Planning Board - Regular Meeting

I added the PUD being available for the live locals, so that's why I wanted to let you know. That's why it's going in a PUD.

Thank you. We're pretty close to 9.05. Excuse me. So why don't we go back to the item on the agenda. This is the section of the agenda where members of the public could get up and speak for anything that's not on the agenda. You have four minutes. You could come up to the podium, state your name, and have at it. We do have two registered speakers. And so if I can call them first, please. Lisa Foster.

Hi.

Lisa Foster Marco resident I just wanted to comment on this PUD that just came up the that zoning request is showing as just a PUD request I believe that location is already a PUD and I'm not sure that legally it shouldn't be the request of an amendment to their PUD and I believe that changes the bar to their request and the parameters of the request Then looking a little bit further in it, if you look at Florida State Statute 125.01055, there's a provision in there for, that I think that I would call it gaming the system, where they're allowed to do development on wetlands under 10 acres. And I would hope that we would look into the, um provisions to protect those wetlands and those designations and the necessity to build on wetlands if it is even necessary a couple of months ago stephen gray proposed to city council that we send a letter to the governor and ask for an exemption to the live local act as a barrier island that needed protections to our density and as you know we frequently get storms we need to evacuate so any gross leaps in density will lead to a physical danger to us the council chose not to do that they may want to do that now even as an afterthought because at the time our city manager Mike McNeese said nothing burger it's not going to affect us it's never going to affect us well never came pretty darn fast feel kind of strongly about this we're losing control of our home rule and thank you all for your service thank you our next registered speaker mr. Hattendorf

Good morning. My name is Ron Hattendorf. I live over at Angler's Cove, Marco Island, Florida. My concern probably isn't, it's probably for the next meeting with Rose Marina, but I'm very concerned about the cruise ship. I'll get a picture again. You can see it has two pictures. There's one with the cruise ship and there's one without it in the same position. And it blocks my view and many, many other condos and residents' view. This is a five-story cruise ship. And I think I'll have to bring this up at the next meeting with Rose. I know they didn't accept the dock extension, but I know he's making room for possibly another cruise ship. And I'm very concerned about not having any of you. They're there about four days a week. They do nothing for the island. To me, it's like a bus stop. They stop, let everybody off the boat, bring buses in, and go to Collier County and spend their money and come back over our bridge. And during season, which is very crowded, I just don't know how they got away doing this because it does nothing for Marco Island at all. But I know I sent all of you people. I went with Dan Smith, who did a nice job, a very nice community director, whatever he is. And I got a letter out to all of you and to the board of Markle. So anyway, that's all I got. I want to make sure you all got that letter from me, from Dan Smith, that you're aware of my position. And I'll be at the next meeting when it's about Rosemarino. That's all. Thank you. Thank you.

So those are the registered speakers. Anyone else who would like to speak? Dr. Bona?

Good morning. Thanks for your service. Rich Blana, 1541 San Marco Road. I sent you guys an email about the seven recreational green zones. I wanted to just give you an opportunity to ask me any questions. Essentially, the point I'm trying to make is that the two green recreational zones where pickleball is currently being played, one is at the YMCA and the second one is at the city complex. And if you look at those green rec zones, I think they really were intended because the language is something like unlimited. So you're pretty much allowed to do whatever the hell you want to do in these zones. Excuse my language. And I think they were intended to capture things like, literally games, adults getting together and maybe tossing a football around or something. You can't possibly identify all of the recreational activities that could go on and the potential noise that could be generated by them. So I can understand having an unlimited green recreational zone. Why we have seven green zones, I don't quite understand. But anyway, the two that are pickleball are being played in are unlimited. And I think it's time that the planning board and the city needs to understand that no one could have ever understood the noise generated by pickleball. It's completely unique. I sent you links to articles looking at these psychological effects of this unrelenting pock, pock, pock. that goes on for 10 hours a day behind some people's houses. And again, no one could possibly have understood what that was all about when the city was formed and we incorporated and we took over the green rec zone. What I'm asking you to do is to really rethink these unlimited designations where pretty much any activity can go on and maybe start to try and get a subcommittee to at least formulate some standards for pickleball play because it's unique and we've never really been exposed to it. I mean, I actually took a lesson and played, because I want to know what I'm dealing with since it's 60 feet behind my yard. And I brought one of these new balls that are dead in the sound by 50%. And I played with the pro. And the quality of the play was unaffected. And the sound was dropped by about 50%. So there's now technology involved that can really help us deal with this sound. I was a professor of health education. My whole life I advocated people getting out and getting exercise. I just came from my three mile run on the beach. So I'm not against healthy exercise. To hear all these people having fun playing the sport is great. It's just when it's 60 feet behind your house, 12 hours a day, six, seven days a week, it creates a zoning issue that I think you need to really explore a little deeper. If you have any questions for me now, fire away. Or if you want to reach out to me, I'm more than willing to meet with you.

Thank you.

Thanks for your time.

Anyone else? All right, seeing no one, we will close public comment and move on. We have some new business. Mary, Dan, Sherry? Oh, I apologize. I got to do something out of order. Did anybody lose a pair of sunglasses? All right. There you go. They wouldn't fit my big head, so.

Good morning, Planning Board. Thank you, Chair Bailey. I will read the title of the resolution into record. This is a resolution of the City of Marco Island Planning Board approving a site development plan amendment submitted by Collier County Utilities for the property located at 2559 San Marco Road, Marco Island, Florida, making findings, approving the site development plan, providing for failure to comply with approval, providing for failure to obtain other permits, and providing for an effective date. Thank you.

Thank you. David?

Good morning. Once again, David Tolstice, Assistant City Attorney. As this is a quasi-judicial item, I would respectfully request that anybody who's going to be offering testimony or evidence related to this matter please stand and raise your right hand so we can swear you in. Is there an applicant here? All right. There he is. OK. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony gave you the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So we got it. All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, back to you for ex parte communications and disclosures.

Annette? Site visit, no communication. Site, no communication.

Site visit, no communication. Site visit, no communication. No site visit, no communication.

Site visit, no communication.

All right. Off you go.

Good morning. Mary Holden, your planning manager. Before you today, I'm going to address both applications at once because they go hand in hand, the SDP amendment and the variances. Collier County Public Utilities is upgrading their site, and in conjunction with the paving, drainage, et cetera, they're adding in elevated emergency generator and fuel tanks to provide Obviously operate the treatment plant while power goes out as a result of some of the requirements the uniqueness the Irregular lot line of budding right away, etc. They're going to have to ask for variances which include the buffer to the north, which abuts the right-of-way, to their setbacks. And the way our code reads is this is zoned PST, special treatment, which means public use, and the adjacent zoning is AGST. public use and for I mean I'm sorry AG special treatment and the way that the public use dimensional standards read is the most restrictive within a hundred feet so that would be the AG which is 50 feet all around this site was approved and built back in 1995 so some of the existing structures do not meet the setbacks but they're Illegal non-conforming they're asking for approval for this site and the existing setback encroachments Staff has reviewed all of our agencies or departments have reviewed it and There are some conditions that have been added both to the SDP and to the variance petition And it's mainly with utilities and Public Works and then our standard condition that both have to be approved. Otherwise, it's null and void Staff has no concerns with it we're recommending approval and we're recommending the Planning Board forward an approval of the variance petition to the City Council and And as you saw, the applicant is here should there be any questions.

Recommending approval, Mary, for both?

Yes, sir.

Okay. Compatibility with the comprehensive plan, compatibility with the LDC based on and the configuration of a lot. Basically what they have there is preexisting and nonconforming, correct?

Correct. And it's a public utility.

I got it. That's all I have.

Yeah, could I ask a couple questions? So a couple of nitpicky questions, if I could. And because we don't get the full packet printed anymore, and because I'm cheap, I don't print the whole thing out, so I just made a couple notes. In the resolution for this, was there an error in one of the whereas clauses where it talks about the City of Marco Island submitted the site development plan? Should that be Collier County Utilities submitted the site development plan?

Yes.

Okay, so we would need to change that?

Change that.

And then you had talked about the change in the scope of work. So on the application, it talks about the demolition and replacement of the tank, which isn't happening anymore. You talked about the generator and the fuel tank and all that getting done. But some of this other stuff talks about chemical storage, feed systems. removing the aluminum platform and stairs, which I guess that would happen. But just trying to figure out, is this other stuff happening, the improvements we made to the recirculation, piping, and tank drain systems? Is any of that happening, or is it just the generator, elevated, fuel tank?

That's what we look at. I can have the engineer comment on that, but that's more. Did you want to come up?

Just so I have an accurate scope of work, that's all. You'd have to come to the microphone and state your name for the record, please.

Mason Lundquist Tetra Tech Engineer for Collier County Utilities

Originally we were going to put in a new tank 500,000 gallon tank but Due to cost and feasibility we were going to keep that tank there. We are going to provide improvements to that pump building which includes the you know chemical feed and in all that so We're going to do the improvements to that building but in order to We were going to move that fuel tank outside, which is what we're not going to put in a new one, but we're going to elevate it, make sure it meets flood. And the main thing was we worked with Daniel as well. I believe his name is Daniel Zunzunagai. which is why we needed to move back that north fence which is why we couldn't meet that landscape buffer and you can see the irregular shape of this lot it was very difficult to meet the The AG setback requirements, but most of it is the existing, you know 500,000 gallon storage tank and Putting in a generator was a main priority and okay Yeah, I was just I was trying to figure out some of the secondary things if those were happening or not.

Yes The tank spillage

there's barrier around that if the tank ever let go yes yeah so we're gonna we're gonna keep the the tank it is and then yes there's uh for the spillage there's uh we're gonna improve that that out there so yes okay anyone else have any other questions anyone feel like making a motion and do you want two motions on this david

One for the site development plan. Yeah.

I mean, at this point, you've only had the resolution for the site development plan, so let's do the motion for that, and then we'll do the variance.

Okay.

Anyone want to make a motion on the site development plan?

I'll make a motion to approve the site development plan based on the recommendations of staff, the questions and concerns of the chairman. Second. Okay. All right.

We've got a motion and a second. Do we have anybody in the public who wants to comment on this item? All right, seeing nobody. Anything else from the board? Daisy, would you call the roll, please?

Member Henson?

Yes.

Member Ferringer? Yes. Member Finkel? Yes. Member Hogan?

Yes.

Member Jensen? Yes. Chair Bailey?

Yes. All right, that item's approved. So the variance petition, we'll repeat that process.

Thank you, Chair Bailey. I'll read the resolution for the variance by title only into the record. This is a resolution of the City of Marco Island, Florida, a proven variance petition, VP26-000054, providing for a variance from Section 30-3053 and Section 30-441G of the City of Marco Island Land Development Code for the property located at 2559 San Marco Road, Marco Island, Florida, 34145, providing for findings of condition of approval and providing for an effective date. Thank you.

So with respect to this item, I would just ask Mary to consent to the introduction of all the information provided with the site development plan amendment in this file and testimony regarding that item into this item.

I agree.

Okay.

Do you want us to repeat ex parte for this?

No, it's all the same property, same petition. So you have all the testimony and evidence that was presented with respect to the site development plan amendment included in this. You can certainly ask any questions related to this, but I think the record is complete, unless there's any public comment, of course, regarding this item.

Anyone want to make a motion? So moved.

Second. Go ahead, Joan. I'll yield to Joan.

All right. So we have a motion and a second. Do we have anybody in the public who would like to comment on this item? All right. Seeing nobody, anything else from the board? Daisy, would you call the roll, please?

Member Hogan? Yes. Member Jensen? Yes. Member Finkel? Yes. Member Ferringer? Yes. Member Henson?

Yes.

Chair Bailey?

Yes. That item moves forward. All right. Next item. Sherry? Dan?

Thank you, Chair Bailey, Sherry Kerr, City of Marco Island. I will read the ordinance by title only into the record. This is an ordinance of the City of Marco Island, Florida, amending the official zoning atlas of the City of Marco Island to provide for the rezoning of property located at 560 South Collier Boulevard, Marco Island, Florida, consisting of approximately 10.44 acres from residential tourist RT zoning. to plan unit development, PUD zoning, making specific findings providing that approval does not create a vested right, providing for failure to comply with this ordinance, providing for interpretation and severability, and providing for an effective date. Thank you.

So as with the prior items, while this is not a final action and only a recommendation to the city council, we'll still treat this as a quasi-judicial hearing. So I would ask that anybody who is going to be offering testimony or evidence related to this item, please stand at this time and raise your right hand. If you're not sure if you're going to, it's pretty painless, so we do it now. That way we don't have to do it again. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? All right, thank you very much. You may be seated. Mr. Chair, back to you and the board for any ex parte communications, site visits, et cetera.

Annette? Site visit, no communication. Site visit, no communication.

Site visit, no communication.

Site visit, no communication. Site visit, no communication.

Site visit, no communication.

All right, Dan?

Daniel Smith, Director of Community Affairs. Good morning, actually.

You want to ask a question now? I'm sorry, Dan. You want to ask a question now, Brad?

I would, just so we make sure the record's clear. Dan, I reached out to you the other day. I didn't have time to send you an email. I just want to check on the notice provision. I went by the property, saw the posting of the actual board that they put up for the change in zoning, which included the application number. It was very visible on that. What puzzled me is when I looked in the, I was looking for another reason actually regarding our pilot program on the internet, but I noticed that the public notice for this application omitted the application number. It's not on there. And Marco's code, just from my review, Marco's code requires the application number to be noticed in the paper. It's a terrible, I mean, the code reads like a maze, for God's sakes. But it references one section to another section to another section to another section. So, you know, for a city council meeting on this application, pretty clear that put the application number in the public notice. Same thing for the planning board, but it uses references throughout the code to include it all. So the reason I bring this up is for a conditional use like Rose Marina, has to have the application number in the public notice, has to be posted on the property. In this particular instance, for whatever reason, the application number was omitted in the Naples Daily News. I don't know why. So that's a jurisdictional question for me in my prior career. When you talk about land development, particularly this massive thing here that we're talking about changing zoning, jurisdiction is key. So it's not something to play around with. In other words, if jurisdiction is challenged and because the application number was not in the notice, then it's as if this meeting never occurred. That's what concerns me. It can be fixed. They can re-notice. They can come back. But there's no question that that application number is not in the daily news, nor is it online. So if someone from the public could clearly stand up and say, I didn't know what the application number was, I didn't know what to look for, I didn't know how to find it, so on and so forth, then we could have a potential issue. I do think it is within our code the way it reads. It is convoluted. It's not a quick read. I can tell you, David, it's not a quick read. There's a lot of back and forth as to what's included on a change in zoning or conditional use. We don't have use runs. So that's my concern. Unless I missed something, there was another notice in the paper, I would say that we need to consider maybe postponing and letting them re-notice it properly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

May I reply? We had a discussion yesterday. I said I didn't agree with your assessment. I said please send it to me. I haven't received anything from you.

So that's all I can say. Well, I would certainly appreciate it. Maybe the applicant. In this situation, the code reads, again, it's probably, and we all know this, the code is very complicated.

Yeah, so we're in recess until 945. All right, everyone, let's call the meeting back to order, please. So how do you guys want to proceed? Did you want to chime in? Zach, Dan, somebody?

Just so you know, I had a discussion with Zach, and we had talked about the Friday, which is the 31st. If that's available, then we can just re-advertise this and bring this back. If that's not available, then it would be the August 7th.

So July 31st or August 2nd.

July 31st.

All right. So who can do July 31st? Nanette cannot. And we don't know about Hayden's availability. You cannot do July 31st? I can do July 31st. Oh, you can do July 31st. I can do both. Okay. Could you do August? You said it was 7th, I'm sorry? 7th?

Regularly scheduled meeting.

Yeah.

I can do that too.

Well, I'm inclined to just put it on our regularly scheduled meeting if that's okay. But Zach, do you want to chime in?

Sure the Hilton would request that we do this on the 31st which is the next possible date we could do with the re-noticing I think it's disappointing that the advertisement wasn't provided to us so that we could avoid this issue there's a lot of mobilization to get into a room like this and so if we could get to the 31st that would be certainly appreciated by the Hilton but at the end of the day what I want to comment and confirm is It's your decision, we understand that, and we do not want to plow forward over a notice issue. I think it's important that the community be a part of the conversation and we're not in any way suggesting that we should move forward without this, which I think is consistent with prior positions I've taken as to these. And I, for the record, on behalf of this client and other clients, I would request that advertisements be sent to the applicant for review before they're running the paper because there's no way for us to participate in this and again there's a lot of people we had to fly people in there's a lot that has to happen to a meeting like this and we have we can't even give input so it's just it's a little frustrating on the applicant's part but the decision is easy because we're not going to move forward over a notice issue well mr chair i would say if i'm the only one that's not going to be here we have only six people today and i would certainly not be insulted if you went forward on the 31st but

I just know that I won't be in town then.

Yeah. I mean, if you're requesting the 31st, I'm inclined to do the 31st if nobody has a problem with it. It sounds like it was the city's error perhaps, right?

Is there anything on the agenda for the 7th?

There may be or you're not yet Dan.

We're thinking about Walker's cave marina coming forward, but that may not happen So right now it's kind of open So maybe just be one thing and this may be it Well, I mean I it's it's the pleasure of the board I mean show of hands who wants to do it on the 31st Who wants to do it on the 7th

I don't care.

I don't care. It doesn't matter to me.

It does not matter.

It doesn't matter. Yeah, I mean, we have a regularly scheduled meeting.

I think this is your call, Mr. Chairman. That's why you've got to sit there.

Why is it that you don't want to do it on the regularly scheduled meeting and want to do it on the 31st?

We would just like to keep the application moving forward. There's obviously subsequent notice deadlines. This goes to a series of additional hearings.

It's only a week.

It's only a week, but there's 15-day separations between everything. It's actually more like 18 days because the city has to contact the newspaper. And so, again, part of this has to do with availability of the team and just trying to keep the momentum moving forward on the application.

That's a good point, Mr. Chairman. So your team, and you said some people flew in today? Absolutely. Okay, so that's better for the 31st for them.

We prefer 31st. You prefer 31st.

Yes. Okay. And this was a city error, not your error. It was not provided to us. I don't think there's something we can do to correct it. Chairman, again, this is your call to make a recommendation. I'll certainly prepare to vote.

I'm a little on the fence because if we have a meeting scheduled for the following week and there's crickets, then we're taking staff time and resources away from things. Yeah. Well, then do the 31st. I mean, I'm fine with it. I mean, I love coming here and hanging out on Fridays with my buddies, so it's fine.

Whatever the board's pleasure is, you just need to make a motion to continue this hearing to a specific date and time, and that will cover any of the other notices that were sent.

I'll make a motion to continue to the 31st. Second.

At 9 a.m.? So the motion is continue this item, which is REZN24-000098, related to plan unit development for the property located 560 South Collier Boulevard to July 31st at 9 a.m.

So we have a motion and a second. Would it be appropriate for me to have citizen comment on the motion to continue it?

No. Okay. It's a ministerial act by the board. The item, if it passes, is continued.

I think we had this same conversation with Rose Marina. All right, so we have a motion and a second. Anything else from the board?

And the motion includes, obviously, renoticing. I assume Zach would put that in the city has to renotice with the application number. We'll take care of it.

We'll take care of it. Loud and clear.

All right. Daisy, would you call the roll, please?

Member Ferringer?

Yes.

Member Hogan? Yes. Member Finkel? Yes. Member Henson? Yes. Member Jensen? Yes. Chair Bailey?

Yes. Items continued. Forward communications.

Anything from the board? Well, I don't know. Are we down to that's just something we want to talk about briefly or not really? Like something I want to bring out?

Sure.

OK. Just quickly. The pilot program for the notice is how I caught this issue. So we started our pilot program for phasing into all digital notices. So I did some review on that and checked into it. One thing that I did discover is that when you take the link that's provided on the website to the county, and you sign up for email, and if you wanted to sign up for first class mail, there's a charge. There's actually a charge there for $8 and then $5 for each page thereafter. I did some hunting into it. I think the council would probably want to know this. It may be a flawed pilot because I checked and I can't find any other county that charges for statutory mail notice that's required by the law, David. If you register as a citizen or a resident of the community, you're entitled to the notice, and there's nothing about paying for it in the enabling state law. So I did some research. I signed up for Miami-Dade County just to see what would happen, and they mailed it right to me, no charge, $2.67, and I had a packet this thick. So that is a very important, again, jurisdictional issue. If you're going to phase all the way to digital, no more newspaper, which is usually bulletproof if you have the application number in the thing, if you're going to go all the way, then you have to make sure that you comply. Our program right now is saying you sign up, you've got to pay. I talked to a gentleman named... He called me because I signed up for it. His name is Nathan Thornton, and he works for a third-party person for the county, which the county put it off on. And the county's website disclaims any and all responsibility for emails or mailing. They disclaim it all. So if the city were to move totally to this, jurisdiction again becomes an issue on bad emails, no first-class mail, I didn't get it, how do you prove it? And the county is absolving themselves from any part of that process. So I just bring that up for David to look into, really, and so he can maybe, I don't know.

I mean, that's probably a better discussion with the city clerk, but it's a county program.

Yeah, I'm saying from our pilot program. In other words, here's what I'm afraid of. We approved and recommended the pilot program, correct? Did we not do that? We did. Did we not, Mr. Chairman? So we set that parameter up. So what I'm concerned is we get to the end of the pilot program, nobody's signing up for an $8 and $5 page thereafter. Just nobody's going to do that, and that's probably not legal, and we're not going to really know what the demand is going to be for first class unless it's free like it's supposed to be. And then the city will be able to determine is it really worth it or not. Most counties, and I'm telling you this, most cities do both. They do both and really developers that really have big applications, they don't run the risk on email and first class mail from another county. They put it in the paper and they put it in the paper and they make sure it's in the paper the right way. So I think there may be a problem with the mechanism of having to pay. I could find nothing in the law, I'm not a lawyer in Florida, I'm a lawyer in New Jersey, but I could find nothing in the law that would convince me that there's any authority to bill for first-class mail in this situation. Zero. And I can't find any other county that does it or requires money for that first-class mail. Did I just bring that up?

That's something we should look into. Okay, that's it. Something the city should look into, absolutely. Yeah, thank you. Anything else from the board? If not, entertain a motion to adjourn.

Like a motion to adjourn?

A citizen comment was at 9.05.

Yep, there it is.

This is not city council. Thank you, though. We're adjourned. Thank you. Have a great weekend.