THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND
City Council Meeting Agenda
Chairman: Michael F. Minozzi
City Council: John A. Arceri, Heyward E. Boyce, Terri DiSciullo, Vickie Kelber,
S. Jeannette K. Patterson, E. Glenn Tucker
City Manager: A. William Moss
City Clerk: Laura Litzan City Attorney: Rich Yovanovich
Regular Meeting
Monday, April 7, 2003, 4:30 PM
Frank E. Mackle Jr. Community Park,1361 Andalusia Terrace
Marco Island, Florida
Notice: Formal action may be taken on any item discussed or added to this agenda. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard.
1. ROLL CALL
2. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Greg Niles, Community Development Director
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
(A) Council Minutes for March 17, 2003 (Regular Meeting)
5. BUSINESS
(A) RESOLUTION A Resolution Identifying the Parcels and Interest to be Acquired in Connection with the Acquisition of the Water and Wastewater Utility Assets of Florida Water Services Corporation.
(B) RESOLUTION A Resolution for District IV Sidewalk Improvement Assessment.
(C) DISCUSSION Award of Contract Engineering Services for North Collier Boulevard.
(D) DISCUSSION Award of Contract Engineering Services for South Collier Boulevard.
(E) DISCUSSION Award of Contract Bridge Repair for Caxambas Court and Blackmore Court Bridge.
(F) DISCUSSION Appointment to the Code Enforcement Board.
(G) DISCUSSION Selection Process for City Attorney.
(H) DISCUSSION Managing Agency for Otter Mound Property.
(I) DISCUSSION Emergency Dispatch Services.
(J) DISCUSSION Annual Level of Service (LOS) Report Concurrency Management.
6. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND DISCUSSION
7. FUTURE AGENDA
8. PUBLIC COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
9. ADJOURN
We encourage our citizens to participate in the governing of Marco Island. Public comments are appreciated. We respectfully ask our citizens to be courteous, and to respect the rights of others to petition City Council and express their opinions. We also ask that Public comment be limited to four minutes.
THE CITY OF MARCO ISLAND
City Council Meeting Agenda
Chairman: Michael F. Minozzi
City Council: John A. Arceri, Heyward E. Boyce, Terri DiSciullo, Vickie Kelber,
S. Jeannette K. Patterson, E. Glenn Tucker
City Manager: A. William Moss
City Clerk: Laura Litzan City Attorney: Rich Yovanovich
Regular Meeting
Monday, April 7, 2003, 6:00 PM
Frank E. Mackle Jr. Community Park,1361 Andalusia Terrace
Marco Island, Florida
Notice: Formal action may be taken on any item discussed or added to this agenda. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard.
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Michael F. Minozzi, Council Chairman
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. PRESENTATIONS
(B) Recognition Plaque for Service as Council Chairman E. Glenn Tucker.
5. BUSINESS
(K) ORDINANCE Second Reading & Public Hearing An Ordinance to Amend Existing Signage Regulations.
(L) ORDINANCE Second Reading & Public Hearing Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment SSCPA-03-02, Eastern 300 Feet of Tract C, Unit 17 (Moran s Barge Marina) From “Preservation/Conservation” to “Community Commercial”.
(M) ORDINANCE Second Reading & Public Hearing Petition R-02-02, William G. Morris as agent for Moran s Barge Marina, is Requesting a Rezone From A-ST to C-4, Companion to Petition SSCPA-03-02.
(N) ORDINANCE Second Reading & Public Hearing Amendment to the Conditional Use Section of the CF (Community Facility) Zoning District Standards to Add the Ability to Exceed the 30-Foot Maximum Height for Certain Care Housing Facilities, Subject to Addition Review Criteria.
(O) ORDINANCE Second Reading & Public Hearing Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment SSCPA-03-01, Tract “L”, MB Unit 5, From “Low Density Residential” to “Community Commercial”, Approximately 0.38 Acre.
(P) ORDINANCE Second Reading & Public Hearing Rezoning From RSF-3 to C-1/T, Petition R-03-01, Companion to Petition SSCPA-03-01.
(Q) RESOLUTION Public Hearing Craig R. Woodward, representing Kinglsey Investment, LLC, is requesting Conditional Use “10” of Section “30-324” of the Community Facility “CF” Zoning District to Increase the Maximum Building Height of Principal Structures from 30 Feet to 50 Feet, in Order to Construct a Continuing Care Retirement Community (The Aviary) on Subject Site.
(R) RESOLUTION Reconsideration of Petition V-03-01, Requesting a 2.5 Foot Variance from the Required 18-Foot From Yard Depth Requirement for a Single-Family House Located at 1472 Butterfield Court, Marco Island.
(S) DISCUSSION / APPEAL An Appeal Filed by Vincent A. Cautero Representing Calusa Island Marina, Marco Shores, Appealing an Official Interpretation that any Introduction of Hotel Units at the Goodland Marina Would Be Subject to Residential Density Calculations.
(T) DISCUSSION Development of a Dog Park.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT (ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
7. ADJOURN
We encourage our citizens to participate in the governing of Marco Island. Public comments are appreciated. We respectfully ask our citizens to be courteous, and to respect the rights of others to petition City Council and express their opinions. We also ask that Public comment be limited to four minutes.
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: 4(B) Prepared By: A. William Moss, City Manager
Date: March 24, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Presentation
Subject: Recognition of Service as Chairman Department: City Council
E. Glenn Tucker
BACKGROUND:
E. Glenn Tucker served as Chairman of the Marco Island City Council for the period March 19, 2001 to March 17, 2003. A plaque will be presented to Vice-Chair Tucker in recognition of his leadership and exemplary service as Chairman.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Presentation of plaque by the Chairman on behalf of City Council.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: 5(F) Prepared By: A. William Moss, City Manager
Date: March 10, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Discussion
Subject: Appointment to the Code Enforcement Board Department: City Council
BACKGROUND:
Chapter 14, Article II of the City Code established the seven-member Code Enforcement Board. The Code provides that appointment of the members to the Code Enforcement Board shall be made on the basis of experience or interest in the fields of zoning and building control, or others areas that are relevant to the codes or ordinances of the City to be enforced. The membership of the board shall, whenever possible, include, but not be limited to, an architect, a business person, an engineer, a general contractor, a subcontractor, and a realtor.
On March 3, 2003 City Council directed staff to advertise for the vacant position on the Code Enforcement Board due to the resignation of Mr. Monte Lazarus, which resulted from Mr. Lazarus s appointment to the Planning Board. Mr. Lazarus was appointed by Vice-Chair Tucker; his unexpired four-year term ends in March 2004.
The resumes from interested citizens who have applied for the position are attached for consideration.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion by Vice-Chair Tucker to nominate (citizen name) for appointment to the Code Enforcement Board.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: K. Greg Niles
5(H) Date: March 10, 2003
Agenda Section: Discussion
Business:
Subject: Managing Agency Acceptance Otter Department: Community Development
Mound Property, Addison Court
BACKGROUND:
Recently the State of Florida announced that the "Otter Mound" property, a 1.78 acre tract adjacent to Addison Court, had been selected for acquisition under a preservation grant program. City Council may recall that in October 2002 Council approved a three-lot subdivision for the subject property at the request of the owner. As represented to staff and City Council, the owner's desire for the subdivision was to heighten the status of the property to "imminent development potential", and thus hasten the need for prompt consideration by the State.
The Otter Mound property contains whelk shell walls that have historical significance. The State has requested that the City serve as managing agency for the property (See attached memorandum). Staff has contacted the State to determine what may be expected from the City as managing agency, and received a list of potential activities (also attached). As noted in the attached document, the activities listed may be initiated by the managing agency. In response to the list of activities staff offers the following assessment:
1. Posting City can post the property appropriately.
2. Law Enforcement & Protection Police Department can patrol the subject property.
3. Management Plan Development Reserve action for another custodial group such as the Historical Society or the Conservancy.
4. Bridge/Culvert Replacement/Repair N/A.
5. Road Repairs N/A.
6. Establishing Parking Areas May be accommodated within ROW after Management Plan is developed.
7. Exotic Species Control Will seek grant assistance, either by City staff or custodial group. Could have a fiscal impact for exotic removal.
8. Prescribed Burning N/A.
9. Fences or Gates N/A if property is posted appropriately.
10. Removal of Structures N/A.
11. Replace Existing Water Control Structures N/A.
12. Wildlife Habitat Enhancement City will monitor and mark nests as needed.
13. Trash removal Will seek a custodial group partner to remove trash a/k/a "adopt a road".
14. Personnel N/A.
The property owner is anxious to complete the land transaction with the State. Further, staff has received inquiries from groups interested in assuming custodial responsibilities should the City become the managing agency as requested.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discussion; motion to accept managing agency responsibilities for the Otter Mound property, if desired.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: A. William Moss, City Manager
5(A) Date: March 10, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Resolution
Subject: A Resolution Identifying the Parcels and Interest Department: City Council
To be Acquired in Connection with the Acquisition
Of the Water and Wastewater Utility Assets of
Florida Water Services Corporation
BACKGROUND:
On February 19, 2002 City Council adopted a resolution to initiate eminent domain proceedings to acquire the Marco Island water and sewer systems from Florida Water Services Corporation. On December 2, 2002 City Council authorized the City Manager to negotiate in good faith with the owner in an attempt to reach an agreement regarding the amount of compensation to be paid. Council further authorized the City Manager to offer the sum of $90 million to Florida Water Services Corporation. The offer was submitted, but the City has received no response.
The City s condemnation counsel, Oliver, Hicks & Schreiber, P.A., recommends that City Council adopt another resolution to ratify and re-adopt the original resolution and to list the real property to be acquired through the acquisition by the use of eminent domain. The resolution is attached.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt resolution.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: A. William Moss, City Manager
5(G) Date: March 19, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Discussion
Subject: City Attorney Department: City Council
BACKGROUND:
On March 17, 2003 City Council discussed options for legal services provided by the City Attorney. Options discussed included: renegotiation of the contract for legal services with Goodlette, Coleman ,and Johnson, requesting Statements of Qualifications from qualified attorneys to provide legal services, and hiring “in-house” legal counsel.
The attached memorandum from the Finance Director shows the amount expended last year for legal services (excluding expenditures for utility issues). Based upon expenditures for the last two years and year to date projections, we should expect to expend in the range of $100,000 annually for general legal services. Specialty legal services such as litigation, labor negotiations, and utility matters are not included.
Options for consideration include the following:
1. The City Council may appoint one of its members to negotiate a renewal contract with the law firm of Goodlette, Coleman, and Johnson, P.A. Mr. Yovanovich has indicated that his firm would like to continue providing legal services to the City, with Mr. Yovanovich serving as lead counsel. A new contract would state the specific hourly rate and provisions for contract review and termination.
2. Distribute a Request for Qualifications for General Legal Services. The Statement of Qualifications would then be forwarded to City Council for consideration. City Council may prefer to develop a “short list” of two or three firms or individuals and arrange for interviews. Thereafter, a firm or individual would be selected. City Council should then negotiate a contract with the selected firm or authorize one of its members to negotiate on behalf of City Council.
3. City Council has inquired as to the desirability of hiring full-time in-house counsel to serve as City Attorney. A full-time attorney has several advantages. These include: one person dedicated to Marco Island on a full-time basis; immediate accessibility to Councilors and staff on a daily basis; greater involvement of legal counsel in day-to-day affairs; individual dedicated to the practice of municipal law; City Manager and staff will be able to dedicate their time to other issues rather than researching law and drafting ordinances.
There are also disadvantages. These include: cost effectiveness of in-house counsel; the likelihood of additional clerical support, either immediately or in the future; the potential for insufficient workload to justify a full-time position; outside counsel may still be required for special legal issues and litigation; one attorney may not offer the “depth of experience” that may be found in a practice with more than one attorney.
There is likely no clear economic advantage to retaining in-house counsel. One should expect that the salary and benefits for a City Attorney will exceed the current annual costs, and any future clerical services will add to the cost. However, the advantages of a full-time attorney may warrant slightly higher costs in exchange for the full-time services available to City Council and staff. Furthermore, in-house counsel may be able to offer services currently provided by specialized services such as labor, pension, and litigation.
Should City Council be unsure as to whether legal services should be provided contractually or in-house, the Request for Qualifications could be designed to allow candidates and firms to express an interest in either contractual services or full-time in-house services. City Council would then have the option of comparing services and making the decision at a later date.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discussion and direction.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: 5(N) Prepared By: K. Greg Niles
Date: March 19, 2003
Agenda Section: Ord. 2nd Reading/Public Hearing
Business:
Subject: Amendment to Conditional Use section of the Department: Community Development
CF (community facility) Zoning District to add
The ability to exceed 30 foot maximum height
For certain Care Housing facilities subject to
Additional review criteria.
BACKGROUND:
At the March 17, 2003 meeting, City Council adopted on first reading an ordinance to amend the conditional use section of the CF (community facility) zoning district standards (Sec. 30-324), to allow certain care housing facilities to exceed the maximum building height of 30 feet, subject to additional review criteria.
When considering the ordinance on first reading, Council decided to replace proposed review criteria (10) b. with alternative language that was presented and discussed at length. The alternative language has been incorporated into the attached ordinance for consideration on second reading.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct required public hearing; motion to approve ordinance on second reading.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: 5(J) Prepared By: K. Greg Niles
Date: March 23, 2003
Agenda Section: Discussion
Business:
Subject: Annual Level of Service (LOS) Report Department: Community Development
Concurrency Management System
BACKGROUND:
City Council has been presented under separate cover with a copy of the Annual Level of Service (LOS) Report. This report tracks development impacts on adopted LOS standards, and provides a mechanism to forewarn City Council of potential LOS deficiencies over the next five years. As noted in the Executive Summary (copy attached), and Chart provided at the beginning of Tab B of the Report, the City is operating within adopted LOS standards, and with minor exceptions, will continue to operate in full compliance throughout the five-year horizon.
Adopted Level of Service standards apply to the following areas: 1. Transportation; 2. Potable Water; 3. Sanitary Sewers; 4. Stormwater Drainage; 5. Community Parks; and 6. Solid Waste.
Currently the City is primarily responsible for transportation, stormwater drainage and community park facilities. Solid Waste is managed through agreements with Collier County. Potable water and sanitary sewers are primarily within the control of a private entity (Florida Water Services). Due to on-going issues with that private entity, detailed evaluation of facility capacity and future capital expenditures have proven difficult to ascertain, and therefore the report utilizes information gleaned from permit applications.
Per Chapter 30, Article X (Concurrency Management System) the Planning Board is required to conduct a public hearing on the contents of the Annual LOS report, and if the current LOS is below adopted levels of service policy standards, must discuss and recommend three potential strategies to resolve those deficiencies. The Planning Board considered this report at their March 21, 2003 meeting, and after the required public hearing determined that no corrective actions as stated in City Code are warranted at this time. While the Planning Board would like to further scrutinize the information of the report, and adopted LOS standards, they voted 3-2 to recommend that City Council receive the report with no further action.
Attached for Council's review is a draft resolution to accept the findings of the LOS report. Per City Code, Council will conduct a public hearing on the report on April 21st at which time the resolution can be adopted. Once the resolution is adopted, the report will be forwarded to the Dept. of Community Affairs as the City's first AUIR (Annual Update and Inventory Report).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: Bryan Milk, City Planner
5(P) Date: March 25, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Ordinance 2nd Reading
Subject: Rezoning action for RSF-3 to C-1/T
Petition R-03-01, Companion to Petition SSCPA-03-01 Department: Community Development
BACKGROUND:
Attached for Council s consideration on second reading is a petition from Margot Knauerhase of ERA Real Estate, representing Gottfried and Thelka Zielke requesting a rezone from “RSF-3” (single family residential) to”C-1/T” (transitional commercial), for property located at the southeast intersection of South Barfield Drive and Hawaii Circle, further described as Tract “L”, Marco Beach Unit 5.
Historically, the 0.38-acre lot was zoned “C-3” consistent with other commercial property located immediately north and south of the subject site. However, in 1991 the Collier County Board of County Commissioners rezoned the subject property from “C-3” to “RSF-3” through the Collier County Zoning Re-Evaluation Program mandated by Collier County Comprehensive Plan.
The Zielkes have previously inquired about building a single-family residence on the vacant 0.38-acre corner lot, however, pursuant to the Marco Island Deed Restrictions, a single-family residence is prohibited from being developed on the subject property. In contrast, these same deed restrictions allow commercial and institutional type land uses, many of which are higher intensity and more offensive than the uses provided for in the “C-1/T” zoning district.
The Planning Board considered this petition at a public hearing on January 31, 2003, and voted 5 to 0, with 1 abstention, to recommend approval of Petition R-03-01. No members of the public spoke in opposition or support for the petition.
City Council approved this petition on first reading at the meeting of March 17, 2003.
Depending on City Council s action regarding the companion small-scale comprehensive plan amendment, this petition should either be tabled or progress forward consistent with the comprehensive plan amendment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1) Motion to table; or
2) Conduct public hearing; motion to approve ordinance on second reading, if desired.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: Bryan Milk, City Planner
5(Q) Date: March 26, 2003
Agenda Section: ,
Business: Resolution Public Hearing
Subject: Conditional Use petition to increase
the maximum building height of principal structures
from 30 feet to 50 feet. Department: Community Development
BACKGROUND:
Craig R. Woodward, representing Kingsley Investment, LLC, is requesting conditional use “10” of Section “30-324” of the Community Facility “CF” zoning district to increase the maximum building height of principal structures from 30 feet to 50 feet, in order to construct a Continuing Care Retirement Community (The Aviary) on the subject 5.7 acre site.
The facility will consist of 100 independent housing units, and 24 assisted living units. According to the petitioner, the Aviary will be licensed by the State of Florida as an Assisted Living Facility. On-site amenities that support the assisted living environment for both independent and dependent units include a 24 hour care and maintenance staff, common dining facilities and support facilities, health spa, fitness center, meeting rooms, library , computer room, and chapel. The total floor area devoted to these amenities and services is approximately 33,665 square feet. Outdoor amenities include lush landscaping, enhanced perimeter walking paths, and garden plots.
The Aviary is comprised of five stories and provides approximately 228,100 square feet of air-conditioned floor area. Presently, 61% of the site is devoted to open space, which is encompassed with landscaping, recreation amenities, pathways, and water features. Two driveways are provided at San Marco Road with a service drive contiguous to the main entry drive. The master plan reveals vehicular parking throughout the site with under building parking provided. Additionally, the plan provides perimeter landscape buffers, a jurisdictional preservation area, and a 6-foot tall masonry wall adjacent to the western property line.
The architectural plans reveal 24 assisted living units on the first floor. The remaining floors accommodate independent care units ranging in size from 1,100 square feet to 2,555 square feet with the average room size equating to approximately 1,500 square feet. Most of the amenities are provided on the first and second floors.
The Planning Board considered this petition on March 21, 2003 and voted 4 to 0, with 1 abstention, to recommend conditional approval of Petition CU-03-01. The Planning Board, after lengthy discussions, requested a detailed list of services and amenities for “aging in place”. The petitioner publicly
acknowledged the Aviary would provide a list of services and amenities prior to Council s review. The Planning Board s favorable recommendation was premised upon this stipulation and additional conditions and exhibits listed in the Resolution of Adoption.
Staff has not received any letters or telecommunications opposing the subject petition.
City Council will be acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals when considering this petition.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct public hearing; motion to approve, if desired.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: April 7, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: K. Greg Niles
5(S) Date: March 26, 2003
Agenda Section: Discussion - Appeal
Business:
Subject: Appeal of Official Interpretation Department: Community Development
Re: Calusa Island Marina
BACKGROUND:
On January 21, 2003 an Official Interpretation was rendered pursuant to the Calusa Island Marina, a component of the Marco Shores PUD. The interpretation stated that, "any introduction of hotel units at the Goodland Marina would be subject to residential density calculations as specified in the LDC". Mr. Vincent Cautero, AICP, as agent for Calusa Island Marina has filed an appeal of that interpretation.
In this matter City Council will be acting as the City's Board of Zoning Appeals. Per City Code, City Council may, at the conclusion of the required public hearing, adopt the interpretation rendered by the Community Development Director, with or without conditions, or reject the interpretation. Further, the board of zoning appeals…shall not be authorized to modify or reject the director's interpretation unless such board finds that the determination is not supported by substantial competent evidence or that the determination is contrary to the comprehensive plan, the future land use map plan, the code or the official zoning atlas, whichever is applicable.
Attached for Council's review and consideration is a memorandum in response to the appeal, and associated documents identified as Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
| 
