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, May 19, 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. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Greg Niles, Community Development Director
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
(A) Council Minutes for May 7, 2003 (Regular Meeting)
5. BUSINESS
(A) RESOLUTION – Public Hearing – Petition No. V-03-03, Kenneth Gordon King, as agent for Gigi Moers, property owner, requesting a 7.5-foot variance from the required 7.5-foot setback requirement for a boat dock facility on property located at 1049 San Marco Road, Marco Island.
(B) RESOLUTION – Public Hearing – Petition No. BD-02-34, Jerry Neal, as agent for Bayfront Place, LC, property owner, requesting a 20-foot extension from the maximum permitted 20-foot protrusion into the waterway to allow for a 40-foot boat docking facility on property located at 771-779 West Elkcam Circle, Marco Island.
(C) RESOLUTION – Public Hearing – An appeal filed by Stephen R. Ostrow, Esq., representing Philip and Martha Spaulding, property owners, appealing the Official Interpretation of the Marco Island City Code. Mr. Ostrow is appealing the interpretation that the boat docking facility constructed at 171 Geranium Court, Marco Island, does not comply with the applicable setback requirements of 7.5-feet as set forth in Section 54-111.
(D) RESOLUTION - Regarding the Acquisition of the Water and Sewer Utility System from Florida Water Services, A Resolution Establishing Intent to Reimburse Certain Capital Expenditures Incurred with Proceeds of Future Tax-Exempt Financing.
(E) DISCUSSION – Approval of City Attorney Contract.
(F) DISCUSSION – Urban County Agreement – HUD.
(G) DISCUSSION – Memorial Contributions.
(H) DISCUSSION – Fiscal Year 2004 Spending Cap Calculations.
(I) DISCUSSION – Workshop to Discuss Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan.
(J) DISCUSSION - Acquisition of Glon Property on Elkcam Circle.
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.
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: K. Greg Niles
5(F) Date: May 6, 2003
Agenda Section: Discussion
Business:
Subject: Urban County Cooperation Agreement Department: Community Development
BACKGROUND:
In September 2001 the City of Marco Island entered into a three-year Urban County Cooperative Agreement with Collier County. At that time the County was seeking City support, and use of our population, to ensure the County would meet a specified population threshold for recognition by HUD as an "urban county". As an "urban county", Collier County receives and allocates funding for various CDBG and housing programs. Under the prior agreement, the City was guaranteed $250,000 per year for three years for any eligible project. By qualifying the Tallwood neighborhood as an eligible project area the City was able to utilize $750,000 for the current storm sewer improvements.
The population of Collier County is now sufficient to qualify as an "urban county" without the inclusion of the City's population. The County would like the City to enter into an amended Cooperative Agreement for the next three years. The amended agreement would not contain a guaranteed amount for eligible projects, but would allow the City to submit projects for consideration on a competitive basis. By entering into the Agreement qualified city residents could participate in the HOME program, which provides funds for rental assistance and minor repairs to structures. Further, continuation of the agreement would complement the services provided by Collier County under the existing Housing Interlocal Agreement.
Attached for Council's reference is a copy of the current (FY 2000-2003) Agreement. The only real change to the document would be the deletion of subsection 12. c.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Discussion; motion to enter into Urban County Cooperative Agreement for fiscal years 2004-2006.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: William P. Harrison
5(D) Date: May 7, 2003
Agenda Section: Resolutions
Business:
Subject: Reimbursement Resolution Department: Finance
BACKGROUND: As part of the formal process of the acquisition of the water and sewer utility system from Florida Water, the City Council should approve a resolution expressing it’s intent to include in the upcoming bond issue funds to reimburse the City for costs incurred prior to the issuance of the bonds. Costs incurred for expenditures such as due diligence engineering, legal work, and rate studies are referred to as “soft costs”. While these “soft costs” are generally eligible for reimbursement through the bond issue, even before the approval of a reimbursement resolution, this resolution officially establishes the intent of the City Council to add these costs to the final bond issue and makes eligible for reimbursement any other costs directly related to the utility acquisition which
may be incurred before the bond issue date. This resolution has been prepared by the City’s bond counsel, Bryant, Miller & Olive.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of the attached resolution, establishing the intent of the City Council for the City to be reimbursed for “soft costs” such as engineering and legal services from proceeds of the bond issue to finance the Florida Water acquisition.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: William P. Harrison
5(I) Date: May 12, 2003
Agenda Section: DISCUSSION
Business:
Subject: BUDGET REVIEW MEETINGS Department: Finance
BACKGROUND: At the Budget Workshop of May 9, 2003 City Council held productive discussions on the upcoming Fiscal Year 2003-04 Capital Improvements Budget. At the end of the day, Councilors felt that additional discussion on the budget would be appropriate, and scheduled the regular council meeting of May 19th to establish the date for further discussions. In our budget calendar, we have two more scheduled meetings for budget review: THURSDAY, JUNE 19TH AND THURSDAY, JULY 24TH.
Your staff feels that two full days will be sufficient to complete the review of the CIP budget, review of the Operating Fund budgets and to establish the mil levy for next year. With your concurrence, we will schedule the June 19th meeting for a continuation of the discussion of the CIP budget review and then spend the full day on July 24th for review of the operating funds and determination of the mil levy for next year. We are not looking for any substantive changes to the General Fund budget for next year, so that review should go reasonably quickly.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Council discussion and establishing dates for the completion of the budget review process.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: 5(H) Prepared By: William P. Harrison
Date: May 12, 2003
Agenda Section: DISCUSSION
Business:
Subject: FISCAL YEAR 2004 SPENDING CAP Department: Finance
BACKGROUND: At the March 3rd City Council meeting, Council established the Spending Cap for Fiscal Year 2004 at $14,060,420. That figure was determined by taking the Spending Cap for 2004 without modifications and eliminating the 2001 purchase of the City Hall by emergency authorization in the amount of $1,275,000. Several councilors expressed concern that the Spending Cap for 2004 was being modified without knowing the fiscal impact of the cap reductions.
Other options were presented for Council considerations at that time, including one option which eliminated the purchase of the City Hall but added back the 2001 annual operating budget of the Sewer Fund. In 2001, Collier County deeded the small sewer operation to the City which had formerly been operated by the County. Council at that time required that the City’s budget be cut by $775,000 to include the operations of the sewer utility without increasing the total size of the budget. Had that decision not been made, the 2001 budget (and the basis for future spending caps) would have been $775,000 higher. In September 2002, voters decided that enterprise fund operations, such as our sewer utility, would be exempt from the Spending Cap.
At the CIP Workshop of May 9th, Council directed that the Spending Cap issue be placed on the May 19th Council Agenda for further discussion. A Spending Cap for Fiscal Year 2004 that both removes the 2001 purchase of the City Hall and adds back the 2001 budget for the Sewer Fund would be as follows:
FISCAL YEAR 2004 SPENDING CAP WITHOUT ADJUSTMENTS: $15,335,420
LESS: 2001 PURCHASE OF CITY HALL (1,275,000)
ADD BACK: 2001 SEWER UTILITY FUND BUDGET 775,000
AMENDED FISCAL YEAR 2004 SPENDING CAP: $14,835,420
RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Council discussion and determination of the Spending Cap for Fiscal Year 2004.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: Kelly Michele Smith
5(A) Date: May 12, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Resolution
Subject: V-03-03, requesting a 7.5-foot variance from the Department: Community Development
required 7.5 foot setback and boat dock facility
BACKGROUND:
Kenneth Gordon King, Esq., as agent for Gigi Moers, property owner, is requesting a 7.5 foot variance from the required 7.5 foot setback for a boat dock facility on property located at 1049 San Marco Road.
In August 2002, the property owner was issued a Notice of Violation by the City of Marco Island Code Compliance Division with regard to the boat dock facility which does not comply with the required 7.5 foot side yard setback and also encroaches onto the neighboring dock structure. The case was presented to the Code Enforcement Board at their November 12, 2002 meeting. At that meeting the subject boat dock facility was found to be in violation of the setback requirements and the property owner was given 90 days to obtain a variance or bring the boat dock facility into compliance with the setback requirement.
The petitioner has stated that the boat dock facility was constructed by the previous property owner and has existed in the current configuration for 17 years. Staff does not consider the existence of the subject boat dock facility as a special condition as the petitioner has not supplied any evidence that the current boat dock facility was legally permitted and constructed. At the public hearing held by the Planning Board, Jim Love, the previous owner of the adjacent property at 20 Hickory Court (currently owned by Cynthia Cervelli) addressed the Planning Board. Mr. Love explained that he engaged the services of a local dock builder to extend his dock. While the dock was being extended his next-door neighbor (former owner of Gigi Moers’ home) offered to pay to have the docks joined together and Mr. Love agreed. He told the Board
that he thought the dock contractor applied for a dock permit but could not produce a copy or permit number for the Board.
The City Council will be acting as the City’s Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter. The Planning Board heard this request at their April 25, 2003 meeting and voted 6-0 to recommend approval of petition V-03-03, subject to the following stipulations:
1. The boat dock facility may be altered so that the boat dock facility would be self
sustainable on Ms. Moers’ side of the property within her riparian lines.
2. Within 60 days Ms. Moers’ dock shall be altered to be self-sustainable or work out any
arrangements necessary between the property owners for the Cervelli’s to go ahead with
the demolition if they so choose while leaving Ms. Moers’ dock self sustainable.
Attached for Council’s consideration is the staff report presented at the Planning Board meeting, a copy of the minutes of the April 25, 2003 Planning Board meeting, and correspondence received to date. Also attached for Council’s review is a copy of a letter to Ms. Moers from Greg Niles dated September 19, 2002.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct required public hearing; motion to deny variance requested.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: Kelly Michele Smith
5(B) Date: May 12, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Resolution
Subject: BD-02-34 requesting a 20 foot extension from the Department: Community Development
maximum permitted 20 foot protrusion into the waterway
BACKGROUND:
Jerry Neal of Hole Montes, Inc., as agent for Bayfront Place, LC, property owner, is requesting a 20-foot extension from the maximum permitted 20 foot protrusion into the waterway to allow for a 40 foot boat dock facility on property located at West Elkcam Circle, more commonly known as Bayfront Place Condominium.
The subject property is located on Smokehouse Bay, which is approximately 1,100 feet wide at the subject site. The boat dock facility will protrude 40 feet, or 4% of the waterway. The petitioner has indicated that the boat dock extension being requested is reasonable and justified because the subject property is zoned multi-family and there is not enough shoreline to accommodate seven slips without the need for a boat dock extension.
The proposed boat dock facility consists of a 5-foot wide marginal dock with three perpendicular finger piers 4 feet in width extending out 35 feet from the marginal dock. Six boatlifts are also proposed. An area for temporary mooring parallel to the marginal dock has also been proposed.
The City Council will be acting as the City’s Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter. The Planning Board heard this request at their March 21, 2003 and April 25, 2003 meetings. Several neighboring property owners were in attendance at the meeting and spoke in opposition to the boat dock extension requested. Staff has also received several letters of objection, copies of which are attached for Council’s information. At the conclusion of the April 25, 2003 public hearing the Planning Board voted 2-4 to recommend approval of petition BD-02-34. Because the motion failed, the petition is forwarded to Council with a recommendation of denial. It should be noted that at the public hearing the petitioner offered several modifications to the site plan submitted, including an increased setback on both sides of the boat dock facility,
replacing the fixed docks with concrete floating docks, and elimination of boatlifts. None of these modifications were acceptable to the Planning Board. Should these modifications be agreeable to the City Council and the petitioner, staff would recommend that the modifications be incorporated into a resolution of approval. A copy of the staff report supporting the petition and minutes of both Planning Board meetings are attached for Council’s review.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct required public hearing. Motion to deny boat dock extension, if desired.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Meeting Date: May 19, 2003
Agenda Item: Prepared By: A. William Moss, City Manager
5(E) Date: May 14, 2003
Agenda Section:
Business: Discussion
Subject: Approval of City Attorney Contract Department: City Council
BACKGROUND:
On April 7, 2003 City Council authorized Vice-Chair Tucker to negotiate a one-year renewal contract with Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson to provide legal services for the City. A copy of the negotiated contract is attached for Council's consideration and approval.
Changes to this contract from the previous contract include a change in lead attorney from Kenneth B. Cuyler to Richard D. Yovanovich, and a change in the attorney compensation rate from $165.00 per hour to $175.00 per hour. All other terms remain the same.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the Agreement for Legal Services for the period May 1, 2003 through April 30, 2004.
Reviewed by Department Director Reviewed by City Manager
Council Action: Motion by: Second by:
| 
