:lng until the arrival o£ ORD~ 91-39 ~N~NDXNG ORDXIq~NCZ 88-96, P&!~IF~ ~ RECRE~TTONAL F&CILITI~ 114P&CT ~ 0RDINANCZ - ~DOPTED AS Legal notice having been published In the Naplet~ Daily News on May 1991, and May 16, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavits of Publication filed with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider an ordt- · nancs amending Ordinance 88-96, Parks and Recreational Facilities .';.i~pact Fee Ordinance. Assistant County Attorney Cronin noted this to the second public hearing to consider amending the Collier County Parks and Recreational Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance. H~ stated the amendment proposes to Increase regional park impact fees from $144 to $179 and community park impact fees from 82?8 to 8399, per dwelling unit. He advised a related element to the community park Impact fee is the merger and consolidation of five separate community park districts In East Naples, Golden Gate, North Naples, South Naples and the urban Estates into one Naples and Urban Collier County Community Park District. He ? referred to an exhibit that he indicated showed the three community 'park districts which will be in existence following adoption of this amendment, namely the Naples and Urban Collier County Community Park District, the Marco Island Community Park District and the Immokalee Community Park District. Commissioner Hasse questioned if the impact fees charged within ,. each district will be merged or will each district receive the benefit '",:' of Its own fees? Mr. Cronin responded the fees will remain in the three separate community park districts. Commissioner Hasse commented that the districts receiving less impact fees~l-ll-have a smaller fund, to which Mr. Cronin concurred. 'County Attorney Cuyler explained the theory that a district is receiving less impact fee revenue because the growth rate Is less, therefore, less revenue Is needed for growth related construction. am IJt;u,,. 03 Page 2 ,~:~-.. ., May 22, 199! -~.. '? Commissioner Saunders added that Collier County is constrained by Florida legal requirements to use Impact fees generated in a certain area.within that area. ~ Commissioner Volpe mentioned there are no impact fees being collected on Marco Island. He asked how will the County address the growth anticipated in that area? Jane Fitzpatrick with Henderson, Young & Company, advised that although there are currently no impact fees collected on Marco Island for community parks, there is an impact fee for regional parks. She explained that by comparing the capacity of the facilities on Marco Island, there is excess capacity at the present time. She added the level of service on Marco Island is higher than that which was adopted in the Comprehensive Plan for the County. .... :i.'.'In answer to Commissioner Volpe, Ms. Fitzpatrick gave a brief history on how the original districts were e~tabltshed in 1988. She reported since the Comprehensive Plan limited the service area to a three mile radius, Marco Island was not isolated, it was established based on that radius. She added Marco Shores, under the current system, is not in any of the community park districts, but with this amendment will be included in the new l~aples and Urban Collier County Community Park District. '' Commissioner Volpe inquired if the impact fees can be used for infrastructure, not within the parks themselves, but for access roads to the parks? Mr. Cronin responded that is not an allowable use of the fees. Ms. Fitzpatrick advised the cost factors which were included in the Impact fees do not Include access roads, turn lanes or signals to Facilities themselves. She remarked the Board can assess the parks impact fees for road improvements and reflect that charge in the park impact fees. , Commissioner Volpe asked the Board to consider using impact fees for:,:improvements that may have to be made fox. access to the parks. .,::Me. Fitzpatrick cautioned the impact fee~ collected to date cannot / OOU?llf'~' OA Page 3 be used for road Improvements becau.e it was not factored Into the !i.,',~cost of those fees. '..,,. : County Manager Dorrill stated that a fairly good argument may be made to using impact fees for access roads if the primary benefit of the road is to gain access to the park as opposed to providing an arterial road benefit, to which County Attorney Cu¥1er concurred. Commissioner Volpe suggested the proposal be amended to reflect the above. Cc~Assioner Shanahen ~oved, seconded b~ Co--lsstoner Huse ~d =~t~ 4/0, to clo~ the ~bl/c he~/ng. ~~to~r S~ ~, ~ond~ ~ Co~t~stoner Sa~r~ ~d c~-4/0, ~o a~ t~ ~~t to Ordt~ce 88-96 u ~~ ~ ~te~ into Ordlmce ~ok No. 43: ORDINANCE 91-39 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 88-96, RELATING TO COLLIER COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE; PROVIDING FOR MODIFICATION TO PARTICULAR DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR MODIFICATIONS AND UPDATING OF THE STUDY ENTITLED "IMPACT FEES FOR PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA"; PROVIDING FOR DELETION AND MERGER OF SPECIFIC COMMUNITY PARK DISTRICTS; PROVIDING FOR DELETION AND MERGER OF SPECIFIC COUNTY COMMUNITY PARK IMPACT FEES TRUST ACCOUNTS; PROVIDING FOR DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTION CREDIT TO BE DETERMINED AT A SPECIFIC TIME; PROVIDING FOR THE ORDINANCE TO BE REVIEWED EVERY THREE (3) YEARS; PROVIDING FOR AN INCREASE TO THE IMPOSITION OF THE REGIONAL PARK IMPACT FEE AND THE COMMUNITY PARK DISTRICT IMPACT FEE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ORDIHANC~ 91-40 RE PETITION Z0-90-21, TO AMEND ORDINANCE 82-2, SECTION 9.9, TO PROVIDE H~I~HT, LIGHTING AND NOISE REGULATIONS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT AROUND COLLIER COUNTY AIRPORTS AND TO PROVIDE NOTICE OF POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACTS FOR PROPERTIES WITHIN TH~ ESTaBLISHeD NAPLES AIRPORT NOISE ZONES - ADOPTED Legal notice having been published In the Naples Daily News on May 16, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with the Clerk, public hsarlng was opened to consider Petition ZO-90-2~, to "amend Ordinance 82-2, Section 9.9. Planner Michelle Edwards advised this As the second public hearing on this Item. She said the proposed amendment Includes two parts. 05 Page The.first part, she reported, ia an update of special regulations to ~'~. prevent hazards which endanger the lives and properties of users of the airports in Collier County as well as occupants of land within the vicinity of airports. She advised the amendmt~nt relates to the height and lighting requirements and includes maps identifying the various zones in which those requirements must be met. Ms. Edwards explained the second part of %he ame~tdment refers to sound-proofing of residential uses within the established noise zones !:.' around Naples Municipal Airport. She mentioned the other airports within the County do not have noise zones. She stat~d the ordinance establishes the noise zones identified in the Part 1§0 Study through · maps which depict the noise zones and the legal descriptions of those ' zones. She added sound-proofing will be required for renovations or additions to structures. She asserted the ordinance also provides notification of potential noise impact to tho~e area~ affected by the :!:'/ noise zones. Commissioner Volp~? commented that landfills are prohibited uses ~.i. within the zones, however, landfill is not defined. Assistant County Attorney Student advised landfills were included in the ordinance pursuant to requirements of State statute, therefore, that-may be the place to look for a definition. She advised, however, · hat the proper place for inclusion of the definition would be Section 20 of the Zoning Ordinance, which contains definitions. David Borden, representing the Halstart Partnership which owns the Grey Oaks project, reported the end of the Naples Municipal Airport ';? n~ise zone penetrates the lower quadrant of that project. He stated the Part 150 Study was done at the time P~edmont Airlines was flying out of the airport. He said those engines created an artificially large amount of noise at the time of the study. He stated the study thentook those noise standards and projected them at an increasing rats over five years, which created the noise zone as it is presently :: established. He noted there is no motivation for th~ Airport to con- duct another Part ~50 Study and as a result, the Grey Oaks project is impacted by something they should not have to comply with. ~sm~one%" $]~,,nmhm- ~oved, ~econded by Co~~ ~ ~d ~i~ 4/0, ~o c~o~ ~he ~b~c he~ng. c~ 4/0, to Ipprovl Petition Z0-90-2~ ~d ~ha~ ~he Ord~cu u ~~ ~ titled ~1~ ~ adopted ~d entere~ Anto Ordi~ce ~ok No. 43: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANGE NO. 82-2, THE GOMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINGORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SEGTION 20, DEFINITIONS, TO ADD CERTAIN DEFINITIONS RELATIVE TO AIRPORT NOISE AND SAFETY; BY AMENDING SECTION 9.9, SPECIAL REGULATIONS FOR SPEGIFIED AREAS IN AND AROUND THE NAPLES, EVERGLADES, AER0-0ASIS, MARCO ISLAND AND IMMOKALEE (ED SCOTT AIRFIELD) AIRPORTS TO AMEND THE TITLE, TO MAKE REVISIONS TO TEXT TO ADD CERTAIN LAND USE RESTRICTIONS, TO AMEND NONCONFORMING USE REQUIREMENTS, AND TO REDESICNATE THE AIRPORT NOISE ZONE; BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION 9.9 d., NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT NOISE ZONES, LAND USE RESTRICTIONS, SOUND LEVEL REQUIREMENTS (SLR} FOR STRUCTURES, AND SLR DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, TO REGULATE THE SOUND LEVEL REDUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION 9.9 e., TO REQUIRE NOTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL NOISE IMPACT; BY PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Itel#SC PETITION ZO-91-2, AN ORDINANCE &MENDING ORDINAIlCH 82-2, BY AMENDING $~CTION ?.23, (PUD) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT BY DHLETING SUBS%CTION 7.2Tf.6., MULTI-FAMILY ~lqTRY LEVEL RENTAL HOUSING - SECOND PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD JUNE 5r 1991 Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on May 14, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publicatioa f~led w~th the : Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider Petition ZO-91-2, an ordinance amending Ordinance 82-2, by amending Section ?.2S, (PUD) Planned Unit Development District. Planner Sam Saadeh presented Petition Z0-9]-2, an ordinance amending Ordinance 82-2, by amending Section ?.23, (PUD) Planned Unit Development District by deleting Subsaction 7.27f.6., Multi-Family Entry Level Rental Housing. He referred to the November 27, 1990 Board of County Comm~ssioners meeting at which a new Affordable · Housing Ordinance, which was ~ntended to take precedence over ';'~ Subsection ?.27f.6., was adopted, therefore, S%lbsectton ? 27f.6. 'should be deleted. He noted on May 2, 1991, the CCPC unanimously for- Page 6 warded Petition Z0-91-2 to the Board of County Conunlsslonere with a recommendation for approval. ~~ ~~ly, to c2~ t~ ~bllc ~tng. Co~tsstoner Goodnight advised ~he second public hearing to con- s/der Pet/t/on Z0-91-2 ~tll be he~d on J~e 5, 1991. lt~.~D O~~ 91-41 ~ZNG ~ ZONI~ ~UATION O~ZN~CE~ ~LZTZ~ C~~, ZNC., ~ C~ON ~SOL~IOR 91-388 Legal notice having been published in the Naples Daily News on May 16, 1991, as evidenced by Affidavit of Publication flied with the Clerk, public hearing was opened to consider amending the Zoning Reevaluatton Ordinance and the fee schedule for compatibility excep- t ton~. :.. Assistant County Attorney Student noted this t~ the second public hearing to consider this item. She said the Board has executed the stipulated settlement agreement which provides for these amendments to the Zoning Resvaluation Ordinance. She explained there are provisions relating to providing that a list Is made availabl(~ to the public, in advance of notification to the property owner, of ~he Growth Planning Director's determinations on compatibility except/on applications. She added the standing to come before this Board on an appeal for a compatibility exception determination, as well as an appeal from the !!~i,i.Heartng Off/certs dec/s/on in the vested rights determination have also been broadened. She advised the companion resolution Is an a~endment to an existing resolution setting forth the fees for these types of proceedings, specifically the fee for compatibility deter- mtnatlon has been amended to be $100. She concluded the CCPC unani- mously recommended that the Board approve these amendments. County Attorney Cu¥1er commented that during a discussion with Dudley Goodlette this date, he requested clarification with regard to Page ? Section 3 of the agreement. Nay 22, 1991 He expressed that some people are under the Impression that Section 3 provided that the compatibility excep- tion determinations Issued by the Growth Planning Department would not ~:~-. be available until July 22nd. In fact, he advised, the agreement says ., either on the effective date of this ordinance or July 22nd, whichever is earlier. He said thereafter, the 10 day notice requirement for the compatibility exception results will be listed by Growth Planning and can be issued without waiting until July 22nd. Commissioner Shan~han coeuauntcated that Mr. Goodlette asked that the following statement be read into the record: "Granting the public the right to participate in these applications is improper. Florida Statute 163 clearly sets forth the publlc'a right to participate in local government action in cases involving County determinations which may be Inconsistent with its comprehensive plan. The publicks right under the proposed settlement agreement goes way beyond the Statutory !ietandtng provisions." Commissioner Saunders suggested in responge, that the Statute sets out mtnlmu~ standing requirements. He Indicated he does not believe there is any prohibition under Florida law for those standing rights to be.expanded beyond the mtnlmu~ requirements. Assistant County Attorney Student concurried, adding that the aim of the Growth Management Act is to ensure public participation. C4e~J~e,on~r Shanaban ~oved, ~econded by Co.~t~sioner ~e and carr~e4-unanJ~ma~l¥, to close the ;,abllc he~rtng. Ce..~t~,on~r $hanahan ~oved, .~conded by Co--~sloner Volpa and c~teduna~zJ~e~u~ly, to approve th~ a~nd~ent. to the Zoning Reev~lu~tton Ordinance, adopt ~esolution 91-388 m~d~ng the fee sche- du~efo~ co,~tibil~t~ exception~, ~nd that the Ordinance a. numbered ~ titled belo~be adopted ~nd entered into Ordtn~ncs Book ~o. 43: ORDI~CE 91-41 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 90-23, THE COLLIER COUNTY ZONING REEVALUATION ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING SECTION 10.4, REVIEW AND DETERMINATION BY GROWTH PLANNING DIRECTOR, TO REQUIRE THE POSTING OF PROPOSED COMPATIBILITY EXCEPTION DECISIONS FOR A PERIOD OF TEN DAYS PRIOR TO THEIR RIlLEASE; AMENDING SECTION 10.5, APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, TO PERMIT ANY COLLIER COUNTY RESIDENT OR REAL PROPERTY OWNER TO APPEAL OR May 22, 1991 INTERVENE IN THE APPEAL OF A COMPATIBILITY EXCEPTION DETERMINATION= AMENDING SECTION 11.8, APPEAL TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, TO PERMIT ANY PARTY TO THE HEARING OFFICER'S HEARING ON VESTED RIGHTS APPLICATIONS TO APPEAL THE HEARING OFFICER'S DECISION TO THE BOARD; AMENDING SECTION 13, APPEALS, TO ALLOW ANY PARTY TO AN APPEAL OF A COMPATIBILITY EXCEPTION OR VESTED RIGHTS DETERMINATION TO APPLY TO THE CIRCUIT COURT HAVING JURISDICTION IN COLLIER COUNTY FOR JUDICIAL RELIEF; BY PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY~ AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Commissioner Saunders updated the Board on the status of the other challenges by the Clttzen's PolttAcal Committee. He advised the Is'sues have been narrowed to a few that are very manageable, and It appears that those cases may soon be resolved. He noted the Ctttzen's Political Committee and Staff have been very cooperative in attempting to obtain a good result. Page 9 May 22, 1991 There being no further business flor the Good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Order of th~ Chair - Time: ?:15 P.M. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS/ BOARD OF ZO~!ING APPEALS/EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD(S) OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS UNDER ITS CONTROL MICHAE~ VOL~E, VICE-CHAIRMAN .-" ~ved by the Board as prese~ted,'~'[~.~~' or as corrected [10U- iU Page ZO